Tokyo 2020’s Laurel Hubbard—a 41-year-old transgender weightlifter—could become the first biological male to win an Olympic medal after testosterone suppression, sparking outrage from athletes like Deborah Akason and Tracy Lambrex, who dropped weight classes to avoid competing. Critics argue Hubbard retains male advantages, citing Zuby’s viral 500-pound lift as proof of absurdity in gender-inclusive sports policies. Meanwhile, Tulsi Gabbard sues Google for $50M over ad suppression during her 2020 campaign, framing it as a democratic threat, while Republicans push bills like Hawley’s and Gosar’s to curb tech bias. Legal battles also target Canadian journalist Sheila Gonridi amid claims of political persecution, exposing tensions between free speech and institutional power. The episode questions whether fairness in sports and media is being sacrificed for ideological conformity. [Automatically generated summary]
I got a strange show for you today and I know we're doing the podcast here so you're gonna have to take my word for the descriptions of people but I show about 20 pictures of people because I talk about women, men, and men who say they're women.
I'm talking about weightlifting and a lot of athletes including very strong Samoan weightlifting women, women who compete for weightlifting.
A lot of the strong competitors from Samoa.
You know, Samoans are very strong, look at the rock.
But there's a guy who's taking all those women's championships now.
He's a guy named Gavin Hubbard.
He calls himself Laurel now.
And he says, no, I'm a gal.
No, I'm a gal.
And you got to let me compete against the gals.
And so he's winning.
And you have all these sad girls who've worked their whole life at bodybuilding and they're just getting pushed aside from this guy.
And I asked the question, so how are the Olympics going to go?
The Olympics are a year away.
Anyways, I hope the podcast works for you because you'll have to take my description of these things.
The reason I emphasize the visual is because you can get access to the video side of this, the video form of this monologue, by becoming a Rebel Premium subscriber.
And you just go to the rebel.media slash shows.
It's $8 a month.
And you get the video of my show plus Sheila Gonridi's show and David Mancy's show.
And the money helps us float the boat here.
So without further ado, here is my commentary on how trans athletes are going to destroy half the Olympics.
Tonight, the Olympics are less than a year away.
What will they do with all the transgender cheaters?
It's July 26th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
The 2020 Summer Olympics will be in Tokyo next year.
I think it's going to be pretty exciting.
I mean, I get it.
Most people don't care about most of the sports and most of the athletes year-round.
But it's hard not to get into the morale of it, the spirit of it when you finally see it.
There's something, I think, deep within the human spirit that loves these competitions, the thrill of them, the tribalism, but also the sportsmanship and the camaraderie.
The Greeks knew what they were doing with their Olympic Games, and the Romans knew the value of their Coliseums, didn't they?
And of course, it's big business.
This is a Forbes magazine roundup of some of the Olympics' financial stats.
The last Olympics in Korea apparently had a $13 billion budget.
I'm not even sure how it's possible, but the Sochi Olympics in Russia apparently cost, what, $50 billion plus?
I don't know how.
Which is about what the Beijing Olympics cost too, whether they say $44 billion.
A lot of that is surely corruption in Russia and China.
A lot of that's propaganda, getting those two authoritarian regimes looking presentable to the rest of the world.
But my point is how much money is riding on the success of the Olympics, which is measured partly by how smoothly these events go, but also, of course, by how many people watch them, right?
One more set of stats from that same Forbes article.
They note that NBC, the American TV network, paid $4.4 billion for the broadcast rights through till next year, and then another $7.65 billion for the dozen years after that.
I find that incredible.
And just the domestic sponsorships in Japan next year, so that's just in Japan, are $3 billion.
I guess they think the Japanese are going to just love having the Olympics.
I'm sure they will, actually.
Okay, and now I've made my point.
These things are huge, the hugest.
That's my point.
So what do you think of this?
It's a story in the BBC.
Sharon Davies fears for female athletes at Tokyo Olympic Games.
Really?
What's going to happen?
What's going to happen to them?
Well, it's a BBC story from the UK.
Sharon Davies, by the way, is a championship swimmer for the UK.
She has won medals in the past.
She went to the Olympics for them.
She's continued as a sports commentator.
And listen to what she's saying about the Olympics for women.
She's afraid for them.
Let me read.
It will take female athletes being thrown under the bus at Tokyo 2020 before changes are made to transgender rules, says ex-swimmer Sharon Davies.
International Olympic Committee guidelines state that transgender women must suppress testosterone levels for at least 12 months before competition.
But in March, Davies and others wrote to the IOC calling for more research.
In Tokyo, Laurel Hubbard of New Zealand could become the first transgender female to win an Olympic medal.
The 41-year-old weightlifter, you can see the top of his head down there below, won two golds at the Pacific Games earlier in July.
Now, let me stop just for a moment.
That's Laurel Hubbard.
And note that the BBC is calling Laurel Hubbard a transgender female.
I appreciate that adjective, transgender female, because the CBC and pretty much the rest of the media in Canada and the U.S. wouldn't have the adjective transgender female.
They would just say female.
They would call her she.
They would go along with that.
But I'm sorry, that's just not the case.
This is a pure emperor has no clothes moment.
That would be like calling Rachel Dolitzall.
Remember her?
The white girl who claimed to be black and did her hair maybe in a black style.
And actually, she became a spokesman for the NAACP, the black civil rights group.
It would be like calling her black.
I mean, I know she wants to be black and she loves black people, but she ain't black.
Because black actually has an objective meaning.
You can't just say you're black.
If you can just say you're black, then I can just say I'm the king of Spain.
Now, I can even believe that I am, but I don't think the media would start calling me your Royal Highness.
So I'm sorry, but Laurel Hubbard is not a woman.
In fact, until just a few moments ago, Laurel Hubbard was Gavin Hubbard, a moderately successful weightlifter as a guy.
He actually seems like a good bloke.
There's a great picture of him as a man on that page.
You go out for beer and wings with him.
He won some medals when he was 20.
He won them as a young man, but he's not as a young man now.
There he is as a woman.
He's not Gavin anymore.
He's Laurel Hubbard.
And he's crushing it.
Let me read a little bit more from the BBC website.
After Samoa's Commonwealth Games champion, Figa Stowers, I hope I'm saying that right, missed out on a medal.
Hubbard's participation was criticized.
Now, Stowers, this is a picture of Figa Stowers.
Forgive me if I got the name wrong.
She is Samoan.
That's an ethnicity.
That's a group of islands.
Now, she's born a woman.
She's genetically a woman.
She's strong.
You know, a lot of Samoans are strong.
That's not an ethnic stereotype.
I'm not being prejudiced.
It's just an observation.
The same way so many Kenyans win marathons.
There is such a thing as human biodiversity.
I'm just saying Figa Stowers is absolutely a strong woman, but she's 100% woman.
And I'm not surprised at all that a Samoan would be so strong.
You know, the rock, Dwayne Johnson, he's half Samoan.
Look at the guy.
You can see there's sort of a Samoan body type.
Of course, he's strong.
So this Hubbard, the guy who's now a gal, he went to this weightlifting championship in Samoa, but not to compete as a guy.
He competed as the girls.
Now they're strong girls.
You saw them, the Samoan girls, but he crushed them because, I mean, I don't care how strong you are as a girl.
You're not going to be stronger than a man who says he's a girl, even if he's in his 40s and washed up.
Here's the Samoa Observer newspaper.
That's another Samoan girl named Iuniara Sipaya, a real Samoan girl.
Forgive me if my pronunciation is wrong.
She looks like a great weightlifter.
She looks really strong, but I mean, look at that.
That's a strong woman, and that's 100% woman.
But I'm sorry, that's not strong enough to beat a man.
It's just not.
So yeah, Gavin Hubbard beat Sipaya.
So brave of him.
So sportsmanlike.
Here's the Washington Post.
They did a little roundup on the subject, quoting another female athlete who was there, and let me quote from the Washington Post, which was quoting from a local New Zealand paper.
If I was in that category, I wouldn't feel like I was in an equal situation, two-time Olympian Deborah Akason, who competes at the 75-kilogram level, told New Zealand news site stuff.
I just feel that if it's not even, why are we doing the sport?
Yeah, good point.
Another female athlete dropped weight classes to avoid Hubbard.
You know what I mean by weight classes, right?
Tracy Lambrex, who competed for New Zealand at the Rio Olympics last summer, dropped weight classes to avoid facing Hubbard, who would have taken Lambrex's Olympic spot had she been ready to compete in the Olympic qualifying events last year.
I'm more than happy that she has become a female.
I have no problem with that, as everybody needs to do what they need to do to be happy with life, Lambrex told New Zealand's Radio Live earlier this month.
Personally, I think they should be able to compete, but they shouldn't be able to take spots from other female athletes.
Oh, you're going to jail for that one.
Now, this is Tracy.
She looks like a strong girl.
Tracy Lambrex, and she's a girl.
She is a woman.
She's obviously worked hard at her sport, but who cares?
A 40-year-old man who calls himself a woman is going to crush her every time.
Is that fun?
Is that sports?
Not for the girls, but we're talking about the Olympics.
Is that going to be fun for the Olympics?
There's a reason why men and women compete in separate competitions.
There's a reason why sports have different gradations.
In boxing, you match heavyweights against heavyweights, lightweights against lightweights.
That's why you have a weigh-in, because if you're 50 pounds heavier than a guy, sorry, that ain't a fair fight.
Because yes, we know that a heavyweight could probably crush a lightweight 99 times out of 100.
That's not really sport.
That's really not fun to watch, and it's not sportsmanlike.
So we have different sex categories.
We have different weight categories.
Some sports have different age categories, acknowledging that middle-aged or even seniors have different natural characteristics, and they can still compete against each other, and that can still be really fun and sporty.
So if Gavin, I mean, Laurel Hubbard, is now allowed just to go in and beat all the girls, will he really go to the Olympics and bravely beat all the girls there?
Well, he would beat the girls there.
I mean, look, a real weightlifter, his own size and weight and sex, would crush him because he's just a washed up guy, but he's still going to crush the girls.
I love showing this clip from Seinfeld of Kramer, the goofy guy, who was so proud that he beat everybody at the Taekwondo gym.
Yeah, no, they just happen to be kids.
Remember this?
Yes, Sansi.
Funny stance.
I mean, that's really funny.
I've seen that ten times.
I always laugh.
But that is a television comedy.
I don't think any real sports enthusiasts would watch that, let alone pay to watch that.
But hey, if Gavin Hubbard can compete, why not a rapper named Zuby?
His real name is Inzube Udezu, and he goes by Zuby, and he's an entertainer.
Here's a clip of who he is.
I like his smile.
You know, he's a really avid fitness buff.
You can't really tell there.
He's actually a very accomplished weightlifter.
I don't think he competes or anything, but it's clear he just loves, loves, loves doing it.
And he is strong.
He's strong.
He's fit.
And he's stronger than just about any woman in the world.
And he knows it.
And that doesn't make him proud because he knows he's a man.
He would perhaps like to be stronger than any man in the world.
That's sport.
But a man being stronger than any woman in the world for a man is about as much as an achievement as Kramer beating those children in Taekwondo.
But here's Zuby saying he is now officially the strongest woman in the United Kingdom because he is identifying as a woman.
And what?
He is some sort of transphobic bigot or something?
I keep hearing, oh, there you go.
Watch that video.
Now hold that on the screen for a second.
Let me read it.
He tweeted, I keep hearing about how biological men don't have any physical strength advantage over women in 2019.
So watch me destroy the British women's deadlift record without trying.
P.S.
I identified as a woman whilst lifting the weight.
Don't be a bigot.
And I don't know if you can see, there's a lot of plates on that barbell there that, I mean, that was, I think that was about 500 pounds.
I don't care how strong you are.
If you are a woman, you're not lifting 500 pounds.
And Zuby did it.
So in one afternoon, he just beat, and he did another one and another one and another one.
And he just beat every weightlifting record for British women.
Live Rainbows?00:04:43
For women.
Now, it was a gag, of course, because of course he's not a woman.
And he's not seriously saying he's a woman.
He was making a point.
If he says he's a woman, what do you want to be transphobic and racist?
You better admit he's a woman.
Let me read the rest of that BBC story that I started with.
Sharon Davis, Davies said, that's that real female former Olympian who's worried.
Here's what she said.
An Olympic silver medalist in 1980, Davies, who said she has had no response from the International Olympic Committee since writing to it, says the body is conducting a live experiment.
Yeah, ain't that the truth?
The Britain told BBC Sport, I find it extraordinary that Hubbard winning medals is where we have to go before the IOC open their eyes.
I'm positive things will change, but the problem is we will be throwing females under the bus before it does change.
I think she's right.
And I mean, it's quirky and it's weird when you have one guy winning and a bunch of sad Samoan women standing around saying, that could have been me, it should have been me.
It's funny when you have Zubi making Twitter jokes.
He seems like a real card, doesn't he?
I like him.
But what happens when?
Not if, but when?
It's not one kook named Gavin Hubbard, but it's well it's it's a bunch of them.
Um three, four, five, ten, twenty guys compete in every women's sports championship.
So it's not just Hubbard standing in the gold medal stage and two sad women in silver and bronze who should have been gold and silver.
It's Hubbard and two other guys, or more likely just three other guys who are actually really, really strong, like Zuby.
And Laurel Hubbard is now just washed up just like Gavin Hubbard is.
My point is, is anyone going to pay to watch those kinds of Olympics?
Would you watch a women's Olympics event if there were male competitors, the best of the best, and then the women's competitors, the best of the worst, by which I mean the best of the guys who couldn't compete against the other guys or the compete against girls?
Would you watch an Olympics where you have the real men going against real men?
That's going to be great competition.
And then you have the fake men going after any women that left.
There's not going to be any real girls left there.
It's going to be the real men and then the men saying they're women.
You know, a few weeks ago, the U.S. women's soccer team won their championship and they immediately started complaining that they get paid less than male soccer players.
It is true.
It's absolutely true.
And it's math because far, far fewer people watch women soccer than watch men's soccer.
The reason why the Olympics are so staggeringly rich are in part because the whole world watches them.
NBC is not a patron of the arts.
They don't care about charity.
They're not giving a gift with that money.
They think they can make a profit off the Olympics rights by selling ads.
People don't watch women's soccer as much as they watch men's soccer for a variety of reasons.
But one of them, I'm sorry to say it, might be because some people know that they're not watching the absolute best of the best of the best in the world when it comes to soccer.
I'm sorry to say that.
But we know that when a team of teenaged boys beat those U.S. women's champions, that sort of proves the point a bit.
If women's soccer has weak TV ratings and thus a weak commercial basis, what do you think it's going to be like when it's just a bunch of second-rate guys who say they're girls?
Hey, do me a favor.
The Olympics, all of its sponsors, all of the government and quasi-government agencies involved in the Olympics and amateur sports, please stop pretending that you're feminists or even for equal treatment of women.
You're not.
We are about to see a mass purge of every athletic woman in the world because we found something more woke than women, and that's men who say they're women, who then beat women in a sport.
You know, someone might even call that misogynistic.
Stay with us for more.
Google's Role in Political Ads00:13:17
Where I live, there are rainbows.
Flowers full of colours and birds filled with sun.
I can smile when it's raining.
Touch the warmth of the sun.
I hear children laughing In this place that I love where I live, there are rainbows.
There's life in the laughter of the morning and star starry night Look at that.
I would say those two people are not only a little bit beautiful, they're a little bit cool.
And what's so unusual is that that woman isn't just sort of some cool Hawaiian lady.
Her name is Tulsi Gabbard, and she is running to be the president of the United States.
She's seeking the Democratic Party nomination.
And normally I'm somewhat cautious of people wearing flower lays and playing ukulele's, but she's very interesting.
I mean, she's a military veteran, the Hawaii Army National Guard.
She has very interesting views about freedom and non-interventionism.
I got to tell you, if I had to pick a Democrat, and I don't, but if I did, I would pick Tulsi Gabbard from the amazing state of Hawaii.
Now, the funny thing is, in some of the early Democratic Party debates, Tulsi was a breakout.
She broke away from the PAC.
Everybody already knows and have a view, has a view on people like, oh, I don't know, Vice President Joe Biden.
But Tulsi was new and fresh, and she instantly became the most searched-for person on the internet, the most Googled.
But at precisely that moment, Google disabled her search accounts.
She's suing them now.
And here to join us to talk about this is our friend Alan Bokari, the senior tech correspondent for Breitbart.com.
Great to see you, Alan.
Hi, Ezra.
Good to see you.
I like Tulsi.
I mean, of course, I'm a Trump guy, but if I had to choose a Democrat, there's a lot of things I like about her.
And even the fact that she's from Hawaii, she's sort of a dissenter, an anomaly outside the establishment.
I think there's a lot to like.
She seemed to connect with viewers, I guess, if everyone was Googling her, right?
That's right.
She was the most Google candidate after the first Democratic debate.
And it was at precisely that moment, according to this new lawsuit by Gabbard against Google, that Google decided to suspend her ads account.
So she was heavily restricted in her ability to reach all of those people who were Googling her at the very moment that they were most interested in doing so.
I think Tulsi's right to be suspicious about this because she's not an ordinary Democratic candidate.
She tries to avoid identity politics.
She's very anti-war, very anti-establishment.
The establishment don't like her.
In fact, the media has even tried to connect her to the Russian interference narrative.
They're saying she's Russia's favorite candidate, much the same way they did to Trump.
So they're behaving in the same way to Tulsi that they did to Bernie Sanders in 2016.
They see her as this dangerous anti-establishment outsider.
And Google has very close ties to the Democratic establishment.
So I think Tulsi is absolutely right to be suspicious here.
Yeah, I mean, listen, I don't agree with everything.
I don't agree with anything any politician has to say, but I find her remarkably free.
Like, she doesn't play a lot of the cards that the Democrats do.
And I agree with you.
Just because she doesn't want to indulge in elective wars of opportunity, I don't, I mean, to allege that she is somehow in collusion with Russia or Syria because she doesn't want to casually get involved in another Afghanistan or another Iraq.
Frankly, that's Trump's position, too.
I wouldn't call it isolationism.
I'd say it's about not being globo cop and not sacrificing another 2,500 Americans as were sacrificed in Afghanistan.
And by the way, over 150 Canadians, too.
I don't know.
I like her a lot.
Tell me what it means to have her Google ad account suspended.
So people who were Googling her could still find her on the search engine, right?
It was just her ability to advertise to them was shut down.
Is that what went on?
Well, her ability to advertise to anyone on Google was shut down.
So people who were searching for her, people who weren't searching for her.
And, you know, the way Google ads works is that if an ad appears related to what you're searching for, so, you know, if the Tulsi Gabbard campaign ad appeared as people were searching for Tulsi Gabbard, that would be that normally that's judged as a very accurate ad.
That's the kind of ads that Google tries to encourage to appear next to search results.
But in this case, Gabbard was totally stopped from doing that.
And she's now introduced a lawsuit against Google asking for 50 million in damages because of that lost opportunity there.
And it also accuses Google of many other things that Concerned has been talking about, that you and I have been talking about for a while, which is that Google has this vast influence over democratic elections, while at the same time having no accountability and no transparency.
You know, I'm so glad to read this in your report and Alam.
I'm not surprised by that at all.
I would think that this would be front page news everywhere, but alas, as with the attempt to marginalize Tulsi in other ways, I think this has been ignored.
Let me read the three tweets that Tulsi Gabbard tweeted about this, and I learned this again from your report.
I'll just read them.
Her first one says, in the hours following the first debate, while millions of Americans searched for info about Tulsi, Google suspended her search ad account without explanation.
It is vital to our democracy that big tech companies can't affect the outcome of elections.
So that's very interesting that there was no explanation.
I find that completely believable.
We have been hit the same way.
No explanation, no warning, no appeal, no transparency.
And I like the fact that she's calling them out for meddling.
Let me just read two more of her tweets, and then I'd love your comment on this, Alam.
Her second tweet was, Google controls 80% of 88% of internet search in the U.S., giving it control over our access to information.
Google's arbitrary suspension of the account of a presidential candidate should be of concern to all Americans.
Very hard to disagree with that.
And let me read the third tweet and then I'll invite you back, Alam.
Google's discrimination against our campaign reveals the danger of their dominance and how the dominance of big tech over public discourse threatens core American values.
They threaten our democracy and Tulsi will fight back on behalf of all Americans.
Normally, Alam, the Democrat narrative on big tech is we need you to help us combat fake news.
It's Republicans who usually say lay off the partisanship.
I think Tulsi is reaching out to moderates and independents by saying, I care about free speech too.
It's not just a Republican value.
Absolutely.
And, you know, this isn't the first time that a Democrat has called out Silicon Valley of censorship.
Elizabeth Warren also called out Facebook after they suspended one of her ads.
The difference is that Elizabeth Warren is pretty much, other than that one incident, Elizabeth Warren holds the party line on Silicon Valley censorship.
She, well, in that case, she condemned Facebook for censorship.
She later condemned Facebook for allowing a parody doctored video of Nancy Pelosi to spread.
So, you know, she's happy to demand more censorship from the tech giants when she wants to.
That's Elizabeth Warren.
But Tulsi has always been consistent in her case that Silicon Valley is censoring, is a threat to free speech, is a threat to elections.
She's actually said this before Google interfered with Haran.
So she's quite consistent on this topic.
And actually, she's more in line with Democratic voters because there was a Pew survey, I believe, last year or 2017 that shows a majority of both Republicans and Democrats believe that social media companies routinely censor political opinions.
So the Democratic voters are with Tulsi on this.
Isn't that interesting?
They actually don't agree with people like Jerry Nadler and Maisie Hirono, Democratic politicians who say that censorship is just a made-up conspiracy theory by the political right.
I've just learned about this from your piece, so I thank you for doing that reporting.
Have you had a chance to examine the actual lawsuit itself?
If so, do you have any information for us about it?
And also, does it have any hope?
Because in the past, lawsuits against these tech giants have generally been dismissed because their terms of service are so one-sided.
It's basically take it or leave it.
If you don't like Google, go elsewhere.
Yeah, so the problem this and other lawsuits will run into is that tech companies are protected by something called, I believe we discussed this before, section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which gives tech companies broad powers to censor for almost any reason.
And, you know, worryingly, USMCA, the new trade bill that's being pushed by the Trump administration, actually entrenches that power of tech companies, a sort of legal perk that no other company other than the Silicon Valley Giants enjoy.
So that's a problem this lawsuit and indeed any lawsuit against the tech giants will run into.
But the fact that it's coming from a Democratic presidential candidate is going to be a huge embarrassment for Google.
And it's going to attract press coverage in a way that other lawsuits haven't.
So the more lawsuits that these companies face over bias, you know, the higher profile this issue will become and the more pressure they'll face.
So will it be successful?
I know I'm not a lawyer.
I can't really give you an answer to that question.
Section 230 has in the past stopped lawsuits like this.
But the more they face, the more pressure they will be under.
And that's a problem for Silicon Valley.
Last question for you.
And thanks for your time, Alam.
As always, we really enjoy it.
A couple of weeks ago, Donald Trump had a social media summit at the White House where he invited a number of people who were active on Twitter and YouTube.
He expressly and conspicuously did not invite the mainstream media.
And it was chaired by Harmeet Dylan, who is a free speech lawyer.
That's James DeMoore's lawyer suing Google for firing him for his concerted politics.
She's very effective.
By the way, I should disclose she is a lawyer, one of our lawyers on censorship issues.
I saw other lawyers there, Ron Coleman, another free speech lawyer, again, one of our free speech lawyers.
So I'm excited that Trump is meeting with people who truly care.
But it's one thing to meet.
It's another thing to tweet.
Both of those are different from taking action.
We're coming up on 2020.
These guys are, if they're willing to stop Tulsi Gabbard, you know they'll be obsessed with stopping Donald Trump.
Is the president going to actually do anything here, Alam?
Well, the question is, what can he do?
So he has, the Justice Department has launched an antitrust investigation into Google, although whether antitrust can really be used to tackle the censorship question, that's another issue.
Maybe it could be some part of the settlement.
Who knows?
Really, you need Congress to take action and change Section 230.
But Senator Josh Hawley has introduced a bill to that effect.
Just today, actually, Representative Paul Gosar introduced a Stop Online Censorship Act to do the same thing, amend that law, make it easier for censored users on these platforms to sue the companies.
But, you know, they've got a Democratic majority to get passed in the House.
You know, maybe minus Tulsi Gabbard.
So it's going to be very difficult.
Congress moves slowly on these issues.
As for Trump, well, one thing he kind of brought this up a few times is just deny federal contracts to big tech companies, start using alternative platforms.
But whether that'll be enough really to take these guys down or stop them from censoring or interfering in the election is another issue.
I'm increasingly pessimistic about whether there'll be any serious curbing of their ability to interfere in the Democratic pressures before 2020.
So I think that if Donald Trump wins in 2020, it'll be despite Silicon Valley censorship, not because they managed to stop it.
Yeah.
Why Am I Spending My Money?00:04:28
Well, Alan, always educational, always depressing to get the news from you.
But thank God you're covering it because so few people are.
I appreciate your work, and I would encourage all of our rebel viewers to check you out at Breitbart.com.
You are the master of this beat, and we're grateful for your input.
Thanks, my friend.
Thanks, Ezra.
All right, there you have it.
Alan Bukhari is the senior tech correspondent for Breitbart.com.
Stay with us, Moran.
Hey, welcome back.
We received a lot of letters about the show Wednesday on our campaign to save Sheila.
Carol writes, What kind of society are we in?
It's like I'm having a nightmare wide awake on a regular basis.
Yesterday, we imprisoned people like Tommy Robinson and Assange for exposing the truth.
Today, we go after a woman for writing a book.
Yeah, I don't even get it because, I mean, you know, to write a book, you put the words down, and that's just the creative act, the journalistic act.
And then to publish a book, what does that mean?
Well, it's the person who takes the words, lays them out, puts them in a book, sells it, does all the bits, like it's the business side, right?
So the Rebel is the publisher of Sheila's book.
And we also promoted her book online and with those fun election style launch lines.
So if there was some problem with the book itself, the price of the book, the marketing of the book, the promotion of the book, that's me.
Now, obviously, there's nothing wrong with the book.
We live in a free country.
The election law clearly exempts books from anything.
So obviously we're fine.
But if there were a problem and there is not, well, talk to me.
The publisher.
My company name is on the book, published by Rebel News Network.
The reason they're going after Sheila is because they hate her.
But that's not a good reason to go after someone.
She's not the publisher.
Do you see what I mean?
It's outrageous that they would go after her or me.
But if you've got a problem with the book, come for me.
Why are they picking on Sheila, the journalist?
And do they really think that we would not help our dear friend Sheila?
Unbelievable.
It'll be interesting to see what journalists come to our aid.
I don't mean financially, I mean morally.
I see a few of them in Toronto.
Laurie Goldstein is one.
He's with the Toronto Sun.
Joe Warmington is one.
He's with the Toronto Sun also.
Brian Passifium, he's with Post Media.
He's been friendly.
And I'm almost done my list of journalists in Canada who are standing with Sheila.
Bob Wrights, donation on its way to help fight back against NDP depravity.
Well, thank you, Barb.
And yes, it was NDP depravity, but I should point out that Rachel Notley is no longer premier, is she?
James Wrights, his job is to get Sheila to incriminate herself.
He wants Sheila to do his work for him.
Best advice when he calls, saying nothing except call my lawyer.
Well, yeah, and that's, in fact, a few days ago, our lawyer sent a letter to Ken Brander and said, stop talking to Sheila, deal with us only.
We'll see if he has the courage for that or if he prefers to pick on girls.
Pat writes, why am I spending my money to pay for lawyers to fight my government?
And as a taxpayer, why am I borrowing money to pay for lawyers to stifle Sheila?
Pat, that's a very keen observation.
They're using the unlimited resources of the state to get Sheila.
Now, I've got to think that they know going after an offer is illegal and unconstitutional.
I've got to believe they know that.
I mean, how can you not know that?
I think they just don't care because they're sort of like kamikaze pilots.
They don't care.
They know they're going to be fired any day now by Jason Kenney, I hope.
And so they're just saying, what the heck?
You know, let's just make as much mess as we can and put us through the punishment of the process.
That's my theory.
Rob writes, why hasn't Premier Kenney dismissed this election commissioner and shut down this foul NDP department?
I agree.
I think he should absolutely shut down the entire office.
Trouble is, they're investigating him, or if not him, his cabinet and MLAs and whatnot.
So it might look like as if Donald Trump had shut down the Mueller report.
That would have, oh, he's just trying to save himself.
So it's a bit of a pickle.
I think we're going to have to meet him in court, and I think we will.
All right, well, that's the show for this week, and that brings the week to an end.
I thank you for your support on so many things that we do.