All Episodes
Previous Next
March 27, 2025 - Dinesh D'Souza
53:47
NO WHITES NEED APPLY Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep1050
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Coming up, I want to expose the No Whites Need Apply culture that has now become part of not just our universities, but also literary prizes and awards.
I'm also going to talk about the scandalous waste in the IRS and also in the Social Security program.
And Sue Ellen Wrightson, who is a politician in Australia, Running for Prime Minister joins me from the land down under to talk about how Trump principles are emerging all the way over there.
Hey, if you're watching on XRumble or YouTube or listening on Apple or Spotify, please subscribe to my channel.
Hit the subscribe, follow, and the notifications button.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast.
America needs this voice.
The times are crazy.
In a time of confusion, division, and lies, we need a brave voice of reason, understanding, and truth.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast.
I'd like to talk about a culture of anti-whiteness.
that has become institutionalized in the United States.
Now this is a surprise at one level because, hey, the United States is a country largely made up of white people.
So how strange it is to find an anti-white ethic, anti-white laws that are embedded In the society, particularly at the elite level.
It's kind of like going to Indonesia and seeing that there are anti-Indonesian laws or anti-Muslim laws in a Muslim country.
Or going to India and finding that there are laws against Hindus who happen to be the majority of Indians.
Or going to Africa and seeing that they discriminate over there against black people.
That would be downright...
Strange. And yet, it is in fact the case.
Now, we're familiar with the anti-white policies in affirmative action, in DEI, in university culture, but I want to show how this stuff has seeped out into the larger society.
And I want to talk particularly about literary publications, poetry, prizes, works of art.
There's a very interesting article in Compact magazine that documents some of this in rather riveting detail.
Let's read a few lines.
Over the course of the 2010s, meaning the last decade, The literary pipeline for white men was effectively shut down.
Between 2001 and 2011, six white men won the New York Public Library's Young Lions Prize for debut fiction.
Since 2020, not a single white man has even been nominated, of 25 total nominations.
The past decade has seen 70 finalists for the Center for Fiction's first novel prize, with again, Not a single straight white American millennial man.
Of 14 millennial finalists for the National Book Award during that same period, exactly zero are white men.
The Wallace Stegner Fellowship at Stanford, a launching pad for young writers, currently has zero white male fiction and poetry fellows.
Of 25 fiction fellows since 2020, just one...
Was a white man.
Perhaps most astonishingly, not a single white American man born after 1984 has published a work of literary fiction in The New Yorker.
At least 24 and probably closer to 30 young millennials have been published in total.
So out of these people published, not one white man.
And this is now the world of, you could say, chic fiction.
And poetry and literary fellowships.
But it is a window into how the extent of the discrimination.
Because you might expect, let's just say, for example, that whites are 70 to 75 percent of the population.
That's about right.
And white men are about half of that.
So white men are larger in number than any of the other minority groups, certainly larger than blacks.
And by blacks, I mean black men and women put together or Hispanic men and women put together.
And so you might expect that even if there is some preference that is given to minorities, you would still see a substantial representation of white men.
But really what the article is demonstrating is that no, in the name of social justice, in the name of fighting whiteness, in the name of Of diversity, they have eradicated white men from the field.
And think of what that does to your aspirations.
I mean, I was an English major at Dartmouth, and at one time I thought about the idea of writing fiction.
In fact, for my thesis, I wrote a kind of creative novel, and even though most of my published work since then has been non-fiction, nevertheless, Think of how demoralizing it is, what a blow to your morale, to basically realize that the pipeline of opportunity has been tightly closed.
I suppose this is perhaps somewhat similar to what blacks faced in the 1930s and 40s, and now it has come full circle.
Now, in the earlier part of the century, last century, Blacks would, quote, pass as whites, meaning they would try to get doors of opportunity open by pretending to be white.
And of course, in many cases, the blacks who did that were partly white.
They were light-skinned blacks who could be mistaken, if you will, for white.
And now you have the exact opposite.
And here's an interesting story.
One of my favorite stories from the woke era.
is the sordid tale of Yi Fen Chow, an obscure poet whose poem The Bees, The Flowers, Jesus, Ancient Tigers, Poseidon, Adam, and Eve was selected for the prestigious Best American Poetry Collection of 2015.
Very interesting.
This Yi Fen Chow is clearly making a mark, right?
Well, guess what?
What the editors of Best American did not know was that the same person had been rejected over 40 times by journals large and small.
And that Yi Fen Chao was not a Chinese woman with a complicated immigration story, but a nondescript white guy from Fort Wayne, Indiana, named Michael Derek Hudson, who, after years of summary rejection by the literary establishment, decided to submit his poems under a different name and was immediately vaulted to the heights of success in his field.
Now, Debbie is kind of chuckling on the side, and rightly so, but think of what this really means.
You know, we talk about the fact that we believe in merit.
Interestingly, when this guy kind of goes blind, by that I mean, puts his work solely based on the merit of the poems, they're like, oh my, this is amazing stuff!
But it's amazing stuff, quote, coming from a Chinese woman, and it stinks coming from a white man.
The same poem, the same work of art.
And now, there are, when you do this kind of stuff...
And I'm glad that some of it is now being challenged, being stopped.
The Trump administration is going after this kind of discrimination, even though I predict that in a number of these literary journals, the New Yorker certainly, this stuff is going to continue.
These are not people who are beholden to federal money.
They are imbued with this ethic of anti-white discrimination.
They think it's the right thing to do.
They award themselves virtue prizes and virtue points for doing it, so they're going to keep doing it.
But there are political consequences.
And here is one that is revealed by the New York Times columnist Ezra Klein, who was reviewing the results of the 2024 election, and he noticed a detail that hasn't gotten enough attention.
He says there's one finding in here that is so shocking that he had to sort of do a double take on it.
And what is it?
He says, well, he says, when you look at the white vote, which was won by Trump, you find that with regard to middle-aged whites and even middle-aged white men and even older white men,
the gap between the Republicans and the Democrats So in other words, American politics in general is becoming a little less racialized.
By that I mean that the white advantage of the Republicans is narrowing and the minority advantage of the Democrats is narrowing.
So Trump got more Hispanic and black votes than he did previously, but he got about the same and in some cases fewer white votes.
With one notable exception, and that notable exception is young people.
Here's Ezra Klein.
He says, if you look at this chart, 75-year-old white men supported Kamala Harris at a significantly higher rate than 20-year-old white men.
In other words, Trump is doing better among the 20-somethings than he is among the 75-year-olds.
And this is totally against the Democratic narrative.
The Democratic narrative was Trump is so unpopular among millennials, so unpopular among Gen Z types that the Republicans might, you know, be able to tap into a vein of nativism and resentment among the older whites, but those people are going to be passing away from the scene and the Republican Party is going to be in terrible shape.
And Ezra Klein says, not so.
In fact, the young people that are the future are swinging to the right.
And this is a complete surprise because he says that these young people, just a decade or so ago, were swinging to the left.
So, quote, That we've experienced maybe in 50 to 60 years.
So this to me is a delicious irony because think about the word progressive.
Progressive means we own the future.
Progressive means the future is moving in our direction.
Progressive means that the arc of history bends leftward.
And what we're seeing empirically...
As opposed to theoretically or imaginatively or in terms of wishful fantasy, the reality is that the arc of history, at least as of right now, is bending in the right direction.
Debbie and I care about our health, and we've come across a remarkable device that is a total game-changer.
We use it.
We love it.
It makes a huge difference.
It's called Juvent Micro Impact Platform.
It's based on the latest cutting-edge science.
It uses micro-impact frequency to promote joint health.
Improve bone density, boost circulation, and even stimulate the production of stem cells in your body.
Crazy, right?
But it works.
All you have to do is stand on it.
I stand on it for about 10 or 12 minutes a day, Debbie a little longer, and that's it.
It's going to make those crinks and stiffness and aches and pains vanish, and it can even add up to five years to your life.
Wow. You've got to learn about this new technology.
It's not to be confused with some gimmicky vibration plates out there.
Go to Juvent.com slash Dinesh to learn more.
That's J-U-V-E-N-T dot com slash Dinesh.
And they've got a great deal for you right now.
$500 off, 10-year warranty, financing options, even a six-week buyback promise because they believe in the product so much.
Juvent can change your life.
Find out more.
Check it out.
Go to Juvent.com slash Dinesh.
President Trump's 2024 victory wasn't just an election.
It was a movement.
The American people stood up, fought back, and reclaimed their country.
But the fight isn't just about politics.
It's also about culture.
For too long, Hollywood has dictated what we watch, what we think, what we value.
But now a revolution is underway.
A grassroots film studio powered by We the People.
is taking back our culture.
From Sound of Freedom, a courageous film that exposed an evil the elites would rather keep hidden, to movies that honor faith, family, and country like Homestead.
Angel Studios is redefining what storytelling should be.
And here's the best part.
You get to be part of it.
By joining the Angel Guild, you get a say in what stories get made.
You're not just watching.
You're shaping a culture that reflects your values.
Hollywood won't fix itself.
The media won't change.
But we, the people, can build something better.
Angel Studios is proof of that.
Go to angel.com slash Dinesh today.
Join the movement.
Support the films that matter.
Let's take our culture back.
Angel.com slash Dinesh.
Each day, it seems, we learn about new government scams.
Or to put it differently, we learn about the way in which government is a scam.
It's a scam at the federal level.
It's also a scam at the state and local level.
Ron DeSantis put out a...
Statement, that the state of Florida has been trying to return to the federal government $878 million in unused federal funds.
But he says, we have not been able to do it.
Why? Because under Biden and Harris, they claimed that they couldn't take the money.
They couldn't figure out how to take it back.
They had no answer.
To someone, in this case Florida, that wanted to give them $878 million.
Think about that would put a dent in the debt.
It could be used for other programs.
It could be returned to taxpayers.
The federal government is in a situation where they say, we don't know how to do it.
Don't do it because we haven't figured out how to take the money.
Think of the insanity of this.
Think about how this would never...
Be the case in the private sector, and certainly not in the case of your life or mine, right?
Someone comes to us and say, hey, Dinesh, we figured out that we owe you, you know, $40,000 that we haven't paid you.
I'd be like, okay, let me figure out how to do it, and I'll be there to collect the money tomorrow.
And this would be the case of any private corporation.
You know, call up any company.
The phone company, Amazon, Costco, and tell them, hey, listen, I'm a supplier and I owe you $100,000 or I owe you a million dollars.
They would take the money faster than they would take the money immediately.
But the federal government is not like that.
And it's not like that for a reason that was given many years ago by Milton Friedman.
I don't know if I've mentioned this on the podcast before, but Friedman had this beautiful diagram where he divided the page into four boxes.
And on one box, it was, what do you do when you're spending your own money on something that you know about?
And then on the second box, what do you do if you're spending your own money on something that you don't know about, don't know a lot about?
So this would be, for example, if you're a philanthropist.
That's not your field.
You're spending your own money, but you're spending your own money on something that you don't know a lot about.
The third box is, what happens when you spend someone else's money on something that you know about?
And this would be, for example, if someone else, let's say, gives you some money and says, Let's say a gardener.
I want you to advise me on, let's say, gardening or buy some gardening tools for me.
This is using other people's money for something that you know about.
In the fourth box, this is the box I'm getting to.
This is government.
This is the telling box.
When you spend other people's money on something that you don't know about.
So Friedman's point is that in the first box, you're going to pay the most attention to what you're doing because it's your money, so you have a stake in it.
And number two, you're spending it on something you know about.
Friedman says in the second case, when you're spending your own money on something you don't know about, it's your own money, so you're going to be kind of careful.
But on the other hand, you're in a field, let's just say, for example, improving the hunger or helping people start micro-businesses, something you don't know about, the money is going to be spent less wisely because of your ignorance about what you're spending it on.
The third box is...
Again, also a problem because you're spending other people's money on something you know about.
You know about the field, so you can spend sort of wisely, but you don't really care because it's not your money.
But the worst case of all, says Milton Friedman, is when you're spending other people's money on something that you don't know about.
And this is where you find that waste, fraud becomes utterly rampant.
People are reckless with other people's money, politicians especially so.
And second of all, they don't.
Have a good understanding of what they're in fact doing.
Let's look, for example, at the case of Social Security.
Recently, one of the Doge investigators, a guy named Sam Korkos, talked about the Social Security program.
And he said, first of all, the IRS is 30 years behind in its technology.
And it is $15 billion over on its budget.
So this is not just in the Social Security program.
This is the IRS generally.
And he says that the IRS is so wasteful that you can cancel a $50 million contract and nobody can even tell you why it existed.
Now, continuing with the IRS, he says the IRS has a tech staff, tech staff, Not IRS agents, but tech staff of 8,000 people.
And the tech division has a $3.5 billion budget.
He says that you have large banks that run their entire IT program with 200 people.
They spend at most $20 million.
And he says yet the IRS has got this massive technical operation.
And yet the technical operation is wildly out of date.
So here again you see government in its full-blown inefficiency.
And now let's talk about Social Security because Social Security is full of not only inefficiency but duplications and sending multiple checks to people.
Who have the same names, who are being double counted by the system.
Some checks go out to people who are long dead.
Checks are going out to people who have scammed the system.
Illegals have penetrated the system at all levels.
And of course, their backgrounds are much more difficult to confirm or verify.
And so Doge is right in there trying to clean up this operation.
But the Democrats, and this is really their game, is that they treat efforts to eliminate waste and fraud in a program as, quote, cutting the program.
Republicans are targeting Social Security.
So think about this.
The Democrats are supposed to be the party of responsible government.
They know that government is rife with waste and fraud.
In fact, Chuck Schumer at times has even said that.
Yeah, we do need to look at government.
Yeah, we do need to have accountability.
Yeah, we do need to make appropriate cuts.
But they won't let you do it.
And they won't do it themselves.
Think about it.
If Harris had become the president, do you think that there would be anything resembling Doge?
On the contrary.
There would be new spending programs.
The waste and fraud would be magnified to a whole new level.
It was magnified under Obama.
It was raised even more under Biden.
And it will have reached almost defying...
Mind-defying proportions.
The program itself, Social Security, is very badly structured and is radically unfair to people who put money in it because they give you the false idea that when you work...
That they're making you save for your retirement, and there's an element of compulsion.
You have to do it.
You have to make these, quote, contributions, even though they're not really contributions.
They're being extracted from you.
But they give you the idea that no worries, because we're putting this money kind of in an account in your name.
It's going to grow over the years.
So when you retire, you will have the benefit of this money for your retirement.
Except none of this is even true.
Because when you work and put money into Social Security, that money does not go into an account.
It doesn't bear your name.
It doesn't earn any interest.
Why? Because the moment it goes in, it is spent.
So in other words, people working today put money into Social Security.
The government takes that money and pays it out to current retirees.
And so...
Think about it.
If you put that money into a savings account, or you put the money into the stock market, or you put the money into real estate investments, those would grow over time.
Those would appreciate over time, even if that appreciation is then diluted by inflation.
Nevertheless, you do have the benefit of that growth.
On the other hand, with Social Security, you don't, because as I say, it's money in, money out.
Quite apart from the fact that Social Security is redistributive, by which I mean that even if you earn more and you pay more into the system, there's an element of redistribution in the way that the checks are paid out.
The bigger problem is that you're being ripped off.
The government is stealing from you in this program, and they are selling the program under false premises.
Now, because Social Security is...
So many people are dependent on it.
It has become politically largely untouchable.
Trump even says, I'm not going to be cutting Social Security.
So you have to adopt this hands-off approach to Social Security.
But that doesn't prevent us from seeing the way in which FDR very deliberately and very deceptively set up this program.
He said he wanted to set it up in a way that nobody, no future politician could undo it.
And in a way, it's been prophetic because here we are almost 100 years later and we still have the program.
But nevertheless, the program is unfair, it's destructive, and in the end, it may play a large role in bankrupting the country.
MyPillow is excited to announce they are extending the mega sale on overstock, on clearance, and also on brand new products.
Now, this is your chance to grab some incredible deals on some of MyPillow's most popular and newly released items.
For example, Save $40 on the new spring MyPillar bedsheets, available in any size and any color.
These luxurious sheets are designed for maximum comfort and breathability, perfect for a great night's sleep.
Looking for a meaningful gift?
Save 30% on the brand new MyCrosses, inspired by the one Mike Lindell has worn every day for over 20 years.
These beautifully crafted crosses come in both men's and women's designs and are proudly made in the USA.
Get the six-piece bath or kitchen towel sets for just...
$39.98.
Initial quantities are extremely limited, so don't wait.
And don't forget the best-selling standard MyPillow, now just $17.98.
Plus orders over $75 ship free.
Call 800-876-0227.
That's 800-876-0227.
Or go to MyPillow.com and make sure to use the promo code.
It's D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
Guys, there is a big national election coming up in Australia in April.
And I have one of the leading candidates running in that election.
Her name is Sue Ellen Wrightson.
She is the party leader of a new party.
It's called Trumpet of Patriots.
A great title.
We're going to talk a little bit more about the significance of that title.
By the way, the website is Trumpetofpatriots.org.
You can follow Sue Ellen on social media at SueEllenWW4.
Now, she's been involved in Australian national politics and also state politics, generally kind of behind the scenes as a national director, as a state director.
But now she's teamed up with an Australian billionaire, Clive Palmer, and they are contesting the Australian national election.
Sue Ellen, welcome.
Thank you for joining me.
Debbie and I had the pleasure of meeting you in Australia when, along with Tucker Carlson, we did this...
This multi-city lecture tour.
This was in June, late June of last year.
And we got a little bit of a window, a surprising window, into Australian life but also Australian politics.
And one of the things that was so, to me, surprising is the way in which some of the issues in Australia mirrored things that are happening in the United States and perhaps also I want to talk about the issues in the Australian election, but before I do that, I think our viewers and listeners need a little bit of a primer in the political system of Australia.
So can we start with a couple of basics?
Australia has a parliamentary system, doesn't it?
Can you explain what that, in a nutshell, what that means?
The parliamentary system is a system where we have a local government, we have a state government and then we have a federal government.
And the federal government is our Commonwealth laws and that covers the entire nation.
So not too dissimilar to America.
And in our federal parliament that covers the entire Commonwealth, Our Prime Minister is elected from the federal parliament and it's the Prime Minister that becomes the leader of the country.
So the upcoming election is a federal election and hopefully we will get to elect a new Prime Minister, somebody that can lead us out of the trouble that we're in.
The parliament itself is made up of a lower house and an upper house.
So there are 150 seats.
Or areas that make up the lower house and that spans right across the country and then you have in the upper house what is called a house of review and that is where our senators are and there are 76 senators in the upper house.
Senators are elected from the states so we have our states and a couple of territories and there are 12 senators in each state.
And the idea of having the two houses of parliament, the upper house and the lower house, is that if some bad laws are trying to be pushed through the lower house or introduced into the lower house...
They have to go to the upper house to get debated and approved.
And the idea is that traditionally the upper house is the house of review and it's supposed to be able to block really bad legislation.
Now, unfortunately, in our country right now, the Labor Party is in power.
The Labor Party are a left of centre.
They have the majority in the lower house and through the support of the far left Greens party in the Senate, they're able to control legislation and they're able to basically put through whatever new laws they want and that has been absolutely devastating for Australia.
It has really sent us back.
Quite a good way.
And we're all really hoping that this election can be called in the coming days.
And we'll have to wait six weeks to find out whether we can get a new leader for this country.
Sue Ellen, under normal circumstances, as a conservative, as someone who is right of center, you would say, and I suppose this is very similar to America, that if the Democrats or the left is in power, There should be a rival party, and of course the rival party in Australia is the Liberal Party.
And liberal has a little different meaning in Australia than it does in America, because liberal refers to classical liberals, people who believe in liberty.
But there appears to be some concern that the Liberal Party, far from being the determined opposition to the Labour Party, is somehow...
Kind of in league with the Labour Party, at least to some degree.
Can you talk about what are the key differences right now between Liberal and Labour and why the need for you to contest this election from a third party point of view?
The number one devastating issue that we have in Australia is the net zero agenda, the climate change agenda.
The globe is not boiling, Dinesh.
I can assure you now the globe is not boiling.
Emissions reduction schemes.
We've got capacity investment schemes.
We have net zero authorities.
We have every kind of organisation you can name under the sun in this country that's sinking us.
And that is largely driven by the Labor Party, the current government, and through the support of the far left Greens.
So it's a very, very leftist agenda.
And the two things that...
I guess this is one area where the two major parties in Australia would align.
They both agree that we need government policy to achieve...
Emissions reductions targets.
They are both committed to the Paris Climate Agreement.
And it was this nexus in time with the two major political parties coming together and saying that, yes, we will collectively destroy our country trying to meet our Paris climate target.
It's really, really, I guess...
It's frustrating and it's scary at the same time that the two major, we call them the duopoly.
A lot of people call them the uni party because this is a great example of how they're both colluding to destroy the nation collectively and thankfully.
It appears as though the Liberal Party is starting to listen to some common sense on the right and they're looking at changing some of their policies going into this election, thankfully.
They're pushing for nuclear power in this country and our party completely agrees with, you know, lifting the ban on nuclear which is currently in place in Australia because we see that as...
Key to everything that happens in the country.
It's key to us being able to be self-sufficient, have supply chain resilience, to be able to start manufacturing things again in Australia.
It all hinges upon energy.
What we have now is a Labor government committed to reducing our emissions net zero by 80% by a particular point in time.
We have wind farms being installed in our country right across our prime agricultural lands.
Sterilising those lands, reducing our agricultural output.
We have another fantasy of offshore wind turbines that have just been approved by this Labor government and it's all heavily subsidised and financed by the Australian taxpayers.
Now, that's a really, really important point.
I think that part of my job and throughout this campaign, we'll be really talking a lot A subsidy really is taxpayers handing over their money to quite often a foreign company, a foreign organisation, so that they can continue to operate at a loss.
They operate at a loss because this climate change, renewable technology is bad.
It doesn't stack up.
It has a low capacity.
You know, taxpayers are propping up these companies when they continue to make a loss.
So if something's unviable, get rid of it.
So that's why we're looking at nuclear.
We think that, you know, we think that that is just the only way to get our country out of this mess.
But in the meantime, we have an abundance of coal.
The Newcastle coal measures in Australia, we have the most...
It's the most efficient and lowest emission coal in the world.
It comes from Australia.
So if you look at Indonesian coal, for example, it's brown.
It has far more emissions than Australian coal.
So we believe that we need to continue to use our coal reserves until we can make that transition into nuclear power.
That's what we need to do.
Clive Palmer had a party and under normal circumstances, I suppose...
He could contest the election that way.
But through some clever machinations, it appears like they were able to get a judge or get a court to say that Clive Farmer could not use his party in this election.
And so along comes the trumpet of patriots.
Can you tell the story of how this new party with a very interesting name, a name that somewhat evokes Trump, talk a little bit about the meaning of the name and how the...
trumpet of patriots burst on the scene as a party contesting the national election?
So, going back to our original party, the party name was the United Australia Party.
And our party, the United Australia Party, is the biggest party in the country.
We have over 80,000 members.
We have massive support right across the country.
And the United Australia Party was deregistered for a period of time.
And leading into the election, we attempted to re-register that party because Clive Palmer holds the trademark to the logo, the name.
And everything else that you can imagine attached to the party.
So we didn't think that it would be a problem.
And yes, we did hit a stumbling block with the Australian Electoral Commission.
We took it all the way to the High Court and we were told that we were not allowed to re-register our party.
So we looked at some other options.
We looked at a Plan B. And when the court decision was put out into the public domain, we were approached by the holders of or the owners of an existing party that was already registered in Australia, and it was called the Trumpet of Patriots.
And that name...
When they brought it to us, I just said to Clive, I said, this is an omen.
This is fabulous.
And we looked at each other and he said, it's, you know, the Trump, you know, the Trump in the name, the trumpet.
And I said, well, you know, how pertinent, you know, is this?
And I said to Clive, I said, well, you know, I like the Patriot bit.
So Clive really liked the Trump part of the name.
I really love the Patriot.
You know, word in the name.
And it just spells Donald Trump.
I mean, he is the ultimate patriot of America.
That man did not have to come back and do what he did.
But thank God he did because he has come in and he has absolutely saved America.
There is no question whatsoever.
And I think a lot of that hope and a lot of that goodwill and hope Hope for us kind of rests in our name.
And I kind of feel like that, you know, we are the custodians to some degree to pick up some of that incredible success and patriotism and love for your country, pick it up and bring it to Australia and try and emulate what President Trump has done in the United States.
It's incredible.
I mean, that's the part of it I think that many Americans will find quite amazing.
And actually, Tucker and I and Debbie, we found it amazing because when we were there last June, of course, the debates were cooking up in America.
And there was an intimate familiarity on the part of Australians with the details of American politics, what Trump represented.
Now, there is a movement in America, Make America Great Again, the MAGA movement.
In some ways, are you representing a kind of a Make Australia Great Again movement that parallels the Trump movement?
And beyond that, talk about...
The role that a third party like yours can play in this election.
Are you looking to be sort of the power broker that settles the issue between the liberals and the labor government?
What do you hope to achieve in this election to advance this agenda?
We are absolutely the party that wants to make Australia great again.
Our party commissioned a poll, interestingly, just last month.
And the question was put to Australians that were surveyed was, would you like to see Trump-style policies in Australia?
And we got an overwhelming, resounding, positive response from that question.
And the answer was yes.
I think Australians are looking, desperately crying out for strong leadership.
The leader that we have right now is weak.
In a word, he is weak, he is uninspiring, and he's the person that's responsible for sending our country backwards at a rate of knots.
So people need hope.
They're looking for strong leadership.
And they're looking for policies that are going to get our country back on track.
And it's policies like the Department of Government Efficiency getting in there and having a look at the financial structures, having a look at how some of these leftist, globalist corporations have been funded, not only in America, but around the world.
It's just been shocking.
It has been shocking that these organisations, funded by American taxpayer dollars, have been able to get away with what they've gotten away with for a very long time.
The propaganda units, the brainwashing units, it's been horrendous.
And we all stopped and took a look at ourselves and we said, well, it's probably going on here as well in Australia.
And, yes, It's been going on.
The amount of money that's going into these green climate catastrophe propaganda alarm units is absolutely frightening.
Our country is using taxpayer dollars to fund research and development costs for foreign offshore proponents of these wind farm projects.
I mean, we should be putting taxpayer dollars into roads, schools, bridges, hospitals, but instead it's going to these green leftist climate fanatical cult issues.
And so we just said fantastic because the only way you fix your country financially is to work out where all of the waste is.
And so that would be one of the first things that we do is to emulate the Department of Government Efficiency.
But the thing with that, Dinesh, is that it has to be set up carefully by a third-party entity with obviously very close oversight by the government of the day.
But if you think about it, the government running this themselves is akin to the criminal investigating the crime.
You know, you have to have that independence and I think that that is something that Elon Musk has brought to the Department of Government Efficiency just so well and the people that he's brought in and the amount of work and analysis that they've been able to do in a very short period of time has been nothing but incredible.
So Trump policies is...
It's strong leadership.
We look at him.
He's the leader of the free world.
And he's putting his citizens first.
I mean, you would think that a responsible government that loves you will put you first.
But no, no.
Our current government is actually putting the globe and...
Emissions and achieving emissions reductions targets before they fund our hospitals.
It's an absolute disgrace that our government has recently announced in the order of $9 billion for our hospitals.
But there's over $60 billion going into these climate change initiatives and organisations, emissions reductions, you know, net zero authorities.
And there is about approximately $7 billion worth of administrative funding just to oversee all of those different layer upon layer upon layer of these green, culty, climate fanatical organisations.
I mean, we need to come in with a red pen and just wipe them out, red pen everything, exit the Paris Climate Agreement exactly like President Trump has done.
And align ourselves more closely with the United States, a very good step in that direction would be getting rid of the current ambassador to America.
His name is Kevin Rudd.
I'm not sure whether you are or are not familiar with him, but he's synonymous for calling your president a village idiot.
So it's our view...
And we've stated this publicly within Australia that he should be shown the door and he should be sent back home.
Now, we don't really want him, but we think that he's far better off being here and going off and doing lawn bowls or playing golf or doing something that he might actually be good at rather than destroying the relationship that we have with the United States.
The United States are our big brother.
Like, you guys are our family.
That's how I see the United States and that's precisely what we need to do to stick together as Western nations in a really, I guess, uncertain world.
Sue Ellen, one of the things that a lot of Americans noticed during COVID, and in fact somewhat shockingly, was the kind of authoritarianism that was evident in Australia.
It seemed to, I mean there was a streak of that even here, but the herding of Australians into these COVID camps, it was kind of a disturbingly eye-opening for a lot of people.
Is there an effort to have any kind of...
Post-mortem, any kind of reckoning, any kind of lessons learned, we don't want to do that kind of thing again post-COVID?
I would never have dreamed in a million years that Australians would have laid down and taken what they took.
It was tyranny at its...
At its worst, our government, our police were using rubber bullets against the citizens.
It was the propaganda associated with COVID was utterly disgraceful.
And I kind of feel like Australians were used as a bit of an experiment because if you inject enough fear and lies into the community...
Then people can be controlled and manipulated.
We had some really terrible, terrible, terrible things where families still don't talk to each other because some people were vaccinated, other people were not vaccinated.
And the government response was nothing short of just tyrannical.
Australians were locked up in quarantine camps.
They were locked up in their homes.
We had police patrolling the streets.
We had a pregnant woman arrested because there was a social media post.
Put out there and they were saying, look, let's get together and have a meeting because everything that we're being told through the mainstream media may not actually be the truth.
And we're hearing stuff online and things aren't as bad in other countries.
You know, they seem to be going okay in Sweden, America.
And so the government response was...
Disgraceful. Now, the worst thing that governments around the world have actually done, so the Americans did it, the UK did it, everybody did it, and it was the pharmaceutical companies that were giving us the so-called COVID vaccines if countries wanted to purchase their product.
It was contingent upon the country giving Big Pharma a liability protection.
So essentially saying if something goes wrong with the COVID vaccine and it kills your citizens, well, the countries will pick up the cost or wear the compensation or deal with the injuries.
If any legal action is started against the pharmaceutical companies, then it's up to the countries to hand over the money to sort out the compensation or whatever else might come with it.
And that was...
The world should have stood up and pushed back.
We should have said collectively as nations around the world, we are your customers and if you're going to, if you're happy for a product to go into our bodies, then you need to guarantee it.
You need to warrant that product and we should never...
Ever let that happen again, collectively as countries.
But again, there was this fear perpetuated.
There was, you know, countries were doing advanced purchase agreements.
We were competing against each other for this product that was actually a product that, you know, one of them was never used in humans before.
So very scary.
You know, the lockdowns harmed us economically.
You had the social harms.
You had the physical harms.
I mean, our country, our government, the current government, you know, another really outstanding, stupid move that they've made is that they ended the COVID-19 vaccine injury compensation scheme in September last year.
And it was a terrible scheme to begin with.
I mean, a lot, you know, Most of the people that tried to put a claim in were knocked back by lawyers, by doctors that were supposed to be specialists in this field for a product that's never before been used in humans.
It was just, look, just a lot of crazy stuff has come out of it, a lot of harmful, hurtful, regressive results from this.
So we pushed in the parliament.
I'm actually a chief of staff to one of our senators, Senator Ralph Babette.
And we pushed for in the Parliament to change the legislation to prevent our government from granting an indemnity ever again to a pharmaceutical company.
You know, if they're going to sell us something, make sure that you're happy to warrant it.
That was knocked back resoundingly, actually, by the two major parties.
So by Labor and Liberal, so the Red and the Blue Party, they both knocked it back and we just could not believe it.
And we've also been calling for a COVID Royal Commission.
So a Royal Commission has the ultimate far-reaching power of inquiry to have a look at the response to COVID, you know, the advice that we received, you know, the use of that advice.
Our citizens deserve a COVID Royal Commission.
It's something that we will continue to push for if we have people elected to the parliament at the next election and it just has to be done.
We've got to learn from our mistakes of the past.
Sue Ellen, I wish you all the best in the upcoming election.
It sounds like you're representing a lot of great ideas.
Guys, I've been talking to Sue Ellen Wrightson.
She's the Australia Party leader of Trumpet of Patriots.
Follow her on social media on X at Sue Ellen W. The website, check it out, trumpetofpatriots.org.
Sue Ellen, always a pleasure.
Thank you very much for joining me.
Thank you for having me.
Subscribe to the Dinesh D'Souza podcast on Apple, Google, and Spotify.
▲
Export Selection