Rebel News Podcast - EZRA LEVANT ｜ CBC tried to smear Rebel News — so we beat them to the punch

00:00:00.000 Hello my friends. Strange morning. I woke up to an email from the CBC threatening to, well,

00:00:07.220 really do a hit job on me and Rebel News if I didn't answer them within a few hours. They gave

00:00:11.940 me very little notice. Well, I decided to answer them in the form of a video and that's my monologue

00:00:17.480 for today. We'll also interview our friend Ava Chipiuk from the Trucker Convoy. That's up a

00:00:22.380 little bit later. But first let me invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.

00:00:25.380 That's the video version of this show. And I'd like you to do that because I'm going to show

00:00:30.700 you a few things about this CBC threat to me. I want to show you the letter. I want to show you

00:00:36.040 my reply. Just go to rebelnewsplus.com, click subscribe. It's eight bucks a month. And you

00:00:42.620 know, we really rely on that money because unlike the CBC, we don't take any public funds. All right,

00:00:48.260 here's today's show.

00:00:55.380 Tonight, the CBC threatens to smear Rebel News. I'll give you my response. It's January 25th

00:01:11.000 and this is the Ezra Levant Show.

00:01:27.380 Trudeau's CBC state broadcaster just told me they're coming to smear Rebel News.

00:01:32.860 This morning, they contacted me telling me they were going to publish an attack on us

00:01:40.700 at 12 noon Alberta time today. They say they have a secret letter written by me to the Premier of

00:01:49.000 Alberta, Danielle Smith, and that they're going to publish a story about that letter at 12 noon. And

00:01:54.760 do I have any explanations for it? Wow.

00:01:58.860 Well, what would you do if a government journalist from Trudeau's CBC state broadcaster was trying to

00:02:04.860 blackmail you with a gotcha story? Well, I think you'd probably do the obvious. You would publish

00:02:11.140 the letter yourself first so everyone could see it in full. You'd call the CBC's bluff.

00:02:18.860 So that's what I'm doing. You can see my letter to Danielle Smith right now

00:02:23.680 at a website we've set up called lockdownamnesty.com. It's a five-page letter that I sent to the

00:02:31.600 Premier's Chief of Staff back in November after I had a chat with her in person. And I want to let

00:02:37.860 you know I am very proud of that letter and I stand by every word of it and I want you to read it

00:02:43.420 at lockdownamnesty.com. Read the whole thing for yourself.

00:02:46.620 It should come as no surprise that the CBC is coming to throw mud at Rebel News and me. They are

00:02:53.320 Justin Trudeau's state broadcaster. They are his attack dogs and they hate nothing more than Rebel

00:02:59.320 News and the people who support us. They follow Justin Trudeau's lead. Quite frankly, your,

00:03:05.880 I won't call it a media organization, your group of individuals need to take accountability for

00:03:14.060 some of the polarization that we're seeing in this country. And I think Canadians are cluing into

00:03:21.600 the fact that there is a really important decision we take about the kind of country

00:03:26.760 we want to see. And I salute all extraordinary hard-working journalists that put science and facts

00:03:34.100 at the heart of what they do and ask me tough questions every day, but make sure that they are

00:03:40.840 educating and informing Canadians from a broad range of perspectives, which is the last thing 0.80

00:03:46.940 that you guys do.

00:03:48.380 The CBC obeys Trudeau and copies him. So they smear us and they attack us. They're part of the

00:03:54.800 parliamentary press gallery that has illegally voted to block our reporters from attending press

00:03:59.700 conferences in Ottawa. That's how gross the CBC is. So the CBC has come for Rebel News now.

00:04:05.700 They think this is their moment to hurt us. Now, when I got their letter this morning, I thought

00:04:11.360 for a moment of writing back to the CBC smear merchants directly, but then I thought, why would

00:04:16.160 I do that? Rebel News has far more viewers in Alberta than the CBC does. Why wouldn't I just

00:04:22.700 make this video with their gotcha questions and my answers and send it out myself? At least

00:04:28.960 that way I know that Trudeau's journalists won't tamper with what I say. Out of fairness,

00:04:34.340 I'll read to you their entire letter to me. They would never give me that fairness.

00:04:39.280 Their letter is from a wicked liar named Megan Grant. But first, let me tell you a little

00:04:43.320 bit about what this, what this is all about and why it's happening. See, when Alberta Premier

00:04:47.960 Danielle Smith was first running for the leadership of the United Conservative Party a few months 0.94

00:04:52.740 ago to succeed Jason Kenney, when she launched her campaign, our reporter, Adam Sos, asked her

00:04:59.360 a great question that the CBC would never ask her. We asked if she would call off Jason

00:05:05.200 Kenney's politically motivated lockdown prosecutions.

00:05:08.900 Meanwhile, though, we're still seeing targeted charges against pastors and small business owners.

00:05:13.920 Some of these are being dropped, fortunately. Others are still clogging up the courts. Are you

00:05:18.660 willing to commit to staying charges and freezing ongoing investigations against those emanating

00:05:23.440 from the lockdown? And how do you plan to restore faith in the courts and in politics?

00:05:28.320 Yes, we have to, we never should have come down on pastors the way we did some every other

00:05:35.000 jurisdiction, it seems we're able to enforce their measures without putting pastors in jail and has

00:05:41.480 created so much division in our communities. So yes, we should drop we should drop those. We should

00:05:48.540 also drop charges against small businesses. Part of the reason why we're enjoying the freedoms that we have

00:05:53.240 today and the ability to go and watch hockey games is because there were some courageous people who

00:05:59.520 stood up and said, you know what, there's another way to do this enough is enough. It took the

00:06:02.720 politicians a little while longer to realize that. But now that they've realized that, I think part of

00:06:08.460 the healing process is to make sure that some of those, that those charges are dropped. The other

00:06:13.820 thing we need to do, though, is we need to have a full reckoning about what happened, who made the

00:06:19.440 decisions, why they made the decisions that they did? Great question and a great answer. It became

00:06:24.020 part of her campaign platform. And right then the CBC resolved that they would do anything in their

00:06:29.820 power to destroy Danielle Smith, but they failed. She is now the premier of Alberta, but the CBC knows

00:06:37.000 they'll get another chance just four months from now in the general election. So they are campaigning

00:06:42.020 against her full tilt. Anyways, it looks like Smith is serious about keeping her promise to call off

00:06:48.700 these very political lockdown prosecutions. Here's Smith confirming her position when our reporter

00:06:54.920 Selina Glass asked her about it in November. During your campaign, you said that not only would you

00:07:00.360 issue an apology to those prosecuted during COVID restrictions, but you would also grant them

00:07:04.960 amnesty. When can we expect those apologies? I can apologize right now. I'm deeply sorry.

00:07:12.020 for anyone who was inappropriately subjected to discrimination as a result of their vaccine

00:07:19.560 status. I'm deeply sorry for any government's employee that was fired from their job because

00:07:25.220 of their vaccine status. And I welcome them back if they want to come back. As for the amnesty,

00:07:31.040 I have to get some legal advice on that. And so I've already asked my staff to request that advice

00:07:37.840 so I can see how we would be able to proceed on that. My view has been that these were political

00:07:43.420 decisions that were made. And so I think that they can be political decisions to offer a reversal.

00:07:48.320 But I do want to get some legal advice on that first.

00:07:51.380 Would that also have to do with the timeline for the proposed amnesty?

00:07:55.280 I would have to see. If I can do it, I would do it at the earliest opportunity. So I'm hoping within

00:08:01.380 the next week I'll get that legal advice. And at Christmas, I personally sat down for a one-on-one

00:08:07.820 year-end interview with Premier Smith. And it was actually the main issue I asked her about. And I'm

00:08:13.660 not going to play you the whole interview. We talked for almost half an hour. You can see that

00:08:17.760 whole interview at lockdownamnesty.com if you want. We put the video there. But here's just a taste of

00:08:23.100 it. The world has moved on, but Alberta Health and Alberta Justice are still prosecuting. And they

00:08:27.840 haven't had a lot of wins, but they've had a few. And it just feels like a hangover from a bygone

00:08:34.940 era. It doesn't feel like it's in sync with the times. Is there a way to move on? It feels like a

00:08:45.600 vendetta from some prosecutors that really want to punish these guys. Now, I'm coming from a very

00:08:50.920 strong point of view. I support these guys. And I know you've got to be... You can't meddle in a

00:08:56.620 judicial process, but boy, it doesn't feel like it's in the public interest.

00:09:00.220 You know, I think we learned a lot about how our justice system works in watching things at the

00:09:04.540 federal level and how the Attorney General and the Crown have an independence from the Premier's

00:09:11.240 office. The questions that I can ask and have asked and continue to ask is, is it in the public

00:09:17.540 interest? And is there a reasonable likelihood of conviction? And I think the longer that we go on

00:09:24.120 seeing that prosecutions are not being successful, it makes a stronger case on both of those fronts,

00:09:31.060 that if the conviction isn't likely, we know that we have a lot of pressure on our courts.

00:09:37.400 And if the public has now come to terms with wanting a different approach, is it in the public

00:09:41.820 interest? It's becoming increasingly hard to answer those two questions. Now, I put it to the

00:09:47.200 prosecutors. And I've asked them to do a review of the cases with those two things in mind.

00:09:52.880 Smith was very careful with her words, wasn't she? She said she wasn't going to interfere with any

00:09:58.620 prosecutions. That's what Justin Trudeau did to save his corrupt friends at SNC-Lavalin. But

00:10:04.320 Smith would follow the rules and just have a look at cases to make sure they were legally appropriate,

00:10:12.080 especially since the province was losing so many of those cases in court.

00:10:16.820 Were they really in the public interest to pursue? Did they really have a chance of conviction?

00:10:21.060 Well, the government journalists at Trudeau's CBC state broadcaster couldn't stand that.

00:10:28.900 And they hunted and hunted for proof that someone did something wrong. They showed a passion for this

00:10:33.920 story that they never showed for Trudeau's interference with the SNC-Lavalin case. And huge scoop,

00:10:40.340 they found the smoking gun. Here's the blockbuster story that Megan, the CBC liar, published last week.

00:10:47.080 Let me show it to you on Twitter. New, Alberta Premier's office contacted Crown Prosecution about

00:10:54.220 Coutts cases. Sources. Coutts is some of the trucker cases. And I'm not sure if you can see it, but more

00:11:01.720 than half a million people read that tweet. And if you click on it, it leads to this story that is still

00:11:07.780 up on the CBC website right now. Alberta Premier's office contacted Crown Prosecution about Coutts cases.

00:11:14.920 Sources. Now I'll read just a little bit from the story. A staffer in Alberta Premier Danielle Smith's

00:11:20.780 office sent a series of emails to the Alberta Crown Prosecution Service challenging prosecutors'

00:11:27.480 assessment and direction on cases stemming from the Coutts border blockades and protests,

00:11:31.620 CBC News has learned. The emails were sent last fall, according to sources whom CBC has agreed

00:11:39.300 not to identify because they fear they could lose their jobs. Wow. That is a bombshell. That's amazing

00:11:45.540 investigative journalism. It's a smoking gun. In fact, it was so devastating, it caused an emergency

00:11:51.660 caucus meeting in Alberta. Smith's MLAs were in open revolt. Except it wasn't true. There were no such

00:12:01.440 emails. And the CBC didn't admit until days later that they actually never saw any such emails.

00:12:10.240 They didn't disclose that in their original story because they're not real journalists. They're

00:12:14.240 government journalists. That's a very different thing you have to understand. They work for Trudeau.

00:12:19.280 But because of that false accusation, the public service of Alberta, the nonpartisan permanent staff

00:12:25.160 government, they had an emergency search of every single email between the premier's entire staff

00:12:31.720 and the Justice Department. They literally reviewed one million emails.

00:12:40.280 And there wasn't a single one. Not one.

00:12:44.200 Here's a CBC story grudgingly admitting that, nearly a week after their smear was first published.

00:12:52.280 You can see this was written by a different CBC reporter. Megan Grant is still lying about things. 1.00

00:12:58.920 Her lie is still being published, both the tweet and the story that I showed you. They're still up.

00:13:03.640 All they've done is added this little note to it. They say,

00:13:08.120 editors note the original version of the story published January 19th neglected to note that CBC

00:13:14.680 News has not seen the emails in question. Seriously, they let that out? They didn't mention

00:13:22.280 that when they first made the accusation? They didn't admit. They actually hadn't seen any proof.

00:13:28.600 They smeared the entire government, not to mention the prosecutors. They tried to cause a caucus revolt,

00:13:34.520 and they actually hadn't seen the emails they claimed existed, and that we now know do not exist. How is

00:13:42.600 that story even still online? How are they still broadcasting then? How is that headline even still

00:13:50.760 there? How is that wicked liar, that fabricator, that hoaxer, that disinformation spreader, that Trudeau,

00:13:57.960 she'll Megan Grant? How is she even still employed there? Well, because lying to Albertans and lying 0.98

00:14:05.160 about Albertans is a key requirement to work for Trudeau's CBC, duh. Remember this other CBC liar lying

00:14:11.640 about the trucker convoy? You know, given Canada's support of Ukraine in this current crisis with Russia,

00:14:18.760 I don't know if it's far-fetched to ask, but there is concern that Russian actors could be continuing to

00:14:26.200 fuel things as this protest grows, but perhaps even instigating it from the outset.

00:14:31.640 Huh. She actually got a raise and a promotion after that lie because it pleased Justin Trudeau.

00:14:37.480 I bet Megan Grant got an attagirl call from the PMO, too. So the CBC just blew up whatever

00:14:43.880 credibility they had left in Alberta. I mean, not that they had any. I mean, they really hit rock bottom

00:14:48.360 such a long time ago, but they're still digging. But Megan Grant is now trying in some way to salvage 0.97

00:14:54.440 her credibility. So she sent me this letter this morning, and I'm going to read it to you. And

00:14:59.320 you can see it in full at our special website, lockdownamnesty.com. Here's what the liar Megan 1.00

00:15:05.720 Grant said to me. Hi, Ezra. My colleagues and I are working on a story about the premier putting

00:15:12.600 pressure on the justice minister in an effort to get COVID-related charges dropped, especially Arthur

00:15:17.960 Pawlowski's. We have an email dated October 25 sent from you to the premier's office following an in-person

00:15:23.880 meeting, which took place at the UCP convention days earlier. The email advocates for nonviolent

00:15:29.400 COVID-related charges to be stayed or withdrawn and advises the premier on how she could make that

00:15:34.600 happen. The email makes the case for why some charges should be dropped and why the attorney

00:15:39.640 general should intervene. My questions for you are, what prompted you to send that email? What influence

00:15:47.320 do you feel your advocacy has had on these types of cases? Do you wish to add further comment on these

00:15:52.600 matters? We plan to publish at noon. Many thanks, Megan Grant. So now she's trying to imply that in

00:16:01.160 some way, Rebel News has done something wrong or that I have, or that we have somehow counseled the

00:16:06.760 premier to do something wrong. It's a gotcha. And she says, I only have a few hours to reply or she's

00:16:13.160 going to leak my letter. So I'm going to leak it first at lockdownamnesty.com. You know,

00:16:21.320 Rebel News and I have been saying the same thing about these lockdown prosecutions in public and

00:16:26.280 in private to anyone who would listen for nearly three years, including at Smith's annual general

00:16:31.640 meeting. And in my year end interview with Smith, you might even know we literally have a billboard

00:16:38.920 at the side of the main highway in Alberta calling on Smith to drop the prosecutions. It's called

00:16:43.720 lockdown amnesty. Here's an excerpt from my five page letter, the one that the CBC thinks is a smoking

00:16:49.400 gun. It is five pages with legal footnotes. There's a lot of legalese in them. So I won't read the whole

00:16:56.040 thing to you, but here's part of it. I just want to give you a flavor of this letter.

00:17:00.920 I am only suggesting that the prosecutions, which have been politically motivated,

00:17:05.320 targeting people who only sought to exercise their constitutional freedom of expression and religion,

00:17:10.440 be stayed or discontinued. From my knowledge of the prosecutions,

00:17:14.440 most people charged were either attending a protest or a religious gathering. Usually the

00:17:19.560 people charged were the low hanging fruit, the most vocal or the ones sharing their message on social

00:17:24.280 media. None of the prosecutions that the democracy fund or Rebel News supports have any violence or

00:17:30.040 firearms involved. The premier's action on these prosecutions will promote democratic principles

00:17:35.240 and ensure an appropriate use of our court's limited resources. You've heard me say that a dozen

00:17:40.920 times before, including in my year-end interview with the premier, the CBC somehow thinks this is

00:17:45.640 a gotcha moment, but it just shows they only re-breathe their own air and listen to their own

00:17:51.480 point of view. They never listen to any other voices and they obviously don't watch my show or

00:17:56.200 they'd know what I said to the premier herself in my year-end interview. Here's another excerpt from

00:18:01.400 my letter. Really, go and read the whole thing at lockdownamnesty.com. I'm very proud of that letter

00:18:06.680 and I think you might enjoy it. You might learn something from it. I think it was a useful letter.

00:18:11.240 Let me read some more. Withdrawing charges, staying proceedings or declining to prosecute

00:18:17.880 or continue a prosecution is justified if there is no reasonable likelihood of conviction. This

00:18:24.200 standard varies by the facts of each case or if the prosecution does not serve the public interest.

00:18:29.880 The prosecutions that I am aware of do not meet either element of the test, let alone both.

00:18:34.680 So staying the charges is well justified. There are clear legal issues with many of the prosecutions

00:18:40.600 that I am familiar with. Prosecutions under the Public Health Act are likely to fail

00:18:45.080 because as the premier likely recalls, the chief medical officer of health orders were vague,

00:18:49.720 confusing, inconsistent, and did not specifically prohibit certain activities." 0.55

00:18:55.320 There's a little legalese in there, but I think you can get it. Last excerpt. I'm proud of

00:19:00.120 this letter. I want you to read it. The premier can, should she choose to, direct the attorney general

00:19:07.000 to review and withdraw or discontinue any cases arising from the chief medical officer of health

00:19:12.760 orders under the Public Health Act, criminal charges being prosecuted by the Alberta Crown Prosecution

00:19:18.680 Service, charges under the Critical Infrastructure Defense Act, or any pending charges or applications

00:19:24.520 stemming from alleged breaches of the court's orders to refrain from public gatherings or otherwise.

00:19:30.920 The premier could request that the review be undertaken with respect to each prosecution held

00:19:36.280 with Alberta Crown Prosecution Service, and cases where there is no reasonable chance of conviction,

00:19:42.200 or where prosecution does not serve the public interest, be discontinued immediately. Obviously,

00:19:47.800 the attorney general would take into account the premier's view that without more, i.e. violence,

00:19:53.400 proceeding with these prosecutions is not in the public interest, unquote. Look, I've said that in

00:19:57.720 public. I've said that in private. I've said that to the previous government. I've said it to the current

00:20:01.960 government. I said it to Danielle Smith in an interview, and I've said it to her in a private conversation,

00:20:07.400 and I've said it to her in an amazing five-page letter that you really should read for yourself.

00:20:11.720 And that's what the CBC can't stand. They can't stand that Premier Danielle Smith would actually

00:20:19.960 listen to another point of view besides Trudeau's point of view or the CBC's point of view. She can't

00:20:25.160 stand, sorry, they can't stand that Premier Smith actually might care about freedom and think that

00:20:31.240 bullying Christian pastors or, you know, small restauranteurs or other peaceful protesters is not

00:20:37.080 in the public interest. The CBC can't stand that Smith actually talks to me and gave me a great

00:20:43.640 year-end interview, by the way. Look, I have no idea what Smith did or didn't do with the letter I

00:20:49.320 wrote to her. I hope it was circulated, frankly. I'm just glad that she's interested in more points

00:20:55.320 of view than the Trudeau shills at the CBC. And that's what the CBC hates. So that's why I'm not

00:21:02.520 actually scared about the CBC leaking my letter because they might think it's scandalous, but I

00:21:07.560 am actually very proud of it. In fact, I would be grateful if you read it. And in fact, if you are

00:21:13.160 in Albertan, I would encourage you to send a version of that letter to Smith yourself or to your local MLA.

00:21:21.320 And while you're at that special website, LockdownAmnesty.com, take a moment to sign our

00:21:26.280 petition. I just checked and nearly 25,000 people have signed it so far to call off these prosecutions.

00:21:33.320 Let's see how high we can get that number. If you're like me and you despise the CBC and you're

00:21:40.920 deeply embarrassed for the unethical journalism published by Megan Grant last week,

00:21:45.400 do something positive about it. Sign our petition calling on the premier to bring in

00:21:50.840 Lockdown Amnesty. That's what we're calling it.

00:21:53.080 And while you're on that website, feel free to chip in to support our journalism

00:21:57.720 and our advocacy. Megan Grant is bought and paid for by Justin Trudeau, and it shows.

00:22:12.520 Well, I'm recording this interview segment at 3 p.m. Eastern time, which is 1 p.m. Alberta time.

00:22:23.720 And the reason I tell you that is because the CBC has not yet published their threatened smear

00:22:29.720 against me or Rebel News, despite saying their deadline was 12 noon. So I will keep you posted

00:22:35.160 on how that goes. I'll let you know probably tomorrow. We'll see what they do about it.

00:22:40.220 But I want to talk about a very important thing. It was very important to Rebel News viewers in 2022,

00:22:46.940 the Trucker Convoy, and then the echo of that in the Trucker Commission, the Public Order Inquiry

00:22:55.500 Commission, where a judge presided over a judicial inquiry for weeks into whether or not Justin Trudeau's

00:23:03.100 invocation of that form of martial law was justifiable. And one of the stars—in fact,

00:23:09.340 I would say I was very proud of the democracy funds rule, but there is no denying it—the gaggle

00:23:15.580 of lawyers from the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms really set the tone. There was, I think,

00:23:20.540 seven of them all together, and they were related. There was the JCCF lawyers and the Freedom Convoy lawyers,

00:23:27.420 the Trucker lawyers. I couldn't quite keep them all straight, but one of our favorites was Eva

00:23:32.860 Chipiuk, who not only grilled the Prime Minister directly, but she also was a regular guest on our

00:23:39.260 pop-up studio that we had in Ottawa, where we did our live streams every day. I was really proud that

00:23:44.940 we did that. We really covered that commission. Well, here's just a little recap of Eva asking

00:23:51.020 questions of Justin Trudeau. I'll just play this before we bring Eva back on the show. Take a look.

00:23:55.980 Minister Blair, Public Safety Minister, Minister Mendicino, National Security Intelligence Advisor

00:24:03.740 Jody Thomas, and RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucky, and today you, testified that the federal government

00:24:09.740 was committed to exhausting all alternatives to a resolution prior to making a decision to invoke the

00:24:15.820 extraordinary powers of the Emergencies Act. Do you agree that that accurately describes your

00:24:21.340 government's position? That the invocation of the Emergencies Act was a measure of last resort,

00:24:27.500 was not something to be taken lightly. Thank you. And something to do when other options were not

00:24:33.660 effective. And you are aware that the OPP, along with others, developed an engagement proposal and you

00:24:40.620 were advised of that proposal at the IRG meeting on February 12th, correct?

00:24:45.660 Um, it was a proposal, but we had, and it was presented to us, we had more questions, uh, about, uh,

00:24:54.380 how it would actually work. Uh, there, it was not a complete proposal. My last question,

00:24:59.100 Mr. Prime Minister, when did you and your government start to become so afraid of your own citizens?

00:25:06.940 That's a very unfair... I am not, and we are not.

00:25:10.620 Those are my questions.

00:25:11.820 Well, good for her. And I'm glad that freedom-oriented lawyers were allowed in. But the 0.99

00:25:17.500 other day, I saw Ava tweeting about the imminent release of the Judicial Commission's report,

00:25:25.100 and I wanted to bring her on the show to hear her elocute on that at greater length. Joining me now

00:25:30.540 via Skype from Edmonton, the City of Champions, is our friend Ava Chipic. Ava, great to see you again.

00:25:35.420 Nice to see you as well, Ezra.

00:25:37.740 Well, it's a pleasure to have you on, and you were a very strong part of the team out there,

00:25:41.740 the freedom team. I really think that were it not for you guys and Alan Hohner of the Democracy Fund,

00:25:47.420 the whole flavor, the whole tone of that commission would have been very different. So I'm glad you

00:25:51.900 were on it. But the other day, I saw you tweeting a bit that you were a little worried. And, um, I,

00:25:57.980 I thought, well, let's get Eva on the show. Let's talk about it because I want to hear it. And,

00:26:02.780 and, you know, you might be right. So what, first of all, when do we expect the Judicial Commission to,

00:26:11.980 to issue its report? Do we, is that date set in stone?

00:26:17.260 It is. And that's one of the concerns, uh, I raised on Twitter and via social media,

00:26:22.700 is that the commission is going to publicly release the decision on February 20th. That would,

00:26:30.380 goes directly to parliament and the public. So, uh, one year anniversary of the day, um, the, uh,

00:26:36.700 the, uh, emergencies act was revoked. Right. So it's statutorily required that within a year,

00:26:44.780 a report is presented to parliament and presented to the public where the concern has been raised is

00:26:52.220 in order to set up the commission, parliament cabinet issued an order in council and it made

00:26:59.660 certain specifications. And one of the specifications that we noted is that the commission,

00:27:06.620 the commissioner was directed by, um, cabinet to issue a report no later than February 6th.

00:27:15.100 And that goes to cabinet only. So two weeks in advance of parliament and the public getting the

00:27:21.980 report, cabinet is getting it. Got it. Now I saw that, and that is concerning for two reasons. First

00:27:28.220 of all, it shortens the amount of time the judge has to operate by two weeks. And it was a very compressed

00:27:34.220 time frame. By the way, the judge, I think had an, uh, emergency surgery, if I'm not mistaken,

00:27:39.420 which delayed the whole inquiry by a number of weeks anyway. So, um, there, there were, uh,

00:27:45.500 obviously that couldn't be helped, but it's shortened the amount of time. But the idea of

00:27:51.660 Trudeau getting a secret copy of it for two weeks to work on his spin is troubling in a way. But

00:27:58.220 Eva, I think that is a standard practice with some reports about the government. If I'm not mistaken,

00:28:07.020 auditors general give their report to the government in advance too. And the rationale, I think,

00:28:15.980 is that since the government is what is sort of being on trial, they have a chance to think about it,

00:28:21.980 digest it, so that when it's released to the public, they can say, okay, we've reviewed it,

00:28:26.940 we accept this, we dispute that. Like if I can understand it, uh, so that the government

00:28:34.540 has some time to think about their response. I just don't like the fact that the government

00:28:39.180 obviously will be spinning against any criticism, but isn't that sort of normal on like auditor general

00:28:45.260 reports? Not that I'm aware. And so let's think about that for a moment. Uh, that's the best case

00:28:51.340 scenario is that it's given to the government in advance. And I do have concerns with the short

00:28:56.860 timeframe as well, that shortens the timeline for two weeks. When we had such an insane schedule in

00:29:03.820 Ottawa, it's, you know, completely unfair for the commission and for the parties to, uh, then even

00:29:10.380 shorten it more. So that being one concern, uh, spinning it is, would be the milder of the issues,

00:29:17.820 but given that nobody sees it, what if it, the issue is a little bit more sinister. And then at

00:29:24.460 that point cabinet has an opportunity to ask for changes. We don't see it. So we don't know. One

00:29:32.140 thing I do know that happens at least in other countries and situations like this is that you

00:29:37.420 would all, all parties at a minimum parties that were involved, lawyers that were involved,

00:29:42.380 should be able to get a copy, uh, like under embargo or under some kind of undertakings. We

00:29:49.340 were all asked to sign very stringent undertakings, which we did have some concerns about. So why isn't

00:29:55.420 that put in place for everybody at the same time either? Got it. I understand that because of course,

00:30:01.340 the government is one party, but so is, so was everybody else there, I suppose. I mean,

00:30:07.660 a party or at least had some standing. I mean, I wouldn't want the report to go into the hands of,

00:30:12.540 crazy activists, like say, Zexy Lee, but at least some of the lawyers there, I think.

00:30:17.740 But do you really think that changes would be made? Uh, is that permitted? Uh, is that in the

00:30:23.900 cabinet order? Because the idea that, you know, other than like a typo would be corrected, I would

00:30:30.140 think that I would hope that a judge would push back because this is a, it's a judge and a judicial

00:30:37.340 inquiry, if I'm not mistaken. So it has a certain, it has a certain level of authority

00:30:42.620 and to have one party ex parte, as they say, in secret with no one else there asking for changes.

00:30:49.900 I've got to hope that's unlikely or, or, um, irregular. Do we have, I mean, is there anything

00:30:58.780 in the, in the cabinet order that would permit that? So not that I see it. I think the words

00:31:04.060 are final, but what I would go to is what we saw throughout the inquiry. And I went very optimistic

00:31:10.860 about how it would be handled, but we did see that, uh, we had quite a bit of challenges

00:31:16.700 with the redacted documents that the federal government was giving to everyone and very

00:31:22.060 late disclosure, incredibly late, so late that it's not useful. Same with the redacted documents.

00:31:27.980 It's almost not useful to the parties when you can't understand it, when redactions were deemed

00:31:33.820 to be not proper because there's no lawyers and they're claiming solicitor sign client privilege.

00:31:40.300 And it shouldn't be on parties in an inquiry like that to be adversarial within one another.

00:31:46.940 So the, it was on the commission to ensure that it was a fair process for everyone.

00:31:53.340 Given that, that, that actually didn't transpire throughout the whole inquiry.

00:31:58.460 That's where I have a little bit more concerns about the transparency.

00:32:02.460 Now we didn't get transparency during the inquiry. So I have a little bit less faith that we're going

00:32:08.220 to have it at this end of the game. All right. Well, I hope that you're wrong.

00:32:13.820 Now, are there other issues that you're worried about? I take your point that this shortens the

00:32:19.180 amount of time the judge has to contemplate things. I take your point that it's only being shared with

00:32:24.060 the bad guys, so to speak. And I take your point that there's a possibility that changes could be made,

00:32:30.860 but I, I have to hope that that's an unlikely outcome.

00:32:36.460 Me too. I, and I have to agree that the second thing I did post about was that there,

00:32:41.820 the government really by the last week, especially relied on the legal opinion that was presented to

00:32:48.860 cabinet. That was the reason they justified the emergencies act. That is also secret. So again,

00:32:54.380 the transparency is really hard to see. And let me remind the viewers that this isn't just any act,

00:33:01.020 this is the emergencies act, formerly known as the war measures act. And when this new emergencies act

00:33:08.460 was debated, there was so much debate about this inquiry and that how important it is to be transparent

00:33:15.820 and accountable because this is the most egregious tool you can put on Canadians. So if we're going to

00:33:23.900 ask about transparency and accountability of the Canadian government at any time, this is the time.

00:33:31.980 Right. I take your point and you're right. And the thing is a legal opinion. Well, there are

00:33:36.540 tens of thousands of lawyers in Canada who wrote it. Was it a justice department lawyer or did justice

00:33:46.700 hire an outside firm? Was it a constitutional expert or someone friendly to the liberal party? Do we know

00:33:53.260 any of those answers? Do we know anything about, like, I mean, you could get five lawyers writing

00:33:58.460 five different opinions, sort of like doctors. Now there is a common body of law, but you can shop

00:34:05.340 around and there are law firms that are closely connected to the liberal party. There are law firms

00:34:10.220 that sort of tilt liberal. There are some that tilt conservative, believe it or not. There are even some

00:34:15.100 that tilt NDP, sort of labor oriented law firms. So the fact that we don't even know that information,

00:34:21.340 let alone see the legal memo, I think is worrying. They presented a document and all it said on the

00:34:30.860 top of the document was Department of Justice and everything else blanked out. So just, you know,

00:34:37.180 disheartening to see. And again, reminder, this is the most, you know, a stringent act that they could

00:34:44.540 use. And it is for the federal government to show that they justified using the emergencies act,

00:34:51.580 not for parties, especially the protesters. You know, it was, it's incumbent on the federal

00:34:58.380 government to do that. And if everything is so secret, it's incredibly hard to be reassured that

00:35:04.700 they did the right thing. Yeah. The whole point of the inquiry is to inquire and it's a public inquiry.

00:35:10.700 It's not a secret inquiry. Are there anything else? Is there anything else that's on your mind? I would

00:35:16.220 say that those are legitimate worries of different degrees of worrisomeness. The fact that the legal

00:35:25.340 opinion was not shown, I think goes to a lack of transparency. Now, do we know if the judge himself

00:35:31.100 saw the legal opinion? Not that we're aware of. No. Wow. See, that's weird. Why wouldn't a judge

00:35:37.340 who's running this community? I can understand, like in a lot of trials, there are matters that,

00:35:43.900 you know, both sides haggle over. I think the phrase is a voir dire, where you have sort of a

00:35:50.540 trial within a trial about whether or not you can disclose a certain piece of evidence.

00:35:56.220 And typically the judge and the two lawyers talk about it. And the judge will say, yes,

00:36:02.300 I will show that to the jury or no, I won't because it's too prejudicial or whatever. But

00:36:07.820 typically the judge gets to see everything. If the judge himself couldn't see that legal opinion,

00:36:15.580 that's troubling. Do we do we know that? I'm fairly confident because we do know that that

00:36:21.420 kind of voir dire process was set up for the CSIS information. And you touched on something very

00:36:29.020 important, is that in normal cases, the lawyers from both sides and the judge would again go into

00:36:36.060 this voir dire where nobody else can see it. And that makes sense. Again, we were under very strict

00:36:42.620 undertakings. But what happened with the CSIS was very interesting in its own right, in that the judge

00:36:49.020 got to see it and only people with special national clearance could go. So none of the lawyers for the

00:36:55.580 freedom corporation and the freedom oriented that I know of were able to participate in that voir dire.

00:37:02.460 You know what? I think that they were just using that to keep out other eyes. I just have no idea

00:37:08.380 how a legal opinion could be a national security issue if there was one or two facts in that legal

00:37:15.180 opinion. And by the way, did the lawyer who wrote the legal opinion have national security clearance?

00:37:20.300 So I have to be clear, that was a separate issue. It was the CSIS national security and threat,

00:37:26.380 their assessments. So while we were in Ottawa, they did a voir dire.

00:37:30.380 Got it, got it. Thank you. Now I understand. So you're saying there was a voir dire process

00:37:34.380 for another document. Thank you. Now I understand. All right. Well, listen, here's my take on this.

00:37:39.260 I was worried from the outset because I had heard scuttlebutt that the judge may have some

00:37:47.020 connections to the Liberal Party. My first reply to that was, yeah, many judges do. Most judges,

00:37:54.700 I would say in this country, are a lean liberal either ideologically or were appointed by a partisan

00:38:01.100 liberal. But you've got to be able to put that aside or you're not going to be happy with any

00:38:07.500 legal process. So I sort of held my breath on that. I also believe that the judge had a really

00:38:14.300 tough time, any judge would have, balancing all the different people and interests and parties

00:38:20.220 and interveners. And, you know, it was his job to make it run on time because, as you pointed out,

00:38:27.100 it has an end date. Most trials could be adjourned. That means to postpone, delayed, more days added.

00:38:33.420 This could, so this judge had a very tough job. He couldn't just call a break

00:38:37.900 and say, okay, we're going to spend two days looking at this side issue. He had to do it

00:38:43.100 almost, well, in a very rushed way. So I sympathized with the judge. And even if he got some of the calls

00:38:49.420 wrong, I don't think you can reject a judge. If a judge is asked to make 50 different decisions

00:38:55.820 in the course of a trial and he gets a few of them wrong or a few of them go the other way,

00:39:00.540 I don't think you can write off the judge for that because it would be too high a standard to say,

00:39:05.900 I want the judge to be perfect in every way from my point of view. So I, I'm going into this with

00:39:11.660 some hope. I'm going into this. I still have hope. Maybe I'm going to be proven to be a foolish,

00:39:18.300 naive, you know, justice lover who, who still believes that there's the rule of law. Believe me,

00:39:25.900 that's been taxed over the last three years. But at this point, Ava, I still am hopeful

00:39:33.500 that this public order inquiry commission will do the right thing and say what we all know,

00:39:38.460 which is Justin Trudeau had no national crisis rationale. It was all a political optics campaign

00:39:49.180 matter. And he just used the nuclear weapon just to save face against the truckers. I think that's

00:39:57.660 evident to everybody, even this judge. What I'm really afraid of, and I'm sorry, I'm rambling on. I'd

00:40:04.540 like your thoughts on this. Here's what I'm worried about. I'm worried that the judge is going to do what

00:40:10.700 the conflict of interest commissioner did, which is say, yeah, Trudeau broke the law. Duh. Of course

00:40:17.980 he did. And then the whole country shrugs and says, oh, well. And all the media says, oh, okay.

00:40:25.660 And Trudeau says, well, it's a learning experience for all of us. And nothing. Because Trudeau has had

00:40:33.580 so many scandals, including being convicted for breaking the conflict of interest, taking that secret

00:40:39.100 vacation. Firing Jody Wilson-Raybould is another crisis. And he just says, oh, yeah, sorry about

00:40:44.860 it. That's what I'm more worried about. I'm more worried that the judge will do the right thing.

00:40:48.940 And the entire national establishment, which is basically on his payroll, will say, oh, yeah,

00:40:53.260 that's okay. That's okay. Don't worry. So I'm actually really glad you brought that up. And that was

00:40:59.500 part of my tweet as well, is I put in a call to action. I said, if you don't believe this is fair,

00:41:05.820 or this is right, or this is not transparent, you as a Canadian should reach out to your MPs. And I

00:41:11.340 think maybe as Canadians, we've gotten a little bit passive about things in the last few years.

00:41:17.100 And obviously what's happened in the last year or so has shown that Canadians are interested in what's

00:41:24.300 going on in government. And exactly to your point, is this commission we knew from the beginning,

00:41:31.260 it doesn't have teeth, like many Canadians were asking for a tap teeth to put Justin Trudeau in

00:41:37.180 jail or something like that. It never had the power to do anything more than to make an assessment.

00:41:43.100 My call to action for Canadians is right now, if you don't think this is fair,

00:41:48.300 talk, reach out to your MPs, maybe do it on social media because they are looking at them. That's one

00:41:53.980 thing we did learn at the inquiry is they're sending, texting each other tweets all the time,

00:41:58.860 even at a high ministerial levels. But the second thing is, if the commission does find that Justin

00:42:05.260 Trudeau should not have invoked the emergencies act, it was not justified, like both of us agree,

00:42:11.660 then what is the next step? Canadians should call to action their MPs and say, that's it,

00:42:17.420 this is the final straw. Now this was the worst thing he could have done to his own Canadian citizens.

00:42:23.420 And it was found to be not justified. We need to do something about it.

00:42:27.900 Well, listen, I hope Canadians do do something about it because I'm worried that the 0.96

00:42:31.500 establishment won't remember the truckers. It felt that the truckers, as George Orwell would say,

00:42:36.300 the proles, the proletariat, ordinary people to do something because all the fancy people in the

00:42:41.420 country for two years did not. All the political parties, all the mainstream media, all the law

00:42:46.220 professors, all the colleges of physicians and surgeons, all the old school civil liberties groups,

00:42:51.820 all the celebrities, all the influencers, all the checks and balances failed, except for the common

00:42:59.820 sense of the common people. So who knows? Maybe they'll save us again. Last word to you, Eva. 0.66

00:43:06.300 Yeah, well, thanks, because it is the one year anniversary, if you could believe it or not,

00:43:12.060 of the Freedom Convoy starting to work its way to Ottawa and them getting settled into Ottawa, escorted

00:43:18.860 into Ottawa by the Ottawa police on Saturday. And so some of the people on the Freedom Corp board still,

00:43:27.820 they've been thinking about how they can commemorate it. There's still so much incredible support.

00:43:33.180 And what they've thought about is for people to go out to where they were on the highways,

00:43:38.620 to wave in the truckers, to go there Saturday at noon and take pictures and wave their flags and

00:43:46.620 bring that community back together because it was strong a year ago. And I'm sure, and again,

00:43:51.820 it's still so strong right now. Right on. Well, listen, great to catch up with you. I hope that you're

00:43:57.260 being pessimistic and that things turn out better. We'll find out soon. And of course,

00:44:02.060 there is a chance that the report will leak. It wouldn't surprise me that anything that's

00:44:07.180 positive towards Trudeau will be strategically leaked by his office. Trudeau has no compunction

00:44:13.660 about that, so he may well do that. But we'll all find out on February 20th. Eva Cipiuk,

00:44:19.420 Lawyer for Freedom, great to see you again.

00:44:21.020 Likewise. Thanks for having me.

00:44:23.100 All right. Our pleasure. Stay with us. Your letters to me next.

00:44:38.460 Hey, welcome back. I got a couple of letters from last week when I was with the team

00:44:43.900 at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Let me read those. Margarita writes,

00:44:47.340 Good evening, Ezra. I am following a bunch of Hungarian YouTubers because of my Hungarian 0.99

00:44:53.260 mother tongue. The video on you reporting from Davos asking tough questions from the Pfizer guy,

00:44:58.300 Greta, as well as Larry Fink. I heard some of it from Rebel, but it was nice to hear your reporting

00:45:03.340 being appreciated by Hungarian reporters as well. I just love it. Kind regards. Well, isn't that fun?

00:45:08.620 As I mentioned the other day, I have seen our Rebel News videos being translated into so many other

00:45:15.900 languages. Now you're saying it's in Hungarian too. Sometimes we have a real viral video and I see

00:45:22.220 it get translated into a few. But the thing is, the vaccines and the mRNA vaccines and the Pfizer

00:45:29.740 mandates and the fact that so many countries forced you to take a jab or you would be fired from your

00:45:35.020 job or couldn't go in public means this issue is something that literally billions of people around

00:45:41.500 the world care about. In fact, as I mentioned, it was a real kerfuffle in India, even though the 1.00

00:45:46.300 Pfizer vaccine was not allowed in. And I tried to watch some of that coverage. A lot of Indian news is

00:45:52.220 in English, by the way. And I think it was because there were some politicians in India who were clearly

00:45:58.220 on Pfizer's side trying to bring the mRNA vaccines into the country. So it, our report, I just, it was quite

00:46:05.900 something, I didn't quite understand why there was this uproar and kerfuffle in India about my interview

00:46:14.380 and Avi's interview. And it was, it was amazing to see. So thank you for the report from Hungary.

00:46:20.140 I think that is the most watched video of all time that we have done in our eight years. So it obviously

00:46:25.900 connected with people. And I keep laughing because we didn't actually get any answers. How could such a

00:46:32.060 video be so popular if there was no answers? But it was putting the questions to a guy who'd never

00:46:36.460 been questioned before. That's why. Christopher Ray says, hi, Ezra. Just wondering, has the FBI

00:46:43.660 been a contributor to the World Economic Forum in the past? If so, for how long? Continuously.

00:46:48.060 Wondering why the current director is there to contribute. Then little Brian Stelter. What a clown

00:46:52.620 show, literally and figuratively. Like what you were doing and the great people you meet, you look cold,

00:46:57.580 stay warm. Now, I think Christopher Ray is a pseudonym because I think that's the name of the FBI

00:47:02.860 director. It's a great question. Why would the FBI director go to Davos? I understand why a businessman

00:47:09.900 might to make money to get a deal. I understand why a political leader might to meet political leaders

00:47:16.540 from other countries to try and, I don't know, get donations or something. There's a lot of people who

00:47:21.340 their being there makes sense to me, even if I don't like the World Economic Forum, the media

00:47:27.340 being there, you can have media trying to suck up and get access or media like us trying to hold to

00:47:32.060 account. But why would America's top policemen, who is very recently engaged in very political raids

00:47:39.820 against Donald Trump, why would America's top policemen be at Davos for the World Economic Forum?

00:47:48.300 I don't know. And the thing is, we'll never know. Because one of the whole perks or attributes of

00:47:55.260 the World Economic Forum is that what goes on in Davos stays in Davos, unless they positively want

00:48:00.700 you to know about it. It's not like Congress or Parliament, where there's a handshake, where there's

00:48:04.700 a record, where there's a lobbyist registry. So I think it's sort of creepy that the head of the FBI was

00:48:09.660 there. Thanks for your letters. I'll let you know when the CBC finally publishes their smear against me,

00:48:15.580 if they ever do. Between this morning and now, they haven't done anything, so we'll see.

00:48:21.500 Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters to you at home, good night,

00:48:26.060 and keep fighting for freedom.

Rebel News Podcast - January 26, 2023

EZRA LEVANT ｜ CBC tried to smear Rebel News — so we beat them to the punch

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript