Lewis Brackpool critiques Britain’s optional mask policy (March 16) and Canada’s selective refugee support, citing 10% lifetime employment rates for refugees while blaming Putin for inflation. He dismisses concerns over transgender athletes as bigotry but questions Trudeau’s 2016/2019 meetings with neo-Nazi Audrey Perubli, co-founder of Ukraine’s Svoboda Party, known for Nazi symbols and anti-Semitic remarks. Meanwhile, Trump’s Full Send interview—removed for election misinformation—undermines media narratives, exposing establishment fears of his appeal to younger voters. Canada’s immigration policies, they argue, prioritize votes and labor over public needs, worsening housing crises while ignoring conflicts like Ukraine’s far-right ties. [Automatically generated summary]
Lewis Brackpool, straight out of bed, it looks like, even though it's 5 p.m., winner of the International Women's Woman of the Year Award.
How are you doing, Lewis?
Yeah, I'm not too bad.
Yeah, still getting over my illness, but I'm all good.
And no, I've not just gotten out of bed, I promise.
You're just handsome as always.
Thank you for joining us, everybody.
We're on Rumble.
We're on YouTube.
We're on Super U, Odyssey, Getter, probably something else.
But on some of those, you can give us a paid chat.
We'll read it.
We will take your questions, comments, concerns, insults, love questions even for Lewis.
And you can send those on Rumble as a Rumble rant.
You can send them on Super U, and you can send them on Odyssey as well.
And we may have to cut away from YouTube if things get too spicy, get too COVID-y or election-y, or anything else really of relative importance.
Lewis, what's on your mind today?
How are you feeling?
It's 5 p.m. there.
Tea time is almost upon you.
Talk to me, man.
Yeah, I'm all good.
I'm all good.
I'm glad about some of the things that we're talking about, or we're going to be talking about in relation to travel restrictions and in relations to masks.
There is some good news on the horizon, and of course, we're going to get a little bit into that.
But yeah, I'm feeling okay.
I'm feeling okay.
I'm feeling better than I was, but still on the recovery, but we're still plowing forward.
I feel like you should have worn the union jack suit that we were talking about.
I forgot that we were doing this.
So this is a coincidence, this plaid.
Lewis and I had a long argument yesterday about the word PETA and how it's called PITA in the UK.
So you can look forward to that on our, you know, our PETA-related podcast later.
Let's get into this stuff about unmasking or de-masking on flights in the UK.
This just happened.
Which company announced this?
You want to fill people in on this?
Sure.
British Airways have announced that they are changing their mask policy where passengers now no longer have to wear masks on board.
And the reaction to it has been well predictable.
If you go on to, of course, Twitter, as we can see there.
From March the 16th, our face mask policy is changing.
Where we're clear the destination you're traveling to doesn't require a face mask on board, it will become optional.
And of course, all the Karens were out in full force right after this was announced.
And people want to be masked up, as what I've seen from the comments.
And well, it's not surprising, to be honest.
I mean, these poor people were led astray for two years to do with cloths on their faces.
So, yeah, so the reaction has kind of been predictable.
I think where people will not be forced to wear masks, it will become weird that the people around them are still wearing masks.
And I don't think it'll last long.
I think they'll quickly realize how silly they are being.
Here's the graphic from British Airways.
Could have chosen a younger person.
I don't know.
But removing their mask.
And apparently some people in the comments, I don't know if those people are flying anyways.
You never know these people.
I'm never going to be flying with British Airways again.
You either weren't or you're still going to do it.
You don't really have to believe those people.
And I think it's good.
I wonder how long it'll take for Canada to get there.
Lon Vak still can't fly here.
I can't leave the country essentially.
The only thing I eject myself with is baby oil to enlarge my muscles like a Brazilian bodybuilder.
But I can't leave the country, I don't think.
I'd love to go on other shows.
I'd love to travel to the great cities of Buffalo, New York, or Detroit, Michigan, become a slumlord, but I can't, Lewis.
Justin Trudeau's in Europe, you know, feigning that he cares about Ukraine for a while.
So I'm glad things are happening there for you.
I'm glad things are happening across the world.
But, you know, in Canada land, we're still down in the dumps.
Our gas prices are through the roof.
Biological Women's Concerns00:11:44
And I guess it's Putin's fault, I guess, Lewis.
Well, yeah, it's all Putin's fault at the minute, isn't it?
Everything, this is all, you know, everything that's bad that's happening is to be blamed on that one man.
So yeah.
In five days, our masks are coming off, though, basically inside stores and everything.
And then I'll be able to get a haircut.
I'll look less like a lumberjack from 1994.
I should be carrying some paper towel or something.
I think that's a brand.
But yeah, troubled times here, Lewis.
Even more troublesome, I think, is I said off the top, you're the winner of the international woman of the year or something, Woman X. That's been something that's been a meme that's making its rounds.
It's not funny, Lewis.
Making its way around the internet.
Which producer, which magazine or publication is coming out with this list?
USA Today, which is, of course, every American reads because it's, again, 1994.
Let's bring that up, though.
So they put out a list of who they think are the best international or the best women of the year, probably for the USA.
Let's read them.
Simone Biles, the woman who quit the Olympics because she was sad.
Great role model there.
Rosalind Brewer, who's that?
Let's go through as many of them before we get bored.
Black CEO.
Of course, they have to mention their race.
What else we got up there?
Who's Melinda French Gates?
So Bill Gates and Melinda Gates.
She committed to donating most of her wealth in her lifetime.
She's become a global advocate for women and girls.
So the thing about that is you can donate $10 billion when you still have another $10 billion and you're not going to really notice a difference in your day-to-day life, I think, Lewis.
Obviously, the gates are a little bit evil.
They say she broke up with Bill Gates because of his connections to Epstein.
Did you just find out about that?
Were we just finding out who Jeffrey Epstein is?
We're just finding out that we can't sweat, stuff like that.
Can we bring it back up?
I want to read more of these, please.
I think it's interesting.
Kamala Harris, the first black and first Indian woman to be vice president.
Of course, she wasn't voted in.
She actually couldn't make it past the first set of primaries, but she was assigned there.
You'll notice one on the right-hand side there, Louis, Rachel Levine, which, of course, is not the person's real name.
We're not on Twitter, so we can say stuff like this.
She became the highest-ranking openly transgender official when the Senate confirmed her as Assistant Secretary of Health in October 2021.
Feelings, Lewis?
Lots of feelings here.
Let's get your feelings on this.
My feelings on that.
Well, I think there's a lot of chatter on online spaces about this particular choice of candidate for International Women's Day.
Now, the highest-ranking transgender highest-ranking openly transgender official.
Now, there's rankings for transgenders.
They've just got a ranking system.
Below her is Caitlin Jenner, I believe.
And then below Caitlin Jenner is, I don't know, somebody on one of those drag race shows.
I'm sure there's got to be a list now.
You're saying that's all right.
I think a lot of women, biological women, are feeling almost displaced or erased by that particular choice almost because there's a lot of talk about changing of culture and changing of language and things like that.
And biological women, at least a lot of biological women that I've spoken to about these issues.
How many biological women do you speak to, Lewis?
Majority, I would say.
So, yeah, there is a lot of, there's a big debate around it, of course.
Women, biological women, feel like that they are being basically erased and that womanhood doesn't mean anything anymore because of these types of things.
It's like it's all these awards.
I mean, didn't Caitlyn Jenner won or win apologies?
The what was that?
Women's Athlete of the Year, I believe, female athlete of the year.
That's the one.
And there was a lot of, of course, cause for concerns about that as well.
And there's obviously the hot topic of transgender athletes competing against their biological counterpart, which is, of course, that debate will rage on for years and years to come now, where women feel like, yeah, once again, that they're being misplaced, that they're being casted out, and that womanhood doesn't mean anything anymore.
And I completely understand that.
And I'm not sure if that lands me in hot water saying that, but I'd rather speak the truth.
Well, personally, I think you're being a bigot, and I think all these biological women are bigots.
You should be happy that a woman can beat or a man comes and beats you in your swimming tournament.
And you should be happy that a man comes and is now the most reputable woman in the country.
I think you should be happy about it.
If we're going to usher in all these things based on feelings, where we can't hurt anyone's feeling by telling them they're not a woman or telling a child that they're not a different gender and they're not non-binary, we can't tell people that they're morbidly obese.
If we're okay with doing all that stuff, then how can we stop now?
Where's the line going to be?
If this is how we're going to govern ourselves and our morals in our society, then you've dug your own graves, ladies.
I'm sure that a lot of you don't agree with it, but some of them do.
A loud, possibly small minority, even though they're probably large in size, agree with this.
And this is the inevitable end that they're going to have to face.
That these people are going to come in.
Now, I'm not going to tell these people, do they really feel like they're a man or a woman?
That's not my place to tell them.
They're adults, they can do what they want.
But for these publications and these organizations, whether it's athletic boards or USA Today, to completely perpetuate this, then I have to blame the women who have pushed this for the past, I don't know, five or six years.
Ever since Trump won, everything had to go completely 180, like an Australian toilet or something.
And now you have to sleep in the bed that you made.
So if we are to turn away from this, I mean, I'm not affected by Leah Thomas coming in and crushing girls at swimming.
The girls are affected.
So these girls have to stand up for themselves.
Having said that, there's one or two girls on that swimming team that are just like, I'm so proud of Leah Thomas.
It's great that she's crushing us and ruining our lives and making our scholarships worthless.
A person who's taking an athletic scholarship away from a girl who's swam her entire high school career to make times and probably, you know, work out five or six hours a day frankly, to get to this spot, and that person, that girl, is no longer going to get that scholarship at that school because Leah Thomas decided two years into his college career that he's going to be a female swimmer now, so that's how it is.
But these girls aren't going to stand up for themselves.
Their coaches aren't going to stand up for them.
Probably a lot of female coaches in these sports USA today, the women at the who work at USA today, aren't going to say no, this isn't right.
They're going to say oh, this is great.
So if they're not going to stand up for themselves, what can we do?
Lewis, it's our job to protect women, but I would, I would wager that the same people who want to name Colonel number one transgender highest ranking sorry, I'm just saying that because I don't remember the name Rachel Levine, Rachel Levine they probably don't want to be protected by men.
They probably don't want to have any some sort of savior or anybody coming to their defense, because that's patriarchal and that's bad.
So if that's the, the way they want the world to go then unfortunately, we're not going to have any women's sports, we're not going to have any women's spaces, you're not going to have your own locker room and you know um, the world's going to be run by Rachel Levine and they're going to be telling you that you're bigot if you want clothes that are for women only.
I don't know, you're going to be running out of places to go here, and it's going to happen real fast.
And then, all of a sudden, what year are we in?
Now, where women can't really do anything they want, because if a man wants to come in and take their place, so long as they identify as a woman, you know they must have the priority.
Yeah, pregnant people, pregnant people indeed um, the the problem is we're now uh, and even now, even speaking about it.
I don't know about you, but it almost feels like you want to tread on eggshells when um when, speaking about subjects like this, and this is the price to pay now for for, not for not wanting to allow dialogue and for allowing mob rule um, whether it be on the internet or in uh, supreme courts, or in government, or in wherever.
So the idea now that we have to tread carefully when speaking about subjects like this?
Um is wrong.
We should be able to to openly and freely discuss different ideas sure, um?
You know if, if the idea of of biological women and um, of course, the other, uh to compete against one one, each other um uh that's, that's an idea that we can debate, but now it's beyond debate it's, it's happening, it's and, and this is what um people have voted for um, and I say people, a small minority of people, um have wanted to vote for, but we're now going to see um, of course,
the erasure of womanhood.
Um, I believe, and it's only going to get worse now but, and with this mitigated silence, you're you're not going to see any progressive results, because that's what you want, right?
Progressivism.
Well, it's going to go the other way.
Personally, I don't see anything progressive about biological men going into women's sports and beating them, whatever sports that they do, and getting away with it.
And then if you say, well, hang on a minute, there is a biological advantage against women in these scenarios.
You're considered a bigot.
You're considered a transphobe.
You're considered all of these words that just get lambasted at you.
And it's wrong.
I think there should be a free open discourse about it.
And women should have the right, biological women should have the right to stick up for their own womanhood.
And that's all I've got to say about that.
When LeBron James retires and comes back five years later as LeBrona and joins the WNBA, there will still be people cheering him on, saying, what a hero as he dunks on all of the girls as a 45-year-old man.
Let's move on now from misunderstood show topics of transgenders and obese people to the next segment.
Throw something up for us, producer.
We've gone over them.
Why Support Ukraine?00:03:47
There's no one order we can go on.
We're just going to have to play it by ear here.
She's working.
She's working.
Russian blacklist Trudeau's 312 other officials by internet superstar Ian Miles Chong.
Now, this is likely coming right after, as it says there, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky addressed the Canadian Parliament.
Now, Lewis, the Canadian Parliament has never been this filled in, I don't know, since Justin Trudeau has been prime minister.
It's had the bottom part filled, but the top part was filled.
All the MPs were there.
They never show up for work.
There's never more than a quarter of them in the House of Commons showing up to do their job.
They can vote digitally.
Why would they leave their home?
But it's never been more packed.
And it was seals clapping to a guy.
It's okay if you want to support Ukraine.
It's okay if you want to support, you know, uh, their, uh, I'm not even going to get caught on camera saying it's okay to support them.
If you want to support Ukraine and you think it's a tragedy what's happening with the people, that's fine.
I agree that it's bad that these people are dying.
I think Ukraine's exacerbating the situation.
However you feel about it, to have the Ukrainian president come on there and to all of a sudden bring every single politician in the country who's a federal politician to come in there and clap unequivocally.
And all of a sudden everything Justin Trudeau is saying right is right.
For years, every time Justin Trudeau says something, there's a joke made about it.
There's a meme made about it.
The other side calls him terrible.
But now, Justin Trudeau is unequivocally right.
Ukraine is the greatest place on earth.
It's not corrupt at all.
The president isn't an actor.
There is no propaganda coming from them.
There is no white supremacist fighting for them.
None of this stuff matters.
All of a sudden, we all come together and we clap and we say, more weapons to Ukraine.
More money to a different country.
And if you want to say, you know, we should help the people when they leave Ukraine, they're at the Polish border.
They need food.
They need medical care.
They need housing.
That's completely fine if that's what you want to say.
But that's not what's happening, Louis.
What Joe Biden says and what Mitch McConnell says and what Justin Trudeau and what Pierre Polev say is we need to give them weapons.
Why do we need to give them weapons, Lewis?
What happens after we give them weapons?
Let's say we give them 250 javelins like the United States gives or more.
Now we've got these high-tech weapons that can destroy more Russian tanks.
The war continues.
This war they're never going to win, Lewis, continues.
More Ukrainian people die.
More Russians who live in Ukraine get bombed because that's what they were doing for eight years, people.
Sorry to tell you that the Ukrainians were bombing people in their own territories for eight years.
And that's what happens.
What else happens when you sell these weapons?
Well, if you might be watching a young man named Jesse Waters on Fox News, he broke the story that there's a bunch of Congress people in the United States who increase their stock portfolio for places like Raytheon who produce these weapons.
And they did this right before the Ukraine conflict happened, right before the bill was passed, which is, I think, $14 billion, if I'm not mistaken, in military support, in lethal force support to Ukraine.
So they're making money off of this.
At least some of the Congress people are.
Now, in Canada, I don't have any information that suggests that we are making money or our politicians are making money off of sending them weapons.
But we don't even have those weapons here, Lewis.
I'm sorry to tell you that we're giving money to a country to defend itself with better equipment than we have here.
Do you think Canada has javelins, more than like 10 of them?
And we probably have the old stand-up ones from the early 2000s.
Do you think Canada's military is efficiently equipped to defend itself?
Chase of Conspiracy00:03:38
What if Russia came through the Arctic today?
Now, Russia may fail on its own because their equipment is terrible, but does Canada have the capacity to defend against Russians without America's help?
No, it does not.
So why is it all of a sudden, Lewis?
My question to you is, why is it all of a sudden fashionable to be arms dealers, to be perpetuating war, to be cutting off Russians just because they're from Russia?
And I am by no means pro-Russia.
But why is it now fashionable, so fashionable that everybody applauds blindly to Justin Trudeau and to the prime minister of Ukraine?
Why is this the thing to do now?
Because the TV tells them that it's good.
And that's the simple answer.
Unfortunately, the TV makes up a lot of what you think and what your actions do now because people don't like to think for themselves.
They don't like to do their own research.
They like their research handed to them on a plate, parroted by some anchor at the BBC or something like that.
And that's unfortunately the honest truth.
And a lot of people don't like to look alternative or, you know, they, oh, oh, he's got his own ideas.
You know, people don't like that.
People like, or the general populace enjoys just sitting at home, watching Coronation Street and being told what to think.
And that's unfortunate.
I thought it was S-Club 7 actually that you were watching.
They'll stick that on straight after Coronation Street's finished.
Maybe a bit of the trait, the chase as well.
So you never heard of the chase.
Can we queue up something called the Chase of British TV show?
Yeah, everyone watches the chase now with Bradley Walsh.
But I'm a fan personally.
But anyways, I think, yeah, people like being told what to think and not how to think anymore.
And I think it is fashionable now, like you said.
I mean, we saw it with COVID for two years.
We saw that the way the news and the media manipulated people into thinking a certain way, into not questioning things.
And if you were to question things, you're considered a bad person.
That's now standard practice.
And it's moved on from, yeah, this is it, a chase.
To the game show?
It is a game show where people answer quiz questions and then win money to take home.
And then they have to go against a quiz master who's incredibly smart.
And then they battle for the money at the end.
So this will last like two years before people stop caring and it'll live on another game show related channel until the end of time.
Yeah.
This is the post-dinner thing to watch or during dinner, in fact.
Oh, you guys have TVs in there.
I'm going to get them online now.
I feel like I feel like English people only have one TV, and it's one of those old box TVs, and you would never disrespect your dinner guests by watching television during a meal.
Well, no, you have it in the same room so that everyone can just get involved.
But yeah, no, we've seen this.
We've seen this with COVID for the last two to three years, and it's still ongoing, unfortunately.
A lot of people are having a hard time seeing the other argument being brought to light and being proved that, well, the conspiracy theorists were right.
And it's the same with this Russia-Ukraine situation.
Lots and lots of scenarios, especially as you mentioned, with the white supremacists that are fighting alongside the National Guard.
Refugee Scheme Confusion00:15:16
That was a conspiracy theory.
Of course, we all knew that it's not a conspiracy theory.
And this has been a fact since 2014, where they were actually funded.
And we are now funding them now.
And we'll continue to do that, unfortunately, until more and more people in government decide to say, actually, I don't think this is right.
But is that going to happen?
No, of course not, because they've already set the seeds up to grow now.
And the seeds to grow is if you criticize that same country that we want to completely defend inherently through and throughout, you are a bad person.
And we're just seeing COVID 2.0 now.
As long as they can get everybody on board with something as a distraction, that's what they're going to do.
Because now this is happening.
Oh, the gas prices are Putin's fault.
Oh, inflation doesn't matter.
Oh, COVID doesn't matter.
As long as they can get everybody focused on one thing.
Like, in what world does Justin Trudeau and the leader of the Conservative Party unequivocally agree on something?
Pierre Polev, I don't know if you want to go to his Instagram page.
He posted something about the conflict yesterday, and it was a photo, I think, of five points of what he thinks they should do regarding this.
And I want to bring that up because only one point was good.
And only one point was a conservative thing.
And everybody's saying, oh, he's great.
And wow, he's wonderful.
He says all the right things.
He does say a lot of good things.
But things like he's saying in this post, they kind of just tell me that he is one of the, you're not willing to go against the green on anything this big.
I mean, whether you agree with Trump or not, he's going to go against the establishment on certain topics.
He can be wrong, he can be right, but he never wanted to go to war with Russia is the long and short of that.
Do we have that post?
I'm on his Instagram, actually.
Maybe he tweeted it too, but it's just a list of things.
I can look it up.
If you guys have opinions on the Russia-Ukraine thing or questions and you want us to answer them or just read them aloud, let us know Super Chat.
We will read it right away.
Producer Efron advised me, read it right away, Andrew.
What are you waiting for?
And then he, like, he stabbed me a little bit.
I don't know if I should tell people this.
He carries around a shiv with him.
That's just, I'm just joking, Efron.
Efron was assaulted at a hotel a couple years ago.
Yes.
So it's proven that he is a victim.
Do we have it now?
Is it the Ukraine play?
I think so.
Bring it up.
We can just go through his page if that's not what it is.
Just bring up it.
Yeah, can we zoom that in here?
To those five points there in the middle.
Yeah, Instagram doesn't like zooming, I guess.
Okay.
Woo.
There we go.
That's good.
There we go.
Scroll down to the points, to the bullet points.
Okay.
So, first point.
We must lead Canada by doing the following.
Deliver the weapons Ukraine needs.
What about delivering the weapons the Canadian military needs?
You guys have been cutting funding from them for eons now.
Impose sanctions on top Russian officials and entities.
Okay, do you think that, let's say, Vladimir Putin's Secretary of Defense or whoever works in the Russian government, do you think putting sanctions on them, like what does that do?
Does that do anything?
And they're entities.
They've already started doing deals with China, Slovakia, India.
They're making a new economy without us.
I'm sorry to tell you.
Impose and jump in whenever you see fit, Lewis, here.
I know I'm animated.
We're animated.
We're on Infowars.com.
We're on newswars.com.
We're bringing you the truth.
The war is on for your mind.
Anyways, impose punishing sectoral sanctions against Russia's main sources of revenue, energy and natural resources.
Already doing that.
Canada's already banned oil products from them.
We're banning, I think, material imports from them outright.
At least I think the U.S. is talking about that.
So again, things that are useless or have already been done.
This is the one point I like.
Replace Russian gas in Europe by fast-tracking development of Canadian LNG and secure long-term agreements in Europe.
So he wants to have oil and gas agreements with Europe coming from Canada.
Great idea.
You know what the thing about that, Louis?
It's not going to happen.
You want to know why it's not going to happen?
Because we buy all our oil from the United States and Saudi Arabia.
All of a sudden, we're just going to say, hey, United States, we don't need your oil anymore.
So we're just going to start producing it and we're going to start selling it to Europe.
And Saudi Arabia, we sell you tons of weapons and everything and we buy a bunch of your oil.
But all of a sudden, we're going to turn our backs on you.
Justin Trudeau will never turn his back on Saudi Arabians.
And the relationship between Canada and the United States, you think America is just going to be like, oh, that's good that you're not going to buy a few hundred billion dollars of our oil per year.
And that'll bring up the last point again, please.
Welcome Ukrainian refugees fleeing the Russian invasion.
So my short answer is going to be no.
And I'll tell you why, Lewis.
Because when we start picking and choosing these things, just like we did Syrian refugees, why aren't we taking in more Syrians?
Why aren't we taking in Yemenese people?
Why aren't we taking in people who were fleeing Russia or Ukraine before this?
In the Danex region when they were being bombed?
Why don't we take in refugees from other African countries that are constantly at war in the Sudanese regions?
So we're picking and choosing, because the TV tells us to, which places we should support and which places we should not support.
What makes Ukraine special in this conflict?
That's the question I'm trying to figure out.
I think it has something to do with screwing over Russia and the business that governments already have there.
But what makes them special?
I have sympathy for people who are fleeing a region of war, of course, but are we, let's just bring everybody in then, Louis.
We have already unlimited immigration.
We have unlimited taxes.
Why aren't we just bringing in everybody from every conflict zone in the world?
Well, here's the thing as well.
I think people have forgotten how refugee schemes work.
I believe the first written rule of a refugee crisis and taking in refugees is that they are to flee to the closest safe country.
I mean, you look at Canada in comparison and even Britain in comparison to where Ukraine is and the amount of safe countries there are along the way.
That's why the line, when we talk about the illegal crossings from Calais to Dover, they say, oh, well, they're fleeing war-torn countries.
It's like, well, I didn't realize France was a war-torn country.
And, you know, that's the same line that's used over and over again for a reason, because it is a safe country for a start.
And there's a lot of confusion with how the refugee scheme works.
And people seem to forget about that.
So people have started making lists saying, oh, look at all these surrounding countries, Poland, Estonia, Romania.
Look, look at how many that they've taken in.
Poland, 1.6 million.
Even Hungary have taken in over 300,000.
Look at Britain.
We've only taken 80.
And it's like, yeah, because they're supposed to go to the closest, safest country and stay there.
And they possibly don't want to stay there.
They probably want to go back once everything's mitigated and everything's, you know, relaxed.
So I don't get this hunger for virtue now.
It's almost like, well, you know, people like Gary Lineker and many other celebrities who fawn over the idea of taking in or telling the public to take in refugees most of all when gas prices are up, energy prices are up.
We were told not to even see our families for two years.
And on top of that, food prices and everything like that, expenses are all up really, really high at the minute due to inflation due to lots and lots of things, tax hikes.
And now we're expected to take in other families.
I'm sorry, that's just, it's not feasible for a start.
The timing, yeah, it's pretty poor.
And we're also being lectured by these people who don't have these.
Oh, for example, as well, MPs in the British establishment in Parliament, they have most of their energy bills put on the expenses relief.
So they're not paying the same as everyone else.
So if they want to lecture people into taking refugees, then maybe they should go first.
They're having a levy on their bills to pay.
Why don't they go first?
And it's unbelievable how it's just unsustainable.
So I share your sentiment as well, Andrew, when you say no, because that's exactly how I feel.
It's just unforeseeable and it's unfeasible as well.
Well, here's what they don't tell you, Lewis.
And we like giving you the other side of the story at Rebel News and be above the narrative.
That's my new catchphrase.
We are above the narrative.
The refugee program as a settlement for people doesn't work.
Yes, it's good to take people in.
And what's supposed to happen is once their country is stabilized, then they go back.
But as it stands, the last time I checked, and I believe it's 2017, the refugees to Canada program overall has a 10% employment rate lifetime.
Now, I could be wrong, that could have been just the Syrians, but they have a 10% employment rate lifetime for refugees.
So what that means is they come here, they get better health care than you, which is true.
They get an income and they get housing for their family.
That's great if it's temporary, but then if it's not temporary, all of a sudden you've got a better life than, I don't know, a third of Canadians maybe.
And here's another thing they won't tell you.
Why does the Conservative Party all of a sudden want Ukrainian refugees?
Other than trying to look good.
The same way Justin Trudeau wants Syrian refugees, the same way Joe Biden, Kamal Harris, the cleanse the Obamas want Central American refugees, because they will then vote for them.
Ukrainians are a religious people.
They're not going to come in here with leftist views.
As we can see, other Eastern European immigrants who have come here, they will vote for the Conservative Party when they come in.
That's why they want fast-tracked people in.
That's why Pierre Pollov's other point that he made yesterday was we need to fast-track skilled workers, skilled immigrants.
We need to make it even shorter.
They want to bring in people who will work for them and they want to bring in people who will vote for them.
That's no secret, but it's this, you know, oh, we're just doing this to be to be good and to be nice and to be loving because we care so much about Vladimir Zelensky and he's a hero.
It's never that way.
They're never different.
As long as they're in these establishment parties and as long as they're going to say, like, we need to send weapons to Ukraine, it's imperative that Canada sends its 12 weapons to Ukraine.
That's why we're just going to give them money instead.
This is not, you know, a loving situation, Lewis.
The politicians don't love you.
When Boris Johnson is running out in his, what looks like boxer shorts and his breasts are bouncing around.
He's not doing that because he loves you.
He's doing it because, look at this fun photo I've got and everybody's going to love me and they'll see me as a non-threatening character.
Yeah, well, that's it.
And what's progressive about exploiting people for cheap labor?
Like, there's nothing progressive about that whatsoever.
The Canadian Conservative Party, sorry to jump in again, they're never going to cut on immigration.
So we're supposed to take 400,000, 600,000 people every single year until the end of time, I guess, because they want to grow the economy and they want to be more of a powerhouse.
And they want people to vote for them.
It's the government's plan.
It's not the people's plan.
Why do you think wages don't go up?
I know I'm sounding like it's 1998, but this has been tabooed for some reason, even though it's the truth.
Wages go down.
We're in a housing crisis right now in this area where you can't rent for less than a trillion dollars.
You can't buy a house.
And they had to come up with all these programs to help people who are first-time Canadian homeowners.
They've had to stop Chinese immigrants from buying as many houses and leaving them empty.
There's a vacancy tax now.
So there's all these rules they've had to put in place to relieve Canadians.
But the gigantic stream of immigration never stops.
Just like in the United States, they let in a few million people a year.
Where's the limit?
Nobody can ever say, how does this help the Canadian people?
This helps the government grow themselves into a bigger power, but how does this help people in the country?
And if the government's going to claim that they are doing it for humanitarian reasons and because they love people and they just want to help people, then where were they on the last 20 different conflicts?
Nowhere to be seen.
Exactly.
Yeah, I've got no objections to that at all.
I think you're dead right.
You're spot on.
Thank you.
Yeah, no problem.
I don't think there's much more to add to that, I don't think.
I'm trying to think whether there's any other points to make to do with that.
Obviously, we know the welfare state is broken.
The refugee scheme is completely broken.
And people have been taking advantage of these schemes for a long, long time because we know that when people come over illegally, it makes it 10 times or incredibly difficult anyway to deport criminals back home.
And it's been increasingly more difficult over the years.
And I don't know why in Britain the left don't absolutely love Pretty Patel.
I mean, she's hated from both sides.
But I mean, if you look at illegal immigration in the UK, you're looking at around 38,000 people alone, I believe, in 2021 came over illegally and she only deported five.
So I don't know why the left don't absolutely revere her and love her.
But no, she's this horrible racist Indian woman that just, you know, is out there to just be completely racist and horrible.
And she's not basically a real person.
And it's quite actually horrible to watch because she is criticized from both sides.
Personally, I don't think she has done enough in that sort of in that area.
Imagine Alex Jones on Talk Shows00:09:41
So who knows what's going to happen?
But, you know, it's a tricky subject, isn't it?
When you talk about refugees and illegal immigration because people immediately class you as this xenophobic character if you have any sort of concerns.
But, you know, that rhetoric has been in motion since, well, a long, long time now.
So, you know, what can you do?
Well, they're going to have a hard time doing that when it's white people.
And I love Ukrainian people.
Where I come from in Oshawa, Ontario, Canada, shout out everybody.
There's tons of Ukrainian people, lots of Polish people, lots of Eastern Europeans in general.
So I grew up around these people.
And what I'm saying is we can't just start caring about one thing and being like, this is the most important thing in the world.
And we have to help these people now by giving them weapons and continuing this unwinnable war.
But let's move on, Lewis.
Do we have any paid chats about Ukraine?
No, we do not, unfortunately.
I talked about Donald Trump.
And he made an appearance on a podcast last week, which was taken down for election misinformation, I believe, Lewis.
And it's on this channel called the Full Send Podcast, which is, you know, very my speed, I'll call it, these guys.
They're from, you know, 20 minutes away from me.
And it got pulled down, and they have a gigantic audience.
It's like 7 million YouTube subscribers.
Their podcast has 2 million subscribers, unlimited social media followers, unlimited views.
And they get pulled down.
And Jimmy Kimmel comes along and he starts basically a war with them, which I think is a big mistake.
Big mistake for Jimmy Kimmel, whose audience is going to be, you know, his echo chamber and people who don't actually care about him.
They just want to maybe see some celebrities and they want to hear him talk about how horrible Donald Trump is still.
So Jimmy Kimmel goes on TV and he says, oh, these little YouTubers, they come in in their shorts and their t-shirts and they ask him dopey questions.
And here's a mashup of what Donald Trump said, completely mocking the situation, transitions it to, you know, Trump's best friend Putin is doing this, that, and the other.
But I think what he's doing, if we can bring up this video, I think what Jimmy Kimmel's doing is a grave mistake.
He's had to turn off his Instagram comments for everything because his fan base is so loyal to them.
And I think he's putting himself, either he's not going to talk about this or this is going to turn out to be a big mistake, which is already is.
Let's show you the clip of what we're talking about.
The Nelka boys.
Now, these guys, they show up at Mar-a-Lago in sweatshirts and shorts and logos all over their clothes.
Trump sits down for an hour with them during a war to answer the dopiest questions.
One of the great things about Trump is doesn't matter who's interviewing him.
It could be George Stephanopoulos or three doofuses who brought a 12-pack of hard seltzer along with him.
He's going to answer the same way.
But they have one good question, which Trump never answered.
He danced around.
And the question was, would you impose a no-fly zone around Ukraine?
But he did take time to wax poetic about his prowess as a DJ.
You know, over our lives, we take tests and aptitude tests and all this.
I've always had a high aptitude for music, but I love great music.
So do you actually spin or what do you pick?
I pick the ones I like.
I don't want to spin.
I want to pick the ones out.
What's your go-to banger?
Well, I have a lot of them.
You know what gets them rocking?
YMCA.
The gay national anthem.
Do you ever hear that?
They call it the gay national anthem.
What's the best song to like transition to?
Like YMCA to what?
Maybe, maybe Mobamba.
Maybe, hold on, I'm coming.
That's when Melania just runs out of the room.
So here's what Jimmy Kimmel doesn't understand.
And first of all, imagine the producers going through this podcast and trying to find these points.
It's 40-something minutes long, and they condense it to that, of course.
They don't include the part where Trump says this podcast is going to be taken down, and it was.
They don't include any of their other questions that are about politics, of course.
And it's fundamentally, they just don't understand.
And there's a bit of cynicism to this and sinisterness, even, Lewis.
And let me explain why.
If Trump goes on podcasts which are cool, then they're going to lose.
Trump can't be seen as cool.
Trump can't go to these podcasters who are immensely popular in Canada, United States, Brazil, wherever they've gone.
If Trump's going on these things and all of a sudden he's accepted into the cool culture, into the young people's culture, their audience has got to be ages 13 to however old I am.
Nobody knows.
This can't happen.
And I've asked this of Alex Jones when he was on my show.
Imagine Alex Jones is on talk shows.
Imagine he's on late-night talk shows.
How hilarious that would be.
They can't have a world where this is acceptable.
They can't have a world where Donald Trump is going on now the second most popular podcast on Spotify to Joe Rogan.
They can't have him going on there and being likable and being friendly.
And to his point about them being three doofuses with seltzer, well, it's their own product that they're promoting.
So obviously.
And this is who they are.
They're not political pundits.
They're prankster YouTubers who travel around the world and give people money.
Like that's basically the long and short of it.
And you want them to be like, you want them to be the professional interviewers that you aren't Jimmy Kimmel because like you're supposed to be a comedian.
You can't interview anybody either.
And they just can't accept this, Lewis.
They can't accept that Trump goes on something, predicts that he's going to be censored, which he was, and has a good time and is seen by millions and millions of young people as a cool, fun guy.
Because you know what?
Kids look up to these guys.
Kids buy whatever they're selling.
Their merchandise sales, whatever they're promoting, whatever website they're promoting, whatever people they're promoting, they explode into the stratosphere.
They can't have Trump being connected to a younger audience like this.
So for Jimmy Kimmel is like one of the mainstream media's foot soldiers when he talks about like whatever Chuck Schumer told him to talk about about healthcare.
When he talks about all these things, they send out the foot soldiers, which are Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel, to say we have to squash this and make him look ridiculous and make all of this look ridiculous.
So my point is that's a big mistake.
And they suffered the consequences within 24 hours of being flooded with messages and comments that are negative and all this news coverage.
And it reminds me of a time, Lewis.
I don't know if you remember or if it's too like North America for you, but Snoop Dogg, the rapper, went on Bill O'Reilly.
And Bill O'Reilly tried to be like, oh, your criminal background of smoking weed and having weapons charges or whatever and your songs about this and your lyrics about this.
Bill O'Reilly couldn't understand why people like Snoop Dogg.
They couldn't understand why there's an audience that likes him, despite him being a criminal, despite him talking about, you know, things that aren't positive for children.
And now him being, you know, very anti-Trump, tra-la-la.
Bill O'Reilly can't imagine why people would like a character like that.
And this is the same thing.
Jimmy Kimmel's producers who wrote this for him and put this segment together for him, they can't imagine a world where people like this kind of thing because it's not for them.
So they need to put a stop to it, Lewis.
And if they don't put a stop to it, then, you know, Trump could win again.
Trump could become more popular with young people and people who are 16, 17, who may be able to vote when Trump runs again in 2024.
All of a sudden, they're saying, oh, well, the Nelk boys like him, so he can't be that bad.
I don't know anything about politics, but I know Nelk likes them and I like Nelk, so I'm going to vote for him.
And I think that's what they're trying to stop, Lewis.
Well, this is it.
And they're worried.
The establishment are still worried about Trump, I believe.
And, you know, they'll find any excuse to try and talk about him, even though, you know, the election time for 2024 is nothing but a couple of years away.
So they've still got time, but they've still got time to plant the seeds about Trump early.
So the more that they can do it, the more that, you know, they will.
Because they're scared of him.
They're worried that he'll get in again and make the country great again.
Wow, Lewis.
Wow.
Where's your hat?
But yeah, where is my hat?
So, yeah, I mean, you compare the votes between, you know, him and Biden and what they've accomplished so far within their years.
And, you know, it shows you that a lot of people do miss him and a lot of people do regret their vote.
So, you know, we'll probably see we'll probably see a big media establishment backlash once again.
I don't think they'll start liking Trump at any point.
I don't even know, you know, he could do all the right things and, you know, the establishment will still hate him for it.
Because, yeah, that's just the way it goes now.
If you start preaching too much truth, then, yeah, they'll censor you, they'll ban you, and anything that you decide to appear on, that'll be labeled as some sort of, I don't know, threat.
So, yeah, we're going to see more of that, I reckon.
And, you know, I bet they've missed talking about Trump.
So it's nice to see that they still are obsessed with him and living in their heads rent-free.
Neo-Nazi Delegation Meeting00:09:29
All right, let's queue up the next story.
And I'm sure Lewis has actually a make Clive Owen great again shirt or hat going.
Loyal rebel viewers will know who that is from Saturday afternoons of British Whose Line Is It Anyway?
Lewis didn't even know who that was.
No, I didn't know.
Oh, Trudeau met with neo-Nazis.
Let's talk about that.
Let's bring that one up.
What year was this from?
Is this current?
True North just posted.
True North just posted it.
Trudeau Freeland met with Ukrainian neo-Nazi co-founder.
This is right now just posted.
Can we shift it a little bit more so we can read that?
This is a spicy live stream.
This is the spiciest, but this is breaking news.
And we'll cut it right here so it's easy to clip, Lewis.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Christia Freeland met with the co-founder of a far-right fascist party in Ukraine, which was styled off of Hitler's Nazi Party.
True North has learned.
Now, if you go back in the history, True North is a very credible outlet.
If you go back in history, these are actual neo-Nazi groups, white supremacists, fascist groups, whatever you want to call it.
They have a long history.
It's not just 10 guys in a basement like it might be in other places.
This is a real group, a real set of militias that have been trained by Western allies and have been allowed to operate by the current Ukrainian regime.
Back to the article, please.
Audrey Perubli served as the equivalent of the legislative speaker of the Ukrainian parliament from 2016 to 2019.
And during that time, he personally met with Trudeau and Freeland several times.
Earlier in his career, Perubli was an influential member of Ukraine's far-right neo-Nazi movement.
In 91, he co-founded the Nazi-styled Social National Party of Ukraine and focused on racial nationalism that even adopted the Nazi Wolf Sangle symbol as its logo.
In 2004, it was renamed the Svoboda Party.
I can pronounce that one because of hockey players named Svoboda.
And efforts were made to remove Nazi imagery and expel fascist members from the party.
Within the Ukrainian political context, the party is still described as ultra-nationalist and part of Ukraine's far right.
Let's read that again for a second.
It was renamed, and efforts were made to remove the Nazi imagery and expel extreme fascist members from the party.
According to a report from the Jerusalem Post, which, of course, is going to be biased, recently as 2016, Perubli made an anti-Semitic comment or comment.
He accused Jews of sending convicts to settle eastern Ukraine and trying to destroy the genetic memory of Holodomor.
We might need to look up what Holodomor is in a moment.
Perubli first rubbed shoulders with Trudeau in 2016 while part of visiting a delegation to Ottawa.
The Ukrainian embassy to Canada detailed the meeting, which also included then Minister of Defense Harjit Sajan.
So, what I'm getting here is this guy was part of this neo-Nazi group.
I believe it said it was a co-founder, right, producer?
Yes, co-founder.
And he then transitioned into trying to make a better face for the party, remove this imagery, and remove some of the people.
But we still know that within the last five years, this group, these militias still exist.
They still have like the black sun.
They still have swastikas flags.
They're still hanging it.
These militias still exist.
So, on one hand, Lewis, and I'll get your take on this.
You could say this guy was reformed.
He no longer wanted to have his party do that.
He transitioned out of it.
And Justin Trudeau is just meeting with a leader of a political group.
You could say that.
That's not what I believe.
But the other side would be: how can you be a reformed white supremacist within just a few years?
How can you have a neo-Nazi party and then blame Jews for infiltrating your country?
So where do we draw our opinion from here, Lewis?
Do you think it's likely that a guy just leading a political party that wanted to de-Nazify it, for example, and talk to world leaders, or guy who's just, you know, trying to make everything look better?
And why wouldn't you leave the party instead of renaming it?
I just don't get it.
I'm sorry.
I just don't get it at all.
Like, there are people on the liberal side who cry Nazi at people and have been doing this for years.
But then Trudeau meets actual neo-Nazis and that's considered okay.
I don't understand.
Like, you know, and he won't be canceled for this at all.
You know, obviously, we've seen Trudeau's history with how he likes to dress up and what he likes to put on.
And, you know, and it's terrible.
And surely this is the last straw.
Surely.
You can't be.
It's just, I don't even know what to say.
It's just absolutely mental to see.
No, it's wrong.
It's just, oh, sorry.
I've got nothing else.
Here's the thing, Lewis: is that just recently, Justin Trudeau said that Conservative Party members, a Jewish one in specifically, whether he knew that or not, said stands with swastikas.
Mistake number one.
Christy Freeland stands with people holding flags that support these groups.
I'm sorry to tell you guys.
And then they photoshopped it out.
Strike two.
Will strike three be you guys met with these people, and will that be brought up?
I don't know, because in order for that to be brought up in parliament, now all of a sudden the conservative party has to say, oh, all of a sudden there's a problem.
There's actually a problem in Ukraine.
There's actually a problem with these people fighting with Ukraine and us sending money to them and Zelensky, who's a god now, by the way, allowing these militias to perpetuate and exist and fight alongside them whilst they were bombing Russians, side note, for eight years, side note.
Are they going to actually break rank there, Lewis, and actually say something negative about Ukraine in order to get Trudeau?
Well, here's the thing.
This isn't just like a measly mistake or a meetup or like, you know, oh, I'm pictured with so-and-so and I didn't know who he is.
He knows exactly who this person is.
Yet they still go ahead and meet them.
And they still go ahead and rub shoulders with them.
That's what I don't understand.
Well, what year is that?
Is that article saying that they met in 2016 or 2017?
Or is that, I think that's what it was saying, or is it saying they are meeting with them now?
Well, Freeland met with them in 2019.
Freeland met with them in 2019.
So that's two years ago.
Two, three years ago.
Justin Trudeau was in 2016.
So that is still while the war is going on with Russia.
Since 2014.
Yeah, is when they were bombing Donetsk in those regions.
And if you actually see the footage and the aftermath of the bombings in these regions, it looks just the same as when Russia's bombing the Ukrainian buildings.
These things go back and forth for a long time.
But those militias have existed during this time.
And for Christia Freeland to meet with this guy in 2019, and like, that's the thing, Lewis.
That's the thing that's hard to square away.
And I'm trying to play devil's advocate because I don't want to do the whole like, oh, these people are Nazis and everybody's a white supremacist.
But if you're a political person and you legitimately are not carrying these opinions and these, you know, viewpoints like this guy, why would you not completely join a different political group?
Why would you not join a new group?
Instead, you've rebranded the group and you still want to keep some of the aspects of it, but you want to get rid of them.
Like, when the Cleveland Indians change their name to the Guardians or the Washington Redskins changed to the Washington football team, horrible name, they don't get rid of the entire franchise and move somewhere else because they have the infrastructure there.
They have the fan base there.
They have everything set up.
Exactly.
So they change the name to rebrand it so you don't have this thought, whatever, all 12 people that had a negative thought about the Washington Redskins.
You rebrand it to appease those people.
When a political party completely rebrands, do you think that the people that work there and are there have such wildly different views that there's no remnants of this stuff at all?
If you're in a party that's neo-Nazi and is focusing on race nationalism and I don't believe in that, I'm not going to stay in the party no matter what they name themselves because at the core it's going to be a lot of the same people.
You know what I mean?
So that's the hardest thing to square because I don't want to be one of these people that just overblows every claim and calls people and labels these people these things, Lewis.
But I don't think there's any justification for this, for Justin Trudeau and Christia Freeland here.
Two years ago, less than three years ago at most, to be meeting with this guy.
And it wasn't just, oh, I was captured in a photo with this guy who came up to me.
You had a meeting with him.
There's a delegation to Ottawa.
Delegation to Ottawa00:03:17
Yeah.
That was my point as well.
Like, you know, it's not just some random photo.
It's a meeting, a fully-fledged meeting.
And you're meeting with Eastern European Nazis.
Hmm, yeah, not a good look, uh, not a good look at all.
And the problem is, this will be buried, you know, this won't be.
Um, I mean, people will start to bring it up, um, most likely, but is it going to do anything?
No, because the narrative has already been set and it's not enough to crush the narrative just yet.
But yeah, it's just, I mean, it blows my mind how much that your liberal party can get away with.
I know I say your liberal party, yeah, I say your liberal party somewhere in red, yes, yeah.
It's almost tea time, Lewis.
I think we're out of time here.
Tell us what you're working on.
Do you have, are we announcing you did a good interview?
Uh, do we have clips?
Yes, are there public clips of that yet?
No, no, there's a clip, producer Efron says there's a clip on Twitter.
Yeah, let's play it.
Let's cue that up for when we leave.
I want to tell everybody that I interviewed Andrew Lawton and Spencer Fernando to Canadian powerhouses, Lewis.
And that'll be on my show Thursday.
So, everybody, please subscribe to Rebel News Plus.
And we have a super chat to get to.
Let's throw that up on the board.
We need like a family feud board.
And then switch over.
Billy Howard, good name.
UK is now also open for unvaxxed international travel as pre-COVID.
When will Canada follow suit?
Never.
Never.
I can never leave.
I will never get to go meet Lewis and fulfill my girlfriend's dream of us going on a date.
I'll never be able to go visit Bryce and Gray and have him yell at me for two hours.
I'll never be able to go to Texas and be on slightly offensive.
I'm banned from everywhere, Lewis, because of my loving government.
So you've got this interview with Count Dankula.
And the clip I've seen is hilarious.
I hope it's the same clip.
But thank you, everybody, for watching.
For all the people in England and the UK, you went to Scotland the other day and you dressed like a Scot.
So kudos to you.
Probably ate some haggis.
What's their beer there?
Maclays or something?
I think it's Tinette, but no, I didn't go to Scotland.
Oh, he just likes to say that it looks like Scotland.
No, it's just an open field near where I live to go for a walk.
And I predicted that you had an open field near your house, did I not?
Tell the people.
Yeah, I know England better than England knows itself.
Thanks, everybody, for watching.
We're going to call this segment Across the Pond every week, I think, Lewis.
Across the Pond with Lewis and Andrew, starring Clive Owen.
And who's the other Clive?
He's an actor.
Anyways, actors named Clive will play us.
Thank you, Producer Efron and Producer Olivia.
Thank you for everybody watching.
And we will see you on RebelNews.com.
Let's play Lewis's clip with Count Dankula.
For the longest time, the Tories weren't doing anything for speech.
100% Obviously Crimes00:01:25
Like, so it's a case of I wasn't regarding them too much because I'm like, okay, they're not helping, but they're not hindering either.
So forget about them.
But now, yeah, they are starting to come after speech in a lot of aspects, even though it is a fundamental basic human right that the government is choosing to deny everyone.
And you're getting people that are getting people in the general population that are actually supporting it because they're like, oh, but the government should have control over what people can and can't say because there are some things that annoy me.
And I want the government to do things about that.
And it's just sort of how what level of narcissism do you need to be on?
Right.
Well, there's things, there's certain things that obviously should be crimes, you know, like rape, murder, things like that.
100% obviously should be crimes.
But then you get people that are like, oh, it should be a crime to upset me for five minutes.
And it's like, like, go and yourself, you big baby, you big baby.
Like, what a weak human being.
Like, I saw a tweet where someone called me gay, gay, and cringe on Twitter.
I'm going to call the police.
Like, I'm sorry, that's that's not that's not a man, that's not an adult.
That that's a child, that's three children stacked up on top on each other's shoulders in a trench coat.
Like, that's that's what that is.
But there are people out there who are unironically like saying that.