Ezra Levant of Rebel News alleges a partisan audit threat from Elections Canada on March 24th, orchestrated by Mark Carney and bureaucrats Luis Kirot and Stéphane Perot as revenge for his criticism of Chinese interference and Liberal corruption. Joined by Tom Maven, Levant condemns Public Safety Minister Gary Ananda Sangari's Tamil Tiger ties and ineffective gun buybacks while highlighting ignored hate crimes like the New Brunswick church burning. Ultimately, this coordinated pressure aims to silence dissent, yet Levant vows to continue his campaign against Carney despite the intimidation tactics. [Automatically generated summary]
I got a shocking letter from Mark Carney's Elections Canada.
They're auditing me, and that announcement comes one day after I announced that we're going to be having a third-party campaign against Carney.
Is it a coincidence?
Yeah, pull my other leg.
I'll go through it with you today.
But first, let me invite you to become a subscriber to what we call Rebel News Plus.
It's the video version of this podcast.
And today, it's important I want to show you the threat letter I got from Mark Carney.
And I want to show you the audit we already passed.
I want you to see it with your own eyes.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe.
You'll get that great content.
And it's eight bucks a month, which may not sound like a lot to you, but it sure adds up for us.
And it's an important source of revenue if you can afford it.
It's rebelnewsplus.com.
Tonight, Mark Carney just announced he's auditing me, and I've got six days to give him hundreds of records.
It's March 24th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Shame on you, you sensorious bug!
I can't even believe it.
They're not even trying to hide it.
The day after I announce we're going to campaign against Mark Carney in the upcoming by-elections by properly registering with Elections Canada as a third-party campaign group, the day after that, Elections Canada writes to me telling me they're going to audit me for last year when we did the same thing.
Now, what are the odds that they send that audit threat letter to me on the very next business day after I announce we're going to be criticizing Carney?
They're abusing their auditing powers.
They're making it partisan.
They're using it for revenge.
It's like when they seized personal bank accounts of the truckers in the Freedom Convoy, something Carney personally supported.
Now, don't take my word for any of this.
Read their insane threat letter yourself.
You can see it at a website we just launched called auditabusers.com.
That's exactly what they're doing here.
Oh, by the way, we were already audited for our third-party group we had last year.
Not only did we do the accounting in full compliance with the law, we paid an external elections lawyer to advise us, and then an external independent auditor reviewed everything.
It was extremely expensive, but we did it to comply.
You can see that full audit at the same website we've set up, auditabusers.com.
So you can see we are in full compliance and have been the whole time.
Otherwise, why would we have registered?
And not a word from Elections Canada in nearly a year.
And then suddenly, right after we announce we're going to take another crack at Kearney, Elections Canada sends us a threat.
This is just political punishment because we are on Mark Carney's enemies list.
And get this.
For those of you who know something about audits, you'll find this shocking.
The letter came from a government bureaucrat named Luis Kirot, he, him.
Okay.
Now he's demanding all of our expense invoices, all of our bank statements, all of our canceled checks within one week.
Within one week, hundreds of documents for a campaign we did a year ago.
Now, Luis Kirot is obviously just the bureaucrat.
They've sicked on us, but he signed the letter saying we have just days to give him hundreds of documents.
But I'm sure Luis Kirot isn't acting on his own.
I'm sure he's been directed to do this by his boss, Stéphane Perot, the CEO of Elections Canada, who was personally appointed by Justin Trudeau.
Now, Perot is the head of Elections Canada who has done two very important favors for the Liberals.
First, he refused to investigate the 11 ridings that the Chinese Communist Party interfered with in support of the Liberal Party.
China's dictatorship tampered with our elections, including bussing in foreign nationals to participate in a candidate selection.
Perot also turned a blind eye to manipulation of the Liberal Party's leadership vote last year, where the majority of ballots were discarded for irregularities.
That leadership vote conducted online installed Mark Carney as our PM.
Imagine refusing to do those two obvious and very important investigations.
He was like a sleeping lifeguard who just didn't care.
But remember, Carney and Xi Jinping are friends, and a career bureaucrat like Perot knows better than to investigate the prime minister's friends.
Instead, Perot spent five years and more than a million dollars prosecuting me in Rebel News for publishing my book, The Labranos, that criticized Liberal Party corruption.
So now Elections Canada is coming for me and Rebel News again.
I just can't get over that one-week deadline.
That's such an admission of bad faith.
They've waited almost a whole year to spring this audit on us, even though we've already passed an audit.
This is exactly what it looks like it is.
This is Mark Carney's revenge against us for daring to ask questions about him that the regime media won't.
This is selective punishment.
This is a message to anyone else also.
Don't you dare cross the Liberals.
I need your help to fight back legally, of course.
We've got to pay an accountant to comply with this malicious audit to meet the artificial and prejudicial demands of Elections Canada.
We've got to do it immediately.
We've got to hire an accountant to get to work now.
We've only got five days left.
And of course, they're surely going to do this to us again because, like I mentioned on Friday, we are going to campaign in the upcoming by-elections again.
Not going to stop because of a few thugs making threats against us.
And who knows?
Maybe we'll even take our campaign right to the head office of Elections Canada.
Maybe we'll take our big, beautiful billboard truck that they hate so much and use it to ask them a few uncomfortable questions about why they're so friendly to communist China when they interfere, but so hostile to actual Canadian citizens speaking out.
Look, I don't have a lot of nice things to say about Justin Trudeau, but I'll give him this.
At least he never audited me or Rebel News.
Now, Mark Carney, well, he's a bit more of a thug, isn't he?
I mean, during the trucker convoy, he said that the government should have gone harder on the truckers and accused peaceful protesters of sedition.
He's a bully who can't stand criticism.
That's why Mark Carney hates us.
That's why Elections Canada is coming after us instead of Communist China.
If you can help us fight back against this abusive audit by hiring an accountant to prove that this is nothing more than a political vendetta, please do by going to auditabusers.com.
That's what Carney is.
That's what Elections Canada is.
They're audit abusers.
I promise to keep you posted, and I promise we'll fight the bully Mark Carney every step of the way.
Go to auditabusers.com to see their threat letter and to see our audit and to help us fight back.
Political Vendetta Against Gun Owners00:03:42
Thank you.
Well, Gary Ananda Sangary is perhaps the worst public safety minister Canada has ever had.
And that's quite a contest considering who has filled that role before.
Even before he was appointed, he was trouble.
He was an activist with the Tamil Tigers.
That's a registered terrorist group.
So the RCMP obviously flagged that.
Nonetheless, for reasons of ethnic politics and votes, Mark Carney appointed him to that high office.
He must recuse himself, however, from dealing with that terrorist group.
Imagine thinking that that's the right guy to be in charge of public safety.
Gary Ananda Sangri also made himself famous for talking to a tenant.
You see, besides being a busy cabinet minister, our friend Gary has a number of rental apartments that he spends time going door-to-door collecting rent.
And one of his tenants is a firearms owner and complained about this to Gary, who said, oh, don't worry about it.
It's just for show.
It's just for public consumption.
Let me know and we'll get you off the hook if you have a hassle.
Here's a clip of that audio recording.
Gary didn't realize he was being taped.
Take a quick listen.
These guys, I have to say, protection police policies, these guys are caught, right?
Might spend a couple of days in jail.
Get a bail hearing.
I know they don't.
But you're taking stuff away from people that are harmed at all.
Listen, it's voluntary.
That's the only idea.
So what's the third option?
So I deactivate.
I turn them in.
What's the third option?
Third option is you don't do either.
And what's that mean?
Then it's up to the local police.
What's that mean to become?
Yeah.
What's that?
A criminal.
Police enforce it, yes.
Well, of course, the police are going to enforce it.
Because you're going to mandate.
Well, it's not even the criminal.
It's there.
It's recorded written in the criminal code.
Yeah.
So you're basically saying, is if I don't deactivate or return them at a loss, I'm going to be either in your case.
What are your losses?
You're telling me I'll personally.
It's not the point of all Gary said.
I met Gary Anandisangri for the first time a few weeks ago when a Toronto synagogue not far from my own house was shot up and Gary had nothing to offer whatsoever.
See, he's not so interested in gun crimes by criminals.
He's much more interested in pressing law-abiding gun owners like sports shooters, farmers, or ranchers.
Those are the guns that interest Gary Ananda Sangri.
Joining us now to talk about Gary and his, and I'm calling him Gary because it's a little bit simpler to say that.
And his failed firearms buyback project is Tom Maven.
He's the Ontario director and registered lobbyist for the NFA, the National Firearms Association.
Tom, great to have you on the show.
Thanks for joining us.
Thank you very much, Esir, for having me on.
You know, I just can't believe the contrast with how lackadaisical Gary Ananda Sangri is when it comes to actual places of worship being shot with what are surely illegal firearms.
Like he has almost nothing to say about that.
He's reluctant to talk about that.
But boy, he's enthusiastic when it comes to arresting law-abiding people if they don't give up their firearms, isn't he?
Failed Buyback Scheme Skepticism00:11:59
That's for sure.
We know he doesn't have any sort of firearm background because when he first took the stage as the public safety minister, he didn't even know what an RPL was, an RPL being a restricted possession and acquisition license.
Yeah, I mean, the liberals put in people who don't know.
I mean, just if you ask them a simple question, what is an assault rifle?
Because they use that term a lot.
They have no idea what it is.
They say it's something that looks scary.
Again, it's not about actually solving problems.
It's about sending out a message track to their easily scared urban voters, distracting them from the real source of gun crime.
Here, let me play a clip of Gary Nandis Angri at Parliament the other day announcing the results of his attempted gun buyback.
Here, let's take a look.
We're down to the last seven days as of March 31st.
The time for those who enroll who have prohibited firearms comes to an end.
Right now, we have over 26,000 Canadians who have voluntarily enrolled, declaring over 51,000 firearms.
We are just reminding Canadians to those with prohibited firearms to enroll and to take part in the program.
This is a voluntary program.
However, compliance under the Act will not be voluntary as of October the 31st when the current Order on Council is set to expire.
So, with that, I want to just thank everyone who has already taken their civic duty seriously and enrolled in the program.
And we look forward to others doing the same.
This is a critical part of the work that our government is doing, in addition to the number of legislation that's before the House to ensure the safety and security of Canadians.
And we believe that removing these prohibited firearms is one additional step in that measure.
There are millions of firearms in Canada.
The government thought they could buy back 136,000 of them.
That was their plan.
In the end, they had 51,000 guns by 26,000 people.
In other words, a small fraction of Canadians decided to sell their guns to the government.
I think that Canadians who have firearms simply don't trust the government.
And I think the government is not trustworthy on firearms.
And there was a bit of a menace there that he was suggesting it's voluntary for now, but will not be later.
Joining us now is Tom Maven again.
Tom, what do you make of the fact that they thought they'd have 136,000 firearms sold to them, but actually a fraction of that, only 26,000 gun owners went along with the buyback scheme?
What does that say?
I wasn't entirely sure the purpose of their announcement there yesterday.
Were they desperately looking for people to sign up, or were they touting some great success?
We certainly don't see what they've accomplished as a great success, 26,000 people and 51,000 firearms.
They know from their own records that there's 110 to 136,000 previously registered firearms that are now banned.
So when they say that they're seeking 136,000, they're not including the potentially million to 2 million other firearms that are recently banned within the last six years by the federal government.
And those are the firearms they're trying to take in.
You know, I've noticed that police forces around the country, including in jurisdictions where liberals do well politically, police force after police force has said they're simply not going to put their resources into this project.
That's sort of a stunning thing.
I mean, we believe in civilian oversight of the police, but the police have said, sorry, we're not just running that foolish errand.
We're actually going to focus on real crime.
I mean, here in the Greater Toronto area, there are 20 car thefts a day.
And imagine saying, no, we're going to put us at home invasions galore.
Imagine saying we're going to put that aside and go after some farmer who's got a little plinker that hasn't given it up.
What do you make of the fact that actual police are speaking up and saying this is BS?
Well, I'm certainly behind that.
I'm a retired police officer myself.
I spent my last 20 years in police forensics.
I was a CSI, and I'm a bloodstain pattern analyst, a shooting incident reconstructionist, and a forensic expert on firearms.
But I was with the Waterloo Regional Police for those 30 years.
And that police service is actually one of the ones that is participating now in the buyback scheme.
And there, I think, one of only three in Canada.
So I personally find it a little disconcerting that Waterloo is actually taking part in that.
That's interesting.
I didn't know that only three police forces are cooperating.
I find that very interesting.
And actually, I find it a little bit hopeful.
I noticed that the Liberals keep talking about 2,500 different types of firearms that are banned.
I didn't know there were even 2,500 types.
I think that they're just trying to find tiny little distinctions so they can have big numbers like that that impress and scare urban liberal voters.
I don't think that the liberals know anything about firearms.
I don't even think they have the vocabulary.
I think if they were serious about gun crime, they would have a totally different focus.
They would focus on illegal guns coming across from the United States.
They would focus on the guns of choice used by criminals.
I mean, they're focused mainly on long arms, which is exactly what it sounds, a big, long rifle that you have to pull the trigger every time.
That is typically not what's used in gang crimes or smashing grabs, is it?
I mean, the kind of home invasions, they're not typically long arms.
You correct me if I'm wrong.
Well, I can correct you from personal experience.
I haven't been a police officer.
The firearms that they have banned, they started with the Armalite Rifle 15 or AR-15 and then banned many variants of that same firearm.
So basically, most of the firearms that they're banning have the physical appearance of an AR-15.
And that's why they use the word assault-style firearm rather than assault rifle, which is incorrect, of course, because assault rifles have been banned in Canada since about 1978.
You know, I find this whole thing to be theater, extremely expensive theater.
I remember when Alan Rock set up the gun registry about 30 odd years ago, and he spent billions on it.
It's always been ineffective for its real purpose, but I think its collateral purpose, which is to demonize farmers and rural people, has been a great success.
Here's another clip.
Here's a Liberal MP, Natalie Prevo, who is saying anyone who is a skeptic of this is engaging in disinformation.
Here, let's take a listen.
The gun lobby and the conservatives want you to believe that no one supports the assault-style firearm compensation program.
Pierre Poiliev claims that we are, and I quote, confiscating hunting rifles and popcan guns that are used on farm, that we are banning farmers from dealing with gophers.
In that compensation program, there is the Rue Germinikators, which was used against me in Polytechnique.
There's the firearm that was used at the mosque.
There were some firearms that were used at Port Tepec.
I don't feel I am a doc or a gopher or a popcan.
So please, please help us stop that disinformation.
Canadians deserve to register and to get their money back.
They are honest, assault-style firearms.
They bought their firearms honestly, with goodwill.
And we recognize that.
And so that's why there is that compensation program.
But if they are not registered by March the 21st, they won't be able to recuperate that money.
So please, please help us pan that information.
It doesn't take long.
It's just a few minutes.
And by March 31, they'll be able to recover that money.
There's still 19,000 models that are accessible for hunting, for sports shootings, so they can practice their activities.
So please help us tell to Canadians that we're not grabbing guns that are made for duck guns or gopher guns.
We are fighting against assault-style weapon, and it's important that the real message is heard.
Please.
You know, there's a bit of emotional blackmail in there, but what I take away from that little rant was she acknowledged that the people she's targeting are law-abiding, happy, patriotic people.
Like that was the one thing of substance there, other than her moral blackmail, is emotional blackmail, is that she was saying these people bought their firearms in good faith, legally licensed.
We got to get the guns back from them.
That's what she said.
They are not the problem.
They're, you know, people who target practice, farmers, that's exactly not the, I don't think there's a single farmer in Canada has used who has used an assault style weapon in a crime.
I've never even heard of one.
I was going to say ever.
I'm sure there has been one in the course of time.
But I think there's firearms used every single day in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, and other cities that are not like she literally said these happy, law-abiding farmers are good people.
Well, then why are you taking the guns from them?
I think she gave it away there, maybe by accident.
Well, first off, as a representative of the firearms lobby in Canada, I'm quite pleased with the efforts we've made in correcting the disinformation from people such as MP Provo that you just saw in the video there.
The information that she was providing that they were not going after hunting guns, duck guns, pop can guns, gopher guns is incorrect because they have been going after those types of firearms and their legislation.
Simple 22 planking rifles are on the banned firearms list.
Duck hunting guns are on the firearms banned list.
And for her to come out and say that publicly, that she is the one that is promoting disinformation there.
Yeah, well, that's sort of standard fair with the liberals on firearms.
Tom Mabin of the National Firearms Association, great to have you on the show.
Hope to have you back soon.
Thank you very much, Ms. Good to see you.
Church Burnings And Disinformation00:02:09
There he is.
Tom Mabin from the NFA.
Stay with us.
your letters to me next.
Hey, welcome back.
Your letters to me.
The first is on my visit to New Brunswick, to that burnt church.
By the way, there's a town called Burnt Church out there.
Julia Bork says, I live in Fredericton, and this is the first I've heard of this church being torched.
I've drove by that church many times.
Jesus will take care of these who oppose or mock him.
It's coming sooner than we think.
Yeah, I pointed out in my video that it wasn't torched to the ground, and I have to acknowledge that the church is not being used in several years.
But so what?
It's still part of the religious history and the cultural history of New Brunswick.
It's still obviously a former church, and for it to be torched, if that was any other religious group, that would be called a hate crime.
I'm just saying it would be.
So I'm really glad I went out there.
And one of the things that really irks me is that when churches are vandalized or torched in this case, or actually burned to the ground, the media, the mainstream media at least, does their best to ignore it, to throw it down the memory hole.
DMA 712 says, How many charges have the police laid on these crimes?
Probably zero.
None that I know of.
And there's been more than a hundred of these.
Dig in Deep says this has to be a foreign agenda.
No Canadian would burn holy sites, just as no Canadian would shoot at synagogues.
It's a very interesting point.
I don't know.
I have no clue who it was.
I must concede that there is a possibility that it was not targeting a religious building, but just an empty building.
I know there are cases of pyromaniacs or just hooligans or even drunk teenagers doing something stupid.
So there is a possibility it is not motivated by hatred, but I find that hard to believe that a church would be targeted in this way.
And part of this is pattern recognition.
I mean, one church burnt is a news story.
Two is a concern.
Three is a crime wave.
What do you call it when it's a hundred churches either vandalized and burnt?
For you to deny the pattern requires a great effort.
Pattern Recognition In Arson00:00:14
And I think you can see that the media and politicians are trying to cover it up.
I'm glad I went.
Well, that's the show for today.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night.