Tom Marazzo and Sydney dissect the Public Order Emergencies Commission testimony, exposing Diane Deans’ shifting support for Peter Sloly amid Watson’s advisor clique controlling council votes. The $54M ArriveCan app—developed in weeks—flawed travel restrictions, violating PIPEDA, and misquarantined 10,000 users while protesters maintained order. Trudeau’s Emergencies Act froze assets, sparking bank runs, despite Coutts blockades ending before its use; Justice McLean’s ruling on protest rights was ignored. Global parallels to Canada’s convoy protests reveal systemic distrust in dialogue over coercion, questioning whether Liberal failures stem from incompetence or deliberate authoritarianism. [Automatically generated summary]
Well, Tom, I think we've been regular guests on the live stream.
How are you doing today?
I'm good.
Good.
Yeah.
So, Sydney, Sydney, you've been watching the streaming a little bit more than meets day because I was out in front of Parliament to ask politicians some questions.
So you'll have to get us going.
Well, I'm still trying to absorb as much information as I can as well, right?
I think even that's an issue for the commission itself, the extreme timelines for which all of this information is coming out.
So my brain's a little dead as well, just going on, what, five, six hours of the live stream and then, you know, nine plus every day.
So there is really an extreme amount of information coming out there.
Is there anything you wanted to add or anything specifically that you noted from today?
Well, you know, I guess I guess we'll add Tom.
Tom, what's the main takeaway from today?
Well, for the most part, I saw a lot of the testimony from Diane Deans.
She's the former president of the police services board for the city of Ottawa.
And pretty interesting testimony, I have to say.
And if ever you wanted to see a textbook example of waning loyalties, that's what you saw today.
You know, there was a lot of support for Peter Slowly on her part.
And then at some point, she transitioned to basically throwing him under a bus and then back to support.
And I mean, these are the kinds of things that we were seeing.
And that's been a consistent sort of theme throughout this whole thing with a few exceptions.
And I want to sort of say that those exceptions are interesting because they're coming from people that are not politicians.
Every time the politicians get in the seat, you start to see them showing all of their infighting, right?
Because these people are the ones who make the decisions, the final decisions.
The staff, their role and their goal is to put them into a position that they can make sound decisions.
And so you can see the efforts of the staff to try to put the politicians into those decisions.
But yet when they fumble the ball on the one-yard line quite regularly, they start attacking each other.
So that was kind of a reinforcement of that same theme that we've seen throughout.
Yeah, the politicians are always trying to save their career.
I think we truly saw the difference with Jim Watson yesterday and the people testifying the day before.
And let's never forget, every time a politician is in front of a camera, they're campaigning.
No, 100%.
Always.
100%.
So can you talk to us a little bit more about the two witnesses that testified in front of the committee today?
Yeah, so I think he's the chief of intelligence, Pat.
He's currently on there.
He's on a break right now.
He's been testifying the OPP.
I think he's the superintendent for the OPP, Pat Morrison, I think is his name.
And I was listening to his testimony this afternoon, but they spent quite a significant amount of time with Diane Deans today.
So I wasn't able to kind of get the full picture with him, but I did manage to get some.
And, you know, from my experience with the military, I understood his demeanor.
I understood sort of the thought processes that he was going through that when he was making advice or kind of integrating with the Ottawa police and other agencies.
So that was kind of an interesting thing.
And again, like he's not a political creature.
So when he's up there, he's actually able to get up there and spell out the facts as what they knew at the time.
And so that's a different dynamic hearing his testimony than, for example, seeing one of the decision makers who's a politician, somebody like Diane Deans.
Yeah, and Diane Deans, so from what I understand, she used to work with Chief Slowly before he was replaced by a bike chief.
Yeah, so under the Police Services Act, there's, you know, the way that's kind of governed, in a sense, you could say that at one point, Diane Deans was the boss of Peter Slowly, right?
It is the police services board that hires and suspends or fires ultimately the chief of police and maybe the executive level officers within a police department.
They work for the police services board.
However, it is actually forbidden for the police services board to ever get involved in directing police operations.
So Diane Dean never had any authority or any police services board member does not have the authority to direct police operations.
So it was interesting to see the level of integration and discussion between Diane Deans and Peter Slowly.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And it's an interesting dynamic, right?
Because there's no doubt in my mind that even though that separation has to legally happen between police operations and the police services board, listening to the testimony, I think in this, what they would have considered, and I mean, it's fair to say this is an extraordinary situation.
I think a lot of that normal professionalism between the two was probably relaxed quite a bit, to put it, you know, in a respectful way, I suppose.
So you got a sense that there was some interference or there were some mainstream media impacts to Peter Slowly's career with the Ottawa Police Services.
There was, and I can't remember which news agency was writing a story about Peter Slowly, and it was going to be damning for him in terms of way his history or his command presence or command style was becoming a liability to Diane Deans.
And I think that eventually kind of led to her supporting his removal.
Coincidentally, we heard from her that at the time the police services board and the council were looking to remove police Peter Slowly, they were also talking about getting rid of her at the same time.
Right.
And yeah, we talked a little bit about Diane Dean, but for the viewers at home that don't know who Diane Dean is, Olivia, is it possible to throw to one of the clips from her testifying today?
Perfect.
Well, let's take a look.
Oh, okay, yeah.
Yeah, that works as well.
Let's just show the viewers who Diane Dean is.
I mean, I was just aghast this weekend that, you know, there's a bouncy castle and there's a hot tub.
David, I wanted to go up there and poke that hot tub myself and let the water flow out of it and unplug that damn bouncy castle because it's just a symbol of the frustration that's gone on for 19 days in the capital.
So yes, we are making changes to do everything that we can do to end this illegal occupation of our city.
I mean, I was just...
Can I add one thing to that?
Yeah, what'd you make to that?
Honestly, in listening to the commission, it seems like most of the frustrations that these people talk about, it wasn't because of the convoy.
Sure, the convoy had its set of logistical issues to deal with, but this is all stuff that they neither planned for nor could they communicate about with each other because there's just so much breakdown within the communication within the government officials.
And a lot of that blame, unfortunately, seems to have been cast on the freedom organizers.
And then you look at the phone call that was put into evidence this morning between the mayor and Diane.
Well, did you guys hear that conversation?
I did not hear that conversation.
Oh, fair enough.
I'll leave it for the time being, but it does speak to what you were mentioning about the tensions and the butting heads between these different political factions.
And at one point, she basically alluded to this clique that the mayor had.
And if they did want to vote out the police chief, I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that group would have been involved.
They would have had to have the mayor's consent basically to move and to act on these changes.
But just communication breakdown all around is what it seems like.
Yeah.
I picked up on that as well when she had, you know, Diane Dean doesn't really have a dog in the fight anymore, right?
She was removed as the chair of the police services board.
And so, you know, we saw this division or this crack or this revealing of this relationship between herself and the mayor.
And so she probably felt more free to describe the relationship that the mayor himself has with the entire council.
And she basically said, Look, if he wants something, nobody's going to stop him.
So he's running that as a very tight ship.
And I think we have a clip of that actually, just some of these conversations that were happening.
Maybe we can pull that one up now.
Right.
If I can take a moment to explain the sort of culture that exists at City Hall, the mayor has a group of counselors that are very supportive of his agenda and, generally speaking, will deliver to him any vote on any issue at any time.
And so, and that's a reality.
And I know that no motion of that magnitude would ever see its way onto the floor of council without the mayor's consent.
And so when I got wind that this was being contemplated, I started asking the mayor's staff if this motion was coming because I was very concerned about it.
I didn't share it with Chief Slowly.
I thought he had enough stress, frankly.
And if it was never going to see the light of day on the council floor, I wasn't going to tell him about it because he didn't.
Yeah.
Yeah, that's the clip that I was referring to.
Yeah, the communication breakdowns.
There's this left, right, and center.
Everywhere it could be found, it was found.
It is unfortunate to say this, pardon me, to say the least, especially for the locals of Ottawa, who they could have been getting proper assistance.
There could have been issues that were alleviated.
But instead, it was just all back and forth arguing behind closed doors.
Yeah.
Yeah, that's lack of transparency for you for the city council.
Yeah, I mean, we, we, you know, we made certain assumptions collectively.
We, you know, had lots of discussions of, you know, during the time of the convoy.
We made many assumptions.
And what's really interesting to see is, you know, when we're listening to this testimony, a lot of our assumptions were actually extremely accurate.
And that's not because, you know, everybody here has this crystal ball or anything.
It's just that it was all painfully obvious that what we were sensing in various different ways of what was going on behind the scenes.
I mean, I got to say it's not entirely, you know, I'm not gratified by it, but I mean, at least it's good to see that our objective was to always be safe and responsible.
And now we're kind of getting an affirmation of why we were getting the resistance that we were constantly getting.
And that's a little bit disheartening, I have to say, because in frustrating, because we were trying really hard to get these lines of communications opened up with the city.
And, you know, I want to say something.
I do find it humorous.
Like we didn't have a lot of discussions where we actually wanted to talk to Jim Watson.
There was no value for us to talk to Jim Watson.
The value for us was always to talk to a member of the federal government.
The mandates were from the federal government.
Yes, they were from the federal government.
That's what we wanted to talk to.
So I viewed it having to talk to the mayor as kind of a big waste of time.
But I was alone in that assumption.
There were many other people in these discussions, right?
And I was perfectly happy to talk to somebody above the rank of sergeant, at least.
And I mean, I'm not saying that to be disrespectful to the police liaison sergeants that we spoke to.
I mean, they worked really hard at what they were trying to accomplish, but we all knew in talking to the police liaison officers that they were getting it basically from both ends.
I mean, they weren't in a position where they had decision-making authority on anything.
I mean, it's similar to dealing with a brand new car salesman, right?
They're not really the ones that can make the final decision on the deal that they're going to get.
So this is what we were doing.
And, you know, I was trying to make an effort to get somebody of a higher rank that I could get in the room with and then start opening up those lines with the right people.
And, you know, a very stated, clear objective goal was always to be safe and responsible.
But at some point, we recognized that the clock was running out.
We needed to get a line of communication with the federal government going.
And we were getting stonewalled at every turn.
And that was always at a political level.
That was never done.
And what I, and I was, you know, tweeting this today while I was watching that, and I've said it again, this is probably the third day that I'll probably say this on the show is that, and I want to reinforce it today, because every day I go in there and I listen to this testimony, the same idea gets reinforced from me every day.
There was never that I heard, I have not heard any testimony whatsoever where any member of any government actually even contemplated talking to us ever.
What they did is they from day one started to pre-position giving themselves extraordinary powers.
And their main effort, their objectives were to remove us by force.
And they realized that maybe they didn't have the justification.
Maybe they didn't have the authorities to do it.
But their entire strategy was always focused on or central to giving themselves more policing resources, more policing powers, or more authorities to break our will to be there by force.
Mainstream Media Manipulation00:04:22
And only that, the ways they were avoiding talking to you and the way the way they were able to get all those police forces was by vilifying you, was by getting the mainstream media to write false narrative about the convoy and then rebut it afterwards.
But all the people already heard it once.
Yes.
And it's just in the media.
They use the media.
They play the mainstream media like a fiddle, right?
And they're perfectly willing to go along with it to say whatever rhetoric that they're demonizing.
Even though those messages were retracted after.
Oh, yeah, they were all retracted.
I mean, and we heard Jim Watson yesterday going on there in exaggerating the mainstream media talking points for them from nine months ago.
And so, you know, it's very surreal to sit there and listen to and get confirmation that your assumptions nine and ten months ago were actually pretty darn accurate.
And again, and I have to say this, where was the effort to ever talk to us in a meaningful way?
And I can tell you from my experiences and other people's experience dealing with the police liaison teams, they weren't interested in a back and forth exchange.
The police liaison officers, for the most part, were interested in, what are you going to do for me?
That was always their demeanor.
That was their posture.
I want you to do something for me.
It's like, okay, well, you know what I'd like for you to do?
I'd like to, for you to issue those permits for the port-a-potties that we rented and put up on Wellington.
And once you've done issuing the permits, you know what I'd like you to do?
I'd like you open up the street so we could get the truck to come in and clean the port-a-potties now, right?
And it was never, it was never like we were, they, they never allowed us to be in a position where it could be a give and take.
It was always a take, take, take on their part, right?
And, you know, we can talk a little bit about it shortly, but Diane Dean is a central figure in the day that we decided to, when we recognized that the situation had fundamentally changed for the entire convoy.
And so what we had chosen to do was form a strategy based around, quite frankly, the unhinged rhetoric that was coming out of Diane Dean during the Police Services Board meeting that we all watched because it was, it was recorded and we watched it and we were, we we were uh shocked dismayed, frustrated and uh, quite frankly, we realized that the situation had just fundamentally changed and we would need to do something to change that dynamic.
Yeah, you know, you know what?
Let's, let's go, let's go to a little ad break and then we'll go back talking about Diane Dean's.
Uh, right after thursday.
Thursday, in Ottawa, the Public Order Emergencies Commission kicked off is an inquiry into the actions of the government, or at least it's supposed to be.
The inquiry is allegedly meant to examine whether or not the government was justified in invoking an anti-terrorism law called the Emergencies Act to euthanize peaceful Anti-COVID Mandate protests taking place in the nation's capital, but also in other locations across the country Country.
My choice!
My party!
My choice!
Now, the convoy to Ottawa spent nearly four weeks completely peacefully demonstrating against lockdowns and vaccine passports.
It evolved into a nearly month-long street party replete with bouncy castles, hot tubs, street hockey, concerts, and community outreach efforts like soup kitchens and food for the homeless.
Rebel News, as we were for the convoy to Ottawa, will be there on the ground in Ottawa to cover the commission from the beginning to the end because you just cannot trust the mainstream media.
And in fact, that's what today's report is about.
We've rented an Airbnb in Ottawa where we're sending a rotating cast of journalists to report on the public order emergency inquiry.
Now, you can help support our efforts there at truckercommission.com.
The mainstream media's reporting about the alleged foreign nature of the convoy funding was cited as a reason the liberals invoked the Emergencies Act to arrest, detain, and seize the property, bank accounts, and assets of anti-Trudeau demonstrators.
All right, yeah, back to you, Sid.
What are we going to say about Diane's?
Two Representatives Speak00:04:32
Oh, well, I lost off the top of my head, but we had a clip actually about it and the no loss of life that she was talking about.
And to the extent that they were freaking out about this situation, well, at the end of the day, she says there was no loss of life.
It's a quick clip that we have.
Hopefully, we can pull that up in a moment.
But it's very interesting to see that even though there was so much chaos, so much breaking down within Ottawa, the protesters, it is almost like an act of God that they were the ones keeping the ship afloat when the city itself was crumbling.
But maybe that's a stretch to say.
But I did want to bring up one thing, and that is for the last couple of days, there's been the talks about the deal that was struck between the protesters and the city, I believe.
And then the police meddled in that affair, I guess you could say, as the Emergencies Act was being invoked.
I was actually in Coots when this was happening.
I don't know specifically what went down in the timeline.
I'm just picking up the pieces as they're being talked about.
Maybe you guys would be able to fill that gap and explain to the viewers what was this blocking roads debacle as an agreement was being put forward.
Yeah, so there was a couple of scenarios.
Myself and Eva Chipiuk, Chris Barber had been up onto the corner.
I mean, we're really talking about Rito in front of the hotel there, sort of the Chateau Laurier.
Yeah, the Chateau Laurier, sorry.
And, you know, all of us were up there and we were all trying to formulate a plan to talk to the truckers that were there.
And an important thing that people have to understand is each trucker is an individual owner operator of their vehicle.
So we don't have delegated legal command authority over anybody, right?
People are there on their own.
They're volunteering to be there.
And so that particular, there were many different groups within that particular intersection.
And the police asked us if we would be willing to start moving trucks starting at that intersection.
And so we said, you know, we'll work with you.
We'll see if we can make that a possibility.
But we have to, again, I remember communicating this to the police liaison team to say, look, we're going to do the best we can to make the case, talk about what the strategy is, why we think that this is an important thing for all of us.
But we have to let them make an individual decision.
That turned out to be an incredibly difficult, you know, many different conversations that we had with the members that were on that intersection.
But, you know, we got, you know, Eva Chipiuk and I, we spent over two hours in a truck with one of the guys.
And, you know, at times it got heated, but not heated in a violent way, but heated because there was a lot of passion in those conversations, right?
And I remember having these lengthy discussions with everybody on that corner, various different individuals.
And then we finally got to the point where the truckers came together.
They had their own little sort of meeting without me there, without ever anyone.
And they said, okay, let's pick two representatives to go and speak to the police liaison team.
We got that all worked out.
We were there for hours.
And then we walked over to that.
We had the two representatives from that corner to go talk to the police liaison teams.
And the sergeant's phone rang.
And I knew right there and then that that was not going to be good news.
And he got off.
He walked away.
He came back and he says, yeah, there's no deal here.
And they scuttled the deal.
The police were the ones that came back and scuttled that deal that night.
And I mean, they were on us all day long trying to get that.
But at the end of the day, I mean, it was after dark by the time that happened.
And the police came back and said, yeah, there's no deal here.
Yeah.
And you know, I think I'm probably going to repeat this in every live stream, but it's so important because that's what everyone's saying.
The truckers had a willingness to negotiate.
They had a willingness to engage with the city peacefully.
And, you know, Jim Watson justifies his lack of negotiation or his own unwillingness to negotiate by saying that the truckers were Yahoos, that they were extremists, that they were irrational.
And what he bases himself upon to make those claims are reports from mainstream media that were then retracted.
Billion Dollars for Vaccine Passes00:14:51
And we saw he never ever witnessed any act of violence by himself.
Olivia, can we show the viewers once again what he said yesterday in his testimony with Alan Hon?
Mayor Watson, let me just ask you, you told us earlier today where evidence came out that these protesters, they were nasty, they were hateful and they were vulgar.
Is that right?
Yes.
And you said that you saw where you said that they had ripped masks off of people?
Yes.
Did you actually see that?
No, I saw it reported in the media.
Okay.
And I think you also said that certain people were attacked.
Is that right?
I didn't say that.
No.
I said that I had death threats, but I wasn't physically attacked.
No, I didn't say that you were attacked, but you said that these protesters were attacking people.
Did you not say that?
No.
They were disrupting people's lives, that's for sure.
And they refused on at least three occasions that I'm aware of that they refused to adhere to the provincial mandate of wearing a mask when going into a shop or a restaurant.
So you're not aware of any incidents of physical violence from the protesters?
Well, you'll have to ask the police.
I know they arrested a couple hundred people and charged a couple hundred people.
I don't know what the charges were, so I'm not privy to that information.
According to your knowledge.
You don't know of any?
So I don't know any of any physical attacks.
Not to my own personal knowledge, no.
All right.
Thank you.
Those are my questions.
What do you guys make of that?
How violent was this at the end of the day?
I mean, you know, you're seeing testimony from the superintendent of intelligence for the OPP today.
And he's getting his sources of intelligence from the mainstream media.
Yeah, go ahead.
Can I ask one question?
Do you guys think that this is a matter of too many cooks in the kitchen or is this a matter of some unpronounced act of malevolence on part of our government officials?
I have to say that it is gross incompetence and very egocentric.
And I'll tell you why I'll say this.
We heard from Councillor Fleury the other day.
I think it was Friday when he testified.
William and I did the quick math on this afterwards.
And he had 99 protests per year, you know, almost two a week.
And he had been a counselor for 12 years.
So that puts him roughly at about 1,200 protests.
That's how much experience he has.
And as a city counselor and knowing all the individuals, it's interesting because he's one of the counselors in the wards that are affected.
And he stated that while protests are taking place, the rest of the community is not supposed to be served by the police because they don't have enough resources.
And that's what he said is during a protest, all police resources go to the protest and the city is left largely unprotected or uncovered, which is an exaggeration, I think.
I don't think the police are that careless.
But the interesting thing is you've got that type of, that level of experience.
And even the OPP said today that the level of experience with protest and with this police department is extremely high.
But yet you've got all of these integration mechanisms.
We've had terrorist attacks or domestic terrorist attacks when the man was running around with the gun and he killed the soldier at the National War Memorial and made his way into parliament.
And this is the nation's capital.
You have plans for this.
I've never read this taking place.
Yes.
I mean, you're always under an alert for some sort of a threat to your nation's capital and to your government.
So, you know, I'll tell you an interesting story before I make my final point.
2010, I was a captain.
I was posted to Toronto at the headquarters for the Army Commander for the Div that's here in Ontario.
And we, you know, I participated as a night shift low-level duty officer in the headquarters that we had.
It was an integrated headquarters with the police.
And we were in Barry, Ontario at the secret headquarters that everybody in town knew was there, by the way.
And on the first day we walked in and I remember this lieutenant colonel that we had there who said, look, I've been working on this profile for this portfolio for a year and a half.
And he said, just because the police wear a uniform and they carry a weapon, that is where the similarities end.
He said, they will not work with us.
They will not train with us.
They are so political.
They cannot train with us because they cannot fail in front of each other in training because they could lose their careers.
And so we saw, you know, the G8G20 summit headed by Bill Blair at the time.
He was the chief of police of Toronto.
And, you know, we saw what happened.
And those lawsuits are still going on 12 years later on what the police were led to do.
And so, you know, when we come back to this experience here in Ottawa, you don't see that they've learned a whole lot.
You know, and the city of Ottawa has not learned how to integrate and properly assimilate these police forces into one another, share intelligence.
You know, from my perspective, what I'm starting to observe and learn, I think that Peter Slowly was right.
He said this may not be a policing solution.
The politicians made it a policing solution.
They refused to engage with the peaceful protesters over there.
Yeah.
And so he was trying in the early days to say this is probably not a policing solution, but they pushed and pushed and pushed.
And here we are today, right?
The politicians invoked the Emergency Act, not the police.
And we heard testimony of that already in the other commission that's ongoing.
The police, no jurisdiction of police in this country asked for the emergency act.
This was all done politically.
And so, you know, when you look at this overall, there's been no integration, no coordination.
And all of the interference kept coming really from the politicians.
And then that interference on the political side, I believe, had an impact on the interference at the police leadership side.
So this to me is just really a level of systemic incompetence integrating as one sort of unified government.
But all they had to do was come and talk to us.
And I think you would have had a vastly different outcome.
Yeah.
Well, of course, when you don't use your words and when you use negotiation, you are forced to go ahead and move with force.
Yes.
That's what took place with the Emergencies Act.
That's what took place with the police.
Well, at the end of the day, this all kind of does come down to one individual.
And, you know, over the days, we've been hearing those representatives from Ottawa saying, you know, they were on numerous occasions requesting federal assistance.
And, you know, some of them even saying, like, look, Ottawa didn't set in place the federal mandates.
The federal government did.
But of course, they're situated in Ottawa.
So if there's a mass number of protesters who are here specifically for that, for the federal government, then we need the federal government to have some play in the game.
But it seems like for most of it, they were just waiting in the shadows, waiting for things to come to collapse, I guess you could say, so that they could be the white knight and bring in the guns, so to speak.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And talking about politicians, we should throw to a nad, but then when we come back, we'll talk about Justin Trudeau and the ArifCan app and what took place inside of the House of Commons earlier today.
Hey, folks, from October 13th to November 25th, we are here in Ottawa for the Emergencies Act Inquiry organized by the Public Order Emergency Commission.
But why the Emergencies Act Inquiry?
Well, because during the Freedom Convoy back in February, Justin Trudeau used a never-invoked before emergencies act to basically seize protesters' bank accounts, seize protesters' money, seize their assets, trample their civil liberties.
So we're here this month for the next month and a half to figure out if the way the government acted was lawful and was appropriate.
So we are here to hold the government accountable, but we need your help.
We are here to cover it for you because everyone else here is mainstream media.
So if you want to help us cover it, if you want to help us bring you the other side of the story, factual, actual news, go to truckercommission.com and consider making a donation.
Well, I hope you guys do make some of those donations.
Hopefully I'll be able to make it out there for a couple days as well.
Ottawa, of course, right now is where all the action is happening.
And being there, there's actually some non-virtual engagements that you've committed to.
Would you mind just telling us about that?
Non-virtual engagements?
I'm sorry, William in Parliament.
Okay, sorry.
Non-virtual.
Oh, yeah.
Are you talking about the people that I was able to encounter earlier today?
Yes, my apologies.
Sorry.
Yeah.
So earlier today, as I always do, I went in front of parliament with our videographer, Isabel Ravosch, here at Rebel News.
And I spoke to some of the ministers that were there.
I was able to catch Marco Mendicino, Omar Al Jabra, Defense Minister, Anita Anand.
And I asked Al Jabra and Ms. Anand if it is found that Justin Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act wrongly and unjustifiably, will they be asking for his resignation?
And I didn't get any answers unsurprisingly, as it's always the case with those ministers.
And as well, I think you were going to bring up something that happened earlier today, either Trudeau or Christia Freeland.
Yes, you want to bring that to our attention.
Yeah, so we should take a look.
Olivia, are you able to put the clip of the politicians talking about ArriveCan in the House of Commons earlier?
Perfect.
Sure.
So, yeah, so basically, the ArriveCan app, the ArriveCan app that prevented Canadians from traveling across the country and leaving the country.
What are your thoughts on the ArriveCan app?
Well, I mean, I fundamentally disagree with its very existence, for one.
It, to me, was just one more step closer to digital ID and tracking his citizens with records that nobody has a business having any access to anyway.
And the ArriveCan app is absolutely a flawed software that was rushed into production probably with little testing.
And I was a software teacher before I lost my job at Georgian College in Barrie.
And I taught making iOS apps and Android apps.
So I kind of thought it was hilarious when originally Justin Trudeau dedicated 10, no, a billion dollars to the provinces to develop their own COVID-19 vaccine passes.
And I thought it was hilarious.
Like he was dedicating a billion dollars for apps.
I'm like, listen, I'll do it for a cool 10 million.
Okay.
In fact, you know, the level of sophistication for that kind of an app would probably been something I would have given to my students as a turn project in as a group work.
So it's not overly sophisticated stuff.
And I could never comprehend where they were getting, you know, this number of $10 billion.
And then we see ArriveCan was $54 million?
Come on.
I'll do it for $10.
Yeah, let's take a look at what Trudeau had to say today.
It's good to know, but no surprise that the Prime Minister thinks that $54 million is just a petty matter.
According to one, a programmer demonstrated that the ArriveCan app could have been designed in a single weekend for less than a quarter million dollars.
Instead, this prime minister paid $54 million.
10,000 people were sent by that app wrongly into quarantine when they shouldn't have been.
Someone designed an app that didn't work, that sent 10,000 people wrongly into quarantine, that had addresses, home addresses, as the headquarters of the companies that received the money.
Many of the subcontractors are still secret.
And if the prime minister will not tell us the identity of those companies, then maybe he can tell us who was the genius, with the genius who spent that $54 million on an app that could be designed in a weekend.
Please stand up now.
Justin Trudeau's beautiful, smug face at the end.
What do you make of his listen?
You know, no matter what you think about Pierre Polyev, I haven't fully decided on the guy.
You can't help but want to get the popcorn when he gets on a roll, when he starts tearing into the liberal government.
I mean, it's a fun thing to watch.
I'm not going to lie.
But, you know, he's right.
He's right.
Like, I mean, these are, you know, a quarter of a million dollars.
I mean, I'm even shocked by that number to design this app.
And I mean, what's frightening is what he clearly identified was, you know, violations of FEPEDA, which is something software developers are aware of in terms of internet security.
He's violated, you know, if they're giving out wrong addresses or addresses are showing up.
I mean, that's a clear breach.
I mean, I would be surprised if this thing could be hacked with something as simple as an SQL injection, which is like an old way of hacking.
But it's really bizarre to me to see.
And then I did hear the stories about 10,000, or I didn't know the number at the time, but all these people that were wrongly forced into quarantine because of fatal flaws in the software itself.
And I can tell you, as a former software developer, you know, coding is only 10% of what you do.
90% of what you do is debugging.
And it doesn't sound to me like they had enough time to get through any of the debugging.
Yeah.
And, you know, how much did he spend on the app?
$54 million?
$54 million.
Clear Breach and Economic Threat00:12:42
So we see a pattern of the Liberal Party of Canada.
The Liberal Party doesn't evaluate the success of one of their programs, of one of their spending programs by how effective it was.
They don't evaluate it by looking at how effective ArifCan was, at how helpful ArrifCan was.
They look at how much money they spent on the app.
When they talk about housing crisis in the House of Commons, they always mention how much they are willing to invest.
When they talk about dental care, when they talk about health care, about child care, they say we are going to spend $100 million billion dollars.
But they never mention how effective their programs are.
And that's what we see right here.
The ArifCan app was a pure failure and a pure joke that restricted elderly Canadians and unvaccinated Canadians from entering their country, either because they did not have a cell phone or because they were not vaccinated, which is absolutely disgusting to see.
Yet they don't evaluate the success of their program by looking at these terrible things that occurred.
They evaluate it by saying we spent $54 million on that program.
That's twice as more as conservatives have spent on X program.
It is absolutely unbelievable, but it's not surprising for the Liberal Party.
What do you think, Sid?
We're proud that we were able to waste more of your money than the other guy.
I mean, that's honestly what I'm hearing, right?
And it is really sad because it is almost a history of this.
And I kind of asked the same question before with regards to Ottawa officials.
But are they just like, do they know that they're making these mistakes?
Are they able to visualize their own faults?
Or are they doing this on purpose?
Which is the dangerous question or the dangerous answer to that question is yes.
And that's something I guess is in speculation at the moment.
But the track record of failure is now unparalleled, I think it's fair to say.
And even though he still does have a lot of support and he has that ear-to-ear grin of his that everybody just hates, even though many love, I think his love is rapidly declining.
I think people are waking up.
The convoy was one of a great example of that, where people across the country are being like, oh, I'm not alone.
I'm not the crazy one in the room.
They are literally doing this to thousands, if not millions of Canadians.
And it's just a matter of time.
When are they going to come pay the bill?
Or are they going to try and dine and dash?
Yeah.
I think we have another clip from the House of Commons, Christia Freeland, talking about the current ongoing Emergencies Act inquiry.
And by the way, Christia Fuelin will be testifying at the inquiry alongside Justin Trudeau, David LeMedi, Anita Anad, Marcom Dicito, and Omar Alcabra in the last week of the inquiry.
And I believe Christia Fuhn is the exact last witness to be testifying.
Yeah, exactly on the list.
Let's show what Sethi had to say today about the inquiry.
I think the fact that we acted, that we understood the magnitude of the challenge and we rose to that challenge, that should be reassuring to Canada's customers and to people investing in Canada.
I am grateful for the question because I was really worried.
I was worried about precisely the issue, Greg, that you've touched on.
I was worried about the losses that Canada was facing every day.
But even more, I was worried about the potential damage those blockades could do to Canada's reputation as a reliable trading partner, as a reliable place to invest.
And frankly, I was worried about the way that had the blockades not been stopped, they could have contributed to the arguments of protectionists south of our border.
And that is one of the reasons that as finance minister, I was firmly of the view that the government needed to act, that it was a national security threat to Canada, a threat to the economic lifeblood of our country for that to go on.
And I do think the fact that we acted decisively, that our action worked, shows to our trading partners that you can rely on Canada.
Now, I can't, we're not a perfect country.
We're a pretty amazing country, but we're not perfect.
I think what our government showed then, and it was a serious, serious, serious decision.
But what we showed then is when we understood the seriousness of the challenge and we took the strongest possible action to end it.
No, I just, I just want to start off by apologizing for making all of our of our viewers having to listen to this person once again on the live stream.
But Tricia, the reason why people wouldn't trust Canada to invest is because your government is so authoritarian that it feels a right to shut down the economy for as much as as long as they want because they have the power.
If there's one reason why people would be afraid to move to Canada or people would be afraid to have trust in Canada or invest in Canada, invest in Canada's economy is because they never know at what point your authoritarian government is going to shut it down, as you just did during the time of COVID-19.
And we saw Florida flourish and it wasn't shut down as much as Canada.
But no, here we have a different sign than in Florida.
You know, there's so many, I got to start making notes when you guys run the clips of that.
There's just so many things I could pull out of that.
And the first thing I want to say is this.
The first, I would say, 30 seconds of what she just said, she strung together nothing but catchphrases and slogans and somehow masterfully pulled out an entire paragraph of, it was a paragraph like a Seinfeld paragraph, a paragraph of nothing.
And that's the important thing about the first sort of what she said.
You know, like William, what he's saying is I absolutely agree with because, you know, she said they wanted to sort of send a signal or to demonstrate to our trading partners that we are absolutely willing to stomp our own citizens in order for you to feel confident in our ability to control our people by force,
by the strongest means necessary, and, you know, exactly by force so that you feel confident that you'll trade with us.
But here's the problem.
It backfired because, you know, when they started to freeze the financial assets, and I'm getting a lot of feedback from wealthy individuals that have ties both in Canada and to the United States that said they actually achieved the exact opposite.
They destabilized the confidence in the Canadian government and people started pulling their money.
And don't forget, our charter banks now are international banks.
They're not just, you know, TV Bank doesn't just operate in Canadian soil.
It's an international bank.
And if you remember, when they started to seize the bank accounts, TD Bank had a run on their accounts on their banks.
They shut down their ATMs.
And the Americans were getting very nervous about this as well.
Right.
And so they unfortunately sell that to the mainstream media consumers, the digesters, and they'll believe what she's saying as if, though, it's actually that Christia Freeland and Justin Trudeau did good things for Canada.
When in reality, it's a snow job is all it is.
It's completely false.
What she just said is just spin doctoring.
That's all she's about.
100%.
She says that she loves Canada and we're in perfect country.
Perhaps it's time for you to show how much you think Canada is green instead of vilifying it in House of Commons, instead of saying that we have a problem with systemic racism, that we have all of these woke leftist issues.
Maybe a sign that shows some appreciation for the country.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I likewise with you guys.
I'd love to go through that entire segment of hers word for word.
But speaking as one of the individuals who was at the Couts blockade, and I've recently done an interview with Chad Williamson, one of the legal representatives for some of the individuals down there, he attests to the fact that, and this is the same thing that the government of Alberta, I believe, has now attested to, and the protesters said as much when I was there in talking to them, that the Emergencies Act literally had nothing to do with the Alberta blockade.
It wasn't a reason for the protesters to have left.
It wasn't something that law enforcement was asking for or ever mentioned.
And it was something that one of the lawyers that was involved there was saying there's absolutely no tie-in to the Coutz blockade and the Emergencies Act.
Well, it was dealt with before the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
It wasn't dealt with.
The protesters went home.
They decided to leave.
It wasn't dismantled by anybody.
A bit of a different situation than what we saw in Windsor.
And I can't speak to all the blockades, of course, that happened, but any allegation of the blockade in Coutz, and these charges of whatnot, none of the events that happened in Coots have anything to do with the Emergencies Act, other than it's, what would you call it?
Not a bargaining chip, but it's like a card to play.
It's like, oh, look at that blockade over there.
Maybe that's a justification we can source for the time being.
But at the end of the day, it didn't have anything to do with it.
It's false correlations.
Yes.
And even the blockade or let's say the interruption on the bridge in Windsor, I know from a very good friend of mine who was there and who was arrested and did face criminal charges.
He had stated to me, he's a fellow veteran.
He stated to me, he says, look, I'll put my hand on my heart.
And I'm telling you right now, we kept a safety or we kept a lane open.
It was slowed.
The progress was slowed over the bridge because you've reduced it down to one lane.
But let's keep something else in mind.
I don't believe that that was just Canadian truckers, right?
Like they think that was a Canada-US trucker partnership in a sense, too.
It wasn't just us doing all that stuff.
I could be wrong about that, but I don't think I am.
But the other issue is we know for discussing this specifically with my friend who was there.
He said we kept one lane open the entire time.
And I believe that you were at a coup blockade, right?
You can talk to us a little bit more about that.
16 days.
But actually, I want to mention one other thing: and as you mentioned, there were Americans that were joining in in these protests as well.
Is the sentiment that was shared by these protesters was quite literally international.
You've got, you know, the Dutch, the large Dutch protests that were taking place with the tractors, even months after, there were still protests.
I mean, they've been protesting for a long time, the European.
But even months after the convoy and the blockades, there was a mimicking of those behaviors across the world.
And if that doesn't tell you how many people were fed up with people and policies like those of Trudeau, well, I don't know what will.
Yeah, my understanding was 27 convoys that happened around the world.
27.
So I think that is the exact opposite of a fringe minority across the planet.
But I would certainly say that that is a substantial collective of people across the world that are telling all of their elected officials the same exact messages.
That, listen, you people work for us.
You're only in that job because we went to elections.
We put you there to occupy that position.
Now you're not doing what we want.
Fine.
We, you know, we will continue to protest.
We will try to have dialogue.
I posted today, I went on the House of Commons website and posted a picture of really what the terms of service is to be a member of parliament in here in this country.
Elected Officials' Message00:11:22
And it basically, one of the lines, it says, you know, you're supposed to talk to your constituents.
And whether you agree or not, and I posted on my Twitter so you can go check it out or, you know, for yourself, but this is their job.
Like their job is to talk to people.
And what we saw again for the fifth day is this absolute determination not to have any dialogue with us unless it's to your advantage to do so.
Right.
And I don't mean that in it.
Yeah, there it is.
You know, if you click on that, it'll open up.
Yeah.
Yeah, it says against the problems of constituents and examine how the government uses or abuses, abuses the power it exercises on behalf of the people of Canada, right there in the bottom two rows, right?
This is their job, literally.
Literally, at the highest level of government.
And make no mistake, Justin Trudeau is the member of parliament.
Yeah.
And instead of doing that.
Well, and instead of doing that, they were, it was accusations of terrorism, of extremism, literally everything, you know, fill the blank.
It was there.
But perhaps just to reiterate slightly, you know, that 27 convoys or blockades or whatnot that grew or developed internationally out of the convoys and blockades that were happening in Canada.
Well, what was the message they were spreading?
Was it burn down the buildings, shoot the guns?
No, it was we're going to sit here, make a peaceful statement in a way that may financially hinder you.
And maybe that's, you know, any action might inevitably result in that.
But we're going to do this peacefully.
We're going to make a peaceful statement that we've had enough with your baloney.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And you know, you know, about financial difficulties, if you compare the two years of difficulties that Trudeau made sure businesses would suffer through, would go through due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
If you compare that to the business that actually decided to stay open because they saw there was no violence that took place in Ottawa, these businesses, Tim Hortson's, made an enormous amount of profit.
The businesses that stayed open downtown made so much profit.
But just to go back on Justin Trudeau, is it possible to put out a clip of what he stated in regards to the inquiry today, once again, in this House of Commons?
We're going to keep hearing lots of information coming out over the coming weeks on what happened day by day with the Emergencies Act, with the illegal protests here in Ottawa and elsewhere across the country.
I think one of the most important things, however, is that the province and the federal government stood together.
Don Ford invoked his Emergencies Act.
We invoked our Emergencies Act.
We put the citizens of Ontario, the well-being of families, the well-being of our economy, ahead of the interests of illegal protesters.
And we were glad to stand together on that.
And as you saw on Monday, we continue to stand together on this, even as we're making important economic announcements for the future of Ontario.
He was hiding.
He said he was hiding because of politics.
So was he helping or was he hiding?
I think we continue to see how important it was for everyone to work together.
And of course, there were moments during the unfolding of this convoy where there were times where different organizations, different orders of government weren't working as tightly as would have been ideal.
But the important thing is that we all stood together and put Ontarians and Canadians first, and we resolved the situation.
Did I reporters yell at him?
Yeah.
You know, when I yell at him, I'm being told that I'm harassing the politicians.
But anyways, yeah, once again, I apologize for making you go through a clip of Justin Trudeau.
What are we going to say?
Yes.
The province and the federal government.
That's how he opens it.
What about the municipal government?
Is that just not part of the conversation?
Didn't it take a week before there was any dialogue properly?
I don't know exactly.
I was there the whole time, but the one thing I take extreme exception to is his use of the terms illegal protest.
Okay, I'd like to understand.
You know, if I could ask one question, actually, if I could ask two questions.
And my second question that I'm going to state is directly from Keith Wilson.
It's not my question, but it's a brilliant question.
Let's make it clear.
My question really would be: at what point did we become an illegal protest?
Because according to Justice McClain, who ruled on the injunction for the horns, he actually said we had a legal right to be here and to do this protest.
Okay, so at what point did Justice McLean get overruled by the executive branch of the government, not the judicial branch?
At what point was there an overruling of an actual judge in this city that made that an illegal protest?
And I'll admit, I mean, I did on the final day that I announced that we would peacefully withdraw from the city, this troll who works for one of the online magazines.
He's a horrible human being as far as I'm concerned, was just harassing me.
It was the first question.
It was ridiculous.
And I looked at him and I said, well, what laws did we break?
And his jaw just kind of dropped.
What laws did we?
And I asked him again, I said, what laws did we break?
And he had no answer.
And I said, parking infractions.
These are parking violations.
That was the illegal act that allowed you to have your paramilitary units of all of your police departments to attack your citizens because of parking violations and bouncy castles.
You know, thank God Diane Dean was not actually in charge of a tactical unit.
Because then this idea of a miracle that nobody was injured would have been a complete falsehood.
So the second question is, and Keith Wilson put this to, I believe it was Andrew Lawton he asked the question to, and he said, you know, Andrew said, if there was a question you could ask Justin Trudeau.
And Keith said, the question I would ask Justin Trudeau is, what made you think you would get away with it?
Right.
Well, perhaps his, perhaps his, I think he's at seven years now.
Perhaps seven years in powers, despite We Charity, SNC La Vale, Gropeny Reporter, despite all his scandals, I think he had, I think it was Raikon to see Alder Khan being on the island.
I mean, he's had, he's been found guilty of ethics violations in the past, but yet this alliance with the NDP is a vanguard that protects him and gives him this basically this alliance has created a this coalition government has created an unelected majority for Justin Trudeau, right?
And it's funny because we were vilified because we were talking about coalition governments during the thing and everyone said you were trying to overthrow the government as an unelected official and form a coalition, which is a lie.
It is not what we were talking about doing, but we're being criticized for talking about other government parties coming together and forming a coalition.
Meanwhile, Justin Trudeau and the NDP had already done and formed an unofficial coalition government, but they failed to notify the public of this.
And they're vilifying us.
And you got Bill Blair saying that we're trying to form an unelected government through a coalition.
No, but you just formed an unelected majority government through a coalition with the NDP.
Yeah, just hypocrisy 100%.
We are running out of time a little bit.
Any last thoughts, Sydney?
Sure, I'll just end on a quick thing.
What did they say?
I believe it was earlier how the criminal code, there's bylaws, municipal bylaw infractions, these things, they didn't account for the extraordinary nature of what the Freedom Convoy was.
And so it seems maybe because they didn't have laws that said it was illegal, they kind of made that assumption.
It's like it is without or it is outside of the domain of the laws in which we can enforce.
And so it must be illegal because it's not in the book.
Maybe that was the end of the day analysis, but I know we're running short on time and I'm all full of speculation.
Yeah.
So there were two times where Justin Trudeau had met with previous protests.
I think one was a pipeline, one was involving indigenous people.
And the BLM too.
Yeah.
He took any.
And BLM, he took a knee.
And he also, I'll stay away from that one, but there's just too many.
But it was our actual sincere belief that he would send at least an envoy to come and talk to us.
So we had no reason to believe that he wouldn't talk to us.
And when he refused to talk to us, you know, after all that time, and instead his natural default was to use violence against his own citizens.
No, it's an incredible thing.
You know that you're not living in the real world anymore.
Yeah, it definitely says a lot about Justin Schumann.
I think there's way too much is a phrase that you can use with Justin Trudeau a lot of times.
Thank you so much for joining us.
That's Day Sid from Alberta, right?
Yep, I'm from Alberta.
Originally from Toronto.
Oh, so you're in Ski and you moved from Toronto to Alberta.
Yeah.
Yeah, and the great province of Alberta.
Thank you for coming again.
Yeah, thank you for definitely have you on at some point as well.
We keep having you all the time.
I really look forward to seeing your testimony, by the way.
I can't wait.
It's happening in week four, right?
Probably week four.
It's hard to say.
It's kind of a shifting thing and the witness list may be modified somewhat, but the sooner the better.
Yeah.
And thank you for everyone for joining us tonight as well.
The service later, however, highlighted the need for additional legal supports in both the short and medium term, requesting assistance to find uncharted legal territory.
The service referenced the criminal code as being archaic and both the Provincial Highway Traffic Act and City of Ottawa bylaws as being limited in that they all failed to consider events such as the trucker convoy.
Do you recall who said this?
I believe it was Chief Slowly.
And what did you understand this to mean?
Well, just that we didn't have the tools that we needed in terms of this specific convoy with large 18-wheel vehicles to be able to effectively address legal issues around that because this had not perhaps ever been considered in terms of criminal code or even our own Ottawa bylaws in the past.
Did you understand it to be saying that they needed new enforcement authority to effectively end these events?