The Megyn Kelly Show - COVID Lockdown Reality and MSNBC Banned from Rittenhouse Courtroom, with Dr. Scott Atlas, Robert Barnes, and Dan Abrams

00:00:00.600 Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations.

00:00:11.920 Hey, everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. Big show planned for you today.

00:00:16.140 Very excited to be speaking in just a bit with Dr. Scott Atlas. During the height of the pandemic,

00:00:21.040 I think it's safe to say there was no one more maligned in the media than Dr. Atlas. He is here

00:00:26.920 to set the record straight. And we'll also discuss the fate of President Biden's vaccine

00:00:31.920 mandate now that the agency within the government tasked with carrying it out has suspended enforcement

00:00:37.780 of that mandate after losing in court. And I'm going to ask him about this new so-called study

00:00:43.260 being touted by left wing media saying that masks overwhelmingly work. And these are the key to

00:00:50.240 preventing infection with covid. It was published. There's a big article in The Guardian. What does

00:00:56.020 he think of that and the actual science behind it? We'll get into all of that. First, though,

00:01:00.760 day three of jury deliberations underway right now in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, the now 18-year-old

00:01:07.100 young man accused of shooting three men, killing two in August of 2020. In the wake of the Jacob Blake

00:01:15.780 shooting by police a few days earlier, the city of Kenosha, Wisconsin was experiencing significant

00:01:23.600 unrest. And citizens like Kyle took to the streets of Kenosha to try to help others and prevent violence.

00:01:30.400 Chaos ensued. And Kyle found himself on the wrong end of three different men attacking him.

00:01:36.060 His defense is not that he didn't shoot them, but that it was in self-defense, something it is the

00:01:41.080 prosecution's burden to disprove. The jury of seven women and five men have now deliberated for roughly

00:01:46.820 18 hours. Yesterday evening, in the last hour of deliberations, the jury rewatched several videos

00:01:53.700 and evidence, including drone footage of the shooting of Joseph Rosenbaum, the first man shot,

00:01:59.940 and a video involving the second shootings of Anthony Huber and Gage Grosskreutz. I'm now joined by

00:02:06.160 Robert Barnes, who's founding attorney of Barnes Law, and Kyle Rittenhouse's formal civil attorney who's

00:02:11.740 been following the case very closely. Great to have you back, Robert. So as I gather, I mean,

00:02:17.140 it's still kind of surprising to me that now we're in day three and several hours in. No one observing

00:02:23.100 the jury said that they seemed tense. No one said they seemed tense, but they did a report that they

00:02:28.120 looked fatigued at the end of deliberations yesterday. That's not surprising. Kind of parlays

00:02:33.420 with your own theories about this jury. And you revealed to us yesterday, you and your jury

00:02:38.360 consultant, when you were representing Kyle, had taken a very hard look at the likely pool of jurors

00:02:42.620 and the challenges Kyle would be facing. And so those reports of the fatigue on the faces of the

00:02:48.440 jurors and also the ongoing deliberations and the willingness and desire to look at videos over and

00:02:55.820 over and over. What does it all tell you? I mean, I think what you have is a split jury. I think it's

00:03:01.280 probably eight to four, nine to three in favor of acquittal because that was the normal pattern with

00:03:06.720 these kind of facts that were overwhelmingly in Kyle's favor developed in trial. There were several

00:03:11.620 jurors in the jury pool that would just not listen to any evidence no matter what. And it seems like

00:03:17.460 they're saying, well, you know, either side will say, well, let's look at this. Let's look at this

00:03:21.580 to try to persuade the other side of their argument. And it seems that's the way it's going. And people

00:03:26.520 that have been in the courtroom and seen who's there, it looks like there are a couple of people that

00:03:31.280 are the potential holdouts. But the holdout, one of the holdouts may be the four, four woman herself,

00:03:37.000 if the initial information is correct. So what do you mean? Why do you think that?

00:03:42.880 Because there was there was a group of three, three women that fit a certain personality and

00:03:48.960 psychological and profile that that would have been concerning if we had been involved during jury

00:03:55.840 selection because they were the they fit the overlapping demographic of politics and social

00:04:02.580 standing and general other affiliations and associations, trust and confidence in mainstream

00:04:07.860 media, et cetera, that led them to be likely hostile jurors. And they fit that demographically

00:04:14.080 and stylistically. And from what information we have, they've been grouped together ever since jury

00:04:18.680 deliberation started. And it appears it's not certain, but it appears that one of them, an older

00:04:24.160 professor may actually be the four woman on the jury. And so the people that we would have been

00:04:29.800 most concerned about may have a leading role in the jury. And that usually protracts a split jury

00:04:36.100 because normally if you have nine to three, eight to four, the three or four usually fold after a day

00:04:41.360 or two on the up. But if the three of that three or four, you have some really strong leaders,

00:04:46.840 including one who, because they pick the four person before they know what the four person's vote is.

00:04:52.960 And so what you may have is the four person may have one view of the case and the majority of

00:04:58.000 the jurors, a different view of the case that usually prolongs jury deliberations when you have

00:05:03.160 a potential conflict like this within the jury. Yeah, everything's on its head because normally

00:05:07.740 this would be great news for the defendant. He normally would love to have a hung jury and this

00:05:12.440 would be wonderful. The longer it goes on, the more likely they're hung, the more likely he gets

00:05:16.240 another try. I think everyone thought that the case went very well. Most people did for

00:05:21.360 Kyle Rittenhouse. And so maybe not this time around, maybe he doesn't, but I'm sure at this

00:05:25.720 point they'd rather the defense would maybe mistrials looking better and better to them as

00:05:29.660 the days go by. Yeah, I think that Kyle and some people close to Kyle recognize that things could

00:05:35.640 have been done better at trial and things could have been done much better in the jury selection stage

00:05:39.960 and a retrial affords them the opportunity to remedy both of those. So I think that's why I believe

00:05:46.200 Kyle yesterday instructed his defense lawyer to request a mistrial even without prejudice.

00:05:52.180 And I think it's because he recognizes, I don't want to gamble on this jury going AWOL.

00:05:56.260 The information he received from me and other people prior to trial has turned out true.

00:06:00.760 And I think that he would rather go with a new trial with a better jury selection team,

00:06:05.120 maybe a new defense team as well, or at least added to it rather than gamble on whether this

00:06:10.460 jury does something crazy, like issue a split verdict or any kind of conviction, which would

00:06:15.660 seem crazy given the facts of the case. We continue to see unrest outside of the courthouse,

00:06:22.160 more reports that the protesters can be heard quite clearly inside the courthouse. And you pointed

00:06:27.500 out yesterday, it's a small courthouse. This is not some huge federal courthouse like you'd see in

00:06:31.600 New York City. It's small. And indeed, those inside can hear the protesters, no justice, no peace.

00:06:36.780 And you know what that means? Like, it's the first time I ever really thought about it.

00:06:39.420 You know, if so, if if the protesters don't get their version of justice, the city will not

00:06:45.280 remain peaceful. That's basically what they're saying. And that's exactly what you said the jury

00:06:50.560 pool was worried about. These are, you know, it's not a huge town, Kenosha, it's about 100,000 people,

00:06:56.220 Midwestern in its feel and flavor. They're not used to this kind of rabble rousing and,

00:07:01.180 you know, unrest. I will say, you know, Manhattan, it's not that unusual, right? But like in Kenosha,

00:07:06.600 maybe so. And even right now, just getting this from the New York Times, they're reporting that the

00:07:12.620 local schools around the county courthouse are holding online classes for the rest of the week

00:07:17.320 in preparation for the verdict. Five public schools have cited the continuing jury deliberations at

00:07:23.540 the courthouse as the reason for the switch. So now if any of these jurors have kids, now they

00:07:28.580 understand their kids are not going to school for the rest of the week because the entire city is

00:07:33.380 bracing itself for protests in the wake of this verdict. Good gracious. Exactly. And you have to

00:07:39.980 wonder a little bit whether some of these public announcements by the governor, by saying he's going

00:07:44.100 to send in the National Guard, by the mayor and the local Kenosha Democratic politicians, by shutting

00:07:49.200 down the schools near the courthouse, are really trying to send a message to the jury, the same message

00:07:54.540 that the protesters who are within both eyeshot every day and then earshot while they're in the

00:07:59.780 deliberations room of what the jurors are demanding, which is they're demanding convictions of Kyle,

00:08:04.840 or they will commit basically more rioting. And so that's the problem is that shouldn't have

00:08:11.560 happened. The court should have excluded your First Amendment rights and at the right to an impartial

00:08:16.360 jury trial. So they should have excluded those any protesters to be at least a block or more away from

00:08:22.200 the courthouse, not to be right on the courthouse steps, not to be within earshot of the jury during

00:08:27.040 deliberations. And I believe some of these Democratic politicians like the governor and some local

00:08:31.480 politicians in Kenosha are trying to coerce a conviction where they know the facts don't support

00:08:36.020 it for their own political objectives. Okay. So adding to that now law and crime, which is both an

00:08:42.080 online property and a cable news network run by our pal Dan Abrams, they are reporting, if you have

00:08:48.340 reporter Kathy Russin, that a person was following the jurors claiming to work for NBC slash MSNBC.

00:08:55.720 Don't know whether that's in fact true, but the Kenosha County Sheriff's PIO, public information

00:09:00.900 officer says, quote, that incident did take place yesterday. He says yesterday in 1118, that's today,

00:09:07.120 and was handled by the Kenosha Police Department and is still under investigation.

00:09:11.660 So, Robert, you got somebody following the jurors around. You got somebody who videotaped the jurors.

00:09:17.740 You got the jurors hearing the protesters out on the courtroom steps. You've got them being told

00:09:22.940 their kids can't go to school this week because they're waiting for these guys' verdict. Not to

00:09:28.420 mention, if they know about the National Guard, some 500 of them, which is twice what the governor of

00:09:34.360 Wisconsin called in in the height of the riots. First, he called in none. Then it was 125. Then he

00:09:38.820 finally realized he should call in some more. And it was 250 at the heights. Now he's doubled that

00:09:42.060 waiting for this jury's verdict. And what I'm starting to wonder is if this goes the wrong

00:09:46.020 way for Kyle Rittenhouse, whether all of this is amounting to a grounds for appeal.

00:09:50.920 No doubt. It's grounds for mistrial and grounds for neutral grounds for appeal of any ruling that

00:09:56.300 goes against Kyle because of these circumstances. It's becoming more like a circus. And I think the

00:10:01.760 court was naive. And I think that defense counsel was naive about the ability to actually do a fair

00:10:08.460 impartial jury in Kenosha. What we found when we did the polling was 80 percent of Kenosha's were

00:10:14.280 worried about participating in the case because of the impact on potential riots. You cannot get a

00:10:19.760 fair jury in this context. And so I think that they needed to take extraordinary steps, both in the jury

00:10:27.120 selection process and during the jury deliberation process, to mitigate the risk of this occurring.

00:10:32.640 They didn't. And now the jury is experiencing it. They're being photographed. They're being threatened

00:10:36.820 with being doxxed. They're being threatened with adverse outcomes from the protesters on an hourly

00:10:41.180 basis, right within their earshot while they're in the deliberations room. Now they're being followed

00:10:45.760 by fake press that can intimidate them. They have the governor and the local politicians reinforcing that

00:10:51.200 by shutting down schools and sending in National Guard. This is not the way to conduct a criminal trial

00:10:57.020 in America. We certainly hope that it was fake, that they didn't, in fact, work for NBC or MSNBC.

00:11:03.520 They are saying, for the record, that this person does not work for them, that whoever was following

00:11:09.520 the jury does not work for those news organizations. The judge is apparently going to make a statement

00:11:13.140 this morning on it and an arrest has been made. But none of that calms the fears of the jury. The

00:11:19.580 jury would probably be relieved to find out it was a reporter as opposed to somebody posing as a reporter,

00:11:25.300 probably taking pictures of them, trying to get information on them. And let's face it,

00:11:29.640 this isn't exactly like going into witness protection. It's not that hard to figure out

00:11:33.380 who the jurors are and where they live. And they need to be worried. The judge's own children have

00:11:37.900 received death threats now in the wake of this trial. By some, I presume those who want to see

00:11:43.240 Kyle convicted who think this judge is now a white supremacist and so on. So all of this is amping up to

00:11:48.820 a seriously problematic place for Kyle. I mean, what Kyle's entitled to is a fair trial. And as

00:11:58.420 the defense attorney said yesterday, we're talking about a life sentence. They want to take this 18

00:12:02.740 year old and put him in jail forever. So we really do need to bend over backward. And I wonder now,

00:12:08.780 you've had two motions for a mistrial with prejudice, one for a mistrial without prejudice

00:12:13.680 by the defense. And I wonder now, because the judge's rhetoric seems to be amping up about

00:12:19.080 you're on, you know, you're on a thin ice to the prosecution. And I've been telling you that I've got

00:12:25.420 real qualms about the way you're handling the evidence and they're only getting worse. And to

00:12:29.900 me, it almost sounds like he is getting ready to lay the, he's laying the foundation for him to

00:12:34.660 enter a verdict, notwithstanding the jury's verdict. If they find, if they mistrial or if they,

00:12:40.280 if they find him guilty, I feel like this judge might be getting ready to overrule it.

00:12:44.860 Yes. And what I hope he does, he steps in now because he's putting the jury in an untenable

00:12:49.340 position and just issue a mistrial with prejudice. The, the, the reason why we're here is because

00:12:55.480 the prosecutor took a lot of steps to inflame the local court of public opinion, then convinced the

00:13:01.160 court to allow a shortened jury selection, then did a lot of things during trial that were

00:13:05.240 completely impermissible, not only commenting on Kyle's fifth amendment rights, but also commenting on

00:13:09.860 evidence that had been excluded. Also doing things that in my view, constituted subordinating perjury

00:13:14.780 by putting two car source witnesses on there, testifying in a completely incredulous manner.

00:13:19.380 And he had to know their testimony wasn't true. And we actually had live testimony from a witness who

00:13:23.940 said the prosecution tried to suborn perjury and influence his testimony in prior to trial.

00:13:30.480 So you've got extraordinary levels of misconduct. Now you have the fact that they produced one video.

00:13:35.500 It turned out not to be the highest quality version, which was critical for the defense to

00:13:39.600 be able to meaningfully prepare. When you aggregate these things together, there's no way this can be

00:13:43.900 a fair verdict at this point, if it was anything other than acquittals. And, uh, thus I hope the

00:13:49.380 court steps up and realizes the jury's in an untenable position dismisses the case. And I think

00:13:54.740 he should dismiss it with prejudice because this is the product of the prosecution's own bad faith

00:13:59.900 misconduct. That's the thing. It's like, there's never a perfect trial and judges know that they

00:14:03.920 do the best they can. It needs to be fair, but it doesn't need to be perfect. So some mistakes,

00:14:08.960 even some prosecutorial misconduct or defense lawyer misconduct sometimes happens and it doesn't

00:14:13.840 always result in a mistrial. But if there's too much, or if any one incident is too egregious,

00:14:18.580 you could be, you could be in trouble. Now, the thing about the video is at first I was like,

00:14:22.820 I don't know. So they, what happened was the prosecution gave a video that was much grainier to the

00:14:26.760 defense than the version they had, which was much, much clearer. That's not okay. They're supposed

00:14:31.240 to turn it over. And originally I was like, well, do we really, does it really matter? Because the

00:14:35.960 defense saw what was in the video. They knew it was in the video. They argued what was in the video.

00:14:39.840 They had multiple versions of the video. And here on the screen, if you guys want to check it on a

00:14:43.420 YouTube, we're putting it up. Um, you can see quite a difference between the grainy video that was given

00:14:49.040 to the defense and the much clearer video that was that the prosecution kept for itself. The

00:14:55.060 granny's on top and the clear is on bottom and boy, oh boy, it really is like looking through a pair of

00:14:59.580 binoculars and focusing them, you know, top versus bottom. So when this came up in court, it was kind

00:15:05.560 of a fascinating moment, Robert. I mean, it appeared to me, the prosecution just got caught.

00:15:09.320 They got caught red handed by a young defense counsel, uh, named Wisco is a woman who we hadn't

00:15:15.800 heard from yet. And yet in the case is probably younger associate who was in charge of, you know,

00:15:19.300 the exhibits and so on. And so we're going to play it for you. This is Binger, the assistant district

00:15:25.540 attorney, Krause, his co-counsel and the female's voice is Wisco. She's defense. And you'll hear the

00:15:31.780 judge weighing in as well. And the defense counsel Richards, they're back and forth. And what's

00:15:35.580 happening is Binger's trying to show video and he's not happy that it's not very good quality because

00:15:42.560 they were using the defense version. So we're going to play it and we're going to put the words on the

00:15:46.980 screen for folks on YouTube. And then I'm going to walk our listeners through it. So the folks just

00:15:50.620 listening to this can understand, listen.

00:15:53.420 Bacon staff, as we're passing out, this is the same quality as our version.

00:15:58.600 Our version is much, our version is much clearer.

00:16:03.020 We'll have to do that.

00:16:07.700 I have the enhanced one in play as well, but that is exactly what we got from you.

00:16:12.000 I got one of the screen from Dropbox.

00:16:13.480 Mr. Stutz. So what you're showing me now is, it just doesn't show anything.

00:16:18.720 This is the platform.

00:16:19.640 This is the defense.

00:16:20.740 Yes.

00:16:21.940 Mr. Stutz on his way.

00:16:23.260 I don't know that that's right on Dropbox.

00:16:25.180 So if your version is clear, that means that you didn't give us your version.

00:16:29.520 It's just plain weird.

00:16:33.300 That's not how that works.

00:16:34.920 Okay, so just for the audience listening at home, I know it's hard.

00:16:39.680 Binger's complaining that the video they're playing is not, you know, Krause says to him,

00:16:43.720 yeah, our versions are much clearer.

00:16:45.280 Binger, yeah.

00:16:46.300 Natalie Wisco, I got this from you.

00:16:48.820 I have the enhanced one because they enhanced their video, but that's exactly what we got

00:16:54.120 from you.

00:16:54.460 We got that from the Dropbox you sent us.

00:16:56.520 The judge, so what you're showing me, this doesn't show anything.

00:16:58.760 This is provided to the defense.

00:17:01.780 And Richard says, yes.

00:17:03.240 Binger says, somebody else is on their way.

00:17:05.360 Wisco says, that is what we got from the Dropbox.

00:17:07.920 If your version is clear, that means you didn't give us your version.

00:17:11.620 Then Krause suddenly goes, oh, it's just plain weird.

00:17:13.920 Meanwhile, Krause already said our versions are much clearer.

00:17:16.920 And Wisco said, that's not how this works.

00:17:18.720 The prosecution is not admitting that they gave them only the crappy version.

00:17:22.380 They're saying, you know, you must have downloaded it wrong.

00:17:25.060 But this young Wisco is saying, uh-uh, because what you gave to the state crime lab has a different

00:17:30.700 label and different sort of megabytes on it, I think, than what you gave me.

00:17:35.360 So you clearly, it's not my computer.

00:17:37.600 I literally just took exactly what you sent me.

00:17:40.440 And you tell me whether this is a bigger issue than it first appears.

00:17:45.980 It is a substantial issue because the difference in quality was meaningful for evidentiary presentation

00:17:50.740 and preparation.

00:17:51.440 And the defense did not have the opportunity prior to the close of evidence because they

00:17:55.440 only found out this after the close of evidence that there was a higher quality version that

00:17:59.860 could have provided helpful information to them and help provide expert witness testimony

00:18:04.320 that they could have used in a some form of rebuttal or surrebuttal in this context because

00:18:09.180 this evidence only came in at the very latest stage by the prosecution.

00:18:13.260 In fact, the video itself wasn't even discovered until middle of trial.

00:18:16.860 My view is that was grounds for a mistrial right out of the gate to have, you can't have

00:18:21.080 new evidence of this kind that was so relied upon.

00:18:24.440 This was the primary evidence the prosecution relied upon for their provocation instruction.

00:18:29.500 And the provocation instruction was the primary theory of the government's case by the time

00:18:33.600 of closing.

00:18:34.300 And the defense did not even have any aspect of this evidence until mid-trial.

00:18:38.560 And the key aspects, the high quality version, they didn't have until after close of evidence.

00:18:43.620 It also kind of came out today, it hasn't yet been presented in court, but it's been discussed

00:18:48.020 elsewhere, that it appears this is a cropped video.

00:18:51.580 And on top of that, it appears the prosecution lied about what was broadcast on Tucker Carlson.

00:18:56.640 They said what was broadcast on Tucker Carlson did not disclose the source of this video,

00:19:00.900 but actually Tucker did, had the name of the company and the name of the individual that

00:19:04.960 this drone video footage originally came from.

00:19:07.620 The defense had gone to that person and he claimed he didn't have it and that the defense

00:19:11.620 was mistaken.

00:19:12.640 It turns out that was actually accurate all along.

00:19:15.140 The prosecution knew it.

00:19:16.660 When they got it, we really don't fully know.

00:19:18.620 They claim they didn't get it until mid-trial, but they didn't even turn over what was necessary

00:19:22.800 because the digital tracking and tracing of this video evidence and labeling of this video

00:19:27.800 evidence, the metadata, as the defense counsel Wisco noted, showed that what they were given

00:19:33.280 was a different version, not the same version of what the government had.

00:19:37.220 Mm-hmm.

00:19:38.200 This stuff matters.

00:19:39.300 It may sound very technical, but again, as the defense lawyer said, we're talking about

00:19:42.480 a man's life on the line.

00:19:43.580 We're talking about life in prison he's facing.

00:19:45.820 And so you need to be really careful.

00:19:47.980 And as a prosecution, as a prosecutor, this is a stomach drop moment when you realize you

00:19:53.140 haven't given, if it were, if it really was inadvertent that you haven't given the best

00:19:57.680 evidence to the defense, which they have a constitutional right to get their hands on.

00:20:02.640 I want to talk to you about what the jury has to review.

00:20:05.260 They got 45 minutes or so.

00:20:06.800 They had unlimited time.

00:20:08.080 They only took 45 last night.

00:20:09.820 The judge, by the way, said to all the reporters, you will clear this courtroom.

00:20:13.300 The jury's coming in here to watch it on the big screen.

00:20:15.680 Anybody who leaves an electronic device behind can say goodbye to it forever because you know

00:20:20.440 there'd be some sort of person who leaves their iPhone on tape trying to hear the jurors.

00:20:24.780 You know, so the bailiffs checked out the courtroom thoroughly and made sure nothing was in

00:20:28.980 there.

00:20:29.180 And the jury went in and watched several videos.

00:20:31.060 The videos were of the drone videos showing the attacks, a video, FBI footage of the

00:20:37.120 Rosenbaum shooting before and after a slow motion video of, again, some of the incidents.

00:20:42.980 But interesting to me was a soundbite of Gage Grosskreutz running along Rittenhouse.

00:20:48.060 It's eight seconds, seconds long.

00:20:49.780 You can barely understand what they're saying, but there was testimony about it at trial.

00:20:54.340 I want to play it here.

00:20:55.080 Listen.

00:20:56.720 Hey, what are you doing?

00:20:58.400 You shot somebody?

00:20:59.220 I want to get the police.

00:21:01.560 Who's shot?

00:21:03.420 Who's shot?

00:21:05.120 So they wanted to see that.

00:21:07.360 And I'm fascinated by that.

00:21:09.660 Why?

00:21:10.520 Do you have any guess?

00:21:12.180 My guess is that somebody in the jury bought Binger's misrepresentation about what that

00:21:18.400 showed, because the Binger misrepresented that and Grosskreutz misrepresented that at trial

00:21:24.580 as Kyle saying that he was police.

00:21:28.340 And in fact, that's not it.

00:21:29.800 He says, I'm going to the police.

00:21:31.820 And so the it may have been a dispute about what was set.

00:21:35.080 Uh, and so you may have had somebody that's pro conviction saying, well, he misrepresented

00:21:40.120 the fact that he was police, uh, that, you know, this shows a sort of pattern of reckless

00:21:44.220 behavior, et cetera, criminal intent.

00:21:46.480 And somebody else said, no, that's not what he said on that.

00:21:48.840 What he said was he was going to the police, which also makes Grosskreutz's actions even

00:21:53.100 more irrational and more reasonable for Kyle to interpret Grosskreutz as a threat because

00:21:58.700 he had told Grosskreutz, I'm going to the police yet Grosskreutz pulls down a gun and

00:22:03.100 tries to attack him when he's on the ground.

00:22:05.060 So my guess is videotaping this is so-called victim number three, the guy who got his bicep

00:22:10.760 shot.

00:22:11.560 So that's him talking to Kyle Rittenhouse as Kyle's running away from him, running away.

00:22:17.320 Exactly.

00:22:17.960 And it's significant for Kyle's state of mind because he knows he's told this person he's

00:22:22.440 running to the police.

00:22:23.240 Everybody can see he's running to the police.

00:22:25.340 And then later that same individual, uh, so-called victim number three, I consider him attacker

00:22:30.980 number four or five, depending on what order you put him in, uh, is the one that of course,

00:22:35.640 famously at trial pulled the gun, admitted that Kyle didn't shoot when he had his hands

00:22:40.320 up in the air, that Kyle only shot when he pulled his gun and pointed it at Kyle's head.

00:22:44.960 And probably one of the most dramatic moments throughout the entire trial.

00:22:48.320 So my guess is that's the dispute is they're disputing what was said.

00:22:52.180 On that audio and between the jury.

00:22:54.500 And that's why they wanted it replayed.

00:22:56.140 Let's just play it one more time so we can listen for ourselves.

00:22:59.020 It's very short.

00:22:59.940 Listen.

00:23:02.020 Hey, what are you doing?

00:23:03.720 You shot somebody?

00:23:07.060 Who's shot?

00:23:08.920 Who's shot?

00:23:10.420 To me, it sounds, it sounds like he's saying, I want the police.

00:23:13.320 And just on the note of Binger and Grove, uh, Gage Grosskreutz, um, just watch again because

00:23:19.040 people, you know, the, the prosecutor misrepresented his own star witness testimony when he spoke

00:23:25.340 to the jury and the jury seems pretty focused on Gage Grosskreutz.

00:23:29.280 Uh, there was a question about him yesterday.

00:23:31.020 Now they want to see the Grosskreutz video.

00:23:33.100 And I really wonder how that one's going to me.

00:23:35.940 That one was sort of done.

00:23:37.380 It was done when Grosskreutz took the stand.

00:23:39.260 I'm kind of surprised they're still debating him.

00:23:41.900 Um, and so here's just to remind the audience, here's how the prosecutor represented what

00:23:47.640 Grosskreutz said happened and then Gage Grosskreutz on the stand with his own firsthand account.

00:23:55.880 Listen.

00:23:57.600 The gun goes off at no point in this process is Mr. Grosskreutz pointing his gun at the

00:24:04.500 defendant.

00:24:04.780 It wasn't until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him with your gun, now your hands

00:24:11.460 down, pointed at him, that he fired, right?

00:24:15.680 Correct.

00:24:17.020 I mean, it's so clear.

00:24:18.960 It's so clear, Robert, but there are politics inside that jury deliberation room, same as

00:24:24.940 there are outside of it.

00:24:27.040 Exactly.

00:24:27.680 And because I think what probably happened is somebody actually bought Binger's lie and somebody

00:24:32.280 else in the jury said, no, Binger's wrong.

00:24:34.720 What the witness admitted to is what actually took place.

00:24:39.000 And that part of that story was that Grosskreutz had heard Kyle misrepresent himself as police.

00:24:43.920 That was made up by Grosskreutz.

00:24:45.680 That was not what happened.

00:24:47.260 He didn't say, hey, I'm police.

00:24:48.880 I didn't shoot anybody.

00:24:49.980 That's partially what Binger implied in opening as well.

00:24:52.600 That was all false.

00:24:53.620 And it just shows a broader pattern of false statements by the prosecution.

00:24:56.600 But it's sad that you're to the point where you have jurors who don't recognize that after

00:25:01.160 a two week trial.

00:25:02.380 And that's because the strength of bias and prejudice some jurors carried into this case

00:25:06.920 was so strong that they would not even hear or listen to or process evidence that contradicted

00:25:12.260 their beliefs.

00:25:12.820 This is one of the problems of politicizing these cases, you know, from the now president

00:25:20.120 and his vice president, who were candidates when they weighed in on this, you know, and

00:25:25.040 calling Kyle a white supremacist to the governor of Wisconsin and so on.

00:25:30.340 It's been politicized from the get go.

00:25:31.680 And once you slap politics on a case and telegraph to the nation, if you wear a blue shirt, you

00:25:36.380 should be on this side.

00:25:37.140 If you wear a red shirt, you should be on that side.

00:25:38.920 But you're really endangering the entire judicial system.

00:25:43.880 Politics have no place inside of a courtroom.

00:25:46.580 And historically, with some exceptions, but historically, they haven't played a massive

00:25:51.140 role.

00:25:51.520 It's only now I'll give you the last word.

00:25:54.520 No doubt.

00:25:54.880 I mean, the problem with this case was that if jury selection wasn't done in a certain

00:25:58.220 way, there was real risk for Kyle.

00:25:59.920 But that's not Kyle's fault.

00:26:01.360 That's the fault of a corrupt media, corrupt press and a corrupt prosecution that has politicized

00:26:06.100 everything to the point where an innocent kid's life is in the hands of a jury that may be

00:26:10.560 influenced unduly by politics.

00:26:13.060 You know, I just want to give you this update.

00:26:15.900 Reporter for the Kenosha News or Kenosha News, Deneen Smith, saying the judge is back on the

00:26:22.060 stand.

00:26:23.060 Kyle Rittenhouse and all the attorneys are in the courtroom.

00:26:26.020 No word yet on what exactly is happening.

00:26:29.860 All right.

00:26:30.040 If we get breaking news, we're going to get Robert back on.

00:26:32.700 We're going to call you back and ask you what what significance it is.

00:26:37.280 But you've been amazing, Robert.

00:26:38.240 Thank you so much for all of your expertise.

00:26:40.720 Thanks.

00:26:40.980 Glad to be here.

00:26:41.980 Coming up next, we're going to switch over to COVID because there's a lot going on right

00:26:46.080 now.

00:26:46.340 The Biden administration took a major hit thanks to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

00:26:49.920 and had to revoke, basically had to stand down on that OSHA mandatory vaccine order.

00:26:55.780 That is we get a new study claiming masks work and we should all be in them forever.

00:26:59.880 That's my own synopsis.

00:27:01.160 Dr. Scott Atlas is here to talk about all of that, his time in the White House, his new

00:27:06.280 book and more.

00:27:07.280 Don't go away.

00:27:07.800 When I found out my friend got a great deal on a wool coat from Winner's, I started wondering,

00:27:15.060 is every fabulous item I see from Winner's?

00:27:18.160 Like that woman over there with the designer jeans.

00:27:20.860 Are those from Winner's?

00:27:22.420 Ooh, or those beautiful gold earrings?

00:27:24.860 Did she pay full price?

00:27:26.200 Or that leather tote?

00:27:27.200 Or that cashmere sweater?

00:27:28.420 Or those knee-high boots?

00:27:29.860 That dress?

00:27:30.680 That jacket?

00:27:31.360 Those shoes?

00:27:32.380 Is anyone paying full price for anything?

00:27:34.880 Stop wondering.

00:27:36.640 Start winning.

00:27:37.540 Winners.

00:27:38.160 Find fabulous for less.

00:27:39.540 We are joined now by former White House COVID advisor and author of the new book, A Plague

00:27:50.380 Upon Our House, my fight at the Trump White House to stop COVID from destroying America,

00:27:56.740 Dr. Scott Atlas.

00:27:57.900 In the four months that Dr. Atlas served as an advisor to President Trump, he was constantly

00:28:03.440 slammed by the media and even some of his colleagues for having a different scientific

00:28:08.160 perspective on the pandemic than Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx.

00:28:13.120 In his new book, he gives new insight into what really happened behind the scenes during

00:28:16.460 those COVID task force meetings and how COVID changed our country and the world.

00:28:21.800 Welcome, Dr. Atlas.

00:28:22.640 Great to have you here.

00:28:23.320 How are you?

00:28:24.040 Thank you for having me.

00:28:24.920 Great to be here.

00:28:26.000 My pleasure.

00:28:26.560 All right, so I remember, you know, reading you prior to you being selected to go into

00:28:31.700 the White House and listening to you and thinking, oh, you know, that sounds right.

00:28:35.520 That sounds sane.

00:28:36.580 And it doesn't sound like everybody else out there, which is what makes it even more interesting,

00:28:40.140 right?

00:28:40.580 And of course, we were quick to learn in COVID.

00:28:42.940 Well, that's not allowed.

00:28:43.720 That's exactly why you became so controversial and just became the scourge of the mainstream

00:28:48.660 media.

00:28:49.380 And then even your colleagues at Stanford started to turn on you, which was disgusting.

00:28:53.660 I was pleased to see people like Victor Davis Hanson back you and so on.

00:28:58.520 But that's what they do, right?

00:28:59.560 They sort of try to tear you down when you say stuff that they don't like, especially

00:29:02.380 on COVID and masks and restrictions.

00:29:05.280 So let me ask you this.

00:29:07.440 You know, the COVID mania has been bizarre for all of us, you know, that March of 2020 to

00:29:12.280 now, when you look back at your your role, March of 2020 versus the way you are now, who

00:29:19.540 you are now and how people think about you and talk about you, how do you think it's

00:29:23.940 changed and how do you personally feel about it?

00:29:27.260 Well, you know, I was a health care policy scholar for 17 years at Hoover Institution

00:29:33.860 at Stanford and before that, 25 years in academic medicine, both doing research, taking care of

00:29:41.260 patients, reviewing papers at some of the best medical centers in the country and medical

00:29:46.320 science.

00:29:46.920 And then I was working on COVID because the country was off the rails.

00:29:53.440 In March of 2020, there was missing common sense, missing even basic immunology.

00:30:01.500 Science was being denied.

00:30:03.420 And I thought, OK, something is seriously wrong.

00:30:06.140 So in the next six months, I worked very hard doing research, speaking with some of the world's

00:30:11.940 best epidemiologists almost every single day and considering health policy, which means

00:30:18.280 the impact of COVID, but the impact of the policy itself and everything that went along

00:30:23.440 with it on public health.

00:30:24.800 That's the only responsible way to be.

00:30:27.220 In that next six months, I became somewhat visible doing the research and was appalled

00:30:33.320 at the lack of critical thinking that was going on by the task force and the rest, many people

00:30:39.740 on TV.

00:30:40.680 And then I was asked to help the president.

00:30:44.000 And so the president of the United States calls you up as a public health policy expert and

00:30:50.640 says, will you help in the biggest health policy crisis in a century?

00:30:55.260 And of course, the answer is yes.

00:30:57.320 And for anybody who thinks that wasn't my lane, I mean, that's that's sort of silly.

00:31:01.700 In fact, there were no health policy scholars on the task force, none until I walked in at

00:31:09.280 the beginning of August.

00:31:11.020 There were people, three or four doctors that were virology trained, focused on stopping COVID-19

00:31:18.720 at all costs.

00:31:19.680 And I think this is what people understood about things like you.

00:31:23.900 It wasn't just I was saying something different.

00:31:26.180 It was that I was using logic and common sense because everybody knows that you don't, there's

00:31:32.040 nothing appropriate about stopping one infection at all costs because what was happening in those

00:31:38.720 six months, and this continued, unfortunately, throughout my three and a half months there.

00:31:44.520 And then after I left was the policy was stopping COVID-19 with lockdowns.

00:31:50.520 And what that meant was business closures and restrictions, school closures, curfews, restrictions

00:31:56.920 on personal movement, restrictions on seeing your own family, and stopping non-COVID medical

00:32:02.700 care.

00:32:03.740 OK, so what the impact of that was, was the following.

00:32:07.640 The lockdown policies failed to stop the spread of the infection.

00:32:11.100 They failed to stop elderly from dying, the high-risk group, and they destroyed millions

00:32:18.080 of people.

00:32:19.020 So if people think that the policies cost unnecessary lives, the policies that were implemented were

00:32:25.540 the Birx-Fauci lockdowns that was the official policy of the White House coronavirus before,

00:32:32.740 during, and at task force, before, during, and after I left.

00:32:37.580 I did my best to do something different, which was called focus protection, which is logically,

00:32:44.460 OK, we knew who was at risk.

00:32:46.980 The high-risk people were a well-defined population of mainly elderly people and people with comorbidities.

00:32:52.980 In fact, two-thirds of people that died from COVID in the United States, two-thirds had more

00:32:59.640 than six comorbidities.

00:33:02.180 These were not just healthy, marathon-running 75-year-olds, OK?

00:33:06.000 So, you know, this is something, the data, you had to be a critical thinker.

00:33:11.560 The difference between me and the people on the task force was, A, I was a health policy

00:33:17.340 scholar.

00:33:18.220 I understood medicine.

00:33:19.760 The people on the task force were bureaucrats for 40 years in the government, OK?

00:33:25.700 Secondly, I'm a critical thinker.

00:33:27.940 I would come to the meetings, every single meeting, with the scientific papers.

00:33:32.740 I would have a dozen, 20 different scientific papers.

00:33:36.100 I was asked a question, and when I gave my opinion, I would go through the data in the

00:33:41.380 scientific papers.

00:33:42.800 Not a single person other than me brought a scientific paper into a task force meeting.

00:33:48.660 Zero.

00:33:49.740 And so you have to be a critical thinker.

00:33:51.620 You're not supposed to, as a scientist or a medical science sort of evaluator, look at the

00:33:58.040 bottom-line blurb of a paper, as the New York Times reports it.

00:34:03.060 You're supposed to look at the paper, evaluate the way the study is designed.

00:34:07.240 If the study is not designed correctly, the conclusion is not valid, period.

00:34:12.140 You have to be a critical thinker.

00:34:13.480 I'll put it this way.

00:34:14.660 You don't have to be a scientist to be a critical thinker, but you have to be a critical thinker

00:34:18.540 if you want to be a scientist.

00:34:20.180 And this was really missing from the task force.

00:34:23.080 And so as you sort of alluded to here, what happened was I did my best to increase the

00:34:30.460 protection of the people who were high risk.

00:34:33.040 That means increased testing in nursing homes, increased testing of the nursing home staff

00:34:38.180 who are bringing in the cases, increased testing in senior centers, more resources, more protective

00:34:45.320 equipment in high-risk places, sending more tests to historically black colleges and universities

00:34:51.120 because the faculty were higher risk.

00:34:53.080 But in addition, opening schools safely, opening low-risk settings where children, where we're

00:35:01.420 proven to have healthy children have extremely low risk from COVID, period.

00:35:05.780 That was known back in the spring of 2020.

00:35:07.880 That has not changed.

00:35:09.360 Healthy children are not significant spreaders of COVID.

00:35:13.080 That was proven back in the spring of 2020 from all over the world.

00:35:17.260 But you have to know the data and be able to evaluate it.

00:35:19.780 And so the idea of closing schools was extraordinarily harmful.

00:35:26.140 And I can go through some of that because I could talk all day about the data.

00:35:29.620 But the fact is that when you close schools, and America was unique, the Western European

00:35:35.660 peer nations opened the schools in the fall of 2020.

00:35:38.920 Only the United States kept the schools closed, with almost no exception, with a couple of states

00:35:44.380 that kept them open.

00:35:45.800 And so when we look at the harms of the policy, okay, I wanted to increase the protection of the

00:35:53.720 elderly and the high risk.

00:35:55.220 And I wanted to remove the destruction of the lockdowns and the school closures, which were

00:36:03.140 enormous.

00:36:03.880 And the problem here is that the lockdowns were a luxury of the rich, okay?

00:36:11.140 People like, okay, let's face it, you and me, and the people that work in government, the

00:36:16.960 people in journalism, what you would call the university elites, okay?

00:36:22.460 They don't have a problem, except for inconvenience, to use Zoom calls and to do their meetings from

00:36:28.720 home, and their children are underfoot.

00:36:31.360 But, okay, but the people who are low-income people, they are destroyed.

00:36:36.600 The people that work in the restaurant, in the bus station, that clean the toilets in

00:36:42.860 the hospitals or whatever, when they are told in the restaurants, in stores, when they lose

00:36:49.200 their jobs, they're destroyed.

00:36:51.480 And so not only were they economically devastated, but that translates into life years lost.

00:36:57.400 That was known, I wrote about it with some economists back in May, there was a false dichotomy

00:37:03.280 set up by people who said, if you're against the lockdowns, then you must be, you're dangerous,

00:37:11.160 and you're sort of letting things go without any, you know, mitigation.

00:37:16.780 And that's absolutely false, because what was happening was the lockdowns were killing people,

00:37:21.920 the lockdowns destroyed people, and there are enormous harms to children from closing the

00:37:27.040 schools.

00:37:27.380 This was a heinous abuse of, and a social class sort of abuse, of taking these lower-income

00:37:34.940 families who weren't able to work from home.

00:37:39.980 And not only that, some of them were the essential workers that were forced to be exposed to COVID,

00:37:44.940 okay?

00:37:45.900 I mean, if you think about this, this was really an incredible lack of a moral compass

00:37:52.560 in the public health leadership, and a complete abrogation of what a public health leader is

00:37:58.800 supposed to do.

00:37:59.440 Because when you use a policy, you don't just sit there and try to stop one disease.

00:38:05.080 What you do is you look at the impact of all health, you look at the impact on everyone.

00:38:10.340 And so what we see, if I can go on, with closing schools, it wasn't just that the school closures

00:38:17.280 were a failure because online education's not adequate, and people were failing, and they

00:38:22.680 weren't signing up.

00:38:23.560 And this is data documented all over.

00:38:25.840 But I was for opening schools because what happens was, just in the spring closures of 2020,

00:38:32.840 300,000 cases of child abuse went unreported in the United States because schools are the

00:38:38.180 number one agency.

00:38:39.100 Okay, we had one out of four college students thinking of killing themselves in June of 2020

00:38:46.260 because of the isolation.

00:38:48.280 Children don't just learn book learning.

00:38:51.420 That's where we pick up visual problems, hearing problems.

00:38:55.360 They learn socialization.

00:38:56.780 Every parent knows this.

00:38:59.500 And so when you're doing this, you're not only losing the education and losing those things,

00:39:04.680 you're creating, and we know the data now, created a massive psychological harm on our children.

00:39:11.840 We had tripling three times the visits of teenagers to doctors for self-harm because of the isolation.

00:39:18.060 That means putting cigarettes out on their skin, cutting their wrists.

00:39:21.900 We have an explosion of mental illness in teenagers in the United States.

00:39:28.060 Drug abuse, overdoses, a skyrocketing of suicide in teenage girls specifically.

00:39:35.020 And this is all from the isolation.

00:39:37.460 We have 52.

00:39:38.180 Any sane policy when it comes to public health looks at all of public health and not just

00:39:45.300 whether we've gotten a particular virus.

00:39:48.160 I'm going to squeeze in a quick ad here, but I do want to echo your point about the children

00:39:51.920 because to me it seems like the children have had the lowest risk of being hospitalized

00:39:57.640 or dying from COVID, the lowest risk of transmitting COVID to another, and have paid the highest price

00:40:04.720 in fighting this virus and continue to, continue to.

00:40:09.140 We've moved on with leaving all these kids masked all day long, and all we really want from them

00:40:16.580 as a matter of public health is for them to give over their arm so we can stick an experimental

00:40:20.760 vaccine in there.

00:40:22.100 And really, it's in the name of sort of public health as well.

00:40:25.420 It's not really to protect them, which we'll get to in a minute.

00:40:28.280 Dr. Ellis, so happy that you're here.

00:40:29.680 Stand by.

00:40:31.120 Remember, folks, I want you to know you can catch The Megyn Kelly Show live on Sirius XM

00:40:35.280 Triumph Channel 111 every weekday at noon east, and the full video show and clips by

00:40:40.640 subscribing to our YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Megyn Kelly.

00:40:45.480 Would love if you went there today.

00:40:46.800 You could see the comparison of that high resolution video versus the low resolution, which the defense

00:40:52.120 says is all it was provided for.

00:40:53.960 By the way, getting an update from the Rittenhouse trial right now, which is fascinating about

00:40:58.000 MSNBC.

00:40:59.920 By the way, if you prefer an audio podcast, go ahead and subscribe and download on Apple,

00:41:03.720 Spotify, Pandora, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.

00:41:06.700 And there you'll find all of our archives, more than 200 shows, including our COVID shows with

00:41:11.040 Josh Rogan, my very lively discussion with Scott Gottlieb, and much, much more.

00:41:15.720 When I found out my friend got a great deal on a wool coat from Winners, I started wondering,

00:41:23.020 is every fabulous item I see from Winners?

00:41:25.940 Like that woman over there with the designer jeans.

00:41:28.840 Are those from Winners?

00:41:30.380 Ooh, or those beautiful gold earrings?

00:41:32.820 Did she pay full price?

00:41:34.180 Or that leather tote?

00:41:35.160 Or that cashmere sweater?

00:41:36.360 Or those knee-high boots?

00:41:37.820 That dress?

00:41:38.640 That jacket?

00:41:39.320 Those shoes?

00:41:40.000 Is anyone paying full price for anything?

00:41:43.420 Stop wondering.

00:41:44.600 Start winning.

00:41:45.520 Winners.

00:41:46.140 Find fabulous for less.

00:41:51.660 It's funny because you talk about the cost to the lower socioeconomic groups in the country

00:41:56.600 and having these schools closed and being forced to go remote, and that's obviously true.

00:42:01.780 I'll tell you, in our case, we were in New York City in the fall of 2020, and we were in private

00:42:08.540 school.

00:42:08.820 And while the public schools were closed the whole year, except for a couple of days, the

00:42:16.140 private schools were opening, except for ours, and we didn't understand why.

00:42:20.240 And we got a letter about adding an abundance of caution, and we got to make sure everybody's

00:42:24.440 safe.

00:42:25.100 And then the parents were mad and did some digging.

00:42:28.800 And do you know why?

00:42:29.560 They weren't going to, at least this is what we found out, the parents who'd been in the

00:42:34.420 Hamptons for the whole quarantine and the summer wanted to stay there.

00:42:39.300 These rich, sort of hedge fund people didn't have to go into their jobs on Wall Street,

00:42:44.460 and they were loving their time in the Hamptons as opposed to their Manhattan apartments.

00:42:47.920 So they wanted remote schooling.

00:42:49.620 You want to talk about privilege, right?

00:42:51.160 And the haves and the have-nots.

00:42:52.520 And to me, it was so absurd.

00:42:55.380 I don't join in a lot of letter-writing campaigns, especially as a journalist.

00:42:59.100 It's not my thing.

00:43:00.120 But I joined in that one, and the school did open.

00:43:02.760 And they understood, like, this is crazy talk.

00:43:05.420 But yeah, it's the poor.

00:43:06.800 It's the poor who've really taken the brunt of all these lockdowns, which, you know, now

00:43:12.140 we seem to be moving past.

00:43:13.680 And even in places like D.C., now the mayor down there under political pressure has said

00:43:17.640 she's going to lift the mask mandate, the indoor mask mandate, which is pretty, has been

00:43:22.200 very restrictive, except in schools.

00:43:26.440 I mean, the kids are never getting on masks, Doc.

00:43:28.820 And I wonder what it's going to take.

00:43:31.280 What will make them do it?

00:43:32.760 Yeah, you know, I want to point out something before I answer that, which is that the bizarre

00:43:40.240 part of the whole thing here is that the United States and many, many places have doubled down

00:43:45.560 on things like mask mandates and all these requirements in the lowest risk environments.

00:43:52.180 And now I'm talking about two specific examples.

00:43:54.920 One are the schools, which you have pointed out.

00:43:57.160 And this has been known all over the world for a year and a half now, that schools are

00:44:02.920 a very low risk environment, that children don't have a, healthy children have extremely

00:44:07.780 low risk.

00:44:08.740 And also teachers do not have a high risk in schools.

00:44:13.040 We know this.

00:44:13.720 The studies have been done in Europe that showed that there's not a higher risk.

00:44:17.460 In fact, children have less chance of transmitting to adults.

00:44:21.460 Teachers are a young profession.

00:44:23.560 And if there are high risk teachers, they have the option of either using extreme mitigation

00:44:28.820 themselves, now getting a vaccine or staying home and teaching a distance.

00:44:32.700 But there's no reason to have all these restrictions inside schools.

00:44:36.000 The second low risk environment are airplanes.

00:44:39.280 OK, when you look at the data on airplanes, there's never been outbreaks on airplanes.

00:44:43.600 This is before vaccines were available.

00:44:46.340 Because of they have this incredible air purification system, there's been no outbreaks on airplanes.

00:44:52.500 And in fact, it's uniquely low risk.

00:44:55.860 The studies at the FAA did showed it.

00:44:58.860 Yet we are doubling down.

00:45:02.100 If you've ever, you've probably flown, as I have.

00:45:05.140 And depending on the airline, there's an obsession and constant announcements.

00:45:10.440 And the sort of very oppressive sort of atmosphere when there is no high risk on airplanes.

00:45:16.780 If they see you chewing your food, you know, it used to be you could have your mask off when

00:45:22.620 you were eating or drinking on the plane.

00:45:24.740 Now you're allowed to take a bite or a sip.

00:45:27.940 But when swallowing or chewing, the mask is supposed to go back up.

00:45:32.040 And I can attest to having been a target of a flight attendant who's like, pull it up when

00:45:37.620 she sees chewing as opposed to active biting.

00:45:39.900 And you really, really want to get into a fight, right?

00:45:44.680 It's like, this is absurd.

00:45:46.980 How did I not spread it during the height of the pandemic when I had the mask off while

00:45:50.440 chewing?

00:45:50.900 But now I'm a death threat while I take two chews of my pudding or whatever it is, my

00:45:56.220 pretzels.

00:45:57.380 So but you can't because you don't want to wind up in YouTube.

00:46:00.020 But yeah, it makes no sense.

00:46:01.720 It's virtue signaling.

00:46:02.820 And Pete Buttigieg is now in charge of our airplane experience.

00:46:06.280 Well, you know, and I also also I'll answer the question, what will it take to end things?

00:46:11.700 And I think we're in a we're in a time now where I think we've learned people have to

00:46:16.660 take responsibility for being critical thinkers themselves.

00:46:19.900 Trust in experts has rightfully been lost.

00:46:23.180 The expert people, the public health agencies, the faces you see on TV, they've been erratic

00:46:29.780 in what they've said.

00:46:30.600 They've denied science.

00:46:32.020 They've denied decades, even centuries of basic immunology about recovery from infection,

00:46:37.980 et cetera.

00:46:38.480 So now we have to say, OK, who do we trust?

00:46:40.960 Well, first, you should trust people who are consistent, who know the data and cite the

00:46:46.080 data.

00:46:46.660 But also you have to be a critical thinker.

00:46:48.980 You know, you're an adult.

00:46:50.140 This is a year and a half now, almost two years into this thing.

00:46:53.620 And I think at some point you have to take charge of your life and figure out what's appropriate

00:46:59.160 for you.

00:46:59.800 I do want to make one point, which is that, you know, one of the differences I said between

00:47:04.200 me and the task force members.

00:47:05.980 First, I had a different background.

00:47:07.660 I'm in health policy.

00:47:08.700 I'm in medical science.

00:47:09.660 They're government bureaucrats.

00:47:11.820 Secondly, my approach was using the data, the world's research studies and really going

00:47:18.500 through in a critical way and citing that data.

00:47:20.940 But third, you know, these people really, as opposed to me, their policies were doing

00:47:28.440 these restrictions and lockdowns.

00:47:30.860 My policies were opening schools and considering all health of people and their policies were

00:47:39.600 implemented.

00:47:40.540 Let me stand you by.

00:47:41.680 We'll squeeze in a quick ad.

00:47:42.940 We'll pick it up there.

00:47:43.800 Mask mandates and this new study and your thoughts on it.

00:47:47.320 Just a bit.

00:47:47.780 We'll be right back.

00:48:17.780 Winners find fabulous for less.

00:48:23.800 Wow.

00:48:24.260 We have some breaking news for you on Kyle Rittenhouse.

00:48:26.740 No, there's no verdict.

00:48:27.540 Not yet.

00:48:28.480 But want to bring you up to speed on what's happened.

00:48:30.700 Guess what?

00:48:31.180 It actually was someone working for NBC who followed MSNBC, who followed the jury.

00:48:37.740 This is more from, let's see, the courthouse, the jury.

00:48:42.140 OK, first of all, the jury in this case is transported from a location where they meet in

00:48:45.940 the morning to the courthouse in a bus with the windows blocked.

00:48:49.640 Right.

00:48:50.360 They don't want them to see demonstrators and they don't want anyone to see them.

00:48:54.820 Yesterday, someone claiming to be a producer for MSNBC was following the bus closely, ran

00:49:01.280 a red light.

00:49:02.580 Police pulled him over.

00:49:04.060 He said he was instructed to follow the jury bus and he was ticketed for a traffic violation,

00:49:09.200 saying it is under investigation.

00:49:12.580 Now we learn again, this is from Long Crimes, Kathy Roussan.

00:49:17.420 He was instructed.

00:49:19.160 He did indeed work as a freelancer for MSNBC.

00:49:24.100 His name was James J.

00:49:25.840 Morrison.

00:49:26.400 The court announced it.

00:49:27.800 So it's public already working as a freelancer for MSNBC.

00:49:31.980 And he says his supervisor and the person who told him to do this was apparently a woman

00:49:36.360 named Irene Bayan in New York.

00:49:40.640 Irene Bayan is a booking producer at NBC and she's let's see.

00:49:47.600 Yeah.

00:49:47.780 OK, so the judge had heard this entire report.

00:49:51.440 He understands what law enforcement did.

00:49:53.100 He confirmed that it was the guy who did work for MSNBC.

00:49:56.920 And this is what the judge just said.

00:49:59.640 Listen, I have instructed that.

00:50:01.720 No one from MSNBC news will be permitted in this building for the duration of this trial.

00:50:08.760 This is a very serious matter.

00:50:11.020 And I don't know what the ultimate truth of it is, but absolutely it would go without

00:50:17.120 much thinking that someone who is following the jury bus, that is a very extremely serious matter.

00:50:28.740 This is a disgusting, egregious, ethical lapse by this young reporter.

00:50:37.700 I don't know if he's young.

00:50:39.260 I shouldn't presume.

00:50:40.380 And by the booking producer who told him to do this, there are things to do as a booker

00:50:44.300 and there are ethical lines, you know, you may not cross.

00:50:47.140 And following the jurors who are already being threatened, who, you know, have been videotaped

00:50:54.800 to the consternation of the judge who made a big deal out of that, who are already dealing

00:51:00.340 with protesters outside of the courthouse and threats in a city that's already on the

00:51:05.660 edge and a powder keg is disgustingly irresponsible and someone ought to get fired.

00:51:10.740 I mean, this is a fireable offense.

00:51:12.960 I don't know anything about this freelancer, but whoever gave the order, if it's the booking

00:51:16.060 producer, what have you.

00:51:17.540 And I predict there will be consequences because this is absolutely egregious.

00:51:21.940 One thing I can tell you about NBC is they do have a very strict ethics department that

00:51:27.440 reviews one's reporting before it goes to the air and cable.

00:51:30.620 Well, we didn't have that at NBC.

00:51:32.920 It was pretty strict.

00:51:33.720 And I'm sure once they get wind of this, they're going to be displeased.

00:51:37.400 But this is completely wrong.

00:51:38.800 That judge was 100 percent right to ban MSNBC, all of them from entering the courthouse as

00:51:44.040 a result, though they still get all their reporting from NBC anyway.

00:51:47.920 And it's just yet another ethical lapse by an organization that is riddled with them day

00:51:52.420 after day.

00:51:53.980 We'll continue to follow it as we get more breaking news from the courthouse.

00:51:57.380 Want to get back to our guest, Dr.

00:51:59.180 Scott Atlas, who's got a new book out called A Plague Upon Our House.

00:52:04.760 Man, it really has been my fight at the Trump White House to stop COVID from destroying America.

00:52:10.160 All right.

00:52:10.340 So, Dr.

00:52:10.700 Atlas, let's before we get to this new mask study, I want to just talk about because you're

00:52:14.720 pretty open in your book about your conflicts with, in particular, Dr.

00:52:19.460 Birx, who was on the White House coronavirus task force.

00:52:24.520 And you and she butted heads because she was much more team Fauci and she didn't really

00:52:29.260 like, I guess, what you were saying and wanted she wanted more restrictions.

00:52:33.540 She wanted more testing.

00:52:34.720 She wanted all of it.

00:52:35.460 And can you tell us?

00:52:36.540 I mean, I could just read it, but I would love for you to just tell us a story about what

00:52:39.160 happened in the Oval Office when Trump, who didn't want tons of testing of healthy

00:52:44.360 people, put the question directly to you about whether we needed more testing and directly

00:52:48.760 to her about whether we needed more testing of people who didn't have symptoms.

00:52:54.320 Yeah.

00:52:54.800 Well, OK, to set the scene, Dr.

00:52:57.440 Birx was the official head of the medical side of the task force.

00:53:00.820 She was the task force coordinator for six months before I even walked in Washington.

00:53:06.100 For the entire time I was there, she wrote all of the official advice on policy to the

00:53:12.500 governors.

00:53:12.840 She visited dozens of states as the official White House policy.

00:53:18.040 I was an advisor to the president.

00:53:19.760 I sat in on task force meetings from middle of August to middle of October.

00:53:24.500 That's what I did for the task force.

00:53:26.700 But in any event, we had a meeting briefly in the Oval Office, as I outlined in the book.

00:53:33.400 And there was a policy that was written about by the CDC about testing.

00:53:41.900 And that policy was to increase testing and getting doctors or people who are knowledgeable

00:53:48.120 involved in testing decisions.

00:53:50.000 This was a document that was generated by Dr.

00:53:53.940 Girard, the head of the testing on the task force, and Dr.

00:53:57.760 Redfield, the head of the CDC.

00:54:00.140 And that discussion about testing, my view was we should increase the testing where it really

00:54:07.540 counted because there was a massive testing apparatus that the White House finally generated.

00:54:13.320 And they should use that to save lives.

00:54:15.520 That's the point of testing.

00:54:16.960 So I said, the cases are coming into the nursing homes by the staff.

00:54:20.540 We should be increasing the testing frequency.

00:54:22.980 They were recommending one time a week.

00:54:24.880 I said, well, why not three times a week?

00:54:26.460 Every single day.

00:54:27.380 That's where the cases are coming in and people are dying.

00:54:29.960 And I wanted more testing in these high-risk environments.

00:54:34.100 And so we went through and the president asked if Dr.

00:54:37.460 Birx agreed with the policy.

00:54:40.520 And I had heard the discussions in the task force from her.

00:54:44.460 And she said, well, yes, I do agree.

00:54:47.860 OK.

00:54:48.240 And so then and she sort of nervously looked over toward me.

00:54:51.420 We're sitting in front of the president.

00:54:52.560 And the president said, is that true?

00:54:54.880 And he probably asked that because he saw that she was uncomfortable saying, yes, she agrees.

00:54:59.060 And I said, well, no, it's not true.

00:55:01.500 I said, Dr. Birx wants to be testing people who are asymptomatic and confining them if they're

00:55:09.460 testing positive or confining them waiting for days, which is what was happening at the time,

00:55:16.160 even if they were just potentially exposed.

00:55:20.000 And that would stop healthy people from being out in society who were asymptomatic and even

00:55:26.280 negative on tests because there was a five-day wait at that time or something like that.

00:55:32.000 And so I said, so she doesn't agree.

00:55:33.460 And I went through what she didn't, what she was really not telling the truth to the president.

00:55:37.660 OK, because if the president of the United States asked me a question, as I did the entire time I

00:55:42.440 was there and as I am doing right now, I'm telling the truth.

00:55:45.700 And I had no reason to lie about what she was thinking.

00:55:48.660 So, you know, she sort of was very upset.

00:55:52.800 The president didn't really respond at the end of the meeting.

00:55:56.040 We walked out and she started screaming at me as I outlined in the book.

00:55:59.900 Don't ever do that, especially in the Oval, yelling at me in the periphery of the Oval

00:56:06.160 office after the president had left.

00:56:08.500 OK, so, you know, what's the illustration there?

00:56:10.240 Well, the illustration number one is that I'm going to tell the truth, period.

00:56:14.160 I wasn't there to make friends.

00:56:15.460 I'm there to stop people from dying.

00:56:18.040 And if the president of the United States asked me a question, I'm telling the truth.

00:56:21.740 I'm not like one of these people, government bureaucrats who are interested or have a secondary

00:56:26.480 motive, their own image to the president, their own standing in their agency.

00:56:32.380 I don't care about that.

00:56:33.360 I didn't need the job.

00:56:34.640 I didn't go there for a second, secondary reason.

00:56:37.920 I went there because the country was off the rails and these people were doing the wrong

00:56:41.640 policies that were failing to stop people from dying.

00:56:44.720 You know, the second part is, you know, when I went to to even interview or not interview,

00:56:51.300 they asked me to come and talk to the president before I decided that I would help.

00:56:57.200 And he said I had a conversation with Jared Kushner and this is in the book.

00:57:01.580 And I said to Jared when he said, OK, well, we want you to help at the end of this first

00:57:06.220 day.

00:57:06.380 And I said, OK, well, I'd like to help.

00:57:08.440 But I just want to tell you something very clearly.

00:57:10.640 No matter what anybody tells me to say, if I don't agree with it, I'm not going to say

00:57:14.820 it no matter who it is.

00:57:16.160 I said, I'm not going to sign on to some group statement or task force statement or any other

00:57:21.000 statement if I don't fully agree with it.

00:57:23.700 And I'm not going to do or change my opinion no matter who tells me to.

00:57:28.320 I said, that's what you're getting with me.

00:57:29.980 And I because, you know, that's my only reason for going to help.

00:57:35.780 Well, it's amazing because most people, if Dr.

00:57:39.020 Birx lied and said she supported their position, would have just taken the yeah, OK, yeah, I

00:57:46.180 guess I persuaded her.

00:57:47.640 But you knew it wasn't true.

00:57:49.080 No.

00:57:49.940 Well, because, you know, the point is, listen, Megan, this is a very important thing that was

00:57:55.160 happening here.

00:57:56.300 And I'm not interested in being sort of I'll use the word political.

00:58:00.800 When I'm talking to the president, he asked me a question.

00:58:03.640 You know, there is no other way to answer other than completely truthfully.

00:58:07.380 I want to point something out.

00:58:08.640 When I said to Jared Kushner, this is what you're getting with me.

00:58:13.600 He he, to his credit, turned to me and said, that's exactly why we want you.

00:58:18.260 And that's actually I was shocked, actually, pleasantly so.

00:58:24.180 And then if I want to finish that conversation, I said, OK, you know, then I'll then I'll help.

00:58:30.040 And he then said to me, I just want to say something to you.

00:58:33.460 If this becomes public, they're going to destroy you, which is another thing that shocked me

00:58:38.540 because I never thought that anyone, you know, really cared about that.

00:58:42.660 And so my reaction to that was, well, you know, maybe I'll help from home first.

00:58:48.900 And I actually flew back home to California for a few days because I don't want to be destroyed.

00:58:55.280 But I had the help.

00:58:57.460 I mean, the president asked you to help in the biggest health care crisis in the century.

00:59:00.960 You're a health care policy expert.

00:59:03.460 The answer is yes, period.

00:59:05.840 And that's what I did.

00:59:07.400 But then they did.

00:59:08.180 They didn't destroy you, but they sure tried.

00:59:10.260 And trust me, I have been there, so I understand what it's like.

00:59:14.000 But we did tee up not to make you relive it, but just so the audience gets a flavor of how

00:59:18.500 the media portrayed you, who you are truly a national health care policy expert.

00:59:24.320 You've been that for years.

00:59:25.520 In addition to all of your other wonderful credentials.

00:59:28.120 I mean, we could go on and on about your your resume.

00:59:30.460 I guess I'll just take off a few just so in case people don't know.

00:59:34.260 Got your Bachelor of Science from University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana.

00:59:37.560 I got your MD from University of Chicago.

00:59:39.260 Your chief resident at Northwestern Fellowship at the University of Pennsylvania, expert

00:59:44.280 in neuroradiology, leading clinician and researcher in novel applications of advanced MRI and disorders

00:59:49.640 of the brain and the spine and so on.

00:59:51.200 But even Victor, in his piece talking about you, said this is not only one of the world's

00:59:56.320 world's top neuroradiologists, but you are the national expert on public health policy,

01:00:00.960 especially in the cost benefit analysis of government programs, which is what's directly

01:00:07.380 relevant right in the covid situation.

01:00:09.380 It's not all about virology or immunology.

01:00:11.640 It's also about cost benefit analysis.

01:00:13.520 And what's the best decision for overall public health?

01:00:15.720 Keeping in mind some of the things you mentioned about, you know, teenage suicide and anxiety and

01:00:19.980 depression and abuse and blah, blah, blah.

01:00:21.760 So the media not not cognizant or not willing to acknowledge all the rest of that decided

01:00:28.120 to portray you as basically some sort of a destructive nutcase.

01:00:31.720 And here's a here's a little flavor of their best hits.

01:00:35.400 Dr. Atlas.

01:00:37.520 OK, a guy with no pandemic experience.

01:00:40.900 He literally would know more if he stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

01:00:45.220 For Scott Atlas, his main covid advisor, his covid Rasputin, if you will.

01:00:49.680 Atlas, of course, is a neuroradiologist with no expertise in epidemiology, but increasingly

01:00:55.960 has the president's ear when it comes to the coronavirus.

01:00:58.800 But now he's got this new advisor, not an expert, not somebody who is steeped in the

01:01:04.500 science here, according to his own colleagues.

01:01:06.620 OK, first off, Dr. Atlas clearly wouldn't know science if it kicked him in the Atlas.

01:01:13.120 Oh, my Lord.

01:01:14.080 I'm honestly what a dope.

01:01:15.560 So many stupid people on television.

01:01:17.980 It's kind of upsetting.

01:01:18.720 But whatever it is, what it is.

01:01:20.520 So how is that for you experiencing that, you know, sitting at home or in the White House?

01:01:24.140 Well, you know, I mean, I have to say I was naive.

01:01:28.720 I'm very naive.

01:01:29.620 I'm not a politician.

01:01:31.680 I've not been in government at all.

01:01:34.620 I actually thought that, you know, truth mattered, that facts mattered.

01:01:39.420 And my role was to provide the best possible advice in a big crisis.

01:01:45.760 Now, you have to realize that what was implemented was what what I call the Birx Fauci lockdowns.

01:01:52.160 The Birx Fauci lockdowns were implemented for the entire year, including during my time there.

01:01:57.400 Nothing was really changed except in a few states.

01:02:00.100 I only actually visited one state.

01:02:02.680 So if you think that the policies failed, you better ask doctors Birx and Fauci and the people

01:02:08.220 that impose those man, those mandated behaviors and lockdowns, because that's what was implemented,

01:02:14.860 period.

01:02:15.160 Now, what happened to me?

01:02:17.780 OK, I mean, the problem with what happened to me.

01:02:20.340 OK, I have to say, I thought I was sort of a tough guy and I'm probably not as tough as

01:02:26.660 I thought, but I have a supportive family and I knew I was right.

01:02:31.160 I mean, what with the irony of the whole thing is that every single thing I said was correct.

01:02:35.800 So I knew that.

01:02:37.300 But I also had something much bigger going on, which is I had millions of people, it turned

01:02:42.440 out, that were depending on me.

01:02:44.020 I had thousands of emails a week from all over the country, from mothers and fathers and seniors

01:02:50.460 and students and priests praying for me to keep going.

01:02:55.900 And scientists from all over the country saying, Scott, you're right.

01:03:00.120 Please keep going.

01:03:01.260 We cannot we're afraid to step forward.

01:03:04.280 So it's very important that good people have the courage to step forward and do what's right.

01:03:11.860 This is service to the country.

01:03:13.600 It has absolutely nothing to do with the political party.

01:03:17.020 And yet, unfortunately, right now, the media is super destructive, as you know.

01:03:21.860 Uh, there, you know, the American media, particularly 90 plus percent of stories about COVID were

01:03:27.960 negative, yet only half the stories in English speaking media outside the U.S. were negative.

01:03:33.960 90 plus percent of stories on the schools opening were negative in the U.S., only half in other

01:03:40.780 countries, English speaking major media.

01:03:42.640 And even when the cases were going down in the U.S., the stories about cases going up outnumbered

01:03:50.960 those stories five to one.

01:03:52.740 This is data from Brown and Dartmouth University.

01:03:56.540 So the English speaking media outside the U.S. was sane.

01:04:01.160 American media was, in my view, very destructive and harmful.

01:04:05.260 And that also happened by the university faculty here, who are extraordinarily politicized and

01:04:13.200 really blind to the facts.

01:04:14.820 And this is very dangerous for these people, teach our youth, and these people have a lot

01:04:19.520 of influence.

01:04:20.360 And now we're in the situation where science has become politicized.

01:04:23.500 So it's not really about me, but we need to really get a handle on this.

01:04:27.560 And I and others who have a lot of care about the country, without science and trust in science,

01:04:36.960 what do we have?

01:04:37.980 I mean, this is very frightening.

01:04:39.700 I mean, we really need to get a handle on this and get this politics out of this fact

01:04:46.160 finding, because if we suppress the freedom of ideas and exchange of ideas freely, we will

01:04:53.840 never arrive at the truths and solutions we need to solve other crises.

01:04:58.100 Yeah, that's right.

01:04:58.860 We're seeing it.

01:04:59.780 We're living it at this moment.

01:05:02.000 So much more to go over with Dr.

01:05:03.480 Scott Atlas.

01:05:04.100 He's staying with us.

01:05:05.400 Going to squeeze in a quick break here.

01:05:07.060 But we're also going to be joined in just a bit by Dan Abrams, not only in Sirius XM,

01:05:11.960 a host, but also a guy who used to be in the primetime of MSNBC.

01:05:16.940 In fact, he used to run MSNBC way back in the day.

01:05:20.160 He's going to join us on MSNBC now getting banned from the Rittenhouse trial courtroom

01:05:24.300 after following the jurors.

01:05:50.160 That jacket, those shoes, is anyone paying full price for anything?

01:05:55.000 Stop wondering, start winning.

01:05:57.180 Winners find fabulous for less.

01:06:01.620 Joined now by Dr.

01:06:02.920 Scott Atlas.

01:06:03.740 And we're talking all things COVID from his time in the White House working for President

01:06:07.920 Trump on the COVID task force to what's happening in the news today.

01:06:11.720 And that brings me to this study doc.

01:06:14.000 Apparently, it was done by researchers across the pond at the University of Edinburgh and

01:06:20.200 Monash University, published in the British Medical Journal.

01:06:23.880 And the headline with The Guardian, the very first line of the piece, is that, quote, mask

01:06:28.320 wearing is the single most effective public health measure at tackling COVID, reducing incidence

01:06:35.760 by 53 percent.

01:06:37.900 The first global study of its kind shows they they love, love, love masks, the single most

01:06:46.700 effective public health measure.

01:06:48.540 What do you make of it?

01:06:50.120 OK, so, I mean, first of all, I think we have to take a step back here and realize that a

01:06:54.940 year and nine months into this pandemic, after people were insisting that masks work, there's

01:07:01.380 still this desperate attempt to find some study that shows that masks work.

01:07:08.200 I'm going to review.

01:07:09.100 To me, you know, at some point, the earth is round and the burden is not on me or anybody

01:07:15.680 else to convince people who believe the earth is flat, that the earth is round.

01:07:19.500 But I will go through a few things.

01:07:21.540 I have a study saying that the earth is flat.

01:07:24.360 Yes.

01:07:24.680 In May 2020, the CDC published a review of all the papers, including something like 10

01:07:32.240 randomized controlled trials, which are the best types of studies, on masks in influenza.

01:07:37.300 Influenza is relevant because influenza is the same size, roughly, as this virus.

01:07:42.980 And there was no significant impact of widespread mask usage on either the transmission or the

01:07:49.920 receiving end of influenza infection.

01:07:52.660 That was May 2020 CDC paper.

01:07:55.620 This was repeated, of course, in analysis by University of Oxford, the World Health Organization

01:08:00.960 and others.

01:08:02.360 We saw the evidence during this pandemic all over the world with mask mandates and mask

01:08:07.420 usage that there was an explosion of cases through populations wearing masks and including

01:08:13.060 in the United States where 80 to 90 percent of people were wearing masks.

01:08:17.720 We see the evidence on three studies after that.

01:08:21.140 The Denmark randomized controlled study published in November 2020, 6,000 people, a randomized

01:08:27.240 population of groups that were wearing masks and people that were not wearing masks.

01:08:32.440 There was no statistically significant difference between the people getting infections with

01:08:37.940 masks versus without masks.

01:08:39.840 That's the best study on mask wearing for protecting yourself.

01:08:43.340 The University of Louisville published a study finally published in May 2021 that analyzed all

01:08:51.120 the mask mandates in the United States and all the mask usage in the United States.

01:08:57.180 And their conclusions were mask mandates do not reduce the spread of the virus and mask usage

01:09:03.380 does not reduce the spread of the virus for healthy and for widespread mask usage.

01:09:08.220 That's the University of Louisville.

01:09:09.640 Then we see a study that was highlighted in the late newspapers on Bangladesh villages.

01:09:17.060 And what they did was they had certain villages were instructed to wear masks and other villages

01:09:21.360 were not.

01:09:22.300 And they didn't test the people who were wearing masks or not.

01:09:24.940 But what they found was that there was an 11 percent reduction in people and only people

01:09:31.540 over 50 of symptomatic COVID.

01:09:35.100 It has nothing to do with who was wearing the mask.

01:09:36.800 So in villages instructed to wear masks, the older people suppose a minority of older people

01:09:43.940 got a reduction in symptomatic COVID.

01:09:47.320 What that outlines, by the way, cloth masks in that study did not work at all statistically.

01:09:52.840 So what that study showed was that there was possibly a small effect on symptomatic COVID,

01:09:58.680 although only in people of a certain age.

01:10:00.580 For instance, if you were 40 to 50, there was no reduction.

01:10:03.260 30 to 40, no reduction.

01:10:04.460 Just people 50 to 60, which to me, any critical thinker should say, hey, maybe those older

01:10:09.680 people did other things, too, to avoid getting infected.

01:10:12.640 But be that as it may, there may be a small reduction from that study.

01:10:17.440 But the other studies showed there was none.

01:10:20.440 And so, you know, I don't know why masks are somehow the obsession.

01:10:24.600 Now, we've had a lot of obsessions in COVID.

01:10:27.700 We had an obsession with children.

01:10:29.200 That was completely false.

01:10:30.380 We had an obsession that everyone's at risk, including, and that there's massive asymptomatic

01:10:35.160 spread.

01:10:35.600 That is false.

01:10:36.940 Now, we had an obsession with masks.

01:10:39.020 We had an obsession with a six-foot rule.

01:10:42.940 The studies came out saying that six feet really wasn't any different from three feet.

01:10:47.980 We know many countries in the world have been using three feet, by the way, the whole time.

01:10:51.020 Yeah, it was made up.

01:10:51.700 They admitted that.

01:10:52.540 Yeah.

01:10:52.980 Well, I mean, there's not good evidence that six feet works.

01:10:56.840 And so, yet, we cling to that, even though the studies disproved it.

01:11:00.260 The studies disproved that COVID was transmitted on countertops and tables.

01:11:04.600 Yet, we go onto an airplane, and my God, people are grasping for the alcohol swabs for the

01:11:09.780 trays.

01:11:09.980 They hand it to you when you get on the plane.

01:11:11.840 When you get on the plane, they hand you the little swab.

01:11:13.620 It's like, okay.

01:11:14.940 Right.

01:11:15.360 And so, okay, let people wear...

01:11:16.880 I'm not for forbidding masks.

01:11:19.180 I'm for letting people wear masks, just like I'm for letting people wear copper bracelets

01:11:23.920 for arthritis.

01:11:24.940 I'm not saying you can't do that.

01:11:26.740 But I prefer to use scientific data and critical thinking.

01:11:30.980 And by the way, 97% of people, roughly, who are over 65 in the United States, have been

01:11:37.000 vaccinated.

01:11:38.500 Okay, that's a high risk.

01:11:39.240 I want to ask you about that, because the numbers are in.

01:11:41.500 I'll get to that one second.

01:11:42.380 I just want to put a period on the end of this discussion.

01:11:43.940 Dr. Vinay Prasad, he's been on the show.

01:11:45.660 He's brilliant.

01:11:46.460 Very fair on COVID.

01:11:48.280 And he said, first of all, he points out that even the authors of this study that say,

01:11:53.840 you know, the masks are great, 53% reduction, say, and I quote, risk of bias across the six

01:11:59.780 studies that they chose to look at ranged from moderate to serious or critical.

01:12:06.380 He said, I never thought I'd be wishing for just mild bias again.

01:12:09.680 So basically, they took studies in which they admit those who were self-reporting may have

01:12:14.860 considered themselves seriously biased in favor of masks and said and they conclude masks work.

01:12:21.260 And he went on to say, I think it's fairly clear that cloth masking has at best weak,

01:12:26.740 inconclusive data and no clear evidence of efficacy.

01:12:29.240 That's what mostly everybody wears.

01:12:30.580 At the same time, he says, given the massive number of mask devotees, I have no doubt that

01:12:35.500 non-randomized studies will find 53, 80 or even 90% efficacy.

01:12:40.620 With enough analyses, we may even get to 95%, but that won't make any of them true.

01:12:46.680 Yet, I will point out that Guardian article touting this.

01:12:50.180 Guess what, Dr. Atlas?

01:12:51.260 It doesn't have a little Twitter warning on it.

01:12:53.920 It doesn't have the little thing saying, go to the CDC's website for the best information.

01:12:58.980 Oh, no.

01:12:59.620 As long as you're touting masks or vaccines or mandates, you're good with everyone in big tech.

01:13:04.840 It's only when you push back against that that you get banned.

01:13:07.640 All right, let's talk vaccines because I did look at the latest numbers.

01:13:11.080 It's now 80% of Americans age 12 and older have received at least one dose.

01:13:15.720 98.5% of adults 65 and older have gotten at least one dose, and 85.8% are fully vaccinated.

01:13:26.720 Even as you go a little younger, you've got 85.9% of people between the ages of 50 and 64

01:13:33.680 who have gotten at least one shot, 78% ages 40 to 49, and even the young, young folks, 12

01:13:39.820 to 16 or 12 to 15, I think it is, 57% were vaccinated.

01:13:44.700 They're never going to, and now they're moving the goalposts saying you're not considered

01:13:48.320 fully vaccinated anymore, lest you get the booster shots.

01:13:51.660 You've got to get the, Boris Johnson over in the UK just came out and said, that's what

01:13:54.820 fully vaccinated means now.

01:13:56.120 You've got to have a booster.

01:13:57.320 It's never going to end.

01:13:58.260 The goalposts are never going to be in front of us or achievable.

01:14:03.760 Yeah.

01:14:04.300 And so here's the several points that I think are important.

01:14:07.300 Number one, if you're high risk for dying from COVID, you know, the vaccines, to my reading

01:14:15.600 of the data, prevent people from dying, and that's very good and very important.

01:14:21.340 Vaccines after three to six months do not stop you from getting infection.

01:14:27.260 In fact, people that, okay, so that's the second point.

01:14:30.980 And the third point is, therefore, after three to six months, vaccines do not stop you from

01:14:35.740 preventing, I mean, from spreading the infection.

01:14:39.720 And so it's a personal protection, particularly for people who have high risk, because you're

01:14:45.620 not going to die, almost certainly, if you get the vaccine.

01:14:49.680 And it's not a public health really effective thing, because you're not prevented from spreading

01:14:58.140 the infection after a few months.

01:15:00.080 This is proven.

01:15:01.340 This is proven in the Qatar study, where 98% of the population is vaccinated.

01:15:05.420 This is proven in the UK.

01:15:06.620 This is proven in the Israel data.

01:15:08.500 And frankly, by the way, I like to look at the other countries' data, because I'm at the

01:15:12.500 point now where I'm a little bit worried about even looking at our own data, which is very

01:15:16.480 frightening.

01:15:17.900 You know, so that's the other thing about the immunity that has been really ignored with

01:15:22.240 these vaccine mandates in the United States in particular, and not in the other countries,

01:15:26.600 is natural immunity of people who have had the infection.

01:15:30.080 Okay, we know that almost half the country has had the infection.

01:15:33.760 That means half the country has not only protection immunologically, but better protection than those

01:15:40.340 who've been vaccinated but not infected.

01:15:42.760 That's proven.

01:15:44.060 People who have been vaccinated but not infected have 27-fold increased cases of symptomatic COVID

01:15:51.060 than people who've been infected and recovered.

01:15:54.280 Okay, this is proven.

01:15:55.780 This is the Israel data.

01:15:56.700 You have to look at the studies.

01:15:58.580 And this is not just Israel.

01:15:59.900 It's other countries also show the durable and long-term impact of protection from getting

01:16:06.340 the infection.

01:16:06.960 So to say to somebody who has better protection because they've recovered from COVID that you

01:16:11.740 must get vaccinated, you know, that doesn't make sense.

01:16:15.240 The second part, I want to mention something about the boosters.

01:16:17.900 There's no significant safety data on a third dose.

01:16:20.660 Okay, this is an experimental vaccine to begin with.

01:16:23.940 We've never had an mRNA vaccine.

01:16:26.120 We don't have long-term safety data on the vaccine.

01:16:29.420 I'm not against the vaccine for people who need it.

01:16:32.880 You know, it's a cost-benefit, you know, benefit-risk kind of calculation.

01:16:38.540 But we don't have long-term safety data because after the emergency use was granted, they broke

01:16:44.820 the blinding.

01:16:46.200 In other words, all the placebo people, almost all of them got the vaccine.

01:16:49.900 So we don't have a placebo control.

01:16:52.080 We don't have a long-term, what's called a phase three trial.

01:16:55.360 But more than that, the boosters, there's no safety data to speak of on a third dose.

01:17:00.620 There's a few thousand people in Israel after one month who, you know, there's a safety

01:17:06.360 evaluation.

01:17:06.980 It takes normally five to 10 years for a vaccine to have enough safety data to be formally approved

01:17:13.860 historically.

01:17:14.400 So this is, you know, to say that it's safe to get a booster, I'm not sure.

01:17:19.900 I mean, I'm not saying don't get it.

01:17:21.660 What I'm saying is that use your brain.

01:17:24.540 You're an adult.

01:17:25.600 It's your decision with your doctor.

01:17:27.660 If you have a doctor who is also a critical thinker, which is in short supply, even among

01:17:31.580 doctors.

01:17:32.720 But, you know, you sort of have to figure this out.

01:17:35.540 What is your risk from COVID?

01:17:37.660 What is your risk tolerance?

01:17:40.880 What is your benefit from getting the vaccine?

01:17:43.860 It's not the same for everybody.

01:17:45.740 This is a disease that is exceptionally risky for high risk, older people, particularly with

01:17:52.020 a lot of comorbidities or kids with serious underlying diseases like leukemia.

01:17:58.020 OK, but, you know, typical people that are healthy, you do not have a high risk from COVID,

01:18:04.520 period.

01:18:04.980 That's not even arguable.

01:18:06.320 Can I just add that Austria now is putting its unvaccinated into lockdowns, into mandatory

01:18:12.880 lockdowns that are being enforced by the police?

01:18:16.060 And the one exception that they'll make is if you had COVID, the Austria, which is doing

01:18:22.220 something crazy that we've never done, mandatory lockdowns of the unvaccinated enforced with

01:18:27.280 police recognizes natural immunity.

01:18:30.720 But we don't.

01:18:32.360 And I mean, it's not the reason that President Biden's vaccine mandate got shot down by the

01:18:37.840 Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

01:18:38.880 And now OSHA has admitted it's got to it's got to hold.

01:18:42.300 It has to put a hold on its on its mandate.

01:18:44.900 It's not going to be upheld in the courts.

01:18:47.540 It's not going to be upheld by the Supreme Court.

01:18:49.700 As other appellate courts weigh in on it, it's going to go down time and time again.

01:18:53.520 There are multiple lawsuits working their ways up to the court.

01:18:55.660 They don't have the authority to do it.

01:18:57.440 And by the way, the vaccine mandate.

01:18:59.220 I mean, the vaccine numbers are already so good.

01:19:01.260 So but here's a practical question, right?

01:19:03.740 If you have this much natural immunity in the country, we know we have tons of natural

01:19:07.140 immunity and you have these kinds of vaccine numbers, then why do we still see cases rising?

01:19:13.540 The New York Times puts that on the front cover every day.

01:19:15.660 I don't know why we're still looking at the cases, but the case is rising and the deaths

01:19:21.020 numbers are down 14 percent over the last two weeks.

01:19:24.100 Cases are up 14 percent over the two weeks, but deaths are down.

01:19:26.500 So why do we keep seeing those numbers rise at all?

01:19:32.620 OK, so your question sort of has multiple parts, I think.

01:19:37.180 Number one, cases, again, the vaccines do not protect in a durable way, a long term way,

01:19:45.080 more than three to six months against getting infected.

01:19:48.300 I mean, in Qatar, after five months, only 20 percent effective in preventing an infection.

01:19:54.180 OK, 20 percent.

01:19:55.640 That's it.

01:19:56.280 That's not much protection.

01:19:57.600 So just because you're vaccinated does not mean you will you will not get the infection

01:20:02.740 after a few months.

01:20:03.980 That's point number one.

01:20:05.100 Point number two, we don't know who got the vaccine versus who actually had immunity.

01:20:09.500 Many, many people took the vaccine also already had immunity.

01:20:13.140 So it's not true that you add up 50 percent of people had the infection and then you add

01:20:17.860 the people who are vaccinated.

01:20:20.140 There's an overlap there, obviously.

01:20:21.660 Sure.

01:20:22.500 And then third is that we've never done such testing for a virus.

01:20:28.240 If you look at the influenza data, by the way, most people that die from influenza, at

01:20:35.480 least half the people who die already were vaccinated.

01:20:38.480 OK, so people don't don't realize that they didn't look at the data.

01:20:41.460 Seventy five percent of people with influenza were asymptomatic.

01:20:44.600 If we tested everybody for all of these viruses, we would see a lot of them.

01:20:49.080 And that's why, you know, the focus on number of cases, you have to realize the focus should

01:20:56.520 be on number of serious illnesses, number of people.

01:20:58.920 If you're if you have a fever for a day or if you're asymptomatic and positive for SARS

01:21:04.600 2 testing, that doesn't mean you're you're really sick.

01:21:07.760 And this is actually very important when you quantify the things like hospitalizations and

01:21:13.660 deaths from covid, which we didn't talk about hospitalizations from covid.

01:21:17.840 There's a couple of studies in the literature that show once from Stanford in the past and

01:21:21.540 the Children's Hospital, half of people who were called covid hospitalizations were had

01:21:27.320 zero symptoms of covid.

01:21:28.900 They had a positive virus test, but they ended up being hospitalized because they were sick with

01:21:33.240 something else.

01:21:34.240 Yet in the final telling, they were called covid.

01:21:36.660 OK, the same thing is happening with deaths.

01:21:38.800 The CDC itself said a third of people under 18 who supposedly died from covid.

01:21:45.220 These are children.

01:21:46.420 A third of them were not even feasible, was their word, to have had covid on chart review.

01:21:53.920 So people that were categorized as covid, whether for hospitalizations or deaths, a lot of them,

01:21:59.340 we don't know how many, but a lot of them were only SARS 2 positive.

01:22:03.700 It doesn't mean they were sick.

01:22:04.940 COVID is an illness.

01:22:06.880 Testing a person and having a positive virus test is not an illness.

01:22:11.820 OK, that's an infection.

01:22:13.580 There's something very important about this, which is in my book.

01:22:16.540 I talked about this.

01:22:17.880 I distributed the data on PCR testing because PCR testing, the way it's done, 97 percent of

01:22:26.100 positive PCR tests, if you're doing it the way the FDA recommended during this whole pandemic

01:22:32.320 of 2020, 97 percent were positive, but they were not contagious people.

01:22:37.420 But they were being confined and curfewed and contact tracing and all this stuff because

01:22:42.760 97 percent of positive PCR tests with a cycle threshold of 35 or more, 97 percent were showing

01:22:49.860 dead virus, not contagious people.

01:22:52.360 So this kind of information, I was the only one that brought this up in the task force.

01:22:57.020 I have to, in fact, distributed the data.

01:22:59.400 Nobody on the task force talked about this.

01:23:01.600 There were refractory to the facts that were very important when you're designing the policies

01:23:07.100 about what to do.

01:23:08.420 So the PCR testing data was very flawed and misleading, and it's still being used all over the world

01:23:14.780 incorrectly in many countries.

01:23:17.220 The data on hospitalizations from COVID is misleading, and the deaths from COVID is misleading.

01:23:23.760 It's not that I'm minimizing the disease.

01:23:26.180 Many people died.

01:23:27.560 It's a tragedy who died.

01:23:29.360 But the problem is the policies that were implemented throughout the pandemic didn't protect people

01:23:35.400 from dying and instead locked down the low-risk people.

01:23:39.020 And those policies were recommended by Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci.

01:23:43.400 Yeah.

01:23:44.420 And they were implemented.

01:23:45.380 And at least one of those is still calling the shots.

01:23:49.140 I mean, Fauci's, he's still, he's been, you know, he's a demigod now, and we have a president

01:23:55.240 in the White House that will do whatever he says.

01:23:57.740 And that's the frustration.

01:23:59.320 I really do wonder whether it's just going to take the political threat of another Virginia,

01:24:04.780 but this time a 50 statewide type Virginia in November of 2022, to make them stop, just

01:24:12.440 stop with the mandatory masks and the mandatory vaccines and firing people who have natural

01:24:17.120 immunity, who don't want to get the vaccine.

01:24:19.320 It's, I just don't, I personally believe nothing other than their political fortunes being at

01:24:26.080 risk are going to make them see reason.

01:24:28.980 I'll give you the last word.

01:24:29.820 Yeah, well, I just want to say we're in an era now, I'll repeat this, where individuals

01:24:35.600 have to start being the critical thinkers.

01:24:38.000 You have to trust yourself.

01:24:39.460 You have to look through the studies if you want, but you also have to find people who

01:24:43.880 are speaking credibly, consistently, and showing the facts in a very concise way.

01:24:49.340 And you will arrive at the best decisions for yourself and your family.

01:24:52.840 Yeah, we only wish it weren't quite that hard.

01:24:55.260 All right.

01:24:55.440 Want to tell everybody again, you got to check out Dr. Atlas's book.

01:24:59.560 Please support him.

01:25:00.560 He deserves it.

01:25:01.560 It's called A Plague Upon Our House.

01:25:04.420 My fight at the Trump White House to stop COVID from destroying America.

01:25:08.460 Doctor, great to have you.

01:25:09.400 Hope you can come back soon.

01:25:11.380 Thanks for having me.

01:25:12.100 Appreciate it.

01:25:13.100 And want to tell our audience that we are also continuing to follow the breaking news at

01:25:16.800 the Kyle Rittenhouse murder trial just a short time ago, the judge banned MSNBC reporters

01:25:22.540 from the courthouse.

01:25:23.440 The ban came after a producer, a freelance producer for MSNBC was caught following the

01:25:31.560 jury bus.

01:25:32.980 Here's the judge explaining what happened.

01:25:35.340 Listen.

01:25:37.560 A person who identified himself as James G. Morrison and who claimed that he was a producer with

01:25:44.980 NBC News, employed for MSNBC under the supervision of someone named Irene Bayon in New York.

01:25:56.840 The police, when they stopped him because he was following at a distance of about a block

01:26:03.180 and went through a red light and stated that he had been instructed by Ms. Bayon in New York

01:26:10.860 to follow the jury bus, I have instructed that no one from MSNBC News will be permitted in this

01:26:19.300 building for the duration of this trial.

01:26:22.980 Wow.

01:26:24.220 Turning me now by phone, my pal and ABC News chief legal analyst, not to mention host of the Dan

01:26:31.260 Abrams show on Sirius XM and the founder of Long Crime Network, which actually is reporting some of

01:26:36.080 this today, Dan Abrams.

01:26:37.800 Dan, you heard it right from the judge that they caught this guy, James J. Morrison, freelance

01:26:43.960 producer for MSNBC, that he was instructed by this booker, Irene Bayon in New York to follow the jury.

01:26:53.500 And he was caught.

01:26:55.280 Your thoughts on it?

01:26:57.120 Yeah, I mean, look, it's still sort of unfolding.

01:26:59.480 I'm still getting notes in real time from people at the courthouse about what we know and what we

01:27:05.140 don't know.

01:27:06.080 I mean, initially, it's funny.

01:27:07.120 I told your producers, well, you know what?

01:27:09.300 It seems that it wasn't a reporter for it wasn't connected to MSNBC.

01:27:13.520 And then I got another thing.

01:27:14.920 Wait, wait, hold on.

01:27:15.820 Hold on.

01:27:16.320 Wait.

01:27:16.760 It seems it was someone who was a freelancer.

01:27:18.580 So, look, bottom line is, if it's true that someone at MSNBC instructed a freelancer to

01:27:28.200 follow the jury, you know, it's not only moronic and despicable, it's illegal.

01:27:35.740 So, you know, you're not just talking about the possibility of MSNBC not being allowed back in

01:27:43.920 the courtroom if it turns out that this is true.

01:27:47.220 But, you know, the person involved could be facing charges for trying to, you know, for

01:27:54.860 refusing to adhere to a judicial order, et cetera.

01:27:59.060 So this is this is really bad if this is true.

01:28:02.880 And not only that, but I agree with you 100 percent on the ethical violation.

01:28:06.700 But this guy and now MSNBC are going to wind up in a motion for a mistrial and possibly appellate

01:28:13.060 court papers if if this kid, if this guy, Kyle Rittenhouse, gets convicted, because it'll

01:28:19.220 be cited as one of the many things that intimidated this jury into coming up with what the defense

01:28:23.480 will argue was the wrong verdict if it doesn't go their way.

01:28:25.680 Yeah, I don't think that this will be the best argument.

01:28:28.880 I think that I think that the defense's argument about this video is actually a much stronger

01:28:35.060 argument than some guy who didn't actually, you know, get in touch with the jurors, et

01:28:39.140 cetera.

01:28:40.220 You know, I think that this question about the quality of the video, you would think people

01:28:44.480 are going to say, oh, come on, what's the big deal about so that the defense is saying,

01:28:49.660 well, you know, they got a version of the video which was of lesser quality.

01:28:53.720 Well, part of their defense has been that you can't really tell from the video what

01:28:59.180 was happening.

01:29:00.360 So if they didn't have that video and if it's true that the prosecutors did this on, you

01:29:05.920 know, well, I shouldn't say if it's true.

01:29:07.340 We'll see if the prosecutors did this intentionally.

01:29:10.860 They say it was inadvertent.

01:29:12.200 But that's a big issue, because there you're talking about literally the defense making

01:29:18.460 arguments in court that now they can totally they can say we would never would have argued.

01:29:25.580 You can't see the video if we'd had the original version of it.

01:29:29.660 Yeah, no, it's true.

01:29:31.100 And the court in that particular instance has said he's not sure he believes the prosecution,

01:29:37.200 that he's actually going to put them on the stand under oath and potentially and wants

01:29:42.780 to hear directly directly from them, as well as from expert witnesses on which he said from

01:29:47.320 the beginning on whether this tape should have been admitted at all.

01:29:49.880 So it's certainly going to be potential grounds for an appeal if this doesn't go the defense's

01:29:53.800 way.

01:29:54.040 I want to tell you that NBC just issued a statement.

01:29:56.940 I will read it in full.

01:29:58.800 Last night, a freelancer received a traffic citation.

01:30:01.980 While the traffic violation took place near the jury van, the freelancer never contacted or

01:30:06.300 intended to contact the jurors during deliberations and never photographed or intended to photograph

01:30:11.480 them.

01:30:12.320 We regret the incident and will fully cooperate with the authorities on any investigation.

01:30:16.900 NBC News spokesperson, I will say that's good enough.

01:30:21.380 That's no, that's not a good.

01:30:22.740 So so we started this conversation by me saying you let's see whether NBC is admitting.

01:30:29.480 So they are they're admitting that this person worked for them.

01:30:33.160 OK, bad fact number one, they're admitting.

01:30:36.300 That the person was following the the bus.

01:30:39.120 Bad fact number two.

01:30:40.220 And they're not denying that someone in, you know, an executive there was instructing him

01:30:48.340 to do this.

01:30:49.120 That's horrible fact number three.

01:30:51.440 So, you know, while some people are going to read that and say, oh, you know, NBC is sort

01:30:57.520 of sort of owning up to a minor violation.

01:31:01.320 That, to me, actually makes this now a bigger story.

01:31:05.080 Yeah.

01:31:05.420 And and I don't know.

01:31:06.980 It sounds like it happened last night.

01:31:08.720 So he must have been following the jury van, I'm assuming, on their way back to, you know,

01:31:14.280 from the courthouse to their main location.

01:31:15.720 Who knows?

01:31:16.120 But there's only one reason a producer follows a jury van.

01:31:19.980 They either want to contact the jurors or they want to see where the jurors live so that they

01:31:24.400 can contact them later.

01:31:25.640 Either way, totally impermissible, way out of line.

01:31:28.740 And any journalist knows you're not supposed to do that.

01:31:31.640 The jurors in particular are supposed to be held inviolate.

01:31:35.820 You don't mess with them.

01:31:37.040 If their identities are public.

01:31:38.700 Sure.

01:31:38.880 You can contact them after the trial and ask them if they want to speak.

01:31:41.580 But you don't follow them.

01:31:42.800 You really are messing with something very high stakes.

01:31:46.800 Because, you know what, I was thinking as we were talking about this, well, maybe someone

01:31:51.000 said, you know, go so you can get a sense of what they look like for later.

01:31:56.300 But you know what they look like.

01:31:57.800 You're here in court.

01:31:58.860 You know, it's not like so there's no I was trying to think of like, what could their

01:32:02.840 possible explanation be?

01:32:04.220 It can't be.

01:32:05.180 Well, I just wanted to get a visual on them for later, because the visual you can get in

01:32:09.960 court of all the jurors.

01:32:11.300 So, yeah, there is you're exactly right that that following the jurors back, the

01:32:15.980 only reason that you would do that is to see where they're going.

01:32:20.120 And that period is unacceptable and impermissible.

01:32:23.440 Yeah.

01:32:23.760 I mean, this is these bookers for the big networks are famous or infamous, depending on your view,

01:32:29.800 for their aggressive measures in trying to book guests.

01:32:32.620 And the jurors in the Rittenhouse trial will be a major booking if they decide to do it.

01:32:36.980 But there are limits.

01:32:38.660 The law limits what they can do.

01:32:40.940 And this is this is gross.

01:32:42.000 And NBC is not going to get away with this statement, because if it really was this Irene,

01:32:46.240 as the freelancer identifies by name, Irene Bayan in New York, who told him to do it.

01:32:50.460 She's got some explaining to do, too.

01:32:52.240 Oh, this is one on one.

01:32:53.860 Right, Megan?

01:32:54.440 I mean, look, you've covered a lot of cases.

01:32:56.360 You know, obviously I have to.

01:32:57.840 And this is this is seriously one on one, meaning like, you know, you hire a producer to go to

01:33:03.700 a trial, it's probably the three things you tell them are, you know, follow what's happening in

01:33:08.960 court and take notes, see if you can get any interviews in the hallway and stay away from

01:33:15.480 the jurors.

01:33:16.200 Right.

01:33:16.960 It's like it's one of the very basic things that you tell people who are covering a trial.

01:33:22.640 And now they're going to need to add follow what happens in court and do not follow the jury.

01:33:27.940 Right.

01:33:28.140 By the way, that that booking producer has now deleted her LinkedIn.

01:33:32.320 She's in a lot of trouble.

01:33:33.620 And so is this freelancer.

01:33:34.840 And so is.

01:33:35.600 So, I mean, look, and MSNBC is banned from the courthouse.

01:33:39.100 But as far as I can tell, NBC isn't.

01:33:41.720 They share resources.

01:33:42.720 I can attest to that.

01:33:44.180 I'm sure you can, too, from your time at MSNBC.

01:33:47.040 So, you know, the the punishment isn't all that punitive, but the judge is doing the right

01:33:51.680 thing.

01:33:52.500 Let's see.

01:33:53.020 Let's see where we just go.

01:33:54.020 This isn't over.

01:33:54.800 Right.

01:33:55.140 I mean, yeah, this is the punishment for now.

01:33:57.440 Let's see if this goes further than just the traffic violation.

01:34:01.680 It really is going to depend on the intent here.

01:34:05.100 Right.

01:34:05.420 I mean, if it was truly just a traffic violation from someone who was happened to be in the

01:34:11.840 same place as the jurors bus.

01:34:14.420 OK, but that's not the way the judge is interpreting it as of right now.

01:34:19.620 Exactly right.

01:34:20.560 Exactly right.

01:34:21.300 Dan, such a pleasure.

01:34:22.000 Thanks for pinch hitting here.

01:34:23.640 Appreciate it.

01:34:24.700 Sure thing, Megan.

01:34:25.620 Talk to you soon.

01:34:26.220 I want to tell you tomorrow, we'll we'll have all the latest on the Rittenhouse trial

01:34:29.300 for you.

01:34:30.060 We're also going to be joined by Adam Carolla.

01:34:31.840 Always love talking to him.

01:34:33.480 And go ahead and download our show, Megan Kelly Show on Apple, Pandora, Spotify and Stitcher

01:34:37.640 and go to YouTube dot com slash Megan Kelly.

01:34:40.520 Do me a favor.

01:34:41.140 Subscribe there.

01:34:41.900 That helps our show.

01:34:43.160 We appreciate it.

01:34:44.340 And thanks, everyone, for listening.

01:34:48.540 Thanks for listening to the Megan Kelly Show.

01:34:50.560 No BS, no agenda and no fear.

01:34:54.140 No BS, no agenda and no fear.

The Megyn Kelly Show - November 18, 2021

COVID Lockdown Reality and MSNBC Banned from Rittenhouse Courtroom, with Dr. Scott Atlas, Robert Barnes, and Dan Abrams ｜ Ep. 206

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript