Speaker 1: Height our two Sean Hannity Show toll free. Here is
Speaker 1: our number. It's eight hundred and nine point one, Shawn,
Speaker 1: if you want to be a part of the program. So,
Speaker 1: the issue of Canada being the fifty first state Panama,
Speaker 1: whether or not they are allowing Chinese control over the
Speaker 1: Panama Canal without which, without the help of the United
Speaker 1: States would not exist, certainly one of the worst deals
Speaker 1: ever made by an American president and ratified by the
Speaker 1: US Senate, I think in history has taken center stage
Speaker 1: and Donald Trump Junior arriving in Greenland saying well, it's
Speaker 1: time to make Greenland great again. And this is what
Speaker 1: he said, pins in.
Speaker 2: You love and I can go up there with his
Speaker 2: two very talented friends.
Speaker 1: And the other the other gred blood of other people.
Speaker 2: So I just want to say that we're very it's
Speaker 2: a very special place. It's need security for itself, but
Speaker 2: it also needs security very much for the world.
Speaker 3: The location really you see the people that the ships
Speaker 3: sailing around.
Speaker 1: And then not the right chans and then not the
Speaker 1: ships you want to know about. So we need security
Speaker 1: in the car country.
Speaker 2: Deson and all the world desent.
Speaker 1: So strategically, look, thank you everybody. Yeah, we're learning a lot.
Speaker 1: It's been great, actually, incredibly beautiful place. The people are incredible, the.
Speaker 4: Welcome was uh spectacular.
Speaker 1: Uh, it's pretty amazing.
Speaker 4: Well last break.
Speaker 2: Were you got a good time everybody, and we're going
Speaker 2: to treat you well and you know that and just
Speaker 2: take care of yourself.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Oliver.
Speaker 1: You anyway, So that was the trip, Don Junior Maid
Speaker 1: and President Trump calling into it. It seems to have
Speaker 1: some people just it's a little shock and awe, which
Speaker 1: we told you was going to happen. A lot of
Speaker 1: people didn't listen to us, Like a lot of people
Speaker 1: didn't listen to the lead up of the election. I've
Speaker 1: made the argument that I think that legacy media is dead.
Speaker 1: Those people ABC, NBC, CBS, MSDNC, Fake New, CNN, The
Speaker 1: Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times, they're all dead
Speaker 1: because they spent nine long years and they had one mission,
Speaker 1: one fixation, one focus, and that was to hate all
Speaker 1: things Donald Trump and to basically be an extension of
Speaker 1: all things liberal, radical democrat. Their press office, and they
Speaker 1: didn't tell people the truth. They didn't tell people the
Speaker 1: truth about what was happening at our borders. They didn't
Speaker 1: tell people the truth about the economy. They didn't tell
Speaker 1: people the truth about why you were paying a buck
Speaker 1: buck fifty more per gallon per gasoline. They just moving
Speaker 1: forward with their woke agenda. They were not exactly transparent
Speaker 1: when it came to Joe's cognitive decline. They weren't transparent
Speaker 1: about the war in Ukraine. And they're sending billions and
Speaker 1: billions of dollars rather than de escalating that situation, or
Speaker 1: the lack of support for Israel for that matter, and
Speaker 1: they paid a very dear price. You know, people ask
Speaker 1: me all the time, what about the future of media.
Speaker 1: I was on the ground floor of a transformation, which
Speaker 1: was talk radio and then the Fox News Channel, which
Speaker 1: continues to do well thanks to all of you. And
Speaker 1: I think now with social media and the developments with
Speaker 1: meta in particular today, I think they're very relevant. The
Speaker 1: President addressed that in his press conference, as I mentioned earlier,
Speaker 1: and social media in general, podcasting in general. It's a
Speaker 1: new world out there, and I think those people that
Speaker 1: will survive and thrive are going to be people that
Speaker 1: tell the truth. Such person that was bucking that trend
Speaker 1: throughout the entire twenty twenty four election cycle and saying
Speaker 1: things that his former colleagues, former friends at Big Networks
Speaker 1: didn't particularly like. Is Mark Cowpert. And he's the editor
Speaker 1: in chief of this new interactive video platform. It's called
Speaker 1: two Way, and it's growing by leaps and bounds. And
Speaker 1: it's great to have you back.
Speaker 3: How are you, Sean, Thank you for the kind words,
Speaker 3: Happy new year. Great to be back with you.
Speaker 1: One thing that we did, the two of us individually,
Speaker 1: and then we compared notes on every single day. And
Speaker 1: this is what I never understood about the media in
Speaker 1: this election is we were getting early voting numbers and
Speaker 1: there were nowhere near the numbers that Democrats had had
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty. For example, on election Day, I went
Speaker 1: on I went on with with Dana Perino and Bill
Speaker 1: Hemmer at nine o'clock in the morning that morning, and
Speaker 1: I said, starting out today, Kamala Harris has a math problem.
Speaker 1: He's down set one hundred thousand votes from where Joe
Speaker 1: Biden was in twenty twenty. She need a massive turnout,
Speaker 1: a historic turnout in Philly Alleghany County for her to
Speaker 1: catch up. He's down forty five percent in Wisconsin and
Speaker 1: she would need a massive turnout in cities like Milwaukee
Speaker 1: for her to make up background, it would have to
Speaker 1: be a historic turnout. All day long, I was calling
Speaker 1: my friends and sources and all these locations and finding
Speaker 1: out they were not getting historic turnout. And we saw
Speaker 1: it coming. And I remember even writing you once or
Speaker 1: texting you and saying, am I missing something here? And
Speaker 1: you told me I was not.
Speaker 3: Now I mean election day. You're right, it was emphatic.
Speaker 3: But even two weeks out when early voting started, I said,
Speaker 3: about three days into the sort of the first trons
Speaker 3: of early voting, I said, if things stay like this,
Speaker 3: we won't need election night. Well know, on the morning of,
Speaker 3: And as you say, our colleagues, for some reason, just
Speaker 3: decided to ignore the data. This isn't about rooting for
Speaker 3: Trump or having a gut feeling about Mega. It was
Speaker 3: just the mass, and for some reason they wanted to
Speaker 3: buy the Democratic spin that well, the late deciders were
Speaker 3: going to go decisively for Harris. No evidence of that
Speaker 3: either during the campaign or on election day, or you know,
Speaker 3: these are not votes that matter because they're just Republicans
Speaker 3: voting early who would have voted on election day. I
Speaker 3: found it all very confusing. Because again it was just
Speaker 3: straight reporting and it wasn't hard to find. You could
Speaker 3: even find Democrats who said, we're super worried because what
Speaker 3: makes everybody think we're going to have a superhuman turnout
Speaker 3: on election day?
Speaker 1: Well they would have, they would have. That would need
Speaker 1: to be historic. And the interesting thing, if you want
Speaker 1: to say it's interesting, is the madness continues even to
Speaker 1: this day. I mean, yesterday was January sixth, and if
Speaker 1: you turn on a lot of legacy media, all they
Speaker 1: wanted to do, like on ABC and that hard hitting
Speaker 1: news show, the view, they're comparing January sixth to the cost,
Speaker 1: and they're doing it on you know, pretty much every
Speaker 1: single channel. And they seem to have doubled down on
Speaker 1: stupid and they learned nothing from this campaign. And I
Speaker 1: assumed that the American people will continue to distrust them
Speaker 1: because they've given them no reason to trust them.
Speaker 3: Well, the ongoing story that I find the most just
Speaker 3: sort of incredible from the press point of view is
Speaker 3: the Biden mental acuity issue. You read piece after piece
Speaker 3: about Joe Biden's final days, Joe Biden's legacy, Joe Biden's
Speaker 3: you know, maneuvering to make certain decisions in the final Fortnite,
Speaker 3: and the articles don't mention his cognitive decline or the
Speaker 3: fact that he was unable to he was forced to
Speaker 3: give up the nomination because he had no chance to win.
Speaker 3: And I said, since election day, if the press doesn't
Speaker 3: come clean on not just the failure to cover it,
Speaker 3: but its role in the conspiracy to cover it up,
Speaker 3: how could they possibly expect to have credibility going forward?
Speaker 3: And yet that continues, it continues, It's barely mentioned, and
Speaker 3: when it is mentioned, it's mentioned as a political issue,
Speaker 3: as opposed to the national security issue and the credibility
Speaker 3: issue of a White House, which to this day says
Speaker 3: Joe Biden has no cognitive decline. Joe Biden is perfectly
Speaker 3: capable of doing the job. Joe Biden didn't give up
Speaker 3: the nomination because he had a cognitive decline. He gave
Speaker 3: it up for unspecified their reasons about the good of
Speaker 3: the country.
Speaker 1: It was before the twenty twenty election, correct me if
Speaker 1: I'm wrong. Wasn't it before then when Joe said, we
Speaker 1: hold these truth to be self evident, that all men
Speaker 1: and women, his words, not mine, were created by all
Speaker 1: you know, Oh, the thing, the thing you know God,
Speaker 1: Joe the creator of everything, endowed by their creator Joe
Speaker 1: the Creator of everything. But I was they ignored moments
Speaker 1: like that, and when I criticized them, and I'm I'm
Speaker 1: a conservative. I don't even know where you stand politically.
Speaker 1: To be honest with you, I've never asked you. But
Speaker 1: I mean, I was excoriated for pointing out something's wrong here.
Speaker 3: Well, I'm just an old fashioned reporter. I'm for the
Speaker 3: public interest. Look, you're right, there were things leading up
Speaker 3: to twenty twenty. He couldn't have won with that COVID.
Speaker 3: COVID allowed him to hide. But in twenty seventeen, I've
Speaker 3: told this story before. In twenty seventeen, I saw him
Speaker 3: to a book tour event, and this is after he
Speaker 3: left the office as vice president, well before he announced
Speaker 3: he was running. And I said, after the book event
Speaker 3: to my wife, I'm so glad he's out of public life.
Speaker 3: I'm so glad he'll never be asked to do anything
Speaker 3: again that involves speaking in public, because he was exactly
Speaker 3: the way he is now. He'd lost his train of thought.
Speaker 3: It was a book event, he was being questioned by
Speaker 3: a very friendly interviewer, and he could barely get through it.
Speaker 3: He was glassy eyed, he was lethargic, as I said,
Speaker 3: lost train of thought. This was three years before he
Speaker 3: ran the first time. So the notion that this is
Speaker 3: some sort of secret, you know, you read these stories now.
Speaker 3: And Wall Street Journal wrote the story that got a
Speaker 3: lot of attention that say, behind the scenes, people say,
Speaker 3: you know this was happening to seventy. You don't need
Speaker 3: behind the scenes. It was all happening in public. And
Speaker 3: yet again, not only did the media not write about it,
Speaker 3: they covered it up, and then they still having something
Speaker 3: clean about their role in the cover up.
Speaker 1: It's so true. Did you see Meet the Press this
Speaker 1: weekend and Chuck Schumer's questioning on this very topic, he
Speaker 1: got very defensive when asked about whether he knew that
Speaker 1: Joe was incognitive decline. The answer is we know for
Speaker 1: a fact they all did, and that they all covered
Speaker 1: it up. They all lied about it. New York Post
Speaker 1: has a piece today, Well, what about the people that
Speaker 1: covered this up? Don't they have didn't they have an
Speaker 1: obligation of the country to tell us. New York Post
Speaker 1: had an editorial today, Stop lying, Chuck.
Speaker 3: It was unfortunate. You know, he's a skillful guy, and
Speaker 3: he finessed his way through. I give credit to the
Speaker 3: interviewer for asking, but she let him get away with
Speaker 3: giving an answer that makes no sense. You know, George Clooney,
Speaker 3: to his credit, belatedly acknowledged what he saw at a
Speaker 3: fundraiser late in the campaign that led him to call
Speaker 3: join them.
Speaker 1: Well, was it really to his credit or do you
Speaker 1: suspect as I do that I got a call from
Speaker 1: his friend and I know their friends, Barack Obama, and
Speaker 1: was asked to do this as part of this coalition
Speaker 1: that was created to basically kick Joe out of Obama
Speaker 1: Pelosi and Schumer.
Speaker 3: Was it was part of that effort. But but you know,
Speaker 3: I like to give credit for effort, and he spoke
Speaker 3: out before others were still unwilling to speak out.
Speaker 1: You know what it was weeks after he had praised
Speaker 1: Joe Biden. I don't give him as much credit as
Speaker 1: you do. He had been with Joe Biden that some
Speaker 1: fundraiser praising. Yeah, now, so I think it was the
Speaker 1: expediency part of a plan. They didn't think he could win,
Speaker 1: and it was all about winning at that point.
Speaker 3: I agree, and I was going to make that point
Speaker 3: which is those who did it did it not because
Speaker 3: they suddenly said, you know what, the country deserves a
Speaker 3: president who can do the job. It was because they
Speaker 3: thought not only that he would lose. And this is
Speaker 3: a particular concern to Speaker Pelosi that it would drag
Speaker 3: other Democrats down. But they're politicians, right, and Biden's politician.
Speaker 3: They're going to act out of self interest. It's the
Speaker 3: press whose obligation is not to hurt Donald Trump and
Speaker 3: prop up Joe Biden. Their obligation is to sakeguard the
Speaker 3: public interest and to tell the truth to the American people.
Speaker 3: It's the press whose behavior, to me is more outrageous
Speaker 3: and more requiring of explanation than the politicians. The politician said,
Speaker 3: this guy's got impairment, but we don't want Trump to win,
Speaker 3: and if he steps aside, it will probably be here
Speaker 3: and she can't win, So we're going to prop him up. Irresponsible,
Speaker 3: but again political behavior.
Speaker 1: All right, quick freak. We'll come back more with Mark
Speaker 1: Calpern on the other side. Your calls coming up. Eight
Speaker 1: hundred and nine to four one, Shawn our number if
Speaker 1: you want to be a part of the program. As
Speaker 1: we roll along this busy News Tuesday, and we continue
Speaker 1: now with our friend Mark Halpert is with us. In
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, I declared journalism is dead, and
Speaker 1: now I officially have declared legacy media is dead. How
Speaker 1: do your former colleagues at these major networks treat you?
Speaker 1: I'm just curious.
Speaker 3: I mean the one where my friends treat me fine.
Speaker 3: I don't have tons of interaction with just kind of
Speaker 3: the rank and file, but they a lot of them
Speaker 3: watch two Way and they like to Way because they
Speaker 3: recognize that that it's not it's the ideology is part
Speaker 3: of it, but it's also just quality. It's it's authenticity,
Speaker 3: it's journal You were telling.
Speaker 1: Truth that they were not willing to step forward and
Speaker 1: tell themselves on that stuff.
Speaker 3: They ignore it because very few of them are willing
Speaker 3: to even confront it. They pretend it doesn't exist. They
Speaker 3: pretend there's not liberal media buys. It's bizarre. I've doubted
Speaker 3: in my whole career. I worked with a few people
Speaker 3: like Peter Jennings who acknowledge it existed. You know, Michael
Speaker 3: Jordan used to say he didn't endorse Democrats because Republicans
Speaker 3: buy sneakers too. I don't understand the place that's in
Speaker 3: the business of selling news that says, you know what,
Speaker 3: We're not interested in selling it to half the country.
Speaker 3: We're gonna We're gonna cut our market share in half.
Speaker 3: I don't get that.
Speaker 1: You know, more liberals watch that watch cable news, watch
Speaker 1: Fox News than any other cable channel.
Speaker 3: The Fox numbers are so big. More of everything watches
Speaker 3: Fox News.
Speaker 1: Well no, but I mean it's it is interesting and
Speaker 1: oh I know, uh, but they do allow conservative voices
Speaker 1: like mine. But I'm also a truth seeker and I
Speaker 1: tell truth and sometimes I have to tell truth that
Speaker 1: I don't even want to tell about, uh, Conservatives and Republicans.
Speaker 1: But I just you know, I owe it to my
Speaker 1: audience to always be truthful. But anyway, Mark Alprin, Happy
Speaker 1: new year, my friend, God bless you and keep up
Speaker 1: the good work. We're going to pay very close attention
Speaker 1: to your work throughout the year.
Speaker 3: Thank you, sir. Good to talk to you.
Speaker 1: Take care all right, it's getting very interesting what is
Speaker 1: happening with Canada and Little Justin now being out? There
Speaker 1: was an interesting National Review Canada's Financial Post article on
Speaker 1: how Canada and their economy has gone to hell under
Speaker 1: Little Justin Trudeau not a fan of his. It looks
Speaker 1: like Canada is on track to move dramatically to the center.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump addressed it today. I thought it was very
Speaker 1: very interesting that he would literally be very interested in
Speaker 1: in joining forces with Canada. And anyway, here's what the
Speaker 1: President said earlier today and what he said about justin.
Speaker 1: Trudeau said, you're considering military force to acquire anima in Greenland?
Speaker 1: Are you also considering military force to.
Speaker 2: Annex acquire no economic force? Because Canada and the United States,
Speaker 2: that would really be something. You get rid of that
Speaker 2: artificially drawn line and you take a look at what
Speaker 2: that looks like, and it would also be much better
Speaker 2: for national security. You don't forget. We basically protect Canada.
Speaker 2: But here's the problem with Canada. So many friends up there.
Speaker 2: I love the Canadian people, They're great. We're spending hundreds
Speaker 2: of billions a year to take care of Canada. We
Speaker 2: lose in trade deficits, we're losing mass. We don't need
Speaker 2: their cars. You know, they make twenty percent of our cars.
Speaker 2: We don't need that. I'd rather make them in Detroit.
Speaker 2: We don't need anything, So why are we losing two
Speaker 2: hundred billion dollars a year and more to protect Canada.
Speaker 2: And I said that too, as I called them Governor Trudeau,
Speaker 2: I said, listen, what would happen if we didn't subsidize you,
Speaker 2: if we didn't because we give them a lot of money.
Speaker 4: We help them.
Speaker 2: As an example, we're buying icebreakers, and Canada wants to
Speaker 2: join us in the buying of icebreakers.
Speaker 4: I said, you know, we.
Speaker 2: Don't really want to have a partner in the buying
Speaker 2: of icebreakers. We don't need a partner.
Speaker 1: It's over fifty three billion more dollars in goods and
Speaker 1: services that come into Canada each year then we export
Speaker 1: to Canada. That's how big the trade deficit is. On
Speaker 1: top of that, you can really make the argument that
Speaker 1: but for the United States and its military might, Canada
Speaker 1: would not be doing as well. The US provides millions
Speaker 1: of dollars in foreign assistance to Canada every year, and
Speaker 1: we now have seen in just the last number of years,
Speaker 1: for example, on the issue of the border, the border
Speaker 1: patrol chief at the Northern Border has said they've apprehended
Speaker 1: nearly twenty thousand illegals from ninety seven countries in fiscal
Speaker 1: year twenty twenty four. That is higher than the prior
Speaker 1: seventeen years combined, which is unheard of. They're not doing
Speaker 1: their part in terms of controlling the border. On the
Speaker 1: local front. If you go before the pandemic, the Canada's
Speaker 1: national income per head, which was the equivalent to about
Speaker 1: eighty percent of America's in the decade before the pandemic,
Speaker 1: is will be just seventy percent this year, according to
Speaker 1: the economists, and it further goes on to say the
Speaker 1: gap between the Canadian and American economies has now reached
Speaker 1: its widest point in nearly a century. The US continues
Speaker 1: to be on track to produce nearly fifty percent more
Speaker 1: per person than Canada will, and the Financial Post goes
Speaker 1: on to say nearly three million people living in Canada
Speaker 1: have some type of temporary immigration status, with two point
Speaker 1: two million arriving in just the past two years, and
Speaker 1: temporary residents now represent a wopping six point eight percent
Speaker 1: of the country's total population of forty one point three million,
Speaker 1: up you know, from three point five percent in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two. They do nothing to control their borders and
Speaker 1: they have a problem there anyway. Joining us now is
Speaker 1: John Baird. He's the former Canadian Foreign Minister John Welcome
Speaker 1: to the program. Glad you're on board.
Speaker 4: Great to be with you. Sean.
Speaker 1: First of all, we love our friends to the north.
Speaker 1: We love Canada like you. I have a shared passion
Speaker 1: for a hockey Every Canadian that I know does, I
Speaker 1: assume you do. I hope I'm right in my assumption.
Speaker 1: But on so many levels, I would argue that the
Speaker 1: problems that Canada is facing our self induced based on
Speaker 1: the policies that Justin Trudeau espoused in the country. Am
Speaker 1: I wrong?
Speaker 4: Well, Canada is not a broken country, but we've got
Speaker 4: a broken government. Everything. Everything is going wrong here, whether
Speaker 4: it's incompetent, macroeconomic policies, high taxes, big get woke and
Speaker 4: put the correct leadership, cost of living going out of control.
Speaker 4: That's why we in Canada need a change into the government.
Speaker 4: And it all started to accelerate on Monday when True
Speaker 4: threw in the towel. He did not retire because he
Speaker 4: wanted to. He retired because of the Conservative Party here
Speaker 4: and we have a five party system, Sean at five
Speaker 4: party system with first past the post, the Conservative parties
Speaker 4: leading by ten or twenty five percent and just about
Speaker 4: every public opinion poll in the last eighteen months. So
Speaker 4: the change will be coming to Canada. We can rebuild
Speaker 4: the rebuild the economy and make it give it the
Speaker 4: government that it deserves.
Speaker 1: What do you think about and do you understand President
Speaker 1: Trump's position about the trade deficit which is massive, the
Speaker 1: problem at our northern border, which you're also experiencing internally
Speaker 1: in Canada, and your military reliance on the US.
Speaker 4: Yeah, let me say the number of things. One is,
Speaker 4: obviously the United States is our closest friend. We think
Speaker 4: that we consider each other almost like family. We can
Speaker 4: step up and do a better job. Let's look at
Speaker 4: those trade I mean, the trades surplus is almost entirely
Speaker 4: oil and gas, which goes to US refineries, which creates
Speaker 4: literally tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of jobs.
Speaker 4: Not a good thing for the United States is it
Speaker 4: gives the United States power with respect to energy and
Speaker 4: oil and gas. But on defense, we've done our share
Speaker 4: of the heavy lifting. You know, during the war in Afghanistan,
Speaker 4: we suffered more casualties and just about any other country
Speaker 4: out of the United States and the United Kingdom because
Speaker 4: we were doing our share of the heavy lifting. In Canada,
Speaker 4: Heart Province the toughest area within the United States, within
Speaker 4: the Afghanistan. When the President Obama was targeting ISIS, Canada
Speaker 4: was one of the only countries that was in the
Speaker 4: United Kingdom to bomb IIS targets in both Syria and Iraq.
Speaker 4: But we can do better. We can step up our
Speaker 4: game and be a better partner on security and defense.
Speaker 4: And that includes obviously doing our part to raise our
Speaker 4: defense spending. And that's where the United States can help us.
Speaker 4: You know, obviously the US is like Canada, has a
Speaker 4: lot of has a lot of military procurement economy, and
Speaker 4: there's a lot we can get. You know, when I
Speaker 4: was in government, we got the and I was a conservative.
Speaker 4: By the way, just so your viewers that your listeners know,
Speaker 4: we bought C seventeen heavy lift aircraft and made in
Speaker 4: the United States. We brought Chinock calicopters made the United States.
Speaker 4: And there's a lot of help that the United States
Speaker 4: can provide us when we valley up to the bar
Speaker 4: and start to pay our fair share on defense spending.
Speaker 4: There's no argument in this country but that.
Speaker 1: What do you think about the idea? I mean, the
Speaker 1: President made a good point in his press conference today.
Speaker 1: I thought he made a good point. I mean, the
Speaker 1: idea that maybe we should think about joining forces. I mean,
Speaker 1: if you just look at the apps, just the pure
Speaker 1: land mass alone, how amazing that would be. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's he's obviously you know, it's an offer, it's an opportunity,
Speaker 1: it's a thought. Would that be something that the Canadian
Speaker 1: people would ever consider?
Speaker 4: No, I don't think joining the US is on the table.
Speaker 4: It's a non starter. Let's be a clear on that.
Speaker 4: But we are a family. We can we have a
Speaker 4: fairly integrated economy. If we have the open markets, free
Speaker 4: markets between the two countries, we can both economically boom.
Speaker 4: We can't step up on defense. One of the things too,
Speaker 4: The things that the President has been very clear on
Speaker 4: since the election are the need to step up illegal
Speaker 4: border crossings from Canada United States. Obviously it's minuschool compared
Speaker 4: to Mexico, but we're a good neighbor and we should
Speaker 4: be there to ensure that we stop. And there's a
Speaker 4: lot of Canadians going through illegally Mexicans and even from India,
Speaker 4: and we can step up our border enforcement to ensure
Speaker 4: that that we do job. Nothing would make me happen
Speaker 4: in the United States to look at canadon and say,
Speaker 4: why can't Mexico be more like Canada in terms of
Speaker 4: protecting the border. And the President's made a very compelling
Speaker 4: case on Sentinel where security services need to step up
Speaker 4: their effort to stop the flow of sentanel from Canada
Speaker 4: into the United States. Frankly, I think President Trump is
Speaker 4: the one who made most Canadians aware that that was
Speaker 4: a problem and this is something we should do as
Speaker 4: as as a good neighbor to protect the United States.
Speaker 4: The numbers I have are actually even worse than.
Speaker 1: The number you gave Vishan Well, the numbers in terms
Speaker 1: of illegal immigration. I'm giving you the updated numbers that
Speaker 1: I have, and I'm not surprised that they would be worse,
Speaker 1: nor are we aware because we don't have as much
Speaker 1: border patrol uh as much of border patrol presence in
Speaker 1: the north as we do down in the south. Why,
Speaker 1: for example, and the President brought this up at his
Speaker 1: press conference today, why is Canada charging these tariffs for
Speaker 1: American automobiles to go into Canada. I would think that
Speaker 1: that's something we should have free and fair trade and
Speaker 1: it should go both ways. Why why does Canada put
Speaker 1: those tariffs on US car manufacturers.
Speaker 4: I'm gonnaware of a single tariff on the US cars. Uh,
Speaker 4: you know. I think the some parts of a car
Speaker 4: made in can the United States can go back and
Speaker 4: forth as many as six times in the production assembly
Speaker 4: of an automobile. I'm not aware of any tariff that
Speaker 4: we have on the US auto sector.
Speaker 3: Set.
Speaker 4: We manufacture a lot of cars in Canvas sell the
Speaker 4: United States, manufactur a lot of cards United States to
Speaker 4: sell in Canada, and let's have no tariff and that
Speaker 4: it'd be completely open with the free market, that the
Speaker 4: free market operates.
Speaker 1: All right, quick break, We'll come right back more with
Speaker 1: former Canadian Foreign Minister John baird Is with US as
Speaker 1: President Trump mentioning Canada at length, maybe being the fifty
Speaker 1: first state. More on the other side, your calls also
Speaker 1: coming up eight hundred and ninety four one. Shawn is
Speaker 1: on number. As we continue broadcasting on great radio stations
Speaker 1: all over the USA, hits the Sean Hannity Show. Are
Speaker 1: we continue now with former Canadian Foreign Minister John baird
Speaker 1: Is with US while Trudeau was weak and even prior
Speaker 1: to Donald Trump's victory. Do you believe Donald Trump's victory
Speaker 1: played a role in him being finally pushed.
Speaker 4: I think that it's funny his team are all, you know,
Speaker 4: his team was beginning to to to pre massively move
Speaker 4: on pushing him out of power. And I think there's
Speaker 4: only one reason on that is that he was He's
Speaker 4: been trailing in the polls for eighteen months and instead
Speaker 4: of the Rats leaving a leaving a sinking ship, they
Speaker 4: threw the captain overboard. And I think that's probably what
Speaker 4: one had to do with It's just it's this government
Speaker 4: for the last nine years, Canada's GDP per capita has
Speaker 4: not grown in nine years. We we used to have
Speaker 4: a consensus on competent macroeconomic policy, but this government has
Speaker 4: been a high tax, high spend government and you know,
Speaker 4: not tough on crime and uh and very woke in
Speaker 4: political corrupt and I think Todadi it's had enough of it.
Speaker 4: That's why I'm so excited about the next election. Trudo resigning.
Speaker 4: We should go to the We should go to the
Speaker 4: polls in May and Canada, and I'm pretty confident we're
Speaker 4: going to see a return of a conservative government who
Speaker 4: will be a better partner for the United States and
Speaker 4: Frank Elephant, we have.
Speaker 1: A lot of calls from Canada for this radio show.
Speaker 1: It's actually, you know, surprises me how many people from
Speaker 1: Canada actually listen to the show. And I'm glad that
Speaker 1: they do. And one interesting side note, many Americans have
Speaker 1: how did the single payer system healthcare system that you
Speaker 1: have in Canada as an example of what America should adopt.
Speaker 1: But meanwhile, I can give you example after example of
Speaker 1: wealthy and politically connected individuals that need you know, major
Speaker 1: health care services that end up spending their own money
Speaker 1: and crossing the border and coming to the US and
Speaker 1: some of the finest hospitals in the US to get
Speaker 1: their treatment. What does that tell you?
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's a dirty little secret that we have a
Speaker 4: single pair of system in Canada. Healthcare system in Canada
Speaker 4: that you know, has its drawbacks, it has its successes
Speaker 4: as well. If you're really sick, you get the treatment
Speaker 4: you need. But people, I say, the biggest private healthcare
Speaker 4: operator in Canada probably Air Canada because the view of
Speaker 4: the economic means you can justly Detroit or Chicago or Florida,
Speaker 4: the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and get better care. So's
Speaker 4: there's advantages definitely to the saying system, but there is
Speaker 4: obviously rationing which is a concern.
Speaker 1: So your next Prime Minister, how confident are you that
Speaker 1: the government will move to the right and what will
Speaker 1: that mean practically for the people of Canada.
Speaker 4: I don't think it's a writer left continuum. I think
Speaker 4: what it is is a elite, woke based effort by
Speaker 4: Trudeau to a more common sense, competence policy with Septier
Speaker 4: Poli of the Conservative leader. I've known this guy for
Speaker 4: twenty five years. He's smart as hell, he's tough as nails,
Speaker 4: He's got experience in government, experience in parliament. I think
Speaker 4: he could become the he could become a consequential He
Speaker 4: will become a consequential leader for Canada. And I think
Speaker 4: one of the things he can do is rebuild our
Speaker 4: foreign relations with our friends and our foes and our
Speaker 4: allies alike. I look back at the days when Brian
Speaker 4: o'vererney was the Prime Ministry. He had such a great
Speaker 4: partnership with President Reagan and President Bush. Stephen Harper worked
Speaker 4: very well with Bush and Obama. I think I think
Speaker 4: Stephen Harp, I think Per Pauly have the Conservative leader.
Speaker 4: What is elected Prime Minister will be a great Now
Speaker 4: here's a great partner for the United States.
Speaker 1: We do appreciate you being with us, John, We wish
Speaker 1: you the best. We love our friends in Canada. God
Speaker 1: bless you, and God bless Canada as well. And hopefully
Speaker 1: we can repair whatever differences we may have and move
Speaker 1: on as the friends and allies we should be. We
Speaker 1: appreciate it, we work together. Amen. We need it desperately.