Piers Morgan Uncensored - “MAGA Is DEAD!” Carrie Prejean Boller on Trump's Iran War | Plus Bassem Youssef On Ben Shapiro

Episode Date: March 16, 2026

As war dominates headlines, the political fallout in Washington is growing. With the U.S. reportedly spending billions on the conflict while many voters remain focused on the economy, the situation could have serious consequences for President Donald Trump ahead of the midterm elections. Trump, who returned to the White House promising a “peace ticket,” now faces criticism from some supporters who believe that pledge has been broken. At the same time, a visible divide is emerging within conservative media, with figures like Lindsey Graham and Mark Levin strongly backing the war effort, while Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens, and Tucker Carlson have voiced opposition. Rumours and speculation surrounding Tucker Carlson have circulated online, though Axios reports there is no CIA investigation into the commentator. Meanwhile, debates over U.S. involvement, support for Israel, and accusations of antisemitism continue to fuel tensions. For many Americans watching events unfold, both the war and the political conflict surrounding it show little sign of slowing down. Piers Morgan is joined by former Miss California and Trump ally, Carrie Prejean Boller to discuss her removal from the Religious Liberty Commission. Later on Uncensored, Michael Knowles, host of the Daily Wire’s Michael Knowles Show, historian and political scientist Professor Roy Casagranda, former Republican now running for Congress as a Democrat in New York, George Conway and PragerU commentator Shabbos Kestenbaum joins the panel to debate. The conversation then turns to Bassem Youssef, who calls out Ben Shapiro for a debate. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

MAGA is dead. It is deader than dead and Americans are furious. I've been a loyal supporter of the president for almost 20 years. I consider him a dear friend and I will tell you right now. I do not recognize our president. This is the riskiest thing Trump has ever done in politics, yeah, bar none. The only reason that I'm not freaking out now, I say, I'm not freaking out until week six.

He said it would take five weeks, I'm gonna freak out on week six. For now, I say, let him cook. I'm announcing right now on your platform, another invitation for Ben Shapiro to debate me. You gave him space. You platformed his views. You gave him time. And all of that was not enough for him.

Might be tempted for a bit of a transfer to the uncensored empire. Do you fancy joining us? Politics should not be the first concern when it comes to matters of war, but the potential consequences for President Trump are severe. The midterm elections were already looking pretty bleak

before a single shot was fired. Now voters are glued to their screens, watching the US spend a bit billion dollars per day on a war they mostly oppose at a time when the set of the economy is their foremost priority. A president who returned to the White House with such energy and optimism could well leave it as a lame duck and he may well be impeached again. It's one of many reasons why some of the Trump's most fervent supporters are so openly upset that he's supposedly reneged on his peace ticket pledge and no matter where you stand on the conservative media food fight,

the shifting balance of power is objectively remarkable. Senator Lindsay Graham and commentator Mark Levin, both former Never Trumpers who are currently declaring a holy war are back in. Megan Kelly, Marjorie Taylor Green and Tucker Carlson, among others, are frozen out. The president wrote a lengthy and passionate tribute to Levine this weekend, after Megan Kelly said that Levine's inflammatory rhetoric is the result of what she called his micro penis. Marjorie Taylor Green is just responded by saying that Maga's been destroyed by micro penis, Mark Levine. And Tucker Carlson, who of course campaigned for Trump and was beloved by the administration,

him now suspects the same administration, is trying to lock him up. So the other day I found out that the CIA is preparing some kind of criminal referral against me, a crime report to the Department of Justice on the basis of a supposed crime I committed. What's that crime? Well, talking to people in Iran before the war.

They read my texts. So the crime under consideration apparently would be the Foreign Agent Act or something like that, acting as an agent of a foreign power. And I don't expect this to go anywhere. I'm not too worried about an actual criminal case against me for a bunch of reasons. One, I'm not an agent of a foreign power. Unlike a lot of people commenting on U.S. politics and global affairs,

I have only one loyalty, and that's the United States, and have never acted against it. Well, this morning, an Axios reporter said that there is no CIA investigations in Tucker Carlson, but that hasn't stopped the court of social media, convicting him of treason with attorney. General Laura Luma suggesting he could face the death penalty. Meanwhile, tensions over the religious pretext for supporting Israel and the war continue to boil over, as did the accusations of anti-Semitism, leveled at those who oppose it. Many normal people doubtless find all this exhausting. The bad news is that, much like the war itself as it stands, there's no end seemingly in sight.

We've got an excellent panel patiently standing by, but we begin today with Carrie Pre-Jean Boller, the former Miss California, and Trump ally, who was just ousted, from the Religious Liberty Commission. Welcome to you, Carrie. I think it's your first time on censors, so I welcome you to the show. What is your view about this? Because I've known Donald Trump a long time,

and I'm struggling to not see this attack on Iran as potentially the biggest miscalculation of either of his presidency, simply because it is going on already much longer than he indicated it would, And there's no apparent easy off-ramp for him now. And it's causing a lot of damage economically, politically. You know, militarily, America is superior.

But even there, there's sustaining losses. And there are many people, even in the most fervent MAGA part of his support, who say, look, this guy campaigned on no more involvement in foreign walls, particularly in the Middle East. What is he doing? staking everything on the biggest war imaginable in the Middle East. Thank you so much for having me, Pierce. I've been a loyal supporter of the president for almost 20 years.

This goes back to when I was 21 years old and I was Miss California at the Miss USA pageant. And I've known him. I consider him a dear friend and I will tell you right now, I do not recognize our president. I think that we are an occupied nation. I think that a foreign country has occupied our government. and we are seeing now that this president of the United States of America

is being influenced by a foreign government. And MAGA, let me tell you right now, MAGA is dead. It is deader than dead, and Americans are furious. We do not recognize President Donald J. Trump anymore. So obviously, the foreign government you're talking about is Israel. And, you know, Marco Rubio himself said before he then did a complete reverse ferret on it, as we would call it over here in England,

he said that the reason America preemptively attacked Iran was because Israel, he didn't name it, but it was obviously he was talking about, had indicated they were going to launch an attack and that the Iranians may respond against American interests, which seemed a very convoluted reason for American forces to be committed. And they then, under a huge blowback,

tried to pretend he hadn't said it, but we all heard what came out of his mouth. And then we heard Anthony Blinken, one of his predecessors, say that Netanyahu had tried to persuade both Obama and Biden to do the same thing by saying, I'm about to attack Iran. And when they said, no, he then didn't attack Iran. And so, you know, many people share your misgivings about this. Notwithstanding that, the polling still shows pretty strong support amongst the MAGA base for Trump and this attack. So how do you explain that? No, I do not believe that one bit.

I talk to MAGA people all day long every day, and the everyday average American is absolutely against this war, and they know that the only reason why we are even in Iran right now is because of Israel. We see Benjamin Netanyahu coming to our country more than any other foreign government, any other foreign nation. He's been here almost eight times. This is embarrassing.

We are the United States of America. Why are we allowing a foreign country to occupy our government? And now we see we, I was removed from a religious liberty commission because I dared to speak out against Israel. It's no longer conspiracy, Pierce. What Israel wants, Israel gets. And we're witnessing that. And I'm telling you right now, MAGA is dead. And we will not vote for one more politician.

who lies to us and says, oh, we're going to drain the swamp and we're going to not get involved in foreign wars. Trump has betrayed our country, and he has betrayed MAGA, and people are livid. I mean, what is fascinating is to see how split the conservative right is now in America. In a way, I'd never imagine possible. You know, I remember you on the Miss California thing. It was a story at the time, and I remember all that going down.

And I was actually, at the time, I was a judge on. America's got talent. I've just been competing on Donald Trump's inaugural celebrity apprentice show. I won it. That's when I got to know him. So, you know, I remember all that period. And what is fascinating is, if you go back to 2008-9, the idea that people like Megan Kelly, Marjorie Taylor Green, Tucker Carlson, you and others would be so against what Trump, a Republican president is doing, would have been unthinkable. How do you think it's come to this? Well, we witnessed what happened from the very beginning.

We saw that Marjorie Taylor Green was called a traitor by the president. We're seeing never Trumpers, Pierce, never Trumpers like Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz and Mark Levin. I mean, these are never Trumpers who were not by his side back in 2016. And now he's siding with these people and calling true MAGA supporters traitors. He's, you know, but what you realize is. is that the most free people are Megan Kelly, Tucker Carlson, Marjor Taylor Green, Candice Owens, all fired from the mainstream media, all fired from either the president or mainstream media. And now we're seeing that they're the most free.

They're not owned by big corporations, big politicians, big donors. And so we're free. And we're speaking out. And it's important that everybody wakes up and realizes that this country is not a free country any longer. It's very, very sad. And what is fascinating is watching people like Ben Shapiro, even coming after people like me, I've always got on pretty well with him.

He's come on my show a lot. I've been on his a lot. And it only began his attacks on me as a consequence of me becoming more critical of the Israeli government, not of Israel as a country, not of Israeli people, not of Jewish people,

but actually direct criticism specifically laid out against some of the actions of the Israeli government, which I believe is being overrun by extremely hard line, far-right characters like Smodrich and Benghivir, who have a very unhealthy influence over Netanyahu because he owes the fact that he's back in charge to them. And I think this has been a very, very unfortunate chain of events,

which has now led to where we are. But this idea, and you've talked about this quite a lot, including with Tucker, I think, the other day, which is that any criticism of the Israeli government is now framed by people like Ben Shapiro and Mark Levine and others as anti-Semitism, that therefore it means you must hate Jewish people. And I find that a ridiculous and B, actually really offensive

and C, it totally devalues the word anti-Semitism and what it actually means and those who perpetrate it. Yeah, you're exactly right, Pearson. You're witnessing it firsthand. called now an anti-Semite. And you know what? I think that it's getting a little old. You know, I witnessed this back in 2009 when I stood up for traditional marriage. I was called a homophob. I was called a bigot, a hateful person, simply because I'm just upholding my Christian values. And so I think the name calling isn't going to work. But you're exactly right. This is what they do.

And I call them Zionist thugs, because this is exactly who they are and what they are. These are thugs that try to put you in this box and they lock you in and they shut you up and they cancel you from society and they shun you, they humiliate you, they, they backstab you, and then they expect everybody else to do the same. And that's what Zionist thugs do. And this has nothing to do with Jew hatred. I am speaking out because I witnessed a genocide in Gaza. I could not deny my eyes. I am a Christian. I am a mother. And I was witnessing a starvation and a genocide, a real Holocaust, a Holocaust before our very eyes. And they wanted me to deny me to that and I refuse to. And they want to call me an anti-Semite simply because I'm a Christian.

And that's where this is going, Pierce. Pretty soon Christianity will be anti-Semitic. And that is dangerous. And I reject that. Is it, I mean, just to play devil's advocate with you here, we're both Catholics. And I think I'm right in saying that you do not support the concept of Zionism. You don't agree with it. You think it's wrong. And you do that based on your Catholicism. Now, I'm a Catholic, and I don't share that view because it really depends what interpretation you want to put on the word Zionism and being a Zionist and what it means. If you talk to a lot of Jewish people, a lot of Israelis, they'll say, just believe, it means you believe in the concept of an Israeli state. And the disagreement comes when you get perhaps more radical Zionists whose interpretation of what the state of Israel should be geographically is massively,

bigger than perhaps more moderate Zionists. So what is your intrinsic problem based on your own religion with the idea of Zionism? Yeah, I think it's a political ideology that exploits theology. I mean, we have to talk about the theological aspect of Zionism. So as a Catholic, this is what I said on stage. I do not believe 1948 Israel is a biblical prophecy fulfillment. Most Christian Zionists in this country, like Ted Cruz and people, Hegson and Marco Rubio and all these other Zionists thugs supremacists, they want me as a Catholic

to reject the Catholic Church's teaching of 2,000 years and reject the fact that we do not believe that that is a biblical prophecy fulfillment, 1948 Israel, atheist Israel that was established in 48. They want us to believe that and reject and deny our Catholic faith. And I refuse to do that. And so I think it's a political ideology that it's a political ideology that it's. exploits a theology. And you know what? I'm not being attacked by Jews. I'm not being attacked by Muslims. I'm being attacked by Christian Zionists because they're mad that I'm daring to expose the

fact that, wait a second, if 1948 Israel isn't biblical Israel, then we don't have to bless it in order to be blessed. We don't have to support it in order to be, you know, blessed according to Ted Cruz. Those who bless Israel will be blessed. Well, what Israel are you talking about? Because for 2,000 years, Catholic Church has taught that we are the new Israel, that we have fulfilled, that we are the new fulfillment. And so we believe that we are the spiritual semites. And so if you believe that, I don't know what Ted Cruz thinks about that. Obviously, he's upset because I don't believe that 1948 Israel is a biblical prophecy fulfillment. And so once you do that, their heretical teaching gets exposed for exactly what it is. It's heresy. And we have to start calling it that.

Well, Carrie, Brejean Ebola, I appreciate you coming on on Censored. We've got a panel which I'm sure, at least some of them I know, will react, I'm sure, quite falsely to what you just said. But I appreciate you coming on. Thank you very much. Thank you. Well, join me on the panel is Michael Knowles, host of the Daily Wires, Michael Knowles show,

historian and political scientist, Professor Roy Casagrander, George Conway, the former Republican now running for Congress as a Democrat in New York, and the commentator with Prager U, Shabos Kestimbaugh. Welcome to all of you. Michael Knowles, you seem like a perfect person to respond to what you've just heard from Carrie Prejean Bola. What would you say to her? Well, there was so much to respond to. But I think the good point that she makes is that it's true.

The church has never insisted upon Christian Zionism as a religious belief, the idea that there must be a Jewish nation in the Holy Land as a matter of biblical prophecy. That is a Protestant view, and it's actually a minority Protestant. view at that that comes from the 19th century, but Catholics don't believe that. That's totally true. However, it would be taking the argument too far to say that Catholics cannot support the state of Israel because, well, probably most clearly in recent years, St. John Paul II opened diplomatic relations with the state of Israel. And the Catholic Church has offered guidance on this, both from the Second Vatican Council and then following up in a document from 1985, which

discusses how the church, seeing herself as the new Israel, can discuss the relation. of Jews and the state of Israel to the church. And it can be very friendly and we can be supportive of the state of Israel on the grounds of, for instance, international law rather than on the grounds of a nationalist ideology or biblical prophecy. So I kind of see what she's getting at, but it is certainly not the case that the Catholic Church insists

that Catholics not support the state of Israel. That's belied by the actions of the church herself. And before I go to Shabos, Michael, this whole kind of gathering sentiment that if you're critical of the Israeli government, somehow you must be anti-Semitic, what do you think of that? Because I think it's got completely out of hand and devalues what anti-Semitism is, which is actually a very insidious evil thing, which we should all be against. But once you start branding everybody anti-Semitic for criticizing a government, you know,

I would go back to, say, 2003 with the Iraq War, which, you know, I led the media campaign in the UK against that. It never struck anyone's mind that I was being anti-British or anti-the-British people. They just thought I didn't agree with what my government was doing. What's the difference when you criticize Israel's government? Yes, of course. I mean, the phrase anti-Semitism is thrown around far too much,

like the phrase racism. However, two things are true at once. I do think there is a growing strain of Jew hatred in public life. I think we've seen that mostly from the left, but a little bit on the right. But yes, the notion that if you criticize the state of Israel, if you don't embrace the novel theology of Christian Zionism or something like that, the idea that that means you hate Jews

is kind of crazy. What Kerry said there is very important. She said that the church views herself spiritually as Semites. That's a line that comes from Pope Pius the 11th. And the line is important because in the lead up to the Second World War, the Pope was pointing out that Christians really cannot get on board with all of the Jew hatred stuff.

And this was obviously then followed up by Pope Pius the 12th. who was a great defender of the Jews, saved hundreds of thousands of Jews during the Second World War, so much so that the chief rabbi of Rome, Israel Zoli, not only was baptized, but actually took the name Eugene after Pius XI, the 12th, after the Second World War. So, yes, it's very, very frustrating. And it can lead people, I think, emotionally, to say, well, you know, by golly, if you're going to call me an anti-Semite, I'm going to prove you right. But there's just so much propaganda that's flown around from Jew haters,

legitimate Jew haters on one side, to people who are accusing everyone. you know, who doesn't go along with their program as being anti-Semitic. And there is a third option. One can pragmatically and prudentially support the state of Israel when it is just while recognizing that the U.S. and Israel have different interests, that Christianity is different from Judaism. And, you know, we can think about things in a way that avoids those two silly extremes. Yeah. Or you could be like me where you like Israel.

You absolutely believe it has a right to exist. You like Israelis. You like Jewish people. but you don't agree with what the Israeli government is doing a lot of the time. I don't see anything incompatible about any of that. Let me bring in Shabos. You might have a view about whether these are incompatible positions. But it was interesting. You've got a particular involvement with Carrie Prejean Bola,

because you were one of the people she clashed with on the Religious Liberty Commission. So what did you think of what she said to me earlier? Well, it's good to see you. I think the most revealing part of your interview was You were the season one winner of Celebrity Apprentice. I didn't know that, so well done. Thank you. I would say that.

That was a gross mischaracterization of what that hearing would all about. At that hearing, I encourage you. I encourage all the listeners. Watch the hearing. Or just watch my testimony. Go on my Twitter. I posted it for yourself. I did not mention the word Israel, Zionism, Gaza, Apec, B, B.

I spoke about, for someone who's so concerned about the discrimination against Catholics as she purports to be. I spoke about how 20 minutes from my house a Catholic school in Long Beach, California, was vandalized. about how I have American Mormon friends who were victims of chance, F the Mormons at Oklahoma State. Only after did I speak about the religious discrimination faced by so many young Americans in this country. Did I then talk about the discrimination that young American Jews are experiencing on college campuses? Not once did I engage in some political or theological discourse on Israel. But there

was only one person who was fascinated by discussing the Middle East. And this is what Matt Walsh calls Israel derangement syndrome. And that was Carrie Prasjean Bowler. She wore a Palestinian flag. She asked me all sorts of questions about Gaza, and I'm happy to have that debate, but that's not what the purpose of this commission was about. She betrayed the trust of President Trump and this commission to talk about the religious discrimination that so many young Americans are facing. And to Michael's point, and Michael is actually on my show, I pray, are you theological? So he can attest to the fact that I believe very strongly and very comfortably as an Orthodox

too that America is a Christian country. We would be better off and more strong as a country if more young people went back to church. If you're a Catholic, you should absolutely be going to Mass. You should be reading and learning from the New Testament and living a life in accordance with the teachings of Jesus. But if your theology says, I can't support the state of Israel, that's fine. That's your theology. You know, Carrie refuses to debate me. She said in the hearing that we wish we should get coffee and that I'm silencing her speech. I've offered to debate her nine separate times anytime, anywhere, which she doesn't want to, which is why she logged off before this panel. But I'm not interested in debating theology because I don't want her to change her theological viewpoints.

She should believe whatever she wants to believe. But to corrupt the purpose of this commission, betrays the trust of President Trump. And number two, fundamentally, this is to Michael's point, you can support the state of Israel without it having to do anything with theology. In fact, many Jews, myself in particular, were kind of conflicted as to whether the modern state of Israel established in 1948 is some biblical fulfillment. But it's irrelevant because 55% of all Jews in the world live in the modern state of Israel. It's a Western democracy. It's a liberal ally to the United States. That's why I support it, not because of these grandiose theological statements that someone who, by her own admission, only converted to Catholicism in April, is suddenly fascinated in discussing. So it was entirely disingenuous. And shame on her for bringing the flag

to a foreign country into a federal commission. Okay. Let me bring in George Conway here. George, welcome to uncensored. To put it mildly, not a Donald Trump fan. I think it would be fair to say that you've been one of his least supportive people in the United States for a very long time.

Fair. But let's talk about what's happening right now because a lot of people think that Donald Trump has been sort of slightly conned here by Benjamin Netanyahu. And they base it on what Marco Rubio said when he said, look, we had to act preemptively against Iran because we were informed by another country they were going to attack and that the Iranians would likely respond against American assets. So we got in first. Then the next day, when all hell broke loose about this, they did a rain

back and pretend that he never said it. At the same time, we got Anthony Blinken saying, look, you know, Netanyahu tried this with Obama and with Biden. Same. same playbook, we're going to attack Iran. Are you with me? And both of them said no, and he didn't then attack Iran. So there is a suggestion, which is gathering momentum, but that Trump was kind of sort of bamboozled a bit by Netanyahu into doing this. Do you share that suspicion? No, I wouldn't put it that way. I mean, I think Donald Trump is an idiot. I think he does, has no idea what he's doing in the Middle East right now. And but to say that he was somehow bamboozled by Benjamin Netanyahu is ridiculous and frankly it's anti-Semitic.

I mean, everybody's trying to persuade the President of the United States to do things that they want them to do. And I understand Israel's position that, no, I mean, one less, one less murderous Ayatollah in the world makes the world a better place. And I'm not sure I disagree with that, but I do disagree with Donald Trump getting into a war without any plans, without any plan to keep the Shred of Hormuz open, now begging for help from China, and now begging for help from from from NATO allies that he's been shitting all over and so I I don't you know I I I But I do think that the the the suggestion that Bibi Netanyahu is to blame and that Israel is to blame or that the Jews are to blame For our our mistakes in the Middle East I think that's actually anti-Semitic justice animosemitic as as as kerry pre-gene

I was talking about Zion's thoughts I mean I've got to say I mean isn't that exactly what we've just been talking about. I mean, Marco Rubio, on the record, on camera, says the reason America, and he's the Secretary of State, so I kind of take him on his word, the reason the United States preemptively attacked Iran with Israel is because he didn't name the country, but we knew he was talking about Israel, had said to the United States, we're going to attack. Are you with us or not? And he said, we realize Iran would. That may be true. Yeah, but if that's true, it's not anti-Semitic to say that that that. That is what may have happened here.

No, no, but I have to say, I think some of the rhetoric that's been going on about saying that, you know, somehow we were bamboozled by Israel. You know, Trump is bamboozled by everyone. And I don't think it's fair to single out Israel for, you know, exercising what it believes to be in its interest and its prerogative to persuade the United States to do something that maybe the United States shouldn't have gotten fully, fully on. board with. But again, I think to say that he was bamboozled, I just think it plays into anti-Semitic tropes, and I really find it offensive. Okay, let me bring in Professor Roy Cacagrander. Welcome to Uncensored. I think it's the first time we've had you on the show, so I appreciate you coming on. So if you suggest that Benjamin Net and Yahoo pulled a fast one with Trump to persuade him to do this, you're being anti-Semitic. Would you agree with that?

I mean, it seems like a strange thing to say. I think it's very likely that Benjamin Nathia, who did exactly what Marco Rubio said he did, which is I'm going to attack and Trump then, being the petulant little child that he is, felt jealousy and felt the need to jump in as well, because he wanted to be part of it. But it is also true that everybody tries to bamboozle Trump.

And I think there's this saying, right? The last person to talk to Trump is the person who gets, But I don't think it's anti-Semitic to say that Netanyahu tried to bamboozle Trump. I think everybody does it. So I guess that would make everybody anti-Semitic. I don't understand. Yeah, I mean, Michael Knowles, look, looking at it a different way, it's quite possible the Netanyahu said, look, we've located the Ayatollah.

He's in this place with all his top people. We're never going to get a better chance. We can take them all out. And Trump has always talked about the Iranian regime as being a terrible evil thing. right back to way before he was a politician. And he thought, you know what? He just trusted his gut instinct, right. You're right.

Let's go now. Right. And he may have thought this would be as easy as the Maduro thing, where you go in, you decapitate the person at the top, and the rest fall in line as they have it. So far in the Venezuelan regime, they've kind of fallen in line to the way Trump wanted them to behave. And you don't have to have the complete overthrow of the regime to affect. actual change that benefits the United States.

You know, it's quite possible Trump was thinking that. I thought, you know, it was successful with Maduro. We can do it again here. And I think, you know, and Matt Nioi said, look, we'll never get a better chance. That could all be true. Listen, I take issue with the idea that President Trump had not thought about this. That, I think, that claim coming from some of our panelists, I think, is absurd. President Trump had been talking about going after Iran since the 1980s.

And so, yes, I'm sure Benjamin Netanyahu was lobbying him very hard to do it. And it's not anti-Semitic to say that. I also know that Mohammed bin Salman was lobbying very hard for Trump to do this. But also, this has been part of the grand strategy of the United States since at least 1979. Really, you would say since 1953, since the CIA coup that got rid of Mozadegh and consolidated the power of the Shah. So President Trump, from day one, goes in there. It's a very successful first day of the war. He says that the war is going to go on for about five weeks.

We've just finished week two. I myself am skeptical of the Iran operation. Had I been on the NSC, no one invited me, but had I been on it, I would have made arguments against it. But to suggest that Trump was just, you know, befuddled and confused and duped and tricked, I think is ridiculous. Trump has the best foreign policy record of any president in my lifetime, at least, probably including George H.W. Bush, who oversaw the fall of the Soviet Union, he just keeps winning. And I think the people who have been saying for 10 years now that Trump just keeps accidentally getting it right, You know, I think that their argument is beyond credulity at this point. That's interesting, Michael.

Has it created a sense of indensibility in Trump, which may now have tripped him up? And let me explain what I mean by that. Is that when he launched this attack, he came out immediately. Very typical Trump, very belligerent. Right, we've taken out the top people. This is all over. I urge the people of Iran to rise up and take charge. It's gone.

they'll never have a nuclear bomb, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But here we are two and a half weeks later. And actually, the regime is still intact. We don't know about the supposed new Supreme Leader, whether he's alive or dead or whether he's in Moscow getting medical treatment. Maybe all the time this airs, there'll be more clarity on that. But we haven't seen or heard from this guy yet, the slain Ayatollah's son.

But what is indisputable is that the Strait of Hormuz, which carries 20% of the world's oil every day, has been pretty well close to everyone but the Iranians, Chinese and a bit of Russia now for two and a half weeks to enormous economic damage, which will only be felt actually by a lot of Americans in a few weeks or months time when it is reflected in rising food prices, because every day the Strait of Almuzzi is shut is going to be problematic for the food chain supply around the world. So it just seems to me that Trump may have thought this would be a quick, easy win, that militarily, obviously, the Americans and Israelis together, most formidable double-active world military firepower history against the Iranians,

it's a no contest. What they hadn't factored in, and I think this is where the miscalculation has come, is the double-pronged strategy of the Iranians of effectively shutting down the Strait of Hormuz to those they didn't want to have access through it, and simultaneously attacking their neighboring Gulf State in a way that, has seriously imperiled the mission statement future business plan of come and live in Dubai, come and live in Qatar, come and live in Riyadh, and it's safe and it's fun and it's sunny and everything else. Suddenly there are bombs going off in hotels, bombs going off at the Dubai airport and so on.

You're seeing a lot of expats leave. You're seeing a lot of tourists stay away. This double-pronged sort of economic strategy that they've waged has been undeniably quite effective and probably more effective than Trump calculated? I mean, do you think that's a plausible proposition? We certainly can't say that he thought it would be over by now because he said at the outset that it would go on for about five weeks. But I totally agree with you, peers. This is the riskiest thing Trump has ever done in politics, bar none. That is why I would have argued against it had I been on the NSC. However, the good that could be achieved, and don't forget this has been part of U.S. Grant Strategy for many decades, the good that could be achieved would be amazing. You would

basically fulfill the good that began under the Abraham Accords, consolidate the Gulf states with Israel under broad American influence. You'd get rid of the destabilizing force in the Middle East, Iran, you'd chop off the head of the snake, you'd back off China, you'd back off Russia. It could all be great. I'm with you, peers. If the Strait of Hormuz remains closed for much longer, the Republicans are totally sunk in the midterms, one could say that the reason he undertook such a grand operation is because we only have a one-member majority in the House anyway. So if we're to lose the midterms, might as well do something pretty big on our way out. But regardless, yes, if this works, Trump will be one of the most consequential presidents in American history.

He already probably is, but he will go down truly as a foreign policy genius. If this doesn't work out, his legacy will be tarnished as George W. Bush's was. The only reason that I'm not freaking out now, I say, I'm not freaking out until week six. He said it would take five weeks. I'm going to freak out on week six. I don't care how my oil futures are doing. He has a very good record. He's the only president in the last quarter century on whose watch Vladimir Putin hasn't invaded a country. His attack on Iran over the summer was excellent.

His decapitation of Venezuela took 88 minutes. He dropped the Moab. He killed Soleimani. He's just done very, very well on foreign policy, which is why for now I say let him cook. However, he will be the one, along with the American people, to bear the consequences if this doesn't work out. The only spanner in the works I would put in that argument

is he didn't say five weeks at the start. He said it would be very quick. Then he changed it to five weeks when he realized it probably wouldn't be a few days like he hoped. George Conway, let me ask you a difficult question. Have you, in his entire time as President of the United States, in either term, ever knowingly praised Donald Trump for anything? Yeah, no, I have. I mean, I have praised them for things. I can't remember what they are now because they're so few and far between. But let me just say this.

I hope he does get lucky. Where has he done a good thing? I would have to go, um, it's hard. It really is hard. Do you like his suits? But you know, I mean, George, here's my point. George, before you answer it. Here's my point. Here's my point. You see, I look at this. I've always tried to be fair with Trump. I praise him when I think he's right, criticizing him when I think he's wrong. I'll be very critical of him last few days about Iran. But I was very praiseworthy, for example, about something that I can't imagine any American not praising him for, which is what he's done with the southern border. I mean, you know, you compare it to what happened under Biden for four years. Any American, surely, would be happy that the southern border effectively got shut down to millions more illegal people coming into the country, undocumented illegally, into a country where millions had come in the four years before.

I don't think that's a contentious partisan issue. There should be something where even you, George Conway, who hates the guy, can say, you can say, you know what, I'm going to hold my nose, But yes, Mr. President, I think that's a good thing. I mean, there are times where I've held my nose and said, well, he got this one right, usually by accident. But to get back to the Iran issue, I mean, the problem with it is I hope he does get lucky. I hope, frankly, tomorrow he declares victory, and everything goes back to normal,

and oil prices go down, and he gets his victory, and there's peace, at least for now in the Middle East. I don't like the Iranian regime. I wish it would go away. I don't like the fact that they probably will still try to develop nuclear weapons, although I don't think that they're about to do that in the very near future. But I will say this. He doesn't know what he's doing. He can't explain what he's doing.

We've heard so many different rationales about how long the war is going to last, what the purpose of the war is. I mean, this is a man, remember, whose own secretary of state, Rex Tillerson called him an effing idiot, a moron, I'm sorry. Effing moron, I got my words correct. His own national security advisor, John Bolton called him a laughing fool. He's a man who

had to, you know, they had to explain to him the difference between the Balkans and the Baltics. His own chief of staff during his first term, General Kelly had to explain the significance of Pearl Harbor as they were flying into Hickham Air Force Base. He thought they had to explain to him a couple of times

that Ireland is not part of the United Kingdom. My daughter, when she was in fourth grade, won a geography beat where she beat seventh and eighth graders, and she knew more than, she knew more geography than Donald Trump did during his first term and probably still does, definitely does today. Let me tell you, something. I mean, this man has no idea what he's doing. But let me tell you, when I was editor of the mirror during the Iraq war, which we deposed, we took a children's map onto the streets of New York, and we asked 100 New Yorkers

when they came out of the subway to show us where Iraq was. And from memory, at least 11 put it in the middle of the United States. So let's not get too carried away here about geography. Okay, but he's Donald, he's the president of the United States. I know, I know he is.

He probably wouldn't do any better than somebody coming out of the 17th streets. A lot of people in the UK, if you ask them, probably don't know about. Ireland and the complexity of the south of Ireland and the north. So this is not an thing unusual to Donald Trump, I can tell you. Shabos, how do you think this is all going to play out here? Because it seems to me, as Michael said, it's unbelievably high stakes for Trump. Because the midterms are coming fast.

We're nearly in the middle of March here now. Then you're six months away from the midterm elections. He was already likely to lose the House. Big rumblings now he may lose the Senate. because of this. And then he becomes pretty powerless. I mean, he got the power of executive orders, but you know what will happen if he loses control of Congress,

is the Democrats will come with everything they've got to impeach him again. He'll be swallowed up in all that legalese again. And pretty much his effectiveness to run the country properly, as he would like to do, it disappears. So the stakes here are huge. If come June, July, this is still going on, and it's really hitting home with inflation,

on food prices and so on, and at the gas pump and so on, I think this will, in the end, turn out to have been a massive mistake by Trump. Conversely, as Michael said, if somehow by then it's all played out the way he hoped. And I take George's point, I'm not entirely sure what Trump now sees his victory. You know, does he see total surrender? Does he see the overthrow of the regime? Does he see the people rising up? He seems to change from day to day.

But, you know, what do you feel about this politically here? Okay, so I definitely agree with your diagnosis of the problem. Like, as conservatives, as Republicans, historically going into the midterms when you're in power, has never been favorable. But I totally disagree as to the causes of it. So first of all, I have to take issue with the Democratic Party, and I think you were alluding to this, talking about, you know, the cost of gas and fuel. As I said, I moved to Los Angeles for my job at Prager, you. The gas station nearest to where I live.

I do not live in a very expensive area of Los Angeles. gas is $6.46. Though the biggest problem, the biggest threat to affordability is not the Iranian regime. It's Governor Gavin Newsom and the Democratic Party, but they'll sort of fixate on Iran. So that's number one. Number two, the goals of this war have been so unbelievably clear. And in fact, Marco Rubio, when he was part of the gang of the gang of aid in the Senate, he said, we never got the briefings that I is the Secretary of State am now giving any member of Congress who wishes. So President Trump has been so clear. Number one, it's about ending Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. Number two, it's holding the expansion of Iranian's ballistic missile arsenal.

It's preventing the development of longer-ranged missile systems that are capable of hitting the United States, neutralizing threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, which the Ayatollah had repeatedly threatened, degrading the networks responsible for killing Americans. Look, 90% of the funding that the Houthis get, that Hamas gets, that Hasbal gets, is given by Iran. So this idea that, like, we don't have any interest at stake

and what Kerry Prasian was saying, you know, Maga is dead. First of all, she's been saying that Nick Fuentes has been saying this, Candace Owens has been saying this like two years now. Like, great, it's dead. We got it. So you can leave now. But the idea that, the MAGA base don't support this. It's just not demonstrated by any of the facts.

It's totally divorced from reality. The lowest poll I could find before I came on the show was a Washington Post poll that found only 85% of MAGA Republicans support this war. That's the lowest number I can find. I've seen the same. I said that to her, and I don't know where she got her. She was basing hers on individual conversations

she's had with people, but I don't think that's right. It might be a shock. She lies. Let me just close with you by saying this point. President Trump is. is a pragmatic human being, okay? To your point, you were on his show's Celebrity Apprentice. He looks at the news. He looks at polling.

The American people, for the most part, especially his base, are solidly in the war for now. I agree with Michael. If this is going on in five weeks time, six weeks time, that's a different conversation. I would be shocked. And I'm happy to come back on your show and apologize on live TV. But I would be shocked if this is going on in three months time from now. Because President Trump doesn't want that.

He ran in 2016 saying that he was against the war in Iraq. He doesn't want forever wars. This is not the beginning of a war. This is the end of a war. The end of a war that cost the lives of thousands of American civilians and thousands of American troops. Okay. Roy Casagranda, I mean, what would concern me as an American

is the fact that thousands of Marines are now on their way to the area, which if you look at it logically, it's like, well, what are they going to do when they get there, right? These are people that would normally be part of a ground attack. What would that ground attack look like? Are they going to go and try and get the Ural? uranium, probably a pretty hazardous expedition in many ways if that happens. But if he commits boots to the ground, apart from Renegi on a repeated promise not to do that

again in the Middle East, if it was to go wrong, again, they could unravel very quickly that Donald Trump as a politician. Yeah, I agree. The United States obviously doesn't have a great track record of winning war since World War II. George Bush, senior, won Panama, and who won the Cold War. Cold War is a pretty big one. Yeah. So there's one president who won three wars,

and the rest of the presidents have lost all the rest of the wars. So we don't have a good track record of winning. Having said that, it's worth pointing out, and this is one of those fun moments where I can bring in Tucker Carlson. The average American obviously also doesn't know the size of Iran, and U.S. senators don't either. And that's a problem, because Iran is, you know, three times the size of Iraq.

It is a mountainous country. Iraq is a flat country. We starved Iraq and some of the worst crimes against humanity for 12 years before we invaded. So we brought a country to its knees that's a third the size of Iran that's flat, and we still were humiliated after eight years and driven out of that country.

The Iranian people have been preparing for this moment for decades because they know that the United States can go unhinged at any moment like it is doing now. And here's a tragedy. I hope like hell, somehow, I don't see it happening, the Iranian government goes down in a ball of flames.

That would be amazing. And then it gets replaced by something that's better for the Iranian people. The problem is, we went into this with no plan, and the only way this works is if the Iranian military switches sides. The only way that could happen is if we had torn up the IRGC, which we didn't do. Instead, we decapitated the government as if somehow that would get rid of the government, which is a completely foolish nonsense.

We didn't even do that with Venezuela. The vice president replaced the president. It's the same exact state. It's the same exact government. We just took out the leader. In the case of Iran, we inflamed them, and now they want to fight. And they are going to do a number on us globally because they're going to go after oil and fertilizer.

And I don't know if you all know this, but not only does the, I think it's 30% of the fertilizer comes from the Persian Gulf, it's a huge number. but the petroleum goes into tractors. It goes into the trucks that deliver the food to the processing centers. It goes into trains. It goes into the electrical plants where they use oil for generating electricity so we can cool the food and cook the food.

Like this is going to affect the food supply on the planet. And countries like India and countries in Africa are starting to really get nervous. They're freaking out. Europe's freaking out. The Belgian Prime Minister just said that he wants to cool off relations with Russia so they can start buying from Russia. Well, I tell you what would concern me if I was Trump is George Maloney, you know, very supportive of Trump until now, suddenly doing a U-turn about the whole Iran war, wants nothing to do with it.

I thought that was quite a telling moment, actually, because she's pretty conservative European leader who's been very vocally supportive of Trump, suddenly saying... She's to the left of American conservatives. She's just a fascist. I wouldn't say she's a fascist. I think that's a bit of her... I wouldn't. I don't think. I saw people call it.

She's definitely to the left of... I think we need to try and reserve the word fascists and Nazis for actual fascists and Nazis. No, fascists in the Italian sense, not a Nazi. There are two different things. I know, I know, I know. Yeah, let's not go crazy here. I get it, I get it. Michael, I want to be on the way by Michael.

I don't want to get embroil you in this, Michael, but obviously one of your co-workers and I have had a little bit of a spat, which has also dragged in Tucker, Gileson, Megyn Kelly and others. But I couldn't help but notice that when you were directly asked to, you were, get heavily engaged in this by naming names by Ben Shapiro and a little too where you had the other day. You resisted the temptation. You were down the middle. You were the conciliatory voice of reason. And as I was watching you, I was just thinking, you know, you may have noticed a big piece came out about my uncensored business in the New York Times at the weekend, burgeoning, expanding global empire. And, you know, we're looking for provocative, but, you know, people with intelligence, good looks, let's be honest, you know, who are not getting dragged into that kind

of name-calling war, who might be tempted for a bit of a, might be tempted for a bit of a transfer to the uncensored empire. I just wondered, I mean, there might be an inappropriate moment to ask you, but, you know, do you fancy you joining us? Well, peers, I really appreciate the offer, and especially the compliment on my physical beauty, but I just have to ask permission, can I at the very least cut out this clip, send it to my friend Mr. Shapiro, and demand that he pay me double? Because I would love that. My worst part about that whole spat that I saw between you and Ben, of course, is that I found out that you text Ben. You haven't texted me all that much, but it's okay.

We could turn that all around. I don't have your number. I could give it out on air, but something tells me people who are not friends of mine will start texting me. But I very much appreciate it. It's funny you mention that I try to avoid some of the podcaster wars. It's very tempting to get involved. Trust me, I have to restrain my Sicilian blood on it. But I do think that it's generally unproductive.

Obviously, everyone should be clear about what they think, about matters of real public import. But when it comes to the back and forth, it does seem to me that the group most intent on destroying conservatives' chances in the midterms in 2028 is the right-wing podcasters. And I get it. I think it's actually a part of the new media. I understand that it's what happens at the end of a presidential administration, especially it's what happens in the absence of Charlie Kirk after he was killed by the left. So I'm not even surprised by any of it. But I hate it.

I hate the podcast Wars Peers. And the only good thing to come out of it is that you offered me a job. Well, you know what? I can see a strap line now. Michael Knowles, Uncensored, the Sicilian peacemaker. If that isn't a good cell, I don't know what it is. The Sicilian peacemaker. Anyway, Michael, it's great to have you on.

Sorry, several. One thing very quick. I just got to add one thing very quickly. And Michael, I'm not going to ask you to condemn people's names, but I've got to say, you know, I'm a Bible-believing Jew. You're obviously a Bible-believing Christian. I think it's totally legitimate without naming names

that when you see evil, like we have an obligation to call out evil, especially with people with prominent platforms. Deuteronomy 1018 is like, you know, so clear about how we are to treat widows. And when you have an individual who has more followers than there are Jews on planet Earth, who's calling her, let's just call spade as spade, Erica Kirk associated with Jeffrey Epstein. She may have been behind Charlie Kirk's assassination. I'm not asking you or anyone to do anything, but I think as truth tellers, people in the media,

political space, I think we always have an obligation to always speak the truth, even if it's not, even if it's not comfortable. And I don't think there's a conservative war. I think there's one side that's lobbying bombs that is accusing anyone and everyone of horrific crimes. And now for the first time, I think Ben started this with Amphel. Now we're responding to it, but we're not creating disunity. We're trying to bring unity back to the conservative movement and get rid of the people who keep saying Maga is dead, maga is dead.

Fine, maga is dead, so leave. So in general, I think we do have an obligation to call out evil when we see it. There's no question about that. I mean, I've been totally clear on my view, especially vis-à-vis Erica Kirk from the beginning. I think she deserves her sympathy and support. I hate that Candace is doing that show on her. I've been clear as day.

That said, I just don't see the effect, the good effect, to come out of these points. podcaster wars. And I think the way that some people are misunderstanding this is that they're playing an old media game in the new media. In the old media days, if someone were saying something that appeared beyond the pale, then one could go out and just try to get them fired. And I wrote a whole book about how standards and norms can be a very good thing. That doesn't work in the new media. In the new media, all that will happen is you will build up those shows. The only clips that I've seen from the more provocative, radical sorts of shows are coming from the people who are supposedly

opposing it. And so I just think it's totally counterproductive. They're effectively working as publicists for ideas that they purportedly consider to be immoral. And so if it's not doing any good in the political world, I don't think that the catharsis of, you know, expressing, you know, invective or something is good. We should state our moral views clearly. There's no question about that. But, you know, I think, you know, for some of these podcasters that we're talking about, I think that their enemies are their greatest publicists. My biggest problem with being embroiled in the right-wing podcaster war is I wasn't aware until I read that that I was right-wing.

But you learn something every day. There's me, sitting. Welcome. Welcome to the club. I sit firmly on the centrist fence, which is where I'm proudly happy to sit and give everyone a hard time. But no, apparently I'm a right-wing podcaster. So you learn something every day. Michael, I do appreciate you coming on.

A lot of people in your position may have just ducked it for a week, but you didn't. And you've never done that. and I really appreciate it. And I would like your number, but I would like to text you because if I text Ben these days, he doesn't reply. So I need someone who at least I can guarantee

as a reasonable chance of a response. Thank you to you and to rest of my panel. I appreciate it. Good to see, Pierce. Well, now, as most of you're aware, Ben Shapiro's tirade about Dave Smith, Tucker Carlson, Megan Kelly, and me included a clip

featuring one of our returning guests, Bassam Youssef, the comedian and commentator. He was among those labeled either a Nazi or Nazi-adjacent. It's only fair. that he now has a chance to respond. And Bassem rejoins me now. Bassem, welcome back. Ramadan, Karim, Pearce and Eid Mubarak.

You know, it's been a while. This is the holy month of Ramadan. You know, we also have holy days too. Others have purim and use it to slaughter people. So happy Ramadan and Eid Mubarak for you, peers. And I wish you happiness, prosperity. And by the grace of Allah, may he always help remove the blindfolds of your kind heart,

Pierce. Well, Allahi, I miss you. And because last time I actually met you, I think Alan Dershowitzu, threatened me on your show to sue me. I have since posted a 13 minutes apology, but I didn't hear back from him. And I have to say, man, like,

what's the thing with the beef between you and Ben Shapiro? I'm actually, like, you know, I'm surprised. I'm actually not surprised. I wanted to tell you. Well, I'll tell you what it is, Bassem. You know, I'll be straight with you. You and I have had a lot of robust conversations. Yes.

I still get people all around the world. New York, L.A., Sydney, Australia, the Middle East when I'm there, London, Manchester, whatever, and they still talk about the very first interview that we did, which blew up. I was watched by 23 million people watch that interview. And we've had a lot of interviews since. Some have been good tempered. Some have been quite fractures. I don't mind it either way.

I think you're a passionate guy. You say what's on your mind. You don't hold back. I like that. We're an uncensored show. The thing about Shapiro, the thing about Shapiro is to, I mean, I'll obviously let you get into what you want to say about him. But my disappointment with him was he portrays himself

as the king of free speech. Everyone, you know, facts don't care about your feelings. It's literally his pinned tweet on his ex account. And yet, from the moment I became more critical of the Israeli government, he immediately basically cut me off. Stop, refuse to acknowledge any texts of mine, refused to come on the show, didn't invite me back on his. It was all over.

As far as he was concerned, you're either all in, uncritically with the Israeli government, it seemed to me, or you're all out. There's no middle ground. And he's not the only one. There's some others that have done the same thing. But I was just really disappointed in him as a free speech king that he was not able to tolerate legitimate criticism of the Israeli government. And I've never been as critical of Israel as you have.

And I accept that. You would have liked me to have gone further. And we've had that debate. But to not be able to criticize the government at all. And by the way, you have lovely cats. This is fish and chips. This is fish and this is chips. I have two Burmese called Dennis and Bobby,

named after Arsenal Invincible Legends. Of course the Arsenal. Of course it has to be the Arsenal. Of course. Good season, by the way. Thank you. But look, talking seriously about Shapiro for a moment, because I just think this whole weaponising

of the word anti-Semitism does him, it does everyone on that side a very grave, disservice because it's being used as a former censorship. You're completely right, Pierce. And actually, I have actually news for you. The first time ever that I actually got introduced to Ben Shapiro, the first time I ever heard of him, was on your show in 2013, Pierce Morgan tonight on CNN.

Really? Were you guys? Yes, that was the first time I've ever heard of him. And you guys were debating the gun control and he called you a bully. Yeah. And the thing is, over the years, you gave him space, you platformed his views, you gave him time, and all of that was not enough for him. And I wasn't actually mad when he called me a Nazi in his montage, because if you

look at the list of people that he called Nazi, one of them was Professor Norman Finkelstein, who was a Jewish Holocaust survivor. Even that is anti-Semitic for Ben. And I think his tantrums just like Ben Shapiro's tantrum is a reflection of the narcissistic sickness that Israel is. You know, they demand nothing less but absolute obedience, absolute alignment. And they will never have a connoissee conversation. They will hide behind their screen, calling you anti-Semite. But nobody, like, buys that anymore, you know? And by the way, like, in my local, even in my local gym, I get people who come and recognize

me from your show and other show. And they're like young people, 24, 25. And you say, you know, like all our lives, we grew up. listening to Ben Shapiro believing him. But now we cannot believe him anymore. It is very difficult for them to take whatever he's saying. Well, he ranted about, he ranted about Megan Killingai. He called her a coward.

He called me a click bait whore or something, and what was interesting was there was a barrage of responses. And then somebody asked Grock, the AI on X, you know, what percentage of the responses are negative against Ben Shapiro? It was like 95% of the responses to his own post on his own account were having a go at him, saying, this is ridiculous.

And even then, even then, he doesn't seem to get it. I understand what he's going through, because right now we've all seen the past two years. He's losing views. He's losing subscribers. People started to figure out who really is. As you said, a propagandist, a paid asset used by foreign intelligence. He's an agent sponsored by Israel, who, in my view, is the number one enemy of the United States.

He is nervous because his Mossad bosses can see that the Daily Wire is not what it used to be in the early 2000. People now have internet. They can go back and see how much Ben Shapiro have deceived them over the years. And the thing is, that's why I'm actually announcing right now on your platform, another invitation for Ben Shapiro to debate me,

but he will not do it because he is actually busy debating younger college kids, who, by the way, still kick his butt. I am starting on tour right now this week, but I will put aside two weeks in May if he would ever love to come on. And I would love that. And by the way, I would love to watch that

in the same way that when he was trying to belittle and attack Dave Smith, who's a regular on my show, and I don't agree with what Dave says, but I like Dave, he's a very good debater. And I'm like, yeah, Ben, rather than abuse the guy, why don't you, in your eyes, show him up with the power of your argument in a debate?

Same with you. He should come on your show and he should or get you on his, and you two should go at it for a couple of hours and let the public decide who has the better argument. But he won't do that. He takes the easy option time and again. You have to understand.

Again, I kind of feel for Ben because I can see how he's losing his edge and how people are like walking away from him. I mean, the only way for him to stay in the conversation is to put this fake bushy eyebrows so people will talk about him. He's basically prostituting some prosthetic. And he just turned into a low-life, no-taic. and click bait, like a story as human but with a voice resembling a depressed frog. Like, you know, so it's just like, he's not in the conversation anymore.

And he is just there to for rage baiting. As you said, 90% of the comments write on his feed. It's just like, dude, we know who you are. You know who you're lying. It is, and it's a very first thing. I don't think he reflects Bassem what a lot of Jews and Israelis feel. Because when I meet them, a lot, they come up to me and want to talk about it in the streets of London or New York or wherever it may be.

You know, obviously, there's a million Jewish people live in New York. So I have a lot of conversations on the street with them. They share a lot of my misgivings about the Israeli government and what happened in Gaza and what's happening in Iran and so. It doesn't mean to say that they're anti-their government or anti-their country or any of those things. It just means they share my misgivings about what their government's done in their name. You're completely right, Pierce. But, you know, we have to be very careful when we use the word Jews.

Because what kind of Jews are you talking about? Are they the Orthodox Jews in New York who vast the majority of them think that Israel is a modern abomination? It's a secular atheist country that should not exist. Or are you talking about the secular Jews who like people like Jewish Voices for Peace or many of the Jewish artists and comedians and musicians who are 100% against it. That's why I avoid using the word Jews. When I say Israel, and I say Israel as it is how it stands in the international community, how it behaves itself.

So I was very careful using this. So he is reflective of that attitude, just like a fantasy that is made out of propaganda, and people are now figuring out what Israel is all about. They're now the same way they're figuring what Ben is all about. You know, it's interesting. Like at the start of the war, as you know, because you criticized me very heavily for this.

I was quite a vocal defender of Israel's right to defend itself after Hamas perpetrated the horrors of October the 7th. And I would regularly ask pro-Palestinian guests that came on the same question. Do you condemn what Hamas did? And I got a lot of blowback for that in the Arab world. They said that I was inflammatory and I was a Zionist and all these things. And I said, no, actually, what I'm trying to do is be intellectually honest and say that whichever side of this you're on, everyone should be able to condemn what happened that day.

You might, as you've did with me, we had a long interview in Los Angeles where you talked over the whole history. I found a lot of it very interesting. And I learned a lot from you. And I give you credit for that. But, you know, I believe, like, in the same way you should be able to condemn Hamas and then support the Palestinian cause and talk about what you see as the occupation, all these things, you should be able to start from a position of condemning a terror attack. I feel the same way about the Israeli government, not to compare what like would like, but just to say that you should be able to criticize the Israeli government when they do things which are palpably wrong without it being seen as attack on Israel or Israeli people.

When I criticize Hamas, I'm not attacking the Palestinian people, the wider Palestinian people or Gaza as an entity. I'm attacking effectively their government who turned into a terrorist. a group who committed atrocities. And I don't think these things are incompatible. But you've got to be intellectually honest about it. 100% peers. You know, like, as a matter of like, when I go now and I speak against the war, it doesn't mean that I support the Supreme Leader of Iran or the religious,

or the religious government. I mean, I'm actually coming to it as a new American citizen in this country. We can be emotional and just be happy. It's like, yay. Supreme media died. He was a tyrannical leader who hurt his people. But, you know, at least he was not a pedophile like other presidents.

But there's the emotional response and there's also the political sane response. If you go in, is it useful what we are doing right now in Iran? Because we have seen the same deja vu in Afghanistan, the same deja vu in Iraq. Has it helped the Iraqi

people? Has it helped the Afghani people? Has it helped the American people squandering trillions of dollars, leaving our, losing our lives there, losing our weapons now, have it actually helped? Because we see this argument happening over and over again. And I'm kind of like, as an American citizen also, and I'm sure you must be confused like me as a British citizen, why are we there for? Are we there for the WMDs?

No, sorry, that was Iraq. Are we there for the war and terror? I'm sorry, that was Afghanistan. I'm losing track. Well, the biggest problem I have, the biggest problem I have with what's going on now with Iran, is that the Trump administration, led by the president, had been unable to clearly articulate what the aim of this war is. And at the same time, you've got Marco Rubio saying publicly

that the Americans went in preemptively because they knew Israel was going to attack because Israel had told them, and therefore the Iranians would respond against American interests, therefore they had to get in first. None of that seems a good enough reason to launch the biggest, you know, Middle Eastern War in my lifetime.

Yes, I mean, and I remember, like, your position as an anti-war activist against the Iraq war, and you can see the same lies are being, you know, like being, like, popped up again. I mean, is it because of the nuclear weapon? Didn't we destroy it like last year? And if it's for the nuclear weapons, why aren't we not attacking Israel who have, like, unlimited, like, undisclosed supply? They never omitted it. For reasons which I find Baffin, they never admit that.

Wait, wait, wait. I have seen your interview with NAFTA-Liband. You have asked him 20 different ways. 20 different way. Do you have the nukes? Do you have nekees? Yes, we have them, but we will not introduce him. If we have them, we will not do it first. We will not be the first.

It is not us. We're defending ourselves. We won't use them unless we have to. Ishsharmata, it is such like a political whore, you know. And again, it is just like reflective of what Israel does. It denies, deflects, confused, and then continue doing whatever the hell they want. And now they're talking about attacking Turkey, a NATO member. They are talking about Egypt.

Yesterday, I don't know if you called this, in the Jerusalem Post, Rabbi Stewart Vance, sorry, Stewart Vice, sorry, he said that the Egyptians should look at what we did to perjia in Purim and be afraid of what we are going to do to them in Easter. I mean, what kind of a theological dogmatic in St. Bully are we dealing with here? And they have some sort of a Torah calendar lining up future enemies according to their festivals, and then they want to attack because God told them so. And then all of that, and then people are worried about radical Islam. So, when does it stop?

When would Israel feel safe to leave us the hell alone? And the thing is, you mentioned something very important in the beginning about the rising anti-Semitism peers, because this has been kind of a talking point, and it's been used in a very dishonest way to justify what's happening. And what I will tell you will be inspired by Professor Norman Finstein himself, because I saw in an interview with another Jewish podcasters. And he was asked about, what do you think about rising anti-Semitism? And he put that beautifully.

He said, that doesn't make any sense. And because for that statement, rising anti-Semitism to be true, it has to be quantifiable, not just because people feel a certain way, because, you know, facts don't give any an F about your feelings. So in order to decide if there's actually rising anti-Semitism, what we need to ask, we need to ask the following questions. In America, in Britain, have we seen anybody losing their job or denied a career opportunity, denied access to a higher education, got targeted by organizations, organized campaign to lose their livelihood because they were Jewish or pro-Israel? The answer is no.

Have anybody been denied housing, funding, medical care because they were Jewish or pro-Israel? No. Have there someone been docks expelled from universities, deported, lost their immigration status or denied entry into the United States because they were Jewish or pro-Israel? No, have someone been shot point blank paralyzing them for life? Like what happened to my friend Hisham Ahwartani, he is a Palestinian brown university. No, it happened. But all of these same happened many times to pro-Palestinian. Well, we have seen, we have seen a prominent Jews being shot dead.

There were two shot dead. Of course. Yeah, and that's terrible. I think what I would say, what I would say, I would say this, I would say this passive. I think there's, there's indisputably been a rise in the last three years or so. since the events of October the 7th in particular, there's been a rise in intimidation and harassment of Jews around the world, on college campuses, in the streets and so on.

We've seen this logged by law authorities around the world. There is also been, in my estimation, a rise in Islamophobia as well, right, in intimidation and harassment of Muslims, right? Law abiding, peaceful Muslims who get caught up in the net of radicalised Muslims who commit bad acts. I think there are radicalized people in every religion. I'm a Christian Catholic. There are radicalized Christians, right?

Let's not pretend otherwise. And it's the radicalized parts of any religion which caused the problem. And we have to then ring fence the peaceful members of each of those religions and protect them. 100% peace. But the peaceful members of the Jewish faith have announced many, many times that Israel is the number one cause. for anti-Semitism. When you have a bully hiding behind a religious identity of people who don't want to have their religion to be used in order to perpetrate wars, using quotes from the Torah or

the Talmud, and then helpless people who cannot touch that bully react in a wrong way attacking the vulnerable Jews. In this way, Israel is the number one cause of anti-Semitism. And that's not my word. It's a lot of the Jews. I would say, I would put it a different way. I would say that I've been increasingly concerned that there are 15 million Jewish people in the world and that they are going to be increasingly, in my view, imperiled by the actions of their government

in Israel, the Israeli government, in a way that I think people haven't worked out properly yet, but we're beginning to see it. And I think this is what concerns Jewish people I've talked to. They feel more in danger than they did three years ago. Are they going to feel safer as a result of what's happening in Iran? I don't think so. I'm prepared to be proven wrong. Maybe in five years' time, this will all look like a stroke of bold genius,

and the threats against Jews around the world have receded, the intimidation's gone, Israel is living in total safety and harmony. I just don't see that happening. And I don't think bombing your way to what you think is a peaceful resolution, it very rarely works. 100%. And I agree with you. And the thing is,

what you've just mentioned about the rising anti-Semitism, it is a reaction for the problem. It's not the cause of what's happening. You know, people react to that. And I had a very interesting conversation with a British professor. He would choose to stay unnamed for obvious reason.

He was a professor that, you know, he lectured a lot about the psychology of war. And I asked him, said, I don't understand one thing. Any army in the world are extremely disciplined. You know, their soldiers will not be allowed to just post stuff freely online unless their government were allowed them. So, for example, when the American soldiers were shipped to the Gulf, first thing that they do, they take away their phones. They are not allowed to post on social media.

Of course, for security reasons. And it's understood. Any army is like that. But if you remember peace, for two years, two and a half years, and now it's what's happening in Lebanon, we're forgetting that there's a country called Lebanon having a million Lebanese being displaced with the same exact excuses that we heard in Gaza. For two and a half years, we saw Israeli soldiers, IDH soldiers with their phones like, you know, everyday influencers in Gaza, basically posting the most cringe videos wearing women's underwear,

are playing with kids, toys they just killed, bragging about raping women and children, bragging about killing them. And I asked the professor, how come an army would let their armies do it like that? And he said, they will not have posted it unless it is allowed. And the way that the Israeli government think about is that if we do that enough, there will be a lot of hate of Israel and people who cannot discriminate between Israel and the Jews. Now that hate will be transferred to the Jews alone because not everybody is smart enough. Nobody can do that distinction. And then at a certain point, someone will snap, someone will kill someone, someone will bomb someone, someone will do something bad and create your Jews. And then it's a cycle again.

And then as you see, there is anti-Semitism. So we have to go there and bomb more and kill more because we don't. I do not sign up to the theory that somehow the IDF were doing stuff doing bad things, putting them on video purely to goad people into attacking Jews worldwide. So they did it. So they could justify. Well, look, you're entitled to your view of that, Basin. I don't believe that's what was happening. I think, I think, unfortunately, in war, uh, soldiers do bad things.

You know, it just is a fact that they sometimes lose their sense of morality and humanity. Your companion, and I'm interested in your opinion. I don't think, honestly, don't think it's feasible to think they're doing this deliberately to go attacks on Jewish people so they can then use that to justify attacking other places. So, okay, let me ask you something. If I have never seen British soldiers

in the middle of combat would actually do anything because their leadership will completely reprimand them. But we have had British troops. We have had British troops do bad things. In fact, I lost my job at the Daily Mirror for exposing bad things done by some British troops, some rogue elements of them.

Now, the pictures which got me, fired, the jury, as far as I'm concerned, is still out on what those were because they're only denied by the government and the regiment. But the truth of the stories we published were never denied. And in fact, the soldiers we accused, some of them got court-martialed. So I'm afraid even British troops, some rogue elements did bad things in war. And we have to accept that. When it happens, when it happens, you have to be transparent and honest and omitted. Bassim, look, we run out of time. Decide what is. you back another time. We run out of time.

I do really appreciate you, Karim. Ramadan Karim, and again, say hello, this is chips. Hi, chips. And fish, fish, fish, fish, fish went to like on the bed. So fish and for fish and chips, Ramadan Karim to everybody. You have fish and chips. I have Dennis and Bobby. Bassin, good to talk. Good to talk to you.

All right. Thank you. Bye-bye. Bye-bye. Well, thanks to Bassem. And all my guest today, Michael Francese is a very familiar face to uncensored viewers, millions of whom saw his chilling account of being a real-life mafia mob boss. If you enjoyed his interview with me, chances are you'll be riveted by the new episode of History Uncensored. The host Bianca Nobolo interviews Francise for a thrilling true crime deep dive into the history of the mafia.

Check it out in our show notes or by searching for History Uncensor wherever you are watching or listening to this. Piers Morgan Unsensored 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 Unsensored 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 Unsensored Media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it without you.