Ezra Levant’s Federal Court of Appeal battle for Rebel News’s QCJO status—denied despite 400M views on crowdfunded convoy coverage—exposes Canada’s $1M government-backed censorship machine, where bureaucrats reverse decisions under political pressure. Meanwhile, Rebel Air Force footage reveals CFIA staging hay bales near Edgewood to secretly cull ostriches used in therapeutic research, despite herd immunity and farmer arrests. Crowdfunding at letusreport.com fuels his appeal, while supporters mock Mark Carney’s alleged incompetence and question his authority over Palestine recognition, underscoring systemic bias against independent media and dissent. [Automatically generated summary]
I spent it at the Federal Court of Appeal fighting for freedom of the press.
It was a lonely fight.
There were no allies in the room.
I'll tell you more about that.
But first, I want to invite you to get what we call Rebel News Plus.
It's the video version of this podcast because you absolutely have to see the second part of the show.
Drea Humphrey and Sheila Gunread get in a helicopter and go being part of the Rebel Air Force flying over the ostrich ranch in BC looking for the ostrich killers.
If what I've just said makes no sense to you, it is hard to understand.
I get it, but you're going to see it all with your eyes on that segment of the show.
So do yourself a favor and get Rebel News Plus eight bucks a month.
Just go to rebelnewsplus.com.
Tonight, does anyone care about freedom of speech or freedom of the press anymore?
It's September 25th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Shame on you, you sensorious bug.
Oh, hi, everybody.
I just got back to the office, the studio here, from the Federal Court of Appeal, which is in downtown Toronto.
It's a big building on 180 Queen Street West, for those who know the city.
There's all sorts of different courts and tribunals there.
I've been in that building probably half a dozen times.
Frankly, I have a wonderful memory from that building.
I know that sounds really weird to say, but the first time I was ever in that courthouse was in 2019 when Justin Trudeau's hand-picked election debates committee banned Rebel News and at the time, True North from attending the debates.
The last minute, they told us that.
It was like, I think on the Thursday or the Friday.
And if I'm going from memory now, I think the debates was on a Monday.
So they really made it almost impossible to appeal.
But we found lawyers who rushed down there.
And I think it was the morning of the debates.
We found a judge who was available and a courtroom that was available, which is not easy to do, like on no notice.
And the judge heard the case on an emergency basis.
And I could see as the minutes went by that the judge was warming to the case and he was asking more and more critical questions to the government.
And for the first time, maybe in my life, I could feel that the judge was going our way.
And it really felt like a miracle.
I left there and it was one of the happiest moments of my time at Rebel News.
We were vindicated.
Justin Trudeau's bullying was called out by the judge.
He had so many lawyers in there, but we beat him anyways.
So that happened at 180 Queen Street West.
I've since been back several times because, like I say, there's all these different courts there.
We have had some good luck in the courts.
Again, in 2021, the federal court said that Trudeau had to let us in the election debates.
Sometimes now, simply telling the government we're going to go to federal court is enough to make them scared straight.
For example, they tried to ban us from reporting on the G7 conference in Banff.
They wouldn't let us, but as soon as we filed at court, they knew the jig was up, so they conceded.
It's quite funny that way.
But today, it was a different feeling.
We had already been to the federal court and we lost there.
So we were at the federal court of appeal and we were arguing about something you might have heard me talk about before.
The acronym is QCJO, Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization.
What a mouthful, eh?
What an alphabet soup.
It's a code word for a licensed journalist that Justin Trudeau approves.
I mean, that's how he described it, trustworthy journalists, as in he can trust them to do the right thing.
99% of journalists in this country are on the government payroll in one way or another.
And all the big newspapers are QCJO compliant, which is why they're so obedient.
Only Rebel News and maybe one or two others are not QCJO compliant.
But I've heard it said that the QCJO system was called the Kill Rebel Bill.
Two different journalists told me that.
I mean, I would have thought it, but for them to say it was quite striking to hear someone else say it.
And the idea is, how can you separate Rebel News from the other media?
And as I mentioned with the two cases involving the elections debate, it's really hard because what are you going to say?
Oh, you guys are too biased?
Well, we're not any more biased than the CBC or the Toronto Star.
I mean, there's really nothing you can say about Rebel News that you can't say about other media.
I mean, we're Canadian-owned.
We follow Canadian news.
We follow the general practices of journalism.
I mean, you really just have to say, Rebel, you're out.
But even that, how do you do it?
Well, you do it the way Trudeau did it.
He hand-picked a committee of his allies and called them an advisory group.
And then he said to the Canada Revenue Agency, which is actually in charge of the QCJO, you do the work, but listen to my hand-picked advisory group.
And so I learned in court today, and so anyway, just to tell you what I was doing in court, is we were denied a QCJO, so we appealed, and then we appealed again, and that brought us to today.
But here's what I learned in court today.
I learned that the civil servant at the Canada Revenue Agency had agreed to give us the QCJO status.
But then Trudeau's advisory board weighed in and the civil servant, the professional career civil servant at the CRA, flipped and said, okay, fine, we won't let them have it.
Anyways, let me show you a few videos I recorded on location at the court.
The first one, when I knew it was a tough battle, a bit of an uphill battle, but I was hopeful.
So watch this video.
It's slightly repetitious of what I just said, but here's me early this morning.
Ezra Levan here for Rebel News behind me, a police guard.
Don't worry, I'm not being arrested.
It's just parked next to this building here, which is the Federal Court of Appeal in downtown Toronto.
In a few minutes' time, I'll be making my way up into the court to the seventh floor where Rebel News is challenging a decision by the lower court, the federal court, regarding freedom of the press.
Let me give you a quick summary of it.
Justin Trudeau decided to regulate journalism.
He invented a journalism license called the QCJO, Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization.
Now, that's not a Canadian thing to do.
In Canada, the government doesn't get to choose who is or isn't journalists.
The government doesn't get to decide who can or can't criticize them.
But Trudeau did it, and the rest of the media went along with it for two reasons.
Number one, of course, they were all getting this license, naturally.
It was really targeting independent, critical journalists like Rebel News.
And number two, when you get this license, you get massive government funding.
So for example, why would the Toronto Star or the Globe and Mail, which have this journalism license, criticize the licensing regime when it's just independent guys like Rebel News who are locked out?
So we're going to be in the court by ourselves today, I predict.
The federal court of appeal, we've got two lawyers on our side.
I don't know how many will be on the government side.
Typically, they send three, four, five, six, seven.
I mean, it's only taxpayers' money, right?
The Justice Department is really the largest law firm in Canada.
They will be deployed.
They will be arguing that the government has the power to determine who is or isn't a journalist.
And in one sense, who cares what they say, right?
We can just do our journalism as usual.
Not quite.
Because flowing from this QCJO license are various things.
The smallest thing, for example, is that subscribers to QCJO news sources can write off their subscription fees on their taxes.
It's not a huge thing, but it's a two-tiered system.
If you buy government-approved news, you'll get a tax credit.
But if you buy independent news, you won't.
It's a little bit of discrimination pushing people towards their propaganda papers.
But that's the least of it.
I mentioned already massive government subsidies are available to QCJO sources.
Obviously, Rebel News would never apply for or accept government money.
Here's what really worries me about it.
First of all, the credentialing is morally wrong.
Who the hell is the government to determine who is original journalist?
But C-18, which is another government bill, gives the government the power to order social media platforms to change what they call discoverability.
That's a fancy way of saying when you type in a search for Mark Carney News or Liberal Party, what is the order that things show up?
That's a very important part of the internet.
And under C-18, the federal government gave itself the power to order Facebook, YouTube, Google, Twitter, whoever, to alter their algorithm to suit the government's political purposes.
Now, the example they gave in the legislation, they just gave a short list and said, and others, they had a couple examples.
One was French language results.
Another was indigenous language results.
But they left it open.
So if you do not have a QCJO news license, the government can order your news to be suppressed, down-ranked, de-boosted.
But if you toe the government line and get a QCJO news license, they can order the press to boost you, order the social media companies to boost your results.
It's a way of interfering with the internet and cutting off traffic to independent sites like ours.
You think this would animate every free speech activist in the country, from the Canadian Association of Journalists to the falsely named Canadian Journalists for Free Expression.
But they don't care because, like I say, they're all on the inside.
They get paid to be Trudeau and now Mark Carney Schills.
Well, not us.
We're going to fight.
And I've set up a special website called letusreport.com.
And there's two reasons to go there.
The first is I have put up the legal briefs both from our lawyers and from the government lawyers there.
The government case is 30 pages long, ours is 34 pages, so it's not a super long read.
And I want you to see both visions of Canada.
The government vision, where bureaucrats and politicians get to determine who is originalism, a journalist, and our vision, which is let people decide.
What's the government doing meddling?
I think that's unconstitutional, frankly.
That's one reason to go to letusreport.com.
The other is I need your help.
The government has unlimited resources.
They want to squash us like a bug.
It's obvious.
We are on our own.
We have to crowdfund our legal fees.
And, you know, we're being economical, but we want good lawyers.
If you can help me cover the cost of that, go to letusreport.com.
Anyways, I'm going in right now.
I'm going to get through the metal detector and I'm going to go take a seat.
And I will be live tweeting the proceedings.
I'm pretty sure I'm going to be the only one in there.
This isn't the sort of thing that concerns the Canadian Association of Journalists.
They don't really care about government regulation because it benefits them.
I think we may be the only news company in Canada that doesn't get the QCJO designation.
And I have heard the law referred to by two different people as the Get Rebel law because it's so obviously targeted at us.
It hasn't stopped us yet in 10 years, but I am worried that if they order the algorithm to be changed, they're coming for us.
Well, I sat through the three hours and there was two government lawyers, but also three more sort of mini-me government lawyers sitting behind them.
I don't know if you've ever been in a court.
You have different rows, the lawyers and then other lawyers.
It's just like it's a real hierarchy.
So there were two formal lawyers for the government and three others on their side.
And then there was me and my two lawyers.
And then the place was empty.
Like no one cares anymore.
And that's what makes me sad.
It makes me sad that in 2025, when a journalism organization like ours is being banned from having some sort of a certification by the government, that no one cares.
And maybe it's that I'm too abrasive or too critical of other media.
But that doesn't mean they have to, you know, they don't have to be there cheering for me.
They can at least write about the news.
I think that 10 years ago, before Justin Trudeau set out to destroy journalistic independence, and he did it with a carrot and a stick, by the way.
He did it with bribes if you're obedient and sticks if you don't.
So after 10 years of incremental change, no one in the regime media cares.
And if they do care, they don't say it out loud because they get so much in subsidies from the government.
That's sad.
I think we're going to lose.
I'll be very, very honest with you.
Like I had a real sense we were going to win that first court battle in 2019.
I was paying close attention today.
I'd say it's a 60-40 chance we're going to lose.
I mean, it's not hopeless.
The judges actually had fairly good questions for the government lawyers, which may be a sign that they're poking holes in it.
I was sad that I was the only person in court, but it just sort of hit me when you had all these government lawyers talking to government judges about a government bureaucrat denying us journalistic status.
And I thought, who the hell do you think you are?
Like, why are you sitting in judgment as to whether or not I can be a journalist?
Like, how did this happen to our country?
I mean, put aside this legal argument and that fact and this appeal.
And like, that's all once you've accepted the fact that this is normal.
But why are we accepting this as normal?
Anyways, after three hours in court, I was a little bit sad.
And here's my sad Ezra recording outside the court.
It's about five, ten minutes long.
Here, take a listen.
Oh, hi, everybody.
Ezra Lamanthier standing under a tree because it's starting to rain.
I'm actually right near the Federal Court of Appeal.
That's that really big building there where we just had a three-hour hearing.
Rebel News taking on Mark Carney, or actually, it's more like Mark Carney taking on Rebel News.
The subject matter is a journalism license that Justin Trudeau brought in several years ago.
Rebel News applied for it.
It's called the QCJO, Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization.
It's basically a journalism license.
You have to apply for the government.
If you don't get it, they have the power to order social media platforms to downrank your discoverability.
That's in Bill C18.
It allows the government to order Facebook, YouTube, Google, et cetera, to make it so when people search for your news source, the license QCJO choices are boosted, and the independent citizen journalists are throttled.
That's why it's so dangerous.
Anyways, I won't go into the QCJO right now.
I want to talk about the hearing we just had.
Why They Rigged the Rules00:14:10
Rebel News had two lawyers.
Government of Canada had two lawyers sitting at the front, but it ranged over the period of time up to three others in the back of the court on their side.
On my side, it was just me.
It was a huge courtroom, completely empty, other than the lawyers, two clerks, three judges.
There was a three-judge panel, and me.
There was no civil liberties people there from all the traditional groups who claimed to be for press freedom.
There was no one there from the Canadian Association of Journalists.
There was no one there from Canadian Journalists for Free Expression.
No one there from Amnesty International, Penn Canada.
Of course not, because they've all been co-opted.
They've all taken the QCJO news license and the subsidy that comes with it.
Rebel News doesn't want the subsidy.
We just want the ability to do our jobs.
But you see what that's done?
That's neutered, that's nullified any independent spirit in the media.
And it hasn't happened overnight.
It's been a 10-year process.
I think if you could go back in time 10 years and tell the Global Mail, the Toronto Star, the CBC, what has become of this journalism license, they would be shocked.
But over the course of 10 years, they become more and more dependent on government cash and more and more obedient.
It's just a handful of outliers like Rebel News.
Anyway, so to the court.
It was astonishing to hear some of the arguments from the government.
One of the government lawyers said this is not journalism regulation or policing at all.
It is not journalism regulation, she said.
Well, of course it is.
That's why we're here.
We wouldn't care if it wasn't journalism regulation.
There are literally regulations that are published.
It just was very bizarre.
What I learned today that maybe I didn't quite register is that there was a professional civil servant at the Canada Revenue Agency who approved our QCTO status.
I actually don't think I knew that.
But Trudeau's hand-picked committee of his journalist friends who are not staffers of the CRA, Trudeau just appointed a committee.
I mean, he named his allies to it.
They contradicted the CRA civil servant and made her change her report.
Can you believe that?
A government civil servant said, yeah, Rebel News passes the test.
And then Trudeau's friend says, no, it doesn't.
So then the lady in civil servant says, oh, sorry, I'll ban them.
The craziest thing is the reason why.
In their first attempt at banning us, they said we were too opinionated.
They actually said that, but they realized that that was not a grounds under law to ban us because opinion journalism is acceptable journalism.
It's half of what the CBC and the Toronto Star does anyways.
But they later said that what we did was not real news.
They said that only 2% of what we do is real news.
And I thought, how can they even say that?
That doesn't make any sense.
We don't do weather.
We don't do sports.
We don't do human interest stories.
How could you possibly say?
And we selected the audit period in question three weeks during the trucker convoy where we did more journalism than we ever had in our lives.
As you may know, in February of 2022, we had 400 million views and impressions.
So certainly a lot of people around the world thought we were doing journalism.
How can you, we were broadcasting almost 24 hours a day during the trucker convoy.
How can you watch that three weeks of journalism and say, no, that's not journalism?
We didn't figure it out until the very end of the hearing today.
The government said, no, none of that was journalism.
None of that counts because at the end of some of those videos or on the website, we mentioned a crowdfunding campaign for the truckers.
So the government said, yes, you did an enormous amount of journalism.
They mentioned podcasts, documentaries, etc.
But they said, because you supported the truckers and invited other people to support it, we're not calling that news.
None of our coverage on the truckers counted because it was all, and at the end we'd say, hey, if you want to support us, go to, you know, truckerlawyer.com or whatever our website was.
That's why we're banned for our support of the truckers.
They literally admitted that in court today, their lawyers.
I thought that was incredible.
You know, I was getting bogged down in the minutiae, the different rules.
And I mean, here's an example.
The law says a QCJO journalism organization merely has to have two unrelated people publishing news on current events.
Well, we have 30 people doing that.
Obviously, we need the test.
Frankly, even if only, quote, 2% of our stuff is real news, that's still much more news than is necessary to qualify.
So it was really going down the rabbit hole.
And I just sort of thought, what are we doing here?
You have four, five, six, seven lawyers, three judges at the Federal Court of Appeal.
You have two clerks.
I don't know how much money the government has spent on this over the last five years, a million bucks fighting us.
And I thought, you know, I agree with some of the things the lawyers are saying.
I disagree with other things, but why are we in a court?
Why was a government panel telling government bureaucrats that we should be denied our journalism status?
And why was a government lawyer arguing to a government judge that that should involved with who is a journalist at all?
Since when did politicians, judges, lawyers, bureaucrats have the ability to determine who a journalist is?
Like, who the hell are they to sit in judgment of me?
Now, I happen to think that we need all the tests.
I happen to think it's clear they rigged the rules to be against us.
It's clear that they hand-picked a committee that hated rebel news.
This whole thing is really a way just to get rebel news.
I've heard two other journalists refer to the QCJO system as the get-rebel rule.
I believe that we pass the test.
If the CBC, and if the Toronto Star does, we sure do too.
But why should I even have to jump over their hurdles?
Since when does a journalist in any self-respecting democracy have to please the politicians before having the right to cover the politicians?
Politicians don't have a veto who gets to cover them.
That's reverse.
Journalists scrutinize politicians.
Politicians don't get to scrutinize, well, they can scrutinize, but to ban, to punish or reward journalists, it was pretty gross in there.
The judges did ask some good questions of the government side, which gives me a flicker of hope.
But really, I think what our biggest hurdle today was, was the standard of review.
And let me give you one minute about what that means to lawyers.
So the Canada Revenue Agency made this decision.
And as I mentioned, they were pressured by Trudeau's friends.
So we appealed that to the federal court, and then we are appealing that to the Federal Court of Appeal.
And the question that Federal Court of Appeal judges have to ask themselves is how much deference do we give to the CRA, which blacklisted rebel news?
How much do we have to respect their expertise?
And it's different in different cases, but the law, I think, in this case, is reasonableness, not correctness.
Here's what I mean.
The Federal Court of Appeal is not, there wasn't a do-over.
There wasn't evidence.
It wasn't a new hearing.
They were just looking at the case and saying, was the ruling to blacklist rebel news reasonable, plausible, understandable, even if it was wrong?
That's the standard of reasonableness, which is a lower standard than correctness.
Did they get it right?
Even Mark Carney's lawyers today were saying, Judge, if this is wrong, if this is an incorrect decision, you still have to support it because we defer to the lower decision makers.
So even Mark Carney's lawyer himself, lawyers themselves, were saying, we're not even going to try and argue that this was correct.
We just have to say that, could someone believe this?
And again, what am I doing in court?
I don't know.
We've probably spent $100,000 on this case over the last five years.
I know the government's probably spent a million.
Why are we in court arguing about whether or not we have the right to be journalists?
Why do we have to prove that it was unreasonable or incorrect or whatever for us to be journalists?
I find it very frustrating, a little bit sad.
I'm not sure how we're going to do here.
If we lose again, I am going to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada because I want the Supreme Court of Canada to either own this or disown this.
Anyway, I'm getting ahead of myself.
We haven't had the ruling here yet.
There were some positive moments where the government lawyers were grilled a bit.
But it's very hard.
You don't get a lot of wins at the Federal Court of Appeal.
They tend to stand by the lower court cases.
I'm going to think about this some more.
But the one thing that gave me a little bit of hope when I was in the courtroom by myself with all these other expensive people making decisions about our freedom.
Oh, by the way, the government said the Charter of Rights does not apply here.
How do you feel about that?
But the one thing that gave me a little flicker of hope was this.
A few years ago, Elon Musk bought Twitter.
And so Justin Trudeau and Mark Carney, when they decide who is or isn't a journalist, that does have some real-world impact on us.
I mentioned how it affects the taxes of our subscribers.
I mentioned how it could affect us being throttled online.
But that was all done before Elon Musk freed Twitter.
He renamed it X.
And in a lot of places, what happens here is really important.
It's important to us.
It could put us in legal jeopardy.
But I think Justin Trudeau and Mark Carney and the other bullies of the world, I think in some ways they've been gone around, gone through, gone under.
I don't think a lot of people are listening to them anymore.
People are choosing to get information on their own, regardless of what this court says, regardless of what the CRA says, regardless of what Mark Carney or Justin Trudeau says.
And so I very much want to win this court case.
And if I lose it, I'm going to appeal to the Supreme Court.
But I think that we have in part been saved by Elon Musk and his dedication to free speech that in some ways is bigger than what any bureaucrat, politician, lawyer, or judge has to say.
And I'm holding on to that.
I'm holding on to that because I need to have a little bit of hope.
All right, I'm going to make my way back to our office.
Strange day at the Federal Court of Appeal.
We're in there alone fighting for freedom of the press.
It's sort of depressing.
But if you can help us out, I'd be grateful for it.
I haven't got my legal bill for today.
There's no chance that today's hearing will be less than $25,000.
Just no chance.
If you can help, please go to letusreport.com.
And by the way, you can read the legal briefs for yourself there.
We put both Mark Carney's legal brief and ours, so you can read it over and see if I'm right.
There you have it.
For Rebel News, I'm Ezra Levant.
And to help us out, which I need, go to letusreport.com.
Well, look, let me tell you a little secret.
I know in advance that we're going to lose most of our court cases.
I know that.
But I don't know which ones, and I don't know how important the wins are going to be either.
When we went to court back in 2019, our lawyer, I remember him very clearly.
He said, we're going to lose.
Can you please pay your legal bill in advance?
That's what he said.
And we did.
We wired in the money right away.
That's how certain he was we were going to lose.
And it was a miracle that we won.
In 2021, same thing, because remember, the government had two years to study the 2019 ruling and make the changes.
Like in 2019, the court said, well, the rules weren't clear.
So in 2021, there were very clear rules.
In 2019, the judge says the wrong person told Rebel News they were banned.
2021, they made sure they fixed that.
In 2019, the court said you gave just a one-line explanation for why they were banned.
That's not enough.
So in 2021, I think they gave us like an 11-page reasons.
So, for two years, the Liberal government sort of reverse-engineered their way to get rebel news.
And so, I remember talking to our lawyer in that case, it was Chad Williamson.
He said, Ezra, for sure, you're going to lose this one.
Well, we fought it and we won.
That's my reason that I fight even uphill battles because you never know when you're going to have a lucky strike.
And you never know when, you know, I mean, as I say, you make no shots that you don't take.
So, we go to bat for these things.
And sometimes there's small wins.
I don't know if you remember when we sued Stephen Gilbea, the former environment minister, I forget what he's doing now, because he banned us on Twitter.
And that sounds small and tiny, but no, beating him and forcing him to unban us on Twitter and unblock us, which we've then replicated many times.
It's pushing back the government who thinks that we answer to them rather than vice versa.
It was a tiny win, like it was like a one-inch win.
But so, what?
One inch in the right direction is a pleasant change to always being pushed the wrong direction.
So, listen, the fact that we, I think, are going to lose this battle is depressing to me.
And it makes me sad.
It makes me sadder that no one else is in the room.
But, you know, I'm not going to stop because someone's got to do it.
And that's, I mean, there are some good guys out there.
As you know, we're big fans of the Democracy Fund that we work with all the time and of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedom.
That's John Carpe.
And there's a couple other groups like Christine Van Guy with the CCF.
I'm not saying there's no good guys out there, but there's very few good guys in journalism, like the Canadian Association of Journalists are completely colonized by Trudeau and now Mark Carney.
Some Good Guys Out There00:03:06
But someone's got to do it, don't you think?
I mean, I remember when I was in court a few months ago over my book, The Libranos, and our lawn signs that the government said were illegal, because it really ticked off Trudeau.
And I thought, are no other book publishers worried about the fact that you can be prosecuted as an author?
Well, the answer is no.
And I just, and I don't know how all these cases are going to go.
We're going to probably lose more than we win, especially on appeal.
Generally, judges don't like to overturn lower rulings.
They like to, you know, defer to lower courts.
And that was a big issue today.
But we have to do it.
It's in my blood.
It's, you know, I mean, I feel like a journalist a lot of the time, but every once in a while, I feel like a lawyer.
I feel like an activist.
And I think, if not now, when?
And, you know, that's an old proverb.
If not you, then who?
And if not now, when?
I think about those words because sometimes I see an injustice and I think, well, if we don't do something about it, no one will.
That's why we set up the Democracy Fund as an independent arms length charity during the pandemic, because there were thousands of cases of things going wrong and someone had to do something.
So anyways, I'm being a little bit melancholy because I lament the state of our country.
And, you know, I just can't get over that Justin Trudeau handpick a group of his allies and they basically were the mean girls who whispered amongst themselves and they managed to convince the CRA to flip, to reverse their ruling and to ban us.
And I was just thinking, that's what it's like under Mark Carney and Justin Trudeau.
And all the other journalists are fine by it.
Could you imagine if one day Pierre Polyev wins and becomes prime minister?
And instead of, and I think Pierre Polyev would dismantle this atrocious cute CJO, but could you imagine if he didn't?
Can you imagine if he appointed a handful of his close allies to be on this journalism committee of who got to have this QCJO license and not?
And for the mainstream media, who gets the free money and not.
And what if he were to appoint people to it like, oh, I don't know, like me?
Or how about instead of me, how about Kian Bechsty or Candace Malcolm or Derek Fildebrand?
I'm talking about other independent journalists.
Like all these left-wing state broadcasters like the CBC and Andrew Coyne and Rosemary Barton and all of them, they're just tickled pink by this because they don't care about the suppression of independent voices because they're doing great by this system because their friends are in charge.
But what would they say if Pierre Polyev's friends were in charge?
Now, I hope he's principled enough to detonate all these things.
But you know what?
Let me just put a marker down right now.
Yeah, I'll run the QCJO committee if Polyev needs help to do that.
Hell, I'll be the chairman of the CBC if he wants.
That's the thing, you know, you've got to be principled.
And I always say freedom of speech is the gift you have to give to your opponent if you want it for yourself, because that's how precedent works.
Farmers Feeding Bales00:11:19
What comes around goes around.
You've got to make sure the rules are fair.
But the other side actually doesn't play that way.
If Pierre Polyev ever took government and did not make those changes, well, I would be delighted to be the boss of the CBC.
And if people are terrified by that, then they should dismantle the CBC now.
Those are my thoughts on the day in court.
Hey, while I was doing that, I want to tell you it's so exciting with this ostrich battle going on.
And we've only had snippets of news because the internet was so weak.
But today we finally got a full report from Drea Humphrey and Sheila Gunreed, who were down there.
And you wouldn't believe it.
You know, my phone number is actually on the internet, if you can believe it.
So I get random calls a lot.
And sometimes I don't answer it if I don't recognize the number.
But I saw a phone number and the area code and the city came up.
And it was, I thought, I wonder if this is near the ostrich farm.
So I answered the phone, even though I didn't know who it was.
And wouldn't you know it?
It was.
And it was a neighbor who had a helicopter.
And would we like to use the helicopter to get some aerial shots?
Oh my gosh, it was so exciting.
What a generous offer.
So we managed to get Drea and Sheila on that helicopter doing some recon, and they spotted the police staging ground, which you could only do by helicopter.
Anyway, without further ado, let me present to you a very exciting report from the Interior BC featuring our Air Force, Sheila Andrea.
You know, an ostrich might be a flightless bird, but our gals were in the sky.
Here, take a look at this.
The countdown between farmers at 301 Langjill Road in Edgewood, British Columbia,'s fight to try to legally save their flock from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's senseless call order to call them for an avian flu that two of their deceased carcasses late last year tested positive for is on.
It could be just a matter of hours between now and when the Canadian Food Inspection Agency succeeds at culling these birds despite mass protests and eyes around the world watching.
And today we bring you a report of Rebel News being eyes in the sky from a helicopter to give you a view of some of what CFIA has planned in how they're going to call these animals.
Animals that are not for food consumption, animals that instead were being used for furthering therapeutic research, their antibodies being extracted from their eggs.
These ostriches represent so much.
The battle for farmers' rights, food rights, sovereignty, and medical freedom.
I'm Drea Humphrey with Rebel News, and this is Sheila Gunn Reed with Rebel, who's come a very long way to be your eyes and ears, including your eyes in the sky from a helicopter.
All right, Sheila, here we are on the ground.
We're seeing that there are protesters lined up because as we revealed and we'll show you some of the footage we captured above the hay bales are organized in sort of a V shape over here with a smaller line almost seeming to be blocking the vehicles.
What are you making of what we see?
Yeah, so we were able to catch the hay trucks being staged up the road.
Sorry, I'm directionally challenged because we saw it in a helicopter, but we were able to see where the trucks were staged.
They are the big square bales and they brought them in for truck swords.
And at first we thought they were could be bringing them in to feed the birds, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
They have brought them in to obscure the view from the road.
In fact, the hay bales follow the curve of the road so that if you're coming down the road, you will not be able to see what's happening behind the hay bales.
And so the, you know, the presumption is that the cull, when it does happen, will happen behind the bales out of the view of the public.
But we were able to show people today the bales being brought in, which I think was significant because the farmers were arrested earlier today.
And so nobody has really been in the farm except for the police and the CFIA agents.
So really nobody knew what was happening.
We were able to see it from above.
That's right.
They want it out of sight and out of your mind.
And the same way that they, in some ways, sort of convince the farmers who were refusing to get out of the pen, wanting to feed their animals till the very last moment, is the same way they kind of came through the back door.
They told the farmers they could feed the animals.
And when they came closer to the feed, that's when they got arrested.
And they came the same way back here.
But enough of us gabbing.
We have lots of footage of this, including earlier when some supporters did spot sort of the hay and the trucks and were pleading with them, the truck drivers, as well as the companies to change their mind.
Take a look here.
We can really make it out of the way.
Welcome here.
Thanks for coming.
Hi, everybody's safe here now.
Okay, I'm not saying you guys did.
No, don't touch the fence.
Okay, don't mess with the fence.
That's all we're asking.
No, right.
We really don't want to be arrested.
So just talking.
No, I get it.
But one of the brokers was pushing one of the fence.
You're going to shoot the hostages anyway.
Now on, everyone, if you see it.
So after that, we had heard mixed reports.
Everything's happening in the moment, so we didn't have time to verify it.
And we still don't know exactly what happened.
There was claims online that one of the companies wanted to pull out, that they said it was booked through a third party.
They didn't know what it was going to be used for.
And that the farmer who gave the hay also wanted to pull out.
Maybe that was wrong, or maybe the CFIA said a deal is a deal.
We are around the corner.
And this is what we spotted from the air thanks to one of our amazing Rebel News supporters.
Take a look at some of this footage.
We should tell you, as Drea said, that we were able to jump in a helicopter thanks to a Rebel News supporter.
The ride in the helicopter was gifted to us.
And we're just so grateful for that because we were able to show the public what couldn't be seen from anywhere else.
You couldn't see anything that was happening in the farm as they were unloading the hay bales because, well, no one's allowed in the farm except the feds.
And we were able to tip off the farmers.
There was only one farmer left, and that was Dave Belinski, as the other farmers were actually being booked and charged.
And he got a heads up.
I don't know what it looked like over there.
Yeah, so, and we were there just right after the farmers were charged under the Animal Health Act, I believe.
We'll put it on the screen.
People are continuing to come here.
It seems to be endless, and the police are letting them in.
They're letting the protests happen.
But as we said, it looks like the plan is still to make this out of sight.
Rebel News is doing our best to actually live stream from above the pens.
So make sure you're checking our YouTube site, rebelnews.com, obviously, and our main site, savetheostriches.com.
We don't know if they're going to jam those videos or not, but for now, that is still streaming.
And if you want to watch the action as it happens, both myself and Drea are streaming to our ex account.
So Drea Humphrey, give them your Drea Humphrey somehow.
And Sheila Gunread at Sheila Gunread.
And if anything happens, we'll do our best to go live.
Please realize we're struggling with reception and upload speeds because we're not in the middle of nowhere, but it's pretty remote and there are mountains.
And so it is difficult to get the news to you as quickly as you would like us to.
We're doing our very best, but there's so much action happening.
Right.
You're seeing it.
It's non-stop.
And having two people, we're still running all around and things move very quickly.
Plus, tips come in, non-stop tips.
As I'm talking here, who knows how many have come in and some of them have been panning out great.
It really is a team effort here to try to save these birds.
And to weed through the rumors.
And to weed, that's our job, to weed through the rumors.
One was that a stay had already been accepted.
And that is not true.
As you saw from the interview with the lawyer in the sky, that is what they're hoping to happen tomorrow.
But I believe, so does the lawyer.
It looks like they're going very quickly here.
They're racing the stay.
Yeah.
And I want to make sure we're keeping an eye on whether they are following the practices they're supposed to do to make sure this is humane.
They better not cut any corners.
So keep watching at those avenues.
We said, I'm Drea Humphrey with Rebel News.
I'm Sheila Gunread with Rebel News.
By the way, we're going to have to work late tonight because, Drea, give us the timeframe that they are allowed to conduct work on the farm until.
Yes, so the warrant, which is not an RCMP warrant, it is a CFIA warrant that they have under that same act for which the farmers, two of them, have been charged for, says that after 9 o'clock and before 6 a.m., they're actually not allowed to do any of this.
So that's why we were a little panicked.
And I was looking through binoculars when they put the feed out because I thought, oh no, is it happening?
But I think they are actually feeding them.
And someone said to me that the farmers have been saying, you need to feed these animals.
It's been long overdue and you wouldn't let us.
So looks like they fed them for now and they're hiding their license plates perhaps.
And hopefully we get an answer legally and have that for you right away, breaking that news.
Again, save theostriches.com.
Thank you for everyone who is chipping in to not just my cost to be here, now Sheila's cost to be here.
There's many costs involved and you guys have been great because you're just as passionate about this story as we are.
And so, if you could continue to support our ability to keep renting what we're renting, the travel, the gas, the food, everything like that, at savetheostriches.com, there's an option to donate.
Thank you very much.
Thanks.
Well, what do you think?
Now, I learned today that the birds got a stay.
I don't know if it's called a stay of execution, but for at least a few more days, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is not allowed to kill the birds.
Illegal Maneuvering Delayed Crisis00:03:08
I think there's more illegal maneuvering going on.
So, the crisis has been delayed at least for a little bit.
I want to get out there myself.
It looks like so much excitement, and it's a real battle.
And I got to admit, I'm slightly scared of ostriches, and I have this fear that they would peck at my eye or something horrific like that.
But that's not the point.
It's not whether or not the ostriches are cute.
It's that a stupid government bureaucracy out of sheer inertia and lack of accountability seeks to kill hundreds of birds because almost a year ago, a handful of them were sick and have recovered, and now they all have herd immunity.
And so, it's the same foolish bureaucratic inertia and do-it-because I say-so-ness that we all suffer through as people during the pandemic.
So I think that's what's animating some folks.
Hey, let me jam in a few letters from you to me.
Let me read them.
Lowell BP says, outrageous, weak-minded people to do this to the First Lady and President Trump.
Shame on all those thugs.
You're talking about when he was at the United Nations saying they shut down first the escalator and then the teleprompter.
A hilarious practical joke.
If you have people like that who are breaking the oath of their employment, breaking their trust with their employer, to embarrass a world leader, obviously they should be fired.
But it's worse than that.
I mean, the teleprompter thinks, ha ha ha, but to stop an escalator, would they also have stopped an elevator?
With the president of the United States inside the elevator, is that a security risk?
Oh, you bet it is.
I think there has to be a lot more that goes on here in terms of accountability.
That's actually terrifying to me.
Sandy Trimble says, Who determines what the rules-based order consists of, Carney?
Canadians have never voted such an order.
And it doesn't even make sense.
First of all, it is not within Canada's power to grant a state or not.
Does Carney think he's the emperor of the British Empire?
Second of all, as we noted, Parliament in Canada voted against this unless and until the conditions precedent that the Palestinians demilitarize, get rid of Hamas, bring in elections next year, and release the hostages.
None of those things have been done.
And I mean, obviously, none of those things will be done.
It just gets me that Mark Carney says, Israel, you have to recognize Palestine, but Palestine doesn't have to recognize Israel.
Mark Carney's got that bizarre thing about Zionist, a Zionist Gaza.
Oh my God, I can't believe he believes that.
My Helly World says pipelines under a Marxist, delusional government are a pipe dream, and you don't need AI to figure that one out.
Yeah, you know, just like the word sustainable, sustainable, sustainable was the word for about a decade.
Now it's AI, AI.
Canada is an AI superpower.
But is it?
Is it really?
Can you name, like, I see the AI battles.
I see these monster tech companies.
AI Giants and Delusions00:01:02
I'm not even going to try and list them all because I'll get it wrong.
But these are companies with trillion dollars or $100 billion market cap, market capitalization.
We don't have any of those.
By the way, they're all in America.
You can say we're an AI giant.
I think that's just sort of like when he says to boomers, hey, elbows up.
I think maybe enough people feel good to hear that, that they like being deluded.
I got to think that Mark Carney is smart.
I just don't think you become the chairman of Brookfield Asset Management, a trillion dollars under management, without being smart.
He's got to be smart, right?
Like, there's no way a dummy would be the chair.
There's just no way.
But sure seems dumb to me.
I don't know.
Or maybe it's just maybe he's trying to come across as dumb and foggy so you can't get a grip on anything.
I mean, I don't know.
I think he's a disaster as a prime minister so far.
That's our show so far for the day until tomorrow.