In a shocking development, a court has kicked to the curb an indescribably idiotic, asinine, dumbass stupid constitutional challenge from Rebel News:
But if freedom-loving, liberty-adoring and, most importantly, intellectually crippled and irredeemably gullible donors can raise $6.7 million dollars (AUD), then Rebel News can keep subsidizing the lavish lifestyles of its legal colleagues.
Please ... think of the lawyers.
Find someone who thinks as much of you as Andrew Coyne thinks of his own wit and cleverness.
Siri: Show me "Convince me you have really poor judgment without actually admitting you have really poor judgment."
And right on cue, Rebel News' Ezra Levant bloviates about how everyone else is a worthless, biased and on-the-take journalist, unlike the real journalists at Der Rebel:
Furthermore, here's Ezra, promising that, by God, no one will be safe from his relentless probing; he will brook no quarter and spare no codpiece in holding absolutely everyone accountable:
Except, as I pointed out a while back, given how Ezra has burned pretty much all his bridges with anyone sane by now, all he has left to attract clicks are ...
... which suggests that there are a few people that Ezra is in fact going to treat with kid gloves, and that would be the people who are still willing to talk to him and -- God forbid -- might even be paying for all that coverage and perhaps even some imminent "Sponsored Content". And if you think I speculate irresponsibly, why, just scroll further down the very page I am quoting to find:
Which leads one to wonder who will have the temerity to ask whether those politicians that are so clearly getting the courtesy of a reacharound from Ezra and Rebel News are perhaps quietly paying for it? And perhaps we might start watching for an onslaught of laudatory Derek Sloan pieces from Der Rebel, and wonder if any money is changing hands.
I'm just throwing that out there.
OMG, I almost forgot ... if one thinks that Ezra and his merry band of Oompa-Loompas are going to treat everyone with the same relentless skepticism and tough questioning, one can see how they are already fawning over ex-CPC dingbat Derek Sloan, but it gets way funnier if you pop over to Der Rebel and search on the name "Derek Sloan," whereupon you make the eye-popping discovery:
That's right ... a simple search for Sloan's name at Rebel produces, as the very first hit pinned to the top, a direct link to Sloan's home page https://www.dereksloan.ca/. No worries, though ... I'm sure that won't affect anyone's objectivity, right? Right?
BONUS TRACK: One is reminded of the days of yore, when Rebel Media couldn't gush over CPC leadership candidate Kellie Leitch enough, giving her prime real estate and interviews:
while keeping it to themselves that Leitch was horking up some serious dosh for all that fawning:
The more things change, etc etc etc ...
THIS AND THAT ... evil minion drops me a note raising a few other issues that I will proceed to expand upon.
First, there is the obvious question of ethics -- are there any ethical issues with taking money quietly from a political candidate, in exchange for laudatory coverage and puffball interviews of said candidate? Let's be clear -- media outlets run political advertising all the time, but those ads are clearly identified as ads, and have the requisite tagline saying something like, "Authorized and paid for by the committee to re-elect Voldemort^H^H^H^H^H^HStephen Harper."
The above standard political advertising is a far cry from being funded to generate gushing coverage and to publish pandering and worthless interviews which inspire one to think of nothing but, "Geez, why don't the two of you just get a room already?" But it gets worse.
Is there anything in the above scenario that would be covered by Canada's election financing laws? Remember how Ezra has already gotten into trouble by blatantly flouting those laws by refusing to identify as a third party? Could the same thing be happening here? If someone like Sloan handed over tens of thousands for positive news coverage, would that require Der Rebel to register as a third party? But there's one more point worth pondering.
Ezra recently vowed to cover the upcoming election, sending his version of the Childrens Crusade near and far to ask probing questions of Justin Trudeau like, "Aren't you embarrassed to have worn blackface in a high school play?" and "Why did you rape that woman?" ... gripping and timely questions like that.
However, if Rebel News is, in fact (and we are just speculating here) being paid by Sloan or anyone else for positive spin, this would suggest that they should be disqualified from any sort of journalistic accreditation of any kind. If there exists this sort of quid pro quo going on behind the scenes, then Rebel could reasonably be described as acting as an agent of that political campaign and, thusly, has no grounds to demand to be granted accreditation as a legitimate media outlet.
It's all very tacky, is it not?
It was earlier this year that Dominion Voting Systems, fed up with being relentlessly defamed by various con men, scam artists and opportunistic sleazy hucksters, filed a massive defamation action against numerous entities, including raving dingbat Sidney "Release the Kraken!" Powell and Mike "My Crappy Pillow" Lindell. Both of those yobs tried to have the action dismissed, a pathetic effort that was summarily and savagely kicked to the curb.
Interestingly, Dominion is now going after the increasingly smaller players in their undoubtedly lengthy list of sleaze merchants, and that you're a relatively minor sleazoid is not stopping them:
In other words, even being a small player in the ecosystem of trashy right-wing journalism is not going to protect you, and Dominion is clearly working its way down its lengthy list of probable defendants who should expect an unpleasant letter one of these days. One wonders who else might be on the receiving end of such a missive, oh, dear ...
I smell another frantic fundraiser coming on. But that's just a guess.
P.S. It's not like I didn't warn you. Because I did.
You're welcome.
"TRUDEAU MUST GO!!!"
... Trudeau calls snap election ...
"TRUDEAU IS A SLEAZY OPPORTUNIST!!!"
As I informed my adoring readership recently, Rebel News' Obergruppenfuhrer Ezra Levant just lost his third straight (expensive) anti-SLAPP motion, but what's mirth-making is the mind-blowing level of ineptness of his counsel, who apparently has no idea how this legislation actually works and has never taken the time to figure it out.
Let's be clear -- Ezra was going to lose this motion no matter what, but the arguments put forward by his lawyer are truly head-shaking in their irrelevance and illogic. Here, let me give you just two examples.
From the judge's mercifully short ruling, here's paragraph 22:
"[22] The plaintiff responds that this stage of this proceeding does not require “a fully developed damages brief”. I agree. However, as stated in 1704604 Ontario Limited v. Pointes Protection Association, supra (at paragraph 71) to paraphrase, while the harm need not be monetized, there needs to be the “existence” of harm. That is, some harm needs to be identified. Here, the plaintiff has acknowledged that there has been no loss of subscribers. There was no evidence of Rebel News followers thinking less of or contributing less financially to Rebel News as a result of the allegedly defamatory tweet."
Let me explain what's happening here. Ontario's anti-SLAPP legislation is simply a filter -- it is a weeding out mechanism whose purpose is to identify defamation actions that are so utterly without merit or value that there is no point letting them go to trial. And one of the inarguable requirements for your defamation action to defeat the defendant's anti-SLAPP motion and be so allowed to proceed is that you must show some harm or damage of some kind. Any kind -- reputational, financial, just something. But here's the sticky detail.
At the anti-SLAPP stage, you are not required to give a full-blown, fully-costed spreadsheet of the harm you've suffered. By way of example, say you're suing because someone else's alleged defamation cost you business. At trial, you would of course present a comprehensive analysis of the damage, with associated costs and so on. However, for the purposes of the anti-SLAPP motion, that is not necessary -- all that's necessary is you produce some general evidence of harm, such as perhaps some e-mails from clients saying they weren't going to work with you anymore.
See how that works? At the anti-SLAPP stage, no one is asking for excruciating minutiae; rather, all the judge is after is for you to show that there has been harm. This is a painfully simple concept that even first-year law students with massive head injuries have been able to understand by now, and yet ... and yet, Ezra's lawyer seems to have missed that class since, as you can see above, he is clearly making the argument that he need provide no such evidence of any kind, apparently suggesting that can all wait until trial or something. And as you can also see, the judge is having none of it, clearly (with some exasperation) having to explain to Ezra's lawyer how the legislation actually works. But it gets so much worse.
Here's the very next paragraph, wherein Ezra's lawyer ... well, just read it first:
"[23] An allegation was raised that the comment in issue reduced or eliminated a successful application by employees of Rebel News to the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery for membership. However, production of letters to those employees, dated October 29, 2020, from the executive of the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery fails to set out any direct or indirect reference to the allegedly defamatory tweet. Rather, it explains that, what Rebel News admitted on this motion to be accurate, that the approach taken by Rebel News of being active participants in their stories and taking partian positions in relation to politicians or political parties, was not in accordance with that organization’s requirement to adhere to its “generally accepted journalistic principles and practices”."
This is a fascinating claim, since it clearly suggests that the alleged defamation was the cause of Rebel News being denied membership in the Canadian PPG and, if this was true, it actually would represent actual harm, and Ezra would have satisfied that particular test of the anti-SLAPP legislation. Let me say that again -- if Ezra could establish that the alleged defamation was why he was given the brush-off by the PPG, he would have his damage. So what's the problem?
Dear freaking God ... having made that claim and apparently suggesting it was backed up by actual correspondence from the PPG, Ezra's lawyer produces said correspondence ... which says nothing of the sort. Let me say that again -- Ezra's lawyer clearly argued that damage would be established by the correspondence from the PPG, and when forced to produce the correspondence, it established absolutely nothing of the sort.
How dense must you be to have done this? How thick would you need to be to think that maybe the judge would just take your word for something and not, you know, actually read the letters? And how humiliating would it be to have made that claim in court, and have the judge hypothetically mutter something like, "I'm sorry, I don't see the slightest evidence of what you are currently yapping on about."?
With counsel like this, it's understandable why Ezra is currently on such a spectacular losing streak. One can only hope for more hysterically entertaining (and insanely expensive) dumbassery of the kind in the near future.
AFTERSNARK: One wonders what is going through the minds of Rebel News' crack videographers as they humiliate themselves publicly begging for dosh to upgrade their crappy equipment:
One wonders if these clueless young 'uns are ever going to twig to the fact that their efforts are simply subsidizing the pointless, vindictive legal actions of a self-promoting narcissist.
Good luck with that fundraiser, kids.
The true brilliance of Rebel News is its ability to generate a seething rage and feeling of unfairness among grocery store cashiers and gas station attendants from outside Red Deer over the extra cash they'll have to fork over when they finally decide to splurge on that 2022 Lamborghini Aventador SVJ Roadster.
Huh ...
No, no, too wordy ... let's tighten that up a bit:
"It's not for Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen to accept or reject the $85,000 judgment for malicious defamation against him.
"The court issues the judgment, the defendant pays it. End of conversation."
Yeah ... much better.
Several days ago, I opined that the rancidly racist, white supremacist and (yes) anti-Semitic Rebel News had burned so many bridges that, well, here:
But I'm guessing there's more to this story than meets the eye, so you might want to check back later.
Worthless right-wing hacks who politicized vaccine distribution numbers to attack Justin Trudeau will now complain about ... oh, fuck it, just read:
It was back on Aug 8 (go and check for yourself) that I predicted that none of the lying liars that lie for Rebel News would be able to resist totally misrepresenting a Proud Boys hoedown in Portland as an alleged "Christian prayer rally" (complete with full-colour banner of Our Lord and Savior Donald J. Trump clearly visible in the background):
and would proceed to shriek hysterically like an 8-year-old schoolgirl or Sheila Gunn Reid over the vicious and savage intolerance of the Antifa black bloc BLM Communist Marxist Romulan Borg collective towards religion and children and puppies and rainbows.
Behold, the very next day:
Yes, I am that good.
P.S. There is something almost sad-making about recent Rebel addition Adam Soos, who seems utterly incapable of shame, and is willing to put his name to the most ridiculous and obviously fabricated nonsense imaginable.
One can accept that Rebeler and Oil Patch Barbie Sheila Gunn Reid is a relentless prevaricator, while still giving her credit for at least trying to make her stories plausible to the extent that they will be taken seriously by children, people with massive head injuries and anyone living in Red Deer.
Soos, on the other hand ... he apparently has no filter that allows him to be even remotely aware of how ridiculous his musings are. None. There is nothing one cannot imagine Soos publishing in all seriousness:
"Last night, a drunken group of NDP supporters attacked a child's birthday party in Edmonton, murdered everyone there, sodomized the dog, then flew away on dragons back to Westeros.
"Back to you in the studio, David."
Give Gunn Reid credit for being sleazy, underhanded and dishonest, while still clearly knowing when to draw the line and understanding when she is sliding into screaming idiocy.
Just give Soos credit for being an idiot.
Ezra takes it on the chin again:
Here's ex-Rebeler and thoroughly dishonest hack Jack Posobiec sobbing inconsolably over the disruption of a "Christian prayer event" where, as we all know, proper worship of the Christian God requires a sizable flag of Donald Trump hanging out there in the background:
And here's the equally sleazy and Rebel News favourite Andy Ngo, doubling down on the "small family worship event":
an event after which numerous family members hopped in the family car and, fully-equipped with shields, helmets and para-military gear, headed over to IHOP for some waffles:
On the other hand, the public should also know when Brian Lilley is acting like a pandering, sycophantic, right-wing, ass-kissing suck-up to power and doing everything he can to kill your children.
I can't imagine how anyone at Rebel News is going to let this slide, and I predict much shrieky hyper-ventilating over the intolerance and hateful violence of "The Left":
Except there's more here than meets the eye, so let's see if Der Rebel rises to the bait, and then we'll dig into what really happened.
BONUS TRACK: This would be members of the Portland "Christian prayer event," high-tailing it out of town:
