Russell Brand and Megyn Kelly face intense scrutiny over Brand's admission to sleeping with a 16-year-old, legally a child under UK law where consent requires age 18. Host Al Worth dissects Brand's "energy conduction" defense against manipulation charges, noting the investigation began in 2017, two years before his pivot to right-wing conspiracy media. While Kelly initially condemned Brand then shifted support after alleging a British government smear campaign, Worth highlights the hypocrisy of her stance and Brand's dismissal of LGBTQ+ norms alongside his 2028 London mayoral candidacy. Ultimately, the episode exposes how celebrity power dynamics obscure legal realities, suggesting that political rehabilitation often ignores unresolved criminal allegations. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Turning Christian Nationalists Into Nerds00:07:22
This is propaganda live.
I only suggest how she can have to vote.
What a fantastic and special show it is.
Russell Brand is a famous rapist.
This is just from memory.
You can just go, hold on, but they said that, they said that.
I became a Christian preempting that charges would appear from deep history.
I went to one white party.
What?
What are you talking about?
I'm a migrant right now in the United States.
In fact, I would call myself an exile, a political exile.
Lying, probably true.
Inevitably, I lie sometimes.
I feel that Christ may have had a better vision.
I'm the main problem.
I'm the main problem.
Let's go full screen on Russell.
This is On Brand, a podcast where we discuss the ideas and antics of one, Russell Brand.
I'm Al Worth, and every show I go through an episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand in order to dissect and debunk it.
This week, well,.
Russell has been a little bit busy lately, which in turn means I also need to be busy.
In case anyone missed it, Russell did a little press tour from hell to promote his new book, and he was interviewed by Tucker Carlson, Meghan Kelly, and Piers Morgan.
Today I will be dealing with the more softball interviews from Tucker and Meghan Kelly.
But before we get there, if anyone wants to support the show financially by becoming an awakening wonder, head to patreon.comslash onbrand and sign up.
And you will have my eternal gratitude as well as being able to access additional content and a completely ad free version of this show.
Some wonderful wonders have signed up lately, including Sophie, Hilary Sharp, and Sally Cinnamon.
Thank you all so much for becoming Awakening Wonders.
You are deeply appreciated, as are the rest of you wonders.
And if I missed anyone's shout outs, please drop me an email it's theonbrandpod at gmail.com and I will get to it.
Oh, and if anyone is listening to this show on Spotify Premium and you're able, please do me a favor and switch the video on.
I get paid more, and you still shouldn't see any ads.
It's a win win for the most part.
In general, fuck Spotify, by the way, but I'd also rather their money ended up in my pocket than Joe Rogan's.
Now then, let's get into this week's show.
First up, we will be dealing with the interview that Russell had with Tucker Carlson, which opens almost exactly the way anyone would expect with a prayer.
I'm ready.
Heavenly Father, thank you for this chance for us to be together where two or more gathered, you are present, Lord.
Can you help us to put aside any prejudices or biases that you might carry into it?
Can you help me, Lord, not to look at Tucker as a person that exists for my benefit or to facilitate me, but to know that he is like me, a person that's broken and that will die one day, and that we're here to love one another and serve one another.
And by the way, we love one another, they will know that we are in you and that you are in us, Lord.
Tucker, you're going to die one day, just so you know.
How much of an asshole do you have to be to say to someone who you've, at this point, supposedly been friends with for years?
Lord, please help me not to see this person as an opportunity for my own benefit.
Like, Jesus Christ.
I mean, it makes sense, right?
Because it is, of course, a friendship almost entirely based on audience capture swinging both directions, right?
It's a conditional, mutually beneficial friendship.
Like, if these two didn't stand anything to gain materially from talking to one another, this would not be happening.
As it is, like, they haven't spoken publicly since mid 2024 until now.
And that's because Russell's new book is the very first book being sold through Tucker Carlson's new publishing venture.
And yeah, so basically, right off the bat, we're leading with bleak cynicism to get this all going.
And from here, we learn why Russell seems to love the Bible so much.
You've been a reader your entire life, even when you were like a dissipate in Hollywood.
You still read a lot.
How is reading the Bible different from reading Evelyn Waugh?
Well, how it's different, firstly, I've not read Evelyn Waugh.
What?
That's your birthright.
Are you kidding?
I'm lazy.
I'm an autodidact.
And like, you know, Woody Allen, he says with the autodidact, superficial, I've never been properly educated.
So everything's thin across the top.
This is the first time I've gone deep into anything.
Yeah, we want to be listening to Woody Allen.
That's where we're at.
Firstly, if anyone ever describes themselves as an autodidact, run in the opposite direction.
Because here's the thing, right?
I am self taught in many disciplines, but never, ever would I describe myself as an autodidact.
Because the only people in the world who call themselves that are absolute bellins.
Most importantly, what we learned from that, however, is that this is the first time Russell has ever materially studied a book in any sort of depth.
So, in the back of my mind, I'm thinking, well, okay, it kind of makes sense that you sort of fall in love with the first thing that you actually pay any amount of attention to and like read into properly.
I'm like, oh, yeah, of course, duh.
And I've read a number of the classics out there, and let me tell you, the Bible as literature.
Is absolutely dire.
It was not written to be read, it was written to be dictated, you know, by a priest or whatever.
And so for me, I'm sat there thinking, well, what would happen if we somehow managed to get Russell on a course studying Lord of the Rings?
I mean, if we could present this man with a copy of the Silmarillion and get him to, like, study it with equal vigor, I genuinely wonder if we could turn a Christian nationalist instead into a full fledged nerd, like the kind of person who finds it necessary to learn the elven language that Tolkien created and then be able to speak it fluently.
I mean, the Silmarillion is a tough read, but it's better than the Bible.
You know, more compelling stories, better narrative payoff, and the like.
And maybe if it is just a case of, like, better stories, and that's really what these people are yearning for, maybe that's how we can slowly defang fascists.
Like, hey, forget about that Nazi shit.
Take a look at these dwarves.
Pretty fucking cool, right?
And anytime they start to spout racist shit, you just show them Aragorn saying, my friends, you bow to no one, to the hobbits.
You know, in Return of the King, and then boom!
Like, you just can't be mad after watching that.
You just have to be like, shit, man, coexistence is really fucking cool, isn't it?
Yeah.
Anyway, that's just an idle thought that occurred to me.
And just a minor correction for Tucker here it's Evelyn Waugh that he was on about, the guy who wrote Bride's Head Revisited back in the 1940s.
He was quite celebrated in his day in terms of writing ability.
He also had a reputation for being a deeply unpleasant white supremacist and anti Semite and for being deeply Catholic.
I wonder why Tucker's a fan.
Kamala Harris And Imperialism Risks00:04:33
Now we get a bit of a random thought from Russell.
But through his grace and through his greatness, we are participating in something.
But don't you see?
Aren't they even now observing what they are calling large structures?
Aren't they even observing that the cosmos, there's intergalactic influence?
Did you see Randall Carlson ever say that maybe things that are happening on our planet are influenced by other galaxies?
Like it's not because.
You know, cows are farting, or because cars are going too quickly, or not the wrong type.
We're in an intergalactic, eternal, and infinite poem with him.
We've got a new partner.
It's a company called Cowboy Colostrum.
Cowboy Colostrum is part of the infinite poem.
In other news, space stuff is happening, and that's why we don't need to recycle anymore.
Actually, all that climate change that we see around us is space stuff.
I do feel like the climate change deniers are getting increasingly lazy.
You know, we've gone from like, Bullshit clean coal arguments, you know, they were at least trying to like, hey, stuff is happening in space.
So, yeah, us using oil and gas is actually totally cool because space stuff.
In any case, Russell seems on board.
And from here, we get to the first proper segment of the interview discussing Trump and the war in Iran.
I realized that the problem with the kind of imperialism that would have occurred if Kamala Harris had been president.
Is it's globalist and it's bureaucratic and it's managerial, and they use compassion to maximize total control.
I was not, you know, everyone's got 20 20 hindsight, but I like, you know, the videos exist.
I think Trump is an extraordinarily enjoyable public figure.
I think he says what's on his mind in a way that's sort of almost unprecedented.
You've been sucking his dick for years.
He's seeming to become somewhat unpresidential in addition.
What I didn't enter into was the idea that Trump MAGA could be anything other than a bulwark against the annihilation of bureaucratic.
Global imperialism.
That's because I think a personality like that can slow things down.
And I think it's an obstacle.
But the thing that's particularly disheartening about this war, and I know that you spoke about it extensively prior to the election of Trump with the Iranian war, is that this war would be happening if Kamala Harris was president anyway.
That's what, like, that's my very distant, hazy view.
I'm not really in this view.
Is oh, if someone as particular, personal, and extraordinary on the human plane as Trump.
Ultimately ends up doing what the globalist imperialist would have done anyway.
Then, what are we all discussing when we're talking about America First and MAGRA and all of that stuff?
So, what I'm saying there is global bureaucracies is a terrible instantiation of Satan's counterfeit power omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence through technology, absolute ownership.
Okay, so it's Satan.
Groundbreaking stuff there.
Otherwise, how fucking stupid do you need to be to look at Donald Trump and genuinely think, well, How could this man be anything other than a bulwark against global imperialism?
For real now, how absolutely cooked does your brain have to be to look at Donald Trump and go, yeah, he seems conflict diverse.
You know, really, really pass.
He shies away from conflict, that guy.
As for the claim that Kamala Harris would also have gone to war with Iran, I strongly doubt it, and citation needed.
Because in this conception of things, like Kamala Harris is a.
Globalist and part of the satanic cabal running things, particularly to the benefit of usually US imperialism.
Whereas this thing happening in Iran right now has been really fucking bad for the US and continues to be a really bad idea.
And just so all my dear American audience are aware, it is also fucking this country over too and destabilizing basically half the global economy at minimum.
And though she certainly has plenty of flaws, this is just not something I could see Kamala Harris doing.
Incidentally, the image shown here was taken directly from Kamala Harris's website, and upon saving it, the automatic title of the photo retrieved from the website was just Hero.
Russell Talks To Gay People00:12:51
Like I said, she has some flaws.
Anyway, apparently, Russell has been talking to lots of gay people lately.
I spend a surprising amount of time actually speaking to gay people about Christ, and like, you know, because obviously they're concerned, and I'm trying to understand how we.
Love.
But what I can tell them absolutely is I overly identified with my sexuality.
I'll tell you that.
I made my sexuality the most important thing about me.
And I thought it was okay to be hedonistic and decadent.
And it was an expression of my sort of neo pagan self.
And can I say, there's been some consequences.
So you might want to consider there's something more beautiful about you.
Are you saying, for example, that Jesus Christ and the beloved disciple John would have improved this great intimacy and total love between them?
By ejaculating, is that what you're suggesting?
There is more to you than that.
There is a supreme intimacy with God.
He actually wants to be inside you right now.
Look at the carnality.
He's incarnate.
We eat his flesh and blood.
As well as the agape love, there's Eros love in that.
We are his bride.
We are his bride.
And that's not gay.
Russell is God's bride, as is Tucker, apparently, in erotic love with God, Eros.
And that's not gay.
He is inside.
He wants to be inside us all.
Listen, I have sucked several dicks, and to me that sounds pretty gay.
I'm just saying.
I am just saying.
Anyway, obviously a couple of points there.
Firstly, there are some who make the argument that Jesus had a special relationship with John the Baptist and that they were gay together, boning down on the regular.
It's not the craziest thing I've heard about a guy who has.
12 men following him around at all times, but nonetheless, Russell seems to have taken offense to the idea.
And secondly, what is probably the cause of Russell feeling offended is he seems to believe all gay people overly identify with their sexuality, like make their sexuality the most important thing about them, and are all hedonistic and decadent.
This ties in with his usual spiel about, you know, people worshipping the self.
He believes that anyone from any minority community is too obsessed with the self, particularly anyone from the LGBTQ community.
And Here's the thing.
I'm queer, non binary.
I swing in all directions.
I don't give a shit what someone has in their pants.
It's just a question of whether I find them attractive as a human being.
But, as far as I'm concerned, that is probably the least interesting thing about me.
Like, it's about as interesting as my hair color or the shape of my nose, because it's something I cannot control.
I was born this way, and so I live this way.
It just is.
The only time it becomes relevant in a public sense is when some individual or group is trying to act.
Actively oppress people like me because they have a problem with queer folks existing.
I can guarantee you that any and all queer and trans people would love not to have to discuss the finer points of their sexuality or gender to everyone, or be forced into a position of having to justify their own existence.
But it happens on a regular basis, largely thanks to bigots using religion as a cudgel, and people like Russell.
Pride, you know, which began as a protest and should remain as such.
I don't overly identify with my sexuality.
It's other people getting their panties in a bunch over what genitals someone has and which ones are going in which places.
They are more obsessed with that than the actual queer community by a significant margin.
It is deeply weird.
And as if to make my point for me, Russell, in his admonishing of gay people, essentially just rattled off a stereotype of, let's be honest, gay men specifically, that All gay men are just fucking and sucking on every street corner with reckless abandon.
It's a stereotype that, yes, is pretty offensive because gay men are not some two dimensional dick sucking monolith.
Anyway, Russell is trying to figure out how to love gay people because he said before, well, it says in the Bible that it's wrong to be gay.
And what I'll say is that there are a great many people who believe there was an error in the translation of the Bible where.
The original passage in Leviticus said that it wasn't a man who lay with another man that is an abomination, but actually, any man who lays with a child is an abomination before the Lord.
And I think perhaps, given his history, Russell should focus on that part a bit more strongly.
Nonetheless, Russell doesn't want to be judgmental of others, and apparently, neither does Tucker.
I'm still, you know, for my own.
I'm trying to understand how to be completely loving to all people and not.
It says here clearly, don't judge, get the log out of your own eye.
So I guess it's not my.
My ministry is not about that.
But I'm just what I don't want is to be a participant in a church that prioritizes judging and condemning others rather than dealing with our own evident internal fallen broken problems.
That is the truth.
We had this conversation at breakfast this morning with a wonderful person who works for us.
And I was telling her about being in church a couple of weeks ago when somebody got up to read who, you know, I knew a lot about and was judging so much based on.
You know, behavior that we judge or whatever.
Interesting.
This person is up to read.
And joking.
I really felt very strongly that God just like spoke to me, which doesn't happen every day.
And the message was, You are no better than her.
And I turned, it makes me emotional thinking about it.
And I turned to my wife, who I know was having similar thoughts or thought she was.
And I whispered to her, I said, We are no better than her.
And she goes, I know.
And I think that is, that's really at the center of it.
Yeah.
We're real pieces of shit, aren't we?
Yeah, yeah, we are.
Yeah.
I very genuinely struggle to think of a group that Tucker Carlson hasn't been judgmental of and has demonized.
Well, actually, there's only one, and that's the straight white conservative Christian.
Otherwise, Tucker Carlson has a demonstrable record of hating gay people, black people, brown people, women, trans people, poor people, Muslims.
The list is quite frankly endless.
I mean, he popped up on Piers Morgan's show at the tail end of last year, railing against gay people and liberally using the F slur.
We're no better than her.
Yeah, no shit, Tucker.
From here, Russell moves to his thoughts on trans people, which I know you're all excited for.
And we go on quite the journey.
When you see God for who God is, then you will know who you are.
If you don't know God for who God is, then you will be looking for an identity in the world.
I'm an Englishman.
I'm an American.
I'm a proud homosexual.
I'm a.
Young black woman.
I'm a little Dutch boy wearing clogs.
You start to identify with false things that you made with your own hands.
No, the message to people about gender identity is go further.
You are more individual than that.
He loves you more than that.
You are more unique than that.
You're not part of a group of people that happen to feel that you don't fit with the arbitrary gender identities of 2026 American cultural identity that wear this and wear that.
Indeed, in the word, in heaven, there is no man woman.
In heaven, in the supreme reality, there is no man woman.
He says that.
That's in there.
You're right.
You're right in a way.
It's a kind of a performance, but if that performance leads you to, like, you know, Changing your body surgically, then that's potentially there might be another route.
But we can look at the data and see if that's working for people post surgery and how many of them are happy with it.
And I guess we could make a scientific, kind of a scientific judgment.
But the problem is, is that all of us have been now recently exposed to the total illegitimacy of science, in so much as we all know that only profitable experimentation is being undertaken.
Who's doing and conducting the experiments to demonstrate absolutely that there is.
Is no causal link between the childhood vaccine program and the rise in autism.
Sorry, physicists.
Apparently, you can't be trusted anymore because of this bullshit coming out of this guy's mouth.
Sorry, nuclear engineers, you're out.
Yeah, as to what he just said, there are comprehensive studies that prove there is no causal link between vaccines and autism.
And there are nonprofit studies done, usually paid for by some kind of government grant, which is part of why countries need institutions like the NIH.
To make sure that science is still being done without the fetters of capitalism around it.
How we got there from his opinions on trans people, however, is honestly kind of impressive.
So let's go back to the top.
If you don't know who God is, then you're looking for identity in the world and you identify with false things.
So if you're trans in any way, you need to go further into the Bible and get with God, especially if you're considering surgery.
Well, like, have you maybe thought about Christianity instead?
Perhaps the gender dysphoria you're feeling is actually some mystical internal strife because you aren't religious enough.
And I wish that didn't actually sound like something one of these people would genuinely say, but here we are.
Though, when it comes to surgery, hey, perhaps we could look at outcomes post surgery and see how many people are happy with it.
Incidentally, statistically, more people regret Harry Potter tattoos than they do gender affirming surgery.
For the record.
But, ah, well, we have learned that we can't trust science, haven't we?
Because vaccines and COVID and autism.
So I guess all you're actually left with is the Bible.
So surgery's out.
Sorry.
It's the Bible.
That's all you actually need.
He's just absolutely relentless.
I must apologize to everyone for the next clip because it begins with the jarring sound of Tucker Carlson laughing.
But the problem is, I create a lot of data out there during those years.
I was sleeping with thousands of women, and I was sleeping with women that will have sex with you immediately in a bathroom or backstage or in a corridor or in a car.
So I create quite a lot of, I hurt people, I exploit people.
That's greedy, that's selfish, it's inconsiderate, it's mean, it's certainly sinful, immoral, it's all of those things.
There's no question about any of that.
So when, show me the man, I'll show you the crime.
If people's phones are getting scraped, as Edward Snowden revealed from more or less the late 90s, just in case one day you do something we don't like, we're ready to go.
It's either going to be the pink or the green, the money or the honey.
We're going to get you financially or we're going to get you sexually, unless you're a person that's lived in Christ.
If you've lived in Christ your whole life, they're going to have to kill you for doing nothing.
They're going to have to kill you for doing nothing.
Probably what happened to Charlie Kirk.
Probably there was nothing shady to get him with, was there?
That may be what it was.
Yeah, of course.
That's what happened.
Charlie Kirk was just too good and honest.
And there just weren't any skeletons in that man's closet.
So they had to have him just outright killed instead.
Whereas Russell, well, he's nice and easy to deal with because he slept with so many women.
Therefore, any conspiracy to take him down requires minimal effort at best, apparently.
It's a convincing narrative if you're a dipshit.
Obviously, Russell has been claiming the allegations are a conspiracy against him for the last two and a half years, and he continues to do so, trying to imply that the women he both admits are real and admits he at least hurt have all been paid off and encouraged to exaggerate claims against him.
It's a tactic that While it has evidently worked in terms of appealing to his far right audience and other members of the same media sphere, it comes with some element of risk.
Russell Wants London Mayor Role00:15:19
Because it won't be long before this man is put in front of a judge.
And a barrister, lawyer, is going to be pointing out every instance of Russell insinuating a conspiracy around the very serious charges against him.
And I can assure you that both a judge and jury in this country is going to take a very fucking dim view of that kind of behavior.
So every time he does it, Yes, he's retaining his audience, but probably actively working against himself in his own criminal trial.
So, you know, there's maybe a bright side to his bullshit.
We'll see.
Now we move to the segment of the interview that some media outlets took quite seriously when they probably shouldn't have.
In a manageable way, Tucker, the City of London is having an election for mayor in 2028.
The reason this is fascinating is because the office of mayor is manageable.
The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, right now is only in control of the Metropolitan Police Force, London Transport, and certain issues regarding planning and housing.
All of these areas in a participatory direct democracy could be opened up to people that live in London, that love London.
All of a sudden, you don't have politics that thrives and runs on ideology and debate.
You have a pragmatic democracy.
Do you want ULES cameras that charge you if you have a certain type of vehicle?
Do you want a congestion charge?
Vote for it.
If you vote yes, we'll do it.
If you vote no, we won't.
Do you want this type of policing where people are arrested for Facebook posts, or do you want to focus on knife crime?
Which boroughs, which areas, what time of day?
Do you want us to investigate historic crimes, or do you want us to focus on contemporary rape gangs?
So, Russell's idea of technological direct democracy has resurfaced here.
The idea that the populace can all vote for things on an app or whatever through their phones.
Infrastructure that does not, at this point, exist, particularly in any way that is secure and safe.
Hell, our elections over here are still done with pen and paper.
We don't even use voting machines, let alone taking the risk of using digital technology that can be installed on people's phones.
And he set his sights on the City of London for reasons that will become clear in just a moment.
Despite the fact he hasn't lived there in, I think, at least 10 years, I'm pretty sure.
But firstly, I must say he is drastically underestimating the job of the Mayor of London.
From the City of London's website, here is what current Mayor of London Sadiq Khan is responsible for.
He has a duty to create plans and policies for the capital, covering arts and culture, business and economy, environment, fire, health, housing and land, planning, policing and crime, regeneration, sport, transport, young people.
Other priorities for the Mayor include higher education, foreign investment, and attracting events and conferences to London.
So, yeah, the actual list is a bit longer than Russell's idea of it just being policing.
A bit of planning and transport.
I will also point out that while the mayor has control over policing and crime, he cannot change criminal laws.
And people would still be arrested for hate speech on social media, regardless of what any mayor wanted to do.
So, why is Russell talking about all this?
Well, let's find out.
The beauty of it is you would say, we have an opinion and we have a voice and we have advocacy.
You could even, if you wanted, for free, because there's no way I would pay people to do this.
Have a council of elders from the LGBTQ community, from the Muslim community, from the white working class community, from the left and from the right, from all potential groups, and say, Why don't you advocate and advise?
Because I don't want to be in charge of London.
I want to participate in an end to the kind of politics that we know is birthing, midwifing the apocalypse and Armageddon through duplicity, through conflict, through endless self obsession, through pornography, through addiction, using addiction, even where it doesn't typically play out.
Every time we look at a screen, Food that we eat, the things we believe about ourselves.
I would like to run for mayor of London in 2028 so that the people of London would run it, so that politicians are not involved in politics, so we have true open source transparent democracy.
Yeah, this is Russell Brand announcing his candidacy for mayor of London in 2028.
Made a few headlines at the time, which is exactly what Russell wants.
And I want to be clear from the outset that this should be taken about as seriously as Andrew Tate claiming that he's running.
For Prime Minister, in that, no, you're not.
You fucking liar.
Stop wasting everybody's time.
Anyway, Russell apparently wants to be mayor of London, but also not be in charge of London, and instead he wants to defer to multiple unpaid councils of elders, which presumably would be chosen or elected, if you will, by their representative communities, and then those councils of elders with opposing views would essentially have to argue back and forth over what policy decisions ended up happening.
Functionally, what Russell is suggesting is Parliament, but on a smaller scale, like one just for London, and with no one getting paid to do their jobs.
Oh, and with people voting for things on their phones as well, which is sure to be a cybersecurity nightmare.
Sounds well thought out so far.
Speaking of which, what would that digital infrastructure look like?
Russell does have an answer.
I bet you, like me, do polymarket adverts.
They seem to be advertising absolutely everywhere.
That technology for polling and electing could be used to determine where you want your local budgets.
Spent, who you want running a particular area of public life, if there is a requirement for any representation.
And most importantly, you will be in control of your own lives.
And we don't need to quarrel and squabble about Islam and Islamic invasion.
If the people of Epping don't want to have migrants in their community, then let them vote on it.
Now, that's not an area that the London mayor controls.
But certainly, if the polling was available, it would be difficult to impose that on the people of Epping.
Perhaps if people in other communities are very pro refugees, they would get a budget for and the ability to house.
Refugees.
There's no point in us living in this tower of babble, madness, of incessant, unending conflict online and sometimes in person when we have the opportunity for real community, real change.
At this point, Tucker, we know that the Republicans aren't the answer, the Democrats aren't the answer, the Conservatives aren't the answer, the Labour Party, the Greens, Reform, whoever.
What you want is for people to be absolutely empowered in their own lives, as our Lord suggests.
Each of us has direct access to divine truth and you can participate as much as you want to.
I want to tell you as well that my intention, amidst all this madness, with a forthcoming trial and a book out that I'm very pleased with, I'm going to run for Mayor of London in 2028.
You're going back to the UK?
Well, yes, possibly to serve a jail sentence.
Seems much more likely than him becoming Mayor of London, I will say that.
I also can't see Russell moving back here willingly.
He is far less revered in the UK than he is in Florida, where he's been living the last year and a half.
Otherwise, Couple of things.
Apparently, the technology to use for this digital democracy Russell so desperately wants is the gambling platform Polymarket.
Russell has advertised for both them and Kalshi in the past, so it's no surprise this is his solution.
In case anyone doesn't know what either of these platforms are, they're places where you can bet on anything from people getting murdered, to bombs being dropped, to sports outcomes, to world leaders being kidnapped, which is what this picture is, to how many times Trump will say radical leftists in a speech.
Speech.
It truly is a bleak sign of the times, and if anyone wants more detail, Last Week Tonight did a great piece on it a couple of weeks ago.
Needless to say, the idea of such a platform getting involved with our actual democracy is a harrowing thought.
Secondly, I am kind of fascinated by the idea that Russell believes this would solve anything.
According to him, smaller communities being able to vote on things would get rid of the conflict that is rife throughout our society, conflict that he Directly agitates and profits off of, by the way.
When actually, for more than 10 years, at least politics in the UK, especially, has been on a knife's edge and is going in more extreme directions in terms of wanting to deliver change.
As an example, the Senead elections and some local elections will be held in the UK next week.
That's Welsh Parliament being decided upon, and in my constituency, it is firmly split down the middle between Reform, Nigel Farage's party, the far right, and Plaid Cymru, the leftist.
Party who I support and will be voting for.
What that means is my constituency will most likely end up with three reform members of the Senev and three Plaid Cymru members.
It doesn't matter what degree of scale you introduce, the result is going to remain pretty much the same because of both the political and media landscapes of 2026.
You could poll just my town and it would still most likely come out as 50 50.
Plus, as mentioned, where there is conflict, There is money.
Russell's fantasy land accounts for precisely none of this because the man is so firmly detached from reality.
And next, we get an idea of precisely what Russell would do if voted into office.
I don't want power no more.
I don't want the power of being a celebrity or the mayor of London or a lothario.
I don't want that.
All I want is to know him intimately.
And I forget that sometimes because I'm weak and I'm easily distracted and I'm fallen.
But in him, I am none of those things.
He made me and you and everybody for to know him, to know him and love him.
And it doesn't all have to be on a big grand global stage in great big trials against a fallen nation.
Britain's fallen apart.
That's obvious.
It's evident.
It's on a different trajectory from your country.
It's still owned by dark imperial power.
And the thing about the idea of participatory direct democracy, Tucker, is I don't care if I don't want to sit in an office somewhere making decisions.
I want to pray all of the time.
I want to be with God and I want to be with my children and the people I love.
And to tell people to do what it says in the Great Commission tell people in a language that they'll understand God is real, Christ is real.
Stop worshiping the world.
You're going to die.
You're going to die.
And it's all meaningless.
You're going to die.
It's all meaningless.
Vote for me.
I mean, I'm almost half convinced.
So, Russell wants to be mayor of London, but doesn't actually want to do any of the job.
He wants to sit around and read the Bible and pray while his unpaid councils of elders do the actual work.
And if this is a tiny version of parliament, then the position Russell actually wants is that of king.
Like, yes, technically he's the head of state and has some power over government, but functionally he doesn't actually do any work and still gets paid a shitload of money.
That is the job Russell actually wants.
Anyway, I've had quite enough of this.
So let's get to the last clip from the Tucker interview before we move to Megyn Kelly.
Russell Brand, how to become a Christian in seven days.
I think it's pretty obvious that God is using you.
And I'm going to your trial.
Oh, good.
Thanks.
October the 7th.
You recognize me.
Is it actually October the 7th?
Oh, my God.
I didn't even see that.
Yes, it is.
Your trial is October 7th.
Do you know what one of my friends said to me?
He goes, What I know about the state.
And the kind of interest we're talking around is they do things preemptively.
Like if they think, right, if we're going to take this course of action, what are the potential obstacles in this reason?
All right, well, preemptively, get rid of that one, get rid of that one, get rid of that one.
Right, that's the puff.
I didn't realize.
Yeah, it's oxygen.
I assume your pretrial hearing is on 9 11.
I'm disgusting.
I don't know.
Thank you for that.
What Russell should find alarming is that Tucker Carlson just made a funnier joke than Russell managed throughout that entire interview.
And Russell still describes himself as a comedian.
Um, For anyone who missed it, Russell's criminal trial has been pushed back to October, though the date I have is October 12th, not October 7th.
It's set to last around two months, and supposedly Tucker Carlson wants to be there for at least some of it, presumably whenever the cameras are there, as though the situation couldn't get any worse.
It's going to be a full media circus for a while, I imagine, and I am unlikely to be attending, partly because there's not.
Too much, I think, I'd be able to offer that the regular media won't be able to cover, and partly because I absolutely do not want to be in the same room as both Russell Brand and Tucker Carlson.
Um, so now we move to the next softball interview for Russell, this time with Megan Kelly.
And I'm gonna play this clip of Megan talking from early on in the interview to lend context to what we're about to see.
My next phase of you, well, I watched you during COVID and I loved all that, and I thought you've got he's gotten very brave and very outspoken in a great way.
Then came all the allegations, the sexual, alleged sexual assault and rape and so on.
And it first came in this UK quote documentary, and they use that term very loosely there and here.
And I'll tell you up front, I was angry when I saw that because they did it in such a compelling way that, especially the stuff about the 16 year old, that I was angry with you.
I believed what they said, or at least believed that there was enough smoke, there might be fire, and said to the audience at the time, you know, the conservative movement doesn't need.
Somebody like that.
Like, we love what he's saying about COVID, but if this is a guy who's sexually assaulting women and taking advantage of 16 year olds, we need to move on without him.
And I felt that anger for a couple of years around you because I just thought it was so reckless and it was so wrong.
And I knew that it might be false, but it seemed overwhelming the way that they presented the evidence.
And then the more I looked at it, the more I started to recognize I might not know the full story because.
Since then, I have seen what the British government has done, what my own government has done to certain figures that it doesn't like.
And I have an enormous amount of open mindedness to you being railroaded and attacked by people for reasons having nothing to do with actual facts.
Bill Maher Consent Manipulation Claims00:15:11
Allow me to offer a translation.
I was more than happy to throw you under the bus when the allegations came out because you seem like a bad person who did bad things.
But.
Since then, you've convinced enough far right asshats that it's a conspiracy against you, and that means I can profit by supporting you.
So tell me all of your bullshit and let's make some money.
Megyn Kelly is an evil sack of shit, just like Tucker.
No two ways about it, which is pretty much how I feel about most people willing to have Russell on their show these days.
And from here, we get to what was probably the most viral clip of Russell on Megyn Kelly's show, with good reason.
Thank you, Megan Kelly, for giving me the grace to address in particular your anger, which is entirely legitimate and recognizable.
And the plain fact of it is that in Europe and in the United Kingdom where I'm from, the age of consent is 16.
And I did sleep with a 16 year old when I was 30.
But when I was 30, I was a very different person.
I was a lot younger and I was an immature 30 year old.
Consensual sex, actually, with a variety of people, when there is a Strong power differential as there is when you're a famous man that has the ability to attract women that I had at that time.
I think involves exploitation, I think it is exploitative.
I recognized that my sexual conduct in the past was selfish, and I didn't apply enough consideration, barely any, I suppose, really, to how that sex was affecting other people.
We'll get to the rest of this in just a second, but that last sentence has confounded me since I first heard it.
I did not apply enough consideration, barely any, I suppose, really, to how that sex was affecting other people.
He's saying that as though the act of sex was a thing that he did, not an act which involves two consenting parties.
Like, the rule with sex is it takes at least two to tango, right?
Like, even in kink situations of like BDSM or whatever, there is established Ideally, enthusiastic consent beforehand.
There is only one form of sex I can think of that involves one person doing it to the other, and that is sexual assault.
So, for me, just the way he's talking about this here is incredibly telling, particularly because, in the more specific sense, we're discussing Russell having sex with a 16 year old when he was 30.
Now, him coming out with this did somewhat surprise me because it was a significant component of the documentary and the investigative reporting into.
The allegations.
It was him coercing a 16 year old girl, being saved in her phone as a girl's name so her parents wouldn't find out, sending a car to pick her up from school, leaving her in a cold bath for hours while he fucked about doing other things and told her not to move.
He made her read Lolita, which, by the way, is not an instruction manual.
And apparently, he orally raped her as well, on top of the myriad of other disgusting ways he, a grown man, treated this young girl.
But oh, apparently he was an immature 30 year old and he's a very different person now.
And like, I'm sure she is too.
Like, that kind of trauma tends to leave its mark.
In any case, what Russell is doing here is a classic example of admitting to doing a minor bad thing, like a smaller bad thing, like legally sleeping with a 16 year old when he was 30, in order to distract from the multiple very, very bad things he's accused of doing and will be on trial for.
Plus, the bad things he won't be on trial for, like I mentioned before, because Alice is not amongst those pressing charges against Russell, which is probably why he feels comfortable, or at least able, to talk about it.
The other thing I'd like to point out is that Russell is now 50, and if he wanted, he could legally have sex with a 16 year old in the UK now, if he wanted to, provided he had her expressed consent.
And that to me is incredibly fucked up.
The fact that we are not protecting children from this kind of age gap dynamic, like, take the fame and everything out of it.
There is an inherent power differential when someone in their teens is in an ongoing relationship with someone a decade or more older than them.
And that really, really needs to be reflected in the laws we have around sexual consent in the UK and the US, for that matter, actually.
And actually, Russell gets into the concept of consent here.
Obviously, this is, I have to be careful of contempt of court because that's a law in my country where I can't say anything publicly that might in any way influence a potential jury.
But obviously, as soon as I've said I'm not guilty, what I'm in effect saying is I had consensual sex with lots of lots of women.
And you can argue that that's not appropriate.
But the age of consent is an important thing.
The ability to consent is an important thing, like, i.e., drunk people can't consent, mentally ill people can't consent, children can't consent.
Like, consent is what's important.
And what fame gave me and what my addiction fueled was opportunity for endless consent, which led me to be a hedonist and a fool and an exploiter of women.
And that is wrong.
And that is something that needs to be redeemed and addressed and atoned for.
What I'm obviously not only querying, but violently or aggressively or assertively opposing is the idea that this is a judicial criminal matter where consent was overridden.
Actually, what happened was consent was directed.
That's what being famous and being, if I may say, forgive me, charismatic affords you is the ability to direct consent.
I'm sorry, what?
Like, where exactly is the distinction between directing consent and coercion?
Because coercion is very much in the same territory as overriding consent, it is at least right next door to it.
Plus, of course, many women have stated that Russell assaulted them outright with no pretense of anything even close to consent.
It's also interesting to me that he said children can't consent to sex.
Because in the UK, 16 and 17 year olds are in an awkward sort of legal territory where, yes, they can consent to sex, in some cases get married and join the military.
They are not legal adults until they reach 18.
So they can do all those things, but they can't vote, for instance.
So, legal age of consent aside, Alice at 16 was legally a child.
In fact, Russell reportedly only ever referred to her as the child when talking about her, when they were, quote unquote, together.
So if the child can't consent, well, you can see how that puts him in a bit of a pickle.
Oh, God.
I can direct consent indeed.
Jesus wept.
So now, Russell, somehow this isn't contempt of court.
I don't know.
And now Russell explains in his words why he thinks the allegations came out when they did.
As to the second part of what you're saying, why did it happen when it happened?
Because a documentary was made that framed my very explicit public behavior in a particular way.
I believe that there is a strong connection between when it happened and what I was doing publicly.
I'd moved from being acting in movies and being on TV and writing books and essentially advocating for the kind of cultural values that most people within the institutions of power and entertainment power.
Endorse and espouse to being quite critical of them, openly critical of the pharmaceutical industry, the British government, bureaucratic agencies that have unelected power that we often are taxed for and are funding.
And in COVID, I really started to find a voice for something I'd long felt that real power is inaccessible to ordinary people.
Yeah, that's a real hot take there.
Oh, look at this guy over here.
He's saying that real power is inaccessible to ordinary people.
Quick, let's make up some rape charges and put him in prison.
There are plenty of famous examples I could use, but today I will go with Serge Tankian, a vocalist of System of a Down, who has been making that exact point loudly, amongst other more radical points, since the mid 90s.
And yet, no allegations against Serge.
How strange.
I could also rattle off the dozens of other COVID conspiracy theorists who also don't have allegations against them, though that is admittedly a much shadier pool of individuals, so.
You know, with some of them, I wouldn't hold my breath.
And to cap it off, the investigation into Russell's conduct was five or six years in the making, meaning it got underway around like 2017 18, a full two years before he ever began making his pivot to the right wing conspiracy media.
Which is not to say they're 100% causal.
Like, I do believe, I think he believes plenty of the drivel that falls out of his mouth on a weekly basis.
But it is interesting that he ran to just about the only audience that will willingly accept.
And celebrate rapists.
From here, Megan has some thoughts on Bill Maher, of all people.
And for context, Russell had earlier referenced sleeping with an entire flight crew of stewardesses.
Let me ask you something that Bill Maher says about something he says on this subject.
He never married.
Yeah.
And he says it's because he didn't want to have to give up lust, that he enjoys lust too much.
As somebody who's been on both sides of this and is currently in a loving marriage, which does, I.
I hate to tell you, Bill, include lust.
It's not like the first day.
It's not like the first year, but it develops into something else.
What do you think he's missing?
What Bill Ma, with all due respect to him, there is missing and living through is a self perpetuated adolescence, clinging to some injury or wound, I would imagine, that occurred around the time when, you know, I speak as someone who belatedly received these lessons.
What Bill Ma is missing is intimacy.
You can achieve through promiscuity a kind of false intimacy that sort of feels kind of wonderful sometimes, particularly with the charge of sexuality around it.
Especially the whole flight crew there.
Oh man, you got there.
There's nuts coming at you from every direction.
Can I get you a co host house?
That's what she said.
But what you are missing out on is true intimacy.
You are eating the crumbs, that which has fallen from the table, the appearance of something instead of the thing itself.
I actually really love Bill Maher.
I think he's a, I've been on his shows a couple of times.
I think he's a really, really lovely person.
And I reckon that what Bill Maher, what I would pray for Bill Maher is the ability for him to love.
Like that one day we will heal and hear.
Bill Ma say, man, I don't know what I was afraid of.
Yeah.
I have a father.
I have a wife that I love.
This is amazing.
Right.
Why did I wait so long?
Yeah.
I don't know if he's capable.
He doesn't strike me as somebody who's capable.
He's in a very different place.
Now, I'm an expert in Russell Brand, not Bill Ma.
But thankfully, I do know someone who is an expert in Bill Ma.
Will, what do you make of that clip?
You know, the impulse is to say that it's.
Really, it's nuts to go.
Hey, I hope this 70 year old man manages to find a wife and have children.
But Bill Maher is in a serious relationship and says he has found love in his life with a woman who had a baby with Al Pacino when he was 82 years old.
So he did find, if he were to do that, he has found the right woman, I suppose, to do that with.
One of, I'm guessing, would be very few.
But even amidst, Bill Barr's many, many, many unbelievably bad and fucked up ideas about romance and relationships and women.
I still would say he should absolutely refrain from taking any kind of relationship advice from a serial rapist.
For legal reasons, alleged serial rapist.
But otherwise, I couldn't agree more.
Thank you, Will.
I didn't know that Bill Barr was dating Al Pacino's baby mama, and I.
Now, somehow, I feel even more disturbed than I did before.
So, thanks for that.
Continuing on the theme, Russell and Megan discuss what an appropriate age gap might look like.
Confession, truth is the foundation of everything.
I would be lying to myself if I lied to you.
I mean, we're on, you know, where it's being filmed and broadcast and stuff like that, and I'm not stupid.
But what I'm saying is that I've never done anything where I've manipulated consent.
I've manipulated consent by conducting it as a kind of energy conduction.
Bypassing consent is when you make people do things they don't want to do, not make people do things they wouldn't normally do.
That is too young.
You shouldn't sleep with anyone really younger than you.
And if I'd had more, I mean, I wouldn't go, I don't want to time travel back and be a more efficient womanizer.
I don't think 14 years difference is in itself scandalous.
It's just given the age she was, it was.
But if she were 25 and you were 39, I don't think people would be looking at that.
I don't know.
I would still have some concerns.
Like, sure, a human brain is fully developed.
By 25, but a 14 year gap is pretty substantial in terms of maturity, emotional intelligence, as well as like there is bound to be a pretty significant experience gap.
And don't get me wrong, it varies on a case by case basis, but I don't think you can apply a blanket, this is okay, to that sort of age gap at that sort of age.
Like, once everyone involved is, you know, past 30 or so, 30, 35, you can kind of stop worrying about it, right?
Because at some point, everyone is grown and can make their own decisions.
But before that, like in their 20s, I'm not so sure.
Anyway, Russell just said, I manipulated consent by conducting it as a kind of energy conduction.
Age Of Consent And Pedophile Definitions00:06:36
It's not a word.
Again, manipulating consent sounds an awful lot like coercion to me, at a minimum.
And his definition of what overriding consent is.
Does not tally.
Does not tally for me at all.
And from here, we get even more age of consent discussion.
Yeah, it is young, but I don't know if you remember from your own adolescence, because I do, that there were some young women, like, you know, girls, let's call them girls, like there were 16 that were like kids, and then there were others that were like women and like 25 year old guys would pull up in cars outside the school.
Like, just that my normal comprehensive, that means regular state school, you know, when all the girls in your year go out of life.
Listen, you don't have to tell.
I was called a pedophile.
Enabler, because I said there's a difference between 15 year olds and five year olds when we were talking about what Jeffrey Epstein is.
And really, the point I was making was that the term pedophile only applies to somebody who likes prepubescent girls, which is a very different thing than liking women who are in their late teens.
And then you get in the 15, 16 range, and it depends.
It really depends.
I guess the law is the law.
I'm in a legal situation.
Morally, of course, it's wrong.
But I mean, there are 15 and 16 year old girls who are having.
Sex with 18 and 17 year old boys.
Like, the age difference there does feel exploitative and shocking.
Yes.
Like, 15 year olds, 16 year olds, kids having sex with each other is none of my business.
Me as a 30 year old, I had no business having consensual sex with women that were just past girls, that were just over the age of consent.
Yeah.
Megyn Kelly has some bad takes on age of consent.
Like, at the absolute technical root of things, it is my understanding there is a different word for someone who is attracted.
To teenagers as opposed to someone who is attracted to smaller children.
But at the end of the day, a 14 or 15 or 16 year old is still a child.
Like, there is absolutely no reason to be debating that type of semantics unless you're trying to defend someone or deflect from something.
Like, perhaps to deflect from the idea that Donald Trump has assaulted 15 year old girls and potentially younger, for instance.
And again, Russell just said there that 15 year olds, 16 year olds, Kids having sex with each other is none of his business.
So he confirms that a 16 year old is a child.
So taken all together, this reads as Russell Brand admits to having sex with a child.
Of course, he hasn't admitted to all of the other terrible things he apparently did to her, but still, the way this has been covered in the press has largely been one of, oh, that's a bit weird, isn't it?
Rather than, holy fuck, that's insane.
Why is this still allowed?
We've got some wood.
To do is what I'm getting at.
And now, some more questions about the timing of the allegations against Russell.
Look, when Me Too happened in 2015, I was like, wow, I've slept with lots and lots of women.
I wonder if during this moment I'm going to face some allegations.
And that did not happen.
Because I think some people, it seemed, were facing allegations that maybe it looked like consensual activity reframed.
And again, that's one of the things that's very suspicious about the allegations against you is that no one did come forward then.
It wasn't until you got very outspoken in your more right wing views that suddenly.
Channel four thought it would be a great time to do a hit piece on Russell Brand and found some women.
I mean, it'd be the equivalent of like going around and finding all the women who had slept with John Bon Jovi and saying, Do you ever have anything that didn't feel 100%?
You know, it's just when you go to a man who's been as exposed as you have, like a rock star, as you were describing, if you really, really, really lift up every sheet and kick every tire, you may find some women who are unhappy about their experiences.
I'm not diminishing them.
Maybe they're true.
Whatever.
We'll find out the trial, but maybe they're not true.
And maybe this did come up because there was a new agenda when it came to your name, and it was much more interesting to silence you and smear you.
Again, at the start of this interview, Meghan Kelly was like, Oh, I was so angry with you for the allegations.
And now here she is very genuinely insinuating this same bullshit conspiracy theory that the charges against Russell are to silence and smear him.
And on top of that, she is absolutely doing some top tier conflation here.
Unhappy experiences when it comes to sex, or even sex someone regrets, is not the same as what Russell has been accused of and what he's been charged with.
People who've been raped and sexually assaulted are not people who are just unhappy with their experiences.
Like, they have been attacked in probably one of the most harmful ways possible.
It frankly stuns me that a woman in 2026 can happily carry this much water for rapists.
But well done, Megyn Kelly, for carrying what is clearly an Olympic sized pool on your petite shoulders.
You made some money out of it, I'm sure that was worth it.
For the record, the allegations against Russell were starting to be investigated at the tail end of the first Me Too movement.
Before that, it had only been a few years since he'd been a Hollywood star, on top of which, he famously was using the same lawyers as the royal family to send cease and desist notices to anyone who said anything bad about him.
It's not like coming out against this incredibly rich and famous man is an easy thing to do, especially as it would involve such an intense level of public scrutiny as well as the inevitable legal action.
Like, it really is not that fucking simple.
And now we move to the very slightly more palatable subject of Donald Trump.
And Megyn Kelly has been part of the recent revolt against him based on the Iran situation.
Which isn't terribly thrilling, but right at the end, she says something very revealing.
It is what it is.
You know, it is what it is.
But there's still, in my view, a lot to like about Trump.
It's just some of those darker demons are much more in the front view right now because he's like a cornered animal.
He's got no support in this Iran war.
Disempowered Executive Under Trump00:05:04
He can't bring it to an end.
These are tough motherfuckers who are not doing what we want them to and coming to the negotiating table and giving us what we want so we can get out and just declare it a win.
He sees his poll numbers are now, his latest poll approval on Iran was 30.
At 30%.
I mean, his job approval in like the last five polls has been in the low 30s, low 30s.
So his legacy is on the line, and you can tell, he can tell.
So he's acting out in a very, very bad way.
And my prayer every night, every night, Russell, is that he will get back on track.
He will reconnect with what, you know, the agenda that we put him in office to enact.
He will extract himself from this very money driven agenda by the Miriam Adelsons of the world.
You know, she's purchasing what she wants, and Trump's being manipulated into doing it, which is infuriating.
And that the country, or at least those of us who are on what I call Team Sanity, can come back together and work to defeat these crazy leftists like James Carville, who wants to pack the Supreme Court and add Puerto Rico and D.C. as states, right?
Like, The Republicans will never win another national election if we do that.
It always tickles me that America was founded on the idea of no taxation without representation.
Famously, a lot of tea was wasted because of that exact sentiment.
And yet, when it comes to Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico, well, citizens of those places are absolutely American citizens and yet are not afforded any kind of representation whatsoever.
It's Pretty messed up and intensely hypocritical from these people who supposedly love the Founding Fathers so much.
But the funnier idea here is that if DC and Puerto Rico were granted statehood, then the Republicans would never win an election again.
To which I think, well, stop doing shit that the majority of Americans don't actually want then.
Like, if you're going to stand there and openly say to me, oh, it's a good thing not all Americans can vote because otherwise we wouldn't be able to get away with our bullshit.
It's very difficult for me to muster up any sympathy for you.
Though, for what it's worth, I'm also not sure that what she's saying is true.
Tons of Hispanic voters voted for Trump in the last election, believing that they were the good migrants and would be protected.
And on top of that, I'm sure there are plenty of conservatives in both Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. Speaking of the founding fathers, Russell has quite the take here.
The principle ought to be.
Decentralization and democracy.
These are not new ideas.
If the technology that existed today existed when this nation was founded, how much power would they have afforded at the local level?
They would have afforded more.
Yeah, a lot.
Now that technology does exist.
That, of course, was the original ideal anyway.
That was the whole goal of having these little states that were experimental and a very small national federal government that we'd all join and that would be sort of, we'd have some basic ideals that would be enforced at that level.
But that, Each state could have its own personality and its own laws and its own culture.
That was always the vision for America.
It's only as the country went on that we got a more bloated and empowered federal government, that we then ceded a bunch of powers from the congressional branch, which is the people's representative, to the executive branch.
It's gotten bigger and bigger under Obama, under Biden, and now under Trump.
I'd love to get back to where we have a very, very, very tiny, disempowered executive who really can't do much.
Yeah.
That'd be great.
That would be much more consistent with the way the founders wanted the country to be run.
No, no, it wouldn't.
When George Washington was made the first president, he was essentially king of America for a while.
And the various founding fathers all seemed to have their own ideas of just how great it would be to be king.
Much beloved Thomas Jefferson certainly wasn't afraid of wielding his executive powers.
And I really don't think any president since him has been afraid of it either.
As for the whole If the founding fathers were able to vote with their smartphones, bit, no, they wouldn't have afforded anyone any additional amount of power to individuals at the local level.
In fact, Meghan Kelly wouldn't have been able to vote, and as Russell was born working class, he also wouldn't have been able to vote.
Voting rights were given exclusively to white, landowning, and usually slave owning, men.
And that is it.
That was the vision, and boy were they pleased with it.
It had nothing to do with practicality and everything to do with who they believed had the right to make decisions for the country.
And for them, that meant status, wealth, being white, and having a penis.
From Thomas Jefferson, we go to the present day personification of an out of touch white person, and that is Katy Perry.
Voting Rights And Working Class Roots00:04:22
Do you guys keep in touch?
She said you never contacted her again after you sent her a note saying you wanted a divorce.
Look, that is true.
Wow.
Never anything, not a text?
I stay in touch with her father, Keith, and her mother, Mary, because they're good Christian folks.
And I must say, I feel a good deal of sympathy with the recent allegations around.
Katie.
She's been accused of sexually assaulting Ruby Rose by allegedly exposing her badge to this gal's face, which she's denied, but there's a criminal inquiry underway in Australia as a result of these allegations.
To me, that doesn't, I mean, this is probably the old school man in me.
I don't even hear the crime there.
What happened?
I can't even hear where it is.
Like someone would have to poke me with a stick.
There, that's the bit.
There's a crime.
No 20 year old girl wants another woman rubbing her badge on her face.
Uninvited.
That's the crime.
There it is, Russell.
I got it.
I got you.
I got you.
Are you available for the troll?
The Tucker's coming.
Yes, I will come.
Oh, goody.
Yet another reason for me not to attend.
If you could hear a high pitched noise in the background of that clip, it was the sound of Russell's lawyers screaming all the way from across the Atlantic.
And pro tip here if you're ever on trial for sexual assault, don't appear on television saying you think there's nothing wrong with someone sexually assaulting someone else.
Russell should just not be allowed to speak to other human beings at this point.
And we haven't even tackled the Piers Morgan interview yet.
Oh, good lord.
Oh, and also Katy Perry has allegedly exposed someone's penis to everyone as well.
I don't know.
I've previously been somewhat sympathetic towards Katy Perry in terms of her relationship with Russell Brand, but I don't know.
At this point, I'm like, maybe.
Maybe there are reasons they got along.
I don't know.
So, next up, Russell tells us what's wrong with the UK.
So, yeah, yeah, you're right.
I mean, justice and truth, these are ideas that presume God.
In my country, the United Kingdom, it's gone a little bit godless.
Like, you can get an abortion now.
I think even on the child's third birthday, you can still, like, no, I've gone off it.
No, it's annoying.
Get it out of here.
And, like, you can be euphonized, like, if you, I think you could be euphonized if you're annoying.
Yeah, oh god, no, you're out.
And like, this is Britain, a lot of people are annoying.
Look at the teeth, just consider the teeth.
That's probably why Harry and Meghan left.
Not bad, thank you.
See, I don't think that was terribly funny, but it was still funnier than anything Russell has said.
And again, when the people interviewing you are funnier than you are, it might be time to stop calling yourself a comedian.
Um, boy, uh, obviously, none of what he said there was true.
Um, and of all people to have ever been spawned from the United Kingdom.
Russell Brand saying that people are annoying here is just the absolute peak of irony.
He is like the shittiest attributes of James Corden and Piers Morgan, mashed together and combined with the moral compass of Jimmy Savile.
Douse that monstrosity in patchouli oil and arm it with a thesaurus, and presto, you have made yourself a Russell Brand.
Also, if you can be killed off for being annoying, he would be dead on arrival in this country, if that's what happened.
Oh, and no one who has had surgery to correct their teeth should be coming after other people's teeth.
I mean, nobody should do that anyway, but yeah.
Russell did have surgery to correct his teeth before he became properly famous.
In the last clip here, let's see how this car crash ends.
Thank you.
Well, listen, I hope I'm wrong.
I hope.
I'm not predicting.
I'm not predicting a guilty.
I'm not going to predict it.
I'm worried as I'm looking at the cross on the cover of the book and I'm thinking, well, how does this journey go next?
And I really hope, you know, and I'm also thinking about something Erica Kirk said at Charlie's funeral, how Charlie said, use me, you know, use me, Lord.
And she was saying those are powerful words.
Russell Getting Used By Everyone00:01:07
Oh.
You know, like, I hope you don't get used in the way we don't want to see you get used.
But as you point out, if that's God's will, then it, then so it must be.
And He knows better than we do.
And there must be something for you there.
There must be something, some work for you there.
Oh man.
Oh man, indeed.
Uh, Meghan Kelly clearly thinks that Russell is going to prison.
Um, and yet she merrily had him on her show anyway.
These people truly are the worst.
Um, as for Russell getting used, I mean, If he ends up in prison, then odds seem pretty strong.
Anyway, that's our show, everybody.
If you want to support what I do, please head to patreon.comslash onbrand and sign up.
Otherwise, I'll be back real soon because there is still a Piers Morgan interview to deal with.
But in the meantime, take care of yourselves and each other.
Thank you very much.
I love you.
Bye.
I don't want to be reductive, but I am.
So that's how it comes out.
All right.
I'm going to finish now because I'm hungry and I want to eat something.