Dan Wootton Outspoken - NIGEL FARAGE ALLY CLAIMS TORIES WANT HIM DEAD AS RUPERT LOWE'S EMILY MAITLIS FEUD EXPLODES

Episode Date: May 17, 2025

Go to https://ground.news/outspoken to see through media bias and stay fully informed. Subscribe through my link for 40% off unlimited access this month. The reshaping of the British right continues at pace as Nigel Farage’s allies attempt to deal with the Lazarus-like comeback of axed Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe, who is threatening to create his own rival movement. But meanwhile the Conservative party have decided the only way they can win is if Farage is DEAD! We’ll have unparalleled analysis you won’t get from the captured MSM of a landmark week on the right in Britain with Connor Tomlinson, host of Tomlinson Talks on YouTube and a contributor at Courage Media. PLUS: Emily Maitlis is owned by Rupert Lowe in an extraordinary confrontation on the Fake News Agents. We’ll pull it apart. AND: Elon Musk and Katie Hopkins back Lucy Connolly as the Court of Appeal delays its decision yet again, keeping the housewife political prisoner in jail for a 280th day for sending a tweet. THEN IN THE UNCANCELLED AFTERSHOW: Furious Prince William has threatened to “make Meghan pay” for her disgusting decision to contravene the Sandringham Summit agreed with the late Queen. Our Royal Mastermind and Prince Harry’s biographer Angela Levin is here for all the royal news. Sign up to watch at www.outspoken.live. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's Truck Month at GMC. Tackle the open road with added confidence in a 2025 Sierra 1500 Pro Graphite at 0% financing for up to 72 months. With an available 5.3 liter V8 engine, 20 inch high-gloss black painted aluminum wheels, off-road suspension with available 2-inch factory installed lift kit, plus a towing capacity of up to 13,200 pounds, You'll be ready for anything this truck month. Truck month is on now. Ask your GMC dealer for details. What's better than a well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue?

A well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue that was carefully selected by an Instacart shopper and delivered to your door. A well-marbled ribeye you ordered without even leaving the kiddie pool. Whatever groceries your summer calls for, Instacart has you covered. Download the Instacart app and enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply. Instacart. Groceries that over-deliver. No spit, no bias, no censorship. I'm Dan Wooten. This is Outspoken Live, episode number 228.

Breaking right now, the reshaping of the British right, which continues at pace as Nigel Farage's allies attempt to deal with the Lazarus-like comeback of Axe Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe, who is now threatening to create his own rival movement. The problem is, and this isn't to say that what happened was not gross, was not awful, that you have every reason to feel aggrieved, enraged, badly treated perhaps. And I don't know particularly what was going on in the weeks and months before this big ding-dong. But I would just say this, you know,

we wanted you to come on this show so we can have a proper conversation. I wouldn't have, you know, hijacked you or done some sort of gotcha. But meanwhile, the Conservative Party has decided the only way they can win is if Farage is dead. I've heard senior tourists say the best thing is that he smokes and drinks,

so he's probably going to die before then. If that's the best they've got, our best chance of winning this election is if Farage has a hernia. But if that's your strategy, waiting for him to pop his clogs, seems to be a bit threadbare. We'll have unparalleled analysis you won't get from the captured MSM of a landmark week for the right in Britain with Conor Tomlinson, host of Tomlinson Talks on YouTube and a contributor at Courage Media. Also coming up on the show today, Calamity Lammy strikes again with the Foreign Secretary accused of racism and filthiness as this degrading French abuse allegation scandal grows. Emily Maitlis, owned by Rupert Lowe in an extraordinary confrontation

on the fake news agents, we're going to pull it all apart. And Elon Musk and Katie Hopkins back Lucy Connolly as the Court of Appeal delays its decision yet again, keeping the housewife political prisoner in jail for a 280th day for sending a tweet. Then in the uncancelled after show on Substate, Furious Prince William has threatened to make Meghan pay for her disgusting decision to contravene the Sandringham Summit, which was agreed with the late Queen Elizabeth II. Our Royal Mastermind and Prince Harry's Brog for Angela Levin here for all of the royal news.

You can sign up to watch www.outspoken.live. Just enter your email address in there, hit share, and we're ready to go. We're also going to be revealing the worst Britain in the world at the end of the show. I'm really sorry, by the way, because I promised you I was going to put this up immediately after last night's show. With everything going on with Lucy Connolly, I totally forgot. Then I made another boo-boo because on Monday, of course, the union jackass was the Kent police for their disgusting arrest of a pensioner for a thought crime. But it just didn't really work because the Kent police isn't a person. So I went at it again later on in the afternoon with three of your winners this week going head to

head. On Tuesday, Susanna Reid, remember for saying, oh, there's absolutely no issue with immigration in this country. Actually, she loves London. She just thinks it's a diverse, rich, multicultural melting pot. She happens to live in the least diverse area of London. Just saying. Wednesday, Zia Youssef, the Reform UK chairman for his lawfare against Rupert Lowe. And Thursday, Lindsay Hoyle for loving a freebie more than anyone in Parliament. So get voting. We will reveal the worst Britain in the world this week, narrowed down from those three union jackasses at the end of the show.

But now, let's go. Okay, I never agree with the New European, which is, by the way, the most despicable lefty newspaper in the world, which is saying something. I never agree with them about anything. But maybe I'll make one exception today. Because they've posted a death notice for the Conservative Party on their front page, above the headline, yes, you can safely write off the Tory party now. And it reads, deaths, Conservative Party Tories died after a long battle with reality aged 190. Will not be missed.

Beloved child of Robert Peel and Margaret Thatcher survived by Brexit and Nigel. Mindful of austerity, the family asked for no flowers, but donations to the Tufton Street Hospice for the politically deluded, usual brown envelope, please. All further enquiries to Rees-Mogg and co-traditional Victorian funeral directors and look it is true that senior conservatives have admitted to close reform ally Gwaine Towler the poor bloke that was also sacked by Zia Yusuf even though he's brilliant they've admitted to him that their only hope to win the next general election is the death of

Nigel Farage. I've heard senior Tories say the best thing is that he smokes and drinks, so he's probably going to die before then. If that's the best they've got, our best chance to win this election is if Farage has a hernia.

But if that's your strategy, waiting for him to pop his clogs, seems to be a bit threadbare. And with punchy ads like this decrying the immigration invasion of the UK, the odds remain on for Farage storming Downing Street. So we have to make the case for the benefits of migration, the benefits of free movement. The whole United Kingdom is better because of immigration. In particular I'd like to thank the Home Secretary for removing the annual limits on work visas

and also on international students, both of which I lobbied for. The previous government, they wanted to deport us, but now they make the procedure easier for us. So you like the Labour government? Yes. Now they make the procedure easier for us. So you like the Labour government? Yes. Powerful, right? But is it really as simple a choice of Reform UK or nothing. I'd argue that the growing concern from Faragists over the now cleared and unleashed and unshackled Rupert Lowe suggests not. For example, Rupert challenged Farage fanboy Matt Goodwin directly for the first time today on X, writing,

What's your view on four armed police officers arriving at my home unannounced late on a Friday night to confiscate my guns as a result of a false allegation from the reformed chairman? The absurd reality of modern Britain indeed. Goodwin replied, to be frank, I wish you could all find a way of getting along because I'm more interested in trying to save the country. To which Rupert retorted, take that message to the people who made the false allegation to the police and who tried to put me in prison. There was a similar story with Reforms West of England mayoral candidate Aaron Banks, who wrote to Rupert, everyone is bored of the argument. You need to know when to move on. I'm sad you've gone down

a political rabbit hole. Take a rest from it. For Rupert to reply, the reform leadership tried to put me in prison on false allegations, Aaron. How would you feel? And Alex Phillips, who will be here on Outspoken on Monday, called for peace after Rupert turned down her appearance to appear on talk while deciding to enter enemy territory on the newsagents with Emily Maitlis. Now, look, I think we had an interesting little chit chat there about Rupert Lowe. I just want to make it very clear, very clear. And Rupert, especially to you, if you're listening, I think you're brilliant. I am not going to go back from that. I think you are so talented. I think you're politically passionate. I think you've got gumption. I think your conviction when it comes to policies and what you believe in

and what you want to do for this country are entirely sincere. I know you, so I don't have any doubt as to the metal of your character. The problem is, and this isn't to say that what happened was not gross, was not awful, that you, you know, have every reason to feel aggrieved, enraged, badly treated, perhaps. And I don't know particularly what was going on in the weeks and months before this big ding dong. But I would just say this, you know, we wanted you to come on this show so we can have a proper conversation. I wouldn't have, you know, hijacked you or done some sort of gotcha. We could have just spoken. But instead you went to do the news agents, which are a load of extreme leftists who only set out to pillory you, not really anything constructive and really speaking to the wrong audience, because anybody who believes in reform policies aren't listening to that plasticine-faced moron

and that war criminal that he sits next to. Oh, no, that's the other one. The rest is politics. Sorry, I forgot that. Anyway, the sort of BBC has-beens who have finally come out as Corbyn lovers. Can we just take a moment to think about how stuff looks and how stuff impacts, right? Because that is what politics.

I agree with that last point. But I would argue, Alex, Nigel Farage and Zia Youssef should have thought hard about that before reporting their best performing MP endorsed by Elon Musk to the police. And as the brilliant Nick Dixon put it, it's amazing how many people's take on Rupert's situation is, I know they tried to destroy your reputation, which is everything as a public figure, and get you arrested, and that charges were only dropped yesterday, but just chill out about it all. Now, reform, thanks to its own lawfare against their own best performing MP, risks a dramatic splintering of the right, as Rupert Lowe pointed out here on Outspoken yesterday, that he ain't finished yet. Watch. Would you consider joining the Tories, or is that something that you're prepared to rule out? I don't think the Tories are in a position

at the moment to offer me what I need. So in answer to your question now, I think probably not. But a reformed Tory party, Dan, is probably the most powerful route to change the way in which we're governed. Obviously, so I don't think they're in that situation now. I think they've got too many MPs who are arguably Lib Dems rather than Tories. And if you look at their track record, they've had a number of plays with the toy set over the last 14 years, not least Boris with an 80 seat majority, and they have singularly failed to deliver anything other than more legal immigration and locking us all down for a prolonged period of time, which damaged the economy and damaged a lot of our young people. So I don't think they've got a particularly good track record. And I think they need to do a lot of changes or make a lot of changes to their structure at head office, probably to the blend of their MPs and start selecting people on merit and merit alone. So what that means is that there is a new party of the right coming.

Possibly this new Ben Habib veal, the integrity party that I warned them about for weeks only to be branded an enemy. And there was an example of this on yesterday's show. They said multiple people made statements. So presumably that means more than you and Yusuf. I was aware of two. I was aware of two, made aware of two at the interview. Who were they from? One from Lee Anderson, who from the questioning was suggesting

I was going around Parliament saying I was a good shot and I was going to shoot Zia Yusuf, which is maybe why the police decided it was right to take my guns away. And from the questioning, I think I was accused by Zia Youssef of standing over him and threatening him. Now, we did have a robust conversation. The WhatsApp chain which followed wouldn't have supported and didn't support what he said. I don't know what other witness statements they got, but they must have got some supportive statements because I think clearly there wasn't any evidence. And I can tell you, it didn't worry me because I know I didn't do anything that justified the approach that was taken. And I think anybody with any common sense, Dan, could see that this was a bungled attempt at political assassination.

If you combine it with the vile accusation that I had early on, Settlementia, which I think you were quite clear was a message that was being spread. And you also commingle that with this accusation of bullying within the office, which is also piffle. You can see a sort of smear campaign, which they hoped would gather momentum. But I have to tell you, the majority of people in Parliament, I think, thought it was laughable. And actually, they've all been extremely supportive and very kind and uh that kindness and belief in me has been borne out in in in the result which came through yesterday at 11 o'clock when i was offshore great yarmouth looking at rwb's offshore wind farm so so look i mean must have been a big relief can i just clarify though about the police though, because are you saying that Lee Anderson

and Zia Yousaf have lied to the police? I haven't seen their statements, but from the questioning, I think they have made false statements and in my opinion, they've wasted police time. Now, whether the police will do anything about that, I don't know. I personally think we do need to now raise this in Parliament, which I intend to do. Now, what Farage has going for him to counter all of this, of course, is how clueless the political establishment is, as this exchange on Newsnight last night summed up. It's really hard to know because I cannot get into the mind of the average reform voter, I'm afraid.

I don't know why they vote reform. And watching him just now, I actually agreed with a couple of things he said. Reform doesn't have any policies, it doesn't have a plan. And of course, Nigel Farage isn't fit to be Prime Minister. So, you know, sometimes we can agree with people that we've got nothing else in common with. In the middle are the voters. And it is important, Jenny Jones, that you do know why people vote reform, because they beat you two to one.

Even so-called right-wing commentators like Fraser Nelson just don't get it. Something as predictable and as predicted as a prisons crisis, we see chaos. Now, that is what is leading your average voter to think, hang on a minute, we knew the Tories weren't very good, but it seems that Labour could be even worse. And this is what is promoting, in my view, support for Nigel Farage, not because people think Farage is fantastic or he'd do a better job, but they're kind of sick of being given the Hobson's choice

between a failing Tory party and what now seems to be a failing Labour government. Fraser, it is more than just mismanagement. It's more than just policy failure. We have been betrayed for six decades when it comes to mass immigration. And that deep-rooted betrayal by the Uni Party means there is just no going back. I promise you that. And Slippery Starmer's desperate bid to morph into Farage Light isn't fooling anyone. Prime Minister unusually chose to take only one broadcaster, GB News, with him for this trip,

suggesting he hoped to land a hardline message on immigration. I'm concerned that the last four years under the last government have risked us becoming an island of strangers. And that's why I'm clear that we shouldn't be an island of strangers. To respond now, Conor Tomlinson is here. connor okay where do we start on this one let's presume we agree with this new european death notice about the conservative party does that mean that aaron banks and alex phillips are right matt goodwin are right and it's just like ru Rupert Lowe, you've got no chance. Just move on. Just forget what they did to you.

Reform is the only game in town. Or is there the prospect of a genuine small-c conservative party led by Rupert Lowe on the right? First of all, Dan, I don't know what's worse, a clip of Fraser Nelson, my intellectual arch nemesis, or the fact that the New European have suggested that they're taking their instructions from Tufton Street. Now, as someone who moonlights at Tufton Street

filming a podcast called The Programme once a week, I can tell you the Taxpayers' Alliance, Net Zero Watch, and the New Culture Forum are not exactly delighted with what the Tories did for the last 14 years. So if they really were taking their lead from Tufton Street, very questionable. Anyway, as for reforms... I'm in their shit list every year, by the way,

the New Europeans. So as I say, this is the first time I think I've ever agreed with them about something. But anyway, go on. Yeah, as Diane Abbott once said said a broken clock is right three times a day um so as for as for reform yes i know alex you know personally attempted to broke a peace between two men and she has the best of intentions i know aaron banks during his mayoralty run was tweeting favorably and as for the things that rupert below was saying

so he is a true believer and it's a shame that he came in second. It's also a shame that actually Banks, he didn't deface the size of his house and push up the property value. However, as for the rest of the people in reform, and you know, I like Matt Goodwin, it feels a little bit like, you know when you have a fight with a slightly deranged and jealous lover,

as we all have in our past, and they accuse you of cheating on them because they've had a dream or something. They've overseen a text they've misinterpreted. And you step by step disprove the allegations against you. And then they, in a fit of embarrassment, but never wanting to admit it, go, well, why do you care so much? I don't know why you're still bringing it up. That's how it feels.

Because as Rupert has pointed out, I believe before in a different interview if he would have been convicted on these bogus charges of coarse words exchanged with zia yusuf months before they were filed to the metropolitan police by the ostensibly anti-woke party who wants to get rid of speech crimes if they would have persecuted him for this and successfully prosecuted him for this reform would have celebrated themselves as having done the right thing and he would be sitting in prison for something completely fraudulent, just like Lucy Connolly is, right? And so the issue you have here is that one party was the provocateur, and that is Lee Anderson and Zia Youssef, and unfortunately Nigel Farage, because he wrote in the Telegraph in March that Reform UK has acted properly regarding Rupert Lowe, which we now know not to be true. Whereas Rupert Lowe, and I dislike the term victim, but he is the person whose reputation has been rubbished by this. And if he were to go into prison as a 67-year-old man who is a high-profile critic of Islam, and we know that prisons are overrun by Islamist gangs, his very

life would have been in danger. And certain figures in Reform were happy to have that. So look, I'm all for brokering peace. And I know that Rupert Lowe is an asset to whichever movement and party he goes to next. But the onus now is on reform to apologize, retract and make amends if they were ever interested to take Rupert Lowe back. Unfortunately, Nigel Farage has already made it clear that he thinks there's absolutely no prospect for that. And Rupert, and I can't say I blame him, says, well, I don't feel welcome. I'm not going to try and join a club that doesn't want me as a member. Totally. But there are things, Connor, that I think could be done as a sort of halfway house.

So, for example, Richard Tice, when he was interviewed this week on Times Radio, said, no, we will absolutely be running in the Great Yarmouth constituency at the next election, which would obviously split the vote, potentially allow Labour through. Now, there could have been an olive branch there. And he could have said, well, of course, we're going to look at what Rupert sets up. And maybe this would be a seat where we agree that Rupert is the best person. Now, I understand it's probably too early for Richard Tice to do that. But at this point, reform have offered nothing to Rupert Lowe. They haven't thrown any type of bone. All they've done is tried to destroy him. There's been no apology. There's been no expression that we got this wrong. And I mean, Rupert has a right, I think, to feel pretty aggrieved,

given we saw those pictures earlier. The police raided his home late on a Friday night, took all of his guns away. And apparently that is because, well, according to Rupert, Lee Anderson had told the police that Rupert was going around Parliament joking about shooting Zia Yusuf, which, Connor, let's be honest, even if that had been said, and Rupert denies it, but even if that had been said, right, it was clearly said in jest. And Reform UK are meant to be the party of free speech.

They're meant to be the party that doesn't shot people to the cops for jokes. Exactly. And so it's undermined their credibility needlessly as I pointed out on a tweet that you read out earlier in the week on your show Dan none of this needed to happen you could have resolved your disputes quietly with Rupert even something as small and I don't endorse this

by the way even something as small as suspending the whip over that interview with Andrew Pearce, where he made some mild criticisms of the personality-led nature over the policy-led nature of reform. Even that was a repairable situation. The moment you call the cops on the guy, you not only put his reputation in danger, but again, his very life. So I don't see that being repaired. And I don't see it being repaired because as you've suggested, if they were to have a non-aggression pact, that would be a strategic calculation. I think all of this is personal. I don't think any of this is being,

none of these decisions are being made with cool heads. And I think that is on reform side, unfortunately. And I say this as someone who has tried to proactively encourage and shape them to live up to their potential. And I think the reformer doing this, and are unlikely to apologise even though it's going to be the right thing, because they've made the electoral calculation that this won't hurt them. Now, never mind the fact that there was a 95 vote

protest vote in Runcorn and Helsby, when the margin of victory was only six votes, that didn't need to exist. And it was because Catherine Blakelock ran as a spoil-the-ballot candidate, essentially, on behalf of their persecution of Rupert Lowe. They could have won by a comfortable hundred in that constituency if they wouldn't have made this rod for their own back. But reformists are still betting, by the time of the next election, we'll be on 35%. We'll be not just a protest party, but we have a first-past-the the post system, as you rightly point out.

So it's not necessarily just about the national vote. It's about what damage, say, an integrity party candidate could able to build a movement that actually delivers MPs to Parliament in bigger numbers than just, say, a handful? Well, I wouldn't say never, because if we remember, Reform, while under the leadership of Richard Tice, were engaging with the online right and the likes of Lotus Eaters when they were polling on, you know, five to nine percent for many, many years. And then within a year, they've now become the leading party of government. Yes, it's the Farage effect, but it is the fact that the two parties have completely collapsed, exhausted their credibility. And so now the public wants an alternative. So never say never in politics. I think reform's main problem now is attracting talent because as Sarah Pochin herself has said in one of her many disastrous interviews in the last week, that she has now replaced Rupert Lowe. Well, I think even Reform UK will have to admit that the calibre of talent of Sarah Pochin versus Rupert Lowe is not excellent when she cannot answer questions on policy. She has taken by far and away the wrong position on the assisted dying bill, and she's taken wrong positions throughout her career, so it shows she hasn't got good instincts. As far as Lowe's future ventures, I anticipate he's going to keep his

powder dry for about a year or so, because the world is now his oyster. He's cleared the police investigation, he's conducting the rape gang inquiry, and he's been very frank about the fact that some of the Tories want him. Now, the future of the Conservative Party is one final thing, Dan, if I may, that is in flux, that people aren't paying attention to because they are the now third most popular party in the country by a significant gap between them, Labour and Reform. And nobody really likes Kimmy Badenock, especially because making a first-generation immigrant your leader at the time of immigration scepticism was a big, bad boo-boo. However, there is a civil war ongoing in the Conservative Party that not many people know about, and I've been informed about this from people involved.

CCHQ is getting a bit of a clear out and they are putting, let's say, people on the generic wing of things in charge of their social media and potentially the head of candidate selection, which is the most important thing. Because for ages you've had David Cameron and Munira Mirza and Dougie Smith in charge of choosing completely compliant woke wets on the basis of their diversity credentials. The types like James Cleverley, who's got up today in parliament and said, oh, have you thought about the implications of intersectionality for this? Literally a term about race Marxism. So if we get someone who is more amenable to your and my way of thinking in their Dan, more amenable to generic way of thinking and generic words take over from Kemi, the Conservative Party might be in a very different place because parties are all about the people in them.

And if they're making the offer to Rupert that looks mightily attractive in two years, he might well go there instead. And even he's saying he's keeping all his options open. So I'm not one to trust the Tories, especially considering you've got the likes of Andy Street and Tom Tugendhat saying, well, we have to be moderate conservatives and run back to the centre. But maybe, maybe Jenrick might provide a soft landing pad for Rupert in the future. You never know. Breaking right now, calamity Lamy strikes again.

How much more embarrassment from our foreign secretary on the international stage are we going to have to put up with? The man who, just remember, thinks Marie Antoinette won the Nobel Prize for Science, who thought the BBC were being racist when they spoke about black smoke leaving the chimney during a conclave electing a previous pope. This guy is not only thick, though, he's also a nasty piece of work. He's a nasty piece of work who called Brexiteers Nazis. He's a nasty piece of work who compared Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler and he is now representing us on the world stage. It was always going to be a disaster, but did anyone think it would be as bad as this? Front page of The Sun today. Foreign Secretary yelled effing French at me, says Fair Row cab driver. Now, of course, there's a whole load of back and forth about exactly what left it in after six hours in that car. As Chris Rose pointed out,

a sandwich packet, plastic fork and a discarded coffee cup can all be seen in the photo. This is Starmer's top choice to represent Britain on the world stage. I repeat, he is an embarrassment. He is a champagne socialist. And he was always going to be a shocking choice. Did he assault this taxi driver? Well, of course, the taxi driver says no. And all of the deep state, all of the establishment have come down on the side of David Lammy. And of course, the mainstream media have just dismissed the story, have just decided this isn't a big deal. When you know if it had been Priti Patel, if she were foreign secretary, the Tory shadow foreign secretary, you just know they would be demanding her resignation. It would

be leading the British Bashy News. It would be leading Wokai TV News. It would be leading Sly News. Patel actually posted on this saying, if these reports are correct, then Calamity Lammy must be honest about the details of his trip as this is becoming an embarrassing saga for Britain's chief diplomat and for our country. I replied to her saying, if this had been you as a minister, it would have been leading every news bulletin. The PM would have been hounded about it. You would have been doorstepped every morning. You can't hate the MSM and its hypocrisy enough. Lammy is an international embarrassment. Now, Conor Tomlinson of Tomlinson Talks on YouTube, senior contributor to Courage Media, joins me now. Conor, I'm going to go through all of the ins and outs of this story in just one moment. Lammy was, of course, in the taxi with his wife. But can we just look at the macro

of this first, right? This guy is shaming us on the international stage on a daily basis, and the mainstream media are just like, nothing to see here. Yeah, the photo of the backseat of that taxi dam. I mean, David Lammy, an inconsiderate slob. Knock me down with a feather. But of course, as you've already pointed out, I'm no fan of Priti Patel, considering she flooded us with millions of people

that she called living bridges to the Modi regime under the Boris wave. However, it is correct that if she had done this, the Guardian would have knocked up another cartoon of her as literally the devil standing at the despatch box. So we know this is politically ill-motivated. As far as David Lammy goes, I can say on behalf of our allies in the US

that they think he's a blithering idiot who isn't worth their time and that they can see through like a terrible bit of tissue paper um so if kirsten were to replace him in a forthcoming cabinet reshuffle which he thinks he's seen off i would wager by this new immigration announcement and the fact that rachel reed has got a slight reputation boost for a 0.7 gdp. Whoopee. I think that he could replace Lammy at little to no cost. The only thing that you would get is griping by the Labour backbench at his insufficient level of diversity on his front bench. So obviously skin colour diversity, not intellectual diversity, because David Lammy hasn't got even two brain cells to rub together. But I think it would be

a wise choice for Keir Starmer to do so if he wants to refashion himself as the ruthless pragmatist that Tony Blair is in his ear telling him to be. The problem is he committed to keeping Lammy in the Foreign Office job for his entire term. But look, let me take you through the details of the story, Connor. It's incredibly sordid. And I also have to question David Lammy's wife.

She's an artist. Maybe I'm being stereotypical. Maybe she's a bit airy-fairy. But surely in that situation, the wife steps in and say, don't leave the car in such a mess. Don't get into a row with this taxi driver. Just calm yourself down. But anyway, here's what the Sun has revealed. Foreign Secretary David Lamy shouted effing French twice during a furious row over a taxi fare, the driver has claimed. Nassim Mamoum, 40, said the minister who oversees His Majesty's

Diplomatic Service got aggressive when asked to pay for a six-hour trip last month from Italy to a ski resort in France. Foreign Secretary David Lamy shouted effing French twice during that row. Now, the Sun has obtained, and we saw this, of course, photos showing the filthy state in which the Ford was allegedly left. And the chauffeur told the Sun when he got out of the vehicle he said effing french effing french i was afraid he claims mr lammy's 588 pound fare is still unpaid following last month's trip in the french alps now lammy who was of course with his wife nicola green has said he totally refutes the allegations and insists the fare was paid in full. Now, I would argue, Connor, why on earth he was taking a six-hour taxi anyway?

Surely there would have been lots of other ways that he could have travelled, even if this driver was potentially attempting to rip him off, is the solution, if you're a diplomat, if you're someone representing Britain on the world stage, isn't the solution to simply say, okay, I'm going to give you the money now. I'll deal with this with the company later. I'll get one of my phalanx of civil servants onto this it feels so weird that he decided to pick a fight with this guy well i don't know swearing at the french maybe he is an englishman after all i know actually some people are saying this might make him more popular he's as british as you and me um as far as his wife wearing the trousers i mean if it's david lammy she'll have to use it as a

duvet i suppose uh as far as it goes with getting alternative modes of transport, look, his justification will be, as a minister in a foreign country, there are security concerns. Therefore, I need a personal car no matter where I travel. I can't just hop on the bus or the metro. And that would be understandable if, one, he had paid the fare from his own pocket and two, he had not allegedly treated the driver in this way. The final thing I will note is whether or not this is a trend from other Labour ministers. We already had, you know, Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves accepting Taylor Swift and Sabrina Carpenter tickets and free clothes and Angela Rayner going on raves in Ibiza when she's meant to be doing much more serious things. It seems to be a very much car and harem syndrome that we saw from the inner Soviet Union, where they're preaching socialist solidarity and the redistribution of wealth and, frankly, the expropriation of all property.

If you look at the Marxist grave robbing they're doing on the farmers while amassing opulence and going to fancy parties and sipping on champagne, they're not practicing what they preach. And so this is an attitude endemic to the Labour Party. And so, you know, I think if you replace David Lammy and break yet another pledge that Keir Starmer has made and you get someone more sensible and less of a reputation risk in both globally and to your party as foreign secretary, you're probably not going to root out that disconnected attitude from the rest of the country, because it seems like every single Labour politician has got far too comfortable to the lavish lifestyle they're living in SW1. Though come the next election,

I don't think most of them are going to be living it. No, I mean, they're ultimate campaign socialists, aren't they? We saw that time and again. And of course, Starmer, in order to get Lady Victoria back on side, had to offer her all of these clothes paid for by Lord Arley. I mean, it was extraordinary just before the election was held. Now, let me go back to what the striver said, though, because he is also indicating there was some abuse

and threatening behaviour by Lammy as well he told the son at a certain point when I asked him to pay the bill the difference of 700 euros he hadn't paid me I received two blows like that he hit the middle seat he was behind me he hit like this tack tack two. When he got out of the vehicle, that's when he said the swear words. And he got out of my car, went around, he made a turn to come towards me. I was afraid. He said he had acted like a thug. Now, why this is significant, Connor, is because Mr. Taxi Driver claims that it was that threatening behaviour from Lamy which saw him drive off and go to a police station the next morning. Lamy claims that he had left the luggage in the car and so as a result this French taxi driver,

who's now been prosecuted by the, for theft, had stolen his items. But if Lamy was being threatening to the taxi driver, the taxi driver is going to drive off. So it very much is a tit for tat story here. Well, also, and again, I don't think David Lamy is a champion of reason. If you were going to steal his luggage of a foreign diplomat why would you drive straight to a police station with said luggage still in the car like sorry if you'd committed a murder you wouldn't rock up with a body in the boot would you so yeah i i again it's all alleged i am inclined to not take david lammy's account of this word for word and if he did have this

childish outburst of entitlement it would not surprise me in the least what's interesting as well is that lammy who's a dirty guy he's a really dirty guy he plays dirty he leaves his car dirty he's dirty on so many levels. And he is playing dirty here because he is now accusing Mr. Mamoun of threatening his wife by showing a knife. But Mr. Mamoun says that is absolute rubbish. And it was simply a pen poking out from a bundle of receipts in his armrest he provided the son this picture of said pen and it would be surprising Connor wouldn't it for a diplomatic driver who has all of the correct registration and everything in France to drive foreign dignitaries to have a knife. And so I would argue, although of course this will not be proven until the court case, but I would

argue this is Lamy trying desperately to get out of this by throwing every possible accusation at the guy and saying, oh yeah, he had a knife. had a knife yeah we don't know uh the personal trustworthiness of the taxi driver in question no we do know that david lammy has a very difficult relationship to the truth yes and we do know that this guy at least is um professional enough to get one of those licenses connor to drive diplomats which means you can't like this is i guess the point i'm making this is not like a bog-standard Uber driver who doesn't need to have any form of qualifications or

any form of credibility checks. Yes, and David Lammy was more than happy to say that men can grow a cervix in order to walk the party line and get elected, so I don't think that David Lammy is a bastion of truth and integrity and therefore I,

I question as to whether or not he really thought that shiny pen was a knife, or if he thought that it was a post hoc rationalization to, to bolster the credibility of his story with the police, to depict himself as a victim when, yeah, you know, he threw a bit of a fit when he shouldn't have.

So, well, I'm just going to say it, Connor, I don't believe Lammy. And I'll tell you why. Because not all taxi drivers, and I mean, this is why I try and catch black cabs

when I'm in London, because we know not all taxi drivers are honourable people. Okay? We know that taxi drivers can rip people off. But what do we all have, Connor, now? We have mobile phones. And if there's any type of confrontation like this, especially if you're Foreign Secretary, the first thing you do is you start recording

what happened. That is just total common sense. And there is absolutely no claim from Lamy. And let me show you this trip, actually, because it was a very, very long trip. 360 mile journey, by the way, from France to Italy, which I think is utterly ludicrous. The total fare was £1,305. And the suggestion, by the way, is that Lamy was potentially going to double dip in terms of the receipt, because the driver says that he snatched the receipt from his hand without providing the cash. But what I think is also particularly not kind about this is the arrogance in which Lammy and his team are trying to discredit the the driver is what I'm trying to say. Because listen to what the ally of Mr. Lammy told The Sun. He said, anyone choosing to believe made up stories and

photos from a rogue taxi driver charged with a serious crime by French prosecutors over the UK Foreign Secretary needs to get a grip. So effectively, Connor, we're just meant to believe Lammy because of his job. End of story. Yeah, if anything, David Lammy's job on his track record makes me much less likely to believe him. But again, Labour Party apparatchiks will always deny all wrongdoing. They'll always come out and excuse any bad behaviour or egregious policy inflicted upon the British public when there is no democratic mandate for doing so. And they'll say that it's in our best interest that we actually always promise this do not believe the evidence of your own lying eyes I anticipate that there might be more evidence that comes out

about this that makes David Lammy's story look even less credible um for the time being I won't be declarative in either way you know because our enemies can be very litigious dan but i will just say that everything david lammy's ever done costs his accountant to doubt breaking right now rupert lowe has shamed emily maitlis during an extraordinary appearance on the newsagents where the liberal lefty lovey dismissing the Pakistani Muslim rape gang cover-up, which Alison Pearson has described as the biggest scandal in British history, decided to grasp what all lefty loveys do, of course, racism. So we're going to pick apart this appearance with Connor Tomlinson of Tomlinson Talks and Courage Media in just one moment. But let's look at this first clash between the pair. Why are you doing this? Why are you just trying to talk about Pakistani grooming gangs when there are four times, eight times and ten times

as many white grooming gang suspects. Do you not think, Emily, there's an issue with Pakistani Muslims raping working class white underage girls? Do you not think there's an issue there? I think there is. Are you telling me there's no issue?

There's an appalling issue with grooming when it hits any community and any age. We only ever hear you talk about Pakistani perpetrators. Are you telling me there's no issue? I'm telling you that you are focusing on Pakistani grooming gangs because probably you're racist and you don't believe that there are white perpetrators of the same crime. Can you deny that? I am concentrating on it because it's a blot on our national history.

It has not been properly dealt with. Now, I was quite surprised yesterday when I had Rupert here because he didn't respond at all to that racism allegation. Here's what he told me. Did you hear her accuse you of being racist? And do you want to respond now? Because to me, it's an absolutely outrageous allegation. I hope they published the whole interview because emily maters as you know i think i told her she was a fully paid up member of the

british liberal elite um and and as you know she's very good at getting her side of the story across i'm not a racist uh i think everybody knows that and at the end of the day uh um you know Emily is welcome to her own opinions but she was trying to you know as she does uh create a an interview which which everybody wanted to watch well I I think I gave her as good as as I got and um at the end I shook her hand and and we and we parted no I'm not a racist and she's not going to be able to do to the Duke of York what she did to me or do to him what do to me what she did to him. So, Conor Tomlinson, in some ways, I like the fact, right, that Rupert Lowe didn't care. He just didn't care. It's like, I guess these days we're all so used to being called racist. But it's quite shocking, isn't it, that Emily Maitlis had the front to do that.

I know you've been looking very closely into this interview. Do you want to respond to that first section? Yes. Well, Dan, our enemies think milk are racist. They think that discussing this issue ever is racist. They think that saying that, you know, the Windrush was not the British equivalent of the Mayflower that showed up after 1945 and actually settled the blitz-ridden wilderness of Britain and that we had no culture here before is itself racist. So excuse me and Rupert and yourself and everyone else if we don't take what they think is racist is gospel. As far as the stats that Emily Maitlis was citing to call Rupert Lowe a racist, I have a piece out tomorrow

in The Critic going over a lot of this, but she referenced a report in The Times from Operation Hydrant, which collated the data on child sexual abuse and exploitation offences by ethnicity from all 43 police forces in England and Wales. And it shows that 23% of group-based exploitation cases were committed by Asian male offenders. 7% of those were Pakistani, even though Pakistani males are only 2.7% of the population, according to the 2021 census. So that means that by her own statistics, Pakistani men are overrepresented by a factor of two. But if she doesn't like those statistics that, you know, she herself cited to call Rupert Lowe a racist, we can go to some ones where, rather than nationally, we look regionally, where there is a large concentration of Pakistani males. And we can look at West

Yorkshire. Now, this is data that I got given by a Freedom of Information request for 2009 to 2024, when the new sexual exploitation guidelines were released and they gave it by the victim and the perpetrator's ethnicity and asian suspects and what they mean by this is of course pakistani bangladeshi because it's not like japanese businessmen or sikhs doing this right asian suspects were between 23 and 43 percent of child sexual abuse offense suspects that's a rate two to four times their share of the population both locally of course and nationally and white victims were the largest group pakistani victims asian pakistani victims are only two percent so this shows that despite being the largest group per capita of perpetrators they they were the smallest group of victims,

which means these crimes are happening between ethnic groups rather than within households, as Emily Maitlis was insinuating to call Rupert Lowe racist. These stats have been out there recently. Stats from 2013 show that Asian males were the largest group of offenders for type one group-based child sexual exploitation and then of course there was the quilliam report in 2017 that found that 84 of these offenders were asian and even dr ella cockbane right who is the go-to academic by the guardian to refute the grooming gang's narrative found in her own work in her own sample that 80 of the offenders of child sexual abuse were ethnically pakistani and she said herself well i don't want to provide a conclusion on this. And I'm shocked by the data. Turns out that actually the perpetrators themselves are very vocal about the racial, religious and ethnic motivations for their crimes.

And Emily Maitlis, to deny this, to obfuscate this, to say, well, all grooming is bad, just like Jeremy Corbyn says when he's asked, why do you support Hezbollah? Well, all terrorism bad. It is inexcusable in the face of abundant evidence. Fascinating statistics, Conor. Can we look at the next confrontation from the interview? And this actually was my favourite part because finally someone just had the balls to say to Maitlis' face, you're just a London

liberal lovey. Because I mean it. And at the end of the day, if you don't think the British people agree with me, then you're wrong because they do. They've had enough of it. You don't have illegal migrants living next to you, Emily, because you live in a part of the country that probably doesn't have them. And if you did, you would want them to starve to death. So you are part of this liberal elite who basically says, do as I say, not as I do. OK, so I'm sorry. What I meant was, and I mean it, is if our legal system doesn't allow us to detain and deport, we should set up a tented camp on an island.

We should not treat them unfairly, but we should equally not put them at the top of waiting lists for dental treatment, for medical treatment. We should not give them spending money. We should not effectively treat them as if they have been taxpayers for years. They haven't been. They are illegal migrants. And by the way, they're not asylum seekers. They're economic migrants, most of them. So I mean, I know the virtue signaling do gooders want to sort of feel good about of course not. And that's not something that she has to confront. Like many metropolitan liberals who live in a leafy London suburb, completely insulated by their own luxury beliefs from the consequences of those visited upon the working classes who can't escape these neighbourhoods when they've had rapid demographic and cultural change and the deleterious criminal effects of that visited upon them. If I might say, Dan, and I might touch a bit of a third rail here, but I don't think it's just that Emily Maitlis is delusionally liberal and has an abundance of compassion. I think her compassion is very, very selective. And I've written about this in my piece on this essay.

Both her and her co-host, John Sopel, are British Jews. And so after October the 7th, they were quite rightly appalled, not just by the acts of barbarity that were committed by Hamas on that day, but by the denial in the streets by pro-Hamas marchers who registered with the Met police

to conduct their hate march before the bodies had even gone cold, before the massacre had even stopped, right? And they said that these scenes were appalling and they were afraid, as British Jews, for their future in the country if so many people were denying these atrocities to their face. If someone had sat down opposite Emily Maitlis and said, well, you know, there were only 6 million Jews that died in the Holocaust,

but there were 20 million people that died on the Western Front. So why are you only talking about Jews? Don't you think all death is bad? Why are you focusing on it so much? She would quite rightly call that person anti-Semite. She would quite rightly say, I think that you do not have my best interests at heart. I think you don't like me,

and I don't think you like me as a group because I'm Jewish. I think you're dismissing atrocities that have been committed against me for my race and for my perceived religion. I don't know if she's practicing. And if I presume she is, like many journalists, been privy to the horrific footage that Hamas themselves recorded from that day. We're broadcasting it, we're filming it, we're phoning family members and boasting about it. Okay. If that's the standard, right? The perpetrators were unapologetic. There is abundant documentation of these crimes and that if you deny it, you should not be provided a platform

by something as wealthy as the news agents, global and presumably LBC and the BBC, where all the hosts formerly had their careers. Then why did the victims of October 7th, who quite rightly deserve sympathy, get Emily's mate as a sympathy, but not thousands of girls who have been raped, tortured,

in some cases murdered, just like the girls in Reem at the Nova Festival. Why do they not get the same amount of sympathy? Why does Emily Maitlis just obfuscate in the great cloud of child sexual offences this specific crime where, just like Hamas, the Pakistani rapists are unapologetic about abusing these girls because they are kafir and because they are white and because they think Pakistanis are the supreme race. And as one transcript that was read out by Katie Lamb recently have said, we're here to F white girls and F the government. There is a specifically racial, religious and political motivation to these crimes, just as there was in October the 7th committed by Hamas.

So why does Emily Mait make this care about those girls in israel but not these girls in england i think it's a disgusting double standard and i think it should be called out indeed and look rupert those double down actually uh this afternoon i i love it he's post on x emily mateless can call me racist for highlighting the pakistani rape gangs let me be clear i do not care That vile attitude enables the decades long mass rape of working class white girls by Pakistani men. Justice must finally be delivered. Now, in another section of the interview, she actually accused Rupert Lowe of profiting from the rape gangs. And the rape gang inquiry has now officially responded to that,

saying yesterday Emily Maitland accused Rupert Lowe of making money from this inquiry. That is entirely untrue. In fact, Rupert has made a substantial donation out of his own pocket and will not receive a penny from the inquiry. Maitlis should apologize for her false remarks. At this point, she hasn't. I don't expect that she will. She feels totally protected by the mainstream media. And Rupert Lowe has also been backed by the brilliant Sammy Woodhouse on this, who is a victim of the Pakistani Muslim rape gangs, also now an advisor to his official inquiry. But she's not someone who does what anyone tells her to do, trust me. And Sammy has posted, this is the same bullshit. This is responding directly to ME Make This. This is the same bullshit we've all been called and have heard for decades

whenever we speak out about how children in the UK have been groomed, abused, raped, tortured, trafficked, criminalised, impregnated and murdered. It's boring. Try something new. We're not racist for talking about rape gangs and we're not going to stop just because of shit journalists like Emily Maitlis. Keep up the good work, R and i loved that but connor uh emily maitlis wasn't the only mainstream media figure proving to be totally out of touch this week uh let's have a

look at suzanna reed on good morning britain make a stranger on your island? Well, I live in the most diverse city in the UK, London. We're in it now. And I don't feel like a stranger. No. I feel like I'm in a really rich, multicultural society. In London, I live in... But am I out of touch with people who this phrase is going to chime with? Because I don't really understand.

And like, okay, Connor, yep, she's totally out of touch. A couple of things. Firstly, just a few months ago, she was complaining about being mugged in London. It's also revealed that she lives in Belem, which is one of the least diverse parts of London. So yes, Susanna, you are completely out of touch, right? Yeah, if she wasn't just playing hatchling

and using rhetorical devices to answer her antiquated and thoroughly refuted by reality multicultural argument, you know, it might be useful, Susanna, to pop your SW1 bubble for a while and invite someone on the show who might explain to you the mindset of the

majority of the country, who have even told the BBC a margin I think of 92% that multiculturalism has failed. The majority of the country now that is swinging towards parties, all of the big three now who are making immigration restriction, not just illegal, but legal migration restriction, the main pitch to the electorate and the 90% of constituencies registered before the last general election, who thought, you know what, let's get immigration down. And they underestimated the level of net migration by a factor of 10. They thought it was 70,000, not 700,000, and still wanted immigration reduced and or stopped. So yes, she's completely out of touch, but this sort of feigned outrage and confusion

shows that she's not interested in getting back in touch. As far as what Sammy Woodhouse has said, I echo that, well done to her. Emily Maitlis is engaging in the continued cover-up that has been conducted for decades, and it shows why the BBC weren't bothered about covering the story Three Girls Aside for many years and it's as was repeated in the telford inquiry the alexis jay report the louise casey report sensitivities around community cohesion or offending the asial

community or inflaming race relations were the reason why the lid was kept on this boiling pot what emily make this has just tried to do there is silence Rupert Lowe, render the issue radioactive, rubbish his position, and tell her audience, who are presumably the metropolitan liberal types that hobnob with Susanna Reid and Maitlis herself, you cannot talk about this issue.

And those people are more proximate to power, more proximate to the politicians and lawyers and the policymakers who would be able to do something about this than the left behind people in Northern Milltowns who are not even engaging with a podcast as odious as the news agents, let alone capable of writing to their local MP and leveraging pressure for a national inquiry. So Emily Maitlis is trying to gatekeep against justice for these

girls. It's reprehensible. It's been going on far too long. And everyone who turns around and just says, I don't care if you call me racist, I care about truth and justice, is on the right side of this. Totally. Do you think the migrant bubble is being burst a little bit in the mainstream media, though, Connor? Because we also had this extraordinary call on LBC this week that went viral watch this for like three months and then I quit I went to look for a job elsewhere I worked in construction first it didn't work for me I worked for Amazon as well it didn't work for me and then I found a job in the bank and I'm living my life effectively and how many people in the care home that you worked in were in a

similar situation to you? So I have, first of all, I have four of my two sisters and two brothers. So we are five effectively coming from the same family in Zimbabwe. Oh, really? And we have all moved. My sister has moved into, she just recently got a job as well with one of the councils, which I'm not going to mention. And my brother has gone into, my other brother has gone into the construction industry

where he's working. And do you mind me asking how you afforded it? How did you afford to do it? Because the wages, obviously, are pretty notoriously bad in the care sector. So how did you fund your way through it? It was very easy. So I had my cousin who was here,

and she's the one who helped us to set up a company. She set up a company to bring us out of Zimbabwe, and that's how we managed to come here. So actually, her care company is not working. It's not there, as I'm speaking right now. It doesn't exist. So she just helped us to come into the company. So hang on, hang on, Jamie. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Your family member set up a company that acted as a provider of carers,

through which they recruited you from abroad. Yes. And you went into a care home for precisely three and a half minutes or whatever, and then looked for other work. So you manipulated the system for yourself, or you feel like you used the system to its best effects for you? Absolutely. Very easy, Connor.

Very easy. That was his words. You have to laugh or you cry because you know you're paying for all of it, Dan. I mean, okay, I don't think this is a popping of the metropolitan multicultural

consensus bubble on this. think is just that the boris wave has led to such a high volume of demographic and cultural change by people who have felt no pressure to assimilate to either british culture or have not had to abide by market incentive mechanisms to actually contribute and therefore are shamelessly just pilfering taxpayer coffers that when you just talk to one of these people they in their third world corruption mindset just tell you exactly what they think it's completely honest and so if you ask most of the african care workers that have been brought over that are outnumbered by their dependents they'll tell you the exact same story and and And perhaps people will accuse me of gross overgeneralizations on this.

They figured out earlier this year, and it was published in the Telegraph, and Mike Jones has written about it very well for The Critic, as have I before. They calculated the number of health and social care visas, which have failed to fill demand,

by the way. I think 70,000 health and social care visas in 2022 only led to 11,000 vacancies being filled. So just like that guy, they just hopped from job to job to job. But they figured out that they handed out something like 299,000 health and social care visas between 2021 and 2024. And they were outnumbered by almost 400,000 dependents. For people from Zimbabwe, like that caller there, they were outnumbered by their dependents. For every one care worker, there were 10 dependents. And every single one of those people, the dependents and the care worker, remember, who is paid for by the taxpayer, are net taxpayer drains. They will never, across their lifetime, be a net contributor. So why are we battery farming tax dependents from the third world as a matter of government policy? What's happened now with the Labour government, and again, I've broken down all of the nasty details

hinted in the immigration white paper, what they've done is they have extended the five-year period for indefinite leave to remain to 10 years, which means that after the next election, all of these people can have their visas rescinded and sent home. And the reason they need to do that is because if they don't, the ones that are already here, like this chap, the Zimbabwean care worker for three minutes, he and the rest of them will cost the taxpayer £264 pounds across their lifetime utterly untenable and we are being taken for fools by people from the third world who know exactly what they're doing oh yes they do oh yes they do stand by connor thompson big update on the lucy connelly case in just one

minute so don't go anywhere you're going to want to hear this but first the reason you're watching this show is that it's becoming increasingly difficult to trust mainstream media or the so-called fact checkers, as we're always talking about, because they claim to determine which facts are true. The good reason we're losing trust. Think about the ongoing debates over free speech or Brexit or Trump or trans issues. But the good news is I've found a solution. It's called Ground News and it's the best way to stay informed and cut through media bias and manipulative narratives so you can get the facts for yourself. It has been a game changer for a news junkie like me and you can see for yourself at ground.news.com. I'm going to tell you about an incredible discount

opportunity today in just one moment, but first let me show you this incredible website and app in action. So let's use my favorite story of the year. The Supreme Court ruled that women can only be biological adult human females, reversing years of trans extremism. In one place, Ground News puts the 350 sources covering the story. Then they instantly show how the story is being covered by the media broken down by whether it leans to the left or the right. This is called the bias distribution chart. If you scroll down, you can see every headline about the story, along with the political bias and ownership of the publication. So we can see for ourselves

quite clearly that on the right, the Daily Wire covered the case very accurately with the headline, UK Supreme Court Rules Trans Identifying Men Are Not Women. Spiked online was even more forthright, declaring women exist, get over it. And the Daily Telegraph looked in depth at the disgraced famous faces who declared trans women are women. David Tennant, I'm looking at you. By stark contrast, the left-wing National said the result was only a victory for gender-critical feminists. And the Canary ran with this hilarious headline, victory for the far right, as Supreme Court rolls back trans women's rights by two decades. So yep, JK Rowling, she's far right now. Yeah, right, I say. My favourite

feature though, the blind spot feed. This services upwards of 20 stories daily that receive the majority of coverage from one side of the political spectrum. So if you love the news like I do, the Blindspot feed is the best way to get a balanced perspective on what's happening. Go to ground.news slash outspoken or scan the QR code to subscribe today, get 40% off the same Vantage plan I use for unlimited access. That's 40% off right now at ground.news slash outspoken. But now, back to the show. Breaking right now, Lucy Connolly, the housewife, the grieving mother, and the British political prisoner, is spending at least three more days in jail, putting her tally behind bars to 282 days after the Court of Appeal delayed its decision as to whether her sentencing was unfair.

Now, as you know, I was at this trial at the Court of Appeal yesterday. The whole case blows my mind. It's completely disgusting. Lucy was brilliant. She's you, she's me, and she doesn't deserve to be there. But the great news is some major support incoming. Katie Hopkins, talking about the delay, wrote, the appeal court does not need time to make a judgment. The Stasi do not want to allow scenes of celebration or to be shown to be wrong. So they didn't want the announcement on the day when we were all there, rather they will do the judgment on paper. But a really significant development overnight. Elon Musk, even though he's trying to stay out of international politics at the moment, given his role in the Trump administration, has backed Lucy Connolly via X, the former Twitter.

And this is via their global affairs department, which posted Lucy Connolly, a user of the X platform, posted a comment on X in the aftermath of the Southport massacre in the UK. As a mother who lost her firstborn at 19 months old and has a 12-year-old child, she was triggered by the unjust suffering and death of children attending their local dance class. Her understandable frustration came out in her post on X. After cooling down and a walk with her dog, she decided to remove the post. Despite the post being live for only a few hours and her subsequent deletion of the post, she was arrested and charged under Section 19 of the Public Order Act for publishing material intending to stir up racial hatred.

Based on advice she received while in custody, she pled guilty and was convicted. Lucy believed a guilty plea would result in her being able to get back to her family faster. Instead, she was sentenced to 31 months in jail because of her post and denied the ability to release on temporary license, which allows inmates up to two days at home with their families. The Free Speech Union, a non-profit that X has worked with on similar matters, is providing Lucy with representation to appeal her sentence. X wholeheartedly supports Lucy and the free speech union in this case. Hear, hear. That is a really significant backing that Lucy Connolly has received. And what's amazing, of course, is that when I spoke to Lucy on the phone before the case

yesterday, she was fairly nervous. But there is a sense of positivity, a sense of positivity that hopefully because of the huge traction now that her case is receiving, that something good can come out of this. And the good has to be our protection of free speech and also our protection to make mistakes online as well without being locked up away from your family for three years. But that wasn't where the support ended. Rupert Lowe wrote quite clearly Lucy Connolly should not be in prison. No ifs or buts there. And of course, the huge hypocrisy of the case was also pointed out by suffragette Gent, who wrote Lucy Connolly is already seven months into a 31 month sentence meanwhile Labour's Ricky Jones still hasn't been tried this is blatant two-tier justice now the left has of course reacted horrendously to this case I'm going to show you some of that

in just one moment but first I want to thank Katie Hopkins, actually, because she brought a huge amount of international attention to this case. We'll get analysis from Connor Tomlinson of Tomlinson Talks and Courage Media in just one moment. But first, let's have a look at what Katie had to say. A couple of things on Lucy Connolly and her appeal. I'm just backstage ahead of a show tonight. So first up, a massive well done to everybody who turned up and actually was there to hear the appeal or to be outside. Dan Wooten, Alison Pearson, the hard work of the Free Speech Union. So important to get eyeballs on these sorts of things. Secondly, to imagine what that was like for Lucy Connolly to be jailed

for two years and seven months for words online that she deleted and just put out there in the heat of the moment and regretted afterwards. To be in that courtroom, to be sobbing, to imagine you could be freed, to imagine that this could be the day it's over for you, the hell is over, and then to not be allowed to go home. And the point I'm really trying to get to is, of course, the judge doesn't have to take time to decide. The judge could have made a decision there and then. They're equipped with all the facts. They know the law such that it is. They could have made that decision as they did for other people like Labour MPs, for example, who beat people to a pulp on the streets. But no, they sent her back to prison and said that there will be a written verdict. And the reason for that is the government doesn't

want people celebrating a win outside. The government doesn't want to give power to the Free Speech Union, to Alison Pearson, or to any of the other independent journalists covering this. And most of all, the government doesn't want to look like it was in the wrong for jailing her in the first place. So the truth of it is, the appeal doesn't really matter. The appeal court doesn't matter. The judge doesn't matter, because it's the corrupt government that are deciding how this gets handed down in a written way a few days later so that no one can be seen celebrating and no one can question the wildly authoritarian regime that brits now have to live under that's all i wanted to say very powerful conor thompson do you agree with Katie Hopkins? Almost to the letter. The only thing I will say is I don't want to evade accountability for the judges on this matter, because the government doesn't actually appoint the judges, even though Keir Starmer agrees with the Blairite legislation that changed the appointment of judges, taking it away from the loyal chancellor who would politically appoint them to now the Judicial Review Council, which does it in a back room that no one can see and then selects these activists by hand picking them. And the reason I raise this is because Judge

Melbourne Inman, KC, who is the one who sentenced Lucy in the first place to 31 months, there's a really interesting piece in the Spectator in March by Jonathan Miller. And he tried to look into this judge's background. And he seems to have appeared from thin air. Nobody knows anything about him, other than all of his rulings are questionable. For example, Mohammed Abkar is a schizophrenic who doused two men in a mosque in petrol, to other Muslims, and set them alight. Inman gave him a hospital order, rather than a prison sentence. Lucy Connolly, for a deleted tweet, 31 months in one of the hardest prisons. But this chap, oh, he gets ice cream and bedtime.

There was someone else as well. There was a chap who killed someone for dangerous driving. This is Antonio Boparan. Again, another good British name. I wonder if that factored into the sentence. And he got an 18-month sentence and served only nine months. So much less than that served and given to Lucy Connolly. And then the other thing that I wanted to point out with the judges is that Laurie Wastell of the Free Speech Union, someone that everyone should be following on Twitter because he does fantastic work, he has been transcribing bits and pieces that the cross examination and the Crown Prosecution Service was saying at yesterday's trial, as you well know, Dan. And they were asking Lucy Connolly whether she has strong views on immigration, if she thinks that children were unsafe because of illegal immigration.

Does she feel threatened by immigrants? And does she hold a hatred of migrants? Now, you might be asking yourself, what could that possibly have to do with whether or not there was a miscarriage of justice that went on here? And the answer is, as Katie has alluded to, this is a political prosecution. Kirstalmer spread multiple times that the Southport riots were a reaction of Islamophobic racist hatred by an organized far right, something that a report just this week has come out and completely disproven. So they are trying to make Lucy Connolly and people like Peter Lynch and everyone else that's still in prison under false pretenses, the scapegoats for the fact that the government narrative is completely untenable, especially in light of Keir Starmer this week and coming out and saying mass immigration is not a far right issue and we don't want to feel like a nation of strangers. Why is Lucy Connolly still

being held hostage in jail over her views on immigration when the prime minister who mobilized magistrates courts to lock up mothers like her has just come out and said that concerns about immigration are very legitimate? This is clearly the political corruption of the justice system absolutely and yeah it was brilliant actually seeing that exchange on x because it was so obvious what the state prosecutor was trying to do even though lucy during her testimony and you can watch my video uh where i outline everything that went on during Lucy's evidence, but she makes it abundantly clear that she had absolutely no intention to incite racial hatred. And more to the point, Connor, and it was really effective the way that Lucy's

defence outlined this in court, it's ridiculous, it's ludicrous to suggest that she was trying to incite violence, right? Because the timeline doesn't match up because she posted her tweet on the first night, but she wasn't arrested until after the riots because her tweet hadn't been picked up widely at that point. In the intervening period, Connor, she had posted multiple tweets discouraging violence, actually condemning the riots, saying she was opposed to violence, saying that they were not legitimate protests and saying that the riots only played into the hands of the mainstream media and the establishment. So it was so obvious. It's just a fact that she wasn't trying to incite violence.

Yes. And there was another bit that Laurie tweeted out. The concluding remarks from the Crown Prosecution Service saying, Lucy's post was a continuing reflection of her racist mindset and the other posts demonstrated her racist views and that she clearly intended to stir up racial hatred and serious violence. They also, as Alison Pearson covered in her original Telegraph piece about Lucy's story, which brought the world's attention to just how bad it was, obviously you'd been covering her unjust imprisonment for a while, but it had exclusive details. The Crown Prosecution Service and the police lied about Lucy and said she was a racist

to justify her imprisonment after the fact. Now, I'm going to say something incredibly inflammatory here, as I want to do, but it's only inflammatory to people who have lost their mind. I don't care if people are a racist, it shouldn't be a criminal offence. You should not be a racist, as in you should not have hatred for someone else's skin colour based on nothing else other than their appearance, right? As a Christian, I think that's abhorrent. Judge people by their actions, not by their complexion. Should it be a criminal offence, especially should it be a criminal offence when people,

as we mentioned earlier in the show, that are administering this are Kiyosama, an activist judiciary and a media class who think that milk or talking about the

ethnic and religious composition of the Bath and Sarnie great games is racist. And also, by the way, no one is suggesting that Whom's a Useless is locked up, the former Scottish

First Minister, for his anti-white racism. And by the way, we would not encourage that either. We'd just rather have the debate. But you've got to be very careful if we do start saying that distasteful speech gets you locked up. And again, if you look at Lucy's original tweet, yeah, people can say it wasn't nice. That's fine. But she wasn't inciting violence because she said,

go and do that for all I care. It was very, very different to actually inciting violence. But of course, the left have been utterly vile on this. And I wanted to show you, Connor, and get your reaction to exchange on GB News between the very sound Ben Habib and the very distasteful Joe Phillips. Instead of being honest about Rudy Cabana and getting up and telling the nation what had happened, he categorised everyone who was protesting as far right. He directed the criminal justice system to detain them, remand them, charge them and find them guilty. It was the biggest example of politicised policing, criminal justice in this country. For a start, the government cannot demand that people are found guilty. That is precisely what he did. No, it is not. Well, where's your proof?

Well, I'll get, watch the clip, Jo. Where is your proof? Get the clip. Watch what Starmer said. I am going to intervene. They will be apprehended, they will be charged and they will be imprisoned. She deserved to go to prison. What she said was disgusting. It was unforgivable. She knows that. She's pled guilty to that at the earlier hearing. It may be that it was too long.

It may be tomorrow her sentence. And we'll see what sort of a woman she is when she comes out. I mean, that is left literally showing their true colours, isn't it? We disagree with you. We think your views are disgusting. So we want to send you to jail to change you. To silence you.

As usual, people like Joe Phillips wouldn't have a job if Ofcom weren't mandating these idiots be paid to appear for balance. But it would be fantastic if they could at least do a little bit of research for example the home office as uh now lord toby young of the free speech union has pointed out before um seems to have broken their own online safety act law because during the aftermath of the south port protests and riots when they were snatching

people up off the street there was a photo sorry a video they posted to Twitter of them apprehending a man while aboard a flight. And they said that these criminals will all be locked up. So this was before the people had been charged and even convicted. The Home Office, the government, were designating them as criminals by the fact that they had been present at a protest, had posted something online, and that they had arrested them for an obviously political act. And so, Joe, completely incorrect. And then her justification of Lucy Connolly rotting in prison for 31 months for a tweet where she did not incite violence and it would not pass the sniff test under the Brandenburg test for free speech and imminent incitement to violence in the US. Absolutely disgraceful. Alexander Solzhenitsyn described these people in the

Gulag Archipelago as the same kind of crackpot Marxists who, even if they were hauled off in cuffs on some false charge, would still insist that they themselves had done something wrong because the regime that they believed in ideologically was infallible. It was correct. And so I genuinely think that one of the people that have been snatched up under these malign online speech legislation was a Lib Dem counsellor. Right. This was only a little while ago. He's a Times radio producer as well. And he had complained about his daughter's school on a WhatsApp group. And he is one of 12,000 every year that get arrested on these spurious charges. Now, Joe is from the Lib Dems. John Sweeney, who had a shouting match with me in

the Frontline Club a little while ago, saying that, why do you care about free speech in Britain because Russia is way worse? He was also a Lib Dem candidate. When one of their own has been snatched up under these spurious speech charges, they don't even think to question it. These people outsource all of their thinking to the law and ideology. And you know what? If Joe Phillips was in Lucy Connolly's place, I think she'd somehow work out a way to justify her own imprisonment. So yeah, I wouldn't take her word for mustard whatsoever. No, indeed, indeed. I do have to give credit though, because there are some politicians

who are raising their head above the parapet. And I think we're both fans of this guy as bad as the Tories are on so many levels. So credit to Robert Jenrick. It's difficult if you're a frontline politician, especially in the Justice Brief, to talk about an ongoing case. But Robert Jenrick did so on talk. Watch this.

A basic sense of fairness within the criminal justice system. Look, it's a matter before the court now, so I can't comment on that specifically. She herself deleted the tweet because she decided it was wrong, and I certainly don't condone the comments that she made. But is it right that somebody goes to prison for that period of time for a tweet when you've got dangerous people being released early under the

government's policy this week and there are so many cases of people who've committed crimes so much more serious than this who are not going to jail i'll give you an example this week a man avoided jail despite it being found he had 12 000 images of children on his computer pornographic images uh one uh or more of children as young as one years old being raped and the man doesn't go to jail for that and yet here you've got lucy connelly going to jail for a long period of time as you say somebody of previous good character for a tweet i think that offends most people's sense of well, Hugh Edwards didn't go to jail, did he, Connor? No, quite rightly so. Quite rightly to point that out.

Again, there are far too many of the most egregious criminals who escape accountability. And at the moment, the Labour Party are letting out serial sex offenders, as they've already let out violent offenders early, to ease overcrowding. And it's funny, the Prisons Minister has already given an interview to the Guardian a couple of months ago, saying they are doing this in anticipation of another summer of

disorder. So they are specifically letting out violent and sexual criminals from prison early and telling magistrates not to give harsh sentences to these criminals in anticipation of a time where they would need to lock up more political prisoners like peter lynch and lucy connolly so the state the security state is setting itself against the aggrieved and quite rightly so native host population who are sick to death of avoidable tragedies being visited on their children by imported client classes and the police are running essentially by by persecuting this online speech like lucy connelly's a protection racket to preserve the pristine reputation

undeservedly so of many tribal violent minorities and i think it's a completely untenable state of affairs and even the economist today who's got his head in the proverbial multicultural sand have come out and said oh it's a bit alarming now that like the likes of lib dem councillors are being persecuted for these speech crimes shouldn't we think we tone it back a little bit the hypocrisy is always there beautifully put connor tomlinson host of tomlinson talks on youtube a contributor to courage media and presenter of the D Program podcast on the New Culture Forum. Thank you so much, Connor. We will speak very soon. But of course, before we go, we are now going to reveal the worst Britain in the world this week. Oh, I've loved your comments

on this. You're quite divided. So Jane Marsden wrote, Lindsay Hoyle, the greedy toad who has taken so many freebies, he makes Starmer look like a rank amateur and Sean understands agrees saying Hoyle for me I just hate him so much almost as much as Starmer this week however I think Emily Mate less as an M-A-T-E-L-E-S-S should win very appropriate last name he says I actually think Rupert should sue for defamation I was wondering if he was going to go down that path but no he just said he doesn't care i think someone should nominate emily mateless to be union jackass next week right because i could see that happening but then of course the other nominee susanna reed and stacy 16 said susanna and her smug patronizing i'm better

than you face infuriates me so much and Luby Luto wrote never like this woman remember how uppity she was when she first joined the lineup peers leaving signal the downfall of this mess speaking about good morning Britain so the results are in with 20% of the vote Lindsay Hoyle the runner-up with 23% of the vote, Reform UK chairman Zia Youssef, but with 57% of the vote, the worst Briton in the world this week is Susanna Reid for her complete dismissal of the fact there are any issues with the mass uncontrolled immigration of London.

And in fact, it's just lovely living in this city. God almighty. Okay, don't go anywhere. We're going to wrap the week with Angela Levin. Huge royal news in the uncancelled after show. Join us at www.outspoken.live. Substack really is the best way to communicate directly with me, to keep up with everything I'm doing, to maintain that direct connection, and also protect me from

big tech cancellations. So I really would be so grateful, so grateful, if this Friday you could just pop in your email address, join, and be part of our amazing Outsspoken community, which is 40,000 strong and growing. Have an amazing weekend. Really hope you get some time to relax and switch off, actually, from the madness of this world. But we are back. 5 p.m. UK time on Monday, midday Eastern, 9 a.m. Pacific. Hit subscribe if you're watching on YouTube and Rumble. And most importantly, I promise to keep fighting for you.