Rebel News Podcast - April 21, 2022


EZRA LEVANT | Who is on the Twitter board of directors that rejected Elon Musk?


Episode Stats


Length

56 minutes

Words per minute

173.97966

Word count

9,840

Sentence count

669

Harmful content

Misogyny

4

sentences flagged

Hate speech

9

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Who is on the board of directors of Twitter that rejected Elon Musk's $43 billion offer to buy it? And why is it important that someone from the board is on there? Who is Bob Zellick? And who is Elon Musk?

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Hello, my Rebels. Today, I'm going to take you through the biography of one of Twitter's
00:00:03.920 directors of the board. I thought they would be all sort of young tech guys and Silicon Valley
00:00:10.880 experts, maybe in their 40s or maybe in their 50s, but basically young guys like Mark Zuckerberg or
00:00:16.500 Jack Dorsey. I was so surprised to see an ancient political name on there, someone by the name of
00:00:23.800 Bob Zellick, and you've got to be in your 60s to know who he is. He's like sort of a slightly
00:00:29.440 younger, Henry Kissinger. What is a, you know, former deep state diplomat doing on Twitter's
00:00:38.260 board? The guy's never used Twitter himself. His account literally has zero tweets. I'll take you
00:00:43.120 through it. I've got some theories on it. I'll introduce you to one of Twitter's directors,
00:00:48.420 probably relevant to Elon Musk's offer to buy the thing. But before I do, let me invite you to become
00:00:53.620 a subscriber to Rebel News Plus. That's the video version of this podcast. I want to show you things,
00:00:58.260 it's not just tell you things, and that's where the video podcast comes in. Go to rebelnewsplus.com,
00:01:03.400 click subscribe. It's eight bucks a month. You get my show every day, and then weekly shows from
00:01:08.380 four of my friends. All right, here's today's podcast.
00:01:16.560 Tonight, who is on the board of directors of Twitter that rejected Elon Musk? It's April
00:01:32.500 20th, and this is the Ezra LeVant Show.
00:01:37.460 Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
00:01:41.160 There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
00:01:45.240 The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody
00:01:50.120 right to do so. We've talked a couple times now about the $43 billion offer that Elon Musk made
00:02:03.880 to buy Twitter. Of course, some of it is just that Musk is one of the world's most interesting people.
00:02:09.680 He's the richest person, at least for now. He's a businessman with some real success. Tesla
00:02:14.660 Tesla is worth a trillion dollars, according to the stock market. That's more than GM and Ford
00:02:21.300 and Chrysler combined, if you're counting. Now, you may not think that's right, but millions of
00:02:27.200 investors seem to. So he's not just a businessman. He's a bit of a mad scientist, too. Not just his
00:02:33.400 electric cars idea, but his spaceship's idea. He has a company called the Boring Company that's about
00:02:40.020 tunneling underground for cars, hence the word boring. It's a double entendre. He's cheeky.
00:02:46.320 He's a bit of a mad scientist. He made flamethrowers and sold them. I'm not sure why, but he did.
00:02:52.780 He's a bit of a pundit, a bit of a philosopher. He seems to love pot. He smokes it while talking for
00:03:00.820 hours with podcasters like Joe Rogan. He meets with the comedy writers of the Babylon Bee. I think
00:03:07.320 they're the funniest conservative website around. So, of course, Elon Musk himself is fun to talk
00:03:12.320 about. I'm sure the fact that I'm obviously addicted to Twitter personally makes me more
00:03:16.920 interested than a normal person would be who isn't on Twitter. But that's the thing. Who is on Twitter?
00:03:23.300 It's big, but it's not that big. I mean, it has 400 million users. So, sure, that's enormous. But
00:03:28.680 Facebook has, what, 2 billion users? TikTok and Instagram are more than a billion.
00:03:33.520 Twitter doesn't make a lot of money. And it's not really growing that quickly either. So,
00:03:39.860 why is it so important? Why are people fighting over it? Because the number one reason users say
00:03:45.560 they have Twitter is to get the news. Yeah, sports, comedy, celebrities, entertainment, of course,
00:03:51.080 that's important too. But Twitter is about the news. It's about politics. More importantly,
00:03:56.300 it's, maybe more accurately, it's about news makers and news creators and news writers and news editors.
00:04:02.620 News shapers. If you're a billionaire, you can go and buy yourself a newspaper.
00:04:09.640 You can buy yourself a TV news station. Elon Musk probably could. But if you have Twitter,
00:04:15.320 and by that, if you control it, well, you sort of have every news network in your hand because
00:04:20.220 they all use Twitter to propagate stories and videos. More importantly, all the journalists are
00:04:26.560 on Twitter. They're hooked on Twitter. They're obsessed with Twitter, checking Twitter always. It's
00:04:31.860 the clubhouse for journalists. It's where PR companies live. It's the public square, the town
00:04:37.400 square. Twitter calls itself that. So sure, it has a financial value, but its value is much deeper than
00:04:43.760 that. It's the bulletin board that every political and media person in the world uses, not just Americans,
00:04:49.080 but Canadians. The Chinese, the Russians, the Ukrainians, the Iranians, everyone. Now,
00:04:55.220 you can't use Twitter itself in China or Iran, but the Chinese and Iranian dictators use Twitter.
00:05:03.620 You see my point? That's their value that they place on it. And Twitter's top hashtag last year,
00:05:10.180 that means a little tagline that users type out on the stories to help people searching,
00:05:15.040 find them, was COVID-19. Are you getting it? Let's say you wanted to control the entire
00:05:22.820 national discussion. Actually, the global discussion. Say you wanted to talk about Ukraine
00:05:27.800 and Russia, not just in English, but in many other languages. You could try and buy newspapers
00:05:32.740 in every country, TV stations, whatever. But why not just own the public square, own the meeting place,
00:05:38.200 own the medium that they all use, and then subtly build in a few filters, call them algorithms.
00:05:45.840 Pump up the voices you want promoted, boost them. Show them to more people. And do the opposite
00:05:52.100 to voices you don't want seen. Demote them. Show them to fewer people. Put warnings on the accounts
00:05:59.540 of people you don't like. Ban them even, which is exactly what Twitter has done. And that's what
00:06:05.760 they say they've done. Their new CEO, Parag Agrawal, famously said, they're not so much interested in
00:06:11.500 free speech, but rather deciding who gets attention to their speech. So everyone can shout into the wind,
00:06:16.680 but only Agrawal's friends will have their shouts heard by anyone. So if you're Pfizer and Moderna,
00:06:24.600 that's extremely valuable. You need to boost tweets that promote vaccines. You need to de-boost
00:06:29.880 throttle tweets that are skeptical. Call that misinformation, even if it later turns out that
00:06:35.640 they were right. Now, normally it's subtle. You might not even notice it. Sometimes it's just too much not to
00:06:41.560 notice, like when they literally suspended a sitting president of the United States, or when they suspended
00:06:47.720 the mighty New York Post, one of America's oldest newspapers, for posting a completely true story about
00:06:53.000 Hunter Biden's laptop just before the election. What's the value of that? If that censorship moved the needle
00:06:59.460 a couple of percent in the election, did they lose it for Trump and win it for Biden?
00:07:04.460 What's the value of that? It's got to be trillions. Think about what China or Russia or frankly Pfizer
00:07:12.800 or Moderna would do for that kind of control over the discourse. There was no war for four years under
00:07:19.640 Donald Trump. You know that? I mean, he didn't invade anybody. He lobbed a few missiles in Syria for
00:07:23.780 effect, but he started no new wars. Russia and North Korea were pacified during that time too. In fact,
00:07:30.200 Trump made peace between the Jews and the Arabs. I wonder if any, oh, I don't know, arms dealers
00:07:35.540 wanted Trump gone. I wonder what the value of owning Twitter, the massive censorship machine
00:07:41.520 would be to them. That's what Twitter is. It's a filter. It's a subtle censor. And do you doubt that
00:07:49.000 they compile everything you look at, every message you sound? Don't doubt it. It's in their terms of
00:07:53.460 service. It's a business model. So imagine everything that every politician and every journalist
00:07:58.360 writes and reads being owned by Twitter. But more than that, Twitter has private messages you can
00:08:04.580 send people that the public doesn't see. They're called DMs, direct messages. Do you doubt that Twitter
00:08:10.260 staff read those secret messages between politicians, journalists, diplomats, etc.? I've had some pretty
00:08:15.560 frank discussions with sitting politicians over Twitter direct messages, sensitive for them, maybe for me
00:08:21.580 too. I don't know. But do you doubt they're being read by Twitter's left-wing staff? Again, let me
00:08:27.680 disabuse you of your naivete if you do doubt it. Look at this story from the Washington Post, no less.
00:08:35.440 Former Twitter employees charged with spying for Saudi Arabia by digging into the accounts of kingdom
00:08:40.720 critics. Well, there it is. And it just so happens that Prince Al-Waleed of Saudi Arabia is one of the
00:08:45.640 largest investors at Twitter, has been for a while. He says, I don't believe that the proposed offer by
00:08:51.820 Elon Musk comes close to the intrinsic value of Twitter given its growth prospects. Being one of
00:08:57.500 the largest and long-term shareholders at Twitter, Kingdom HC and I reject this offer. Now here's Elon
00:09:04.800 Musk's reply to the Saudi prince. He says, interesting. Just two questions, if I may. How much of Twitter does
00:09:10.800 the kingdom own directly and indirectly? What are the kingdom's views on journalistic freedom of speech?
00:09:17.780 Elon Musk is right. He's pointing out that a foreign prince of a dictatorship is calling the shots at an
00:09:22.860 American company. But his second point, while spicy, isn't quite right. I don't think the main value to the
00:09:29.720 Saudi regime of owning Twitter is spying on domestic political activists. Of course, that's part of it, for sure. 0.90
00:09:36.540 But Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Twitter ownership can spy on everyone in the world, on the West. 0.85
00:09:40.800 Spy and Throttler Boost tweak the algorithms to show people more of what the owners want them to see and less of
00:09:47.120 what the owners don't want them to see. It's sort of obvious. If you're using a free service like Facebook or
00:09:53.780 Twitter, it's because you're the product that's being bought and sold. All of which brings me to this. I saw this the
00:10:03.020 other day. It's a list of Twitter's board of directors. Someone put a spreadsheet together showing just how few shares
00:10:09.360 they own in Twitter. These directors get paid about a quarter million U.S. a year.
00:10:14.740 Elon Musk is
00:10:15.680 in for a bad time, says this guy. Not sure he's prepared to take on a couple of PhDs, a few MBAs,
00:10:21.700 and a baroness who use Twitter once a year to reset their passwords and collectively own 77 shares of
00:10:27.920 the company. Well, I don't know if that's sarcastic or not, but here's what Elon Musk said in reply.
00:10:32.680 Wow, with Jack departing, the Twitter board collectively owns almost no shares. Objectively,
00:10:38.800 their economic interests are simply not aligned with shareholders. And then he said that if he
00:10:43.380 takes over, he'll stop paying directors, saving the company three million bucks a year.
00:10:49.060 But it's obviously not about the money. It's about the other thing, their interests,
00:10:55.520 the director's interests versus the shareholders' interests. If these directors own almost zero stock,
00:11:00.460 why are they directors? Not to make money. I mean, if you don't own it, why do you care about it?
00:11:07.680 Well, like I say, because you care about other things than money that Twitter gives you.
00:11:13.460 I saw this name on there. I was glancing at that list on that tweet, and I recognized the name
00:11:19.220 because I'm a political person and I've been following politics for years. I recognize that
00:11:24.020 Bob Zellick. I bet very few people other than political watchers in their 50s know who he is.
00:11:30.660 He looks a bit like Steve Buscemi. I'd call him a bit of a mini Henry Kissinger.
00:11:36.540 Here's his Twitter account. He's never tweeted, not once ever. Here's his page on the Twitter board
00:11:44.080 of directors, his official biography there. Can I read his whole biography for you? It's quite
00:11:49.860 impressive. Let me do it. Give me a minute. Robert Zellick has served as a member of our
00:11:54.840 board of directors since July 2018. From May 2017 to April 2019, Mr. Zellick served as the chairman
00:12:01.560 of the board of directors of Alliance Bernstein Holding LP. Since August 2013, Mr. Zellick has
00:12:08.180 served as a board member of Temasek Holdings Private Limited, a Singaporean corporation principally
00:12:14.860 engaged in the business of investment holding. Since May 2017, he has served as a senior counselor
00:12:20.680 to the Brunswick Group, a global public affairs and communications firm. Since July 2012, he has
00:12:27.080 also been a senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard
00:12:33.080 University's Kennedy School of Government. From October 2013 until September 2016, Mr. Zellick served as
00:12:40.320 chairman of the board of international advisors at the Goldman Sachs Group. From July 2007 until July
00:12:47.880 June 2012, he served as president of the World Bank Group. From 2006 to 2007, he served as vice chairman
00:12:56.380 international and a managing director of Goldman Sachs. Mr. Zellick served as the deputy secretary for the
00:13:03.160 U.S. Department of State from 2005 till 2006 and as the U.S. trade representative from 2001 to 2004.
00:13:10.300 From 1985 to 1993, Mr. Zellick held various posts in the U.S. government, including counselor to the U.S.
00:13:16.980 Secretary of the Treasury, undersecretary of state, and deputy chief of staff at the White House.
00:13:23.360 Mr. Zellick holds a B.A. from Swarthmore College, a J.D. from the Harvard Law School,
00:13:27.320 and an MPP from Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. Oh, my God. I think that's a dictionary
00:13:35.280 definition of the deep state. I mean, obviously, he cares about money, Goldman Sachs, that kind of thing.
00:13:43.300 But it's much more than just money. This guy is the government. He's the world. He's the globe. He's
00:13:49.760 a... It's globalist money. It's money with a certain political point of view, isn't it? It's not mom-and-pop
00:13:55.380 shops. World Bank, deputy White House chief of staff, international diplomat, Harvard. He really
00:14:02.660 is a master of the universe. He's a senior big shot at Brunswick Group. I'd never heard of them.
00:14:09.520 I went to their website. Now, apparently, there are communications firm, but they call themselves
00:14:14.280 critical issues. It's their focus. What does that mean? What's a critical issue? I spent a fair amount
00:14:21.020 of time on their website, and I don't really think I know any more now than I did before.
00:14:26.160 It's quite a style of communicating they have. If you look, they're huge, actually. They're all
00:14:33.200 over the world, from Beijing to London to Dubai to Washington. Can I show you a two-minute video
00:14:39.140 on one of their pages that explains what they do? I don't understand it. You tell me if you
00:14:44.980 understand a thing here. Can you watch this? You tell me. This is the boss of Twitter. Take a look.
00:14:51.020 Brunswick. Brunswick. Brunswick is the world's leading. Brunswick is the world's leading critical
00:14:56.080 issues firm. We work with the leadership teams of the great value-creating organizations around
00:15:01.600 the world. From huge multinational corporations to non-profits and to up-and-coming disruptors.
00:15:08.740 Because we recognize their value to society, and we recognize how important it is that they tell
00:15:13.880 their story in a meaningful way. That is what a critical issues firm is all about. Brunswick can
00:15:19.420 provide the full suite of services to clients. We can sit in a boardroom advising around major
00:15:25.980 geopolitical issues down to drafting a simple press release. We're not just advising a company
00:15:32.500 on a deal or an IPO. We're advising them on an opportunity to tell their story to the world.
00:15:38.520 In terms of thinking through how they engage with their stakeholders.
00:15:41.400 Which are very broad and span across the regulatory, political, financial, and social spheres.
00:15:49.180 And help companies make the right business decisions and then communicate them effectively
00:15:53.640 to those various stakeholders. Allow them to play their role in the world, but also to meaningfully,
00:15:59.400 and that's really important, to meaningfully engage with all their stakeholders.
00:16:02.960 We support them in becoming the kind of company that they want to be. Brunswick's purpose.
00:16:09.420 Our purpose. Is to help clients play. Brunswick's purpose is to help clients play their role
00:16:14.720 in society most successfully. And we do that by working with them on their most critical issues.
00:16:20.380 But to do it in a way that contributes to not only their bottom line, but also contributes to
00:16:26.080 the advancement of society as well. I truly believe that businesses are a key force for good.
00:16:31.780 We help people understand not just challenge and risk, but we help them understand opportunity.
00:16:38.620 And we help them position for a better future.
00:16:46.460 What does that mean? Are they like a private CIA? They can't tell you? Do they do things like spy?
00:16:56.060 I don't know. I mean, in a good way even? Or a bad way? What are they doing in Beijing?
00:17:00.860 I have no clue. And I think that's by design on their part. I don't know. Do they do nasty things
00:17:08.360 for nasty people for a lot of money? They operate in a lot of nasty places. They know how to stop 1.00
00:17:13.680 people like Elon Musk, though. They really emphasize that. Take a look at this. I found this page on their
00:17:19.380 website. Shareholder activism, an integrated team equipping clients with communications tools to
00:17:25.480 defend against activists. I'm going to read every word on this page to you because this seems to be a
00:17:30.720 fit with Twitter. Give me a minute, okay? Let me read this. The surge of shareholder activism sweeping
00:17:36.680 through the corporate world is only accelerating, and virtually no company is immune. Brunswick works
00:17:43.280 hand-in-hand with clients facing the increasingly complex threat of activist investors, from defense
00:17:49.320 preparation before an activist establishes a public position in the stock, to a full-blown proxy fight.
00:17:55.960 In the planning stages, we work with executives across a client's organization to identify possible
00:18:01.420 areas of weakness that could be exploited by an activist investor, determine appropriate reactive
00:18:07.380 messaging, and establish the detailed protocol and logistics needed to respond quickly to the wide
00:18:13.140 range of public and private activist approaches. When a fight turns public, Brunswick has the global
00:18:19.800 media and shareholder engagement expertise to launch extended campaigns, all underpinned by our in-house
00:18:26.020 digital, creative, and market research teams. Strategic use of social media, such as Twitter and
00:18:31.300 LinkedIn, can provide a company with a powerful campaign advantage. So what do they do? They protect
00:18:38.480 companies from investors? The right team at the right time with the right experience, we know that a
00:18:44.360 company's ability to hold off an activist will depend on how well you conduct your campaign and
00:18:49.080 convince investors you are right. We have a team of former lawyers, bankers, analysts, and journalists
00:18:55.340 who have successfully advised on many of the highest-profile activist fights, as well as behind-the-scenes
00:19:00.420 preparation for clients large and small. So yeah, that's who's on the board. Elon Musk is up against
00:19:07.360 some big operators. They sound like the kind of people who have their hands in a million things.
00:19:13.640 I don't know. Maybe they helped get this article published today in the Toronto Star.
00:19:18.240 Could be. The headline you can see right there, Elon Musk's attempt to buy Twitter should be setting
00:19:24.040 off alarm bells in Ottawa. Here's the thing. Elon Musk can offer these people a hundred million,
00:19:29.660 a hundred billion dollars. A trillion dollars. They're not going to sell.
00:19:33.320 Well, Twitter isn't worth that much as an ad platform. It's only worth that much as a political
00:19:41.540 spy machine, a message censorship machine, a mass formation psychosis machine.
00:19:50.300 If they really were about freedom of speech, things would be different. I wonder if Trump would
00:19:58.860 still be president if Twitter wasn't politically corruptible. We'll never know the effect of
00:20:03.100 throttling the Hunter Biden laptop story. I know that things would have been a lot different about
00:20:08.500 the pandemic, that's for sure. The vaccines, discussions about ivermectin, alternative treatments,
00:20:12.920 whether you agree with them or not. These were all subjects that were throttled or banned by Twitter.
00:20:17.560 That's pretty valuable to Moderna and Pfizer, isn't it? Well, Twitter is not about freedom,
00:20:23.060 hasn't been in a long time. It's about control. That's why Bob Zelleck and the Brunswick, I don't
00:20:28.880 know, what even is that company? That's who runs it now. Bob Zelleck doesn't tweet, but why would he?
00:20:36.040 I bet he reads a few tweets. If Elon Musk were to buy Twitter, not only might he stop their censorship
00:20:42.380 and the twisting of the world's perception of things, but I think he'd probably unearthed things
00:20:48.960 they've been up to all these past years but haven't told us about. Jack Dorsey, the founder and the
00:20:55.840 past president of the place, he seems to have something he wants to say. Someone asked him on Twitter,
00:21:02.240 this is actually a reporter for CNBC, serious question for Jack. If you think the Twitter board
00:21:07.740 is or was so dysfunctional and kept that company from being great, as you imply, either through your
00:21:13.160 own tweets or replies to others, why didn't you do anything about it when you ran the company for
00:21:17.960 several years? Well, Jack replied. He said, so much to say, but nothing that can be said. Yeah, I don't
00:21:27.080 know. I might be wrong. Bob Zelleck might just care about freedom of speech in his own way and making
00:21:33.700 good old-fashioned money. Nothing wrong with that. He's smarter than that Saudi prince who weighed in
00:21:38.760 in public on Twitter. What a fool showing his cards like that. I have no idea what Bob Zelleck is really
00:21:44.440 doing, either at Brunswick or at Twitter. But then again, I had no idea he was on the board. It really is
00:21:51.440 like a mini Henry Kissinger, isn't he? I'd never have guessed it. There's a lot we don't know about our
00:21:59.340 American oligarchs. I think they like it that way. P.S. I don't think that even the world's richest man
00:22:07.380 can beat them. Stay with us for more.
00:22:10.180 Because the core problem with housing in Canada is we just don't have enough housing. It's just a
00:22:29.140 mathematical thing. Canada has the fastest growing population in the G7. That is fantastic. That is
00:22:35.820 actually a huge driver of economic growth. And it is one of Canada's competitive advantages.
00:22:42.580 But we cannot have the fastest growing population in the G7 without also having the fastest growing
00:22:51.900 housing stock in the G7. And we don't have that right now. We have a shortage of homes.
00:22:57.480 There's some truth to it. The map doesn't lie. Price is dependent on supply and demand.
00:23:02.260 Since Justin Trudeau became prime minister, the pricing of an average house in the country
00:23:08.560 has doubled. And it is much worse in the number one destination for newcomers to Canada,
00:23:15.140 namely Toronto and Vancouver. In fact, in the last year alone, the prices in Toronto have gone up nearly
00:23:20.580 30% in one year. Here to join us to talk about it is our friend Spencer Fernando, whose latest article
00:23:28.200 is called Freeland admits federal immigration policy has driven up housing costs. Spencer,
00:23:34.080 great to see again. I think this is a kind of breakthrough. It's one of the first times I can
00:23:41.180 remember a liberal actually acknowledging that immigration is driving demand, which is driving
00:23:47.220 price. I mean, whether or not the liberals admit it, it is how supply and demand words. But I think she
00:23:53.860 admits it. Having the highest immigration policy of the G7 is causing the highest housing prices of the
00:24:00.040 G7. Yeah, it's interesting to, you know, see her say that. You know, I've seen people on Twitter
00:24:05.880 noting that if a conservative politician were to have said something similar, they'd be, you know,
00:24:11.820 tapped as anti-immigrant, anti-immigration, racist, bigoted, all of those things. And so it's
00:24:17.140 interesting that she's saying that. But she is correct, obviously. I mean, you know,
00:24:20.280 it is a simple supply and demand issue. The only problem is, of course, after she acknowledged
00:24:26.140 the truth, she basically went on and said, oh, this is great. And this is how we're growing the
00:24:29.780 economy. And obviously, thinking that you're growing the economy just by bringing in more
00:24:34.060 people as opposed to having per capita GDP growth is obviously a serious problem. And it's concerning
00:24:39.000 to see the finance minister kind of falling into a logical trap like that. Yeah, that's a great point.
00:24:45.360 I mean, when you add people to an economy, when you bring people, when you do any activity,
00:24:49.800 it is GDP. But it's like the broken windows fallacy. And I'm not comparing it to immigration. 0.98
00:24:54.460 I'm just comparing the logical flaw. Sorry. I mean, if you break a window, if you have a car
00:24:59.680 accident, you have a car accident, the GDP goes up. But it's not productive GDP. If you smash a window,
00:25:05.900 okay, you created a job for a glazier, but you haven't improved people's wealth, you burned it up.
00:25:11.560 Immigration can be a tremendous source of growth and wealth, actually, but it depends on who's 0.91
00:25:18.020 coming. And one of the things that Trudeau boasts about is that while there are some economic,
00:25:24.320 you know, economically strong, like professional class immigrants, the plurality of the immigrants
00:25:32.680 under Trudeau's current immigration scheme are people who are either family members or they're
00:25:38.700 refugees. They're not economic. So while we may be bringing in, say, 200,000 people a year who are 1.00
00:25:45.220 probably net positive on the GDP side, we're bringing in 150,000 a year who are who are not
00:25:51.160 investor class or professional class.
00:25:54.800 Yeah, I mean, it's obviously a balance, right? Because you have, you know, for example, someone
00:25:58.600 has a large family, they may be an entrepreneur, and then they bring over a relative and they can help
00:26:03.040 take care of their children. So, you know, there can be benefits there as well. But I think,
00:26:07.160 you know, the deeper problem is that we don't discuss immigration in this country in a mature
00:26:11.740 way. You know, a mature country is able to have people who say, well, I think we should have more
00:26:15.980 immigration. Other people say we should have less immigration. But somehow in Canada, it's become
00:26:20.460 almost everybody in the political establishment basically feels pressured to go along with whatever
00:26:25.460 the current highest number is. You know, as I note in the article, if someone supports, say,
00:26:30.360 about half the immigration level we have now. So say they said they want 230,000 or 240,000 people
00:26:36.080 to come into the country every year. As a percentage of our economy, that would give us
00:26:41.760 one of still the highest immigration rates in the world. And that would be in most countries kind of
00:26:46.840 the maximalist pro-immigration position. Whereas, you know, the other side of it would be people 0.90
00:26:51.900 saying they want much less. Whereas in Canada, if someone says, oh, we should, you know, have 240,000
00:26:56.640 people come in every year, that's considered a huge cut to immigration. And they will be called
00:27:01.160 an anti-immigrant in many cases. So I think the fact that the debate on immigration in Canada
00:27:05.480 has become so, it's emotional, it's political, everybody demonizes everybody. I think that's a
00:27:11.400 real drawback for the future of the country, because we should be able to have, you know,
00:27:15.320 a logical and reasonable and balanced debate about this issue.
00:27:19.180 You know, Angus Reid is one of the few pollsters who regularly test that question.
00:27:23.740 Actually, I'm sure all pollsters do. But Angus Reid is one of the few who publish it.
00:27:27.600 And overwhelmingly, Canadians say either we have enough, or the number is just right, 0.99
00:27:34.480 or the number is too high. Very, very few, always less than 10% say we need more. And yet,
00:27:41.400 Trudeau increases the number every time. I think this is one of those issues where if
00:27:46.080 a politician were to say it very gently and very carefully, and in a way that allowed no
00:27:51.740 misinterpretation that it was a race-based thing, but rather on an economic basis,
00:27:56.600 if we've just doubled the cost of housing in this country, you know, don't tell me how this is
00:28:01.800 wonderful for our GDP if inflation is now close to 7%. No young people can get a house. You know,
00:28:08.560 the fact that the GDP is doing well, but no one can afford to buy a house, you know, that might work
00:28:14.100 in Chrystia Freeland's world, but I don't think it works for ordinary Canadians.
00:28:17.360 Yeah. And I think there's also the issue of, I guess you could say economic illiteracy is obviously
00:28:24.480 a serious problem, even apparently at the higher echelons of the liberal government. But this idea
00:28:30.220 that, you know, if you make the economy bigger overall, that you're actually benefiting people,
00:28:33.960 like that's not really how it works, right? You know, say somehow we decided tomorrow that we were
00:28:39.440 going to double Canada's population. You know, people from every part of the world came in,
00:28:42.920 and we got to, I guess, what would be 74, 75 million people or so. Okay. Well, we'd probably
00:28:49.980 have a much bigger GDP than we do now, certainly, but everybody else would be much poorer on an
00:28:55.500 individual basis, right? Everything would massively increase in price. There would just be chaos in
00:29:00.480 the country. And so sure, the overall economy would be bigger, but we'd all be worse off.
00:29:05.020 And so, you know, that's, that's the issue with immigration is you'd have to have it at a level 0.55
00:29:08.360 that is benefiting the country and reducing some of the drawbacks that, you know, very high
00:29:12.540 immigration can cause. And we just, we just don't have that discussion. As you said, you know,
00:29:16.760 polls show a lot of Canadians want to see a change in the immigration numbers. People either think
00:29:21.260 it's, there's enough people coming in yearly already, or there should be fewer people coming
00:29:24.900 in. And very few people in the political, you know, the political class in this country
00:29:29.440 are willing to actually talk about that. You know, it seems sort of obvious to me that
00:29:33.920 just like spending in a country can go up and down depending on the economic cycle,
00:29:39.340 immigration can too. I mean, if, if immigration is leading to a depression in wages and an increase
00:29:45.860 in housing prices, it seems like a lever that you can adjust. You know, if, if you're in a recession
00:29:52.240 or if you're in boom times that you can adjust government spending too. I mean, the whole theory
00:29:57.340 of Kenzie and economics was that when times are amazing, the government puts the brakes on a bit
00:30:02.100 and maybe runs a surplus. And in tough times, the government, you know, it's counter-cyclical.
00:30:07.740 So if things are tough, well, maybe that's when the government spends more. And I'm not necessarily
00:30:11.100 a Keynesian, but the point is, it's not always run a deficit. And the thing about immigration is
00:30:18.120 it's not always more, more, more, more, more. There may be times when less is the answer,
00:30:23.040 when, when their wages can't keep up with, with the cost of living, when housing has doubled
00:30:29.300 in four years, there may be a time to pump the brakes. Um, I, you know, the funny thing about
00:30:33.940 Christy Freeland, I just remembered it when she came back to Canada from New York, where she had
00:30:38.420 been working for years, she bought a house so that she could say she lived in her neighborhood in
00:30:43.860 Toronto. She had to get her dad to co-sign the mortgage. Now I'm not making a lot of fun of her,
00:30:50.600 although I think it is sort of a little bit odd that a woman in her forties in the cabinet can't,
00:30:54.500 you know, doesn't have the credit to get her own house. But if the deputy prime minister herself 1.00
00:31:00.780 needs help to buy a house, she's a bit glib with people who are not of her station in life,
00:31:07.980 who need help to buy a house, or frankly, there's no hope for them at all.
00:31:13.000 Yeah, I think a lot of what's happening is the liberals have kind of backed themselves into a
00:31:16.720 corner because of, you know, the overtly ideological nature of how they govern the country. I mean,
00:31:22.140 immigration will be one example. You know, they keep increasing the immigration number every year.
00:31:26.620 The carbon tax, obviously, their anti-energy sector policies, these are all policies that cause,
00:31:30.860 you know, issues in the economy, obviously inflation. The carbon tax is, you know, a
00:31:34.640 deliberately inflationary policy. It's designed to make things more expensive, and it makes them
00:31:38.980 more expensive every year. And so they can't really actually do anything about these problems
00:31:44.700 without admitting that, you know, their ideology is the cause of many of these issues. And so they're
00:31:49.520 forced to kind of play the game where they say, oh, we're very concerned about inflation, and we're
00:31:53.320 very concerned about housing, and we're very concerned about the cost of living, and we're going to do
00:31:57.480 everything we can to help people. But they can't really do anything because that would have been
00:32:01.520 involved in admitting they were wrong in their overall policy focus for the last, what is it,
00:32:05.880 six or seven years? And so I think that that's kind of what's happening now is they're just trying
00:32:10.620 to, you know, muddle along, pretend they're concerned, hope people focus on other things. I think,
00:32:15.260 you know, that's one of the reasons Pierre Polyev is doing so well. He's one of the only politicians
00:32:19.140 who's offering an agenda that is ideologically very different than what the liberals are offering.
00:32:24.020 And he's saying, look, here's the problem, here's a solution, here's what I'm going to do.
00:32:27.380 And it's very different than what the liberals are talking about. And so I think that's why the
00:32:30.560 establishment really is going after him so much, because he represents a real alternative.
00:32:35.860 And if he was to get in and have very different policies and make things better for people,
00:32:40.060 a lot of people would say, you know, why were we putting up with these, you know, these supposedly
00:32:43.680 brilliant and, you know, supposedly progressive policies over the past, you know, years. And so
00:32:48.640 I think they're very concerned. They want to stop him from getting in power because they know his
00:32:52.680 ideas will probably actually work. You know, it's interesting. He is getting criticisms because
00:32:58.420 his crowds are so large. I mean, if his crowds were small, he'd be getting criticism for, ha ha,
00:33:03.860 he can't draw a crowd. He's had events on an Indian reserve in Alberta. He's had events that
00:33:09.860 seek in Chinese cultural locations, but he's accused of being too white. I mean, the criticisms
00:33:17.460 about him seem pretty desperate. The one thing I like about Pierre Polyev is his command of fiscal
00:33:24.440 policy, but also monetary policy, which is a little bit hard for, I think it's something that
00:33:29.260 most ordinary folks don't think about a lot, but he really has thought a lot about it and inflation
00:33:34.400 and how it's really attacks on everything because it devalues your money. I mean, the fact that he's
00:33:40.060 into crypto, but not in a, not in sort of a, you know, a hype kind of way, but he, he sees it as a
00:33:46.440 way to solve some of the problems of government inflation. I really think that's thoughtful. And
00:33:50.960 he's also good at putting it in layman's terms. I think that in Pierre Polyev, you've got a guy with
00:33:56.920 a lot of substance on cost of living issues. And Trudeau, I mean, he famously bragged,
00:34:03.160 he doesn't think about monetary policy. I don't know if you saw this clip from, um, his pre prime
00:34:08.380 minister days, here's Trudeau saying he's never really been good with numbers and it's a learning
00:34:14.040 disability. He claims, I don't know if you saw this, take a look at this. I have a little confession
00:34:19.080 to make. I have a slight learning disability. I am dysnumeric. What that means is I have an inability
00:34:30.160 to handle small numbers and little calculations. Those easy things that people do so well. 13
00:34:38.620 plus 14.
00:34:42.580 7. Under pressure, it's even worse. So I mean, if I pick up numbers and try to do it,
00:34:46.620 2 plus 3 minus 1 times 2 minus 4 plus 2. How many people follow that?
00:34:57.420 Now, I'm not looking to make fun of anyone for a learning disability. I have a hunch that
00:35:02.460 that's just a fancy term given to a bad student in the case of Trudeau. But when he says he doesn't
00:35:09.720 follow monetary policy, when he says the budget will balance itself, when he says that you grow the
00:35:15.360 economy from the heart out. And when he says he's dysnumeric, a guy tells you four times he's not
00:35:20.220 good at numbers. We should probably listen to him. It's sort of terrifying that he's the guy in
00:35:25.080 charge of the economy right now.
00:35:27.380 Yeah, it's quite concerning. And I think, you know, a lot of it is in many ways a luxury that
00:35:31.940 the Western world has had from a period of, you know, peace and prosperity that went on really for
00:35:36.840 historic, you know, amount of time. You know, if you look at history, this has been a long time
00:35:42.060 of, you know, economies growing and the world being relatively peaceful. And a lot of that's
00:35:46.320 obviously starting to change. And so I think what's happened over time is people, obviously
00:35:50.400 people like Justin Trudeau, who had a very privileged upbringing, but, you know, the society in many
00:35:54.780 ways, you know, at large and our political institutions, there's been so much, you know,
00:36:00.300 wealth created that people kind of lost the understanding that at the end of the day, you still
00:36:05.040 have to produce real things. You still have to make, you have to produce food, you have to transport it,
00:36:09.880 you know, you have to fill your cars with gasoline, you have to drive around, planes have to get where
00:36:14.660 they're going, you have to, you know, extract minerals and, you know, things from the earth to
00:36:18.520 build things. And there's been this idea where, oh, we don't really need to produce things, we just print
00:36:23.520 more money and give out the money, and then we're richer, and then we're all doing better. And so I think
00:36:28.280 that's starting to slowly shift. You know, Paul Yev, as you talk about monetary policy, that would be,
00:36:32.960 he's an example of someone who's starting to, you know, help people kind of get out of that
00:36:36.400 mindset. But Trudeau is obviously still very much in the way of thinking that, oh, well,
00:36:41.680 there's a problem, you know, the government just, you know, creates some money and gives it out to
00:36:44.560 people and, you know, money fixes the problem. So there's no issue. Obviously, that just devalues
00:36:48.880 the currency and makes everything more expensive, as we're seeing across the country and much of the
00:36:52.800 world. But, you know, he's not going to get it. You know, Chrystia Freeland, you know, I wouldn't be
00:36:57.520 shocked if at some level she does understand it, but politically she can't admit that these are terrible
00:37:02.100 policies and reverse any of them. So she's just going to keep going along with it as well.
00:37:05.580 And so I think until there's a change of government and until hopefully it's someone
00:37:10.340 like Pierre Polyev, not someone like Jean Charest, until that happens, you know, Canada is going to
00:37:15.320 be stuck in a set of policies where the government says, oh, we're very concerned about these issues,
00:37:19.460 and then their policies make all these issues worse. You know, I wouldn't put too much stock in
00:37:24.000 Chrystia Freeland. I sat down and read her last book, and I have to say, I didn't find it thoughtful or
00:37:29.520 philosophical. It felt like sort of a lifestyles of the rich and famous. And her work at
00:37:35.540 Reuters, Thompson, not only did she nearly destroy a whole enterprise, like she was a disaster as a 1.00
00:37:44.840 manager. I just, I think that she is puffed up in a way like Trudeau himself is. I don't think there's a
00:37:53.900 lot of there there, but compared to Trudeau, she looks like a, you know, a PhD professor. I don't know.
00:37:59.460 I mean, Pierre Polyev's phenomenon is interesting. And here's my theory on that. And I know we're
00:38:05.760 shifting gears from the original immigration and cost of living question, but it is quite something
00:38:11.740 for a guy to get a thousand people out in small towns in on short notice, like he's getting a
00:38:19.480 thousand, five thousand, seven thousand people out. And he's not even the leader yet. And my theory is
00:38:26.280 for two years, there's been anti-gathering rules. You can't gather in public. The political
00:38:34.100 accountability of our system has been reduced as well. Parliament has not sat in the normal way.
00:38:40.540 Politicians have been cloistered. And because of the quote emergency, I think the political classes
00:38:49.240 and the courts have sort of agreed with each other. They've sort of huddled together. They've
00:38:54.220 circled the wagons. And so for the first time in two years, people can express themselves. And I
00:39:00.140 think you have pent up two years of disagreement, two years at anything over the last two years has
00:39:06.240 bothered you. You've never really been able to act on it. Even the last election, all the candidates
00:39:12.800 were so similar, including Aaron O'Toole. I think you're not just seeing Pierre Polyev, you're seeing
00:39:17.600 that the fake political media consensus of the last two years was indeed fake. And that someone
00:39:25.580 who takes on the system, whether it's the lockdown system or the monetary system or the housing system
00:39:32.180 or the media system, is really tapping into something that the media has missed. It's that populist
00:39:38.300 undercurrent that was sort of papered over for two years. That's what I think Pierre Polyev has tapped
00:39:43.820 into. Maybe that's sort of obvious, but I think you're looking at two years of fake news that
00:39:50.160 everyone was going along with this crisis from Trudeau. And a lot of people are saying, no, we're
00:39:55.080 completely sick of it. And the establishment has failed us in every respect. What do you think?
00:40:00.220 Yeah, I think if you look at what happened to Aaron O'Toole, that's it's all part of the same
00:40:04.200 pattern, right? I mean, he was basically, you know, he campaigned as one thing in the leadership race,
00:40:09.620 obviously offered something very different that a lot of people were not too pleased about.
00:40:13.660 But when he became the leader of the party, and a lot of what he did was basically, as you say,
00:40:17.520 create a false political consensus, right? He made it appear as if even the largest opposition
00:40:22.480 party was completely in favor of most of the things the liberals were doing, except with maybe a few
00:40:27.340 tweaks and it'll be, you know, marketed a little differently. And so Polyev, you know, I think
00:40:33.420 another reason he's getting big crowds, in addition to the points you raised, is that he's been talking
00:40:37.200 about these issues for some time. And I wrote recently in the National Citizens Coalition how he has a lot
00:40:41.820 more credibility than most people, because he was talking about the danger of government spending
00:40:45.540 and money printing two years ago, when those policies were extremely popular, when almost
00:40:50.620 everybody else was afraid to, you know, utter any criticism of the government spending massive amounts
00:40:55.840 of money, he was still out there talking about, you know, this is going to cause a problem. This is
00:40:59.120 why, you know, the government needs to get its fiscal house in order. This is why it's dangerous for
00:41:03.320 the Bank of Canada to print so much money. And so I think the fact that he's been talking about that for
00:41:08.640 such a long time, gives him credibility. And then, you know, in some ways, you know, the moment
00:41:12.580 has worked out well for him. Unfortunately, it means that there's obviously issues going on
00:41:17.940 in the country, because people are obviously upset. But I mean, if you're talking about,
00:41:22.640 you know, the danger of government policy and spending and, you know, monetary policy,
00:41:26.480 and then people see their prices going up all over the place, they're going to look and say,
00:41:30.020 who is somebody who's offering something different? We know what the liberals and NDP offer. It's just
00:41:33.780 more spending, more government intervention, you know, the same problems that have caused this mess.
00:41:38.720 Who's someone who's actually offering something different? So I think all these things are kind
00:41:41.860 of coming together. The false consensus that the Conservative Party tried to impose on people
00:41:46.240 through O'Toole, you know, the media suppressing a lot of different viewpoints. Yes, the fact that
00:41:49.940 people couldn't gather. And then the fact that Paul Yev is offering something different and has been
00:41:53.880 relatively consistent for two years, I think it's all kind of coming together and really forming a
00:41:58.660 movement, not just a political campaign, but a movement across the country.
00:42:01.600 Yeah. Well, we're in very interesting days. And I dare to have a little bit of hope as well.
00:42:07.660 Spencer Fernando, great to catch up with you folks. You can follow Spencer as I do at
00:42:12.020 spencerfernando.com. He's one of the few journalists in this country who is not on Trudeau's payroll.
00:42:17.460 Take care of Spencer. Thank you.
00:42:19.240 No problem.
00:42:19.920 All right. Cheers. Stay with us. More ahead.
00:42:31.600 Hey, welcome back. Your Viewer Mail. Sean Roberts says, when the Canadian government lets unvaccinated 1.00
00:42:38.980 refugees in, but actual Canadians aren't allowed to travel unvaccinated, mask mandates are the least
00:42:43.900 of my concerns. I'd wear a mask on a plane if it meant I was allowed to travel. That's an excellent
00:42:48.980 point. At what point is it just pure abusiveness? I mean, they're not testing anymore if you're,
00:42:57.840 if you have symptoms, if you're, if you're sick, you're allowed to, like, if, if you are sick,
00:43:03.580 since they don't ask for testing, and I guess you wouldn't have to tell them, you're allowed on the
00:43:07.640 plane. But if you're unvaccinated, you're not allowed on the plane, even if you're not sick, even if you
00:43:12.600 got sick and have natural immunity now, it's just about punishment.
00:43:18.800 Howard Tannenbaum says they will make the motions of an appeal or registering their objections.
00:43:24.120 He's talking about Biden and the American mask ruling. I don't think that Biden
00:43:27.340 wants to appeal. What happens to the Dems if the mandate is reinstated? More fuel to hate on them.
00:43:33.320 He was done a favor by this judge. I think so. But yesterday, Biden sort of flip-flopped. At first,
00:43:37.480 he said it's fine, but then they suggested they might appeal. It's very interesting what's going
00:43:41.440 on in that party right now, the Democrats. Scott Cook says great news for the USA, but when do we
00:43:47.040 in Canada get our freedoms back and the criminals arrested for violating our rights?
00:43:50.980 Like I say, our Supreme Court has not even weighed in on the pandemic. It has been more than two
00:43:56.780 years. And our Supreme Court has not had a thing to say about it. And our Charter of Rights has not
00:44:02.980 protected us in one way. What's the point of it? Like, what a joke it is if in the worst civil
00:44:09.300 liberties bonfire in our history, the Charter of Rights was never used to protect us. What is the
00:44:14.000 bloody point? That's our show for today. Let me leave you with our video of the day from Tamera
00:44:20.300 Ugolini. Now vaccine injured, this former believer in vaccine speaks out. This is a tough story to see.
00:44:29.220 Until tomorrow, folks. Good night and keep fighting for freedom. Here's Tamera's video. Bye-bye.
00:44:34.600 Tamera Ugolini here with Rebel News, and I continue to hear absolute silence from mainstream media
00:44:40.320 about the reactions that Canadians are suffering from as a result of COVID-19 injections, which makes
00:44:47.400 the story that I'm bringing you today even more shocking because a mere few months ago, 47-year-old
00:44:53.860 Saskatchewan resident Trina Huss was an avid mainstreamist. She relied on the mainstream media
00:45:00.020 as her daily news source and was terrified into submission by their incessant and exaggerated
00:45:07.100 COVID reporting. They report on this idea of long COVID, but completely ignore the vaccine reactions
00:45:13.960 that are happening. And Trina knew after only one dose of this injectable that her body wouldn't be
00:45:20.820 able to handle anymore. And then she got COVID and because she didn't die, despite technically being in
00:45:27.720 a high risk category with comorbidity, she began to question what was happening in the mainstream.
00:45:32.200 Listen to her story. So Trina, tell me why you decided to get the injection and what brand,
00:45:39.800 what manufacturer you went with. I got the vaccine a year ago. And the reason I got it was SHA,
00:45:48.380 Saskatchewan Health Authority, sent me a letter telling me I can get the vaccine before my age group
00:45:54.500 due to my health conditions, autoimmune disease. But I took a month and I thought about it. And then I
00:46:01.380 finally was like, Hey, I better do this because I'm scared. I'm terrified. I'm going to get COVID
00:46:06.940 because the news is saying like, if you get it, you're going to die. Doctors are saying you're
00:46:13.040 going to get it. You're going to die because you're immune compromised. So they, they literally had me
00:46:17.760 scared and I got the vaccine April 23rd. And the very next day I started having reaction. It blared up
00:46:28.540 my arthritis and created, uh, more, more back issues than what I was dealing with before.
00:46:35.700 And did you, you landed up in the ER? Is that correct?
00:46:39.360 Yes. I ended up going to the ER, uh, twice and they say, said, well, there's no evidence that the
00:46:48.980 vaccine has done this. Uh, so we really can't help you basically.
00:46:55.360 Tell me what the follow-up's been like. You've, you've gone to a few different specialists,
00:47:01.120 you know, it's been a year. Tell me a little bit about what that's looked like.
00:47:06.740 The, the internalist, uh, was no help. Basically said there was no evidence that the vaccine is
00:47:14.340 doing this to you. Said that I need a neurologist and to see my rheumatologist. So I am still waiting
00:47:20.920 for a neurologist appointment. Haven't heard anything. And this was back in September when
00:47:28.380 she put the requisition in, but I've seen the rheumatologist now twice and they, she put me on
00:47:36.200 new medications that are helping to a point. And then just recently saw her again. And she recently
00:47:43.180 just put me on another medication to see if it'll help even more with the pain that's going on in my
00:47:49.280 body due to the vaccine and like my health issues before it does. The vaccine triggered it even more.
00:47:57.540 What was, I understand that the tone or the tune rather of your rheumatologist has changed since
00:48:05.300 the previous time you saw her. And then you saw her again, just a few days ago. Can you elaborate on
00:48:09.840 that? Yes. Back in October, again, there was no evidence that the vaccine has done this to you,
00:48:17.360 but since seeing me, she has also seen more patients like me come into her due to the vaccine,
00:48:25.960 which I had was Moderna. And, um, she's now agreeing that the vaccine has caused my issues
00:48:36.240 to be worse. And she's now getting the ball going and getting more imaging done for my back where 0.78
00:48:43.380 the pain won't go away. It's 24 seven. So she's while I'm still waiting for the neurologist appointment,
00:48:52.340 she's going to get things going. Now, how has this affected your daily life,
00:48:58.220 this pain and this inflammation that you, you deal with chronically?
00:49:02.880 I had to stop working. I cleaned houses and businesses for a living before,
00:49:08.360 which my body hurt after I was done, of course, because of my issues, but I still was able to
00:49:13.860 work. I wasn't completely crippled to where I can't, where now I can't work. I can't even do my
00:49:20.580 own dishes. I'm bent over the sink while doing dishes now to get them put in the dishwasher.
00:49:28.240 And then by the time I'm done that, I got to sit before I could even continue to do any other kind
00:49:33.700 of housework, you know? So I basically, it takes me a week just to clean my whole house doing fits
00:49:42.100 every day. You and your husband, you, he, so he chose, opted not to, and, and, you know,
00:49:50.360 correct me if you don't want to discuss this on camera. Um, but what's the difference there
00:49:55.460 health wise between the two of you, someone, you know, living in the same household, someone who
00:49:59.120 chose to, to get the first dose and someone who didn't. He's, he's fairly healthy. Like he's got
00:50:07.020 his blood pressure problems, but otherwise he's healthy and he was possibly going to get the vaccine.
00:50:14.460 But after I did and saw my reactions, it made him, no, I'm not doing this. And now that he's also
00:50:23.960 have had COVID three times, why get it when he has all the antibodies? You haven't had COVID. Is that,
00:50:31.060 do I remember that correctly? I did have COVID just recently. We both recently got over it a couple
00:50:37.020 weeks ago. We had it March, end of March, beginning of April. The first two times he had COVID, I didn't
00:50:44.520 get COVID. And that the second time was in August and I had my shot in April. So this was in August
00:50:54.440 when he had COVID. And then in October, we did our antibodies test. My antibodies test came back that I
00:50:59.960 had no antibodies, which I should have, if I had a vaccine. So I asked the doctor, I said, okay, when
00:51:08.880 we did our antibodies test, his came back that he had two strains. I, mine came back. I had nothing,
00:51:15.920 which why didn't I, if I had the shot? And she said, well, it leaves, it runs out or leaves your body
00:51:24.020 within three months. So then that would have been by August. I should have not been, the vaccine
00:51:31.540 should have been gone. So then I asked her, well, then why didn't I get COVID? Because then the
00:51:35.840 vaccine would have been out of my body. And I slept with my husband, like we shared everything in the
00:51:40.760 same house. I took care of him. And she's like, well, that's because you're vaccinated. Well, you just
00:51:46.000 finished telling me that by the time August comes around, I was no longer vaccinated, but yet I was
00:51:52.500 protected because I, the vaccine was in my body. Like you just turned your words around.
00:51:59.320 Like, it's really hard to follow some of this, this logic. It seems very illogical. Um, exactly.
00:52:05.940 What was, what was the main deciding factor for you not to get or to proceed with the second dose?
00:52:13.280 Because of all the pain, what's the second dose going to do to me? You know, the first one did this
00:52:19.480 to me, is it going to inflame my arthritis and everything, all the other issues going on inside
00:52:24.500 my body, even worse. And then also like when I got the shot two months later, I had my last monthly
00:52:36.500 and I'm thinking like, okay, well it must be due to the menopause I'm going through. So I just brushed
00:52:40.980 it off. But when I got COVID and nine months later, my monthly started and then it got worse and worse
00:52:50.100 and worse while I had COVID. And then it got better when I was better from COVID. So I had no period for
00:52:57.720 nine months. So it seems to be a lot of anecdotal discussions around that. And then when I did go to
00:53:05.360 a doctor about that issue, um, he did agree that the Moderna did do that to me.
00:53:12.560 But no one has formally documented this as a reaction and they won't give you any further
00:53:17.720 exemption for other doses? No. The one doctor I asked if I can even get disability, he just said
00:53:26.820 to me, no, because there's no evidence the vaccine did this to you. You basically have fibromyalgia.
00:53:31.340 So just deal with it. And then, and then he said, and then that's a rheumatologist appointment. So
00:53:36.520 talk to your rheumatologist and tell her what I said. So when I did tell her on Friday that he
00:53:42.060 basically told me to tell her that I have fibromyalgia and I have to just deal with it.
00:53:46.460 She got kind of mad and she was going to rate some kind of complaint. It must be on a forum that they,
00:53:52.420 they have and was going to put in a complaint about doctors sending patients to her,
00:53:58.340 just saying you have fibromyalgia, just deal with it. She said, no, there is fibromyalgia. She goes,
00:54:03.520 but I don't like to diagnose that because there is a route to what's going on. And we got to find
00:54:09.200 that. Interesting. Well, hopefully you can get very interesting as well. Yeah. Well, keep me posted.
00:54:17.240 Hopefully you can get to the bottom of, you know, whether or not she ends up documenting this and
00:54:21.600 maybe at that point you would be eligible to receive the government. There's a federal grant
00:54:26.460 program out now for vaccine injured. I just, have you heard anything on mainstream media? I understand
00:54:34.040 that you were a heavy consumer of mainstream media. Did you hear about any of these reactions
00:54:38.220 through the media or how did you find others? No, I didn't hear any of it on the media. It was all
00:54:44.960 through following all the live feeds from the convoy and then people commenting about their reactions
00:54:53.200 from the vaccine. And I relate to many of those people. We all are in the same situation.
00:55:02.020 We're all vaccine victims and it's a real thing. We're not people out there lying just to get
00:55:10.240 attention. This is real. And these doctors need to deal with it.
00:55:15.580 Do you have a message for the mainstream media who may be instilling this fear of COVID and
00:55:22.700 simultaneously not acknowledging that the injections are causing damage to some people?
00:55:30.540 Coming from someone who has been watching mainstream media, Global News, the one I've been
00:55:37.360 watching since I was little, which started out as ITV. Please start listening to us. Listening to the
00:55:46.560 ones who are hurting because we're in pain due to this vaccine. Everyone's still getting COVID even with
00:55:56.880 this vaccine. Whether you have it or not, we're all getting it. We got to live with it. Stop putting people through hell.
00:56:07.360 .
00:56:09.100 .
00:56:10.100 .
00:56:15.220 .
00:56:16.220 .
00:56:16.600 .
00:56:17.220 .
00:56:18.700 .
00:56:20.820 .
00:56:20.860 .
00:56:20.920 .
00:56:22.040 .
00:56:22.700 .
00:56:24.420 .
00:56:26.400 . .
00:56:26.460 .
00:56:27.560 .
00:56:28.420 .
00:56:30.220 .
00:56:32.460 .
00:56:32.520 .