Liberal government spent $1 million for a podcast nobody listens to!
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
180.12721
Summary
It was recently revealed that the government spent over $970,000 to produce a podcast that ended up with only having 229 subscribers. That's a lot of money per subscriber, but it's not like it's a government podcast.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey guys, Wyatt Claypool here. Sometimes you just have to love the Canadian government.
00:00:06.720
Not because they're doing anything correct, but because they do things so incorrectly,
00:00:12.560
it becomes extremely funny. One of the funniest examples of this was just revealed in a committee
00:00:18.860
meeting studying the government subsidization of both the CBC, other legacy media outlets,
00:00:25.460
and as it turns out, Statistics Canada. Check this out. We have Damien Couric,
00:00:31.640
the Conservative MP from Battle River, asking Chris Sims from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
00:00:37.480
about a Statistics Canada podcast that the government nearly spent a million dollars on.
00:00:43.920
Thank you very much. I think I still had a bit over a minute.
00:00:48.640
Okay. It was recently revealed that the government spent over $970,000 to produce a podcast
00:00:59.020
that ended up only having 229 subscribers. That's a lot of dollars per subscriber. I'm wondering if...
00:01:07.180
Yes, it's a podcast by Statistics Canada. Not like a podcast about Stats Canada, where the CBC did a
00:01:15.180
podcast and they talk about interesting things that Stats Canada finds out. No, like Statistics Canada.
00:01:21.380
This would be like Revenue Canada or the IRS in the US having their own podcast. And maybe they do have
00:01:26.960
their own podcasts. I do not know. But they only got 229 people to watch. You have to be incompetent
00:01:33.720
in like an extreme degree to have that few people watch your podcast. You almost have to be trying
00:01:40.340
to make sure no one discovers it. Simply putting a podcast out on the internet will eventually have
00:01:45.740
people discover it from just plugging in keywords. And this was specifically Stats Canada that had
00:01:51.520
paid this close to a million dollars. I'm wondering if you have any thoughts or feedback about nearly a
00:01:57.420
million dollars spent to produce a podcast that many people do from their phones, walking down the
00:02:06.180
street, whatever the case is, for virtually no cost. Yet the government spent a million bucks,
00:02:10.400
yet only garnered a subscriber base of 229. I'm wondering if you have any thoughts or feelings
00:02:16.160
about that. So off the top, quickly, I actually thought I misheard that when I first heard about
00:02:21.960
it. I thought it was government funding other people's podcasts, whatever it was. But no, this was
00:02:27.520
a government department's podcast. It is astonishing that they're spending a nickel on that.
00:02:33.440
And I'd love to be a fly on the wall in the meeting where they were going over the lack of
00:02:38.320
viewership. That's how incompetent government is. And I've been around a lot of government type people,
00:02:43.240
people who work in bureaucracies, they will simply think that having a podcast out there or putting
00:02:49.200
out some sort of product is simply good enough. Mission accomplished, put up the banner, we put out
00:02:54.700
a podcast. Does anyone listen to it? Has anyone given us five stars on Apple Podcasts yet? Eh,
00:03:01.700
eh, I don't know. It doesn't really matter. We have a podcast. We've achieved it. There's a lot
00:03:07.220
of marketing people, consultants who are like this too. By simply creating the thing, we have now
00:03:12.740
accomplished the thing. Like, no, we have not. I do this show for about $5 and a ham sandwich.
00:03:18.700
And I can get thousands of people to watch because I'm not inherently dull, I suppose. I might not even
00:03:24.920
be particularly talented. But I'm not so bureaucratic and stuffy as to make a podcast for Statistics
00:03:32.800
Canada and achieve literally less than a thousand views. I'm not sure how many, how long it's been
00:03:38.760
since this podcast has been out, but that's borderline impossible. And I'm going to turn this over to my
00:03:43.000
colleague. He's the investigative journalist for the CTF, Ryan Thorpe. Ryan, you were doing some digging on
00:03:48.380
that. It was astonishing to see. Yeah. So, oh, sorry. Thank you. Oh, and you only have 15 seconds.
00:03:55.300
Thanks. I'll just add quickly that we dug up these records. The costs are ridiculous. They're producing
00:04:01.060
podcasts that no Canadian would ask or be willing to pay for. It's reflected in that subscriber count,
00:04:08.600
and it is clearly a massive waste. And that's, and that is a perfect way of putting it. This is stuff
00:04:14.780
that Canadians have never asked for. That's why the CBC is so bad. I think I've done it for you guys
00:04:20.560
here before, and I'm going to do it again for anyone who hasn't seen me do it because I only
00:04:25.560
did it once. The CBC also has its own podcast. So let's set aside that Statistics Canada has a
00:04:31.760
podcast. They shouldn't have a podcast. Their Statistics Canada, why the heck do they have a
00:04:35.460
podcast? But let's see, let's even talk about the CBC who gets $1.4 billion of taxpayer money every
00:04:41.300
year. And I'm going to assume they probably pay per year or per season about the same amount of
00:04:48.020
money to produce their podcasts, or at least in the ballpark of what Statistics Canada paid
00:04:52.460
whenever they do stuff. This is the, these are the podcasts that the CBC is putting out. Let's go
00:04:58.440
down to like the alphabetical order part. Is it here? Yeah, all podcasts. This is alphabetical order.
00:05:04.400
Who is watching any of these? Look at this stuff. Look, look how long it takes me to get through
00:05:10.180
all of the current podcasts that the CBC has been running. I assume these are all the current ones,
00:05:15.480
because obviously, they turn a lot of their radio shows into podcasts, and none of the stuff is from
00:05:19.440
like the 90s. So that I assume this is all over like the last few years, at least, and ongoing shows.
00:05:25.220
Look, look how far down I can go. Who's watching this one? Who is watching this? Who is watching the
00:05:31.880
One in Six Fertility Journey podcast? Who is watching other people's problems? Or the Outlaw Ocean?
00:05:37.900
Who's doing this? Maybe some of them are interesting, but who the heck is actually going to go and look up
00:05:43.780
all this stuff to see if it's actually good or not? The spirit to soar. Who's watching this stuff?
00:05:50.980
Nobody is. And it's all, it all has millions of dollars behind all this garbage. That's the problem
00:05:57.800
with the CBC and anything that the government funds. The quality control quickly goes out the window,
00:06:04.200
because we don't have to actually turn a profit on any of this stuff. In fact, the CBC is extremely
00:06:10.440
smug about, well, you know that taxpayer funding is only 70% of our current budget, because they do
00:06:18.280
bring in some money from revenue, from ad revenue. How could you not bring in some money from ad
00:06:23.760
revenue? You have a $1.4 billion budget to work with. In fact, in real business, your seed money to do
00:06:30.860
a thing is usually supposed to generate more money than you put in. That's how actual business works.
00:06:36.840
But the CBC is like proud of itself that it brings in like $300 million a year in ad revenue
00:06:42.980
with a budget of $1.4 billion taxpayer dollars. It's insane that these people think these sorts of
00:06:51.380
things. Anyways, I want to go back and look at some of the other things that were said in this committee
00:06:56.080
meeting. Thank you for Rebel News for clipping some of this stuff. I think she just did a really good job
00:07:01.880
of breaking down just how badly money is spent on things like the CBC and, you know, that Stats Canada
00:07:08.520
podcast. So take a look at this. This is another clip of Chris Sims talking here.
00:07:13.760
The invitation to speak with you all today. My name is Chris Sims. I'm the Alberta Director for the Canadian
00:07:18.580
Taxpayers Federation. I'm here with my colleague, Ryan Thorpe, the investigative journalist for the CTF.
00:07:24.340
We are here to speak for thousands of hardworking taxpayers who want to defund the CBC. This needs
00:07:31.400
to happen for three important reasons. The cost of the CBC. Nearly nobody is watching the CBC and
00:07:38.140
journalists should not be paid by the government. First, the cost. I don't need to probably show her
00:07:45.180
going over all this stuff, but it was not exactly received very well from the liberals in the committee,
00:07:50.480
but I think the conservatives did a good job of utilizing Chris Sims on this. And I just want to
00:07:55.200
jump over into this specific example that she brings up of why journalists should not be being
00:08:00.880
paid by the government because I think this is the most, I think this is the best argument against the
00:08:05.480
CBC because someone could hand wave away the cost. Well, it's only $1.4 billion in the overall
00:08:11.360
government budget. It's not that much money. And like, yeah, technically a billion dollars isn't that
00:08:16.540
much money in the overall big picture, but it all adds up. But, and you could say, well,
00:08:21.440
who cares if nobody's watching it? Is it quality? It's not quality. And here's her laying it out.
00:08:26.660
Journalists should not be paid by the government. A free press means journalists free from government.
00:08:34.020
A journalist who is paid by the government is in a direct conflict of interest. You cannot hold the
00:08:40.820
powerful government to account when you're counting on the powerful government for your paycheck. The
00:08:46.420
CBC is government funded media. This government funding has warped the media landscape for decades,
00:08:53.380
putting private media companies at a disadvantage. And so that affliction is catching. Other media
00:08:59.700
companies are... And she's 100% right about this. The thing is that somebody might say, well, nobody
00:09:04.340
watches the CBC, so how is it competition for anybody else? Yet nobody watches the CBC or reads a CBC article
00:09:12.020
in terms of its per capita viewership is very low, especially compared to its budget. The problem though is
00:09:19.460
when the CBC and the Canadian press and other subsidized journalists are all just absolutely
00:09:25.460
manufacturing the same articles, every single person writes on, does poor quality reports on a
00:09:31.380
bunch of different topics. Well, you're necessarily boxing out the independent private journalist who's
00:09:38.340
investing in themselves because although their work is better quality than CBC, the CBC has a better
00:09:44.340
placement in the algorithm because of the sheer amount of content they produce, the sheer amount
00:09:48.980
of SEO advantage they have. And so even though somebody might read my article from the National
00:09:54.580
Telegraph back when I used to write more, they would prefer to read mine. The thing is that the CBC and
00:10:00.420
CTV and Global and Canada Press and all the other ones, they will eat up a significant portion, meaning
00:10:06.580
that I don't really have the capacity to make any money with written material. And the thing is,
00:10:12.420
it's not fair because the CBC doesn't have to have anyone really read its content for the person to
00:10:17.460
get paid because they're just being paid by the taxpayer. That's why it's so gross. It ends up
00:10:22.580
watering down the entire industry while putting out bad quality content are also on government payroll.
00:10:28.900
Now at the same time, trust in journalism has plummeted. About 61% of Canadians now think journalists are
00:10:37.620
quote, purposely trying to mislead people by saying things they know are false or gross exaggerations.
00:10:46.180
Canadians need a press that is free from government so the people can hold their government to account.
00:10:53.060
The CBC is a huge waste of money. Nearly nobody is watching it and journalists should not be paid by
00:10:59.860
the government. It is time to defund the CBC. She also brought up later in another clip as well,
00:11:06.820
and I didn't even know this because the CBC has been kind of using older statistics to pretend more
00:11:11.700
people watch them. I think I saw that the CBC The National was getting like 3.4% viewership in prime
00:11:19.220
time, but that's prime time with one particular show. On average, CBC content only captures about 1.7%
00:11:27.620
of the market and its key demographic ratings are even worse. I think I talked about in another
00:11:34.500
episode too, especially its local programming only captures about 1.1% viewership, and that's among
00:11:41.140
23 separate stations that excluding the national station. You know, if you add together all the CBC
00:11:47.860
Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Regina, if you add all those ones together,
00:11:53.780
there, nobody's watching them at all. And that's always the funny thing. Whenever you deal with
00:11:58.820
journalists from the CBC or from other legacy media outlets, they have this sense that we're
00:12:04.500
professionals. You know, they almost need to flash a badge around to make sure that people know a real
00:12:09.300
journalist is on the job, and nobody watches any of you. Like, people in independent media should make
00:12:15.300
sure not to get too arrogant about how much better they are at actually being able to portray the facts
00:12:20.900
over the legacy media, just because of the fact that I'm not a reporter, I do not go out and report
00:12:25.780
things. And so I do agree that places like the CBC are at least useful in the sense that they do report
00:12:32.660
some facts, but you have to wade through it and see what they're exaggerating, what they're leaving
00:12:36.900
out and all that other stuff. So we do need real reporters. But the thing is, the CBC, if they went away,
00:12:42.740
it's not like we would lose reporters. Independent media would then fill the gap because there would be
00:12:47.140
actual money in sending reporters out to collect facts. Right now, there's no point in hiring beat
00:12:52.660
reporters, because there's like five or six into legacy media subsidized journalists who are out
00:12:58.100
there doing it. And so it's really hard to make a go of it, because it's just such a watered down
00:13:04.500
industry that you have to make sure you get like a disproportionate amount of eyes on your work.
00:13:09.140
And with the CBC and CTV stealing eyes for their lower quality subsidized work, that means even if
00:13:15.060
you're doing good work, you're probably not making any of your money back. Here is an article from the
00:13:20.900
CBC I want to talk about because I think it just highlights all of these issues in one little place
00:13:27.780
in terms of the bias, the exaggerated reporting, leaving out details. And it also includes a lot of
00:13:34.180
the ongoing sort of international like foreign interference in our elections type stuff. So here
00:13:39.940
is a headline from the CBC. I have read this entire article and it says,
00:13:45.620
agents of Indian government interfered in Patrick Brown's conservative leadership campaign sources.
00:13:51.540
Who are the sources? Nobody, nobody willing to go on the record. It's literally nobody. Even the
00:13:57.540
person that they say was affected by this, who was Michelle Rempel Garner, who the sources say
00:14:04.900
was told to back off of Patrick Brown's campaign because the Indian government didn't like him,
00:14:10.980
which it doesn't shock me the Indian government doesn't like him. Patrick Brown is very close to
00:14:15.140
both Calistanis as well as Muslim Brotherhood activists. But even Michelle Rempel denies she
00:14:21.140
was ever told to back off of him. She explored a UCP leadership race and then she never went back
00:14:26.420
to Patrick Brown's campaign. And the CBC kind of does this stupid intimation that,
00:14:31.460
oh, she must have explored that UCP leadership opportunity and then dropped it and not went back
00:14:39.140
to Patrick Brown's campaign as an excuse to do what Indian agents were telling her to do. No.
00:14:45.060
Do you know why, do you want to know why Michelle Rempel decided to explore that UCP leadership
00:14:51.220
opportunity? Because she was probably genuinely interested in it. She then probably found out there
00:14:56.340
wasn't really any appeal in her running for it, or she wouldn't have a good chance of winning.
00:15:00.820
And this was a great opportunity to jump off of the sinking ship that was Patrick Brown's federal
00:15:06.340
conservative leadership or campaign. Because guess what? Even if Indian government agents were
00:15:12.500
trying to influence the election, the leadership election away from Patrick Brown and maybe in
00:15:17.700
Pierre Polyev's favor, even if this happened, which the evidence of is very scanty at this point,
00:15:23.540
it doesn't matter in the sense that Patrick Brown was going to lose, Pierre Polyev was going to win.
00:15:28.340
And this harkens to a video series I really like. It's like six parts. You can go look it up. It's
00:15:34.020
on Stephen Michael Davis's channel. It's called Bernie Wasn't Robbed. It's talking about Bernie Sanders
00:15:40.180
running in the 2016 and 2020 Democratic primaries. And there's this progressive narrative that he was
00:15:45.780
robbed and he should have been the nominee over Hillary Clinton. Then he should have been the nominee
00:15:49.700
over Joe Biden. One, he shouldn't have. And I'm no Democrat. I'd probably be a Republican, obviously,
00:15:55.300
if I was in the US. I'm a conservative in Canada. But there's nothing to suggest that Bernie Sanders
00:16:01.620
would have been able to win the primaries. It's not like, oh, well, Donna Brazile leaked a few questions
00:16:05.780
to Hillary Clinton before the CNN debate. It's like, okay, I've seen what those questions were. They were
00:16:12.820
kind of nothing burger questions to get the answers or the questions given to you ahead of time
00:16:17.780
anyways. And Bernie Sanders wasn't winning those races because people didn't want to vote for him.
00:16:22.900
People weren't tricked into voting for Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden. Bernie Sanders just has
00:16:27.140
less appeal than them. That's the problem with Patrick Brown. This is also the problem with the PPC.
00:16:31.700
I always see PPC people acting as if everyone should naturally be voting PPC. And if they're not voting
00:16:37.220
PPC, they've been tricked. It's this idea that everyone is just a temporarily confused progressive
00:16:44.100
or populist, depending on what side you're on. And we just need to wake them up. It's like,
00:16:48.660
maybe people just don't like you. That's the problem. Nobody liked Patrick Brown. Patrick Brown
00:16:54.580
is obviously kind of like a sleazy politician. He is one of the sleaziest politicians. He was the one
00:17:01.860
who tried to bring in a carbon tax into the PC party of Ontario's platform in 2018. And then
00:17:08.260
Jim Carajalios and the new blue, not new blue party. He's running the new blue party. Now,
00:17:12.420
if you live in Ontario, I'd suggest voting for the new blue party because it's actually conservative
00:17:16.740
and not like in the sense that like, Oh, it's more conservative than the PCs. I mean,
00:17:20.500
like the Doug Ford PCs right now are just not conservative at all. It's like, they're just a retail
00:17:24.740
politics party. That's pretty much it. But Patrick Brown was the guy who tried to bring in the carbon tax
00:17:29.700
in 2018. And Jim Carajalios's original acts, the tax campaign is what basically pressured him out of
00:17:35.860
the leadership. Although they made up some basically like assault scandal to get rid of
00:17:39.700
Patrick Brown that was later proven to be nonsense because they probably didn't want to admit that it
00:17:43.620
was the acts, the tax movement and take back the PC party with Jim Carajalios. That was the main
00:17:48.660
pressure point to wanting to get rid of Patrick Brown. But Patrick Brown ran a bad campaign. He mostly
00:17:54.020
relies on diaspora type politics, which is not very effective to win a race. And by the way,
00:17:59.380
this entire CBC article keeps talking about how the Indian government doesn't like Patrick
00:18:03.780
Brown because he's too close to Sikh people. The Indian government doesn't care about Sikh people.
00:18:08.900
The Indian government, in fact, doesn't hate Sikh people at all. They don't like Kalistanis,
00:18:13.300
people who want to break up India and are in favor of certain forms of terrorism.
00:18:17.700
That's who the Indian government doesn't like. Could they have meddled in the CBC leadership race?
00:18:23.220
Maybe. They also prove themselves to be completely stupid if they did, because there's no chance
00:18:28.100
Patrick Brown was ever going to win. And whoever suggested that they should interview should be
00:18:32.980
fired for incompetence for being so stupid as to think Patrick Brown was going to win in the first
00:18:37.460
place. That is the big thing here. But the article is all about attacking the conservatives, sort of
00:18:43.220
indicating that maybe Polyev was basically falsely installed. And there's already a lot of liberals on
00:18:49.620
Twitter and other social media saying, ooh, see, pure Polyev is a puppet of Nehendra Modi and the Indian
00:18:55.620
government based on that somebody might have told Michelle Rempel that you should stop being Patrick
00:19:02.100
Brown's campaign chair. Even if that's true, that's a nothing burger of a story. And also, Michelle
00:19:08.500
Rempel denies it. Who's your source? Name the guy. Because that might be helpful for us understanding the
00:19:14.340
credibility here. We even have people like, who is it here? We have Mark Gerritsen, the liberal MP from
00:19:23.220
Kingston and the islands, who is luckily probably going to lose his reelection, now trying to make
00:19:28.100
a big thing about this. But you guys, this is what the rumor and story mongering about the UC, like
00:19:35.380
from the CBC is all about, is trying to create stories like this. It's trying to create pressure
00:19:43.540
points that liberal politicians and activists can press on that are not really, there's nothing to it here.
00:19:50.100
So he says, Mark Gerritsen says, watch, conservative MP and chair of Pierre Polyev's Alberta Leadership
00:19:55.940
Campaign gets questioned about foreign interference and just can't answer it. You can almost feel her pain
00:20:02.100
staring at the ellipses on her phone while waiting for the answer to appear. I believe this is about Michelle
00:20:08.980
Rempel here, or is it? Oh no, it's Stephanie Cousy. Sorry, I want to get to the other one here. But I will get to that
00:20:16.260
one soonish. But this is Michelle Rempel, who's like Mark Gerritsen's trying to make a big deal,
00:20:20.100
but walking out of the room, she says, Michelle Rempel-Garner runs away when approached by
00:20:24.180
reporters about foreign interference allegations in Patrick Brown's leadership campaign. He posts
00:20:28.340
this after she said nothing was going on. Hi, Chris from CBC. I just, I just got to ask you about the,
00:20:34.580
you're running away from me. I'm just asking you about.
00:20:41.700
That's the kind of confrontational journalism that's annoying. She's literally already answered
00:20:45.780
his questions, but he wants to generate this moment of Michelle Rempel. Can we ask you a question? And
00:20:51.220
the funny thing is, I'm the type of person who I disagree with Michelle Rempel on tons of stuff. I am
00:20:56.020
not here to defend Michelle Rempel. Not that I'm here to attack her either. But this is ridiculous.
00:21:01.140
Mark Gerritsen already, Mark Gerritsen shared the article. Look right here. He literally shared
00:21:06.660
the article where she denied that any of this was true. Not that a denial makes it not true,
00:21:12.260
but how is he then trying to shame her in the next post for running away when he knows very well that
00:21:18.180
she already said that this isn't true. Now here is Mark Gerritsen trying to go after, not him
00:21:23.540
specifically, but here's him going after Stephanie Cousy, Polyev's campaign chair.
00:21:28.340
Thank you, Madam Speaker. The member opposite spoke about character and I'm just curious how she
00:21:34.100
feels about the CBC story breaking today that India interfered in the, or allegedly interfered
00:21:41.780
in the leadership race and that members of her own caucus were encouraged to step down from helping
00:21:49.300
any leader other than their current leader. If you're.
00:21:52.340
That's not even true. That's literally not true. It was one allegation that Michelle Rempel was told
00:22:00.100
to step down from Patrick Brown's campaign. I'm pretty sure she was the only one who had endorsed
00:22:04.980
Patrick Brown because nobody likes Patrick Brown. Did anyone, was anyone told to back off of
00:22:10.900
Lesley Lewis or, or Sheree or what Chris, or not Chris Barber, Roman Barber? Baber? No? Bueller?
00:22:21.860
Like that, that didn't happen. And they, but they've already laundered the story into a narrative that,
00:22:26.820
oh, tons of people were told to step down based on anonymous source.
00:22:29.940
Talking about character, then how does the member opposite respond to these allegations that their
00:22:36.980
official leader couldn't win that, uh, leadership election unless there was a finger on the scale?
00:22:42.740
What, that, when was that even alleged? I have literally been in a nomination where people were
00:22:49.540
falsely kicked out of the race for bad reasons. I was one of those people. Look, right there is my
00:22:54.660
campaign literature and it's probably because they didn't, someone didn't want me to win or they
00:22:58.580
won their ally to win. Jokes on them. I'm still made sure they didn't win anyways. They're the
00:23:02.820
ally that they wanted jammed in. I think David McKenzie is now the nominee for our writing for
00:23:07.860
next election. He's a fine choice. But the thing is that I'm literally somebody who could potentially
00:23:13.300
have a bone to pick and be willing to just believe everything about the CBC story. I don't because it's
00:23:18.660
full of it. Oh, Polioff couldn't win without a finger on scale. He would have won anyways.
00:23:23.620
Even if there was a finger on scale, nothing would have changed the outcome. Did you see the rallies?
00:23:27.860
Did you see any of that stuff? Polioff was the popular one. I like Leslie and Lewis. I even marked
00:23:33.700
my ballot. Lewis won, Polioff too, because I'm more socially conservative and I knew that Lewis
00:23:38.740
wouldn't win, but I want to give her more number ones to show that I like a more socially conservative
00:23:43.460
style to politics. But no, at no point was she going to be able to win. No point was Jean Charest going to
00:23:49.860
win. Patrick Brown wasn't going to win, even with his obviously kind of fraudulently
00:23:54.340
inflated membership numbers because he very much practices the politics of walking into a religious
00:24:00.500
institution and pressuring people to sign up for memberships. Even he couldn't even get half
00:24:05.300
of Polioff's membership sales. Questions? The Honour Member Calgary,
00:24:09.780
Min Napour. Yeah. Thank you very much to my colleague for that question. You know, I was very proud to serve as
00:24:20.420
the Alberta campaign chair for the leader for Carleton. And I can tell you, we swept Alberta.
00:24:29.060
And so I am not concerned at all about the support and the tipping the scale. To me, it sounds,
00:24:40.340
it just absolutely sounds ridiculous. And I just, I think it's unfortunate that
00:24:51.460
that she would say such, such things about, about that. And I just, again, I think it's,
00:25:01.780
it just speaks to the desperation of, of the Liberal government over there. Thank you.
00:25:07.620
Although I wish she wasn't looking at her phone during that answer. I do agree with her.
00:25:11.860
This is just a desperation move. It's trying to slip, sling mud and hope that the somehow this
00:25:18.100
is going to hurt, hurt the conservatives in the polls. It's not, it doesn't stand to reason.
00:25:22.420
Even if every single Canadian read the story, I think most Canadians, as they're reading the story,
00:25:26.900
will start to ask, well, you know, where's the beef here? Where are we actually getting the smoking
00:25:31.780
gun where the Polyev conservatives did something wrong, where Polyev's party, like Polyev's faction
00:25:38.180
did something wrong here? Where is it that we can actually see the Indian government changing the
00:25:42.740
outcome? And Patrick Brown was later kicked out of the conservative party race, but had nothing to
00:25:48.420
do with like Indian interference, removing him from the race. Again, Polyev would have won anyways.
00:25:54.100
He had like double to triple the membership sales as Patrick Brown. And Patrick Brown was like,
00:25:59.060
nobody, but maybe Jean Charest voters, number two or number three choice. He had no ability to grow
00:26:04.740
and he didn't have that much support in the first place. And Patrick Brown was kicked out,
00:26:08.980
not because again, of anything to do with the Indian government, but because of his basically
00:26:14.660
shady way. He raises money and sells memberships, which is kind of a Patrick Brown classic. That's not
00:26:20.340
something that was at all unsurprising to see. And this was all before there was like allegations made.
00:26:27.300
And also Patrick Brown was not surging. He didn't have an ability to win. I feel like I'm repeating
00:26:32.740
myself a lot here, but it's true. That's why I'm repeating it. Anyways, that's basically it for me
00:26:38.740
there. Sorry, that was turning into a rant by the end of it. But I guess if you want to support the
00:26:44.180
show, subscribe to the channel, like this video, leave a comment. You can always donate to my Give,
00:26:48.580
Send, Go legal fund in the description below, as well as pinned at the comments below. But yeah,
00:26:53.780
this stuff just bothers me a lot. Because again, I've been in a nomination where I wasn't treated
00:26:59.620
fairly. It's not because the Conservative Party is bad. I know there's PPC guys online saying, oh,
00:27:05.060
Wyatt got like, like somebody screwed Wyatt over, and he still supports the Conservatives. Like,
00:27:09.620
what's your logic that if somebody in an upper advisory position in the party does something nasty
00:27:15.700
to me, because they have the ability to kind of manipulate the rules on a small scale and nominations
00:27:20.740
like this, that I am then supposed to hate good people like Damian Couric or Stephanie Cousy there,
00:27:26.500
or people like Arnold Veersen or Pierre Polyev himself? I don't dislike anyone who hasn't done
00:27:32.260
anything wrong to me. 99%, probably more than that, of people in the Conservative Party are perfectly fine
00:27:38.500
to me. We have a situation where somebody was able to manipulate the rules, and they're at a high
00:27:43.700
enough pay grade that it would have been extremely explosive for the party to have ousted them,
00:27:49.220
or gotten rid of them. And so they just kind of muddled through what was obviously a bad process.
00:27:54.100
And I hate when nominations are affected. It means that you are obviously picking weaker candidates
00:28:00.180
if you don't believe they can even win against other Conservative competitors. That's a bad thing.
00:28:05.140
But then when I see the CBC pretending like, oh my goodness, there was Indian government interference
00:28:10.740
in the CBC leadership race, because Michelle Rempel was told that maybe she shouldn't be the co-chair
00:28:16.100
or the chair of Patrick Brown's campaign, and then she tried to run for the UCP race,
00:28:20.260
decide not to, and then she didn't return. Wow, what a concept. It's almost like she knew it was a
00:28:24.500
dead on arrival campaign and decide not to come back, especially because Polyev is probably going
00:28:29.380
to be her boss. So why doggedly keep supporting the guy who's going to lose and has been pretty nasty
00:28:35.300
to Polyev the entire race? It's just basic logic. People, and the funny thing is, when did the media
00:28:41.460
cover, you know, Signal Hill, the one I ran in? When did they cover any other nomination from any
00:28:46.100
other party that probably should have been investigated? They don't care. That's the thing.
00:28:50.820
They only care about hurting the upper brass of the Conservative Party in terms of big name
00:28:55.620
Conservatives. If it has to do with someone like me, eh, well, who gives a crap? Who cares about
00:29:01.060
Leela Ahir also kicked out of this race? Eh. And it's like reported on very weekly, if it even is
00:29:07.140
reported on, and things move on. The nomination process in Canada needs to be reformed heavily.
00:29:12.820
And the funny thing is that this is not what happened to Patrick Brown. He would have been
00:29:16.580
kicked out by any rules, even in like a Republican primary. If you're just like, you know, committing
00:29:21.860
fraud, if you're committing financial fraud, you might be booted out. I have to look into what
00:29:27.540
happened with that case, if he ever brought it in toward like in front of a judge. But my guess
00:29:32.500
would be that they would have seen that a lot of the stuff was pretty sketchy. Anyways, that's it