Ezra Levant exposes leaked Facebook/Instagram documents from April 2021, where the Biden White House—via Andy Slavitt—pressured platforms to censor vaccine-skeptical posts like a DiCaprio meme, even as executives like Nick Clegg warned of First Amendment risks. By August 2021, Facebook admitted policy shifts, including suppressing Tucker Carlson’s content and targeting the "disinformation dozen," while Levant compares this to Musk’s transparency at Twitter. He ties Canada’s inflation (fueled by the Bank of Canada’s $370B money printing) to Trudeau’s $11M+ cabinet salaries and 98K bureaucrats, warning of undemocratic redistribution. Concluding, Levant urges support for groups like Rebel News Plus to combat censorship and government overreach. [Automatically generated summary]
Some incredible revelations in the United States about how Joe Biden threatened Facebook and Instagram to censor vaccine skeptics, and they threatened to do such damage to Facebook, Facebook panicked and gave in.
We'll have the actual memos for you today.
I want you to see them with your own eyes, which means I want you to see the video version of this podcast, which means you need what we call Rebel News Plus.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe.
It's eight bucks a month.
I know that's not a lot of money for you, but you add it all up.
It's a lot of money for us.
That's how we survive without government bailouts.
We survive based on your support.
So please go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe, get the video version of these podcasts.
And here's today's show.
Tonight, the smoking gun.
New documents show how Joe Biden threatened Facebook and Instagram.
And they panicked and agreed to violate their users' rights.
It's July 27th, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
Shame on you, you censorious bug.
Censorship is almost always a bad thing.
I should really say it's always a bad thing, but I can think of one example where it's not.
In the year 1644, a philosopher-poet named John Milton wrote a defense of freedom of speech and freedom of the press in the United Kingdom.
He gave it a Greek name, Areopagitica.
He nailed it, though.
He got it right.
New Documents Reveal Censorship Threat00:05:00
And it really hasn't been improved upon in 380 years.
I think this is the best thing ever written on free speech.
You might know his most famous line from this essay, let truth and falsehood grapple, whoever knew truth put to the worst in a free and open encounter.
Isn't that the truth?
Now, sometimes truth takes a little while to get its boots laced up, and falsehood has already run around a bit, but truth catches up in the end, I believe.
And who are the censors to censor?
Why are they able to look at the words and see if they're bad or good before telling us we can see it or not?
Why do they look at the bad tweets and the bad books and a bad movie and then make a decision for us?
Why can't we be our own censors?
What I mean is, are they made of better stuff than us?
They think you can't handle the truth.
You'd be corrupted by it.
You'd be misled by it.
They're better than you.
They won't be fooled.
They can look at the bad things and tell you if it's okay.
Who chose them?
And just by censoring something, haven't you actually imbued it with a magical power?
It's cool now.
You've made it more attractive.
It's a bad boy thing.
You've also said something about the regime that has done the censoring, though, haven't you?
That regime must be brittle.
It cannot withstand scrutiny.
It's weak.
Anything done forcibly has that effect, doesn't it?
Let me give you the example of vaccines.
I think I know people who would have considered taking the vaccine had they been permitted to make the decision freely for themselves.
They'd have done their research.
They'd have thought about it, weighed it.
Maybe they wouldn't have taken it, but I think others might have, but for the fact that they were being forced to do so.
It's quite a disease that was so meek that most of the time you had to have a special test to know if you even had it.
And it's quite a vaccine that's so safe and effective that you had to be forced on pain of being fired to get the jab.
Do you see my point?
The very brutality of it is what turned off many.
They couldn't persuade us, so they tried to force us.
But if you'd force a man and a woman and a pregnant woman and a young child, if you'd force them to actually take a vaccine, it's not hard to believe that you would force people to stop asking questions about them.
Am I right?
You would force them not to see things that are critical.
Hey, let me show you a comedy sketch by a comedian named Jimmy Dore.
But of course, he's much more than a comedian.
He's a very thoughtful, skeptical social commentator.
He's a man of the left, and he can't believe what's happened to the left, but left or right, watch this.
I think he's brilliant and funny.
Take a look.
It happened around COVID.
I'd never noticed this before in any other time of my life.
But you weren't allowed to ask questions at any point during this.
You just had to do what the man on the TV said without questions, and then you're a good person.
But if you question it, Jimmy, only dumb people ask questions.
No, I'm pretty sure we're supposed to question authority.
It's like a value.
Is that what they taught you in comedy school?
Yeah, that is what they taught me at comedy school.
Even comedians would get on stage and they would shame people for trying to get informed about a medical treatment that was experimental that they had to take or they would lose their jobs and they wouldn't be able to travel.
And when people tried to get informed about that, other people shamed them.
They would say, please tell me you're not going to do your own research.
You know, before COVID, doing your own research used to be called reading.
Now you're shaming me for reading at the behest of Big Pharma?
It's like I woke up in the middle of a Bill Hicks pit.
Well, looks like we got ourselves a reader.
Tell me, boy, what you reading for everything that needs to be read has already been readed by a small cousin.
That's how much people internalize the propaganda for big pharma.
You would never shame people for trying to get informed, no matter what other subject it was.
Like if I say, hey, I'm going to go buy a car.
Don't look into it.
Well, how will I know which car to get?
Ask the salesman.
He's the expert.
My point is: the marketplace of ideas generally works.
I can't really think of a time or a place where the people doing the censorship were the good guys in the sweep of history.
I acknowledge there are some very limited examples to the contrary.
Frankly, the only one I could think of right now is in wartime, censoring a report about secret troop movements that might help the enemy.
But unless it's that extreme and limited a case, what is censorship other than an admission that you cannot deal with someone else's ideas?
You can't debate them.
You don't have an idea yourself.
You're too lazy.
You're too above it.
I don't know.
Public Pressure on Biden00:15:27
Did you see David Menzies accosting that man playing rugby in a women's team the other day?
By the way, his female teammates were defending him, but they couldn't muster any arguments.
Just watch the craziness here for a moment.
Yeah, 34, 21.
Mr. Davis, Ash, why are you doing this?
I'm David Menzies, Rebel News.
No, you're not really a part of this.
Human rights.
What about the human rights of biological women being injured by this man?
As a mother, why would you expose your kids to a misogynist?
That is my partner.
That is not my wife's day.
You aren't being.
So he's a lesbian.
It's not a sport.
Or it's not an issue.
I'm a registered social worker, sir, and I demand human rights for everybody.
Oh, okay.
Yeah, what's the biological female?
How do you feel about a biological male playing in rugby match?
Thank you.
I don't really give a f about it.
Okay.
I don't know what is a crime anymore.
Well, sometimes we all ask ourselves that, right?
But it's not just 19-year-old rugby players who can't debate.
Neither can the president of the United States.
Let me show you what he did.
This is new.
This is from the Congressional Inquiry into the weaponization of the state against political dissidents.
It's a thread of Twitter posts made by Jim Jordan, the Republican leading the inquiry.
And you should know that our friend Janine Eunice is the lawyer on that committee.
I'm so proud to know her.
Let's read through them.
It's actually more than a dozen tweets.
All right, let me read some of these tweets.
The first one says the Facebook files, part one, smoking gun docks prove Facebook censored Americans because of Biden White House pressure.
Let me read through them, and I'm going to go through them because I really can't improve upon them.
And it's not even for me to improve upon.
I want to show you what the U.S. Congress is doing.
And maybe I'll make you a little bit jealous that we don't have this kind of parliamentary curiosity in Canada, too.
Never before released internal documents subpoenaed by the Judiciary Committee prove that Facebook and Instagram censored posts and changed their content moderation policies because of unconstitutional pressure from the Biden White House.
During the first half of 2021, social media companies like Facebook faced tremendous pressure from the Biden White House, both publicly and privately, to crack down on alleged, quote, misinformation.
In April 2021, a Facebook employee circulated an email for Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Cheryl Sandberg, writing, we are facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the Biden White House, to remove posts.
Isn't that crazy?
That's a direct violation of the First Amendment.
You don't need to be a legal scholar to know that.
And then he shows the memo.
That's the difference.
It's not just an accusation now.
He shows the email.
Mark, Cheryl, we are seeking your guidance on whether to take more aggressive action against certain vaccine-discouraging content.
Look what's highlighted in yellow.
We are facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the White House and the press, to remove more COVID-19 vaccine-discouraging content.
And they go on a little bit.
In another April 2021 email, Nick Clegg, Facebook's president for global affairs, informed the team at Facebook that Andy Slavitt, a senior advisor to President Biden, was, quote, outraged that Facebook did not remove a particular post.
And here's what he said.
And again, this is an internal document.
Just got off an hour-long call with Andy Slavet.
There are some pretty serious and sensitive issues we need to address.
A summary.
And then you can see the bullet points.
And the one that's highlighted below says, as an example, he was outraged.
Not too strong a word to describe his reaction that we did not remove this post, which was third most highly ranked post in the data set we sent to him.
And then what do you think it was?
Do you think it was some false scientific claim?
Do you think it was some complete fabrication or lie?
Get a load of this.
What did the Biden White House want removed?
A meme.
That's right.
Even memes weren't spared from the Biden White House's censorship plans.
And they show the meme.
It's this one.
It's a picture of Leonardo DiCaprio pointing at something.
Looks like a TV set.
And it says, 10 years from now, you will be watching TV and hear, did you or a loved one take the COVID vaccine?
You may be entitled, you know, just like there are class action lawyers advertising.
It wasn't misinformation.
It wasn't a lie.
It was an opinion.
It was a joke.
It was a daydream about what might happen 10 years from now.
And Andy Slavitt, the president's senior advisor, was shouting at the president of Facebook internationally for an hour.
And this was what made him most furious.
That's not disinformation.
That's not a lie.
It's not a falsehood.
It's not defamatory.
It's not obscene.
It's an opinion.
And the White House demanded it be taken down.
When Clegg, quote, countered that removing content like that would represent a significant incursion into traditional boundaries of free speech, free expression in the U.S., Slabit disregarded the warning and the First Amendment, and they show, again, that email.
I countered that removing content like that would represent a significant incursion in traditional boundaries of free expression in the U.S., but he replied that the Post was directly comparing COVID vaccines to asbestos poisoning in a way which demonstrably inhibits confidence in COVID vaccines amongst those the Biden administration is trying to reach.
You know what's amazing is Nick Clegg is not even American.
He's a Brit.
And he cares more about freedom of speech in the United States and the First Amendment than the U.S. president did.
I'll keep reading.
What happened next?
Facebook panicked.
In another April 2021 email, Brian Rice, Facebook's VP of Public Policy, raised the concern that Slabit's challenge felt, quote, and I'm going to quote from the yellow part of the email here, very much like a crossroads for us and the White House in these early days.
But Facebook wanted to repair its relationship with the White House to avoid adverse action.
And I'm going to quote again from the email.
This is from Nick Clegg.
Given what is at stake here, it would also be a good idea if we could regroup to take stock of where we are in our relations with the White House and our internal methods, too.
So Facebook did not want to censor these things.
And they're very censorious to begin with.
Even a foreigner, Nick Clegg, understood the importance of the First Amendment, not just in life, but to their business.
That they were so terrified of the White House senior advisor shouting at them for an hour, they said this is a real crossroads.
This is really going to determine our relationship with the White House.
They were terrified.
I'll keep reading.
This wasn't the first time that the Biden White House was angry that Facebook didn't censor more.
According to these documents, the Biden White House demanded to know why Facebook had not censored a video from, you guessed it, Tucker Carlson.
So Facebook prepared its response to appease the Biden White House.
Talking points were drafted for Clegg.
They knew that Biden hated Tucker Carlson and they were ready for it.
Facebook was ready to tell the White House that it had demoted a video posted by Tucker Carlson by 50% in response to the White House's demands, even though the post didn't violate any policies.
Can you believe that?
They throttled, they turned down the availability.
They stopped people from seeing it, even though in their mind there was nothing wrong with it.
They were censoring to appease Biden.
You can see the internal email.
Thanks, Nick.
Here's some talking points that you can use if Andy raises Rob's questions.
You can say reduced and demoted.
What does that mean?
There's 40,000 shares on that video.
Who is seeing it now?
How many?
How effective is that?
Like the detail that they hated their critics and they had this whole team of censors is shocking.
I'm going to keep reading.
Public pressure mounted as well.
In July 2021, President Biden publicly denounced Facebook and other social media platforms, claiming they were killing people by not censoring alleged misinformation.
On August 2nd, 2021, Facebook admitted it was going to change its policies because of pressure from the Biden White House.
And you can see a lengthy memo about that.
Facebook's leadership asked misinfo policy to brainstorm some additional policy levers we can pull to be more aggressive.
This is stemming from continued criticism of our approach from the Biden administration.
That's illegal.
You can't do things indirectly that you can't do directly.
You can't outsource censorship.
If you're threatening Facebook, which is obviously how they felt and what was happening, imagine a one-hour call being shouted at by an outraged senior advisor to the president.
They were terrified.
And if Facebook, which has been censoring Americans and people around the world for a decade, is being forced to censor even more than they naturally want to, you can imagine how bad it was.
But it wasn't just the White House.
Facebook also changed its policies in direct response to pressure from Biden's Surgeon General, censoring members of the disinformation dozen.
What?
Yeah.
They came up with like a hit list of people that they did not think should be allowed to talk.
You know, there's a concept of a bill of attainder, and it's one of the things that was motivating the American Revolution, where you pass laws to target that guy and pass a law to target that guy.
It's called a bill of attainder.
That's basically what the White House was doing.
I recommend you read the tweets.
I'm not going to read every single word of it, but what's new here is for the first time ever, Facebook has disgorged its documents.
Facebook shows the internal panic amongst its executives.
Facebook shows the pressure it was under that they literally made these choices to preserve their peace with the White House.
They were afraid.
It's a violation of the First Amendment by the government.
I think that people who were banned and punished and censored by Facebook might have a legal claim against Facebook and against the government.
In a way, I can understand Facebook's position.
I don't agree with it.
I can at least understand it.
That they were between a rock and a hard place.
Even their own principles were violated.
I think they should have gone public.
I think they should have resisted.
I think they should have said, look, we're built on freedom of speech.
See you in court.
Instead, they took a cowardly way out.
But at the end of the day, I understand that they were going to be smashed by the government if they didn't do so.
I don't exculpate them, but I understand them.
I think that Americans who were censored in the disinformation dozen should be amongst them should sue Facebook for violating their terms of service and should sue the U.S. government for violating the First Amendment.
Will the Americans reclaim their freedom?
Will Facebook push back?
Certainly they have a role model in Elon Musk, who's turned Twitter into a free speech machine.
Or do they sort of like being told to censor by Biden?
Because now they can just blame Biden and now they're not treated poorly like Biden.
But let me close with what I think is the most obvious point as I stand here in Canada reading about this.
Why can't we have this kind of inquiry in Canada?
Why doesn't anyone in our political system care about freedom of speech?
Why don't we have political inquiries, legal inquiries?
Why don't we have a vigorous, coast-to-coast, multi-partisan freedom of speech caucus?
Why don't we have lawyers and politicians and frankly other media doing this?
Well, you know the answer.
Because freedom has been slowly wrung out of our system.
The media has been colonized.
Law schools teach wokeness.
It's not just in the lawyers.
It's in the judges now.
I'm afraid our system is not as strong as the Americans.
If anyone's going to save our freedom in Canada, it just might be Americans saving it for us.
Wouldn't it be something if this American inquiry causes Facebook to take its foot off the neck of controversial outlets?
We might be the beneficiaries up here.
And wouldn't it be something if those same Americans who love their freedom stopped some of Trudeau's other plans like C-18 and C-11 to regulate and censor the media?
Stay with us for more.
Well, there's a new poll out by Abacus.
You've heard me talk about that pollster before.
They're a liberal-oriented firm, so I'm a little bit cautious of what they report.
But when they report news and do a poll that shows the Liberals in a terrible light, which their latest poll does, I tend to take it seriously because they wouldn't say that if it weren't the case.
I've never seen a poll this starkly in favor of the Conservatives.
In fact, it suggests a Conservative Party majority.
I see that the Liberals are trailing badly across most of the country, even Ontario.
For the first time in memory, the Conservative Party actually has a lead amongst women.
Even Atlantic Canada is pretty much split.
And the demand for a change is enormously high.
You might recall that it's this same firm that detected 81% of Canadians wanted a change.
Well, Justin Trudeau's no dummy.
He won in 2015, 2019, and 2021 because he pays close attention to the polls.
And if his party is despised, and if it's going down in the polls and people want change, well, change he'll give them.
He won't replace himself, of course, but he replaced an enormous number of cabinet ministers.
Some of them were achingly awful and had to be replaced.
Others, I think he's just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
But what will it mean for your tax load?
Because I think economics are one of the reasons that people want to change.
Inflation, mortgage rates, the cost of living, things are tougher than ever.
An enormous number of Canadians are one paycheck away from disasters.
And God forbid, if they lost their job or were off work for a single pay period, they simply wouldn't be able to make ends meet.
People are scared.
And it's money issues again, even though Trudeau likes to work on cultural Marxist divisions.
Well, who do we talk to if we want to know about how the new cabinet will hit our pocketbook?
There's only one group I trust on that.
And you know who I'm talking about.
It's the Canadian Taxpayers Federation because they do not take any money from the government.
So when they speak on these matters, they speak in a nonpartisan way.
In fact, what I like about them is they sometimes criticize the conservatives too.
And joining me now via Skype from Ottawa is our friend Franco Terrazzano with the latest on this liberal cabinet shuffle.
Franco, good to see you again.
I saw a tweet by you today.
Let me read it.
I thought it was a good point.
You said total salary cost of Trudeau's cabinet, $11,310,000, and you compared it to years past.
Bank Canada's Inflationary Scheme00:09:03
Last year was $10 million, the year before $9 million, the year before $7 million.
I mean, the election before $7 million.
You're pointing out that we're paying more than we ever have for a cabinet, but that's pretty crooked timber in this cabinet.
Take it away, Franco.
Well, yeah, the reason we're paying more for this cabinet is more ministers with bigger salaries.
Now, doesn't that just always seem to be the case with this government?
More, coming from Canadian taxpayers.
What's not more?
The value that we're getting, right?
Because let's not also forget that the Trudeau, since he took office back, what, after the 2015 election, he's hired more than 98,000 bureaucrats, ballooning the size of the bureaucracy by what, 40%?
Now, is anyone out there getting 40% more value from the federal government?
No.
Maybe the only thing we're getting that's 40% more is 40% more wait times every time we try to get a passport renewed.
Yeah.
And just disaster in airports, really all the practical things that the government's responsible for.
Now, I take the point of your tweet that we have the biggest, flabbiest cabinet ever.
And I think it's also true to say that a lot of those cabinet ministers aren't really running the show.
I think Trudeau has an approach that he wants to show a diversity, an ethnic and a demographic and a geographic diversity in his cabinet for PR's sake.
But I think the key decisions are made in the prime minister's office.
I really think so.
We learned some of that during the Trucker Commission of Inquiry, where we learned that Marco Mendocino wasn't even consulted with key decisions.
His own staff knew he wasn't the decider.
Here's my point.
It's gross how big the cabinet is.
Trudeau's trying to shuffle the deck to say, hey, Canadians, you want change?
I'll give you change.
But I think the core problems are still there.
Trudeau himself and his disastrous finance minister, Christia Freeland.
I think those two people really are the core of this government.
In some ways, I think Christian Freeland actually makes more decisions than Trudeau does.
What do you think of that thesis, Franco?
Well, okay, first of all, like a cabinet change, that's not what Canadians really need.
What Canadians really need is a culture change from this government.
And you know, you mentioned Freeland.
I'm glad you did, because here's the thing, folks.
Until the government, whether it's Freeland, whether it's Trudeau, actually changes its policies, i.e. put out its fiscal dumpster fire and stop raising taxes that make everything more expensive.
Until the government does that, I mean, all of this is just adding lipstick onto a peg, right?
I mean, the government can, you know, shuffle its cabinet every single day.
It can pose for the camera every single day.
None of that would matter until the government actually does what?
Two things.
Stop raising taxes.
That makes everything more expensive.
In fact, the whole point of the Trudeau governments and Freeland's carbon tax increases are to make your life more expensive, right?
Live the way we say or pay.
And the next thing that the government has to do, stop spending money like crazy.
The reason Canadians are paying too much tax is because the government loves to shower itself living a lavish lifestyle on our tab.
I think there's a related point.
Would you agree with this, Franco, about printing money?
Because by printing so much money, they devalue the amount of money out there.
It's sort of like counterfeit money.
Counterfeit money dilutes the value of real money.
Well, it's the same thing.
The government adds billions of dollars just by printing.
It makes us all poorer, drives prices up.
I think that's a source of inflation, isn't it?
One of the sources.
It's not a source of inflation, Ezra.
It's the source of inflation.
Look, I'm not saying that there aren't things going on internationally, whether it's supply shortages of that nature.
I'm not saying that doesn't impact it.
But what that explains are changes in relative prices.
But what makes all prices go up?
An increase in the money supply, burr, the printing press.
And what happened during the pandemic?
Well, in the two years between March 2020 to March 2022, the central bank, the Bank of Canada, printed about $370 billion right out of thin air and then dropped all that freshly printed cash into an economy that was essentially locked down by government fiat.
What does that do?
Too many dollars chasing too few goods.
And to tie the bow on this, Ezra, what was the Bank of Canada largely purchasing?
Government of Canada debt, okay?
That is using the printing press to finance Ottawa's deficits.
It's the inflation tax and it's why your life is more expensive.
You know, the other day, Christy Freeland was on a panel with a lot of foreign media and she boasted that Canadian inflation was, they finally whipped it and she was so proud of herself.
But that wasn't quite true, was it?
Inflation in Canada has come down.
You didn't ask me about this, Matt.
I can't believe it.
Okay.
Inflation, we had our inflation number on Tuesday, 2.8%.
Isn't that great?
Yeah, it is.
Okay, we are now within the Bank of Canada's target range.
This is huge.
It's come down from 8.1% last June.
Okay, so whenever you hear those headlines like inflation is cooling, this is what it actually means, folks.
And you already know this, right?
If you're not living under a rock, if you've left that rock to go to a gas station or a grocery store in the last I don't know couple years, you know that this is the case in 2022.
We had 40 year high inflation, 40 year high inflation and now inflation is cooling to 2.8.
What does that really mean?
Well, if you trust the government numbers, let's take it at face value, for the sake of it.
It means inflation was a 40 year high last year and prices are still going up right by another 2.8 percent.
It's still inflating.
It's still, you know.
Let me tell you a little anecdote, because I this blew me away.
I the other day, I had the pleasure of going to a museum and handling a real coin called a piece of eight.
Pieces of eight.
It was silver from a mine, I think in Bolivia or something.
Give me just one minute to tell you this story.
This was the most prolific mine in world history for silver, and it was this it's what really fueled the Spanish conquistadors who kept going to South America.
This mine produced so much silver and it was sort of cool to handle the coin.
This was 500 years ago, but you dumped more silver into the world than had ever seen before.
It chased, like you said.
You had so much more money chasing so many more things.
The prices zoomed, it distorted the entire world's economy.
This one little mine in I think it was Bolivia and I just to hear this story in the museum.
It was shocking to think that these things happened like half a millennium ago here in, but at least the silver was real.
But in Canada we're just.
The BANK OF Canada is just print like a xerox machine and there there isn't even anything underneath it.
At least silver.
You could use it for jewelry, you could use it for things.
They're just printing paper money and it's, I think it's doing the same thing.
It's driving up the price of everything.
You just made me think of those, that Pieces Of Eight silver mine story and we're doing it all over again.
Well, i've got a couple things on that, okay.
So number one, uh, it doesn't take a phd in economics to understand that if you print more money, the dollars that everyone has is going to be able to buy less.
That's inflation.
In fact, I think the only people who can understand that fact nowadays are the people with phds in economics working at their taxpayer funded universities.
Okay, but the next thing.
You know why inflation is so pernicious?
Two reasons.
Number one, fundamentally undemocratic right, because everyone knows when the sales tax goes up, everyone knows when an income tax goes up, and then they're able to hold their politicians accountable.
But, like people, if you just stop anyone at any main street, how many people are going to know how much the BANK OF Canada printed?
In fact, go talk to those 338 members of parliament that are walking around Ottawa.
How many of those members of parliament even know what's going on at the BANK OF Canada.
It's a pretty pretty uh, pretty tough bet there, right?
But the third, the third thing that we have to understand, and another reason that inflation is so pernicious, is because it's a fundamentally redistributive scheme, because not everyone gets those new dollars right away.
Right, They're not dropping it from the sky, from an airplane.
No, no, no.
The people who are closest to the newly printed cash, whether it's those big banks that the Bank of Canada is getting the money from or getting the bonds from, or if it's wherever the government is spending that money quick, well, they essentially get a transfer of wealth.
So not only is inflation, the Bank of Canada increasing the cost of living, not only is it undemocratic, but it's fundamentally a redistributive scheme as well.
Transfer Of Wealth00:03:11
You are so right.
Whoa, my brain is stretched.
Franco, it's great to see you again.
Keep up the fight.
And I recommend again that our viewers support Taxpayers Federation, the only nonpartisan group in Ottawa on the tax beat that doesn't take money or direction from the government.
Great to see my friend.
Keep up the fight.
Thanks so much.
All right.
Well, stay with us.
More ahead.
And I'm going to go study that silver mine again.
It was quite something to hear about worldwide inflation a half a millennium ago.
I got to beef up on that.
Stay with us.
More ahead.
Well, it's great to be back in Toronto.
You'll notice I'm not actually in the studio.
We did an amazing thing in the studio.
We sort of raised the roof, literally.
Hopefully, I'll be back in that room on Monday, and I'll show you what it's like.
It's very exciting.
But I'm in our boardroom.
You can see behind me a couple of plaques.
Our million subscriber plaque from YouTube isn't that relevant to my monologue today and some of our donor plaques too.
That's how we survived the crackdown by social media.
I hope you enjoyed my trip to Hungary.
I know that's rather an obscure subject matter.
There's only 10 million Hungarians in Hungary and some millions around the world.
It's not a large country like France or Italy or the UK, but I think what they're doing is very interesting.
And the fact that Victor Orban has resisted the globalist woke brigades, and he talks that way.
He talks about it.
He talks about being colonized by the European Union and even foreign powers other than that.
I enjoyed my trip there, and I hope you thought it was okay that I was away for some time.
Then I went to Lethbridge to cover the trial of the Coots 4, at least a pre-trial hearing.
What I learned there was a little bit disturbing, and I know some people are upset that we are not championing in the same way the Coots 4 as we are the Coots 3.
You might remember we're defending three other truckers who were arrested and charged, but they were not accused of any violence.
They're just civil disobedience.
Of course, we're representing hundreds, indeed more than 2,500 people across the country, including Tamara Leach.
And when I say we, I mean either Rebel News or Rebel News is crowdfunding for the Democracy Fund.
So we are defending literally thousands of people, including very prominent victims of the lockdowns.
I just have to say, in all honesty and candor, I cannot divert Rebel News and Democracy Fund donors to a conspiracy to commit murder.
It just is outside the scope of how we raise the money.
I know some people are upset by that.
I hope that the men are acquitted.
I hope the charges against them are false.
And I hope that they did not do the things they're accused of.
And if so, I'll happily eat my words.
But until then, we'll do our best to do fair journalism on their case.
But I'm worried that some people got a little too deeply into this diagonal on fake reactionary militia and that actually became real when the town was swarming with cops and they said a bunch of stupid things that I can't report to you now, but that'll come out in trial.
That's our show for today.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rubble World Headquarters to you at home, good night and keep fighting for freedom.