'FROZEN OUT By Ben Shapiro' Piers Morgan x Jeremy Boreing On Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson & Fuentes
The Daily Wire was ahead of the game in harnessing the potential of digital media and the exodus from the mainstream media. And the cost of its success is significant scrutiny, with it often being accused of failing to live up to its own standards on things like free speech. Jeremy Boreing is the man who co-founded and ran the Daily Wire and hired Candace Owens. He joins Piers Morgan to discuss Tucker, Candace, Ben Shapiro, Nick Fuentes and more. Melania: Step inside the 20 days before history is made—watch MELANIA, only in theaters January 30; get your tickets now!Cardiff: Get fast business funding without bank delays—apply in minutes with Cardiff and access up to $500,000 in same‑day funding at https://Cardiff.co/PIERS Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Free Speech vs Anti-Semitism00:15:03
Fen Shapiro, fuck you and the midget horse that you rode in on.
I say that on behalf of the world.
Fence's a fantastic proponent for free speech.
Where does that sit if you do criticize Israel?
One can imagine that it's very difficult to hear nuance when nuance itself is being sort of weaponized as a way of masking actual anti-Semitism by so many.
How best to deal with people like Nick Fuentes?
What he's doing is actually very sophisticated.
I'll watch every clip and laugh 90% of the time.
Well, love it or hate it.
The fact is that social and digital media are now at the apex of pretty much all popular debate.
It's where opinions are formed, values are interrogated, and agendas are set.
Carmela Harris diverted a plane to New York for a 90-second cameo on SNL.
Donald Trump taught dozens of podcasts and spent three hours with Joe Rogan.
You know which one became president.
The Daily Wire was ahead of the game in harnessing the potential of digital media and the exodus from the mainstream media.
The cost of his success is, of course, significant scrutiny.
It's often accused of failing to live up to its own standards on things like free speech.
Commentators like Tucker Carlson and yes, Candice Owens say it's on the opposite side of a battle for conservative values with an unhealthy appetite for Israel and war.
Well, Jeremy Boring co-founded and ran the Daily Wire.
He also hired Candice Owens.
In a moment, he'll respond to that.
But first, a quick reminder of his first and only previous appearance on Uncensored, where he found himself challenging Basim Youssev in a clip now viewed 24 million times.
I think the sort of lie of the post-World War II, the post-war consensus lie, is that somehow war in which you kill a bunch of people and don't secure victory is morally superior to war where you do secure victory.
I would say that the only way to morally justify a war is to win it.
Otherwise, the very argument that brought you into the war, this enemy must be defeated, ends up being proven a lie.
How can you justify the killing in the West Bank where Hamas does not exist?
And if the disproportionate response during the overall of these years have actually worked, what will be new this time that did not happen before?
I just want to...
That was my question.
Okay.
Well, I'm pleased to say that Jeremy Boring, the former Daily Wire CEO and director of The Pendragon Cycle, joins me now.
Jeremy, welcome back.
Good to be back.
I'm glad that you're back on your feet.
Well, I actually am not actually back on my feet.
I'm still on crutches.
I'm glad that you're back on the air.
Yeah, I'm back on the airways.
Let's put it like that, which is certainly a step up from where I was last week.
Interesting that your only other appearance, 23 million people watch that.
In a way, that was the catalyst, actually, that show, because of the response on YouTube, for me to reach the conclusion you had reached many years before, obviously, with The Daily Wire, that the future is not conventional linear television mainstream media, but that actually through the medium of places like YouTube, that is where young people in particular are going in bigger and bigger numbers.
So thank you for being part of that catalyst.
You were at the Daily Wire, I think, how long in the end, for 11 years?
Just 10 years, yeah.
I founded the company, actually, in my pool house.
Right.
So I was going to ask you, because you managed to build a business, a billion-dollar business.
And I've watched it with great admiration from afar.
I've had lots of people from the Daily Wire come and go on Uncensored, obviously, including some who've left you, like Candice.
And we'll come to that.
When you started the Daily Wire, what was the sort of, what was the dream that you had in your head?
Has it manifested how you hoped in your wildest dreams?
Or in the end, did it become something perhaps you preferred it not to have become?
Well, I think that, you know, when you start something like the Daily Wire, of course you're going to make mistakes.
Things aren't always going to go the way that you thought that they were going to go.
I think we got a lot more hits than we had in misses, though.
When we first started the company, we saw the opportunity being afforded by emerging social media platforms to really help us get a message sort of around the traditional gatekeepers and directly to the people, a message that we thought needed to be expressed.
We're all LA guys, so of course we also wanted to create culture, not just criticize culture.
And we did all of those things over the decade that I was running the company alongside Caleb Robinson and in partnership with Ben Shapiro.
So yeah, I think I would have to say that we really achieved most of the things that we set out to achieve.
And of course, some of them we achieved beyond our wildest imagination.
Of course, you couldn't have foreseen all of the mistakes either.
But part of being an entrepreneur is being comfortable with the idea that you're going to make mistakes, that things aren't always going to go exactly according to plan or even according to plan at all.
And you're going to have to react and pivot and make changes in the moment.
I think we successfully did that too, which is why, as you say, we grew a billion dollars worth of revenue over that 10 years and deployed all of that money in pursuit of those fundamental values that we had when we first established the company.
You created some massive stars or taken people on and made them much bigger stars and people have come and go.
Now, Ben's still at the top of the pyramid and we'll come to him.
Candace Owens was one of the people that you brought into the Daily Wire family and then she had a spectacular falling out with everyone, notably over Israel.
What's your view of Candace?
I mean, my view for what it's worth, I've had her on Uncensored many times.
I know her a little bit away from the camera.
She's unbelievably smart.
She's a brilliant debater.
She's compelling.
She's great on camera, all of these things.
But I've watched her in the last couple of years drifting to a place where I really, really have reservations about whether she believes half the stuff that she's putting on her show.
You know, whether it's Brigitte Macron being a man or all the Charlie Kirk stuff or whatever it may be.
I do think she's now gone down a path of deliberately promoting conspiracy theories for cash.
What is your assessment?
Well, the problem with trying to wield cynicism for clicks is that cynicism ultimately wields you.
And I think that that's true of a lot of the sort of mistakes that we make in life.
We always think that we're too clever for the sort of, you know, the sort of evil that exists in the world to ever touch us.
I've asked Candace on two separate occasions what she actually believes.
On both occasions, she said, I believe what the people believe.
I am the voice of the people.
And of course, both times, I don't know what that means, Candace.
I've come to understand, though, at least from my point of view, I think she's articulating the idea of audience capture and expressing it as a positive value.
Does she actually believe the things that she's saying?
I don't know.
I do know that if you say things long enough, you come to believe them.
The most convincing voice in the world is our own voice.
To your point, though, Candace is a genuine superstar.
I mean, she has it, the thing that we talk about in show business.
She has it in spades.
I've never met anybody with any more of it.
The camera absolutely loves her.
To your point, she's whip smart.
When she's using those powers in service of the true and the good and the virtuous, I think there's nobody better.
But like you, I'm very concerned about the direction that she's taking it right now.
We've got a little mashup of things she said about the Daily Wire and about Ben.
Let's take a look at this.
Harry, that is coming from Daily Wire management, Daily Wire commentators regarding things that I've said, positions that I have, or just appearances that I am making.
And, you know, I would like to really leave the Daily Wire in the rearview mirror.
Like when you break up with someone and you have a crazy ex.
That was how it felt like being fired from the Daily Wire.
Andrew Clavin of the Daily Wire released a one-hour video essentially accusing me of many things, but referring to me as anti-Semitic, trying to link me to Nick Fuentes.
This one is so fully off of the mother effing plantation.
Truly, Ben Shapiro, fuck you and the midget horse that you rode in on.
And I say that on behalf of the world.
What's your feeling when you hear that?
Well, she says it on behalf of the world, so it must be true.
Listen, it's funny to hear Candace, who will do literally now, you know, over 50 episodes on the Charlie Kirk assassination, talk about other people fixating.
This is, it's ridiculous.
Candace is very good at what she does.
She makes very compelling television, and that's all you're seeing in those clips.
Here we go again for the cameras.
Before the ceremony, before history is made, every detail is chosen.
From Amazon MGM Studios comes Melania.
This new film takes you inside the 20 days leading up to the 2025 presidential inauguration through the eyes of the first lady herself, where fashion isn't just style, it's strategy.
Witness the image-defining decisions made behind closed doors, a celebration of duty and glamour.
Melania, only in theaters, January 30.
It's interesting.
I mean, she fell out with Ben primarily over Israel.
I've had an interesting experience with Ben because I, you know, when we were at CNN, we had a famous notorious run-in on air that helped make it actually in a way.
He was, you know, to his supporters, he took me down.
And it became a big viral thing, and people keep sending it to me now and so on.
I've watched his rise then from a very young guy, very sort of firebrand, young conservative commentator, to somebody who is, you know, one of the most dominant figures in this space in the world.
There's no question about that.
And I have a lot of admiration for Ben.
But he was coming on my show a lot when I was very pro-Israel's right to defend itself after October the 7th.
And we were texting each other quite regularly.
But when I became more critical at the start of last year in particular and through last year about the scale of Israel's response and what I perceive to be the disproportionality and so on, he just stopped, A, stopped coming on and then stopped replying to any messages of mine.
Completely froze me out.
And I've had no more contact with him.
And so a little part of me is like, Ben's, you know, he's brilliant and he's a fantastic proponent for free speech.
But where does that sit if you do criticize Israel?
I've never criticized Jewish people.
I'm not remotely anti-Semitic.
I think he probably knows that.
But I do believe I have a right to criticize the Israeli government when they're waging a war of the kind they've been waging in Gaza.
Now, regardless of whether you agree with me about that, it doesn't really matter.
I'm surprised that he's cut me off like this.
And I don't really understand it other than he has a little bit of a blind spot about Israel when it comes to the free speech debate.
Well, I think Ben's been a great champion of freedom of speech.
Of course, Ben, as probably the most famous religious Jew on earth, has very strong opinions about Israel.
And, you know, I can't speak to him not texting you back or appearing on the show during that period of time.
And I haven't been in daily contact with Ben in the last 10 months because of leaving the Daily Wire and all the changes that have happened as a result of that.
But I can say that I think one might understand why when so many voices in the media have gone so far in their quote-unquote opposition to Israel, which was a very thin veneer on actual anti-Semitism.
And I think as time has gone on, we see what's behind that mask more and more from so many people in public life.
One can imagine that it's very difficult to hear nuance when nuance itself is being sort of weaponized as a way of masking actual anti-Semitism by so many.
But isn't that ultimately what the whole free speech debate comes down to?
It's the ability to listen and tolerate people's views you don't like, even if you find them hateful.
There is nothing I've ever said which could be remotely construed as anti-Semitic or any dislike or hatred of Jewish people.
And he knows that.
He really doesn't want to engage with me at all simply because I became more critical of the Israeli government.
And I think that's inconsistent with his stance about free speech.
Well, I don't think it's inconsistent with a broad support for free speech to not engage with people who say things that you don't like.
Free speech says that you have the right to say it.
It doesn't say that I have the obligation to continue to engage with you when you do say it.
So I'd be careful about that.
But then, of course, we're getting into fairly personal territory here where only Ben could speak for himself.
I would only again point out that I think that over the last few years, a lot of people have said, I'm only criticizing Israel.
Don't I have the right to criticize a foreign government, which of course you do have the right to criticize a foreign government in your own government or any government.
But because that was used as a kind of Trojan horse by so many who have since exposed real anti-Semitism, one can imagine that if you were in the position of Ben Shapiro or other very prominent Jewish figures in the political debate, that that would be a tough thing to hear when it's been weaponized by so many.
Is that what you're feeling?
I don't know.
Again, I can't speak to you.
Yeah, no, I don't expect you to speak for him about it.
I was just curious, because I know Candace fell out with him over the issue of Israel.
And I think she has said things which are certainly borderline, could be construed as anti-Semitic.
So I think it's a different situation.
But I'll leave her to have that argument with him.
Did you fall out with Ben at all, personally, towards the end?
Well, certainly neither of us set out to see this kind of separation, right?
When you get married, you don't think too much about divorce.
Ben Shapiro's Long Relationship00:04:01
And Ben and I had a long and very productive partnership over the last 15 years.
I mean, really going back before the Daily Wire.
I was on the phone with Ben as he walked out of the studio from that infamous constitution when he handed you the Constitution, that infamous appearance that you referenced a little bit ago.
So we had a long partnership.
And when something like that comes to an end, of course it's going to leave a mark.
But we fought in a lot of battles together.
We were in the trenches alongside one another for a long time.
I think that probably creates a bond that isn't easily broken.
As I like to say, if Ben ever needs a kidney, I've got one.
I suppose if Caleb needs a kidney, I've got two.
If they need a kidney at the same time, they'll have to duke it out because I'm keeping one for myself.
When did you last talk to Ben?
Ben sent me a message on the day that Charlie Kirk was shot.
Obviously, Ben and I met Charlie at the same time at the same event at the Breakers in Florida when Charlie was a teenager.
So we both had a very long relationship with Charlie.
And Ben sent me a very kind message, just checking on me and the kind of things that would be expressed between two brothers in a moment like that.
One of Candice Owens' accusations has been that Ben was jealous of Charlie Kirk's success and influence and he wanted to bring down the turning point organization.
You would be better placed than most to know if that was true.
What do you say to that?
No.
Well, listen, in public life, we all have little rivalries at times and little jealousies at times.
You know, there were times when I got on the wrong side of Charlie or Charlie got on the wrong side of me, or where, you know, any of us in the space for whom that may be true.
But to say that Ben was engaged in a project to take down TPUSA, that's absurd.
Ben and Charlie had a very lengthy relationship.
One of Charlie's last guests on his show was Ben Shapiro.
And I think that's just indicative of the long relationship that they had.
And for the, you know, as far as I ever saw, and I think I had a lot of transparency into it.
Charlie would stop by anytime he was in Nashville and check on us at the Daily Wire.
So I don't think there's any truth to that.
It's very interesting to be watching from the sidelines, if you like, about how it always used to be the case, the conservative right in America would line up full square behind Israel, for example.
But now that's not the case.
Now you see people like Tucker Carlson, you see Candice, you see Dave Smith, you see a lot of people now who are very outspoken against Israel.
And you're seeing a real split, I guess, there.
What do you make of that?
Have you noticed this?
Do you feel concerned about it?
What's your feel about the way this has gone?
Well, I'd be careful not to conflate Candace Owens, who is sort of the queen of the Grift industrial complex, with Tucker Carlson, who, like him or leave him, is engaged in an actual political project.
You know, as far as I can tell, Tucker is trying to create a new American majority out of a sort of amalgamation of left-wing economic populism on the one hand and right-wing social populism on the other.
He's actively engaged behind the scenes at the White House and staffing decisions.
He wields his influence to try to effectuate a political end.
I happen to disagree vehemently with him about what I perceive to be the political good, but at least what he's doing is fundamentally political.
I don't think what Candace is doing is fundamentally political at all.
I think that she's engaged in a kind of self-aggrandizement and click chasing, audience capture, economic, cynical economic play.
I don't perceive that about Tucker.
Cynical Audience Capture Plays00:02:33
How best to deal with people like Nick Fuentes?
You know, I had him on the show recently.
I think five, six million people watched it.
There's no doubt there's a huge interest in this guy.
I think I challenged him pretty robustly over all his views.
But, you know, his technique was to kind of brazenly just admit most of it.
Yeah, I'm a racist.
Yeah.
And this to mock the Holocaust and so on and so on.
You know, it's quite hard to have a serious conversation with somebody that does that kind of thing.
His Groypers, his followers, loved it, of course.
Nobody ends up, you know, they just declare total all-out victory, whatever.
I didn't feel I got much out of it, to be honest with you.
But, you know, people like him are increasingly popular.
I know that you had quite strong views about him.
I don't think he appeared at the Daily Wire, certainly not in recent years.
What's the best way to handle people like that who are phenomena out there?
If you don't platform them, they go unchallenged.
If you do, they kind of use it to fuel themselves and become ever more popular.
What's the best way, do you think, to handle this?
Small businesses drive our economy, but securing capital is a constant struggle.
Of this 36 million small businesses in the United States, over 70% report needing additional capital at least once per year.
Big banks are burying owners in mountains of paperwork for months.
If you want competitive bank rates without all those frustrating bank delays, visit our sponsor, Cardiff.co slash peers, for up to $500,000 in funding.
Cardiff's application takes less than five minutes and has no impact on your personal credit.
Approvals happen in minutes.
Banks try to lock out small businesses.
Cardiff has the key.
Big banks may not want to approve your business loans, but Cardiff does.
If you've been in business for at least a year and you're putting in $20,000 a month in revenue, apply now for up to $500,000 in the same day business funding at cardiff.co slash peers.
Again, that's cardiff.co slash peers.
Real growth, fast funding.
Well, I do think that it's a flaw in the immune system of popular media that we don't have good tools to deal with people who aren't playing by any sort of rules that we identify.
You know, I think the Daily Wire's position under my, during my tenure, was to ignore Nick Fuentes and not have him, not to give him any exposure.
Ideological Uncertainty on the Right00:11:41
The problem is, of course, that Nick engages in enormous amounts of irony.
You know, his fans understand the plan.
They trust the plan.
They don't even see the same interview that your average audience member sees.
When they watch you talk to Nick Fuentes, it might as well be a completely different show that they're watching because Nick isn't having the surface level conversation.
What he's doing is actually very sophisticated.
It's incredibly funny.
I mean, I have to admit, I have to mute Nick on social media because I'll watch every clip and laugh 90% of the time.
He's very, very talented.
And if you see what he's doing, listen, I despise what he's doing.
Again, I think that he's also engaged in a true political project.
And so I don't want to completely, I don't want to discount him or be dismissive of him.
I think that what Nick Fuentes is doing will have actual political resonance for the rest of our lives.
And I think it's a thing that has to be opposed.
And as someone on the right, I believe that, you know, it's my job to oppose it.
But I don't think that it does any good to engage in conversation with him as though the conversation is of the sort that you and I are having right now, where we're just exchanging ideas in good faith.
Nick Fuentes is not exchanging ideas with you in good faith.
When you have a conversation with him, you are a prop.
And he is wielding you to make all the jokes and get in all the points that he's hoping to get in for his very select initiated audience.
And for that reason, you can't win a debate with him.
Right.
No, I agree.
I totally agree.
When it comes to MAGA itself, this extraordinary revolution in many ways that's twice propelled Donald Trump to the White House, it feels quite fractured at the moment.
And we're seeing more and more examples of this where how does America first sit with decapitating Maduro in Venezuela or attacking Iran or whatever it may be?
You know, when you see the Minneapolis shootings with ICE, you know, I've seen a lot of people on the right now condemning it.
I'm seeing others vehemently trying to defend it and so on.
You're seeing a lot of like disparate voices in the MAGA base, or certainly the conservative right incorporating it.
How profound is that getting?
And what does that mean for it going forward?
Well, MAGA is probably like, yes, we can, which was Barack Obama's famous line, right?
Yes, we can, yes, we can.
Si se puede.
Of course, has a long history, particularly in Latin America on the left, but in America popularized by Barack Obama.
I don't think MAGA as a concept really outlives Donald Trump.
I think it's something that he embodies.
He has said that, and I think that he's right, which is why you see this division happening on the right today, because we're going into the midterms right now.
Midterms, typically not good for the party of the president in this country.
And once you're through the midterms, we're going to be back in a new presidential cycle.
And it'll be the first presidential cycle in the last decade in which Donald Trump isn't seeking the office of president of the United States.
And so what that means is everyone on the right who wants a hand in defining the future of the party sees a non-Donald Trump-centric future just right within reach.
And so for that reason, there's going to be a lot of disparate voices trying to seize the mantle of MAGA or seize the mantle of conservatism or seize the mantle.
But all of those are in some ways going to be a redefinition because Donald Trump himself was a MAGA itself was a departure from traditional American conservatism as we've understood it since, say, Ronald Reagan through the Tea Party, et cetera.
And so I think that it's a real moment of ideological uncertainty on the right.
That's why people like Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentez in his own way are trying to create a new sort of American right.
Again, as I said, blending left-wing economic populism and right-wing social populism.
Other people are trying to move the party maybe back toward that Reagan Revolution Tea Party sort of ethos that it's had for most of my life, certainly.
And how is all that going to shake out?
That's what politics is all about.
We're going to discover that through the midterms and certainly going into the next presidential.
Right now, I think that the coalition that ascended Donald Trump to the presidency both in 2016 and 2020, no one is actually grabbing that mantle.
Everyone's trying to redefine it in disparate ways.
And that could mean that our chances as Republicans going into 2028 are not particularly good.
If someone can't find a way to keep that coalition together, then I think that we're looking at pretty strong headwinds.
How many times have you voted for Donald Trump?
Two out of three ain't bad.
When was the one you didn't?
I didn't vote for Donald Trump in 2016.
I was pretty outspoken at the time in my belief that Donald Trump ascending would redefine conservatism in ways that I wasn't particularly comfortable with.
You know, I would say that I was never Trump in 2016, but once Trump was president, the idea of never Trump sort of lost its connection to reality for me.
You can't say never Trump when Trump is.
And so at that point, I started assessing Trump from a different framework, not the what do I think the party should be, and more what do I think the actual political battles in front of us actually are, practically speaking.
And in that regard, like every president, of course, Donald Trump is a mixed bag.
There's been things that I like and things that I don't.
I'm certainly glad that Hillary Clinton wasn't president.
I'm certainly glad that Kamala Harris wasn't president.
I think Donald Trump in the last year has made some incredibly great moves in America's interest, particularly in foreign policy.
I think other parts of the strategy are flawed.
What's happened in Minneapolis?
Listen, Americans voted in overwhelming numbers to see our border secured and to see a corrective in the form of Donald Trump for Joe Biden's open border policies.
I think what's actually happening on the ground in Minneapolis cuts against that.
I think it adds chaos instead of reducing chaos, and I think it's a distraction from the actual mission.
That's going to be true in any presidency.
Donald Trump has a pretty remarkable way of pivoting when something isn't working.
So I'm hoping that that's what we see in that particular situation and in a few others over the next few months.
We're going to see a battle for the heart and soul of the conservative right in America.
Could Ben Shapiro emerge as a candidate in 2028?
I mean, is that a mad idea?
You know, in 2015, I thought, I'm going to run Ben Shapiro for president in 2020.
Today, I think you probably couldn't get Ben Shapiro to run for office for any amount of money.
You know, politics has always been a bloody sport.
And I think in America right now, I think anybody who, you have to be about half crazy to seek that office.
We've had a very civilized conversation here.
As you know, a lot of conversation in the political arena, certainly, and media, actually, but political arena in America is extremely incendiary.
It's toxic.
It's very tribal.
It's hyper-partisan.
And we see social media fueling things like the Minneapolis.
Well, I don't want to attack an injured man.
Very kind of you.
But I think the point I was going to make was that if you look at, say, Minneapolis, people just, what happened first to Renee Goode and then to the second victim there, you just saw people immediately run to their party line and then not be moved one inch from that, regardless of new video footage, of new facts emerging, or new anything.
And then there's been a little bit of a sea change this week where even Donald Trump has realized if you send out your people to try and try and say that what the public have seen with their own eyes is actually not what they saw, they're not going to buy it and they're going to start turning on you.
Do you feel like it's a little bit of a turning point this week?
Because I do.
I sort of feel like this idea that you can say, look, I know you've all watched this, but that is not what happened.
I think that game may be over.
Well, I think it's an occupational hazard in politics and political media.
You know, if your pitcher dings a batter and the other team clears the bench, you have to clear your bench.
That's what it means to be on a team.
Even if after the game, when we're all talking amongst ourselves, you go, well, I'm pretty sure that our pitcher dinged that guy on purpose.
In politics, that's also a natural reaction, that sort of team sport instinct.
But it doesn't hold.
You know, people, Donald Trump, people running the country, are actually, despite all evidence to the contrary, are actually thoughtful people.
They are people trying to do what's right.
Donald Trump is rightly trying to deal with the excesses of America's immigration policy, certainly over the four years preceding his second term, but really over the last 40 years.
And no one wants to see someone, an unarmed man in captivity, be shot.
Alex Predy shouldn't be dead today.
I don't think that the Border Patrol agent who shot him woke up that morning wanting to shoot an unarmed man.
I think it was a chaotic situation.
And When you have people interfering with law enforcement or trying to obstruct law enforcement, when you have really heightened emotional situations like that, very chaotic situations, and you have armed police on one side, and in the case of Pretty, an armed citizen on the other side, sometimes mistakes are going to happen.
Terrible things happen.
And this seems, from everything I've seen, to be an instance of that, a real tragedy.
I think of it somewhat as distinct from the shooting of the woman a few weeks ago who I think much more arguably was a justified shooting, although still a very tragic one, much more arguably a justified shooting.
And I think that one can support the actions of law enforcement broadly and still say, listen, this horrible thing happened, and there have to be consequences when horrible things happen, even when they're even when they're mistakes.
But I don't think that the average conservative of good conscience in this country is happy to see an unarmed man shot.
And I think Donald Trump will make he will make corrections to the policy because his ultimate goal isn't bluster and chaos.
His ultimate goal is an actual effect of policy to fix the immigration problem in this country.
Yeah, I think that's right.
Let's end by talking about the launch of the Penn Dragon cycle on the Delhi Wire.
It was years in the making.
Let's take a look at the trailer and then we'll talk about it.
All of this is an illusion.
An echo of a voice that has died.
And soon that echo will cease.
Preserving Culture in Story Form00:04:09
So lots of things to like about this.
Lashings of violence, death, sex, non-wokery at its finest.
Very, very high budget.
I mean, I read that you spent seven figures on each episode, which is seriously high budget.
And it looks like it.
It's very, it's exciting to watch.
A lot is set in Britain, of course, which pleased me enormously.
For those who are not really aware of it yet, what's your short sales pitch for why they should watch it?
Yeah, well, listen, it's based on Arthurian myth.
I had the privilege one time of visiting the robing room at Parliament where your monarch prepares to open Parliament when he goes into the House of Lords.
And I was struck by the fact that the room is surrounded on all sides by these beautiful wooden reliefs from Arthurian myth.
And it occurred to me: well, isn't it an amazing thing that when the actual monarch of Britain is about to perform their constitutional duty, they first surround themselves by the sort of idyllic platonic version of their role?
That's what Arthur is.
He's the Western king who should be.
It's the most popular story in the Western canon that doesn't come directly from the Bible.
It's enduring for a reason.
And it's always been a story about who we are, about what Christianity is.
And I think that as we drift away from those myths, as we tell them fewer and fewer times, or as we tell them in more and more secularized versions and abstract them away from the actual messages that they contained throughout the centuries that we've been telling them, we lose an important part of our identity.
I'm against the destruction of the narrative structure on which our cultures have been built.
I'm against pulling down statues of Thomas Jefferson and Christopher Columbus on the one hand.
I'm against saying that Churchill is the chief villain of World War II or that the moon landing didn't happen or that 9-11 was an inside job on the other.
Those are both physical and rhetorical examples of tearing down statues and destroying our sort of national identity.
And I think that our national identity is really the immune system against tyranny.
It's part of what has made the West successful, what's made Britain so successful, what's made America so successful over the last several hundred years, is that our sense of ourself is virtuous.
We don't always act in accordance with our sense of ourselves.
We don't always behave virtuously, but we aspire to virtue.
That's what the Arthurian legend is to me.
I think Stephen Lawhead captured it beautifully in his novels, which I read as a teenager.
I've wanted to bring these to the screen every day since then.
And when we had the opportunity to do it at Daily Wire, I thought that it was not only the fulfillment of, you know, sort of my desire over the last 30 years, but really a fulfillment of the mission of the company to create culture, but not just to create culture, to create culture that helps us to reconnect to that identity that I think has been responsible for all the good that the West has done over the centuries.
Yeah, I completely agree.
And that's what makes it so enjoyable.
Just finally, what next for you?
What are you going to do?
I mean, you've built a business worth a billion dollars.
You've sailed off into the sunset.
You've pulled a Lennon and McCartney with Ben.
It did eventually make up, so there's hope.
But what are you going to do?
Yeah.
Well, you know, I'm just going to do what I've always done.
You know, I want to help preserve our culture in story form.
I want to have a voice in national and international politics.
I want to criticize culture, of course, but I want to put more of my efforts into creating culture than I do criticizing it.
You know, I'll have to find new mechanisms to do that now outside of the Daily Wire.
I think that I will, in some ways, have to focus on my own mission as independent from the broader mission of a big network, which is what, you know, I've always sort of been a bulldog in defense of all of my hosts, even Candace when she worked for me.
And now I have to find a way to be a champion of my own perspective and my own values.
And I'm looking forward to that freedom.
Championing Own Values and Freedom00:00:34
Well, Jeremy, great to have you back on Uncensored.
I really enjoyed the conversation and best of luck to you.
Thank you very much, Piers.
Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent.
The only boss around here is me.
To enjoy our show, we ask for only one simple thing: hit subscribe on YouTube and follow PiersMorgan 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 uncensored media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it Without you.