VENGEANCE: Mark Carney is auditing Rebel News!

Summary

---

Rebel News Podcast: "VENGEANCE: Mark Carney is Auditing Rebel News!"

Host: Ezra Levant (Rebel News)
Date: March 24, 2026

---

Episode Theme Overview

This episode of the Ezra Levant Show focuses on a recent audit threat issued by Elections Canada to Rebel News—timed, according to host Ezra Levant, as an act of political retribution following Rebel News’ announcement of a third-party campaign against Mark Carney in upcoming by-elections. The episode details the circumstances of the audit, Levant’s accusation of “partisan abuse” by Elections Canada, and critiques of the Canadian government’s approach to firearms regulation. Levant also features a discussion with Tom Maven of the National Firearms Association about the federal gun buyback program.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Elections Canada Audit & Mark Carney (00:00–08:46)

• Audit Notification and Timing

  • Ezra Levant received an official audit letter from Elections Canada the day after Rebel News announced plans for a third-party campaign against Mark Carney.
  • Levant claims the timing is not coincidental but “partisan abuse,” implying political retaliation:

    “Now, what are the odds that they send that audit threat letter to me on the very next business day after I announce we're going to be criticizing Carney?” (01:32)

• Transparency and Compliance Claims

  • Rebel News has previously passed an audit and claims to be “in full compliance” with election laws, employing an external lawyer and auditor:

    “Not only did we do the accounting in full compliance with the law, we paid an external elections lawyer… [and] independent auditor reviewed everything.” (02:50)

  • Levant directs listeners to view both the threat letter and audit documents at auditabusers.com.

• Allegations Against Elections Canada and Liberal Appointees

  • Levant suggests that senior appointees, especially CEO Stéphane Perrault, are acting at the behest of the Liberal Party and Mark Carney.
  • He accuses Perrault of ignoring election interference by foreign and party insiders, and labels their actions as “revenge” for critical coverage.

• Accusations on Enforcement Tactics

  • Levant denounces the audit as “selective punishment” and “a message… don’t you dare cross the Liberals.” (04:46)
  • Suggests resemblance to “seiz[ing] personal bank accounts of the truckers in the Freedom Convoy,” previously supported by Carney.

• Vow to Continue Campaigning

  • Despite the audit, Levant asserts:

    “…we are going to campaign in the upcoming by-elections again, not going to stop because of a few thugs making threats against us.” (06:25)

• Characterization of Mark Carney

  • Levant characterizes Carney as a “bully who can’t stand criticism” and likens him to a “thug” for supporting harsh measures against peaceful protesters:

    “Now, Mark Carney, he's a bit more of a thug, isn't he?... during the trucker convoy, he said that the government should have gone harder on the truckers...” (07:32)

2. Critique of Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree (08:46–11:57)

• Allegations of Inappropriate Appointment

  • Levant accuses Anandasangaree of former activism with a terrorist group (Tamil Tigers), and insinuates his appointment was politically motivated.

• Audio Clip Analysis

  • Airs surreptitiously recorded audio of Anandasangaree allegedly discussing firearm policy loopholes and enforcement ambiguities.
  • Levant points out duplicity:

    “He's not so interested in gun crimes by criminals. He's much more interested in pressing law abiding gun owners…” (10:00)

3. Interview: Tom Maven, National Firearms Association (11:57–23:03)

a. Federal Gun Buyback Program (11:57–18:26)

• Government’s Claims vs. Reality

  • Only 26,000 Canadians (out of an expected 136,000) participated, surrendering 51,000 firearms.
  • Maven says the government’s numbers exclude “potentially 1–2 million other firearms” banned over recent years.

• Law Enforcement Reluctance

  • Levant and Maven note that most Canadian police forces are refusing to cooperate with the buyback:

    “Police force after police force, has said they're simply not going to put their resources into this project.” (15:00)

  • Maven confirms only three police services are participating, expressing surprise at his former employer’s (Waterloo Regional Police) involvement.

b. Firearm Policy Critique

• Legislative Focus

  • Both argue laws are targeting “assault-style” firearms that are rarely used in criminal activity, especially in urban violence.
  • Maven clarifies:

    “…they use the word assault style firearm rather than assault rifle, which is incorrect… Assault rifles have been banned in Canada since about 1978.” (17:43)

• Motivation for Legislation

  • Levant and Maven agree that targeting “law abiding, happy, patriotic people” is a politically motivated move to appeal to urban voters and demonize rural ones.
  • They criticize the government’s “theater”:

    “It's always been ineffective for its real purpose, but I think its collateral purpose, which is to demonize farmers and rural people, has been a great success.” (18:26)

c. Liberal MP Natalie Provost’s Statement (18:59–22:54)

• Provost’s Assertions

  • Provost denies the government is confiscating “farm guns,” calling such claims “disinformation.”
  • Levant counters:

    “What I take away from that little rant was she acknowledged that the people she's targeting are law abiding, happy, patriotic people… Why are you taking the guns from them?” (20:52)

• Maven’s Response

  • Maven states that the government’s list does indeed include hunting and plinking rifles, labeling Provost's comments as “promoting disinformation.”

4. Viewer Mail: Church Burnings (23:14–End)

• Coverage Suppression and Hate Crime Discussion
  • Levant laments alleged underreporting of attacks on Christian churches by the mainstream media, stating if another religious group were targeted, it would be labeled a hate crime.
  • Highlights user comments blaming foreign actors and expressing disbelief that such acts would be committed by Canadians.
  • Levant points to a pattern of church attacks as evidence of media and political suppression of “uncomfortable truths.”

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “They're abusing their auditing powers. They're making it partisan. They're using it for revenge.”
  —Ezra Levant (02:09)

• “This is just political punishment because we are on Mark Carney's enemies list.”
  —Ezra Levant (03:38)

• “We've only got five days left. And of course they're surely going to do this to us again because… we are going to campaign in the upcoming by elections again, not going to stop because of a few thugs making threats against us.”
  —Ezra Levant (06:23)

• “He's not so interested in gun crimes by criminals. He's much more interested in pressing law abiding gun owners like sports shooters, farmers or ranchers. Those are the guns that interest Gary Ananda Sangaree.”
  —Ezra Levant (10:00)

• “...basically most of the firearms that they are banning have the physical appearance of an AR15... they use the word assault style firearm rather than assault rifle, which is incorrect of course, because assault rifles have been banned in Canada since about 1978.”
  —Tom Maven (17:43)

• “The information she was providing that they were not going after hunting guns... is incorrect because they have been going after those types of firearms in their legislation.”
  —Tom Maven (22:02)

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:00–08:46 — Opening monologue: audit notification, Carney’s alleged influence, and accusations of partisan abuse.
• 08:46–11:57 — Critique of Gary Anandasangaree, surreptitious audio, and gun policy focus.
• 11:57–18:26 — Interview with Tom Maven: gun buyback stats, police response, government motives.
• 18:59–22:54 — Discussion of Liberal MP Natalie Provost’s statements and rebuttals around firearm bans.
• 23:14–End — Viewer mail on church burnings and media coverage.

---

Tone and Style

The episode maintains a confrontational, skeptical tone—characterized by Levant’s direct and unsubtle rhetorical style, frequent appeals to listeners for support, and a persistent framing of government action as maliciously partisan and anti-free-speech. The show leverages emotional appeals, combative language, and pointed accusations against political adversaries.

---

Summary

In this episode, Ezra Levant paints a picture of government overreach, accusing Mark Carney and top Elections Canada officials of abusing their authority to punish political opponents. The episode features a blend of personal grievance over regulatory investigations and broader critiques of Liberal policies—especially those on firearms—highlighting perceived rural/urban divides and charging government and media with misleading the public. The interview with Tom Maven adds expert commentary to the firearms debate, furthering the show’s overall narrative of official overreach and rural victimization.

Listeners are repeatedly told that this audit is part of a larger campaign of “revenge,” retribution, and censorship against dissenting conservative-leaning voices, with frequent encouragements to visit Rebel News’s support and documentation websites.

Transcript

[A]

Hello, my friends. I got a shocking letter from Mark Carney's Elections Canada. They're auditing me. And that announcement comes one day after I announced that we're going to be having a third party campaign against Carney. Is it a coincidence? Yeah. Pull my other leg. I'll go through it with you today. But first, let me invite you to become a subscriber to what we call Rebel News plus. It's the video version of this podcast. And today it's important. I want to show you the threat letter I got from Mark Carney. And I want to show you the audit we already passed. I want you to see it with your own eyes. Just go to rebelnewsplus.com, click subscribe. You'll get that great content. And it's eight bucks a month, which may not sound like a lot to you, but it sure adds up for us. And it's an important source of revenue if you can afford it. It's rebelnewsplus.com. Tonight, Mark Carney just announced he's auditing me. And I've got six days to give him hundreds of records. It's March 24, and this is the Ezra Levant Show. Shame on you, you censorious bug. I can't even believe it. They're not even trying to hide it. The day after I announced we're going to campaign against Mark Carney in the upcoming by elections, by properly registering with Elections Canada as a third party campaign group. The day after that, Elections Canada writes to me telling me they're going to audit me for last year when we did the same thing. Now, what are the odds that they send that audit threat letter to me on the very next business? Day after I announce we're going to be criticizing Carney, they're abusing their auditing powers. They're making it partisan. They're using it for revenge. It's like when they seized personal bank accounts of the truckers in the Freedom Convoy. Something Carney personally supported. Now, don't take my word for any of this. Read their insane threat letter yourself. You can see it at a website we just launched called auditabusers.com that's exactly what they're doing here. Oh, by the way, we were already audited for our third party group we had last year. Not only did we do the accounting in full compliance with the law, we paid an external elections lawyer to advise us. And then an external independent auditor reviewed everything. It was extremely expensive, but we did it to comply. You can see that full audit at the same website. We've set up auditabusers.com so you can see we are in full compliance and have been the whole time. Otherwise why would we have registered and not a word from Elections Canada in nearly a year. And then suddenly, right after we announce we're going to take another crack at Carney, Elections Canada sends us a threat. This is just political punishment because we are on Mark Carney's enemies list. And get this. For those of you who know something about audits, you'll find this shocking. The letter came from a government bureaucrat named Luis Quiro. He himself, okay. Now he's demanding all of our expense invoices, all of our bank statements, all of our canceled checks within one week. Within one week. Hundreds of documents for a campaign we did a year ago. Now, Luis Kiro is obviously just the bureaucrat they've sicked on us. But he signed the letter saying we have just days to give him hundreds of documents. But I'm sure Luis Kiro isn't acting on his own. I'm sure he's been directing to do that. Directed to do this by his boss, Stephane Perrault, the CEO of Elections Canada, who was personally appointed by Justin Trudeau. Now Perot is the head of Elections Canada who has done two very important favors for the Liberals. First, he refused to investigate the 11 ridings that the Chinese Communist Party interfered with in support of the Liberal Party. China's dictatorship tampered with our elections, including busing in front of foreign nationals to participate in a candidate selection. Perot also turned a blind eye to manipulation of the Liberal Party's leadership vote last year, where the majority of ballots were discarded for irregularities. That leadership vote, conducted online, installed Mark Carney as our pm. Imagine refusing to do those two obvious and very important investigations. He was like a sleeping lifeguard who just didn't care. But remember, Carney and Xi Jinping are friends. And a career bureaucrat like Perot knows better than to investigate the Prime Minister's friends. Instead, Perot spent five years and more than a million dollars prosecuting me and Rebel News for publishing my book, the Lebranos that criticized Liberal Party corruption. So now Elections Canada is coming for me and Rebel News again. I just can't get over that one week deadline that such an admission of bad faith. They've waited almost a whole year to spring this audit on us, even though we've already passed an audit. This is exactly what it looks like it is. This is Mark Carney's revenge against us for daring to ask questions about him that the regime media won't. This is selective punishment. This is a message to anyone else. Also, don't you dare cross the Liberals. I need your help to fight back. Legally, of course. We've got to pay an accountant to comply with this malicious audit to meet the artificial and prejudicial demands of Elections Canada. We've got to do it immediately. We got to hire an accountant to get to work. Now, we've only got five days left. And of course they're surely going to do this to us again because like I mentioned on Friday, we are going to campaign in the upcoming by elections again, not going to stop because of a few thugs making threats against us. And who knows, maybe we'll even take our campaign right to the head office of Elections Canada. Maybe we'll take our big, beautiful billboard truck that they hate so much and use it to ask them a few uncomfortable questions about why they're so friendly to Communist China when they interfere, but so hostile to actual Canadian citizens speaking out. Look, I don't have a lot of nice things to say about Justin Trudeau, but I'll give him this at least he never audited me or Rebel News. Now, Mark Carney, he's a bit more of a thug, isn't he? I mean, during the trucker convoy, he said that the government should have gone harder on the truckers and accused peaceful protesters of sedition. He's a bully who can't stand criticism. That's why Mark Carney hates us. That's why Elections Canada is coming after us instead of Communist China. If you can help us fight back against this abusive audit by hiring an accountant to prove that this is nothing more than a political vendetta, please do by going to auditabusers.com that's what Carney is. That's what Elections Canada is. They're audit abusers. I promise to keep you posted, and I promise we'll fight the bully Mark Carney every step of the way. Go to auditabusers.com to see their threat letter and to see our audit and to help us fight back. Thank you. Well, Gary Ananda Sangaree is perhaps the worst public safety minister Canada has ever had. And that's quite a contest considering who has filled that role before. Even before he was appointed, he was trouble. He was an activist with the Tamil Tigers. That's a registered terrorist group, so the RCMP obviously flagged that. Nonetheless, for reasons of ethnic politics and votes, Mark Carney appointed him to that high office. He must recuse himself, however, from dealing with that Terrorist group. Imagine thinking that that's the right guy to be in charge of public safety. Gary Ananda Sangri also made himself famous for talking to a tenant. You see, besides being a busy cabinet minister, our friend Gary has a number of rental apartments that he spends time going door to door collecting rent. And one of his tenants is a firearms owner and complained about this to the, to Gary who said oh, don't worry about it, it's just for show. It's just for public consumption. Let me know and we'll get you off the hook if you have a hassle. Here's a clip of that audio recording. Gary didn't realize he was being taped.

[B]

Take a quick listen these guys to say with your kitchen release policies, these guys are caught, right? Might spend a couple days in jail, get a bail hearing and out they go. But you're taking stuff away from people that aren't a problem. Yeah, listen, it's voluntary, okay? That's, that's the only thing. It's a voluntary. Yeah. So what's the third option? So I deactivate, I turn them in. What's the third option? Third option is you don't do either. And what's that mean then? It's up to the local police. So then what does that mean? To become. Yeah, what's that? A criminal? If police enforce it. Yes. Well of course the police are going to enforce it because you're going to mandate. But it's not in the criminal, it's there, it's already written in the criminal code. So you're basically, you're saying is if I don't deactivate or return them at a loss. Yeah. In your case, what are your losses? You tell me of personally, there's nothing.

[A]

I met Gary and Anders angry for the first time a few weeks ago when a Toronto synagogue not far from my own house was shot up. And Gary had nothing to offer whatsoever. See, he's not so interested in gun crimes by criminals. He's much more interested in pressing law abiding gun owners like sports shooters, farmers or ranchers. Those are the guns that interest Gary and Anda Sangaree. Dr. Joining us now to talk about Gary and his. I'm calling him Gary because it's a little bit simpler to say that. And his failed firearms buyback project is Tom Maven. He's the Ontario director and registered lobbyist for the nfa, the National Firearms Association. Tom, great to have you on the show. Thanks for joining us.

[C]

Thank you very much Ezra for having me on.

[A]

You know, I just can't believe the contrast with how lackadaisical Gary Ananda Sangaree is with when it comes to actual places of worship being shot with what are surely illegal firearms like. He has almost nothing to say about that. He's reluctant to talk about that, but boy, he's enthusiastic when it comes to arresting law abiding people if they don't give up their firearms, isn't he?

[C]

That's, that's, that's for sure. We know he doesn't have any sort of firearm background because when he first took the stage as the public safety minister, he didn't even know what a RPEL was. An RPEL being a Restricted Possession and Acquisition License.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, the liberals put in people who don't know. I mean, just if you ask them a simple question, what is an assault rifle? Because they use that term a lot, they have no idea what it is. They say it's something that looks scary. Again, it's not about actually solving problems. It's about sending out a message track to their easily scared urban voters, distracting them from the real source of gun crime. Here, let me play a clip of Gary Nanda Sangri at Parliament the other day announcing the results of his attempted gun buyback here. Let's take a look.

[B]

We are down to the last seven days. As of March 31, the time for those who enroll who have prohibited firearms comes to an end. Right now we have over 26,000 Canadians who have voluntarily enrolled declaring over 51,000 firearms. We are just reminding Canadians to those with prohibited firearms to enroll and to take part in the program. This is a voluntary program. However, compliance under the actual will not be voluntary as of October 31, when the current order and council is set to expire. So with that, I want to just thank everyone who has already taken their civic duty seriously and enrolled in the program. And we look forward to others doing the same. This is a critical part of the work that our government is doing in addition to the number of legislation that's before the House to ensure the safety and security of Canadians. And we believe that removing these prohibited firearms is one additional step in that measure.

[A]

There are millions of firearms in Canada. The government thought they could buy back 136,000 of them. That was their plan. In the end, they had 51,000 guns by 26,000 people. In other words, a small fraction of Canadians decided to sell their guns to the government. I think that Canadians who have firearms simply don't trust the government. And I think the government is not trustworthy on firearms. And there was a bit of a menace there that he was suggesting. It's voluntary for now, but will not be later. Joining us now is Tom Maven again. Tom, what do you make of the fact that they thought they'd have 136,000 firearms sold to them, but actually a fraction of that, only 26,000 gun owners, went along with the buyback scheme? What does that say?

[C]

I wasn't entirely sure the purpose of their announcement there yesterday. Were they desperately looking for people to sign up or were they touting some great success? We certainly don't see what they've accomplished as a great success. 26,000 people and 51,000 firearms. They know from their own records that there's 110 to 136,000 previously registered firearms that are now banned. So when they say that they're seeking 136,000, they're not including the potentially million to 2 million other firearms that are recently banned within the last six years by the federal government. And those are the firearms they're trying to take him.

[A]

You know, I've noticed that police forces around the country, including in jurisdictions where liberals do well politically, police force after police force, has said they're simply not going to put their resources into this project. That's sort of a stunning thing. I mean, we believe in civilian oversight of the police, but the police have said, sorry, we're not just running that foolish errand. We're actually going to focus on real crime. I mean, here in the Greater Toronto area, there are 20 car thefts a day. And imagine saying, no, we're going to put us and home invasions galore. Imagine saying, we're going to put that aside and go after some farmer who's got a little plinker that hasn't given it up. I. What do you make of the fact that actual police are speaking up and saying this is bs?

[C]

Well, I'm certainly behind that. I'm a retired police officer myself. I spent my last 20 years in police forensics. I was a CSI and I'm a bloodstain pattern analyst, a shooting incident reconstructionist and a forensic expert on firearms. But I was with the Waterloo Regional police for those 30 years. And that police service is actually one of the ones that is participating now in the. The buyback scheme. And there are, I think, one of only three in Canada. So I. I personally find it a little disconcerting that Waterloo is actually taking part in that.

[A]

Interesting. I didn't know that only three police forces are cooperating. I find that very interesting and actually I find it a little bit hopeful. I, I notice that the liberals keep talking about 2500 different types of firearms that are banned. I didn't know there were even 2500. I think that they're just trying to find tiny little distinctions so they can have big numbers like that that impress and scare urban liberal voters. I don't think that the liberals know anything about firearms. I don't even think they have the vocabulary. I think if they were serious about gun crime, they would have a totally different focus. They would focus on illegal guns coming across from the United States. They would focus on the guns of choice used by criminals. I mean, they're focused mainly on long arms, which is exactly what it sounds. A big long rifle that you have to pull the trigger every time. That is typically not what's used in gang crimes or smashing grabs, is it? I mean, the kind of home invasions are not typically long arms. You correct me if I'm wrong.

[C]

Well, I can, I can correct you from personal experience. I haven't been a police officer. The, the firearms that they, they have been, they started with the Armalite rifle 15 or AR15 and then banned many variants of that same firearm. So basically most of the firearms that they are banning have the physical appearance of an AR15 and that's why they use the word assault style firearm rather than assault rifle, which is incorrect of course, because assault rifles have been banned in Canada since about 1978.

[A]

You know, I find this whole thing to be theater, extremely expensive theater. I remember when Alan Rock set up the gun registry about 30 odd years ago and he spent billions on it. It's always been ineffective for its real purpose, but I think its collateral purpose, which is to demonize farmers and rural people, has been a great success. Here. Here's another clip. Here's a liberal mp, Natalie Prevost, who is saying anyone who is a skeptic of this is engaging in disinformation here. Let's, let's take a listen.

[D]

The gun lobby and the conservatives want you to believe that no one supports the assault style Fararam compensation program. Pierre Poilievre claims that we are, and I quote, confiscating hunting rifles and pup can guns that are used on farm. That we are banning farmers from dealing with gophers in that compensation program. There is the Ruger Mini Catal which was used against me in Polytechnic. There's the firearm that was used at the mosque. There were some firearms that were used at Port Epic. I don't feel I am a duck or a Gopher or a pop can. So please, please help us stop that disinformation. Canadian deserve to register and to get their money back. They are honest, assault style. They bought their firearms honestly with goodwill and we recognize that. And so that's why there is that compensation program. But if they are not registered by March 21, they won't be able to recuperate that money. So please, please help us pen that information. It doesn't take long, it's just a few minutes. And by March 31st they'll be able to recover their money. There's still 19,000 models that are accessible for hunting, for sports shootings so they can practice their activities. So please help us tell to Canadian that we're not grabbing guns that are made for dog guns or go for guns. We are fighting against assault style weapons and it's important that the real message is heard. Please.

[A]

You know, there's a bit of emotional blackmail in there. But what I take away from that little rant was she acknowledged that the people she's targeting are law abiding, happy, patriotic people like that. That was the one thing of substance there other than her moral blackmail is emotional blackmail is that she was saying these people bought their firearms in good faith, legally licensed. We got to get the guns back from them. That's what she said. They are not the problem. They're, you know, people who target practice farmers. That's exactly not the. I don't think there's a single farmer in Canada who has used an assault style weapon in a crime in. I've never even heard of one. I was going to say ever. I'm sure there has been one in the course of time, but I think there's firearms used every single day in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and other cities that are not like she literally said, these happy law abiding farmers are good people. Well then why are you taking the guns from them? I think she gave it away there, maybe by accident.

[C]

Well, first off, as a representative of the firearms lobby in Canada, I'm quite pleased with the efforts we've made in correcting the disinformation from people such as MP Provo that you just saw in the video there. The information that she was providing that they were not going after hunting guns, duck guns, pop can guns, gopher guns is incorrect because they have been going after those types of firearms in their legislation. Simple 22 plinking rifles are on the banned firearms list. Duck hunting guns are on the firearms banned list. And for her to come out and say that publicly that she is the One that is promoting disinformation there.

[A]

Yeah, well, that's sort of standard fare with the liberals on firearms. Tom Maven of the National Firearms Association, Great to have you on the show. Hope to have you back soon.

[C]

Thank you very much. Good to see you.

[A]

There he is. Tom Maven from the nfa. Stay with us. Your letters to me, next.

[B]

Foreign.

[A]

Hey, welcome back. Your letters to me. The first is on my visit to New Brunswick to that burnt church. By the way, there's a town called Burnt Church out there. Julia Bork says, I live in Fredericton and this is the first I've heard of this church being torched. I've drove by that church many times. Jesus will take care of these who oppose or mock him. It's coming sooner than we think. Yeah, I. I pointed out in my video that it wasn't torched to the ground. And I have to acknowledge that the church has not been used in several years. But so what? It's still part of the religious history and the cultural history of New Brunswick. It's still obviously a former church. And for it to be torched, if that was any other religious group, that would be called a hate crime. I'm just saying it would be. So. I'm really glad I went out there. And one of the things that really irks me is that when churches are vandalized or torched, in this case, or actually burned to the ground, the media, the mainstream media at least, does their best to ignore it, to throw it down the memory hole. DMA712 says. How many charges have the police laid on these crimes? Probably zero. None that I know of. And there's been more than a hundred of these. Dig in deep says, this has to be a foreign agenda. No Canadian would burn holy sites, just as no Canadian would shoot at synagogues. It's a very interesting point. I don't know. I have no clue who it was. I must concede that there is a possibility that it was not targeting a religious building, but just an empty building. I know there are cases of pyromaniacs or just hooligans or even drunk teenagers doing something stupid. So there is a possibility it is not motivated by hatred. But I find that hard to believe that a church would be targeted in this way. And part of this is pattern recognition. I mean, one church burned is a news story, two is a concern, three is a crime wave. What do you call it when it's a hundred churches either vandalized and burnt? For you to deny the pattern requires a great effort And I think that you can see that the media and politicians are trying to cover it up. I'm glad I went. Well, that's the show for today. Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel world headquarters, to you at home, good night. Keep fighting for freedom, Sam.