David Menzies details Rebel News’ clashes with police, including Toronto’s Soleimani vigil where officers blocked terrorism questions and Vaughan’s Rogers event where he was physically restrained for interviewing Ron McClain. Kian Bexty faced assault by Jonathan Yaniv while sheriffs allegedly stood down, yet media scrutiny of white politicians like Peter MacKay—who later became a centrist target—was treated differently. Ezra Levant contrasts Tommy Robinson’s UK solitary confinement (66 days) with his World Free Press Award in Denmark’s parliament, questioning global press freedom hypocrisy amid rising state-media collusion against dissenting voices. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, why is it that certain members of law enforcement are acting as state-appointed agents of censorship?
It's January 17th, 2020.
I'm David Menzies and this is the Ezra Event 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 publisher is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Back in the days of yore when movies were called motion pictures, the on-screen narrative was typically kept very simplified so as not to confuse the audience.
Take the Western genre.
The bad guys wore black hats.
The good guys wore white.
Easy peasy.
But fast forward to 2020 and it very often feels like everyone's wearing shades of gray.
And I'm not talking movies here, folks, but rather real life.
I speak specifically of certain members of law enforcement here because a series of unfortunate events in the past two weeks in this brand new decade of ours has me scratching my cranium and it also has me asking the question, hey Constable, just whose side are you on anyway?
Oh and it's not just me.
I think my colleague Kian Bexty is equally confused and asking the very same thing because it seems that the guys who ought to be wearing the white hats, you know, the good guys, the guys who should be upholding the law, well, many have apparently traded in those chapots for the ebony-hued ones instead, at least when it comes to standing up for some of our most cherished freedoms, such as freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and of course, freedom of the press.
Simply put, folks, too many members of law enforcement have demonstrated that they are either ignorant of the law and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms when it comes to what can be said or done in the public square, or maybe it's a matter of law enforcement being infiltrated by so many woke leftists in uniforms who now side with the thugs and the creeps and the bullies,
as long as that rogues gallery is pursuing a leftist agenda.
On several occasions in the past two weeks alone, Kian and I have been shut down by the authorities.
Sometimes we were illegally assaulted by those sworn to uphold the law.
It's crazy.
Allow me to cut to the chase by way of providing examples.
For starters, earlier this month, there was a candlelight vigil held in Tehran, I mean Toronto, for the deceased Iranian general Qasim Soleimani.
This is a man with the blood of hundreds, if not thousands, on his hands.
This is a man who was, prior to his encounter with a U.S. drone, in the employ of the biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world.
I thought it was newsworthy, albeit appalling, that there were actually a few hundred people living in our great dominion who believed the loss of such an individual was something worth mourning.
But when I asked questions about the general, and keep in mind folks, this event was taking place in the public square, they called the police to step in and shut me down from practicing journalism.
Here, check it out.
Hi, man.
What brings you to this candlelight vigil?
I'm sorry, I'm not answering.
Oh, okay.
No problem.
Yes, sir.
Hi.
Would you mind coming to the other side with us, please?
I'm trying to do my job of journalism, sir, by asking questions.
I'm not breaking any laws.
We're in the public square.
I'm asking you if you'd be kind enough to come to the other side with us because we just have some people.
The light's a little bright and I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
Yeah, we just have some people expressing concerns about some of the questions and perhaps you called some of them a terrorist.
No, I didn't call anyone here a terrorist.
Absolutely not.
I've got everything on film.
No, no, no, I'm just asking you to be kind enough to just come to the other side for a few moments.
Okay, but I don't understand why I'm in a public place, sir.
Yeah, no, I'm just under.
Are we under Canadian law or Sharia law?
I'm just asking you.
And I'm politely declining because I have no obligation to do that.
So if I hear any more complaints about using the word terrorism, I'm going to be back here, okay?
So I can't call a terrorist a terrorist?
Not in this sort of environment.
No, you can't, okay?
Because that's going to incite a breach of the peace.
And that is Canadian law.
Am I clear?
If I was to call Osama bin Laden a terrorist, that would be against you, please.
Am I clear?
I know you're not clear, sir.
I can't call Osama bin Laden.
And it incites a breach of the peace, you would be placed under arrest.
Do you understand?
Terrorist?
Or what am I going to be arrested for?
What am I going to be arrested for, sir?
Breach of the peace for performing journalism.
If I hear that again, I'm going to be right back.
So I can't call Osama bin Laden a terrorist.
Is that what you're saying, officer?
Listen to me.
Okay.
Listen to me.
Was Osama bin Laden a terrorist?
Okay.
If I hear another word like that, you're coming with us.
Okay, two things.
If simple questions make certain people act violently, is it not the role of law enforcement to crack down on those individuals defaulting to the sticks and stones mode?
Or is that maybe too much heavy lifting?
But the subtext here is that, according to the Toronto Police Service, if the mob merely implies that it will act violently if and when it is asked certain queries, well then the cops must shut down the questions of a journalist, not the impending violence of the mob.
Secondly, there is the double standard at play here.
I can't call bona fide terrorists terrorists, but look at this guy's sign.
In writing, he is falsely claiming that President Trump is a terrorist.
But that's okay somehow, right?
Now, just a week after that incident, I was hoping to scrum ex-Don Cherry sidekick Ron McClain at a taping of Rogers' hometown hockey in Vaughan, Ontario.
The news peg for this hope for Q ⁇ A was that new numbers from Namaris indicate that since Coach's Corner was axed, ratings from Hockey Night in Canada have plummeted.
So I wanted to ask the suddenly woke hockey commentator slash backstabber about that.
Well, the Uber control freaks at Rogers Communications, they don't like to see their domesticated lapdog bothered by the likes of me, so they literally called the cops.
But just like the people on University Avenue in Toronto bemoaning the loss of Iran's former terrorist-in-chief, I was in the public square yet again.
I was committing no crime.
Even so, this is what unfolded.
Hey, Ron, how you doing?
Great, how are you doing?
Good, sir.
I'm just wondering, how do you feel about the ratings for Hockey Night in Canada plummeting?
Excuse me.
No, Yeah, my way.
Since Don Cherry was fired.
I wouldn't know, sir.
Excuse me.
I'm in a public place.
Ron, why did you throw Ron under the bus?
Excuse me.
I'm in a public place.
What are you doing?
What are you doing?
You just hit me.
I'm trying to get around you.
You're holding me back.
I'm trying to do my job.
No, you're not trying to do your job.
I'm in a public place.
Yes, you're not allowed to hit me like that.
I didn't hit you.
I've got on camera.
Okay.
Perfect.
Are you guys kidding me?
It's called criminal harassment.
This is assault!
It's called criminal harassment.
This is what you're doing.
This is not journalism.
Do you have a journalism pass to be here?
Yes, I do.
I have press credentials.
No, you don't.
See, that's a lie.
I'm in a public place.
What is this?
Are you guys kidding me?
No, we're not.
No, no, no.
This is a private event?
I'm on a public street officer.
You're right.
That's a private event.
He has a private sector here.
This is incredible, folks.
I got three York Regional cops.
Sorry.
Are you kidding me?
Are you kidding me?
Okay, stop, stop, stop.
Are you kidding me?
No, we're not kidding you.
We're not kidding you.
This is forcible confinement.
No, it's not forcible confinement.
It is.
You're holding me back.
I'm on a public street.
You were in his face.
You're not allowed to be in his face.
That's harassment.
This is called freedom of the press, officer.
You were in his face.
He didn't want you to be there.
He didn't say that.
Say that?
He didn't say that.
Listen, excuse me.
We are under the city.
Let go of the microphone.
What's your problem, Bal?
I don't have a problem.
Huh?
We're just trying to stop you.
We don't have the problem.
The problem lies with you, right?
Why?
Listen, I'm not talking into your microphone.
I can do that.
Listen, you can sit there and film me, but you can't show the microphone in my face.
Okay, then I'll be on my way.
No, you won't.
Not in here.
Are you kidding me?
Well, did you hear what that cop said about potentially preventing a crime from occurring?
Shades of the 2002 Tom Cruise film Minority Rapporteur.
You know, a film that depicted a near future where the pre-crimes unit arrests people based on a hunch from telepath, a hunch that these people might commit a crime.
Well, apparently, life imitates art in York Region, given that the York Regional Police has a pre-crimes unit of its own in 2020.
Scary.
But enough about me, because my colleague Kian Bexty, well, he also has been unlawfully harassed and bullied, not merely by thugs, but at the hands of the authorities.
Check out this footage of Kean trying to go to a public courthouse to cover the trial of Jonathan, aka Jessica Yaniv.
That's the humanoid that is trying to force real women to wax his sweaty balls.
But Yaniv stepped over the line when he brandished a prohibited weapon online, hence his trial.
But when Kian went to the BC court to cover it, just look what unfolded.
Jonathan, will you be pleading guilty?
Leave me alone.
Will you be pleading guilty?
Will you be pleading guilty?
Don't touch my property.
Don't touch my property.
I'm not.
Will you be pleading guilty, Jonathan?
My name is not Jonathan.
You know that.
The court registry says otherwise.
Will you be pleading guilty?
Now, this individual right here grabbed my equipment and tried to pull it down.
This individual didn't want me asking a predator questions.
I don't know why that is.
He had no right to touch me, to touch my equipment.
We were outside of the courthouse.
I was in a public space recording a public individual, someone of international significance, who's been ridiculed on the global stage.
Someone who's destroyed the reputation of the trans movement, for better or for worse, here in Canada.
I was asking very basic questions, but for some reason, the sheriffs are so keen to protect Jonathan Yaneve.
Now, I tried to get back into the courthouse, but they were not having it.
You, sir, are not coming inside.
Yeah, you know, you're not coming inside.
Can you believe it?
Sheriffs preventing a journalist from covering a trial open to the public.
But that's not their call to make.
That's the judge's call.
Oh, and it gets worse, folks.
The sheriff said they were preventing Kian from entering based on a lie.
They pointed to section 4D of the BC Sheriff's Act, citing that Kian posed a threat to the occupants of the building.
Just one not so insignificant hitch here.
There is no such thing as Section 4D of the BC Sheriff's Act.
They just pulled that falsehood out of their collective asses.
It would appear.
And oh, where, oh, where is law enforcement when Yaniv exited the courtroom and did this to Kian?
Yaniv, will you be pleading guilty?
No, don't touch me.
Don't touch me.
Stop!
Get away from me!
Go away!
Fucking hell!
Go away from me!
Jesus, get away from me!
Go away!
Fucking crazy fucking.
Stay away from me!
Get away!
Get the fuck away from me!
Stay away from me.
Get away from me!
Now!
Right now!
You heard me?
I'm calling the police on you.
I don't give a shit!
Get away from me!
You stay away from me.
I'm back.
Yes, just like when I endured five blows with a steel cane over my head and shoulders by Jonathan while Mama Yaniv repeatedly jammed her iPad into my throat back in August.
Nothing to see here, folks, when it comes to that particular assault, at least when it's perpetrated by this odious individual.
Because I guess trans people are somehow special.
And even though the assaults were caught on our cameras and security cameras, nah, Yaniv somehow automatically receives a get out of jail free card.
Way to go, BCRCMP.
Indeed, two words come to mind when I think of the Lotus Land Mounties, and those two words are Dudley Do-Wright.
Now, in case any of you think he and I are anti-cop, nothing could be further from the truth.
We are, however, anti-bad cop.
All of us should be anti-bad cop, especially given that they have the right to employ deadly force.
And as you know, folks, like the umpire behind home plate, I calls them as I sees them.
Here's an example of good police work when it comes to interacting with a journalist.
It happened last week to me in Richmond Hill, Ontario, when I went to the constituency office of Majid Johari.
He's the Liberal MP who actually supports the totalitarian regime in Tehran.
It is downright despicable, given the downing of the Ukrainian airliner that left 57 Canadians dead, that this person is still in caucus.
But that's how the Trudeau Liberals roll it would appear.
Anyway, part of the course, after I was kicked out of Johari's office, I lingered in the common area of the building.
Johari's people nevertheless called the cops on me, and this is what went down.
Hey, officer.
In The Common Area00:03:03
I'm so worried.
Are you going to film me while we're going to do this?
Oh, what are we doing, sir?
I'm just waiting for Mr. Johari.
I'm just chatting with you right now.
Obviously, we have a call from the office here.
Oh, the office called the police on me.
Yeah.
Is there a reason why you're here?
I just want to hear your side of the story.
Yes, sir.
My name is David Menzies with Rebel News.
Mr. Johari is the member of parliament for Richmond Hill.
He is someone that allegedly has ties to the Iranian regime.
He has applauded them and supported them.
And there's been recent allegations that he's actually an agent of Iran in Canada.
I'm just trying to get his side of the story and find out what he has to say about this terrible tragedy.
Three times more Canadians died on this than in 9-11, sir.
And I came here and evidently hiding behind the skirt of his office manager.
That's who she claims to be.
She wouldn't give me her name.
And so I'm out here in the common area waiting for him to come out so I can scrum him.
Okay, so just like, well, just tell anyone that, you know, he's not in the office.
Obviously, we just spoke with the chief of staff and analytics.
so in this common area it's right now we don't have the well obviously they're very emotional as you can expect right after hearing such a news Well, you know, that's the crux of the matter, officer.
They say that he's planning on going to a vigil.
Well, I'm not going to discuss the...
Oh, no, but I just think...
I just want to let you know why we're going to call it here, right?
Okay.
So I just want you to know, like, you know, give the privacy, right?
It's obviously you're in the common area for now.
We don't have the permission of the landlord yet, but I guess they're going to work something out.
And if they do, they might not want you to be here just because, you know.
So if the landlord tells me to vacate, I'll have to vacate.
Okay, I understand.
Okay.
Yeah, so just that's that's what I'm just telling you right now.
Okay.
You can film here and do what you got to do.
I really appreciate it.
I appreciate that, officer.
Thank you.
Now that, folks, that is good policing.
No threats of being arrested for breach of the peace.
No physical assaults.
No forcible confinement.
No making up regulations that don't exist.
A tip of the hat to Constable Young.
But moving forward, we obviously have a problem with certain members of law enforcement.
And to quote the band twisted sister, we're not going to take it anymore.
So we are fighting back with litigation.
We'll have more about that in the days and weeks ahead.
Because as it stands now, no one is above the law in Canada, not even the police.
Conservatives And The Media00:14:34
And last time I checked, it is not a crime to practice journalism in this great dominion.
At least, not yet.
Stay with us for more.
Well, folks, welcome back to the Ezra Levin Show.
Well, you know, Stephen Harper has been out of politics for five years now, yet the CBC just can't resist to do a drive-by smear of the ex-conservative leader.
And even when they're making things up for which they kind of took back in sort of a lame apology, I speak of that attack piece by the CBC in which they said Stephen Harper was advocating for regime change in Iran, implying a military action.
Of course, Stephen Harper says no such thing.
And of course, if we are speaking about Stephen Harper, we must talk about the Conservative Party of Canada.
A big week in terms of who announced who's in and who's out.
And I can think of no better person to pontificate on this than Andrew Lawton of True North, whose brand new podcast show just debuted this week.
Hey, Andrew, thanks for joining me on the Ezra Levent show.
And congratulations on your show, my friend.
Hey, thanks very much, David.
Good to talk to you, and happy to be here.
Well, you know, there's been so many people that are still upset that you were taken off the airwaves in London, so this is the next best thing.
I mean, that's what it comes down to these days.
They got rid of Don Cherry on Coach's Corner.
He just has a podcast now, and he's not going to get out of the ballpark there.
So they can try to shut us up, but they will not succeed in this brave new world of social media.
Now, Andrew, what did you make of this incredible story?
I thought that A, the CBC was literally trying to put words in Stephen Harper's mouth to make a story out of a non-story, that being regime change in Iran.
And let's be honest, who in their right mind wouldn't be happy to see regime change in Iran, especially given the most recent downing of that Ukrainian airlines plane that took the lives of 57 Canadians?
Yeah, and I think there's an interesting point there, David, which is that most people would accept that regime change is a positive.
The question is whether you want to be the one actively pushing for it.
And in the wake of the Iraq war and other American foreign policy for the better half or the latter half of the 20th century, regime change is very much a loaded term.
People associate it with that American neoconservatism, which may or may not be fine in your eyes, but that was not the argument that Stephen Harper was making.
He was saying a point that no one could find disagreeable, except apparently CBC, which was that if Iran is going to get over all of these other problems that we're seeing come to a head, there's going to have to be a change there.
He's making an analytical point.
He was not lining up the troops and saying, all right, everyone, let's go to war.
He was making a point that is not objectionable in most people's eyes, certainly not mine.
But to say that he was pushing for regime change, which is how that initial headline and tweet made it sound like, he was undercutting Canadian foreign policy when we know from the full context of his remarks that wasn't actually happening.
Indeed, Andrew.
And I mean, I think his point was that we can't expect to see tangible change in Iran until there's a more broad-based change in the Middle East.
Now, Andrew, for as long as you and I have been alive and even before then, let's face it, the Middle East is a rough neighborhood.
I mean, there's always tensions.
There's always fighting and terrorism linked to the Middle East.
So what Stephen Harper said was completely reasonable, I think.
And I want to ask you, since he never said the words regime change, are the journalists at CBC incapable of reading the English language?
Or is there a more nefarious agenda at play here, Andrew?
Well, I mean, there are always two options when errors are made of this nature.
There's incompetence or malice, and then every now and then malicious incompetence.
But I think what happens here is you get someone that either doesn't understand the difference, that change and regime change mean different things, or someone who doesn't understand the baggage of the term regime change, or you have someone who's actually trying to cast Stephen Harper in that sinister light that they know people will draw from that term.
I don't know who's responsible for it.
I don't know what the motivation was.
What I do know is that it's a very significant situation that we're seeing as far as Canada's relationship with Iran.
And a comment like that is not meaningless.
Were Stephen Harper to come out and make it?
Were he to come out and say, this is what we as a Canadian government, in which he is no longer a part, needs to be doing.
So it is a big mistake.
CBC walked it back, but the very nature of errors is that, you know, the big front page headline might be wrong and the correction is in a little tiny box on page 75.
It's very similar on Twitter, David, where a mistake will, or a malicious lie, whatever you want to call it, but something that is factually untrue will get dozens and dozens and dozens of comments.
The correction will get just a handful.
Yeah, and it was ever thus in the newspaper world, you're smeared on the front page, and the correction appears on C19 of the classified section, right?
Andrew, I want to ask you this.
Where is CBC, and for that matter, the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail, et cetera, et cetera, when it comes to what I think is the number one angle in terms of the Iranian situation as it pertains to Canada?
And it's something that I've been pursuing for the last several days, and that is trying to nail down Richmond Hill Liberal MP Majeed Johari, who is actually pro-regime.
We know he's pro-regime because he has tweeted out his admiration for the Mullahs in Tehran.
We know he's pro-regime too, Andrew, because I don't know if you know this or not.
In October, ex-liberal MPPs and MPs put out a mass email urging people not to vote for Majid Johari.
I've never seen such a thing.
And yet I'm the only one that's been attempting to scrum him.
I think this is an amazing story simply because he is a member of parliament in a Western democracy who is taking the side of the thugs, the Mullahs in Iran, that killed 57 of our citizens, and he's getting a free pass, whereas the CBC makes up a bunch of garbage about something Stephen Harper never said.
Can you connect the dots for me on this file?
Anytime the question has ever been raised about whether a lawmaker has dual loyalties, the immediate reaction from the left and from the media is that it's racist.
Now, look, if in any case we have evidence that someone is in bed with the Chinese regime, with radical Islamism, with the Iranian regime, I mean, these are questions that need to be explored, and more importantly, questions that need to be asked.
You know, to go back to the leaders' debates in the election that you and he and Beksi and I had to, by court order, get into to cover, I had asked a question of Jagneet Singh.
I believe it was after the French debate, or yes, it was after the French debate.
And the question was, look, you've been banned from visiting India.
Is mending that relationship going to be important if you become prime minister?
And he gave an answer that I thought was a very valid answer.
This is a guy who has refused to denounce in unequivocal terms Palestinian extremism.
So it's relevant to ask the question, and I think it's relevant to ask any leader, any lawmaker, any elected official in Canada.
And I think the mainstream media can't be shying away from that or condemning those who want to ask those questions.
Oh, indeed, Andrew.
And I say BS to anyone who dares play the racism card when it comes to criticizing Majid Johari because he's Iranian.
I live in Richmond Hill.
I've lived there for more than two decades, Andrew.
Every Persian I have met in Richmond Hill is anti-regime, except for the member of parliament for Richmond Hill.
Well, you raise a valid point, David, about how this isn't racial, because right now we are in like year 75, I think, of the Russia trial in the U.S., or what feels like that.
And the whole basis of this is that the Democrats think everyone under the sun has been in bed with the Russians.
And it's a shame the media in Canada, which is still following this Russian witch hunt, is not as interested in looking at any sort of loyalties that may lie with other regimes among Canadians.
Yeah, like I said, Andrew, it's baffling to me because if there was any other nationality on that plane, let's say there was somebody in the Ukrainian parliament that was going to bat for the regime in Tehran, I could imagine the live eyes camped outside of their house to get some kind of explanation for taking such a grotesque stance.
But in Canada, oh, well, you know what?
A person of color, different faith, nothing to see here, even though people in his own community despise him.
So it's really a double standard.
But to change gears on you, Andrew, as I mentioned in the intro, big week in the world of the Conservative Party of Canada in terms of who's in, namely Peter McKay, who's out, namely Rona Ambrose.
What is your take on those two individuals and the choices they made, as well as other players in the conservative race?
Well, I think Peter McKay has basically been sharpening his knives for this for, I mean, basically since 2004, when Stephen Harper became leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, or 2003, it would have been.
And I think that Ronna Ambrose, who I like and respect a great deal, I think she saw the writing on the wall and understood that a lot of her popularity was because she was an effective and adequate interim leader.
People looked at her and saw she was someone who wouldn't rock the boat.
She'd be a stable hand.
She was liked by everyone.
I'm not sure that appeal would transfer into a leadership race.
And I'm not sure that the media is saying, oh, why can't all conservatives be like Ronna Ambrose would transfer to if she were the leader?
Similar to Peter McKay.
Right now, Peter McKay is the media's favorite candidate.
The second he's the leader, he'll be the new Hitler.
This is what happens with conservatives, is that the media says, oh, why can't they all be like X?
And then once X is within a shot of victory, then all of a sudden they hate them like every other conservative.
I do think what's interesting, though, as I look at the candidates in the race right now, or those rumored to enter, is that there isn't thus far anyone who's going to be running to the right side of the party.
I mean, Pierre Polyevic is popular among a lot of red meat conservatives, but he made a comment, according to La Press, saying that not only would abortion legislation not come up under his leadership, he would ban his caucus from introducing even private members' bills on abortion.
So this is now a pro-choice position that mirrors that of Justin Trudeau, which is that you cannot legislate on this issue, even as a private member, even as a backbencher.
And I think this is really feeding into that idea the media has put forward that social conservatives are done.
Well, Brad Trost in the last leadership race came in fourth place.
They are a big chunk of this party, whether you like it or not.
And so far, I'm not seeing a leadership candidate that's prepared to speak to them.
You know, Andrew, you raise a very good point, and it's this.
Before we even start talking about who the next leader of the Conservative Party is, I think the discussion, especially as we head into the convention in June in Toronto, is to determine really what is the Conservative Party of Canada and what does it stand for and what are its values?
I mean, I like the Conservative Party Stephen Harper lorded over when he was prime minister.
I didn't like what I saw as the hope for regime of the Conservative Party under Andrew Scheer, which was almost liberal light.
So, you know, once, you know, the convention gets closer to fruition, how do you see this party going regardless of who the leader is?
You know, I cautioned a lot of people when the conservative, the conservative movement or parts of the conservative movement were petitioning to get rid of Andrew Scheer that they should be careful what they wish for in some respects.
And because the social conservative groups were saying, we don't like Andrew Scheer because he's not socially conservative enough.
The Red Tory groups were saying we don't like Andrew Scheer because he's too far right.
He's too socially conservative.
And I said to the SOCONS at the time, be careful because you may align with the Red Tories that Scheer is not the guy, but you're not going to win when it comes to choosing what's next if you feed into this narrative.
So the media is convinced now that Andrew Scheer lost because he was too far right.
So the incentive for any other leadership candidate is run to the middle, run to the left, because that's where the party is now.
And that's a myth, but it's only going to be reinforced by whatever comes in the ashes of the Conservative Party or whatever rises up.
And you look at Aaron O'Toole, Peter McKay.
These are guys that I think are very capable, very qualified, but they're Red Tory.
They are Red Tories, and that is going to be, I think, the flavor of the day through this leadership campaign unless someone comes in and shakes this race up.
Well, these are fascinating weeks and months ahead of us in terms of this issue, Andrew.
I will give Peter McKay this, though.
That was the greatest metaphor of all time and a hockey one at that when he talked about how essentially Andrew Scheer had a breakaway on an open net and missed.
And I think Andrew Scheer might have said, oh, but I hit the crossbar.
I got more votes than True Nawton.
So too bad it doesn't.
I don't know what any of those words mean, but I'll take you at your word that it makes sense.
And I'll take you to a hockey game one day, my friend.
Tommy Robinson's Award Ceremony00:03:54
But before we wrap, before we wrap, can you please tell our audience how they can get access to your podcast, my friend?
Yeah, thank you for that.
The Andrew Lawton Show is carried by True North.
And if you go to andrew Lawtonshow.com, A-N-D-R-E-W-L-A-W-T-O-N.com, you can get all the subscribe links.
You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, watch it on YouTube, listen online, and all of the episodes are posted as well at TrueNorth, which is tnc.news.
And I look forward to hearing from all sorts of people about what they think.
Fantastic.
Well, Andrew, thank you so much for coming on the Ezra Levant Show.
Good luck with the podcast.
Have a great weekend.
And let's keep in touch regarding some of the issues we discussed today.
Thank you again, sir.
Thank you.
And that was Andrew Lawton somewhere in southwestern Ontario.
Keep it here, folks.
More of the Ezreal event show to come right after this.
Well, folks, thank you so much for tuning in.
And thanks, of course, for putting up with me yet again.
And hey, if you're wondering where our commander, Ezra Levant, is, well, here's a short video that will give you an update on his latest mission.
Hi, David.
Thanks very much for holding the fort today on my show.
I am now in Copenhagen, Denmark.
It's very chilly here, but they love to ride bikes even in the cold in this town.
It's something I know that is easier here than in Canada with all our snow.
Anyways, the reason I'm in Denmark for just 24 hours is that Tommy Robinson has been awarded or will be awarded tomorrow the World Free Press Award as the person who's done the most in the past year to promote freedom of the press.
And I think it's true.
Not only has he done so as a journalist, but he's done so as a political prisoner.
As you know, he served 66 days in solitary confinement in the UK's harshest prison, Belmarsh Prison, for a trumped-up charge of contempt of court just for reporting outside a Muslim rape gang trial.
Anyways, the reason I'm here covering this is because I know no one else will.
No other journalists will, because it goes against their narrative.
The narrative that Tommy is just some thug or some extremist.
In the United Kingdom, he's treated as a pariah.
He's treated as a criminal.
But in other places, like Denmark, he's treated as a free speech hero.
What's even more remarkable is that the award will be handed out in Denmark's parliament in the actual parliament building tomorrow.
And the gala presentation will be MC'd or started at least by a Danish MP.
So far from being prison guards and prosecutions, the highest institutions of Denmark are saluting Tommy Robinson.
I should tell you this prize is quite prestigious.
Roger Scruton, the late British philosopher who just passed away, was a recent winner and I don't mean to brag, but about six years ago I won it for my fight against Canada's human rights commissions in publishing the Danish cartoons of Mohammed.
So I'm here to cover the awards that Tommy will receive at Parliament.
I'll be at Parliament tomorrow.
And I understand that Tommy will make a weighty acceptance speech where he'll go through, he'll make a presentation.
Put Video Up00:00:52
I'll do my best to record all that.
And I'll put this video and others up at TommyPrize.com.
And the purpose for that is to compile the videos I'll do here.
And if people want to help chip in to my economy class flight here to Copenhagen, they can do so too.
I got a last-minute airfare and an economy hotel altogether.
It's about $1,800 Canadian or just over a thousand pounds.
If folks want to chip in, they can do so there.
Anyway, it's pretty chilly here, even though there's still biking around me, as you can see, it's sort of a lovely, there's some Christmas lights.
I just want to show you Copenhagen.
It's a very pretty city.
Alas, I don't think I'll have time to do much sightseeing.