Ezra Levant mocks Twitter’s reinstatement of banned conservatives—like Dr. James Lindsay, suspended for 106 days over "groomer" debates—as a hollow "negative gulag," exposing woke ideology’s authoritarian roots in Gnosticism while questioning Elon Musk’s motives amid Bloomberg and Biden scrutiny. He contrasts Epstein-linked figures like Bill Gates’ unchecked influence with their demonization, ties Canada’s midterm election losses to alleged Democratic ballot harvesting abuses, and reveals the federal government pre-ordered 585M COVID vaccine doses—including 104M Moderna and 236M Pfizer—before Health Canada approval, suggesting regulatory capture. The episode frames censorship as a Pyrrhic victory for power, urging Republicans to prioritize election integrity, energy, and education while rejecting corrupt tactics. [Automatically generated summary]
I'm going to go deep on the subject of Twitter banning conservatives and then reinstating some of those conservatives.
We'll have a feature-length conversation with Dr. James Lindsay.
I really like this guy.
We've talked to him a few times before.
Really smart, really goes deep into the intellectual history behind woke-ism.
I won't try and explain who he is.
I'll just get straight to the conversation.
I think you'll get a kick out of it.
We talk about everything from Donald Trump to, you know, the midterm elections to Elon Musk and why the phrase okay groomer was banned by Twitter.
That's ahead.
But first, let me invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus is the video version of this podcast.
Just go to rebelnewsplus.com, click subscribe.
It's eight bucks a month.
You get the video version plus the satisfaction of knowing that you're keeping Rebel News strong because we don't take any money from the government.
All right, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, Elon Musk reinstates many banned conservatives on Twitter.com.
We'll talk to Dr. James Lindsay, who was sent to Cyber Siberia.
It's November 21st, and this is the Azure Levant Show.
shame on you you sensorious bug hey great to see you again I'm sorry I was away a few days last week.
I couldn't avoid it.
But, you know, I got right back into it on the weekend.
I don't know if you know this, but in the Greater Toronto area, we had something called Rebel News Live.
We used to do these a lot in the before times.
We had over 750 people buying tickets for a day-long Rebel News conference.
Now, some of those tickets were virtual tickets where people could join online and Zoom, but we had about 500 people in the room physically, which is a great pleasure.
Because if you're like me, you're still remembering what it's like to go to conferences and meet with lots of people after we were atomized and forced apart from each other.
It was great, and all your favorite Rebel News personalities gave talks and took questions, but also interesting newsmakers, too.
Two of my favorites included Arthur Pavlovsky, the Alberta pastor who was jailed.
And speaking of political prisoners, Tamara Leach, the trucker, spiritual leader, I'm going to call her, was there too.
It was a wonderful event.
Other great speakers, including our friend Palminder Singh, who also came to prominence during the Trucker Convoy.
Just a great time was had by all.
Now, that was in the Toronto area.
We are doing it again this coming weekend in Calgary.
There are still tickets available.
Go to RebelNewsLive.com.
And there's different tickets if you want to come for the whole day.
If you want to add on a VIP dinner with the guests afterwards, that's pretty fun.
Or you can join by Zoom if you're not able to make it to the Calgary location.
Of course, we'll serve breakfast and lunch.
You know we will because we're always hungry for knowledge and hungry for snacks.
So it's been a busy time at Rebel News.
But in the back of my mind, and by the way, today, the Trucker Commission, holy mackerel, I was watching Sheila Gunread's live tweeting.
Senior government officials were there, including Bill Blair.
Government Disinformation Planted00:14:51
Very soon, Justin Trudeau himself will take the stand.
One of the things we saw today was how this false allegations, this literal government disinformation about the truckers being violent extremists was planted in the media by the government.
They were colluding with journalists like Rachel Gilmore and Glenn McGregor.
Just absolutely atrocious.
We always sensed it in our bones, but the truth came out today.
I'm so proud of our team in Ottawa.
You can follow them at truckercommission.com.
As you know, we've rented an Airbnb in that city that we've turned into a TV studio.
I'm glad Sheila was down there on this very important day.
So we're doing lots of stuff in Canada, but in the back of my mind is Twitter.com, recently bought and turned private by Elon Musk.
And he is following through, and he is allowing some formerly censored voices to come back.
The most important, of course, being Donald Trump.
Elon Musk put up a Twitter poll.
15 million people voted in a day.
And it was close, 52 to 48.
But he claimed it was that poll that made him say, vox populi, vox day.
That's Latin for the voice of the people is the voice of God.
And with that, he reinstated Donald Trump's tweets.
Now, Trump himself has not yet availed himself of that.
You may recall after Donald Trump was banned from Twitter, which was outrageous.
He was a sitting U.S. president, banned from Twitter.
The Ayatollahs of Iran, the communist leaders of China, they're on Twitter, but not the American president.
It was deeply disturbing.
In fact, other countries around the world, including Angela Merkel, who was the leader of Germany at the time and the president of Mexico, neither of them were fans of Trump.
But both of those leaders in particular said it is a dangerous thing when woke bureaucrats in Silicon Valley can simply wave the wand and silence the leader of a sovereign country.
Very interesting.
Trump has not yet tweeted yet.
I hope he will.
It would be absurd if he didn't.
If you had 100 million viewers who were tuned into you, you'd be foolish not to use that.
Trump used social media to great effect in 2016.
We'll see if he returns to it.
But interesting to me is the reaction by the liberals.
Just incredible.
Here is one of the regular talk shows.
I think this was on Face the Nation yesterday, saying, oh, you know, this election, this vote on Donald Trump, it was rigged by the Russians.
Take a look at this.
Just hilarious.
So I think these polls are mostly a gimmick.
And I would argue the people haven't spoken.
The GRU has spoken.
Russian intelligence, you mean?
100%.
Twitter has become a playground for bad actors and fake bots.
This poll is meaningless.
This decision is meaningless.
No evidence provided, of course, but I guess a Twitter poll you can say is rigged by the Russians.
You're just not allowed to say that Joe Biden's win was rigged by anyone.
Anyhow, I want to tell you that today we're going to speak with a political pundit scholar, public intellectual on the right, Dr. James Lindsay.
We've spoken with him before.
I really like talking with him.
He's really smart.
And he was one of those banned in the last year by the Twitter censors.
And he has now been unbanned.
I want to just show you two photos side by side.
Here's a picture of Twitter staff in the time before Elon Musk bought the company.
And here's a picture of Twitter staff now.
I think they have fewer, you know, touchy-feely censorship activists and a lot more rock hard engineers.
At least that's what it looks like.
I got to play this video for you again.
This is a day in the life of a Twitter manager.
I'm not kidding.
This is real.
This was uploaded to TikTok by a Twitter worker.
You can see what kind of place it was.
It was not about tech.
It was not about computer science.
It was about democratic politics.
Just take a quick look at this.
Hey guys, come to work with me at Twitter in Atlanta.
This was my first time going into the office in such a long time, but it was nice to have a change of scenery from my apartment.
Looking like a worker brace.
She's so cute.
For lunch, we decided to go downstairs to Barvegan.
If you haven't tried it before, it's a black-owned restaurant inside of Pond's Market.
We ordered the quesadillas with the tots and then also got a fancy pants cocktail, and they were all really good.
So, I'll definitely be back.
After lunch, we came back upstairs to an extremely empty office, but honestly, we were just so proud of our productivity.
After work, we went back downstairs to Monero to reward ourselves with some afterwork margaritas.
We stayed in happy hour until around 7 p.m., and then I finally headed home to enjoy a well-deserved double bath.
Bye, guys.
It's easy to see why our next guest was banned by the likes of that Twitter worker, who I presume is no longer there.
So when we come back, a feature conversation with Dr. James Lindsay.
You know, we have an enormous social media account on YouTube.com.
In fact, until Global News bought artificial subscribers, we were the largest news channel in Canada on that forum.
We lost our monetization, that is, they refused to sell ads on it, and they de-boosted us.
They pushed us down their search rankings for a sin.
Now, we didn't do anything illegal.
We didn't publish any gratuitous violence or any obscenity.
We certainly broke no law, but we violated their interpretation of their community guidelines.
What did it was we showed a brief clip of President Donald Trump in an official video released by his office talking about the January 6th so-called insurrection.
We didn't show it to endorse it or to cheer for it, but rather to document it as a prosecutor might put a piece of evidence to a jury.
Here's what Trump said.
Here's what they said.
Here's what they said.
But merely for showing that video and not endorsing it, but just showing it as a historical artifact, an official communication by the President of the United States.
The hall monitors of YouTube used that as the justification to rip out about a million dollars a year from Rebel News, and they have never given it back to us since.
I tell you that, because that obviously violated no norm in a liberal democratic society.
Rather, it violated the political tastes of the tastemakers who now dominate these big tech companies.
Once upon a time, a long time ago, they were basically run by nerdy guys who loved computer science.
It was, I suppose, like NASA was in the 1960s.
But that's not NASA today, and that's not big tech today.
As I showed you earlier, Twitter is the home of woke millennial women.
And they're not there to do computer programming, at least not in the main.
They're there to say what you can and can't say about transgenderism, to say what you can and can't say about the election in 2020.
Was it reliable or not?
And that's how we ourselves were demonetized.
And I tell you this because our next guest was canceled on Twitter.
His account was suspended for what?
Was he doing something atrocious like promoting child pornography?
No, in fact, he was doing the opposite.
He was condemning what he called child groomers, which is adults who target young children of tender years to sexualize them.
And by calling them groomers, which is standard parlance for that tactic, he was suspended from Twitter for being against child pornography.
Dr. James Lindsay was reinstated on Twitter yesterday, shortly after Elon Musk acquired the company and took it private.
And joining us now, Vioskype from Tennessee is Dr. James Lindsay.
He's a scholar and the head of the New Discourses Institute.
What a pleasure to have you back on the show.
We love having you.
We always get into the good stuff, you and I. I'm really grateful for your time and your smarts.
But today I want to talk about you and your story a little bit and what it can teach us about Twitter and the censorship therein.
And if Elon Musk is to be trusted, even just a little bit, I'm delighted that you're back on and able to communicate in that public forum.
Well, I don't know if I'm delighted yet or not.
It feels a bit like I got kicked out of an insane asylum and now I've been let back in and a little hesitant to go back, but all my friends are there, so I don't really know what to think about that.
But I do think it will be effective.
I unfortunately did notice some drop in my effectiveness, which I had hoped would not be the case.
I think somebody told me that I was exiled from Twitter land for something like 105 or something, 106 days or something.
And unfortunately, that was long enough to notice a dip in my reach.
And so it's good to get back for professional reasons at least.
Well, and that's the thing.
And to hear the language of the left and the media party, as I call it, or I'm calling it the regime media in Canada now because we're learning how they colluded with Trudeau in the martial law imposition.
It's really shocking.
To hear how they squawk when they leave Twitter and try and create a new colony on rival social media platforms, like one's called Mastodon.
And I've got nothing against these rival sites.
It's just to see them ache at losing their social status and their social connection and their audience, that pain, which is true.
It's what you just described, how you lost your social status and your connections.
They were punishing wrong thinkers with a kind of intellectual exile.
You say you were exiled from the insane asylum, and I take your point because Twitter can be rambunctious and it can be addictive and it can be a time waster and there's a lot of garbage on there.
But it is, but that's just a reflection of people.
And you were really banned from people who talk and think and watch and observe and comment.
And that is like if you were a factory worker, it really would make no difference to your life.
But you're a dealer in ideas.
You're in the intellectual trades.
And for you to be banned from the public square, it really is an attack on who you are.
I'm not trying to build you up.
I'm just saying Twitter is the public square, like it or not.
And that is why they wanted to banish you from life.
They wanted to send you to Siberia.
They really did.
I mean, I do get that.
As a matter of fact, I reflected a number of times, and no one can quite copy the eloquence of Christopher Hitchens.
But before he died, he obviously wrote quite a bit famously about mortality.
And he said that with death, it's not so much that the party will end, but more that it most assuredly will go on without you in it.
And it definitely felt like that I had been exiled from the ability to participate in this kind of rambunctious and kind of Wild West center of discourse.
And it is, in a sense, at least, you know, the world's newsstand, but also a center of dialogue.
I also look upon this phenomenon of the left-leaning matriculation off of Twitter to other social media with a bit of amusement.
I watched a number of the large accounts yesterday kvetching that they get sent, they've sent themselves off to these other platforms and bless them.
And they've gone and tried to transform them.
It needs content moderation and this is all these problematics and we need to do this and that.
And the CEOs are coming out and saying, if you want to change it to Twitter, go complain to Elon.
And I can't help but laugh.
But yeah, you can see with both sides of this then that unfortunately, maybe, or maybe it's fortunate, I don't know, these large tech platforms have truly become something like where the public dynamic takes place.
And so it is in a very significant sense almost a digital gulag.
And, you know, I've done some recordings talking about what they could do with digital gulags with algorithms, kind of a direct application of re-education through social credit systems or whatever else.
But there's also this other aspect of having been removed.
It's like a negative gulag.
You've been removed from society in order to teach you a lesson.
And while Twitter isn't exactly, you know, the best place on earth, there's still that sense.
It was also weird to read eulogies for myself.
So people perceive it as a kind of social death, but I read several of those.
You know, I spoke to our handler at YouTube, obviously, as they took us through the marginalization and denormalization process.
And I asked, actually, I asked a question, it was our handler at Twitter that I asked this question.
I asked, is there any redemption for people who have been suspended?
I was thinking of Alex Jones.
But for anyone who has a permanent ban, because the left, liberals, the woke folks, they don't believe in lifetime bans for anything, for actual real murder.
They don't believe in a life sentence.
They believe in parole.
You could look at that in a Christian light and say they believe that there's a possibility for people to see the light and repent and redeem themselves.
And I think we all want to believe that someone who's wrong can become right.
But these social media punishments were all life sentences with no appeal.
And they were often secret decisions, too, like a Star Chamber.
I don't know.
I find that quite something that they were so harsh in dealing with anyone who made word sins, because isn't that the worst crime you can make?
Murder, they'll excuse.
They have sanctuary cities for murderers.
But anyone who has a thought crime like the one you committed, calling out adults who target children sexually as groomers, simply for using that word, which is not a controversial term, frankly, your word crime was deserving a life sentence, a life banishment to Siberia.
These people would have been absolutely at home in the Soviet Union or in the East German secret police, the Stasi.
They really would.
Elon Musk's Strategic Moves00:15:44
I mean, it's in all of us.
We like to think that maybe we're morally or genetically even different than the generation of Nazis, but we're flesh and bone.
In fact, I think the kind of compliance and snitch culture that arose during the lockdowns reminds us that, God forbid, if we were living under Nazi Germany, there would be plenty of our friends and neighbors and academics and police and politicians who would eagerly volunteer to be enforcers.
Like, I really think that the kind of people who would be drawn to be a censor in social media would be the kind of people who were drawn to join the Stasi or the SS or the KGB or the FSB.
I really do think so.
And I'm not exaggerating.
I'm not stretching.
I'm saying it's that psychology of authoritarian control over people you don't like.
Yeah, well, I think that if we might allow to get a little nerdy for the moment, as you know, I recognize this so-called woke movement, which we could characterize all of this within, as being, you know, a new manifestation of communism under kind of revamped, you know, neo-Marxist or critical Marxist theory.
And if you read the literature in communism, they're very, very clear that what the people means.
Everything's supposed to be for the people, on the side of the people, to see from the people's standpoint.
But it's very, very clear that what they mean by the people are the people who agree with them.
And no one else quite qualifies as personhood.
And so that impulse, an authoritarian impulse, I actually am now, the research that I'm engaging in now, is starting to point me to conclude that what that comes from is, in fact, something far older than communism, something far further back in history than Karl Marx or Hegel or Oettinger or any of these kind of German philosophers, if you will, that they came up with this stuff that we're dealing with today in the modern era, at the end of the modern era.
It is in fact an ancient religion known as Gnosticism.
And the Gnostics are literally elevated above other people.
They have the correct consciousness and they therefore have the capacity to determine who counts as a person and who doesn't, who can get away with crimes because they get special permission and who has to be punished.
And as you pointed out, they're particularly sensitive because what they're doing is playing word games about being beaten at word games.
And so they understand that there's much power in language.
And I, in fact, didn't get canceled from Twitter just as a small point of fact for using the word groomer specifically.
I actually got in trouble for that.
And then I deleted all of my okay groomer tweets, knowing that the writing was on the wall with that word.
And I said, okay, child sexualization specialist to one of the same people.
So I played a bit of a word game myself.
And I beat a leftist at a word game and found myself, you know, sent to Siberia, if you will, for doing so.
And so you can kind of see this.
This, I think, is exactly how their mentality is.
But the most important part is the people who aren't part of the ideology don't count as people from the perspective of the ideology, which is extraordinarily dangerous and extraordinarily contrary to broadly liberal societies.
In fact, it's their exact antithesis in not a good or not any good way.
We should take very seriously the signs that this ideology is giving off about what it is and what it intends to do, which is to claim power and that the ends of them having power justify the means of doing whatever they do, destroying liberal societies that stand in their way and the constitutions that prevent them from having power and from controlling people.
And we should look to the lessons of history, the 20th century, certainly, and see just what a terrible road that this ideology wants to walk us down, thinking that it is benefiting the greater good, which it alone, as Gnostics, understands.
You know, I try to understand what Elon Musk is doing.
I mean, by some measures, he's the world's richest man.
I'm not sure if that's the case on any given day with the stock price of Tesla.
But he does seem quite unusual.
I mean, that's a pretty obvious thing to say.
He's a serial entrepreneur.
He seems to love hard sciences.
He seems sort of quirky himself.
He seems to be awkward but self-deprecating, which is a wonderful combination.
I've seen him talk about freedom and authoritarianism and government, and I'm generally impressed with it.
I think he's got a blind spot with it comes to China.
I wouldn't say a blind spot, but he's so exposed.
Tesla is so exposed to China, and he knows that a false word there could crumple his company.
So I think he just sort of stops talking honestly when it comes to China or stops talking at all.
But other than that, I think he's generally, I'd say he's a little bit libertarian.
And he constantly points out that all the subsidies Tesla got were not requested by Tesla.
They were requested by his competitors at GM and elsewhere.
And he just happily took them.
I believe that, first of all.
And Why a man who's such a builder, SpaceX, Skylink, or whatever his internet satellites are called, Tesla, would get into Twitter.
One of my questions is why?
Is it because he just really loves Twitter?
I think he does.
He really enjoys the banter.
He enjoys the jokes.
He enjoys the memes.
He's silly.
And normally a man of such accomplishment is not silly.
I can't imagine Rockefeller being silly.
Why would he, and he's obviously spending a lot of time on it.
If I was a shareholder of Tesla or something else, I'd be saying, hey, can you come and run the car company?
Please, what are you doing messing around for yucks?
I'm trying to understand his motivation.
And maybe he's so clever that he's just playing the joker, playing the jester, the entertainer, but there's something deadly.
I mean, that would, you know, as they say in another context, the first trick of the devil is to make you think he doesn't exist.
Maybe Elon Musk's first trick is to make you think he's some harmless goofball, but underneath it all, he's deadly serious about something.
I've come to the conclusion that Twitter was a CIA operation or FBI operation, just the same way as TikTok is a People's Liberation Army operation.
And I don't say that in any conspiratorial way, but rather we know that the FBI, for example, had a direct portal at Twitter where they could upload their concerns to Twitter and Twitter would censor their enemies.
They had the same thing going on during the pandemic where Fauci would give them lists of skeptics.
We know that other countries use Twitter to spy on dissidents.
Saudi Arabia had some staff arrested for that.
We know the old Twitter board had secretary of state type people like Deep State.
What are you doing in a social media tech company?
Well, imagine having access to all that data.
What politician is looking at what?
Who's having a direct message with whom?
And of course, under the terms of service, you own it all.
Buying Twitter, you're buying the ads, you're buying the business, but you're buying the intel.
You're buying everyone's secrets.
So maybe he's joking around and having fun, but underneath it, there's something deeper.
I don't know.
I'd love your theory.
Why is Elon Musk buying something that's regarded as a game or an addiction?
What's he doing?
Well, I mean, we could take his own stated purposes at face value, which seems not to be a losing strategy with Elon Musk from what I've seen throughout the years with him.
And his statement was that there should be a place that's not heavily restricted free speech, that's not heavily biased.
He said that the furthest right and the furthest left should be equally mad at the company, not one side being outraged and the other side quite happy or mad for funny reasons.
A lot of his decision-making followed, he went on the podcast for the satire site, the Babylon Bee, with Seth Dylan and them, and he sat down and he talked to him.
And he was a big fan of the, or is a big fan of the Babylon Bee.
And then the next thing you know, Twitter decided to lock the Babylon B out for making a joke about Richard Levine, if I remember correctly, or Rachel or whatever the hell we're supposed to call this person.
And in making that joke and getting locked out of Twitter, it's like, you know, Babylon Bee made a beautiful joke about it.
They said, you know, the person who locked the Babylon B's account now wondering if he's in hot water, because that seemed to have triggered a kind of moment in Elon, if we look kind of, again, at face value, where he recognized that if you're censoring satire to this degree, something is badly wrong.
And it could be.
There's no other deeper motivation than that he believes that this is what needs to be done.
If you look at his big projects, whether electric cars, whether this boring company, whether the internet with the Starlink, whether The SpaceX, the space travel, and maybe colonization of Mars.
It seems almost like, and even the Neuralink, it's almost as though he knows the kinds of technological advances that, if we might refer to it as the regime that they want to use and take advantage of.
His interest in cryptocurrency was another example of this.
And it almost seems like he likes to get ahead of them.
Them controlling all of social media and tech through their, whether it's ESG, Cabal, or whatever, or Davos commitment or whatever it happens to be.
It's something that would fall into a pattern with Elon Musk of not trusting that kind of unipole of all power and panopticon capacity.
On the other hand, he's also, you know, you said he's buying access to all of this data, which who knows what he could do with it, all this intel.
But he also says that he believes and has said for years that he believes that direct messages should be peer-to-peer encrypted and all of these other kinds of security measures that don't currently exist.
So it is possible that he genuinely thinks that we should have a kind of wild, wild west open marketplace of ideas.
And as far as what he's doing, it's fascinating to watch.
I don't honestly believe he fully knows what he's doing.
This makes Elon Musk fans very upset.
But I do also think that he is a very quick learner and he's very savvy at picking up on a game as he's playing it and then playing it to win and doing very well at that.
So it may come out to be this kind of uncontrolled or limited control kind of environment for free speech that we haven't had in a number of years.
That would be a tremendous mark outside of the broad regime.
What his ultimate goals with that are, though, I shouldn't guess and couldn't guess.
You know, Elon Musk is big in wealth and big in ideas and big in a network of friends, I suppose.
But there's always someone bigger.
And in terms of money, you know, BlackRock, Soros, and his networks, there's always someone bigger.
And you'd think a fellow who can muster 44 billion or whatever it is is pretty impervious.
But we saw that the head of censorship at Twitter, who Elon Musk kept around, his name is Yoel Roth.
Elon Musk kept him around for a bit, but then he quit and he wrote sort of a catty op-ed in the New York Times.
And one of the things he alluded to was: you know, most apps that you download on your phone come from one of two places: Android, which is the Google App Store, or the iPhone App Store.
And that's the choke point.
And if you want to kill Twitter, ban it from the app stores on both systems.
And of course, you could go deeper than that.
Who hosts the servers?
I mean, maybe Twitter has their own stuff, or maybe they're using Amazon web services, as so many companies do.
Like there's always a deeper level of infrastructure.
Like your house is built on a foundation, and the foundation are built on perhaps some sort of pillars.
Like in the internet, there's always a deeper backbone.
And so, however big Elon Musk is, there are bigger people out there.
The CIA is bigger.
Maybe even the KGB is bigger.
The State Department's bigger.
The U.S. government is bigger.
The Department of Justice is bigger.
I saw this clip the other day, just outrageous.
A reporter for Bloomberg in an obvious setup asking Joe Biden if Elon Musk should be investigated for colluding with foreigners.
They asked this of the father of Hunter Biden.
Remember this clip?
Take a look.
Mr. President, do you think Elon Musk is a threat to U.S. national security?
And should the U.S. and with the tools you have investigate his joint acquisition of Twitter with foreign governments, which include the Saudis?
I think that Elon Musk's cooperation and or technical relationships with other countries is worthy of being looked at.
Whether or not he is doing anything inappropriate, I'm not suggesting that.
I'm suggesting that it worth being looked at.
But that's all I'll say.
Just absolute scripted setup question.
By the way, Michael Bloomberg himself, the boss of that reporter, praises Xi Jinping.
Actually said that Xi Jinping is not a dictator.
He's a kind of Democrat.
I think that Elon Musk is as powerful as you can get as an individual, but there is always a bigger force.
And I'm worried if he takes on the deep state or if he takes on wokeism, woke capital is bigger than Elon Musk, and woke CIA and woke Pentagon is more powerful.
And I'm just worried that no one's big enough to fight the man.
What do you think?
I am not worried about that.
I don't lose a minute of sleep about that.
And the reason isn't because I don't think the concern is real.
It's because I would love to see the mask come off to that degree.
I would love to see the, I think we'd be up to a category 11 hurricane of red pills that would fall from the parlor maneuver where the Play Store and the iStore or whatever it's called on Apple, Apple Store, the app stores get rid of Twitter or the servers are cut out from under.
I would love to see them crush Twitter and just watch people stare in wide-eyed amazement at how scary the world that they live in currently actually is and let it come to the point.
I would prefer that that doesn't happen, but I win either way.
Either we have a space that enables, at least ostensibly, more free speech that is kind of the bedrock of what this nation or this kind of liberal experiment throughout the world is built on, or the regime reveals itself in a way that, again, is so unambiguous that they frighten and awaken and possibly even radicalize people by the tens or maybe hundreds of millions as to what they really are.
Jeffrey Epstein's Shadow00:05:26
I think that that's they're not as strong, they may have power, but they're not in a strong position because they can't use the power that they have ethically.
And I think that the executive from Twitter who wrote that, the censorship czar at Twitter that wrote that, just reveals who he is.
He's a tyrant.
He's an evil person by having written that with kind of this little hi-hit grin.
And the New York Times reveals itself yet again to be a pile of garbage, a failing enterprise that's kept aloft because of its use to the regime, not because of its utility in delivering news or honesty or opinion or information to people.
I just find those, I think that would be called a Pyrrhic victory.
Uh-huh.
Yes.
I told you it was that bad, and now you see how bad it is.
I take your point.
A lot of people would see it, but it reminds me of the Jeffrey Epstein case.
I mean, we know that the story was suffocated.
We know that the likelihood of the official line that he committed suicide is laughably implausible.
Know the security guards who were sleeping, the cameras that weren't working, and the fact that we still don't know the list of his customers.
Like, I think the Jeffrey Epstein crisis revealed that so many conspiracy theories were real, including international sex trafficking of billionaires and everyone's in, like it revealed the fact that Bill Gates, his own wife, divorced him over it.
I mean, here's a just quick reminder.
Here's Melinda Gates speaking about as plainly as she can to make sure she's not Jeffrey Epstein.
Remember this?
You know, it was also widely reported that Bill had a friendship or business or some kind of contact with Jeffrey Epstein and that you were not, that that was very upsetting to you.
Did that play a role in the divorce at all in this process?
Yeah, as I said, it's not one thing.
It was many things.
But I did not like that he'd had meetings with Jeffrey Epstein, no.
And you made that clear to him.
I made that clear to him.
I also met Jeffrey Epstein exactly one time.
Did you?
Yes, because I wanted to see who this man was.
And I regretted it from the second I stepped in the door.
He was abhorrent.
He was evil personified.
I had nightmares about it afterwards.
So, you know, my heart breaks for these young women because that's how I felt.
And here I'm an older woman.
My God, I feel terrible for those young women.
It was awful.
You felt that the moment you walked in.
I didn't realize that.
It was awful.
Yeah.
And you shared that with Bill and he still continued to spend time with him?
Any of the questions remaining about what Bill's relationship there was, those are for Bill to answer.
Okay.
But I made it very clear how I felt about him.
So Melinda Gates effectively said, I divorced my husband because he wouldn't stop visiting with a child rapist again and again and again and again and again.
I think it was N. Gadget or Gibsmodo who said that they visited dozens of times.
His own wife divorced him and is saying so publicly.
And yet Bill Gates was the hero of the pandemic.
He's the toast of every establishment.
Jeffrey Epstein is dead, but all his handlers or customers have impunity.
So these Pyrrhic victories, aha, I revealed how the world is a stitch-up.
I find them, I find no comfort in that.
Well, the comfort isn't, I mean, the comfort isn't where you're looking at it directly.
I would like to just kind of point out that my fundamental belief about what's going on, having kind of trudged through this muck for quite a while, is that it's getting into late 1943 and we're three quarters of the way to Berlin.
And we know that Hitler is gassing people by the hundreds of thousands per unit time.
We know that he holds all the territory.
We know how bad the war machine is.
Everything looks like it's hanging by a thread and we are three quarters to Berlin.
We're almost there.
And I think that we may find a brighter spring through these kind of series.
We can call them Pyrrhic victories for the regime or we can call them tripping over their own feet in many cases.
And so I don't think it's something to be comfortable about.
I think it's a feature of the ugliness of war.
But I do also think that we are, like I said, about three quarters of the way to Berlin and everything looks very, very dark.
But I also think that things are coming apart for them much more quickly than they can sustain.
I am very grateful for your time.
I know we only asked you for a few minutes and we've taken up half your afternoon, but it's great to talk with you.
It's so good to catch up.
And I have to tell you, I'm delighted that you're back on Twitter, not just for your own sake, but for the reaction it's causing in the bad guys.
And that's even more delicious, if I may say.
I want to ask you upset at the moment.
I don't know if you saw, I tweeted a picture of myself.
I visited the UK last week.
I actually, they'll be quite upset when it comes out.
I was invited to debate whether woke culture has gone too far at the Oxford Union.
But while I was in the UK, I paid my visits to Karl Marx's grave and took a picture pretending to urinate on it, and they're just losing their marbles over this.
Debate Rigging and Ballot Harvesting00:09:07
Well, I mean, at least you didn't tear down the statue.
That's the move of the left.
All I did was stand there with my hands near my waist.
I didn't even do anything.
Donald Trump was a very powerful and effective and admirable character in my mind because he, although he was a billionaire who was powerful and he used the system, I mean, Dave Chappelle's monologue the other day was spot on that rather than deny it, Trump said, yeah, I can tell you how bad it is because I use the, here's a quick clip of Dave Chappelle.
I think Dave Chappelle is secretly a conservative.
He really protests every time, oh, I'm a Democrat.
I got to remind you I'm a Democrat.
He says that, but I actually don't think he is.
I think he's a radical.
In his own way, he's conservative.
I think the fact that he doesn't live in Manhattan, he lives in a small town in Ohio.
Here's that clip of Dave Chappelle grokking Donald Trump in a second.
Take a look.
I get it because I hear it every day.
He's very loved.
And the reason he's loved is because people in Ohio have never seen somebody like him.
He's what I call an honest liar.
Well, I'm not joking right now.
He's an honest liar.
That first debate, that first debate, I've never seen anything like it.
I've never seen a white male billionaire screaming at the top of his lungs.
This whole system is rigged, he said.
And across the stage was a white woman, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama sitting over there looking at him like, no, it's not.
I said, now, wait a minute, bro.
It's what he said.
And the moderator said, well, Mr. Trump, if in fact the system is rigged, as you suggest, what would be your evidence?
Remember what he said, bro?
He said, I know the system is rigged because I use it.
I said, God damn.
And then he pulled out an Illuminati membership card, chopper out of cocaine up and get it right into the podium.
I think that is Trump.
He knows where the bodies are buried, and he's still got sort of a blue-collar sensibility that he says, I'm against it.
He really did stop the wars.
He really, his unpredictability scared a lot of bad actors, whether it was North Korea, China, or Russia.
And he really did take on the deep state.
Now, he lost that.
He lost his battle with the deep state.
My number one thing I like about Trump is he fights that hidden hand and he proves that it exists, but he lost to it.
I don't know if Trump in 2024 is the same Trump that we loved in 2016.
I don't know if he's fighting for the people so much or if he's fighting to relitigate his own election battle.
I don't know if he's, I don't know.
I mean, there's so many things I love about him and admire about him.
But what are your thoughts on Trump today versus Trump six years ago?
Well, I mean, I generally like Trump, but I think he's hilarious, not least of all.
But I also, again, to invoke the Babylon B, they put out, and I'll butcher the wording, it's unfortunate.
They put out a joke a couple of days ago that America, you know, nostalgically remembers when one election ends before another one begins.
And so I'm not putting a lot of thought into 24 yet.
And I'm trying to kind of just sit back and watch, see how people behave, see where their mind is.
There is certainly the mind that Trump will have to get revenge on the people who did him wrong or to beat the people who beat him, have his comeback story that should be brought into calculation.
I don't know that his commitment to the people has wavered much.
From what I understand, he's still very much of the people.
His base at least sees that or feels that from him.
So again, I hesitate to make any claims on this because I think it's a time for watching and waiting and thinking and not jumping to conclusions when there's just so much runway still ahead of us on the issue.
Give me one minute on the midterms before we let you go.
I mean, I think a lot of people on the right thought that it would be a more dramatic pendulum shift to the Republicans.
I mean, for heaven's sakes, you've got an 80-year-old president with obviously cognitive decline.
You've got inflation shortages.
You've got shortages of things.
Gas prices high.
You've got war or the rumors of war around the world.
And yet they're going to hold the Senate.
And the Republicans just slouched across the finish line in the House.
They missed races they should have won, whether it was in Georgia or even New York, I think there was a possibility that the governorship could have gone to the Republicans.
I don't know how you lose to a victim of a stroke like John Fetterman in Pennsylvania.
Like it's laughable that someone who has been brain injured can win a Senate seat, but what's more laughable is the man who would lose to such a man.
I left dispirited.
What did you think of the midterms?
I mean, if I would have been on Twitter, you would have known.
I was one of the few people saying all along this summer that there would be no red wave.
I had no such aspirations or hopes.
It came in a little thinner than I thought it would, to be honest.
I didn't think that the result in the House would be quite so close.
But I think that, you know, even without invoking the obvious concern, like when you have a stroke victim winning in Pennsylvania, or you have also in Pennsylvania, a literal dead person winning over a Republican.
You know, there are obvious things when you look at what just took place in Maricopa County and throughout Arizona.
There are obvious eyebrow-raising moments that are going on here.
When you see the same states exactly as in 2020 having the exact same kinds of delays for exactly the same kind of turnarounds, it's a little, it raises some questions.
But even if you set aside that issue, the left has created a ballot harvesting machine that it is incredibly effective at using in broadly a legal sense, probably almost entirely illegal sense.
So you don't even have to invoke something like election fraud in order to get them across these finish lines if they have a month-long ballot harvesting project where they can have, before, say, Oz and Fetterman even debate, they can have a big enough electoral sandbag where Fetterman essentially can't lose.
And so the Republicans and Democrats are playing two electoral games, which puts them in a very ugly choice, which is either to try to abolish the ballot harvesting game and go back to a voting system, which is what we're supposed to have, or to reify that corrupt system by joining in and participating in it.
Without doing one or the other, it will not be possible to win.
Reifying the system creates a tremendous possibility for being stuck in this kind of very corrupt, months-long ballot harvesting battle throughout various political districts that are of some consequence.
And so, I don't know that that's the Republicans' best strategy, but at the same time, it may be their only strategy in some places.
And so, having a principled solution to that, should they take up the temptation to use the ring rather than to destroy it, they better have a plan for its ultimate destruction that doesn't rely on it for long.
I think that that ultimately is the name that the game-this is the big thing I think that we learned that Republicans in the United States, in particular, learned coming out of 2022: the Democrats have created a ballot harvesting program that is largely legal in most of the states that it's happening in, and that it is a catastrophe.
It is a way to completely subvert what our electoral system is supposed to be in the name of improving suffrage, which is the typical kind of nasty trick that leftists do in order to get themselves into power.
And so, I think it ultimately, my opinion is that it needs to end and it needs to end everywhere, and it needs to be a top three priority for Republicans in virtually every district, along with education and energy, which are my three top issues.
Elections need to be cleaned up, energy, and then education, not necessarily in that order as the top three issues that Republicans need to be facing and focusing on going forward.
But I think that's the lesson that we've learned: that they're playing a different electoral game and they're very good at it, and they have certain advantages.
Purchased Pfizer Doses00:06:22
They have a whole war machine, and we're now stuck in the decision of having to try to beat it from outside or to reify it by accepting it and trying to play on its terms, which I'm already hearing a lot of prominent conservative voices calling for.
And my prudence alarm is kind of ringing a bit, thinking that's not a good idea.
I don't know if it's a necessary evil, and I don't know if necessary evils are acceptable.
You know, I'll end as I began, which is our mighty YouTube channel.
It really was mighty, especially for Canada to have 1.6 million subscribers in a country like ours.
It really was astounding.
And it was taken away because not only we didn't even agree with or express an opinion about it, we just showed it as an artifact, Donald Trump talking about the 2020 election.
And because that hinted at a discredited election, YouTube was now, I think it was just an excuse to knock rebel news down.
But imagine being so sensitive to questions about election integrity that that, other than misgendering someone, can knock an entire channel basically off the platform.
They're obviously scared of it.
They're obviously scared of what will happen if people talk about election rule-rigging.
Otherwise, why would they censor it so hard?
You know, it's okay to be wrong.
You're allowed to be wrong, you're allowed to have opinions that are unreasonable.
You're allowed to get your facts wrong, except on this one thing where you're not allowed to even hint at it.
It's very telling to me.
Dr. James Lindsay, what a pleasure to catch up with you again.
You know, I think your return to Twitter, given the issues you focus on and your tough style, to me was a more important signal.
The reinstatement of Project Veritas, very important, but just such an obvious one.
They were so obviously doing public interest journalism.
It would be shocking were they not reinstated.
The Babylon be, of course, their satire.
But to bring you on with the toughness of your political analysis and commentary, to me, that was a sign that the new censorship approach of Twitter genuinely has changed because it would have been easy for them to keep you in the intolerable undesirables category, but they didn't.
And I find that very helpful.
It's great to join you again.
Not that we couldn't have joined you a week ago, but it just gives us a great opportunity to talk about it.
So thanks for being with us today.
Yeah, well, thank you for having me.
It's been great to catch up.
Right on.
I look forward to our next conversation.
There you have it.
Dr. James Lindsay, the boss of newdiscourses.com.
What a pleasure to catch up with him.
He joined us today from the great state of Tennessee shortly after being reinstated on Twitter.com.
That's our show for today.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night and keep fighting for freedom.
I can show you data on just how many COVID-19 vaccines the federal government purchased before those same vaccines were even approved by Health Canada for human use.
Quite a gamble.
They were on a wing and a prayer.
Today's information comes to us by way of an order paper question posed to the federal government by Conservative MP Colin Kerry.
He asked the federal government for all the data on the number of vaccines that were purchased by the feds and then how many of those purchases were made in advance of Health Canada approval for the vaccine.
By my estimation, the federal government now has or had purchase orders for nearly 600 million doses of COVID-19 vaccine, 585 million actually, with 373 million of those doses purchased in advance of Health Canada approval.
It's a pretty big gamble, like I said, but it's not their money.
And it's probably the reason these vaccines keep getting approved regardless of their efficacy.
Now, the response to Kerry's question was read into the House of Commons official record handsward this week, and it goes on and on, 600 million doses worth.
But here are just a couple of examples.
For Moderna's Spike Vax, the date the initial purchase agreement was publicly announced, November 16th, 2020.
The number of doses purchased was 44 million in 2021, and then they exercised options to buy more, another 25 million in 2022, 35 million in 2023, and 35 million in 2024.
The initial date of approval from Health Canada, though, was December 23rd, 2020.
So by my math, that's 104 million doses of just Moderna, that vaccine with serious myocarditis outcomes, with about 40% of that contract purchased in advance of Health Canada's approval.
For Pfizer's JAB, the date the initial agreement was publicly announced was July 20th, 2020.
The number of doses was 51 million in 2021, and then they upped it, buying some more for 2022, another 65 million, and then another 60 million in 2023, and another 60 million in 2024.
However, the date of approval from Health Canada was December 9th, 2020.
If I'm reading this right, this means we purchased 236 million doses of Pfizer with 51 million of those purchased five months before the initial approval of the vaccine.
For the Sanofi vaccine, the date the original purchase agreement was announced was July 29th, 2020.
The number of doses purchased at that time was 72 million, and that vaccine is still under review by Health Canada.
So 72 million doses were purchased by the federal government of a medicine that is still under review two full years later.
But I think that one's going to get approved because why not?
How could it not?
Remember this?
It is basically biological chip that it is in the tablet.
And once you take the tablet and dissolves into your stomach, sends a signal that you took the tablet.
So imagine the applications of that, the compliance.
I'm not entirely sure what Health Canada is reviewing.
We know COVID vaccines don't have to work to receive approval.
Just ask all the quadruple boosted multiple COVID infection survivors like Justin Trudeau who are wasting all of our money on these things.