Chronicles of Twatrick: Here come da ... civil enforcement bailiff?

Based on some very recent advice, guidance and research, it would appear that it might be way easier to start garnishing the wages of undischarged bankrupt and fugitive from the Saskatchewan Sheriffs Patrick Ross than I had assumed. Apparently, the province of Alberta defines the interesting position of something called a civil enforcement bailiff, whose fundamental purpose in life is, well, you can read it for yourself:

Far more detail can be found in the text of Alberta's "Civil Enforcement Act"; in particular, I draw your attention to Part 8 -- the rules on garnishment. This is particularly relevant since, even though I have a garnishment order against Patrick in Saskatchewan, it is not enforceable across provincial boundaries, but it would seem that fixing that oversight will be much cheaper and easier than I thought, given that my 2010 judgment for malicious defamation is already registered in Alberta, so there's very little to do but retain the services of one of these people and turn them loose to serve a garnishment order on Patrick's employer, something that could conceivably happen this week if I put my mind to it.

Note well that all of the above is entirely independent of Patrick's upcoming legal obligation to fill out and return the Saskatchewan Sheriffs' mandatory financial questionnaire, so Patrick might want to reserve some time over the next several days to deal with all of this. Because, I can assure him, it's happening.

Yeah, it's happening.

P.S. Note from the above that said bailiffs have the authority to show up and take physical property from the debtor's residence, and it just so happens that I think I can track down where Patrick is living in the vicinity of Grande Prairie. And while names are concealed to protect the innocent, I have it on reasonably good authority that Patrick is renting a single room from an oil patch colleague, "BKS", which suggests that if I time it right and watch for Patrick to unwisely advertise on social media when he is on the road, I can have the bailiffs show up during his absence and strip him bare.

Patrick might want to give his landlord a heads-up about the possibility. That would be the polite thing to do.

AFTERSNARK: I will remind one and all again that, as opposed to Saskatchewan, Alberta is a very debtor-unfriendly province, as you can see by the gruesomely minimal garnishment exemptions in that province:

Quite simply, once garnishment starts, Patrick will be allowed to keep a grand total of $1,600 per month. So say goodbye to all those $21 greaseburgers.

Chronicles of Twatrick: CORRECTION -- countdown not started yet.

I have recently heard from a moderately reliable source that the 10-day countdown for undischarged bankrupt and deeply-in-debt-to-me Patrick "Nexus Outlaw Dragon Fire MMA Cosplay Super Number One Mullet" Ross has not yet begun, as he is currently avoiding the registered mail sent to him with the mandatory financial questionnaire (even though he absolutely knows about it as he was informed by e-mail).

Because of that, the 10-day deadline has not actually begun, but it will shortly as that registered mail will now be returned as "not picked up," which kicks off the clock. Patrick can, of course, hustle his pasty ass back to the Lloyd and sign for that mail, but that will also similarly start the clock. In short, the clock will start ticking one way or the other very soon now, and there is nothing Patrick can do to stop it.

None of this gets in the way of my current plan to register my 2010 judgment in the province of Alberta for the purpose of garnishment.

And now you know.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Two days and counting ...

Not sure if weekends count towards the 10-day deadline but, technically, undischarged bankrupt Patrick Ross has two more days to complete and return the mandatory financial questionnaire served on him by the Saskatchewan Sheriffs, although no one expects him to do that; rather, one expects him to ignore the e-mail and registered mail, then exclaim, "What? You sent a questionnaire? I didn't see it, if only someone had told me!"

In any event, assuming Patrick will be as evasive as history suggests, come early next week, we move on to the increasingly (for Patrick) unpleasant stages of enforcement, quite possibly culminating in the SK sheriffs showing up at Patrick's alleged residence in Lloydminster with a warrant entitling them to seize anything and everything of Patrick's relevant to this enforcement procedure.

Note that all of the above is independent of the garnishment order I intend to file in Alberta to start taking most of Patrick's paycheque from who seems to be his employer, Avenge Energy. In other words, it is entirely possible that, even as I take the lion's share of Patrick's salary in Alberta, the Saskatchewan sheriffs will be seizing his material possessions back in Saskatchewan.

No more Mr. Nice Guy.

P.S. Not that long ago, Patrick posted regularly on Twitter about me, with screenshots and everything. Since the official service of the mandatory questionnaire, there has been nary a mention of me, I'm guessing because the instant Patrick took another screenshot of anything of mine on social media, I could use it as evidence that he is fully aware of that service as I have mentioned it on a regular basis.

At this point, it seems highly likely that Patrick really is going for the "Gosh, I had no idea I'd been served" defence. He tried that once before ... it did not end well for him.

Chronicles of Twatrick: The Alberta Garnishment Intervention.

And on a legal front, as I have explained on earlier occasions, while I have a registered garnishment order against Lloydminster's Patrick Ross for the inexorably increasing amount he owes me:

that garnishment order was registered in Saskatchewan, and it appears garnishment orders are not enforceable across provincial boundaries. Because of that, I have been strongly encouraged to simply file for garnishment in the province of Alberta (where Patrick is employed), and since my 2010 judgment against Patrick has long been registered in Alberta, everything is in place to just file for garnishment, so I think that is what I'm going to do, and I'm looking for someone in that province to be able to do this for me (the Alberta lawyer I had working for me years ago is no longer practicing so I need someone new).

This should not be an onerous job -- I have it on good authority that Patrick works at an outfit called Avenge Energy, and I've even heard that he is renting a room from an oil patch buddy (I will not name said buddy, but initials would seem to be "BKS", just as a heads-up to Patrick that I may actually know where he lives in the vicinity of Grande Prairie).

In any event, I can provide all of the necessary information if some reasonably affordable lawyer wants to do the paperwork and get this started. Drop me a note at canadiancynic@yahoo.ca if you're up for the job.

BY THE WAY, garnishment exemptions differ from province to province and, by choosing to work in Alberta, Patrick has made a moderately poor choice as to which province's garnishment exemptions he is entitled to. Here's how it works in Alberta (amounts listed relative to net monthly income):

In other words (as I read this), no matter how much Patrick earns, he gets to keep the first $800, then half of the next $1,600, then nothing from there forward. In short, regardless of Patrick's income, he will be allowed to keep at most $1,600 net per month, while his employer is legally obligated to hand me the rest. And if Patrick moves back to Saskatchewan for employment, well, there is a garnishment order waiting for him there the instant he re-enters the province.

One final note: Even as the garnishment is proceeding, what Patrick owes me will still be increasing at five per cent annually, so it is entirely possible that what is being garnished might not even be keeping up with accruing interest.

In any event, if any enterprising Alberta lawyer wants to handle the paperwork here, drop me a line and we can get this started.

OH, THOSE COSTS ... while this snippet relates to garnishment in British Columbia, the same principle holds everywhere in Canada; since Patrick has forced me to file garnishment orders against him, I can bill him for all of that. And, trust me, I'm keeping the receipts.

P.S. None of this changes the fact that Patrick still needs to complete and return that mandatory financial questionnaire from the Saskatchewan sheriffs. So ... there's that.

Chronicles of Twatrick: The "QAnon Shaman" dumbassitude.

While this has little to do with undischarged bankrupt Patrick Ross' impending legal and financial ass-kicking in terms of owing me well over $100,000, it's worth snickering over Patrick's latest rancid dishonesty, as he whines piteously over the alleged unfairness of Jacob "QAnon Shaman" Chansley's prison sentence:

And despite Patrick's mouth-breathing ignorance and misrepresentation of the facts, you're invited to learn what really happened here. In short, Patrick is as much of a liar as ever.

You're welcome.

P.S. Three days and counting ...

Chronicles of Ezra: Ah, that secure portal thing.

At this point, I need not elaborate on why Ezra Levant's 2016 Indiegogo fundraiser, ostensibly for the wildfire victims of Fort McMurray, Alberta, was such a disingenuous and unmitigated disaster -- I've detailed that more than enough so let's just summarize for what is about to happen here.

If, back in 2016, you wanted to donate to the Red Cross for that cause, donating directly had every conceivable benefit, as in:

• There was no "processing fee"; what you donated is what arrived at the Red Cross.
• What you donated was available instantly to the Red Cross, which meant that not only was your donation usable right away, but as long as you donated during the month of May, 2016, your donation was automatically available to be matched both federally and provincially, effectively tripling its value.
• The generation of tax receipts for donors who wanted them was automatic, requiring no human intervention on the part of anyone at the Red Cross.

None of the above is debatable. Compare this to the ridiculous drawbacks of Ezra's vanity fundraiser:

• All donations lost five per cent to Indiegogo's processing fee, even Ezra's vaunted $10,000 initial donation (which turned out to not be a donation after all).
• Donations were not available to the Red Cross immediately, since all that money was required to sit in the Indiegogo account until weeks after the fundraiser ended.
• Because of the delay in getting access to the funds, Ezra was forced to "front" the money to get it matched and, even then, he fell far short in fronting the entire amount, thereby screwing the Fort Mac Red Cross out of well over $100,000.
• Generating tax receipts involved dumping a pile of work on some poor sap at the Red Cross, who had to do all of that manually (and, yes, I have the evidence for that).

All of the above is documented and beyond contestation, which inspires one to ask, why would Ezra -- given the obvious benefits of encouraging people to donate directly to the Red Cross -- choose to register his own vanity fundraiser with all of its flaws? And here's the answer.

Narcissism and profit.

You see, if all you do is send people to the main Red Cross donation portal, well, it's hard to brag about it afterwards (and the fact that Ezra desperately wanted the glory and accolades for his alleged humanitarianism will be the subject of another thread), because in encouraging people to donate directly, there is no official record afterwards.

On the other hand, if you stupidly choose to compete against the Red Cross by registering your own Indiegogo page, well, there's your chance to brag and preen and strut about your incomparable humanitarianism and charity and compassion for your fellow citizens, even while boning them out of over $100,000 simply because of your overweening vanity. So is that it? Can we accept that Ezra's financially unwise decision to register his own fundraiser page was, in some way, necessary just to satisfy his overwhelming ego? Actually, no, and this is the new part that I don't believe I've written about before.

Because, you see, that entire time, Ezra had the ability to have the best of all possible worlds; that is, all the benefits of an official Red Cross donation portal, and still get the chance to puff up his chest about what a wonderful human being he was.

It's called a Red Cross "secure portal," and it was available at absolutely no charge to people who want to encourage donations, but also want to do it in a "branded" way so they can take a bit of credit and also have a record of total donations they've driven to the Red Cross. Here, let me give you some examples.

Here's Concord Pacific's secure portal from back then, where you can clearly see that they raised $1950, and also got to tout their own horn just a bit:

And here's Unifor, getting the same chance to talk about themselves while showing how much they raised:

I have screenshots of numerous others but I think you see the point -- if Ezra's only motivation for registering his own competing fundraiser page was to be able to stroke himself in public, well, that opportunity was already there, and he chose to not take advantage of it. Understand something: every Red Cross secure portal had every benefit of donating directly to the Red Cross, while also allowing the registrant to brag about themselves just a wee bit.

Let's say this again so there is no misunderstanding -- Ezra Levant had every opportunity to satisfy his prodigious ego and get all the benefits of direct Red Cross donation at the same time ... and he chose to not do that, with disastrous financial consequences for the Fort McMurray Red Cross. Which inspires the obvious question ... why? Why, given every possible advantage associated with a Red Cross secure portal, would anyone stupidly choose to not take advantage of that and instead register an inferior-in-every-way Indiegogo fundraiser page? And there is, in fact, an answer.

Because a Red Cross secure portal does not allow one to collect donor information.

That's it ... that is the crucial difference.

Despite an Indiegogo page being inferior financially in every aspect to a Red Cross secure portal, it had the sole benefit in that it allowed Ezra to hoover up all that precious donor information and subsequently monetize the shit out of it, many tens of thousands of dollars lost in the process be damned.

That's what this was all about: Fuck it if your approach wipes out over $100,000 of donations to wildfire victims, as long as you can get your hands on all that sweet, sweet donor info.

And now you know.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Five days and counting ...

Well, technically, it's a 10-day deadline to fill out that mandatory Saskatchewan Sheriffs' financial questionnaire from the time Patrick is officially served:

... and since Patrick is steadfastly refusing to acknowledge having received the above by email, it's unclear when that clock started ticking, but Patrick can ignore this for only so long before the Court is going to decide he's had long enough, at which time ... well, I'll just keep that to myself for now.

If you run into Patrick out there on the Intertoobz, feel free to bring the above to his attention.

P.S. If you see even the slightest indication from Patrick that he is aware of the above, a screenshot would be delightful as it would be treated by the Court as an acknowledgement of service.

Chronicles of Twatrick: "Dodging and weaving" edition.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that undischarged bankrupt and perpetually bad-faith debater Patrick "Super Nexus Outlaw Mullet MMA Cosplay Creepy Stalker" Ross is doing whatever he can to ignore the recently-served mandatory financial questionnaire from the Saskatchewan Sheriffs; even worse for Patrick, he can't even mock it online since the slightest acknowledgement of it can be used as evidence that he's aware of it.

So as much as Patrick is going out of his way to pretend he's unaware of that questionnaire, if anyone wants to bring it to his attention, you have my permission. You can write about it on his Facebook page or, if you are currently embroiled in yet another bad-faith argument with Patrick on Twitter, quietly sneak in a reference during the discussion and, the instant he replies, a screenshot will be all the proof I need that he has acknowledged service. There are all sorts of ways to draw him out, so use your imagination.

Six days and counting ...

P.S. I see that, at the moment, Patrick is waxing stunningly ignorant about the issues behind the public funding of private and/or charter schools. Let me assure you, he is lying about every bit of that issue, but he can't take umbrage with me pointing that out since, you know, he'd be admitting he read this blog post and that would end badly for him.

In any event, if you run into Patrick, just remind him of his now legal obligation to the Saskatchewan Sheriffs. I'm sure he'd want you to.

Chronicles of Twatrick: 10 days and counting ...

MARCH 3 UPDATE: So far, there is no indication that Patrick is prepared to acknowledge being served with the Saskatchewan sheriffs' mandatory questionnaire but, given Patrick's lack of discipline, all it will take is even an indirect reference to it in an email or on social media and that can be used to prove he is aware of it, so you're all invited to watch Patrick closely to see if he slips up and admits he knows he's received said questionnaire. A screenshot of such an admission would be just ducky.

MARCH 2 UPDATE: Nine days ...

I was just informed that Patrick "Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen" Ross was officially served with the Saskatchewan Sheriffs' mandatory questionnaire as of this morning, which requires Patrick to -- within 10 days -- fill out a detailed inventory of his finances and, if he does not, well, bad things will happen.

Part of service involves registered mail and, since Patrick does make it difficult to serve him at his Lloydminster address (as he is rarely there), I am open to any information as to where he is working these days, or where he lives in the vicinity of Grande Prairie, or whatever else you might know. (I already have a good idea of the identity of his employer, but I'll leave it open for others to make suggestions).

Unsurprisingly, if Patrick goes out of his way to make it difficult to be served, any costs I incur in eventually tracking him down will be added to his ever-increasing debt to me. So if you've seen him out and about, chowing down on $21 greaseburgers, feel free to drop me a comment.

10 days. Tick tick tick ...

P.S. I have been assured that Patrick has been served via email so, at this point, he is absolutely aware that he is obligated to complete and return that questionnaire. If history is any guide, Patrick will refuse to open the email, and later claim he never saw it.

Chronicles of Twatrick: After-acquired assets.

Oh, my ...

Well, if Patrick still had a trustee, he'd declare them as an "after-acquired asset", but since Patrick's trustee discharged himself from Patrick's file in disgust due to Patrick's non-compliance almost a decade ago, I will just record this in the "Stuff I will take from Patrick when the reckoning comes due" file.

It's not clear whether Patrick's stupidity is endangering the financial well-being of any of his siblings, but I would speculate that none of them will be thrilled to know what Patrick is spending their inheritance on.

That's just a guess.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Time to start disclosing stuff.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, I have this week directed that the Saskatchewan sheriffs serve undischarged bankrupt, garnishment fugitive and man who owes me over $100,000 Patrick Ross with their mandatory questionnaire. Since Patrick enjoys talking smack about me on social media, it is only fair that I return the favour. Here are the first two pages of the questionnaire (further pages are not relevant):

I have been assured that the consequences of ignoring the above (or even filling it out inaccurately or incompletely) are unpleasant indeed, so it will be Patrick's choice if he decides to play games with this.

If it comes to it, I already have a pretty good idea of both where he works and where he lives but, given that I already have substituted service for him, I shouldn't need to track him down personally.

In any event, Patrick will shortly be under a legal obligation to fill out and return the above to me. Whether he insists on continuing to play stupid games remains to be seen.

P.S. I have been assured that all costs incurred by further legal action related to this will be added to Patrick's debt to me. In short, Patrick will end up paying for everything I need to do moving forward to collect my money.

P.P.S. Ah, I neglected to mention this part on page 3 of the questionnaire:

It is an offence pursuant to subsection 15(3) and section 122 of The Enforcement of Money Judgments Act for any person to fail to provide complete and accurate information in any questionnaire or examination.

And the possible consequences?

And now ... we wait.

BONUS TRACK: Several years ago, when a process server was attempting to serve Patrick at his Lloydminster residence, his father threatened the server and chased him off the property, yelling that the server was a "tool of Satan." If it comes to that and I have to file an Order for the sheriffs to enter that same residence and seize all property and documentation relevant to my collection proceedings, and Patrick's father unwisely decides to get in the way, the EMJA describes in some detail the consequences of that interference:

As I wrote earlier, it remains to be seen whether Patrick will finally understand it's time to act like an adult, or whether he wants to continue playing games, with the inevitable consequences.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Happy (early) interestversary!

Yes, it's a couple days early but since the upcoming 19th is a Sunday, I thought I'd remind everyone that it is now a full year and a half that undischarged bankrupt and garnishment fugitive Patrick Ross was told by a Saskatchewan court that he owed me over $100,000, and that that amount was now increasing at five per cent per year:

That outstanding amount went down slightly due to the Saskatchewan sheriffs managing to forcibly extract a few thousand dollars from Patrick's credit union account but, as you can see, what Patrick owes me is increasing inexorably and will continue to do so, month after month and year after year.

I have plans for Patrick this year but I am going to keep them to myself for now. I have already mentioned that I have a Saskatchewan garnishment order against Patrick but, as he is currently employed in Alberta, it can't be enforced; it also means he can't return to Saskatchewan for work since that order would kick in immediately so one and all are invited to keep me posted on whether it appears Patrick is suddenly working back in Saskatchewan.

In the end, Patrick has been running from his legal and financial responsibilities for over a decade and, while he might look on this as some sort of victory, it's safe to say this is not a long-term sustainable lifestyle, especially if Patrick assumes he is going to inherit his father's Lloydminster property when the time comes (note: he won't).

That's it for now -- check back in a month for any new developments.

UPPITY DATE, FEB 17: I see no harm in letting people in on this latest development. Some time ago, and pursuant to my collection efforts against Patrick Ross, I directed the Saskatchewan sheriffs to serve Patrick with a voluntary financial questionnaire, wherein Patrick would list his assets, employment, salary and stuff like that there. Given that that questionnaire was voluntary, it will surprise absolutely no one that Patrick replied with nothing.

This morning, given Patrick's failure to reply to that first questionnaire, I have instructed the sheriffs to proceed to the next phase, which involves a mandatory questionnaire, and herein lies the difference.

Whereas there are no consequences for blowing off that first questionnaire, as I read it, ignoring this second one is a really, really bad idea, in that the consequences quite possibly involve uniformed folks showing up at Patrick's residence and seizing things like property and financial documents that would be relevant to my collection efforts. This might be awkward since, as Patrick refuses to disclose where he lives or works these days and lists as an address for service his father's residence in Lloydminster, that is almost certainly where the sheriffs would show up to start taking stuff.

In any event, Patrick is in the process of being served with the mandatory questionnaire and, since I already have substituted service for him, it is unnecessary for me to track him down -- service will involve simply e-mail and a registered letter. And if Patrick does not reply fully and completely within a limited time, well, there's phase three. And if it gets that far, it will be unpleasant.

Chronicles of Ezra: Why this matters.

WARNING: I reserve the right to return and edit this post any way I want. You are welcome to leave comments here or back on Twitter; comments here are ruthlessly moderated to avoid any engagement with Rebel News trolls.

While I've published a fair amount over the years about Ezra Levant's meritless 2016 defamation lawsuit against me related to his self-obsessed and self-serving fundraiser ostensibly for Fort McMurray fire victims, this piece takes this issue to a whole new level and is meant to persuade folks that this is something in which they have a vested interest, and to convince those folks that, yes, there are good reasons to contribute to my "Stand Up To Ezra" Fundraiser in preparation for finally going to trial. You might think you've heard it all before, but I guarantee this post contains information I have never published before, so you might want to get comfortable.

(SIDE NOTE: I typically publish lawsuit-related content on my Twitter account but, given the volume of information, it did not make sense to have a 350-tweet thread, so I'll do my best to keep you abreast of developments as they happen.)

Let's dispense with an obvious concern right away -- one might ask why I'm confident about my chances at trial given that I lost my anti-SLAPP motion against this lawsuit, and further lost the appeal. I will keep this short and brutal as I have written on this topic at length -- I lost because of the stunning and appalling incompetence of the Ontario judiciary. If you don't believe me, you are welcome to peruse all of my earlier publications on the topic, some of which I will refer to again here. I lost because the motion judge was an imbecile, and the Ontario Appeals Court was even dumber. Beyond that, if you need convincing, you can do your own homework as we have more important things to discuss here. So ... onward.

First important point: given that Ezra Levant filed this action under the Simplified Rules in Ontario, each of us was entitled to question the other for up to two hours under oath. Ezra's lawyer already had his shot back in the fall of 2016, wherein he grilled me for almost that amount of time, then proceeded to totally misrepresent what I said to the Court. I will be blunt -- Ezra's lawyer lied to the Court about what I said during questioning, something I have already proved. Whether you believe that or not doesn't concern me, because here's what this tediously long blog post is all about -- I have not yet questioned Ezra, so I still have my two hours to sit his pasty ass down, get him under oath and ask him questions and demand he turn over evidence of my choice. I can assure you, that is going to happen, and the rest of this piece will explain why so many people should be intensely interested in how that is going to work and what Ezra will be legally required to disclose.

The first demand for disclosure from Ezra will, unsurprisingly, be all of the financials related to his 2016 fundraiser where I published that several of his claims were simply untrue:

1. his claim that all (100%) of donations would be turned over to the Red Cross (did not happen)
2. his claim that all (100%) of donations would be "matched" (also did not happen), and
3. that all donors were eligible for Canada Revenue Agency charitable tax receipts (they most emphatically were not).

Logically, of course I would demand all financials related to that fundraiser, as every bit of that information is relevant to my defense. But we are just getting started, and there is so much more that Ezra will be turning over that you might not have thought about, so let's ponder this.

It is already established that Ezra did not turn over the full 100% of donations to the Red Cross, for a very simple reason -- he was using Indiegogo as the fundraising vehicle, and Indiegogo takes a straight 5% off the top as their processing fee. This is well known and not the slightest bit controversial -- everyone (including Ezra) knows how Indiegogo works, so it was massively baffling as to why Ezra kept insisting that that processing fee somehow did not apply to him. Many people asked about it, and they were mocked and ignored, as you can see here. I already know precisely how much Ezra turned over to the Red Cross (it was several thousand dollars short of what was donated), so the obvious question is, if I already have the receipts, what more is there to ask about? As Londo Mollari once said, "Oh, Mr. Morden ... I have not started with you yet."

One of the relevant issues in a defamation action is whether the defendant made a good faith effort to determine the facts; that is, was there due diligence? Ezra even takes me to task in his Statement of Claim, suggesting I did not work hard enough in terms of asking him directly to explain the apparent 5% inconsistency. But if you look at the link above, you can clearly see that others were asking, and they were being blown off, which inspires me to want to know the following:

Given the obvious evasion on the parts of Rebelers Sheila Gunn Reid and Holly Nicholas, were staffers at Rebel Media given instructions as to how to respond to anyone asking direct questions like that? That is, given how easy it would have been to simply answer the question, it is exceedingly puzzling as to why Sheila and Holly steadfastly refused to just respond to Camron, which means that when my questioning time comes, I can assure you I will be requiring Ezra to turn over to me any and all communications between him and other Rebelers where they are being advised about how to reply to people asking for details. Because if there is a single suggestion that Ezra advised anyone to deliberately evade and deflect and refuse to answer, then his whole "lack of due diligence" argument against me is toast. And we are only getting started.

Let us stick with the "100% turned over" argument to see where else it takes us. For example, even as Ezra was making this assurance, it would be trivially easy to show he knew his assurance was false if he was, behind the scenes, in contact with Indiegogo trying to somehow get a special deal where Indiegogo would waive its processing fee. If I could prove that that happened, it would show beyond any doubt that Ezra knew his promise was false, so Ezra will be turning over all correspondence between Rebel Media and Indiegogo related to his fundraiser. All of it. Every scrap.

SPOILER ALERT: I will insist that Ezra turn over all of that correspondence despite the fact that I already have the evidence that Rebel Media was begging Indiegogo to waive the very fee that Ezra was steadfastly denying existed:

So while the above is a bit of a spoiler, it's also a caution that even as I am asking for disclosure of all those financials and underlying communications, I already have the indisputable proof for a lot of it, so if Ezra lies to me during questioning, that may end very badly for him (it's called "perjury" and he might want to ask his lawyer to explain it to him). In any event ... onward.

As another example of what I will be requiring Ezra to turn over, consider Ezra's assurance that 100% of all donations would be turned over in time for "matching," a claim which I already know to be false and which Ezra admitted years ago was false. So if we all know that claim is false, what is there to ask about?

As above, I will insist that Ezra turn over all correspondence between Rebel Media and Indiegogo related to any attempts by Ezra to convince Indiegogo to release those donated funds ahead of time since, if that is what was happening, that is clear evidence that Ezra knew he was lying and trying to salvage the situation behind the scenes. I suspect you're starting to see the pattern -- Ezra will turn over all correspondence even vaguely related to his 2016 fundraiser to establish whether he knew his claims were false and was only trying to make the best of a bad situation while not admitting to any of it. But, as before, we've barely started so a couple more examples.

One of the features of Ezra's fundraiser was the tedious insistence of both Ezra Levant and Sheila Gunn Reid that the Red Cross was delighted with their participation, and that the Red  Cross "thanked " them on numerous occasions. I already know that Rebel Media registered their "Red Cross"-themed fundraiser with neither the knowledge nor permission of the Red Cross, and that the Red Cross was just the tiniest bit unimpressed with having their name used that way. So, yes, Ezra will be turning over the entirety of the communications between Rebel and the Red Cross, on that topic and all others.

So, is that it? Is that the earth-shaking blog post I've been promising you for days? Oh, please, Mr. Morden, I have not started with you yet.

In his disgustingly inaccurate and dishonest Statement of Claim, Ezra accuses me of claiming that he stole money from the fundraiser. I said nothing of the kind; what I suggested was that Ezra was almost certainly getting a personal benefit from his fundraiser, and when his bloviating gasbag of a lawyer asked me to explain that during discovery in October of 2016, I said the following.

I said there were two obvious ways Ezra and/or Rebel Media could be benefiting from that fundraiser:

• By collecting personal information of donors, Ezra was almost certainly monetizing that contact information to subsequently add to his rentable mailing lists, and
• By offering "perks" to donors, he was almost certainly eligible to assign a "fair market value" to them, and claim them as business deductions.

Just to back up the above, I offer a screenshot of a snippet from the transcript of that 2016 questioning, wherein I attempt to explain to Ezra's indescribably clueless lawyer how business deductions work:

My attempt to explain business deductions was an utter waste of time, as it turned out that Ezra's lawyer did not have the foggiest fucking idea how deductions work, and he totally misrepresented what I said above to the Court. (There was a lot of that -- Ezra's lawyer lying about what I said during questioning.) So what is the consequence of the above? The consequence is that, since Ezra totally denies any possible personal or corporate benefit from his 2016 fundraiser, I guarantee he will be turning over all financials related to the money and personal contact info collected, and related to all of the "perks" he offered and how much that represented in terms of deductions for Rebel Media. So, is that it? Is that the post? Oh, please. Onward.

I have written before how Ezra, in order to beat the hard matching deadline of the evening of May 31, 2016, quietly fronted the amount of $96,000 on his American Express card in order to get that amount to the Red Cross in time (still representing a massive shortfall in matching). And while that seems just weird and funny, it inspires a number of questions for which I am going to demand answers:

1. Even as people during the entire month of May, 2016 asked Ezra how he was going to beat the matching deadline, did he ever, at any time, disclose that this is what he was going to do? (Answer: no.)
2. Did transferring that amount on his AmEx card cost a further percentage of the donations?
3. Based on the type of card, did Ezra or Rebel Media get any massive perks such as points or air miles based on that amount transferred?

I can assure you, there is way more that I will be requiring Ezra to turn over, at which time some people might be wondering how much one is allowed to demand during questioning. That is, can someone being questioned finally refuse to disclose any more information by insisting that it just isn't relevant? Well, no, and here's why.

First, I tried that back in 2016, and Ezra's bloviating nutsack of a lawyer assured me that he could ask anything he wanted, and I had a legal obligation to answer. But the second reason Ezra can't refuse to disclose what I want is far more entertaining -- because Ezra himself said so, and here is where the fun starts.

It was back in July of 2009 that Ezra was chortling gleefully about a potential defamation lawsuit against him from one Khurrum Awan (wherein Ezra eventually had his balls handed to him in a sack). Now, one wonders why someone would be so excited about being the defendant in a defamation action, until one reads Ezra's reasoning in this web-archived version of Ezra's post. (The original of that post is long since deleted, for reasons that should become evident in short order. There's a lot of that -- Ezra deleting embarrassing blog posts that I had the foresight to capture years ago.)

I could build up to this slowly but, heck, let's see why Ezra thinks being a defendant in a defamation action is such a super neat-o development:

Now, I'm going to give you a minute to digest the import of the above, to understand how it applies in my situation. Ezra is quite openly and gleefully bragging about how being the defendant in a defamation action affords him unfettered access to, well, just about every fucking thing he wants in terms of internal documents. And for once, I will admit that I agree with Ezra since, if he tries to push back on what I ask in terms of eventual questioning, I will bludgeon him unconscious with his own words above.

Using Ezra's own logic (which he long ago scrubbed from the Intertoobz but is still viewable at the Wayback Machine, to Ezra's obvious regret), I have every right to ask for whatever the fuck I want related to that 2016 fundraiser, and Ezra is absolutely going to turn it over. And if he doesn't, I will quote Ezra Levant to Ezra Levant and get what I want. So ... is that it? Is that what this is all about? No, and what comes next is what we've been building towards all this time.

Because I am not going to restrict myself to just matters related to that fundraiser. You see, Ezra sued me primarily for calling him a "grifter," insisting that that characterization sullied his squeaky clean reputation; in effect, by stating quite explicitly that the description of "grifter" was defamatory, Ezra has opened the door to my demanding Rebel News-related financials for every goddamned thing I want, and I plan to take advantage of it:

• Everything related to Rebel News' fundraisers and petitions ... all of them
• All that "Fight the Fines" nonsense, and where all the money went
• How well paid were the lawyers Rebel News hired to fight those cases?
• Money that flowed between Rebel News and any "Freedom Convoy" entities

And it won't end there, as I will be requiring Ezra to turn over all information related to other infamous grifts that he ran. Let's start with Ezra's panicked plea for money based on his lender threatening to call in his loan. What happened with all that money? Where did it go? I suspect a lot of people would love to know. Well, given that I am the defendant in this action, I can assure you Ezra is going to tell me. But let's not stop there.

How about when Ezra claimed that he had been been blackballed for a mortgage, and immediately started crowdfunding for a new office building? I'm betting folks are more than a wee bit curious about what happened to all that dosh. Well, guess what ... Ezra is going to tell me.

And, finally, one of the issues I have been most curious about -- what is Ezra's/Rebel News' financial relationship with "The Democracy Fund," such that Rebel can run fundraisers while TDF can hand out charitable tax receipts for all of that? Yes, Ezra is going to tell me how that works as well (given that TDF is run by a number of Ezra's old oilpatch buddies).

But I imagine some people are now suspecting that I might be overreaching here; after all, this is going a bit beyond just that 2016 Fort Mac fundraiser, isn't it? On whose authority can I demand the disclosure of all of these financials, and the answer may surprise you. My unimpeachable legal authority for this is ... Ezra Levant, who was imprudent enough to publish the following at that same link above, and I suggest you read this carefully to truly appreciate its significance:

Let me translate the above for you. Given that Ezra sued me explicitly for allegedly damaging his reputation, by Ezra's own logic, he better damned well be squeaky clean since, according to Ezra, 

Defamation's a funny kind of lawsuit, because it's all about the reputation of the plaintiff. Every thing they've said and done goes to the value of their reputation. Every lie they've told, every dishonourable thing they've done -- that's all relevant, because it goes to damages.

You know what? I could not agree more, and since Ezra himself assures us that damages are based on every single lie or dishonourable action one has ever done, he has thrown open the door to allow me to demand details and explanations of all those petitions, and fundraisers, and mortgage applications, and tax receipts, and anything else that goes to his reputation. And I can assure you, I will be insisting he turn it all over, and it will all be entered into evidence so I can use it to defend myself at trial.

And that is what this has all been about, and why people should want to step up and fund my defense against Ezra Levant -- because so many people have said for so many years, "Man, if only we could see where all that money went." Well, here's your chance since I am the person being sued by Ezra Levant and, by Ezra's own logic, as the defendant, I have access to whatever internal documents I fucking want, and it's going to be a "feast."

That is what this is all about -- if you were waiting for someone to step up and dig into the finances of Ezra Levant and Rebel News, here's your chance. Ezra sued me back in 2016; now it's my turn for discovery and questioning him under oath and I can assure you, I am not going to waste the opportunity.

And if you want to make this happen, you're invited to help. I've dealt with this vexatious and frivolous bullshit for over six years now, so it's your turn to step up. If you've always wanted to dig into years worth of financials related to Ezra Levant and Rebel News, then stop whining and put your money where my fundraiser is. I've been fighting this shit for over six years, so it's not unreasonable to suggest that you take a few seconds to offer some support.

This has cost me a lot of cash over the years, but I've stuck it out and now it's my turn. Feel free to help.

FEB 13 UPPITY DATE: There are many more things I will be asking Ezra under oath, and requiring him to hand over, and here's just one more. A while back, an anonymous tipster dropped me a note and asked me if I'd noticed how suspiciously often Rebel "journalists" get detained or arrested by the constabulary, after which they immediately fire up a fundraiser. Well, duh, of course I'd noticed, just like the rest of the planet had noticed.

Anonymous tipster assured me that those journos are expressly coached in how to most effectively provoke the authorities to get the result they want, so you can be sure I will be demanding any evidence or correspondence that establishes that Rebel reporters are reading from a script of some kind, expressly designed to provoke a confrontation for the purpose of playing the victim and registering a new fundraiser.

According to tipster, one example of that alleged script involves deliberately crowding someone to the point where they simply put a hand on you to get some space, whereupon you immediately scream, "Don't touch me! You can't touch me, stop touching me!!", and making sure all of that is caught on video but subsequently edited to show only the end result and not what led up to it.

In any event, that will be part of the discovery process. As will far more.

Chronicles of Twatrick: The prodigal son who can never returneth.

My network of crack, elite, secret, elite and crack spies tells me that Lloydminster's Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen is currently camped out in the Fort Nelson Hotel in Fort Nelson, BC, suggesting that Patrick is indeed doing everything he can to avoid working in his home province of Saskatchewan so as to not be subject to the garnishment order I have against him.

Sure, that's one way to beat garnishment, but one has to think that leaving the province for employment is going to get kind of tiring after five or 10 years. Then again, it's not like anyone in the Lloyd misses him or anything.

Chronicles of Twatrick: And the collections keep on coming ...

(JAN 25 UPPITY DATE BELOW.)

I was just informed that, pursuant to my collection proceedings against Lloydminster's favourite undischarged bankrupt and village idiot Patrick Ross, the Saskatchewan Sheriffs are turning over to my crack, elite and crack legal team several hundred dollars, representing an amount apparently seized sometime between February and August of last year; the time lag is because any collections made pursuant to SK's "Enforcement of Money Judgments Act" (EMJA) are required to be held for a period to give the seizee (in this case, Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen) the chance to object to the seizure, but since Patrick has absolutely zero grounds to fight these collections, it is all eventually turned over to me thusly:

If I read the above correctly, it means that while a grand total of $947.31 was wrenched forcibly from Patrick's sweaty hands, a full $187.75 of that was redirected to the government to reimburse them for their time and efforts in effecting the collection; this means that while Patrick was divested of almost a thousand dollars, he gets credit for only the amount that gets to me: $759.56. And this happens every single time; whenever a collection is made, Patrick loses close to two hundred dollars as the collection fee, and his debt to me is reduced only by the remainder. Simply put, every time I ask the sheriffs to go after his bank account again, it costs Patrick a couple hundred dollars he will never see again on top of whatever else the sheriffs get their hands on.

Oh, and it would appear from the above that, after all that, during that same time period, Patrick's debt to me increased by a whopping $2,871.15. In other words, even as I take Patrick's money, what he owes me grows even faster than what I collect.

If one accepts the evidence, one can safely conclude that Patrick is not getting out of bankruptcy any time soon.

UPPITY DATE: Pursuant to a couple emails I got asking how garnishment proceedings are going against Patrick, they're not as, apparently, garnishment does not work across provincial boundaries so, for the time being, I am content to just ask the sheriffs to occasionally seize what is in Patrick's credit union account.

The awkward consequence for Patrick is that, in order to avoid garnishment enforcement, he is of course required to work out of province, effectively preventing him from returning to any job in Saskatchewan. So, yes, this is the life Patrick has chosen for himself. And to think of the numerous opportunities he had over the years to get out of this inexpensively and get his life back.

The road not taken, I guess.

Chonicles of Twatrick: Happy interestversary, 2023 edition!

It is now 17 months since a Saskatchewan judge allowed me to register my 2010 judgment for malicious defamation against Lloydminster's Patrick "Nexus Alpha Male Triple Threat Dragon Fire Super Mullet MMA Cosplay" Ross, whereupon he was informed by the court that he owed me over $100,000, and that that amount was increasing at a punishing five per cent annually:

To no one's surprise, in that 17 months, Patrick has handed over no money and has refused to engage in anything regarding negotiation or settlement talks, so you're welcome to do the math as to how much he owes me as the weeks and months go by.

I have plans for Patrick for 2023; more than that, I will keep to myself.

P.S. In case anyone is keeping up with the ongoing adventures of Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen and notices he's relocated back to Saskatchewan, I would appreciate a heads-up on that.

Chronicles of Twatrick: OK, then.

JUXTAPOSE! Man who 1) maliciously defamed me, 2) ran and hid from 2010 judgment, 3) dodged and weaved for 2 years to the point where he was held in contempt twice, 4) declared personal bankruptcy, 5) refused to honour his bankruptcy obligations to the point where his trustee discharged himself, and 6) further refused to honour his bankruptcy obligations to the point where I successfully filed to have him removed from bankruptcy's stay of proceedings, will now mock others for making poor life choices.

You can't make this stuff up. You just can't.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Ah, the irony.

Man who owes me well over $100,000 pursuant to defaming me maliciously over a decade ago will now take issue with others who allegedly misrepresent stuff.

Chronicles of Twatrick: 2023 coming down hard.

Hard to believe it's been almost a year and a half since a Saskatchewan judge allowed the registration in that province of my 2010 malicious defamation judgment against Lloydminster's Patrick "Super Duper Alpha Male" Ross, laying out just what he owes me and how rapidly that amount is increasing:

As regular followers of this sorry saga surely know, Patrick has made it clear that he has no intention of ever paying off what he owes me, and has even stated quite publicly that he does not consider my judgment valid (despite what courts in Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta have found). But what exactly is in store for Patrick in 2023? I'm glad you asked.

As it stands, I have at least three avenues via which I can legally drag Patrick in for questioning regarding his finances and assets and, after pondering, I'm thinking that I might use the powers granted me by Canada's Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, particularly those found in Section 163, so let's take a quick look at what's there.

Section 163(1) looks promising:

However, note well that that paragraph describes the power of the trustee to examine the bankrupt, and since Patrick has not had a trustee since February of 2014 (said trustee having discharged himself due to Patrick's ongoing refusal to honour his obligations under the bankruptcy regime), that paragraph doesn't really apply here. But scroll down just a wee bit and ... JACKPOT!

Yup, that's what we're after, as that paragraph goes into gruesome detail as to how the undischarged and uncooperative bankrupt can have his sorry ass hauled in for questioning by a creditor, and that would be me. And the best parts of the above?

First, note well that all that examination would be under oath, so if Patrick lies (as he is wont to do), well, that's perjury. But that's not even the best part.

Note also that my questioning is not limited to just Patrick. No, the BIA gives me -- the sole creditor -- the power to question "any other person named in the order," which almost certainly would include anyone who might have had financial dealings with Patrick over the last several years, including his father and siblings (and possibly even others), so Patrick and all the rest of those reprobates might start preparing for the eventual court order requiring them to turn over years worth of bank statements and credit card statements and tax returns and so on and so on, because I am absolutely going to name that entire collection of idiots in the eventual court order.

Finally, no one need take my word for any of this -- read that section of the BIA for yourself and tell me it doesn't say what I claim it does. Long story short, sometime in this new year, Patrick will be on the receiving end of a court order, requiring him to turn over to me a truckload of financial statements, then ordering him to sit for a BIA-mandated examination under oath. And I won't be leaving his family members out of the fun, either.

Anyway, how's your year going so far?

ADDENDUM: In the comments section, "PLG" asks the burning question for 2023:

The big question for me is, what are the consequences when Patrick doesn't show up to this (or furnish any of the ordered stuff)? 'Cause you know he won't, so there better be some for the whole thing to be worthwhile.

I will refrain from editorializing and refer interested spectators to the BIA, in particular the following sections. First, here's parts of Section 164:

As one can read, failure to produce has consequences for either Patrick or anyone else named in the order.

More significantly, a failure to attend an ordered examination will have consequences for both Patrick and, again, anyone else ordered to attend for questioning:

The tail end of that section can be summarized as "a warrant may be issued for their arrest."

I plan on doing this entirely by the book; I will file the appropriate action(s), and let the power inherent in the BIA take it from there. And if that culminates in arrest warrants being issued for one or more people, so be it.

P.S. Note well that Patrick has very little room to fuck around and waste time, as the BIA makes it absolutely clear that, once ordered to produce documents, Patrick and anyone else has only five days to hand them over. So when things start to happen, they will happen quickly.

MORE ADDENDUM: Lest anyone think I am embellishing any of this, I will once again simply point you to the BIA, and this section explaining under what circumstances the court is more than willing to issue an arrest warrant for a bankrupt:

In short, if Patrick, any time after he declared bankruptcy in December of 2012, transferred out of his possession without permission so much as $25 worth of property, well, that might have consequences.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Happy interestversary!

Yeah, it's a couple days early but I'm loading a suitcase and heading out of town shortly and I didn't want to deprive my loyal readers of their monthly giggle. As of Monday, December 19, it will be 16 months exactly since Patrick "Kid Cash Thunderbolt Assholery Nexus Bikini Designer Fugitive Tory Quintuple Threat MMA Cosplay Failed Bankrupt" Ross was told by a Saskatchewan court that he owed me over $100,000 due to his refusal to honour his obligations under Canada's federal bankruptcy laws:

an amount that (as you can see) is growing by five per cent per year. And while I have managed to forcibly seize a few thousand dollars from him over the last year or so, it's reasonably safe to say that Patrick's debt to me is increasing inexorably by over $500 per month, despite his insistence that as long as he ignores the situation and pretends it's not happening, he won't have to pay me anything.

It doesn't work that way.

In any event, y'all have a fun holiday; I'll be online throughout and working to some extent, but it's time for a little R&R while I allow the Twatrick debt clock to keep chugging along. Patrick can continue to dodge and weave from his legal obligations to the Saskatchewan sheriffs and the federal Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy, but there will, someday, be a reckoning. And it will not be pretty.

Suspended temporarily from Twitter ... and you won''t believe why.

I can't even ...

Feel free to let Twitter know that I'll be unusually quiet for the next 11 hours and 46 minutes because of sarcasm. Or satire. Or whatever.

P.S. Let @JohnFugelsang on Twitter know that this is all *his* fault. Or something.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Change of direction.

So my application for summary judgment didn't work today as I failed to file sufficient paperwork, but as it turns out, it doesn't matter as, only a few days ago, I was told that there is a much more effective approach I should have taken, so I'm going to do that instead.

In any event, time to prepare for the holidays. Gin and wagyu for everyone!

P.S. Judge actually opined that it looked like I had a pretty strong case, but I already have what is apparently a better idea so I'm going with that.