Piers Morgan Uncensored - Cenk Uygur vs Andrew Wilson - On Trump Pardons, Elon Musk Salute & More

Episode Date: January 28, 2025

As Elon Musk's controversial salute to Trump supporters and the pardoning of the January 6th rioters continue to divide opinions across the world, Piers Morgan brings two juggernauts of the online arena together to have it out. Veteran Uncensored contributor Cenk Uygur spars with The Crucible's Andrew Wilson, with fiery results. Was Elon's salute a Nazi dogwhistle? Was the January 6th attack on the US Capitol a genuine attempt to overthrow democracy? Words collide as Piers sits back to watch. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

He did that so crisp, so sharp, exactly like the way that they did in the Third Reich. That's not an accident. He's a smart guy. All the evidence points to the fact, not only is he not a Nazi, but there's no good incentive for him to even do this. You just don't care. You don't care because you want it to be some trolling Nazi thing when it clearly isn't. I think you're an idiot. I think you love that coup on January 6th.

I think you hate our democracy. I think you hate our Constitution. So what part of that is cozying up to the right wing, bitch? You have a female bishop. That's an impossibility. That is not Christian at all. That is satanic. It's inversion, dude.

It's satanic. You sound insane. To me, honestly, you sound like you belong in a mental asylum. By the way, it's great to have the old check back, by the way. President Trump pledged to transform the United States, and his first days in his office have been nothing short of shock and awe. Trump unveiled a tidal waiver of executive actions as well as scrapping all of Joe Biden's

with a stroke of a pen. Supporters reckon Trump has crossed out more than just policy with his trademark sharpie. They believe in a profound and perhaps permanent cultural pivot to a supreme United States in which bros rule, woke is dead, and Americans' answers to nobody but God and maybe Trump. But are they right?

Well, join me to debate for the first time together. Andrew Wilson, his host of the Crucible, fame for what he calls blood sport debates with controversial thinkers from the worlds of politics, philosophy and religion. And in the opposite corner, Chek Yuga, is the founder and CEO of the Young Turks, where the OG of Digital Debates,

has found his progressive populism at odds with many conservative commentators, as well as his own side. Well, Chek has recently made his mission to engage with conservative and pro-Trump firebrands like Andrew Wilson. The question is, can he keep his temper?

We're about to find out. Because, Chink, you've got a volcanic one when it goes, You've been on very good behavior since Trump won. Let's see if it lasts. Gentlemen, I joke. Welcome to both of you. Chek, let me start with you. It's been a blizzard of stuff going on, as always, in Trump world.

But it seems unlike 2016, that this time there's a kind of laser focus and a plan to what Trump is doing. He's had time to think about this, time to work out what he got right and wrong first time, and he's hit the ground very hard, running very fast, really to try and send a message, right, this is the new America. What do you make of it? Yeah, so first of all, credit to him on both the optics and the action, right? So when a Democrat gets in office, they immediately start saying,

our voters have to push us to do the right thing. And then they say, don't push, push, push, don't push. Hey, how about we elect you? and you do your goddamn job, right? And for Democrats, that seems to be a really hard ask, right? So that's why I'm so frustrated with my own party. Trump comes in and goes, you want to see son? Boom, here we go, day one.

Signing after signing after signing, executive order after executive order. So give them credit for that. Number two, give credit to Susie Wiles, who ran a brilliant campaign and now seems to be running a very tight ship as the chief of staff. Now, when it comes to the actual orders, I disagree with. with tons and tons of them. Some of them are expected. We're getting out of the Paris Climate Treaty,

which is a disaster for us to get out of. But once Trump's elected, that's fait accompli. So it's not like you should be overly surprised by that. The pardons of the violent criminals on January 6th is unacceptable, except for the fact that it was super obvious that he was going to do it, right? And then when he gets to the absurdities like birthright, taking away birthright citizenship,

I think he does that as, kind of a squirrel to distract people and get everybody to focus on that while he passes everything else because that has no chance. That's wildly unconstitutional. And by the way, I would hope that Maga would realize things that are unconstitutional and go, wait, wait, wait, we're supposed to love this document. I can't have you going outside the Constitution and outside the law. Okay. Andrew, your response? Yeah, so there, I mean, there's a whole bunch of problems here. So the first problem is these were not violent criminals who were released. These were political prisoners who were released. What happened is there was no fair application of the law whatsoever.

These guys were being tried in D.C. There was a political witch hunt. We have more evidence every single day which provides for that. Why these guys are busy now complaining and showing us, oh, down here on the border, we have a mom crying because she might be separated from her kid. Nobody's commenting on the fact that we have a ton of families that just got reunited. And on behalf of all of the Wilson's of the world, welcome home. January Sixers, it's guys like this that wanted to put you away in a hole in a dark hole, absent due process and throw away the key. These were not violent criminals.

By the way, thank you, Andrew. Andrew, Andrew, hang on. Let me just stop me there. So I actually interviewed one of the protesters, Jacob, who was the Q-in-on-on-Shaman guy. And I also had a Capitol police officer who'd been working that day. And what they both agreed, very interestingly, was that they both condemned. the violence against police officers that day. So if you can have one of the protesters

who've just been pardoned, concede that the violence that was perpetrated by some of the protesters was wrong, unacceptable, and should be condemned, why would you categorize it as nonviolent? Well, I didn't categorize it as nonviolent. I said these are not violent criminals, which is how it's being framed.

But if you're perpetrating violence against police officers, it is, isn't it? What? What? How many? A few? A few? A couple? This guy, on May 3. 30th of 2020. The White House was under siege. It was attacked over 100 Secret Service agents injured.

They were burning down stations. This guy said, oh, well, Trump had to go hide out in his bunker. Can you imagine if the roles were reversed and Donald Trump came out and was like, oh, AOC had to go hide? Oh, these politicians had to go hide. He doesn't care about political violence. The left doesn't care about political violence at all. They'll use it when it's expedient for them.

They always do. pointing to a couple of bad actors at this thing and saying all of them have to be thrown away and you know the key uh thrown away with them is insanity and no i i don't think so i think it's a miscategorization to frame all of them as violent criminals and they weren't they weren't at all i mean that's what he was doing that's what he was framing it though yeah no i don't i don't agree with that i don't think all the 1500 were violent in fact we know for a fact they weren't a lot of them were not convicted of violence Yeah, I didn't say that at all.

So look, all right, whatever, dude. So on the Young Turks, we've been super clear about this. And as always, we're the one guy's setting people who are fair. You'll see both sides do all this extreme stuff like Andrew's doing. So first of all, the people who went to the speech of Donald Trump, a lot of times they get thrown into this. And I have always said, no, that's not fair. They didn't go down on the Capitol. For the people who went to the Capitol, it's an obvious crime to break into the Capitol.

to the Capitol and why were they doing that? They were trying to overturn the results of the election. So you could blah, blah, blah, and only your talking points, but it's absurdity. Obviously, they were trying to hurt our democracy. They were trying to steal that election. And were some of them violent? Were all the violent? No. Were some of them violent? Obviously, we have eyes and ears. So you can do all the propaganda you want, but we just watch the tape of them trying to beat the crap out of the cops. I thought you guys cared about cops. I care about crime. I'm against crime. And, you know, and we take heat sometimes from the left because they think that crime is a right-wing narrative and doesn't actually exist. Well, the voters just showed you it does exist and they're pissed about it. But they're also pissed about it when you go beat up cops for Trump. So look, I'm past it because the American people voted. They put Trump back in office. And that's pretty definitive. I didn't want that, but it happened, right? But if you're going to try to do revisionist history that these were some patriots, who showed up for a picnic.

But oh, golly, gee, there was a capital. So they started to bust in and beat the living crap out of the cops. And, oh, he lost the election. But, oh, no, it was stolen. So they go and try to do a coup attempt. I hate it. I think it's a terrible precedent. And I think every time you guys defend it, you sound absurd.

And it sounds like overwhelming, ridiculous propaganda. Andrew? Yeah. What it's about is a fair application of law. And there has not been fair application of law here. Sank himself cannot even do fair application of law. At the same time, he says, oh, he tried to cooing over there of the democracies.

Exactly what happened. May 30th, when they were attacking the White House, they were attacking Secret Service agents, they wanted to get in there, and all he could do was whine about how Trump had to get sent to a bunker. Where was his outrage about the coup d'etat? Where was he when Black Lives Matter was burning down cities?

There is no coup on May 30th. He was saying, he was saying instead, Sank, I didn't interrupt you once. Do you think he calmed down for me? So anyway, what's going on very simply is that he has the revisionist history. While at the same time, the Democrats are saying, you got to stay home and stay masked up.

They're telling other people go outside, burn down cities, make Chaz Chop, a nice free independent zone. I don't know how you could say that that's anything other than an insurrection to say that this is now no longer part of the United States government, have your own armed militia there. The entire nine yards, May 30th, they attack, and this guy says nothing. Suddenly, J6, though, oh my God, they're violent extremists.

They're going to overthrow democracy. It's all nonsense. It's not fairly applied. He's never fairly applied it. The laws has never been fairly applied to the J.6ers. They were tried in D.C., not in front of impartial juries. And here's how our law works. Our law works like this.

A thousand walk free, so one guilty person doesn't spend a day in prison. That is the precedent for our law. That's why they got pardoned, and it's exactly why they should have. And Andrew, on the ending the birth, Can I just address that? Hang on, Chek. I'll come in a moment. Response. On what Czech mentioned also about the ending the birthright citizenship is one of the executive orders, do you think Trump intends to do that? Because it seems to me he's already won the debate about illegal immigrants who are here are criminals in America. Everyone pretty much agrees they should be

sent back, including the million who've already been processed but haven't been deported yet. So all of that seems to be very popular. But there is, a lot of anger about the idea that you may end what seems to be a very American thing, the very ethos of the country, this birthrights relationship. What do you feel? It's a very un-American thing. The 14th, I'm sorry, this was never, by the way, never set up so that people could come in, have a baby and then anchor themselves to the child.

And that's what's been going on. It's been going on for years. We know what's been going on for years. This was designed for things like for immigrants who came in legally. They have children here. Of course, those are United States citizens. Nobody's disputing that. What we're disputing is that you can just come in illegally,

have a child on American soil, and then try to anchor yourself to that child. That is not in the spirit of what we're even talking about. Of course, Trump wants to end it. It's bad policy across the board. It's always been bad policy across the board. And I hope the Supreme Court, it gets challenged by the Supreme Court, we could get it in front of them so that they can interpret it correctly.

because that's not the way this is supposed to be applied. Chang? Yeah, so first let me address what he said, and I'll come back to this. So look, guys, what happened on May 30th was nothing but a protest. But if they attack Secret Service guys, then they should be arrested.

That's a violent crime. I'm principled on both of those things. And in Portland, when they took over a portion of the city, I was against it. Like, that's not a thing. You don't get to take over a portion of a city. I was against it when gangs took over apartment, complexes and buildings in Colorado.

So if Trump stays with things that the American people are in favor of getting rid of the violent felons that are undocumented here, that's going to be very popular, whether the left likes it or doesn't like it, right? But when he goes too far and he goes to things like birthright citizenship, then people are going to push back. And that's when it gets interesting. Is Trump going to double down and go, no, I'm going to, you know, go to damagog on this? and get you people to hate, you know, foreigners coming in, et cetera.

And I don't care what the Constitution says, and we're going to change the way America is, and you're no longer an American if you're born here. We're going to judge you based on, you know, where you're from, et cetera. That'll be very unpopular. Does he dig in or does he, as he does sometimes go, man, you know what, I gave it a shot, didn't work and retract. I hope that that's the direction he goes, because this whole,

look, brother, if you have a problem with a part of the Constitution, you need to go through the right process. You need to go and do an amendment. Like I want to do an amendment to get money out of politics. But when Biden was in office, I didn't think he should just come in and go, ah, forget what the Supreme Court said. Forget what the Constitution said. Let's go nuts and do whatever the hell we want.

That's not how it works. Well, gee, I never thought about that. I didn't know that we were supposed to go through a process of law for these things, which is exactly what Trump is doing via his executive order, which then hopefully will get it in front of the Supreme Court. Which looks like that's what the plan is. That's not part of the legal process. By the way, just so you know, the interpretation of this,

that's what we're really talking about is the interpretation. Ultimately here, it is not, and you need to agree with me on this, it is not in the spirit that you can come in and have a child here and anchor yourself to the child, specifically so that you have some pathway or motivation to citizenship. You say, it's not a part of the legal process. Yes, these challenges getting in front of the Supreme Court, getting in front of various courts is part of the process.

It's been done this way time and time and time again. Also, I reject categorically what you said, just lied to the audience. You called Trump bunker boy, right? He was going down to the bunker during the protest to inspect it. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, right? You didn't care at all. You weren't denouncing political violence. You weren't denouncing these people getting beat up.

You didn't care when the violence is on your side, like a typical Democrat. You don't care at all, saying, you don't care. And he never cared. The only reason you care now is because you want to kiss. And I condemn it every time people be violent. Literally every time. But the thing is snake is that you're just trying to kiss the right wing's ass now to get back in with them because the left has categorically rejected you. And that's what's actually happening.

Chank, is that what's happening? All right, you amuse me. Yeah, yeah, this guy amuses me. So like you think calling me snake is going to somehow win you the debate? Good luck with that childish. I already won the debate. way of going. Oh, you did because you said it. Okay, that by the way, another great debating tactic. Just saying you want. And second of all, we have 27 million, how many times do I have to say this?

27 million subscribers, 30 billion lifetime views. You're a pimple on my ass. I literally don't even know who you are. So you come in here talking about audience and, oh, you're a snake. Okay, you're a total, you're squibious. Whatever. Do I win now? I didn't say anything about audience. What are you talking about? Are you like, Are you a lunatic? You did? You just said, oh, yeah, the left wing's audience has got a problem with them. I know the left wing.

I said you lied to, I said you lied to the audience. You're trying to cozy up with right wingers. What are you doing at TPSA, saying? Trying to cozy in with right wingers like Charlie Kirk. You're literally kissing up to them because you want in good, because the left is rejecting center left policies now. That's what's happening. Hey, brother.

Either want to go far left or far right. Okay, listen, brother, as you see me. bitch slapping you right here on National Airways. The only thing you can bitch slaps a cheater. What part of that seems like cozying up? What's the part of that seems like cozying up to the right? I think you're an idiot.

I think you love that coup on January 6th. I think you hate our democracy. I think you hate our Constitution. So what part of that is cozing up to the right wing? I hate snakes like you who try to get in as good as you can with a weak right like Charlie Kirk when you have

weaponized political violence yourself. Oh, Charlie Kirk is weak right and you're a strong right. The same time. Interesting. At the same time, you say, wait a second. I can't believe the J-6ers' coup d'age. You didn't give a damn. You've never given a damn.

We have your words on record. You flip-flopped. You're the biggest flip-flopper on the left. You're known for it. I haven't changed a single policy position. You and you move positions. You and Annex-Belian both move positions like a two-to-to-to-to-trade. Oh, Trump.

I love Trump. Oh, I love Trump so much. And all you care about is Trump's arrangement syndrome. All you have is Trump derangement syndrome. All right. Let me try. TDS, always on display. But wait a minute.

How can you say, wait, hold on. I don't say one thing. You both made your feelings clear. How could I have, how could I, how can you say that I'm cozying up to the right and say I have Trump derangement syndrome? All right. Make up your mind. You're a very poor thing. We watched, we watched the entirety of his entire first term.

You were Russia, Russia, Russia. He's a colluder. He's evil. He's this and that. And he flipped off on that position. The second it was. politically expedient. Okay.

Let me try and... None of those things are true. Let me try and move on to... Guys, let's move on to some policy debate. Andrew, let me ask you, do you feel like the woke worm is in reverse as strongly as I'm sensing it is? And specifically, just the simple statement from Trump, that the policy of the United States will be to recognize two genders, male and female.

Well, duh, that's always been the case. It's just incredible. the president of the free world, effectively, has to make this clear to people who'd lost their minds and believe that actually men can be women and women can be men. But do you feel that this has been a big marker in the beginning of the end of the woke mind virus, as Musk calls it? No, it's not the end of the woke mind virus. You're going to always have to battle this as definitions change because people need to justify their insane and degenerate behavior in society. So they come up with all sorts of nonsense like this.

In this particular case, the trans advocacy groups have done more to reverse any type of progress LGBTQ people in the United States have made in the last 30 years because of what they're trying to do with children and the fact that they don't care that you as a Christian do not believe at all that a man can become a woman. So yes, this is whiplash on that. There's going to be a lot more whiplash that's going towards that as people. reject categorically what these people have been trying to push on us you can look no further than what just happened at the inauguration you have a female bishop that's an impossibility that is not Christian at all you're not allowed to have female bishops

that is satanic that's literally satanic to have a female bishop come up and say anything you can laugh but it is that's okay well before okay he's laughing is because it's true well chank I'll get you to respond but first of all let's play the clip of that bishop because my objection was actually for different reasons. Let's take a look at it. I ask you to have mercy, Mr. President, on those in our communities whose children fear that their parents will be taken away

and that you help those who are fleeing war zones and persecution in their own lands to find compassion and welcome here. So, Chink, I mean, notwithstanding Andrew's position on the fact that shouldn't be a female bishop, but the fact that she was there on such a big, historic moment, delivering a kind of scolding woke lecture with Donald Trump and J.D. Vance and their wife sitting there, I just thought it was completely inappropriate. I didn't care

who the president was or what the scolding was. But to turn the pulpit into a scolding thing about all America's gay children are going to be running for their lives, I just thought it was completely wrong. Yeah, peers, I totally disagree. I loved it. And the reason I loved it is because it's true to power and you can say hey it's her truth is the truth of about half of americans it's not necessarily the truth but at least she's trying to challenge the powerful and i love that look there the reason why a lot of people agree with me is because i challenge the powerful on both sides on the democratic side and the republican side and that yeah that makes

the partisans get super mad at me no no no bides right about everything no no trump's right about everything no she she i love that she spoke for half the country and she said it right to his face i wish reporters would do that and i think a lot of the reporters got the message to be softer on Trump. No, no, no, no, be harder on the Democrats and the Republicans and the establishment. Be harder on everyone. So do exactly as she did, even though apparently she's Satan. Brother, look, I don't, how can I talk to you, man? When you say such ludicrousness, do you know that, like, 95% of Americans, when you say that she's satanic because she's a woman bishop, think that you're nuts? Do you at least understand and acknowledge that?

they don't you don't understand anything about the bible apostolic succession church history you don't know anything about these things think you have no idea what you're talking about first of all she wasn't speaking truth to power she was speaking subversiveness to goodness and that's what's actually going on and that's what democrats are great at doing yes it is completely satanic to have inversion inversion is when you take the what is considered the christ head in this case a bishop and invert it to a woman that's what you people are great at doing is inversion. If you looked at the 2000 years of Christian history, you would understand this, especially church history, going all the way back to the time of price and apostolic succession. People, oh, well, you can, but the truth is that people get all

of their ethics and goodness in this nation from biblical ethics and Christian ethics, not from St. Ugar thinks it's neat that a chick can do this. It's like, no, that's not part of our ethical standard there. That's not what it is. We don't have an ethical standard based around your version of the woke Bible. Go ahead. Yeah. When you call a respected bishop a chick and satanic, respected by who?

It's funny that you don't see that you lose such a giant percentage of the country. And so, like, guys like this make it really impossible for a huge, huge part of the country to ever vote for Republicans. Because if you vote for a Republican, you're going to get these ghouls and goblins. And they're going to say, oh, your chick shouldn't be on bishops, man. And it's inversion, dude, it's satanic. You sound insane. You sell, to me, honestly, you sound like you should, you belong in a mental asylum.

But when you call people satanic. What the hell is that even me? She's a woman. Just because she's a woman. She's satanic in that role. See, that's exactly why I'm a populist, but I can't be populist right, when guys like this. I'm speaking truth to power, say such a same thing. And drive hatred.

Drive hatred. You're right. I am power. You're huge. Remember how you said, I'm massive, I'm huge, I have his massive audience. So I'm here saying, speaking truth to power, you should be all about that. You should be loving the fact that I'm telling you something now, which is true. Except you're speaking gibberish to power. It is an inversion.

Is Beelzebub in the room with us right now? It is an inversion. I want to change. I want to change. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You hate Christianity? You hate Christian ethics, saying?

Time out. Let's move Christian ethics for another thing. I don't hate Christianity. I want to ask you about Nazi. I hate your radical lunatic. You sure sound like you do. Chaps, I want to calm the temperature by turning to Nazi salutes. Chek, you said about Elon Musk.

Let's take a look at what he did, just to remind everyone who may not have seen it. This one really mattered. And I just want to say thank you for making it happen. Thank you. Now, Chek, you said it was the most obvious Nazi salute you'd ever seen, which I think he... might be surprised about, but, but, um, you don't really say that, did you say? Oh, come. Yeah, but check, just to be clear, you don't actually think he's a Nazi, do you?

So how can you make a Nazi salute if you're not actually a Nazi, and in fact, absolutely hate everything they stand for? That's not a Nazi salute. It's a awkward thing that he did to say, my heart to you, that then gets deliberately misinterpreted as a Nazi salute by people who keep wanting to call everyone on the people. the right a Nazi. No. So Elon Musk is trolling. So this is a classic right wing maneuver. It's to get attention. And he knows that if he does a Nazi salute, but he says, oh, but he touched my heart.

And I can't believe they're calling me a Nazi. I'm the victim. The left wing is coming after me just because I did the most obvious Nazi salute of all time. Now, the left is angry at me because I'm not calling him a Nazi. I think he's trolling. I think he's doing it for attention. And he does this plausible deniability. It's the oldest trick in the book coming from the right wing. In fact, when you get upset at the right wing, they usually go, ah, he's just trolling, right? So that's what happened there. That wasn't subtle.

And again, I have credibility here because when they accused so many people of doing this, I said no. When Laura Ingram was at the RNC and she raised her arm and they're like, that's a Nazi salute. That's not a Nazi salute. She just raised her arm. Everybody raises their arm. He did that so crisp, so. sharp exactly like the way that they did in the Third Reich. That's not an accident. He's a smart guy. He's doing it to get to get us to do this segment and for the inauguration to all be

about Elon's, he's swallowing up all their attention. I think that is the biggest load of cobblers I've ever heard in my life. Andrew, over to you. Yeah. So it is. And it is. Oh my God. No, no, no, don't criticize what is so freaking obvious. And what do we put a nuts? He put a swastick on his You guys would be like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. It's not what it appears. It's not what it appears. Calm down. Sam, calm down.

Yeah, go ahead. Again, did you interrupt you? Andrea, go ahead. Well, it's great to have the old check back, by the way, just for the record. Yeah, I didn't interrupt you, Snake. Just calm down for a second. Let me, let me respond. Go ahead, Andrea.

Okay, so we have tons of evidence that Elon Musk isn't a Nazi. Kanye West, I don't know if you remember this. I didn't call him a Nazi. He ran for political office when he released a swastika. It wasn't even a swastika. It's just something that looked like one. Musk banned him for it. Musk just went through and did a massive purge.

He just went through and did a massive purge of all sorts of people who were considered Nazis or that the left had been calling Nazis on Twitter. It's a big thing right now. All the evidence points to the fact, not only is he not a Nazi, but there's no good incentive for him to even do this. What's the incentive? You say, well, it's a dog whistle. He's trolling.

He's just funding this and that. No. This is very common, by the way, for people to make this hand gesture. I have it from AOC. I have it from Clinton. I have it from all of these various people. And the thing is, yeah, I have it from all of the Democrats saying you can make, draw it side-by-side comparisons.

People have been showing you them nonstop. You just don't care. You don't care because you want it to be some trolling Nazi thing when it clearly is. And why did I defend all the right-wingers when they raised their arms like that? Then why did I defend all the right-wingerers when they raise their arms like that? Because the same reason you defend left-wingers when they do. Nazi salute. And by the way, I literally said, even if he put a swastika on his head, you guys would find an excuse for it. And then hold on. And then you said about Kanye,

when he put a swastika on his head, it wasn't really a Nazi symbol. I mean, you proved my point over and over again. So it's a delight debate. I didn't say it wasn't a Nazi symbol. I said the swastika. I said it wasn't an actual swastika, but it looked enough like one that he that he banned. Okay. So there you go again. I mean, it's a swastika, but not really, but not really. Because, okay, so look, even the symbols actually look like actual symbols because they're actual symbols. It's an absolute Nazi salute. Yeah, so look, guys. No, he didn't say that.

You just made it up. Against the ghost. Let me know. Listen, Chink, as he didn't make a Nazi suit. He literally says from my heart to you, whatever the words were, right? He literally tells you what he's doing. Yeah, that's the possible deniability. Of course.

Nobody. Nobody actually believes. Piers. Hang on, Checks. Piers. Hang on. You're a sophisticated media person. You really think he would have said, this is for the Third Reich.

No, of course he's going to have plausible deniability and make up an excuse. You know that. If he was a Nazi, he'd say, Heil Hitler, this is for you, the Third Reich, my love to you. Yes, because he would be an actual Nazi. Instead, he's a guy who literally a few months ago went to Jerusalem. He went to Jerusalem. And then he went down to the, you went down to the kibbutts, which was annihilation. a ghost. I didn't say he was a Nazi. He literally went to the scene of the massacre of

Jewish people. I'm saying he's doing it for attention and you know that peers. As a guy who loves attention, you know he's doing it for the attention. So stop making an argument debating an argument that I didn't even make. There is absolutely no way in the world, Elon must deliberately did that to get attention as a Nazi sympathizer. The whole idea of that is fanci of delusional and deliberately non-scientificer appears as a person who goes me, me, me, look at me, look at me, look at me. It's trolling. Do you not understand the concept of trolling?

I do. I'm very good at myself. Things with plausible deniability so that you could then come and go, oh my God, I got all the attention, plus I'm the victim because they're misinterpreting me. Craig, Craig, Craig, you're having a nonsense debate about whether he's a Nazi. I'm telling you that he did it for attention.

I hear you. But just to be clear, you really think that what he thought would be a good move as he's celebrating Donald Trump's historic second presidency starting, that what Donald Trump would want on the front pages the next day was not a picture of him as the new president, but a picture of Elon Musk doing what you say was a Nazi salute. You think he literally gained that deliberately to troll people. What part of your brain thinks that is even feasible from a guy?

from a guy who literally lands space rockets in cradles. He's got one of the biggest brains in the world. He was not deliberately trolling people as if he's a Nazi. It's ridiculous. Yeah. So, peers, let me ask you a question back. If you were giving a speech in inauguration or in the parliament or anywhere, as somebody told you, hey, go say from my heart and do this exact thing

where you even almost snap your boots. You know, he just snapped that salute, right? He won't do it again. Would you really do it? And I want you to do it right now. I told him. You say you would do it. I told him, oh, I didn't tell him, but I tweeted, and 10 million people have viewed my post on X.

So he'll have seen it. I just said it was very ill-advised of him to do that move. Absolutely. There you go. Very ill-vised. But anyone who genuinely believes he was doing it to replicate a Nazi salute is talking complete bullshit. And to just respond. No, but Peter's-

I want to bring Andrew in. If it didn't look like a Nazi salute, why was it? If it didn't look like a Nazi salute, why was it ill-advised? Andrew, it was ill-advised to do it, and I'm sure he'll now realize that. It was an ill-advised act. Okay, good. So here's the thing, too. This is something is off the cuff.

Sank's entire argument here is, it's trolling, believe me. That's it. No evidence, no anything, all evidence to the contrary. You don't have evidence either. You don't know what's in his head. It's not my claim. You the claimer. You bring the evidence.

You, the claimer, bring the evidence. Oh, it was trolling? I have no evidence. The evidence is in the video where he does a sick hyal. Oh, that's the evidence. And you're saying no, it's not a Sechyle. His mind. Now it's a Seekyle.

You read his mind and he meant really well by you are the one claiming you read his mind. You're the one claiming you read his mind. No, I'm telling you what we all saw with our own eyes and ears. In fact, Pierce admits that it looks like a Nazi salute. Pears is on my side on that. No, no. I said it was an eliz. It looks like a Nazi salute. I read his mind and he meant nothing but war as much in saying.

It was an ill-advised movement of his arm because obviously the kickback has shown that. However, however, however, he did not say, as you're saying, as you're saying, as you're saying, Chink, he did not say C Kyle, because that would have made him a Nazi saluting Adolf Hitler. He said, from my heart to you, rather less, I would say, contentious than. see Kyle, which is what you want people to think he was doing. Salute. All right. Let me ask you one more question. Let's change subject.

If Elon thought, oh my God, that's so ill-advised, I feel so bad about that. If somebody was saying that I did something not said, oh, my God, I feel bad about that if it was ill-advised. Why wouldn't he just say, oh, of course I didn't mean it that way. You know what? Here's the proof, Chech. But he never does that. What does he need to apologize for you?

If Elon must does it again. But Pierce thinks he did something wrong. No, Chink, if he does it again, he does it. in public that way, then he will be trolling people. Because now he knows how it looks. Okay, deal. And I don't believe he meant that in a million years. The last thing Elon Musk, having literally been to the kibbutz where Jewish people were massacred on October the 7th, literally a few months ago, the idea that he would now want people to think he's a Nazi.

After being pressured to do it. Is ridiculous. Anyway, I want to change the subject quickly. We're running out time. Andrew, many people are saying that what Elon Musk and Trump and Trump and, uh, RFK, Joe Rogan, all these guys, that there's a kind of new broligarchy that is ruling America.

And that's why so many young men in particular, black, white, Muslim, Jew, whatever, all came out and voted for Trump in bigger numbers. Do you feel that's, is it a real thing, the broligarchy? Yeah. I mean, to, I mean, to put it bluntly, yes, men like things which are masculine, and they're moving back towards masculinity

from the social ineptness of the left saying, oh, no, all these feminine virtues are great. Men are not happy with that. They're not thrilled about it one bit. Absolutely, I would say that there's a ton of people now who are saying, look, we need to have some type of common sense. We can't have trans kids running around. We can't have this stuff in our schools.

We can't have these indoctrination programs everywhere. So it's trying to yield back to common sense. Remember what Trump said in the inauguration. He says, now it is time to go back to common sense. sense. He said that. He also said it's Liberation Day because we're going back to common sense. So yes, I wouldn't say it's an oligarchy or prologarchy, right? I would just say it's a whole bunch of like-minded men who are all saying no at the same time. There's not only nothing wrong with that, but it's been needed for a long time. Yeah, and Chink, I agree. I do think that men for a number

of years now, since the Me Too and Times Up movements, quite rightly held a lot of predatory men to proper account. No problem with that whatsoever. But the pendulum swung so far the other way that every man started feeling like they were predatory until they could prove otherwise. And a lot of young men in particular gravitated to people like Andrew Tate and these kind of more contentious characters because they were crying out for someone to tell them what they should be like as a man. And what it feels to me now is, as Andrew has said, is that you're getting a return perhaps of the pendulum to a place where it's okay to be masculine. It's okay to slightly beat your chest and say,

I'm proud to be a man. And I think it is. I think that's been long overdue to have that pendulum come back to where not all masculinity is toxic. On this one, I completely agree with you, Pierce. I think the pendulum swings all the time, and every time it swings, I'm against it when it gets to the extremes and I get hit by both sides.

But, yeah, I think that people went too far. every form of masculinity was being called toxic masculinity. But that's not right. There's things that are masculine that are perfectly great. And, you know, I've said this on many shows. It's kind of an hilarious thing to say. But I'm proud of being a man. I love being a man.

And so if we are really progressive and we're on the left, we have to be accepting of everyone and exactly as they are. So if someone's very feminine, great, someone's very masculine, great. So they're somewhere in the middle. They viewed masculinity and femininity differently. Great, no problem. We believe in freedom. We believe in these principles.

So I think the pendulum did swing too far. This is definitely the country reacting back. But I do want to say one thing. That term you use is kind of a misnomer, because it takes the bros and combines them with the oligarchs, and the oligarchs are different. Like Elon Musk might be a bro, but he's way more of an oligarch. Like the Rogans and the portnoys are more of the classic bros. And I have a lot in common with those guys.

I also have tons of disagreements with those guys. That's normal. But I'm just warning everyone. Populist right, populist left. Beware of the donor class. And I'm not dead set against Elon or anyone else. As you know, Pierce, if he wants to cut the Pentagon, I'll help him cut the Pentagon. He control all he likes.

I don't care as long as we get to the right policy and the right things for the American people. But be careful, guys. The donor class has a lot of power. And they want things for their own benefit and not necessarily for that. You know what? I don't disagree with you. Well, you know, I got to give, I got to give some ground here where ground is due. You are correct about that.

They should be disassociated between the two. Joe Rogan's not like Elon Musk. But I think when Pierce is referencing a broligarchy, it's tongue in cheek to say, hey, a lot of these guys are working kind of hand in hand in tandem in order to move a political agenda. And I don't even think any of us would disagree with that. But yes, I agree with you. There are actual oligarchs in the United States. There is a techno-pratic class, which is coming to fruition.

Nobody's disputing that. That's how we handle it that matters. Yeah. And you know, it was quite funny, Andrew, because my team had prepared some of your supposedly controversial inflammatory quotes about women. And I've just read them. And I'm thinking, I think in the Brave New World, I don't find them that controversial. So I'm just going to rewold.

It was a very controversial person. One is the only reason femoid hate my wife is because I tell her to get me a beer and she does. That's the kind of thing I say to my wife and she laughs once she's made my dinner. And then you say women find beds to be. Can I ask you a question? Yeah. Doesn't the beer taste better when your wife brings it to you? Absolutely.

Absolutely. And then you said this and Chang, I'll be interested whether you agree with this or a lot. Women find beds to be a centerpiece of decoration. Men find beds to be tools for sleeping. It serves no purpose. I mean, I agree. I agree. Ching?

Beds. He said beds, saying. So, like, men, when we look at beds, we look at them as tools for sleeping in, women actually look at them as decorations as well. Chang? Yeah. Oh, yeah. I mean, there's some truth to that.

Of course, not all women are the same. Not all men are the same. But my mom would do curtains that didn't cover the windows at all because they looked great. So here's my point. Exactly. Exactly. Here's my point. We've reached a point where Andrew Wilson's deeply inflammatory, controversial quotes about women,

can actually now be laughter in the tone that I believe they were originally expressed, which is, you know what, it's just a bit of fun. It doesn't matter. Women and men can tell little lighthearted jokes about each other, playing up all kinds of stereotypes, and it doesn't matter. People don't need to be shamed, canceled, gilified, fired from their jobs. We can actually have fun, and then we can actually, by doing that, isolate the people who really deserve to be isolated,

who are despicable pieces of work. So anyway, look, we've reached at the end a point of agreement, which is breathtaking to me. And, Chank, it goes well with your line about my theories. We might be able to get more done if we put aside the mutual hatred. I'm glad we saw a bit of the old volcanic, Chank, rear its head today. Good to see that hasn't gone away, but also good to see...

Can't wait to do it again. But also good to see we reached a point of agreement at the end, chaps, and I would love to do it again. Actually, really interesting debate. Thank you both very much. Appreciate it. I take none of this personally, by the way, Shank, and I hope you have a wonderful evening. Shank, final word?

God bless, Andrew. Great to see you guys. I appreciate you guys. Look, I always appreciate every conversation. The more of these conversations we have, as heated as they get, at the end, you find agreement. I agree. And that's what we have to do.

We have to talk through things as a country. Totally agree. So that we could find the parts where we actually agree. That is why, listen, that's why we all do what we do, right? We just want to be part of a debate, which makes things better, not worse. I do anyway. see you, chaps. Thank you very much.