The Megyn Kelly Show - COLLUSION Keeping Him From Debate Stage？｜ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. x Megyn Kelly - The FULL Interview

00:00:00.400 Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at New East.

00:00:12.260 Robert F. Kennedy Jr. filing a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission,

00:00:17.500 accusing President Biden, former President Trump, and CNN of colluding to keep him out of CNN's

00:00:22.920 upcoming presidential debate. It has been over 30 years since an independent presidential

00:00:28.120 candidate appeared in a general election debate, and RFKJ is vowing to make this stage.

00:00:34.100 This is RFKJ's fifth time, fifth on our show. Back in March of 2022, we did a two-part in-depth

00:00:40.880 series with Bobby that is a must-listen. We did two hours on vaccines, and then we did a full two

00:00:46.280 hours on his amazing background, tackled it all. A lot on Anthony Fauci. It was just so good. Everybody

00:00:52.980 loved these episodes. You will, too, if you want to check them out. They're numbers 282 and 283.

00:00:59.360 Bobby Kennedy, welcome back to the show.

00:01:01.360 Thank you, Megyn. And yeah, thanks for putting me on back in, what was it? Was it March of 2022?

00:01:09.080 Yeah, that's right.

00:01:10.280 Yeah, because you were one of the first people to let me on at a time when it was, you know,

00:01:14.500 very dangerous for other outlets to give me a platform. And I've always been very grateful to

00:01:23.060 you for that. 0.97

00:01:24.220 Oh, that was all so silly. And I'm thrilled to see you out there with your message and doing so well 0.65

00:01:29.540 as you should be. That whole thing was so nonsensical. Okay, let me jump right back right

00:01:35.000 into some of the issues. So this is interesting that you want into this debate. I would love to

00:01:39.440 see you in this debate personally, but they're doing their level best to keep you out, both Trump

00:01:44.500 Biden have said, the terms are the terms. It's a two man debate. That's it. And so what

00:01:50.180 can the FEC do? You want them to, to bar CNN from holding it if they don't let you in?

00:01:56.960 Well, the FEC rules say that, um, any that they've, that candidates can't collude, particularly

00:02:05.320 with a network to exclude other candidates. Otherwise it becomes an illegal campaign contribution.

00:02:13.140 So, um, what we know from the accounts, both from our conversations with CNN and also from the

00:02:21.780 accounts in the Washington Post and other press outlets, plus that, and, and just to back up for

00:02:28.100 a second, what the FEC rules require is that the, uh, that the, the rules for the debate be

00:02:35.780 preexisting. In other words, the candidates have no input in them and also that they be objective.

00:02:44.020 So they can't be designed to exclude somebody, but in the conversations that were reported by

00:02:50.660 the Washington Post between the Biden administration, between the Biden White House, uh, President Trump's

00:02:57.380 staff and CNN, uh, President Biden's staff was adamant that the rules needed to be designed to

00:03:06.980 keep me off the platform. They said, if, if he's going to be on, we're not going to be on. He has to be

00:03:13.300 off. President Biden said the same thing. Now, when we asked CNN, did you, after hearing that,

00:03:22.180 did you then create the rules and CNN said, that's privileged, which of course it's not privilege.

00:03:32.020 Right. It's the opposite of privilege. It should be very transparent and, you know,

00:03:37.700 and available to the public. So, you know, if you do collude with them, it becomes, as I said,

00:03:44.580 an illegal campaign contribution. And, um, you know, and we're, we filed a complaint with the FEC

00:03:51.860 to, uh, address that, um, and to, you know, and to, and to make rules that allow me into the debate.

00:04:00.340 The other thing is, Megan, that the rules that they came up with is ironic. There's two rules that

00:04:07.060 are designed to exclude other candidates. One of those rules is that each candidate has to have

00:04:16.260 polls from four separate firms that are on a list of 12 polling firms, an approved list of 12 polling

00:04:26.100 firms, that four of those polls need to show me at 15% or more of the public. And I think CNN assumed

00:04:37.540 that I did not have the polls, but we submitted five polls, including their own poll from last month,

00:04:43.700 which shows me at 16%. And the other polls are all from the list. And since then, yet another poll has

00:04:51.220 come out from that list that has me at 15%. The, the final rule that they, that they use to try to

00:05:01.300 exclude me as a rule that says that you have to be on the ballot in enough states to get 270 electoral votes

00:05:10.660 by June 20th. So we are now, we have enough, we're on the ballot in the seven states. We have enough

00:05:19.860 signatures now as of today for 17 states. By June 20th, we will have enough signatures for 343 electoral

00:05:29.380 votes. Today, we have, I think, 225. Um, but ironically, we are the only one who's on a ballot

00:05:37.620 anywhere because president Trump, president Biden are not on any ballots anywhere. They are, you know,

00:05:44.260 people presume they're going to be the nominees for the democratic Republican party, but that is not

00:05:49.220 locked in yet. So I'm the only one who will qualify for that, uh, without requirement. And so CNN is kind of

00:06:00.820 in a jam. And, you know, we think that if FEC acts that we will win this.

00:06:08.580 They don't want you. ABC doesn't want you. Trump and Biden don't want you. And right now,

00:06:13.060 given the bypassing of the commission on presidential debates, they're calling the shots. So this will be

00:06:17.860 interesting to watch unfold. Um, I think you'd be a great addition up there. I think it'd be fascinating

00:06:22.180 to watch them respond to you and, um, some of your issues, which are important. That's why you're

00:06:26.180 polling. Well, with a certain segment of the population, let me ask you, Donald Trump quickly

00:06:30.660 is on trial. Uh, the jury is deliberating the charges against him right now that we have read

00:06:36.260 this week in Politico that president Biden, uh, intends to address the verdict when it comes down.

00:06:43.220 We presume assuming it's guilty. I don't know if he's going to do anything if it's not guilty

00:06:47.700 from the white house that he's going to comment on a criminal case from the white house. Do you think

00:06:53.460 that's appropriate? You know, I, I try to stay away from commenting on these cases

00:07:01.540 because I think it feeds into this, you know, national polarization. And I don't comment on

00:07:07.940 president Trump's personal issues on a hundred Biden or, you know, any of the

00:07:13.380 Biden administration's personal interviews. And I try to really talk about the economy,

00:07:17.700 about the fact that we've got a $34 trillion debt. That's nobody's talking about.

00:07:23.300 The fact that 60% of our kids are sick with chronic disease. The fact that 57% of Americans

00:07:30.500 can't put their hands on a thousand dollars if they have an emergency, um, on the forever wars

00:07:36.900 that both president Trump and president Biden support. And on this polarization that they both feed into,

00:07:43.860 which is toxic and is more dangerous, I think, to our country than any time since the American civil

00:07:49.620 war. But what I've tried to do, what I said when I declared a year ago is I'm going to stay away from

00:07:56.820 the, you know, these, these little cultural war issues that are designed, are orchestrated to keep

00:08:03.620 us all at each other's throats and to focus instead on the values that keep us together.

00:08:11.380 And the issues that are critical to us, healing our country, both economically, spiritually,

00:08:16.740 culturally, and healing the rift. Oh, I've been pretty disciplined about not commenting on the legal

00:08:22.980 case. I don't. Well, this, this isn't an, an ask for that. This is a question about whether you think

00:08:28.100 it's appropriate. You're running for president for the president of the United States to comment

00:08:32.020 on an individual criminal matter, even one that involves a former president and not for nothing,

00:08:38.180 his chief political rival. I don't think that I would comment if I were president,

00:08:44.980 I don't think I would comment on this particular case. I think this is the weakest of the case

00:08:50.980 against president Trump. Um, and it's, uh, it's not kind of an existential case. I mean,

00:08:58.100 you know, maybe it's appropriate to, to comment if there, if, if the, if the case about the, you know,

00:09:04.980 January 6, uh, election, if that came down, it may be appropriate to make a comment about it. I,

00:09:11.940 if it were me, I would try to focus on making healing comments rather than comments that demonize,

00:09:19.220 you know, the president Trump, who's, you know, likely to be the nominee in the Republican party,

00:09:25.860 or that demonize people who vote for him and support him. I, I would really try to do something

00:09:31.540 that was, that was going to heal our country rather than increase the division.

00:09:36.820 It looks like it's going another way, but we'll see. First, we have to see what this jury does.

00:09:40.980 And as I say, I'd be surprised to be said as anything, if Trump gets acquitted and hung jury,

00:09:45.700 we'll, we'll find out, I guess we'll find out. Um, all right,

00:09:48.260 so I've got to ask you a couple of questions. Last time we spoke, I asked you about your stance

00:09:53.460 on legislation banning puberty blockers, cross sex hormones, and these gender reassignment

00:09:59.620 procedures for minors. And you said that you would support a ban if the minor didn't have parental

00:10:08.020 permission, but you weren't sure about an outright ban, even where there's parental

00:10:12.820 permission. Have you given any more thought to this issue?

00:10:17.620 Yeah, I have. My, my stance now is that I'm against them all together for people under 18. 1.00

00:10:24.260 And a lot of that is, you know, a lot of the,

00:10:26.900 Against the bans or against the procedures?

00:10:29.620 Against the procedure. I would ban them in, uh, kids under 18. Oh, I, you know, and I,

00:10:35.860 I would say this, I think people who have, um, gender confusion that they need to be treated with 1.00

00:10:43.620 compassion, uh, with kindness, with, uh, with utmost respect, and that any kind of bullying or,

00:10:52.020 or, you know, vilification of, of people, um, who are struggling with those issues, uh,

00:10:59.060 uh, should be, you know, is, is itself contemptible. But, um, there are a lot of, there's, you know,

00:11:08.180 there's this recent study in Europe, particularly from the, the UK that, um, that throws water on a

00:11:17.380 lot of the claims that were being made by the pharmaceutical industry and by the proponents of

00:11:22.340 these gender blockers. Yeah. And, um, and I, you know, having looked at that report, the results

00:11:29.540 of that report, um, with some horror, I became convinced that this is, you know, it's something

00:11:38.420 that shouldn't happen. You know, we, we stop kids from driving. We stop, you know, we don't,

00:11:44.500 don't allow children to drink until they're 18. Um, and these decisions are 18 or 25.

00:11:53.860 My kids used to drive up to Montreal and I grew up in, you know, when it was,

00:11:57.780 that's right. Way back when we were little. Yeah. That's right. So, so yeah, the 21. So,

00:12:05.140 and the decision to do this, you know, these puberty blockers is, uh, is consequential and it has

00:12:12.660 lifetime consequences. And a lot of people are remorseful about the result who make those

00:12:18.100 decisions when they're young are later on remorseful about the results. So I, you know,

00:12:24.340 my, my, uh, position is that we shouldn't allow them at all for kids under 18.

00:12:30.500 Well, this makes perfect sense to me much more sense, uh, than before, because you,

00:12:34.980 one of the things people love about you is how you are totally unafraid to call out the medical

00:12:41.300 industrial complex. And that's why you were so vocal during the COVID lockdowns and about the

00:12:46.500 vaccines and how we were being misled. And this to me seems like yet another area in which we could

00:12:51.620 really use your honest voice. You touched on it in your answer there about how that same complex

00:12:57.220 is making money hand over fist off of hurting children off of chopping off the body parts of 14

00:13:06.100 year old kids. It's nuts. And it's completely backwards to what the Hippocratic oath requires 0.98

00:13:13.300 of them. And yet we're seeing for ourselves now in this one example, some of the things you've been

00:13:18.020 saying for years, which is they, they don't care about you. They care about themselves and their bottom

00:13:24.340 line. Yeah. I mean, I would agree with that. I, you know, the last, what I always say to people is you

00:13:32.260 can't convince me of anything by, you know, defaming me or calling me names, but if you show me facts,

00:13:38.900 I'm going to, you know, that I will change my policies or my worldview. If I see facts that are

00:13:45.140 not consistent with it. And, you know, since the last time I've talked to you, I've done more research

00:13:51.860 and I, you know, like that, that report, um, had a, I would say transformative effect on me.

00:13:59.620 And I guess, you know, the revulsion of just reading a couple of pages of it. Um, I think

00:14:06.420 anybody who reads that is going to be, is going to, you know, come to the same conclusion that I did.

00:14:13.060 All right. Um, what do you make of President Biden's changes to Title IX?

00:14:16.340 Um, I don't really understand exactly what the implications are. Why don't you tell me? I,

00:14:25.700 you know, I know that they have, um, that he's giving, uh, uh, more, he's opening it up to people

00:14:36.180 who are transgender. You know, my position on that has been very, very clear. My uncle wrote Title IX,

00:14:44.020 uh, Senator Ted Kennedy. Uh, he wrote it because women, um, women's sports were not being recognized

00:14:53.380 or funded by the colleges and they're, you know, women had been fighting for years and years to get 1.00

00:14:59.060 those rights. And he was very, very proud of that. We were all proud of, of that accomplishment.

00:15:05.540 I have right now, Megan, I have a niece, um, Zoe Hines, who is one of the star softball players

00:15:13.860 on the BC college team. She's on a full scholarship. When she was growing up, Cheryl and I would invite

00:15:21.780 her and her twin brother, who's also an athlete to come skiing every year and to come to us at the

00:15:28.420 Cape in the summer. And she really wanted to do it, but she would never do it because she was devoting

00:15:34.020 her life to trying to get these scholarships so she could go to college. It would be really ironic and

00:15:40.980 tragic in my view, if she could lose her place on that team to a boy who walks off of a, a boy softball

00:15:52.820 field and just says, well, I'm a girl now and, uh, and knocks her out of competitive plays. I don't

00:16:00.260 think that's a good result to the extent that president Biden's changes to title nine would

00:16:07.220 allow a result like that. I would oppose it. I, you know, but I don't really know exactly how those,

00:16:14.500 what those changes are. I'd love to hear from you if you have, if you have better knowledge than I.

00:16:20.020 Well, I mean, this is a big issue for me and I think a lot of my audience, um, he's changed title

00:16:26.420 nine with the, you know, the stroke of his pen with his administrative agency to redefined who's

00:16:31.620 protected by it. It's no longer just girls and women. It's now trans girls and women who, which

00:16:37.700 means men, men are now protected by title nine when title nine was a response to what had already been

00:16:44.580 men's rights in the school setting, right. To create at the time equal sports and equal facilities and that

00:16:49.540 kind of thing. But now because of his changes, men have the right to use women's locker rooms 0.99

00:16:55.940 and women's bathrooms, girls bathrooms, K through college, K through college. And they can't say no. 0.84

00:17:03.060 So if you have some hulking 275 pound man who last week ran as a male runner and he decides he's a girl 0.74

00:17:10.980 now and he wants to run against the female runners, he can do it and he can use their restroom and he can 1.00

00:17:15.300 do it, you know, full man, full, full genitalia, no hormone therapy, no dress, nothing. He can parade 0.99

00:17:21.540 around. You know, I went to college when I was 17, a 17 year old girl's locker room in college or,

00:17:26.100 or beneath that with impunity. And on top of that, at the college level of young man who gets accused,

00:17:33.380 and I know you are related to Michael Skakel. And that's a case I have a lot of interest in because

00:17:39.780 I am a true crime lover. Anyway, he isn't Kennedy who was accused of killing a young girl in a

00:17:47.220 Connecticut neighborhood and anybody. And you had another family member who was accused down in

00:17:52.820 Florida of a sexual sort of me too situation. In any event, my point in raising this is not to

00:17:56.900 bring up the family tragedies, but these young men in college campuses, thanks to his changes,

00:18:01.060 are no longer going to be afforded due process. Now they no longer have the right to counsel,

00:18:04.980 the right to cross examine. They now have the hearings held their, their trials, their kangaroo

00:18:11.060 courts by the same person who investigated them. So the prosecutor winds up being their judge. They

00:18:17.460 have no right to demand evidence. So if this girl's been texting her roommates, uh, it was, 0.99

00:18:22.020 I was totally into it. It was consensual. These guys will never know that all because of President

00:18:26.980 Biden's stroke of the pen. Yeah. Um, um, just, uh, in defense of my cousin, Michael Skakel,

00:18:34.820 I did do a book on that. Yeah. I read it on that. And I, and, uh, I was able to track down

00:18:43.060 the people who actually were responsible for the murder, which was not my cousin. And he was then

00:18:49.940 released from prison, um, because of that investigation. So I just want to say a word,

00:18:55.620 word, word, word about questions linger to be fair. Go ahead. Yeah. Um, uh, so, um,

00:19:06.740 yeah, I mean, I, I, I agree. I agree that, you know, what you're saying, if those are the results,

00:19:13.060 they're not, they're not good results. And I, um, and I'm very, you know, like I said, I'm against,

00:19:19.620 I'm against allowing males, biologically born males to participate in consequential 1.00

00:19:28.660 female sports. Right. But this goes beyond that. We're talking about locker rooms and bathrooms 1.00

00:19:32.900 now in the, in the school setting. Yeah, that probably doesn't make any sense either.

00:19:39.460 Okay. Um, while we're on the topic of women's rights, let's talk about abortion. Um, that's 1.00

00:19:44.740 that's another issue that you've sent some mixed signals on. And I want to ask you about your

00:19:50.420 position. Last August, you were speaking to reporters at the Iowa state fair, and you said

00:19:54.660 you'd sign a federal abortion ban after 15 weeks or 21 weeks. If you were elected and your campaign

00:20:03.300 came out and said, you misunderstood the question and that your position on abortion is that quote,

00:20:08.260 it is always the woman's right to choose. He does not support legislation banning abortion period.

00:20:15.860 Then this month, you sat down with our pal Sage Steele, who has her own podcast. She just launched.

00:20:20.500 And you said that women should have the right to an abortion, even if full term, which is,

00:20:24.980 which lines up with your campaign's statement after your own spoken words at the Iowa state fair

00:20:30.180 saying 15 or 21 week ban. They said, no, when you spoke to stage, you seem to be saying no bands.

00:20:35.460 Woman should have the right to choose even if full term quote, we shouldn't have government involved, 1.00

00:20:40.820 even if it's full term. Then there was outcry and you reverse yourself there saying in a tweet,

00:20:46.340 once the baby's viable outside the womb, it should have rights. It deserves society's

00:20:50.180 protection. So at this point in your campaign, isn't it fair to say you should have a firm position

00:20:54.260 on this and be able to espouse it clearly and uniformly. Um, I suppose I should. I'll tell you what

00:21:01.460 my own evolution was on this. I've been a medical freedom activist for my entire life. So my

00:21:09.140 inclination is that government should stay out of medical procedures and that with abortions,

00:21:15.780 that we should trust women. We should just trust the judgment of a mother. Um, my understanding 1.00

00:21:24.100 was that, well, you know, the, my initial understanding when I gave that, uh, interview

00:21:32.420 in Iowa was that, uh, was the same as Roe v. Wade, which, which protects mothers and the women's choice

00:21:42.100 during the early pregnancy. But then later on in, in pregnancy after viability, that the state has an

00:21:49.300 increasing interest in regulating and protecting that, that unborn child. Um, and that interest would

00:21:57.140 increase up to the day of, you know, of pregnancy of, of, um, of birth. Um, I, you know, I got blowback

00:22:06.260 on that position and particularly from my wife and her sisters are very close advisors to me. And one of

00:22:14.900 the points that they made is that there's no woman who is, who wants to, uh, get pregnant and then

00:22:24.660 carry that pregnancy till for nine months. And then at the last minute, abort it. That just doesn't 0.83

00:22:30.740 happen. And indeed there's a lot of advocacy groups that say that that literally never happens,

00:22:37.060 that the, the choices that are made at the end of pregnancy to abort or choice that are made on,

00:22:44.900 usually on dire medical emergencies, um, that, uh, that involve either the health of the child

00:22:54.340 or the health of the mother. And that's the, to me, it seemed like that's the last place

00:23:01.300 that we want to bring in bureaucrats or government officials to make decisions. That's when you really

00:23:06.340 want to leave the decision with a, to another. When I gave that decision on stage, when I gave that,

00:23:14.420 uh, talked about that position on stage steals program, I got a lot of blowback from people

00:23:22.100 and some data that indicated that actually there are a lot of, not a, not a dramatic number, but in the

00:23:32.260 thousands of births each year that are elective abortions during the final month of, uh, of pregnancy.

00:23:42.820 And in my view, those, those should not happen. And, um, and you know, I've seen the pictures that are

00:23:53.140 very gruesome as I'm sure you have. So I changed my position again, you know, I'll change my position

00:24:01.220 always based upon if I was wrong on the facts, I'm not going to dig in and defend a position where

00:24:10.580 factually, I believe that I would, my initial position was wrong. So that's my, you know,

00:24:15.540 my position now is basically the same position as in Roe v. Wade, that the government does have at the

00:24:22.980 end of pregnancy after viability, that the government does have an interest in protecting the unborn child.

00:24:31.220 So you say, uh, the final month of pregnancy, you saw gruesome photos, uh, about abortions there,

00:24:38.020 which would be 36 weeks to 40 weeks, a pregnancy lasts 40 weeks. You're, are you saying that you

00:24:45.060 would allow abortions all the way up to 36 weeks? Because viability happens a lot earlier, happens 1.00

00:24:51.060 in the low twenties, depends on who you ask, but between the low twenties to 28 weeks.

00:24:54.740 Yeah. What I would, I wouldn't pick a week, Megan. I would say that

00:25:01.380 my policy would be the same as under Roe v. Wade, that the state after viability,

00:25:07.780 the state has an interest in protecting the baby.

00:25:12.660 Okay. So, cause under Roe v. Wade, that's where we did have

00:25:15.940 third term abortions happening in some places because they, they would leave it in various 0.93

00:25:20.420 states up to the woman. And there, while it's true that it's rare for babies to be aborted in

00:25:26.020 the third trimester and that final month, it does happen. That's how we wound up with Kermit

00:25:30.180 Gosnell in Pennsylvania. I mean, there are some brutal butchers out there and there are some

00:25:34.100 negligent women who don't pay attention to their menstrual cycle and who will find themselves 1.00

00:25:38.260 pregnant and who abort a perfectly healthy baby under the auspices of mental health, mental health.

00:25:43.540 Should that be banned?

00:25:47.780 Well, as I said, I would get, I would leave it to the states during the,

00:25:53.460 to make their determination about when viability happens and what kind of regulation. I'm not going

00:25:59.060 to dictate to the states where, you know, exactly what kind of regulation. I think that should,

00:26:05.700 that should be up to the people of that state.

00:26:07.700 That position you just espoused is currently Trump's position that it should be left to the

00:26:14.500 states. It's a state's issue and it's the default constitutional provision post Dobbs,

00:26:20.260 which got rid of Roe versus Wade.

00:26:22.420 I think, I think president, I think president Trump would give no protection to, as I understand

00:26:30.820 his position, to the women's right to choose even early on in pregnancy. And that's not

00:26:37.540 my position.

00:26:37.780 He says it's a state's rights issue. He says it's a state's rights issue.

00:26:40.260 Yeah, it's a state's rights issue. And I would say that the women should have 1.00

00:26:44.260 federal protection up until viability, that it's a woman's right to choose up to that. 1.00

00:26:49.620 So, because president Biden wants to codify Roe and Roe, I mean, you know, Roe is kind of loose,

00:26:57.140 right? Like you could use Roe to say a woman has the right to choose all the way through the ninth 0.99

00:27:01.460 month if her health depends on it is how they use it. And when you think about, okay,

00:27:06.340 the mother's life, that's one thing. Of course, the life that's here and existing always gets 0.82

00:27:10.580 precedence over the unborn life. But what they do is they create health exceptions. And then a

00:27:16.660 mother, an irresponsible one, a person who doesn't care about her unborn fetus says it's my mental 0.92

00:27:22.180 health. And there are some ethical doctors who will perform abortion on a totally viable, healthy

00:27:26.420 baby as late as 38 weeks because of that. Like that doesn't seem to me like it should be allowed.

00:27:33.300 All right. I think we've, we've beaten that one. We got it. Let's talk about immigration 0.99

00:27:37.140 because that's another one that's very important to, I know, right leaning and now even left

00:27:41.700 leaning audiences and voters. More and more, this is the number one issue for Democrats, which is

00:27:47.940 really telling that I've never seen that so high up on the issue ranking for Democrat voters,

00:27:53.140 but it's there now. In October, you went to a rally and admitted that in the past,

00:27:59.060 you believed in an open border and that you felt that if a person was for sealing the border,

00:28:04.420 it meant you were probably a xenophobe or a racist. You admitted that that's how you used

00:28:08.980 to feel. Then you said you went to the border in Arizona and Yuma and you called that border

00:28:13.300 crisis. You saw unsustainable and said a person's not bigoted for wanting a secure border. But then

00:28:19.300 this month at a rally in Austin, you said the border issue is not an existential issue. Use that term

00:28:24.740 in our interview today. It's not an existential issue. So how can you say that when we're looking

00:28:29.700 at over 8 million illegal immigrants coming into this country under Joe Biden's presidency alone?

00:28:35.700 How is that not existential for life? Yeah, I don't think that that was my characterization.

00:28:46.260 And if it was, then, you know, I would not make that characterization. I think what I was doing

00:28:52.820 was talking about a number of cultural issues that generally are, like, you know, I said,

00:28:58.100 very important issues. That's right. Here, I'll play it. We have, we have this down,

00:29:01.700 but I'll play it so the audience knows what you're talking about. It's top 22.

00:29:04.580 We have two presidents who are running today. Two ex-presidents. One is the current president.

00:29:12.020 They both had four years in office. They couldn't be more different than each other.

00:29:17.780 But the issues that they're actually disputing on are a very narrow Overton window. It's what

00:29:24.820 Nicole was saying. It's guns. It's abortion. It's the border. It's trans rights. These issues

00:29:33.060 that are all important, but none of them are existential. None of them are the issues that

00:29:38.660 really matter to you, to me, to our children. The border.

00:29:46.900 Yeah, well, if I, you know, I was talking about another class of issues that are actually

00:29:53.460 existential. I would, I think arguably the border is existential and maybe more than arguably,

00:30:01.140 it just may be, you know, what I saw on the border was, uh, was cataclysmic.

00:30:08.180 And I never thought that people who oppose, and I never thought we should have an open border,

00:30:13.860 by the way, Megan. I thought that, um, I, I opposed for a time, President Trump's wall.

00:30:20.580 And I said, I was wrong about that. We do need a wall. We don't need a wall.

00:30:24.340 2,200 miles all the way from Brownsville, Texas to San Diego. But we do need a wall in the populated 0.65

00:30:32.020 places, um, that where immigrants can, undocumented immigrants can, can disappear very, very quickly.

00:30:40.900 I think it was a huge, not just a mistake, but a catastrophe that President Biden suspended

00:30:48.980 the construction on the wall when he first came into office and then also began tearing down a lot

00:30:55.060 of the infrastructure for making sure that didn't happen and essentially implemented an open border

00:31:02.420 policy. Although the President Biden's administration denies that everybody border knows that to be true.

00:31:09.140 And, but I, you know, I watched 300 immigrants come across the border at between 2 a.m. and 4 a.m.

00:31:16.580 The first time I was there, you know, I'd been back, et cetera. But, um, they were coming from all over

00:31:21.860 the world. They were coming on buses that were owned by the Sinaloa drug cartel, um, that was, uh, uh,

00:31:29.860 bringing them from the airport in Mexicali to, uh, to the border at, in Yuma and, uh, and then allowing

00:31:38.980 them a hundred and 110 or 105 people on each bus. The first two buses that came were West Africans.

00:31:46.500 There were only the whole, that whole evening. I only saw two Latin American, uh, families, one from

00:31:52.580 Colombia, one from Peru. The rest of the immigrants were coming from Asia, from Ukraine,

00:31:59.300 from China, from Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Nepal, Tibet, India, Bangladesh. And they were responding

00:32:07.540 to advertisements that the drug cartels put on TikTok and YouTube, where they offer immigrant, 0.84

00:32:15.380 immigration to the United States for $10,000 to $15,000 per person. And they all knew exactly what

00:32:23.060 was going to happen to them when they crossed the border. The border patrol had been reduced.

00:32:28.260 Instead of defending the border to processing all these new immigrants coming across, 1.00

00:32:33.380 they give them a, uh, fingerprint check to see if they have a criminal record. If they don't have

00:32:38.020 a criminal record, they bring them to the Yuma airport and put them on an airplane to any

00:32:42.340 destination in the United States with no, uh, uh, uh, with, uh, with a, with a, a court date in the asylum

00:32:51.060 court, seven years in the future. And, uh, 9 million, up to 9 million people have come across that way in

00:32:59.460 the past three and a half years. And yeah, I would say that is existential. There's no nation that can

00:33:06.340 survive if it doesn't protect its borders. So, uh, you know, my, my bad, um, okay. Let's talk about

00:33:15.540 an issue that's somewhat obscure, but, um, I, I think our audience is going to remember this.

00:33:20.580 So way back in where we just celebrated our 800th episode, but way back in episode 125 of the show,

00:33:27.540 before we'd even added video, uh, we had on a rancher, uh, she was from Wyoming and she was 1.00

00:33:35.460 objecting at the time to this, this bill, this law that president Biden had pushed through,

00:33:40.740 which sought to give black farmers federal financial assistance based solely on their race,

00:33:48.180 not on their financial condition, not on any suffering they may have had economically

00:33:53.940 based totally on their melanin. And the farmers didn't wind up getting the financial relief because

00:34:00.960 several lawsuits were filed claiming that's race discrimination. That's illegal under the

00:34:04.760 constitution. And so the program was frozen after an injunction. So I want to play you the soundbite of

00:34:09.780 this rancher who we interviewed. Take a listen. It's basically a slap in the face saying, Hey,

00:34:16.140 just because you're white, you can't apply. And you know, it's wrong. And you've been talking about 0.99

00:34:21.900 the USDA's past discrimination. Well, a big part of it is women like me have been discriminated against,

00:34:28.960 um, not me specifically, but women in the past, and they're completely overlooking that aspect of it. 0.97

00:34:36.120 And so being a white woman who's recognized as being socially disadvantaged, it does humiliate me

00:34:42.940 because I should be a part of that group. And then, you know, I look down at my neighbors who are

00:34:49.200 struggling, who are barely getting by, and I don't know if they're going to make it another year. And it's

00:34:54.340 humiliating to them because they don't feel like they deserve it enough either. And, you know, it's just

00:35:00.720 completely wrong. Okay. Now you were recently on a podcast with a black farmer and vowed to give black 1.00

00:35:09.580 farmers this money. Now I've just outlaid for you why it's so controversial. Do you stand by that pledge?

00:35:15.000 Yeah. And I think, um, the woman that you, uh, talk to does not have the whole story. Um, here,

00:35:24.760 here's what happened, Megan. There was a, you know, there's a, uh, there's a, uh, program within the

00:35:31.160 USDA and the Department of Agriculture that is designed to help small farmers across this country,

00:35:37.840 which was the reason that the USDA was launched in the first place. USDA now does the opposite of

00:35:46.560 that. It protects big, you know, agricultural, industrial agriculture production, and basically

00:35:53.460 enables a war against small farmers. But there is a program that still exists within USDA that's

00:36:00.440 designed to make, to give, uh, low interest loans and grants to small farmers. As it turns out, the,

00:36:08.720 the man who was running that program for many men for decades was a man who was intensely racist.

00:36:17.380 And there is a racist history within the group conceded, but I want to get to

00:36:22.620 because I will, I will, I will, I will. I've been letting you finish, but I just want to make sure

00:36:28.500 that we were on point here because under our U S constitution, it's unconstitutional to

00:36:32.860 discriminate on the basis of race. You can't do it to white, just like you can't do it to blacks. 0.75

00:36:37.340 Yeah. And if you let me finish what I'm saying, um, and I agree with you that you can't have, 0.95

00:36:44.660 you know, under the, uh, um, particularly under the Harvard decision that the Supreme court,

00:36:49.340 uh, judge Roberts just issued, there is no, you know, affirmative action or race based affirmative action

00:36:56.320 legal in this country, but that's not what this is. The black farmers association, this individual

00:37:03.680 within USDA simply cut off all grants to black people because of their skin color, but he gave

00:37:12.480 the money to whites and to white farmers. And I think most Americans would agree that that was wrong,

00:37:19.620 that you can't, of course you can't have race based benefits, but you also shouldn't suffer race

00:37:25.500 based deprivations of, of grants to which you're entitled to. And this, that this association,

00:37:33.940 the association of black farmers sued the USDA and they won in court. And the, the court quantified

00:37:43.020 exactly how much money that, that black farmers had been deprived of during that period, since this guy

00:37:52.300 started, uh, running the program. So it was a specific amount of money at a court and a jury

00:38:00.660 had decided on, and they awarded it to the black farmers. It was just a class action suit.

00:38:07.020 Well, because the suit is against the government, Congress has to appropriate that money. And although

00:38:15.420 the money was put in the presidential budget, Congress refused to appropriate it. So that's the

00:38:22.540 issue. Would you, you know, should that money be paid out to people to whom it is owed or should it not

00:38:29.580 be? This is not a race based benefit. Yes. Well, that's what you say. You know, what I would say is

00:38:38.060 we looked, we took a hard look at this bill at the time and you could get it irrespective of your

00:38:43.660 financial condition. Megan Markle could go out there and say, I just bought a rent Oprah. She has a ranch 1.00

00:38:50.780 in California. She could say, I am black and I want the assistance. And she could get it. It was

00:38:55.500 irrespective of financial condition. Yeah. Well, then you're talking about a different

00:39:01.140 instance than I was talking about because the instance I was talking about was specifically

00:39:05.620 related to this case. I know this case that happened 30 years ago. Uh, and typically the

00:39:10.820 remedy would be, you know, you, you sue for damages and then you try to get your damages and then you

00:39:15.240 don't take the money out of the taxpayers while it's 30 years later, who had nothing to do with what

00:39:19.540 happened. Well, except it was litig, it was litigation that they won 30 years ago. And that

00:39:25.620 simply was not, I don't know if it was 30 years ago. I mean, like there, there's a reason we have

00:39:30.460 those caps on what the federal government can pay because it's the taxpayer who winds up having to

00:39:34.180 pay these judgments. I'm not saying I don't have empathy for the black farmers. I'm just saying the

00:39:38.320 program that was shut down was not remedy for a judgment. The government never paid. It was a

00:39:46.260 giveaway to black farmers and ranchers. And when whites wanted to apply, they were told no.

00:39:52.460 And Megan, then you're talking about a different issue than I was talking about when I said that I

00:39:58.360 would make sure that that money was paid. The money I was talking about was the money that was owed to

00:40:05.160 black farmers. And a court had said it was owed to black farmers and there is no cap on federal

00:40:12.620 recoveries. There's a, there was just a refusal because Congress has to approve any appropriation,

00:40:19.880 including an appropriation or lawsuits that the federal government lost engaging in negligent or

00:40:29.660 reckless or, you know, or malicious behavior. Congress still has to appropriate it. Oh, and the person

00:40:37.360 who, who, who bought that lawsuit at the outset, who was a farmer, who was continually denied,

00:40:44.240 um, at grants and loans, that other farmer, he was, he was sitting in the office

00:40:51.120 for sometimes for days at a time. And white farmers were walking past him,

00:40:57.980 picking up their loans and leaving after six or eight minutes.

00:41:01.620 Got it. No, no one's defending that. I understand. No one's defending that.

00:41:05.060 You seem to be defending it.

00:41:09.160 I'm not defending it at all.

00:41:11.060 Okay.

00:41:11.500 I'm objecting to, I'm objecting to race based relief for farmers and ranchers in 2024. 0.87

00:41:19.820 It's illegal period. Okay. I got to take a break.

00:41:22.980 I wasn't defending that. We'll be right back. I know I got it. You're, you're suggesting I am

00:41:28.780 defending no relief to any farmers who have been aggrieved by the U S government that the way you

00:41:33.500 handle that as you file a lawsuit, the way they did, I understand they didn't get the relief they

00:41:37.340 wanted. It's unfortunate, but that doesn't necessarily mean 30 years later, you create an

00:41:42.320 unfair program to remedy these past wrongs to that in which white economically disadvantaged 0.81

00:41:47.500 ranchers get screwed. We've gone through it. We've spent far too much time on it. I've got to

00:41:51.440 take a break. I'll be right back. Stand by on the topic of Trump and Biden and where you fit in

00:41:57.000 is, you know, you got to take votes from both of those guys in order to make this happen.

00:42:02.040 You're starting to get the attention of the Trump campaign, which is probably a good sign for you.

00:42:06.580 And the Trump spokesperson, Steve Chung came out and said, the voter should not be deceived by you,

00:42:12.780 suggesting that this is a quote vanity project for you, for a liberal Kennedy looking to cash in on

00:42:18.960 his family's name. Now it is true, according to you, that you voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and you

00:42:26.360 voted for Hillary Clinton in, in 2016 and you voted for president Biden in 2020. So why shouldn't Republican

00:42:35.520 voters have some doubts about you? Well, you know, I, I, I mean, I would say, um, first of all, that,

00:42:48.620 you know, if you're, um, you know, my, my promise when I announced this was that I was going to

00:43:00.000 try to persuade Americans that they weren't Republicans or Democrats anymore and that they

00:43:07.740 were Americans and that they're Americans first. But what I would say to you is, you know, I'm not 0.78

00:43:14.560 going to characterize, characterize, characterize myself as a conservative or liberal. I'm neither a

00:43:22.460 Democrat or Republican, um, listen to the issues. And if you don't agree with my issues, then you

00:43:30.200 should vote for somebody else the way that I handle the issues. If you, if you have a candidate who

00:43:36.480 agrees with you more, who, who thinks it's okay to be at war in the Ukraine, um, who is okay with the

00:43:45.580 $34 trillion debt, who's okay with having 60% of American kids have chronic disease, um, and who's

00:43:55.940 okay with, uh, the, the, the regulatory agencies in our country being run by the, by the, uh, industries

00:44:06.120 they're supposed to regulate, um, and this, this corrupt merger of state and corporate power that 0.66

00:44:12.000 President Biden, President Trump have presided over, then if you're okay with all that, then you

00:44:17.360 should vote for one of them. If you, if you're tired of those things and want to do something

00:44:21.760 different, if you want to change, if I get elected president, all that's going to change. The government's

00:44:28.280 going to stop lying to you. Why? Because on my first day in office, I'm going to issue an executive

00:44:33.640 order saying that any federal employee who lies to the American public in conjunction with his job

00:44:40.920 will be fired. Um, I'm going to stop the CIA from propagandizing Americans and, and from censoring

00:44:49.300 Americans. I'm going to fire any federal employee who participates with the mainstream media or the 1.00

00:44:55.560 social media in censorship. I'm going to stop the chronic disease epidemic and save this country $4.3

00:45:03.120 trillion. We're now spending on chronic disease. When my uncle was president, 6% of Americans had chronic

00:45:09.320 disease. Today, it's 60% diabetes in this country. When I was a kid, a typical pediatrician would see

00:45:17.080 one diabetes case in his lifetime. Today, one out of every three kids who walks through his office door

00:45:23.840 is either pre-diabetic or diabetic, and it's costing us more than the defense budget to deal with

00:45:30.180 diabetes. President Trump have never mentioned that issue. They're never going to. They're never

00:45:37.160 going to fix the budget deficit. Why? Because they ran it up. President Trump in his four short years

00:45:42.980 ran up $8 trillion in debt, more than all the presidents combined from George Washington to George

00:45:49.100 W. Bush. And President Biden is trying to beat him on that. And neither of them are going to deal

00:45:55.900 with the existential issues that are actually threatening our country. So if you want to label

00:46:01.600 me as a conservative or as a liberal, I don't think it's accurate. I think I'm trying to have a common

00:46:08.620 sense solution to what's happening in this country. I promise to listen to people. It changed my mind

00:46:15.380 when I'm wrong on the facts, to not demonize and marginalize and vilify other Americans, but to try to

00:46:22.540 find the common ground that we all share in common, rather than, you know, focusing on the trials and the

00:46:31.160 culture war issue and the race issues that, you know, Republicans and Democrats are all trying to

00:46:38.140 get us to focus on. And it's like jangling the keys. Even the issues that you focus on today,

00:46:44.020 Megan, are all cultural issues. It's like- These are important. These are important too. I have a huge

00:46:49.460 audience, Bobby, as you know. I have a huge audience. And these- But listen, no, no, no. That's not fair.

00:46:54.760 Don't go there. I know the issues that interest my audience. And there's a reason this is one of the

00:47:00.000 top shows in the nation. So don't disparage what matters to them, okay? The issue about young women

00:47:06.700 and young girls and our rights and due process on college campuses and the right of the unborn

00:47:11.700 and the immigration issue and race baiting by our highest officials, those matter. Those matter.

00:47:19.900 Your issues matter too. I love what you just said. It was the best answer you gave the whole interview.

00:47:23.420 But don't diminish what matters to my audience, because that's also important. I'll give you the

00:47:28.140 last word. I blew my last commercial break for you. I'll give you the last 40 seconds.

00:47:30.740 Yeah. I say, you know, focusing on- There's certain issues that are allowed in the political

00:47:38.460 dialogue. And I didn't mean to disparage your issues. I'm just saying, those are the issues

00:47:44.940 that everybody talks about. And then you look around and you say, but, you know, there's all

00:47:50.780 these other issues like the, the continual wars and nobody's talking about. And those are the ones

00:47:58.160 that I'm trying to focus on. I got to cut you off because the computer's going to,

00:48:00.860 it's going to end us in 10 seconds. Those are important. And we've discussed those on some of

00:48:04.940 your earlier appearances. And I hope there'll be another one. You know, I admire you. Thank you

00:48:08.960 so much for being here. Bobby Kennedy, back tomorrow.

00:48:13.780 Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

00:48:20.780 Thank you.

The Megyn Kelly Show - June 20, 2024

COLLUSION Keeping Him From Debate Stage？｜ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. x Megyn Kelly - The FULL Interview

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript

The Megyn Kelly Show - June 20, 2024

COLLUSION Keeping Him From Debate Stage？ ｜ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. x Megyn Kelly - The FULL Interview

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript

COLLUSION Keeping Him From Debate Stage？｜ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. x Megyn Kelly - The FULL Interview