Jacinda Ardern’s New Zealand deployed soldiers to enforce mask laws and delayed elections, while Canada raided Melbourne protesters—including a pregnant woman arrested for a Facebook post—and fined UK activist Pierce Corbyn £10,000 for organizing a peaceful rally. Alam Bokari’s book Deleted reveals how Google, Facebook, Twitter, and others weaponized "misinformation" to suppress conservative voices globally, from Brazil to France, with Silicon Valley insiders like Obama-era officials shaping partisan censorship. Without Trump’s re-election, tech elites may face no accountability, as their legal immunities and unchecked power—once tools for free speech—now silence dissent, threatening democracy’s digital foundation. [Automatically generated summary]
Why are the Commonwealth countries, Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, doing so poorly at standing up for our civil liberties in the face of the pandemic lockdown?
I don't get it.
I'll give you some crazy examples too, including a new video out of Melbourne, Australia that will make you sick.
I wish you could see the video so you'll hear it and you'll understand it.
But seeing is believing with these home invasions.
I mean, I won't tell you what you're in for, but basically cops busting into a private house with a search warrant because someone didn't like the lockdown.
I'd like it if you could see the videos here, and you can, by becoming a premium subscriber.
It's what we call Rebel News Plus.
It's the podcast, but in video form, with all the video clips and me standing in the studio waving my arms around.
It's eight bucks a month to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
And in addition to my daily show, you get a show from Sheila Gunread and David Menzies every week, plus the satisfaction of knowing that your $8 a month helps us pay for our independent journalism.
Okay, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, why are the Commonwealth countries doing so poorly defending civil liberties?
It's September 2nd, 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.
But why publish them?
It's because it's my bloody right to do so.
We're not as free as the Americans, a country born in revolution where freedom was the central issue.
You really should read the Declaration of Independence.
I mean, this stuff.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.
I mean, if that's the recipe for dissolving an old country and building a new country, you know it's going to be good.
If you think that's good, well, you've got to read their Bill of Rights too.
First Amendment for Free Speech, Second Amendment for the Right to Bear Arms.
It's a pretty serious place when it comes to freedom, but you know, here in Canada, we're supposed to be pretty free too.
We're more passive to be sure.
Canada got our independence through negotiation and legislation, not revolution.
Same with Australia, New Zealand, pretty much the whole Commonwealth.
But you'd think we'd still have kept the best of British freedom, the Magna Carta, the evolution of British liberty as enshrined in both laws passed by Parliament, but also centuries of common law, court rulings, and then there's just the culture, the literature, the arguments.
This book, published in 1644 by John Milton, with the Greek name Areopagitica, for the liberty of unlicensed printing.
What does that mean?
350 years ago, the British Parliament wanted to pass an order that you had to have a license before you could print a book.
So it wasn't even just censorship.
It was censorship before the fact.
You couldn't even publish and then be censored.
You had to go to the government first to ask for the right to publish in advance.
How un-British.
That's what I mean by the culture of freedom.
There's laws, then there's the history, the customs, like John Milton.
For centuries, freedom was the thing in the United Kingdom and the British Empire, and they spread it around the world.
Surely we inherited enough of that.
But I point out that while there have been some absurd violations of civil liberties in the United States, such as California's satanic rules that ban churches from opening, in general, America has been pretty free.
I suppose partly it's because there are 50 different United States and governors can only be a tyrant in their territory.
And while California is unfree in part, because it's so very Democrat-dominated, both the legislatures and the courts, well, most of America is saner and has more checks and balances because it's not so lopsided to one party.
The Constitution of the United States applies across the country.
America's done pretty well, all things considered.
But what about us?
In Canada and Australia and New Zealand and the UK itself, how have we done?
We've done the worst, among the worst, not as bad as China, but terrible on the civil liberties side, I mean.
Civil Liberties Under Siege00:10:34
New Zealand, they were so proud of themselves for not having any cases of the virus.
They celebrated 100 days virus-free because they're a small island and they're fairly isolated and then they basically stopped all air travel.
And of course, because their prime minister is a woman, a socialist extremist named Jacinda Ardern, well, you had countless stories about how it was because she was a woman that New Zealand was doing so well.
I'm serious.
New York Times said that.
You know, that's obviously a scientific explanation.
Yeah, well, New Zealand cut itself off, but not 100%.
So someone did come in with the virus and it spread like wildfire to four people.
Four.
And they went into full panic, full authoritarian mode.
Oh, Jacinda Ardern was just waiting for that.
They went full crazy.
They actually postponed their parliamentary elections for a month.
They put 1,200 New Zealand soldiers on the street to enforce their mask laws.
Mandatory tracking of people too.
And listen to Ardern cackle about how she locks people up and keeps them locked up until they take some medical tests.
You said I wanted to, I've got a number of questions about people refusing.
What do we do if someone refuses to be tested?
Well, they can't now.
If someone refuses in our facilities to be tested, they have to keep staying.
So they won't be able to leave after 14 days.
They have to stay on for another 14 days.
So it's a pretty good incentive.
You either get your tests done and make sure you're cleared, or we will keep you in a facility longer.
So I think most people will look at that and say, I'll take the test.
Yeah, you can tell she was the youth president of the Socialist International.
But she's just one person in a Commonwealth democracy.
She's not a tyrant by nature.
I mean, her position isn't.
She is, but her position.
She's the prime minister in a parliamentary system that has checks and balances, that has the rule of law, that has courts, that has the opposition MPs, that has the press.
How did it happen?
You can't put it all on her.
It was the whole country that succumbed.
How?
Australia, or at least the state of Victoria in the Southeast, has gone just as nuts.
This is from a few weeks ago.
Remember this?
What the f ⁇ ?
You're f ⁇ ed in the head!
You're f ⁇ ing What on earth?
And that's in the name of public health?
Or did you see this one?
I think I showed this to you in my daytime show the other day.
Distance, please.
I'm distancing you.
Not from me.
Excuse me, don't touch me.
Excuse me, don't touch me.
Excuse me.
I've got all of that on video.
No, no, no, you're not free to go.
Please don't touch her.
Don't touch me.
You're not free to go to my hands.
I'm recording this.
She's asking you to remove her hand.
Anyone else?
Can you please stop moving closer towards me?
Can you stop moving closer towards me?
I'm not watching the ground.
Excuse me.
She has his son with her and she's done nothing wrong.
You're embarrassing.
You're embarrassing.
You are scaring a child.
Embarrassing.
You are trying to make a point.
She has done nothing illegal.
Leave her alone.
Stop it.
She has her son with her.
You're embarrassing.
Leave her alone.
Can you please not get so close to me?
I'm social distancing.
You have come within a metre and a half of me.
I've been social distancing.
Keep away from me.
You just so long you're recording her.
Let her hold her.
She has her child with her.
You are disgusting.
You are disgusting human beings.
She has her child with her.
You miss a poly.
Are you a mother?
Are you a mother?
What were they doing wrong?
It was so important to stop that you traumatised that kid for life.
And look at this new video from yesterday in Melbourne.
Yeah, you can show me your search warrant before you go through my house.
You're the occupied or television.
I own this house.
There it is.
Now it's a search warrant.
Search warrant for what?
Now, what I will explain to you is: if you want to listen, you've got your phone going.
Yeah, I do.
Yeah.
Now, you're under arrest in relation to incitement.
Incitement?
You're not obliged to say do anything, but anything you say, do may be given evidence.
Excuse me, incitement for what?
What on earth?
Excuse me, what on earth?
Just put your phone down.
Can you record this?
It might be just an ultrasound in an hour because if I have an ultrasound in an hour.
Let me finish and I'll explain.
It's in relation to a Facebook post in relation to a lockdown protest you put on for Saturday.
Yeah, and I wasn't breaking any laws by doing that.
You are, actually.
You are breaking all.
That's why I'm arresting you.
In relation to the children.
How can you arrest her?
Can't you just say to her, take the post down?
Like, come on.
I'm happy to delete the post.
This is ridiculous.
Yeah, I have to give you this caution and rights.
Do you understand?
Yeah, that's fine.
Like, I'm happy to delete the post.
This is ridiculous.
Like, I just say that.
Maybe give me the evidence.
You understand that?
Yeah, that's fine.
But my two kids are here.
I have an ultrasound in an hour.
Like, I'm happy to delete the post.
You also have the right to communicate with or to communicate with a legal practitioner.
Do you understand those rights?
Yeah, this is ridiculous.
Yeah, this is a bit unfair.
Come on, mate.
What about she just doesn't do the event?
Like, it's not like she's done it.
She made a post.
So that's an offence.
in her own house, pregnant, on her way to an ultrasound exam, police barge in search warrant, arresting her for a Facebook post for incitement.
Incitement to what?
To riot?
That's what incitement usually means.
No, in this case, it means disagreeing with the government's politics.
Here's the actual offending Facebook post.
She was promoting a lawful protest, a protest that actually complies with mask laws.
busting into her house, arresting her in front of her family.
She's pregnant.
How does that happen?
How do police go along with this?
How do judges go along with this?
Who signed the search warrant?
Who approved this?
How do the jailers take in such a woman on these charges?
How does anyone in the entire system, from the justice minister to the judges, all the way on down, from the prime minister on down?
Where are the civil libertarians?
What is happening to Australia?
How could it happen?
Without a peep, no one objected.
And in the United Kingdom, too.
Pierce Corbyn, as the name suggests, the brother of former labor leader Jeremy Corbyn, an activist in his own right, more conservative in some ways than his brother.
He was a leading global warming skeptic, and it won't surprise you now to learn he's a leading pandemic lockdown skeptic.
It's the same sort of mindset.
He organized a peaceful demonstration, not a Black Lives Matter riot.
And look at this.
He was fined 10,000 pounds.
And when he tried to crowdfund it, the crowdfunding company deleted his campaign immediately.
Why?
What's happening here?
And Australia and the UK don't have the excuse of being run by a socialist politician.
They have conservative prime ministers.
What's happening?
Yesterday I interviewed Rocco Galati about his lawsuit by his own self-description.
He's a rebel, a dissident, a gadfly, good.
I'm glad he's suing.
But really, where's everyone else?
Where are the fancy people, the establishment people, even the vultures, you know, the class action lawyers motivated by money alone?
Good.
We can use them now.
Where are the media hounds?
Lawyers motivated by publicity alone.
I mean, they are part of our legal ecosystem.
Why has everyone, the media, the courts, the culture, the professors, everyone being so silent?
Where are all the law professors?
Well, they're not just silent, they're complicit, they're obedient.
Yesterday, Nancy Pelosi was caught getting a private hair salon visit in California.
Someone leaked the closed circuit security footage of it.
No mask on, of course.
But the bigger point is this is all while hair salons across California are locked down for the little people, not for the Speaker of the House.
This was a huge scoop.
It proves the elite doesn't believe their own spin about the pandemic.
It's just a power move.
But look at this reaction.
Here's what a reporter at Politico wrote in reply.
Have to ask upon seeing this, is it legal in California, a two-party consent state, to videotape someone in a private home or business without their consent?
Is that journalism?
You don't think it's interesting that the top Democrat in Congress is breaking her own rules?
Rather, you'd like to cook up some kooky theory that even reporting on this huge news is illegal?
It's not, by the way.
But this is a reporter, not just acting as an enforcer for lockdowns and mask laws, but acting as an enforcer for a Democrat caught cheating.
That's the state of the media?
That's California, one out of 50 U.S. states.
It's bad there in California, but most Canadian provinces are worse than your average American state.
You can't even travel from Canada to the United States.
Well, you can travel in, but you can't get back without a 14-day quarantine.
It's part of Trudeau's attempt to help the Democrats hurt Trump and the American economy in the next four months to denormalize things, to destabilize Trump.
Algorithms And Bias00:15:31
I'm sure of it.
There's no medical basis for it.
I see that Canada is opening up direct flights with China again, but not with the United States in the same manner.
And as bad as Canada is, we're nothing compared to our other Five Eyes allies in New Zealand and Australia.
How is it that our freedoms in the British Commonwealth and in the UK itself withstood for centuries?
World wars, the Great Depression, a hundred other menaces, including genuinely huge pandemics like the Spanish flu 100 years ago, but that now all of a sudden we're lost it all so quickly and so stupidly.
Stay with us for more.
I know this is probably not the most joyous TGIF we have had.
You know, it's been an extraordinarily stressful time, I'm sure, for many of you.
You know, the outcome, you know, in a two-party system with a lot of polarization in the country, it's a deeply divided country, and you have a binary outcome, right?
There is no easy way through this.
It was a shock to all of us, the results of the election.
It was a fair and democratic process, and we honor that.
That was the first moment I really felt like we were going to lose.
And it was this massive, like, kick in the gut that we were going to lose, and it was really painful.
That shocking, emotional, personal display of corporate solidarity with the Democratic Party, matched with a juvenile personal, emotional rejection of the voters' will, that was a Google leadership town hall meeting the week that Donald Trump won his election in 2016.
Did you catch the language there?
They said, we, us, first person plural.
There was no separating line between Google and the Democrat campaign and Hillary Clinton.
Their loss was the same loss as Hillary Clinton's.
And ever since, for four years, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Twitter, all of them have vowed they would never again allow social media or the internet to be used by their enemies, which is their mindset towards anyone conservative.
It's one of the reasons why we here at Rebel News in Canada were demonetized.
That was one of the first moves by YouTube to demonetize conservative media.
Well, we learned about that town hall video from Alam Bokari, the senior tech correspondent at Breitbart.com.
And over the past four years, you've gotten to know Alam well.
I've said it many times.
He's the most important journalist covering tech in America these days because he focuses on tech's political goals.
And I am so delighted to say that just in the nick of time, Alam has published a new book on the subject called Deleted: Big Tech's Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal the Election.
And Alum joins us now.
Alum, great to see you again.
Thank God this book is being published.
Will it, in fact, be shipped and published by Amazon?
My own book was censored by Amazon for two months.
Do you know if this book will be censored or will it even be allowed to be published on Amazon?
Well, this is the question that all political authors have to ask themselves with big tech dominating publishing, whether it's news publishing or book publishing in so many ways.
Your book was censored.
They also censored Alex Berenson, who wrote a book critiquing the coronavirus panic.
So it's something that Amazon is doing more and more often.
So I suppose we'll see that we'll see what happens there.
It's also available, I'm happy to say, on Barnes ⁇ Noble and various other more traditional book retailers.
So if it does go down on Amazon, there will be some alternatives.
I guess we'll see what happens if they ding me for hate speech or something like that.
Maybe criticizing the tech companies is going to be redefined as hate speech soon.
Who knows?
Yeah, isn't that the truth?
And they don't even engage you in a conversation.
When they banned my own book, and I don't want to talk about my own book, but I just know that when Amazon banned my book called China Virus, they refused to give any explanation other than it contradicted, quote, official sources.
I can only imagine what they would do with your book, because at least I was criticizing China.
You are actually criticizing the tech companies themselves.
I'm worried that even your book will be censored on Facebook, on YouTube, in other places.
I mean, that certainly wouldn't be the first time that, and, you know, I have to be fair to them, I haven't seen any signs of this so far, but it wouldn't be the first time that big tech has tried to censor a Breitbart reporter.
You know, they've censored Breitbart stories before on Facebook.
It wouldn't be the first time that big tech has censored reporting that's critical of them.
I remember them censoring videos from James O'Keefe at Project Veritas exposing the tech giants.
The thing is, these tech companies, there's no law regulating them.
There's no oversight preventing them from interfering with journalism, from interfering with politics.
And this is something that's going to be a huge, huge problem in the next election, I think.
That's the whole theme of the book, the four-year plot to undermine the Trump movement and steal the election to avoid a repeat of 2016.
That's been the absolute imperative for so many people inside Silicon Valley over the past four years.
And we're going to see how that's going to impact the next election for the first time, actually, because in 2016 they were complacent.
They're not going to be complacent this time.
They're going to be using every tool in their arsenal to avoid a similar outcome.
And by the way, Estra, this doesn't just come from me.
This comes from all of my sources inside these companies that have informed the book and informed my journalism.
People inside Google, inside Facebook, inside Twitter, who've just been watching this hysteria erupt across the industry.
And of course, they're unable to say anything because if you challenge the political narratives, you'll get set upon and fired and hounded out of the company by your colleagues, much like Sir James DeMoore was when he critiqued narratives.
But all of these sources, they say the same thing, that there was a complete panic inside every single major big tech company after Trump won in 2016.
And afterwards, what happened was this outgrowth of all these new words they invented, misinformation, hate speech, fake news, conspiracy theories.
All of these words that give them plausible deniability, but have basically served as a way to ban Trump supporters from their platforms over the past four years.
Not just ban them overtly, which you can see, but also suppress them covertly in the algorithms.
Yeah.
You know, something that I think has changed since watching that tearful town hall that Google had with their senior managers and staff felt a little bit naive.
They were genuinely stunned.
Their reaction was childish, but they were stunned.
I don't think they're babes in the woods anymore.
I think they're much more aggressive and much more partisan.
For example, I note that one of Kamala Harris's senior staffers went directly from her presidential campaign to a senior censorship position at Twitter.
We see a revolving door between Justin Trudeau in Canada and tech companies, the Obama administration and the overlap with Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Netflix.
You don't know where one ends and the other begins.
I think that that kind of naivete in 2016 has been replaced with really a professional campaign political class like you would see in a super PAC.
These just aren't accidental politicians now.
They're professional politicians now.
What do you think of that?
I agree.
And even when Silicon Valley doesn't want to censor, on the rare occasions where it stands up to pressure from, say, the Democrats or from the mainstream media to censor political viewpoints, they're immediately faced with advertiser boycotts, threats from Democrats to regulate them.
And all of this just adds to the sense that they have to do something, that they have to crack down these opinions that the establishment hate.
I think recently, actually, Facebook introduced a new rule saying that if there's a regulatory, I can't remember the exact phrasing, but the general gist is if there's a potential regulatory threat to Facebook from content on its platform, it gives itself the right to remove that content.
So essentially this means that as Democrats and other politicians ramp up the threat of regulation of these companies, they'll be forced to censor even more.
And you mentioned Kamala Harris's former employee working for Twitter.
We also did a story recently at Breitbart exposing a Facebook team member who works in their misinformation department, who first of all used to work for the CIA under John Brennan and also had a Black Lives Matter banner picture on her LinkedIn profile.
So these companies are just full of left-wing Democrat partisans, especially Google, which was so deeply tied to the Obama administration.
I mean, there was essentially a revolving door between Google and the Obama White House, employees going from one to the other and back again during that whole administration.
We know Eric Schmidt worked pretty much directly for the Clinton campaign, was at Clinton's election night party, was very open about campaigning for her and trying to help her win.
While he was still at Google, by the way, he was like one of the senior people there.
So they're not even trying to conceal their sympathies at this point.
The only question is, how is the vast amount of power that they have over the control of the flow of information over everything we see online, how is that going to impact the 2020 election?
And can the Trump movement somehow win despite this vast mobilization of technological power?
We're talking with Alan Bukhari, the author of the new book, Deleted Big Tech's Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal the Election.
Alam, we recently interviewed Ryan Hartwig, who for more than a year was a contractor working for a company called Cognizant, based in Phoenix, Arizona.
I couldn't believe the statistics he told me.
He said there were 1,500 employees at the Phoenix office alone.
They were working three shifts a day, and they were censoring up to 200 posts per day each.
My math tells me that's 300,000 little acts of censorship per day just from that office.
I found it interesting that they had a specific Canadian election censorship manual, and that's what I focused on with my discussions with him.
But if they were so brazen at censoring Canadian elections, which I don't know if that's that important a deal for Facebook, I can only imagine how many contractors have been employed and tasked with censoring the American election, which is what Facebook really cares about.
You've hit on something truly terrifying, which is that these tech companies aren't simply going to interfere in the election in America, but they can now interfere in elections all around the world.
These are global companies.
They also interfered in the Brazilian election, targeting WhatsApp groups that supported Brazil's President Bolsonaro.
Obviously, Facebook owns WhatsApp.
Facebook also banned thousands of Le Pen supporters before the French elections.
I believe they've targeted populace in Italy as well.
This is all around the world that this is happening.
And by the way, one of their senior people at Facebook is Nick Clegg, who was pretty open about wanting to overturn the result of the Brexit referendum in Britain.
He was the leader of the most pro-Brexit party in the country.
Facebook's also advised by the Atlantic Council, which is essentially a neocon globalist think tank filled with people who spent their entire careers interfering in other countries.
And again, there's no oversight stopping them from interfering in elections.
Yeah.
I think the scariest thing I heard from that censor contractor was that these 300,000 censorship actions per day were training the AI, the artificial intelligence.
So what they did for a few years, those millions, maybe a billion acts of censorship, they were teaching the computer how to automatically censor.
I find that the scariest.
Tell me a few things.
I mean, you and I have just been bantering about this general issue.
Tell me some of the themes you get into the book, because I know you and I talk about current events and this subject, but are there any things in the book that might surprise people, that might come as news to people?
Even for me, you and I talk quite frequently, but tell me why we should go out and get the book right now, which I intend to do, by the way.
But give me some teasers about what's actually in the book.
Well, you just hit on one of the most important things, which is artificial intelligence.
That's the next stage of censorship, really, because we're all aware of the prominent conservatives who get kicked off these platforms.
Often there's a human decision behind that.
But the future of censorship is going to be these intelligent machines that scan all of our posts and essentially censor us in advance, decide whether our posts will be seen in people's feeds or just get completely buried in the algorithm.
And by the way, the point about algorithms, people think they're complicated.
They're not complicated.
All algorithms are is something that essentially takes up, takes in a set of inputs and analyzes them and makes decision based on those inputs and how it's being programmed.
So to give you an example, if an algorithm sees your post, it will scan your post.
That's the input.
And it will then analyze it based on its own criteria of hate speech, which is, of course, determined by leftists in Silicon Valley.
And then it will decide whether your post is going to be suppressed or not.
And again, this is going to happen across these platforms to everything automatically.
And my sources have explained how this is going to happen and how Silicon Valley has essentially created a system where these algorithms are just going to get more and more biased over time because the people programming are just moving further and further to the left because of the echo chamber.
And the people who disagree with them can't voice their disagreement openly.
So we're essentially looking at a kind of dystopian future internet that's controlled and censored by the left.
Algorithms And Echo Chambers00:05:57
Another key point about another key thing in the book that I'd recommend looking into is the future of anonymity.
Anonymity is one of the, I think, one of the most important things that free speech has been for even before the internet.
You know, the Federalists, the Federalist Papers in the U.S., that was when the founders debated the emerging constitution.
They did that anonymously through anonymous letters.
Voltaire in France used a pen name to write about controversial political issues.
So there's a long history of anonymity being used to discuss taboo issues, being used to challenge existing norms.
And that's especially important today in the age of cancel culture.
But unfortunately, some of my sources have told me that even if we think we have anonymity, there's technology being worked on right now that will essentially render anonymity completely useless.
So even if you think you're anonymous, there will be programs that will track your writing style, even track your mouse movements to determine your identity.
So I'd certainly recommend reading the chapter on that if you're concerned about the future of free speech and the ability to talk about sort of forbidden ideas and have forbidden debates that you can't have in public.
I find that absolutely terrifying, especially in the age of the pandemic when we're forced online.
You can't have a big meeting.
You can't have a public gathering in some jurisdictions, but in many you can't.
So we're forced into these handful of oligophones of these huge companies.
It's no coincidence that the value of Amazon has doubled in the stock market during the pandemic because they shut down mom-and-pop shops and they shut down conferences and conventions.
So we're forced into Skype and Zoom.
I hate the fact that we are being turned into little mice on the little hamster wheel.
And let me ask you, why has Donald Trump let four years go without doing anything of substance here?
Well, this is another key theme of the book.
You know, as these companies grow more wealthy and powerful, their political influence increases as well, much as it did for the big railroad and oil monopolies of the late 19th century.
These tech companies are, if anything, even more powerful than that, and their political influence matches it.
So one of my chapters focuses on the connections that Silicon Valley has made to Washington, D.C.
The vast amounts of money they pump into think tanks and advocacy organizations and lobbying groups in the capital.
And by the way, that's both conservatives and liberals.
If you ever see a conservative think tank saying, well, we have to leave the tech companies alone because it's just the free market and we can't interfere.
I will bet you any amount of money that person is being funded by Google or Facebook.
And by the way, that free market argument, we've discussed it before, but it's completely bogus because these companies owe their position, they owe their dominant position to special government perks they got in the 1990s through legal immunities that Congress passed for them.
Well, I find this subject very terrifying.
And it's hard to not come to the conclusion that Trump's election is essential to stop this.
It's not necessarily sufficient.
Trump being re-elected won't necessarily stop it.
But I put it to you, if Trump is not re-elected, there will be no chance to stop it.
So it's essential but not sufficient, if that makes any sense.
Last word to you, Alam.
I guess I'm going to ask you the question, do you think Trump can win?
It'll be a big test of how powerful these tech companies actually are.
He certainly has quite a bit of momentum at the moment, still trading in the polls a little bit, but the gap is narrowing.
And obviously, there's always going to be those shy Trump voters who don't tell pollsters who they're actually going to vote for.
So I think it's going to be a lot tougher this time.
I'm not going to make one prediction either way, because anything could happen.
It's an election.
But I think the thing working against Trump and the reason why Americans need to be informed about the power of the tech companies is that in this election, more than the next, much more than the last election, the elites, whether that's the deep state, the media, or the tech companies, or indeed the people who are going to be cheating with mail-in ballots.
There was an article in the New York Post recently about a whistleblower exposing that.
Cheating is now going to be virtuous.
They're not complacent, and many of these people will feel a moral imperative to cheat in the election because they feel that they've been radicalized by the media into thinking Trump is the second coming of Hitler.
So the tech companies will be doing everything they can to stop him.
And that's something he didn't face in the last election.
The final thing I'll say, and I think this is important because this goes actually beyond Trump, is just think of what these tech companies have destroyed in their efforts to kill the Trump movement.
They've destroyed internet freedom.
And internet freedom was this amazing achievement of human technology, unprecedented in human history.
For a short period, say 2005 to 2015, you could go, if you had a laptop, you could go on the internet and immediately access a global audience.
This was an unprecedented level of freedom that was extremely disruptive to the old controlled media gatekeepers.
And that was fantastic.
But these tech companies have basically destroyed that in an effort to defeat politicians they don't like.
It's an outrage.
People should be very angry about it.
Yeah, angry and terrified.
Wishes For Success00:02:42
Well, Alan, it's a pleasure to talk with you.
I wish you good luck with this book.
I hope it is not censored or shadow censored.
We're going to put this video on YouTube and we'll email it to our Canadian viewers.
Hopefully we can get them to read this because every single thing you said applies in Canada too.
We wish you good luck.
Great to see you again.
Thanks, Ezra.
Great to be on.
All right, there you have it.
Alan Bokhari, senior tech editor at Breitbart.com and the author of the new book, Deleted Big Tech's Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal the Election.
Stay with us.
Hey, welcome back on my show last night with Rocco Galati.
Irene writes, excellent program.
I pray wish for success in this lawsuit.
Yeah, I enjoyed going through it.
I mean, I think the lawsuit technically risks having some parts struck out.
I'm sure that a lot of the defendants will say, well, this is pleading evidence and this is off point.
But there's a lot of core arguments there that no one is making.
And I ask again, as I did in my monologue, where's the class action lawyers?
Where's the favorite media go-to publicity style lawyers?
Why has it fallen to a self-described gadfly to sue?
Where's everybody else?
Where's law professors who love to challenge a prime minister when it's Stephen Harper?
Where's all the law professors who were there for Omar Carter?
Where are they for ordinary Canadians?
Where's everybody?
Susan writes, love this guy.
You go, Rocco.
I enjoyed talking with him.
I don't agree with everything he's done legally.
Obviously, he even represented one of the Cotter brothers.
He sued Stephen Harper a lot.
I didn't agree with all of his cases, but you've got to hand it to the guy.
He's non-partisan, and he loves to take on the state.
You know, these days, I'll call that guy an ally.
Michelle writes, thanks, Mr. Gladdy and the Rebel.
Excellent interview.
Everyone in Canada should see this.
Maybe this should be made available for everyone.
Well, thanks for the idea.
In fact, today, we put the whole interview on YouTube for free for the public.
I like to have special stuff behind the paywall just for you, our paying subscribers.
We've got to give you something special or people won't pay the eight bucks a month that we rely on here.
But every once in a while, maybe once a month, we take a special show and put it out there for the world to see.
And I got a lot of requests for this one.
All right, that's today's show.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, do you at home?