Speaker 1: From the Skyinging Center. This is Paul Burray Live. Thank
Speaker 1: you Sharry.
Speaker 2: Welcome a big one, very big one tonight.
Speaker 3: In fact, we have got an awful lot to talk about,
Speaker 3: including when the ghost and the bloke and the Pink
Speaker 3: Mansion get together. You know, it's the place Australia doesn't
Speaker 3: want to be. Also sad news, it looks like interest
Speaker 3: rate cut could well be delayed, in part because of
Speaker 3: how many topic.
Speaker 1: Servants that we have.
Speaker 3: And the great Nigel Ferraji joins us to bask in
Speaker 3: the glory of all things Trump.
Speaker 1: There are plenty of things to say about the UK,
Speaker 1: but what about it? What a moment?
Speaker 3: Think about where four years ago Trump flushed from office
Speaker 3: four years ago, not even getting calls from his own
Speaker 3: supporters in the Republican Party. The election that just played out,
Speaker 3: of course, was one where he was going to return
Speaker 3: to the presidency or he would go to prison for
Speaker 3: the rest of his life. Well today he was back
Speaker 3: in the White House ahead of returning on January the twentieth.
Speaker 3: Unbelievable that these two blokes have ripped into each other
Speaker 3: as hard as they have. Well, this is what happened
Speaker 3: when two presidents look at each other in the eye
Speaker 3: in the office that means the most of that country.
Speaker 4: So everything we can make sure you're ac comminating.
Speaker 1: What you need.
Speaker 4: And we're going to get a chance to talk across
Speaker 4: some out today.
Speaker 1: It's good, welcome, welcay no n it's cold. Is not
Speaker 1: that goal for the fire.
Speaker 3: For his part, Donald Trump was rather polite about the
Speaker 3: bloke that he laid into and basically ended his political
Speaker 3: career at the height of the election season.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much.
Speaker 5: And politics is tough, and it's many cases not a
Speaker 5: very nice world, but it is a nice world today,
Speaker 5: and they appreciate very much.
Speaker 3: I again the remarkable nature of what happened here, because
Speaker 3: remember what these two blokes have said about each other
Speaker 3: for years and years and years.
Speaker 5: The only garbage I see flowing down there is his supporters.
Speaker 1: His demonization seems unconscionable, and it's on American.
Speaker 5: My supporters are far higher quality than Crooked Joe or
Speaker 5: Layon Kamala.
Speaker 6: Now, I know some of you guys are attempted to
Speaker 6: think as much your guys, I'll tell you what, manute,
Speaker 6: But I'm serious.
Speaker 7: These are the kind of guys you'd like to smack
Speaker 7: an ass.
Speaker 3: I'd always find that articularly weird, but transfer of power important.
Speaker 3: It was a failure of Trump not to do so
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty and Biden well again, for all the
Speaker 3: criticism that many people have had and have included about
Speaker 3: him his presidency, the tone of his presidency, for him
Speaker 3: to extend hand the way that he did was credit
Speaker 3: to his legacy. But I think he might be happy because,
Speaker 3: of course he'll always be able to play out the
Speaker 3: twenty twenty four election and it choose your own adventure
Speaker 3: fashion that if he had run, he would have won,
Speaker 3: but of course they pushed him out of the.
Speaker 1: Way and Kamala got her come up.
Speaker 3: Which brings us to the Australian ambassador in the United States.
Speaker 3: Now you've heard too much about this in the past
Speaker 3: couple of weeks, but let's be very clear. The reason
Speaker 3: Kevin Rudd is in a world of trouble is because
Speaker 3: he is an absolutely poor fit for the new broom
Speaker 3: that is coming to Washington. The only way that he
Speaker 3: was going to be a long term option was if
Speaker 3: there was a Democratic president that was going to be there. Now,
Speaker 3: remember to Kevin Rudd and Anthony Aberneze's worldview Donald Trump
Speaker 3: was never a chance of winning any election ever, and
Speaker 3: of course we knew that the price of Kevin Rudd
Speaker 3: helping his former deputy prime minister to win the twenty
Speaker 3: twenty two election was that he would be sent to Washington. Now,
Speaker 3: of course at the time we were told that's definitely
Speaker 3: not happening. But each way, Albow unsurprisingly ended up doing
Speaker 3: the exact opposite of what he had said during a campaign.
Speaker 3: But since Donald Trump became close to the polls and
Speaker 3: let alone has won the presidency in the past week,
Speaker 3: all of the things that Kevin Rudd has said over
Speaker 3: the years about Donald Trump have resurfaced.
Speaker 1: And why wouldn't that.
Speaker 7: Trump at present represents a political liability for both sides
Speaker 7: of Australian politics. This guy is a problem, but the
Speaker 7: underpinnings of it was still incoherent because Trump himself was incoherent.
Speaker 2: The United States in the last four years has been
Speaker 2: run by a village idiot.
Speaker 3: Now again, everyone has the right to have whatever you
Speaker 3: they want about a political leader, but of course there
Speaker 3: are consequences if the job that you want, the job
Speaker 3: that you have is to deal with all types of
Speaker 3: people on the political spectrum, including the people that you
Speaker 3: have well frankly called out, criticized or frankly abused in
Speaker 3: a snobbish fashion like Rudd has over Trump.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 3: Of course, when Trump was asked about this by Nigel Farage,
Speaker 3: you know what his position was.
Speaker 5: I don't know much about him. I heard he was
Speaker 5: a little bit nasty. He who's not the writer's bulb.
Speaker 5: But I don't know much about him. But if he's
Speaker 5: at all hostile.
Speaker 1: He will not be there long.
Speaker 8: Well.
Speaker 3: Today, the uniformity of the political class to suggest that
Speaker 3: because Kevin wants the job, Kevin can have the job,
Speaker 3: and Kevin can have the job for as long as
Speaker 3: Kevin wants the job, because in part the political class
Speaker 3: is excited that there's a form of verbal handcuffs that
Speaker 3: are on him by having to represent the government rather
Speaker 3: than trying to sort of be some shadow prime minister
Speaker 3: or some alternative leader rolling around saying whatever he wants.
Speaker 3: Was broken and was broken by Peter Dutton, who, while
Speaker 3: not calling for a change in the Australian ambassador, obviously
Speaker 3: is in the right place, which is, if we have
Speaker 3: a problem with our chief representative to the United States,
Speaker 3: it is a problem of this government's making because they
Speaker 3: decided to throw him in when, of course there was
Speaker 3: always a fifty to fifty.
Speaker 1: Chance that Trump would come back.
Speaker 8: The ambassador has to have a functional, working relationship with
Speaker 8: the administration, whether that's a Democrat or Republican administration. Of course,
Speaker 8: it's not just mister rh I mean, we're talking about
Speaker 8: mister Albinisi and Senator Wong and others in the Labor
Speaker 8: Party who have seen fit to criticize to criticize President
Speaker 8: elect Trump.
Speaker 3: Now, all of that's not news to you, But what
Speaker 3: is now starting to happen is that apparently the replaying
Speaker 3: of the criticism that Kevin Rudd has offered in multiple
Speaker 3: forums for multiple years about Donald Trump is apparently part
Speaker 3: of some sort of grand conspiracy from the company of
Speaker 3: which owns this television station and thus is my employer,
Speaker 3: And it is being pushed by people who should know better,
Speaker 3: but they're more than happy to play to the narrative.
Speaker 3: Now again, we've seen that one of the things that
Speaker 3: Trump scrambles the circuits of is of the establishment, the
Speaker 3: people who believe that certain things were work in a
Speaker 3: certain way, and that establishment exists in every Western country.
Speaker 1: It exists here too, in Australia.
Speaker 3: And while Australia doesn't get referred to as things like
Speaker 3: the swamp or the deep state, there are the people
Speaker 3: that have been around for both sides of politics for
Speaker 3: a long period of time. And Dennis Richardson is a
Speaker 3: person who has played significant roles in national defense, national
Speaker 3: intelligence and has had plenty to say after representing all
Speaker 3: sides of politics and as a significant member of those communities, well,
Speaker 3: he's pushing along this whole idea that to replay the
Speaker 3: comments of Kevin Rudd critical of the incoming president, that
Speaker 3: it's somehow an agenda being set by one news company.
Speaker 3: Because Kevin Rudd is very pointed in his criticisms of
Speaker 3: this news company. He spoke to Michelle Gratton, a person
Speaker 3: who has been around for a very long time in
Speaker 3: the Camber Press Gallery in no surprise, but this is
Speaker 3: what she's spun out today in the New Daily website,
Speaker 3: which is a new site that is paid for by
Speaker 3: union superannuation money. Precisely nothing what Australia should do when
Speaker 3: it comes to Kevin Rudd and Donald Trump the funeral
Speaker 3: or over Australia's ambassador to Washington, Kevin is a self
Speaker 3: licking ice cream created by some at Sky News. Former
Speaker 3: Defense chief and former Ambassador of the United States Dennis
Speaker 3: Richardson says. Richardson says, the present controversy around radis quote
Speaker 3: not an issue that arose out of any normal process.
Speaker 1: This is an issue that is being pursued by one
Speaker 1: news outlet.
Speaker 3: What if any diplomat had the record of criticism of
Speaker 3: the government he is about to he or she is
Speaker 3: about to interact with.
Speaker 1: It's a news story.
Speaker 3: Just because it's an inconvenient news story does not mean
Speaker 3: that it is all part of the wider agenda that
Speaker 3: people believe exists. Now again, Kevin Rudd, as a free citizen,
Speaker 3: has every right to say whatever he wants about anything
Speaker 3: that he wants. He can try to say that the
Speaker 3: Australian media doesn't have things like taxpayer funded rates or
Speaker 3: television stations, in fact, two of them. He can pretend
Speaker 3: that when you're adding up who, what and where and
Speaker 3: how many columns and how many minutes and how many signals,
Speaker 3: that the ABC doesn't exist or SBS doesn't exist, or
Speaker 3: that due to the Internet, your capacity to read The
Speaker 3: New York Times, The Washington Post, The Times of India
Speaker 3: or the Sun news, whatever you want to read is
Speaker 3: out there, and that's the news environment that we live
Speaker 3: in today.
Speaker 1: But how is it not a.
Speaker 3: Legitimate, reasonable news story to turn around and say that
Speaker 3: the ambassador of Australia, who has said plenty of nasty
Speaker 3: things about the incoming president of the United States may
Speaker 3: well not get along with the incoming president of the
Speaker 3: United States, who we know odd's a grudge. Now you
Speaker 3: can look at that exclusively from the Trump side, that
Speaker 3: it's Trump who has the problem. And if Trump doesn't
Speaker 3: change the way that he relates to Australia, then that's
Speaker 3: his problem, not our problem. And of course the American
Speaker 3: president shouldn't be able to dictate whom our ambassador is.
Speaker 3: But when governor to make decisions about who represents our country,
Speaker 3: you're supposed to find the best possible fit, and very
Speaker 3: obviously at the moment, Rudd is not that best possible fit.
Speaker 3: But again, while the media talking about the media is
Speaker 3: the single most boring thing for people like yourself who
Speaker 3: are watching the media.
Speaker 1: Sometimes you do have to stand up for yourself. And
Speaker 1: I don't say this on the behalf of my company.
Speaker 3: I say this is a fairly common sense person who
Speaker 3: reads all of the media all the day. Who's swum
Speaker 3: in it for an entire career? Again, a little more
Speaker 3: from this story. News Corp has been running hard on
Speaker 3: this story for months. This, by the way, was the
Speaker 3: City Morning Herald and it's editorial today Rudd spoke sense
Speaker 3: about Trump. It's a vengeful news Corp that has the
Speaker 3: explaining to do.
Speaker 1: Again.
Speaker 3: If the City Morning, Let's imagine it was Scott Morrison
Speaker 3: who said a whole bunch of nasty things about the
Speaker 3: Labor Party in the UK, and he was the ambassador
Speaker 3: for Austrated to the UK, it'd be just as legitimate
Speaker 3: a story. But News Corp has been running hard on
Speaker 3: this for months, ramping up the sense of crisis the
Speaker 3: point where it has created one media campaigns can be
Speaker 3: a force for good.
Speaker 1: This one by News Corp is a disgrace. Again, he
Speaker 1: said it multiple times.
Speaker 3: Anyone who has a sentilla of understanding of the way
Speaker 3: American politics works is that one of two sides is
Speaker 3: going to win a presidential election. And four years ago
Speaker 3: I wouldn't have thought that Donald Trump was returning to
Speaker 3: the presidency, but it became clear two years ago that
Speaker 3: he was nominating for the presidency. It became clear a
Speaker 3: year ago that he was going to win the Republican nomination,
Speaker 3: and now we deal with the reality that he is
Speaker 3: the president of the United States, one who does not
Speaker 3: need to seek re election, and one who will try
Speaker 3: to change his country in his mind, it is supporter's
Speaker 3: mind for the better over the next four years.
Speaker 1: Now, Australia is.
Speaker 3: Not going to become some sort of a quasi enemy
Speaker 3: or is going to be put in the naughty corner
Speaker 3: because of Kevin and Run. In fact, the relationship between
Speaker 3: Australia and the United States always exists in spite of
Speaker 3: the president or in this case, in spite of the ambassador.
Speaker 1: But the idea that to point out that a.
Speaker 3: Person who has form of saying a whole collection of
Speaker 3: nasty things about the incoming president of the United States
Speaker 3: may not get along with the President of the United
Speaker 3: States is hardly a media campaign. And the second that
Speaker 3: he decides at whatever time to leave the position of
Speaker 3: ambassador in Washington, I'll tell you the first thing he's
Speaker 3: going to do.
Speaker 1: He's going to get.
Speaker 3: Straight back into the campaign that is about a royal
Speaker 3: commission into the very organization that I work for, an
Speaker 3: attempt to somehow shut it down or silence it. So
Speaker 3: I'd like to know what the four D chess idea
Speaker 3: here is is that the News Corp campaign is to
Speaker 3: get rid of Kevin Rudd so he can come back
Speaker 3: to lead the charge against News Corp as.
Speaker 1: A Royal Commission. Yeah, okay, that's the thinking.
Speaker 3: Now let's get to some big changes happening while everyone
Speaker 3: is distracted by lots of other news, lots of other
Speaker 3: things that are happening, and they are going to be
Speaker 3: big changes to the way our elections work.
Speaker 1: This should be a lead story. It should be a
Speaker 1: big story.
Speaker 3: But because it gets a little bit complicated and there's
Speaker 3: not that much sexy pictures to show you, you probably
Speaker 3: haven't heard about this in the six PM years. Some
Speaker 3: dirty deals are being done amongst the major parties in
Speaker 3: and around Parliament House. Now, as you know, in many
Speaker 3: states around the country, state governments have turned around and
Speaker 3: have changed the way that elections are funded, where the
Speaker 3: political parties get more money from their version of the
Speaker 3: Electoral Commission based on the number of votes that they
Speaker 3: get from you or I at a state or federal election,
Speaker 3: but equally they're created caps on how much money can
Speaker 3: be spent by an individual candidate or an individual party
Speaker 3: in an individual seat. But then of course there are
Speaker 3: the third party or independent groups that are allowed to
Speaker 3: spend the same amount of money. And we see in
Speaker 3: the case of Queensland, in the case of West Australia,
Speaker 3: and in the case of Victoria that the unions, despite
Speaker 3: the fact that they are literally fifty percent of the
Speaker 3: Labor Party. Every Labour MP, state or federal is a
Speaker 3: member of a union, and the unions, according to the
Speaker 3: constitution of the Labor Party, are fifty percent of the organization.
Speaker 3: They picked the candidates, they pick the policies, they pick
Speaker 3: the leaders, but they are under these electoral fiddles referred
Speaker 3: to as independent. So in a place like Queensland, where
Speaker 3: there are dozens of unions, it meant that at any
Speaker 3: one time that the Labor Party was able to outspend
Speaker 3: anyone else on the ballot paper by the best part
Speaker 3: of ten to one. Because you see the independent union
Speaker 3: that is able to spend as much money as the candidate. Well,
Speaker 3: one union, two union, three reunions. You get how big
Speaker 3: the financial advantage becomes. Now, this isn't just something about
Speaker 3: people who want a fair play between Team Red and
Speaker 3: Team Blue. But it also means a massive financial advantage
Speaker 3: is handed firstly to the existing candidate, the existing party,
Speaker 3: and the party who of course ends up with government,
Speaker 3: which means more seats, more votes, has more money than
Speaker 3: their opposition. That's not the way our system should work.
Speaker 3: To have a permanent, taxpayer funded system that is slanted
Speaker 3: so heavily in one direction in favor of the existing MP,
Speaker 3: the existing party, or the existing government, it means that
Speaker 3: minor parties, Independence or Greens are at a significant financial disadvantage.
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 3: An attempt to change this system is underway. In fact,
Speaker 3: the federal government has been for months trying to negotiate
Speaker 3: the very fiddle to the system that has been put
Speaker 3: in place in Queensland, in Victoria and in Western Australia.
Speaker 3: And we learn today again via the Sydney Morning Herald
Speaker 3: that Labor and the Coalition have apparently done a deal
Speaker 3: to help fiddle the system when it comes to the
Speaker 3: money going into federal elections. The major Party on the
Speaker 3: cusp of a critical deal to overhaul Australia's election system
Speaker 3: and strip big money from politics, with a plan to
Speaker 3: ward off US style elections dominated by billionaire backers gaining
Speaker 3: in principal agreement from Labor and the Coalition. Now I've
Speaker 3: said this many times before. When they talk about cap
Speaker 3: on spending, what they try to do is try and
Speaker 3: tell you that it's all about.
Speaker 1: Clive Palmer, the client.
Speaker 3: Palmer using his own money should be limited about how
Speaker 3: much money he can spend in advocacy of his candidates.
Speaker 3: You see in twenty nineteen when the message was very
Speaker 3: clear against Bill Shorten, that message and then Preferences ended
Speaker 3: up re electing the Liberal Party when the message was
Speaker 3: put them all last. Well, we all know what happened
Speaker 3: to the twenty twenty two election. But that's Clive's right
Speaker 3: as a citizen to use his own money in service
Speaker 3: of a political party that yes, he'd get somebody elected,
Speaker 3: Ralph Babbitt to the Senate via Victoria. But you see,
Speaker 3: the other billionaire they never really talk about with this
Speaker 3: stuff is the one whose money helped win way more seats,
Speaker 3: and that Simon Holmes a court. Now, he, of course
Speaker 3: who the Climate two hundred group is able to hand
Speaker 3: so called independence despite the fact they all believe the
Speaker 3: same things, say the same thing, market themselves the same
Speaker 3: You get the point, and they're able to have a
Speaker 3: money advantage to start a campaign, to be able to
Speaker 3: always go after conservative members of the Liberal Party. They
Speaker 3: don't have any track record of running against people in
Speaker 3: the Labor Party. So Clive Palmer bad billionaire, Simon Holmes
Speaker 3: a court good billionaire. Yeah, okay, so let's explain how
Speaker 3: this system is going to work. According to The Sidney
Speaker 3: Morning Herald, The Age, the Brisbane Times or They reported
Speaker 3: in August that elements of the draft legislation being considered
Speaker 3: include a cap on the amount of money that a
Speaker 3: candidate is likely to receive. It is also expected to
Speaker 3: include a limit on how much a party can spend. Surprise, surprise,
Speaker 3: that we talked about here. But here's the devil in
Speaker 3: the detail. Despite the fact that apparently this is an
Speaker 3: urgent need to change our political system, the rules will
Speaker 3: not apply for the upcoming federal election. They will apply
Speaker 3: to the election after that, and of course what happens
Speaker 3: between the next election and the election after that. While
Speaker 3: all of this legislation could be completely drawn up again,
Speaker 3: meaning it's all about making it look like they're changing
Speaker 3: the system, then actually changing the system. And why would
Speaker 3: they only want to look like they were changing the system,
Speaker 3: because it's pretty obvious that if the polls are correct,
Speaker 3: we are headed towards a minority government, meaning that either
Speaker 3: the Labor Party or in the best case scenario, the
Speaker 3: Liberal Party get themselves into a position where they need
Speaker 3: somebody else on the crossbench to be able to give
Speaker 3: them the support to form a government.
Speaker 1: Well, of course, those people are the.
Speaker 3: Ones, particularly the Teals, directly affected by change in caps.
Speaker 3: They are the people if it happens to be another
Speaker 3: United Australian Party MP like Clive was elected to the
Speaker 3: Lower House who would be affected by the caps. So
Speaker 3: beware what looks like a solution to a problem that
Speaker 3: isn't really a big problem in Australian politics. And what
Speaker 3: do you think if there was a minority Labor government
Speaker 3: propped up by the Teals, do you think that the
Speaker 3: changes that had passed the Parliament for the not this
Speaker 3: election but the one after would stand or would they
Speaker 3: magically melt away? Meaning of course the Teals would end
Speaker 3: up with a system where the Liberal Party or the Greens,
Speaker 3: or One Nation or the Victorian Socialists or the United
Speaker 3: Australian Party is in a position where there's a limit
Speaker 3: on how much can be spent at any one time
Speaker 3: in any one's seat, apart from.
Speaker 1: Independent groups like the Unions.
Speaker 3: But of course what may will end up turning up
Speaker 3: here is a scenario where they will end up making
Speaker 3: a scenario where the Liberal Party, if in opposition, would
Speaker 3: have less money than the Labor Party, who would have
Speaker 3: greater ability to have so called independent supporters flooding the market.
Speaker 3: They would of course find a way to say they
Speaker 3: run backsides while doing in the Liberal Party. That of
Speaker 3: course would be bad for democracy, but you're not allowed
Speaker 3: to say that. It's only lefties who get to say
Speaker 3: democracy is a threat all day every day. Got some
Speaker 3: bad news if you, like me, are part of the
Speaker 3: third of the country that's trying to pay off a house.
Speaker 3: Now we learn today that, of course the Preserve Bank
Speaker 3: due to meet in the next little while. The expectations
Speaker 3: were that if there was to be a rate cut,
Speaker 3: it could happen as early as February. Now this is
Speaker 3: not going to be massive because this this been twelve
Speaker 3: interestrate rise. As it doesn't matter if they take it
Speaker 3: down by a quarter of a percent or even half
Speaker 3: of a percent, it'd be nice, but it's not going
Speaker 3: to change the financial position of many in most Australians
Speaker 3: who've had to find literally tens of thousands of dollars
Speaker 3: extra since this mob came to government to be.
Speaker 1: Able to pay off the House.
Speaker 3: Well, the expectations were that February would be when that
Speaker 3: was going to take place, But get ready for that
Speaker 3: expectation to now start to move down the road. Now,
Speaker 3: by their own admission, the people who are desperately finding
Speaker 3: ways for this government to get re elected as a
Speaker 3: majority or as a Teal and Green assisted minority, will
Speaker 3: they say that Anthony Aberaneze it needs interest rates to fall.
Speaker 3: If they don't his re election and chances certainly will.
Speaker 3: So it is with some interest today that the Financial
Speaker 3: Review writes a piece saying interest rates could be on
Speaker 3: hold for all of twenty twenty five. So slight relief
Speaker 3: maybe at the start of twenty twenty five could well
Speaker 3: be pushed off deep into.
Speaker 1: Twenty twenty five. The best case scenario right now is.
Speaker 3: That, according to the National Australian Bank, they believe that
Speaker 3: we are now looking at potentially the first of interest
Speaker 3: rate cuts to happen in May, right on top of
Speaker 3: a federal election.
Speaker 1: But of course my suggestion would be that after twelve.
Speaker 3: Interest rate rises. If we go back to the eleventh
Speaker 3: of the interestrate rise, Australians will not be clicking their
Speaker 3: heels with lee because they still will have been dealing
Speaker 3: with the pain of the past couple of years, and
Speaker 3: they will be punishing a government who remember, we drew
Speaker 3: fifteen hundred dollars from ten mini Australians at a time
Speaker 3: when they could least afford it. There's also this information
Speaker 3: about why the Reserve Bank may will be holding off
Speaker 3: from Channel nine tonight. And remember this is the same
Speaker 3: bloke who said mission accomplished a couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 3: when the government, of course was falsely and fiddling with
Speaker 3: the inflation figures as a result of their power rebate scheme.
Speaker 9: Number of jobs in our economy is still rising, which
Speaker 9: is good, but that might cost us interest rate cuts.
Speaker 9: The unemployment rate remains steady in October at four point
Speaker 9: one percent with fifteen nine hundred new jobs created, and
Speaker 9: the RBA's most reason forecast points to four and a
Speaker 9: half percent by the end of next year, so according
Speaker 9: to them, it's still too low right now, and between us,
Speaker 9: the experts are getting less and less confident the Central
Speaker 9: Bank will lower interest rates next year. This shows what
Speaker 9: the market was expecting. At the start of October, almost
Speaker 9: four rate cuts were being factored in for next year,
Speaker 9: but by late October there were two cups expected. Now
Speaker 9: one is being priced in. A big part of the
Speaker 9: reason for that is because the labor market is staying
Speaker 9: so tight. Basically, it seems we'll need to see a
Speaker 9: lot more people lose their jobs before interest rates start
Speaker 9: falling either way.
Speaker 3: A will of pay for a government that deserves to
Speaker 3: feel it, because we've been feeling it for way too long.
Speaker 3: Another thing that's playing out as we speak, which is
Speaker 3: in the next couple of weeks when Parliament comes back,
Speaker 3: the government is going to try to censor the Internet.
Speaker 3: Don't fall for the Misinformation Bill. It's about censoring the Internet.
Speaker 3: And while the Internet is a world away from where
Speaker 3: it was in the early days in the nine nineties
Speaker 3: and the early two thousands of a wild West where
Speaker 3: you could pretty much say whatever you want wherever you want,
Speaker 3: big companies have rolled in and taken over large swathes
Speaker 3: of Internet land, no question about it. But the Prime
Speaker 3: Minister and is Communication Minister have been trying to find
Speaker 3: a way to plug the information hole now they believe
Speaker 3: it's about lies and disinformation.
Speaker 1: But the reality is, of.
Speaker 3: Course, as we just saw in the United States, that
Speaker 3: as soon as you start to step out of the
Speaker 3: old school media into the new school media, then the
Speaker 3: population can't be what was the word that Hillary said,
Speaker 3: oh controlled, that's right, and there of course has been
Speaker 3: an explosion in the amount of information that people are
Speaker 3: able to get via the Internet. Literally, Sky News now
Speaker 3: has five million YouTube subscribers. Congratulations to Tim Jack and
Speaker 3: all of our digital team who have worked their absolute
Speaker 3: backsides off. But I will make it very clear that
Speaker 3: is frightening to those in the federal government who believe
Speaker 3: that organizations like ours that challenge all day every day
Speaker 3: what they do is that this is a space they
Speaker 3: don't control. The Internet is of course something that is global.
Speaker 3: So there are these attempts to so called sense of
Speaker 3: the Internet where they turn around and they would find
Speaker 3: social media companies if you decided to post a to
Speaker 3: information that someone somewhere decided was misinformation, now how would
Speaker 3: they decide what the truth is? Well, of course far
Speaker 3: left wing think tank would turn around and rule at
Speaker 3: something that I said was misinformation, despite the fact that
Speaker 3: in every editorial every time I show you the data
Speaker 3: before throwing on the opinion on top of it. Right, Yes,
Speaker 3: the bricks are the data. The opinion is the mortar
Speaker 3: that holds the wall together. But these left wing groups
Speaker 3: they turn around and say, well, according to this report
Speaker 3: and that report, and this report, and this guy and
Speaker 3: this guy and this expert and this person who's always.
Speaker 1: Disagreed that what you've just seen is clearly misinformation.
Speaker 3: And then they fact checkers would then go off to
Speaker 3: the broadcasting authority, which has turned around and said some
Speaker 3: of the nastiest things about pretty popular radio.
Speaker 1: Programs like Colin Jack Yoda should be taken.
Speaker 2: Off the air, cheered on by the media watch class.
Speaker 3: You get the point here, right, What this really is
Speaker 3: about is not about saving you from all world of lies.
Speaker 3: There's already a whole series of legislation that we adhere
Speaker 3: to hear about defamation, that we adhere to about all
Speaker 3: sorts of different broadcasting standards. But it's the idea that
Speaker 3: the government does not want information that it does not
Speaker 3: approve to be able to spread like wildfire, because of
Speaker 3: course that means they're not able to hold onto their control. Well,
Speaker 3: next week is when this will actually start to move
Speaker 3: to its final phase. We will learn whether they can
Speaker 3: censor the Internet in the country or whether there are
Speaker 3: some politicians left who do believe in free speech. The
Speaker 3: Senate will finally vote on this legislation before the end
Speaker 3: of the year, and the maths is starting to get
Speaker 3: tight for the government. And normally they would have a
Speaker 3: pretty easy passage of legislation because you need thirty nine
Speaker 3: votes to pass a law. You'd have the Labour Party
Speaker 3: voting together with the Greens, that gets you thirty six
Speaker 3: and you only need three other votes to be able
Speaker 3: to get it over the line. Now, obviously with one nation,
Speaker 3: with a series of other former Liberal or National MPs
Speaker 3: saying no that a're now sitting on the cross benches,
Speaker 3: and of course the United Australian Party, then we are
Speaker 3: down to just one, two, three, four, five potential places
Speaker 3: they can get a vote. Pocock, lamby Thorpe, Tyrrell and
Speaker 3: payment well in the past twenty four hours or so.
Speaker 3: As I told you last night, you can strike one
Speaker 3: name off the list, and that is David Pocock. He
Speaker 3: will not be voting for the legislation. You can strike
Speaker 3: another name off Tammy Tyrell. She will not be voting
Speaker 3: for the legislation that leaves specifically three left. So if
Speaker 3: Lamby or Thorpe or Payment decided to vote against it,
Speaker 3: then the bill will die for those three senators. Don't
Speaker 3: pay attention to me, pay attention to other people, including
Speaker 3: experts and legal experts, have referred to this is a
Speaker 3: deeply flawed piece of legislation. Also look forward to the
Speaker 3: ABC saying that the early days of the pandemic explodes
Speaker 3: the flaw in the government's misinformation laws, say legal experts,
Speaker 3: who decides what's true, the gaping hole in the misinformation laws.
Speaker 3: The conversation how the federal government's misinformation bill might impede
Speaker 3: freedom of speech.
Speaker 1: That is what is before you.
Speaker 3: There are already laws in this country that are enforced
Speaker 3: daily about deformation, meaning you can't tell lies about people
Speaker 3: on television or radio, and that would extend to the
Speaker 3: internet versions of what content is made here on television
Speaker 3: or if you're listening via Sky News radio. There's also
Speaker 3: a whole series of codes that exist about misinformation already.
Speaker 3: The idea that now into the social media world, we
Speaker 3: would introduce these new ways of shutting down debate, well,
Speaker 3: it works for the far left as it does for
Speaker 3: the far right, It works for the center left as
Speaker 3: it does for the center right. It works for the
Speaker 3: center as it does for the polar opposites. Government should
Speaker 3: not decide what truth is data, information, and experience.
Speaker 1: And if you can show the working in your argument,
Speaker 1: then your argument should be allowed to be heard.
Speaker 3: If you disagree with it, then you are free to
Speaker 3: use information, data and your way of arguing against it.
Speaker 3: But the idea of shutting it down before it even
Speaker 3: gets off first base to a point where essentially the
Speaker 3: social media companies can't be bothered posting the content from
Speaker 3: insert media provider because they can't be bothered for filling
Speaker 3: out the paperwork. Well, that is of course the desired effect,
Speaker 3: the chilling effect, and that is not something that anyone
Speaker 3: in the Australian media should be cheering on.
Speaker 1: That's all. But wait, watch and see.
Speaker 3: Next week is when we will find out exactly what
Speaker 3: side those senators are on. Upgrade Albo, what about this
Speaker 3: for a new poll showing that, surprise, surprise, Australians don't
Speaker 3: like the idea that people use their position of power
Speaker 3: to get themselves an upgrade on a flight pole question,
Speaker 3: here was about Anthony Albersi. Thirty percent of people say sure,
Speaker 3: he can get upgraded whenever he wants. Thirty five percent
Speaker 3: said that he shouldn't be getting them for personal flights.
Speaker 3: Twenty four percent said that he shouldn't be getting them
Speaker 3: for work or personal flights. The same when it comes
Speaker 3: to overall members and their ability to get flights here
Speaker 3: where what the best part of Fifty one percent of
Speaker 3: people say they should be banned outright or certainly banned
Speaker 3: for personal flights. And as for the membership for thirty
Speaker 3: nine percent of people say absolutely no, they should refuse
Speaker 3: the land's memberships. Forty five percent of people say fair enough,
Speaker 3: and presumably the rest said I've got something else.
Speaker 1: To talk about. Can I talk about that please?
Speaker 3: And finally, le's talk here about pollution, Let's talk about
Speaker 3: climate change, and let's talk about China demanding money from us.
Speaker 3: China is the biggest polluter in the world. Don't trust me,
Speaker 3: trust the information, trust the data, the bricks. As I
Speaker 3: add the mortar to the argument of the wall here,
Speaker 3: thirty three percent of global carbon emissions come from China.
Speaker 3: Then it's India, then it's the United States, then it's Russia,
Speaker 3: then it's Indonesia, then it's Brazil, then it's the EU,
Speaker 3: then it's Japan, then it's South Korea, and we are
Speaker 3: one percent of the thirteen percent of the rest of
Speaker 3: it that are called others. China says that the western world,
Speaker 3: including Australia, should give countries like them one point eight
Speaker 3: t four trillion dollars, not once, but every year, and
Speaker 3: this should be the amount of money that the first
Speaker 3: world pays to the third world for them to.
Speaker 1: Be able to deal with climate change.
Speaker 3: China has led the call for developed countries including Australia,
Speaker 3: to provide one point three or one point eight trillion
Speaker 3: dollars in Australia each and every year. The Climate Change
Speaker 3: Minister is on his way to these negotiations to work
Speaker 3: out exactly how much money is going to be put before.
Speaker 1: All of this. But what sticks in microwel here is
Speaker 1: the biggest polluter in the world.
Speaker 3: China has the balls to turn around and demand it
Speaker 3: from the rest of the world that they need money
Speaker 3: to produce less pollution because they are a developing nation. Now,
Speaker 3: of course they are a self defined developing nation. But
Speaker 3: I want you to think about how many small African countries.
Speaker 3: How many of the poorest parts of Asia that are
Speaker 3: truly developing countries have the type of wealth that China has.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 3: China, of course, don't forget, has a space station. It
Speaker 3: has a space station and a space program that, by
Speaker 3: the way, is about trying to work out how to
Speaker 3: set up a moon base. They don't even just have
Speaker 3: a space station. They're trying to come up with a
Speaker 3: new shuttle that will work like a taxi service to
Speaker 3: go to and from China to space. This so called
Speaker 3: developing country that wants its slice of one point eight
Speaker 3: trillion dollars has held not one, but two Olympic Games
Speaker 3: this century. That is not a developing country. That is
Speaker 3: a first world country that intentionally keeps parts of its
Speaker 3: population in poverty or in slave labor so it can
Speaker 3: turn around and fiddle the global system. Australia needs to
Speaker 3: do its bit, but Australia is one percent of the
Speaker 3: world's problem. The idea that the one percent of the
Speaker 3: world's problem has to send money to the one producing
Speaker 3: thirty three percent of the world's problem is a disgrace.
Speaker 3: We'll discuss that and a whole lot more than a
Speaker 3: moment or two is time here on Paul Murray Live.
Speaker 3: Glad you're watching us this Thursday night. Niger Faraj standing
Speaker 3: by and a crack of jackpanel next da go anywhere.
Speaker 1: Thanks for watching. I can't believe it and do this too.
Speaker 1: Last night I got very caught up in everything and
Speaker 1: I was a.
Speaker 3: Little bit jet late Zadi's birthday yesterday, a beautiful little
Speaker 3: girl turned seven. It's my little rock star. She's awesome.
Speaker 3: We will of course celebrate it over the weekend. But
Speaker 3: thank you to all of you wherever we go with
Speaker 3: our tan. So it's how the kids, how those Ash
Speaker 3: and Zadi are awesome. They are great and they are
Speaker 3: certainly looking forward to a fun summer with mum, dad
Speaker 3: and their mates. All right, let's get into this right
Speaker 3: now with people who love their families as well, none
Speaker 3: other than Caroline Marcus and of course Michael Kroger love
Speaker 3: you both, guys.
Speaker 1: Let's get straight to it.
Speaker 2: So, Michael, let's explain the logic here.
Speaker 3: The four D Chess apparently is that News Corp is
Speaker 3: going after Kevin Rudd to blast him out of the
Speaker 3: job in Washington so we can come back to lead
Speaker 3: the call for the Royal Commission into News Corp. Now
Speaker 3: let's be really clear, right, Let's now take this again
Speaker 3: away from some of the news some of the media garbage.
Speaker 1: Right, Rudd said this stuff about Trump.
Speaker 3: Right, If you're a professional diplomat or somebody wanting to
Speaker 3: be a diplomat, then one of the reasons why we
Speaker 3: sometimes get frustrated with politicians is there a little bit
Speaker 3: beige and they're a little bit fifty to fifty. Right,
Speaker 3: But when you want to be a partisan, or you
Speaker 3: want to be somebody who's going to take pretty strong criticism,
Speaker 3: then you can't be expecting to put your hand up
Speaker 3: to be a job to end up having a deal
Speaker 3: with in this case, Trump's America. How I mean again,
Speaker 3: I just what's your reaction to the scenario that Rudd
Speaker 3: has put himself in and the people who were pretending
Speaker 3: that there's some sort of media game when any other organization,
Speaker 3: as if the ABC wouldn't play the comments of Scott
Speaker 3: Morrison about insert country that he was being sent to.
Speaker 6: Mate. Everyone in the Labor Party told Anthony Albernis, not
Speaker 6: for point Rudd, Penny Wong told him. Other people around
Speaker 6: him said, did not appoint this guy. It was a
Speaker 6: captain's pick. And he appointed him, and this is what's happened.
Speaker 6: Not all the comments that he was known to have
Speaker 6: made before he was appointed were known. The one that
Speaker 6: Shari marks and produced the other night of him calling
Speaker 6: him the village idiot, and a couple of others. No
Speaker 6: one had seen that before, and I'm sure there are
Speaker 6: others that out there too. So to say this is
Speaker 6: some kind of media conspiracy, and the Sydney Morning Herald,
Speaker 6: you know, I'm really disappointed their editorial. So that's a
Speaker 6: news limited conspiracy, as if people made up these quotes.
Speaker 1: You correct.
Speaker 6: This is all this guy's own work. It's his own work.
Speaker 6: It's his own work. And to suggest that there's some
Speaker 6: kind of plot or conspiracy against this guy for just
Speaker 6: publicizing his own work, I'll tell you where we are today, mate,
Speaker 6: I'll tell you where we are today. This country is
Speaker 6: now in a position we're our prime minister. And by
Speaker 6: the way, for all those people criticizing Dutton, Morrison, Abbott,
Speaker 6: Hockey and Birmingham for supporting Rudd, don't criticize him. There's
Speaker 6: thing called Australia first. So when an Australian ambassador representative
Speaker 6: is overseas, it's an unwritten rule amongst all the parties,
Speaker 6: you always support that person. So that's why the Liberal
Speaker 6: Party at a federal level have come behind, not because
Speaker 6: any of them think he should stay. I don't think,
Speaker 6: but because that's the way this game works. You support
Speaker 6: Team Australia overseas. But we're now in under a third position. Mate,
Speaker 6: we're Albanezi, who's going to be in South America and says,
Speaker 6: oh Mari Laga is not on the route. It's eight
Speaker 6: hours from where he's going to Florida. He cannot go
Speaker 6: and visit Trump. Why why can't he go and visit Trump?
Speaker 6: Because the protocol is you take your ambassador with you.
Speaker 1: Good point, really, good point?
Speaker 10: No, no, excellent?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I love this is it? Carolina?
Speaker 10: And that's.
Speaker 1: That's all right. I'll jump back in here.
Speaker 3: Se delay there to Adelaide, Radelaide.
Speaker 1: Doing it best.
Speaker 3: Good to know you're there for the supercars by the way,
Speaker 3: go and watch the boom brooms going around this weekend
Speaker 3: championship decider.
Speaker 1: But again, Caroline, about run.
Speaker 3: The look if he stays, if they decide to stick
Speaker 3: in there and find him fair enough, the idea that
Speaker 3: the stuff that he has said is not a story
Speaker 3: is just rubbish.
Speaker 11: It's a classic case of shoot the messenger. And as
Speaker 11: if these journalists wouldn't have reported it if they had
Speaker 11: got it first, or maybe they wouldn't because there is
Speaker 11: a political agenda there for people who work as well
Speaker 11: at the nine newspapers. Let's admit it. As you said,
Speaker 11: if it was Scott Morrison or someone on the side
Speaker 11: that they dislike, then it would very much be a
Speaker 11: front page story. What are we supposed to do cover
Speaker 11: up his past comments, pretend they don't matter. I mean,
Speaker 11: even Kevin Rudd deleted his tweets so he can see
Speaker 11: they matter.
Speaker 3: But also it's this thing where and again, you know,
Speaker 3: just because it happened in America a couple a week
Speaker 3: ago doesn't mean everything's the same here in Australia, right,
Speaker 3: But one of the absolute lessons right was that the
Speaker 3: media ecosystem ain't what it was two years ago, five.
Speaker 1: Years ago, ten years ago. And the idea that the
Speaker 1: idea that oh, there's no.
Speaker 3: One in the world who could possibly turn around and
Speaker 3: see what the problem is, it's just ridiculous, all right.
Speaker 3: What do you think about China, Michael and this idea
Speaker 3: that I'll wear a self declared devilop, big.
Speaker 2: Nation with a space station, with two Olympics.
Speaker 3: Oh but you know we deserve a crack at one
Speaker 3: point eight trillion dollars a year when they are polluting
Speaker 3: the world thirty three times more than Australia.
Speaker 2: And Bowen's already signed up to this garbage.
Speaker 6: Look, I mean we see this at every one of
Speaker 6: the international conferences. There's there's pressure on the West for
Speaker 6: more contributions, reparations, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, this
Speaker 6: is an old card three card trick that we see
Speaker 6: played at so many of these international conferences, whether it's
Speaker 6: the Pacific Island Forum, et cetera, cetera. The West that
Speaker 6: developed Western countries are always being asked to pay reparations, contributions, whatever,
Speaker 6: and the Chinese to say they're developing countries, so of
Speaker 6: course the one point eight trillion they don't have to contribute.
Speaker 6: Oh please, we've seen this playbook before, and for Bowen
Speaker 6: to sign up to it, well, Chris, how much you
Speaker 6: how much Chris are we contributing? Perhaps he could announce
Speaker 6: at that conference how much the Australian taxpayer is contributing.
Speaker 6: And the more they contribute, the more seats are boys
Speaker 6: going to lose?
Speaker 1: Mate?
Speaker 3: Well, and don't forget these idiots want to host one
Speaker 3: of these conferences here.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you what.
Speaker 3: When interest rates are where they are, where inflation is
Speaker 3: where it is, when potential job losses are where they are,
Speaker 3: the idea that this government yet again is going to
Speaker 3: show what its priority is is going to go down
Speaker 3: like the proverbial lead balloon Caroline you're reporting.
Speaker 1: On are and also at scotties dot com dot he.
Speaker 3: Was both mentioning specifically here it's not in primetime, which
Speaker 3: is about barbershop in southwest Sydney.
Speaker 1: What have they done? What have you found?
Speaker 11: Well, let's not implicate the whole barbershop, but the owner
Speaker 11: of the barbershop, zax Or. He's a gentleman who's been
Speaker 11: posting prolifically some really disturbing staff, glorifying the leaders of
Speaker 11: Haslah and Hamas and talking about jihad being the greatest deed.
Speaker 11: He is under police investigation for these posts, which include
Speaker 11: two video which appear to be taken from a site
Speaker 11: in South Lebanon that has the Hesbela logo and military
Speaker 11: weapons military uniforms in it. I confronted him at the
Speaker 11: barber shop that he owns, and he claimed that he
Speaker 11: has no regrets over this, that police have visited him
Speaker 11: and had a friendly chat with him, That's how he
Speaker 11: described it. He doesn't think he's in any trouble. That's
Speaker 11: the impression he says he's got from police officers. And
Speaker 11: I guess that's the most disturbing thing. I mean, this
Speaker 11: is one guy, and he's certainly not an isolated case.
Speaker 11: There are plenty, as we've seen on the streets holding
Speaker 11: HESBELA flags who are really thumbing their nose at authorities
Speaker 11: because we introduced laws back in January that the display
Speaker 11: of terror symbols are prohibited. But where has any of
Speaker 11: them have any of the prosecutions Meet Paul.
Speaker 4: I don't regret any of that, because at the end
Speaker 4: of the day, I'm not saying I'm a did with
Speaker 4: anything but the day, those are the people who are
Speaker 4: standing up for innocent children being bombed and killed. I
Speaker 4: know for a fact that these associations aren't terror's goods.
Speaker 11: I'm glad he knows that our government's got it wrong,
Speaker 11: apparently by prescribing them as such.
Speaker 3: All right, now, Michael, you're a money man, so I've
Speaker 3: got to ask you this question, or at least you're
Speaker 3: aware of money, right, you know that you know how
Speaker 3: things move bitcoin Now, when I was recently in the States,
Speaker 3: yes it was a casino, Yes it was Las Vegas.
Speaker 1: There was like there was a bitcoin eighty m right.
Speaker 1: And bitcoin is.
Speaker 3: Something that certainly a lot of people think, you know,
Speaker 3: is going to rise as an alternative currency under the
Speaker 3: Trump administration.
Speaker 1: Elon Musk, you know, being not so subtle.
Speaker 3: About that with his reference to doge as the organization
Speaker 3: he's going to be leading to have a look at
Speaker 3: the line by line through the federal budget today. Interestingly,
Speaker 3: the head of the Reserve Bank says, this is garbage.
Speaker 3: It's not real money, it's not in real money, and
Speaker 3: it's not going to be accepted here. Your thoughts on
Speaker 3: whether we'll have to accept bitcoin as a way of
Speaker 3: paying for things.
Speaker 6: Here, Well, the great news is this, Not only did
Speaker 6: Michelle Bullet, the head of Reserve Bank, say what you
Speaker 6: said she said, but she said something else, very profound.
Speaker 6: She said she didn't understand bitcoin. So for all those
Speaker 6: people at home who've got no idea what it is,
Speaker 6: you are in the same boat as Michelle Bullock, who's
Speaker 6: been in the treasure, but in treasure in the financial
Speaker 6: markets for thirty years. So I'm in that boat too.
Speaker 6: Here's the simple here's the simple truth of the thing.
Speaker 6: Central banks issue currency. Our currency is issued by the
Speaker 6: Reserve Bank. It's not issued by the local butcher shop,
Speaker 6: the barbershop, the car dealer or anyone else. It's issued
Speaker 6: by central banks. And this was a point made to
Speaker 6: me years ago by the Great Henry Ergast from the
Speaker 6: Australian who made that simple point when I was asking
Speaker 6: him about bitcoin, and he said he didn't particularly understand
Speaker 6: it either, because anyone could then issue money if it
Speaker 6: wasn't through a central bank. So comfort yourself in the
Speaker 6: knoll that if Michelle Bullock and the Reserve and the
Speaker 6: Treasury don't issue, Treasury don't issue money, then it's really
Speaker 6: got no value. It's an asset class that a lot
Speaker 6: of people believe in and think's got value. Good on
Speaker 6: them if they want to pay eighty thousand US dollars
Speaker 6: for a bit of bitcoin, good on them. But it's
Speaker 6: not a tradeable asset class of any great certainty. You
Speaker 6: can barter with it in the same way that you
Speaker 6: can go to a shop and say I've got an
Speaker 6: old washing machine. Can I swap that for you for
Speaker 6: chik chicken and chips if you want to, you can
Speaker 6: barter with it. But is it currency? No, it's not currency.
Speaker 1: All right, guys, appreciate it.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much for isn't loses when we've got
Speaker 3: more time next time because of the great winner that is.
Speaker 1: Nigel Farage joins.
Speaker 2: Us straight after the break.
Speaker 3: He's in London plenty to fire up about basking in
Speaker 3: the Trump glory, but also some madness in the UK.
Speaker 1: Nigel Farage exclusive. It's to Paul Moorray life exit leader,
Speaker 1: Reform Party leader and a very happy man. Is none
Speaker 1: other than mate Nigel Farrage.
Speaker 3: Nigel, you were there in mary Lago, you were in
Speaker 3: the room as it was all because, I mean clear,
Speaker 3: what was it like a week ago?
Speaker 10: It was an honor, a genuine honor to be the
Speaker 10: only British person in the room. And there it was.
Speaker 10: There was Donald Trump sitting in the middle of the
Speaker 10: room with family, with Elon Musk, Dana White and around
Speaker 10: were friends, mar A Largo members, donors. There were no cameras,
Speaker 10: there were no journalists taking notes and writing about it.
Speaker 10: It was a very private occasion. And the extraordinary thing
Speaker 10: was I started the evening off, I was very bullish.
Speaker 10: I'd been outside a polling station that morning in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 10: I was convinced he was going to win. Most people
Speaker 10: were a bit cautious, and as the whooping and hollering began,
Speaker 10: Trump just sat there, relaxed, having an ice cream, as
Speaker 10: if kind of no big deal. I mean, he is
Speaker 10: one cool dude. I got to tell you, no, it
Speaker 10: was honestly memorable, and I I can't think, I really
Speaker 10: genuinely can't think of a more dramatic, decisive election result
Speaker 10: at any point in my life.
Speaker 1: It really is a big deal.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And we've all had this floating feeling since, right,
Speaker 3: which is this sense of reset, this sense of recalibration,
Speaker 3: and an opportunity for things to head off in a.
Speaker 1: Direction that we would all love to see. I hope
Speaker 1: it all happens now.
Speaker 3: Obviously, today you saw the meaning between Trump and Biden,
Speaker 3: and we've got to say, you know, while we've all
Speaker 3: wailed on Joe Biden, he stepped up right. They both
Speaker 3: showed themselves to be bigger men than things they had
Speaker 3: said in the past. I liked it. It was a
Speaker 3: regret that it didn't happen four years ago, but I
Speaker 3: thought it was great it happened today.
Speaker 1: No, I agree entirely.
Speaker 10: And you know, both of them behave with dignity and
Speaker 10: said nice, decent things, and that's all well and good.
Speaker 10: And a transition is going at absolutely breakneck speed.
Speaker 1: And let me tell you something.
Speaker 10: In twenty sixteen, when I arrived in Trump Tower a
Speaker 10: couple of days after the election, I was the first
Speaker 10: foreigner to see Donald Trump after his first victory. They
Speaker 10: hadn't expected to win. There was no planning or preparation
Speaker 10: for what was to come at all. It was like,
Speaker 10: you know, a completely shock. He has the power of
Speaker 10: patronage over three, maybe even four thousand people, and they've
Speaker 10: been planning this now for the last eighteen months.
Speaker 1: And what you're going to.
Speaker 10: See is Trump going into office on January the twentieth,
Speaker 10: putting people that he trusts and knows in the key positions.
Speaker 10: And the most exciting of all, of course, is Ilon
Speaker 10: Musk with this new Doge Department that's going to cut
Speaker 10: back the size of a state, cut back the waste
Speaker 10: of taxpayers money. I mean, that is for me, the
Speaker 10: most exciting thing I've seen since Margaret Thatcher closed down
Speaker 10: lots of government authorities and got rid of people. You know,
Speaker 10: government is too big, and goodness me, it's worse than Australia.
Speaker 1: I think in terms of.
Speaker 10: The amount of state does the amount of laws you've
Speaker 10: got that it is probably anywhere else. So this could be,
Speaker 10: this could be an object lesson for all of us.
Speaker 3: Forgive me for any giving you thirty seconds to explain
Speaker 3: the Allison Pearson situation.
Speaker 1: But she's a columnist in a newspaper. She puts out
Speaker 1: a bunch of tweets in the police turner.
Speaker 10: Alison Pearson, very respected columnist, podcast, a commentator, very decently
Speaker 10: in every way too, please turn up on remembrance Sunday
Speaker 10: morning and say she's in trouble for a non crime
Speaker 10: hate incident. She asks, what was it? I said, we
Speaker 10: can't tell you. Who is it that has complained? No,
Speaker 10: the victim, the victim has complained. Who is the victim?
Speaker 10: We can't tell you, And off they go saying it
Speaker 10: may become a criminal matter. Basically, this is state intimidation.
Speaker 10: It's saying keep your mouth shut, stop criticizing, or you
Speaker 10: will be in trouble. And it isn't just happening to Allison.
Speaker 10: It's happening to thousands of people all over Britain, many
Speaker 10: of whom, all of whom don't have the voice like
Speaker 10: she does to fight back. It is Orwellian, it is kafcrasque.
Speaker 10: It is horrifying and we've got to stand up and
Speaker 10: fight it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, if you want to see more about this story
Speaker 3: and plenty more. Nigel of Courses on GP News. Lovely
Speaker 3: to see you mate. We'll see you again next week.
Speaker 3: We'll have more time to talk about it. All right,
Speaker 3: that's it for the show for this week. We'll see
Speaker 3: you again Sunday Night, where the news only ever gets bigger.
Speaker 3: Go Yankees have a great We again