Rebel News’ host critiques CBC’s Mary Walsh, a "liberal partisan" comedian who mocked Harper as "Stasi Steve" in 2015 but now avoids Trudeau, instead offering performative advice. They contrast Thatcher’s unyielding leadership—surviving an assassination attempt—with modern politicians like Sherry Romanado, who weaponize gender complaints to dodge accountability. Bill C-11 and other censorship bills target creators like Rebel News, despite outdated justifications, while Quebec’s King vs. Epstein case exposed "pandemic scolds" falsely accusing a neighbor of threats. The segment warns that history’s atrocities, like Mao’s Cultural Revolution (50–85M dead), risk repetition if ignored, teasing Trudeau’s alleged projection of failures and Dutch farmers’ protests under media bias. [Automatically generated summary]
One that could do nothing but commentary, one that would go out into the world and do journalism in interesting places, like that super fun trip we had to the World Economic Forum.
And another one of me, the worst version of me, that would try and do the businessy side of things.
I recently visited a couple of American news organizations.
I went to Blaze Media in Dallas.
I went to Breitbart in LA.
And both of them have full-time business people as their CEOs.
No one else tries to have a reporter run things too.
I mean, you can do that when you're a very small shop.
But I hope that one day Rebel News grows enough that it can be like Breitbart or Daily Wire or Blaze and have someone take over on the business side, just because I don't think that's my forte.
Although, don't knock it.
I mean, in eight years, we've grown enough that we have 47 staff.
That number's gone up and down sometimes during the height of the pandemic.
We were closer to 60.
But, you know, I do get a kick out of all of the different sides of things.
But if you had to say, well, what are you?
Are you a reporter?
Are you a commentator?
Or are you a business person?
I'd say I'm probably a commentator first, a reporter second, and a business person like 10th or something.
But I think that's also given us a bit of a flavor, too.
I mean, I think for better or for worse, when you regard your company as a mission, even more than as a business, it shows.
People know that we care and that we don't just do things to make money.
We do things to, I mean, the way to make money during the pandemic was to be a Pfizer repeater.
And it was super gross to see, for example, those late night comedians just go full pharma salesman.
Wasn't that gross?
Stephen Colbert, Colbert, the vaccine.
That was, I think, the lowest moment I've ever seen in late night TV.
And I've seen Jimmy Fallon, but you can go lower than him.
Yeah, I mean, if you're about making money, you follow the establishment narrative because that's where the money is.
You will not get demonetized if you're a Pfizer salesman.
Even if you say false and misleading things, if it's in the service of the official narrative, you won't be demonetized.
I've seen no fact checks of the mainstream media for denying the lab leak theory now that it's effectively being confirmed by the U.S. government.
I've seen no fact checks calling it fake news when people said, oh, the vaccine is 100% effective and 100% safe.
Who would ever say those things to begin with?
Who would ever say that?
So, anyway, that's me.
That's who I am.
I'm part journalist and part business person and part pundit.
And that's who I am.
I used to be funnier, I think.
Maybe I still have some funny in me, but it's been tough to laugh over the last few years.
And we deal with such heavy things.
Maybe laughter is the way.
When I was at Sun News 10 years ago, especially in the early days, I was in the mood to laugh more.
And I'll tell you why.
First of all, because the darkness of the canceled culture, extreme woke politics had not yet really sunk its teeth into the culture.
Sun News Network, where I was a decade ago, was under some mild boycotting by some anti-foot types, but it wasn't ubiquitous.
Other media companies would still talk to us, come on our shows.
We were officially affiliated with the Sun chain of newspapers, so we had built-in friends.
I guess what I'm saying is, and of course, Stephen Harper was the prime minister, so you didn't have the insane divisiveness and violation of civil liberties that you have now.
And I didn't have other things weighing on my mind.
I was not a business person.
I was a salaried presenter.
So I would show up at the crack of 10, do my writing, record my show at, I think I did it every day at 1 or 2, and be done by 4.
What a life that was, working from 10 to 4.
I dropped my kids off at school in the morning.
So maybe I was more lighthearted.
I mean, I still think I'm the same person.
It's just I think the world is more grave and my hair is more white to show for.
Anyways, I want to show, the reason I tell you that, besides a little bit of autobiography, is yesterday, I think it was yesterday, maybe it was today, I just saw it today, in the House of Commons, CBC, you know, it's a state broadcaster, right?
It's like Pravda or Russia today or Al Jazeera is in Qatar.
A lot of countries have a state broadcaster.
China has a series of them.
I haven't been to China in a while, but when I was there a dozen years ago, they had, I think it was called CCTV or something, Communist China TV or whatever.
Like there was like nine channels and each one of them was a different version of the state broadcaster.
Jester's Role in Power00:15:01
It was quite something.
I wonder what it's like now.
So the CBC is a state broadcaster, which is gross to begin with.
But of course, they have government comedians on the official government comedy show.
And being a government comedian makes about as much sense as being a government punk rocker.
It's like, I mean, the whole nature of being government is you're the establishment, you're the ruler, you're the power.
Whereas the whole nature of comedian is to speak truth to power in the form of ridicule and jest.
Was it, who was it?
Was it Solzhenitsyn or was it Orwell who said, every joke is a little revolution?
I forget.
It was one of those two freedom fighters.
And it was no one less than the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran who said, there is no humor in Islam, he said.
Now, that's his view.
There are some Muslim people who disagree with him.
But the idea of authoritarianism is that you cannot abide jokes because jokes are made at your expense.
We've talked about this before, how King Henry, for example, had a court fool, a court jester, and who was a jokester and who might dress up sometimes.
Will Summer was the name, Will Summer was the name of, yeah, put that up on screen there, was a very famous court jester.
I think he was Henry VIII's court jester.
And this is just a Wikipedia story, but I've read it and it appears accurate to me.
The thing about the court jester is his job was to joke and he was given a special immunity.
What I mean by that is he could do something that no one else around him could do.
He could make fun of the king, make fun of the king.
In fact, Olivia, it's before your time, but did you ever watch that TV show called The Tudors?
T-U-D-O-R, that was Henry's last name.
Did you ever watch The Tudors?
It was quite a good show, if you like, sort of British and medieval stuff.
And of course, King Henry, one of the most interesting people in the last thousand years.
And it was, by the way, it was as I think, I think they got some things right.
I think there was a fair bit of historical accuracy there.
And by the way, if you ask the average age, yeah, throw some B-roll up from the Tudors just to give people some flavor while I talk about it.
This is a very long way to get back to the CBC, but I'm talking about what a government jester really is.
As you can see, there was a lot of sex and relationship drama in the Tudors.
And you know what?
I think that's accurate.
I mean, how many wives did Henry VIII have?
How many did he divorce?
How many did he kill?
How many mistresses did he have?
And when the movie starts out, King Henry VIII is quite a young man.
And of course, that is accurate in other ways too.
The average life expectancy, you know, 500 years ago in the UK, I don't have that information at my fingertips, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was like 35.
And there were more children and families.
People lived shorter.
And so the average person, forget about life expectancy, the average person was probably a teenager.
And, you know, the concept that we have of middle-aged, that's when you expired back then.
They didn't have our notions of medicine and things like that.
My point is, I think that they captured the spirit of that time.
And one of the things they did, and I can't, I've looked for 20 minutes on YouTube another time.
I couldn't find it.
There was a wonderful scene with Will Summers, the court jester.
And of course, this was a fictional dramatization of Henry VIII.
But I think that Will Somers was actually a senior advisor to the king in that he could say the king's things to the king.
He could make genuine criticisms to the king that no one else could make.
And I think he took that role very seriously.
And if you believe what you read on the history side, not the fiction side, people would use the court jester as a way to get information to the king through, you know, there's a lot of barriers.
How do you get to the king?
You have to know someone.
Everyone's got their interests and agendas.
But maybe if you could get to the king's jester and convince him there's a problem, maybe he can speak very candidly with the king.
Anyway, there's a wonderful scene that I watched in the series a decade ago, and I can't find it online, where the jester is really taunting and pushing King Henry and just giving him, being like a one-man opposition to him.
And I think that was essential.
It's like the old apocryphal saying about Roman emperors that would have a slave.
And I don't know if this was real, but I've heard this enough.
And how would we know?
That there would be a slave standing next to the king whose job would be to whisper in his ear, you are mortal.
You are mortal.
Because you're the emperor of Rome, the greatest empire the world has ever seen.
Total power from Britannia and Gaul and Hibernia.
These are the Roman names for Britain and Scotland and France, all the way to Judea.
You know what, a mighty emperor, and you might be tempted to think that you were a god.
And so the idea was that a slave would just whisper in your ear, No, you're just a man.
And there's actually a Jewish story: King Solomon allegedly had a ring with an inscription on it that was always true, which is, this too shall pass.
And when he had happy times, it sobered him up.
And when he was down in the dumps, it gave him hope.
All this is to say, in a very long way, the powerful people need some sort of challenge.
Powerful people need a check and a balance.
And if you've ever met an oligarch, and I have, I've had the pleasure, the mixed pleasure sometimes.
If you meet an extremely wealthy and powerful person, the kind of person who only travels on private jets and limousines, who has personal security, who has a security VP, someone who has billions or maybe even more, you'll notice that everyone around them, almost everyone around them, is doing whatever they can to anticipate what the great man wants and to say, yes, sir, no, sir, three bags full, sir.
How high should I jump, sir?
And I think the more self-aware oligarchs know this, that they're surrounded by flatterers.
And you can see, I mean, this is what they say about Vladimir Putin.
They say, and this could well be propaganda, how would I know, that he doesn't tolerate bad news, and so his advisors won't give him the straight goods.
And I don't know if that's true.
That sounds like a generic insult you could say about any out-of-touch politician, but I can imagine it's true.
And if you watch that docudrama, Chernobyl, which I absolutely loved, there was a degree of that too.
Just lie, don't give anyone bad news.
It's a wonderful show, Chernobyl.
It's a terrible story, but it's wonderfully told.
Powerful people, rich people, people who are used to getting their way, people who have a lot to give, whether it's power, money, access, or something like that, they attract flatterers.
They attract yes men.
Would you have the courage to defy a billionaire, let alone King Henry VIII, who wasn't just a billionaire?
He had the power of life or death over people.
So Will Summers played an incredibly important role as the court fool, the court jester.
He was the only one who could look the king in the eye and say, you are full of it.
You are so wrong.
And insult the king and not be killed for it.
Isn't that an important job?
I know it's an important job.
That's why in this country, we take the country's biggest complainer, we give him a free house, a big staff, and a salary, and call him the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition.
We institutionalize dissent.
We hardwire it right into the system.
And there's something to the title, Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, because you're loyal to the country.
You just oppose the buffoon who's running the place.
Pierre Polyev is loyal to the king and to the country.
He's not loyal to Justin Trudeau and Trudeau's government.
And that's an important distinction there, too, isn't it?
And so here I am, a half hour having passed without me getting to my point.
So maybe the time is to get to my point now before we all get older.
The CBC state broadcaster has a government comedian named Mary Walsh, one of the least funny comedians I have ever seen.
She's also a liberal partisan.
Know this because in the 2015 election, she recorded an attack ad on Stephen Harper.
I might show you that later, calling him Stasi Steve and said Heil Harper, as if he's a Nazi.
So, Mary Walsh can find no jokes other than to call someone a Nazi.
That's how shallow her pool of humor is.
And she doesn't mind trivializing the Holocaust by equating the grave crimes and horrific crimes of the Holocaust with her political opponent because that's what's important to her.
Anyway, so yesterday, I think it was yesterday, I don't think it was today, yesterday, in the foyer of the House of Commons, where Rebel News is banned by Trudeau's Parliamentary Press Gallery.
We cannot attend.
But this burnt-out, over-the-hill so-called comedian who is unfunny without a laugh track goes and accosts the prime minister when he is on the hot seat.
Trudeau is on the back foot over these China allegations.
What did he know?
When did he know it?
How many Chinese hand-picked candidates are in his party, in his caucus, in his cabinet?
Why did he allow it?
Did he, like this, you could think of the questions you're saying?
They're simple questions.
Trudeau has evaded all of them.
And so there's this brief moment he walks out of the parliament and he's available to the media.
And there's a lot of reporters.
And I have to give credit to the mainstream media for the first time in eight years that seem to have woken up.
You got Bob Fife and Steve Chase at the Globe and Mail.
You've got Sam Cooper and McKenzie.
I forget his last name at Global News.
And look at me, I'm praising journalists in the mainstream media.
What's come over me?
No, nothing's come over me.
I'm the same guy I was a week ago.
It said these journalists are actually doing some work.
But instead of talking to Sam Cooper or McKenzie, what's his name, or Steve Chase or Bob Fife, or any other journalist who's asking questions, the CBC state broadcaster sends in their alleged comedian and will play it for you in a second.
I don't even know what the hell she's saying.
I don't understand her point other than I think she's saying, Prime Minister, we should all be less partisan.
Don't you think?
Why don't you set an example?
I don't even get it.
I think it's some stupid compliment.
She's not going to make a joke at his expense.
She's going to save him, save him, A, from the journalists who are trying to get questions to him a few feet away, and B, trying to create some change the channel narrative.
You could have a lot of funny jokes poking fun at Trudeau's Do You Admire China comment.
That is not what the state broadcaster and their government communities do.
Watch the unfunniest woman in Canada, paid for by your tax dollars, have a go at Justin Trudeau.
Take a look.
I'll show outraged about everything that we're not listening to each other anymore.
But if you were a good-looking guy like you, you probably know how to fix that, right?
And so I'm here to listen to what you think.
How do we get everybody back together again?
How do we can the waters?
How do we make Canada unbroken?
Oh my God, is that Pierre Polly Emperor over there?
All so outrageous.
So I'm here to figure out how to make Canada unbroken.
Everyone's so outraged.
Prime Minister, all these people are outraged because your party and your friends are taking hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars from China.
How do we shut them up, Prime Minister?
Like, it's not even funny.
Let's say the obvious thing.
It's not even funny.
And I think the chief job of a comedian is to be funny.
It doesn't make a point.
And I think that's the second job of a comedian.
Do you have a point to make?
Like, you can just tell a funny joke, make a fart joke for all I care.
If it's funny, I'll laugh.
So is she funny?
Check her ex.
Ex, she's not funny.
Okay, fine.
So you're not that funny, but you make a serious point in a funny way.
That's what a lot of late-night talk shows are.
They're basically Democrat Party operatives with a band, a house band, and some jokes.
So does she make a point?
Not really.
Her best point is, hey, Prime Minister, everyone is so outraged.
How do we get out of that?
It's the implication being there's no rational basis to be outraged.
We shouldn't be outraged.
You've done nothing wrong.
But before he even has something to say, she turns around and goes.
Oh, there's Pierre Polyev.
And I don't even know if that's true, but I think we can assume it was true because if Pierre Polyev is there, she knows her role is to be a destroyer.
Can you, I want to show my video that Andrew Lawton did next.
But then after that, if there's a Rebel News video from 2015, very early, where Mary Walsh says to Stephen Harper, Heil Harper, and whatnot.
22 Minutes Of Chaos00:15:32
Well, I'll show that.
I want to just show how unfunny she is, what a hack she is, the fact that she's basically paid to attack conservatives.
So when she doesn't even wait for Trudeau's answer, it says, oh, there's Pierre Polyev, I think she's actually telling the truth because she knows she has to go detonate herself on Pierre Polyev because that's the CBC mandate.
Anyways, when I was at the Sun News Network before Rebel News, that was the predecessor to Rebel News.
I worked at Sun News Network for a few years, well, from the beginning.
I worked from the beginning to the end.
And it shut down for regulatory and other reasons I won't get into.
But I did funnier stuff back then.
And maybe I should get back to the funny.
So this is about a decade ago.
I dressed up as Marg Dellahunty.
I don't think I've ever worn lipstick before or after.
I wear a lip balm.
And sometimes people say it looks like I never wear a lipstick.
I think I wore a lipstick in this video.
I'm not sure.
I think I had makeup.
I wear TV makeup, and it's a wig.
That's not my hair.
Let me show you from a decade ago, my impression of Marg Dellahunty of this hour is 22 minutes stalking the late Toronto mayor, Rob Ford.
But before we play it, we have to show you an ad to pay the bill.
So don't you go away.
That video is next.
But here's a quick ad.
Take a look.
If you want to look good and shine like me, you can do so at our store.
Go to RibandNewsStar.com on this website.
You have so much different style to wear as this one, my favorite one, Justin Castro.
With my code Alexa10, you will have 10% off on your next purchase.
So don't hesitate.
Go now and look so good like me.
Hi, it's me, Barge Della Hunty.
From this 22 minutes, feels like an hour.
I'm here at Toronto City Hall.
That's the mayor's inner sanctum.
I understand he's talking about busting the labor he needs to pick up our garbage.
I'm going to go in there now.
If I don't make it out alive, well, long may your big jib draw.
Let's go.
Yeah, Doug.
No, no, we got to figure out a way to get out of this garbage strike.
No, the city can't afford our repair strike.
He's talking about the garbage strike.
No, it can't happen.
It can't happen.
We've got to figure out a way to get these unions.
Can't, no.
Mayor Born, Mayor Born, Mayor Borden.
Barnes Dellahunty from this 22 minutes feels like an hour.
Why are you doing some arbitrary union busting?
Oh, you're talking about garbage strikes, are you now, boy?
Every time you leave the office, you take out the garbage.
Got him!
I'm Barge Della Hunty.
From this 22 minutes, feels like an hour.
And I've sneaked into City Hall to find Mayor Rob Ford.
Follow me.
I think he's inside here, boy.
Mayor Rob Ford.
Mayor Rob Ford.
Where are you?
Smells like conservative policymaking in here.
Mayor Ford, it's Barge Dellahunty.
What are you doing?
Oh, Lord, love it.
Like Jesus Mary, Joseph and the Seventh said, oh, what's that?
What's that?
Is that your Tory policy platform?
Got him!
Mayor!
Stay where you do.
We'll come to where you're at.
Mayor, Mayor, Mayor, why do you keep running from the Mayor?
Mars Dellahunty from this 22 minutes feels like an hour.
Got him!
I'm Barge Dellahunty from this 22 minutes feels like an hour.
And I'm actually in Rob Ford's home.
The chicken coop!
That's his badly mayor.
Let's go catch him unawares.
Oh, Martin, he's like a beach twail, isn't it?
Where's this Ford?
There's trouble in the house, isn't there?
Mayor Ford.
Mayor Ford, it's Marge Dellahunty.
Mayor Ford!
Mayor Ford!
I gotta give you a big smooch, Mayor Ford.
Oh, Mayor Ford, my eyes are up here, Mayor Ford.
Look up here, that's my eyes.
Got him!
Look, let me just be the first to say that that was not particularly funny either.
Thus the use of the laugh track.
And one of the creepy things about this hour is 22 minutes, especially Mary Walsh, who does Mark Dellahunty, is if you take the laugh track out of her videos, there is nothing funny in them.
And I've done this before, like she actually went to Rob Ford's house and just started abusing him.
And the final version that was on TV obviously had a lot of laugh track, which we added here too.
And a laugh track is a kind of conformity.
You hear other people laughing.
You feel like, you know, if someone else tells a joke and someone laughs, do you ever find yourself sort of, I don't get it, but everyone else is laughing.
Do you ever do that?
I think it's like a yawn.
You see someone yawning and you yawn.
There's some human reaction.
That's why people use laugh tracks because they work.
Because they're a cue to say other people think this is funny, so you should laugh too.
In fact, there's this whole genre of YouTube videos of TV shows with the laugh track removed.
What's that one of all the nerds who live to get?
What's that?
Big Bang Theory.
That's right.
Do you want to look for one?
Well, we're just going to Big Bang Theory, no laugh track.
And it is astonishing.
I never liked that show.
I don't think I've watched five minutes of that whole series.
But a lot of people love that show.
Listen, each do his own.
But it's just astonishing to hear that show with the laugh track removed.
Do you ever see that?
YouTube's got some funny genres.
One is, and I love this, famous singers singing famous songs with all the instrumental tracks removed.
So it's pure a cappella.
That can be a haunting, wonderful experience.
You can see who the true talent is when you strip out the background vocals, strip out the accompanying music.
There's just some extraordinary talent that almost was covered up by the accompaniment.
But I forget what you called this show again.
What's it called?
Big Bang Theory, thank you.
There's not a lot of raw talent there.
They just need that laugh track.
Do you have one?
Go ahead.
I just want to show people what I mean.
Go ahead.
Nothing makes beer tastes better than cool, clear Rocky Mountain spring water.
Where are the Rocky Mountains anyway?
Philadelphia.
William, I thought they were out west someplace.
Think about it, Raj.
Where did the movie Rocky take place?
Philadelphia.
Okay, now I get it.
Thanks.
This is the plan from now on.
That was just a quick example.
Would you laugh out loud at that?
That you can see how achingly that show.
I mean, maybe that's funny.
Were you laughing there, Olivia?
Was that funny?
I don't think that was funny.
That's not even like pun-level word game funny.
But if you know this show, and I don't really, they just pour the, I don't know how this show could work.
Was that not excruciating?
Like, it's not even funny.
But you throw on a laugh track and people laugh.
And that is the story of Mary Walsh.
There's two stories of Mary Walsh.
Her mission is to destroy, embarrass, and genuinely, genuinely disrupt anyone conservative.
And to do the bidding of the CBC.
So their job right now is to go in and save Justin Trudeau in some way.
So it's only taken me 31 minutes to talk about one story, Olivia, but I had a lot of things I had to get to.
There is a lot of news about the China stuff.
And so the opposition is on a roll.
And so the government and their agents, like the CBC, are doing everything to trip them up to change the channel.
Here is an example of that.
Do we have that Michael Cooper clip?
Actually, I want to look at Sherry Romanado's response.
Do you know what I'm talking about?
I think you've got that, that video.
It's the second one there.
So Michael Cooper, who is an MP from the Edmonton area, was asking questions of Melanie Jolie, our clueless foreign minister.
And she said something like, I stared him in the eye.
And I looked him down on talking about Vladimir Putin.
I stared Putin in the eye.
I looked him.
And Michael Cooper sort of laughed at that and said, oh, you stared him in the eye.
And it's a funny phrase because George W. Bush said, I looked into Vladimir Putin's eyes and saw his soul.
Okay.
And Stephen Harper said, I looked him in the eye and said, I'll shake your hand, but you get out of Ukraine.
Like, so people talk about looking Putin in the eye.
It's a metaphor.
I mean, the eyes are the window to the soul.
The eyes tell us a lot.
I contact, he won't meet my eye.
He gave me the stink eye, the evil eye.
There's a lot of symbolism and non-verbal communication that happens to the eyes.
The eyes give you away.
That's why poker players often wear sunglasses.
Sometimes your eyes dart around or your pupils eyelate and you can't even control it.
So it's a metaphor and it's a symbol.
And Melanie Jolie deployed it and Michael Cooper gently mocked it and said, oh, so that must have scared him.
A complete, I mean, just a completely irrelevant point.
Like not even, but oh my God, the liberals have their proof of sexism.
No, that's it.
Sexism, not even too long after International Women's Day.
Let's change the subject to that to anything.
And of course, the media has gone along with it.
Here, take a look at this.
Minister Jolie, you've talked tough.
You've talked tough with your Beijing counterparts.
So you say you even stared into his eyes.
I'm sure he was very intimidated.
And now we learned today, and now we learned today or yesterday in the London Mail very conveniently that a visa was not, was denied of a diplomat who wanted to work at the Canadian Beijing embassy.
One visa is bad.
I have a point of order in regards to the conduct of Mr. Cooper and his comments.
I think any woman sitting around this room, I'm sure men have can appreciate it and understand it too.
The constant demeaning nature that only occurs to our female minister that appeared today.
Yesterday, it was another member of our team asking a question in QP, and a conservative member said she deserved a participation medal.
Today, it was a question of whether this minister is tough enough.
Every single day, we sit in this house as women, and we hear these are called microaggressions, but they don't feel very micro to continuously be undermined.
And I think he owes this committee and the minister in particular an apology.
And I am really sick and tired of sitting in here having to listen to it.
I am sick and tired of Canadians having to see it.
And I'm really sick and tired of the Conservatives just not getting it.
Mrs. Romanado.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And I, too, am really disappointed.
I want to know if that member opposite, when then Prime Minister Stephen Harper confronted Vladimir Putin and said, get out of Ukraine, did that member opposite say, was he tough enough?
That was completely unacceptable.
Unacceptable behavior for every woman that has ever taken her place in this house.
And I demand an apology under Standing Order 18.
You know, let me list some of the toughest political leaders of the 20th century.
Are you ready?
I think at the top of the list in the post-war world, like the toughest political leader in the 20th century was probably Winston Churchill.
Stalin and Mao, in their own odious ways, they were tough in that they were brutal.
But in the second half of the 20th century, I mean, that's when Mao and Stalin did a lot of their work, but would you agree with me that Margaret Thatcher was tough as nails?
If you don't agree with me, ask the Argentinian dictator, Galtieri, if I remember, who thought that he would take advantage of things and invade the Falkland Islands, which is a little island, group of islands off the southern tip of Argentina.
Couldn't be further away from the UK.
Like it's, we're talking almost at the Antarctic.
Very small population, maybe just a couple thousand.
I don't know for sure.
So close to Argentina, so far from the UK, and he invades and reconquers the Falkland Islands.
They call them Las Malvinas.
That's the Spanish name for them.
And how on earth is Margaret Thatcher, thousands of miles away, gonna what's she gonna do about it?
Well, she put together an aircraft carrier and a battle group and soldiers, and she had them steam down to Argentina.
And she basically said, Brother, you got till we get there to get out or we are going to smash you.
And there was a war.
There was a war.
And the Brits from thousands of miles away won, retook the islands.
And in fact, the dictator was booted out.
There's some incredible imagery of the British aircraft carrier.
And the jets they used at the time were an American-made jet, the Harrier jump jet, which could land short takeoff, vertical landing, very maneuverable.
The Argentinians had Mirage fighters, and it wasn't without cost.
The Brits lost a ship called the HMS Sheffield.
The Argentinians lost a giant battleship called the General Belgrano.
It was actually a very bloody war, especially on the Argentinian side.
Iron Lady's Triumph00:04:22
This is all a way of saying you don't think Margaret Thatcher was tough?
There's that old saying.
I don't know if it's a joke or for real.
What would you like, Madam Prime Minister?
I'll have the roast beef, please.
And the vegetables?
Oh, they'll have the roast beef, too.
I mean, she was so tough.
She was so tough.
And not just tough on foreign enemies.
She was tough on the IRA.
The Irish Republican Army.
You might recall that the IRA blew up, blew things up.
In fact, they tried to assassinate her.
I had a friend, my old friend John O'Sullivan, was with her the night that they had an explosion, and he described it to me.
Terrifying.
Tough, would you say?
Do you think that she would whine if someone poked fun at her?
You're just saying that because I'm a girl.
Do you think Margaret Thatcher ever said those words in her life?
You're just doing that.
You're just mean to me because I'm a girl.
Do you think Margaret Thatcher could even make that whiny sound that we heard?
Yeah, put up some volume.
Let's hear her talk about the Falklands.
Or just anything.
Let's just remind our people.
They called her the Iron Lady.
She would chew up her critics, male or female, chew them up and spit them out.
And I can't imagine what she would think of those losers, Jennifer O'Connell and Sherry Romanado, who instead of talking about the weighty items of the day, just want to have a little pout.
They actually prove that they are girls, not women.
Certainly not women like Margaret Thatcher.
Here, play a bit of Margaret Thatcher.
Just give people a little blast from the past.
Where there is discord, may we bring harmony.
Where there is error, may we bring truth.
Where there is doubt, may we bring faith.
And where there is despair, may we bring hope.
To those waiting with bated breaths for that favorite media catchphrase, the U-turn, I have only one thing to say: U-turn if you want to.
The ladies not for turning.
Be pleased to inform Her Majesty that the white ensign flies alongside the Union Jack in South Georgia.
God save the Queen.
What happens next?
Thank you very much.
Rejoice at that news and congratulate our forces and the Marines.
Of course, the chairman or the President of the Commission, Mr. Delor, said at press conference the other day that he wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the community.
He wanted the Commission to be the executive and he wanted the Council of Ministers to be the Senate.
No.
All levels of income are better off than they were in 1979.
But what the honorable member is saying is that he would rather the poor were poorer, provided the rich were less rich.
That way you will never create the wealth for better social services than we have.
And what a policy.
Yes, he would rather have the poor poorer, provided the rich were less rich.
That is a liberal policy.
And we're very happy that we leave the United Kingdom in a very, very much better state than when we came here 11 and a half years ago.
Well, that's quite a tour de force of her history.
And when they talked about South Georgia, that's, I think, the name of the, sorry, that reference about the white flag and the union flag, they're talking about reconquering the Falklands.
That was a great summary of her career arc.
She was deposed by her own party.
She didn't lose her election in the end.
But do you think the first woman prime minister of the United Kingdom who beat labor again and again like a drum, in fact, was undefeated.
She was only defeated by her own party's treachery.
Do you think she, what do you think she would think of not the women, but the girls who succeed her and walk in her footsteps, Jennifer O'Connor and Sherry Romanado?
Regulating Content: New Democrat Concerns00:09:31
How dare you wouldn't say mean things like that to a boy?
Yeah, actually, politics is mean.
And when you play the gender card, you're essentially saying, I can't hack it with the lads.
Please put your kid gloves on for me.
Now we don't have the same time to go in depth with Indira Gandhi of India or Golden Myir of Israel, the prime minister who had, you know, all three of these women ran nuclear powers, nuclear armed powers.
And it's deeply embarrassing that their successors would push the, I'm just a girl.
Math is hard.
Don't be mean to me.
I'm a girl.
They're not mean to you because you're a girl.
They mean to you because you're an idiot.
And to shift that to that you're a female is to imply that you're an idiot because you're female.
You're an idiot because you're an idiot.
There are men who are idiots and there are women who are idiots.
And it's unthinkable that someone would say, you're just saying that to me because I'm a boy.
No, it's because you're stupid.
And they actually demean feminism.
They don't demean feminism.
They demean their own sex by pushing the don't pick on me button instead of what do you think Margaret Thatcher would do?
She would roar like a lion and intimidate the lads.
I'm conscious of the time.
I want to show you two videos about C-11.
C-11 is one of four bills that Justin Trudeau has introduced, passed, or will introduce to censor the internet.
C-11, which regulates the internet, C-18, called the Online News Act, regulates news broadcasters, especially like us.
There was a bill in the last parliament called C-36 that reintroduces hate crimes.
And then there's a bill that has not been introduced yet, but has been released in sort of a pre-bill format, and it's called the Online Harms Act.
Taken together, that's four pieces of legislation to censor the internet.
That's more legislation, as I like to say, than Trudeau has to deal with the economy, than he has to deal with inflation or housing prices.
Because Trudeau deeply cares about censorship, it's actually his number one issue.
And I want to show you a new Democrat member of parliament who just has a really weird angle here.
I don't think this is accurate talking about 1 million followers, but even if it was, it's really weird here.
Without further ado, let's play that NDP MP.
Well, we started with a bill called C10, which was definitely a worse bill.
And I think what the member's referring back to is our concerns we were expressing at that time.
And so some of the changes that came in C11 reassured us.
And one of those changes is the very one the Conservatives are harping on.
And that is the changes that made sure that user-generated content is not affected by this bill.
Now, I think what they're ignoring there is there's an exception.
If you're creating your own content and you have a million followers, a million subscribers, and you're making money out of that, then yes, we are going to have the CRTC have an ability to look at that.
So it's not what the Conservatives are saying, is that we should have a blanket exemption, that nobody who's making money on the internet has to report to anybody or be accountable for anything.
And really, that was one of the major improvements between the first version of the bill and the bill that we're now supporting.
You know, I think I just got stupider there.
I don't think a word that guy said was accurate.
I think that million thing was just something.
I just don't even think that that's in the law.
I'm not an expert in the same way that Michael Geist is.
He's a professor of law and especially law to do with the media and things like that.
And he said this about, you can find this on Michael Geist's Twitter account.
He said this.
Is it any wonder Canadian digital creators fear Bill C-11?
Here's NDP MP Randall Garrison saying the bill is much improved since creators with a million followers or who make money are subject to CRTC oversight.
He's wrong.
The bill regulates user content and subscriber numbers not a threshold.
But still, yeah, where's that like that million?
He just made that up.
He just made that up.
He's so dumb, even his opposition to it is dumb.
And there's a, oh my God, we're doomed.
But that isn't that right.
I mean, speaking of dumb, I'm going to call Jagmeet Singh dumb.
And it's not because he's a girl or a boy.
It's because he's truly dumb.
And I think he has the dumbest caucus.
Although those two liberals are giving him a run for the money.
Here's another.
This is scary.
I think this is another New Democrat.
An MP named Lori Idlout from the far north.
And she, there was sort of a vibe with Randall Garrison there that this is good, that people who are saying things should be regulated because we don't like other people to have power other than us.
And we should be able to censor them.
Here's Lori Idlot basically saying, yeah, we like censorship.
We like the fact that we can finally control those pesky people who think they can just talk freely.
Who the hell do they think we are?
Take a look at this video by another New Democrat.
And I thank the member for his question.
I guess to put it simply, I very much prefer to have the CRTC determine what is reflected back, what they regulate regarding online streaming as opposed to studio executives that are outside of this country.
And that is what we're talking about in this bill.
There's already been content regulation for TV.
There's been content regulation for radio.
And that content regulation needs to happen for online streaming because so many Canadians are online every day.
Content regulation.
You heard her.
So this isn't about a crime.
Crimes are already covered, whether you do it in person, on the phone, in a newspaper, on the internet.
Crimes are already.
So it's not about crimes.
It's not about taxes.
You can make money in any way, but you're taxable.
You know, we're a for-profit company trying to make money.
Whether we do it in a podcast, an email, or a video, you're still taxed.
So she's not worried about financial matters.
She's not worried about criminal matters.
You heard her.
She wants to regulate content.
Now, one of the reasons why 80 years ago, the CBC, all these regulations were put into effect is because it was thought that there was limited bandwidth.
And there's some truth to that over-the-air radio.
There were other reasons that are simply obsolete right now.
There's unlimited bandwidth.
There was also an idea, well, we need to boost Canadian content because otherwise it won't happen.
Everyone's a content producer now.
This is not about some noble reason.
You heard two MPs in a row.
This is about regulating what you say.
And what you say is based on what you think, and what you think is based on what you believe, your conscience.
This is about regulating your mind and your heart and telling you what you can or can't say, think, feel.
That's C11.
Don't take it from me.
Take it from its supporters.
Hey, I'm going to take a minute to read some super chats.
Enmark, five bucks.
Is Adam Soaps coming back?
I loved you on the news and why it matters.
I hope you go on there again soon.
Two parts there.
Yeah, I think Adam's coming back.
He's on paternity leave, which is the thing.
So I'm not sure exactly when he's back, but I think it might be next month.
And I'm glad you miss him.
The second is you love me on News and Why It's Matters.
That's a show on the Glenn Beck Blaze Network.
Thank you very much.
I went down there the other day and I did four shows in one day, including Glenn Beck's.
And they were very warm to the messages we had and were very friendly.
Fraser McBurney says, wow, the last few days have had more news.
Tucker Carlson, Proud Boys, True Dope, J6, McCarthy, East Palestine, and Lying Fake News.
Great job, Rebel News.
Well, the news never stops, does it?
And we do our best to cover it.
Look, we're an army, but we're a very small army compared to other news gathering operations.
So it's hard to cover the waterfront.
But I think we're doing a fairly good job, if I may.
LB762 said, Ezra, I was funnier and more lighthearted a few years ago as well prior to 2020.
It is a symptom of our current times.
Fighting for Truth00:02:21
For those of us that don't have our head in the sand, you know what?
When I'm funny, I like that version of me.
But there's many things that weigh on me.
And you can't always think about the news because you'll be depressed all the time.
And I think social media is a depression machine.
If you're on Instagram, well, you just look at all the beautiful people and think, well, I'm not that beautiful.
If you're on, I don't really spend any time on Facebook, but I don't know, LinkedIn or whatever.
Oh, how's my career going compared to my classmates or something?
Twitter just makes you politically revved up, angry, and nervous.
So I think social media has taken a lot of fun out of life.
And I say this is a social media addict.
I think the times are heavy, but you've got to fence it off.
Cannot.
You know, there's a Jewish saying, you are not, it's not up to you to save the world, but neither are you free to do nothing.
That's another way of saying.
There's a balance there.
You cannot just worry about the world.
You should do your part, but you can't just worry another way of looking at that.
This is a quote I use from time to time these days, and I thought about it a lot during the lockdowns, how hard should you fight?
How far should you go?
I fought in my own way, as hard as I could.
That's what I think I did, and we deployed our company to that.
But let me ask you a question that has never been posed to me, if I would have lost my job, if I would if, if fighting hard would have meant I would have lost my job and thus put my family in economic distress, would I have fought?
Would I have fought so?
And another way of saying, maybe it was easy for me to fight because i'm the boss of my own company and uh, and in fact our company's mission became fighting.
But what if I was a had a more normal job like, let's say, I worked as a nurse somewhere and I had to be jabbed or be fired, and if and if I got fired, I don't have a ton of savings and my, my family depends on me.
Would I have?
Would I have gone that distance?
Lucky Choices00:03:20
I I never had to think about that.
I would like to think that I would do the principled thing.
But there's certainly a principle to putting food on the table for your own family.
That's a what about that principle?
So i'm lucky in that I never had an existential challenge before me.
I'm lucky.
But I also created that possibility for myself by founding Rebel NEWS, a place that I could.
It's right in the name Rebel.
It's a home for other rebels too.
But what if I wasn't so lucky?
What if I was working in a factory somewhere um, like GM, and I was told, guess what?
We're changing your collective agreement, the union's being bought off and you now need the jam?
Would I have quit on principle?
And it's a different answer if you're only defending depending on yourself, or if your family's depending on you.
I quote Solzon it'sin, the Soviet dissident, who takes this into account and realizes, not everyone can fight, not everyone can sacrifice, not everyone's conflict oriented, not everyone's built for fighting.
Some people are very weak or vulnerable, or they just don't know how.
And so he said and maybe you could find the exact wording here, because i'm just paraphrasing, i've used this quote before at least don't participate in it.
Don't participate in the evil, don't let it use you as a vector.
Yeah, live not by lies.
Um is probably.
Is there a quote there that touches on that?
can you pump that up a little just even two notches more size-wise so i can read it yeah go yeah i'll read that On the day Solzhenitsyn was arrested, February 1974, He released the text to live not by lies.
The next day he was exiled to the West where he received a hero's welcome.
This moment marks the peak of his fame.
Solzhenitsyn equates lies with ideology, the illusion that human nature and society can be reshaped to predetermined specifications.
And his last words before leaving his homeland urges Soviet citizens as individuals to refrain from cooperating with the regime's lies.
Even the most timid can take this least demanding step towards spiritual independence.
If many march together on this path of passive resistance, the whole inhuman system will totter and collapse.
Okay, so that's written by this other guy, Edward Erickson.
That's not the actual quote, but you get my meaning.
Solzhenitsyn said, you don't have to be on the front lines.
You don't have to sacrifice, but at least don't go along with the lie.
Do not support the lie, do not say the lie is true.
Do not join the enemy.
Just don't join the enemy.
Just don't be a part of the system.
And that's what I thought of when, for example, when I wasn't vaxed and had no vax passport and would want to go to a restaurant that I'd been going to for years and the woman who would always seat me said, no, get out, you're not vaxed.
Judge Epstein's Backdrop00:14:38
And I thought to myself, why are you doing this?
There's no cop around, there's no one around, no one's holding you to account.
It's not like your boss is here.
You asked me if I'm jabbed.
I said no, okay.
So you asked what you're supposed to do now.
Can I have a seat please?
Why are you being a functionary of this authoritarian rule?
Why are you being a willing participant?
You're not in the government.
This isn't your policy.
Why are you taking it upon yourself to enforce it?
Why are you letting the lie flow through you?
Why don't you just ignore him?
You know we had a.
We had an event when vaccine passports were required and I'll tell you.
I won't say who, but I talked to the manager and I said, we're not vaxed.
Will you let us come?
And he said I'm gonna ask everyone for their vax passport.
I'm gonna just ask them in case a cop stings me.
He'll hear me asking, but whatever you say, I'll let you in.
I thought that's the right answer.
There's a guy who's protecting himself.
He doesn't want to lose his business or lose his job, but he's not going to be a little Nazi about it.
I found people like that.
I found little restaurants and places like that.
I found a barber like that.
I found found places like that during during the lockdown.
But I also found so many people who not only would be enforcers, they erotically loved being snitches.
In fact, I just saw a court case.
I just read a court case.
It was crazy.
It's two o'clock, but give me a moment.
I saw this crazy court case.
I'll send the link to you.
I'm gonna send you a link now.
I just put it in slack.
This is a crazy case out of Quebec Olivia, did you get it in slack there?
You did yeah, pump it up big um.
You can yeah, you can put it in PDF mode.
You see, on the top right there it says PDF.
That might make it prettier if you, if you click on that link.
So this, this was before the honorable Dennis Galiatzos, A judge in Quebec.
And it was the prosecution.
It was prosecuting a guy named Neil Epstein.
I have no idea who that is.
I'm going to read a little bit of this, okay?
The accused, Neil Epstein, is charged with criminal harassment and uttering death threats towards his neighbor, Michael Nachachi.
The alleged events occurred between March and May of 2021.
Do you know what was happening between March and May of 2021?
I do.
Harsh lockdowns.
Paragraph two of this ruling.
Picture the following scene: a beautiful spring day, a quiet street in a small residential neighborhood, just steps away from two elementary schools, a daycare in a park.
Up the road, a four-year-old girl rides her scooter in front of her house with three adults sitting on camping chairs in their driveway watching her.
Said driveway is adorned with chalk drawings made by the child.
A few meters away, another gathering of nine children spanning ages two to eight, smiles from ear to ear.
Some have bicycles, some have scooters, all are wearing helmets.
Other children are simply walking, playing, getting much in need of fresh air.
They are all under the watchful eye of their parents.
He goes on and on and on.
Paragraph three to most.
This scene represents a blissful snapshot of suburban utopia.
And then here we get to it.
Paragraph four.
Yet to the complainant and his family, this is an unbearable nuisance and a front on many levels, so much so that according to objective video evidence, they drive dangerously near the children as a way to protest their presence and express their discontent.
That is the backdrop of this case.
The complainants have a list of grievances against the accused, his family, his young children, another neighbor's young children.
These grievances are nothing more than mundane petty neighborhood trivialities.
The complainants have consistently videotaped their neighbors, yet they charge Mr. Epstein with criminal harassment.
With an irony of unmatched proportions, they complain that he might have recorded them.
He did not.
To the complainants, the presence of young families outside is a source of scorn, blah, blah, blah.
A man who has somehow been subjected to criminal charges for almost two years.
This injustice ends today.
Are you not gripped?
Are you not riveted?
And I'm going to, okay, I'll just read a little bit of paragraph seven.
Give me some time here.
This is a fascinating case and is beautifully written.
After Mr. Epstein testified in chief in a tremendous display of professionalism and objectivity, Crown Counsel declined to cross-examine him since, in her view, it was not in the public interest to do so.
Instead, she humbly invited the court to enter an acquittal.
Having heard the evidence, I can unreservedly confirm that she made the right call.
Counsel's integrity was commendable.
Let me tell you what that means.
So they charged this guy, Neil Epstein, with stalking, right?
That's what criminal harassment is.
But as the video evidence was played showing that it wasn't him that was the stalker, it was the complainants.
It's that Nechachi guy.
When this Mr. Epstein got up and said, well, here's what happened.
Here's what happened.
Here's what happened.
The Crown Prosecutor said, Judge, I don't think we should convict this guy.
I'm going to stand down.
When was the last time that happened?
And look at the judge saying, good for the Crown Counsel.
And I'm just going to skip ahead here.
The evidence presented a trial.
The interested parties live on Watford Street in Beaconsfield.
It's a small, narrow road with sidewalks.
It is barely 10 houses long.
The testimony of the complainant, Michael Nakachi.
Michael Nakachi is a 34-year-old man.
He has a large build, albeit smaller than the accused's.
Nikachi lives with his brother Ari, who also has a heavyset frame, his father Frank and his mother Martine.
Nikachi has installed four closed-service cameras filming the front of his house at all times.
He's also installed two dashboard cameras in his parents' vehicles, a third rear-facing camera in his father's car, and a high-resolution camera on his motorcycle helmet.
He monitored the accused and his family, tried to record.
Anyhow, so what's this beef about?
What are they mad about?
I'm going to look for it here.
They're mad that these kids and neighbors are violating the lockdown anti-gathering rules.
Look at paragraph 18.
Mr. Nikachi describes it as follows.
They were having a street party, blocking the street while drinking at the height of the pandemic.
They were having a party in the middle of the street.
And he goes on, but look at paragraph 20.
The video evidence paints a starkly different picture.
The scene is far less pernicious than it portrays to be.
First, this party in the middle of the street is a complete misnomer.
It implies some block party.
In reality, it was simply some children playing on the road.
The court does not see, there were no toys left in the middle of the road, on and on and on.
So everything was a lie.
But it was Nikachi who was driving fast and in a risky way.
Let me skip ahead to 31.
Martine Nikachi never slows down her car.
Instead, the little girl is left to her own devices, quickly pursuing her scooter, narrowly avoiding being hit.
And again, Frank Nikachi does not slow his speed.
In fact, Mr. Epstein gestures to him to slow down.
Again, so anyway, it's a fascinating case.
You can find it yourself.
It's called the King versus Neil Epstein.
It's a Quebec case.
Maybe I took too long in there, but here's my point.
It is about a family, the Nikachi's, if I'm saying that right, at war with the other families on the street if they're hanging out outside, kids using sidewalk chalk scooters, playing around.
And instead of slowing down for the kids, he drives quickly by them to scare them and almost hits them.
This crazy Nikachi family is filming everything.
And by the way, the film shows that they're the ones to blame.
And they managed to get the cops to charge this Neil Epstein guy.
And they managed to get all the way to court.
And as you can hear, after Epstein gave his testimony and after the video evidence was seen, the crown prosecutor said, Judge, I'm sorry, I don't want to proceed here.
And the judge commends the prosecutor.
There's a lot of interesting things in this case, a lot of crazy details, but the thing that stands out to me is this was a snitch.
This was a pandemic snitch.
This was a Karen.
This was someone who was furious that neighbors and kids no less would be outside playing during a pandemic.
And they actually managed, and I didn't read the whole ruling.
I just read pretty much up to there a little bit further.
They managed to convince a cop and a prosecutor to take it to court.
And good for the prosecutor for seeing the error of her ways.
But why did it have to go that far?
She didn't know this was BS.
She had to wait till this Neil Epstein's life was turned upside down.
Why did it go that far?
And the judge, you know what?
Actually, I did read a little bit further.
I got to read a little bit more.
This is.
Someone sent this to me.
Go to paragraph 169, if you would.
So apparently, Mr. Epstein gave Nikachi the finger one day.
Oh, my God.
And this was proof of stalking, criminal harassment.
Let me read what the judge says at 168.
To be abundantly clear, it is not a crime to give someone the finger.
Are you relieved, Olivia?
I wouldn't want to live in a country where it was a crime to give someone the finger.
To be abundantly clear, it's not a crime to give someone the finger.
Flipping the proverbial bird is a God-given charter-enshrined right that belongs to every red-blooded Canadian.
It may not be civil.
It may not be polite.
It may not be gentlemanly.
Nonetheless, it does not trigger criminal liability.
Offending someone is not a crime.
It is an integral component of one's freedom of expression.
Citizens are to be thicker-skinned, especially when they behave in ways that are highly likely to trigger such profanity, like driving too fast on the street where innocent kids are playing.
Be told to fuck off should not prompt a call to 911, which is what happened here.
On that topic, the evidence in the case, at Bar Established, said even after the accused's arrest, therefore after the period covered by these charges, Michael Nikachi called the police again to report that Mr. Epstein's wife had given them the finger while walking on the street.
Calling the police because they gave you a finger because you're a pandemic scold?
Paragraph 171.
This needs to stop.
The complainants are free to clutch their pearls in the face of such an insult.
However, the police department and the 911 dispatching service have more important priorities to address.
The complainant's brother is fortunate that he was not charged with assault.
Similarly, both of his parents are lucky they were not ticked under the highway safety code for driving recklessly in the presence of children.
Finally, based on the evidence of the case apart, Michael Nikatchi is fortunate that he was not charged with uttering death threats.
The complainants should all check those in the victory column.
Let me read paragraph 171.
I think this judge is doing a hell of a job.
This is really a crazy story, isn't it?
But this is, would you agree that this is a mask and pandemic scold gone wild?
Have you ever heard of such a thing?
They managed to get criminal charges.
Let me read right at the end.
Paragraph 174.
In the modern-day vernacular, people often refer to a criminal case being thrown out.
Obviously, this is a little more than a figurative expression.
Cases aren't actually thrown out in the literal or physical sense.
Nevertheless, in the specific circumstance of this case, the court is inclined to actually take the file and throw it out the window, which is the only way to adequately express my bewilderment with the fact that Mr. Epstein was subjected to an arrest and a fulsome criminal prosecution.
Alas, the courtrooms of the Montreal courthouse do not have windows.
A mere verdict of acquittal will have to suffice.
For these reasons, the accused is found not guilty on all charges.
What do you think of that?
I like this judge, Galeazzos.
I think he's got a sense of humor to him.
Like I say, you really do need a sense of humor because what else are you going to do?
If you don't laugh, what else are you going to do?
That's just incredible.
Anyhow, a lawyer sent that to me because I was telling her the importance of being able to swear.
Being able to swear, it's not polite, but sometimes it's how we express ourselves.
And imagine having the cops called on you, being arrested and being prosecuted because you swore.
And imagine the whole thing is over pandemic compliance.
That's a crazy story.
And I'm glad to have read that case.
And I'm glad to know that a judge with that common sense and sense of humor sits on the bench.
And I hope to spend less time in courts in my second half century.
But if I ever find myself in a court, I would hope that a judge like that judge is sitting because we need all the common sense and humor we can find.
Cops Called Over Swearing00:04:21
My friends, it is 2.12 Eastern Time, 12.12 in the promised land of Alberta, and I got to go.
But I do have a couple of super chats I'm told that I'll read quickly before I vacate the chair.
Memory hole, 20 bucks.
The Libs were the party that forced the minister out over $15 orange juice.
Trudeau screamed several caucus, screamed several caucus members out of politics.
He elbowed an MP in the chest, then there's Jody Wilson Rabel.
Yeah.
The difference in corruption standards, the difference in transparency and media bullying, but when Harper did it or didn't do it versus the liberals is incredible.
And Maminka says, yes, don't go along with the lie.
No excuses.
Even those who are not capable of fighting the evil can do their part.
Well said, Ezra.
Well, thank you.
Of course, it wasn't said by me.
It was said by Solzhenitsyn.
I'm repeating it, and I think that's important.
We have to repeat and remember these things.
You know, two years ago or three years ago, I did a whole show, maybe the whole live stream, on the book Red Color News Soldier.
Do you want to put a copy of that book cover, Red Color C-O-L-O-R, News Soldier?
That's a weird title, isn't it?
But that was this red color was communist, news soldier.
That's his book.
I bought that book in Hong Kong when I was there some 15 years ago.
I would not be safe to go back there now, and I don't even know if this book would be publishable.
Now, show some of the images.
Click the so you saw the book cover.
So go back a page and then click images.
So you're on the Amazon page, but go back to the Google search and click images.
And look at those images.
These are the Red Guard and the Cultural Revolution and the struggle sessions and the jailing of dissidents.
And I want to show you what I regard as the most terrifying photo of them all.
I'm going to put it in Slack.
And I know that we did a whole show on this, but it was a few years ago and people might forget.
So there's a book, Red-ColorNewsSoldier.com.
Anyway, I just sent you the link, Olivia.
And there's one photo in particular I want to show you.
Feel free to put it on the screen because even getting to there will be interesting.
We really should re-up that.
Anyway, I brought the book home.
I was showing it to my family.
So click that link.
It's taking forever to load.
I wonder if I can send you a different link.
I don't know if I can.
All right.
I'm going to send you a different version of it.
I'm going to actually just going to copy the image and send it to you.
I just sent it to you in Slack.
So the actual image.
This is not a very high-res version, but you see it in Slack there now.
Yeah.
So what is this?
You see a man being overpowered by what looks like military or police.
But what's he doing?
What's in his hand?
What's in his mouth?
This was a show trial, a sham trial.
He has something around his neck.
There's another photo of him.
It's a confession, a forced confession that he was like a capitalist running dog or he wasn't sufficiently obedient to Mao or something.
So what's with his mouth?
Well, he was protesting his innocence.
He wasn't going along with the show trial.
He wasn't playing his scripted role.
He was saying, no, no, I'm not guilty.
Here's why.
Well, that doesn't work very well.
You've got to apologize and take your punishment.
So they stuffed, I think it was a glove in his mouth to shut him up.
They stuffed a glove in his mouth to shut him up.
Mao's Legacy00:02:20
And Mao killed more people than in raw numbers than anyone else in world history, depending on the source of statistics.
Between 50 million and 85 million of his fellow countrymen.
That's more than Hitler killed.
That's more than Stalin killed.
Depending on the sources, 85 million of his fellow countrymen.
Incredible.
There was a larger killer in terms of percentage of the world population.
In medieval times, someone named Tamerlane.
But we'll have to leave that for another day.
I tell you that because you say, you know, you refer to the Solzoninson quote.
That's 50 years old now.
And these red-color news soldier photos are from the late 60s, early 70s.
That's more than 55 years old now.
And of course, the Holocaust itself is 80 years old now, 80, 85 years old now.
So there's really no one alive from back then.
If you were 15 years old in 1945, you would have been born in 1930.
So you would be 93 years old now.
That's how old Gene Hackman is, by the way.
Be 93 years old.
So there are some people.
There are some people who were teenagers.
There might be some people who are 100 years old who were adults during the Holocaust.
But not a lot.
And soon the generation of Chinese people who survived the Cultural Revolution will die off, too.
And soon we'll only have memories, not eyewitnesses, to testify.
And would it not be beneficial to all to learn from history rather than to be ignorant of it and condemned to repeat it?
I think so.
Well, that's our show for today.
I'll be back tonight at 8 p.m. Eastern, 6 p.m. Mountain to talk about Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party and what a psychologist would call projection, projecting their sins on you and me.
I think we're going to close with a video from our friend Callum Smiles.
I'll see you tonight.
Goodbye, everybody.
Callum Smiles In The Hague00:00:35
And check out this vid from Callum.
This is Callum Smiles, Rebel News, here in The Hague, the day before the Dutch farmers' protest.
Now, Rebel News covered these protests before, and as the Dutch government aren't budging an inch, we've come back here to cover it once again.
And we have to be here, because the mainstream media will most likely paint a government-positive narrative, as Mark Rutter has his lackeys in the mainstream media.
So you can stay tuned to everything we're doing here in The Hague as the Dutch protest happens tomorrow at farmerrebellion.com.