By Rebel News | Created at 2024-11-27 16:31:30 | Updated at 2024-12-05 02:13:55
1 week ago
LIVE UPDATES: Ezra Levant appeals 'The Libranos' book court decision
Trudeau's hyper-partisan Elections Canada claims that Levant's 2019 book, The Libranos, was illegal campaign interference.
Rebel News boss Ezra Levant is in downtown Toronto this morning at the Federal Court of Appeal over his best-selling 2019 book, The Libranos.
I’m out of jail. But I’m back in court.
This morning at 9:30 a.m. ET, Trudeau’s hyper-partisan @ElectionsCan_E is prosecuting me at the Federal Court of Appeal — my fourth hearing. They claim my bestselling book, The Libranos, published five years ago, was an illegal campaign… pic.twitter.com/GhYGy1puGB
This is Levant's fourth time in court over the book, which Elections Canada claims was illegal campaign interference. The Rebel News boss is facing up against an army of Trudeau's lawyers being funded by taxpayers during the appeal, while Levant has one lawyer.
Follow along below for live updates:
If you're wondering why no Canadian book publishers care about this case, and none of them have intervened in this case, wonder no longer: every single book publisher in Canada receives massive government funding.
They don't dare bite the hand that feeds them.
Trudeau lawyer just said that half of their evidence to ban The Libranos came from creeping Rebel News social media posts.
As in, our political views on our website was used to condemn a book I published as illegal.
Because it showed my wrongthink.
Trudeau lawyer: government had the obligation to look at the planning of this book and the timing of this book.
Seriously. She's trying to set a legal precedent where the government can ask book publishers and authors about their plans for political books.
She just said that.
Trudeau lawyer: the Elections Commissioner didn't ban our tweets. But he used our tweets as a reason to ban our lawn signs.
The government will spy on your social media, and use that to convict you of election crimes.
Trudeau lawyer Effendi: the Elections Commissioner was entitled to look at Rebel News tweets and videos.
Holy sh!t. The government was spying on Rebel News political views and used our editorial thoughts as a reason to ban the book (and the promotion of the book).
Oh my God. Trudeau's lawyers just said that the fact that we used a partisan hashtag (she didn't say which one) on Twitter proves that our book was an illegal campaign document.
They're stalking us on Twitter. They're arguing the book should be banned because of our tweets.
Wow. Trudeau's lawyer just admitted that the lawn signs promoted the book. (Obviously). But she says that doesn't matter. She says my book (and the promotion of it) must be banned because the cover of it criticized Trudeau, and that was on the lawn signs. pic.twitter.com/EeSoLSCRsX
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Let me sum up.
I'm in the Federal Court of Appeal. Trudeau has eight lawyers and articling students here to prosecute my book about him, published five years ago.
They're arguing that any book that shows partisanship cannot be shown in a campaign -- that makes it illegal. pic.twitter.com/de1CRxIcbB
So weird! Trudeau's lawyers do not want the court to accept that there is an exception to books. Even though that's what the law says: https://t.co/6jBOCRDD4G
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024I mean, seriously, why would she be so obsessed with saying that books are NOT exempt from election finance laws? This is apparently the most important thing to the government, because so far it has dominated the government's case.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Now I get it. The reason Trudeau has sent eight lawyers and junior lawyers to court today, against The Libranos -- a five-year-old book -- is because he's trying to set a legal precedent that books are, by default, bannable. There's no other way I can figure out their case.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024If you can ban a promotion of a book because you've banned the cover of the book, you're just banning the book.
Trudeau is a book-banner, and he's spent a million dollars and five years of Election Canada's time coming for me, because I embarrassed him in a book.
Trudeau lawyer: the lawn signs promoting the book opposed Trudeau. (They were simply the cover of the book with the words "buy the book".) pic.twitter.com/Xm3qvGFZ9T
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Trudeau lawyer just said the test was whether or not the book would be published "regardless" of whether there was an election. (But that's not the test he used -- he made up his own standard, whether the book "coincided" with the election. That's not the law.)
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Trudeau lawyer: the sole issue is whether Elections Canada was "reasonable" in fining Rebel News for publishing a book.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024The judges return from the break. The lawyers are all in their places. Now one of the government lawyers is on her feet. An astonishing amount of resources has been deployed to fight against one little book. (You can still buy it at https://t.co/ESd3BWRjx6)
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Miller: we ask the court to declare the Election Commissioner's unreasonable and ask that their ruling be set aside.
Judge calls for the morning break.
Judge: "the standard of review is reasonableness, not correctness"
As in, Elections Canada doesn't have to get it right. They just have to be plausible.
We say it's unreasonable for them to make up a standard just to apply to my book, and ignore 23 other pro-Trudeau books.
Miller: because the lawn signs criticized the Liberal Party, Elections Canada claimed it was no longer allowed as a book promotion -- even if it was simply the book cover and the words "buy the book".
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Miller: you can promote a book and do other things, and still be legal. The promotion of the book may seem partisan, but they're promoting a book, and they're explicitly permitted in the law.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Elections Canada said the lawn signs were not promoting the book. Even though they were simply the cover of the book with the words "Buy the book". Miller says you can both promote a book and express an opinion -- that's not illegal. pic.twitter.com/QaCg2E9Fw7
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Miller: Elections Canada banned our lawn signs because they say they're doing more than promoting the sale of the book. But that can't destroy the immunity for the promotion of books -- or then the law makes no sense.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Either a lawn sign to promote a book is legal or not. The law says it's legal. For Elections Canada to ban the lawn signs because they show the cover of a book is not within the spirit of the law or within their power.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Miller's argument is this: book promotion is specifically permitted under the law. If that's only applies to promotions that don't expresses support or opposition for a politician, then the law is ridiculous and unworkable. Again, Elections Canada was just making it up.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Miller now moves on to her second main argument: that our ads for The Libranos (including the lawn signs) had multiple defensible purposes. Under the law, promoting books is legal. Miller says that should apply even if the lawn sign (of the book cover) criticizes Trudeau. pic.twitter.com/pwp19RTU7W
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024So that's her first main argument: Elections Canada didn't apply the law as written, because I had complied with it; they invented a news standard and convicted me under that made-up law.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Sarah Miller refers to a pro-Trudeau book by CBC shill Aaron Wherry, a government journalist. His book was timed to "coincide" with the election, too, but of course he was not prosecuted.
Miller says inventing the "coinciding" standard is unreasonable.
Judge: the standard of review that the Federal Court of Appeal will use is "reasonableness". Which grants deference to lower decision-makers, even if they're wrong.
Miller: it's unreasonable to say that "coinciding" with an election is illegal, and would ban all other books.
Miller shows on several occasions where the Elections Commissioner convicted me for publishing a book "coinciding" with the election. But that is not illegal -- 23 other publishers did so, and the law allows it.
(Elections Canada made up a fake law to convict me.)
Justice Webb: is the "regardless of an election" a question of fact?
Miller: yes. And the Elections Commissioner applied the wrong test and wrong standard.
Sarah Miller is showing the court evidence of other books about Trudeau published "coinciding" with the election. Miller says the law does not books that "coincide" with elections -- but that was the standard used against me.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Miller: available "regardless" of the election is different from "coinciding" with the election.
Elections Canada said it was illegal to "coincide" with an election, though the law doesn't say that.
Miller says it was explicitly put to the Elections Commissioner that section 2(1)(b) of the law protects the promotion of a book, and that argument was made.
Here's the section in question: https://t.co/6jBOCRDD4G
2 (1) The definitions in this subsection apply in this Act.…
Miller says promotions of a book can also have other purposes too -- e.g. editorial, political, journalistic.
Justice Webb asks if those points were raised in the first instance.
Justice Webb asks why a particular argument about freedom of the press was not raised before the Election Commissioner.
Miller: the issue was inherently before the Commission, it was clearly before them.
A judge chimes in, asking if we made these points before the Elections Commissioner. Miller says, "yes" and goes to find the paragraph in question...
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Miller: election advertising doesn't include books if:
* the book is sold at a commercial price
* whether it was planned to be available "regardless of whether there is to be an election"
(That's different from timing a book for an election -- as all 24 publishers did.)
Miller: the legal question turns on what is or is not election advertising. (I note again, The Libranos was one of 24 books published during the 2019 campaign, but the only one prosecuted by Elections Canada.)
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Miller: Does publishing a book, coinciding with an election, make it illegal?
And: can a book ad achieve multiple purposes -- in addition to selling the book?
These are the two issues that bring us to the Federal Court of Appeal.
This is the fourth hearing I've had over that book. Elections Canada had two different internal trials; and then we were at the Federal Court. And now we're here at the Federal Court of Appeal. With eight government lawyers. No chance this has cost taxpayers less than $1M.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024The investigation was against the lawn signs -- but the lawn signs were simply the cover of the book with the three words, "buy the book". (In my view, you cannot separate banning the cover of the book from banning the book itself.)
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024She says there are two issues: the definition of whether my book "coincided" with the 2019 election in an illegal way, and whether the promotion of my book, through lawn signs, can be legal (Elections Canada says they were illegal).
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024Our lawyer, Sarah Miller, is up first. She proposes to give a brief outline of the facts, review the law, and highlight two errors that the Election Commissioner made when convicting me of writing an illegal book.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024The Justice Department is the largest "law firm" in the country. Hundreds of lawyers. But that wasn't enough for Trudeau. He has also hired lawyers from the expensive Bay Street firm, Borden Ladner Gervais.
Because money is no object when you're censoring a journalist.
The three judges come in. There's also two clerks.
So that's a total of 11 people, all on the taxpayer dime, who have gathered today to debate whether or not a book can be criminalized in Canada.
Good to know.
Here's my lawyer, Sarah Miller. I get a kick out of the fact that she's fighting against eight bad guys, and she's as cool as a cucumber. https://t.co/VNog12uRVF
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024There will be three Federal Court of Appeal judges hearing the appeal today. They are Justices Rennie, Lasking and Webb. You can find their biographies here: https://t.co/LPj1WYKKi5
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) November 27, 2024I'm inside the Federal Court of Appeal now. I'm not allowed to take photos, but I wish I could.
On my side, is my brave lawyer, Sarah Miller.
Arrayed against her are FOUR govt lawyers and FOUR govt articling students, "observing".
Eight against one.
Paid by your taxes.
COMMENTS
Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
