The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - CBC attacks ex-host - CBC exposed as Liberal Party front group

00:00:00.000 Hey guys, Wyatt Claypool here. I absolutely love this story today because I absolutely

00:00:07.140 hate the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. It is Canada's faux-neutral public broadcaster

00:00:14.100 who has always basically been a Liberal Party front group, or at least for most of the last

00:00:20.020 two decades they have acted as a Liberal Party front group. They were very arrogant in assuming

00:00:25.440 that they were never going to get called out by a higher level employee in their organization.

00:00:31.280 We've known for a long time as Conservatives that they have been politically corrupt, but

00:00:36.620 they've always had some level of plausible deniability, or they've at least gaslit you

00:00:42.360 into thinking that you're just seeing and hearing things that they're not actually saying. They're

00:00:47.000 not pushing Liberal messaging, they're just playing it down the middle and you just happen to not like

00:00:51.600 that. Well, that narrative was completely shredded by an ex-host leaving the organization and calling

00:00:58.340 them out for political corruption on the way out. This is turning into a big scandal. The opposition

00:01:04.180 in Parliament, including the Conservatives, NDP, and Bloc are probably going to jump on board for

00:01:09.580 an investigation, and I hope this will actually result in either the CBC's reputation being shredded

00:01:15.860 or the government actually cutting their funding. I am very skeptical that the Liberals would ever

00:01:21.900 cut their funding because, hey, it's their front group, why would they cut funding to it? But at the

00:01:25.940 very least, this should set up Canadians who are in the middle to realize why the Conservatives have

00:01:31.840 been pushing to defund them for years now. But anyways, before I get into the details and some of the

00:01:37.600 really petty things the CBC is doing to attack the whistleblower, I just want to remind you guys,

00:01:42.580 hey, if you like the show, make sure to leave a like on it. Subscribe if you are not yet a subscriber.

00:01:48.220 We are trying to hit 100,000 subscribers by mid-December of this year, and leave a comment

00:01:53.660 on what you think about the story. Now, let's get into it. There's going to be a lot of details, so

00:01:59.080 forgive me if I mess up a little bit here and there. I do this all in one take.

00:02:03.360 So, Travis Dunraj was a host of his own show at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation,

00:02:09.400 and I'm just highlighting this headline right here because it really demonstrates

00:02:13.840 just how petty things were inside the CBC. He was somebody who was genuinely trying to be

00:02:21.340 a neutral reporter of the news. I don't know if he leans left. I don't know if he leans right. Maybe

00:02:26.340 he's politically agnostic. But his lawyer has come out and said that if he wanted conservative voices

00:02:33.220 on the show, like genuine conservative voices, not Fred DeLore, not Andrew Coyne,

00:02:39.220 red Tories who believe in nothing other than a few fiscally conservative policies,

00:02:44.060 when he wanted genuine conservative voices on, it would get vetoed. When he wanted to actually,

00:02:49.380 you know, take a story in a direction that would have been more neutral,

00:02:53.040 that would have given a good hearing to the conservative position, the liberal position,

00:02:57.000 it was always skewed to having liberal experts on. You know, take a quote here or there from a

00:03:02.900 conservative MP, then have an expert on from some communist department at a university who's going

00:03:08.640 to tell you that basically the liberals or the NDPs right. And so don't listen to those, you know,

00:03:15.260 right wing crackpots over there. We're, you know, degreed people. We have PhDs, not like those people.

00:03:21.600 They only have that dirty common sense thing. Now, obviously, I'm not saying that, you know,

00:03:26.460 a liberal can't be right about something or that, you know, common sense is purely conservative. But

00:03:31.520 there has always been a problem at the CBC that we've been observing for a long time of, you know,

00:03:37.840 the CBC pretending to be neutral in their articles or actual televised reporting, saying, you know,

00:03:43.560 some left wing thing, experts say. They're not saying it, just this expert saying it who works for

00:03:49.420 the Canada Anti-Hate Network or Press Progress, or they come from some, again, some very left wing

00:03:55.040 liberal arts department at a university. It's not neutral reporting. It is the, it's under the guise

00:04:00.980 of neutrality because the reporter is not saying the opinion, but they always go to the lefty or the

00:04:05.600 opinion. And now, before I get into what the CBC is now trying to do to Travis Dunraj, who is absolutely

00:04:11.540 brave. Again, I don't know what his political persuasion is, but he is being a patriot right now by

00:04:16.360 calling them out. I want to show you some headlines, some articles from the CBC, the type of people

00:04:23.360 that these guys highlight. Check out this headline right here. This says, this teacher quit his day

00:04:30.580 job for TikTok. So, so can you make a living on social media? And the, the subhead is making money

00:04:37.900 through an online presence is harder in Canada, but doable. This is from May 3rd, 2025. And who are

00:04:44.300 they talking about? Steve Boots, a socialist borderline communist TikToker turned YouTuber

00:04:53.220 who used to be a public school teacher in Saskatchewan. That's who they're going to go

00:04:58.260 to, to talk about just how it's like being a social media influencer and making money on that,

00:05:05.140 with that. You're not talking about politics online. Now, that's fine. Do they ever interview

00:05:10.840 other conservative people? No, they write hit pieces on them. Let's find somebody else that

00:05:15.640 they've promoted. Here is another article where they cite this man. It's, it's an article titled

00:05:24.280 news influencers are changing how Canadians stay informed for better or worse. And one of the main

00:05:29.680 people they cite is this man, Frank Dominic, who is again, a very far left creator who in fact,

00:05:36.860 justified the murder of the, uh, of the healthcare CEO in the United States by Luigi Mangioni. He'll

00:05:44.780 claim I'm lying about that. But at the time he said, well, I'm going to justify why people don't

00:05:50.280 feel bad for United healthcare CEO, a father who was shot twice in the back by some communist brat.

00:05:56.580 That is the type of person that the CBC is going to highlight on how like, you know, TikTok and social

00:06:03.340 media is changing the flow of news. By the way, Frank Dominic here has basically no followers.

00:06:09.400 He's not even a very popular guy. Go check out his YouTube channel. There's nothing there.

00:06:13.800 His Apple podcast, I think has five reviews and on TikTok, his numbers are very mediocre compared to

00:06:20.340 someone like Mario Zendaya or other people who are actually far more successful on TikTok.

00:06:25.600 I'd at least give Steve Boots. He has good YouTube viewership and good TikTok viewership.

00:06:29.840 Frank Dominic doesn't have much, but he is liked by people inside the CBC. He also has articles

00:06:36.300 where he was attacking parents. This is the Toronto Sun report on this. He was attacking parents who

00:06:41.860 didn't want him teaching socialism and gender theory to their children when he is supposed to be,

00:06:47.900 I don't know, like their social studies teacher or English, no English teacher. He doesn't even have

00:06:51.680 the right to be teaching anything about history, but he starts teaching left-wing nonsense in his

00:06:56.360 classroom and they just have to put up with it. But again, these are the people that the CBC

00:07:02.400 thinks are credible individuals to be citing. But now there's some other stuff I could highlight,

00:07:08.680 but I want to talk about what the CBC has been doing recently to try and discredit Travis Dunraj.

00:07:17.660 This is extremely petty. So check this out right here. This headline says,

00:07:28.540 Dunraj still employed, CBC says, despite going public with resignation. And this has been reported

00:07:35.500 elsewhere as well. The CBC will not let Travis Dunraj quit because they don't want him quitting on the

00:07:42.380 narrative. It was because of political corruption, which it absolutely is. He is telling the public

00:07:47.840 that's why he's leaving, but they will not let him leave. I want to find the other headline I think

00:07:52.520 was a little bit better on this. It's not just that he hasn't resigned yet because he's a big old

00:07:58.220 hypocrite and he's trying to collect a few more paychecks. This is another headline from the National 1.00

00:08:03.080 Post that says, CBC refusing to accept Travis Dunraj's resignation over abuse of work culture,

00:08:10.560 lawyer says. And this here is what the CBC's public affairs individual said. He said, despite,

00:08:18.980 or I'll just read the article so you can see it. Despite journalist Travis Dunraj's very public

00:08:24.880 resignation from CBC, the national broadcaster, says that he is an employee. He is, quote,

00:08:31.600 still an employee, although he is currently on leave, unquote, said CBC's head of public affairs,

00:08:37.160 Chuck Thompson, to National Post via email on Wednesday morning. Dunraj's lawyer, Catherine

00:08:42.580 Marshall, told National Post that, quote, the CBC is refusing to accept his resignation. Quote,

00:08:49.180 this refusal is indicative of their workplace, of their abuse of workplace culture. However,

00:08:55.300 to be clear, Travis has resigned, albeit involuntarily. We intend to commerce a human rights lawsuit,

00:09:01.000 she said in an emailed statement. Now, what's going on is that they refuse to let him resign

00:09:07.800 in this involuntary fashion, basically saying they have structurally prevented me from doing my job,

00:09:13.660 so I must leave because, or else I'm basically sitting here on leave, not being able to actually

00:09:19.880 do my job because I refuse to become an apparatchik of the Liberal Party. That's what's going on here.

00:09:26.280 And by the way, this is not like some special case of a man who has done something wrong. They

00:09:34.240 placed him on leave. He was placed on leave because he refused to basically read the scripts they were

00:09:39.480 giving him, and they basically labeled him a bad employee. In another article that I was reading

00:09:45.560 yesterday, they were so petty, like not allowing him to resign, even though, like, it is an involuntary

00:09:52.020 resignation. But in a position like this, where they're not letting you do your job and you're on

00:09:56.680 leave, it is basically you having to resign to be able to actually go pursue real work or else they're

00:10:03.460 just keeping you on hold. In another article, they were so petty as to remove his name from his show

00:10:09.200 just to slap back at him because he had gotten in fights with them over them trying to skew the

00:10:15.380 editorial direction of his show. So him attempting to have integrity on his show started getting him

00:10:21.760 alienated by staff, getting basically stonewalled and trying to have the guests on that he wanted,

00:10:27.300 and it got to the point where they just removed his name from the show to show Travis Dunraj that you

00:10:31.900 don't mess with people like us. And in part, why they got mad at him was because he had tweeted out

00:10:38.760 about Catherine Tate, the current CEO of CBC, getting a massive salary for effectively doing

00:10:46.260 nothing and blowing massive amounts of money from the CBC on bonuses for executives and other high

00:10:53.120 ranking employees. Now, I want to bring this up from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, because this

00:10:59.200 is not, this absolutely has to do with a corruption on the political level, in terms of the political

00:11:05.200 corruption of their coverage. So this article from Franco Terrazzano says,

00:11:11.760 taxpayers to Tate, no bonus or severant payouts. And they say down here, Tate's salary,

00:11:19.540 Catherine Tate, the CEO of CBC, her salary is between $422,000 to $497,000 per year,

00:11:27.740 according to a federal government order in council. For comparison, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's salary

00:11:33.260 is $406,000 a year. Now, that is not at all disconnected from the Liberal Party corruption

00:11:41.840 of the CBC. Do you think that somebody is going to, effectively, it is a Liberal Party slush fund?

00:11:49.260 This is why they're mismanaging money. To loyal liberals, you can get a high ranking job at the

00:11:54.720 CBC and make massive amounts of money out of it. Why do you think these most loyal government

00:12:00.520 employees around the country suddenly get contracts for a quarter million a year or half a million a

00:12:05.960 year and you don't know what they do? Or they do something that nobody in their right mind would

00:12:10.060 actually think anyone should be getting paid for? And at the CBC, yes, they need a CEO, but should

00:12:15.720 you be absolutely raking in cash to just manage what is an entity that hasn't made any money of its own

00:12:21.400 in decades? The CBC is just a money hole for taxpayer dollars to fund hacked journalists who, again,

00:12:28.700 just put out reports that are trying to favor the Liberal Party. Now, the CBC is not exactly press

00:12:36.500 progress. It's not exactly the anti-hate network. It isn't the TIE, though many of those get government

00:12:43.480 money as well, but those are very obvious left-wing front groups. The CBC is a Liberal Party front group

00:12:49.900 in a very insidious way. You really can't tell that they're a Liberal when you read a few of their

00:12:54.560 reports. If you catch the pattern of them reporting things with the silly expert say tactic of saying

00:13:01.260 something left-wing but saying, well, it wasn't us saying it. It's this guy over here. It gives the

00:13:06.540 reader the impression that this is truly a neutral publication because no host is ever just going to

00:13:13.000 stand up and just say, well, the Liberals are right. It will just be that the panels are always

00:13:17.960 stacked with more eloquent Liberal speakers and weak Conservatives. Or the experts they always cite

00:13:22.920 have left-wing ideas. Maybe they're even NDP individuals. But when it comes down, when, you know,

00:13:30.700 at the end of the day, Canadian politics is a fight between Conservatives and Liberals. So whether you

00:13:36.000 have an NDP professor on or some Communist or Green Party official, they're still effectively

00:13:43.240 bolstering left-wing narratives in which the Liberal Party is the most accessible left-wing

00:13:48.540 party to vote for in Canada. And again, everything always goes to the idea that the Conservatives

00:13:53.560 have the experts against them. The Conservatives said this, but this expert says this.

00:13:59.700 And I wanted to show you this clip from CBC's Power in Politics that I think perfectly highlights

00:14:06.120 the way the CBC effectively acts like a front group for the Liberal Party. They will front-run policies

00:14:13.000 in order to see if they're popular, to see if they can get Canadians on board. They will work kind of in

00:14:18.960 tandem. Liberals want to potentially raise taxes. CBC will have a panel of people talking about should we

00:14:24.860 raise taxes to see what the effect would be or see what the public reaction would be. I'll get to that in

00:14:30.140 just a second. I want you to check out this Power in Politics panel right here, where they are

00:14:36.440 effectively trying to groom Canadians into the idea that they need to sacrifice more for government

00:14:42.480 priorities. They made the point that this is not about, you know, cutting a bunch of jobs. It's about

00:14:47.660 rebalancing things, retirement, and as people leave. And you could move people from Department A to say

00:14:53.220 defense, because that's going to be a big priority. But they also said they wanted to bust the current

00:14:59.200 cycle or change the current cycle of budget building where departments just come in with

00:15:02.680 a wish list and count on the finance department to find the cash. They're trying to put a culture

00:15:06.940 of rigor throughout all the departments in this process. Yeah, there will be a necessary change

00:15:11.860 in orthodoxy. I'm reminded of what happened with Jean Chrétien, who, when you ask Mark Carney who the

00:15:20.020 leaders are that he respects, Jean Chrétien is one of them, Stephen Harper is another one, because of

00:15:24.700 discipline. And when he talked about Mr. Chrétien, it was fiscal discipline. 30 years ago, Jean Chrétien,

00:15:31.780 more than 30 years ago, was sitting in Stornoway, just before he was elected, and they had policy

00:15:36.940 experts invited into Stornoway, and they asked him, what are your three priorities once you get into

00:15:41.320 government? He said, keep our independence from the United States, maintain Canadian unity,

00:15:47.820 and keep the IMF from taking over the Canadian economy. Now, we have a United States independence

00:15:57.060 problem. They are... We have a unity issue too. We have a unity issue as well. We also have Canadians

00:16:03.940 who are doing the kinds of things that the government is about to do now. Canadians, if you look at real

00:16:09.600 estate listings, Canadians are buying fewer homes. They're borrowing less money. They're not going on

00:16:15.940 vacation the way they used to. They're staying home. They're selling their vacation.

00:16:20.620 What they're doing here, if you're not seeing what's happening, is that they're setting up the

00:16:25.560 idea that you, with this hacky liberal economist on the panel, that you are going to have to just put

00:16:31.800 up with the fact that the liberals are going to cut service funding at the same time they're going to

00:16:37.260 increase funding to other departments that Mark Carney is trying to build his re-election campaign on.

00:16:43.580 He's trying to run on the idea that he is going to greatly increase Canada's defense spending.

00:16:49.040 He is going to increase infrastructure spending and move money towards his modular home projects

00:16:55.400 and the auto sector and subsidizing different Canadian industries that he's trying to protect

00:17:00.620 from the US tariffs, even though he's screwing up trade negotiations right now. They're basically

00:17:05.400 saying, so Canadians are already tightening their belts. The government's now going to tighten its

00:17:09.740 fault, but it's not. It's not going to do that. So it's saying that, you know how, like, you're

00:17:14.420 suffering? Well, the government's suffering too. And so just realize that your service spending is

00:17:20.720 about to go down. Now, I think the government budget is bloated, but none of this is going towards

00:17:25.720 trying to hand taxpayer money back. In fact, they're floating on other media outlets, the idea of

00:17:31.300 increasing the GST, like the Globe and Mail was pitching through Stephen Chase.

00:17:35.940 Properties in the United States. Canadians seem to be prepared for sacrifice. How much sacrifice is

00:17:42.960 yet to be tested? We're going to find out. Even Mr. Kretzian, who won plaudits, paid a price in

00:17:49.040 1997 in Atlantic Canada, in particular, where he lost several seats for this.

00:17:53.220 Yeah. The difference is Kretzian actually cut taxes massively. He actually got the economy 1.00

00:17:58.440 restarted by getting the government out of the way. Is Carney doing that? I don't see any real

00:18:03.840 indications. I know that he's floating the idea he may approve a pipeline, but there's so many

00:18:09.060 maybes and I mights and I could do's in the statements he puts out. My confidence level is

00:18:14.760 not super high. Even if he approves one, it's years away. I still want a pipeline. I will cheer

00:18:19.900 anyone who creates a pipeline. But the rhetoric that comes out of the CBC on a daily basis is always

00:18:25.220 the idea that, you know, hedge your expectations now. You may have to sacrifice a little bit more.

00:18:30.340 The government might have to cut some service spending to you to give you taxpayer money back,

00:18:35.700 to cut people's taxes. They're cutting people's taxes by 1% under $50,000, in which you don't even

00:18:42.520 pay any taxes on the first $18,000. They're giving you $300 back. And then they're going to be

00:18:48.000 increasing industrial carbon tax. They're going to be putting in place a carbon border adjustment,

00:18:52.520 basically a carbon tax tariff. And then they also may, like the Globe and Mail has been floating,

00:18:57.960 potentially thinking about it. Don't hold us to it. We may increase the GST. What do you guys think?

00:19:05.860 This is why the CBC is awful. Everything they do is just to either, I guess, like soften the blow

00:19:15.520 of bad things the liberals do or pump up any good things they do and basically downplay conservative

00:19:20.580 criticisms by always having an expert around to say why the conservatives are actually very bad.

00:19:24.880 We see it constantly. All the articles basically accusing the conservatives of having far right

00:19:30.040 connections because a guy was shaking another guy's hand, experts say. But yeah, I hope the CBC goes

00:19:37.700 down over the next few years. It's an awful organization. It gives Canadians absolutely no 0.99

00:19:41.840 utility unless bad news coverage and terrible sitcoms is your bread and butter in life.

00:19:47.560 Anyways, so that should be it for me today, guys. Thanks for watching the show. Like the video,

00:19:53.220 subscribe to the channel, leave a comment, do all that great stuff, and I will see you guys all later.

The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - July 10, 2025

CBC attacks ex-host - CBC exposed as Liberal Party front group

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript