(Ezra Levant) Michael Ignatieff's aide tries to silence me with a lawsuit

Ezra Levant ^ | 2008-12-11 | Ezra Levant

[Clive]

Michael Ignatieff’s campaign aide, Warren Kinsella, is threatening to sue me for writing about his involvement in Adscam. You can see a copy of his libel notice here.

Justice John Gomery, who chaired the Judicial Inquiry into that scandal, named Kinsella more than a dozen times in his report. You can read the whole thing here – or just search for the word “Kinsella” to get to the point. On page 160 of the report, in a chapter called “Who is responsible?” Justice Gomery noted that Kinsella, then chief of staff to Public Works Minister David Dingwall, tried to steer lucrative government advertising and polling contracts away from their proper course and towards Chuck Guite instead. Guite was later convicted of five counts of fraud.

Justice Gomery called Kinsella’s conduct “a highly inappropriate attempt by political staff to interfere in the internal administration of [Public Works]”.

Folks, that’s not an allegation. That’s a judicial finding of fact. And true facts are a defence to libel.

There’s only one reason why Kinsella would sue in the face of the Gomery Commission’s findings. Well, two if you include Kinsella’s temper – he’s clearly embarrassed and angry that anyone would dare mention his questionable past. The other reason is that he thinks he can silence me through nuisance lawsuits.

Kinsella has already sued me once this year for pointing out another true fact – that he gave help and advice to the anti-Semitic Canadian Islamic Congress in their failed attempt to censor Maclean’s magazine.

That lawsuit by Kinsella against me didn’t make sense, either – again, truth and fair comment applied there, too. Kinsella had boasted about helping the CIC on his own website. But at least that lawsuit was before Kinsella joined Ignatieff’s campaign team. Back then he could be reckless. But after he joined Ignatieff’s campaign, Kinsella had to be well behaved. And he was, for a little bit – he was slightly less abusive on his blog, knowing that his conduct reflected on his candidate. It was actually encouraging to see Kinsella toning it down. He can even be charming sometimes, when he tries.

Which is why this latest lawsuit is so surprising.

Why would Kinsella give in to his emotions, to the detriment of Ignatieff’s political campaign? Why would he give in to his pride and his rage by suing me – but thereby locking himself into a formal legal process where I will have the right to examine all his private documents about Adscam, and cross-examine him at length about his conduct – all in open court, all during an election year? Why would he allow himself to be a high profile “news peg” for the media to discuss the Liberals and Adscam again?

Did Ignatieff even know that Kinsella was going to file this suit? I doubt it. During the last election, Ignatieff was asked about an allegedly defamatory website. He told reporters:

I want to make it very clear my campaign would never attempt to suppress freedom of speech and freedom of opinion. So we're not trying to shut this thing down.

That’s the spirit. Ignatieff is a professor – he’s used to debating opponents, not trying to sue them into submission. It’s bad form – and it’s politically risky, too.

That’s because defamation is a funny sort of lawsuit – it’s about reputation. Kinsella claims that my blog improperly hurt his reputation. Well, a trial will test that theory. We’ll have to ask Kinsella’s clients – including Ignatieff himself – what they think of Kinsella’s “highly inappropriate” conduct. Did it lower their esteem for him? I just can’t imagine why Kinsella would sign up for a two-week root canal like that – or why Ignatieff would let him.

Folks, I don’t even think this lawsuit is about defamation. I think it’s part and parcel of Kinsella’s campaign of “lawfare” against me, because I dared to criticize his beloved human rights commissions and their censorship powers. And his suits are part of the larger campaign of lawfare being waged against me by Kinsella’s friend, Richard Warman of section 13 fame. Between the two of them, they have filed five law society complaints and two lawsuits against me, and now this one. That’s the whole idea – to pile so many actions against me that I’m crushed under the weight of my legal bills and the stress of fighting so many fights.

But I don’t want to cooperate in my own destruction. Because Kinsella and Warman are bullies, who are abusing the law as a political weapon. They’re censors, who would rather sue me into silence instead of debating me. And, in Kinsella’s case, it’s especially ominous – he thinks he can shut down legitimate political criticism of himself, the Liberals and Michael Ignatieff, about the core issue of political corruption.

Not on my watch.

I’m going to fight this lawsuit full tilt. I can think of things I’d rather do with my time and money. But if Kinsella wants a fight about his role in Adscam – and if Ignatieff doesn’t rein him in – they’ll get it.

If you agree with me that this lawsuit is nothing more than a nuisance suit designed to shut me up, then please help me out. I’ve lost count of all the suits and complaints against me – it’s well over 20 now – and my legal bills for 2008 are over $175,000. Naturally, I couldn’t have afforded that on my own – only my readers have saved me.

I hate to ask again, but I’ve been sued again. So please chip in if you think I should stand firm against Kinsella. I’m prepared to go all the way with this – really, what else could I do, given the Gomery report? If you can help me with my legal fees, I promise to fight like hell until I win.

Thank you so much for your ongoing support. We’re making Canada a freer place by standing up to these bullies.

Yours gratefully,

Ezra

P.S. You can chip in through PayPal, below, or by sending a cheque by snail mail to my lawyer on this matter:

“Christopher Ashby in Trust”
Attn: Ezra Levant defence fund
Suite 1013
8 King Street East
Toronto ON M5C 1B5

"I am not a registered non-profit organization. Donations are not tax deductible for federal income tax purposes."

[Clive]

-

[Cindy]

ping

[agere_contra]

Thanks for posting this. Ezra, like many others, is at the scwherpunkt of the battle against criminalization of the truth. A hundred C$ is the least I can do.

[fanfan]

Thanks for the pings, Clive and Cindy.

[Cindy]

You’re very welcome.

Have a good day fanfan.

[Clive]

Well said.

[Candor7]

aKinsella is a liberal fascist. This is how fascists work.

Folks should read Jonah Goldbergs book/treatise. Its called "Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of America's Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning"

Even though the context of Jonah's work is the USA, the devices and methods of liberal fascism are quite well explained, and their annotated historical evolution into modern liberal politics is well revealed.

Liberal fascists believe that ANY use of power they weild is justified by superior moral imperative , one which is ungraspable by the electorate. Trampling individual freedoms is a mere justified lark.

Someday they will get so bad that Canadians will have to out the whole kit and caboodle, which is just what Harper is attempting to do by cutting off the public purse for their electoral campaigns.

Good for Mr. Harper, and good for Ezra, because these fascist prigs like Kinsella need the cleansing light of day cast repeatedly upon their dirty little fascist tricks. This is especially true in Canada where the MSM press is even more in the bag for the fascist liberals of Canada, than it is in the USA.