Alex Marlow, Breitbart’s editor-in-chief, exposes how Justin Trudeau’s government funnels $2.1B annually into CBC and newspapers—subsidizing outlets like The Hockey News ($873K)—while Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg pays 14 left-wing Canadian media to amplify their content, calling it "unconditional support." Both systems allegedly suppress conservative voices, from Trudeau’s blackface censorship to Fauci’s lab-leak reversal, now dismissed as misinformation. Marlow warns of legal risks for dissenters, like "domestic violent extremist" labels, while critics argue child vaccines without consent—pushed via free ice cream incentives in Toronto—undermine parental rights and mask experimental risks, with unverified claims suggesting vaccine deaths outpace COVID’s for kids. The episode reveals a coordinated effort to control narratives, leaving conservatives fighting back through legal and independent platforms. [Automatically generated summary]
I've got some bad news for those of us who like independent journalism, but good news for those journalists on the left who can't seem to find anyone to pay for their crap.
And the news is that Mark Zuckerberg has gone into the business of giving handouts to media companies.
Trudeau led the way, but Zuckerberg's probably got more money.
Now they're both giving money to left-wing news organizations in Canada.
I'll give you the details and how gross it is.
Before I do, I'd like to invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
That's what we call the video version of this podcast.
It's eight bucks a month, and we need it because we're not taking that government dough, and we're not taking money from Facebook either.
All right, here's today's show.
Tonight, who would you rather have choosing your news for you?
Justin Trudeau or Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg?
It's May 25th, and this is the Astral 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 governments about why I publish them is because it's my bloody right to do so.
It's so embarrassing, I think, when foreign media break Canadian news.
At least when it's news that embarrasses the Canadian political media industrial complex.
I mean, it's going to happen.
The largest news gathering organizations in the world are outside Canada, in places like America and the UK.
Sometimes they're going to break news in Canada just because they're good and they're hunting for news.
But what I'm really talking about is opposition research style local political news, accountability news, really news that only Canadians should care about.
The Canadian journalists should naturally be taking the lead on things that, you know, it really would be strange if foreigners broke the news on first.
I mean, wouldn't it be weird if a regular newspaper in Edmonton broke a big scoop about Joe Biden?
I think it'd be weird.
Or if a radio station in Winnipeg broke a big news scoop about the UK's Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Wouldn't that be weird?
I think that'd be weird.
Well, that never happens.
But it often happens the other way.
Like when the Canadian media knew that Justin Trudeau had dressed up in blackface dozens of times, too often for him to even remember.
He did it in three decades, his teens, his 20s, and his 30s.
All the media had photos or videos of it, but it fell to Time magazine in the States to break the news, not because they were smarter or were digging harder, but because a Canadian citizen was so frustrated by the fact that there was this cone of silence over the mainstream media, he literally had to leave Canada to find an honest reporter.
And within hours of Time magazine breaking that story, Canadian media all rushed to catch up by publishing the photos and videos that they had all been sitting on all along.
Embarrassing.
And you know, it was embarrassing because of their vengeance, because the CBC and the Globe and Mail and the rest of the media party then turned their rage against that Vancouver man, just some guy who gave the tip to Time magazine.
They did more research on that guy than they bothered to do on Trudeau himself, the Canadian media.
Just happened again this weekend.
I don't know if you saw it, the BBC, British Broadcasting Corporation, the state broadcaster in the UK, not exactly freedom-loving folks.
They did a news report that shows Toronto is the most locked down city in the world.
It's just the most, more than any other city.
We're the worst.
I can think of six and a half million people in the greater Toronto area who might like to have learned about that fact, you know, in a Canadian media outlet and who still have not heard about it in a Canadian media outlet?
Because really, unless you're an expat or a strange masochist, why would you be watching the BBC?
Why wouldn't Canadian journalists tell that story, break that story?
They're living that story.
It's obviously newsworthy.
The BBC certainly thought so, and they're thousands of miles away.
Normally, Canadian media types get so excited when someone in a foreign country recognizes Canada.
I mean, how often does some second-rate Oscar winner have an aunt who had a cousin whose mechanic was from Halifax?
We're so excited about that.
But where's the news here?
I didn't see any Canadians following up on this BBC story because the media party has merged with the Liberal Party.
Was always that way to an extent, but Trudeau made it a formal union with his media bailout.
It really is incredible how easily bought they all were.
Even the odd guy who said, no, no, I'll go along without government money, like this guy, David Skock.
He started some online tech news magazine called The Logic, and he swore he wouldn't take government cash.
He took government cash.
These guys are so cheaply bought, I guess they're so desperate to have someone support their hobby, because obviously it's not commercially viable on its own, that they're happy to take a patron of the arts, like there's some Renaissance sculptor or painter, except these Renaissance artists, they might flatter their patrons with a lovely portrait of their paymaster's wife or something.
No harm done.
But in the news business, when your patron is the government, the subject of the news, the politicians, that's corruption.
No wonder we need foreign media to tell us about Canada.
Everyone else is on the take.
You'd think the current $1.5 billion a year to the CBC plus $600 million to the newspapers would be enough, but no, it is not.
Look at this story in Blacklocks.
Media double dip on grants.
New tax changes will allow media to double dip on taxpayers' subsidies.
The Department of Finance confirmed yesterday.
Amendments inserted in a 336-page budget bill will see some publishers draw subsidies equal to 100% of newsroom costs.
It still is a bit sticky, Senator David Richards, New Brunswick earlier told the Senate National Finance Committee.
I've been a writer and I've written 30 books, so I know how this works.
It's often very subjective on how you qualify or don't qualify for certain types of grants.
What?
I mean, look at this.
Look at this.
Double dipping was intended to meet policy objectives, said the finance department.
It did not explain.
Publishers who stand to benefit from the tax change did not report the fact.
Past payouts under the Aid to Publishers program included, get this.
$1.5 million to Canadian Living magazine, $1.25 million to McLean's, $1.14 million to Reader's Digest, $873 grand to the Hockey News, $855 grand to Ontario Farmer, $739,000 to Chatelaine, $650,000 to Good Times magazine for seniors, $500,000 to Toronto Life.
It goes on.
I think there's a correlation between magazines that take free money from the government becoming the most boring magazines, and they become the most Trudeau magazines, the most pro-Trudeau magazines, and they lose public support.
I mean, do you really know anyone other than maybe a dentist's office that gets McLean's magazine anymore, and the dentist probably gets it for free?
Because they're not writing for you anymore.
They're writing only for one man, and that man's name is Justin Trudeau.
By the way, I was talking to a lawyer for McLean's magazine the other day who says they only have 14 staff left at the whole company.
How can you take $1.25 million in bailout money when you don't even have a payroll that big?
Someone's put a lot of cash in their jeans.
Well, who has a bigger ego than Trudeau?
And who has more money than Trudeau?
And really, who has more critics that he'd like to pay off than Trudeau?
Well, how about one of the richest and most irritating men in the world, Mark Zuckerberg, the lizard-like founder of Facebook?
And he's decided to get into the media payoff game too.
All left-wing outlets, of course.
I mean, he's only going to give money to the left.
And I promise you this, you'll start to see a lot more pro-Facebook coverage in those outlets, or at least no more criticism of Facebook.
Here's a story about it in the Globe and Mail.
New initiative.
We'll see Facebook pay 14 Canadian media outlets for content.
Facebook is launching a trial news initiative in Canada in which the social media giant will pay publishers to link to selected articles on their websites.
The company announced the partnership Tuesday with 14 Canadian media outlets under the news innovation test.
Facebook will pay publishers an undisclosed amount to include selected links on their pages that bring users to news sites.
The links will be provided on certain Facebook pages, such as the company's information hubs, but the partnership does not include links that are shared by the media outlets themselves.
Okay, hang on a second.
I don't think that's how it works.
See, Facebook is providing the traffic to those websites.
And with traffic, of course, the eyeballs comes ad revenues.
Facebook is literally linking and diverting people to these news websites, doing them a huge favor.
Those news websites typically pay Facebook for ads to get that traffic.
I bet most of them do.
Because a Facebook link can turn into a river of cash for whoever the link is pointing at.
That's how it works.
How is it benefiting Facebook to send a customer from Facebook to a news site, on a news story and a news site?
Why would they pay for that?
That's not real commerce.
That's a payoff.
That's a bribe.
That's a kind of money laundering.
Let me read.
Facebook will compensate media companies and drive traffic to their sites, according to Kevin Chan, the company's head of public policy for Canada.
It's the first time the news innovation test is being introduced anywhere, though Facebook is testing another feature known as Facebook News in other countries.
Who's Kevin Chan?
They never say in the article, oh, it's not important.
I mean, he's the policy boss for Facebook Canada.
He's the one spraying money and traffic at left-wing news sites.
Pay no attention to the fact that he was a senior staffer in the Liberal Party before.
I wonder why that wasn't mentioned in this article.
Sure, it's just a coincidence.
Small world, right?
And all the sites that he's hosing money at are liberal.
What are the odds?
I'll keep reading.
The participating media outlets are a mix of large established publishers and smaller independent ones in both English and French.
The 14 outlets are Blog TO, Canada's National Observer, The Coast, The Cooperative Nationale des Information, Independent, Daily Hive, Le Divoir, Discourse Media, FP Newspapers, NarCity, the Narwhal SawWire Network, The Sprawl, the Taiye, and Village Media.
They're either begging money from Trudeau or begging money from Facebook.
Actually, it's not an either or, they're begging from both.
Every single one of those magazines is left-wing.
And McGilchris, co-founder and editor-in-chief of the Narwhal, said she is pleased with the partnership.
Basically provides us with unconditional support to produce more journalism, she said.
It's a pretty good deal from our perspective.
Yeah, no doubt, sister.
Normally you have to pay Facebook to drive traffic to your site.
No one pays you to give traffic to your site.
That would be like a billboard company saying, excuse me, can we pay you money to put up a billboard for the privilege of advertising your product for free?
That's not commerce.
That's called a bribe.
Launched in 2018, The Narwhal is a nonprofit publication focused on environmental journalism.
It is financially supported by memberships.
Yeah, that's not quite true.
It gets a lot of grants from left-wing anti-oil groups and now from Mark Zuckerberg.
Ms. Guild Christ said the initiative is also a way for Facebook to promote strong journalism and combat misinformation on their platform, something the social media company has had issues with in the past.
Well, now you're getting to it.
This is about combating misinformation, by which they mean, of course, views they disagree with, people they disagree with.
That's an environmental extremist, Emma Gilchrist, and she's calling anyone who disagrees with her theory of man-made global warming, that's misinformation.
Hey, who would you rather have curating your news?
That is subsidizing some folks and censoring other folks.
Justin Trudeau?
Mark Zuckerberg?
Well, now it's both.
No wonder they all hate rebel news so much.
Stay with us for more.
But no, I'm not convinced about that.
I think that we should continue to investigate what went on in China until we find out to the best of our ability exactly what happened.
Certainly, the people who've investigated say it likely was the emergence from an animal reservoir that then infected individuals, but it could have been something else.
And we need to find that out.
So, you know, that's the reason why I said I'm perfectly in favor of any investigation that looks into the origin of the virus.
Well, would you look at that no one less than Dr. Anthony Fauci himself saying, hmm, maybe, after all, after saying it was fake news for 14 months, maybe, in fact, the virus from Wuhan came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Something that if you were to have said yourself, you would have been called a conspiracy theorist, a fake news promoter.
And in fact, YouTube has been extremely strict in policing contrarian ideas like that, talking about vaccines or the Wuhan virus, or even saying phrases like China virus.
Well, that was enough to get my own book by that same title banned by Amazon, not once, but twice.
And yet there's Fauci saying, no, no, no, it's something we should take a look at.
Well, what do we make of the media industrial complex that itself lies, but accuses others of lying to expose them?
Well, that is the thesis of the book by our next guest.
His name is Alex Marlow.
He's the boss of Breitbart.com.
And his book is called Breaking the News, Exposing the Establishment Media's Hidden Deals and Secret Corruption.
And Alex Marlowe joins us now from Washington, D.C.
Well, congratulations on this book.
And I just want to say congratulations on Breitbart.com.
I feel like this book, at least how you've laid it out, is a distillation of the entire mission of Breitbart.com, isn't it?
I think it is, Azra.
Thanks so much for having me.
Breaking the News00:11:28
It's great to catch up.
And we love our Canadian readers, of which we have very many, which is very heartening and exciting to us at Breitbart.
But yeah, but Breitbart is only necessary because the establishment media is so horrible at their jobs.
And apparently they're getting worse.
The good news is, it does seem like, at least in the United States, more and more people every year wise and up to this fact.
Something catches their eye and they think, wait a minute, that's not quite right.
And this could be one of those examples, the one that you lay out with the virus perhaps coming from the lab.
Now, I'm pretty agnostic.
I don't know if it's from the lab or from the wet market, or it could have been in the wet market and then could have gone to the lab and then got out.
None of that matters to me nearly as much as the fact that the establishment media would have deplatformed you, thrown you offline.
If you even hinted that maybe this coincidental lab that just happened to be right there in Wuhan that we happen to be funding in the United States, that might have had something to do with this virus.
Even that suggestion was grounds for cancellation.
Of course, it was absurd.
Of course, the lab was at least a legitimate possibility.
And we were just sitting here in conservative media going, How crazy do these people think we are to dismiss this out of hand like that?
Yeah, that's exactly what the establishment did.
Yeah, you know, there's a couple of Canadian angles there too.
Our viewers know this.
After the pandemic, Trudeau donated over $800,000 in foreign aid to the lab.
It's one thing to have been involved with that lab to begin with, but after the pandemic, Trudeau was still sending money over.
And of course, we also see our own lab crisis.
There's a high-risk virus lab in Winnipeg, Canada that had Chinese nationals working at it until it was shut down by the RCMP.
But you're not allowed to talk about these things.
At best, they'll call you racist, but at worst, they'll just vaporize you, cancel your channel, knock you off Twitter, Facebook, YouTube.
That's what I'm worried about.
You said a moment ago, Alex, that you think Americans are wising up to it, and I'll add Canadians in that too.
I think some are, but I think whatever progress is being made about enlightening people, things are getting worse on the ground.
More people than ever are banned, shadow banned, kicked off their accounts.
So it may be that people are wising up, but just as fast as that's happening, they're being depersoned.
What do you think of that?
Yeah, you're right about this because the militant wing of the institutional left in the United States, and I'm sure it's similar up north where you guys are, is getting more powerful, more angry, and more emboldened because they keep getting victories.
So even though I think they're relatively few in number, I would say at most, maybe 30% in the United States, they seem to have overwhelmed all of our major corporations and virtually every media establishment and tech platform.
And that's very scary because even if, let's say, 50 or even 60% of people are with us ideologically, we're kind of powerless to push back against that 30% number that are so determined to throw off any thought that they disagree with from the web.
They don't think about in America, we've got the First Amendment, of course, and it is something that should be cherished.
It should be held dear.
Instead, we treat it as just some sort of statute, some sort of law that's on the books to be, you know, where we can pick and choose when we want to apply it.
It needs to drive us.
It needs to drive what we do day in and day out, or else we're going to lose the ability to speak freely as we give that power and we outsource it solely to Silicon Valley and the establishment news.
The book is called Breaking the News, Exposing the Establishment, Media's Hidden Deals, and Secret Corruption.
We'll have an Amazon link underneath this video.
One of the things I'm worried about is that especially the Democrat Party in the United States and Joe Biden, they've created this threat.
They call it domestic violence extremists.
It's another way of saying people who oppose Biden so deeply they're a terrorist risk.
We see that same language being echoed up here in Canada.
I see little or no evidence that the right is a risk of violence, especially in Canada.
It just hasn't been.
But this constant drumbeat, we've got to silence voices like RebelNews or Breitbart.com or Facebook pages because they make the jump to inciting violence.
If you're a conservative, well, you're one inch away from going postal about it.
How do you deal with that?
Because that's my great worry, is that being conservative will now be criminalized.
That's exactly right.
We're now at a point in the United States, at least, where conservative thought is considered violence and violent actions by the left is excused.
And you see it with the mostly peaceful riots from Black Lives Matter, that a lot of that was actually seen as acceptable because the cause was just in the eyes of the woke media.
And I break down the history of this in the book, and I try to explain how we got to this point.
But the point we're at is incredibly scary.
And this is being used as a pretext to throw people offline, despite the fact, Ezra, that there is so little violence coming from the right in the United States of America.
January 6th, four Trump supporters died.
We were lied to about what happened to Officer Sicknick.
This wasn't some sort of massive violent event.
It was a bad day.
It was a terrible day for people who support Donald Trump.
And I disavowed all of the violent actions at the time, and I do so in the book.
But that said, it didn't turn into this widespread violent movement the way Black Lives Matter turned into.
And yet the media treats still to this day, January 6th, like it was the worst day in American history.
And Black Lives Matter like it's some sort of noble cause.
A half of America, at least, if not more, sees this as absurd.
But this has been happening for a while.
The media has been building up to this moment where they're going to portray normative conservative thinking as cancelable as inspiring violence.
Ezra, I don't know any white nationalists.
I'm not saying they're not out there.
I don't know any of them.
I don't know a lot of QAnon supporters.
I think I know one, but we're constantly told that those are the people that represent the entirety of conservative America.
And it's just not accurate.
And it's being the design is to throw us off their platforms.
Yeah, you know, it's funny you say that.
I was just thinking about it.
In my entire life, I'm 49.
I grew up in a rural, you know, suburb of Calgary.
I went to a country school.
My sister and I were the only two Jews in a school of 400 kids.
Like, I've been to places where you're supposed to find discrimination.
In my 49 years, I have never seen a swastika.
I've never seen a Nazi flag, except very recently, for example, the pro-Palestinian pro-Hamas protest.
So we've been conditioned and trained to be on the alert for Nazis on the right.
And I have to tell you, I consider myself Jewish and I'm interested in Jewish cultural things and I'm worried about anti-Semitism.
I'm on the alert for it.
I've never in my life seen a swastika except at a pro-Hamas rally.
And I noticed the deafening silence from the official Hate Finders General on the left, the Anti-Defamation League, the SPLC.
Up here, we've got something called the Canadian Anti-Hate Network.
Just absolutely silent when you see swastikas or new Islamic style Nazism on the left.
But boy, are they hunting for it on the right, including amongst Jewish conservatives?
I think they're getting away with it more than maybe you say they are, or certainly more than they are in America.
I think Canada, that's closer to conventional wisdom than the 60-30 split you were talking about before.
Well, I think that they are getting away with it.
That's true.
I just don't think that they're convincing as many people as they think they are.
Case in point, we were told Donald Trump was the biggest racist of all time, and racial hatred had just gotten so much worse under Trump.
And then he got 10 million more votes the second time around, including increasing the vote with black and Latino Americans, which is a great sign.
But your point, I've lived exactly what you've described at Breitbart, is we're constantly being told that we're some sort of racist outlet.
I know you're close with Joel Pollock, who's an Orthodox Jew, who's one of our top editors.
Our copy chief is a black woman.
Our entertainment editor is a black man.
Our world editor is a Latino woman.
We have gay writers.
It have throughout all time.
The company is owned by Jews.
Jews own our company.
And it is, and I'm half Jewish myself.
We're proud of that.
We're proud to be pro-Israel.
It's all of this, and we're supposed to be this font of racism.
But Ezra, no one in the establishment media wants to give me the platform that you're giving me.
And if they do, it's merely to attack me.
And this way I can explain that to you.
And your audience is probably chuckling, thinking, wow, I had no idea about that with Breitbart.
Well, that's the truth.
And people hold that back because it doesn't fit that narrative.
The book is called Breaking the News, Exposing the Establishment Media's Hidden Deals and Secret Corruption.
Permit me to ask you a question because you mentioned it in a promotion for the book.
I never had the pleasure of meeting Andrew Breitbart in person, but I did interview him a couple of times at Sun News Network, and I found him electrifying.
Let me just read one sentence from your promo.
You say, Breitbart began mentoring Marlow.
You were just a 21-year-old student at the time, on how to fight the culture war one headline at a time and to remain resilient in the face of personal attacks.
Obviously, you had an outstanding opportunity to be mentored by really, I think Andrew Breitbart was a visionary in how he reframed things.
What advice would you have for me personally, for rebel news, for other journalists, for other people in the public sphere?
You say remain resilient in the face of personal attacks.
How?
Yeah, it's a great question.
And I'm always happy to talk about Andrew, who I owe so much to, as we all do, at Breitbart, really all of conservative media, he laid out the blueprint, as I know we discussed a little bit offline.
He laid out the blueprint that so many of us follow.
And I'm thrilled to get to call him my mentor.
And Andrew, he shared something with me that was very clarifying, is that he had two personas, jocularity and righteous indignation, which basically meant he would try to get through to people using humor when he could.
And when humor wasn't getting through, then he would use his righteous indignation, his righteous anger.
And those are the skill sets that we employ at Breitbart most of the time.
When we feel like people are open-minded and are willing to laugh at themselves and are willing to see their own foibles, poking fun is sometimes the best approach.
But when they're really entrenched and they're really weaponized and they're really pugilistic and they're trying to destroy what we stand for and maybe the people in our lives, then you got to turn on your righteous indignation and you got to make sure never to give an inch and to be as tough as humanly possible.
And this includes defying the establishment no matter what the costs.
Again, I disavow violence, but it's still important to think of the perspective that you want to be, you want to have incredible willpower in the face of adversity, which is constantly surrounding us.
Yeah, you know what?
I think that duality, it made me think of the phrase that Mark Stein used to use, happy warrior.
You're a happy warrior.
You fight like hell, but you also have a laugh and you realize you can't be dour all the time.
And you got to live too.
You can't just fight.
Dialogue and Debate00:02:54
I don't know.
Maybe that would sum it up.
Let me ask you this.
No, perfect.
Yeah, it's perfect.
If people want to dialogue, have the dialogue.
Be respectful.
Make your arguments.
Let the best ideas win.
But if they don't, then you should not be afraid to call out names, to investigate, to get to the bottom of whatever is the true motivation behind a person's actions and to call them out for it.
I want to ask you a question.
You know, frankly, this question is probably more in the vein of personal advice.
Again, I'm asking you all these personal questions because in some way, we have not a lot of Canadian templates to learn from.
There's not a lot of conservative media in Canada.
I look to the States.
I look at Glenn Beck.
I look at what Drudge Report was until recently.
I look at the late Rush Limbaugh and I look at Daily Caller, which is founded by some alumni of yours.
I look at Breitbart.com.
And we really don't have a lot up here on this side of the border.
Do you have advice on how to deal with deeper deplatforming?
I mean, YouTube suspended us.
They let us back on, but I think it's a ticking time bomb there.
PayPal, just without notice, explanation, or appeal, ended a six-year relationship.
We did, you know, close to $10 million with PayPal.
Just gone.
No explanation.
I'm a happy warrior.
I think we're all happy warriors up here.
We love to just fight and fight.
And we fight fair fights.
But what happens if it's just some thunderbolt from Mount Olympus and we wake up one day and we're just not even on the internet?
Yeah, there's two ways to fight back.
And the first thing is with the law.
And I know this is very tough for conservatives because we all have libertarian streaks and we would love for just the free market to sort this stuff out.
But we're running out of time.
The free market thus far has benefited the people who are trying to control our speech and our freedoms.
And these are people who are not elected.
No one put them in charge.
They're just these huge businesses, particularly out of Silicon Valley with these giant multinational interests who don't care about America.
They don't care about Canada.
They care about their bottom line and advancing this left-wing globalist agenda and where the law can apply.
And Canadian law is going to be different.
It should be, we should think about ways to use the law to try to make sure we're holding these entities accountable, particularly the big tech giants.
In America, we need some reforms to antitrust.
We need to break up these companies if we can.
We have this thing called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which has been a disaster, which has allowed the left basically to spread whatever fake news they want and then to deplatform anyone they want for whatever reason.
We need to reform that as well.
That's got to be for starters.
But the other thing is we do need to build our own stuff and it's really hard to do.
Parlor tried to build their own Twitter and Amazon threw them off their servers and it created a huge headache that they haven't fully recovered from, though I'm optimistic they will down the road.
Reforming Independent Media00:02:31
But this is why it's going to be a multi-decade process.
And so if you're a financier and you're watching this, if you've got someone with money, if you want to support independent media, I recommend doing it.
And we need time to try and fail and have trial and error and to see what's going to stick, what's going to survive court challenges and what new platforms and entities can get off the ground and start making a difference.
It's going to be a long effort.
And trust me, the left will be clawing to get whatever territory we take back in real time.
So it's going to be a fight and we got to get into it right now.
We can't wait.
Yeah, I think you're right.
And I think you're right not to say there's a silver bullet.
I think that it took decades to get into this problem.
I think it will likely take decades, as you say, one headline at a time to get out of it.
Well, listen, it's great to catch up with you.
Thank you for coming on our show up here.
We'll send an email to our viewers.
We'll put this on YouTube and conservative leaning sites like Rumble and libertarian sites like Odyssey and Super U, because we can't just use the big tech platform.
So thank you, Alex Marlowe.
Once more, I'll say the name of the book.
We'll put the cover on the screen again.
It's called Breaking the News, Exposing the Establishment Media's Hidden Deals and Secret Corruption.
I know we spoke more about you and Breitbart and some of the lessons, but I get the feeling that's really what this book is, an expression of the Breitbart mindset and your mindset as the leader of that place.
It comes through a lot, but I do think that what people will really get a lot out of the book is all the research.
I got to say, I spent a year with a small team of really serious journalists doing deep dives into these corporations.
And what I found was frankly stunning.
From I've identified who I believe is the new Soros operating in the United States.
I've exposed the extent to which American businesses are doing business with the communist Chinese and how much they're willing to compromise in order to maintain access to China.
Some of the stuff is truly frightening, the conflict of interest in terms of the brand name people in our establishment press.
So there's a lot of revelations in the book as well.
And I think a lot of explanation of where we are and how we got there.
Well, I can hardly wait to learn who this new Soros is because the old Soros was bad enough.
Alex Marlowe, great to see you.
Thanks for your time.
Good luck out there.
Ezra, appreciate it.
My pleasure.
All right, there you have it.
Alex Marlowe stay with us.
more ahead.
Vaccinated Children Controversy00:03:20
Hey, welcome back on my vaccinated children story.
Bruce writes, vaccinating children without parental permission is the latest ploy to arrest the authority of parents by the government.
Socialists have done that for decades, and this is just the latest move by so-called progressives to confiscate children from their biological parents.
That is right in so many ways.
First of all, this pandemic's been around for more than a year.
So why can you not wait one day to have parents give their consent and have them involved?
Why is it so urgent that you must do this right now?
I mean, put aside all the medical arguments we made the other day.
Whenever other adults say to a child, shh, don't tell your parents we're going to do something, that's a manipulative move that, frankly, is a form of child abuse.
Perry writes.
Parents make adult decisions on behalf of their children until legal age because the child lacks the experience and the knowledge required in many situations to make a clear and concise decision on their own.
The government should have no right to interfere with this.
Well, it's worse than that.
I couldn't even believe it.
This weekend in Toronto, they had vaccines for kids, vaccines for kids.
Right outside City Hall in a place called Nathan Phillips Square, they were giving kids as young as 12 vaccines, again, no parental consent required.
And they're giving away ice cream if you did it.
That's like, you know, these memes you see of a terrible beat up 70s van that says, you know, free candy, like a terrifying start to a horror movie, just showing how you would trick a child to go, oh, free candy, I'll go in this dangerous van.
Don't do it.
You're saying, free ice cream.
Hey, kids, if you get this jab, you get free ice cream.
Now that I've said free ice cream to a 12-year-old a bunch of times, they can make informed consent on whether or not this experimental medicine that is not yet approved, but it's been authorized, and they'll know the difference.
I mean, that really is like the free candy scary van approach.
That was going on in downtown Toronto with the approval of the mayor and all everyone else involved.
That is not a public health statement.
And imagine if you're a poor kid saying, mommy, mommy, can I get an ice cream?
Oh, I can't afford an ice cream.
Oh, there's a free ice cream.
Oh, but you got to get the jab.
Mommy, let me get the jab.
They say it's fine.
What are we doing?
Tammy writes, that is wrong to do to kids.
COVID vaccine have a higher death rate than COVID.
I don't know if that's true for the general population, but I know that for children of tender years, I think there's been a single child in Ontario under the age of 20 who's died from the vaccine.
Maybe it's like two, but in the whole country, there are literally millions of children.
So it's less than a one in a million chance of death from the virus.
I don't yet know, and I don't even know if we know the death rate from the vaccine.
We don't know its long-term effects because it's only been out a few months.
So it's, in my mind, it's statistically absurd to give it to children.
I mean, if you want to make that decision, if you're 70 or 80, or if you have the underlying comorbidities, okay, make that decision.
But what are you doing going to literally the most immune or the healthiest people in the world and saying, yeah, take this and don't tell your parents.
It's so gross.
That's the show for today.
Until next time, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters to you at home, good night.