David Menzies highlights Stephen Guilbeault’s $9,759 no-bid Liberal contract in January 2019—just before his campaign launch—while criticizing Bill C-36 for allegedly enabling censorship of conservative outlets. He also covers Abigail Smart’s wrongful termination at BC Eddie Bauer for refusing mask/vax policies despite inconsistent enforcement, and Ruby Ebby’s case, a biological male charged with child sexual assault, where Toronto Police used female pronouns, risking female prisoners’ safety. The episode ties these controversies to "woke extremism," urging boycotts and demanding policy reversals to prioritize public safety over ideological agendas. [Automatically generated summary]
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, ladies and gentlemen, and the rest of you, in which we look back at some of the very best commentaries of the week by your favorite rebels.
I'm your host, David Menzies.
Well, knock me down with a feather.
It turns out that even after declaring that he was going to be a candidate for the Liberal Party of Canada, Stephen Guibot still received a sole-sourced contract from the government.
And this sanctimonious virtue signaler, who is also a convicted criminal, by the way, wants to reinvent his role as chief internet censor.
Unbelievable.
Sheila Gunread has all the details.
And hey, whatever happened to reasonable accommodation?
Just ask Abigail Smart.
She is, or rather, she was an employee at a BC Eddie Bauer store.
But when she refused to wear a mask and didn't get the experimental Wuhan virus vaccine, she was promptly terminated.
Drea Humphrey has that story.
And letters, we get your letters.
We get them every minute of every day.
And you had plenty to say about my report regarding Rudy Eby, a Toronto woman who was recently charged with sexually assaulting a six-year-old boy at a park.
Oh, but wait a second, folks.
There's a perverse twist regarding this accused pedophile.
Ruby is actually a 100% biological man.
He merely identifies as being a woman.
And guess what?
That's good enough for the authorities and the police.
Sickening.
Those are your rebels.
Now let's round them up.
Today I'm going to show you exactly why Trudeau's censorship czar, Stephen Gilbo, is creating a whole raft of legislation designed to shut up conservative journalists.
Now, Gilbo and Trudeau's new censorship bill, C36, criminalizes mean words on the internet.
You can get in trouble for things you said years ago.
It also allows for nuisance complaints that are kept secret, where you might be liable for up to $20,000 for every offensive tweet or Facebook post you made, in addition to $50,000 in fines to the government.
But this thing is even worse than that.
The bill allows your political enemies to go into court to accuse you of triggering them to say that they are afraid that you might do or say something hateful.
It's pre-crime stuff.
It's the worst anti-free speech law in the free world.
And really, I think it's designed to litigate rebel news right out of business through hurt feelings complaints.
Now you can sign our petition and read the proposed new law at stopc36.com.
And if that internet censorship czar, Stephen Gilbo, as reported today by BlackLock's reporter, is concerned that mean tweets are undermining democracy, imagine what he's going to feel and say about my mean story today.
It's about the strategically crafted sole source contract gifted to him by his friends in the federal government while he was preparing to run for the Liberals as a candidate.
Let me show you the proof.
It's here, buried on page 21 of 329 of a recent order paper question response tabled in the House of Commons.
Look at this line item.
Stephen Gilbo, this is a sole source contract, meaning that the government said Stephen Gilbo was the only guy possible for the job for the conveniently, unsurprisingly vague work of, quote, other professional services not elsewhere specified.
Sure.
Now, the amount is also very convenient.
It falls under the $10,000 amount where there would be mandatory reporting of the contract on the proactive disclosure list.
And it's also under the mandatory amount for open tender.
It's $9,759.
So about $240 shy of the value where it would have to be posted on the proactive disclosure website.
So they kept it nicely hidden and they kept Gilbo paid while he prepared to run for the Liberals.
And we have to remember, he made a big show of resigning from Equitaire beforehand in November 2018.
That was before this contract was awarded on January 2019.
And when Gilbo resigned from Equitaire, he made it very clear that he had intentions to run for the Liberal Party of Canada.
Now, the end date of the contract, that's also very relevant.
It's March 13th, 2019.
So from January to March 13th.
Now, it was widely reported by then that Gilbo was running for the Liberals and was the preferred candidate.
Look at this article from the French language newspaper Le Devoir.
It's dated March 12th, 2019.
So like one day before.
The Liberal Party is counting on environmentalist Stephen Gilbo to win the riding, confirmed another source for Le Devoir.
Mr. Gilbo had left Equitaire in October, and the federal liberals almost immediately appointed him co-chair of an advisory council on climate change.
So Gilbo was widely accepted by the Liberal Party by then, widely acknowledged both in the media and by the party as the preferred candidate for the liberals by then.
And yet, Gilbo was getting sole-sourced non-compete contracts.
Well, isn't that sweet?
Isn't that special?
Trudeau's Ministry of Truth Puba and internet censorship minister Stephen Guibot wants to censor and perhaps even deplatform those who commit the egregious crime of hurting the feelings of assorted soyboys and spirit unicorns and the like.
Yet this paragon of truth and virtue elicitly benefits from being the recipient of a sole source contract after declaring his intentions to run for the liberals.
Then again, Guibot is indeed a convicted criminal.
So maybe there's an element of entitlement here that Stevie thinks he can get away with anything these days.
Heck, his boss sure thinks that way.
And joining me now for more on this story is Sheila Gunread.
How you doing there, Sheila?
I'm doing great, David.
Thank you for having me on the show.
It is always a pleasure.
But Sheila, this is surreal.
Guibot, I think, is unethical.
He's immoral.
He's definitely an ex-con.
And yet, this Chabroni wants to police the internet while being, I guess, entitled to his entitlements, as the saying goes.
Does this guy not have any shame whatsoever?
You know, as I was digging through this contract and, you know, I was sort of giving some thought to, well, you know, this is the sort of reason that Guibot wants to censor the internet or not censor the internet.
Let's be real here.
He's not going to censor the CBC.
He's going to censor us.
He's going to censor True North.
He's going to censor postmillennial.
He's going to censor Western Standard.
Anybody who does any sort of real investigation into the liberals, digging into this contract and examining exactly how it came to be sole-sourced, the timing of the contract,
and the amount of the contract are precisely the reasons Guibo wants to censor the internet is because we are the only people asking these questions about these inappropriate and unethical but not illegal contracts because this was given to him in the three-month stretch to, I guess, keep him fed and watered before the campaign started.
He made this big production of resigning from Equitair, the environmental NGO, in November.
Then by the beginning of January, he's getting a sole source contract from the liberals that would take him through right through to the middle of March, at which point he would be campaigning.
And when he resigned from Equitaire, it was clear to everybody, including him, the news media, everybody, and the liberals, that he was going to be the preferred candidate for the liberals in the riding that he was running in.
So this was just designed to just under the $10,000 mark so that he could be free from scrutiny because then it would not automatically be posted to the proactive disclosures list and it would not have to go to tender.
So it was just like $250 shy of the amount that would take him over the limit where we would all know about it.
Unbelievable.
You know, Sheila, I think that's a brilliant analysis in the department of connecting the dots here in terms of what the unspoken strategy is.
And then in the bigger picture, as you referred to, when it comes to media, there's two ways the Justin Trudeau liberals go about things, isn't there?
It's the carrot or the stick.
And by that, I mean you want to be funded.
You want a taxpayer welfare check going your way so your unviable businesses can indeed be viable.
You want to be the print version of bombardier, I guess.
Well, we'll cut you a check.
But for those types out there, us, you know, true north, like you said, Sheila, that aren't going to cooperate, well, then we have the stick.
And the stick is censorship.
It's fining.
It's deplatforming even perhaps.
I can't believe this is Canada in the 21st century, Sheila, as opposed to some banana republic.
You know, it's really funny because right now we're watching them by them the Cuban government stop the internet because even the Cuban government, they recognize that this is where people are able to speak truth to power, where they're able to spread their message, where things can ultimately be changed.
People are allowed to communicate with each other.
And so the Cuban government has basically put an end to the internet in Cuba as people are rising up against communism.
And without an ounce of self-awareness, the liberals are bringing in Bill C-36 to basically do the same, except they're not going to kill the entire internet in Canada.
They're just going to kill the portions of the internet that don't conform completely with liberal values, where this enormously overbroad bill could result in fines to the government of $50,000 for saying things that hurt people's feelings.
And you can actually be brought before the court guilty of a pre-crime because someone thinks you might one day or could do something or say something that ran afoul of hate speech laws.
So, I mean, it's very interesting.
Again, when you start connecting all the dots, you know, that I took the time to drill down on this just shy of $10,000 contract.
For me, when it's the kind of thing that just even doing these sorts of stories, it's the kind of thing that under Bill C-36 would put our company in serious jeopardy.
You know, but Sheila, that's the thing, though, isn't it?
You pointed to Cuba.
Well, Cuba, I'm sorry, is a police state.
When it comes to the free world, and I think Canada is still part of the free world, there is nothing like this kind of proposed legislation, is there?
And what I get, what really grinds my gears with this story is the audacity factor.
You know, there's a Latin phrase that translates into English: who watches the watchers?
And the idea that the Justin Trudeau liberals and the likes of this convicted convict from previous years think they occupy the moral high ground.
They look down from Mount Olympus and say, oh, no, that's not right.
A fine for you, deplatforming for you.
And yet look at their behavior when it comes to their entitlements.
I think it's appalling.
What do you say to wrap this up, Sheila?
Well, you ask who watches the watchers.
It used to be journalists.
You know, journalists used to be the ones that spoke truth to power.
They held the government to account.
They were able to ask prickly questions to unwilling politicians about things politicians didn't want to talk about.
That's their job.
That's our job.
I still think that's our job.
But Justin Trudeau sure took care of that with that bailout, didn't he?
Because again, that's the carrot.
We're getting the stick.
The carrot took care of the liberal-leaning media.
Anybody in there who ever thought that they might continue to do some actual journalism, well, now they know.
If I do that, we lose funding.
We experience another round of layoffs.
Who Watches the Watchers?00:13:29
So we're just not going to do that.
So to answer the question, who watches the watchers?
Well, I guess it's just us for now.
You know, I think you're right, Sheila.
I mean, I remember back in yesterday, the slogan for the Toronto Star used to be, comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
Now they're just like so many trained SEALs at Marineland saying, what else do you want us to say, Both?
Just what a sorry, sorry state journalism has descended into.
And the sugar daddy is a guy like Guibot.
You couldn't write this if you tried.
But great work, Sheila, in going through all those documents.
And thank you so much for that report.
Thanks, David.
You have a great weekend.
You too.
And that was Sheila Gunread, somewhere in the northern hinterland of Alberta.
Keep it here.
more of rumble roundup to come right after this at this point the i think the ship was 10 to 5.
It says 11 to 6 on my schedule.
Oh, okay.
I don't know what happened there, but that's a completely deal.
Sorry, I genuinely came for 11.
That was so fun.
I don't know what happened.
No big deal.
It's not a big deal at all.
So at this point, if you are hereby suspended from any further specific hour, someone from corporate offices will be in contact with you next week.
More than likely Tuesday or Wednesday since it is a holiday in the U.S.
And that's all I have to say today.
I'm suspended and I have to wait till Tuesday or Wednesday for corporate to contact me.
So what do you want to do?
I don't know.
She's not probably going to come out for a while.
Sending employees from all of the public health advice, that masks are optional.
My understanding is she's a good employee and you guys warned her without even letting her know what the new policy is.
That's how Eddie Bauer worked.
What about bodily autonomy?
You don't want your employees to have that they should be granted based on assumptions of vaccination?
All right, so you're currently suspended, right?
I am.
Yes, I'm suspended.
I will hear from corporate on about Tuesday or Thursday, she said.
And I'm just waiting to hear back.
I am suspended without pay right now.
Okay.
Do you think you're going to get your job back or get to work?
I don't see what grounds they have to fire me right now.
I don't believe I've done anything wrong.
In fact, I think I'm being treated improperly and the workplace is starting to become hostile.
How do you feel about Abigail getting suspended without pay?
Particularly for not wearing a mask, which is public health situation.
Did she help me get the job here?
Is that true?
No.
How come you guys have some customers in here that don't have masks on?
You're letting them have, you know, bodily autonomy, but for your own coworkers, there's discrimination for them.
They let people get fired real quick or suspension without pay indefinitely after four years of working here simply because masks are optional.
And some people are choosing to go ahead and take the mask off after, I don't know, months of a mask mandate.
And I don't know.
We'll check to see if she's healthy and asymptomatic, but I'm not getting really any answers here.
So folks, how are you digging that so-called new normal so far?
It sure seems really abnormal to me, especially when a company like Eddie Bauer can come up with a cockamani health and safety policy that is really nothing short of a direct violation of the privacy rights of its own employees.
Just ask Abigail Smart, who worked for Eddie Bauer for four years, only to be terminated by the COVID Karens who are responsible for Eddie Bauer's so-called health and safety rules.
And really, how shameful is that?
And joining me now to discuss this matter further is Drea Humphrey.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, Drea.
Thanks for having me, David.
Well, it's always a pleasure, my friend.
Drea, a buzzword of the left and the Uber woke has long been reasonable accommodation.
Please tell me, where is the reasonable accommodation here for Abigail Smart?
Well, I'm still trying to answer that question.
I didn't see it at all.
I mean, being branded basically for your medical choice is what that is when you say someone has to wear a mask.
And Abigail actually never said she wasn't vaccinated.
She just said she's not comfortable answering that question.
So yeah, it's out the window, I guess.
And well, that's the other thing, too, Drea, is that our medical information has long been considered private, at least until recently, it seems to me.
I mean, what are employers going to ask next?
What is your history of sexually transmitted diseases?
I mean, where does it end?
That's exactly what I was thinking.
Are you going to have an application out of work and it's going to say, you know, are you vaccinated?
How is that any different than are you gay?
Like, it's the same thing and it leads to discrimination.
But I think what's happening here is we've had it so good in Canada for so long.
It's kind of like the equivalent of, you know, a child being raised and given everything they want.
So we've had freedom, we've had rights.
And now that they're being taken from us, most Canadians or a lot of Canadians don't even notice.
They don't even understand how important it is to have things like medical privacy and freedom of bodily autonomy and things like that.
Yeah, I'm with you on that, Drea.
The whole sheeple factor during this pandemic.
But you know, what gets me about this particular story, and you caught it on camera beautifully, was that this is all about ostensibly the health and safety of our staff, our associates, our customers.
And yet, when customers come in with no mask on, they're not queried about whether they've been double jabbed.
I mean, if Eddie Bauer was really adamant about the health and safety angle, they would either require customers to wear masks or to have somebody up front ask them these very impersonal questions, personal questions, I should say.
But that's not the case.
And I guess obviously the reason is, well, that's revenue coming in.
So now it's a different prism, isn't it?
Yeah, well, logic was the first COVID death.
So you're right.
It comes down to money.
They want to have the image like they're doing everything to keep the environment safe.
So it doesn't matter if a customer walks in without a mask because people can just assume they are, you know, duo vaccinated.
And they completely ignore the fact that you can still spread or catch COVID with the jab.
So it just makes no sense on so many levels.
No, it doesn't.
And it's hypocritical of Eddie Bauer, too, because whether you're a staff member or a customer, the virus is the virus, the science is the science, but obviously not on this element.
You know, Drea, what really disturbed me too, I thought it was a little heartbreaking, was the fact that her co-workers, that's Abigail's coworkers at the Eddie Bauer store, they're hostile to her, including one who she helped get the job there.
I mean, goodness gracious, what have you done for me lately?
But I don't think the spread of the virus is so much a concern anymore.
It's the spread of this kind of what I call Karenism that's running amok.
There seemed to be a lot of Karens in that video, some of the voice recordings as well.
But yeah, you know, we came in after Abigail had already been warned and had already gone through some of the treatment.
That was, I believe, her second warning or third maybe.
So she, I think she was really hurt by, you know, having a relationship and even, you know, going out on a limb to help her get the job.
And according to Abigail, that was the one who was most adamant about something being done to Abigail.
So I don't know if that's what started the whole policy or what have you.
I know it's sort of an American company that's in other places.
So yeah, it's just that I think during this pandemic, we've seen the very best in people.
We've seen the worst.
And I think this is really, you know, a sad commentary on the human condition.
A, that somebody would be so ungrateful, and B, that there'd be this group hostility against Abigail, who strikes me as a very lovely young lady.
You know, Drea, I think your video, this is just the tip of the iceberg.
As we return to a degree of normalcy pre early 2020, I think we are going to see a deluge of cases hitting the news of my work required me to answer these questions.
My work required me to go over and above the medical health authority to either mask up, get the double jab, and what have you.
I'm sure along with that deluge of cases, we're going to see a deluge of people going to court with this, people going to human rights tribunals.
But as far as Abigail Smart is concerned, what's her next step?
Is she going to lawyer up, assuming she has the resources, or where does she go from here?
Well, I'm happy to say that Abigail has informed me that she does have a summer job now.
And at her summer job, they are not requiring her to wear a mask, and nor did they ask her if she had been vaccinated.
And she's looking forward to going to school in the fall.
I know she had mentioned she was going to talk to an employment lawyer, so I'm not sure what's going on with that.
But she seems to be in good spirits and kudos to her.
Well, I'm very happy for her in that regard.
And you know, one last question, Drea, before we wrap.
You know, because Abigail Smart is female, because it looked like most of her associates at least were female, the manager is female.
I just find a bit of perverse irony here.
We've long heard from the left, at least when it comes to the abortion debate, my body, my choice.
And suddenly, that doesn't apply anymore with the Wuhan virus.
What's your take on this?
Yeah, I think that people just say what they think they're supposed to say half of the time, and they're not comfortable with what consequences they perceive may happen should they actually speak their mind or speak what they're really thinking.
And then I think it's, I think what we're seeing is the prime example of, yes, everybody would jump off a bridge if everybody else would.
There's only a few people who would stand back and say, wait, why are we jumping off the bridge?
This makes no sense.
And so, yeah, it's sad.
But I mean, if you lose a lot of Abigails, you know, maybe people, businesses are going to have a change of heart.
You know, we saw in the beginning before mask mandates came in in British Columbia, we saw different stores start to implement them themselves.
And we also saw some of them stop.
Like Costco actually said, hey, you have to wear a mask.
Then they got backlash and said, okay, fine, you don't have to wear a mask anymore until it became a mandate.
So, you know, maybe that's what we're going to see a little bit of these businesses almost thinking they have to behave this way and then realizing like Eddie Bauer has realized, if you look on Twitter, they've got someone dedicated to just responding to everybody who is just sickened by their treatment of Abigail.
On Twitter, someone is responding to everyone.
So they're probably realizing that, hey, you know, not everybody respects this type of treatment.
So maybe we should rethink these policies.
Oh, 100%.
And I got to tell you, Drea, like Santa Claus, I'm making a list and I'm checking it twice.
And if I see any shops out there violating our privacy rights, going over and above what the local health authorities are saying, well, I'm just going to vote with my wallet and simply not shop there.
I think that is probably the most resounding message we could do en masse if you disagree with these kind of crazy policies and this kind of mistreatment of the Abigail Smarts of the world.
Sexual Assault Controversy00:07:15
Drea, it was an excellent report.
Thank you so much.
And you have a good weekend, my friend.
Thanks.
Bye, everyone.
Okay.
And that was Drea Humphrey in Vancouver.
Keep it here, folks.
More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
Definite Menzies for Rebel News here at Toronto's Walter Saunders Memorial Park.
Well, folks, I'm here because recently the Toronto Police Service held a press conference in which they were announcing charges against a 33-year-old woman, Ruby Ebby.
And Miss Ebby is charged with sexual interference with a person under 16 and sexual assault.
And that sexual assault, that alleged sexual assault, that is, took place right here at this park on May the 20th and it involved a six-year-old boy.
Now, right off the hopper, things didn't seem right to me.
I mean, this is extremely unusual that a mature woman would sexually assault a minor.
And then things began to become that much clearer.
Folks, I want you to check out the photograph of 33-year-old Miss Ruby Ebby.
I'm sorry, but in this gender utopia that we live in, sometimes you got to call it as you see it.
And Ruby is not a she, it's a he, it's an obvious man.
Well, I reached out to the Toronto Police Service to question them why this person is being considered a female as opposed to a male.
And my response from police communications was the following, quote, Ruby Ebby identifies as a woman.
The Toronto Police Service recognizes that people have the right to identify by their choice and respect this decision, end quote.
Now, this is doubly troubling, folks, because if indeed this person is being considered a woman, albeit biologically male, then that will, of course, mean that this person, if found guilty, serve his time in a female correctional institution.
You may recall how last month we went out and covered a protest about that in Kitchener.
It is penal policy right now that biological males, simply for stating that they are female, can do time with female prisoners.
And that creates a dangerous condition for the biological females.
How is it that we ever got to this point?
How is it that we have allowed madness to reign?
How is it that we are bending the knee constantly to radical transgender ideology to the expense of public safety?
It's a disgrace and it has to end.
Gross.
That's the only word that comes to mind when I reflect upon the sordid story of Ruby Ebby.
But riddle me this.
What is more grotesque, the fact that Mr. Ebby is gaming the system, presumably on the basis that if he is indeed found guilty, he shall do his time at a female prison?
Or do you have more contempt for those in charge?
Woke nutcases who are bending the knee to this sort of transgender extremism crap simply out of the fear of being labeled transphobic.
Well, you had a lot to say about Ruby Ebby.
And while this individual has not been convicted of any of the sex crimes he was charged with, one thing is certain: this dude is most certainly a conman supreme.
Barbara Sherman writes, It's dangerous to lie about a sex offender's actual sex.
An accurate description is vital.
And why is society agreeing to lie on behalf of sex offenders?
Why give them one single bit of validation when they are the worst of the worst?
Over 90% of sex offenders are male, and they're now saying they identify as women so they can get transferred to a woman's prison.
There, they re-traumatize the woman, almost all of whom are already victims of sexual assault.
Our society is sick.
Well, Barbara, I couldn't have said it better myself.
And by the way, guess who we have to thank for this perverse policy of men being able to transfer into women's prisons?
Well, it's none other than Justin Trudeau.
He got the ball rolling on this perversity four years ago.
Yeah, some feminist, eh?
LSD writes: one of our kids allegedly is sexually assaulted, but we dare not offend Ruby.
This is sickening.
You got an LSD misgendering someone, even a creep like Ruby.
Well, that's considered an unforgivable crime by Team Woke.
Gee, they really have their priorities straight, don't they?
Catherine Chiara writes: Any woman who supports or is an ally to a biological male identifying as female and is okay with him or her molesting a six-year-old is a disgrace to her womanhood.
The early feminists did not sacrifice blood, sweat, and tears for this madness.
Great reporting, David, as always.
Comforting to know that there are still real men out there protecting sanity.
Well, Catherine, first of all, thanks for the kind words.
As for the feminist movement, it is spectacular to me that they are sitting this one out.
Today's far-left woke feminists are actually throwing real women under the bus when it comes to radical transgenderism.
It's baffling.
Lava 1964 writes: How is it that we got to this point?
Simple.
The good people did not nip it in the bud.
We assumed that this nonsense would never become the law.
Now that it's gained a foothold, it's irreversible.
Actually, Lava 1964, I disagree that this madness is irreversible.
All we need is some courageous men and women in power to do the right thing and take a stand against these radical transgender activists.
They seem to be AWOL now, but hope as always abounds that someone will do the right thing and reverse this grotesque nonsense in the future.
Well, that wraps up another edition of Rebel Roundup.
Thanks so much for joining us.
See you next week.
And hey, folks, never forget, without risk, there can be no glory.