Today, well, I spend a monologue answering a question I got from a viewer.
Why are we spending so much time fighting legal battles?
Well, that's a good question.
I'll do my best to answer it.
Hey, by the way, before I do, can I invite you to become a premium subscriber of Rebel News?
Just go to RebelNews.com.
It's $8 a month or $80 for the whole year if you buy it in advance.
Less than the cost of Netflix, and you get the video version of this podcast as well as Sheila Gunn Reed's show and David Menzies' show once a week.
They're great.
So go to RebelNews.com and sign up for Rebel News Plus.
All right, here's the podcast.
Tonight, why are we involved in so many lawsuits at Rebel News?
It's July 29th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say is government.
But why?
this because it's my bloody right to do so.
Yesterday was such a busy day.
I was hunkered down with two different law firms, one of them in Alberta.
We were fighting to get access to the Alberta Legislative Press Gallery.
That is the right to go into the legislature building, ask questions of the Premier and of the opposition parties there.
The Premier in Alberta, Jason Kenney, has taken questions from Rebel News reporters before, and he's quite open to it, unlike Rachel Notley when she was NDP Premier, banning Sheila Gunn Reed, sending the sheriff.
So the problem was not that Jason Kenney or the UCP United Conservative Party government was banning us.
The problem was that rival journalists who run the Parliamentary Press Gallery, well, they banned us.
So we had a two-pronged approach.
Our Alberta lawyers was dealing with the government, with the Speaker of the House, with the Minister of Infrastructure trying to get in.
And our Toronto lawyers filed what I thought was a very creative legal threat, I suppose you could say, against the news media company that was involved in censoring us.
Tyler Dawson, the post-media journalist who runs the Alberta Legislative Press Gallery.
Well, we reminded him in a sharp letter to him and his law firm that they're violating the Competition Act, which is of concern to any cartel.
But it should be doubly concerning to post media, which made explicit promises to the Competition Bureau when they bought out their competitors five years ago that they would not engage in anti-competitive practices.
So that's what took up so much of my day yesterday.
And it was the subject for our show last night.
And we did a video today and emails.
It really consumed, I mean, dealing with two different law firms, checking the letters, da-da-da.
The day went by in a flash.
I think we got a good show out of it.
But I want to read you a letter I received.
And it made me think.
Here's a letter.
It was from Steve.
And Steve said, Ezra, what's up with your content lately?
Your network appears more interested in legal battles and fighting fines than reporting on the news.
The biggest story in the country is we, and there is barely a peep from your network.
Yet last week you devoted two shows to your activism and bragging about legal battles.
Stick to what you're good at, reporting news and calling out the liberals' corruption and hypocrisy.
Thanks.
Steve, a loyal subscriber from the beginning.
Well, I know that Steve is a loyal subscriber.
Anyone who is a subscriber and pays eight bucks a month is a friend of mine because you keep us going and you don't have to because there's so much free stuff out there for you to pay $8 a month.
I know you're a supporter.
I know that.
And those are real questions too.
Here's the letter that I wrote back directly to Steve and then I'd like to amplify that a little bit.
And the reason I'm doing this today is we're going to have a slightly shorter show today because the Independent Press Gallery created by Candace Malcolm is hosting a debate tonight for the Conservative Party Leadership Campaign.
So we're going to send our team down there and I'm going to be here.
We're going to have a show starting at 6.30 p.m. Eastern.
So it's before this actually goes to air.
And we'll be on from 7 till 9 Eastern.
You'll be able to watch it on YouTube.
So we've got a lot of cooking today and we'll put that all up on the website too.
But anyways, here's what I wrote back to Steve last night.
I said, hi, Steve.
I did my guest segment on we today on the show.
So we didn't.
I mean, Keem was on.
We talked about it.
We played some videos from the parliamentary testimony.
And we aren't just covering we, we're filing legal complaints against them at auditwe.com.
If you look through our site, we've probably done 10 we stories.
Our people like activism too.
Tonight's main show, I wrote, isn't a bragging thing, it's a defensive thing.
We were banned from the press gallery.
We didn't choose that.
It was done to us.
Fighting back is what we do when attacked.
I appreciate your support, but you know we have a mix.
One-third reporting, one-third commentary, and one-third activism, more or less.
Ezra.
P.S., we just hired a new reporter in Vancouver, and we have a prospective new reporter from Ontario trying out with us this week, too.
We'll have so much news you won't have time to do anything else.
Cheers.
And I think that's true.
I got to be candid.
You know, I'm a busy guy.
Don't tell anyone, but sometimes I don't have a chance to watch every single video we put up.
Because we've got so much stuff.
Sometimes we do 10 videos in one day.
Who's got the time?
But I take Steve's point.
What are we here?
Are we just about legal fights?
Well, I actually had our civil liberties lawyer put together a list of all the legal stuff we have on the go.
I'm not even including internal contracts or what we call pre-publication defamation review.
That's what we're about to do, a spicy story.
So we have lawyers go through it to fact check to make, I'm not even talking about that.
These are civil liberties type cases we're doing.
I want to go through this fairly quickly.
It's a big list.
And then I want to explain why we do this.
Because I get it.
It's probably tiring hearing about all the lawyering.
And it's certainly tiring hearing me say, please help, please help, please help.
That's the only way we're going to pay for these lawyers.
But let me go through it and explain one at a time why we're doing what we're doing.
I think I could whip through this in 10 minutes.
So I have 13 items on here.
The first is the Leaders Debate Commission.
Remember when Justin Trudeau banned Kean Becksty and David Menzies from covering the Leaders Debate last year, last October?
We ran to court for an emergency injunction, and we got it.
But that wasn't the only thing we went to court for.
That was just a quick band-aid.
We asked for a full judicial review of them banning us.
Not only do we want a permanent fix, we want to know what went on.
We didn't have the time to do that in a very short emergency hearing.
That battle is still raging.
We're still in court with the Trudeau Commission.
By the way, Craig Kielberger's on it.
And we're still spending money on it because we want to smoke out what really happened and change that debates commission forever.
They're still in effect, and they're still going to send to the next election debate.
Number two, an investigation by Canada's election commissioner of the Libranos.
Remember that?
Remember, I had so much fun when those two former RCMP officers grilled me for an hour about my book, and then I recorded them.
I knew no one else.
That's still going on.
I don't know if you know that.
Their investigation of my book, The Labranos, I mean, I had fun bantering with them, and we sent them that silly top-secret business plan to make a mockery of them.
Yeah, I'm laughing, but they're not laughing.
That legal investigation is continuing.
We still have that.
So, so far, you'll notice a theme here.
Trudeau's trying to censor us.
We're fighting back.
I did not choose either of those fights.
Number three, you're not even going to believe this.
Judicial review and constitutional challenge of Alberta's election advertising laws.
I don't know if you remember, but we had billboards in Alberta.
Key and Bexley put up a billboard to fire Dave Egan, the horrible education minister.
It just said fire Egan.
That's all it said.
The Alberta government started to investigate Keen.
That is still ongoing, even though Jason Kenney is the new premier and the NDP has been thrown out.
Did you know that?
I mean, I haven't talked to you about it, so maybe you don't know it.
Again, did I choose that?
Well, maybe I was getting a little rough with the billboards, but I didn't choose that legal fight.
Number four, Trudeau's daily pandemic briefings.
Remember, they kicked us out and they actually grabbed Keen by the arm and forced him out of there?
We're suing over that.
That's still ongoing.
I know I haven't talked to you about that in a couple months, but this doesn't mean it's not going on.
Okay, fight the fines.
We just had our 11th case, Tamara Ugolini, who was arrested and actually put in a jail cell for 90 minutes for daring to walk on an empty beach.
Yet we've got 11 cases under fight the fines.
Look, I felt that was important.
Now, that's something we chose to do.
It wasn't something done to us that we were being defensive.
And we've had 11 of those cases.
And frankly, it's one of the things I'm very proud of this year.
We filled the void left by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
I don't even see anyone else fighting back.
So we are absolutely doing that.
And I accept that that is a voluntary choice.
But don't you think it's, we had our first victory.
That pastor in Calgary, Arthur Pavlovsky, who was fined over $1,000 for feeding the homeless, the Crown dropped the charges because we lawyered up.
So I'm not going to be defensive about that one.
Number six, freeing the two Michaels, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.
Okay, again, that's something we chose to do.
I confess it.
But it was just staring at me.
Why isn't anyone doing anything?
And what levers do we have as private citizens?
Well, Professor David Matis, one of the best respected human rights lawyers in Canada, he said, well, let's file this complaint.
I'm proud of doing that.
And it cost us low five figures.
We still have to go to Geneva.
When the flight restrictions are done, we'll go on the cheap.
But I think that's important to do.
I don't know.
I mean, so far, I've read to you six different things.
Four of them were defensive, and two were our choice.
I don't know.
Number seven, well, this really flared up yesterday.
Fight for media accreditation with the federal and Alberta press galleries.
We lost around yesterday when Alberta vetoed us, but we're not taking that loss in stride.
We're fighting back hard.
Number eight, dispute with Amazon over their banning my book.
Again, like the press gallery stuff, I'm not looking to be censored.
I'm not looking to be banned.
It's the censorious attitude out there, and still we're quarreling with Amazon.
We're back on Amazon for now, but how long will that last?
I don't know.
Defense of rebel journalists.
We still have a David Menzies lawsuit against the York Regional Police who assaulted him to protect Ron McClain, the Judas who knifed Coach Don Cherry in the back.
Ron McClain was out in an event.
He had a bunch of cops around him.
David asked a question, the cops threw David down.
We're suing them.
We stand up for our reporters.
Police complaints regarding assaults by protesters.
You might recall that David Menzies went to Kingston, was assaulted by Antifa.
We're working with police to make sure charges are pressed, and we've had some success there.
Lawsuits against Jonathan Yanie for attacking both David and Keen.
That's ongoing.
We finished up our legal defense for Anna Slatz, who was thrown in jail in property by New York City police.
And so all of those I'm calling number, so there's four of those items under 0.9: defense of rebel journalists.
That's one, two, three, four.
I can see he's leaving one out, of course.
We have a lawsuit against the Holiday in Toronto East for attacking David Menzie.
I've got a lot of law here.
So far, I think only two of these are elective.
Dispute with Facebook over false labeling.
Facebook is labeling some of our stories false, putting warnings on them, giving us advertising strikes.
We're legally fighting with them over that too.
I'm almost done, but that's a lot of law, isn't it?
Number 11, stop deplatforming.
Remember when I had my Librano's book launch scheduled for Alberta?
I was going to have one in Calgary at the Plaza Theater and one in Edmonton at the Princess Theater, both owned by the same guy, a good guy named Mike Brar, who I've done business with before.
We've done movie launches there before, sold out houses, everything great.
Well, this time, he was bullied by leftist protesters into ripping up the contract.
So we're fighting back by suing the deplatformers under a tort called inducement of breach of contract.
That fight is still ongoing.
Number 12, providing information for Canadians about what exemptions there are to the mask laws.
And we'll have an update on that later this week at maskexemption.ca.
And finally, as I mentioned earlier in the show, we have filed formal legal complaints to the Canada Revenue Agency's Audit Department over WeCharity.
No one else has done that.
We have a few more to go in that vein.
But look, as I say, it's one thing to report the news, we do that.
It's another to comment on the news, we do that.
But sometimes, don't you want to change the news?
Fighting for Freedom00:03:46
I get it, Steve.
We talk about lawsuits all the time.
And most of the time, it's defensive.
Out of all of these cases, and I think all together, with the sub-cases and the different examples, there's almost 20 here.
That's not even including the 11 different fight to fly.
There's 25 cases here.
Almost all of them are us defending our rights to be journalists.
I have to say that if we were in a time 10 years ago or 20 years ago, most of these cases wouldn't exist.
The idea of keeping out journalists from a press gallery, keeping out journalists from a press scrum for Trudeau or the leadership debates, or fighting with Amazon for book banning, this would have been unthinkable before the current age of radical deplatforming.
So I know I talk to you a lot about lawsuits, and I'm sorry I do.
I like to fight, so I guess I'm not that sorry.
I just don't want to be pushed around.
And I know this: that every single one of these fights, yeah, either my name's on it or one of our reporters' names on it, or it was us being victimized.
But I know this, that every win we have is a precedent that will benefit everyone else.
As I said last night, when we are suing post media to knock down their decision to block us from the Alberta Press Gallery, in our own way, we're doing that for post-media's benefit too.
Because when we fight for freedom in the press for ourselves, we're fighting for everyone.
And when we're fighting the fines for those 11 cases in the pandemic, we're fighting for everyone's civil liberties.
I think this is part of the rebel.
It's sort of who we are.
It was even what we did when I was back at Sun News Network.
We got our start in, I don't know if you remember, in Nanaimo, where a local town council banned a Christian group from having a little conference in a public meeting room.
We hired a lawyer, we went to bat.
It's sort of what we do here at the Rebel.
Maybe what I'm hearing from Steve is that our balance is off a little bit.
We've got to do a bit more reporting and a bit more commentary and a bit less activism.
Well, these things come in waves.
And like I say, we're hiring more reporters.
So you'll get so much you won't know what to do with it.
But that's my attempt at a defense or at least an explanation for why we fight.
We fight because we have to.
We fight because freedom of speech is under attack and we're in the speech business.
And at the end of the day, I think we're fighting for you.
Stay with us.
of censorship.
He won't believe this next story.
We're here because we feel as though the American people have not heard from all the expertise that's out there all across our We do have some experts speaking, but there's lots and lots of experts across the country.
So some of us decided to get together.
We're America's frontline doctors.
We're here only to help American patients and the American nation heal.
We have a lot of information to share.
Americans are riveted and captured by fear at the moment.
We are not held down by the virus as much as we're being held down by the spider web of fear.
That spider web is all around us and it's constricting us and it's draining the lifeblood of the American people, American society, and American economy.
This is not, this does not make sense.
Well, that is a short excerpt from a fascinating press conference held by real doctors.
America's Frontline Doctors00:06:55
Often when you see someone wearing a white lab coat like that, it's just for show.
These are real doctors talking about a problem you could hear that is obviously a problem here in Canada too, in the United Kingdom and many countries in the West.
And one of the things they talked about was hydroxychloroquine, which has been a safe drug for use for more than 50 years, generally to combat malaria.
And it has been prescribed around the world.
In fact, we've shown you before, surveys show that doctors throughout the world prescribe hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, often in combination, to combat COVID-19.
And it is the number one recommended therapy by frontline doctors, not just in America, but in Europe and even in China, if you can trust surveys of Chinese doctors.
Well, this video was so interesting.
It was so contrary to the official narrative that at one moment yesterday, it was the most watched video on the entire Facebook platform.
Two billion people in the world have Facebook.
And this, in just a short number of hours, racked up 17 million views.
It was extremely popular.
Donald Trump Jr. retweeted the video and said, hey, take a look at this.
But very soon, strange things started to happen.
The video was deleted from almost everywhere.
Donald Trump's tweet was not only deleted, his entire account was suspended.
And Facebook not only deleted the video, but put up contrary information.
Here's a tweet.
Andy Stone of Facebook said he's not only taking it down, but Facebook was, quote, showing messages in news feed to people who have reacted to, commented on, or shared harmful COVID-19 related misinformation that we have removed.
So Facebook was engaging in some remedial therapy of their own, political therapy, for anyone who had dared to watch this video.
It's a shocking case of censorship, and it's no surprise that our friend Alam Bokhari was the lead reporter covering the censorship.
He joins us now via Skype from Breitbart's Washington Studios.
First of all, great to see you, Alam.
And I should note that this number one world record viewed video was actually posted by you guys at Breitbart.com.
Absolutely.
It got more than 17 million views on the platform before it was taken down.
At one point, we had, I think, over 185,000 concurrent viewers.
That was, you know, a record number for us.
It's a huge number of people who were clearly interested.
You know, one thing I'll point out, you know, we weren't offering any commentary on the event.
We were just covering it as a news organization.
But Facebook seems to decide what news stories are allowed and what ones aren't these days.
Yeah, that's very crazy.
I'm curious about all points of view.
I watch points of view that I don't agree with.
I even do it on purpose.
I want to know what the other side thinks.
One of our mottos here at Rebel News is telling the other side of the story.
So I'm interested in both sides of the story.
When I see a bunch of doctors standing on Capitol Hill saying, hey, can we give you a second opinion?
Well, I sort of like that about doctors having a second opinion.
That is a doctor thing to do.
These weren't quacks.
These weren't people, you know, pawning off potions or salves.
These were board-certified physicians with a different point of view.
That's all, am I right?
Absolutely.
And, you know, I'm not a medical expert.
To be honest, I haven't followed the debate over this drug very closely.
But if I wanted to get interested in the topic and do my research, I'd want to hear from as many perspectives and viewpoints as possible.
You know, scientists don't agree.
You know, as Tucker Carlson said yesterday, that's why it's science.
It evolves.
The consensus evolves over time.
Scientists disagree with each other.
They acquire new evidence and the consensus changes.
You know, at the start of this crisis, I believe the consensus was that masks don't work.
Now they're mandatory in most places.
Opinions change.
So the idea that Facebook has decided it's going to be the arbiter of truth on this very rapidly evolving pandemic, a very new pandemic, it's only been around for less than half a year.
But Facebook has decided it knows the absolute truth and it's going to shut down actual frontline doctors and shut down just the press conference, not even an endorsement of their views, just coverage of their views.
Yeah, that's crazy.
I should note, because I think it's relevant, that this press conference featured an elected congressman, Representative Ralph Norman, a Republican from South Carolina.
Again, he could be a Democrat, he could be Republican, he could be a mayor, I don't care, but he's an elected official who was having a political moment.
The fact that Facebook would think nothing of deleting, like, don't promote it, fine, but to literally delete something that is an official statement from an elected congressman because they don't think it's right, this is very dangerous.
This is, and I'm not going to call it a precedent because it's not new.
It's just the most dramatic example I've ever heard of it.
It's certainly hard to be shocked by these things at this point because Facebook and these other tech platforms have decided for a long time now that they have the ability to censor politicians and decide whose politicians' messages get out and whose don't, essentially making them the arbiters of democracy.
They have entire departments all coincidentally set up after the 2016 election entire departments dedicated to so-called election integrity.
They see themselves as the overseers of democracy, the guarantees of free and fair elections.
Obviously, it's the very progressive far-left view of free and fair elections in which only one side gets to speak.
And this is the new reality we're living in.
These big tech companies have become, I think, the biggest threat to free and fair elections in America and indeed around the world.
And it needs to be a number one issue for American citizens who want to keep their political rights and keep their democracy free and fair.
You know, the creepiest part of this, I mean, it's outrageous that this video was deleted.
I think the creepiest part is that Facebook is coming right out and saying, that's a Facebook executive, Andy Stone, am I right?
Who said not only are they removing it, but they are force-feeding anyone who interacted with it their own political point of view.
Big Tech's Democratic Threat00:10:18
So that's the tracking that's terrifying.
They know what you're watching.
If you're watching something they don't agree with, they will correct you.
It's like Clockwork Orange, where that character had his eyes held open and he was forced to watch reels of movies he didn't want to see.
They are not even hiding it anymore, are they, Alan?
Not at all.
And you know, I often think that the definition of being center-right or right-wing today is simply noticing things you're not supposed to, noticing things they don't want you to notice.
And this seems to be the entire mission of the left at the moment to control what we're allowed to see, what information we can access.
And these tech giants that have accumulated, I think, unprecedented power, unprecedented control over global information flows, more control than I think any other entity in history.
That's why they're so important for the left, why the left constantly pressures them to send some more and more information, because it's their way of stopping us from noticing things that we're not supposed to.
Yeah, it's terrifying.
I mean, there's so many, the idea that they would simply suspend the Twitter account of Donald Trump Jr. and get away with it.
Well, why don't they suspend the account of Donald Trump himself?
I mean, really, why not?
And they're already deleting the president's tweets that this is just a new normal for them.
Yeah, and I was shocked when it first happened, but then it happens again and again and again.
It becomes almost a daily occurrence.
It's how they grant they do it once, and then you're accustomed to it, and they do it again and again and again.
Yeah.
And of course, never to Democratic politicians.
That's a great point.
I mean, I myself have had my own book called China Virus censored not once but twice by Amazon.
And I don't even purport to offer any medical remedies.
I'm not giving medical advice in the book.
What's crazy is they've never actually responded to my lawyers' letters, Alan, when I say, what did we do wrong?
Because obviously it wasn't a mistake if they did it twice and gave the same excuse twice that we contradicted, quote, official sources.
They never told me what official.
Was it a World Health Organization official?
Was it a Chinese government official, a Trudeau government official?
They would never say, because really who's ever going to hold them accountable?
I've never seen any group at all hold them accountable.
I've never seen the ACLU in the States or a Canadian version.
I've never seen any legislator hold them accountable other than maybe just by writing an essay about it.
Like, I have actually never seen anyone ever hold big tech to account.
The possible exception would be in a small scale.
The lawyer Harmeet Dylan from San Francisco, who's actually helped us out from time to time.
She has occasional lawsuits against tech companies, but that's such a small scale.
There's no systemic reaction to the tightening control of Silicon Valley.
Is there any civil liberties movement or any legislature fighting back that you know of, Alan?
Well, as you say, Harmee Dylan has done groundbreaking legal work against these tech companies, and she now has a nonprofit called the Liberty Center that's doing more First Amendment and civil rights cases, the ones that get ignored by, as you say, the mainstream organizations like the ACLU.
So that's positive.
The real problem, I think, is Republicans, Republican politicians and Republican donors, they don't seem very interested in this issue.
And in fact, many Republican politicians still take money from Google and from these tech giants.
I think Republican voters need to make their voice heard.
Taking money from big tech companies for a Republican politician, that needs to be seen as unacceptable as taking money from Planned Parenthood.
Or on the left, you know, the left doesn't tolerate it when their employees take money from oil companies.
That's how it has to be with tech companies on the right, I think.
That's a great point.
There's just so much cash.
I mean, Google, Facebook, these giants are by far the biggest spenders on lobbying in Washington, D.C., and it pays off.
I want to mention that you've got a book.
We've talked about this last time on the show.
You've got a book coming up, and it's just perfectly titled, Deleted, Big Tech's Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal the Election.
Now, that book's coming out in just a few weeks in September, and thank God, because, oh my God, that's exactly what's happening here.
I want to read that title because it's just so perfect.
Deleted, big tech's battle to erase the Trump movement and steal the election.
Surely Trump knows this.
I mean, his son was just suspended.
His allies are being erased one at a time.
And yet, other than some tough talk, I see nothing from the president.
Am I wrong on that?
Is something happening behind the scenes?
I don't see anything.
Well, the problem Trump has had is that, you know, he's had the right instincts on this issue, but as in many other areas, the wall included, he's been hamstrung by this federal bureaucracy, this deep state that doesn't implement his agenda and is, in fact, bitterly opposed to his agenda.
Now, he can't, you know, avoid responsibility altogether.
He should have made more appointments earlier in his administration to clear out the deep state and bring more pressure to these tech companies.
But I think there was so much going on and so much chaos, it was probably very difficult.
Now, the executive order is a step in the right direction.
There are more good people being appointed to federal positions and positions in the administration.
Adam Kandaeb, who's been very good on Section 230 issues, recently appointed the administration to look at some of these tech issues.
So there are signs of progress in the administration, but I don't think anything will be done by the time of the next election.
And that's partly why I wrote this book, Ezra, because over the past four years, it's been increasingly obvious what the tech companies want to do.
They don't want a repeat of 2016.
All of my sources inside these companies, inside Facebook and Google and all the rest, they all say the same thing, that there was a total panic inside these companies after the 2016 election.
They all thought that they hadn't done enough to stop Donald Trump.
And all of these departments that they set up to tackle fake news and misinformation and all these other terms that conveniently emerged right after the 2016 election.
They all became staffed by the most anti-Trump people at these companies.
The mission is to suppress Donald Trump's online support.
They've banned countless prominent Trump supporters, as you know, and ultimately steal the election.
Yeah, it's happening in Canada, too.
A senior staffer from the Liberal Party's leader's office, Kevin Chan, now runs Facebook in Canada.
A senior staffer from Trudeau's personal entourage just went to Amazon.
Frankly, a week before we were banned.
I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
I hope your book is not banned.
I live in great fear of this issue because it's less than 100 days to the presidential election.
And frankly, I don't know what Trump could even do that would be sticky enough to actually work in the next 100 days.
You are going to see a propaganda campaign that Goebbels could only dream of.
Last word to you, Alam.
I think this has to be an issue that the base takes up.
And I really think the first step is taking back the Republican Party, completing the work that Donald Trump started.
We've got to expose all the Republican politicians, all the conservative think tanks and institutions that are on the take from these big tech companies.
And we've got to stop giving them money.
We've got to stop supporting them.
And, you know, if necessary, primary them.
Yeah.
Well, that's step one.
I wish we were at like step seven, eight, or nine already.
I am deathly afraid of this issue.
It was such a close call in 2016 before the internet was censored.
I mean, we had such an amazing year in 2016 because we were not censored.
Like so many websites, we were throttled shortly after his election.
If Trump, if it was such a close-fought thing in 2016, you throw in 5% or 10% to the Democrats because of this meddling, I am afraid that Trump will lose.
Hopefully my pessimism is not well put.
Alam, great to see you again.
Good luck on the book.
Please come back when it's officially out there because we'd love to interview you for that.
Thank you, Ezra.
Great to be on, as always.
All right, there you have it.
Alan Bokari, senior tech editor for Breitbart.com.
Stay with us.
More ahead.
I already read Steve's letter as my monologue tonight, but on my monologue last night on the National Post banning our reporters from the Alberta legislature, Mark writes, I stopped reading the National Post because of their blatant censorship and obvious bias towards all things LPC, Liberal Party of Canada.
Money bought the media, which means they're no longer unbiased, fair and balanced.
Well, listen, the National Post is the least worst.
Them and the Toronto Sun I like.
Doesn't change the fact that they're on Trudeau's payroll.
David writes, I regret that I don't have a National Post subscription to cancel.
Yet, what are they doing?
What are they even doing?
No journalists should be censoring other journals.
Why are they doing that?
On my interview with Kian Becksy on the We scandal, Elizabeth writes, Craig and Mark Kielberger make the back of my neck prickle every time I see them.
Always trust your initial reaction to people.
It's usually right.
You know, they really remind me of Trudeau in the manner that he speaks and their evasion.
And I think that works most of the time.
But yesterday was maybe that one in 100 times when people see right through the Teflon.
I think people see they're scammers.
I wonder who's the bigger crime family, the Trudeau's or the Kielbergers?