Ezra Levant details a second conviction from Trudeau’s Elections Commissioner for The Labranos, his 2019 book exposing alleged media corruption, despite no clear complaint and $6B in fines ignored for pro-Trudeau titles. He reveals invasive surveillance by Trudeau’s "compliance unit," including social media monitoring and questioning over lawn signs criticizing the PM. Levant links this to vaccine passport authoritarianism—like France’s mandatory policies—and Fauci’s polarizing rhetoric, warning of eroded trust and potential healthcare backlash. The episode frames Trudeau’s legal attacks as a harbinger of broader internet censorship under bills like C-10 and C-36, urging resistance through appeals up to the Supreme Court. [Automatically generated summary]
I got another letter from the Elections Commission today convicting me again for my book, The Labranos.
They just won't stop.
It's coming up on two years now.
Thousands of dollars in fines.
I'll take you through the letter and I'll tell you my plans.
Hey, just I don't want to, you know, spoiler alert here, but do you think I'm going to pay or do you think I'm going to appeal this ruling?
What do you think?
I'll take you through it.
But before I do, let me invite you to get the video version of this podcast.
I think it's better because you can see the letter.
You can see.
I'm going to play for you some video footage.
It's just a richer experience.
I know not everyone can watch the video because you're on the go or whatever, but please consider subscribing to the video version of the podcast.
It's called Rebel News Plus.
It's $8 a month.
Or if you buy for a whole year, it's $80 for the whole year in advance.
So that's really two free months.
And in addition to my show, which is daily, you get weekly shows from Sheila Gunread, Andrew Chapatos, David Menzies, and you're the reason we get to be independent and not just a Trudeau repeater.
Just go to RebelNews.com and click subscribe and the rest is easy.
All right, thanks for your help with that.
and here's the podcast.
Tonight, on the eve of a federal election, Trudeau's elections commissioner sends me a letter convicting me again of writing an illegal book.
It's July 13th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a 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 to the government about why I publish them is because it's my bloody right to do so.
I don't think you're going to believe what I'm about to tell you.
I just received another conviction letter from Justin Trudeau's Elections Commissioner.
He's personally found me guilty for a second time of writing an illegal book about Trudeau back in 2019 called The Labranos, What the Media Won't Tell You About Justin Trudeau's Corruption.
The book, its front cover, my tweets about it, our promotion of the book across the country.
Trudeau's Elections Commissioner had senior officers investigating me, tracking me, tracking our staff, creeping through our social media.
And they say it's illegal.
And they now demand that I pay thousands of dollars in fines.
You probably think I'm exaggerating or even just making it up.
So I've put the police state-style letter online at thelabranos.com for you to see for yourself.
This 14-page letter convicting me is there, including the thousands of dollars in fines.
I've also put their past convictions to me online at the same website and my lawyer's submissions too.
I think the craziest thing on that website is a hidden camera video I recorded of my one-hour interrogation at the hands of two senior ex-RCMP officers who are now on censorship patrol.
I mean, it's like that book, Fahrenheit 451, about the government's official book burners.
By the way, if you don't realize this is all a test drive for their plan to censor the internet, I think you're missing their point.
I'm the test case.
You're next.
Complaints and Concealments00:02:54
So go to thelebranos.com for that.
If you're new to this story, you probably don't know how nuts it is to have two 30-year ex-RCMP veterans who used to be on the counter-terrorism beat ask you questions like,
why didn't you register your book with the government before criticizing the prime minister the knowledge that you would have or not have of the of the election act the canada elections act when you are planning the book and you the the the new third party rules because i believe there's some comments on your stuff as well about that
Did you give any consideration of saying maybe I should register as a third party for this circumstance, or maybe I shouldn't because of my interpretation of what I'm going to do?
Or did you not make that determination?
How crazy is it to be told that you can't even see the complaint against you, let alone know who complained?
Can I see the complaint against me?
The letter that you received?
No, I presume that your investigation complaint, yeah.
Oh, this is still part of the investigation, so we'll have to, once the investigation's been completed, the commission will have to make a decision.
And at that point, you'll have to decide if that is releasable or not.
It's not something that usually is released, no.
So it's a secret complaint?
It's not a secret complaint.
It's just a complaint that's part of the investigation.
And to keep the integrity of the investigation right now, you'll understand that we can't share everything that we have as well.
Well, I don't want everything that you had.
I just, if I'm here to meet a complaint, but you won't show me the complaint, how can I possibly meet the complaint?
How can I possibly respond to something that you won't show me?
Well, though, I think the letter was quite clear on what the infraction is alleged.
And this is what we want to clarify with you.
Well, did you generate the complaint or was it from an outside party?
No, we didn't generate the complaint.
Okay, so someone did not generate the complaint.
So someone external to your office generated the complaint?
That is usually the case.
Is that the case in this case?
Yeah.
Yeah, we did not generate the complaint.
Okay, was it the Liberal Party that generated the complaint?
I went into that, sir.
So you won't tell me who the complaint is?
The complainant is.
That's the CEO?
Yeah, no, not at this point.
So at what point do you tell me who this is?
The commissioner is the ultimate responsible person for the investigation and how this is decided.
So how do I know what conduct has been complained about if you won't tell me?
And talk about creepy.
Those cops wanted to know who we hire at Rebel News and why.
Complaints and Criticism00:14:06
Sorry, so moving forward.
So for the book, you seek volunteers that, and without going back to the tape to get the exact quote, that wanted to have a certain view on Trudeau and Gerald Butts and believed in free speech and that were embarrassed by the Prime Minister Trudeau in Blackface, and you sought that specific type of person.
Is that correct?
I want to go back when you were doing your recruiting for people and how you described it.
Can you go over that again for me, who your type of people you were looking for?
So in that, were they, you were seeking these people for what purpose?
Because you explained to us the type of people you were seeking.
What was the purpose?
Well, not to brag, but I think they're after us because the Lobranos was a number one bestseller, more than 1,000 five-star ratings from readers, meticulously researched 289 footnotes proving my assertions.
I think that's why Trudeau hates the book so much.
It's embarrassing to him, and he hates to be embarrassed.
He's not used to anyone criticizing him.
He fires cabinet ministers who dare to speak back to him, even the former justice minister, Jody Wilson Raybould.
99% of Canada's media is obedient to Trudeau, but he just obsesses about that last 1% that's still independent.
That's why he's had a dozen police and bureaucrats and lawyers investigating me for nearly two years.
I think he's obsessed with this book.
I was convicted already once this year, but my lawyers immediately appealed.
We gave notice of our appeal in February, and Trudeau's elections commissioner waited until now, just weeks before this year's election is called, to convict me again.
I think he's trying to send me a message not to criticize Trudeau during this next election.
Hey, do you think I'm going to obey him?
He says my book is illegal.
He says I'm not allowed to write a book that criticizes Trudeau during an election campaign.
He says that makes it the same as a political party ad.
And so I have to register my book with the government, and I can't promote my book because that's campaign ads.
He's making that all up, by the way.
There were 24 books published about Trudeau in the last election campaign.
For example, well, I mean, there were 23 pro-Trudeau books, like this one by Aaron Werry, the government journalist who works at Trudeau CBC.
And here's a book by John Iveson, who works for Post Media, which is the largest recipient of Trudeau's newspaper bailout.
So none of the 23 pro-Trudeau books published at exactly the same time as my book, none of them were investigated or convicted or fined, just mine.
Now, my lawyers pointed that out in my appeal.
And here's what Trudeau's election commissioner said today.
He said, in its submissions, Rebel News argued that it has been treated unfairly and in a selective manner in this matter because two other books identified by Rebel News as allegedly promoting the prime minister and that were published during the election period were not investigated by my office.
This argument cannot be given effect to.
As commissioner, under section 510 of the Act, I cannot be prevented from investigating a case for the reason that there are other cases that could or should also be investigated.
Relevant case law supports his position.
Well, it's actually 23 other pro-Trudeau books, not two.
But he's not denying that I'm the only author who was prosecuted, even though they were all published at the same time.
In fact, he's sort of bragging about that.
He's saying he knows about other Trudeau books.
Sure, he does.
He's aware of them.
But he's just chosen only to prosecute me, and he should be allowed to do that because, I mean, seriously, he actually gives no reason.
Go read the letter for yourself.
I just told you what he said.
He says he can pick and choose who he's going after, and he's just chosen to do that.
And what are you going to do about it, peasant?
You see, the process is the punishment.
The stigma is the punishment.
He's not really mad about books during the election, just books that criticize Trudeau.
Now, you're probably wondering, since when do we prosecute books at all?
I mean, forget this weird Trudeau commissioner who says he gets to pick and choose when to uphold the law.
Why does he get to prosecute any books at all?
I mean, I don't want him to prosecute any authors, not me, not the pro-Trudeau authors.
We're not China or Iran.
We don't prosecute authors in Canada.
And in fact, the law specifically has a books exemption.
And the promotion of those books, ads, websites, lawn signs, billboards, whatever, anything that sells a book is exempt from these election laws, which my lawyers pointed out.
But look at this.
Here's his reply.
The book exemption argument.
Rebel News relies on what it calls the book promotion exemption, found in the definition of election advertising.
It's subsection two of the Act.
The relevant portion of the provision at paragraph two under election advertising clarifies that for greater certainty, election advertising does not include the distribution of a book or the promotion of the sale of a book for no less than its commercial value if the book was planned to be made available to the public regardless of whether there was to be an election.
It is clear from the underlying passage that the so-called book exemption applies only in relation to a book that would have been published whether or not the election was called.
Okay, just stop for a moment.
My book costs $15, which is priced fairly.
They don't quarrel with that.
It meets that test.
And of course I'd publish it whether or not there was an election.
That's a really weird test.
If there was no election, we'd have a constitutional crisis.
Section 4 of our Charter of Rights requires that there be an election every five years.
If in some insane situation there was no election, of course I'd have published the book and probably given a much stronger title than the Libranos.
But look at this sneaky little Trudeau weasel.
Here's how he gets around that.
He says, the book exemption does not apply.
I am of the view that the clarification of paragraph two of the act does not apply in this case because Rebel News had planned the launch of the book to coincide with the election.
Okay, hang on, but the law doesn't say I can't time the book to coincide with an election.
Every election book is timed for the election.
It wouldn't make sense to publish a book about an election a week after the election.
A lot of more books about Trump being published in 2020 than in 2021.
These Trudeau boys are just making this up to get me.
They're saying the fact that I wanted people to read my book before the election makes it an illegal book.
But that's not what the law says.
But it gets weirder.
The next few pages, pages 6, 7, 8, 9 in the letter, you can see it all at thelabranos.com, is a partial list of the things that Trudeau's police did to spy on us.
They creeped our social media pages.
They looked at photos published by our staff.
They watched my shows.
They tracked me.
These are just the things they admit to.
I don't know if they tapped my phone or hacked our computers or even sent a spy into our office.
They certainly put a lot of manpower on this.
And like I say, the two cops who grilled me were former counterterrorism Mounties.
They had a whole police squad on this.
They gave it a name, the compliance unit.
And the crime these cops were looking for was anything that was mean to Trudeau and his friends.
I'm not kidding.
See for yourself.
Here's page eight of the letter.
Other evidentiary elements identified in the compliance unit recommendation report established that the lawn signs were intended to oppose the Liberal Party and the election of its leader and certain members of the cabinet whose pictures were also included on the lawn signs by using the word the Libranos and by showing edited pictures of the Prime Minister,
Trudeau, and of some members of the cabinet, Rebel News intended most likely to oppose the Liberal Party of Canada and its leader.
Therefore, in my view, Rebel News lawn signs campaign was designed to oppose the Liberal Party of Canada and the election of some of the candidates.
They're talking about one of our promotion devices, which was we had little signs that said, buy the book.
But they're mad.
And you can see what they're mad about.
They're mad that we use a dollar sign for the S in Libranos.
They seriously put that in their official reasons for convicting me.
And they're mad that we made an artistic interpretation of Trudeau and his henchmen.
By the way, I think they all look great.
I think they have a bit of, I think it takes a bit of a guilty mind to think they look like crooks, but I think they all look handsome there.
But is this really what Canada's elections police and RCMP are spending almost two years on?
By the way, the signs just said buy the book.
Those were the only three words on them besides the Libranos.
But let's say I concede their point.
Of course I want Canadians to oppose Trudeau.
I don't think I'm shy about that.
I'm pretty sure I told that to the counterterrorism RCMP who grilled me for an hour.
I'm not denying that I oppose Trudeau or that my book does.
I'm saying it's my right to oppose Trudeau and that Trudeau and his cops are the creepy ones here.
And anyone who puts cops on a two-year investigation of an author, they're the ones who are probably breaking the law.
There is specifically a book exemption and an exemption for the promotion of books right in the law.
And it specifically covers ads for the books.
And it says nothing about timing a book to coincide with a campaign because that would be really dumb.
I mean, I'm talking Trudeau level dumb, maybe even Seamus O'Regan level dumb to think books aren't timed for elections.
It's natural to criticize politicians.
It's actually our right to do so.
And you know what?
I think I might do so again this year in this election.
I shouldn't have to answer to the police for that.
But look at this creepiness from Trudeau's henchmen, paragraph 35 on page 10, see for yourself at thelabranos.com.
Investigators gathered many screen captures from Rebel News' Twitter account showing that Rebel News distributed its lawn signs during the election period in various places across the country.
Again, to be clear, those lawn signs simply say, buy the book.
Can you imagine if Stephen Harper had directed police to track social media photos of journalists who criticized him?
Could you imagine the uproar if he had done so?
And if he put mounties on the file, I've instructed my lawyers to appeal this ridiculous new conviction, to take it to a real court, and out of the hands of Trudeau's henchmen.
We're going to appeal to the federal court of Canada, real judges.
I know that the fines here are only a few thousand dollars, and that appealing this to the federal court, and if need be to the federal court of appeal, and if need be to the Supreme Court of Canada, I know each of those steps will probably cost $100,000.
This isn't about the money, though.
If it were about the money, I would just pay the few thousand dollars and move on.
But do you think that would be the right thing to have police investigate authors because the book cover is mean to Trudeau and his crony?
They put that in their ruling here.
Because the publication date of the book is inconvenient for Trudeau.
I don't get to publish my book when he says I can't.
An election boss who spends more time and money investigating a Canadian citizen author than foreign interference from China or actual vote fraud.
Trudeau's election boss who thinks he has the power to censor an author and put cops on a two-year hunt of Trudeau's enemies and to tell me when I can or can't publish my book and how I can tell people to buy it.
And do you not see that this is all a trial run of things to come?
If Trudeau wins this election, which he probably will, do you not see that he will apply this same censorship to his critics online, too, through his new internet regulation bill, C10, C36?
Don't you see this isn't about a few thousand dollars in fines.
It's not even really about my book, The Libranos, even though he really hates that book.
It's about anyone who dares to criticize the thin-skinned little bully who wants total control of all political discourse in Canada.
He couldn't buy us off like the rest of the media, so he wants to shut us down.
No, no, see you in court.
And friends, if you can help me cover the cost of this legal appeal, please do.
It's not about the money, it's about stopping a political bully who thinks he can tell authors when they're allowed to write books and when they're not, and what they're allowed to put on their book covers and their book ads and what they're not.
Look, I know Trudeau admires China, he's told us, and I know this is what they do in China, but it's not what we do here in Canada.
Go to thelebranos.com to read this 14-page conviction letter for yourself.
While you're there, if you can, please chip in to help me appeal this ruling to the Federal Court of Canada.
New ID Policy in Sydney00:06:38
Thank you.
To avoid an inactive record of personal credit, please follow the relevant regulations and help with the orders on the train and at the station.
There you have it.
We've shown you that video before.
A train in China several years ago saying if you don't behave, if you are disorderly, if you conduct yourself discreditably, that'll go in your own personal information system.
It was a vaccine passport before the vaccine.
It was called a social credit system.
China gave us the social credit system, and then China gave us the virus, and the West is combining them now.
Joining us now to talk about how vaccine passports will use this Chinese-style system to track us is our friend Janine Yunes.
She is an activist and a lawyer with the new Civil Liberties Alliance.
Great to see you again, Janine.
Thanks for joining us.
Thanks for having me back.
Well, it's my pleasure.
You know, I follow your tweets on Twitter, and I like your approach to things because you come from the liberal left, as opposed to the don't tread on me Tea Party right, let's say.
I want to go through a few of your tweets for our viewers because I find them so interesting.
France, which has more of an authoritarian streak than I think a lot of us realize, they have brought in mandatory vaccinations.
Here's your tweet on it.
I'll just read it.
As most have undoubtedly heard by now, France has implemented an inhumane and unacceptable vaccine policy.
The unvaccinated now can't even use public transport or go to the mall.
My heart goes out to the people of France who do not want to get the vaccine.
Janine, I think it's not just punitive.
It has the effect of punishing certain groups, minority groups, religious groups, obviously the disabled are people who for health reasons can't take the vax.
Obviously, low-income people who would need to take public transit.
You can be rich and unvaxed and have a limbo driver, I suppose.
This is the worst policy I've seen.
What do you think of it?
I think it's a horrendous policy, and you're right that it will have a more pernicious effect on minority groups and the less fortunate who for whom it's less easy to get the vaccine or, you know, they can have groceries delivered more easily or they don't have to, you know, take public transit.
There's a real authoritarian slide going on here in the West.
And it's not, you know, it's not just France.
I mean, we're seeing something similar in the United States, although so far, apart from New York, there hasn't really been a passport program mandated.
But we're seeing people like Leanna Wen, who's become a very vocal proponent of sort of coercing vaccination, saying that we should make life very, very difficult for unvaccinated people.
We have Anthony Fauci going around saying, just get over it, just get the vaccine, you know, without recognizing that there are legitimate reasons for people not to get the vaccine or illegitimate reasons because, and it should be a personal choice.
And I think it's quite scary.
Australia, I tweeted about this as well.
In Sydney, they just have a new rule that you have to show an ID card to show that you're not more than 10 kilometers, I think, or some short distance.
I'm not that familiar with that system, but from your home because they're in another lockdown.
I mean, what's going on in the West is really scary.
You know what?
We're familiar with the Australia situation.
We have a reporter in Melbourne.
Sydney, of course, is a different part of Australia, but they are in an extreme lockdown.
Just to remind our viewers, here's your tweet on the subject.
Australia, having triumphed over the coronavirus at least 23 separate times so far, is now a police state.
What a great success story.
I know you're kidding, but you're being ironic there.
They throw entire states into lockdowns on a single death or a handful of cases.
I want to show you what it looks like when you can be fined for merely being away from your house.
We've shown this to our viewers before.
Here's a dad and his kid who were parked at the side of the road just having a bite to eat in their car.
Nothing wrong or weird.
Cops ran his plate apropos of nothing.
And because his car was registered to an address more than 10 kilometers away, they swarmed his vehicle, tried to extract the dad from the car while the son cried.
And I've just told you all the relevant facts.
His only, quote, crime was his car was registered more than 10 kilometers away.
Take a look at this.
What are you doing?
Record this picture?
What are you doing?
Do not touch my neck, bro.
Come out of the car.
Get out of the car.
I had spinal surgery and I assume the shit out of the car.
They're forcing somebody out of their vehicle now.
I've done nothing wrong.
I've done nothing wrong.
This is Galois.
Yep, this is going nowhere.
You're weak as f ⁇ ing now.
Major, she's recording.
Look at what you're doing to my son.
Major, sit back.
You're all right.
Leave me the f ⁇ alone, bro.
I've done nothing wrong.
So that's real life.
And that was in Melbourne, but they have those same rules in Sydney.
What's so crazy, Janine, is that as the virus itself subsides, as the death toll and the hospitalizations fall, the enforcement becomes more and more extreme, as if almost to create the panic itself that the virus can't anymore, because people just aren't dying in numbers anymore.
We understand it's not a disease of the young anymore.
Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated00:12:21
So to create and maintain that panic, The state is filling in by getting into the house of horrors.
It's like a haunted house business trying to scare you.
Exactly.
Actually, and I think that's sort of what's happening with the vaccines now.
I mean, there's no reason to be coercing people into getting the vaccines the way that we're seeing it.
I actually spoke with Jay Bhattacharya the other day, who's one of the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which was advocating for focus protection instead of lockdowns.
And he was saying it doesn't even make any sense from a scientific perspective.
If you get the vaccine, you're more or less protected.
This idea that everybody needs to be vaccinated to create herd immunity doesn't make any sense.
And I think this is just, I think we've split into authoritarianism and we can't get out of it now.
And Ward Sumption, actually, who's great, he's the British House of Lords and has been an incredible voice of reason on the side of liberty during this whole thing, wrote about a year ago that once you start to, you can't suspend liberty and democracy for a short while and then bring it back.
Once you give the state this kind of power and once our fellow citizens tell us that, you know, well, it's okay for the state to tell you you can't leave your home.
It's okay for the state to force a vaccine on you.
It's okay for the state to tell you you have to wear a piece of cloth over your face.
It's not that easy to get out of.
And I think we're seeing that around the world now.
And I'm quite scared, actually.
Yeah, I am too.
And in Canada, we see provinces like Quebec and Manitoba bringing in protein examples of vaccine passports.
Alberta said they won't, but they're permitting private sector vax passports.
For example, the Calgary Stampede now requires proof that you're vaxed or you have to wear a mask at their concert area.
So even if the state itself is not doing it, private corporations now feel empowered to demand your private personal medical info.
Here's an unintended consequence that I am quite certain will happen.
Janine, I'm not sure if you've seen this clip before.
A few months ago, when Fauci and the head of the FDA and other groups were before the Senate, I think it was Senator Chuck Grassley, I think it was him who said, what percentage of your own staff have been vaxed?
And I thought that was a pretty good question.
And I was startled that in the Centers for Disease Control, the Food and Drug Administration, I'm talking about, this is like the Vatican of public health vax promoters.
In each of these institutions, half of the staff refuse.
Here, just take a look.
You might not believe it if you don't see with your own eyes.
Take a look at this.
Okay, this question, I'm going to go to Dr. Fauci, Dr. Marks, and Dr. Lewinsky.
What percentage of the employees in your institute, your center, or your agency of your employees has been vaccinated?
You know, I'm not 100 percent sure, Senator, but I think it's probably a little bit more than half, probably around 60 percent.
Dr. Marks?
I can't tell you the exact number, but it's probably in the same range.
Some people vaccinated at our facility and others outside of the facility.
Dr. Winski?
We're encouraging our employees to get vaccinated.
We've been doing town halls and education seminars.
Our staff have the option to report their vaccination status, but as you understand, the federal government is not requiring it, so we do not know.
So, Janine, the people who know the most about the vaccines are actually less likely to use them than many other groups in society.
And I know that, for example, there have been hospitals in the United States, a single hospital, where 150 staff have either resigned or been fired for refusing to take the vaccine.
Maybe they know something we don't know.
Maybe they're just cautious because they see that the vast majority of people get better from this without serious malady.
But whatever, whether they're right or wrong, if you're now forcing, as France is doing, everyone in the healthcare industry to be vaxed, I think you're going to have a new unintended consequence crisis on your hands.
You're going to have half your healthcare system unstaffed.
You're going to have tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of nurses, doctors, you know, just other folks working in hospitals who are either fired or quit.
So I think that Macron is going to create a new healthcare disaster because of his order.
What do you think of that?
So I think that this is, actually a friend made a point to me the other day.
I think this is a political ploy.
I don't think people like Fauci, they know that half the country is not going to get the vaccine, especially if they feel pressured by people like him and by the Democrats.
So I think it's a political ploy so that they don't get it.
And then, you know, when the virus sticks around, as it will anyway, because it's endemic at this point, they can blame those people.
Oh, those rednecks and the Ozarks, they wouldn't get the vaccine and now we still have the virus.
So I think it's just the Democrats trying to win elections.
They know that this sort of pressure isn't convincing people and it's not helpful.
They could just give people the information and allow them to make their own decisions.
And I think most of them would probably get the vaccine if they didn't feel coerced.
Yeah, I think there's something to it.
I think it's almost to the point where whatever Fauci and the rest of the public health industrial complex says, half of America is repelled by it.
Just like, you know, a year ago, whatever Trump said, half of America did the opposite.
I think there's such a polarization.
So if Trump talked about hydroxychloroquine or some other remedy, half America said, that's got to be junk science.
That's quackery.
You can't even say it.
But the reverse is true also.
Let me show you a quick clip.
This is from CNN.
So there was a conservative conference called CPAC, and there were some folks on the stage, and they were vaccine skeptics, and that's fine.
And someone expressed some skepticism, and there was cheering.
So Jake Tapper of CNN was interviewing Fauci, and there's two interesting things about this video.
First of all, Tapper says, I'm not going to let you hear what these vax skeptics say because it's false.
So he was saying to his viewers, I won't even let you hear the secret words they have to say because those words are so powerful and you're so dumb, you might be convinced.
But Fauci's answer is incredible.
He says, why are you politicizing this as if he hasn't politicized it for a year?
It's quite an exchange.
Take a look at this.
To do with politics.
It's a public health issue.
It doesn't matter who you are.
The virus doesn't know whether you're a Democrat, a Republican, or an Independent.
For sure, we know that.
And yet there is that divide of people wanting to get vaccinated and not wanting to get vaccinated, which is really unfortunate because it's losing lives.
The conservative political conference, CPAC, is going on this weekend.
I want to play for you a clip of one of the speakers from that event yesterday.
They were hoping, the government was hoping, that they could sort of sucker 90% of the population into getting vaccinated.
And it isn't happening, right?
There's a younger people.
I'm going to cut him off right there because he just goes on to just say things that are not true about the vaccine.
But what I wanted to get your reaction to is the crowd cheering when this gentleman talks about how the government was not able to achieve a 90% vaccine goal.
The crowd cheers.
As a public health official, what's your reaction when you hear that?
It's horrifying.
I mean, they're cheering about someone saying that it's a good thing for people not to try and save their lives.
I mean, if you just unpack that for a second, Jake, it's almost frightening to say, hey, guess what?
We don't want you to do something to save your life.
Yay.
Everybody starts screaming and clapping.
I just don't get that.
I mean, and I don't think that anybody who's thinking clearly can get that.
What is that all about?
I don't understand that, Jake.
On the other side of the, you know, fairly or not, I think that Fauci has become like Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris.
People have a sort of a derangement syndrome towards him.
I mean, his mannerisms, his accent, his style.
And that's probably unfair to a degree.
But when Fauci mocks people and say, you're literally asking for people to die, I don't get it.
I think it's, like you say, it's not actually designed to convince anybody.
It's designed to polarize it.
It's like telling someone you're arguing with, oh, calm down.
You're not actually trying to calm them down.
You're dismissing them.
I think that, I don't know.
I just think that the fact that they're otherizing anyone who's a skeptic, they're not granting that there may be some legitimate reasons for skepticism, and they're just demonizing it as false after they got so many things wrong.
I really think that we're into a new era of division based on not even on the virus, but on the vaccine and the lockdowns.
Yeah, I think that's right.
And, you know, he said something very interesting, which is the virus doesn't care who you are.
That's absolutely not true.
If you've had COVID, for instance, you're most likely almost certainly immune.
If you're 20, you're almost certainly going to have a mild case.
You don't have anything to worry about.
So the virus does care who you are.
And surely Fauci knows that.
And, you know, I mean, there was just something new about the JNJ vaccine the other day.
And again, I want to be very clear.
I'm not, you know, I'm not anti-vax.
I'm not anti-the COVID vaccs.
I'm not here to tell anyone whether or not to get the vaccine.
But, you know, there are new stories constantly about new side effects that we didn't know about, possible long-term effects.
I think it's called, what is it, Gilbert disease?
I'm not sure how you pronounce that.
It's now tied to the J and J vaccine.
And by overplaying their hand, I think the public health establishment is losing a lot of trust.
You know, if they had said from the start, look, we think the vaccine is safe and effective, probably you're better off getting it than not getting it.
But we, you know, we can't be certain about long-term effects.
We can't be certain about everything.
I think people would go and get it in greater numbers.
But by insisting, oh, there's everyone should get it.
There's nothing to be worried about.
You're crazy if you have any doubts whatsoever.
They've lost all trust, I think.
I mean, they've turned me into more of a skeptic than I certainly was.
Yeah, you know, it reminds me of censorship.
When you ban something, all of a sudden people say, oh, that must be a very powerful thing.
I'm very curious about it.
You know, there's Jake Tapper saying that speaker, his name is Alex Berenson.
He's actually a New York Times best-selling author, and I think he's quite rigorous in his review of scholarship.
I don't think he's a scientist himself, but simply to say, I'm not even going to show you what Alex Berenson says because it's untrue.
Okay, well, you're forcing me to be your child in that I have to trust you like a father.
You're protecting me from something, some goblins and ghosts so terrifying, you say I can't handle it.
That made me think he must be telling the truth.
And legislating that I must take this.
What kind of vaccine in what kind of pandemic has to be forced on people?
Like that's that's quite some vaccine and some pandemic there.
If you've got to have million-dollar lotteries to coax people to take it, and even that doesn't work.
I don't know.
I just think that we're in the worst of times.
And it's not even, it doesn't even have anything to do with the virus anymore.
Last word to you, Janine.
Stand Up Against Forced Vaccines00:04:56
I agree with you.
We're in very scary times, and it doesn't have to do with the virus.
I agree with all of that.
And it's really time for people to stand up.
I mean, that's why I'm doing this.
You know, it's given, I've created a lot of enemies for myself and a lot of problems for myself, I can say that.
But I think, you know, this is the moment we have to stand up and we have to resist this because this is, you know, states really doing some very scary things.
Yeah, well, listen, I hope to hear more from you.
Just for our viewers who want to follow Janine on Twitter, her Twitter handle is leftylockdowns1.
And I enjoy following it.
Lots of links to articles and authoritative studies and personal reflections on things.
Janine is a lawyer, and she's with the new Civil Liberties Alliance.
Great to see you again.
Thanks for your time.
Thanks so much.
All right, there you have it.
Stay with us.
Hey, welcome back.
On my show last night, Kirk writes, parents, join your PTA.
Show up to your local school board meetings en masse.
Write the education ministers and demand that this nonsense, along with critical race theory and other progressive BS, be removed from the curriculum.
Yeah, good luck with that.
Do they even have meetings in Ontario?
Are they even allowed or is that a criminal gathering under the lockdown?
I think if this government is impervious to any criticism or compromise over the lockdown, it's the worst in the world.
I really don't think they're going to bend the knee to public demands on education.
I think really, and I mean, I always think, what's the worst government in Canada?
I think it's Ontario.
Earl writes, China and India laugh as Western countries tie themselves into intersectional identity knots.
Yeah.
You know, the only math we're good at doing is coming up, the only research is coming up with new genders.
Hey, China, India, Russia, be terrified.
We've just discovered a new gender.
Patrick writes, I went to the U.S. for my PhD in physics, Cornell.
In my first semester, I saw how Asian students were getting the best marks.
I realized they were very smart, but also worked extremely hard.
Never crossed my mind that they were favored because of their race.
I just started studying 14 hours a day to catch up.
Yeah, listen, I mean, I'm not getting into race at all.
That's sort of my point, is that if you're trying to destroy math as a meritocracy, you're going to have a racial effect.
And this isn't new.
You know, Joe Oliver, the former finance minister, he told me he's getting up there in age now.
He told me that when he went to McGill, you know, 60, 70 years ago, Joe's getting up there in age, that he was one of the first Jews let in after they removed the quota.
There was a maximum number of Jews who were admitted to the professional schools in McGill and Montreal in Canada, because they said the same thing about the Jews.
Oh, there's too many Jews.
They're doing too well on the test.
We've got to level the playing field.
We don't want too many Jews in med school or law school.
And of all the different fields of study, math is pure and objective more than any other.
There's just no wiggle room there.
And whoever succeeds there, you've got to protect that meritocracy.
And if you're just trying to change the racial makeup, maybe you're the racist one.
That's the point I was trying to make yesterday.
Anyways, thanks for watching the show today.
What do you think about this new letter?
I got it right here from the Elections Commissioner.
They just won't stop.
I mean, the fine, it's a few thousand dollars.
It won't destroy me, obviously.
But I just don't think we can roll over and say, well, okay, well, pay.
I really think we have to appeal this until we're completely exhausted our appeals, until we go to the Supreme Court really.
They're literally saying I'm not allowed to write a book at a time that's inconvenient for Trudeau.
It's not what the law says.
They admit they're not prosecuting anyone else.
They say they don't have to if they don't want to.
I just think this is just so terrible.
I got to stand up for it.
And I know I'm always in a legal pickle, but I think it's because we're the leading edge of so many fights.
We're the pointing edge of the spear.
So they're going to be focused on us more than anyone else.
I mean, I can tell you one thing.
Trudeau is not prosecuting Aaron Warry's love letter to Trudeau that was published at the same time as my criticism.
Now, there's a reason no one read Aaron Warry's love letter.
It's just boring propaganda.
Whereas my book actually challenged the powers that be.
Apparently, elections can the things you're not allowed to speak truth to power, at least not when it counts.
All right, go to thelebranos.com if you want to see more on that.