Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Trans Angler, Brand's Rumble Return, Hans Niemann

Episode Date: September 25, 2023

On tonight's episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers discusses why a woman has refused to take part in the world angling championships due tot their team mate being trans. Piers looks into Russell Brand's Rumble return. Piers is joined by Hans Riemann to discus to whether he used any beads to cheat at Chess at the world level. 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 Pierce Morgan, uncensored, Russell Brand is back, breaking his silence on Rumble with another conspiracy-laden tirade, with advertisers pulling out and the police now investigating what will happen to the troubled star. Members of England ladies' angling team refused to go to the world championships in protest over a trans teammate. Are they right? Does physical brawn make a big difference in the world of angling? I'll talk to the two women at the very deep end of this story. As questions, I never thought I'd have to ask, did you wear anal beads while cheating? I get to the bottom of Chess' biggest ever scandal

in an extensive interview with the new bad boy of chess, Hans Neiman. Live from the news building in London, this is Pearce Morgan Unscensored. Good evening from London. Welcome to Pierce Morgan Unsensitive. I want to tell you a little story. It's about an advertising campaign, so helplessly woke and absurd, but I'm convinced it was designed specifically

lead to irritate me. Not long ago in a large glass building filled with smug people and kale smoothies, the marketing team at HSBC commissioned a children's author to rewrite three classic fairy tales. You might well think that's an unusual thing for a bank to do. If you're sitting comfortably, I'll allow them to explain. With financial attitude shaped as early as five years old, the new book challenges traditional gender stereotypes, it says. At this point, I've already lost track, really of exactly why the bank is rewriting fairy tales or what any of it has got to do with gender stereotypes. But it gets worse. The book called Fairer Tales reimagined Cinderella Sleeping Beauty in Rapunzel, a successful businesswoman. Prince Charming is inevitable be a race as the main character.

He's a prince and he's charming. But apparently that's not enough. The marketing geniuses decided to pay tennis player Emeraldi Khanu to read the stories for reasons which remain unclear. This is how it went. Where have you been? The boys and girls are here and they're waiting to hear the three tales about money. My name's Emma and this is Ace. We have a fantastic story for you today. Now, the story may seem like one you'd know, but the characters in it are a little bit different. It's hard to believe, but the tennis ball exchanging hilarious banter with Emma Roderkan, in the video is not real.

It's CGI, and believe it or not, Emma is a tennis player, not an actor. but let's not distract from the powerful core message. So in the end, the princesses didn't need a prince to save them. They set up their own businesses, save their money, and then spent it very wisely. Thanks to our princesses, Aces learnt some new money skills. Maybe you'll buy a tower one day, or set up your own shoe business, or any business you want. Now that you've learned how to save and spend money, you can do anything. Of course, as we all know, the best way to improve the aspirations of women is by trashy.

men and as Emma says, women don't need men at all. She certainly never needed any men as far as we know to get where she is today, except, well, a father of course, who manages her career and well, fathered her. And then there are her five coaches who so far have all been male, or Max Eisenbud, her agent, who apparently is very, very good at maximizing her earning potential, despite being a man. And then a final twist of this dastardly tale of virtue signal in treasury, it turns out the chairman, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer on HSBC's Board of Directors are all men too.

Well, joining me now has talked if you contribute to Esther Cracko, associate editor of Mirro, Kevin McGuire, socialist, author, Grace Blakely. Grace, I don't know when I want to start with this. I mean, apart from the fact that as a man, let me just offer Ms. Radaragana some advice, I think she's great.

And when she won the US Open, it was amazing. But she hasn't won a shoebox since then, and I think she's spending too much time on this commercial stuff and not enough time on the court. That's my personal view as a man. Take it, leave it, trash it, whatever you want. I think you're missing, actually,

the most important part of this story, right? Which isn't like the big man versus women battle that we're all supposed to take aside in. It's the fact that HSBC is a massive international, you know, bank that has frequently been accused of things like money laundering. It was accused of money laundering for Mexican drug cartels. It was accused of supporting tax avoidance and evasion. It frequently threatened the government of the UK

to relocate to another part of the world if we, you know, say, do something like raise tax on corporations or if we start regulating the financial sector properly. And this is basically an attempt at kind of pink washing at saying, don't look at all the terrible things that we've been embroiled in over the last several decades. Don't look at the fact that we're basically trying to undermine democracy by telling you what laws you can and can't pass.

Just look at the fact that we've done a nice, pretty little fairy tale. And, oh, by the way, if you're a woman and you start a business, then that's great and that makes you a good woman. Feminism isn't for people who don't get the chance to start. And it certainly isn't a great thing to be a woman at HSBC, where the vast majority of the people that run the bank are actually men. I mean, the problem is it's a bit like Barbie, the movie. It's a bit like all these things.

There's a kind of subtext here of, well, men are pointless and annoying, and you should never not just rely on them, but have them in your life. Just expunge men from the world. All will be fine. Well, yes, but I think that we should be more concerned with why a bank or any business feels the need to actually do this. I don't remember asking HSBC what they think about fairy tales or women in business or anything like that.

Why can't they just be a business? Why do businesses feel the need to lecture us or take a particular political position as if we need them as our moral arbiters or anything? I totally agree. I mean, Kevin, we've seen this time and again now. Companies just doing these woke advertising campaigns, none of which work, right?

There's an immediate backlash from all their customers who don't like this kind of thing. I think it's a growing number of people, whether you're Bud Light or Gillette when they play this stunt or any of these others, now we have this. It's not going to work. It's not going to achieve what they think it is. People aren't going to go, fantastic age busy.

They're going to say what Grace said, which is, you're just a bunch of flaming hypocrites. Or they're going to say, stop talking to me about this stuff. Just make my bank do its job. Be a banker. That's why I love it, because it backfires. It is entirely cynical by this bank, which, look, you open a business. with them. You can't keep up your repayments on a loan and they'll have you. They'll have the shirt off your back. They'll have your handbag of your shoes. They'll have your house.

They'll have every last penny you've got. But somehow there's a whole industry convincing them they should do this. If whoever's doing it, a good look to the advertising people who get them to do this nonsense. Can I just say, kudos to Emma Radicalan who's agent for actually getting her this game. Because she's a terrible actress. She looks like as wooden as a board. And she doesn't even believe what she's reading. I think there is an important underlying story here, right? Which is the reason that we've had this explosion in kind of, you know, green washing, pink washing, things like ethical consumption, is that most people realise that the system we live in is incredibly unfair. They want to, you know, do things to support to prevent climate breakdown.

They want to do things to support, you know, equal rights and prevent, you know, the economy from privileging certain people over others. And corporations are basically trying to make money out of this. Just like they're making money out of the climate, you know, dying, just like they're making money out of the gap between women and just okay, let's move on to this concept of making money out of things and who shouldn't, who shouldn't. So Russell Brand, today the Met Police in the last few hours, Kevin, have announced that they are launching a police investigation into what they call historic allegations.

We don't know who it's from. We don't know which of the stories, whether the people who came forward to the Sunday Times at Channel 4, whether they're new people, they haven't explained yet exactly who these accuses are, but it's certainly multiple people. And it takes it to where I've wanted this to go, which is legal due process. We're now going to have a proper police investigation. But what still concerns me about the story is what is going on off the back of the original investigation,

which is this sort of huge concerted effort to cancel Ross Obran, who is now doing exactly what I knew he would do. He's exploiting that to say, look, it's all a witch hunt. They're all trying to shut me down. Let's take a little look at his clip on Rumble today. Plainly, this is a story that is much bigger than me. Plainly, the trusted news initiative has an agenda, an explicit agenda to throttle and choke independent media. Plainly, the government are reaching out to ask big tech platforms to suppress the voices of content creators from independent media outlets,

particularly those that are dissenting. And as you have seen, many of those media organisations have been willing to comply. Now, Esther, this is all heading to a very dark place, I think. You now have Russell Brown facing a serious police investigation into rape, sexual abuse, all sorts of very serious allegations. But he's just carrying on like nothing's happening. He did a two-hour rant today with all sorts of conspiracy-fueled stuff, his normal sort of shtick. What do you feel about the way he's behaving, a lot of these allegations? There's no apology.

There's no clarification. There's just this ongoing, no, it's all a witch hunt. and also the way the world is responding to these allegations. Yeah, well, I saw this coming, because this is why I said originally these women should have gone to the police because now we live in an era when someone is being attacked like this. It's automatically a conspiracy. And I just think there's nothing that particularly special about Russell Brand.

He's not an intellectual luminary for the likes of CNN or any of these massive media corporations to be scared of. The reality is he has been accused of something very serious and the law should play out. The reality is, at the end of the day, going to keep going and saying that this is a conspiracy against him. Because like he says, he's maintaining his innocence. So if he's innocent, he's not going to apologize.

But Grace, what we have now is you see a trend. Donald Trump sort of started this, really. Boris Johnson has done a bit of it too, where regardless of the allegation or its seriousness, you simply say it's a witch hunt. You simply say it's mainstream legacy media, combining with big tech, combining the government, and I'm a victim here.

So this kind of turning the thing on its head and using victimhood as a protective. shield against this, and they've got millions of people who go along with this. Well, again, you know, I think this is, it's similar to the last story, and you led on from it, in the sense that people are, people like Russell Brands are taking advantage of a climate, basically, of kind of fear and mistrust that exists in our society, because of the massive disparities of power that do exist there, right? There is, you know, a massive coordination in terms of the power of small number of media

organizations. It is difficult for smaller media organizations to get through that. there are, you know, a lot of very troubling things that have been, you know, done or covered up by people at the top of our society, whether we're looking at, you know, billions of dollars distributed to private corporations during the financial crisis or COVID or whatever. People know that the people at the top of our society

do not have their best interests at heart and often lie to them about what is actually going on. And that is what fuels conspirators. And Kevin, the trouble is, when we had the chair of the parliamentary committee, Caroline Dynage, I think it is, when she wrote to the bosses of all the big tech companies to say you've got to stop monetizing this guy,

that kind of overreach by politicians plays completely into the hands of Russell Brand and his followers. That's like clear evidence of the state trying to overreach, isn't it? I always feel very uncomfortable about politicians using their positions to exert pressure that way. However, if I was running a company, I wouldn't want my ads on his channel at the moment when he's facing these accusations.

And one way he's right, it is bigger than him, but not in the way he means. And the way it's bigger is one of the reasons only one in every hundred reported rapes in the UK end up in court with a prosecution is because too many powerful men and the authorities of shouted down and not acting in the interests of women.

Right. I mean, what is amazing is the BBC revealed a couple of days ago, story involving a woman who went on the record saying that in Los Angeles, he had come into a bathroom where she was and he'd exposed himself to her and said, I'm going to sexually have sex with and she said, no, you're not, was disgusted and whatever. And she's only now come forward and said it, again, allegations. But what's extraordinary is it, then 25 minutes later, he's on the airways, on the BBC, joking about this and saying, you know, the guy says 25 minutes ago, you were showing a woman your Willie, right? So the BBC,

BBC's got this big archive now of stuff. Yeah. Well, they've just broadcast almost confessional stuff from brand about this stuff. Why were they not doing more standards and practices at the time? Mistakes, frightened, in all of him, whatever it is. No, I think he was a darling. He was a darling of that subsect of British media. His free speech is not restricted.

Can I put a spanner in the worst? Was it because at the time he was a left-wing darling? Exactly. Oh, for goodness. But it's true. I do. I'm sorry, have we not seen any right-wing people who've had, you know, allegations of sexual assault covered up over the last several.

We're not talking about institutions. You're missing my point. The left wing decided he was a superstar. He attended Guardian editorial conferences. He's next to the editor, Alan Rusbridge, who's now outraged by him. He wrote a column for the Guardian for seven years. He appeared at their conferences. He edited the New Statesman.

He was on all this stuff, right? He was being given. And yet they must have not. known about the stuff that was going out on the BBC at the same time. He did no one at the Guardian think, hang on, is he exposed himself to a woman? There was a culture of permissiveness where powerful men could joke about sleeping and abusing and flashing to women. It was all considered a laugh. If you go back in British TV, think of Benny Hill.

Yeah. All right, just think of it. You can come up. Happen to people on the right, too. But I want to make the point. His free speech is not infringed because he can say what he likes. But we cannot. We cannot.

We cannot. say it because of libel laws, which he uses, defamation laws, which he's been very ready to do before. And also, there are just legal restrictions now because the police are getting... You know, it raises a lot of issues. I'm just glad the police are now investigating. We may get to the bottom of it where it becomes irrefutable, right? If there's a proper legal process, I would hope, we get to the facts and the truth. That's not to diminish the accusers. They may well all be telling 100% the truth. But we know also, sadly, sometimes accusers do not tell the truth. And we've got to be

to everyone, whoever they are. Let's turn to John Federman, who's this senator in America, who's obviously had a lot of health issues, but they've now changed the law, not the law, but they've changed the rules of the Senate. Because he says he gets triggered by having to wear certain clothing to work because of his condition,

he now can go in dress like this, and he's been wearing shorts and hoodies and all sorts of stuff. I mean, Kevin, even you now appear on television, in a smart way. Even if you put a jacket and shirt on. Right? Even you?

When we drop the standards of things like the US Senate, it would be like the British Parliament. There's somebody there saying I get triggered by wearing suits and we saw someone coming in in shorts and a hoodie. Come on. They changed, actually, in the British Parliament, the House of Commons in the Chamber, the rules on having to wear a tie because there was an MP

who couldn't fix a tie because of a medical condition. Look, it's between him and he's constituents. The people who elect them. That is it. If they are happy to elect him, you can wear what he wants. He can go in public and moon members of the public or pull down his trousers. I'm sorry, the reason why you need to act and dress like you have respect for the office that you occupy. It's not very difficult to put on a shirt.

What about freedom of expression? You know, we have freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of expression. Those are supposed to be. No, no, no, those are the liberal. rights upon which democracy, British democracy, once founded. We are on this show all the time talking about the importance of free speech, the importance of protecting against the despotism of the state. Freedom of expression falls into that category as well. Let people do the thing and stop being so snowsaking about people's personal choices.

My mother always said to me, dress as if you're going to meet the queen. Thank you. I would wear what I would always wear. I think if you go to work, dresses if you're going to meet the queen is a pretty good rule. But if you're a Republican and you think the queen is just the same as anyone else in the street. If he wants to meet the president. If he meets the queen, he can't he? A bin's dressed

like that, can't he? What was funny was, a New York post and a journalist ran to all the top restaurants in New York dressed like him and the hoodie in the shorts, and most of them said you're not coming in here. It's very funny. I want to leave with a little tribute to Megan Rapino, the world's most annoying sports star, who's now retired

from international soccer and she said this. I feel like the stuff off the field is like the reason I'm here on this planet that feels like my life's work and something that just feels like breathing to me. So I love that work.

You know, I love being able to leverage this amazing platform and use that to, you know, in some way, make the world a better place. Oh, shut up. Honestly. Good for her. Yeah, good for her. You kick a round little bowler. That's it. Nobody wants to see you make the world a better place. Let me tell you what she means by this stuff off the pitch is that now she's retired

Now she says she wants to see biological males who've transitioned to be trans women play in the women's national soccer team Not while she was playing herself so they couldn't take her place These biological males but now she'd be quite happy for that to happen. In fact, she wants it to happen if that's what your contribution is to women's rights Because she's basically saying, look at me. I did all this stuff for women's rights. Actually, Ms. Rapino, what you've done, you've left with a little sting of the tale, is that now, having fought for women's rights,

for pay parity and so much I totally applaud you for, now you've left endorsing something that would destroy women's rights to fairness and equality. That is your legacy. Anyone got a thought? Yeah, the progress. It's absolutely absurd to suggest. The reason that she's left at this point

is because her life has become so difficult as she's tried to campaign for fairness and equality for trans women in sport. Even as she's, you know, fought for a very, very long time to get through all of these measures that you've just said have been really, really important. We've reached the stage where the political debate about trans people has become so top.

So if Erling Harlan... All right, Grace. In order to be a four-five campaigner. Erling Harlan says, I'm a woman. He can play. The number of trans people... The number of trans people... Alina. I support it.

It's not... Hang on. Very important. One of the question, Grace, can Erling Harland, if he says, I now identify as a woman, play in the Norwegian national women's teams? He has massive blonde. He's the best strike in the world. He's six foot four. He's a massive beast. He scores goals every 10 seconds in the men's game. Are you happy? If he suddenly decided to become trans, go through all of the horror. Actually, you don't have to go through anything.

Just like... Just self-identify. He does he. He deals with all of the pushback on social media, the death threat, everything that he's going to get as a lot of. result of that and then says, I want to become women, like, what do I don't want to identify a woman? Then, you know, the team would be able to legitimately make a decision as whether or not that was an answer. That is exactly, that is the

Megan Rapino position right there. You are our Megan Rapino. You've just destroyed... You're saying that I'm an international women's soccer player. No, I'm saying you're relatively irritating. Take a position which is always wrong.

And on this one, and on this one, you have just endorsed. early Harland playing women's football which of course would destroy women's football congratulations women's rights nil i didn't but look look you're not one i didn't leave it there biological sex matters right yeah and men born as men shouldn't be playing in sport rapino free speech what's wrong with that she's allowed to be nothing and by the way nothing wrong with me exercising my right to free speech to say it's complete a bit like grazie's position on early harland who she only just heard on complete a man can apparently

destroy women's football of a clutch of a hat. It would. It would. Thank you, Pat. Good to see you all. Unsenso. Next I get to the bottom

of chess' biggest ever scandal with bad boy Hans Neiman. It's one of my most probing interviews ever and the language has been used very deliberately here. We're talking chess and anal beads.

It's not for the faint heart in this next same interview. Welcome back to Pierceville and Unseneman. Hans Neiman is a name that may not mean much to you, but he's a chess prodigy. In fact, right now, he's the most controversial chess player, perhaps ever. For the past year, he's been at the center of a salacious scandal that has rocked his sport,

and I sat down for an exclusive head-to-head with Hans and his lawyer. But first of all, let's take a look at how this scandal unfolded. Hans Neiman is the wild child of chess. A year ago, this 20-year-old U.S. prodigy beat legendary world champion Magnus Carlson, causing major vibrations in the sporting world. It wasn't just Neiman's bishops causing the buzz. Carlson sensually accused him of cheating, which sparked frenzy speculation, including a claim that Neiman used anal beads,

even Elon Musk weighed in. Now, Neiman does admit to cheating twice when he was 12 and 16 with computers, but he says he never did it in person, and he insists he never used anal beads. How could I, you know... He sued Carlson for $100 million. The case has now been settled out of court. So will there be a rematch and can he rebuild his battered reputation? And once and for all, did he or didn't he?

Lose the bees. Tonight I'll find out. Hans Neiman goes uncensored. We'll have joined now by Hans Neiman and by his lawyer, Terence Ovi. So first question, Hans, for you. Why have you got your lawyer with you? Well, considering the recent case and settlement, some legal questions, I'm, you know, my lawyer might be able to

better answer and to be honest I'm you know Terry and his team has been frankly you know great and in helping me resolve this case and I'm very very thankful to them for believing in me and you know this is not just a he's not just my lawyer he's a friend he's a confidant and he's someone who I trust fully and that's why he's here today okay so look you you are a chess prodigy no question you're a grandmaster which you got that title into 17 you rank the fourth best junior chess player. So you're a brilliant chess player. The question mark that got put over your head

came after you beat Norway's world champion, Magnus Carlson. This is back in Missouri in September 2022, so a year ago. And you beat him ending a 53 game unbeaten streak. And as a result, you were accused of being a cheat. And you're accused of cheating in a particularly fascinating manner, which is the allegation was that your coach had basically instructed you to insert anal beads inside yourself,

which he would then send remote signals to. First of all, when that story broke those allegations, what was your reaction? Well, obviously, it was very disheartening to be accused of cheating after that victory. But, you know, these things, you know, it happened, and I learned a lot from that time, and it really has taught me a lot of very, very important lessons about life and chess, and I think it's only strengthened my resolve. Okay, but just to be clear, you didn't cheat? Of course not.

So what have you had to learn if you didn't cheat? Well, I think the learning experience was more so the media attacking me and all the chess world crashing down on me. I think dealing with that was a learning experience, dealing with all that pressure and competing under all that pressure. But again, to be clear, on the specific allegation, have you ever used anal beads

while playing chess? Not a question I ever thought I'd ask a guest, to be honest, but... Well, you know, your curiosity is a bit concerning, you know. Maybe you're personally interested, but I can tell you no. Okay, categorical no. Of course, yes, categorically no.

No, obviously, I didn't make the allegations. I'm just repeating what was put to you at the time. As a result of the furority that developed, you were investigated by chess.com. They banned you while they did this. And they published a report saying that you had likely cheated more than 100 times in online games.

You then admitted you had cheated, I think, twice, you said, in online games on chess.com when you were 12 and 16, but denied ever doing so in an in-person game. Is that an accurate assessment of what went down? That's correct. Given you've admitted to cheating, is it completely outrageous that people thought you may have continued cheating? Well, let me just clarify. The Chess.com report where they, you know, accused me of cheating over 100 games, is completely defamatory. And, you know, as outlined in my lawsuit, you know, the person who actually wrote that report, Danny Wrench, told me himself that they knew that I had never cheated while streaming.

and the most serious accusations in that report happened while I was streaming live on Twitch and the only reason that they banned me was because they were finalizing, you know, merger with the Play Magnus Group and their new, you know, star ambassador was making a mockery of himself and they need to back up his accusations and discredit me.

So Chess.com's report accusing me of 100 games of cheating is frankly ridiculous and the timing that they decided to ban me only during this merger and only after this. accusation you know it's absolutely ridiculous and and that report should not be taken seriously whatsoever I understand but but just to be clear again um hands when you did cheat the ones you've admitted to what were the circumstances of cheating well I was 12

years old in the I was very young it was not uh it was you know in a tournament but it was a childish mistake and something I've admit to and I don't think that uh something you do when 12 and something, you know, with, you know, a couple hundred bucks in the line should have any... No, but how did you cheat? Someone was like an iPad. So someone was giving you moves from an iPad? Yes, it was a very childish thing. I had no...

I didn't even understand the seriousness of what was happening. But then you were 16 and did it again. Was it the same thing again when you were 16? Well, when I was 16, this was not a price. money event. These were random meaningless games. It's like, you know, going to play, Call a Duty. It was a similar manner.

You see, so the first one you could put down to being a 12-year-old kid, all right, you make a mistake, you learn your lesson, you move on. But to do it again four years later when you're 16, it's only like four years ago, why did you do it again? I saw those, use those game as meaningless. And they were meaningless. There was no money or anything attached to them. And again, it was a childish. I was living on my own when I was 16.

I was financially independent, and I felt a lot of pressure. I just simply wanted to get a higher rating on the website. But I want to make a differentiation, peers. When you talk about online chess and in-person chess, this is a very, very different thing. And you need to understand the difference between that. These online games, these are absolutely meaningless. I don't like people that cheat in any form of competition or sport,

because to me, it just kills the integrity and purity of it. guess you would agree with that, right? No, of course. But you should understand, you know, the difference between when you're a young child and you're under severe pressure and you make a mistake. And, you know, you should also understand

that when it comes to over-the-board official tournaments, I've never cheated. And there's absolutely no evidence that I've ever cheated. No, but here's the problem. Here's the problem with that. Like I say, when you're 12, all right, I get it. But to do the same thing again when you're 16 shows there's a pattern.

And we only actually have your word for. I mean, there might not be hard evidence to have nailed you, but you can understand why people will be suspicious, given your emissions. Pierce, we understand Hans was 16 years old. He made a mistake. We understand that you have a different interpretation. He was playing online in a game that really didn't matter

at a young age. We understand, and you're not wrong, but to try to extrapolate from the fact of something that he did an online game when he was 16 and say, once a cheater, always a cheater. If you did something when you were 16, I'm going to hold it against you for the rest of your life. We think that's a little harsh, and it certainly doesn't properly characterize.

I'd have interesting. All right, but why couldn't he answer that question? I think he was trying to. Well, no. Well, he wasn't. You jumped in. Sorry. Yeah, Hans, it was really aimed at you.

You know, have you cheat in a sport once when you're young? Well, I can understand. But let me, let me, let me, let me, I can give you analogy as well. So let's say that, you know, you know, you know, 16-year-old kid went into like a pickup basketball game. That is the equivalent of the games that I cheated in at 16-year-old is the equivalent of a meaningless pickup basketball game. Do you think that that should define my entire career, especially...

It's not a foul, though. You're using, you know, computerized systems to... Well, some way of... Okay, I understand that. But some way of cheating. I can't think of a more egregious way of cheating than doing that. You're using a non-human brain to beat a human. I mean, it's just...

But he did not do that here. But he did not do that here, meaning what he did back then, what he did about five years ago and then about 10 years ago, you're correct. He's admitted that and he's apologized for that. But that has absolutely nothing to do with what happened here. Nothing else could be closer to the truth.

Well, Lundsenz's the next explosive finale to my interview with Hans Neiman. If you thought part one was buzzing with revelations, you might need to strap yourself in for round two. Welcome back to Pittsburgh, because I said. So now the second part of my exclusive interview with the chess bad boy grandmaster Hans Neiman, things get a little touchy. So yesterday, I believe,

you played Vladimir Kramnik on chess.com and you beat him. And Kramnik said afterwards, I decided to stop playing on chess.com from tomorrow on. There's too many obvious cheaters on here and nothing is done to clean the platform from these small crooks. Harsh words but true.

What did you make of that? Well, the Kremlin's situation is quite complex because I actually beat him about a week ago and he made a video that was a bit confusing. but actually a couple days ago I had private correspondence with him where he told me that he personally has no issue with me and where he said

that he was not meant to be an accusation whatsoever so I don't think that that's related to me it couldn't have been a more blatant suggestion that you cheated again well that contradicts you know the direct you know the private correspondence and email that he sent to me

and he actually invited me why would he infer you're a cheat in public in the way that he did that was yesterday Well, he invoked, but he, he, he, he, he, he, he, he, he's accused a lot of people of cheating. He's accused, yeah, but he's, he played, that same day, he played against, you know, 10 other people. Right. And considering that I was invited by him to Amsterdam, to meet him, and to play games with him, um, it seems a bit weird, uh, that, you know, that he would do that, you know, and then the next day, supposedly accused me of cheating.

So, you know, I understand that how it might look, but, uh, you know, he's privately reached out to me and I was invited to Amsterdam. unfortunately can't go due to another conflict, but I hope to meet him and to discuss things in more detail with him. Okay, you sued. Isn't that the real damage of this also, Pierce? Isn't that the real damage as well? So whenever now someone to beat someone, rather than acknowledge it and say that I'll get better, now this has set a precedent that whenever someone beats you, instead of trying to make yourself better, trying to take it away from them.

Yes, but unfortunately, actions have consequences. If you admit you've cheated twice over a four-year period and you've become a grand master of a year after the second time, and you're now only 20 now, people are going to obviously guard aspersions. Well, why do you focus on those two isolated incidents? Why don't you focus on all the hundreds of matches that is won? They're the two your clients admitted to it. Of course, but the other hundreds of matches that is one

are those totally meaningless. So you can always focus on the shade. I don't know. I don't know. I can only... I'm not judging your client. I'm just saying he's admitted to cheating twice over a four-year period, and that's why maybe people are...

In meaningless games, you know. I mean, people do one day. They do wonder, how did you beat Magnus Carlson? Okay, well, if you want to take that logic, you know, you want to take that logic, right? So I have proven my strength, right? Chess.com themselves have said that since I, you know, since they gave me a short ban before, they said that since then I have never cheated. So on their website, I've beaten some of the best players in the world.

I've performed at the highest level on their website, which they themselves say that I didn't cheat in. In addition to that, in over-the-board tournaments, I have continued to play chess at a very, very high level. I have, you know, my ranking did not just drop. I continued to play well even after this victory. I have proven my chess level, my chest strength time and time again. This is simply a case of, you know, where bullies are, you know, going after someone because

they threaten their business interests. So you should be looking at the fact that... Of course he's a bully. He used his entire empire. He used his connections at chess.com. He leveraged his, you know, the fact that there's a, you know, a merger happening. And he got all of these people to attack me. And it was, it's a bully.

It's a simple thing. But, you know, I don't, you know, let people bully me. I'm going to stand up to him and I stood up to him. And, you know, I look forward to competing him against the board again. And, you know, I'm going to, you know, do what I do best and improve myself. Are you still suing him for $100 million? No. You dropped that.

The case has been resolved, Pierce. Yeah. Did he? Correct. Did he pay any money or? We can't discuss that. Okay. Out of interest, how do you disprove that you've used anal beads to cheat?

How could I, you know, disprove a negative? It's like, you know, how do you expect me? That was never a serious thing. That was something that the media caught up. But that was, you know, if you look at the consensus among chess players, the consensus among experts.

It is an unequivocal fact that I have never cheated in an over-the-board game. Yeah, but, Hans, I'm just wondering, how do you disprove it? I mean, were you strip search? Did they explore cavities? Where do we go here? Well, through tournaments, there are security checks

where they, you know, will do various security checks, you know, metal detectors, different scanners. Would that pick up anal bees, do you know? I don't know, Pierce. I have no... I'm genuinely curious.

I've no idea. You should invite them on your show. You should invite them on your show. show and ask them that. It appears that that's the main topic of your curiosity, appears to be that, as opposed to the fact that you have a 19-year-old champion who defeated a champion who defeated the whole world of chess and the largest cyberbullying case in history, the world of chess versus Hans Neiman, and he's here to talk about it, and he's still a victor. And instead of becoming bitter, he became better, and you want to ask him about the anal bead, something he never said or

never did. We don't know the answer to that question, Pierce. Maybe you can ask the anal bead people. Have them on your show and they can explain it to you better. I think I will. It's actually a fast... Listen, I love chess. I was my school, my prep school chess champion. You seem to love anal beads better, Pierce. Well, I was my prep school chess champion.

I never cheated. You're a better person. You're a better person. Your word's not mine, Terence. But I'm just genuinely curious. It was a massive story, as you know. It's why you're famous outside of the chess world. It's because there was this allegation made,

and it was fueled by the world champion who couldn't understand how in normal circumstances you would beat him. And then came this extraordinary. Well, he's lost to many people of my same ranking many times. So this idea that it's a statistical anomaly, he can lose one game. And that's the issue, right? He lost to people similar age, similar rating multiple times recently.

So me beating him in a singular game is not a statistical anomaly, right? He hasn't agreed to play you, as I understand it. Is he chickening out? What's the deal there? No, he has agreed to play me. He put out a public statement that he will play against me. Right, but there's no date, right? Well, when we are matched in a tournament, which is inevitable, we will play.

And will you allow yourself to be stripped-searched just to rule out any rumors? I find that question to be just, you know, I can't take you seriously when you ask those questions, Pierce. I'm sorry, because you're entertaining, honestly, an allegation that should not even be taken seriously. Because it's purely, you know, for you to get media attention. When this is, it's not even a serious thing. how can you, as a reporter, take that allegation seriously at all? Well, I understand. No, but I know, do you genuinely believe that?

No, but do you, you actually believe that that is the case? I don't know. Could you even fathom the world? I don't know. I know you're capable of cheating because you've omitted it. I don't know how far you go. You cheated twice in a four-year period. I've never cheated in an over-the-board game.

I've never, well, I'm clearly not capable, and I've never cheated an over-the-board game. But we only have your word for that. You accept that, right? We have your word for that. It's unequivocal. Chess.com. themselves said that. Right.

It is an unequivocal, statistical fact that I have never cheated in over-the-board game. And that is something you cannot debate. Elon Musk, as you know, tweeted on what was known as Twitter then, is now X. Talent hits a target, no one else can hit. Genius hits a target, no one can see because it's in your butt.

What did you feel when you read that? Well, I was a bit surprised. You know, I was surprised. You know, I didn't really think much of it. I focus on competing and I don't let these things affect me. And my goal is to become the best chess player in the world and to give back to chess players all around the world. And I think that chess is a beautiful game that should be spread.

And that's why I intend to do a lot more charity work and give back to the communities who helped me. Do you think when you play Magnus Carlson again, you'll kick his butt for one of a better phrase? You know, I'll just let my chess speak for itself. Hans Neiman. And Terence, your lawyer. Thank you both very much indeed.

Thank you. Still not quite sure what that lawyer was doing there, to be honest with you. Or where the truth lies with Hans Neiman, the bad boy of chess. Did he or didn't he? I don't think I'm any of the wiser after that. We know he does cheat or has done. But did he go that far? What a story if he did.

You can see the full uncut interview with Hansen. There's plenty more on the Pierce Morgan Unsensored YouTube channel. It's worth looking in full. Fascinating, fascinating story. We're coming next to night, England's women's fishing team has pulled out of the World Angling Championships in protests at a trans anglers inclusion in their squad. Does physical power of a biological male

whose transition, does that actually have a huge impact in fishing? Well, apparently, it does, and we'll talk to those at the deep end in this round after the break. Welcome back to Pittsburgh and I'll say, some members of the England ladies' angling team who have refused to compete in this year's world championships. The decision comes after a trans woman,

Becky Lee, Bertwistle Hodges. A former male rugby player was picked for the team. Well, England's Angling Trust, the governing body, says trans women have no advantage over biological women. Many of England's star female anglers, however, vehemently disagree. Here to explain, after the captain of the England ladies' angling team, Heather Linfield and Wendy Metcalfe, a former England ladies angling star who's described by North Norfolk News as a leading figure of the sport. So welcome to both of you. All right, let me start with you, Heather, if I may.

There's a kind of belief from the governing bodies here that being a biological male would have no impact on the sport of angling. Is that right? That's what they're saying and it's not true, but they do not realise that. They're mixing us up with course anglers, game anglers. Sea fishing, we're battling the elements of the weather, there's weed, there's the tide.

It's even walking in the water, getting knocked over, because we're women. We cannot cast as far. You know, sort of majority of men are well over 100 yards. Women aren't guessing that distance whatsoever. And it's just about the unfairness to us women, you know, with transgender as being on the team. And it's not fair competitiveness. For those like me who don't fish much, my brother's a massive. keen fisherman has been his whole life so he would know but if you can cast twice as far or more

than one of your competitors what advantage does that give you well you've got obviously more water that you can cover sometimes that there's fish that's further out you get fish that sort of like do come close into shore and a lot of majority of fish can be further out so when you're fishing you've got far more choice if you can cast further than uh than a woman female. Okay, let me bring in Wendy. You pulled out of the England team in 2018 because of all this.

Well, I've covered a lot of this stuff about trans women beginning to dominate and, in my view, start to ruin women's sport and the integrity of women's sport. Why did you feel so strongly about this? I feel strongly about it.

I feel very strongly about it. I think that this is nothing about Becky Lee. This is nothing against Becky Lee herself as a person. What she does in her life is entirely up her. It's no concern of ours. The problem is she has a significant amount of upper body strength and it's not fair. It's not a fair and level playing field peers. Something's got to happen. The Angling Trust have really got to sit up and take notice of this. It's really not fair.

I mean, what's fascinating to me is that this is really a point of principle for both of it, because of course it gives England an unfair advantage and therefore we would have a better a chance presumably of winning big competition. So you guys are really making a stand, Wendy, on a genuine point of principle, which would actually harm your chances of success. Yeah, absolutely. And I'm very proud that the England ladies this year have pulled out.

I just can't thank them enough for standing their ground. It's about time that something was done about it. And yes, you're right. If we had Becky Lee in the team, it would give us an advantage. But if we won a medal, which I believe they did, when Becky Lee was put in the team, when the Angling Trust said that she wouldn't be entered into the team, they won bronze medal, but it's a hollow victory peers. It's not right.

No, it's not. And Heather, I think this is the problem with all these, is that nobody feels good about this. And I don't feel good about this trans-athlet, this trans-fisherwoman, fisherman, whatever she wants to call herself. It doesn't matter to me. but what matters to me is the integrity of women's sport being preserved and that women's rights to equality and fairness are not destroyed in the process.

Yeah, exactly. I'm sort of, you know, I've done a 20-odd year stint at this and I just want it right for the people that are coming in and who haven't got the voice because they're too scared in case they're not chosen or selected for a team. and they won't speak up because they're afraid of this, whereas I want to leave what I have put my whole life into. I want it leaving in safe hands for us women.

Yeah, and I just don't understand why this particular person, Becky, can't just continue to compete with biological men, which is her biological sex as a male. Why can't she just keep doing that with people who are, of the same physical build. Yeah, that's what, that's my main point, is to Becky Lee, if you're watching this, why don't you put all your efforts into campaigning

to get your own category? Yeah. That would make sense. Yeah. Can you imagine, can you imagine, peers, what it would be like in the future? The whole of the women's team could be transgender. Well, I think it's ridiculous.

Like I say, I've done lots on this issue. I think it's ridiculous. I think it's got to stop. and we've got to protect women's sport. Thank you. We run out of time, ladies. Thank you both very much indeed for joining me. And good on you for sticking up for your principles.

That's it from me. We're up to keep it uncensored. Good night.