Why is whistleblower David McBride on a podcast for far-right conspiracists?

David McBride’s ardent supporters on the left might need to reflect on his motivations for releasing information to journalists about war crimes in Afghanistan following his appearance on right-wing conspiracy theorist “radio” station TNT.

As Crikey has previously reported, TNT, a Gold Coast-based broadcaster catering to conspiracists, peddles climate denialism, vaccine fearmongering and pro-Russian propaganda. McBride has filled in as a host for Dean Mackin, a candidate for Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party who was sacked by Newcastle station 2HD in 2019 for his unbalanced views. McBride interviewed Greens NSW Senator David Shoebridge about AUKUS while hosting on TNT last year (a spokesperson for Shoebridge told Crikey “politics is too important to narrowcast, Senator Shoebridge even goes on Sky”).

On February 7, McBride appeared on TNT as a guest of Mackin’s to discuss Ben Roberts-Smith’s appeal against his defamation judgment. Prior to McBride appearing, Mackin dwelt at length on what he insisted was a migrant crime problem in Australia and the UK, claimed freedom of speech had vanished in Ireland, and played an ad with a voiceover that said: “If you’re still wearing a cloth or surgical mask around in public, you’re guilty of spreading COVID misinformation, it’s that simple.” Mackin then interviewed Craig Kelly, at that stage of the Palmer party, saying Kelly was “literally saving this country in every way shape or form”. Less than three weeks later, Kelly had abandoned the Palmer party for Pauline Hanson — his second defection in three years.

Joining Mackin after Kelly, McBride, presumably aware of the content that had preceded him, told his host that he felt some “ownership” of the program, before discussing the Roberts-Smith case. If Mackin was hoping McBride would share his host’s enthusiasm for Roberts-Smith, he would have been disappointed. McBride noted that TNT listeners were likely sympathetic to the war criminal, and explained some of the aspects of the appeal case, but pointed out that the evidence against Roberts-Smith came from fellow soldiers, not Afghans or journalists, and it had been tested under cross-examination. Moreover, McBride pointed out, the trial judge had found Roberts-Smith had been involved in several killings, not just one, and an error in the conclusion about one didn’t negate the findings in the others.

But McBride then observed, “He won’t be going to jail. Nor do I think he should, in the sense there’s absolutely nothing to be gained by putting our former soldiers in jail.”

At this time, there are no criminal charges in relation to Ben Roberts-Smith, so the appropriateness or otherwise of his being jailed is meaningless. But McBride’s statement that there is absolutely nothing to be gained from putting former soldiers in jail is extraordinary, suggesting that soldiers be exempted from war crimes and crimes against humanity legislation, removing any benefit from such legislation.

Lionised by many on the left, and championed as a persecuted whistleblower by much of the media — including Crikey, the readers of which voted him Person of the Year in 2023 — McBride has enjoyed relatively little scrutiny of the circumstances in which he leaked to the media confidential material relating to war crimes in Afghanistan.

McBride’s lawyer last November admitted to the ABC that “his initial complaint, the thing that angered him most, was what he thought was inappropriate charging of soldiers for war crimes, that these were trivial incidents. And suddenly he’s being ridden very heavily to prosecute people. And he says, ‘Well, they haven’t done anything.’ So … absolutely it was in defence of Australian soldiers that he kicked off his actions.”

In his interview with prosecutors that the Crown submitted at his trial, McBride complained about the use made of the material by ABC journalists to expose war crimes — the resulting report was, in his words, “the opposite of what I believed”.

McBride’s lawyers are now engaged in attacks on the ABC and journalist Dan Oakes, saying “the ABC abandoned the source of their biggest story that year because he was a bit rude to their journalist”, that Oakes and the ABC breached confidence (an extraordinary allegation to make against any reputable journalist), refused to help McBride, and that Oakes behaved in an “unfair and improper” manner.

McBride responded to Crikey’s private questions about the statement on TNT with a long public attack against me, but failed to address whether he stood by the comments, or our invitation to expand his reasoning.

Crikey’s question to McBride:

Hi David — FYI I have sent the following questions to your legal team. I’m doing a piece on your appearances on TNT: On 7 February you spoke to Dean Mackin about Ben Roberts-Smith’s appeal. As I’ll note, you seemed at pains to distance yourself from the enthusiasm of the TNT audience for BRS and pointed out the evidence against him came from other soldiers. However, you also said the following about the possibility of BRS being jailed: ‘Yeah yeah, he won’t be going to jail. Nor do I think he should, in the sense there’s absolutely nothing to be gained by putting our former soldiers in jail.’ Putting aside the case of BRS, which as you note is purely a civil matter at this stage, do you stand by the view that there’s nothing to be gained from jailing soldiers who have committed war crimes? Can you expand on that view? What’s the deterrent for crimes against humanity if no one is at risk of being jailed for them? Thanks B

Has David McBride been lionised by the left? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.