Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Stephen A Smith

Episode Date: January 23, 2023

Tonight on Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers gives his verdict on whether there's any way back for Prince Andrew as he prepares to launch a legal challenge to his settlement with Virginia Giuffre. Stephen A Smith speaks to Piers Morgan about the hypocrisy of politics in sports and almost being cancelled for criticising Rihanna. Piers says he finds the non-binary singer, Sam Smith, "exhausting" after they said it's "a shame" that no women were nominated in the Brits Best Artist category. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8 pm on TalkTV on Sky 522, 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 on Pizmogne. We're censored, Disgraced Prince Andrew, blots a legal fight to reopen his sex abuse case, as his friend Gilane Maxwell, from behind bars, launches an extraordinary defense. Is there any way back to public life, though, for Andrew? Is he simply fanning the flames of a scandal the Royals just want to forget? Gillane Maxwell's bombshell interview, airing exclusively here on Talk TV, has made global headlines. But why should anyone believe a word she says?

I'll talk to one of Epstein's victims, and the superstar lawyer who represented 20 others. Plus, he's one of the most explosive sportscasters on American television, and he's now in deep trouble for daring to say that he prefers Beyonce to Rihanna. Stephen A. Smith has had to issue groveling apologies to battle cancel culture. Tonight, we'll be speaking to him live. Live from London, this is Pearz Morgan Unsensored. Well, good evening from London.

Welcome to Pierce Morgan Unsensored. Prince Andrew is, of course, the royal headache that just won't go away. He's never apologized for the shame he heaped on the reputation of the British monarchy. He's never apologized for remaining friends with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, even after Epstein admitted child abuse.

He's also never apologized to Virginia Geoffrey, the woman who sued him for sexual abuse and claimed she had sex with him, age 17, after being trafficked by Epstein. In fact, Prince Andrew explicitly vowed to clear his name in that case. He was going to have his day in court, but he didn't. First, he claimed he never met her,

then he handed millions of pounds to settle the case out of court and avoid having his day. Well, now he's planning to overturn the settlement, according to reports, after Geoffrey dropped a completely separate claim against the American lawyer Alan Dershowitz. He'll likely claim again that he's never met his accuser

and that the infamous photograph of the two of them is a fake, where one person cheering him on from behind bars is his friend Gilley Maxwell is serving 20 years for trafficking young girls to Epstein for him to abuse. She spoke about that photograph in an extraordinary interview airing exclusively tonight on Talk TV. It's a fake.

I don't believe that. I don't believe it's real for a second. In fact, I'm sure it's not. There's never been an original. And further, there's no photograph. And I've only ever seen a photocopy of it. Well, she's got no evidence to say that. She's locked up for a very long time for committing wicked crimes.

The judge sentencing her said, Maxwell directly and repeatedly over the course of many years, participated in a horrific scheme to entice, transport and traffic, underage girls, some as young as 14, for sexual abuse by and with Jeffrey Epstein. The damage done to these girls was incalculable.

If I was Prince Andrew, Gillane Maxwell would not be somebody I'd want in my corner. Her defence failed in the Court of Public Opinion and in a Court of Law, and through the course of this extraordinary interview, she somehow managed to make it worse. I say that Epstein died and they should take their disappointment and upset out on the authorities that allowed that to happen.

And as I said, I hope that they have some closure by the judicial process that they took place. Well, her complete failure to accept responsibility, is shocking, but sadly very familiar. Prince Andrew dragged his own reputation into the gutter with his own choices. He spent millions of pounds, most of it coughed up by his mother, the late Queen, and King Charles' brother,

by settling out of court. Now he's preparing to spend hundreds of thousands more to fight it all over again. Lawyers for Epstein's victims will be licking their lips at the idea of Prince Andrew on the witness stand, dragging the entire scandal back

onto the front pages around the world again. Andrew threw in the towel by settling his case. That was an omission by him that it was over. He wasn't actually going to fight this. He wasn't actually going to clear his name. He wasn't going to have his day in court. He just paid this woman who he claims he's never met, an enormous sum of money to go away. But he also closed the door on a sorry chapter of royal history by doing so and on his own involvement in any more royal duties. And that's how it should stay. The time for protesting innocence in this scandal is long gone. What, joining me now as social

and Prince Andrew's former girlfriend, Lady Victoria Harvey, author and historian, Dr. Tessa Dunlop, and Monson's former Royal editor, Duncan Larkham. And from America, a lawyer to 20 of Jeffrey Epstein's victims, Gloria Allred. Well, welcome to all of you, a stellar panel. Gloria All right, let me, well, first of all, love you to talk to you and belated Happy New Year to you, Gloria. Your reaction when you heard that Gillet Maxwell

had given this extraordinary interview from behind bars and I suppose more pertinently to the content of that interview. Well, I think that she obviously was trying to be helpful to her former friend or acquaintance, Prince Andrew, and that that was part of her intent. I can't read her mind. I don't know what her motive was in saying it. Maybe it's because that's what she believes to be true.

But it has stirred up quite a storm. But at some point, we should talk about whether there really is, going to be a trial because I have done many, many settlements with his attorney, not about this case, although you're correct. I did represent 20 victims of Jeffrey Epstein, some of whom had accusations against Ms. Maxwell. But there was a settlement, and his attorney, Andrew Rutler, is very, very good, and for him to say that Prince Andrew, or to have it suggested as a rumor, that he is going to a lawsuit that somehow he was pressured by his mother into the settlement.

That, you know, as they say in the south in some parts of the United States, that dog won't hunt because that's not a reason to overturn a settlement. And further, likely, although I haven't seen the settlement, most settlements or in fact all of them that I've ever done with Andrew Brettler, his attorney, have always included an arbitration clause, which means that he can't just go right to trial, even if he would want to. If in fact he did file the lawsuit, Virginia could make a motion to compel arbitration because always there's always been arbitration clauses.

And that would mean it's likely that the court, if it's a court in New York, would compel arbitration. And so there would not be a public trial. At best, there would be an arbitration. Okay, but Gloria, on the central point of the credibility of his accuser, there's no doubt that the settlement of the case with Alan Dershowitz in which she admitted that she'd had memory mistakes and so on, that was a serious dent to her credibility. If you were representing Prince Andrew,

wouldn't you think that actually if the main accuser here who received this huge amount of money, if this other case has basically collapsed on an issue of her credibility, would it not be worth at least to choose? trying to go again? Well, that case ended up in a settlement, not in a verdict. And the argument also could be, and of course I wouldn't represent Prince Andrew, but the argument for a plaintiff would be that, you know, that maybe she had a memory

lapse about one person and one set of events. That doesn't mean she had a memory lapse about other events. Right, but it would be... last thing, which is... Right, but, listen, but, Gloria, you're a very smart lawyer, razor smart, I would say, one of the finest legal minds I know. If you had a situation like this and you were up against it on the other side,

wouldn't you think that if her credibility was now seriously in question, if her memory was proven to be completely wrong in another allegation of a similar kind, would you not think that that might open the door again? You know, perhaps, but I think it's unlikely. You know, in order for Prince Andrew to have an actual trial or, you know, even in an arbitration, he would have to prove some kind of fraud at the time. And not only that there was a fraud, that it was, that Virginia was part of this fraud, that's a very high bar of evidence.

That's very difficult for him to prove. And I don't know that he's ever going to prove it. Okay. Interesting stuff. Let me come to Tessa on this. I have a view that the moment Andrew paid that check, it was game over in this case. He can't revisit this. He said, I'm going to take it all the way, I'm going to clear my name, then he just caved and paid a massive amount of money. Millions. We're not exactly sure how many. You read between three and ten million. It's, you know, take your choice. But it was millions and millions of dollars. To a woman, he claims he never met,

which never had any credibility as far as I'm concerned. Why would you pay somebody who never met millions of dollars in a sex abuse case? So you put it all together and you think that. But, and it's an important but, if his main accuser, the woman he's paid all this money to, has got now serious credibility issues, why shouldn't Andrew re-enter the legal fray? It's an entirely separate case. This is absolutely classic. People going out of their way to discredit.

the victim of sex abuse crimes. These girls generally girls. Hang on just look. To play devil's advocate, people aren't going out of their way to do it. She was discredited in her allegations against Alan Dershowitz. In one case. Right. But if an accuser admits that she actually lied about that man

and told very serious allegations about which turned out not to be true, that's different, isn't it? I think it's really important to remember that these girls come from chaotic backgrounds, which is one of the reasons why it's so hard to make a case stick, which is why we all have to remember when we've been listening to what Jolaine Maxwell's been saying, this is a woman who was called out by the judge.

She was called out... You've got notes because you don't know anything about this case. I do know quite a lot about talking truth to power. I'm sitting here on an MDA. So I understand what it's like as a woman. I can tell you quite a lot. She was called out by the judge. Have you read her book? Have you read her book? Have you read her book? Have you read her book? No. I have not. I have not read her book. About taking so many sleeping pills and so many drugs

the weekend at Kinnerton Street that her memory was very hazy. She writes up with her own hand. Let's recall that Virginia goof, Jolene Maxwell, keenness and predatory is what the judge called her. And she went out of her one second. She went out of her way. to give Jelaine a 20-year sentence that was beyond the maximum guideline. That is how appalling was. It was extraordinary to get all those women talking truth to power in that way. So don't let's just finally, Ms. Credit, no, Ms. Credit, go free and her bravery. I'm going to be, let's just be honest.

She's a fucking liar. Let's remember. I just want to finally remind you what Andrew signed his name to. Okay. Let's stop. I just want to. Sorry for the bad language. which was used in only for that.

Victoria, here's the bottom line with this. I don't believe Gillian Maxwell at all. I think she was up to her neck in it with Epstein. I think she was guilty as she was found guilty. And I find this revisionist bleating she's now doing. It's all self-centered

to try and get herself off the rat. The more interesting question for me is Andrew. Right. So he was made to settle. He didn't want to settle. But he's a grown man. He makes him settle. The queen, because he's an honourable person. He didn't have to settle that. He did. Were you there in the room?

I mean, I wasn't there, but I was told that the queen and Buckingham Palace, basically, he was forced to settle. He had no choice. I mean, look, let's bring in Duncan here. And they literally just fed him to the wolves. Okay. Oh, come on. Hang on, Tessa. I want to bring in Duncan.

From a journalistic point of view, if we were pursuing this as an investigation, and you had a woman who made allegations against two high-profile people, and one was a top lawyer, right? Alan Dersh was not any old lawyer. This is a guy who represented John Lennon and got him from being deported, right? This is a famous guy in America. It's a totally different guy.

No, no, here's my point. And she makes allegations of a similar nature against him as she did against Prince Andrew. And she's now had to drop them, drop that lawsuit, admitting she may have made a mistake in identifying him as one of her past abusers. We know, as journalists, our natural instinct would be

to then be very skeptical about anything else that she was saying, right? Well, yes, but I mean, apart from the fact that this is a case that's gone on for years. But just pretend it's not her. Just pretend it's like a person has just done this and has openly lied. And then so what would you think about the case with another person? Do you think she's being truthful? Well, either lied or she opened or she made a terrible mistake based on issues in her life. I think just had a very creative imagination.

Whatever the reason she's, let's wait a minute. Whatever the reason she got it wrong, badly wrong, and seriously defamed Alan Dershowitz in the process, and he fought it all the way, and that lawsuit's now been dropped. And that is the same woman is accused Prince Andrew. There are all kinds of things that had it gone to court that would have probably needed light shed on them and might not have stood up to any kind of testament of time,

the picture and the authenticity of it, obviously, being one of those points. But also about the involvement in newspapers more than a decade ago when the story was being effectively sold. to the tabloid papers, which I was part of at the time. So that would be, in Britain, certainly, that would put a big question mark over any potential victim. But I don't think any of it matters if you take a step back. It doesn't actually matter.

What on earth Andrew's thinking, if he is seriously contemplating, reopening this, he's already been found guilty in the court of public opinion. And his appearance on the BBC with Emily Maitliss has just demonstrated. Well, that was a total disaster. Yeah, well, that was a complete set up. And I can't even tell you what is really behind this because you wouldn't even understand.

It wasn't a setup. I mean, News and I went to him. He agreed to do an interview. And he thought he said he basically exposed himself hideously over an hour long toe-cirling encounter with a very smart journalist. Here's my problem with Andrew about all this, right? I remember when the pictures appeared

on the front page of the News of the World of him walking with Epstein through a park, central park in New York. It wasn't like he just met him in the park. He spent four days with the guy at his Manhattan townhouse. We don't know how many days he goes. Four days and they were all partying. Lots of women seen coming and going in that time.

This is after Epstein had admitted abusing a 14-year-old. After he was a convicted paed fire. So here's my question. You can get around. Everything else can be murky. What I can't get my head round is Andrew, son of the queen, flies to New York for a four-day jolly. Do we know for sure it was four days?

We do. It was four days. Four day jolly with a guy who was a convicted pedophile. Yeah. Now, that alone, to me, should disqualify him for public life, right? You can't be a senior member of the royal family and consult with convicted paedophiles willingly for four days. Yeah, but, you know, we have to remember it wasn't such a big story back then. It doesn't change the facts of what he did.

It doesn't change the facts of what he did. Like when it happened the first time, I almost didn't even be. believe it when I first read it because it was kind of like it wasn't on the front pages back then Victoria what you've said there is absolutely a classic case people don't believe it when establishment figures do the unbelievable but but what I'm saying is you don't know about Virginia like I follow this day and night could I just tell you what Andrew's signed his name to can I know what I've got here are notes from I know you're doing notes because you don't let me tell you Andrew accepted when he signed last year,

he accepted that Virginia had suffered as an established victim of abuse. And as a result of public attacks, he accepted that publicly. So are you now saying Andrew's a liar? Because to rescind on that, he's a liar. He's never admitted anything, any wrongdoing. She was the victim of abuse, upset the abuse.

He had to say that. Oh, so now you're saying he's a liar. You know, the irony, Victoria, is if Andrew had not settled, if he had taken it to court, then actually, given the timeline of this other case collapsing, it could have been a situation

where the credibility of his main accuser had been brought into serious question before they even got into court. In which case, the whole case may have been dropped anyone. What happened to Alan Dershevitz? I've been in communication with him, I don't know, maybe a year or so, and Virginia kept delaying. Her lawyers kept

delaying and delaying and his health wasn't good. You know, he was really suffering. And so she, if you're innocent, why would you keep delaying a deposition? Right? All right. We're going to take a short break. When we come back, we're going to talk to one of Jeffrey Epstein's victims live from America. Also going to play some more of these extraordinary tapes with Gillet Maxwell from behind bars.

A talk TV exclusive. That's after the break. We're talking to come tonight. Who do you prefer Beyonce or Rihanna? One of an American TV sports superstar, Stephen A. Smith. one of my favorite sporting pundits in the world when he dared to say which one he preferred all hell broke loose and they tried to cancel it.

He survived. He's live on Pierce Morgan Uncensored in a few minutes. He looks pretty chilled about it now but it's been a hot week. But first, I'm going to speak to one of Jeffrey Epstein's victims in a moment, but before I do that, I want to play Gilane Maxwell from this extraordinary interview behind bars in the American prison where she's being held, where she says a number of,

well, to me, deluded and self-serving things. Take a listen. I believe that he was murdered. I was shocked. And I wondered how it has happened. Because he was going to... I was sure he was going to appeal. I wish I'd never met him.

You know, looking back now, I probably wish I had stayed at... in England. I say that Epstein died and they should take their

disappointment and upset out on the authorities that allowed that to happen. And as I said I hope that they have some closure by the

judicial process that they don't place. What's a fake? I don't believe that. I don't believe it It's real for a second. In fact, I'm sure it's not. There's never been an original.

And further, there's no photograph. And I've only ever seen a photocopy of it. Well, joining me now is one of Jeffrey Epstein's victims, Juliet Bryant. I've still got my pack with me. And Gloria Allred also be listening to this. Juliette Bryant, thank you very much indeed for joining me. Can you hear me, Juliet? Juliet, can you hear me?

Hello. Hello, Piers, yes, I can hear you. Well, thank you very much indeed for joining me. I know this is not an easy thing for you to do. But what is your reaction to Gilein Maxwell's interview from behind bars? Well, I think people want to know more about what was really going on. And I think people need to deserve to know the truth. In your case, what was the truth?

Sum up for me what happened to you? taken their, you know, I was promised to modelling career. So we're having a lot of trouble here in the hotel room that got booked, and everything's fallen out of my ears. I think we've got a few technical issues there with Juliet's recording issues there. So we'll come back and see if we can sort that out. We've got Gloria Allred. Gloria, I just played those clips again.

We're going to try and speak to Juliet again later. But you've represented many of the victims of Epstein. I would imagine this does bring back. horrific memories for all of them. But I'd imagine many of them will see Gilein Maxwell doing interviews at all as a massive slap in the teeth. Well, I would say that many of them would like to put all of this behind them and not have to keep hearing about Jeffrey Epstein and Ms. Maxwell.

And, you know, I think in reference to this photograph that is so much at issue, I wonder if the FBI, first of all, if it has ever been admitted into evidence in the case against Ms. Maxwell. Because that would be important. She says that she's never seen an original. Does that mean that a copy was put in evidence and not authenticated as an original?

I have never heard anything about that. And I have heard that the FBI received it. But does that mean that? it actually was admitted into evidence, the original, as opposed to a copy. It's just a question that I have, and I think it's a really important question, because I think if it had been admitted into evidence, then there would have to have been some testimony about who took the photo, when it was taken, and is this an original, and more questions that would help to answer the question about.

is this an authentic photo, which would be crucial to what Ms. Maxwell says and the position of Andrew. And Gloria, have you ever had a case in all your career where somebody has paid millions and millions of dollars to a woman he says he's never met to make a sex abuse case go away? Yes, I have. And because in a settlement, you know, both sides, they do rely on everything. evidence, but it's not necessarily evidence that has been vetted in a court of law because often there's a settlement before a lawsuit was filed. Not in this case because Virginia had to file it in order to stop the, in order to be within the statute of limitations, the time period set by law in New York for adult survivors of child sexual abuse, which she asserted that she was one to file a lawsuit. But in any event, yes, to answer your question, yes, we've obtained millions of dollars from accused sexual predators. Even though in the settlement discussions, they deny that they abused our client in some cases they ever met her. We don't really care what they say, but we do care about what the ultimate number is that they're going to pay.

and of course we do have to evaluate the evidence in terms of what our recommendation is to our client about the number that is being offered. Now, in some way, of course, some predators or the accused, even if they're not predators, will settle because they don't want this continuing discussion in the press. And, you know, for whatever their reason is,

it doesn't matter as long as both sides agree to the number that is being offered, this element. Gloria, thank you, as always. Brilliant perspective. Duncan, come back to the future for Prince Andrew regardless. The last thing the new king, Charles wants, especially with the coronation coming, is all this back all over the papers again around the world.

It's such a horribly damaging story from start to finish. There'll be no will-will there in the royal family and the hierarchy there of Charles and William to want Andrew back on the balcony as a lead role again? Absolutely none. And we're already seeing in King Charles, someone who's actually possibly even surprising us

with his savvy nature, with the public, how things look. So far, that king, he has played a pretty flawless game. But now with the re-emergence of this, the suggestions that this is with Prince Charles' support, I question that. I can't see the palace wanting this. The thing about this, it's just never going away.

We've seen that in the last year, that the fact is they did the settlement agreement, but it's still in the press all the time. It's still super negative about Andrew, and it's like, it's not going to go away. So you have to prove his citizens. I think you're wrong. I think this is just him having a fine little flutter of his clip drawl wings. He's saber rattling.

He's did that loads before the settlement. And I'm afraid this is about his inherited a bit of money. He's desperate to get back to the Republic of life. He's an bit of money from mummy. He can't lie. Like, he's a military guy. Like, even what he was wearing. He can't lie because he's a military.

Well, no, no. But just what he's. Victoria, military people can't lie. No, but him as a person, right? So even the outfit that he was wearing in that picture, apparently that outfit wouldn't, he wouldn't have even been wearing that because he's

very specific of what clothes he wears for his travel clothes. So again, it comes back to this. Why not then? If he's absolutely confident, he's ever met the woman, the picture was a fake, you can just go and you want to clear your name, you've got a court. Yeah, well, right now I think there's a lot that has been coming out

and what basically, like, I found out or other people that will really help prove his case this time. I mean, like I said, I'm actually in touch with the person. I know you are, Victoria. And the problem is why we haven't been able to bring him into the limelight is he does have a criminal record. You are well-meaning, but you are also part of that establishment. And much as I love you, when I first went to follow you on Instagram, there was a warning that you spread misinformation. So I have to put something of a truth.

That was about COVID. But a truth sticker on some of what you said. No, no, just shut up. I think more broadly, Charles ain't going to do this. Guys, I've got to leave it there. It's a good debate. We'll see what happens.

It's going to keep raging, that's for sure. I think this is the last thing in the raw as well. All right. Thank you for joining me. Yeah. Well, coming up next, the US sports card, Stephen A. Smith, and almost being cancelled, criticizing or daring to suggest

Beyonce is better than Rihanna. Well, my views about cancelled culture are pretty clear. First, I think is dangerous to society in his own way in terms of its attack on free speech. Secondly, I'd like to take those ultra-woke lunatics who calls council culture head on. Well, last week, one of America's top sports broadcaster, Stephen A. Smith, faced a social media Ferrari

if you dared to give an opinion on pop superstar Rihanna, who's doing this year's halftime NFL Super Bowl show next month. Let's take a look. Ladies and gentlemen, she's a lot of things. She's spectacular, actually. Yes. And congratulations on New Mamahood. Yes.

There's one thing she's not. Uh-huh. She ain't Beyonce. Now, Stephen A. Smith, he's a very opinionated guy, and he's perfectly entitled to his opinions, and his personal opinion is that Beyonce is there, and Rihanna is great, but not quite as good as Beyonce, which is an honestly held opinion, and many people would agree with him. But there was a most extraordinary social media pile on,

so much so that he was forced to issue an apology. Rihanna, go do your thing? I apologize for creating whatever bro. When the true ha-ha comes up this, I gotta be more careful where people twisted and turn it into something that ain't. My bad on that. Well, Stephen's new book, it's called Straight Shooter, does exactly what it says on the tin. And he joins me like, Stephen, it's great to have you on the program. First of all, thank you very much indeed for joining me.

Good to talk to you, man. How you doing? My pleasure. How you doing? I'm a little bit disappointed in you because I love you, and I don't think you should have bowed to the mob and apologize. you should have dug in, stuck to your guns, and said, you know what, I prefer Beyonce. No disrespect to Rihanna. I just prefer Beyonce.

Well, first of all, if you listen to what I had to say, I didn't apologize to any mob, I apologized to Rihanna. And what I apologized for was making a mess of this whole deal, not realizing that people were going to react this way, all of a sudden recognizing it as a crime to express my opinion. You know, my thing is she's home, she's a new mom, she's doing very well for herself. obviously she's a sensational artist

and my point to her was that I wasn't saying that you're not great just like I bought Beyonce's album I bought yours I am a fan it's just that I am of the opinion that Beyonce may be the greatest I've ever seen

I certainly didn't apologize for expressing that opinion what I was apologizing who I was apologizing to was Rihanna personally and what I was apologizing for was how people were able to twist it and try to interpret it as me

denigrating her in any way, which I was not doing. You see, I got into a little furor in my own last week with another pop star, Madonna, who I think has become a train wreck of epic proportions, and I said it quite vehemently. Hello? And all hell broke loose. Can you hear me? I don't hear you. Oh, I think you're... We're having a few technical issues tonight, so we're going to fix that IFB, just a little

airpiece, which goes into Stephen's ear. We'll put it back in. We've got him back. I'm back. Stephen, I think your IFP popped out. No problem. You're back. I had a little issue with Madonna. I said on air last week, Madonna, I thought when she announced her tour, I thought she'd become the biggest train wreck in world entertainment. All help.

Here's a little clip of what I said. Here we are. See, I don't even care. I don't need to like singers to enjoy them at all. In fact, quite the opposite. I don't need to like any artist to enjoy them. But in her case, I find her behavior for a woman in her 60s just utterly embarrassing. I mean, if that was my mother or grandmothers or something, you'd be like cringing.

Now, that's... That was my honestly held opinion, Stephen, about Madonna. People can disagree. You might disagree. But certainly, I had a huge blowback from people, Madonna fans and so on, calling me all sorts of stuff, wanting me cancel, you want to be shame for being a misogynist, sex, and so on. It was none of those things.

I just think she does things deliberately to provoke, and I find them pretty revolting, actually. Now, here's the point. Here's my point. It would never have crossed my mind to apologize. And I just thought that knowing you and I'm such a fan of yours, I was surprised you felt you needed to. I felt I needed to because I think that if your Rihanna is sitting home mind of your business, you interpreted it maybe without seeing it yourself as people expressing sentiments

that I was disrespectful to her, which I did not do. And my point is a lot of times you have people that are subjected to the headlines without really knowing the details of the content that's been disseminated. So I wanted to make sure that she understand exactly where I was coming from, that I was a fan of hers. I'm just a bigger fan of Beyonce, and I'm not apologizing for that to anybody. Having said all of that, your point about Madonna,

here's where I would compare to two. You were talking about Madonna as a person and how she conducts herself, and you are entitled to your opinion, and people are entitled to disagree and even be offended by that. My point is, what did I say about Rihanna that was offensive?

I say she's great and sensational and that she's done great. I said nothing offensive about her. And so for people to interpret that, if she didn't see it herself, she might have just went with these fools out there with this woke culture that goes to the extreme and I wanted to make sure that I addressed it directly

and apologize to her for creating this stir but in the same breath, please understand. I am not someone who is fearful of the right or the left to the extreme. Walt culture doesn't fear me. They can all kiss off. I'm not here to make friends and subject what I feel or suppress what I feel because I'm fearful about how somebody is going to react.

It's just that I wanted Rihanna to make sure she knew. I wanted to make sure she knew in no way that I intend any disrespect towards her. Everybody else could kick rocks. I'm not worried about what you feel. Well, I'm very glad to hear it, because that's more like the Stephen Smith than I know. But let me ask you this. What does it say about wider society that you can go on a show, as you did, to promote your excellent book, and just make a genuine, honest observation that you think Beyonce is the biggest star of a kind in the world

and that Rihanna may not be quite at that level, but it's still great. And that creates a gigantic firestorm driven by social media. What does it say about where we've gone to as a society? It says several things. A, people don't have a lot of things going on in their life. They have nothing better to do. Or number two, they're entirely too petty. Or number three, they're feigning passion and vitriol and what have you

because it's click-baked material and everybody's looking. to find a way to monetize whatever they're doing as opposed to going out there and really putting in the work and making something of themselves. That's not to say that everybody that feels that way are that way because I'm certainly not trying to imply that. But I would like to believe that most people in this world have better things to do with their time

than creating a controversy out of something this minuscule and innocuous. Comedians, that's different. I mean, you're making jokes, you see, you react to it, You're making people laugh and stuff like that. But I'm talking about the natural, organic, authentic uproar over something that there was nothing to have an uproar about. But that's the society that we're living in because those are people on the fringes, whether it's the extreme right or the extreme left. They make up about 8% of the population, no matter which side you lean to. And unfortunately, the ones who screech the louder are the ones who get the most attention as opposed to the vast majority of us who have some damn sense.

that's really what the situation is and that's what you have to deal with in today. What is the answer? It's unfortunate, it's sad at that time, but you can deal with it. Steve, well, what is the answer to this cancelled culture, which is enveloped society, not just in the States, but over here in the UK, around the world, actually. Elon Musk has called it the woke virus

where people feel this immediate inclination if they hear an opinion they don't like or don't agree with to want to shame and vilify that person, get them hounded out of their job, ruin their lives if they can. They take great glee in that. What do we do about it? How do we stop it happening?

You have to shame the petty into the petty holes they belong in. And those of us who have some sense or have some decorum and are relatively reasonable, we need to make sure that our voices are just as loud, if not louder, than theirs. If somebody is loud and obnoxious

and you never hear anybody else, sure they're going to come across as profound in some people's eyes because they're getting that shine, that level of attention. But when you give attention to those who are worthy of it, who make more sense, who exercise more common sense and decency and decorum,

et cetera, then obviously those people will weed itself out. Stop allowing these people to monetize such certain situations, make money off of the pettiness and the vitriol, make sure that they got to go out there and earn their money the old-fashioned way, and then

you'll see people preoccupying themselves with other things instead of this kind of nonsense that I was subjected to last week. Adam, interest, did you hear from either Beyonce or Rihanna personally? No, no, no, I didn't. Because I had my own little run-in with Rihanna, who's quite feisty. This was a few years ago. She performed... I didn't know that.

She performed at a Paralympics event and was fantastic, but she cut her hair very short. And I, rather cheekily, I admit, I went on Twitter and said, I think Rihanna should grow her hair back fast. And she replied by, she came off stage actually and immediately replied to me, you should grow your bleep fast, referring to a lower part of my abdominal region. Well, let me say this to you.

I don't agree with that comeback by her. I don't think that was necessary. But I would tell you this. I would tell you this. I also don't agree with your assertion of Rihanna. Rihanna on her worst day looks better than most women. She is a very, very beautiful woman. Short here or long here.

And I definitely think that you, I actually think that you are a bit off kilter there. It's pretty hard to find a woman more beautiful than Rihanna. I think you cross the line there. I think you raise a very good point, Mr. Smith. Talk me quickly about your book. Because you wrote a book and it's called Straight Shooter. I wrote a book called Shooting Straight. So I think we are kindred spirits in many ways.

and agree probably about a lot more than we disagree about. But if you were selling your book, giving a sort of a sales pitch, what would you say to people as to why they should go and buy it? I think that it's a motivational book. It's an inspirational book. If you're young or old and the odds are stacked against you and you're down and people are telling you you're out

that there's no way to climb from the bottom, from the abyss, or to ascend to new heights, they're wrong. The fact of the matter is you put your head down, you're focused, plan, there's always somebody out there to help you, give you a helping hand, and to give you that motivation to move forward. And that's what I want people to get out of this, to understand that there's a lot of us in this world that go through a lot of trials and tribulations. But you don't stand still, you don't lay down and just accept the dormant consequences of your life or

your actions at that particular moment and time. As long as you're living and breathing, you've got an opportunity to get up and make tomorrow in the next day, and the day after that a hell of a lot better than past days were. That's the kind of message that I want people to appeal from this book. I love it. Stephen A. Smith, what a pleasure to have you on the show. Please come back. I loved that segment. Thank you very much. My pleasure. My pleasure. Take care. Interesting guy. Inspiring guy, too. Well, next tonight I'm joined by tonight's pack. A lot of politics slees again. Yorn. But we'll get into it. We'll work out who you should have

to resign. They're always resigning, aren't they? And they're always sleazy. Is it the end of this Tory government ready? We always had enough of it. We all just sleeves out. Are they just a bunch of sleath balls? We'll debate that after the break. Welcome back. Back with my pack tonight here with talk to if he contributors, Esther Cracker and Paula Rohn-Aid. Welcome to you, ladies. Stephen A. Smith, you're smart guy.

Yeah, really funny. Interesting, funny. Yeah. But even he, who does a book called Straight Shooter, even he gets basically bullied into apologising for basically just saying he prefers Beyonce. He didn't apologize. He didn't apologize. He didn't apologize. It's a three. minute apology. To Rihanna.

Because he was concerned that she may have misinterpreted. Yeah, exactly. He didn't bow to them all. And he was right to be concerned. Well, I don't know if he was. Who is better?

Beyonce or Rihanna? They're two different. Don't know. I think vocally, Beyonce is obviously better, but I think stylistically Rihanna is more my generation. You need to ask me who I would dance to. Exactly.

Who did you dance to? I'd dance to Rihanna. Really? What does it work? Work, work. Yeah, of course. You would dance to Riana. I would twirk.

I would twerk to both of them. Can you twerk to Crazy in Love? I'm not going to show you my twerking live on it. It's a very private thing. I feel like we can. A bit of bump and grind, but twerking. I don't want to censor you, Piers. I would not want to sense to you.

I know. We should get you to do it. Up on the table. Really? I don't think the nation is quite ready for me twerking on the table. I think you underestimate. Talking of singing, Sam Smith,

he, they, them, she, whatever, he currently calls themselves, she does, they, whatever they, you see, I can't call one person I have a problem with that. Because you can't get your head around it. No, because he can't either. You need to take time.

They can't either because they keep changing their minds what they are. No, it's not their problem. It's your problem. They was a gay man, came out as gay. Then he said, actually, I'm now non-binary. Yes. Then something else. And now they have got the gall to come out and say that the Brit Awards fiasco

where all the nominees of bed hours, of course, are men, because they made it. gender neutral so the men dominate. So you're accepting about the sex discrimination that still exists? No. Oh, you see, how classic that a woman, because the five best artists... No, hang on. Because the five...

I mean, I am. I'm bored about the sex discrimination as well. So you make it gender neutral to avoid discrimination. Not me. And when the five best artist nominations actually turn out to be men that year, that's discrimination against women. But no one was surprised at all. What about going back to having best women and best men?

which was what old Sam Smith wanted to stop, right? They wanted it to stop. They wanted non-binary to get the same part of the pie as men and women. And guess what? Now he wants more women to be nominated. Really, Sam Smith? They... How do I even speak to...

The reality is, and the reason why you're getting so tired, the reason why you're exhausted. It's exhausting. And it's true. It's exhausting. It's true. Somebody's gay in one minute, the non-binary, They want women removed from awards ceremonies.

They want gender neutral awards. And then when it turns out that no women get nominated, that becomes sexism. Then they wants to have more women in. Take a breath. And this is the problem. There is no such thing as a woke war. This is you.

Oh, no, no, no, no. Excited and exhausted about a myth. No, there is. And we need to dispel that. No, no. This is about Sam Smith. This is about them discovering going on a journey. about who they are.

It is ridiculous. And you need to keep up with that and you're struggling. No, I don't need to. And so because you're struggling, you want us to stop. But we don't need to stop. Paula, I can't actually keep up with Sam Smith.

Yeah. They change their identity so often from he to she to they to whatever. I can't keep up with it? And why does that... Why should I have to? And why should we have to?

How many women do you think were asked for their permission to whether they think the women's category should be removed? Exactly. How many women do you think Why don't you ask you doubt? He said the whole thing was ridiculous.

Yeah, and I agree with you. Because that decision was made effectively by people backing this man. It is literally the patriarchy. The fact that one confused man, which is what Sam Smith is, said, oh, but we don't want to identify as male or female. And so they removed the female. I'm not sure he would agree with you defining image confused. He's obviously confused.

I'm not sure he would agree with you as defining him is confused. He wouldn't. He? What do you mean he? Yeah, they. Hey, Paula. Hold on. You just misgender.

Sam Smith. I did. And I apologise. Can you please apologise? I apologise. Look into the camera. Apologise to the camera. I apologise. I apologise. Shed a tear. I didn't mean to do that. You see how easy it is? It is easy. But what we need to do

is have this conversation. Actually, I'm fed up with it. And by calling somebody confused, it's not helpful? If I said my pronoun was hottest man alive, if that was my genuine pronoun, would you feel obliged to call me that every day?

Hey, hottest man alive. No, you wouldn't. No. No. In other words, it all depends who decides what they want to be called. And isn't that what we're discussing? The fact that I don't have to do that. So why do we have to call Sam Smith they?

Because we're respecting their choice. That's my choice. When do I have to call you? Hang on it's my choice. When do I have to call you? Hottest man alive. Hottest man alive. Yes.

All the time. That is my choice and I demand you respect it. I'm struggling because we're now, I think. Sorry, my preferred pronouns are hotest man alive. I think we're really demeaning the topic, aren't we? Sorry. I want you... What are you now going to say that today,

you just said, we have to call... Tomorrow you want to define yourself as a chair or is a dolphin? Well, I once identified as a two-spirit penguin because I was told there are 100 genders, including astrogender, which is an affinity with the stars, and I was told Piers stop being ridiculous. I was like, if there are 100 genders, I can be a two-spirit penguin. I think the serious part.

I can now demand, you call me as my pronouns, hottest man alive. But you don't want to because you think that's ridiculous. But you'll call a single person they and then.

The serious part of this conversation is about people who do not fit into your box and you struggle with that. Here's where I struggle. You struggle with that. Paula, let me answer. Here's my problem with Sam Smith.

They said when they weren't actually they, when they were a gay man, they said we need to even up these award ceremonies by making them all gender neutral. I demand it. It's now happened, and they, as the former gay man now wants us to call him,

now says it's terribly unfair and we've got to have more women. They are responsible for where we've got to. Because changing a name doesn't change the discrimination. We never got around the Tory sleeves, but you know what? The good thing about the Tories, there's always time tomorrow. Because there'll be more of it by tomorrow. Keep it uncensored.