The Megyn Kelly Show - COVID Truth Suppression and Prince Andrew's Perilous Future, with Sen. Marco Rubio, Dan Wootton, and Anne Bremner ｜ Ep. 241

00:00:00.400 Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations.

00:00:12.040 Hey everyone, welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. I'm Megyn Kelly.

00:00:16.060 We begin today with new questions about whether we can trust the public health officials overseeing America's response to this pandemic.

00:00:23.220 On Monday, we dove into CDC Director Rochelle Walensky's attempts to cover for Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who embarrassed herself last week from the bench, grossly overstating the number of hospitalized children with COVID.

00:00:37.580 Yesterday, we reported about Walensky continuing to tout a discredited study on masking in schools.

00:00:43.720 Today, we have proof that Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins of the National Institutes of Health have been willfully misleading the public on COVID's origins in an effort, it turns out, to protect China and themselves.

00:00:58.820 Documents emerged this week that public health officials did not want us to see.

00:01:02.820 They dodged FOIA requests and other attempts to get them, but House Republicans finally got their hands on emails between Drs. Fauci, Collins, and some of the world's top virologists discussing early on in the pandemic whether COVID-19 came from a lab.

00:01:20.340 It turns out the very officials who dismissed that as a fringe conspiracy theory in the press were being told exactly the opposite by the world's top experts as early as February 2020.

00:01:34.320 They have known from the start.

00:01:35.860 The emails and notes, which only the lawmakers have seen, though they have transcribed them for the public, show that on February 1, 2020, Drs. Fauci and Collins had a teleconference about COVID's origins with 11 of the world's top virologists.

00:01:52.300 Emails were exchanged the very next day that make clear several of those advising Fauci and Collins believe this virus came from a lab, not some bat or other animal from a wet market or a cave.

00:02:04.920 They had studied the virus's genetic makeup, you see, and found the insertion of a genetic sequence that makes a virus more transmissible, a furin cleavage site.

00:02:18.620 Physicist Robert Mueller was on our show in June explaining why the furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 is indeed a smoking gun that proves lab origins.

00:02:30.460 There is a particular part on what's called the spike.

00:02:35.400 You know, if you see a picture of the virus, it's a sphere with these spikes coming out.

00:02:39.660 These spikes are what attach to the victim cell.

00:02:42.140 Now, this spike in coronavirus has a particular feature that makes it extremely capable of attaching to a victim cell and injecting its virus particles very quickly.

00:02:58.920 To get in and to get in so quickly and so effectively as to be really infectious, it has this little code in it.

00:03:06.940 And the little code is something that has never been seen in this whole class of coronaviruses that include both SARS, which is famous, and MERS, the Mideast Respiratory Syndrome.

00:03:20.400 Neither of those had this in it.

00:03:22.900 So this is really, really something unexpected, unique, and it's inconceivable that this could have happened by accident.

00:03:33.380 It was efficient.

00:03:35.360 It was highly contagious to humans from the start.

00:03:39.700 And that was a tell.

00:03:40.940 The former director of the CDC, Robert Redfield, backed the lab leak theory publicly last summer, writing in the Wall Street Journal,

00:03:49.060 What virus comes out of a bat cave and infects humans by the millions? 0.99

00:03:53.120 It's not biologically possible.

00:03:55.640 One of those scientists on that call with Fauci and Collins, a Brit, Sir Jeremy Farrar, sent a follow-up email to Collins and Fauci the next day, expressing support for the lab leak theory.

00:04:06.960 He relayed the thoughts of two more experts, Robert Gary of Tulane University and Michael Farzan of the Scripps Research Institute.

00:04:16.100 Robert Gary, he said, can't think of a plausible natural scenario.

00:04:20.960 And Farzan was, quote, bothered by the furin site and having a hard time explaining that outside the lab.

00:04:28.320 Farzan, he said, favored lab leak over natural origin 70 to 30 or 60 to 40.

00:04:32.980 We know from a book Sir Farrar wrote last year that two of the other experts advising Fauci and Collins were strongly in the lab leak camp as well.

00:04:42.780 Christiane Anderson of the Scripps Research Institute put the lab leak theory at 60 to 70 percent likely.

00:04:49.100 Eddie Holmes of Sydney, 80 percent.

00:04:52.080 In Farrar's emails, he said Holmes was at 60 percent.

00:04:54.980 But either way, the guy clearly favored the lab leak origin.

00:04:58.720 So did Fauci and Collins create a commission to study this further, to get to the bottom of it?

00:05:05.720 Did they call a press conference telling us all the lab leak theory deserved our full and serious consideration?

00:05:11.140 After all, people were dying and would continue to die.

00:05:14.040 Five point five million and counting now.

00:05:17.060 Didn't they want to know how this deadly virus got started so we could prevent it from happening again?

00:05:22.580 Actually, they went another way.

00:05:24.220 Two days after those scientists went to Collins and Fauci and told them this thing likely came from a lab, five of them authored a paper on how the virus began, including at least three who had openly favored the lab leak theory.

00:05:38.620 And in that paper, they did a complete 180, concluding that this virus was clearly, quote, that's a quote, clearly not from a lab and clearly not manipulated by man.

00:05:54.280 Sir Farrar, well, he went on to write a different article again just days later, denouncing anyone who believed the lab leak theory as a bigot.

00:06:02.280 Guess that includes himself and all his buds.

00:06:04.300 Oh, and these same scientists took pains to assure us in their writings that soon the natural animal source would be found.

00:06:14.180 Two years, 209 species and 80,000 animal examinations later, it hasn't happened.

00:06:21.700 So why the about face?

00:06:23.840 Were these guys strong armed by Collins and Fauci, both of whom were involved in the draft article from its inception?

00:06:30.680 Keep in mind, Fauci and Collins control the grant money from which many of these scientists make their living.

00:06:38.140 You cross them, you're done.

00:06:39.600 Your grants, your research, possibly even your career, gone.

00:06:44.360 You do as they say, things get better for you.

00:06:47.820 Six months after they reversed course, Christiane Anderson and Robert Gary reportedly received an $8.9 million grant from Fauci and Collins.

00:06:58.980 It's funny how well that worked out.

00:07:02.300 Fauci wanted the lab leak theory gone.

00:07:05.080 He later called it a shiny object, reassuring colleagues it would go away.

00:07:10.020 He also clearly backed the waffling scientist's article, which had been sent to him for editing, though it's unclear how if at all he changed it, taking to the White House podium and even mentioning the article there.

00:07:22.100 Collins, for his part, is on record in these emails, making very clear his orders.

00:07:27.020 This article was important to, quote, settle this matter.

00:07:32.120 Wait, why?

00:07:33.600 He wanted to, quote, put down this very destructive conspiracy about a lab leak, lest the experts do, quote, great potential harm to science and international harmony.

00:07:46.460 International harmony?

00:07:47.880 He means China. 0.94

00:07:49.600 Shut up about the lab leak in Wuhan, China.

00:07:52.700 Dr. Ron Foshier, whose group in the Netherlands researches how to make animal viruses more dangerous, put it even more clearly in an email at the time.

00:08:02.240 Further debate about such accusations would unnecessarily distract top researchers from their active duties and do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular.

00:08:17.060 And there it is, China.

00:08:19.780 China had been America's biggest and most important collaborator in scientific research.

00:08:24.780 Our collaboration with the Chinese over the past 20 years has grown exponentially, despite their human rights abuses and our occasional objections. 0.99

00:08:32.140 We have been working together there and here on research just like what was happening in that lab.

00:08:40.080 It is not at all clear we can blame them and only them and not just just any research, but controversial gain of function research that takes, say, a coronavirus and makes it more dangerous or contagious, possibly even to humans, allowing scientists ostensibly to get ahead of it.

00:08:58.440 But what if, what if, what if it gets ahead of them?

00:09:03.720 Fauci was behind much of the U.S. funding in China.

00:09:07.060 He admitted approving grants for EcoHealth Alliance, a group that researched coronaviruses in the Wuhan lab.

00:09:14.340 Fauci would only admit so much, however, swearing that this research, well, it didn't qualify as that risky gain of function stuff.

00:09:21.400 Dozens of scientists called BS on that.

00:09:25.100 But the point is now moot because documents emerged proving Fauci was wrong, that EcoHealth Alliance was doing gain of function research in Wuhan, a fact that ultimately the NIH itself was forced to admit, though it denied Fauci actually knew or that the research had any link to what we now know as COVID-19.

00:09:45.000 Fauci maintains he was shocked, shocked to learn the truth, that the research he had approved was, in fact, gain of function.

00:09:52.960 After all, he had been denying this allegation under oath for months.

00:09:58.200 Well, his denials are clearly questionable, especially when one considers that EcoHealth Alliance was not exactly stealthy about the work it wanted to pursue.

00:10:08.360 In 2018, it actually hit up the Defense Department for another grant that was rather on the nose, its goal to partner with the Wuhan lab, deliberately inserting novel furin cleavage sites into bat coronaviruses, making them more transmissible to humans. 0.87

00:10:27.120 The grant was turned down as clearly too dangerous, but as prominent science journalist Matt Ridley reports, quote, it is an open secret in science that you sometimes put things into grant proposals you have already started doing.

00:10:41.560 And the Chinese Academy of Sciences was funding most of the work in the Wuhan Institute of Virology anyway.

00:10:48.540 EcoHealth's CEO, Peter Daszak, was one of the first to beg officials to reject the lab leak theory, and tellingly, he warned that the public release of the virus's genetic sequencing would bring, quote, very unwelcome attention.

00:11:06.860 Best case scenario is Fauci and Collins had every reason to suspect what Daszak and Wuhan were doing, but look the other way or were reckless in their oversight of a dangerous lab funded by you, the American taxpayer.

00:11:23.700 Worst case is they knowingly funded it, then tried to cover it up when things went south and COVID-19 emerged, of all places, smack dab in the middle of Wuhan, China.

00:11:34.500 Fauci and Collins were told immediately by their expert pals, this thing looks man-made, or at least like it grew from passing from animal to animal in a lab, perhaps one that uses humanized mice like the Wuhan lab.

00:11:51.640 But these two men prized international harmony over a full-throated investigation, the narrative was changed, and discussion was shut down actively and forcefully, using charges of bigotry and conspiracy-mongering.

00:12:07.420 And the world's top scientists and the slobbering media let them get away with it.

00:12:12.900 Nor is this over.

00:12:16.380 Not only does COVID-19 continue to morph and circulate and cause havoc across the world,

00:12:21.540 The Washington Post's Josh Rogan reports that the Biden administration wants to spend millions more, right now, to resume risky virus research in other countries.

00:12:32.260 This, as Anthony Fauci is calling on Congress to give him a few billion dollars a year to develop vaccines for pandemics that do not yet exist.

00:12:44.260 And when asked this week to come clean about these exchanges with the world's top virologists about the origins of COVID-19, he dodged.

00:12:54.820 Did you communicate with the five scientists who wrote the opinion piece in Nature, where they were describing, oh, there's no way this could have come from the lab?

00:13:05.320 That was not me.

00:13:06.200 What I did...

00:13:06.820 Did you talk with any of those scientists privately?

00:13:08.420 See, but you keep the story and the truth.

00:13:10.800 It is stunning how you do that.

00:13:12.380 Did you talk to any of the scientists privately who wrote the opinion?

00:13:15.780 You did.

00:13:16.520 What were they telling you privately?

00:13:18.060 Well, let me explain.

00:13:19.520 You know, you're going back to that original discussion when I brought together a group of people to look at every possibility with an open mind.

00:13:28.940 So not only are you distorting it, you are completely turning it around.

00:13:33.440 As most of the scientists that came to you privately, did they come to you privately and say, no way, this came from the lab?

00:13:39.180 Or was their initial impression, Dr. Gary and others that were involved, was their initial impression, actually, that it looked very suspicious for a virus that came from a lab?

00:13:48.060 Senator, we are here at a committee to look at a virus now that has killed almost 900,000 people.

00:13:58.140 And the purpose of the committee was to try and get things out, how we can help to get the American public.

00:14:04.780 And you keep coming back to personal attacks on me that have absolutely no relevance to reality.

00:14:12.300 Joining me now, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida.

00:14:18.700 Senator, great to have you here.

00:14:20.340 So that's the question.

00:14:21.380 Can we trust Dr. Fauci, Dr. Collins, and our public health officials?

00:14:28.140 Well, I think like anybody in public office, they need to maintain that trust in any turn.

00:14:32.880 You saw the answers right there in that segment leading in.

00:14:35.200 And it makes me very queasy to see a public official like Dr. Fauci, who is being relied upon by the president and by many people as sort of the leading authority on what our country should do about it.

00:14:45.960 He's asked a very specific question.

00:14:47.420 And that is, when these people came to you early on, did they tell you this looks like it might have come out of a lab accident or whatever?

00:14:54.280 He says, well, that's a personal attack and just refused to answer the question or address it formally.

00:14:59.580 If the answer to those questions were there was suspicion early on, we looked at it and everybody ruled it out, then he should have said that.

00:15:07.420 But instead, he wouldn't answer that specific question.

00:15:09.360 So your question is about trust.

00:15:11.020 I don't know how you see an answer like that where someone diverts into the realm of a political spin and and leave that feeling more trustful about what he's saying on this or, frankly, all these other things.

00:15:22.020 And I say this with no great pleasure because I don't think it's good for our country to have a leading health official like Dr. Fauci have such low credibility in the eyes of so many Americans at this point.

00:15:31.800 How can he go on in this post?

00:15:33.920 How given it's been drip by drip.

00:15:36.160 But this is this is significant.

00:15:38.080 He actively misled us.

00:15:40.900 Collins, too, actively misled us.

00:15:43.140 They knew this is not in dispute.

00:15:45.260 These virologists are on record.

00:15:47.500 We've got the emails now.

00:15:48.920 House Republicans do.

00:15:50.680 They were advised.

00:15:52.420 This thing likely came from a lab.

00:15:53.840 And yet Collins and Fauci were out there calling it a conspiracy theory, saying it's just a shiny object that will go away and trying to manipulate the narrative to the point where social media was shutting down any discussion of that possibility.

00:16:04.640 So how does he stay in this post now?

00:16:08.080 Well, Dr. Collins is no longer in the post.

00:16:10.900 He's retired.

00:16:12.320 And I imagine Dr. Fauci will retire fairly soon as well.

00:16:16.140 How he remains in the post is pretty straightforward.

00:16:18.040 And that is he has established himself in the eyes of this administration, Democratic Congress and much of the mainstream media as someone who cannot be questioned as a sort of a czar over COVID.

00:16:30.660 And that any sort of scrutiny and any sort of hard questions of him is denial of COVID, denial of this, that, or the other.

00:16:39.660 I mean, anti-science.

00:16:40.920 So I think he's positioned and insulated himself in a way that a lot of these people end up doing.

00:16:45.720 And this is very common to people in this, you know, look, science is very complicated and they know that.

00:16:49.900 And so, therefore, they believe that people in their position should not be questioned because they don't have the time to explain it to people.

00:16:55.640 And if it's an answer they don't like, they simply tell you, listen, you don't need to know because you wouldn't understand.

00:17:00.540 And that's how they get away with it.

00:17:01.800 And it's I don't, as I said, he survives because he's being protected.

00:17:06.980 One of the frustrations watching the hearing the other day with Rand Paul and others was, of course, they only have, what, eight minutes.

00:17:12.700 It's a short amount of time.

00:17:13.940 They can't get much done.

00:17:15.580 And it's not like having somebody for an hour or two where you can methodically ask the questions and get real answers.

00:17:21.980 And when they try to dodge, you know, let them dodge a little, but then follow up.

00:17:26.740 So how can we get Fauci in that position where he really has to answer real questions and the clock doesn't keep expiring to where no questioning is is effective?

00:17:38.600 Well, look, the committees can can structure their own rules.

00:17:41.940 So let's say Republicans were in charge in the House or in the Senate.

00:17:44.960 There's no nothing in the law or in the Constitution that says it has to be eight minutes or 10 minutes or 12 minutes.

00:17:49.920 And you're absolutely right.

00:17:50.880 I mean, one of the typical strategies that's used up here by veteran as veterans of Capitol Hill testimony is they just delay for time.

00:17:58.860 You ask them a simple question.

00:18:00.040 They go on a two minute rant.

00:18:01.280 They know you only have five or seven minutes and they never get to answering your question.

00:18:05.120 And then if you try to interrupt them and get to the point, you know, the chairman may interject and say, well, let them answer the question.

00:18:12.220 So these are tactics that are used.

00:18:13.680 And I imagine these are tactics.

00:18:14.960 I'm sure he went into this hearing knowing this was coming and had a game plan for it.

00:18:18.440 And if he could just hold on for five or six minutes, he would survive that round of questioning.

00:18:23.540 And but I think the way to get around it is to have committees that basically say like they used to do.

00:18:27.620 I mean, it wasn't 20 years ago.

00:18:28.820 You go see the hearings or read the transcripts of the organized crime hearings.

00:18:32.800 It was actually the council on even Watergate.

00:18:35.140 It was the council on the committee in many cases that was asking sort of deposition style questions of the witnesses and allowed you to get to answers.

00:18:41.980 What we're doing now is basically theatrical productions and people trying to figure out, can I get a soundbite out of a five minute questioning round?

00:18:48.860 Right.

00:18:49.080 It's so frustrating.

00:18:50.040 You know, as a recovering lawyer, it drives me nuts because, you know, you want to see the follow up.

00:18:54.140 You want to see let him talk.

00:18:56.100 Great.

00:18:56.360 Let's let him talk.

00:18:57.380 I'd love to hear the full answer on whether he consulted with those scientists and what exactly he said, because now we've got the documents to impeach him if he tries to wiggle.

00:19:06.640 But why is the White House cooperating with this?

00:19:10.280 I mean, cover up.

00:19:12.100 Well, I don't know how you want to refer to it.

00:19:13.560 And why is the Intel community community apparently helping to the Intel community did ostensibly investigate where this originated COVID-19 and basically said, oh, some of us think a lab.

00:19:26.580 Some of us don't.

00:19:27.560 It's inconclusive and quietly but notably moved on, as has the White House.

00:19:33.800 Given the stakes, you know what I said in my opening, you know, 5.5 million dead worldwide, only 900,000 Americans.

00:19:39.580 Where is the appetite to push further?

00:19:43.940 Yeah.

00:19:44.580 Well, I think there's a significant amount of appetite moving forward, especially those Republican majorities.

00:19:49.320 I'm sure it'll be accused of being a witch hunt by many in the press, but that's irrelevant.

00:19:53.820 What's most important is getting to the truth.

00:19:55.960 The administration is deeply tied.

00:19:57.760 And now in the Fauci's success, they view it as their success.

00:20:02.940 They've now they're too far down that road to turn back and abandon them.

00:20:05.960 Now it would hurt them.

00:20:06.760 They would have raised questions about why they didn't ask these things themselves sooner.

00:20:10.520 And on the question of the intelligence community, actually, what the intelligence community's assessment was, is that a lab leak is just as likely as it having naturally occurred, that it could have been either one.

00:20:20.440 You know, the intelligence community operates on certainty.

00:20:22.360 And so the notion that somehow you're going to have two scientists in China talking to each other, emailing each other, saying, hey, yeah, you know, that thing we designed in the lab really went wrong.

00:20:31.220 You know, that kind of smoking gun is actually pretty rare in intelligence.

00:20:35.280 What intelligence is valuable for is analysis.

00:20:38.380 And that is, you don't have to have a you don't have to have every piece of evidence to sort of piece it all together and draw conclusions based on what you know about the world, about the people you're analyzing, about the circumstances you're analyzing.

00:20:48.700 And it's been my consistent view that the likeliest thing that happened here was that they were conducting risky experiments in an unsafe lab.

00:20:56.520 Something went wrong.

00:20:57.780 They're in a totalitarian regime where bad news being reported is not rewarded the way bad news about Chernobyl was not rewarded in the old Soviet Union.

00:21:06.140 And so no one reported it up.

00:21:08.060 This thing got worse.

00:21:08.980 And the Chinese government itself, although they obviously were funding and involved in this, the highest leaders may not have known early on where this came from.

00:21:16.400 And they'll never tell us and they'll never admit to that error.

00:21:18.860 But I think that's the likeliest scenario here.

00:21:21.800 And whether we'll ever have a smoking gun is is a different question.

00:21:25.680 That's that's a harder thing to find.

00:21:26.900 Yeah, I mean, near as I can tell from listening to the testimony and so on, very few people are alleging this was an intentional release by the Chinese.

00:21:35.120 You know, it's it's possible.

00:21:36.440 It appears that in that lab there was a bioweapons section or at least a section that was overseen by the Chinese military.

00:21:42.960 But we have no proof that that's where this virus came from.

00:21:46.500 We do have a lot of circumstantial evidence that covid-19 was someplace in that lab and somehow got out.

00:21:52.180 There were there were scientists in the lab who were getting sick in the fall of 19, 2019, you know, before it sort of went worldwide and other circumstantial evidence that it was sort of it was released.

00:22:03.820 The accident happened in the fall of 19.

00:22:06.380 But I wonder whether, you know, given given that that's what we suspect, we should be putting into place right now, whether you want to blame Fauci or Wuhan or not, a worldwide moratorium on any further research like this gain of function research till we get to the bottom of it.

00:22:24.280 Right. Like maybe we don't want to do that because we have no desire to get to the bottom of it.

00:22:27.560 But why on earth would we be with the Biden administration be talking about one hundred and twenty five million more toward research like this?

00:22:34.580 Well, I don't know why they're talking about it.

00:22:37.300 You can go back pre covid almost a decade to a lot of debate in scientific communities about why gain of function was very dangerous.

00:22:44.080 And, you know, why all of this is relevant is that in China and in different parts of the world, there's all kinds of research going on, not just gain of function research,

00:22:51.120 but research about how you can genetic genetically alter human beings so that they can operate on less sleep or are smarter or are able to go.

00:23:00.240 Well, that weren't very rough without.

00:23:02.380 Yeah. Well, you know, but smarter in the sense of what they determined to be smarter in terms of like a battlefield acuity and things of that nature.

00:23:09.020 So what you know, I'm getting now outside of my lane here in terms of what I fully understand.

00:23:13.280 And I can tell you this, any time you start messing with things like people, DNA and trying to alter the way the brain works in human beings,

00:23:20.000 you know, that that can lead to the creation of Frankenstein monsters, not literally, but sort of unanticipated consequences.

00:23:26.960 Gain of function is something like that. I mean, gain of function is basically there's this virus out there among animals.

00:23:32.500 It's not infectious in humans, but it could evolve to become infections in humans.

00:23:36.580 So let's try to predict how it would evolve. Let's make it evolve that way.

00:23:40.660 So then we can come up for a cure and a treatment for it.

00:23:43.360 What happens, though, is if someone gets infected after they've done that, now all of a sudden you have introduced a virus into the human population that mankind has never seen.

00:23:51.720 Our bodies have no defenses for and people start to die.

00:23:54.900 And, you know, this I'm not saying COVID is not bad.

00:23:57.460 COVID has been very bad, especially early on. We didn't know a lot about it.

00:24:00.440 We didn't know how to treat it. But I think most epidemiologists who talk to will tell you there are other viruses out there.

00:24:06.240 among the animal population, that if they ever became zoonotic, if they ever transferred over into humans, would be far more devastating.

00:24:14.240 This is not even close to the worst possible virus that could one day potentially cross over.

00:24:19.920 And if they're messing around with that and we have an accident with those sorts of things, we're talking about a very different situation here.

00:24:25.080 So this is very relevant. We shouldn't be funding it.

00:24:27.360 But more importantly, I think there should be global crackdown and condemnation on it because it has a global impact.

00:24:32.440 This will not be contained to whatever country is doing it.

00:24:34.500 Well, that's the problem, too, is that we weren't supposed to be funding it even when we were.

00:24:39.300 And there was there was a moratorium put in place because we recognize this is pretty dangerous.

00:24:43.060 Why are we digging up bats out of caves that have dangerous diseases and manipulating them to make them more transmissible and dangerous to humans just in case the virus ever gets out so that we'll be ready?

00:24:53.820 It's like, well, what could possibly go wrong?

00:24:55.400 Well, something like this, this Wuhan lab with its humanized mice, what they believe is that it was put in a mouse and mice.

00:25:02.400 And then it sort of kept improving gain.

00:25:04.800 It was gaining function, getting better and stronger and more transmissible.

00:25:09.060 And it was at that point that somehow it got out.

00:25:12.340 Wuhan lab workers got sick.

00:25:13.920 And before you knew it, we had a worldwide pandemic.

00:25:17.700 All of this needs to be examined by a bipartisan commission.

00:25:21.880 We got a bipartisan commission on January 6th to figure out why people stormed the Capitol and committed some crimes.

00:25:27.860 OK, where's our bipartisan commission figuring out how five point five million people died, including almost a million Americans?

00:25:34.480 There's no appetite for it at this administration's top levels.

00:25:38.860 And so it will be interesting to see if you guys take over in the Senate, in the House as of November, what we get.

00:25:47.220 All right.

00:25:47.400 Senator Rubio is staying with us.

00:25:49.220 There's a lot more to go over.

00:25:50.340 President Biden now at a 33 percent approval rating, 33 percent.

00:25:55.440 And what is he focused on?

00:25:57.540 Voting rights and trying to federalize national elections, something he has absolutely no chance of getting through.

00:26:03.600 What is going on?

00:26:05.520 That's next.

00:26:13.460 So, Senator, you know, with inflation now at record high in 40 years.

00:26:18.740 Right.

00:26:19.960 And the supply chain crisis is not over, not by a long shot.

00:26:23.800 Have you tried to buy a dishwasher lately?

00:26:25.280 My goodness.

00:26:26.060 Good luck.

00:26:26.820 Literally, we were told we had to wait a year.

00:26:29.060 A year.

00:26:30.140 I mean, like, OK.

00:26:31.280 OK, he's decided to focus on voting rights.

00:26:34.620 Build Back Better fell apart.

00:26:35.760 He couldn't get it through.

00:26:36.520 And now his switch is to voting rights, which helps the American people right now in their kitchen sort of table issues.

00:26:44.440 How?

00:26:45.100 I don't know.

00:26:45.760 But I want to give you a flavor and get you to react to how he's describing the stakes, why he says he's so focused on this right now.

00:26:55.820 Here's a compilation of a speech he gave in Georgia on Tuesday.

00:26:58.580 Listen.

00:26:58.760 Today, we come to Atlanta, the cradle of civil rights, to make clear what must come after that dreadful day when a dagger was literally held at the throat of American democracy.

00:27:17.660 They want chaos to reign.

00:27:21.140 We want the people to rule.

00:27:24.660 Jim Crow 2.0 is about two insidious things.

00:27:29.000 Voter suppression and election subversion.

00:27:33.040 At consequential moments in history, they present a choice.

00:27:38.280 Do you want to be on the side of Dr. King or George Wallace?

00:27:42.460 Do you want to be on the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor?

00:27:48.380 Do you want to be on the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis?

00:27:53.800 Well, there you have it, Senator.

00:27:55.220 I guess he would say you're on the side of Jefferson Davis and Bull Connor because this is about his voting rights proposal, which essentially seeks to federalize elections.

00:28:06.620 But he would say it seeks to make them more fair and protect voter rights.

00:28:10.960 Your thoughts on his comments?

00:28:13.040 Yeah, and there's a lot to unpack here.

00:28:14.740 The first thing I would say is that even some Democrats were sort of embarrassed by – you see that in some of their statements – a little bit embarrassed by how far the speech went.

00:28:22.540 Almost overcompensating, I guess, for the failures and things of that nature.

00:28:26.840 So that kind of hyperbole actually backfires because people look at it and shake their heads.

00:28:30.520 I would tell you that most of the people I've talked to on real earth, not Washington bubble, didn't even know that speech happened, didn't even know that this was happening.

00:28:39.440 It doesn't make it unimportant because they're trying to change the election law and have a federal takeover.

00:28:43.380 But I think your point is the number one issue – like if you went and asked people in this country, what are the top 10 things on your mind, this wouldn't even be on the top 50 because it's easier than ever to vote in America.

00:28:52.460 It just simply is.

00:28:53.340 And the numbers bear that out.

00:28:55.640 So there's two things at play here.

00:28:57.380 I think the first is a desire for power.

00:28:59.460 They certainly view this as the perfect issue in which to break the filibuster.

00:29:03.420 If there is no Senate filibuster, they can't – they not only can pass this voting bill, they can pack the Supreme Court.

00:29:10.500 They can make D.C. a state.

00:29:12.120 There's all kinds of things that they could do if there were no filibuster.

00:29:15.140 And so, number one, it's about that.

00:29:17.240 And I think number two, frankly, is about politics.

00:29:20.160 I think Chuck Schumer is afraid to get primaried in New York.

00:29:23.120 AOC has not ruled out running for Senate against him.

00:29:26.280 I think a lot of Democrats, particularly Chuck Schumer in a state like New York, see that over the last few years you've had longtime incumbents taken out by people from the far left, and they're concerned about it.

00:29:35.660 Maybe he thinks he's still going to win, but he doesn't want to go through that process.

00:29:38.500 There's a tremendous amount of pressure coming from the base of the party, particularly radical elements of the base.

00:29:44.460 And this month just happens to be the turn of those who are out there saying, I know, that there's some sort of, as he called it, Jim Crow 2.0, which is absurd and most Americans will tell you it's absurd.

00:29:55.500 Can I ask you about politics?

00:29:56.580 Because to me, the politics of this whole voting rights thing has not made any sense.

00:30:01.300 Now, I am just a journalist, so I don't totally get it.

00:30:04.060 But it was clear that he did not have the votes to get rid of the filibuster, either for a limited purpose, like he says, you know, just to get the voting rights law through.

00:30:13.300 So, um, or on a wider basis.

00:30:15.760 And it was pretty clear he might not even have the votes for the voting rights legislation itself.

00:30:20.720 And yet he's running around saying, we're doing it, giving speeches.

00:30:23.840 Chuck Schumer saying, I'm bringing it to a vote.

00:30:25.640 It's happening.

00:30:26.660 And then, of course, Kyrsten Sinema, you know, this week is like, yeah, it's not happening.

00:30:30.820 I'm not not supporting a Democrat.

00:30:32.580 Right.

00:30:32.760 So they don't have the votes.

00:30:33.680 They knew they didn't have the votes.

00:30:35.080 So why were they making such a thing?

00:30:37.320 It's like they did the same thing with Build Back Better.

00:30:39.140 Like, we're going to do it.

00:30:39.940 We've got it.

00:30:40.500 And like, Manchin was never on board.

00:30:41.980 Why do they keep embarrassing themselves?

00:30:43.320 This is an easy thing to avoid.

00:30:45.680 Yeah, there's a pattern in politics.

00:30:47.200 So what happens is you win an election.

00:30:48.660 You have a 50-50 Senate, a very narrow majority in the House.

00:30:51.360 But your base, the most radical elements, the people who give you $50 a month online,

00:30:55.780 who knock on doors, who make the phone calls, who, if they're not energized, you have no chance

00:31:01.320 of winning elections.

00:31:02.120 Those people think we have a mandate.

00:31:03.940 And they say, OK, you won.

00:31:04.960 And it doesn't matter if you won by one vote, one point, or you won by 20, you won.

00:31:08.860 And now we expect you to do all the things you promised.

00:31:11.620 And so they go out there and they try to do these things.

00:31:13.560 And they're not going to pass.

00:31:14.880 But they're angry at them.

00:31:15.940 And they're saying, well, at least try.

00:31:17.220 You have to at least try.

00:31:18.440 It happens in politics.

00:31:19.440 It happens to both sides in some cases.

00:31:21.300 You know you're not going to win something.

00:31:22.660 But if you don't at least show you're fighting, then your base gets really angry at you.

00:31:26.680 Then they get turned off.

00:31:27.660 They won't show up.

00:31:28.380 They won't give money.

00:31:29.020 And you get destroyed because you can't win an election these days if your base is not energized.

00:31:34.060 So that's what this is about.

00:31:35.660 It's not just about Chuck Schumer.

00:31:36.860 Personally, think about how selfish this is.

00:31:38.940 This may, he thinks, may help send off a primary challenge.

00:31:42.720 But he has all these Democrats running in states that are somewhat vulnerable.

00:31:46.780 And they're being put on the spot on this thing.

00:31:48.600 And they're going to have to go out there now and take positions on it and dividing his own conference over that.

00:31:53.220 But it's all a base play because they have to be able to go to the base and say, we tried.

00:31:57.140 We fought.

00:31:58.000 But these two guys over here and the racist Republicans wouldn't let us move forward.

00:32:02.080 And that's what this is.

00:32:03.200 It's as simple as that.

00:32:04.800 They say, and I want to get to the accusations of racism because they're coming in by the minute against Kyrsten Sinema now and others.

00:32:11.880 But they say, look, we have to have this new voting rights law because of January 6th, because the Republicans are trying to change laws across the nation to make it easier for the vote to be thrown out.

00:32:24.760 And January 6th proved that, you know, we need more federal control of how these things get certified and go down.

00:32:31.000 There was a moment where you tried to address that rationale.

00:32:36.080 We cut the soundbite because we found it kind of interesting.

00:32:38.340 This is soundbite five.

00:32:39.220 I'm going to play it and then get you to add to it.

00:32:40.960 I think almost everyone would tell you that what happened on January 6th here was a terrible thing.

00:32:45.880 It should never have happened and it should never happen again.

00:32:49.040 But I don't care how many candlelight vigils and musical performances you have from the cast of Hamilton.

00:32:53.660 You're not going to convince at least more, most normal, insane people that our government last year was almost overthrown by a guy wearing a Viking hat and speedos.

00:33:03.180 OK, well, they've they've issued their first arrest for a guy charged with, quote, sedition now.

00:33:10.240 Does that change your opinion?

00:33:13.140 No, I look at my opinion is that what happened on January 6th was a terrible thing.

00:33:16.900 Crimes were committed on that day and the people that are responsible for that should be charged, should be put on trial and convicted, should serve sentences for it.

00:33:24.200 And and I continue to believe that I believe that from the moment it started.

00:33:27.480 I don't care who you are. I don't care what your banner is.

00:33:30.160 I don't care whose side you're on, who you voted for, whether you agree with me on issues or not.

00:33:34.000 You can't do what happened on that day.

00:33:35.560 You can't do it in the Capitol and you can't do it in the 700 different riots that took place in the summer of 2020 across this country.

00:33:42.660 You cannot do it. And those are crimes that need to be prosecuted and people need to be put on trial and hopefully convicted for it.

00:33:48.800 That is separate from the argument that somehow this was an orchestrated effort to overthrow the government of the United States of America.

00:33:55.160 That just is not true. We were nowhere close to that. That was not going to happen.

00:33:59.540 And so I think what happens is when you exaggerate these things, you lose credibility.

00:34:03.600 When you lose credibility, then we lose the ability to analyze these things for what they truly are.

00:34:09.020 And in many cases, you sort of empower the worst elements.

00:34:11.460 You go around calling if everyone is a racist, if that becomes just a throwaway line.

00:34:18.800 You're numb to it. And then you really can't call out the people that are racist or that are doing things that are race based as a result of it.

00:34:25.760 And it's the same thing with this. You know, what happened that day?

00:34:29.000 You don't have to be most people in the normal people are able to do to say what happened on a day was wrong and it shouldn't have happened.

00:34:36.980 But it also is an equivalent of Pearl Harbor, where the U.S. was pulled into a world war that that ended up killing three percent of the global population. 0.97

00:34:45.500 These are stupid things for people to say, particularly a vice president of the United States, as an example. 0.98

00:34:50.780 Yeah. The that's how she opened her remarks the other day. I mean, comparing it to 9-11, too. 1.00

00:34:55.560 It's like so disrespectful, I think the the Democrats, though, continue and the press helps trying to call the senators, the lawmakers, anyone who's not in favor of the voting rights bill or eliminating the filibuster, which is very controversial.

00:35:12.560 Or that Build Back Better plan, which, of course, is just a list, a laundry list of Democratic wish items, wish list items, bigots.

00:35:21.720 This is a sample we have from MSNBC. They're going after Joe Manchin and some others because, of course, Manchin stopped Build Back Better.

00:35:28.560 He's also reportedly not in favor of eliminating the filibuster, something Joe Biden opposed for almost his entire career until he became the president.

00:35:36.880 And Kristen Sinema is taking her fair shot of these accusations as well.

00:35:40.740 This is Soundbite 9.

00:35:42.560 But if Chris Coombs, John Tester, Mark Kelly, Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin want to be on the side of of George Wallace, want to be on the side of Strong Thurman and many others who stood in the way of civil rights, even Strong Thurman came around on voting rights.

00:35:57.960 But if they want to go down in history as standing on the side of segregationists and those individuals who oppose people who look like me, having free and fair access to the ballot, then we will remember them as such.

00:36:10.280 All right. So a clip from CNN and here to add to that, Senator, New York Democrat, Representative Jamal Bowman today sharing his views of Kyrsten Sinema on Twitter, retreating a picture of her and the late John Lewis, former congressman.

00:36:24.760 In the original image, Senator Sinema had tweeted my hero after Lewis died.

00:36:30.520 Bowman tweets out the following hero, a person who is admired or idealized for coverage, outstanding achievements or noble qualities.

00:36:39.600 Traitor, a person who betrays a friend, country, principal, et cetera.

00:36:43.160 He went on to say, Bowman, John Lewis is a hero. 0.84

00:36:47.560 You, Sinema, are a traitor to his legacy, your constituents and our democracy.

00:36:53.360 What do you make of it? 0.87

00:36:55.200 I make of it two things.

00:36:56.360 Number one, if you want to get noticed in American politics today, you say things like that.

00:37:00.400 Right. And the more outrageous, the more notice you're going to get.

00:37:02.620 And there are some people that are going to applaud it, at least treat it as a serious statement.

00:37:05.700 I think the other is that it's poisonous and toxic and and nasty. 0.99

00:37:10.020 And I don't even have the words to describe how ridiculous that assumption is. 0.97

00:37:14.580 But it goes back to the point I made earlier. 0.91

00:37:16.180 And that is this now things like traitor, things like racists, things like bigot have become throwaway lines.

00:37:22.600 Look, there are bigots and there are racists in this country.

00:37:27.460 There are bigots and there are racists on the entire planet Earth. 0.76

00:37:29.880 It is one of the sins that bedevils mankind.

00:37:32.580 And we should reserve our anger for the ones that are really that and are motivated by that.

00:37:38.400 But when you start calling everybody that and every issue becomes on the basis of that, then suddenly that issue, you can no longer raise it.

00:37:45.360 In essence, you almost give cover to the people that are actually racists and bigots.

00:37:49.860 And again, look, I think that this sort of language that we just described, it plays really well among a certain core constituency that watches, you know, CNN or MSNBC or or lives on Twitter and and gives money to their campaigns.

00:38:05.460 But to the overwhelming majority of Americans, particularly the ones that are paying attention, because most people aren't, they would look at that and say, this is a bridge too far.

00:38:15.120 I think sometimes we forget that the common sense of real people is still there, even if the people running the country sometimes seem to be out of their minds.

00:38:23.400 Hmm. There's I want to get to quite a few other things with you, including Biden's 33 percent approval rating and what happened at the Supreme Court.

00:38:29.780 We now have a decision on the vaccine mandates.

00:38:31.740 But first, can I ask you quickly, speaking of bigotry, as we all know, the Chinese are engaged in an ethnic genocide against the Muslim minorities within China. 0.77

00:38:41.040 And you've been taking the lead in trying to push for some accountability on this as we're on the precipice of the Beijing Olympics.

00:38:50.540 One of the things that jumped out at me, as I saw I'm preparing for this interview, you are asking for Olympic partners to acknowledge this genocide.

00:38:58.300 You have you do that back in December, penning a letter to these Olympic sponsors, you know, calling them out for what you say is ignoring an ongoing genocide.

00:39:07.000 I looked at the list. I cannot believe companies like Coke, Coca-Cola is so busy over here lecturing us on how terrible we all are.

00:39:16.220 And yet they are a sponsor of these Olympics.

00:39:20.540 Yeah, it's unfortunate. Nike, others that are out there and they were there.

00:39:24.400 I'm not sure if Nike is a sponsor, but I'm sure they'll be very involved in advertising around it because of the athletes that are performing.

00:39:30.420 And what happens with these companies is they they have they are very quick to order, you know, call for the boycott of a state, put up billboards and run commercials about how terrible the United States of America is or how terrible some decision that was made by elected representatives of the American people are.

00:39:46.980 But they won't say a word about China. And it's not just about the Olympics. It is in general.

00:39:50.700 This is just true all the way across the board. And and that kind of hypocrisy needs to be called out.

00:39:55.640 But I doubt you'll see any of these companies step forward because if they do, the Chinese will shut them down and they that would cost them billions of dollars and maybe get the CEO fired as a result of it. 0.99

00:40:06.040 So I don't have a lot of hope. We're going to get a response from them. But but I think it's important to continue to call out this hypocrisy.

00:40:12.620 Yeah, I mean, well, of course, the truth about Coke is it lectures us here not because it really cares or has any heart in the matters that it's lecturing us on.

00:40:22.380 It thinks it's good for business. It's always looking to line its bottom its pockets.

00:40:26.620 That's how companies work and that you get a different result in China where it will not help their bottom line to call out the Chinese Communist Party or the government there.

00:40:37.200 All right. There's plenty more to get to more with Marco Rubio in just one minute when we take on quite a few items, including do you think Hillary Clinton could run against Trump in 2024?

00:40:48.020 Could that be the matchup again? Marco Rubio has run for president and he may have an opinion.

00:40:54.160 Remember, folks, you can catch The Megyn Kelly Show live on Sirius XM Triumph Channel 111 every weekday at noon east and the full video show and clips by subscribing to our YouTube channel, YouTube dot com slash Megyn Kelly.

00:41:07.480 If you prefer an audio podcast, just download the show for free at Apple, Spotify, Pandora, Stitcher or wherever you get your podcasts.

00:41:15.700 And there you will find over 230 archives shows, including the one I mentioned with Richard Muller.

00:41:23.500 We had him on in June. We had him on again in October.

00:41:27.800 And he's the physicist who really shows you why the the genetic sequencing of COVID-19 proves it came from a lab.

00:41:38.240 We'll be right back.

00:41:38.740 We'll be right back.

00:42:08.740 So what do you make of it? Because people are mad at Justice Kavanaugh, in particular, for siding with Chief Justice Roberts.

00:42:14.620 Conservatives are used to Roberts now betraying them and crossing over to help the lives.

00:42:18.840 But Roberts and Kavanaugh crossed over to save the vaccine mandate for the health care workers, people going through Medicare or Medicaid.

00:42:26.180 But the decision came out, as predicted, six, three on the the bigger vaccine mandate that applies would have applied to some 83 million Americans through their employers.

00:42:35.220 Right. So and I think, you know, this obviously from your legal background, but it's always important to remind people the Supreme Court's job is not to tell us if some policy is a good idea or a bad idea.

00:42:45.220 The job is to tell us whether it's unconstitutional or not. Does the federal government have the power to do this?

00:42:50.940 I think clearly and most people thought it did not have the power.

00:42:53.920 And I think the Biden administration knew they did not have the power to do the broad vaccine mandate using OSHA, that OSHA was not created to go into businesses and tell them they had to put this in place.

00:43:04.540 I have not read the opinions and I have not read any of the writings with regards to the to either of the decisions, but particularly the one about the health care workers.

00:43:11.820 So I'd like to dig into that before pining on what Kavanaugh and Roberts just rationale was.

00:43:17.380 But on the first point, I don't think the Biden administration ever thought they would win a legal challenge to it.

00:43:22.300 I think in their view is let's do it. And if the Supreme Court upholds it, fine. And if they don't, then they don't.

00:43:27.080 You know, we can just say a lot of people are going to die because Supreme Court made a bad decision.

00:43:30.460 But I think it's really important to remind people, particularly those who believe, as I do, that the job of the court is not to make policy, but to interpret and apply the Constitution, that that's what their job is.

00:43:41.720 And I think that's what they were trying to do here. And and and I think reach the right decision, at least on the OSHA piece.

00:43:48.500 Yeah, it was clearly not going to be upheld as constitutional.

00:43:51.980 We were on the record saying that. So were many people who had taken a hard look at this.

00:43:56.260 And yet he did it. He did the same thing with the eviction moratorium over the summer.

00:43:59.940 He knew it wasn't going to be upheld. It was very clear that it was going to be struck down.

00:44:02.920 But he did it anyway. These extra legal moves by somebody who's not a king.

00:44:08.240 And yet there's no accountability. Same as there's no accountability for Fauci or Collins for the lies that they've been telling us.

00:44:13.260 Same as there's been no accountability for a single general at all involved in the Afghanistan withdrawal.

00:44:19.780 You know, we had Lieutenant Colonel Scheller, now former Marine on the show.

00:44:23.380 He's the only guy who lost his job because he spoke out about the leadership.

00:44:26.700 It's just it's so frustrating to the American people to see no accountability time after time after time.

00:44:32.240 And again, as I say, extra legal behavior by the president of the United States.

00:44:37.080 But I actually disagree slightly. I think there is accountability and it's being reflected today in the public polling.

00:44:42.880 And I think in November in the elections, that's where the accountability is going to be.

00:44:46.780 Yeah, you're right. I mean, no one's being hauled off to jail. No one's being prosecuted.

00:44:50.260 No one's being fired or losing their job. But there's no doubt that Joe Biden and his party are paying a tremendous price at the polls, in the public polling you see now.

00:44:59.900 But ultimately, I believe in November because of any of these things that they've done.

00:45:03.580 And if you look at the debacle in Afghanistan, that almost perfectly coincides with the beginning of this dramatic and precipitous decline in his approval ratings.

00:45:12.900 So the accountability here is ultimately in the hands of American voters. And I think you're going to see that play out in November.

00:45:18.820 Well, if the election were today, it would not look good for President Biden.

00:45:22.580 He has got a 33 percent approval rating right now, according to Quinnipiac polling.

00:45:27.740 That's the lowest of any poll tracked by Real Clear Politics, from which I got the reporting.

00:45:32.700 Among Democrats, he had 87 percent support in November. Now it's down to 75.

00:45:38.120 The racial breakdowns, whites approve 32 percent, 57 percent disapprove.

00:45:44.020 Blacks, 57 percent approve, 27 percent disapprove. 0.93

00:45:46.960 Hispanics, 28 percent approve. That's it.

00:45:51.300 51 percent disapprove.

00:45:52.580 By the way, among independents, only 25 percent approve.

00:45:56.100 The drop with Hispanics, a group that the Democratic Party has courted, in its words at least, so ardently has got to come as a particularly painful piece of data to them.

00:46:08.380 Your thoughts on it?

00:46:10.000 Yeah. Look, if you're a mother or a father, if you're a small business owner, if you're just a worker trying to get ahead,

00:46:15.880 if you're a parent working really hard so your kids will have a chance at a better life like my parents did,

00:46:20.440 your number one identity is father, mother, worker, small business owner.

00:46:25.540 You know, it's not Hispanic. 1.00

00:46:27.400 When my dad woke up every morning before going to work, he didn't look in the mirror and say,

00:46:31.300 good morning, Hispanic American.

00:46:32.600 He woke up in the morning and he acknowledged today, I'm going to go out and I'm going to work really hard to provide for my family.

00:46:38.060 So one day my kids will have a chance to do the things I never had the chance to do.

00:46:42.800 That is the primary identity, not just of Hispanic Americans, but of millions of Americans,

00:46:47.100 irrespective of what race or where they came from, what their ethnicity might be.

00:46:51.700 I think that's been forgotten in all of this, that somehow, you know, inflation is going to,

00:46:56.900 inflation is hurting a Hispanic small business owner, the same as it's hurting or more in many cases

00:47:01.900 than it might be hurting a non-Hispanic small business owner.

00:47:05.120 And I think that we've forgotten that in American politics.

00:47:08.300 We, there are people that talk about politics, involved in politics,

00:47:11.360 who think people's primary identity in this country is their race or their ethnicity.

00:47:14.960 And it is not the primary identity of most people in this country is that they're a spouse,

00:47:20.140 they're a husband, they're a wife, they're a father, they're a mother,

00:47:22.680 they're a business owner, they're an employee somewhere, they're a student.

00:47:25.040 That's the primary identity.

00:47:27.440 So what you're saying is when you wake up in the morning,

00:47:29.040 you don't look at yourself and say, there's one good looking latinx. 1.00

00:47:34.600 Yeah, no, no, no.

00:47:36.860 Especially these days, that's for sure. 0.99

00:47:40.020 That term is so ridiculous. 0.97

00:47:41.360 There was a poll that's where like 2% of people of Hispanic descent like that term latinx or latinx, 0.98

00:47:47.280 whatever it goes either way.

00:47:48.680 Okay, so let me ask you.

00:47:50.080 I don't even know how to pronounce it.

00:47:50.220 I never heard anybody use it.

00:47:51.520 So I don't know what it is.

00:47:51.880 Don't get used to it.

00:47:52.500 I thought it was a band or something.

00:47:55.160 So I didn't know.

00:47:56.400 Don't get used to it because the Democrats too will abandon it soon when they see the polling.

00:48:01.200 We got to talk presidential politics for a minute.

00:48:03.460 I've covered you now as you've been running for president.

00:48:06.020 The race, of course, it's a couple of years away, but, you know, we get started before 2024 on something like this.

00:48:12.360 And Doug Schoen, my old pal from Fox News, Democrat analyst and operative, had a piece saying Hillary Clinton's going to come again.

00:48:22.200 She's going to have a comeback. 1.00

00:48:23.160 All signs he knows her well suggest the once unfathomable scenario is now plausible.

00:48:31.300 A political comeback for Hillary who will run, get this, as a change candidate, change candidate. 0.98

00:48:37.620 And by the way, as you know, Trump is suggesting he's going to run too.

00:48:41.920 So we could actually have a Trump-Hillary matchup. 1.00

00:48:44.140 What do you think the odds of that are?

00:48:46.280 Let me tell you something.

00:48:47.260 I think a few years ago people stood on shows like this and would make predictions with some level of certainty about what the future would hold.

00:48:53.760 I think what the last eight to ten years have showed us is, I don't know what tomorrow is going to look like, but I'm confident it won't look anything like it does today.

00:49:00.620 And I think that's certainly been true beginning since 2015.

00:49:03.980 We're just in a very unusual, fluid, and dynamic time where anything's possible.

00:49:07.920 And if you told me that in 2024 the two candidates for president would be Hillary Clinton against Donald Trump, a rematch of 2016, a lot of people may think that's far-fetched right now.

00:49:19.280 But I think it's about as plausible as any of the other things that people are talking about.

00:49:23.340 It truly is.

00:49:24.640 I mean, if I told you two and a half years ago we're going to all be shut down because there's some virus that's going to come out of China and do this, this, and this, people would say, well, that's a great plot for a movie, but that's not really going to happen.

00:49:34.880 Well, it did. It did happen. And so, like I said, look, I mean, there's just so much that happens these days, you just can't predict.

00:49:40.800 As somebody who's actually run against Trump, what do you think is good for the Republican Party? That Trump runs or no?

00:49:47.700 Listen, Donald Trump, okay, brought people into the Republican Party, many of whom had never voted Republican before.

00:49:54.820 I mean, one of the most fascinating voters in America are the people that voted for Barack Obama twice and then Donald Trump twice.

00:50:00.400 And we certainly want those people to remain within the Republican fold.

00:50:03.780 There's been a tremendous realignment in American politics, I think, to the net benefit of the Republican Party.

00:50:09.500 And Donald Trump's been a big part of it. I have no idea what Donald Trump is going to do.

00:50:12.600 I can tell you just this, because knowing politics a little bit, he's the most popular Republican in the country.

00:50:17.880 Whether people like it or not, he's the most Republican. He's the most popular and influential Republican in the country.

00:50:23.200 If he runs for president, he's going to be the Republican nominee.

00:50:25.700 And I think he has at least a 50-50 chance to win the presidency as a result of that, if not higher, depending on who his opponent is, especially if it's Hillary Clinton or disastrous Joe Biden.

00:50:36.400 So those are facts.

00:50:37.400 And ultimately, I would say this.

00:50:40.900 I look back a couple of years and, you know, you don't have to agree with everything Trump said.

00:50:46.160 America's economy and America was better and America in the world stage was safer when he was president than it is now under Joe Biden.

00:50:53.180 For me, that's unquestionable.

00:50:54.260 And in the end, that to me is the most important thing we do in government.

00:50:57.680 Give people a chance to succeed economically and keep our country safe.

00:51:01.600 And on both counts, we were better off under Donald Trump than we are now.

00:51:04.600 So great to have you, Senator Rubio.

00:51:07.380 Really love talking to you.

00:51:08.900 Buckle up. 0.96

00:51:09.500 It's going to be an interesting couple of years.

00:51:11.740 All the best to you.

00:51:12.420 Yeah, exactly.

00:51:13.460 Thank you.

00:51:15.020 Up next, Prince Andrew's fall from grace and his connection to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, by the way, is her verdict about to get thrown out.

00:51:24.860 A royal fall from grace and how for Britain's Prince Andrew, as the civil sex assault case against him is allowed to move forward.

00:51:39.800 And his mother, the Queen, strips him of his military titles and royal patronages, effectively sending her son into exile.

00:51:49.820 Dan Wooten is amazing.

00:51:51.580 He's host of GB News' Dan Wooten Tonight and a Daily Mail columnist.

00:51:56.420 Dan, great to have you here.

00:51:57.360 How are you?

00:51:58.120 I'm good, Megan.

00:51:59.080 So good to see you.

00:52:00.420 So good to see you, too.

00:52:01.240 I love coming on your show and it's fun to have you back on ours.

00:52:03.700 So, Dan, first of all, can I start with this?

00:52:07.300 This all is happening because the court here in the sexual assault lawsuit against him brought by Virginia Roberts, who was who claims and the evidence is there that she was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein.

00:52:18.520 She claims Prince Andrew was one of the men to whom she was trafficked repeatedly.

00:52:22.220 He denies it.

00:52:23.540 So she filed a civil lawsuit against him.

00:52:25.340 And all that's happened is the judge has said it can move forward.

00:52:29.280 I'm not going to throw it out on the papers, which happens in 98 percent of all cases.

00:52:33.680 Motions to dismiss are usually not granted because all the presumptions go to the plaintiff to be given a chance to prove his or her case.

00:52:40.940 So why is there such a national freak out, you know, in Great Britain, in the palace over the fact that, you know, all that's changed for Prince Andrew from two days ago to today is the judge, as expected, allowed the case to move forward.

00:52:55.740 The problem is, Megan, this has been dragging on now for years and it's dragging down the reputation of the monarchy.

00:53:04.200 I mean, you'll remember Prince Andrew had an opportunity to try and prove that he had a case that would make Virginia due phrase claims.

00:53:15.120 And I know we've spoken many times before that there are doubts around the credibility of Virginia.

00:53:19.800 But he had an opportunity in a one hour interview with the BBC to set things straight and he failed.

00:53:27.080 He was not credible.

00:53:28.120 He also said in that interview that he would cooperate with the U.S. authorities, specifically the FBI.

00:53:35.340 He would get on a plane and go to the U.S. because he had nothing to hide about that very close friendship with his BFF, you know, the pedo Jeffrey Epstein and his gal pal Ghislaine Maxwell, who, remember, Megan, he had taken to the Queen's residence.

00:53:52.560 I mean, they were incredibly close.

00:53:55.060 So he had an opportunity over the past two years to do that.

00:53:58.800 He failed.

00:53:59.860 And by this point, the people who he was working on behalf of, for example, the Grenadier guards on the military side and his royal patronages, they didn't want a bar of him.

00:54:12.700 So this was a very difficult decision for the Queen.

00:54:15.440 She is said to be devastated about it.

00:54:17.020 Believe it or not, Megan, Prince Andrew is her favourite son.

00:54:20.400 They remain incredibly close.

00:54:22.100 They live just down the road from each other on the grounds of Windsor Castle.

00:54:25.460 They still go horse riding.

00:54:26.580 They still go to church together.

00:54:28.260 But really, Prince Charles and Prince William have stepped in over the past 48 hours.

00:54:32.740 And remember, the pressure has been building for a long time on the Queen.

00:54:35.540 And they said enough is enough.

00:54:37.960 So it's not it's not fair to just look at it as, hey, a case is filed.

00:54:42.280 It's going to play out.

00:54:43.180 Let's wait.

00:54:43.760 It's that he has.

00:54:45.420 First of all, he he did.

00:54:47.620 We know, engage in some questionable behavior, even if you give him the benefit of the doubt on her allegations.

00:54:52.380 He definitely hung out with a guy who had copped a plea on a underage sex charge, knowing that he had just done that.

00:54:59.960 I mean, he went and stayed with Jeffrey Epstein after Jeffrey Epstein took that plea bargain in the criminal case.

00:55:04.840 So that's yeah, you can see how there'd be consequences.

00:55:07.540 But what you're saying is he's actively taken steps since then that have embarrassed the royal family, his promises about cooperation, his weird defenses that he offered in that BBC interview that didn't pan out.

00:55:18.980 So he kind of worsened his own situation.

00:55:22.760 Absolutely.

00:55:23.540 And remember, Megan, we are in a changing monarchy.

00:55:26.360 And for people outside of the UK, it's maybe slightly difficult to understand because, of course, the Queen has always said she will never abdicate.

00:55:35.700 And unless she is forced to because of severely ill health, we really do believe she will stay on the throne.

00:55:41.860 And people think I'm crazy, Megan.

00:55:43.260 But I say all the time we need the Queen to be on that throne for decades to come. 1.00

00:55:48.660 She's a healthy woman.

00:55:49.960 And my God, we pray that she will be because there's a lot of issues around a King Charles and a Queen Camilla.

00:55:57.820 But part of the plan that King Charles is currently putting into action is to streamline the monarchy, to slim it down, to modernize it.

00:56:07.160 So to have Prince Andrew and his chancer wife, Fergie, who has shamed the royal family time and again over the past two decades as senior royals was just unconscionable. 1.00

00:56:22.780 And it was unconscionable for Prince Charles and Prince William.

00:56:25.500 And I think what this decision shows is that they are calling the shots now.

00:56:29.040 The Queen, at 95 years old, without her husband, Prince Philip, who obviously was an enforcer behind the scenes within the royal family for his entire life.

00:56:39.020 And by the way, despised Fergie. 0.91

00:56:41.420 Sarah Ferguson would not allow her to be at royal events.

00:56:45.520 All of a sudden, he's out of the picture.

00:56:47.380 And so it's Prince Charles and Prince William, who are no fans of their brother, Prince Andrew, and their uncle, Prince Andrew, because they believe he's bought shame on the monarchy.

00:56:56.880 Hmm. Well, I mean, it's certainly it's hard to argue when you see that picture of him with Virginia Roberts when she was allegedly around 17.

00:57:05.040 That's what she claims. And she claims that she she serviced him sexually three times and in three different locations in London, in New York and down at Jeffrey's private island in the Virgin Islands.

00:57:15.880 All of which, again, he denies. And normally we would just see, you know, discovery play out in the civil case.

00:57:21.340 And then when discovery is done, the defendant would move for summary judgment, saying, don't let this go to a jury.

00:57:27.460 Give me a judgment on the papers, your honor, because all the evidence that she's amassed in this case, even if we take it as true in the light most favorable to her, doesn't make a case.

00:57:38.540 But he can't really do that. I mean, maybe that he could legally, but he's fighting a PR war, too.

00:57:45.400 And it seems like the British public has about had it and is not going to give him any more leeway on that PR war.

00:57:52.160 No, because he had an opportunity. And just remember what discovery would mean for Prince Andrew.

00:57:59.300 It would mean, for example, his daughters, Princess, Princess's Beatrice and Eugenie potentially having to give evidence and say under oath whether their dad was telling the truth

00:58:11.640 when they claimed that he was having dinner with them at a pizza express restaurant rather than at Tramp nightclub where he was claimed to have have been with Epstein and Epstein's victim.

00:58:25.860 So it's just really not tenable. Obviously, the issue at the moment is, is this a financial play by Virginia, Virginia Dufresne?

00:58:35.480 Obviously, she says it's not. Prince Andrew and his team certainly think it is, Megan, because he's currently selling his £10 million ski chalet to prepare to pay.

00:58:49.180 Wait a minute. Did you say Tramp nightclub? T-R-A-M-P? 1.00

00:58:52.560 Yes.

00:58:53.440 Why did you not take me there when I came and visited you in London?

00:58:57.740 Doug and I would have gone with you to Tramp.

00:58:59.300 Because there's loads of sleazeballs there, Megan, just like Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein looking for a very young woman.

00:59:09.020 The thought of Prince Andrew sitting in a nightclub called Tramp is in and of itself kind of shocking.

00:59:15.880 But OK, so, yes, let's talk about the money.

00:59:19.020 If he has to pay her and I mean, I feel like he will pay her.

00:59:22.080 He will settle this, even though she's saying it's not about money.

00:59:25.040 I want to hold him accountable. But listen, let's face it.

00:59:27.680 She's not an independently rich woman. If he makes the check big enough, she's going to take it and go away. 1.00

00:59:32.420 Then David Boyce, her lawyer, certainly is going to take it and go away.

00:59:35.580 I got a lot of things to say about him.

00:59:38.180 Anyway, how does he pay for that?

00:59:41.220 And is the Queen actually funding right now Prince Andrew's defence?

00:59:46.180 She has been. Yeah. And I mean, that's the disgrace in all of this.

00:59:49.100 So in the statement released by Buckingham Palace yesterday, they insisted that Prince Andrew would be fighting this case as a private citizen.

00:59:58.540 But that doesn't mean he isn't running to mummy dairist and asking her to dip into her very deep pockets. 0.83

01:00:04.820 Because, of course, yes, the Queen is partly funded by the state, but she also has a very large personal fortune.

01:00:10.820 And the £10 million ski chalet, most people think, is only going to cover some of his legal costs.

01:00:16.820 So we're in this crazy world where Prince Andrew may have to ask the Queen to pay the settlement that goes to Virginia Dufresne.

01:00:26.380 And for a 95-year-old woman who is in her twilight years, who has lived, let's be completely honest, a life without scandal, a life completely dedicated to her country,

01:00:39.840 where she has put her country before herself time and again at great personal sacrifice.

01:00:47.020 I think the position that he's putting the Queen in and the embarrassment that he is causing the Queen, let alone the heartache of her having to watch her favourite son go through this, I just feel like it is a low blow.

01:01:01.580 What if he's innocent? You know, what if he didn't do it?

01:01:04.580 What if she just named him because she saw a deep pocket and all this stuff is happening to him unfairly?

01:01:10.980 Yes, he's a rube in front of the camera. He doesn't he's not smooth.

01:01:14.460 He said a bunch of dumb things, but I've tried enough cases and been involved in enough to know people aren't always perfect when you get them in front of the cameras. 0.70

01:01:22.180 And sometimes they say dumb stuff, even though they're totally innocent. 0.98

01:01:26.320 Well, especially someone as entitled and delusional as Prince Andrew. 0.89

01:01:30.160 I mean, Megan, you know, I've been reporting this case now for well over a decade.

01:01:34.500 And I think probably the most fascinating day was the day after that BBC interview.

01:01:40.980 When I spoke to one of my sources very close to Prince Andrew and he'd actually gone to church with the Queen at Windsor Castle.

01:01:49.600 And at that point, remember, you've got everyone in Britain saying Prince Andrew's finished. 0.52

01:01:53.940 This was the most ridiculous interview we've ever heard in our life. 0.50

01:01:56.400 What does he mean? He can't sweat. He's lost all credibility. 0.99

01:02:00.680 Prince Andrew actually told the Queen that morning, mommy, I did great.

01:02:05.840 This is over. So this is a man who lives in a different world, Megan.

01:02:11.440 He is very privileged. He's never had anyone telling him what to do or how to act.

01:02:17.860 And that's one of the problems with royalty, obviously.

01:02:21.780 So, look, I think there's a chance Prince Andrew is innocent.

01:02:25.820 Of course I do. He has not been proven guilty of anything when it comes to the conduct of his behavior with Virginia Dufresne.

01:02:32.840 But the key point, Megan, is the one that you raised earlier in the interview.

01:02:36.900 Why did he go and spend the weekend staying with Jeffrey Epstein after he had already gone to jail for child sex trafficking?

01:02:46.780 And remember, if it wasn't my old newspaper, the News of the World and my current newspaper, the Daily Mail,

01:02:52.900 that has been on this story for years and years and years, that visit would have remained secret.

01:02:57.820 Remember, it was a paparazzi picture that actually captured Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew on that walk through Central Park.

01:03:05.180 Now, if that photographer hadn't been there, perhaps the story would never have come to public light.

01:03:09.180 And Andrew and Epstein would have got away with the entire thing.

01:03:12.740 And then, of course, it was the Mail on Sunday newspaper, which is part of the Daily Mail group,

01:03:16.500 that first ran that picture, that very consequential image of Virginia Dufresne and Prince Andrew

01:03:23.220 with sex trafficker, convicted sex trafficker, and Al Ghislaine Maxwell in the background.

01:03:28.000 So I don't know about you, Megan, but I would say whether or not Prince Andrew had sexual relations with Virginia Dufresne,

01:03:35.040 there are still serious questions for him to answer based on everything we know about his incredibly close relationship with Epstein and Maxwell.

01:03:44.260 And just to take our audience back, Dan, to that BBC interview, because many, most of our audience probably didn't see that.

01:03:50.980 I wonder why he gave it, because it was universally panned as awful and a death knell to his public reputation.

01:03:58.120 I wonder why he gave it.

01:03:59.640 And then you referenced the sweating comment.

01:04:02.380 We actually have that cut.

01:04:03.440 So I'm going to play a soundbite.

01:04:04.820 Then you can explain to the audience what on earth he was doing here.

01:04:08.160 OK, let's listen.

01:04:10.040 She was very specific about that night.

01:04:12.200 She described dancing with you and you profusely sweating and that she went on to have baths, possibly.

01:04:21.280 There's a slight problem with the sweating because I have a peculiar medical condition,

01:04:31.240 which is that I don't sweat or I didn't sweat at the time.

01:04:34.720 And that was, oh, actually, yes, I didn't sweat at the time because I had suffered what I would describe as an overdose of adrenaline in the Falklands War when I was shot at.

01:04:46.900 And I simply, it was almost impossible for me to sweat.

01:04:53.720 And it's only because I have done a number of things in the recent past that I'm starting to be able to do that again.

01:05:01.600 So I'm afraid to say that there's a medical condition that says that I didn't do it.

01:05:06.440 Oh, Dan.

01:05:08.600 Thoughts?

01:05:09.080 Come on.

01:05:10.820 Come on.

01:05:13.800 He didn't sweat then.

01:05:16.080 He does sweat now.

01:05:18.300 There's absolutely no proof of this medical condition.

01:05:21.980 He doesn't have doctor's notes backing it up.

01:05:24.880 Come on.

01:05:25.780 He wasn't a credible witness.

01:05:28.040 It was a car crash.

01:05:29.760 And it did effectively finish him off.

01:05:32.320 And then you mentioned the British tabloid press.

01:05:34.100 They promptly came out with a bunch of photos since the Falklands War, which is 1981, I think, showing him sweaty.

01:05:41.300 You knew they were going to do it.

01:05:43.000 He should know the British press better than anyone.

01:05:46.460 Well, I know.

01:05:46.920 And, you know, the British press gets a bad rap, Meghan.

01:05:49.360 But one of the things that I would say, because, you know, all the time we get this criticism.

01:05:54.660 Why do you care so much about Harry and Meghan?

01:05:57.820 Why do you give them such a hard time and you let Prince Andrew off the hook?

01:06:03.140 As I say, without British newspapers, not only would Prince Andrew have got away with all of this,

01:06:09.940 Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell would have got away with all of this, too.

01:06:13.720 So it is the campaigning journalism of the British media that actually saw Epstein get to court.

01:06:21.020 Because you know what?

01:06:21.740 And I think it's completely despicable, actually.

01:06:23.760 The establishment wanted this to go away.

01:06:25.580 The political establishment wanted this to go away.

01:06:27.500 The royal establishment wanted this to go away.

01:06:30.060 The business establishment wanted this to go away.

01:06:32.440 Because it was very convenient for them, for Prince Andrew, to be this very odd liaison

01:06:37.100 between the royal family, between big business, between politicians.

01:06:41.840 And look, he was always incredibly dodgy in some of his practices.

01:06:46.620 And so, too, was his wife, Sarah Ferguson.

01:06:48.840 So they are no loss to the royal family.

01:06:51.700 Right.

01:06:52.220 They're willing to walk away.

01:06:53.180 It's not like this happened to Prince William, who, I don't know,

01:06:55.820 there are reports in that same press about him possibly stepping outside of his marriage.

01:06:59.600 Dan, I don't know whether that's true or not, but that's one thing.

01:07:02.600 The British people will tolerate such a thing, but they will not tolerate

01:07:05.200 this kind of thing.

01:07:06.540 And they aren't in the same field morally.

01:07:09.580 Oh, no, absolutely not.

01:07:11.000 Well, I mean, as it stands right now, Meghan, the best hope for the future of the royal family

01:07:15.820 are Prince William and his wife, Kate, who turned 40 over the weekend and remains a beloved

01:07:22.400 figure in the UK and throughout the Commonwealth.

01:07:25.260 Of course, there's a lot of pressure on that couple, Meghan, because you've seen Harry and

01:07:30.300 Meghan go.

01:07:31.440 You've seen Prince Andrew now go.

01:07:34.320 Prince Philip has, of course, died.

01:07:36.160 So they actually take a lot of the burden of the future of the monarchy and the current

01:07:40.920 work of the monarchy on their shoulders as well.

01:07:43.700 What remains fascinating is that if you actually ask the British public, they would prefer that

01:07:49.240 Prince, that King Charles never happens and that the throne would immediately pass to his son,

01:07:56.260 Prince William, because they haven't forgiven him for his conduct towards Princess Diana.

01:08:02.240 And they certainly haven't forgiven his wife, Camilla.

01:08:05.040 And it's something you don't actually hear the British media talk about too much, because

01:08:09.180 there's a feeling that we need to get behind Prince Charles.

01:08:13.400 He's our guy.

01:08:14.560 He's going to be king.

01:08:15.880 But if you look at the polling and you dig into it, the British public haven't forgotten

01:08:20.360 what went on in the 1990s.

01:08:23.800 Well, what if what if there's more reporting about Prince William allegedly cheating on Kate?

01:08:28.820 I mean, would they hold that against him?

01:08:30.960 Or was the Diana situation unique because she spoke out about it?

01:08:36.360 She showed us in the interview with Martin Bashir how hurt she was and what a wreck she

01:08:42.980 was over that whole situation.

01:08:46.340 Yeah, I think you're right.

01:08:47.700 The way that Charles treated Diana was unconscionable.

01:08:51.600 And of course, it was brought to the attention of a lot of youngsters for the first time in the

01:08:56.020 Netflix series, The Crown, because it's hard for us to believe, isn't it, that Princess Diana was

01:09:00.700 only 19 years old and a virgin, Meghan, when she met Prince Charles.

01:09:06.300 And she was thrown into this crazy world and treated terribly by the royal institution.

01:09:11.980 And Prince Charles didn't protect her.

01:09:15.240 Now, look, there's obviously no proof of Prince William ever having relationships outside of

01:09:22.760 his marriage with Kate. I'm obviously aware of the rumors.

01:09:26.720 It's not something that I can really talk about, apart from to say this is something that the

01:09:35.080 royal family would push back very, very strongly on.

01:09:38.360 And that's why you haven't seen reporting on it within Britain.

01:09:42.500 Hmm. Right. Exactly.

01:09:43.580 And you have to be so careful over there about what you say.

01:09:46.400 Speaking of the comments.

01:09:47.940 Don't get me into court again, Meghan.

01:09:49.460 I'm not going to get you in trouble.

01:09:50.500 I'm not going to get you in trouble. So the comments you just made about Princess Diana,

01:09:54.320 and I've heard people say that who have watched The Crown, and The Crown is amazing.

01:09:58.040 They try to draw a parallel between Diana and Meghan Markle. 0.69

01:10:01.120 They try to say, oh, you see, joining the royal family is really rough.

01:10:05.900 It's not all about living in a castle and being married to a prince.

01:10:08.700 It's incredibly oppressive. You lose yourself. It can be almost abusive.

01:10:14.240 And that's really what was happening to Meghan Markle, plus a hefty dose of racism. 1.00

01:10:18.500 So we should all be much more empathetic toward her.

01:10:22.780 Your thoughts on that argument in her defense?

01:10:26.040 I think that is a load of baloney.

01:10:29.100 Meghan was in her late 30s.

01:10:32.000 She was already a star.

01:10:34.960 I mean, what you've got to remember, Meghan, is I remember Meghan Markle when she was an aspiring actress.

01:10:40.480 And she used to travel to London to actually seek out gossip columnists. 1.00

01:10:45.600 One of my friends, actually, who was working for a newspaper called The Sunday People.

01:10:48.680 And look, it's a good newspaper, Meghan, but it's not one of the big newspapers.

01:10:51.940 It's not one of the credible newspapers in the UK.

01:10:54.440 And she took my friend for a night out because she was so desperate to get into the British gossip columns. 1.00

01:11:00.480 And she was so desperate to meet a British celebrity.

01:11:03.540 And it wasn't just Piers Morgan who she was messaging.

01:11:06.520 It was a guy called Max George, who was a boy band member who used to be in The Wanted.

01:11:11.200 It was a guy called Max, Matt Cardell, who won The X Factor, Simon Cowell's big talent show over here.

01:11:18.340 And the reason I mention those names is because she hit the jackpot when she was introduced to Prince Harry.

01:11:26.520 This was someone who was actively looking to find a famous British celebrity.

01:11:32.120 A good friend of mine, Lizzie Cundey, was friends with Meghan Markle until she ghosted her once she met Prince Harry.

01:11:39.140 And Lizzie tells me that Meghan said to her on multiple occasions, look, I really want to find a British man.

01:11:44.380 But she was actually asking my friend Lizzie about a guy called Ashley Cole.

01:11:48.860 You've probably never heard of her, Meghan.

01:11:50.340 Heard of her, Meghan, but he was at the time one of the biggest footballers in Britain and married to a pop star called Cheryl Cole.

01:11:59.540 And he was widely regarded as a love rat, someone who would cheat all the time.

01:12:04.520 And it was actually Lizzie who said to Meghan Markle, look, you want to stay away from this guy.

01:12:08.080 He's bad news.

01:12:08.860 But my point is that Meghan Markle had a very different agenda to a 19-year-old Princess Diana who genuinely fell in love with the future king and was a virgin and had absolutely no idea about the media or the royal family or what she was getting herself in for.

01:12:26.440 The latest report on Meghan and Harry here in the States, now they're our problem, thanks Dan, is that they've become dissatisfied with their Montecito estate, valued at something like $17 million.

01:12:42.040 It's not really all it was cracked up to be.

01:12:44.040 So I guess they're thinking about taking their $50 million from Spotify and Netflix and so on and moving to a larger estate, someplace where they can have the proper grounds and the proper security.

01:12:56.220 And meanwhile, you know, they give an interview every other week, Dan, while maintaining what they really want is their privacy.

01:13:01.060 And please step back unless you're that one guy who they give all of their leaks to because he'll print whatever they tell him to.

01:13:08.560 So your thoughts on what they're doing now and whether they really want what they say they want.

01:13:15.740 Yeah, that guy's a little oddball, isn't he?

01:13:18.080 Omid Scobie, he's called.

01:13:19.680 Very weird. Omid, Omid.

01:13:20.580 He says that he's a journalist, right?

01:13:23.460 He's not a journalist.

01:13:25.020 He's a PR.

01:13:26.700 He's a stenographer.

01:13:27.480 Because all he does is take whatever Meghan and Harry says and he publishes it, whether it's true or not.

01:13:33.000 And by the way, Meghan, shame on Harper's Bazaar, the famous U.S. magazine that publishes everything that this guy writes without ever checking if it's true or not.

01:13:44.120 And by the way, all of that relationship was exposed in court recently.

01:13:47.320 And the Mail on Sunday may have lost the legal case against Meghan because they published this private letter that she had written to Thomas Markle.

01:13:55.940 But my God, Meghan and Harry lost the PR war because it showed that they had lied about the fact that they were cooperating with this book by Omid Scobie called Finding Freedom.

01:14:07.860 And look, this is a couple that are prepared to lie.

01:14:10.100 And I think we need to remember that.

01:14:12.380 I also think the fact that they're unhappy is not surprising to me.

01:14:15.340 Don't you think, Meghan, one of the issues with these people who are so in touch with their feelings and always want to talk about their emotions constantly,

01:14:22.220 actually, it can make them very unhappy.

01:14:24.540 And I think both Meghan and Harry are people who are always going to be unhappy.

01:14:28.880 They always want to play the victim.

01:14:31.060 And I find it very hard to believe that anyone is going to feel sorry for them anymore when they're living in this £80 million Montecito mansion and they're raking in millions and millions of pounds from Spotify and Netflix.

01:14:41.600 And you know what's particularly despicable, Meghan?

01:14:43.220 Guess how much money they raised for their Archie Well charity in its first year?

01:14:48.820 $50,000.

01:14:50.420 So they're raising over £50 million for themselves and yet they say that they're all about charity and they raise $50,000.

01:15:01.040 If that doesn't tell you everything we need to know about this couple and what they're in it for, and I've said it right from the start, they are in it for the big bucks, they're in it for the greenback, they're in it for the moolah. 0.59

01:15:10.680 Now, that's what they care about.

01:15:12.340 They don't give a damn about charity causes because if they did, they would have remained part of the royal family.

01:15:17.160 Yeah.

01:15:17.480 I mean, you found out everything you needed to know about her when we were in the middle of a global pandemic with millions of people dead, hundreds of thousands in our country and yours.

01:15:26.160 And she goes on TV with Oprah to try to make us care about what title her baby's going to get. 1.00

01:15:33.140 No one gives a damn about your kid's title.

01:15:37.520 They're trying to live.

01:15:39.100 They're trying to make it through frontline working in hospitals and grocery stores. 1.00

01:15:42.340 And no one cares about your stupid, petty complaints that you're sticking the knife in the royal family without naming names so that they can't actually defend themselves. 0.98

01:15:51.280 I will say, though, that that that victory that she had with the Mail on Sunday, as you point out, that talk about winning, winning the battle, but losing the war. 1.00

01:16:00.080 That's great.

01:16:00.740 I'm sure the Mail on Sunday will have absolutely no hostility toward her in the future, and they will definitely not look for opportunities to print stories about her that maybe don't reflect her in the best light, albeit they're true.

01:16:14.300 Right.

01:16:14.500 So it's like you have to be so careful on these things.

01:16:17.060 Is that like one day of glory and and euphoria that you won?

01:16:21.580 They'll win in the end.

01:16:22.700 They always do, Dan.

01:16:25.300 Well, I think the British public have made up their mind, to be honest, now and Meghan and Harry.

01:16:29.600 And I think it's going to be very difficult for them to change their mind.

01:16:33.520 Obviously, they have support, don't they, from both coasts of America, Meghan?

01:16:37.760 You know, they're adored by the New York Times set.

01:16:41.480 They're adored by the Hollywood set in California.

01:16:44.960 But I think middle America can see exactly what they're all about.

01:16:49.240 100 percent.

01:16:49.880 Could not agree more.

01:16:50.560 They should have gone with the stiff upper lip approach that he brought to the marriage instead of her woke-ified American, boo-hoo, poor me. 0.89

01:16:59.080 He jumped on board that.

01:17:00.540 Now he's lecturing us.

01:17:01.600 I mean, Prince Harry.

01:17:02.400 Prince Harry, who grew up in a palace, is lecturing us about white privilege.

01:17:05.380 OK, Dan, it's always a pleasure.

01:17:07.880 Love to see you.

01:17:08.920 Everybody's got to check out GB News, which I love.

01:17:11.440 I go on every week with Dan, and I enjoy it.

01:17:13.900 He gives such a great interview and does great conversations with all sorts of folks.

01:17:18.600 GB News is awesome, and so are you.

01:17:21.440 Meghan, I love your show.

01:17:22.440 Thank you so much for having me.

01:17:24.260 Thank you, sir.

01:17:24.720 OK, up next, we're going to be joined by an attorney who's going to weigh in on the legal ramifications, not just for Prince Andrew, but Ghislaine Maxwell now.

01:17:32.760 It's looking more and more like her conviction could be going bye-bye.

01:17:36.940 Don't go away.

01:17:37.360 We've been talking about the fall of Britain's Prince Andrew.

01:17:46.280 We want to discuss that case with a lawyer, but there's also another case closely related involving Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein's lover, partner, and co-conspirator.

01:17:56.720 She was recently convicted of five charges linked to the sex trafficking of minors.

01:18:01.860 Her attorneys are now demanding a new trial after it emerged that there was a juror on the jury who had revealed that he was a victim of sexual abuse as a child, but he waited until after the trial, apparently, to reveal that.

01:18:18.640 And that is a legal impropriety.

01:18:21.580 Anne Bremmer is a trial attorney and legal analyst. 0.99

01:18:24.600 We used to talk all the time while I was on Fox.

01:18:26.920 Anne, good to see you again.

01:18:28.460 It's great to see you.

01:18:29.420 It's an honor and a pleasure.

01:18:30.500 And we did.

01:18:31.260 It was wonderful to be on with you then and now.

01:18:33.780 Well, you're the real deal, especially in this area. 0.93

01:18:35.940 You've done more than your fair share of cases involving sex abuse, child sex abuse, and so on. 0.58

01:18:40.860 So let's start with Andrew, Prince Andrew, and then we'll move on to Ghislaine.

01:18:44.720 And I have lots of questions for you on this.

01:18:46.560 So Prince Andrew filed a motion to dismiss Virginia Roberts-Dufresne's claim against him.

01:18:52.300 She wants money. 1.00

01:18:52.940 He's not going to get charged criminally, as far as we can tell.

01:18:56.100 And he was basing it off of a settlement agreement she had signed with Jeffrey Epstein in 2009

01:19:01.680 that seemed to try to benefit third-party beneficiary defendants.

01:19:05.980 Like, Jeffrey Epstein, you can't sue him anymore.

01:19:09.140 You can't sue him anymore.

01:19:10.420 And here's a whole collection of other unnamed people who you also agree not to sue.

01:19:15.420 It was pretty wide net.

01:19:18.860 And Prince Andrew was like, I'm in there.

01:19:20.720 I'm in there.

01:19:21.160 She waived her right to sue me. 0.55

01:19:22.540 So was the judge right in saying, no, no, sir?

01:19:27.220 Yeah.

01:19:27.520 What the judge said, as you remember, Megan, is he said, that dog won't hunt.

01:19:31.020 Just like that argument from Prince Andrew's lawyers, he's like, that dog won't hunt.

01:19:34.780 I mean, he was he just was slapping it down in the oral argument, of course, and then did

01:19:38.560 later in a written ruling.

01:19:39.720 Because in 2009, I mean, it usually can be pretty broad language in a release.

01:19:45.180 It was pretty vague.

01:19:46.540 And what the judge said was there was nothing specific in that 2009 settlement agreement

01:19:51.700 that's applied to Prince Andrew.

01:19:54.020 So I think really that motion should never have been brought.

01:19:57.100 And of course, the dial of it has been catastrophic to Prince Andrew in the UK.

01:20:02.160 So I was just interviewing Dan Wooten, a journalist in the UK, and he and you know him and he you

01:20:08.500 know, I was asking him this question.

01:20:09.800 But let me ask you as the lawyer.

01:20:10.760 To me, something about this feels unfair.

01:20:13.640 And and I understand he very well, Prince Andrew may have done this.

01:20:16.780 But if he didn't, he's losing everything before he's even had a trial.

01:20:20.600 So it's like, what precedent is this set that you could sue any royal with, you know, claims

01:20:26.140 like this and basically ruin their lives?

01:20:28.960 He he's no longer going to get that his royal highness stripped of his military titles, his

01:20:33.660 honors based on allegations that have not yet been proven.

01:20:37.440 Well, it's cancel culture these days, as we all know.

01:20:41.220 I mean, you can look in the comments section of the Daily Mail and it'll say innocent until

01:20:45.480 proven guilty.

01:20:46.460 But, you know, the reality is this had to happen.

01:20:49.460 And it was a culmination of things, as Dan talked about.

01:20:52.700 I mean, the fact that he had that what they call the car crash interview.

01:20:56.740 I mean, he wasn't DOA then.

01:20:59.240 But when his lawyers brought this motion and I'm sure they were very eagerly anticipating

01:21:03.940 the ruling, you know, and with the queen and the royal family.

01:21:07.440 And it was a devastating blow, basically saying, that's about your last clear chance, right,

01:21:12.400 to try and get this case dismissed.

01:21:14.140 And your attempt was unsuccessful.

01:21:16.500 But yeah, I mean, we have we have a presumption of innocence.

01:21:19.020 But the fact is, with the PR and the royal family and the queen's interest in preserving

01:21:23.980 the monarchy above all else, that's what she had to do.

01:21:28.460 Yeah.

01:21:28.720 So his car is basically heading off the cliff right now.

01:21:31.520 Prince Andrew's metaphorically.

01:21:32.820 Yeah.

01:21:33.240 And and this motion to dismiss was the last exit ramp, last exit ramp before the cliff.

01:21:38.440 I know.

01:21:38.940 I know.

01:21:39.360 It's like, oh, my God.

01:21:41.040 And when they felt that motion, I thought, you know, yeah, he's just going right off the

01:21:43.920 cliff.

01:21:44.500 And I love the car crash interview when they said he was asked, what did you think all

01:21:48.480 those young girls, those young who were those women, those young women in Epstein's

01:21:52.780 palatial Manhattan home?

01:21:55.540 He said he thought they were servants.

01:21:57.540 That always got me.

01:21:58.700 The sweating thing was a big thing.

01:22:00.080 But the servants, you know, but it's just oh, my gosh, we'd like to take a walk around

01:22:04.760 Buckingham Palace and see what the staff looks like there.

01:22:06.980 I'm going to guess.

01:22:07.840 I was thinking.

01:22:08.960 Right.

01:22:09.420 Have a few more years on them than the than the Epstein gals. 0.99

01:22:13.860 If if so, the question is, what is, you know, he's going to settle, I think.

01:22:17.740 Right.

01:22:17.940 I mean, I really think there's he could go through discovery and file a motion for summary

01:22:22.220 judgment, try to avoid a jury trial like that.

01:22:23.960 But if he sits for a deposition and they're going to get as personal and graphic about

01:22:31.400 him, his body as possible.

01:22:35.600 Right.

01:22:35.900 I mean, there's no way he can avoid that.

01:22:37.520 Right.

01:22:38.560 His manhood.

01:22:39.740 I mean, that's what they're going to ask for descriptions.

01:22:42.180 Everything else.

01:22:43.320 I mean, it reminds me of the Michael Jackson case.

01:22:44.900 Remember when they went through all of that, you know, with him on distinctive markings or

01:22:48.760 whatever they claimed in that case, which actually were true.

01:22:50.740 So, but yeah, I mean, horrific and it's going to be public.

01:22:55.340 Even Bill Gates, who's brilliant, did not do well in a deposition.

01:22:59.520 I mean, it was widely believed that when he was deposed and all of that Microsoft litigation,

01:23:03.720 he rocked back and forth in his chair.

01:23:05.480 His, you know, his answers were basically, you know, he was vilified about how he behaved

01:23:09.960 and what he said.

01:23:10.620 But if he can't do it, do you think Prince Andrew can do it and come off well?

01:23:15.120 And it's going to be very, it's going to be salacious because, you know, he's around

01:23:18.720 a lot of these women. 1.00

01:23:20.240 It's not just, you know, Virginia Roberts.

01:23:22.520 And I actually sat with Jack Scarola, who's got a lot of the victim cases in Florida at

01:23:27.840 a dinner recently.

01:23:28.600 And I just said, what about Prince Andrew?

01:23:30.360 But he's like, oh, you know, I mean, there's a lot more out there we don't know about.

01:23:34.580 We've got certain things that are still sealed.

01:23:36.340 And we didn't hear about prominent people in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, given the narrow

01:23:41.460 focus, at least of that trial, or somewhat narrow focus, I should say.

01:23:46.200 So a disaster with a capital D, car crash with a capital C, it'll be worse than the car

01:23:51.820 crash interview.

01:23:52.520 He cannot let that deposition go forward, innocent or not.

01:23:55.980 He's got to get out of that.

01:23:57.000 That will be, I mean, because as you say, at this point, they're thinking not so much about

01:24:00.600 Prince Andrew and his reputation, but that of the royal family.

01:24:03.300 And, you know, which is, I don't want to say controversial, but maybe not as popular with

01:24:07.940 the British public as it used to be.

01:24:09.620 There are questions already debated about whether they need it anymore.

01:24:13.300 And so the queen has done her level best over her 95 years to, you know, keep it upstanding

01:24:18.100 and provide a great example.

01:24:19.560 Her family, not as much.

01:24:22.240 So, yeah, they've got to get rid of it.

01:24:25.380 Right.

01:24:25.580 And, you know, I majored in medieval history at Stanford, medieval English history.

01:24:30.340 So when I think of the monarchy, I mean, it's a long, traditional family, right?

01:24:36.040 And so I'm thinking, I get that.

01:24:37.640 I actually, I get that, you know, the preservation of the monarchy for the country.

01:24:41.920 And as she's about to face her, they call it the platinum jubilee, 70 years on the throne.

01:24:48.060 This is supposed to be a great year for her.

01:24:50.460 And so far, not so much.

01:24:52.380 Thanks to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's weird accusations and now Prince Andrew.

01:24:56.640 So it's, you got to sort of fish or cut bait.

01:24:59.980 And I think they've decided they're going to cut bait and Andrew's on his own.

01:25:02.940 Now, the other case is Ghislaine Maxwell.

01:25:06.860 And I'm fascinated by what's going on there.

01:25:09.640 I was totally fine with the verdict.

01:25:11.080 I thought it could have gone either way, frankly, because, you know, 30, 40 years later

01:25:15.260 testimony, a jury could reject that saying, it's too late.

01:25:18.820 I don't trust your memory.

01:25:19.880 They chose to go another way.

01:25:21.140 I think it was totally supported.

01:25:22.080 But now it comes out that not just one, but two jurors may have innocently omitted, lied

01:25:35.520 about information on their juror questionnaires regarding whether they'd ever been the victim

01:25:41.440 of sexual assault or abuse in their past.

01:25:44.120 It's clearly a relevant thing for the attorneys and judge to know before they seated the jury

01:25:48.940 because this was a case involving sexual abuse of minors allegations.

01:25:53.740 So what do you think is going to happen now that the prosecution's asking for the judge

01:25:58.860 to investigate these, at least one of the jurors and the defense wants a full mistrial?

01:26:03.960 Well, Meghan, you've got the brilliant legal mind, but I believe they're getting that she's 0.64

01:26:08.340 going to get a new trial.

01:26:09.780 I just can't have a deal.

01:26:11.860 I'll get good.

01:26:12.300 I do, too.

01:26:13.460 I do agree.

01:26:14.100 I want to check with you first.

01:26:15.620 Yeah, I do.

01:26:16.360 Yeah, I think she's getting a new trial. 0.96

01:26:19.180 And there's, you know, of course, the dishonesty in voir dire on the jury selection form.

01:26:24.320 I mean, it was under penalty of perjury.

01:26:25.920 Have you been a victim?

01:26:26.940 His family member, et cetera.

01:26:27.980 He says no.

01:26:29.160 You know, so then the question is, would there have been a basis for a challenge for cause?

01:26:33.940 If you'd been honest, you know, then you've got that issue.

01:26:36.340 But I think the bigger issue is when a jury lies in voir dire about an issue that's germane

01:26:41.300 to the case, and then they, like an expert, basically, like I'm a child abuse victim.

01:26:46.820 I'm kind of an expert because I lived it.

01:26:48.700 They inject that extrinsic evidence into the jury room during deliberation.

01:26:53.220 I think he presumed prejudice by a combination of that non-disclosure and voir dire and the

01:26:58.520 injection of the quote-unquote extrinsic evidence into the jury room.

01:27:02.220 Can't be cross-examined.

01:27:03.280 He sits as an expert, along with another juror, apparently, it was a victim, to say, I believe

01:27:08.500 those victims because I felt the same way.

01:27:10.960 I didn't remember certain things, or I didn't say certain things.

01:27:14.400 I mean, I think that combination gets her a new trial. 1.00

01:27:17.920 And there were some interesting quotes in some of the cases.

01:27:20.840 I loved one of them said, a juror like this is not a juror.

01:27:24.400 They're like an interloper into the case, right?

01:27:27.060 Because they're not a fair and impartial juror.

01:27:28.580 They've come into this thing, you know, interloping, basically, and affecting the verdict adversely,

01:27:34.620 and I think warning a new trial by virtue of their misbehavior.

01:27:38.840 I agree with everything you just said wholeheartedly.

01:27:42.800 And this is why prosecutors are like, don't talk.

01:27:47.820 They don't want the jurors to talk after the case is over when they've secured a conviction

01:27:52.680 because things can go south.

01:27:54.440 So the way they went south in the Ghislaine Maxwell case is a guy, a juror who only goes

01:27:58.980 by his first and his middle name, at least for purposes of this, named Scotty David, spoke

01:28:04.080 with a couple of press outlets, including the Daily Mail, and it was on camera, and we actually

01:28:09.300 have a soundbite queued up.

01:28:10.560 Let's listen to him and what got him in trouble.

01:28:14.580 No, they don't ask your sexual abuse history.

01:28:18.140 They didn't ask it in the questionnaire.

01:28:19.220 I thought in the questionnaire there was a question that asked if you were a victim or

01:28:23.280 if you were a friend or else if you were a victim.

01:28:27.300 Pretty sure it was number 48.

01:28:32.700 I don't remember.

01:28:34.240 Somebody sent me the questionnaire today and there was a question.

01:28:38.280 Interesting.

01:28:40.160 I mean, I guess, when did you fill in that questionnaire?

01:28:42.320 I definitely, on the first day of jury selection, I would have definitely marked yes, but I honestly

01:28:49.320 don't remember that question.

01:28:50.500 Listen, you're not in the sand right now, do you?

01:28:52.720 No, no.

01:28:53.660 I mean, I know my face is red because I can feel the blood, but I honestly, that's why I

01:28:57.620 answered it that way.

01:28:58.380 I don't remember it being there, but I did answer, I definitely remember a family or relative

01:29:04.840 or something, but being sexually abused.

01:29:07.400 I was honest on all my questions. 0.91

01:29:09.120 Were you?

01:29:11.980 Because you don't seem, you don't project honest in your interview.

01:29:16.220 Here's the questionnaire and this is the exact question.

01:29:19.160 This is per ABC News reporting on what question 48 the reporter was right asked, quote, have

01:29:25.220 you or a friend or a family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse

01:29:31.680 or sexual assault?

01:29:33.860 It goes on to say this includes actual or attempted sexual assault or other unwanted sexual advance

01:29:38.780 including by a stranger, acquaintance, supervisor, teacher, or family member.

01:29:41.960 And you say yes for yourself or yes for your friend or family member or no.

01:29:45.480 Then it says 48 A.

01:29:46.900 If yes, without listing names, please explain.

01:29:48.980 48 B.

01:29:49.620 If your answer to 48 was yes.

01:29:51.160 Do you believe this would affect your ability to serve fairly and impartially as a juror in

01:29:54.200 this case?

01:29:54.580 Yes or no.

01:29:55.340 48 C.

01:29:55.820 If yes to 48 B.

01:29:57.300 Please explain.

01:29:58.600 And on it goes.

01:29:59.420 And what the reports seem to suggest right now is that he did not say yes to this.

01:30:06.280 And it looks like the other juror didn't either.

01:30:09.680 And the reason people are deducing that is, yes, that interview with Scotty David, but also

01:30:13.780 because the judge in doing the voir dire of the jurors followed up with all those in the

01:30:19.880 jury pool who had said, yes, I have been the victim and no such questioning happened for

01:30:25.380 him or the other juror.

01:30:27.680 It's a problem.

01:30:28.760 Yeah, it's a huge problem.

01:30:30.420 And of course, you bring out the jurors individually.

01:30:33.100 They answered yes to that.

01:30:34.360 It's sensitive and you don't want them in front of the whole veneer being asked.

01:30:38.300 And this particular juror said he was in and out of the courtroom, you know, and Billy

01:30:44.080 wasn't as much of anything.

01:30:45.080 So, you know, there's a case from 1984, it's called McDonough, and it says you have a right

01:30:50.880 to a fair trial, but not a perfect trial.

01:30:53.420 And that was based upon a juror's mistaken, but wrongful response, you know, to a question.

01:31:00.920 And they're saying, you're asking for something too close to perfection when you're asking

01:31:05.460 jurors, you know, to basically give, you know, if they're mistaken and they didn't answer

01:31:10.800 something correctly to grant a new trial.

01:31:12.680 That is not this case.

01:31:13.600 I mean, this is somebody, you know, and this is the other thing, like you said, when I

01:31:17.780 try cases, I still hand everybody my business card, the jurors, I stay in touch with them.

01:31:23.280 And when I was a prosecutor, you know, I always like made sure I was like, you know, you can

01:31:26.400 get ahold of me if you need to, i.e.

01:31:28.180 If somebody tries to get misconduct, I want to know, right?

01:31:31.580 I want to know if, you know, there's something that's going to happen to my verdict if I win

01:31:35.760 a case.

01:31:36.360 And look at this is terrible.

01:31:38.880 Well, so, you know, I mean, does it matter in your view if he he's trying to feign ignorance?

01:31:42.900 You know, I didn't see that question.

01:31:44.120 I thought I was telling about family members.

01:31:45.260 I was confused.

01:31:46.020 And of course, he's going to go that way.

01:31:47.580 But does that matter legally?

01:31:49.900 You know, intentional omission or misstatement versus inadvertent.

01:31:54.740 And also, you tell me, why is the court now appointing him his own lawyer?

01:32:00.920 Right.

01:32:01.480 And you're right, man.

01:32:02.560 It doesn't matter if it's intentional or not.

01:32:04.340 The fact is that he lied and he was dishonest and he deprived the defense of a challenge for

01:32:10.660 cause or even a peremptory.

01:32:11.940 I mean, you can argue.

01:32:13.080 But, you know, the fact is there's cases out there prosecuting jurors for misconduct, you

01:32:18.800 know, for things like going out and, you know, that I mean, looking up evidence or getting

01:32:22.000 getting on the Internet or, you know, anything else, everything else.

01:32:24.940 And he signed this under penalty perjury.

01:32:27.860 So aside from juror misconduct, you know, he basically is facing issues with with affirming

01:32:33.460 under penalty perjury that he hadn't been a victim.

01:32:36.320 And as you recounted, there were a number of places, number of places where he didn't

01:32:41.320 respond affirmatively.

01:32:42.880 That's why as a lawyer and I tell me this, this is.

01:32:48.060 Yeah.

01:32:48.420 Sorry.

01:32:48.640 Go ahead.

01:32:48.860 Finish your point.

01:32:50.100 No, I was just going to say.

01:32:51.020 And the lawyers ask for the questionnaire.

01:32:53.080 You know that.

01:32:53.720 So it's like, huh, does he not?

01:32:56.240 I mean, he needs that.

01:32:57.100 The lawyer needs to see that questionnaire.

01:32:58.680 Mm hmm.

01:33:00.740 You tell me whether this case is more like the first case I'm going to tell you about

01:33:04.000 or the second case I'm going to tell you about.

01:33:05.240 OK, this is actually Reuters reporting this.

01:33:08.900 There was a there was a case in New York state, 2016, where a judge declined to overturn the

01:33:13.980 manslaughter conviction of a New York City police officer, despite a juror's failure to

01:33:19.300 disclose during jury selection that his estranged father had been convicted of manslaughter.

01:33:25.360 OK, that's what that's what this police officer was on trial for.

01:33:28.260 The judge said the defense had not shown that the juror's actions violated the defendant's

01:33:32.960 right to a fair trial.

01:33:33.900 So that's what then there's another one.

01:33:37.060 Here's another one.

01:33:37.780 Manhattan.

01:33:38.340 OK, again, New York, 2012.

01:33:42.040 A federal judge ordered a new trial for defendants convicted of running a tax shelter scheme

01:33:48.020 after it was revealed that a juror lied during the pretrial screening.

01:33:52.220 The juror said she only had a bachelor's degree and was a stay at home wife, quote unquote, when

01:33:57.440 in fact she had graduated from law school.

01:33:59.400 She later admitted to lying to make herself more, quote, marketable as a juror.

01:34:04.340 Right.

01:34:04.480 The judge called the juror a pathological liar in his ruling, said if the juror had answered

01:34:10.200 honestly, he would not have let her serve.

01:34:12.160 A lawyer who represent one of the defendants told Reuters the juror, quote, literally lied

01:34:17.000 in response to every question.

01:34:18.960 So you got sort of you tell me which one of those cases is closer to ours.

01:34:24.120 One of my one of my worst nightmares is being asked the legal quiz by Megyn Kelly.

01:34:29.760 There's no right answer.

01:34:31.040 I'm just curious. 1.00

01:34:32.520 This guy might be a pathological liar. 0.99

01:34:34.800 I don't know. 0.99

01:34:35.340 He seems a little off.

01:34:36.820 I think I'm I'm going to pick number two.

01:34:38.960 And now actually that case was the quote I talked about where the court said she wasn't

01:34:43.320 really a juror.

01:34:44.000 She was like an interloper getting into that case to, you know, become famous or whatever 1.00

01:34:48.100 else.

01:34:48.600 But what do you think?

01:34:49.940 Would you like number one or two?

01:34:51.500 Well, why?

01:34:52.080 I do think advertence versus inadvertence matters, because if this truly was just an innocent

01:34:58.280 mistake and he read it wrong, I think, you know, you could make a good argument.

01:35:02.660 We don't want to throw out the entire trial, all this taxpayer funded, you know, you know,

01:35:07.300 justice and so on.

01:35:08.780 But if this guy wanted on that jury and he sounds like he wanted on that jury and he looked

01:35:17.760 like he'd been caught when he was asked about his omission, that's different.

01:35:22.480 And and now we know from his own admission to the press, he worked the other jurors in

01:35:27.340 the deliberation room saying he did.

01:35:29.140 You can't you can't question the memory of the victims because I'm a victim and I forgot

01:35:33.420 details.

01:35:33.820 And let me explain to you how it works.

01:35:35.940 And there's that other juror helping him out.

01:35:37.980 I I just think we're talking about a woman's life here.

01:35:41.300 The stakes are very, very high.

01:35:42.680 This isn't about dollars and cents in a civil court.

01:35:44.580 This is about the rest of this woman's life. 1.00

01:35:46.480 She deserves a new trial. 1.00

01:35:48.820 She does.

01:35:49.420 And and actually, the first case is more like the McDonough case from 1984, the Supreme Court

01:35:53.640 case, it said to invalidate a verdict based upon a juror's mistaken but honest, you know,

01:35:58.720 answer in in voir dire is asking for perfection that we don't have in the legal system.

01:36:03.780 You know, you have a right to a fair trial, not a perfect trial.

01:36:05.940 But this juror clearly is like the juror in the in the second instance.

01:36:12.100 And I can tell you, I've had two cases like this, one of them where it went against me

01:36:16.160 and one of them where it went my way.

01:36:18.500 And there's nothing more disheartening to be in a case that you blood, sweat and tears

01:36:23.760 into and then to have a juror come out.

01:36:27.000 In my case, they didn't disclose in voir dire and talked about the jury.

01:36:30.520 You know, as a serial rapist, sometimes a prosecutor had to be retried.

01:36:35.180 Yeah.

01:36:35.240 These poor women, right, who the jury has essentially said are, in fact, victims. 0.67

01:36:39.400 They're going to have to go through this all over again if the judge finds it accordingly.

01:36:44.500 Quick question before I let you go.

01:36:46.600 Ghislaine Maxwell is now giving up on an objection she had to keeping the names of these John

01:36:53.540 Doe's private. 0.99

01:36:55.340 Can you explain this to me?

01:36:56.380 So Virginia Giuffre, she wants to unseal documents that name names in her. 1.00

01:37:02.180 I guess it's been settled.

01:37:03.380 Her civil lawsuit against Ghislaine Maxwell.

01:37:05.160 These are all people that Virginia has accused.

01:37:08.280 What's because it looks like this is now going to get unsealed.

01:37:10.520 We're going to get names.

01:37:11.440 But who are names?

01:37:12.640 Yeah, I was looking at this last night in terms of it's kind of like an ad hoc application

01:37:19.300 of the requirements with respect to motions to seal and unsealing documents in federal

01:37:25.220 court.

01:37:25.880 That's kind of been alleged in this case.

01:37:27.600 But if she's withdrawn the request, then why wouldn't it be?

01:37:30.700 Why wouldn't the John Doe information be unsealed now?

01:37:34.140 Right.

01:37:34.860 Mm hmm.

01:37:35.660 And is it just people she's accused?

01:37:37.800 Is it is it that she just wants America, the world to know who she has accused?

01:37:41.480 Yeah, I mean, I and I also think, though, it's just it's all out war and it's not just on

01:37:49.900 Andrew.

01:37:50.680 And I assume Andrew is one of them, which buttresses her case.

01:37:54.520 And David Boyce, as you well know, is kind of a scorched earth kind of guy.

01:37:59.540 So that would be my that would be my view in terms of what what I could see from that.

01:38:05.100 But Ghislaine Maxwell has withdrawn her objection.

01:38:09.340 So I'm assuming she had an objection in the underlying litigation.

01:38:13.200 Does that also tell us that she's going to start talking about other people?

01:38:17.340 I kind of think that, too.

01:38:19.040 That is a sixty four thousand dollar question.

01:38:21.420 And so good to catch up with you and to see you come back again soon.

01:38:25.820 I'd love to.

01:38:26.420 It's such a pleasure and an honor.

01:38:27.800 Thanks, Megan.

01:38:28.260 All right.

01:38:28.760 Up next, we're saying thanks, but no thanks to the new push to make everyone wear

01:38:33.320 N95 masks.

01:38:35.240 Don't go away.

01:38:40.580 It's time for another edition of thanks, but no thanks.

01:38:43.600 Our feature here on the show where we say thanks, but no thanks to some absurd new talking

01:38:47.540 point or cultural push in the news.

01:38:49.780 Today, we're talking about my favorite topic masks.

01:38:53.160 Ah, yes, I got vaxxed both doses and then I got boosted.

01:38:56.780 And now I'm done.

01:38:58.540 Done with masks for sure.

01:39:00.680 You want to wear a mask?

01:39:01.700 Great.

01:39:01.960 Go for it.

01:39:02.680 We're three.

01:39:03.640 I am keeping them off of my face for a minute.

01:39:06.320 I thought that's where we were all headed after our quote experts started finally admitting

01:39:10.380 this year that cloth masks do absolutely nothing to stop the spread of covid.

01:39:14.920 The next logical step should have been saying goodbye to the whole concept entirely.

01:39:19.120 Of course, logic is in short supply these days.

01:39:22.080 No, instead, we're going a different way.

01:39:24.580 Cloth masks do nothing.

01:39:26.660 Well, how about masks that do just a tiny bit more?

01:39:29.200 Really tight, uncomfortable ones that are ever so slightly more effective than cloth masks.

01:39:33.860 Yes, that's a solution.

01:39:35.260 And ninety five for everyone leading the charge.

01:39:38.120 Senator Bernie Sanders.

01:39:39.620 Look at this guy in a CNN interview this week modeling his N95 for the camera.

01:39:44.460 Look, here's a simple fact.

01:39:48.180 This is a mask.

01:39:50.340 This is a mask.

01:39:52.480 But these are very different masks in terms of their effectiveness.

01:39:57.220 This is an N95 mask.

01:40:00.020 This is just a mask that most people use.

01:40:02.560 The truth of the matter is, is a mask is not a mask.

01:40:07.700 An N95 mask is far, far more effective in protecting the individual and also stopping the spread of the virus to other individuals.

01:40:17.340 A mask is not a mask.

01:40:20.200 You got it?

01:40:21.200 Seriously, how tight does that thing look on his cheeks?

01:40:23.320 Is he going to be OK?

01:40:24.060 See how red he was?

01:40:25.460 Sanders is sponsoring the Masks for All Act in the Senate, which will send a package of three N95 masks to everyone in the country.

01:40:35.260 Save your postage, Senator.

01:40:36.780 I'll pass.

01:40:37.840 But this is the push all across the country.

01:40:39.840 President Biden has started talking about the need to wear better masks.

01:40:43.000 The CDC is considering changing its mask guidance to recommend N95 and KN95 masks for all.

01:40:50.740 And it's even coming to our schools.

01:40:52.660 The New York Times national education reporter Dana Goldstein tweeted last week,

01:40:56.940 Our pre-K wants kids in KN95 masks.

01:41:00.940 My four-year-old has a tiny face and everywhere I am checking is sold out.

01:41:05.120 Help?

01:41:05.900 Let's all help, Dana.

01:41:07.300 Dana, you don't have to comply with this nonsense.

01:41:10.260 Your four-year-old with the tiny face is going to be just fine without a mask that's made to protect against hazardous substances.

01:41:18.380 Have we all lost our ever-loving minds?

01:41:21.180 Dana, Bernie, and the rest of the mask zealots wear all the N95s you want until you're literally blue or red in the face.

01:41:28.400 But you try to force those things on me and my kids?

01:41:31.660 Thanks, but no thanks.

01:41:33.120 That's it for us this week.

01:41:35.860 Thanks for joining us.

01:41:36.800 We're going to be back on Tuesday, taking the day on Monday.

01:41:38.880 Hope you have a wonderful holiday weekend.

01:41:41.400 In the meantime, check out our show on podcast, on YouTube, and don't miss next week's programming

01:41:47.300 because the one and only Goldie Hawn will be here. 0.99

01:41:51.140 Have a great one.

01:41:53.480 Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. 0.94

01:41:55.400 No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

01:42:03.120 Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. 0.94

The Megyn Kelly Show - January 14, 2022

COVID Truth Suppression and Prince Andrew's Perilous Future, with Sen. Marco Rubio, Dan Wootton, and Anne Bremner ｜ Ep. 241

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript