Ezra Levant exposes the "media party’s" 2019 Canadian election bias, comparing CBC’s relentless scrutiny of Conservative Justina McCaffrey—using a 2013 apolitical video as opposition research—to its silence on Liberal Hassan Guillet’s anti-Semitism or Trudeau’s evasive press tactics. Debates commissioner David Johnston’s exclusion of PPC leader Maxime Bernier, the only candidate tackling populist issues like global warming and open borders, underscores systemic favoritism. Levant’s coverage of Tommy Robinson’s prison release reveals double standards in media outrage, while Rebel Media’s election focus grows despite polarized backlash, proving how selective narratives shape public perception. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey Rebels, in today's podcast, I examine a few vignettes, I call them, to compare how the media party is covering the conservatives and the liberals.
I try and take similar or even identical subjects, policy announcements, controversial candidates, and show you, or even, I think, how many questions the leaders take on their campaign trips.
And I compare the media covering like with like.
So I'm comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges.
I'm trying to eliminate all the variables except for one to show you, to make my thesis, my hypothesis, that the media party is corrupt to the core.
So that's what you'll see today, or at least hear it in podcast form.
I'd love it if you saw it too, because I have video clips.
I show you tweets.
Obviously, you can't get that in a podcast, but please consider becoming a premium subscriber.
You get the video version of all these podcasts.
You know that.
And you get Sheila Gunread's show and David Menzie's show.
It's all just $8 a month or $80 for the whole year.
You can even get a discount if you type in the coupon code podcast.
And that's all at the rebel.media slash shows.
I'd appreciate the support if you did that.
All right, here's today's podcast.
You're listening to a Rebel Media Podcast.
Tonight, how is the media party covering the election so far?
I'll show you just how bad it is.
It's September 16th, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
Why should others go to jail when you're the biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I'm publishing it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Hey, can I show you a few vignettes from the past few days of election coverage?
Here's the first one.
It starts in the Liberal Party war room.
It's some opposition research into a conservative candidate from Ontario named Justina McCaffrey.
Now, six years ago, apparently, she made a video with our former employee, Faith Goldie, who was then, I think she was at the Sun News Network back then.
They were talking about the Toronto social scene and how they were a couple of girls on the town.
Here's the tweet.
Banned from Facebook for spreading online hate, yet Faith Goldie is embraced by Andrew Shears Conservatives.
Sheering Goldie spoke at the same rally this year, and today he campaigns with Justina McCaffrey, Faith Goldie's best friend.
They even pitched a TV show together, Watch.
So it's a chatty, girly TV show that McCaffrey and Goldie proposed six years ago.
And here's the devastating clip from it.
I'm only going to play 30 seconds or so.
It's all like this, I promise.
Hi, everyone.
My name is Justina McCaffrey, and I'm a wedding dress designer.
I design the most beautiful dresses in the whole wide world, and I see brides and brides come in and come out of my life.
So I have my girlfriend, Faith, who's wonderful.
We hang out, have glasses of wine, martinis.
So I just thought it might be an opportunity for you to get an idea of the show and how this all is going to play out.
It's me and my friends and my kids, and we're just out there trying to find someone for me.
Hi, my name is Faith Goldie.
I'm here to help out my friend Justina McCaffrey because we want to put together the coolest, the hottest new show on TV called A Wedding Dress for Everyone But Me, not me, her.
It goes on like that.
Of course, Faith went on to work at the Sun News Network, so she didn't do this YouTube show.
There is literally nothing in that clip about politics.
Just showing the two of them, they were friends back then.
And that's the liberal attack on the conservative candidate in 2019.
They were friends six years ago.
Pretty laughable.
But you see, you're thinking like a normal person.
I mean, I have my beefs with Faith Goldie too.
As you may recall, I fired her in 2017 for going on an unacceptable podcast run by a Neo-Nazi website.
I fired her that moment I had no idea she had done it.
But in 2013, four years before that, for doing a girly society girl kind of YouTube thing.
That's the big scandal the liberals have on a conservative candidate.
What a laugh.
But yeah, you see the media party and in particular, the CBC they take their marching orders directly from the Liberal Party.
In fact, they don't even have to take the orders, they already know what to do.
So, if you can believe it, at a campaign event in Ontario where McCaffrey and Andrew Scheer were both speaking, the CBC broke away from Scheer when he was in the middle of his speech.
I'm going to show you a clip.
You'll hear him still speaking.
To chase Justina McCaffrey into a car chase is a bit of a big word.
You can see the journalist in question here just taking a few steps, but turning it into a major scandal, huge news story.
Here's the tweet, conservative candidate Justina McCaffrey fled questions from Katie Simpson following a campaign rally with conservative leader, Andrew Scheer.
Liberal candidates posted old videos.
McCaffrey Saturday one that includes friend Faith Goldie.
Watch the video.
Thank you very much, everyone.
I think we have some questions.
From five feet away from her car and the CBC said, can we ask you some questions?
And she just got in the car.
I don't even think Justina McCaffrey ran away.
I think she was walking to the car and drove away.
But that's, that's the scandal.
That's how a video six years ago of a couple of friends that's how the liberals handled that an apolitical chat with someone six years ago say, did you see anything like that?
The breathless coverage?
Did you see Katie Simpson in an uncharacteristic sprint chasing down Justin Trudeau?
Or Hassan Guillet?
Remember that anti-semitic liberal candidate in Montreal?
I said not someone who said hello to an anti-semite six years ago, someone who is an anti-semite himself today.
I didn't see that coverage, did you?
The funniest thing?
Um, what was this tweet about Faith Goldie by David Aiken?
Um, from the Liberal Party WAR ROOM today, part one, Re-Kanata Carlton candidate Justina running against liberal Income and blah blah, blah.
He's trying to make that guilt by association thing.
I guess my old colleague, David Aiken, who works for Global NEWS, now forgot that back in 2013, he also worked with Faith Goldie.
In fact, we were all working together at the SUN NEWS Network, Guilt BY Association and so tepid so we.
Here's another comparison.
This is, I think, even more persuasive.
Take a look at this.
This is the headline for the CBC, covering a liberal announcement.
Great picture of Justin Trudeau.
Isn't that a great picture?
It's just cut and paste though, directly from the liberal press release.
Liberals promise financial incentives, lower fees, to help entrepreneurs.
What a gorgeous picture.
That is too.
Hey, I think that actually might have been word for word the liberal press release, and it might have even been a handout picture from the liberal party.
Now compare that to their identical, analogous coverage of an Andrew Scheer policy announcement.
So we're comparing apples and apples.
Not exactly a great photo, but not terrible.
And the headline is, Scheer's costly tax credit could boost public transit use, but likely not by much.
So they're covering an identical thing, a political party's policy announcement.
But with the conservative announcement, instead of reporting the news of the announcement, like they did for the liberals, the CBC goes straight to rebuttal mode.
You couldn't have a more perfect comparison.
All the elements are controlled.
All the variables are controlled.
The only thing different is liberal or conservative.
Or look at this.
Look at this.
Look how the CBC covers Andrew Scheer saying he's not going to throw out every single candidate who said something dumb on social media 10 years ago.
Here, here's the story by the CBC from Katie Simpson.
Again, she's a loyal liberal.
She wants so badly to end up in the Senate, doesn't she?
Shear will stand by candidates with racist, homophobic past comments as long as they apologize.
And look at the leader has been dogged by, being dogged by social media.
Oh, he's in defense.
So again, I asked, was that written by the Liberal War Room or the CBC newsroom?
And is there even any difference?
So that's the headline.
But is that what Scheer actually said?
Or is that what Katie Simpson loyally wrote?
Here, watch what Shear said for yourself.
Listen to this.
Look, as long as someone takes responsibility for what they say and addresses the fact that in 2019, some things that may have been said in the past are inappropriate today, that if anything that they've ever said in the past caused any type of hurt or disrespect to one community or another and have apologized for that, I accept that.
I accept the fact that people can make mistakes in the past and can own up to that and accept that.
So what the CBC headline is, is not what he said, was it?
Taking responsibility, realizing that 2019 is different.
But here's how Jagmeet Singh of the NDP was reported for saying pretty much exactly the same thing as Andrew Scheer did.
Here's a tweet from Althea Raj, who works for the foreign meddling website Huffingham Post.
But she's also a regular pundit on the CBC and is actually a leaders debate moderator.
Here's what she said.
Identical comments by Jagmeet Singh.
Re past intolerant comments from candidates.
Singh says he'll judge any potential incidents on a case-by-case basis, but he believes that people can change.
If someone apologizes and commits to changes, he could keep them.
People can grow.
This is how we build a better world.
I love you.
That last part was just perfect.
People can grow.
Hey guys, this is how we build a better world.
I wonder why they didn't pin that little comment on the end of Andrew Scheer's reporting.
But I think the most telling thing is how the media are reacting to how they're being handled by various parties.
Cochran's Deleted Gaffe00:05:09
Here's the leftist Glenn McGregor complaining that Andrew Scheer isn't allowing supplementary questions to journalists on the campaign trail.
As in, Andrew Scheer moves on to another journalist for another question instead of saying with the one reporter again and again.
Here's McGregor's tweet.
He says, Andrew Scheer's conservative campaign is restricting reporters' questions by not allowing follow-ups in some cases.
They took the mic away from me and Katie Simpson today for our second questions on his candidates.
Oh, that's just devastating.
It really were one step away from Hugo Chavez-style crackdown.
And here's another one.
This is another one.
This is from years ago, though.
You see, this is from the 2011 campaign.
Remember this horror, Stephen Harper, 2011, when he only took five questions a day?
Oh, the outrage.
How cruel he was.
How's Justin Trudeau doing?
Well, here's a government journalist for the CBC named David Cochran, not just explaining why Trudeau wasn't taking any questions.
I mean, zero.
Not any, not five, not no follow-ups, zero.
But David Cochran of the state broadcaster was promoting these as legitimate reasons, defending Trudeau to the world.
Now, I had trouble finding the original tweet that Cochrane made because he deleted it after being mocked.
But that's what we call a gaffe, someone in politics accidentally saying something that's true.
Now, David Cochrane accidentally showed who he was, a liberal spin doctor, happy to be abused by the prime minister, knowing his proper place.
But put that tweet back up for a second because Norman Specter caught a bit of it before it was deleted.
David Cochran had said, Well, you know, it's fair for Trudeau not to take our questions because they are focusing on rapid movement through writings on Saturday and Sunday.
As in, that's why Trudeau couldn't take questions for five minutes.
He was focusing on rapid movement, guys.
Come on, guys.
Stop being so mean.
It's unbelievable.
Cochrane deleted his first most embarrassing tweet, but he still couldn't help himself.
Here's what he said next.
He said, So people are asking about Trudeau not taking questions for two days, implying the media is okay with it and asking why we aren't howling with outrage.
So here's a short thread as to what's happening on the bus with us.
Yeah, you deleted what you said, mate, but here's the second.
He said, We have all reported that it's been two days with no questions, so we have been transparent and disclosed.
There are sometimes days incumbents without availabilities due to travel and time restrictions.
We want that to be the exception, not the norm.
Hey, guys, full disclosure.
We totally told you how we're being abused and disrespected by Trudeau.
So we already said it, so stop being mad.
And yeah, we're not howling with rage because, well, because why exactly?
He didn't exactly say why he's not howling with rage.
Because we all know why, because he's bought and paid for or rented might be more accurate in the case of him.
So it's so rushed, you see.
You see, Trudeau's in a real rush.
So he just can't make any time for questions, not even one.
Look, we've been transparent.
We told you that.
It was so, so, so, so gross.
Even other journalists criticized him.
Here's someone from the Globe and Mail, Janice Dixon.
But how does anyone make the travel argument when Andrew Scheer scrums until we run out of questions on his plane?
That's a good one.
Here's a journalist so close to Trudeau, she can kiss him, or in this case, praise his footwear.
Trudeau has cowboy boots on.
Hey, guys, I'm a reporter.
Trudeau has cowboy boots on, and he's got a wonderful cologne.
Maybe it's Axe Body Spray.
She's that close, she can feel his warmth.
But she couldn't quite bring herself to ask him a question other than, how come you're so dreamy?
I mean, asking a question about any of the Trudeau scandals right now, that wouldn't be friendly.
And look, there's $600 million in bailout money in the mix.
Or this one, look at this.
This is my favorite, Cormac McSweeney.
Liberal leader Justin Trudeau asked about the Leafs signing Mitch Marner.
Says he's the wrong person to ask since he's a Montreal fan.
Hey, guys.
But he wishes Toronto the best of luck.
So he likes both cities, okay?
So vote for him in both cities, okay?
That's accountability journalism in an election.
I swear to God, that was the question put to him.
Hey, do you like Toronto or Montreal better?
I like both guys.
He said he likes both.
I don't know who's going to win the election on October 21st.
I do not know.
But I think there are a lot of great contenders to win the prize for the all-time lamest media party question ever asked of Justin Trudeau.
Here's the reigning champ.
The one that the entire country wants to know.
What shampoo do you use?
What a disappointing answer this is going to be.
Justin Trudeau's Lamest Media Questions00:12:49
Whatever happens to be hanging around at the time.
Oh my God, that is so embarrassing.
If I live to 101, I will never forget the cringe in that video.
So who's going to knock Tom Clark out of his top position for cringiest question ever, ever asked of Trudeau?
I think right now, David Cochran of the CBC is in the lead.
Don't you?
Stay with us for more on this.
Welcome back.
Well, I have to tell you, the biggest media surprise of the day today for me was that the Globe and Mail, the newspaper of record for the Canadian establishment, they published an op-ed by me about the rebel and the liberal government censorship of it.
I almost couldn't believe it.
And I can only imagine how much backlash the editors have received from people who want to deplatform us.
So I'm doubly impressed.
That's a little shimmer, a little glimpse of good news.
There's other news on the campaign trail, but I think in general, the media's coverage of the campaign has been disastrous.
Joining us now for his point of view is our friend Andrew Lawton, one of the few independent journalists out there just like us.
He's with TNC.news and he joins us now vice guy bandwidth.
Great to see you again.
Likewise, and congrats on that op-ed.
Hell has indeed, as you note, frozen over.
That's right.
Well, and I was happy to refer to you in that column because you were one of the journalists who was blacklisted by Christia Freeland at that London free speech conference.
So you actually played a role in fighting for freedom.
I was only too happy to mention your name.
Yeah, and I will say on that note, because it is relevant, the Globe and Mail's reporter at that conference was one of the ones who, as you wrote about, with that little media gaggle there that said, you know what, we're not going to go along with this sham if Andrew and Sheila are not included.
So I was very grateful for that, and I'm glad that commitment to press freedom on their part has continued.
Yeah.
Well, we've talked about a little flicker of good news, and I don't regard it as good news simply because I had that column published in the Globe.
I mean, that felt good personally, but I was glad that a legacy newspaper, a media party newspaper, as I say, actually fought for free speech by giving me some space.
So it wasn't just the personal aspects.
I'm glad that anyone did it about anything but free speech.
But I think in general, the coverage of the campaign so far has been disastrously lopsided.
I've made some comparisons today.
Trudeau absolutely taking no questions at all from journalists and them saying, oh, shucks, what can you do?
Whereas when Stephen Harper limited himself to five questions a day in the last campaign, it was wall-to-wall media outrage.
They're not even pretending to be neutral anymore, are they?
Especially the CBC.
No, and the five-question rule that Harper had at the time was just so egregious and how dare he.
And he was compared to like some state-censored.
And now zero questions is somehow just, oh, it's all power for the course and it's a busy campaign.
And, you know, we'll get to them when we get to them.
And this is important because oftentimes media bias is not as brazen or as obvious as people would like to think it.
It's not as obvious as, you know, some outlets saying, you know, Justin Trudeau good, Stephen Harper bad.
It's a lot more insidious than that and oftentimes a lot more apparent in what isn't covered.
And right now, we're seeing no coverage of the process.
And the process stories were all that the media liked to write about when Stephen Harper was prime minister, about how he did this to journalists, he did this, and so on.
Yeah, you sort of write about the process stories.
You know, that one clip I showed earlier before I brought you on about Katie Simpson of the CBC literally chasing down a conservative candidate about some friendship video she did six years ago compared to their absolute obsequiousness with, for example, Hassan Guillet, the anti-Semitic candidate in Montreal.
It couldn't be more stark.
I don't know.
I guess my main question for you is you and me follow this stuff very closely.
So we're attentive and we detect these differences.
But I think most severely normal people, they're not really applying the acid test to what they get from the media party.
So if all they see is Katie Simpson chasing down someone who was obviously very bad, and then they see tweets about how cool Justin Trudeau's cowboy boots are, maybe they just, maybe if someone's not really dialed into politics, they'll say, oh, so the Conservatives are on defense, they're full of haters, and Justin Trudeau is just as stylish as ever.
So I'm worried that it's working, maybe not with people who are really, really interested in politics, but with severely normal people who have normal lives and aren't obsessing about these things.
Yeah, and I am of two minds on this.
I mean, many of your viewers may know I was a candidate in last year's provincial election in Ontario, and I was absolutely pilloried by a lot of the same people that are going after Andrew Scheer and his candidates in this round.
And what I found most interesting about it is how little of that made it through to ordinary Canadians in a lot of respects, to the people that I would meet whose doors I was knocking on.
So there is very much a media bubble mentality here where the media loves to just talk to each other on Twitter and write these stories that most Canadians aren't seeing at first.
And I say at first because eventually when it goes on long enough, people are going to start to pay attention.
Even the least engaged voters who in the last few days of the campaign start reading the news are going to see whatever is still being covered there.
So that is the caveat of this.
And what we're seeing right now is that the liberal war room is digging up, you know, some 370-year-old tweet that some candidate in Abittibi Tamiska Mang posted at the dawn of the millennium, say.
And then what's happening is that instead of this just being a Twitter sensation, every single one of these Liberal War Room tweets is transitioning into a question from a mainstream media report reporter.
It used to be that reporters would ignore the political propaganda from all sides and focus on the stories that are actual stories.
Whereas right now what the media is doing is creating none of their original reporting.
They're just asking whatever the liberal war room is tweeting about.
And that's dangerous.
Yeah.
Now, I want to tell you what I think the biggest media story of the day is.
And that is, by whatever means, and I don't quite know how, Maxime Bernier has in fact been accepted into the next all-party leaders debate.
Now, I think it was a scandal that he was kept out by Justin Trudeau's hand-picked debates commissioner, David Johnston.
But through whatever means, he's back in there.
And here's the thing.
I think that statistically speaking, it is impossible for Maxime Bernier to win this next election.
I just do not think that that is, I think that's a one in a thousand chance if that.
I think he may win his own seat.
I don't even know where a second seat to punch through would be.
I could be wrong.
But the great value, in my view, Andrew, and I like your reaction to this, of having him in those debates is that he is the only one of the party leaders who will bring the populist point of view on issues like global warming, political correctness, and open borders immigration to light.
Even Andrew Schears steers clear of those for fear of the media party.
So I don't know how many votes Maxime Bernier would peel off of the conservatives or whatever.
That's the concern on the right.
But having him there to talk about those issues, I think is cracking open the conversation in a wonderful way.
I've been a firm believer since the beginning that Maxine Bernier should be in the debates, not because I have any endorsement or support for Maxime Bernier.
I'm not supporting any party in this election, but because I think ideological diversity in these debates is important.
And I also think that it's important to acknowledge that the PPC is a player in the election.
Now, I share your assessment, Ezra, that he's not going to win.
And PPC people may not like that, but that's just not the numbers that I see right now.
However, you don't need to be able to win to be able to shape the election campaign.
And I think the Bloqué Bécois is a great example of this.
The BQ has a statistical impossibility of winning.
Even if the BQ won every single seat in which it's running a candidate, it would not win the election because it's only running candidates in Quebec.
So the reason this is important is because we've already abandoned this idea that you need to be able to form government to be in the debates.
We've determined that the Bloqué Bécois is a player.
The Green Party, we know, which gets single digits and has only ever elected two MPs and one of them was very recent, has been included in debates.
And even in 2006, before the Green Party had ever elected an MP, it had a representative in the debate, an Elizabeth May.
So if you look at the precedent on this, Maxine Bernier very much should have been included from the get-go.
I was not optimistic that the debate commission would review its position and change its position, but it did.
So I have to give credit where it's due there.
And what they've really leaned on is that the PPC gave five ridings where it feels it has the best shot at electing someone.
And the debate commission did polling for the PPC, basically, and found that there was a significant chunk of the voters in each of these ridings that would consider voting for the PPC.
And, you know, we were looking at anywhere from, I think, low 20s to low 30s of people that would consider voting for the PPC candidate in a few of these ridings.
And that's all you need to win a seat in the Canadian system when you have so many parties represented.
So all they need to do is show a good enough response in even a couple of ridings, and they'll have done as well as the Green Party ever has.
Isn't that interesting?
I think it's rather weird, pitiful, micromanagey, and too much government that a government-appointed government debate commission is doing government polls on whether or not to blackball an opponent to the government.
I think it's about five layers of gross there, but the fact that that gross system produced a free result, I think that's good news.
And I think immigration, global warming, that Greta Tunberg girl, the crazy over-the-top political correctness, I think these are things that Canadians care about just as much as the officially approved debates where you can have the entire spectrum of opinion from A to B.
I think Maxine Bernier is going to shake it up.
And I don't think it's resolved yet who he will shake votes away from.
I think one of the reasons the Greens have polled well recently is because in British Columbia, Justin Trudeau has alienated people and they're going to the Green Party as a sort of protest vote.
It could be that Maxime Bernier gets some of those former liberal votes too.
I mean, it makes sense that he would get votes from conservatives.
He used to be a conservative until a year ago.
But who knows where a populist candidate would get votes from?
It's not yet resolved that it would be only splitting Shears vote.
I'm just very interested in how it goes down, and I think it's a small blow for freedom.
Last word to you, my friend.
Well, I will say that I'm less interested in the PPC contribution to the debate specifically as much as I'm interested in pushing back against this idea of state gatekeepers of political discourse.
And, you know, whether it was Elizabeth May, whether it was Jagmeet Singh, whether it's Maxine Bernier, I don't like that idea at all of government bureaucrats deciding who Canadians have a right to hear from.
And we see a couple of private sector debates right now, the Monk debate or last week's McLean debates.
And they made the decision to exclude Maxine Bernier.
I still think it's wrong, but I have a lot less time when it's the state that's doing that because the state is telling people this is the official debate.
Tommy's Prison Break00:03:21
Yeah.
Well, very interesting days.
And I salute you and your friends at TNC.news.
We know them and we love them, whether it's Anthony Fury or Candace Malcolm.
You got a lot of good people over there and we support you and we think you're one of the good guys out there, independent journalist, not on the government payroll.
So you keep up your great election coverage.
We'll keep an eye on you and hope to have you back on.
Happy to.
Thanks a lot.
All right.
Thanks, my friend.
Well, there you have it.
Andrew Lawton not only covers Canadian politics, but you might recall he actually visited the UK with me a couple of times to cover Tommy Robinson's trial.
And actually, he was there crowdfunded on his own dime to attend the Media Freedom Conference in London.
Very, very interesting times we live in.
Stay with us.
more ahead on The Rebel.
Hey there, on my special interview with Tommy Robinson, right after he was released from prison, Paul writes, the arrest and imprisonment of Tommy is a black mark on British history and undermines the credibility of human rights groups like Amnesty International.
Great to see him out and still fighting.
All the best to Tommy and his family going forward.
Yeah, I like the fact I was right there when he walked out of prison and within two minutes, the Daily Mirror, a hard left-wing alt-left publication, was pounding him.
And he was pounding right back.
And I like that because it showed me that Tommy wasn't too screwed up after being in solitary confinement for 66 days, unlike being kept in a little box like he was in Onley prison.
So that made me feel good.
Mike writes, riveting, great interview, Ezra.
Thanks for just listening and letting Stephen unload.
Pulitzer material.
The British establishment is watching what they hope to be Ashes produce a Tommy Phoenix.
Of course, Stephen is the real name of Tommy Robinson, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon.
I was glad to be out there.
It felt meaningful to me to see him returned to freedom in one piece because he certainly was damaged physically and psychologically the last time.
I feel like rebel viewers had a role to play in that by allowing us to make four prison visits to ensure his proper treatment and then to be there when he got out.
It felt good.
Liz writes, so glad Tommy is looking so fit.
I would not want to be his mother or his wife.
His wife must be an exceptional woman to go through all this for him.
I hope he can stay safe and they don't trump up any charges to throw him back into jail.
I've had the pleasure of meeting Jenna, his wife, many times and his three lovely kids, and they are impossibly great.
And his kids, they remind me of those rosy-cheeked cherubs and all those Rubens paintings.
They're unbelievably cute kids.
And I don't know if you saw the clip of the video where Tommy was home.
The kids thought he was getting out Sunday or Monday.
He got home Friday.
Of course, we immediately took him to a McDonald's to get a quarter pounder.
Then we took him for a haircut because the kids were still at school because he got out about 10.30.
And I think his wife was working.
So then he got home and he was sitting there all cleaned up.
And his kids were coming home from Friday school.
They thought, okay, it's going to be two or three days till dad comes home.
And there he was.
And that, I mean, you had to have a heart of stone not to not to feel something when you saw those kids reunite with their dad.
Kids Expecting Early Release00:01:44
You know, there's that human side of things.
And it was, it was quite something.
So that's my report for today of our news in Canada.
I can tell you that it felt important for me to go to London for Tommy's release from prison, given that we followed it so closely these past 66 days.
But I don't expect to see myself going to the UK for many weeks because, of course, he's not in prison.
There are more legal battles that he's fighting.
And I enjoy live tweeting them.
And millions of people follow me when I do.
I mean, the last time I live tweeted Tommy's Day in Court, I think I had 6 million views of that in one day, which tells me there's an enormous demand for that.
I feel compelled to go back for any of his trials.
But I don't expect to be making any trips out there in the next month.
The focus for the Rebel is going to be our Canadian election.
I mean, we love covering things in the U.S.
We loved going to Hong Kong in the personage of Avi Yamini a few weeks ago.
It was fun to send Jessica to Greenland.
We've been covering the U.S. pretty well.
But until October 22nd, I think you, October 21st, the election, I think you will see our great focus being on the Canadian election.
I think it's our time to shine, and I think we will do it very well.
By the way, if you haven't checked it out yet, go to the Globe and Mail.
My op-ed on freedom of speech for the Rebel was so popular today.
This is sort of startling to me.
It was trending on Twitter.
I think it was the number three trending subject on Twitter in Canada that I had an op-ed in the globe.
How funny is that?
I tell you, the Rebel's on the move.
People are watching us.
They love us or hate us, but they don't ignore us.
I'm glad you're a supporter.
Thanks for being here.
Until next time, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, see you at home.