Speaker 1: On scorn US Australia.
Speaker 2: This is the Reader Panalty Show.
Speaker 3: Good evening and welcome to the Reader Paney Show coming
Speaker 3: up tonight. Douglas Murray joins me and he has a
Speaker 3: message for the activist journalists at the ABC. You do
Speaker 3: not want to miss that the tills are upset about
Speaker 3: standards of behavior in Parliament House. Dan Wilde looks at
Speaker 3: the tone police scene from the Karen Brigade.
Speaker 4: Mi Horowitz is in.
Speaker 3: Chicago and we'll have the latest from the ugly scenes
Speaker 3: at the Democratic National Convention and the great Alex Epstein
Speaker 3: on how Facebook is suppressing factual information about nuclear energy
Speaker 3: and a segment that has millions of views, Left is
Speaker 3: losing it.
Speaker 5: Women were now without electrical not allowed, not without electoral, electoral.
Speaker 6: Or political power.
Speaker 4: No curry, no kidding.
Speaker 3: Let's bring in Daniel Wah, Deputy Executive director of the
Speaker 3: Institute of Public Affairs. Dad, let's start with the tills
Speaker 3: there are not happy about the standards.
Speaker 4: Of behavior in Parliament House.
Speaker 3: They had a press conference today saying proper standards are
Speaker 3: rarely seen.
Speaker 4: Let's hear from.
Speaker 3: The woman who only last week called Peter Dutton racist
Speaker 3: in Parliament House.
Speaker 2: Stop it at the top.
Speaker 7: At the end of the day, we hear a lot
Speaker 7: of talk about commitment to better standards, better behavior, but
Speaker 7: that can only be modeled by the leadership. All those
Speaker 7: MPs take their queue from their leaders. They are elected
Speaker 7: leaders of their parties, from David Little Proud as a
Speaker 7: leader of the Nationals, Peter Dutton, the leader of the
Speaker 7: Liberal Party, Anthony Albernizi, the leader of the Labor Party.
Speaker 3: Dan it's a good that she knows who leads each party.
Speaker 4: That's refreshing. She didn't mention the Greens there, I think,
Speaker 4: But I do wonder whether.
Speaker 3: This is a case of people in glasshouses not throwing stones.
Speaker 4: It was literally days.
Speaker 3: Ago when she had to withdraw a comment calling Peter
Speaker 3: Dutton racist in parliament.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 8: It is the pot calling the kettle black. You know,
Speaker 8: just look at your own behavior. Of course, the Teals
Speaker 8: are the ones that thought it was a good idea
Speaker 8: to divide the country by race in the Constitution, and
Speaker 8: they're going to lect to everybody else about parliamentary behavior.
Speaker 8: You're right, she didn't point out the Greens. I suspect
Speaker 8: the reason for that is because the Teals are just
Speaker 8: cashed up Greens. They vote you know, analysis on Sky
Speaker 8: News yesterday revealed they vote with the Greens sixty percent
Speaker 8: of the time, coalition a third of the time. So
Speaker 8: how are they really independent and representing the views of
Speaker 8: their community.
Speaker 4: And I won't even part like it wasn't.
Speaker 3: Just that they weren't supposedly independent, but they portrayed themselves
Speaker 3: as conservative alternatives. They were conservatives, they cared about the environment.
Speaker 3: That was kind of the narrative that was pushed. And
Speaker 3: there are nothing of the sort as you've just explained.
Speaker 8: No, look, that's exactly right. And they're a part of
Speaker 8: a growing cohort of these inner city elites that are
Speaker 8: not interested in a debate. They you know, anytime somebody
Speaker 8: raises a different opinion, they will try and silence people.
Speaker 8: And they say it's about parliamentary behavior. Well, you're allowed
Speaker 8: to have a debate in a democracy, particularly in parliament House.
Speaker 8: And they are not interested in debating the substance of
Speaker 8: the issues.
Speaker 4: No, And to me it is tone policing.
Speaker 3: Where do they get off telling others how they can
Speaker 3: express themselves. Of course, you don't cross the line into
Speaker 3: a straight out abuse like Gazali indulged in calling pinadutt
Speaker 3: and racist and you obviously wouldn't say anything threatening. But
Speaker 3: if you I've got robust discussions happening in Parliament House,
Speaker 3: well that's the place for it. I don't think that's
Speaker 3: something to hold a press conference about.
Speaker 9: Now.
Speaker 3: We spoke on Monday about the Environment Minister using Indigenous
Speaker 3: heritage laws to ban a one billion dollar gold mine
Speaker 3: project in New South Wales, and now we learn Ai
Speaker 3: Pulvasek is refusing to release the advice that led to
Speaker 3: that ban, which did take the resource industry by surprise.
Speaker 3: Tamil Pulversek made the decision despite local Aboriginal land councils
Speaker 3: saying there were no unmanageable concerns about the proposed site.
Speaker 3: Dan the Environment Minister is defending this decision. We know
Speaker 3: it's going to cost eight hundred jobs, it's going to
Speaker 3: cost New South Wales around two hundred million in royalties
Speaker 3: and taxes. Surely we need a little bit more transparency here.
Speaker 8: Well, there's a pattern of repeated behavior. We've seen this
Speaker 8: with the whole Nature Positive Laws, which is the big
Speaker 8: new green bureaucracy that this government wants to bring in.
Speaker 8: We put in a freedom of information request a couple
Speaker 8: of months ago to the Department and they said there
Speaker 8: was something like two hundred and twenty thousand documents relating
Speaker 8: to the nature positive laws, but they weren't going to
Speaker 8: release them into public. So there's a pattern here of
Speaker 8: having closed workshop meetings with stakeholders. We have to sign
Speaker 8: confidentiality or non disclosure agreements in order to view legislation.
Speaker 8: We've also seen that with religious freedom laws.
Speaker 3: Again, what's the point of going through that process if
Speaker 3: you can't actually then speak about what you've seen well.
Speaker 8: Because the government just wants to say they've consulted, They
Speaker 8: don't want people to be heard and they don't want
Speaker 8: people to speak out. So you know something else is
Speaker 8: going on here. But you know this is only going
Speaker 8: to be the beginning of what we see in terms
Speaker 8: of this anti development agenda from this government.
Speaker 3: And you've got people within the indigenous communities saying these
Speaker 3: Aboriginal heritage laws are being misused, they've been corrupted, hijacked,
Speaker 3: whatever way you want to describe it. And again that's
Speaker 3: not only divisive, but they're using that in really in
Speaker 3: a cynical manner to hold back this development at a
Speaker 3: time where we need investment we need jobs, we need
Speaker 3: more taxes and loyalties to go to our state governments well.
Speaker 8: Exactly, and depending on the location of approject it can
Speaker 8: often be Indigenous people that are some of the main
Speaker 8: beneficiaries of these projects, whether it is through the royalty
Speaker 8: distribution as you mentioned, or through employment opportunities, which is
Speaker 8: exactly what people on the ground need. This also has
Speaker 8: I think the vibes of the Western Australian cultural heritage
Speaker 8: laws in using claim tangible or intangible Indigenous cultural heritage
Speaker 8: as a mechanism to stop development and to stop investment.
Speaker 8: So I think that this may be a sign of
Speaker 8: what is to come.
Speaker 4: Now it must be a day ending.
Speaker 3: And why because the Guardian is published another hysterical piece
Speaker 3: of nonsense. I mean, it happens daily. I don't know
Speaker 3: why we even highlight it anymore. This time they're pushing
Speaker 3: the theory that Elon Musk could plan and insurrection if
Speaker 3: Donald Trump loses the presidential election.
Speaker 4: Let me read this extract to you.
Speaker 3: Britain's twenty twenty four summer riots were Elon Musk's trial balloon.
Speaker 4: He got away with it.
Speaker 3: And if you're not terrified by both the extraordinary super
Speaker 3: national power of that and the potential consequences should be.
Speaker 4: Are you terrified, Dan, Well, what.
Speaker 8: I'm terrified is the censorial nature of the left. I mean,
Speaker 8: in the UK they are putting people in jail for
Speaker 8: putting memes and opinion on social media. I don't think
Speaker 8: the Guardian has spoken out against that, of course not
Speaker 8: they support it. They support it because they fundamentally you know,
Speaker 8: as it currently stands, democracy is only working for one side.
Speaker 8: If you speak out as a mainstream citizen in the
Speaker 8: Western world, you will be brutally shut down or canceled
Speaker 8: or put in jail. That is where we are. Twitter
Speaker 8: is perhaps one of the only forums that is left
Speaker 8: on the Internet where people can have almost unfettered speech.
Speaker 8: Of course, with unfettered speech, people will say all kinds
Speaker 8: of horrible things that should be regulated by the platform
Speaker 8: in some way. But in terms of actually having it
Speaker 8: going on there and putting your opinion, you can't do
Speaker 8: it on Facebook. You mentioned the nuclear poster banned on
Speaker 8: or sense it on Facebook. So this is one of
Speaker 8: the last avenues for free speech in the Western world,
Speaker 8: and the left is mercilessly trying to shut it down.
Speaker 3: It's just like if they have a conservative program or columnist,
Speaker 3: even if ninety five percent of the media leans the
Speaker 3: other way. They want to shut down that last remaining
Speaker 3: contrary opinion.
Speaker 4: Dan Wild, thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 3: Thank you joining me now is best selling author Douglas.
Speaker 4: Murray Douglas.
Speaker 3: The Democratic National Convention is underway, and we are told
Speaker 3: the Democrats are.
Speaker 4: All of our joy.
Speaker 3: But inside and outside the venue, it appears that the
Speaker 3: modern left is devoid of joy. There are violent protests
Speaker 3: from a range of activists outside in Chicago and inside
Speaker 3: the convention.
Speaker 4: We've had plenty of vitriol, including.
Speaker 3: President Biden's manic rant where he repeated many debunk lies
Speaker 3: like this.
Speaker 5: Well, the president was asked what he thought had happened.
Speaker 5: Donald Trump said, night quote, there are very fine people
Speaker 5: on both sides.
Speaker 6: My god, that's what he said. That is what he said,
Speaker 6: and what he meant. I realized, headless of the admission.
Speaker 5: Of my dead son, I could not stay in the sidelines.
Speaker 4: Very rare, Douglas.
Speaker 3: Even Snopes has debunked this vague news. But President Biden
Speaker 3: persists with this inflammatory lie even after an assassination attempt.
Speaker 3: Almost so President Trump's short dead Why do the Democrats
Speaker 3: persist with this lie. Why are they so tied to
Speaker 3: this narrative?
Speaker 1: Absolutely, it's just one of a set of completely debunkable
Speaker 1: lies that just should have no place of politics. If
Speaker 1: people want to stop lying in politics, they should start
Speaker 1: by just not lying themselves. Joe Biden has been using
Speaker 1: this complete misquotation from what former President Trump said after
Speaker 1: the Charlottesville appalling scenes there twenty seventeen. He has kept
Speaker 1: using this claim that Donald Trump simply said find people
Speaker 1: on both sides, as opposed to some of the people
Speaker 1: trying to defend statues in the area will find people,
Speaker 1: but went on to say that there was no excuse
Speaker 1: to the neo Nazis, white supremacists, and someone who were
Speaker 1: on show that day. Joe Biden has had plenty of
Speaker 1: opportunity to correct himself, but he just doesn't. He's determined
Speaker 1: to stick to the narrative. And if you look at
Speaker 1: that very strange performance of his last night, it's a
Speaker 1: complete replica of performances he's done before. He talks about Charlottesville.
Speaker 1: He claims that Donald Trump praised the neo Nazis. He
Speaker 1: then cites his late son Bo and it's as if
Speaker 1: Biden knows this will fire himself up, and he hopes
Speaker 1: will fire his supporters up. It's the same thing with
Speaker 1: the Democrats trying to claim that form President Trump referred
Speaker 1: to a blood bath coming if he comes back as
Speaker 1: opposed to a blood bath for the automobile industry, if
Speaker 1: Harris woure to get in. But you know, as I say,
Speaker 1: if people actually care about lying in politics, just don't lie.
Speaker 1: And these are just straight out, completely verifiable lies that
Speaker 1: Biden is telling about the person who was his opponent.
Speaker 1: I think it's just appalling. And if Trump was doing this,
Speaker 1: people would call it out. I see no reason why
Speaker 1: they shouldn't do it if Biden is, especially if.
Speaker 3: It had been an assassination attempt against President Biden, and
Speaker 3: you still put forward these really ugly inflammatory lies.
Speaker 5: Now.
Speaker 3: President Biden was also angry about the Israel Hamas war.
Speaker 3: He wants a permanency swine. He thinks that the anti
Speaker 3: Israeli protesters outside the venue have a point. Biden, let's
Speaker 3: have it. Listen to what he said about these protests.
Speaker 5: And finally, finally finally deliver a cease fireing and this war.
Speaker 5: Those protesters out in the street, they have.
Speaker 3: A point, Douglas, your reaction to that, and looking forward,
Speaker 3: what sort of foreign policy can we expect from a
Speaker 3: Harris Walls administration. Kamala has also made it clear she
Speaker 3: does not see this war through a binary lens.
Speaker 1: To use her words, well, I mean, again, such a
Speaker 1: bizarre performance by Biden. I mean, he's so angry, so
Speaker 1: so sort of filled with fury, which I just can't
Speaker 1: help thinking looks completely put on. I have to say,
Speaker 1: it just looks completely staged and fake to me, that performance,
Speaker 1: as if he's trying to show there's there's there's a
Speaker 1: life in the older guy yet. But yeah, he whipped
Speaker 1: himself up to that, and then that very strange clane
Speaker 1: that people outside have a point. Well, well, yes, I
Speaker 1: mean everybody wants the killing to stop. Everyone wants the
Speaker 1: water to stop. The follow on question, the only important
Speaker 1: question is on whose terms? Is it once Hamaz has
Speaker 1: been destroyed or surrendered and given back the remaining Israeli hostages,
Speaker 1: or is it just stop now because everybody hates killing? Well,
Speaker 1: I have to say, I mean, I'm not sure how
Speaker 1: much Joe Biden is able to think this through anymore.
Speaker 1: But I'm not sure whether Kamala Harris has much of
Speaker 1: an ability to think it through either. I mean the
Speaker 1: banalities that come from these people outside the DNC in
Speaker 1: Chicago this week, by the way, which include people flying
Speaker 1: Hamaz flags and wearing has Bilar uniforms, which by the way,
Speaker 1: has prescribed terrorist organizations ought to be an offense in
Speaker 1: the United States. But let's park that for now. If
Speaker 1: he thinks they have a point, well, why doesn't he
Speaker 1: say to them that if you want to free Gaza,
Speaker 1: the best thing to do is to free Gaza from Hamaz.
Speaker 2: Why doesn't he.
Speaker 1: Correct these people? Because what he has realized in last year,
Speaker 1: and what I think Kamala Harris, if she does become president,
Speaker 1: will realize very fast, is these kinds of protesters are
Speaker 1: not going to stop with a little bit of on
Speaker 1: the one side. On the other ism, they burned the
Speaker 1: American flag in the Capitol of DC, as well as
Speaker 1: the Israeli flag. These protesters, these are not some kind
Speaker 1: of you know, simply want to cause a cease fire
Speaker 1: and stop for killing sort of Diali Lama or I
Speaker 1: don't know, Buddhists sort of you know, pacifists. Far far
Speaker 1: from it.
Speaker 3: You're so right there They've shown us who they are
Speaker 3: over and over again, and some politicians in the media
Speaker 3: refused to see it. Now on the issue of the economy,
Speaker 3: and it's probably the number one issue in America along
Speaker 3: with the illegal immigration crisis.
Speaker 4: You've written in the.
Speaker 3: New York Post about the choice Americans face in November,
Speaker 3: and when it comes to comic policies, you argue the
Speaker 3: choices between those who.
Speaker 4: Will grow the size of the economy and those.
Speaker 3: Who will grow the size of the state. Kamala Harris
Speaker 3: is arguing strongly that Americans should continue to march forward.
Speaker 4: Is that how you say it?
Speaker 1: Yes, of course, because in the same way that Joe
Speaker 1: Biden sees all things as being either him or the Nazis.
Speaker 1: In the case of Kamala Harris, of course, her great
Speaker 1: insight into politics is that we should go forwards, not backwards.
Speaker 1: And actually, as I mentioned in that piece in your post,
Speaker 1: when it comes to economy, going backwards a bit wouldn't
Speaker 1: be such a bad thing. The economy between twenty sixteen
Speaker 1: twenty twenty did far better, and that's until the COVID
Speaker 1: disaster did far better, certainly than the Harris Biden administration
Speaker 1: has managed economically in the four years since, and you
Speaker 1: simply need to look at any of the figures, whether
Speaker 1: it's median household income, whether it's like the rise in
Speaker 1: median household income for Black Americans, by the way, which
Speaker 1: was better under Trump than under Obama, as well as
Speaker 1: much better than it has been under Trump, Harris, if
Speaker 1: you look at just things like inflation, which is, you know,
Speaker 1: causing just devastation to Americans paying their bills each month,
Speaker 1: or you go to something like the attainability of getting
Speaker 1: on the household ladder, first time home ownership is is
Speaker 1: tougher now than it's been in America at any point
Speaker 1: since nineteen eighty four. And so when Kamala Harris says,
Speaker 1: you know, we need to go forwards into this great world,
Speaker 1: which by the way, I've been the second most important
Speaker 1: person in for the last four years, but give me
Speaker 1: a chance for another four years, because that's where it
Speaker 1: will really improve, I think people just need to look
Speaker 1: at the figures. The figures in the economy under Biden
Speaker 1: Harris have been really pretty woeful. And Harris should certainly
Speaker 1: come up with a better plan than let's go forward.
Speaker 1: If she's going to persuade the electorate in November.
Speaker 3: Well, given some of her economic policies about price controls,
Speaker 3: I think the less she says, the better will be
Speaker 3: for her, because it's wow, she's quite radical in some
Speaker 3: of those positions. Now, on a different issue, we've spoken
Speaker 3: about the attacks against you personally, Elon Musk, from some
Speaker 3: very prominent voices in the UK who want you both arrested.
Speaker 4: Some are calling for you to be jailed.
Speaker 3: Our own ABC here in Australia is also a lover
Speaker 3: of censorship. It's a state funded, taxpayer funded broadcaster. Their
Speaker 3: Media Watch program claims that the ex owner, Elon Musk,
Speaker 3: is increasingly using his platform to spread misinformation and in
Speaker 3: flames social division, and they ask can governments and regulators
Speaker 3: tame the media mogul? Is that really what's happening, Douglas?
Speaker 3: And is this a good use of our one billion
Speaker 3: plus dollars of taxpayer money that goes to the ABC
Speaker 3: every single year?
Speaker 2: Exactly?
Speaker 1: I mean it's amazing, isn't it. Reta in Australia, in Canada,
Speaker 1: in Britain, with all these countries among others, have national
Speaker 1: broadcasters and as you say, they're in receipt of huge
Speaker 1: amounts of public money and when I see those completely
Speaker 1: indentured broadcasters attacking day after day Elon Musk as having
Speaker 1: too much power in the media. Sorry, guys, you are
Speaker 1: the guys who were literally given a monopoly which has
Speaker 1: to be broken up by the free market. You're the
Speaker 1: guys who are still subsidized, and you're the guys who
Speaker 1: can pump out disinformation all the time under the guise
Speaker 1: of a fish the official sort of you know, version
Speaker 1: of events, and still ridiculously have some legitimacy for doing so.
Speaker 1: The reason why they're going for Elon Musk, among other things,
Speaker 1: is that he's beating them all effectively in the ratings.
Speaker 2: Ex.
Speaker 1: Twitter under his ownership has become so much more respected
Speaker 1: and used as a news source than ABC and others
Speaker 1: that of course they're concerned. Of course they're worried. They
Speaker 1: should be, because it's perfectly possible that it's not just
Speaker 1: evil Elon Musk that they've got to rail against. Actually,
Speaker 1: the problem for them is the audience. They are losing
Speaker 1: their audience all the time. They keep their billion dollar subsidies,
Speaker 1: oh yeah, but they're losing audience all the time, and
Speaker 1: they're losing them, among other things, to Elon Musk and
Speaker 1: so of course they're better. I don't think they're going
Speaker 1: to have much luck extraditing Elon Musk and the few
Speaker 1: people are complete cranks in the UK who've been calling
Speaker 1: for some kind of censure of me. I've got a
Speaker 1: horrible surprise for them. They're not going to silence me either.
Speaker 1: You might as well give it up, guys.
Speaker 3: Well, they are sold against a free speech in the UK,
Speaker 3: the two tier policing, the two tier justice system.
Speaker 4: There is something that is concerning people around the world.
Speaker 3: I do wonder if people in the UK realize that
Speaker 3: a lot of us around the world are looking on
Speaker 3: in horror and at a time where in the UK
Speaker 3: violent criminals are including killers, are having their jail times
Speaker 3: slashed because of overcrowding, they are prioritizing locking up what
Speaker 3: they call far right extremists. Let's hear here from Mark
Speaker 3: Fairhurst on the BBC.
Speaker 9: We will guarantee a prison style. We will make sure
Speaker 9: that those people who need to be in prison will
Speaker 9: be in prison, not necessarily in the area where they live.
Speaker 9: They may be two three hundred miles away from home,
Speaker 9: but we will guarantee people at prison.
Speaker 2: Self.
Speaker 3: Douglas, you've written in the Spectator about the persecution of
Speaker 3: the plubs as you've put it, explain what you mean
Speaker 3: by that and this assault against free spreech in the UK,
Speaker 3: and it really is I think quite effective because you're
Speaker 3: seeing people being arrested for online posts, for retweeting something,
Speaker 3: for attending a rally that was violent, even if they
Speaker 3: didn't participate in any of the violence. You can see
Speaker 3: why people are refraining from saying what they think.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the point of this piece, and of course they
Speaker 1: use plebs in inverted commas. I mean, it's My point
Speaker 1: is is that I suspect that the authorities, if they
Speaker 1: try to go down this route, will have quite a
Speaker 1: hard time, as I say, taking out some elon Musk,
Speaker 1: and they'd have a hard time taking out in that case.
Speaker 1: I cited Rowan Atkinson, great comedian who some years ago
Speaker 1: defended the speech laws in the UK against further encroachment
Speaker 1: against the freedom of speech in Britain. As Ron Atkinson
Speaker 1: said then ten years ago he said, I don't think
Speaker 1: they're going to kind of come for me, but I
Speaker 1: think that the people who have less of a profile
Speaker 1: or no profile could be very vulnerable in this situation.
Speaker 1: I said what Ron Atkinson saw ten years or more
Speaker 1: ago is exactly what's happening now, because actually what's happening
Speaker 1: is that as well as by the way that the
Speaker 1: sudden discovery that our prisoners have got masses of room
Speaker 1: in them apparently, and the discovery by the police, who
Speaker 1: can't solve a burglary in most areas in the UK
Speaker 1: and haven't for years, their discovery that they can be
Speaker 1: a really crack hit squad when it comes to police
Speaker 1: sing Twitter is an amazing discovery for them and apart
Speaker 1: from anything else, it makes their lives a lot easier.
Speaker 1: It's quite difficult, not that difficult, but it's quite difficult
Speaker 1: to chase down career criminals who are routine lee burglaring
Speaker 1: villages and cities in the UK. Relatively easy, by contrast,
Speaker 1: just knock on somebody's door and say I see that
Speaker 1: you retweeted this thing, and it's regarded as being hate,
Speaker 1: so come with me. But it's not much as a
Speaker 1: laugh for the people whose lives are destroyed. And here's
Speaker 1: the thing. There have been people in recent weeks in
Speaker 1: the UK who said terrible things online. There were some
Speaker 1: people who definitely said racist things online. There are other
Speaker 1: people who retweeted things, including information in the wake of
Speaker 1: the Southport murders that turned out not to be true.
Speaker 1: But what an amazing direction the resources of the police
Speaker 1: are put in. Weeks after the Southport stabbings of the
Speaker 1: three girls slaughtered at a Taylor Swift Dance party, we
Speaker 1: don't know almost anything about the killer, the alleged killer,
Speaker 1: as I have to say, the court system will probably
Speaker 1: take a very long time to bring him to justice.
Speaker 1: The media, by the way, doesn't seem to be particularly
Speaker 1: bothered about him, or his identity or anything that might
Speaker 1: have inspired him to this act of terror.
Speaker 2: They've just that's all sort of fallen away.
Speaker 1: What they have managed to focus on is people retweeting
Speaker 1: things that turned out not to be true in the
Speaker 1: wake of that. Oh, and those people have had special
Speaker 1: courts set up for them and all night sittings and more,
Speaker 1: and the jail cells have been found for them. Well,
Speaker 1: how about speeding up justice when it comes to, for instance,
Speaker 1: slaughtering young girls at a Taylor Swift Dance Cup party.
Speaker 1: But you can lock up a tweeter in twenty four hours.
Speaker 1: Great example of a completely corrupted and politicized justice system
Speaker 1: right there.
Speaker 4: Douglas Murray, thank you so much for your time this evening.
Speaker 4: Thank you still to come.
Speaker 3: Lefty's losing head and what's what happens when army horror
Speaker 3: witch gets the mic at an anti Israeli protest.
Speaker 4: It doesn't end well. Welcome back.
Speaker 3: Now it's time for lefties losing it and the DNC
Speaker 3: lunacy has really kicked into gear. We've even got NBA
Speaker 3: coach Steve Kerr, you know, taken near Kerr.
Speaker 4: He was there and he had a message for Donald Trump.
Speaker 5: In the words of the Great Steph Curry, we can
Speaker 5: tell Donald Trump.
Speaker 7: N n.
Speaker 4: No, no no.
Speaker 3: The Warriors coach had a lot more to say than
Speaker 3: just that. He spoke about why he was there making
Speaker 3: a fool of himself, why he backs the Democrats.
Speaker 4: He explained what he looks for in a leader.
Speaker 2: I believe that leaders must display dignity. I believe that
Speaker 2: leaders must tell the true truth.
Speaker 4: Got it, Dignity and truth.
Speaker 3: Let's get a dose of that with the leader that
Speaker 3: Steve Kerr backs right now. Joe Biden, who spoke sometime
Speaker 3: after Kerr, was way past this bedtime, and it was
Speaker 3: a manic, incoherent rant.
Speaker 4: He told women that had no electrical or electoral power.
Speaker 4: Try to figure this out.
Speaker 5: Women were not without electrical not allowed, not without electoral,
Speaker 5: electoral or political power.
Speaker 4: No kidding, no kidding.
Speaker 3: But let'sus get back to that dignity thing. Steve Kerr
Speaker 3: was talking about dignity and truth, and here we see
Speaker 3: that sort of glorious dignity of Biden repeating verifiable lies
Speaker 3: to so racial division, and in doing so he even
Speaker 3: invoked the name of his dead son.
Speaker 4: It's not very dignified in my book, and.
Speaker 5: Changing the same exact anti Semitic bio that was hurt
Speaker 5: in Germany in the early thirties Neo Nazis white supremacist
Speaker 5: Ni krukus Klan. When the President was asked what he
Speaker 5: thought had happened, Donald Trump said, I quote, there are
Speaker 5: very fine people on both sides.
Speaker 6: My god, that's what he said. That is what he said,
Speaker 6: and what he meant. That's what I realized. Had listened
Speaker 6: to the abuition of my dead son. I could not
Speaker 6: stay in the sidelines. So I ran.
Speaker 3: So dignified, so truthful, so full of joy. That demented
Speaker 3: Die tribe was, of course devoid of fact.
Speaker 4: We told you that years ago it's all on video.
Speaker 3: The Fine People hoax is just that Trump did condemn
Speaker 3: the Neo Nazis and race unequivocally.
Speaker 10: And you had people and I'm not talking about the
Speaker 10: neo Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be
Speaker 10: condemned totally, but you had many people in that group
Speaker 10: other than Neo Nazis and white nationalists, okay, And the
Speaker 10: press has treated them absolutely unfairly.
Speaker 3: And yet years later, the Democrats from Joe Biden down
Speaker 3: continue to push that dangerous, divisive lie, even after President
Speaker 3: Trump was almost assassinated. It's beyond despicable, but Steve Kerr
Speaker 3: thinks it's dignified and full of truth and unity.
Speaker 4: Now. Old Joe also seemed.
Speaker 3: Confused because he credited himself and particularly Kamala for reopening
Speaker 3: schools during the pandemic.
Speaker 5: During the pandemic, Commahi helped states and cities get back
Speaker 5: your schools back open.
Speaker 3: Kamala helped get the schools back open. Really, do the
Speaker 3: Democrats think we have forgotten? They ran attack ads against
Speaker 3: Donald Trump for wanting to reopen schools.
Speaker 5: Remember this, desperate to reopen schools because he thinks it
Speaker 5: will save his reelection.
Speaker 2: We have to open the schools.
Speaker 4: Critical shortage of PPE.
Speaker 10: Threatening they're funding when they don't open their schools, We're
Speaker 10: not going to fund.
Speaker 5: Them, ignoring how the virus spreads, risking teachers and parents' lives,
Speaker 5: going against the advice of experts, so very little.
Speaker 2: Impact on young people.
Speaker 4: Trump was one hundred percent ride there.
Speaker 3: The virus had very little impact on young, healthy kids,
Speaker 3: and schools should have never been closed. And that was
Speaker 3: only one of the many, many verifiable lives uttered on
Speaker 3: the DNC stage by Biden and others. Indeed, the whole
Speaker 3: thing seemed to be less about Carmala and walls and
Speaker 3: the Democrats' vision and really all about Trump Trump trump.
Speaker 6: Trump donald Trump, donald trump, donald trump, donald trump, donald trump,
Speaker 6: donald trump.
Speaker 11: Donald trump, donald trump, donald trump.
Speaker 5: Donald trump, donald trump, donald trump, trump Trump. Who in
Speaker 5: the hell does he think he is?
Speaker 2: Who goes he think he is?
Speaker 3: Indeed, there was very little set of the DNC about
Speaker 3: the big issues facing the country.
Speaker 4: Throughout the day.
Speaker 3: There was only three mentions of inflation, only eight of
Speaker 3: the border, six mentions of crime, but more than one
Speaker 3: hundred and forty mentions of Donald Trump. They seem a
Speaker 3: tad obsessed and get ready for more lefties content with
Speaker 3: my next guest.
Speaker 4: Who is playing a dangerous game.
Speaker 3: With leftist agitators in Chicago. Here he is starting a
Speaker 3: chant with these clowns before revealing to them.
Speaker 4: That he is in fact pro Israel.
Speaker 2: How to get behind the bikes?
Speaker 5: Please?
Speaker 2: What's up?
Speaker 5: Everybody behind the bikes not in front of the police
Speaker 5: are playing right now?
Speaker 1: The people.
Speaker 3: On this road line, Oh good, lord is going to
Speaker 3: get himself hurt again. Joining me now from the Democratic
Speaker 3: National Convention in Chicago is journalist and documentary filmmaker Army Horowitz. Army,
Speaker 3: you've already been assaulted by anti Israeli activists this year
Speaker 3: when you had the temerity to turn up with an
Speaker 3: American flag. Tell me about what is happening in the
Speaker 3: streets of Chicago right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, look at that video. God, that guy was an idiot.
Speaker 2: What was who was he thinking?
Speaker 10: Uh?
Speaker 2: You know, look, you're caught up in a moment, right,
Speaker 2: I sign an opportunity. I'll tell you when how I
Speaker 2: went down a little background of that. But this there's
Speaker 2: you know, look, this is not hyperbole. Does not make
Speaker 2: us making you know, uh, words up that are actually
Speaker 2: more dramac and they actually are. If you walk around,
Speaker 2: I ask people, I interview these people, they said to me,
Speaker 2: we are Prohmas. In fact, one guy had a that
Speaker 2: said we should arm Hamas, not Israel. When I asked them,
Speaker 2: should we see destruction of the Jewish state, they emphatically
Speaker 2: said yes. So when I saw the guy who was
Speaker 2: running this rally, the main pro Hamas rally at the
Speaker 2: DNC in front of the Israeli consulate, and he was
Speaker 2: chanting till the cops. He was chanting destroy Israel. And
Speaker 2: of course he was also chanting how much he hated
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris and Joe Biden. Right, make no mistake about it.
Speaker 2: Her coming up to where she was, her elevation, maybe
Speaker 2: even kind of a coup to take over and push
Speaker 2: out Joe Biden has created no love among these radicals,
Speaker 2: make no mistake about it. They hate her. Still, they
Speaker 2: are still not going to vote for her because look,
Speaker 2: she said very clearly, I'm the last person in the room. Right.
Speaker 2: She has taken ownership of all of Joe Biden's policies,
Speaker 2: good and bad. Mostly bad. They realized that. So when
Speaker 2: they when she says hey, uh, and she tries to
Speaker 2: suck up to them and meet with the dearborn Michigan
Speaker 2: mayor secretly, by the way, so nobody knew about it.
Speaker 2: When when when waltz uh has has talked about how
Speaker 2: a a in a mom in his area who was
Speaker 2: an October seventh enthusiast, he spoke with him five times
Speaker 2: publicly called him a master class teacher. This stuff has
Speaker 2: actually not moved the meal for these people. They are
Speaker 2: animals out there attacking the police. And by the way,
Speaker 2: I gotta say, I got to give it up to
Speaker 2: the Chicago Police department. They are not taking crap. They
Speaker 2: are pushing these guys back. They are not unlike the
Speaker 2: police in Papolis during Waltz we gave them roof to breathe.
Speaker 2: The Chicago police have got this stuff locked down. I
Speaker 2: gotta say I was very impressed by it. I went
Speaker 2: to all the riots across the country. They did a
Speaker 2: great job. So yeah, no, there's chaos in the streets.
Speaker 2: But they are not going for.
Speaker 4: Kambalayrs Well, I'm not sure about that.
Speaker 3: They're certainly not going to vote for Donald Trump because
Speaker 3: he's as pro Asrael as they come. So in the end,
Speaker 3: and this is the argument the Democrats are making to them,
Speaker 3: is that what else are you going to do if
Speaker 3: you don't vote for us, that's effectively a vote for
Speaker 3: Donald Trump, even if you stay away and don't.
Speaker 4: Vote that day.
Speaker 3: And I wonder whether that was behind Joe Biden having
Speaker 3: sympathy for these protesters.
Speaker 12: The.
Speaker 5: Civilian suffering of the Palace Indian people and finally, finally,
Speaker 5: finally deliver a cease firing in this war. Those protesters
Speaker 5: out in the street, they have a point.
Speaker 3: I mean, you said, the protesters out on the street
Speaker 3: have a pointer. We had Barack Obama speak tonight at
Speaker 3: the DANC.
Speaker 4: We know what his Middle.
Speaker 3: East policy was, we know what the Biden Harris administration
Speaker 3: position has been. And it's no surprise that these protests
Speaker 3: feel emboldened.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, Look, there's no question that they are desperate
Speaker 2: to try to get these people to vote for them
Speaker 2: on this election. Right then, particularly in Michigan, Right, that's
Speaker 2: kind of where they're saying, Hey, if we lose these votes,
Speaker 2: we may lose Michigan, and also in Pennsylvania's quite a
Speaker 2: few of them. The reality is, of course, to be emboldened. Absolutely.
Speaker 2: Look but that clip you showed, that's the real good
Speaker 2: people on both sides clip right, not the BS one
Speaker 2: they made about dob Top you mentioned before. Their signs
Speaker 2: are clear. They're not hiding the ball here when he's
Speaker 2: talking about they have a good point. Explain to me
Speaker 2: what point you're referring to, because when I was with them,
Speaker 2: they were calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.
Speaker 2: And by the way, they were crapp on you too,
Speaker 2: genocide Joe as they call them, or killer Kamala and
Speaker 2: they call her. I don't think you're right. When I
Speaker 2: was talking these protesters about are you gonna vote for Kamala?
Speaker 2: They all said no, And I asked them, this is
Speaker 2: going to this might lead to a Trump victory. They
Speaker 2: don't care. They want to see the destruction of our system.
Speaker 2: And they're they're they were chanting, by the way, not
Speaker 2: just down with Israel, down to cops. They were chanting
Speaker 2: down with the DNC, down with the Democrats. They are
Speaker 2: not down with the Democrats, that's for sure.
Speaker 3: Okay, well, we'll see, we'll see how those votes go.
Speaker 3: You don't have compulsory voting in America, so you do
Speaker 3: have the option to stay away. In Australia, it's a
Speaker 3: different system. If we don't turn up to vote, we
Speaker 3: get fined. That's an issue for another day. But that's true,
Speaker 3: and the radicals aren't just add saw.
Speaker 11: It is true.
Speaker 3: That's that's we've got compulsory voting in this country, preferential voting,
Speaker 3: very different system to yours.
Speaker 4: But the radicals aren't just in the streets army.
Speaker 3: There's plenty of radicals inside the DNC venue and giving
Speaker 3: an insight into how far left the Democrats have veered
Speaker 3: in recent years, we've learned that the head of a
Speaker 3: prominent social justice group that's what they call themselves, who
Speaker 3: has published an essay calling for decriminalizing of terrorist group
Speaker 3: of mass has visited the White House multiple times this year.
Speaker 4: That's according to official logs.
Speaker 3: Joyce al Joni's group has also called for the defunding
Speaker 3: of police forces and the elimination of immigration agencies.
Speaker 4: Why would a character like.
Speaker 3: This have access to the White House and who they
Speaker 3: meeting with?
Speaker 4: What sort of.
Speaker 3: Influence are they having. I just find it astonishing that
Speaker 3: people who are this far well to the left, to
Speaker 3: the right, they're just in my mind, borderline extremist. Why
Speaker 3: are they getting access to the bought An administration and
Speaker 3: to the White House.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't think it's borderline extremists. I think these
Speaker 2: are extremists. I don't think there's any let's let's not
Speaker 2: pull our punches here. Look, I think you could look
Speaker 2: at it from a point of view of, hey, we'll
Speaker 2: give them benefit of the doubt or like that there,
Speaker 2: or you're get from the point of view of there's
Speaker 2: a real problem and the call is coming from inside
Speaker 2: the house. Look, if you want to give the benefit
Speaker 2: of the doubt, and this is not really the benefit
Speaker 2: of the doubt. This is also crass and terrible. Their
Speaker 2: viewpoint is electoral, pure electoral, which is, hey, we need
Speaker 2: to win this race, and we will take votes from
Speaker 2: whoever we can get them from. And that means we're
Speaker 2: going to cater and kowtow the pro Hamas wing of
Speaker 2: this party. We will do so. And that's to say
Speaker 2: that they don't believe it. That's to say they're just
Speaker 2: trying to make a political calculation here. There's another reading
Speaker 2: of this, which is and I don't think this is
Speaker 2: Joe right, I do think this is Kamala and it's
Speaker 2: it's it's some other extremists within. Look again, Biden isn't
Speaker 2: running the show. He's not. He's not really president, right,
Speaker 2: So you have to ask the question who's making the invitations.
Speaker 2: I don't think that Joe Biden, right, He's not with us,
Speaker 2: he is no longer with us. So you have to
Speaker 2: ask the question, who are actually putting these invitations out
Speaker 2: to these radicals? Who are really taking the meetings. We
Speaker 2: don't know the answer to that. But the yeah, but
Speaker 2: the truth is gether.
Speaker 4: Is the problem? Well, this is the problem.
Speaker 3: We don't know who in the administration is actually pulling
Speaker 3: the strings because we know it's not Biden who's making
Speaker 3: the key decisions here, I.
Speaker 4: Mean, Horowitz. Stay safe. We'll speak to you again soon.
Speaker 2: What's a pleasure? Thank you?
Speaker 4: Still to come?
Speaker 3: Alex Epstein on social media side censoring factual information about
Speaker 3: nuclear energie. Welcome back to the I read a panety show.
Speaker 3: Joining me now as author of Fossil Future Alex Epstein, Alex,
Speaker 3: we're seeing social media giant meta suppressed debate about energy policy.
Speaker 3: Many Facebook posts promoting pro nuclear lobby group Nuclear for
Speaker 3: Australia have seen their posts removed, supposedly for being misleading
Speaker 3: users who shared a petition to legalize nuclear energy in
Speaker 3: this country and also shared an interview between pro nuclear
Speaker 3: advocate Will Shackle and businessman Dick Smith found their post
Speaker 3: blocked or their accounts suspended. This has impacted quite a
Speaker 3: few people. I wonder what impact is censorship in the
Speaker 3: media and social media having on the energy debate.
Speaker 12: You know, it's hard to say that the scope of it,
Speaker 12: and you know, depending on what it is. If it's
Speaker 12: encouraged by the government, then I consider it censorship. If
Speaker 12: it's just the platform deciding what to do with its
Speaker 12: own platform, I consider that suppression. In either case, I
Speaker 12: consider it wrong, particularly when you're suppressing perfectly reasonable ideas.
Speaker 12: I know, you know my own experience has been I
Speaker 12: see stuff suppressed all the time on meta, Like there's
Speaker 12: one thing where I show a graph about the truth
Speaker 12: about sea levels. How in some places around the world
Speaker 12: they've risen, in some places they stayed the same, and
Speaker 12: in some places they've gone down. And the point is
Speaker 12: that sea level change is mostly local. There is a
Speaker 12: global rise, but it's very slow. It's mostly local changes
Speaker 12: that make a difference. And they flag that as misinformation.
Speaker 12: And you know how they justify that not that anything
Speaker 12: I said is false, but that somebody once used my
Speaker 12: graphic and said something false, So they've basically smeared my
Speaker 12: graphic because somebody made a false statement associated with it.
Speaker 2: So you can just see can you.
Speaker 12: Imagine them doing that the other way, Like if somebody
Speaker 12: had a graphic that somebody made a statement critical of
Speaker 12: fossil fuels and then had a graphic about energy, they
Speaker 12: would suppress that obviously not so you can see this bias.
Speaker 12: It's particularly ominous that it's extending to nuclear in Australia
Speaker 12: because Australia needs to know everything it possibly can about
Speaker 12: why nuclear energy is really good and should be adopted.
Speaker 3: Well, yes, given we're sitting on the world's biggest reserves
Speaker 3: of uranium, it seems particularly mad with the policies we
Speaker 3: have in place at the moment. I'll get back to
Speaker 3: Australia shortly. But the Democrats presidential candidate with the DNC
Speaker 3: underway the moment. But Kamala Harris has a long history
Speaker 3: of being anti fossil fuels. She has said repeatedly that
Speaker 3: she would ban fracking on day one of her administration.
Speaker 4: Let's have a look at this clip from CNN.
Speaker 3: As saying pretty much just that the first time she
Speaker 3: ran for president.
Speaker 11: There's no question I'm in favor of banning fracking, So yeah,
Speaker 11: and starting and starting with what we can do on
Speaker 11: day one around public lands, right, and then there has
Speaker 11: to be a legislation. But yes, and this is something
Speaker 11: I've taken on in California out of a history of
Speaker 11: working on this issue, and to your point, and you
Speaker 11: know that we have to just acknowledge that the residual
Speaker 11: impact of fracking is enormous in terms of the impact
Speaker 11: on the health and safety of communities.
Speaker 3: That was back in twenty nineteen, not that long ago.
Speaker 3: She's now changed to chun Alex. She's saying she is
Speaker 3: not for a fracking ban. Obviously, she wants to win
Speaker 3: swing states like Pennsylvania. But from what you've seen and
Speaker 3: what you know of the policies she has backed, what
Speaker 3: would energy policy in the US look like under a
Speaker 3: Harris administration.
Speaker 12: Well, I'm glad she's feeling pressure to change her policies.
Speaker 12: There doesn't seem to be any real change in conviction.
Speaker 12: I don't know if there ever was any conviction in
Speaker 12: the first place. But it's a good sign that she's
Speaker 12: at least retreating from this idea of banning fracking, because
Speaker 12: banning fracking is an existential threat to the United States.
Speaker 12: You're talking about sixty percent of her oil production, seventy
Speaker 12: five percent of our natural gas production involves fracking, and
Speaker 12: she talks about fracking. Is the threat held in safety?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 12: The threat health in safety is we can't produce oil,
Speaker 12: we can't produce gas. Prices skyrocket around the world. Americans
Speaker 12: can't heat their homes, we can't run their factories.
Speaker 2: That's really bad.
Speaker 12: The worst thing, though, is the continuation of the Biden
Speaker 12: agenda on electricity. This is the real existential threat. We
Speaker 12: already have a grid in crisis, and yet what the
Speaker 12: administration is doing is they're artificially increasing demand for electricity
Speaker 12: by things like mandating a lot of evs, and even worse,
Speaker 12: they're artificially restricting the supply by banning existing coal plants
Speaker 12: through their new EPA rules and then effectively banning new
Speaker 12: natural gas plants to replace those coal plants. So we
Speaker 12: already have a crisis, and they're talking about shutting down
Speaker 12: a fifth plus of our reliable capacity and then not
Speaker 12: allowing us to build natural gas when we need way
Speaker 12: more electricity. Not just for evs, which we shouldn't be
Speaker 12: forcing anyone, but for things like data centers for AI,
Speaker 12: which we're just seeing unprecedented increases in demand force. So
Speaker 12: this is a total crash course. And Harris, if anything,
Speaker 12: would be worse than Biden with her track record. She
Speaker 12: was one of the eleven co sponsors of the Green
Speaker 12: New Deal, which was a fossil fuel and nuclear abolition
Speaker 12: plan proposed a few years ago. So at best, she
Speaker 12: doesn't care at all about energy, and at worst she's
Speaker 12: very hostile to energy. And I think that the truth
Speaker 12: is somewhere in between those two very bad points.
Speaker 3: Well, she's from California, and California has given us an
Speaker 3: example of what we can look forward to if we
Speaker 3: go down this neit zero path wholeheartedly. We know some
Speaker 3: of the radical policies backed in that state.
Speaker 4: How is that going? Are they getting the outcomes they're expecting.
Speaker 1: In California?
Speaker 12: So I'm a Californian, so I think the leaders of it,
Speaker 12: some of them wanted the outcomes we're getting, which is
Speaker 12: more blackouts and less energy use and more poverty. But
Speaker 12: in terms of the outcomes they promised, in terms of
Speaker 12: a glowing green economy and more electricity than ever. No,
Speaker 12: I mean it's you know, there's this story about Gavin
Speaker 12: Newsom announced hey, no more internal combustion engines, you have
Speaker 12: to use evs, and then literally six days later said
Speaker 12: don't charge your evs you don't have enough electricity. It's
Speaker 12: commonplace in California to say, hey, don't run your air
Speaker 12: conditioning during summer, we don't have enough electricity. You know,
Speaker 12: electricity companies, not just in California but in other places
Speaker 12: influenced by bad policy, including Texas, they've come to be
Speaker 12: electricity rationing agencies. It's like a Soviet style thing. In
Speaker 12: the past, electricity companies tried to get you to use
Speaker 12: more electricity. Now they're trying to get you to use
Speaker 12: less because we're not actually allowed to produce electricity.
Speaker 3: Now it's finally we are seeing here in Australia and
Speaker 3: elsewhere in countries that have embraced it zero policies that
Speaker 3: really manipulate the market. They push renewables restrict or sometimes
Speaker 3: outright ban everything else, from nuclear to gas exploration to
Speaker 3: coal plants. Can the renewable sector survive without government handouts
Speaker 3: and market manipulation.
Speaker 2: No, I mean there's no evidence.
Speaker 12: So what I'm in favor of is what I call
Speaker 12: energy freedom. So every source of energy is free to compete.
Speaker 2: You know, we were free to produce and consume them.
Speaker 12: And in electricity, what that means is everyone can compete,
Speaker 12: but everyone has to produce reliable electricity. You don't allow
Speaker 12: this charade of solar and wind get paid the same
Speaker 12: to produce unreliable electricity, and then un fossil fuels and
Speaker 12: nuclear produce reliable electricity. That doesn't make any sense. And
Speaker 12: what ends up happening is you reward unreliable electricity, you
Speaker 12: start to bankrupt reliable electricity. And then the other factor
Speaker 12: you mentioned, which is the worst factor, is that we
Speaker 12: are restricting or shackling reliable stuff. So it's one thing
Speaker 12: to impoverish people by forcing them to pay for unreliable energy,
Speaker 12: that's really bad. It's far worse to prevent people from
Speaker 12: producing and using reliable energy. That's what we're seeing on
Speaker 12: our grid in America, you're seeing those pressures in Australia,
Speaker 12: You're seeing that around the world. So subsidizing unreliables and
Speaker 12: shackling reliables is a death sentence to grids and that's
Speaker 12: unfortunately what the current administration is doing. And we need
Speaker 12: to just liberate energy. We should, you know, the ideal
Speaker 12: should be America, Australia. We should have the lowest cost,
Speaker 12: most reliablectricity in the world. We have all the raw
Speaker 12: materials to do it, we have the ingenuity to do it,
Speaker 12: but we have insane, ultimately anti human, certainly anti energy
Speaker 12: policies that are causing us to We've basically uninvented affordable,
Speaker 12: reliable electricity.
Speaker 3: That is a wonderful way to put it, and you
Speaker 3: are so right. I think it applies to Australia even
Speaker 3: more so than the US.
Speaker 4: Alex Epstein, thank you so much for your time this evening.
Speaker 1: Great to see you.
Speaker 4: That's it for me. I'll see you at eleven tomorrow.
Speaker 4: Up next is Newsnight.