In an effort to protect China and themselves, officials at the National Institutes of Health have been willfully misleading the public on the SARS-CoV-19 pandemic s origins, documents emerged this week that public health officials did not want us to see. But House Republicans finally got their hands on emails between Drs. Fauci and Collins and some of the world s top virologists discussing early on in the pandemic whether SARS came from a lab.
00:00:00.400Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations.
00:00:12.040Hey everyone, welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. I'm Megyn Kelly.
00:00:16.060We begin today with new questions about whether we can trust the public health officials overseeing America's response to this pandemic.
00:00:23.220On 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.
00:00:37.580Yesterday, we reported about Walensky continuing to tout a discredited study on masking in schools.
00:00:43.720Today, 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.
00:00:58.820Documents emerged this week that public health officials did not want us to see.
00:01:02.820They 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.
00:01:20.340It 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.
00:01:35.860The 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.
00:01:52.300Emails 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.
00:02:04.920They 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.
00:02:18.620Physicist 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.
00:02:30.460There is a particular part on what's called the spike.
00:02:35.400You know, if you see a picture of the virus, it's a sphere with these spikes coming out.
00:02:39.660These spikes are what attach to the victim cell.
00:02:42.140Now, 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.
00:02:58.920To get in and to get in so quickly and so effectively as to be really infectious, it has this little code in it.
00:03:06.940And 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.
00:03:55.640One 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.
00:04:06.960He relayed the thoughts of two more experts, Robert Gary of Tulane University and Michael Farzan of the Scripps Research Institute.
00:04:16.100Robert Gary, he said, can't think of a plausible natural scenario.
00:04:20.960And Farzan was, quote, bothered by the furin site and having a hard time explaining that outside the lab.
00:04:28.320Farzan, he said, favored lab leak over natural origin 70 to 30 or 60 to 40.
00:04:32.980We 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.
00:04:42.780Christiane Anderson of the Scripps Research Institute put the lab leak theory at 60 to 70 percent likely.
00:05:24.220Two 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.
00:05:38.620And 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.
00:05:54.280Sir 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.
00:06:02.280Guess that includes himself and all his buds.
00:06:04.300Oh, and these same scientists took pains to assure us in their writings that soon the natural animal source would be found.
00:06:14.180Two years, 209 species and 80,000 animal examinations later, it hasn't happened.
00:06:39.600Your grants, your research, possibly even your career, gone.
00:06:44.360You do as they say, things get better for you.
00:06:47.820Six months after they reversed course, Christiane Anderson and Robert Gary reportedly received an $8.9 million grant from Fauci and Collins.
00:07:02.300Fauci wanted the lab leak theory gone.
00:07:05.080He later called it a shiny object, reassuring colleagues it would go away.
00:07:10.020He 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.
00:07:22.100Collins, for his part, is on record in these emails, making very clear his orders.
00:07:27.020This article was important to, quote, settle this matter.
00:07:33.600He 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.
00:07:49.600Shut up about the lab leak in Wuhan, China.
00:07:52.700Dr. 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.
00:08:02.240Further 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.
00:08:19.780China had been America's biggest and most important collaborator in scientific research.
00:08:24.780Our collaboration with the Chinese over the past 20 years has grown exponentially, despite their human rights abuses and our occasional objections.
00:08:32.140We have been working together there and here on research just like what was happening in that lab.
00:08:40.080It 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.
00:08:58.440But what if, what if, what if it gets ahead of them?
00:09:03.720Fauci was behind much of the U.S. funding in China.
00:09:07.060He admitted approving grants for EcoHealth Alliance, a group that researched coronaviruses in the Wuhan lab.
00:09:14.340Fauci would only admit so much, however, swearing that this research, well, it didn't qualify as that risky gain of function stuff.
00:09:21.400Dozens of scientists called BS on that.
00:09:25.100But 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.
00:09:45.000Fauci maintains he was shocked, shocked to learn the truth, that the research he had approved was, in fact, gain of function.
00:09:52.960After all, he had been denying this allegation under oath for months.
00:09:58.200Well, his denials are clearly questionable, especially when one considers that EcoHealth Alliance was not exactly stealthy about the work it wanted to pursue.
00:10:08.360In 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.
00:10:27.120The 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.
00:10:41.560And the Chinese Academy of Sciences was funding most of the work in the Wuhan Institute of Virology anyway.
00:10:48.540EcoHealth'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.
00:11:06.860Best 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.
00:11:23.700Worst 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.
00:11:34.500Fauci 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.
00:11:51.640But 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.
00:12:07.420And the world's top scientists and the slobbering media let them get away with it.
00:12:16.380Not only does COVID-19 continue to morph and circulate and cause havoc across the world,
00:12:21.540The 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.
00:12:32.260This, 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.
00:12:44.260And when asked this week to come clean about these exchanges with the world's top virologists about the origins of COVID-19, he dodged.
00:12:54.820Did 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?
00:13:19.520You 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.
00:13:28.940So not only are you distorting it, you are completely turning it around.
00:13:33.440As most of the scientists that came to you privately, did they come to you privately and say, no way, this came from the lab?
00:13:39.180Or 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?
00:13:48.060Senator, we are here at a committee to look at a virus now that has killed almost 900,000 people.
00:13:58.140And the purpose of the committee was to try and get things out, how we can help to get the American public.
00:14:04.780And you keep coming back to personal attacks on me that have absolutely no relevance to reality.
00:14:12.300Joining me now, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida.
00:14:21.380Can we trust Dr. Fauci, Dr. Collins, and our public health officials?
00:14:28.140Well, I think like anybody in public office, they need to maintain that trust in any turn.
00:14:32.880You saw the answers right there in that segment leading in.
00:14:35.200And 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.
00:14:47.420And 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?
00:14:54.280He says, well, that's a personal attack and just refused to answer the question or address it formally.
00:14:59.580If 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.
00:15:07.420But instead, he wouldn't answer that specific question.
00:15:11.020I 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.
00:15:22.020And 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.
00:15:53.840And 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.
00:16:12.320And I imagine Dr. Fauci will retire fairly soon as well.
00:16:16.140How he remains in the post is pretty straightforward.
00:16:18.040And 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.
00:16:30.660And that any sort of scrutiny and any sort of hard questions of him is denial of COVID, denial of this, that, or the other.
00:16:40.920So I think he's positioned and insulated himself in a way that a lot of these people end up doing.
00:16:45.720And this is very common to people in this, you know, look, science is very complicated and they know that.
00:16:49.900And 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.
00:16:55.640And 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.
00:17:15.580And it's not like having somebody for an hour or two where you can methodically ask the questions and get real answers.
00:17:21.980And when they try to dodge, you know, let them dodge a little, but then follow up.
00:17:26.740So 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?
00:17:38.600Well, look, the committees can can structure their own rules.
00:17:41.940So let's say Republicans were in charge in the House or in the Senate.
00:17:44.960There's no nothing in the law or in the Constitution that says it has to be eight minutes or 10 minutes or 12 minutes.
00:18:01.280They know you only have five or seven minutes and they never get to answering your question.
00:18:05.120And 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.
00:18:28.820You go see the hearings or read the transcripts of the organized crime hearings.
00:18:32.800It was actually the council on even Watergate.
00:18:35.140It 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.
00:18:41.980What 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?
00:18:57.380I'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.
00:19:06.640But why is the White House cooperating with this?
00:19:12.100Well, I don't know how you want to refer to it.
00:19:13.560And 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.
00:20:06.760They would have raised questions about why they didn't ask these things themselves sooner.
00:20:10.520And 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.
00:20:20.440You know, the intelligence community operates on certainty.
00:20:22.360And 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.
00:20:31.220You know, that kind of smoking gun is actually pretty rare in intelligence.
00:20:35.280What intelligence is valuable for is analysis.
00:20:38.380And 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.
00:20:48.700And it's been my consistent view that the likeliest thing that happened here was that they were conducting risky experiments in an unsafe lab.
00:20:57.780They'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.
00:21:08.980And 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.
00:21:16.400And they'll never tell us and they'll never admit to that error.
00:21:18.860But I think that's the likeliest scenario here.
00:21:21.800And whether we'll ever have a smoking gun is is a different question.
00:21:26.900Yeah, 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.
00:21:36.440It appears that in that lab there was a bioweapons section or at least a section that was overseen by the Chinese military.
00:21:42.960But we have no proof that that's where this virus came from.
00:21:46.500We do have a lot of circumstantial evidence that covid-19 was someplace in that lab and somehow got out.
00:21:52.180There 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.
00:22:03.820The accident happened in the fall of 19.
00:22:06.380But 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.
00:22:24.280Right. Like maybe we don't want to do that because we have no desire to get to the bottom of it.
00:22:27.560But why on earth would we be with the Biden administration be talking about one hundred and twenty five million more toward research like this?
00:22:34.580Well, I don't know why they're talking about it.
00:22:37.300You can go back pre covid almost a decade to a lot of debate in scientific communities about why gain of function was very dangerous.
00:22:44.080And, 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,
00:22:51.120but 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.
00:23:00.240Well, that weren't very rough without.
00:23:02.380Yeah. 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.
00:23:09.020So what you know, I'm getting now outside of my lane here in terms of what I fully understand.
00:23:13.280And 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,
00:23:20.000you know, that that can lead to the creation of Frankenstein monsters, not literally, but sort of unanticipated consequences.
00:23:26.960Gain of function is something like that. I mean, gain of function is basically there's this virus out there among animals.
00:23:32.500It's not infectious in humans, but it could evolve to become infections in humans.
00:23:36.580So let's try to predict how it would evolve. Let's make it evolve that way.
00:23:40.660So then we can come up for a cure and a treatment for it.
00:23:43.360What 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.
00:23:51.720Our bodies have no defenses for and people start to die.
00:23:54.900And, you know, this I'm not saying COVID is not bad.
00:23:57.460COVID has been very bad, especially early on. We didn't know a lot about it.
00:24:00.440We didn't know how to treat it. But I think most epidemiologists who talk to will tell you there are other viruses out there.
00:24:06.240among the animal population, that if they ever became zoonotic, if they ever transferred over into humans, would be far more devastating.
00:24:14.240This is not even close to the worst possible virus that could one day potentially cross over.
00:24:19.920And 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.
00:24:25.080So this is very relevant. We shouldn't be funding it.
00:24:27.360But more importantly, I think there should be global crackdown and condemnation on it because it has a global impact.
00:24:32.440This will not be contained to whatever country is doing it.
00:24:34.500Well, that's the problem, too, is that we weren't supposed to be funding it even when we were.
00:24:39.300And there was there was a moratorium put in place because we recognize this is pretty dangerous.
00:24:43.060Why 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?
00:24:53.820It's like, well, what could possibly go wrong?
00:24:55.400Well, something like this, this Wuhan lab with its humanized mice, what they believe is that it was put in a mouse and mice.
00:25:02.400And then it sort of kept improving gain.
00:25:04.800It was gaining function, getting better and stronger and more transmissible.
00:25:09.060And it was at that point that somehow it got out.
00:26:58.760Today, 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.
00:27:55.220I 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.
00:28:06.620But he would say it seeks to make them more fair and protect voter rights.
00:28:13.040Yeah, and there's a lot to unpack here.
00:28:14.740The 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.
00:28:22.540Almost overcompensating, I guess, for the failures and things of that nature.
00:28:26.840So that kind of hyperbole actually backfires because people look at it and shake their heads.
00:28:30.520I 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.
00:28:39.440It doesn't make it unimportant because they're trying to change the election law and have a federal takeover.
00:28:43.380But 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.
00:29:17.240And I think number two, frankly, is about politics.
00:29:20.160I think Chuck Schumer is afraid to get primaried in New York.
00:29:23.120AOC has not ruled out running for Senate against him.
00:29:26.280I 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.
00:29:35.660Maybe he thinks he's still going to win, but he doesn't want to go through that process.
00:29:38.500There's a tremendous amount of pressure coming from the base of the party, particularly radical elements of the base.
00:29:44.460And 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.
00:29:56.580Because to me, the politics of this whole voting rights thing has not made any sense.
00:30:01.300Now, I am just a journalist, so I don't totally get it.
00:30:04.060But 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.
00:32:04.800They 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.
00:32:11.880But 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.
00:32:24.760And January 6th proved that, you know, we need more federal control of how these things get certified and go down.
00:32:31.000There was a moment where you tried to address that rationale.
00:32:36.080We cut the soundbite because we found it kind of interesting.
00:32:39.220I'm going to play it and then get you to add to it.
00:32:40.960I think almost everyone would tell you that what happened on January 6th here was a terrible thing.
00:32:45.880It should never have happened and it should never happen again.
00:32:49.040But I don't care how many candlelight vigils and musical performances you have from the cast of Hamilton.
00:32:53.660You'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.
00:33:03.180OK, well, they've they've issued their first arrest for a guy charged with, quote, sedition now.
00:33:13.140No, I look at my opinion is that what happened on January 6th was a terrible thing.
00:33:16.900Crimes 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.
00:33:24.200And and I continue to believe that I believe that from the moment it started.
00:33:27.480I don't care who you are. I don't care what your banner is.
00:33:30.160I don't care whose side you're on, who you voted for, whether you agree with me on issues or not.
00:33:34.000You can't do what happened on that day.
00:33:35.560You 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.
00:33:42.660You 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.
00:33:48.800That is separate from the argument that somehow this was an orchestrated effort to overthrow the government of the United States of America.
00:33:55.160That just is not true. We were nowhere close to that. That was not going to happen.
00:33:59.540And so I think what happens is when you exaggerate these things, you lose credibility.
00:34:03.600When you lose credibility, then we lose the ability to analyze these things for what they truly are.
00:34:09.020And in many cases, you sort of empower the worst elements.
00:34:11.460You go around calling if everyone is a racist, if that becomes just a throwaway line.
00:34:18.800You'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.
00:34:25.760And it's the same thing with this. You know, what happened that day?
00:34:29.000You 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.
00:34:36.980But 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.
00:34:45.500These are stupid things for people to say, particularly a vice president of the United States, as an example.
00:34:50.780Yeah. The that's how she opened her remarks the other day. I mean, comparing it to 9-11, too.
00:34:55.560It'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.
00:35:12.560Or that Build Back Better plan, which, of course, is just a list, a laundry list of Democratic wish items, wish list items, bigots.
00:35:21.720This is a sample we have from MSNBC. They're going after Joe Manchin and some others because, of course, Manchin stopped Build Back Better.
00:35:28.560He's also reportedly not in favor of eliminating the filibuster, something Joe Biden opposed for almost his entire career until he became the president.
00:35:36.880And Kristen Sinema is taking her fair shot of these accusations as well.
00:35:42.560But 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.
00:35:57.960But 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.
00:36:10.280All 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.
00:36:24.760In the original image, Senator Sinema had tweeted my hero after Lewis died.
00:36:30.520Bowman tweets out the following hero, a person who is admired or idealized for coverage, outstanding achievements or noble qualities.
00:36:39.600Traitor, a person who betrays a friend, country, principal, et cetera.
00:36:43.160He went on to say, Bowman, John Lewis is a hero.
00:36:47.560You, Sinema, are a traitor to his legacy, your constituents and our democracy.
00:36:56.360Number one, if you want to get noticed in American politics today, you say things like that.
00:37:00.400Right. And the more outrageous, the more notice you're going to get.
00:37:02.620And there are some people that are going to applaud it, at least treat it as a serious statement.
00:37:05.700I think the other is that it's poisonous and toxic and and nasty.
00:37:10.020And I don't even have the words to describe how ridiculous that assumption is.
00:37:14.580But it goes back to the point I made earlier.
00:37:16.180And that is this now things like traitor, things like racists, things like bigot have become throwaway lines.
00:37:22.600Look, there are bigots and there are racists in this country.
00:37:27.460There are bigots and there are racists on the entire planet Earth.
00:37:29.880It is one of the sins that bedevils mankind.
00:37:32.580And we should reserve our anger for the ones that are really that and are motivated by that.
00:37:38.400But 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.
00:37:45.360In essence, you almost give cover to the people that are actually racists and bigots.
00:37:49.860And 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.
00:38:05.460But 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.
00:38:15.120I 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.
00:38:23.400Hmm. 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.
00:38:29.780We now have a decision on the vaccine mandates.
00:38:31.740But 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.
00:38:41.040And 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.
00:38:50.540One 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.
00:38:58.300You 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.
00:39:07.000I 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.
00:39:16.220And yet they are a sponsor of these Olympics.
00:39:20.540Yeah, it's unfortunate. Nike, others that are out there and they were there.
00:39:24.400I'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.
00:39:30.420And 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.
00:39:46.980But they won't say a word about China. And it's not just about the Olympics. It is in general.
00:39:50.700This is just true all the way across the board. And and that kind of hypocrisy needs to be called out.
00:39:55.640But 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.
00:40:06.040So 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.
00:40:12.620Yeah, 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.
00:40:22.380It thinks it's good for business. It's always looking to line its bottom its pockets.
00:40:26.620That'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.
00:40:37.200All 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?
00:40:48.020Could that be the matchup again? Marco Rubio has run for president and he may have an opinion.
00:40:54.160Remember, 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.
00:41:07.480If you prefer an audio podcast, just download the show for free at Apple, Spotify, Pandora, Stitcher or wherever you get your podcasts.
00:41:15.700And there you will find over 230 archives shows, including the one I mentioned with Richard Muller.
00:41:23.500We had him on in June. We had him on again in October.
00:41:27.800And he's the physicist who really shows you why the the genetic sequencing of COVID-19 proves it came from a lab.
00:42:08.740So what do you make of it? Because people are mad at Justice Kavanaugh, in particular, for siding with Chief Justice Roberts.
00:42:14.620Conservatives are used to Roberts now betraying them and crossing over to help the lives.
00:42:18.840But Roberts and Kavanaugh crossed over to save the vaccine mandate for the health care workers, people going through Medicare or Medicaid.
00:42:26.180But 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.
00:42:35.220Right. 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.
00:42:45.220The job is to tell us whether it's unconstitutional or not. Does the federal government have the power to do this?
00:42:50.940I think clearly and most people thought it did not have the power.
00:42:53.920And 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.
00:43:04.540I 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.
00:43:11.820So I'd like to dig into that before pining on what Kavanaugh and Roberts just rationale was.
00:43:17.380But on the first point, I don't think the Biden administration ever thought they would win a legal challenge to it.
00:43:22.300I 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.
00:43:27.080You know, we can just say a lot of people are going to die because Supreme Court made a bad decision.
00:43:30.460But 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.
00:43:41.720And 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.
00:43:48.500Yeah, it was clearly not going to be upheld as constitutional.
00:43:51.980We were on the record saying that. So were many people who had taken a hard look at this.
00:43:56.260And yet he did it. He did the same thing with the eviction moratorium over the summer.
00:43:59.940He knew it wasn't going to be upheld. It was very clear that it was going to be struck down.
00:44:02.920But he did it anyway. These extra legal moves by somebody who's not a king.
00:44:08.240And yet there's no accountability. Same as there's no accountability for Fauci or Collins for the lies that they've been telling us.
00:44:13.260Same as there's been no accountability for a single general at all involved in the Afghanistan withdrawal.
00:44:19.780You know, we had Lieutenant Colonel Scheller, now former Marine on the show.
00:44:23.380He's the only guy who lost his job because he spoke out about the leadership.
00:44:26.700It's just it's so frustrating to the American people to see no accountability time after time after time.
00:44:32.240And again, as I say, extra legal behavior by the president of the United States.
00:44:37.080But I actually disagree slightly. I think there is accountability and it's being reflected today in the public polling.
00:44:42.880And I think in November in the elections, that's where the accountability is going to be.
00:44:46.780Yeah, you're right. I mean, no one's being hauled off to jail. No one's being prosecuted.
00:44:50.260No 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.
00:44:59.900But ultimately, I believe in November because of any of these things that they've done.
00:45:03.580And 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.
00:45:12.900So the accountability here is ultimately in the hands of American voters. And I think you're going to see that play out in November.
00:45:18.820Well, if the election were today, it would not look good for President Biden.
00:45:22.580He has got a 33 percent approval rating right now, according to Quinnipiac polling.
00:45:27.740That's the lowest of any poll tracked by Real Clear Politics, from which I got the reporting.
00:45:32.700Among Democrats, he had 87 percent support in November. Now it's down to 75.
00:45:52.580By the way, among independents, only 25 percent approve.
00:45:56.100The 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.
00:48:47.260I 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.
00:48:53.760I 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.
00:49:00.620And I think that's certainly been true beginning since 2015.
00:49:03.980We're just in a very unusual, fluid, and dynamic time where anything's possible.
00:49:07.920And 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.
00:49:19.280But I think it's about as plausible as any of the other things that people are talking about.
00:49:24.640I 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.
00:49:34.880Well, 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.
00:49:40.800As somebody who's actually run against Trump, what do you think is good for the Republican Party? That Trump runs or no?
00:49:47.700Listen, Donald Trump, okay, brought people into the Republican Party, many of whom had never voted Republican before.
00:49:54.820I mean, one of the most fascinating voters in America are the people that voted for Barack Obama twice and then Donald Trump twice.
00:50:00.400And we certainly want those people to remain within the Republican fold.
00:50:03.780There's been a tremendous realignment in American politics, I think, to the net benefit of the Republican Party.
00:50:09.500And Donald Trump's been a big part of it. I have no idea what Donald Trump is going to do.
00:50:12.600I can tell you just this, because knowing politics a little bit, he's the most popular Republican in the country.
00:50:17.880Whether people like it or not, he's the most Republican. He's the most popular and influential Republican in the country.
00:50:23.200If he runs for president, he's going to be the Republican nominee.
00:50:25.700And 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.
00:51:15.020Up 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.
00:51:24.860A royal fall from grace and how for Britain's Prince Andrew, as the civil sex assault case against him is allowed to move forward.
00:51:39.800And his mother, the Queen, strips him of his military titles and royal patronages, effectively sending her son into exile.
00:52:01.240I love coming on your show and it's fun to have you back on ours.
00:52:03.700So, Dan, first of all, can I start with this?
00:52:07.300This 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.
00:52:18.520She claims Prince Andrew was one of the men to whom she was trafficked repeatedly.
00:52:23.540So she filed a civil lawsuit against him.
00:52:25.340And all that's happened is the judge has said it can move forward.
00:52:29.280I'm not going to throw it out on the papers, which happens in 98 percent of all cases.
00:52:33.680Motions 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.
00:52:40.940So 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.
00:52:55.740The problem is, Megan, this has been dragging on now for years and it's dragging down the reputation of the monarchy.
00:53:04.200I 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.
00:53:15.120And I know we've spoken many times before that there are doubts around the credibility of Virginia.
00:53:19.800But he had an opportunity in a one hour interview with the BBC to set things straight and he failed.
00:53:28.120He also said in that interview that he would cooperate with the U.S. authorities, specifically the FBI.
00:53:35.340He 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.
00:53:59.860And 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.
00:54:12.700So this was a very difficult decision for the Queen.
00:54:15.440She is said to be devastated about it.
00:54:17.020Believe it or not, Megan, Prince Andrew is her favourite son.
00:54:47.620We know, engage in some questionable behavior, even if you give him the benefit of the doubt on her allegations.
00:54:52.380He definitely hung out with a guy who had copped a plea on a underage sex charge, knowing that he had just done that.
00:54:59.960I mean, he went and stayed with Jeffrey Epstein after Jeffrey Epstein took that plea bargain in the criminal case.
00:55:04.840So that's yeah, you can see how there'd be consequences.
00:55:07.540But 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.
00:55:18.980So he kind of worsened his own situation.
00:55:23.540And remember, Megan, we are in a changing monarchy.
00:55:26.360And 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.
00:55:35.700And unless she is forced to because of severely ill health, we really do believe she will stay on the throne.
00:55:49.960And my God, we pray that she will be because there's a lot of issues around a King Charles and a Queen Camilla.
00:55:57.820But part of the plan that King Charles is currently putting into action is to streamline the monarchy, to slim it down, to modernize it.
00:56:07.160So 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.
00:56:22.780And it was unconscionable for Prince Charles and Prince William.
00:56:25.500And I think what this decision shows is that they are calling the shots now.
00:56:29.040The 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.
00:56:41.420Sarah Ferguson would not allow her to be at royal events.
00:56:45.520All of a sudden, he's out of the picture.
00:56:47.380And 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.
00:56:56.880Hmm. 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.
00:57:05.040That'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.
00:57:15.880All of which, again, he denies. And normally we would just see, you know, discovery play out in the civil case.
00:57:21.340And then when discovery is done, the defendant would move for summary judgment, saying, don't let this go to a jury.
00:57:27.460Give 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.
00:57:38.540But he can't really do that. I mean, maybe that he could legally, but he's fighting a PR war, too.
00:57:45.400And it seems like the British public has about had it and is not going to give him any more leeway on that PR war.
00:57:52.160No, because he had an opportunity. And just remember what discovery would mean for Prince Andrew.
00:57:59.300It 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
00:58:11.640when 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.
00:58:25.860So it's just really not tenable. Obviously, the issue at the moment is, is this a financial play by Virginia, Virginia Dufresne?
00:58:35.480Obviously, 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.
00:58:49.180Wait a minute. Did you say Tramp nightclub? T-R-A-M-P?
00:59:41.220And is the Queen actually funding right now Prince Andrew's defence?
00:59:46.180She has been. Yeah. And I mean, that's the disgrace in all of this.
00:59:49.100So in the statement released by Buckingham Palace yesterday, they insisted that Prince Andrew would be fighting this case as a private citizen.
00:59:58.540But that doesn't mean he isn't running to mummy dairist and asking her to dip into her very deep pockets.
01:00:04.820Because, of course, yes, the Queen is partly funded by the state, but she also has a very large personal fortune.
01:00:10.820And the £10 million ski chalet, most people think, is only going to cover some of his legal costs.
01:00:16.820So we're in this crazy world where Prince Andrew may have to ask the Queen to pay the settlement that goes to Virginia Dufresne.
01:00:26.380And 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,
01:00:39.840where she has put her country before herself time and again at great personal sacrifice.
01:00:47.020I 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.
01:01:01.580What if he's innocent? You know, what if he didn't do it?
01:01:04.580What if she just named him because she saw a deep pocket and all this stuff is happening to him unfairly?
01:01:10.980Yes, he's a rube in front of the camera. He doesn't he's not smooth.
01:01:14.460He 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.
01:01:22.180And sometimes they say dumb stuff, even though they're totally innocent.
01:01:26.320Well, especially someone as entitled and delusional as Prince Andrew.
01:01:30.160I mean, Megan, you know, I've been reporting this case now for well over a decade.
01:01:34.500And I think probably the most fascinating day was the day after that BBC interview.
01:01:40.980When 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.
01:01:49.600And at that point, remember, you've got everyone in Britain saying Prince Andrew's finished.
01:01:53.940This was the most ridiculous interview we've ever heard in our life.
01:01:56.400What does he mean? He can't sweat. He's lost all credibility.
01:02:00.680Prince Andrew actually told the Queen that morning, mommy, I did great.
01:02:05.840This is over. So this is a man who lives in a different world, Megan.
01:02:11.440He is very privileged. He's never had anyone telling him what to do or how to act.
01:02:17.860And that's one of the problems with royalty, obviously.
01:02:21.780So, look, I think there's a chance Prince Andrew is innocent.
01:02:25.820Of course I do. He has not been proven guilty of anything when it comes to the conduct of his behavior with Virginia Dufresne.
01:02:32.840But the key point, Megan, is the one that you raised earlier in the interview.
01:02:36.900Why did he go and spend the weekend staying with Jeffrey Epstein after he had already gone to jail for child sex trafficking?
01:02:46.780And remember, if it wasn't my old newspaper, the News of the World and my current newspaper, the Daily Mail,
01:02:52.900that has been on this story for years and years and years, that visit would have remained secret.
01:02:57.820Remember, it was a paparazzi picture that actually captured Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew on that walk through Central Park.
01:03:05.180Now, if that photographer hadn't been there, perhaps the story would never have come to public light.
01:03:09.180And Andrew and Epstein would have got away with the entire thing.
01:03:12.740And then, of course, it was the Mail on Sunday newspaper, which is part of the Daily Mail group,
01:03:16.500that first ran that picture, that very consequential image of Virginia Dufresne and Prince Andrew
01:03:23.220with sex trafficker, convicted sex trafficker, and Al Ghislaine Maxwell in the background.
01:03:28.000So I don't know about you, Megan, but I would say whether or not Prince Andrew had sexual relations with Virginia Dufresne,
01:03:35.040there are still serious questions for him to answer based on everything we know about his incredibly close relationship with Epstein and Maxwell.
01:03:44.260And just to take our audience back, Dan, to that BBC interview, because many, most of our audience probably didn't see that.
01:03:50.980I wonder why he gave it, because it was universally panned as awful and a death knell to his public reputation.
01:04:10.040She was very specific about that night.
01:04:12.200She described dancing with you and you profusely sweating and that she went on to have baths, possibly.
01:04:21.280There's a slight problem with the sweating because I have a peculiar medical condition,
01:04:31.240which is that I don't sweat or I didn't sweat at the time.
01:04:34.720And 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.
01:04:46.900And I simply, it was almost impossible for me to sweat.
01:04:53.720And 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.
01:05:01.600So I'm afraid to say that there's a medical condition that says that I didn't do it.
01:12:08.860But 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.
01:12:26.440The 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.
01:12:42.040It's not really all it was cracked up to be.
01:12:44.040So 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.
01:12:56.220And meanwhile, you know, they give an interview every other week, Dan, while maintaining what they really want is their privacy.
01:13:01.060And 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.
01:13:08.560So your thoughts on what they're doing now and whether they really want what they say they want.
01:13:15.740Yeah, that guy's a little oddball, isn't he?
01:13:27.480Because all he does is take whatever Meghan and Harry says and he publishes it, whether it's true or not.
01:13:33.000And 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.
01:13:44.120And by the way, all of that relationship was exposed in court recently.
01:13:47.320And 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.
01:13:55.940But 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.
01:14:07.860And look, this is a couple that are prepared to lie.
01:14:12.380I also think the fact that they're unhappy is not surprising to me.
01:14:15.340Don'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,
01:14:22.220actually, it can make them very unhappy.
01:14:24.540And I think both Meghan and Harry are people who are always going to be unhappy.
01:14:31.060And 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.
01:14:41.600And you know what's particularly despicable, Meghan?
01:14:43.220Guess how much money they raised for their Archie Well charity in its first year?
01:14:50.420So they're raising over £50 million for themselves and yet they say that they're all about charity and they raise $50,000.
01:15:01.040If 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.
01:15:17.480I 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.
01:15:26.160And she goes on TV with Oprah to try to make us care about what title her baby's going to get.
01:15:33.140No one gives a damn about your kid's title.
01:15:39.100They're trying to make it through frontline working in hospitals and grocery stores.
01:15:42.340And 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.
01:15:51.280I 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.
01:16:00.740I'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.
01:16:50.560They 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.
01:17:24.720OK, 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.
01:17:32.760It's looking more and more like her conviction could be going bye-bye.
01:17:37.360We've been talking about the fall of Britain's Prince Andrew.
01:17:46.280We 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.
01:17:56.720She was recently convicted of five charges linked to the sex trafficking of minors.
01:18:01.860Her 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.