Shaun Newman Podcast - #340 - Trish Wood

Episode Date: November 11, 2022

For nearly a decade she was one of the hosts for The Fifth Estate, has a critically acclaimed series with Amazon Studios & hosts the Trish Wood is Critical podcast.  Let me know what you think Text me 587-217-8500

Hey everybody, this is Paul Brandt. This is Wayne Peters. This is Sean Baker. I'm Megan Murphy. This is Jess Moskaloop. I'm Rupa Supermonea. This is Sheila Gunn-Reed, and you're listening to the Sean Newman podcast. Welcome to the podcast, folks.

Happy Friday. What a week it has been. Man, just full throttle since Monday morning till now. Today's episode brought to by Upstream Data. The big cahoona, the big cheese of their, of Upstream Data, that is, is Stephen Barber. He's been on the podcast multiple times. episode 163 and episode 318, you kind of get a good feel for what the company's all about if you go back and listen to his thoughts on some of the current things going on and gives a brief history of upstream data as well. Anyway, since 2017, they've been pioneering creative and solutions prevented inflated natural gas at upstream oil and gas facilities,

a problem that has persisted the oil and gas industry since the very beginning, and their solution is to pair modular Bitcoin mining data centers to natural gas engines. Obviously, it started in the oil field, and it's across Canada and down in the States and everywhere else. All you've got to do is go to upstreamdata.ca to find out exactly what they're working with. And it's extended just from the oil field now into commercial. It can be put in your grader or your barn, et cetera. They've got a whole bunch of different opportunities. Anyways, just upstream data.com.

You can find out what they're working with and everything they're all about. RectTech Power products for the past 20 years, they've been committed to excellence in the power sports industry. They offer a full lineup, including CanAM, Skidoo, Cidoo Sprider, Merckery, Evan, oh man, oh man, Evan Roo, oh, man, her rocks are parts. They got a full parts department that can hook you up with any upgrades. I'm excited, folks. It's Friday.

Parts department that can hook you up with any upgrades or odds at ends in the maintenance. I can't spit anything out. And they're open Monday through Saturday. For further details, visit them at rectech power products.com. HSI group, they are the local oil-filled burners and combustion experts that can help make sure you have a compliance system working for you. The team also offers security, surveillance, and automation products for residential, commercial, livestock, and agricultural applications. They use technology to give you peace of mind so you can focus on the things that truly matter.

Just stopping at a day, 3902-502-2-2nd Streeter, get Brodie or 8258-8-106-8-106-106-106. Gartner management is a Lloydminster-based company, specialized at all types of rental properties. So whether you're looking for a small office or you've got multiple employees, give Wade-Gartner a call today 780-808-50-25. Now let's get on to that tail of tape brought to you by Hancock Petroleum for the past 8. 80 years, they've been an industry leader in bulk fuels, lubricants, methanol, and chemicals delivering your farm commercial or oil fuel locations. For more information, visit them at Hancock, Petroleum. DA. For nearly 10 years, she was one of the hosts for the Emmy Award-winning investigative

current affairs series, The Fifth Estate. She is a critically acclaimed show on Amazon Studios, Ted Bundy, falling for a killer, and now host the podcast Trish Wood is critical. I'm talking about Trish Wood. So buckle up. Here we go. I'm Trish Wood, and you are listening to the... the Sean Newman podcast. Well, welcome to the Sean Newman podcast. Today I'm joined by Trish Wood.

First off, thank you for hopping on with me. I am so thrilled to be here. You asked me to do this like a year ago or something. And I, you know, something, I hate to use a cliche for the delay, but I've been so busy, mostly around COVID and obviously media issues and that sort of thing. But I have an EA now named Dorothea, and she just says, you've got to do this stuff. You can't say, no, you've got to do it. You got to do it. So I'm really happy she's pushing me to do these things, because I quite enjoy them, and I really admire what you've built. I think it's terrific.

But normally I would be like, no, we'll do that stuff later. I need to investigate this new thing or get this new guest or something like that. So it's been like a year, I think. Well, it's been some time. But I always tell people, you know, like I always go back to Keith Morrison. with a dateline. I got him on, and that literally took probably 100 emails. And nobody has even come as close to his heart of a guy to get as that man.

As Keith, yeah. I actually know Keith, but we worked together at the journal when I first started working there. And we also have a familial connection too. Like his wife, Suzanne Perry, her sister, Martha Langford, was married to my first husband, Victor Hayes, who died recently. So there's just some weird. It was an Ottawa connection, right? The Langford's were a big family in Ottawa and Suzanne.

I think Keith is Suzanne's second husband. She was married to somebody named Perry, who is the father, obviously, of Matthew, who is really struggling right now with some addiction issues, which is sad as something I struggle with too for a long time, so I get it. Not as bad as him. I was never a drug addict.

I was just a drinker, but yeah, so weird, all these things. Keith Morrison's a very nice guy and a terrific writer, and I admire very much what he does on Dateline. Well, I was going to, all I was going to say is, you know, I've learned on this side of the thing, when things don't work out, it's usually just not meant to be for that time, you know? And so you apologize? I appreciate that, Trish, but here you are.

And I just go, well, I'm back when I was trying. It just wasn't the time. And now here we sit. So I'm excited to sit across me because I fall. follow a lot of what you do. I'm probably in the same, I say this to a lot of people, it's hard to keep up. There's just so much good content starting to bubble to the surface, so to speak, across Canada. And for a long time, it just seemed hard to find or, I don't know, I actually don't know the answer to that. But right now, it just seems like it's all over the place.

In saying that, I assume people know who Trish is. I always, when it's a first time person on the podcast, I would love Trish for you to just outline, you know, a little. little bit of your backstory so people can get a feel for for who they're listening to. Well, it's so huge and that's because I'm old, right? So I have a really big, I have a really big backstory. But, um, I guess. Well, that's good because a podcast, we get to listen to the backstory. I, I would love nothing more than hear some of your backstory. Uh, please don't, uh, race through it because, you know, part of this journey is getting to know the different people from across Canada and what they're doing and what their backstory is. So please, uh, and gale us all

with a little bit of a story, if you would. Well, so my professional life is that I became a journalist in my 20s because I had sort of a decent radio voice back when that stuff really mattered. And realized I had a kind of a knack for it. And I think the knack for journalism is really a sense of having an overdeveloped sense of right and wrong, which I did. I think I have that because I came from a kind of a troubled background. So I know, I've said this before that if you,

if you're in a newsroom and you say how many of you came from alcoholic parents, like it's like that scene where Woody Allen asked if anybody has a valium, you know, one of this, it's like everybody puts their hand up, right? So it does, dysfunctional childhoods do drive journalism careers, I think, in the best possible way. Because we, why is that? Well, it's a couple of things because we are used to chaos and we're comfortable with chaos, right? So we can kind of run to the chaotic situation and feel like we might be of use.

And kids learn that when they're growing up in those kinds of households that, you know, if they want to have a decent life, they have to learn to cope with chaos quite well. So that's one quality. But I think the other quality is a sense, like I said, it's an overdeveloped sense of right and wrong. which I think actually has been completely distorted now by this new generation of journalists, but I'm talking about the olden days, where we really felt, most of us felt, that we were there to represent the common man, that we were the bold work between the working class and the middle class to some degree

and the power elites, right? That was our job. We felt a connection and a responsibility to people who, weren't being spoken for. And I think not to jump too far ahead, but I think that's missing now from journalism. I think journalists, especially the highly paid ones at the Amnets and here on our networks too, most of them went to Shishi schools.

They come from Shishi backgrounds, many of them, and they see the working class and the middle class even as kind of undesirable. I mean, you'll notice. the best example of that for me was Andrew Coyne who called the the trucker protesters without even knowing them, hillbillies. That was the word he used about them, right? I thought like, wow, 30 years ago, we would never have said that. I mean, we just, you know, we would have been identifying with people who were doing some of the protests. So just went back to my beginning. So I was good at that. And I think also when you have a troubled background, you're an empathetic

listener. So I could go up to people who'd been through some terrible crisis and have a pretty good conversation with them. I had the courage to do it and I had the empathy to understand what they were going through. So my career went pretty quickly. I just kept sort of going up and up and up from private radio in Vancouver to private radio in Ottawa and then to radio in Toronto at a really good radio station called CFTR. It isn't now, but in the olden days we had a newsroom with like 10 people in it. We had a city hall reporter and a Queens Park reporter and I think we might even have had a connection with somebody in Ottawa, police reporter like we were, it was a good radio station with serious people. And it was as a result of working there that I got tapped by the CBC.

I was working on a weekly show that CFTR produced called Sunday Sunday. That was kind of the private radio version of Sunday morning on CBC radio. Someone heard it and liked it. And I was hired to work on this new show called The Journal with Barbara Frum and Mary Lou Finley, right? So it was like, wow, way different culture for me too. But I, you know, I walked in my first day and there was Barbara From and Mary Lou Finley and Keith Morrison and Peter Kent. And it was like unbelievable. And so I was there for a few years working as a producer and I did some some journalism there too. And then I was at CB at CTB for a while working at Canada AM and then I came back and worked it as it happens as the science and medical reporter covering

Tony Fauci and AIDS. So I had like an early experience with him and as I've said I have limited respect as a result of what happened then and what's happening now obviously. And then because primarily of that work I was doing at as a happens which was very very critical science and medicine reporting I got tapped to host the fifth estate which was huge my salary like quadrupled and all of a sudden you know you become this sort of huge TV star commodity whatever and I was there for 10 years and then left under sort of a little bit of controversial circumstances that were sort of unfair but and then took gears off

to parent and then came back, wrote a book about the Iraq War, which I'm devoted to exposing, and then spent not a small amount of time like Keith Morrison in True Crime, doing true crime doing true crime documentaries because that part of the business allowed me to be a single parent so I could kind of make my own schedule of travel and that sort of thing. And then, so my last big project was a huge thing for Amazon Studios. So it was a five-part series on Ted Bundy with a big exclusive with his girlfriend, Liz, who he'd been involved with during many of the murders, most of the murders, actually. And so we wrapped that up, and I was pretty depressed because the material was quite dark,

and it was a hard, those big documentaries for big streamers are hard work, right? You never seem to have enough money, and the schedule's too short, and you're flying back and forth between Toronto and L.A. and Toronto and Seattle. and stuff. But it was a wonderful experience for me. I loved doing it, but I was burned out. And I thought, well, I think I'll take some time off a couple years off now. You know, maybe think about writing another book. And then COVID happened, like right after COVID happened. And I, like, I knew from the beginning, this is on my substack, if you want to go thereafter. On my substack, you'll see a document called, if only they'd listened. It was written and it's

time stamped by my PDF generator was written in March of 2020 and it said this is going to be a shit show the numbers are wrong Fauci needs to be watched lockdowns will harm people I mean everything that sort of came to be true right and I say that so so I was sucked back into something I that's what started the podcast rolling I didn't really know what a podcast was I didn't have a social media account I didn't know how to, and I'd always had like talented technicians to do my, you know, my audio and stuff. I didn't know how to do any of that. But I got sucked into this new phase of life around this because the, I mean, we're living through a period of history that's so extraordinary.

Like they got so much wrong. This is very likely the largest public policy failure in the history of the world. I can't think of a bigger one right now, not even the wars that they're. they got wrong. So I got sucked into this and didn't really get my time off, you know, to contemplate a garden or my dog or whatever. But that's what happened. And the document I wrote that is posted on my substack, I actually sent it to a moderately famous American journalist whose email address I had. And I said, send this out. You guys are getting the story wrong. Send it out to your friends and just for your your

Contemplation I've covered this guy before I've covered Tony Fauci before I told a couple stories in the letter of things he'd gotten wrong that mirror like early treatment mistakes obsession with a vaccine all that stuff Fear generating fear and I never heard back from him so we kind of left it there But so that's how I got here in a kind of a nutshell Well first off that to, geez, I feel like now we could probably have five-part series on different stages of Trish Woods' life. And I got to correct myself. I said in Gail, and I, as soon as I said it, I was like, folks, that is the wrong word. I meant regale. Anyways, that's a, there we are. That's

going to bug now. We knew what you meant. I got to get it off my chest, though, because it's sitting in the back of my hand. I'm like, oh, why did I say? Anyways, it doesn't matter. Welcome to the podcast, Trish. Let's start here. We're talking about, You give me a whole bunch. But I want to start out on the first thing he said. The she-she schools. What do you mean? You were talking about today's journalists.

Right. And what do you mean by that? Well, so what I meant by that is in the olden days, like when I got into journalism, you didn't have to have a degree to practice journalism. You just kind of went out and did it. Some people had degrees. I did a year of journalism school and hated it and got a job without a degree. And off I went, you couldn't do that now.

So when I say, she-she schools, especially in America, these are like Harvard, you know, Columbia has a big, these she-she schools, right? And so once you're in that stream of kind of elite thinking and woke ideology and post-modern theory and all the garbage that's polluting journalism these days, I mean, understand that post-modern theory is about embracing the idea. There is no objective truth, right? That's what they think. So how do you marry that with the idea of journalism? It's ridiculous. And it's why none of the ideas that we're swimming around in right now can withstand actual scrutiny. In your career then, you know, you talk about taking a year and then like becoming a journalist and going out and not having this big four-year degree and everything else. What was a story in your early career?

or before COVID. I certainly want to talk about COVID. I got all the time in the world for it. It's bringing the light lots of things. But I kind of love hearing some earlier stories that kind of give, like, you could see COVID coming almost, right? Or you expose corruption or you had an idea of something and then you went and researched and that kind of blew your brain, so to speak, on what you found out. Right.

In your early career, I mean, like you talk, Trish. You worked a lot of different places. You went pretty much around the world digging into different stories. You had access to a ton of help, you know, like, Fifth Estate, that's no small fry. No. Is there a story, you know, where you go back and you look at it, you're like, you know, at the time I didn't realize what I was getting myself into. And the harder I dug, the more I went. Oh, my goodness.

Well, yeah. I mean, I think there's two stories that they're both. They're both fifth-day stories actually. The other state was great because they have money and they have a lot of committed journalists there. I don't understand what's happened to them and I couldn't work there right now. I couldn't even have a drink with the people who work there now.

It's so weird. So one of the stories we did was about the wrongful conviction of a guy named Clayton Johnson out in Nova Scotia in Shelburne, Nova Scotia, right? He was accused of murdering his wife. They said he pushed her. No, they said he bludgeoned her. But the alternative theory, the original theory, the correct theory, was actually that she'd fallen down the stairs and banged her head quite badly.

And what I learned in doing that show, which proved that he was innocent, it got him out of jail. He was given many, many hundreds, millions of dollars. I think he got like $8 million or something like that. for the mistake showed me. It wasn't the first time I knew this, but it really showed it in kind of stark relief how compromised the expert class can be. So you put a medical examiner on the witness stand

who's come to a conclusion, right? And it can be the wrong conclusion, but it can also skate, that wrong conclusion can skate by all of the guardrails they're supposed to prevent wrongful convictions, right? In fact, they did. I mean, I think the Crown, when Clayton was convicted, I think the Crown produced two medical examiners

who said, yeah, yeah, she was murdered. He bludgeoned her, even though, and the reason for that, just not to get too technical, was that the, if he'd actually bludgeoned her about the head, as they claimed, there would have been what they call blood spatter evidence around the basement, right? The head is a very vascular piece your body. You know how a head wound like really bleeds, right? So if you're going to bash your

wife's head and I think they were hypothesizing with a piece of firewood, I mean, it would have been blood everywhere. Every time you swing back the thing, the blood goes on the ceiling, and there was a nanny in the back. There was no blood spatter in the basement at all, but witnesses who'd been in the basement and originally had reported no blood spatter changed their stories, I believe anyway later on when Clayton became a suspect. And that's a whole other thing. But But my point is that these two wrong assessments of what happened to Janice Johnson skated through the court system and sent an innocent man to jail. So that says something about our belief that the expert class don't get things wrong. And that was very much a part of what we're seeing now with COVID, right?

There's a whole bunch of people out there who think that the experts who were weighing in and creating COVID policy don't get things wrong and that they had to have been right, even though the evidence suggests otherwise. So that was one. But the bigger story for me, and I talk about this a lot on the show, was one of the first ones I did at the Fifth Estate. There was two documentaries. One of them was called Out of the Mousa Babes, and the other one was called, I was about multiple. Multiple personality disorder. I can't remember the name of it, but anyway, I did them with Michelle Mativier, who's a brilliant, brilliant producer. And the story was essentially this, that in the 80s, there was a wave of what they called satanic ritual abuse prosecutions in daycare centers around North America and the UK, right?

And the stories were this, that daycare centers run by normal people, all of a sudden kids were allegedly reporting. that they were being sexually abused in the most grotesque and unbelievable ways possible without ever a mark being left on the kids, right? They'd go home and be normal. But the evidence was being garnered from the kids in this sort of new way of interviewing them by people who believed in this so-called satanic cult, right? And the idea was that the reason nobody ever got caught or there was no evidence was because the cops and the courts and the prime minister and they were all involved in this, right?

So it was a phenomenon that came and went and did a lot of damage to a lot of people. The prosecutor in the McMartin preschool case in California actually resigned in the middle of the trial. He said, this is, I can't prosecute this. It's crazy, right? It was the longest trial before OJ in American jurisprudence. So we reported on that. But the other part of that story was multiple personality disorder, which has also been rejected finally by, you know, psychiatry. And what they were saying in order to to buttress the children's stories, as they were saying they were finding adults who'd been ritually abused now. They had no memory of it.

They couldn't remember anything. They'd been ritually abused by a satanic cult for 20 years. They couldn't remember it because they had multiple personalities that were holding the memory. So they people would go in, this is true, people would go in to see a psychotherapist, a woman, with maybe she's depressed or problems in her marriage, and she'd come out believing she had a hundred personalities and that she'd been sexually abused by her parents who belonged to a satanic cult. That is absolutely true what I just said to you. And again, there was never any evidence for it.

And Oprah did shows, multiple personality, this woman has multiple, they did big shows, government's funded treatment centers, there was a guy from Canada, Colin, I forgot his last name, who was, who ran a clinic in Texas that treated these people and the government of Ontario was paying $40,000 to send women down there to treat them for multiple, it was ridiculous, right? And eventually these women were sort of cured of it when they went to psychologists who stopped believing in it. And what was happening was the idea that they had this problem was kind of being implanted during hypnotherapy sessions, right? So there was a little bit of what they call a folly idea, like the people would kind of play along and the psychiatrist really believed in it. So they would

end up creating this manifestation of something that doesn't exist and was removed from the DSM three or four, I believe they just took it out of the statistical manual for psychiatry. So why am I telling you this? And what is the correlation? The correlation is this. And then recovered memory syndrome too was part of it, that women who hadn't been abused were remembering abuse and there was no evidence for it.

So what we learned from that is that very highly credentialed and highly regarded people in various professions through group think and politics and ideology, because this was very driven by academic feminism, right? You know, women never lie about abuse. Children never lie about abuse, which is not what we were alleging at all. We weren't saying they were lying.

That a whole profession can be captured by something that is preposterous and demonstrably wrong, but still believe it and go along with it, right? And so my sense of a lot of the things that have happened during COVID-19 is that there is an element of capture, right? That professionals have been captured by this. The people who won't brook any argument about vaccines at all, the people who say, I've had nine boosters and I've only had COVID four times. Isn't that great? Those people, right?

They're captured by something in the same way that the people who believed in an MPD, in satanic ritual abuse and recovered memory, also believed in something not as a demonstrably provable scientific thing, but rather as a set of belief systems adopted by their profession as if it is a cult. And what happened at the end of the day? Why did that end? It ended for two reasons.

It ended because they weren't getting convictions and prosecutors got sick of bringing cases to court that had no evidence except this childhood remembrances that were corrupted through the interview process. Keigh McFarland was the woman who was doing somebody interviews, very famous case. But also because people started to sue. People started to sue the psychiatrists and psychologists who were creating this manifestation that had caused them either personally harm or parents who'd been wrongfully accused.

So I think that's going to happen around COVID. it. I believe, I'll tell you one thing that happened that relates to this. I interviewed a guy about the excess deaths issue and whether or not the excess deaths we're seeing around the world are caused by lockdown policy or vaccines, right? Not sure yet, but maybe a little of both. We can't explain it. England had a big, big number last week that we talked about on the show. But what he, his name is Edward Dowd, and what Edward Dowd said to me is, look, Trish, people on Wall Street are talking about this. They're talking about how if people are dying from inoculations in this way, it's hard to pick up the data because it may be causing a multitude of things. But the insurance

industry is starting to say, do we really want to insure these people? There may be a point where the insurance companies will say, we're not going to insure people who are vaccinated. That could happen, right? So the way these things end is never with a big commission saying, wow, we got satanic abuse wrong and we're not going to do that and now we're starting away to train young therapists that doesn't happen they just kind of stop doing it and the courts and the litigators take over and it slips from the news media right i mean Oprah never apologized for having that multiple personality faker on her show she didn't nor did any of the other media who encouraged that kind of thinking so this is what could happen here that

maybe the insurance industry will shut it down or maybe lawsuit, second party lawsuits against companies that mandated it will start shutting it down. It's hard to know. But I don't think it will be what some of us would like to see, which is an open discussion under oath by the people who brought this on us. So that was a big segue, wasn't it? So that was the, you said, what was the story? And the other way I look at the world is through the, just to be finished this thought, is through the trans extremism too. All these captured psychiatrists and psychologists who are doing only gender affirming therapy, they're not doing any forensic looking at why these kids may think they have a gender issue.

They're not allowed to do it anymore, right? That's the same. It feels the same to me. And I think that this will slowly, it's happening in the UK to have a stock. clinic is closed, Mermaids is in trouble in the courts now, that will roll over here and it'll slowly kind of disappear. They'll stop treating kids the way they're doing with, with puberty blockers and stuff, and it will just kind of quietly go away and be sorted out by the courts. That's what happens with these things. No one says, I'm sorry, right?

I got to, I just, I have to ask because I feel multiple personality disorder. I always saw it like I guess you know once again I come in in these shows thinking you know I think I got a little bit of a grasp and then I hear you talk about it Trish and I go oh so that is not a thing whatsoever no it's not a thing certainly not the way it was being portrayed then what what they call it now I think in the DSM 5 which is maybe the current one is dissociative disorder and that's maybe more like somebody spacing out during a traumatic event. But that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about people who say, I've got 40 personalities. One of them is a truck driver. One of them is a three-year-old who has a baby, like a baby model. One of them is a stripper.

You know, I mean, and then they would switch from one to the other, and it was really great television and stuff. And we filmed them doing this in our, in our documentary. That is bogus. That is completely and utterly bogus, as is the idea that there is a cult. like in our film about the satanic cults one of the women training canadian therapists to find satanic ritual abuse told was telling she was paid by the government to tell therapists that the cults were sacrificing human infants at these events right and that they'd sacrificed thousands of Canadian infants at these events right and so okay where are the missing babies so right I mean it's like ridiculous And as we were leaving, she said, I remember who it was,

it was Louise Edward, and I believe she lived in Colonna. She said to me, I've got a candle, a baby wax candle. That proves what I'm saying, right? And I said, what's a baby wax candle? This is all on camera. And she said, it's a candle made of dead babies. And she said, nobody will test it for us. We want the police to test it.

And I said, well, we'll test it. Give it to us. We'll take it. We'll get it tested. And of course, she wouldn't do that in the end. We asked her to do it. She wouldn't because it was not true. Nobody is making candles out of dead babies in this country, right?

So how much weight then, Trish, do you put in, you know, the conspiracy theory world? Because, you know, through COVID, you know, I think it was, you know, I'll butcher this a little bit. But you see, you know, the difference between conspiracy theory and fact is about three to six months, you know, depending on, you know, because there was a lot of doctors that I had on the show, different people that you've had on your show. go, they were saying things that were pretty controversial. People are like, yeah, there's no weight in this. And then, you know, it only took a month, two months, whatever it was, sometimes a couple weeks. And all of a sudden, it went from being a conspiracy theory to be, no, that's pretty much what the data shows, right? But in saying that, that this world right now, where everything feels like, if you don't agree with it, it's conspiracy theory.

Yeah. How much weight do you put in some of the, the, stuff. You know, you talk about satanic ritual. I mean, literally, there are people out there who put a lot of eggs in that basket right now with some of the elites and some of the things they're into. I know. And that troubles me. And in fact, when I was, when I've been at various events, people have to talk to me about it. Look, I am not saying that there are not probably some weirdos in a satanic cult somewhere. I'm not saying that. Of course, anything can exist, right, in the world we live in.

I'm also not saying that there are no important people who are pedophiles. Of course there are, because there are petapiles at every walk of life, right? Do I think they get together, you know, all of them in a room? No, no, I don't. There's no evidence for that, right? There's no evidence for it. There has to be evidence for things. So, yes, worshiping Satan can exist. Of course it can. and yes, powerful people as pedophiles can exist. Of course it can.

And maybe a powerful person believes in Satan. That also could be true. But is there a massive conspiracy of people doing that? There's no evidence for it. But let me address your idea about conspiracy theories because I blame legacy media and the sort of managerial class elites for all of this now. And I'll tell you why I do, because people, there was a statistic out of America a couple of weeks ago.

80% of people think that legacy media is destroying America, right? I mean, think about that. So how did that come to happen? It's not that the conspiracy theorists, right, who are on the Internet, there are many of them, have done that. It's that the legacy media's abandonment of its own core principles of journalism have caused people to go looking elsewhere for information and also that the assault, I believe, that sort of the cultural assault, the political assault on the average working person has been so destabilizing that people do believe stuff that they probably shouldn't believe. Like I think that's maybe the basis of QAnon even. Like I was following Q&N a little bit at the very beginning. I didn't know what it was.

I was kind of like reading. I was reading a lot about it on Twitter. And I can see why people would gravitate to something like that. I, you know, I don't think QNON is not a real thing, right? I actually think it was a CIA SciOF because they kept saying things to keep the mega crowd calm, right, when bad things were happening to Trump. So it felt kind of sketchy to me. But people need something to believe in, right?

People need to believe in something. And if you can't believe in your government anymore and the legacy media that you believed in is clearly lying about a multitude of things, mostly around COVID, but let's just go back with the Russia hoax, the Covington kids, there's a million things they lied about, a million things they lied about.

and that we knew they lied about and they got caught lying about and never, I mean, the New York Times won a Pulitzer Prize for its coverage of the Russia hoax. Just think about that, right? And it's like, for me, I've lost friends over my position on this

because you can only be in the cool kids club if you hate Trump no matter what. And that any move taken by media or politicians to get rid of him has to be a okay, right? And if you're a journalist like me who says, well, wait a minute, if Trump is so terrible, then you should be able to get him out of office on truth.

If the only way to get him out is on lies, which is what was happening in D.C. around the Russia, and then I think later around some of the Ukraine impeachment stuff, too, was pretty ridiculous, right? I don't particularly like Trump. I think he's now he's probably, you know, too tarnish to, you know, to be able to win and lead because they'll just keep, I don't think it can work. But people, when people in my business abdicated the basic tenets of truth telling

in order to get in line with the ideology of Trump hating, they drove people into the arms of conspiracy theorists. That's what they did because what they were doing was so absurd and a betrayal of the citizenry they're supposed to be serving at the end of the day that it felt like anything was possible right like did you ever think like if you look back at what they did to Donald Trump I don't even like the guy but from the from the day he was elected he was never allowed to govern right Hillary Clinton started it I think Putin is controlling him you know I resist it's an it's a what does she say it you know he the the election was thrown Russia Putin intervened to give Trump. And that's what she said. Now, on the other side, they say,

oh, their election deniers terrible people. But Hillary Clinton said that about Trump from day one. And they never, from the minute that he took office, gave him a second to govern. And part of it was not just that they're terrible losers, but that he was very much, or seemed at the beginning anyway, to be very much against the military and death real complex. You know, he was, he was against misbegotten foreign wars. He said so. He said it was against the Iraq. war and they kept trying to get him involved in stuff he wouldn't get involved in but and I think he mismanaged all of that terribly anyway but they just weren't going to let him govern so that's sort of where we are now that the the people

who are supposed to be purveying objective information or at least analysis that is not totally tainted with hatred for a particular politician or leader when they abdicate then you open up a pretty wide market for people who are peddling all sorts of shit. And now I happen to think that, as you do, most of the conspiracy theories around COVID or many of them turned out to be not that at all. And were never that, like natural immunity.

I mean, really? And focused protection. Okay, like that was the pandemic plan before this one. I mean, it's just so stupid. But they have created this mess. and I don't think that we're going to get out of it anytime soon either. I think it's beyond politics. I think it's strayed a little bit into mental illness.

That's what I see. There's a guy, this Michael Betchloss guy, this historian, said on TV last week that if the Republicans win, your children will die. He said that. He said they'll kill your children. He actually effing said that. And they let him say that, right? He was saying it because he's paid by the media to say that sort of stuff.

So that, how can you, that's not a fair election. It's not that at all. It's ridiculous. Well, I mean, the longer it continues, Trish, the more people will be driven to the other side. Mm-hmm. And they will, the longer they try and paint it as the other side is extremism or whatever you want to call it, the more anger they feel. I mean, the United States, perfect example. I mean, Biden had a full-on address in Philadelphia, wasn't it?

And it looked straight on as eerie as it's going to get. Demonic. It looked demonic. It did. And I don't mean to set flames to any more conspiracy theory. Like, it just like everything. Exactly. What was that about? And it was to address that the other main party were, you know, essentially evil.

That's a sitting president doing it. that. I don't have to drive anybody to conspiracy theories with the president of the United States will get up and say things like that. That's maybe the most powerful man or at least in what? There's 10 leaders in the world, maybe less than that, probably less than that, probably like four that have the ability of the United States. And for a guy to get up there and say that, that I think I can speak lightly for the listeners, which I do not like doing when you go, if they're willing to do that, how far does this rabbit hole goal? That's a really, really good point.

And that is why, well, I mean, that evening was a nightmare. But then he just did another one a couple of days ago, too, where he was, you know, saying this is, you know, that you're going to lose. Remember, we're going to lose the democracy's way saying now. You're going to lose your democracy. I mean, you can never get away with that five years ago. And the reason they get away with it is because legacy media lets him, nobody on any of the other channels, but Fox was calling that out as nonsense. I don't think the New York Times did either. Well, I think they called out the Philadelphia one, but the losing your democracy talking point has everybody, Hillary Clinton is using that talking point. I mean, I think she's a horrible person, but she used to be a kind of, even though I just agreed with some of things, she used to be like 10 years ago, a reasonably respectable politician, but now they're all just scum. And they are because the media lets them. This was my point about accountability, right? Without the media holding accountable, all the

people it goes right off the rails and my saying on the show has been from day one that I blame legacy media for everything that's happening right now everything bad that's happening I blame them they didn't hold the COVID people accountable they didn't read the science they didn't they were just taking dictation you know I interviewed Mary and Cloak who quit the CBC over the way I mean it's just ridiculous we wouldn't be in the mess we're in with COVID if media had done their job and asked Tony Fauci a hard question, which they didn't do, right?

Ukraine war, disaster, how many Ukrainians are we going to sacrifice for this stupid narrative that they've got going? Right? And media is not holding them accountable about that either. Like all of the economic problems, the media is not going after him really about, Biden about shutting down oil production. I mean, everything is crashing right now, and it's crashing because the politicians, so-called,

know that they can get away with that and nobody's going to do what we did in the olden days which was do a big messy scrum where the journalists are all together asking hard questions and if he doesn't answer my question then the person beside me in solidarity will ask the question like they keep going

that's what used to happen and politicians lived in fear of that moment of TV when the PAC has turned on them right but they only apply that PAC mentality now to conservatives and Republicans. And the politicians on the other side know they can say whatever they want, no matter how absurd. You talk about the PAC. Yeah.

When did that start to change, Trish? Like, I highly don't. There was just like one day you walked in and it's like, oh, everybody's gone. You know, lots of people bring up COVID in particular because you sat around with people in a room and you all had the same thoughts. and then the actions they did didn't match what they said behind closed doors, so to speak. And we saw the pressure of businesses and corporations push on their employees and everything else, a thought process, if you will. And that type of fear-mongering and punishment for ideas and actions and everything else is like hard to reconcile.

But in the journalist field, when you talk about it used to be we were a pack. And if we had something to say and it didn't get said in the question, then the next person would do. When did that, like, is that a course of 20 years that disappeared? Or was that a big event and all of a sudden it started to change? That's a really, really good question. And I've been out of it, you know, for 20 years. So I'm just an observer, right? But I would say that that attitude is reflective of the cultural division.

between what used to be political disagreements, right? It's not just that you don't agree with your conservative neighbor, right? You think your conservative neighbor is an existential threat, right, to the world. So I think that once that happened, the class of journalists who have been graduating out of this postmodern nuttiness in academia right now, they're trained to see the world through a social justice lens. They actually teach that in J-school, which is horrifying, because who's going to decide what is held within that lens?

What's right and what's wrong? It means somebody's making a subjective, a subjective decision about what's coverable and what's not coverable, instead of letting the facts sort of dictate what the story is going to be. I'm not saying, and journalists made a lot of mistakes too, They weren't great before either, but this is unbelievable. So to answer your question, I think it's been a slow process. I think it's been a confluence of circumstances.

I think a lot of it has to do with the consolidation of media into various companies owning a few, you know, a few organizations that purvey most of what we see. I think it's about the cultural divide between left and right and journalists now are mostly left and mostly progressive left. as well. And I think that they actually don't see their roles, as I said when we first started talking in the same way. I'm not sure that they see their role as a kind of a bulwark between people and their elected representatives. I don't think they see themselves that way anymore. As I said, during COVID, all they did was take dictation. They didn't ask a single hard question of anybody as I recall. I mean, do you remember Teresa Tam ever being on the hot seat or you know somebody is standing up even our even the opposition saying standing up and saying,

well, what where's the studies you're basing the mandates on? Like after we, you know, after we knew it didn't prevent transmission, it took a long time for the opposition to stand up because they were sort of cowardly waiting for the first person to say it, right? Well, I, I saw tough questions, if you will, on premieres out west, but they always came from an angle of save the people, save the people, protect the people, why are you endangering everyone, blah, blah, blah. There was never the side of, you know,

like, where's the part of the French, where the fuck is the early treatment? Like, where, why are these all such bad ideas? Now, a politician isn't supposed to be able, maybe to answer that. Maybe that's more directed at the medical side of things. But to me, it was always, always frame, you know, you got Daniel Smith in Alberta right now, right?

Yeah. And she is under immense attack from people that, you know, tell her to follow the science. Stop, you know, stop. She is. I mean, we both sit here and go, I've watched a ton of your interviews, Trish. And your extensive list of different guests who go against the narrative, so to speak, and talk about openly, you know, a lot of the studies that are happening right now. nobody seems to give a shit it's no you know i mean obviously the people who are listening to us do

there's a ton of the public who just do not care and you you get a person like daniel smith now in who's openly stating we're never having lockdowns again holy man the side that's just going after them you know and there's a few people maybe starting to report a little bit like this is a great thing but there's a lot that still are stuck in the uh doom and gloom of of the world it's very interesting to watch in a dark and morbid way. No, look, I agree with you. You're exactly right. And what you said in the beginning here, you said there are people asking hard questions,

but understand the hard questions are only asked in defense of the official narrative. Yes. So even though they're hard questions, they're hard questions that defend the dictation they've been taking from, right? They're complicit. The media are complicit in this disaster and they know it, right? So for her, I actually was talking to somebody the other day who knows her, because I'm watching from afar with great interest. And what Danielle Smith needs to do is go back and look at every news conference Ron DeSantis has ever held on COVID. Why does he win on COVID?

Because they went after him too. Now they've kind of just drifted away. But why did he win the argument? He won the argument because he was totally armed with the facts and the science to back up what he was saying. He was on a hotline phone to Jay Baticharia and all the people who understood their actual data, the real data, why aren't we doing those guys, right? So he didn't go out there and try and BS his way through. Trump, that was Trump's mistake. Trump was, his instincts were right, but he was lazy about fully understanding the epidemiology of COVID, right?

He was afraid of it or something. But DeSantis and Carrie Lake now, are kind of prevailed because they the media could not make them look bad. It was kind of like, okay, come from me. And the media would say something and DeSantis knew more about COVID than the media did and he'd make them look ridiculous, which they absolutely were. I mean, Florida's numbers were fine, even though he wasn't locking down in the same way. So as are Sweden's.

I mean, the media want to fight that narrative. It's absolutely true. So what Danielle Smith has to do, is she's got to hit the books and she's got to fully understand the breadth and scope of the mistakes that have been made. So when she says we're not going to lock down again, right, she can say, here's why, because, you know, 4,000 or 40,000 people in Alberta lost their businesses, 2,000 teenagers committed suicide, blah, blah, she's got to be able to list that and then say, why would we spend all this time and effort harming people in order to protect them from a virus they're not going to have a bad outcome from and not do like super, super hardcore protection for the people we know we're going to have a bad outcome? That's it's that simple, right? We know what the stratification of risk is from COVID.

We know very clear. It's mostly old people, most of them who die are over the age of like 82. Yeah. I think some of them. And they get comorbidities, you know, like here in Alberta, one of the things we've been privy to, you know, I've had multiple guys on the show, is Alberta, the government of Alberta, love or hate what they've done. The data they published every week was so damning.

And you could see it if you just went and looked at it. I know. And there have been guys here in Alberta do exactly that. and it's just there for anyone to see. Cor morbidities, age, blah, blah, blah, blah, the fact that, you know, they made some absolute blunders throughout the whole thing of this. The problem was is that media wouldn't talk about it, you know?

So it was left to people such as myself, who, you know, are a fledgling in the media world, so to speak, to bring on people to these conversations. You know, Daniel Smith was on the show well before she ever was a candidate, talking about a lot of the things that Ron DeSantis and others were doing and saying and talking about back then Jason Kenney. And, you know, it's, it's been an interesting ride up until this point.

You know, I want to take you back, though. You mentioned this early on, and I want to make sure we get this in there because I've been, I wrote it down, I highlighted it, was you talked about Tony Fauci back in the days of AIDS. And I know there's been a lot come up about this, but in Trisha's mind, from Trisha's memory, what's something that, you know, sticks out, or maybe the story that sticks out about Anthony Fauci back then because there you want her Tony Fochie you talk about a you talk about a giant character in this play he is one of the mainstays yeah I'd say well I have my own views about what personality disorder 20 Fauci has but I won't say

it but so there's three things that I I witnessed experienced when I was covering I like I was in the same room I interviewed him I did an interview with him for fifth of in his opposite NIH. It was really uncomfortable. He's quite slippery. He was mad at me. So the three, yeah. Sorry, before the three things,

why was it uncomfortable? Oh, well, I'll tell you the story. Sure, sure, sure. So the three things, the first thing is that he was pushing vaccines from day one. That was his focus, right? And we still don't have a vaccine for HIV. We don't.

We don't. And context, what year is this, Trish? How long ago are we talking? Let me think about it. It was mid to late 80s just before I went to the fifth estate, right? Okay. So he was pushing every AIDS conference. He'd say, oh, yeah, we're going to have a vaccine in a year.

And in New York Times, vaccine a year. And we still don't have one. So there was a hyper focus on that. He's always been focused on that. And I think to the detriment, obviously, of other things that can save people. That was one thing. The other thing was to he early on signing. off on a study that someone had published astonishingly suggesting that people could get AIDS

from casual contact and purporting to a found a case of children living in a house with someone with HIV who got HIV. That does not happen. It just doesn't happen. It's almost physically impossible unless there's something else going on. So that was totally wrong. But he signed off on the study. And what that did was inflamed the fear of people with AIDS in such a way that back in the day,

people would not, audio guys would not even put a mic on a person with AIDS back in the, I mean, that's how scared people were, right? It's terrible. And that Fauci did that. He did it. But here's the big story, and it is the one that reflects his behavior now. There was a drug, is a drug called Backdrum. It's a sulfur drug.

You'd probably taken it for an infection of some kind at some point in your life. Most of us have. and they found that Bactrum as a prophylax drug, meaning you take it to prevent a recurrence of something worked really well against nemesisisisis-cureani pneumonia

which was the pneumonia that was originally killing men with AIDS dropping like flies. It was a terrible thing. A friend of mine died of it. So the clinicians kind of like today's Peter McCulles and those guys, right, were

trying everything they could try to stop PCP from killing. And they found that Backroom did the trick, right? It was an off-label use. They didn't have big clinical trials or anything. So a guy named Michael Cowan, who was the longest person surviving with AIDS at that time, his doctor, Joe Sonoband from New York City.

And someone else went to visit Tony Fauci at NIH, and they said, look, this is really working. They're good results all over the country. Please put out a bulletin suggesting that if doctors are treating people with AIDS, they should prophylax them with backdrops them with backtrum, save lives, right? Fauci wouldn't do it. Refused to do it, wouldn't do it, wouldn't do it.

And so when Michael Callan was dying of finally of AIDS, I got what I think was maybe the last interview with him or one of the last. I remember very clearly we were sitting in a penthouse apartment in New York, a penthouse hotel room in New York, twinkling lights or the city below us. And he was really reflective of his life as a person with AIDS and an activist who was trying to save people. And I asked him what his big regret was, and he said his big regret was not being able to convince Tony Fauci to put out a bulletin suggesting the use of Bactram.

Now, understand, this was the days before the internet. So Fauci was the guy who could disseminate the information and save lives. And he said he never understood Fauci's reason. So I interviewed Tony Fauci. I went to the NIH and I was kind of loaded for bear because there didn't seem to be a good reason to deny this kind of treatment from people. And all he would say is that it wasn't his job,

that wasn't his role, it's been misunderstood, yada, yada, yada. And it was a really unsatisfactory answer. answer because backdrome like ivermectin for instance and hydroxychloroquine didn't have any terrible side effects really i mean there are some but with a person with AIDS they're going to die anyway so why not so he didn't have a good answer and um the kind of the moral of the story about tony fouchy is that there there are dueling statistics as to how many people died of PCP after that meeting michael callan had with fouchy in which he wouldn't do it and

And it's about 17,000 people, right? And he just, he just wouldn't do it. So again, it's like early treatment. You know, he wants perfectly controlled, perfectly like placebo control, double-blind, yada-yatta studies before I'll approve something in a crisis, which kind of, you know, it seems like good science. But if it's a product like, for instance, Ivermectin that doesn't really have any side effects to it, why would you prevent people from taking it?

I mean, it makes no sense. So that's the Tony Fauci. I know. I have limited respect for him. And I was really scared to know that he was going to be put in charge of another crisis, virus crisis. Well, when it comes back to just early treatment in general, you know, when I first had Peter McCull on, and you've had Peter as well, one of the things that he said back back, you know, this is, geez, I don't know if this is a year ago. Man, it's a while back now. he was talking about, you know, essentially, COVID is bad.

It's not a good thing. But if we started using early treatments, 85% of people. Now, and I always go, let's say he's high on the number. Let's just say it's 50% of people that get it can scoot through. All of a sudden, I mean, the problem goes away overnight. Not completely, but kind of. you know like uh and when i hear the story of of tony from your your side it's just like it's like it's like a recurring bad dream you know and i once come i always come back to you know so what

this does is it's like its history shows us that this has been proven out before and this is what's going to lend more to conspiracy theories than anything it's like so where are the people who are in government and whatever other agencies that are staring at this going this guy can never lead another crisis again. And yet, here he is, at the biggest crisis the world has ever seen shutting down early treatments and different things like that, when other governments in different parts of the world did just that, implemented early treatments, implemented different things like that. And you go, it just makes zero sense to me, Trish.

Like absolutely zero. I'm almost flabbergasted at the thought of all this, you know, coming back full swing. He's there because someone wants him there, right? He's there because he serves the needs, not of the American public, but he serves the needs of that thing, the big pharma, the big, you know, all the, I mean, that's what we really have to come to terms with now, is that most people in government are not governing because the citizens put them there and they're trying to do what the citizens want them to do. I mean, we see that they're not doing what we want, right?

So they have an agenda, and I can't remember which president, and it was who kind of warned against the military industrial complex. But, you know, Big Pharma has really kind of replaced, well, look at, you know, Raytheon is still a huge donor to all of the campaigns, and they run foreign policy in D.C. There's no question about that. And now Big Pharma has their own role too, right? Like they... Well, Big Pharma, big tech, you know?

Yeah. Like the amount of money that goes into politics and donations, and the fact there's no donation limits anymore in the United States. States is should terrify everyone. Well, and this is getting back to our conspiracy theory conversation. This is why they happen because citizens are saying, wow, nothing in my world reflects what I think. The media doesn't reflect what I think.

They're not governing to reflect what I think or what I want, right? Nothing in my world makes sense anymore at all. So then they start looking elsewhere for explanations. I mean, I don't think the W.E.F. stuff is a conspiracy theory. I think, you know, they are elected officials who meet in secret, and that bugs me. I think, and Danielle Smith, actually, I think she said something about that. I don't embrace everything that said about the W.E.F. But the idea that interests of global elites, who all of our leaders, especially Justin Trudeau, seem to be catering to, is that is a real thing, right? They want to impose climate change restrictions that they agree on without ever there being an open. If you're a denier, if you want, well, wait a minute. Like, can we really? Our electric cars are actually going to work right now?

You know, like there's many issues that global leaders agree on that I think the populace is saying, well, no. And I think what's interesting about, I don't know exactly what she said, Danielle Smith said, But I know that the idea of, and this is probably going to come to bear for Pierre Pilev as well, the idea that people are going to want to have our participation in WEF on the ballot eventually. The public is going to start saying, I don't want that. Are you going there? We don't want you to go there. And if you go there, you've got to do it in person.

You go in public. In public, we want to see what you talk about, right? There's nothing wrong with that. That's democracy, right? There's anything wrong with that. But once again, with the WES. It was only let's let's go a year. Maybe it was a bit more than that.

Maybe it was a bit less. It was conspiracy. Oh, you, nobody's, nobody's there. Not isn't happening. Blah, blah, blah. Everyone's like, go look at the website. Like, go listen to what they're saying. Go look at what they're proposing.

Sorry, can't spit it out. I mean, it was, it's AHS here in Alberta that has ties now to the WF, right? That's one of the things that Daniel Smith came out talking about. And so it's like, it went. from being, this is the conspiracy, the conspiracy theory talk is an interesting conversation because it's like, well, once upon a time, W.E.F. was a part of that. It was there. And now it's gotten to the point where it's irrefutable. And if you, if you think it's conspiracy theory, like you aren't, you aren't listening watching anything. Like you, all you're listening to

is the narrative tell you that it, no, it's okay. There's nothing wrong. There's nothing wrong. There's nothing wrong. Meanwhile, the world is going up in flames. And part of the, the stuff, or maybe a lot of it comes directly from the leadership of the W.E.F. And their young global leaders and all that stuff. It's like tied. I mean, our country is, we are not in good shape there. You talk about Justin Trudeau. The name that comes to mind for me is Freeland, right?

I mean, that stuff is, well, it's, I mean, I sit here and I go, man, what are some other things that I've written off? You know, like, nah, that's nothing. There's nothing there. that actually there is more weight to it than I give credit to. It's part of the lovely journey of a podcast. Certainly on this side, Trish, that I get to, you know, you get to down and go, huh, hmm. And you get to let your listeners experience and go, oh, yeah, no, don't have that back on.

That was a little bit much. Or, oh, wow, that was something, right? Because right now, if you want to denounce somebody, you just call them a conspiracy theorist. You say they're wild. They don't know what they're talking about. And when I hear that kind of talk about any person or thing, I'm like, I should probably go listen to what they got to say first before I get on that side. Because that's where the meat of the story has been for the last going on three years. Well, and the other thing, it's a good point because the misinformation, disinformation mantra of these people is it's really indicative of the bankruptcy of their position.

because especially with guys the great Barrington people let's remember that Tony Fauci put out with Francis Collins emails saying these are fringe scientists right Harvard Stanford Oxford hardly fringe leaders in their field right but focus protection challenged the lunacy of locking down healthy people which did a lot of damage as we know right so When people on behalf of Tony Fauci, a couple of reporters in particular, started smearing these people and Scott Atlas too, they never did it with actual scientific arguments, right? It's always the ad hominem attack. So if you look very carefully at a prominent person who's being accused of disinformation or misinformation,

Here's what that is code for. That is code for this person is challenging the narrative, the acceptable narrative, and we must quash them now before anybody gets wind of what they're saying, right? And so the quashing is frequently the use of those terms ad hom-hame, like fringe. What does fringe mean? Well, how could somebody say Sinatra Gupta at Oxford is a fringe scientist?

She's like totally not. not but that was enough they also as I recall mischaracterized what the great Barrington declaration was about they weren't saying let it rip but that phraseology was used in those emails as I understand that and they went after Scott really hard they really hated Scott Atlas because he was involved with Trump right so that makes him like double bad he's double bad so they went after him saying that his his idea for focus protection and herd immunity which was a bad thing. World Health Organization actually is so corrupt, it changed its definition of herd immunity on its website in order to facilitate the smear of the Great Barrington people. The new definition, I've got them both in my note somewhere, but the new definition suggested

herd immunity can only be reached through vaccine and not natural immunity. Imagine that. Well, I mean, on that thought right there, I just go, I come back to the conspiracy theory. Right. These big government, these big agencies that are, you know, control and everybody looks to it, have all the answers. And then you hear that and you go, what a bunch of horseshit. Like, I mean, how can you be in that organization, see that and go, that makes any sense when it completely doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Now, I'm watching the clock, Trish, because I don't want to hold you here all day. I have really enjoyed this chat.

And certainly, the next time I get you. I'm hoping one of two things. One is we, we, we, we, uh, I book you for a little longer or two, who knows, maybe I'll get it out east, uh, to do it face face, you know, what, uh, to the listener before we started this chat. Trist says, ah, I kind of like the, the radio feel, you know, it's more intimate. And I, I, I, I chuckle because I'm all about, uh, in person, seeing the person, feeling the, uh, the energy, so to speak, just like the interaction is, is something that I

really enjoy. Either way, this has been a ton of fun. And like I say, I don't want to hold you here all day. Um, I, um, I don't want to hold you here all day. Um, um, I know you've got other things on the go. So I want to just slide into the final question brought to you by Crude Master Transport. Shout out to Heath and Tracy McDonald. They've been supporters of the podcast since the very beginning.

And I'd love to joke. I have not made that easy. Certainly not made that easy. There he swartz. He says if you're going to stand behind a cause that you think is right, then stand behind it. Absolutely. What's one thing Trish stands behind? Wow.

I guess at this point after I just came back from this free speech and medicine conference in Bedek Nova Scotia and J. Batacharia and other Chris Milburn and Martha Fulford and other wonderful COVID heretics who have been proven right were there. So I would say right now, what I stand behind most of all is the unshakable principle that people need to be allowed to tell the truth without being smeared. If we don't have that, we are going to lose everything. And we didn't have that and we still don't have it. science and we don't have it in media and we don't have it in politics we don't have it in culture so that's what I would say the ability for people to to say what they believe to be true and not be

taking to the woodshed for it do you think it's changing no I don't think it's changing I think this American election might change a lot because I think it's going to be a red wave and I think once people are allowed to say you know the trans extremism oh I don't know why she's going to me this. It's my kid, right? Well, you know what? You know what's happening? My kid is moving out.

He's moving out of his bedroom. He just came back from university. Now he's moved into an apartment. He just handed me, this was in his room, a Canadian Association of Journalism Award. For outstanding investigative journalism in Canada 1990, Honorable Mention, Network Radio, Michael Ross and the Monster Within by Trish Wood,

as it happens. There you go. Um, memories. Um, so I think people need to, I think people need to be able to speak the truth, especially in science and medicine and not be fired or smeared or a lot of them. Or have their medical license revoked or, you know, the list goes on. But let's do our, let's do our next chat about the Andrea Gale because I'm really interested in that too. That's a bit of an obsession of mine for like, oh, you know, 10 years or so.

Well, I tell you what, for the list. listener once again, this was a chat we're having before we started about Judy Reeves, episode 110, if you're so inclined, talking about surviving the perfect storm. And that's the Halloween gale. What was that? 1991, I believe. Yeah. And I was actually, I was in the town where they left from. I was there actually doing an interview for my book on the Iraq War. And there was a cruise ship out in the harbor. What was the name, the crow's nest? Wasn't that the bar where they were drinking before they went out. And there was like a cruise ship.

So now it's like a tourist attraction, this place where this sort of terrible marine tragedy happened because of Sebastian Junger's book. It's quite interesting. But as I said to before, I'm from a seafaring family. I lost a distant cousin and a gale at one point, a long time ago, went overboard.

So I love those stories, and I thought it was so well told. Yeah. I tell you what, the next time you're on, we'll bring up that. I got to bring up the Iraq war. You mentioned you were devoted to exposing. I'm like, all I need is more minutes on the clock

because I'd love to hear your thoughts on something like that. Anytime I hear devoted, I think, man, you must have sunk a ton of time into that. And of course, you've written a book and everything else. I think that would be a fantastic chat as well, Trish. Well, there's probably an anniversary coming up, right? Like, I think we're coming up on the 20, when did it? Yeah, so the Iraq War started in. 2020, 2002, 2003, I believe.

Yes, it did. It was two years after 9-11. So we're coming up on an anniversary, like next year. Next year. Yeah, there'll be an anniversary. So maybe we can talk about the book. The book is called What Was Asked of Us, and it's an oral history by the soldiers who fought that war.

It's really an eye-opener. Well, for the listener, if they want to find you and look you up, where can they find you, Trish? So Trishwood is critical is the name of the podcast on all formats. I have a substack. Also, Trishwood is critical that I do a piece a week, sometimes a little bit more. I got some pretty good investigative stuff coming up to on the American election. I found a document that will blow people's minds.

I have a Twitter, which is at Wood. Well, geez, and now maybe we're going to have you back on just for that. Now you're teasing me with things. And I'm like, hmm, that sounds interesting. Yeah, it's an amazing thing. So at Wood Reporting and my website is Trishwoodpodcast.com, I believe. So you can find me in one of those places. Well, I've appreciated you giving me some time.

It's been a year in the making of getting you on this side. Either way, happy to have you aboard and look forward certainly to the next time because, I mean, we've just, you know, kind of teased about three different subjects that I think would be fantastic to have a chat about. Either way, Trish. appreciate it again and look forward to the next time. And look how far you've come. Keep on going. You're doing great, great stuff.

Thanks, Trish. I hope you're proud of that. I tell you what, on this side, it started as a hobby, and now it's full time, right? So, I mean, it's jumped with leaps and bounds. And I got to say this, I've got to throw this out there. That would not happen without the great listeners and audience that I have, and I'm sure you have as well. People want to hear open dialogue.

They want to hear open conversations. And proof is in the pudding, so to speak, when it comes to this end. Well, good for you. Have a great week. You as well.