Uncensored - Piers Morgan - 20250313_trump-the-money-guy-tariffs-tesla-more-plus-god-of

All Episodes

Previous Next

Plain Text

March 13, 2025 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan

01:32:43

20250313_trump-the-money-guy-tariffs-tesla-more-plus-god-of

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
Musk's Free Speech Exceptions 00:02:01
	Musk and Trump said they were free speech absolutists, but now they say no, no, there's one exception and there is always one exception.
	You'll get no Epstein files.
	You'll get no freedom of speech.
	We'll do nothing but cancel culture, but always on behalf of beloved special ally Israel.
	The Biden administration forbid Israelis from coming into America.
	Oh, yeah, Biden's so tough on Israel.
	That's why you're getting dying after the exact same thing.
	They're going to bring up it.
	Openly making these threats against American citizens like myself here in the streets of New York City, joined by Israelis, and nothing is done about it.
	One of her protests was so, it's so terrible and anti-Semitic that even AOC decided that she had gone too far.
	You're brutalizing them.
	58 years.
	You've kept them in a dark dungeon.
	And anytime they dare to oppose you, you cut off their water.
	Musk has done this.
	I've known Elon Musk for a very long time.
	He was, at the same time, an ally and a competitor.
	Carlos, how rich are you?
	Elon Musk's Tesla, the world's most valuable car company, is in turmoil.
	The president is even selling them on the White House lawn to arrest its market meltdown.
	Musk says he's putting country before cars, but can he do both?
	Later on, I'll speak exclusively to Carlos Goen, the man known as the god of cars, who escaped fraud charges in Japan by fleeing the country in a box on a private plane.
	Now lives in Beirut as a fugitive.
	If that's not worth looking around for, well, frankly, what is?
	We'll begin with two special guests in the uncensored studio.
	They both share a deep disdain for donor-driven politicians.
	They both have profound concerns about the state of our culture and the world we live in.
	They both have very different views on the solutions.
	Winston Marshall is host of the Winston Marshall Show, a battle-hardened survivor of cancelled culture, whose many achievements include eviscerating Nancy Pelosi at the Oxford Union.
	Check Uger is founder and CEO of The Young Turks, an uncensored legend who was not smuggled here in a box as far as I'm aware.
Political Leaders and Solutions 00:05:45
	And gentlemen, well, welcome to both of you.
	Winston, great to see you again here.
	Check, welcome to London.
	Welcome to the uncensored lair.
	Thank you.
	It's a pleasure being here.
	And no, I wouldn't have fit in a box.
	It's an extraordinary story, that guy, actually.
	I'm looking forward to talking to him.
	Let's start.
	Chen, Donald Trump.
	We're 50 days in.
	It feels like every day, as it was the first time with Trump, is a massive story.
	A lot of people saying it's total chaos.
	He doesn't know what he's doing, etc.
	Many on his side coming out going, actually, there's a plan.
	There's always been a plan.
	And it's not chaos.
	And you're going to see the results of all this in a few months' time.
	What's your take on it all?
	Yeah, I'm positive that there's no plan, but with a huge caveat.
	So I'll get to the caveat in a second.
	But first of all, he just doesn't know what he's doing.
	So he went out against Tom Massey the other day.
	And Tom Massey is one of the most principled conservatives slash libertarians there are.
	I knew that if he went after Tom Massey, that it would be a major mistake because Massey has better bona fides than Trump does, even in MAGA world and in conservative circles.
	But he doesn't even know that.
	You don't know that Massey's the principled conservative.
	You don't know that that's the worst guy to target.
	And they don't.
	He's flying by the seat of his pants.
	And so, but by the way, I also have experience with Democrats gaslighting.
	They told us, oh, no, The Democratic leadership knows exactly what they're doing.
	They're playing four-dimensional chess.
	You simpletons don't understand it.
	You see, if you run someone who's super old and has dementia, they'll seem young and dynamic.
	I'm like, no, you don't know anything.
	It's all Wizard of Oz.
	The men that you pull back the curtain on Democratic leaders or Republican leaders, they're all fools.
	So let me put a scenario to you.
	Because what Trump did in the first term before the pandemic was get the economy purring pretty nicely by common agreement.
	Here's a different scenario to you.
	Within six months, he's got peace in Ukraine.
	He's got peace in the Middle East.
	He's won the Nobel Peace Prize, or should certainly be nominated for it, because Obama got one for doing something that no one can even today tell me what he deserved it for.
	And the economy is, well, after all the tariff, mayhem, and everything else, is beginning to really purr as it did in his first term.
	I mean, that could happen.
	He could also win the Super Bowl and the World Cup.
	But there's your rosy hand.
	All those three things could still happen.
	So look, no, there's one that definitely cannot happen, which is peace in the Middle East.
	Like, there is a plan that I've told you about on the show many times where he agrees with what the Arab League says easy path to peace in the Middle East.
	But the reason we can't have it is because Israel doesn't want peace.
	So they want to grab Gaza and the West Bank.
	So there's no chance Israel is going to say yes to peace.
	So that one's foreclosed.
	Ukraine and Russia.
	Look, if he actually got it done, though, Ukraine-Russia, peace, and he really got a two-state solution, of course he would deserve a Nobel Peace Prize.
	And yes, Obama shouldn't have gotten one, but you don't want to.
	Why did he get one?
	Two wrongs don't make a right.
	Because they were so hyped up.
	They were so anti-Bush and Cheney, the whole world was, and they were right, right?
	And now even the Republicans agree and Trump agrees that Bush and Cheney were a disaster.
	The minute anyone came, and it could have been Mickey Mouse, they'd be like, Nobel Peace Prize for not attacking a random Middle Eastern country.
	So that's why he got it, but he didn't deserve it.
	And he did the drones that said it.
	But the caveat's important.
	What Trump does is he A-B-tests everything.
	So he'll try something.
	And then if it doesn't work, he'll say, oh, I'm doubling down the tariffs on Canada.
	Oh, the stock market crash?
	No, I'm not.
	No, I'm not.
	I said I'm doing only 25%.
	And he keeps flip-flopping because that's what he's always done because he doesn't have principles.
	He's just trying to find out what's popular.
	But he's also a dealmaker.
	I mean, this thing about Trump, I think people often forget or deliberately choose to forget is that at his gut, everything's a deal.
	Everything's transactional.
	I think he genuinely does want to make America great.
	I don't dispute that for a moment.
	How he does it is the way he sells real estate or used to, right?
	Is that everything's up for negotiation?
	He's a pragmatist, but he's also a disruptor.
	And I think that what we're seeing as we speak right now, the stock markets come down, although I think it's only just past where it was before it got the bump before his election win back in November.
	He disrupts the market and he messes about with things.
	And, you know, look at Ukraine.
	As we talk, he has got the Ukrainians have agreed to a ceasefire and it's up to the Russians now to come to the table.
	After everything we saw at the Oval Office, all of this.
	And I was asked about that because I actually spoke to Trump the morning before the Oval Office bust up.
	That morning I spoke to him.
	And I was asked afterwards, well, come on then, you know, this is obviously the end of any chance of peace there.
	He's humiliated.
	I went, why don't you just hang on a bit?
	Yeah.
	Right.
	Because there's clearly a bit of method to the madness.
	Well, likewise with the government.
	And it turned out I was right, right?
	Because they've been in Saudi Arabia.
	They've got an agreement from Zelensky.
	He's going to go back and see Trump in the White House.
	I just think with Trump, sometimes everybody throws their toys out of a stroller way too quickly.
	Just see what the plan is and see if it works.
	If it doesn't work, hammer him.
	Likewise with all the upset about the Gaza plan, the idea that America would take over.
	That goes completely against his America First MAGA principles.
	And certainly he doesn't want to embroil America into some sort of new deal.
	But look what's happened since.
	The Arab nations have come together and said, no, we don't want America looking after.
	And they've put together this, what is it, $53 billion Gaza rebuild plan.
	No, it may not work, Jack.
	I'm not saying for a moment all this is going to work.
	I just think when people look at Trump and think he doesn't know what he's doing, as you said, it's all chaos, blah, blah, blah.
	I honestly don't believe that is the case.
Fighting Fraud Unpopularly 00:02:36
	He's got some very smart people around him, not least Elon Musk.
	And whatever people think of Musk, when they say he's stupid, they're the stupid ones.
	He's one of the most brilliant minds in America.
	Now, he's a little odd.
	There's no question.
	By his own admission, he's a bit autistic.
	He doesn't behave in the way that we might normally expect our political leaders to behave.
	And he kind of is a political leader in a way.
	But what he's doing with Doge, for example, I imagine that resonates very well with most Americans if they keep finding clear evidence of waste.
	American homeowners are at risk of a growing real estate scam, which the FBI calls house stealing.
	This is how it works.
	Criminals forge your signature on just one document, use a fake notary stamp, pay a small fee, and then file it with your local recorder's office.
	Just like that, your home title is transferred out of your name.
	Scammers can then take out loans using your equity as collateral or even sell the property behind your back.
	You won't even know it's happening until you start getting collection or foreclosure notices.
	When was the last time you checked your home title?
	I own a home in the United States, and the answer for me is never until now.
	That's why I trust Home Title Lock.
	Their million dollar triple lot protection helps keep your home and equity safe.
	Here's what you get.
	Immediate 24-7 monitoring of your property, urgent alerts if there are any changes.
	And if fraud does happen, their US-based restoration team will spend up to a million dollars to fix the fraud and restore your title at no additional cost.
	I've teamed up with Home Title Lock to give you a free title history report so you can find out if you're already a victim and get access to your personal title expert, a $250 value just for signing up.
	Go to hometitleck.com and use the promo code PEERS or just click on the link in the description.
	Make sure you check out the million-dollar triple lot protection details when you get there.
	That's home-titlelock.com, promo code PEERS, P-I-E-R-S, to get the protection and peace of mind that you deserve.
	Yeah, well, so the idea of finding waste, fraud, and abuse has been popular forever and ever.
	And in fact, Al Gore actually did a pretty good job in finding a lot of waste, fraud, and abuse during the Clinton administration.
	They cleaned it out and Clinton was the last president to balance the budget.
	So there is waste, fraud, and abuse there.
	The place you would start is subsidies.
	There's like $30 billion in oil subsidies.
	It's just nothing but a robbery.
	I can show you robbery after robbery.
	Corporations pay money to politicians and they get subsidies out.
	I despise it.
	So if that's what they did, they would be intensely popular.
Subsidies and Market Belief 00:10:23
	But what did he do instead?
	Oh, I'm just going to cut a whole bunch of people that came in last.
	I'm going to fire a whole bunch of people without even looking.
	And then that made it really unpopular.
	They've somehow found a way to make fighting fraud, waste, and abuse unpopular.
	It's now 37% and dropping in terms of Doge's popularity.
	So there's a right way to do it and a wrong way to do it.
	I mean, you can make excuses about autistic, et cetera, but I need a brother who can think through a plan.
	Both Musk and Trump are like, I'll just throw it up against the wall and see what sticks.
	Well, that one sucks.
	Is Elon Musk, is he underestimating the difference between, or misunderstanding, the difference between the business world in which he's been all-conquering and the political world?
	In other words, some things may make completely logical business sense, but from a political standpoint, if you start to see the polls massively responding negatively, Trump's a politician now.
	He's not going to let that slide for very long.
	Yeah, that's why he reigned him in.
	So that's why I say he does A-B testing.
	He tries one thing.
	If it doesn't work, he goes to the next thing.
	And by the way, that is, to be fair to your point of view, that is a bit of a plan.
	Yeah.
	It's a plan to say, well, look, I don't really know what's going to work, but I'll try this.
	And if it doesn't work, I'll reject it.
	What I think he's doing, Winston, I think he's trying to force action to be taken to resolve things that have been unresolvable, right?
	The Ukraine war.
	You know, I spoke to him a couple of weeks before he got inaugurated, and he was telling me that the Pentagon has said 100,000 people had died on the battlefield in the previous six weeks.
	100,000.
	On this on both sides, right?
	He said it was based like a World War I killing field with flat fields and they're just killing each other all day long.
	And he said it has to stop.
	Now, you know, did he have the one day fix?
	Of course, he didn't.
	No, I don't think anyone thought he did.
	Has what he's done since hastened a potential settlement?
	I would argue it has.
	He's got Zelensky to agree to the parameters of a peace arrangement.
	He's got to persuade Putin.
	That's the big test.
	We'll see if Putin goes along with it or what Trump does to Putin to make him go along with it.
	But I do see method there to what he's doing.
	Same with Israel.
	We're going to come to the Israel-Gaza situation a little later.
	But I do see, you know, like the tariffs.
	He's always been on about tariffs, Trump.
	Tariffs' favourite word.
	I've known him.
	I've known Trump 20 years.
	He's always had a B in his bonnet about tariffs and about other countries ripping America off.
	And so he's saying, right, if you're going to do this to us, we're going to whack you.
	And they're all blinking, by the way, these countries.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I just would like to talk about tariffs because I think that's really important.
	As we're talking, a lot of what's happening in the stock exchange is because of his tariffs.
	Now, why this is really important is because he managed to appeal to working people in America, the forgotten, the Rust Belt, the flyover state people whose industries were gutted.
	I think we might have some agreement on this.
	These were left behind Americans, and they were left behind by globalism, by free trade across the world.
	They were the ones who suffered.
	Indisputably.
	His ideas with tariffs, whether or not he can pull them off, none of us can know whether or not it will.
	But the idea is to bring back, to onshore those industries, encourage manufacturing.
	I would note Elon Musk has said he's going to double Tesla productions, increase manufacturing in America.
	This is done specifically for the working people of America.
	It's a reason why the unions, or at least uneducated unions.
	He's a working class hero, Cheney.
	No.
	No, no, nonsense.
	So look, here's the thing.
	Is he running as a populist?
	Yes, he ran as a populist.
	Yes, he talked about bringing jobs back, manufacturing back, et cetera.
	But what's he actually going to do?
	A $4.5 trillion tax cut for the richest people in the world, for corporate executives.
	The reason why they're doing all these Doge cuts in a panic, chaotic way is so they can say, oh, no, no, it's okay.
	The Doge cuts will cover the $4.5 trillion.
	Oh, it's okay.
	The gold card and the tariffs will cover the $4.5 trillion.
	When that's utter nonsense, you know it's not going to cover the $4.5 trillion.
	It's a giant giveaway.
	Look, he's a bit of a Trojan horse for corporate rule.
	So he rolls in as a populist.
	He opens up the hatch.
	And then next thing, you know, Elon Musk and all the tech bros come out of the horse and go, give us giant tax cuts.
	Give us deregulation.
	Fire everyone at the SEC.
	Fire all the inspector generals.
	Why?
	Because we're going to rob the place blind.
	And then we'll give me a crypto reserve filled with junk.
	That makes no sense at all.
	So trillions of dollars in robbery headed in our direction.
	And who is it going to help?
	The average American?
	No, it's going to rob the average American to help corporate executives.
	So let's be honest about what's happening.
	Okay, let's say that's the worst faith interpretation of what's going on.
	Let me paint the best faith interpretation.
	It's a three-pronged attack.
	One, you clear out, and this is what's happening with Doe, you clear out federal waste.
	You clear out government waste.
	Musk says he wants to get $2 trillion out.
	I don't think that's feasible.
	Maybe he'll get a trillion.
	He says he can get a trillion issues.
	Hang on a sec.
	Because you know he's not going to get $2 trillion.
	Hang on a sec.
	So then the other aspect, the other foot of the stool, the tripod, is tariffs.
	He's hoping to onshore manufacturing, bring back that to America.
	And the final piece is reducing income.
	So income tax, excuse me.
	The reason he wants to reduce income tax might be, as you say, or it might be, but by having all working people have more of their own money, keep more of their own money, they'll be able to spend it on things that they want that will encourage the economy.
	No, that's always what they say.
	Supply-side economics, my ass.
	Come on, this is the biggest trick on the, not only just American people, but people all across the world.
	That's why they call it a laugher curve because they laugh their ass off at the average guy who believes it.
	So the idea is trickle-down economics.
	We give all of the money to the rich, trillions and trillions and trillions.
	Later, they trickle all over you and you'll have to thank them for it.
	No, no.
	So I guarantee you the four and a half trillion is a robbery.
	That's robbery number one.
	I'm worried about robbery number two, which is crypto.
	So I don't know why we have a crypto reserve.
	The crypto guys told me that they didn't like the government.
	They wanted the government stinking hands off their crypto.
	All of a sudden, Trump said, they're like, no, buy my crypto.
	Buy my crypto.
	Make the American taxpayers buy my crypto.
	No, no, I don't want your crap.
	You like your crap?
	You keep your crap.
	Okay.
	But I don't need average Joe in Nebraska and Jane in Kansas buying your crypto for you, okay, in a reserve.
	So this is all a giant robbery.
	But the problem is by the time people find out whether I'm right, you're right, Piers, or you're right, Winston, it's going to be too late.
	He's already going to be gone.
	I don't dispute that after three years of his first term, the U.S. economy was in good shape.
	You don't dispute that.
	No, I don't dispute that.
	But Biden's economy was also in good shape.
	Well, one of the reasons Trump, I think, reacted so badly to the pandemic was he knew it was crushing the stock market.
	It was crushing the economy.
	It was attacking the very things he cares most about, which is money and the economy.
	He's a money guy.
	And I think that he felt awful about that.
	It really affected him.
	But for the three years, as I've said to him, for the three years up until that point, actually the U.S. economy was in good shape.
	And that's why if I'm, I think a lot of Americans went, you know what?
	I sort of backed Trump on the economy.
	I may not even like him, but I kind of think he knows what he's doing on the economy.
	When you say he doesn't know what he's doing, I do dispute that.
	He's got some incredibly smart guys there around him.
	I see them all the time.
	But these are, I get what you're saying.
	And, you know, look, I'm fair about the facts.
	So those three years were pretty good.
	So now you can say, hey, Jenkins, that proves the case.
	But it doesn't prove the case.
	But it might prove he knows what he's doing.
	Yeah, I hear what you're saying.
	So what I'm saying is, look, that time there was an establishment that was in the White House and they frustrated him in a lot of ways.
	Half the time they were wrong, half the time they were right.
	But they were the brakes in the car.
	This is a car without any brakes.
	So we're now in a Tesla with no brakes at all, almost a driverless car, and it's careening out of control because there's nobody to go, hey, brother, if you do 50% tariffs on Canada, the stock market's going to drop by 1,000%.
	But everybody knows that.
	But everyone knows this is all negotiation going on, these tariffs, right?
	He is negotiating from a very strong position.
	But he's the president of the United States.
	He's the biggest dog in the race.
	But when you say 50 and then you say 25 within the same day once the stock market crashes, you look weak.
	Do you?
	Of course you can.
	It depends what he makes everybody think, oh, he's bluffing.
	He's bluffing.
	We just wait him out.
	A lot of the time he is bluffing.
	He is often bluffing.
	But the problem is, have you ever played poker when you play when you're playing against a bluffer?
	I've met New York real estate tycoons.
	And guess what?
	The art of the bluff is a real thing.
	It is, but it's an art.
	If you bluff on every hand, you're going to get called and you're going to lose all your money.
	Every poker player knows that.
	He doesn't bluff all the time.
	He does nothing but bluffing.
	He negotiates all the time.
	Yeah, he does.
	He does.
	Look, I don't mind the negotiation.
	And look, we've got a pendulum swinging.
	Because I feel with you, Check, you've come on a bit of a journey with Trump.
	I think you're far less, if I may say so, without offending you, hysterical about Trump than you were before.
	I do think you've calmed down about it because I think you do understand, as I've always, I've known him a long time, always focus on what Trump actually does rather than what he says in any given moment, which may sound preposterous given he's the president of the United States.
	But look how much he talks, not least to the media.
	He's already done more talking, freewheeling chats with the media in America in his first five, six weeks than Obama and Biden did in their first six months, right?
	This is a guy who just chats away.
	He says the first thing that comes into his head a lot of the time.
	It's not presidential by the normal yardstick, but I think a lot of people find it quite refreshing.
	So, Piers, the pendulum is swinging.
	So, Biden and the Democrats did absolutely nothing.
	And they always brag about how they do nothing.
	Oh, there's nothing we can do, right?
	Now, Trump is taking non-stop, chaotic action, non-stop.
	It's a cyclone of action, right?
	So, the country wants it, but they don't want it as chaotic as he's going to be.
	Well, the countries are built like the stock markets.
	They're a bit freaked out by it.
	They don't quite know what to make of it.
	Stock markets are a bunch of headless chickens, right?
	We know this.
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Good and bad, right?
	They can fly up and down on a heartbeat of what they call.
	We do know some things, Piers.
	We know that if you do a 50% tariff on Canada, the stock market is.
	If you genuinely think it's going to still be 50% in six months' time.
	I doubt it'll be there in six days.
	So you're asking the stock market to stop believing what Trump is saying.
	I must obviously leave the story.
	I'm asking the stock market to basically remember that it's better to focus on longer term with Trump than in the short moment.
	One more thing, Piers.
	But we now had 50 days.
Sovereignty and Terrorist Groups 00:15:13
	So you're right.
	I'm much more open-minded, and the left is attacking me for being open-minded.
	And I said, I'll hear Trump out, I'll hear Musk out.
	Are they really going to cut the Pentagon?
	But now the jury is coming in.
	Now they're saying, no, we're not going to cut the Pentagon.
	We were lying about that.
	We're going to add $100 billion to the Pentagon.
	Are we still doing a $4.5 trillion tax cut to corporate executives?
	Yes, we are.
	Are we now starting to arrest people for criticizing Israel?
	Yes, we are.
	But let's come to that, because that's a big story of the week.
	And we're going to be joined by another guest in a moment on this very point.
	But this is this guy, Mahmoud Halil, who many think is now being held as a political prisoner.
	He fronts quite a radical group called the Columbia United Apartheid Divest, C-U-A-D, which sympathizes openly with terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah and has called for an end of Western civilization.
	They actually posted, and we've got this, we are Westerners fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization.
	We stand in full solidarity with every movement for liberation in the global south.
	Our intifada is an intentionalist one we are fighting for nothing less than the liberation of all people.
	We reject every genocidal, Jainismist regime that seeks to undermine the personhood of the colonized.
	And so it goes on.
	We're joined by Nadine Kizwani.
	She's been on the show, of course, many times before.
	Nadine, great to have you back.
	You're pro-Palestinian anti-Zionist activist of a group called Leader of Within Our Lifetime.
	So welcome to you.
	But let me start with you, Winston, on this.
	My only concern about this guy is that obviously when you read the wording of what this group that he fronts said there, it sounds on the face of it like a call for very violent action.
	Intifada, by definition, is violent.
	Others say that's not what he meant.
	He means the structures of Western civilization, which he believes are oppressive.
	Do we need more meat on the bone about what he has said, supporting directly Hamas and so on, to justify what many think has been an attack on his First Amendment rights?
	Let me give you some more meat for the bone, as well as the statement you've read out.
	Sorry, that group, the CUAD, have put out various statements, including calling Operation Alexa flood, i.e. October 7th, a quote, moral, military, and political victory.
	There are various statements across their Instagram, across their social media, across their substack, making equivalent such statements.
	Now, the reason I actually thought that they had gone too far in arresting him initially, because all of the evidence I found to show that he might support a terrorist organization, i.e. Hamas, was consequential.
	Sorry, circumstantial, I should say.
	Now, why I've changed my mind is because he is not only been a spokesperson for the CUAD, but he's also been one of their chief negotiators.
	Why that's important?
	Because according to Title VIII of the US Code, he is not allowed to, as he is not an American naturalized citizen, he is not allowed to, he is an alien.
	It counts as terrorist activity if an alien is a representative of a political, social, or other group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity.
	So as far as I can...
	It's good in the news.
	Let's throw out all the Israeli supporters.
	Oh, that's very interesting that you mentioned that.
	No, it's very interesting to mention it because the same that in 2023, the Biden administration forbade Israelis getting past visas to come to America.
	This is basically not a free speech issue.
	It's an American sovereignty issue.
	Yeah, America doesn't have to be.
	Are they going to throw out Israeli supporters that love terrorism and say that it's okay for Israel to get 400 times the number of children that Hamas has?
	Well, the terror is clearly more of a terrorist group.
	Well, no, no, hang on.
	The key point is that America has categorized Hamas as a terrorist organization.
	Correct.
	It does not categorize Israel in that way.
	It should.
	Well, okay, that's an argument, but it's not the reality of where we are with it at the moment.
	Hey, I'm Caitlin Becker, the host of the New York Postcast, and I've got exactly what you need to start your weekdays.
	Every morning, I'll bring you the stories that matter, plus the news people actually talk about.
	The juicy details in the world, politics, business, pop culture, and everything in between.
	It's what you want from the New York Post wrapped up in one snappy show.
	Ask your smart speaker to play the NY Postcast podcast.
	Listen and subscribe on Amazon Music, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	Nadine, let me bring you in here.
	I mean, you've been on these marches famously.
	I think you came on my show after you'd been on one on the day of your wedding because you felt so passionately about this.
	Let's take a look at you here.
	Palestine will never die.
	Palestine will never die.
	There is only one solution.
	There is only one solution.
	And the father of revolution.
	Now, you were not a student of Colombia.
	You were a student at City University of New York.
	You've organized a number of protests outside Colombia, though.
	The Jerusalem Post reported on April 21st that after your wedding, you managed to enter the campus, despite it being in a form of lockdown and led the crowd on a chant of there's only one solution into father revolution.
	We just heard that.
	You were then banned from Colombia after that.
	And they said you were considered a persona non grata due to alarming and concerning behavior.
	On March the 6th this year, you said on X Be Like Student at Columbia and Barnard, fearless and unrelenting in the fight for Palestine, disrupt every Zionist event on your campus.
	And if you can't stand with those of us who do, the Fames of Revolution burn Colombia because they refuse to accept the status quo.
	Now, none of those words in themselves are necessarily an incitement to violence.
	But when you talk about an intifada, then everyone who understands what an intifada is would say that is a call for violent behavior, response, reaction, resistance, whatever you want to call it.
	Do you accept that intifada is a call to arms, a call to violence?
	Intifada is shaking off of oppression, and it's not just applied in the Palestinian context, but in Arab-speaking countries throughout, whenever they're fighting against oppression, that's what intifada means.
	People talk about revolution in the context of fighting oppression in the U.S. for many other causes, from the black liberation, the black struggle for liberation, to immigrants fighting for their rights in this country.
	So, I mean, we've even heard Democrats talk about needing revolution, needing change, but we know that Palestinians are uniquely targeted, not because the Palestinian struggle in the U.S. is violent, but because Palestinian dissent or dissent to Israel's support for U.S. support for Israel and the ongoing genocide is consistently criminalized.
	We've seen this with the Holy Land 5 Foundation, who are currently, many of them are still in prison for providing humanitarian aid to Gaza.
	We've seen this with the LA 8 case, who were also accused of supporting terrorism, but the case fell apart in court, even though the US government tried to prove for 20 years and couldn't prove for 20 years that speaking in support of Palestinian and Palestinian resistance.
	But do you accept that any country and any government would be perfectly within their rights if they have identified an organization as a terrorist organization, as America has with Hamas, for example?
	And that is how they're categorized.
	That if you are openly supporting a terror organization, as we saw that CUAD, which Mahmoud Halil France has done publicly and with no apparent shame, that if you do that, then that country is entitled to deport you because you're supporting openly a terrorist organization.
	We haven't seen CUAD do that, so I'm not sure what you're referring to.
	But we just haven't seen that.
	The advocates of the USAID is a very important piece.
	Winston just read a quote which CUAD had posted in which they described what happened October the 7th as a victory.
	Okay, and that's Palestinian resistance broadly.
	They're not referring to any Palestinian results.
	They said a laxa flood specifically.
	We'll talk about examples.
	How many Americans, how many Irish Americans supported the IRA?
	Do you see them getting deported for supporting the IRA in their time?
	No, we didn't see that happen.
	So it's actually still under the purview of freedom of speech.
	But again, Palestinians even saying that they think Palestine should be free or chanting from the river to the sea are accused of things like anti-Semitism and terrorism.
	So I just see that as an extension of it.
	And honestly, all of their arguments are completely delegitimized because they just throw them out on anybody speaking in support of Palestinian liberation, no matter what they say.
	So, you know, I think that's a good idea.
	I don't know.
	Two things for Winston.
	One, the general point about free speech, you know, the Republicans have been extremely hot on free speech.
	People's rights, especially Elon Musk, right?
	He's returned X, as he put it, to a platform that allows all opinion to be had.
	He has somebody who's expressing opinions that he may not like, but Donald Trump may not like and the government may not like, but their first reaction, it seems to many people, is to then chop them out of the country and suppress their right to free speech in America.
	That's an arguable point.
	But on the second point, which is an interesting one about the IRA, there's no doubt.
	You know, I'm an Irish Catholic.
	I can remember people on the streets of New York on St. Patrick's Day and other days, right?
	I can remember people openly supporting the IRA during those troubles.
	And they were a prescribed terror group.
	What's the difference?
	Well, the difference is that this is not a free speech issue necessarily.
	So, for example, as I've already quoted, what it is that is Mahmoud Khalil is being deported on is that he broke the rules that he agreed to when he came to America.
	He can continue saying what he wants.
	In fact, he could have said all that he said, or rather, no, he can't.
	He can't express support for Mas.
	Have expressed support for Palestine.
	He could even have been anti-Semitic and it wouldn't have broken the rules.
	But specifically, he supported terrorist activity in terrorist organizations, and that broke the rules, which he agreed to when he came to the end.
	This is all nonsense.
	This is all nonsense.
	That's political.
	Because they never investigated any Irish people on student visas.
	Hold on, or any Irish people who are on green cards.
	They never, look, the PKK is a Kurdish terrorist organization.
	Did they investigate anybody who supports them?
	No.
	The only people that are investigated are people who criticize Israel.
	Who are we hitting?
	No, I want you to answer the question.
	Be honest and be serious.
	Do you think that any other country or any other movement is investigated other than if you dare to criticize our special ally Israel because they buy all our politicians?
	That's so obvious.
	That's the most obvious thing in the world.
	Anyone who doesn't acknowledge that, including every single mainstream media reporter in America, is an enormous liar.
	It is the money talking and saying, how dare you arrest anyone who cares to criticize Israel?
	Admit that that's true.
	If you don't admit that there is no point in this conversation, in 2023, the Biden administration forbid Israelis from coming into America.
	Oh, yeah, Biden's so tough on Israel.
	That's why you're getting Brown.
	This is what Biden is doing.
	You slaughter Palestinian countries in the rain.
	You're obsessed with Israel, but what about the law being done by China?
	What about the law being obsessed with Pakistan?
	What about the law being done by the Saudis?
	The Qataris.
	No, they're always the what about issues.
	All of these people.
	Oh, we get to commit a lot of people.
	You're ignoring people.
	Unbelievable.
	Okay, look, look, America and everyone else in the world.
	Now you're clear.
	I believe that Israel has disproportionate power in America because their lobby, for example, has given $337 million to Trump.
	It doesn't compare to what China, the China lobbyist.
	Oh, doesn't compare to the Protestants.
	And Chinese talk about our country.
	I don't want to.
	Hang on, hang on.
	Let me just make this last point in Reggie.
	Last point is by Chengde.
	Then, Nadine.
	So this is the epitome of cancel culture.
	Sorry, just like Nadine.
	I'll bring you another question.
	This is the epitome of canceled culture, but we're canceling people on behalf of a foreign government.
	Musk and Trump said that they were free speech absolutists, but now they say, no, no, there's one exception and there is always one exception.
	You'll get no obscene files.
	You'll get no freedom of speech.
	We'll do nothing but cancel culture, but always on behalf of beloved special ally Israel that has stuffed all of our pockets with millions of dollars.
	On a technical point, on a technical point, Cheng, is Winston not correct?
	That if you're not a naturalized citizen of the United States, I happen to notice I'm an exceptional alien in your country.
	That's what it says on my visa.
	I don't complain about the wording.
	It is a bit weird.
	You call us exceptional aliens.
	But if I'm going to be an alien, I may as well be exceptional.
	But it's a very difficult process.
	It's a long process.
	It's an expensive process to become an exceptional alien in your great country.
	But if I was to suddenly start supporting an organization that is a prescribed terrorist group in the United States, I would be in breach, as Winston said, of the criteria by which I signed up to enter the country.
	So on that purely legal technical point, you might play whataboundary with other groups and say it hasn't been consistent.
	That's a perfectly rational argument to have.
	But is the U.S. government in breach of his First Amendment rights if they can establish he has supported openly Hamas?
	And that would go against all the paperwork he signed up to when he became a green card holder in America.
	Look at this tricannery.
	So Israel buys all of our politicians, says every group of opposites.
	Hold on, hold on.
	Every group opposes me, put them on a terrorist list.
	Even though I do 400 times worse terrorism, don't put me on.
	Don't play what about it.
	Now, all of you corrupt American politicians, put all of our enemies on a terrorist list.
	And on top of that, I want your money.
	Give me $300 billion.
	On top of that, I want you to attack all these guys that I'm calling terrorists that are just Israel's enemies.
	So they completely control the American government in this direction.
	And I'm not interested in it.
	I dare you to challenge any other people.
	Be in favor of any other terrorist group.
	You'll have zero problems in America.
	But just to say Israel, oh my God.
	Oh, the money, the money.
Condemning the Hannibal Directive 00:14:58
	Come on, keep it real.
	Just to repeat.
	Biden's top donor, Trump's top donor.
	Kamala's top donor.
	Like I said, there might well be many inconsistencies.
	That's a perfectly valid point to make.
	But on the specific question I asked you: is the government infringing on his First Amendment rights, Mahmoud Khalil?
	If they can establish his support at Hamas, which is a prescribed terror group, that would put him in breach of his entry requirements and criteria to become a green card holder.
	Are they not legally well, hang on, under that pretext, are they not legally?
	Hang on, hang on, Nadine.
	I'm going to come to you.
	Are they not legally in their rights to do it in that eventuality?
	No.
	So I heard all the time from MAGA that, hey, free speech isn't just about the First Amendment.
	It should also apply to social media and we should protect free speech no matter what.
	We should be free speech absolutists.
	And MAGA has actually been fairly consistent about this.
	And that is why Trump is going to lose part of his base by constantly saying, I want to do cancel culture for Israel.
	I want to violate the First Amendment.
	I want to violate free speech as long as Miriam Adelson keeps sending me checks.
	So no, this is against the principles of free speech in America.
	I don't care that Israel got a corrupt law passed to make it illegal to criticize any, to criticize them or to support any of their enemies.
	And how many, hey, would Israel accept a 58-year occupation?
	And if they dared to fight back, would we call them terrorists?
	Of course we wouldn't.
	Okay, let me bring in Nadine.
	Nadine.
	Yeah, I mean, material support isn't applicable to free speech.
	Material support requires way more than speech.
	So this idea that supporting a terrorist organization is not really applicable here.
	And if we look at organizations like the Jewish Defense League, which up until recently were considered a terrorist organization by the United States, they were able to openly operate in New York City, in the streets of New York City.
	They've been counter-protesting within our lifetime protests for over 10 years and oftentimes joined by Israelis, by people who are not U.S. citizens, you know, coming and threatening us at our protests.
	One of the organizations that actually claimed to work with the government to bring up Khalil's case, Batar, is a nonprofit 501c3 here in New York City, offering people $1,800, a bounty on my head, to give me a beeper, which obviously calls back to the beeper attacks on Lebanon, terrorist attacks that have left people blind and killed people, including children, right?
	Openly making these threats against American citizens like myself here in the streets of New York City, joined by Israelis, and nothing is done about it.
	Openly tolerated by the Democrats as well, not just the Republicans.
	So it's clear that not only is it a double standard, it's beyond that.
	We have never seen Palestinians calling for bombing of Israelis here in New York City.
	Okay, let me ask Winston this.
	We've seen Israeli organizations, Zionist organizations do that.
	I want to play a clip.
	This is you, Winston, on Gutfeld, a mutual friend of ours, Greg Gutfeld, a great guy, very funny guy.
	Both done his show many times.
	This is the clip that you do, and Elon Musk responded to this.
	So let's watch the clip first and I'll read his response.
	It's actually far more concerning what's happening in England.
	In fact, England today is what America would be if it had elected Kamla as president.
	And it's really, it's quite sad.
	I've been here for about two weeks.
	America is about lifting people up.
	It is not an envious country.
	England today is about tearing down the aspirational, tearing down those who want to do better with their life.
	And as a consequence, people are fleeing England.
	Things are even worse, actually.
	A week ago, my lawyer back home called me up and said, two of your tweets are technically illegal.
	You could be arrested when you return.
	Elon Musk posted after that, Britain's turning into a police state.
	So he was enraged about this infringement on your rights to free speech, even about contentious issues.
	So it's a tricky question, I think, for you and for Elon Musk, if he was here, would be, well, what really is the difference here?
	Because a lot of people were hoovered up in the riots in England, of course, last summer for saying inflammatory things online and supporting in some cases the violence.
	I'm given quite extensive prison sentences.
	Many would say, well, the rage that people felt, particularly Elon Musk, actually, over the infringement on their free speech rights does not sit very well with what's now happening to Mahmoud Halil.
	Okay, so in Britain we have the Terrorism Act 2000.
	It's forbidden to support a terrorist organization.
	In this case, obviously we're talking about Hamas.
	Your guest, Nadine, she is entitled to support a terrorist organization in America because they have the First Amendment.
	They have a different law.
	But the Mahmoud Khalil is a different situation because he, as we have already discussed, came in and under the U.S. Code, Title VIII, I believe it is, he is forbidden from supporting terrorism.
	He's not American citizens.
	And may I continue?
	But may I continue...
	Should he be cancelled?
	He broke those rules.
	So then my question to you is, should the law about this title, U.S. Code VIII, where the American executive government have power to control who is and is not in their country, should that be revoked?
	For example, last year, five Chinese students were forbidden from entering into Biden's America.
	No reason was given.
	As I said, the year before, Biden forbade Israelis of a certain political persuasion from coming into America.
	Do you want the executive order to have power over the American borders or not?
	But we let Nanyahu, the world's biggest terrorists, in, and we let him into Congress.
	It's not prescribed any innovation.
	Israel is not a prescribed information.
	Israel is not going to prescribe.
	That's exactly my problem with this.
	That's the prescribed name.
	No, but Winston, that's exactly my problem with this.
	Yeah, but you might not be able to do that.
	So now, of course, let's ring the law in favor of Israel.
	So then when we apply it, we go, hey, there was already a law.
	We had already ringed it in favor of Israel.
	That law is not applied to anyone outside of opponents of Israel.
	Do you agree with that?
	So by the way, American citizens, they're going to come for you next.
	Of course I do.
	I also think Israel is a terrorist organization.
	But if Hamas is not a person, I object because I actually care about free speech.
	Because Americans, they're going to come for you next.
	They're going to come for you next.
	Don't you dare criticize Israel.
	They'll call you an anti-Semite.
	They'll give you a scarlet letter A. That's the new scarlet letter for anti-Semite.
	And they'll fire you.
	They'll cancer you.
	They'll arrest you.
	They'll deport you.
	They'll do all these things because Israel first is anti-Palestinian.
	Okay, let me ask.
	Oh, hang on.
	Nadine has been able to...
	One of her protests outside a Navarra music festival commemoration was so it's so terrible and anti-Semitic that even AOC, the progressive politician, decided that she had gone too far and that the organization...
	But she has her free speech to do that.
	She has her free speech and she's able to do it.
	No, she's not a measure of the Palestinian freedom of speech.
	I don't know why you're bringing her up or as if we're aligned with the Democrats when we've been protesting against the Democrats for the last 16 months who set up all the dominoes that created for this to happen in the first place.
	She's not an ally to the Palestinian movement By the stretch that we expect people to be, especially when the U.S.
	But the point is, you were not arrested for that.
	And the weapons to kill the Palestinians.
	You were allowed to say it.
	You, as an American citizen, were entitled to the people.
	There was no panic about my behavior.
	The difference is with Madame.
	That was an atrocity propaganda used to fuel a genocide against my people.
	It's anti-Semitic to say that I don't believe that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, that millions of Palestinians should be displaced, should be killed, should be bombed, should be not given access to food and water like we've seen in Ghaza for the last 11 days.
	They've been under even stricter blockade, not allowing electricity in during the month of Ramadan.
	People are continuously.
	But that is not why he's not anti-Semitic.
	That is not why he's been threatened with deportation.
	I mean, my question for you would be, Nadine, I've asked you this before, and I'm interested if you've got the same answer or not.
	But I mean, do you personally, right now, do you support Hamas?
	I don't condemn and I don't tell people who are living under occupation, living under genocide, how they can resist occupation.
	You know, I've never, I've never, I've never publicly expressed support for any specific parties or groups in Palestine, including the Palestinian Authority, even.
	But I support all people who are oppressed to resist their oppression.
	You can't tell people that they don't have the right to defend themselves.
	Right, but you do accept if you're not prepared to condemn a group like Hamas, then you are de facto supporting them.
	I'm not going to condemn anybody who's defending themselves, and I won't condemn my people who are the victims of this.
	Hang on, hang on, condemn Israel.
	Hang on, so you condemn the terrorists.
	Hang on, hang on, hang on, Nadine.
	So, did you condemn what they did on October the 7th?
	Again, I think a lot of what we saw about October the 7th was actually lies and they've been disproven.
	Wow.
	So, you know, I don't know what conversation we're having here.
	They are.
	The 40 beheaded a baby's lies was disproven.
	Well, do you think the 1200s were not aware of the people who were a lot of the rape atrocities?
	Okay, well, let me be specific to you.
	Let me be specific on my question.
	We've seen that.
	Do you believe it?
	Hang on.
	That's what I condemned.
	Do you believe that 3,000 people?
	Do you condemn Israel?
	Can I ask you a question, please?
	Let me ask you a question and then respond.
	That's how this works.
	Do you believe that 3,000 Hamas terrorists crossed the border on October the 7th in three different phases and attacked indiscriminately any Israelis and in particular Jewish Israelis they could get their hands on?
	That they murdered 1,200 people, that they wounded, some of them irreparably in terms of injuries that will never be recovered from, nearly 7,000 more people, that they captured and kidnapped 250 odd people, including a baby, including Holocaust survivors.
	So do you accept those basic facts?
	I mean, the U.S. government is currently negotiating the continuous ceasefire with Hamas.
	And so it's clear that the actions were taken.
	Nadine, I just asked if you accept those facts.
	I don't, like I said, it's clear whatever actions they've taken, and I'm not sure what part of all of that is or isn't true.
	There's been a lot of propaganda, but it's clear that that was a response to oppression since 1948 to when Zionist groups were in villages like mine.
	So just to be clear, you don't condemn.
	So you cannot condemn what they did that day.
	Like I said, I can't condemn what has been repeated.
	No, no, we've heard you louder than the media.
	We've heard you louder than that.
	What I don't know is true.
	What I don't know to be true.
	I know.
	How very convenient that you don't think any of it is true.
	I mean, we literally saw what they did through their own GoPro videos that they beamed to the world of them murdering innocent people.
	They literally beamed it in the world.
	I believe Israel actually killed a lot of them.
	They wanted to condemn the Hannibal directive that was directed towards their own people.
	If Israel cared about their hostages so much, why do they continuously bomb Gaza while they're there?
	I believe a lot of what we see.
	Let me ask Winston.
	Okay, Winston, the Hannibal Directive is a perfectly valid point that it does appear that certain leaders on the Israeli side are now conceding there was a Hannibal directive, which is that they would basically stop their own people from being kidnapped.
	And if it meant taking their lives in that eventuality, that would have to happen.
	And there is some evidence that that may have happened with some of the people who were killed.
	So let's be clear, right?
	I try and be very fair-minded about this.
	I go where the facts take us.
	The 40 beheaded babies turned out not to be true.
	It was stated as fact by an Israeli member of the Israeli forces.
	It turned out to be untrue.
	It is true, however, that some people were beheaded.
	It is true that babies were kidnapped.
	So these things are all a question of scale.
	I am very happy to condemn all of it because it was all a despicable act of terrorism.
	Winston, when you hear someone like Nadine who is defending this guy's right to be in America, when you see her so, in my opinion, people can have their own view about the way she's responded, but so glibly brush off what Hamas did that day.
	This has always been my problem with this debate.
	If you just cannot find it in yourself, Cheng, if I asked him, would condemn what happened that day because he has done repeatedly.
	And then you can have a rational conversation.
	If you can't condemn it and you put it all down as some form of resistance or opposition, you lose me.
	Winston.
	Yeah, I mean, I don't know really what to respond to that.
	It's clear what happened on October 7th.
	And from what little research I've done into Nadine's work, she seems to have supported what happens to October.
	It's not that she's not even condemned.
	No, there's not just one day in the world, right?
	I mean, so you guys keep talking about October 7th.
	And you would condemn what happened.
	Yeah, of course.
	But do you guys condemn the 58-year brutal occupation of the Israelis, butchering, slaughtering, oppressing the Palestinians?
	Do you condemn that they've killed 14,500 children, 4,350 children under the age of five, 800 babies under the age of one?
	They've incinerated them alive.
	So how can you now be honest and fair and say that Israel is clearly a terrorist state?
	I will be honest and fair.
	I think that Israel's right to self-defense has now gone too far.
	I think I've been saying this for months.
	I think they have killed too many innocent civilians.
	They keep saying that they have proportionally, it's been better than any other modern urban warfare, to which I respond.
	Actually, there is a massively disproportionate number of children, i.e. under 18s, in Gaza.
	Half the population of 2 million is under 18.
	And therefore, the proportion of children who've been killed as a total of the casualties is like on a scale we haven't seen in modern times in any urban warfare.
	So, yes, I think they've gone way too far.
	I also think, as I said from the start, what's the end game?
	What's the plan for after this?
	Two-thirds of Gaza has been obliterated.
	There's evidence from the American intelligence that actually for every Hamas terrorist who's been killed, they've already filled it with someone with similar ideology.
	So, the ideology has certainly not been eliminated.
Gaza Power Cuts and Conflict 00:10:09
	Nor have Hamas.
	When we see the hostages being released, there's massive displays by people who look very much and sound very much like Hamas terrorists.
	So, there are lots of things, Chenk, that I'm very happy to criticize about what Israel's done.
	What I won't do, what I won't do is say that they didn't have a fundamental right stroke duty to defend their people after the appalling atrocities of October the 7th.
	Because Hamas has said they're going to carry on doing that.
	Hamas' official spokesman's atrocity.
	So we're going to do this again and again and again.
	Then do the Palestinians have a right to defend themselves.
	You say Israel does.
	When Hamas, in their mind, defends the Palestinians, you say they're no good terrorists.
	If anybody ever says a kind word about them, they should be arrested and deported.
	I think the honesty.
	But when Israel does 400 times worse than Hamas, they've gone too far.
	I wouldn't call them terrorists.
	You're allowed to support them and their terrorists.
	But in the 75 years or so of this conflict, right, there have been five flare-ups of war that people accept were flare-ups of war.
	It would be hard to argue they haven't all been orchestrated by the Palestinian side.
	Would you accept that?
	In other words, the actual flare-ups of war.
	I don't accept that.
	You don't accept that?
	Palestinians or pro-Palestinians are fighting have actually been responsible for the outbreaks of warfare.
	No, I don't accept that 1%.
	So first of all, if I occupy you in a prison for 58 years and you try to break out five times, I wouldn't blame you for it.
	But even acceptance is not a problem.
	But even so, but even so, but even so, no.
	So Israel, for example, on October 7th, we know that they had the intelligence on October 7th, the greatest intelligence agency in the whole world.
	And then, so why did they let it happen?
	Spectacular failure.
	No, it's not.
	It was a spectacular success for their mission to grab Gaza and the West Bank.
	That's nonsense.
	Nonsense, my ass.
	What are they doing now?
	So, Piers, will you admit that once they try to push the Palestinians out and take Gaza for themselves, that it was never about self-defense?
	It was always about stealing Palestinians.
	Which is what they have done over and over and over again since 1948.
	Yeah, the idea that the Israelis knew what was going on.
	Hang on, hang on, hang on.
	Sorry, just to respond to that.
	The idea that the Israelis knew that October 7th was going to happen and deliberately allowed it to happen to their own people is preposterous.
	Some people in the Israeli government who are literally terrorists, like Ben Gavir, absolutely.
	Netanyahu, who I think is literally the largest in the world right now, you're telling me Netanyahu wouldn't do that.
	Netanyahu lied us into the Iraq war.
	He talked about weapons of mass destruction.
	He talked about how they did 9-11 when, in fact, Saddam Hussein was opposed to Al-Qaeda.
	So that giant liar that lied America into the Iraq war as part of the neocons wouldn't lie to his own people to protect himself from corruption charges, from protecting himself from a very, very unpopular leadership to be able to have an action.
	Let me ask when they choose to steal more Palestinian land.
	That is exactly what Netanyahu is.
	Hang on, Nadi.
	I'll come back.
	They should know that oppressing Palestinians would result in people defending themselves.
	They should know that.
	And I've said this on your show before.
	As long as there is oppression, there is going to be Palestinian resistance to it.
	As long as there's an occupation, apartheid, genocide, ethnic cleansing, Palestinians are going to take whatever means they have to defend themselves.
	We don't have an army because we don't have a state because the U.S. and Israel continuously blocks that from happening.
	So yes, when Palestinian militias come together to defend themselves, they're going to be considered terrorist organizations because there is no means for us to be able to lawfully do that, which is exactly the situation that they created.
	So yes, they are going to expect that it's going to happen whether they have the intelligence or not.
	But I do know that they had the intelligence.
	We do believe they had the intelligence to know that an attack like October 7th was imminent and that Palestinians are going to continue to resist recognition.
	Okay, Wait.
	That's in the Israeli papers.
	All right.
	Wait a second.
	Final word to you here.
	I would just ask you a difficult question, I guess, which is, there are many people who are absolutely of the view that Israel should continue until the last Hamas terrorists is gone.
	Many in Israel feel that.
	They're not as keen on Yahoo, for example, but they're absolutely keen on the mission to get rid of Hamas.
	And the trauma that Israel suffered that day cannot be underestimated.
	However, if you look at the conflict in totality, it is hard to argue, particularly in light of events this week, where Israel has just casually turned off the power into Gaza, which made me ask some questions on X.
	Well, hang on, who gives them the right to have that right to turn the power on and off into Gaza?
	And it turns out that they control more than 50% of all the electricity that Gaza has and turned off 90% of that almost immediately after October the 7th.
	So you've got these, look, there are guilty Hamas terrorists there.
	There are also many, many hundreds of thousands of perfectly innocent, particularly children, living there who have had almost no power now, are now getting no fuel coming in.
	There have been limitations on water.
	The power that was coming in was being used to provide clean water.
	That's now been withdrawn.
	None of this strikes me as being a reasonable thing for Israel to be doing now.
	Does it you?
	Okay, so I think to understand the electricity thing, there's a bit of background needs to be understood.
	Firstly, why is it that Gaza doesn't have more power plants?
	One of the reasons is that they have spent many billions of their donations building up a vast territory.
	That is true.
	And another question is true.
	Why is it that Egypt aren't supplying electricity to Gaza?
	The reason is even Egypt themselves recognize Hamas as a Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organization, and they are incredibly wary of that organization.
	Then, as well as understanding that, you've got to understand ceasefire negotiations that have broken down.
	But do you accept any criticism of what Israel is doing now?
	I think that they are back in conflict because ceasefire has failed.
	Both sides...
	Now, look, if you go into why the ceasefire has failed, well, there's arguments on both sides.
	Israel obviously only got 22 of the promised 33 hostages.
	Hamas said they would clear the Fidelphi passage.
	Israel's definitely.
	Do you all have grievances when they try to take Gaza?
	May I?
	Israel have grievances about the phase one of the ceasefire failing.
	So they've been unable to get to phase two of the ceasefire.
	Hang on.
	Should they be turning off the power into Gaza?
	Now that the ceasefire has failed, the conflict is been starving them to death.
	Blockades.
	You want them to be able to starvate are a normal part of war.
	So starvation is a normal part of war.
	No, it's a war crime.
	I'm glad you brought up Nazi Germany.
	That's exactly what the Germans would have done.
	Cut off their food.
	Cut off and incinerate their kids.
	Because that's what they did.
	They put them in an incinerated Jewish during the whole declaration.
	It was heartbreaking.
	Jews have suffered so much throughout the world.
	Now, Israel turns around, pretends to be the Jewish state, and says, I speak for all Jews.
	No, you don't.
	You don't speak for my Jewish friends.
	You don't speak for my Jewish family.
	And you've actually greatly tainted them.
	And I despise Israel for that.
	Now Israel says, we get to starve children to death.
	We get to burn them to death.
	We get to crush their skulls.
	No, no, you have become what you most despise.
	So please stop.
	I know that there's nothing we could do because you bought every single politician in America, but I'm asking you to have morality and remember your Jewish faith, which is a wonderful faith that is giving and generous and talks in Passover about even having mercy for the people who kept you as slaves.
	Can you not have mercy for the people that you are keeping as slaves?
	How long are you going to occupy them?
	Answer that question.
	How long are you going to occupy them?
	You are brutalizing them.
	58 years.
	You've kept them in a dark dungeon.
	And anytime they dare to oppose you, you cut off their water.
	Hamas has done this.
	And you kill their children.
	It's Hamas.
	Israel, you should be better than this.
	They've done this.
	So I would say Chenka is occupied by the Protestants.
	Hang on, hang on, hang on a little bit.
	I would say, Cheng, in response to that, we've got to wrap things up.
	So it's been a very interesting debate.
	But you could also look at Hamas, who have governed Gaza for 20 years.
	They were given $6 billion, right?
	All with Netanyahu's apparent happiness because he wanted to split them from the Palestinian Authority.
	Okay, whatever.
	Put the politics aside.
	$6 billion.
	And what do they do with it?
	They did nothing to improve the lives of Palestinian people.
	Quite the opposite.
	They built a sophisticated October.
	Hang on.
	They built a sophisticated tunnel network around Gaza, embedded themselves in civilian population areas.
	So they knew when they committed the acts they did on October the 7th, they knew that Israel would respond with incredible force because they would have felt compelled to.
	And in that moment, they knew that many, many, many thousands, tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza would get killed.
	And they didn't give a damn.
	And the people who were safe were Hamas hiding in the tunnels.
	It wasn't the innocent civilians, including all the innocent kids that you talk about who've been killed, which is utterly heartbreaking.
	But if they had been properly looked after by Hamas, this wouldn't have happened either.
	So let's just put things a bit.
	Yeah, so you're asking me a question.
	No, no, I'm not.
	I'm making a statement.
	I'm going to leave it there.
	I would drive out Hamas.
	I would bring in Fatah, make a deal with them, two-state solution.
	Fatah would then have the credibility to be able to drive Hamas.
	Well, I agree with you about the two-state solution.
	I'm not sure that he's a good one.
	I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do that.
	Yeah, I don't agree with that.
	By the way, I don't agree with that, Nadine.
	I don't agree with the expansion of settlements in the West Bank.
	I think it's all outrageous.
	I want this over.
	We all want it over.
	Except Israel.
	Well, who wants the land?
	There are certainly people in that cabinet who do not, I think, want it over.
	I think my cabinet is filled with terrorists.
	I think some of them are despicable people.
	We've got to leave it there.
	Thank you all very much.
	Check, great to have you in London.
	Thank you.
	Good to see you.
	It doesn't matter where you are geographically.
Managing Two Companies 00:08:10
	That's good to see.
	Nadine, thank you for joining me.
	I appreciate it.
	And Winston, good to see you.
	Hey, Mike Baker here, host of the President's Daily Brief podcast.
	If you want straight talk on national security, foreign policy, and the biggest global stories going on of the day, this is the show for you.
	We publish twice a day, Monday through Friday, once in the morning, again in the afternoon.
	And on the weekend, we go longer with the PBB Situation Report with excellent guests, including national security insiders and foreign policy experts.
	Check us out on Spotify and Apple or wherever you get your podcasts.
	Also, on our YouTube channel at President's Daily Brief.
	Carlos Gohan is known to millions of people around the world for two big reasons.
	First, The Escape.
	Three hit documentaries that charted his cinematic exit from Japan, where he fled charges of financial misconduct by first disguising himself and then hiding inside a large box with the help of a special forces veteran.
	And second, of course, the cars.
	Carlos Gohm is revered in the business world.
	There's revival of Nissan.
	There's remarkable leadership of Renault.
	Some called him the king of cars.
	Some called him the god of cars.
	The French called him Le Coste Killer.
	Now, the first time, he is the next guest on Piers Morgan Uncensored.
	Mr. Gohan, welcome to Uncensored.
	Thank you, Piers.
	My first question is a simple one.
	How are you?
	Look, I can't complain.
	I'm fine.
	Living obviously in an environment which, as you know, is extremely turbulent with the war in the country.
	I was at war a few months ago.
	But it looks like things are going into the right way.
	So I can't complain.
	When you look back on that crazy time in your life, and I realize a lot of it is still ongoing in terms of legal actions and so on.
	But can you quite believe how fast you went from one status to another?
	Well, you know, this was obviously a plot, an accident.
	It happened.
	It has been carefully prepared for more than one year in a way that didn't give me any suspicion about what was going on.
	But frankly, the explanation is very simple.
	You know, there were two conflicting ideas about the future of Nissan in 2018.
	One, which was shared by some executive in Nissan with the Minister of Industry of Japan and also with the agreement of Tsuga-san, who at that moment was the number two guy in the government, that they need to take Nissan out of the control of Renault.
	From the other side, you had the French administration, the Macron administration, who really was pushing for a merger and they had a big influence on the Renault board.
	They are the main shareholder of Renault.
	And I was in the middle.
	I didn't believe in one or the other.
	I thought that any one of them would be very dangerous for the future of Nissan.
	I wanted just to strengthen the alliance, but maintaining the two identities totally separate.
	And at a certain point in time, because the Japanese, when the French asked me to renew my mandate, four years mandate in 2018, the Japanese took it as this is the moment to eliminate the cornerstone or the pillar of the alliance, which I represented, in order to take back control on Nissan.
	And frankly, they won.
	They want to take back control of Nissan, but you know exactly what happened after.
	I'm going to come to exactly what happened after.
	I did think of you yesterday when I saw President Trump and Elon Musk on the lawn of the White House having what appeared to be a sales conference for Musk's company, Tesla.
	You must have been watching all this with great fascination to see Elon Musk, who is the biggest Western producer of green cars there's ever been, one of the most successful business guys in the world, now coming under increasing heat politically, which is having a negative effect on Tesla's sales and on his reputation.
	When you've watched this going down, what's your feeling about it?
	Look, I've known Elon Musk for a very long time because he was at the same time an ally and a competitor because we were the two first guys to really believe into the electric cars, into the zero-emission cars.
	He started it through a startup.
	I introduced it through the LEAF, which was the Nissan Leaf, which was the first zero-emission mass-marketed car in the world.
	And we started together.
	So obviously we were competing on the same field, but at the same time, we were ally because we were defending the idea of electric car and the idea of the necessity to bring a zero-emission car.
	And frankly, I have a lot of respect for him because he has been extremely tenacious.
	He had a lot of problems at the beginning, you know, that Tesla practically collapsed a couple of times and he came back to it.
	And, you know, when today you see him as the main producer of electric car, you know, I have a lot of respect for him.
	Now, the fact that today he's dedicated time on top of his multiple responsibility to a political mission to serve President Trump, it's also something which require from myself anyway.
	I have a lot of respect of that because frankly, I don't know how he can handle everything.
	And I've seen him on TV recently.
	When somebody asked him, you know, can you do all of this?
	He said, well, you know, I'm suffering through all the responsibilities, which is frankly respectable because he's sacrificing his own interest.
	That means he's CEO of many companies in order to execute a mission, which is a tough mission, which is in fact reducing the cost of the American state.
	When you know what is the level of the debt of the US and what is the level of the budget deficit of the US, you can understand that it takes somebody extraordinary to undertake this task.
	And I understand the respect that President Trump has for him because he has done so many things in the past.
	He can do this mission.
	But you're somebody that was accused of taking on too much yourself.
	Do you think Elon Musk has taken on a little bit too much here?
	Is it now spreading him too thinly?
	Is that what's causing damage for argument's sake to Tesla and its business performance?
	Look, frankly, the multiple mission I had have nothing to do with what Musk is doing.
	I mean, I was managing three companies.
	Two of them was Japanese, one was French, but in the same field.
	So I had to use the same, in a certain way, knowledge and the same content on the same market.
	He is managing a car company, he's managing a space company, he's managing many other company, many companies, and on top of this, taking this tremendous charge.
	So I don't think we're comparable.
	I'm a small multitasker compared to him.
	Now, when I see the reaction of the market recently on the shares of Tesla, it's obvious that it has nothing to do with the concept.
	It has nothing to do with the company.
	This is due to the worry that shareholders have on the fact that Elon Musk is not consecrating enough time to his company.
	That's what the market is saying, and that is translating into the drop of the share.
	Is that true?
	Do you think they're right to be concerned about that?
	Well, I'm not a shareholder of Tesla, I must tell you.
	So I cannot put myself in the shoes.
	But obviously, if you know, I can tell you that a lot of the shareholders I had from Renault and Nissan, when I was managing both companies, they're worried about the fact that I was managing two companies.
	But as long as I was performing and delivering the results, and the company are doing well, their anxiety was calmed by the results.
	You know, at the end of the day, we as business people were just on a very simple set of results.
	If they are good, you're good.
Shareholder Concerns Overload 00:05:54
	If they're not good, you're out.
	So as long as he delivers, I think there will be no problem.
	Have you heard from Elon Musk since you fled to Lebanon?
	Unfortunately, not.
	No, I didn't hear from him.
	Were you disappointed?
	No, that means we are in different worlds in a certain way.
	He has his own responsibility.
	No, I'm not disappointed.
	But I know from many people who have participated to dinner with him and conversation with him that he was always very positive about me.
	And you've been to a life experience, Carlos, which is a cliché, but it's true.
	You often find out who your real friends are.
	Have you been surprised at some people who you thought were friends who turned out not to be very loyal to you, and other people perhaps, conversely, who you didn't think were that close to you, who turned out to be incredibly loyal?
	Well, I can tell you that I was very disappointed by many, many, many people, which I was expecting this, but not at this number and not at this level.
	And usually the people who surprised me positively are people who were at the lower level of the organization that I directed and showed me a real loyalty and a real engagement because they were really very upset by the way I have been treated.
	But the biggest disappointment came, as you can understand, from the Macron administration, who, when I was arrested in Japan, for three weeks hesitated, and then they had to make a decision, confront the Japanese authorities or just drop me.
	And they decided to drop me and they announced it in a very clear announcement, but they said the interest of France and the relationship between France and Japan are much bigger than the fate of any individual.
	So they just let me down.
	You know, I was not a tourist going visiting Japan.
	I was visiting Japan at the head of the alliance, the CEO of Renault.
	And the fact that I was dropped like this under the so-called alleged misconduct, the financial misconduct they, frankly, they did not believe in.
	Because if you want to come back to the charge for which I was arrested, it was really ridiculous.
	I was arrested for a, as you know, for an amount of money which was not quantified, not decided, and not paid.
	It took me two weeks to understand what was the charge.
	I frankly thought that I was missing something, but that was it.
	And they left me 23 days under interrogation on this simple charge.
	And after this, because of the weakness of the charge, I started to bring something else.
	It was not a surprise.
	They told me all the time, prosecutor told me all the time, if you don't confess to this charge, we're going to bring something else.
	We're going to implicate your family.
	We're going to implicate your friends.
	And you're going to regret it.
	And I said, no, because this is where I discovered how the hostage justice system in Japan works.
	It's based on confession.
	Once they are arresting you, they want you to confess.
	They don't care about the rest.
	And this is how they get 99.4% conviction rate, by just terrorizing the people they arrest and telling them that they're going to have to pay a much higher price if they don't confess to it.
	There's lots of footage of you with President Macron in the good times when he was keen to celebrate you as one of the most successful business people, engaged obviously with a lot of French business as well through Renault.
	It sounds to me like President Macron, when push came to shove, shoved you under a massive bus.
	Look, it's true.
	That's the way anyway I'm perceiving it.
	Because obviously you're going to say, yes, it's the board.
	No, at the end of the day, you know that this kind of decision always come to the top level.
	And I think they truly thought that by bending the knees in front of the Japanese, they would be able to safeguard the alliance.
	But the Japanese played them because, as you know, after Macron put his minion as chairman of the board of Renault, and they came and they made a big celebration with Nissan and Mitsubishi about this new alliance that they were going to continue.
	In fact, it was just a masquerade because you know that the alliance immediately became frozen.
	No collaboration took place.
	It's a zombie.
	Nobody talked about it.
	Renault came back to what it was in 1999, a small regional company selling 2.2 million cars with frankly no future.
	And Nissan is in total disarray.
	So that's, you know, you know, and this means, just to take an example, Nissan lost 60% of its market cap between 2018 and today.
	Okay, so this, and they lost more than 40% of their sales.
	But behind all of this, you have shareholders losing a lot of money.
	You have employees losing their job.
	You have suppliers struggling because of this.
	You have distributors.
	You have community.
	And nobody talks about all this damage, which has been counted in billions of dollars that unfortunately a bad strategy, bad decision, and the plot has driven to.
	What are your feelings about Emmanuel Macron today?
	Disappointment, obviously, but it's okay.
	Obviously, that means the Japanese, which organized the crime and the plot, and it took them one year to prepare it, you know.
	But so obviously they have committed, in my opinion, what destroyed the alliance and de facto destroyed Nissan and they're paying the consequence of it.
Employee Parties in Crisis 00:09:18
	But obviously, I'm bitter about the fact that the French did nothing to support me.
	I was a kind of collateral damage, which contribution to a major company in France was forgotten very quickly.
	The question I'm most fascinated to ask you is when you made your dramatic escape in a big audio sound box that the special forces people who were helping you do this, they'd already wrecked the private jet area.
	They knew that a box like that probably wouldn't be checked by the X-ray machines and therefore they could get you in and onto the plane without detection.
	But there must have been a moment as you're going through there in this box of unbelievable tension.
	What were you thinking as you were being carried in this box through to the plane?
	Look, I was extremely focused.
	I was very tense because this was the key moment when the box was going through customs to get out to the plane.
	And the question was, are they going to open the box or are they going to let it go?
	So it's a few seconds.
	They are intense.
	You are extremely attentive to anything that could happen to say, okay, what's my plan B if they open the box?
	Fortunately for me, they didn't do it.
	And you know, they didn't do it because this plan was very efficiently executed and with a lot of subtlety because we decided to leave at you know on the 30th of December where usually the normal employees are not here and they're being replaced by temporary people because these are the vacation of the end of the year.
	And temporary people don't take extraordinary measures.
	You know, they said, okay, let's go.
	And then when the box started to move and I heard the engine of the plane roaring, I knew that 90% of it was solved and I was about to open a new chapter in my life.
	I reflected on it, you know, a lot of achievement, but also a lot of betrayals.
	But now I was ready to be able to defend myself.
	Don't forget, Pierce, I stayed practically one year without being able to open my mouth.
	I could not make a press conference.
	I could not talk to any press.
	They had all the platform for them.
	I'm talking about Nissan.
	I'm talking about the Japanese government.
	I'm talking even about the Renault and the French government who decided to support them for them, telling how much dysfunctions and how much of problems there were there was, even though with companies which were doing very well, they were profitable, they were growing, they were at the top level of the industry.
	And when you look five years later, four years, where these companies are, you know, with much less sales, much less production, lower market capitalization, Nissan made in 2018 practically $6 billion of profit.
	And now I've been told that their provision for this year is none or even negative.
	It's amazing.
	I mean, there's no doubt you were brilliant at your job.
	I don't think anyone can test that.
	The part of your story that people still deliberate over, and obviously we may never get to have this aired in a courtroom, so we may never get to reality.
	Only you know really what the reality was.
	But what people who like you but are still critical of you say is that perhaps you got too big for your own good, too successful, and that the line between spending company money strictly on company business blurred into extending that to spending money on yourself and your family and having a good time,
	and that you considered that to be a legitimate perk of the job because you were not being paid by the Nissan end, by the Japanese end, what you felt you should have been paid.
	What do you say to that?
	Yeah, look, first I was arrested on one single charge.
	There was nothing else, which was they was accusing me of not declaring an amount that was neither quantified, neither decided, neither paid.
	Then after this, immediately after this, they started what we call the character assassination, which is a very classical approach.
	You know, I was very known and liked in Japan.
	I was very known globally, even in France, maybe not as liked as in Japan, in France, because I was a kind of very weird person, a hybrid person with very different methods from the classical management in France.
	But they needed to make the character assassination.
	You know that Bloomberg said in an article that Nissan paid more than $300 million to take me down.
	$300 million.
	For so-called avoiding to pay $80 million, this is the estimate that they put, even though it was not decided or quantified, of retirement.
	I mean, it doesn't make sense.
	And taking the risk of collapsing the company, which they were successful in doing.
	Now, on my lifestyle, people said, yeah, you know what?
	He has his own plane.
	Without plane, I could not do three jobs on two different continents.
	It was not possible.
	The shareholders knew that.
	The different houses, well, these houses were owned by Nissan, put to me to my own work and to be able to travel and work in a very secret and confidential way.
	I used to have a lot of meetings.
	So come on, all of this was forgotten.
	You know the story about Versailles, which took place in 2014.
	It was a kind of ceremony for the 15 years of the Alliance.
	You know, it took place in 2014.
	There were about 300 guests.
	It was known in all the newspaper.
	Everybody knows about it.
	And you know very well that the counting of the expenses of the CEO are very, very scrupulously followed by all the different auditors who are following large companies like Runau or like Nissan.
	So nothing happened in 2014.
	It was in all the newspaper.
	Everybody was happy.
	They came back with the story in 2018 after I was arrested by saying, oh, you know what?
	At the end of the day, it was a birthday party.
	It was not the Lions.
	And many guests which were invited should not be here.
	I mean, this is what I call character assassination.
	What they said just killed the rabbit at the right moment.
	What they said about the Versailles party was that actually nobody from Renault or Nissan were there.
	Just you, and it was a private party for you and your friends.
	Yeah.
	No, This is totally wrong.
	This is fake news.
	The party in Versailles that took place in 2014, I had 300 guests.
	From the 300 guests, you had about 240 people who were all people from outside France who came because they supported the creation of the lines.
	I had American senators, I have British politicians.
	But were they employees of the company, I think is the point?
	But were they employees of the companies?
	Yeah, but you know what?
	Because no.
	Yeah, let me tell you why.
	There was no employee of the company because we had this second party to celebrate the 15 years of the lines, but obviously nobody is going to tell you about it.
	That took place in Tokyo.
	Obviously, I made the party for outside the world, all the people who were our supporters in Paris, in Versailles.
	But there was another party that took place two weeks later in Japan for the executive committee and all the members from inside who contributed to the lines.
	But nobody's going to talk to you about it.
	So they're saying, oh, you know, what kind of party is this?
	Because there was no employee.
	Well, there was a different party for the employees that took place.
	We have a record of it.
	All the executive, the joint executive committee took place.
	The joint corporate officer took place.
	But it took place in Tokyo.
	Carlos, if you had your time again, would you have been so extravagant in your spending?
	Or would you have been more cognizant that this could become a statement?
	It could become a stick to beat you with.
	Piers, you know, I had done, as you know, I've been CEO of Nissan for 18 years.
	I've been CEO of Renault for practically 13 years.
	The only thing they pulled on me was one event, the one event.
	They talked about other events, but they were traditional events made before me and continue after me, particularly into the Renaissance.
	I don't think I was an extravagant CEO.
	And I'm going to tell you why, because I didn't have time to be extravagant.
	I used to manage three companies.
	I had many crises all the time.
	I had at least one company in crisis at a certain point in time, if not two or three.
	So I hadn't time for that.
	Even if I wanted to be extravagant, I couldn't be extravagant.
	In September last year, a court ordered you to return your yacht and to pay damages to Nissan of $32 million.
	Have you done those two things?
Regaining Freedom from Justice 00:08:10
	No, no.
	That means we obviously obstruct this.
	We made an appeal and we are defending the case.
	This is a very legalistic point of view.
	I don't think they have any right on this one.
	And I think I'm going to prevail on this one.
	And because it continues in court, I can tell you that it's still under my control and I'm still using it.
	And Carlos, how rich are you?
	Well, much less than I was before, because I can tell you that between the lawyers that you have to pay, plus, you know, that I had to pay the highest bail in Japan of any individual that ever existed, which means that the wrath of the prosecutor in Japan was such that they really wanted to punish me under different angles.
	You know, and obviously it costs a lot of money to defend yourself.
	Unfortunately, if you want justice to prevail when you're fighting against a company, you have to pay a lot of money.
	And, you know, a big part of what I had has been spent and continues to be spent for this.
	But just to tell you about the wrath of the prosecutor and the rage that they have, you know very well that my wife Carol has a red notice on her.
	And it's interesting that the red notice said she had a perjury against her own memory because she said to the judge when she was interrogated that she don't remember knowing a certain person.
	And they said, no, no, you should remember because you received a message or a WhatsApp message from this person four months ago.
	So after she was interrogated, they let her go.
	And the prosecutor said she's not a suspect.
	Six months later, six months later, when I arrived in Lebanon and they were furious about it, and when I announced a press conference, they slapped her with the red notice.
	And they are absolutely refusing to transmit to the Lebanese authorities the reasons for which they have done it.
	And they are not accepting to cooperate in order to remove it.
	And she has been trapped in the country for five years.
	She's an American citizen.
	Five years.
	I mean, how much of a weaponization of justice, what kind of a superb demonstration of weaponization of justice and going after you through your loved ones?
	So, Carlos.
	As things stand, you can't leave Lebanon and knock on your wife by the sound of it.
	And that may be just an ongoing situation.
	Are you happy to spend the rest of your life potentially in Beirut, in Lebanon?
	Look, you know, I love Lebanon.
	I'm very at ease in the Lebanese society, which received me very well.
	Lebanese people are very supportive.
	They are shocked by the lack of recognition towards me from the Japanese and also from the French.
	And it's expressed to me under different angles.
	This being said, I would love to regain my freedom.
	I would love to go back, be able to go back to Brazil to see my mother and see my sisters.
	I would love to be able to visit, spend some time for me visiting the world.
	I visited the world, I visited many countries in the world, but always it was as a professional, as a CEO.
	It's not the same thing.
	Yes, I'm still fighting to regain my freedom as well as the freedom of my wife, because I think that this is not about justice here.
	This is about revenge.
	Because if this was about justice, that means the Japanese authority would have transferred all these so-called accusations to the Lebanese authorities so I can finally be judged and the truth would appear.
	But they refuse to do it.
	They just want to punish you.
	They say, no, you know what?
	If you want us to remove it, you have to come back to Japan.
	I mean, this is a completely rotten system.
	I don't know if you remember, but when I arrived to Lebanon, the Minister of Justice of Japan said he needs to come back to Japan to prove his innocence.
	I mean, this is a Minister of Justice forgetting the fact that one of the basic human rights is when there is an accusation against you, the prosecutor has to prove that you're guilty.
	You don't have to prove that you are innocent.
	But even the Minister of Justice saying, and in fact, she was very honest, the true reality of the Japanese system, that as long as you are, immediately when you are arrested, you are considered as guilty.
	And Carlos, do you know Donald Trump?
	I didn't have the chance to meet him.
	No, I met him once in Davos when he was, but it was in the middle of many people.
	I mean, he's been, as he would say, the victim of some serious miscarriages of justice himself.
	Would you like him, he's got very good relationships with the Japanese, given that your wife is an American citizen, would you like Donald Trump to potentially intervene and try and get this resolved?
	I would love that.
	I would love that.
	Pierce, if you can do that, I would be eternally grateful.
	But you know, I'm very sensitive to all the victims of the weaponization of justice for political objectives or for objectives which have nothing to do with justice.
	I'm a victim of this.
	I am innocent.
	I'm not claiming I'm innocent.
	I'm innocent.
	I know the reality of what happened.
	And I'm being punished because I found myself in the middle of the struggle of two completely different states with different opinions about the future of the lines.
	I never thought that this battle would be so fierce, and I would be the victim of this battle.
	So, yes, I really understand and I have a lot of empathy with everybody, whatever the level.
	And usually, when you are at high level, when you are in a position of power, it's even more brutal when you are a victim of weaponization of justice.
	I mean, just Donald Trump, I know, watches uncensored occasionally.
	What would you like to say to him if he's watching this?
	No, look, you know, what he's doing in the United States was predictable.
	You know, a lot of people ask me about what's going on with the car industry, particularly in North America with the tariffs.
	You know, first it was predictable.
	When he says America first and he says, I'm going to bring back employment in the United States, he's doing it.
	Okay, so guys, it's totally in line with what he announced.
	He has not been wishy-washy about it.
	He's very straightforward.
	And frankly, it has already some results.
	I heard recently, you remember that on cars moved from the United States to Europe, they mean tax 10%.
	And the cars coming from Europe to the United States are taxed 2.5%.
	So the EU dropped, in front of the threat of tariffs, they dropped the 10% to 2.5%.
	Okay, you should have done it before.
	This is fair trade.
	I mean, we're not talking about supporting an underdeveloped region.
	We are talking about fair trade.
	And on top of that, he said very clearly he wants to encourage employment in the United States.
	Well, that's what the Chinese are doing.
	That means China is the largest market in the world.
	The United States is the second largest market in the world.
	Well, in China, when we worked with China, we had very strict rules.
	You want to work in China, you need to produce in China, and you need to sell in China.
	If you don't produce in China, there is no way you're going to do it.
	Well, obviously, what President Trump is doing is not as strict as what the Chinese are doing, but it's totally fair to say, I want more employment in the United States for cars sold in the United States.
	Carlos, Gohan, we've run out of time.
	Thank you very much indeed.
	I appreciate it.
	Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent.
	The only boss around here is me.
	You enjoy our show?
	We ask for only one simple thing.
	Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.
	And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate, and entertain.
	And we'll do it all for free.
	independent on censor media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it Without you.

Chapters

00:00:00 Musk's Free Speech Exceptions
00:02:02 Political Leaders and Solutions
00:07:48 Fighting Fraud Unpopularly
00:10:24 Subsidies and Market Belief
00:20:48 Sovereignty and Terrorist Groups
00:36:01 Condemning the Hannibal Directive
00:50:59 Gaza Power Cuts and Conflict
01:01:09 Managing Two Companies
01:09:19 Shareholder Concerns Overload
01:15:14 Employee Parties in Crisis
01:24:32 Regaining Freedom from Justice