R Magic Brow

On Friday, Saskatchewan truck driver Chris Barber took to X and posted a photo of "Big Red," his 2003 Kenworth W900Lr. With it, he included a reminder of Canada's upcoming federal election April 28. "This is my livelihood, the breadwinner that has kept my family fed for years, and the crown seeks to destroy my life and future because we took a stand against tyranny. Government overreach at its finest. Our Canada under #Liberal rule!!!!! Vote smart #Canada" The Convoy was the largest peaceful protest in Canadian history, and these proceedings now hold the title of longest mischief trial in the history of the nation. As one of the faces of 2022's Freedom Convoy, the largest and most effective populist uprising in recent history, Barber has been subject to three years of vicious lawfare from the Liberal-controlled Canadian government. And now that same government wants to take "Big Red," which has become a symbol of the Convoy. The truck stops here On Thursday, April 3, a ruling came down in an Ottawa courtroom against Barber and another prominent Convoy protester, Tamara Lich, a grandmother and musician from Alberta. Ontario Court Justice Heather Perkins-McVey gave her final judgments on a number of charges stemming from the three-week protest in February 2022, where Barber, Lich, and thousands of others exercised their once-cherished rights to freedom of expression, hurting no one and causing no property damage as they demanded to meet Prime Minister Justin Trudeau or his underlings and negotiate an end to Trudeau’s punishing COVID regime. Perkins-McVey acknowledged the peaceful nature of the protest in her ruling, despite presiding over 45 days of government testimony spread across 20 months in a Kafka-esque show trial where the government argued over the minutiae of TikTok videos and the meaning of slogans such as “Hold the Line!” Court-sanctioned 'mischief' This entire situation has been one for the record books. The Convoy was the largest peaceful protest in Canadian history, and these proceedings now hold the title of longest mischief trial in the history of the nation. Prosecutors failed to convince Perkins-McVey of most of their cases against Lich and Barber, who were found not guilty of intimidation, along with other fraudulent and spurious charges. Lich and Barber were, however, found guilty of mischief, and Barber additionally was found guilty of disobeying a court order regarding the honking of truckers’ air horns, which became a rallying cry of the protest and an instant online meme. Barber had made a video telling his followers to honk their horns in defiance of the order if, and only if, their trucks were approached by a large group of police officers. This context didn’t move Perkins-McVey. The problem with mischief, as a criminal charge in Canada, is that it is a “property” crime, and a conviction can land you in prison for a maximum of 10 years. What was the property here? The public property of the streets of Ottawa. Hamas exception In a very peculiar part of the ruling, McVey asserts that the public’s enjoyment of the use of city streets took precedence over the Convoy’s right to protest. It ought be noted that since the tragic events in Israel in October 2023, supporters of Hamas have protested every single week, unencumbered by the government, nor have they been accused of interrupting the enjoyment of those streets. At the conclusion of the ruling, Justice Perkins-McVey sought to issue sentencing the following day, but on the objection of the prosecutors, a later date was set to … set another date. Prosecutors wanted time to assemble more victim impact statements, as if three years of hearing from Ottawa’s bureaucrats about the delusions of phantom honking wasn’t enough to assemble them all. Maybe they needed to hear about the honking again, just one more time. In case anyone forgot. 'Red' notice On April 16, we found out the punishment that the crown seeks against Lich and Barber is two years in a federal clink, and, in a request that is clearly vindictive and requires an essay of its own to unpack, the crown is seeking to seize “Big Red.” Barber’s rig had become a symbol of the Freedom Convoy, featured in thousands of pictures, videos, and memes, as it led the Western Canadian Convoy to Ottawa. Barber has owned and operated that truck since 2003 and put 3.4 million kilometers (roughly 2.1 million miles) on it, mostly hauling heavy agricultural equipment across his home province of Saskatchewan and picking up new equipment from factories in America for his customers. In the 22 years Barber has owned and operated that truck, he has raised his children in it over trips too many to count, and when his dog Buddy was approaching the end of his life, the poor old dog was put down while lying on the passenger seat: Buddy's favorite place to be.With the mischief conviction, Barber may not be allowed back into the United States to serve his customers, a pretty major blow to his business — and punishment enough, in a way. A new low What justice is served in this move by the Canadian government? In all the hundreds of prosecutions of other Convoy protesters, many of which remain ongoing, never has the government sought to seize anyone’s property. Perhaps authorities did enough of that during the protest itself, when they froze hundreds of people’s bank accounts and locked them out of economic life altogether, something that likewise happened to Barber. The actions of the banks were so comprehensive that drivers working for Barber’s small company were calling him when the bank freezings started, to tell him the fuel cards for their trucks no longer worked.It seems like the government is trying to send a message to every Canadian that dissent will not be tolerated at all and that if you defy the government diktat, the authorities will crush you, your family, and your very own business. Barack Obama famously dismissed the efforts of American business owners with his comment, “You didn’t build that.” It seems that the Canadian government, under the Liberal Party of the very recently departed Justin Trudeau, is building on Obama’s attitude. He built that It doesn't matter that Chris Barber did build something. Never mind the time and blood and sweat and sacrifice he put into his successful small trucking company. Our leaders can come and take it all away with the swipe of a pen. Truly and terribly evil — and unbecoming a once supposedly free country.Lawyers for Barber have filed for a stay of proceedings. It’s a pretty long shot, but if granted, this gross abuse of state power and capricious message-sending will be stopped. Meanwhile, in a TikTok video thanking his supporters, Barber paid tribute to "Big Red:" I bought this truck brand-new in 2003, November 26 to be exact, and I've got 3.4 million kilometers on this truck as of today. I have raised my children in this truck. I have trucked all over North America with this bad boy. It is a piece of me. It even has the little foot marks from where Jonathan as a toddler used to kick the dash with his little winter boots in the car seat. Click here to watch the message in its entirety. A version of this article previously appeared on the Autonomous Truck(er)s Substack.

NFL Hall of Famer and ESPN football analyst Shannon Sharpe was recently hit with a $50 million lawsuit accusing him of rape, battery, and emotional abuse. The plaintiff, whom Sharpe has identified as OnlyFans model Gabbi Zuniga, has accused Sharpe of raping her twice, recording sexual encounters without consent, and threatening her. Zuniga’s attorney, Tony Buzbee, who’s litigated against several high-profile black celebrities — including Jay Z, Sean "Diddy" Combs, and Deshaun Watson — released a short audio clip to TMZ, in which Sharpe can be heard telling Zuniga, “I'm going to f**king choke the s**t out of you when I see you.” Sharpe has vehemently denied all allegations, claiming the relationship was consensual and that the audio clip was intentionally edited to misrepresent a consensual interaction. Now another audio clip has been leaked, pouring even more gasoline on the controversy. This clip from March 2025 allegedly captures former NBA player Matt Barnes claiming that Shaquille O'Neal was offering "top dollar" for incriminating information on Shannon Sharpe. - YouTube “He said that Shannon did some s**t back to him a while back, and he's been awful, so that's why he's doing this. But please, please, please keep his name quiet,” Barnes allegedly says. Barnes has denied the authenticity of the audio clip, claiming it was AI-generated. Despite his denial, Jason Whitlock says high-profile celebrities putting a “financial bounty” on those they don’t like is sadly very common. “Shaq's a billionaire, and he's got a problem with Shannon Sharpe. He can put money out and say, ‘Anybody – I got 500,000 bucks or 50,000 bucks or 100,000 bucks or a million bucks if you got dirt on Shannon Sharpe,'" he says. He recalls a conversation he had with his friend, former NFL player Derrick Thomas, in the “late 1990s,” during which Thomas told him there was “animus and beef” between Shaq and Sharpe over a woman. Jason doesn’t know if this age-old rivalry has anything to do with Shaq allegedly offering a high price for dirt on Sharpe, nor does he know if the Zuniga lawsuit is connected in any way to Shaq’s alleged vendetta. “I'm not saying Shaq is involved in the downfall of Shannon Sharpe here, but what I'm saying is, like, these guys at this level, when ... you live as unrighteously as [Sharpe] has, you've left dirt out there for people to use to compromise and embarrass you and take you down,” says Jason. “Shaq makes it no secret he's some sort of mason,” he explains. He and those like him “make it no secret that they feel like they're power players in control of the culture.” This scandal, he says, shouldn’t surprise anyone. “We love to celebrate these athletic billionaires without reflecting on how much power we're granting them and then what cultures are they attached to,” Jason says. “When they all attach themselves to hip-hop — that degenerate, pagan, demonic culture … we should not be shocked at the ramifications of that and where that ends up leading.” To hear more of Jason’s commentary, watch the clip above. Want more from Jason Whitlock?To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Give George Clooney a little credit.The star played a doctor on NBC’s “ER” for five seasons, but he never dragged a stranger into surgery to remove his gallbladder.David’s 'My Dinner with Adolf' op-ed in the New York Times earlier this week got a lot of attention, in part because it’s the first time David created something profoundly unfunny.“I’m not a doctor, but I play one on TV.”Too bad he doesn’t take a similar approach to his newest gig. He’s starring as journalist Edward R. Murrow in “Good Night, and Good Luck,” the Broadway adaptation of his 2005 film. Now, everywhere, Clooney is weighing in on the state of journalism as if he spent decades under the tutelage of Woodward and/or Bernstein.He didn’t. And it shows. Every time he hails the glory of the fourth estate, he ignores how it covered up President Joe Biden’s obvious dementia-like condition. Even worse for Clooney? He did, too. He saw the diminished Biden up close and personal at a DNC fundraiser last June but didn’t write his "Get Out, Joe” New York Times op-ed until weeks later.The least Clooney can do now is act a little embarrassed ...Netflix to cinemas: Drop deadTed Sarandos has vision. To a point.The Netflix CEO lords over the mightiest streaming platform —the one that inspired “Netflix and chill” — and has scared movie studios silly.Why? Netflix churns out film-quality “content” that allows consumers to stay home rather than go to the cineplex.That’s a dying model anyway, Sarandos argues.“Folks grew up thinking, ‘I want to make movies on a gigantic screen and have strangers watch them [and to have them] play in the theater for two months and people cry and sold-out shows. ... It’s an outdated concept.”In the same speech, Sarandos explained why theaters will go the way of the eight-track tape.“If you’re fortunate to live ... in Manhattan, and you can walk to a multiplex and see a movie, that’s fantastic. Most of the country cannot.”Shhh! Nobody tell him they invented these box-like contraptions that take people from point A to point B on just a few drops of fossil fuel ...Jar Jar's comebackWe’re sorry, George! (Lucas, not Clooney.)The “Star Wars” maestro caught endless heat for his prequel films: “The Phantom Menace,” “Attack of the Clones,” and “Revenge of the Sith.” The trio couldn’t replicate the magic of his original saga.And to be blunt, Padme, Anakin, and Jar Jar Binks never joined the pop culture canon like Han, Chewie, and friends.Now, “Revenge of the Sith” is getting a re-release for its 20th anniversary, and the film could make a pretty penny. Initial calls say it’ll make $25-plus million, a remarkable sum for a title that’s been available on home video for years.That’s also more than brand-new films like “Until Dawn” and “The Accountant 2” will earn in their debut frames.Movie studios might want to give their film libraries a long look moving forward. It might be more profitable than greenlighting yet another remake or reboot ...Marvel's 'Fantastic' fanaticsSpeaking of reboots, the actors behind the upcoming “Fantastic Four” update have a message for Rachel Zegler. Hold our beer.First, Vanessa Kirby and Joseph Quinn (Invisible Girl and the Human Torch, respectively) trashed the comic book source material as antiquated, much like Zegler did with Disney’s “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.”Now, co-star Pedro Pascal is declaring war on beloved author J.K. Rowling. Her crime, in the actor’s eyes? She cheered on the U.K.’s Supreme Court for deciding that men are men and women are women. Oh, and she doesn’t think trans women should compete against biological women.The horror, the horror.Pascal called for a boycott of the new “Harry Potter” Max series and all things Rowling.Is this any way to promote a movie? “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” hits theaters July 25. We’ll see if the Zegler effect hampers its box-office tally ...Maher's fuhrer furorThat’s what friends aren’t for.Larry David took his pal Bill Maher to the woodshed for daring to break bread with President Donald Trump earlier this month. David’s “My Dinner with Adolf” op-ed in the New York Times earlier this week got a lot of attention, in part because it’s the first time David created something profoundly unfunny.Well, Maher is firing back at his “friend,” although it appears their bond may be fading fast.“But you know, to use the Hitler thing, first of all, I just think it’s kind of insulting to six million dead Jews. You know, like, that should kind of be in its own place in history.”Read it again with the “Curb Your Enthusiasm” theme music playing. Loud.

On April 2, President Trump announced a sweeping policy of reciprocal tariffs aimed at severing America’s economic dependence on China. His goal: to reshore American industry and restore national self-sufficiency. How can the United States defend its independence while relying on Chinese ships, machinery, and computers? It can’t. Tariffs aren’t just about economics. They are a matter of national survival. But time is short. Trump has just four years to prove that tariffs can bring back American manufacturing. The challenge is steep — but not unprecedented. Nations like South Korea and Japan have done it. So has the United States in earlier eras. We can do it again. Here’s how. Escaping the altar of globalism Tariffs were never just about economics. They’re about self-suffiency. A self-sufficient America doesn’t depend on foreign powers for its prosperity — or its defense. Political independence means nothing without economic independence. America’s founders learned that lesson the hard way: No industry, no nation. The entire supply chain lives offshore. America doesn’t just import chips — it imports the ability to make them. That’s a massive strategic vulnerability. During the Revolutionary War, British soldiers weren’t the only threat. British factories were just as dangerous. The colonies relied on British imports for everything from textiles to muskets. Without manufacturing, they had no means to wage war. Victory only became possible when France began supplying the revolution, sending over 80,000 firearms. That lifeline turned the tide. After the Revolution, George Washington wrote: A free people ought not only to be armed, but ... their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies. Washington’s first major legislative achievement was the Tariff Act of 1789. Two years later, Alexander Hamilton released his “Report on Manufactures,” a foundational blueprint for American industrial strategy. Hamilton didn’t view tariffs as mere taxes — he saw them as the engine for national development. For nearly two centuries, America followed Hamilton’s lead. Under high tariffs, the nation prospered and industrialized. In fact, the U.S. maintained the highest average tariff rates in the 19th century. By 1870, America produced one-quarter of the world’s manufactured goods. By 1945, it produced half. The United States wasn’t just an economic powerhouse — it was the world’s factory. That changed in the 1970s. Washington elites embraced globalism. The result? America has run trade deficits every year since 1974. The cumulative total now exceeds $25 trillion in today’s dollars. Meanwhile, American companies have poured $6.7 trillion into building factories, labs, and infrastructure overseas. And as if outsourcing weren’t bad enough, foreign governments and corporations have stolen nearly $10 trillion worth of American intellectual property and technology. The consequences have been devastating. Since the 1980s, more than 60,000 factories have moved overseas — to China, Mexico, and Europe. The result? The United States has lost over 5 million well-paying manufacturing jobs. This industrial exodus didn’t just hollow out factories — it gutted middle-class bargaining power. Once employers gained the ability to offshore production, they no longer had to reward rising productivity with higher wages. That historic link — more output, more pay — was severed. Today, American workers face a brutal equation: Take the deal on the table, or the job goes to China. The “race to the bottom” isn’t a slogan. It’s an economic policy — and it’s killing the American middle class. Offshoring has crippled American industry, turning the United States into a nation dependent on foreign suppliers. Technology offers the clearest example. In 2024, the U.S. imported $763 billion in advanced technology products. That includes a massive trade deficit in semiconductors, which power the brains of everything from fighter jets to toasters. If imports stopped, America would grind to a halt. Worse, America doesn’t even make the machines needed to produce chips. Photolithography systems — critical to chip fabrication — come from the Netherlands. They’re shipped to Taiwan, where the chips are made and then sold back to the U.S. The entire supply chain lives offshore. America doesn’t just import chips — it imports the ability to make them. That’s not just dependency. That’s a massive strategic vulnerability. And the problem extends far beyond tech. The U.S. imports its steel, ball bearings, cars, and oceangoing ships. China now builds far more commercial vessels than the United States — by orders of magnitude. How can America call itself a global power when it can no longer command the seas? What happens if China stops shipping silicon chips to the U.S.? Or if it cuts off something as basic as shoes or light bulbs? No foreign power should hold that kind of leverage over the American people. And while China does, America isn’t truly free. No freer than a newborn clinging to a bottle. Dependence breeds servitude. Make America self-sufficient again Trump has precious little time to prove that reindustrializing America isn’t just a slogan — it’s possible. But he won’t get there with half-measures. “Reciprocal” tariffs? That’s a distraction. Pausing tariffs for 90 days to sweet-talk foreign leaders? That delays progress. Spooking the stock market with mixed signals? That sabotages momentum. To succeed, Trump must start with one urgent move: establish high, stable tariffs — now, not later. Tariffs must be high enough to make reshoring profitable. If it’s still cheaper to build factories in China or Vietnam and just pay a tariff, then the tariff becomes little more than a tax — raising revenue but doing nothing to bring industry home. What’s the right rate? Time will tell, but Trump doesn’t have time. He should impose immediate overkill tariffs of 100% on day one to force the issue. Better to overshoot than fall short. That figure may sound extreme, but consider this: Under the American System, the U.S. maintained average tariffs above 30% — without forklifts, without container ships, and without globalized supply chains. In modern terms, we’d need to go higher just to match that level of protection. South Korea industrialized with average tariffs near 40%. And the Koreans had key advantages — cheap labor and a weak currency. America has neither. Tariffs must bridge the gap. Just as important: Tariffs must remain stable. No company will invest trillions to reindustrialize the U.S. if rates shift every two weeks. They’ll ride out the storm, often with help from foreign governments eager to keep their access to American consumers. President Trump must pick a strong, flat tariff — and stick to it. This is our last chance Tariffs must also serve their purpose: reindustrialization. If they don’t advance that goal, they’re useless. Start with raw materials. Industry needs them cheap. That means zero tariffs on inputs like rare earth minerals, iron, and oil. Energy independence doesn’t come from taxing fuel — it comes from unleashing it. Next, skip tariffs on goods America can’t produce. We don’t grow coffee or bananas. So taxing them does nothing for American workers or factories. It’s a scam — a cash grab disguised as policy. Tariff revenue should fund America’s comeback. Imports won’t vanish overnight, which means revenue will flow. Use it wisely. Cut taxes for domestic manufacturers. Offer low-interest loans for large-scale industrial projects. American industry runs on capital — Washington should help supply it. A more innovative use of tariff revenue? Help cover the down payments for large-scale industrial projects. American businesses often struggle to raise capital for major builds. This plan fixes that. Secure the loans against the land, then recoup them with interest when the land sells. It’s a smart way to jump-start American reindustrialization and build capital fast. But let’s be clear: Tariffs alone won’t save us. Trump must work with Congress to slash taxes and regulations. America needs a business environment that rewards risk and investment, not one that punishes it. That means rebuilding crumbling infrastructure — railways, ports, power grids, and fiber networks. It means unlocking cheap energy from coal, hydro, and next-gen nuclear. This is the final chance to reindustrialize. Another decade of globalism will leave American industry too hollowed out to recover. Great Britain was once the workshop of the world. Now it’s a cautionary tale. Trump must hold the line. Impose high, stable tariffs. Reshore the factories. And bring the American dream roaring back to life.