Rebel News Podcast - EZRA LEVANT ｜ A feature-length interview with law professor Bruce Pardy

00:00:00.000 Hello, my friends, a great heart to heart with Bruce Pardy, the Queens University law professor, contrarian and freedom fighter.

00:00:08.180 You know, I want to invite you to get the video version of this podcast because there's a video clip I want you to see that I play in this interview.

00:00:14.820 Go to rebelnewsplus.com, click subscribe. It's eight bucks a month.

00:00:18.180 By the way, you get my show every night in video form and Sheila Gunn Reads weekly show, plus the satisfaction that you are helping us stay free and independent.

00:00:26.360 You know, we don't take a dime from Trudeau and it shows.

00:00:28.640 Please go to rebelnewsplus.com.

00:00:31.280 All right, here's today's broadcast.

00:00:47.380 Tonight, a feature length interview with our friend, the law professor, Bruce Pardy.

00:00:52.380 It's June 28th and this is the Ezra LeVant Show.

00:00:58.640 Shame on you, you censorious bug.

00:01:01.720 You know, there was a tradition for years that the prime minister would appoint one or two journalists to the Senate.

00:01:17.060 And that dream of winning that appointment was enough to keep a hundred journalists loyal to a prime minister, even though only one or two would ever get that magical golden call.

00:01:30.020 The rest were certainly auditioning for it.

00:01:32.560 They say that the Senate is not a thankless task, but a taskless thanks.

00:01:38.040 And indeed, it really is the best perk you can get, other than, I suppose, being the governor general.

00:01:44.240 But there is a better perk, a better patronage appointment, because the Senate has the travel and the, you know, the prestige, but it doesn't actually have any power.

00:01:54.580 What is a perk that is even greater than being appointed to the Senate?

00:02:00.840 I tell you, it's being appointed a judge, because a judge is appointed for the same duration as that of a senator, earns even more money, but unlike a senator, actually has power.

00:02:13.760 I put it to you that that is enough to keep so many lawyers and law professors in line, even though only a handful will get that golden nod.

00:02:24.080 The rest of them will be auditioning their whole careers.

00:02:26.840 And that is why the law, in my opinion, is increasingly political, or at least one of the reasons.

00:02:31.920 So it's very hard to find a lawyer, let alone a law professor, let alone a law professor at a prestigious school who is willing to be a little bit contrarian and willing to call out the excesses of his industry.

00:02:46.860 In fact, in this whole country, I think you can count them on one finger's hands, one hand's fingers.

00:02:52.040 And joining me for the duration of today's show is one such man.

00:02:55.660 His name is Professor Bruce Pardee.

00:02:57.960 He is a professor of law at Queen's University.

00:03:00.480 He is with Rights Probe, a charity designed to increase our civil liberties, and he joins me.

00:03:06.720 Matt, what a pleasure to have you.

00:03:08.300 Thanks for having me, Esther.

00:03:09.280 It's a pleasure.

00:03:09.900 Do you think I'm accurate when I say that at least for some ambitious, politically-minded lawyers, the ultimate outcome is to become a judge?

00:03:18.260 Oh, there's no doubt that it is the ambition of many.

00:03:22.080 Now, not all of them compromise themselves in search of that goal,

00:03:28.180 but it's certainly a matter in the back of your mind, I would think, so that you don't...

00:03:33.940 so you keep yourself in the running.

00:03:35.720 Don't dismiss yourself out of hand just by wandering too far outside the lines of accepted rhetoric, I suppose one might put it.

00:03:46.940 You know, civilization is a thin veneer, and societies tell themselves stories about their institutions to hold themselves together.

00:03:58.280 And some of those stories are about our legalist institutions.

00:04:04.640 And it works as long as the stories are mostly true.

00:04:10.120 Right.

00:04:10.240 And in the recent past, one begins to wonder whether or not we've gone too far, and people are wondering if the stories are really true.

00:04:20.240 You are so right.

00:04:21.400 You know, when I was in law school, and this is more than 20 years ago, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was such a sacred text.

00:04:29.140 It had to be revered.

00:04:30.820 It's as if Canada didn't exist before.

00:04:32.900 It was, even though the first line of the Charter refers to, you know, under God, most law professors skipped that part, and they thought that this was like a holy text.

00:04:43.900 And yet, after 20, 25 years of hearing that, the Charter of Rights is above all.

00:04:50.260 I mean, I guess it's been more than 40 years since the law said it looks.

00:04:54.680 It didn't do a bloody thing during the pandemic.

00:04:57.100 I can't think of one systemic case of discrimination, infringements on our civil liberties, lockdowns, shut down churches.

00:05:06.000 You can't go to school.

00:05:07.700 You can't open your business.

00:05:09.280 You can't travel in your own country.

00:05:11.100 You can't visit your family.

00:05:13.120 This so-called sacred text was proven to be a nullity.

00:05:16.900 I think that's exactly what you mean about the myths we tell ourselves.

00:05:20.740 The mythic document was the Charter.

00:05:22.820 It failed its biggest test ever.

00:05:25.040 It was a great disappointment, no question about it.

00:05:28.700 It reflected, though, the faith that a lot of people put into it.

00:05:34.040 And, you know, in a way, if there's any silver lining to this COVID thing, it is in a way that, for some people, a curtain has been pulled back on the way the thing actually works.

00:05:45.380 And it's actually not quite true that the Charter has ever been the foundation of our legal system.

00:05:52.940 I mean, it looks to be a very important document.

00:05:55.860 It's our Bill of Rights or the equivalent.

00:05:58.300 But, really, the Charter functions only as a gloss on what legislatures can do.

00:06:05.220 And it's only, really, it's turned out to be only an interpretive guide for the courts in terms of judging what the legislatures do.

00:06:15.240 So, people, to this document, it's written down in black and white.

00:06:18.020 They think, well, they're the words.

00:06:20.220 Therefore, I have the freedoms that are listed.

00:06:22.640 But the test of whether or not you actually have those freedoms is what happens when you go into a court and say, this happened to me, you know, please enforce my right.

00:06:32.420 And then sometimes the courts say, well, I'm sorry, I know it says this, but that's actually not what it means.

00:06:39.100 And, in a way, this is the premise of our system, even with or without the Charter.

00:06:47.540 The system is, somebody always has to have the last word.

00:06:51.520 And, in our system, the courts have the last word.

00:06:55.020 And, in particular, the Supreme Court of Canada has the last word.

00:06:58.180 And there's no overseer of the Supreme Court of Canada.

00:07:04.140 You know, and who decides?

00:07:06.000 It might be nine people in robes.

00:07:08.380 It might be 338 MPs.

00:07:11.120 It might be 40 million Canadians.

00:07:13.480 What is that club?

00:07:14.660 What is that club and what are their rules?

00:07:17.440 I, you know, I think, I can't think, in fact, I don't think our Supreme Court is well.

00:07:21.520 It might be quite in on the, on any COVID channels.

00:07:23.660 On COVID, on the COVID situation.

00:07:25.260 Or our system just wasn't speedy enough.

00:07:27.240 The U.S. Supreme Court got straight to, like, within months, they were knocking down laws.

00:07:33.240 Our Supreme Court, our system, and we sneer at the Americans, really, theirs worked. 0.97

00:07:39.460 Ours literally has not gone to worse.

00:07:41.880 Well, they, I don't disagree with you.

00:07:44.480 But, but they have the same feature that I was describing, which is, there's always got to be a last word.

00:07:50.760 That's why it's such a battle.

00:07:51.820 And the Supreme Court of the United States has the same kind of last word authority that the Supreme Court of Canada does.

00:07:57.680 But one of the things that has made it work for periods of time is the philosophy that judges and courts are restrained.

00:08:11.700 They're restrained because they have such power.

00:08:13.960 If they're not elected, they can't be removed.

00:08:15.960 The government can't remove them.

00:08:17.120 The government can't overrule them.

00:08:18.500 They have the last word in a very little sense about what's going to happen in society.

00:08:22.280 And so they're very powerful people.

00:08:24.540 And the thing that has kept that power in check is an idea.

00:08:27.820 And the idea is restraint.

00:08:29.920 We will apply the law.

00:08:31.600 We will interpret it in accordance with principles.

00:08:34.240 We won't sort of wander off and do whatever we think is right.

00:08:37.220 But we've now entered a period where more courts are inclined to think that it is their job to do the policy work and to design things so that it works in the way that they approve of.

00:08:50.240 And the former chief justice said, it's a dialogue between us and the legislators.

00:08:56.600 You know, our Beverly McLaughlin, restrained, was she?

00:09:01.780 She was the one who said that Canada was a genocidal state.

00:09:05.340 And she didn't even say so through a court case, which is a speech.

00:09:08.840 And why shouldn't she give a speech? 0.98

00:09:10.260 She's a queen of all she surveys.

00:09:11.620 I think it's telling that Xi, after finishing her tour of duty in Canada, now sits on Xi Jinping's court of high appeal in Hong Kong.

00:09:20.960 That's true.

00:09:21.840 The British judges quit when Xi Jinping took over Hong Kong.

00:09:26.120 They quit out of moral solidarity with the Hong Kong people.

00:09:30.640 But also they weren't going to be, they literally were not going to work for a dictator.

00:09:34.260 I am stunned that Beverly McLaughlin shows up for work every day with a smile for the world's largest tyrant. 1.00

00:09:43.120 I find that incredible.

00:09:45.320 Well, one of the things that's in flux now is what we mean by the rule of law.

00:09:50.800 It's a, it's a hallowed phrase.

00:09:53.260 It's in the Constitution.

00:09:55.360 But, you know, there's a, there's a difference of opinion about what even that means.

00:10:00.320 And here are, here are two ideas that I, I like, both from Hayek.

00:10:05.020 So, one of the ideas about the rule of law, and one way to conceive of it is to think of it as the opposite of the rule of persons.

00:10:13.520 You don't want any one person ruling over you, right?

00:10:17.280 And there are a couple of ways to avoid that.

00:10:19.240 The statue of justice being blind with a blindfold.

00:10:21.920 Justice is blind.

00:10:22.620 So, what we do is, number one, Hayek says, rules fixed and announced beforehand.

00:10:30.400 That's what the law is supposed to be, right?

00:10:32.100 So, we can all know what the laws are ahead of time, govern ourselves accordingly, make sure we don't get into trouble.

00:10:37.340 But you have to at least tell us where the lines are that we have to obey.

00:10:41.520 And the second way is to divide powers between our legislature, our courts, and our executive branch so that none of them have concentrated power.

00:10:50.820 Right. And the natural instinct is checked by the other national instinct.

00:10:54.980 Exactly. So, they're all checks and balances on each other.

00:10:57.260 But both of these ideas now are eroding.

00:11:00.340 Yeah.

00:11:00.660 Because they're, all three of these branches are on the same page about the necessity for having the state manage society.

00:11:10.500 You know, and I see that in America, too.

00:11:12.560 I mean, we're in Canada, we're mainly going to talk about Canada.

00:11:14.880 But I see that there are certain things that we must, you know, whether it's the CIA or the Justice Department or, I'm going to say, the military-industrial complex.

00:11:26.400 We have a higher duty than to allow that Donald Trump to run wild here.

00:11:31.820 Sure, you know, we may be exceeding our office, head of the FBI.

00:11:35.260 Sure, head of the CIA.

00:11:36.580 But we have to.

00:11:37.620 We're the keepers.

00:11:38.460 I feel that that's strong in America these days, but it's always been there in Canada, too.

00:11:42.600 We don't have the same accountability in Canada they do even now in America.

00:11:47.200 We have had a longer history of state journalism being part of the national identity, if you like.

00:11:55.640 But there is a very strong impetus now for management.

00:11:58.340 Look at David Johnson.

00:11:59.360 Look at David Johnson, who, surely.

00:12:01.940 I mean, I look like a central casting, trustworthy gentleman, and maybe for the first time in a long time, it didn't work with him.

00:12:10.860 Well, that's true.

00:12:11.540 That's true.

00:12:12.100 And in part, I think this is maybe part of the reluctance of the courts to condemn the COVID regime, because the COVID regime was all about managing.

00:12:21.180 It was all about managing.

00:12:22.520 About people we had never met before.

00:12:24.280 Theresa Tam, Davila here in Toronto.

00:12:27.420 Every province, every city had a new boss.

00:12:30.860 We had never met before.

00:12:32.560 How were they chosen?

00:12:33.380 Who are they?

00:12:33.880 What's their background?

00:12:34.680 What do they stand for?

00:12:35.660 What's their ideological stripe?

00:12:36.840 What party are they with?

00:12:37.920 What limits their power?

00:12:38.900 What have they ever gotten right or wrong before?

00:12:40.400 Suddenly, we had a roster of new people running things, and every politician deferred to them.

00:12:45.920 Deferred because, and this is what politicians do now, the legislatures now pass statutes that delegate enormous rulemaking authority

00:12:56.620 to other branches, to the executive branch and other authorities, like public health officials, but I'm not limited to that.

00:13:03.500 The whole regime of administrative bodies that we have commonly now make rules and policies about all manner of things because it's part of their management function.

00:13:14.680 That, I think, is one of the cores of the difficulty.

00:13:18.740 We believe, we're now in the era of the administrative state.

00:13:22.220 And if you, you know, stop any random person on the street and you ask them whether or not the administrative state, if they knew what that was.

00:13:29.040 I don't know what that is.

00:13:29.680 No.

00:13:30.020 But they would probably agree with the proposition that it's government's job to manage society and solve a social problem.

00:13:38.260 And as soon as you accept that premise, you go down the road that we're on.

00:13:44.220 You know, I've been holding in my hand here.

00:13:46.060 I haven't even referred to this document yet.

00:13:47.760 Your 20-page essay in the C2C Journal, I really get a kick out of that because there's, there are longer pieces.

00:13:54.640 There's not, I mean, I'm a Twitter guy, so I read 280 notes, but this is a 20-page essay by you.

00:14:01.540 Let me just read the opening headline and teaser here, and I'd like you to talk into this.

00:14:05.880 Legal canons and social fables, the law in Canada has never been perfect, but now it is losing its way.

00:14:14.060 And let me just read two more sentences.

00:14:15.820 I'd love you to get into this, sir.

00:14:17.280 I think you already have a bit.

00:14:19.320 Unashamed racial discrimination in the name of equality.

00:14:23.480 Judges refusing to hear scientific evidence and basing life-altering rulings on mere assumptions,

00:14:29.120 like denying that lady her heart transferred, her organ transplant because she wasn't jabbed.

00:14:33.920 Public institutions brazenly claiming to be above the law and courts agreeing.

00:14:40.660 Jurists, judges, upending unambiguous constitutional provisions.

00:14:45.140 Public intellectuals enduring professional misconduct investigations for the crime of applying their intellect.

00:14:50.620 And can talk about Jordan Peterson.

00:14:52.500 Professionals punished for exercising independent judgment.

00:14:55.540 Bruce Party, that's you, surveys the dissent of Canada's legal system into Alice in Wonderland surrealism,

00:15:03.960 a state that poses dangers to virtually every Canadian and to the future of the rule of law itself.

00:15:09.080 That is a pretty apocalyptic summary.

00:15:12.480 I mean, yet you are part of this establishment.

00:15:16.380 I mean, Queens is a first-ranked university.

00:15:19.020 You're a law professor there.

00:15:20.620 That is, you know, you are part of the priest in a way.

00:15:26.200 But maybe you are a blaspheming...

00:15:29.080 I'm the barbarian.

00:15:31.320 Let me ask you before you get into this, have they tried to expel you like they tried to expel Jordan Peterson?

00:15:37.760 No.

00:15:38.420 Why?

00:15:38.840 No, to their great credit.

00:15:40.060 Now, I, uh, a short number of years ago, a short time ago, I invited Jordan to give a lecture at Queens.

00:15:48.120 And the response of the community was divided.

00:15:52.760 Lots of people were very enthusiastic about seeing and hearing him.

00:15:56.160 Others were of the view that he should not be given a platform at Queens.

00:15:59.960 And to their great credit, the principal and the dean of law at the time both said,

00:16:05.440 no, no, this is the work that we do at universities.

00:16:10.620 We listen to people, even if we don't agree with them.

00:16:13.580 And they insisted that it go ahead.

00:16:16.780 Did it go ahead?

00:16:17.420 It went ahead.

00:16:18.360 It was a tremendous success.

00:16:20.460 There were 800-plus people packed into the university's largest venue.

00:16:25.740 It was a fantastic event.

00:16:27.340 And how did the protesters protest?

00:16:28.500 Well, the protesters were supposed to say they were on the sidewalk, which was, of course, fine.

00:16:33.160 Yeah.

00:16:34.040 But...

00:16:34.440 Did they pull up fire alarms?

00:16:36.100 Well, they did actually all kinds of things that were beyond, over the line.

00:16:40.560 They banged on the windows and managed to break one of them.

00:16:44.440 And in the meantime, it was very difficult to hear what was going on inside the hall.

00:16:49.140 I was on the stage with Jordan, and frankly, at times, I couldn't hear what was going on.

00:16:53.600 And they blocked some of the exits so that people couldn't get out in the case of a fire.

00:16:58.500 And so on.

00:16:59.560 But overall, it went very well.

00:17:03.840 And in a sense, the protesters only managed to make the points that Jordan was making inside the hall, which is, these people just don't want to hear anything they don't agree with.

00:17:15.420 You know, I am sure that every young person, and I presume it was students mainly in their room, although there would have been others in the community.

00:17:23.560 Yeah.

00:17:23.740 And I'm sure they won't forget that night, the drama, the excitement, and being the receivers of a knowledge that the other side wants to ban.

00:17:33.760 There's something tantalizing about secret knowledge.

00:17:37.160 I think it's one of the reasons why people are open to conspiracy theories, because they have an alternate explanation for the world that only they know.

00:17:44.260 And it gives them some sort of superiority.

00:17:46.440 Right.

00:17:47.160 And that's sort of a fake superiority.

00:17:50.260 Yeah.

00:17:50.440 But if there's a wise and thoughtful guy who may get some things wrong, but Jordan Peterson is not an intellectual lightweight.

00:17:57.720 He's been thinking about these things for 40 years.

00:17:59.700 And if, and he's tried to popularize and he'll, he'll debate anyone.

00:18:05.280 So he's not, you know, he may have strong opinions, but he's not a kook or a crank.

00:18:10.340 And people, a lot of people find real meaning in what he's saying.

00:18:13.720 And imagine going there and having to strain and listen over the smashing sounds and having the, the whiff of some real violence.

00:18:22.800 Well, maybe I'm going to get hurt.

00:18:24.480 You will never forget what you heard that day.

00:18:27.800 And if there's any doubt that you heard something important, that doubt is gone because the other side certainly thought it was important enough to stop.

00:18:35.980 I'm not sure if my analogy of secret knowledge works there, but you heard something that the other side wants to make impossible to know.

00:18:42.720 I think you're right about proving the point.

00:18:45.500 I've got to think that makes Jordan Peterson's followers even more dedicated.

00:18:50.480 Oh, I would think.

00:18:51.240 I would think.

00:18:51.580 But it's interesting what you say about secret knowledge, because in a way, that is one thing that characterizes the legal profession.

00:19:01.080 They are the holders of secret knowledge.

00:19:03.340 And, you know, listen, the law can be a difficult task.

00:19:09.660 You know, language has inherent ambiguities.

00:19:12.580 Things are not always straightforward.

00:19:13.920 It's difficult to make them straightforward.

00:19:15.720 But on the other hand, our legal system has become very tangled.

00:19:20.680 We have laws about everything.

00:19:24.300 The, the, the, the, the, the amount of rules and policies we have about everything under the sun is getting to be overwhelming.

00:19:33.040 It's difficult to make your ways through the legal system without a lawyer.

00:19:35.820 Even for the lawyers, it's becoming overly bureaucratic.

00:19:39.960 It's very slow.

00:19:41.160 It's very expensive for everybody.

00:19:43.740 The, the, the, the access to justice is becoming as challenging to obtain sometimes as timely medical care in this country.

00:19:54.820 And not just access to justice, but, you know, the old saying, the more laws, the more corruption.

00:20:00.800 And, and I'm going to give you one more quote.

00:20:04.800 I think it was Lavrenti Beria, the founder of the Soviet secret police, who said, show me the man and I'll find you the crime.

00:20:13.180 I said, if you've got a lot of laws out there, especially if they're vague and murky.

00:20:17.240 Oh, sure.

00:20:18.320 Give me, give me the guy and I'll, I'll tell you how we can get him.

00:20:20.940 I'll tell you how we can get him.

00:20:22.500 And, and you see that there are some, I mean, I'm going to give you a case of Arthur Pawlowski.

00:20:26.760 Right.

00:20:26.960 He, he is exactly, uh, what would be meant by this turbulent priest.

00:20:32.240 Will someone rid me of this turbulent priest?

00:20:34.400 Like he will not stop.

00:20:36.120 He, he is turbulent in every definition.

00:20:38.740 Right.

00:20:39.100 And that, yeah, it's the mayor and the police and the, like, it's, he's like an allergic reaction in human form.

00:20:48.960 Mm.

00:20:49.900 And so they're going after him again and again and again.

00:20:52.160 And sometimes they win and sometimes they lose.

00:20:53.800 There's been a hundred charges, tickets, one hundred.

00:20:57.960 I don't mean 50.

00:20:59.200 I mean a hundred.

00:21:00.300 Right.

00:21:02.460 And eventually he wins most of them, by the way.

00:21:05.840 But I think there's something wrong with a society that will simply keep charging a man and jailing, jailing, jailing, jailing, jailing, Risa, sorry, Tamara Leach for 49 days without a, without a hearing.

00:21:18.140 Uh-huh.

00:21:18.340 And they chose to do that to her, but not to others.

00:21:21.960 I'm sure there wasn't a single arrest at the Jordan Peterson meeting at Queens.

00:21:25.840 Was there a single arrest?

00:21:26.820 I don't believe so.

00:21:28.240 Smashing windows.

00:21:29.000 There's more violence than all the trucker convoy did combined.

00:21:31.640 Yes, that's true.

00:21:32.260 Threatening, blocking fire.

00:21:33.980 There, there may have been an arrest after the fact.

00:21:35.940 Somebody was, uh, discovered to have been carrying a, a garotte, uh, a weapon.

00:21:40.420 Um, but I don't think that was on the scene.

00:21:42.460 I think it was after the fact.

00:21:43.200 Okay, well, but the smashing and, you know, that, that's more than the truckers did.

00:21:47.860 Yes, yes.

00:21:48.760 And, and I feel like we are at that point where you can be one rebel news.

00:21:52.460 Yeah.

00:21:52.680 You know, I feel sometimes like the censorship laws are called the rebel news laws.

00:21:56.840 Like they're so clearly targeting, uh, the few contrary.

00:22:00.500 Well, there's that, there's, there's, there's, uh, one of my favorite quotes is by a Colombian professor,

00:22:04.340 whose name escapes me at the moment, but he says,

00:22:07.640 dying societies accumulate laws like dying men accumulate remedies. 0.92

00:22:13.680 Oh, oh, isn't that?

00:22:15.020 So if you want to stop this and stop that and restrict this and manage that,

00:22:18.360 then suddenly you have a plethora of laws about everything.

00:22:22.420 Yeah.

00:22:22.720 Instead of having a few basic rules about conduct and some principles.

00:22:26.840 That's a great quote.

00:22:28.300 Hey, I want to do this because I could talk to you all day,

00:22:30.460 but I, I, I want to get through your C2C article.

00:22:33.100 Why don't we do this?

00:22:33.800 Yes.

00:22:34.080 You've broken it down into what you call fables.

00:22:36.960 Right.

00:22:37.200 These are what you talk about, the myths that we, we have to have a common story,

00:22:41.620 a common narrative as a society, what, what keeps us together.

00:22:44.580 Right.

00:22:45.060 And in some places it's history, in some places it's blood and, and, and nationality.

00:22:50.300 What is it in Canada?

00:22:51.320 Well, maybe it's a story.

00:22:52.540 Mm-hmm.

00:22:53.080 Let's whip through these fables.

00:22:54.960 Now, the first part of them I see is a picture that's where at least we were just talking about a second ago.

00:22:58.680 Right.

00:22:58.820 Fable number one, the criminal justice system is fair and even handed.

00:23:02.240 You've already talked a little bit about this, but give me a one-liner on it.

00:23:05.200 Yes.

00:23:05.380 Well, so, so that these are the things that give our system legitimacy in the minds of the people.

00:23:11.940 If you think you're going to get a fair shake, if you're charged or the like, then you're going to go along with the idea that the process will protect you.

00:23:19.600 Whatever the outcome is, you're going to get a fair shake, but you can take examples like the Tamara Litch situation and think, well, that, that wasn't fair.

00:23:29.940 Uh, in the Tamara Litch situation, as you alluded to, she was kept in jail for 49 days in total in two different, at two different times for a charge that was nonviolent, um, in, within a system in which people charged with all manner of things, including violent crimes, are let out on bail routinely.

00:23:51.100 Including terrorists, by the way.

00:23:52.600 And, and, and twice, on, on both these occasions, she was, she was, uh, put in jail by lower court officials and then released by, uh, superior court judges when the case came before them.

00:24:05.440 And, and it certainly seemed like the prosecutor was determined to hold her in jail and maybe even punish her before her trial and before conviction for this crime of the century that she committed in Ottawa, even though, as you say, it was a, it was a peaceful protest.

00:24:21.360 So, it's, it, it's one of the challenges, one of the examples, and this is not to say that this happens all the time, it doesn't.

00:24:27.480 But, if you can pull out anecdotes, examples of things where it doesn't go right, then the strength of the story begins to, to weaken.

00:24:37.940 And when you learn things, and this is what they mean in the law, not to bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

00:24:45.520 That's a great line that's burned in my memory because you've got to conduct yourself in a way that people have confidence, even, especially the losers.

00:24:55.460 The losers have to love and trust the system enough that when they lose, they say, well, I had my shot.

00:25:02.160 That's exactly right. There's another phrase that goes, justice must not only be done, but must manifestly appear to be done.

00:25:09.880 And when they put Moise Karimji, the out-of-control, vendetta-driven, liberal donor, as the prosecutor for Tamara Leach, they undid that and they undid that on purpose.

00:25:22.540 And, by the way, that same prosecutor tried to have our reporter, Sheila Gunn-Reed, convicted of contempt of court.

00:25:28.080 Out-of-control madman. Now, I should tell you, go ahead, they just recently replaced him, sacked him as the prosecutor on Tamara Leach.

00:25:35.580 And part of me says, thank God, what took you so long.

00:25:40.240 Another part of me said, well, I wish that madman would go all the way to trial just to get a proper smackdown by a court.

00:25:47.340 The silver lining in this situation, if you watch the thing the whole way through, was in the way that the Superior Court responded to the attempts to have her released.

00:26:02.360 You know, the committals were done by one level of court and then the Superior Court, in what I thought were very good judges, said, this is not correct.

00:26:13.540 And then let her out.

00:26:15.980 So, unshackle that woman. 1.00

00:26:17.360 So, there was a silver lining.

00:26:19.600 Yeah.

00:26:19.980 Yeah.

00:26:20.280 Takes a long time to get that silver lining.

00:26:21.980 Arthur Pawlowski, when he was initially convicted, he was banned from traveling outside the province.

00:26:28.420 What has that got to do with anything other than they didn't want him on a speaking tour?

00:26:32.700 Anytime he made a Facebook post, a sermon, or a media interview, he had to read a little handwritten script.

00:26:38.360 I don't know if you remember this, Justice Adam Germain hand-wrote a little thing.

00:26:41.940 Here's what you have to say.

00:26:43.320 I came up with this as a judge.

00:26:44.780 I'm quite proud of my wording.

00:26:46.260 And you have to self-renounce every time.

00:26:49.240 And that was the law for months until the Court of Appeal finally came and unanimously threw that out.

00:26:56.560 Justice comes slowly.

00:26:58.760 Listen, this is one of the things that burdens our...

00:27:01.480 Expansively.

00:27:02.860 Expansively and slowly is one of the two of the things that burden our system now.

00:27:07.200 It needs to be fixed.

00:27:09.000 All right, I said quick snappers, and we didn't go quickly there.

00:27:12.060 Fable number two, judges are impartial.

00:27:13.860 You've got a shocking story about the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

00:27:17.400 Go ahead.

00:27:17.960 Yes, well, it's a very public story.

00:27:19.500 So, shortly after the end of the convoy and after the Trudeau government had invoked the Emergencies Act,

00:27:28.780 the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court gave an interview to Le Devoir.

00:27:32.540 I believe it was in April.

00:27:34.040 The convoy was in February.

00:27:35.880 And in that interview, as published by the Devoir, the Chief Justice condemned the convoy

00:27:41.540 and suggested that, you know, the powerful forces in the country ought to have done what they did, essentially.

00:27:49.080 So, we've got a pundit on our hands now.

00:27:50.880 And if anybody else other than a judge has said that, there would have been no trouble because it's an opinion.

00:27:55.760 Yeah, it's a perfectly valid opinion, but he's the Chief Justice of the whole system.

00:28:01.180 And shortly after the Emergency Act was invoked, a number of applications were brought to challenge the validity of its invocation, of course.

00:28:09.420 And those applications have now been heard at first instance by the federal court, not yet decided.

00:28:14.940 But this could very easily go before the Supreme Court of Canada.

00:28:17.660 And now you have a Chief Justice who has already essentially given his opinion about this issue.

00:28:22.740 And so, going back to this idea that justice must not only be done, but manifestly must appear to be done,

00:28:28.960 it would be difficult if you were bringing the applications to think,

00:28:32.860 well, I'm going to get a fair shake from the Chief Justice because he's already told me what he thinks.

00:28:36.620 And not just on that.

00:28:38.340 Before the vaccine mandates, I mean, the vaccine mandates to this day have not yet been to the Supreme Court.

00:28:43.740 But the Chief Justice announced publicly, very early, that he was going to enforce a vaccine mandate

00:28:49.900 in the building of the Supreme Court for a Supreme Court stop.

00:28:53.020 So he tells you without a hearing, without a pro and a con, without an argument,

00:28:57.560 he's basically told you where he stands on the civil liberties issue of the day.

00:29:01.700 And it was very interesting that different courts took a different approach to this question.

00:29:05.340 I believe the federal court said the vaccination status of our judges is not public information.

00:29:10.600 It's private. It's up to them.

00:29:13.080 Whereas other courts, like the Supreme Court of Canada, said all our judges are vaccinated as a matter of policy.

00:29:19.800 So it's a very interesting conundrum.

00:29:22.660 Let's whip through some of these.

00:29:23.900 Fable number three, courts find facts with evidence.

00:29:28.440 Right.

00:29:28.920 Right. Well, this is one of the basic propositions, right?

00:29:31.480 One of the strengths of a judge is that they know nothing about anything else.

00:29:37.820 Right, so they can start with a blank slate.

00:29:39.240 Right.

00:29:39.440 I don't, they don't have the, the, the ingrained predispositions of experts.

00:29:44.760 And they have to base their findings of fact on what they hear in the courtroom and upon nothing else.

00:29:49.460 That's the whole idea.

00:29:50.280 Right.

00:29:51.160 But during COVID, some courts went so far as to take judicial notice of certain facts about the vaccine,

00:29:59.440 especially in family law cases where there is a dispute between parents about whether or not a child is going to be vaccinated.

00:30:04.360 And there are, there's more than one example, but I speak about one example from Saskatchewan where the, the, the judge basically said, I'm going to take judicial notice of the fact that the virus is dangerous and that the vaccine is safe for children to take.

00:30:18.860 And, and, and that's the way it went.

00:30:21.800 Well, same thing with Adam Germain case I mentioned before said, everyone knows someone who has died from COVID.

00:30:28.460 No, you're just a locked up, terrified old man who deals with other locked up, terrified old people, some of whom are sick. 0.69

00:30:36.960 And by the way, I'm getting old too. 0.99

00:30:38.440 I mean, we're all going to get old, but don't tell me that you know a damn thing about anything.

00:30:42.480 You, you're not in schools and restaurants, you're not in bars or gyms, you're terrified and you talk to other people who are terrified. 0.98

00:30:49.600 You don't know a damn thing.

00:30:51.540 And, and it was, you know, sometimes having old people as judges is very, is, you know, uh, word senator, senior, a lot of, a lot of, you know, age and wisdom are correlated. 0.97

00:31:04.180 They really are because you have life experience.

00:31:06.040 Yes, sir.

00:31:06.380 But in this case, it was the worst because you had the people who were afraid of themselves giving advice to, to young men.

00:31:14.680 Right.

00:31:15.380 Right.

00:31:15.660 It wasn't the old judges getting myocarditis playing sports at school.

00:31:19.320 Right.

00:31:20.120 Very outrageous.

00:31:20.900 Right.

00:31:21.220 Fable number four, justice is blind.

00:31:23.920 Yeah.

00:31:24.100 We sort of talked about that already.

00:31:25.340 A little bit.

00:31:25.860 Yes.

00:31:26.620 But we have gotten to the point now where our idea about equal treatment under the law has morphed into something very different.

00:31:32.780 The idea of justice being blind is just that, that the, the, the, the law shouldn't care who you are, what your characteristics are, whether you're a man or a woman or a rich or poor or black or white or straight or gay.

00:31:45.360 We should apply the same rules to everybody without regard to your identity.

00:31:49.760 And we, we've now gotten to a place where the law very much wants to know who you are, both in civil matters, in, uh, in human rights tribunal matters, in, uh, criminal sentencing.

00:32:02.600 They want to know, you know, what race you are and, and other kinds of characteristics so they can, they can adjust the rules in accordance with the groups that you may or may not belong to.

00:32:14.700 And there was a very interesting statement by the human rights tribunal of Ontario, uh, from last fall, where, and this is not a, this is not a new thing, but it's, it's, it's new to see it set out loud this way.

00:32:27.320 They basically said in black and white, white people cannot claim discrimination under the code.

00:32:32.120 Now, I'm not sure that's entirely correct, but it's certainly that trend that we're, we've been headed down for Cordova.

00:32:37.760 Yeah. You know, I, I, I'm not even kidding when I say, I wonder how that works for people who are mixed race.

00:32:45.060 Well, this is the absurdity of it, right? I mean, it, it, it doesn't make any sense.

00:32:48.960 Yeah. I mean, Barack Obama was black, but he was also white.

00:32:53.460 Sure.

00:32:54.080 And I think so many people in humanity, I mean, everyone's fascinated by those DNA tests, 23andMe, because they want to say, well, what percentage is this and that?

00:33:02.420 And, you know, a lot of people were kicked out of some place and moved to some other place. That's the history of the world.

00:33:08.980 I mean, uh, my own family, 120 years ago, was kicked out of some place.

00:33:14.220 Sure.

00:33:14.840 And, I don't know, it's just such a strange thing that people who are, who were not hard done by hundreds of years ago are being reimbursed either legally or financially by people who didn't do anything wrong to them today.

00:33:29.980 But this is, this is what happens, though, when you, when you start down the road of, of trying to treat people as though they are merely members of groups instead of individuals, right?

00:33:41.660 You reward them and punish them for things they had nothing to do.

00:33:44.500 And then they start to think of themselves in those terms. I think that's the weaponization of race.

00:33:48.700 And I think that's the new weaponization we see with sexuality.

00:33:51.520 I mean, I mean, gay rights was one thing, but the T in LGBT and the Q, that's not, it's got nothing to do with the L and the G.

00:34:02.260 I think it's about weaponizing gender, weaponizing sex, weaponizing psychology and self-identity, just like wokeness around race.

00:34:12.780 And I think that, I think the critical race theory and cultural Marxism, I really think it's, I think it's real. 0.93

00:34:21.160 And I, I think it's too coordinated. I mean, I, for it not to be a strategy.

00:34:26.920 Well, let's put this in very simple political terms.

00:34:28.780 So, in a, in a sense, the idea that everybody should be entitled to the same rights regardless of their identity is a classical liberal idea.

00:34:37.160 Yeah.

00:34:37.340 Right? It's, it's, it's justice is blind, equal treatment of the law, we don't care who you are. 0.99

00:34:41.080 The alternative, which we're in, thick into now, is that it's not just a question of our freedom to do things that we want.

00:34:50.540 It is the fact that we must have societal endorsement of what we're doing.

00:34:55.300 And to that end, the state will manage your attitudes so that you must approve of what other people are doing in their own lives.

00:35:05.140 Those two things are very different visions.

00:35:07.700 We used to use the word tolerance to tolerate.

00:35:10.520 Are you tolerant?

00:35:12.040 Now it has to be acceptance and even advocacy.

00:35:14.560 Reminds me of the summer job grants program a few years back where you had to sign an attestation.

00:35:19.980 Right.

00:35:20.240 That you agreed with Justin Trudeau on social policy.

00:35:22.200 It's got nothing to do with the summer job.

00:35:23.460 Right.

00:35:23.760 Exactly.

00:35:24.860 You've got so many fables in here.

00:35:26.460 I can't go through them all.

00:35:27.440 Fable seven, public inquiries provide accountability.

00:35:29.680 Well, we've learned that one from both Justice Rolo and David Johnson, who has a Chinese name, I learned, David Jiangshan, given to him.

00:35:38.940 He's so well known.

00:35:40.160 I mean, he sent his daughters to university there.

00:35:43.620 He could send, he was the president of the university.

00:35:45.580 He was the governing general.

00:35:46.660 He could have sent his daughters to any school in the world, Cambridge, Harvard.

00:35:50.500 He sent them to Chinese schools. 1.00

00:35:53.000 They're not the finest schools in the world, but they're the way to get connected to China.

00:35:56.380 He's a Chinese asset.

00:35:59.200 I don't know.

00:35:59.620 I don't know if you have thoughts.

00:36:00.960 I'm not aware of that, Becker.

00:36:03.040 Fable eight, professional regulators are nonpolitical and act in the public interest.

00:36:07.320 I mean, that's the case of Jordan Peterson.

00:36:09.080 That's right.

00:36:09.460 And that hearing was heard just last week.

00:36:11.220 Do we know?

00:36:12.120 We do not know the outcome yet.

00:36:13.700 Yeah.

00:36:14.460 Well, it'll be very interesting because that's the College of Psychologists on Ontario.

00:36:20.460 Yes.

00:36:20.760 And all their complaints were from, I mean, Jordan Peterson doesn't have any patients anymore.

00:36:25.920 Right.

00:36:26.160 I know.

00:36:26.540 Correct.

00:36:26.720 So these aren't people who said, oh, he mistreated me or he took advantage in some way or he violated.

00:36:33.880 He didn't know that.

00:36:34.440 It's not even on the table.

00:36:36.000 The question is merely, you know, how he behaves on social media.

00:36:40.180 And so they're using, they're really, it's an abuse of law.

00:36:45.640 It's a vexatious litigation.

00:36:47.360 But because it's not in a real court, it can't be dismissed with prejudice.

00:36:52.460 The lawyers making submissions in the case last week,

00:36:55.260 even said at one point, they said, it's not even a question of the content of these tweets or the comments.

00:37:03.380 It's the tone.

00:37:04.540 That's incredible.

00:37:08.180 Um, on the one hand, the College of Psychologists of Ontario can do whatever they please and he's going to stop them.

00:37:15.520 And if they can take Jordan Peterson down a peg, that's a message to everyone else in the country.

00:37:22.580 If we can take him down with his fame and his fortune, we can take you down, buddy.

00:37:28.220 But on the other hand, Jordan Peterson is an irresistible force.

00:37:31.780 He has such a following and he's very sharp himself.

00:37:35.460 Very sharp and he has a, and he has a spine.

00:37:37.840 Yeah.

00:37:38.260 That's, that's...

00:37:38.880 Oh, well, that's, that's the essential thing.

00:37:40.500 Yes.

00:37:41.280 And, um, I don't know how that's going to play out because on the one hand, institutionally,

00:37:46.720 they will suffer damage in the court of public opinion if they rule against him.

00:37:51.740 And they may eventually, Peterson may eventually win if it appeals to a court of law.

00:37:56.040 But on the other hand, you've got this nest of activists who say, I got him.

00:38:00.920 I've got him in my little kangaroo court.

00:38:04.480 I'm the boss here.

00:38:05.980 I'm not even a real judge.

00:38:07.600 I'm the boss and I got him before me.

00:38:10.020 I'm going to get him.

00:38:10.840 This is my one chance to get him.

00:38:12.540 I think you've, you've got a hell of a thing because why wouldn't they stick it to,

00:38:17.700 these are the woke activists.

00:38:19.160 Why wouldn't they stick it to him?

00:38:20.320 Well, and, and this all gets tangled up in the role of these executive bodies, like the regulator.

00:38:27.480 The regulator is a government body, even though it's self-regulation.

00:38:31.120 And, you know, when the, when the courts, you know, hear the application with respect to what the college has done,

00:38:39.060 then you get the question of whether or not the court should defer to the regulator or whether or not the limits are strict.

00:38:45.360 I mean, all, all of these things we're talking about are, are displayed in cases like this and bring to light the dilemmas that we are now facing as a society and as a legal system about how the rules are supposed to work and, and who gets to say.

00:39:02.620 You know, I was a lawyer.

00:39:04.580 I graduated from law school.

00:39:05.940 I practiced a bit, but then I, I got busy doing other shenanigans, but I kept my status with the law society because I, you know, I sort of liked, I liked calling myself a lawyer.

00:39:14.200 But that opened myself up to complaints identical to this.

00:39:17.940 I didn't practice law.

00:39:18.720 I didn't have any clients, but that conduct on becoming a lawyer is such a catch-all.

00:39:23.560 They would, they, it was a handful of people who would, every time I would write a newspaper column, they would submit it.

00:39:29.640 And there was a point in time when I was responsible for 10% of all the work at the law society of Alberta's compliance, what they told me.

00:39:36.260 And I got to know the staff there and I, I jokingly said to them, I'm sorry, you have to read all of my columns and watch all of my TV shows.

00:39:43.820 I got, I got on a first name basis.

00:39:45.580 They were pretty friendly.

00:39:47.020 All 24 complaints were dismissed, but I meant 24.

00:39:51.200 And it took a lot of time.

00:39:53.120 And, and I made a decision because I, I, you know, I, I like thinking about the law and using the law, but I don't want to be a lawyer.

00:40:00.560 I, I haven't done that in more than 20 years now.

00:40:02.960 Right.

00:40:04.680 So I said to the law side, I'm happy to resign, but I can't resign under a cloud of an accusation because that's called a deemed disbarment.

00:40:13.520 Right.

00:40:13.980 So we actually arranged it so the moment they acquitted me from the last one, I just said, okay, I'm, I'm done now.

00:40:20.220 Believe it or not, the two complainants sued the law side to try and bring me back in so they could punish me.

00:40:25.180 It's crazy.

00:40:25.960 Right.

00:40:26.520 I mean, but that's what they're trying to do to Jordan Peterson. 1.00

00:40:29.420 Yes.

00:40:29.620 Because he is such a success.

00:40:32.540 They want to say he is a, I don't know, the equivalent of disbarred or defrocked.

00:40:37.820 I don't know what you say about a psychologist who is being disciplined, but they want to attach that huge asterisk to his name because he's out there.

00:40:46.340 Combination of psychology and philosophy and history.

00:40:50.200 Like it's such a wonderful thing.

00:40:51.560 Yes.

00:40:52.000 And they want to say, no, no, no, he's disbarred.

00:40:53.860 But, but another interesting thing about this case though, is that it's not even disciplinary yet.

00:40:59.320 They haven't even done an investigation yet.

00:41:01.360 Really?

00:41:31.760 I mean, we're, we're, this is just a preliminary thing and it really doesn't, doesn't deserve to be examined this way.

00:41:37.100 Well, you know what that is, they are trying to, they can't out debate him.

00:41:42.380 I mean, one of the favorite debates I've ever watched of all time was when he was on channel four and then you, oh yes.

00:41:48.980 And permit me just to throw to a clip of that because to this day, I think that was perhaps the most glorious interview I've ever seen.

00:41:57.040 Indulge me.

00:41:57.840 Here's a minute of that.

00:41:58.820 Who cited freedom of speech in that?

00:42:00.420 Why should your right to freedom of speech, Trump, a trans person's right not to be offended?

00:42:06.720 Because in order to be able to think you have to risk being offensive.

00:42:13.640 I mean, look at the conversation we're having right now, you know, like you're certainly willing to risk offending me in the pursuit of truth.

00:42:20.000 Why should you have the right to do that?

00:42:21.660 It's been rather uncomfortable.

00:42:22.840 Well, I'm, I'm very glad I put you on the spot.

00:42:26.900 I'm very glad that I have exercised my freedom of speech.

00:42:29.200 You get my point.

00:42:30.000 It's like, you're, you're doing what you should do, which is digging a bit to see what the hell's going on.

00:42:34.760 And that is what you should do.

00:42:36.120 But you're exercising your freedom of speech to certainly risk offending me.

00:42:40.260 And that's fine.

00:42:41.480 I think more power to you as far as I'm concerned.

00:42:44.580 Except you haven't sat there and.

00:42:47.700 Oh, that's, that's so, so good.

00:42:49.480 Jordan Peterson's a pretty good debater.

00:42:51.060 Um, you, you're probably not going to get him that way.

00:42:56.500 He, he, um, he's got a big fall and he's financially successful.

00:43:02.180 How do you get him?

00:43:03.460 How do you get a guy like that? 0.91

00:43:05.260 Well, you manipulate the legal system, a legal system that was built to protect patients from abusive psychologists has now been taken off mission and by woke extremists.

00:43:16.500 And it's not just the college of psychologists.

00:43:18.600 I mean, so the, the idea of, of professional competence more and more and not, not across the board, not in every case, but, but you can see how more regulators are looking at professional competence through an ideological lens in there.

00:43:33.780 Well, that's why they shut down, uh, I think it was called Trinity Western University and BC wanted a law school and they forbade them.

00:43:42.120 They said, yeah, your teaching's up to snuff.

00:43:43.760 There's no doubt your curriculum is, as rigorous, but you have a student, um, personal conduct policy not to have sex outside of marriage. 0.98

00:43:53.480 That includes gay sex because you have this student conduct code. 0.99

00:43:59.900 We are not allowing you. 0.98

00:44:02.740 We're not going to, so the, the law side of Ontario and so the other law society said in advance, we will not acknowledge that anyone, even someone who is gay, you can be gay and go to Trinity Western.

00:44:15.860 Sure.

00:44:16.560 Even a gay graduate from Trinity Western law school will not be certified in Ontario or other problems. 0.98

00:44:23.180 You can come from a law school in Saudi Arabia or Iran and take your tests and be certified where they literally stone gays to death. 1.00

00:44:32.120 But how dare you think that a Christian university will be able to accredit lawyers. 1.00

00:44:36.600 And this brings us all the way back full circle to the charter because the Supreme Court of Canada heard that case and deferred to the law societies to do as they had done, even though the only charter right in question was held by Trinity Western and its people.

00:44:54.240 Right.

00:44:54.580 They had the freedom of religion.

00:44:56.120 The law societies are part of the state.

00:44:58.140 They're subject to the charter.

00:44:59.600 But the Supreme Court said, we're going to defer, essentially.

00:45:02.460 We're going to allow the law societies, as long as what they've done is reasonably within what we are going to imagine as the values of the charter, then we're going to let it go.

00:45:15.520 Well, Bruce, it's great to catch up with you.

00:45:18.160 And I understand that you may be going back to teaching.

00:45:20.880 Is that right?

00:45:22.400 Eventually, not this September, but the September after that.

00:45:25.860 Right.

00:45:26.100 Well, I'm very glad.

00:45:26.960 And I think that there's not a lot of professors out there who are willing to speak out.

00:45:32.920 I mean, it's been a while since I was in law school.

00:45:35.740 I think back then, dissent was more allowed.

00:45:38.420 In fact, some professors encouraged it.

00:45:40.440 I wonder if that's how it is in the academies these days.

00:45:45.000 Well, there are always fun moments where the debate is the thing.

00:45:50.780 And I am of the opinion that at the universities, generally, that is becoming more rare.

00:45:58.140 People are much more uptight about saying the wrong thing.

00:46:02.060 You can see it in the student body.

00:46:04.760 They don't want to get criticized in this age of social media.

00:46:09.400 I think there is...

00:46:10.660 Students recording everything on phones.

00:46:12.620 It's got to be tough.

00:46:13.540 You can't get one word wrong.

00:46:14.780 Well, also, there is a...

00:46:16.780 For my money, inside the universities, there's also a narrowing of acceptable thought on the part of the faculty and the granting agencies and so on.

00:46:26.700 So, in many ways, the university environment has narrowed in that sense, yes.

00:46:32.680 Well, listen, I wish you good luck here.

00:46:34.540 As I said, at the outset, you're a rare person in the legal community in the highest heights of the priesthood, and yet you haven't bent the knee.

00:46:42.960 That's very rare.

00:46:43.760 I don't know if I would survive...

00:46:46.080 I mean, I survived law school 25 years ago.

00:46:48.300 I don't know if I would survive it today.

00:46:51.020 Well, you know, a lot of people go to law school, and they do survive it, and they become terrific lawyers.

00:46:57.260 But I think for some, it can be a challenge.

00:46:59.520 Yeah.

00:46:59.820 Yeah.

00:47:01.020 Before we go, is there anything we should be keeping an eye peeled from you?

00:47:04.040 Is there a website?

00:47:04.940 This essay you wrote is on C2C Journal.

00:47:08.000 C2C Journal, yes.

00:47:08.960 And all the stuff I do is posted on the Right to Probe website, righttoprobe.org.

00:47:15.040 Okay.

00:47:15.740 Great.

00:47:16.380 Good to catch up with you.

00:47:17.280 Thanks, Ezra.

00:47:17.780 Great to have it.

00:47:18.360 Well, until next time, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night, and keep fighting for freedom.

00:47:27.020 Good to have it.

00:47:47.720 Thank you.

Rebel News Podcast - June 28, 2023

EZRA LEVANT ｜ A feature-length interview with law professor Bruce Pardy

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript