To absolutely no one's surprise, Rebel News' Ezra Levant is appealing his recent ass-paddling beatdown in two anti-SLAPP motions, and the most amusing thing about these appeals is their stunning and spectacular incoherence, wherein apparently neither Ezra nor his bloviating gasbag of a lawyer seem to have even the most basic understanding of Ontario's anti-SLAPP legislation, as they continually confuse the rules of that legislation with normal defamation law, a misunderstanding that would get a first-year law student banished to the quad with their desk.
No, really, they're that bad.
4 comments:
Where does Ezra get the money to practically live in court these days? He just finished a trial where he's being sued for $200,000 for defamation; he lost those two recent anti-SLAPP motions which means he has to pay his own legal fees *AND* the fees of the other two parties and he's going to appeal both of those so he'll end up paying even more after he loses; he had to settle with CJPME last year in a defamation lawsuit. You go back even further and he lost to Khurrum Awan, which looks like that cost him way over a quarter million after it was all over.
Why do people keep donating to Ezra when he just blows it all on lawyers?
Is there anything illegal if Ezra claims he's fundraising for hiring more staff or reporters, then using all that money to pay off his legal fees and judgments? I'm sure he's got the fine print nailed down that says he has every right to do that, but it sure stinks if that's what's happening.
I wonder what the other reporters at Rebel think if they're getting paid next to nothing, and watching Ezra waste all those donations in court.
The Rebel's website makes it pretty clear: Ezra can spend the money he gets on pretty much anything he wants.
Here's the only "policy" statement I could find: "Surplus funds raised for specific initiatives will be used for other costs associated with that particular project, such as website development, website hosting, mail, and other such expenses including to pay our journalists' salaries. Additional funds will be used towards other similar initiatives in the future."
How many loopholes can you find in there? How 'bout these?
a) "Surplus funds" means whatever Ezra wants it to mean. He carefully avoid publishing financial goals for most of his fundraising initiatives, instead specifying their "target number of donors" which, from a fiscal point of view, is meaningless.
b) Since the Rebel is essentially a group video blog, virtually EVERY project expense will involve "website hosting, mail, and other such expenses including to pay our journalists' salaries - in other words, the day to day cost of running his site.
c) This is all somewhat moot in any case, given that donors are invited to make their cheques payable to "donations@rebelnews.com", without necessarily specifying whether they're contributing to a trip to London for Ezra to hold hands with Tommy Robinson, Dave Menzie's latest "assault", Sheila Gunn Reid's next FOA request, or a staff lunch.
d) The Rebel does NOT publish project specific reports on money invested vs. actual outcomes.
Given all that, I think Ezra has made it clear to his readers that it's pretty much a fiscal free-for-all at the Rebel. Doesn't seem to matter: his peanut gallery think "Caveat Emptor" was a Roman emperor.
So far the actual return on reader's investment in the Rebel's "top notch team of lawyer" (for a giggle, check them out in Linked-in) appears to have been pretty meager. Sheila Ain't Gunna Read announced a MAJOR TRIUMPH for the Rebel when charges against the Whistle Stop were dropped. Except it turned out that the Government had lifted restrictions on sit down dining everywhere in the province. Well, never mind.
Post a Comment