Thanks Andrew well, as Shari revealed would happen on this program in April, Prime Minister Anthony Alberizi today announced a Special Envoy on anti Semitism. Lawyer and businesswoman Gillian Siegel, who Shari also said was the front runner for the GIG, has been appointed to the role. This was the Prime Minister this morning.
The government has made the decision to appoint a Special Envoy on anti Semitism as part of those ongoing efforts to promote social cohesion. That Gillian will advise myself and the Immigration and Multicultural Affairs Minister, but also engaged with the community.
Now.
The idea is that the Special Envoy will report directly to the PM, and not just the Multicultural Affairs Minister, which happens to be the illustrious Andrew Giles, with advice on issues of anti Semitism and to publicly campaign against it. Miss Siegel, sorry, is pleased to be taking up the role.
Anti Semitism erodes all that is good and healthy in a society. As such, it poses a threat not just to the Jewish community but to our entire nation.
But of course, Albaniz he couldn't just appoint an Envoy for anti Semitism, because there's been an explosion of that since October seven. No, he had to also flag that a special Envoy on Islamophobia was also on the way.
Shortly, we'll also be announcing an envoy on Islamophobia. That will be important as well, playing a similar role working with that community to promote social cohesion.
Now it doesn't matter what this bloke does, no matter how much he tries to look like he actually cares about anti Semitism. He has to keep the Muslim voters of Western Sydney sweet. He wouldn't want to jeopardize those votes by just being honest. It's a bit like when one kid gets a LOTPTP because I don't know they needed for school, and the other kid has to be given something as well, otherwise they'll complain that their sibling got something and they felt left out, even though they're
not really deserving of anything. And let's just get this out of the way. I don't like the term Islamophobia. It's not about being scared of Muslims, which phobia would imply, and that term is most often used to describe genuine criticism of Islam and its doctrines. What we should be
talking about here is hatred. But let's be real. I'm sure there are individual cases of anti Muslim hatred and anti Muslim attacks in this country, no doubt, just as there would be individual examples of hatred and attacks against people of every single religion and ethnicity. That's just the reality. But you haven't seen any mass uprisings of anti Muslim hatred.
You haven't seen tens of thousands of people gathering in the streets and in parks to shout anti muslim slogans that effectively call for the removal of Muslims from the Middle East. But of course we have seen tens of thousands of people gathering in streets and in parks to shout anti Semitic slogans like from the River to the Sea, which effectively call for the removal of Jews from the
Middle East. Or there is only one solution into Farda revolution, which implies that violence must be used to resist Israel, because of course the second into Farda was marred by suicide bombings and the targeting of Israeli civilians, And of course you had the events of October nine on the steps of the Sydney Opera house, gas the Jews, where's the Jews? Whatever you think it is, it doesn't really matter. You had a large mob of angry men in one
place shouting if the Jews and where's the Jews? I mean, why do you think they were saying? Where's the Jews? They're not inviting them down to the opera house for some champagne before the opening night of Karmen, are they? And then you have the hate preachers who have gone effectively unpunished. Well, Lah, they don't love us and they wish they can kill all of us.
You Muslim in Australia, carrying the citizenship, your blood means something else to them.
If the Australian government like it or not. If you likes that are not if they were to depart me from Ausselia or not, did you hurt?
Is the solution for the Umna, and there's no other way to defend the Muslims and raise This is a humilation.
From the Ummah. But finding in the sake of a loss of Hannah. That same bloke brother Ismael said that at the end of times the trees will speak and tell the Muslims to kill the Jews. Now you can think, can you think sorry of any equivalent event in the other direction. Can you Can you think of a single example of a big pack of Jewish men gathering and shouting where's the Muslims? Willing them to come down for
a fight? Every rally in support of Israel, and there haven't been that many of them has been a peaceful gathering calling for the release of hostages. I mean, can you think of a single violent slogan or chant that's been shouted by supporters of Israel. Can you think of an Australian rabbi who's called for the death of Muslims. The point is that yes, anti Muslim hatred does exist, but it doesn't exist on the grand public scale that
anti Semitism has for the past nine months. And drawing an equivalence between the two by saying we need a special envoy for his amophobia to complement a special envoy for anti Semitism is garbage. And of course Albanezy knows that this has all gone on for too long. We know how he really feels. He's a longtime supporter of Palestine, but he knows most people aren't so sympathetic, and that under his watch, anti Semitism has been a big problem. So he kind of has to be seen to be
doing something, even if it's nine months late. Not that he's willing to take any responsibility, if you can confuse.
Much as flat members of the opposition, the members of the Jewish community, Holocaust survivors of not taking a strong enough leadership and sending these messages when it comes to the conflict the outside and pomatism, do you take responsibility for all contributing.
To the smiling.
It's a fairly provocative question. What I take responsibility for is my actions, which has been principal. My actions have opposed the decision, the actions, the terrorist action of Hamas on October.
Seventh, the Prime Minister talking to our own Caroline Marcus there and just as the Prime Minister needlessly open divisions with the Voice referendum, he allowed a foreign conflict to open wide divisions in this country. Now he's scrambling to look like he's doing something because he knows it's too far gone. And look, there probably is some merit in a special envoy on anti Semitism. It's essentially an advisor
to the PM. But then you could ask how blind is the bloke if he couldn't see what the rest of us have been able to see for the better part of a year. But you have to ask the question, what is this actually going to achieve? Okay, so we have a special envoy, what next? What actually changes? Is anti Semitism solved overnight? Is Albanize suddenly willing to close
the divisions that he allowed to open. We already have a Human Rights Commission which has the Race Discrimination Commissioner, who, by the way, is on three hundred and eighty four thousand, nine hundred and seventy dollars a year. Why isn't a publicly funded commision or nearly four hundred k whose job is to deal with racial discrimination up to the job. Do we really need to call someone else in instead?
I mean, look, this is at least an acknowledgment of the scourge of anti Semitism, and I'm sure many in the Jewish community will be pleased to see it. But call me cynical. I just don't know how much this will actually achieve. To me, it smacks of desperation to
look like you're doing something without really doing much. The same as every time a problem comes up and a government commissions an inquiry now, Look, there might be some merit in investigating a problem further, but we have a problem here now and it needs to be dealt with, at least in part. Now. Inquiries allow cans to be kicked down the road, and I suspect this envoy will become Albanese's catch all for anti Semitism, much like those inquiries.
Oh look, I can't be doing anything wrong. I'm listening to my envoy that time and waiting for advice. Johnny Mathies and Denise Williams once sang a song, good song called too much, too little, too late, and I think on all three counts this ticks the box. Also tonight, another foreign criminal has been freed under Andrew Jarles' bungled n z YQ ruling. We'll get into that. Plus Day
two of lockdown is underway in Alice Springs. Will cross live to the troubled out back town to see how the community is faring, and I'll be joined by former Victorian top cop kill Glare on the latest drug scandal plaguing the AFL. Well now to new developments in the alleged political cover up behind the Britney Higgins saga. In twenty twenty one we heard both Katie Gallagher and Penny Wong initially standing by the fact that they had no
knowledge of Britney Higgins's rape before the story broke. I was told by one of your senators two weeks before.
About what you were intending to do with the story in my office two weeks before.
I had no knowledge of this.
No one had any knowledge.
Okay, how dare you order now?
We will move yourself.
But that, of course wasn't true. The following week, Katie Gallagher fronted the Senate to admit she knew more than she initially led on.
I was provided with information in the days before the allegations were first reported, and I did nothing with that information, absolutely nothing. I was asked to keep it to myself and I did. I was not involved in any way with a story that went to air.
But now there are new revelations after The Australian obtained an updated statement of claim from Senator Linda Reynolds, which alleges Ms Higgins and mister Charaz Drip fed false information to Senators Gallagher and Wong as part of an effort to destroy her career. She says quote they were published in furtherance of a plan by the defendant and mister Shiraz to use the defendant's allegations of a rape and the political cover up as a weapon to inflict immediate
political damage upon the plaintiff and then government. Joining me now to discuss the latest is Sam Macedoni from Macedoni Legal, Sam, what exactly has this statement of claim from Linda Reynolds elucidames.
Well, it makes it quite clear that there were and were discussions prior to it becoming public between Shiraz and members of the Labor Party to wise them up in relation to this story that was going to break. And of course since then they've alleged that there was an attempt by Senator Reynolds to cover up the allegation of the rape under hassle or put pressure on Brittany Higgins not to make it public. That's been proved be incorrect.
Justice Lee in the Federal Court said quite clearly that this allegation of a cover up just did not exist. In fact, he said, the facts on that were pretty short, but they were pretty large on speculation, So there was just nothing there. But yet this is something that has now been uncovered by Senator Reynolds in this matter, in
particular the giving of information. For instance, the pre recording of the Project interview was made known to them to allow them ammunition to attack Senator Reynolds in Parliament over this allegation. Of course she denies it.
Yeah, and obviously all of this will be tested in the processes the defamation proceedings that are currently going on between Linda Reynolds and mister raz and Ms Higgins. But if this is correct that it was being used as a political hit job, and I don't mean the political hit job that Miss Higgins had perhaps suggested the cover up,
but a hitjob against Reynolds and the government. What do you think that means for the former government, the Labor Party, in particularly people like Wong and Gallagher.
Well, part of the statement of claim indicates that there were meetings between Chiraz and our Prime minister. So to me that is a very worrying thing to think that people of that height in the Labor Party were getting together to plan something that would derail the then coalition government. I know that mister Morrison's going to give evidence in these proceedings if they come to trial on the second of August. So there's a lot to be heard, I think, and will be surprised with what comes out.
Yeah, and the whole thing. I mean, I've said so many times I'm not the only one that pretty much anyone who's touched this case has failed to come out unscathed in some way or another. And of course we had the defamation trial, which you know, in some ways was highly damaging to Lehreman and in some ways highly damaging to Miss Higgins as well, because of course Justice Lee did not find her to be the most convincing
witness he had ever come across. But I think there's still a question in the back of a lot of people's heads in the public that we need a full inquiry into all of this, because we've still got that sum of money that was paid to Miss Higgins by the Federal government's compensation for her treatment when she worked in Parliament House, and this does nothing to dissuade a lot of people from thinking, well, there's still a lot of questions to answer.
Well, the big question is why was she paid, because you know, it was paid on the basis that she was damaged by things that was said by members of the Liberal Party. But the judge, Justice Lee has said that just didn't happen. I mean, even he questioned, I think the need to make a payment to her. I mean,
it's a very complic cad story. But I think that we haven't heard the end of it yet, and there's still a lot more to come out of it, and I don't think we've really got anywhere near the basic understanding of what happened and who said what, and what were the reasons for these discussions.
In a case like this, given of course, that it is so intrinsically linked to politics, was it basically impossible for it to not be politicized in some way?
Look, I think it was. I mean, basically, if there was a straight out allegation by miss Higgins to the police that she had been raped, and it was left at that level, that is police level, without involving members of the parliament and suggesting that some people were trying to cover it up, and otherwise it would have been okay.
But they've made it political, which gives weight to the fact that what Senator Reynolds is now saying is that there was a bit of a conspiracy and a bit of a planned to drip feed information that was going to damage the Coalition Party.
And of course you know that the reason we're talking about all of this is the defamation trail that's coming up between Miss Reynolds and Miss Higgins and mister Charaz that's meant to kick off next month. Justc it's a short praises of where all that's sitting at, what it will look like.
Well, the case is set down for hearing on the second of August. It's been allocated four to six weeks to be completed. There've been a series of mediations that have taken place to try and have the matter resolved, but that mediation has not been successful. I know that Senator Reynolds simply wants Higgins and Shiraz to admit they were wrong and to apologize for what they've done. I have no idea about any monetary compensation that's being sought,
but at this stage nothing, there's no resolution. So I think it'll go to trial and we'll have very much the same story that we had with the Lehman defamation case. It'll all come down, things will be dug deep down, and who knows what will come out of it at the end of the day. I don't think anyone will come out of an unscathed.
I think you're one hundred percent right, and it's one hell of a story that just keeps on rolling off. Sam Macedoni, thanks much for you never stops giving well. Alice Springs residence at tonight, facing a second night under curfew following a dramatic surge in crime and violence, including a horrific brawl including four police officers on Saturday night. Let's head over there now, where a Senator Nampa jimper
Price joins us. Senator, you of course have spoken out about the fact that this is not the be all and end all, this curfew. You need to work a lot harder on the route causes. But how is the feeling in the community over there at the moment.
Well, it's the usual sort of you know, the community's sick to death of the crime that's been committed over and over again. You know, people from Alice Springs don't feel safe at night. When we go to bed at night, we listen for every sound. You know, could this be someone breaking into our high home. We know that our police force is under the pump, and there doesn't seem to.
Be any real reprieve.
Sure there's another curfew but it's not actually addressing the underlying problems that need to be dealt with within our community.
Well, of course, the curfew will end tomorrow night. It will be the last of this seventy two hour lockdown, so you essentially go back into exactly the same position as you were before. I know, the Police Commissioner can then ask to extend it for potentially another seven days. But really it's not achieving much, No, it's not.
And we're still even when the lockdown is lifted. I mean, we still have to make sure that we get all our shopping done before seven pm every night because the major supermarkets closed down because it's unsafe to shop after seven pm when they used to be open till about ten pm. And you know, our young people they don't have the sort of upbringing in this town now as certainly I did when I was younger. You could feel safe going with your friends to the cinema.
It's school holidays.
So other young people feel like they don't get the opportunity to just live freely in a community because of the behavior, the crime that's been committed by others.
I know. Marian Scrimgore had spoken out in support of a curfew. But where's the Prime Minister Anthony Alberisi, Where's where's the Indigenous Affairs Minister Linda Bernie. They seem to be very quiet on this issue, but we're very vocal about the voice, but very quiet on this right now.
Yeah, absolutely quiet. And they don't have a clue. They absolutely do not have a clue as to how to deal with these really difficult issues in places like Alice Springs and remote communities because they're utterly removed from the circumstances and they're not prepared to sit down and understand the reality of what goes on within our communities in out back Australia. And that's just that's the reality of it.
The sooner we get rid of this government, the sooner we can actually start applying some serious measures going forward to alleviate some of these problems and to help our most marginalize in practical terms.
And you know it frustrates me, and I know it frustrates you as well, Senator, But to watch people talk so much, and by people, I mean those like the Prime Minister and Bernie, to talk so much about how they care about Indigenous affairs and they want the best for indigenous people and the rubber hits the road and
they really do nothing about it. And then you have people like you and me who others you know, spuriously claim to be racist in some way sitting here saying no, hang on, like these are the lives of children initially and then adults who get ruined by a lack of intervention and a lack of help and no jobs and not going to school, etc. And we're trying to say is that if you really want to help people, you've got to help them from the start, and you get shouted down for doing it.
That's exactly right. I mean, this labor government, the alban Ezy government, the territory government, want to maintain Aboriginal people on welfare, on dependent on governments instead of allowing them to stand on their own two feet and creating real jobs out on communities, not a jobs program, but actually opening up for economic development opportunities in remote communities so
that there's not this double standard going on. You know, if life got better out of communities, we wouldn't have the influx of people in our towns, you know.
Using the services.
And you know what, the territory is a haven for service providers as well. They siphon off the government just as much as everyone else. This whole structure needs to be changed, and the alban Ezy government is certainly not prepared to listen or make those changes. They continue down the same old, same old.
Well, it's forty odd billion dollars a year, isn't it. We spend on what I call the indigenous industry and what do we get for it? Very little? Now. I mentioned Linda Bernie before she was asked by the ABC this morning if she believed that the Coalition would support a Truth and Justice commission. Here's what she had to say.
Well, the Opposition has played an absolute spoiler's role in my view in a visional affairs. I mean it was traditionally bipartisan issue for many years across the Parliament. I don't feel like it is now. I feel very very sorry about that.
A spoiler's role, Senator.
Look, yeah, absolutely, I'm quite happy to spoil the program of the elites and to actually prioritize our most marginalized. If in fact, a Truth and Justice commission actually ensured that anal kid in a remote community avoided sexual abuse, domestic violence, got an education, finished high school well, then absolutely, I'll be all for it. But the truth is a Truth and Justice Commission is just about creating yet another blot of bureaucracy and paying people six figure salaries who
live in places far, far away from remote communities. So I'm sorry, Linda Bernie if that upsets Labor. If I'm a spoiler, so be it. I'm a spoiler. I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in common sense, practical policies that are going to focus and prioritize our most marginalized.
Here here, Senator Nampachin Purprice or should I call you the spoiler? Thank you for your time. Well, coming up, another foreign criminal has been freed under Labour's n z Yq ruling. We'll get into that. And we just played host to the Chinese premiere. But now the federal government says CCP backed hackers have been targeting Australia. Why are we sidling up to them? That more with my panel
up next, welcome back Caleb bond in for Shari this week. Well, news tonight that another foreign criminal has been freed under Labour's in zed Yq ruling. Iraq born failely Curred had his bridging visa canceled after an alleged relationship with a thirteen year old, which he was never convicted for, but he was later sent to immigration detention where he was convicted with assault after an incident that occurred at the facility.
Now we learn a judge ordered that the man be released into the community because quote continuing detention of the applicant is within the constitutionally permitted period of executive detention identified in in zed YQ. Well to discuss this and much more as our panel tonight, former Speaker of the House, from a bishop who joins me here on the desk, and from Melbourne the pr Council Managing Director Christy McSweeney.
Good to have you both here, Bronwin. Just another person who's been released thanks to the decision of the High Court Aughton. Of course, we were told that the government was rushing to get some legislation together that would mean that any person that they thought was dangerous would be red attained. Exactly how many of them have been retained? Ronwin?
That's a very good question, isn't it. The fact of the matter is that mister Charles is opposed to the very thrust of what the policy should be. We remember that he acted for the people in the Tampa. He likes open borders, he likes not locking up people who are bad for the people of Australia. So we have this consistent problem of always being behind the eight ball.
So I have no confidence at all that there'll be any successful relocking up of the people who need to be so, I mean, I keep seeing that vision of the face of that elderly woman bashed by someone who should have been locked up.
Correct, correct, And this is the reality of it. Leged, we should say, allegedly back, but this is the reality of it. Christian. And you know, we all remember that period where these people kept being let out and there was a headline on the front of the Australian every single day, And just when you thought it couldn't get worse for Andrew Giles, it just did get that little
bit worse. And it's rearing its ugly head again. I mean, at a time where this federal government is steering down the barrel of an interest rate rise, which is the last thing they need if they're thinking about an election, they just have this one come back to bite them on the button.
Well in politics were used the term barnacles, and you want to clear your barnacles before.
You go into an election.
Most now the government hasn't cleared this one. So if they want to go into election mode this year, which we know that banking the cash, the pm is asked the Cabinet to reinvest the savings into the government budget kitty of budget measures that haven't yet been rolled out but approved but not implemented. So they are banking.
The cash for a blitz.
But based on the strategy around the immigration debarcle that has dragged on far too long, they haven't cleared it.
There is still significant dissent in the public's mind around it that minister remains in place, and of course there is some entanglement around what the minister was doing under instruction from the Prime Minister, around the Attorney General's role in perhaps not receiving or not reading properly or not thinking it warranted further investigation, the advice from the Australian Government solicitor around what the High Court is likely to do. So he's taken his eye of the ball, and of
course is Clara O'Neil. There is a third minister, so that's a lot of barnacles to clear if you want to go forward at try and campaign or folk campaign even towards a poll.
Well, look, if having brain fartz was an Olympic sport, I think Andrew Jarles would be a gold medal winner at Paris in a couple of weeks. Now, while we're on the government labor has been strongly criticized today for of course it's in action on the antisemitism crisis that
plagued dow nation since October the seventh. So speaking at Sydney's Jewish Museum, the Prime Minister, as I talked about at the top of the show, named Jewish lawyer and businesswoman Jillian Siegel as Australia's first anti Semitism Envoy.
We have seen since October seventh last year a significant rise in anti Semitism in Australia and that is why the Government has made the decision to appoint a Special Envoy on anti Semitism.
And of course, as I said earlier, Sharry revealed on this program back in April that this was going to happen. And the idea is that the envoy will report directly to the PM, not just to the Multicultural Affairs Minister, which is mister Giles, who were just talking about Bronwin. But in the back of my head, I just wonder, what is this actually going to achieve? So you allowed anti Semitism to go more or less unchecked for nine months. Now you say you're going to have a special envoy.
Is it more or less just a cloak for the Prime Minister to say that he's doing something without really doing anything.
Well, I think the timing is interesting because he has been made to look an absolute fool by the Muslim vote organization and Senator Payman, who has really played a pivotal role in letting this organization build up. So he has been made to look an absolute fool, and he realizes that he has alienated the Jewish voters who he had And I think the timing is such that he thinks that this is one a distraction. Let's say the
appointment of the person he's chosen. She's an excellent choice and if a job can be done, I'm sure she will do it, but there are no guidelines really about
how it will work. What is the job? I would have thought the first job she would have had was to go to Sydney University and stop that ridiculous deal that has been struck between the university's vice chancellor or rather yes, the vice chancellor and this organization, which is an organization that really should be declared a terrorist organization as well, because the people who identify with those people now have access to information which they ought not to have,
information about defense contracts and so on. I would have thought the first place to go in there was to go in there and repeat all that and say if you want funding for the work you're doing, here is in the university. This goes so, but there's none of that. So I just think that the tagline that he put, and of course there'll be in Islamophobia envoys world, just shows that he has no judgment at all and no courage. He has no courage to stand up to them and say this behavior is not there.
That and that islamophobia voice just the little salvo to those those Western Sydney.
Appeasement doesn't work. I know, I know he looks at the results in the UK. He is running scared. He's the one with Khobe.
One hundred percent. Not only weeks after Anthony Albanezi welcomed Chinese Premier Lijiang to the country, the federal government is accused of Chinese government backed cyber group of hacking both public and private networks in Australia that date back years and are still ongoing. This group is apparently called APT forty and it's been working on behalf of China's Ministry
of State Security. But of course, Christy, you know, just a couple of weeks ago, was all hunky dory happy, We're getting a few pandas you know, the Prime Minister goes over to China. He's a handsome boy, and meanwhile they are trying to steal every bit of information they can from us.
Well, what do we say about deploymacy with China when you need to keep hold of seats in Western Australia where China happens to be the reason where everybody has a job in the mining industry, and it happens to be the reason for the buoyancy of the Western Australian labor government. So there's a consciousness around that. Again, I always look to the politics on a domestic level, which I'm sure the government does too, but that's part of
their consciousness. And interestingly, though I will commend the Australian Signals Director it has actually done a really good job of this because for the first time ever, the intelligence gathering around this issue has been in conjunction with South Korea and Japan, so two partners within our actual region, and that hasn't happened before. So obviously we've partnered with the United States. But this is actually a really good
thing that this has been uncovered. But of course the government doesn't mention the elephant in the room in their response. And another thing today is they didn't mention the C word China either, announcing measures to help Pacific nations restore and recalibrate their financial services and their banking system. So everybody was very hesitant not to mention China in that
framework either. So I'd love to say diplomatic language, because it really is diplomatic, but there's a lack of the politics being talked about with a couple of things this week.
Well, you call it the elephant in the room, we may well call it the panda in the room given the circumstances. Christy Bronwin, thank you so much for joining me tonight. Well, coming up, hows the AFL's medical model has made way for one of its biggest drug scandals. Yet we'll get into that after this with former top cop kel Glare. He'll get into the explosive story. Don't
go away now. Two weeks ago, when I was here filling in for Andrew Bolt, I talked about a report from Sport Integrity Australia which said that professional sport was at risk of being corrupted by criminal gangs that could
blackmail players by hanging their drug use over their heads. Now, that investigation was triggered after we found out that the AFL had been running what it calls a medical model, whereby some players can be tested for illicit drugs before a game by their team doctor and instead of it counting against them, the AFL is meant to have a three strikes policy, it gets swept under the rug and that player perhaps mysteriously doesn't play on the weekend, which
of course means they won't being contravention of any rules, that is anti doping rules, and we never hear about it because of course there must be patient doctor confidentiality. The point is, though, that drug use is clearly rife in the AFL and probably in many other forms of professional sport, and an example of exactly what the SIA warned about was detailed by Mick Warner in The Herald
Sun today. He wrote that criminals sent the parents of a drug addicted player a photo of them that's the crims with their son, and that they threatened his safety unless his parents immediately paid his drug debts. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie, who blew the whistle on all of this off the books drug testing stuff a few months ago, said the kind of drug use being described by the
families isn't occasional recreational drug use. We are being told of players using the medical model to continue taking illicit drugs for multiple years. Rather than helping players get off drugs, the medical model has enabled players to continue taking drugs in secret. Joining me now is former Victorian Police Commissioner Kell Glaire Kel. You have spoken out against this quote
unquote medical model before. We are now seeing the real consequences of this, which is that a it encourages players to take drugs and that that threatens the impunity of the game. Because of course, once you start saying well we've got something over you, this can be used for all sorts of criminal purposes. I don't know. You tell a player that if they don't do something, well, they're going to be in big trouble, and then you go and bet on the result of the game based on
what you told them to do. This is very dangerous, It certainly is.
It opens up all kinds of criminality and the act of taking elicit drugs in itself as criminal. So those are players who are using drugs and know as that's thee as recreational drugs, the drugs are all as simpil as that as a crime to take them. They're facilitating criminal actions by using these illicit drugs. There have to be consequences for that kind of behavior, and the idea
of off the books testing is anathema. Two are really having a sport that's clean and enjoyed by people because it is clean.
Will Kell, obviously a former police commissioner, you are well aware of the damage that illicit drugs do. You used to see it every day as a rank and file police officer, and then obviously running the show. To see a major sporting league in this country essentially encouraging illicit drug use must be galling.
Oh.
I'm absolutely shocked that a body like the AFL could in any way countenance not exposing this as you are dealing with it. Those players who are using ill asit drugs need help, they need the opportunity to get off drugs. But I certainly shouldn't be playing football and having their conduct covered up during that time that they're getting help and being able to get straightened out and killed of their drug addiction. It is just not the way to even think about approaching the issue.
What really worries me about it as well, beyond just the damage that it obviously causes to these particular players, is a You've got young players coming through who walk into a club for the first time and they get exposed to this kind of culture and they feel like they have to participate in it, so they sort of unwittingly get drawn into drugs when all they really wanted
to do was play football at a high level. But it's also the kids watching at home who are watching these people who they see as role models, and essentially their role models are out taking drugs potentially every second weekend, and that is condone owned by the league. If you're a young kid, or even just a young man or woman for that matter, and that's the culture that you're seeing in something that you really respect and look up to.
It sends a message to the broader public that illicit drugs are okay.
It's totally the wrong message. What they should be doing is getting out and speaking to young people about the dangers of illicit drug use and doing their best because they are role models to turn illicit drug use away and keep people away from that kind of thing, because it always leads to disaster in the end. It is something that's a scourge on the whole of society, and these players have an opportunity to do some good things
to prevent kids going down the wrong path. They have a responsibility, in my view, to accept that role and to do the best, to do the best they can to make sure that the use of illicit drugs diminishes rather than increases.
Well, I think it's probably more than a responsibility. It's an obligation, isn't it. I Mean, what we're essentially talking about is the AFL and probably other sporting leagues covering up criminality. Now, I know that is not in and of itself illegal to tell players to go and take a drug test so that they avoid having to take one on the field, where of course they would be
found in contravention of world anti doping rules. But they are covering up criminality and that's one of the biggest organizations in the country doing that.
That's exactly right. They're facilitating, as I've said, they're facilitating the use of lisit drugs by covering up. I think I should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. I think they need to have a re examination of their policy and to change it to show that they are really as a music coloqual it's a fair egham about tackling this use of illicit drugs and they're prepared to do something about it. If that means that you are star players. If they're using a list of drugs, don't get the
play over it. Certainly they shouldn't be allowed to play while they're using and they, you know, as I keep saying, have to suffer consequences for their illegal conduct.
Yep.
And you know that's what the three strike policy was meant to be about. But they created the three strike policy and then found a way to get around the three strike policy. And if we see any more formal blackmail come through, and we've had an example of it here, if it gets to the point where it is influencing the outcomes of games, then the AFL will have a lot more on its hands than it really wants to deal with. Kell Gleare, thank you so much for your.
Time, my pleasure.
Now, look, I have to issue a correction. I've had an email very recently telling me that I've been saying envoy all night and that in fact it's actually envoy. My apologies. I'm sure Kill Richards will have something to say about that as well. After the break, the desperate attempts from bumbling Joe Biden to stay in the race, and why the White House refuses to explain the President's
humorous visits to the doctor don't go away. Well, the fate of the US president has been on the line since the world witnessed that shocking performance in the first presidential debate. But we know, despite even Democrats urging him to withdraw from the race, the demented Biden, well he just won't back down.
I'm going to show frustrated by the leap now I'm not talking about you guys, but by the elite and the party.
Who they know so much more.
But then, in these days, I don't think I should lot.
Some run against me.
And now the president challenge man the convention.
Oh, he's getting angry. And the President then took the time to write a letter to his fellow Democrats saying, I am firmly committed to staying in this race. I wouldn't be running again if I did not absolutely believe I was the best person to beat Donald Trump in twenty twenty five. But I suppose that is what a
demented person would say. Isn't it joining me now to discuss, as The Australian's Washington correspondent Adam crighton, how on earth can Biden continue to justify that he is the man for the job.
Well, clearly he's extremely determined, and he's doubled down massively, to the point that if he does ever step down, he's going to look rather silly. But I suppose a political cynic would say that he has to say this the whole time because he can't say anything else until he finally makes the decision to leave, which I think
is still what's most likely to happen. I think there's too many people have come out now and said bad things about him on his own side, that it's just giving so much fodder to the Republicans for their campaign.
Oh one hundred percent. And I mean Trump's saying now that it's Biden's ego that's getting in the way here, it's the only reason that he won't drop out. What do you make of that?
Well, I think that's fair. I mean, before he ran in twenty twenty, I think Biden gave a speech saying that he'd be the bridge to the future, basically implying he'd only do one term. But he's hanging on for a second term. And plus he's already big vice president fate is so I think the greedy accusation.
Is you know, is true.
It's fair.
But look, there's there's four months ago. The betting markets, by the way, are just terrible for him right now, sixteen percent chance of winning in November compared to Trump's fifty five percent. So things have certainly turned around.
Yeah, I mean, I should have put some more money on before they debate on Trump by me for that matter. But when you talk about and look, I don't want to suggest that I have looked at his medical records, because of course I haven't. But look, I think we all know that there is some kind of diagnosis going on there with Joe Biden. And of course when you try to deal with people who have dementia or Alzheimer's and you try to tell them that no, that that's wrong,
you can't do that anymore. That's not quite how it used to be. They don't take very well to it. And that's exactly what we're say being from Baden right now.
Yes, look, that's certainly true. And sometimes it manifests itself in yelling suddenly. And actually that's that's what the President did in that Morning Joe clip that you just played earlier. I mean, he periodically yelled. I mean the host was surprised. And he's done that before in speeches, he suddenly yells. But it's just been a terrible few days for him, you know, on this so called reassurance tour that he's
trying to do. I mean, he said on the fourth of July that he was the first black woman in the White House. I mean, that's that wasn't great. And then and then he you know, he said ho ho ho as if he was Santa Claus on the fourth of July to the audience. So these aren't great signs of reassurance.
Yeah, but Adam, you can't say that he's not a black woman, he might well identify as a black woman. You can't come under this program. Be so big, ato, Adam. I won't stand for it. While we're talking about medical diagnoses, a Parkinson's expert was recorded as visiting the White House last week, which, as you can imagine, raised a few eyebrows. But White House pre Secretary caring John Pierre, she was quick to shut down any speculation.
So I am telling you that he has seen or a neurelogists three times while he has been in this presidency. That's what I'm saying. I also said to you, for security reasons, we cannot share names. We cannot share names.
Oh that wasn't just look nothing to worry about, was it? No?
She was rather angry. But as it turned out that doctor himself, I think that clarified that he wasn't seeing Biden in particular in all of those visits. That White House has a very large staff, something like more than a thousand and so sometimes doctors are seeing other stuff. But I think the broader point is that now the media has changed its tune on Biden, these sorts of stories are going to drop all the time, and it's just going to undermine his standing, you know, basically every
week in the lead up to the election. So that's why I think ultimately he's going to have to stand aside. It's just going to get worse and worse. And of course, you know, for Trump it's just been fantastic because he's a basically had a almost two weeks off playing golf and just watching the Democrats attack themselves each other.
And that's all he could have asked for, really, you know, to be honest, and Trump just had to rock up to that debate, and given that the mics were off in particular, all he had to do was rock up and look sober and alive, and well, that's all he really had to do in the end. Speaking of Trump, he set to announce his VP candidate next week. The front runners are apparently North Dakota Governor Doug Bergham and Senator JD. Vance. So what do you think who's most likely to make the cart.
Look, it's a good question. I think it's fifty to fifty. I couldn't you know, choose. I think you know, they're quite different. I mean Vance is thirty nine, for instance, and Burgham was sixty seven. I think so quite a large age gap. Of course, Burgham's a billionaire as well, whereas Vance is a young politician. Look, their politics are broadly similar, so I think maybe that he might pick Dvance.
If you're going to to pick between those two, I'd say he'll pick Vance because it's going to set Vans up. He'll be rather admires apparently Trump. It'll set him up to run in twenty twenty eight when he'll be in his mid forties, and presume you a lot more experienced. So I think that's who i'd pick. But you know Trump, you can never really predict.
So indeed, you've only got ten seconds, Adam. Should it have been a woman or should have been a woman?
Well, look, I think it probably should have been, and I'm a little bit surprised that it seems like it won't be because I think he might have got a few more votes from being a woman. But look, you know, we can't really fault Trump. I mean, he's come back massively, so he must know what he's doing.
Indeed, Adam Crichton, thank you so much for your time. That's it from me. I'll be back tomorrow at eight pm. Now Paul Murray Live with the Great James Morrow,