All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
March 8, 2023 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan
46:33
20230308_piers-morgan-uncensored-gary-lineker-international
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Defining Womanhood and Rights 00:15:23
Turn up Piers Morgan uncensored.
Gary Lineker compares the government and its policy on migrants to Nazi Germany.
But whether you agree with him or not, and I'll give my verdict, should he be sacked for expressing an honestly held opinion?
International Women's Day, but what's the point celebrating it or even having it when most of the people virtue signaling about it today won't even say what a woman is?
We'll debate that.
Plus, how old is too old to run a country?
Two Septuagenarian superstars, Gene Simmons, the rock legend, and Jerry Springer, the legend legend, go head to head.
Live from London, this is Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Well, good evening from London.
Welcome to Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Happy International Women's Day!
Hurrah!
Although personally, as a more ardent feminist than all the virtue signallers out there today, I celebrate it every day.
For me, I'm a 365 day a year feminist.
Not just one day a year.
Not me.
I'm every day.
But what about this International Women's Day anyway?
What does it mean?
We're in an era where people won't say the word women.
They say things like individuals with a cervix, persons who identify as female, birthing parents, menstruators, chest feeders, bodies with vaginas, and so on and so on.
It's utter madness, but this is becoming the norm.
These are all genuine terms used to describe adult human females by everyone from the British NHS to the Lancet Medical Journal.
Now, you might notice a problem with this so-called inclusive language.
It excludes women.
And in these fevered times, woman seems to be the hardest word.
Can you provide a definition for the word woman?
Can I provide a definition?
No, yeah.
I can't.
My question is, are all trans women women?
You haven't answered that question.
Well, that's not the point that we're dealing with here.
I like scented candles.
I've watched Sex in the City.
Yeah.
How do I know if I'm a woman?
That's a great question.
A woman can have a penis.
I'm not.
What are they identifying as?
As a woman, as a translation.
But what is that?
As a woman.
Trans women are women, but in the present context, there is no automatic right for a trans woman.
There are contexts where a trans woman is not a woman.
No, there is.
As Prime Minister Richie Sunak told me, to my great relief, and probably yours, it's not a difficult question.
A woman is an adult human female.
Standing up for women has never been more important.
Women have fought for years for the right to vote, for equal pay, opportunities, respect.
But all those rights are now under attack, and the attacks range from the ridiculous to the downright dangerous.
This ultra-woke mentality that anyone can be a woman who sticks their hand up and says they're a woman leads to people like sex offenders like Adam Graham in Scotland, who suddenly identified as Isla Bryson at his trial, demanded a place in a female prison and got one, where if he'd been allowed to stay there, he could have attacked other women.
Eventually, common sense prevailed.
Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister of Scotland, was forced to resign over the fallout from all this.
And he, and I'm afraid I use the word he in his case, he's a male rapist, was sent back to a male prison where he belonged.
Even his ex-wife said the whole thing was a total scam to get a softer sentence.
The Cambridge Dictionary is clear.
It's an adult human female.
It's a biological fact.
You can't muck around with biology.
It's also an adult who lives and identifies as female, though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth.
Well, some girls' schools will no longer call their pupils girls on the off chance that the girls identify as one of the other 7,500 genders we're now supposed to accept.
Sportswomen who've dedicated their lives to achieving excellence in their fields find themselves competing against, and in many cases, losing to, people who were born male.
The Brita Wars, as I and many others warned, erased gendered categories to appease the virtue singlers and women were promptly expunged from the top category.
Not a single woman in the best artist category.
Exactly what I said would happen.
Ironically, given the subject matter, the world has gone nuts.
Women used to be called women before trans activists made it a verbal hate crime punishable by instant cancellation.
And it's not about trans rights.
I support trans people's rights to fairness and equality.
But as I always say, not when it impinges and infringes and destroys women's rights to fairness and equality.
So I say we should just get rid of International Women's Day.
I think it's become a farce until all those queuing up to signal their virtue about it are prepared to say in public what a woman is.
Otherwise, what are we celebrating?
And how can we use the word women in the title of a day we're supposed to celebrate when those who want to celebrate it refuse to say what one is?
Well, join me now as the author and commentator Angelica Mallet, Talk TV's Esther Krakow and Fox News contributor Tommy Lowry.
So Tommy Larin, let me start with you.
Two people in Britain today who've been at the forefront of not saying what a woman is.
One is Nicola Sturgeon, the ex-First Minister of Scotland who lost her job because of this ridiculous farce of a rapist self-identifying.
She tweeted today, proud on International Women's Day to visit my old University of Glasgow and banged on about women's rights.
This is the woman who just literally lost her job for allowing a male rapist into a female prison.
And Sir Keir Starmer, who's leader of the opposition Labour Party here, was talking about protections for women in parliament today, and yet he refuses to say what a woman is.
Where are we with this?
How has it come that leaders of parties in countries like the UK, and we see a lot of it in America as well, just won't say what a woman is?
Well, first of all, I have to apologise to you because all of this wokeness originates here in the United States of America and then we export it to you in the U.S.
Yes, you're to blame.
We started this really in America.
Yes, we are.
You know, the wokeness starts here and then it, of course, moves over and now you guys have to deal with it.
The world has to deal with it.
But I say this, I'm proud to celebrate International Women's Day because I know what a woman is.
So I would say if you don't know what a woman is, you don't get to celebrate it.
You don't get to pretend to be a feminist when it's helpful to you or helpful to your political narrative.
You have to be able to define what a woman is.
This is all a farce.
They are seeking to erase women and this is the radical rainbow mafia, as I call it.
This is not your average LGBT activist.
This is the rainbow mafia section of that radical LGBTQ movement that has made women less than and then has elevated all of this transgenderism and all of this pick your gender, identify as potato.
They have hijacked the women's rights movement, the feminist movement, and actual feminists should be really pissed off about it.
Well, as a feminist, I am.
I recently interviewed Angelica, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, and I asked him this question, which seems to stump many other leaders.
Here's the clip.
What is a woman?
We know that Nicola Sturgeon can't answer that.
We know Keir Starmer can't answer that.
You're the British Prime Minister.
What is a woman?
Yeah, of course I know what woman is, adult, human, female.
It's not difficult, is it, Angelica?
I mean, that is what a woman is.
I mean, I don't know why you're obsessed with defining it.
Like, what is a man?
Like, why do we need these arbitrary?
A man is a male adult human.
I mean, that's it.
Right.
Okay.
I don't know that we need to be aware of that.
These are just biological facts, but they're just facts.
They're not arguable points, are they?
Well, but I think we have a right to self-identify.
And you said you want to.
As what?
If you'd like to be a woman, you can identify as a woman.
I don't know why there is such an issue around.
We've literally just seen a male rapist use that scam to get himself put into a female prison where he could attack vulnerable women inside a female prison when even his ex-wife said it was all a scam.
Which is a terrible, very distressing, isolated incident.
And I think it's easy to take that and say that means that no one can identify as a woman.
That's not an absolute person in there.
But it's...
42% of trans-identifying prisoners in prison are in there for sex crimes.
There's actually an advantage, evidently, to identifying as a female because they never identify as male because somehow male prisons seem less appealing to them.
It's really weird.
Anyway, but is it limitless, this self-identity?
It's not totally limitless.
So when you're talking about International Women's Day, I don't know why we take the conversation around International Women's Day and make it about this.
But if anyone has so many benefits, but if anyone, according to you, can identify as a woman, anyone can, right?
I don't see a problem with that.
Just literally put their hand up and say, I'm a woman.
But it's not an easy thing to do to go out and tell the world.
I don't know.
It's very easy.
You might think it's easy to say, but to decide to do that, to say, what is it doing involved?
Whatever that person decides, but to go out into the world and say, I don't identify as perhaps a sex identifier.
So why can't I identify?
Okay, why can't I identify as a black lesbian?
Well, firstly, I mean, it was quite a bit of a problem.
Well, I'm serious.
I'm serious.
If I can identify as anything without any need to prove I'm actually what that is, why can't I on International Women's Day say, I'm Piers Morgan, I'm a black lesbian?
I think taking it to a kind of absurd status.
With respect, I think that you'd already opened the absurdity door by saying it is limitless.
You can do what you like.
Anyone can say, I'm a woman.
So I simply ask you, why can't I?
I mean, this point kind of ridicules trans people to an extent.
Actually, I think what you said ridicules trans people.
Because actually, people who go through the full process of transitioning, who actually go through what we used to call a sex change, which I don't think you can muck around with original biology, but those who actually go through surgical procedure of a number of years, I've got a great respect for that very difficult journey they go on.
I have zero respect for people who just wallop their hand up and go, suddenly, I'm a woman and I want all the rights that a woman has and I want to compete.
Say in sport, I'm a six foot four inch athlete, sprinter, swimmer, whatever, who's competed very mediocrely in male sport.
I now want to come in and crush women in swimming pools and in sprinting events and break all their records, perhaps irrevocably, just by saying, I'm a woman.
I think that is the absurdity you were talking about.
My response was to say, well, if it's limitless, why can't I then say whatever I want to say?
And you say immediately, as I knew you would, well, that's ridiculous.
But my point is, you were being ridiculous.
Well, that's your opinion.
You can think I'm ridiculous, but I don't think you can say, well, it has to be.
I don't know why I am, but you're not.
I don't think you have to say it's post-op is the only way that someone's allowed to identify.
The original standard is the same.
The original standard for being transgender was being diagnosed with gender dysphoria, which is a legitimate condition.
And now it's been, oh, however way you feel.
So if you feel on Tuesday you're a woman and on Thursday you're a pizza, that's perfectly valid.
But to you, that's ridiculous.
And I want to know why that is ridiculous.
We should be talking about actual women on International Women's Day.
That's not crazy.
I mean, I agree.
But your idea of an actual woman is an adult female.
It's not difficult.
The chromosomes are a pretty good indication.
I don't think you have to be biologically female to identify.
Then you are wrong, because then I can identify as a fox.
Yeah.
But again, it's kind of absurd point.
Well, let me ask you this.
Let me ask you this, Angelica.
How many genders are there?
Two.
There are two genders?
Wow.
So you don't believe in transgenders at all.
Well, I think there's...
Whoa, hang on.
Whoa, There are two genders.
Well, it's taught in...
Well, if you say, well, you've literally just launched this huge defense of transgenderism.
Now you've eradicated it.
I think there's...
There are two genders.
You mean male and female, right?
There's gender fluidity.
I will...
Fluid between what?
Between what?
Between different identities, and we can choose one identity.
You see how difficult this is, though?
But it is difficult, but I think making...
But it's not difficult until you make it difficult.
You see, the BBC has done teaching videos to 11 and 12-year-olds where they say there are 100 genders.
One of them was astragender, which is an affinity with the stars on the galaxy.
My response to that on the last show I did was to say, well, in that case, I identify as a two-spirit penguin.
I was then told I was being ridiculous.
But I made the same point.
The ridiculousness is the BBC teaching kids there are 100 genders.
There aren't.
It is absurd.
Bring back Tommy Lehron, who I imagine is hyperventilating over there in America.
Tommy, I mean, look, I don't see why, if it's limitless, I can't just say, I'm Piers Morgan, I'm a black lesbian.
Because that is where limitless self-identity takes us.
It means that male rapists can say they're women and get into female prisons.
It means I can say I'm a two-spirit penguin or a black lesbian and why can't I?
Because that is where it takes you.
Well, it certainly does.
And I think you just had the perfect argument there.
It's impossible to define and it's impossible to stand up for because it's a mockery of what actual people are.
And furthermore, going back to children, when this happens at a young age, when you start trying to convince kids that they don't know what gender they are, they're born in the wrong body at two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten years old, that's child abuse.
All right?
Gender-affirming care wherein you only tell somebody they can be whatever they want to be regardless of their biology at a young age, that is child abuse.
It's happening in the UK.
It's happening in the US.
And this is making room for groomers to groom young people, to confuse the heck out of them, make them not know what they are, so they can take advantage and exploit them.
Now, I want to be very clear here.
This is not the mainstream LGBTQ movement.
There are a lot of conservatives that even support that movement.
This is a radical agenda made by groomers, and they don't want you to call them groomers, which is a perfect example of why they are groomers.
This is what we're doing is to confuse young people, to confuse all people, to make them dumber, make them confuse as to what they are.
It's a mockery of women's rights.
It's a mockery of human rights.
And we should no longer be having this.
And you end up with scandals like the Tavistock Clinic here in London in the UK, where they were basically mutilating children, young kids, teenagers, mutilating their bodies irrevocably.
And then it turned out after it closed after a scandalous report came out, that 97% of all the patients had other conditions, from autism to depression to other issues, which may have been affecting their ability to think straight about what they wanted to be.
And that was to me, as a father of four kids, utterly horrific.
Just horrific that this was going on.
And anyone who tried to raise concerns about this, and journalists did, were immediately branded transphobic.
Crossing the Line with Lineker 00:13:49
And Esther, this comes back to what we see with people like J.K. Rowling, who's, I'm no friend of J.K. Rowling.
She can't stand me.
I don't like her, right?
It's like fire and water.
But on this issue, I've not seen a word she said that is transphobic.
I've just heard her go, I want to support and protect women's rights.
For that, she's been unbelievably hounded, abused, attempts to cancel, which fortunately have backfired.
But it's all wrong this, isn't it?
The thing is, and one of the shocking things that she's been attacked for is for drawing attention to domestic violence and violence against women.
And that's actually the biggest point here.
Other than the fact that, you know, that male rapist was allowed to go into a female prison in Scotland.
There's a genuine danger around allowing men into women's spaces like women's shelters and all that.
And they can be there just by identifying as a woman and then identifying as a tree the next day.
Right, so Angelica, do you understand that part of the argument?
I understand that kind of the argument, but I mean, like Tommy said, I don't think this is confusing for children.
I think it's giving you freedom of expression and freedom of choice.
How many girls did you know?
Like my wife was a bit of a tomboy when she was young, right?
How many kids do you know, young girls in particular, who are tomboys?
But if the wrong person gets hold of them and persuades them, actually, what you should start doing is mutilating your body and have a full attempt to become a boy.
That's not what most tomboys end up wanting.
They end up actually going through puberty, getting older, and then that's it.
They become women.
But if you get hold of these impressionable young minds too early when they're just clowning around being tomboys, that's the danger to me.
I don't think the messaging is as extreme as you think it is.
And I think we really extreme.
I think we whip ourselves into a frenzy thinking these things.
And this language that you mentioned at the start of the show, I don't think you hear that language used that often in like everyday speech.
Which language?
I think what you were saying.
Oh, no, these are on NHS websites.
No, no, no, this is where you're wrong.
This is actually NHS websites in many cases.
They genuinely call women chest feeders, birthing partners.
They dare not say anything gender specific to women in case some trans people don't like it.
To which I say, where are the rights of women to be called what they want to be called?
Why does all language have to be de-gendered for a tiny minority of people?
I think the problem is there's so much fear around having these kind of conversations and saying the wrong thing, getting it wrong, that means that people can't have conversations that feel kind of progressive about what is gender identity, what does the future look like?
How do we create a compassionate space?
So I think to your question at start, like what is woman and why politicians wouldn't answer it?
They're so scared of getting it wrong.
People are scared because the mob come for them.
Exactly.
And the mob needs to just go away and shut up.
Anyway, I think scrap International Women's Day until we can all agree what a woman is.
No, I'm sorry.
I think there's so many benefits to having International Women's Day.
It would be a real shame to do that.
Well, if you had your way, everyone would celebrate it by identifying as a woman, even if they weren't.
Well, being a woman.
Happy International Women's Day.
I am a woman.
It's a farce.
Anyway, Angelica, lovely to see you.
Thank you very much.
Esther, going to see you a bit later on.
Tommy, always good to have you over at the pond.
International Women's Day.
There you are.
Fine example of a genuine woman.
Correct?
Thank you.
Yes, absolutely.
Identify as a woman.
I am a woman.
And that's how this thing works, ladies and gentlemen.
Exactly.
Thank you, Tommy Lehru.
Well, next tonight, MPs demand that Gary Lineke, sporting legend, is fired from the BBC after comparing the government's migrant policy to Nazi Germany.
Is he entitled to share his opinions?
We'll debate that with his former colleague, Mark Lawrenson, next.
What's turning to come to life?
Possibly the greatest panel ever ascended to debate how old is too old to be a world leader.
Two Septuagintarian superstars, Gene Simmons from KISS and Jerry Springer, TV Icon, will join me live and go head to head.
But first, the match of the day star Gary Lineke, a former England striker, of course, has faced down demands from MPs he should be fired for condemning the government's migrant policy.
Well, in response to a video of Home Secretary Swale Braverman explaining the scheme, Lineke tweeted, good heavens, this is beyond awful.
He went on to say, there is no huge influx.
We take far fewer refugees than other major European countries.
It's just an immeasurably cruel policy dictated at the most vulnerable people in language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s.
And I'm out of order.
It's an interesting debate this.
My view is it's clearly incendiary, what Gary Lineke has said, and historically wrong, I think.
There's no comparison between what this current British government is proposing to what Nazi Germany did.
Gary got a bit carried away, as he tends to do.
We have dinner together quite regularly, and this is what he does.
And he would say the same about me.
We both have strong opinions.
We both believe in what we say and we express them forcefully.
But we agree to disagree.
And I have no problem with Gary Lineke, a football presenter, sports presenter, from giving his views.
He's not a BBC news journalist.
He's not anchoring the news at 10 or question time or news night.
He's a football presenter doing match of the day and other major sporting events.
He's a celebrity and a public figure.
People want to know his eight and a half million followers, want to know what he thinks about stuff.
Why do we pretend that people like him exist in a sealed BBC bubble of perfect propriety where no opinions exist?
I know many BBC journalists, they're all highly opinionated.
But the ones that work in news understand the importance of impartiality.
Who cares what Gary Dineke really says about government policy on stuff?
He's just, in the end, a football presenter.
I don't mean that to denigrate him.
He's very good at it.
But he's not a news presenter.
So it shouldn't matter to the BBC's news output what he thinks about the migrant situation.
Now, if he said this on Match of the Day, then the criticism would be justified.
I, for example, did not like him making his start of the World Cup coverage a monologue about Qatar's human rights abuses, because he hadn't done it before in previous World Cups in other countries, not least Russia.
And I very much doubt he'll do it at the next one in America.
So I felt it was wrong to single out Qatar.
And also it blended politics and football in that case.
But my question then for the BBC would be, if it was all right for Gary Lineke to express his views about Qatar's human rights abuses and you put him up to doing it and agreed that he could do that, wanted him to, well, what's the difference between him doing that at the start of a World Cup and now tweeting his disagreement about what he considers human rights abuses by the current British government?
Now, if you decide not to watch him because of opinions, that's his right.
But I don't think you can be a campaigner for free speech as I am and just turn off a tap because I don't like the opinion I'm hearing.
If Lineke was cheering the government for getting to grips with the migrant crisis, the very people now demanding he be fired would be wanting him to get a statue in Trafalgar Square.
Well joining me is Lineke's former Match of the Day co-star Mark Lawrence and also joined by Daily Mirrors Associate Editor Kevin Maguire and Esther Kraku are still with me.
So Mark Lawrenson, what is your honest view about this?
It's the latest in many run-ins that Gary's had over his political tweets on his own Twitter account.
So not on television or Match of the Day.
But do you think it crosses a line?
Well first of all Piers, I'm a pint of Guinness if you're interested.
And secondly, look, look, it's up to him if he wants to say what he wants to say.
I mean, the use in terms of in relation talking about the Nazis was absolutely totally wrong.
Pert is a human being.
He's bright.
You know he's bright as well.
He's allowed to say what he wants to say.
And it's frightening at the moment.
And everybody all of a sudden is saying, you've got to sack him.
Why have you got to sack him?
We've all got a right to say what we want to say, have we not?
It's the problem, Mark.
I mean, I don't know what guidance you were given when you worked for the BBC for so long, but it's the problem that the BBC themselves haven't really drawn the line.
They haven't really clarified this situation where if a news and current affairs presenter does something like this, everybody knows that crosses a line.
But it hasn't really been said publicly what the line is in relation to people like you when you worked there or Gary Lineke.
Is that part of the problem?
Or were you told specifically you can't do this kind of thing?
No, no, you're not told at all.
And obviously, you know, because if you've got any modicum of common sense, you know exactly what you need to say at the given moment.
But no, there's no, I mean, the problem is they are frightened to death of their own shadows, the BBC.
That is the crux of the matter.
And therefore, every time somebody goes on television, obviously, on the radio, whatever, or what Gary said in terms of the tweet, they are wetting themselves because they just do not know.
And they're saying, oh, we're going to wrap him over the knuckles.
You're not going to sack Gary Lineke for what he said.
You may totally disagree, and I agree, disagree with what he said anyway, but there's no way you're going to sack him, is there?
Well, apart from anything else, one of the people that would have to authorise his sacking would be Richard Sharp, the chairman, who gave £400,000 to the Conservative Party and also helped Boris Johnson get a loan of £800,000.
Is he really going to sack a presenter for impartiality issues?
Because I think that would be a pretty hard sell.
I guess what I would say on the BBC side, I know a lot of BBC presenters, and they do take the news ones, the impartiality principle, incredibly seriously.
And a lot of them are genuinely angry that Gary seems to be able to get away with saying whatever he likes to a very large number of people, to his eight and a half million followers.
They believe it then backfires on their ability in the news division to genuinely say that the whole corporation is impartial.
But Piers, he's saying it as a person, not as a match of the day sport presenter, whatever you want to describe him as.
He's just saying it as a human being.
I think it's different if you're involved with the news, which it has to be.
But he's just, as you say, for, you know, an old England scorer.
And that's what he is.
As good as he is as a presenter, that's basically the bottom of it all.
Yeah.
Kevin, I mean, this is my thing.
I felt the analogy he drew was completely wrong.
Actually quite offensive to anyone who went through the Holocaust.
If you're Jewish and you read this, trying to compare what's happening now, sending people back who come up on shore on a dinghy, to anything the Nazis did and exterminating 12 million people, 6 million of which were Jewish.
That analogy seemed to me to be completely wrong.
Yeah, but what he was doing, Piers, he wasn't saying the government's setting up concentration camps.
He was actually echoing Joan Falter, who's a British Holocaust survivor, who earlier this year said what the government is doing is dehumanising people.
And this is what happened in Germany.
People were dehumanised first, and then you go somewhere else.
So he's not saying they're putting people in gas.
So you think it was more a clumsy analogy?
There is a clumsiness in it, but it's the dehumanisation and not treating them as people.
Esther, the problem is, I think whenever the moment you evoke Adolf Hitler or the Nazis, unless you're literally talking about people who've murdered millions and millions of people, it never ever works.
It's an extremely important thing.
It is always the wrong analogy.
It's an extremely poor taste.
I have an issue with this because why does he never draw parallels with the Rwandan genocide, for example, or what happened in Cambodia?
Why is it always Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler and the Nazis?
Because it's Western Europe and we're in Western Europe.
Because there is a disregard.
There is a disregard there for the Jewish communities in this country that actually have a history attached to that.
And I think that's what it comes to.
A lot of Jewish people today on the airways were upset because of the people.
The Holocaust was more than just Jewish people, six million, but absolutely central.
They're also Romani, Gypsies, trade unions, communists.
Yeah, but he never had to do that.
No, no, no, but that's...
You can claim there's an over-Western focus in Western Europe.
I think that should be illegitimate.
That's the principle of impartiality.
I mean, Emily Maitlis basically left the BBC over a Fiore involving, amongst other things, retweeting me about Dominic Cummings, who was just a blatant liar taking the public for a ride about Barnard Castle and eyesight and so on.
And she reflected that accurately.
And the Fiori, I think, helped drive her out of the BBC.
So they do take it very seriously.
And they see what happened to someone like Emily and they see a double standard applied.
No, she doesn't.
She thinks he should be allowed to have his say.
She was tweeting that today.
But look, it appears the BBC is having a crisis of confidence because it's under such assault because of its central position funded by a licence fee that you have to pay.
But if you buy this idea, it's a hotbed of lefties, you'd have to explain how did David Cameron's press secretary come from BBC.
Well, there are certainly a few people who are not lefties.
Yeah, Boris Johnson's press secretary come from BBC.
Is Biden Too Old 00:11:57
I used to joke that you...
There are a lot of Tories and right-wingers.
There are, but you could shoot a harpoon in the BBC newsroom and not hit a Conservative.
I mean, I've always felt that.
I think we should stop pretending that the BBC is not biased, right?
And I don't think it's biased, particularly in one direction, but there's no such thing as impartial journalism.
It's impossible.
It attempts to be.
Sometimes it's over.
It's over in Paris.
As it was on climate change or on Brexit.
So final question, Esther.
Should he get fired for this?
Absolutely not.
No.
No?
And Mark, I presume you don't think he should either.
Absolutely not.
More importantly, Mark, before I let you go, are Arsenal going to win the league?
No, Arsenal are not going to win the league.
Hopefully.
Listen.
Listen, we'll have you Twittering and whitering on about it for three months when the season finishes.
Well, you'd hear a lot about a lot longer than that, Sunshine.
But because of your refusal to admit the inevitable, I'm going to fire you from this program tonight.
Mark Lawrenson, you're fired.
Thank you.
Great to see you.
Good to see you guys.
See you later on.
Next tonight.
How old is Tuol to be a world leader?
I'll be debating that with KISS legend Gene Simmons, who's now embarking on KISSI's final tour, and TV legend Jerry Springer, who will never, ever stop working.
It's the greatest panel ever assembled.
Look at that.
Two icons in their fields.
They'll be live next.
Well, Donald Trump, aged 76, remains the frontrunner to be the Republican nominee at next year's presidential election, aged 80.
Joe Biden is already the oldest president in American history.
If he runs again and wins, he'd be 86 by the time his second term ends in 2028.
He's already saying things like this this week.
I came back from a trip after being away for a couple of days and I had these terrible headaches, was diagnosed with having a anyway.
They had to take the top of my head off a couple of times to see if I had a brain.
That's comforting, isn't it?
That's the President of the United States this week.
Is it any wonder they're concerned about Biden's age top list of reasons Democrat voters want the party to find an alternative candidate for 2024?
Well, joining me now, a legendary KISS frontman Gene Simmons, who's just announced dates for one final world tour, legendary former talk show host, ex-mayor of Cincinnati, and current TV icon, because that never gets taken away, Jerry Springer.
Well, welcome to both of you.
Like I say, greatest panel ever assembled.
Gene Simmons, you're 73, I believe, and you've decided to end things with KISS in terms of touring.
Is that an age-related decision by the band?
Well, yes, it is, you know, part and parcel of being around for 50 years, longer than you've been alive, young man.
Not quite.
We've been touring since the last century, literally speaking.
And at a certain point, pride, self-respect, and everything says get off the stage.
So at 73 years of age right now, still have hair, much more on my back, unfortunately, the physicality just gets in the way.
I mean, we're not blues performers.
We don't stand still and just strum acoustic guitar.
I wear dragon boots that have the weight of a bowling ball, about 40 pounds in all.
I've got a Spitfire flying through the air.
At a certain point, self-respect says, be grateful, thankful, and get off the stage.
And do you think, Gene, should the same logic apply to presidents?
I mean, if Biden, he's already 80.
He'd be 86 if he was to run again and win.
And he's already showing signs of what many people think of first on set of dementia.
Should he be able to run as president at this age?
No, I don't think so.
And that doesn't mean that I agree or don't agree with the politics.
Politics aside, there should be a test to find out if somebody has their wits about them.
Number one, you're talking about the most powerful person on earth.
And also to find out whether or not somebody is absolutely nuts.
There should be a qualification, a medical qualification and psychological qualification that somebody in charge isn't just going to go nuts and go like that or fall down the stairs when they try to go up on Air Force One.
Okay, let me bring in Jerry on this because Nikki Haley is one of the other Republican candidates.
She actually did say something very similar.
Here's what she said.
In the America I see, the permanent politician will finally retire.
We'll have term limits for Congress.
And mandatory mental competency tests for politicians over 75 years old.
Jerry, you were about 15 when you were mayor of Cincinnati, from memory.
It was a very long time ago.
But you were a young man.
Don't these jobs require a certain degree of mental agility?
Certainly.
Running a country like America, which you would think that every year after 80, you're probably losing your powers, right?
Well, first of all, if we had a mental acuity test for people who are going to be president, we never would have had Trump.
There are a whole bunch of other people that aren't older, you know.
So that issue I put aside.
Biden is an exceptional case.
Now, we can discuss whether he's too old to be president, but the fact of the matter is, the only person that actually knows that for a fact is the person or persons who examined him.
Everyone else just has an opinion.
He's being tested whether or not he has those facilities.
Now, the question is: when I look at the evidence, this man in two and a half years has accomplished more than any American president since Franklin Roosevelt, with the possible exception of Blyndon Johnson, on domestic policies.
Now, a lot of people don't like what he's done.
But when you take a look at the things that he's accomplished, this is not a man with dementia lowering health care and drug costs.
Inflation Reduction Act.
Well, he's done these wonderful things.
Why are you questioning that?
Listen, I understand as a Democrat, you think they're all wonderful.
A lot of Republicans think he's done a series of terrible things.
But there's no doubt the midterm election results, for example, were in some way a validation of Biden's presidency so far.
It was a lot better than people thought might happen.
My question is, when you see him do that clip this week, where he talks about him taking off the top of his head to see if he has a brain and mumbling and stumbling through that thing.
Trying to make a silly comment.
But he wasn't really joking.
He wasn't even laughing when he said it.
He just looked really out of it.
No, he started a joke and halfway through it realized this thing is falling flat.
Trust me, I've been there.
So that's Jerry.
How old are you now, if you don't mind me asking?
I'm 79.
Right.
And you've never stopped working.
I don't think you'll ever stop working, right?
Well, I might, but it's, I think I still have my mental acuity.
I think I may stop because there are other things I want to do.
I want to spend more time with Richard, my grandson, and follow him in baseball and basketball and do things like that.
So it's more that decision more than a medical decision.
Here's what I believe is happening.
Overwhelmingly, every poll shows that the vast majority of people who think Biden is too old are conservative and Republican.
Now, there are Democrats who think he's too old.
But when you ask them why they think he's too old, is they worry that if he's at the top of the ballot, other people will think he's too old and the ballot and the whole ticket will go down the drain.
That's a political worry.
But if you're asking the question, is he competent to be president of the United States?
There is absolutely no evidence on his record so far that he is not competent to lead this country.
I can see Gene wanting to get back in here, Gene.
Sorry.
Look, let's call it for what it is.
I'm on both sides of the fence about all sorts of political issues, so you can't call me a rabid Democrat or conservative or liberal or any of that.
You know, everybody's worse than him because I simply vote on the issues.
But let's call it the way it is.
The masses, I don't believe for a second, vote on political platform.
They wouldn't be able to explain to you anything.
It is invariably and intrinsically, in other big words like gymnasium, the cult of personality.
When people saw Nixon with his five o'clock shadow before any of you were born, it was a TV and sweaty debate between Kennedy and Nixon, and he had the five o'clock shadow.
Nobody remembers what they stood for or who was a Democrat.
They just didn't like that guy who looked like, you know, Uncle Joe, who was drinking a little too much.
He just didn't look so.
So when people watch Mr. Trump, who we both know, they have their perception.
And when people watch Mr. Biden, and we've all seen him on TV and stuff, unfortunately, sometimes turning around to shake hands with people who aren't there or mumbling words.
That doesn't mean I agree or don't agree with the politics.
People will judge this following political battle based on personality.
I have not met regular people who have been able to explain to me what the different political platforms are.
So I believe Mr. Biden is in deep trouble.
I just want to say one last thing very quickly.
If I was on the other side, Mr. Trump's side, and I may not be actually, I have lots of problems with him, somebody is going to put together greatest hits of Mr. Biden falling off bicycles, falling on stairs, and not even talk about politics, not even talk about politics.
And that person will be able to do that.
And I would think actually.
Can you imagine?
But can you imagine?
Hang on, Jerry, Jerry Trump.
Jerry, let me just say to you, the bigger problem, Jerry, for Democrats, I think, is not really Trump who remains the bogeyman that may get out the Democrat vote actually as it happened last time.
So that might be the worst scenario for the Republicans if Trump does win the nomination.
But if it's someone like Governor Ron DeSantis, who's in his 40s, full of energy, full of dynamism, you know, on a tough campaign trail, I would not want to be a Democrat trying to have Biden as my guy against a bloke half his age with that kind of energy.
Just purely on the opposite side of the state.
Gene just mentioned.
Okay.
Let me just say this.
I absolutely agree with you that there would be a political burden with Biden at the top of the ticket.
I totally recognize that.
But I'm on the show because the question was, is Biden too old to be president?
Yeah.
On that issue, he is not too old based on his performance.
Is there a political price to pay?
Absolutely.
So, Gene, I have no argument with what you just said.
I agree with you totally.
But the issue is, is he too old?
Objectively, in his case, I'm not saying another 84-year-old or 82-year-old.
I'm saying him.
I'm saying objectively.
Ronaldo's Honor at Man Utd 00:02:28
Well, I know people, I'm going to say, other than you two who burst with radiant vitality and youthful dynamism.
I know people like Dame Joan Collins, who's nearly 90 and is like a 50-year-old.
Warren Buffett, people like this who are in the 90s, still as sharp as a whip.
There are also people I know who are in their late 80s, 90s who are incredibly on it.
My issue with Biden is when you see all these gaffes and all these stumbles and everything else, he looks to me like he's already feeling his age at 80.
And that would be a concern for me.
But anyway, guys, I've got to leave it there.
Jerry, brilliant to see you again.
We worked together on America's Got Talent.
And Gene, great to see you.
We worked together on Celebrity Apprentice.
And thank God you pulled out after a few episodes because that allowed me to win.
Because I think if you'd stayed in, I'd have been a dead man.
So thank you, Gene Simmons, for your selfless act.
Great to see you, guys.
Take care.
What next tonight?
We may have mentioned this yesterday.
We're going to wallow in it a bit more.
We won an award on this program for Scoop of the Year at the British Sports Oscars.
And we're going to boast about it after the break.
We'll welcome back.
I've still got Kevin and Esther here, but I'll take a little moment to wallow in a little bit of triumph of the show.
The Ronaldo interview that we did, which of course went around the world and led to a lot of consequences.
He left Manchester United, went to Saudi Arabia, and all the fall that preceded that.
So we won scoop of the year at the British Sports Journalism Awards, which are the kind of the Oscars of British sports journalism.
It was a great honor to win that, I have to say.
I wanted to be a sports journalist when I was a young kid.
So there's our award.
And here's a little montage of why we won it with a little bit of what I said about it on stage after the award was given to me.
Sir Alex Person left a big gap in the club.
People forget that I'm a human being, that I passed through a difficult moment, your baby daughters in hospital.
Kind of that didn't believe.
Where I felt provoked by the coach.
I think that the empathy with the coach is not good.
I think you don't respect the way I should deserve.
It's hard for me to say that I will not be back to Manchester United, but regardless, as you say, it's...
Madonna, DiCaprio, and Age Gaps 00:02:55
Let's see what's going to happen.
Well, I'd like to thank Cristiano Ronaldo, who until yesterday evening was the most iconic number seven in Manchester United history.
I'm sure I speak for the whole room here, indisputably the greatest footballer of all time.
He's also a man of his word and a really good guy.
And I want to thank him, because without him, I wouldn't be here.
There'd be no scoop.
So thank you, Cristiano.
Well, there we have it.
So the 7-0 gag obviously went down well with those who got it, but not so well with Man United fans.
But I sincere thanks to Cristiano, because without him, there wouldn't have been any scoop.
And it was an amazing thing to be involved with.
And I feel very proud of the interview and also of the team here at Piers Morgan.
I sensitive Talk TV who helped get it on air and go around the world.
It was a thunderous scoop and it didn't cost us a penny.
So they're the best ones.
So thank you all very much.
Let's turn to something else.
Catherine Ryan, the comedian, says about Leonardo DiCaprio dating young ladies.
I don't think it's controversial to say it's gross.
Now, is she right?
Is it getting creepy that DiCaprio keeps dating women apparently when he gets to 25?
That's the cut-off point.
I don't.
As he heads to 50.
Or is there a double standard?
Because Madonna keeps prancing around with young toy boys.
She doesn't get anything like the aggravation he gets.
I don't think it's gross because it is not a secret that men like young, beautiful, attractive women.
I think it's gross that the women who are clearly not attracted to Leonardo DiCaprio because he is very not attractive are just doing it clearly for his money.
Now, with Madonna dating toy boys, we can all assume that she's not all there anyway because she keeps showing us pictures of her bum and her face now looks like a loaf of warbled.
Kevin, what do you think?
Is it any of any of our businesses?
I find the Madonna thing a total cringe.
But I also find it slightly cringy, DiCaprio, that it's all the women are always very young.
It's like, well, really, me?
You're not your own age.
What do they talk about?
I find DiCaprio creepy, actually.
Carried out with people, you know, easily young enough to be his, you know, his daughter, or in some cases, probably his grandfather.
It's perfectly lawful if he likes to go out with younger women.
He's a single guy or a single one.
You're quite right.
There might be some double standards with me because I've criticised you for having to pop up Madonna before.
Maybe we should get Madonna and DiCaprio together.
And then we'll just solve all the problems.
Well, she's about 35 years too old.
Could you imagine?
Well, not all of her.
I think most men, if they're honest with themselves, they could date beautiful people.
We know the French thing.
The French thing is half a man's age plus seven is the optimum age.
So if he's 50, the woman can be 32.
Yes.
That's it.
Apparently.
That's the French way.
They seem to know about these things, don't they?
Come in and see.
Let's see for tonight.
Keep it uncensored.
Tonight,
Export Selection