TruthArchive.ai - Related Post Feed

buperac
Posted - February 14, 2022 at 10:50 PM
Saved - July 28, 2023 at 2:44 PM

@buperac - bu/ac

Well what have we here? It’s this guys friends son that was arrested for firearms in Coutts? It wasn’t anyone in the convoy? Who were the 12 other people? Terrible time for RCMP to be caught in a lie regardless.

Video Transcript AI Summary
On February 14th, there was an arrest near the Coots blockade, not within it. The person arrested was a friend's son involved with the protest. The authorities are attempting to blame the entire blockade for this incident. It is important to spread this message on all social media platforms and discuss it wherever possible. Let's continue to prioritize freedom and peace.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hey there, freedom fighters. It's Monday, February 14th. It's 1 o'clock, and I have confirmed for a fact that the arrest with the guns and Coots were not in the Coots blockade at all. It was on a residence near it. I know for a fact it's a friend's son that was arrested involved with it. They are trying to smear it on the whole blockade in this protest. Everybody needs to get this message out on every kind of social media. Start talking about it everywhere, everywhere you can. Please Keep the freedom. Keep the peace, everybody.
TPostMillennial
Posted - October 18, 2023 at 7:55 PM
Saved - October 19, 2023 at 8:39 AM

@TPostMillennial - The Post Millennial

EXCLUSIVE: Lead plaintiff against Canadian Freedom Convoy leaves court in tears after contradicting previous testimony https://thepostmillennial.com/exclusive-lead-plaintiff-against-canadian-freedom-convoy-leaves-court-in-tears-after-contradicting-previous-testimony?utm_campaign=64466

EXCLUSIVE: Lead plaintiff against Canadian Freedom Convoy leaves court in tears after contradicting previous testimony She caught flack for repeatedly calling the Freedom Convoy protest an “occupation.” thepostmillennial.com
DonaldBestCA
Posted - December 21, 2023 at 1:01 AM
Saved - December 21, 2023 at 1:57 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Canada continues to hold political prisoners Chris Carbert, Anthony Olienick, Jerry Morin, and Chris Lysak without release or trial for 675 days. While others accused of serious crimes are granted bail, the #FreedomConvoy protesters, who were falsely implicated, remain detained. This highlights the government's use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies as political tools. The death of #RuleOfLaw and democracy is lamented by @BezirganMocha.

@DonaldBestCA - DonaldBest.CA * DO NOT COMPLY \\\

Canada still refuses to release political prisoners Chris Carbert, Anthony Olienick, Jerry Morin, and Chris Lysak. 675 days in prison without a trial. Everybody makes bail in Canada: accused cop killers, gang-bangers, child rapists... everybody. But not #FreedomConvoy protesters set up with false #hategate evidence by Canada's intelligence and law enforcement officers. The police, CSIS, prosecutors, and the courts act as political muscle for the government - enforcing political policies. Have no doubt - the police investigation, laying of charges, denial of bail, and the Emergencies Act were all one political event that is still continuing... @BezirganMocha has the woeful tale of the death of #RuleOfLaw and democracy...

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

BREAKING: The hearing has been adjourned to January 8th, 2024, during which the judge will announce the date for delivering the decision. People leave the courtroom with tears in their eyes. https://t.co/bmEUJnBXwe

BezirganMocha
Posted - January 27, 2024 at 5:04 PM
Saved - January 27, 2024 at 6:38 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
A large convoy is heading to Coutts, Alberta in support of 4 protesters held in remand for over 700 days. Some believe there is a 2-tier justice system in the country, where elites don't face consequences for their crimes. The protest is facing a media blackout, support @MediaBezirgan for coverage.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

BREAKING: A large convoy in support of the 4 protesters who’ve been held in remand for over 700 days is now heading down to Coutts, Alberta. “I think we got a 2-tier justice system in this country, our elites don’t seem to ever pay for any of their crimes, we just saw the Emergencies Act talked about in court that it was illegal, it was criminal that how they enacted it, and I doubt we’ll see any kind of consequences for that.” There seems to be a media blackout on this protest, please consider supporting @MediaBezirgan so that I can bring you the coverage that nobody else will.

Video Transcript AI Summary
At the Tucker Carlson event in Calgary, the speaker mentions that the turnout is expected to be bigger than last year's convoy, which had 400 vehicles. They express their lack of faith in the government and judicial system, believing that the four prisoners are being punished for protesting against mandates. They highlight a double standard in the justice system, where elites escape consequences for their crimes while average citizens face harsh treatment. The speaker appreciates the independent media coverage since they haven't seen any other media present. The video ends with a request for donations to support the media's mission.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We were just at the Tucker Carlson event in Calgary a couple days ago, and, seeing him talk about the 4 prisoners was really good. And I think that's bringing a lot of people out, raising a lot of awareness. So kind of expected to be bigger than last year. So, you know, it was big last year. I think there was 400 vehicles at the convoy. So this one looks like it's gonna be even bigger. Speaker 1: But last year, did you expect them to be held in remand for this long? Speaker 0: Unfortunately, I kinda did. I mean, I I don't have a whole lot of faith in our government or our judicial system. I think we need really big changes. So I'm not shocked that they're punishing these guys, you know. They they stood up against, you you know, the mandates and everything else, and they needed an example. You know? So I think these guys are getting punished for everybody that protested. Speaker 1: You know, on the on the other hand, we have companies like Assasin Lavalin who commit corruption and, you know, they get they get slap on their wrist. They don't The government don't make an example out of them. What do you make of that? Speaker 0: I think we got a 2 tiered justice, system in this country. You know, our elites don't seem to ever pay for any of their crimes. I mean, we just saw the emergency act get, you know, talked about in court that it was illegal, was criminal, how they enacted it. And I doubt we'll see any kind of, consequences for that for anybody. Yet the average person, you know, had their bank accounts frozen, had their Property seized got beat up, got pepper sprayed, you know, just for, for using their rights. So, yeah, I I think we got 2 very different systems thing on what kind of person you are. So yeah. That's why we're here protesting today. Speaker 1: My last question. Have you seen any media so far? Speaker 0: No. You're the first. So, yeah, it's good to bump into you. It's good to see somebody covering this, some independent media. I don't know where everybody else is. I guess they don't, they don't pay them to cover these kind of things. Speaker 1: Hey, guys. I'm out here covering the Cowboys' 2nd anniversary. Please consider donating at the media visitor count.gov/donate so that the mission of bringing you
BezirganMocha
Posted - January 28, 2024 at 12:59 AM
Saved - January 28, 2024 at 1:54 AM

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

“I think all of these prosecutions are politically motivated,” says Tamara Lich (@LichTamara) when asked about the “Coutts 4” case. “Let’s get these boys out of jail.” More to come @MediaBezirgan https://t.co/79CffE7gth

Video Transcript AI Summary
Today was great, and I decided last minute to come here and support these boys. We need to put pressure on the judiciary system to get them out of jail. I believe all these prosecutions are politically motivated. A recent federal court ruling gives me hope for a positive impact on our cases. I really hope these guys can be released soon. Thank you for your time.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yeah. How was today? It was great. Yeah. It was awesome to come down here. I kinda made a last minute decision and, hopped in the shower, and here I am. Gotta support these boys. Yeah. Do you have a message to the rest of the freedom movements across Canada? Let's get these boys out of jail. Now we need to put some pressure on and we need to get the judiciary system moving and we need to get these boys out of jail. Would you consider their prosecution politically motivated? I think all of these prosecutions are politically motivated. I mean, we just had a landmark federal court ruling this week, so we'll see what the fallout from that is over the coming days. But I have a lot of hope that it's gonna have a positive impact on all of our cases, guys, and I'm really hoping for these guys to get out. Thank you very much for your time.
rupasubramanya
Posted - January 30, 2024 at 1:06 AM
Saved - January 30, 2024 at 1:50 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Recent stories in Canada raise concerns about the justice system. A Muslim ex RCMP officer received a lenient punishment for sexually assaulting a 16-year-old, raising questions about the influence of Sharia law. Additionally, an Indian man involved in people smuggling, linked to the death of a family, remains free while the RCMP has not arrested him. In contrast, four white men involved in border blockades have been in prison for over 700 days without bail. These disparities fuel suspicion and may contribute to anti-immigrant sentiment.

@rupasubramanya - Rupa Subramanya

Two recent stories raise serious questions about Canada's justice system, a subject of which I've written about for @TheFP . First, is about a Muslim ex RCMP officer who sexually assaulted a 16 year old three years ago. Her family seemed to have allowed the relationship perhaps in the hopes that they would get married. He was 27, she was 16. Is Sharia law taking root in Canada even though it's illegal according to our criminal code? No matter, the officer's only punishment is house arrest for nine months and community service. Second, is about an Indian origin man involved with people smuggling, and the death in January 2022 of a family of four Indians in the freezing cold on the Manitoba US border. He's is now living a normal life in the suburbs of Toronto. And the RCMP have not arrested him. Meanwhile, four white men are languishing in a prison cell in Alberta for more than 700 days with no bail which is unprecedented even despite the charges they face which have not been substantiated by the Crown. They were part of the border blockades during the Freedom Convoy protests in February 2022. Something is seriously messed up in our criminal justice system in Canada. It's only going to fuel the suspicion that minorities get a special deal which is appalling as it'll only fan the flames of anti-immigrant sentiment, and all of us who came as immigrants will face the backlash. Having said that, this is working according to script for Trudeau.

GreyMatterConvo
Posted - February 2, 2024 at 9:19 PM
Saved - February 4, 2024 at 3:21 AM

@GreyMatterConvo - Grey Matter Podcast

I spoke with Max Bernier today. Max is the only Canadian political leader seeking justice for the Coutts 4. He recently visited with them in Lethbridge and plans to meet their lawyers before calling an Alberta press conference. He wants to end this travesty of injustice in AB🤜 https://t.co/iBWBQNUtva

BezirganMocha
Posted - May 27, 2024 at 11:16 PM
Saved - May 28, 2024 at 12:19 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Advocates raise concerns about the physical and mental effects on the accused as the trial of two men accused of conspiring to kill RCMP officers begins after 26 months. Two other members of the "Coutts 4" were released in a plea deal. One of the accused has been denied proper medical care for over 570+ days. The trial is set to begin, and the journalist asks for support to continue covering the story.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Coutts 4: Advocates Raise Concerns on Compounding Negative Health Effects as Lengthy Trial Begins After 26 Months Today is the last week of pre-trial hearings before the two men accused of conspiring to kill RCMP officers during a two-week-long anti-Covid-19 protest at the Canada-U.S. border town of Coutts, Alberta, finally proceed to trial next week. The hearings are taking place inside a newly renovated courtroom with a new cabin constructed for the arrestees, where the two accused, Chris Carbert and Anthony Oilineck, are now seated on a metal board with shackles on their feet. This uncomfortable renovation has prompted human rights advocates to raise concerns about the compounding physical and mental effects on the accused. 🧵 Follow and support @MediaBezirgan for more.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Two of the four men accused of conspiring to kill RCMP officers during an anti-COVID mandate protest in Coutts, Alberta, have been in pretrial custody for 26 months. They face uncomfortable conditions in a newly renovated courtroom, prompting concerns from human rights advocates. The men endure long hours sitting on metal benches with shackles on their feet. The trial is expected to last six weeks, with advocates calling the treatment inhumane and akin to torture. Despite struggles to receive proper medication, one of the accused finally obtained necessary drugs after a fight. Media presence has been lacking, but attention is expected to increase as the trial progresses.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm back in Lethbridge to bring you up to speed with the latest news on 2 of the 4 men who are still remanded under pretrial custody after 26 months, Accused of conspiring to kill RCMP officers during the 2 week long anti COVID mandate protest in the Canada US border town of Coutts, Alberta. Today is the last week of pretrial hearings before the matter finally proceeds to trial next week. The hearings are taking place inside the newly renovated courtroom, now equipped with advanced technology like HD cameras from all the recording from all different angles and streaming it on large television screens within the courthouse. However, what's most concerning is the new cabin constructed for the arrestees where the 2 accused, Chris Carbutt and Antoni Olynyk, have to sit on a metal board with shackles on their feet. This uncomfortable renovation has prompted human rights advocates to raise concerns about the compounding physical and mental effects on the accused. Here's an interview with an advocate on the hardships the remaining men are enduring. Speaker 1: The guys have said to me they come in about 8:30 in the morning. They're held in an area where it's just one of them sitting on a single seat. They're brought into the courtroom looking like caged animals in that, containment they've got them in is the nicest way to put it. Sitting on a metal bench all day. Both of them have said that there's a molding on the back. When they lean back, it's it's very, very uncomfortable. So I can't imagine sitting from 10 o'clock in the morning till 4 or, like, 5 o'clock today on a metal bench all day where it's uncomfortable to even lean back. It's not healthy and it's inhumane. Speaker 0: Once they have shackles on their feet. Right? Speaker 1: Yep. They're shackled every time. As soon as they leave the the the correction shackled, and they're shackled till they go back. Speaker 0: And, how long are we expecting the trial to last? Speaker 1: I'm guessing well, they've got it scheduled for 6 weeks depending on what happens here. But, yeah, 6 weeks is is a long time for this. We don't treat animals like this. That's the problem. And this should this should enrage every person that this kind of I call it torture at this point because it's been over 2 years and it's torture. Speaker 0: I see. Is there anything else you would like to add? A message to premier perhaps? Speaker 1: Well, the premier does not wanna get back to me. The the minister health minister does not wanna get back to me. I have wrote a report into the public health or the public commissioner, to get, investigation onto what's going in on with AHS involving these facilities, and I have not heard back from them yet. And and it's really sad that in this province that this has happened. People used to say this happens in 3rd world countries. Well, here we are. Speaker 0: Yeah. My last question, last year, we did a report on Anthony Olenek's, struggle to receive an approved drug, but the AHS wouldn't give it to him. Is there any updates on that? Speaker 1: Yes. After about 6 months, we finally persevered and got him a probiotic and got him some magnesium citrate. It was one hell of a fight, to get him some proper medication. Only with perseverance did we get it, and he still still has it to this day. So I guess when it's the next time to refill his medication, we'll see if it is still continued. Speaker 0: The 2 other members of the Quds IV were released a few months ago in a plea deal where they plead guilty to lesser charges. Today, I was the only accredited journalist inside the courtroom with firm adherence to the principles of innocent until proven guilty. The lack of media presence has been a concern throughout the trial, but with the jury selected the trial set to begin next week and the publication ban set to be partially lifted, there should be more attention forthcoming. If you enjoyed this report and appreciate my efforts, please consider donating atmediabysirgown.com/ donate so I can continue to bring you more coverage on this very important story every day. Thank you.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

The two other members of the "Coutts 4" were released a few months ago in a plea deal where they pled guilty to lesser charges. https://t.co/yqC182uHTd

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

CALLS FOR INVESTIGATION GROW: “723 days of pre-trial is a travesty of justice — there has to be a full inquiry into these prosecutions,” says Lysak’s friend, calling for an investigation after Chris Lysak’s and Jerry Morin’s charges of conspiracy to commit murder on RCMP have been dropped in a plea deal. The 2 men are expected to be released from Lethbridge remand today after 723 days in remand. The pre-trial for the other 2 have been adjourned to February 20. More details to follow on the plea deal once the information becomes available. @MediaBezirgan

Video Transcript AI Summary
Two of the accused in the courthouse took a plea deal on weapons trafficking charges, while the conspiracy to commit murder charge was dropped. The guilty pleas resulted in time served, leading to their release later today. The speaker believes there was a miscarriage of justice due to the lengthy pretrial detention. They hope for an investigation into the proceedings and public pressure on the authorities.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Marco Vanugambas, friend of Chris Lisek. Speaker 1: I understand you were in the courthouse courtroom where, a plea deal occurred. Can you please give us some details? Speaker 0: Yeah. So essentially, what happened this morning was, to some degree, a mini trial where, 2 of the 4 accused before the courts, took a plea deal on one of their on on one of their respective charges, which changes everything, obviously, and creates a lot of uncertainty for the remaining 2, Chris Garbert and Tony Olynyk. Speaker 1: And, do you do we know what charges have been dropped? What are the details with the deal? Speaker 0: So I don't have, all the charges in front of me, but the charges that they, pleaded to, was a weapons trafficking charge in relation to, Jerry Moran. And there will be obviously additional detail that'll come out, from both the the courts or or the judiciary in relation to their respective procedures and, Chris Leislic plead guilty to a restrict restricted weapons charge. Speaker 1: Did the conspiracy to commit murder charge dropped? Speaker 0: Correct. Speaker 1: Okay. That's very interesting news. Do you have any details other than Speaker 0: That charge was dropped. They plead not guilty to that. That not guilty plea was accepted, and the guilty pleas were accepted. The sentencing, recommended by both defence, councils and the crown prosecutor, was in relation to time served, so quid pro quo. Chris Lysek did and I'm doing some math here, and I I don't remember. But, essentially, 719 or 723 days today times 1.5 for remand. That's how they calculate calculate this. So being, being in custody pre for pretrial, Jerry Morin, which shocked me. And, I I I feel this is a tragic travesty of justice among other reasons, just this issue alone, spent 74 days in solitary confinement during his total incarceration, which they put a multiplier of 3 times on. So essentially, both plea deals and and both sentences were 4 times served, to be released later today. So these men will be released to go back to their families later this afternoon at the at the at the latest, I hope. So for these men, and I know there's 4, and I feel for the other 2, and there must be a lot of questions. There's gonna be a lot of questions, and I I I I'm pretty sure I'll be talking to Chris Carver later this afternoon. But for these 2 men that have been released, it's it's a good day. It doesn't answer it it doesn't address the questions the public may have, but I hope that these proceedings and the public attention that they have been given and that they still are under turn into an investigation. There is a miscarriage of justice here to hold men, to hold Canadians pretrial for this length of time on a charge such as a restricted firearm or a weapons trafficking, that's that's unheard of. And I feel this is I feel this is I feel there has been public pressure put on public and possibly even pressure from superiors and authorities on the crown and Stephen Johnson in this particular case. And that this was a tactic on their part to essentially justify justify their behavior. And because because at this point, we now have guilty pleas. And a lot of people will say, see? I told you so. 723 days pretrial is a travesty of justice in Canada, and it has to be treated as such, and there has to be a full inquiry into these prosecutions. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you very much for your time.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

About a year ago, I published this report that demonstrates the hardships the accused endures to obtain proper medical care: Healthcare Denial for Coutts 4 Inmate: Ministry Offers No Explanation for Denying a Formulary Drug https://t.co/KjaFVgdAB2

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Healthcare Denial for Coutts 4 Inmate: Ministry Offers No Explanation for Denying a Formulary Drug Tony is accused of conspiracy to murder RCMP, but after being held for over 570+ days without a conviction, some believe he's a political prisoner. "I feel let down by the system," said Tony, emphasizing that he's being treated as "guilty until proven innocent." He's been denied basic healthcare to address pain from a gut disease and a needed formulary drug. "No matter who you are, you shouldn't be treated like this, especially in a democratic, free country like Canada," he added. Follow and support @MediaBezirgan for more exclusive, unbiased, and quality journalism.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Four individuals in Alberta have been detained for over 560 days without a trial or bail, accused of conspiring to murder RCMP officers. Advocates argue that the charges are exaggerated and politically motivated. One of the detainees, Tony Olenek, is facing subpar healthcare in the correctional facility, with denied access to prescription medicines and probiotics. Despite efforts to seek help from government agencies, including the health ministry and the premier's office, no answers or clarifications have been provided. Tony's health issues, including a gut disease and gout, have worsened due to neglect in the correctional facility. Concerned individuals are calling for awareness and support to improve the healthcare situation for detainees like Tony.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The trial involving 4 Albertans arrested during the Coutts blockade has been gaining attention. Speaker 1: When Coutts happened and when Ottawa happened, the federal minister of health was about to mandate a booster every 3 months. That was on the table. Those people stopped that. Speaker 0: Advocates argue that these 4 individuals are detained on exaggerated charges with political motives to allow the Liberal government at the time to justify enacting the Emergencies Act to quash the peaceful protest that erupted across Canada. Speaker 2: So 560 days later with no trial date in sight, this is political, and it's got politics written all over it. Speaker 0: Accused of conspiring to murder RCMP officers, they have languished in remand for over one and a half years with neither bail nor a verdict. We have people who committed serious crimes who are out on bail. Tony Olenek, one of the 4, exemplifies the sub bar health care that he may grapple with in Alberta's correctional facilities. Speaker 3: I couldn't walk for a couple weeks, and not being able to walk will be in jail. So I'm, like, pretty much bedridden in a cell. Speaker 2: Tony isn't even allowed to get prescription medicines for his intestinal issues. That's insane. Speaker 0: His distressing ordeal underscores a desperate situation in which loved ones find themselves as government agencies shuffle responsibility amongst themselves. Speaker 4: Tony's only an accused man. He's not an incarcerated man. Incarcerated men have better health care than Tony. Speaker 5: My name is Nikki Tom. I'm a very good friend to Tony's. He has actually asked me to advocate on his health. He's not getting any help in the remand centre. I have contacted AHS. I have a file number for Tony. I've been on phone probably 15 or 20 calls with a gentleman at AHS. Have got nowhere in over a month and a half. Speaker 0: To gain a comprehensive understanding of the situation, I reached out to both the health ministry and the premier's office with specific inquiries about Tony Olenek's situation and the claims made by Nikki. Speaker 5: He has asked many times for a probiotic. His probiotic was issued in the Medicine Hat Reman facility. He was then transferred to Lethbridge in Calgary, and apparently, the prescriptions do not follow them. I did ask HS, so what happens if somebody's a diabetic? Does the prescription not also follow them? And they said, well, of course it wouldn't. Then I had said, how come a probiotic doesn't follow them? He's asked for probiotic and they have said it's non formulary, not approved. Here's a form saying at one point his probiotic This one, I contacted Tony's natural path to see how he could be treated that was something formulary from Alberta Health Services, so he did ask for magcitrate. Here in the in the sheet says, sorry, magcitrate is non formulary. Under Alberta Health Services records, magnesium citrate is formulary. And he has been denied a citrate is formulary, and he has been denied a formulary product by AHS. So they are denying him access to health care. Speaker 0: A check on the Alberta Health Services website indeed confirms magnesium straight as a formulary drug contradicting the response given to mister Olynyk. For clarity, I reached out to Alberta's health ministry. The question specifically revolved around the medical evaluation of mister Olyanek, treatment protocols, the discrepancy surrounding magnesium straight status, potential alternative treatments, the ministry's measures, and their stance on mister Olenek's claims. Despite providing a clear time frame, I've yet to receive any answers. Speaker 5: Tony has sent me documentation for me to speak on his behalf. I have since reached out to MLAs, the health minister, the minister of justice, Danielle Smith's office because she oversees these ministers. I was told from the secretary at Danielle Smith's office that I was unreliable, unbelievable, and uncredible. My husband's aunt had phoned the following Monday, and Danielle Smith's office had said, I wish you people would stop this conspiracy. AHS is very reputable, and this would never happen. Speaker 0: Despite being given a 48 hour window to respond, neither office has provided a comment or clarification. Speaker 5: His last day of court, he said he actually didn't know how he was gonna make it through the last few days because he was in such pain sitting in that courtroom from not being treated. Speaker 0: If every word from Nikki rings true, this could very well be just another example of incompetency and lack of care within Alberta's correctional facilities. Speaker 5: This is a disaster, and people have been trying to expose it for years with no avail because the politicians won't listen. Speaker 0: The state of neglect in Alberta's institutions is no secret, but another layer deserves our attention. With Tony detained for an astounding 570 + days without a final verdict and having been denied bail. Many consider him a political prisoner. During our interview, we received a call from Tony himself. Speaker 5: People that are innocent are not getting health care, and it it's a travesty. Speaker 0: Tony recounts his history with a gut disease that was addressed by a naturopath through diet and natural remedies in Calgary when he was a free man. However, he says that the neglect of his medical needs behind bars has set him back several years. Speaker 3: Following her her weight diet plan and her natural remedy, captured my my issue with my gut suffering from a thing called the small intestinal bacterial organ growth effect. We have a lot of people suffer from this, but mainstream here, actually, HS just doesn't recognize that they just think, oh, you know, you're just a regular inmate. All you want is some free drug. They just try to prescribe to you what Speaker 6: they think you need, and, you know, and I Speaker 3: was just appalled since they were, like, oh, you just need to take a fancy depressive. And I'm like, I'm not depressed. I'm not stressed. I'm not at the above. I'm I'm, just, you know, concerned. And I'm just not getting the proper dietary appeal to help my body digest properly. So that very it's very frustrating. I'm gonna be picky on what I eat, and then I try to trade off all the sugary sweets for stuff that's, you know, more healthy, you know, for salads that we do get here and there, which is kinda nice. But in a lot of times, again, it seems like the the jail for an example is a is a horrible way of keeping tomatoes and apples and Speaker 6: fresh fruit. They they throw them in the freezer and a Speaker 3: lot of time they come out free and they're burnt. So just get a Speaker 6: good product, fruits and vegetables and Speaker 3: then the next few days, they're all pretty much, like, soggy and roast right out of our freezer. So it's it's been a challenging on the field battle to say the least to try to maintain gut health and and still fight with the system, and AHS called the shot here. But sadly, the jail should still provide health, especially if my natural staff has diagnosed it, my situation, and all I'm asking for is a probiotic. I'm not asking for any nefarious drugs or anything like that. You can tell they're the ones that wanna give them to me. You know? They immediately say, well, if you if you start getting real cramps and pain, gladly prescribe you some kind of pain medication. Like, it's that's not the problem. Like, stop trying to, you know, force stuff on me. That doesn't make sense. I'm just looking for a probiotic. It's pretty simple. And then the fact that they did gave me one, they prescribed me one, then all of a sudden out of nowhere redacted their formulated policy, and they said, oh, we pulled it off our list of things to prescribe. And when they showed me the list, there's all kinds of probiotics and even things like your root tea. They used to be able to prescribe it. They said they're having, you know, upset stomachs or something. They even removed that because it's not a formulary, prescription. So what does that mean? Does that mean that, you know, they just because they don't have a contract with that particular company providing them those products that that's why they don't prescribe them anymore? Follow the money. It's where it all leads to, I believe. And I think somebody's frothing off the misery of, not just me, but, multiple inmates, throughout the whole jails. And and big pharma and AHS have something to do with that for sure. Speaker 0: You haven't been convicted of anything. You're innocent until proven guilty. So why are they treating you the way they treat you? Do you feel discriminated? Speaker 3: I feel led down by the system. Speaker 6: Yeah. The system treats pretty much you Speaker 3: like you're matter what it is and no matter what it is and no matter who you are, you should be treated like that if you live in a, you know, democratic free country like Canada supposedly. Speaker 0: Tony states that the neglect of his gut health has led to more severe health complications, such as triggering his gout. Speaker 3: It did trigger my gout. And so my big toe would all swell swell up, and I couldn't walk for a couple weeks. And not being able to walk while being in jail sucks. So I'm, like, pretty much bedridden in a cell, can't do anything, and relying on a cell mate to go to go and get my meal straightened for me. And it's pretty, it's not the greatest feeling. Put it that way. Speaker 0: You were physically unable to walk? Speaker 6: So, yeah, there were times I just spent the whole Speaker 3: days days on days, and myself just sitting there and and reading. And not couldn't be able to do anything. Unfortunately, I had a good cellmate, like I said, to go and Speaker 6: get me get me my wheelchair because it literally Speaker 3: my foot's full. My toe swells up so bad. I think you couldn't even I didn't put pressure on it. Speaker 6: You couldn't even put a bench sheet on Speaker 3: it because it would hurt the worst age you could ever imagine. It's terrible Speaker 6: to Do Speaker 0: you have a plea to your elected representatives to the Canadian people? Speaker 6: We have one minute remaining for this call. Speaker 3: I would just like them to hopefully grow some more awareness on our situation that will help benefit other inmates better, real Canadians, and hopefully, they have some sympathy and, and wanna help because if they did, it would make a bigger difference. We'd have less people in the code of the system, and it'd be a less burden on taxpayers, and it Speaker 6: would be greater good for her for Speaker 5: Oh, we lost him. Speaker 0: Tony's ongoing suffering has not gone unnoticed. Speaker 7: No prisoner of war would be treated in the same manner as these men. Geneva can vent it. Speaker 0: While we were unable to obtain clarifications directly from the provincial authorities. A concerned individual from Sylvan Lake took it upon herself to confront Alberta's health minister regarding Toni's conditions. Speaker 7: Well, I I heard yesterday afternoon that she was gonna be speaking at a town meeting in Sylvan Lake, Alberta, and that's only 20 minutes from my house. So I felt compelled Speaker 5: that I had to Speaker 7: go to this meeting and speak for these men because I'm just one more person in the stitch in the quilt of freedom. We have 4 men in a remand center for 558 days today. They do not get health care. Tell her that they are being treated worse than prisoners of war. Speaker 6: I have Speaker 7: one man in there who has has a disease called SIBO. He needs probiotics, something that can be purchased at a drugstore over the counter. She asked about these men, what their names were, and where what they were. I told her their names, what remands they were in, and I told her about Tony's health issues with his c book. I told her that he should be able to get probiotics to treat him. Speaker 0: What is your assessment of this situation? Speaker 4: Total confusion, to be honest. We all deserve health care. And like Tony had said to one of the nurses, I'm innocent until proven guilty. I deserve health care. And even if you're incarcerated, Tony's only an accused man. He's not an incarcerated man. Incarcerated men have better health care than Tony. Just because he's an accused man? What if this was your son? Would you people want him to to have help? Of course, you would. So please contact, if you wish, the health minister of Alberta, even the justice minister, the Alberta government. Please reach out to them through email and phone and ask them about Tony Olianek's help. And say to them, what if this was your child? What if this was your brother? Please help him. That's all we're asking. We're not asking for government to interfere on something. What we're asking is the government to do their job and to help Tony. Please help him. That's all we're asking. Just please help this young man. Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Speaker 5: And I'd like to thank you, MOCA. Speaker 4: I love you. And, if you can support MOCA, please support him. This young man is is working endless hours, and, we need an honest young man like him out there. So please keep MoCA going. Speaker 0: Thank you. I appreciate that endorsement. Thank you.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

I was the only accredited journalist inside the courtroom today. As the trial is set to begin, I'm going to need your help. Please consider donating at mediabezirgan.com/donate so that I can continue to cover this important story.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Minor correction: The new screens are streaming within the courtroom not the courthouse.

BezirganMocha
Posted - June 5, 2024 at 7:33 PM
Saved - June 5, 2024 at 8:01 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
A man who grew up under apartheid in South Africa protests the "Coutts 4" trial, claiming corruption in the system. Two men are set to face trial by jury for conspiracy to murder RCMP officers during an anti-COVID protest in Coutts, Alberta. Advocates believe the government exaggerated the conspiracy charge and consider the remaining men as political prisoners. Follow and support @MediaBezirgan for more information.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

BREAKING: Man Who Grew Up Under Apartheid in South Africa Storms Out of the "Coutts 4" Trial in Protest: "The System is Corrupt" Trial by jury is set to begin tomorrow for the two men who have been held in remand for over 840 days on charges of conspiracy to murder RCMP officers during the anti-COVID mandates protest in Coutts, Alberta. Following the release of the other two accused a few months ago in a plea deal that dropped the conspiracy charge, advocates believe that the government has exaggerated the conspiracy charge and recognize the remaining men as political prisoners. For more on this story, be sure to follow and support @MediaBezirgan.

Video Transcript AI Summary
I stormed out of the courtroom due to perceived corruption in the system. The Charter of Rights in Canada seems ineffective, as rights can be disregarded for government interests. Drawing parallels to apartheid in South Africa, I see a divided society in Canada. The government may target more dissenters after this case. Law enforcement in Canada has used violent tactics, including seizing bank accounts. The trial for the Coutts 4 is starting soon, with updates to come. Support independent journalism at mediabezigian.com/donate.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What made you storm out of the courtroom? Speaker 1: I stormed out because my belief is that the system is corrupt. I mean, I can't, announce here now what actually the decisions were made, but the decisions were made to to, as far as I can see, protect the interests of the crown entirely. You know, one would think that, 2 boys now still over 800 days, 840 odd days, in a remand center. They have not yet been tried. They could be out gainfully employed doing whatever they've done, have lost their employment, have lost their business, their livelihoods, and yet are imprisoned. So we we're arguing about things, and I felt that it was just this is a method of prolonging that imprisonment. And if the decision that I heard in the court was not going, to be a logical or reasonable one, I thought, really, I can't sit around and watch this. I've been here for a year now. June last year, I started attending. And, you know, I've seen this go back and forwards. It's very disappointing to see see the direction it's going in at the moment. Speaker 0: Do you think the charter means anything at all at this point? Speaker 1: No. I think, the charter is meant to pass if Canadians to think that they have some rights, but these are really just privileges in, this current situation here in Canada. I think it's a very impressive document because it tends to indicate to people that, you know, you can have protection. But if that protection gives the government or the crown, the evidence you know, the sort of evidence they need, they'll trample that over and and do away with your rights. Your rights for, you know, protecting your own interests, protecting your privacy, protecting your possessions can easily be taken away and then an excuse, given afterwards, which is sad, unfortunately, because, I think I well, I came from South Africa. My accent might tell people that. You know? I grew up in an era of apartheid where the country was divided, and I just don't can't can't understand how our current, Canadian government doesn't understand the division that has was created, how we don't see the similarities, Africa, in South Africa, tyranny here to to separate people. In in Africa and South Africa, it was a, white versus non white. Here, it's still the, you know, it's the anti vaxxers, the anti mandates, the, you know, whatever, co COVID deniers. Things are coming out as well in the media today. It's a thing where suddenly, doctor Fauci has he's not really a doctor. He's was he had no idea that, with 6 foot distances, masks, or anything would help, but he he quoted that as being de facto science. And here we have a situation where, the people who stood up against the government have been divided as as much as the white or black populations in in South Africa. And we went through a terrific horrific time, which led to the assassination ultimately of Henrik Vert, a leader of the of the country. You know, the situation we're facing here, and I I sitting in court, I can't quote some of the cases, the case law that has been quoted, but none of those cases had any any relevance, to something like a a pandemic, something like mandates where seniors were being locked in their seniors' homes and died, where people were forced, you know, into situations where or coerced. You know, you keep your job if you take a vaccination. Things like that. None of those case laws quoted at any circumstance. And that's why you say, you know, what happened in South Africa? Yes. I grew up as a kid in apartheid. So things were very, very different, and we are facing this divided society here. And the yet the case laws that are being quoted do not reflect on a divided society. They reflect on particular incidents that have happened. And I still go back to this. Nobody was hurt. Nothing was broken other than what the police damage to excavators at the protest, which were provocation. Based on all the provocation, there was no reaction. So the, what what really becomes a a government theory of what could have potentially happened, if the, average, member of the public in Canada has these type of theories, what could happen? That's regarded as conspiracy. So there's no balance of of, probability of which is real and which is not real. Speaker 0: My last question, if I may. Do you think after this case is over, the crown could come after more people? Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure they will. Yes. Because, the current government is splintered at the moment. The current the the economy of this country is in a terrible condition. A lot of people are standing up and resisting the current existing government that's in power due to a coalition in Canada. And I think the only way that they could keep that is by trying to route out anybody who has alternative views on how things and, certainly, in terms of law enforcement, we have not yet seen violence in Canada, you know, other than that's perpetrated by the intimidation of the law enforcement. So, you Speaker 0: were in Ottawa? Speaker 1: I was in Ottawa and were chased out of downtown by violent police with batons, with tear gas, with with, horses stomping on people. This is all evidence that exists. Speaker 0: Bank accounts being seized. Speaker 1: Correct. There was no no regard to real law, true law enforcement. You know, serve and protect is what I grew up to respect police for, yet they've been turned against us. And I say us, all Canadians, for more aspects. Speaker 0: The trial by jury for the Coutts 4 trial is set to begin tomorrow. I will continue to bring you updates periodically throughout the trial. It is expected to last one and a half months. If you like to support my independent journalism and help me cover my expenses, please consider supporting it by donating atmediabezirgian.com/donate. Thank you.
PeymanAskari451
Posted - June 7, 2024 at 3:30 AM
Saved - June 7, 2024 at 4:14 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
The posts discuss various criticisms of the Supreme Court of Canada and Chief Justice Wagner. The author, @buckmcyoung, highlights concerns about elitism, political bias, lack of accountability, and the need for institutional reform. They also mention specific cases, such as the Mosley case and the Coutts 4, and express a desire for a leader to take responsibility. The author emphasizes the importance of civil discourse and fixing the country.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

1/ THREAD This article criticizing the @SCC_eng was so impactful that I just had to sit down @buckmcyoung and go over it, paragraph by paragraph. https://t.co/X625rv18hh

@buckmcyoung - Buck

x.com/i/article/1798…

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

2/ @buckmcyoung's aim in writing this article was to draw attention to the elitism that permeates the judiciary. https://t.co/17GgghWQWX

Video Transcript AI Summary
Canada's institutions, including the justice system, are seen as deeply flawed. The prime minister's remarks about protesters in Ottawa were criticized for being divisive and elitist, reflecting a wider issue of elitism in Canadian politics. The lack of criticism towards institutions like the judiciary is concerning.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You said, Canada's institutions are deeply broken. Our justice system is no exception. Little further on, you go on to say that our prime minister disparaged thousands of Canadians who gathered to end the COVID tyranny. I I'm assuming you're referring to Ottawa. Can you tell us why you said that? Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. I mean, I think a lot of Canadians feel that his comments about, you know, the French minority, the racists, they're bigoted, they're misogynistic, But those comments were directed at them. And, you know, and and, you know, the the prime minister may have tried to distance himself from those comments, but, you know, they're very much in keeping with the, you you know, prosecution of the unvaccinated and COVID dissidents throughout the COVID era. So, you know, I think it is emblematic of the elitism that is rife in in Canadian politics and institutions. And, you know, so I'm taking aim here at probably one institution and leader of an institution that, experiences the least amount of criticism, you know, because of all this deference that we give to the judiciary and so forth.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

3/ One common theme throughout our conversation is that @buckmcyoung believes that those in authority won't apologize because it may land them in trouble. https://t.co/QR4W5iLbEz

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker criticizes the lack of accountability and apology from Canadian elites for decisions made during COVID. They believe elites fear being held responsible if they admit mistakes. People are angry at institutions for failing them and violating their rights. The speaker calls for elites to take responsibility and address the issues through self-reflection and accountability.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Their uniform reaction has been to blame the public without one iota of self reflection or discerning contemplation as to what has led to such public consternation. Give me what what are you referring to here? Speaker 1: I think it's odd that, we can't get a simple apology out of anybody, for any of the decisions that were made during COVID. We can't even get an acknowledgment that, you know, these mistakes were made and and and define them. So, you know, I think fundamentally there is, an expectation among the elites in Canada that if they acknowledge what has transpired, you know, rightly so, they will be held accountable for it. And it seems to be, you know, just kicking the can down as, as far down the road as they can, to avoid, you know, that accountability, while they're still in office or in positions of authority. Right? So, you know, I think that accounting has to happen. Right? People are are very upset that their institutions failed them, that their rights were, violated and that nobody stood up for them. Nobody in a position of authority or power, leading an institution stood up for them. So, you you know, obviously people, get a little uncivil when, they don't feel like their issues are attended to or the voice is being heard. And, you know, and that's why, you know, I'm advocating that we have that public accounting. I I I put the onus on the elites. This is a problem they created. It's up to them to solve it, and it was only gonna happen through that, self flagellation.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

4/ Our Chief Justice, like all the elites in Canada, is carrying a bias, and that is is undermining the credibility of the @SCC_eng https://t.co/9offpZKtvz

Video Transcript AI Summary
I believe the chief justice has shown bias in his views on COVID and the convoy, making him unfit for his role. I have personally experienced institutional bias in the legal profession and have evolved to be more of a populist, valuing confrontation in the political process.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What did you mean by, the institution that's principally responsible for discernment and the fact that Wagner's kind of gone off the rails? Well, I mean, this is what we expect of of our courts and our justices is that, you know, they can see things from both sides and find the nuance in arguments. Except that I I think it's pretty clear that our chief justice here has taken a very polarized view, of the issues of COVID and then, the convoy and so forth. And so, you know, that's that to me means, he's unfit, for the role. You know, the lack of, discretion in his public comments, after the convoy, I think is, indicative that, you know, this individual is, carrying a bias. And, you know, it's the institutional bias that, all of the elites in Canada have for the the pledge. Right? You know, so I I think it's, you know, I I again, I'm taking aim at this institution because, you know, it's one that I understand, to a certain degree. You know, I went to law school. You know, I've been to, you know, meetings with crown attorneys. I participated in preparing, charter cases. You know, I was a legal observer during the g 20 protests, and I watched, Canadians' rights, to protest be violently repressed. You know, and then during that time sort of, you know, 2008, era where there was a lot of public discontent about, the banking crisis. You know, I think I experienced the institutional bias amongst the legal profession towards, politics of respectability. And I think to a certain extent, I even, you know, bought into that notion. It's sort of only, having seen where, you know, where that leads us to this indifference to the plight of, average Canadians that I've reversed my view on that and, you know, can appreciate that, confrontation is, is part of the political process. And, you know, so I I, I guess I've evolved on the issue a bit, and I find myself, much more of a populist these days.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

5/ While Chief Justice Wagner is calling for more collegiality, a more aggressive interpretation would be that he is calling for more cowardice in confronting the courts. @buckmcyoung

Video Transcript AI Summary
Civility in the legal profession has led to corruption. Lawyers need to maintain respect for each other but also hold each other accountable. The lack of criticism and courage has allowed the system to be distorted. Only 13 lawyers in Canada have spoken out against unethical behavior. The legal profession needs to reflect on their societal obligations, not just their professional duties.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Civility, I contend contend, is what led to the corruption of this most important democratic institution. Can you can you break that down for us, please? Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, you can take it a number of ways. You know, I think within the legal profession, you know, all this collegiality that chief justice Wodgner is always going on about, collegiality and civility. You know, it's really baked into the professional ethos. And, you know, and I can understand that. You you know, at the end of the day, lawyers are sales advocates for their clients, and, they are to take, you know, an adversarial approach. And that's how the administration of justice is is done. You know, and and so if you're gonna be arguing with your colleagues all the time, you have to maintain a certain, respect, mutual respect for each other, so that you can, you know, make your arguments, but, you can avoid, getting personal about things. And I think that's that that really captures the legal professions ethos. But, you know, we also rely on, lawyers to, be the stewards of this institution. And, you know, I think all that collegiality and deference and, you know, said more, said more aggressively the, the cowardice that, many people who work in the profession have to criticize judges, criticize politicians, or criticize their colleagues is what has facilitated, you know, the distortion of, of our system, the capture of our system. Right? And so, you know, there are I mean, as in this article, there are 13, you know, courageous lawyers in Canada who are willing to, write a letter, to, the, you know, the administrative body that is supposed to, adjudicate the behavior of judges, which I'll note is led by chief justice Wagner. So we'll see how effective that institution is at, at, correcting his behavior that is, I think plainly offside with the ethics, that they're supposed to be held to. But, you know, I would be surprised there aren't more than 13. And I'm also surprised that there weren't a bunch of, lawyers in their robes marching with folks during the convoy. You know, I think the legal profession really needs to take a long look in the mirror, about, you know, their obligations to society as a whole and, you know, not just their professional ethos to, any one particular client.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

6/ That David Lametti advised the government to illegally invoke the Emergencies Act and violently repressed Canadian's right to protest and could still show his face in a law firm proves that there is no accountability within the legal profession. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/ANEGA7oGHx

Video Transcript AI Summary
Former Attorney General David Lammetti resigned after the Mosley decision. Despite this, his reputation remains intact among his peers. The fact that he can now work at a law firm shows a lack of accountability in the legal profession.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This one line, it almost made me chuckle. You said the now disgraced former attorney general David Lammetti. Why do you say he's disgraced? Speaker 1: Well, because he resigned immediately after, Mosley decision came out. Now, I mean, he's not disgraced in the legal profession. He's now a partner at, I forget which firm. I'm not gonna name it. It's just in case I get it wrong. You know? So, unfortunately, amongst, his peers, his reputation is intact. And I think that actually is exactly what I'm talking about. That somebody, who could advise the government to, illegally invoke the emergencies act and violently repress Canadians' right to protest, seize their bank accounts and so forth, that that individual could even show his face, in in a law firm, I think, is the evidence that, you know, there is not accountability within the profession.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

7/ This is strictly my interpretation, but Chief Justice Wagner is using the concept of 'civility' as a shield against criticism of his own political bias. https://t.co/R7d2TYLcKB

Video Transcript AI Summary
Wagner emphasizes civility for judges to avoid criticizing colleagues, but some see it as a way to hide bias. The focus should be on addressing issues or ideas, not attacking individuals. This concept of civility may be used as a shield to avoid accountability in the legal profession. Translation: Wagner stresses the importance of civility for judges to refrain from criticizing their colleagues, but some view it as a way to conceal bias. It is essential to address issues or ideas instead of attacking individuals. This notion of civility could be used as a shield to evade accountability in the legal field.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Wagner states in his address that civility means that judges should avoid criticizing colleagues where possible. I think he's not saying this, but, basically, he's using civility as a shield to hide his bias behind? Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, the the context there is that, you know, he's talking about, you know, as a supreme court justice versus, you know, reviewing the work of a lower court justice, you know, or or, you know, critiquing a lawyer's argument that you you don't attack the person. You you address the issue or the idea. Right? But I think that is has extrapolated into, as you say, a shield to accountability within the profession.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

8/ When the Chief Justice is explicitly attacking a head of state, we have a serious problem. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/URFAOSSPmO

Video Transcript AI Summary
He criticizes Brexit, social media freedom, and Trump, but not COVID-19. His criticism of Trump shows his political bias, which worries other lawyers in the convoy cases.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He cites things like Brexit, the freedom on social media, Trump politics. He he sort of criticizes some politicians, but what you're saying is he he did not bring this same level of criticism when it came to COVID 19. Well, Speaker 1: yeah. I mean, he's explicitly, in 2019, explicitly attacking the head of state Donald Trump, and, and and attacking the people who voted him in. You know, but then just very shortly thereafter, it, you know, refuses. Now I'm not suggesting he should make those comments, and and it's his place to address, you know, our leaders and their behavior. Only in the context in which there's a case before him should we hear his opinions, And and they should be rooted in the law and not, his personal politics. And so, you know, I only mean to point it out not to say, well, look. There's hypocrisy here, and he should have been criticizing Trudeau and and all the liberal cabinet ministers who continue to lie and gaslight us, like, every day. It's shocking. However, you know, the fact that he did it, you know, felt comfortable to do so in attacking Trump, I think is just a, the veil drops and you understand his political biases. And this is what I think concerns me and these other lawyers about, the convoy cases.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

9/ I'm leading the witness here, but it's my contention that Chief Justice Wagner is more political than his office should tolerate. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/WcOrczqZzM

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker questions the impartiality of a Canadian judge, suggesting they may be more politically biased than previous chief justices. They express doubt about the judge's ability to remain apolitical in their role.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He has the temerity to to say, in Canada, judges are still seen as being above the political fray. Now I don't understand the the the legal aspect as well as you do, but I'm looking at him, and he doesn't seem apolitical. He doesn't even seem like he's capable of of his position. Is he more partisan than previous, chief justices? I would think so. Definitely. I I mean, this is very, becoming behavior for a chief justice.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

10/ To further drive home the point that Chief Justice Wagner is behaving in a partisan manner, he was promoting this narrative that the convoy was funded by the US. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/9PWbzsgzYW

Video Transcript AI Summary
He mentioned that some Canadians in the convoy were good-hearted, but claimed others were influenced by external forces, hinting at US involvement. He also said the convoy was turning into chaos and Canadians were being held hostage, which contradicted the peaceful activities seen in livestreams. Despite a court injunction to stop honking, it acknowledged the protest as lawful and safe. His statements seemed to disregard lower court rulings. Translation: The speaker discussed contrasting views on the Canadian convoy, suggesting external influence and chaos while ignoring evidence of peaceful protests and court rulings.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And could you go on to tell us, what did he say in, oh, lord, that, shocked so many people about the convoy? I have to refresh myself here. I mean, he made another a number of comments. He let you know, he, on one hand, said that there were, you know, good good hearted or or or good natured Canadians involved, but then he also alleged that, many of the protesters were, being directed by some sort of external influence. I think this was feeding into the narrative that the the convoy was some US political influence op operation. You know, obviously, this that's a a very political take. There's no evidence to suggest that. I don't know how he could, make an allegation like that, you know, in in April other than maybe reading it off of, you know, CTV News or or wherever he got that from. You know? But he also, remarks that the convoy was, devolving into anarchy and, and that, Canadians were being taken hostage. I mean, this is very inflammatory language. We're talking about, you know, a convoy that was cleaning up the streets and, you know, feeding the homeless and, you know, bouncy castles and children. Like, the the the I watched livestream what was going on, and, and it just doesn't comport at all with, you know, what he was saying. I mean, even to the point where, you know, the horn honking was, very problematic for the residents living in the downtown. And, and there you know, it went to court and, the Ontario Superior Court, had the injunction where on one hand, they said, hey. The has gotta stop, you know, which I think for the most part was complied with. But at the same time, that decision said that this was lawful peaceful protest and safe protests. So, you know, I just think, he is essentially ignoring the rulings of lower courts, in his public statements, which, contradict that.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

11/ We have a serious problem where the government launders fabrications through NGOs, to the @rcmpgrcpolice, and then back to the government as coroborating evidence. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/d7c3v07z6k

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker questions if the media and courts are shaping false narratives to serve political agendas. They raise concerns about bias in the justice system and the manipulation of information by government-funded groups. The involvement of the chief justice in political narratives is seen as problematic.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm gonna I'm gonna cite something Jan Jekalik said was, when the convoy made its way to Ottawa, the politicians, they they they basically said these guys are insurrectionists. They're here to throw us throw overthrow us. They then turn to the media to parrot that narrative back to them to convince them of what they wanted to be convinced in the first place. Is the same thing happening with our courts? I I hope that makes sense. Well, Speaker 1: I mean, I think I'd have to I I don't think I'm positioned to really opine on it yet. Maybe it's something I could get back to you on. You know, I'm taking one one justice's comment, public comments, and, you know, and and making a very specific claim here that this individual, has a bias and that bias is on, you know, full effect. I do think that why would why would our chief justice in April 2022, be making these statements? To launder a false narrative. Right? In the same way that, you know, Canadian hate alliance, you know, government paid, you know, quote, unquote NGOs are fabricating evidence, that is being laundered, you know, to the RCMP and then back from the RCMP. And and then the government is saying, well, this came from the RCMP. Right? There's all kinds of narrative laundering going on. And, I do think it's very problematic that our chief justice would be getting involved in shaping political narratives.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

12/ @buckmcyoung suggests that we may have collapsed the three branches of government into one. @PardyBruce https://t.co/sghSMwsoOq

Video Transcript AI Summary
The concern raised is about the merging of government branches in Canada. The speaker points out that the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches are not functioning separately as intended. The executive branch, under a strong majority government, is also leading the legislative branch. During COVID, the judiciary deferred to the executive, creating a situation where all branches are essentially one. This collapse of the three branches into one entity is seen as a fundamental issue in Canadian governance.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That's actually what I was asking. Like, I I understand if you don't wanna answer it definitively. But to what extent I'm reading this, the the this line right here. The the beginning of anarchy, to take other citizens hostage, to take the law into their own hands, not to respect the mechanism, that I find worrying. That sounds like something, you know, Trudeau handed a a a letter over to Wagner, and he read it. Like, how are are these two branches of government merging? Speaker 1: Well, that's a a good point you're making, actually. I think it's something that, Bruce Pardee also makes is that, you know, Canada you know, when we think of the subdivision of powers, we think of, the legislative branch, the judicial branch, and the executive branch. Now in Canada, we don't really conform to that, ideal very well because the leader of the executive branch is also, you know, under a majority government or a coalition that is as strong as this one, the leader of the legislative as well. And, you know, so we're already deviating from that ideal division of powers. You know, but I think it's fair to say that, you know, the judiciary, at least during the COVID era, also deferred their responsibility to the executive. So we have a legislative that's not legislating, passing laws and leaving it up to the regulations to fill in the details. And you've got a judiciary that is taking judicial notice that the that the decisions that the executive branch is making are valid without even, you know, requiring any evidence for it. So, yes, we have collapsed, the 3 branches of government into 1. And that is a a a root problem for this dysfunction in Canadian governance.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

13/ It's unlikely that we will see any positive self policing from the Council of Judges @buckmcyoung https://t.co/I1DLQm9cRN

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes that the legal profession needs reform, similar to the expansion of the Supreme Court in the United States under FDR. They suggest that the current conservative government may face opposition from liberal-appointed judges and senators if they try to address issues from the previous Trudeau era. Strong measures may be necessary to make changes.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We we've kind of talked about you've talked about these 13 judges, 13 lawyers. What do you think is gonna happen? Because it seems like, the council of judges is not doing anything about it. Yeah. I doubt anything's gonna happen, unfortunately. You know, I think it's good that, lawyers are are planting a flag in the ground. That's the most courageous thing I've seen out of the legal profession in some time. You know, but I don't expect that it it will be addressed this way. I mean, to be honest, I think we are looking at, some drastic, need to reform the courts. And, you know, this happened in the United States, the expansion of the Supreme Court, you know, to because the Supreme Court in the United States, under FDR was opposing, his legislative mandate, you know, he stacked the court. He added a lot more, justices to, to be able to to move that through. And, you know, I think it remains to be seen, but, you know, the conservatives are likely gonna have a strong mandate. We don't know yet if they're gonna go about trying to fix, a lot of the problems that were created during the Trudeau era. But if they do, you know, expect that, the judiciary and the senate will be brakes on that. And, you know, I think, 7 of the 9, justices on the supreme court are liberal appointees, Trudeau appointees. And, you know, they may seek to, protect his, legacy. And, and, you know, Pierre is gonna have to consider, some strong measures if, if he's, if that's the case and he is intent on on fixing some things.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

14/ It's important to point out that Chief Justice Wagner is not a @JustinTrudeau appointee, but a @stephenharper appointee https://t.co/pMdgIIakVL

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 mentions that Justice Wagner was appointed by Harper. Speaker 1 notes that most justices seem liberal, but can't speak for all. Some align with liberal agendas, but not all are political. Speaker 1 emphasizes not to be seen as biased. Speaker 0 acknowledges. Translation: Speaker 0 mentions that Justice Wagner was appointed by Harper. Speaker 1 notes that most justices seem liberal, but can't speak for all. Some align with liberal agendas, but not all are political. Speaker 1 emphasizes not to be seen as biased. Speaker 0 acknowledges.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I I'd just like to point out, I believe you told me that justice Wagner is actually a Harper appointee? Speaker 1: Yes. So, the 8th of the 9 justices seem to, have a liberal bent. Well, I shouldn't say that. Yeah. I shouldn't say that because I can't speak to the 7 that were appointed. I know a couple of them that I would say, have revealed themselves, you know, to be ideologically aligned with, the liberal, legislative agenda. But, I shouldn't say just because all of the justices were appointed by Trudeau that they are, political, in nature. That that wouldn't be appropriate for me to say. Make sure that one gets in because I don't wanna I don't wanna be seen as Clarkson. Speaker 0: Will do.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

15/ If the @SCC_eng was worried less about @JustinTrudeau's legacy, and more about it's reputation, it would have immediately fast tracked the Mosley case. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/pJrv9p1z3A

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker questions if recent events have damaged the credibility of institutions, particularly the courts. They believe the delay in addressing legal issues is a tactic to benefit certain political parties. They express disappointment in the Supreme Court's handling of cases and suggest that clarity and quick rulings are needed to regain public trust. The speaker implies that important decisions may be postponed until after the current political leader has left office.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I don't Speaker 1: know if this constitutes a constitutional crisis, but has Wagner really eroded the credibility of of, like, his institution? I know I'm I'm beating a dead horse here, but all all across the board, all the institutions are failing. And we all kind of hinted that the the the courts were failing us during COVID, but this is like the nail in the coffin, isn't it? Speaker 0: Well, this is indicative of what may be to come. I think when we see the, COVID era cases move their way through, you know, I would have liked to have seen the Supreme Court take up the Moseley appeal immediately. That is their prerogative. The fact that they are gonna let that go through court of appeals, before, ultimately seizing the matter, I think is just buying breathing room for the Liberals to, say, well, you know, even though mostly is the law of the land and that was unlawful behavior, the liberals can say, well, no, it's waiting appeal and and, you know, it's yet to be decided, which is factually incorrect. It is decided. That's the law of the land. You know, I think in a, a supreme court that was intent on engendering support from the public would immediately take up that issue and provide a quick ruling and some clarity on the issue. But, alas, we're not gonna see it until after Trudeau is well gone.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

16/ There is no way that the @JustinTrudeau administration read the Mosley decision before they decided to appeal it. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/DucjnuSUVj

Video Transcript AI Summary
The government appealed a ruling without reading it first, claiming it was wrong. This move was seen as political maneuvering. The speaker believes a previous Supreme Court would have addressed the issue immediately instead of allowing the government to create ambiguity by appealing.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Like, is it proper for a government to appeal a ruling without actually having time to read it? That's a good point. Yeah. I'm not sure exact I try to look up exactly when the decision came out. It was probably around 10 in the morning. And by 1 o'clock, you know, Freeland was doing her press conference, saying that she consulted with the prime minister and the cabinet, legal experts, and and the Department of Justice. And, you know, and they had all reviewed it and, they had concluded that, this 190 page decision, was, wrong and that they would were going to appeal it. The truth is that there's no way they read that decision, before they decided to appeal it. It's pure political, maneuvering that, that the federal government appealed it. And as I say, I think a a, a pre prior version of the Supreme Court would have, taken up their prerogative and immediately addressed the issue, rather than letting this government, you know, sort of continue on in, in the ambiguity that they created by appealing it.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

17/ Canada owes a debt of gratitude to Justice Mosely for delivering such a bullet proof ruling. @buckmcyoung @GreyMatterConvo https://t.co/94B1ZjAJtw

Video Transcript AI Summary
I spoke with a constitutional attorney about the Moseley decision, which he praised for being well-written and difficult to overturn. Despite some opposition, I believe the decision will stand as good law, especially given the flaws in the national security threat definition. The attorney's recommendation to remove that part of the definition suggests even he recognizes the illegality of its use.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I was talking to Leighton Gray's Alberta constitutional attorney, right after the Moseley decision, and he said that he read the thing, and it's really well written. And and he goes, Moseley wrote it specifically in a way that it probably couldn't be overturned on appeal. What are your thoughts? Speaker 1: Yeah. I thought it was written really well, as well. I think, you know, folks like that who are practicing professionals, their opinion matters a whole lot more than mine. You know? And I did take some flack for, you know, suggesting that supreme court take this issue up because people were pushing back and saying, no. No. No. Mostly the law of the land. You know, we've got all these cases that are working their way through the courts. We don't we don't want it overturned. You know, and I was of the mind. Look. You know, it it's this is gonna be this is good law, and so it's going to stand up, you know, unless we have some crazy travesty of justice. You you know, but I think it's it's very clear. And if you look at the, forgive me the Public Order Emergencies Commission rule decision. You know, he says he recommend one of the recommendations is that the national threat to national security part of the definition is removed. Well, I think he's even acknowledging, even though he, you know, is a political appointee and he was there to, you know, prop up the liberals and and cover over for them, even he acknowledges that, the the test the standard was not matched for the indication. And that recommendation is is, sort of a clear acknowledgment that even he knows, that, that it was illegally invoked.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

18/ As the saying goes, Justice must not only be served, it must appear to be served. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/HG1CQ0FrbP

Video Transcript AI Summary
The judiciary's impartiality is crucial for public trust in justice. Perception may outweigh reality; if people doubt institutions, even if they function well, they lose legitimacy and can't fulfill their roles.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The impartiality of the judiciary is foundational to the public's confidence in the administration of justice. How much do you think I mean, beyond just the sound administration of justice, how much is it important to have the per the perception of that? Speaker 1: I'd almost argue that the perception is more important than the fact. I mean, at the end of the day, if people don't think that their institutions work, whether or not they do, then those institutions have lost their legitimacy and they can't fulfill their mandates.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

19/ If doctors can't debate science, if lawyers can't debate law, if cops can't investigate deaths, then what are these institutions doing? @buckmcyoung https://t.co/zyWD1GjalW

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses examples of travesties that have eroded public trust, such as the case of detective Helen Bruce investigating COVID-related child deaths and facing disciplinary action. They also mention Dr. Kovind Kaur, a physician facing repercussions for speaking out on Twitter. These instances highlight a pattern of corruption and suppression within various regulatory bodies, undermining their intended purposes.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It is under acute scrutiny as a result of travesties in the last few years that have shattered the public's trust. We're gonna jump into the Coutts 4. But other than the Coutts 4, can you give me examples of travesties? And and try to give it from the perspective of the audience is the left, Right? So it's not our echo chamber. Speaker 1: Look, I would bring up Helen Bruce, who is the, detective who, I think was dismissed for, you know, dishonorable conduct because she was investigating, deaths in children, and, you know, with the implication that they could be associated with, the COVID transactions. And she was disciplined and, I think her court case or review is is currently underway. And, you know, and it's it's, it's an essentially, it looks like a cover up. They don't really wanna let the public in. They don't wanna talk about the issues. So that you know, there there would be an example, I think. You know, I think, doctor Kovind Kaur, again, this is a a physician who was very vocal and outspoken on Twitter. Elon Musk is actually supporting her, litigation right now because, the Ontario Medical Association really came after her. I can't remember exactly all the details, but, you know, I think they they took away your license threatened to take away your license or it's in jeopardy at this moment for simply pointing out things that we all understand to be facts now that you couldn't say back in, you know, 2021. You know, and so what you know, whether it's whatever the institution is, you know, and these are all sort of adjacent, like even if they're not the courts themselves, these are all semi judicial. All these regulatory bodies and panels and tribunals, all sorta have a judicial flavor to them. And they're all experiencing the same kind of the same kind of corruption for the status quo. Right? This deference to government and the administrative state and, a persecution of dissidents that would seek to challenge it. You know? And so if if we can't have doctors debate science and we can't have, you know, lawyers debate law, you know, or cops to, you know, investigate, you know, deaths, Like, what are these institutions doing? They have abandoned their foundational purpose.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

20/ The Coutts 4 got framed by the federal government such that it could invoke the emergencies act. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/ECtRzffLoD

Video Transcript AI Summary
The four individuals known as the Cootes Four were unjustly targeted in a political prosecution, falsely accused of involvement in an armed insurrection at the Coutts border blockade. They have been held in pretrial detention for over 800 days without visitation access or being convicted of any crime. The media initially spread false narratives about the case, but a pretrial publication ban now prevents the accused from telling their side of the story. The trial is beginning today, and it is expected that the truth will come to light, revealing the injustice they have faced at the hands of a government that disregards justice and rights. Translation: The Cootes Four were unfairly prosecuted for a political agenda, falsely accused of inciting violence at the Coutts border blockade. They have been in pretrial detention for over 800 days without being convicted of any crime. The media initially spread false narratives, but a publication ban now prevents the accused from sharing their side of the story. The trial is starting today, and it is believed that the truth will reveal the injustice they have endured due to a government that does not respect justice or rights.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: For people that have no idea who the coupes for are, can you tell us what exactly is the what's the injustice there? Speaker 1: Well, there's things that we don't know yet, but we're gonna find out very soon that, maybe I'll leave to another conversation because, I'll probably get ahead of myself. But I think what we can clearly say is an injustice is that these 4 individuals were, the subject of a political prosecution, that the government needed a pretext to invoke the Emergencies Act. You know, they laundered false intelligence, Canadian anti hate to RCMP, to government and claim you know, claiming that this was RCMP investigations. You know, this whole narrative around an insurrection and people violent, and so forth, you know, created this, narrative that these individuals were involved in, you know, an attempt to murder an RCMP officer. Warrants were executed at a bunch of locations, not at the Cootes border, but, you know, elsewhere in Alberta. And, you know, a bunch of guns and ammo were, brought to one location and staged for a photo op, to give, you know, give the public the impression that an armed insurrection was happening at the Coutts border blockade. That is not I'm comfortable enough saying it, and I'll leave these words, if I turn out to be wrong. That's absolutely not what happened there. And, and this very, odious narrative was used to, keep these 4 men in pretrial detention, which is not, you know, don't have all of the, I'll call it, comforts of, prison, but a remand center, which is supposed to be a temporary holding zone where, you you know, the drunks dry out before they go get their court date. They've been they these there's 2 men left who've been there for 843 days, behind bars, without visitation access, away from their families, and they've been convicted of no crime. Right? Meanwhile, violent repeat offenders are routinely given bail and and go on to, to reoffend and including murder. So, you know, the public safety here was the argument for why these men should be, you know, kept in custody. You know, but, the the the other implication of that is that, you know, they also haven't been able to tell their story. Right? There was a, a supreme court case that came out, and this was supposed to protect the rights of the accused from, you know, biasing a jury. But there's supposed to be a there is a pretrial publication ban, that is in place that prevents people from talking about what went on. And that that wasn't the case at the very beginning. And so the media was running with all of these narratives about insurrection and guns and ammo and pipe bombs and all that stuff. And then this decision from the supreme court gets handed down. And and now these men can't tell their story. Right? They are you know, no no no journalist is allowed to report the lawfare that's going on in the courtroom. You know? And so we're gonna I think today is the first day of their trial. We're gonna get the full accounting and the story soon. And I think what we're gonna come to appreciate is that, you know, these men got railroaded so that the Liberal government could invent a pretext to invoke the Emergencies Act, which was unlawful. And, and so they've lost almost 2 years of their lives to a government, that, doesn't respect justice nor rights.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

21/ The Coutts 4 did not meet the threshold to be denied bail. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/OrQoZtLBG5

Video Transcript AI Summary
There are cases where bail can be denied, like for repeat violent offenders. But in this situation, with charges dropped or individuals choosing to go to court, keeping them in custody for years without conviction is seen as punishment. The process itself changes people, sending a message that challenging the government may lead to retribution. Many others facing similar charges have experienced persecution for resisting COVID regulations.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Can I ask you some basic questions? Speaker 1: Sure. Speaker 0: Is there ever a case to deny someone bail? Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, I think so. Sure. Certainly, I can conceive of, many circumstances where that would be the case. I think if you've got repeat violent offenders who are a threat to the community, those people should be denied bail. This is not that context. Right? These individuals, you know, 2 of them have already had the attempted murder charge dropped. They pled out, to lesser charges. And, and 2 of them have decided that they are gonna have their day in court. You know, and so yeah. I think there are circumstances where it may be appropriate, but I would say that it's it's probably rare. Right? You know, we have a presumption of, you know, innocent till proven guilty. And, if you're gonna keep people in, you know, inadequate conditions for 2 years going on 3 years, you know, without convicting them, well, the process is the punishment. These men will be let out. They'll they'll maybe have lost their houses, paying for lawyers, overturning, you know, unlawful warrants and so forth. You know, they'll be forever changed. And, you know, and I think that is the whole point. It's, it a Speaker 0: Buck, we we lost you there. You were saying that these guys were changed forever. Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, the process is the punishment. I think this was a signal to folks that, you know, if you challenge the government, they will use whatever means that are available, lawful or not, you know, to, inflict retribution on you. Now I could be wrong. I might be eating these words, the publication ban is up today, and, and we're gonna get that story. But, I think there's no shortage of other people who, you know, were subject to mischief charges and, you know, the, you know, being terminated from employment and being denied employment insurance and every other, you know, form of persecution that was done to those that, you know, resisted the the COVID regime. You know, it's par for the course.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

22/ A publication ban is meant to protect the defendant, not the government. @buckmcyoung

Video Transcript AI Summary
There is merit to a pretrial publication ban to protect the rights of the accused, not the government. It prevents potential jurors from being biased before the trial. However, in this case, the ban has perpetuated injustice.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Buck, my next question again, these are very basic questions. Is there ever a justification for a a publication ban or a gag order? Speaker 1: Well, yes. I think there is merit to that supreme court decision about pretrial publication ban because it is intended to protect the rights of the accused. What you don't want is, you know, getting to a jury selection stage and every potential juror has already been, you know, convinced that you're guilty. You know? But the the the point of that pretrial publication then is to protect the rights of the accused, not the government. Right? And, anyways, I I don't know all the details and I understand that maybe, you know, the lawyers advising these men, you know, may have given different advice, and I I don't know all the context. But I think in this circumstance, that pretrial publication ban has, perpetuated this injustice.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

23/ The government is hoping that the last 4 years gets swept under the carpet and that no real institutional reform is brought about. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/U4m7KgcV67

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 believes the justice system is being compromised for political gain. Speaker 0 thinks the situation reveals widespread corruption and distrust in institutions. Speaker 1 wonders why charges aren't dropped, but Speaker 0 has no answer. They agree on the need for change.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm go Speaker 1: what I'm gonna say is it's like a loaded statement. It's it's almost like it's not even a question for you. But, like, they are dragging the integrity of the justice system through the mud to get a temporary win, I guess, you know, to get the Emergency Measures Act across the line. And now, they just can't let it go? They they're in too deep? What's going on? Speaker 0: Well, look. I I think they're hoping that all of this blows over and no real institutional reform as a consequence of COVID happens. I think it's bigger than just the Emergencies Act. You know, I think what what has happened is that people have woken up to the corruption that exists in all of our institutions. There's, you know, a a great deal of resentment, for authority. And, you know, and if it finds its expression, that'll be a force to be reckoned with. Speaker 1: I I thought you you put that beautifully, Buck, and I agree. What's to stop them from just dropping the charges at this point? Speaker 0: That's a good question. I don't know. I I don't know, actually. I don't have a good answer for my payment. It's beyond my pay grade. Speaker 1: Oh, that's that's too bad you're the expert. So moving on.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

24/ @buckmcyoung's hope is to see just one leader in government step forward and take responsibility for their actions. https://t.co/SWWRPYQP7D

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker criticizes Chief Justice Wagner for bias and calls for accountability. They mention a complaint filed by 13 lawyers and hope for a public apology to restore trust in the justice system. The speaker emphasizes the importance of leaders admitting mistakes to improve civil discourse. They express doubt that Chief Justice Wagner will take this opportunity for leadership.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What are your so going back to what we were talking about, the the appealing of the Moseley decision, can you speak to the bias that you see in the chief justice? Like, I I I call it, like, looking out of one eye. Like, he sees hyper laser focuses on things that he doesn't like and then gives the government a free pass. What are your thoughts on that? Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, I'm only basing on this on this, you know, these public statements he made back in April 2022. You know, maybe in the, you know, in the fullness of time, he's helped come to regret some of those statements. I think if the, the the complaint that's been filed by these 13 lawyers results in him giving a mea culpa and saying, you know what? I was wrong. That wasn't appropriate behavior. I'd love to see a leader of an institution take that kind of approach, right, and admit their own wrongdoing. I think that is exactly what I'm advocating for in this article is that the leaders, contend with the mistakes that they have made or their institutions have made. I see that it's the only way that we get back to, civil discourse. Because until you stop gaslighting people and telling them that, you know, vaccines are safe and effective and, you know, we had to lock you down for your safety, you know, they're just not gonna buy anything you say and and until their that trust is restored. So, this is a big opportunity for, chief justice Wagner to show leadership and, and reestablish public confidence in in the administration of justice. Speaker 0: Well, let's hope he's watching this. Speaker 1: I doubt it.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

25/ Chief Justice Wagner is calling for civility in the face of f**k Trudeau flags, but the reason people are flying those flags is b/c being civil got them de-platformed or silenced or censored. @buckmcyoung https://t.co/GSYI2Bd4xR

Video Transcript AI Summary
The lack of civility in Canada is due to certain viewpoints being silenced, leading to emotional outbursts. When people are deplatformed for expressing themselves civilly, they resort to uncivil behavior. Without all perspectives being heard, there is no genuine discourse, just an echo chamber. It is essential to allow all arguments to be presented for true civility to exist.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Based on his Toronto Star article and, your article, he uses the word civility a lot, and I think civil means something different to him than than it does to me. But what you're saying here is that the lack of civility on display in Canada is because all points of view are not being heard. What do you mean? Speaker 1: Well, I think, the reason people are flying, you know, fuck Trudeau flags, and, you know, are quite happy to, you know, express themselves in unmitigated ways is because them expressing themselves in civil ways got them kicked off in Twitter, you know, disinvited from Christmas and Easter and, you know, resulted in the loss of relationships. Well, that what is that? You know, somebody's trying to express themselves and you deplatform them, there that that's gonna invoke an emotional response and that emotional response is gonna come out as, you know, discourse with a lack of civility. So, you know, I think that's my point is like when when, you know, the courts will take judicial notice that, you know, non pharmaceutical interventions like, you know, limit restrictions on travel within our own country or, you know, the social distancing laws that, resulted in certain businesses being closed. You know, when when those cases can't be brought forward because judges will just defer to the wisdom of the administrative state, Well, then you can't have there is no civil discourse because one side of the conversation is not at the table. Right? And so, you know, this is what I'm I'm trying to get at is, you know, he's saying we need civility so that everybody's arguments can can be heard. And I'm saying, you you're not having the argument. You just have an echo chamber of, you know, a bunch of people who are reinforcing their own narrative. You're not letting the counternarrative, come to the table.

@PeymanAskari451 - Peyman Askari

26/ @buckmcyoung is a shining example to Canada. You don't need a 1M Twitter following. Just take what you do best and do it in service of fixing your country. If we all do that, then we're going to get through this. God bless this great nation 🇨🇦

ryangerritsen
Posted - June 23, 2024 at 1:31 PM
Saved - June 24, 2024 at 12:36 PM

@ryangerritsen - Ryan Gerritsen🇨🇦🇳🇱

Can you believe what you are reading? The RCMP chief wants to protect those accused of treason?!? https://t.co/p6ZeqIj7PF

WeAreCanProud
Posted - July 23, 2024 at 8:10 PM
Saved - July 23, 2024 at 10:35 PM

@WeAreCanProud - Canada Proud

Ontario PC MPP @BramptonGraham is CALLING OUT Justin Trudeau's revolving door justice system after a MASSIVE crime ring bust caught multiple repeat offenders. https://t.co/JPjBPY1pY7

Video Transcript AI Summary
Project Warlock led to 18 arrests for violent crimes, with suspects often re-offending while out on bail. The speaker criticizes the justice system for allowing repeat offenders to harm innocent people. They call for meaningful bail reform, emphasizing the need for federal government action. The police and local authorities have done their part, now it's time for the government to step up.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When I was briefed on project warlock, I was dismayed to hear that several of the suspects in custody, were arrested while out on bail. And this is a story that residents are sick and tired of hearing. Repeat and violent offenders who continue to walk our streets because of the revolving door justice system. I hear from police regularly about catching the same criminal 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 times. And to hear that today, police are arresting the same people who've already been previously arrested breaks my heart. Project Warlock involves 18 arrests, a 150 criminal code charges laid. That's 17 violent home invasions, armed robberies, and carjackings, guns and knives used against innocent people. Shame on our society if these individuals are allowed out on bail to do it again. I understand that it's a role of judges to interpret the law and make rulings. It's not a politician's business to get involved. Fine. But the criminal code that they're interpreting is written by politicians, specifically the federal politicians that we have in Ottawa. Premier Ford wrote a letter over a year and a half ago signed by all 13 provinces and territories in Canada, calling on prime minister Trudeau to implement meaningful bail reform. We have continued to see a revolving door justice system ever since. We've heard from the police on this, but put yourself in the victim's shoes. Imagine an armed scumbag breaks into your home, puts a gun to your head. Police do their jobs and catch the guy who did it. You expect him to go to jail. Only you see him at the gym the next day because the last criminal code let him not unveil. Enough is enough. Ontario has done its part. Peel has done its part. Peel police, they've gone above and beyond what anybody could reasonably expect of them. We need the federal government to do their part. Let's make it happen.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - August 3, 2024 at 4:22 AM
Saved - August 3, 2024 at 5:47 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
None of the accused at Coutts were guilty of "Conspiracy to Commit Murder of a Police Officer," and I believe the RCMP was aware of this from the start. This has been a 900-day political imprisonment and show trial to satisfy politicians in Ottawa. With today's other "guilty" verdicts, it seems Ottawa will be pleased. I question whether the accused ever had a real chance of being acquitted. After years in captivity, I'm left wondering what will happen at the sentencing.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking... None of the accused at Coutts were guilty of "Conspiracy to Commit Murder of a Police Officer" and I believe the RCMP knew this from the beginning. This was a 900 day political imprisonment and show trial to please politicians in Ottawa. With today's other "guilty" verdicts, no doubt Ottawa will be happy. I wonder if the accused ever really had any chance of being acquitted across the board. I personally don't think so. After years in captivity, what will happen at the sentencing?

@JasonLavigneMP - Jason Lavigne

COUTTS VERDICT Anthony Olienick Not Guilty - Conspiracy to Commit Murder of Police Officer Guilty - Possession of Weapons for Dangerous Purposes Guilty - Mischief over $5000 Guilty - Possession of Explosives for a Dangerous Purposes Christopher Carbert Not Guilty - Conspiracy to Commit Murder of Police Officer Guilty - Possession of Weapons for Dangerous Purposes Guilty - Mischief over $5000 Sentencing/Bail Hearing August 12th, 2024

BezirganMocha
Posted - August 3, 2024 at 5:59 AM
Saved - August 3, 2024 at 5:03 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Tonight, I feel a sense of relief knowing our community stands on the right side of history. The Coutts men were not found guilty of conspiracy to murder police, despite being held in remand for over two years on that serious charge. Their innocence has been recognized.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Tonight this community can sleep comfortably for having been on the right side of history. None of the Coutts men have been found guilty of conspiracy to murder police. Bails were denied because the men were believed to be a danger to law enforcement given the conspiracy to murder police charge. They were innocent of a serious charge that got them locked up in remand for 2+ years.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

BREAKING: A large convoy in support of the 4 protesters who’ve been held in remand for over 700 days is now heading down to Coutts, Alberta. “I think we got a 2-tier justice system in this country, our elites don’t seem to ever pay for any of their crimes, we just saw the Emergencies Act talked about in court that it was illegal, it was criminal that how they enacted it, and I doubt we’ll see any kind of consequences for that.” There seems to be a media blackout on this protest, please consider supporting @MediaBezirgan so that I can bring you the coverage that nobody else will.

Video Transcript AI Summary
We attended the Tucker Carlson event in Calgary, expecting a bigger turnout than last year's 400-vehicle convoy. The speaker lacks faith in the government and judicial system, believing the 4 prisoners are being punished as an example for protesting mandates. They criticize the 2-tiered justice system where elites escape consequences while average citizens face harsh treatment for exercising their rights. The lack of media coverage is noted, with appreciation for independent media presence. Another individual promotes donations for coverage of the event.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We were just at the Tucker Carlson event in Calgary a couple days ago, and, seeing him talk about the 4 prisoners was really good. And I think that's bringing a lot of people out, raising a lot of awareness. So kind of expected to be bigger than last year. So, you know, it was big last year. I think there was 400 vehicles at the convoy. So this one looks like it's gonna be even bigger. Speaker 1: But last year, did you expect them to be held in remand for this long? Speaker 0: Unfortunately, I kinda did. I mean, I I don't have a whole lot of faith in our government or our judicial system. I think we need really big changes. So I'm not shocked that they're punishing these guys, you know. They they stood up against, you know, the mandates and everything else, and they needed an example. You know? So I think these guys are getting punished for everybody that protested. Speaker 1: You know, on the on the other hand, we have companies like Assasi Lavalin who commit corruption and, you know, they get they get slapped on their wrist. They don't the government don't make an example out of them. What do you make of that? Speaker 0: I think we got a 2 tiered justice, system in this country. You know, our elites don't seem to ever pay for any of their crimes. I mean, we just saw the emergency act get, you know, talked about in court that it was illegal, was criminal, how they enacted it. And I doubt we'll see any kind of, consequences for that for anybody. Yet the average person, you know, had their bank accounts frozen, had their property seized, got beat up, got pepper sprayed, you know, just for, for using their rights. So, yeah, I I think we got 2 very different systems depending on what kind of person you are. So, yeah, that's why we're here protesting today. Speaker 1: My last question, have you seen any media so far? Speaker 0: No. You're the first. So, yeah, it's good to bump into you. It's good to see somebody covering this, some independent media. I don't know where everybody else is. I guess they don't, they don't pay them to cover these kind of things. Speaker 2: Hey, guys. I'm out here covering the Cowboys 2nd anniversary. Reserviant.gov/donate so that my mission of bringing you the coverage that you deserve can be found. Thank you.
marco_huigenbos
Posted - August 4, 2024 at 3:30 AM
Saved - August 4, 2024 at 2:51 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe Canada's justice system is being compromised by rogue prosecutors targeting individuals whose views differ from the state. Four Canadian men have been unjustly held for nearly nine years, and while two were acquitted recently, the situation raises alarm across the political spectrum. The Coutts4 case demands a thorough inquiry by Alberta's Justice Minister to restore trust in our institutions. It's crucial to confront the misuse of our justice system by corrupt prosecutors to protect the foundations of Canadian democracy.

@marco_huigenbos - Marco Van Huigenbos

Canada's justice system has been hijacked. Rogue prosecutors are using the powers afforded them to persecute and prosecute Canadians whose views no longer align with the state! These prosecutors remanded 4 Canadian sons 3,246 days and counting, which is almost 9 years combined. Last night, the remaining 2 men were aquited of the allegations prosecutors brought against them. Canadians from all political persuasions should be extremely concerned with the lawfare that is setting precedence in the courts across this country. The Coutts4 proceedings require a full inquiry by Alberta Justice Minister @mickeyamery. Trust has been lost. Only a full public accounting will provide the opportunity for Albertans and Canadians to regain some trust in the institution that was once the cornerstone of canadian democracy. The weaponization of our Justice system by corrupt prosecutors needs to be addressed!!

BezirganMocha
Posted - September 9, 2024 at 4:47 PM
Saved - September 9, 2024 at 6:21 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The courtroom is packed as the Coutts Four face sentencing. They were found guilty of serious charges after spending over 900 days in remand. Justice Labrenz emphasizes the need for deterrence against armed protests, acknowledging the men's lack of prior criminal records and personal losses as mitigating factors. However, he cites the serious nature of their offenses and their political motivations as aggravating. Sentences of at least 6.5 years are suggested, and he addresses the implications of their actions on the rule of law. The prosecutor requests the destruction of all seized weapons.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

The courtroom is full, the corridor seats are full, the accredited media row is full, and the parking lot is packed. Cameras are set, police are on standby, and tensions are high as the remaining two of the Coutts Four face the judge for sentencing today. They were found innocent of conspiracy to murder police but guilty of other charges, such as possession of a firearm for dangerous purposes, by a jury of their peers after spending over 900 days in remand without bail. Earlier this year the other 2 men were released after a plea deal that had the conspiracy to murder charge dropped. The crown asks for 9 years. More to come @MediaBezirgan

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Please consider supporting my coverage to make it financially feasible and freely accessible to all Canadians mediabezirgan.com/donate

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

LIVE: Justice David Labrenz says denunciation and deterrence are needed to discourage others from arming themselves at a protest or a cause, and says that the accused's moral culpability is "high" as he delivers his sentence.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz considers men having no prior criminal record, and being otherwise productive and law-abiding members of the society as mitigating factors. Justice also acknowledges the men's financial losses, business losses, and the losses of the lives of their family members while the men were in remand.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz considered the cage of weapons, the men's comments, the body armour, and other factors as aggregative factors.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz uses the same case law regarding political motives as an aggravating factor that was used against Artur Pawlowski and James Sowery.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

At least 6.5 years of incarceration Justice Labrenz alludes to for Chris Carbert, before reductions.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz says the serious nature of the offences outweighed the intrusion of their privacy regarding the collection of DNA information.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

The protest was political in nature and resulted in economic harm, designed to force political change, says Justice Labrenz as he delivers his sentencing for the guilty verdict of mischief over $5,000.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz denies considering sentencing authorities suggested by defence lawyers given the difference in gravity between blocking an international highway with political motivations to force change of government policy and the case law brought before him.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz says the protest in Coutts was an attack on the rule of law.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz says the 2 accused were knowingly engaging in illegal activity but they did not care as they believed they were doing it for a worthy cause.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz delivers his sentence on the charge of 2 "pipebombs" found in Olineck's house. Justice Labrenz says he is not aware of the purpose of these pipebombs, as Olineck argued that they were for purposes of quarry. Justice says he can't say if the purpose was to kill police or not.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Justice Labrenz considers Olineck's time in segregation in remand as a mitigation factor on this charge. Sentences him to 6 months, consecutive to sentences of other charges.

@BezirganMocha - Mocha Bezirgan 🇨🇦

Prosecutor Steven Johnston interrupts to request that all seized weapons be destroyed.

MaximeBernier
Posted - September 10, 2024 at 4:02 PM
Saved - September 10, 2024 at 6:51 PM

@MaximeBernier - Maxime Bernier

There are violent criminals who get bail and are allowed to go free and continue to commit crimes. These peaceful men are being persecuted and kept in jail for years to justify Trudeau’s unconstitutional invoking of the Emergencies Act. This is a complete travesty of justice! https://t.co/QFpDpyR4xO

DonaldBestCA
Posted - October 11, 2024 at 4:03 PM
Saved - October 11, 2024 at 10:39 PM

@DonaldBestCA - DonaldBest.CA * DO NOT COMPLY

@DaveFreedom6 One of the most important Canadian criminal cases - and most of us have never heard of it... https://t.co/SOaLuDkzH0

cdnrefusenik
Posted - October 12, 2024 at 9:19 PM
Saved - October 13, 2024 at 12:45 PM

@cdnrefusenik - Canadian Refusenik 🍁

A retired judge says Canadians have been “deliberately deceived by their own government”. https://t.co/YXeWaeuU0I

PaulChampLaw
Posted - December 3, 2024 at 10:19 PM
Saved - December 4, 2024 at 4:04 PM

@PaulChampLaw - Paul Champ

Another Freedom Convoy leader convicted of mischief. Charland made videos saying there was a siege of downtown Ottawa and they wouldn't leave until all public health restrictions were dropped. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-steeve-charland-guilty-mischief-convoy-1.7400030

JohnStrandUSA
Posted - December 12, 2024 at 6:26 AM
Saved - December 12, 2024 at 4:22 PM

@JohnStrandUSA - John Strand

But I thought you assured us they already made a confession of guilt…isn’t that why you’ve been shrieking about plea deals? Or is this the part of the movie where everyone realizes that you coerced those pleas with a fraudulent 20-year felony, because you’re fascist thugs? https://t.co/nSjgYz4bpt

elonmusk
Posted - January 2, 2025 at 5:49 PM
Saved - January 2, 2025 at 8:42 PM

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

A mass murderer is living free as a professor in Canada?

@PierrePoilievre - Pierre Poilievre

A man convicted in a French court for killing 4 people in a Paris synagogue bombing is living freely in Canada, even working as a professor teaching students about 'social justice in action.' Why hasn’t he been extradited to France to face justice? Is Justin Trudeau refusing France's extradition request? https://nationalpost.com/opinion/iddo-moed-carleton-fans-the-flames-of-toxicity-by-employing-convicted-terrorist

Iddo Moed: Carleton fans the flames of toxicity by employing convicted terrorist Our elected officials and university presidents need to show moral clarity nationalpost.com
AntonioTweets2
Posted - August 20, 2025 at 3:12 PM
Saved - August 21, 2025 at 5:11 AM

@AntonioTweets2 - 🇨🇦 Antonio Tweets

The justice system is broken in Canada. Why is that? 🤬🇨🇦 https://t.co/4VfFd9irUk

Video Transcript AI Summary
Crash killed two children, ages seven and three, and their 68 year old grandmother. Now Mahak Deep Singh shouldn't have been driving at all. He falsified his logbook for one thing. For another, Canada never should have allowed him into the country. But in the end, he was sentenced to just five years in prison. Probably won't even be deported. Back in 2018, Jeff Skirits failed to stop at a stop sign. He had dozens of recorded safety violations the days prior to the crash. And as punishment for destroying more than a dozen families and wiping out a small town's hockey team, killing everyone, he received a sentence of just eight years in prison, six months per death. For comparison, that's the same sentence that the government of Canada sought against the organizer of the nonviolent trucker convoy protesting COVID mandates.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Crash killed two children, ages seven and three, and their 68 year old grandmother. Now Mahak Deep Singh shouldn't have been driving at all. He falsified his logbook for one thing. For another, Canada never should have allowed him into the country. But in the end, he was sentenced to just five years in prison. Probably won't even be deported. For wiping out an entire family, you get a lighter sentence than what George Santos got. That's not surprising in Canada. Back in 2018, Jeff Skirits failed to stop at a stop sign. He had dozens of recorded safety violations the days prior to the crash. Shouldn't have been on the roads either. And as punishment for destroying more than a dozen families and wiping out a small town's hockey team, killing everyone, he received a sentence of just eight years in prison, six months per death. For comparison, that's the same sentence that the government of Canada sought against the organizer of the nonviolent trucker convoy protesting COVID mandates. That's how far gone Canada is. Upsetting the government is treated as equally as bad as mass murder.
DavidMcLA
Posted - October 10, 2025 at 2:14 AM
Saved - October 10, 2025 at 8:27 PM

@DavidMcLA - David McLaughlin

I dunno, but I think the true "national heroes" were the millions and millions of everyday Canadians who abided by public health orders, supported the health system, and got vaccinated to get their families, friends, and communities through the pandemic as quickly as possible.

@echipiuk - Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM

Read it and weep, snowflakes. The lies are exposed, the facts don’t lie, and people across the world can see the truth. The question remains: when will you stop lying to yourself and others, and start thanking your fellow citizens for fighting for your freedom? “Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, organizers of the most successful protest in Canadian history, kept their cool, kept the peace and brought national unity, patriotism and common sense back to Canada after the pandemic – this, despite the sustained efforts of the most aggressively controlling, divisive government the nation has ever had. They achieved this under intense pressure and at great personal cost. They’re national heroes, and the persecution waged against them is destroying trust in the Canadian judicial system, though the judge involved does not seem to realize it. Justice Perkins-McVey said in court that if she discharged the defendants, it would “undermine confidence in the administration of justice”. But it’s quite the opposite… There was another ironic moment at the sentencing. The judge announced, “Politics has no place inside this courtroom” – yet the trial has been widely viewed as nothing more than the political vengeance of Doug Ford and the Ontario government. If it weren’t for politics, Lich and Barber would never have been arrested, let alone put through jail time, solitary confinement, loss of employment, years of drawn-out, costly legal proceedings, onerous bail conditions and emotional strain… This means the public is paying twice – once as taxpayers, with money intended to pursue real criminals wasted on a political vendetta – and once again, voluntarily, to support the brave people who stood up to ask for an end to lockdowns and vaccine mandates. This is the same public that already gave $24 million to the truckers to help them go to Ottawa and protest vaccine mandates and lockdowns: $24 million that never reached them, because politicians colluded with fundraising sites and banks to freeze the money, debank the protestors and doxx the donors, all without a court order. No criminal charges have been laid in Canada, to this writer’s knowledge, against the perpetrators of these deeds, though they damaged national institutions far more than any protest ever could. Justice Perkins-McVey is right to be concerned about confidence in the administration of justice. Many Canadians share her concern. Sadly, her handling of this case has done little to dispel their fears.”

@ikwilson - Keith Wilson, K.C.

The Freedom Convoy trial has disgraced Canada’s justice system - The Spectator, Australia https://www.spectator.com.au/2025/10/the-freedom-convoy-trial-has-disgraced-canadas-justice-system/

The Freedom Convoy trial has disgraced Canada’s justice system In a disgraceful conclusion to a disgraceful trial, Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber have been sentenced to… spectator.com.au
JinglaiHe
Posted - October 18, 2025 at 10:38 PM
Saved - October 19, 2025 at 1:09 AM

@JinglaiHe - Jinglai He 🇨🇦

BREAKING: Conservative MP Michael Cooper makes the RCMP confirm that Justin Trudeau ILLEGALLY obstructed the investigation into SNC-Lavalin and broke the law. Well would you look at that, Pierre was RIGHT AGAIN! Why isn't the CBC covering this clip? https://t.co/NqZoCE0I2O

Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion centers on the RCMP examination into whether the prime minister obstructed justice under section 139(2) of the Criminal Code. The RCMP’s strongest theory of obstruction involved the prime minister shuffling Jody Wilson-Raybould out of the position of attorney general so a new attorney general might pursue a different decision regarding SNC-Lavalin. It is stated that the RCMP did not have access to all material evidence related to this strongest theory, because of the parameters of the order in council concerning the waiver of cabinet confidentiality. The RCMP acknowledge that the scope limitations prevented them from fully examining this central aspect of potential criminal conduct. When pressed, it is indicated that the decision to expand the parameters would have to be made within the government, and that the RCMP did request an expansion to obtain additional evidence, but the request was denied. The denial occurred on 08/30/2019 and came from the Prime Minister’s Department (the PCO). The RCMP clarifies that they did receive a letter from the Department of Justice, but cannot confirm if it originated from the PCO; regardless, the refusal by the prime minister’s personal department significantly impeded the RCMP’s ability to pursue a full investigation into potential obstruction of justice. The RCMP describes this as limiting their capability and suggests that, given the scope constraints, they could not reach the heart of the obstruction issue. Speaker 0 asserts that the prime minister’s department obstructed the investigation, and questions whether any other Canadian could single-handedly block RCMP access in such a way. Speaker 2 emphasizes that the RCMP operates within established parameters and regulations, noting that certain information remains inaccessible under those rules, including some international security information. Nevertheless, Speaker 0 states that there is no one with such powers and characterizes the situation as part of a pattern of cover-up. Speaker 2 reiterates that they made efforts to obtain additional information, but the expansion request was refused, leaving the investigation constrained. In closing, Speaker 0 thanks the commissioner and Justice, and the exchange underscores that the RCMP felt hindered by the parameters set by the PCO, which curtailed their ability to conduct a full investigation into the prime minister’s potential obstruction of justice.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Thank you, mister chair. Thank you to the witnesses. A part of the RCMP's examination to determine whether the prime minister violated section one thirty nine sub two of criminal code by committing obstruction of justice. Correct? That was part of the RCMP's examination. Speaker 1: That's correct, mister chair. And Speaker 0: paragraph 19 of the RCMP investigation report states that the strongest fury towards an offensive obstruction of justice was that the prime minister shuffled Jody Wilson Raybold out of the position of attorney general so that a new attorney general would make a different decision regarding the prosecution of SNC Lavalin. Correct? That's correct, mister chair. And it's fair to say that the RCMP did not have access to all material evidence surrounding miss Wilson Rabel being shuffled out as attorney general. Correct? Speaker 1: That's correct, mister chair. Speaker 0: And so, just to clarify then or emphasize, the RCMP did not have access to all material evidence on the strongest theory surrounding the prime minister's potential criminality involving obstruction of justice. Correct? Speaker 1: That's correct, mister chair. And Speaker 0: the reason the RCMP did not have access to that material evidence on what was central to determining whether the prime minister broke the law was because of the parameters of the scope of the order of counsel with respect to the waiver of cabinet confidentiality. Correct? Speaker 1: That's correct, mister chair. The parameters did not allow us to fully look into this one. However, I should just Speaker 0: Thank add thank you for that. You answered it. The parameters did not allow you to, get that evidence. Now there is one person who had the authority to expand the parameters of that order and council, and that is the prime minister himself. Correct? Speaker 1: I would have to say, mister chair, I'm not exactly sure of the exact process of where the prime minister would be involved in such a decision. However, I I do believe the decision has to be made within the Somewhere. Somewhere within the government. Speaker 0: I would submit the decision would have to be made by the prime minister, but the RCMP went and requested an expansion of the scope to obtain that evidence, to follow that evidence. Correct? Speaker 1: Before we proceeded with the assessment, yes. We did make a request for an expansion to the parameters. Speaker 2: I just have, mister Cooper, it's not to follow the evidence. It's to glean additional information. That could be evidence. Correct. Speaker 0: And that request was turned down on 08/30/2019. Speaker 1: I would have to say, mister chair, that the request for the expansion was was not allowed. Speaker 0: It was turned down, and it was turned down by the PCO, the prime minister's department. Correct? Speaker 1: We mister chair, we did receive a letter from the Department of Justice. I could not remember exactly specifically if this came from the Speaker 0: Well, it was from the PCO, and that's in the RCMP's investigation report. And, would it be fair to say that the refusal by the prime minister's personal department, the PCO, to expand the scope of the order in council significantly impeded the full investigation into the prime minister's potential obstruction of justice. Speaker 2: It limited our capability of pursuing a full investigation. Speaker 0: And it would have limited it in a fairly significant way. Because after all, we're talking about going to the heart of the matter of obstruction. Speaker 2: And again, I I don't know what additional not knowing what additional information is out there, it's hard for me to speculate that there's a Pandora box out there which is full of information, so it's hard for us without speculating. Speaker 0: Well, let the record show that the prime minister's department, the PCO, obstructed the RCMP investigation into the prime minister's potential obstruction of justice. Are you aware of any other Canadian who can single handedly block the RCMP from investigating his own criminality in such an effective way as the prime minister? Good question. Fantastic. Speaker 2: I wouldn't I wouldn't use the term, mister mister president. I wouldn't use the term block. The RCMP is when it runs an investigation, operates within the parameters and the regulations that we're allowed to. And we see international security investigation as well where there's some information that we don't have access to, we can't use into investigations. It's the it's the parameters it's the it's the parameters that we are Speaker 0: I think the answer to that question is there is no one who has such powers. And was any explanation provided by the prime minister's personal department why there was this refusal to expand the scope of the order in council? Speaker 1: Again, mister chair, as far as for a response on this one, of course, it was indicated, of course, the the importance, of course, of these privilege that do exist. They are there for a reason. And, again, as the commissioner mentioned Well we do have to operate within these parameters. Speaker 0: It would seem to me to be part of a pattern of cover up. Speaker 2: That's right. Speaker 0: That's what it would seem to me to be. How can the prime minister be subject to the rule of law like every other Canadian if his personal department can shield him from an RCMP criminal investigation? Speaker 2: Absolutely. So mister chair, I'll I'll I'll let individuals draw their own conclusion. What I what I come back to is we operate within a set of regulations and parameters that, unfortunately, we did we made the effort to go and get additional information, and it was refused. Speaker 0: Thank you, commissioner. Thank you. Justice, I Thank would you, mister Cooper.
View Full Interactive Feed