The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - Liberal government spent $1 million for a podcast nobody listens to!

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.

00:00:46.960 One minute, 30 seconds. Yeah, sorry.

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 0.99

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, 0.98

00:14:31.460 oh, she must have explored that UCP leadership opportunity and then dropped it and not went back 1.00

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 0.89

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 0.70

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 0.52

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 0.62

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, 1.00

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 1.00

00:18:28.100 Patrick Brown was ever going to win. And whoever suggested that they should interview should be 1.00

00:18:32.980 fired for incompetence for being so stupid as to think Patrick Brown was going to win in the first 1.00

00:18:37.460 place. That is the big thing here. But the article is all about attacking the conservatives, sort of 1.00

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 0.97

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 0.99

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 0.92

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 0.59

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 1.00

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 0.90

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. 0.99

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 0.99

00:28:16.100 or the chair of Patrick Brown's campaign, and then she tried to run for the UCP race, 0.95

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 0.99

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

00:29:37.780 for me. See you guys later.

The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - December 02, 2024

Liberal government spent $1 million for a podcast nobody listens to!

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript