The Ben Mulroney Show - How to flip a pancake and the debate over cops using DNA tech

Episode Date: July 7, 2025

- Ron Chhinzer If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://link.chtbl.com/bms⁠⁠⁠⁠ Also, on youtube -- ⁠⁠���⁠https://www.youtube.com/@BenMulroneyShow⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The all new 2025 kicks isn't just a bold new vehicle on the road. It's Nissan's number one selling subcompact SUV. With expressive style and advanced tech, Kicks is number one. Right now, lease the 2025 Kicks for the equivalent of $65 weekly for 48 months. Hurry into your local dealer today. S front wheel drive for 280 monthly with 3,495 down at 3.49%. Includes.5% loyalty reduction for qualifying Nissan owners. Conditions apply.

See Nissan.ca for details. ["Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy"] This is the Ben Mulroney Show. It's the Ben Mulroney Show, whether it's on YouTube, whether it'soney Show, whether it's on YouTube, whether it's a podcast, whether it's on the radio, whether you find it on social media, it's always the Ben Mulroney Show, always in always.

Thank you for joining us. And okay, so we're gonna talk about the Blue Jays for a moment. My technical producer, Dave Spargalla, does not want me talking about the Blue Jays because he feels it might jinx any chance they have at success. They have had quite a run, 34 games and now they're up at top the AL East alone, atop the AL East for the first time in a very long time.

Apparently they haven't had this many wins at this point in the season since 1993. And he hates that. I can see him getting a little nervous right now. So they're doing great. And one thing they did over the weekend that they have never done before was they swept the New York Yankees for four games at home.

Never been done in the history of the franchise. And Jamie Campbell, who is a phenomenal sports analyst, was covering the post game and had himself a broom. And do we, oh, do we have, no, so actually we'll talk about that after. So yeah, so he had a broom. And do we, oh, do we have, no, so actually we'll talk about that after. So yeah, so he had a broom to show that we swept them and then he threw the broom away.

And this did not go over very well with his Yankees counterpart, Michael K. Here's his assessment of the broom gate. Now I love Toronto. It is a cosmopolitan city. It's one of the greatest cities in the world for me. I think it's great. You waving a broom on a postgame show, you turning it into Mayberry RFD.

I just don't get it. I don't understand it. You should be proud of the factory in first place. And one final thing, you shouldn't hang on the rim three minutes into the third quarter of a basketball game feel good about sweeping the eighties feel good about winning all these games in a row feel good about being in first place but to hang on the rim this early

i was saying on the room in october that's when you hang on the rim so he's not wrong he's not wrong and you know and what's what's the line that from boiler room it was ailer Room? It was a movie about like day traders and corrupt people on Wall Street. And there's a great speech in it by Ben Affleck. It's not a great movie, but there's a great speech. You know the ABC from Glengarry Glen Larros,

Always Be Closing? It's that version of that where he says, act as if, act as if you are the biggest mo fo in the room act as if you have a billion dollars in the bank act as if you're the ceo of the company sort of uh it's a it's a i guess the movie version of you know dressing for the job that you want act as if you've been there before is what some people have said. Like for example, it's like the old school traditionalists in football that don't want people celebrating

when they get to the end zone. Cause that's what you're supposed to do. You're supposed to get in the end zone. You shouldn't celebrate when you get there. That's part of your job. And so there's two schools of thought there. Anyway, this could have escalated, right? This could have been a war of the words

between Jamie Campbell and Michael K. But both of them professional, both of them have sort of respect for each other as colleagues in the industry. And Jamie Campbell, who again, I got a lot of respect for, I think he's great at what he does. He said, he turned the temperature down. He said, I should point out

that I've always had great respect for Mr. K. That's a tough market and he's endured. We haven't been able to say first place around here for a while, just having a little fun. And then Michael K responded by saying, Jamie, you are a class act. Hopefully we will get a chance to chat in a couple of weeks. See, you know what, you know what that proves? You can actually have a decent and honest and fair conversation on Twitter. I know some people think that you can't do that or shouldn't do that.

A lot of people think that that's the place where you hurl insults, but you can actually further a conversation on Twitter if both parties are willing. And just so while we're on the topic, incidental to that, I think I've said this before, like what's my policy in engaging on social media? My policy is this, I will write something,

I will post something. And if people come back at me and address the substance of what I said, I will reengage with them respectfully. If you come back at me with an ad hominem attack, if you come back at me insulting me and not paying attention to anything I wrote, well then my job in that moment is to destroy you.

And I am not good at a lot of stuff. I think it's really important for people to know who they are. I know what I am not good at a lot of stuff. I think it's really important for people to know who they are. I know what I'm not good at. You know what I'm really good at friggin destroying anybody in a hundred and forty characters or less. I promise you if you ever come for me on social media, I will hit back with the force of a thousand sons and you will never recover at least not to your friends who are going to watch you limping away. That's all I have to say about that.

Our prime minister was at the Stampede in Calgary, which is it's an annual, the Stampede itself is an annual tradition. The pancake breakfast is an annual tradition for a great many politicians around this country. This was Mark Carney's first, his first one. And look, he's getting a lot of grief for a couple of things. He's getting a lot of grief for wearing a suit. I think that's where the grief should begin and end.

Why are you wearing a suit, Mr. Prime Minister to the stampede. And for sure, it's it was a deconstructed suit, but it was a suit. And, you know, it's sort of to me, it's like, Steven Harper being photographed shaking hands with his son, like, it's just, come on, you should get called out. And, and those who think I'm just attacking the prime minister, I'm saying it with a smile on my face. So appreciate context, where I don't think he should be getting any crap

is the fact that he is probably one of the worst pancake flippers on the planet. There is video out there of him flipping pancakes with disastrous results. But he has mentioned before, he doesn't do the grocery shopping. He doesn't cook. He's got people for that. And that's fine.

There's a lot of people like that. I bear him no ill will that that's not in his wheelhouse. I make pancakes for my kids regularly. And if you're most people will agree with what I'm about to say. The rule of thumb is the first pancake is always the practice pancake. It's always the one that is misshapen. It's not big enough or it's too big. It's all, it's always the one that you test the rest of you, you, you, you test the waters for it.

Because then everyone after that has the same shape. It's cooked for the same amount of time. So the fact that he was willing to learn on the job with the cameras on my hat goes off to him because the bar you listen, you got a lot of eyeballs on you. That's probably the first time since his childhood that he flipped a pancake. And the fact that he was willing to do it with the cameras on good for him. Now, something good that came out of this, I think for all of us, is that he said that he said he's talking confidently with an eye on two pivotal oil and gas initiatives that could be on what's called the major projects list.

So a pipeline and a carbon capture project could be, he said he's confident that those things are going to make the list of the nation building projects that this country so desperately needs to get behind. You know that this is on the wish list for the Danielle Smith and her government in Alberta. But he always has to hedge. He says the private sector is going to drive it. We've got legislation, but we've also got people in He says, the private sector is going to drive it. We've got legislation, but we've also got people in place at the federal level who can get things done. I'm confident that my government will do everything we can so that all the projects can be built.

And well, so right there, we have to hold him to what he said. I am confident that my government will do everything we can so that those projects can be built. Does that also include repealing the pipeline killing and the resource development killing legislation that was front and center under Justin Trudeau, the no nude pipelines law, the tanker ban, the cap on on emissions and exports. Like, are those things going to go the way of the dodo bird? Because if you keep that system in place, I don't know if we are going to be able to

optimize the value that we are going to be able to get from one of these national pipeline initiatives. But he is saying the things that so many of us were hoping he would say. Time will tell where this goes. All right, don't go anywhere. When we when we come back, should genealogical, should DNA be part of police investigations? That's next on the Ben Mulrooney Show. Welcome back to the Ben Mulrooney Show. All right, there is a story out there that certain questions need to be asked and the implications of what we decide as a society moving forward could have an impact on how our police forces are able

to investigate crimes. So there was an RCMP investigation in Burby, BC, where RCMP officers posed as tea servers at a Kurdish New Year celebration to discreetly collect DNA off of the tea cups in the rape and murder case of a 13-year-old girl. And the operation was based on DNA evidence suggesting that the unknown suspect was likely of Kurdish descent. And so over 140 of these cups were swabbed.

There was a breakthrough. One DNA sample matched the suspect's brother, which led to identifying and convicting the killer. But this has privacy concerns raised. The Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner highlighted the case in a report warning of unchecked genetic surveillance. And let's not forget a lot of people,

hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people have availed themselves of online genealogical DNA research where they voluntarily given over, they swabbed themselves and gave their DNA in hopes of learning more about their genetic makeup and their background and where their family comes from. And all of that has been cross-referenced on databases all over the world.

So have those people inadvertently given their DNA and made it available for investigations? Lots of questions come up from this. And so let's talk to somebody who knows a lot more about investigations of all types. We're joined by Ron Chinzer, former police officer, former candidate for the conservative party in the last election.

And also he sat in this very chair more than once. Ron, welcome to the show. Hey, welcome Ben. Thanks for having me. Appreciate it. Okay, so yeah, this is like to me, I think this is a pretty cool thing. You know that the DNA is out there.

There's evidence that suggests that it's a, the person was of Kurdish descent. So let's go target, let's go where the Kurds are and as a former police officer are there any red flags and that we should be we should be concerned with in how this investigation unfolded no I don't think so I think this should be what's expected of our police services when you have a 13 year old girl raped And there's DNA evidence, which is one of the strongest pieces of evidence you can have in a stranger on stranger sexual assault and

You know the police end up getting some information from some sort of examination of the DNA that would identify You know certain a certain group plus other information and they go out and do their job That's exactly what we need to expect. And that's what we should encourage and reward. Well, exactly. Listen, if I don't know what I don't know. But now that I know that this is something that the police can do. If I found out say six months from now that there was another crime that happened under similar circumstances,

like you said, stranger on stranger rape of a young girl. And I found out that the cops didn't avail themselves of this sort of technique. I would think to myself, cops didn't do everything to solve the crime. And- You're right. You know what that would be? That would be neglect of duty.

And I am of the opinion now that I've watched from the sidelines. So it's just one person's anecdotal lived experience, but it feels to me like we're living in a time where the priority should should always be placed on the the rights and respect of the of the victim and the victims family. And in this case, it feels like the police satisfied that test. I don't feel like that happens enough or often enough.

No, you're right. And look, there's a couple things here. Number one, I have to ask, who are we protecting when I hear these type of conversations from these different commissioners? Oh, we have to worry about this. We have to look at the common sense of this individual incident, and the expectation and the good work done by police officers. Additionally, they always talk about the rights of the accused. Let me explain something to most of the listeners. We as good human

beings as good citizens also have the right to safety, security, and liberty. When you break the laws, your rights are infringed upon primarily your right to liberty because you get arrested and charged because as a society that is what we have determined is healthy for us to do. Now if the rights of the accused are greater than the rights of the rest of normal citizens, we now potentially have our rights infringed by an entire system. So this whole thing is backwards. You know, we talk about these rights and it's like, yes, we're doing the right thing. Guys, a 13-year-old girl was raped. You know, most of these sexual assaults, these aren't repeat violent criminals that are doing all these

deviant offenses. These are sick people that are oftentimes untouched by the regular criminal justice system. There's no other way for us to get these people until they do it. And how many countless documentaries do you have to see on Netflix where once they get DNA, they link them to rapes over like 20 years? Yeah. This is critical.

So listen, a lot of what I know about this sort of thing comes from most people is what they see on TV. So I don't know if the American example necessarily translates to Canada. But you know, I do know that I've seen in I've seen police going through people's trash. And the assumption is if you put your trash out for collection, you put it out there for anybody to look into. So honor. So that is that the same here?

Exactly. Okay, once you discard trash, you lose the right to privacy. Okay, because you think it's no longer a part of my life. Well, and the same the same goes for collecting DNA on a cup in a public place. You know, if you're gonna leave, if you're gonna leave your DNA around and a public place, the cops can go get it. So that I don't understand how any of these things are a bridge too far. Then there's,

but what's the other argument they said? Should there be warrants for police using ancestry, like ancestry.com or 23andme? I don't think so. Yeah, well, you know, they, they, they would need warrants because it's a private entity, and the corporate setting the Bible. So they would need what's called a production order or a warrant to be able to obtain that data because they can't use that type of data as like a big fishing net. You don't have really specific reason to go,

you know, you have to satisfy what's called like the four corners, which ultimately just means, you know, does the data exist with the person or group that has it? Will it help? Do we have reasonable grounds to get it? And will this help, you this help clear up an investigation? All that will be legally sound.

And even to your first one, when you said, collected the data, look, that was an undercover operation, which probably means that there was already some judicial oversight to be like, are we within the scope of the law to be able to do this? Undercover operators, there are certain bills in different provinces that allow them to actually commit some minor crimes in the picture of the greater good. But you have to have this designation from the

province, which not many people have. Because the greater good needs to be satisfied from some judicial authority to be like, look, there is no other way for us to solve this rape of this 13 year old, unless we do this. And by the way, here's why. Now that information might not never be publicly disclosed, but all that has oversight bodies to it. So it's not like just a group of us said in a room one day, hey, this is what we're going to do. It's very proper, very professional. Yeah. And so what about the, what about the complaint that ethnic communities aren't fairly targeted in high profile crimes? To me, that's a canard. Like that's a, that, that, that doesn't make any sense. Look, if the evidence takes,

you have to assume good faith. I assume good faith until when it comes to investigations by our police forces until shown otherwise, right? And if the evidence is leading towards a one community or another, I think it would be insane to cast a wide net. Okay, well, if we know that they come from the Kurdish community, that's where we're going to focus our investigation.

Yeah, you're right. Well, you know, this is the irony of the entire thing. You know, people, people talk about data and data is the driver. And listen, when you have DNA, it's nothing but data. This is scientific data. The data will give you particular information that has to do with race, genealogy, sex, history. That's what drives the direction of the investigation. So when everybody comes up, nowadays when people say, well, this is minority, this is minority, I'm a visible minority. I have been my entire life. Guess what? All right. If somebody raped somebody, I don't care what you look like, purple, brown, black, blue, orange, you're a bad guy. We have to go after you. So

whenever this gets entered into the conversation, to me, I just kind of push that way to the back of the line to be like, my evidence that's leading me in this investigation has nothing to do with that unless it is scientific or a eyewitness or video reason to go after it. Yeah, cannot just not talk about this and pretend like it's not a factor. If it's a driver of identifier, we have an obligation to go after and find and find the right people. Well, yeah, we can't be we can't be forced into a world

where every single conversation for the past five years has been about race and gender and sexuality. And those are the things that identify us. And those are the things that make us different. And then be told that those things that are so important to identity cannot be used to identify a criminal. Well, you know, you bring up a good point and it's about triaging stuff, right?

And we need, what is a priority? What is not a priority? There is room in the conversation for all of that stuff, post all of this. Right now, when you have an immediate threat, an immediate incident, immediate victim, all of that needs to be secondary to stopping the threats by the person responsible, making sure the victim's okay.

Ron, we gotta leave it there, but thank you very much, my friend. I really appreciate it. Thanks, Ben. Take care, bye. Now the competition has begun. What will you need to stay in this house? What do I need to give you to get you out of that house? This wall has to stay. This wall has to go or we go.

What do you think of the house? I hate it. Okay, so I have a little bit of work to do. Design expert Paige Turner joins David as they ask homeowners the all-important question. Are you gonna love it? Or are you going to list it? You wanna tell them? Love it or list it. All new, Sunday at 9.

On Home Network. Stream on STAC TV and the Global TV app.