“Warren Kinsella's book, ‘Fight the Right: A Manual for Surviving the Coming Conservative Apocalypse,’ is of vital importance for American conservatives and other right-leaning individuals to read, learn and understand.”

- The Washington Times

“One of the best books of the year.”

- The Hill Times

“Justin Trudeau’s speech followed Mr. Kinsella’s playbook on beating conservatives chapter and verse...[He followed] the central theme of the Kinsella narrative: “Take back values. That’s what progressives need to do.”

- National Post

“[Kinsella] is a master when it comes to spinning and political planning...”

- George Stroumboulopoulos, CBC TV

“Kinsella pulls no punches in Fight The Right...Fight the Right accomplishes what it sets out to do – provide readers with a glimpse into the kinds of strategies that have made Conservatives successful and lay out a credible roadmap for progressive forces to regain power.”

- Elizabeth Thompson, iPolitics

“[Kinsella] deserves credit for writing this book, period... he is absolutely on the money...[Fight The Right] is well worth picking up.”

- Huffington Post

“Run, don't walk, to get this amazing book.”

- Mike Duncan, Classical 96 radio

“Fight the Right is very interesting and - for conservatives - very provocative.”

- Former Ontario Conservative leader John Tory

“His new book is great! All of his books are great!”

- Tommy Schnurmacher, CJAD

“I absolutely recommend this book.”

- Paul Wells, Maclean’s

“Kinsella puts the Left on the right track with new book!”

- Calgary Herald



Just got back from Good Friday Mass with Lisa, to receive this photo. At St. Francis’ Easter procession, which is a very, very solemn occasion, that SOB cackles on the side of the road with his loathsome brother and some others.

Maybe he was looking to score, and he forget where he was. In any event, it reminded me of how much I despise him.

20140418-165146.jpg

.


Bishop Carroll.

Just can’t stop thinking about this terrible thing. Know that street, know that neighbourhood, know the family names. The horror of it – it’s hard to shake.

20140418-104326.jpg

.


At his “historic” rally.

Back to Etobicoke with you soon, Crackhead. Soon.

20140417-213318.jpg

.


.



20140416-190747.jpg

Bjorn Von Flapjack III, Winkie, Davey Snot and Royal Niblet tonight at the Tranzac Club, on Brunswick at Bloor!

.


Also, it’s Bjorn’s birthday. I may therefore acknowledge his presence onstage, but that’s a big if.

20140410-135252.jpg

.


20140414-223651.jpg

.



…and so will the other defendants named in this big defamation action. Barring a speedy discretion-before-dishonour top-secret settlement, this thing will drag on for quite some time.  But whenever it concludes, it will do so with the Liberal leader and his inner circle losing, big time.

I haven’t read the pleadings, but what is publicly known about this little psychodrama suggests apologies, retractions and cheque-writing are in Justin Trudeau’s future.  Here’s why:

  • There were several statements made by Trudeau and his inner circle that had a tendency to defame Christine Innes’ reputation: they stated, directly, that she engaged in intimidation and threats with Young Liberals.  Chances of those Young Liberals being (a) available and/or (b) credible at the time of trial? Zero.
  • The publicly-expressed justification for the barring of Innes is completely contradicted by the privately-expressed reason: Trudeau, he of the open nomination pledge, wanted to save the seat for Chrystia Freeland. Innes has the emails to prove that. Trudeau not only will be shown to be caught in a fib, he will be found to be caught in a defamatory fib.
  • Innes has damages that are easy to measure: She was the previous candidate, twice, and now has been barred for professed reasons that (see above) are patently false.  Her professional reputation has clearly been damaged, and from coast-to-coast, too. (Personal, but not legal, source of irritation for me: Innes was ostensibly barred not for her actions, but that of her husband.  Talk about sexist.)
  • Innes has met all of the legal requirements for a winning case: identification (clear), publication (widespread) and defamatory (I’d argue it’s defamatory per se, the most serious variant).  Being a “reverse onus tort,” the legal burden now shifts to Trudeau et al. – and the presumption will be that they defamed Innes, that they were malicious, that they spoke falsely, and that there are damages.  Those things will be presumed. Ouch.

Could I be wrong? Of course.  I thought (and still feel) Divisional Court were idiotic for letting Rob Ford off the hook – I never saw that bit of historic stupidity coming.  Could happen in the Innes v. Trudeau et al. case, too.

But as things stand now, Trudeau and his advisors will lose, big time.  And the NDP’s Joe Cressy has already won a by-election that hasn’t even been called yet.

.