Rebel News Podcast - July 18, 2019


INSIDE Trudeau’s anti-pipeline law： “Indigenous knowledge” and “gender-diverse persons” will determine policies


Episode Stats


Length

47 minutes

Words per minute

162.71472

Word count

7,736

Sentence count

508

Harmful content

Misogyny

28

sentences flagged

Hate speech

7

sentences flagged


Summary

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

Justin Trudeau's anti-pipeline law is bad, but it's even worse than what Stephen Harper did, and I'll take you through it to prove it. Ezra Levenant takes you through Bill C-69 and shows you why.

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 take you through a law called Bill C-69.
00:00:03.940 It's the anti-pipeline law, although Trudeau's senator in Alberta, Paula Simon, says,
00:00:09.200 no, no, no, it's got nothing to do with pipelines.
00:00:11.120 And if it does, it's even better than what Stephen Harper did.
00:00:15.520 I'll take you through that and prove that it's wrong.
00:00:18.120 But before I cork it and move on to the show,
00:00:21.360 I'd be grateful if you considered becoming a subscriber to our premium content.
00:00:25.580 It's $8 a month or $80 a year.
00:00:27.060 You can get a discount by typing podcast as your coupon code.
00:00:31.360 And what it does is it gives you the video version of the podcast, which I think is good.
00:00:36.980 And it also gives you access to other shows, including one by Sheila Gunn-Reed and David Menzies.
00:00:41.360 And I think really the greatest value is the moral value that you're supporting us
00:00:45.800 because we don't take a dime from the government, unlike most Canadian media.
00:00:50.140 All right, without further ado, here's today's podcast.
00:00:53.680 You're listening to a Rebel Media Podcast.
00:00:56.160 Tonight, have you actually read Trudeau's new anti-pipeline law?
00:01:01.180 It's incredible. I'll take you through it.
00:01:03.140 It's July 17th, and this is The Ezra LeVant Show.
00:01:08.040 Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
00:01:11.720 There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
00:01:15.780 The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it
00:01:19.300 is because it's my bloody right to do so.
00:01:21.620 I want to let you know how bad it is.
00:01:28.820 Sorry about that, but I think it's better to know than to not know, right?
00:01:32.160 I'm talking about Justin Trudeau's anti-pipeline law.
00:01:35.320 It's officially proclaimed now.
00:01:37.160 It's formally called an act to enact the Impact Assessment Act
00:01:43.700 and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act to amend the Navigation Protection Act
00:01:48.800 and to make consequential amendments to other acts.
00:01:52.860 That's its name.
00:01:54.340 That's the long name.
00:01:55.100 But you've probably heard more about it as C-69,
00:01:59.020 which was its name when it was a bill moving through Parliament.
00:02:02.240 I've told you about it probably a dozen times before, mainly in passing,
00:02:06.100 mainly showing you two video clips from Catherine McKenna,
00:02:09.980 the out-of-control environment minister who championed the bill.
00:02:13.340 I've shown you an excerpt from a Twitter video published by McKenna
00:02:17.300 where she talks about how gender analysis and Aboriginal folklore
00:02:22.160 and other things like that will now have a veto over pipelines 0.75
00:02:27.660 and other industrial projects.
00:02:28.980 Here's a slightly longer version of the clip that I've shown you before.
00:02:33.180 Project decisions will be based on science, evidence,
00:02:36.400 and Indigenous traditional knowledge.
00:02:38.860 There will be more opportunities for Canadians like you
00:02:41.660 to have a say in reviews for projects that concern you.
00:02:44.700 You'll have better access to science
00:02:47.240 and we'll make easy-to-understand summaries
00:02:49.300 and decisions publicly available.
00:02:51.720 We'll work in partnership with Indigenous peoples
00:02:54.140 on project reviews from the start and recognize their rights.
00:02:58.440 This is one way we're following through
00:03:00.120 in our commitment to reconciliation
00:03:01.540 and it will lead to better project decisions in the long run.
00:03:06.620 We're putting forward a single agency in charge
00:03:08.960 of all federal impact assessments for major projects.
00:03:11.840 This will make sure the approach is fair, consistent, and more efficient.
00:03:17.100 We're also taking a bigger picture look
00:03:19.020 at the potential impacts of a proposed project.
00:03:22.180 Instead of just looking at the environmental impacts,
00:03:24.760 we'll look at how a project could affect our communities and health,
00:03:28.440 jobs and the economy over the long term,
00:03:30.920 and we'll also do a gender-based analysis.
00:03:33.580 The changes that we're making will make this whole review system
00:03:36.700 more open and straightforward
00:03:38.260 and we'll get to decisions that are both more trustworthy
00:03:40.780 and more timely
00:03:42.300 so we can get good projects built
00:03:44.560 and create jobs and communities across Canada.
00:03:48.100 Really, eh?
00:03:49.320 So, bringing in traditional folklore and gender analysis,
00:03:55.260 that's going to make decision-making faster
00:03:58.240 and more sciency and more trustworthy, eh?
00:04:01.140 You can tell she's never done anything real in real life.
00:04:05.120 Just never.
00:04:07.040 A life of chatter, of voyeurism,
00:04:09.180 of being a rootless critic, jet-setting everywhere,
00:04:12.220 endlessly repeating shallow, hollow talking points, cliches,
00:04:16.140 never had to actually do anything.
00:04:19.180 There's not one builder in Trudeau's cabinet,
00:04:21.200 not one doer, not one employer,
00:04:22.700 not one person who created something by himself or herself,
00:04:25.820 who risked their own money,
00:04:27.320 who mortgaged their own house,
00:04:28.640 borrowed from their life savings to start something,
00:04:31.140 no one who, when payroll came around,
00:04:33.100 had to skip their own paycheck to pay their staff.
00:04:36.080 No one had to deal with red tape and then more red tape
00:04:38.580 and then so much red tape
00:04:39.840 that they had to hire someone, an accountant, a lawyer,
00:04:42.380 just to handle all the red tape.
00:04:44.180 No, not one.
00:04:45.640 If they had, they'd know how insane this all is.
00:04:49.140 It was so nuts that even Don Martin,
00:04:51.920 himself, a lifelong chatterbox at CTV,
00:04:54.660 even he couldn't believe it.
00:04:56.200 Seriously, gender analysis on pipelines?
00:05:01.140 Gender impact, how does that fit into a pipeline approval process? 0.99
00:05:04.480 So, I'm really glad you asked that
00:05:05.840 because I think people are like,
00:05:06.840 well, what is this gender thing? 1.00
00:05:08.340 Well, imagine that you have a huge number of people
00:05:13.480 going to a remote community, many men.
00:05:15.920 What is the impact on the community?
00:05:17.700 What is the impact on women in the community? 1.00
00:05:19.720 And actually, once again, smart proponents understand this.
00:05:22.400 So, they're going to put measures in place.
00:05:24.160 That's all it is.
00:05:24.920 It's just taking a smart approach to thinking about,
00:05:27.420 okay, what's going to be the impact of a major development
00:05:29.900 in a particular area?
00:05:32.300 Yeah, come on. 0.77
00:05:33.080 I mean, everyone smart knows what it means.
00:05:35.740 I mean, I've never built anything.
00:05:37.620 I've never run anything other than my mouth.
00:05:40.240 But come on, smart people know the answer
00:05:43.560 that you do gender analysis on pipelines.
00:05:50.000 I swear to God she said that
00:05:51.520 because when it comes to judging
00:05:52.900 whether or not a company is smart
00:05:55.100 or a businessman is smart,
00:05:56.460 Catherine McKenna, who has never run anything,
00:05:58.740 she would know.
00:06:00.440 I can't help but remember
00:06:01.560 when she was lecturing a great Canadian farmer
00:06:04.360 named Megs Reynolds about farming.
00:06:06.900 See, you know Catherine McKenna is an expert
00:06:08.540 about mining and pipelines.
00:06:10.540 She's also an expert in farming, did you know? 0.54
00:06:12.040 Now, you can't farm without fossil fuels.
00:06:14.220 You just can't.
00:06:15.460 But Catherine McKenna told this farmer,
00:06:17.520 duh, just farm smarter.
00:06:21.080 I guess she couldn't drop the gender analysis line on Megs. 1.00
00:06:25.000 But look at this, a shallow, snide Ottawa lovey
00:06:29.780 telling a hardworking farmer,
00:06:31.640 just farm smarter to afford the carbon tax.
00:06:35.560 The biggest challenge as a farmer for me
00:06:38.920 is going to be the carbon pricing
00:06:40.180 because agriculture is pretty much the only industry
00:06:42.920 where we don't get to pass on
00:06:44.440 that additional cost to our operation.
00:06:47.540 So carbon pricing is going to be
00:06:49.260 an extremely challenging bill
00:06:50.880 for a lot of farmers to be able to deal with.
00:06:52.840 She can't raise the price of her grain 0.71
00:06:54.800 or she'll be forced out of the market. 0.96
00:06:56.740 So like maybe this explains
00:06:58.480 why you've got all the prairie premiers
00:07:00.900 basically saying, or most of them saying,
00:07:03.160 we don't want a carbon price.
00:07:04.520 How do you win over farmers like her? 1.00
00:07:07.140 Look, if anyone understands the impacts of climate change,
00:07:10.820 it's farmers.
00:07:11.620 Our system will give more money back
00:07:13.980 to residents of that province than they will pay
00:07:16.480 and will create the incentives for innovation.
00:07:18.760 And I've seen amazing innovations in farming, for example.
00:07:22.500 Zero till agriculture, using less water,
00:07:26.620 using smart technologies, artificial intelligence
00:07:29.680 to figure out how you can use less fertilizer,
00:07:33.060 how you can do a better job tilling,
00:07:35.600 how you can get better results.
00:07:37.260 We can all do this.
00:07:38.940 But if we don't, the impact will be dire on farms.
00:07:44.520 I think I just lost 10 IQ points listening to that.
00:07:49.600 Be smarter, use artificial intelligence
00:07:52.520 to figure the answer out.
00:07:54.500 So like I'm just going to tax you a little bit
00:07:57.000 and you're just going to be smarter.
00:07:58.780 That's the cabinet ministry.
00:08:01.560 But my point today is that's how bad C-69 was 0.95
00:08:07.160 when it was introduced as a bill.
00:08:08.960 And of course, it goes without saying,
00:08:10.580 this would only apply to Canadian industry.
00:08:12.860 That's sort of a point Meg was making there.
00:08:15.520 Imports don't have to pay these crazy taxes 1.00
00:08:17.840 or go through these crazy regulations.
00:08:19.860 So there would be no gender analysis
00:08:21.720 or aboriginal analysis or queer analysis
00:08:24.860 or feminist analysis on oil brought in 0.99
00:08:27.940 from the United States by rail
00:08:29.460 or oil brought in from Saudi Arabia by tankership.
00:08:33.280 No extra permits required for them,
00:08:35.020 just for Canadian producers.
00:08:37.040 Imagine passing a law that would harm Canadians
00:08:39.640 but exempt foreign oil producers.
00:08:41.900 That's what Meg Reynolds says, 1.00
00:08:43.700 Catherine McKenna is doing to farmers. 0.98
00:08:45.160 Well, she wants to do it to oil and gas too. 0.99
00:08:46.720 So it was an outrage, C-69.
00:08:48.460 It's the war on the West.
00:08:49.780 It's the war on Alberta.
00:08:50.640 It's a war on oil and gas.
00:08:51.780 War on entrepreneurs.
00:08:52.600 It's like Pierre Trudeau's national energy program.
00:08:55.940 Now that was done in the name of energy nationalism,
00:08:58.120 if you can believe it.
00:08:59.480 This time it's being done in the name of what exactly?
00:09:03.280 Global warming, feminism, whatever. 1.00
00:09:07.980 But look, Trudeau's going to Trudeau.
00:09:10.720 Catherine McKenna with her fake Kardashian acts
00:09:13.200 and she's as shallow as a puddle. 1.00
00:09:15.160 But what about people who are supposed to,
00:09:17.320 you know, stand up for Alberta and its core industry?
00:09:19.480 What about, say, Alberta's senators?
00:09:23.320 Well, here's what Paula Simons, 0.90
00:09:24.660 one of Trudeau's hand-picked senators in Alberta,
00:09:27.080 wrote on Facebook.
00:09:28.420 Let me read a fair bit of it
00:09:29.440 because it's too long to read it all,
00:09:31.340 but I want to read a chunk of it.
00:09:33.220 She had just voted for C-69
00:09:36.380 and she was rightly being denounced as a sellout,
00:09:39.440 someone who put her personal loyalty to Justin Trudeau
00:09:41.820 because Trudeau gave her a free, luxurious job for life.
00:09:45.540 So she's putting her loyalty to Trudeau
00:09:47.640 above her loyalty to her own province
00:09:49.400 and her own neighbours.
00:09:50.540 And frankly, her loyalty to the truth takes second place.
00:09:54.920 So here's what she wrote on Facebook.
00:09:56.180 She said,
00:09:56.500 So much confusion and misinformation out there
00:10:00.100 about the final votes on C-48 and C-69.
00:10:02.860 Just off the plane,
00:10:03.820 but here's an excerpt from text of the letter
00:10:05.620 I've been sending out to people today
00:10:07.300 to try to explain.
00:10:08.480 You may know that I was a member of the Standing Committee
00:10:11.760 on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources
00:10:14.420 as an Albertan and as a committee member.
00:10:16.840 I had a special responsibility to research and study Bill C-69
00:10:20.000 and consider its impact on Canadian industry,
00:10:22.540 on the Canadian environment
00:10:23.460 and on Canada's relations with its Indigenous communities.
00:10:27.000 I spent months meeting with stakeholders and lobbyists
00:10:30.180 and listening to witnesses at hearings across the country.
00:10:32.620 I traveled to Vancouver, Calgary, Fort McMurray,
00:10:34.580 Saskatoon, Winnipeg, St. John's, Halifax, St. John
00:10:36.660 and Quebec City to hear from citizens, politicians,
00:10:39.760 scientists, environmentalists, Indigenous leaders
00:10:41.780 and representatives of dozens of different industries.
00:10:44.620 In the end, our committee forwarded a suggested
00:10:47.560 187 amendments to the House of Commons
00:10:50.000 to address many of the flaws we found in the legislation.
00:10:52.500 I was pleased, relieved and not a little surprised
00:10:55.320 when the government accepted 99% of those amendments,
00:10:59.620 not 99%, sorry, 99, in whole or in part.
00:11:03.880 This was unprecedented.
00:11:05.500 In Canadian political history, never before in 152 years
00:11:10.320 has any government accepted so many amendments to any bill.
00:11:14.200 I love you, Justin Trudeau.
00:11:16.920 I'm sorry, I added that last part.
00:11:18.660 The letter goes on at some length, but here's how she ended it.
00:11:22.100 But will Bill C-69, as amended,
00:11:24.880 make it easier for good projects to get approved
00:11:27.040 than it is the case right now?
00:11:28.500 Will it make it possible to get projects built
00:11:30.620 while still protecting the environment?
00:11:32.120 And does it offer a way forward, a way for proponents
00:11:34.560 to work with First Nations communities to get projects built?
00:11:38.080 Yes, that's why I voted in favor of the bill.
00:11:41.520 Thursday night, we also voted on C-48,
00:11:43.420 the confidential tanker ban bill.
00:11:45.080 I have long opposed C-48, and I voted against it last night.
00:11:48.180 It was a close vote, 49 to 46.
00:11:50.440 It was frustrating to get that close to defeating the bill,
00:11:52.660 only to see it pass.
00:11:53.560 But I fought my hardest for Alberta without apology.
00:11:58.380 I'm the best.
00:12:01.700 So C-69, you saw me read it.
00:12:05.520 She's saying it will actually make it easier to get pipelines built.
00:12:09.240 She said that.
00:12:09.800 You saw me read it.
00:12:11.460 Is that true?
00:12:13.380 No.
00:12:14.620 No, not in reality.
00:12:16.260 I'll take you through the final version of the bill,
00:12:18.560 the one that was proclaimed as law.
00:12:20.360 It was just finally posted by Parliament a few days ago.
00:12:22.300 For some reason, Parliament didn't publish that final version
00:12:25.280 with the amendments until just a few days ago.
00:12:27.480 I'll show you them.
00:12:29.400 But just one last thing.
00:12:30.680 I want to show you Alberta's noisiest senator, Paula Simons. 1.00
00:12:33.700 She used to be a left-wing pundit from the Edmonton Journal.
00:12:36.000 She was given her reward from the liberals
00:12:39.060 for a lifetime of liberal journalism
00:12:40.520 by giving the taskless thanks of being a senator for life.
00:12:44.380 Nice gig, if you can get it.
00:12:45.740 Paula Simons could never win an election in Alberta.
00:12:49.520 She's just too far outside the mainstream hard left.
00:12:51.780 But with Trudeau on her side, she doesn't need to win elections. 1.00
00:12:54.620 And she returns the favor to him every day.
00:12:57.740 Here, listen to this.
00:12:58.900 This is a Trudeau senator, Paula Simons, on the Trudeau CBC,
00:13:02.960 telling Albertans that this anti-pipeline bill, C-69,
00:13:06.100 is so great that she's proudly voting for it.
00:13:09.960 Well, I think this is really proof of what the new Senate can do,
00:13:13.700 that we have the authority, the moral and political authority,
00:13:16.880 to say to the government, this is inadequate,
00:13:19.780 these are serious problems, here are some serious solutions,
00:13:23.160 and to have the government listen, that's really quite historic.
00:13:27.720 Wow.
00:13:29.800 I didn't know we had a new Senate.
00:13:31.500 I just learned that right there.
00:13:33.180 And it's historic what happened there.
00:13:35.880 Now, she says the bill isn't just great for oil and gas.
00:13:41.300 She says it's proof that Justin Trudeau really cares about Albert.
00:13:44.000 He's really listening, people.
00:13:46.240 Now, even the CBC had trouble buying that.
00:13:49.480 But Paula Simons knows that any critics of this bill are just,
00:13:53.980 they're just stupid, unlike her.
00:13:56.420 Take a look at this.
00:13:57.460 On the street.
00:13:58.100 They know what it is.
00:13:58.900 They think they know what it is.
00:14:00.980 They know what they've been told that it is.
00:14:03.600 By whom?
00:14:04.620 By the politicians, in some cases by the media.
00:14:09.720 I mean, believe me, I have read Bill C-69.
00:14:13.620 Some of the things that people think are in it are just not there.
00:14:18.380 Yeah, the little people, they can be so dumb, aren't they? 0.97
00:14:21.120 I mean, she read it, and you're wrong, and she's right,
00:14:24.680 and she's a Trudeau senator, so she would never lie to you.
00:14:28.900 Now, like I say, she was a lifelong left-wing journalist. 0.87
00:14:31.200 That is little preparation for being a senator,
00:14:33.400 other than, I guess, you talk a lot, like Catherine McKenna talks a lot,
00:14:36.380 and the rest of Trudeau's team talks a lot.
00:14:38.260 Paula Simons, though, like them, has never actually built anything,
00:14:41.100 but she thinks maybe if she talks enough, that's all that matters.
00:14:45.700 I honestly believe, I'm quoting her tweet here,
00:14:48.620 I honestly believe this bill, as amended,
00:14:51.940 will be better for industry proponents than the status quo.
00:14:54.580 Oh, but C-69 has no impact on conventional drilling or in-situ or oil prices.
00:15:00.440 I just want to show you a few more of these tweets.
00:15:02.540 She actually, you saw it there again, C-69 will actually help companies.
00:15:07.020 It's a plus, it's a bonus.
00:15:08.860 Let me read another tweet.
00:15:10.820 It's a lot better, and better than the status quo.
00:15:14.240 Senators can't just block legislation because it needs fine-tuning. 0.98
00:15:17.720 We defer to the elected House.
00:15:19.020 We push back when things are dire, and they were.
00:15:21.300 C-69, as written, was a bad bill.
00:15:23.840 We made big improvements.
00:15:26.560 She wrote that just two weeks ago.
00:15:29.000 Now, hang on, she just said it was good.
00:15:31.780 Now she says it was awful, but it's simply less awful after the amendments.
00:15:37.060 Not sure if both of those can be true at the same time.
00:15:40.300 Well, I guess we know which side she landed on 0.87
00:15:43.700 because she positively voted for C-69 in the end.
00:15:47.160 She said, just so you aren't surprised, I will be voting in favor of C-69 tonight.
00:15:52.540 I did not support the bills that first came to us.
00:15:55.100 The 99 amendments accepted by the government,
00:15:57.580 amendments agreed to by conservatives, independents, liberal, and unaffiliated senators,
00:16:01.020 improved it hugely.
00:16:04.680 Wow, improved it hugely, eh?
00:16:08.080 And she's actually saying it was more pro-pipeline
00:16:11.160 than anything that Stephen Harper did.
00:16:14.240 Look at this tweet.
00:16:15.100 Patty and I aren't liberals,
00:16:17.940 and C-69, as amended and rewritten,
00:16:20.400 is far more likely to get pipelines built
00:16:23.260 that had Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012.
00:16:27.760 That was Stephen Harper's law.
00:16:28.920 Just one more tweet from Trudeau's senator in Alberta.
00:16:32.160 But C-69 doesn't mean no pipelines.
00:16:34.340 If anything, it should make new pipelines easier to approve.
00:16:38.820 The problem we have is that Trans Mountain expansion was waylaid,
00:16:42.280 and Line 3 and Keystone are being held up south of the border.
00:16:45.440 Okay.
00:16:47.040 So this bill makes it easier for pipelines to be approved.
00:16:50.980 Is that true? Is that true?
00:16:52.840 All right, enough chatter from a chatterbox know-nothing
00:16:55.020 in a Trudeau government full of chatterbox know-nothings,
00:16:58.200 run by Trudeau himself, a chatterbox know-nothing.
00:17:02.080 Let's actually look at the law, okay?
00:17:03.960 Something I honestly don't think Paula Simons has done.
00:17:08.640 I don't think she's read it, at least all the way through.
00:17:12.460 I just don't think she has,
00:17:14.060 because I don't think she could say those things if she had.
00:17:16.120 See, the other day I tweeted out the transgender part of the bill.
00:17:19.460 I'm not even kidding.
00:17:20.100 Look at my tweet.
00:17:20.740 I said, Alberta's unelected senator, Paula Simons, voted for C-69, Trudeau's anti-pipeline bill.
00:17:28.320 Here's the law, and I have a link to it.
00:17:30.280 Six times it says no pipelines will be built that don't take into account how groups of women, 1.00
00:17:35.640 men, and gender-diverse people may experience policies.
00:17:38.620 And you can see there, I actually have a screenshot.
00:17:41.240 I copied the part of the law that says pipeline regulars must now take into consideration
00:17:48.740 sex and gender and other identity factors before approving a pipeline.
00:17:55.940 I know, it's crazy.
00:17:57.560 So that's what I tweeted about a month ago, but Paula Simons denied it.
00:18:00.840 She said this, she wrote back.
00:18:02.420 She said, I believe that is a year-old version before 99 amendments.
00:18:07.800 I did not support that original bill.
00:18:11.240 Okay, is that true?
00:18:13.360 That whole transgender thing, is that one of the things that she did not support, would 1.00
00:18:17.820 not support, was amended by her 99 amendments?
00:18:20.760 Is it true?
00:18:22.140 All the things that Paula Simons, the Trudeau senator, and Alberta says?
00:18:26.740 She said the bill isn't really even about pipelines, really.
00:18:29.520 She said all those bad things were just in an old version, that her 99 amendments improves
00:18:34.480 things a lot, that this will make pipeline approvals easier than it was under Stephen Harper.
00:18:39.500 Is that true?
00:18:43.520 No, it is not true.
00:18:45.700 Let's look at the law.
00:18:47.200 As you can see, Parliament has finally posted the final version of the bill that was proclaimed
00:18:53.120 as law.
00:18:54.580 You can see the bottom there, it says assented to.
00:18:56.980 That's the governor general saying, that's a law.
00:18:59.500 Let's start by testing a few of Paula Simons' statements.
00:19:02.060 She says it's not a pipeline law.
00:19:04.000 She said that endlessly.
00:19:04.900 I did a word search of the document.
00:19:09.500 It's 365 pages.
00:19:11.100 It's huge, by the way.
00:19:12.560 Imagine thinking the 365 pages of new rules will make it faster to get anything approved.
00:19:20.860 365 new pages of rules.
00:19:22.440 That's what someone who has never run a lemonade stand, let alone a pipeline company, would say.
00:19:26.680 This 365-page chunk of red tape is going to help your life.
00:19:31.480 Anyways, I use the word search function on my computer because it's 365 pages long.
00:19:36.300 And I know, I'm shocked like you are, Trudeau's senator is lying.
00:19:41.120 The word pipeline is in there actually 345 times if you do a word search, which I did.
00:19:49.620 You know, Pipeline Claims Tribunal is in there.
00:19:52.960 It describes punishments for pipelines, sentencing, respecting releases from pipelines.
00:19:59.580 It talks about pipelines exhaustively.
00:20:02.860 Why did she say it doesn't?
00:20:06.080 Oil is mentioned 130 times.
00:20:08.540 Gas is mentioned 144 times.
00:20:12.320 Why did she say this really isn't a pipeline law?
00:20:15.060 Oh, and it's a prison law too.
00:20:16.800 Did you know that?
00:20:17.320 Did you know that this law, C-69, contains fines of up to a million dollars and prison terms of up to five years?
00:20:25.340 The word imprisonment, the word imprisonment is in this law 21 times.
00:20:30.800 Here's just one example.
00:20:31.700 I'm just going to read one example.
00:20:33.480 Offense and punishment.
00:20:35.740 Everyone who contravenes an order made under subsection 95.1 or 2 or regulation made under section 96
00:20:41.080 is guilty of an offense and liable on conviction on indictment to a fine of not more than a million dollars
00:20:47.700 or imprisonment for a term of not more than five years or to both
00:20:54.380 or on summary of conviction to a fine of not more than $100,000
00:20:59.100 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than one year or to both.
00:21:03.920 Oh, hey guys.
00:21:05.420 A Trudeau senator just told us there's absolutely nothing wrong with the law
00:21:08.440 and if you say there's a problem with the law, you're uninformed.
00:21:12.780 Just don't trip the wire of those 20 things that will get you sent to prison.
00:21:16.360 But let me come back to the crazy thing I showed you right at the beginning.
00:21:21.000 Project's decisions will be based on science, evidence, and indigenous traditional knowledge.
00:21:26.380 We're also taking a bigger picture look at the potential impacts of a proposed project.
00:21:31.020 Instead of just looking at the environmental impacts,
00:21:33.940 we'll look at how a project could affect our communities and health,
00:21:36.900 jobs and the economy over the long term,
00:21:39.880 and we'll also do a gender-based analysis.
00:21:43.680 So is that all that crazy stuff? Is that still in there?
00:21:47.280 That was the part I tweeted the other day that Senator Paula Simon said,
00:21:51.760 no, no, no, that's outdated. No, no, no. We fixed that with 99 amendments.
00:21:54.920 I would never support that. I mean, who told you that?
00:22:00.200 No, no, she's pulling a Trudeau on you. 1.00
00:22:02.240 Let me read this. This is the law, the final version, assented to last month,
00:22:08.320 that Paula Simons voted for, against her own province, against her own people,
00:22:12.780 out of loyalty to Justin Trudeau.
00:22:14.740 Quebecers are better than the rest of Canada because, you know, we're Quebecers.
00:22:22.180 Yeah, that Trudeau. So that's who Paula Simons is loyal to. 1.00
00:22:25.600 Let me read, at some length, from the law, as passed.
00:22:31.520 These are the new factors that the government must consider.
00:22:33.980 The word must is in there. Not could, not should, not maybe, not can.
00:22:38.660 They must. The government must consider. Let me read it.
00:22:43.600 Factors to consider.
00:22:45.500 The Commission must make its recommendation taking into account,
00:22:49.560 in light of, among other things, any indigenous knowledge that has been provided to the Commission,
00:22:54.480 and scientific information and data,
00:22:57.580 all considerations that appear to it to be relevant and directly related to the pipeline,
00:23:02.180 including the environmental effects, including any cumulative environmental effects,
00:23:08.580 the safety and security of persons and the protection of property and the environment.
00:23:13.340 Okay, so good so far.
00:23:14.400 I'll stop there for a moment. Of course, the Commission should take into account environmental effects.
00:23:34.040 That's the whole point of this Commission. Of course, people should be protected. Of course, we don't want danger.
00:23:38.680 Those are criteria one and two.
00:23:41.380 But the third one, the very third one, is transgenderism and other identity factors.
00:23:49.800 Black Lives Matter, Hispanic rights, whatever.
00:23:55.460 Being gay, being...
00:23:57.780 Identity grievances are hardwired into the law,
00:24:01.980 and the government must take them into account,
00:24:04.560 and transgenderism is specifically in there.
00:24:10.600 And even that first part, indigenous knowledge plus scientific information,
00:24:14.700 well, which one is it?
00:24:16.040 I know what folklore is.
00:24:17.800 I know what cultural customs are.
00:24:19.180 We all have our ethnic and religious and spiritual traditions.
00:24:22.360 And I love aboriginal traditions, by the way.
00:24:25.740 But those traditions don't include building pipelines.
00:24:28.460 How can the law, the binding law, say that the Commission must, not can, not should, but must,
00:24:36.060 listen to aboriginal folklore about building a pipeline?
00:24:38.620 What does that even mean?
00:24:39.700 Who decides what that folklore is?
00:24:42.220 Which sources?
00:24:43.000 Which traditions?
00:24:43.900 On what authority?
00:24:44.780 There were no books.
00:24:47.220 And Paula Simon says this will make approving pipelines easier than before.
00:24:51.800 This is better than it was under Stephen Harper.
00:24:53.980 And you know the proof, just look at all the construction on the Trans Mountain expansion.
00:24:59.840 Oh, right, that hasn't happened.
00:25:01.600 In fact, for the first time in memory, according to the National Energy Board,
00:25:04.500 Canada's oil production is actually shrinking.
00:25:08.000 It's less than it was.
00:25:09.640 While the United States is producing so much,
00:25:12.520 it's now a net energy exporter.
00:25:14.400 It even exports oil to Canada.
00:25:16.320 And Paula Simons and her bosses, Justin Trudeau and Catherine McKenna,
00:25:21.900 are just fine with that American oil coming in,
00:25:25.020 regardless of what transgender intersectionality or indigenous folklore have to say about that American oil.
00:25:31.160 Yeah, Paula Simons, you are a liar. 1.00
00:25:34.380 Just like your boss, Justin Trudeau, is a liar.
00:25:37.300 And you both do everything in your power to undermine Alberta,
00:25:42.340 including passing a new law that makes new construction of pipelines impossible in any practical sense.
00:25:48.500 You both are destroyers of the industry and therefore destroyers of Alberta families.
00:25:54.980 I suppose in that way, that makes Trudeau a bit more honest about himself than you.
00:26:01.380 Doesn't it?
00:26:03.380 Stay with us for more.
00:26:07.300 Welcome back.
00:26:19.180 Well, as you know, one of our chief stories for the last two years has been censorship by the oligopoly of tech giants in Silicon Valley
00:26:29.200 that run so much of our lives.
00:26:30.420 I mean, try for a moment to think of how you could even exist without Google, YouTube, Gmail.
00:26:36.480 That's one company.
00:26:37.300 Without Facebook, Instagram, that's another company.
00:26:40.780 Without Twitter, Microsoft, just a handful of companies control so much information, so much communication.
00:26:47.300 Being de-platformed is like being de-person, but it's almost just as bad if you haven't been de-platformed
00:26:53.620 because you are being shaped.
00:26:56.280 And what you see is a filtered version of reality.
00:26:59.880 And I think the censorship is coming quite quickly.
00:27:01.820 In Canada, I think we'll see it faster than in the United States because I think they're going to test out their censorship of right-wing voices in the Canadian federal election in October
00:27:11.680 as a prototype for how they're going to deal with the American election in 2020.
00:27:16.620 Just a quick anecdote before I introduce our guest today.
00:27:19.480 I recently received an email from Twitter announcing a new product.
00:27:23.420 It's a censorship product that they're rolling out in Canada to test.
00:27:27.660 Well, obviously, that's because of our election.
00:27:29.720 It allows politicians like Justin Trudeau, Catherine McKenna, politicians who hate being mocked by people on Twitter,
00:27:36.880 and they're mocked all the time, it allows them to silence people from replying to their tweets.
00:27:44.840 Not just, I mean, right now, anyone on Twitter can block their ability to see mean things said about them.
00:27:51.080 And I support that, by the way.
00:27:52.680 But this would allow these politicians to block other people from seeing these mean replies.
00:27:59.860 That is how Twitter plans to control the Canadian election.
00:28:03.740 It'll be interesting to see what else they do.
00:28:05.240 The reason I tell you all this is because, at least in the United States,
00:28:09.460 at least some quarters of the Republican Party are somewhat concerned about censorship
00:28:14.180 and about the bending and the filtering of reality in a way designed to change our political views.
00:28:22.340 And joining us now to talk about the latest hearings on Capitol Hill is our friend Alan Bocari,
00:28:27.420 the senior tech editor of Breitbart.com.
00:28:30.180 Alan, great to see you again from the city where just yesterday.
00:28:33.540 Hi, it's great to see you.
00:28:34.380 Thanks for being here.
00:28:35.660 Tell me about yesterday's hearings.
00:28:38.200 So, yesterday, Senator Ted Cruz shared a hearing with Google on Google and censorship.
00:28:45.280 And it's a topic Cruz has been a leader on, I think.
00:28:48.000 He was the first senator to come out and say there's a big incompatibility in the law
00:28:53.740 in which tech companies are able to claim the legal privileges of neutral platforms in which they get legal immunity from user-generated content,
00:29:03.160 while also claiming the rights of a publisher to editorialize and generally act in a non-neutral manner.
00:29:10.740 Cruz's argument is that, and I think this is backed up in the law,
00:29:14.580 that if you're going to be a neutral platform and claim that special perk that basically renders you immune from any kind of lawsuit related to content hosted on your platform,
00:29:24.460 then you need to behave like a neutral platform and not take sides politically.
00:29:30.260 So, you know, if the rebel media posted something defamatory, they could get sued for that.
00:29:37.080 But if something defamatory is posted on Twitter or Facebook, then they can't be sued because of this law.
00:29:41.900 And Cruz's point, and now Josh Hawley's point as well, and multiple Republican senators and congressmen are making this point,
00:29:47.400 if you want that special perk from the government, you're going to have to have some obligations attached with it.
00:29:54.420 And the most obvious obligation is if you're going to be a neutral platform, you should behave neutrally.
00:29:59.420 So that was one of the topics that was brought up in the hearing.
00:30:04.840 Senator Cruz also cited my report on the good censor,
00:30:09.340 which is a document I obtained and released from Google last year in which the company admits that both Google and YouTube and other tech companies as well
00:30:21.460 have all shifted towards censorship over the past two years, two to three years,
00:30:26.940 which is an interesting time period because, you know, what happened two to three years ago,
00:30:30.240 I wonder what could have kicked off this mass panic, this massive censorship in Silicon Valley,
00:30:36.260 maybe some political event that happened two or three years ago, who knows?
00:30:39.340 Yeah, that's right.
00:30:40.260 Well, of course, I think the tech companies missed Brexit.
00:30:44.200 They didn't quite get it, what happened there.
00:30:46.300 Everyone, all the establishment missed Brexit.
00:30:49.020 It wasn't until that same wave put Trump in the Oval Office that they panicked.
00:30:53.720 Here, I want to show a quick clip of Ted Cruz asking Google's vice president about your scoop,
00:31:00.360 the good censor, which is how Google sees itself.
00:31:04.220 Here, take a quick look at that.
00:31:05.380 It is a document that at least purports to be authored by Google.
00:31:10.340 The title of the document is The Good Censor.
00:31:13.460 How can Google reassure the world that it protects users from harmful content while still supporting free speech?
00:31:23.660 And it's dated March of 2018.
00:31:26.800 Is this document, in fact, a document that was prepared within Google?
00:31:31.960 I have seen the document before, Senator.
00:31:35.880 I've seen references to it.
00:31:36.900 I understand that it was.
00:31:38.180 Yeah.
00:31:38.640 Okay.
00:31:39.600 Is this document prepared within Google?
00:31:41.880 Is it accurate?
00:31:42.780 Is Google engaged in, and the terms used, are censorship and moderation?
00:31:47.860 And moderation in this context, I understand not to mean being moderate, but rather actively moderating the speech that occurs.
00:31:56.380 Is that, in fact, what Google is doing, which is censoring and moderating speech on its platform?
00:32:03.440 So, I would not say that we are censoring speech on our platform.
00:32:07.220 In fact, there is a dramatic, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, remarkable opportunities for every part of the political spectrum to be able to participate through the online platforms.
00:32:19.440 Well, Alan, congratulations on your reporting.
00:32:22.220 It's a real feather in your cap to have your scoop color hearings.
00:32:27.940 Tell me about one of the other lines of questioning for Google, namely their blacklists for search results.
00:32:38.300 You know, it sounds like a paranoid conspiracy theory, but it's actually how they do things.
00:32:43.240 Can you tell us a bit about that, and then we'll throw to a clip?
00:32:47.080 Absolutely.
00:32:47.560 And, you know, the other thing I'd say about my reporting is that it all relies on these very brave sources in Silicon Valley who come forward and blow the whistle on wrongdoing within their companies.
00:32:58.920 And they're taking a huge risk by doing that because Google will, and other tech companies, will fire you with the slightest hint of conservative viewpoints.
00:33:07.080 James DeMorme, who isn't even conservative, is a former software engineer who was fired from Google simply for expressing mainstream views about gender and suggesting there needs to be more political diversity at Google.
00:33:19.640 He was fired for that.
00:33:20.600 So these sources are taking a huge risk by coming forward, but they're doing it anyway because they know there's a whole lot of bias at these companies, and it's having a massive impact on American politics.
00:33:31.820 But to return to your question, another key point in the hearing, I think, was when Marsha Blackburn was questioning one of the Google representatives, and the Google representative specifically denied the company uses blacklists.
00:33:48.680 He did that twice because Blackburn asked him to repeat it.
00:33:52.160 And I don't know how he interprets blacklists, but I reported a few months ago that Google maintains this file called YouTube underscore controversial underscore query underscore blacklist.
00:34:09.060 So they have a file with a big list of search terms, and they've called that file a blacklist.
00:34:14.200 So I don't know how Google's representative can go before the Senate and say the company doesn't use blacklists.
00:34:19.520 Well, if you're a company that's, I don't know, not quite a trillion dollars in market cap, but getting there, I suppose you think you have impunity.
00:34:29.840 I mean, what's the government going to do, sue you for lying?
00:34:33.140 Here, let's take a quick look at that exchange.
00:34:35.180 Has Google ever blacklisted or attempted to blacklist a company, group, individual, or outlet from its advertising partners or its search results for political reasons?
00:34:50.180 No, ma'am.
00:34:51.220 We don't use blacklist, whitelist to influence our search results.
00:34:55.560 For what reason does Google blacklist a company?
00:34:59.760 As I said, per your previous question, we do not utilize blacklists or whitelists in our search results to favor political outcomes.
00:35:09.660 It's not, doesn't happen.
00:35:11.520 Well, Alan, I find it encouraging that senators and some congressmen are sharpening their inquiries.
00:35:19.380 I remember the first wave of these hearings Facebook attended.
00:35:23.940 You had senators and congressmen who obviously do not use the Internet intimately, are not familiar with the problems,
00:35:33.340 and were asking questions that sounded like they were written by staffers, and they just didn't,
00:35:40.140 the questions weren't sharp, and they betrayed that the question askers really didn't believe or understand the file.
00:35:48.620 I sense that with Senator Hawley in particular, but also Ted Cruz and Marshall Blackburn, that these people are starting to get it,
00:35:56.280 and they also know that the tech companies are, as you just indicated, they're liars.
00:36:02.580 And so I think they're taking more of an adversarial cross-examination style of inquiry.
00:36:08.040 Would you agree with that?
00:36:10.240 I think so.
00:36:11.620 I don't think they care about lying to Congress or not even showing up to Congress.
00:36:17.500 I mean, on a number of occasions, Google simply hasn't shown up to these hearings, and they've just put an empty chair there.
00:36:24.400 I think they don't care, because even when governments, like in Europe especially, do fine these companies,
00:36:30.100 the fines aren't nearly high enough that it would actually do serious damage to these companies.
00:36:35.460 You know, these companies can take the fines.
00:36:38.220 You know, we're talking about big fines for, like, antitrust and competition violations.
00:36:42.260 These companies have, like, been totally fine.
00:36:44.140 They've just taken that on the nose.
00:36:45.180 So something like, you know, misrepresenting what their companies do to Congress is a much lower offense in their eyes than antitrust or competition.
00:36:58.060 They know nothing is really going to happen to them, especially when they do so much spending on Capitol Hill with lobbying,
00:37:04.500 and they have so many friends in Congress.
00:37:06.620 I mean, keep in mind, we're talking about two or three senators, less than a dozen congressmen, who are active criticizing these companies.
00:37:15.900 You know, think about all the congressmen who are just totally silent on Google and Facebook.
00:37:19.800 Is there even a majority for regulating them in either of the houses?
00:37:23.600 I'm not even sure that exists.
00:37:25.140 Yeah.
00:37:25.400 Yeah, well, I mean, these tech companies are now by far the largest spender on lobbyists in Washington.
00:37:31.440 You mentioned an antitrust fine.
00:37:34.060 And I just glanced at the headline, was it a $5 billion fine that Facebook was dinged?
00:37:40.960 And their stock immediately went up because I think the market said, what, that's it?
00:37:45.880 Like, that's like an hour's worth.
00:37:47.460 I don't know, it's a little more than an hour's worth.
00:37:49.240 But, you know, that's not even a flesh wound to a company of that size.
00:37:54.620 Am I right on that number?
00:37:55.500 Yeah, it was $5 billion.
00:37:58.320 But as you said, Facebook is such a huge company that $5 billion is a drop in the bucket for them.
00:38:04.180 I mean, I think it was Marshall Blackburn at the hearing who said, you know, that was way too low.
00:38:07.840 It should have been $50 billion.
00:38:09.060 Like, those are the numbers we're talking about to actually do damage to a company like Facebook.
00:38:13.440 So they'll actually, you know, take notice of what governments and politicians are saying and not just continue as they were before.
00:38:22.680 But even then you have a problem because what do most politicians want?
00:38:26.280 They want to censor their opponents.
00:38:29.120 Most politicians don't care about free speech, especially in Europe and Canada and also in America.
00:38:34.400 I mean, Ted Cruz called that hearing, but the ranking Democrat, Senator Hirono, did a weird thing where she simultaneously claimed censorship doesn't exist on social media, while also demanding that they do more of it and take down objectionable videos.
00:38:48.820 So there are plenty of politicians who will use their power to demand more censorship from these companies, not less.
00:38:54.800 Well, we see that here in Canada.
00:38:56.120 The Canadian example you mentioned.
00:38:57.680 I tell you, Alan, I know you're based in Washington, D.C.
00:39:01.160 Obviously, that's the power capital of the world.
00:39:02.940 And I know your eyes are on San Francisco.
00:39:04.900 Obviously, that's the tech capital of the world.
00:39:06.640 But I ask you to cast a glance north of the 49th parallel from time to time, because up here is their dark laboratory where they are going to test these things out, not only on the tech side, as that Twitter example I just mentioned, but also on the legislation and regulatory side.
00:39:24.300 I think in some ways we are as bad as Europe, maybe not as bad as Germany, but we are certainly their lab for what they're going to do to America. 0.98
00:39:32.080 Last point, because there was a tiny flicker of hope that crossed my Twitter feed the other day.
00:39:37.860 Donald Trump himself, he likes a few folks in Silicon Valley, including a very interesting and idiosyncratic tech billionaire named Peter Thiel.
00:39:50.780 PayPal, I think he was actually one of the first investors, if I'm not mistaken, in Facebook itself, if memory serves, I think he put in the first, I think he was the first person to put in six figures.
00:40:05.060 Thiel was saying that Google should be investigated for treason.
00:40:10.380 Let me show you Trump's tweet, and then you can explain.
00:40:14.640 Billionaire tech investor Peter Thiel believes Google should be investigated for treason.
00:40:19.380 He accuses Google of working with the Chinese government.
00:40:22.400 A great and brilliant guy who knows this subject better than anyone.
00:40:26.240 The Trump administration will take a look.
00:40:27.940 Well, listen, if tweets were laws, we'd have a wall by now, Alam.
00:40:33.920 So I've learned to take some of Trump's tweets with a grain of salt.
00:40:37.640 But I thought that was a very interesting point by Trump.
00:40:40.420 Do you think anything will come of it?
00:40:41.460 Well, it was like Thiel made this point in a speech a few days ago, and it was a very powerful speech condemning Google in very, very strong terms.
00:40:52.800 So Google executives yesterday denied accusations that the company has been infiltrated by China.
00:40:57.640 But, Ezra, I've talked to people inside Google who say that the safeguards they've built to stop the people in China and people linked to the Chinese government from accessing their technology is just totally ineffective.
00:41:11.460 So, you know, Google has denied these things before.
00:41:15.060 Tech companies always deny wrongdoing.
00:41:17.360 We have to investigate to find out what they're actually doing.
00:41:19.820 And we know that they built Dragonfly.
00:41:21.740 They were working on this sensitive search app for the Chinese market that was designed to be in line with the demands of the Chinese government.
00:41:29.380 So we know that they'll work with the Chinese military.
00:41:34.340 They won't work with the U.S. military.
00:41:35.840 So I think there's a lot of basis to what Peter Thiel is saying.
00:41:38.620 You know, there was a great Canadian tech company when Ottawa was a real hub of technological development, BlackBerry, JDS Uniface.
00:41:48.100 There was a lot going on in Canada about 15 years ago.
00:41:52.060 And one of the champions of industry was called Nortel.
00:41:56.520 And they were destroyed by Chinese hacking. 0.55
00:41:58.960 And I heard someone try and explain Google and their approach to China by saying Google has decided to sell their censorship and technology to China out the front door rather than to have it stolen from them from the back door.
00:42:18.080 I mean, that's basically the choice these companies make, do a Nortel and be destroyed by China or give it to China and hope they pay you. 0.79
00:42:27.700 Either option is terrible.
00:42:29.500 Maybe Trump is the only person who hates Silicon Valley enough and hates Chinese communists enough to deal with both problems.
00:42:36.900 Last point to you, Alan, what do you think of that?
00:42:39.260 Absolutely.
00:42:40.260 And that's one of the big issues of the Trump administration.
00:42:43.240 And it's not just about Silicon Valley either.
00:42:46.780 Like all the globalists who oppose Trump in finance, in business, the big donors, you know, since the 1990s, they've been told by people who advised them that, you know, China's next big opportunity to invest in China.
00:43:02.000 So they've got a vested interest in keeping good relations between China and the U.S., even if China was using all these links to sell us technology that spies us, you know, steal intellectual property, undermine trade, all of this stuff.
00:43:19.020 The globalists don't care because they have a lot of potential profit in keeping that market open.
00:43:24.440 And Google's no exception.
00:43:25.540 So I absolutely think that Peter Thiel is on the money there, and it's something that should continue to be talked about.
00:43:33.940 Yeah.
00:43:34.260 Well, listen, it's great to get an update from you, a catch-up.
00:43:37.320 Sounds like things are interesting in Washington.
00:43:39.520 In Canada, I should tell you, not one politician, not even in the Conservative Opposition Party, will even speak out against social media censorship, let alone hold hearings, let alone introduce some legislation.
00:43:54.020 It is absolute total submission in this country, Alan.
00:43:59.060 So we look to the land of the First Amendment to save us all, and I'm sure you do, too.
00:44:04.180 We all can hear your British accent, so you have moved to a freer place than from where you came, and hopefully we can save our freedoms up here.
00:44:14.320 Great to see you again, my friend.
00:44:16.320 Good to see you, Ezra.
00:44:16.800 All right, there you have it.
00:44:17.980 Alan Bocari, the most important journalist in the world, in my view, on the most important beat in the world, in my view, namely Silicon Valley oligarchs, billionaires of the left, telling you not only what you can say, but what you can see, hear, and think.
00:44:36.760 Stay with us.
00:44:38.760 More ahead on The Rebel.
00:44:51.420 On my monologue yesterday about Trudeau's cabinet minister, Dominic LeBlanc, Deborah writes,
00:44:56.780 The liberals continue to gorge on the public dime.
00:44:59.200 There are no rules for the liberal elite.
00:45:01.420 Yeah, hey, anybody remember Bev Oda's $16 orange juice?
00:45:05.100 That got her kicked out of cabinet. 0.63
00:45:09.080 I showed you a flight that Trudeau spent over $100,000.
00:45:14.320 It was $142,000 on food and drink on one flight.
00:45:19.540 How do you even do that?
00:45:20.980 I don't know how many seats there are on the big government jet.
00:45:23.420 Are there 50 seats?
00:45:24.740 How do you spend $3,000 per person on food for a flight?
00:45:30.180 How do you even do that?
00:45:32.300 There's some funny business going on there.
00:45:35.100 On my interview with Kian Bextie, Edward writes,
00:45:39.320 Nice to see they used Kian's clip on Hannity and Laura Ingraham's show tonight.
00:45:44.320 Yeah, it's been all over at Fox News the day before it was on Tucker Carlson.
00:45:47.820 He was just asking questions Americans hadn't.
00:45:51.080 Stephen writes,
00:45:52.740 Kian is pretty good and very persistent.
00:45:54.360 Watch out for Antifa.
00:45:55.240 You know, that's good advice.
00:45:57.320 They'll probably come to hurt him one day.
00:45:59.700 And it's good for us to be on alert.
00:46:02.140 We do take the security of our staff seriously because so many of them have been attacked by the left.
00:46:07.020 Look, if congressmen won't answer the question, will you renounce violence?
00:46:10.480 Well, that's the moral role models.
00:46:13.240 Congress.
00:46:13.760 I mean, that's pretty close to the top of the public sector moral example pyramid in America.
00:46:20.580 If a congressman, if congressman after congressman refuses to renounce Antifa violence,
00:46:26.140 why should an ordinary political activist?
00:46:29.040 Well, that's our show for today.
00:46:30.480 We've got some big news tomorrow for you, my friends.
00:46:32.620 It's news about a big battle that is maybe our biggest ever.
00:46:38.880 Maybe our biggest ever.
00:46:39.680 I'm not trying to tease you.
00:46:40.800 This is my way of saying tune in tomorrow.
00:46:42.480 You do not want to miss our show tomorrow.
00:46:45.580 All right.
00:46:45.940 Until then, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night.
00:46:49.360 And keep fighting for freedom.
00:47:02.620 We'll be right back.