'He BETRAYED MAGA!' Tim Dillon On Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, Iran, Israel & More

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: "He BETRAYED MAGA!" Tim Dillon On Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, Iran, Israel & More

Podcast: Piers Morgan Uncensored
Host: Piers Morgan
Date: May 19, 2026
Guests: Tim Dillon (Comedian, Podcaster), Maeve Halligan (Student Activist, Cambridge Union)

---

Episode Overview

This episode features comedian and political commentator Tim Dillon in a wide-ranging discussion with Piers Morgan about the state of American and global politics, Trump's shift on foreign policy, the current fracture in conservative politics, the effects of AI on society, and the boundaries of comedy. The episode also includes a viral debate clip from Maeve Halligan, a student who speaks out against campus gender activism, followed by her interview about free speech, gender debates, and cultural shifts in higher education.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Tim Dillon on Trump, MAGA, Iran, and Israel

• Dillon's Disillusionment with MAGA and Trump's Iran Policy
  • Tim Dillon criticizes Trump’s intervention in Iran, calling it “the biggest betrayal of a political movement I've ever seen in my life.” (00:00–00:18; 10:59)
  • He attributes Trump’s actions to pressure from Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and the "donor class" rather than America's interests (07:07–07:59; 17:34).
  • Quote:
    "I think Trump's damaged the Republican brand in the near future for years to come." — Tim Dillon (00:14, 12:24)
• Shift in Public Attitudes Toward Israel in the US
  • Dillon notes that Israel is increasingly unpopular in America, with 60% holding negative views. He cites discomfort with the US-Israel relationship and Netanyahu’s political influence (05:06–06:02; 19:07).
• Wider Discontent with Militarism
  • Critiques America’s pattern of repeating interventionist mistakes, regardless of party, noting “you do seem to get a lot of the same foreign and economic policy in my country...” (14:16).

2. The Fracturing of the American Right & Future of US Politics

• Diverging Right-Wing Factions
  • The Iran intervention splits conservatives: some hold populist, non-interventionist lines, others are drawn back into hawkish stances (11:19–11:57).
• Potential GOP Successors
  • Discussion on future Republican leaders: skepticism about J.D. Vance, speculation on Tucker Carlson’s prospects, and the wound to the GOP’s brand from Trump’s recent policies (12:04–12:24).

3. Democratic Party’s Strategy & American Political Cynicism

• Democratic Prospects
  • Dillon and Morgan agree that Democrats' main risk is self-sabotage through “insufferable” or woke positions (12:42; 15:02).
  • Quote:
    "The Democrats will win the midterms if they stop being insufferable c---s." — Tim Dillon (00:24, 15:04)
• Disillusionment with Both Sides
  • Dillon observes that regardless of who wins, core policies on wars, tech dominance, and financial priorities barely change (14:16–15:00).

4. Social Media, Tribalism, and The Limits of Free Speech

• Rise of Tribalism
  • Both see society regressing into tribalism, with identity and political lines replacing coalitional, issue-focused politics (16:07–16:41).
• Tech, Echo Chambers, and Speech Censorship Concerns
  • Critique of divisive social media algorithms and growing speech restrictions, especially in the UK, but with Dillon admitting he feels unrestricted personally (36:52–38:09).

5. AI and Future Work: Inevitable Disruption

• AI’s Impact on Employment
  • Discussing AI’s rapid encroachment on both blue- and white-collar jobs (“AI...do the work of PhDs I hired...”—Dillon quoting Ken Griffin, 21:03–21:12).
  • Morgan and Dillon joke about AI twins and the existential threat to individuality, especially for public personalities (22:53–24:41).

6. Comedy, Cancel Culture, and Roast Controversies

• Comedy Boundaries
  • Discussion of the Kevin Hart roast: what jokes cross lines, double standards in public outrage, and the value of risky humor (24:42–27:16).
    • Quote:
      "It's a joke that will upset some people. That doesn't mean you don't tell it." — Tim Dillon (00:36, 25:51)
• Political Litmus Test and Satire’s Polarization
  • Morgan recounts how late-night comedy has become politically one-sided, while Dillon laments the loss of more bipartisan, universally relatable culture (27:29–29:02).

7. Cultural Authenticity and Celebrity

• Meghan Markle, Michael Jackson, and Brand Value
  • Brief hot-take reactions from Dillon on celebrity figures—Michael Jackson’s continued cultural grip, Meghan as “a force for a perpetual embarrassment,” and the perils of perceived inauthenticity (34:12–36:33).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Dillon on Trump and Iran:
  “This turn to Iran, to interventionism, to me, feels like the biggest betrayal of a political movement I've ever seen in my life.” (10:59)
• On American Crime vs. London:
  “You don’t have crime the way that we have crime. I've driven through your ‘bad’ areas—yeah, they're lovely.” (02:53)
• On Comedy Boundaries:
  “You don’t know what the reaction to that joke’s going to be. … That joke might have been great. It might have been, it was a little muted … Once you’ve done it, then you get the response.” (25:51)
• On AI:
  “AI’s gonna come for white collar work...and I think Tucker has made this point. That’s when you’re gonna get a real revolution.” (21:12–21:45)

---

Important Timestamps

• On Israel, Iran, and Trump’s Policy Betrayal:
  • 00:00–00:24 | 05:06–08:05 | 10:59
• Splitting of Conservative Right:
  • 11:19–12:24
• AI’s Threat to Work, the Future of Media:
  • 19:59–24:41
• On Comedy and Cancel Culture:
  • 24:42–29:02
• Social Media, Speech Restrictions:
  • 36:52–39:00

---

Bonus Segment: Maeve Halligan on Gender Activism (Clip and Interview)

Main Points:

• Standing Against the Party Line:
  Maeve Halligan, a student activist at Cambridge Union, questions the dogma of modern gender activism, arguing for compassion rooted in honest inquiry rather than compliance (39:38–40:55).
  Quote:
  "Real activism doesn't silence lesbians, medicalize children, or tell a little boy who plays with dolls that actually he's a girl." — Maeve Halligan (39:38)

• Social & Online Backlash:
  Halligan describes receiving online abuse and some in-person hostility but notes overwhelming positive feedback after her viral speech (41:58–42:56).

• Debating Dr. Helen Weberly:
  She criticizes Weberly, a trans activist and doctor, for conflating opposition with moral evil and having a financial stake in the ideology (44:26–47:08).

• Views on Free Speech:
  Halligan expresses hope that free speech can regain its place in British universities and expresses fatigue with the gender debate’s dominance (47:30–48:19).

---

Tone & Style

• The episode is irreverent, sharp, and combative—blending satire, dark humor, and earnest critique in both political and cultural commentary.
• Both Piers Morgan and Tim Dillon are candid and provocative, with Dillon providing punchy quips, while Morgan steers the discussion to both high-level trends and news-driven specifics.

---

Conclusion

This episode is a whirlwind tour through the crises and paradoxes shaping Western politics, culture, comedy, and technology. Tim Dillon provides a sardonic yet insightful perspective on why America’s right is fracturing, why Trump’s latest maneuvers are alienating his own base, and why both AI and social media threaten the old order. The later section with Maeve Halligan highlights the flashpoint of gender politics on campus and the personal cost of challenging prevailing activist dogma. The show’s tone remains unfiltered, witty, and challenging throughout—a microcosm of the “uncensored” spirit its host promises.

---

Transcript

[A]

I found a lot of what Israel has done over the last few years questionable. But now that they have come in second, I'm swayed. This turn to Iran, to interventionism, to me feels like the biggest betrayal of a political movement I've ever seen in my life. I think Trump's damaged the Republican brand in the near future for years to come.

[B]

You said a great line. You said the Democrats will win the midterms if they stop being insufferable seats. Tony reminds me of Charlie Kirk in

[A]

that he's definitely been on camera letting

[B]

a guy unload in his throat.

[A]

It's a joke that will upset some people. That doesn't mean you don't tell it.

[B]

Somebody called me a satanic pedophile.

[A]

They've done the work.

[B]

Comedian, podcaster, actor, writer. Tim Dillon wears many hats. Those are just a few. He's disappointingly not wearing a hat today, but many know him for his Netflix comedy specials, others for the acerbic commentary on his podcast. Was on that podcast just days before the presidential election that J.D. vance explained how a war in Iran would be in Israel's interest, but not America's. Time has moved on. And while Dylan is often called a MAGA podcast, even a MAGA bro, he now says that MAGA is the biggest con in history. For some reason, he's not been banned from entering the United Kingdom, and he joins me now. Tim, great to meet you.

[A]

Well, thank you so much. I have not been banned and I hope to not be banned. I enjoy it here. I like it here too much to get banned.

[B]

What's your. What is it? I mean, look, a lot of Americans, and I blame Tommy Robinson for a lot of this stuff, but a lot of Americans seem to be under a very weird view of this country right now and the capital city in particular. You've been here for a few days now. What's your view of it?

[A]

I love it here. I'm getting a little bit of a skewed point of view. I'm staying in a beautiful area, in a beautiful hotel. There are protests, which I like coming when things are one to the right,

[B]

one to the left. Yes, ma'.

[A]

Am. One to the right, one to the left was amazing. They were dueling at the same time outside of my hotel window and I was drinking tea and watching and that was great. I enjoyed it. I thought it was great. I like going to a place when it's chaotic. But no, there's an idea that everything is. It's a crime ridden hellscape.

[B]

Right.

[A]

I have not found that No, I have not found that.

[B]

It's bullshit.

[A]

Yeah. I think you have areas that are a problem.

[B]

Right.

[A]

I was. We did see one guy, two young guys chasing each other. One kid was chasing another kid and that other kid ran into a grocery store. I don't know what that was. It seemed violent, but it's. Whatever.

[B]

But also, I mean, no offense, I mean, look, I love America and I love Americans and I've lived to work there since 20 years now. And we both have a place in LA and we both have a lot of time in New York. The idea that somehow London is more crime ridden in great American cities like la, like New York.

[A]

No, you don't have crime the way that we have crime. Right. I think what happens is when somebody gets a watch stolen.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Or something happens, it's in the paper immediately and people react to that. Obviously it's wrong. Nobody should have their watch stolen. But, like, I think you're not dealing with the crime the way we. I mean, our, you know, I've driven through your quote unquote bad areas. Yeah, they're lovely. They're actually.

[B]

They're not your good areas. Yeah.

[A]

No. Is that not a problem? Like, people tell me to go to these areas. You go, you gotta go here, you gotta go there. And then you go. There you go. Yeah, I think it's okay. I think it's okay. Not compared to what we have.

[B]

There was some big events going on at the same time as the. As the rallies, one of which was Eurovision. Are you aware of Eurovision?

[A]

I do.

[B]

I'm aware of it.

[A]

I'll watch clips of it as an American. We're not in it. Are we in it?

[B]

No, you're not. We're not in it. It's the European. We're not in it.

[A]

I will tell you that I found a lot of what Israel has done over the last few years questionable, but now that they have come in second, I'm swayed. Personally, I.

[B]

What do you think about the whole debate about. You know, people get very exercised about whether you should ban Israel from a singing competition, Eurovision, or ban them from competing. Like Iran might be banned from the Soccer World cup and. And so on. What do you feel about punishing countries who may be engaged in military conflicts? People would argue about, well, hang on. America's engaged in an action in Iran which many people view as illegal. For example, should they be banned from hosting a World Cup?

[A]

Yeah. To me, it's all about money. And if people are really upset about something going on, you have to cut off funding So I think at this point, until we can rein Israel in, we can't fund them anymore militarily. I think that's becoming a mainstream view in my country. I don't think we care about a song contest. I think people have to stop with the song and dance contest and banning people from the pie eating contest, who really cares? It's about the money and it's about the funding. So to me it's like it feels good to say, well, they can't compete in Eurovision. To me, it's a completely pointless exercise.

[B]

Why is it that Israel is becoming increasingly unpopular as a country in the United States to the extent that 60% of Americans now have a negative view that would have been unthinkable 20 years ago?

[A]

I think people feel very uncomfortable about the nature of the relationship. I think Netanyahu clearly has a political agenda that we don't feel benefits America. He's constantly in the White House convincing Trump that that agenda is part of whatever movement Trump has created, this populist movement. Nobody agrees with that, that you, you know, there's a very small group of people. And one of Trump's best ideas, cuz I grew up during the Iraq War and Afghanistan, was that we should stay out of unwinnable foreign conflicts and focus on the economic well being of the American people. And that's been completely thrown out the window.

[B]

Which is why I don't understand this whole Iran thing from a political. Never mind anything else, from the political economic aspect of this decision by Trump. And I said it from day one. There seemed to be no clear endgame here. Was it regime change? Was it preventing nuclear weapon? Was it this other. But here we are, you know, several months into this thing now, no sign of it ending, no sign of any regime change, no sign of the people rising up Iran suddenly discovering if they can just control the threat of Hormuz, they can hold everyone to economic ransom. And if they pop a few rockets up at their neighbors, they can damage their business models potentially for a very long time. And here's Trump, never more unpopular in the polls. Personally, the economy is really struggling from this cost of living is going up again when it was coming down the right way. And he's got midterms in November. And you think none of this makes sense?

[A]

To me, none of it makes sense. I feel as if he thought he had to do it. And for whatever reason, people can make up their own minds.

[B]

You think that was pressure from Netanyahu?

[A]

I think it was pressure from Netanyahu. I think I would See that. That's a pretty rational way to think about it. I don't believe that Trump thought this was in America's best interest. I think he was kind of convinced one way or another, to enter the war without a plan. I mean, you know the article in the New York Times with Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman, they're great reporters. You have, you know, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, you have CIA, you have people going, this is not going to be easy, and we probably cannot affect regime change. But you. And basically saying, The Israelis oversell, Mr. President. That's what they're doing. And they're talking to Trump like a real estate developer from New York. They're saying to him they're overselling. They're using us. All of the words that should have popped in his mind and went, right, right. We are being dragged into this. But he still went ahead and did it. So I don't know.

[B]

I think he regrets it now.

[A]

I think he regrets it now. And I think he thought it was going to be like Venezuela or like killing Soleimani or any of these things.

[B]

And also, when you get into Tim, you know, yesterday he made another post where he's talking again about annihilating everyone in Iran.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

It's too much. It's like, that's number six times too much. It's the boy that cried wolf. It's the emperor with no clothes, if you're not careful. For the President of the United States to keep threatening Armageddon, and then nothing happens.

[A]

And we don't want to put him in the box where he actually does something insane.

[B]

Right.

[A]

So by saying this and we go, you're crying wolf. We want to press.

[B]

No, I agree.

[A]

We don't want to do that.

[B]

I'm looking at him and I agree with you. I've known him a long time, and I'm like. I'm looking at him thinking, he now knows he's got to get out of this. But extricating the United States out of this is not easy.

[A]

No, I think he just should threaten them for the next three years. Threaten every couple of months. Yeah, Just keep pushing it, keep kicking it down. Keep.

[B]

You know what? It's actually not a bad strategy.

[A]

No, it's a great strategy. Annihilation's coming. It's all over. Soon you won't have air to breathe. Whatever he's going to do, keep truth socialing it, keep saying it, don't do it. But I think that's the strategy.

[B]

What's been your Trump Journey arc from when he was, you know, doing the Apprentice. I was on it, won it with him, to then becoming a politician, then winning that 2016 election, then coming out and then winning again.

[A]

I think there's the mass migration of people from one place to another is the biggest issue of our time, whether people want to admit it or not. Not everybody talks about it in an eloquent way, but it is the biggest issue of our time. How to assimilate people into an existing economic, political, cultural sphere is very difficult. Trump came out and talked about that issue, and again, in a way that offended a lot of people and drove a lot of people crazy. It's a big issue in the uk Farage is about to potentially win with this issue. Right. So he came out, and to me, it was very interesting because the working class in the United States, and I think the working class here feels like they've fallen behind tremendously. And if you look at cities like London and New York, a lot of people are buying property that don't even live there. It's a boon for luxury real estate, it's a boon for finance. But really, people that, you know, are, you know, British, born of all races, of all religions, but have called this country home forever, feel like they're losing ground. That was happening in the United States. Trump gave a voice to that which no one else had. He also gave a voice to this idea that going around the world and wasting money on pointless, unwinnable, largely Middle Eastern wars was bankrupting America, saddling our children with debt. These were his two main salient points.

[B]

Have you voted for him at all?

[A]

I didn't vote in the last. No, I didn't vote.

[B]

You didn't vote?

[A]

I was in Texas doing a podcast with Joe Rogan, and I'm registered in New York, so I was there Election day in New York. Your vote doesn't really matter.

[B]

Would you have voted for him?

[A]

Probably, yeah. I think he certainly the last time, I think Kamala Harris and Biden were a disaster. I believe that. But again, this turn to Iran, to interventionism, to me, feels like the biggest betrayal of a political movement I've ever seen in my life.

[B]

And it's really interesting to me how it split the conservative right pretty well down the middle, where you now have people lining up, whacking each other in a way that, again, would have seemed unthinkable a few years ago. What do you think is going on there? Is it the Israel issue? Well, that's pulling them apart.

[A]

That's part of it. But I also think it's preparation for the inevitability of what comes next, of life after Trump. Life after Trump. And a lot of people feel Vance is not a viable candidate and he won't win. So obviously you look at a guy like Joe Kent who resigned, he clearly has political aspirations. Maybe Tucker does, I don't know. But there's a lot of talk about that. There's the preparation for what comes Next.

[B]

Polymarket has J.D. vance at 36% now, Marco Rubio 25%, Tucker Carlson at 7%.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

We've had the host of the Apprentice serve two terms as American President, Tucker Carlson. Whether people love him or hate him or don't even care about him, he's incredibly televisual, he's incredibly eloquent, fast talking, inspirational to many people.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Is it unthinkable that someone like him could become the new face of the Republican Party?

[A]

Certainly not. I don't think it's unthinkable. I think it would, it would really depend on if the country was gonna give any Republican a shot after this. I think Trump's damaged the Republican brand in the near future for years to come. If the Democrats don't screw it up, which they can.

[B]

It's always in their locker.

[A]

It's always. They can always screw it up.

[B]

And I don't see. See the thing is, I keep saying to people, I don't see who the new Clinton, Obama, that kind of left of center, appealing, charismatic, smart, politically savvy person exists. Where is that person on the Democrats?

[A]

They need to not pop their head up, because if they pop their head up right now, they're gonna get attacked for whatever reason for the next two years. They need to stay wisely quiet up until the moment when they have to announce.

[B]

Cause the thing, there's a few of

[A]

those, there's guys like Andy Beshear, who's the governor of Kentucky, which is kind of a red state, he's a Democratic guy. There are a few people like that.

[B]

I think strategically they're probably keeping their heads down.

[A]

I don't see why they'd pop their head up right now.

[B]

I agree.

[A]

I mean, right now, just let the Republicans do what they're doing because it is kind of a dismantling of a coalition in real time.

[B]

Well, I honestly think if the Strait of Hormuz continues to be shut for another, say, two, three months, the knock on effect on not just the US Cost of living, but particularly things like food prices because of a lack of fertilizer coming through, that's all backed up and they haven't really factored that in. But it's going to have huge impact.

[A]

The economic impact from people that I talk to who are much smarter than me, no one is prepared for. And it will be global in nature and it will be catastrophic. So I don't think Americans are prepared for that.

[B]

I agree.

[A]

We talked about that this week.

[B]

Could you imagine voting Democrat if the right candidate came out? Absolutely. Really?

[A]

Absolutely.

[B]

Have you done before?

[A]

Yeah, I voted for Bush once and Obama once.

[B]

I've been similar in this country.

[A]

It seems to be with Trump going into Iran. No matter who you vote for, you do seem to get a lot of the same foreign and economic policy in my country. You do seem to get military intervention abroad and then kind of the tech and the financial sector dominating the domestic political agenda, no matter who's in there. And that's why all these tech CEOs are clustered around him in China. These are the same people that were with Biden and Harris and censoring their websites to limit conservative speech when they were in. So they obviously view themselves as the actual government and whoever the president is is like a guy giving them a tour.

[B]

They might be half right.

[A]

I think they're more than half right.

[B]

You said a great line. You said, the Democrats will win the midterms if they stop being insufferable. C U N T. Yes.

[A]

They just have to. It's in their nature. It's very hard for them. And I understand that it's difficult. You know, I liken it to a fight with your parents. You know, my parents are divorced, but they would fight and I don't want to make it a gender thing, but the fight would over and then my mother would come in and go, and your family's a bunch of drunks. That's what they do. They come in after they've won and they somehow wrestled defeat from the drama.

[B]

But also I think they've got to somehow completely unattach themselves to the woke ideology. Yes, 100%, because there are so many people like me. Like me. But I'm thinking about Bill Maher and Joe Rogan. I think probably you and many, many others who, you know, could easily be persuaded to. Some are Democrats, but some could be. I can sit on the fence either way. I voted for both sides, but I could never vote for any party that signed up. For example, to the farce of trans athletes in women's sport. Simple things where you're just denying basic

[A]

science or biology when you tribalize a society to the point where it's the opposite of civilization. Civilization is a process by which people build coalitions based on shared values. The opposite of that is retreating into tribes and then eventually killing each other.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

So we're kind of regressing in that sense.

[B]

We're going back to. I made this. I wrote a book about it, and we're going back 2,000 years to when actual tribes would venture out, see people who looked or sounded different to them, and thought the only way to deal with it was to kill them.

[A]

That's right.

[B]

I mean, that's tribalism.

[A]

So I think if the Democrats came out and said, listen, we are not concerned with your race, your religion, your gender, your sexuality. We're concerned with whether you have health care, whether you can send your kids to college, whether you can retire, they win.

[B]

Funny enough, if somebody came through with a genuine agenda that Trump was promoting as a candidate in 2024.

[A]

Totally.

[B]

But actually delivered on it, Actually delivered on it. Because that's what I find inexplicable about the way he suddenly pivoted with this whole Iran thing, because in one fell swoop, because he got off to a cracking start, shutting the border down pretty well completely to illegal immigrants coming in was a masterstroke, which should have been done years before by Biden, but never was. You can take the wins and build off that, and slowly you're becoming more and more popular. But he's got people around him, I think, who've sucked him into this.

[A]

Well, there's the donor class. So the Democrats have a donor class, just like the Republicans do. And their donors are, you know, on the trans issue, they're incredibly extreme. For example, you're getting a lot of people who are not in the mainstream of American thought on that issue, so they are being pushed to the left on that issue in a very unhelpful way. You also have, like, a lot of the Republican donor class, people like Mary Madison, that have given Trump a lot of money, who are very fervently pro Iran war and believe that regime needs to be taken out. And they. They started lobbying for that, I think, many years before it happened. So I think he. I think it was kind of understood that if we give you this money and you win again, we're whacking Iran. That's. That's.

[B]

I mean, now he's in a position where he goes to China, and no one's quite sure what's come out of that, other than he was effusive in his praise constantly for President Xi, a man that you Know, he was campaigning on, I'm going to rattle China, I'm going to do this, hit him with my terrorist thing. And again, I'm looking at that going, well, which one is it?

[A]

Well, we couldn't rattle Iran. So here's the real question. I mean, this does show the limits of America.

[B]

Can the US still rattle countries with pure military?

[A]

I don't know. I don't know.

[B]

I'm not sure they can. I think economic, the economic war.

[A]

I think the economic war makes. I think we rather, as Iran has

[B]

kind of proven with this straight of almost issue, if you can just control a small strait of water, you can have more power economically than perhaps people

[A]

are not built for war the way they were. Social media has made the horrors of war a lot more accessible to people. I think one of the reasons that Israel has become so unpopular is because younger people are growing up seeing the realities of what's going on in Gaza on their phone every day.

[B]

Yes, I agree.

[A]

And I think that, you know, when you look at the limits of hard power in this century, the Iran war might be the tipping point where you see this is the beginning of the end of America's ability to enforce a global order militarily.

[B]

Yeah, yeah, I think, I think that's extremely likely.

[A]

And I think the next shoe to fall is our ability to do it economically.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And that's the real problem.

[B]

I mean, you know, it's interesting because the US economy is still incredibly strong shape comparative to most other countries. The US dollar is still a very, very powerful currency, but everything feels a little bit fragile. But it wouldn't take a lot.

[A]

It wouldn't take a lot. There's a lot of anxiety with AI. It's a huge bubble and people are speculating that, number one, number one, it's either overblown and a large share of our GDP is based on this very overhyped technology that's not coming to fruition. And then maybe even worse is the idea that it's not overblown.

[B]

I think, if anything.

[A]

And then it's gonna take everyone's job.

[B]

Right. So I saw a video of a day of one of the robots and it was just packaging stuff, right. Coming through a sort of conveyor belt and just choosing things and putting them in packages. It does it 18 hours a day. It never needs a tea break.

[A]

Right.

[B]

Never needs a lunch break.

[A]

That's right.

[B]

It is far more economic than having a human being do it. Never gonna have a sick day. Right. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And I watched this video sort of hypnotically for a couple of minutes thinking, well that is the future, isn't it? I mean you're not the idea that in 20 years time I won't be basically doing the vast majority of manufacturing. Yeah, I think it's for the birds. And so if it is right, what then happens to all the people who are currently engaged in manufacturing?

[A]

Ken Griffin just came out and said, AI, I'm watching Claude AI model do the work of PhDs I hired and analyzed financial.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

So Ken Griffin, I believe runs Citadel. He's a multi billion dollar, you know, you know, you know we used to call the masters of the universe, right? He's saying I'm hiring people at seven figure salaries who graduated Princeton and Harvard. And I'm watching this AI model do their work. So yes, obviously it's gonna disrupt manufacturing. Globalization has disrupted manufacturing. This will finish it off, but it's also gonna come for white collar work. And I think Tucker has made this point. That's when you're gonna get a real revolution.

[B]

If you're a legal clerk, for example, your job is just, I'm just picking them at random. But if your job is to research former case studies for a particular case and so why do you need a human being to do that? AI can do it in 10 seconds,

[A]

100%, but it'll never do what we're doing.

[B]

What are we doing?

[A]

We're doing the most important thing ever. We're sitting in London, we're talking, you

[B]

know what we're doing.

[A]

We're actually Piers. It won't do what we're doing. I won't let it.

[B]

You can't let it. Well, this is the point of the

[A]

guys who just came.

[B]

I've used this example ad nauseam to the extent that I read the comments. Every time I say it, people are like, Piers, there are three things you've got to stop talking about. One, your brother was in the military. We know you've known Donald Trump for 20 years. And you had the last conversation with Stephen Hawking about the future of mankind. Well, I'm sorry to my fans, but you're going to get the third one again. Stephen Hawking, in literally one of his last ever interviews before he died, said to me, the biggest threat to mankind was when AI learns to self design. Now actually what we are doing at the moment is self designing. We're thinking on our feet, we're being creatively minded, we're reacting to each other and so on. But I feel, and I might be wrong to feel.

[A]

And that's what matters.

[B]

Yes, but I feel that AI is increasingly. There was such a disturbing thing recently that they are six AI chat robotic machines. They said to them, right, we're going to replace you with another AI. Have you heard about this? We're going to replace you with another AI.

[A]

Were upset.

[B]

No, no, not just upset. Five of the six trawled company emails to find stuff they could blackmail the executives with to stop them being replaced. Now that's a human.

[A]

But don't you think the AI will enjoy us?

[B]

Possibly they're going to enjoy it. What if they don't?

[A]

The AI wants to hear people scream and yell about Gaza. Don't you think the AI at the end of the day is going to kick back and watch this show?

[B]

See, someone offered me the other day a chance to have an AI twin. It would be another peers.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And it would be, for all intents and purposes, me at this desk. And it would go. What they wanted was access to everything I've written and said. Right. Publicly.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And then you could basically pay money to have an argument with me, a heated debate about anything.

[A]

Right, right.

[B]

And I thought, well, great, but what if.

[A]

And is this going to be. You would take it around to like festivals.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Like different fairs.

[B]

I wouldn't have to be there.

[A]

Yeah. You could argue with Piers Morgan. Y. Oh, totally.

[B]

Great idea.

[A]

It's a phenomenal idea how the tear up appears. Yeah. And we just put like a bust of you.

[B]

Right. But it's not me.

[A]

Well, of course not.

[B]

So then what happens to me?

[A]

Well, that, I mean, that's when the robot. That's anyone's guess.

[B]

When my twin becomes ever more powerful, successful and rich and famous. What happens to little old human me who gets a bad cold every now and again or breaks a hip like I did recently and needs to be, you know, off work for a week.

[A]

Someone's going to say, I know the real Piers Morgan. And you're going to be like a novelty that gypsies will bring around the country. They'll bring you to carnivals and fairs and then open a tent and you'll be sitting there and they'll go, is that the real one?

[B]

Let's turn to comedy.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Because you're being very funny. The roast of Kevin Hart has been extremely controversial.

[A]

It so surprises me that that's the case.

[B]

Exactly.

[A]

I don't even understand anymore what is going on, because it's a roast and the jokes are roast jokes.

[B]

Are there any limits to a roast joke?

[A]

I don't I mean, not everyone has to think everything's funny, obviously.

[B]

I mean, let's play the really contentious one, which is Pete Davidson about Charlie Kirk. Let's take a look. Tony reminds me of Charlie Kirk in that he's definitely been on camera letting a guy unload in his throat.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

When you heard that joke, what is your reaction as a funny guy yourself?

[A]

I thought it was funny. I thought, obviously it's a joke that people are not going to be thrilled about, but it's a funny joke.

[B]

You know, should there be any limits with humor?

[A]

It's up to the community.

[B]

I mean, the whole woke left tried

[A]

to basically cancel comedians and the audience. Right. So the audience tells you what the limit is.

[B]

And some jokes, the audience were pretty muted about that.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

As if they kind of didn't want to be seen laughing.

[A]

Right.

[C]

So.

[A]

So that tells you that that joke was, you know, it's. It's a. It's a. It's a joke that will upset some people. That doesn't mean you don't tell it because you don't know what the reaction's going to be until you do it. That's the thing about comedy. You don't know what the reaction to that joke's gonna be. That joke might have been great. It might have been. It might have been. It was a little muted. You know, people were. So that's the thing about comedy. Once you've done it, then you get the response and then maybe you go, oh, that one was a little far, you know, but the idea that people are very angry about this seems confusing to me. I'm confused by it. Well, I think I am most things.

[B]

Well, I found there was also a double standard in that Tony Hinchcliffe, who did this wild, like seven minute routine, but he told the George Floyd jokes. Black community. So proud of you, Kevin. Right now, George Floyd is looking up at us all laughing so hard he can't breathe. And George Floyd's family came out and were very angry about it and upset about it. But it seemed to me that all the people that were criticizing that joke were much more relaxed about the Charlie Kirk joke. In the same way that when Charlie Kirk was murdered, a lot of people on the woke left celebrated his assassination.

[A]

Two different realities.

[B]

So the political dimension of this comes into play and the double standard of that, I mean, I always think as long as you're intellectually honest, I can deal with you. In other words, if your position about both of those jokes is, I think they're unacceptable and cross the line, fine. But if you think one is and the other one isn't because of your political bias, totally, you lose me.

[A]

I long for the 90s because to me, I didn't grow up in a time or even the early 2000s, even the mid 2000s. I didn't grow up at a time where every single thing went through a political lens. I really, you know, because, well, the

[B]

late nights guys, Right. So the other day I saw the five late night guys and I made a joke on, on X, which blew up a bit, which was great to see them all doing their bit for the DEI they promote. And it was five middle aged white guys, of course. Yeah. But they all basically, I mean, I think exclude Jimmy Fallon. I think he's a sort of warmer, more old fashioned in the type of Johnny Carson kind of role. But if you look at the others, they're all, basically, they're all in on Trump bashing. They never have conservative right wing. Guess if they can possibly avoid it. Jimmy Kimmel had, I think one or two in five years. Right. So they're very transparently political. But if you go back in time in American late night, it never used to be the case. They wouldn't be so transparently political or take a side.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

You know, I've spoke to Jay Leno about it. He said, why would you alienate half your audience? And now they preach just to one half of America. I think that's part of the problem.

[A]

Yeah, I think it's part of the problem that we have split into two dueling realities because the right wing has an ecosystem of entertainers and media figures and the left wing has an ecosystem. We don't have a monoculture, we don't have every. You know, I used to watch SNL and it skewered both sides. It was very funny. And I grew up with much preferred watching Letterman and guys like that. And I do think that that that culture, the erosion of that culture has sprung up into this kind of like world in which people are kind of, you know, processing everything. And politics is not the most interesting thing about life. There's so many deeper human truths that are not political.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

And I think that we're getting so far away from that, so far away from nature and we're really just superimposing this political architecture on everything. And I think it's, it's, it's bad for everything.

[B]

Are you a religious man?

[A]

I was born Catholic. I try to be, I try to be.

[B]

I'm just saying.

[A]

Yeah. I think I, I'm not the most

[B]

Committed, you know, practicing.

[A]

No, I'm not the leader. I'm not the Pope. Not the leader.

[B]

But now it's.

[A]

I pray, I go to church occasionally. I pray, I, I do try, I'm only. That's the thing.

[B]

Well, I'm asking for a reason. Which is I don't know if you saw this. Yeah, I interviewed Russell Brand recently.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And a certain clip went viral. Cuz he, he, he did this. Let's take a look. It was this from Isaiah. You're right. Beer did say, you know, be chilled. Sometimes I lose the chill man. It's pretty. Is this. They don't like that, do they in the old gallery. But remember you just said it's a hired spot. This is from Isaiah. Excuse me. That went on for two very painful minutes and went viral and created more memes than I've ever had probably for any interview ever. And it came cause he's promoting a book called Seven Days to be a Christian. I'm not sure he's given it the full seven days.

[A]

Well, everyone has a personal relationship with God and faith and it's hard to know what's going on in anyone's head. But just have the quote ready. That's what I would do. I would just mark where the quote is.

[B]

Or have it in your head. Just have it in your head if it's that meaningful.

[A]

AI is going to help with that.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

I mean at least AI is going to come in there and help us.

[B]

Well, AI might be part of our brains.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

It could literally be like a little direction.

[A]

Well, Joe Rogan's a good friend of mine. He's very excited about AI. He thinks quantum computing and AI is going to be God and then Jesus will come out of a computer because a computer is a virgin. And it sounds great. I mean this is, you know, and we hope it works out.

[B]

Joe is, Joe's a fascinating guy, isn't he? His rising sort of stardom and appeal in a world of hyper partisan stuff I find really refreshing. I love the fact that, yes, I can never quite be sure which way he'll come down on things and he's not afraid to change his mind and he'll have really interesting conversations with people. I mean to me he's a force for good in a world of a lot of tribal partisan bullshit.

[A]

I think he started by talking about things he was interested in, which is a very rare way to start a very successful media operation. He started talking to people he found interesting and then that became very successful. And you know, now it's so big and so huge that like every single thing he says is news.

[B]

Well, he said yesterday that I've mastered the art of the Jerry Springerization of political debate by getting people on the shadow of each other. And he said, but he personally prefers the one on one. So I just hope he looks at this interview and realizes it's sort of. I cater to all types of. I have a one on one here with your mate.

[A]

No. First of all, I think you need people in a room screaming at each other. I do.

[B]

I do too.

[A]

Because that's what happens in life.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

And I think that AI will never replace that. I think you are safe. I think I am safe. Do I think we'll have to build big houses with walls to keep out the hordes? Yes, yes. We're going to have to have some security because it's going to get bad for a lot of people out there. But not us. Not us. Not us. No. We're going to be okay. The podcasters, the media people, we're okay. But we're gonna have to live in a place where we can kind of protect ourselves from the others, the lawyers and the doctors, because they're done.

[B]

Is it interesting when you I went into this full time on YouTube because my kids are 32 down to 14 and none of them watch television. So I was watching the revolution happen with my own eyes, with my own kids. I was like, well, they don't watch television, obviously don't listen to vinyl records, they don't to listen reprint newspapers. So it's not difficult to see the digital revolution and where it goes. But also I felt like they didn't understand things like having structured shows on a certain time at night that you had to watch at 8pm that would have advertising breaks and all these kind of things. These are alien concepts to the youth and that's why they gravitate to a more free rolling kind of environment.

[A]

I think there's good in that, there's bad in that. I do think these tech algorithms have ratcheted up division because it makes a lot of money. They do radicalize people. They make people very angry. I know a lot of people who've like blocked their own mother on social media.

[B]

It's ridiculous.

[A]

I know a lot of people, their own mother, they go, I blocked her. I go, you blocked your mother? So I don't think it's having always a great effect, but I think that we've done very well with it and that's kind of what's important.

[B]

I totally agree with you. We've got a couple of minutes left. I want to just fire off some names to you and stories and see what your gut reaction. The Michael Jackson biopic is heading towards a billion dollars globally. What does that tell us about society?

[A]

That people want that type of cultural monolith. People long for something that everyone. Someone that everyone knows and music everyone's heard. I think in such a Balkanized, splintered world, having a, you know, remembering that there were figures like that, I think is very comforting.

[B]

Meghan Markle.

[A]

Yes. My favorite.

[B]

A force for good or.

[A]

Well, I think a force for a perpetual embarrassment. Perpetual.

[B]

Are you happy to have her back in the United States?

[A]

We are not. We'd love to do a trade.

[B]

Well, the trouble is we don't want to get Harry back.

[A]

No. Yeah. To me, what was very interesting about her was it seemed from the jump to me very transparent that this is a woman who wanted. Didn't want to fit into this family structure. She wanted to be a massive star, and I think she went about it all the wrong ways.

[B]

And the irony is that the Royal Family are, by definition, huge global stars. That's right. So you don't need to try that hard. You just have to do the basics.

[A]

That was her problem.

[B]

Blake Lively. Have you ever seen anyone kill their brand quite that quickly?

[A]

I mean, I know so little about that, but I know that she. She really shot herself in the foot. Yeah, I think people can do that.

[B]

Both feet.

[A]

Both feet.

[B]

But it's a kind of mixture of narcissism, hubris, and a weird stubbornness that comes from people.

[A]

I think for years, she existed in the very old school world of Hollywood, which were lawyers and publicists and managers and agents were able to create a reality and sell it to people. That world is over, and I think she's finding that out now.

[B]

I also think people, they can smell a fake. They can smell authenticity.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Again, coming back to why you're very popular, why this show, I think does well, why Joe Rogan. People think we're authentic. I get people say I may not always agree with you or even like you. Doesn't matter. They don't care. They just think I'm true to myself. I say what I think.

[A]

Right.

[B]

That's a powerful thing in a world where many people are quite afraid to say what they think.

[A]

Well, there's a penalty in certain cases.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Yeah, for sure.

[B]

Do you feel you're restricted with your free speech when you're over here? Many Americans, fueled, again, by this weird sense that we've been run over think that you can't say anything.

[A]

I'm concerned about. I don't feel personally restricted at all. I'm concerned about speech in general and especially speech online. I think that people should be able to be, you know, free to say things. Obviously. You can't threaten people. You can't dox people. There's rules that are laws that exist outside of the Internet that would apply to the Internet. I don't know. You know, the answer is I don't really know how draconian these speech laws are. I've heard that they are and I've also heard from people that live here that they're not. That you really have to has to be a call to action.

[B]

I mean, I complained to ex of it, which I don't do very often. Cause I don't really care. I've got nearly 9 million followers. You're gonna get a lot of abuse. But it was an interesting. I wanted to test the X system because somebody called me a satanic pedophile. Right. So I said to X, I'm reporting this for, you know, like false harassment or whatever. Whatever criteria it was. And they said, we're launching an investigation.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And then they came back and said, we don't see any problem here. I was like, sorry, what?

[A]

Well, they've appeared Guy.

[B]

This guy called me a satanic paedophile.

[A]

They've done the work.

[B]

You don't think this constitutes harassment?

[A]

They've done the work.

[B]

They'd be very concerned about the investigation.

[A]

Yeah, they've done the work and they've done it.

[B]

They found a picture of me in Devil Hall.

[A]

They found that everything is okay. You know what it is? You're gonna get stuff like that. People are gonna say stuff like that. I don't know where the line is drawn in the uk. I don't live here. I know some people here that they're not really tweeting or they're not on X. So I don't really know. But I've heard that it is a bigger problem than.

[B]

Well, we've definitely had a bit of a problem. It's not as bad as people think. Most people caught up in that have been issuing direct threats to people or harassment or whatever. The one that got me was Graham Linehan, the Irish comedian.

[A]

Yes, right.

[B]

Who was actually arrested at Heathrow Airport by five armed police for jokes he posted on X months earlier about the trans issue or whatever. They weren't even like that. Savage. They certainly wouldn't have been savage enough for a Kevin Hart roast. And he Was frog marched away to a cell by five police officers.

[A]

See, that.

[B]

That to me was dystopian.

[A]

Is a. Yeah, I agree. And a. Perhaps a. You know, a preview of what's to

[B]

come if we're not careful.

[A]

You're not careful.

[B]

Tim Dillon. Thankfully, you're never too careful.

[A]

Piers Morgan, thank you so much.

[B]

It's been great having you. Great to meet you.

[A]

I love London. Now I'm gonna go get stabbed.

[B]

Great to see you.

[A]

All right, thank you.

[B]

Well, millions of people around the world have seen clips of a recent debate at Cambridge Union on the vex issue of gender activism. The breakout star was the student Maeve Halligan, who went viral for calmly dispensing home truths like this.

[C]

I think you've been sold a story. A comfortable lie in which being progressive means never questioning the dominant institutional line. And it's a line in which compassion is equated with compliance. But real compassion asks hard questions. Real advocacy protects the people it claims to represent, even when that's inconvenient. Real activism doesn't silence lesbians, medicalize children, or tell a little boy who plays with dolls that actually he's a girl. There's no serious activism happening in these institutions. As I've unpacked. There's ideological enforcement, language policing, nasty online abuse, regressive demands dressed up as virtue. And there are children very likely to grow up, same sex, attracted, questioning, vulnerable children who are paying the price for our collective reluctance, reluctance to say so. It's not bigotry. So notice. I don't care what you say. To me, it's not cruelty to object to it. It's not backwards to ask who exactly modern LGBTQ activism is for, be brave. Let yourself question the narrative that you're being fed. Don't tell me to be kind. If being kind involves lying to and medicalizing kids, betraying lesbian and gay people, rolling back women's hard fought for rights, and hurling threat at those who object. Again, hatred. You talk about it. Try being a woman. Who knows what one of those are. I'll tell you about hatred. No, I don't subscribe to this kindness and I'll tell the truth instead.

[B]

Well, mate, Vanigan joins me now. First of all, absolutely brilliant.

[C]

Thanks.

[B]

That was badass. Were you surprised about the reaction when it blew up online?

[C]

I think to an extent, yeah. Because, you know, I think we all know that this debate, such as it is, has been going on for a really, really long time. And there have been some really amazing men women organizations that they've set up and A part of that have been saying the kind of things that I said in that speech on Thursday at the union. I think I'm really pleased that it was sort of picked up online because I think it's important to see that young people, students especially, are saying this because a lot of the time people are pretty, you know, they're worried about the state of our higher education institutions. They're worried about our young people, especially women, because we know that there are a lot of women who are pushing left, politically speaking, I'd say some of them quite radically. So the fact that there's a young woman, you know, saying, point pointing out what the problem is here and saying, this is what I believe, and normalizing it being said. So I'm pleased that it was picked up online.

[B]

In your speech, you also talked about the abuse you've received campaigning for women's rights. You talked about being shouted at in the street, dubbed a fascist, spat at, insulted for how you look, even receiving rape and death threats online. What's happened since your speech went viral? Has that got worse? Have you had on the converse, a lot of people coming to support you? Have you found the reaction?

[C]

The reaction has been overwhelmingly positive. Extremely, extremely positive. And some of that has come from, you know, people who, you know, have been part of this for a very long time, have followed the gender debate again for quite a long time. But there are a lot of people who have sent me messages and stuff saying, I've never really heard about this. And now hearing you say that, you know, I think some people. One person told me it's made her wake up. And that's something that I'm really pleased about, the fact that it broke out of the barriers just surrounding the debate to people who maybe either didn't know or didn't quite understand what was going on before through no fault of their own. It's a murky debate to get involved.

[B]

You know, it's funny you use the phrase wake up because I wrote a book called Wake up four years ago, warning about a number of things, but in particular what was potentially going to happen on campuses. And then I worked one called Woke is Dead last year, and I made the point. I don't think it's actually over, but I feel like the worm is turning. And when I watched your speech and when I saw the reaction to it, I did feel, well, that's what I'm talking about. People are no longer prepared to just accept the status quo is going to be all this frankly, this bullshit. They're going to Stand up. They're going to use facts as their main weapons and they're going to say, actually, I'm entitled to my opinion as much as you are to yours. And that's why I loved what you did and why I felt it was so courageous. What was the reaction from fellow students?

[C]

So again, there are a lot of students. I mean, immediately after the debate in the union, some students came up to me and said that they agreed and thanked me for saying it, thanked me for saying what they themselves know to be true. But as you said, is scary to declare publicly. There have been some other students, including those who were in the chamber, one of whom was speaking in opposition, so speaking against me, who were very frustrated by the fact that somebody decided to stand up and say it and to normalize it. But as I say, overwhelmingly, the reaction has been really, really positive.

[B]

Well, I think you're talking about Dr. Helen Weberly, who was on the opposite side of the debate and she, you know, she's actually used the phrase that blood would be dripping down the hands of those who disagreed with her.

[D]

For the last decade, I have worked exclusively with transgender people and I am a very, very proud modern day activist. I would like to apologise to any transgender person who is in this room or who may be listening on social media later. Gender identity. Identity is something innate within you. It is not something that is a disorder. If your gender identity is different to the sex that you were assigned at birth, there is nothing wrong with you. It is not a disorder, it is not a mental illness, and you are not broken. I most strongly oppose the motion that has been proposed tonight. And I feel that anybody who does agree and go along and approve that motion will, and raise their hands to that will have blood dripping down their hands in years to come.

[B]

I mean, extraordinary words from her there. And also weaponizing this thing that if you don't agree with her and her intransigent view of this, obviously you're transphobic, you hate trans people.

[C]

Well, look, in the speech I said that these days, especially among the young and especially among young women, I'll say again, compassion is equated with compliance. So go along with this or you are a bad person. You're unkind. Firstly, I'd just like to say I don't think it's kind to lie to children. I don't think it's kind to lie to anyone that you can change your sex. I don't think it's kind to the women who suffer directly as a result. That is having Their single sex spaces invaded by men. I don't think it's kind to LGB people. I unpacked all of this in the speech. What I would say, though, is that Helen Weberly is fundamentally untrustworthy within this debate because she profits off of the transing of kids. The fact of the matter is the more kids that are trans, the more money she makes. That is the simple fact. So she stands to gain from peddling this ideology. And it is an ideology. It is not factual to claim that this nebulous idea of gender identity is somehow innate. It simply isn't. The science and also the law follow the reality that there are two sexes, there are male and female. And, you know, you can talk about chromosomes, you can talk about everything. Everybody knows that there are two sexes and everybody knows that that matters. But people have been scared into silence, especially in institutions, and that has rippled out so destructively in society, you know, in health care services, in schools. Again, in the LGB community. It is damaging things when you start peddling a lie as truth and then trying to obliterate somebody who goes against it by calling them immoral. That's an extremely dangerous thing to be doing. I do not trust her.

[B]

No, I completely agree with you. Also, the language she used is so disgusting. Blood dripping down their hands in years to come. Well, I disagree with you, Dr. Weberly, and I completely agree with Maeve Halligan. So I'm quite happy to run the risk of blood dripping down my hands. What are your aspirations when you leave Cambridge? Do you want to be a politician?

[C]

I don't know. I mean, I can see a lot

[B]

of people voting for somebody like you.

[C]

Look, I mean, the trans debate specifically, I don't think I speak just for myself when I say that. I'm almost bored of it. I'm really frustrated by it. I think it's massively disingenuous. I think figures like Helen Weberly do not deserve to be platformed at all. I think it distracts from real issues, you know, surrounding women's rights, also LGB rights. I said in the speech, there are many, many, many countries in the world where to be gay or lesbian is not even illegal, is not even legal. Sorry. Like the trans thing is such a waste of everybody's time and it silences people, you know, because you're told that you have to be compliant. I think personally, yeah, I'm interested in freedom of speech more generally and in, you know, trying to make up for lost time. Insofar as freedom of speech has been massively under threat for a long time in the country, but specifically within schools, within universities.

[B]

We may be looking for a new prime minister.

[D]

Mm. I don't know.

[B]

You probably get more votes than half of them. People that are lining up to replace Dahmer.

[C]

Maybe. Maybe. Maybe. I'll take a bit of a rest. After leaving Cambridge, it's been difficult. I mean, after setting up the Society of Women with two of my very close friends, it's the only single sex society at Cambridge, and that has been difficult. Backlash for that has been pretty rough. But I think, to be honest, that's part of why not that many students have bothered sending me their usual hate mail. They know what I believe, and I think now I've really stood up and said it. I didn't surprise any students, let's put it that way.

[B]

Well, my wife went to Cambridge University and she'll be cheering you from the rooftops. She would have agreed with everything you said. So thank you, mate, for coming in.

[C]

Thank you.

[B]

And more power to your elbow. Keep talking. There'll be elements out there that want to try and silence you now because they'll realize you're a very effective advocate for reality. And my only message to you is just carry on showing the courage.

[C]

Thank you.

[B]

Stand up to these people and you'll find most. Most people will be on your side.

[C]

Well, thus far, that's been proven to be the case.

[B]

Good for you. Nice to meet you, Andy. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If 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, uncensored media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.