Ezra Levant attended Tommy Robinson’s July 23 appeal, exposing media lies: Robinson was jailed in hours for reporting on a 29-person Muslim rape gang case, with only 15 minutes of trial time, while outlets like The Guardian falsely claimed he was only appealing his sentence. Levant’s live tweets reached 5.7M views in 12 hours, contrasting with mainstream media’s distortions. At Burnaby’s Camp Cloud, protesters—including violent squatters—threatened journalists like Sheila Gunreed, forcing crowdfunded security after past clashes, like the OCA crisis where a cop died. Levant and Joel Pollock also dissect Trump’s Iran tweet, framing it as a multi-layered diplomatic move ignored by media obsessed with Russia collusion narratives, despite no evidence. Robinson’s imprisonment sets a dangerous precedent for free speech in Britain, with Levant vowing to expose media bias until his release. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, I'm back in Canada after attending Tommy Robinson's court date in London.
I've got a report for you.
It's July 23rd 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 for why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
I was away for most of last week.
I was in London attending the legal appeal made by Tommy Robinson's lawyers.
I'd like to tell you a bit about that.
I'm sure you know, but just in case you don't, here's a minute on why Tommy is in jail in the first place.
Tommy was arrested two months ago for reporting outside the trial of a 29-person Muslim rape gang accused of systematically and repeatedly raping young Indigenous British girls as young as 11 years old.
Tommy was swarmed by seven police who packed him into a police van and within hours he was charged, convicted, sentenced, and sent off to prison with a 13-month term.
The actual time it took to have his trial was about 15 minutes.
And if you recall, the judge who did all that to Tommy originally put a publication ban over everything he did.
I'm sorry, but how is that different from how turbulent reporters are handled in Venezuela or Russia?
Now, I've been doing some cursory research into contempt of court cases in the UK.
I can't find any journalist who has been sent to prison for contempt of court since 1949.
And 13 months in prison?
As you know, Tommy's confined to his own self for his own safety.
Most British prisons are dominated by Muslim criminal gangs.
They'd killed Tommy in a moment to be heroes, to get their 72 virgins, whatever.
It's not really speculation.
Last time Tommy was in prison, he was attacked, in fact, by just such a gang.
So he's done two months in solitary conditions, let out just 30 minutes a day, timed by the jail so he can't even connect with his kids.
It's awful.
I've told you this before.
Anyways, Tommy left the rebel to go independent a few months back, so we weren't in a position to make decisions for him, unlike a year earlier when he was arrested for the same thing in Canterbury.
Back then, we immediately hired a top law firm, went to battle for him.
As his employer, I didn't need to consult with anyone before hiring lawyers and crowdfunding to pay them and taking the most aggressive legal strategy we could do.
And it worked.
We got him out.
This time, though, I have no legal standing.
He doesn't work for us anymore.
Any lawyers he has owe their allegiance only to him.
He's their client, not us.
So technically, I'm just a meddler.
So it took me a few weeks to meddle, to make some gentle suggestions to Tommy's family, and through them to Tommy himself in prison.
Nearly a month had passed, but Tommy and his family decided to file an appeal, thank God, and to crowdfund some top lawyers and to let us do the crowdfunding.
That's sort of what we're built to do here.
So finally, we did it.
And finally, the appeal was heard.
On Wednesday at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
Now, I posted eight videos while I was over there.
If you haven't seen them yet, please go to TommyTrial.com.
Eight videos on the trial or the appeal.
And in addition, I sat in the courtroom during the appeal.
I got there early.
In fact, I got there a day early.
And let me start with that.
I've flown to the UK half dozen times in the past year or so to visit Tommy when he was working for us.
And finally, to say goodbye to him when he left to go independent.
I never had any trouble at the border at all.
In fact, I went there so often, they literally suggested to me that I register as a trusted traveler so I could speed through without any paperwork at Heathrow.
So I did that.
And by the way, I'm also a registered Nexus traveler in North America, which means I can skip the long lines because I've submitted to a police background check.
I've given my fingerprints, I've gone for a police interview, the whole thing.
I'm just telling you this to let you know that I've never had any trouble at any border ever.
But this time I was worried.
See, in recent months, more and more of Tommy Robinson's friends who went to visit him in the UK were detained at the border and permanently banned from entering the UK.
Our former reporter Lauren Southern, her friend here, Brittany Pettibone, and her Brittany's boyfriend, Martin Sellner, all three of them are being banned.
And a few years back, Tommy Robinson's friends, Robert Spencer of Jihad Wash, who's on our show regularly, and the fabulous Pamela Geller.
All five of these friends of Tommy have been banned forever from the United Kingdom just for their political views.
There are at least 23,000 jihadis roaming the streets of the United Kingdom, by the way.
But apparently five of Tommy Robinson's friends are banned for having conservative views.
So I thought, look, I've been in public face of Tommy's crowdfunding for about a month.
I'd better go a day early just in case I'm given a hassle too.
And I even retained a UK law firm in advance just in case I was stopped at the border.
Now in the end, I was not stopped, but I was ready in case I was.
Would you agree with me that it was wise to go a day early, given the five other friends who were stopped, just to be careful.
Anyways, the morning of the trial, I went to the court two hours early also.
I didn't want to have come all that way and not have a seat in court.
Now on my way over, I got talking to my cabby, a driver in one of those old-fashioned black taxi cabs.
I think every single taxicab driver in the UK loves Tommy, at least the ones who drive those black cabs.
Because when I told this cabby what I was doing in town, he literally refused to take my cab fare.
Now it was only five pounds.
It was a short drive.
But still, he said it was his contribution to the cause.
Can you believe that?
People in the UK have been following Tommy's case very closely.
You know they have been.
He's been getting huge support at public rallies.
And you can imagine, for every person who shows up at a demo, probably another 100, follow it online.
Anyways, so I got to the courthouse finally on Wednesday morning, two hours early.
And other people were there too.
Two hours early.
Some reporters were wearing free Tommy shirts.
Others were dressed in normal civilian clothes.
Other people dressed up a bit.
Here's one fella took a picture with me.
He's a Royal Air Force vet wearing an impressive array of medals, wouldn't you say?
There were supporters there from every background.
I mean, from all walks of life.
It was quite something.
The variety of people who support Tommy.
Anyway, the pro-Tommy protesters stayed there all day.
I didn't see any anti-Tommy protesters, by the way.
I saw a lot of cops, including manted police.
I went in early to get a good seat.
And wouldn't you know it, by coincidence, in the exact same courtroom where Tommy's appeal was going to be heard, an hour earlier at 9.30 a.m., the new Attorney General for the United Kingdom was being sworn in.
What were the chances of that?
So I listened to that very pleasant ceremony.
And afterwards, when everyone was shaking the new Attorney General's hand, I went right up to the fella and I shook his hand too, and I asked him a question.
He was right there in the courtroom.
I asked him about the new, the news report that a U.S. diplomat, a Trump ambassador, as they call it in this story here, had raised concerns with the UK government about Tommy's treatment in this case.
So I asked Jeffrey Cox, what did he have to say about that?
I was pretty excited to put that question to him right there in the court.
Well, he gave me a good answer.
He said he had been too busy preparing for his new job as Attorney General, so he didn't read that and he didn't know about it and hadn't been briefed on it.
It's probably true, by the way.
And it's a good answer even if it wasn't true.
I enjoyed the fact that I got to ask the top dog that question mere minutes after he was sworn in, still in the courthouse.
That was sort of fun.
And then the hearing got started in an exquisitely ornate room more than a century old.
The Royal Courts of Justice is a Victorian era building.
Look at that.
How nice is that?
There were three judges led by this fella, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, and I got to say he was an excellent judge, very fair-minded, very attentive, very smart.
Tommy had four lawyers, actually, two main lawyers, a barrister and a solicitor, and they each had a junior.
That's the way to do it in such an important case.
It really is the most prominent case in the United Kingdom today.
The other side was not represented by a prosecutor, but rather by a delegate from the Attorney General's office, not styled as a prosecutor, but rather a friend of the court, to provide expert advice to the court on the technicalities of the obscure law of contempt.
He was sometimes hostile to Tommy Robinson, but sometimes he granted Tommy's lawyers some points.
It's very interesting.
Anyways, before the trial got underway, I asked a clerk of the court to check with a judge whether or not I could use my laptop in the court to tweet my comments live, and he said yes.
And so I set up my laptop.
I sat right beside Tommy's solicitor, John Carson, and I typed as fast as I could for the appeal.
Can you see these tweets on the screen behind me?
I did my best to hear everything, even though unlike Canadian and U.S. courts, we weren't given access to the filed legal briefs submitted by the lawyers.
Nonetheless, I think I managed to give the gist of what was going on.
And according to my Twitter analytics, I wrote more than 150 tweets from court that were seen 5.7 million times in 12 hours.
5.7 million.
So many people in the United Kingdom and around the world want to know the facts and they didn't trust the other media.
There were about a half dozen other media in the court, but their hatred for Tommy eclipses their love of the facts and the news.
They just plain lied about him.
I'm not exaggerating.
I'm not saying that being negative about Tommy is a lie.
That's an opinion.
I'm saying these other journalists just told factual untruths, fake news.
Here's a small example, but stay with me here.
Here's the political correspondent for the Guardian newspaper.
You can also see that he's a bicycling activist, which tells you 90% of what you need to know about him.
Anyways, he obviously hates Tommy.
He hates Tommy's supporters, and so he wrote this.
Note for some of those tweeting about Tommy Robinson appeal.
It's not being held in secret.
There are some temporary reporting restrictions.
These are usually there to avoid other trials being jeopardized.
He's only appealing against the sentence.
He pleaded guilty.
All right.
But in fact, Tommy's conviction had, in fact, been subject to a publication ban, a total publication ban for days.
That's why people would have called it secret, because it was.
And there was, in fact, a partial reporting ban on the appeal on Wednesday too.
There still is.
So any Tommy fans who said that, they're right.
But look at that next part he said there.
He said, he's only appealing against the sentence.
Well, actually, yeah, that was the original plan.
But as Tommy's lawyers learned more about his treatment in court that day in Leeds, they learned that the way he was treated violated so many rules of criminal procedure.
The judge who convicted Tommy in Leeds made so many mistakes, not just in the 13-month sentence, but in the rest of it too, that Tommy's lawyers decided to appeal the conviction itself.
And this was obvious and evident within the first 10 minutes of court.
I mean, it was probably, what, 80, 90% of what was discussed in the appeal for hours.
But look at this Guardian political editor telling the little people, no, you're wrong.
He's not appealing the conviction itself, dummy.
I'm sorry, that is not an opinion.
That is a fact.
And it's what the appeal centered around.
And this Guardian political editor, this snobby, sneering TOF, was just telling people fake news and trying to embarrass them for being idiots.
But he was the idiot.
When all these working class Tommy supporters pointed out to His Highness from The Guardian that he's wrong, well, he finally, grudgingly admitted it.
He wrote, it seems, embarrassingly, I was wrong on the second point.
Court listing and earlier wire stories said it was just appeal against sentence, but hearing covered both this and the conviction.
Apologies to anyone I've contradicted over this.
I don't know why I'm doing a valley girl accent for a British snob.
Thanks for the apology, mate.
But how could you get such a central fact so wrong and be so confident about it that you attacked those who got it right, called them fools?
But look, the snob apologized, leave him be.
But of course, he couldn't leave it be.
He couldn't just apologize.
He had to attack, well, me.
Look at this.
He said, all credit, I'm not even going to try an accent.
He said, all credit for Mr. Levant for reporting from court.
Not enough people do that these days.
But I've just looked at the website he works for, and it's all a bit unsavory.
Hang on, hang on, hang on.
So this Guardian political editor who was writing about the appeal, so he wasn't actually in the courtroom?
What, was it hard to find the court?
Maybe they moved it.
Now, I was coming in from Canada.
I came in a day early to make sure I got in.
I got to court two hours early in the morning to make sure I got a seat.
Was it really that hard to come all the way down from the Guardian's office to the courts?
It was a bit hard.
But he still wanted to tweet about the appeal as if he had made that tiny effort.
What a clown.
But hey guys, he finds the rebel a bit unsavory.
So sure, we have our facts right.
He was lying, but we're unsavory if he does say so himself.
And we have to take his word for it that he actually read our website because he just exposed himself for writing about an appeal to which he did not attend.
Do you see why it was important that I intended the court in person?
If the Guardian editor would lie about something so easily checkable like that, imagine what else he lies about.
Here's another example from Channel 4, a major British broadcaster.
Look at what's happening here.
Okay?
So this is just some guy, Adrian Short.
He's just some guy, random person.
He's not with Channel 4.
And he writes, why would Tommy get bail?
He's convicted and serving his sentence, and there's no possibility of overturning the conviction as he isn't even appealing that.
Again, that's just false in a whole bunch of ways.
But he's just some nobody on Twitter.
He's probably some kid.
He wasn't in court, obviously.
But that tweet, right underneath it, let's show it here.
From Kieran Bryan, do you see how that's right underneath?
He's the chief video producer for Channel 4 News, and he's in charge of fact-checking.
So not some random nobody, not even in the court.
That first, the random nobody, excuse me, the random nobody is Adrian Short.
He was not even in court.
And he said something factually false.
And that's good enough research for Channel 4 that liked that false tweet.
So do you see what went on here?
Channel 4's Fake News Sensation00:03:44
Some nobody, not in the court, said Tommy's not even appealing that.
And that tweet is liked by the chief video producer of Channel 4 News, the boss of fact-checking.
Just to remind you, Channel 4 is the clown show that had Kathy Newman take a run at Jordan Peterson again and again, falsely trying to put words in his mouth.
It was comedy.
Remember this?
You're just saying that's the way it is.
Well, I'm not saying anything.
It's just an observation.
So we should dominate.
Is that what you're saying?
No.
You're saying you've done your research and women are unhappy dominating men.
I didn't say they were unhappy dominating men.
It was a bad long-term solution.
It was a massacre.
If you haven't watched that whole video, you got to.
Anyways, so you can seem that Channel 4 is still in the fake news business.
Pretty embarrassing.
But do you see what I mean?
Channel 4, The Guardian, that's the mainstream media in the UK.
They just make stuff up.
They weren't even at court and they were making stuff up about court.
Okay, but take a look at this.
There's one last thing I want to show you.
The BBC, their state broadcaster over there, did a long piece on who are these Tommy Robinson supporters.
It was like they were sending someone from National Geographic to the deepest, darkest Amazon to report on an obscure tribe or something.
Who are these Tommy Robinson supporters?
Now, I watched the whole thing.
They mocked Tommy's people a lot, the usual, like our own CBC, except they really have the class snobbery at the BBC down pat.
But there are two clips I want to show you from this BBC mini documentary.
The first, this BBC anthropologist goes to a pro-Tommy, pro-Donald Trump march just the other week.
And I don't know if you recall, but some anti-Trump leftists had this rather small blimp, they called it.
It was really just a big balloon of the size of a bouncy castle of Donald Trump as a baby.
I guess that's really some powerful way to speak truth to Bower or something.
You see this balloon?
It was a media sensation and the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, personally approved it being held aloft, right?
So some pro-Trump people at this Tommy Robinson rally, they took a little Peppa pig balloon.
Peppa Pig is a cartoon in the UK, and they just glued a picture of Sadiq Khan to it.
A cartoon.
Making fun of the mayor in a cartoon.
And that's it.
Peaceful rally for Tommy, Trafalgar Square.
Just a kid's balloon with Sadiq Khan on it.
And the police on horseback charged the person holding the balloon and those all around him charged on horseback.
I know you don't believe me, so watch with your own eyes.
A balloon catches the eye of the police.
It's clearly a response to the baby blimp flown by the anti-Trump protesters the previous day.
But the police decide that Peppa Pig crosses a line.
As officers try to remove the offending balloon, bottles are thrown.
So they have a balloon with a pig, and the mayor is glued to it, in obvious juxtaposition to the Trump blimp.
And the police literally charged on horseback.
Peppa Pig Protest00:03:30
Why?
Because Sadiq Khan is the mayor or because it's a pig and that's not halal or whatever reason at all.
And it's just okay for the police to charge families.
You saw that young boy there, your kid's there.
And the BBC finds that really uncontroversial and maybe even laudatory.
And this same BBC anthropologist, going deep into the heart of working class Britain, he confronts a woman because she's for Tommy and she asks why.
And why does she think that Muslims rape young girls?
I mean, why on earth would she think that?
That's what he says.
So he tries to humiliate her for a full minute.
And to the BBC, this video footage of the humiliation was gold.
I've heard that Muslims believe that they can have sex with children.
And do you believe that?
I do believe that.
I believe that in their country, they're allowed to have sex with children.
What if I told you that that wasn't true?
Because it isn't true.
I mean, I've been to many Muslim countries.
I've been all over the Middle East and North Africa.
It's definitely not true.
Why are we being shown in this country that it is true then?
Why are we being told and shown the things I believe what I read unless it's proven to be not true?
I'm just wondering where you get this idea from.
From what people, for instance, this rally last month, we were told what Sharia law is.
I'm from the government.
I'm from the media.
I'm from the government media.
And I'm here to tell you what to think.
Well, the thing is, it is happening every single day in the United Kingdom.
Forget about overseas, where it's common.
Forget about in the Quran, where historically Muhammad took a six-year-old girl, Aisha, as his bride and consummated that marriage when she was nine.
Forget about different times and different places.
In the United Kingdom, now, tens of thousands of white British girls are being raped by Muslim rape gangs, 1,400 in the small city of Rotherham alone.
It's what Tommy was arrested for reporting about in Canterbury last year.
It's what Tommy was arrested for reporting about in Leeds this year.
It's happening all around the United Kingdom all the time.
There have been countless convictions and countless more charges to come.
And the BBC is saying, no, you're just wrong.
It just doesn't happen.
Take it from me.
I would know I'm with the BBC.
Take it from me.
I bet he got a raise for humiliating her that way.
My friends, do you see why I went to London last week?
You just can't trust a word the mainstream media says.
Not here in Canada and not in the UK.
Stay with us for more.
Occupy Burnaby Eviction00:10:21
Welcome back.
Well, you know that there has been a shanty town, an illegal camp out in Burnaby for months, protesting against the expansion of Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain Pipeline.
It's really an echo of the Occupy Wall Street squalor that we've seen in New York, of course, Occupy Wall Street, but we've seen it across Canada, Occupy Toronto, and other places.
Illegal, unhygienic, rampant with drug crime and even sex crimes.
And of course, all of it is in violation of municipal bylaws.
You simply can't build structures or even camp out in your camper as a protest.
You just can't do that.
It's against the bylaws.
It's not just these trivial or minor or petty offenses, though.
Many people in these protests physically attack police.
And when they're arrested, police have been instructed, we're told, to lay the most minor charges possible.
And of course, courts have done similar things, giving just tiny slaps on the wrist to even members of parliament who break restraining orders and protest right on Kinder Morgan's own property.
Well, I tell you all this because finally, the city of Burnaby has issued a demand to one protest squalid tent city, laughably called Camp Cloud.
I have in my hand a copy of the notice of eviction and non-compliance with bylaws.
It only took him, what, half a year to get around it.
Notice, all structures at Camp Cloud must be removed immediately, including buildings, tents, enclosures, and tarps.
Notice, trailers and vehicles must be removed immediately or we'll be towed.
Notice, open fires.
Like they have open fires must be extinguished immediately.
Notice the shower must be removed.
Please, of all the things to keep, let them keep their shower.
Notice, dogs present at the site must be leashed.
If you do not comply with this notice within 72 hours, the city of Burnaby will take action to enforce compliance, including removing the camp.
Well, I saw that and I said, baloney, I don't believe that because I happen to know the mayor of Burnaby is an anti-pipeline extremist himself who's wasted countless funds of the city with long shot suits against the pipeline.
And he said he'd really a protester himself.
So I thought, let's go and send a team, an investigative team, to see what really happens when this eviction notice expires.
Does the city actually do anything?
You see, I don't trust protesters.
I don't trust the mayor of Burnaby, but I don't trust the media either because they always cover for the environmental activists because the media themselves are environmental activists.
The only reporter in the country I trust to give us the straight goods on what happened with this eviction notice is our own Alberta Bureau chief, Sheila Gunread, who lives and breathes oil and gas and freedom and the rule of law.
And she went down there in her pickup truck with a cameraman and joining us now by a Skype from the highway is our friend Sheila in her gorgeous pickup.
Great to see you again, Sheila.
Hey, Ezra, thanks for having me.
So you're actually making your way back to your home from Burnaby.
You're driving back right now and you just pull over to do this Skype interview.
Thanks very much for taking the time.
Of course, of course.
You know, it's a beautiful drive and fossil fuels made it possible.
You know, I'm glad you went and we flew in a cameraman.
He is based in Toronto, so of course it would be too long a drive, but I appreciate you doing the drive.
And we also had a security guard for you because these shanty towns are squalid and many of the people who were paid to protest in them, I'm not being insulting here, I'm just observing.
Many of them are street people, homeless people who are paid 50, 100 bucks a day just to be cannon fodder for the left.
A lot of them are mentally ill.
I've encountered them in Toronto and Vancouver.
Is that how you would describe a lot of the cannon fodder at this Camp Cloud?
Yeah, you know, I would describe it exactly that way.
I would say it's a 50-50 mix.
And by 50-50, I mean probably three and three of, you know, busybody university students trying to justify their joblessness by saying that they're trying to save the world.
And the other three or four people that are down there are people who realize that you can't smoke drugs at the homeless shelter.
So they've moved into this, I mean, it's not even a tent city.
It is a mini slum.
Like we would call it a slum if you came across this.
I think we got to do this.
Let's put it up while we're talking.
So if you listen to the media, the CBC, the Vancouver Sun, whatever, they make it sound like this is an enormous protest.
But if I hear you right, you said there's just six people there.
I guess that's when the cameras aren't there.
There's six sort of permanent squatters.
Is that right?
Yeah, you know, and I actually went down the night before the eviction notice was supposed to happen because I wanted to see this place in its natural condition, I guess, before it puts on a big front for the media.
So, you know, I went down there, put a dash cam on my truck, drove past the protest site.
It was empty.
There were, you know, two, maybe three cars sort of parked alongside of it because, of course, the protesters drive cars.
And I saw, you know, I drove past three or four times.
I saw upwards of three people just sort of milling about the night before.
Then on the day of the eviction, I mean, there was probably 20 or 30 people that showed up and the whole road was lined with cars of protesters who, again, drive their cars to an anti-oil protest.
And then we decided to come back again, you know, 12 or 13 hours later.
And guess what?
The camp is basically empty.
It's just, you know, maybe a half a dozen holdouts that are there just sort of staking their claim to the ditch.
It's not even a real thing.
It's so pathetic, actually, that three university students and three or four homeless people can hold up the entire economy.
Yeah, and let's show it again because it's so gross.
And I want you to set the scene a bit.
This is some footage of the shantytown, the slum.
But there's some, put it back up.
So that's the Kindermorgan site.
It says private property.
But I see a tent.
I see other tents and lean-to's, but there's some actual wooden structures there.
How close is this to private citizens, to moms and kids and girls and boys going to school?
Like, this looks really gross.
And this reminds me, like this shot here, especially, it looks who knows what's going on inside there.
There's a sign that says neighbors welcome.
Can you imagine being parents of a kid and you have all these hobos there?
How close is it to families?
Oh, it's so close.
It is so close.
It's probably 150 meters to the corner where you turn into the Forest Grove neighborhood.
And when we were down there, we actually went into Forest Grove.
I drove through there.
It's a beautiful neighborhood.
Those houses have been there.
They were built up sort of around the pipeline and around the tank farm.
Those people bought those houses knowing that there's a tank farm right behind them.
They don't seem to mind.
It's beautiful.
And really, none of the protesters are locals to the neighborhood.
They're sort of, they're really just an infestation.
But they are, the place where they're camped, if you sort of go as the crow flies across the field behind them, there's a kids park there.
And a lot of the community is concerned about the open drug use that's happening at the site.
If you go on their Facebook page, they post videos of them doing drugs right to their Facebook page.
I was going to say, I mean, I remember when I went to Occupy Toronto, that was the first time I encountered this professional protest culture and then the cannon fodder side.
And what I mean by that is you've got the Greenpeace, foreign-funded activists at the top.
They're often lawyers or very educated, professional, high-income activists, very savvy and sophisticated.
They're never the ones who do the stunts.
They're not the ones who break in with a Greenpeace stunt.
They're not the ones who were sleeping overnight in these gross shelters.
Those are the little people, the lower people, often mentally disturbed.
In Toronto, I saw a lot of drug use, and there were credible reports of rapes.
Did you see any evidence of drug use or rapes there at, quote, Camp Cloud?
I don't even want to call it Camp Cloud.
I've never seen a cloud look so gross in my life.
This protest slum, did you see any evidence of drug use, drug paraphernalia, or other crimes of that sort?
You know, I did, you know, like you can smell the open drug use happening everywhere.
Now, I didn't see any needles.
And they also, but they're very strangely protective of their side of the concrete barriers that the city has erected to keep them safe from being run over as they sleep in the ditch.
I got accosted by one of the protesters who, you know, I'm not being rude, but he did look homeless, for lack of a better term.
He came running down the hill and accosted me because I had crossed the concrete barriers onto his, you know, sacred encampment.
And it's so funny that after the, like, now they're concerned with trespassing.
They accused me of trespassing while they're sleeping in the ditch around the corner from this beautiful community.
Cameras on the Hill00:07:30
And I asked them, did you ask anybody around the corner for permission before you started sleeping in their ditch?
And the man just sort of walked away because he knew, you know, what I was asking him.
There's no answer for it.
That's reminds me of Occupy Toronto, Occupy Wall Street.
They were occupying the public park, but they wouldn't let you occupy it.
There was one thing you told me about this by email.
And I mentioned this at the beginning.
The reason why we were so happy for you to go with our cameraman and our security guard is because I knew we can't trust the journalist.
I knew that this eviction would not actually happen.
But more than that, I knew the media would put their own gloss on it.
And you told me by email, and I think we have a clip of it, of a journalist for Aboriginal People TV Network.
And I sort of like that network.
I think it's a young, scrappy, not young.
It's a scrappy little outfit.
And I have no beef with it.
I ideologically disagree with some of their ideas, but so what?
But one of the so-called journalists for APTN saw you, recognized you, and ran to these hippies to say, that's Sheila Gonread.
The rebel.
So he was in collusion with them against you.
And it reminded me of the day where you were attacked by other left-wing hippies and the media was in collusion also.
I'm glad we had a security guard with you.
Let's play that clip and then I'd like your comments on it.
So here's the clip.
And I'm glad our cameraman kept the camera rolling.
Here, let's take a look.
Sure, I'm Sheila.
Sheila.
Gunn.
Gun.
Okay.
And who are you with?
I'm with the Rebel.
Okay.
Why did you come here to cover Camp Cloud?
Another median interviewing another media?
I mean, what's newsworthy to you and to the rebel about the camp?
More specifically, I guess, the fact that this encampment is holding up nearly an $8 billion project.
I mean, I think it's pretty evident that, you know, the entire Kinder Morgan project is in the news.
Of course, this whole thing is newsworthy, wouldn't you say?
It is, yeah, yeah.
I'm just wondering, like, do you have you spoken with any of the indigenous people involved with?
Okay.
All right, thank you.
Thanks.
Now, you were very friendly there, friendlier than I would have been.
I would have said you can watch my reports.
So that was a fairly polite interaction.
But tell me what happened thereafter.
You say he scurried over to them and said, don't talk to you.
Tell me what happened next.
Okay, so I guess he, as we were coming up the hill, we were met by a camper who didn't want us crossing onto his side of the barrier.
And so this reporter from APTN comes barreling down the hill at me.
The way he was barreling at me, I thought he was a protester.
And he stuck his camera in my face, his cell phone camera, because that's what they do.
And, you know, when I realized he was another reporter, I sort of laughed.
You can hear it on the video because, like, what do you mean this isn't newsworthy to me?
Why don't you think I should be here?
I was sort of, I was astounded that he was sort of impugning my motives and interrogating me about why I would bother coming.
But what he did next was really the worst part.
He scurried up the hill in front of us and told all the protesters who we were and where we were from.
So by the time I was getting up the hill, I was already being berated and yelled at by these protesters.
And I thought, you know, this is so ridiculous because we know what the people at Camp Cloud do to people they ideologically oppose.
They beat up cops, they send cops to the hospital.
200 people have been arrested there and they threatened the next OCA crisis.
So, I mean, we all remember OCA, a cop died there.
That's the kind of people I was walking up the hill to meet.
And I didn't need to have them agitated by someone from APTN.
Yeah.
Now, just give us a word on security.
We had a security guard there.
Tell me, how was he?
Did he seem, were you pleased with it?
And because we have to crowdfund that.
Whenever we send you into an event like this or any of other reporters, we have to crowdfund security.
No other media has to.
The Vancouver Sun doesn't have to.
The CBC doesn't have to because they are in league with the protesters.
In a way, I admire the honesty of that APTN thug reporter protester because he knows you're the only real journalist asking questions.
Oh, there's nothing to see here.
Oh, that's not newsworthy.
He knows actually.
He's a bully.
He's a thug.
He tried to intimidate you.
But in a way, he's honest.
And then he knows you will be the only person reporting accurately.
And the protesters there, they don't have to beat up the Vancouver Sun.
They don't have to punch the CBC because that's their propaganda arm.
You're the only real reporter who ever visited there.
That's my view.
How was the security guard?
Did he stay close to you?
Our security guard was phenomenal.
He was great.
There's no way I would have set foot anywhere near that protest encampment without him.
There were a couple times where the protesters got a little handsy with my cameraman.
He was right there to disperse it, to break it up.
Nobody touched me at all.
I did get a lot of yelling, but whatever.
I wouldn't be me if I didn't get yelled at by left-wingers.
But, you know, he kept us safe from beginning to end, professional, and we needed him every step of the way yesterday.
Well, I'm glad he was there.
I'm glad you are safe.
You show a lot of courage, Sheila, in a lot of ways.
Sometimes it's against bureaucratic bullies, like when the United Nations kicked you out of their climate change conference, when Rachel Notley sent a cop to keep you out of the legislature.
This was a physical risk to you.
I'm grateful to you that you took the risk.
We tried to mitigate it with the security guard, and it sounds like that worked.
I think this is important journalism.
You did a bunch of videos.
We're putting them all up on a special website, right?
RebelBurnaby.com?
Yes.
You know, when I was there, I was trying to make sure that I was fulfilling our journalistic mission and telling the other side of the story.
As I walked through that encampment, there was so much that I thought the rest of the mainstream or the mainstream media and the rest of the media in general are not telling us about what's happening at Camp Cloud.
And I think that's why the APTN reporter didn't want me there.
So I did a ton of videos.
Every time something sort of piqued my interest or struck me as hypocrisy, we stopped.
We shot a quick video.
And you can see that all at RebelBurnabee.com.
Well, that's great.
And if folks want to help chip in, you drove your way down there.
Obviously, we'll cover your gas in the hotel.
Efron, our cameraman, flew out there.
And of course, we paid for the security guard.
So there were a few thousand bucks we spent getting these stories.
But I really believe, Sheila, that your reports, and they're all at RebelBurnabee.com, I really believe that they're worth every penny.
And if our viewers think so, I'd like to encourage them to go to RebelBurnaby.com and help chip in for those expenses.
Great work as always, my friend.
Thanks, boss.
All right, there you have it.
Sheila Gunreed, doing journalism no one else in the country has done.
Iran, Putin, And The Democrats00:11:13
Would you agree with me on that?
And would you agree with me that it's a pitiful sign of the times that we literally have to hire a strong, smart security guard to keep Sheila and our cameramen safe?
Would you agree that it's a troubling sign of the times?
But it's something we got to do.
If you want to help us, please go to RebelBurnabe.com.
All right, stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Welcome back.
Well, I follow Donald Trump's tweets as more than 50 million people do.
He's really the most interesting user of that platform, and he uses it to say things in 280 characters that other presidents would either not say or bury within a one-hour speech written in bland diplomats speak.
Well, I've never seen a tweet like this one written in all capital letters.
You would say it's the equivalent of shouting, I suppose.
Let's put it on the screen and take a look.
This is from Donald Trump the president.
He said, to Iranian President Rouhani, never, ever threaten the United States again, or you will suffer consequences the likes of which few throughout history have ever suffered before.
We are no longer a country that will stand for your demented words of violence and death.
Be cautious.
I have never seen anything like that before.
But then again, with Donald Trump, you could say that almost every day.
Joining us now via Skype is our friend Joel Pollock, senior editor at large at Breitbart.com and a very serious Trump watcher.
Good to see you, Joel.
What do you make of this?
What do you make?
I have a theory, but I'll put it to you after I hear your theory.
What do you make of this tweet?
Well, the tweet operates on three levels.
The first is the literal level where the tweet is a threat.
Donald Trump is basically saying to Iran, you can't get away with calling us the great Satan anymore.
You can't get away with death to America.
We are going to start taking that seriously.
We're not going to treat it as a normal part of your internal political process.
If you threaten us, we may respond.
So that's going to put the regime on notice.
There are two other levels on which this is operating.
The second of the three is that this is equivalent, you could say, to Donald Trump attacking Kim Jong-un on Twitter, which eventually got the two of them in a room to hash out the beginnings of what may be a deal to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula.
It may be that Trump, who has long indicated that his preference is for a new deal with Iran, it may be that he's trying to push the regime into a framework within which both sides can come together somehow and improve dramatically on the agreement that the United States withdrew from a few weeks ago.
And the third level on which this works is a signal to Russia that the United States is getting serious about the Iranian threat and that Russia would be better off not aligning too closely with Iran.
Remember that amidst all of the noise and chaos around Trump's summit meeting with Putin in Helsinki, there were a few observers, primarily at Bright Part and one or two other places, who suggested that what Trump was trying to do was a reverse or inverse Richard Nixon.
Nixon helped contain the Soviet Union by becoming closer with China.
Trump may contain China by becoming closer with Russia.
And Trump may also draw Putin away from Iran.
So by embracing the Russian bear, Trump may be increasing his leverage on China and Iran.
So this is a signal to Russia that Trump is serious about confronting Iran and has staked his personal credibility on being able to do so and that Putin could cooperate by, for example, voting against Iran at the United Nations or not defending Iranian troops if they get to parts of Syria that the United States doesn't want them in or by not building new nuclear reactors in Iran or something like that.
But Trump wants to start to shake that relationship up a little bit and make Iran more isolated.
You know, that's a good point.
And I noticed you made that reverse Nixon comment on Twitter.
I thought that was very interesting.
I wish, Joel, that there had been a little bit more reporting about the substance of the Trump-Putin meeting, because there's a lot of serious issues.
The media was in an absolute mayhem about, oh, this proves he's in collusion.
He's a Soviet agent.
I mean, we saw the craziest things.
We saw, I think it was John Drennan, former CIA director, saying this is treason.
Like there was a mania that I haven't seen in the mainstream media in at least a week since the last mania and the mania before that, which is too bad because I would have liked to have learned more from the media about what Trump and Putin actually talked about when the media craziness was done.
They talked about Israel.
They talked about Iran, I'm sure.
I would like to know what those two men talked about.
Trump on Twitter somewhat defensively the other day was saying, I didn't give anything away.
And I don't know if you have to be this obvious and explain to journalists who are saying, why didn't Trump slap Putin right there?
Well, because he's trying to be diplomatic, which is not natural for Trump, I think.
Or maybe it is.
He's trying to get a deal.
It's the same reason he was polite to Kim Jong-un, who's a butcher.
Well, he's trying to get a deal.
I don't know.
I just think that there's a lot of poor coverage of Trump's diplomacy because the media don't want him to actually succeed at it.
That's my theory, Joel.
Right.
So there's that.
They don't want to see him as a successful president.
The other issue is that the media are completely laser focused on domestic politics in the United States, the American media.
They only asked about Robert Mueller and interference in the 2016 election.
There was one very small question about Crimea, but there was not one American journalist who asked about Syria, who asked about Iran, who asked about North Korea, who asked about anything in Europe aside from the Crimea question, which was very minor.
The United States media is entirely focused on domestic politics.
By the way, that's true not just when the president goes abroad.
That's true at home.
Marco Rubio, the senator from Florida, played a huge role in tanking the nomination of a senior judge on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which was a very, very significant political development.
And he was on several Sunday shows, but the hosts didn't ask him about that.
Normally, that would have been major headline news.
No, they asked him about Helsinki.
They asked him about Putin.
They asked him about Russia.
So the media are convinced that there's something in this Trump-Putin relationship that will remove Trump from office.
It's a bizarre tinfoil hat conspiracy theory, but they're so determined to get rid of him that they have seized on it.
And the reason they think that this Helsinki summit was bad and therefore good for them because they want to get Trump out of office is for them it's the culmination of the supposed collusion, for which there's no evidence, by the way, but for them it's the ultimate payoff for Putin to have Trump in the room with him.
And now Trump has said, well, I'm going to invite him to Washington.
So now they're all tearing their hair out about that.
Forgetting, of course, that Ronald Reagan hosted Mikhail Gorbachev, a much more dangerous enemy at the time in 1987 in Washington.
So the media have completely lost their minds because they're totally focused on the domestic politics of the United States.
They want the Democrats to win the midterm elections.
They want Trump to be impeached.
They want Trump to go away or have to resign or whatever.
And the key to doing that, they believe, is pressing on the idea that there's something nefarious that Trump did or that Putin has on Trump.
And so they are not reporting what happened in Helsinki because they're just not interested.
They're not even reporting on what's happening in the United States.
Right now, the leadership of the American media is all in for getting rid of Donald Trump, and that is the theme they report about.
Yeah.
I think some of them have bought into the conspiracy theory totally.
I think others haven't, but they just want to be part of the team.
They know that's an effective distractor, irritant.
They put enough pressure on things.
The narrative sets.
I don't know.
I think some of the media believe he's a KGB spy, FSB spy.
Some of them don't, but they just love playing along with it.
I noticed a few new opinion polls.
A Wall Street Journal opinion poll shows his approval is up.
I saw another poll that asked Americans about their priorities.
Russia wasn't even in the top 10.
Like, that's just a nutty, nutty inside the beltway media echo chamber thing.
Do you think it's going to leave a mark?
We're at almost 600 days of media mania on Russia collusion.
The midterm elections are coming up in November.
Do you think it's going to have an impact, or do you think it's going to cement Trump's narrative that you just can't trust the mainstream media?
Well, it's definitely already cemented that narrative for Trump in the minds of his supporters.
I don't think that the Russia narrative helps Democrats at all.
It probably hurts them because it encourages their far left wing to dream about impeachment, and that turns the voters off.
That doesn't mean Trump's going to have an easy time in the midterms.
I think Republicans are in trouble for a variety of reasons, one of which is their failure to pass meaningful health care reform, and Democrats are going to remind them of that.
There's also a lot of energy on the left, even though some of it's crazed, a lot of it is there, and that could motivate Democrats to go to the polls.
Even if a lot of people don't like what Democrats are saying, there could be enough that show up because they think they're going to impeach Trump that it could tip the balance.
Now, with all of that, we saw in California, which is the key area for the midterm elections, because there are seven districts in California Democrats think they can win because Hillary Clinton won those districts, but they're currently represented in Congress by Republicans.
In six out of the seven, there were more Republican voters than Democratic voters in the primary on June 5th.
So that's good for Republicans, but Democrats think they can boost their numbers, and if they can bring more voters to the polls in those seven districts, they will win them.
That puts them much closer to the total of 22 or 23 they're going to need to win a majority in the House.
If they do that, they can impeach the president.
So you're going to see a tough trench warfare kind of political fight in California, which is great for me because I'm the editor of Breitbart, California, so stay tuned.
Us Hopefully Close00:06:59
Great for you, and I look forward to your coverage of it.
Terrifying for the nation and for the world.
Joel, it's great to see you again.
Thanks for taking the time with us.
Thank you.
All right, there you have it.
Our friend Joel Pollock, senior editor-at-large at Breitbart News.
Stay with us.
more ahead of the road.
Hey, welcome back.
All my videos reporting on Tommy Robinson's appeal at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
Dawn writes, excellent reports, Ezra.
It is heartening to know that there is reason for hope, not only for our hero, Tommy, Tommy, Tommy Robinson, but by extension for the cause of freedom for Britain and the rest of the free world, if some important precedents are eventually set as a result of the court's decision.
Well, that's the thing.
I mean, I got to know Tommy in a friendly way when he worked for us for a year.
I actually had the pleasure of meeting his family, too.
They're very nice.
He doesn't even deserve them.
They're amazing.
They're great.
His wife and kids.
They're so cute.
They remind me of those Renaissance paintings of little cherubs, little seraphs, little angels.
That's important that Tommy get out of prison for himself and for his wife and his kids.
But that's not really why we got involved.
We got involved because of the cause.
Because Tommy is the last lion in the United Kingdom, the last courageous citizen journalist who is not like that BBC reporter I showed you, or the Channel 4 reporter I showed you, or the Guardian reporter I showed you, who sneer and mock and lie.
And I have to say, if Tommy were locked up, 13 months would kill a guy in solitary if the Muslim gangs don't kill him first.
That's why we helped in our small way with crowdfunding.
And thousands of rebel viewers supported Tommy's crowdfunding.
So thank you on his behalf.
Russ writes, very professional reporting, Ezra, and you did a sterling job of motivating support from the people.
Top guy, and well done for everything you've done for Tommy.
Well, Russ, thanks very much.
I was initially a little reluctant to do so because a guy leaves the company, even if it's amicable, he's not part of the team anymore.
He's got his own team in his own way.
But I just sort of thought, you know, Tommy, you know, who's going to fight?
His wife's a mum.
You know, she can't fight and either family.
They're not built for fighting like Tommy is.
We sort of know the guy.
We sort of done this for him before, so it felt like a fit.
And I'm glad we did.
It was the right thing to do.
And I can hardly wait to Tommy's out and give him a big handshake and a hug and say, good luck.
You know, we're going to put some space between us again because you're independent.
I hope we can hang out with him from time to time.
We like him from time to time.
And my one hope, though, is he stays out of prison because it's clear that the state is gunning for him and they'll find any tiny infraction and blow it up.
He's the first journalist since 1949 to be sentenced to prison.
Yeah, it doesn't shock me whatsoever, even though it was for a trifle.
Because he's Tommy Robinson and they're hunting for him.
So, you know, it's tough to communicate with Tommy.
In prison, I send emails in, and he sort of gives a message to his family.
It's very, very circuitous.
But when he gets out, I know, I'll tell you right now what I'm going to tell him.
I'm going to say, I'm glad you're out, my friend.
Stay safe physically, stay safe loyally, legally.
I'm going to say turn it down.
Just don't always go 100%.
Go 90%.
Because a 90% Tommy is still better than anything else.
And it makes it harder for them to throw me in jail.
That's what I'm going to tell them.
So you're going to sneak peek at what I'm going to tell Tommy when he's free.
By the way, I think he will be free.
Dee writes, thanks for the coverage, Rebel.
Without you guys, it would just be the fake leftist mainstream media, mainstream news.
Well, you're right.
And I just gave you three examples.
The Guardian, the BBC, and Channel 4.
I haven't even gone through The Mirror, The Sun, The Mail, The Telegraph, The Times, The Standard.
There's so many different papers there.
And weirdly, they all hate Tommy.
Even the working class papers whose readers love Tommy, all the publishers and editors hate Tommy.
And that's not just a business decision that I regard as foolish.
It is editorially and in the public interest it is a bad decision because the facts ought to be known about Tommy.
And the way he is treated sets a precedent for everyone.
And that's a dark thing.
Ted writes, excellent report says, sir, I was very concerned about your safety in the UK, but you're obviously okay.
Thank goodness.
Hopefully you can stay long enough to cover the verdict and hopefully Tommy's release.
Well, I actually, as you know, as I mentioned, I went there a day early just in case there was trouble at the border.
I thought I'm not going to risk it.
I mean, first of all, a flight can be laid a few hours anyways.
I didn't want to miss it.
But I thought there's a chance they're going to hold me at the border.
Now, thankfully, I was wrong on that.
But five other of Tommy's friends were held.
I also stayed a day later because I didn't know how long the appeal would go.
If it would go two days, and I wanted to greet Tommy when he was released.
But that decision has been delayed.
So I'm back in Canada now, as you can probably tell.
And I am still in touch with the lawyers and the family.
In fact, I was in touch with both just an hour ago.
And they promised to tell me the minute they know the date of when these three judges will return to court to issue their ruling.
And I think I'm going to go back for that because, again, I want to rebut the lies of the mainstream media.
And if Tommy's free, I want to shake his hand, give him a hug, and maybe have him say thanks to his crowdfunding supporters, aka you.
And then I'll leave him be.
I'll give the guy some space.
He'll let us do his own thing.
But until he's out, I think I want to stay on the file, don't you think?
And that mission ends only after the reporting on the verdict ends because you know that BBC are going to lie, the Guardian's going to lie, Channel 4 is going to lie, ITV's going to lie, Sky's going to lie, Guardian, all these things, they're going to lie.
They're going to lie.
Well, that's our show for today.
So anyhow, let me close by saying, the second I get the news of that verdict, I'm probably going to buy a ticket and I might even go that night, right?
So theoretically, tomorrow morning, I could get the news, the appeal is coming.
And since it's a seven-hour flight from Toronto, and you've got to buy my tickets, so I probably am going to have to leave immediately, like within hours of getting that news.
So forgive me if I go, but it's because we've got to close this story off, don't you think?
We've talked about it so much over the last month and a half.
We were there at the hearing itself.
Let's close it up.
Let's close it up.
So that's probably going to be a day, maybe two, that I'll be out of town again.
But like I said, when I was at Tommy's hearing, I did eight videos and over 150 tweets.
So hopefully I can give you enough information to make it worth your while.