EZRA LEVANT | Zohran Mamdani's push to punish the rich will punish New York City instead

Summary

Rebel News Podcast — EZRA LEVANT | Zohran Mamdani's push to punish the rich will punish New York City instead
Host: Ezra Levant
Date: May 7, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode features Ezra Levant’s in-depth monologue on New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s newly announced “pied-à-terre tax,” aimed at the city’s wealthiest property owners. Levant critically analyzes Mamdani’s populist approach, explores the broader trend of stigmatizing builders and entrepreneurs, and draws parallels to economic and political developments in Canada. The discussion includes reactions from affected billionaire Ken Griffin and a segment on Canada’s immigration policy dysfunction, featuring journalist Tristan Hopper.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Rising Populism and Punishing the Rich

• Ezra Levant delves into the phenomenon of left-wing anti-capitalist sentiment among the young and within urban politics.
• Draws on Marc Andreessen’s analysis that millennials/Gen Z associate capitalism with unaffordable homes and crushing student debt (03:00), fueling resentment toward the wealthy.

2. Zohran Mamdani’s Political Persona & Coalition

• Mamdani portrayed as a leftist “theater kid” who leverages his "working class" image despite personal privilege (05:30).
• Points out shifting demographics—New York, like Canadian cities, is now heavily foreign-born, which Levant argues affects its political and economic outlook.
• Quote:
  "New York City is 37% foreign born. Toronto, 51%. So yeah, you’re going to have foreign-born champions who do not carry with them a free market heritage." — Ezra Levant (06:45)

3. The Pied-à-Terre Tax — Attack or Policy?

• Mamdani’s announcement: Direct action outside billionaire Ken Griffin’s residence, targeting the super-rich with an annual tax on secondary luxury homes (08:08–09:13).

  “This is an annual fee on luxury properties worth more than $5 million whose owners do not live full time in the city... This is a fundamentally unfair system that hurts working New Yorkers. Now it's coming to an end.” — Zohran Mamdani [08:08]

• Levant’s take:

  • Argues the tax is more symbolic punishment than fiscal necessity.
  • Sees it as theatrical demonization rather than a practical solution for the city’s problems.
  • Compares attack ads against Griffin with rising social approval for violence against wealthy figures and political opponents.
  • Quote:
    "The purpose of this tax, just like the purpose of this attack ad, is not to raise funds for a project. It's punishment, demonization, and jealousy." — Ezra Levant (09:35)

4. Political Violence, Social Decay, and Demagogues

• Levant cites recent high-profile assassinations and growing left-wing rhetoric glorifying violence against the rich (11:00–14:05).
• Noteworthy examples include Luigi Mangione’s killing of a healthcare CEO and comments from progressive commentators like Hasan Piker.
• Quote:
  "Violence is back. Violence is cool. Violence is on the talk shows, of course. Violence, real violence is on the rise against Jews, which Mamdani's wife supports." — Ezra Levant (14:05)

5. Ken Griffin’s Response (CNBC Interview Breakdown)

• Full Reaction Segment [15:42–20:49]:

  • Griffin expresses shock at being personally targeted, raising safety concerns in light of local CEO assassinations.

    “What really upset me about the video was the fact that he put me in harm’s way... To put any citizen in harm’s way is just inappropriate for one of our political leaders.” — Ken Griffin [15:54]

  • Warns of negative economic consequences: Potential $6B development and 15,000 NYC jobs now at risk; expansion shifts to Miami as a direct result of Mamdani’s attack.

    “We will add far more jobs in Miami over the next decade as an immediate and direct consequence of the mayor’s poor decision here.” — Ken Griffin [17:33]

  • Griffin highlights how “kill-the-rich” policies have hollowed out places like Detroit and are driving talent and investment from progressive states like California.

    “I don’t think any city should be so arrogant as to believe that it is immune to economic realities and to the hard, cold fact that when people that drive success are told they’re not welcome... they will leave.” — Ken Griffin [19:22]

6. Broader Lessons for Canada & the West

• Levant warns that jealousy-driven policies create lasting economic harm:
  • Cites how Uganda expelled its entrepreneurial class under Idi Amin, resulting in collapse (22:30).
  • Draws parallel between Mamdani’s approach and Canadian political trends, arguing Canadian billionaires keep a low profile or control their media narrative.
  • Quote:
    "Zoran Mamdani is going to ruin New York City… It’s not even the tax itself. It’s the fact that he signaled to the wealthy job creators, builders, investors, developers — 'I hate you.' And that was all they needed to hear and they’re going to leave." — Ezra Levant (25:15)

---

Canadian Immigration Discussion

With Tristan Hopper (Journalist), Starting 30:29

1. Auditor General’s Report on Immigration Mismanagement

• Parliamentary exchange reveals 153,000 flagged applications, minimal investigation, and no exit-tracking system.
  • Quote:
    "There’s no way to track whether they're doing so… No entry or exit system in place in your department." — Senator Costas Managakis [31:23]

2. Systemic Lack of Enforcement & Accountability

• Levant’s thesis: Canada’s open-door policy is functioning as intended—to maximize population growth with minimal scrutiny (34:59).
• Tristan Hopper:
  • Suggests some dysfunction is historic, but the scale of recent laxity is new and unmanageable.
  • Describes overall state as “everything is on fire”—asylum, temporary migration, screening, etc.

3. Public Sentiment & the Prospect of Mass Deportations

• Discussion of whether “mass deportations” are logistically viable; public polling shows surprisingly robust support.
• Complexity of Canadian sentiment—pro-immigration, but also resentful when laws and expectations are abused (40:01–42:34).
  • Quote:
    "So when you see that majority of Canadians saying we need some sort of mass deportations... people like the idea of a plane filled with foreign criminals who are not respecting the system not being here anymore." — Tristan Hopper [41:39]

4. Effectiveness of Oversight

• Auditor General’s sampling reveals massive investigatory failures—only 4,000 of 153,000 flagged student visas were investigated (44:54–47:10).
• Government reluctance to allow further scrutiny (committees voting to turn off media cameras).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Ezra Levant on Mamdani's motives:
  "It's all about theater... Zoran Namdani has actually never employed anybody. He's never run anything other than his mouth." (21:10)

• Ken Griffin on safety and capital flight:
  "Any city that thinks talent and capital will put up with this is mistaken. Detroit learned it the hard way. So did California. Now New York." (19:22–20:07)

• Tristan Hopper, on government inertia:
  "If your crappy boyfriend says he’s working on his problems, that doesn’t mean he’s actually going to fix those problems." (33:44)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Ezra’s Monologue on Anti-Capitalism: 01:32–08:08
• Mamdani’s Tax Announcement (Video): 08:08–09:13
• Levant’s critique and political violence discussion: 09:13–15:42
• Ken Griffin’s Response (CNBC Interview): 15:42–20:49
• Detroit Case Study and Lessons for Canada: 19:03–25:15
• Canadian Immigration Dysfunction (w/ Tristan Hopper): 30:29–47:28
• Auditor General’s Findings: 44:54–47:10

---

Tone & Style

• Language: Direct, often blunt and polemical (typical of Ezra Levant).
• Approach: Mix of analysis, polemic, and personal commentary; occasional humor or sarcasm.
• Atmosphere: Alarmed, combative, critical of left-wing governance and policies in both U.S. and Canada.

---

Useful for Listeners Who:

• Want an overview of the current political rhetoric and policy experiments in New York and their parallels in Canada.
• Are interested in the arguments against populist “tax the rich” policies and capital flight.
• Wish to understand right-wing criticisms of Canadian immigration policy and government oversight.
• Seek insights into the broader sociopolitical implications of policy trends in North American cities.

Transcript

[A]

Hello, my friends. I want to expand on that crazy attack ad that the New York mayor directed at a particular New York City billionaire, totally catching him off guard. And I want to show you his reaction. And then when I want to ask you if we have that same hatred for builders and creators in Canada, I'll take you through it. I'll show you some video clips. I want you to see the videos. There's some very touching videos, including, believe it or not, from this billionaire who comes across so sympathetically, at least to me, he did. To see the video version of this program, go to rebelnewsplus.com and click subscribe. And not only do you get the video content, but you support Rebel News because we take no government money and it shows. One more thing.

[B]

Are you wondering how you can support your favorite independent news outlet while also sharing your opinions in a unique way? Head over to revenue store.com and check out our merch. We have got incredible T shirts, hoodies, mugs, and winter gear we ship internationally. And if you use the code ALEX10, you will get 10% off your order. Go and take a look today.

[A]

Tonight, let me show you a video clip of a city about to stumble. It's May 6th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show. Shame on you, you Sensorian thug. I talked a little bit about this on the live stream yesterday, but it really got my noggin jogging. So I want to expand on it in a monologue. I'm talking about New York City, but really I'm also talking about Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton, Montreal, and a lot of smaller cities in Canada, too. But I'm also talking about young people and support for capitalism. Support for free enterprise is ebbing. It's in retreat. And I think one of the reasons for that. I heard this explained by Marc Andreessen, who's a Silicon Valley tycoon. He said that anyone under 30 knows only two things about capitalism. One is that they cannot afford to buy a house and perhaps never will. So capitalism is locking them out of capital. They won't own a home, which is not only a place to live, but it's a place to save and to perhaps build up your value. And the second thing they know is that they have student debt that they do have to pay for and that isn't typically wiped out in a bankruptcy, let's say. And that student debt that they incurred to get a university degree, especially in the United States, where schools can be very expensive, those university degrees don't pay off. So on the one hand, you can't get in on the rising tide of property values. On the other hand, you were trapped by your student debt that you were sold by the academic and social community. Oh, you got to have a university degree and it turned out to be useless. And now it's a stone around your neck. There are some jobs for people who get those degrees, some government jobs, some corporate HR departments sop them up. But even those people, they're not going to be rich. And it's going to be hard for them to pay down a hundred thousand dollar students student loan. And for some of them, artificial intelligence is a real risk. So is automation. I mean, I think I told you that a few months ago. I, I ordered an Uber. I was in Austin, Texas and a robot car showed up. A driverless car. I didn't know that on the Uber app. I guess they're connected to these, these driverless cars. And it was a little disorienting at first, but by the time the ride was over, it all almost felt normal I guess sort of like a. An elevator that didn't have an operator. I don't know if you remember the old timey elevators had a person in them operating them. It must have been very weird at first to switch to a operator less elevator, but now the opposite is weird. By the way, the trades are doing well and will continue to do well. You can't dig a ditch with AI. You can't work on an oil rig with AI. Anyways, back to New York City. But like I say, it's an identical story for Toronto. It's very similar even for London, England. A lot of big cities, especially in the states. Portland, Oregon, Seattle, Washington. Let me show you the new mayor of New York City. You know who I'm talking about? Zoran Mamdani. He's a Muslim immigrant to America. His and he beat, he replaced an African American mayor. The mayor of New York City was a ex cop black man. And he also beat. And partly he won because they split the vote. An Italian American former governor. So you had the black former mayor, Italian American former governor. You had an anti crime candidate siphoning a few percent. And Zoran Mamdani came up the middle on the Marxist vote and on the foreign born vote. Mamdani speaks the language of the poor, of the working class, but he's actually rich. His parents were not typical immigrants. His dad is a professor at Columbia University. His mom is a Disney filmmaker. I think you may know that. So his whole working class ness is a shtick. It's an act. He tried being a Rapper once he tries different things, he switches accents around depending where he is. He's more like a theater kid than a working class kid. He's never done anything working class in his life. But he was able to win because there is a big enough coalition now in New York to propel him ahead of Italian Americans or black Americans or he just one by cobbling it together. New York City is 37% foreign born. 37%. I checked this morning, those numbers are 51% in Toronto, 60% in Brampton. Montreal, 34%. Vancouver is more than 50% of foreign born people. And so yeah, you're going to have foreign born champions who do not carry with them a free market heritage. I mean if you're coming from places in the world that are a totalitarian or communist or Islamist region regime and you come to America and a few years later you're running for office, you are probably still inculcated or you could be in those foreign ways. I reminds me the other day of MPs who voted to shut down the cameras in Parliament, included Salma Zahid and Maggie Chee, who were born in dictatorships or where freedom of speech and political freedom was not only not important, it was hated. And so you have two. They're Canadian citizens now and they're MPs now and they're voting to shut down media access to parliamentary committees because it's about power to them. It's not about being part of a liberal democracy. They've only been here quite recently. They're from places without freedom traditions. Anyways, back to what the Islamist communist coalition mayor in New York said the other day. And I played this on the livestream yesterday. But let me show you Zoran Mamdani's economic policy. He announced it outside the particular residence of a particular billionaire. And I'll just play it for you because I want you to get the real tone of it. Take a look.

[C]

When I ran for mayor, I said I was gonna tax the rich. Well, today we're taxing the rich. I'm thrilled to announce we've secured a pied a terre tax, the first in New York's history. This is an annual fee on luxury properties worth more than $5 million whose owners do not live full time in the city. Like for this penthouse, which hedge fund CEO Ken Griffin bought for $238 million. This pied a terre tax is specifically designed for the richest of the rich, those who store their wealth in New York City real estate, but who don't actually live. But even so, they're able to reap the huge financial rewards of owning property in, dare I say, the greatest city in the world. And most of the time, these units are sitting empty since, again, they don't actually live here. This is a fundamentally unfair system that hurts working New Yorkers. Now it's coming to an end. This tax will raise at least $500 million directly for the city. It'll help fund things like free childcare, cleaner streets, and safer neighborhoods. As mayor, I believe everyone has a role to play in contributing to our city. And some a little bit more than others. Happy tax day, New York.

[A]

Now he's mayor already and he's in office and he has the levers of power. So he doesn't need to do this. He wants to do this. And to do what? He's putting in a new tax on the very wealthy. But it's not going to raise enough money to actually do things to help him keep his promises. To abolish fares on transit or to open government grocery stores or all this cockamamie schemes. It'll raise millions of dollars. But New York City's budget is in the tens of billions of dollars. And as you could see, that ad, sort of an attack ad demonizing a private citizen. Like, he's not going, you'll notice he's not going after the Republicans. He's not going after the former mayor or the governor. He's just decided to pick on some guy who was rich and do a campaign ad right outside his building. The purpose of this tax, just like the purpose of this attack ad, is not to raise funds for a project. It's punishment, demonization, and jealousy. It's a sop to those people I was talking about young people who think capitalism is not for them, hasn't given them anything. It's a demonization of someone who made it in this capitalist way. Weird personal attack on naming Ken Griffin, naming his house. Griffin is a hedge fund manager, and obviously he's in Wall Street. By the way, he's also a philanthropist who has given away more than $2 billion to various charities. I won't go through here. Now, Mamdani thought that Griffin could be recruited into some sort of central casting villain. He's a billionaire. Hey, everybody, I found this billionaire. Let's all hate him together. And I'm gonna sock it to him by giving him a special tax for him and his buddies. And I suppose that works to the kind of people who voted for ma'. Am. Danny Griffin is a central casting villain. I mean, he's rich, right? But I actually think that Mamdani comes across as the central casting villain. I think it's part of a wave that is particularly strong in New York City. It's part of the kill the rich wave. Kill. Kill the rich. I don't know if you remember a few months ago, an activist, a Marxist communist activist, very much like Zoram Mamdani named Luigi Mangione assassinated the CEO of United Healthcare, just killed him and has become a cult classic. He's become a star. There's graffiti and posters above him. Young women send him love letters. Luigi Mangione allegedly murdered a millionaire and became a hero. And that kind of violence is no longer forbidden in social circus. It's no longer marginalized. Charlie Kirk was murdered. And although that was shocking to people on the right, it was a source of glee on the left. And to this day, it's a threat wished upon enemies of the left. Donald Trump, of course, has had various assassination attempts. And whenever it happens, the left celebrates the attack and laments its lack of success. There's a rising star in the Democrat left. His name is Hassan Piker and he's doing the circuit calling for violence. Like just. That's his shtick. He's. And again, he's part of an immigrant family to America, bringing foreign values of violence where once it was a high trust society where we figured things out peacefully. Here's some of Hassan Piker. If you don't know who he is,

[B]

regardless of your background, any kind of fucking Zionist tendency should be treated in the same way as, as being a fucking rabid neo Nazi. And you couldn't even, you shouldn't even let someone be the fucking local dog catcher as Felix was posting. If they've ever exhibited any sort of fucking, any sort of like positive feelings about the state of Israel. I'm so serious about this.

[A]

I mean, Jimmy Kimmel is gross. He's born in America, he's not a migrant, but he's part of that violent thing theme. Here he is talking about in his own fake coverage of the press correspondence dinner where Trump had an assassination emptier. He is saying that Melania has a look of a glowing would be widow. Take a look at this super gross comment by Jimmy Kimmel.

[D]

Of course our first lady Melania is here. Look at Melania, so beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow.

[A]

Yeah. So violence is back. Violence is cool. Violence is on the talk shows, of course. Violence, real violence is on the rise against Jews, which Mamdani's wife supports. You may recall that all her social media accounts came out after the election, which is a strange time to come out. They should have come out beforehand showing that she was a supporter of the Hamas massacre of Jews. She's a vicious anti Semite, not as clever as her husband who keeps it behind euphemism. So, yeah, we're in the era of violence again. And then there's the ongoing violence in America of antifa and foreign terrorists. Which brings me back to Zoran Mamdani's targeting of Ken Griffin, naming him, showing his house, demonizing him, and saying, we're going to raise money, not to pay for things, but we're going to raise money to get these guys. Well, Ken Griffin thought about it a bit, and I want to play for you a fairly lengthy response that he gave to cnbc. And I really, I was going to cut this down, but it's so good, almost every word is meaningful. Ken Griffin, obviously a very thoughtful man, a builder, a man who thinks about the future, thinks about jobs, thinks about investing, thinks about risk. He. He's a thinker, a doer. And I think he was genuinely stunned that he was targeted in this personal way. And I just want you to listen to him talk about it, and I'll come right back. On the other side. Take a look at his answer when he was asked by CNBC about this

[E]

personal attack, posted that video outside your apartment, one of your apartments in New York City, and demonized you, advertising his bed of terror attacks. How'd you react to that when you first saw it?

[D]

I actually had to see it a second time because the first time I couldn't believe what I was watching. And I'll tell you, it took a moment to digest what I was watching. What really upset me about the video was the fact that he put me in harm's way. You know, he seems to have forgotten that the CEO of another American company was assassinated just blocks from where I live in New York. And to put any citizen in harm's way is just inappropriate for one of our political leaders. I have no longstanding fights or issues or dynamics between Mandami to turn me into a political puppet was just in poor taste, really poor taste. The tax itself is a tax that discriminates against a narrow group of people is also disconcerting. You know, our company is thinking about making a $6 billion investment in New York City.

[E]

350 park, right?

[D]

Are they going to now have a special tax rate for those that own office buildings who live out of state? Like, where's this stop in New York New York's got a problem. New York has to put the spending back in control. They've got to show the people of New York City and New York State that the enormously expensive and large government that they have created over the last 30 years actually delivers value to the taxpayers.

[E]

Are you going to go through with that building?

[D]

We probably will go through the building when it's all said and done, but I got to tell you, it's a real topic of debate. The only decision that we've made with no regrets in the last few days is to expand the size of our office footprint in our new Miami headquarters.

[E]

Just in the last few days. You made that?

[D]

Yes, we.

[E]

In reaction to New York.

[D]

In reaction to New York, we filed a permit with the city of Miami. We've added several hundred thousand square feet of new space in our new building. We will add far more jobs in Miami over the next decade as an immediate and direct consequence of the mayor's poor decision here with respect to his. His posting of that video.

[E]

I believe you met with Governor Hochul afterwards as well. What was that like?

[D]

That was. I'll sum it up. I'll sum it up as no comment. Sum it up is no comment. Okay, sum it up is no comment,

[E]

but you'll probably go through with the building. I guess the question is, you know, you.

[D]

I mean, here's what's disappointing, right? The comments from the governor's office after this was that Mandami scored political points.

[E]

Spokesperson said that. Yes.

[D]

Wow. Like, that's real leadership.

[E]

Governor Hogan, they're playing both sides, right?

[D]

I'm being as sarcastic as I could be here. You know, what New York City needs and what New York State needs right now is. Is a government who takes on the bloated, wasteful government that puts an incredible burden upon the lives of all New Yorkers. And with 1% of New York taxpayers paying 45% of all the taxes, cities in a precarious position if they make those who create value feel like they're best off moving their businesses and their lives to other jurisdictions.

[E]

New York City, different New York, we have best talent. We have the best everything. I mean, I know you left Chicago because of some of this stuff, but

[D]

I used to hand politicians a photo album of Detroit. Why Detroit? Detroit was the most. Most wealthy city in America per capita in the 1950s. Detroit was the powerhouse of our country.

[E]

And then.

[D]

And then a photographer a few years ago did a phenomenal photo book of the carnage of New York City. The rotting buildings, this empty stages, the vacant and Dilapidated homes. It's an absolutely heartbreaking book to see. How is it that the most successful city in America wound up in bankruptcy and despair in just 50 years? I don't think any city should be so arrogant as to believe that it is immune to economic realities and to the hard, cold fact that when people that drive success are told they're not welcome or invited, that they will leave. We were in California.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

They have a proposed bailout initiative to create a wealth tax here in California. Larry Page's child is now a classmate of my children in Miami. And a substantial number of the business leaders in California have fled to Texas and to Florida and to other states in just a few months. Now. People go, well, like, you know, the progressive left goes, good riddance, but who's going to pay the bills? And with them goes jobs, with them goes management experience. You know, what we forget is that very few people have the gifts to run these large, complicated businesses.

[A]

He said so many interesting things. First of all, he said he's glad he's moving his offices to Miami. It sounds like he was in Chicago, had similar anti capitalist attacks there. And he's moving to Miami, which has really become a freedom capital, a business capital, has the political culture of freedom and free enterprise, not just at the mayor's level, but at the governor's level. That's Ron DeSantis's state. I thought it was very interesting that he said he was being doxxed and put in harm's way. And he alluded to the United Healthcare assassination. I think he believes it. I think he means it. I think he was actually hurt by this. Now you'll notice that the question the journalist from cnbc talked about. 350 Park Avenue. That's this huge project that Ken Griffin is building in New York. Park Avenue you've probably heard of. It's a Big Street, 350 Park Avenue. It's going to be a $6 billion redevelopment that will have 6,000 construction jobs. And when it's done, we'll have 15,000 permanent jobs in the offices and shops. Like, this is huge. Think about 15,000 permanent jobs. That's 15,000 families. That's like, you know, 60,000 people. If you have a wife and two kids. Like it's, it's the size of city. He's building that in New York. But now he's thinking, well, maybe I shouldn't. And it was very interesting that he thought perhaps they'll be targeted too, because they're on the wrong side of this vengeful mayor. He said he literally chose Miami as quote, an immediate and direct consequence of the mayor's vicious attack. And he says, you know, states like Texas, Tennessee, Florida, I mean these are places where people move to. He was asked about his conversation with the governor of New York, who's supposedly a bit more of a grown up, but he wouldn't get into it and said that the governor was sort of impressed that Mamdani scored political points. Again, it's all about theater. Like I say, Zoran Namdani has actually never employed anybody. He's never run anything other than his mouth. He tried being a rapper, didn't quite work out. Running for mayor was a role to play. Rudy Giuliani was a successful prosecutor who broke the mob and then he went as mayor. He cleaned up the streets. Michael Bloomberg was a billionaire and an innovator who became mayor. Like all these people were successful at life, at something before becoming mayor. They were real life successes. Zoran Mamdani accomplished nothing before being mayor. He's reading a script he's playing, he's acting as a mayor, but he doesn't really know how to do it. Cause he doesn't really know how to do anything. So he's still campaigning, but instead of attacking Republicans, he's attacking business people, investors, builders and. And they're just saying they're moving away. Did you catch that point that the top 1% in New York City pay 45% of all taxes? The 1 percenter. Oh, you're a 1 percenter? Yeah. You know, the 1 percenters are the 45 percenters. And the thing is, if you drive away Ken Griffin and if you drive away those like them, you're not going to have people paying the 45%. You're going to run out of other people's money. And when he said that, he used to hand people a photo album of Detroit before and after. Something I think about a lot is how Detroit was the leading city in America and now it is a basically a burned out husk and it's all because of politics. And he made one more allusion to, to how billionaires are losing, are leaving California. California brought in this billionaires tax, just like Zoran Mandan is doing. That would target startup companies where the CEO and the management team had a lot of money on paper because the stock was growing in value, but they didn't have a lot of cash flow. They were maybe working just for stock. They were actually, it looked like they were poor because they didn't have a lot of cash. They were just getting Paid with a percentage of the company they were building. The classic pull yourself up from the bootstraps entrepreneur. But they would be taxed on the value of their assets, which haven't been sold yet. I won't get into the technical. Maybe I'm not explaining it clearly enough, but they actually don't have the cash to pay these huge billionaire taxes without selling their companies and liquidating it. So instead, they're moving out of California. But $100 billion worth of wealth has left California to avoid this get the billionaires tax. I thought that response by the billionaire that Mamdani was targeting was heartbreaking, was genuine, was thoughtful, and, you know, it's what has happened around the world. I mean, Zoran Mamdani and his family come from East Africa. And as you can see, he's brown, he's not black. And there was a large community of South Asians in places like Uganda. And then one day, a black supremacist named IDI Amin said to all the brown people, it was a racist thing. He said, you have two weeks to get out or I'm going to kill you all. That was about 55 years ago. And a number of them came to Canada. That's the Ismaili Muslims who fled. IDI Amin and Pierre Trudeau let them in. That's the followers of the Aga Khan, and all the professionals and all the educated people and all the business people were kicked out. And then, of course, the place fell down. It didn't have the economic backbone, and they've started to beg them to come back. Same thing with other parts of Africa that kicked out their rich people and then realized what they had done to themselves. That Third Worldism is what's happening in New York and it's also happening in Toronto. We're just a little bit, I suppose, less explicit about it. Our rich simply leave to the United States and then don't make a big fuss about it. I mean, Mark Carney himself moved his company's headquarters from Toronto to New York. It was the last thing he did at Brookfield. Those rich who stay in Canada, they carefully keep a low profile, and they actually pay off the critics like Loblaws who raised the price of bread illegally on the poor, or the richest family in Canada. Do you even know their name? I mean, we all know Elon Musk and Jeffrey Bezos and other gazillionaires. But do you even know the name of the richest family in Canada? I bet you don't. Without prompting. Not because you don't follow the news but because the news is silent on it, because the richest billionaires in Canada manage to keep criticism of themselves tamped down. The loblaws, the Thompson's family is the answer. They actually own the Globe and Mail, which is part of the explanation. The Irving family in New Brunswick, they basically own the politicians. They managed to avoid scrutiny because they simply buy off press coverage. In Canada, we have wealth envy. It's targeted more at the entire province of Alberta and any Albertan than it is billionaires. Condominium, condominium in New York City. Most of the billionaires in Alberta's oil patch, they have moved on to greener pastures or at least moved their assets there. They, they're not really investing a lot more in Alberta. They're into lower risk places these days like Venezuela. I mean, there's really nothing more mobile than oil producers. Oil's found in more than 100 countries in the world. If you're not allowed to drill for it, if you're taxed too much for drilling in Alberta, you can find somewhere else. I don't know, I find it very depressing. Zoran Mamdani is going to ruin New York City. In this case, it's not even the tax itself. It's the fact that he signaled to the wealthy job creators, builders, investors, developers. He said, I hate you. I don't just disagree with you. I don't just want some of your money. I hate you. I'm going to demonize you. I'm going to get you. And that was all they needed to hear and they took it to heart and they're going to leave. And New York, I mean, it's a great city, but as that photo book of Detroit shows, even great cities can fall into ruin. Stay with us for more. Well, I read the National Post. I call it the mainstream media because by many measurements it is. But it is, I think, the last bastion of independent critical commentary. And one of my favorite parts to read is called First Reading. It's sort of a summary of what's going on there, curated by Tristan Hopper. And I was just chatting with him before we turn on the cameras about his coverage of that so called spaceport in Canso, Nova Scotia. What a scandal that is. But he had an interesting story today. The headline is, ottawa has no idea how many temporary migrants are still here. While Canada has asked millions of migrants to leave, there's no way to track whether they're doing so. Here's an exchange in Parliament between conservative Senator Costas Managakis and Lina Diab. Just absolutely priceless.

[F]

Take a Quick look, Admittedly, the Auditor General report found big time problems in screening within your department. So we've talked a little bit this morning about the 153,000 flagged applications. How many in those had ties to terrorist organizations like the irgc?

[E]

To my understanding, and none, you know,

[F]

that you've met with them, you've gone through the process, you've done the background checks.

[E]

Well, again, you only looked at.

[F]

According to.

[E]

As I said, of the 153,000, 78% were already eliminated because we knew, we know who they are and whether they have status or the 14% that have claimed asylum. So, yes, the department would know. And of the 22%, work is ongoing to determine how many have left the country.

[F]

Yeah, it's a little hard to believe that on March 23, the Auditor General found 153,000 people. And then boom, magically within a month or so, you know, the problem seems to have been resolved on your end. Still, there are 21,000, 420 people that you're looking into and there's concern about people being in our communities. Mr. Galavan, Mr. Galavan, I think has

[A]

a response to you.

[F]

I still have another question. So Mr. Galavan astoundingly testified that there was no entry or exit system in place in your department. So the question is why? The government has been in power for 11 years now. This is the 11th year. Canadians want to know. We want to know why there would be no entry or exit system in place.

[E]

Well, that's a good question. I wondered the same thing as a. But that's how Canada has been throughout its history. This is nothing new. Canada has never, ever had that ever since Canada was created. So the issue now, and I agree with you, we should have it and we are working towards it. That is the good news. So I agree with you.

[F]

But you let in record numbers of people, millions and millions of people over the past 11 years with no control, no record, no way of having an entry or an exit system. So I'm glad that you agree with me because it's obviously a major failure of the government. Government over the past 11 years. And that's who you're representing.

[A]

I agree with you. We should have it and we are working towards it. That is the good news. Hey, guys. The good. You want to. I got some really good news on foreign migrants who have to leave. Here's the good news. Are you ready? We've been in power for 11 years, but the good news is we're working towards it. All right. All right. Well, There you have it, the state of Canadian politics and immigration. Joining us now to talk about it is Tristan Hopper, the author of First Reading. Tristan, am I missing something? Is that really good news that they're working towards it? I mean, I suppose it is, I

[B]

guess, acknowledging that, yeah, something is a problem. But it's sort of like, you know, if your crappy boyfriend says he's working on his problems, that doesn't mean he's actually going to fix those problems, he's working on them.

[A]

Well, you know, there's a saying that you hear sometimes that's not a bug, that's a feature, which means this problem that you're talking about, it's actually not considered a problem. It's the whole point of things. And I would put it to you that our excessively, incredibly libertine immigration system, that's not an accident, that's on purpose. So it's working as planned. I mean, there's a saying in computer science of the purpose of a system is what it does. So if you want to know what is the purpose of our immigration system, it brings in maximum people with minimum scrutiny. That is what it does, that is its purpose. And anything that Lena Diab says, that's actually the anomaly. I mean, I think that they want to bring in absolute masses of people for economic reasons. You know, this is that Century club idea of 100 million people. If you're the banks, you love it. If you're a cell phone company, you love it. If you're a landlord, you love it. If you're an employer, you love driving down wages. There are a lot of people who love maximum population migration. I think that's the purpose of it.

[B]

I mean there is, there's definitely a pattern. I've seen certain areas of the government in which you'll have sort of a conspicuous lac of data on something that the government wants to do. I mean, the classic example I can think of is harm reduction. So when you're opening sort of safe injection sites, the usual scientific rigor you would apply to such experiments if you were legitimately trying to see if they were having a net good, is you would do long term, 5, 10 year studies of the overall health of a community. Instead you had very limited within six months. Here's what happens to crime within the several blocks around the safe injection site. So it's so limited, it's so patchy, it's almost you're intentionally trying to avoid the bigger picture in this case, I mean, there's lots of areas in which the government actually has been transparent about figures on migration that if your theory was to hold, they wouldn't want those figures coming out. There was actually pretty good numbers on when we had just thousands of illegal border crossers starting in 2017 crossing over the border. We actually had up to the person pretty regular updates on how many of those were coming in. So on this particular metric, I would be more inclined to say it's one of those many things within the Canadian system. Because Lena Diab was saying, well, you know, there's never been a way to track who's actually leaving. You know, all the way back to 1867, there hasn't been a system like this. So I think that just speaks to. There's a lot of things in the Canadian system that we didn't need to have this kind of rigorous simply because it hadn't been stress tested to this point. There's never been a prior example in Canadian history of you just bring in 1 to 2 million temporary migrants within the space of a few months and you expect them all to just voluntarily leave because you asked them politely and you didn't screen them when they came in. So you have no idea who any of these people are. So you have a system that worked for the first 150 years, but then when you have, hey, you million and a half people we didn't screen and many some of you came in here under false pretenses, can you please leave? And we'll just assume you did. That worked under the prior system. But now, you know, we're discovering it may be lacking.

[A]

You know, over the last 11 years, they've pretty much phased out any meetings, any appointments with a human being to immigrate to Canada. It's all just done online.

[B]

I mean, even your citizenship ceremony is remote. If you're even appearing.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, and that's just the icing on the cake. But a foreign national does not have to actually meet with a Canadian in an embassy or a consulate. It's just like going on a Facebook page or something. And, and I think that all of these things taken together, they all point one way reduce barriers to entry. But if you're not even having a person look at a would be migrant when they come in, of course they're not looking to kick them out. I mean, it's sort of obvious what the point of the system is. If you were to acknowledge that they were a problem, if you were to count, if you were to say, well, we actually know how many people are here that shouldn't be, then you might actually have to do something if you acknowledge the problem. That's why you see no evil and hear no evil. Because if you did, you know, it's like the saying for a criminal accused, do not tell your lawyer you're guilty. Don't give it away. I think that they're deliberately not acknowledging a problem so they don't have to deal with it.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, the state of the immigration department right now is absolutely. Everything is on fire. You know, asylum seekers is on fire, screening of temporary migrants is on fire. All of the things they were supposed to be doing, they've all collapsed and they're all kind of a disaster. So even if Lena Diablo was approaching this with completely good intentions and she actually wanted to rein things in and bring it back to sustainable immigration system, we used to have, you could even sympathize with, okay, we're going to open this door and that's just going to be a backdraft and fire. So maybe we'll just wait to deal with all these other fires first.

[A]

I've asked this question to the Conservative Party's immigration critic, and I was sort of surprised with the fortitude of her answer. I said, would you support mass deportations? Because it's more than a million people whose tenure here has expired, either students or temporary workers, or they're here in some other way. Like that would be a lot of planes getting filled up and flying back to countries far away. If you were going to enforce the law, it would be an enormous challenge. And we can see how big a challenge it is in the United States when you have a fully funded and aggressively supported ice. I mean, America has barely deported a million people.

[B]

It's called Nice now.

[D]

Yeah.

[A]

Which is hilarious. So even the, I mean, the Conservatives are very timidly saying, yeah, I guess. I guess that's the logical conclusion.

[B]

It's because it's not tremendously controversial. So Post Media, we commissioned a poll two years ago, so 2024, and it's been a long two years. So immigration sentiments among the Canadian population were not nearly as radicalized, you know, then as. As they are now. And even then we had a poll, I think it was, it was either a huge plurality or a majority of Canadians. When asked point blank, would you favor nasty partitions? They said yes. So if. I think that's why the Conservative Party is taking this on, because although you can look at poll numbers, you can look at outside support for the Liberal Party, you can think that you are surrounded by Canadians who have lost touch with reality and they don't see the things you do a lot. Sometimes on these specific issues, you'll find very radical sentiments, even not radical sentiments. But on mass deportations specifically, I think the average Canadian, they're looking at day after day after day just reporting about things that didn't used to happen. You know, an entire city in Surrey taken over by Punjabi gangsters, Constant court cases in which someone has come from another country, immediately starts breaking the law, scamming the system, and they're kept in the country. A judge decides they cannot be deported. So I think your average Canadian, regardless of their political affiliation, sees that and determines that some sort of action needs to be taken about it. So when you see that majority of Canadians saying we need some sort of mass deportations, I don't know what that looks like. But people like the idea of a plane filled with foreign criminals who are not respecting the system not being here anymore.

[A]

And I think that's how the US tried to start it. Go after the absolute worst cases that have no personal sympathy, go after the criminals, go after the people who committed horrific offenses.

[B]

And I think the timidness is because we have this strange dynamic in Canada. I think the majority, I think we're still among the most pro immigration countries on earth. But that's balanced with if you are pro immigration and you like the idea of people coming from all over the world, you're almost more pissed off than the average at abuses of the immigration system. So that's sort of the dynamic. I see my inbox, personally, if it's in, you know, conspicuously African or Indian name, it's always something about, hey, immigration's out of control, and then it's a bunch of white people calling me racist. So it's a very unique immigration dynamic we have in Canada versus say like European country, which. Which is just like, you know, get rid of all the immigrants. Ours is a bit more nuanced.

[A]

You know, in the United Kingdom, the head of the point person on this stuff, in the most anti immigration party that's got a chance, it's called Reform uk. It's Nigel Farage's party. His name is Zia Yousef and he's a Muslim man, if I'm not mistaken, originally from Pakistan. And I think he needs that bulletproofiness for him to say mass deportations. And they just announced a policy, I don't know if they would ever implement it, where they're gonna have detention centers of migrants and they're gonna put those centers in the districts that vote green, that vote for sanctuary cities.

[B]

But Going back to mass deportations. I mean, when you're thinking, who do you want to mass deport? There was that figure just a couple years ago when you had several thousand foreign students. They'd come here as foreign students studied, and as their permits came to an end, they applied for asylum. So we've just had these really egregious, obviously fake asylum claims. And given the metrics in the asylum system, you know, chances are likely they will get some sort of permanent status. So I struggle to think of anybody who would look at those specific asylum claims and not say, oh, just get out of the country. I mean, you'll even see that among the Liberal Party going all the way back to 2018. I mean, you had Haas, what the heck is his name? He was like five immigration ministers ago, but at the time he was publicly saying with the illegal border crossers, you know, Nigerians are scamming us. We have to stop this. So it's very strange how often you will see the very people overseeing these broken systems will occasionally admit that how broken it is in a public forum.

[A]

Yeah, accidentally, maybe. Hey, I got a last question for you. In the system, we have an Auditor General that's generally focused on accounting corruption, fraud, waste, but they also track effectiveness. The best Auditor General reports go beyond just money and say, look, we did not achieve our policy objectives here and here's why. In the States they have a similar thing. I think they generally call them Inspector generals and they seem very aggressive down there. Has there been, as far as, you know, that sort of independent audit of what's going on? Because it sounds like the, the minutes,

[B]

I mean that, that clip you played earlier from the host Commons committee, they, the, all the proceedings of that particular committee were involving a March report by the Auditor General looking into. And so the audio Auditor General did very much what an investigative journalist would do, said, okay, you know, everything's on fire. We're just going to pick one very specific part of the immigration system and we're going to see if people are doing their job. So they picked two years of student visas. And we're going to look at how many of these were flagged as being potentially noncompliant, how many of these were flagged as being fraudulent and how many of those that subset was actually investigated by the department. And you probably covered this back when the report came out in March, but they found that basically no investigation is being done. So they said. According to internal data, 153,000 foreign students during that two year period were flagged as being potentially non compliant. So they agreed to come to students. They're not showing up to classes, they're not reporting to their visa. Whatever the terms were, they weren't being followed. And they said, well, how many of those 153,000 did you investigate? And they said 4,000. We only had funding for 4,000. So, okay, 149,000 just got off scot free. And then they said, well, how did those 4,000 investigations go? And they said, well, half of them we couldn't do because they just didn't call us back. We called them and asked them if they're, hey, are you breaking the law and staying in the country illegally? And they didn't get back to us, so we couldn't. So, I mean, that is a very good example of the Auditor General taking just one small part and finding just shocking dysfunction. And there's no reason to think, and every time you see some, some close examination of one section, you know, actually, are you doing any sort of immigration screening? That wasn't an investigation. That was a, that was a report by a former IRCC official. I think it was published in the Hub or by the McDonald Laurier Institute. But every time you find some new aspect of the immigration system and you would, you know, are you doing any screening, you know, what, what is actually happening to asylum seekers? I mean, the dysfunction is way higher than even I imagined in my, in my worst nightmares. And that just keeps happening. So there is a role. Yeah. For Inspector General, et cetera, looking at this.

[A]

Well, I didn't actually read that Auditor General's report a couple months ago, and maybe someone else on our team covered it, but you have certainly piqued my interest and I'm glad that there is an Auditor General who is at least sampling some of the work of this department.

[B]

And great time to be an Auditor General. Yeah, just a lot of failure to

[A]

pick up, you know what I mean? You can see that the government doesn't perhaps want the scrutiny. They voted the other day to turn cameras off in one of the committee meetings. So I think there's a battle on to tell the truth. Tristan Hopper, great to have you on the show. I'm really grateful for your time and I would like to recommend everyone here, even if you're a skeptic of the mainstream media, which I certainly am, I do recommend First Reading. That's Tristan's regular feature in Post Media and it has just some great stories, including some that we cover on our show. Once again, Tristan Harper. Thanks for your time.

[B]

Thank you.

[A]

All right. Stay with us. Your letters to me next. Hey, welcome back. Your letters to me on Louise Arbour, the former Supreme Court judge and then former UN Human Rights commissioner and now Governor General Raging Canuck says my spouse, Muse the carney always manages to pick people who are totally unsuitable for their appointments. I responded that suitability was not his criterion. Instead, he chose those who would do his bidding, promote elitism and not be above a good palm greasing if they were faced with any moral conundrums in the exercise of his wishes. You know, there was this incredible clip where she was asked if she's a monarchist and she basically says, nah, but I like the perks and the prestige. Here, take a look at this video. Yeah.

[B]

Am I a monarchy? Well, I started by saying that this term is unfortunately very often used in a pejorative way. What I can say is that I will accede to a function in which I will be the representative of the crown in a constitutional arrangement that I think has served Canada extremely well throughout our history, but even more in recent decades. I think a system that will continue to provide continuity in our institutions and our form of government.

[A]

Marilyn Haley says Liberal appointed governor general. Liberal appointed senators. Liberal appointed rcmp. Liberal appointed Chinese police stations. Liberal appointed judges. Yep, Canada is done. Rest in peace. I tell you one thing, the past is a different country. Isn't it the case? And our media has been colonized and house trained, so they're not squawking. A few are. But 99% of journalists are just stenographers asking for their next bailout. Jirwin Tiberius says, can we just kick out the remnants of the British Empire and be a free, independent and sovereign nation like the U.S. you know, I hear what you're saying. I mean, there's some people who say, well, the governor general's whole office and that whole position is a relic of the past. Well, listen, something is going to be in power. Nature abhors a vacuum in the States. They have a very regal presidency, don't they? I mean, look at the Air Force One and the, and the presidential, you know, entourage and the White House and everything. And I'm not criticizing. I'm just saying something needs to fill that role of pomp and circumstance. Donald Trump is putting his face on the passport, putting a signature on the money. So something or someone will always fill those positions of prestige and authority. Having the king fill that role and the governor general and having some modesty, some nonpartisanship, some sense of reserve, I think displaces a presidential overreach and one of the problems is Mark Carney is putting into place, just like Trudeau did before him, partisan troublemakers instead of dutiful servants of the King. I am a monarchist because if you don't have that family that goes back century with their sense of duty and reserve, you're going to have something else fill that void. And I'd much rather have the King and a governor general than an all powerful president. So to me, it's the lesser of two evils. Who can we have there that's not going to get too big for the British. Ironically, a royal king is probably less ostentatious than what would replace it in Canada. Let me know if you disagree. That's the show for today. Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, see you at home. Good night. And keep fighting for freedom.