Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took a rare step in the Canadian context.
Not seen in a number of decades of declaring a national Public order
emergency in an attempt to shut down the protests that have been going on in
Canada for some time.
This Emergency's act invocation can provide for the use of the military, but
may not necessarily lead to that.
And Trudeau said the government is not bringing them in, but
it can temporarily suspend citizen's rights to free movement or assembly.
And the government is taking steps to stop financial support of illegal protests.
That part it's been doing for some time.
The emergencies act invocation is new and
they're making claims about how far they'll go with that.
And no further, we'll have to see in a week or
two where that's at, bear in mind a few things have also happened recently.
The decision to invoke the law came as the Royal Canadian mounted police in Alberta
said on Monday that they had arrested 13 people.
And seized items including guns, body armor, and ammunition.
You can see actually a shot of some of what was seized.
I'm assuming that that is, in the Canadian context, a large arsenal.
It's one family's worth of guns here in the US, but quite a bit over there.
And Trudeau is saying that the government is not overriding the charter of rights
and freedoms in Canada.
Nor limiting the right to peaceful assembly, saying,
we are not preventing people from exercising their right to protest legally.
Of course, he's putting a lot of spin on legally there,
a lot of the weight of that sentence there is on legally.
Also, the Chief of Police has resigned in Ottawa,
that was actually just earlier today.
So a lot has been going on there.
>> Yeah, so before we get to the right wing overreaction to this,
I think this is a tough issue and we've talked about it in this context.
So I normally this kind of stuff is used against left wing protesters and
they don't wait a couple of weeks.
It was a left wing protesters, they're gonna go in first day and
I don't know about calling an emergency in the nationwide emergency, but
they usually act without doing that.
And I'm being a little unfair to count because I don't really know how they
deal with it.
Other than a couple of stories I've read about how they dealt with indigenous
tribes, right?
But here in America, your left wing protest, they're gonna remove you,
they don't need no special act.
Nothing, okay, and they'll beat you over the head and then put you in prison.
I mean, we've covered all these stories, but if you're a right winger and
anywhere on the continent apparently you get kid gloves, right?
Okay, let's be really careful, let's be really careful the right wing.
Okay, so but on the other hand, I believe in the right to protest and
I believe sometimes you do have to block a road.
So I've said from day one, look, I kind of like what the truckers
are doing until they weirdly turn on the local population, right?
So I don't like the swastikas and the confederate flags.
But you know what, you can't put that on every one of the truckers there.
It's the individuals that have those particular flags,
the nonstop honking and they're harassing the locals is a weird turn.
And so that's gonna be the focus of whether Trudeau is doing the right
thing or not.
But I would normally exercise a lot of caution and
not just normally, but also in this case and going after protesters.
So, now the question is, are they breaking some laws
where you would say okay enough is enough, right?
So they've been there a long time and
apparently they had a ton of standoffs with the locals.
They even negotiated a deal about when to honk their horns because they were keeping
everybody up at night, etc.
But even inconveniencing people that is partly the point of a protest, right?
>> Yeah, we're in that weird position where, because we're on the left and
the right believes absolutely saying things about the left.
We are always told what we're advocating for, even when it's not, we did,
we did not ask for the truckers to get cleared out.
Two hours, another protest in the same way that when we were adding context of
the Joe Rogan thing, I never called for his show to be canceled?
We're always told that the extreme thing we want is unacceptable when we're not
actually pushing for it, but
I do think that we should have a conversation about it.
I agree with Jake.
I think that protests can and often should be inconvenient, but
it's a lot like a filibuster.
You're doing all of this, it provides an opportunity for you to persuade,
but there's also a risk to it.
If you are moving in a trucker convoy,
that draws attention to the issues that you wanna push.
And that's the way that potentially you persuade people or
maybe people don't like your issue.
And they turn against you and in this case, look, we know that the vast,
vast majority of Canadians and even truckers don't actually agree with them.
Now, you do not have to have a lot of popular support for
your protest to be legitimate.
You can be incredibly unpopular, so they're free to do that.
The question then is, and
this is an honest question I would ask to good faith conservatives.
So what is the limit, then?
I don't believe it's on me, especially in the Canadian context to say,
you get to block the streets of Ottawa for three days or eight days.
When people don't seem to be buying it, they're not getting onto your side.
So then how long is it forever?
Can they just, there's no more streets in Ottawa like forever.
Is that actually what you want?
There has to be bounds of reason at some point.
And so can we have an actual conversation about that at some point?
>> Right, and part of the point of protest, left wing or
right wing is to draw attention to an issue.
And so for example, in Selma Alabama,
when they were doing the march in the civil rights era,
obviously the cops did a cavalry charge on them with,
on horses, but they also sic dogs on them.
And some of the most powerful pictures were of civil rights protesters being
mauled by dogs.
And so, once they got attention to the issue, the whole country realized, my God,
they still don't have basic rights in the south for African Americans,
not basic rights.
And then the country said that's not good, we don't want that.
And Lyndon Johnson pushed very aggressively by Martin Luther,
King Malcolm X and the others passed the civil rights act and
the voting rights act.
Which required big majorities to do that because they had to get past
the filibuster, okay?
And so now when the right wing draws attention and
they've done this trucker convoy in terms of the original point of the protest.
To draw attention to your cause has done a spectacular job, everybody's heard of it.
And so their causes don't believe 99% of the world's doctors.
All the doctors are morons.
And we right wing truckers are specific not all truckers okay,
have got this figured out, and the truckers know better than the doctors.
Congratulations, you've made your case.
Okay, now, how long are you going to continue to make your case,
which the great majority of Canadians find to be mental?
Okay, so, [LAUGH].
>> Is it a week, is it a month?
>> I don't know, those are good questions.
Right, those are good questions because I wanna allow protests as much as possible.
But at some point, I don't know what the time period is after you're still
blocking the roads, which is yes, technically illegal, right?
And and there's a lot of things that happen that are technically illegal
in a protest, right?
But I would account for and say it's okay, including right wing protests, right?
But there are some things you can't do.
So like, for example, when the Bundy guys took over a Federal Reserve and
not a Federal reserve, that, so that would be a different act.
And then trust me that then all of a sudden the government would care, right?
But when they took over that federal land in Oregon, well,
that's not a normal pro you can't come in with guns and
take over like land and say it's now mine, right?
So there's different levels of criminality, etc.
So that's an interesting conversation, but
of course right wing media is not having an interesting conversation.
>> And the difficult thing is that, like I was trying to ask an honest question, but
we can't for the vast majority of these things.
We can't have an honest, open conversation about this because most
of the people involved in this are operating in entirely bad faith.
If you are just a trucker who wants people to be aware of the mandate thing,
then you might have a certain limit for
how long you think it makes sense to do your protest.
If on the other hand, you're an American right wing news network that would
desperately like all of the time between now and the 2022 congressional elections.
And possibly the 2024 presidential election, to just be a vague,
amorphous, never ending Tea Partyesque trucker protest.
Then you don't care about persuading people on the mandates or
anything like that.
You just want there to be stuff, stuff so
that you don't have to talk about specific policies.
Just a thing where truckers are there or whatever.
And we fundamentally if we're talking about good faith,
what does the right actually think about this?
I wanna have a conversation about how much allowance for
protests we are on the side of a lot of allowance for protests.
Including inconvenient protest they are pretending that they wanna do
that right now.
But clearly they don't.
Were they just advocating for occupy Wall Street, this is the right of the people to
do this or the autonomous zone in the Pacific northwest.
They were advocating for you to be able to run down and kill protesters and
get off scot free.
They don't actually support any of this, except if it's convenient and
they agree with the protesters in a very limited context.
So we can't talk about actual principles when they don't have any actual principles
that they're bringing to bear on this issue.
>> Absolutely, before we go to the Tiger clip,
I wanna go to our members because a couple of really good points.
Cousin Vinnie wrote in remind me where Tiger was when trump had black
Lives Matter protesters abducted and
thrown into unmarked vans without giving cause or reason for arrest.
So we're principled, and even in the right wing protests, we tell you, hey,
we gotta figure out a way to let them protest for quite some time, right?
Those guys are like, they're kidnapping people off the streets,
who cares, they're black or they're left wingers.
Good Police State is awesome!
So they're just goddamn liars and they're the world's biggest hypocrites,
totally true.
Sudo Dragon lives in Ottawa and he said Jake, I live in Ottawa,
this is far more than inconvenient, it is hateful.
It is violent and has been and it has been since day one,
please read some of the local news coverage before talking about this again.
No, no brother, I have read it and by the way,
that's probably why the Ottawa police chief resigned because if they're breaking
other laws like hey, I'm doing the boycott.
But hey, you're a random citizen of Ottawa.
I don't like you, I'm gonna assault you.
Well, that guy should be arrested on the spot.
That's not a part of a protest at all.
If they break any of the laws that outside of blocking the streets instead of,
that's part of their protest.
Of course, they should be arrested and a lot of us should have already
been arrested for those specific crimes that they were committing.
But thank you for writing in, I loved doing the show with our members and
you guys often provide excellent perspective which you do from Ottawa.
So TYT.com slash join to become a member and do the show with us.