DAILY examines Ottawa’s Emergencies Act invocation, freezing accounts—including crypto wallets—of protesters while excluding Quebec despite nationwide disruptions. Freeland and Mendocino deny targeting specifics but link far-right extremism to blockades, citing Coutts border arrests. Critics argue this mirrors past leniency toward left-wing protests, accusing Trudeau of hypocrisy over dissent and labeling truckers as fringe while empathizing with terrorists. Legal experts warn the act’s use sets a precedent for crushing speech-based opposition, risking future crackdowns on any perceived political threat. [Automatically generated summary]
We've seen a major issue for the city of Ottawa is in terms of the capacity of removing all these tractor trailers.
And does he know that Section 21 of the Criminal Code obliges transportation companies to provide the police with resources when they're asked?
And once again, does he agree that there's been a lack of balance between the existing law and available capacities and resources?
The Honourable Member for Belé Chamblé.
Except, well, if you want to immobilize a tractor trailer, unless you have the police involved, it can be illegal.
The Ottawa police has asked for assistance since they're overwhelmed, and then you don't give them that help.
You say that we're going to send RCMP, and the Prime Minister starts to find things that are getting complicated.
And he himself has said that Ottawa Police has all the necessary power to intervene until he realized what he said didn't make sense.
Provinces have powers and they have legislative abilities.
There are emergency acts in various jurisdictions and it gives them all the necessary tools.
We shouldn't say without this such laws wouldn't exist.
The province could have intervened and can.
they could have done that everywhere except for here around the parliament questions and comments the honorable member for saanich gulf islands thank you mr speaker I'd like to thank the Honourable Leader of the Bloc, Quebecois.
I have a question because I am concerned with the law and the geographical issue.
What we have in front of us lacks a clear reference to a geographical region.
Yesterday, the Prime Minister and other ministers said that the use of the Emergencies Act will include a geographical limit, but I don't find it here.
So my question for the leader of the bloc is this.
If the government amended the act with the geographical limit which excluded Quebec from acts that were clearly intended to greater bring.
the greatest disruption to the lives of their fellow citizens, and indeed all Canadians?
I want to assure them that this will end and that we will be there for them to continue to support them and to hold those who have taken from them the peace of their neighborhoods and their communities.
We will hold them to account for their actions.
Thank you all very much.
Merci Bucou.
I would like to invite people who may have questions of myself and my colleagues.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
We'll be taking journalists' questions until 11.55.
Journalists until 11:55, and we'll start in the room.
Hi, it's Annie Berger-Oliver with CTV National News.
My question is for you, Minister Freeland.
You mentioned in your opening remarks that action is being taken by financial services, and that's making a difference.
I'm wondering if you can provide any specific numbers on how many accounts, either personal or corporate, are being targeted.
And also, what type of safeguards are in place to ensure that it's protesters and not simply someone with the same name whose accounts are being targeted and frozen?
Well, thank you very much for the question.
I have those numbers here in front of me, and they were reviewed just last night by me and Minister Mendocino, Minister Blair, the Prime Minister, and Minister Lometi.
But I'm not going to share them with you right now because operational actions are being taken, and we want to be very, very careful not to jeopardize those operational actions.
But I do want to assure you, and through you, all Canadians, that action is being taken.
We are seeing it, and that action is going to increase in the coming days.
It's a good question about what are the safeguards, and there, I really want to assure all Canadians that that is something very much on our minds.
That is something that we and law enforcement and the financial service providers have been working on very, very carefully.
And that's why I say the financial, the use of the financial tools is actually going to increase in the coming days because it was important for us to be sure that safeguards were in place.
And I do also want to say that the actions we have taken are emergency measures.
Due process remains in place.
Charter rights remain in place.
And of course, the courts are there, and they will be, these will all be institutions that will be there to support Canadians.
Okay, so my follow-up is in two parts then.
So you're confirming that accounts have been frozen, both personal and corporate, but you're not releasing the information.
And the actual follow-up is: I'm just wondering whether the bank accounts will be targeted of individuals who donated to the Give, Send, Go and the GoFundMe campaigns.
Are they considered designated people under the Emergencies Act, meaning that their credit cards could be cut and financial services are targeting them as well?
Okay, so the names of both individuals and entities, as well as crypto wallets, have been shared by the RCMP with financial institutions, and accounts have been frozen, and more accounts will be frozen.
Crowdfunding platforms and payment service providers have started the registration process with FinTrack.
In terms of the specifics on whose accounts are being frozen, you now have the regulations.
The financial service providers have those regulations as well.
And they, working with law enforcement, will be making the operational decisions.
But I do want to say really clearly to Canadians: we have now outlined with great clarity that these blockades and occupations are illegal.
It is now time for people to go home, to take their trucks home, and to stop funding illegal blockades and occupations.
Thank you.
Yes, Alex Ballingall with the Toronto Star.
Just on the same subject, the warning that you're issuing to the drivers about their accounts being suspended and their truck insurance being suspended is pretty unequivocal.
So I'm wondering if you can say or shed some light on whether the, to what degree, I guess, the large financial institutions are actually on board with this and also clarify exactly why you can't share the figures, why that's an operational secret at this point.
The Emergencies Act has compelled financial service providers to take these actions, and we have provided them with immunity for actions undertaken in good faith under these measures.
Those are two important facts.
The financial service providers have a stake in Canada and the Canadian economy, and they are a really important institutional pillar of Canada.
They are, as they are legally obliged to do, collaborating properly and effectively with the RCMP, and with law enforcement.
In terms of disclosing specifics, all of us had a conversation yesterday with law enforcement about that.
And there was a clear view that it's important right now not to in any way jeopardize the very important work law enforcement is taking.
And that's why I'm not disclosing the specifics.
But let me assure you, those details will be disclosed in due course and soon.
And I want you to know it is happening.
I do have the numbers in front of me.
And I do particularly want people who are participating in illegal blockades and in illegal occupation to know these measures are real.
They are being used.
They will have an impact.
And there is a really easy way to avoid being affected by these measures.
And that is just go home, go back to work.
And I think that Minister Mendicino, you mentioned that all the border crossings that have been blockaded are cleared.
There's been attempts, I guess, to re-blockade them.
And that's been part of the justification you guys have used for the Emergencies Act.
But you've also mentioned that you want to lift this emergency declaration before the The 30-day limit is up.
So, if the concern is them returning, what are the conditions you need to see, I guess, as a government, as a cabinet, in order to actually lift this emergency declaration?
Well, first and foremost, one of the conditions is that the blockades are no longer there.
And that is one of the reasons why we have been going to great pains over the last number of days to send a very clear, unequivocal message to those who are participating in them-be they at a border or in front of a legislature, including here in Ottawa in front of the parliament, but equally in the communities and in the neighborhoods where these are no longer just mere disturbances of the peace, where there has been a rampant and flagrant disregard for the law.
The time is now to stop and to go home.
And you've heard me say it, you've heard Minister Blair say it, you've heard the Deputy Prime Minister say it, you've heard the Prime Minister say it.
You've heard yesterday the interim Ottawa police chief say it.
There should be no ambiguity right now to anyone that is still participating in an illegal blockade, whether it's for some misguided, under the misguided belief that this is a lawful protest when it is not, or for some other more malevolent purpose, the time is to go home.
And the invocation of the Emergencies Act is a resort that we came to as a result of the significant challenges that law enforcement using conventional tools had faced for the last three weeks.
And while we have made progress, while we see that the ports of entry are open right now, I would suggest that at this fragile moment, it's precarious.
I mean, yesterday you just heard Mayor Drew Dilkins in the course of a press conference say that there was yet another effort to try and shut it down again.
And so, yes, I mean, I think we all want to be cautiously optimistic that we are coming to the end of it.
But in the meantime, as a government, we have an obligation and a responsibility to Canadians to make sure that we are using all of the tools in the box.
And yes, that includes declaring certain areas as no-go zones.
That includes the ability to commandeer the kind of assets that are required to preserve the flow of traffic at our critical infrastructure, including at our borders.
That includes choking off proceeds, currencies that may be used to advance the illegal blockade.
And in the case of the RCMP, that includes using a very important and time-limited measure to be able to rapidly deploy them so that we can ensure that there is public safety.
So, you know, we're getting there, but we're not quite there yet.
And obviously, it is our desire to see the measures that we have introduced under the order sunset as quickly as possible.
But that will be a decision that is taken again very carefully on the advice of our officials, on the advice of law enforcement, and what we're seeing and hearing on the ground.
Thanks.
We'll take one more question in the room and then take questions from the phone.
Une autre question dans la salle, ensuite les questions par téléphone.
Oui, bonjour, Laurence Martin de Radio-Canada.
Hello, Laurence Martin from Radio-Canada.
Question.
Question for Ms. Friedland.
Yeah, take your time.
No problem.
On the frozen accounts, the bank accounts that have been frozen.
I understand that you can't give us the specific numbers, but could you give us an idea?
Are we talking about a few dozen, a few hundred accounts that have been frozen so far?
Today, for today, we made the decision following discussions with people who have the operational responsibilities to implement these measures that this would not be the time to have this discussion regarding the number of frozen accounts.
But I can assure you that to this point there have been accounts that have been frozen.
It is in an ongoing process.
Clarifying Police Findings00:10:59
It's a process that will accelerate and be stepped up if the blockades and the occupations continue.
Question.
You are also saying that there are extremist, violent extremist elements in these blockade movements.
What specific concrete data do you have on that that you could share with us?
Answer.
It's information that the police services have found in Alberta, in Coutz.
They already talked about what those details are.
They have more details that will be made public by police forces throughout the country.
But as Minister Mendicino stated, we understand that there may be people who did not get the message that these are illegal, unlawful blockades and occupations.
We want to tell those people that it's time.
It's time to go home.
But it's also important for Canadians to understand that there are organized elements from extremist groups that are part of what's happening right now.
Our government will not allow these elements to continue to threaten our economic institutions or democratic institutions and our economy.
Thank you.
We'll take a question by phone, and then one last one in the room.
On the phone, and then a last question in the room.
Opérateur, question, s'il vous plaît.
Operate a question, please.
For questions over the phone, please press star 1 on the device's keypad.
Pour les questions au téléphone, peut-être étoilant sur votre appareil.
La première question nous vient d'Émilie Bergeron.
The first question is from Émilie Bergeron, La Presse canadienne.
You have the floor.
Question.
Yes, hello.
This is a question from Ms. Freeland or Mr. Mendicino.
This is more about the debate happening at the House of Commons on the ratification on the Emergencies Act.
We feel, listening to you here, that you do feel like there's some urgency in having this being adopted quickly in the House.
What would a reasonable timeframe be, one that is fair and sufficient?
And when would you want to see the vote on the motion?
Answer.
Thank you for this question.
I'm going to start answering and then I'll give the floor to Minister Mendicino.
To start, I will simply say that one of the key elements in these emergency measures is the vote in the House of Commons.
We used existing powers currently existing in Canada.
They are completely legal and completely constitutional for us.
The element of ensuring that there's a debate at the House of Commons, that the House of Commons participate, that it votes on this, is completely essential.
Our goal today is to protect the democratic institutions of Canada, and we will proceed in an absolutely democratic fashion that absolutely respects the law.
And now I will give the floor to Minister Mendicino.
Minister Mendicino, answer.
Thank you.
But I think Minister Freeland clearly explained what the process is and what we want to see over the next few days.
In my opinion, it's very important to take part in a debate that is fair and that is balanced and transparent.
We need to explain to Canadians all the reasons why we need to put this measure of last resort in place.
It is not an easy decision.
It is a very delicate situation for everybody.
But the measures that are included in the Declaration and in the order are necessary in the government's opinion.
They are necessary for police services to be able to take action quickly in a way that respects all the rights and freedoms protected under the Charter.
I hope the debates will demonstrate and put forward all those reasons that the government has to Canadians.
Question.
Thank you.
So as a follow-up, my question was more when would you want to see the House move to a vote on this?
So I'll ask the same question more directly.
When do you want to see the vote on this?
Do you want it to happen before the House adjourns tomorrow, which is Friday?
And for the Senate quickly, because that was going to be my follow-up.
The Senate will be sitting tomorrow.
When do you think the Senate will be able to vote on this once it has been debated there?
For that second point, answer.
For that second point, we do not know.
We are not sure when all the discussions will end, but we all want it to happen quickly yesterday.
But for your first question regarding the Emergencies Act, it's a technical question.
It's a question that the House Leader will be discussing with other House leaders in the House.
Thank you very much.
Last question, Maria, go ahead.
Yes, question.
You've been insinuating for days that there are weapons that were brought to Ottawa or that are in Ottawa as were found in Coots in Alberta.
Could you confirm here, rather than insinuating, as you have been doing for days, what are the plans to ensure that they won't be used at the time of an intervention, as we're seeing being prepared?
And how did those weapons stay in Ottawa for three weeks, in downtown Ottawa for three weeks?
Answer.
Just an important clarification.
I'm not saying that there's intelligence saying that there are weapons in Ottawa, in Audible.
Question inaudible to the interpreter.
Answer, no, it's an important point.
As I said yesterday, and even my colleagues did, that there are public reports showing that there are indications that there's extremist ideological positions and there's that link between the blockades.
There are similarities of what is being targeted.
For example, border crossings, legislators, and many other critical infrastructure elements.
That's what the blockades are focusing on.
There are similarities between the tactics that those groups are used that are being used by those groups at the border and here in Ottawa before Parliament.
And there's a similarity in the rhetoric emerging in social media and elsewhere.
Those are similarities that everybody is sharing concerns about.
Question.
So here you're telling me that there are no weapons in Ottawa.
That wasn't my follow-up question.
My follow-up question was about the children who are in downtown Ottawa.
You keep asking for them to leave.
They are not leaving.
Some people, protesters, are calling for more children to come so that children, so that the police will be impeded in their action.
Clearly, your calls for them to go home are not being heeded.
So what is being looked at?
Answer.
First, regarding the firearms and all the risks, that's a question for the police services.
There's a difference between our different functions here at government.
It is to create legislation, to enact it, to give police services tools, and it is their responsibility to use those tools to respond to those questions on the ground regarding risks related to firearms and so on.
Now, as for children, that's a very serious question.
We all share the concerns that the children must leave now.
And that's why everybody, the police services at the government side, are saying clearly, very clearly, we're emphasizing that they need to go.
The kids need to go now.
Good Morning Briefings00:15:22
Thank you very much.
Yeah, you're done.
Okay.
Unfortunately, we really have to cut it off.
They have to get going.
I think we're joining Minister Blair for the debate, but we'll be happy to take more questions later.
Thank you very much.
This concludes the press conference.
David, we're on.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
It is the Rebel News live stream that you have tuned into.
Pardon me, I was ordering my lunch.
An army travels on its stomach, after all.
And I'm David Menzies, as you know, and my co-host, as always, is, well, she's the she-devil with a sword.
She is the Khaleesi of Northern Alberta.
She is Sheila Gun Reed.
Sheila, good afternoon.
No, it's still morning by three minutes.
Good morning to you, my dear friend.
What do you make of what you just heard there for the last several minutes?
You know, there are a lot of contenders.
By the way, it's good morning here for two hours and three minutes, David.
But I know when we're about to eat lunch, you guys are still getting out of bed.
That's the problem with these time zones, but I digress.
Sure, Mr. I'm late to every morning meeting.
Anyway, there are a lot of new contenders for dumbest MP in Justin Trudeau's cabinet.
These people are giving Seamus O'Reagan a run for their money.
You know what I mean?
That's harsh, even for you, Sheila.
Mendocino is an absolute idiot.
Yesterday, he was saying the exact same thing that he's saying today.
And when pressed on it, then he walks it back.
So you heard the journalist there say, luckily, I was not on for much of Christia Freeland's nonsense because she's impossible to watch.
I cannot deal with her constant twitching.
It's like she's being subject to electric shocks all the time.
She's just always wiggling.
But Mendocino said the exact same thing 20 hours ago.
I went and looked because Andrew Lawton clipped it.
So Mendocino always makes these allegations about guns in the crowd at Ottawa and how it's dangerous and there's violent rhetoric.
But then when somebody pushes him on it and says, well, how do you know that?
He says, well, I just know it.
I just know it.
I don't have any police intelligence.
No, the cops have never said anything like that.
But I just know these people have guns.
Like, completely unaware of his own bigotry against truck drivers, right?
That they're violent, gun-toting psychopaths.
By the way, it's not illegal to have a gun in the trunk of your car.
Yeah.
And Sheila, this is despicable by Marco because if there are terrorists on Parliament Hill, if there are insurgents upon Parliament Hill ready to do a Canadian version of January the 6th, name them.
Give us the names of the individuals.
Give us the names of the terrorist organizations.
As Clara Peller, the spokeswoman for Wendy's, used to say in the 80s, where's the beef?
But it's a nothing burger.
That's what's being served up here.
He has a hunch that there are bad guys afoot, and that's good enough.
But they implied a few days ago, Sheila, they had police intelligence suggesting that.
Well, share that intelligence with us, won't you?
He cannot back up anything he's saying with fact.
He, and to the media's credit, and they've been terrible on this issue from the very beginning, but to their credit, they keep saying, well, how do you know this?
And he keeps saying, well, I just, I just, I feel it.
I feel it in my bones.
Well, that's not a good enough reason to be making allegations that these people are violent.
Yeah, this is what Andrew Lawton said.
Watch this video from start to finish.
Public Safety Minister, Marco Mendocino, the guy in charge now of the gun grab, definitely says people charged with firearms offenses in Coots are connected to far-right groups in Ottawa, but when challenged, completely walks back the claim to an unrecognizable point.
Let's just roll this because he said much of the same things today.
So he gets embarrassed yesterday, but like a good liberal, learns nothing.
This should be a life lesson, but he learned nothing and he pulled it again today.
So let's listen.
This week at the Coots border crossing and seized a significant number of lethal firearms, a large supply of ammunition, body armor.
Four men were charged by the RCMP with a conspiracy to murder officers.
As the deputy commissioner of the RCMP noted, and I quote, Monday's weapons, seizure, and subsequent arrests speak to the serious criminal activities taking place during the protest and illegal blockades.
The dangerous criminal activity occurring away from the TV cameras and social media posts was real and organized.
It could have been deadly for citizens, protesters, and officers.
We need to be clear-eyed about the seriousness of these incidents.
Indeed, several of the individuals at Coots have strong ties to a far-right extreme organization with leaders who are in Ottawa.
We're talking about a group that is organized, agile, knowledgeable, and driven by an extremist ideology where might makes right.
And this is completely contrary to our democratic values.
Minister Manachino, you mentioned that there's these ties with a far-right group between what happened in Coots and what's going on in Ottawa.
Can you explain exactly what group you're talking about?
How big is it?
How much of a threat is this to people's safety?
We saw a bunch of guns and body armor in Coots.
Are you concerned there's similar items in Ottawa?
Just please expand on what you said because that was quite striking.
Well, I think we're beginning to see what we're beginning to see emerge now are the hallmarks of a sophisticated and capable organization of a small number of individuals, but with a steel resolve driven by an extreme ideology that would seek to create, to overthrow the existing government and create some kind of parallel structure whereby they get to dictate the rules based on untrammeled freedoms.
And it may sound far out there and left field, but looking back over the course of the last number of weeks, and more importantly, seeing the developments of the arrests and seizures that have been made this past week, there's a real danger in trivializing and diminishing exactly what's going on here.
And we have good reason to be concerned about that, as Canadians do.
I mean, you talked about the individuals at Coots have strong ties to a far-right extreme organization with leaders who are in Ottawa.
Are you talking about the leaders of the convoy who sometimes hold press conferences, who we've seen on social media talking about fundraising?
Who exactly are you talking about?
Does the group have a name?
What is this far-right organization with ties between Coots and the leaders in Ottawa?
Alex, those are very, Alex, those are very good questions for law enforcement and for police.
All I can tell you is that what we're seeing is a very similar pattern of conduct and the hallmarks of the ideology and the motivations of people who are operating in different parts of the country who are trying to interrupt our borders, who are interrupting daily life here in our communities.
They use similar rhetoric.
They use similar rallying calls.
One only has to turn to social media.
But in terms of the details, which I think you are quite right to ask, those are questions which are best put to our law enforcement.
Can you please clarify yes or no?
Have you seen clear or been given or told clear evidence of a direct tie between the people who had the guns and the motives and plans to kill officers in Alberta and people who are in the demonstrations and blockades in Ottawa?
The charges that have been laid in Coots will lay out exactly what it is that the police believe and hope to prove in a court of law.
The point that is being made is that the rhetoric that supported the movement in Coots is very similar and strikingly similar to the kind of rhetoric that we're seeing not only in Ottawa, but right across the country.
I want to follow up on Marika Walsh's question.
I think that we need to be certain that it sounds like you are making the connection between the rhetoric of suspects who are accused of attempted and conspiring to attempt murder in Coots, Alberta, and the organizers here.
So is that what your conclusion is, or is that something that's backed up by evidence of an ongoing law enforcement investigation?
No, I think you have it right.
I mean, I think the pattern that we're seeing here is in the rhetoric that is being used not only in Coots, not only in Ottawa, but right across the country.
And, you know, one of the things that I've seen that very plainly in the similar messages that are being shared by those who are participating actively in the blockades.
And so that unified and focused message is one of concern, and I think does shed light on the ideological motivations of those who are prepared to move beyond just demonstrations and crossing into different conduct, which would be illegal.
You know, Sheila, forgive me, I'm experiencing.
I'm dumber for listening to that.
Oh, it's unbelievable, but more so, I'm experiencing a profound feeling of deja vu right now.
And we go back to last March.
Do you remember FBI Director Christopher Wray, who said that the quote, top threat, end quote, to American lives in the U.S. right now is white supremacists?
That was echoed by President Biden the day later.
And yeah, because you know, Sheila, the aircraft used on 9-11, they were jam-packed with white supremacists, but it was the same thing, Sheila.
Where's the evidence?
No evidence.
And this is coming from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a creature that allegedly acts on the rules of evidence?
Zero evidence.
Just, oh, well, we have a feeling just like Marco.
So I think, if anything, FBI was ahead of the curve because we see the same crap being uttered by Marco.
As I said earlier, show us the names, show us the organizations.
They don't have anything because nothing exists.
And I'm getting sick, whether it's Marco or Freeland or LaMedi or Trudeau talking about the funding of terrorists.
That's really rich when it's coming from the Trudeau liberals that funded our own homegrown al-Qaeda terrorist, Omar Carter, to the tune of eight figures, 10.5 million bucks.
They cut this son of a you-know-what in 2016.
A man who admits to killing and partially blinding two U.S. servicemen, our allies, and for hurt feelings for having a rough go at Gitmo Bay, allegedly, he gets that money.
These are the terrorist funders, our federal government under Justin Trudeau.
Yeah, it's really interesting, too, when you look back at Justin Trudeau's reasoning for paying out the money to Omar Cotter.
First of all, never went to trial because all of a sudden he was a fiscal conservative.
Oh, it'll cost way more money.
We go to trial.
So let's just pay him $10.5 million for what amounts to some sleepless nights in Gitmo.
I mean, I think anybody would have sleepless nights in Gitmo.
But then Justin Trudeau says, you know, he's a Canadian and a Canadian's rights were violated.
And then right now, he's violating the rights of how many of us are there now?
37, 38 million of us, maybe 39 million of us?
That's perfectly fine.
But as long as we protected sweet little Omar Cotter from a few rough nights in Gitmo, it's no big deal.
And then I went through some of the other times that Justin Trudeau exhibited sympathy for the devil and the liberals too.
So after the Boston bombing, do you remember that?
Oh, yeah.
Justin Trudeau did that sit-down with Peter Mansbridge.
And Peter Mansbridge, again, to his credit, was like, what kind of craziness am I listening to?
You can see it in the interview.
And he's, you know, a pretty liberal guy.
But Justin Trudeau, when he's talking about the Boston bombers, he says, clearly, this is somebody who's been excluded.
And instead of, you know, doing things that grow the exclusion that makes these people want to blow up a marathon, that was who Justin Trudeau was sympathizing with.
But even then, he said, and I thought, isn't that weird how now he can extend that sort of unity movement to his political enemies?
He says, you know, we shouldn't be driving this division.
We have to understand why people do these sorts of things, blah, Fast forward nine years.
And all of a sudden, he's criminalizing the lady who baked cookies for the truckers as they left Edmonton because that would be providing material supports to terrorism, which is akin to being an ISIS bride.
Yeah, this is the thing.
Remember, he said that?
This is someone who's been excluded.
And it's like, now he's the guy who's driving division and saying these people, these anti-vaxxers, and these people are not anti-vaxxers, by the way.
They just believe that maybe this is a choice between them and their government, not them, or them and their doctor, not them and their government and their employer.
He's saying there's no space for them in Canadian society, that they hold unacceptable fringe views.
But the terrorists, he could empathize with them, actual terrorists.
Poor Peter Mansbridge, that look on his face, he's probably saying, I wish I was still back at the Gimli airport announcing arrivals and departures.
But, you know, you're right.
But, you know, let's take Trudeau.
If for some reason he got a direct interview to the Boston bomber and found out that he was excluded from society, so what?
That doesn't give you the right to carry out terrorism and kill people and maim people at a marathon.
And also, Sheila, here's the double standard.
If that Boston bomber had been wearing, oh, I don't know, a MAGA cap, does Trudeau go out and say, oh, he's misunderstood.
He was excluded from society.
Give the kid a break.
Double Standard Debate00:03:01
Does he?
No, but now let's fast forward because let's, oh, yeah, this is a good tweet too.
This is from Justin Trudeau.
I think this is in, what year was this?
2013, 2012?
Yeah, 2012.
The ongoing blockades and occupation are presenting serious challenges to law enforcement's ability to effectively enforce the law.
Because of that, the federal government is invoking the Emergencies Act.
But then back in, I think it was 2012, he said when the government starts trying to cancel dissent and avoid dissent is when it's rapidly losing its moral authority to govern.
And he was quoting Harper back in 2005.
But he's that guy now.
But even if we look at Justin Trudeau's treatment of actual terrorists, so he enriched one with $10.5 million, filled up his bank account with your money while actually stealing yours out of your bank account right now, by the way.
Let's just even, and also his empathy for the Boston bombers, that maybe they were excluded and we need to be more united as a society, blah, Let's even say that society and governing has hardened Justin Trudeau.
And he's changed his mind about certain things.
Just a few short months ago, remember the gender minister, Miriam Monsef, also was in the running for being one of the dumbest cabinet ministers ever in the House of Commons, but no, she was unelected, thank goodness.
She called the Taliban her brothers.
So the Taliban are the brothers of the Liberal Party, but people who just say, you know what, I kind of want to make my own medical decisions without my employer and my government being involved, those people have unacceptable fringe views.
Well, you know, Sheila, wasn't it fantastic that Maryam Monsef lost her seat in the last federal election?
That was about the only good news that came out of the last federal election.
So now she has all the time in the world to hang with her brothers.
But, you know, somebody better give her some fashion advice.
I hear those kind of brothers, they don't like it when a woman, I don't know, shows her face in public.
That's kind of like putting yourself out there like an open can of tuna fish for the cat.
Something to eat a, you know, so anyway, so I wonder what she's up to now that she's got an incredible free amount of time to spend with terrorist brothers.
That was an outrageous statement.
And the idea that, oh, no, just a turn of phrase.
You know, it's like how the young ones these days say, hey, bro, you know, that's what it's like.
Yeah, bro with a suicide vest attached to them.
The hypocrisy is unbelievable, Sheila.
And I'm just wondering, you know, where it goes from here.
Outside Interlopers Hugging Zone00:05:16
One of the things that we saw come in is that police, Ottawa police are informing the protesters that you risk up to $5,000 fine and up to five years imprisonment if you bring a minor into the unlawful protest zone.
I think it's not even bringing the kids to the protest zone.
I think it's within half a kilometer purposefully of the protest zone.
Yeah, let's define the zone.
Like where's the barrier, right?
And, you know, and it's funny when Marco talks about law enforcement in Coots, Alberta.
As far as I can see, the only crime committed there, Sheila, was by law enforcement.
Since when does enacting the law mean breaking the law?
And I talk about our fantastic work from our colleague Sid Fizard, who showed that three excavators were vandalized to the tune of over $100,000.
Wires cut, filters removed.
These are privately owned excavators on private property, not even where the border demonstration is happening.
And RCMP admitted that they went in like a bunch of antifa or black block vandals and disabled this equipment.
So really, who are the real criminals?
Who are the real terrorists out there right now, Sheila?
Well, with regard to the Coots arrests, it's my understanding that not a single one of them are from the community.
Some of them came in just days before the arrest.
And as a tip of the hat to just how peaceful the blockaders were down there, as soon as there were arrests made that were unrelated to the people participating in the blockade, they came in as interlopers, let's be clear.
Those guys that were charged with gun offenses and conspiracy to murder RCMP officers, they came in after they were not participating in the blockade.
And the blockaders immediately left because they said, we are not associated with that.
We are not violent.
This has been peaceful from the very beginning.
This has spoiled what we are trying to do here.
And we are leaving.
And you can see those images where they were hugging and shaking hands with the cops.
So the blockators and the protesters and the cops were hugging and shaking hands with each other because that was the true spirit of what was happening at Coots.
And it was spoiled by outside interlopers who came in looking for trouble.
You know, you're so right, Sheila.
And I wonder how many of those images of RCMP officers and everyday citizens hugging each other.
I wonder how many of those images were captured and put on the newspapers here in our great dominion.
If they were, maybe they were on page C19 after the classifieds or something like that.
Because those are fantastic images, but you really have to look for them when it comes to media outlets to get them on.
And you're right about the interlopers.
You know, it reminds me of Grace Life Church when that was walled off, right, Sheila?
And the church members, the people in the community, they respected the fact that this egregious thing was happening by law enforcement, sealing off the church behind, you know, like a concentration camp type fence.
And then it was interlopers, correct me if I'm wrong, you were on the ground, Sheila, that decided to yank those fences down.
And I believe it was the people in the community that helped erect them again.
So again, you really need a program to find out who's who in the zoo when it comes to these demonstrations.
And one of the big problems, Sheila, as you know, is when it comes to these blockades, when it comes to these trucker convoys, so many people illicitly declare themselves as the spokesman or spokeswoman.
And it's really difficult.
And some of these people, I won't mention his name, rhymes with Burger King, but I digress.
You know, are what I think just liars and unhinged and are all about making a name for themselves.
Yeah, there's a lot of people who are riding the coattails of other people's hard work to make a name for themselves.
And they're just liars, low liability protesters, because their bad legal advice will ruin other people's lives.
But they don't actually have, as my mom used to say, a pot to piss in.
So it doesn't matter if their bad legal advice ruins their lives because they have nothing left to lose.
There are a lot of those people in the middle of this trying to make this about themselves when this movement of truckers has been completely grassroots.
A Pot to Piss In00:03:03
It's just been a groundswell from the bottom up.
I've heard that saying too of people from a certain generation: a pot to piss.
And has anyone ever pissed in a pot?
Like, why would you do that?
Also, the other thing I've always wondered is: you see someone grumpy and somebody says, Oh, who pissed in your cornflakes this morning?
Has that ever happened in the history of mankind?
Has anyone ever urinated in a cereal?
And like, why would you do that?
I just think of the logistics involved, but I digress.
Yeah, I regret, I regret using that turn of phrase instantly.
Now, Mr. Producer whispers in my ear.
Actually, we're 20 minutes into the show and actually a little bit longer because we came on early and we've still never explained to everybody what we're doing here.
So, for those of you who get annoyed when I go through this little spiel, go get a coffee and be back here in about 90 seconds.
I'm going to make it fast.
So, this is the Revolutes daily live stream.
Used to just be hosted on Friday by Ezra Levant, but then the pandemic struck and there was more news than ever, but you wouldn't know it if you got all your news from the mainstream media because they decided it was too dangerous to talk about stuff and go out in the world.
And we thought, you know what?
That's fine.
We will.
We're not scared, which is what we do.
But also, the news changes so fast that sometimes the best way to sit down and deal with the news is exactly how we are.
It's better talked about as it's happening, spontaneously, instead of a fully produced video.
So, that's why we expanded the live stream to five full workdays of the week.
And it's usually for an hour, sometimes a little longer.
And it gives us a great opportunity to interact with each other because I'm way out here in the West and I don't work in the Toronto office.
So, this is kind of good for me to feel connected, but it also helps us feel connected to you out there.
Because, unlike the mainstream media, again, we welcome your viewer feedback.
We welcome your questions, queries, and comments.
And we don't rely on Justin Trudeau to pay the bills.
We rely on all of you at home.
So, coupling those two aspects of the company together, might I invite you to interact with it with us on one of the streaming platforms that we are on?
So, we're on YouTube, but we may have to say Cyanara to YouTube about halfway through the show, depending on the topics we talk about.
And we're completely demonetized over there anyway.
So, if you're watching us there, migrate to one of these other platforms: Rumble, Odyssey, and Super U. Rumble, you can interact with us by way of a Rumble rant, throw a little cash in the pot, and Mr. Producer will send us your question, query, or comment, and we'll read it on air.
Likewise, with Odyssey, that's a hyper chat that you can leave us there.
And Super U shouts likewise, same thing.
If you want to talk to us, that's a great way to do it.
It's a direct channel to us, just throw a little money at us.
And we are also live streaming simultaneously on Getter.
This completes, I think, no, tomorrow completes our third full week of streaming on Getter.
So, if you're watching us on Getter, nice to see you.
Thanks for tuning in.
Parents Clampdown Playgrounds00:15:55
So, I think that's it.
The people who get angry with me for talking about that every single time, every single time that I'm on air, they should be back now.
Mr. Producer whispers in my ear that we should talk about, as I said in the morning meeting, the treatment of the trucker convoy in Ottawa is turning into a little bit of a country song.
They've taken your bank account, they've taken your truck, your guns, your wife, now your kids, and later on, they'll take your dog too.
And we'll get to that in a second.
So, Children's Aid Society urges Ottawa convoy protesters to make arrangements for kids' care.
Wow.
They're going to take the kids from the truckers now.
I've never seen them do this at a lefty protest when kids are like sleeping in public parks with dangerous dogs around and drug use.
I've never seen them move in to take kids out of the care of a lefty protest.
But also, this speaks to a certain elitism that blue-collar working-class people, we just don't know how to take care of our kids as well as rich people do.
So, we need the state to step in and make decisions for us.
Much like what they're doing with our bodies and the vaccines.
Yeah.
And Sheila, not to belabor the point, but I just want to jump back to Omar Cotter.
Remember, the narrative in the left-wing media was child soldier, child soldier, child soldier.
Even when he was an adult, they were still showing photographs of him as a 15-year-old.
Where was the Children's Aid Society in removing the child soldier?
Because obviously, his odious parents, if you believe the narrative, they're the ones that were pulling his strings.
But they weren't interested in removing Omar Cotter, I guess, because, oh, I don't know, cultural or religious sensitivities.
I mean, you know, educate me, explain it to me.
For I am a bear of very little brain when it comes to whose kids get taken away and whose are allowed to, oh, I don't know, go overseas and kill people.
Well, it falls down on politics, right?
So, if you believe that you're in charge of your kids, that you should take care of your kids, and it's none of the state's business what you teach your kids, as long as you're teaching them to be productive, well-adjusted human beings going forward, you're a bad guy.
But if you believe that the state is a co-parent with you and can infect your child with whatever sort of gender theory or race theory or whatever, and teach them to hate themselves and hate the traditional family and the values that make this country great, that's fine.
It doesn't matter what you do to your kid because your politics are fine.
And I think that's what this is about: it's politics and it's class struggle.
That's what's happening here.
And, Sheila, you're so right.
I mean, look at the difference of this protest in Canada now versus two years ago when we had blockades all over Canada, billions with a B, billions and billions of dollars.
Was there any vilification or demonization of those demonstrators by the government or the media?
No.
Was there any like ticking timeline?
Was there any consideration of invoking the Emergencies Act?
No.
Eventually, weeks and weeks and weeks later, it was taken down.
But as soon as these trucks rolled into Ottawa, it was almost as though, okay, you had your little weekend of letting off steam.
Can you exit stage right now?
Or else?
I mean, that is an appalling double standard.
I guess it comes down to race-based demonstrations.
What can I say?
Even though the people involved with the trucker convoy, contrary to all this white supremacist crap you hear, are of all races, all faiths.
So that doesn't even stick.
Sheila, I can't get over the double standard.
Oh my goodness, that we are enduring on, I guess, an hourly basis right now.
Yeah, and I don't even think it's race-based.
I think it is just: do you fall down along liberal party politics?
Well, yeah, there are identity politics at play, for sure.
Yeah.
You know, so maybe that's a better way to do that.
Yes, okay, you're fine.
Yeah.
You know, for example, Christian parents are not allowed in this country to take their child who may or may not be struggling with gender identity to talk to the local priest.
That's illegal now.
Now that is conversion therapy.
So you cannot, as a Christian parent, say, okay, you're telling me you're having these problems.
Let's go to a trained counselor, by the way, and talk to him in a way that is in line with our family's values.
Nothing forced.
This is just parents looking for spiritual and psychological guidance.
That's illegal in this country now.
So that was a unanimous vote in the House of Commons.
Not just unanimous.
The conservatives were giving each other high fives too.
They were as though they're just like dog catchers, but for gay people, leaving the church and just snatching them up and then taking them off to a re-education camp.
That's the concept that the liberals ran with this ban on conversion therapy instead of the reality of what it is.
It was just bigotry from start to finish, by the way.
No, I agree with you, Sheila.
When it comes to conversion therapy, there is nuance here, but you can't even approach that.
Can't have that discussion.
It's a third rail all of a sudden.
You even raise that.
You're a homophobe, a transphobe.
Child abuser.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Child abuser.
And not one dissenting opinion.
Not one saying, well, what about this particular case?
Absolutely dreadful.
Now, we've gotten the kids in the convoy out of the way.
So if you take your kids to the convoy, you can go to jail for five years or take your kids near the convoy.
Sorry.
Doesn't even have to be in the convoy, near the convoy.
You can go to jail for five years, and the Children's Aid Society is going to take your kids.
But they don't stop there.
They will also take your dog because apparently your dog can have the wrong politics too.
And so they've said the Ottawa Humane Society has said that they will take your dog and they will bill you for taking your dog, even though your dog is perfectly well cared for.
Your dog is just, the dog's owner has the wrong politics.
I think there's a tweet actually from the Ottawa Humane Society if you want to dig that up.
But it's on Ezra's Twitter feed too, Mr. Producer.
So then they'll bill you after they abduct your dog from you, steal your dog.
And then after, if you cannot pay to get your dog out of, I guess, Hawk, then you they will, your dog will be considered relinquished, whatever that means.
No, but what do you think it means, Sheila?
Relinquise it out to somebody else, or does it mean it's time to put Fido down?
Yeah, I think they euthanize your dog.
Unbelievable.
You know what?
I'll tell you, the way people feel about their dogs, and you know what?
There are some people out there in Canada, Sheila, their only companion, their only family member.
Truckers, long-haul truckers bring your dogs with them all the time.
I mean, if anyone went after my golden doodle, Sir Gregor, wow, I don't know what I do.
My dog's under the desk.
I might be going to the canine prison myself, you know.
This smacks to me, Sheila, of desperation.
And it also smacks to me of vindictiveness.
You know, we are really going to hurt you where it really hurts.
And maybe you don't care about going to jail and having your insurance canceled and your rig seized and your bank account frozen.
But now we're going after your child.
We're going after your pet.
This is, I don't even know if I've ever seen this in like a banana republic, Sheila.
This is demonic.
They don't take dogs away from homeless people, drug-addled, homeless people with bad dogs, like the one that bit you.
That was in a public park for a long time.
And the only time they did something about it was when it attacked you.
They don't do this to homeless people.
They are taking perfectly well-cared for dogs away from people based on politics.
This is demonic.
This is mobilizing every aspect of the state to crush dissent and to emotionally cripple people.
Do you know, you raise a great point.
I'm glad you brought it up.
What happened to me at Trinity Bellwoods Park when not only was this man homeless, but he was a drug addict who set his dogs upon me, one of them doing serious damage on my thigh.
And when I spoke to a really nice guy with animal control, this dog, Sheila, had already been deemed a dangerous dog.
And I thought, well, this man gave me an education because I thought, well, if you have a dangerous dog, that means it's put down.
Oh, no, no, no.
There are conditions in which you can own a dangerous dog.
For example, it has to be leashed at all times in public.
It has to be muzzled at all times in public.
It can't be anywhere near children or playgrounds.
This dog, no leash, no muzzle within 30 meters of a playground where kids are playing at Trinity Bellwoods Park.
Because you know what, Sheila?
If we give a homeless drug addict a dangerous dog, hey, what could go wrong, right?
And two reported bites and what I was told, more like this was another person, a social worker that's familiar with this individual.
She said it's more like 30 people have been bitten.
It's just that they didn't bother to report it.
But at least two, and then with me, three persons that said I was bitten by this dog.
That's okay.
You know, have your dog run around Trinity Bellwoods Park.
Have him go to the playground.
Hopefully he doesn't step on a hypodermic needle, another big problem in the playgrounds there.
That's all right.
But if you're a trucker with your companion, your little dog, you're going to have him taken away and you better have some do-ray me to get him out of canine prison.
Otherwise, he's going to the, he's getting the long needle, if you know what I mean.
We should, Mr. Producer tells me that they're currently debating the motion to accept the Emergency Measures Act.
But before we move on, I just want to get to this ridiculous thing from Press Progress because they never cease to amaze me how ridiculous they are.
And this is new.
So they have this article.
This is outrageous to them.
Photos show young child with gas can strapped to their body next to Parliament Hill.
So the kids just wearing an empty, obviously empty, because no little kid is going to wear a full gas can on their back.
Like that's heavy.
Anybody ever tried to gas up the lawn tractor?
It's heavy to lift in and then like pour it in.
Like I'm strong, but that's heavy.
So this is empty.
This is just a kid wearing it because gas cans, empty gas cans have become a symbol of protest.
So this is, you know, like I see them at the protests in Edmonton.
People are banging jerry cans together to make noise or whatever, just to show like the, it's a symbol of resistance to the authoritarian actions of the police.
But this is in press progress and they say photos which were obtained exclusively by press progress from a source who works in downtown Ottawa show the child running back and forth on a mat while wearing a gas can as if it were a school backpack.
So like playing?
Is that is that the thing that you're upset about?
Like playing?
The kid was playing.
Photos show the child playing in the middle of Wellington Street on a stretch of road between Parliament Hill and the Supreme Court.
But this is all blocked off by trucks.
So, it's not like they're going to get hit.
They were playing lawn bowling for 10 to 15 minutes as their parents looked on.
So, this kid is playing outside, having fun, doing like athletic little kid things while the parents looked on.
So, the kid is playing outside.
Check, good thing.
I'm always like, get out of the house, go play outside.
And the parents were supervising, also.
Good thing.
But these people think this is a bad thing because the parents have the wrong politics.
Yeah.
Anyways, this is then they go on to say, like, this little person, their parents deserve to be issued a $5,000 fine.
No, Sheila, you nailed it with wrong politics because here's what's really behind, I think, removing kids, in addition to causing the adults who are the parents of those kids incredible emotional distress at having their children separated from them.
The other thing is, this government doesn't want the next generation, the young people, to witness a peaceful protest on Parliament Hill.
Salt of the Earth Canadians standing up to a prime minister who admires the basic dictatorship of China for getting things done.
They don't want to see that because with their philosophy, Sheila, they want them to go through the school system.
They want them to be indoctrinated.
They want them to come out as little Marxists.
And you know, when it comes to communism or whether it comes to marketing beer, as they say on Madison Avenue, get them young, get them forever.
I think that's what's behind this clampdown on the children.
Just as you were talking there, as my mind tends to do when you're talking, I wondered a little bit to how I think the media and the liberals, but I repeat myself since they are the same homogenous group.
I think they are seriously miscalculating snatching the kids here because there are two ways that this is going to happen, and they're both bad for the liberals and the media, optically speaking.
You are going to see screaming, crying children as the state takes away their parents for the crime of having the wrong politics.
I will never forget the images of the kids crying and the wives crying as the farmers were taken away in handcuffs for selling their own wheat.
That turned the tide against the liberals, those images.
These ordinary men who didn't do anything wrong and they're screaming, crying families.
I'll never forget it.
You're going to see this replicated en masse in Ottawa, either one of two ways, or the children are going to be taken away.
And the children are going to be screaming.
The mothers are going to be crying.
The dads are going to be raging near violent.
I don't know how my husband would be able to contain himself if somebody took away our children.
And that will also further turn the tide away from the government because everybody who is a parent can relate to that.
Children Taken Away00:08:05
And you think about, I remember years and years and years ago, maybe 20 years ago, and the FBI were right to do this raid.
I think it was the FBI or Children's Aid Society on the FLDS, the fundamentalist Latter-day Saints.
There was a raid on their compound because they were, as it turns out, years later, engaging in child marriage and sex trafficking.
And the guy who's the head of the FLDS church is still in jail, thank God.
But there was a raid on one of their compounds.
I think it was Zion.
I forget what it is.
Waiting for Zion.
I think that's what the ranch was called.
Anyways, they had a big Mormon temple there.
FLDS temple, not a Mormon temple.
But the images of those children being taken away from their mothers, it was enough to turn the FBI and the Children's Aid Society away from that branch of FLDS because it was so catastrophic, even though there needed to be intervention there.
But those images of children being separated from their mothers, it was too much.
It was too much optically speaking.
Yeah, this.
Exactly.
These women watching their children being taken away on buses.
And there were things happening to those kids.
There was sex trafficking and abuse happening there.
But to see the children taken away en masse, it was enough to have law enforcement and the Children's Aid Society step away for nearly 20 years from what was happening there.
So if they start taking those kids, you're going to see a country harden against the liberals where people who are against the truckers are saying, this, what you're doing here, this is too far.
This is way too far.
You know, Sheila, you raise a very interesting point here.
Clearly, the government and law enforcement, they're ramping up for the end game in terms of shutting this demonstration down, clearly by invoking the Emergencies Act.
That's the end goal.
What do you think is the possibility that this might go sideways a la the Waco takedown back in the 90s?
Well, we're three weeks into this, and they're completely peaceful.
Completely peaceful.
The supply of racism does not meet the demand.
The supply of violence does not meet the demand.
You know, the left is faking arsons now because they just can't get the truckers to react.
And I think that's what some of these threats about kids and dogs, that's what it's about.
Seizing their bank accounts, that's not enough to hurt them.
Seizing their property, that's not enough to hurt them.
But I think taking kids and animals, that's the government trying to incite a violent confrontation so that they can do what they think they need to do to clear the streets of Ottawa.
And as one reporter said to Justin Trudeau's father back in 1970 when the War Measures Act was invoked, how far are you willing to go?
Of course, Papa Pierre Trudeau said, just watch me.
And that's the question I have.
At some point, do we see the use of, I mean, I know it sounds preposterous, but do we see the use of tear gas, rubber bullets, water cannons?
You know, because clearly these people, as of right now, I was speaking to our wonderful correspondent, Alexa Lavoie, who and with, of course, Lincoln Jay, they're both in the nation's capital covering that.
There's no mad rush out of Dodge, regardless of the rhetoric that the government is using.
So there you have it.
By the way, it's an important thing we should discuss too, this freezing of bank accounts.
If you have given a donation to the likes of a GoFundMe, and of course, 93,000 Canadians had their names hacked.
And so there's a whole list of people whose privacy has been obliterated.
I was just speaking to a woman yesterday, Sheila, and she gave $25 to the other funding, what's it called?
Go give.
Give, send, go.
Give, send, go.
Thank you so much.
And she is right now, as we're speaking, she's at her bank removing her savings, which is $40,000.
And she is, well, quite literally, she's going to put it under her mattress.
She feels it's safer there than in a bank.
Now, I would imagine the government is really going after the big fish, those who are, you know, funding this convoy six, seven, maybe even eight figures, who knows.
But I wouldn't put it past them to have their CRA tack dogs go after Canadians that gave donations under $100.
And wow, look at that.
Scotia Bank outages reported in the last 24 hours.
When it says outage, RBC, this RBC outage, yeah, that was inconvenient yesterday.
Well, she is a Scotiabank customer.
She's gotten some money in that one, TD.
That's going to be taken care of tomorrow.
Are we going to see a run on the bank, Sheila?
We are seeing a run on the banks.
And this is not them going after the big guys.
Lincoln ran into somebody who he had previously covered when he was in Winnipeg.
And he was at the Convoy protest.
He's a gym owner, and he is just a small fish in a big pond.
And they froze his bank account.
So they don't care how his mortgage gets paid, his kids get fed.
They don't care.
They just seize his bank account.
And you know something else?
I talked to our wonderful lawyer in Ottawa, David Amber, yesterday.
And he's wonderful.
And he made mention, you know, how much the, because I was asking, is that a possibility that somebody could lose, have their bank account frozen because of a very minor donation?
And he said, he brought up a point.
You know, the Justin Trudeau liberals despise, it's visceral.
They just despise rebel news.
He said, I wouldn't put it past them to whoever has an identical surname.
So if there's a Menzies, a Gun Reid, a Levant, even though there's absolutely no connection, no relation, get them.
Go after them.
Just because maybe that is a family member and we want to incur as much damage as possible.
I know, folks, you might think that's preposterous, a conspiracy theory, but Sheila, what's your take?
I wouldn't put it past them.
I'm getting emails to that effect.
I'm getting emails from people saying CBC reached out to me.
Yes, I've seen it.
Toronto Star reached out to me, but I didn't donate to the Convoy.
This is someone with the same name as me.
But these hunter killers are going after everybody.
By the way, I tweeted yesterday.
I wonder if CBC paid for the hacked data.
Not that it wasn't readily available, but I think they're just dumb enough to pay for it, is all I'm saying.
You know what?
Personally, I don't think so.
I think it's even more nefarious, Sheila.
I wouldn't put it past CESAs to pay for that hack.
Certainly that hacker, he claims he's been hired by law enforcement in the past.
And you know how?
I mean, hey, listen, if you're going after a pedophile ring, hack away.
Madam Speaker's Dilemma00:15:16
But these are law-abiding, peaceful protesters.
And think of it.
Think of this hacker's rationale.
I'm doing this because they're breaking the law.
Well, he's breaking the law by violating their privacy.
I just think that even like, I'm sure somebody shopped an Excel file To or a PDF to CBC, and they were like, How much do you want for it?
Even though it's just everywhere on Twitter, because it's somebody else's money to waste, right?
Yeah, just put it on expensive to Rosie.
Let's, if the debate is still going on, let's cut to a little bit of that and see what's happening there.
Okay.
So, Dean Lloyd.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
The Honourable Member for Regina Capella.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
I'd like to thank my colleague for agreeing to share his time with me.
I think it's very important for Canadians to understand that this is in no way, that the government's reaction, the government's proposal to invoke the Emergency Measures Act, is in no way connected to public safety, to restoring order, or to upholding the rule of law.
We know this because we know what they've done with previous protests and blockades.
When the Prime Minister agrees with the aims of protesters, he does nothing.
In fact, actually, it would be unfair to say he does nothing.
He does nothing to end the blockades.
He actually will send negotiators, he'll actually send government delegations to meet with protesters and even propose settlements and compromises when he agrees with the political aims of those protesting.
We know this because in 2020, anti-energy protesters, anti-oil and gas worker protesters held up vital transportation links for weeks, Madam Speaker at the time.
The Prime Minister had a much different tone.
Let's take a look at what he said when vital transportation links, when rail lines were blockaded, crippling the Canadian economy for weeks and weeks at a time.
He said, and I quote: Therefore, we are creating a space for peaceful, honest dialogue with willing partners.
Compare that to the rhetoric and inflammatory language that he has used over the past several weeks here in 2022.
Make no mistake, Madam Speaker.
The protests that are happening in Ottawa and that have taken place across the country are a direct result of the Prime Minister's actions and his rhetoric.
The demonization of people who are fighting to get their rights back.
After two years of incredible hardship, two years of politicians and government agencies telling people that they weren't allowed to have family members visit them inside their own home.
After two years of governments telling business owners that they had to keep their doors shut and their employees laid off.
After years of people not able to use the various support systems that they've had in their life, relying on friends and family, gyms closed, activities for children cancelled.
After two years of this, just as there is hope on the horizon, as other jurisdictions around the world and even here in Canada were lifting restrictions and easing mandates, the Prime Minister added a new one.
He added a new restriction.
After two years of telling truck drivers that they were essential services, that they were be allowed to travel across the border to bring vital goods into our markets.
After two years of deeming them that essential service, just as there was hope and reasons to lift restrictions and mandates, the Prime Minister added a new one without any data to back it up, without any evidence to back it up.
Then, when people started objecting to this, finally saying enough is enough.
We want our freedoms back, Madam Speaker.
It's time for the government to retreat back to the normal boundaries of government interference in our lives.
When people started doing that, started to gather together to peacefully protest against government overreach, what did the Prime Minister do?
He called them names, tried to smear them with broad brushes.
He called them racists and misogynists.
He asked the question, the rhetorical question, Madam Speaker, about whether or not we should tolerate these people.
Madam Speaker, I'd like to ask the Prime Minister a question.
What does not tolerating these people look like?
Because what he's done over the past few weeks has just been shameful.
This Prime Minister has lowered the office in which he serves to unprecedented depths.
In my 17 years of being a member of parliament, I've never seen a Prime Minister, for that matter, any other politician, so debase the office that they hold, hurling insults at people, referring to a Jewish member of this House as standing with people waving swastikas.
Just outrageous, Madam Speaker.
I have to tell my honourable colleagues in the Liberal benches who have often admonished their political opponents for in any way, you know, even sharing the same postal code as someone who may be holding an offensive flag or a placard with unacceptable language on it.
And when Conservatives denounce that, that's not good enough for members of the Liberal Party.
They say, you know, you're supposed to paint the entire group protesting with that broad brush.
But, Madam Speaker, they don't hold themselves to that same standard.
I see many honourable members across the way, some of whom I've served with.
I know them to be honourable people.
I don't assume that they are all racists just because their leader has performed racist acts by putting on blackface so often in his life that he can't remember how many times he's done it.
We don't paint every single Liberal member of parliament with that brush.
They have no problem being photographed with the Prime Minister, despite his history of racist acts.
So neither should members of parliament hold or paint the entire group of people who are protesting for their freedoms back with that same broad brush.
The lengths at which this government, and indeed not just the government, but many of their friends in the corporate media, to paint every single person who's protesting, who's demanding an end to the restrictions and end to mandates with that broad brush, Madam Speaker.
You look at the lengths that they go to discredit and to dehumanize those people who are just fighting for their traditional civil liberties.
I ask you, Madam Speaker, if we kind of look at this into two different groups, on the one hand, you've got people who are saying after two years of hardship, two years of sacrifice, two years of being forced to comply with unprecedented government intrusion in our lives.
Unprecedented.
Government's telling you where you can go, who you can have in your house.
That is a new level of government interference in our life that we have not seen in recent Canadian history.
After two years of that, there's a group of people who are saying, I just don't believe I should be fired for making a health care decision.
Then on the other hand, you've got a group of people who are saying that anybody who holds that view is a racist, a misogynist, an insurrectionist, Madam Speaker.
You've got a group of people who are saying that government should have the ability to tell you who you can have in your house, whether or not your business is allowed to stay open.
Which group seems more unreasonable, Madam Speaker.
I would say after two years, those who are fighting against this government intrusion in their lives have a legitimate case to be made.
Whether or not we agree with them or not, we must respect their right to advocate for their views.
The Prime Minister has not provided any legitimate justification for bringing in the Emergency Measures Act.
He asks us to trust him.
He says, don't worry, we're going to make sure everything's fine with the courts.
We're going to make sure everything's compliant with the charter.
This is the same guy who fired his attorney general because she wouldn't go along with his plans to interfere in a criminal court case, Madam Speaker.
So you will pardon, you will pardon the members of the Conservative Party if we're not going to take the Prime Minister's word that he's not going to abuse the power that he's granting himself.
You know, I think that's good.
He points to specific incidents.
Who is this guy?
Who's this guy?
This is Andrew Scheer.
Where was this guy three years ago?
Who's this guy?
Sheila, you stole my thunder.
If only Mr. Personality was like this in 2019 on the federal election campaign trail.
Yeah, he might have had far more success.
Suddenly, he's dropped the rules of Queensbury and he's turned into a street fighter.
That comment on blackface is absolutely fantastic.
That's what makes it so rich when Justin Trudeau calls anyone a racist.
As Mr. Scheer said, even the Prime Minister can't remember how many times he's donned Blackface.
And so again, he's got his fighting spirit back.
He's got his mojo back.
Too bad it comes three years too late, at least in terms of Mr. Scheer becoming prime minister.
But yeah, like you said, Sheila, who is that guy in the blue suit?
Yeah, he's saying all the right things.
And he is sort of, I mean, it's serious business, what Trudeau is doing to the country.
But it is so laughable that it is coming from Trudeau that you can see it in his face.
And this is so ridiculous.
He's obviously telling a joke because people are laughing.
So I'll have to go back and watch this later.
But I just suggested to our web team and our editors that we should clip this speech in full and just clip it and stick it up on our YouTube because I think this is incredible.
People should be watching this again, three years too late.
But you know what?
I guess redemption comes in all forms.
Well, Sheila, that's a great idea from the House of Ideas, Sheila Gunread.
I'm full of good ideas.
I'm full of something.
I don't know what.
Oh, David.
We are rapidly running out of time.
We've got a few chats to get to, but the one thing that I think we should talk about is Justin Trudeau and Andrew Scheer alluded to it there.
Yesterday, Andrew Sheer, sorry, Justin Trudeau accused a Jewish MP, Melissa Lanceman, of standing with Nazis.
She is the granddaughter of Holocaust survivors.
I just, I can't even believe this.
And she could not point out, because it is against parliamentary rules, that instead of apologizing, Justin Trudeau just ran away, as he tends to do.
Like, oh, the country is protesting me.
I'm going to the lake.
Like, that's how he normally reacts.
So naturally, he did run out of the House of Commons.
She just can't say that because you can't point out if a member is not there.
It's against the rules.
But maybe let's roll this.
Hopeful vision for public life isn't a naive dream.
It could be a powerful force for change.
If Canadians are to trust their government, their government needs to trust Canadians.
Those are the words of the Prime Minister in 2015.
These people, very often misogynistic, racist, women haters, science deniers, the fringe.
Same prime minister six years later as he fans the flames of an unjustified national emergency.
So, Mr. Speaker, when did the prime minister lose his way?
When did it happen?
The Right Honourable Prime Minister.
Mr. Speaker, Conservative Party members can stand with people who wave swastikas.
They can stand with people who wave the Confederate flag.
We will choose to stand with Canadians who deserve to be able to get to their jobs, who'll be able to get their lives back.
These illegal protests need to stop, and they will, Mr. Speaker.
Look at those idiot women behind him.
Bring order.
I just want to remind the honorable members, including the Honourable Right, Honorable Prime Minister, to use words that are not inflammatory in the House.
And that's for both sides.
The Honourable Member for Thornhill.
Oh, too bad we didn't see that.
But regardless, I think I'm contractually obliged not to talk about Ms. Lansburg.
I asked you specifically not to.
I will give commentary here.
I'm going to keep my mouth shut.
I know nothing.
I saw nothing.
Again, who is this lady?
You know what?
Who is this lady?
Again, redemption comes in all forms.
Melissa Lansman, new MP, daughter of Holocaust survivors, accused of standing with Nazis by the Prime Minister.
And you could tell she stood up and she was ready to fight.
She was like stretching her arms out and ready to fight.
And Justin Trudeau was like, ah, dang.
And he was asked to apologize, I think not once, not twice, but thrice, and then he left.
But the only way Justin Trudeau gets away with stuff this stupid is the idiots sitting behind him as he's accusing a conservative, a Jewish conservative of standing with neo-Nazis.
Yeah, we'll go to this.
Sorry.
She was on Ingraham last night.
So let's watch this.
This is not a surprise to me.
You just said it.
This is just true colors.
I sit there and watch him divide and wedge and stigmatize Canadians every single day.
And today, the rest of Canada saw a G7 prime minister go after a Jewish member of parliament and then walk away and not apologize.
Do you think there is an anti-Semitic element to this, or was it just a slip, a verbal slip?
Well, look, I think that words matter.
And if you looked at my inbox in my office and you saw what my staff was looking at, when you accuse somebody of standing with a swastika, you get an influx of people calling you a Nazi, and that's not okay.
Words Matter00:02:47
And he is driving that.
He's been driving division in this country throughout this throughout the was since the protest started, since before the protest started, for his political gain.
And I think his leadership is in trouble, the country's in trouble, and he's lost control of the situation.
By the way, Sheila, not to go off on a tangerine, but when they were showing those photographs of Justin Trudeau in blackface, which is disturbing enough, what is it about, did you notice the commonality?
He's always sticking his tongue out.
Does he think, and I think that's even almost worse than the blackface, does he think that black people are incapable of keeping their tongue in their mouth?
Why would he do that?
I mean, and I'm being serious.
I mean, it's perversely amusing on one hand, but is this how he thinks black people come across in general society?
They're walking around with their tongue sticking out like a dog.
He's just a gross, gross man, just guilty of all those things that he accuses other people of.
But as I was saying before, we went to that clip.
The only way he gets away with any of this stuff is the enablers within his own party.
He should be facing an open caucus revolt.
It's not going to happen.
Let me just say that.
And instead, he's got those ladies, Marcia Yen or whatever and that other one sitting there going, yep, just nodding along as he accuses a Jewish MP of being a Nazi enabler.
Sheila, this is not going to happen despite the speculation and wishes of so many.
And I'm going to tell you why.
It's because let's look at the history of Justin Trudeau.
And you got to give credit where credit is due.
He took a third place party.
Remember, in 2015, the liberals aren't even the official opposition, for goodness sake.
He took them from third place to majority government and then won two more elections.
Here's the deal.
All those backbencher liberal MPs, these nudniks, the thing is they will remain eternally grateful for giving them an office.
And now, of course, qualifying for a pension, getting past, what is it, six years, I believe, right?
There is going to be no revolution in the Liberal Party of Canada.
He is still their rock star, their sun god, their king, because it's all based on their own personal gain.
I was a nobody and I become an MP three times elected into the House of Commons, and it's Justin Trudeau at the helm of this ship.
Government Proactive Measures00:07:14
And that's the sad reality.
What do ethics and morals and even the law have to do with it?
It's power and money.
That's all they care about.
Power and money.
They don't care about charter rights.
They don't care about any of the things that they say they talk about.
They don't care about climate change.
Neither do I, but at least I'm honest about it.
They just care about using climate change to control your life.
They don't care about free speech or human rights or any of those things because when it comes down to it, they are the ones crushing human rights in Canada.
The Truckers Convoy is the most successful human rights movement we have seen in my lifetime.
And yet it is going to be crushed or it is attempted to be crushed under the boot of this state.
And this, if Putin were doing this, who wouldn't shut up about it?
Justin Trudeau, Joe Biden?
That you couldn't hear silence from them.
Oh.
Yep.
Okay, so Mr. Producer tells me in my ear, sorry, that this morning, and we had Alexa on the ground and Lincoln on the ground showing us that fences went up around the House of Commons today, and they have just taken, the protesters have taken the fence down.
Now, this will obviously be painted as violent.
Oh, they're honking the horns.
It will be painted, Sheila, as an attempt to an insurrection.
Yeah.
Unbelievable.
By the way, before we get to those super chats, we were talking, could there be a run on the bank?
I just got a text.
Listen to this.
It's from Lady Menzoid.
David, after the live stream, please send me an email to say that you give authorization to close or move anything that we have in our joint account at the bank.
Oh, I guess it's coming into my name.
Oh boy, if only I could get to Las Vegas.
But of course, not being double backs, I can't.
Anyways, this, I think this story has legs, Sheila.
Suddenly, I think anyone that's given a donation, even 10 bucks, they're terrified by all this talk about frozen assets and seizing bank accounts.
And you know what?
And I gotta, are you at all distressed, Sheila, that somebody like, oh, I don't know, the Royal Bank of Canada that now subscribes to politics when it comes to giving a mortgage out, that they might be given a fiscal kick in the you-know-what?
I'm not.
Yeah, I'm not losing any sleep over the banks suffering through this at all.
These are banks that, you know, they'll do business with you or not based on your politics.
This is absolutely no different.
This is exactly, I mean, did the banks put up any resistance to any of this?
I bet not.
Oh, no.
They don't care.
I mean, they don't care.
They're federally regulated.
You think they want to play dirty with the government?
Why am I saying play dirty?
Take a stance, a rightful stance against the government or bureaucracy.
All they care about is their soaring quarterly dividends to shareholders and their profits.
And Canadian banks are not ones to rock the boat.
It's, you know, follow the money.
It's all about the money.
And they don't see any benefit in them taking a stance against this outrageous clampdown against law-abiding Canadian citizens.
And I want to tell you one thing, too.
I talked to David Amber, our Ottawa lawyer, about this as well, Sheila.
I hope he's not billing us for all the advice he's giving you.
Oh, gee, I never thought about that.
Sorry, guys, right.
But here's the thing, Sheila.
Inevitably, if the government goes through with that and seizes the accounts of thousands or millions of Canadians for giving a donation to this trucker convoy, the argument in court would be this.
When I gave the donation, this was perfectly legal to do.
Yeah.
Right?
You then brought in an emergencies act that I didn't know you were going to do.
You then deemed my past behavior was illegal when it was legal at the time.
Sheila, what this is, in baseball terms, is changing the rules of the game in the bottom of the ninth inning.
Suddenly, it's five strikes and I'm out, right?
And he thinks that once this goes before a court, and of course, sometimes the penalty is the process.
We're talking months, maybe years, if these seizures happen.
We're talking so many dollars in legal fees.
No judge is going to say that this was righteous.
It's retroactive criminalization.
Exactly.
I think is how I would describe it.
But they are already seizing bank accounts.
Now, I don't know about property.
I guess the trucks, they'll just take them once they start towing them, as they say they're going to, because they're going to commandeer not only tow truck companies, but the people who drive the tow trucks too, because that's not slavery or anything.
So I guess we'll see how this plays out in the coming days.
Justice Minister David LeMetty said a couple of days ago that the government's going to basically nationalize the local tow truck industry.
The drivers have spoken out.
No way.
The Canadian and Ontario Trucking Associations, their heads, have said no chance.
And the reason is, once all these shenanigans are over, when this country and this world gets back to a normal state, they depend on the truckers, if you're running a heavy tow operation, for business.
If they are identified as those tow trucks that came in and yanked away the rigs of these peaceful protesters, well, they may as well just declare bankruptcy right now.
And like I said, imagine private property, private companies, private individuals.
I mean, towing is not a government department.
It's not a government crown agency like it is in Alberta now.
Well, yeah, there you go.
But for them to do this, like I said, Sheila, this is beyond banana republic kind of stuff.
Actually, I can't call Canadian Canada a banana republic, Sheila.
Our weather doesn't permit the growth of bananas.
So let's call ourselves now a maple syrup republic.
And the dictator has the initials JT.
Well, over here in the Canola Republic of Alberta, our government has had to procure their own tow trucks because no tow operators would be involved in towing any of the blockades.
So the government has gone and decided to be proactive.
They are going to procure their own tow trucks.
Sheila, if I was an Ottawa area tow truck driver with this kind of equipment, I would do what the RCMP did to those excavators.
I would vandalize my own equipment and go, I'd love to help you out.
Something happened.
Aside from me having COVID, my rig is down too.
Dean Blundell's Attention Seekers00:07:41
Some nasty person, some deplorable vandalized it.
Sorry.
I wonder what Minister LaMedi would say to that.
What a disgrace.
Yeah.
Okay, so we should get to some of these chats because we are 12 minutes past the hour and I have a meeting to be in here shortly.
So it's several videos to watch for editorial review.
And we've got a buck from our friend and colleague, Andrew Chapados, who says, Menzies, who is Dean Blundell?
Dean Blundell is someone that used to have a job at 102.1.
He was fired.
Didn't he say creepy things about young girls?
I think he said some homophobic things, but regardless, you know, I'm not one to subscribe to cancel culture.
Dean Blundell has gone from, I think, a pretty funny morning man to a very embittered troll online.
Case in point, when I was beaten up by Justin Trudeau's henchman back in December on a public sidewalk where I was posing no harm to anyone, Dean Blundell, and I don't understand why.
There you go, Dean Blundell firing over homophobic remarks.
But he tweeted something out and he said that here is video footage of Menzies getting beaten up.
Nothing like these visuals to send you off with a smile in your face for the weekend.
I'm paraphrasing, of course, but the point is, is he was cheering the beat down on.
And I think this is someone, Sheila, who lost a gig in mainstream media and is now incredibly bitter and is now lashing out at others who, quite frankly, are enjoying a measure of success.
I'm not mad at Dean Blundell.
I feel extreme pity for this pathetic individual.
Yeah, there's a lot of, if you Google Dean Blundell fired, there are a lot of times that he was for a lot of dumb things.
But he's always paying on other people to lose their careers.
No, I advocate freedom of speech.
But I think the last time he was fired, there was an element of him talking about a court case in which you couldn't give those particular details.
I'm going by memory.
It's going back years ago.
So that was a serious line he crossed, and it wasn't some kind of political correctness thing.
It was some kind of a judicial thing.
But like I said, here's a guy who was riding high once upon a time, can't get hired in this town.
I think he does a podcast or something.
I have no time or desire to tune into it.
But he has a hate on for me.
I don't know why.
I don't know, because you have a job.
Maybe.
I don't know.
Like, it's just like he's fired.
He's like, he's just in Trudeau.
He's just fired for all those things that he accuses other people of being sexist, transphobic, racist, fired, And then he apologizes and he gets a second chance and a third chance and a fourth chance and then just blows it.
It's like he can't help himself.
And he's like, so many of those people who were like former free speechers who have now suddenly gone woke, like Charles Adler, like Michael Corin, because that if you are not willing to work hard and be true to your principles, that's where the money is at because those jobs come government subsidized in the mainstream media.
And you know what, Sheila, one last thing on this.
You know what the difference is between us and the likes of Adeem Blundell?
I would go to bat, even now, even after all the nasty stuff he said about me, that, okay, he made a so-called homophobic comment.
He, he, you know, it offended the sensibilities of a gay person.
I don't believe that's worthy of a death sentence.
Once upon a time, you did an on-air apology.
Maybe you were taken off the air for three days, but in cancel culture, you are in jail as in forever.
And I just want to say that think of the worst crime you can commit, Sheila.
That would be, in my book, first-degree murder.
You, in a premeditated way, took the life of another human being.
In Canada, you're looking at a 25-year sentence, unless deemed a dangerous offender, and you are out.
Why?
Because we believe in second chances.
Even in this crime.
Yeah, Homolka in Montreal taking her kids to school.
No problem.
It's like nothing ever happened.
No one for, you know, let's not forget that she was a co-serial killer.
But we will give you a permanent death sentence or permanent incarceration in thought crime penitentiary if you say something that goes across the politically correct grain.
That is despicable.
It makes no sense.
So I'm just saying, while Dean Blundell is happy, I get beaten off, but beaten up, while Dean Blundell would love to see me taken off the air, I would still stand up to allow him to say what he says because we really believe in freedom of speech.
I think we've given this guy more thought than I've ever given him ever in these few short moments.
I don't even like I know on Twitter he likes to try to get my attention.
It's weird.
There are a few people like that who are like, they'll come up and say the most insightful comments about my political arguments, like, you're ugly.
You have a man face.
You're old.
What?
Good argument, guys.
Good arguments.
Very, very good.
How could they be making me ready?
They must be prepared.
You're beautiful.
Can I say that?
David, call a coworker beautiful.
We don't have a human resources character right now.
I think I am the human resources person.
But the reason I bring that up is because they don't actually have legitimate arguments, but they pick fights with us for attention to get like street cred with the other leftists.
So I just don't even pay attention.
It's so pathetic.
And I feel like even talking about him right now is punching down.
So let's just move on.
Good job, Andrew, for hijacking the show.
Let's include it.
One last thing about those awful people that say those vile things about you.
I don't care.
Think of what Margaret Thatcher said when she was asked about when people say, oh, you're ugly.
Oh, you're fat.
She said, I'm very happy, actually, because when you resort to ad hominem attacks, that means I've won the argument.
You have nothing to say.
You're now throwing insults as opposed to points that further the debate.
So there you go.
When they say that to you, you have officially won.
Sheila Gunnright, read victorious again.
I just think they're just looking for a fight like they want to offend me.
And I literally could not care less what they think.
Like, I couldn't care less.
I just don't care.
But he just does it for attention.
So many of them.
If you're watching and you hate watching me, because I know you are, I don't care.
Go, you know, like, go feed your cats.
Do something like that.
Like, what you're neglecting your cats when you're bothering me.
Go take care of your cats.
Fraser McBurney gives us five bucks.
When and if Trudeau sends in those shock troops, you will see the liberals drop from 32% to 16% down to 8% and the emergency now.
John T. Singis gives us a buck.
Trump Supporters' Rant00:09:26
David LeMetti is total slime.
How can he smear and threaten Trump supporters who donate to the trucker convoy when Trump could be re-elected?
He's a Canadian minister.
How do we have good relations with the U.S.?
Yeah, I hope future President Ron DeSantis appoints Donald Trump just as busy work to be the Secretary of State so that the Canadians have to deal with him all the time just for spite.
You know, I mean, that remark from LeVetti.
Oh, did you say Trump supporters, minister?
Oh, my gosh, call in the military, call in the National Guard.
And think of what Donald Trump did in his four years.
Energy independence, a roaring economy, historical lows of employment, including employment for Hispanics, blacks, Asians.
Peace through power.
Oh, it was a lot of people.
I mean, he was the opposite of a hawk.
He took out a couple of terrorists, which the mainstream media in the U.S. would call scholars and whatnot.
But I mean, what's happened to America and the world in the last year of Trump out of office?
And you're telling me this is someone that should be demonized and you're a supporter of sleepy Joe Biden in the White House?
Are you kidding me?
Yeah.
I mean, the world is a far more dangerous place.
Putin's going to take over the Ukraine.
Sorry, Ukraine.
I don't know why I always say the Ukraine.
Putin's like saber-rattling Ukraine.
China is doing all kinds of bad things.
You know, under Trump, we had the Abraham Accord and everyone was behaving themselves.
Why?
Because he turned a few terrorists to dust and scared everybody straight.
Okay, let's keep going.
TAC 178, 10 bucks.
This is my friend from Twitter.
I think the missing piece to the puzzle for many people is that Trudeau is a communist.
Those who work for him are communists.
Those who support him are communists.
Never forget.
I agree, Sheila.
I mean, the great Mark Levin last year with American Marxism.
Wonderful book.
I urge all our viewers to read it.
What we're seeing right now is Canadian Marxism.
Make no mistake.
Mr. Producer, what are you whispering in my ear?
Okay, great.
Let's show this.
Okay.
President Biden says there's a very high probability that Russia will invade Ukraine.
They have not moved any of their troops out.
They've moved more troops in.
We have reason to believe that they are engaged in a false flag operation.
I wonder if it'll be a minor incursion or a minor invasion.
Let's listen to Biden mumble through this.
We have reason to believe that they are engaged in a false flag operation.
They have an excuse to go in.
Every indication we have is they're prepared to go into Ukraine, attack Ukraine.
Number one.
Number two, I've been waiting for a response from Putin for my letter, my response to him.
It comes with that Moscow embassy.
Their factions are here.
Not facts in the very tenure is here.
I have not read it yet.
I cannot comment on it.
And number three, we have advised that the invading Russian troops should remain socially distant and wear masks.
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.
I can't believe he's the leader of the free world.
Look at him just standing there squinting, has no idea what's going on.
Nothing.
Like, he's like, when's my nap?
When's my nap?
Where's he's got a pocket?
Yeah, he's got a pocket full of worthers.
He should just be hanging out with the grandkids.
He shouldn't be in charge of anything.
This is elder abuse, Democrats.
Stop it.
Yeah, it is.
Yep.
Frederick Bernie gives us five bucks.
Because of my support of Rebel News and others, I've taken out my bank the bulk of my savings, leaving just $100 in the bank.
Wow.
H. Pierce, 888, 10 bucks.
We need to get as many vaccinated people down to parliament as we can.
We'll get them on the stage in front of parliament to tell their stories, get them in parliament too, so Trudeau can see his handiwork.
You know, that's the thing.
Doctors don't even say that this stuff happened.
So, and I'm trying to keep us on YouTube, so let's just move along.
Nikka BC gives us 20 bucks just checking if my credit card is still working.
Thank you, Rebel.
Well, I'm glad you checked it out with us, and I'm glad your credit card is still working.
Sister II, a buck.
Andrew Scheer finally, Andrew Scheer finally found his spine and other parts of his anatomy three years late, but very welcome.
Thank you.
That's the thing.
I'm trying to be graceful.
Adam Sos has got me working on being more graceful when people come around to my way of thinking.
Jory Georgie gives us a buck.
Trudeau is reminding me of dictators in their final act.
I've studied a lot of them.
Their antics never end well.
I hope Trudeau recognizes that, but he won't.
He wants to bring all of us down with him.
Yeah, usually the third world dictators have pulled the shoot by now.
Like, I think it was only three days to get rid of Ferdinand Marcos.
We're going on three weeks, so we still can't dislodge Trudeau.
Bill CF7.
Who's to blame for that?
Jugmeat Slim, I would suggest.
He rails against these oppressive measures in the Emergencies Act, but says, yeah, but we'll probably anyway, so it can go through.
That is the most disgraceful guy in the House of Commons today.
Yeah.
Yeah.
All of this hinges on him.
And he knows that those same people on the steps of the House of Commons, they are politically opposed to him too.
So he's happy to silence dissidents as long as those people are dissident against him too.
Bill CF7, a buck.
The law hasn't been passed yet, so it is illegal to freeze bank accounts.
Well, tell it to the bank.
Bob Smith, $18.29, $2.
Alert.
Canadian Constitution Foundation has announced a lawsuit against Emergencies Act source.
That's great.
They're great people.
They're doing good work over there.
We have some, I think we have some overlap with some of their lawyers or one of our lawyers used to work for them.
So they're good.
Johnston 666, $10.
David, have you seen your buddy Patrick Brown lately?
It was hilarious when you showed up when he was about to start his hockey game.
Can you go see him and find out if he's still being sneaky?
We have some news there.
What a coincidence, sir, because stay tuned in the days ahead.
The reason I was interviewing David Amber was indeed all about.
But here's the teaser.
Remember how I was handcuffed and taken away in a police cruiser and charged with trespassing for standing on a parking lot at a rec center?
Well, we had our day in court.
Stay tuned to see how that turned out.
Well, I think we are successfully all caught up.
We've gone almost a half an hour long.
Oh, we've got one or two more chats coming in.
So, Mr. Producer will send those to me right away.
David, what do you think is going to happen?
You think the liberals are going to prop up the, or the NDP are going to prop up the liberals today?
I know that they are convinced this is going to pass the House and end up in the Senate because I saw Canada's most useless senator, Paula Simons from Alberta, complaining that she has been recalled to Ottawa, so she might actually have to work for a living.
I would bet my life Jugbeat is going to support this government, won't let it fall on this issue because you know what?
He's very concerned about all the races and bigots and white supremacists out there, and something should be done.
Although his brother-in-law, I understand, made a sizable donation to the trucker convoy.
So all is not simpatico in the Sing family, I understand.
But yeah, he's trying to play it both ways.
He's saying these are extreme measures, these are unacceptable in a democracy, blah, blah, blah.
But when push comes to shove, you know, it's like you see on some police cruisers, deeds speak, Sheila.
And he is going to vote.
And here's the question: I wonder if it's a whip vote.
I wonder if he's told his caucus, you must vote to support this government.
Singh is trying to play it both ways.
He is a despicable coward.
Not only on this issue, but when we get into the parliamentary press debates, Sheila, this is the jabroni that says, I do not take questions from rebel news reporters.
So, in other words, the guy that wants to run the country, the guy that would be dealing with some of the most reprehensible dictators in the world if he became prime minister, he's too afraid of the likes of Alexa Lavoie.
Give me a break.
Yeah.
Okay, those final few chats came in.
Crazy Beach gives us a buck.
Edited For Impact00:03:55
Can your RRSPs and investment accounts be frozen too?
I don't think anybody knows.
I don't think the liberals know.
I don't think the banks know.
So if you have those things and you donated to the convoy, I would just be ready for those things to be frozen.
On the note of who you look like, Sheila, we had this discussion on Tuesday.
I think Alice from the L-word, I had to Google her because I've never watched that show.
She's got light hair, though, but maybe.
I think she's got like a wide nose like I do.
So maybe I can see it.
What's the L-word?
It was a show on HBO, I think.
But what long time?
What's the L-word?
I think it was lesbian.
But you knew that.
You just made me say it because I just wanted to see you say lesbian.
That's all.
There's, you know, something.
Well, I exhaled a lot before I did.
Okay.
Paul Otto Newman gives us a buck.
Sheila, calling it the Ukraine implies that it's part of Russia.
Yes, I know.
Calling it Ukraine implies that it is an independent state.
Yes, I've fallen for Soviet propaganda, and I'm very sorry.
Schmickle, five bucks.
Was there information found regarding the editing or modification of the emergency acts page edited February 15th, 2022?
They can edit it all the time because they can change existing laws and regulations through an ordering council.
You know, like they can add penalties to certain acts.
That happens all the time.
So if you see a law that's been edited, that just happens because there's this thing called an ordering council, which means that it doesn't have to go before parliament.
They can just sort of do it.
And it becomes part of the law.
It just becomes a regulation in the law.
So when you see things edited, it happens all the time.
So obviously, since they just invoked the Emergencies Act and they are putting things in there about kids and the proximity to a protest, that's all new.
So you will see that law being edited on February 15th, 2022.
Always read the fine print.
I want to quickly mention this news item, Sheila.
You know, we're having an election in Ontario on June 2nd.
One of the promises of Doug Ford and the PC party was that electricity rates were going to be cut by 12%.
So here we are four months away from the June election and they haven't been cut.
And when queried on it, well, to paraphrase the Premier, it was kind of like, well, suckers, read the fine print.
What we meant to say is that if the Liberals got back in again, they would have raised the rates by 12%.
But we froze.
So Sheila, it's kind of like me going on a diet to lose 50 pounds and I don't even lose one pound.
And I go, no, it's a success because if I had eaten really the way I wanted to have eaten, I would have gained 50 pounds.
So I didn't gain the, can you believe that?
And this is from a conservative premier.
How's your buck of beer coming, by the way?
Speaking of election promises.
Yeah, the NDP do this all the time in Alberta, too.
They're like, oh, look at the cuts to healthcare.
And it's like, no, it's not a cut if we don't give you as much money as you were asking for.
We still gave you more money, increased spending, but if we didn't increase it as much as you were asking for, that's not a cut.
But yeah, I just, it would be nice if Doug Ford followed through on like any novelty election promise, like being for the people.
And, you know, Ontario open for business?
Remember that word?
For open for business?
For the people, buck of beer.
We're really batting a thousand.
Again, read the fine print.
If you're Costco, Walmart, or the L CBO, you're open for business no matter what.
I mean, even if a tsunami hit Ontario, you're open for business.
You momentary businesses out there, go home and go out of business.
Ontario Open for Business?00:04:34
You know what?
Quickly, before we wrap up, okay, we've got a little update from Toronto Police, and there's one more thing I want to talk about.
Ottawa police, of course.
We know you've been through a lot and we're committed to returning your streets back to normal.
We know that the increased police presence may be distressing to some.
We're here to keep you safe and complete our mission.
We will be communicating all of our actions as soon as we can.
And you will be hearing more from us in the hours and days to come.
And Sheila, you want to know why they put out those tweets?
It's this.
They're coming.
They're coming.
No, not only are they coming.
Remember, the people in Ottawa or in Canada or anywhere in the world that are urging governments to crack down on these trucker convoy peaceful protests are the very same people who campaign on defunding the police.
But now that the police are useful idiots with the use of force to shut down a political movement they despise, suddenly we like them.
And the Ottawa police are saying, hey, we know in normal times you hate us, but please don't be too, too triggered because we're actually trying to do your bidding, at least on this state of affairs.
Sheila, we're living in the bizarre old Superman universe.
What can I tell you?
We're never going to get off air because I have two more things that we need to talk about.
There's a perfect example of this.
I forget her name.
Catherine something or other.
I tweeted about her the other day, and then that was the day that Defiant L's, like the account that just screenshots Democrats being hypocrites, that was the day it got canceled.
And I'm like, oh no, did I just cancel myself by doing exactly the same thing?
I forget her name because I'm not really deep on Ottawa municipal politics.
But she was the Ottawa counselor who looks exactly how you think she would, who lobbied for the declaration of Ottawa as a sanctuary city.
So anybody, no, no one is illegal.
She's like, everybody's got to come to everybody can come to Ottawa.
This is a place where everybody's welcome.
Now she's the one who's like, get these terrorists out of my city and return law and order.
Like just the worst hypocrite ever.
But that, yeah, that's, is that her?
No, it's not Diane Deans.
She's another one who the pandemic has not been kind to her mind.
Catherine something?
Catherine McCressy or something.
And Sheila, don't forget to say what the unspoken strategy is between the two groups.
With the illegals, there is this quid pro quo, unspoken, unwritten agreement that every four years you vote for team red, liberal, but they know the demonstrators, part of the trucker convoy.
Is there a single liberal voter in that group?
And no, they can't be converted to go red.
So that's why one group is demonized and another group is welcome to come into Ottawa.
And of course, even during COVID, Wroxham Road remains open for any illegal aliens coming in.
Again, the proviso being: remember, every election, vote liberal.
That's the difference.
Yeah, that was her.
He found her.
I think, what was her name?
Catherine McCressy?
Is that it?
Oh, Catherine McKenney.
Pronouns every time.
Oh, exactly how you think she's going to be a little bit more than that.
Well, she know exactly where somebody stands when you see that.
Oh, and it's a they, them.
So that means it's just, I'm trying to keep us from getting in trouble, but I just was like, I was standing in the kitchen doing dishes, and I was like, who is this mad woman who's just like, oh, like, get these people out of my city?
They're terrorists.
We need to restore law and order.
They're not welcome here.
They're Canadians.
That's their capital city.
If anybody's welcome in Ottawa, it's them.
But anyways, I was like, I wonder.
I wonder.
I bet you this person was spearheading the movement for sanctuary cities that plagued Canada a few years back.
And sure as heck, it was her.
I was like, ah, I see.
I see.
Well, speaking of someone from the Z-Zer community, I completely agree with you.
The Smartest Virus00:04:24
One last thing before we go.
I don't know if you saw this morning.
Well, we talked about it a little bit.
The COVID virus is really just the smartest virus that's ever existed.
And I'm going to parse my words carefully so that we can stay on YouTube because apparently, much like how it knows to attack you if you are out on the streets walking your dog on a certain calendar day after a certain hour at night, or if it knows to attack you if you're standing in a pub, but not if you're sitting in a pub having a beer.
The virus also now knows whether or not to attack you based on what's in the sea can that you're hauling with your semi-truck.
So unvaccinated truckers delivering vaccines and COVID devices are exempt from border rules.
So I guess somehow the disease knows that you are carrying PPE or ventilators or vaccines.
And so if you follow the science TM, it's perfectly fine to dodge the mandatory vaccinations, the mandatory testing, the mandatory isolation rules that Justin Trudeau has imposed on people hauling food, which I'm also pretty sure is essential.
But they've given this exemption due to the urgent public health necessity.
So if it is safe for a trucker to haul vaccines and jump the stupid rules, then it is perfectly safe for the trucker hauling your sweatshirts, avocados, whatever.
But more nonsense.
That doesn't make any sense.
Sheila, you're 100% right.
I don't know why we're only learning about this right now, this enormous loophole.
And of course, the proponents are saying, well, you know, the COVID-19 vaccine, it's a matter of life and death.
As you just said, well, this is something.
Do you know what, folks?
I swear to God, this is true.
You have a 100% chance of dying if you don't eat.
You know, what about the medicine that the truckers deliver to the pharmacies of our country?
I'm not talking about the vaccine.
I'm talking about all the other medicines that people need to stay alive.
And for Justin Trudeau, how do you think your blackface cream is getting over the border?
Because drink box water bottle sort of things are getting to the door.
They're not walking there.
But I guess we're all essential.
These are all essential items, Sheila, but some essentials are more essential than other essentials, to paraphrase George Orwell.
That has been the story from the beginning of the pandemic.
What is essential to the liberals is not essential to you.
So I think it's an essential health emergency for somebody to have a job and pay their bills, keep a roof over their head and feed their kids.
Not so for the liberals.
So that's your latest hypocrisy.
But I think that brings us to the end of the show.
We went 41 minutes over and we started 10 minutes early.
Do we get paid overtime for that, Sheila?
I mean, we don't have overtime here, David.
What am I saying?
Okay, well, folks, thank you so much for tuning in.
A special thank you to all of you who generously chipped in.
We really appreciate that.
Sheila and I will be back on the live stream on Tuesday, tomorrow.
Two other rebels whose identities I do not know at this moment shall be here at 12 noon Eastern.
And in the meantime, as always, stay sane.
Use of force and violence, or do we resolve our differences through peaceful civil means?
That is the question that is put before Canadians today.
Our history has been one of peaceful civil discourse and to resolve differences in considered, thoughtful manners.
Our Prime Minister is asking us to discard our history, discard our history, and to embrace forceful planet means to resolve our differences.
Definition Of Public Order Emergency00:10:56
With that, I would like to ask Professor Bruce Parley to come to the podium.
When it comes to the Emergencies Act, the Emperor has no clothes, is the message I would like to deliver to.
You may have seen or read legal commentators say that the invocation of the Emergencies Act has not been proper, is not valid, has not been, the requirements have not been met, and they are correct.
And I want just briefly to explain why that is.
I don't want to get too far into the weeds, but I think it's important that we all understand what they're saying and why.
So, I want to start with the Emergencies Act itself.
It is, as you probably know, a federal statute, an ordinary federal statute that already existed, has existed since 1988.
It provides the framework for a government to invoke as long as, as long as the requirements in the statute are met.
And if those requirements are not met, then nothing else works.
Nothing else is valid.
In other words, the government cannot act in this way unless it has statutory authority.
So that's the first point.
Second point is this.
The Emergencies Act provides for four different kinds of emergencies.
Public welfare, public order, international, and war.
Now on this occasion, if you look at the proclamation, the declaration that the government has brought forward, they have chosen a public order emergency.
So the other three are now out.
We're talking about a public order emergency as defined in the Act.
So let's look at the definition.
And the words, as is always the case when you're dealing with law, the words matter.
The words matter.
They define the line between lawful and unlawful.
So here's the definition of a public order emergency.
It means an emergency that arises from threats to the security of Canada that is so serious as to be a national emergency.
Now, as is so often the case in statutes, you have definitions that have terms that are themselves defined.
So one of the requirements of meeting this threshold for a public order emergency is to have a national emergency.
What does national emergency mean in the statute?
It means this.
It means an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that is either A or B.
And here's A, and I'll tell you B.
A is this.
A, it seriously endangers the lives, health, or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with.
That's A. B is seriously threatens the ability of the government to preserve the sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity.
Now, those are the two choices.
It's got to be A or B.
And in this case, I'll get to it in a minute.
The government has chosen A.
So forget B.
And the final bit of that definition is: and that cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.
Okay, so we're racking up requirements here.
What do we have so far?
Number one, in order to be validly invoked, there has to be a public order emergency that, number one, threatens the security of Canada.
Number two, seriously endangers the lives, health, and safety of Canadians.
Number three, exceeds the capacity or authority of a province to deal with.
And number four, is not able to be effectively dealt with under any existing laws.
If you do not meet all those four things, you have not met the threshold of a public order emergency.
Now, that's the statute.
That's the statute that has existed since 1988.
Now we get into what the Trudeau government has actually done.
The first thing they did is proclaim, invoke, declare that they were using the Act.
And in that proclamation, they have identified, as they are required to do, the emergency they are acting on.
How do they describe it?
Well, in several parts, but here's the key one: the emergency is activities that are directed toward or in support of threat or use of acts of serious violence.
The emergency is serious violence.
That's what the government has said for the purpose of achieving a political or ideological objective.
That's the basis for the regulations that they have now made.
One providing for emergency measures on the ground and one providing for economic measures like freezing your bank account.
So the question is: this: Is that a valid invocation of the act?
Well, just this morning, in response to a report, the Minister of Public Safety was asked what the basis was, whether or not they had intelligence about the violence or the weapons.
Because after all, keep this in mind, there has not been any violence in Ottawa from the Congo.
There has been no violence.
And so there must be some kind of evidence that indicates that there's going to be violence, there's going to be a threat of violence, because here again are the words.
The words are in the proclamation: the threat or use of acts of serious violence.
In response to the question from the reporter, the minister said that there was no intelligence of the existence or presence of weapons in Dam Tan.
And in fact, what he said instead was that the basis for the government's actions was rhetoric.
Rhetoric.
It was speech.
It was the expression of an ideological position.
Now, just for a moment, consider the implications.
This is a government that has invoked an emergency statute on its own admission on the basis of something that somebody has said.
They have no actual violence occurring.
They have no intelligence about threats of violence occurring.
I'm sure you can work out what the consequences are if this is to be considered a proper use of the Emergencies Act.
Now, let's just take a bigger picture just for a moment.
I don't want to get too far into this, and I don't want to take up too much time.
But just for a moment, consider this.
The ideology that is now in place in our political realm is one in which language is being redefined.
There's all kinds of terms that don't mean what they used to mean.
Racism, fortunately.
But included in that list are some very important terms that are very relevant here, like freedom.
Freedom now means, apparently, safety.
The rule of law means governments taking control of things for, quote, proper outcomes.
And one of those words that have been redefined is violence.
Violence can now mean words.
Honking has been called violence.
And they now are taking that literally.
They have said they're proceeding against violence, and what do they have?
They have words.
They have rhetoric.
They have an expression of a political position.
And it is that rhetoric, it is that political position that they are afraid of.
And that constitutes the emergency.
And in a way, you know it does.
It does constitute an emergency for them.
Not within the meaning of the Emergencies Act.
That does not meet that threshold.
But in political terms, you can kind of see how this might be seen by them as an emergency.
So I'll leave you with this thought.
If this invocation of the Emergencies Act is valid, then governments have the power to declare emergencies and crush any peaceful protest, any dissent that threatens their political fortunes and ideology.