reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The events on Friday were unacceptable and embarrassing to the House and Canadians. The speaker should listen to members and step down. Translation: What happened on Friday was not okay and brought shame to the House and Canadians. The speaker should heed the members' calls and resign.

I request unanimous consent to remove the recognition given by the Speaker of the House to an individual present in the gallery during a joint address to parliament by Volodymyr Zelensky. This removal should be done from the House of Commons Debates of September 21, 2023, and any House multimedia recording. Thank you.

I request to remove the recognition of an individual during a joint address to Parliament by Volodymyr Zelensky from the House of Commons Debates and Multimedia Recording. Unanimous consent is not achieved.

Multiple speakers express their desire to speak on the nomination, despite having already debated it twice. Speaker 0 insists that they have debated enough and proceeds with the roll call. Speaker 4 warns of consequences if they continue down this path, while Speaker 2 and Speaker 3 request the opportunity to speak. Speaker 5 argues that debate cannot be limited without invoking rule 4. The speakers continue to request their turn to speak, expressing frustration at not being given the chance. Speaker 1 accuses the chairman of destroying the committee and setting a dangerous precedent. The roll call continues, and Speaker 3 questions why members who have not spoken are being made to vote. The speakers express disappointment and frustration with the chairman's actions.

Hunter Biden's alleged involvement in making pornography was brought up during a discussion. The speaker questioned whether it was appropriate to display such content. The chairperson interrupted, stating that the speaker's time had expired. Another person was offered the remaining time to speak.

The speaker asserts that a vote has already occurred, preventing a revote. Amidst rising voices, the speaker demands order and attempts to gain clarification, but is interrupted by yelling. The speaker accuses others of disruptive behavior and a double standard, claiming that offensive remarks against another person would be tolerated.

I request unanimous consent to remove the recognition given by the Speaker of the House to an individual present in the gallery during a joint address to parliament by Volodymyr Zelensky. This removal should be done from the appendix of the House of Commons Debates on September 21, 2023, as well as from any House multimedia recording. Thank you.

I request to remove the recognition of an individual during a joint address to Parliament from the House of Commons Debates and Multimedia Recording. We will now seek unanimous consent. Any objections? No objections were raised. Thank you. Translation: I ask to delete the acknowledgment of a person during a joint address to Parliament from the House of Commons Debates and Multimedia Recording. We will now seek unanimous agreement. Any objections? No objections were made. Thank you.

Friday's events were unacceptable and embarrassing to the House and Canadians. The speaker should listen to members and step down.

Speaker 0 launches a confrontation about books, insisting that new books should be purchased and that she must get rid of “the 500 filthy books that you have.” She says she will read one aloud and warns that if there are children in the audience, they need to leave. Speaker 1 interrupts, stating this is a public hearing and that the book content must not be read if it is not appropriate in public. Speaker 0 objects, asking why the content is in schools, claiming the content is in public schools. Speaker 0 continues, asserting, “This this book your time,” and references DeBakey, Furr, and Heights High School, saying, “His cock was enormous.” Speaker 1 responds firmly, declaring that this is not allowed and that Speaker 0 is out of order, issuing a first warning and threatening removal with one more word. Despite the warning, Speaker 0 persists. Speaker 0 then describes explicit actions connected to the content: “She wrapped her hand around his cock.” Speaker 1 reiterates that it is not permitted and maintains the order that Speaker 0 is out of order. Speaker 0 further describes explicit sexual action: “head tongue sliding into the small slip,” continuing to read or reference the material in a manner that violates the presiding rules of the public hearing. Speaker 1 again instructs that if the content is not to be allowed, it should be removed, so that the children do not have access to it, and warns that Speaker 0 is being removed, thanking the people present and acknowledging the authority to remove them. The exchange ends with Speaker 0 muttering, “My name is,” before the transcript cuts off, leaving the final identification incomplete. Summary of key points: - Speaker 0 demands the purchase of new books and the removal of “500 filthy books,” and declares she will read one aloud, telling children to leave if present. - Speaker 1 enforces public hearing decorum, arguing some content is not appropriate for public display in schools. - Speaker 0 references sexual content tied to books allegedly in DeBakey, Furr, and Heights High School, including explicit phrases: “His cock was enormous.” - The exchange escalates with explicit descriptions, and Speaker 1 issues warnings and orders removal to maintain safety and propriety for the audience, especially children. - The session ends with Speaker 0 interrupted before finishing their identification.

Speaker 0 confronts someone who is recording a video of them in a public place. Speaker 0 insists that the video should not be saved as it could cause trouble for them. Speaker 0 tries to delete the video from their phone, but the other person refuses to let them. Speaker 0 asks for a moment to delete the video.

Speaker 0 told Speaker 1 they need to read a book because they have no understanding. Speaker 0 then called Speaker 1 an incompetent journalist and said CBC has sunk. Speaker 1 responded that the accusations and shouting were not helpful to the case. Speaker 0 denied shouting and said they were just telling Speaker 1 something as someone doing an interview on the case. Speaker 1 then ended the interview.

Speaker 0 interrupts and is asked to sit down. Speaker 1 tells Speaker 0 to leave the auditorium. Speaker 2 comments on the situation. Speaker 1 calls Speaker 0 a sick person for turning it into a political issue.

Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 to keep going for safety. Speaker 1 disagrees and is asked to leave. Speaker 1 mentions harm caused. Speaker 0 tells Speaker 1 they don't have to stay for the recording.

The speaker of the house resigned after inviting an actual Nazi to the House of Commons. The prime minister is being blamed for the embarrassment, but he claims no one knew ahead of time. The government vetted the Nazi, and a minister tried to erase the incident from the historical record. The member for Thornhill demands an apology from the prime minister for slandering and dishonoring Holocaust survivors. The government house leader defends the speaker's decision and emphasizes that no one in the chamber knew who the Nazi was. The speaker has taken responsibility and resigned.

Given continued disruptions, I'm directing the sergeant at arms to restore order and remove this individual from the chamber. Members, please maintain decorum in the House.

Speaker 1 admits to leaving a required oversight hearing in order to go on a personal vacation. Speaker 0 finds this unacceptable and questions if Speaker 1 paid for the flight. Speaker 1 confirms they paid for it and agrees to provide receipts to the committee. Speaker 0 asks if Speaker 1 is still capable of doing their job, to which Speaker 1 responds affirmatively. However, Speaker 0 disagrees and believes Speaker 1 should have been removed long ago.

The speaker mentioned the goal of getting Republicans elected. However, the gentleman was not recognized and members were reminded not to engage in personal attacks against each other.

Speaker 0 accuses the prime minister of bullying senators and lying about the independence of the senate. Speaker 1 interrupts, asking Speaker 0 to retract a word. Speaker 0 refuses and Speaker 1 asks them to apologize. Speaker 0 again refuses. Speaker 1 asks Speaker 0 to leave, and they eventually comply.

Speaker 0 requests unanimous consent to remove recognition of an individual from the House of Commons Debates and multimedia recording. Speaker 1 asks for unanimous consent but is met with opposition. Speaker 2 expresses disappointment and compares the incident to the importance of learning from history. Speaker 1 interrupts, stating that the discussion is becoming more of a debate.

I request unanimous consent to remove the recognition given by the Speaker of the House to an individual present in the gallery during a joint address to parliament by Volodymyr Zelensky. This removal should apply to the House of Commons Debates of September 21, 2023, and any House multimedia recording. Thank you.

I will address the house to apologize for inviting and recognizing a controversial figure. The speaker took responsibility and resigned. We regret clapping without knowing the context, which hurt many communities. We deeply apologize for disrespecting the memory of Holocaust victims. We are sorry for the distress caused to President Zelensky and the Ukrainian delegation. It is concerning that Russia is using this mistake for false propaganda. Let us never forget the atrocities of the Holocaust.

Speaker 0 requests unanimous consent. Speaker 1 acknowledges the official opposition leader. Confusion arises regarding the request.

The minister accused of painting Canadians as Nazis refuses to apologize for a vetted Nazi. The descendant of Holocaust survivors criticizes the distortion of history. The government house leader deflects blame, stating the speaker invited the individual and took responsibility. The speaker resigned, which was deemed honorable and necessary.

Speaker 0 states: 'The house voted today to censure Ilhan Omar and remove her from her committee committees.' Four Republicans voted with the Democrats: from Nebraska, Colorado, California, and Florida. 'When the midterm come, remember this because they just let her go. They basically gave her a slap on the wrist.' Speaker 1 notes: 'There has been an attempt to censure Ilhan Omar to punish her for her Charlie Kirk related remarks and actions, and that attempt has just failed due to four Republicans coming to her rescue.' The vote count: 'yeas are two fourteen and the nays are two thirteen. The motion is adopted. Without objection, the motion reconsider is laid on the table.' The discussion closes with online reaction and calls for comments and subscriptions.