The Megyn Kelly Show - Biased Trump Trial Jury Pool, Supreme Court Takes on January 6 Defendants, and NPR's Woke New CEO, with the Ruthless Podcast

00:00:00.520 Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at New East.

00:00:12.060 Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show.

00:00:15.300 The first criminal trial of former President Donald Trump is underway,

00:00:18.500 and more than half of the prospective jurors in the New York City courtroom have already been dismissed

00:00:24.140 because they've admitted they cannot possibly be fair.

00:00:27.840 So his concerns about doing this in New York appear to have been justified,

00:00:32.920 though eventually they will find a jury. That's for sure. This is going to be a while. We're

00:00:39.000 going to cover all of the absurdity both inside the courtroom and outside of it, and we've got

00:00:42.600 an update on some of that in one second. And in other Trump legal news, arguments are taking place

00:00:48.020 this morning before the U.S. Supreme Court relating to January 6th defendants, not Trump, but January

00:00:55.720 6th defendants that could have major, major ramifications for the former president's future

00:01:00.540 trials. We've been watching it very closely. I listened to the argument this morning all the

00:01:05.460 way up until almost the very end, and it's not going well for the government. It's not going well

00:01:10.240 for them at all. And we'll play you some of the sound bites, but if this case, this criminal charge,

00:01:16.160 obstruction of an official proceeding goes away, it's huge for Trump in Jack Smith's January 6th

00:01:23.680 D.C. federal prosecution of him. All that plus the NPR whistleblower has now been suspended.

00:01:30.240 Yeah, this is we now get to look at the old tweets from NPR's new CEO that have been uncovered,

00:01:36.880 and they are amazing that this woman is the CEO of NPR and that this poor guy, Uri Berlinger,

00:01:44.280 who tried to say, hey, we seem kind of biased, got fired, tells it well suspended, tells you everything

00:01:49.280 you need to know about NPR. We're going to get into all of it with the perfect guest today. And those

00:01:53.680 guys are Josh Holmes, Michael Duncan, Comfortably Smug, and John Ashbrook together. They are the hosts

00:02:01.100 of Ruthless, now on YouTube and at youtube.com slash Ruthless Podcast. Guys, welcome back.

00:02:10.800 Hey, Megan. Great to be back. Great to be here.

00:02:13.320 Great to see you. All right. So let's start in New York State Supreme, where they are now conducting

00:02:19.960 voir dire of the jurors. This morning, Trump entered and sat there reading the questionnaire,

00:02:26.420 you know, page by page as they went through it with the prospective jurors.

00:02:30.840 The New York Times writing up every second, he closed his eyes for one minute. Oh, unclear if he's

00:02:36.360 asleep or if he just closed his eyes. Like, all right, it's jury selection. It's one of the most

00:02:40.700 boring things for everyone who's not the lawyer or the one juror being questioned. And all this as

00:02:48.500 the DA in the case, Alvin Bragg, has now officially moved to hold Donald Trump in contempt for speaking

00:02:56.160 about Michael Cohen as a violation of the gag order, trying to say that he should be fined $3,000 and

00:03:04.960 asking the court to threaten him that if he does it again, that the court can put him up in jail for

00:03:11.900 up to 30 days. Can you imagine? So what do you think the likelihood of that is? And what effect

00:03:19.320 do you think Trump going to jail for some odd days for speaking out about witnesses who are bashing him

00:03:24.140 in every turn on cable will do to this political race?

00:03:27.600 Oh, well, let's start with the jury selection component for a minute, because I find this

00:03:33.280 hilarious. All of us have had at some point been called for jury duty. And like, I think I speak

00:03:39.360 for all of us when your first inclination is like, what can I do here to get out of this?

00:03:44.480 Right. So, you know, they've given them the perfect out. And it's like, well, can you be fair to

00:03:54.120 Donald Trump? They're like, no, not at all. You know, it's like you're always tempted in the

00:03:58.500 beginning of one of these things to be like, well, I'm an incredible racist. I couldn't possibly

00:04:01.940 render, you know, be like, all right, so you're dismissed and off you go. And so you don't have

00:04:05.840 anything to do. I wonder how much of it has something to do with that. But I think the larger

00:04:09.540 point that you conveyed, Megan, is true and that he's going to have an awfully difficult time finding

00:04:14.520 a jury of his peers that aren't dead set against him. I mean, you just look at the demographics

00:04:19.520 and the voting behavior of the city he's being tried. And it's very, very troubling.

00:04:24.820 Yeah. I would also like to talk about how Megan knows the term Wadir.

00:04:29.240 Yeah, that's which is like very smart. You know, it's almost like she knows what she's

00:04:33.400 talking about and all this legal stuff. So people listening, you should definitely listen to her

00:04:37.560 more than us. But but I mean, even just like from a practical standpoint, like the ideology of

00:04:46.200 of the electorate in Manhattan aside, which is obviously one thing. But like, how could you

00:04:53.120 really have an impartial view of Donald Trump, a guy with 99.9% name ID who has ubiquitous media

00:05:02.260 coverage?

00:05:02.700 Like who's on the fence?

00:05:03.960 He's on the fence.

00:05:04.920 You're telling me you haven't formed some opinion? Like after all this? You kidding me?

00:05:09.720 Like, I'll be honest, I don't know.

00:05:10.700 You're too dumb to be on the jury.

00:05:11.600 Like that is disqualifying. If you haven't formed a single opinion after all of the articles that

00:05:17.120 have been written about Donald Trump in the last six years, like I'm I'm worried about your ability

00:05:20.900 to tie your own shoes.

00:05:21.900 I don't want that person my freedom in their hands for sure.

00:05:26.580 Listen, here's a little sample of who they've had to go through so far in figuring it out.

00:05:31.560 This is as of yesterday. This is not read today of the 96 possible jurors quoting here from the

00:05:36.980 New York Times brought into the room for the first round. More than 50 raised their hands to say

00:05:40.480 they couldn't be fair. They were immediately excused. Court from color on the potential

00:05:43.960 of jurors by New York Times. The first prospective juror. So these are people who I think have still

00:05:49.400 made the dance. They haven't yet been eliminated. First one is a young woman of color with a business

00:05:55.160 degree who reads the New York Times and watches CNN.

00:05:58.280 Eh, out, right? If you're Trump's lawyer. Bye.

00:06:02.160 Um, she seemed unbothered by the need to be fair and impartial. Oh, you don't say the second

00:06:11.020 prospective juror is a white creative director with glasses who lives in Midtown. Also a Times

00:06:16.440 reader. The third prospective juror asked about her hobby said she likes to go to the club. She said

00:06:22.520 it in a playful voice, prompting a big laugh from the reporters in the overflow room. Really? They're

00:06:27.760 really desperate for material in there, I guess. And then the latest potential juror to be questioned

00:06:32.360 reads the Times, the journal, and is also the first person to say that they are a New York Post reader

00:06:38.560 and therefore will certainly be bounced by, uh, Trump's prosecutors because that shows some

00:06:44.780 willingness with the journal and the Post to try to keep a fair mind, which is the last thing Alvin

00:06:49.360 Bragg wants. But you go through like the resume of the people who are getting called in there. And I

00:06:54.240 mean, that is just perfect, right? Woman of color, business degree, who reads the Times and watches

00:06:58.680 CNN. Good luck to you, Trump's defense counsel. This is the road you have to hoe.

00:07:04.040 I don't think, uh, she's going to have a totally open mind. Uh, and the other thing that you surface,

00:07:08.740 the Cohen piece, which, you know, whether to hold him in contempt or not, what is hard for me to

00:07:14.380 actually process is this is so unique. You've got a presidential nominee, right? I mean, he's going to be

00:07:21.660 the candidate the Republicans put up for president of the United States. If he is getting consistent

00:07:28.440 incoming from somebody who's involved with the trial in any way, is he not supposed to defend

00:07:34.260 himself in any form or fashion? It seems like just a straight up speech and debate. Yeah. That you would

00:07:40.320 have difficulty putting a muzzle on a defendant. Now, granted, I get how you need to do that on your

00:07:47.220 average criminal trial. This is not your average criminal trial by any stretch of the imagination.

00:07:52.700 He has a obligation at some point to the millions of voters who have already voted for him to try

00:08:00.280 to defend himself in a court of public opinion. Does he not? I mean, I think that honestly, that speaks

00:08:05.080 to the larger issue here where, yes, there used to be a set of rules of what is proper and what's

00:08:10.680 allowed in that, you know, the justice system exists to go after criminals and make sure that

00:08:16.500 we have a just society. But it's very clear the purpose of it now is to do everything it can to

00:08:22.240 defend Joe Biden and his poor record. Like they have to find a way to muzzle Trump because he can't be

00:08:28.040 out there talking about how, wow, look how open the border is. Look how terrible things have gotten

00:08:32.800 under Joe Biden. This is, and it's a series of these trials. Like this is their only approach they

00:08:38.280 know because they can't run on a record. The record is terrible. So the only thing they can use is,

00:08:43.760 is these systems that they have in place where they ran on, I will prosecute Donald Trump as,

00:08:49.380 as their platform when they're running for election. It's just completely politicized.

00:08:53.420 It is. And the other thing, the other thing that came up yesterday is the judge making all kinds of

00:08:59.280 different rulings as it pertains to different things that can be entered into the court record.

00:09:04.280 And it seems extremely clear to me that the prosecution is trying to basically muddy up

00:09:11.060 his character, right? I mean, they want to bring in people he's had affairs with to testify

00:09:16.560 against him. There's components of it that they want into the record. And the judge is trying to

00:09:23.060 sort through these things about what something's prejudicial or something's not, or whether it's

00:09:27.620 relevant or whether it's not, but it's very clear in the first day, what the game plan is here,

00:09:33.960 right? And they, they want to throw as much mud on this guy as they possibly can in the context of a

00:09:39.960 court of law, where in the context of the court, court of public opinion, it, nothing stuck to him.

00:09:45.880 And I think that you could say that it was clear well before the first day, what their intentions were,

00:09:51.100 because if you look at the track record of the major dark money left-wing funders, Smug was talking

00:09:57.660 about how there is this network of prosecutors around the country who are going after conservatives.

00:10:03.580 They're funded by George Soros and allies of his who are spending money literally to elect these people

00:10:10.180 to put Republicans and conservatives on their heels and make them feel like they can't be a productive

00:10:15.620 member of our society. If you look at how much money George Soros gave color of change pack,

00:10:21.820 for example, he wrote a million dollar check to a pack that supported Alvin Bragg. And so Alvin

00:10:28.340 Bragg's game plan here started well before this trial opened. And I think that's a big part of the

00:10:35.220 defense's case is that it's, it's hyper political. And you know, as well as anybody, Megan, that,

00:10:41.120 that you can't, you can't be guilty of, of having a point of view.

00:10:45.620 Well, you know, what's ironic, you guys is they're trying to screen these potential jurors out for

00:10:50.040 bias and, you know, following certain news sources and so on that might evidence that bias.

00:10:55.780 Look at the DA. Right.

00:10:58.740 Look at Rams promising to get Trump. Look at the judge who's had negative Trump commentary in the

00:11:05.420 past as his own daughter has espoused criticizing him on social media. Like, it's amazing that you can

00:11:10.820 get bounced as a juror for that crap, but you can still try the case as the judge and you can still

00:11:14.940 prosecute the case as Alvin Bragg. Here's a little bit more color from what's happening

00:11:19.200 inside the courtroom. This is many news outlets, including NBC and the times have like a running

00:11:24.500 blog because there's no cameras and there's no audio. It's very frustrating. Um, but here's just

00:11:30.060 a couple. Okay. 11 potential jurors remain for questioning after reading the survey responses.

00:11:34.940 So they're trying to go through those 11 to find actual jurors instead of just potential jurors.

00:11:38.880 One juror dismissed after saying he follows an anti-Trump group on social media. I'm sure that's

00:11:44.880 the hashtag resistance. I would imagine. First potential juror says he followed Trump on X and

00:11:49.740 read some of his books. Oh, that's going to be a problem. Art of the deal and how to get rich.

00:11:54.060 Um, the response drew a smile and a nod from Trump. It drew a smile and a nod from Trump.

00:12:02.040 That's so good. I love that. They gotta let cameras in this. Please let cameras in this.

00:12:09.180 He's like, he's one step away from giving the thumbs up that he does. Um, one juror says her

00:12:14.460 Facebook page contains Occupy Democrats content. She's a goner. There's no way a hyper left-wing

00:12:21.000 group. Um, tick tock is a common source of news. Nine of the 23 potential jurors who have answered

00:12:28.400 the question here so far have identified tick tock as a source of news. That's sad. Uh, let's see.

00:12:34.060 Juror dismissed after struggling with ability to be fair. She said, I believe no one's above the law.

00:12:40.480 So I guess that's a strong opinion asked by the judge, whether she could be impartial. She said,

00:12:44.800 I'm not 100% sure that I could be fair. She was excused. Good. Everyone knows Donald Trump. Uh,

00:12:52.620 the prosecutor, this is not brag, but his, uh, his co-counsel, Joshua Steinglass addresses the

00:12:58.580 elephant in the room. No one's suggesting you can't be fair because you've heard from Donald Trump.

00:13:03.020 We need jurors who can set aside strong feelings and focus on evidence. It's not a referendum on the

00:13:08.220 Trump presidency. We don't care. This case is about whether this man broke the law.

00:13:12.420 And then, um, let's see one more. The prosecutor, this is interesting because it's a preview potentially

00:13:18.960 of the opening statements that we'll get. The prosecutor fronts for the jury, potential jury,

00:13:25.360 that some of the witness, several of the witnesses you're going to hear from in this case, quote,

00:13:30.740 have some baggage. You think he says, uh, let's see. Several of these witnesses have what you might

00:13:39.260 consider to be some baggage. Yeah. Like the ex-con Michael Cohen, the porn, by the way, I have been

00:13:48.340 keeping my eye on MSNBC and, and I was watching Mad Owl last night. Just, I'd like to see what she

00:13:52.960 says because she's probably the most lunatic of the lunatic fringe over there. And, uh, she, I,

00:13:58.320 she has elevated Stormy Daniels from porn actress to porn director and actor.

00:14:05.260 Oh, that's important. Maybe she gets a production credit too. That's all. Is that better?

00:14:10.400 What she really wanted to do is direct. Is it better to be a director than an actor? It feels

00:14:15.640 like even worse, doesn't it? I think, I think you get joined like director's guild at that point,

00:14:20.400 right? Is there a lot of directing that happens, do you think? Do we want to know the answer to that?

00:14:28.320 Megan? Do we want to know? You guys tell me, you look like the kind of guys who get the $19 movie

00:14:35.900 rentals. Oh my God. They want a shot across the bar. How dare you? Unbelievable. She's starting off

00:14:45.340 hot on us, guys. Fellas, we got to respond. Listen, Megan, this could get ugly. Baggage. Speaking of

00:14:51.720 baggage. Oh, speaking of baggage. Okay. Let's talk for one second about Jeffrey Toobin. So the

00:14:59.200 high court is taking arguments on this other case. So we, that's the New York case. It's

00:15:04.200 ongoing. They're in a recess right now because they just started like two minutes ago. So they

00:15:07.860 already need a recess. This is like when you get contractors to work on your lawn. Um, so

00:15:12.860 they're over at the Supreme court though, they're dealing with a second Trump prosecution. This isn't

00:15:18.680 really about Trump, but as you guys and I have discussed this other case involving J six defendants

00:15:24.240 could directly affect the J six case against Trump brought by Jack Smith with Tanya chucking as the

00:15:32.260 judge. Anyway, the question is whether the main charge against Trump, although again, this one

00:15:37.140 relates only to J six defendants other than Trump is viable charge. It's called obstruction of an

00:15:42.380 official proceeding. And more than 300 J six defendants have been charged with this. And many have

00:15:47.480 pleaded guilty or been found guilty. And all of those could go away. If the Supreme court says,

00:15:51.960 this is not a charge you can bring against J six defendants, protesters, it's not available to you.

00:15:57.820 And, um, I'm going to get to the heart of that argument in one second, but let me just start with

00:16:01.380 Jeffrey Toobin. Okay. Because he felt the need to weigh in. And there was a time in which he was

00:16:06.420 considered and treated as an expert on the U S Supreme court. That time has passed. He tweeted out

00:16:12.160 in oral argument today, justice Thomas is minimizing the severity of the one six insurrection at the

00:16:18.460 Capitol. Perhaps that's because his wife was part of the conspiracy. What a disgrace that he's sitting

00:16:24.020 on this case in response to which I tweeted. Hi tube. And FYI, you waived your right to use the

00:16:31.560 term disgraced about other lawyers. When you took your dick out of your pants and jerked off in front

00:16:36.600 of your colleagues. I've heard that, uh, the problem with subtleties at some point at times people

00:16:47.820 don't get it. You've thrown that out and put a fine point, uh, Jeffrey to, but I don't think I also

00:16:53.960 don't think he should be talking about oral anything at any, at any time. Uh, there's a wide range of

00:17:00.360 issues that he should be, uh, entirely separated from, and including being on our television set

00:17:06.960 because Lord knows what could happen with that. How can you think about it though, guys, you know,

00:17:12.400 chutzpah are you, you guys know chutzpah. This guy is sitting there as a lawyer calling a sitting

00:17:19.640 Supreme court justice, a disgrace after what he did. Just take a seat, write your long New Yorker

00:17:27.780 articles or whatever it is you're going to do. I don't know. I guess he was fired from there.

00:17:30.640 Cause those are the colleagues to whom he showed his penis. And, uh, I don't, I don't want to look

00:17:35.620 at it. I don't want to see it on Twitter. I don't, I don't want to hear from him.

00:17:39.880 It's there's a shamelessness to it really, Megan. And what I can't possibly understand

00:17:45.700 is I feel like there's a lot of legal commentary in the United States. You're telling me CNN can't find

00:17:50.900 somebody else like this guy. This is the only guy in America who can, you know, have a, have

00:17:56.160 commentary on the Supreme court or our legal process. Like just fine. Literally anyone else.

00:18:01.340 I got news for you, Michael Duncan. Okay. It's not just CNN. He, guess whose podcast he was on

00:18:06.660 yesterday? Oh, please. Who? Don Lemon. Oh, come on. Come on. They're getting the band back together.

00:18:18.620 They've like broken the simulation at this point. I mean, it's just one hilarious joke after another

00:18:24.840 that Don Lemon and Tubin getting together for a high level discussion. I mean, they had Keith

00:18:30.420 Olbermann. I'm sure they were talking about how aggrieved they are, how mean CNN is, how terrible

00:18:34.940 they were to them. It's so unjust, both firings. This is Don Lemon who like had a burner phone to

00:18:41.020 send intimidating messages to a coworker because he was like jealous of her. Right. Right. And then

00:18:46.720 he has the chronic masturbator on his podcast and they're going to, they're going to lecture all

00:18:54.540 of us about the legal system and what, who's disgraced. This is just incredible. People have no

00:18:59.660 sense of shame. Is Duncan being fair? Is chronic, you know, is that appropriate? Do we know that

00:19:04.540 about Tubin? I don't think you do it for the meeting. I don't think you do it for the first

00:19:08.880 time on Zoom. That's what I'm saying. Okay. Okay. Look, this is conjecture. This is conjecture. And I

00:19:13.880 know the man is a lawyer. And so I just want to make that extremely clear. I don't, I don't have

00:19:17.760 any knowledge of whether he's a chronic masturbator. I would merely suggest the idea that you cannot

00:19:22.840 contain yourself. It's an opinion. My opinion is if you cannot contain yourself on a Zoom with

00:19:28.320 colleagues, you might have a problem. Perhaps there's a habitual nature to that. That's what

00:19:34.080 I'm saying. That's my, that's my opinion. My favorite theory of that whole thing came from

00:19:39.500 Victor Davis Hanson of all people. Right. But he's like so distinguished and so smart and at the

00:19:44.060 Stanford. Anyway, um, his theory was that people don't do that by accident. And that actually this

00:19:52.600 may very well have been intentional. Like maybe he was enjoying getting off in front of his

00:19:58.540 colleagues. Like, whoopsie, I forgot to hit the end button. I like it. That brings it to a whole new

00:20:05.680 level. Yeah. It's just horrifying. And then you're just like, oh, I forgot to hit the button. Either

00:20:11.320 way, who the hell be jerking off that close to a live Zoom? You deserve the consequences of your

00:20:16.620 terrible decision making. Anyway, now he's decided to rip on a distinguished, respected,

00:20:22.040 beloved Supreme court justice who gets bashed by him as a disgrace because what he's an uncle Tom

00:20:28.340 because he's married to Ginny Thomas. Who's got a political career. Um, okay, Jeffrey Toobin it's

00:20:33.280 done. What he's really lecturing him on is ethics. I mean, truly he's lecturing Clarence Thomas on

00:20:38.980 ethics. Does he have his dick in or out of his pants while he's doing it? That's what we need to

00:20:44.240 know first. Is it in or out? Do you think better when it's out and you're exhibiting? Maybe. I'm sorry.

00:20:50.980 I know it's already to forgive me audience, but I've just the audacity of this guy.

00:20:57.040 I don't even know how we, how am I supposed to respond to that?

00:20:59.600 Well, you know, this is, this is the point in the program when, when Megan goes down these,

00:21:04.420 these, you know, rabbit holes where you just got to say, what else can be said?

00:21:08.260 Well, on that note, let's talk about what's happening inside the U S Supreme court where

00:21:19.720 there are nine distinguished jurists. Although I have to tell you, I don't get to listen to the

00:21:25.280 high court that often anymore. Cause I have this job, but I used to all the time. I covered the

00:21:29.420 high court for three years for Fox and I, it was wonderful. I got to sit in there for all the big

00:21:34.040 oral arguments and it's just so fun. I really enjoy it. Like they're so erudite. They're so well

00:21:40.540 read. They're so learned. They make such historical and textual references. You're like, oh, I was

00:21:46.080 struggling to keep up with these big, big brains. That was not how I felt when I listened to Sonia

00:21:50.200 Sotomayor. I'm not going to lie. She was like trying to cross-examine the lawyer for the defendant

00:21:56.700 on this one piece of text. And he was trying to tell her, you know, no, she was like, but,

00:22:02.880 but your second provision only relates to acts, not attempts. And he's like, no, it's attempts too.

00:22:07.700 And she's like, no, it only relates to acts, not attempts. He's like, no, also attempts. She's like,

00:22:11.480 the language is right here. It says if he acts or attempts, she didn't read the whole thing.

00:22:22.720 The lawyer was right. The statute spoke to both the actual act and attempts and her whole line

00:22:28.700 of inquiry just read out attempts. And she was like, but it doesn't say attempts. It does. And

00:22:34.040 he was like, yes, it does. It does. And then finally she was like, no. And she tried to impeach

00:22:37.520 him by reading the actual text of the statute, which was exactly as the lawyer was telling her.

00:22:41.880 It was, it's just like, that's just too dumb. That's too dumb to be up there.

00:22:47.020 You get the impression that some of the more liberal presidents that we've had over the years

00:22:50.840 are perhaps not sending their best to the Supreme court.

00:22:52.940 Yeah. Well, they're sending, they're sending the people who will make the decisions in their way

00:22:58.120 without even reading. Yeah. I mean, I, I, you, you, you followed all this about how, so some people

00:23:04.180 on the left are trying to get Sotomayor to step down so that Joe Biden can appoint. I don't know

00:23:08.700 who he would appoint. Who would he appoint? They want. So, um, again, it's these left wing,

00:23:13.580 dark wing, left wing, dark money groups, like demand justice stuff. We're trying to push her to retire

00:23:18.200 because they're terrified of an RBG situation. Again, they're like, Trump's going to come back.

00:23:22.380 And if any liberal justice decides to retire, it's going to be like really over at that point,

00:23:27.820 seven, two, but they also don't like that. Sonia Sotomayor is not left wing enough.

00:23:34.060 They really want just like a complete political activist. They want someone who's like laying down

00:23:41.100 on the highway for Palestine to then go to the Supreme court. Like that's their ideal Supreme court justice.

00:23:47.140 I just love the idea that like the future of democratic politics is like this nesting doll

00:23:53.160 of liberal boomers clinging to power for too long, like RBG, then Joe Biden, and now Sotomayor. And

00:24:01.300 like, what, what, what does it say about their confidence in their nominee, Joe Biden, that

00:24:06.980 they're concerned that Donald Trump's going to come back and Sotomayor is not going to be there

00:24:10.620 anymore. Well, having listened to her again today, they're right. They should be pushing for her to

00:24:16.480 go. There's, they're not wrong. I have to say, well, I'm on the side of liberals. If I were a

00:24:20.080 leftist, I'd want her gone too. They should push harder. I completely see it in a new light.

00:24:24.560 Who they replace them with is always worse. Like Ketanji is going to look like Scalia compared to

00:24:28.860 who they try to replace her with. I mean, that's what you always think about the Democrats. And then

00:24:32.040 they go further and further left. We had topless trans people at the white house. Would you think

00:24:36.040 that would happen four years ago? That's a good point. They move fast. That's why Jeffrey

00:24:40.840 Toobin will be joining the court this fall. Can I tell you something? It's worse than we knew guys,

00:24:47.540 because my crack team, we don't actually listen to Don Lemon's podcast. No one does. But in the

00:24:53.200 wake of our discussion here, they went and decided to pull a clip of these two discussing Stormy Daniels.

00:25:00.760 Oh, yes. Take a listen.

00:25:02.360 Does Stormy Daniels have credibility issues? Because didn't she write a letter because she

00:25:06.360 said she didn't want to violate her NDA saying that I had no relationship with Donald Trump?

00:25:12.360 In 2018, she wrote a letter saying she never had sex with him. That she has since repudiated.

00:25:20.600 There's lots of evidence that she has told people earlier that they did, in fact, have sex. Look,

00:25:26.440 I, you know, it's important to remember that Stormy Daniels was the key witness against Michael

00:25:32.680 Avenatti in a fraud case that was tried earlier in Manhattan federal court. And the jury believed

00:25:39.160 every word she said. There's a reason why they shot Jeffrey Toobin only from the waist up.

00:25:47.720 Like Elvis. Well, you get him talking about porn stars. You never know what's going to happen,

00:25:53.080 right? I mean, that's a dangerous territory for Lemon to put his viewers.

00:25:57.240 Guys, don't you remember Jeffrey Toobin, in addition to, you know, jerk off gate? I don't

00:26:01.800 know what you even call it. He was in the news for having gotten some young woman who was the

00:26:08.840 daughter of Jeffrey Goldberg, right, of the Atlantic? Greenfield, right? Sorry, Greenfield,

00:26:14.440 of the Atlantic, that he got his daughter pregnant, they had an affair, and then he pressured her into

00:26:19.400 having an abortion. This guy, he's out there commenting. You know what? Maybe I'm wrong.

00:26:24.040 Maybe he's the perfect person to talk about Stormy Daniels.

00:26:27.800 We had a running joke for a long time about Toobin, because he would always get himself

00:26:32.760 into trouble and he would say controversial things. This is long before jerk gate or whatever

00:26:37.320 it is that you're calling. Right.

00:26:38.600 But every time his name- That works on a couple levels.

00:26:43.240 But like, every time his name was surfaced, we were like, the real victim of all of this is

00:26:48.440 Jeff Greenfield. Yeah. Right? This is the poor guy whose name is invoked every time you're talking

00:26:54.680 about Toobin, and all he's got is like a daughter who is involved with him. And this poor guy, right?

00:26:59.800 I mean, it's like he had to work alongside of this dude at CNN for years. Yeah. Meanwhile,

00:27:06.200 like Jeffrey Toobin's on TV talking about how disgraceful Clarence Thomas is. It's unreal.

00:27:11.080 How bad like Kavanaugh is. And it's like, bro, you tried to pressure my daughter into getting an abortion.

00:27:16.920 Right. It's unbelievable. It's just incredible.

00:27:19.640 And they didn't want to pay child support, right? Like they had to get a whole paternity test done

00:27:23.320 on him before he would support the baby. It's like, this is not a nice guy. Like,

00:27:27.640 let's just be honest. You can't recover from things like that. You shouldn't be able to. You,

00:27:30.920 you wind up on the Don Lemon podcast if you do those things. Okay. Back to SCOTUS. So this,

00:27:37.240 let me just give you a little background on this case, because this is important. Really this,

00:27:40.200 this, the way I see it, the way, what I heard today, the J six prosecution against Trump is

00:27:46.280 getting gutted within the next two months. This, I, I counted six, three, I counted six.

00:27:51.320 Chief Justice Roberts seemed firmly against the government on trying to turn what was a charge

00:27:57.800 meant to punish entities like Arthur Anderson, which shredded documents after it had received a

00:28:04.280 subpoena or when it knew it was about to from doing that into something that would swoop up

00:28:09.880 hundreds of J six defendants who randomly found themselves on the Capitol that day.

00:28:14.920 So here's what happened. Small town cop, Joseph Fisher spent about four minutes inside the Capitol

00:28:20.680 building, joined the crowd, breaching the Capitol from the East side. He yelled again and again,

00:28:26.360 charge the government says before pushing forward toward a cop, toward a police line while yelling

00:28:32.200 mother effers. He and other writers fell to the ground after other writers lifted him up.

00:28:37.800 Video disclosed as evidence shows that he tried to appeal to officers protecting the Capitol,

00:28:43.000 telling them that he was an officer too. It's our effing house brother. The video appears to show

00:28:48.440 Fisher saying that day. It's also on his social media as of the next day, January 7th,

00:28:55.560 Fisher writing that he had been pepper balled and pepper sprayed, but entry into the Capitol was needed to

00:29:01.560 send a message that we, the people hold the real power. Okay. Not surprisingly, this guy got charged.

00:29:07.000 He was charged with seven criminal counts, including a felony count of obstructing an official proceeding.

00:29:13.080 He also got charged with assaulting a cop and entering a restricted building, et cetera, et cetera.

00:29:17.640 But this whole case is about obstructing an official proceeding. And it is also the main charge

00:29:24.360 against Donald Trump in that DC federal prosecution. Um, what happened was the district

00:29:30.840 court judge as a trial court judge, Carl Nichols ruled that this charge could not stand that.

00:29:37.480 This was not, it didn't fit the behavior that they were alleging against Fisher. That's not what this

00:29:43.160 charge was meant to cover. It's section 1512 C one prohibits tampering with evidence with the

00:29:50.360 intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in official proceeding.

00:29:54.840 And then there's 1512 C two, which says, well, I'll get to it, but basically has wider language

00:30:01.480 saying somebody who with corrupt intent, otherwise obstructs influences or impedes any official proceeding

00:30:07.240 or attempts to justice. So they, they're kind of looking back to Arthur Anderson saying this,

00:30:14.680 this law was meant to get after financial fraud or like interference with an official proceeding

00:30:19.960 by somebody who's in financial trouble, who shreds documents or tries to intimidate a witness into not

00:30:24.280 testifying. And the otherwise provision is meant to only say, okay, you, you, sub one says you can't

00:30:33.720 alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal a record, a document or other object or attempt to. And then

00:30:40.120 sub two says, or otherwise obstruct. And what the defense is arguing here is that second clause doesn't

00:30:49.480 expand this statute to cover any kind of obstruction of an official proceeding. It's, it's all still under

00:30:55.720 the lane of records, documents, other objects that get destroyed, mutilated, or something like that.

00:31:01.560 That's what they're trying to argue. Has to still be in the lane of, it's like a financial fraud or

00:31:06.760 coverup or interference when you get a subpoena in this lane. And the government's trying to say no

00:31:12.760 sub two, which says, or otherwise obstruct covers everything, everything. It's, it's a catch-all

00:31:19.160 that's meant to just get all kinds of behavior, including what we saw in J six. That's what it comes

00:31:23.880 down to. Well, what happened today was the lawyer for the defendant, Mr. Fisher got up there,

00:31:30.440 made a very brief argument along the lines of what I just said. It's very limited, should, should be

00:31:35.080 limited. You can't expand it. And he got a couple of questions from, like I said, Sotomayor and some

00:31:40.520 of the more liberal jurists. There's only three, three now, which were fine. I mean, to me, honestly,

00:31:45.160 like half of them were just confusing. I'm like, I don't, I don't even understand what they're asking

00:31:48.680 these ladies, but okay. And he did. Okay. I don't, I give that guy like a B. Then the solicitor

00:31:55.800 general gets up, she represents the governor or the government. And, um, she started getting

00:32:01.160 peppered with questions by the conservative jurists almost right away. And not surprisingly,

00:32:06.360 Thomas, he was right off the bat. He, he laid into her on when the hell has this otherwise provision

00:32:12.920 ever been applied to protesters? Has that ever happened before? Or is this just a Donald Trump

00:32:17.280 J six thing? Here's a little bit of that inside 11. There've been many violent protests that have

00:32:23.640 interfered with, uh, uh, proceedings as the government, uh, uh, applied this provision

00:32:31.080 to other protests in the past. And has this been the government's position throughout the

00:32:38.440 lifespan of the statute? It has certainly been the government's position since the enactment of 1512

00:32:44.200 C2, that it covers the myriad forms of obstructing an official proceeding, and that it's not limited

00:32:49.240 to some kind of evidence impairment gloss. Have you, so have you, have you enforced it in that

00:32:54.040 manner? We have enforced it in a variety of prosecutions that don't focus on evidence tampering.

00:32:58.920 Now I can't give you an example of enforcing it in a situation where people have violently stormed a

00:33:03.720 building in order to prevent an official proceeding, a specified one from occurring.

00:33:07.560 So what role does, uh, C1 play in your analysis? So we understand 1512 C to split up the world of

00:33:14.920 obstructive conduct of an official proceeding into the C1 offense and into C2. C1 covers everything

00:33:20.440 it enumerates. It's the acts of altering, concealing, destroying records, documents,

00:33:25.240 or other objects. And then C2 would only pick up conduct that obstructs an official proceeding in a

00:33:30.760 different way. Okay. So you get the gist, right? You know, Thomas is not buying it. He's like,

00:33:37.400 I mean, look, you guys, look what happened to Kavanaugh. Look what happened when Kavanaugh was,

00:33:44.040 I don't even mean the death threats, the attempted murder. I mean, when he was sitting for his

00:33:49.080 confirmation hearing, look what the Democrats did to him on Capitol Hill. If that was that not

00:33:55.000 obstruction of an, that's what he's going for. Right. Yeah. It's exactly right. If I was Clarence

00:34:01.720 Thomas, I would have put it a little bit more succinctly. I would have said,

00:34:04.600 so counselor, uh, if somebody stood up right now and started protesting here at the United States

00:34:09.920 Supreme court, would they be charged with this offense? Yeah. Cause this is an official proceeding.

00:34:15.540 You you're accepted under the U S Supreme court because Justice Alito went exactly there. You're,

00:34:22.560 you're now in the running, uh, toward becoming America's next Supreme court justice. Take a listen

00:34:26.760 to Alito. I'll nominate you. Stand by. So we've had a number of protests in the

00:34:34.580 courtroom. Let's say that today, while you're arguing, or Mr. Green is arguing five people

00:34:43.040 get up one after the other, and they shout either keeps the January six insurrectionists

00:34:49.700 in jail or free the January six Patriots. And as a result of this, our police officers have

00:34:55.780 to remove them forcibly from the courtroom. And let's say we have to do it delays the proceeding

00:35:01.700 for five minutes. So would that be a violation of 1512 C two? I think it would be difficult for

00:35:08.880 the government to prove that at the outset, we don't think that 1512 C two picks up minimal

00:35:14.300 de minimis minor interferences. We think that the term obstruct on its face connotes a meaningful,

00:35:19.200 uh, interference with the proceeding. Well, it doesn't say, I'm sorry. Uh,

00:35:23.160 uh, C two does not refer just to obstruct. It says obstructs influences or impedes. Impedes is

00:35:33.340 something less than obstructs. I think that this is a verb phrase where iteration was obviously afoot.

00:35:39.160 And you're, you're preaching the plain meaning, uh, interpretation of this provision. The,

00:35:46.760 the plain meaning of, uh, uh, impede in Webster's is to interfere with, or get in the way of the

00:35:55.480 progress. Why wouldn't that fall within? Now you could say, well, we're not going to prosecute

00:36:00.060 that. Why isn't that a violation of five 12, uh, uh, uh, 1512 C two. We read the act as Reyes more

00:36:06.180 narrowly. You guys get it. That's why the Supreme court is so important. I mean, that right there is a

00:36:13.280 perfect distillation of why the Supreme court is so important. When like Ashbrook said, you've got

00:36:18.560 these prosecutors who are getting bought and put in place by Soros and other left-wing billionaires

00:36:24.720 across the country, because they know voters don't want to legalize crime. So they say,

00:36:29.040 why not just have the prosecutor not do it? And that's the same thing that they are attempting

00:36:32.880 to do with the Supreme court is they want to legislate from the bench for so long. They had a

00:36:37.840 complete lockdown on having their way, whether it was legal or not. The reason Roe existed for so many

00:36:42.160 years. And now they're faced with a court that follows the letter of the law. And that's what

00:36:47.760 drives them nuts because that's the only thing standing between them and complete control at

00:36:51.520 this point. Yeah. I mean, it's a perfect illustration between the difference of liberal progressive

00:36:56.240 legal theory and conservative strict constructionists. Yes. Right. Because what they're talking about

00:37:02.240 and believe me, I I'm very much a holiday and express lawyer. Like my best resume is that I had two

00:37:07.360 parents that were attorneys. That's like all I can do. But, uh, all that being said,

00:37:12.480 they're talking about the original intent of the statute, right? Yeah. The plain meaning.

00:37:17.680 Because if, if you're just somebody off the street and you say obstruction of a official proceeding,

00:37:23.360 clearly there was an official proceeding and clearly it was obstructed. Okay. That's fine and well

00:37:28.160 and good. But when you get into a court of law, the people who follow these sorts of things are like,

00:37:31.440 okay, well, here's what that statute has been used for. This is what it was intended to do.

00:37:37.840 Here's what you are suggesting. And here's the far reaching cataclysmic type prosecution event that it

00:37:44.800 would cause if we were to find in your favor, meaning like anyone, anyone.

00:37:50.560 And what he was saying was you're, you just nailed it. Exactly. First of all. And, and second,

00:37:55.120 all second of all, what he was saying was the absurdity, like this is somebody standing up here and

00:38:00.000 yelling something could fall within this and they could, they could get prosecuted and her defense,

00:38:05.200 realizing she'd been caught by, you know, her very broad definition of this otherwise provision

00:38:11.680 has her caught in a very unreasonable interpretation of the statute. She said,

00:38:16.560 oh, well that would be de minimis. That would just be a small thing. And I think there's really a,

00:38:21.440 like de minimis acts clearly wouldn't be covered by this. And he was like, hold on a second.

00:38:27.040 Now you're asking us to read new terms into this provision. There's nothing about the level of

00:38:33.760 intrusion or instruction, right? Like he's like, this is where your crazy ass interpretation would

00:38:39.680 take us. And there isn't something in here that would say, oh, but de minimis acts don't count.

00:38:44.640 Right. She's allowed to interpret things broadly where it helps her. And it's more narrow where it

00:38:50.320 doesn't help her. I mean, this is like, what, what about an official person? What, what's the definition

00:38:54.480 of an official proceeding? How about like an ambulance trying to cross the Golden Gate Bridge

00:38:59.280 while a bunch of Hamas protesters were blocking it yesterday? How about 5,000 people trying to get

00:39:06.080 to their airplanes at Chicago O'Hare airport yesterday after paying a thousand bucks a ticket

00:39:10.560 or whatever you have to pay to fly on an, on an airline in this country? Like, how about the

00:39:16.240 obstruction of those people? Like at what point, what's an official act? What's an official event?

00:39:21.120 Is it an official event? How about burning down a police station? Well, that seems pretty

00:39:25.840 official. Where were the federal charges then? Yep. Yep. Yeah. I also, I would have loved if

00:39:33.040 Kavanaugh would have been like, ah, can we just go over the definition of de minimis one more time?

00:39:38.160 Because that didn't feel very de mute to me. Yeah. This poor guy, more than anyone up there,

00:39:43.920 has gotten protested at his house.

00:39:53.360 An attempted assassin showed up. Nobody should try to stop him from ruling in favor of, of throwing out

00:40:00.640 Roe. All these conservative justices have been harassed and tried to be intimidated out of their

00:40:07.040 draft opinion. To this day, they're still, those protesters are still outside their homes to this

00:40:13.200 day, two years later. Yeah. Yeah. But okay. That's no, no problem. That's fine. Cause I guess

00:40:17.520 it's not an official proceeding if you do it at their house. Oh wait, there's a law against that

00:40:21.520 too. So here was the crux of the day. Okay. So it was very clear to me that you had at least five

00:40:28.240 justices. Gorsuch shouldn't pick, uh, speak up until late, but he's pretty conservative on that. I

00:40:32.800 don't, I don't think he's a risk, but the question is always chief justice, John Roberts, right? Like

00:40:36.880 maybe Amy Coney Barrett, Barrett seemed firmly in the camp of, um, the defense to me, it was a little

00:40:43.600 less clear than the others, but she's, to me, she seemed in their camp and then chief justice, John

00:40:48.400 Roberts pipes in. And it was to me, a glorious moment. I loved it. Now listen, it's a little in

00:40:53.200 the weeds, but you're going to understand it. He, the whole discussion is, do we take the specific,

00:40:59.840 specific first clause and interpret the otherwise clause that comes after it to be limited to acts

00:41:07.600 like we had in clause one, or do we go with the government with the otherwise is a huge catch-all

00:41:14.800 that gets all behavior, including for sure showing up at the Capitol on J six and chief justice Roberts

00:41:22.480 drops this bomb on the solicitor general. They're arguing for the government and for the more broad

00:41:28.700 interpretation. Take a listen to South five. General, I'm sure you've had a chance to read our

00:41:34.300 opinion released Friday in the voice in that case with the anonymous, it was very short,

00:41:40.860 but it explained how to apply the doctrine of Houston generous. And it, what it said is that

00:41:46.140 specific terms, a more general catch-all, if you will, term at the end. And it said that the general

00:41:52.220 phrase is controlled and defined by reference to the terms that precede it. Uh, the otherwise phrase

00:41:59.580 is more general. Uh, and the terms that precede it are alters, destroys, mutilates, uh, or can,

00:42:06.060 and seals a record and document and the terms record document or other object carried carry forward

00:42:12.220 into two as well. And it seems to me that they, as I said, sort of control and defined the,

00:42:18.700 uh, the more general term. So I think the problem with that approach with respect to 1512 is that

00:42:25.020 it doesn't look like the typical kind of statutory phrase that consists of a parallel list of nouns

00:42:30.940 or a parallel list of verbs where the court has applied to use them generous or the nose good or

00:42:36.460 cannon. You know, these are separate prohibitions that have their own complex, non-parallel internal

00:42:41.820 structure that there are multiple competing interpretations at issue in this case.

00:42:45.580 When you, when you apply that doctrine again, as we did on Friday, uh, it, uh, it responds to some

00:42:52.860 of the concerns that have been raised about how broad, uh, C2 is. You can't just tack it on and

00:42:58.140 say, look at it as if it's standing alone because it's not. That's him saying, I'm going to rule against

00:43:05.180 you. That's him saying you, you know, you cannot make it this general. We just issued a ruling on Friday

00:43:11.980 that F's you and she's dancing and she's bringing up the Latin and you know, it's, it's over. I mean,

00:43:17.980 my prediction is the Supreme court is going to go six, three to say, this is, you cannot bring this

00:43:23.180 charge in the J six context. And that means the federal prosecution against Trump in Washington,

00:43:29.420 DC is also gutted. If that happens. It also occurs to me that in the process of listening to this

00:43:36.860 argument and I'm glad you've got the audio. Cause it's fascinating that it is like a doctorate level

00:43:42.220 on the importance of separation of powers and the importance of the way that the framers put

00:43:48.300 together our system genius, right? Because when you have strict constructionists and people who follow

00:43:53.900 law to apply justice in this country, you do it based on a legislative intent of laws that are passed.

00:44:01.260 And you may well have a huge problem with what happened on January 6th. You may argue

00:44:06.940 that that was criminal in a variety of different ways. What you cannot do is extrapolate a term that

00:44:14.700 sounds like it's being prosecuted against these people in obstruction of an official proceeding

00:44:21.260 and apply it in a way that was not intended by the legislature. Right. And so, I mean, again,

00:44:26.060 there's a lot of people who look at the importance of court fights and they think, well, it's a

00:44:31.340 conservative versus liberal. It's an outcome based thing. It's not. It's an outcome based thing on the

00:44:35.820 liberal side. On the conservative side, all we've ever wanted is someone who interprets law and applies

00:44:42.060 the constitution and acts fairly within those confines. This is a doctorate level exhibition of the

00:44:50.300 importance of all of that. So true. A little previously, I think one of the most important

00:44:55.820 parts is when you had Justice Thomas ask straight up, is there any precedent of this being used?

00:45:02.060 And she has to dance around until she finally gets to, well, there hasn't been any specific

00:45:05.740 precedent. Like the worst thing you can say at the Supreme Court is try to argue a position and say,

00:45:09.740 there's no precedent for this. I'm asking you to legislate from the bench, which is incredible.

00:45:14.060 And for him to just cut through the argument to that point, say, has there been any precedent of this

00:45:18.380 being applied in the way that you're trying to do here? Straightforward.

00:45:21.340 And her answer was basically like, well, J6 was unprecedented. So it's like, all right,

00:45:26.860 that's not going to save you. It is. It is great. You know, the Democrats for four years of Trump

00:45:32.380 would say, you know, the system held the system held against this extraordinary test of this rogue,

00:45:40.140 you know, executive. And what actually happened today, if they ruled the way I think they're going

00:45:46.540 to, is the system held to your point, Holmes, that we, we, there was a process. We somehow managed

00:45:52.780 to get six conservative Supreme Court justices sitting. It was a miracle. Your old boss, Mitch

00:45:58.060 McConnell was huge. And that is a debt that everybody who is independent or right of center owes to him.

00:46:05.500 Um, obviously when it comes to something to do with it, so did George W. Bush. But anyway,

00:46:09.340 my point is when it finally got in front of them, they're, they appear to be doing the right thing.

00:46:15.020 They're sticking to the letter of the law. And I think it's going to come out the way

00:46:18.060 Congress would have intended. And if Congress doesn't intend it, by the way, they'll go back

00:46:21.500 and clarify it. That's also the system. That's, that's the system working. And when it comes to

00:46:25.980 politics, uh, sometimes it works for you. Sometimes it works against you. That's the entire point of

00:46:30.860 having a system of laws, the way that it's set up. I mean, like there's a chance that they could go

00:46:36.140 nine O against Trump on the immunity question and just a short period of time. Yeah. Yeah. And so like,

00:46:42.780 you know, Republicans are going to be complaining about the court at that point. I'm sure some

00:46:46.700 Republicans will, it's like, you know, sometimes it's for you. Sometimes it's against you. That's

00:46:50.300 the entire point. Yeah. Uh, okay. Hold on a second. I'm just getting updates from my team. Uh, okay.

00:46:56.700 Washington post their lead on SCOTUS Supreme court. The Supreme court seemed deeply divided Tuesday.

00:47:03.260 Well, six to three, uh, over a challenge to a federal law that prosecutors used to charge more

00:47:08.860 than 350 people who were part of the pro Donald Trump mob that attacked the U S Capitol and J six,

00:47:13.580 several conservatives express concern about giving prosecutors broad power that they suggested would

00:47:20.380 allow the government to target peaceful protesters or hecklers who disrupted court proceeding. Other

00:47:24.380 justices seem to back the government. Wow. Um, they're kind of missing the headline here,

00:47:29.740 which is sure. It was deeply divided. It's going to come down six, three. I who on the conservative

00:47:35.660 side was sounded at all. Like they were entertaining the liberals argument, not one,

00:47:41.020 not one, according to what I listened to everything, but the last 10 minutes, I, there's no way they want

00:47:44.540 them over in that. We'll see. Sometimes the Supreme court can be hard to predict. They sometimes surprise

00:47:49.740 you. I don't, I don't think I'm going to get surprised in this particular case guys. So what,

00:47:54.380 what does it mean? Right? So like if the J six case goes away, do we have to take a break right now?

00:47:59.740 Hold on a second. My team's training. Oh, we have, okay. We'll talk about that on the backside.

00:48:03.740 And we've got to get to these insane protests that you guys mentioned across the country. Now,

00:48:07.340 as these lunatics are trying to shut down airports and bridges and so on much, much more with ruthless

00:48:12.620 ahead. Don't go away. Anti-Israel protesters, blocking roads, bridges, and highways in big cities

00:48:22.860 across the United States in the wake of Iran attacking Israel. Okay. Demonstrations were

00:48:30.620 part of a global economic blockade to free Palestine. Protesters seen here on the Golden

00:48:35.580 Gate Bridge in San Francisco chained themselves to 55 gallon drums filled with cement. Very tempting to

00:48:41.660 throw the cement barrels over the bridge. Very tempting. The ABC local channel in San Francisco caught

00:48:47.980 on tape one driver near the front, getting out of his car and demanding that the protesters get the

00:48:53.020 hell out of the road. Yes. He speaks for us all. They're so annoying. Police arrested 38 people,

00:48:58.220 but it took about four hours to move them out thanks to their cement blocks and get the traffic moving

00:49:06.460 again. Can you imagine how infuriating this is if you're stuck in the middle of it? Protesters also

00:49:13.020 block the entrance to Seattle's international airport for three hours. Travelers were forced

00:49:19.100 to get out of their cars and walk to the terminals with their luggage. Not everybody has the rolly

00:49:25.180 luggage. Some people actually have to carry it. Police can be seen standing near the protesters.

00:49:30.380 You're going to be shocked in Seattle. They weren't doing much of anything,

00:49:34.060 not much of anything to get them out of the street. In the end, however, 46 people were arrested there.

00:49:39.580 Um, further south into Miami, about 150 protesters attempted to block traffic to Port Miami. Key

00:49:48.220 word here is attempted. We're now we're in Florida. Keep in mind, police officers in riot gear on

00:49:53.340 horseback and on motorcycles quickly moved in to break apart the protest. And after repeatedly trying

00:49:59.100 to block traffic, several were arrested by the cops. The group behind the protest later accused police of

00:50:04.380 aggressively arresting them. Too bad. Protesters also taunted coffee drinkers at a Starbucks in Ann Arbor,

00:50:14.220 Michigan. Democratic Pennsylvania Senator and ardent Israel supporter John Fetterman tweeted about the

00:50:19.420 protesters saying, quote, I don't know who needs to hear this, but blocking a bridge or berating folks in

00:50:24.860 Starbucks isn't righteous. It just makes you an asshole here here, Senator Fetterman. But some of the most

00:50:31.420 disturbing images came out of New York, downtown Wall Street in particular in lower Manhattan.

00:50:37.500 One protester was seen waving the yellow and green banner of the terror group Hezbollah. Great.

00:50:45.180 This is video from friend of the show, Julio Rosas, who is always on the scene of these protests

00:50:51.980 to document them for his sub stack called Mostly Peaceful. You get the reference, right? He's doing the work

00:50:59.380 that the New York Times won't do and other publications like it showing you it's now come

00:51:04.340 to Hezbollah flags right here in America, right in New York steps away, by the way, from where the

00:51:09.860 Twin Towers were brought down. Other protesters proclaimed death to America and praise the man

00:51:17.060 behind those 9-11 attacks. Osama bin Laden. Watch.

00:51:20.980 What do you think about the USA? What do you think about the USA?

00:51:24.660 What do you think about the USA? It should burn.

00:51:27.220 Death to America.

00:51:28.660 Sir, what do you think about the American flag?

00:51:31.460 What do you think about the American flag?

00:51:32.660 It should be burned.

00:51:33.860 It should be burned?

00:51:34.660 Yeah.

00:51:35.620 What do you think about the USA?

00:51:36.660 Burn it all down.

00:51:38.500 You have freedoms here, no?

00:51:40.740 Supposedly.

00:51:42.740 Supposedly.

00:51:43.220 What do you think about Osama bin Laden in 9-11?

00:51:45.300 He did what he did because he had to do it.

00:51:48.020 So it was justified?

00:51:48.900 I said what I said.

00:51:53.620 Then get out. If you don't like it, get out. We don't want you either.

00:51:58.660 Move death to America. Okay, tough guy. Sure. With your face all covered so we can't see who you

00:52:03.940 are and get you fired, which I'd be happy to because F you if you don't want to be a move along.

00:52:08.260 Go to the evil top hat Canada. See how you like it up there.

00:52:11.620 Back with me now, the guys from Ruthless. This is so infuriating.

00:52:15.620 It's amazing that this didn't result in violence. Am I wrong?

00:52:20.020 No. It occurs to me, what's going on down in Gitmo? We have some vacancies down there.

00:52:25.700 Yeah.

00:52:26.020 I feel like we could fill up a couple of cells with some folks, right? I mean,

00:52:30.020 that's what we had it there for in the first place. The whole death to America,

00:52:33.460 praising Osama bin Laden. Enhanced interrogation might be necessary again.

00:52:38.420 I got dollars to donuts. Half of those people are on public assistance.

00:52:41.940 Yeah, probably. See, I have a different perspective on this, Megan. I tend to think a lot of them,

00:52:47.460 especially in a place like New York like that, some of those young folks who cover their faces,

00:52:51.860 they probably have like a trust fund.

00:52:53.460 Yeah. We saw that with Occupy Wall Street.

00:52:57.380 Right. Right. It's like, well, I think what's most dangerous about this and scary about it is

00:53:03.940 it's gone a long way from like criticizing the foreign policy of the United States of America to

00:53:09.140 like actively waving the flags of terrorist organizations in our own country.

00:53:16.020 I mean, if that doesn't get you on a watch from the trade center.

00:53:19.220 Yeah. Steps from the World Trade Center footprint.

00:53:21.780 It's so obnoxious.

00:53:24.260 To your point about Occupy Wall Street, there's a big difference between

00:53:27.620 protesting corporate greed and saying death to America, burn the flag. I mean, if anything

00:53:32.740 tells you we have an immigration problem in this country, I don't. I mean, that does. It's like,

00:53:37.700 this is this is a a gigantic problem. And I don't understand if people are going to be arrested at an

00:53:44.900 airport for blocking cars from parking and going to their planes, they're going to be arrested

00:53:50.820 eventually. Why can't they be arrested right away? You know, why is it that they're allowed to just

00:53:56.820 sit there and cause problems for everybody going about their lives and nothing happens? I mean,

00:54:02.900 literally they're arrested. And then what? Then they just released to go do it again.

00:54:08.020 So that's the thing is, is like we had again earlier discussed is when you've got these dark

00:54:12.340 money funded prosecutors, you don't need to elect officials who will pass laws to stop this kind

00:54:18.340 of nonsense when the prosecutor you can buy just won't bring up any charges. We saw this happen

00:54:22.820 in New York with all the riots that happened there and so much destruction of small businesses

00:54:28.500 and every single one of those people received a pardon. So when you have this culture of lawlessness,

00:54:33.860 it just, you know, it spirals and spirals and spirals. But to me, what's even more disturbing than

00:54:38.500 some random protesters saying this is we now have members of Congress, you know, Ilhan Omar,

00:54:43.300 Rashida Tlaib. These are people who after this rocket attack from Iran,

00:54:48.260 were completely silent. They were completely silent. And they have specifically run on their

00:54:54.900 hatred of Israel, their hatred of this country, believing that America is like a fallen country

00:54:59.780 that can't be redeemed. That's their core belief. And they were elected within 20 years or right

00:55:06.100 around 20 years of the attack on September 11th. And right there, we're seeing this happen.

00:55:10.500 And they've dragged the rest of the Democratic Party to their view in all of this. And they say it,

00:55:15.140 you know, most quote unquote, responsible Democrats say in a different way, but they've

00:55:19.380 all been pushing Israel to, you know, have a ceasefire with the terrorists who murdered all of those

00:55:24.900 people on October 7th. Mind you, Hamas, who cannot account for any of those hostages now as

00:55:30.340 part of that ceasefire deal, you got Chuck Schumer calling for a ceasefire three days before Iran

00:55:37.140 starts lobbing missiles into Israel. And now suddenly, the funniest part is how all these folks have to

00:55:41.540 sort of like retcon their opinion on Israel and say, we stand with Israel against Iran. And it's

00:55:47.620 like, dude, three days ago, you were telling them to give up trying to get Americans back and their

00:55:51.860 own citizens back from Gaza. It's a larger and more pervasive problem than we're sort of covering here

00:55:58.100 with the protesters. The reality is that those protesters have a constituency within the Democratic

00:56:03.540 party of today's America. It is unbelievable to say it is, it is, you know, akin to saying like

00:56:10.420 the Ku Klux Klan has got a constituency in one of the parties. It is not a demographic you should ever

00:56:17.540 try to appeal for. They call for the genocide and the extent extinction of Jewish people. They take them

00:56:23.700 at their word. That is what they are trying to do. They have such a constituency that you, as you said,

00:56:29.140 they are electing members of Congress that represent those points of view. And what makes it,

00:56:35.460 I think, more alarming to me, Megan, than anything else is that the Biden administration, which started

00:56:40.580 out immediately after October 7th, saying all the right things about the interests that America has

00:56:46.500 in Israel and the region. And then they've sort of figured out that they have a political problem

00:56:51.460 along the way. And you look at poll after poll where they are underperforming against progressive and

00:56:56.340 young voters. And they know that at some level in some states, Michigan and others,

00:57:01.220 it's because of this issue. And so they've begun to try to triangulate American foreign policy to fit

00:57:08.180 a political problem that Joe Biden finds himself in, in an election year, which is fucking scary.

00:57:15.220 That is an unbelievable departure from any sort of foreign policy concert. I don't care if you're a

00:57:21.380 libertarian or if you're a defense hawk, the idea that domestic politics are entirely changing our

00:57:29.140 relationship to one of maybe two of the best allies that we have in the entire world should scare the

00:57:35.380 hell out of everybody. So can I, I want to make two points and then I'll give you the floor. One,

00:57:42.020 yes, it's incredibly inconvenient for people who are flying and you never know where they're flying.

00:57:45.380 You know, it's like, this is like an assumption that every trip is for pleasure. That's not true.

00:57:49.140 Right. You know, the American industry is what it is because people work hard here. We're not France

00:57:53.620 and they have important meetings to get to. They have important things to do.

00:57:56.900 They have funerals to make, you know, they have like the selfishness of this. But then you think

00:58:02.180 about like the ambulances that get shut down, the emergency trips to the hospital, the people having

00:58:06.340 the babies, the people who had a heart attack, all of them. None of that matters because these people

00:58:11.220 want to make a point about Palestinian suffering. What about the Americans who you're making suffer right

00:58:16.180 now? They don't care. That's why they're chanting death to America. And then I have no adverse reaction

00:58:21.620 to the lunatic wave, waving the Hezbollah flag right next to them. They want attention for themselves.

00:58:27.540 They have them have no fucking idea who Hezbollah is or what this Palestinian Israel conflict is all

00:58:33.940 about. They've just decided, you know, the black, brown, white equation warrants them going out there

00:58:39.380 and siding against America. But I do want to talk about the messaging, the anti-American messaging.

00:58:45.780 Before I do that, though, Ashbrook, were you trying to get in on what those guys were just saying?

00:58:49.860 No, no, I was just actually what you just said is sort of what I was going to say is that what the

00:58:55.540 left really wants in this country is power. What the what the protesters will not talk about is how

00:59:01.300 Hamas treats regular Palestinians inside of Gaza. They're blocking the relief supplies. They're blocking

00:59:08.100 the food. Hamas is trying to keep the regular person in palace at regular person living in Gaza down.

00:59:15.380 And now you have these Hamas protesters here in America who are trying to stop regular people in

00:59:21.300 America from living their lives. And what we've seen from the left over a long period of time

00:59:28.260 is this move to where we're not allowed to have like they don't like normal Americans having the

00:59:35.140 typical American political arguments where somebody says, oh, don't I don't like tax cuts or somebody

00:59:40.820 says, oh, I don't like these Medicaid waivers like they think that those types of arguments are bad

00:59:46.020 because then we're not talking about what they want to talk about, which is completely destroying

00:59:52.020 America and completely destroying Israel and their radical ideas that are echoed by these major

00:59:59.780 institutions on the left and more and more echoed by major media institutions on the left. And it's

01:00:05.140 just one of the worst things that's happened in our society. Go ahead, Megan. Sorry.

01:00:08.980 So, no, I go on a tangent there and I was right. Here's what's so annoying about, you know, the left

01:00:17.700 can't stand this country. Not all of the leftists, right? Not liberals, but leftists and these protesters

01:00:24.180 out there in the streets or they they hate America. They're only now giving specific voice to it.

01:00:30.100 Death to America. Right. Like, OK, I'm not shocked. I knew you felt that way. But it's great to have

01:00:35.540 you actually say it explicitly. Right. Right here on American soil over and over, whether it's down on

01:00:41.060 Wall Street or is in Dearborn, Michigan, Michigan last week. And after that happened in Dearborn,

01:00:47.220 Hillary Vaughn of Fox News got in the grill of Rashida Tlaib and tried to get her because it's her

01:00:53.780 jurisdiction to condemn those words. It shouldn't be hard. It's a no brainer, madam. Yes, I condemn.

01:01:03.140 Absolutely. I am an American congresswoman. Of course, I don't agree with that. But instead,

01:01:09.460 here's what happened. Congressman Tlaib. I don't talk to Fox News. At a rally in your district,

01:01:16.580 people were chanting death to America. Do you condemn? I do not talk to Fox News.

01:01:21.540 But do you condemn chants of death to America? I don't talk to people that use racist tropes.

01:01:28.580 Why can't you just say whether or not you condemn people chanting death to? Why are you afraid to

01:01:33.140 talk to talk to Fox News? Fox News is not, not, listen, using racist tropes towards my community

01:01:39.700 is what Fox News is about. And I don't talk to Fox News. Is death to America racist?

01:01:46.340 Is chanting death to America racist? I'm talking about your guys' racist tropes.

01:01:50.500 You know, you guys are, you guys know exactly what you do. I know you're Islamophobic,

01:01:54.740 but you guys got to go deal with it on your own self. You're not going to use me.

01:01:59.700 Okay. Oh, profiles and courage. Just insanity.

01:02:03.620 And it's like, how many words does she take to say, I don't talk to Fox News over and over?

01:02:07.780 She could have just said, yeah, I condemn. I condemn.

01:02:11.620 Because she can't. But she doesn't. But she doesn't. And that's the problem. There is a

01:02:17.860 constituency deeply embedded in today's Democratic Party where that's the view. That's the view.

01:02:25.460 And we can all pretend like it doesn't happen because the New York Times isn't going to cover

01:02:29.460 it and the Washington Post isn't going to cover it and the AP and CNN and MSNBC are not going to

01:02:34.260 talk about that. But it's the ugly reality that you're dealing with a constituency within the

01:02:39.060 Democratic Party who wants the elimination, not only of just America, but a whole population of people

01:02:47.140 in the Middle East. I mean, it is truly, I don't think we really have grappled with the gravity

01:02:54.100 of what this represents. Because at no point in our history, since the days of slavery and since the

01:03:02.340 days of just horrible, racist prosecutions and the days of Jim Crow, have we dealt with a constituency

01:03:12.500 within a major political party in this country that is telling you exactly what it is that they say?

01:03:19.300 And what they say is, we want these people dead. That's what they're saying. Let's just listen to it

01:03:26.420 and be very, very clear about our understanding. They're going to pretend like it doesn't. But watch

01:03:30.820 what happens with Joe Biden. Watch how he's triangulating. They're trying to accommodate a

01:03:35.140 constituency where that's the view. And that is amazing that, you know, she won't talk to Fox

01:03:40.980 News. Nobody else will ask her that question. So she doesn't have to answer it at all. They're

01:03:45.860 literally the only ones with access to her and she won't answer the question. OK, all of this leads me

01:03:52.180 to this meltdown that Joe Scarborough had on MSNBC this morning. OK, and we've gone through it. Like

01:04:00.500 the as the Hezbollah, the Dearborn, Michigan chants, which we played last week, Rashida Tlaib won't

01:04:06.500 condemn. We all know why. And now here's Scarborough with what the real problem is in America, who the

01:04:17.300 real haters are of our country watches. We are so much more powerful, so much stronger than we have

01:04:28.980 ever been. And you're voting for a guy that tells you every day that America sucks. What's wrong with

01:04:33.940 you? Who raised you? You don't read. Because if you read, Mike, the facts are clear. And I'm getting

01:04:41.460 tired of saying this to people who claim to be patriotic but hate America because they're always

01:04:47.620 running America down. They're always trashing America. They're always saying America's horrible.

01:04:52.820 It's democracy doesn't work. We need a dictatorship if Donald Trump doesn't win.

01:04:57.620 So what do they do? They find a trans athlete in Utah.

01:05:02.580 The world's coming to it. Help us, Jesus. The country. Country ain't the country ours raised in.

01:05:11.700 No, it's better. It's stronger.

01:05:13.540 Oh, he's not talking about Rashida Tlaib, right? MAGA. They're the very hate America. No one on his

01:05:25.380 team. I missed his condemnation of all of that rhetoric that we just went through.

01:05:30.500 They can't. And they won't. And they're going to pretend like it doesn't exist. I mean, one of the

01:05:35.780 things that the democratic corporate media has done over the years, and I think they're most effective

01:05:41.780 at, is narrative choosing. It's not so much the real power. Yeah. The real power is to try to pretend

01:05:49.700 like the news only exists in the silos that they provide it. And then they ignore the more pervasive

01:05:57.220 pieces of a democratic constituency in a party that they support and don't want to make that

01:06:01.700 a public discussion because, boy, that would threaten the narrative. And that's what you see

01:06:06.020 Joe doing there. I mean, look, he's about a week late on our hack madness tournament.

01:06:11.540 Yeah. Megan, we have our tournament where we have 64 of the best and brightest liberal hacks

01:06:17.380 in the country. And we do a tournament at Ruthless. And Scarborough made a pretty good run this year.

01:06:22.580 He made a good run, but he should have done that earlier.

01:06:23.940 Did Overman win? Didn't Overman win here?

01:06:25.700 Yeah. Overman took the crown this year.

01:06:27.620 Well done. I think that was meritorious.

01:06:30.740 I think what's really interesting to see in this is all of this is based around the fundamental change in

01:06:37.940 the progressives, the left, the Democrat party, where they've essentially made it that you have

01:06:43.540 to agree with all of it or you're the enemy, right? So you see these seemingly disparate groups,

01:06:50.100 like when you see these parades of queers for Palestine, which makes no sense at all,

01:06:56.180 as they would be killed in Palestine. But they enforce this doctrine on them of, listen,

01:07:02.580 there's intersectionality. You have to agree with all of it or none of it. You have to say,

01:07:06.980 yes, you agree with the trans movement. You also agree in this belief that Israel is

01:07:13.780 committing a genocide. You have to agree with the complete Black Lives Matter, that you're allowed

01:07:18.420 to have riots and burn down buildings. So part and parcel, if you don't agree with all of that,

01:07:23.700 then you're the enemy. And they enforce this by saying, if you're not with us, you're against

01:07:27.620 democracy. You're attacking democracy. So they have to simplify it as it's us versus them. And if you're

01:07:34.100 not with us, you're attacking democracy and you're the enemy. And you're seeing it goes beyond just

01:07:38.740 the rhetoric. Now they just use the Justice Department to go after their political enemies.

01:07:42.420 It's just amazing to me, the level of hatred and honestly, the level of stupidity,

01:07:48.100 like Starbucks, Starbucks, you can't hide. Not till we free Palestine. How is Starbucks going to

01:07:55.140 hide? How is that? It's such a great question.

01:07:59.060 Just sell a cup of coffee.

01:08:00.340 How is that a thing?

01:08:04.900 Even better. You guys know Jesse's single. He was, he tweeted out.

01:08:10.260 This made me laugh out loud.

01:08:13.140 We shall fight in the Starbucks. We shall fight in the theater companies.

01:08:17.460 We shall fight in the small literary magazines and in the fast food restaurants.

01:08:21.380 Oh, it's so good. It's so good.

01:08:27.300 It's easy to laugh until you see the death to America chant. And then you're like,

01:08:30.660 I'm not really laughing anymore.

01:08:32.580 Right. Yeah. We should have sort of like a, a new legislative push to create a series of laws

01:08:37.460 where it provides the, like the intent of the, the protesters to live on what they're protesting.

01:08:43.460 Like all these Gaza folks, we should just load up a C-130 and send them to Gaza and see how they love

01:08:48.100 that. Or if you like shut it down over a climate change or something, you just load up a C-130 and

01:08:52.500 send them to Antarctica. You know what I mean? Like that seems like a, that seems like a pretty

01:08:57.380 good punishment. Like you actually have to live now the, what you're trying to protest the rest of

01:09:02.660 us over rather than disrupting our daily lives. And on your way there, you'll be suffering three

01:09:07.460 hour delays in the street. Thanks to the richest guys and their bags of cement.

01:09:11.140 Right. Exactly. All right. So while, while we're on the subject of, uh, errant media, uh,

01:09:16.500 which is where I put Scarborough's remarks this morning, let's talk for a minute about NPR because

01:09:21.140 there's an update in that guy, Yuri Berlinger, who wrote the Berliner, forgive me, who wrote the

01:09:27.300 piece exposing their just hardcore left bias. And we knew, but like, we didn't have all the details

01:09:35.220 around it. And now we've got a lot more color on just how bad they are over there. He wrote for the

01:09:39.540 free press and a remarkable piece. He's been suspended five days without pay. It's a formal

01:09:46.700 rebuke. And the reason is, uh, according to David Folkenflik, who works for NPR and reported on this,

01:09:53.220 that he failed to secure NPR's approval for outside work for another news outlet. He has been issued a

01:10:01.020 quote, final warning saying that he will be fired if he violates NPR's policy again. Uh, he has said

01:10:09.180 that he will not appeal the punishment and NPR has said the other thing he did was publicly release

01:10:15.200 proprietary information about audience demographics, which it considers confidential. That I believe is

01:10:21.280 a reference to the fact that notwithstanding they're making NPR into a living, breathing DEI

01:10:26.860 machine. They have just rock bottom numbers on Hispanic and black viewers and listeners. Nobody

01:10:35.540 they're shocked to find out that diverse communities are not obsessed with race and identity the way the

01:10:41.900 white liberal elites who work at NPR are. And this comes as we find out, this is one of my favorite

01:10:49.380 stories today that the new CEO, she came on in January of NPR is like hardcore resistance to

01:10:59.580 mask wearing. I mean, this is like, she must've been my neighbor on the Upper West side. Catherine

01:11:05.200 Mayer is her name. Actually, she's from Connecticut, Wilton, Connecticut, the Tony town of Wilton,

01:11:10.220 Connecticut. And, uh, Chris Rufo has been doing a great job pulling some of her tweets, which I would

01:11:17.540 love to share with you guys. Cause I think you'd like to get to know Catherine and opine on the

01:11:21.760 state of American media. Okay. I'm going to give you a couple September 27th, 2018. She wasn't at

01:11:27.000 NPR at the time. She used to run Wikipedia. Uh, this is during Christine Blasey Ford's testimony

01:11:32.020 before the Senate. I'm angry, hot, angry, slow, angry, relentless, angry. Jeffrey Toobin's reacting.

01:11:40.300 The anger is going to fuel. It's going to fuel and burn for a long time and it will deliver back

01:11:46.960 exponentially. Okay. That's her. That's Christine Blasey Ford reaction. April or August 16th,

01:11:53.360 2019. This is after Trump said he might open California's giant Sequoia national monument

01:11:59.980 to development. There are so many injustices piling up. It becomes hard to not just sit

01:12:05.580 and cry. Just sit and cry. She goes on to say, January of 2020, I grew up feeling superior.

01:12:13.740 Huh? How white of me? Because I was from new England and my part of the country didn't have

01:12:18.080 slaves or so I'd been taught. And then follows up shortly thereafter in February with I'm a super

01:12:23.820 big public transit nerd. I hate private cars and cities. I love bikes. And yes, I love buses,

01:12:31.520 transit justice and climate love in one humble hunk of rolling metal.

01:12:36.640 Oh my God. Okay. I'm not done. It's, it sounds made up. I know it sounds made up like an AI version

01:12:45.760 of what you'd think would be running NPR. Here's August, 2020 had a dream where Kamala and I,

01:12:52.020 she dreams about her and about her. Had a dream where Kamala and I were on a road trip in an

01:12:58.440 unspecified location, sampling and comparing nuts and baklava from roadside stands.

01:13:04.340 What? No. Okay. Um, yeah, there's more. She's mad about the Tom Cotton, uh, piece in the New York

01:13:12.780 Times. It shames the New York Times to publish an op-ed that should and would never have passed

01:13:17.520 journalistic editorial review November 7th, 2020 after Biden won. I can't stop crying with relief.

01:13:24.920 This person is now running NPR. And I do think I'm not out on a limb when I say

01:13:30.040 Yuri Berliner's days over there are numbered. What do you guys make of it?

01:13:36.420 Yeah. So I went and I looked through her tweets, uh, and they are far crazier.

01:13:42.340 Bangers.

01:13:42.780 Uh, than any of those. I'll put one up right here. Uh, she says, I know that hysteric white woman voice.

01:13:49.160 I was taught to do it. I've done it. It's a disturbing recognition. While I don't recall ever using it to

01:13:54.500 deliberately expose another person to immediate physical harm on my own cognizance, it's not

01:13:59.280 impossible. That is whiteness. Like how broken and deranged are these individuals? And the thing

01:14:10.320 is, is, you know, she's coming from Wikipedia. This used to be an arbiter of truth and is now going to

01:14:16.180 be given taxpayer dollars to have their message spread. Like it is unbelievable how deranged these

01:14:23.300 people are. Yeah. At least she's copped to understanding what a hysteric white woman voice

01:14:28.760 sounds like, right? You just have to add the wrong takeaway from it. You got to add the tip top

01:14:33.240 Richard Ney and you know, all of that included. And then you get, you pop out a CEO of NPR at the end

01:14:39.440 of it. It's amazing. There's this one from July, 2020, lots of jokes about leaving the U S and I get

01:14:45.720 it. But as someone with cis white mobility privilege, I'm thinking I'm staying and investing

01:14:51.700 in ridding ourselves of this spectra of specter of tyranny. I mean, Ashbrook, you're right. It

01:14:58.180 sounds like AI, right? And there she is in her Joe Biden for president hat marching door to door to

01:15:07.440 get people to vote for Joe Biden. It's the most biased. Like get out of here. And by the way,

01:15:12.960 can I just, can I just say something else about this punishment for Uri Berliner where he supposedly

01:15:18.940 released demographic, proprietary demographic data? I mean, we already know who the demographic is that

01:15:27.620 listens to NPR. There was no news to anybody, but aren't we entitled to some of this information?

01:15:32.680 We're paying for it. You know, it's Ronald Reagan who said he's paying for that microphone.

01:15:36.780 We're paying for theirs. Don't we get to know that in Uri, but he wasn't allowed to talk to

01:15:42.500 Barry Weiss without getting permission from David Fulkenfleck. And from this, like, from this,

01:15:47.800 from this woman who's a volunteer campaigner for Joe Biden, he has to call them before he talks to

01:15:53.900 Barry Weiss. I'm sorry. I thought Barry Weiss paid for NPR too. She's, she's just another taxpayer

01:16:00.060 who's asking questions, wondering why it's been so terrible over the years. And all Uri Berliner is doing

01:16:05.840 is saying, well, you know what? I counted in the newsroom and 87 people were Democrats,

01:16:10.940 zero were Republicans. I am a Democrat. I grew up in a liberal household. And all I'm saying is maybe

01:16:16.280 we should have a little more balance in our network. And she's like, no, sorry, you're almost fired for

01:16:21.060 that. Well, even, even, even get out of here. It's the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard in my

01:16:26.040 life. But it's even, even worse than that. I think Ashbrook is, is the irony. So, you know,

01:16:32.280 she put out this statement, basically responding to Uri Berliner's commentary on the state of

01:16:37.720 journalism at NPR. Mind you, again, we've read all of this woman's tweets where she talks about

01:16:43.340 being a hysterical white woman and reducing everyone to their identity and their race and

01:16:47.540 their gender. Actually, from her statement, responding to him, pointing out the fact there

01:16:53.200 was no Republicans on the entire staff. Right.

01:16:55.240 She says, questioning whether our people are serving our mission with integrity based on

01:17:02.460 little more than the recognition of their identity is profoundly disrespectful, hurtful,

01:17:08.640 and demeaning. Oh, it's the identity thing.

01:17:12.000 Oh, wow. Well, who started talking about identity?

01:17:14.960 Boy, that dog came back to bite, didn't he?

01:17:17.080 That is the, that's the funniest thing is like NPR can have like, you know, support groups for BIPOC

01:17:23.480 gender neutral basket weavers and all of that sort of stuff.

01:17:27.800 It's NPR noir. NPR noir.

01:17:30.620 But heaven forbid they have a Republican on staff. That would be offensive. And that'd be reducing

01:17:35.040 people to their identity. Like, are you fucking kidding me?

01:17:37.880 And also, there's no NPR at all.

01:17:39.840 The way she led that question, that her statement, asking a question, you're not allowed to ask

01:17:46.200 questions at NPR. No, you're not allowed to ask any questions. And you know what? We've said

01:17:50.020 something here on the program here for a few days, and I think we should repeat it with you,

01:17:53.400 Megyn Kelly. Ich bin Uri Berliner. To quote President Kennedy.

01:18:01.140 I'm not sure, guys. You know, this is how he began his piece, which it was actually equally

01:18:06.500 amazing to the body of it. He writes, you know, the stereotype of the NPR listener and electric

01:18:12.960 vehicle driving, wordle playing, tote bag carrying, coastal elite. It doesn't precisely describe me,

01:18:18.700 but it's not far off. I'm Sarah Lawrence educated, was raised by a lesbian peace activist mother.

01:18:24.720 I drive a Subaru and Spotify says my listening habits are most similar to people in Berkeley.

01:18:29.960 I'm not sure if ich, dein Uri Berliner, but I get the point.

01:18:34.900 I would, I'm friends with all journalists. He's a journalist himself.

01:18:37.400 Well, no, I just, I like honesty. Yeah. And this guy was honest up front and he's honest

01:18:41.540 about the problems at his network. He wants violence. That's, that's what everybody wants.

01:18:45.180 That's the thing, Megyn, is like, if we could at the very least get an acknowledgement from people

01:18:50.520 in journalism that they carry these biases from being, you know, liberals who went to Sarah Lawrence.

01:18:55.440 I can understand that. And I would respect that a lot more than this pretend idea that these

01:19:02.500 people at NPR reflect the fabric of America. I mean, how many of them like own a Ford F-150 and

01:19:08.940 have gone hunting before? I bet you zero, zero, zero. And that's fine, but at least acknowledge it

01:19:14.660 and try to reflect the opinions of all Americans and not, Joe, cloister yourself in that environment

01:19:19.320 and declare yourself America. It's ridiculous. Right. And okay, go ahead.

01:19:22.940 Well, one thing I wanted to note is the, you know, repetition of her being like, I'm confronting

01:19:27.520 my whiteness, or it's important to understand that this is how whiteness operates. It's,

01:19:32.120 they have to make these statements of like self-flagellation because it's like these communist

01:19:37.800 struggle sessions, you know, to be allowed into the modern democratic party to, you have to say,

01:19:43.380 oh, you know, I am confronting these biases and my whiteness and I need to do the work. Like you

01:19:48.660 have to put out those buzzwords or you're not allowed into the club. Because if she's being

01:19:53.560 honest, she's like, well, I was raised in Connecticut, you know, like I'm a blue blood.

01:19:59.660 I've had everything handed to me. So what the hell would she know about like the issues that

01:20:04.580 people face in America? She's never faced any issues. It's unbelievable. So to be able to have

01:20:09.880 that position. Yeah. At least she feels bad about it. That's what makes her better than you.

01:20:14.320 That's right. His greatest defense was that he wouldn't conform.

01:20:18.660 I mean, the reason she can't focus on any of this is she's too busy organizing the

01:20:23.300 McGuy-Pock meeting of the marginalized genders and intersex people of color mentorship program

01:20:28.020 of NPR. That's why you no longer have balance on the radio. It's just busy organizing McGuy-Pock

01:20:34.700 meetings. I'll let that marinate and we'll come back and talk about the shocking cancellation of

01:20:41.420 King Charles. No one even knows what I'm talking about because it was a narrow watched show that CNN

01:20:48.400 attempted. That was a complete disaster. You'll be shocked, shocked to learn that Gail King and

01:20:54.840 Charles Barkley, who was out there threatening black voters who go for Trump, was not a hit.

01:20:59.780 Stand by.

01:21:01.220 I'm Megan Kelly, host of The Megan Kelly Show on Sirius XM. It's your home for open,

01:21:07.380 honest, and provocative conversations with the most interesting and important political,

01:21:11.380 legal, and cultural figures today. You can catch The Megan Kelly Show on Triumph,

01:21:15.800 a Sirius XM channel featuring lots of hosts you may know and probably love. Great people like Dr.

01:21:22.220 Laura. Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace, Dave Ramsey, and yours truly, Megan Kelly. You can stream The

01:21:28.760 Megan Kelly Show on Sirius XM at home or anywhere you are. No car required. I do it all the time. I

01:21:35.400 love the Sirius XM app. It has ad-free music coverage of every major sport, comedy, talk,

01:21:42.260 podcast, and more. Subscribe now. Get your first three months for free.

01:21:45.660 Go to SiriusXM.com slash MK show to subscribe and get three months free. That's SiriusXM.com

01:21:54.440 slash MK show and get three months free. Offer details apply.

01:22:04.040 Speaking of DEI, Joy Reid is super happy about DEI and its effects on the 2024 presidential election.

01:22:14.220 She's calling it out. Listen to her. For me, there is something wonderfully poetic about the fact that

01:22:21.700 despite the fact that even if convicted, he's not going to go to prison, the first person to actually

01:22:27.800 criminally prosecute Donald Trump is a black Harvard grad, the very kind of person that his former

01:22:35.220 staff, the people who worked for him, Stephen Miller, et cetera, want to never be at Harvard

01:22:41.540 law school. But he was. And a black woman is doing that same exact thing in Georgia. And a black woman

01:22:48.940 forced you to pay $175 million fine that Donald Trump is being held to account by the very

01:22:55.660 multicultural, multiracial democracy that he's trying to dismantle. And for me, there's something

01:23:01.460 poetic and actually wonderful about that. It says something good about our country that we're still

01:23:06.840 capable of having that happen. Go DEI. My DEIs are bringing it home. Oh, my Lord.

01:23:13.040 Yeah. Like when I think about representation in our democracy, what I really think about

01:23:18.160 is taking a misdemeanor charge in the state of New York, one that wasn't going to be prosecuted by the

01:23:23.520 DOJ or Cy Vance and trumping it up into 40 felony charges and deciding there's an underlying crime with

01:23:30.760 an FEC violation. Again, that was not previously charged. That is representation. That's what it

01:23:35.920 is. That's what it is. You know, and that's that's the ridiculous nature of all of this,

01:23:40.720 Megan. Right. It's like the facts be damned. Right. Like the subsection C before the United

01:23:46.180 States Supreme Court, the subsection C that is supposed to apply to financial crimes done by

01:23:51.580 like Enron and Arthur Anderson can be applied to everybody on January 6th. And Donald Trump can

01:23:56.300 have a misdemeanor trumped up to 40 felonies. That doesn't matter to them. What matters is the

01:24:01.320 representation. Well, Michael, there was a woman, a solicitor that was arguing it before the court.

01:24:06.020 What are these details? That's not right. Just take the take the W, Duncan. It's just lawlessness

01:24:13.460 dressed up. Can I say that? Can I can I say, oh, my DEIs. There's my DEI. Alvin Bragg. There he is.

01:24:20.840 Does that is that how that works? If she can adopt a white woman hair, can I adopt her black woman

01:24:26.060 DEIs, my DEIs? Is that can that it's just that I think if you take a step back, it's just it's

01:24:32.480 deranged and disturbing of essentially you are doing everything you can to divide Americans.

01:24:39.200 That's the whole equity thing of being like, you know what? I'm really happy that there's a lot of

01:24:44.080 black people out here who can prosecute a white person. This sounds like it's a very healthy thing

01:24:50.480 to celebrate. And then the rest of the people on the on the TV panel clap like seals, like,

01:24:55.820 yeah, good idea. Let's try to divide Americans by their race, hit them against each other.

01:25:00.760 This seems healthy, but also can talk about their DEIs and the power that they're bringing

01:25:05.440 in the same breath of condemning Clarence Thomas. Yeah, of course.

01:25:09.480 Right. It's like, no, no, no. It's not actually DEIs that you're concerned about. It's progressive

01:25:15.400 liberals that you're in any sort of form or shape. And that's how gross is she to bring

01:25:21.580 Stephen Miller into it. Stephen Miller, she's talking about America first legal. Yeah, I'm

01:25:26.600 sure they did oppose the affirmative action program that was unlawful as held by the Supreme

01:25:30.900 Court. It's not Stephen Miller's fault. It's the fault of the people who put it in place

01:25:36.080 contrary to the Constitution. You're not allowed to have that kind of a program. And the Supreme

01:25:41.900 Court's been telegraphing that it would go away for 20 years. And now finally it has.

01:25:45.260 So but no, for Joy Reid, it means he doesn't want black people at Harvard. All the black

01:25:49.240 people in the world can get into Harvard just as long as they can get into Harvard, Joy

01:25:51.940 Reid. That's it. Have them get somewhat decent grades. Right now, it's much easier to get

01:25:56.800 into Harvard as a young black or or man or woman than it is to be any other race. Guaranteed.

01:26:02.800 So just stop. OK, stop. There's no problem getting black people to Harvard as long as they

01:26:06.860 have somewhat decent grades. She's a liar. It's not not going to happen anymore because of Stephen

01:26:11.280 Miller. She just loves to gin up racial enmity wherever she can. Yeah, I'd love to know her

01:26:18.240 opinion on like a male Asian American getting into Harvard. Yeah, I would I would happen to

01:26:23.640 think her opinion might be a little bit different. Suddenly that's not the EI. Nope, no, that

01:26:27.440 one doesn't work. That one doesn't fit. That doesn't qualify. So the the I was going to show

01:26:34.460 you this to just talking about like the way the media is approaching the Trump cases. That's

01:26:40.300 her. Like she's so proud that everybody's black involved. All the prosecutors are black.

01:26:43.660 Yay. Yay. Me. That's what she's saying. I mean, can you imagine? It's like seriously

01:26:47.260 think about if I were like, well, I'm just so proud that like all the whites are going

01:26:52.340 after the blacks now. It makes me feel so good. I feel wonderful. That's basically what

01:26:57.700 she's saying. It's like she gets away with it because blacks are 14 percent of the American

01:27:02.940 population. But like virtually none of them feel the way she does. Only lunatic white women

01:27:07.120 on the Upper West Side share her views are in Seattle or San Francisco. She doesn't speak

01:27:11.080 for speak for the black community. You know, I have actually many black friends and people

01:27:14.740 in my life. They'd be appalled if they saw that clip. She's disgusting. She gets away

01:27:18.700 with it over and over because she's on MSNBC. And I'm just sick of her nonsense.

01:27:24.220 But anyway, it's the same way defund the police polls. Like if you ask black voters their thoughts

01:27:28.760 on defund the police, they say, without a doubt, absolutely not, except for the talking heads

01:27:34.020 on TV and the white liberals in the Northeast and on the coast, they're the ones who push

01:27:39.440 this idea thinking, oh, you know, I want to be helpful to my DEIs. So I think defunding

01:27:46.300 the police is the way to do it. A hundred percent.

01:27:48.620 Yeah. Okay. So here is George Stephanopoulos over the weekend trying to cross examine Chris

01:27:55.280 Sununu of New Hampshire, the governor who was behind Nikki Haley and now has said he's going

01:28:00.660 to go with team Trump. I mean, he's a Republican and trying. I mean, we just put a montage together

01:28:06.000 of the questions. You tell me whether you think George Stephanopoulos understands the right half

01:28:10.740 of America and came to this with a fair and impartial approach. Watch.

01:28:15.060 Will your support for Donald Trump continue even if he's convicted?

01:28:18.120 So I'm asking you about right and wrong. You think it's you're comfortable with the idea

01:28:22.500 of supporting someone who's convicted on January 11th, 2021. You said that President Trump's rhetoric

01:28:28.260 and actions contributed to the insurrection. So please explain, given the fact that you believe

01:28:33.360 he contributed to an insurrection, how you can say we should have him back in the Oval Office?

01:28:38.460 Just to sum up, you would support him for president even if he's convicted in classified documents.

01:28:42.540 You support him for president even though you believe he contributed to an insurrection.

01:28:46.200 You support him for president even though you believe he's lying about the last election.

01:28:49.760 You'd support him for president even if he's convicted in the Manhattan case.

01:28:52.780 I just want to say the answer to that is yes, correct?

01:28:54.740 Correct. Yeah, me and 51% of America.

01:29:02.540 What a wonderful clip, Megan, and just a demonstration of ABC's deep and abiding commitment to DEI

01:29:09.680 and everything it stands for by hiring a Democrat press secretary to once again

01:29:14.220 anchor the news at their broadcasting network.

01:29:17.740 Oh, it's amazing. Like he doesn't get it. He doesn't get it. Like the right half of the country

01:29:24.320 doesn't see these things as rising to the level of criminality. They haven't been treated as crimes

01:29:30.120 when we've had these so-called insurrections by the Democrats challenging elections or turning over

01:29:35.600 police stations, as we talked about earlier, setting them on fire courthouses as well,

01:29:39.400 all just completely ignored. They're having trouble finding their outrage vein on these Trump behaviors

01:29:46.540 because it's so one-sided. Even the documents case. Your guy did that too. Your guy did that

01:29:52.680 and he took the documents when he wasn't even President George. I will say I don't think

01:29:56.600 Sununu was all that effective in responding to it, but it was just a complete skewering by an unfair

01:30:01.080 journalist. And by the way, why do Republicans keep going on these shows? Because you're just there to be

01:30:06.100 their little- That's a better question. I don't know the answer to that question. I certainly

01:30:12.540 wouldn't recommend it to anybody that I was advising. Seems like Stephanopoulos has stepped

01:30:17.660 on a lot of rakes lately. Yeah. By the way, you had that Nancy Mace thing, right? And then now this

01:30:22.580 thing. But to the larger point here that he can't conceptualize, it's sort of amazing to me. I can only

01:30:30.560 imagine what your information flow and your silo of information and socialization looks like when

01:30:38.040 you can't understand, even if you are a Trump critic and you have had a huge problem with January 6th

01:30:46.160 and you didn't like any of the post-2020 stuff and you don't like him personally and you think he's

01:30:50.840 offensive, but you're a conservative and you're a Republican and you're looking out at a absolutely

01:30:56.960 feeble president of the United States that's running this country down to the ground domestically and

01:31:01.520 abroad and you have a binary choice between the two. I don't understand why it's from a conception

01:31:08.560 standpoint. Like why don't you understand? Yeah, Biden is that bad. Well, he can't get it. He's like, I

01:31:14.920 talked to my friends at Soho House and I was at Dean and to look at having a coffee and everyone said

01:31:19.800 that like Biden's doing a great job. In the Hamptons too. Yeah. Yeah. I also really love that

01:31:26.560 the Protect Our Democracy coalition of Democrats and the media and the party like suddenly want you

01:31:34.120 as a Republican to be like, no, you know, the voters who voted for Donald Trump in this Republican

01:31:38.720 primary made him the nominee. They're wrong. You know what I mean? Like it's actually profoundly

01:31:43.680 undemocratic what they're hoping that they can convince some Republican talking heads to do.

01:31:48.540 Also the same crew that expressed absolutely no outrage about the fact that this White House tried

01:31:52.520 to cancel all of their primaries and just renominate the president of the United States.

01:31:56.060 Very pro-democratic position, right? Very pro-democratic. And remove Trump from the ballot

01:32:00.540 in several states. Very pro-democratic. Also democracy. But that's what you get when the internal

01:32:05.740 conversations at your network look like the internal conversations at the DNC. If you had half of

01:32:12.920 that network who was Republicans, half of that network were Democrats, they would have internal

01:32:17.380 fights to just to recenter the perspective of the way they're approaching the news. They don't have

01:32:24.120 that now. There's nobody pushing back on him in the pre-meetings to say, hey, here's what half the

01:32:29.980 country thinks, man. You should really approach it this way if you want to actually get real news

01:32:34.700 that the middle of the country is interested in. They don't have any of that. And it's the same

01:32:39.360 problem that they have at NPR, they have at ABC, they have at NBC, they have at CBS. There are no

01:32:44.260 Republicans working at these networks. And until they get at least half, I don't think Republicans

01:32:49.900 need to go on. I mean, yeah, I mean, I guarantee you they patted him on the back after that. They're

01:32:54.260 probably doing high fives after that. Oh, yeah. Just like you rocked it. Just like just like the

01:32:59.220 press secretary in Ilhan Omar's office pats her on the back when she goes on MSNBC. It's the same it's the

01:33:04.200 same concept. It's a Democrat operation. It's not a news organization anymore. Yeah,

01:33:09.360 it's just a perversion of all of these shows and the way that we cover news today on a lot of these

01:33:14.880 networks, because, I mean, look, you remember back in the day, Tim Russert himself, a former

01:33:19.080 Democratic operative in many ways. But when he got into that sort of prosecutorial back and forth,

01:33:25.140 what it was always about in his era was trying to get answers for things he felt like people were

01:33:29.740 obfuscating from. Right. It wasn't a partisan prosecution based on a point of view that only

01:33:34.580 half of this country actually holds. Right. It was about trying to get answers on things like

01:33:38.580 the Iraq war or things that were affecting this country. And he was he was trying to just pin

01:33:43.160 people down. They have taken that model of a confrontational question and answer style to

01:33:48.880 public officials and just layered on top of it. Absolute, blatant, bald faced partisanship

01:33:56.860 as well. I'll give you the new model of journalism. We've come a long way from Tim

01:34:05.180 Russert. I give you Gayle King and Charles Barkley in their now defunct after six months

01:34:12.320 show on CNN. Look at a mashup here. Like it's so much noise coming out of D.C.

01:34:18.320 How are you able to work your way through that every day? Because we can also say he's a truth

01:34:23.780 teller because when Bob Costas sat down in the seat, can I please get a close up shot

01:34:27.940 of my face? He sat down and he goes, God, that thing's getting bigger. Look, yeah, it's getting

01:34:32.840 bigger and hopefully it won't get so big. Do you ever just like, hey, you know what, can

01:34:36.460 we just talk about issues and not talk about all the noise and the extracurricular stuff?

01:34:41.540 Yes. If you have a disagreement with a co-worker and they start giving you the silent treatment,

01:34:46.600 how do you handle that? Personally, I, you know, I respond in kind. If you give me the silent

01:34:52.300 treatment, I'm going to pretend you don't exist. Really? I hear that you get a lot of questions

01:34:56.440 from people talking about smelly co-workers. You have to say something. It's just like,

01:35:01.180 excuse me, but are you dealing with something? Do you have a hormonal issue? Is the water not

01:35:05.700 working at your home? Something tells me, Charles, this will not be the last, just saying,

01:35:10.320 this will not be the last time that we're working together. Call me, Gayle. Yeah.

01:35:13.300 Uh, I'm going to take the under. Wow. I'm going to take the under on that. That show was on for six

01:35:21.840 months? For real? It's done. They only had 14 episodes. They were drawing an average of 459,000

01:35:30.260 total viewers, 100,000 in the key demo of 25 to 54. That's a nightmare. They were up against Gutfeld,

01:35:37.820 just for, you know, comparison. That'll do it. He's getting 2.2 million total, 320,000 in the demo.

01:35:44.240 Even Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC had 1.5 million up against this. This was a nightmare. Absolutely

01:35:50.260 nobody watched it. And the only thing CNN is able to say is it wasn't a failure because

01:35:55.600 we attracted an audience that was 44% non-white. Oh my God. That's, that was, that's a metric for

01:36:03.160 success. That's it. Well, that's amazing. I was listening to, I'm kind of a fan of Charles

01:36:07.080 Barkley and his NBA and basketball analysis. And I was listening to a sports talk thing when this

01:36:11.500 whole thing was announced. And he's like, yeah, man, all my friends tell me this is a tremendous

01:36:15.560 mistake. I don't know. I guess we'll find out. And I was like, well, I guess you did. Right. I guess

01:36:21.040 we did find out. It wasn't, it was a mistake. Do you feel like people didn't want a close up of

01:36:26.080 Gayle King's cold sore? Is that what we were seeing there? And I don't know what she was calling

01:36:30.500 attention to on her lip. It's probably ill-advised. I mean, they should be ashamed. They subjected

01:36:35.740 people of color to that garbage. Enhanced interrogation or portraits. Depends on your

01:36:43.220 video. They can't find good TV and are listening on NPR. Now CNN is gone. I guess it's back to

01:36:49.380 Ruthless. Guys. Yes. So fun talking to you. You're the best, Megan. Thanks for having us. Thank you,

01:36:55.060 Megan. Oh, the pleasure is all mine. Go check them out. YouTube.com.

01:37:00.500 slash ruthless podcast. Well worth your time. The laughs are always there and great info too.

01:37:05.540 Stay with us all week. We're going to bring the latest on the Trump trial in New York

01:37:08.240 like no one else. See you tomorrow.

01:37:13.600 Thanks for listening to the Megan Kelly show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

01:37:30.500 Thanks for listening to the Megan Kelly show. The next one is planned dating.

01:37:33.920 If we were going to be the last one, we hear the scenes from the

01:37:36.140 second one. Thanks for listening.

01:37:37.680 I Bible through.

01:37:38.640 Bye.

01:37:39.340 Bye.

01:37:39.900 Hi.

01:37:40.340 Bye.

01:37:41.600 Bye.

01:37:42.640 Bye.

01:37:43.460 Bye.

01:37:43.660 Bye.

01:37:44.520 Bye.

01:37:45.200 Bye.

01:37:45.560 Bye.

01:37:47.600 Bye.

01:37:48.520 Bye.

01:37:49.520 Bye.

01:37:50.360 Bye.

01:37:51.080 Bye.

01:37:51.760 Bye.

01:37:53.400 Bye.

01:37:54.220 Bye.

01:37:55.460 Peace.

01:37:55.640 Bye.

01:37:56.340 Bye.

01:37:56.480 Bye.

01:37:56.780 Bye.

01:37:57.620 Bye.

01:37:58.360 Bye.

The Megyn Kelly Show - April 16, 2024

Biased Trump Trial Jury Pool, Supreme Court Takes on January 6 Defendants, and NPR's Woke New CEO, with the Ruthless Podcast ｜ 767

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript