Trudeau’s carbon tax secrecy sparks outrage as Liberal MPs—including Bill Blair, Gagan Sikand, and Omar Al-Jabra—accuse scheduling votes during Eid of Islamophobia, despite the policy’s divisive legacy, like Doug Ford’s 2018 victory. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s 7-2 ruling against Trinity Western’s Christian law school exposes alleged anti-Christian bias, ignoring precedent while favoring social justice activists, with six of nine judges appointed under Harper. Critics warn judicial overreach risks backlash, urging pro-freedom leaders to counterbalance activist courts. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, Liberal MPs argue that Parliament shouldn't sit on the Muslim holiday of Ramadan.
It's June 15th, and you're watching The Ezra LeVant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here and you won't give them an answer.
You come here once a year with a sign and you feel morally superior.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
So Justin Trudeau doesn't want to tell Canadians how much his carbon tax is going to cost us.
He knows because they study that sort of thing in Ottawa.
They do research into it.
They run models.
They have experts.
You'd want your government to have someone estimating the impacts of such a tax.
How could politicians who aren't experts know if they're making the right decisions without weighing all the facts?
But Trudeau refuses to disclose that information.
It's not a state secret.
It's not a military secret.
It's not a commercial secret.
There's no legal or constitutional or moral reason to keep the cost of the carbon tax hidden.
I'm just giving examples of reasons that are sometimes used to keep government information secret, but none of that applies here.
It's something much more obvious.
Trudeau is politically embarrassed because he knows Canadians love to say they're concerned about global warming, but no one actually means it.
Enough at least to pay an extra, what, I don't know, 30 cents a liter for gas, just as an example.
It's easy to tell a pollster you care, you really, really deeply care about global warming because just say it and then you hang up the phone.
That makes you sound very woke and very sensitive.
On a phone call, you know what the right answer is that the pollster's expecting.
But come on.
Have you ever seen an environmentalist who does not drive a car, who does not fly on planes, who does not use plastic or artificial fibers in their life?
Yeah, me neither.
So my point is no one actually means it when they say they'd want to pay more to fix global warming.
Although if a carbon tax would actually fix global warming, maybe some people might pay more, but no one actually believes a carbon tax will change the weather.
Not even liberals believe that.
They don't actually say it will change the climate.
They always just say it is symbolic to show that we're doing our part, as they say, doing our part at nothing.
Doing our part symbolically.
Because it doesn't make a difference.
So Trudeau doesn't want to show the true cost that would come with that virtue signaling.
Here's what access to information documents about the subject look like.
This is from Pierre Polyev, who requested them.
You see that blacked out part at the bottom?
Anyways, the federal conservatives know this is a winning issue.
Doug Ford ran for the Premier of Ontario and won with the most blazingly anti-carbon tax platform possible.
And look at that.
Look at that.
Just today having a big press conference on the subject.
Look at that podium there.
That's awesome.
So much for that consensus that existed in Ontario just six months ago when all the parties were unanimously saying they believed in the carbon tax.
That is over.
I am excited about it.
The momentum is shifting.
And Trudeau wants to keep the degree of pain of a carbon tax a secret.
So the Conservatives have used what little power they have in Parliament to force a series of votes on the matter to embarrass the Liberals into having to cover up for the PM and revealing the facts.
They've done this before the Conservatives.
When Trudeau lied about that India fiasco, remember when he sent out a staffer to lie about rogue India agents planting a terrorist in his Canadian delegation?
The Conservatives had a bunch of votes in Parliament to try to smoke up the truth, but the Liberals dug in to protect the shiny pony.
So the votes were held on the carbon tax matter.
They were scheduled, as votes always are in a majority government, by the governing party's House leader, in this case Bardish Chagar is her name.
They were scheduled for last night, which makes sense because if you know about MPs, especially the far-flung ones, a lot of them go home to their ridings on Friday.
So Thursday night is actually the best time for a vote.
Okay, so far so boring, right?
But guess what?
It's the end of Ramadan.
So it's the Muslim religious holiday of Eid.
So it's a big party.
Here's a scene from Toronto.
That's Toronto, you betcha.
So what's my point?
Well, all of a sudden, last night, all sorts of liberal MPs began tweeting, just before the votes, that to proceed with this embarrassing vote about the carbon tax, why, that's an insult to Islam.
Because you see, it was during the end of Ramadan feast of Eid.
So the Conservatives shouldn't have scheduled the votes then, the bigots.
Of course, Conservatives don't have the power to schedule votes.
That's something that the liberal majority house leader does.
But so what?
Wanting a vote to reveal the cost of the carbon tax, that's xymophobic.
I kid you not.
Here's Bill Blair, a dopey liberal MP.
He wrote, I have several mosques in my riding and a very large Muslim population that I am honored to serve.
They have important Eid celebrations scheduled for tomorrow that I am always honored to attend.
They are owed an explanation for my absence.
Okay, here's an explanation.
You're an MP and you have work.
You're a member of parliament.
Suggests where you should be.
It's what you do.
I'm sure some other liberal hack can visit the mosques in your riding to schmooze.
Bill Blair, you're not a religious leader.
You're not Muslim.
You're not a member of any mosque.
You're just saying in a really weird way that you think Muslim holidays should be de facto government of Canada holidays.
That's what that means.
What a kook.
Here's another liberal MP named Gagan Sikand.
Now he is Sikh.
He is not Muslim.
And he wrote, I want Andrew Shear Conservatives to explain to my riding that I'm missing Eid el-Futr because they want to vote all night just to waste time.
Hey guys, it's just to waste time.
Yeah, Gagan, you're not Muslim either.
In fact, it's an interesting story, Gagan Sikand.
He actually didn't vote with the Liberals for M103.
Almost all of them did.
That was the anti-Islamophobia motion.
Gagan Sikand bravely abstained.
That's a lot of courage.
That's as much courage as any liberal gets.
Because his writing was so split on the subject.
And believe me, that probably took some effort to be permitted to not vote for M103 as a liberal.
But suddenly, he's found religion, someone else's religion, and he used it as an excuse to claim that the conservatives were meanies for making him do his job on a night scheduled by his party's officer, where if he really, really cared, he could probably just go get his free meal because the liberal government has a majority, and it's not like they'd ever lose a vote.
They could spare a few of these deeply religious MPs going away.
But look at this one.
This is my absolute favorite, Mark Holland, obviously a white guy.
Let me show you his tweet.
He said, I was looking forward to celebrating Eid in Ajax after 30 days of fasting.
Sadly, Andrew Shearer is for saying 30 hours of unnecessary votes all through this most holy of Muslim holidays.
I will miss being with you in Ajax this year and wish everyone observing Eid Mubarak.
Now, did you see that?
He is following a Muslim religious ritual, fasting for 30 days.
That's not what he wrote.
I mean, fasting during the day is what Muslims do during Ramadan.
And he's not Muslim, but is he crazy?
And he's fasting, but he's not Muslim.
And he's calling it a most holy day.
He's not Muslim.
I have never seen such pandering in my life, to be honest.
I don't even believe a word of it.
Do you actually believe that Mark Holland doesn't eat a bite or drink a drop of water all day and only eats at night, as observant Muslims do during Ramadan?
Or do you think it's just more likely that he's lying and just making the biggest pander you've ever seen in your life?
Oh my God.
But seriously, the most kooky part of that whole kooky kookiness was when he said these are unnecessary votes.
That's what they're saying.
Hey guys, we have a liberal majority government and we're here to say you opposition MPs, you don't need to vote.
It's so unnecessary.
You don't even need to be here.
Just go home.
I mean, why are you even bothering?
It's so unnecessary.
If you think that's unnecessary, question period, what a hassle.
Come on, guys, just accept the fact that we're keeping the carbon tax's cost secret.
And if you disagree, you're an Islamophobe.
I'm serious, actually.
I'm serious that I'm serious.
Here's Omar Al Jabra, the ringleader, shrieking in a tweet to Conservative Aaron O'Toole, the MP for the Tories, who pointed out how kooky this sort of form letter tweet was that they were all tweeting at the same time.
Here's what Al Jabra said.
He said, you don't believe Islamophobia exists, exclamation point.
You disrespect the importance of Eid!
Exclamation point.
You will be voting all night against funding the veterans, RCMP, and CAF members, exclamation point.
It's clear who needs to apologize.
Hey, buddy, just take it down a notch.
Just take it down just a little bit, you kooky, kooky, crazy nut job.
Omar al-Jabra, of course, was the former president of the Canadian Arab Federation, a group that lobbied to legalize terrorist groups, Hamas and Hezbollah.
Omar Al-Jabra is the most extreme Islamist in all of parliament.
And of course he calls everyone who wants to, you know, work during their work.
Well, he calls them an Islamophobe.
And if you don't respect the holiness of Eid, well then you're a bigot.
So what do we have here?
Well, of course we have a liberal government that is hiding the truth about the carbon tax, that is willing to go to the wall to protect the lies of Justin Trudeau.
I mean, the.
Of course, we also have a liberal government that's lazy.
They want to take days off and nights off, like their lazy leader, Justin, and his 56 vacations.
Of course, we have hypocrisy.
It was their own party that scheduled the vote on the night that they did.
But none of that is as important as what we have learned that's new.
And that's the definition of Islamophobia that the Liberals want to enshrine into law.
And it's this.
If you do anything whatsoever that hurts the feelings of Muslims or of liberal suck-ups to Islam like freaky Mark Holland, the fake faster, if you do anything, you'll be called an Islamophobe.
If you ask the wrong questions, if you want unnecessary votes, you're an Islamophobe.
The word literally means nothing now except that the liberals want to label you a hater.
Don't like the carbon tax?
You Islamophobe.
Want to be the real opposition party and oppose a vote?
Islamophobe.
It couldn't be clearer.
It was always a hoax.
But now we just know how shameless it is.
Stay with us for more.
Well, six months ago, if you would have told me that Doug Ford would be the Premier of Ontario, I would have said, well, this thing makes sense.
Might run for the Mayor of Toronto.
What are you talking about, Premier?
Well, things move quickly.
It was a very exciting election.
And I have to say, I mean, we love the rebel.
We think we're the dissidents and we're the troublemakers.
I have to give credit where it's due.
The Toronto Sun newspaper was the most important newspaper in that election because they were the ones doing the real due diligence on the various parties and their candidates.
And one of the reporters who brought spectacular stories to the front page, in addition to our friend Joe Warmington, is our friend Sue Ann Levy.
And she joins us down in studio.
So it's great to see you again.
Hey, Ezra.
Nice to see you.
Well, you know, last time we had you on, I think it was to talk about your book, Underdog.
Yeah.
Confession of a right-wing gay Jewish muckbreaker.
That's a heck of a lot of great adjectives together.
You broke a lot of stories about some NDP candidates that if they had not been vetted by you, God forbid, they might even be cabinet ministers today.
Oh my God, and some of them got in.
Give me an example of some of the crazy, crazy that you got in.
Who got in?
Who actually got in?
Let's go through some of your hits.
Tell me about some of the stories you broke.
Well, the one woman who got in in my own riding, St. Paul's, is a fat black activist, queer activist.
She's allied with Black Lives Matter.
I'm actually heartbroken that she got in.
And she made her living off of getting people or speaking up about fat shaming and actually giving talks on fat shaming.
It's sort of a weird skill set that's probably not applicable to running a province.
Well, the worst thing was that what we found out and I did a story on was that right after the gay pride parade two years ago, she called the police chief a coon on her Facebook feed.
And the police, just for those who don't know who aren't in Toronto, the police chief in Toronto is a black man.
Is a black man.
And I don't think it makes it any better that the insulter herself was black.
In fact, I don't think that makes it any better at all.
No, no, no, but they said that she had every right.
And she was propped up, by the way, by Desmond Cole, that radical black activist.
I think he's a very hateful man, very angry man.
And they said that it was quite fine because it was just talk between black people.
The other woman who got in in University of Rosedale, which is a new riding, her name is Jessica Bell, formerly known as Jessica Markham, was arrested twice in Seattle for civil disobedience.
You changed her name to sort of leave that critical pass behind.
Exactly.
That's good investigation.
Yeah.
So, you know, it started, Ezra, as just a couple of stories about the anti-Israel.
The other person who got in was Joel Hardin in Ottawa Center.
Thank goodness these people are not going to hold cabinet positions.
He is also a rabid promoter of the boycott divestment and sanctions movement and has been pushing the NDP to support that movement.
You know, I accept that I'm right-wing and that there's left-wingers and that we can have a hearty debate.
But we're not even talking about right wing, left wing.
When you're anti-cop, like Gurutan Singh, that's one more candidate.
Yes.
That he's an NDP or his brother's jackman.
And then the poppy lady.
And the poppy.
When you're holding a sign that says F-U-C-K, the police, standing next to a cop, there's a theme here.
These aren't just, I mean, I can abide an honest leftist who makes the case.
And there are some.
But these are pure identity politics smashers who are one inch over from antifa rioters.
John Torrey's Influence00:09:57
Well, the big problem is that, you know, there are a roster of obviously not well vetted, or the fact was that they were vetted because their Facebook and Twitter feeds were scrubbed completely.
We had to go back a couple of years.
They weren't vetted.
If they were vetted, then, you know, this is what the people wanted.
Yeah, this is what they wanted.
They wanted social justice candidates.
And the other problem was that Andrea Horvath is a weak, I think she's still a weak leader, and she didn't speak out against all these hateful candidates.
Every single one of them, she found an excuse.
Yes.
Oh, I'm for free speech.
Really?
Really?
Yes.
I wish she was for free speech.
Well, I have to say, congratulations, and I enjoyed reading your stuff.
Oh, thank you.
And I have to say, not only did I enjoy reading it, I enjoyed the reaction of the media party to your calms.
Boy, they wanted to shut you and Joe out.
Yes, they did.
That's when you know you're doing good work.
Well, the last week I went out on the campaign trail with her.
I asked to go out because I felt that they were lobbing her softball questions, the media party.
And you should have seen the looks that they gave me.
Yeah, because they're sort of the auxiliary of the NDP.
Right.
Well, congratulations, Suanne.
I want to shift gears a little.
I mean, boy, that was a very exciting campaign.
I'm a new Ontarian.
I'm from out west, and I have to say, Doug Ford has the spirit of the West in him.
Yes.
I like that about him.
Let's shift gears to the biggest city in the country, Toronto, that used to be run by Mayor Rob Ford.
And I have a soft, I had a soft spot for Rob, obviously he's passed away now.
I found his flaws to be touching.
I mean, I wasn't thrilled about his troubles, but I thought he was, I don't know, the hatred and the viciousness, I found him a sympathetic character.
Me too.
And underneath all the flaws, and we don't need to list them all, I know it sounds weird to say there was an honest man underneath the trouble, but there was, I think.
And I think people saw that, and he had a connection with people.
I hate the fact that was anyway, we don't need to talk about, but he was replaced by John Torrey.
Now tell me a bit about John Torrey.
Well, he's been a huge disappointment, I think, to many who voted for him.
However, I knew what we were getting into.
In fact, endorsed Doug Ford when they ran against each other in 2014.
Doug, of course, jumped in to replace his brother, who was ill, and did very well.
And I knew that John Torrey was a weak man.
I knew that he would put his finger up and detect whichever way the wind blew.
And, you know, not surprisingly, he has been totally co-opted by the left on council and their crazy ideas.
And he is, I guess, in a way, a champagne, he's not a socialist, but he has, you know, been brought up with a silver spoon in his mouth.
But he has a sense of guilt that he has to do whatever he can to help the downtrodden.
The only thing is, is that the natives now are running the asylum in this city, and it's very concerning to me the way he's pandered, in particular to two leftists on council.
Well, three.
Kristen Wongtam, Joe Cressy, and Joe Mehavik, all with radical agendas, pro-safe injection site agendas, pro-shelter, throw everything wherever.
Who gives a gosh damn about anybody who is a law-abiding taxpaying citizen?
In a way, a guy like John Torrey is the worst because he doesn't have the grassroots connections of a Ford.
He comes from the fancy end of things, so he's, like you say, he's always got this guilt.
He's always apologizing.
And so he's so susceptible because he doesn't have a strong rudder himself.
Let me ask you, when's the next Toronto civic election?
It's October 22nd of this year.
Are you serious?
It's coming up.
Yes, very quickly.
Actually, the nominations close at the end of July.
That is almost now.
I want to ask you, with Doug Ford in the provincial government, that says two things to me.
First of all, the big dog everyone was sort of counting on a run, but he's got other things to do.
But his success, including in the Toronto boundaries, suggests that there might be an appetite for voters for someone with some real are there any people on your radar screen who might fit the bill.
Well, you know, the unfortunate thing is that John Torrey has shifted so far to the left that nobody on the left wants to run because he's given them everything they want and more.
So he's not a conservative anymore.
I don't know if he ever was.
You really need somebody with some common sense who is more akin to fiscal conservatism and understands a law and order agenda.
Is there someone?
Give me some names.
Oh, God.
You know, I wish we could just throw somebody in there to ask them hard questions.
Well, okay.
I got to ask you.
Because if you said ask them hard questions, well, you were the one who had to go out and ask hard questions, Andrea Horagraph.
You were the one who had to do the digging to vet candidates that the mighty Toronto Star and the mighty CBC with their enormous budgets didn't.
I'm just going to take a lark here.
Sue Ann Levy, you got a big personality.
Jewish gay mayor.
Jewish gay mayor.
Well, you know, I have toyed with it, but it's a very expensive proposition to run.
So it would have to be a real grassroots campaign.
Have you let people know that you would be open to it?
I've just been thinking about it in the last little while.
You need money, but you need a team.
You need a platform.
I think you'd have the platform.
Well, the only thing with John Torrey is that he has the big power players behind him.
By platform, I mean like a list of top three ideas or something.
Like when I think Rob Ford, I think garbage strike and the gravy trains, taxes, cut the red tape.
I think law and order in this city is a mess.
I think there's a real problem with enabling drug dealers, drug addicted.
Objection sites.
Okay, what about transit?
It's a complicated subject.
I don't even know if it's right-wing or left-wing.
Do you have any thoughts on that?
Well, transit, I think, you know, the problem is that there's just not enough money for transit, and you've got a council that's shifted every which way and, you know, backwards.
So the reason nothing is getting built is because they keep changing their mind.
I don't agree with John Torrey's $3 billion to now one subway stop to Scarborough.
There's got to be another way to do it.
All right.
I like your style.
You've got a profile.
Anyone who writes for the newspaper, people know them.
They feel a familiarity.
So unlike some other candidates, you've already got name and face recognition.
I'm guessing.
Are you trying to propose?
I want to ask you this.
You said you're sort of floating some trial balloons.
How can people feed back to you, yes or no?
Do you have a website?
Do you have an email address?
So let's say there's someone who's watching right now who says, well, I'd chip in some bucks.
I'd chip in some time.
And I got some friends, and I'm ready to roll.
How do they say, hey, Sue Ann, jump in?
How do they do that?
Scoop Levy at Rogers.com.
Scoop Levy at Rogers.com.
Okay, we'll put that up on the screen.
I think you should get a website, like just to test the waters, or maybe get a friend, like a draft.
I do actually have a website, suannlevy.ca.
Sueanlevy.ca.
Yes.
All right.
Well, I'm very interested.
I mean, I'm a fan of yours.
I'm a fan of yours.
Well, it's like, you see, I mean, here's what I know about you.
You fight.
You fight.
And you have that spirit.
And you don't bend the knee when the other side says, submit.
You don't.
And to me, that's the most important characteristic of a public leader is you're not going to be intimidated or shouted down or, you know, that tusk by the media party.
Well, you know what?
Rob Ford, actually, for the first year and a half, unfortunately, he had his addictions.
We won't talk about them.
But he did some really good work and he had some really good people around him.
And he accomplished a lot.
That's never covered by the media party.
All right.
Well, we'll put up on the screen the contact information again if you want to give your feedback to Sue Ann.
Do you think she should run?
Some might say you're having more influence where you are.
There's a difference between power and influence.
Yes.
You don't have any power as a columnist, but you have influence.
You have a lot of influence in the first election.
It's going to be interesting.
And I know I drive John Torrey crazy whenever I write about it.
Well, that's valuable in itself, too.
It's great to see you again.
Thank you.
I was just so pleased with what I think that you and Joe, and I like you guys, I think that you more than any other two people helped save this province from a near disaster.
And let me just say thanks as a new one.
You know, it's funny because the NDP just came out of nowhere, and it was...
Well, it could have gone that way.
It could have gone that way.
All right, well, let's put those contact email address and the website up on the screen.
And I'd invite you, my viewers, to let Sue Ann know what do you think?
You think she should run?
Are you just saying that?
Or would you, you know, help out, whether it's a few bucks or some hours?
Let us know.
All right, folks, stay with us.
Moorhead.
Welcome back.
Well, we spoke with him yesterday about a case involving freedom of speech at the Ottawa Public Library.
While he's in town, John Carpe is here to talk to us about a disaster at the Supreme Court of Canada, a disaster for religious liberty, for freedom of association, and for the idea of precedent, that law can be relied on and not just changed with every political fashion.
Join me.
Now it's John Carpe.
John, nice to see you again.
Christian Code Controversy00:14:16
We're talking about the case of Trinity Western University, which is a small Christian university in BC that wanted to have a law school.
And I'll just give our viewers a little bit of background and I'll throw to you for the news today.
I've been to Trinity.
It's a small school.
Academically, it's successful.
No one, none of its critics said this law school would be deficient academically in any sense.
But because it's a Christian school, they asked their students to sign a Christian code of conduct.
No drinking, no swearing, no gambling, no sex except for inside a Christian marriage, a traditional marriage of a man and woman.
So no premarital or extramarital sex.
Well, if you don't like that, don't go to that Christian school.
But law societies in three provinces said we are not going to even accept graduates from this university because it's a bigoted place and we simply will not, even if the students are brilliant and excellent lawyers, we ban them.
They're blackballed.
And today, John, the Supreme Court of Canada, I've held that blackballing 7-2.
7-2.
7-2.
I thought that freedom of religion, freedom of association would allow a Christian school to be Christian.
I thought that was actually in our constitution, Christian schooling.
Well, there's so many things appalling about this decision.
And one of them is just the utter, it's not even a lack of respect.
It's almost a contempt for religious freedom.
That the majority says this is just trivial for Trinity Western University to repudiate its own code of conduct, which, by the way, every university has a code of conduct.
But just repudiate it.
Get over it already and drop your opposition to sex outside of marriage.
And you can still have an authentic Christian law school.
I mean, that would be like telling an Orthodox Jewish school, drop your prohibition on pork and allow non-Jewish kids to come to your school and bring their pork sandwich for lunch and just get over it.
You can still be a good Jewish school and allow pork sandwiches to be eaten there.
Just complete contempt for what is a pillar of human dignity.
It's your right, my right, to not just believe, but also live out and practice your faith.
Well, you know, what's so crazy about this is the school itself is not being forced to do anything.
It's graduates from this school are being blackballed, am I right?
So this school can proceed.
And it can graduate students.
Those students just will never be allowed to practice law in Canada.
And that's what the Supreme Court has actually upheld, am I right?
Yeah, if Trinity Western goes ahead with their law school, which I don't know if they will or not, but if they do go ahead with it and spend the money and hire the law profs and so on and so forth, then the graduates from that law school will not be eligible to practice law.
Yeah, so that's the thing.
It's not even, the school itself is not touched by these law societies.
In a way.
Understand what I'm getting in a way.
You can have a gay student.
You can have a liberal, conservative, you can have, I mean, there are gay graduates of Trinity Western, of course.
Who, by the way, have filed affidavits in court stating that it's a warm and welcoming and accepting environment where it was safe to come out.
So you can have an out-of-the-closet gay student at Trinity.
You can be a Christian gay student.
You don't even have to be Christian to go to Trinity Western.
And there are Muslims there.
There are atheists there.
It's a university.
So you can get a great education.
You can be a warm, open-minded progress.
You can be left-wing a graduate.
It's the graduate that is being prejudged as being not a legitimate lawyer.
To me, that's actually far worse, John, is that they're saying in advance, we haven't met any of these lawyer graduates.
They haven't done anything wrong.
They don't even exist yet.
But we know in advance that they must be blackballed from the profession.
It's actually not the law school itself that is the big loser.
It's any student that would dare say, I believe in that code of conduct.
Even the gay kids who went there say, I believe in that code of conduct.
It is a pure anti-Christian bigotry.
Unfortunately, it is bigotry.
I would love to disagree with you on this and say, you know, no, Ezra, you're wrong.
They're deciding on the finer points of law.
But this is basically an attack on a Christian institution.
And it's so cowardly, and it's hypocritical.
They're not doing this to Brigham Young University, Mormon University, Latter-day Saints, similar code of conduct.
All kinds of Christian universities, Catholic universities in the U.S. that have a code of conduct that says no sex outside of marriage.
There's Muslim universities around the world.
And there's Muslim universities around the world.
And their grads are allowed to practice in Canada.
Their grads can come into Canada and all they have to do is take, say, 12 months of equivalency courses.
And presto, they're in.
Yeah, and that equivalency has got nothing to do with the religious nature.
It's just, do you know your Canadian law?
Do you know your Canadian contract and constitutional criminal?
So you can go to Al-Azhar University in Cairo, which is...
Not familiar with it, but okay.
Or Karachi, University of Karachi, UK.
U of K.
And as long as you prove you can understand Canadian contracts, you're good to go.
You can move to Canada and take 12 months, or maybe in some cases, a little bit more than 12 months, but you take your Canadian equivalency courses and away you go.
I've got a question for you.
There was a case more than a dozen years ago in BC involving the BC Teachers College.
Precedent, you would think.
It was identical.
Trinity Western University, same school.
Same code of conduct.
Same thing.
The teachers' college says, we don't like your Christian nature, so we're blackballing any student teachers.
The Supreme Court ruled was eight to one in favor of Trinity Western.
So what year was that case?
It was only 15 years ago.
So for 15 years we went from same school, same code of conduct, BC Teachers College, to same school, same code of conduct, law colleges.
And all of a sudden that freedom of association, freedom of religion is gone.
Well, the law societies would say, oh, these cases are fundamentally different.
But that's hierarchical.
They couldn't be more identified.
They couldn't be more similar.
I'm furious, but who are the two judges who voted on the side of Trinity West?
Russell Brown and Justice Cote.
You know, I ask that because you mentioned the Jewish thing.
I know there's two or three Jews on the Supreme Court.
Rosalia Bella.
I've just forgotten the names of the other ones.
I'm sorry.
I don't want to guess.
You know, if this was a Jewish school, I wonder what they would have said.
Well, and I wonder what they would have said to a Muslim school.
Some of the language in the decision, it is so political.
They talk about diversity and equality without defining equality.
They could be for or against equality, depending on what do you mean exactly by that.
Well, we know for a fact that dozens and dozens and dozens of Sharia-compliant Muslim groups in Canada got their summer jobs grant from Justin Trudeau when more than 1,500 Christian groups didn't get their summer grant from Justin Trudeau.
I say that this is anti-Christian bigotry.
And what do you do when your Supreme Court of Canada, the last Court of Appeal, says, yeah, Christians, get over it.
Yeah, get over it.
That's what it says, get over it.
You've got your community covenant, but so what?
We're not going to respect that.
And you know what's sad is the whole model of the charter, the way it's supposed to be, the concept is you've got these politicians which might pander to the mob and they might be populists and they might trample on rights and freedoms.
And frankly, there are times, you can point to many examples in history where crushing rights and freedoms is wildly popular amongst the people.
So the idea is, but oh, we've got this charter and we've got these judges to protect us from these populations.
These judges are the mob.
These judges are the vanguard.
Now you've got the judges are cheering on the social justice warriors.
What this means is that people have to be more engaged in the democratic process to elect pro-freedom people than ever before.
Because we can't count on the judges to defend our free society.
We have to elect pro-freedom people.
I think out of the nine judges, six are Harper appointees.
Something like that.
I think Trudeau just made an appointment, didn't he?
Yes.
So six out of nine are Harper.
And he didn't move the needle one bit.
You know, Donald Trump, people said he's not a real conservative, really.
He's made the most outstanding judicial appointments.
Stephen Harper dropped the ball on two things in my view.
The CBC, he didn't privatize it.
And he abandoned the courts to the social justice activists.
I can name on one hand, he had nine years.
Just a few good judges.
Yeah, like I say, I can name on one of the people.
He name them on one hand.
He could have transformed the judiciary.
And I'm not saying to be activist right-wing.
Just interpret the law as it was written.
Starry decises, let's stand the precedent.
I find this is deeply undemocratic.
And I despair, because if you can't get your justice formally, properly, through the courts, what is left?
It's scary for the future because when the courts are not upholding the rule of law and if the politicians don't get it, consequences can be scary.
When there's a backlash, it won't be pretty.
You know, it sounds crazy, but I wish this had been a Muslim school.
You might have had a different outcome.
Well, it might have.
It would have.
It would have because this social justice activist court would have said, oh, well, in the name of diversity, we will allow a Muslim law school.
Because I'm so frustrated, John, but I know you fought the good fight with the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms.
We've had you on to talk about this a dozen times before.
You fought the good fight as an intervener at the first and second occasions here.
I know you're undaunted in your larger mission, and I wish you good luck.
And the website's jccf.ca, right?
jccf.ca.
And you know what?
It's a bad day for justice, but we're going to keep on fighting because the worst thing you can do is to throw up your hands in despair and say, oh, we're going home, we're not playing anymore.
No, we'll just keep on fighting these fights, and you win some, you lose some.
What gets me is this is so transparent.
This is existing incumbent establishment lawyers keeping out Christian lawyers.
It's bad enough how clubby the law is, but they're saying we don't want Christian lawyers.
I think Christians ought to deploy themselves into the legal sphere because they're so clearly being blackballed.
And I'm Jewish myself, but if I were a Christian of any salt, if I had any saltiness to me, making a very poor allusion to the phrase salt that is not lost, it's saltiness.
I would understand that the law and the courts is where this country is being ruled from, and I would try and get on the inside like you're doing, John.
I'm angry.
I'm angry, but I'm going to stop there because I'll just rant.
Keep up the fight, my friend.
And you were a freedom fighter that all of us Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or atheists can get behind.
Thanks for having me on your show.
Hi, what's nice to see you?
Well, I'm frustrated by that.
I'm frustrated by that.
Let's take a break.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue yesterday about Chrystia Freeland winning an award for being the world's best diplomat.
James writes, isn't that like winning used car salesman?
I mean, person of the year?
Well, no.
No, it's not.
I mean, you know, there's that old saying, a diplomat is someone who goes to lie abroad for their country.
And that's actually a triple entendre.
Lie abroad is what they call the battleship sort of facing all its guns in one direction.
So that's one meeting, lie abroad.
The other is to lie, as in to tell a lie abroad.
And of course, the third is that's not really, anyhow, it's a hundred-year-old joke.
But it's not really always true.
Look at Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State.
Is he going to lie abroad for his country?
No.
He's going to do an important deal with North Korea.
May it work.
NAFTA, that's not about lying.
That's about getting a trade deal that works for both parties.
So, no, I think there is such a thing as a good diplomat.
I don't think Christy Freeland is it.
Ted writes, Christy Freeland thinks the threat to democracy comes from the right.
She isn't confused.
She's delusional.
Yeah, it was a really weird speech.
And it was so tone-deaf given the recent fraca between Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau.
It's just so maybe they're trying to wreck things on purpose.
Deborah writes, liberals love to hand out awards to themselves so they can keep pushing their agenda down our throats.
Christira doesn't hold a candle to a real Canadian diplomat, Ken Taylor.
I know you're referring to the great Canadian diplomat in Iran, if I recall, who sort of smuggled the Canadian diplomat who smuggled American hostages out.
I'm sorry, I forget my history, but yeah, that wasn't just great democracy, great diplomacy.
That was personal courage.
Lindsay Shepard's Triumph00:02:01
Sort of unrelated to the actual job he had, but it was amazing, you're right.
On my interview with Howard Levitt, Tammy writes, very interesting development concerning Lindsay Shepard.
I wish her every success with this lawsuit.
Yeah, you know, I got to say, I mean, I enjoy all our guests we talk to.
I think that was my favorite interview this week.
First of all, he's a great talker, isn't he?
I think that's because he's a good lawyer, so lawyers have a facility with words, I think.
But he's also a journalist, so he knows how to talk.
But he's also a bit of a believer.
But he's also a bit of an expert.
And also, it's got such a fascinating case.
And Lindsay's interesting, and Laurier's interesting, and suing professors is unusual.
It's just, that was my favorite interview of the week.
Maybe even in the month, come to think of it.
I'm excited, and I'm glad he agreed to keep us posted.
Lawsuits move very slowly.
As we said in our discussion yesterday, it could be a month or months before the next milestone comes.
But I promise you, we will keep in touch on that story.
And he said it.
He says, I hope we don't settle.
I mean, if the University of Wilford Laurier University said to Lindsay Shepard, here's a million bucks, go away.
Don't lie, it would be extremely difficult for even the most principled person in the world to say, million bucks, five years of costly fighting in court.
I mean, who wouldn't take a million bucks?
I hope they don't offer her that money.
I hope she goes the distance because we need the teachable moment.
I hope she wins a trial, but I hope it doesn't settle.
I think she's a good fighter.
All right, that's the show for today, and that means the show for the week.
I hope you enjoyed it.
And if you are free every day at 12 noon Eastern, 10 a.m. Mountain Time, 9 a.m. on the West Coast, tune into our YouTube channel.
I do a daily live chat at 12 noon Eastern Time, and people have fun.
And by live chat, I mean I look on the camera and I chat, and I have live comments that people type, and it's pretty fun.