David Jamieson, West Midlands police chief, warns officers may raid homes over lockdown violations, risking unrest despite claims of balancing enforcement with festive freedom, while Scotland’s Hamza Yousaf pushes a hate crime bill criminalizing private jokes or memes—even in households. Meanwhile, Alberta’s Elections Commissioner secretly convicted Rebel News for a "Fire Eggen" billboard, later reversed under pressure, but now Kenney’s government defends the conviction using taxpayer funds, exposing procedural abuses. The OPP’s compliance propaganda underscores police alignment with overreach, as Rebel News fights for broader free speech rights amid resource-strapped conservative groups facing similar fines. These moves signal a creeping erosion of speech protections under both left and right-wing governments, demanding urgent voter resistance beyond symbolic alternatives. [Automatically generated summary]
Hello my friends, today I have two stories from the United Kingdom.
I don't like either one of them, I'll tell you that.
One's about police busting in on Christmas dinners.
The other is about police prosecuting you for what you say at Christmas dinners.
And I ask, could that happen in Canada too?
That's ahead.
But first, let me invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
It's just eight bucks a month, 80 bucks for the whole year.
You get the video version of this podcast.
Just go to rebelnews.com and click the word subscribe.
Alright, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, two ominous signs from the United Kingdom about freedom of speech.
It's October 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.
But why?
is because it's my bloody right to do so.
We are interested in things beyond our own borders for the same reason we're interested in things beyond our own backyard.
We're curious.
We're social beings.
We wonder how other people live.
We care about the world.
I am interested in the United Kingdom for these reasons and the reason that we came from them.
Our laws, our customs, our language, so many things.
Thankfully, that wonderful inheritance includes the Magna Carta, a primordial constitutional law that limited the powers of the king, and through the centuries other legal precepts, the abolition of slavery, the entrenchment of property rights and privacy, summed up by the phrase, a man's home is his castle.
The history of free speech, both in parliament, I mean, even the concept of a loyal opposition leader, loyal to the country, but opposed to the government.
That's amazing.
Magna Carta's Legacy00:05:37
And of course, free speech itself, especially speech that offends, especially speech that offends the government.
I mean, if you're merely praising power, if you're polishing its shoes and singing its praises, that sort of free speech isn't worth much.
It's the ability to tell people something they don't want to hear.
That's what counts.
That's what George Orwell said.
He's the great British writer and thinker, author of books, 1984, Animal Farm.
As he put it, if liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
Exactly.
So I want to know about censorship in the UK because that's the true virus.
That's a true pandemic.
That will spread and that is deadly.
That's why I went to the UK so much a few years back to cover the trials of Tommy Robinson.
You don't think they'd do that to me and to you here in Canada if they could.
Oh, you know they would.
So I saw this and I was appalled.
I saw it originally in the Telegraph of London.
Here's a version in other papers.
West Midlands police could enter homes to break up Christmas dinners as crime commissioner fears riots.
West Midlands police and crime commissioner David Jameson has vowed officers will investigate large Christmas gatherings.
Hey, I don't know if that all makes sense together.
If people are at home having a Christmas dinner, they're not out causing trouble.
They're actually at one of the best times of the year with family, good food, a bit of religion in the air, maybe, I don't know.
Young men are with their moms and dads and sisters and brothers not out rampaging around on the streets.
How could Christmas dinner turn into a riot?
Those are sort of opposite things.
Well, the obvious answer is if police come into your house and tell half of you to get out because of those pandemic rules.
If police come into your home, your castle, that is, a man's home is his castle.
That's Simain's case.
That's centuries-old British law.
We have it here too.
You can't come into my house without a warrant, not even if you're the king.
Yeah, you bust into a house on Christmas, Christmas dinner, you're gonna get a small riot right there.
You bet you will.
I'll read some more.
Police could enter homes to break up Christmas dinners if families breach lockdown rules, with the West Midlands Crime Commissioner also predicting potential riots.
David Jamieson has vowed his officers will investigate large Christmas gatherings, saying officers can only enforce the rules handed down by the government.
Okay, so it's a bit clearer now.
So the top cop was actually saying he will be the one causing the riots.
He's just warning people about what he's going to do.
Okay, got it, boss.
He also warned a time bomb of social unrest, including riots, could be triggered by the end of the furlough scheme, coronavirus job retention scheme, and festive restrictions.
Mr. Jamieson told the Telegraph, if we think there's large groups of people gathering where they shouldn't be, then police will have to intervene.
If again, there's flagrant breaking the rules, then police would have to enforce.
Don't lie.
We know that's not true.
The police allowed thousands of protesters in the UK to march with Black Lives Matter.
That was against the rules.
Police regularly allow antifa riots in the UK, riots actually.
In the UK, police have lustily taken an E in support of Black Lives Matter, even though that's an American invention, it's an American club.
There was never any slavery in the UK.
The UK eradicated slavery in the world.
It fought against the slave trade.
Police shootings aren't a UK thing either.
Most UK police don't even carry guns.
You know that, right?
So the hands-up, don't shoot thing, that's fake in the UK.
That's an American thing.
Yet the police love Black Lives Matter in the UK.
But, oh my God, Christmas dinner, no, no.
We'll come smash it up, quote, it's not the police's job to stop people enjoying their Christmas.
Well, you just said it was, mate.
Mr. Jameson added, however, we are there to enforce the rules that the government makes.
And if the government makes those rules, then the government has to explain that to the public.
He continued, we're sitting on a time bomb here.
We're getting very near the stage where you could see a considerable explosion of frustration and energy.
Things are very on the edge in a lot of communities, and it wouldn't take very much to spark off unrestries damage.
The idea that we can carry on as we are and have a normal Christmas is wishful thinking in the extreme.
A government scientific advisor has said.
Professor John Edmonds, a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, SAGE, I love that, said radical action would be needed to stem the rise in coronavirus cases, particularly in regions with high incidence of the virus.
I'm sorry, these people are nuts.
Maybe that's what the cop's trying to say in his own stupid way.
He's trying to say, guys, you know, if you really want me to go out there, it's going to be.
Maybe that's the cop's way of saying, please don't make me do it.
But he could have just said, please don't make me do it.
I think these people are kooky.
They're just out of control.
Here you have a scientist with SAGE saying we have to get more radical.
You know, two weeks to flatten the curve, eh?
I think they mean two years.
You know, I think we've all learned over the past, I don't know, half here, who amongst us, if we had been in occupied France after the Germans invaded, I think we've got a glimpse of who amongst us would have joined the resistance and who amongst us would have signed up with the invaders and gone to work for the Vichy occupiers.
I'm not comparing public health bureaucrats to Nazis.
I'm talking about the reduction in civil liberties and how quickly people adjust to the new limits and new restrictions and how some embrace them and champion them and love them.
I love the mask.
I love the social distancing.
I love the scolding.
Scottish Libel Laws Controversy00:05:08
You know, from a murder point of view, I wouldn't call it murder, but maybe statistical murder, can you use that word?
I mean, when you lock down people, you kill businesses, when you close places where people stay healthy, like gyms, when you force people to be poor and alone, when you shut down hospitals for the regular sick and fetishize a flu called COVID, when you have countless deaths from cancers and other problems that you simply determined were less politically sexy, so you cancer, you cancel those elective surgeries and you cancel cancer screening.
So yeah, there is a death toll in there too.
And if you're fine with all that, and the obedient compliance that wearing a mask shows, masks that we know don't work, then sure, yeah.
I think we know what you'd probably have been like under the first gentle breeze of political pressure 80, 90 years ago in Europe.
So that's the cops.
And in their defense, they're following the insanity of their politicians.
I showed you this before.
This is the First Minister in Wales.
Total lockdown.
There will be no gatherings with people you do not live with, either indoors or outdoors, during this two-week period.
Yeah, just don't talk to anyone else for two full weeks.
You're in prison in solitary confinement.
Meet no one in public or private.
Do you think that little tyrant follows that rule himself?
I would bet my life savings he does not.
That's the First Minister of Wales.
Here's the Justice Minister of Scotland.
You'll remember him as the Muslim activist who for some reason hates Scottish people, even though they made him their Justice Minister.
What do you make of this?
But why are we so surprised when the most senior positions in Scotland are filled almost exclusively by those who are white?
Take my portfolio alone.
The Lord President, white.
The Lord Justice Clerk, white.
Every High Court judge, white.
The Lord Advocate, white.
The Solicitor General, white.
The Chief Constable, white.
Every Deputy Chief Constable, white.
Every Assistant Chief Constable, white.
The head of the Law Society, white.
The head of the Faculty of Advocates, white.
Every prison governor, white.
And not just Justice.
The Chief Medical Officer, white.
The Chief Nursing Officer, white.
The Chief Veterinary Officer, white.
The Chief Social Work Advisor, white.
Almost every trade union in this country headed by people who are white.
In the Scottish Government, every Director General is white.
Every chair of every public body is white.
That is not good enough.
What a creepy weirdo.
He's so racist.
How can he say that with his straight face?
Anyways, as you'll recall, he introduced a bill that would make it illegal to insult people, make it illegal to tell insulting jokes, maybe make it illegal to have insulting memes on your computer.
It would be equivalent to having child porn on your computer now.
Anyways, he's getting some pushback.
Believe it or not, my video about him a couple months ago has been seen almost 200,000 times.
And it is a long video.
Much of those audience is in Scotland, actually made the front pages of a couple of Scottish newspapers.
I think that we at Rebel News actually helped give arguments to the opponents of this censorship in Scotland.
So anyways, they were grilling him in the Scottish Parliament about his bill and possible amendments.
And he actually said, I'm not even kidding, the police in Scotland would arrest people in their own homes for saying things in their homes that Hamza Yousaf finds insulting or racist.
I mean, Hamza Youssef can say racist things in Parliament.
That's just him being woke.
But literally in your own home, when you talk to your family, you can be arrested for what you say at home.
People were mocking that on Twitter, and he actually defended it.
Look at this.
Some Scottish Tory says a deeply concerning suggestion.
Hate crime bill, hate talk in homes must be prosecuted.
So Hamza Youssef writes back.
He says, beyond headline, if you invite 10 mates around, it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that you intentionally stirred up hatred against Jews.
Why should this not be prosecuted?
It would if you did so down the pub, but not in your house.
I love how he makes it a Jewish thing.
I love the pub angle too.
How about a mosque, though, if we're talking about places where insulting or offensive comments are actually made about Jews?
I've never heard Scotland being a hotspot for anti-Semitism amongst Scots, but who knows?
Maybe Hamza Youssef knows better.
The point is, regardless of his bizarre attempt to smear Scots as anti-Semitic, he's standing by the report.
He absolutely wants the ability to arrest you for what you say in the privacy of your own home to your own family.
My friends, that is the United Kingdom today.
Busting up your Christmas dinner with cops, prosecuting for what you say over dinner with your family and friends.
Here in Canada, I think we're not quite there yet, but I think we're maybe five minutes behind them.
Defending Freedom of Speech00:15:19
Don't you?
Stay with us for more.
Welcome back.
We're talking about free speech today, literally today, we were in a court in Edmonton, Alberta, defending our freedom of speech, in particular, our right to publish billboards critical of the government.
It all comes from this billboard.
Remember, two years ago, David Egan was the socialist education minister in the province of Alberta.
Disastrous results if you care about learning stuff.
But boy, he was successful at propaganda.
Well, we put up a billboard, Fire Eggen.
That was his last name.
All right, you don't like it, so ignore it.
Put up your own billboard, whatever.
No, no, no.
Rachel Notley, the NDP Premier of the Day, had her hand-picked election commissioner prosecute us for an illegal ad.
There's no such thing as an illegal ad.
We're a news site that was our editorial opinion.
It linked back to our website.
We can say fire Egan all we like.
Well, that wasn't Rachel Notley's point of view.
And incredibly, that election commissioner, the disgraced Lauren Gibson, he told us he was coming to get us.
He told us he was going to investigate us.
We lawyered up.
But before our lawyers could even present our side of the story, there was a secret trial to which we were not invited and we were convicted in absentia, even though our lawyer had already said, all right, we'll be there.
We'll meet this ridiculous charge.
Well, we appealed.
We asked for a judicial review of that.
And that came today.
What's so bizarre is that Rachel Notley was sacked by voters.
Lauren Gibson was fired by Jason Kenney.
And yet, the government of Alberta was in court today using taxpayers' money under Premier Jason Kenney to fight us and to insist that this conviction stands.
Joining us now via Skype from Alberta is Sheila Gunread, who spent the day following along with the hearing, live tweeting it.
If you haven't yet gone to the website, rebeltrial.com, you can see all the documents in the case and Sheila's live tweets.
Sheila, great to see you.
We're catching you at this moment in a hiatus in the hearing.
It's not yet done.
Our lawyer made his case, but up next is the government lawyers.
Is that right?
Yeah, up next is the government lawyers from the Ministry of Justice.
Jason Kenney's government, his Ministry of Justice, has sent at least two lawyers that I can tell to argue the case on behalf of the Elections Commissioner against us.
Are you sure about that?
I just want to check that.
I mean, I know you're following and you got all the documents.
So these are Justice Department lawyers.
They're not actually Election Alberta lawyers.
Yes, there's two lawyers right now there from the Ministry of Justice.
Really?
Well, that is news to me.
I am, because that's different.
If the Elections Canada, sorry, Elections Alberta, pardon me, hired lawyers on behalf of their own agency.
But for the Department of Justice, this would obviously have been done or arranged under Doug Schweitzer's regime as justice minister.
I don't think Casey Medew would allow this.
So Jason Kenney's government, you got to put it on the boss.
Jason Kenney's government is sending lawyers to insist that the court uphold the ban on us having political billboards.
I am shocked.
I didn't think that Kenney was sending lawyers.
That is news to me, Sheila.
Yeah, I mean, it remains to be seen.
I suppose their arguments later on in the day, when we broke, they said they would need at least an hour, maybe an hour and a half to make their case, whatever that looks like.
I'm interested to see how they plan to defend what happened to us here, because really it was an abusive process from the very beginning.
And I'm not sure if I'm learning new things or if I'm remembering things that I forgot because this case is just so wild.
For example, I did not realize that investigators from both the Elections Commissioner and Elections Alberta harassed our sign guy and interrogated our sign guy.
And then on the day that they found us guilty in a secret trial, their investigators contacted our sign guy and said, take down the sign, which they cannot do.
They don't have the authority to do that.
I also didn't realize that on the very day that we filed for the judicial review that I'm sitting through today, the exact same day, that's the day the elections commissioner sent us a lawyer saying, oh, no, no, we found you guilty.
We gave you a fine.
We didn't allow you to participate in the process.
But you know what?
Let's have a mulligan and we'll reprimand you instead.
That happened on the very same day that we filed for this judicial review, meaning we spooked the daylights out of them.
And I also didn't realize that, as our lawyer argues in court, that misunderstanding and we're going to give you a reprimand instead, that wasn't a favor to us.
It was to kneecap our ability to appeal the findings against us and lay the facts bare because you can't appeal a reprimand.
You know, I just want to come back to that for a second.
I remember when that came in, we had hired the best free speech law firm in Edmonton.
They're called Reynolds Mirth.
They're very famous for defending journalists of all backgrounds.
Fred Kozak's their senior lawyer.
I think he is beloved by so many journalists because he really is their guardian angel.
I was thrilled when he took the case and his understudy, Michael Swanberg, who's also an excellent lawyer.
So we hired the best because you don't want to mess around when your freedom's at stake.
They contacted Elections Alberta, said we're on the file, da, da, da.
And then we were all shocked, including our lawyers, when we were found guilty without even a hearing.
But here's the thing, and I just want to emphasize this.
You mentioned this, Sheila, but let me just emphasize it for our viewers.
So they said you're guilty, even though we weren't invited to be part of the secret trial.
And we propose a $5,500 fine.
When we said, no, thanks, we're appealing.
They said, whoa, we're going to take the fine away.
Please don't appeal.
Because they didn't want any of their processes, any of their secret trials, any of their misconduct being scrutinized by grown-ups, by real judges in their real process.
They were so not you make the point that they were trying to kneecap our ability to appeal.
Fair enough.
I think it was the opposite.
I think they were desperate so we wouldn't appeal because they don't want grown-ups to see how misbehaved they were.
And that's what today's hearing is about.
Well, and I think they forgot who they're tangling with.
We don't take reprimands when we didn't do anything wrong.
And people need to realize that the elections commissioner in Alberta is the investigator and the jury and the executioner.
They investigate you.
You may or may not know that they are investigating you.
Actually, from what I learned today, they reached out to our billboard contractor before they ever let us know that we were under investigation.
And then they can find you guilty without you ever participating in it.
And then maybe they'll allow you input into what your consequences are going to be.
They'll hear submissions from you on what the fine is.
That's the process here in Alberta.
Oh my God.
Sorry, guys.
My cat's jumping up.
No problem, Sheila.
You know, your cat's getting revved up just like we are.
I have to say, I sort of forgot about this because in my mind, Sheila, Rachel Notley was thrown out by voters.
I remember when Jason Kenney fired Lauren Gibson, the disgraced election commissioner.
So I honestly sort of forgot about this until our lawyer said, hey, guys, that judicial review we asked for two years ago, two years ago, it's happening now.
And is that Margaret Scratcher?
That's Margaret Scratcher.
That's a great name.
You know what?
That's great.
You know what?
You're working from home and you got this home-based studio there.
And we appreciate all the work you do, Sheila.
You're just the best.
So I haven't added up all the expenses, but I want to invite people, if you're curious about this case, and I hope you are, go to rebeltrial.com.
On that page, you have Sheila's tweets, which are great.
But importantly, you have all the legal documents, including the letters that the election commissioner sent us.
I call it the threat letter, and then there was the conviction letter where they say you're guilty.
And then our lawsuit.
So if you're really interested in this, you can go deep on the website.
There's an hour's worth of reading there if you want to read it.
The thing about it is when lawyers write, they write very carefully, and I think you'll be proud of the quality of our lawyers, but they're not working for free.
And today's court hearing alone will surely cost $10,000.
I think we're probably up to $50,000.
And that's just our expenses.
Jason Kenney and Rachel Notley have probably spent a quarter of a million dollars.
I mean, you say they've got two lawyers from the Department of Justice alone this afternoon.
Then there's the Elections Canada, Elections Alberta, and then the Elections Commissioner.
There's probably 10 or 15 people in the government working on censoring us, Sheila.
And it's really lopsided.
Like, I mean, we're being much more efficient.
We have one main lawyer, Michael Swanberg, on the case, but we're still out 50 grand.
The government's got to have spent at least a quarter million to silence us.
I'm optimistic, though.
I think we've got a real chance here.
What do you think?
I do too.
The judge seemed very impressed with our lawyer, Justice Lima.
Another thing I want to add, though, is that this, when I said this was an abusive process from the very beginning, I think people need to understand that this complaint, it doesn't seem like it came by way of the public.
It seems as though it came directly from Elections Alberta, and they made the complaint to the elections commissioner.
So it was the government of the day, headed by Rachel Notley, investigating an independent journalism outlet for expressing an editorial opinion in a billboard on the side of a highway, which is really just what they do in the editorial pages of failing newspapers all the time.
We just do it in a fun, new way.
But they were the ones that were kicking off this investigation against us.
And they have unlimited resources to do it.
We crowdfund everything.
We appreciate everything that we get.
But that's what we're up against.
We are up against two government agencies who formulated this complaint against us, and now we're left to defend it.
Yeah, you know what?
I'm so mad to learn that there's two Jason Kenney lawyers going to be there.
I'm very surprised by this.
It sounds like this hearing may go longer than a full day.
I hope not.
The cost of such a thing would be huge.
But hopefully, I mean, I don't know anything about this judge, but hopefully a real judge with real rules of procedure would look at this and say what seems so blatantly obvious to me.
You can't convict someone in a hearing without inviting them there.
You can't convict someone without hearing their side of the story.
You have to show them some basic facts about the complaint against them.
None of those basic rules of procedural fairness were there.
And then just because we say we object, oh, please don't go to court.
Please don't have a real judge supervise my work.
We'll just give you a reprimand.
I'm sorry, I don't take reprimands from governments for having the wrong political view.
In fact, as I was saying earlier on my noontime show, you know, being fined, at least that's just money.
I hate it, but the government's in my pocket every day.
It's one thing to be fined money, but when the government say we, with all our authority and all our sovereignty, hereby reprimand you for having the wrong ideas, well, I cannot stand that.
I cannot accept that.
I grumble when my money is taken from me through taxes, through fees, through every excuse that politicians come up with.
But don't you dare seek to judge me and reprimand me for criticizing Rachel Notley or Jason Kenney or Stephen Harper or Justin Trudeau.
I'm a Canadian citizen.
I'm a natural born human.
I have inherent rights that predate the government.
Imagine the chutzpah of Rachel Notley reprimanding me for a point of view.
Sheila, I'm getting mad just talking about this.
It's really quite bizarre because, I mean, there's an argument to be made that this law is unconstitutional.
And from what I understand, that argument will be made at a later date.
And we do have a lawyer from the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms, James Kitchen.
He's sitting in as an observer in the hearing today.
I do know that they, I think they want to be interveners in that constitutional challenge.
But really, this is, it comes down to: do we allow secret trials in Canada?
That's really what this is about.
They didn't give one shred of evidence to our lawyers before they convicted us.
Yeah, and they have that duty.
Even a murderer has the right to disclosure from the crown.
You know, let me say one last point.
Sheila, I appreciate you.
First of all, you were covering that trial.
You were live tweeting it.
That's actually a high-energy job because you got a strain to listen what all the lawyers say, and sometimes they use legal jargon and to type it up.
So thanks for live tweeting it.
You mentioned that the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms is listening in, and I'm so glad they are.
In my view, they're the only civil liberties, public interest law firm of any note in this country.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Canadians for Justice and Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, Canadian Association of Journalists, Penn Canada, all these reporters without borders, all these groups, they don't care.
They're all on the take with Trudeau, or they don't want to be offside with Trudeau.
They don't care much for freedom of speech anymore.
They certainly don't like the rebel.
It's so sad.
When I was a kid, if something like this would have happened, every newspaper from the whole spectrum would have been in court together, intervening together, all for one-on-one for all, free speech for everybody.
That's a bygone era, Sheila.
I wouldn't even say way back when you were a kid.
Fighting For Freedom On Twitter00:05:04
I would say in 2015, they would have come to our aid.
And they did when Rachel Notley threw me out of the legislature and banned me from reporting there.
They sided with us begrudgingly, but they did, but nobody seems to care about any of this.
And I send, I think it's $70 a year to Penn Canada just for the right to say, you took my money, but you don't do a damn thing for me.
Well, let me invite our viewers who care about freedom for us, but the precedents we set redound to the benefit of all Albertans and all Canadians.
If you are upset that we were prosecuted, convicted in absentia, fined, and then generally jerked around because we put up a billboard.
If you think we ought to have the funds to fight that, please help.
Go to rebeltrial.com.
And while you're there, if you've got the time, read the very well-drafted legal arguments by our lawyer Michael Swanberg.
I think they're educational.
There is some legal jargon in them, but I think you can generally work your way through them.
And mainly, I want you to see those insane letters from the election commissioner that are just so baffling.
So I'd invite all our viewers to go to rebeltrial.com.
Last word to you, Sheila.
We got a lot of lawsuits on the go.
Most of them are fighting for freedom.
That's sort of a sad state of affairs.
Well, and the thing is, with this judicial review that we're bringing today and all the legal fees that we are accumulating on this matter, you just hinted at it that we are, you know, doing this for all Albertans, but Notley cracked down on a lot of smaller conservative advocacy groups using this onerous elections law.
And they don't have the ability to fight.
They don't have the deep pockets.
They don't have the support like we do of the people at home.
And really, we're fighting this fight for them too.
That is such a good point.
It's been a while since I've looked, but when I went on the election commissioner's website a few months ago, there was a list of all the people they steamrolled using the same bad behavior and tens of thousands, in some cases, I think it was even over $100,000 in the fines and the abusive process.
And no one stopped them, Sheila.
And now they've been fired and sacked and disgraced, but they're still, it's like a zombie.
It's like they're still going on after death.
The election commission is dissolved.
The election commissioner was fired.
But bizarrely, the Alberta bureaucracy posthumously is fighting us using taxpayers' dollars.
It's very strange.
I could go on for some length.
Please keep covering this on your Twitter feed.
And when it's all done, maybe you could do a video summarizing how it went because these days, obviously, it's so hard for people to go to the court, even if they are in Edmonton.
So maybe you could do a video for all our viewers on YouTube.
Definitely.
All right.
Thanks so much, Sheila.
Thanks.
There you go, Sheila Gunn Reed, our chief reporter based there in Edmonton.
Her kitty cat, Margaret Thatcher, Scratcher, excuse me, covering today's trial at the Edmonton Court, Queen's Bench.
with us more.
Hey, welcome back to my show last night.
Corey writes, People's Party of Canada proving to be a bit of a non-factor.
It's strange, given they are the only party which espouses actual freedom, that they don't resonate more, especially in our current environment where we seem to be losing our freedoms daily.
Well, the thing is, Maxine Bernier doesn't have a seat.
So there's no seed crystal around which things can form.
And I think people are so eager to get rid of the Liberals, and the Conservative Party has a new leader, that I think the anti-liberal vote that's anywhere associated with conservatism or freedom all coalesced around the conservative.
That's my theory.
I note with interest, as I mentioned the other day, that the Buffalo Party is a strong third in Saskatchewan, even having run just a few candidates.
So I think Canadians are still looking for an alternative, but if it's a matter of kicking out Trudeau or not, they're not going to spend their vote on a choice that has no chance of winning.
On my interview with David Manzies, BG writes, what a joke.
Those cops should be charged for neglect of duty.
You are so opposite.
That wasn't some sneaky video or some citizen journalism video or a cop publishing his own video.
I took that from the Twitter feed of the OPP commissioner himself, the Ontario Provincial Police.
That was an official video.
He was so proud of that.
He was promoting that.
He was signaling to the world, this is how it is in Ontario.