Speaker 1: From the skying In Center.
Speaker 2: This is Paul Murray livedo Maidan God love you Australia.
Speaker 2: A constant reminder. So despite the fact that last night
Speaker 2: was the budget and tonight we'll talk about the budget
Speaker 2: and great detail. We'll have a great debate between Stephen
Speaker 2: Conroy and Broman Bishop. We'll have another heavy hitter in
Speaker 2: Megan Kelly.
Speaker 3: Every now and.
Speaker 2: Then Australia gets to remind the people who talk about
Speaker 2: politics for a reason exactly where they sit in the
Speaker 2: pecking order. Now, as you know, everyone's got an opinion.
Speaker 2: It's rough technical and this worked and this didn't work.
Speaker 2: About the budget, you have.
Speaker 4: To make sure that as you rearrange the pain, you
Speaker 4: don't add to the overall pain. You don't add to
Speaker 4: the inflation which is giving us the problems around our
Speaker 4: cost of living. And the government did the first, it
Speaker 4: didn't really do the second.
Speaker 2: The Albanezy government is copying plenty of flack for its
Speaker 2: big spending budget, giving it three hundred dollars energy rebates
Speaker 2: to everyone.
Speaker 5: Jim Chalmers insists this budget isn't about winning votes, but
Speaker 5: we'll take that with a grain of salt. It would
Speaker 5: be the first government ever to not want to win
Speaker 5: votes with the budget.
Speaker 2: The Treasurer spends beig on budget cost of living relief,
Speaker 2: but Sydney's lowest paid workers have wage risers delayed.
Speaker 6: If you're struggling to pay your energy bills, you're going
Speaker 6: to have another three hundred dollars on top of whatever
Speaker 6: the state government's doing.
Speaker 1: But you are going to pay for it.
Speaker 6: Either you're going to pay for it or someone else
Speaker 6: is going to pay for it in higher inflation and
Speaker 6: other things and higher interest rates.
Speaker 3: But a little reminder to Albow and to Jim Charmers.
Speaker 2: While they think that they are the center of the universe,
Speaker 2: and the people who talk about them think that they're
Speaker 2: close to the center of the universe, and the people
Speaker 2: who talk about the people who talk about the people
Speaker 2: think they're close to the almost center of the universe.
Speaker 2: Australian television viewers sent a very big message yesterday, just
Speaker 2: one of many, many, many, many many television shows that
Speaker 2: people preferred to watch them in The Treasurer's speech.
Speaker 7: Was this, Oh yes, come on, so it's got to
Speaker 7: give a little lateral push, paps, get down, go rides.
Speaker 8: A bit for us as close yep yep, is it.
Speaker 7: Here, Rob is it?
Speaker 8: Here?
Speaker 1: Is it?
Speaker 8: Here?
Speaker 5: Is it there?
Speaker 3: Who cares?
Speaker 2: What the GDB growthreat's gonna be, what's gonna happen, What's gonna.
Speaker 3: Happen with the little Bittal coin?
Speaker 2: Seriously, anyway, personally I prefer the Chase Slarry Eam does
Speaker 2: a dear friend, God love him.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 2: The reviews are in, however, for the budget, and this
Speaker 2: is worth noticing that while the Treasurer was out there
Speaker 2: and selling it and kind of trying to pretend that
Speaker 2: he was selling you sugar when he was really trying
Speaker 2: to set you something a little less edible, the people
Speaker 2: of Australia were exactly where we were when we talked
Speaker 2: about the budget last night, kind of in a giant.
Speaker 3: Really, we don't want cash.
Speaker 1: Three hundred dollars.
Speaker 9: What are you going to do with that that doesn't
Speaker 9: go to take giving me food for the nextra week.
Speaker 10: I think it's just buying bades.
Speaker 4: It sounds like it's to me they electricity. That's nothing
Speaker 4: it absolutely laughs.
Speaker 2: Thir three hundred dollars won't make much of difference. No, well, okay,
Speaker 2: those are just vox pops as we call them in
Speaker 2: the business. They're hardly scientific. They're randomly about who was
Speaker 2: available when.
Speaker 3: The camera was around.
Speaker 2: Perhaps the labor loving analysts over on Channel two, they
Speaker 2: can tell us why this was an amazing budget.
Speaker 9: Why do high earning Australians need a subsidy.
Speaker 5: Multiple parts of our cost of living package. There's a
Speaker 5: tax cut for every taxpayer, and there's energy bill relief
Speaker 5: for every household.
Speaker 9: About middle Australia. But there's a whole bunch of people
Speaker 9: who aren't in Middle Australia. Why do you need to
Speaker 9: give energy relief to those people?
Speaker 5: But I think people are under the pump right around Australia.
Speaker 9: Yes, but you will acknowledge there are people who are
Speaker 9: not under the pump. We hear about it a lot,
Speaker 9: the baby boomers, those people who've won the housing lottery
Speaker 9: and so on. Why are those people going to get
Speaker 9: three hundred dollars in their pocket?
Speaker 3: Hang on, every baby boomer is rich.
Speaker 2: That may be news to one or two people watching
Speaker 2: us right now, But you know, well, okay, maybe the
Speaker 2: guy who has seen like fifty budgets in a row,
Speaker 2: maybe his review is that this is a stunning document
Speaker 2: that is going to fix all of our problems.
Speaker 3: Elbows each way.
Speaker 2: Bet On our Future ahead of his article where have
Speaker 2: I heard each way elbow before?
Speaker 3: Um? Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 2: Okay, well okay, what about the people who actually talk
Speaker 2: about economics for a living, even more so than Ross Giddens.
Speaker 2: What about the Financial Review? What did they think of
Speaker 2: the budget? This is the most irresponsible budget in recent memory.
Speaker 3: Okay, okay, so.
Speaker 2: The newspapers Okay, the newspapers are probably wrong here, THEBC
Speaker 2: is probably wrong.
Speaker 3: Voxpop's definitely wrong.
Speaker 2: So what about the guy who works for the ABC
Speaker 2: but also writes columns for a news webs that is
Speaker 2: paid for.
Speaker 3: By union superannuation money. He says.
Speaker 2: That this is a risky, not responsible budget and it
Speaker 2: could mean to rate hikes.
Speaker 3: Okay, no, no, no, no, they're all wrong. They are all wrong.
Speaker 2: The cartoons of Australia, they're the ones who connect, They understand,
Speaker 2: they know how to take big and complicated issues and
Speaker 2: sum up what's really going on, like Johannes Sleek in
Speaker 2: The Australian, or maybe the Mark Knight Mark Knight, Mark
Speaker 2: Knight in the.
Speaker 3: Okay, what about Warren Brown? He will really care about.
Speaker 2: The power thing that's seventy five bucks every three months
Speaker 2: or twenty five dollars a month or six dollars a week. Okay,
Speaker 2: So that's all old media, right. Okay, so the ABC,
Speaker 2: the Financial Review, that's all old media. Like, guys, people
Speaker 2: aren't tuning into that anymore. All about social media because
Speaker 2: social media is where you can just really connect with
Speaker 2: the papa. And this was the Prime Minister really connecting
Speaker 2: my papa on the internet last night.
Speaker 11: Hi, I wanted to talk to you about one of
Speaker 11: the major announcements we have in tonight's budget, and that's
Speaker 11: from July one, every household will get three hundred dollars
Speaker 11: off their energy bills.
Speaker 2: Okay, So the people have seen the prominent I mean,
Speaker 2: he's looking at me right, like he filmed that himself,
Speaker 2: so he understands me.
Speaker 3: Right. He's got a dog called Toto.
Speaker 2: Did you also know he's from a single parent household
Speaker 2: and he grew up in Housing Commission.
Speaker 3: I didn't know that until like today.
Speaker 2: So the people responding to that video on the internet
Speaker 2: who were following the Prime minister was presumably they liked
Speaker 2: the Prime minister right.
Speaker 3: Three hundred bucks yep, that'll go far.
Speaker 2: You realize how much power bills have gone up since
Speaker 2: you came to office. We've heard all of this before.
Speaker 2: It was a lie the first time. It's a lie now.
Speaker 2: The cost of everything has gone up since Labour's taken path.
Speaker 2: These are people who follow him on the internet and
Speaker 2: therefore presumably like him. Is this like the two hundred
Speaker 2: and seventy five dollars reduction we never saw. You can't
Speaker 2: buy your way out of this. Your government drove price
Speaker 2: is up by far more than you're rebating all of
Speaker 2: Australians now with taxpayer money. Call the election, okay, all right,
Speaker 2: So social media is wrong, mainstream media is wrong, people
Speaker 2: in the street are wrong.
Speaker 3: Cartoonists are wrong.
Speaker 2: Well, maybe the best person to review the budget is
Speaker 2: the guy who handed the budget down.
Speaker 5: What we released last night will be part of the
Speaker 5: solution to this high inflation that's been in our economy
Speaker 5: for a couple of years now, not part of the problem.
Speaker 5: Some of the cost of living package is broad, a
Speaker 5: tax cut for every taxpayer, energy bill, relief for every household,
Speaker 5: and some of it is targeted ran assistance, a help
Speaker 5: with cheaper medicines.
Speaker 3: And more an like that.
Speaker 5: While the outlook is uncertain, Treasury's forecasts make it clear
Speaker 5: that our policies could see inflation return to target earlier,
Speaker 5: perhaps even by the end of the year. So what
Speaker 5: we're doing instead is we're providing this energy bill relief
Speaker 5: to every household.
Speaker 2: Sure, mate, you're amazing.
Speaker 3: Just ask yourself again.
Speaker 2: Australia's reaction to the budget. We knew it last night.
Speaker 2: The media tried. They tried, but they didn't like it
Speaker 2: because the reality is as hard as the Prime Minister
Speaker 2: and the treasure we want to run around pat themselves on
Speaker 2: the back and say they've solved all of the world's problems.
Speaker 2: The reality is that seventy seven percent of Australians are
Speaker 2: in extreme cost of living pressures right now. So three
Speaker 2: hundred bucks a year, which is really seventy five bucks
Speaker 2: a quarter, which is really twenty five bunks a month
Speaker 2: that you don't see by the way they're paying the
Speaker 2: power companies, that's not going to really move that needle,
Speaker 2: literally the cost of living needle.
Speaker 3: And as has been explained by the Great Andrew Clarnel.
Speaker 6: And you get seventy five a quarter all of us.
Speaker 6: You know, Jena Reinhart gets it, Twiggy Forest gets it,
Speaker 6: we all get it. Everyone watching gets it. And I
Speaker 6: think it just rolls pretty much straight onto your bill.
Speaker 2: To make sure that the mansions of Australia can heat
Speaker 2: their puls.
Speaker 3: This is a labor budget.
Speaker 2: The problem is one of the reasons why people have
Speaker 2: gone today is firstly, there's no extra money in your pocket.
Speaker 2: There's money that has been handed to power companies and
Speaker 2: it's seventy five dollars a quarter. The average household bills
Speaker 2: when it comes to power in this country are thirteen
Speaker 2: hundred dollars in Sydney, twelve hundred dollars in Melbourne, twelve
Speaker 2: hundred dollars in Brisbane. Now they're the annual numbers, so
Speaker 2: minus three hundred off all of that, it's still way
Speaker 2: over a grand, which is way higher than it was
Speaker 2: when they came to power.
Speaker 3: But don't tell anyone.
Speaker 2: And then again when it comes to workers, why are
Speaker 2: Australians a bit whatever? Because, as Jim Chalmers says, when
Speaker 2: it comes to the two little too late tax cuts.
Speaker 5: From July one, all thirteen point six million taxpayers, we'll
Speaker 5: get a tax cut and for eighty four percent of
Speaker 5: taxpayers and ninety percent of tax paying women, a bigger
Speaker 5: tax cut than they would have under the previous government.
Speaker 5: This is about rewarding the hard work of our nurses
Speaker 5: and teachers and truckies and tradees and the two point
Speaker 5: nine million people earning forty five thousand dollars a year
Speaker 5: or less who would have received nothing. The average benefit
Speaker 5: is one eight hundred and eighty eight dollars a year,
Speaker 5: which is thirty six dollars a week.
Speaker 3: Wow.
Speaker 2: You know when you're driving around listening to your favorite
Speaker 2: radio station and they've got one hundred bucks to give
Speaker 2: away because you called and you're the secret sound person
Speaker 2: who guessed and you win five hundred.
Speaker 3: Bucks and you go, okay, Well.
Speaker 2: That's how this feels, because it doesn't actually change anyone's life,
Speaker 2: because again, thirty six dollars a week, how does that.
Speaker 3: Affect the car insurance that you're paying?
Speaker 2: According to Canstar, the average cost of comprehensive insurance in
Speaker 2: Australia is twenty one hundred bucks. But thanks for the
Speaker 2: thirty six bucks a week. Oh yeah, and what about
Speaker 2: the increases in everything at supermarkets? Thirty six bucks a
Speaker 2: week doesn't really change any games, does it, Because, as
Speaker 2: we've seen over the past couple of years, food inflation,
Speaker 2: meat inflation, dairy inflation, fruit and veg and non alcoholic beverages, Up, up,
Speaker 2: up and again the MUH at thirty six bucks a week,
Speaker 2: Thank you so much, doctor Jim. If you're trying to
Speaker 2: pay off a house, or you live in a house
Speaker 2: and paying rent to somebody's trying to pay off a house, they,
Speaker 2: of course, as we've told you many times before, have
Speaker 2: to find an extra fourteen thousand dollars than before this
Speaker 2: government came to power because of the elbow dozen of
Speaker 2: interest rate rises, or twenty nine thousand dollars if it's
Speaker 2: a million dollar mortgage. Now, all of this, of course,
Speaker 2: is not really about changing your life. It's about changing
Speaker 2: the political fortunes of a government that has let cost
Speaker 2: of living burn is an issue all the way through
Speaker 2: twenty twenty three. You see, they thought they could distract
Speaker 2: with a year long campaign about what words should exist
Speaker 2: in our constitution, about the voice. That's why they put
Speaker 2: four hundred and thirty million dollars. They didn't add four
Speaker 2: hundred and thirty million dollars to charities that we're dealing
Speaker 2: with cost of living. The budget last year took fifteen
Speaker 2: hundred dollars off ten million workers. That's fifteen hundred dollars
Speaker 2: that you would get automatically as a tax return, fifteen
Speaker 2: hundred dollars that you would automatically get, so you'd be
Speaker 2: able to have an actual stack of cash to pay
Speaker 2: off one of the mini bills that you haven't been
Speaker 2: able to because of all of the different squeezes that
Speaker 2: have taken place. Instead, they are literally spending b for
Speaker 2: billions of dollars, billions of dollars to not move the needle,
Speaker 2: to not change your life, so they can have a
Speaker 2: slogan to turn the poles around. Get ready, it's tried,
Speaker 2: it's tested, it's focus grouped within an inch of its life,
Speaker 2: and you will be sick of it if you aren't
Speaker 2: already by the time they finish saying it.
Speaker 5: A tax cut for every taxpayer, energy bill relief for
Speaker 5: every household.
Speaker 12: And we think that every single one of your listeners
Speaker 12: deserves that energy bill relief. Every single one of your
Speaker 12: listeners watching this program deserve a tax cut.
Speaker 5: There's a tax cut for every taxpayer, and there's energy
Speaker 5: bill relief for every household.
Speaker 2: Listeners who are watching your program, they know you better
Speaker 2: than you do. Apparently you don't watch your program, you
Speaker 2: just listen to it. Of course, it's just about the slogan.
Speaker 2: The slogan to try to say we're helping everyone, and
Speaker 2: if you oppose any of this, then you're against helping everyone.
Speaker 2: But if that everyone doesn't actually feel the help, then
Speaker 2: it's just a bumper sticker that they're just going to
Speaker 2: scream at us. It'll be about as impactful as those
Speaker 2: people who drive around with the bumper stickers for the
Speaker 2: past twenty years saying.
Speaker 3: Save our ab See. However, I've got to be fair.
Speaker 2: There is a lot of good news in the budget
Speaker 2: that we didn't get a chance to talk about last night,
Speaker 2: and we've been able to find some of the details
Speaker 2: in the budget that really are going to help people,
Speaker 2: Like they are going.
Speaker 3: To lower taxes on sweet potatoes.
Speaker 2: There's one hundred and seventeen million dollars for the Flying
Speaker 2: fruit Fly circus. There's more money for the ABC so
Speaker 2: that they can get kids who live in the bush
Speaker 2: to send them emails. I refer now to the Nightly
Speaker 2: and they're up late hosts to go through some other
Speaker 2: amazing initiatives.
Speaker 13: First, back to back surpluses in nearly two decades. Apparently
Speaker 13: living within our means for two years in a row
Speaker 13: is worth a high five.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he said, this is a budget for the here and.
Speaker 13: Now, a responsible budget that helps people under pressure to date,
Speaker 13: like who ethne, building a million homes is something different.
Speaker 13: You can't find a trade for love nor money at
Speaker 13: the moment.
Speaker 5: So tax cuts for all energy rebates and a million
Speaker 5: new homes and.
Speaker 13: We're meant to believe none of that is inflation. Is
Speaker 13: the one page in all that that Jim really doesn't
Speaker 13: want you to pay attention to is this one that
Speaker 13: shows that by the end of twenty twenty eight, our
Speaker 13: national debt will be over one point one trillion dollars
Speaker 13: and the interest on that debt each year will be
Speaker 13: thirty five point six billion.
Speaker 2: You may recall Cumberland City Council made a decision a
Speaker 2: couple of weeks ago about a book that was in
Speaker 2: the children's section that some people freaked out about. It
Speaker 2: was a book about same sex parents. Now, I haven't
Speaker 2: talked about this because I knew this would resolve itself,
Speaker 2: and there's a meeting happening with the council right now,
Speaker 2: a vote in fact, maybe will be happening as we speak,
Speaker 2: so we'll check the details for you.
Speaker 3: But the book.
Speaker 2: Is written for the youngest of readers, and it's like
Speaker 2: my dad is Greg and my other dad is Bill,
Speaker 2: and some people try to turn this into sort of,
Speaker 2: you know, the example of that really weird stuff that
Speaker 2: is being pushed on some kids about all sorts of
Speaker 2: stuff in the United States.
Speaker 3: Reality is, it's not so to me.
Speaker 2: It's obvious this thing is going to be turned around.
Speaker 2: But as you remember, people said who were in favor
Speaker 2: of the book being removed from the local library, that
Speaker 2: this is not Newtown, this is not Merrickville. So tonight
Speaker 2: is actually when the meeting has taken place to presumably overturn.
Speaker 3: The change.
Speaker 2: Now I'm not going to say bad, but you overturn
Speaker 2: the change to get rid of the book, certainly out
Speaker 2: of the children's section. Now, there's been a live stream
Speaker 2: on this that I've been watching for the past Wow.
Speaker 2: A lot of people screaming, a lot of people fired up.
Speaker 2: Who knew this was the one thing that would actually
Speaker 2: pull our communities apart and the police would all need
Speaker 2: to turn up and all the rest of it, you know,
Speaker 2: people being booted out every two.
Speaker 3: Or three seconds.
Speaker 2: Well, apparently it was but interesting and important to note that,
Speaker 2: as I say, the reason I think this thing is
Speaker 2: probably going to get overturned. Is because there was a
Speaker 2: couple councils missing from the original meeting, so they are
Speaker 2: voting as we speak. When I have a result for you,
Speaker 2: I will tell you. If not the late debate who
Speaker 2: have been watching the stream as well, and I have
Speaker 2: made sure that I was going to stay hands off
Speaker 2: on the goodness of the stream so they could bring
Speaker 2: it to you.
Speaker 3: They will do so at the top of the hour.
Speaker 2: Now, Australian universities are deeply reliant on China. Now we
Speaker 2: know this because of the Confucius Institutes. Not to mention
Speaker 2: the international students. The business model basically means never upset China. Well,
Speaker 2: there is a bloke who studies out an Australian university
Speaker 2: who will and truly upset China. He's done many protests,
Speaker 2: including dressing up as Winnie the Pooh, which is the
Speaker 2: number one way to pee off the Chinese president. His name, apparently,
Speaker 2: or the name they've given him, is Aaron. But guess
Speaker 2: what happened after Aaron protested against China in Australia. According
Speaker 2: to his story, the police then went and threatened him
Speaker 2: his parents in China and they used the threats of
Speaker 2: the parents in China to pick up the phone and
Speaker 2: call him in Australia to say knock this stuff off.
Speaker 2: The police threatened my parents about their income and their superannuation,
Speaker 2: about my relative's future ability to become public servants or
Speaker 2: get a job in a national owned company if I
Speaker 2: didn't stop, he says. Once he eventually got on the
Speaker 2: phone to his parents, it was like they were reading
Speaker 2: a script. They told me not to attend protests, or
Speaker 2: organize any protests, or to use Twitter from Monday to Friday.
Speaker 2: The University of Sydney student who prefers to be known
Speaker 2: by the fake name as we said, Aaron. He suspects
Speaker 2: that a Chinese police officer was standing over his parents
Speaker 2: while they gave him the instructions. Now we've had planning
Speaker 2: of chats about what isn't isn't acceptable on student campuses,
Speaker 2: what protests are allowed.
Speaker 3: And not allowed.
Speaker 2: But is there going to be any discussion whatsoever about
Speaker 2: the pressure that is put on students from China who
Speaker 2: come to Australia via their parents back at home because
Speaker 2: of what they are doing on a free campus here
Speaker 2: in Australia. Well, of course, Australia will never stand up
Speaker 2: to China under this current government, and certainly the leadership
Speaker 2: of many of our modern universities would have no interest
Speaker 2: whatsoever in standing up to the Chinese money that is
Speaker 2: constantly flowing their way. But maybe someone somewhere should ask
Speaker 2: a couple of questions about this incented estimates. Maybe call
Speaker 2: forward the bosses of the universities. And while we're all
Speaker 2: talking about protests in and around the Middle East, could
Speaker 2: we also talk about, so, how do you protect these
Speaker 2: people for being able to freely express themselves in this
Speaker 2: country and not being intimidated by threats to their parents
Speaker 2: in another country? And if you can't control it, then
Speaker 2: maybe we should just cut ties with China. Oh yeah,
Speaker 2: And speaking of our universities, somebody was booted out of
Speaker 2: the country because they were apparently spying on some of
Speaker 2: our intellectual property that was being researched in our universities.
Speaker 2: I'm sure the Prime ministers talk about that when he
Speaker 2: rolls out of the red carpet for the Chinese premiere.
Speaker 2: Oh that's right, zero chance. A couple of big things
Speaker 2: I want to talk about out of the United States now,
Speaker 2: of course, Donald Trump in court, this thing has gone
Speaker 2: on for weeks and weeks and weeks, and I'll be
Speaker 2: honest with you, if I'm a weirder tonight than I
Speaker 2: may normally be, it's because I didn't sleep all night
Speaker 2: after being so pumped up after the budget. I sat
Speaker 2: and watched the Michael Cohen stuff, and I didn't get
Speaker 2: to sleep until like after the kids left for school
Speaker 2: this morning.
Speaker 3: So it was a long night.
Speaker 2: But it was fascinating watching Michael Cohen because the prosecution
Speaker 2: is using Michael Cohen as the key person to be
Speaker 2: able to turn around and say Donald Trump knew everything,
Speaker 2: and therefore Donald Trump knew how the payments to him
Speaker 2: which went to Stormy Daniels were being accounted for in
Speaker 2: the business.
Speaker 3: The only problem is none of that actually came out
Speaker 3: in evidence.
Speaker 2: Yes, there was a lot about how Trump ran his
Speaker 2: business et cetera, et cetera, but the prosecution didn't ask
Speaker 2: and Cohen didn't say that explicitly Trump knew how it
Speaker 2: was being accounted for. He intentionally knew how it was
Speaker 2: being accounted for, because if he knew that, then that's
Speaker 2: the crime. But even reporters from the New Your Times
Speaker 2: are saying that this has not been proven yet. Now
Speaker 2: what's fascinating about watching this if you get the chance
Speaker 2: in the middle of the night, as I do and
Speaker 2: have been, is American cable TV just has a whole
Speaker 2: bunch of people out the front of the court, and
Speaker 2: then they've got a whole bunch of people who used
Speaker 2: to work for prosecutors around the country, all just feverishly
Speaker 2: agreeing about everything's being constantly proven.
Speaker 3: But the reality is is.
Speaker 2: That and I followed many days, and I've had many
Speaker 2: kind of sleepless nights trying to follow the details here.
Speaker 2: The reality is is that the one person who absolutely
Speaker 2: would know whether Donald Trump told the Trump organization to
Speaker 2: write up these receipts as legal expenses when the assumption
Speaker 2: was that they weren't, but the prosecution won't call him
Speaker 2: the blowstone is Alan Weiselberg. He was the man who
Speaker 2: was essentially the chief bookkeeper for the Trump organization. It's
Speaker 2: his name on the non disclosure agreement agreements with Stormy Daniels.
Speaker 2: Do you know whose name.
Speaker 3: Is not on them? Donald Trump's.
Speaker 2: In fact, they did have Donald Trump's name there for
Speaker 2: him to sign, but he never signed the document. So
Speaker 2: why won't the prosecution call the key bookkeeper? Is it
Speaker 2: perhaps because the bookkeeper will say, no, I didn't do
Speaker 2: it because he told me to do it. I did
Speaker 2: it because we were giving money to a lawyer. And
Speaker 2: that's a legal expense. Small problem, of course for the trial,
Speaker 2: but it's not stopping the media, as I say, going
Speaker 2: over every little detail. And one of the problems with
Speaker 2: covering this is that there is no live video, There
Speaker 2: is no live audio. Everyone is reading along with a transcript. Well,
Speaker 2: thankfully the good folks at CNN have decided to take
Speaker 2: two people who I'm sure absolutely loved the idea that
Speaker 2: this is their fifteen minutes of fame, to just read
Speaker 2: from the transcripts like high school actors.
Speaker 14: You referred to President Trump as a dictator, didn't you.
Speaker 3: Sounds like something I said.
Speaker 14: And on that same tech talk so again on April
Speaker 14: twenty third, you referred to President Trump when he left
Speaker 14: the courtroom. You said that he goes right into that
Speaker 14: little cage, which is where he belongs, in an fing cage,
Speaker 14: like an animal. Do you recall saying that.
Speaker 10: I recall saying.
Speaker 8: That that's a dramatic reading.
Speaker 2: Abby, Yeah, I mean, that's kind of how it went down,
Speaker 2: but that's not the best that CNN has done. You
Speaker 2: see what they just did then was just read and
Speaker 2: show you photo of person, photo of person.
Speaker 3: They did that because they had.
Speaker 2: Been absolutely humiliated by their first attempt at this where
Speaker 2: literally you watch two people reading a script like they're
Speaker 2: rehearsing for a TV show.
Speaker 15: Did he say anything to you at that time about
Speaker 15: how this might be viewed if.
Speaker 13: It got out?
Speaker 1: Yes?
Speaker 9: What did he say in substance?
Speaker 10: He said to me, this is a disaster, total disaster.
Speaker 10: Women are going to hate me because this is really
Speaker 10: a disaster. Women will hate me. Guys may think it's cool,
Speaker 10: but this is going to be a disaster for the campaign.
Speaker 2: Fun to watch, right, That's not the reason that I
Speaker 2: have the sleepless night. It's the actual, live, live, live,
Speaker 2: what's happening right now coverage. But at least when it
Speaker 2: was Prince Harry, they hired actual actors who kind of
Speaker 2: sounded like them instead of.
Speaker 3: Just you'll do read it.
Speaker 2: Of course, Trump each and every day he speaks at
Speaker 2: the start and the end of.
Speaker 3: The court day.
Speaker 2: Now, I think he's at his best when he's basically
Speaker 2: talking about election stuff, but most of the time it's
Speaker 2: just reading people who agree with him about the court
Speaker 2: case and the judge this and the prosecutor that. But
Speaker 2: I wanted to show you something is the opinion polls. Now,
Speaker 2: right now, there is a tendency for you to hear
Speaker 2: a lot of polls which are Joe Biden versus Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: It's two points here, it's five points there. But just
Speaker 2: like an Australian election, there are not just two candidates
Speaker 2: on the ballot paper. Instead, most states have many more
Speaker 2: than just those two people running for president. And obviously
Speaker 2: Robert F. Kennedy Junior is a significant factor where his
Speaker 2: vote will be high.
Speaker 3: Here and low there.
Speaker 2: But remember the American election, just like an Australian election,
Speaker 2: is think of the states like electorates. Like you know,
Speaker 2: we've got one hundred and fifty one electorates in our
Speaker 2: Lower House here in Australia, well, of course, fifty states,
Speaker 2: fifty separate electorates. And as you know, the electoral college
Speaker 2: means certain states based off population, have certain votes in
Speaker 2: the actual group of people who end up electing the president.
Speaker 2: You need two hundred and seventy to get there. Now,
Speaker 2: this group of states went for Trump in sixteen, This
Speaker 2: group of states went for Biden into twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: So even after the court case had started, even after
Speaker 2: all day every day on most cable news, it's he's guilty,
Speaker 2: This proves he's guilty, This is what's next, and guilty.
Speaker 2: These are the latest polls that are sending the left
Speaker 2: on five yard because when you actually look at a
Speaker 2: list that includes Robert F. Kennedy Junior, in all of
Speaker 2: the swing states, Trump is winning with one exception. He's
Speaker 2: tired in Wisconsin, in Arizona forty two, thirty three in Georgia,
Speaker 2: thirty nine, thirty one in Michigan, thirty eight, thirty six
Speaker 2: in Nevada. In Nevada, which you didn't even win when
Speaker 2: he won in twenty sixteen, this has a huge Hispanic population,
Speaker 2: and these poles show that Hispanic voters are split fifty
Speaker 2: to fifty at the moment between Biden and Trump. That's
Speaker 2: a huge change between sixteen twenty and twenty four, let
Speaker 2: alone in Pennsylvania and then, as I say, in Wisconsin.
Speaker 2: And one of the reasons why was Conson in particular
Speaker 2: ends up as a tight race has everything to do
Speaker 2: with unions and ethnic populations. But make no mistake, while
Speaker 2: I have sat back and said things like abortion probably
Speaker 2: going to be a big issue. According to this poll
Speaker 2: and many others, it's the economy stupid, and no matter
Speaker 2: what data they tell you from the capital city, the
Speaker 2: lived experience of the economy is what people are now voting.
Speaker 2: Perhaps a little lesson for the people in Canberra who
Speaker 2: want to tell us everything is awesome, but the reality
Speaker 2: is you don't have enough money to even rent the
Speaker 2: Lego movie, let alone sing it song, big debate, let's
Speaker 2: get to it right now, Broba, Bishop Stephen Conroy. Then
Speaker 2: after that, Megan Kelly, lots to go. We're in a
Speaker 2: funny mood with a bit of lack of sleep, so
Speaker 2: anything's about to happen on what could be the final.
Speaker 3: Paul Murray life if I do it really wrong.
Speaker 2: I've been pumped about this tonight, which is to have
Speaker 2: the conversation with one of them Bromber, Bishop of the
Speaker 2: wonderful Stephen Connery round two after our little leer ding
Speaker 2: dong last night. Now Stevenson camp because he's there to
Speaker 2: help always. Bromhen is here because he's always the carryover champ.
Speaker 3: So let's talk.
Speaker 2: About the budget. And Howard has gone down. Obviously you
Speaker 2: saw my summation of how much of the media has had.
Speaker 3: A look at it. I even was watching seven thirty
Speaker 3: reports tonight.
Speaker 2: Saying, yeah, it hasn't quite landed. They haven't landed on
Speaker 2: the lines yet, like they're being as polite as they
Speaker 2: possibly can. That said, do you feel Bromwin that the
Speaker 2: best case scenario of the budget is to give them
Speaker 2: the best case possible for an election this year?
Speaker 8: Well, I've said from the time the Dunkly by election,
Speaker 8: when they first announced that they were breaking their promise
Speaker 8: on the Stage three tax cuts and doing their revamp,
Speaker 8: that there would be an early election because those tax
Speaker 8: cuts won't last till May next year.
Speaker 3: And when I.
Speaker 8: Saw this budget I looked at it as a barnacle
Speaker 8: cleansing exercise. The rent payments is to try and cut
Speaker 8: into the Greens debate on being the friend of renters.
Speaker 3: The three hundred.
Speaker 8: Dollars to every household was because they said we'll give
Speaker 8: you two hundred. Your electricity bill will be two hundred
Speaker 8: and seventy five dollars less. There was to be a
Speaker 8: permanent less, not this twelve months old, but never mind
Speaker 8: all so we gave you all three hundred dollars, which
Speaker 8: is why they didn't bother to try and do anything
Speaker 8: about means testing or whatever, because I just wanted to say, look,
Speaker 8: we've done it. Didn't care. And then of course when
Speaker 8: you look at the rest of the budget, they're trying
Speaker 8: to create a new narrative, which is we care about
Speaker 8: manufacturing in Australia and we're going to do good things here.
Speaker 8: But of course, again you know, Twicky Forest is the
Speaker 8: big winner. I've never seen a man with his hand
Speaker 8: out so often. So it is a let's get rid
Speaker 8: of the barnacles, let's get rid of the Greens argument,
Speaker 8: let's get rid of the electricity argument, let's get here's
Speaker 8: your tax cuts. Let's go for it. Because Jim has said.
Speaker 3: Doctor charm, please, please please. He studied, he studied political superinuation.
Speaker 8: And of course he said that this is anti inflationary
Speaker 8: and there will be tax cuts. There's no possibility of
Speaker 8: there being increases.
Speaker 3: He's at dead.
Speaker 8: Odds with the RBA, and the one thing he doesn't
Speaker 8: want to be is tested. So if you go too long,
Speaker 8: you'll get tested. And if he's wrong, he's toast all.
Speaker 2: Right, Stephen that said, well, no doubt we can do
Speaker 2: the fighting thing. In a second clearly what this budget
Speaker 2: was about was about creating a line that every labor
Speaker 2: MP and every labor candidate at one point in time
Speaker 2: is able to look somebody in the eye who maybe
Speaker 2: was watching Tipping point or farmer wants a wife or
Speaker 2: home and away or.
Speaker 3: Compulsory voter land.
Speaker 2: Right, They're not in the they're not counting the grains
Speaker 2: of sand on the beach like we do. And I
Speaker 2: love what we do, but we know that, you know,
Speaker 2: there's an awful lot of people who who would prefer
Speaker 2: to not vote than to be forced to vote.
Speaker 3: In the end, they.
Speaker 2: Turn around and they've got this tax cut for everyone,
Speaker 2: power cut for every household. Do you think that that
Speaker 2: is as potent as it may seem to be if
Speaker 2: the lived reality of your life circumstances doesn't actually change.
Speaker 16: Well, Paul, I think there's a couple of different points
Speaker 16: you've made there. So you and I have over the
Speaker 16: last few years enjoyed electro knights, and then we've enjoyed
Speaker 16: talking about.
Speaker 1: What's going to be the pole reaction.
Speaker 16: So I'm talking about over you know, the Scott Morrison
Speaker 16: the last few years and ours, and what you've consistently
Speaker 16: seen is that there's been.
Speaker 1: No post budget bump.
Speaker 16: I mean maybe ten years ago before media splintered in
Speaker 16: the way it has with social media, that enough people
Speaker 16: were watching on a given night that they actually absorbed
Speaker 16: it on the night and felt positive or negative about it.
Speaker 16: So the first thing to say is that there's been
Speaker 16: almost no pole bumps for Scott Morrison in his budgets and.
Speaker 1: So far for Albow in his budget.
Speaker 16: So I'm not expecting any significant pole bump at all.
Speaker 16: Having said that, I surprisingly Paul agreed with a lot
Speaker 16: of what broman just had to say. I thought she
Speaker 16: described it in the way I would have described it.
Speaker 16: I think that over the last few months, and to
Speaker 16: some degree in this budget, the government have been cleaning
Speaker 16: the binnacles off the ship in a way that says
Speaker 16: we want to be focused, we want to be talking
Speaker 16: about labor issues. What difference I have with the interpretation
Speaker 16: that Bromwin had is that Labour's done this because there's
Speaker 16: labor values behind this, and so we want to make
Speaker 16: sure that people understand that a core labor value is housing,
Speaker 16: not this fantasy dreams socialists paradise that the Greens talk about. Okay,
Speaker 16: this is a core labor issue housing on energy transition.
Speaker 16: A core Labor value is to manage the energy transition.
Speaker 1: So yes, the transition requires gas. Labor has said in.
Speaker 16: The last few weeks gas is central to the energy transition.
Speaker 16: The costs issue, so Labor has said we're going to
Speaker 16: give energy.
Speaker 1: Cost relief.
Speaker 16: But their core labor values the tax cuts.
Speaker 8: That is not valu values at all. Increase tis taxing
Speaker 8: budget in twenty years. This is big tax and you
Speaker 8: know that the Labor DNA in the Labor Party Stephen,
Speaker 8: is to have government intervention, to have more people dependent
Speaker 8: on the government so that their own initiative is to
Speaker 8: respond to what the government wants them to do. And
Speaker 8: that's exactly what this budget is. It is trying to
Speaker 8: make more people dependent on what the government wants them
Speaker 8: to do.
Speaker 16: I'm going to have to put your secret conspiracy aside there.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm an history. If you go into conspiracy.
Speaker 16: Labor wants to hook people onto the Social Security payments
Speaker 16: or one off payments. I mean, the big who master
Speaker 16: minded the one off payments? You know, I'm sorry, but
Speaker 16: the last coalition government mastered one off payments. Brommen, it
Speaker 16: was the master of them. So please don't pretend that
Speaker 16: a one off payment from labor some socialist conspiracy to
Speaker 16: hook the masses.
Speaker 1: Even that's not about as much government dependence.
Speaker 8: That's exactly friend, the Treasurer is saying, he's the only
Speaker 8: one who's been managed to get to.
Speaker 1: Get a black Yeah, he's t surpluses. You're right.
Speaker 8: Yeah, But if you had the same if you had
Speaker 8: the same if you had the same accounting method of place,
Speaker 8: which is just look at the excise alone. Paul's been
Speaker 8: talking about. The xis around fifteen billion dollars just from tobacco, correct,
Speaker 8: and you've got another what's sixteen billion coming in for fuel,
Speaker 8: which you keep pushing up the pushing up the tax component.
Speaker 8: Now I understand this p and thimble trick that's going
Speaker 8: on here that the Treasurer says, if we actually lower
Speaker 8: the cost of electricity by the three hundred dollars, that'll
Speaker 8: come out of the basket of items that are in
Speaker 8: the CPI basket. So that will be deflationary, that's the argument.
Speaker 8: But because the tax so going to everybody, last, the
Speaker 8: people will the people will actually spend the money that
Speaker 8: they're getting in the tax cuts, which is inflationary.
Speaker 2: Okay, now I've literally got two minutes before we're going
Speaker 2: to go to Meg and Kelly.
Speaker 3: So speed round for everyone here if it's possible.
Speaker 2: Stephen, Okay, if the idea is green, hydrogen is literally
Speaker 2: going to become this superpower, will fuel the world, like
Speaker 2: Wi Fi, the CSRO came up with, change the world,
Speaker 2: all of those things. Why doesn't the government not just say,
Speaker 2: here's your tax credit, but if you take the tax credit,
Speaker 2: we're going to get parts of the profits if you
Speaker 2: actually discover if you actually are able to, for want
Speaker 2: of a bit of term, split the atom and change
Speaker 2: the world. Because it seems to me that the only
Speaker 2: thing that I resent is I don't want to happen,
Speaker 2: sort of like the Telstra style thing where the taxpayers
Speaker 2: laid all of the cables and then it became a
Speaker 2: private company and then the access to the cables.
Speaker 3: Meant they could middle finger every other company.
Speaker 1: Well, I think you make a good point there, Paul.
Speaker 16: I least comfortable around some of the issues where some
Speaker 16: of the beneficiaries are some of the wealthiest people. Now
Speaker 16: they're putting their own private capital in as well, and
Speaker 16: others might not be willing to do it. I think
Speaker 16: so I think you make a fair criticism there. This
Speaker 16: is this is not one that excites me. I think
Speaker 16: there's a range of other issues in the budget that
Speaker 16: are absolutely worth selling. But they're all part of the
Speaker 16: path of transition to renewables. Whether this one comes up
Speaker 16: or not, you know, time will tell. But Labor isn't
Speaker 16: putting all its eggs in one basket.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 8: Is now in the agenda is because all the policies
Speaker 8: are burned, and therefore Albanesis with regard to renewables have failed.
Speaker 16: The Madling King, Madeline King, has consistently for two years.
Speaker 8: She's a brave warm isn't she.
Speaker 1: To win this battle?
Speaker 16: And she's this battle and she deserves applau Gasberg later
Speaker 16: is behind it.
Speaker 8: She's been saying, you can't speak your transition. She saw
Speaker 8: reality and bald the cat.
Speaker 3: All right, Bromin, give me thirty seconds.
Speaker 1: She had been courageous and successful.
Speaker 8: The bottom line is is that we've got to get
Speaker 8: rid of this government if we're going to solve this,
Speaker 8: save this nation. We've got nothing but increased cost of living,
Speaker 8: hiking of interest rates for mortgages. We have Are you
Speaker 8: better off than you were before this lot was elected?
Speaker 8: Nowhere not and all the out and all the adjectives
Speaker 8: and the adverbs that the Treasury uses in his speeches.
Speaker 8: If it took them all away, it'd take half the
Speaker 8: time to deliver it. But all the grandiose language in
Speaker 8: the world is not going to convince the Australian people
Speaker 8: that they're better off since he got the job.
Speaker 3: All right, thank you, Gang, do appreciate it.
Speaker 2: You can have the next thirty seconds next week, Steven,
Speaker 2: do appreciate it.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Guys were always here to help. We'll carry
Speaker 3: over champs with these guys next week. The Great Megan
Speaker 3: Kelly is next.
Speaker 2: Everything from Donald Trump made and Markel idiot protesters plenty
Speaker 2: to come. My favorite time of the week to talk
Speaker 2: to one of our favorite people in the world, the
Speaker 2: wonderful Megan Kelly from the United States, host of The
Speaker 2: Meg and Kelly Show. You can find a lot of
Speaker 2: those highlights on YouTube or podcast, or if you're in
Speaker 2: the States ever on Serious XM. You're looking sharp, my.
Speaker 3: Friend, Thank you very much.
Speaker 15: Very corporate tonight.
Speaker 2: Now the Trump trial is at it's absolute highlight. The
Speaker 2: bloke it used to work for him is saying all
Speaker 2: the right things.
Speaker 3: The prosecution want him to say.
Speaker 2: But it is interesting that even Trump hating journalists are
Speaker 2: noticing that they haven't actually proven the case. Maggie Haberman,
Speaker 2: she writes for The New York Times. She says, from
Speaker 2: the courtroom, we still haven't had anything directly tying Trump
Speaker 2: to the structure of the false business records outside of
Speaker 2: Cohen's words on the stand.
Speaker 3: Isn't that the entire case?
Speaker 4: Correct?
Speaker 15: Yes, that's the entire case. We have spent the entire
Speaker 15: case on Irrelevan and things like whether he had a
Speaker 15: one light, one night interlude with Stormy Daniels, whether they
Speaker 15: use protection, what positions they were in all that, whether
Speaker 15: she now feels threatened because suddenly it's a me too situation,
Speaker 15: even though she's on record repeatedly saying it wasn't a
Speaker 15: me two situation. She was there, in fact, even though
Speaker 15: on the stand it was I didn't think I could
Speaker 15: get out. He was blocking the way, there was a
Speaker 15: bodyguard out the door. Earlier in her book she said
Speaker 15: he was my bitch. I made him my bitch, Okay,
Speaker 15: So which is it now? You the poor Anyway, that's
Speaker 15: what we've spent the trial on, and the testimony about
Speaker 15: Trump had the willful intent to violate campaign finance laws
Speaker 15: and commit a fraud on insert name of victim here
Speaker 15: hasn't happened. None of it's happened, Almost no testimony. The
Speaker 15: closest they got was Michael Cohen today or yesterday saying
Speaker 15: or late yesterday and then a little bit more today saying, Okay,
Speaker 15: he was in the room when we decided that I
Speaker 15: would submit a bill for legal expenses. He knew I
Speaker 15: was going to submit my reimbursement payment as quote legal expenses. Well,
Speaker 15: that's not good enough. That doesn't mean that he actually
Speaker 15: submitted the bill that way, or that it was booked
Speaker 15: in the Trump organization's accounting logs that way, because that's
Speaker 15: what Trump is being charged with. Nothing about how Michael
Speaker 15: Cohen submitted the bill. That's not on Trump. What did
Speaker 15: Trump organization do and did Trump know about it? That's
Speaker 15: what they have to prove, and that it was a willful, meaning,
Speaker 15: cognizant violation of law. Trump knew it was illegal to
Speaker 15: document it. However he did and did it anyway that
Speaker 15: they have not proven that.
Speaker 2: Now, if the reporter from the New York Times says
Speaker 2: they haven't made the case, surely there is at least
Speaker 2: one of twelve people who maybe didn't even vote for
Speaker 2: Donald Trump, who can see they haven't proven their case yet.
Speaker 15: You're so cute. We'd like to think that there's very
Speaker 15: little evidence in the past to suggest that a partisan jury,
Speaker 15: in dealing with a partisan man, will come out with
Speaker 15: anything other than a part as in verdict. And the
Speaker 15: reason I say that not to disparage the jury. But
Speaker 15: what's going to happen here, Paul, is this case will
Speaker 15: be made or broken by the jury instructions, and that
Speaker 15: argument hasn't entirely played out. We have yet to see
Speaker 15: what they're going to be, but a lot of it
Speaker 15: has played out. This judge did not want to hear
Speaker 15: from an election law expert on what campaign finance law
Speaker 15: really does require in order to prove that the expensive
Speaker 15: issue falls within its purview. But we've had that kind
Speaker 15: of expert on. We had the guy who ran the
Speaker 15: FEC Federal Election Commission, which is the group that would
Speaker 15: enforce this law against Trump, but declined to do so
Speaker 15: here because they did not see a campaign finance violation.
Speaker 15: And what this man said was all this testimony about
Speaker 15: what was in Trump's head. It was to protect Milania
Speaker 15: when we paid off the porn star. No, it was
Speaker 15: to help us electoral chances. Oh, it's dual purpose. Well,
Speaker 15: that's helpful to Trump. No, the prosecution has proven that
Speaker 15: it was all about the campaign. That's good for them.
Speaker 15: Is irrelevant. The relevant question, The only relevant question is
Speaker 15: what is the nature of this payment? Is this kind
Speaker 15: of payment a kind of payment that is only ever
Speaker 15: made to advance one's campaign or might it be used
Speaker 15: outside of the electoral process. Well, hush money payments have
Speaker 15: been used since the dawn of time to keep women
Speaker 15: quiet about extramarital affairs, and thus it is by definition
Speaker 15: not a campaign finance expense. And therefore the underlying basis
Speaker 15: for this entire criminal prosecution comes up empty because there
Speaker 15: is no campaign finance violation. No laws relating to campaign
Speaker 15: finance were even arguably violated. But the jury is not
Speaker 15: going to be told any of that.
Speaker 2: Speaking of Poor and Dan Trodden, Harry and Meghan, there's
Speaker 2: some trouble with their charities in the United States.
Speaker 15: Yeah, Well, their charity arch Well has been notified that
Speaker 15: it is delinquent with respect to its tax returns and filings,
Speaker 15: and not only is it now stopped from raising future money,
Speaker 15: but it stopped from spending money right now, and if
Speaker 15: they don't pay up immediately, they could be under serious investigation.
Speaker 15: What they're claiming is, oh, the check was lost in
Speaker 15: the mail. I don't believe that. I don't believe that
Speaker 15: for one minute. Who That's not how taxes are filed
Speaker 15: these days. Snail mail by a corporation that's a charity. No,
Speaker 15: it either gets filed electronically, or it gets fedexed with
Speaker 15: return receipt requested, or it can all be tracked. You
Speaker 15: want me to believe that somebody put it in the
Speaker 15: snail mail with a little stamp and it just got lost.
Speaker 15: That's a lie. I'm just going to say it right now.
Speaker 15: I believe they're lying because they're humiliated, and I don't
Speaker 15: know why they didn't file the tax return. It's probably
Speaker 15: because the person likely running that branch of arch Well
Speaker 15: left in tiers because Megan was so mean, like most
Speaker 15: of the employees who work for her. But that's just
Speaker 15: speculation of my part. I can tell you this that
Speaker 15: according to the reporting last year for the year in question,
Speaker 15: we do know that their donations dropped from some twelve
Speaker 15: million in year one down to two million, and so
Speaker 15: the donations have dried up, and even those Paul are
Speaker 15: AstroTurf because the two million reportedly came from just two
Speaker 15: major donors. Two people donated about half of each one
Speaker 15: of those those millions. And so she's got this massive
Speaker 15: charity that she wants is to believe she's the next
Speaker 15: royal family, you know, only West Coast, based on two
Speaker 15: donors giving her two donations that are apparently so paltry
Speaker 15: and pathetic. She doesn't even want to file her tax
Speaker 15: returns so we can actually see exactly where the money went.
Speaker 15: I smell a rat and I look forward to this
Speaker 15: story developed with great anticipation.
Speaker 3: Also, I'm a little bit fascinated.
Speaker 2: Right, the mother was born in America, the father was
Speaker 2: born in America. But Megan is now telling us that
Speaker 2: she's forty three percent Nigerian.
Speaker 15: This is the most ridiculous. This is the same woman
Speaker 15: who said I never even considered my blackness until the
Speaker 15: British tabloids started to make a thing out of it.
Speaker 15: Now she's like, I am Nigeria. Fellow women, hear me, roar,
Speaker 15: I mean, who is she kidding? She's as white as
Speaker 15: I am, and she's over there like leaning in. Now
Speaker 15: I'm the face of the black woman.
Speaker 13: Okay.
Speaker 15: How much time did she have for this when she
Speaker 15: was on suits, when she was doing the tig when
Speaker 15: she was trying to land the ginger from the royal
Speaker 15: family to marry her. Apparently none by her own admission.
Speaker 15: But now she wants us to believe. Okay, she's a
Speaker 15: Nigerian and she's gonna I believe it when I see it.
Speaker 15: I look forward to all the time she spends in
Speaker 15: Nigeria helping the Nigerian people.
Speaker 3: Good night and good luck, Megan.
Speaker 12: All right, thanks Paul.
Speaker 3: Alright, we're done for tonight. The Late Debate about to begin.
Speaker 2: But if you are in parks in beautiful New South Wales,
Speaker 2: please we are coming for ourtown in a couple of
Speaker 2: weeks time, so if you'd like to join us, Semion
Speaker 2: email outtown. It's godhus dot com dot areu. Here's the
Speaker 2: Late Debate