Ezra Levant exposes Justin Trudeau’s racial database, tracking "black people, Indigenous groups, and persons with disabilities" for deputy minister roles via bi-monthly updates, questioning merit-based hiring and the term "racialized" amid Toronto’s majority-minority demographics. Mark Morano links COVID lockdowns—like Victoria State’s mandates—to authoritarian control, citing financial conflicts of interest among officials and debunked mask efficacy, while Levant ties it to media bailouts and U.S. political chaos ahead of elections in 69 days. Both warn of systemic power grabs under crises, from public health to hiring policies. [Automatically generated summary]
Today I take you through a scoop from our friends at True North who revealed that Justin Trudeau is spending millions of dollars building up a racial database to inventory different minority groups.
Oh it's so gross, but I got some basic questions like, hey can you tell me who's black and who's white?
It's not as easy a question as it sounds.
That's ahead, but first let me invite you to become a subscriber to what we call Rebel News Plus.
It's $8 a month.
Your primary benefit is that you get these podcasts in video form, plus weekly shows from David Menzies and Sheila Gunread.
But a secondary benefit is that you keep us alive because we don't take a dime from Justin Trudeau.
So it's just you, mate.
It's just you.
It's $8 a month or $80 for the whole year?
That's less than Netflix.
Just go to RebelNews.com and click subscribe.
Okay, here's today's show.
Tonight, Trudeau sets up a racial database to track workers genetically.
It's August 28th 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 will want to publish just because it's my bloody right to do so.
Look at this story that our friends at True North broke the other day.
Liberals to make database of racial minorities to hire for government jobs.
The contract requires prospective service providers to identify candidates who reflect Canada's diversity and update the database at least every two months.
That's racist.
That's the dictionary definition of racism.
Judging people based on race and then discriminating based on those racist judgments.
So instead of caring about the content of someone's character, as Martin Luther King Jr. told us to do, we're supposed to care now about the color of your skin.
And you don't just care about it.
It's the basis upon which you are hired or not hired.
That's discrimination.
As Martin Luther King would tell you, thinking this way and acting this way destroys our humanity because it reduces us to our skin color.
We're no longer individual people.
What we do or say or think or how we act or whether we're smart or dumb or kind or mean, all the choices we make as people, all the moral decisions, everything we do thoughtfully, it's all irrelevant compared to an immutable characteristic that we actually had no control over our skin color.
You didn't choose your skin color.
You may have achieved amazing things or terrible things, but none of that matters.
Just show us your skin colour and we'll judge you on that.
That's your resume.
That's your job application.
Why bother even having a job interview, really?
Just send us a photograph of your skin.
No wonder they describe people as inventory in this system.
The federal The federal government is seeking a contractor to create an inventory of black people and other racial minorities that can shuffle into deputy minister and assistant deputy minister positions.
Hey, I need to stock up on Asian Canadians.
Hey, I've got too much inventory of black Canadians.
How's your inventory?
Imagine talking that way.
Imagine doing that.
A request for a proposal on the federal government's procurement and tendering website lists the proposed contract's objective as being to establish and maintain on an ongoing basis an inventory of qualified and interested black people and other racialized groups, Indigenous people, as well as persons with disabilities from outside the federal public service for the government of Canada to consider for the deputy minister and assistant deputy minister, cadre.
What does that word racialized mean?
It's a made-up word.
Does it mean visible minority?
I think the reason they invented this made-up word racialized is that in many places such as Toronto and Vancouver, visible minorities are not actually the minority anymore.
Those are majority minority cities, which is an oxymoron.
To be candid, white Canadians are a visible minority in Toronto and Vancouver, or at least in large parts of those cities.
So if you're in those cities and you're going to hire based on race, you can't very well say you're doing so to promote minorities.
You need a new word.
Now this was a great scoop by TrueNorth, so much so that the Globe and Mail, which followed the story, actually gave TrueNorth credit for it, which they hate doing.
Ottawa creating inventory of racial minorities to fill senior public service posts.
Here's the actual Trudeau posting on the government website.
It's a request for bids.
Most of it is just boilerplate rules for bidding for a government contract.
But there's a few code words like this.
Companies have to show, quote, the bidder's strategy for sourcing potential candidates that will enable it to draw on its expertise in recruiting of executives from employment equity seeking groups as defined in the Employment Equity Act.
That's fancy talk for tell us how you propose to select people based on race.
What's your racial strategy?
Or this.
The challenges the bidder might expect to encounter in conducting a search in order to develop an inventory of deputy minister and assistant deputy minister cadre candidates representing equity seeking groups as defined in the Employment Equity Act compared to typical executive searches, including how the bidder would apply an employment equity lens and determine whether their skills are suitable to be considered for any number of roles as opposed to specific roles.
That is fancy talk for what problems do you think you're going to have conducting a race-based search for people?
It's a huge government contract.
It has to be bilingual, of course.
It's going to cost millions, absolutely millions of dollars.
Hey, I've got a few dumb questions that weren't on the checklist here.
36-page request for bids.
I got some dumb questions.
What's a racialized person?
I mean, really.
I take it that means a visible minority.
So how can you tell?
I'm serious.
If you're going to give or take away rights and privileges and money and jobs based on race, you need a pretty good definition.
Hitler's Nazis actually had to make a chart about what they called mixlings.
If your father or mother was a Jew, if they were both Jewish, you were obviously considered Jewish.
If your father or mother was considered Jewish, you were considered Jewish.
But what if just one grandparent was Jewish?
Were you Jewish enough to be sent away to death camps?
They had to have rules, right?
Same thing in the United States during slavery.
There were rules about what blacks and whites could do in the law, so you had to determine how black was black.
You got all sorts of terrible ideas, and I hate to even say the words, but they invented this racial taxonomy.
Quadroon and octaroon.
Those are terrible words, which meant a quarter black or an eighth black.
That's the kind of awful science you needed to uphold racist laws.
There were some laws that had a one-drop rule.
They used words like blood quantum.
One drop of blood is in any amount at all, and you would be that minority.
By that math, by the way, Peter Laheed, the great Alberta Premier, was racialized.
He was Métis.
So would Peter Lawheed have been a visible minority or a racialized person?
How about Jews?
I'm interested in that.
Some people think Jews are white.
Some alt-right types think Jews aren't white.
Myself, I don't think being Jewish is a color.
It's a religion.
But there is a genetics to Ashkenazi Jews, European Jews.
I'm an Ashkenazi Jew.
Is that white?
I know some black Jews.
I'm guessing they count because they're black.
Hey, how about Barack Obama?
His dad was black and his mom was white, so he was 50-50.
Under the old racist laws, he would be called a mulatto.
And his dad wasn't an American black, so he wasn't a descendant of slaves.
These are terrible things to even talk about, but hey, when you're setting up a racial system, you've got to talk about it.
Should someone like Barack Obama get free stuff?
He's half black, half white, but he's not descended from slaves.
If he were under this Canadian system, would he be put in Trudeau's racial inventory?
What a terrible word.
What's the purpose behind this?
To make up for past wrongs?
The majority of racialized people in Canada either immigrated here recently or were born here in the last generation.
I mean, until about 30 years ago, Canada was overwhelmingly white.
And as you know, we abolished slavery in 1793 in Upper Canada.
We were part of the British Empire's 50-year war against the slave trade.
So I don't think we're really making up for a history of slavery as perhaps the U.S. is still grappling with after this Civil War.
So what exactly are we doing this to achieve?
If someone immigrated here in the past decade or two, what are we remedying for them?
And why is it based on race?
If we're trying to help poor people get ahead, well, statistically speaking, that would mean we would help Newfoundlanders.
But under this system, someone who immigrated, let's say, from India in the past five years, and maybe they're a millionaire, maybe they're an investor-class immigrant who came to Canada because they brought millions of dollars with them.
Such a person, though, from India, who's a millionaire, would be preferentially hired as opposed to someone who came from 10 generations of poverty in white Newfoundland.
What's our goal here again?
This whole race-based view of the world.
Why?
Is it a police thing where we're copycatting the U.S. Black Lives Matter thing?
Okay, well, what about black police chiefs?
Like Toronto's black police chief.
Was he bad or good?
Seattle's police chief was a black woman, Carmen Best.
She just resigned after Seattle's largely white city council voted to slash her pay and slash her budget as part of the defund police madness.
So she was a female black police chief.
Not a lot of female black police chiefs, but she was effectively fired by white liberals.
I can't remember if that's good or bad.
Who's the bad guy there?
Who's a good guy?
I'm having trouble keeping track of things.
It's so confusing.
And I fear that all of this is just some attempt to whitewash or blackwash.
Is that a word?
Justin Trudeau's own blackface scandal.
He's trying to cover that up or something or make up for it.
He's trying to copycat his American counterparts on the left by bringing their racial grievances into Canada where we don't really have that.
If we're hiring and firing based on race, and we're treating even wealthy and well-educated minorities as victims, but poor or uneducated white working class people as bad guys, what's our goal here again?
Other than to judge us by race and pit us against each other by race?
Why are we doing that?
Again, is there a real problem we're trying to fix here?
I don't see it.
If this starts with a job inventory of black people, white people, will it spread elsewhere, like to the court system?
Of course it will.
I mean, is it really a good idea to have reduced sentences for convicted criminals who are indigenous?
That's the law right now, based on a case called Glad You, named after a case where the court said, well, an Indigenous criminal's prison sentence had to be shortened because they're Indigenous.
Okay, I see the thinking there.
But what if the victims of Indigenous criminals are predominantly other Indigenous people, including Indigenous women?
I mean, if you're letting men who commit violent crimes get off easy in terms of sentencing, and they live on an Indian reserve, who do you think their victims are and will be again?
The other people living on the reserve.
Hey, should we keep Asian Canadians out of this?
Because they seem to be doing very well, let's say, applying to elite universities.
So Harvard and some schools in California keep out Asian Americans because they're too smart.
Should we keep out Asian Americans?
Should we keep out Jews?
Both seem to do pretty well economically and scholastically on SATs and tests like that.
Are the tests themselves racist?
Or is it racist to ban Jews and Asians?
That's what McGill did about 60 years ago.
They limited the number of Jews who could go to medical school there because Jews did too well in medical school.
Hey, is it like being trans?
Can you just say you identify as black or brown or Asian?
That's what Rachel Dolitzall did.
She actually got a job with the AAACP.
I mean, if I say I'm black and you say, no, you're not, you're white, who's the racist one there?
Is it me or is it you?
I'm confused.
I mean, I remember when we just said, look, hire the best person for the job.
Any consideration of race is, you know, racist.
Just hire the best person, man or woman, black or white, whatever.
But that was before we had Justin Trudeau to guide us.
Why The Pandemic Skeptic Was First00:11:59
Stay with us for a moment.
Welcome back.
Let me quote from Tucker Carlson, who is a Fox News Channel host, and I think one of the most influential conservative thinkers in the United States.
I think someone who truly understands the nationalism, the populism, the America firstism, and is a great communicator of it.
He said this the other day.
He said, for Dr. Tedros, that's the head of the World Health Organization.
He's not a real medical doctor, by the way, and Bill Gates, the pandemic and climate change share a very different connection.
Both are useful pretexts for mass social control.
Both are essentially unsolvable crises they can harness to bypass democracy and force powerless populations to obey their command.
I think he's nailed it.
And you'll notice that with the pandemic, which is statistically over, has been over since May, well, that doesn't mean that the government is done.
The mask bylaws all started in August, even though the matter was over in May.
Now vaccines are the next step, but now the UN is saying, well, even vaccines aren't the end of it.
This is a perpetual crisis, just like that of global warming in Jordania.
Why I skept to talk about this is someone who I think was the first pandemic skeptic I ever spoke with.
I'm talking about our friend Mark Morano, the boss of climatepot.com.
Great to see you again, Mark.
Thank you here, Ezra.
Yeah, I didn't buy this thing from the beginning.
I mean, obviously there was a virus, but the idea that lockdowns are necessary, I had known and saw firsthand what the CDC and the FDA even did when it comes to vaping.
I actually followed your own public health in Canada.
I mean, vaping, regardless of what you think it's safe or not, is clearly safer than tobacco smoke.
But both Canada and the United States heavily regulated it, used the scare of teen lung ailments to hype it, even though the teens were buying illegal black market vape devices.
So I knew going into this that the CDC was caught just outrageously lying about that.
But not only that, I followed the work of Michael Fimento for decades, and he's the one that called out the CDC and the myth of heterosexual AIDS and actually the whole AIDS alleged epidemic at the time.
Because if you look back, Fauci was one of the ones warning it was going to be spreading everywhere and it was going to be this dangerous new thing they weren't you know in the early days.
Their first instinct with the CDC is always the fear because it generates the crisis situation which gives them more power.
So I never bought into this and it's been just an insane fight, but I feel like we're losing it.
Even with President Trump, we are losing this battle.
Trump's still touting the Neil Ferguson discredited model that he saved millions of lives.
President Trump still doesn't publicly get it.
Yeah.
I think he's in a pickle because on the one hand, he wants to say, look, it was going to be this bad, but I saved you from that.
Because if he doesn't say that, the Democrats will say, oh, we had 100,000 plus, 180,000 deaths.
So I think he has to play their game to rebut their rhetoric.
But as we know from the global warming, if you grant the underlying premise, then you've lost already.
I remember our first conversation.
You were so bold.
And I wasn't because I think my misinformation came from a different place.
I was extremely skeptical of global health experts, but I probably was oversampling news from dissident voices in China.
I follow a great number of underground sources showing videos from China.
And so I saw the extreme lockdown measures there, something right out of a, or, well, now we see them in Victoria State in Australia, but I saw the extreme reaction in China.
I had just watched the HBO miniseries Chernobyl, and I saw in March and early April the death toll, even in the West, climbing daily.
And I thought, oh, my God, maybe China has millions of deaths.
And so I was dealing with Chinese misinformation, disinformation.
You were looking at it from a CDC World Health Organization point of view.
I guess your skepticism was better than my skepticism.
Well, I mean, I think we all were initially scared, especially with the propaganda coming out of China.
You know, they had video of people dropping dead in the streets.
They had people being welded into their homes.
And then you had Fauci out there just on a scare campaign.
You had, and then the entire Trump, here's a key thing here.
The entire Trump administration fell in line and gave Fauci daily briefings.
Had this been a Democratic president when this happened, I think we would have had a lot more skepticism because people, Republicans, conservatives, libertarians, people on the right would have stood up to a president who was essentially allowing the shutdown of the entire country.
And I think because it was Trump, I don't think people question it as much.
They thought, well, if even Trump's convinced, this must be bad.
So in a way, Trump, having Trump president, may have worked against us here.
And we saw that with some of the Democratic states.
You know, there's a lot of opposition in places like New York, Michigan, Pennsylvania protests.
But in Republican states, where it's obviously not as bad in terms of lockdown, you don't get those protests.
And Republican governors have been very respectful of that.
But I think the overall thing here is this was the latest crisis that public health could assert.
Now, public health has been for years as we're trying to get in on the climate scare.
In fact, the World Health Organization in 2018 said that climate change was the greatest health threat the world faced.
And this was years before COVID.
And so with that, and then with Dr. Tedros, as they say, from the World Health Organization, coming out saying COVID has now given a new impetus on the need to accelerate our response to global warming, we're now marrying the climate and the COVID issue into a totalitarian or a marriage made in authoritarianism.
And this is not good going forward.
We already have Jane Fonda.
We already have John Kerry.
We already have Al Gore all warning that global warming is going to create more viruses.
And to go to your point about Tucker Carlson's quote, these are both unsolvable crises.
We have never had a daily count for the flu, a death toll count.
But believe me, we're probably going to get that.
We're looking at, you know, the public health division is already talking about lockdown 2.0 based on what we're seeing in Victoria and New Zealand.
It's no longer flattened the curve on hospitals or deaths.
It's now no new cases are allowed.
We must be completely safe.
We have now reached a completely bizarro world, in the words of the Superman world.
So this is something that, you know, everyone has now has to wake up.
I'm against phased reopening.
To me, a phased reopening in some ways is worse than a lockdown.
The idea that government can tell you how many feet, whether you can have a mask, what businesses can open.
We have governors in America where gyms are still closed, movie theaters are still closed, where Hawaii is closing outdoor beaches again.
I mean, this based on a number of cases on a test that isn't even designed to test COVID.
So we have gone way beyond anything.
In fact, I issued a public apology just two weeks ago, Ezra, apologizing for stating that the climate scare was the greatest threat to liberty.
I now did not see it coming to this extent.
COVID viral fears are now the greatest threat.
They've supplanted climate and they're not going back anytime soon.
Climate is now a permanent second fiddle to viral fears.
I think you're so right on that.
It was interesting to watch Greta, the school strike teenager, try and retool and pivot away from global warming to the virus to make that her thing because suddenly no one cared about her, was paying attention to her.
I remember she said on Instagram, hey guys, I think I might have the virus.
Hey, it's me over here.
Now she didn't, but she like she did this bizarre tweet.
I feel like I might have it guys.
Hey, can I get some attention?
So she's trying to rebrand.
All these other types are.
Here's an advantage the virus fear has over the climate fear.
The virus fear, people see the death numbers, as you say, saw that video of that guy falling down on the street.
So they're actually afraid of it.
And so they actually will wear a mask, even if it doesn't make sense.
And they'll snitch on their neighbors for not wearing a mask.
Whereas for global warming, people would telepolister, yeah, yeah, it's deeply important to me.
But then they would get right in their car.
And you wouldn't have snitches snitching on a neighbor.
Oh, he drove his car to the corner store instead of walking.
I think because people had a palpable fear of harm imminent, which they never had with global warming.
Exactly.
And because we've turned our neighbors into the enforcers, if you don't see a mask, wear a mask.
We've turned shopkeepers into little policemen.
It's much worse than that.
But there's a similar antidote.
I found it was always very effective to show how the global warming elites lived.
They lived like they didn't believe it.
They jetted around.
They were on yachts.
They didn't live as if they were in a panic themselves.
And I think you're starting to see that around the world.
Health ministers, health officers who ban you from doing this and that.
Every one of them knows it's BS.
Every one of them is going to their summer cottage, going across state or county or provincial lines.
In the city of Brampton, Ontario, Mark, we had a mayor who shut down hockey arenas for kids, but then he was secretly playing weekly hockey games with his buddies privately in these public arenas he had shut down.
So we can tell that the bosses don't believe it, but they want us to live in fear.
Yeah, I mean, you have the public health commissioner in Pennsylvania.
There's another example of the two-facedness, took his mother out of nursing home right when they were sending the sick nursing home patients back in because they were afraid, allegedly, that the hospitals would be overrun.
You have a whole layer of hypocrisy here.
The biggest hypocrisy is we're all in this together.
Jim Kramer, CNBC business, Wall Street guy, said it best.
This is the greatest transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy in the history of our planet that he's ever seen.
Just this.
What we've seen is Walmart stock, Amazon, Facebook, all of these companies making money.
And all the people making the decisions for continued lockdowns, not a single one, not a single public health professional, not a single governor, mayor, or judge who's ruling on the constitutionality of these lockdowns are having their salary affected.
In other words, if you flip that, Ezra, how long would these lockdowns and phased reopenings have gone on if the people who were making the decisions weren't having a salary and were losing their homes and having cars repossessed and having their lives turned upside down?
They would not have gone on as long.
They're loving it.
I mean, every single one of them still got paid when the courts were shut down, the schools shut down, the DMV, the motor vehicles department shut down.
Oh, they were all getting paid.
I know government workers.
Yeah, they love it.
And if they, at worst, some of the government workers, I know federal workers, they have to go to work one week, have a week off, but they still get paid full salary.
And a lot of them now can telecommute.
They don't even have to deal with driving in.
They love it.
I know people who, Ezra, conservative Republicans who are literally saying that they love the lockdown because they don't have to commute and deal with traffic anymore.
So there's a lot of people out there who aren't looking at the bigger picture, who are looking at their own self-interest.
Viral Fears Manipulated00:04:02
And this is why viral fears are great, because if you have a health concern or you're old or you have a sick family member, you're all in because you're afraid.
And that's where they get you that climate never did.
They just, as you said, people would, oh, yeah, I'm concerned about climate, but they never would do a darn thing about it.
They never wanted to pay anything to do it.
They never wanted to make any, what's the word, sacrifices.
But with climate, they talked openly about planned recessions to fight global warming at UN summits.
We have a whole degrowth movement led by the Sierra Club and other activists.
Now, what is a lockdown but a government-mandated recession?
And now they're never going to give this up.
They're talking Robert Reich, former Clinton administration, former Obama administration.
They're talking about the next phase lockdown.
Joe Biden's talking about a federal lockdown in January if the scientists say it's necessary.
Why would it be necessary to get cases down to zero?
And there's no evidence that lockdowns work.
There's zero evidence that masks work.
Masks actually the other way.
Even in hospital settings, cases of influenza and viruses go up because people end up either calming, you know, not taking the other protocols or they touch their face.
A mask makes your face a target for your hands, which have many viruses.
So going back to the 1970s, masks studies actually show that masks aren't effective in preventing viruses.
Yet they're now mandated across the country.
Well, I find this very dangerous.
And I confess that for the first month there, I was worried.
How could you not be?
You go outside.
I would be the only person on the street in Toronto, the largest city in Canada, fourth largest city in North America.
I'd go on the street.
I wouldn't see another car.
I came to my office here one day.
Streets were empty.
There was a cop out front.
I said, what are you doing here?
I felt like I was the last, like in that TV show, The Last Man on Earth.
And I didn't know what was what.
I would put a mask on just because I didn't want other people to be scared of me because everyone was walking around scared.
And I didn't know.
And I'm talking about late March, early April, when the deaths really were climbing daily.
But they peaked in mid-April and they basically were over in May, June, July, August.
We are done.
Days pass in Toronto, the largest city in Canada, without a death.
The entire UK the other day, not one death, not one child has died from COVID in the UK.
But things are getting stricter in terms of government.
Last word to you, Mark.
They are.
In fact, they've changed the definition.
It's just like climate change.
It used to be, and if you go back, even Al Gore's first movie, you would look at polar bears, sea level temperature.
When all these things failed to cooperate, and believe me, they're not cooperating on any metric, they started going into things like, well, let's see, crime is going to go up or rape, vehicle thefts.
And they started having all these different measures of global warming because they couldn't do it.
So they've redefined COVID now to cases.
And cases are very dubious because I think it's, you know, the one case they were going to talk about, shutting down meat production in the United States.
The Tyson meat plant, of the people who tested positive based on this test, which wasn't even designed to test COVID, of the people who tested positive, 96% of those were asymptomatic, no symptoms.
4% had symptoms.
They were going to shut down American meat plants based on 4% of the people who tested positive.
Not 4% of the workers, but 4% of the workers who tested positive having symptoms.
That's how crazy this is.
So now, in the case of New Zealand, you want to look at how crazy it can get.
Shutting down an entire country, isolating people.
Same with Victoria, all because of cases, forced quarantines.
This is a very, I mean, again, the global warming people are lusting after this.
They are just drooling.
This is what they hoped for.
They never got.
So they want to join in on the COVID madness.
And frankly, they probably will successfully do so.
I'm not liking the pushback we're seeing in Washington right now, even with the Trump administration.
Newspapers On The Internet00:02:36
Well, you've changed my views on things in this interview.
You made me realize this is not a temporary battle.
This is not just, oh, 2020 was a write-off.
This is a new permanent battle.
And I believe that now.
I think you've convinced me.
And there are forces out there so large and opportunistic, and they see the enormous success they've had here that they didn't have with global warming.
I do believe that this is the greatest risk to our liberty.
And you've changed my mind.
Thank you.
Thank you, Edgar.
I appreciate it.
All right, there you have it, Mark Morano, the boss of climatepot.com.
Stay with us.
more ahead.
Hey, welcome back to my monologue last night about television and radio stations asking for handouts.
Mike writes, if the independent stations didn't have to compete with the CBC, they wouldn't need a bailout.
There's some truth to that.
You know, newspapers too, because of course, for the longest time, newspapers said, haha, we're not under any threat from the CBC.
They're just, you know, competing against TV.
Well, now everything's converged on the internet.
Newspapers on the internet, CBC's on the internet.
And so it's no surprise that newspapers have been bankrupted by the CBC too.
Ibn writes, sorry, they are businesses with a failing business model.
The government should not be involved in media.
They already have too much control with the CRTC.
Yeah, it's incredible to me that not a word in that entire Canadian Association of Broadcasters memo was about how do they actually win viewers attention back through good content.
Not a word about that.
They're not even in the audience game anymore.
They're not even in the what do our viewers care about business anymore.
They're, okay, how do we milk Trudeau?
Because he seems to be throwing billions of dollars around.
On my interview with Joel Pollack, Paul writes, the Democrats overplayed their hand.
The riots started too soon.
Yes, they own those riots, whether they like it or not.
People have had enough and are starting to turn on them, and they're fake news lackeys.
Well, I know people who are alert to fake news, like you and me are, people who hang out on Twitter and places like that are, but what about severely normal people who are too busy, you know, being moms and dads and driving their kids around to sports and going to work?
Are they alert to the fact that the Democrats really are the ones calling for these street riots?
I don't know.
We'll find out in less than 70 days.
That's it for today.
Until next time, on behalf of all of us here at Rubble World Headquarters, do you at home?