Media fact-checkers like PolitiFact, often funded by corporate backers such as Facebook (Mark Zuckerberg) and TikTok (linked to the Chinese Communist Party), are accused of weaponizing "debunking" against conservative voices—e.g., dismissing COVID-19 lab-leak theories tied to Wuhan’s 2020 bat research or Canada’s Winnipeg lab, where PLA-affiliated researchers worked. Candice Bergen’s House of Commons questions about China’s trustworthiness were labeled racist by Justin Trudeau, who also called border controls "bigoted," mirroring his past blackface and groping controversies. Spencer Fernando frames Trudeau’s rhetoric as fear-driven, while the segment urges support for independent journalists like Kyle Kemper to counter perceived ideological censorship, portraying freedom as an ideal under relentless attack rather than a default state. [Automatically generated summary]
Do you know what a fact checker is in the news business?
I would think it's anyone in the news business.
Isn't that sort of what news is?
You're checking the facts, who, what, where, why, when?
So what are all these government-funded fact-checkers really about?
I'll give you my thoughts on it.
And I think the way to answer it is to follow the money.
I'll show you where millions of dollars in fact-checking comes from.
Before I do, let me invite you to become a subscriber to the video version of this podcast.
We call it Rebel News Plus.
Besides my daily show, you get weekly shows from my friends Sheila Gunri, David Menzies, and Andrew Chapados.
So that's a lot of TV coming your way for eight bucks a month or 80 bucks for the whole year.
Just go to RebelNews.com and click subscribe.
In addition to TV, you'll have the satisfaction of supporting one of Canada's very few remaining independent news organizations.
That's all at RebelNews.com.
All right, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, I think it's pretty clear media fact checkers are a joke.
It's May 27th, 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 don't want to publish it just because it's my bloody right to do so.
What's a fact checker in the news business?
I mean, aren't all news reporters fact checkers?
Pretty basic journalism to tell a story, who, what, where, why, when, and how.
You know, facts.
That's the news.
That's journalism.
That's any investigation for the truth.
That's what a detective does.
So what about this new phenomenon in journalism called fact-checking?
Isn't that what all journalism is?
At least the news side of things?
I mean, isn't that what the reporter himself would be doing in the first instance?
And maybe that reporter's editor, just to check a few things, and maybe in some prickly cases, bring a lawyer in to really make sure everything's just airtight.
But isn't a journalist who calls himself a fact-checker just a journalist?
Isn't that redundant?
Don't all journalists already do that?
Well, you see, I see there's something, I think there's something ideological about this new terminology.
Trump liked to call out what he described as fake news.
So he fact-checked the media in his own way, and they sure didn't like it.
And they fact-checked him right back.
That's another way of saying they argued.
But these days, especially with Trump gone, fact-checking isn't actually about holding power to account.
Not a lot of fact-checking of Justin Trudeau or Joe Biden.
Fact-checking these days is when some journalists try to discredit other journalists, when some journalists, typically liberal journalists, but more accurately, corporate journalists, try to discredit conservative journalists, but more accurately, dissident independent journalists.
Instead of holding the government to account, instead of holding lockdown politicians or Justin Trudeau or Joe Biden to account, these fact checkers try to hold reporters to account if they don't like those reports.
Now, I'm all for holding people to account if it really is fact-checking, but so much of what goes by fact-checking these days is just opinions.
It's a smear, actually.
It's an attempt to hush up those who would actually try to hold government truly to account.
Here it is, in contrast, on a goofy story.
Remember when this happened?
It was just a couple months ago.
Now look at how the New York Times handled that versus how it handled Trump walking carefully that one time.
See, with Biden, the New York Times wants you to know he's just fine.
With Donald Trump, there are health questions that need to be answered.
I mean, if you think that's bad, that's nothing.
There's a really funny satirical website called The Babylon Bee.
Much funnier than The Onion, but it's conservative.
So it's fact-checked all the time.
A satirical site.
It's a joke site.
That's what satirical means.
It's a site of absurd mockery.
Humor.
Jokes.
But because it comes from a conservative point of view and a Christian point of view, this joke site is fact-checked.
They fact-check the jokes.
Would you ever see anyone try to fact-check a comedy sketch on Saturday Night Live, the Liberal Comedy Hour on TV?
They'd be nuts.
Everyone would say, are you crazy?
That's a comedy sketch.
But the Babylon Bee is actually fact-checked all the time.
Here's a funny joke they made about Lego.
You know, Lego, no longer having male or female pieces.
It's sort of funny.
It's a one-liner.
It's just a quick gag.
It's like an image, really.
It mocks the left, though, a little bit, right?
So PolitiFact, a fact-checking website, literally tried to debunk the joke.
It was a joke.
But they actually phoned Lego to check.
I swear to God, Lego did not respond to PolitiFact's query about the post.
Now, that is so pathetic.
So who pays for PolitiFact?
It sounds so official, doesn't it?
Well, look, lots of big corporate institutions pay for it, the two biggest being Facebook, as you can see, and TikTok.
That's the Chinese Communist Party-controlled app.
So big tech, Mark Zuckerberg, and the Chinese Communist Party.
Got it.
That explains a lot, doesn't it?
Say, do you think PolitiFact is going to fact-check Mark Zuckerberg or China anytime soon?
Sort of the opposite, actually.
They'll sure fact-check the enemies of their patrons, Facebook and China.
Like a year ago, when normal people started asking, hey, is this virus from Wuhan related in any way to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Chinese virus lab studying coronaviruses?
I wonder, wow, the fact-checkers all said, that's debunked.
That's racist.
Well, how could they say it was debunked before it was even investigated?
They could say that they did say that because the Chinese Communist Party told them so.
So they were taking that as the factual truth, standing with power, standing with their donors, defending their donors against criticism.
That's fact-checking these days.
It's spin.
It's a cover-up.
It's the opposite of fact-checking.
And Anthony Fauci, who channeled the same myth.
Look at this.
stepwise evolution over time, strongly indicates that it evolved in nature and then jumped species.
One of the issues of saying, could that virus that was in, first of all, if you accept the premise, which is very strongly supported by scientific evidence, that it was not deliberately mutated and deliberately changed.
And you say, if it was in the wild and evolving, the likelihood it jumped species naturally.
Someone will say, well, maybe somebody took it from the wild, put it in the lab, and then it escaped from the lab.
But that means it was in the wild to begin with.
There's a lot of cloudiness around the origins of COVID-19 still.
So I wanted to ask, are you still confident that it developed naturally?
Oh, 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.
Yeah, wow.
Here's the New York Times on the flip-floppery.
Oh, they mocked anyone who asked any questions about the Chinese government.
Racist conspiracy theories, go put on a tinfoil hat.
They sided with power against skepticism.
But now that Trump is gone and such questions don't benefit him, they'll allow questions for China.
Vox is another one of these left-wing media sites that spends more energy fact-checking conservative media than liberal governments.
They tried to secretly edit their earlier mockery of anyone who mentioned the possibility that the Wuhan virus came from the Wuhan Institute of Urology.
Why would they do that in secret?
Isn't the whole point about corrections and fact-checks?
You're very, very transparent.
Why are you changing what you did in secret?
You don't want your fact-checking to be fact-checked, maybe?
And look at this.
Now, Mark Zuckerberg, one of the world's richest men, the founder of Facebook, he has given us his permission to talk about this.
You see, until now, if you posted anything on your Facebook page about this question, you would be suspended or banned or your post would be deleted because Mark Zuckerberg said so.
But now a year later, His Majesty Mark Zuckerberg will permit you to talk about it.
What a benevolent God he is.
I'm so grateful to him.
You know that story about him, right?
Do you know how gross Mark Zuckerberg is?
What a weirdo he is?
You know, he actually asked the dictator of China, Xi Jinping, to name his own daughter.
Mark Zuckerberg is having a baby girl and asked Xi Jinping to name his daughter.
What a freak.
Zuckerberg.
Xi Jinping is used to people slobbering all over him, but this was too much even for him.
He declined the weirdo.
So yeah, fact checkers.
It was a YouTube fact-checker who suspended us at Rebel News for a week because I did a video back in January called, literally, if big tech can silence Trump, they can silence anyone.
And they banned me.
They banned that.
They suspended us for a week, claiming that I failed their fact check, even though I think that rather proves it, don't you think?
So yeah, fact checkers.
Do you know why I mention this?
Because you know who's getting into the fact-checking business in Canada big time.
You guessed it.
We mentioned to you Facebook the other day.
They just colonized 14 Canadian news organizations just last week, giving millions of dollars to buy them off.
But they actually have a long way to go to catch up to Trudeau's own propaganda.
I mean, here's a story from about a year ago.
Just one tiny example.
$3 million from Stephen Gilbo to fact check critics of the Wuhan virus and the government's response to it.
Just paying to demonize the government's critics.
Just $3 million.
Sure, why not?
Literally millions more in a raft of studies targeting misinformation.
Again, that's just what government calls ideas it doesn't like.
The leading demonizer of independent thought is, of course, the CBC.
They have a whole raft of hit pieces they call fact checks, but they're not fact checks.
They're certainly not fact checks of Justin Trudeau, who could use one or two.
They're smears against other opinions.
You might remember this incredible one.
Some Canadians who received unsolicited copies of Epoch Times, upset by a claim that China was behind virus.
So they were actually criticizing Epoch Times for getting it right.
That headline, by the way, they changed it from the even more insane one beforehand.
That's the CBC, the state broadcaster, smearing private media entities for daring to criticize China in Canada.
Just smearing one of the few media companies in Canada that's not on the take.
So yeah, fact-checking.
Let's fact-check a joke about Lego pieces.
Let's fact-check critics of Trudeau, critics of China, critics of Mark Zuckerberg.
That's not about facts, is it?
That's not about holding power to account, is it?
That's about discrediting those who actually do hold power to account.
Do you know who the only trustworthy trustworthy fact-checker out there is?
It's you.
Stay with us for more.
Welcome back.
Horseshoe Bats and Caves00:07:06
Well, we have been interested in the virus that came from Wuhan.
Well, actually, before the emergency was even called, we started seeing stories out of China and started poking around, I think, before the mainstream media did in many ways.
And I want to take you back to a live stream I did in early April of last year.
So I'm talking, I don't know, almost 14 months ago.
I found a video online produced by the government of China bragging about their virus catcher.
Now, he didn't catch the virus himself that we know of, but he would go into caves, trap bats, get the blood-sucking ticks from the bats, take them to the lab, and examine them and investigate them.
And this is what he did for a living.
You'll see him in the lab, by the way, without any protective gear on.
And at the end of this video, and I'm not going to play the whole thing, but I'll play a few minutes for you.
At the end of it, they actually boast that this lab and others like it in China have discovered more viruses than the rest of the world combined.
And they were very proud of this and their bat virus research until, of course, the global pandemic hit.
Here, let me show you what we uncovered.
I suppose others uncovered it too, but we brought it to you almost 14 months ago.
Take a look.
So, this is obviously, can they hear my voice over top?
Yeah.
So, this is obviously a professionally produced documentary.
Obviously, it's government propaganda.
You saw the name of the agency, China Science Communication, Youth in the Wild.
That's a cave, obviously.
Did you see the bat there?
When we are confronted with an invisible enemy, we can find threats hidden deep.
Only when we hide ourselves.
like a haiku.
Youth in the Wild, the Invisible Defender.
So this is calling these virus scientists invisible defenders.
So he's got his protective.
I am not a doctor, but I work to cure and save people.
Really, do you, mate?
I work in virus sample collection and classification.
Those are some ominous images.
Viruses have been the leading cause of human death.
They have been highly elusive and caught people off guard.
Invisible to the naked eye infect people through vectors over the course of evolution.
Vectors have coexisted with the viruses.
Vector is the host of the virus, I think.
This is our mission.
Wuhan Centers for Disease Prevention and Control.
There you go.
Did you see that?
That's their top.
Okay, keep rolling.
That's their top virus lab in the whole country.
Just happens to be in Wuhan.
So this guy's out there catching creepy crawlies.
It's a very pretty background.
This is very professionally done.
The caves are my workbench.
Oh, can you go back 10 seconds?
What did he say there about the caves?
Mountains and planes service my office.
Is that so pretty?
Yeah, keep going.
The caves are my workbench.
One female and one male.
We are so lucky.
So he's catching bats.
He's going into caves and catching bats.
Hubei province.
It's a treasure trove for vectors.
This tick can kill people.
We caught one now.
Harsh for humankind.
This is a hell of a video.
This is not some amateur production.
Among all known creatures, the bats are rich in various viruses inside.
Can find most viruses responsible for human diseases like rabies virus, SARS, and Ebola.
Accordingly, the caves frequented by bats become our main battlefields.
He's going into the cave of bats.
Wet.
Dark.
And lonely.
Yeah, that's right.
Bats usually lives in caves humans can hardly reach.
Only in these places can we find the most ideal virus vector samples.
Watch out.
Most bats living here are horseshoe bats.
Oh, can you go back for one second?
See, the horseshoe bats, that's such an important point.
And horseshoe bats.
Yeah, hope.
And Pipistrellis abramis.
I'm going to Google that for a second.
Pipistrellis abramus.
That's also called a Japanese house bat.
Okay, I just Googled that.
Remember that word horseshoe bat, okay?
I'm going to come back to that later.
I'll just tell you why now.
Horseshoe bats are not for sale in the Wuhan wet market.
And I'll give you my proof point for that later.
So horseshoe bats and Pipostrellisabramis, that's also called a Japanese bat.
Keep going.
If we keep our skin bare, we can easily get contact with the feces of bats, which contaminate everything.
So it's highly risky here.
It usually takes several days living in the bats' caves to analyze the symbiotic relations between bat populations and viruses.
No cell phone signals.
No supplies.
I can feel the fear.
Fear of infections.
Fear of getting lost.
With this fear, I take every step extremely cautiously.
Spencer On Racism And Dictatorship00:13:36
The more I feel the fear, the more I take cautions in doing the details, because when you find the viruses, you're also most easily exposed to the viruses.
Well, that was my commentary in the background.
Of course, the language was in Chinese, so I was describing what I saw in reading the captions.
Just incredible.
I mean, what are the odds that the virus would come from Wuhan, where the Wuhan Institute for Virology is located, and there is no connection at all?
I mean, surely common sense or, you know, the process of deduction, one would start with thinking, well, is there any correlation?
Especially since China, as you can see in that video, was bragging about their virus research.
Well, that topic has been considered a conspiracy theory for more than a year when suddenly all the authorities from Anthony Fauci to Facebook have said, well, hang on, maybe we won't deplatform you as a conspiracy theorist for talking about it after all.
Joining us now to talk about this and how this is playing out in Canada's House of Commons is our friend Spencer Fernando, proprietor of spencerfernando.com and one of the few independent journalists left in Canada.
Spencer, great to see you.
Sorry for that long introduction.
I mean, it might not be related to the Institute of Virology, but that sure seems like an obvious place to start.
If you were Inspector, you know, if you were a sleuth, if you were a police detective, Sherlock Holmes, you'd probably start at the Institute of Virology.
I'm just guessing.
Yeah, you know, one thing I've been kind of that's been in the back of my head through a lot of this is it reminds me a bit of Chernobyl, right?
You know, you have a communist state that unleashes something that could be very devastating to the world or possibly unleashes something.
And, you know, in Chernobyl, the Soviet Union, they weren't planning to tell anybody about it, right?
It was only when it became such an obvious problem.
And other countries were like, hey, what's all this radiation going on over there?
They had to admit what's going on, right?
So it's kind of like the default position for, you know, ruthless communist states is to just never admit any mistakes and just, you know, cover it up.
And you look at China's behavior.
It was hilariously defensive after the virus emerged, right?
I mean, first they said, oh, it's not a threat at all.
And then they just denounced anyone who even brought it up.
Oh, there's no possibilities.
From the lab.
Then they didn't let people in and then they destroyed a lot of evidence.
And so you think, okay, I mean, does this look like a country that's open and transparent and wants people to actually clear it?
Do they think they'll be cleared if there's a real investigation?
So again, the idea that for a year people were banned and as you say, deplatformed for bringing this up.
And then all of a sudden, oh, maybe we should actually look into it.
I mean, that might have been nice a year ago when there might have still been some evidence around.
Yeah.
You know, I think it's like so many of the things.
If Donald Trump said it, then to prove you were a good liberal or at least not a crazy Trumpist, you had to oppose it.
I mean, Trump would talk about possible remedies, possible medicines, possible treatments, and immediately, because Trump said it, you weren't allowed to re-say it.
And I think that's what happened with this.
Now, here's the thing.
Here's the Canadian angle.
And I find this deeply troubling.
Canada has a very high security virus research lab called the National Microbiology Laboratory.
It's a level four virus security.
Like it's where you study Ebola.
Like there's not a lot of places like that.
It's in Winnipeg.
And incredibly, Chinese nationals, but not just Chinese nationals, people with the People's Liberation Army, like Chinese military researchers were allowed to work there to study these viruses in Canada with Canada's knowledge, permission, cooperation.
They actually published papers with the PLA.
And this is not a rumor or a conspiracy theory.
We know this.
The Global Mail actually had a wonderful expose on it.
The RCMP and CISAs raided this facility, led to the ouster of some of these Chinese nationals.
And yet anyone who talks about it is called a racist or conspiracy theorist.
Spencer, can I show you a quick clip from the House of Commons where Candice Bergen asked about this lab?
I want to play it for our viewers, and I'd love your thoughts on it afterwards.
So stay right there.
Hang on.
Here's Candice Bergen.
The Honorable Member for Portage Linsker.
Well, the problem is, and the Prime Minister maybe does not realize this, is communist China cannot be trusted.
I know he admires their basic dictatorship.
I know he liked to do fundraisers with them over the years.
I know he thought they were the first go-to for vaccines.
But at this point, we would hope that he would learn a lesson and put the safety, security, and protection of Canadians above this fascination he has with the communist regime.
So again, will he commit to ending this research and this cooperation with a regime that not only doesn't have our interest in mind, but actually wants to hurt Canada?
Honorable Prime Minister.
Mr. Speaker, yes, from the beginning of my career onwards, I have worked with many Chinese Canadians and indeed had fundraisers with them.
And the rise in anti-Asian racism we're seeing over the past number of months should be of concern to everyone.
And I would recommend that the members of the Conservative Party, in their zeal to make personal attacks, not start to push too far into intolerance towards Canadians of diverse origins.
We will continue to stand up to defend Canadians' interests, Canadian security.
We will continue to make sure that we're doing everything we can to keep Canadians safe while participating in the global research community and stand up for tolerance and diversity.
You know, there's so many incredible things.
I was just jotting down some of the language.
Trudeau, and I'm sorry I have subjected you to so much, Trudeau, Spencer.
I'll survive, I think.
Trudeau said Canadians of diverse origins.
But that's the thing.
They weren't Canadians.
They were Chinese nationals.
They weren't Canadians.
It wasn't an ethnic comment.
And he said the global research community, it's not the global research community.
It's the Chinese military learning how to weaponize viruses.
The chutzpah there, Spencer, but he's getting away with it as usual, isn't he?
Yeah, you know, I think the one angle that hasn't been touched on too much is that, you know, you were talking about anti-Asian racism.
Well, Trudeau came closer to that than anybody in the House of Commons, right?
Because the Conservatives said, okay, we have communist China's military shouldn't have access to a facility, right?
What was the first thing Trudeau said afterwards?
Oh, don't be racist against Asian Canadians.
So he's linking China's communist military to Canadian citizens who happen to be Asian, a link that most people wouldn't be making.
So it's almost like he wants to kind of stoke resentment so then he can say, oh, look, I'm fighting against resentment and I'm standing up for diversity.
So again, this is the problem when you have someone who in some ways is fundamentally unserious leading a country, right?
It's not like a student council where we'll just be nice to everybody, bring a bunch of different people on board.
We'll have a bunch of nice meetings.
I mean, you're dealing with countries like China that are led by some ruthless people.
They have ruthless ideas and they're willing to do pretty much anything to get their way.
So this whole idea that, oh, we'll just, I'll just repeat, you know, a few woke buzzwords and everything will be fine.
I mean, that's not how it works.
You know, I think you made a very important point there.
Candice Bergen, I know her a little bit, is one of the most fair-minded, gentle people.
I mean, I think she's tough also, but she would never express anything in a racist vein.
And she didn't.
I mean, China is a country.
It also, there is a Chinese ethnicity or many ethnicities.
It was Trudeau who made the connection.
And it reminds me when people compare things to Hitler.
And I always say, don't do that because if you're saying this guy is as bad as Hitler, then Hitler was no worse than this guy.
And you're actually normalizing Hitler.
I mean, when people use language, and so when Candace Berger says, what about China's dictatorship spying on us?
If you're the one who says, stop picking on Chinese Canadians, you're the one who's made the link.
You're the one who has started people thinking, oh, should I be worried about this ethnically Chinese person here?
I think you're so right.
It was Trudeau that made the dual loyalties implication.
It was Trudeau who made the ethnic stereotype implication.
It wasn't Candice Bergen.
It was Trudeau.
Yeah, and you know, one of the big problems is, you know, a lot of Asian Canadians, especially, you know, Chinese Canadians, they're in a very tough situation because there is obviously a terrible rise in anti-Asian racism, which I think everyone should condemn and should oppose.
But they're also getting, you know, intimidation from China itself, right?
I mean, you know, people who have family back in China, they say, oh, well, we don't really like that you have some, you know, say it's pro-Uyghur activism or pro-Hong Kong activism.
Yeah, we don't really like that.
It would be a shame if something happened to your family members.
And they're getting almost no help from the Trudeau government.
So you have on one side people, you know, racist people who are treating them badly, and then China treating them badly.
And then Trudeau basically just saying, yeah, we're not going to do anything to help you, but we'll just, you know, we'll just accuse everybody of racism, even when they bring up legitimate questions.
You know, a lot of people, you know, here who are of Chinese descent, I mean, they left to get away from the Chinese Communist Party.
So they're still in many ways being subjected to it and they're getting no assistance from Trudeau.
So, yeah, it's pretty arrogant for him to claim he's all of a sudden the defender of Asian Canadians when he's left a lot of Chinese Canadians completely out to dry.
Yeah.
You know, the other people who are really pushing this line that asking about the Wuhan Institute of Virology is essentially racist, it's the Chinese government.
I mean, it's sort of creepy.
Twitter is banned in China, but Twitter allows Chinese propagandists.
By that, I mean, the dictatorship, their state-run media, their ambassadors around the world.
There are hundreds, maybe thousands of Chinese propagandists on Twitter, often with verified accounts that are given great credibility.
They're the other ones pushing this line that to ask about the pandemic's origin is racist.
I find it, it's always a bad sign when the Prime Minister of Canada is saying word for word what the Chinese dictatorship's diplomats are saying.
Like, if you are reading the same talking points as Beijing's spin doctors, maybe you should check your bearings again.
I don't know.
I find it creepy.
I don't know.
Are you and I a minority?
Or are most people nodding along and saying, yes, we shouldn't ask about this Wuhan connection?
It's racist to do so.
Or are most people seeing through this?
Are you worried he's getting away with it?
You know, I think one of the things we're seeing a lot in the world is people who are the public mind and the private mind, right?
So I think there's a lot of fear out there.
People are obviously afraid of being accused of racism or not being woke enough or whatever's going on.
And so people will publicly go along with something and then privately, you can be pretty sure they're saying, you know, this is crazy.
I don't believe any of this.
But, you know, people are being scared into it.
So that's what he's trying to do.
He's trying to, you know, I think get the average person who certainly doesn't trust China and certainly is pretty angry about what happened.
He's trying to get them to feel like, oh, no, I don't want to be accused of racism if I say anything.
So it's a fear tactic and it'll work on some people.
We'll see how strong-minded and strong-willed the country is if it can push back against that.
So we'll see.
But what's also concerning is in terms of Canada's national interests.
I mean, we've seen this mistake already over a year ago.
It's the same thing.
When people were saying, well, this whole thing in Wuhan looks pretty concerning.
People getting sick.
And maybe we should stop flights from China.
And China said, no, no, that's bigoted and racist.
You're discriminating against Chinese people.
And Patty Haidu and Justin Trudeau and Teresa Tan, they said very similar things.
Border controls will cause harm.
This is about bigotry.
This is unacceptable.
So they've already made the same mistake of trusting China before and using the rhetoric of any criticism as racist.
So the fact that they're doing it again, it's quite disturbing.
Yeah, it's incredible.
You know, I guess none of us should be surprised because Trudeau's go-to when he's feeling on the defensive is to accuse his opponents of, frankly, many of the same things he does.
He accuses other people of racism.
He's the guy who dresses up in blackface.
He accuses other people of sexism.
He's the one who groped Rose Knight in Creston, B.C.
I think calling people racist is his go-to place when he's feeling like he doesn't have a substantive answer.
I'm just worried he's going to get away with it.
Hey, for those who haven't read the story yet, Spencer has it on his website prominently.
The story is Trudeau's racism deflection on China is a strategy based on weakness and desperation.
And if you're not already signed up for Spencer's website and you get the email updates and supporting him, I encourage you to do so.
He's one of the few independent voices left in Canada.
And we're always grateful to have you on the show.
Thanks for coming by today, Spencer.
Shored Up Freedom00:02:04
Good to talk to you.
All right, there you have it.
Spencer Fernando, stay with us.
More hey, welcome back to my show last night.
Bruce writes, Kyle Kemper is too smart for the Liberal Party's own good.
So they chose a useful idiot who could be the totally compliant puppet for the far left.
Thanks for sharing that video, Ezra.
Look, I don't agree with everything Kyle Kemper said, but I agree with a fair bit of it.
And I like the fact that he expressed it and that he's not so politically correct.
He's just following in the footsteps of his half-brother.
I will admit that any grown man who makes this heart symbol or something, and he was so practical, I just, you know, I find it hard to take that guy too seriously.
But I was glad to meet him and get to know him a little bit.
Through YouTube, I mean.
David writes, Ezra, you might have been saying keep fighting for freedom for six years on the Rebel, but you were saying it before that on the source, and it's still one of the best taglines.
Yeah, I did.
I started it at Sun News Network.
So I guess it's about a decade now.
And that's the thing about freedom is I say keep fighting for freedom.
You always have to keep fighting for freedom, even if you are extremely free.
Because freedom decays.
It falls apart.
Entropy, I think might be the word.
It's always under attack.
It erodes.
It has to be shored up and shored up and shored up all the time.
You can't take your eye off the ball.
Things don't tend towards freedom.
That's actually not the natural state of humanity.
It's the ideal state.
It's where we all want to be.
But if you look back over the course of time, it's the exception, not the rule.
I want us to stay in the freedom times.
I want us to continue to live in this miraculous era, one of the few ones where people have a chance at freedom.