Speaker 1: Lee, welcome the Late Bay.
Speaker 2: Well, good evening, It's great to have your company. I'm
Speaker 2: James Macpherson with Liz Storer and filling in for Caleb Bond,
Speaker 2: who's home unwell tonight. We wish you all the best.
Speaker 2: Caleb is Denika de Georgio. We've got a lot to
Speaker 2: get through tonight, including Sunshine Coast Twins go viral around
Speaker 2: the world after a TV interview. You've got to see
Speaker 2: to believe. We'll show you that a little later. Plus
Speaker 2: when we look at what's making news tomorrow, Peter Dutton
Speaker 2: with a big announcement on defense spending and the cyclist
Speaker 2: involved in a crash involving Dan Andrews awarded a massive payout.
Speaker 2: All of that coming up shortly, but first let's start
Speaker 2: the program by asking how do you think the Teals
Speaker 2: elected on a platform of transparency and integrity are going.
Speaker 2: Here's how Teal MP Monique Ryan began when elected to
Speaker 2: Parliament three years ago. Have a listened.
Speaker 3: In recent years, the people of Australia have lost faith
Speaker 3: in our political system. We have been shamed by the
Speaker 3: lack of integrity and transparency that it has shown. We
Speaker 3: have lost trust in its processes. And have become disaffected
Speaker 3: and disappointed.
Speaker 2: Well that was then, But here's Melik Ryan. Now, oh yeah.
Speaker 4: We don't want to interrupt, but we just wanted to. Yeah,
Speaker 4: we are well in the interest of bit of transparency.
Speaker 5: We just thought maybe we just want to know how
Speaker 5: your campaign's going this morning.
Speaker 3: Well, thanks, Laura, I am here to engage your photos
Speaker 3: through a prepole.
Speaker 2: It's at election. Yeah, so I'm not.
Speaker 3: Sure that this really ideal for you to be interrupting
Speaker 3: that process.
Speaker 4: Have you had any other have you ready?
Speaker 2: I'm not sure what process our Sky News colleague Laura
Speaker 2: Jays was interrupting. If Meniku Ryan wants to engage with voters,
Speaker 2: I would have thought, Liz and Anika that talking to
Speaker 2: the media is a pretty good and standard way to
Speaker 2: engage with voters. Is this what the teals mean by
Speaker 2: politics done differently?
Speaker 4: Clearly?
Speaker 1: Clearly it looks exactly like the old model.
Speaker 4: So I'm a little bit confus here.
Speaker 1: It always amuses me when politicians do this while they're
Speaker 1: scurrying away from cameras, being like, oh, I'm in the
Speaker 1: middle of something else. I've got somewhere else to be
Speaker 1: talk to us, like where your employer, because we are
Speaker 1: we pay your salary, we elect you, we get to
Speaker 1: decide whether or not you get another gig, and you
Speaker 1: bet your bottom dollar, lady. There are plenty of people
Speaker 1: in Quyong who watch Sky, so by talking to Laura Jays,
Speaker 1: you're probably talking to thousands of those voters whose votes.
Speaker 4: You want to turn in your direction.
Speaker 1: Probably not going to happen, though, if you're watching Sky, Tanika.
Speaker 6: No, definitely not.
Speaker 5: And look here we go again with that money crime.
Speaker 5: Sorry doctor money cry, Please don't get that wrongs getting
Speaker 5: that one.
Speaker 6: Rosbie is DoD Monique Ryan. But look here we go again.
Speaker 5: There seems to be some confusion for a person who
Speaker 5: was elected on a platform of integrity and transparency, doctor
Speaker 5: Monique Ryan just can't quite grasp that concept.
Speaker 6: Now. What I particularly liked it from that clip was
Speaker 6: she couldn't just come out and you know, say a
Speaker 6: couple of lines.
Speaker 5: She then had to get a junior staffer, I presume
Speaker 5: it was a junior staffer to trot ride in and
Speaker 5: then say to Laura Jay's, no, no, sorry, she doesn't
Speaker 5: want to speak. There she is on screen again. If
Speaker 5: you're at a public spot, you want to be elected,
Speaker 5: you can't be acting shocked and surprised when the media
Speaker 5: comes knocking at your door wanting to ask genuine questions
Speaker 5: about integrity, because well, who could forget this classic moment
Speaker 5: from Anique Ryan only a few weeks ago on the ABC.
Speaker 2: You'd have to give that some thought.
Speaker 3: Well, uh, I would think that it would be clear.
Speaker 2: I don't know. I think.
Speaker 4: I'd have to give you some thought.
Speaker 5: Oh dear, it never gets any better to watch that.
Speaker 5: But this just is what bothers me about the tials.
Speaker 5: And I'm not just talking solely about Monique Ryan. I'm
Speaker 5: talking about.
Speaker 6: All of the tills.
Speaker 5: They always run away when it comes to anything that
Speaker 5: I want to talk about. It's run, run, run, Well,
Speaker 5: how are you supposed to vote for you if you're
Speaker 5: going to run away?
Speaker 2: Well, it's your point out. It's not just the teal
Speaker 2: politicians who run away, it's also their husband's his Monique
Speaker 2: Ryan's husband taking down liberal coreflute signs and running away.
Speaker 6: They hang on, mate, what are you doing? I'm taking
Speaker 6: the yeah, beg you pardon, I'm taking the side out.
Speaker 3: What are you doing that for?
Speaker 4: It's on public land.
Speaker 2: What amazes me, Liz is how many sections of the
Speaker 2: media continue to fam over the Teals who have been
Speaker 2: exposed over the past three years as rank hypocrites when
Speaker 2: it comes to integrity and trans experiency. They're as bad
Speaker 2: as everybody else. They are not distinguishing themselves at all,
Speaker 2: and yet certain sections of the media continue to fawn
Speaker 2: over them as if there's some new revelation of political
Speaker 2: discourse in the country. They're not. They're the same as
Speaker 2: everybody else, if not worse.
Speaker 1: Indeed, and it's going to be very interesting to see
Speaker 1: how they go this second round, because only once can
Speaker 1: you tell people we're going to be so different, We're
Speaker 1: going to be standouts this lot. We are not like them.
Speaker 1: You can't pull that one trick pony twice.
Speaker 4: Well.
Speaker 1: Around the nation yesterday, early voting centers opened everywhere the
Speaker 1: game is on, except for in Quaker's Hill, where a
Speaker 1: truck bearing liberal signage pulled into the Quaker's Hilk Community
Speaker 1: Center and promptly struck the voting center so hard it
Speaker 1: shunted its roof on to the vehicle, So that has
Speaker 1: been shut down for safety purposes.
Speaker 4: So if you're in Quakers.
Speaker 1: Hill and you are hoping to go to your early
Speaker 1: voting center, well it's just not gonna happen. But get this,
Speaker 1: when the driver realized what he'd done, he promptly removed
Speaker 1: the Liberal signage.
Speaker 4: Here is, oh, here is. We're watching him do it,
Speaker 4: So nobody knew that this was a Liberal truck that
Speaker 4: had done this.
Speaker 1: No, no, he's designaging here's truck.
Speaker 4: So it could have been any truck.
Speaker 1: It could have been anyone that had done this, which
Speaker 1: makes it even more hilarious.
Speaker 4: I mean, you did the crime. Just put your hand
Speaker 4: up and be like, ah, you.
Speaker 2: Know why the Liberal Party truck crashed, don't you. It
Speaker 2: didn't turn right hard enough. That was the problem. But
Speaker 2: of course it makes a mockery of the Liberal slogan
Speaker 2: back on track. It certainly doesn't seem to be back
Speaker 2: on track, but at least they can say their campaign
Speaker 2: hasn't been a train wreck.
Speaker 5: You are really rolling out these punk rehearsing all night. Look,
Speaker 5: the cover up is always worse than the crime, is it.
Speaker 5: I mean, they shouldn't have been ripping that material.
Speaker 6: Off, though.
Speaker 5: I do spare a thought for the people of Quakers
Speaker 5: Hill now because the Australian Electoral Commission has come out
Speaker 5: saying that perhaps this facility, this particular pre pole facility
Speaker 5: may need to be relocated in the next couple of
Speaker 5: days because of this accident.
Speaker 6: You're a thought for Quaker's Hill.
Speaker 2: At the very least, Sime stopped the voats and stopped
Speaker 2: the vote.
Speaker 6: That's live.
Speaker 4: We're roof off this play. That's how amazing we are.
Speaker 1: Well, if you miss the leader's debate tonight, news flash,
Speaker 1: you missed nothing. They said nothing except for the same old,
Speaker 1: crusty lines that you've already heard for weeks. I've said
Speaker 1: it before, these debates.
Speaker 4: Fall on deaf ears when for.
Speaker 1: The better part of an hour, whoever is currently in
Speaker 1: power and their opponent, in this case the leaders, but
Speaker 1: we've heard from.
Speaker 4: The energy ministers, et cetera, and so on.
Speaker 1: All they seem to do at nauseum is state facts
Speaker 1: the other one. It chooses them of lying, then the
Speaker 1: other one. It chooses the other one of lying, and
Speaker 1: everyone sat at home going okay, well, who's telling the truth.
Speaker 1: For a perfect example of this from tonight's debate, look
Speaker 1: no further. When they got to the hot topic of
Speaker 1: health cuts.
Speaker 7: The Prime Minister stands here with a straight face and
Speaker 7: says what he knows not to be true, And I
Speaker 7: think again, it'd be great to see him called out
Speaker 7: because he continues to repeat these mistruths and Australians deserve
Speaker 7: better from Well they're prime, Minister, that's true.
Speaker 8: You described it as a cut if you were twenty
Speaker 8: fourteen budget described it as a cut as a saving.
Speaker 2: If you'll been honest, fifty health EACHYB and education.
Speaker 8: You ripped eighty dollars out of those two items in
Speaker 8: two thousand and four.
Speaker 7: Minister, you couldn't liice straight in bed. Honestly, this is unbelievable.
Speaker 2: It can go to abuse. Well, it's just the gas
Speaker 2: for real abuse.
Speaker 8: That's a sign of desperation. Frankly, as he's lying, that's
Speaker 8: a sign of desperation.
Speaker 1: And nobody's sitting at home. Is any the wiser telling
Speaker 1: the truth here? Nobody knows and who's got the time
Speaker 1: to do the research. That's why they watched the debate.
Speaker 1: They're trying to get a clear idea about these two
Speaker 1: and what they stand for. But I got to give
Speaker 1: it to him Albo when asked about cost of living, well,
Speaker 1: he did really well tonight.
Speaker 7: Are you prepared to repeat that pledge that in another
Speaker 7: three years time?
Speaker 2: Oh?
Speaker 8: We certainly want people to be better off in three
Speaker 8: years time, and that is what it's about.
Speaker 1: But that's what you said three years ago, and nobody
Speaker 1: is I got to say. I think the star of
Speaker 1: tonight's debate was the moderator, who, before either of them
Speaker 1: had said a word, opened the debate by saying, well, guys.
Speaker 4: The polls show that one in three Aussies isn't voting.
Speaker 1: For either of you, so go your hardest. I'm paraphrasing,
Speaker 1: but I thought it was a mic drop moment just
Speaker 1: to look at the amount of Assies.
Speaker 4: That's a huge majority.
Speaker 1: Well not majority, but obviously one in three that is massive,
Speaker 1: being like, we are not voting for either of the
Speaker 1: major parties this time round.
Speaker 4: Was sick of both of them.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And this is the problem right now because look,
Speaker 5: I actually think that Peter Dutton performed very well in
Speaker 5: that debate. I think it was his sharpest performance compared
Speaker 5: to the one on the ABC last week where he
Speaker 5: did look more stress more nervous, even though.
Speaker 6: I thought that was good.
Speaker 5: But the thing for Peter Dutton now is he needs
Speaker 5: some knockout blows. There's only two weeks left of the campaign.
Speaker 5: He now has to come firing on all fronts because
Speaker 5: the Poles are against him. There are a lot of
Speaker 5: disillusioned voters out there. The soft vote is higher than
Speaker 5: ever and he needs to try and convince those voters
Speaker 5: to come over to his side.
Speaker 6: Form very well.
Speaker 5: The question is that going to be enough now to
Speaker 5: convince the disillusioned voter, to convince the undecided voter.
Speaker 6: I'm not so sure. Again.
Speaker 5: Albanisi showed his true colors tonight when it came to
Speaker 5: the cost of living. It goes to show he really,
Speaker 5: in the last three years hasn't quite got a grasp
Speaker 5: on what the cost of living crisis is. My standout
Speaker 5: moment of this debate though, was when the leaders were
Speaker 5: both asked about the would you preference another party? And
Speaker 5: this is what they said, have a look at this.
Speaker 4: Will you do a deal with minority parties?
Speaker 6: Prime Minister no, mister Dutton, not with.
Speaker 7: The Greens, but with independence. And that's not a truthful
Speaker 7: answer from the Prime Minister there of this. It's not
Speaker 7: that the Labor Party will fall over themselves to do
Speaker 7: a deal.
Speaker 2: With the Greens.
Speaker 4: It's it's just you preference them.
Speaker 8: Truth put forward put forward by Peter Well.
Speaker 5: We obviously know that Anthony Albanesi is lying here because
Speaker 5: the polls say it's like to be a minority. A
Speaker 5: minority Labor Greens and Till's government a couple of tills
Speaker 5: scattered in here and there. Anthony Albanesi will definitely do
Speaker 5: a deal with the Greens when push comes to shove.
Speaker 6: We saw it back in the Gillard era.
Speaker 5: It was a disaster back then, but this brand of
Speaker 5: Greens is even more dangerous. They are a disaster for
Speaker 5: this country. And we can rest assured that Anthony Aarbernesi,
Speaker 5: despite his ducking and weaving on the issue, he will
Speaker 5: do a deal if he has to.
Speaker 2: Jake, I'm sure he will. What's fascinating, and you made
Speaker 2: the point. Peter Dutton's got, what is it, ten days
Speaker 2: left of this campaign. He's got to come out firing
Speaker 2: and this, to me is the fascinating part of tonight's
Speaker 2: debate and the next week and a bit going forward.
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton has to nail Anthony Albanesi. But the problem
Speaker 2: he has is people are put off by his hard
Speaker 2: man image. So he's trying to sell himself as soft
Speaker 2: and as relatable and as a guy that we would
Speaker 2: all warm to. But it's very hard to maintain that
Speaker 2: image while nailing the Prime Minister as a liar and
Speaker 2: a fraud. And you saw that in the that you
Speaker 2: played earlier, Liz, where he's accusing Anthony Albanesi of not
Speaker 2: being able to lie straight in bed. But he's just
Speaker 2: not that convincing because instead of going really hard, you
Speaker 2: feel like he's pulling his punches because he knows he
Speaker 2: can't come across as a hard man. Richard Miles, the
Speaker 2: Deputy Prime Minister, made the point after the debate that
Speaker 2: Dutton had come across as agro and it's very clear
Speaker 2: what the Labor Party are going to do. Anthony Alberzi
Speaker 2: accused Peter Dutton of being personal and launching abuse at
Speaker 2: him during the debate. So Dutton's got this problem. He's
Speaker 2: got to really nail Anthony Albanesi as deceitful and as
Speaker 2: a liar. And that's surely Elbanese's weakness in the electorate
Speaker 2: two hundred and seventy five dollars power decrease. We all
Speaker 2: know that was a lie, but how does he make
Speaker 2: that point forcefully enough while still being a good guy
Speaker 2: who's not the tough image that so many voters are rejecting.
Speaker 2: The leaders were asked what they admired about each other,
Speaker 2: which is always an interesting way of gauging not only
Speaker 2: their relationship but how gracious they are. Here's the response, are.
Speaker 6: Three things you would admire about him?
Speaker 8: Three I only ever prepare for.
Speaker 6: One was a problem.
Speaker 8: Let me say this, he that's way above his average
Speaker 8: with Kiraly.
Speaker 2: He has a terrific family.
Speaker 8: I've had the privilege and he clearly cares about them,
Speaker 8: and that's a terrific thing. Longevity in politics he's been
Speaker 8: We've been in Parliament for basically the same amount of time,
Speaker 8: almost both been there for more than twenty years.
Speaker 2: That's an achievement.
Speaker 7: Acknowledged the Prime minister's support of UCAS from opposition, and
Speaker 7: it wasn't an easy outcome. As he pointed out, he
Speaker 7: was satisfied that nuclear energy was safe, but he'd got
Speaker 7: that through the caucus, which was a difficult thing and
Speaker 7: aucus when we negotiated it, it was about underpinning our security
Speaker 7: for the next century.
Speaker 2: I don't how many people who have noticed how clever
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton was there. He congratulated Anti Albanzi on his
Speaker 2: support of ORCUS and managing to Convince Caucus that nuclear
Speaker 2: energy was safe, which of course goes to the labor
Speaker 2: campaign against nuclear power. Yeah, being used in the grid Dnika.
Speaker 6: Clever work by correct.
Speaker 5: I think the problem though with this debate overall, was
Speaker 5: it covered the same ground that we've heard time and
Speaker 5: time again, and what we actually want to see is
Speaker 5: a differentiation in policies and we yet.
Speaker 6: To see that, unfortunately.
Speaker 5: But look, let's move on, because of course it is
Speaker 5: Anzac Day this week.
Speaker 9: Now.
Speaker 5: I don't know about you, but when I was in school,
Speaker 5: it was a day that we celebrated. It was a
Speaker 5: day that we paused to.
Speaker 6: Remember and it actually had meaning and significance.
Speaker 5: We were taught about the history of our ANZACs and
Speaker 5: it really really was important. But the question now in
Speaker 5: twenty twenty five is how many school students actually now
Speaker 5: understand the important meaning behind that day. But there is
Speaker 5: now a new push to teach Ossie students about why
Speaker 5: war matters. I'm surprised we even have to go there.
Speaker 5: But the Center of Indo Pendant Studies adjunct fellow doctor
Speaker 5: Fiona Mueller says that students should be discussing the bigger
Speaker 5: meaning behind Anzac Day, such as why a free and
Speaker 5: democratic country goes to war and why it matters. In
Speaker 5: twenty twenty five, she said the number of young people
Speaker 5: who would be willing to fight for their country had
Speaker 5: decreased to just twenty seven percent. And she's blaming a
Speaker 5: lack of young people willing to fight for Australia a
Speaker 5: lack of understanding about the core Anzac values which we
Speaker 5: all know and love courage, makeship and sacrifice as well
Speaker 5: as humor to forge our nation's identity. Now, back in
Speaker 5: twenty thirteen, there was quite a disturbing survey which came
Speaker 5: out and it actually found that our students find Anzac
Speaker 5: day history deadly, boring and irrelevant to their lives. It
Speaker 5: found that students are more likely to value indigenous perspectives
Speaker 5: learning about the Stolen generation.
Speaker 6: At exploring history through refugee stories.
Speaker 5: And that is exactly the problem here because what we
Speaker 5: are seeing now and I think this is a direct
Speaker 5: correlation to this story, is in doctrination in schools, because
Speaker 5: kids are being taught not about the values that our
Speaker 5: Anzak's left us, and also that soldiers who continue to
Speaker 5: fight for us those core values.
Speaker 6: Of matship, perseverance.
Speaker 5: It's no longer that it is learning about indigenous culture,
Speaker 5: it is apologizing to the stolen generation. It is young
Speaker 5: children being told no, no, no, it is your fault.
Speaker 5: It is your fault. And this is why the culture
Speaker 5: wars matter, because this next generation is being brainwashed into
Speaker 5: completely thinking that we are the enemy here in this country.
Speaker 5: That's why we see the protests on Australia Day, that
Speaker 5: is why we constantly see these people wanting to tear
Speaker 5: down the colony, as they constantly say. And that's what
Speaker 5: I think the key issue here is this is what
Speaker 5: the left want, and this is a direct result of
Speaker 5: the lefts indoctrination.
Speaker 2: They've spent decades reshaping and diluting our traditions and our institutions.
Speaker 2: And so now we find ourselves with the Chinese and
Speaker 2: the Russians starting to eye off our vast compt which
Speaker 2: is completely defenseless, containing rich minerals, and only about a
Speaker 2: quarter of our young people say they'd bother to fight
Speaker 2: for our country. Well, of course they wouldn't bother fighting
Speaker 2: for our country, having been taught, as you said, Danika,
Speaker 2: about how terrible our country has been, the illegitimacy of
Speaker 2: our country, rather than the Anzac spirit the courage, the sacrifice,
Speaker 2: and why it was so important that we defended liberty
Speaker 2: and democracy. Of course, human nature being what it is is,
Speaker 2: you'd always prefer to hear the negative side of things
Speaker 2: and how bad and how evil things were, rather than
Speaker 2: the stories of heroism and sacrifice. But of course those
Speaker 2: stories aren't even being told. Kids learn the date of
Speaker 2: Gallipoli landing, they learn the geography of it, but it's
Speaker 2: never explained to them why that battle was so important,
Speaker 2: why Australians were so motivated to fight. And we've got
Speaker 2: a real problem on our hands at a time where
Speaker 2: everybody is saying we live in a very precarious geopolitical situation.
Speaker 2: Our young people have been indoctrinated to leave that our
Speaker 2: country is bad.
Speaker 1: Indeed, no wonderingly twenty seven I'm surprised it's that high. Actually,
Speaker 1: twenty seven percent would fight for this country. I wouldn't
Speaker 1: fight for this country, and God knows I'm a fighter.
Speaker 4: But I'll tell you why.
Speaker 1: People want to say, oh, it's complicated, it's nuanced. It's
Speaker 1: a culmination of reasons, multifarious reasons as to why every
Speaker 1: single Western country cannot recruit to their military. Every single
Speaker 1: Western country is struggling to make anywhere near the number
Speaker 1: that they're allowed to have by law in their armed forces.
Speaker 1: And this is the reason why, in my humble opinion,
Speaker 1: and this is also the reason why I say I
Speaker 1: would not fight for Australia as it is today.
Speaker 4: The answer is, we don't have.
Speaker 1: A homogeneous society anymore.
Speaker 4: A third of us weren't even born.
Speaker 1: Here, and people who come here have divided loyalties. I'm
Speaker 1: not blaming them for that. If I came from somewhere else,
Speaker 1: my ultimate loyalty would be to my motherland. You can
Speaker 1: bet your bottom dollar back. In the seventies, Malcolm Frasier
Speaker 1: and Golf Whitlam decided that multicultural Australia was going to
Speaker 1: be a multicultural society. We were going to throw out
Speaker 1: our homogeneous society. We were not going to stop requiring
Speaker 1: people who come here to assimilate.
Speaker 4: Instead, now we.
Speaker 1: Welcome millions of people from all over the world and
Speaker 1: encourage them to keep their own culture, to keep their own.
Speaker 4: Set of values.
Speaker 1: And they have moved here in the millions, and what
Speaker 1: do they do when they get here. They find enclaves
Speaker 1: of their own communities and they live there. We do
Speaker 1: not have a homogeneous society. We do not have shared values.
Speaker 1: How many times have we seen this play out in
Speaker 1: our streets over the last couple of years, very precarious
Speaker 1: times here in d I'm running out of breath.
Speaker 4: I'm so passionate about this.
Speaker 1: But I was watching a show recently and every single
Speaker 1: ad break was a recruitment for our Australian Defense Force,
Speaker 1: and I was like, mate, these guys are going hard.
Speaker 1: But in wars of the past, there was no trouble
Speaker 1: with recruitment men. Kids were lying about their age to
Speaker 1: get to the front lines. Why they fought for countries
Speaker 1: that still had homogeneous cultures. When they said I'm fighting
Speaker 1: for God and country, they meant one God all the same,
Speaker 1: and they also meant my country, my culture. These people
Speaker 1: are my people. We share the same values, we share
Speaker 1: the same ethos. We are pulling in the same direction,
Speaker 1: and that is what I'm going to war for, because
Speaker 1: that's not going to change. You mention Russia, you mention China.
Speaker 1: You mentioned bricks, which we do not talk enough about.
Speaker 1: They are amassing such a huge number of countries that
Speaker 1: would be ready to do great damage to us. But
Speaker 1: these are homogeneous cultures.
Speaker 6: They all hail soitarium. He raise a good point.
Speaker 5: I don't think that the problem is is I don't
Speaker 5: think we know what we're fighting for anymore. But that's
Speaker 5: what and that's what identity I think. I think that
Speaker 5: the war is actually now being fought on our land
Speaker 5: through these It has become almost like tribalism really when
Speaker 5: you think about it, because the divisions in our society.
Speaker 6: And I completely agree with you on.
Speaker 5: That that people have imported their cultures here that don't
Speaker 5: necessarily I'm not talking everybody, some people have imported that
Speaker 5: culture here and they do not align with our values,
Speaker 5: or our society, or with a Western democracy, and that's
Speaker 5: the problem. So that the war is no longer on
Speaker 5: an international front. It's like we're fighting a war here
Speaker 5: in our own backyard.
Speaker 2: We mentioned our values, and the problem is people find
Speaker 2: out very difficult to enunciate what our Australian values. And
Speaker 2: typically you'll hear our political class say well, diversity is
Speaker 2: our strength, but of course diversity is not a strength,
Speaker 2: and no one's going to fight for diversity because diversity
Speaker 2: is not something you can unify around. So it's because
Speaker 2: of our values that we're able to handle diversity. But
Speaker 2: diversity in and of itself is not something that anybody
Speaker 2: is going to fight for because that's not a unifying feature.
Speaker 2: So the problem is we can't identify values, and if
Speaker 2: you can't identify values, there's nothing for anyone to fight for.
Speaker 2: So we've got to come together around what is our
Speaker 2: defining feature. It's not diversity. We're to come back to it.
Speaker 1: Well, it's not going to happen for the reasons I
Speaker 1: just described. But we know every state and territory in
Speaker 1: Australia except for Tasmania, is desperate for police recruits.
Speaker 4: Some states have.
Speaker 1: Vacancies of fifteen hundreds. Some states have vacancies of two
Speaker 1: thousand offices that they're looking to recruit. So one wonders,
Speaker 1: has Thailand just unveiled.
Speaker 4: The future solution to this problem?
Speaker 1: Check out this bad Boy, being hailed as.
Speaker 4: The world's first RoboCop.
Speaker 1: It's equipped with three hundred and sixty degree cameras for eyes,
Speaker 1: facial recognition, weapons detection. This bad Boy can identify suspects,
Speaker 1: monitor threats, and sends data directly back to a central
Speaker 1: command center in real time. Ladies and gentlemen, we have
Speaker 1: seen the future and it is terrifying.
Speaker 4: I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
Speaker 10: Put Daniel weapon, you won't two seconds to complay.
Speaker 4: I think you'd better do what he says, Mitter.
Speaker 11: Kenny sense.
Speaker 12: Fifteen quarant.
Speaker 4: Truly terrifying stuff.
Speaker 1: And then we've got Alon Masks, the tech Wizard of
Speaker 1: the World, talking about the fact that he's in the
Speaker 1: process of putting together a minimum of five thousand Optimius robots.
Speaker 11: So this year we hopefully we'll be able to make
Speaker 11: about five thousand Optimus robots. We're technically we're aiming for
Speaker 11: enough parts to make ten thousand, maybe twelve thousand. We're
Speaker 11: succeeding if we get to half of the tenth you know,
Speaker 11: half the ten thousand now, but even five thousand robots,
Speaker 11: that's the size of a Roman legion, which is like
Speaker 11: a little scary thought, Like a whole legion of robots,
Speaker 11: I'd be like, whoa.
Speaker 1: How long before that thing's running you down and putting
Speaker 1: a bolt through your brain?
Speaker 4: I mean, these are truly terrifying times.
Speaker 1: It's Oh my goodness, I genuinely am not intense.
Speaker 6: I am genuinely scared.
Speaker 5: Can you imagine coming up again said that this called
Speaker 5: a AI police cyborg? I would be terrified if that
Speaker 5: thing was staring me down the eye. Apparently it is
Speaker 5: extremely tall. It towers over the rest of the force,
Speaker 5: and that's.
Speaker 6: Apparently a huge giveaway.
Speaker 5: It has a three hundred and sixty degree AI camera
Speaker 5: for eyes, allowing it to track what is going on
Speaker 5: at all times.
Speaker 6: I really worry about this personally.
Speaker 5: I do not like the idea of safety and security
Speaker 5: being dictated by a giant robot. Where is that information going,
Speaker 5: who is it filming, where is it filming.
Speaker 6: Where does that data go?
Speaker 5: There's so many unanswered questions, and it comes back to
Speaker 5: the whole issue of artificial intelligence, one that is clearly
Speaker 5: unregulated around the world, unregulated here in this country. I
Speaker 5: would be very scared, to be honest, I'm very worried
Speaker 5: about this.
Speaker 2: You wouldn't trust the government with the robotic police officer.
Speaker 5: Would you trust the government with a robotic cop that
Speaker 5: towers over everybody?
Speaker 4: James?
Speaker 2: It makes so much sense. My problem with these things
Speaker 2: you can't negotiate with them, you can't talk to them
Speaker 2: or reason with them, so they're pre programmed. There's no
Speaker 2: nuance at all, which is why in twenty twenty, when
Speaker 2: the New York Police Department introduced the Digidog, which was
Speaker 2: a robotic police dog. Very quickly, residents were up in arms.
Speaker 2: It didn't help that they introduced these robotic dogs in
Speaker 2: public housing, which just got everybody up in arms. But
Speaker 2: the New Yorkers did not put up with this. So
Speaker 2: it'd be interesting to see whether thaie people. I can understand.
Speaker 2: In China they're using robotic police dogs. They've got a
Speaker 2: robotic police sphere that rolls across land and through water
Speaker 2: twenty two miles per hour, chasing potential criminals. I'm not
Speaker 2: sure whether in democratic nations we would put up with
Speaker 2: these things. Hey, we've just had easter, right, and so
Speaker 2: get this. The day after Jesus rose from the dead,
Speaker 2: Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum, resigned coincidence.
Speaker 4: I think not.
Speaker 2: I think not. Klaus Schwab, who, as I said, heads
Speaker 2: up the World Economic Forum, announced his resignation with a
Speaker 2: statement saying, following my recent announcement and as I enter
Speaker 2: by eighty eighth year, I've decided to step down from
Speaker 2: the position of chair and as a member of the
Speaker 2: Board of Trustees with immediate effect. Now, of course, the
Speaker 2: World Economic Forum essentially is a shadow government, exercising influence
Speaker 2: without election and policy without consent. Klaus Schwab began in
Speaker 2: nineteen seventy one gathering elites from around the world in
Speaker 2: Davos to plan how they could implement a globalist society, which,
Speaker 2: of course is the enemy of national sovereignty and of
Speaker 2: many of the freedoms that we enjoy. Klaus Schwab will
Speaker 2: now end his chairmanship of the World Economic Forum, and
Speaker 2: I'm proud to say I've not yet eaten bugs. I
Speaker 2: do own things. However, I'm not very happy because their
Speaker 2: influence has been quite pernicious. Of course, the election of
Speaker 2: Donald Trump has started to undermine Klaus schwall globalistic dreams.
Speaker 2: His Trump speaking at the World Economic Forum. I don't know.
Speaker 2: Maybe this is why Klaus Schwab was chosen to get out.
Speaker 9: My administration has taken action to abolish all discriminatory diversity,
Speaker 9: equity and inclusion nonsense. And these are policies that were
Speaker 9: absolute nonsense throughout the government and the private sector. With
Speaker 9: the reason yet somewhat unexpected great Supreme Court decision just
Speaker 9: made America will once again become a merit based country.
Speaker 9: You have to hear that word merit based country.
Speaker 2: When you hear Trump talking like that at the World
Speaker 2: Economic Forum, is you realize why Trump was so opposed, Because,
Speaker 2: of course Klaus Schwab boasted he had young World Economic
Speaker 2: Forum leaders positioned in places of power influence right around
Speaker 2: the world, justin Trudeau being one of the most famous.
Speaker 2: I think just Sinta Adirn another one in New Zealand.
Speaker 2: I don't think this is the end of the world.
Speaker 2: It can make Forum by any stretch. I think Claus
Speaker 2: Schwab is smart enough to orchestrate a change so that
Speaker 2: it continues to exercise influence. But you do have pushback
Speaker 2: from people like Trump, from meloo in Argentina, from the
Speaker 2: Prime Minister of Italy. So the battle is well and
Speaker 2: truly on between nation states and globalist elites.
Speaker 1: Venue the arnofficial one World government, I mean, the globalist
Speaker 1: will rebrand. There's no way Claruk Schwab is going to
Speaker 1: be replaced by someone good.
Speaker 4: But this was the guy who.
Speaker 1: Told everyone to eat the bugs, who campaigned for climate
Speaker 1: de grow through really weird digital policies that everybody else
Speaker 1: knows and indeed referred to as digital communism, like as
Speaker 1: Central Digital Banking System and all the rest of it.
Speaker 1: This guy stood for everything we rail against, and he'll
Speaker 1: be replaced by somebody else who does as well. Is
Speaker 1: a clip of him acknowledging that it's not working. Everything
Speaker 1: I've built, everything I've campaigned for tirelessly. I'm about to
Speaker 1: turn eighty eight, and none of it's worked.
Speaker 12: You have this anti system movement. What we are seeing
Speaker 12: is a revolution against the system. So fixing the pression
Speaker 12: system is not enough now, as it is, of course
Speaker 12: a anti system which is called libertarianism, which means to
Speaker 12: tear down everything.
Speaker 4: Which creates.
Speaker 12: Some kind of influence of government into private lives.
Speaker 1: Yes, exactly, and that's a marvelous thing. And thank god
Speaker 1: populist governments are now arising that have pushed back very
Speaker 1: comprehensively on the WEF's woke ideologies as well as all
Speaker 1: their climate policies, with things like trumpling out of the
Speaker 1: parasp Cords Denika, which of course the WEF in the
Speaker 1: UN you're basically talking about the same body there. They've
Speaker 1: got to know for at least the next four years.
Speaker 4: The writings on the wall. Of course it is.
Speaker 5: And that's why I think conveniently he's jumped ship. Look
Speaker 5: the world Economic Forum, and like other groups like the
Speaker 5: United Nations. They're almost like these giant overlords, aren't they.
Speaker 5: They don't actually do anything properly for the people. The
Speaker 5: WIF once preached that you'll own nothing and you'll be happy. Well,
Speaker 5: they are completely detached, let's be realistic from the lives
Speaker 5: of ordinary people. You've got Klaus who often wears his
Speaker 5: little Game of Thrones outfit if you've seen it. I
Speaker 5: don't know why he wears this little black suit that
Speaker 5: he wears, but.
Speaker 1: On that occasion he was receiving a doctorate degree.
Speaker 4: Nobody looks like an honor.
Speaker 6: Again again, it goes to the overlord themes. All right, fine,
Speaker 6: it was doctor a grave, but it's an overlord thing.
Speaker 5: But it is an agenda with a centralized control model.
Speaker 5: And the other thing I would also say about Klaus
Speaker 5: is is that he actually wrote a book called COVID
Speaker 5: nineteen The Great Reset in when he basically said what
Speaker 5: a wonderful thing COVID nineteen is for the world.
Speaker 6: Again, this is a man so out of touch.
Speaker 5: I think that he's jump ship at the right time
Speaker 5: because he knows that Donald Trump has come in and
Speaker 5: saying we don't want any more of this sort of
Speaker 5: nonsense and he's gone.
Speaker 2: There is another possibility as to why he's chosen to
Speaker 2: get out now, he said, as you pointed out, you'll
Speaker 2: own nothing and be happy. Maybe figures you know what,
Speaker 2: there's no need for him. Anthony Albanezi has done it
Speaker 2: for him. Maybe that's the most increase of own very little.
Speaker 5: Maybe that's why he thought, well, look, we've got to
Speaker 5: talk about the ABC, don't we, Because guess what they'll
Speaker 5: be soon coming to another billboard.
Speaker 6: Next you near you.
Speaker 5: Yes, they are spending more and more of our taxpayer
Speaker 5: dollars to try and promote themselves. This time they've struck
Speaker 5: an advertising deal between themselves and Australia's outdoor media company
Speaker 5: called oh Media. Oh Media, and we'll see the public
Speaker 5: broadcasters news content featured on billboards on street furniture around
Speaker 5: the country. And it's going to cost you and I
Speaker 5: in between three million to four million dollars annually over
Speaker 5: the next four years. It's going to take effect in
Speaker 5: the next couple of months. So look what we've got
Speaker 5: a situation here now is millions of dollars our money
Speaker 5: is now being spent.
Speaker 6: So to remind everyone.
Speaker 5: That they've got to watch the ABC and that's a
Speaker 5: solution to why nobody is watching the ABC. So well
Speaker 5: done to the chairman, well done, more waste of our money.
Speaker 2: I don't have a problem with this. I mean, overall
Speaker 2: they have one point one billion dollars in funding. If
Speaker 2: they spend what three million dollars on advertising, that's pretty conservative,
Speaker 2: effects vaguely conservative thing about the ABC. But we can't
Speaker 2: have it both ways. We can't say no one watches
Speaker 2: the ABC and the ABC aren't allowed to let people
Speaker 2: know what is available. I think that would be wrong
Speaker 2: to do that. The question is whether they're advertising is
Speaker 2: misplaced because clearly it's not working, or whether perhaps the
Speaker 2: content they're advertising is not what people want.
Speaker 13: Why do you have to advertise a free product like
Speaker 13: people really not know about the national broadcaster? Really, there's
Speaker 13: people living in Australia who need to see ads that
Speaker 13: are like watch the ABC.
Speaker 6: They are oh what's the ABC?
Speaker 4: Never heard of it?
Speaker 6: If they don't tune in.
Speaker 13: If they don't advertise, I don't product to watch when
Speaker 13: it's free and people still aren't taking you up away offer.
Speaker 1: In my suburb at the moment, it's that dumping time
Speaker 1: where everyone puts their stuff that they don't want out
Speaker 1: on the curb, and people come with their cars all
Speaker 1: the time. I see them out on my walk literally
Speaker 1: just rating the sidewalks.
Speaker 4: People love free stuff, But when it.
Speaker 1: Comes to the ABC, these guys honestly think spending three
Speaker 1: to four million dollars on advertising is going to up
Speaker 1: their ratings. They've got Buckley's chance, it's free and people
Speaker 1: still don't want you.
Speaker 2: I think they're three million dollars advertising is well spent.
Speaker 2: It makes sure that I know what I'm not going
Speaker 2: to be watching. We're going to go to a break.
Speaker 2: When we come back, look at what's making news, including
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton with a big announcement on defense, all of
Speaker 2: that more in just a moment. Welcome back. Let's look
Speaker 2: at what's making news in tomorrow's papers. Will start with
Speaker 2: the Queensland Career Mail. The headline there reads Dutton's big
Speaker 2: Guns Opposition pledged to spend twenty one billion dollars on defense.
Speaker 2: I should point out that's twenty one billion dollars more
Speaker 2: than the Labor Party are intending on spending redefense. Peter
Speaker 2: Dutton would invest twenty one billion dollars into Australia's defense
Speaker 2: program over five years if he's elected Prime Minister, live
Speaker 2: thing spending to two point five percent of GDP by
Speaker 2: the end of the decade, amid increased competition with China
Speaker 2: and Russia in the Indo Pacific. The article goes on
Speaker 2: to say that Dutton will announce the injection of an
Speaker 2: extra twelve billion dollars over the next four years, with
Speaker 2: the remaining nine billion to be spent by twenty thirty,
Speaker 2: now with ten days to go to the election. Clearly
Speaker 2: the Coalition believe this is their strength national security, and
Speaker 2: indeed that's been the case. So he'll accuse Labor of
Speaker 2: making Australia less safe, and it's a good argument. I mean,
Speaker 2: we've had Chinese warships off the coast of Sydney with
Speaker 2: live ammunition being fired. We only know about it because
Speaker 2: thankfully a Virgin pilot managed to pick up on it.
Speaker 2: We've had Russians wanting apparently to have bases in Indonesia
Speaker 2: and Albanesi has not handled any of that transparently or well.
Speaker 2: So it's a good argument to make the Labor government
Speaker 2: say we're living in precarious times. Well, what are they doing?
Speaker 2: They're spending clearly is a lot short of what it
Speaker 2: should be on defense. The question lives is whether enough
Speaker 2: voters care about this as a singular, singularly important issue
Speaker 2: that they would vote for the coalition despite thinking that
Speaker 2: Labour are probably better on things like cost of living,
Speaker 2: which are probably felt more keenly than the idea that
Speaker 2: we may be invaded by a foreign power.
Speaker 4: Indeed, two things on this.
Speaker 1: Firstly, why would you leave it this late to announces.
Speaker 2: Because it coincides with Anzac day?
Speaker 6: It's beautiful, but who cares?
Speaker 1: Sorry that everybody cares about the poeticism of an election policy.
Speaker 1: L You might you might have put that together, but
Speaker 1: the average punter reading this headline will not be like, oh,
Speaker 1: because it's Ian zach on Friday.
Speaker 4: No.
Speaker 1: Secondly, I'm sorry, it really doesn't matter what Darton pledges
Speaker 1: in my honest opinion, because of the end of the day,
Speaker 1: I've been in politics for over ten years. That's not
Speaker 1: including my time in media. I've worked for politicians across
Speaker 1: the board. Polls get people hopeful, bloody blah dy blah.
Speaker 1: At the end of the day, all that matters is
Speaker 1: the electoral math, and in order for the Libs to
Speaker 1: flip over twenty seats. God himself would have to flex.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, it's just not going to happen this time round.
Speaker 4: And you can quote me on election man.
Speaker 5: I actually think this is great. I do agree though
Speaker 5: with Liz that this should have happened a lot sooner.
Speaker 5: Do people care though this late in the game, I'm
Speaker 5: not so sure. I don't think it's going to flip votes.
Speaker 5: It's a really good policy. We know, like a lot
Speaker 5: of experts actually say that we are not we don't
Speaker 5: have the capability right now to defend ourselves in the
Speaker 5: event of war because our defense is so weak right now,
Speaker 5: it's gone woke. We know that there is the recruitment issues.
Speaker 5: Great policy, but I just think maybe too little, too.
Speaker 2: Late that The other part that he's going to announce tomorrow,
Speaker 2: which I did think was interesting, was a new National
Speaker 2: Defense strategy, which at first we may roll our eyes
Speaker 2: singing on another white paper from the Defense Department. What
Speaker 2: will be unique about it, and it was something pushed
Speaker 2: for by the late Senator Jim Molan is it won't
Speaker 2: be put together by bureaucrats, still be put together by
Speaker 2: eminent Australians who have expertise and experience in this area,
Speaker 2: and it'll be the first defense strategy in a number
Speaker 2: of years reflecting the changed environment. I think that's a
Speaker 2: good idea as well, enough to win an election. Probably not, No,
Speaker 2: probably not at this point.
Speaker 5: Well, let's move on now to the Herald Sun. Their
Speaker 5: headline is Dan Crash Hush cash. A cyclist struck by
Speaker 5: Daniel and Catherine Andrews SUV has pocketed a secret out
Speaker 5: of court settlement worth several hundreds of dollars. Major law
Speaker 5: firms Slater and Gordon has hundred thousand. Sorry, major law
Speaker 5: firms Slater and Gordon has agreed to hand over the
Speaker 5: massive payout to bike boy Ryan Muhlman. Just weeks before
Speaker 5: an explosive Supreme Court trial was due to begin, Ryan's
Speaker 5: lawyer confirmed a confidential set had been reached over the
Speaker 5: families claim that the law firm failed to act in
Speaker 5: his best interest in the aftermath of the crash. But
Speaker 5: the dispute is far from over with, with the Mulmans
Speaker 5: moving to pursue the former Victorian premier and his wife
Speaker 5: directly through the courts over the near fatal twenty thirteen crash. Look,
Speaker 5: this is a long this has been an ongoing saga. Really,
Speaker 5: that has been twelve years. It's been a long time.
Speaker 5: It's clearly not going away. Obviously it's difficult to talk
Speaker 5: about given it is now legal matter, but it is
Speaker 5: not going away. And I think that realistically the public
Speaker 5: deserve transparency on this matter. I mean, it's been something
Speaker 5: that has dogged him since he was premier.
Speaker 2: That's the astonishing thing about this case. And as you said,
Speaker 2: it's an ongoing court issue. But for something to be
Speaker 2: going on this long, involving such prominent people is quite
Speaker 2: quite amazing.
Speaker 1: Indeed, to the front page of The Australian now clamped
Speaker 1: down on spending, IMF warns, tell us something we don't know.
Speaker 1: Australia's next government must rebuild its fiscal buffers, clean up
Speaker 1: public to spending and urgently enacts enact tax reform in
Speaker 1: preparation for a sharp slow down in economic growth as
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's global trade war increases the chance of a
Speaker 1: US recession. The International Monetary Fund says, well, thanks for
Speaker 1: that grocery list of things that neither of the leaders
Speaker 1: have talked about this entire campaign season.
Speaker 4: Thank you for that.
Speaker 1: It is such a statement of the obvious and great article.
Speaker 1: You should read the rest of it. Great work by
Speaker 1: Matthew Krenston and Jack Qua. But seriously, now we're getting
Speaker 1: advice from the other side of the world for what
Speaker 1: the average punter on the street knows. And yet again
Speaker 1: we have not heard either of the men running to
Speaker 1: be the next prime minister or the current one just
Speaker 1: copy paste discuss.
Speaker 4: Any of those.
Speaker 5: No, it's been like the their elephant in the room
Speaker 5: this election campaign. Not one of them have come out
Speaker 5: with serious economic policy for this country.
Speaker 6: We had Peter Dutton come out.
Speaker 5: It was a thought more than anything about to change
Speaker 5: the tax system, but it was a thought bubble. There
Speaker 5: wasn't anything concrete, and that should have happened at the
Speaker 5: start of the campaign.
Speaker 6: I do agree.
Speaker 5: I just think that there hasn't been any thought given
Speaker 5: to how to make deep inroads to try and fix
Speaker 5: things in our economy.
Speaker 2: Wouldn't you hate to live in a country that was
Speaker 2: both militarily weak and economically weak all at the same
Speaker 2: time when enemies are circling That would be a terrible thing. Wait,
Speaker 2: that's the country we're living in and there's no one
Speaker 2: to help.
Speaker 1: To the second headline on the OS, I'm sick of
Speaker 1: you white people.
Speaker 4: Shut up, okay.
Speaker 1: The Aboriginal chairman of Wajerk, the corporation established to deliver
Speaker 1: Australia's biggest native title settlement, has been accused of screaming
Speaker 1: at his chief executive, telling her she had quote better
Speaker 1: watch out woman, as you're on noticed end quote. A
Speaker 1: fellow Woodjack board member also allegedly shouted at Lisa Dobrin,
Speaker 1: who is not Aboriginal, quote I'm sick of you white people.
Speaker 4: Sit down and shut up. End quote. Well, this sounds
Speaker 4: like it's going well.
Speaker 1: The Australian has been told of allegations of intimidation, threats
Speaker 1: and wild workplace scenes involving the three remaining directors at
Speaker 1: wood Jack, the largest of six Aboriginal corporations created to
Speaker 1: distribute the benefits of the one point three billion dollar
Speaker 1: Southwest Native tidal settlement in Perth and the state's southwest.
Speaker 4: Well, this sounds like it's going marvelously.
Speaker 2: The problem, as recorded in the Australian last week, is
Speaker 2: that this Aboriginal corporation needs to give consent for major
Speaker 2: infrastructure projects in Western Australia. Those have been delayed while
Speaker 2: these guys sort themselves out, and as you say, there
Speaker 2: seems to be a lot going on there. So it's
Speaker 2: been things like another airport with a runway exactly, is
Speaker 2: stalled because of infighting in the Indigenous corporation.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it sounds like a really great cultural organization to
Speaker 5: be working for James.
Speaker 1: But you think they would have learned from their cultural
Speaker 1: heritage laws.
Speaker 4: This is wa. This is the state that.
Speaker 1: Made cultural heritage laws in which you needed to get
Speaker 1: permission from various elders and bodies and whatever if you
Speaker 1: wanted to extend your driveway or dig a hole in
Speaker 1: your backyard.
Speaker 4: That's how ridiculous it was.
Speaker 1: And then they had to trash it within months because
Speaker 1: they realized nobody would be able to do anything. Now
Speaker 1: they've just created the same problem again, but on a
Speaker 1: much bigger scale.
Speaker 2: Well, you think labor would learn from the voice, but
Speaker 2: now they're instituting treaties all over the company. So there
Speaker 2: you go. We're going to go to a break when
Speaker 2: we come back. Sunshine Coast Twins. We've gone viral around
Speaker 2: the world after an incredible television interview will show you
Speaker 2: that in just a moment. Welcome back, Well, Denika and Liz,
Speaker 2: I've got twins sons, as you know, and they're twins
Speaker 2: and they're close, but Liz, they I know when you're
Speaker 2: as close as this pair of Sunshine Coast sisters that
Speaker 2: made the news today.
Speaker 1: Indeed, Bridget and Paula Powers have gone viral around the
Speaker 1: world give an interview after a horror carjacking escapade on
Speaker 1: the Sunshine Coast. But the escapade was almost just left
Speaker 1: in the background after people had watched this interview, and
Speaker 1: once you see it, I won't have to tell you why.
Speaker 10: And one guy, he was up there with our mom,
Speaker 10: and he went up there and he was coming back
Speaker 10: down the wards and he goes, run, he's got a gun.
Speaker 10: And oh, our heart started a pound and I said, well, mom,
Speaker 10: where's mom? And paul Mama was suck up there by
Speaker 10: apparently our bravey mom. She goes, are you all right?
Speaker 10: Because he had all bloood his face.
Speaker 4: Just absolutely remarkable. The interview went for longer, and not
Speaker 4: once did.
Speaker 1: They falter, talking over the top of each other, but
Speaker 1: saying exactly the same thing in perfect chorus.
Speaker 5: I just said, I think they are two beautiful women.
Speaker 5: I love this story. I actually find it very heartwarming.
Speaker 5: And a bit of background as well their mum actually
Speaker 5: was very pressured when they were younger to put them
Speaker 5: into a home, but they screamed, and they screamed when
Speaker 5: they were apart, so they actually came back together.
Speaker 6: And also they have an understanding of birds.
Speaker 5: They have a very good wildlife knowledge, which I think
Speaker 5: is very sweet when they want more women like this
Speaker 5: in the world.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a nice story. As I said, I've got
Speaker 2: twins and they often have their own strange language, but
Speaker 2: nothing like that. I saw that clip and just thought
Speaker 2: that is incredible. Speaking of incredible, check out the family
Speaker 2: photo posted by Joe Biden for Easter and see if
Speaker 2: you think it looks a little odd. There's the family
Speaker 2: minus Hunter, I should point out or sitting on the
Speaker 2: steps of their Delaware home. But does Joe Biden look
Speaker 2: a little odd there in his suit, his face made
Speaker 2: up for TV, and the way he's sitting there will
Speaker 2: is he standing? He certainly doesn't look like he's part
Speaker 2: of it, which has led speculation that maybe he's photo
Speaker 2: shopped himself into that photograph. It wouldn't be the first time, Liz,
Speaker 2: that Joe Biden's done something incredibly odd.
Speaker 1: It seems so obvious and Keen observers also notice the
Speaker 1: hand if we get it back up for you, the
Speaker 1: hand on the young man's shoulder to his left, our right, saying,
Speaker 1: whose hand is this?
Speaker 4: What what's your being on?
Speaker 1: They've clearly, well allegedly, I should say, rip someone out
Speaker 1: of the photo and photo shopped either him in their
Speaker 1: place or in what was a blank space.
Speaker 2: It would be back there seem that way. Well, that's
Speaker 2: it from us, good night, stick around. Coming up is
Speaker 2: the readA Penney Show