All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Nov. 8, 2022 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan
47:15
20221108_piers-morgan-uncensored-gavin-williamson-resigns-n
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
British Politics Talent Crisis 00:01:59
Tonight, Piers Morgan uncensored, disgraced Matt Hancock finally slithers into the Australian jungle as two disgraced cabinet members back home cling to their jobs.
It's British politics facing a crisis of talent.
And as Elon Musk revolution continues to cause mayhem at Twitter, can the billionaire save free speech online?
I'll ask the most infamous man on the internet, Andrew Tate.
Plus in a jaw-dropping, fluttering world exclusive.
I'll talk to a protester I actually agree with.
Naked Birdgirl will be here live, naked in the studio.
Live from London, this is Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Well, good evening from London.
Welcome to Piers Morgan Uncensored, for better or worse, and it's probably both.
This is the age of the spectacular political comeback.
Netanyahu faced scandal after scandal in Israel.
Now he's back for a sixth term.
Brazil just re-elected President Lula after 11 years out of office, including two years in jail.
Boris Johnson briefly terrified Britain with sinister threats of his own second coming.
And if Republicans get the results they're predicting in today's US midterm elections, we may be on course for the most remarkable comeback of them all.
I'm going to be making a very big announcement on Tuesday, November 15, at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida.
I think we could probably guess what the announcement will be.
It won't be that he's going off to a quiet retirement to play golf.
A so-called red wave could also mean there's no comeback in 2024 for this guy.
10, 12, 15.
Whoops, stepping on a...
That's black anyway.
You can judge for yourself whether that's a good thing.
Political comebacks are not always spectacular.
Sometimes they're evidence of a total absence of talent and the grubby residue you're left with when you scrape past the bottom of the barrel.
Political Comebacks Are Not Spectacular 00:15:16
Cruella Braverman, as she's now become known, returned as British Home Secretary just six days after being fired for sending sensitive documents to her private email account.
Since then, she's lost what little grip we had of our borders and sparked a diplomatic incident with Albania.
And the ghastly Gavin Williamson is back in the cabinet after twice being fired and then inexplicably getting knighted for his services to being a failure.
And now two short weeks into his latest tenure, he's disgraced the government yet again with stories of bullying.
I get why Prime Minister Rishi Sunak bought them back.
It's a big tent politics, uniting the warring factions of the Conservative Party after years of chaos and big tents are also for circuses.
And the best thing he can do right now, frankly, is fire them both and get on with fixing the country.
There's one other failed, disgraced and universally despised British politician we'd all hope we'd seen the back of and it's the former Health Secretary Matt Hancock who tonight will crawl into the I'm a Celebrity Jungle in New South Wales Australia, precisely 10,190 miles away from the very people he's supposed to represent in West Suffolk.
This may well be the age of the comeback, but I think I speak for the whole of Britain when I say to Matt Hancock, in your case, we'll make an exception.
Well, joining me now as a Talk TV international editor and author of Matt Hancock's pandemic diaries, Isabel Oakeshott, former I'm a celebrity contestant Christine Hamilton, and the beast, Mark Lebette from the TV series The Chase joins me now.
He's actually fading away since even last time I saw you.
How are you?
About eight stone lighter.
You are eight stone lighter in what period of time?
Oh, it's about the way to do it properly over about five or six years.
And how do you feel?
Hungry.
Well, you're not anyone's going to be hungry because Matt Hancock is going to be hungry.
I want to start with Isabel Oakeshott on this, because I wasn't aware you'd been the co-author, or presumably the main author, of his pandemic diaries, which already will put you right into the firing line when those get unleashed on the world.
But is there any defence you can put up, taking your co-author hat off for a moment, about him going into the jungle to or himself around as his constituents face the worst cost of living crisis in history?
Well, look, Piers, I think that the hatred and the pylon on Matt Hancock is out of all proportion to anything he may or may not have done in terms of the rules he broke during the pandemic.
This is somebody who gave the best part of 18 months of their life to trying their level best to save lives.
Now, I have plenty of disagreements, actually, with his response to the pandemic and many of the policies he pursued.
You and I, Piers, actually have a different view on this.
And my view is certainly different to Matt Hancock's on the merits of lockdown.
But, you know, whether or not you agree with how he handled the pandemic response, he was responsible for securing the UK the vaccine ahead of most of the rest of the world.
And I just feel that the hatred that has been directed at him is completely disposable.
Well, it's proportionate given how much he gave.
Let me respond.
I mean, honestly, I've heard defending the indefensible, but that is world-class stuff there, Ms. Oakeshott, because let me represent the case for the prosecution.
He said in January, just before the pandemic began, that we were fully prepared as a country for the pandemic after the first reports from China had come out about a coronavirus.
Turned out we were uniquely ill-prepared.
We had no PPE equipment, which meant that a lot of health workers and care workers died.
We had no testing system, which meant we didn't know who the hell had it at any given time.
So we sent elderly people back from hospitals into care homes where they died in their tens of thousands.
We didn't close our borders at all.
We let millions of people flood in from countries where coronavirus was on the rampage, etc., etc., etc.
On vaccines, it was Kate Bingham who sorted out the vaccines, not Matt Hancock.
So when you put the case for this, I'm sure the pandemic diaries will tell a different story, but I was living all this all day, every day, and I will be fascinated to read his account of it.
But the idea that somehow, before there's even been an inquiry, we should be letting him off the hook when the UK had, and this remains the case, more people die in the UK from COVID than any other country in Europe.
That's just a statistical fact.
Well, Piers, Piers, hang on a minute.
I'm not letting Matt Hancock off the hook and I'm certainly not here to defend his pandemic response.
I'm here to talk about his role in the jungle.
You'll have to wait for the book, which I'm sure you will find.
Let me ask you this.
I think you will find.
Okay, let me ask you this then.
Let's turn to the jungle.
I'm actually As exercised about this as I was about his pandemic antics, because to me, he should at least have the good grace, having been fired for breaking his own lockdown rules with an affair inside government buildings where they literally devised the lockdown rules.
Having been fired from that and having presided, as I say, over a catastrophic handling of the pandemic, certainly in the first phase, the idea that before there's even an inquiry to win in this stuff, before even the embers have settled on his shameful exit from government, the idea he then pockets £400,000 to fly halfway, well, literally across the world, 10,000 miles to Australia, to go and make an idiot of himself on I'm a simply get me out of here,
while his constituents back in West Suffolk are going through the worst cost of living crisis many of them will have ever experienced, I think is completely and utterly shameful.
How dare he?
How dare he abrogate his duty as a politician, disappear off on the taxpayer dime to Australia to promote himself and pocket all this cash?
Seriously, how dare he?
Well, first of all, I'm not Matt Hancock, so you'll have to wait and I'm sure he'll respond to all of that.
But we don't know how much he's earning from this.
There are more than 100,000.
I'm sure it is.
I'm sure it's a substantial amount.
We also know that he's going to be giving a great deal of that to charity.
We also know that thanks to this government's charity, he's going to be having to give.
I don't know the answer to that.
But what I can tell you is he's going to have to give.
Well, I'll tell you this, Piers.
One thing I know for sure is that the top tax rate is still 45p.
So we know perfectly well that he's going to be giving at least 45% of that to the state.
So that's a form of charity in the world.
Oh, do me a favour.
You know, one thing I will...
Oakshot, you cannot say that with a straight face.
Because he's actually paying some tax.
All right, look, we're going to Christian Hamilton.
Christine Hamilton is now covering her face with her hands in disbelief of what she's just heard.
Christine Hamilton, your response to Ms. Oakshot's defence.
Well, honestly, I mean, commendable loyalty from Isabel because she's doing a book with Matt Hancock.
But I mean, I have really heard it all now because he's going to pay tax on it.
I mean, heavens alive.
Let's leave aside his COVID record because, frankly, you've covered that quite well.
Let's just leave that aside.
The man is a member of parliament.
He is paid pretty handsomely by most people's terms to be a member of parliament.
We, the taxpayer, pay him.
His constituents expect him to look after their interests either at Westminster or in Suffolk.
And as you say, he's gone to the other side of the world.
His argument, and I think it's fairly well established that he is getting around 400,000.
So many various sources have confirmed it.
But his argument for going in, he says, because he wants to go to where the people are.
And apparently, 12 million people, was it 12 or 10, tuned in last night to I'm a celebrity.
Well, that's obviously a lot more than tune into yesterday in Parliament.
He wants to talk about dyslexia.
And so therefore, he wants to go to the people to talk about dyslexia.
Has he ever watched I'm a Celebrity?
Does he honestly think that ITV are going to spend prime time giving his views on dyslexia?
They're not going to give money.
They're not eating kangaroo testicles for the delectation of the British public.
Don't need to talk.
Or hanging upside down in a crocodile.
Exactly.
The problem is he's lost his ministerial career.
He knows that's gone.
He's lost his car.
He's lost his uplift in salary.
And he seems to think, in my view, that he's going to be able to reinvent himself like Ed Balls did, who is now a national treasurer, having done Strictly and some great television programmes.
But honestly, Matt Hancock is not Ed Balls.
People who know him say he's actually quite likable.
No, Balls was Balls.
John Glann is a cock, in my opinion.
Let me go to Mart LaBeouf.
He's sitting here patiently listening to all this.
It turns out, this is a bombshell development, that he's actually got your slot.
You were being lined up for it.
Well, I might have been.
I don't know.
I was one of the people interviewed and they hadn't said a word to me, which tends to mean they're probably keeping you on file just in case.
We're both graduates of Exeter College, Oxford, but it looks like he got the gig and I did it.
But I'll make a try to defend the indefensible.
Come on, then.
What parliamentary rules has he broken?
Yeah, we're all fed up that he's gone there and he's trowousing fortune.
Has he actually broken any of the rules of being an MP?
And I'd love it if the Speaker's Office was like, well, yeah, he has.
Well, there's consistency.
Apply the rules to everyone.
Yeah, but I think what he's broken is every moral rule, which is that when you are elected by the British public and you earn 84 grand a year to be a member of parliament, you damn well turn up in parliament.
But that's the problem.
You say the moral rules, there have been MPs who've barely bothered.
They get turfed out the next election.
They're not legally obliged.
They should be.
But I think they're shameful too.
But I think what's worse about this is he's trousering all this extra cash to go and take part in this dumb reality show, which of course we'll all watch.
And it's got huge ratings.
But it's to me profiting from the blood money of handling a pandemic incredibly badly, leading to the worst death toll in Europe, profiting blood money again from the shame of leaving the government when he was caught breaking his own lockdown rules, lockdown rules which cause a lot of other deaths, by the way, and continued to do so because the lockdowns were so draconian.
You could have an argument about it.
I supported them at the time as being the only blunt instrument we had till a vaccine came along.
But that's a different argument.
But my point about it is, in the end, this guy, there are millions of people in this country really suffering on the breadline right now.
Really suffering.
They will want help from their MP.
And their MP is gallivanting out in Australia, taking part in stupid games for 400 grand while they're all left on their own.
That's my problem with it.
No, I agree.
Morally, it stinks.
I'm just saying from the legal point of view, has he actually failed his legal duty?
There's one thing I think people haven't thought of here.
You're one of the 10 other people or whatever is in the jungle.
What happens if you see Matt Hancock turn up and you've lost loved ones in the pandemic?
Well, we know Charlene White has.
I'll be honest, I might have been tempted to knock his lights out if I'd have seen it.
We know she got very tearful on air talking about, I think it was a relative or a good friend who died of COVID, right?
There will be millions of people watching who feel that way.
I know so many people who lost loved ones.
I know people who in the lockdown, I had a very good school friend of mine who said goodbye to her mother on FaceTime on a mobile phone because she wasn't allowed to go to the care home, which had COVID ripped through it because people were sent back from hospital without being tested.
That was on Matt Hancock.
So there will be people absolutely spewing blood about this.
And that's my problem with it.
I will always give the government a little bit of leeway because in March 2020, none of us knew what was coming.
They were trying their best under difficult circumstances.
What we probably don't take into account is that half the government were going down with this disease at the moment, including the Prime Minister.
So you would have had sub-optimality.
My response to that is...
But I'd agree with you after that.
Well, in 2016, we had a pandemic exercise called Exercise Sickness.
And it was a three-day exercise in which it planned the country, supposedly, for a pandemic.
And they made a number of recommendations based on the fact there was no BPE, no testing system, and so on.
None of it got acted on.
Do you know who was in charge?
You know who was in charge?
Jeremy Hunt, who's the new Chancellor of the Exchequer.
He was health secretary.
Now, some breaking news has just come in as we're talking about hapless members of governments.
Gavin Williamson has resigned.
So they obviously listened to my monologue and they've got rid of him.
Gavin Williamson has gone.
That's the third time he's had to leave the government.
It's Rishi Sunak's first loss of a cabinet minister.
And frankly, Rishi, if you're watching, you brought this on yourself.
Why would you bring back Gavin Williamson, who by general consent was utterly hopeless?
Why would you put him back in the government only for this to happen?
Apparently, Williams says he's becoming a distraction.
You think?
You think?
Absolutely ridiculous that he was brought back.
Shameful that he's now had to resign.
And we've got Matt Hancock in the jungle.
Is anybody left...
Is anyone left to defend us?
Isabel Oxcholk, before I let you go, your thoughts on Gavin Williamson?
Well, I didn't think that the text message exchange was reason enough for him to resign because we've all had spats with colleagues, haven't we?
But clearly there was more to it.
But Piers, I just want to challenge your long rant there, blaming all the ills of the pandemic on Matt Hancock.
And you seem to be fixating with the money that he's supposedly receiving for this stint in the jungle.
I will say in Matt's defense, I have rarely met anyone as hardworking and I don't think that his constituents are going to lose out long run as a result of him being in the middle of the year.
How much are you both getting for the mishandling of the pandemic or not?
How much are you getting for the book?
I'm sorry.
How much are you both getting for the book?
I've had not a penny.
I have had not a penny.
But you're doing it for free.
It's an act of charity.
That's the best part.
I actually, do you know what, Piers?
I have spent pretty much the whole year working on it for not one penny.
That may surprise you.
Will that still be the case when you sell the rights?
Well, I would very much hope that I end up recouping some of my losses, let's put it that way.
But this is not a book I have done for the money.
It's a book that I've done for the journalistic story.
You know me, Piers.
I like to be a little bit more.
You know what?
I didn't think there was any job worse than being Madonna's toy boy lover.
But I think being Matt Hancock's defender is right up there, Oak Shot.
I've got to be honest.
Wait till you read the book and then work it out.
Waiting with bated breath.
Defending Matt Hancock's Resignation 00:06:50
Thank you for joining us from...
Are you still in Australia?
No, you're back here now, aren't you?
I'm back here and certainly nowhere near a jungle, unfortunately.
Just for political one.
Well, we appreciate you joining us.
Christy, thank you very much for joining us.
Mark, great to see you.
Tell me about the chase.
Is there anything coming for Christmas?
Yes, we've got two Christmas shows, the glamorous one, and we are...
I've heard rumours you might be in a lady's underwear.
Is that right?
Chance would be a five thing.
I can't possibly comment.
Good after tuning in on Christmas Day.
It's a brilliant show.
I went on it and it was extremely excruciating, but I did enjoy the experience in a weird selfie.
This was a bit of a clip here.
Oh, it was a nightmare.
Yeah, I mean, you were, I mean, you look, Thomas, you look like a beast.
You've lost so much weight.
I'm not sure the beast tag really applies.
I'm still bigger than most people, but unfortunately for you, the one thing we learnt from that, Susanna's way smarter than she was.
She is, I'm sorry about that.
She on general knowledge, I tell you, she was.
I had her on my Christ team any time.
She knows.
I always said she was like the school SWAT, Susanna.
Anyway, great to see you.
Thanks for coming in, mate.
Much appreciated.
Still to come on uncensored.
She's dared to bear all for her cause, which is birds.
And she's here in the studio.
Naked Bird Girl will be live.
Here she is, wearing barely a stitch of clothing.
And I'm fully supportive of this kind of protest, and we'll discuss why in a few moments.
Plus, Elon Musk suspends accounts for parroting him.
Is he still the man to save free speech online?
Well, one man, who knows the thing or two about being banned on social media, is Andrew Tate.
He's back.
He's uncensored again.
And we're giving us his views on Elon Musk and what's going on on Twitter.
Welcome back to Piers Borgon.
Well, big breaking news in the last few minutes.
Sir, still sounds preposterous, Gavin Williamson, knighted for services to resigning and being fired, has now been fired again.
from government.
Letters just come out from him saying he refutes, of course, all allegations of being a nasty little bully, but he's gone anyway because he's become a distraction.
Well, Kate McCann, our political guru, joins me live now from the heart of Westminster there, which is probably exploding with excitement.
So Kate, I mean, this is the least surprising news of the entire millennium.
The more surprising aspect of all this is what on earth Rishi Sunak was doing, bringing somebody so damaged with such a record of failure and ignominious departures from government back into his first government, only for this to then blow up.
Yeah, and I think that was the question that's been swirling around Westminster this afternoon, speaking to people there, you know, trying to understand whether this was one of those issues that was going to run and run.
The thing that kept coming back time and again was that it's the question of Rishi Sunak's political judgment.
And people kept pointing to different things that he'd done during his time, not just as Prime Minister, but also as Chancellor too.
His reaction, for example, to some of the allegations about his own family and the way he dealt with those, that people were saying, well, maybe he's just not quite up to it in terms of the politics and suggesting that he has six months to prove those doubters wrong.
I mean, I think from this letter, it's very clear that Gavin Williamson feels fairly aggrieved by the fact that he's had to resign.
As you pointed out there, Piers, he says he refutes the characterisation of these claims but recognises that he's becoming a distraction.
He also says, interestingly, that he has apologised to the recipient of the messages.
He's talking there about Wendy Morton, the former Conservative chief whip until very recently, also a position that he once held.
Now, she's said over the last couple of days, through allies, not directly, that she felt pretty fed up that he hadn't directly apologised and that actually she'd now referred those text messages to an independent watchdog.
There were three by the end of today investigations into Gavin Williamson's conduct.
That one, one from the Conservative Party, and number 10 was also looking into other serious allegations which emerged yesterday in the Guardian newspaper.
And I think it was fair to say that his time had come.
There was a question about whether or not Gavin Williamson would be allowed to stay until those investigations were over, but clearly tonight that's not the case.
Someone at some point has stepped in.
If it was Rishi Sunak, perhaps the message had got through that people were questioning his political judgment.
But next time he should just call me Rishi Sunak and ask me, is this a good idea, Piers?
It'd be a bit like the conversation about Suella Braverman.
No, these are not good ideas.
You don't bring somebody back after six days after they've been fired and you never bring back someone like Gavin Williamson because he's obviously completely useless.
Anyway, I would imagine the repercussions of this will be pretty significant, not just for Williamson, who's gone, or for the government, but also for Rishi Sunak himself.
Big test of his leadership so early into his tenure.
He's supposed to be steadying the ship, calming everything down, no more dramas.
And here we are, just a few weeks into his tenure, with a spectacular sacking of one of his first cabinet members.
Yeah, an absolutely terrible timing, Piers.
I mean, we're going into Prime Minister's questions tomorrow.
It's only, I think, Rishi Sunak's third outing against Labour leader, Sakir Starmer.
And if you were Labour tonight, you'd be rubbing your hands together.
You've got an absolute wealth of opportunities to push the Prime Minister in difficult directions.
This is going to be top of your agenda.
What on earth went wrong with Gavin Williamson and why did you let this drag out over the weekend?
But today there was a debate in Parliament over Suella Braverman, her conduct, whether she ought to be Home Secretary, really big questions about her appointment.
You've got what's happening at Manston with immigration, you know, illegal migrants crossing the channel and then being essentially left in tents for weeks on end.
There's a question of why he did or didn't want to go to COP27 and whether that speech was long enough.
I mean, there are lots and lots of questions for Rishi Sunak.
And the problem for the government at the moment is that they're pretty hamstrung about what they can actually say.
And so we get to the budget in just under two weeks' time when they will reveal some really difficult choices.
I mean, you've seen over the last couple of days potentially trying to soften that blow, expectation management about the size of the black hole, 50, 60 billion pounds, and then a clear message in the Times that actually those who are most vulnerable will be protected.
But that doesn't mean things won't be hard.
So Rishi Sunak is looking down a tunnel at the end of it is a really difficult budget he's got to deliver with his chancellor and suck up quite hard headlines.
This is the last thing he needs right now.
No, but the one thing he's talking about looking at things, he was probably watching my show because at 8 p.m. tonight, I called for Gavin Williamson to be fired.
And at 8:11 p.m., he was fired.
And I'm doing the maths here at Kate McCann.
And as usual, it looks like the corridors of power are listening to me.
Twitter Control And Real World Impact 00:09:33
Well, Piers, maybe they're in the market for an extra director of comms.
Would you consider it?
I would never demean myself at such a lowly level.
The tagline...
A position in the Lords.
PM for PM still has the most majestic ring to it.
And you know what?
If I do become Prime Minister, you can come and be my director of comms.
My little Alistair Campbell.
Little?
You're little Alistair Campbell.
Well, you're little, aren't you?
Compared to Alistair Campbell.
He's huge.
I'll consider it.
I'll consider it.
Big breaking news anyway.
You're going to be very busy again, Kate.
Thanks for joining the show.
We appreciate it.
Elon Musk's tenure at Twitter has begun explosively with mass layoffs and hotly debated plans to charge users for verification with his vow to restore free speech to the platform's most divided opinion.
The site's so far not restored any high-profile banned accounts like Donald Trump's and so on.
In fact, Twitter suspended several celebrities for impersonating Musk, although that was an existing rule that you couldn't do that.
Well, joining me now is Andrew Tate, whose videos have been viewed billions of times online, but he's been banned from pretty much every mainstream social media platform, including Twitter.
Andrew Tate, welcome back to Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Your take on this, I think, is quite interesting because you've been a victim of being, if victim's the right word, but you've been removed from social media platforms for your opinions.
Elon Musk has dedicated himself, he says, to restoring free speech.
Do you think that's going to include you, for example?
I don't think it matters if it includes me or not.
I think what's important is that free speech is the number one weapon against absolute tyranny.
And although you cannot have complete free speech because then conversations completely break down into asinine insult fests, I do like the idea of the changing of the guard when it comes to control over information.
Is it possible, Andrew Tate, to actually police something like Twitter to be a platform for genuine free speech?
Or is it so toxic and tribal now that whatever happens, you know, before we had all the people on the right screaming away that they were being no-platformed and so on.
Now you've got all the people on the left screaming that they're being no, you know, diminished in some way.
It's very tribal, very toxic.
Can Musk cut through that?
And if so, how?
Yeah, it's going to be extremely difficult.
There's always going to be one group of people who are extremely unhappy.
But I think that anybody who's perspicacious enough to understand the truth of what's been going on in the world recently will know that the left and their narratives have certainly been protected for a very long time.
And the universe has swings and balances.
And God often restores balance to the universe.
and perhaps it might swing the other way for a while.
I truthfully am a person who believes that all points of view are extremely important because as soon as you block points of view, you have absolute tyranny.
And in a way, it's sort of self-defeating, isn't it?
Because you carried on getting huge attention.
It was interesting to me that when you came on the show, for example, we've had, I think, nearly six million people have viewed the whole interview that we did, which is a huge number of people, certainly far higher than watching it on conventional television.
So you have a whole world out there online which operates away from social media platforms.
Yeah, I've been very, very successful in spite of them, but not many people can do that.
I'm in a pretty unique position.
But I think that everybody needs a voice to a degree.
And social media platforms are now the most important platforms on the planet.
They control information and they influence real-world decisions and they influence people's perception of reality.
The last few years of COVID have been a perfect example of what happens when you censor one side of the argument and you only allow one point of view to be purported by the matrix in and of itself.
And that's how you end up in tyrannical situations.
I think you were just discussing that, Piers.
Yeah, and I think that's a perfectly valid point.
You know, people have quite, I think quite rightly, held me to task over some of the positions I took during the COVID pandemic.
Notably, when the scientists said as a definitive fact that you couldn't transmit the virus if you had the vaccine, it turned out that wasn't true.
And I based my observations on that supposed fact and said, right, well, in that case, if you refuse to be vaccinated, you shouldn't get the same rights as people who've been vaccinated.
If it's true that if you're unjabbed, you can pass it on.
It turned out, actually, there's not much difference whether you've been vaccinated or not.
And at that point, I changed my mind.
But I felt that there were a lot of people who were being de-platformed from Twitter at the time for questioning the validity of scientific statements.
And they would then be a complete U-turn.
So I do think it was a very interesting period, actually, for testing what free speech is.
It was actually worse than that.
You're right, Piers, but it was actually worse than interesting because what happens is when you censor an entire side of the argument and only allowed one side of the argument to have a voice, you are changing reality in real time.
You are shaping the world.
The only reason that scam continued as long as it did, and the only reason people didn't get to see their own parents get buried, and the only reason people sat and masked missed cancer appointments because they were scared of the common cold was because they were censoring anybody who said anything contrary to the purported version of events that the mainstream media decided they want the entire world to swallow.
It's beyond simply interesting and it's beyond simply funny or coincidental.
I will challenge you on one thing.
It's not the common cold, right?
COVID-19 has killed 6.6 million people.
It is one of the most deadly viruses certainly of our lifetime.
So it wasn't the common cold, but I do think it is completely justified for people to say we should be more cautious, I think, about accepting during fast-moving pandemics, the word of scientists as being sacrosanct because on a number of things, from the use of masks to the efficacy of vaccines in preventing transmission, they did massive U-turns.
I've read enough history books to know that the people who do the censoring are never the good guys.
And they've been censoring a lot of arguments for a very long time in the name of good.
They are weaponizing virtue and it's always in the name of tyranny.
Anybody who is out here trying to silence an entire side of an argument on any subject, whether it's COVID-19, immigration, anything else, they are the evil people who are out for absolute mind control of the populace.
And they should be...
Well, I certainly agree.
I certainly agree that I think the healthiest thing for any democracy is for all views to be aired and debated.
We seem to have lost the ability to debate.
You know, when I interviewed you, yeah, we had a few fractious moments, but actually, I thought it was a pretty spirited debate between people who perhaps had, you know, preconceived views of each other.
And I've got no problem interviewing you now about these because I think you have an interesting take on this stuff.
And that's the key to life.
When you reach that level of adolescence in your mindset where you can't handle any point of view that is contrary to your own, then you're truly a broken person.
And that's what the internet is purporting.
It's very interesting you said about Twitter being tribal.
There's a large contingent of people on Twitter who simply cannot handle reading an opinion which differs from their own.
And that is a degree of immaturity that we do not need adults to be functioning with in the modern world.
No, I agree.
If you were Elon Musk, this idea of charging $8 now a month, whatever it is, to access the blue tick premium Twitter account, would you do that?
Would you pay the extra?
Would you pay the extra?
I think that social media companies for a very long time have lived in an absolute fantasy where they've printed money from thin air by charging people for pixels and they grew into these large conglomerates with too many staff sitting around doing nothing, having coffee breaks.
And Elon Musk is a businessman.
He's walked into the office and he's firing a bunch of people who are messing around doing nothing.
And he wants his business to make money as it absolutely should.
And how he decides that happens is his prerogative.
I don't see why we should sit and accept that a website needs 200,000 people sitting around discussing in long meetings, sitting on beanbags about policy of human rights, of some garbage, when he's come along and said, no, I'm a businessman.
We're going to charge for our service.
We're going to reduce the number of staff.
And we're going to be a functional, coherent company, as they should be.
And it's his prerogative to do it as he's bought the company.
I think he can do whatever he wants.
Yeah, I mean, I don't disagree because I remember the appalling censorship of the New York Post exclusive about Hunter Biden, the son of the president's, about his laptop.
This is three weeks before the election that Joe Biden won.
He was heading to a possible victory, but it was tight.
And that story, they reckon, could have tipped it either way.
But it was completely suppressed and censored, starting with Twitter, then Facebook, then others.
Twitter literally locked out the New York Post account for two weeks for breaking a completely true story.
I thought that was shameful.
It's worse than shameful.
It's worse than shameful.
When you control information, you control the real world.
They affect the real world in absolute, in real time.
They are genuinely affecting the reality people live in.
They are not just a company.
They're not just a social media platform.
It affects absolutely every single person on the planet when it changes who is elected.
I don't want to comment specifically on Hunter Biden or the laptop.
I would never kill myself.
But I don't think it's fair that they would hide certain key information that close to an election.
And the fact that they've done that was done specifically to affect, to affect the world that we all live in.
Ben Ferguson On New Party Faces 00:09:41
And we all have to suffer the consequences of those things.
So to sit and say that these companies can just do whatever they want and they're private, et cetera.
No, free speech is beyond important for democracy.
It's important for the reality that we exist under.
Andrew Tate, thank you for joining me.
I appreciate it.
Thank you, friend.
Well, Still the Cub, I'll be talking protests at bird life and feeling most definitely uncensored.
This is my kind of eco-activist.
There she is, the naked bird lady.
But there's more to her than just the outfit.
It's actually a very good protest, and we'll explain why.
Last reaction to tonight's big breaking news.
Gavin Williamson has resigned, fired, yet again.
I'll be with my pack to talk about that.
They weren't expecting that to happen, but now they do.
They'll move like all my packs into game mode on Gavin Williamson.
Well big breaking news tonight that Gavin Williamson, arguably the world's most useless politician, has now been fired for the third time.
This is really quite extraordinary.
He got knighted after the first two sackings.
So presumably he'll now be elevated to the House of Lords for services to being useless to the country.
Telegraph reporting tonight that Williamson met Richie Sunak face to face in number 10 tonight, offered his resignation rather than be sacked upright.
Yeah, you were fired, mate, again.
And you were fired because you're a nasty piece of work as well as being useless.
And the combo is not great if you're going to be trying to restore some pride into the country.
Richard Tyes, another day, another scandal.
And I'm sorry, I've got little sympathy for Richie Sunak here.
He should never have brought him back.
Completely.
I mean, he's this guy, Gavin Williamson.
I actually can't call him by the title that he's got.
He shouldn't have sir, Gavin.
It's ridiculous.
It's ridiculous.
But he was useless once and fired.
Useless twice and fired.
Then given a title, out of sync with normal process for reasons we don't understand and haven't been informed.
And now he's been fired again for very serious allegations.
Saying he wants to slit the throats of his political enemies.
Allegations.
And I just think, what on earth did Sunak think he was doing?
Apparently he was told of these text allegations and complaints before he appointed him.
You have to wonder, what is it that Gavin Williamson had on Boris to be knighted?
On all of them.
He had on Sunak.
Well, he wasn't sure.
And he's probably got stuff on all of them.
And apparently he used to often wield that threat.
Now, Paula Rowan, Adrian, this story coming when it does, as Kate McCann said, it couldn't be worse timing for Rishi Sunak, for his new government, for the brave new world of purity and calmness after all the drama and scandal.
He's right back in it.
He's right back in it.
And this is a problem for Rishi.
He told us that he was different, didn't he?
That was his very clear message when he came.
And he said, I'm going to be different.
I'm all about bringing integrity back to this job.
And then within seconds, what we have is Boris Johnson with Pincher by Name, Pincher by Nature.
And now we have Rishi Sunak with Gavin Williamson.
And we've been told.
You've actually forgotten the lettuce, Liz Truss.
Well, she was there for such a short period of time.
I mean, talk about scandal.
She tanked the pound.
She sent interest rates soaring.
She bankrupted probably millions of families.
And she's gone in 44 days.
And now we have this.
And we have Swella, Sue Wellen, who is there.
Suella, they're now calling her.
Who is there, just hovering, hovering.
Why is she there?
Why did he bring her back?
And that's not going to go away.
Well, we know why, don't we, Richard?
I mean, this was all part of the big tent, bringing in people that you need to bring in for political expedience in also from all parts of the party.
Which is good leadership if you're trying to unify people, particularly after a turbulence.
You've got to be the right people.
Of course, they've got to be the right people.
You've got to make the right judgments.
And you can't stand on a platform of integrity and then do a complete U-turn on something you campaigned on, i.e. shale gas fracking, and then ditch it.
So he lied, just like he ditched Boris Johnson for lying.
So that was appalling.
And now he's been sussed for his ridiculous appointment of an utter failure.
I wouldn't trust Gavin Williamson literally to run a sweet shop without expecting him to eat half the sweets and throw the others if they were hard-boiled at people standing next to him.
He's that kind of guy, right?
He takes pride in being a vile bees of work.
But as a journalist, aren't you waiting for the Gavin William tapes?
That must be.
Because Matt Hancock's diary is trying to justify the indefensible.
I'll keep you out of that, Richard.
But the reality about Gavin Williamson is he was always over-promoted.
And you've got to think that he's got so much dirt on these people from because the chief whips soak up all the dirt on everybody.
That's their job, right?
But if you get sacked once, you might just get given another chance.
But if you get sacked twice, why on earth would you give someone another chance and reappoint them to the camp?
Well, I'm expecting him now to announce a book deal and go to the jungle as the new member of the jungle to replace the one that bailed.
I mean, he's got his whip, hasn't he?
Williamson with his whip and his territory.
And his terrestrial.
I'm about to talk to you.
I'm about to talk to Ben Ferguson in America about the American midterm elections.
It's crucially important tonight.
Before he goes in.
I'll go to Ben.
He's got a smug face.
He's the cat that's got the cream because he knows that red wave is coming.
Look at him.
Look at him.
Before we get to you, Ferguson, I'm going to get a quick take on this from you two.
The significance of this being probably if a lot of Donald Trump's picks that he's helped promote up the ladder for this midterm election, if they do well, he's going to come out.
He's already said next Tuesday, Mur-a-Lago, I'm running.
All singing, all dancing.
He'll announce he's running.
And in a sense, that completely kiboshes the chances of anybody else who might want to run because he will say, the people want me.
I'm the success story.
And I think it will be the problem for the Democrats is they've been useless.
Joe Biden looks like he's literally half dead.
I'm sorry to say that, but he does.
And Camilla Harris's number two is completely ineffectual.
The problem is the 6th of January, which I cannot believe anyone in America has forgotten about.
That is the problem.
And that is what Trump will never be able to get over.
Thank you to you two.
Let's bring in Ben Ferguson.
Ben, I can understand why you're looking so smug, because I do think that the red wave is coming.
And the Republicans, I think they're going to take back not just the House, but also the Senate.
Yeah.
Look, I think you're probably going to see it 53, maybe even 54 senators that are Republican at the end of the night tonight.
And I think the messaging for conservatives was really smart.
They talked the issues.
And even Democratic strategists I've talked to over the last couple of days, they said, look, they screwed it up.
This White House did not listen to the voters.
Democrats didn't listen to the voters.
They tried to make this election about Roe v. Wade.
People were caring about the economy.
They were caring about inflation.
They were caring about high gas prices.
And when you just don't listen to voters, you get your ASS kicked on election day.
And that's what's going to happen to a lot of Democrats.
Okay.
The one thing about all this is that Trump clearly is going to run again.
And you would think he may have a free run to becoming the nominee and then a very good chance of becoming president again, which would be an extraordinary comeback.
Obviously, he's got the legal issues, but he might feel this gives him a bit of a protective shield if he becomes a nominee.
But what about Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida, who I think has been a rising star in the party for quite a while now?
Trump has come out tonight on Fox News and said, I don't know if he's running about DeSantis.
I think he could really hurt himself badly.
I could tell you things about him that won't be very flattering.
I know more about him than anybody, other than perhaps his wife.
Any of that stuff is not good.
And he called him Ron DeSanctimonius last week.
He's goading DeSantis.
And DeSantis has shown no sign when anybody else has come after him of backing down.
Are we going to see the big battle finally that people have been waiting for, Trump v. DeSantis, for the soul of the Republicans?
Look, you know that DeSantis is looking at this.
He's been obviously playing it very smart in Florida.
He's very popular nationwide.
And I think there's two things here that Donald Trump, and this is me just talking as a political consultant with that hat on.
He is worried that DeSantis gets in and then something happens.
If DeSantis gets in, Piers, the floodgates open and you will see a lot of different people that will jump in.
There's people talking about Carl Lake.
There's people that are talking about the new faces in the party from this election.
And you'll have others that I think clearly are going to look at the electricity.
Is your money on Trump not only running but winning the nomination and the White House again?
Look, I think if you put him on a debate stage with a bunch of other Republicans, it is going to change that race dynamically.
The question is, if you run against Donald Trump and you beat him, can you get his supporters who will be angry at you to actually coalesce around you as a nominee?
And that's going to be the trickiest part for anybody that challenges him because, look, this guy fills stadiums.
He's still around the city.
I agree.
He's still the most charismatic guy in the whole field, probably in world politics.
Ben Ferguson, good to see you.
I know it's a happy time for you.
Good to see you.
We'll talk to you again later in the week, perhaps, when all this may or may not have happened.
But I appreciate you joining me.
Petition To Save The Swift 00:03:53
Thank you very much.
Well, lots of protesters really annoy me at the moment, but this one I'm completely in favour of.
She's naked, painted, I assume to add, and will be taking me under her wing.
The Bird Woman will be live to explain why she's doing this, and I'll be saying why I support her.
Well, this show's called Uncensored, and this is as uncensored as it gets.
I've had harsh words from militant eco-warriors blocking roads and gluing themselves to prizes are.
In my view, they're incredibly irritating and alienate any public support.
However, I had no such complaints about my next guest who marched naked through London, painted in feathers, to protest the decline in birds.
As I said at the time, I'm definitely in favour of more birds.
Well, bird girl, Hannah Bourne-Taylor, joins me now.
Hannah, welcome to the programme.
Thank you.
You are the most uncensored person I've had on the show.
Ruffling some feathers.
Why aren't you naked, Pierce?
Well, I did hear your challenge, but I didn't think the public were quite ready for that.
Tell me very quickly, what is your protest about?
So the Feather Speech Campaign is science and artists coming together to try to use common sense to save these amazing birds.
Swifts and three other red-listed species facing national extinction.
Simple solution with a petition, but it needs 100,000 signatures to sit down.
And what's the answer?
The answer is we can all help these birds by putting Swift bricks in our new houses, which is why I have a petition, which is what I want you to sign it.
I'm going to be signing your petition.
But also, individual people can help these birds.
Because the RSPB are fully supportive of this.
They think you're doing a good thing.
And is it easy for people to have brickwork which allows for these nests for the Swifts and so on to exist?
Yes, the problem is we're actually blocking their holes up naturally.
So we could stop doing that.
That would be great.
And for new houses, we could put these little, really easy bricks in.
And hey, Presto, win-win, humans, closest wild neighbours, they don't die out.
They're amazing.
Now, you're on national television right now, barely wearing a stitch of clothing.
This is mostly paint.
I really love the birds.
Honestly, I really do.
This takes guts to do this, right?
Yeah, I'm pretty nervous right now, Piers, to be honest.
What are you thinking as you stand there?
I'm thinking, I'm doing this for the birds.
I can be public, ridiculed, judged, whatever, but I'm actually doing it for the birds.
I'm desperate for them.
What reaction have you had from people to mix?
People are saying, I'm brave.
I'm not.
I'm desperate.
People are saying I'm stupid.
Fine, I'm ridiculous.
But I'm actually just trying to get this voice for the birds because they can't speak.
I am prepared.
I did go sort of naked once for a commercial, and I'm prepared to go back to Mr. Look.
Have you seen this?
All right, Piers, we've got two minutes.
What do you think?
I think more feathers and we're on to something.
You can really help.
You've got 8 million followers on Twitter.
I need 100,000 signatures.
I'm going to get those numbers up because I actually think it's a good cause.
We don't want the Swift to go out of...
Is it Swifts or what are the other birds?
Starlings, House Sparrows, House Martins.
But Swifts, they fly more time in the air than any other bird.
They come back to our houses.
One epic thing.
Three of them.
And no problem with the tits.
No problem with the tits.
No, tits aren't really involved in this.
Apart from ironic.
Yeah, ironic.
Yeah.
But it's mainly Swift's Swift's house sparrows are the most house sparrows.
And people think they're ordinary in common.
They're not.
They're on the red list.
They're facing national extinction with 70 British birds.
That's a lot here.
How do people sign the petition?
They go on HannahBorneTaylor.com.
They go on your Twitter.
Yes.
They go on my Piers Morgan.
I'm going to post it.
Sign the petition.
The least we can do for this lady.
For a peaceful protest.
You're not daubing graffiti anywhere.
You're not chucking soup on bangoffs.
You're just doing this.
You're coming on Piers Morgan uncensored, as uncensored as any guest has ever been.
I applaud the bravery of what you're doing.
And I'm going to, is it this?
Yeah.
You're going to be a Swift.
That's it from us.
Keep it uncensored.
Good night.
Export Selection