YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → 'You're a Racist BIGOT!' Mehdi Hasan vs Nancy Mace | Andrew Tate Lawyers Speak to Piers Morgan

'You're a Racist BIGOT!' Mehdi Hasan vs Nancy Mace | Andrew Tate Lawyers Speak to Piers Morgan — Transcript

by Piers Morgan Uncensored · 11,831 words · 1,759 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00Not even allowing me to speak is
0:02basically part of Sharia law. You're
0:04like jihad Jason. Do you not respect
0:06women? Do you like dogs? Like I don't
0:08even know why you're even in this
0:09country anymore.
0:10>> You're not just bigoted. You're mad.
0:12>> Staffers say you sent them to buy you
0:15alcohol at 2:00 in the morning. Why did
0:17you ask for two women to leave a grocery
0:19store? You racist.
0:20>> Now you're smearing me and defaming me
0:22on
0:22>> You want two Muslim women?
0:24>> I am not an alcoholic.
0:25>> I just wonder, were you drunk at the
0:26time?
0:27>> That's not true. And now I'm rich and I
0:29can buy anything I want and there's
0:30nothing to buy.
0:31>> You know what? Most of this is
0:33>> I'm not sure it's all as you
0:35put it.
0:36>> They were creating a bogus
0:39world of uber luxury and glamour and so
0:43on.
0:43>> I would say exaggeration is probably
0:45fair. I'd say Maybe not.
0:49>> It's a difficult time to be a Republican
0:50strategist. As the US prepares for
0:52pivotal midterm elections, candidates
0:54can no longer rely on the strategy of
0:57doubling down on Trump or on the many
0:59common sense crusades which prove so
1:01popular in 2024. But they are betting
1:03that one page from original Trump
1:05playbook can still make a dent. Radical
1:07Islam, they argue, is a grave threat to
1:09the United States. And it's now finding
1:11common cause with another old foe,
1:13communism. That's why in a nationwide
1:15election, so much of their focus is on
1:17Mandani, on Michigan's Abdul Elsa, and
1:20on the streamer Hassan Paher. Two of
1:22these men are not on the ballot. All
1:24three have faced intense scrutiny for
1:26their past comments on 911, among other
1:28things. And Republican Senator Ted Cruz
1:30teed up the whole fight as they see it
1:32in his RNC address.
1:35>> Communists and Islamists coming together
1:39and sweeping over the Democrat party.
1:46They are united because they share the
1:49same enemies.
1:51They hate Christians. They hate Jews.
1:55They hate capitalism. They hate the
1:57Constitution. And they hate America.
2:04>> So, do they have a point? Are the
2:05Democrats really beholden to a new
2:07Islamic Communist alliance? And are the
2:09voters buying it? Joining me to debate
2:11all this is Medi Hassan, founder of
2:14Dateo News, and the Republican
2:16Congresswoman Nancy Mace. Well, welcome
2:18to both of you. Uh, Nancy Mace, a few
2:21weeks ago on X, you posted the
2:23following. Every single Muslim holding
2:25public office in America is a Trojan
2:28horse and a threat to both national
2:30security and our republic. Um, I mean,
2:33it's hard to see, I I would argue, a
2:36better example of brazen Islamophobia
2:39than that, isn't it? A
2:41>> as a woman, I will tell you, Pierce, I
2:43am terrified of radical Islam. I've seen
2:46what they've done in foreign countries
2:48when a woman shows her hair, being
2:50stoned to death, being put to death.
2:52That's not the kind of ideology that I
2:54want to see here grow in the United
2:56States. And look at this, Pierce. days
2:58before the 25th anniversary of 911, we
3:02had the mayor of New York City give his
3:05pen that he signed the remembrance order
3:07over to a guy that defended a member of
3:09al-Qaeda. I mean, to see that happen 25
3:13years later, to see animal sacrifices
3:15being approved by a local city council
3:17in Michigan, the words alawahu Akbar
3:20being screamed death to America screamed
3:22on the streets of America. That kind of
3:24thing is going on and it's growing and
3:27we've got to put a stop to it.
3:29>> All right, Medi Hassan, your response to
3:30that. Couple of things, Pierce, thanks
3:33for having me on. Uh, number one, it's
3:34interesting you didn't play the clip
3:35from Ted Cruz at the RNC where he names
3:39Mamani and Abdul Alad and people in the
3:41shout people in the crowd shout kill
3:43them, shoot them. They actually shout
3:45out death threats. So that's how
3:46dangerous this rhetoric has become from
3:48the Republican party from people like
3:50Ted Cruz and Nancy Mace. We saw an
3:52attack on a mosque in San Diego in May
3:54of this year. Pier, I came on and talked
3:55to you about it at the time. Three
3:56Muslim worshippers killed in the middle
3:58of California uh by two neo-Nazis who
4:00were spouting the kind of stuff that Ted
4:02Cruz and Nancy May spout. It's very,
4:04very dangerous to say stuff like this in
4:07this sweeping bigoted way. We know it's
4:09dangerous. We know that if you say it
4:11about another minority, it's dangerous.
4:12You wouldn't say that Jews should be
4:14banned from public office. And it's
4:16interesting that the congresswoman
4:17started her comment saying she's afraid
4:19of radical Islam. Lots of people are
4:20afraid of radical Islam. I'm afraid of
4:22radical Islam. I don't want to be killed
4:23by a Muslim terrorist like anyone else.
4:26But that's not what she said. She spent
4:28the last few weeks, just the last few
4:30weeks, forget the last few years,
4:31attacking Muslims in general, right? She
4:34has said that no Muslim American should
4:36hold public office in this country.
4:38They're all Trojan horses. That includes
4:41Republicans. Dr. Oz is Donald Trump's
4:44head of Medicaid and Medicare at the
4:45HHS. Uh should he not be allowed to hold
4:48public office? Is Dr. Oz a Trojan horse
4:50cuz he's Muslim and she said no Muslims
4:52should hold that role. She said that not
4:54all Muslims are terrorists but all
4:55terrorists are Muslim. She tweeted that.
4:57Uh that's not true. Obviously the people
4:59in the IRA would be shocked to hear
5:00that. The Hindus in the Tamil Tigers,
5:02the Jewish settlers on the West Bank,
5:04the Christian domestic terrorists
5:05according to the FBI who attacked the
5:07capital on January 6th. The idea that
5:08only Muslims are terrorists is an absurd
5:10statement as well. And the worst of all
5:12is it back in I think it was in June the
5:15congressman tweeted, "I stand with
5:17Dasher. Dasha Kilpatrick is a woman in
5:19Texas who went into a Texas grocery
5:21store, stopped two Muslim American women
5:23doing their shopping and started
5:25shouting at them, telling them to get
5:26out of the country. They don't belong
5:28here. They should go back to their
5:29Islamic country. They're not welcome in
5:31Christian America. Nancy Mace tweeted,
5:33"I stand with Dasher," which makes her a
5:35racist bigot. This is not about radical
5:37Islam. This is about eradicating all
5:39Muslim Americans from public monopoly on
5:41hypocrisy.
5:42>> So why are you asking?
5:43>> So why are you asking two Muslim
5:45American women to leave the country?
5:47Nancy M, deal with WHAT I JUST SAID
5:49BEFORE YOU ATTACK ME. DEAL WITH WHAT I
5:51JUST SAID. YOU SAID I STAND WITH DASHER.
5:53>> Do you stand with Dasher? Do you stand
5:55with Muslim American women? Well, you
5:57want Muslim American women released.
5:59>> You don't respect women.
6:00>> I know you don't want Muslim American
6:01women.
6:02>> You're the one who supports a tax on
6:04women in a Texas grocery store. Because
6:06I'm not going to let you gaslight. I
6:07said something very specific. Two women
6:09in Texas. You call for them to leave the
6:11country. Why? Why did you ask two OF
6:13THEM AMERICAN WOMEN IN Texas to leave
6:15the country? I stand law doesn't give
6:17equality to women.
6:18>> You want Muslim American women removed
6:20from Texas? Why? I'm asking a simple
6:23question. WHY DO YOU WANT TWO MUSLIM
6:24AMERICAN women and Dr.
6:26>> This is not an isolated I had
6:29>> Are you going to let the woman speak? I
6:31mean like you're like jihad and Jason.
6:33Do you not respect women? Do you like
6:35dogs? I can't even understand where
6:37you're going here. But you want two
6:39women to leave a Texas grocery store.
6:42>> Why did you ask for two women to leave a
6:45grocery store? You racist. Why?
6:47>> I'm not racist. I'm American and I'm
6:49America first. Dasha,
6:51>> why do you support having two Americans
6:53removed from a grocery store? Let her
6:55answer. Let her answer. Medie, you can
6:57keep Don't talk over each other. Nancy,
7:01okay, Nancy, respond respond to Mediey's
7:03question.
7:04>> Well, I mean, this is just an example.
7:06Medie's anger toward me and the lack of
7:09respect as a woman, not even allowing me
7:11to speak is basically part of Sharia
7:14law. That's my point here. Medi, you
7:16don't respect women that have opposite
7:18views. And Dasha isn't the only
7:20Christian woman who's had an
7:22interruption or been uh accosted by
7:25Muslim women. I I lived in Atlanta over
7:27a decade ago. This is you liar. I was
7:30nursing an infant in the grocery store,
7:33minding my own business, and two Muslim
7:35women came up to me and asked me to
7:36leave. This has been going on for over a
7:38decade, and it's only getting worse. And
7:41I'm not going to sit here and allow
7:43someone, a hypocrite like Medie, his
7:45son, who said some awful things. I don't
7:48even know why you're even in this
7:49country, Medie, anymore. You said after
7:51a plane crash that make American planes,
7:54you know, crash again. You said some
7:55really disgusting, hypocritical things
7:58even after Charlie Kirk was
7:59assassinated.
8:00>> You know that was a bad joke about
8:01Donald Trump crashing on your program.
8:04>> You still haven't answered the question.
8:06Why do you support removing Dr. Oz? No,
8:09you're not. I'm not going to let you
8:10filibuster. If Pier wants to let you
8:11filibuster, that's fine. I said
8:13something specific. I quoted you AND
8:16YOU'VE NOT RESPONDED. WHY DOES DR. OZ
8:18HAVE TO LEAVE HIS JOB?
8:19>> You want to ask her? SHE'S NOT ANSWERING
8:21ME. PIER, MAYBE SHE'LL ONLY ANSWER.
8:24Where are you? Hang on. Hang on. Dr. Oz.
8:26>> Hang on.
8:27>> Why does Dr. Oz have to leave his job?
8:29You ask. Are you all right? Maybe she'll
8:30ask.
8:30>> All right. When you're both Let me Let
8:32me try and wrestle back some vestage of
8:34control here because when you both talk
8:35over each other, no one can hear a damn
8:37thing.
8:39>> The weather is turning. The leaves are
8:41browning. The rain is certainly pouring.
8:43And as summer begins to sadly fade in
8:45the rear view mirror, it's time to look
8:47for a silver lining in the changing of
8:49the seasons. My personal nomination is
8:52the cozy earth bubble cuddle blanket and
8:55the bamboo bed sheet set. The moment you
8:58pull on this blanket, you will be
8:59overcome by its weighty softness. It may
9:02in fact cause a battle for custody in
9:04your home. As for those legendary bamboo
9:06sheets, they are a gamecher for anyone
9:09who sleeps hot or alongside somebody
9:11else who does. You'll notice a
9:13difference immediately with the right
9:14balance of coolness and comfort all the
9:17way through the night. And honestly, as
9:18the evenings get darker and colder,
9:20there's no better time to kit out your
9:22bedroom and your sofa for some cozy
9:24nights ahead. There's a 100 night trial
9:26and a 10-year warranty, so there's
9:28genuinely no risk in trying it. Go to
9:30cozyearth.com
9:32and use code peers for up to 20% off
9:35home and sleepwear. That's cozyear.com,
9:38code peers, and remember to tell them
9:40that I sent you.
9:43Medie raised an interesting point. You
9:45know, is Dr. Oz, you say every single
9:47Muslim, not radical Muslim, but every
9:50single Muslim holding public office in
9:52America is a Trojan horse. Obviously,
9:54Dr. Oz holds a public office. Would you
9:58would you want him deported as a threat
10:00to national security and are republic?
10:04>> Well, I I didn't say
10:06Dr. I should be deported. I do think
10:08that people that believe in radical
10:10>> You said every single Muslim
10:12>> I said I was talking officials
10:15>> I was talking about elected officials
10:17being Trojan horses because we're seeing
10:20towns taken over starting in Michigan
10:22going into Minnesota taking but if sorry
10:25but just to be clear on this but to be
10:27clear on this then if Dr. if Dr. Oz was
10:30to run for, you know, to be a senator or
10:33to run for president or something, you
10:34would not want him to be allowed in
10:36Pennsylvania.
10:37>> He's not.
10:38>> No, no, but I'm talking about
10:39hypothetically. Hypothetic. But Nancy
10:42Nancy,
10:44don't talk over me now. Don't talk over
10:46me now. It's a very simple question. You
10:49didn't say every single radical Muslim.
10:52You said every single Muslim. That's all
10:54of them. 1.6
10:56billion people around the world. Every
10:58Muslim I said elected Muslim said every
11:01single Muslim holding you didn't say
11:03elected lying I was elected officials as
11:07Trojan horses was the line but you go
11:08back and quote my quote my tweet Mie as
11:11I'm sure you willy
11:13>> I'm not fair
11:19office HANG
11:23to you
11:24please stop talking over each other
11:27Guys, no one can hear this. Let me read
11:30it again so there's no room for
11:31ambiguity. What she actually posted was
11:34every single every single Muslim holding
11:37public office in America is a Trojan
11:40horse and a threat to both national
11:42security and racist by that Nancy Mace.
11:46>> It's okay. Holding public office is an
11:49elected position. Medie, do you need a
11:51dictionary? Like come on. That's what
11:54it's in reference to. So cabinet members
11:55are not public officials. Nancy May. So
11:58So hold on, hold on. Marco Rubio is not
12:00a Is Marco Rubio not a public official?
12:02He's not elected.
12:02>> He's not a radical Islamist. Are you
12:04really going to pass it off right now?
12:06And we HAVE PEOPLE. YOU JUST LIED AGAIN.
12:09YOU JUST said You just said every public
12:11official is elected. I caught you out
12:13again in a second lie. Marco Rubio is a
12:16public official.
12:17>> Marco Rubio is A PUBLIC OFFICIAL. DON'T
12:20WALK IT BACK. Everyone can see your
12:21bigotry.
12:23>> Everyone can see your bigotry. That's
12:25not what I said. Is Rubio a public
12:26official?
12:27>> You just lied to Pierce Morgan and said
12:29a public official IS ELECTED. YOU GOT
12:31CAUGHT. YOU GOT CAUGHT being racist. You
12:33don't want to walk it back. You know,
12:34the best part of you not wanting to walk
12:35it back is 5 years ago, you weren't this
12:37batshit crazy racist. You went on CNN.
12:40Pier, what's interesting is in 2021,
12:42Congresswoman Mace went on CNN after two
12:44of her colleagues, Marjorie Taylor Green
12:46and Lauren Boowbert called Ilhan Omar a
12:48member of the jihad squad. She went on
12:50CNN and said they were racist, they were
12:52disgusting. She suggested they were
12:53religious bigots and she wasn't. She
12:55suggested they're grifters. Ironically,
12:575 years later, she's the racist grifter
12:59and now MTG's calling out her racism.
13:01We've gone full circle. She doesn't even
13:03believe what she's saying. 5 years ago,
13:05she knew that what she's saying now is
13:07racist. 5 years ago, she said Ramadan.
13:10Let her respond.
13:12Let her respond.
13:13>> Please stop talking at the same time.
13:16>> But I was defending.
13:17>> All right. Listen. Look, there's no
13:18point, Nancy. There's no point having
13:20this debate if you both just shout over
13:22each other all the time. So Nancy,
13:24respond to what Medie just said.
13:26>> Uh, well, I was defending someone's
13:29first amendment right to wear whatever
13:31piece of clothing they want to wear.
13:33Same thing with the words that you
13:34speak. Everyone has the first amendment
13:36right to say what they want to say or
13:38wear what they want to wear. Now, fast
13:41forward five years later and we're
13:43seeing some of these radical things
13:45happening in our communities. Uh where
13:47people are pushing back on uh Sharia law
13:50type of things where there's now animal
13:53sacrifices in Michigan where the mayor
13:55of New York City days before 911 is
13:57giving a pen to a guy that defended
13:59al-Qaeda. Even the governor of New York
14:01was in a hijab speaking to only men in a
14:04mosque days before the 25th anniversary
14:06of 911. I find this offensive and I'm
14:08going to continue to speak out about it.
14:10I think it's gotten worse over the last
14:115 years. I think the political division
14:13has also made it worse. But we have to
14:15have people are going to speak out and
14:16push back against this radical thing
14:19that's happening and starting to happen
14:21in towns across the country more so than
14:22ever before.
14:26>> Okay. Medie, can I respond?
14:29>> Yeah. So, it's interesting she talks
14:30about Sharia law. There's no Sharia law.
14:32It's a boogeyman that the Republicans
14:33tried 15 years ago and now they're doing
14:35it again. Why? Because gas prices are
14:37high. Nobody trusts them. They're losing
14:39uh in the polls. They're going to lose
14:40in the midterms. So, they fall back on
14:42racism, bigotry, and Sharia law. Which
14:44Sharia law? Zoran Madani and Abdul Ali
14:46support Sharia law. I'm pretty sure
14:48they're more pro-gay than Nancy Mason's.
14:50They're more protransgender than Nancy
14:52Mason's. She has horrifically bigoted
14:53things to say about gay and transgender
14:55people. So, the idea that they're
14:57pushing Sharia law is absurd. Uh the
14:59idea that Kathy Hokll shouldn't wear a
15:01hijab in a mosque. Ivanka Trump wore a
15:03hijab when she went into a mosque. I
15:05don't remember Nancy Mace attacking
15:06Ivanka Trump for wearing a hijab. I
15:07don't remember her attacking Donald
15:08Trump for wearing a kipper when he went
15:10to a Jewish institution. So this is all
15:12absurd picking on Muslims to get votes.
15:15It's purely cynical because as I pointed
15:17out and she avoided it 5 years ago she
15:19called much less rhetoric
15:22from MTG and Bobbert. She called it
15:24racist. Can I finish? WHY ARE WE TALKING
15:26over each other? Why can't I speak? Do
15:28you not let Muslims speak? I haven't
15:29finished yet. I didn't interrupt you.
15:31Let me finish my point and then you can
15:32actually answer because you spent the
15:34last 15 minutes avoiding everything I
15:35said. You you you said you said keep
15:38talking over me. Everyone can see you
15:39doing it. You said every single public
15:41official in America shouldn't be Muslim.
15:43I pointed out that Dr. Oz is you said
15:45he's not elected. I said Marco Rubio is
15:47not elected. You dodged that point. So
15:49you got caught there. You got caught
15:50lying saying every terrorist is a Muslim
15:52when we all know that's not true.
15:54Everyone knows there are non-Muslim
15:55terrorists. Look at what's happening on
15:56the West Bank right now which you
15:58support
16:00and there are there are also Hindu and
16:02there are also Hindu.
16:04There are also Hindu AND CHRISTIAN AND
16:06JEWISH. WHAT'S REALLY WHAT'S really
16:08interesting is Pier, if I can finish my
16:10point, Pier, if I can finish my point,
16:12Pier, without being talked over,
16:15>> Pier
16:18when she spoke, she did not let me
16:20speak. Let me finish my point.
16:22>> Let me finish my point. Then you can try
16:23and respond. Okay? So, let me make my
16:25point. She still hasn't responded as to
16:27why she supports a woman in a Texas
16:29grocery store attacking two Muslims,
16:31telling them to get out of the country.
16:32Two Muslim American women doing their
16:33shopping. could be my wife or daughter.
16:35She supports attacking them. She
16:36supports banning Muslims for public
16:38office. And it's all cynical peers
16:40because they're losing in the polls.
16:41This is all about elections. She's doing
16:43it because she wanted to win.
16:45Ironically, it didn't even help her. She
16:46came fifth in South Carolina. She came
16:48last in the governor's race. And Donald
16:50Trump didn't endorse her. Donald Trump
16:52said she's a nasty, terrible woman who's
16:54untrustworthy. For the first time in my
16:56life, I agree with Donald Trump. She is
16:58an untrustworthy
17:00did not say that when I was running for
17:02governor. That's not
17:03>> Yes, he did. Exact words. He said that
17:05when you when you were running for
17:06Congress.
17:07>> He said that
17:08>> when you were running for Congress. He
17:09said when you ran for governor, he
17:10endorsed your opponent. AND YOU PUT OUT
17:13YOU PUT OUT AN AI VIDEO. YOU'RE SO
17:15DESPERATE. YOU PUT OUT AN AI VIDEO. You
17:18put out an AI video pretending he
17:20endorsed you.
17:21>> I talked TO THE WHITE HOUSE.
17:22>> YOU put out an AI video.
17:24>> Why did you put out an AI video? Let me
17:26pretend he endorsed you. LET ME ASK YOU,
17:28were you
17:30talking about
17:32Stop to your Twitter now. It's a fake
17:35video of you and Trump.
17:36>> I want to ask
17:39>> I want to ask a separate question in the
17:41news this week.
17:42>> I'm sure that was animated. Maddie, this
17:45is stupid. Like your argument doesn't
17:47make any logical sense.
17:48>> Fake AI video on the day he endorsed
17:50your opponent.
17:51>> Everyone wondered why you did it. TRUMP
17:53ENDORSED YOUR OPPONENT. YOU LIED and
17:55said he hadn't endorsed your opponent. I
17:56just wonder, were you drunk at the time?
17:58What was going on? Why would you post an
17:59AI video? Well, now now you've got thing
18:02to do. You're not just bigoted, you're
18:03mad.
18:05>> See, this is what happens when I'm
18:07>> wondering why you'd put out a crazy
18:08video.
18:09>> A woman now. Now you're smearing me and
18:12defaming me on.
18:13>> You want two Muslim women ejected from a
18:15store in a grocery store. You haven't
18:17addressed that yet.
18:17>> I DO NOT GET DRUNK.
18:18>> I NEVER SAID YOU WERE.
18:20>> And that's disgusting. You just
18:21>> I never said you were. Your former staff
18:22has said it. Your former staffers said
18:25you drink a lot. I never said that.
18:26>> That was anime.
18:27>> I never said that. Your former STAFFERS
18:29TOLD NEW YORK MAGAZINE YOU DRINK ALL day
18:31long. I didn't say that. I said, "Were
18:33you drunk when you POSTED AN AI VIDEO,
18:35BUT YOUR staffers your staffers say you
18:39sent them to buy you alcohol at 2:00 in
18:41the morning?"
18:42>> That's not true.
18:42>> That's what your staffers told New York
18:44magazine.
18:44>> Not true, Maddie.
18:45>> I don't know if it's true or not. That's
18:46what they said.
18:48>> Well, it's not true. Who said that?
18:49>> I never said that. They said that. Your
18:51team Nobody said that. It was
18:53>> your former comms director. Your former
18:55comms director said it. It's never
18:57happened.
18:58>> Your former communications director said
18:59you asked staff to go get drinks for you
19:02in a congressional liquor store while
19:04you're doing town halls.
19:06>> It's not true.
19:07>> No. No. There's a name on it. I can give
19:08you the name. You want me to give you
19:09the name? Take it UP WITH HER. DON'T
19:10TAKE IT UP WITH ME. HER NAME IS NATALIE
19:12JOHNSON. Her name is Natalie Johnson.
19:15She says that you drank so much she'd
19:16have interns and junior staff run to
19:18congressional liquor during the workday
19:20so she could embibe during town halls.
19:22That's what she said. Take it up with
19:24your former comms director. She doesn't
19:26like you either. Donald Trump doesn't
19:27like you. She doesn't like you. And
19:29Muslims don't like you for being racist
19:30towards us.
19:32>> That is very disgusting, Medie. And not
19:36not not true. That's just that very
19:38disgusting attack on a woman who's
19:40trying to debate you about issues. And
19:42you
19:42>> I didn't say it was true. I simply said
19:43that's what your staff said.
19:44>> That are not true. That's what you're
19:46doing right now.
19:46>> You personally attacked me from the
19:47moment this began. You said you said I'm
19:50Jiad Jason at the beginning of the show.
19:52You liar.
19:53>> Didn't happen. You said you called me
19:55jiad. You called me jihad Jason. So
19:57please clutch your pearl somewhere else.
19:59You started the personal attack. You
20:01called for people like me and my wife
20:03and my kids to be attacked. Let me again
20:06try and wrestle back control your
20:08president.
20:10>> I want to ask one more question.
20:11>> Yes. It was a bad joke
20:14of you.
20:14>> Unlike your bigotry that you don't
20:16apologize for. It was a bad It was a bad
20:18joke that I apologize for. You're a big
20:20woman. You're a big
20:21>> I have got one more question, but I'm
20:23not going to bother if you carry on
20:24>> and sexist.
20:27>> I have one more question I'd like to ask
20:29if it's not too much trouble uh for you
20:31to stop shouting the pair of you long
20:33enough to answer it. But we had the big
20:35story this week of Mmore the rapper
20:38being dropped from Ed Sheeran's tour uh
20:40for speaking out about the treatment of
20:42Palestinians in Gaza. The New England
20:45Patriots owner Robert Craft basically
20:48organized a boycott among stadium owners
20:50over this. U Medie Hassan, you know, it
20:54seemed to me pretty obvious if he'd been
20:56saying stuff that was pro-Israeli, there
20:58would have been no issue with Robert
21:00Craft. Uh but because it was pro
21:02Palestinian, even though it wasn't that
21:04incendurary what he was saying, all hell
21:06has broken loose. What does this tell
21:08you about where we are now in in the
21:11discourse about this?
21:14>> It tells me that the United States right
21:16now under Trump is in a very
21:17authoritarian place where free speech is
21:19under attack. Journalists are getting
21:20arrested and of course the greatest
21:21victims of authoritarianism of cancel
21:23culture, so-called quote unquote the
21:25Republicans obsessed over for years have
21:27always been Palestinians or supporters
21:29of Palestine. They're always the first
21:30people to get fired from Hollywood to be
21:32silenced on stage. I'm glad a lot of
21:34other musicians have backed Mackmore
21:35after Ed Sheeran's cowardice and after
21:37Robert Craft's censorship. Robert Croft
21:39being a right-wing pro-Israel
21:40billionaire whose name appears in the
21:42Epstein files who says Israel is one of
21:44his biggest issues. He comes along and
21:46silences this artist. I mean, what kind
21:47of world are we in where artists can't
21:49speak their minds? As you said, peers,
21:50there was nothing incendiary at all. He
21:51said free Palestine. He said he loves
21:53his Jewish brothers and sisters. He's
21:54against a genocide. And the problem now
21:56is is that you have big money in
21:58American politics which is deciding who
22:00can speak and who can't, who can get
22:01elected and who can't. Robert Croft
22:03decides who gets to speak at a concert.
22:05Apac, which spent $30 million in
22:07Michigan trying to defeat Abdul said, I
22:09think has given over a hundred grand to
22:10Nancy Mace. Apac is trying to decide who
22:12should get elected to Congress. You
22:13know, we're losing our freedoms in this
22:15country.
22:17Nancy Mace, did you see a problem with
22:20what Mack said?
22:22>> No. I mean, this is the market doing
22:24what the market does and deciding what
22:26needs to happen with the consumers that
22:28it provides its entertainment to. that's
22:31his right uh to be able to do that. I'm
22:33just glad that someone is pushing back
22:35against the false narrative about
22:37genocide in Gaza. There's no evidence of
22:38genocide in Gaza. Um and pushing back
22:41against people who want all Jews dead. I
22:44mean, this is a very dangerous movement.
22:46Synagogues are being targeted. Jewish
22:48people can't leave their homes because
22:49of the way that they're being targeted.
22:51And I'm glad to see that he did push
22:53back against this and stood up for Jews,
22:56stood up for America, stood up for
22:58Israel.
22:58Uh, I think I got more than 100,000
23:00many. I think it was 138,000. And
23:02clearly it wasn't it wasn't enough.
23:04>> Hope you're proud.
23:06>> America first. Pier, I I do hope I do
23:09hope doesn't decide to I do hope
23:11Mackmore doesn't decide to sue Nancy
23:13May. She just suggested he wants to kill
23:14all Jews, which is an absurd thing. Of
23:16course, Mackmore doesn't believe that.
23:18No one believes that the ideology you
23:20said, I'm glad people are pushing
23:21backology. Maddie, literally, you cannot
23:23tell the truth for 60 seconds. It is
23:25crazy to me. Well, Mmore is the person
23:27who was silenced. He doesn't want to
23:29kill Jews, nor does anyone in the nor
23:31does anyone who's fighting for
23:32Palestinian justice.
23:34>> And as for the evidence of genocide, as
23:36for the evidence of genocide to push
23:38back,
23:40let me educate you. Genocide in Gaza,
23:42there's not. You are a liar, Medie.
23:44Period. Point blank. You can't even tell
23:46the truth.
23:46>> The genocide quote unquote narrative is
23:49one that's backed Pet. Let me remind
23:50you, I've done it before and I know you
23:52and I have had this conversation. Uh,
23:53the vast majority of human rights
23:55groups, including Israeli human rights
23:56groups, say it's a genocide. The vast
23:57majority of genocide scholars, including
23:59the International Association of
24:00Genocide Scholars, say it's a genocide.
24:02All of the UN investigators that looked
24:03into this, including the Independent
24:05Commission of Inquiry, says it's a
24:06genocide. The former deputy head of
24:07Mossad, says it's a genocide. The former
24:09prime minister of Israel says it's a war
24:10of extermination. The evidence is
24:12overwhelming. We're seeing Palestinians
24:13being killed every day. Over a thousand
24:15Palestinians killed just since the
24:16so-called ceasefire, let alone before
24:18it. So, you don't want to call it a
24:20genocide. That's fine. But most experts
24:21have looked at it and say it is a
24:22genocide. People are being mass killed
24:24and you don't care about the death of
24:2620,000 Palestinian children. That's
24:27fine. We already know that you're
24:28racist. You're a racist towards Muslims
24:30and Palestinians. You don't want anyone
24:32in your country around the world in
24:34places like Nigeria than in Gaza.
24:36Period. And that's where our priority
24:38should be.
24:39>> That's just not true. The numbers don't
24:40even come anywhere close to
24:42>> and a Christian in Nigeria is killed.
24:44That's a fact. Medie.
24:47and over 18,000 churches have been
24:48burned.
24:49>> I'm not I'm not in favor of killing
24:51anyone anywhere. I'm not like you. I
24:52don't support illegal foreign wars or
24:54take money from Apac. I'm against all
24:55killing. But the idea that Palestinians
24:57are allowed to be killed because you get
24:59money from Apac to support that war is
25:01absurd.
25:01>> I'm going to look my record up the next
25:03time you debate.
25:05Nice try. Nice try. Congress
25:07voted for the war. Let me check you
25:10hours ago. So stop lying.
25:12>> I'm so glad I'm so glad you mentioned
25:14that. I'm so glad you did because of
25:16course when the war began you supported
25:17Donald Trump. You refused to vote for
25:19the War Powers Act. You said let him
25:20finish the job. So I'm glad you've
25:22caught up with the rest OF US. MAYBE
25:23YOU'LL CATCH UP WITH THE REST of us on
25:24your bigotry and stop being
25:26>> before they have to declare war before
25:27they have to come to Congress. Every
25:29president has been given at least 90
25:31days to come to Congress to declare war.
25:33We're now at seven months and now it's
25:35time for the president to come to
25:37Congress.
25:38>> Glad you've come around. I'm glad you
25:39realized you were wrong. We have given
25:41Trump the same grace that we've given
25:42President Obama, everybody else before
25:44him, and and now is the time to do that.
25:46That is the honest answer and the honest
25:49vote, which is what I took. I'm not
25:51going to sit here and spew lies like you
25:53are.
25:55>> You're already liking.
25:58Let me just ask you finally, Medie,
26:00about this uh uh push by Thomas Massie
26:04to impeach Pete Hegsth for the illegal,
26:08as he puts it, the illegal war in Iran.
26:11Interestingly, he's going after Hegsith
26:13and not President Trump, who you would
26:15assume
26:16>> might be a bigger target for this given
26:17he was the one that took the actual
26:19decision. But what I mean obviously it
26:21probably hasn't got much chance to
26:23success this, but what does it tell you
26:25about what may happen post the midterms
26:28should the Republicans, as many think
26:30may happen, if they lose, you know, both
26:33the House and the Senate, are we going
26:35to just be stuck then into endless stuff
26:38like this? And what happens?
26:42No, it's a great question. I think that
26:44he made a very strategic move, which is
26:45there's probably more support for
26:47impeaching Hexath than Trump. I don't
26:48think either will get a majority, but
26:50the reality is a lot of Republicans are
26:51very upset with Pete Sexus. I think most
26:53Republicans, I'm probably pretty sure
26:54Nancy Mace, even if she doesn't say it,
26:56know he was never qualified. This
26:57weekend, Fox host with a drinking
26:59problem uh to run the Pentagon. He's
27:01done a horrific job of it. The Iran war
27:02is a disaster. We're seven months into a
27:05war with no end in sight after the
27:06president promised us no forever wars.
27:08Uh he's murdering people out in the
27:11Caribbean, out in the Caribbean, blowing
27:12up boats. We don't even know who are on
27:14those boats. Double tap strikes. Of
27:16course, there's a huge case for
27:17impeaching him. to take your underlying
27:19question peers. I hope that the
27:21Democrats when they control Congress, if
27:22they control Congress, will actually
27:24have substant substantive
27:25investigations, not just performative
27:27votes, but we need to know, quote
27:29unquote, or even literally where the
27:31bodies are buried. We need to understand
27:32what's happened with the Epstein files,
27:34what's happened in the Caribbean, what
27:35happened with Iran, what's happened with
27:36all the corruption that we're seeing
27:38from this Trump administration, and all
27:39the selfdeing. That's what Democrats
27:41need to hold hearings on and actually
27:43investigate because Mike Johnson has
27:44given up on his job as being any kind of
27:46check or balance or or third branch of
27:48government.
27:51>> Nancy M, your response.
27:53>> Mike Johnson has done a wonderful job as
27:55speaker of the house. And while I have
27:57stood with Thomas Massie on the Epstein
27:59files and the Epstein petition, I do not
28:01stand with him on this uh publicity
28:04stunt to go after Pete Hegth. And I hope
28:06many that he sues you for defamation. Uh
28:09that is a gross thing to say. you're
28:10just using the alcohol as an excuse to
28:12smear anybody on the right right now,
28:13which is ridiculous. Um, but I support
28:15him. I think he's doing the best job
28:17that he can. Uh, these are difficult
28:19times. It's why I voted for the War
28:20Powers Resolution last night. We are
28:22seeing gas prices up, grocery prices up,
28:24the Feds may uh hike rates today, which
28:27will mean for every hardworking
28:28American, their mortgage is going to be
28:30more expensive, car loans are going to
28:31be more expensive, uh, diesel is going
28:33to go up. I mean, these are real
28:35problems. And I blame both Republicans
28:37and Democrats for the debt that we're
28:40in, for the deficit we have to see every
28:42year, for um for what's happening with
28:44the cost of living. I'm I represent a
28:46congressional district in the fastest
28:48growing state in the nation right now.
28:50And when I got my ass kicked in the
28:52governor's race, I talked to a lot of
28:54seniors while I was running and hearing
28:56story after story of seniors being
28:58kicked out of their homes that they paid
29:00for their entire lives hoping to retire
29:02in this home that they they bought that
29:04can't afford it because taxes are too
29:06high because the cost of groceries is
29:08too much. They can't make they can't
29:09make it anymore. And so seeing that has
29:12been very very difficult. But I blame
29:14both Republicans and I blame Democrats.
29:16And you know the the point of this is
29:18we're supposed to be making their lives
29:19easier when all we're doing is growing
29:21government and making it more difficult
29:22for hardworking Americans, for retirees,
29:25for people that want to have a family,
29:27work and retire, I think in the greatest
29:29nation in the world, we have made it
29:30difficult for all of them, made it worse
29:32and not better. And I hope that when we
29:34get through the midterms, Medie and
29:36Pierce, that you know, we can actually
29:37focus on the things that matter that
29:39we're not doing investigations for
29:41publicity stunts because both
29:42Republicans and Democrats are notorious
29:44for doing that. I do fear we're gonna
29:46have impeachment after impeachment after
29:48impeachment and get nothing done. But
29:50these are very serious times and deserve
29:52very serious responses for what's going
29:55on in this country. And I think the
29:56disaster that Congress is states are
29:58going to have to take a greater role in
29:59stepping up.
30:02>> Pier, can I just say very importantly
30:03here because Nancy Mace after finally
30:06very briefly Nancy Mace after implicitly
30:08defaming MLmore is suggesting I'm
30:10defaming people. Just to be clear, I'm
30:11not saying any of this. New York
30:13Magazine. Hold on. Let me Can I finish a
30:15freaking sentence? New York magazine New
30:18York magazine is the one who published
30:20your former staff is accusing you of
30:22drinking too much. The New Yorker
30:24published a story. The New Yorker pub
30:26Fair enough. New Yorker published a
30:27story suggesting Hendricks was so drunk
30:30he was pulled out of a bar. The New
30:32Yorker go sue them then. They haven't
30:34sued them so far. The New Yorker The New
30:36Yorker magazine published a Can I finish
30:39a sentence? The New Yorker magazine
30:41published a piece suggesting Pete I'm
30:44going to finish a sentence because it's
30:45factual accuracy. The New Yorker
30:47magazine published a piece accusing Pete
30:49Hex of drink of getting so drunk that he
30:53said kill all Muslims. That was in New
30:55Yorker magazine. You know what? And the
30:56Congress, Pierce, you'll notice let me
31:00speak at all. Should I let me speak at
31:01all?
31:02>> Might be. Do you know what? I just want
31:03to let me just say I need a drink after
31:07that and I'm going to go and probably
31:08get drunk to get to get over this.
31:10>> We'll join Cash and say thank you.
31:13Pierce. Hey, Pierce. What's your
31:14>> I'm going to go and have a drink. Uh
31:17uh I think right now I'm probably
31:18looking at a large Jack. Probably a
31:20large Jack Daniels and Coke to be honest
31:22with you.
31:22>> Maddie, what's your favorite drink?
31:26>> Well, I'm an evil Muslim, so I can't
31:28drink. I only drink Coke Zero.
31:30>> Okay.
31:32I like a little red wine. Lamb Brusco.
31:34>> Nancy.
31:36>> Well, I like a bit of red wine, too.
31:38Maybe I'll have that as well. I need a
31:39lot of alcohol after this. Thank you
31:41both very much indeed. Thank you,
31:42Pierce.
31:43>> The British government has officially
31:45filed papers to request the extradition
31:46of the Tate brothers from the United
31:48States. They face a total of 59 charges
31:50in the UK, including rape, sex
31:52trafficking, and indecent images of a
31:54child. Well, both Andrew and Tristan
31:56Tate have always fiercely denied all
31:58criminal wrongdoing. They also intend to
32:00fight their extradition, although hopes
32:01of a presidential reprieve from Trump
32:03appear to be over. And while they wait
32:05for a lengthy legal battle to play out,
32:07the brothers remain locked up in a
32:09Florida jail. A federal judge in Miami
32:11denied their bail, arguing that their
32:13apparently extravagant wealth made them
32:15a flight risk. Rough initial blaze of
32:17publicity following the arrest. The
32:18Tates lawyers have kept their legal
32:20strategy under wraps. But an exclusive
32:22first interview since the extradition
32:24process formally began. His two leading
32:26defense lawyers, Adam Razzle and Andrew
32:28Ford, join me now. Well, welcome to both
32:31of you. I appreciate you coming on our
32:33sensor to talk about this. Um, and
32:35Andrew Ford, let me start just really
32:37by, I guess, laying out how it looks on
32:40the face of it. It looks like it's been
32:42a pretty devastating few weeks for the
32:44Tape brothers. They lost their bail case
32:46in Miami. The UK has now officially
32:48filed extradition papers. They're facing
32:51shocking new charges in Romania. Um, I
32:54mean, it couldn't be going a lot worse,
32:56could it?
32:58>> Well, Pierce, I think the the Romania
33:00points a slight red herring. the the
33:02reason there's further charges in
33:03Romania is because that case has been
33:06returned to the prosecutor to review
33:08based on procedural irregularities which
33:12unfortunately seems to be a bit of a
33:13common theme in relation to this matter.
33:16So that's that's a slight red herring.
33:18They're not new charges in relation to
33:20the bail in the US. The the test is a
33:25high bar. So that was always going to be
33:27a difficult argument and the fact that
33:29they were arrested on preventative
33:31arrest in the first place by um US
33:33marshals at the request of the UK um
33:36it's no surprise perhaps that the UK now
33:38have request formally requested that
33:40extradition and we now wait to see
33:43whether or not they uh or or what's
33:45contained within the evidential pack
33:47which we're yet to see and whether or
33:49not we're furnished with information
33:51like the names of the complainants
33:53because it's very difficult Pierce to
33:55prepare prepare for a case when you
33:57don't know who the complainants are
33:58against you. We're not asking for public
34:00announcements of the name. We're asking
34:02for the defendants, as they will be, to
34:04know the names of the complainants so
34:06that we can prepare our case and so that
34:08we can preserve evidence to support our
34:10case. And I know you're a fierce
34:12proponent of due process, Pierce, and
34:14and that's all we ask for.
34:18>> Yeah. No, I 100% am. I mean, Adam Razel,
34:20I am a a proponent of that and I've
34:22always said about the takes. I don't
34:23know whether they're guilty or not. I do
34:26believe in due process. The whole
34:27process with them appears to just be
34:29dragging on for year after year after
34:32year and then gets more complicated as
34:34more charges are thrown and so on and so
34:36on. Um you know the the the overwhelming
34:39impression being created by the legal
34:41process so far is that the charges
34:44against them are incredibly serious.
34:47there are are a lot of them, a lot of
34:50different people making claims against
34:52them and that their chances of getting
34:55off all this seem to be pretty small.
34:58How confident are you that ultimately
35:00they will be acquitted of everything?
35:03>> Well, firstly, peers, thank you for
35:04having us today. In relation to the
35:07takes exclusively, they've always been
35:10from day one adhering to the Romanian uh
35:13case and investigation and the buildup
35:16over time has built up of several
35:18counts, several charges. We're confident
35:20in the British system where British born
35:23and bred, the legal process and once
35:26this case and if this case gets to the
35:28UK, it's over to a jury where we have
35:30the opportunity to battle fairly,
35:33properly, and professionally. I think
35:36with respect to both the brothers to
35:38date they've had Romania lawyers they've
35:41had coverage in Romania coverage in the
35:43US and it's an opportunity now to see
35:46how the UK team work and you know peers
35:48and Andrew and I uh similarly that the
35:50US system the Romanian system is very
35:53different to the UK and we have faith in
35:56our defense and we're confident and what
35:58I would say peers which is very
35:59important is it's very easy to make an
36:02allegation against someone it's very
36:04easy to give a statement,
36:06>> but it's very difficult to give evidence
36:07in court and stand by what you say. And
36:10that's where we want to be.
36:13>> Yeah. I mean, Andrew Ford, it's
36:15interesting. As part of their Miami bail
36:16application, the Tate defense team
36:19argued they weren't a flight risk with
36:21the means and motive to skip bail
36:23because none of what we see is real.
36:26It's all exaggerated. They said Andrew
36:28and Tristan are social media
36:30personalities. is the outrageousness of
36:33the post by them and about them is the
36:35point. The business model depends on
36:37online attention. The more hyperbolic
36:39and outlandish the post, the more likely
36:42it will generate views and likes, which
36:43in turn generates income. In short,
36:46they're playing a role. Further the
36:47tates are engaged in several businesses
36:49teaching men how to earn money. It's in
36:51their interest to portray themselves on
36:53social media as uber wealthy. You know,
36:56I mean, if you sub that down. I'm a
36:59former editor of a newspaper. It's like,
37:02you know what, most of this is
37:04Uh, they're just massively exaggerating
37:07or inventing stuff to create a false
37:09persona. Now, the issue with that is it
37:12might help them legally, although it
37:14didn't with the bail application. But
37:15what does that send the message to the
37:18people paying money, for example, to
37:20have them teach them if it's all built
37:23on sand? if it's all just
37:26>> Well, I I'm not sure it's all
37:28Pierce, as you put it. But I think the
37:30the important thing in relation to their
37:32means when it comes to the bail hearing
37:34is that they've had those means for many
37:37years. They've had those means for two
37:40years where they've been on bail from
37:41Romania and adhereed to every aspect of
37:43those Romanian bail conditions. So,
37:46what's perhaps more significant is is
37:49not someone who is not flight risk
37:51because they don't run away because they
37:52don't have the means. is somebody has
37:54the means but then opts to adear and and
37:57comply with those bail conditions
37:59rigorously. So, um I would say
38:01exaggeration is probably fair. I'd say
38:03maybe not.
38:07Okay, but let's just go through some of
38:08these. Adam, um you know, Andrew Tate
38:12publicly claimed in 2023 in a podcast
38:15that he had 10 to 12 children. In the
38:17official court findings that came out in
38:19the Miami extradition, it's actually
38:21three. So, he's exaggerated the number
38:24of children he has by up to four times
38:27as many. Why would he do that? I mean,
38:29what what's what's the what's the point
38:31of that if it's so easily provable that
38:34it's nonsense?
38:36>> I think what we got to go back to is
38:38when these boys went from no social
38:41media coverage to huge amounts of social
38:43media coverage. And we all know in
38:45social media there is exaggeration.
38:47There are facts which are not
38:48necessarily right or accurate. But the
38:51main fact here is the differentiation
38:52between a criminal investigation and
38:55facts about children uh doesn't cross
38:57over. The the main issue for us from day
38:58one peers and I think the most important
39:02point is why are we here? We're here
39:04because there are allegations against
39:06our clients. They wish to face the
39:08allegations. They will defend them
39:10rigorously. The facts and admissions of
39:12what they make in social media then
39:14becomes a social media prosecution. And
39:16there's one thing peers I think it's
39:18really important which Andrew touched
39:20upon is when we come back to looking at
39:22the UK legal system. This is a matter
39:25for a jury. So whatever happens outside
39:27this call or on social media or opinions
39:31from other lawyers comes down to the
39:33courtroom where we have faith that the
39:35legal system won't be interested in how
39:37many children he had. We'll be
39:39interested in the facts of what the
39:40victims or alleged victims say against
39:43the defense of the Tates. This is the
39:45first time you've seen Andrew and I on
39:48uh on a call on a video in relation to
39:50this because we've been working
39:52rigorously focusing on the actual result
39:55as opposed to wanting our profiles all
39:57over media and that's the important bit
39:59to act professionally and put our faith
40:01in the jury and that's the most
40:03important factor.
40:06Well, yeah, I think Andrew Ford is it's
40:08certainly true that what happens in a in
40:10a courtroom is obviously the most
40:12important thing, but all this stuff does
40:14go to their credibility. You know, apart
40:17from inventing nine children, he doesn't
40:19have. Um, it was also revealed that the
40:22high-end luxury items that they
40:24constantly post about as being theirs,
40:26like a $7 million customized Bugatti
40:29Chiron, a two and a $2.1 million Aston
40:32Martin. These weren't actually owned by
40:35the T. were rented or corporate leased.
40:38That's been what emerged in these
40:40filings. Again, is that is that correct?
40:42They didn't own any of these cars.
40:44>> Um I'm not sure I could afford to rent a
40:47Bugatti. Um I think that's I think you
40:50still got to have some wealth about you
40:51to be able to to rent or hire or
40:53whatever a
40:55>> Sure. But it's whether they it's whether
40:56they own it whether they own it or
40:58don't. I mean, if they don't, they
40:59don't. But they've always claimed they
41:01did. I think I think they've read I'll
41:04accept the fact they probably readily
41:05conflated the two peers throughout but
41:08um exaggerating that doesn't affect
41:11their credibility when it comes to give
41:12evidence at court. It's worth noting
41:15just to there's a
41:17>> sorry
41:18>> yeah go on
41:19>> I I'll just Thank you. Thank you peers.
41:21I was just saying in relation to that
41:22peers in the last 5 years Andrew and I
41:25have been involved in SFO HMRC cases
41:28where good people like yourself have ps
41:32or presenters of cars and bags and all
41:35of a sudden they're faced with uh
41:37proceeds of crime applications. Where
41:38did that come from? It I'm not saying
41:40it's excusable. What I'm saying is it
41:42puts on a a cover of glamour which isn't
41:46necessarily true. But I don't think it's
41:47something which prejudices their
41:49credibility. I think credibility will
41:51come down to
41:52>> No, no, but No, but it's No, I get that.
41:54But, but it's also, as I said, a lot of
41:56this is just I don't, you
41:57know, I'm just saying that as a
41:58statement of fact. Like, there's a $50
42:00million super yacht, the Obsidian Blade,
42:04frequently appeared in their videos, but
42:05obviously it didn't belong to them, it
42:07turns out. Um, they were paid to promote
42:10the vessel on social media. Um, and
42:12there were a lot of assumptions about
42:14Andrew Tate's luxury uh watch
42:16collection, for example. Um, it turns
42:19out again that he doesn't own most of
42:21this stuff. I guess the point I'm
42:23making, Adam, is that, you know, when I
42:25say it's what I mean is they
42:27were creating a bogus
42:30world of uber luxury and glamour and so
42:34on, which I always suspected was
42:37that a lot of it was massive,
42:39exaggerated, or simply invented. One of
42:42the problems here is as you take these
42:45guys into a courtroom, their honesty and
42:48credibility are going to come to the
42:49four and I can imagine a prosecuting
42:52lawyer will leap on all this stuff and
42:54say, "Well, look, the whole thing is
42:56fake, right? How can you believe a word
42:57these guys say about anything?" So, I do
43:00think it goes to their credibility. If
43:02someone's prepared to just brazenly lie
43:04on social media to millions of people
43:07about how many kids he has or what cars
43:09he owns or yachts he owns or watches he
43:12owns, it does go to credibility, doesn't
43:14it? I mean, it would be naive to think
43:16it doesn't.
43:17>> I wouldn't say it's I
43:18understand the point. If you turn to the
43:20amount of children he has, I think we've
43:22got clients outside the brothers who
43:24will talk about how many people in the
43:26family and children to mask privacy
43:28because that's an issue in relation to
43:31the glamour and the glitz and the bogus
43:32items you're referring to. Don't forget
43:35they've traveled across the Middle East.
43:36They've traveled across parts of Dubai
43:38where other influencers will piggy back
43:40and offer cars, watches, please put this
43:44post out, do this for us. So there is a
43:46smoke grenade there. I understand the
43:47point to an extent, but if a prosecutor
43:50is relying on that point to convict our
43:52clients, then I'll be quite happy about
43:54that.
43:57>> Yeah. No, I think that obviously, as I
43:59said, there going to be a lot more
44:00serious things for them to to uh to
44:03answer than these. Um, in terms of uh
44:07their actual wealth though, Andrew Ford,
44:10I would imagine this legal stuff is
44:12costing them a lot of money. Are they
44:14good for that money? Are you guys all
44:16getting paid on time and what you should
44:18be paid? Are you doing it any of it pro
44:20bono for them? I mean, what what's the
44:21deal?
44:22>> No, we're all good. We're we're we're
44:24well looked after and we're we're in a
44:26position to make sure their defense are
44:27being properly prepared. Um so, yeah,
44:31we're not going to discuss that in too
44:33much detail for obvious reasons, but um
44:36we're okay. It's not a cheap process and
44:38and that's case in point as to why it's
44:40not a complete um faux impression. Um
44:46there's there's legal teams across three
44:48different jurisdictions. Um which is not
44:51a cheap process, especially when you're
44:53you're incarcerated and your ability to
44:55be able to earn revenue is is massively
44:58depleted.
45:01>> I mean, you look, you guys come over as,
45:03you know, just perfectly normal lawyers
45:06to me. I've dealt with a lot of lawyers
45:07in my time. Um, the guy in America,
45:10Joseph McBride, seems to see his role as
45:13being a kind of showman. Uh, how helpful
45:16is that in all this? Would it not be
45:18more helpful if his legal team in
45:19America adopted the kind of persona that
45:22you guys have, a bit more serious about
45:24everything and less that this is all
45:26some form of weird entertainment?
45:29I think there's horses for courses,
45:30Pierce, and uh you're you're probably
45:33happy you got a couple of bricks on
45:34rather than the the more
45:35Americanorientated approach perhaps, but
45:38ultimately this is going to come down to
45:39a trial in the UK. And uh the UK
45:42approach is is perhaps different to what
45:44you might expect in America. Just to
45:46dovetail on that on that peers, um you
45:49might not remember this, but we we met a
45:51few years back at Lords and we had a
45:53very similar conversation about the
45:55professionalism of lawyers. And when it
45:58comes to how we approach things, we
46:01don't cut corners. We do things by the
46:02book. The US team, I'm sure they do, but
46:05we're not here to make a song in a
46:07dance. We have people in our circles and
46:10who have faced criminal investigations
46:12pre-charge, released under
46:14investigation. And I just think it's
46:16appropriate and maybe very British of me
46:18to say to act a certain way, integrity
46:22upheld at all times and there's no need
46:24to shout from the rooftops. And for us,
46:26that's the approach we'll always take
46:27and I appreciate the persona comment,
46:29Pierce, especially from you,
46:32>> right? Well, and obviously the complete
46:36antithesis of your clients who have
46:38always shouted from the rooftops because
46:39that's part of their business model.
46:41What's been interesting has been how
46:43much Andrew Tate in particular, and I'll
46:45come to you Andrew on this, um, has been
46:48complaining on social media about his
46:49prison conditions. This was a post from
46:52September the 8th, so about a week ago.
46:54Someone in general population stabbed
46:56another inmate and was dragged to the
46:57SHU punishment unit and put in the cell
47:00next to me. No commissary, no
47:02television, no phone calls, no pillow.
47:04Guantanamo Bay conditions. He screamed
47:06all day and bang the door all night,
47:08begging to go back to general
47:09population. After seven days, his
47:11punishment was complete for stabbing
47:12someone and released back to general
47:14population. I've been in the shu unit
47:16for 51 days in counting. Not seven days,
47:1951 days. I have no criminal case in
47:21America. Have been respectful to every
47:23guard. The warden said the order to keep
47:25me in shu comes from above. I gather
47:27myqi. I sit in lotus position in the
47:30dark for eight hours gathering my
47:32powers. I can survive. But the question
47:34is, I'm an American citizen with no
47:36criminal accusations in this country.
47:38I'm being accused of a me too from 15
47:40years ago in England, a country which
47:42clearly hates me. Who signed off on
47:44this? Why do they want me in shu? You
47:48know, my question would be how prudent
47:51is it for Andrew Tate to be posting
47:53stuff like this um and playing the
47:56victim, complaining about his conditions
47:58and stuff when it could have a material
48:00effect on how he's treated.
48:04>> The reality is the conditions are
48:06thoroughly unpleasant. There's there's
48:08an hour of daylight a day and which is
48:10the same hour of exercise a day. Um most
48:14people would struggle in those
48:15conditions. I think that's fair to say.
48:16I'm not going to sit here and try and
48:18garner any any sympathy for Andrew Tape
48:20because I'll be on to a loser. I'm fully
48:22aware of that. But what we do ask for
48:24throughout the process is is fairness.
48:27So when when the bail application was
48:30made, conditions of confinement were a
48:32big issue of that bail application. I.e.
48:35They are in the shoe unit, segregated
48:37housing unit, which is was which is
48:39there to be a punishment. And the fact
48:42that they were there in these poor
48:44conditions
48:46when they are unconvicted seemed unfair.
48:50So in the leadup to the bail hearing,
48:53the Department of Justice gave them
48:55orderly status, which gave them a bit
48:57more time out of their cell, and they've
48:59gave them commissary, which is some
49:01extra food, a radio, that type of thing.
49:04They had the hearing, they made a big
49:06song and dance out of that during the
49:07course of the hearing to the judge. The
49:09following day, they removed both of
49:11those things. So, I think we would be
49:14naive to think there wasn't some
49:17slightly atypical approach towards the
49:19tape brothers rather than any other
49:21potential defendant.
49:25>> Okay. And Adam, how is Andrew Tate
49:27posting this stuff? I mean, he's even
49:28been posting poetry, you know, recently
49:31posted, "I fell to bits because of the
49:33rose. What should I do with a rose
49:35garden without you, oh my beloved? What
49:37should I do with life and the world?"
49:39All very poetic, but how is he doing all
49:41this? Has he got a phone? Has he got a
49:43computer? Um, how is he posting? And is
49:47your honest legal advice to him that
49:49it's sensible to keep posting on social
49:51media given the gravity of the charges
49:53he's facing and the fact that he's
49:55incarcerated and wants people to think
49:56he's got extremely draconian conditions.
50:00>> You know, peers, you're you're well
50:01seasoned in the media and entertainment
50:03world. And one good thing about our
50:05position from the UK legal team is we
50:08have no involvement with posts. We have
50:10no involvement with their agents or
50:11family members. They won't have phones.
50:13They won't have laptops with them. But
50:15any family member who has login or th
50:18those things we're not involved in. Uh
50:20the focus on us is to concentrate on the
50:21case, not what they're posting.
50:25>> Right. But have you have you encouraged
50:27Andrew Tate to stop posting?
50:30>> I think that's a bit like an oxymoron. I
50:32think he's been posting for many years
50:34through himself or third parties. We
50:36don't comment on what he posts. We can
50:38only guide people peers as you know
50:40about what they should or shouldn't do.
50:42uh we're brought in to focus on the UK
50:44legal case and if this case arrives in
50:46the UK, I think if you reinter us again
50:49at some stage once this case starts,
50:52we'll be able to give you more
50:53definitive answers about what the actual
50:55charges are because there's there's one
50:57issue in this case, Pers, which um is
50:59important to bring to attention. It's
51:01very easy as we all know to make an
51:03allegation but you know they're leading
51:05cases maybe a few years back in
51:07Manchester where alleged victims went
51:10the whole distance and when they went
51:11the distance and it failed at court
51:13there are fresh perverting the course of
51:15justice charges against the victims and
51:16I'm not saying that's the case here but
51:19I actually think that once this case
51:21gets to the UK you'll be able to
51:23interview us more about what this case
51:25is about and I think you'll be surprised
51:26against the amount of allegations
51:28against the facts of the case and I
51:30think That's important and fairness and
51:32paneling a jury is not going to be easy
51:35in this case because it's a social media
51:37prosecution. Pier,
51:40well, it it's it's not a social media
51:42prosecution. That's a sideshow to the
51:44actual prosecution. Andrew Ford, and the
51:47truth is in the UK they're facing 59
51:49charges now, including rape,
51:51trafficking, prostitution, indecent
51:53images of children. These are very
51:55serious charges and there are a lot of
51:57them. And look, as I said at the start,
51:59it may be they're completely innocent of
52:02all the charges, but no one can dispute
52:04the gravity of the charges um uh or the
52:08gravity of the potential punishment if
52:10they're found guilty. You know, if
52:12they're found guilty as charged, then I
52:15suspect neither will come out of prison
52:17for decades.
52:19>> Absolutely. Nothing that we say is
52:22intended to diminish the seriousness of
52:24the allegations against them. That
52:25doesn't make them true. They just they
52:27are serious allegations by their very
52:29nature. Let me give you an example. You
52:31you touched on the the indecent images
52:33allegations. These emerge from and when
52:36I talk about the process being slightly
52:38atypical, this is a good example. These
52:40emerged from devices seized from Andrew
52:42in 2015.
52:44Andrew, no further action was taken four
52:47years later against Andrew when the
52:49police were in those in possession of
52:51those devices. It's it's perhaps
52:54beggars's belief to think that it's fair
52:56that after those devices were destroyed
52:59in 2019
53:01that they then bring charges in relation
53:04to what was on the devices which they
53:06destroyed in 2019. So there is a there
53:09is a story behind all of these charges
53:11and for now it's very one-sided in terms
53:14of what's out there in the media. Um,
53:17but there is a story behind them and and
53:20those defenses will be presented at the
53:22right time. I I wouldn't get drawn into
53:24the trap of thinking just because
53:26there's 59 charges that they are um all
53:30credible and they're all going to be
53:31made out or or even that that quantity
53:34is something that we can even even base
53:36it on. Criminal charges is all about
53:39quality of the evidence rather than
53:40quantity of the charges.
53:44And Adam, you know, Tristan Tate in his
53:45own post on his exac account accused the
53:47US penal system of housing him and his
53:50brother as political prisoners of the
53:53failing British state. Um, I mean, what
53:56does he base that on?
53:58>> In relation to what he posted, what he
54:00says, I don't know. In relation to
54:04Britain or England itself, the comments
54:05are not helpful. There's no hiding that.
54:07What I would say is when you've gone
54:09from being incarcerated in Romania,
54:11released, then traveling and then
54:13arrested, then going into another
54:15prison, people act differently. People
54:17say things peers and you know and I know
54:20when there are pending criminal
54:21investigations or requests to return to
54:23the UK from the US, there are things
54:26people say which they regret. And I'm
54:28not here to say I might be a good
54:29defense lawyer, Pers, but I don't
54:31pretend that I have a magic wand to
54:33dispel people's comments. One thing I
54:35would say, Pier, which is very useful
54:36about Andrew's comments about the
54:38charges, it's important to understand
54:41one thing. When people make charges and
54:44when they come to court and when you get
54:45an indictment,
54:47those charges have to be stood by. The
54:49evidence has to be presented. We've been
54:52representing the brothers now uh over
54:54maybe around two to three years. And
54:56we've been asked so many times, peers,
54:58to talk about their defense, talk about
55:00what's the next steps. If we represented
55:02you peers, I would never talk about
55:04someone's defense. I'm confident about
55:06what we will do and what we will
55:07achieve. And it's not an arrogant
55:09comment. It's the fact that we spent so
55:10long working on every aspect of the
55:13case. And what we don't want to do is
55:15put live where we're going to go with
55:17this, what the steps are, what the
55:19defense is. I I'm keen for it to get
55:21into the UK court simply because they
55:24have an opportunity to defend
55:25themselves. And I think once that starts
55:28and it's obviously for public viewing, I
55:30think the world may see a different side
55:32of this case. And that's easy for me to
55:34say as a defense lawyer, but it's also
55:36easy for me to say as a human uh because
55:38they we do exist. We're not we're not
55:40all bad lawyers.
55:43And and finally, Andrew Ford. Obviously
55:46um there was a time when politicians
55:48like Nigel Farage praised Andrew Tate
55:50for being an important voice uh for
55:53emasculated young men giving them
55:56confidence and so on. Uh you know the
55:58Trump world uh was pretty on side as
56:00well with Tate brothers for a while.
56:03There seems to have been a deliberate
56:04distancing there. Is there any hope,
56:07Andrew Ford, of Donald Trump intervening
56:10at any stage in this, do you think, or
56:12is that now being parked as never going
56:14to happen?
56:16It will be delegated to to to Marco
56:18Rubio and uh and we'll see. That's still
56:20a bridge that they've got to cross. Um
56:23they've also got to they've also got to
56:25look at the chronology when doing so.
56:27So, as a as an exclusive for you,
56:29Pierce, we have started the process for
56:32judicial review to challenge the UK's
56:35decision to seek extradition. Um, in
56:39March 2024, Romania made an order to
56:43agree to extradition back to the UK. But
56:45once Romanian proceedings are concluded,
56:48we've already spoken about the fact that
56:49those proceedings haven't yet concluded.
56:52So our our argument in that judicial
56:55review is and will be that is an
56:58unreasonable step to take because it's
57:00going to deprive them of their
57:01opportunity to be exonerated in Romania.
57:06Um which in turn is going to impact upon
57:08their uh their ability to be able to
57:10defend themselves in the UK. why when
57:13Andrew and Tristan had traveled many
57:15times to the US, to Dubai, to all of
57:17these countries with extradition
57:19treaties with the UK, they didn't seek
57:22extradition sooner.
57:24I don't know and and and there is no
57:27logical answer to that question. So, we
57:29will be um judicially reviewing that
57:32decision and it will be interesting to
57:34see how that plays out. So, in answer to
57:36your question, it may not reach the
57:37executive. We may have other means of
57:39stopping it before it gets to that
57:41stage.
57:43But would the purpose of the review be
57:45that they could resist being extradited?
57:49That
57:49>> they would be extradited, but once
57:51Romanian proceedings are concluded, so
57:53going back to status quo as it was
57:54before they were arrested in uh in Miami
57:57in July 2026.
57:59So that has been the position. The
58:01brothers have been very keen to respect
58:03the Romanian proceedings. It seems as
58:06though the CPS have not um offered
58:08Romania the same courtesy.
58:10>> Skip the queue. If you fail in the
58:12review, just to be clear, finally, Adam,
58:14just to be clear about the chronology
58:16here and the timeline, like I said at
58:18the start, this has taken years already
58:21as things stand. If the judicial review
58:24uh fails, then what is the sequence of
58:27events here that we can expect and what
58:29would the likely timeline be of this in
58:32terms of when we can expect to see it?
58:34It's something Andrew and I discuss on a
58:35daily Andrew Ford and I discuss on a
58:37daily basis which is if the extradition
58:40um fa well is successful and the
58:42brothers are sent back or sent to the UK
58:46the chronology events will come down to
58:48remand prison availability court I think
58:52it will go into 2027 peers I cannot see
58:55the brothers being sent to the UK this
58:57side of the year that's just based on
58:59the US system not the UK system there's
59:01also another issue um which I think you
59:04talked about many years ago, but back in
59:062020, um, we had COVID and was still
59:09dealing with the courts. We'll go back
59:11to what I said about 15 minutes ago.
59:14Paneling a jury in this case is going to
59:17be difficult. It's I I don't know how
59:20that's going to be achieved. It will
59:21obviously has to be, but it'll take
59:23time. So, I think Andrew and I think
59:25together 2027, I I just I'd be
59:29surprised, but we're ready if they are
59:31brought again. in 26 but I think 27
59:34peers.
59:37>> Well, listen, I appreciate you both
59:38coming on. You haven't done uh much
59:40media around this and it's good to get
59:42some clarity about where the situation
59:43is and as I've said, as I said to Andrew
59:47Tate when I've interviewed him numerous
59:49times, I don't know. I don't know if
59:51he's guilty or not. I do know he's
59:52facing very serious charges. I actually
59:54think it's in everybody's interest that
59:57this gets into a courtroom sooner rather
59:58than later and everyone can see the
1:00:01evidence. they can see the prosecution,
1:00:03they can see the defense, they can see
1:00:05the British justice system working and
1:00:08ultimately get clarity about whether
1:00:10they're guilty or not. Um, but I
1:00:13appreciate you two coming on today to uh
1:00:15talk me through it. Thank you very much.
1:00:16>> Thank you for having us.
1:00:18>> Take care.
1:00:21>> Persson is proudly independent. The only
1:00:23boss around here is me. If you enjoy our
1:00:26show, we ask only one simple thing. Hit
1:00:28subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers
1:00:31Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple
1:00:33Podcast. And in return, we will continue
1:00:35our mission to inform, irritate, and
1:00:38entertain. And we'll do it all for free.
1:00:40Independent uncensored media has never
1:00:43been more critical, and we couldn't do
1:00:44it without you.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of 'You're a Racist BIGOT!' Mehdi Hasan vs Nancy Mace | Andrew Tate Lawyers Speak to Piers Morgan by Piers Morgan Uncensored, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 11,831 words across 1,759 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.