The Megyn Kelly Show - Fani Willis' Perilous Future, and Biden Nudged to Step Aside, with Charlie Kirk, Dave Aronberg, Mike Davis, and Phil Holloway

00:00:00.560 Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at New East.

00:00:12.160 Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show and happy Tuesday.

00:00:16.420 Feels like a Monday because of President's Day. Hope you had a nice holiday.

00:00:20.300 Fulton County District Attorney Fannie Willis speaking out over the weekend,

00:00:24.020 this time quoting scripture about weapons being formed against her.

00:00:29.180 She's talking about how hard her job is. We know. We're aware. Pretty much everyone knows that.

00:00:35.100 That's why most people don't run to be DA. This, as the judge overseeing her potential disqualification,

00:00:41.020 will make several key decisions in the coming days. Do you know this thing is not over?

00:00:45.160 It's still under review. The judge is figuring out whether some of these claims of attorney-client

00:00:49.300 privilege are going to stand. And we have yet to hear closing arguments on the hearing, at least,

00:00:54.720 from the defense and the prosecution. So all that's about to happen.

00:00:59.180 In the coming days. Meantime, we're getting a great response to the deep dive we took on this

00:01:04.600 case on Friday. You can go take a look at it on YouTube. It's setting the internet on fire. So go

00:01:10.000 check it out at our YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Megyn Kelly. If you missed that deep dive,

00:01:16.300 everything you thought you wanted to know about the Fannie Willis case and more.

00:01:19.380 As we signed off for the long weekend, something important happened. As far as we can tell,

00:01:24.800 virtually everybody's missed it. A key witness was on the stand. His name is Terrence Bradley.

00:01:31.420 He's Nathan Wade's former law partner and friend. Now he's originally, he was suggested to be the

00:01:38.800 defense's so-called star witness, meaning the defense in this case, kind of confusing given the

00:01:43.700 way this case is unfolding. But, you know, the defense is Trump. The defense is this guy, Michael

00:01:48.200 Roman, whose lawyer Ashley Merchant brought this whole affair thing to light. And the state is Fannie

00:01:54.480 Willis. And in this case, the lawyers like Ms. Cross defending Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade and their

00:02:00.480 behavior. So it's kind of weird because we say defense, but in this hearing, it's more like Fannie

00:02:06.040 Willis is the defense. Anywho, what I'm saying when I say that Terrence Bradley is the so-called star

00:02:12.100 witness, I mean, of the defendants, Michael Roman and Trump. That's what was allegedly posited by

00:02:18.880 their lawyers. But here's what happened last week. He took the stand for about two minutes and then

00:02:25.320 said, attorney, client, attorney, client, attorney, client, privilege, privilege, privilege. No, no,

00:02:29.280 no, no, no, no. And he stepped down and Ashley Merchant called a different witness. She called

00:02:35.300 Robin Yeardley and that Yeardley. And that woman took the stand and said, this affair began long

00:02:42.560 before 2022, as Fannie and Nathan testified. I was there. I was Fannie's longtime good friend.

00:02:50.160 Then let me tell you, they were had an affair as far back as 19. So that was big. And Ashley Merchant,

00:02:56.860 the lawyer for defendant, Roman, was saying, I got another guy in the wings who's going to say this.

00:03:00.380 His name is Terrence Bradley. I'll give you Robin Yeardley because she's easy. She's nobody's lawyer.

00:03:07.800 We don't have any of these attorney, client, privilege objections. So let me put her on the

00:03:10.880 stand, which we did. They tried to say she was disgruntled because she had been let go from Fannie

00:03:18.100 Willis's office, but they proved she had been let go. They didn't prove she's a liar. She's somebody who

00:03:24.460 would perjure herself with an ax to grind. They didn't even prove that she was bitter. They just proved that

00:03:29.400 she was let go under circumstances that she seemed to object to. Anyway, up pops Terrence Bradley on

00:03:36.460 day two. Again, Nathan Wade's divorce lawyer for a time and friend and former law partner.

00:03:43.120 And something extraordinary happened on the stand. And we're going to walk you through the

00:03:47.060 key moments in his testimony and why the day ended with a potential bombshell.

00:03:53.880 Joining me now for the first time in the show is Philip Holloway. He's the founder of the Holloway

00:03:58.520 Law Group based in Cobb County, Georgia. He appears regularly on national and international

00:04:03.120 media covering legal news. And he happens to know a lot of the key players involved in this

00:04:08.520 developing story. Phil, welcome to the show. Great to be with you, Megan. Thank you for having me.

00:04:14.300 Yeah, the pleasure is all ours. So Terrence Bradley wound up being quite important on Friday.

00:04:20.680 The day kind of started in a sleepy way. They had the former governor of Georgia take the stand to say,

00:04:26.780 Fannie tried to hire me before she hired Nathan Wade. And on cross-examination, he admitted that

00:04:33.860 when Fannie was talking to him about being special prosecutor, Nathan Wade was already in the room.

00:04:38.660 So the defendants are basically suggesting Nathan Wade was already on board. You know, you might have

00:04:43.400 been potentially added as another, but you were not going to replace Wade. Anyway, that's where that

00:04:48.620 went. Fannie Willis's dad took the stand, the former Black Panther. Yeah, it's important to carry cash.

00:04:55.000 No, we didn't live in this house. I never saw Nathan in the house in this, whatever. It was all

00:04:59.800 minutia. Then comes Terrence Bradley back to the stand, Nathan Wade's former lawyer. And

00:05:07.920 Ashley Merchant got up there, Phil, and seemed to be number one, trying to redeem herself because

00:05:14.920 all of Fannie Willis's team, including Fannie herself the day before had said, Ashley Merchant's a liar.

00:05:21.100 She lied. The only reason she got this hearing was she claimed she had Terrence Bradley who was

00:05:27.660 going to confirm an affair began prior to 2022. That didn't happen yesterday. Terrence Bradley in

00:05:33.700 his two minutes on the stand suggested he had never texted with Ashley Merchant. She's a liar.

00:05:39.200 This whole, what we shouldn't even be here. And Ashley Merchant started introducing texts

00:05:44.260 between herself and Terrence Bradley into the record that completely rehabilitated Ashley Merchant,

00:05:50.820 made Fannie Willis and her team look hysterical and dishonest and showed, I believe, that Terrence

00:05:58.600 Bradley, whether he asserted privilege on Friday or not, 100% behind the scenes was confirming

00:06:04.020 this affair to Ashley Merchant prior to having a case of fright when he took the stand. Tell me where

00:06:13.920 I'm going wrong. Well, no, I think you're pretty much where on with all of this, Megan. Listen,

00:06:19.460 it's obvious that if you read between the lines, there's something in those text messages that Fannie

00:06:25.160 Willis really, really, really doesn't want to get out. They literally, Megan, they threw Terrence

00:06:30.780 Bradley under the proverbial bus. They accused him with unsubstantiated, uncharged claims of

00:06:38.720 having engaged in a sexual assault in order to discredit the man.

00:06:43.280 Wait, stand by. Stand by. Hold that thought. Because we're not there yet.

00:06:47.040 No.

00:06:47.380 Because what happened was Ashley gets him on the stand. She starts asking him about the text

00:06:52.520 messages she and he have exchanged. This guy, though he represented Nathan Wade and on the stand

00:06:57.320 was like, everything's privileged. I can't say anything. Oh, he was saying things to

00:07:00.640 Ashley Merchant. He was saying a lot of things prior to actually getting dragged into court.

00:07:04.960 He didn't have any qualms about attorney-client privilege whatsoever. So let's just start there.

00:07:09.780 Yeah, well, we can infer that those text messages, I think, will confirm what the former employee of

00:07:15.880 the DA's office said, which was that the affair started much earlier than they had claimed that it

00:07:21.980 did. In fact, as you said that, you know, she said that it started in as early as 2019.

00:07:26.580 I can infer from what I saw that those text messages probably confirm something along

00:07:32.460 those lines. I hope that when the judge reviews those text messages, and he did that or is doing

00:07:39.160 that, you know, in an in-camera review, I hope that he rules that those things are admissible,

00:07:44.980 because it's obvious that there was a very, I think, broad claim of attorney-client privilege

00:07:50.940 that may or may not necessarily be entirely accurate. The lines, Megan, get blurred when

00:07:56.300 lawyers who are her friends, they are business partners, when they undertake to represent

00:08:02.100 each other in something like a divorce, for example, the lines are very blurred, because what the attorney

00:08:09.320 might know about his client might be from an attorney-client type of conversation. It might be

00:08:16.800 from personal observation. It might be from water cooler talk around the office or just hanging out

00:08:21.960 at lunch. So we just don't know exactly what the basis of Terrence Bradley's knowledge is. And that's

00:08:28.740 what the judge has to figure out when he when he looks at all this stuff back, you know, behind the

00:08:34.140 scenes in his office. So I think that there's something there we would not have seen her. And by her,

00:08:41.260 I mean, Fannie Willis, we would not have seen her team as as aggressively trying to keep this out as

00:08:47.380 we did see, unless they thought those text messages could absolutely bury Fannie Willis. Listen, if she

00:08:54.080 can be shown to have perpetrated a fraud on this court, she could be disbarred, and she could potentially

00:09:00.900 be jailed. She's essentially accusing all of these defendants of making false statements. But if it can

00:09:07.340 come to light, and if it is shown that she is doing that with this court, she's just as guilty as

00:09:13.820 anybody she might be accusing of doing the same thing. And the consequences for her are very dire.

00:09:20.100 She could lose her law license. She could wind up in jail, certainly out of office. And look, the state

00:09:25.120 is looking at this, the state senate. You've now got Congress looking at it. Fannie Willis is under the

00:09:30.500 microscope, and she does not want to be there. She doesn't like playing defense. Prosecutors are accustomed

00:09:36.720 to being on the offense. But she is squarely on her heels. And what the judge rules about these text

00:09:43.160 messages, probably, you know, that that is the key to her fate. The judge's ruling literally, I think,

00:09:50.220 controls her professional fate in this case. I mean, I think we're already there with with the

00:09:55.760 testimony of Robin Urte, who was Fannie's longtime friend, and part for at least sometime employee at

00:10:02.700 the DA's office who said, you know, they lied. The affair began back in 2019. I know that because

00:10:07.340 I witnessed it with my own eyes. And because my good friend at the time, Fannie Willis, told me

00:10:11.240 all about it. She was having an affair with Nathan Wade. Now, Nathan and Fannie disagreed. They said

00:10:15.620 didn't start till 2022. But when we when we closed the day out on Thursday, we had counsel for Fannie,

00:10:22.600 you know, the state attorney, Cross, say, when we come back tomorrow, we're going to put a bunch

00:10:28.200 of witnesses up there to show you Robin Urte's a liar. That's what she promised. Didn't happen,

00:10:33.160 Phil. I watched all day. I waited. Not a one. Yeah. All we got was Fannie Willis's Black Panther

00:10:40.000 father who came to court and talked all about how he you know, he loves cash. He tells his daughter to

00:10:45.860 use cash. You know, cash is king. You know, it's a black thing. Everything needs to be paid in cash.

00:10:50.760 And he was trying to talk about selling a script. And he talked about everything except what we

00:10:55.500 needed to hear was when did this whole thing start? He claimed to never really see or talk to

00:11:02.140 his daughter for various reasons. But surprisingly, he did know enough to know that at some point in

00:11:08.340 2019, she had some other boyfriend, but it wasn't Nathan Wade. That testimony seemed to be, you know,

00:11:15.500 not all that probative. It didn't really move the needle very much other than to,

00:11:20.760 maybe explain why Fannie Willis can't answer a straight question. She seems to get that

00:11:25.260 naturally, you know, from her father, but we did not see any. Yeah, we didn't see any other witnesses

00:11:31.480 that would contradict the claim that that this affair started in 2019. Listen, I want to go

00:11:39.560 through it. Hold on. Hold on. Cause I want to, I want to play some of the sound that, but this is

00:11:42.480 important because when we close the day on Thursday, Robin Urte did some damage. Fannie and Nathan later

00:11:46.920 took the stand and said, Robin is wrong. It didn't begin until 2022. But when the day closed,

00:11:52.540 Fannie's lawyer said the next day they were going to demolish Robin Urte with witnesses showing us

00:11:56.920 how dishonest she was. Not one. They didn't call one witness to even try to do that. It was either

00:12:02.400 a bluff or it fell through, but she didn't have it. And trust me, if she had it, she would have put

00:12:06.700 the witness on the stand because Robin Urte hurt them badly. To the contrary, what we saw was Terrence

00:12:11.920 Bradley, the lawyer, take the stand, try his level best to wiggle. I mean, he was, he was wiggling

00:12:19.520 like an Elvis Presley concert, trying to get out of offering any conversations he's ever had with

00:12:25.980 Nathan Wade. And of course the defense was trying to say he's casting too wide a net judge. He can talk

00:12:32.880 about what he knew from Nathan Wade, his friend, his law partner. He just can't talk about attorney

00:12:38.320 client communications facts. He learned from Nathan only in the context of the AC relationship

00:12:43.360 that were offered to him for purposes of seeking legal advice. And, and Ashley Merchant was trying

00:12:50.120 to show you work together. You knew each other for years. Come on. There's office talk, um, sat out.

00:12:56.460 Trump's lawyer was trying to say there's office talk. You guys talked about that. No, only about sports.

00:13:00.880 That's the only thing we ever discussed outside of the attorney claim. It was obviously untrue.

00:13:05.400 This guy to me was like the biggest liar of anybody I've seen. This is, I don't know any of these

00:13:09.940 players. I know you're down there, but to me, he came across as the biggest liar because he lied to

00:13:15.560 try to protect Nathan Wade at every turn. No, nothing other than attorney client privilege discussions

00:13:20.600 only discussed sports bull. However, Ashley Merchant had him because prior to getting to court,

00:13:27.560 he did text with her. He admitted it. And when she showed him his, her phone with the text messages,

00:13:31.980 he didn't deny it. And we got to hear about at least two of the texts he's trying to get out of

00:13:40.080 now. One was in one text message introduced. Hold on. We actually may just have it here.

00:13:46.340 Yeah. Let's just play it where he was asked about one of the text messages and the content was revealed

00:13:51.500 in sought three. Can you repeat the question? The question is, did I test text you asking you if

00:13:58.080 you knew who I could get an affidavit from about the affair? And you responded, no,

00:14:02.060 no one would freely burn that bridge. Yes, I do see that.

00:14:06.280 Okay. All right, Phil. So let's start with that. His response as Nathan Wade's lawyer,

00:14:12.740 friend, whatever, was not, what affair? There's no affair. And, or I can't talk to you about this

00:14:19.100 because it's attorney client privileged. Yeah. What he said was who, who would want to burn that

00:14:24.480 bridge? And that underscores, you know, he was obviously uncomfortable being there, but that

00:14:29.600 alone proves that when Ashley Merchant claimed in her written legal pleading, she said, look,

00:14:36.460 I'm going to bring Terrence Bradley to court. He's going to back up the other witness and he's going

00:14:42.280 to back up and confirm that this affair started before they claimed it did in 2022. Ashley Merchant

00:14:49.140 is a lawyer who would not have put that in writing in a legal pleading filed in a court if she did not

00:14:56.500 have a good faith basis for putting it in there. That's how it works. I know Ashley Merchant. She's

00:15:02.360 very reputable. She's not going to do something that is that dishonest. If she was basically referring

00:15:09.100 to her conversations with this witness through text messaging, that was her good faith basis for

00:15:16.060 making the claim. And she would not have put it in there if it weren't true. And I think we can all

00:15:19.920 read between the lines, even though we haven't seen or heard all of the text messages. When the judge

00:15:25.640 goes back and reads those and goes over that with Mr. Bradley, the judge is going to see it. Now the

00:15:30.700 judge is going to have to decide, okay, let's say if I decide this is not admissible, I've got to put it

00:15:36.080 out of my brain and not use it for any basis for determining this case. But I don't know how the judge

00:15:43.080 really can do that. Because if he sees these text messages and he knows that Fonnie Willis and Nathan

00:15:49.480 Wade have not been honest and truthful to him, that's got to make a big impact. And I think that

00:15:55.860 the judge is going to reconsider some of his rulings. And I think that a lot of these claims of attorney

00:16:02.240 client privilege will in fact be ruled as not privileged. So we may see Terrence Bradley back

00:16:08.720 on the stand again, whenever this hearing reconvenes. And I think that that's a very

00:16:13.820 likely thing to happen. Maybe not all of the stuff's going to come in, but I think a lot of

00:16:18.800 these text messages might. Here's a second one that we got, you know, the dress was lifted up a little

00:16:24.560 on a couple of these. So we got to hear in the couple of the questions, what Ashley Merchant has

00:16:29.960 and keep in mind, this is not her whole case. It doesn't boil down to these text messages, but she was

00:16:34.020 called a liar. First thing Fannie Willis did when she took the stand on Thursday, you lied. You know,

00:16:39.540 your whole basis for getting this hearing was a lie. No, it wasn't. Nathan Wade's lawyer gave it up

00:16:45.000 to Ashley Merchant in texts. And by the way, that wasn't her only evidence. Then she kept digging.

00:16:49.920 Then she found Robin Urte. And all of this was the basis for calling Nathan Wade and Fannie Willis and

00:16:55.580 asking them the tough questions, which was a totally fair thing to do. And they took umbrage where

00:17:00.620 they tried to get out of the hearing altogether, saying you have no good faith basis to call us.

00:17:04.280 Well, Ashley Merchant did have a good faith basis. These texts prove it. Robin Urte proves it and

00:17:09.980 advances the case against these two even more, that they did have an affair, that it appears to

00:17:14.840 have begun long before they've admitted, and that they were in an inappropriate relationship that they

00:17:19.660 appear to have lied to the court about. Here's the second exchange that reveals some of the content,

00:17:25.360 it's SOT 5. I made reference to an email that Ms. Merchant would have sent you about the

00:17:31.680 motion she was going to file. If you look at this, does this appear to be the email that

00:17:36.960 she received? It's dated January the 6th, 2024, 1025 AM?

00:17:44.920 Yeah, I see it in the email, yes.

00:17:47.780 But that's the email that you received, right, along with, obviously, the attachment, which

00:17:53.920 is right? Yes.

00:17:55.920 Yes.

00:17:57.800 And then, did you respond to that email within the text message that I've just pushed before you?

00:18:06.440 Yes, I said, looks good.

00:18:10.620 The answer is yes.

00:18:12.500 Oh, yes, I did.

00:18:14.600 So there you have it, Phil. You've got Ashley Merchant sent him the January 8th motion she

00:18:21.700 filed, which detailed the affair allegations, which included that it began long before she

00:18:28.160 hired Nathan Wade as special prosecutor. And Nathan Wade's former lawyer slash friend looked it over

00:18:34.800 and responded to Ashley Merchant again, not, what affair? No, it didn't. This is all wrong.

00:18:41.020 Or, I can't comment on this as an attorney who represented him. He responded, looks good.

00:18:48.800 So that tells us what?

00:18:50.560 Yeah, that tells us that Ashley is barking up the right tree. Listen, I watched these people call

00:18:57.220 Ashley an outright liar, and I'm wondering if Ashley doesn't have some basis to sue them for

00:19:04.120 defamation because the civil discovery on that would, I think, be very, very revealing. But when

00:19:09.760 a lawyer, like Ashley, you know, takes the time to send this over to, you know, a witness who knows

00:19:16.200 all of the details and says, is this accurate? And the witness says, looks good to me. That looks

00:19:22.040 like that witness has made an admission, has basically let the cat out of the bag, has opened

00:19:27.900 the door, if you will, to all other conversations he's had about this case. And it opens the door,

00:19:34.980 I think, to all other information he may have, because he may have actually, you know, waved and

00:19:41.120 already given away anything that was covered by attorney-client privilege. The judge, I hope,

00:19:46.580 was watching, and I think he was. He was taking very good notes. But that particular exchange with

00:19:51.220 attorney Steve Sadow, who represents former President Trump, was one of the key moments that I think

00:19:56.520 sets the stage for the admissibility, in my view, of all of the later communications that Terrence

00:20:03.240 Bradley had with Ashley Merchant. So I think it's going to come in. I think this is all going to

00:20:09.060 corroborate Ms. Yurdy. And I think that the judge is probably going to have no choice but to find that

00:20:16.160 these lawyers have, you know, perpetrated a fraud on the court. They have an obligation,

00:20:21.720 as officers of the court, to be truthful, to be honest, to be candid with the court.

00:20:27.120 And it also raises the question, Megan, and I don't think many people have talked about this,

00:20:31.980 if any of the other prosecutors on this prosecution team know that there was a fraud,

00:20:38.160 and they're taking actions by course of continuing to represent the state in this case,

00:20:43.720 that further and perpetrate that fraud, does that bring them into this? Does that mean that they

00:20:49.340 have some obligation to say, wait a minute, I'm not going to participate in this if I know that my

00:20:54.680 boss is not being truthful with the court? This is going to be very interesting to see what the judge

00:20:58.720 rules. That's where it gets really tricky. Yeah.

00:20:59.880 Okay. I do want to dig into that. Let's table it for one second, because I want to get to the point

00:21:03.620 you raised earlier, which is then there was a massive pileup, because there are real questions

00:21:12.420 about whether the rules here are very complicated, because all these people, not Robin Yurdy,

00:21:18.100 but Nathan Wade, Fannie Willis, Terrence Bradley, not to mention Ms. Cross, Ms. Merchant,

00:21:25.880 Mr. Sato, they're all officers of the court. So Terrence Bradley, for example, and Ms. Cross

00:21:32.560 representing Fannie Willis now, they have multiple obligations. You have an obligation as a lawyer to

00:21:39.080 maintain the attorney-client privilege and protect your client's privileges and confidentialities.

00:21:43.440 However, you also have a simultaneous strong duty as an officer of the court to protect the integrity

00:21:50.540 of the court. You're there as an officer of that judge. When you're in that courtroom, you work for

00:21:55.080 him too and for the justice system. And there is a requirement, I actually pulled the Georgia

00:22:02.300 ethical obligations. And what the ethical obligations say is that the disclosure of a client's false

00:22:10.440 testimony, right? So if you're a lawyer and you know, your client is testifying to something that's

00:22:15.420 false. And you know that because he told you in confidence as his lawyer, the disclosure of a

00:22:20.500 client's false testimony can result in grave consequences to the client, including not only

00:22:26.580 a sense of betrayal, but also loss of the case and perhaps a prosecution for perjury. But the alternative

00:22:32.620 is that a lawyer cooperate in deceiving the court, thereby subverting the truth finding process,

00:22:40.560 which the adversary system is designed to implement. And it goes on to talk about that

00:22:46.080 balancing test between a lawyer's obligation to the client and to the court and what the obligation of

00:22:51.560 a lawyer is when they conflict. And Terrence Bradley was squarely in the middle of that on Friday

00:22:56.580 because he was claiming he knew stuff via the attorney-client privilege. I think we both have

00:23:00.680 questions about whether that's really how he learned it, but let's give him the benefit of the doubt.

00:23:05.480 If he learned about an affair from the attorney-client privilege, and then he saw Nathan

00:23:11.140 Wade lie about the affair on the stand, I think the defense is right. He would have an obligation to

00:23:17.660 testify truthfully to the court. The obligation to the court as an officer of the court would trump

00:23:22.680 the attorney-client privilege obligation. That's what Sadow and others were arguing. It's one of the

00:23:27.840 things the judge is going to have to decide. So I'll just get your take on that now instead of

00:23:32.440 tabling it because I just teed it up. What do you make of that?

00:23:34.480 Yeah, well, it's the ethical duty of candor to the court. And we see this sometimes like in a

00:23:40.340 criminal case when the defendant has, say, confessed to his attorney, right? And the attorney

00:23:45.780 says, okay, well, you don't need to testify. But then the person says, look, I'm going to testify.

00:23:51.280 It's my right. And the attorney has to let him. But the attorney can't ask questions because to do so

00:23:56.800 would be perpetrating a fraud on the court. So the attorney just has to put the witness up and say,

00:24:01.420 all right, tell the judge whatever it is you got to say. And that way the attorney's not

00:24:04.780 participating in it. So it's definitely a gray area. It's a very uncomfortable area. I don't know

00:24:11.200 that I would agree that Terrence Bradley had the obligation to take the stand and correct something

00:24:17.660 that Nathan Wade had said. But certainly he cannot do anything to assist Nathan Wade if he's saying

00:24:26.180 something that's not true. Well, I'll give you something there, Phil. I'll give you something

00:24:30.600 there. The defense elicited testimony from him that the divorce proceeding is not yet closed.

00:24:37.140 And they're correct. The divorce apparently is not final. And in any event, the time for any

00:24:42.440 after settlement appeals and so on and challenges has not expired. And according to the ethical

00:24:47.640 rules, an attorney in a case who knows that there's been perjury in a case has an obligation

00:24:52.080 all the way through that proceeding until it's totally closed and the time for appeals or filings

00:24:58.980 post resolution have been exhausted to raise with the court if he knows there's been perjury.

00:25:05.360 So while it came out that Terrence Bradley was not the lawyer for Nathan Wade by the time Nathan

00:25:09.540 Wade submitted those interrogatory answers saying, I never had an affair. I never took a trip with

00:25:14.800 anybody. I know I don't have any receipts showing any travel with another woman in his divorce

00:25:19.360 proceeding. Terrence Bradley represented him for a time in that case. And I believe he would have an

00:25:24.960 ongoing obligation in that proceeding to go back and correct the record. Forget this proceeding. I

00:25:30.480 think I think Terrence Bradley could be in trouble in the divorce proceeding if he knows

00:25:33.680 that Nathan Wade perjured himself. Well, you know, you may very well be right. This whole thing is

00:25:40.080 very complicated. The rules are not always crystal clear. And oftentimes there's a lot of gray areas.

00:25:47.200 Terrence Bradley clearly believes he's living in one of those gray areas. He went so far as to contact

00:25:51.660 the bar and say, you know, what am I supposed to do here? And, you know, the state bar gave him some

00:25:57.320 kind of, you know, advice. Maybe it's binding, maybe it's not. But at the end of the day, he's going to have

00:26:03.120 to disclose this if this judge says that he's going to have to disclose it. And here's the thing,

00:26:08.380 Megan, if I'm the judge, and I think that there's a hint of any evidence that that somebody has

00:26:14.720 perpetrated a fraud on my court and on me, I am going to move mountains to get to the truth. And if

00:26:21.340 that means ordering lawyers to testify, so be it. If it means referring it to the state bar for a more

00:26:26.820 aggressive, thorough investigation, so be it. But I'm going to get to the bottom of this because

00:26:32.080 perpetrating a fraud on the court is one of the worst things that can happen in our justice system.

00:26:37.340 And this is the place where Fonnie Willis and anybody else who may have engaged in a fraud on

00:26:44.180 the court has to be very, very, very careful. She did herself no favors by testifying. She did herself

00:26:51.060 no favors by having her team work so hard to shut Terrence Bradley up because what it did,

00:26:58.560 it gives the appearance that she's got something to hide. And that is a terrible look for a prosecutor.

00:27:04.320 That's our last point. So Terrence Bradley said very little. The most damaging part of his testimony

00:27:10.360 for Fannie Willis was the part Ashley Merchant read out loud and Satow read out loud, which was a

00:27:16.540 reference back to his texts with Merchant prior to the proceeding. But on the stand, Terrence Bradley

00:27:21.940 did no harm to Nathan Wade. He was bending over backwards to not do any harm to Nathan Wade. He just kept

00:27:28.240 saying attorney client privilege. You would never have known that based on the cross-examination

00:27:34.040 that the state Ms. Cross unleashed on this guy. Oh yeah. They went after him, both guns blazing.

00:27:41.000 I'm like, did they watch the same testimony I did? Cause he's on their side. He, maybe he wasn't

00:27:45.720 before the proceeding, but once he's taken the stand, he's totally team Wade. And they tried to

00:27:51.720 eviscerate this guy. Sexual assault is why you left allegedly the law partnership with Nathan Wade.

00:28:00.440 Not one, but two instances of it tried to completely assassinate the guy's character. And

00:28:07.640 it was a mistake. It was a strategic mistake by the prosecution because a, it telegraphed to all of us

00:28:15.280 that Terrence Bradley has something very, very bad to say. And we all want to hear it even more.

00:28:21.240 And yeah, nevermind us telegraph to the judge. Go ahead.

00:28:24.740 Yeah, I think, I think that's right. They literally threw him, threw him under the bus.

00:28:28.260 I was surprised by that. I've known Terrence Bradley for over 25 years. There's not a fiber of my being

00:28:33.580 that will believe he sexually assaulted a client or anyone else. But what is clear is that some

00:28:39.960 allegation was made and that that was perhaps the basis for his leaving the Nathan Wade law firm,

00:28:46.580 which the judge correctly pointed out was a little bit contrary to what he may have said. And,

00:28:51.900 you know, if he claimed that he, he left because of some dispute that was covered by attorney client

00:28:56.560 privilege, the judge said, wait a minute. No, no, this is, this doesn't sound like attorney client

00:29:00.640 privilege. Which is what he said. That was his claim that he left, at least in part, he said,

00:29:05.540 because they had a dispute over the divorce proceeding and attorney client privileged

00:29:11.300 information. And it turns out that, okay, maybe it was having to do with a sexual assault

00:29:15.140 allegation against Terrence. Yeah. And then the judge said, now I'm going to have to go back and

00:29:19.160 reconsider if this witness is not misinterpreting or misconstruing. We have that. Let me play that

00:29:25.040 soundbite because we've got the defense attorneys who jumped all over this. And then you'll hear the

00:29:29.020 judge at the end saying, I'm going to have to reconsider all these claims of attorney client privilege

00:29:33.200 since you and Mr. Bradley have a different definition of it than I do. Watch your assault

00:29:37.200 seven. Judge, if this is allowed to continue in this way, and it does appear a little bit

00:29:42.540 harassing, then is Mr. Bradley going to be excused from his privilege? Because this is not,

00:29:47.580 that's what I was going to do. Don't do that.

00:29:51.600 Mr. Schilber. I think she's already done that.

00:29:54.160 Your Honor, I'm asking in all seriousness, that privilege, although.

00:29:58.300 Based on the answer right now, I think now we've opened up a whole

00:30:02.960 area. What he has just responded to, he previously said, was privilege. That doesn't

00:30:10.520 sound like privilege to me. We'll have to address that when we go back through the run.

00:30:14.980 Mr. Bradley previously testified that the reason he left the firm was totally and completely

00:30:20.340 covered by privilege. When asked by the state, he went into a factual scenario that

00:30:28.300 to my mind, I don't see how it relates to privilege at all. And so now I'm left wondering if Mr.

00:30:33.900 Bradley has been properly interpreting privilege this entire time.

00:30:38.660 That last line, that's it, Phil. I mean, whatever. I don't think a lot of people care

00:30:43.440 about the sexual assault allegation. Clearly nothing came of it. You know, you tell me the

00:30:48.060 guy's got a good reputation down there, you know him. But the fact that it was wrongly asserted

00:30:54.140 in the judge's view there to cover the circumstances of his departure from the firm

00:30:59.240 caused the judge to doubt Mr. Bradley's interpretation of it in the context of his

00:31:05.800 relationship with Wade and the discussions about Fannie. And therefore, this was a big mistake

00:31:11.480 by the state to bring this up, to try to impeach him when he hadn't done them any harm. Now they

00:31:18.500 uncorked a whole other problem for themselves.

00:31:20.740 I think they just couldn't help themselves. They had this witness that was going to come

00:31:24.900 in and talk all about sexual assault. And they just, they were gnashing at the bit to get that

00:31:30.120 testimony out there to try to embarrass somebody that they believe was talking to Michael Roman's

00:31:36.620 attorney about Nathan Wade and maybe saying some bad things. And so they really, really wanted to

00:31:41.200 attack him. They should have just stopped. They should have said, no more questions, judge,

00:31:46.200 not gone there. And we wouldn't even be having this conversation right now, you and I. This was

00:31:51.240 a strategic error, but it opened the door. It kicked it wide open for the judge to go back and say,

00:31:57.160 wait a minute, I think now we might be able to have him testify about a lot of these things that

00:32:02.500 the prosecution team, the state, did not want him to say. And so I don't know what the judge is going

00:32:10.420 to rule. But if I were the judge, I think that a lot of that I would rule is now fair game for the

00:32:16.720 defense to bring him back and to continue to explore with him under oath to see exactly when

00:32:23.180 this affair between Nathan Wade and Fonnie Willis began. This is all about now proving, if they can,

00:32:30.480 the fraud that the merchant team and everybody else on the defense says was perpetrated on this court.

00:32:37.880 So that's going to be huge. And that's going to be the next big area that we're going to see this

00:32:41.860 case, I think, venture into. So, Phil, what do we expect this week? The judge is going to,

00:32:48.060 he said, maybe as soon as Friday, he'll have another hearing. What's happening this week?

00:32:52.380 Yeah, he's been having hearings basically every Friday that are, you know, status or other things

00:32:56.920 because of the number of defendants he's allocating some weekly court time to this. He's not going to

00:33:02.280 rule until several things happen. He's got to conclude the hearing that we've been talking about. As you

00:33:07.500 mentioned, there's still summations. That could be done in person or it might be done by briefs.

00:33:12.140 He may even have more testimony before it's over. And then he's got to digest it all. He's got a lot

00:33:17.440 of research to do. He's got other cases, of course, to handle. I don't expect a ruling anytime soon,

00:33:23.600 but I think at a minimum, I think at a minimum, he's going to disqualify Fonnie Willis and her team

00:33:30.520 from this case, in which case the state of Georgia, through the prosecuting attorney's counsel,

00:33:34.960 was going to have to decide, you know, is this case going to remain an orphan or can we find some

00:33:39.020 other DA to take it? I don't think he's going to go so far as to dismiss it. He might, but I do think

00:33:44.560 that Fonnie Willis and her days on this case are probably numbered. I think that she's ultimately

00:33:50.740 going to have to be removed. Completely agree with that, 100%. Phil, thank you. Come back soon,

00:33:56.300 would you? You bet. Anytime. Great to be here. Nice to have you. All right, coming up, Dave and Mike

00:34:00.900 have been watching this whole thing and they've got thoughts too. We'll bring them on next. Don't

00:34:05.240 go away. Joining me now, our legal all-stars are back. Mike Davis, founder and president of the

00:34:14.140 Article III Project and Dave Ehrenberg, state attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, where

00:34:18.600 Mar-a-Lago is located. Mike, Dave, thank you for being here with us. Breaking news,

00:34:24.880 Margo Cleveland of the Federalist just tweeted out the following. She's apparently been speaking

00:34:31.760 with Ashley Merchant, lawyer for defendant Roman. Ashley Merchant confirmed to me, quote,

00:34:38.220 yes, I spoke directly on a number of occasions with Terrence Bradley. He reviewed my pleadings for

00:34:44.380 accuracy before I filed them. He unequivocally told me the personal and romantic relationship

00:34:51.140 began prior to Nathan Wade receiving the contract as a special prosecutor on this case. This would

00:35:00.260 explain why they tried so very hard, the state did, Mike, on Friday to demolish this guy, even though

00:35:09.640 at least on Friday, he said almost nothing. What do you make of it? Well, now you have two witnesses.

00:35:16.140 You have Fannie Willis' friend slash assistant testifying their relationship started. Fannie Willis

00:35:24.120 and Nathan Wade's personal relationship started back in 2019, long before she hired him to be her

00:35:31.280 special prosecutor, long before she admitted to the court. So you have evidence there that Fannie Willis

00:35:41.240 and Nathan Wade committed perjury in two different courts, one in Nathan Wade's divorce court and one

00:35:46.800 in this criminal court on the Trump prosecution. And then you have Nathan Wade's attorney slash friends

00:35:55.980 also corroborating this. So you have two witnesses, two friends of Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade

00:36:04.220 saying that Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade's, I got the cart before the horse, Fannie Willis and Nathan

00:36:14.020 Wade's personal relationship began long before they testified. That's, that's a serious problem,

00:36:22.420 Dave. And this judge in camera in his courtroom, I mean, in his chambers is going to hear all of that.

00:36:29.980 You know, not all of it played out in front of the public, but as he figures out what's privileged and

00:36:33.560 what's not, he's going to hear this. Ashley Merchant, I'm sure has already represented and will continue

00:36:38.380 to represent exactly to him what she just represented to Marco Cleveland. And, um, I don't

00:36:44.240 know whether he lets it in or prohibits it. He's got real questions about the wide sweeping assertion

00:36:51.000 of privilege by this guy. They were obviously friends and colleagues long before he got retained as a

00:36:57.280 divorce lawyer. Um, but he's going to hear it and he's going to, I think, accept Ashley Merchant's

00:37:04.240 representation as a member, an officer of the court that this was told to her by Terrence Bradley.

00:37:11.480 And he's actually got a confirming text from Terrence Bradley that we heard about may or may not be

00:37:17.040 admissible that says it in writing. So he doesn't even have to accept only Ashley Merchant's word.

00:37:22.800 There's no question that in the judge's mind, this is going to weigh more toward favoring the

00:37:27.920 credibility of Robin year T and not so much Fannie and Nathan. Am I wrong? Yeah, it's a problem.

00:37:35.320 Megan, there are some tricky issues here. This would be a good thing for a law school class to delve into

00:37:40.320 because we're dealing with attorney client privilege, which is held by the client. And the client is the

00:37:45.640 one who would waive it. So if you're talking about the attorney waiving it, that attorney can get in

00:37:50.420 trouble with the bar. That's one of the issues here because the client Wade has not waived it.

00:37:55.660 His lawyer, Bradley looks like he may have waived it. And then you have an issue of who did he waive

00:38:00.360 it to the other lawyer merchant who was apparently informed, well, she's going to take the stand.

00:38:05.500 She can't. She's the lawyer in the case. So this is really tricky and it's going to all be in the

00:38:10.720 hands of judge McAfee here to determine what gets in. And because it is very relevant, although I

00:38:17.040 disagree with all these other pundits who say, well, it's only about whether a conflict existed.

00:38:20.780 No, because both Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade both represented the court that they didn't have

00:38:27.000 an affair or didn't have a relationship, excuse me, until after he started, then this is all

00:38:31.920 relevant. And if they can show that these two are lying, then I think it is game over.

00:38:37.980 It's game over. I agree. Thank you for your honesty, because I couldn't agree more. It's

00:38:42.640 before they took the stand and before that we had Nathan Wade's interrogatory or his affidavit

00:38:47.820 swearing that the affair didn't begin until 2022. It was more abstract. But now you have

00:38:53.640 representations under oath, his in writing and on the stand and hers on the stand, all of it's under

00:38:59.980 oath. Fannie and Nathan saying it didn't begin until 2022. And if this judge finds that those are lies,

00:39:06.180 then then they purge it themselves. And that's a problem for a civilian. And it's an extra problem

00:39:10.940 for an officer of the court who has an ethical obligation to stop perjury when they know it's

00:39:15.800 happening. Never mind not to commit it themselves, Mike. So I agree with Dave. I think we're all in

00:39:20.340 agreement that if the judge favors the testimony of your tea and it considers this testimonial of

00:39:26.880 Terrence Bradley in whatever form, they're both getting booted off of this case. It doesn't require

00:39:32.280 that to boot them, but they will. What do you make, Mike, of the decision by the state to go after

00:39:38.600 him, Hammer and Tong, on Friday, even though he on the stand, he did no damage to them.

00:39:43.560 Nothing actually got out because he just kept saying AC privilege, AC privilege. But they went

00:39:48.900 after him as though, you know, he had just been the critical witness against them and had said the

00:39:54.540 things that we just heard in the Margo Cleveland text. You know, what's bizarre about this whole case,

00:40:01.380 this whole disposition of this case is you have these Fulton County district attorney lawyers

00:40:07.040 who are supposed to be working for Fulton County and they've turned into, it seems, personal attorneys

00:40:14.420 for the politician slash DA Fannie Willis, along with her boyfriend, Nathan Wade. And so you have

00:40:25.940 to wonder who's their client here. Is it the office, Fulton County DA's office, the people of Fulton

00:40:32.600 County, or is it this politician and her boyfriend who are running this office? And that to me is,

00:40:38.280 it has been a head scratcher this whole time is, is who's their client here?

00:40:43.440 That's an interesting point. Let me ask you this, Dave. I don't want to get too deep into the legal

00:40:48.640 ethics, but I do think you're right. This would be a good case for a law school to take a hard look

00:40:53.200 at. And one of the reasons is, as I discussed with Phil, when you're a lawyer, you have an obligation

00:41:00.580 to maintain attorney and client privilege like Terrence Bradley would, if he only learned about

00:41:05.020 the affair through Nathan seeking legal advice, but you have a separate independent duty not to

00:41:12.340 commit a fraud upon the court. And I, and the law, the ethical obligations make pretty clear that when

00:41:19.100 those two things conflict, it's your obligation to the court that trumps everything. So if your

00:41:24.440 client comes to you and says, I'm going to take the stand and I'm going to say, I didn't murder the

00:41:28.220 person. And you know, the client's already confessed. He did murder the person. You have an ethical,

00:41:33.480 ethical obligation, not to suborn perjury as his lawyer. You, the ethical obligations, I just looked

00:41:38.480 them up this morning in Georgia say, first, you try to dissuade the client from doing it. And second,

00:41:43.700 if that doesn't work, you should withdraw from the representation. And if, if necessary, you are

00:41:50.420 supposed to raise it with the court. Like if the, if the client goes ahead and does it anyway, you have

00:41:54.480 an obligation to the court. And that's kind of the situation Terrence Bradley may be in where he may

00:42:00.340 know, let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he knows it through AC privilege that the affair

00:42:05.860 began before 2022. And that these two people just took the stand and swore under oath the contrary.

00:42:11.280 I think there's a good argument that his obligations to this court as an officer of it,

00:42:16.840 trump AC privilege and require him to disclose the truth. What say you?

00:42:23.120 I think when it comes to the divorce case, you can't suborn perjury. That's a trickier one because

00:42:28.440 he may have had to, if that case is ongoing, correct things because you can't, as you say,

00:42:33.320 you can't commit a fraud upon the court. In this case, the case we're talking about,

00:42:37.220 he's not the lawyer, he's a witness. And I I'm not so sure as your last guest, who was really good.

00:42:44.180 He said that it's not the responsibility of the lawyer to start correcting the record,

00:42:47.600 especially when that lawyer is the witness and not the lawyer. So I think, okay, but wait,

00:42:52.420 let me ask you a question on that. Let me, let me ask you a question about it. I know this is tricky

00:42:55.960 stuff. I've, we're all kind of in weird waters now because this doesn't happen very often, but

00:43:01.800 why would the law require a lawyer in the course of representation when the AC privilege and the

00:43:09.780 relationship is at its peak, why would the law and the ethics require a lawyer to betray his client

00:43:16.080 there? And all the way through the conclusion of that case, including pendency of appeals and so on.

00:43:21.940 And not later, not, not a separate proceeding where the bond is, if anything, lesser and the

00:43:27.800 reliance is lesser. And now it's like the, the obligation of the court is still there.

00:43:33.880 I just feel like the, the interest in maintaining the attorney client privilege only wane. They don't

00:43:39.340 increase post-representation. Well, you can't, you can't put on testimony that you know is false.

00:43:46.320 That's a, that's a problem. And that may have happened in the divorce case with the interrogatories.

00:43:52.340 And that's something that that is ongoing. He may have to deal with, but in this case,

00:43:56.380 it's just a different, different responsibility as a witness. Um, the, there is the crime fraud

00:44:02.220 exception, Megan, and this is where it gets kind of tricky. The crime fraud exception says that that

00:44:07.440 pierces attorney client privilege and it applies though for future frauds. Does it apply when you're

00:44:13.960 a witness and you see your client in your view, lying on the stand currently to the judge? I'm not

00:44:21.960 so sure. That's where it gets really tricky. I think that's what Terrence Bradley needed to ask.

00:44:25.140 I don't see crime fraud exception. I see your point. Crime fraud is when the lawyer and the

00:44:29.240 client work together to commit a fraud upon the court at the time. And they, they try to shield

00:44:34.640 their misdoings. I mean, frankly, it's kind of like Michael Cohen situation where, you know,

00:44:39.880 he's representing Trump. They're allegedly working on something that they both know is illegal.

00:44:44.700 And then they try to shield those communications where the lawyer's in on the alleged criminality

00:44:49.880 by saying AC privilege. That doesn't work, but that's, uh, that's, that's different than here.

00:44:54.980 However, um, I do think what Terrence Bradley should have said to the court was judge. I have

00:45:01.080 an obligation to maintain attorney client privilege, and I have an obligation to you as an officer of

00:45:05.320 the court. And what we need you to decide is when I have to choose between those two things,

00:45:12.380 which one do I put above the other? That's really what this court has to decide.

00:45:15.880 If not committing a fraud on the court is the most important thing, then you have to reveal

00:45:21.460 the privilege information. If maintaining the privilege is the most important thing,

00:45:25.340 and I'm satisfied you only learned this thing through AC privilege, not through your friendship,

00:45:30.960 um, then that's a different ruling. So that's where we stand with Terrence Bradley. I think

00:45:34.960 this judge is very smart and I think he's going to make the right decision, Mike. I don't,

00:45:38.620 I'm not sure either Fannie or Nathan at this point is going to be solid in maintaining their bar

00:45:45.080 card. I really think they could be in trouble. They could get disbarred if this court finds that

00:45:49.360 they, that they lied. And if he allows Terrence Bradley to actually testify, and he says this

00:45:53.620 relationship was started well before 2022, I really think both these people could be disbarred.

00:46:00.220 And much worse, they could go to prison for perjury and subvenation of perjury and many other

00:46:05.680 potential crimes. I would say this about attorney client privilege, not every interaction between an

00:46:11.940 attorney and a client, as both of you know, is covered by attorney client privilege. Attorney client

00:46:16.880 privilege is to protect confidential communications between an attorney and a client where the attorney

00:46:23.560 is providing legal advice to the client. So if you have Nathan Wade and his attorney who are friends in a

00:46:32.160 situation where, you know, in their, in their, in their role as friends, as you said, Megan, he says that he was

00:46:39.000 started to date Fannie back in 2019. That's not privileged. If you have this attorney observing

00:46:47.060 Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade in a personal relationship back in 2019, and this attorney is

00:46:53.940 called to test about, testify about his observations, that generally would not be privileged. And so there

00:47:00.520 are ways you can figure out what this attorney knows about Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade's relationship,

00:47:06.460 I think pretty easily without getting into attorney client privilege.

00:47:11.540 I did think it was interesting guys. Didn't you, that we did not see the witness take the stand to

00:47:16.300 say, Robin, your T is a liar. Remember we were talking about that when we chatted on Friday. That

00:47:20.460 didn't happen, Dave. That did not see anybody take the stand to say, don't believe Robin, your T.

00:47:26.180 They may have felt that she didn't hurt him enough, that the father who took the stand did well enough.

00:47:30.900 And, member Megan, this was my prediction, that I still think, based on what we've seen in court,

00:47:36.360 not what's in in-camera, which is behind the scenes in the judge's chambers, that this court,

00:47:41.260 I think, still does not have enough clear-cut evidence that they lied. And so I think, as of

00:47:45.960 right now, he's going to dress them down in court. He's going to admonish them. But I still think that

00:47:50.300 Fannie Willis will be allowed to stay on the case.

00:47:52.280 Oh my Lord. I mean, that's, that would absolutely be stunning. And it would completely undermine this

00:47:57.620 prosecution and the faith in it. I mean, the jury pool has seen this. They all like,

00:48:01.620 who's going to look at Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade the same ever again. And in no way should

00:48:06.140 Nathan Wade stay on this case. He's already a proven liar. I mean, there's just no question.

00:48:09.280 He lied in his divorce interrogatories. That guy's got to get bounced, irrespective of anything else.

00:48:14.820 But I, I disagree. Fannie Willis is not long for the case either. All right. There's more to get to

00:48:19.020 stand by more with Mike and Dave next. Don't go away.

00:48:22.280 I want to do the Trump verdict, uh, the, you know, $350 million verdict in a second, but

00:48:29.940 it's a couple final points on Fannie Willis. Um, there is reporting out today by CNN that

00:48:37.200 a Napa Valley employee, uh, Stan Brody is attesting to the fact that Fannie Willis is uses cash

00:48:48.900 sometimes to pay for things. Willis use the money. She, she apparently took out a bunch of cash from

00:48:55.760 her, uh, pocket book when in Napa Valley. And he says she used the money to pay for two bottles of

00:49:01.840 wine, each valued at roughly $150 and the $50 tasting. According to Stan Brody, who said he

00:49:07.220 hosted Willis and a guest he later learned was Nathan Wade at Acumen wines in early 2023.

00:49:12.920 The media going with Mike, this proves she does use cash. And therefore we, I guess are supposed

00:49:20.860 to believe she was giving thousands in cash to Nathan Wade to reimburse her half for all these

00:49:26.340 trips. What do you make of it? This is such a, uh, unbelievable argument that Fannie Willis is

00:49:32.460 making. She even brought in her black Panther father to, to come defend her, his black Panther

00:49:37.960 cub, Fannie Willis by saying that she keeps thousands of dollars, you know, six months up to

00:49:44.320 six months worth of living expenses of cash in her house. Okay. She testified that she's done this

00:49:51.580 essentially because her father told her to do this her whole life, but she hasn't explained

00:49:57.920 where she came up with this cash. And as she's using this cash to pay for these supposedly pay for

00:50:04.780 her half of these lavish trips to Belize and then, you know, the Caribbean and Napa with her not so

00:50:11.780 secret boyfriend slash special prosecutor, she's paying $250 an hour out of Fulton County funds,

00:50:17.880 $700,000, but she's not taking kickbacks. She says, because she's been paying with cash. Well,

00:50:24.920 did she ever replenish this cash so she can follow her black Panther father's advice and have six months

00:50:32.420 worth of cash in her house. If she's spending the money, how did she replenish it? What's the

00:50:37.580 evidence that she replenished it as the Fulton County DA? Are there any transactions in her bank

00:50:42.940 accounts from her? I have to say though, for me, Dave, I mean, tell me, I, first of all, this didn't

00:50:48.620 come into evidence. So this is interesting to talk about for the three of us, but the judge doesn't

00:50:52.400 get to consider this. He can't take judicial notice of out of court statements like this, which are

00:50:57.240 hearsay. They didn't introduce this guy there. So it's kind of interesting, but not going to be

00:51:02.620 relevant for the proceeding. But I also think it's, it's really not this judge's problem that

00:51:08.600 Fannie Willis didn't get receipts for any of the cash or keep any records of it. It's her problem.

00:51:14.060 She's the one who's been accused of improper conduct, of violating ethical rules, of taking

00:51:19.620 essentially kickbacks from a vendor. And it's her obligation to prove it. Yes, she's got witness

00:51:25.080 testimony. That's, that's evidence. That's all she's got. And the absence of receipts should

00:51:29.660 inure against her. Not, it's not a positive. She's the one who should have kept the receipt.

00:51:35.180 She shouldn't have done it in the first place. And she certainly should have kept receipts

00:51:37.480 if she wanted to prove that she paid her fair share. Yeah, I think that's the greatest weakness

00:51:42.520 in her defense here is that we are led to believe that she reimbursed roughly half of the expenses in

00:51:50.300 cash and there are no records kept. Now, like in, in, uh, for her case, she had her father.

00:51:55.740 And if there are other witnesses, that could be helpful. Ultimately, it's up to the judge to say,

00:51:59.940 no, I don't believe you, but there really is no hard evidence one way or the other, except for just

00:52:05.080 a logical conclusion that, Hey, come on. If you were giving, getting these trips and you did

00:52:10.020 reimburse, you would have some sort of receipt, some sort of Venmo or cash app. And if not that

00:52:14.320 you'd write it down, but her defense is plausible. And she said that she was taught always to pay

00:52:20.960 your way. A man is not a plan. She's had cash and we can't disprove that. But again, I don't think

00:52:27.560 we have to. Robin Urti is her biggest problem. And by the way, Mike, they did not prove disgruntled.

00:52:31.920 I know we talked about this on Friday. Disgruntled is it. That means you're bitter, you're angry,

00:52:35.940 and you've got like an ax to grind. That wasn't proven. They proved that she left the DA's office

00:52:40.580 under circumstances that were not to her liking, that she was essentially forced out, resign,

00:52:45.220 or you're going to be fired by Fannie Willis. What does that prove? Okay. Yes. I accept the

00:52:49.520 way Dave put it on Friday, potential motive to get Fannie, potential, you know, motive to lie,

00:52:55.980 but they didn't prove that. I mean, all really, all they showed was that she was very good friends

00:53:01.200 with Fannie and that she left Fannie's employee under circumstances that she didn't much like.

00:53:06.600 Now that doesn't mean, well, how do we get from that to this woman is willing to commit

00:53:10.560 a felony and perjure herself on the stand to hurt Fannie Willis? Yeah. And remember, Fannie Willis

00:53:18.360 is not a very considerate of her employees. Remember that Nathan Wade and Fannie Willis submitted a court

00:53:26.180 filing in this case where they attached Nathan Wade's false affidavit in his divorce case about his

00:53:34.580 relationship with Fannie Willis. And Nathan Wade and Fannie Willis had eight different lawyers in the

00:53:41.940 Fulton County DA's office submit this court filing to the Fulton County court, right, in response to

00:53:49.140 co-defendant Mike Roman's motion to dismiss. Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade knew that this court filing

00:53:55.420 was false and they still allowed eight lawyers in the Fulton County DA's office to submit this court

00:54:01.180 filing. So I don't think that Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade care too much about the fallout that

00:54:07.800 their lies about their relationship may have with other people because all they're doing here is

00:54:14.120 looking out for themselves. They are clearly lying. They should be clearly disqualified. They should

00:54:20.520 be prosecuted for perjury. And I think this case needs to be dismissed. Well, they might be. All right,

00:54:26.800 let's, let's move on to the Trump civil fraud verdict. Judge Angeron ruled as we expected he

00:54:31.940 would on Friday, the penalty nearly $355 million. My God, it's huge. He also ordered that they pay

00:54:40.460 substantial interest, pushing the penalty for Trump up to 450 million. Trump's banned now for three years

00:54:48.000 from serving in top roles at any of his New York companies or any New York company, including the

00:54:52.700 Trump organization. Sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr. must pay more than $4 million each. The judge

00:55:00.200 wrote that the frauds found here leap off the page and shock the conscience. He wrote that Donald Trump

00:55:07.340 rarely responded to the questions asked in this case. He frequently interjected long, irrelevant

00:55:11.200 speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial. His refusal to answer the questions directly

00:55:15.140 or in some cases at all severely compromised his credibility. The complete lack of contrition and

00:55:21.500 remorse borders on pathological. He said, um, this court must conclude that they they'll engage in

00:55:28.160 it again, unless they are judicially restrained in part, given their lack of contrition. Uh, so I'll

00:55:34.360 start with you as a Trump defender on this, Mike, I know you're against it. I know you think it's crazy,

00:55:39.020 but what are the chances of it actually being reversed on appeal? Well, if this should be reversed on

00:55:46.140 appeal for many different reasons, you had New York attorney general Tish James campaign on the fact

00:55:51.880 that she was going to get Trump. And she did that repeatedly, which is unethical when she, uh, during

00:55:58.120 the first five weeks of this trial, as Congresswoman Elise Stefanik noted in a judicial ethics complaint

00:56:06.020 against Tish James with the New York bar, Tish James made over 50, uh, inappropriate unethical comments

00:56:14.320 during the first five weeks of the trial. So you have, uh, you have a, uh, this, this case has been

00:56:20.820 tainted by politics since before it started. You have this Manhattan judge, Arthur Ingeron, who donated

00:56:28.580 to Biden, donated to Democrats. He ruled that Trump committed fraud before the trial even began, before

00:56:36.660 any witnesses came, before any other evidence. It was clearly a biased trial, uh, from, from the

00:56:43.680 beginning. And then this judge there, there's, there's no evidence whatsoever of any victim.

00:56:49.120 The banks got paid back in full on time as agreed with interest. They still want to do business

00:56:55.020 with Trump. They came in and testified to that. You can argue that New York law, you don't need,

00:57:01.240 uh, you don't need a victim. Well, I would say this, if that's the case, then you have a problem

00:57:06.420 with standing. If there's not a victim, you have a problem with constitutional standing. You also have

00:57:12.140 a problem with an unconstitutionally punitive award here damages award here where you're awarding for

00:57:20.020 almost $500 million, a half billion dollars. When there's, there's no victim, there's, there's no

00:57:27.060 damage to anyone. And they're going to try to award five, almost $500 million in damages. That is

00:57:33.140 unconstitutionally punitive. Um, Dave, the New York state court of appeals, that's the highest court

00:57:40.780 in New York. We'll probably eventually get this. It's more left-leaning. The U S Supreme court could

00:57:47.080 come after that, not left-leaning. So same question to you. I'm sure you don't object to the verdict,

00:57:55.180 but do you think it will be reversed on appeal? Unlikely, Megan, it could get reduced somewhat,

00:58:02.780 but it still will be a massive verdict. I'd like to start with the one area I agree with my friend

00:58:07.080 Mike on is that when you're a prosecutor, whether you're the state attorney or attorney general,

00:58:12.200 you gotta be really careful when you campaign and make comments like I'm going to go after

00:58:15.820 someone that doesn't look good. Now with that said, the facts are the facts. I mean,

00:58:20.920 Trump here did it to himself by, for example, inflating his own apartment at Trump tower,

00:58:27.020 where he said it was, it was over 30,000 feet when it was under 11,000 feet. I mean,

00:58:32.660 that's not a rounding error. That's not just, you know, a harmless puffery. That is a statistical

00:58:38.720 fraud. And when you then show that he didn't have any remorse or any claim to mistake on all these

00:58:44.860 other properties and, and Goran let him go and Goran let him give part of the closing statement

00:58:50.260 where he lit in and Goran and and Goran did that to bend over backwards to make sure it would be

00:58:55.480 upheld on appeal. And as to Mike said, you don't need to have a victim for it to be a fraud in New

00:59:02.040 York. And even though you don't need a victim, like you can make the argument that the banks

00:59:05.900 were victims here, even though they got repaid, they would have lent the money on more favorable

00:59:10.060 terms that they've been told the truth. And so, yes, I think this will be upheld on appeal,

00:59:15.040 although because it was so huge, over 450, around, around 450 million dollars with interest,

00:59:20.700 I think that it could be reduced somewhat, but it won't be overturned.

00:59:24.540 It's unbelievable. I have to say, um, there are questions now about selective prosecution in this

00:59:30.700 case, because why Trump? Why? Like every real estate firm in New York has got to be shaking in its

00:59:39.060 boots right now if they've done anything close to overstating the value of an asset in trying to

00:59:45.740 get loans. This is what, um, Kevin O'Leary, you know, uh, he was just on our show. Mr. Wonderful

00:59:51.760 from Shark Tank was saying to the New York Post, he said, um, you might as well find guilty every

00:59:56.920 real estate developer on earth. He said, I want this reviewed and appealed and turned over because

01:00:00.980 it's wrong for everyone that participates. Every developer, if this judgment sticks, must be jailed.

01:00:06.000 They must be found guilty. They must be put out of business. You can't do this to one another. It's

01:00:09.660 not about Trump. Uh, he says it's un-American. He said the shockwave sent through the real estate

01:00:14.680 industry is insane. We're stunned. You have no idea. I mean, that's the thing. Is there a case to be

01:00:21.820 made for selective prosecution? Is that something that can be raised on appeal at all? Like why Trump?

01:00:28.960 Why was he singled out? And did it have to do with Letitia James? I'll get him. I'll get him. I'll get

01:00:36.040 him. I mean, we could play soundbites for the rest of the show of her saying that she was campaigning,

01:00:40.520 Mike. Yeah. I mean, you could make that argument. The selective prosecution, as you both know,

01:00:45.160 those are hard claims to make, but Tish James made the case pretty easy when she campaigned on the fact

01:00:50.980 that she was going to get Trump repeatedly when she's made over 50 comments during the first five

01:00:57.800 weeks of the trial alone before we stopped counting. Right. And so, uh, there's, there's

01:01:02.880 certainly evidence for a selective prosecution. I would say this about the fraud. Remember with

01:01:07.500 fraud, you have to have, uh, you have to have material misrepresentations of fact, and there

01:01:12.740 has to be detrimental reliance. And the detrimental reliance is key. These banks do their own due

01:01:18.200 diligence. So even if Dave is correct that Trump, you know, misrepresented the size of his apartment,

01:01:23.360 the banks do their own due diligence on this and there's not detrimental reliance to the bank. So

01:01:29.680 how the hell can there be fraud? Yeah, that's, that's what we heard. Even I heard that even on,

01:01:35.260 um, CNN and MSNBC asking that question on Friday, Dave. And, you know, I heard a lot of lawyers say

01:01:41.180 the banks were hurt, even if they don't admit it. It's kind of where we are. There's no victim.

01:01:46.520 You're a victim. Even if you don't know, it is kind of how the, the defenders of the verdict are

01:01:51.080 taking this. The, the, the heart of this matter, the problem is caused by two things. This wacky

01:01:57.820 New York law that allows it, even where there is no victim. And I think just the hatred of Trump,

01:02:03.500 I just think he was singled out. There's no question they went after him because they were

01:02:07.140 looking for a crime, not for, you know, uh, that this man maybe did. And honestly, Dave, how do we,

01:02:13.860 how are we supposed to make sense of you didn't express remorse? He's denying that he did it.

01:02:18.640 Does every defendant now need to say I didn't do it, but if you find that I did, I'm really,

01:02:24.660 really sorry in order to avoid punitive damages. Like, like this is insane. Of course,

01:02:29.540 same thing on E. Jean Carroll. The reason he talks about her so cavalierly is because his position is

01:02:35.340 I never did it. She's a lunatic. It, both of these courts have something similar in that they seem to

01:02:41.200 be punishing him for not admitting the accusations against him. Well, it goes to damages. I think it's not,

01:02:48.320 like the fact is judge and Goron said, you did this, you clearly inflated the values and you knew

01:02:53.120 it and you should have been, here's the example. How do you triple the size of your apartment?

01:02:58.000 That's not a valuation. That's the measuring. You just need a ruler for that. And yet when it comes

01:03:03.240 to this massive judgment, I think that's where the lack of remorse, the, the cockiness, the arrogance,

01:03:09.120 I think that's where it, it, uh, it came into play. Um, one last thing about the damages here,

01:03:15.360 even though banks got repaid, other individuals would have been loaned that money on more favorable

01:03:22.340 terms for the banks. If Trump had not inflated his assets. And so that's where it comes into.

01:03:28.920 So the banks say, yeah, we got repaid. Yeah. But there is an opportunity cost there. You would

01:03:32.600 have gotten made a lot more money somewhere else if you weren't lied to it. And one last thing on that.

01:03:36.640 Talk about speculative damages. You have to prove damages in a court. You can't go that

01:03:40.700 speculative because sorry, keep going. Well, right. Well, one last thing Trump defended himself by

01:03:44.940 saying, we told you that we were liars. We told you don't trust us, but, and he called it a harmless

01:03:51.880 clause, but the clause there was not really what he said it was. It didn't say, don't trust us.

01:03:56.660 We're not telling the truth. That would have gotten him away with it. He could have been given a pass if

01:04:01.140 that were the case. He had some vague clause that they were hiding behind. And I think that also struck

01:04:05.960 the court as another instance of intentional fraud. The problem is I see it here is of course,

01:04:13.020 Trump played fast and loose with these representations. That seems clear as do

01:04:17.620 virtually all realtors in New York. I mean, I know this one guy who's in real estate who said

01:04:22.260 his father would be ashamed if he ever found out that the son had paid $1 in taxes, would be ashamed

01:04:28.300 of him. Real estate moguls in New York have ways of manipulating their bank loans,

01:04:33.960 their taxes and so on that we mere mortals do not have and wouldn't know how to take advantage of

01:04:40.620 even if we thought we could. And it doesn't feel fair. It doesn't feel right to those of us who are

01:04:45.660 just like, you know, salary employees and our taxes get sucked out. And that's the end of that,

01:04:49.340 but they're there. And people like Trump and others are taking advantage of it. It's just Trump's in the

01:04:53.900 news. This Trump's hated by half of the country and by half of the judges and so on. And so I think that

01:05:01.280 Mr. Wonderful has a good point. You could do this to a lot of people, not just Trump. And it feels

01:05:06.180 very persecute-y to me and I'm sure a lot of others. You guys are the best. Thanks for coming

01:05:11.500 on. Further updates to follow. Up next, we've got Charlie Kirk here and we're going to play a little

01:05:16.320 bit more of Fannie Willis out this weekend talking at her church, which honored her yet again,

01:05:22.720 where she has a brand new message for you about, here's a preview, how she's a victim.

01:05:26.720 I'm Megan Kelly, host of The Megan Kelly Show on Sirius XM. It's your home for open,

01:05:33.480 honest, and provocative conversations with the most interesting and important political,

01:05:37.460 legal, and cultural figures today. You can catch The Megan Kelly Show on Triumph,

01:05:41.900 a Sirius XM channel featuring lots of hosts you may know and probably love. Great people like Dr.

01:05:48.320 Laura, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace, Dave Ramsey, and yours truly, Megan Kelly. You can stream The Megan

01:05:55.040 Kelly Show on Sirius XM at home or anywhere you are. No car required. I do it all the time. I love

01:06:01.980 the Sirius XM app. It has ad-free music coverage of every major sport, comedy talk, podcast, and more.

01:06:09.660 Subscribe now. Get your first three months for free.

01:06:11.800 Go to SiriusXM.com slash MKShow to subscribe and get three months free. That's SiriusXM.com slash MKShow

01:06:21.840 and get three months free. Offer details apply.

01:06:29.720 So much happening in the world of politics with Trump and Biden, and we are super glad,

01:06:33.700 as always, to have Charlie Kirk here on it all. He's the founder and CEO of Turning Point USA.

01:06:38.960 You can get involved at TPUSA.com. He's also host of The Charlie Kirk Show podcast. Charlie,

01:06:46.460 great to have you. Welcome back. Thank you. Great to be here. Thanks so much.

01:06:50.740 Have you been following any of the Fannie Willis drama?

01:06:53.700 Oh, yeah. I mean, it's hard not to follow. And, you know, I try not to find too much delight in my

01:06:58.940 enemy's downfall, but it's been very hard to resist. It was, I took over daytime TV. It was

01:07:04.720 indecipherable to see Fannie Willis on the stage, on, you know, testifying, Nathan Wade. It was

01:07:11.840 something else. So we've been following it very closely. So you, um, well, and I, and most people

01:07:19.320 who are not far left, uh, in this country stand alone. We stand alone as a group because the folks

01:07:25.240 over at the New York times are absolutely flabbergasted that this is getting attention

01:07:30.000 now, because as I listened to their podcast, the daily, the other day in discussing the bombshell

01:07:36.340 developments that happened on Thursday, they were talking about how, gee, you know, when this first

01:07:41.900 broke, like who even knew that this could potentially be a thing? It just didn't even

01:07:47.080 seem like a thing to us. Take a listen to these two. And what this motion seems to claim is that if

01:07:53.140 this alleged relationship and the benefit that it brings to Fannie Willis can be proven,

01:07:58.680 then this entire case should therefore be thrown out. That's right. Although it's worth keeping in mind

01:08:04.980 that a number of legal scholars have argued that even if all of these allegations were true,

01:08:10.240 there's really no basis for this being construed as a conflict of interest and that these prosecutors

01:08:17.680 should stay in the case and it should be steady as she goes from here on out, that this is all a

01:08:22.520 big distraction that has no legal merit. So what you're saying is that no one's quite sure

01:08:27.260 that legally speaking, there's a real argument here to be made by Michael Roman. And if I'm remembering

01:08:34.200 correctly, the feeling that a lot of people had when this motion was filed was that it was kind

01:08:40.180 of a Hail Mary, right? And there was not much evidence that it was necessarily even true.

01:08:45.040 Yeah. Well, I mean, there was a Hail Mary in the sense that Michael Roman's lawyer didn't include

01:08:51.020 any evidence to back up her claim. This is very salacious claim. So there was a moment there when

01:08:57.540 nobody knew really what to make of it. It was a very uncomfortable moment.

01:09:01.100 Actually, just fact check for you, New York Times, some of us knew exactly what to make of it. If you

01:09:06.120 just have an open mind when it comes to anything involving Donald Trump, I refer you back to our

01:09:11.600 own coverage the same day this all broke. Watch the case against Trump in Georgia.

01:09:20.120 I'm not sure the case itself is going to go away, but the prosecutor might be.

01:09:24.960 She's in a whole lot of trouble herself and could potentially even be facing criminal charges herself.

01:09:30.360 100 percent right. And those of us who can see the law clearly understood this was a massive

01:09:36.800 potential ethical violation by these two right from the start. All the BS spin at the beginning

01:09:42.280 of that clip about how most legal experts say there's no basis to get rid of them, to throw the

01:09:48.480 that's absolutely not true either. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution broke the case, broke the story

01:09:53.620 and cited Stephen Gillers, who's the god of legal ethics. He's written the textbook that we all

01:09:59.040 study. And in that first article, Stephen Gillers said, if any of this is true, she's in a deep,

01:10:05.440 deep seat of trouble and could get thrown off the case. So the revisionist media coverage of it,

01:10:11.560 Charlie, just yet another reminder of how important the lane you and I are in has become.

01:10:16.140 Yes. Anybody wanting actual honest information?

01:10:20.340 Yeah, a couple of thoughts. First, that's the number one podcast out there. And so it's not

01:10:24.140 just some fringe thing. It does very, very well. It always almost near the top of the podcast charts.

01:10:28.540 Number two, I just laugh when, you know, grown men talk like 15 year old girls with their up

01:10:34.980 inflection of their voice. We don't really know if they're guilty or in it's like it just drives me

01:10:41.300 crazy. It's like that's central casting for Upper East Side, metrosexual New York Times podcast host.

01:10:46.740 Anyway, I'll put that aside. So it just drives me crazy. So the, but hold on. Did they even address

01:10:52.100 the lying about the start date of the relationship? That alone is perjury. I mean, before we even get

01:10:58.000 into some. Disgruntled. The woman who testified that it started early, she was disgruntled. Haven't

01:11:03.680 you heard that, Charlie? Oh yeah. That's their new spin. And then so, but under oath,

01:11:09.020 she said something completely different. So you zero in on that, but I have a, I have a six point

01:11:13.940 list. I want to go through here, Megan, I think it's really important. And I know you covered this

01:11:17.120 in great detail. Um, and this is from Josh McCune, who is the chairman of the Georgia Republican party.

01:11:22.960 Number one, uh, here's no longer in dispute. Uh, Willis awarded a no bid contract for legal services

01:11:28.480 to Wade. That is true. We know that to be true. Number two, Wade engaged in a sexual relationship

01:11:33.880 with Willis while he was submitting bills to her as a vendor that were paid without question,

01:11:38.220 including an invoice for 24 hours of billable time in a single day. Number three, Wade and Willis

01:11:44.160 kept this relationship secret to the point of Wade lying in response to questions submitted

01:11:48.220 in his divorce, divorce proceeding to keep the relationship secret. Number four,

01:11:52.480 Wade filed for divorce from his wife within 24 hours of receiving the no bid contract from Willis

01:11:58.080 divorce contract, divorce contract. Uh, number five, uh, Wade paid for multiple lavish vacations

01:12:04.840 that Willis took with him. And number six, there is no documentation that Willis was ever reimbursed

01:12:10.120 for him for any of these vacations. And hilariously, Megan, one final thought I joked with my team when

01:12:14.940 they were testifying. I said, Oh, they're going to say that they were paid in cash just because

01:12:19.460 that's just what liars do. And maybe they were Megan, but give, I, I, I don't think so. I don't think

01:12:27.440 that Fannie Willis has thousands of dollars in cash and that we're supposed to believe that there was a

01:12:31.980 reimbursement. By the way, there's no withdrawal bank records. There's no deposit bank records.

01:12:38.280 So not looking good for the $5,000 lien against her, a $5,000 lien against her at the time.

01:12:44.320 She's allegedly doling out thousands to Nathan Wade. She just happens to have it sitting around

01:12:48.200 her house. Did her daddy tell her that, that it's important to pay your bills, that it's not good for

01:12:51.740 a sitting DA to have a lien against her. I missed that part of the daddy's testimony. Um, here she is

01:12:57.200 again, back at the church this past Sunday with yet another message about how hard it is to be her

01:13:04.540 as they awarded her at the Atlanta, uh, church, the black history achievement award. Watch.

01:13:12.080 There are things going on recently that I won't talk about, but everybody did not embrace me

01:13:16.620 during those times. And Berean has continued to embrace me. You know, people keep sending me

01:13:22.340 scriptures and I, and I appreciate those scriptures, but the scripture they keep sending me is no weapon

01:13:27.460 formed against you shall prosper. I need y'all to hear me though. They did not say the weapon weapons

01:13:38.960 will not form. The other lesson that I've learned in this three years is God ordains those weapons.

01:13:46.260 He puts those weapons in your life to form against you. And if you really understand him,

01:13:54.260 you become in your maturity to understand he does it for a reason and it's to grow you and it's to

01:14:01.540 make you stronger. And it is to prepare you. This is a really hard job I'm trying to do.

01:14:07.540 And I am an imperfect human being, but I can literally feel the people who loves me's prayers.

01:14:17.140 Okay. It's really hard to be a DA, Charlie newsflash. Very hard to be a DA. She's just

01:14:21.480 doing the best she can in stooping the special counsel she brought in to go after the president

01:14:26.060 of the United States former. Yeah. So first of all, her theology is all screwed up. I'm not going

01:14:29.760 to get into that, but I mean, that's just, you know, she, she, that this just so perverted and

01:14:34.460 twisted and wrong. And let's just not forget Nathan Wade was technically married when this

01:14:38.780 affair was ongoing. Okay. So I don't know. So let's, let's just be careful, you know,

01:14:44.000 talking about how no weapon formed against you. Uh, maybe you've got to get your sexual ethics

01:14:47.920 into gear, Fannie Willis, before you, you start to play the victim anyway. But here, here's what I

01:14:52.520 think is so interesting is the audience applauding and there, she's trying to turn this into kind of

01:14:56.660 like a base community organizing type issue. Um, last time she was at the church, she was playing on

01:15:03.600 outward racial undertones. You know, how hard it is, is it for, you know, a black woman to do her

01:15:09.040 job type thing. I'm paraphrasing Megan, but you remember that was essentially she's like,

01:15:13.100 they were the ones who played the race card, not me. Yeah. And again, this is, this is what's so

01:15:19.440 fascinating about this and why I think she will eventually be taken off the case. If we have any

01:15:24.080 sort of form of rule of law and the judge was also not showing a great deal of sympathy for her,

01:15:28.920 uh, just based on his motions and his tone and just how he was allowing certain line of question

01:15:34.780 to continue, but that remains to be seen. But remember this, the New York times, which you played

01:15:41.140 their podcast earlier, they had a full spread piece profile piece on Fannie Willis last summer.

01:15:47.280 She was supposed to be the one. She was supposed to be the one that could have a rock star. She was

01:15:52.160 supposed to be the new Stacey Abrams. It just turns out that, I don't know, they're kind of O for

01:15:56.120 two so far at trying to pick these heroines out of Georgia. Uh, she was supposed to be the, the,

01:16:01.700 the one that was going to bring down Trump because there are certain elements of this case that are

01:16:05.900 different than the Jack Smith case and the Alvin Bragg case. Number one, the Alvin Bragg case

01:16:09.200 is so legally flawed. It's a joke. There's really nothing to it. The Jack Smith stuff,

01:16:14.400 if Trump were to win, he could get pardoned eventually, um, has federal, it's all under federal

01:16:19.420 statute. And also there's, uh, jurisdictional issues and federal court takes forever. And there's

01:16:25.120 appeal in the Supreme court, Georgia had a couple elements that made it unique. Number one, mandatory

01:16:29.500 prison time. Number two, it wasn't clear whether or not he could be pardoned. Probably not because it

01:16:34.880 was a state-based type, um, crime, uh, indictment. And number three is that there was a, a drumbeat

01:16:42.420 of quote unquote co-conspirators that were pleading guilty. And that makes it hard to overcome as a

01:16:47.940 defendant. If all of a sudden 10 other people plead guilty and they all point fingers at you, it just,

01:16:52.340 no matter what you're accused of, it makes it hard. Now all of a sudden with Fannie Willis being put on

01:16:56.780 defense, regardless of how they proceed, even if she, if she remains, is anyone going to take

01:17:02.260 anything that comes out of this case seriously? Of course not. They're going to look at her as a

01:17:06.960 corrupt district attorney that had sweetheart, no bid contracts, legal services to her lover.

01:17:12.820 And the final element of this, Megan, that I think is being lost, but we don't yet know the extent of

01:17:17.200 it. Remember on the invoice that Nathan Wade submitted, he was communicating with the Biden,

01:17:23.100 Biden White House counsel's office. We don't know the details of that conversation. Uh, we don't know

01:17:28.560 to the extent of what he was talking to the Biden White House counsel office about, but we know that

01:17:33.160 he had 24 billable hours to the executive branches, basically legal representation. Did Biden know

01:17:39.780 according to Newt Gingrich, someone from Washington DC pushed Fannie Willis to put forward

01:17:43.960 this indictment, but this is falling apart. And now the media is like, Oh, well, we never thought

01:17:48.260 it was that big of a deal. Why are you picking on poor Fannie? She was, uh, she was built up to be

01:17:52.880 the one to bring down Donald Trump. The, uh, the official line is that, well, sometimes a local

01:17:59.880 prosecutor might consult with the White House if they've already done an investigation, like the

01:18:03.740 January 6th committee, they talked to them. Sometimes they would consult with a committee that

01:18:07.880 done a bunch of legwork so that they didn't have to repeat the legwork. So it could have been

01:18:11.580 totally innocent. Well, you know, we also see if you're going to account for that, let's also

01:18:16.060 account for the reports. I think it was in Politico last week that Joe Biden privately is very angry

01:18:20.640 at Merrick Garland, not just because of the special counsel, hers report saying he's a well-meaning

01:18:26.300 elderly man with a poor memory, but also because Merrick Garland did not put pedal to the metal

01:18:31.020 on these prosecutions, did not lean harder on the DAs around the country to make sure that Trump had a

01:18:37.780 conviction prior to the election, right? So why should we believe that there was an improper

01:18:42.860 coordination between the Biden White House and Fannie Willis? When we know the president himself,

01:18:48.300 according to this article is grumbling behind the scenes that Merrick Garland should be fired

01:18:52.340 potentially because he didn't fast roll all of these things. He wanted his opponent with the big C

01:18:58.180 conviction prior to November. Yeah. And it turns out that's less and less likely. Now the only conviction

01:19:05.760 they might get is New York with Alvin Bragg. And there will almost, if there will be prison time

01:19:10.920 associated with that, that would be just so outrageous. But New York is, um, New York is its

01:19:15.940 own beast right now, but that's all about just adding Donald Trump's going to have to change his

01:19:20.520 driver's license to the media convicted felon, Donald Trump, every rally, Megan, every time he does an

01:19:25.760 interview, they're going to say, and now about to take the stage, convicted felon, Donald Trump

01:19:29.380 convicted. That's all that the New York case is about. Oh, of course. I mean, yes. I mean,

01:19:34.600 because he, cause he's larger than life, he's a marketing expert. And also he's so far used every

01:19:40.360 single one of these indictments and not yet any convictions, but this lawfare to his advantage,

01:19:45.640 his poll numbers have only made him go up. It's made him more sympathetic. It looks like an

01:19:49.820 overreach of an unpopular president. And so, yeah, I think he's going to lean in to how he does it.

01:19:55.540 I mean, he's the genius. He'll figure it out, uh, as far as, you know, turning this stuff into a

01:19:59.920 positive. And the, the other element of this though, with the Joe Biden white house council's

01:20:04.580 office is that Joe Biden has insisted repeatedly. He said nothing to do with any of these convictions

01:20:09.240 and not with any of these indictments soon. And eventually one of the convictions,

01:20:13.440 if that's the case, why is he grumbling privately about Merrick Garland? And so he's like, Oh, I have

01:20:18.940 nothing to do with this. No, no, no. Now it's becoming very clear. And there are leaks happening out

01:20:23.580 of the Biden white house because they wouldn't, we wouldn't have that if it wasn't for the political

01:20:26.420 story. And this is a white house that notoriously does not leak and reporters are not seeking out

01:20:31.180 leaks. It just kind of is on its own Island. And we have to kind of just guess what's happening.

01:20:35.280 Unlike the Trump white house, which is, you know, we knew what every single staffer was having for

01:20:39.000 lunch and for breakfast, uh, on a daily basis, right? It was, uh, it was happening every day.

01:20:44.140 And so the, um, the, the other element of this though, Megan, that I think is really important,

01:20:48.020 um, just to finish that point is that the more and more it looks like Joe Biden is sending out

01:20:55.380 Merrick Garland and the department of justice, or even Fannie Willis, the even less popular Joe

01:21:00.980 Biden is going to become and the less sympathetic that these, um, trials will be in the eyes of

01:21:06.120 independent and swing voters. Hmm. Now, um, Joe Biden's getting a bit of a push from sources closer

01:21:13.620 to him than expected as recline, uh, a lefty who's committed to the leftist agenda is saying,

01:21:20.500 you know, we don't have to do this. Uh, maybe there's another option available to us. Um,

01:21:26.280 Joe Biden, you know, I don't think he can get the ball across the finish line. I'm nervous

01:21:30.100 and I don't like being nervous. I don't have to be nervous because we've got

01:21:33.360 at least someone great right in reserve, Kamala Harris. She's been underestimated. And if you don't

01:21:41.600 like Kamala Harris, he actually goes on to name. He's like, look at the bench. It's amazing.

01:21:45.700 Gretchen Whitmer, Gavin Newsom, AOC. He mentions AOC as a possible sub in. Now, look, the reason

01:21:54.560 this is interesting is because this is somebody who the white house could potentially be reading

01:21:58.020 and paying attention to. And it just shows some more fractions over there on the left fractures,

01:22:04.820 uh, over on the left when it comes to maintaining Biden as the nominee.

01:22:10.040 Yeah. So there's a, there's a chance and who knows, cause it's all a mystery in some sense,

01:22:15.220 but there's a chance that their pride that they could resurrect Biden's poll numbers will be

01:22:19.060 their downfall. Uh, there's a chance that they felt that they could just turn it around and run

01:22:22.700 enough TV ads. Now they have a very impressive infrastructure of ballot chasing. We've talked

01:22:27.460 about that before, Megan, and their ability to have thousands of full-time people on the ground

01:22:31.020 and chase early ballots, but that all to a certain extent falls apart. If all of a sudden you can't

01:22:35.820 crack 35%. I was going through real clear politics.com the other day, and I found it really

01:22:41.360 interesting. You know who the most stable polar is? The person who actually is the most consistent

01:22:46.660 number is RFK. He's right near that 14 to 18% almost consistently where Trump and Biden are all

01:22:52.240 over the place. 38, 42, 44, it's they're all over the place. RFK is right near that 14 to 18%.

01:22:58.880 Six months ago, I said the exact opposite. I will say now though, and I think that's one of the reasons

01:23:03.820 why Ezra Klein is saying, Hey, we got to get rid of this guy. Six months ago, I think RFK was hurting

01:23:08.200 Trump more than Biden. I think RFK is hurting Biden more than Trump. I think he's becoming

01:23:12.380 kind of a protest vote. I think Democrats are saying, I can't support Biden. You know, okay.

01:23:16.740 The Kennedy name seems perfectly fine. And I think that is one of the reasons why you're seeing the

01:23:20.820 collective intelligentsia of the Democrat party continue to freak out, but they're running out

01:23:26.040 of time. And if they think that Kamala Harris is an all-star player, I hope they select Kamala Harris.

01:23:32.880 Listen, listen to the rehab on her by Ezra Klein. You're going to love this. Um, in private settings,

01:23:40.660 she's enormously magnetic and compelling. Sure, Jan, her challenge would be translating that into a

01:23:47.360 public persona, which is, and let's be blunt about this, a hard thing to do when you've grown up in a

01:23:53.700 world that has always been quick to find your faults, a world that is afraid of women being angry,

01:24:00.420 of black people being angry, a world where for most of your life, it was demanded of you that you be

01:24:07.100 cautious and careful and measured and never make a mistake. And then you get on the public stage and

01:24:12.260 people say, Oh, you're too cautious and too careful and too measured. It's a very, very, very hard bind

01:24:19.380 to get out of, but maybe she can do it. It's her woman and being, yeah. And being a black woman that

01:24:28.300 really, that's, what's causing her troubles on the public stage, Charlie, you see like,

01:24:32.700 I've overcome my lady parts to be able to not be cautious and careful and measured and never make

01:24:41.860 it. It's amazing. I've been able to overcome that, notwithstanding all the estrogen raging in my

01:24:45.940 body. And apparently Kamala Harris, it was just a too strong, a combo, I guess being black and being

01:24:50.740 a woman. Therefore, that's why she is the way she is. I mean, okay. Tell it to Condoleezza Rice.

01:24:55.080 She doesn't suffer from any of those problems. In politics and just like in life, there's the

01:25:00.940 X factor. It's just something like Kamala Harris is, she's just deeply unlikable. Just, it's very

01:25:05.840 similar to Hillary. It's, she just looks so ambitious in a bad way, just synthetic and fake

01:25:12.760 and transactional and artificial. And so if they want to replace Joe Biden with Kamala Harris,

01:25:19.060 let's be honest. The only reason why Joe Biden is still around is because they're not too thrilled

01:25:24.480 about their number two. If they had a superstar at number two, this, this rodeo would have been

01:25:29.680 rearranged six months ago. He does begin his piece interestingly by saying, um,

01:25:35.940 I'll, I'll, I'll put it this way. He's not up for this. Joe Biden. He says, I think he's a good

01:25:40.980 president. I don't like having this conversation. And I know a lot of liberals and Democrats will be

01:25:45.140 furious at me. I still think Biden might win against Trump. It's just that there's a very good

01:25:49.480 chance he might lose maybe even better than even odds. And Trump is dangerous. I want better odds

01:25:55.800 than that. Well, it's too late to throw to the primaries, but it's not too late to do something.

01:26:01.900 You're isolating something really important, which is after Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton,

01:26:06.420 2016, the Democrats operate in, we must eliminate all risk that we can't even have a 5% or a 10% chance.

01:26:13.760 They were so traumatized by what happened in 2016, which I think is at the root of a lot of the law

01:26:19.140 fair stuff and trying to kick Donald Trump off the ballot, which is, I don't think they will be able

01:26:24.420 to handle looking at election returns and even seeing it close. I think some of them don't even

01:26:30.600 have the, the, the genetic material to deal with that. It's they're so invested with making sure

01:26:35.800 Donald Trump won't become president again. That's Ezra Klein. He's like, I can't leave it up to

01:26:39.520 chance. We have to do whatever it takes. So that means switching out Biden, kicking Trump off the

01:26:42.860 ballot. And it's, it's fascinating. I mean, we call it Trump derangement syndrome. Their identity

01:26:49.580 is wrapped up in this. Their, their, their daily obsession is preventing Donald Trump from ever

01:26:54.380 getting back in the white house. And if there's even a 5% risk, that's not, that's not good enough

01:26:59.380 for Ezra Klein. Meanwhile, you have Nate Silver of 538 polling. Now he's got his own sub stack

01:27:05.720 saying it's time for the white house to put up or shut up. And he's got a different plan for

01:27:10.180 president Biden. Okay. This is actually very interesting. Here's what I'd propose quoting

01:27:15.120 here over the course of the next several weeks. Biden should do ready for lengthy sit down

01:27:22.800 interviews with non-friendly sources. Non-friendly doesn't mean hostile. The proposed options, Charlie,

01:27:31.020 the New York times, the Washington post 60 minutes, and maybe, um, even the wall street journal op-ed

01:27:42.340 page. So he writes, he writes what he wants at the op-ed page or even a team of writers at the dispatch,

01:27:48.960 which I mean, I like, I like Jonah Goldberg, Steve, but like, those are never Trumpers. Those are people

01:27:55.500 who would definitely be voting for Biden instead of Trump. So these are his plan for the, the tough,

01:28:02.440 non-friendly sources. You should do the lengthy sit downs with it. What do you make of that

01:28:05.880 resurrection plan? Yeah. The New York times is the non-friendly source. You know, I'd have some,

01:28:10.560 I would, I just want to see, I think it should have to be like a prerequisite that you have to be able

01:28:16.200 to sit through a 90 minute long form podcast interview to become president in the modern era.

01:28:20.660 It's kind of the new litmus test. Donald Trump could do it. I mean, I mean, he sat down with you

01:28:25.220 and, and, you know, you asked him the tough questions. Yep, exactly. And I mean, I was

01:28:30.800 expecting when you were saying that, it's like, are they going to say Joe Rogan? I mean, of course,

01:28:34.500 I mean, could you imagine Joe Biden at the end? At the end, he said, go on Ezra Klein's podcast,

01:28:40.200 question mark, go on Rogan. Just kidding. I think, but Bernie Sanders did it.

01:28:44.840 Yeah. Well, I mean, Bernie Sanders to his credit is far more there than Joe Biden. I mean, he's old,

01:28:52.200 but he's, you know, he's still, he still can put a couple of sentences together. Look, the there,

01:28:56.460 there's this collective freak out. They're running out of time. And they also have said the other

01:29:01.160 Democrat intelligentsia have, you know, in these op-eds like, well, do we really want to put this

01:29:05.720 in the hands of Democrat activists? And that that's code for saying they might get someone insane

01:29:11.440 to become their nominee. Like that's code of being like, well, we don't want, you know,

01:29:17.080 Rashida Tlaib or Ilan Omar to be our nominee, right? That's kind of their code of saying it.

01:29:22.380 And again, I just repeat the third party element here adds a great deal of chance and mystery to

01:29:28.360 very, it's very, very hard to pull when there's three candidates. Whoever has the stronger base will

01:29:34.360 end up winning in a third, you know, typically in a three party or four party, five candidates type

01:29:41.120 situation. And so you have Nate Silver, you have Ezra Klein, but I don't see any movement with this

01:29:47.380 being said, Megan, I don't see a single piece of evidence that Joe Biden is letting go of power

01:29:52.700 that the people around him, they almost seem to be white knuckling. It seems as if they're gearing up

01:29:57.440 and ramping up. And there has not been a sign of life for Joe Biden in polling. He still is significantly

01:30:03.740 down. He does have an advantage when it comes to the plumbing of the elections, the infrastructure,

01:30:09.300 the early voting. But as far as likability and popularity, Joe Biden remains to be in trouble.

01:30:16.020 The I think it was the Ezra Klein piece saying there are some people who can go to Biden and try to

01:30:22.480 convince him to bail. It would include the Obamas, the Chuck Schumer, Mike Donilon, Ron Klain, Nancy

01:30:30.820 Pelosi, Anita Dunn. They need to get him to see the truth. An intervention. Yeah, they got to sit

01:30:38.880 him down and say, Joe, it's a no. But anyway, it's not happening. At least it hasn't happened so far.

01:30:44.360 We'll we'll wait to see whether they, you know, wrestle with. I just I would just love to see the

01:30:49.120 intervention. He walks in. Go ahead. Yes, please. I ask you about the Trump verdict that the anger on

01:30:53.420 four hundred and fifty million dollar when you had the interest in you're you're close with team

01:30:58.500 Trump and Trump family members. My information from people close to Trump was this was the case

01:31:02.840 he was most worried about because really it could and now has shut down his business, his his method

01:31:08.620 of making money for all his life in New York state, his home state, not to mention a half a billion

01:31:14.700 dollar judgment against Trump. And even when you have as much money as Trump does, that doesn't mean

01:31:18.900 you're liquid doesn't mean you have five hundred million dollars sitting in the bank. You can easily

01:31:21.940 cut a check. So have you had any reaction from them that you can share on the insanity of this

01:31:28.440 verdict that came down last Friday? I can't say which one of the most worried about. This is my

01:31:32.860 opinion, not anything they've said, but just gleaning from conversation. This is the one I think

01:31:36.740 they're the most bitter about. And I think that's an important distinction. And I would totally

01:31:41.580 understand. They helped build modern New York. You know this, Megan. I mean, from the woman rink to

01:31:46.800 the convention center, to owning the Plaza Hotel, to the Commodore. And, you know, Donald Trump,

01:31:54.440 he really came to be when New York was still full of slums and was not a world class city. And he gave

01:32:00.080 back through charity and philanthropy and employing tens of thousands, probably over a hundred thousand

01:32:04.300 people over the last couple of decades. And, you know, again, I'm speaking just from an outsider and

01:32:09.620 personal opinion based on conversations I've had. It just feels as if they were knifed by the city

01:32:14.800 that they love. And I think they still have a love for that city, a city where they were born and

01:32:20.360 that, you know, Donald Trump raised his kids and that his first grandkids were born in a city where

01:32:24.940 he built the iconic Trump Tower and had properties all across New York, a city where he was known as

01:32:31.040 Mr. New York, a city where he filmed and shot The Apprentice. And now because he became president and

01:32:37.140 they don't like what he did when he was president and that he's running again, we can just confiscate

01:32:41.180 your business. I mean, it hurts. And I don't mean that in some sort of like gushy, you know,

01:32:47.520 kind of weak way. I mean that in a very, in a way of justice that you feel as if for 40 years,

01:32:54.400 you build a profitable, sustainable business, you pay back everybody that you've borrowed money from,

01:32:59.140 you build beautiful assets. People are thrilled with your brand. They're thrilled with what you've

01:33:03.160 contributed. And they're able to bring this politically charged garbage. And literally it is

01:33:08.940 garbage to do what is the equivalent of Soviet style wealth confiscation. And so, yeah, I can't,

01:33:16.160 I don't want to speak on the president's behalf or his family, nor which one they're the most worried

01:33:20.540 about. But I could say that this one has created a great deal of bitterness for a family that did so

01:33:26.900 much for the city and for the state of New York to only have their empire at least temporarily taken

01:33:33.000 away from them. They have this new kind of business manager that is now in charge of it.

01:33:36.760 This wasn't even a jury trial. Thankfully, there's an appeal process. Kevin O'Leary,

01:33:42.640 Mr. Wonderful, I think that's what he goes by, I think said it best, which is that this is one of

01:33:46.540 the most un-American decisions. It will drive business out of the state of New York. And I've

01:33:51.020 talked to some other, you know, people that have multi-billion dollar portfolios in New York,

01:33:54.880 and they're terrified. They are terrified. And make no mistake, this is a warning shot from Letitia

01:33:59.480 James. They have nothing to worry about as long as they're Democrats. They'll be good.

01:34:03.480 Well, no, that's what I was going to say is that Letitia James, Letitia James's message is like,

01:34:07.260 oh, hey, if you support the right political party, I'm not going to confiscate your stuff.

01:34:11.160 I'm not going to take your property away.

01:34:13.520 And certainly don't. I mean, if you're a Republican, don't don't fly your flag and don't,

01:34:18.840 you know, put it out there. And God forbid you decide to run for office because that's when they

01:34:22.500 really will turn on you. And that's what's really happening. That's what the quiet sort of story

01:34:25.480 behind the scenes is who in their right mind would run for office on the Republican ticket

01:34:29.960 after this. It's really like these little they're not little, but these cuts are causing death by

01:34:36.220 a thousand cuts to the Republican Party, to its future leadership, because this doesn't this

01:34:40.840 doesn't happen to the Democrats. This is happening to the Republican, to Trump, who wasn't even some

01:34:45.560 far right leader. He was more moderate in a lot of his policies, but that's not good enough.

01:34:51.440 I will tell you an anecdote, Megan, that I think is very is connected to this.

01:34:55.320 We raise a lot of money at Turning Point. We raise money for get out the vote efforts.

01:34:58.920 And more and more donors are asking, hey, this is anonymous, right?

01:35:04.280 I say, well, and I say, well, yes, I don't have to disclose you if you give to this particular

01:35:09.980 vehicle, which is, you know, our 501 C3 or 501 C4. But the government might find out.

01:35:15.160 They said, well, I don't want to give to anything that I might be disclosed because I might get

01:35:19.340 targeted. Megan, it's working. I mean, amongst very wealthy people. And my response is kind of

01:35:25.200 always look, I can protect your anonymity. But if you're really so worried that they'll eventually

01:35:30.720 find out you just shouldn't give at that point. I mean, at some point, you have to put, you know,

01:35:36.360 your own spine and your own, you know, willingness behind. Yeah, exactly. I mean, I was going to use

01:35:43.900 some other part of the, you know, human anatomy, but I'll put that aside, which is you got to have

01:35:49.420 some stones, man. Like you want to save the country or not. And by the way, I do, I do support

01:35:54.220 anonymous giving for this reason. So not be harassed by the New York Times, the Washington

01:35:58.240 Post. But Megan, since this has happened, I've seen an alarming increase in top level donors ask

01:36:05.020 and don't not demand, but like basically seek out anonymous giving options because they're afraid of

01:36:11.140 political retribution. Yep. And it's it's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

01:36:16.160 All right, Charlie. So as usual, every time you come on, you're upsetting somebody.

01:36:20.260 Now you know, now I've seen two separate hit pieces on you, one from Real Clear Politics and

01:36:27.360 one from NBC. The Real Clear Politics one wasn't really a hit piece, but it was sort of trying to

01:36:33.600 say that there is a lot of anger toward you because Ronna Romney McDonald, whatever, McDaniel,

01:36:40.360 has been booted as the head of the RNC. She was pushed out effectively by Trump is what we say,

01:36:45.120 what we read, and that the reporting is that she went down to Mar-a-Lago to try to stop it.

01:36:50.880 Instead, Trump said, you've got to go. She did go. But while there, she brought you up,

01:36:55.800 tried to say he's my chief detractor. I'm paraphrasing here. But now we're seeing a couple

01:37:02.380 hit pieces after she's gone on you suggesting you're a problem, that you're causing trouble

01:37:08.020 for Donald Trump. We talked about your comments on black pilots the last time. I encourage the audience

01:37:12.700 go back and look at that more fully because Charlie explains exactly what he meant perfectly.

01:37:17.420 In any event, it appears, you know, it gets resurrected now in an effort to drive, I think,

01:37:22.240 a public wedge between you and the Trumps. Donald Trump Jr. comes out and says, this is bullshit.

01:37:27.980 There's no wedge. We all love Charlie. Just stop it. So what's the truth? What's the story? What's

01:37:33.200 happening here? Well, first, if I just got such a kick at it, it's so coordinated because the two

01:37:38.260 articles both have knives in the title. Do you see that? It's like two separate real clear politics,

01:37:44.340 sharp elbows, sharper knives, NBC News, sharp knives out. Like, okay, so the knives are out for

01:37:48.740 me. Got it. Thanks. Look, I mean, we made it a focus because we want to win to try to have regime

01:37:56.980 change at the RNC. And I said this before, I'll say it again. This was not a personal thing. I used to

01:38:02.680 get along really well with Rana. Obviously, that relationship is no longer ongoing. And we were

01:38:08.420 underwhelmed and underwhelmed repeatedly with election results. And the same way that I treat

01:38:15.200 my college football coaches or my NFL football, which I love, if you're not winning games, you should

01:38:21.640 no longer be in charge of the team. And so whether it be in 2018, 2020, 2022, 2023, and instead of

01:38:31.440 kind of acknowledging that things could be going better, we were met with defiance and we were met

01:38:37.700 with doublespeak. And so long story short, we made it a focus to try and change the leadership of the

01:38:44.060 RNC. And we did it by mentioning on our show a lot. We did it by hosting alternative programs

01:38:49.900 in Las Vegas for the Restoring National Confidence Summit, where we brought in 75 state party chairs,

01:38:57.440 national committeemen, and also county chairs to receive training and to receive grassroots type

01:39:04.340 data technology, not just training, but also how to use the data technology in their local area. And

01:39:11.600 the response was overwhelming. And we knew this was coming, Megan. I mean, make no mistake, you don't

01:39:16.640 focus and eventually end up being successful in getting rid of an RNC chair without them running to

01:39:23.500 NBC News to complain. And so I'm unfazed by it. Yeah, I'm unfazed by it. You know, there's,

01:39:30.220 it's all the typical, quite honestly, like left wing attack vectors that are repurposed by this

01:39:36.080 disgruntled outgoing RNC regime. It should be illuminating for those in your audience that

01:39:41.800 really want to see Joe Biden defeated in November, that the RNC kind of henchmen and their media team

01:39:48.880 were more focused on trying to plant stories against me and trying to lobby NBC News and real

01:39:55.180 clear politics. So two pieces in three days, like, okay, can you make it more obvious instead of

01:40:00.140 trying to unite forces and combine forces to defeat Joe Biden in November? It is what it is. I'm unfazed by

01:40:06.720 it. I mean, we, we played a win. Well, what's amazing, Charlie, is that now the, one of the things in

01:40:10.600 here is that one of the knocks on you is that you're raising all this money. Like one of the knocks on

01:40:16.480 you is that you've, that you want to raise 108 million on a get out the vote campaign in Arizona,

01:40:23.320 Georgia, and Wisconsin to swing the election. These are Republicans ripping you. I can see how

01:40:27.380 why Democrats might want that, but they say setting a quote Republican operative in close contact with

01:40:33.560 the Trump campaign. I don't think Trump is fully aware of that plan when he finds out he's not going

01:40:39.500 to be happy at all because why? Because it has quote little guarantee of success and because it is quote

01:40:48.280 funded by donors who would otherwise give directly to Trump's campaign. Thus they predict the former

01:40:54.820 president quote will be pissed out of his mind. Now I've talked to you about this many times. You're, as far as

01:41:01.060 I understand, your effort is to get the people out to vote for Donald Trump, which I'm not, I'm having

01:41:07.360 trouble following why he would be angry. He wouldn't be. And that's why it's an unnamed Republican

01:41:13.100 operative. It's just someone who doesn't like me or they're upset that we are having success raising

01:41:17.800 money and let the record be clear. We have over 300,000 donors at turning point. Uh, that's a big

01:41:23.280 number. Uh, that's presidential campaign style number to have 300,000 people contribute money to

01:41:28.560 you. Uh, the RNC wishes they had that many active donors and they wonder why they don't. And one of the

01:41:32.900 reasons why is we're relentless and we put it, we, we put results forward and we're transparent with

01:41:38.720 how we spend our money. And so the other aspect though, that you mentioned is yes, we're going to

01:41:42.900 have hundreds of full-time people in Arizona and Wisconsin chasing ballots for get out the vote.

01:41:48.620 The RNC to the best of our knowledge, we'll have one or two full-time people, three or four full-time

01:41:53.240 people. And so there's, we are the disruptors on the scene. We're the new energy, Megan. Uh, we are always

01:41:59.400 thought of just being a youth organization. So they kind of ignored us. And as I have grown and as the

01:42:04.860 organization has grown, we realized that the RNC and the Republican party, uh, was ossified and not

01:42:12.480 innovative and not playing to win and to not have that kind of entrepreneurial approach. Again, we

01:42:18.340 wouldn't have these complaints of 2022 was a blowout year and we won record, uh, record seats in the house

01:42:24.920 and the Senate, but the results speak for themselves. And we believe we've identified an

01:42:29.420 issue, which is to try to help low propensity Republican or center-right voters be able to vote

01:42:34.760 in voting month and not just try to flood the polls on election day, but have people vote early and to

01:42:41.020 expand our ability to run up the score leading into election day. Uh, in addition to all the other

01:42:46.360 programming that we do. And so I remain close with the Trump family. I'm an enthusiastic supporter,

01:42:51.100 obviously a president Trump had the opportunity to know him and defend him for well over eight

01:42:55.620 years. Now. Um, these stories happen every so often, Megan, this is obviously the spiciest one

01:43:01.020 that I've ever been through. It's the most direct salvo from the Republican establishment. Um, but I

01:43:06.620 say, bring it on. We're going to keep on building. They're going to keep on complaining. Uh, we're good

01:43:10.880 at building at turning point. Uh, it's what we do and God willing we'll be successful coming into

01:43:16.020 November. I mean, I've seen it up close and personal and behind the scenes, and it's an amazing

01:43:20.480 operation. It's incredibly sophisticated, professional, well done. And there's a reason.

01:43:25.600 I mean, you've, you've earned every dollar and a bit of attention that you've gotten. Um, I do want

01:43:30.540 to stop with this and with this. So the potential replacements, Trump says, um, to run the RNC,

01:43:38.980 it should be Michael Watley, the North Carolina GOP chairman and suggested the co-chair should be his

01:43:45.620 daughter-in-law, Laura Trump. All right, now I'm going to confess something to you. I don't know

01:43:49.660 Laura Trump, but I remembered that Laura Trump had some sort of a background in the pastry industry.

01:43:54.720 My first thought was, why do we need somebody who knows how to make delicious desserts as co-chair

01:43:59.440 of the RNC? But, but unlike most people, I then went and did my homework and found out, of course,

01:44:06.620 yeah, she's been a spokesperson for Trump for the past several years. But on top of that,

01:44:10.860 I actually went back and I'm not going to tell you who, but I went and started texting friends of

01:44:14.920 mine who were at the top of the RNC over the past many, many, many years. And I received very

01:44:21.120 positive feedback about this idea. People who may not be Trumpers who were basically saying the job

01:44:27.100 of the co-chair is kind of to go out there and, and stir enthusiasm and go to colleges and go to

01:44:32.800 state dinners in Georgia and elsewhere and be a good messenger for team Republican. And if it's Trump

01:44:39.620 is president team Trump, and that she would actually be very good at this. She doesn't necessarily

01:44:43.980 have to be a Charlie Kirk when it comes to organizing, get out the vote. She wouldn't

01:44:48.120 be in the top job. And I started to say, okay, well, I see this differently. I, I kind of,

01:44:53.120 I understand it now, but what do you make of, I don't, I confess, I didn't know who Michael

01:44:57.640 Watley was. What do you make of him? Whatever happened to Harmeet Dillon? And what do you make

01:45:01.840 of Laura Trump? Yeah, I'm actually meeting with Michael Watley soon. And so I have no strong

01:45:06.960 opinions either way. I am an enthusiastic support of Laura Trump. Uh, I got to know Laura back in the

01:45:12.140 2016 campaign when no one thought we would win. And I said, wow, this woman is a superstar and

01:45:18.200 she's excellent on TV. She's very likable. And obviously in recent years, you know, we've seen

01:45:23.740 her immediate success and she is super articulate, um, in her ability to message the Trump agenda.

01:45:30.780 We just had her on our podcast and she was terrific. The biggest issue though, that she solves even more

01:45:35.720 than the enthusiasm and her ability to present, uh, really well in the media is that the base does

01:45:43.320 not support the RNC right now. There has been an evaporation of small dollar donations to the RNC

01:45:50.200 that needs to be fixed immediately. Having someone with the Trump last name that can assure small

01:45:57.400 dollar donors that the RNC is doing what it needs to be done, that it is spending the money correctly

01:46:02.300 and appropriately, that it's defending Donald Trump will go a very, very long way to heal the brand

01:46:07.800 of the RNC. And I could just speak for Laura Trump's work ethic. She's like an ultra marathoner.

01:46:13.200 She is in, she's a very impressive person, a great mother, um, dedicated wife. Um, and also,

01:46:20.380 you know, if you look at some of the issues that the RNC has, the Republican brand has,

01:46:24.400 we have to do better with women. And Laura Trump obviously will be able to be, um, an effective

01:46:29.440 spokesperson, uh, especially on the trans issue, the women, men and female sports issue issues that

01:46:35.700 you've talked about a lot on this program, Megan. So I'm an enthusiastic supporter for it. I think

01:46:39.740 Laura's going to be doing a great job, um, there. And I think that she'll be able to, um, expand the

01:46:45.300 appeal of the Republican party and heal, uh, some of the issues that the RNC is currently facing.

01:46:51.380 Hmm. All right. Now she also is an amazing cook apparently though, because she did study,

01:46:55.340 uh, and has a degree in pastry arts from the French culinary Institute.

01:46:59.980 Nothing wrong with that. I knew I remembered something about that. So she's a woman of many

01:47:04.800 talents. Uh, anyway, it's just a good lesson to keep your mind open and do your homework before you,

01:47:09.000 George, for many opinions on anybody. Charlie Kirk, such a pleasure as always. Thank you so much for

01:47:13.960 being here. And don't forget everybody head to tpusa.com and definitely do it. Honestly, like it's

01:47:19.460 such an impressive organization. You know, Charlie's going to shepherd your dollars into something that you

01:47:23.640 care about. Um, and you can learn more about how you can get involved and you can help his

01:47:27.820 organization's effort, including at the college level where too many conservatives feel they stand

01:47:31.840 alone and they do not. We'll see you tomorrow. Thanks for listening to the Megan Kelly show.

01:47:40.540 No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

01:47:53.640 No BS, no Marian Kelly show.

01:47:58.960 No BS. No problem.

01:47:59.520 No BS. No BS. NoSL.

01:48:01.820 No BS.

01:48:02.980 No BS. No BS. No BS. No BS.

01:48:08.480 No BS. No BS. No BS.

01:48:10.680 No BS.

01:48:14.820 No BS.

The Megyn Kelly Show - February 20, 2024

Fani Willis' Perilous Future, and Biden Nudged to Step Aside, with Charlie Kirk, Dave Aronberg, Mike Davis, and Phil Holloway ｜ Ep. 727

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript