Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Matt Hancock to enter the jungle..

Episode Date: November 1, 2022

Tonight on Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers reacts to former Health Secretary Matt Hancock signing up for I'm a Celeb with care home boss David Crabtree, Lembit Opik and Ann Widdecombe. As Britain is paralysed by strikes, Piers speaks to General Secretary of the TUC Frances O'Grady. Piers speaks to Republican Senator for Arkansas, Tom Cotton after David DePape has been charged with attempting to kidnap senior US politician Nancy Pelosi and assaulting her husband. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8 pm on TalkTV on Sky 526, Virgin Media 606, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and the app.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tonight up here's Morgan on sense. The disgraced MP, Matt Hancock, flees to the jungle to become a reality star. Should the man who failed to protect our elderly through a deadly pandemic, now be allowed to profit from his infamy. Train drivers, dockers, postal workers, barristers, even coffin makers, as Britain is paralyzed by strikes, I'll talk to the union boss holding the country to ransom. After the shocking attack on US Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband,

I'm joined by the tough-on-crime senator who could challenge Donald Trump for the presidential nomination. Live from London, this is Pearce Morgan Uncensored. Well, good evening for London. Welcome to Pierce Morgan Unsensor. Britain's had its fair share of failed politicians lately. Boris Johnson lied more often than he tried. Our last Prime Minister Liz Truss had the shelf life of a lettuce. And Theresa May's legacy, if only we could remember it,

would fit very neatly onto a postage stamp. But a few politicians in modern history have failed harder and more often than Matt Hancock. His attention-seeking, perma-grining gopher of a man is about to appear and I'm a celebrity, get me out of here. That means he'll spend several weeks in a jungle in Australia, pocketing a massive fee on top of his MP's salary,

eating kangaroo testicles for public deletation. I never thought I'd say this, but I actually feel sorry for the kangaroo testicles. I spent six years as a judge on Britain and America's got talents. I've never think or two about entertainment TV and talent, and it got me thinking, Why would they choose Matt Hancock? What are his special talents?

Maybe it's singing. No, for the love of God, do stop him now. He's not a singer. What about acting? Look very carefully here. Look for tears. Just simple words there, reacting it. You're quite emotional about that.

Well, it's just, you know, it's been such a tough year for so many people, and there's William Shakespeare, putting it so simply for everybody, that, you know, we can get on with our lives. Yeah, not a single tier, was it? I've seen more emotion from the waxworks of Madam Tussors. Matt's also a budding text whiz.

Earlier this year, he became the first MP to enter the metaverse with his digital imagining of himself, bringing a whole new level of meaning to Instagram versus reality. So finally, what about his actual core skill? The one thing we know that he is supposed to be competent at, being a politician, the thing he's paid to do. Well, he was forced out as health secretary

for snogging and groping his advisor during a lockdown, breaking his own lockdown rules. And before about his health secretary during the pandemic, he said he was doing this to protect nursing homes. So right from the start, we've tried to throw a protective ring around our care homes. Well, we absolutely did throw a protective ring around social care. We'll keep working to strengthen the protective ring

that we've cast around all our homes. care homes. Absolute nonsense. There was no protective ring. Quite the opposite. Hancock sent thousands of elderly patients from hospitals back to their nursing homes without testing them. That led to COVID spreading the wildfire inside those homes, causing countless more deaths than should ever be allowed to happen. It was a deadly fiasco of a policy from a travesty for health secretary with tragic consequences for thousands of families. I may shock you now, Mr Hancock, because I'm actually glad you're going to a remote tarantial infested jungle on the opposite side of the world. On behalf of of the entire British public, I think I'm safe in saying, I hope you stay there.

Well, joining me now to discuss this is his former Liberal Democrat MP Lember Opec. He also went into I'm a celebrity and the former Conservative Minister, and Whitacom, who I presume would rather shoot herself than go into the jungle, although she did compete her strictly and extremely capably on the answer, I might add. We're also joined by care home owner David Crabtree. A 16 of his residence died in the first wave of the pandemic. Well, welcome to all of you. I want to start with you, David Crabtree, because I remember interviewing you at the high

of the pandemic when so many people were dying. And you gave such a heartfelt and agonized interview in many ways about the appalling situation in care homes. When you heard that Matt Hancock is going into the I'm a Celebrity Jungle while you're still an MP, what was your view? Before I comment on that, Pierce, can I thank you personally for being the lone voice in early 2020?

for social care workers and social care residents. There was no one more shouting for us. As to Mr Hancock, it's the last pitiful act of a pathetic lying man. There was no ring, no protection for us. What's emotional is that when somebody brings this up again, it brings back all the things that you sort of put to the back of your mind. we only this month were able to have a memorial for those who died in 2020 simply because relatives weren't allowed to go to their funerals we weren't

allowed to see the relatives so for two years we've never seen those families again so we've just been able to sort of at least bring that to a conclusion but as to mr hancock he lied there is no two ways about this he lied 850 social care workers died on top of thousands of elderly. They were collateral damage. Someone, with his permission, gave the hospitals the report to say, you can discharge without a negative test. They do not need to be negative to discharge.

They discharged two to us within the first week of March, and both died, and subsequently a further seven died. as a result of those discharges directly. This man oversaw. This is Blazers Iraq. This is Hancock's death of elderly. He is solely responsible for it. I'm still angry about what that man was.

I can tell. And you know what angers me about all this? Is that while some people have been sort of laughing about this extraordinary twist to his career, it emerged today. He's also been taking part in the celebrity SAS show on Channel 4. He's already filmed that. He's also written a book of his pandemic diaries, which I'm sure will be an attempt to gloss over any of his culpability because it

wasn't just about care homes. He also failed and lied to the public about testing. He massaged those figures about the number of tests that were being done and we held him to account for that. I thought our open border policy was a complete disaster and he was partly responsible with that as well as Health Secretary. We had no PPE, so hundreds and hundreds of health and care workers died in their workplace because they weren't properly protected. This first wave of the pandemic in our country was a complete disaster. And it's completely true to say that later we did well with vaccines.

But that first wave was a disaster. And the Health Secretary presiding over this was Matt Hancock. And for him to now, before there's even been a proper inquiry into what happened and what culpability he may actually be proven to have had. For him to now go into a reality show in a jungle, in the way that he's doing for hundreds of thousands of pounds, I think is an absolute smack in the face, particularly to people like you who had to go through so much appalling trauma losing all these people in your homes. And I know other people. I have a friend of mine who lost their parents in care homes and had to have a last conversation on FaceTime.

You know, I just think it's an appalling smack in the face to them. And the idea he's still an MP, receiving an MP salary, is completely disgraceful. I couldn't agree more. I don't know whether this is to pay the divorce settlements or what it's supposed to do. But in the end, he should have, all he had to do was say that we couldn't do it or there was some reason that they couldn't do it. But instead, contracts were awarded for PPE that were no use to us. we couldn't get them.

More importantly, they were discharging elderly people to hope back to home where home care workers were going in without PPE, without the knowledge that the resident had COVID. He put at risk millions of people and then denied it and had the blatant to stand there and say he had put a ring of protection around us,

not once but several times. The man needs to be held account. Yeah, I agree. David, it's good to talk to you. I wish it was always in better circumstances, but I love your passion. I love how much you care about what happened in your care homes, and it's good to catch up with you. And I'm just sorry, again, it's for the wrong reasons. But I look forward to talking to you, perhaps on a happier occasion. Thank you. Well, let's bring in, I mean, Anne, I don't know what you think. To me, the idea of an MP, particularly one who's been disgraced,

who's lost his ministerial position because he was breaking his own lockdown rules whilst having an affair and was caught doing it by a newspaper that had also presided over a shambolic first wave of this pandemic by any yardstick. There's been no inquiry yet, which has cleared him, as he presumably hopes it might do, but I don't think it will. You put all this in totality, and he's now getting hundreds of thousands of pounds to go into a jungle and prance about with celebrities. What do you make of it? Well, what I would say is that even without all those horrendous circumstances. No serving MP should go on a reality show, which takes them away from their constituency and from the House of Commons, where they're paid to vote, takes them

away for weeks on end. I mean, you know, weekend here or a week. That's different. Weeks on end. And that is why I turned down strictly for five years running. I said, no. As soon as I retired, I said, yes, because I wanted to do it. But I wasn't going to do it while I was an MP. And it's not only time there's something else, Pierce, dignity. You do actually have a duty of dignity to the office while you're an MP and there's nothing dignified about the jungle. Well, okay, let me a bit. What about his constituents? Right. This guy has already heaped embarrassment onto his constituency, right? He's managed to hang on as an MP. But this is, as I say, not just I'm a celebrity. He's managed to find time to write a book of diaries. He's managed to find time to do this SAS show on Channel 4. Now he's

going in the jungle. When is he finding any time to do the job he's actually paid to do on a daily base, who should serve the constituents? Direct answer to that question. That is a matter for his constituents at the next election. And I've got experience of this. I may or may not have lost my seat in 2010. Why isn't it a matter for me as a taxpayer who pays his salary? You can have an opinion, but we have a democratic system here. Just as in 2010, Montgomery should decide they didn't want me anymore for whatever reason. So also, his constituents in our democratic system can make the judgment. Now, I know Anne's position and I respect it. I hold a different view here. You've just heard what sounds like a tragic performance as a cabinet minister. That's

different to the principle which Anne rightly raises about whether you should be able to do these extended programs on reality TV. Now, surely, no one disagrees with the principle of a politician doing a reality show. Have I got news for you? It's a comedy show. Vince Cable, very popular the politician did do a little bit of dancing. But hang on, hang on, hang on. Have I got news for you, it's a three-hour taping on a Thursday night. This guy is disappearing off for weeks to Australia

when we're in the middle of a crushing cost of living crisis. I mean, the flaming brass neck of the man. Could be four weeks. It's the first point. He's being paid by us, the taxpayer, not to go and eat kangaroo tentacles. Who is going to cope? Let me ask you this, Lembert.

Who is going to cope if there is an emergency in his constituents? or a constituent has an emergency, where does that constituent go? Yeah, I work on the assumption that if there's, and I don't know this, but I've been told this by second-hand authority, that there is some clause which says

if there's an emergency of a sufficiently serious nature, which is a judgment call he would... Sorry, there is. It's called the cost of living prices. Millions of people in his country are currently facing a winter of hunger, you know, of freezing cold. We've got pensioners going on buses to be warm. Pierce, Pierce, because I do have experience of this. Let me just ask you this.

A constituent gets in touch with the MP because the electricity is about to be cut off. They've got kids in the house. This has happened. And it probably happened with you as well. And when that sort of thing happens, you need the MP, his staff, don't have the clout. Right, two points.

I'm not saying you're on TV earlier then, but I'm trying to answer your question. I know. But you're trying to defend the indefensive one. You don't know what I'm going to say yet, do you? Well, I do know what you said earlier on television. I watched the interview. You compared him to Winston Churchill.

You said Winston Churchill also made mistakes and came back and won us the war. Do you think Winston Churchill would go into a jungle with a bunch of Z-list celebrities and munch kangaroo testicles in a vote by the public? I was one of those Z-d lists of celebrities. Yes, exactly. But I wasn't an empty asmittedly. Second, right. And you all know Winston Churchill either, right? First point, but I've never pretended to be.

First point that let's recognize no one here on the three of us is that. denying that you could do reality shows. You're arguing about the length of time away. Yes. So let's move straight to that second point that Anne's raised. If you're on holiday with your family as an MP, the same situation can arise. Does that mean that the MP has to fly back? You can pick up the phone. So it's not about physically being present.

He's not on holiday. Parliament's not in recess. He doesn't have a phone in the jungle. Parliament's not in reset. Okay. All right, but let's remember that. But you can pick up the phone if you're on holiday. I've had to do that as well.

Some MPs have had to come back. So number one, it's not about whether you do reality shows, it's the length of time. Number two, it's not about being physically present, as answers said. So it's the third question, is it enough of a... He's kind of votes, because he can't be... Is it enough of an obstruction? You don't have phones in the jungle? He can't vote remotely.

Is that enough of an obstruction to say that no politicians should do that? Yes, absolutely. I don't agree. And here's why... But I'm just going to tell you, most things that do turn up in your surgery are handled de facto, So certainly, for me, this was the case, by my staff. I don't pay my taxes to see serving members of Parliament go on jollies to Australia in a jungle with boy George. How do you vote from the jungle when there's a big issue in Parliament?

How do you vote? Well, I don't know if he's got a pairing circumstance. Well, he can't vote now. He's had the whip taken away, right? Oh, he can still vote. He can still vote? Of course. So explain that for me.

If you have the whip taken away, then, you can still vote. You're not expelled from Parliament. So what's the punishment, really? Well, if you have the whip withdrawn, what it means is you're no longer regarded as a member of the party. You can still vote in Parliament as an individual. So why is he not going to be voting then? Well, obviously, because he's not physically there. Correct. So you said he doesn't need to be physically there. He does.

Let's get to the core point here. You listed all the things he's doing. My guess is he's trying to change his career. You may not stand at the next election. I think he's ending his career. Maybe so. I said it was going to happen. The British public are going to make him do the worst possible challenges and then very quickly boot him out. Maybe so. But think about it this way, right?

You're mixing up his performance as a cabinet minister with the principle of whether any political... No, I'm not. I'm actually saying both to me are disqualifying, right? One, he was the health secretary. But there are two different things. He was the health secretary with about... Well, I'm explaining to why both matter, right? On one count, he was the health secretary presided over the worst imaginable pandemic conduct by government I've seen,

which is why we had the worst overall death toll in Europe in terms of total number of, killed mostly in the first wave. One, he should be held accountable with that before he jollies off to some jungle. And secondly, as a serving MP where we pay a salary, he should not be doing this. All right, on the first point, we can now pass judgment about Matt

Hancock, perfectly legitimate political conversation to have. But it's separate to me, separate to the point that Anne's raised, where I disagree, but I respect your position, about whether you can go on an extended reality TV show. The question is, how does he vote, which is his constitutional duty as a member of this?

It's not his constitutional duty. There is no... Why is he an MP? There is no job description for a member of parliament. He's not going to serve his constituents. It's not a constitutional duty. And he's not going to vote. Let me ask you, did you vote on every single vote?

Were you there on Fridays for adjournment debates? I was frequently there on a Friday. And a German debates don't have a vote. But you missed a... The worst thing about it. I meant private members of debate. The worst thing about it is I think he waited. There was an absolutely cringe-making clip of Rishi Sunak

celebrating becoming prime. I don't know if we've got it. And it's the one where he basically goes past and this is happened. We've got it. And you know what? All right, he completely deliberately shuns Hancock there. But the reality is, of course. You see what you want to see?

No, he does. I know Rishie Sunnet, trust me. He saw him there and decided to blank him. So the point being though, if he hadn't, if he'd embraced Hancock and given him a new job, Hancock would have immediately abandoned all plans to go to the jungle. So why should he not be prepared? not be pragmatic about his future peers. Why doesn't he be honest and stand down as an MP?

He's got two more years for an election. What's dishonest about him making that judgment? Back to my original point, would you have an answer? Why don't you leave it to his constituents to make this judgment? That's how democracy works in this country. I'll tell you how democracy works in this country. We elect members of parliament, we the taxpayers pay their salaries. And the very least we expect is they serve their constituents and they turn up and vote.

Neither of which he can do for up to four weeks in Australia while he's on this redemptive. as a particular vanity exercise of assuming the British public will suddenly warm to his creepy little self and vote for him. They're not. They're going to vote from to do despicable things and then kick him out. But as Anne said, as I admitted and I admit, we didn't make it for every single vote. A good percentage is about 60%. He's made a judgment. Four weeks. Four weeks on the top.

He's made many times actually in the last few years to be utterly self-serving, to do what he thinks is best for Matt Hancock, not anybody else. And the result is a slap in the teeth to the British taxpayers at a moment when millions of them are facing the worst cost-living crisis of their lifetime. Piers, hang on. Last word to you, Anne.

Yes, you've said we didn't all attend every single vote. That is quite true, but we all took judgments on the votes we attended. Let me give you an example. When I was actually moving house, that was the night there was a vote on post offices, I actually got assistance to move the house while I went to the vote on post offices. If there's a big vote while he's in the jungle, what does he do?

stays in the jungle. I've got to leave it there. Look, in a way, limit, you're the perfect example of why you shouldn't be doing this because your political career could have been restored, you could have actually rebuilt your career,

and you were a very capable politician. But the moment you see munching the old kangaroo nuts, it's over. Nadine Doris did it. She's never recovered either. She did pretty much. Come on. She got into the cabinet.

She didn't even bring an order queue on this show. She went to the cabinet. I've got to leave here. Thank you for coming in. I appreciate it. Good to see. you both. We're coming next to train drivers, dockers, postal workers, parristers, nurses, teachers, coffin workers, just about everybody in Britain appears to be wanting to go out

and strike, and I'll talk to Britain's top union boss who is presiding over this mayhem. And from the firebomb attack on the UK migrant centre of a shocking hammer assault on the US speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband, his political violence on the rise and what's behind them. Welcome back to Facebook on our sense. The biggest rail strikes in decades have caused recurring chaos of communities across Britain, several moral plans beginning this weekend. This year has already seen walkouts by postal workers, dot workers, airport staff, bin collectors, barristers, bus drivers, even coffin makers, teachers, nurses and doctors.

Could be an ex-college ambulance staff voted the strike earlier today. So while Britain's newly boisterous unions testing the resolve of a penny-pinching government, or are they just annoying and aggravating the patients of working people who are just as squeeze as they are. Well, joining me now is General Secretary of the Trade Union Congress.

Francis O'Grady, well, thank you very much for coming in. Good, first of all, your reaction to Matt Hancock, choosing to take hundreds of thousands of pounds as a serving MP to fly all the way across the world to Australia to munch kangaroo testicles? Well, I think probably pretty similar to yours, peers, in that frankly, if anybody else in a job walked off the job to moonlight and get paid... They'd be fired? They'd have no chance.

So should he basically be out as an MP? Well, to be honest, I think there are many people, many working people would like to see the whole lot of them go off to the... the jungle and have a general election now. Should Matt Hancock be kicked out as an MP? I think people are right to question. How does he stay in his job when any other ordinary person would be fired?

I'd like to see him fired, whatever the democratic process is. But surely, I mean, this is the man, I heard you talking before, not only promised this protective ring, frankly, he should be preparing his defence with the public inquiry. You should be with lawyers. But it was, those social care workers were not only wrapping themselves in bin bags. Most of them earn less than £10 an hour,

and a huge number of them are on zero-hour contracts. That's why they were moving around between different homes, unwittingly spreading the virus. And he let all the elderly and hospitals go back to care homes without being tested. And meanwhile, PPE contracts and other contracts were being handed to mates. People who we knew from the local pub. Let's turn to you, because you're, I mean, depending on who you talk to, People are either supportive of what you're doing

presiding over all these strikes or they think you're as annoying as Matt Hancock because a lot of ordinary people's lives are being directly impacted in a negative way at an incredibly difficult time by this blizzard of strike action. Yeah, and what I'm very clear about is I have not met a single worker

who's voted for strike action lightly. You lose pay. It's the last resort. Any trade unionist wants the employer to get around the table and negotiate affairs. deal. But one of the reasons why we've had unprecedented public support for these strikes is that all working people are facing the same cost of living crisis. And this isn't just this year, this has been 10 years of stagnating pay and real pay cuts, nurses, thousands of pounds worse off than they were 10 years ago. Paramedics, teachers, people have just hit the

limit. I mean, one person, all right, look, I hear you, but one person doesn't done nearly as badly as that, has done rather well is you, Francis O'Grady, gave yourself pay rises of 18,000 pounds since 2013. It was just to 2018. Well, I haven't had a pay rise for the last four years. Your gross salary is 112,000 pounds a year and the total package 167,000 pounds a year. I mean, forgive me for thinking, you're in the top 3% of earners.

Your package is equivalent to 22 times the average amount for recipient of universal credit. Do you feel comfortable about that? I'm a trade unionist. I believe that people should get paid. the rate for the job. I think you should get paid the rate for the job. I don't know what you're on, but I'm leading an organisation that represents six million workers. I understand that, but you think that you should be getting 22 times the average recipient of universal credit.

Does that seem fair to you? In the TUC, the pay ratio, bottom to top, is one to five. I'm getting paid, I think, a fair rate for the job. But most of all, I'm... Who's the lowest paid person in the TUC? We directly employ all our staff. So who's the lowest? The cleaners. What would they get? They get more than the London living wage.

What would they get? More than the London living wage. What does your lowest earning employee get? We only have one employee on less than £15 an hour. So you've got an employee on less than £15 an hour. You're raking in $167 grand. It's all bad, is it? You see, my point is, you're talking about how much you care about people's pay packets.

people's pay packets as well, these strikes are necessary. And yet there's a gap of somebody on your staff earning under 15 pounds an hour, and you're hovering up 167 grand. If you look at the average CEO, as you full well know, and if you look at bonuses in the city, they're not all CEOs running trade unions, right? You're in charge of the trades unions. Wouldn't it be a great gesture to say, wouldn't it be great to say, you know what, I'm actually going to set an example and half my salary. But I tell you what, Piers, let's talk about what working people are under 15. I really talking about that. Is why are the four biggest banks in Britain making 33 billion pounds worth of profit

and the government is lifting the cap on bankers' bonuses? I agree with you. I also agree that they should be whacking the energy companies more. Why is the government? Some of these profits being announced by BP and others today. Absolutely. Absolutely. Top pay, boardroom pay.

Let's talk about the real issues and why it is that we're going to have thousands of workers. So why don't you target there? Thousands of workers in West. Tomorrow lobbying the government and saying, I know. We've hit the limit. And by the way, I agree with you lobbying the government. I agree with you going after the bankers over this ridiculous decision to release the cap on their bonuses.

It was the bonuses that got us into the 2008-9 financial crash. I agree with you going after energy companies, right? Exactly what we should be doing. What I don't agree with is this unbelievable ripple effect of strikes, which is now really destabilizing the country at a worse possible time. But who created the black coal in our first possible time? finances. Well, Liz trust and quasi-grating.

So why make life even more difficult for people already suffering? Is my point? Inflation is running at over 10%. RPI is a lot higher if you take into account mortgages. So how can we afford the government to give everybody whacking pay rises? They caused the crisis. I know. And it's about time they made the wealthy and big business pay their family.

I don't disagree with you. And that... But surely you're not expecting everybody to be... Are you expecting everyone that you represent in totality to get enough money to cover the inflation. Do you know what, peers, if you equalised capital gains tax with income tax, that would cover an entire pay rise for the entire public sector. Do you want the more to be paid in line with inflation?

That would cover it. Right. That would cover it. Do you want everyone to get at 10%? If we were more ambitious, bolder on the windfall tax on greedy energy companies, if we did something about those four big banks, 33 billion pounds. Think what difference that would make. I mean, some people would say, again, some people would say, again,

Again, it's all very well comfortable you for hours of graded, 167 grand. I don't think. You're like one of the greenie bankers yourself. That's the whole package. They're on a hell of a lot more than that, peers, and I'm sure you are too. It was a very nice package, isn't that? You know, I'm representing nearly 6 million workers.

You're not embarrassed by that. Seriously, as a head of the CUC? Because I believe in the rate for the job. I believe in the rate for the job, and that's what nurses, teachers. But you get even more than that. Social care workers. What, on the jungle? I don't think so. I think he's on a bit more than that.

But the point at this, I mean, I think you're being a bit trivial here because the point is... I don't think your salary is true. We've got millions of workers who deserve a pain. I understand that. And I agree with that. That at least keeps up with inflation. And that's why people are taking that difficult decision to strike.

You've also said to me, you have one of your own employees on less than 15 quid an hour. Only one. What about taking some of your 167 grand and bumping them up a bit? What about the government? What about you doing what you want the government to do and be fair to your poor employee who's earning under 15, 15 quid an hour? We are very fair.

I think we have the best thing. Do you feel comfortable? Really? Yes. We, we... Davao Francis, why don't you give that employee a little bit of your dough? Why don't you talk about the government?

I've decided today, Francis O'Grady, that the best way to show the government you've got to spread the money around is I'm going to spread some of my vast fortune myself. I think we have a much lower ratio top to bottom than any other organization. 167 grand to 15 quid an hour?

Yes. Wow. Well, really? One to five. I think that's, we're talking, wow. I think you'll find that most CEOs are earning. I've hardly got arms big enough of that gap. How much more do you earn than the cleaners here?

I'm not the head of the TUC. No, but if we've got a sense of fairness. I'm not demanding that everyone goes on strike. I'm not out there causing mayhem with shutting down railways and everything else. Here you go, Piz. Will you support our Westminster Lobby tomorrow? Tell you what I do. Tell you what I do.

Here's what I do. I will personally match pound for pound, every pound from your salary you give the poor person at the TUC earning under 15 quid an hour. You're all person I'm tempted. I will match it. Pound for pound. Deal? I'm tempted. We'll talk about that. Okay, we have a deal.

Francis McGrady, thank you very much. Well, coming up next, President Biden says there's too much hatred and too much political violence in America. Is he right and is so, who is to blame? I'll be asking the man who could challenge Donald Trump for the presidential nomination. And to stop oil strikes again, you know what? I'm sick of them as well.

Why don't we just shut up about them? Look at them. Childish little toddlers throwing tantrums. Come and do it in my studio. Go on. See how you get on then. Welcome back to baseball. I'm saying, a 42-year-old US man who's been charged with attempted to kidnap Nancy Pelosi,

the third most senior politician in America. David DeBappe raided the Speaker's homo San Francisco attacked her 82-year-old husband with a hammer. His motive is yet to be disclosed, but police say it wasn't random. It comes just months after an alleged assassination attempt on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, raising fresh concerns about political violence

in an already very polarized country. President Biden today condemned the attack. The chant was, where's Nancy? Where's Nancy? Where's Nancy? Enough is enough is enough is enough. Every person of good conscience needs to clearly and unambiguously

stand up against the violence in our politics, regardless what your politics are. Well, joining me now, the Republican Senator for Arkansas, Tom Cotton. Senator, thank you very much indeed for joining me. I appreciate it. What was your reaction to what President Biden said there? Well, first off, I condemn the violent attack on Paul Pelosi.

I wish him well. I hope he has a full recovery. We should throw the book at his assailant. Just like we should throw the book at all violent criminals, not just those who commit crimes against the powerful and the wealthy, but people who are pushing New Yorkers in front of them, of subway trains or committing carjackings or committing murders. Too often we have gone soft on crime in this country in recent years, and I think that's contributed to the crime way we've

had. But if Joe Biden wants to be serious about political violence, why didn't he have his own Department of Justice enforce the law this summer when you had left-wing agitators protesting in front of Supreme Court justices' homes in direct violation of federal law, which culminated with a deranged left-wing hitman traveling from California trying to assassinate Brett Kavanaugh. I condemn that just as strongly and think we should throw the book at him as well. Well, listen, I don't disagree with you.

I would agree with you about that. I suppose my question would be, should we throw the book also at people who are political, either politicians or, you know, budding politicians have big public profiles who make a mockery of incidents like the appalling attack on Paul Pelosi?

Would you throw the book at them as well? Well, their words, though, unwise and unhelpful to healthy debate are protected by the First Amendment. Look, there's a lot of heated rhetoric and campaign, but pointing out that Nancy Pelosi passed Obamacare 12 years ago or has spent trillions of dollars we don't have and contributed this inflation, has no bearing whatsoever on this violence tax on her husband.

I was actually referring to that. I was actually referring to this, or two clips, actually. One is the Arizona governor candidate, Carrie Lake. who said this in response to what happened. It is not impossible to protect our kids at school. They act like it is. Nancy Pelosi, well, she's got protection when she's in DC. Apparently, her house doesn't have a lot of protection.

I mean, hearing an audience laugh out loud at such a crass comment, you must share my horror at that, don't she? Well, peers, again, rhetoric on the campaign trail that may be tough does not contribute to this kind of violent. If anything, what you've heard there, what you've heard from Republicans about Nancy Pelosi, pales in contrast say what Chuck Schumer said on the steps of the Supreme Court that Brett Kavanaugh wouldn't know what hit him if he issued rulings that Chuck Schumer disagreed with. Listen, I'm not for a moment defending anything else that you've been talking about,

and I think they've all been appalling incidents. But for instance, Donald Trump Jr. put a Halloween tweet out, which he then deleted, which said this. This is a picture, as you can see there, of a hammer on a pair of underpants. And Donald Trump Jr. tweeted, the internet remains undefeated. And if you switch out the hammer for a red feather bow, you could be Hunter Biden in an instant.

Now, again, I would simply say that if you're going to, you know, say that we've got to throw people out for bad behavior, bad commentary, bad, whatever, these are just, to me, extraordinarily crass things to be doing in the light of an elderly man who happens to be the husband of the United States speaker who was nearly killed in this attack from all accounts. This is not a subject for humor, is it? Well, peers, I can only tell you what I think it is. I think it's a heinous attack,

and we should be throwing the book at people who commit these violent acts, whether against Paul Pelosi or Brett Kavanaugh or just ordinary Americans. Something that politicians may say in the heat of the campaign, you could think it's crass or that it's poorly, poor judgment, but it's not the same as committing these acts of violence. No, no, listen, I'm not for a moment. I'm not for a moment saying it's the same. I just think it would be really helpful. I speak, because I'm in a country right now, Britain, where two members of Parliament

have been murdered by crazy people in the last six years. And I'm extremely worried. As someone who has a house in America, spends a lot of time over there, loves the country, loves the people. I'm very worried that the temperature of political debate is reaching the kind of levels which we had here over Brexit and other incendiary issues,

which caused crazy people to do crazy things to our politicians. And I don't want to see the next bit of news that we see in America being that an actual politician has been murdered by a crazy person because the rhetoric being hurled around by people and the lack of seriousness taken by political figures when these things happen as well, by the way, that all this, it doesn't help, does it? Isn't it time that everybody dialed things down?

Well, Pierce, I think you can have tough campaigns, you can have spirited debates, but you can also be civil and respectful. Now, I think in many of these cases, unfortunately, like it would appear with the Paul Pelosi incident or Gabby Gifford's incident more than a decade ago, you're dealing with someone who has serious mental health issues as well, which raises a different set of public policy questions.

But I think it's best that we have spirited debates, but debates that are respectful and civil and recognize that we were all Americans, or in your case, all British, and that we can have disagreements, that we can settle those disagreements through our elected representatives or at the ballot box. Yeah, I can endorse that. Now, Sen. So you've got an extraordinary background.

You served in Iraq with 101st Airborne Division and in Afghanistan with a provincial reconstruction team. Between combat tools, you served with a third infantry regiment, the Old Guard, Arlington National Cemetery, which I've been to, which is a remarkable place. So a really commendable military career. And I wanted to ask you specifically about one part of what's going on in the world right now, involving Russia's invasion of Ukraine. and what the recently deposed British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said today about the nuclear threat which Putin keeps making? I don't think he will. I think he'd be crazy to do so.

What would happen is that he would immediately tender Russia's resignation from the Club of Civilized Nations. It would be a total disaster for his country. What did you make of that comment? Well, I tend to agree. with Boris. I know that Vladimir Putin has rattled the nuclear saber. We've seen no indication of him taking kind of steps to use nuclear weapons, nor can we allow the nuclear threat to allow him to blackmail the United States or blackmail the West. You know, I've got a new book

out called Only the Strong, and I write about exactly this kind of threat throughout the Cold War. You know, Ronald Reagan took a very strong, assertive stance against Soviet-Russian communism, even though the nuclear threat then was just as dangerous as it is now. We have to be strong, we have to be resolute in the defense of America's national interests. And as you saw time and time again with Ronald Reagan, that kind of strength and resolution didn't lead to nuclear war, it didn't lead to World War III. It led to victory and success in the Cold War.

There are Republicans. It's quite interesting. I was just been in America, actually. I went to New York, L.A., and talked to a lot of people. Republicans do seem a bit split about Ukraine and about how far America should be going to help the Ukrainian. Some Republicans bang up for it and think that they should be giving him whatever he needs, Zelensky to win the war, recognizing perhaps the wider threat to the world,

including America, if Putin was to win. But other Republicans, and I'm quite surprised about this, have taken a view that it's not really in America's interests to get involved in this conflict at all. What's your view? Well, I think it is in our interest to support the Ukrainians fighting in their own war to defend their own territory. That's what we've been doing from the beginning.

If we had done it earlier and if Joe Biden hadn't granted so many concessions to Vladimir Putin in 2021, I don't think he would have been tempted to go for the jugular in Ukraine in the first place. I go into great detail about this and only the strong. And when I'm traveling across Arkansas, when I'm traveling on the campaign trail across America, I hear that most Americans want to continue to support the Ukrainians who are fighting their own war. There is frustration. They don't think enough European nations are doing their part.

Now, there are some weapons that only America has that only we can provide. But when it comes to financial aid for the government in Ukraine, there's certainly a lot of nations in Europe. that could be doing more to help pull their share of the load. Finally, Senator, I was going to let you plug your book, but you've done that very comprehensively and very impressively, I must say, several times, I won't bother, although I've told us a great read, I do want to ask you, though,

if, as it's suspected, there's a red wave in the midterms next week, and I think it's pretty clear now that that is probably going to happen, there's going to be a lot of speculation about who will be the Republican candidate in the next general election in 2024, and your name is being thrown around with more gusto. Can you say definitively whether you would be interested in running to be president? Well, Pears, I appreciate the question. I think I'll keep my focus on the election that's just a few days away rather than the elections that two years away.

But I will say this. Anyone running for president in the Republican Party who wants to help restore American strength and power in the world should get themselves a copy of Only the Strong and learn exactly how to do that. You know what? If the presidential race is determined by somebody who could, shoehorn the most mentions of their book title into one eight-minute interview. You, sir, are heading to the White House. Senator, I appreciate you coming on. Thank you very much. Thank you, Pearce. Well, coming next, it's World Vegan Day.

Always a day that I celebrate with huge enthusiasm. And there are my pack, a clutching vegan sausage roll from Greg's. One of my favorites. We'll be discussing that after the break. Welcome back. I'm joined by Talk TV contributors, Esther Crackner, and Paula Rohn. And very sadly, they brought with them some sausage rolls, one of which is a real one, which I will be eating for my supper later.

And the other one is a Greg's vegan sausage roll, which remains as inedible as you can possibly imagine any food product to be. But it's World Vegan Day. If that rocks your boat, go and see a doctor, which is what most vegans look like they need to. Welcome to my pack. I want to start with just something that's a bit of fun, but it is a bizarre thing to happen. James Cawden, who's been in the news a lot, over his bust-up in a restaurant, the owner giving him a whack-as.

Omling gate, yeah. So he did a joke on Halloween night on his show in America, and then people thought, hang on, we've heard that before, and this is the mash-up. Because if someone puts up a poster in a town square that says, guitar lessons available... That's like going into a town square, seeing a big notice board, and there's a notice guitar lessons.

Like, you don't get people in the town go, I don't want to play the guitar! And you go, but I don't want guitar lessons. That sign wasn't for you. It was for somebody else. You don't have to get mad about all of it. Fine, it's not for you then. Just walk away. It's not great.

My theory, there's a secret omelet lover in the writing team at the Gordon Show who's basically slipped in one there, right? Absolutely. But let's not talk about it. that. It's just a bit of fun, really. I want to talk about Elon Musk taking over Twitter. We're all on Twitter, right? And today he's announced that it's going to be $8 a month to have your blue tick, about £7, to have your blue tick. And with that, you get a few benefits on top

to edit tweets and so on. Would you pay it? Oh, absolutely. Yeah, I think you would, wouldn't you? It makes sense as a business model as well, because then, you know, the site isn't beholden to just advertisers saying, we're going to boycott you because you haven't de-platform this person. It takes the power out of the advertisers and puts it back into the user's hands because only 1% of Twitter actually has over 1,000 followers and even a fraction of that have blue ticks.

He also thinks it will get rid of a lot of the bots or stuff because people will want to pay this or want to be part of the blue tick thing. By doing that, you have to identify exactly who you are and everything else. And that's important to be able to be challenged because surely that's what Twitter's all about. You want your voice to be heard,

but also you have to have the right to be challenged. And I think that's what's really important about this. And actually, I think that's probably a good thing. I mean, Elon Moss, you see, my thing about him is he's an absolute creative whirlwind genius. Absolutely. I think that goes without saying, already, he seems to be getting under the bonnet of Twitter and working out how to, A, make it a functional, better functioning platform, but also to make a lot of money out of it, which is what he's brilliant at doing.

And I've got no problem with that, because the bedrock of what he wants to do is to restore what he calls a more balanced conversation and allowing people with different views. I mean, we know that mainly conservative views are the ones that have been suppressed, right? Absolutely. And I think this is the thing. Sorry, how do we know that? Well, because actually...

They're the ones that are mostly getting banned. You actually don't see many on the left get banned. And actually, I see some of the left do unspeakably nasty stuff on Twitter and they get away with it because they're on the left. And I'm not one... I don't call for censorship because I don't really care for that. I don't think it should be a playground where it's supposed to be tip for tat. I think these platforms should be exactly that platforms.

You should have everyone should have a voice. You shouldn't just. proportionately favour one or the other. Because at that point, you're not a platform, you're a publisher. And I totally agree with that. That's what I'm really happy about. I love the fact that Elon Musk has annoyed so many people. They're all like, we're leaving Twitter.

I'll tell you what I'm happy about. I'd lost a lot of followers in the last few months. And then they've all come surging back to Elon Musk bought Twitter. I don't know why. Probably a coincidence. Or maybe the Twitter wokeies have been stopped doing what they were doing to anyone whose views that don't like, like people attacking their vegan sausage rolls.

But I'm currently on 7,999,199, 104 followers, which means tonight the big eight million is coming in. I'm going to wake up to a big $8 million and there's going to be an 8 million party on this show tomorrow. What do you think of that? How many followers have you killed?

I think that was just an invite. Yeah, about that amount. How many followers have you both got? About 8 million. About 8 million. How many? How many? About 8.5?

Yeah. I'm going to check if you don't want to study. No, no, I have about 8 million, yeah. I'm about 1,300. 1,400? 1,300? I think so. I want to alarm you.

I don't need to check my ego is just fine. No, no, no, I made millions. You're missing half of my family members. Yeah. Do you think Twitter is ultimately a force for good or bad? Are we all being sent completely nuts by it? Are we too addicted to? We're far too addicted by it.

I think I am probably. We're far too addicted by it. We're far, our egos are simply left to run wild. And that is the problem with Twitter. And on a serious note, I hope Elon Musk can rein it in slightly. And I think he can, because I'm not sure that Donald Trump's going to last very long. I don't think he'll even go back on Twitter. I don't think it serves his purpose anymore. Oh, of course he will. He's a narcissist. He's a narcissist. I mean, I don't see the

incentive behind it. But I think, I don't think Twitter is a force for good as it currently is, because I don't think most people trust it. Like, they don't trust our people. Can we talk about a force for evil, which is the stop the oil cretins who've been up doing their thing? They actually attacked our building, Newt Kays with their paint. They've attacked Downing Street today. They are the biggest toddlers in world protesting history. And I keep saying this, and they don't want to hear it, none of us are actually being moved to follow their cause

by this pathetic behaviour. And the police should be doing more to stop them. Pierce, what was the purpose? We've run out of time, Paul. Thank you, guys. That's it from me. We'll interrupt to. Keep it unscensored. Good night.