Piers Morgan Uncensored - "I'm NOT An Exorcist!" Victor Marx DENIES Lying + Socialist Democrats De-Fund PRISONS

Episode Date: August 5, 2026

The stakes could hardly be higher as the US heads towards the midterm elections, with President Trump's political future and legislative agenda hanging in the balance. The outcome will determine whether Republicans can maintain control of Congress and shape the race to succeed Trump, while growing tensions within the MAGA movement raise fresh questions about the future of his coalition. Much of the political conversation has focused on the so-called "MAGA civil war" over Iran, but another battle is unfolding on the left. More than 35 Democratic Socialists of America-backed candidates have defeated moderate Democrats in primary races, signalling the growing influence of the party's progressive wing. Led by figures including Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Zohran Mamdani, the movement is reshaping the Democratic Party - but not without fierce opposition from within. Meanwhile, Democrats are grappling with the rising influence of the party's progressive wing, as figures including Zohran Mamdani and Hasan Piker divide opinion. Republicans are also facing scrutiny over controversial Colorado gubernatorial candidate Victor Marx following his primary victory. With both parties backing increasingly polarising candidates, the question remains whether American politics is moving further away from the centre and what that could mean for the country's future. Piers Morgan is joined by Republican candidate for governor of Colorado, Victor Marx, Democratic Socialist candidate in South Florida, Oliver Larkin, former national press secretary to Bernie Sanders, Briahna Joy Gray, former Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson, and former Republican congressman and presidential candidate, Joe Walsh to discuss. (01:00) Introduction (01:45) Is Victor Marx an exorcist? (08:16) Why did Marx’s website remove non-profit stats? (14:53) Was he forced to behead a cat at the age of three? (19:02) Was he forced to kill a man at the age of seven? (29:00) Who killed Charlie Kirk? (43:11) The new wave of Democratic candidates (46:38) Migration policies (01:04:37) Abolishing the Pentagon and defunding the police Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

You recounted a story where your dog apparently sensed a demonic presence, prompting you to step in and cast out five demons from a woman. Is that true? That was the only time that my dog keyed up on an individual, the male that I thought was possibly a trafficker. I don't think it's unreasonable, given you want to be governor of Colorado, that people are going, well, hang on. Is this guy the real deal?

With the Democratic Socialists just starting to barrel through, We are going to become a California, and I'll tell you, that's the saddest part. You want to get rid of borders, the Senate, the presidency, the Supreme Court, ICE, prisons. You're exactly the kind of whack job that many people are saying are the problem in the party. The Democratic Socialists of America are polling better than both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Well, hang on, that wasn't my question. Breonna, Breanna, Brianna, Breanna, Breanna, Breanna. This is a fundamental framing problem that people...

The U.S. midterm elections will be enormously consequential. Trump's entire agenda is on the ballot, as is the shape of the presidential race to succeed in. Such as the desire to win, that many imperfect or downright inappropriate candidates have proceeded with the full backing of their parties. Democrats lined up to praise Graham Platner, for example, even as ever more serious scandals piled up around him. My next guest is hoping he falls into the imperfect and not the inappropriate category, but others may disagree. Victor Marx won the Republican primary

in his bid to be the governor of Colorado. Congresswoman Lauren Bobert is a fan. He's a Marines veteran and an exorcist who claims to have killed a man at the age of seven. And he joins me now. Well, Mr. Marks, welcome to Uncensin. Good to be here. Just a point of correction.

I am not an exorcist. I pray for people, but I am not an exorcist. How would you categorize your role in exercising demons then? Well, it's not exercising, it's having authority over them. And as a born-again Christian, rendered my life to Christ while I was in the Marine Corps. Back in 1986, I received, like any Christian who yields himself, the power of God's spirit, and I believe the truth of God's word, that he has given us all authority over the door. demonic. So I simply pray for people who have struggles, but like I've told other interviewers,

you know, the catchphrase exorcist, a Catholic priest wouldn't call me an exorcist. I think they're the only ones that can carry that title. Well, I am a Catholic, so I mean, what you're what you're purporting to be capable of doing is pretty similar to an exorcist. What I thought would be interesting for the purposes of our viewers who don't know you, Victor Marx, is I don't think I've ever seen a candidate to be a governor who has so many extraordinary stories swirling around about him. And I thought in the interest of fair play, we'll just go through these stories and we'll try and establish whether they're true or not.

And on the particular point of the exorcism, for want of a better phrase, in a 223 podcast, you recounted a story where your dog apparently sensed a demonic presence near a swimming pool, prompting you to step in and cast out five demons from a woman. Is that true? I would say it's not characterized correctly, but I, well, let me ask you this for context. Do you personally believe in evil as a Catholic? Sure, sure. Okay.

So I do believe animals can sense things in people, or evil spirits. I do believe that. But I have a trained canine who was tracking on a fella and a young lady across the way. I never stepped into the water, but I actually visited with them.

I just walked over, started conversation. And it eventually led to me asking this young woman, hey, do you want prayer for anything? because I prayed for people all the time. And she actually broke down in tears and said, yes, I really need prayer. So I prayed for her. And we do believe there were five assignments,

five demonic assignments against her. And when we were done, which was a short time, there's nothing drastic. There's nothing Hollywood. It's just me praying for someone. She felt relief, and that was great. and I went back to the other side of the pool and my dog. What's the name of your dog?

Reagan. Reagan was our dog on that one, yeah. And she was with us in Iraq. Her name was Reagan. She was with us in Syria and Iraq, yeah. Is it named after Ronald Reagan? Yes, sir. So a dog put named after Ronald Reagan.

Yeah. Okay. And I love Ronald Reagan, but just to be clear, Your dog Reagan, named after President Ronald Reagan, alerted you to the presence of demons inside a woman by a swimming pool. You go over and you pray with her in a way that removes those demons from her.

Am I understanding the story correctly? No, I would say my dog keyed on what I thought was the fella when my dog, because she's trained, She said, tear one dog. And when she keyed up with a low growl, I thought, what the heck? And because we're involved in counter-trafficking, that's what I went over there for, initially,

to make sure that she was okay. And the fellow was uncomfortable with me. But when I asked her, is she okay and that I prayed for people as I entered the conversation, would she like to be prayed for? She started crying and said, absolutely. So that was the situation.

And later, as I thought about it, I thought, I wondered if my dog picked up that this woman was oppressed by evil. I mean, it's a pretty extraordinary thing. And then a pretty extraordinary power that you appear to think you have. And it is, with all due respect, that is exorcism, what you're talking about. So why would you quibble with the characterization

that you're an exorcist? If you're going around removing demons from people, you're an exorcist, aren't you? Well, I think it's semantics, but in the way of removing demons from inside of a person, I don't do that. I deal with people who are oppressed, and there's a significant difference. Someone who has a demon inside of them, which would be called possession, I don't deal with that. I deal with demonic influences that oppress people. And believe me, then that outcome is the same of someone suffering in so many ways.

if they're believing lies and then acting upon it. I think that's where so much of the ills of today come from, because the Bible says take every thought captive, and most people don't. So these are just thoughts or fiery darts. In the book of Ephesians, it talks about that, how we have to put on the shield of fate. We have to be ready to battle against evil,

but the battleground is definitely in the mind. How often does Reagan sense people with demons? Oh, that was the only time that my dog keyed up on an individual, the male, that I thought was possibly a trafficker. So that was it. Okay. Well, talking of trafficking, your official campaign website initially said that your non-profit, all things possible, ministries, had rescued more than 45,000 women and children from human trafficking and global terrorism. And additionally, you claimed to a single-handedly intercepted human smugglers at the US-Mexico border and made them pay a price. Now, when journalists pointed out these numbers were entirely unsubstantiated, your team quietly scrubbed that figure from the website. And you've since refused to clarify the exact number for security reasons, saying it's only, it was more than one and less than a bunch.

But obviously, 45,000 is an enormous bunch. So, I mean, how many people did you actually rescue? Well, we'll start with the assumption that we quietly scrubbed it. That was not it at all. I had a website for over 20 years with our ministry. I have over 3 million followers on all my social media platforms. I have never said that we rescued 45,000 women or children. anywhere verbally videos, 20 years of documentation, or my main website.

When we had an independent contractor put together a campaign website, actually rather quickly, he himself, not by a direction, he put in the word rescued 45 because he just doesn't know us in that sense, versus save help. And when we found out, it was changed quickly because that wasn't accurate. So I've never claimed that. That would be highly inaccurate. So how many did you rescue? The reason I've never said the exact number was for security reasons,

and we still do work in the Middle East. And I would say this, and my wife, she told me one day, Victor, just tell them your heart, it's not enough. And that's really the main point, that there's too many women and children that are still suffering, that should be rescued. That, you know, justice should happen to those who take advantage and sexually exploit women and children. Well, I agree, Victor.

But if I gave you, like, a parameter of, you know, 10 people, 1,000 people, 10,000 people, 45,000 people, I mean, how many are we talking in terms of the broad area? Well, I would say this. way back around 2017, we stopped counting at about 300. And we never brought that number higher, be the more than the higher risk, and including threats from ISIS. And again, this is documented.

We have generals in the Iraqi Army. We've got generals in the Pentagon. We have people that understand our work. Former Delta operators, former Silt Team 6 guys. But just for clarification, risk doesn't mean I'm repelling upside down from a lacock with a K bar in my mouth like Rambo.

It's facilitating. It's working with teams. Sometimes it's a six-month plan. Just like the last one that my wife and I actually did, personally were involved in, rescuing a girl who had been held captive for nine years in Syria, and she had two boys that, were products of being raped by ISIS.

And we rescued all three. It's documented, but I'm open to scrutiny because I'm running for office. But I would hope people to understand that we still do the work. We're still helping those who are struggling and being exploited. I think people are just trying to get to the, I think people are just trying to, yeah, look, I think people are just trying to get to the cold, hard, factual reality behind some of the claims. because, as you say, an independent outside body appears to have come up with this figure out of nowhere. But just to be clear, that 45,000 figure is nonsense, right?

Oh, it is. We've never said that. Okay. I want to move to this story about you calling in a military airstrike as a civilian. You assert that during your time working as a self-styled, high-risk humanitarian in conflict zones, you personally called in a U.S. military airstrike that killed seven. ISIS fighters. Is that right? Well, you're probably getting your talking points from someone who reported on this,

who actually is not factual. So I never said that I have caught in a US airstrike. What I will share, and it's, again, this is just, it's a simple factual truth. Of the errors that we would work in as teams, oftentimes in advance of other operational teams, We were able to give actionable intelligence to the coalition forces in northern Iraq of where the enemy was, and sometimes great specifics and detailed.

We would give that information. We would let them know that air support would help a friend of mine, Dave Eubank. He talks about calling in air support for smoke. When he rescued a little girl named Dumar, For us, we definitely gave information, again, to coalition, not U.S. Air Force, but coalition forces that was telling the hell, and there were times they acted upon it, and bad people, you know, got their feeling hurt, which is fine by me.

So just to be clear, you've never claimed that you called in an airstrike that killed 70 ISIS fighters? I've never claimed that I called in a U.S. airstrike. I passed on intelligible, actionable intel of where ISIS fighters were, and then they responded on their own. And look, people who've done work overseas, I mean, specialized asymmetrical warfare, understand that civilians can call in or pass on information. and oftentimes, air strikes or air support, it happens. So it's not that big of a deal, but it's not me sitting on a hill as a forward observer calling in an airstrike. It's not like that.

Okay, okay. Okay. Now, you've repeatedly claimed that when you were three years old, you were forced by your abusive stepfather to behead a cat and then wear the dead cat's body on your head. there seems to be no external evidence to support this. And many people have pointed out, how does a three-year-old child behead a cat?

They wouldn't have the physical strength to do that. Did that actually happen, Victor? Well, if you're asking me if I'm a liar, the answer is no. And the reality is as a child, it was a horrible season of my life as a kid in the abuse that I suffered. Regarding the cat, I had only shared that publicly a couple of times because it's so severe. But I did share it on the Sean Ryan show.

It was in the number 83 episode. Millions listened to it. And the purpose is I was willing to share everything I could remember and what I'd gone through therapy for in order to help those who had struggled. Now, if you want specific details, look, I was, when you're abused as a kid, you'll do about anything you're told to do because of fear. It's a grooming issue. But the cat was already, his entrails were out, and my abuser helped me just take the head off of a dead cat. The cat's head was never put on my head. that's just, no, it was the carcass for a short amount of time

of, I think he had some voodoo ritual. I'm not sure, but it was evil. And I was tied to a bed for the better part of all day by one arm, and I was exhausted and terrified as a child. And later he let me rinse off in the shower. I don't do, I have never said that to be sensationalized. I mean, I'm in my sense. 60 years old, I started sharing that like in my late 50s,

because I just didn't want people to feel alone when they've suffered extreme abuse. Just yesterday, I'm at a park for a campaign deal. A lady walks up to me, and she goes, I heard you on the Sean Ryan show. She goes, thank you. I heard you years ago. She goes, it helped save my life.

She goes, I suffered horrible abuse, but those of us who know, no. I said, there's a lot of us out there. So I, when people talk about... Okay, but just to be clear, again, Victor, but just to be clear, how did you behead the cat's head? What did you use? It was like a large butcher kitchen knife, and the cat was dead, and the abuser held my hand,

you know, helped me cut through the neck, and that was it. I mean, if you're three years old, though, how are you cutting a cat's head off? That requires a strength which I've got three sons. None of them would have had the strength of three years old or the dexterity to cut a cat's head off. How have you done that? That's what people are finding a little bit suspicious. I understand. If you put your hand around your son's hand on the knife of a dead cat, could you not cut the head off of it?

It wasn't me. No, I would say we're great. with great difficulty. Have you? I haven't done it, no. Yeah, all I can say, peers, is he forced my hand and to cut the cat's head off with a blade.

I don't know what to say. Okay. Well, this leads me to the, or probably the most contentious story, which is that when you were seven, the same abusive stepfather forced you to kill a man. Now, local law enforcement and sheriffs in the Mississippi area where this event apparently took place have said there are no records

police reports or unsolved homicides matching your account from that time period. So just to be clear, what exactly do you say happened here? Who was the man? How did you kill him? Well, I didn't murder anyone because I was a seven-year-old who was forced to shoot a person. my stepfather, again, holding my hand around a pistol to a man who was handcuffed and on his knees, put his finger over the trigger and pushed it until the man was shot. I don't know who he was. He, best I can remember, he looked like a homeless fellow.

This was never, I never said him 40 years later. And out of just a horrible conscience, I contacted the local sheriff department, And they said, where was the home? I said, I don't know. It was that night when he brought me there. Who was the person? I don't know.

There wasn't much evidence for them to open a case. And again, as a kid being forced to. What happened to this? What happened to the homeless man's body? There was a whole dug in the floor. It was a wooden house. There was a hole cut out and a whole neat the floor. And he was pushed into it and buried.

So why can't the police just go and find it? I don't, we have no location of where the house was. So you've no idea where this happened or who the person was. When you can see why people might be saying, come on, Victor, this really happened? I mean, let me put it to you a different scenario, which is, and I don't want you to be offended by this, I'm just putting it to you because I know it's something that can be a phenomenon, where people, you said that these revelations have come out very later in your life. A lot of people, when they've suffered abuse or trauma, whatever it may be, their mind can play games with them.

It can, you know, persuade them. And I'm not saying this has happened, but many people find some of these claims outlandish, that perhaps your mind is playing games and that these incidents didn't actually happen, but that because of your abuse, you have persuaded yourself that they may have done. Is that a possibility? Well, I studied, and the answer is it's possible. I mean, I studied false memories and had 123 visits to a trauma specialist.

This is nothing that I wanted to go back to, but it's something that was still affecting my life. And, you know, we live in a very evil world. Kids are abused, murdered, kids are made to do horrible things. This is what taught me as a victim, not to be defined by what happened to me, but actually to use this as a, I don't know. as a compulsion and for compassion for people who struggle,

both children and adults. That's why I started helping those who have. So I understand that, but there's anybody who works, all you have to do is interview a forensic investigator in child sexual abuse cases to understand what we're speaking about me, it may be rare to the audience listening. It's not rare in the sphere of the way kids are abused or murdered

or have to see things. I worked with kids who are incarcerated and the horrible things they went through. People wouldn't, if I wrote a book, I've got 6,000 letters here at our office. If people understood how horrible things are. I mean, you talk about the Epstein files. No, no.

I mean, obviously, obviously what you're describing is absolutely horrific. I just, you know, there are people who, you've made a very clear statement to me in this interview that you don't tell lies. And what your critics say about your veracity and your credibility is that even a simple thing like a political poll, for example.

So seven weeks before the June primary, your campaign issued a press release, claiming a public poll showed you dominating the GOP race with a 44-point league. 59% to 15%. Now, in reality, that poll was funded by your own political action committee, and in the end, you won the primary by just 0.5%, 2,000,000 votes. So clearly, the statement put out based on your own poll by your own campaign,

was, as we would say in the UK, a load of old baloney, wasn't it? So it flies to your credibility that you would allow such a ridiculous poll to go out, supposedly illustrating your great dominance, when in the end you didn't win by 44 points, you won by 0.5% just a few weeks later. How do you explain that? Well, that's the great point is I won. As far as the two different polls, you're talking about two different polls. There were polls on the internet. The one that came out by Signal Group, They're a bona fide agency out of D.C. And they did the poll.

I think what changed at the last minute is exactly kind of the direction you're taking. It's an attempt to smear my character, my background. And a lot of money was spent to do that by both candidates and the Democrats. So I think that definitely affects. the election night. Yeah, I mean, look, Victor, I don't know you.

I don't know if you're telling the truth or telling a lot of old whoppers. I've no idea. I mean, there are some, you have to accept. There are a number of outlandish stories in your life that you've talked about, which when people have tried to investigate them, they run up against a brick wall, right?

So I don't think it's unreasonable, given you want to be governor of Colorado, that people are going, well, hang on. Is this guy the real deal? Or could he potentially, have fabricated dramatic stories from his early years to portray himself as a victim and garner support. I'm just saying what you know that's what your critics say.

I don't have a view either way. Yeah, and again, anybody's run for public office. I understand that, but you got, I think people don't understand, for 40 years, for 40 years when I've shared and helped people people and the things that we've done, it's never been challenged or criticized. People sought for what it was, someone who overcame, you know, a horrible past. And by the grace of God, I would say good counseling, faith, time in the Marine Corps to teach me resiliency, an incredible wife of 38 years, five children who are supportive, now five grandkids,

that I actually accomplished what people hope can happen for someone who has struggled. There was no benefit for me to come out in my 40s and talk about some of the worst things or in my 50s. This was all well before any political campaign. And trust me, if I had political ambitions, none of that would have ever been brought out.

So this was just me being transparent to help folks. And I encourage people, go to Victor. 2026.com to learn more. They can find out about really what matters and why I'm running is to help the people of Colorado. I mean, 76% of people polled by the Gazette said they're not sure if they can stay in Colorado. That's a tragedy. We're ranked number two for crime, property crime in the U.S. We're on the brink of destruction. And with the Democratic Socialist Party, you know, just starting to barrel through. If someone does stand and take our state back,

we are going to become a California. And I'll tell you, that's the saddest part. Because as I travel to state meeting with people, from rural to even Democrats who are holding fundraisers for me, it is a horrible place that's turned into because of one-party rule. And that's why I'm simply stepping in to take the state back. I told people from the beginning, I'm not the best candidate, but I beat 23 folks out.

And I did it by never using smear tactics, never attacking other. I just was quiet with all of this, all the way up to Candace Owens. Yeah, look, Candice, as you know. Yeah. Well, Candice, as you know, didn't believe you. I saw that interview. She also suggested that you may have been part of some plot or cover-up involving Charlie Kirk's murder.

You hit back at that, but recently said, wicked people wanted him, Charlie, silenced, and rejoiced his death because Charlie boldly proclaimed the truth of the gospel and was willing to expose darkness and spiritual battle between good and evil.

Who do you think killed Charlie Kirk? Because there are a number of conspiracy theories about this. Do you believe it's the person currently in court charged with his murder, or do you think something else happened? Well, I believe in the rule of law and evidence. I don't believe in speculation. Assumptions get people killed in what we've done.

So I wouldn't assume not knowing all the facts. But I do know this, that what happened with Charlie is the manifestation of evil. And people celebrating his death from around the world, especially here in the U.S. versus those who love him, it shows that wickedness and evil. was real. And I'm a product of God's grace. And when I say I like to pray for people, my gosh, I mean, how does prayer hurt anyone? We bring relief from those suffering. And again, none of this became an issue for anyone until I stepped in to the political realm, which I think is one of the most evil battlefields I've ever seen. And I don't think people are actually

used to someone telling the truth, or being transparent, or caring for people. I've never had to defend myself about anything I've done. I've answered questions. There's a website called victor marks facts.com, and we have documentation on there. There are people who are aggressively against me, but they're funded to keep me from being an office. And I'm going to tell you something right now, Pierce. I don't know if I should say this, but I'm going to do it.

I think one of the biggest reasons people are trying to keep me out of office is because I'm not part of the establishment. I believe part of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are crazy and corrupt. And that's why I've done everything different from the beginning. And I went right to the people. And I still won't do what both sides are going to, but it's for this reason. What people at home think about, you know, is it really a level above? Yeah, it's about money and power. I've been able to see behind the veil and just gone,

this is worse than people think. So when you have two candidates that I beat that now won't support me and they're supposed to be Republicans, I just go, wait a minute, are you really Republicans? When I meet with Democrats who do a fundraiser going, you've got to help our state. But what we've developed is proprietary technology through a dashboard that we have imported the budget

and the 900 page bill and we can show where the waste and fraud is. And that's what people in positions of power and money and political positions are terrified of- Well, you mentioned, you mentioned fraud, obviously Barb Kirkmeyer, who was runner-up to be Republican nominee with, only lost by Port 5%. He's openly criticized your cash.

calling you a fraud who doesn't tell the truth? Yeah, she did, and that's okay. That's all she had. She couldn't attack my policy. She couldn't prove any allegations or lies. So it's just rhetoric that gets told again and again and again. But what's interesting is that without me fighting back, smeared campaigns or anything,

I just simply tell the truth, tell people what I'm going to do for them. I brought in a lieutenant governor, who's a 30-year retired colonel, and we're going to take the state back for the people of Colorado. And I encourage people, go to Victor 2026.com, to learn how we're going to take it back

and what we're going to do. If you were to win... If you were to win... Yeah, if you were to win Victor Marks, would you order an investigation into the murder of that homeless man? because you would become, I believe, the first governor in the history of United States

to have murdered someone when you were seven years old, albeit you say it was with the coercion of your abusive stepfather, but it's an extraordinary state of affairs that this is an unsolved murder of a homeless man whose body is lying under the floorboards of a property. There must be, if there was a proper investigation, a way to establish where that happened and find out who that person was.

If you were governor, would you order that investigation? That's a great question, and it's a good question for a sound bite peers, and I'll tell you this. One, this isn't the state that that happened in of where I was abused, and my goal is to help children never be put in that position of being sexually or physically abused.

And that's why we formed the task force that we've been working to protect children for years now in the U.S. Oh, I understand, but wouldn't you feel a duty, wouldn't you feel a duty to the family of the homeless man or whoever that victim is? You're not sure if it was a homeless man or not. I don't think you could be, given you're only seven.

But do you not owe it to the family of that victim? You talk a lot about victims to go and find out where that victim is still lying, where his remains are and identify that person? Well, thanks for bringing that up. And from my childhood till in my 50s, I lived with guilt over that. And I don't appreciate you trying to put that back on me.

That's every hand. I mean, do you have to try that as a reporter to make someone feel bad for something that happened in the child? Yeah, to be honest, yes, I do. Yeah, Victor, to be crystal clear, my job as a reporter is to report news. You want to be the governor of Colorado. You have confessed that you took part in the murder of what you say was a homeless man

whose body was then put under floorboards in a property in Mississippi. You say you were forced to do it by an abusive stepfather who held the gun with you. Sir, a seven-year-old is not responsible. Look, we work with law enforcement, state, federal, and local. No one would put that on me. Listen, we turned over any, we told the story, we told what we can. They couldn't find anything. I've done my part.

My heart broke for it. I've lived with the shame of that. And I've spent a lifetime trying to help others and prevent kids from being put back in that position of any abuse. So I think my life is redemptive. I'm sad for the evil. And the man who made me do that went to prison, and I was actually, I encourage people to watch my story on YouTube, the Victor Mark story. If you want to know the truth without it being blessed.

Is he still alive? Is your stepfather still alive? He is not. When did he die? He died a number of years ago. And after he got out of prison, and what I'm grateful for is the power of God to enable. me to forgive him for the abuse that he did. And I was at his deathbed in the hospital

and was able to forgive him. And that's one thing I want to tell, folks. If you were a victim, the shame is not yours, just like you were trying to put on me. And it's important for people to forgive to give up your right to hurt someone back. Go for justice, but forgive people who abuse you or else your heart gets hardened.

And that's what my story is about. It's overcoming the evil, because the Bible says what Satan meant for evil, God can return and redeem for good. And those watching, I hope you're never afraid to tell your story to put down. I hope you're never afraid to be willing to step in the leadership to help others.

I wasn't. I'll never be stopped. The people will decide November, and they've already decided June 30th, which is why I won the primary. And I'll keep pressing, again, for affordability, for safety, and for accountability and a corrupt government

here in the state of Colorado that proves it doesn't care about its people like it says. Yeah, I mean, all I would say in response to the incident in which a homeless man was murdered is that there's a victim there too, and that is an unsolved murder. And I'm not shaming you.

I'm not shaming you. You've explained that you were holding the gun because your abusive stepfather was holding it too and made you do it. And it's not for me to. say whether that's true or not. I'm not shaming you for the murder. If you say you were seven and coerced into doing it,

I understand what you're saying. But I also understand that an innocent man was murdered. And that crime has never been solved, and you're big on victims and big on accountability, but no one's been made accountable for that murder. No one has found the body. There must be a property somewhere that has that body under the floorboards. And I think it would be your duty, honestly,

if you become governor to order a proper investigation so that people in your state can actually understand the truth and understand what happened and work out who this person was and what happened to him. I think that would be a good thing to do for his family because he also was obviously a victim. He got killed. Yeah, completely.

I will say this, he was there to abuse me. He was there to abuse me. that's in my story, and he changed his mind. And I didn't wait until I was governor in order to try to seek justice. I went to authorities to try to find out and help them find out who this was because of the guilt and shame I lived with as a child

all the way to adult. So you're talking to one person that doesn't hide facts that doesn't. I've had a life of overcoming And justice matters. So I'm glad you said you're not trying to shame me as a kid who was forced to do something that was horrific. And 123 visits to a trauma specialist prove that.

I'm not, but just to be clear, I would like justice for that homeless man who was brutally mad. I would too. And I think that you should want the same. And I want to protect children so that they don't have to be abused. That's what I've been doing with my life. So I hope law enforcement But I understand that

But I understand that But Victor only one person Only one person was murdered that day And it wasn't you So the real victim of that incident Was the person that was murdered Sir, part of my soul died that day The real

Part of my soul died that day And I've lived it within a lifetime He actually And I told law force men And I hope they could find something And we don't know who it was or why he had to die Well I appreciate you a heart I do you care for children?

Victor Marx, I appreciate you joining us. Do you care for kids? Do you care for kids who are abused? I do, absolutely, yeah. Okay, I absolutely do. Glad to hear that. Yeah. Thank you.

But, Victor, I thank you very much indeed for joining me. I enjoyed it. I hope to see you again. A lot of airtime is devoted to the so-called Maga Civil War, the apparent decimation of Trump's winning coalition over Iran. But as Trump's approval rate in craters, there is a quiet and messy revolution happening in the movement which seeks to replace him.

At least 35 candidates backed by the Democratic Socialists of America have won primaries against moderate candidates for the midterms. Their leading lights are Bernie Sanders, Mamdani and AOC, and they have the radical policies to match. Fund free health care, fund free housing, defund the Pentagon, defund Israel. Not everyone on the left is happy about it. Not a week goes by where don't read about some newly chosen, exciting new face in the Democratic Party.

And then when that face opens its mouth, the communist manifesto or some other crazy shit comes out. Well, the pro-Israel lobby is working overtime to turn this new tide. A-PAC and light-minded groups have spent more than $50 million, a record, backing a pro-Israel candidate in Michigan. And that's not the only kind of big money that Democratic activists are divided on. Mayor Mamdani's decision to publish the personal details of part-time residents facing his new second home tax. has caused outrage. Professor Scott Galloway, who supports the tax and will pay it himself, accused the mayor of doxing. He's taken a legitimate source of tax revenue and has turned it into a wanted poster.

And the question I would have is, other than trying to identify and imply these people have done something wrong, and then 18 months after a healthcare CEO was executed in the street, and then published the list, what is the upside here? Well, Democrats are also divided over the risk. role played by streamer Hassan Piker, the nephew of Cheng Yuga, and an extremely popular far-left commentator. CNN regularly asked candidates to disavow him, others are attacked for hosting him at their events.

Legendary Democrat strategist James Carville says that if Hassan Piker is in, well, he's getting out. I am not going to be in the same party with Hassan Piker. I can tell you that right now. If he becomes a force in a Democratic Party, I'm out of here. I have no intention of ever being in the same political party with that guy. Well, many believe that ship has already sailed. They argue that the DNC's bald old men delivered failed candidates like Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris.

The success of both Trump and Mamdani, they say, shows the U.S. public is sick of the moderate middle and the only radicals can win. Well, are they rights? Well, joining me to debate this, Oliver Larkin, the Democratic Socialist candidate in South Florida, Brianna Joy Gray, the former national press secretary to Bernie Sanders, Marianne Williamson, the former Democratic presidential candidate, and Joe Walsh, the former Republican congressman. Well, welcome to all of you, a perfect panel to debate all this. Marianne Wilson, welcome back to Unsensored.

You know, Mam Darnie may be the most high-profile person in this movement, but he's not an outlier. This is a clip of the DSA national co-chair, Megan Roma, outlining the policies on a Fox News, truth or false segment. abolish borders and give amnesty to anyone currently in the U.S. illegally. As a long-term plan, yep. Defund the Pentagon. Absolutely.

Abolish prisons, at least in large part. Yeah, again, as part of a long-term program, yeah. So, I mean, Marianne, according to that, the DSA wants to abolish borders, the Senate, the presidency, the Supreme Court, ICE, and prisons, and give full amnesty to illegal immigrants. Brianna Joy Gray, and we'll come to you, Brianna, comments that these were fundamentally good and correct positions. Do you think they're fundamentally good and correct positions? Marianne Williamson.

Well, I think that the Democratic Party has to stand for a kind of intelligent middle. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, there are going to be people who have rather extreme positions. But we need to remember that the American people are not waking up every night, lying awake, worrying about that. What they're worried about. is the fact that they can't pay their bills. They're worried about the fact that they don't have food for groceries.

They don't have food for gas. They don't know if they can treat their own medical conditions. They don't know if they can send their kids to college. So when it comes to after the primaries, the Democratic Party has to get on the same page of knowing that we have to deliver for the American people a compelling alternative to Donald Trump and not let this squabbling so separate us

that the American people think that that's what the Democratic Party is. We need to keep on policies that will help people, that we can tell people how we're going to pay for them, how it's going to fix their lives, and, yes, what we are going to say in response to those who criticize it. There will be people on the fringe in the Republican Party and in the Democratic Party saying extreme things, but we as Democrats need to make sure that we are talking to the American people about things that will fix their lives in a way that could actually win in 2008 and not go into the kinds of extremes that could make some people feel that we're on the left. as extreme as some people are on the right. So just to be clear, you would not agree that those policy ideas would be fundamentally good and correct positions. You would view them as extreme.

I think that they are extreme statements about conversations, some of which are legitimate to have. But we need to have an intelligent, legitimate conversations which do not include such extreme positions that it turns people off before they are willing to listen to what you're really trying to say. Okay, Brianna Joy, great. You like these positions. You want to get rid of borders, the Senate, the presidency, the Supreme Court, ICE, prisons, give amnesty to legal immigrants. You're exactly the kind of whack job that many people are saying are the problem in the party, not my words, their words. Why would you support the kind of policies which instinctively most Americans, when they hear them, think, whoever thinks that is a whack job? Americans instinctively feel whatever you say they feel, peers. But the reality is that polling

suggests quite the opposite. The Democratic Socialists of America are polling better than both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. So I think the question that needs to be asked is of traditional establishment corporate Republicans in Dems, why their party is so tarnished, why their brand is so bad, that ideas that do seem relatively novel to the average American ear sound a lot more palatable than two parties who say, fund ICE, who's literally murdering American mothers and nurses in the street. Let's have a foreign policy that intentionally creates pressure on the borders. Let's ignore the domestic concerns of Americans who have been struggling for decades with health concerns, with health care, with being able to provide basic needs like

education and housing. I think Americans are increasingly aware that this is a sort of three-card Monty, where they're asked repeatedly to look over there at the scary thing when you have a government in office currently that ran on and has actively changed. trying to dismantle the Department of Education, dismantle our response to disease. We're in the middle of what is being called a poop pandemic because nobody can even buy bagged veggies anymore in the United States of America.

And when people like Zora Mamdani or Oliver Larkin, who's here on the panel with us, offer straightforward common sense solutions, or even old-time ideas like getting rid of the Senate, which is wildly unrepresentative, does it make common sense to the average American a state like Vermont should have the exact same representation as a state like California,

the world's fifth biggest economy with 30 million people? No, absolutely not. So I think when you get out of the clickbait Fox news segments with Megan Romer, who I also just recently had on my own show Bad Faith, by the way, and had an opportunity to have a more fulsome discussion. As Americans hear more about these ideas,

they're only going to become more popular. How many illegal immigrants would you let into the country in your brave new world? I think what you need to do is, be asking questions about why both Democratic and Republican administrations have a sanctions campaign against Venezuela and other countries in the global South that drive mass immigration by people. This is a fundamental framing problem that people keep a persistent we have. Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, yes. Simple question. How many, how many illegal immigrants would you let in to the United States under your brave new world? And how many undocumented people would you have Donald Trump or any Democratic president

drive out of their country through a crushing sanctions program like the ones Why can't you answer my question? Like the blockade that's being implemented on Cuba? Like the war on drugs. Rihanna, you're not answering my question. Below our border. These are questions you never want to answer, Pierce, because you act like the problem magically materialize it.

Why don't you just answer my question? It's my show. We should live in a world. Do you agree with you? It's my show. I ask the questions. No, I don't know that it works that way, Pierce. Do you want to live in a world where you get to the root of the problem?

It does work that way. Or do you want to keep hand-wringing and passing the buck and passing blame around? Is the ultimate goal- Why can't you answer a straightforward question? And people and other countries are able to live their lives in their nations of origin. Let's try one more time. Let's try one more time. prosperity. Let's try. Let's try what I listen. We're all into utopia. We're just trying to work

out how to get there. Then why don't you want to work toward it, Pierce. Do you agree with these these crushing sanctions program that are the root cause of immigration? What I agree with, them. Hang on. Here's where here's my position on immigration in the United States. And then I'll ask you one more time to answer my question. Under Barack Obama, three million people got deported. He was the greatest supporter of immigrants in the history of the United States. as a president, right? Way more than Trump. Nobody on the left gave a damn.

No one on the left even really knows the number. It became. The left calls him the deportee chief as a criticism all the time. Hang on, hang on. Liberals didn't care with the left did care. Hang on, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna. No one on the left care because it was St. Barak, okay? Then Biden comes along.

Hang on, please stop making speeches. Then Biden comes along and he allows up to 10 million people to cross the border illegally, into the United States. Then Trump replaces him, partly because of what Biden did on the border. That's why he gets reelected, and he immediately closes the southern border.

Your view, unless I'm wrong, is that you basically reopen the border to whoever wants to come in. And my question for you, for the last time, if you don't want to answer it, it's fine, is under your plan, how many would you let in

over the border illegally into the United States? It's a simple question. My view is that it is deeply naive, and frankly sort of dim-witted to believe that the solution to a global immigration crisis, which is only going to get worse, because of climate change and because of the kind of international destabilization

that you've seen Trump instigate with these wars in Iran and that have broadly trickled through the entire Middle East. Can you answer the question, Brianna? I am answering the question. But the problem is, Pierce, you persistently don't want to hear answers to the question that don't fall into your gotcha cycle.

You're not answering the question. And some questions, peers, require a more sophisticated answer than let's throw up a wall on the border that may or may not get to the root of the crisis. All right. I tried. I've tried. We all know why you don't want to put a number on it because under your utopia, it's unlimited.

Because it's absurd. There is no number. The goal is to stop immigration. Is it not, Pierce? Is it or is not the goal to stop immigration? Summer heats up in FX's The Shards. Set in 80s, Los Angeles, the Shards follows a group of beautiful, privileged prep school students who are preyed on by The Trawler, a serial killer targeting teenagers across the city.

This fever dream of youth, beauty, sex, and mystery is a must see. FX's The Shards, now streaming on Hulu on Disney Plus. Sign up now at Disneyplus.com. No, your goal is to stop the concept of illegal immigration. No, that's what you're saying, my goal is. And by the way, and by the way, as Ronald Reagan once said, very rightly, if you don't have a border, you don't have a country. Let me bring in Joe Walsh.

Joe Walsh, you've been grimacing. I don't think I've ever seen anyone pull more faces in a panel in a sustained period of time than you just had. So look, this is the problem. Utopia is great until you actually hear how you're supposed to get there. and then people don't want to explain because the argument collapses. Look, Pierce, the problem is, and again, I got

all the respect in the world for Brianna. She's right about a lot of things. Both parties suck. We need a revolution in this country. Amen to all of that. But you've got to just simply answer a question and defend the position. And when you go off and just sound like

a politician recite and talking points and not answering Pierce's, question, it just doesn't help your cause. Look, Pierce, at the very beginning of this segment, you asked, right, about these positions that the DSA has. And the simple answer is, the vast majority of the American people do not support open borders. The vast majority of the American people do not want to defund the police. The vast majority of the American people don't want to get rid of the United States

Senate or the Supreme Court or the presidency. Breonna is right. and the Democratic Socialists are right in that the establishment sucks. I come from the Tea Party. Baby, that was an anti-establishment movement. The Democrats' peers start having their anti-establishment movement. Good thing. It's coming from the far left.

The far left just needs to be honest about these policies. Most Americans don't support these policies. And Republicans, I used to do this, do a really good job of tagging the whole Democratic policy or party with these policies. And Democrats need to defend them pretty damn quickly. Yeah, I agree. It reminds me of some of the more lunatic. Oh, hang on, Brianna. I want to bring in Oliver Larkin. You're a Democratic socialist candidate in South Florida. What is your view about what should be done at the border then? Would you reopen it? Because obviously Trump has closed it

effectively. Would you reopen the border and allow anyone to come in? we are so far from the conversation of how the United States is not respecting internationally agreed upon standards for the right of refugees to seek asylum at our border. We're trying all of these tricks and trades. And Joe Biden did it the same way as Donald Trump with the remaining Mexico. Hang on, hang on, Oliver, Oliver, do you think all 10 million that came in in Biden's four years were legitimate refugees and asylum seekers? or were the vast majority people just wanting a better life in America, but not wanting to do it legally? I think people who are coming to the United States

are seeking a better life. And let's be clear, we're treating, we're talking about immigration as if it is a criminal violation when it is immigration that is not documented, but this is a civil infraction, not a criminal infraction. Well, it is a crime. It is a crime to enter a country illegally. It is a civil infraction.

It's not a criminal. act. It's a civil ordinance that is not the same as treating people who are breaking the lawful. The United States has a system that is literally making people lose their documented status. When we have the Department of Homeland Security that is invalidating temporary protected status for our Haitian neighbors. Yeah, yeah, but Oliver Larkin, do you accept that if you enter, do you accept Oliver Larkin? If you accept, hang on, hang on, hang on, I want to be clear about, I want to be clear about, I want to be what you think. Hang on, Oliver, do you accept as a point of principle

that if you enter the United States illegally, you are breaking the law? Yes or no? I think that this is a civil violation. It is not a criminal violation. And frankly, people who are entering the United States... You think is lawful or unlawful? We need to add more capacity for immigration judges for people to be able to get...

documentation because we are so under capacity when it comes to people. It is so cost prohibitive for people for immigrants to be able to even maintain documented status. They're forced to wait. They're forced to travel overnight to take off of work. I've been to these facilities, peers in Miramar, the ice enforcement and removal operation center. People are being forced to sleep on the floor in air conditioned rooms that are lit 24-7 while their families are outside. They've had to drive from Venice, Florida, or Sarasota, or Titusville, three, four hours and taking off work at the drop of a hat just to be able to maintain their status. So we make it so hard on immigrants

to be able to even maintain status once they've obtained it. And then we have the Department of Homeland Security that is just blanket invalidating people's status. And they do this to manufacture a political crisis. It was known in Trump's first administration that the sanctioned on Venezuela Oliver, I get it. Oliver, I'm not defending everything Trump's done on immigration. I thought some of the behaviour of ICE was disgusting, including the deaths of people in the street as we saw, which I thought was repulsive and called it out of the time. It went way over the top. However, if I was an American citizen, I would much prefer to have a secure, closed border, pretty much that Trump has brought in to the porous open border that Biden allowed. And my question for you is now the same one I gave to Brianna,

didn't want to answer, which is if you have your utopia, if you have the Democratic Socialist Utopia, then how many illegal immigrants would you allow into the country? The system that I believe we should have is one where people are receiving documentation when they apply for asylum or when they apply to immigrate at our borders. So it's sort of a red herring question of what is the level that is acceptable. I want people to be able to receive the documentation to be able to work and live freely in the United States and not have this legal limbo hanging over people's heads. I mean, we're treating amnesty as a good to dirty work.

Ronald Reagan, you invoked Ronald Reagan's name. Ronald Reagan supported amnesty. I believe that we need to have amnesty. We have a overburdened immigration system that has not had a capacity. I'm not saying that people, that we've had too many people to enter the United States. Oliver, would you let everybody?

Oliver, would you, would you, Oliver, would you, Oliver, you don't have to keep making a campaign speech. Would you therefore let everybody in who wanted to come in? If people have a desire to come, live and work in the United States, then I want to facilitate that. And we can do that and still maintain public safety. I think I was actually... Okay.

I have an attorney and probably the only person here is for actually processed. Okay, okay. No, actually, hang on. I want to bring in Marianne here. I want to bring back Marianne here. You see, Marianne, this is exactly the... the problem that I think people have latched on to, that Joe Walsh was touching on,

that Bill Maher has been talking about, is that when you hear that response, what this person, Oliver Larkin, is actually saying, is he would let everybody into the United States. There would be no border. Without a border, there is no United States. There's no country. So this is a problem, isn't it, Marianne?

You've got a wing of the party that are saying these things, which are, I've got to say, even me, you skew slightly liberal, right? Probably in a more old-fashioned Bill Maher way. I just find that, I'm incredulous, that a politician in America would just open the border to anyone who wants to come in. I'm sorry, Pierce, I've been listening,

and I did not hear him say that. We used to have an immigration system in this country that worked. And what has happened is that, and this is Congress's fault, mainly. One of the reasons why you have so many people entering illegally. And I think Oliver is making a good point, that this is a civil violation. Some of these people, and we know the humanitarian crises that lead so many people to take such desperate measures, and we also need to be having an intelligent conversation about how much

U.S. foreign policy, including our war on drugs and our economic policies towards Latin America for decades, has contributed to that mass amount of desperation. They have made it so that there aren't enough stations. There aren't enough places where people can interlegally. There aren't enough places where there are judges and ways to adjudicate. This was something that Biden was working on when he was president. And it was Donald Trump who came in and told the GOP senators, even though it was a bipartisan bill not to vote for it. And he did that because he knew it would be popular. The American people would appreciate it. And that would give Biden a win. So obviously, the answer is not either just open borders or closed borders.

It is that intelligent middle. The asylum system is a humanitarian core of a principled America. We just have to vet people. We have to have enough judges. We have to do this legally. So I didn't hear Oliver say that. And I don't think the American people want either extreme, either open borders where people aren't even vetted,

and they also don't want a shutting down of America's heart. Joe Walsh. No, that's, by the way, what Marianne just said there is absolutely correct. And look, I'm somebody who would abolish ICE tomorrow. What Trump has done with immigration enforcement is take it to a cruel, ugly, un-American place. This shouldn't be going on. But this is a dangerous overreaction to what the Democrats had done under Joe Biden when they open things up. And Marianne's right.

Most Americans don't like what ICE is doing. Most Americans don't want this going on on our streets, but most Americans want America to have a damn border. I agree with a lot of what Oliver's saying, but when you just say you'd let them all in and then we'll figure out how to process them and all of us, no, there needs to be a border, period. And we've got DSA candidates out there saying we want open borders.

If you say you want open borders, want open borders, then damn it, defend it. Can you name which DSA candidates that they supported open borders? Yeah, Oliver Larkin. The one supported open borders, the one out in Colorado. The one sitting next to you on the battle, Oliver Larkin just said it. He just told you that's not true.

As an attorney and probably the only person who's actually handled an immigration case on this panel, everything that Oliver and Marianne have said about the failure of our processing system, like I think most people have an intuitive sense, people are coming across, you need to be able to sort people into is their national security risk? Is this someone who is not fleeing drug crime and drug trafficking, but someone who is doing that themselves? Are these people that can be put on a path towards citizenship? But the problem is

we have a backlog that last years and years and has only gotten worse since the days when I was an attorney, precisely because there has been an unwillingness to hire, train, and recruit administrative law judges who can actually process this claim. So what you have is a party that is intentionally gumming up the process and then flinging their hands in the air and trying to politically exploit the negative consequences of not having the crisis that has ensued.

And if you want to talk about hugely unpopular 60-40 issues, the elephant in the room is that part of why all of these DSA candidates are so popular is because of Gaza. That's a 60-40 issue against Israel. We have both mainstream parties. Breonna, respectfully, a lot of these DSA candidates

are very, very popular with less. and left of center people in Democratic Party, but they're not popular with all Americans. And when you put their policy positions in front of America, most Americans say no, most. Joe, this is what's so frustrating, because when it comes to an issue like Medicare for all that 88% of Democratic voters support

and 49% of Republicans, half of Republicans also support, we're never doing all of this alarmism about how, wow, there's this really popular policy that we just can't get the two major parties on board with. When we're talking about stopping to stopping funding to the genocide in Gaza, which again is a majoritarian issue against funding Israel. There's none of this hand-wreaning about, oh, my gosh. Brianna, would you defund the Pentagon?

Brianna, would you defund the Pentagon? It's only- Rihanna, would you defund the Pentagon? Absolutely. Walsh, I want you to ask yourself the question why you have a Pentagon that has failed, what, six, seven, eight now? I asked a simple question. Pentagon's got problems, but would you defund it?

Would you get rid of America's entire Defense Department? You guys have to stop with this absurdism that to defund something, to decrease the funding of something, is the same thing as to abolish it. No, it's not to decrease. I'm talking about defunding. When you say defund the police, when you say, Brianna, defund the police,

you're talking about getting rid of the police. Joe, we live in a country that defunds social services every year, that defunds. We have a government right now that is defunding health care every year. And there is, again, no way. No, I don't think you understand. Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Rihanna, Rihanna, I'm here.

You want to keep giving money to this. I'm here. I'm here. She's not going. Stop talking. Brianna. It's not your show. I know it gets confusing.

It's my show. Okay. You're a guest on my house. So please stop talking for a moment because it's very interesting. your interpretation of what defund means. As Joe Walsh rightly says, the actual interpretation of defund the police or defund the Pentagon or whatever it may be is you get rid of that institution and you replace it for something else. What you're talking, what you're saying, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. So I'm asking you whether you mean a decrease in the amount that you fund

these organizations with or do you believe in abolishing them? Would you abolish the police? Would you abolish the Pentagon? Would you abolish prisons? Yes, no, yes, no, yes, no. If you want to know what me, Brianna, Joy, Gray things, you can come on my show and we can debate my views at length. But I think what the viewers want to know is what the TENDS-

That's why you're here. No, why we're here is to discuss with DSA candidates and people who are running for office, not one 40-year-old woman sitting in her apartment in Washington, D.C. So if you want to talk about what the movements to defund the Pentagon are about, It's about asking my questions, please. Wait, it's about asking the question of whether or not we should continuously increase funding an unprecedented, tend to high military budget year after year, that's not what defund means.

That literally fails its audits and can't even account for where the money is going. Rihanna, defund means no reason should be funded more. I'm sorry, Joe. Defund means you abolish it. No, those are two different words. Let me try one more time. Let me try. Let me try one more time.

let me try one more time, given you don't know what defund actually means. Oh, I know what defund means a lot better than you do, Pierce, as evidenced by the fact that you chose to pivot to abolish because you can discern a distinct difference between those two terms. Defunding, just like when Republicans say that when to defund the Department of Education, they want to defund things day and night. The whole point of doge was to defund the national government. And again, I don't see all the hand-wringing about that.

The Pentagon, no one here can answer the direct question of whether or not they believe the Pentagon, which has an unprecedentedly large budget that cannot pass an audit for eight, nine years in a row, should get increased funding. Let me try. Do you think that's the case, Joe? Do you think that's the case, Pierre? Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, once again, it's my show,

so I do the questions and then you answer them or you choose not to. I'm just going to repeat again, whatever your interpretation of defund is, and you clearly have a different one to mine and Joe's. Okay. As part of that debate for one moment. Well, it actually means to stop providing money, or it can mean to reduce the amount of money.

So it depends what interpretation. I'm glad you've acknowledged that now, Pierce. But as you know, but as you know, in the general debate about this, it's been accepted that when people have said defund, they mean abolish. So let me just clarify with you what you personally believe. Would you, in your utopia world, would you abolish the Pentagon, abolish the police, and abolish prisons? Yes or no? Pierce, it's wild that you talk about the general debate about this. When you're the one hosting the debate and creating the end of you being by posing questions exactly like that.

Defund means decrease funding for. Abolish those institutions. Abolish means get rid of entirely. That is a clear answer to your question. Defund means decrease funding for. Abolish means abolish entirely. Period. I'm asking you if you would abolish them.

Would you abolish them? Why do you care what I personally, Brianna Joy Gray, I know why you care of. Because you're a guest on my show. No, because you want to make this a conversation about whatever. I am to the left, way to the left with the USA. I just want to know what you think. Why is this so difficult? This is not a referendum on me.

This is a referendum on the actual DSA and the candidates that you are frustrated, Breanna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, Brianna, you were invited as a guest onto a panel to debate the future of the Democratic Party in light of the rise of the Democratic Party. Right. So let's debate that and not my personal belief. Wait a minute, Brianna. So I'm asking you, I'm asking you, I'm, given that the Democratic, given that I'm going to

keep talking over you, if you keep talking, given that the Democratic socialist candidates, espouse a spouse a philosophy where they want to abolish all these institutions, I'm just asking you, Brianna, whether you personally would like to abolish the Pentagon, the police, and prisons. Yes or no? I, Brianna, think it's Brianna with a with a, um, ah sound, think it's absolutely unconscionable that you can say a kind of mealy mouth. Yeah, I think abolish, I think it was really bad that I was murdered American citizens in the street,

but want to make this a referendum on whether I, one socialist. Yes or no. Yes or no. To me, the answer is yes. She ain't going to do it. Yes or no. The absolute long term goal, I just answer the question. Yes or no.

The long term. Yes or no. The answer is affirmatively yes. Yes or no. Personally, absolutely, me, Brianna Joy Gray, since the world is clamoring from my one woman's opinion, absolutely do believe, abolish the police, abolish the Senate, abolish the Pentagon. I do not think the American war machine, which has caused unfathomable horrors across the globe for the entirety of all of our living memory should persist. Got it. We've got it. We've got there. We've got it. We got it. We got our answer, Pierce.

I think the police. We got it. We got you on the record. That's a rap. That's a. We got it. We got it. Brianna, it's a rap. It's a rap. It's a rap. It's a rap. It's a rap. It's okay. Sorry, Brianna, just to be clear. You've agreed you would abolish the... Wait a minute, Brianna. Please stop talking. You would abolish the Pentagon and the police to say, what about prisons? Would you abolish prisons? Oh, they're first on the list. Just like the DSA, Megan Romer said. Great. Great. Okay. Let me go to all of it. Great. No, no, it's all right. We're done. We're done. We're done. I got my answers. It was utter torture.

but you want to abolish these things. Okay, Brianna, thank you. Brianna, Brianna, it took a long time, but we got the answers eventually. Thank you. That's why you're here. Let me ask Oliver Larkin. Let me ask Oliver, please stop talking.

Stop talking. I'm talking to Oliver Larkin. Please stop talking, Brianna. We'll have to mute you. Do you want me to mute you? I will have to mute you if you keep talking. If that's the only way, you can win the argument, Pierce, go ahead.

Okay, mute. Just temporarily. mute, Brianna, please, just because you can't stop talking. Let me go to Oliver Larkin. I'll bring you back, Brianna, when you stop talking. Oliver Larkin, the same questions to you, which we eventually got the answer to from Biano and Joy Gray, because I'm astonished about what I'm hearing. Would you abolish the Pentagon, the police and prisons? Yes or no? I just got to say, I feel like I'm on around the horn with Tony Riali on ESPN. I didn't know the mute button worked on a nude broadcast. I believe that, you know, we have

a system that has private prisons literally profiting off of mass detention and deportation. $170 plus billion went towards ICE and the one big beautiful bill last year. And I'm coming to you from a district with the corporate headquarters of the geo group, the private prison corporation. Okay. So what are the answers to the questions? We need to abolish a system that allows for the private for-profit detention of individuals in the largest mass incarceration country on earth.

What would you do with the police and the pet- I'm saying private prisons? must be abolished, geo-group, core civic. We need to reduce the amount of incarceration in the United States and the war on drugs and the war on communities of color. Would you abolish the Pentagon and police? I would not abolish the Pentagon. I do believe that the Pentagon could stand for at least a 10% cut in its funding.

We need to stop this nuclear proliferation that is incredibly expensive. We have more nuclear weapons than we can ever be. You're getting somewhere. And as Brianna said, you know, the Pentagon has not passed an audit in years and years and years. We're seeing record Pentagon budgets and yet a complete deficiency in our inventory of missile interceptors of all the things that we're actually supposed to be getting when we invest record amounts in the Pentagon.

We don't actually get them because there's so much waste, fraud and yes, abuse in this system that enriches private military contractors in D.C. I wouldn't take issue. Oliver, I wouldn't take issue. I wouldn't take issue with reforming the Pentagon. at all. What about the police? Would you abolish the police? We need to invest in the things that actually prevent crime, like ensuring that we have quality, universal child care,

paid family and medically. We have wages that pay a living wage. Just give me a straight answer. Piers, there's always going to be a role for law enforcement in any government in any country. But the question is how much of our resources are we to voting? Are our municipalities supposed to be spending upwards of 50%

of their budget on police? That's just an extraordinary amount of money that's going towards things that don't actually prevent crime. Oliver, I don't need the endless speeches. You would not abolish the police then.

You would keep it. Come on, Piers. I'm running for office. I got to do a speech every now and then. I'm giving you my answer. I don't think that we need. You wouldn't abolish the police. nearly the amount of money that we're spending on police.

And again, I think the privatization of so many of these services. So you reduce the spending, but you would keep the police? I think as a long-term goal, I would like to see, you know, systems in this country that don't have so much militarization of police. Hey, Pierce, by the way, can I give a quick compliment to Oliver? Democratic Socialist, Oliver, first time I've met you, Pierce, he's running for office. and he's been honest with you and he realizes, my God, I can't

say abolish the police or abolish the Pentagon. You'll form it. You'll abolish it. I know. I know. I get that. Yeah. And by the way, it's a significant difference between what Brianna said and what he's saying. And you can see Oliver's tormented mind working in real time trying to work out how he says this

without people on the Democratic. So, well, the problem, Oliver, as you know, the problem is a lot of people are doing. Hang on A lot of people on Democratic Socialist side will be agreeing with her, not you. And you know that. So you're not going to have to pick up the pieces when they come after you. Marianne, let me just finish with you, if I may. This is, to me, it's been really fascinating.

A, the torturous attempts I've had to make to extricate simple answer to simple questions. And be the clear divide between people like Brianna Joy Gray, who openly now admit they would get rid of the Pentagon, the police, and the prisons. and you have Oliver Larkin, Democratic Socialist candidate in South Florida, who does not want to commit to any of those things. And there, right there, is the split in the Democratic Party, which so many Democrats are concerned about, because ultimately you're never going to have a better chance,

I would argue, to beat the Republicans in the midterms than the ones coming up in November, with the fiasco of the Iran War, with the fallout from the Tariff War and so on. And then, of course, if you were to wish, You know, the whole of Congress, the House and the Senate in November, it would be probably unstoppable momentum to win the general election. So this is a really critical time for the party. And yet here you have the party completely split over these incredibly consequential things, like whether you would abolish these great pillars of the American state.

That's the problem, isn't it? Not entirely, no. I think what's the problem is the tenor of this conversation. I think it's kind of tragic. Because everything that we have talked about here is extremely important. It's important for us, for our country, for our children, and for generations to come. And yet we could not have anything above a sophomore conversation, not really listening to one another, not creating a space where anyone can speak with nuance,

attacking each other. And that's what turns voters off, by the way. And so we have got to recreate the field of conversation here. It's not always there. You know what it is, Marianne, if I can jump in there. Let me jump in there for a moment because I think Joe Walsh was right about this. What voters really don't like, whether it's from politicians or pundits or whatever, is when they're asked a straightforward simple question, they don't answer it.

And it has to be teased and tormented out of them. I just think the people that I admire in public office are the ones when you ask them a straight question, they give you a straight answer. The panel members that I admire most of my show are the same, right? And actually, the ones who can have intellectual honesty and maybe deviate sometimes from their own side on issues, I particularly admire. But in relation to the simple process of answering a question,

the public hated when people refused to do that. Well, I hear that, definitely. And clearly, Brianna had very strong opinions, and Oliver is running for office. We understand that. But I have traveled this country a lot as a candidate and also not as a candidate. And I think what people want is an adult conversation.

That's what people want. And adults get down and get real. I have talked to so many people in this country and they'll say, well, that conservative value, that's a point, that progressive value was a point, that DSA value was a point, that liberal value was a point. So you say people just want somebody who can answer a question. Yes, we do.

But I think people are very turned off by the attacking, by the way it has to be yes, no, yes, no. And for that, I do think Oliver was trying to say, we need to have police, of course, we need to have police, but we need to have an intelligent conversation about it. We need to have the Pentagon, but we need to have an intelligent conversation about it. I think we'd all agree we need to abolish ICE.

So I'm all for a more intelligent conversation with the American people. That's what they have in a lot of countries, and if they can do it, we can too. We talk to voters like they're in the seventh grade, and we should not be surprised at the results that we're getting because of it. Okay, let me unmute. Brianna.

Purely, because I want to say goodbye to all the panel, and I want to give you the chance to say goodbye, Pierce. So thank you to all my panel. I appreciate it. Thanks, Pierce. Thank you, Pierce. Thanks, Pierce. I'm not a Democrat, Pierce, just a clarification.

That's the point. You're still muted. Hang on, I can't hear it. Fancy that. I said, Pierce, I'm not a Democrat, just a clarification. I am not a Democrat. I don't affiliate with the Democrat, and I'm well to the left of the DSA,

and I'm also not a member of the DSA. Well, there we go. A nice, clear statement from Brianna Joy Gray. An unusual moment in this panel. When we're given the opportunity to speak, I can be very clear, Pierce. Thanks for having me. Oh, I think we've all agreed that you can speak.

Thank you all very much indeed. I appreciate it. Thank you, everyone. Pierce Morgan, Morgan, Sensen, is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask only one simple thing.

Hit subscribe on YouTube. and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain. And we'll do it all for free. Independent uncensored media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.