Ezra Levant’s 2019 episode exposes journalism’s decline through Jeff Sessions’ polarizing visit to Northwestern, where student reporters ignored his speech but protested it violently, later apologizing for "retraumatizing" protesters by tweeting photos. Meanwhile, Tommy Robinson’s defamation trial in London’s High Court devolved into a $580K legal fee battle, with five lawyers (and more proposed) targeting him over truthful reporting, while antifa threats escalate—highlighting how "lawfare" and institutional bias now weaponize free speech against conservatives. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey Rebels, today I tell you a story out of Illinois, Northwestern University to be precise.
It's a crazy story.
It's a fun story.
It's an American story, but I think it's a Canadian story too.
You'll be the judge of that.
Before I go, may I invite you to become a premium member of the Rebel?
Go to premium.rebelnews.com.
It's eight bucks a month.
And you get the video version of this podcast, which I think is great.
All right, here's today's show.
Tonight, I want to show you the state of journalism in 2019.
No, it's worse than you think.
It's November 14th, 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 is government know why I publish this because it's my bloody right to do so.
Do you know the name Jeff Sessions?
He used to be a U.S. Senator, really one of the first to endorse Donald Trump in the Republican primaries a few years back.
That really helped Trump.
It was a sign that someone in the establishment took him seriously and that someone with strong conservative bona fides believed Trump was a conservative.
You have to remember, back in 2015 especially, most Republicans took Trump as if not a joke, just a light-hearted, also-ran, maybe some sort of performance art, something unserious.
No one could believe that it could happen, especially in those early days.
There was what, more than a dozen candidates.
And people thought maybe he was even un-Republican.
But Jeff Sessions and his early endorsement was a significant counterpoint to that.
And Trump rewarded Sessions by appointing him Attorney General, where he served for 18 months.
He took a hard line on some issues, very conservative.
For example, Jeff Sessions really opposed so-called sanctuary cities where local politicians just declare they won't enforce immigration laws even against violent criminals.
Anyways, Sessions served.
Trump grew tired of him and sacked him.
And wouldn't you know it, now Sessions is looking to get back into the Alabama Senate.
I sort of like this campaign ad.
Jeff Sessions here, I approved this ad.
When I left President Trump's cabinet, did I write a tell-all book?
No.
Did I go on CNN and attack the president?
Nope.
Have I said a cross word about our president?
Not one time.
And I'll tell you why.
First, that would be dishonorable.
I was there to serve his agenda, not mine.
Second, the president's doing a great job for America and Alabama, and he has my strong support.
Trump is being mean to Sessions, to use a word, but I thought that was a pretty high-minded response by Sessions.
I don't know if he'll win.
I don't think he's Trump's favorite, but there it is.
Anyways, whatever you think of Jeff Sessions, he's a man of consequence.
He's former Attorney General of his own state, former U.S. Attorney.
He was a senator in Washington for a decade, then Trump's Attorney General.
Or maybe you think he's a footnote.
But the Republican Student Club at a university in Illinois called Northwestern University, they thought Sessions was interesting enough to invite to campus to give a speech.
And if you don't think so, don't go or go and protest, whatever, I don't know.
Of course, as usual, the left on campus had a freak out.
Here are some details about their reaction as published by this student newspaper called The Daily Northwestern.
Over 150 students protested the event, some holding signs and others chanting FUCK sessions.
Protesters also stormed the back entrance to Letkin and attempted to enter the hall by climbing through windows and opening doors.
University police officers followed students into Lutkin, knocking some protesters to the ground and pushing others out.
And here's the university's president, Morton Shapiro, as reported in the newspaper.
Unlike other colleges, Northwestern University PD prevented the protests from fully disrupting sessions' speech effectively, Shapiro said.
Quote, the police force showed tremendous restraint and professionalism to make sure that people couldn't rush in, he said.
I wish it could have gone better.
We have a responsibility for a speaker.
I'm not a fan of the former Attorney General, but he's not going to get hurt at my campus.
Although some universities grant amnesty to student protesters, Shapiro emphasized that Northwestern has no such policy.
He said NU makes the rules of engagement very clear.
You can protest, you can't hurt anybody, and you can't shut down speech.
And if you do, you're going to face the consequences.
I think that's much more enlightened than many other universities where they cave in to the cancelers and the deplatformers and the violent thugs.
I sort of like that guy, just based on what I read here.
Now, of course, the student government at Northwestern is as awful as you'd imagine.
Hardcore left-wing, of course, grievance mongers.
Here's a story in the Northwestern.
ASG introduces resolution following Sessions protests to support students of marginalized identities.
Let me read this from the student paper.
In response to student protests against former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions' speech at Northwestern, the Associated Student Government introduced an emergency resolution during its November 6th session to provide students with more time and resources.
The resolution, which passed 28 to 2 with two abstention votes, called on the university to reconsider attendance policies for students who hold marginalized identities and may have been impacted by the protests, the legislation states.
It also seeks to expand comprehensive counseling and the Center for Awareness, Response, and Education.
As in, if you're a minority and Jeff Sessions hurt your feelings, you get special grief counselors, a more time to do your homework, and I'm up talking all of those sentences because I'm sure that's how it was spoken of the university student government, whose graduates will go on to be part of the real student government, real government, grown-up government, soon enough.
Where do you think AOC came from?
Okay, well flavor popcorn.
This is just normal butter popcorn, but I have a secret.
I put ground pepper over my popcorn and it adds a little like savory dimension.
It just makes, you know, like pop secret, but gourmet.
Anyways, so I didn't mention that Northwestern has what is regarded as one of the United States' leading journalism schools.
It's true.
Which is why they also have a daily student newspaper.
So this isn't just a hobby or an extracurricular, this Northwestern, Daily Northwestern paper I've been quoting from.
It's training for baby journalists.
Here's one of their student reporters covering Jeff Sessions' speech, or more accurately, covering the protests outside.
Here's another one.
Protesters tried to rush the room where Sessions was speaking.
Okay, here's the report on the protests in the newspaper.
Really nothing about the speech itself.
Students protest Jeff Sessions' speech, police presence.
So let me read a little bit because it's a window into what it's like on campuses these days, and I don't think it's much better up here in Canada.
Students on Tuesday protested Northwestern College Republicans' decision to host former Attorney General Jeff Sessions chanting outside Lufkin Hall before attempting to interrupt Sessions' talk by climbing through open windows and pushing through doors.
Around 150 protesters, some holding signs reading, no con sessions, no racism, no KKK, no fascist USA, and Sessions is a traitor, gathered outside the lecture hall before Sessions was scheduled to speak at 7 p.m., booing and yelling as attendees entered the building.
Sessions' talk, hosted by NUCR, was titled The Real Meaning of the Trump Agenda.
Some protesters chanted, hey, hey, JBS, you got us into this mess.
And ICE, KKK, how many kids have you killed today?
While others called attendees clowns and urged them to stop disguising their racism as free speech.
Okay.
So they're a bit crazy, or maybe more than a little bit crazy.
And they're lying, by the way.
In fact, I think I mentioned before that Sessions was a prosecutor back in Alabama before he was a senator.
He's the one who almost 40 years ago filed civil rights charges against the KKK for killing a black man.
That bankrupted the KKK in Alabama.
So yeah, sort of the opposite of a racist, but that's too much journalism for Northwestern.
But look at this.
Look at this.
A few days after Sessions' visit, look at this editorial in the student newspaper, addressing the Daily's coverage of Sessions' protests.
Okay.
What do you have to say?
Last week, the Daily was not the paper that Northwestern students deserve.
Huh?
On November 5th, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions spoke on campus at a Northwestern University College Republicans event.
The Daily sent a reporter to cover that talk and another to cover the students protesting his invitation to campus along with a photographer.
We recognize that we contributed to the harm students experienced and we wanted to apologize for and address the mistakes that we made that night along with how we plan to move forward.
I'm sorry, I just read it.
What?
You were reporters.
You contributed to the harm.
You ran a story that was pretty much 100% in support of the protesters and against Sessions, by the way.
What on earth do you mean?
Well, I'll read some more.
One area of our reporting that harmed many students was our photo coverage of the event.
Some protesters found the photos posted to reporters' Twitter accounts retraumatizing and invasive.
Those photos have since been taken down.
Sorry, guys.
On one hand, as the paper of record for Northwestern, we want to ensure students, administrators, and alumni understand the gravity of the events that took place Tuesday night.
However, we decided to prioritize the trust and safety of students who were photographed.
We feel that covering traumatic events requires a different response than many other stories.
While our goal is to document history and spread information, nothing is more important than ensuring that our fellow students feel safe.
And in situations like this, that they are benefiting from coverage rather than being harmed actively, actively harmed by it.
We failed to do that last week, and we could not be more sorry.
Really?
You couldn't be more sorry.
This is the sorriest you could ever be in the whole world.
You know, that whole safe spaces thing, that whole triggering thing, I think that was just supposed to be a meme or like a joke or sarcasm.
It's not unsafe to take photos of protesters.
That's actually why protesters protest.
It's why people bring signs to protests and have those rhyming chants.
They want to spread a message to the public.
It's why they're in public.
But get this.
Some students also voice concern about the methods that daily staffers use to reach out to them.
Oh, okay, this has got to be really bad.
Some of our staff members who were covering the event used Northwestern's directory to obtain phone numbers for students beforehand and texted them to ask if they'd be willing to be interviewed.
Okay, so where's the bad part?
We recognize being contacted like this is an invasion of privacy, and we've spoken with those reporters along with our entire staff about the correct way to reach out to students for stories.
So don't use phones or is it don't use phone books?
So you're saying journalists politely contacting people whose names are in a public phone directory, asking nicely in advance if they would like to be interviewed.
That's actually journalism.
Now sometimes the answer to such a journalist inquiry is no, or even to say no very rudely, hell no.
Okay, well that's part of journalism too, but to apologize for that?
That's an extremely long and boring op-ed by Northwestern, the Daily Northwestern.
And I keep thinking, this is satire, right?
This is like the onion or the Babylon B or some joke.
new.
Unfortunately, the Daily Northwest, let me read some more.
Ultimately, the Daily failed to consider our impact in our reporting surrounding Jeff Sessions.
We know we hurt students that night, especially those who identify with marginalized groups.
According to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, ethical journalism treats sources, subjects, colleagues, and members of the public as human beings deserving of respect.
So you're apologizing because by telling people what happened in the world, you have hurt their feelings and they feel disrespected.
You know, maybe you did hurt their feelings.
Could be.
But if you care about that, you are in the wrong profession.
You should be in the bubble wrath business or the noise-canceling earphones business or, I don't know, social work or vacation getaways or something where people can avoid bad things.
Anything really, anything other than journalism.
Except that this is journalism by student journalists at one of the leading journalism schools in America, so they say.
And these baby reporters are all about to graduate and go work in real newspapers and radio stations and TV stations and websites around America, which is reason 14 million why you can never trust the mainstream media.
Tommy Robinson's High Court Battle00:02:29
It's just sad too.
Don't you think?
Stay with us for more.
Hello, my friends.
Ezra Levant here.
Let me check what time it is.
It's 4.08 p.m. Greenwich Mean Time, which tells you that I'm in London in the United Kingdom.
I have just stepped into a vehicle outside the Royal Courts of Justice.
at which the High Court is located and I am now driving to Heathrow.
Hopefully I'll make my flight, though with the traffic the way it is in this country, you never know.
The reason I was in London is the reason I'm usually in London, which is to cover the latest litigation involving our friend Tommy Robinson.
When I was last out here, I was actually in Luton, which is Tommy's hometown, about 45 minutes north of London, an hour north.
And that was when the police and prosecution were suing Tommy to ban him from attending any football game in the United Kingdom, or as they call it here.
They call it football, what we call in North America soccer.
I thought that was a bizarre case.
It was the Crown Prosecution Service.
It was the police.
It was literally the state deciding that Tommy Robinson was the most dangerous person because he goes to those football games and we better stop that.
You got 23,000 jihadis running around this country according to MI5A6, one of those MIs.
But Tommy Robinson going to football games was what they were prosecuting for.
That's what I was doing in Luton about a month ago.
But a couple days ago, Tommy Robinson called me up and said, Ez, I've got this civil litigation against me at the high court.
It's a defamation case where a young Syrian migrant who's a student purportedly attacked a British girl at school.
So it's a little bit bumpy, so the camera's jiggling around.
So Tommy reported on this, as he says, he took the other side of the story.
And the kid, his name is Jamal, sued Tommy for defamation.
Tommy's Defamation Case00:12:51
And that's what we were in court for today, but we weren't here for a substantive hearing.
We didn't actually get into the substance of the case.
We didn't hear any witnesses.
There was no testimony.
What it was instead was the lawyers, they talked about one of the issues regarding the witnesses for about 10 minutes, but then for about an hour and a half, the lawyers talked with each other and with the judge about their fees.
I've never seen anything like it in my life.
I'm a former lawyer myself, and of course I've been involved in litigation, both giving and receiving in North America and even in other countries, but I have never seen a thing like I saw today.
So the litigation is in its early stages.
A trial has not happened yet.
And yet there were five lawyers in the room and they were calling for more lawyers.
There was a proposal to have seven lawyers on this case.
And the lawyers were talking with each other and with a judge called the master about what their fees would be.
And they were haggling.
So it was basically Tommy and even Jamal, they really weren't the subject of the conversation today.
It was about the lawyers making sure they got well paid.
It was about 10 minutes about the case.
So we were all in this little office of this kind of a judge called a master.
And it was very small and very intimate.
It was really a big desk.
And the senior lawyers were right up against the desk across from the judge.
And then there was another row of three more lawyers and Tommy.
And then there was me, one other journalist from an alt-left news agency called Press Association, a Tommy supporter, and then a security guy.
So it was very, very small in there.
It was only less than a dozen people.
And for 90 minutes, the lawyers said, well, I want to get paid for this.
I want to get paid for that.
And he shouldn't be able to bill for this, and he shouldn't be able to bill for that.
And they were all gathered for the feast.
And it was really three lawyers talking about seven lawyers getting paid.
And when I say three lawyers, I am including the master because, of course, she's a former lawyer or is a lawyer.
It was quite something.
And the figures they were coming up with were so staggeringly large.
Like I say, I've been involved in litigation in various jurisdictions, never happy.
But there were so many numbers thrown out.
But the final number that the master approved for the plaintiffs, I don't remember it in pounds.
I converted it immediately to Canadian dollars because that's what I understand.
It was $580,000 Canadian dollars.
I tweeted it.
So forgive me if I'm not 100% accurate here.
There were so many numbers thrown out.
You can check my Twitter feed, which is twitter.com slash Ezra Levant for the exactitudes.
So more than half a million for the plaintiff's lawyers if this thing goes all the way and if they win.
I can assure you, although I shouldn't say that now because this is making me question what I thought I knew about the British legal system, that Jamal will not get that amount of money if he wins.
And I don't know if he'll win at all.
But this is a feast for lawyers.
There were five lawyers in the room and there was a suggestion that there ought to be seven lawyers at trial.
And I guess that's just how it is.
What they, the barrister, the one who argues in the court and the solicitor is the one who does the groundwork.
In Canada and the United States, there is no distinction.
You're a lawyer, just a lawyer.
You do all sorts of work.
I can see now why they have that split profession so they can have more people milking the cow.
So they can have more piggies at the trough.
And listen, I'm sure all the lawyers in the room were outstanding lawyers, but I have just never in my life seen such insane bills on both sides.
And I've never seen the money being sorted out as the first issue.
And then the legal case itself comes later.
I mean, in Canada, which I'm most familiar with, is that once a case is all done, the lawyers can then say to the judge, well, here's how it went.
We want a little bit for this and we want a little bit for that.
And typically, even the winning side gets just a fraction of what they spent, unless the behavior by the other side was so egregious, you just get partial fees.
But here, the amount of money they were getting approved in advance was staggering.
I've just never seen anything like it.
And the fact that the lawyers were all discussing this and pleading their own cases to a judge, they weren't pleading Jamal's case or Tommy's case.
The lawyers were pleading their own case, the case of how much they should get paid.
I have to tell you, I'm slightly demoralized by the whole thing and more than slightly grossed out.
And I guess that goes to what this lawsuit's really about.
The process is the punishment.
This defamation case is not about a young Syrian migrant whose reputation was harmed.
I don't believe that's what this case is about.
I believe it's about throwing anything at Tommy and seeing what'll stick.
I mean, Tommy's not a threat to the football games either, but they're prosecuting him there.
They'll throw literally anything they can at him.
And when I say they, I mean the establishment or this plaintiff's law firm.
It's just incredible.
So it was about just slightly less than a two-hour hearing today.
There was a 10 or 15-minute break where the master went through things.
The final result was her coming up with those dollar figures.
But like I say, we didn't even get into any of the substance.
We didn't get into Tommy's main objection, which is he doesn't want to turn over the identity of his witnesses to the plaintiffs because he's worried they'll be abused, threatened, etc.
So Tommy told me, and I think this video should be up at TommyTrial.com.
If not already, it should be up shortly.
I talked to Tommy before the case, and he said he's got students ready to testify, a teacher ready to testify.
He says he's got internal records from the school that all show that this kid was indeed a bully.
He's not a saint.
That's Tommy's contention.
He's pleading truth as his defense.
So we didn't get into any of that today.
For maybe 10 minutes, they talked about the fact that therefore Tommy wants his witnesses to be kept confidential from the plaintiffs, not from the judge.
The judge will obviously be able to know who they are, etc.
But he wants them kept confidential from the public and also from the plaintiff's lawyers.
And the reason for that we didn't get into today, but I know why, having talked to Tommy and seen his videos and whatnot.
The lawyers involved sent an insane antifa street thug to serve papers on Tommy at his family home and they live streamed it, thus revealing his home location.
So this wasn't that Jamal Syrian kid anymore.
It was the law firm that's against Tommy.
The law firm, instead of sending what's called a process server or a private detective or even a courier or a messenger to serve the lawsuit on Tommy, the law firm hired a madman.
You can see it on my other video at TommyTrial.com, some wild guy who threatened Tommy, threatened Tommy's wife and kids, and live streamed the visit to Tommy's confidential home location.
So Tommy, you can see why Tommy doesn't want to give the identity of these child witnesses to the law firm itself because of their abusive conduct so far.
And I understand that the law society or the benchers or whatever they call it over here in the U.S. is looking into this law firm.
I stuck around longer than I should because I was told the whole thing would only go for 90 minutes and I should have been able to make my flight, but it went 45 minutes actually later than I think the whole thing went for two hours and 15 minutes instead of 90 minutes.
And hopefully we can make up time on the road.
I've already checked in and whatnot.
So, oh, and I see just as we're here, Tommy just sent me a voice message, which I obviously can't listen to on the same phone as I'm doing this live stream.
I talked to Tommy a bit about it.
Won't get into the confidential nature of our discussions, but he obviously agrees that this is lawfare.
The process is the punishment, and they're just throwing anything at him, including the kitchen sink, seeing what'll stick.
As I say, there was only one other reporter in the room, a reporter for an extremist news agency called Press Association.
They probably wouldn't call themselves extremists.
They probably call themselves mainstream.
And maybe they are on some issues, but I've seen their misconduct on Tommy reportage.
So frankly, I don't believe a word they say.
I mean, it was a pretty bland and boring hearing.
It wasn't even a hearing today.
It was a meeting, really.
So I'm not even sure how it could be mischaracterized, but if it could, if they could find a way, I'm sure they will.
Anyways, that's my report.
I think I'll sign off because I'm going to check to see what that message from Tommy was.
It might just be him saying goodbye because I did have to leave hastily.
If there's something really newsworthy, I'll strike up another live stream and tell you.
But otherwise, let me conclude my report by saying I'm very disappointed, not in the substance of this case, which was not moved forward one inch today.
I'm very disappointed in the truth about the British legal system, where the lawyers come first.
The lawyers get paid first.
The most important thing to the lawyers is getting paid and lawyers on both sides.
And the fact that we spent really two hours and 15 minutes today making sure the lawyers got well fed.
And I'm serious, there were five lawyers in the room.
One, two, three, four, five.
And I think there was a proposal to have seven at the case.
Like, that makes no sense other than in the UK where the law is obviously run for the benefit of the lawyers, not the people.
Not for Jamal, the plaintiff.
Even if he wins, let's say if he wins.
It really isn't his case, is it?
It's his lawyer's case.
They're just going to get so rich off it.
I'm very frustrated by that, and I'm a little bit disillusioned about justice here.
And I conclude with what I said in one of my last tweets today, which is this is the price you pay in a jurisdiction with no First Amendment.
Because what Tommy said on his video would absolutely not be something subject to litigation in America.
And if someone filed a nuisance suit, it would have been thrown out right away.
But in the UK and to an extent in Canada, there's a free speech tax, and it's only paid by Conservatives, by the way.
I'm unaware of Conservatives suing liberals in nuisance suits to shut them up for political purposes, as I believe is being done to Tommy.
It's only the other way.
So that's my report.
You can see all my live tweets at Ezra Levant.
Sorry, Twitter.com/slash Ezra Levant.
I did interview Tommy for about five minutes before court.
You can find that at TommyTrial.com.
I am racing to the airport now, and I sure hope I get there on time.
No guarantee, though.
If you want to help cover the cost of my flight, I'd be very grateful if you would.
I paid about $1,400 for the flight, plus cab fare each way, and in Toronto also, altogether, it'll be just under $2,000 Canadian, which is about 1,200 British pounds.
Now that I see what lawyers charge here, I'm obviously in the wrong business.
All right, folks, that's it for today from the streets of London.
Until next time, on behalf of all of us at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home and around the world.
Racing to the Airport00:00:46
goodbye and keep fighting for freedom.
What do you think of that crazy story out at Northwestern University?
Do you really think it's any different at Canadian universities that the reporters are apologizing for causing harm and hurt to people's feelings and they're deleting things?
Of course not.
actually further gone in Canada.
We just deleted Don Cherry because he said you people, which is his catchphrase.
Yeah, it's worse up here because it's not just the student papers, it's the state broadcaster.