The Megyn Kelly Show - Tucker Carlson vs. Fox News Legal Battle, and George Santos Arrested, with David Sacks, Jonna Spilbor, and David Wohl ｜ Ep. 547

00:00:00.520 Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations.

00:00:11.840 Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show and happy Wednesday.

00:00:15.760 A massive news day today, so I thank you for trusting us to bring you all the developments and analysis you will not hear anywhere else.

00:00:23.200 We're going to talk about the legal and political ramifications for Donald Trump after a Manhattan jury found that he sexually abused but did not rape writer E. Jean Carroll some 30 years ago.

00:00:35.120 But we begin today with the latest on Tucker Carlson giving the middle finger to Fox News and plotting his return, announcing that it's happening.

00:00:44.240 So as you may have heard yesterday, late in the day, Tucker decided to give Fox News a dose of its own medicine.

00:00:52.460 You want to fight? You got one, is essentially what he said.

00:00:55.920 He tried to take the high road for over two weeks as they smeared him and tried to ruin his reputation while muzzling him and hoping he would just sit back and take the check.

00:01:05.900 And Tucker being Tucker, that was not acceptable to him.

00:01:10.120 It's not just Tucker, don't forget.

00:01:12.060 It's some of his staff, his executive producer, who, by the way, is in he's he's married and he has a husband who is in very poor health, which Fox knows.

00:01:24.740 So that guy's been fired, too, is dependent on his health insurance.

00:01:29.200 There are all sorts of issues and there are all sorts of reasons why Tucker is ready to fight.

00:01:32.980 He wanted to get his voice back out there.

00:01:35.400 And finally, last night, he began to.

00:01:38.080 He posted a video on Twitter, OK, on Twitter, which took the media world by storm.

00:01:45.620 He posted it and provided a link to his new site, Tucker Carlson dot com.

00:01:50.800 You often hear people say the news is full of lies, but most of the time, that's not exactly right.

00:01:57.720 Much of what you see on television or read The New York Times is, in fact, true in the literal sense.

00:02:03.120 You could pass one of the media's own fact checks, but that doesn't make it true.

00:02:07.240 It's not true.

00:02:08.320 Facts have been withheld on purpose, along with proportion and perspective.

00:02:12.880 You are being manipulated.

00:02:14.040 The best you can hope for in the news business at this point is the freedom to tell the fullest truth that you can.

00:02:19.580 But there are always limits.

00:02:21.800 And you know that if you bump up against those limits often enough, you will be fired for it.

00:02:27.300 That's not a guess.

00:02:28.400 It's guaranteed.

00:02:31.000 I'll tell you this.

00:02:32.660 I'm delighted to see what he's doing.

00:02:34.480 I'm delighted that he's going to go out with his own show.

00:02:36.760 People were a little confused on whether he's in a partnership with Elon Musk.

00:02:40.580 He's not.

00:02:42.320 He's just posting the show for now on Twitter.

00:02:44.920 And then it will link, once he has his full show running, to, I think, Tucker Carlson dot com, which will be a subscription service.

00:02:52.840 So right now, people are signing up to get the latest.

00:02:55.980 And as Elon Musk has come out and said, we haven't signed a deal with Tucker.

00:02:59.540 He's just utilizing the Twitter platform, which is smart because Twitter is better than ever.

00:03:05.560 Conservatives feel welcome there now in a way they didn't before Elon.

00:03:09.180 And it's a great way of reaching millions and millions of fans.

00:03:12.680 So Tucker comes out with his video saying, I'm back.

00:03:15.960 It's a three minute video.

00:03:17.080 It's got tens of millions of views already.

00:03:19.180 Just a sign of what Fox News is in for.

00:03:21.600 But the more interesting piece of all of this to me is the legal threat that Tucker, through his lawyer, Brian Friedman, who I've mentioned before, also represents me, made to Fox News late yesterday.

00:03:33.100 But before Tucker's announcement and Tucker's announcement will be treated as a breach of his deal by Fox, which, as you know, if you've been listening to this program, I've been urging him to do.

00:03:42.300 I think it's a smart legal strategy, given what they're doing to him.

00:03:44.940 I mean, what is he really supposed to sit out the 2024 presidential election?

00:03:50.380 OK, let's see what arbitrator is going to uphold that noncompete when he's given back the money and he's been fired by Fox.

00:03:59.220 OK, let's see.

00:04:01.180 Fox knows it's vulnerable.

00:04:03.100 Let's see.

00:04:03.700 I mean, that's the most interesting thing of all to me in this case right now is.

00:04:08.920 Will they fight to enforce only the noncompete, which is what is at issue right now?

00:04:13.940 The bullshit noncompete that we're forced to sign.

00:04:17.680 These things are extremely controversial to begin with.

00:04:21.220 They happen in many industries.

00:04:23.100 It's not just media.

00:04:23.940 It can be the beauty industry.

00:04:25.380 It can be the fast food industry where they try to get you to sign away your right to work for a competitor, even if they fire you.

00:04:35.080 I mean, it's controversial enough if you just choose to leave.

00:04:37.980 But if they fire you, you're not allowed to go to work for a competitor.

00:04:41.840 You just have to sit, sit out and not work.

00:04:44.780 And there haven't been a lot of recent tests, especially in the media industry on these under circumstances like these.

00:04:52.600 Let me tell you who doesn't want to see noncompetes struck down in the media industry.

00:04:57.900 Fox.

00:04:58.500 It does not want an arbitration award or a federal district court award saying you cannot get specific performance.

00:05:10.420 You cannot enjoin Tucker Carlson from working Fox News under these circumstances where you fire him, not for cause.

00:05:18.820 Keep in mind, Fox is not yet arguing.

00:05:20.820 They fired him for cause.

00:05:22.300 He gives back the money, the benefit of the bargain that he was receiving.

00:05:26.280 And so you've received your money back.

00:05:28.160 You've kicked him off the air and you get to silence him.

00:05:31.120 Let's see if they get to know if he gets an award saying that noncompete needs to be thrown out.

00:05:36.320 It's terrible for not just Fox, but all these media media conglomerates, which use them wickedly against talent, high and low, well-known and not very well-known.

00:05:48.420 People like me who, you know, were on cable for 13 years and people who are just starting out whose names you wouldn't know.

00:05:54.520 They get you, they hold you, and it's unfair.

00:05:57.320 So would love to see a fight over that.

00:05:59.580 Do not predict Fox News will win.

00:06:01.200 And even if they did win, how do they win their viewers back?

00:06:06.580 That's the real question.

00:06:07.840 How are they going to rebuild what's happening at eight?

00:06:10.380 Well, the only fight is about whether they're trying to silence their favorite host.

00:06:16.600 Right?

00:06:17.120 How does that happen?

00:06:18.280 I want to watch it happen.

00:06:19.480 Love to see it happen.

00:06:20.240 I predict Fox settles this thing now.

00:06:22.420 They're not going to take this to an arbitrator.

00:06:24.920 They're not going to take this to a court.

00:06:26.920 But that's what Tucker's threatening.

00:06:29.260 So he writes, this is via Axios, which has seen the letter.

00:06:33.800 Uh, he writes, uh, a threatening legal letter to Trump saying, or Trump, to Fox saying as follows.

00:06:46.060 The non-compete provision in his contract is no longer valid.

00:06:50.400 Fox breached the contract first.

00:06:52.380 You know, I've been saying this.

00:06:54.140 I've been saying this all along.

00:06:55.380 It's very clear.

00:06:56.200 If they were behind these smears and you know, my reasoning for believing they are, it's a breach.

00:07:01.980 It's a breach of what we call the good, the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, which

00:07:05.280 is built into every contract.

00:07:06.960 And in the employment law context, what it means is an employer has the obligation, the

00:07:12.400 contractual obligation to deal honestly and fairly with the employee on the other end of

00:07:19.920 the contract, honestly and fairly with the employee who signed the contract.

00:07:25.380 Is it honest and fair for a company to fire a man, silence a man while day by day leaking

00:07:33.620 his confidential moments and communications within the company when he was a faithful servant

00:07:39.860 of the company?

00:07:40.840 Is that honest?

00:07:42.760 And is it fair?

00:07:43.840 You can't say shit.

00:07:45.160 Sorry, Tucker.

00:07:46.000 You can say nothing.

00:07:46.780 You will sit there silenced or we'll say you breached.

00:07:50.460 We, meanwhile, we'll call the New York Times.

00:07:53.100 We'll call the Daily Beast.

00:07:54.800 We'll call Media Matters.

00:07:56.060 We'll call whoever the hell we want and we will say whatever the hell we want about you.

00:08:00.640 We'll say you're a racist.

00:08:02.120 We'll say you're a misogynist.

00:08:03.880 We will take the moments you trusted us to protect when you were on set in commercial

00:08:09.460 breaks or gearing up for a hit or for your show when you did not think you were on the

00:08:14.360 air, but you trusted us to protect your on-camera but off-air moments with the confidentiality

00:08:21.800 that we provide every other anchor.

00:08:25.320 And we used it against you.

00:08:27.480 Why?

00:08:29.280 What did you do again?

00:08:30.500 What was our justification?

00:08:31.760 Oh, we just wanted to ruin you for future employment. 0.98

00:08:34.500 That's what we wanted to make sure you couldn't get another job after your 18-month stint on

00:08:38.920 the sidelines ended.

00:08:40.800 Oh, that's okay.

00:08:42.160 Sure.

00:08:42.440 Is that honest, fair treatment of an employee?

00:08:47.020 That's what they're up against here in New York State, thanks to the Covenant of Good

00:08:50.920 Faith and Fair Dealing.

00:08:52.220 You're not allowed to do this.

00:08:54.580 You're not allowed to do this.

00:08:57.660 So the threat from Brian Friedman is Fox broke its promises to Tucker Carlson in that deal

00:09:05.600 and beyond.

00:09:06.780 Number one, they take aim at Irina Briganti, the head of the Fox comms shop that we've been

00:09:14.160 talking about on this show.

00:09:16.020 They said that she has attempted to undermine, I'm quoting here, embarrass and interfere with 0.99

00:09:22.960 Tucker Carlson's future business prospects, which he maintains would constitute another

00:09:27.700 breach of his employment contract.

00:09:29.300 Quote, make no mistake.

00:09:30.920 We intend to subpoena Ms. Briganti's cell phone records and related documents, which

00:09:36.880 evidence communications with her and all media, including but not limited to the New York

00:09:43.500 Times.

00:09:44.560 Remember, I've been jumping up and down about that one New York Times piece that both revealed

00:09:49.320 Tucker Carlson texts in the Dominion lawsuit saying these were the reason, these were the

00:09:55.640 real reason behind his termination and happened to reference two of the ridiculous videos where

00:10:02.640 Tucker's caught on camera during a commercial break.

00:10:04.520 Who would have access to both of those?

00:10:06.060 Dominion?

00:10:06.740 No, no.

00:10:08.820 Only one entity.

00:10:10.380 And it's Fox News.

00:10:11.920 And the leaks continued well beyond then.

00:10:14.240 And their lawyer, Tucker's lawyer, appears to believe, just as I do, that the person behind

00:10:19.800 those leaks is Irina Briganti. 0.86

00:10:20.940 And there is a very educated reason to believe that she was behind it all.

00:10:27.960 And now we'll find out because guess what?

00:10:29.580 There's no reporter privilege for her.

00:10:32.220 I'm sure they'll try to get the New York Times reporters and say, who gave you this information?

00:10:35.560 And the Times reporters will say, I'm not obligated to tell you that I'm a reporter and

00:10:39.020 I'll protect my source.

00:10:40.240 She doesn't have that right. 1.00

00:10:42.180 The one doing the leaks doesn't have the right to refuse to answer.

00:10:45.620 So if they want to see this through, Brian Friedman and Tucker are going to see it all

00:10:50.920 going to see Irina Briganti's texts, though I know from personal experience, she's smart

00:10:56.040 enough not to text.

00:10:57.140 She usually does her dirty work by phone. 1.00

00:10:59.840 They're going to get all of her cell phone records.

00:11:02.260 They are going to get her landline records.

00:11:05.020 They are going to get her sitting in a deposition and say, who did you talk to? 0.90

00:11:08.400 And she will have to tell them.

00:11:09.800 They're going to get the Fox News executives under deposition, under oath and say, what

00:11:15.120 was discussed?

00:11:15.820 What was the plan?

00:11:16.700 What were her marching orders?

00:11:17.900 What did you do to stop it?

00:11:19.460 Best case scenario for them right now is she was a rogue agent or maybe let's say she didn't

00:11:23.800 do it.

00:11:24.220 Somebody else did it.

00:11:25.280 Best case scenario is why did you wait two weeks before you tried to stop anything before

00:11:30.200 when we had 12, 13 leaks hurting Tucker's reputation?

00:11:33.800 What did you do to protect your employee?

00:11:36.100 What did you do to make sure that his confidential moments were protected?

00:11:39.180 Nothing is going to be the answer.

00:11:40.920 That's Fox's best case scenario.

00:11:44.840 That's not a good look for Fox News in front of an arbitrator or a federal judge.

00:11:50.640 And the reason they did nothing is because they liked it.

00:11:53.520 They wanted him destroyed.

00:11:55.340 This is their bread and butter playbook.

00:11:59.000 So they're going after Irina.

00:12:02.020 They're also alleging that Tucker was told with, first of all, let me back up, that Tucker

00:12:08.420 was promised that Fox would not settle with Dominion, quote, in a way which would indicate

00:12:13.900 wrongdoing on the part of Carlson and not to take any actions in a settlement, that they

00:12:19.480 would not take any actions in a settlement that would harm Carlson's reputation.

00:12:24.140 Carlson was told by a member of the Fox board that he was taken off the air as part of the

00:12:28.640 Dominion settlement.

00:12:30.360 Two sources briefed on a conversation told Axios.

00:12:33.200 So this is Tucker saying he was told by a member of the Fox board he was booted as part

00:12:39.800 of the Dominion settlement and that Fox assured him that they would not settle the case in

00:12:45.700 any way that would indicate wrongdoing on the part of Carlson.

00:12:48.100 Don't forget, he had controversial texts, but he was the one who stopped Fox from its

00:12:52.720 reporting the Sidney Powell lies.

00:12:55.080 He's the one who said, we can't.

00:12:56.140 She's a nutcase. 1.00

00:12:57.040 He said it on the air.

00:12:57.880 So Tucker had some texts that were controversial in that case, but he was not the reason they

00:13:02.300 lost eight hundred million dollars in that settlement.

00:13:04.700 They say these created additional terms of Carlson's employment, which were then broken

00:13:09.560 by the company, that Carlson was also promised by the Fox News lawyers, by the general counsel

00:13:19.360 of Fox News, that if he turned these texts over to the company when they were subpoenaed by

00:13:23.740 Dominion, that they would not be made public, that Fox would not use them to smear Tucker.

00:13:30.320 It's one thing to comply with your discovery obligations in providing something to opposing

00:13:33.940 counsel.

00:13:35.440 It's quite another to hand them over to your own counsel, knowing, fearing that your company

00:13:40.780 might use them to publicly smear you.

00:13:43.100 And they are alleging Tucker received a personal assurance from the lawyers on the Fox side that

00:13:48.220 that would not happen and that nonetheless, it's happening another breach.

00:13:54.780 I mean, think about that.

00:13:56.080 You get a promise from the lawyer and then the lawyer or someone connected with the lawyer

00:14:00.620 and the company violates it.

00:14:03.020 That's not a prior material breach of your employment conditions.

00:14:07.240 We'll just see about that.

00:14:09.260 Here's what I can tell you.

00:14:10.300 I know, based on my context within the building at Fox, there are other talent whose names

00:14:17.120 you would know who refused to turn over their personal cell phones in connection with the

00:14:22.480 Dominion subpoena.

00:14:25.140 They refused.

00:14:26.540 They hired outside counsel of their own and they made sure that their private communications,

00:14:33.540 their private thoughts would be protected.

00:14:34.720 Others, like Tucker, trusted the company and just used the company lawyer and the company

00:14:42.680 general counsel because they worked for the company, maybe for a decade in Tucker's case,

00:14:47.400 and had every reason to believe the company would protect them and live up to its word.

00:14:51.900 Well, what happened here?

00:14:53.540 Did the company then turn around as soon as it settled this case and start leaking because

00:14:59.880 the old man decided to fire Tucker and they decided to ruin him?

00:15:03.660 It didn't matter what they promised the guy.

00:15:06.020 F him.

00:15:07.260 It's, he's out.

00:15:08.440 Like I said, he's out now.

00:15:09.920 You're out of the cult.

00:15:10.780 You're the enemy.

00:15:12.020 Bit by bit, he'll be destroyed.

00:15:13.940 No, he won't.

00:15:15.440 That's what he's saying now.

00:15:16.840 No, I won't be.

00:15:19.060 I'll use my voice and we'll just see if he signs a non-disparagement too.

00:15:22.660 That's definitely going to be an issue.

00:15:24.860 They're going to try to get him to sign something, even if he's allowed to go form a company and

00:15:29.260 speak up professionally.

00:15:30.880 Saying he won't say anything bad about Fox.

00:15:32.500 All right, let's see how that goes.

00:15:35.840 As you know, I refused to sign mine.

00:15:38.240 They withheld months of my pay to which I was legally entitled to try to punish me for

00:15:43.500 exercising a right I had, which was not to sign a deal they offered me, not to sign a

00:15:47.500 non-disparagement I had no obligation to sign.

00:15:50.000 So they will try to strong arm him into silencing any criticism he may have of Fox News.

00:15:56.480 And that's why this lawsuit is so important.

00:15:58.040 And it's so important because this is every talent in the industry should be rooting for

00:16:01.980 this.

00:16:02.900 Let's just see how strong a company's rights are over its menial talent.

00:16:07.920 We're the ones who pay their bills.

00:16:10.120 Right.

00:16:10.540 We're the ones.

00:16:11.060 And let's just see in the context of this case, whether there really was a deal term

00:16:15.380 in the Dominion settlement saying Tucker needs to go.

00:16:18.460 To me, one of the most interesting things is this allegation Tucker was told by a member

00:16:22.760 of the Fox board.

00:16:23.400 He was taken off the air as part of the Dominion settlement.

00:16:25.300 The Fox board.

00:16:26.480 The Fox board only has like five people on it.

00:16:28.360 Five or six.

00:16:29.220 They would know.

00:16:29.780 This is not some vast 40 person thing where all somebody's speculating this person would

00:16:34.520 know.

00:16:35.520 And the denial of this by Dominion, I took another look at it, is is a little hinky.

00:16:41.360 It reads as follows, quote, Dominion did not insist on them firing Tucker Carlson as part

00:16:48.900 of the settlement.

00:16:50.080 What does that mean?

00:16:51.720 They did not insist on it.

00:16:53.340 Well, they don't say it wasn't a deal term explicitly.

00:16:55.700 They don't say it was not part of our agreement.

00:17:01.820 I mean, these are my questions.

00:17:02.880 Was it a deal term?

00:17:04.240 Was there an understanding?

00:17:05.900 Did Fox offer to fire Carlson and you accepted?

00:17:10.060 Right.

00:17:10.460 Was it discussed?

00:17:11.940 None of that is denied by Dominion did not insist on them firing Tucker.

00:17:18.360 We did not insist on them firing Tucker.

00:17:20.800 It is a little interesting the way they worded it.

00:17:24.340 So I don't know.

00:17:24.840 We still don't know what the reason is.

00:17:26.520 Trust me, when they get them in court, they're going to have to tell.

00:17:29.260 And finally, back to my point about what they need to do to win back their audience,

00:17:34.980 taking him to court to keep him silent.

00:17:37.660 Ain't it?

00:17:39.280 The bloodbath continues on the 8 p.m.

00:17:41.980 ratings and beyond.

00:17:43.920 The latest numbers are in for Monday night, and they are just as devastating as they have

00:17:49.740 been for the two weeks since he left.

00:17:52.120 The overall in Tucker's hour, $1.6 million.

00:17:58.700 When Tucker was in the spot, his average over the last two weeks he was on the air was $3.1 million.

00:18:06.580 Okay.

00:18:07.380 Down to $1.6 million now on Monday.

00:18:09.400 In the key demo of 25 to 54-year-olds, Tucker was averaging for the two weeks prior to them

00:18:14.840 booting him.

00:18:16.280 Um, I get it?

00:18:19.800 $382,000.

00:18:21.600 On Monday, they pulled a $161,000.

00:18:25.040 A $161,000.

00:18:28.440 That's awful.

00:18:29.740 That's embarrassing.

00:18:31.140 They know it.

00:18:31.940 And it's, it's ruining the entire primetime.

00:18:34.300 Hannity comes up next, also down $171,000.

00:18:37.380 He lost to Maddow.

00:18:38.800 They continue to lose to MSNBC and CNN on various nights.

00:18:42.760 Uh, and the averages are just awful.

00:18:44.440 Overall, we took the Tucker's last two weeks on the air versus the two weeks since he's

00:18:50.280 been gone.

00:18:50.760 And the 8 p.m. time slot is down 50%, 49% in the 8 p.m. overall and 60% in the demo.

00:19:01.920 They've lost half of their older viewers and they have lost nearly two-thirds of their younger

00:19:07.900 viewers.

00:19:09.780 Think about that.

00:19:10.640 Nearly two-thirds of their younger viewers.

00:19:12.300 I could go down the list.

00:19:13.620 It's affecting all hours.

00:19:15.180 Uh, the 7 p.m. is down 35%.

00:19:16.740 This is, again, the two weeks before he left versus the two weeks after.

00:19:19.560 Here, 7 p.m. is down 35, 8 p.m. down 60.

00:19:22.440 This is in the demo.

00:19:23.600 9 p.m. down 41, 10 p.m. down 32, 11 p.m. down 25.

00:19:28.240 The whole primetime's been blown up thanks to this boneheaded decision.

00:19:32.500 So you go ahead, Fox, and you try to have a 19-month battle with Tucker over whether he

00:19:39.880 needs to sit on the sidelines and not add his voice to the national conversation when he's

00:19:43.220 giving you back the money, when all he wants to do is news commentary.

00:19:46.620 Let's see how that goes for your two-thirds of the audience, which has fled.

00:19:52.600 By the way, I took a look at Newsmax just to see how they're doing.

00:19:57.480 The last two weeks when Tucker was in his seat, the 8 p.m. on Newsmax, in the overall,

00:20:04.220 they were getting 148,000.

00:20:06.320 In the demo, they were getting 20,000.

00:20:08.700 Now the overall on Newsmax is up to 473, and they've doubled their demo up to 46, which

00:20:16.420 for Newsmax is good.

00:20:17.340 So they've doubled their demo and what?

00:20:19.580 Tripled their overall.

00:20:21.000 So Newsmax is the beneficiary of a lot of the older viewers, and I think the digital lane

00:20:24.980 has been the beneficiary of a lot of the younger viewers.

00:20:27.700 Our numbers are up huge.

00:20:28.680 A lot of conservative media up huge right now.

00:20:31.620 I don't know that Fox gets them back.

00:20:33.740 I really don't.

00:20:34.480 Fox is not the behemoth it used to be.

00:20:35.900 It's not the monopoly it used to be.

00:20:37.160 It's got a lot of meaningful competition out there, and their swagger needs to be dialed 0.99

00:20:42.220 back a little because abusing their top talent is now having real-life consequences for them.

00:20:48.640 Joining me now, one of the most brilliant minds in Silicon Valley, David Sachs, happens

00:20:53.000 to be a lawyer, but is better known as a venture capitalist who runs Kraft Ventures and a co-host

00:20:58.300 of the popular All In podcast, also is a close friend of Elon Musk.

00:21:04.220 So he's a great person to talk to about all of this.

00:21:06.940 Welcome back, David.

00:21:07.760 Great to see you.

00:21:09.020 Good to see you, Megan.

00:21:10.180 Thanks for having me.

00:21:10.780 What's your reaction to Tucker's move last night?

00:21:15.120 Well, it's interesting.

00:21:15.780 I think the most interesting part of this to me was the deal-no-deal aspect of this.

00:21:21.440 You have Tucker first announcing he's bringing his show to Twitter, that it would be a show

00:21:26.080 very similar to the one he did on Fox.

00:21:28.440 And then as we learned more details, we found out from Elon that actually Tucker is operating

00:21:34.500 under the same terms and conditions as every other user of Twitter.

00:21:38.600 There is no special deal.

00:21:40.400 He said there's no signed deal.

00:21:42.280 There's no contract.

00:21:43.320 In other words, it's just that Tucker will have the opportunity to earn the same rewards

00:21:48.240 on Twitter as every other user.

00:21:50.620 Those rewards being the ability to use Twitter subscriptions.

00:21:53.860 So monetizing a subscription base.

00:21:56.720 And then Elon also announced that creators would have a rev share on advertising that

00:22:01.400 they generate, which I think is a new announcement.

00:22:04.280 I think he's alluded to it before, but that is a new opportunity for creators on Twitter.

00:22:09.240 So it's very interesting to me that Tucker here is not signing a deal, a traditional media

00:22:17.040 deal.

00:22:17.400 He's not going to a new company.

00:22:18.860 There were all these $20 to $30 million a year, $100 million offers that were being

00:22:26.200 lobbed at him, but it would have required him to make a deal with them similar to the

00:22:32.060 deal he had with Fox.

00:22:33.360 And obviously, he didn't want to do that.

00:22:35.820 He didn't want to be subject to the rules and strictures of another media company.

00:22:42.540 He wanted to work for himself.

00:22:44.500 And he's gotten completely independent.

00:22:46.720 And again, I think what's interesting about this is that Tucker is going to use the same

00:22:51.680 tools that are available to us citizen journalists that the top rated professional in the industry

00:22:58.660 feels like the same tools that I get to use on Twitter are good enough for him.

00:23:03.800 So that, to me, is a real watershed in the industry.

00:23:06.380 We're kind of moving away from major media companies being at the center of everything to

00:23:10.520 more of a creator-centric economy here.

00:23:14.880 Can we spend a minute on Elon?

00:23:17.420 Because I was thinking about this the other day.

00:23:20.220 The amount of impact this guy has had on the national conversation cannot be overstated.

00:23:26.100 I have been on a tear lately, David, about women and what we are and what we are not and

00:23:34.260 rejecting some of the crazy gender nonsense that's being shoved down our throats and saying

00:23:40.940 things like, you know, Kelly J. Keene's, what is a woman, an adult human female, period.

00:23:46.760 That's the end of it.

00:23:48.580 I've been tweeting about it.

00:23:49.740 I've been posting pictures about it.

00:23:50.960 I've been doing segments about it that get posted on Twitter.

00:23:53.480 None of this could have happened pre-Elon Musk.

00:23:56.980 And I think that there's a shift in the national gender conversation, not because of me.

00:24:01.580 I'm just saying because, like, in part because of Twitter.

00:24:04.060 You got Riley Gaines on there tweeting out every day this week, she's calling out a female 0.99

00:24:08.500 athlete like Serena Williams saying, where are you?

00:24:11.460 Why aren't you supporting women in sport and their rights to not compete against biological

00:24:15.720 men?

00:24:16.220 Like, Twitter's had a major role in changing that conversation, which was actively being

00:24:22.420 suppressed by old Twitter.

00:24:25.140 And now you got the Tucker thing, embracing this, understanding this is a place where he

00:24:28.900 can say what he wants to say without somebody muzzling him with the hand over the mouth.

00:24:33.140 Now, there's a sea change going on right now.

00:24:37.200 Right.

00:24:37.800 Well, I think one of the reasons why Tucker feels like he can bring his show to Twitter

00:24:41.960 and use Twitter as his primary platform is because he knows he won't get censored.

00:24:46.180 So if he was going on a platform like YouTube, he just can't trust that the, you know, euphemistically

00:24:53.320 called Trust and Safety Division, which is basically the censorship division of Google, won't

00:24:58.200 censor him, especially when he's criticizing big tech and companies like Google.

00:25:02.200 So I think that this is a major enabler.

00:25:05.960 The fact that Elon is committed to free speech means that the platform he owns is much more

00:25:13.780 viable and acceptable to Tucker, you know?

00:25:17.180 And now there are some others.

00:25:19.660 You have Rumble, for example, but at a different level of scale.

00:25:23.420 And the fact that Twitter is really the only big tech company at this level of scale that's

00:25:28.500 willing to guarantee free speech, I think makes it uniquely desirable to someone like

00:25:34.000 Tucker.

00:25:35.100 And I think that if not for Elon, then yeah, I think maybe it would have been the case that

00:25:39.980 he would have to go sign another, you know, major media deal of the kind he had at Fox.

00:25:44.640 So it does change the game quite a bit that Elon's willing to defend free speech.

00:25:48.820 That's the thing.

00:25:50.460 I mean, I don't, is there a greater free speech warrior in America right now than Elon

00:25:54.860 Musk? 0.97

00:25:56.700 No, I mean, and, you know, especially given that it's really all downside for him, right?

00:26:02.520 I mean, he doesn't really gain anything by being so out there defending free speech.

00:26:09.160 In fact, his other companies have already been threatened.

00:26:11.060 Remember, he was excluded from the EV summit that the White House did.

00:26:15.060 You know, they clearly see him as an enemy.

00:26:17.740 You had President Biden at the White House podium saying, you know, investigate this guy.

00:26:22.040 We need to be looking more closely at him.

00:26:24.040 There have been murmurs about the FCC restricting SpaceX's ability to put up more satellites.

00:26:33.200 So he is definitely facing all sorts of political retaliation or appraisals because of this position

00:26:39.660 he's taking on free speech.

00:26:40.960 And so, yeah, it's, but he's doing it because he genuinely believes in the principle.

00:26:45.920 That's really all that's in it for him.

00:26:48.840 And yeah, that, that I think makes it pretty amazing.

00:26:52.440 And if it weren't for Elon, we wouldn't know anything about, about the government's involvement

00:26:58.020 in the suppression of, of speech.

00:27:00.160 You know, again, we had the Twitter files get released.

00:27:02.960 That was a hundred percent Elon's decision.

00:27:04.820 And we learned that, you know, that it wasn't just a matter of corporate bias here where

00:27:11.400 the executives of Twitter wanted to suppress people on the other side of the political

00:27:16.500 spectrum that they disagreed with.

00:27:18.100 They were being encouraged to do so by the, you know, by permanent Washington, by the deep

00:27:23.740 state.

00:27:23.980 You had 80 FBI agents coordinating with them, pointing out posts that they wanted taken down.

00:27:29.120 You had weekly meetings between, uh, Twitter's trust and safety department and the FBI and

00:27:36.140 Homeland security and the, uh, the state department and even, you know, uh, maybe even the CIA.

00:27:44.060 So, you know, we learned all sorts of really disturbing details about the way that our government

00:27:49.440 is involved in censorship.

00:27:51.480 And again, that only happened because Elon was willing to open up the Twitter files.

00:27:55.620 What do you make of the mass exodus of viewers from Fox and what I described as, you know,

00:28:03.720 the loss of its monopoly in conservative media?

00:28:06.740 Just you look at media and your availability as a conservative viewer of, or even just, you

00:28:12.940 know, center viewer, what's out there for you today versus just 10 years ago, David, it's,

00:28:19.400 it's a whole new world.

00:28:22.200 Completely.

00:28:22.640 I mean, you have so many more alternatives now.

00:28:25.280 I mean, basically the podcasting world is, you know, it's, it's, it's like, um, cable,

00:28:31.360 but with an infinite number of, of channels and you can tune into whoever you want.

00:28:35.340 You can get that content distributed to you and you have so many choices now.

00:28:39.780 And so there's really not a huge need to go to Fox.

00:28:42.560 I'd say that Tucker's show was the main reason that many, many people tuned into Fox, certainly

00:28:47.620 in the younger demographic.

00:28:48.660 His show was, I think, uniquely capable of reaching young people and, um, and even Democrats,

00:28:56.300 uh, and young Democrats.

00:28:57.460 So it was, it was a unique draw for Fox.

00:29:00.380 And just as a, speaking as a business person, I really can't fathom Fox's decisions, business

00:29:06.520 decisions here, you know, that, that they thought they could fire their, uh, their most important

00:29:12.840 host, their top rated host, uh, on their network.

00:29:16.280 And really, and I think in the history of cable news and that they could do it in the

00:29:19.800 way they did, and there wouldn't be blowback.

00:29:21.600 I just can't fathom the business decisions they made.

00:29:24.960 And then to try and think that you can make it better by, you know, dumping an oppo file

00:29:29.820 on him.

00:29:30.500 I don't really understand again, that the business logic of that, all you're going to do is

00:29:34.140 antagonize and alienate your viewer base.

00:29:37.020 It doesn't do anything to, to woo those viewers back.

00:29:39.640 I mean, who are they trying to appeal to with, with that oppo?

00:29:43.080 I mean, the New York times likes the oppo dump, but I don't think the viewers do.

00:29:48.240 So I just can't fathom the business decisions that they're making here.

00:29:52.980 Um, it's a very strange to me and I don't, uh, you know, you're, you're talking about the,

00:29:57.980 maybe the motive here is the dominion settlement.

00:30:00.700 The, the idea that dominion demanded this as part of the settlement and then dominion has

00:30:06.440 come out saying, no, we didn't, I actually believe we didn't insist.

00:30:09.860 We didn't insist.

00:30:10.980 Yeah.

00:30:12.240 Yeah.

00:30:12.800 I, I, you know, I tend to believe dominion in this.

00:30:15.000 I'll tell you why, because, um, because Tucker's firing costs Fox more than that $800 million.

00:30:23.180 Um, you know, their stock price just the day that they fired him went down by something

00:30:26.860 like a billion dollars.

00:30:28.640 So, you know, Fox lost more by firing Tucker than they did in that settlement.

00:30:33.180 And dominion doesn't gain anything by the firing of, of Tucker.

00:30:37.320 Maybe they don't like Tucker, but, you know, Tucker was not the problem from dominion standpoint.

00:30:41.780 You know, if you look at during the, there were other hosts were far more sympathetic

00:30:47.260 to Sidney Powell and brought her on.

00:30:49.200 And by contrast, Tucker dismantled Sidney Powell and all the text messages that were revealed

00:30:54.900 show is that Tucker said, Hey, I caught Sidney Powell in a lie, just like I expected to.

00:31:00.060 And he was calling her names.

00:31:02.120 I'm sure dominion agrees with.

00:31:03.500 So of all the, the people that dominion of all the hosts on Fox at dominion would have

00:31:08.600 a problem with, I don't see why it would be Tucker, but more importantly, they don't

00:31:12.280 gain anything.

00:31:13.040 They don't, you know, there's not a compensating benefit to dominion on the level that there

00:31:19.020 is a cost to Fox by.

00:31:20.720 So in other words, if you're in a settlement negotiation, right.

00:31:23.560 You know, I can understand why dominion would demand 800 million, and I can understand why

00:31:27.740 Fox would not want to pay that 800 million, but I don't understand how they could reach

00:31:32.000 agreement on a point like firing Tucker because it costs Fox a billion and dominion, dominion,

00:31:37.480 sorry.

00:31:38.040 Yeah.

00:31:38.320 Dominion makes zero off that.

00:31:40.120 So just as a matter of negotiation, I don't understand how there can be a meeting of the

00:31:44.160 minds on that point.

00:31:45.060 It doesn't make sense to me.

00:31:46.260 I agree with you.

00:31:47.140 I've, I've doubted this is the reason all along.

00:31:50.520 I'm just basing my update today on, you know, letting people know what they're saying that

00:31:54.920 Tucker was apparently, but can I say one of the thing, the fact that it's now apparently

00:31:58.640 wound up in the lawyer letter, you know, the true nasty ground, this is how you send a real

00:32:02.760 nasty ground, not what happened with Wilson Sonsini with a CYA letter to dominion and to

00:32:07.920 media matters from Fox.

00:32:09.020 Like, Hey, you better really stop printing all the, all the bleak stuff.

00:32:12.740 You know, we're really kind of mad about you doing the leaks.

00:32:15.140 Wink, wink.

00:32:15.800 Um, what's interesting about it is if they really are going to go after Fox saying you

00:32:20.720 made Tucker promises about dominion, you promise not to smear him in connection with

00:32:24.780 any settlement, and you promise that you would protect his texts from leaking to the public.

00:32:29.920 Um, then that reopens everything about dominion in any litigation between Tucker and Fox that

00:32:37.840 allows Brian Friedman to depose Rupert Murdoch and Lachlan Murdoch and Viet Dinh GC and say,

00:32:44.260 what was the reason?

00:32:46.080 Why did you settle for 800 million with dominion, with dominion voting machines?

00:32:49.760 What, what was it?

00:32:50.740 You have to tell us.

00:32:51.540 And this whole, like, we're not going to tell Tucker why we fired him.

00:32:54.420 That's out the window too.

00:32:55.680 What was the reason?

00:32:57.160 You have to say, here you are under oath.

00:33:00.100 So all these like obfuscations will fall away.

00:33:03.180 And it's yet another reason why they're not going to do it.

00:33:06.640 There, there will be no litigation or arbitration between Tucker and Fox news.

00:33:10.640 Fox is going to fold.

00:33:13.400 Yeah.

00:33:13.840 I mean, I, I agree with you that they just don't want to go there.

00:33:15.940 I mean, it's going to further, further alienate their viewer base.

00:33:18.520 And this is not something they want to litigate.

00:33:20.520 I would assume.

00:33:21.860 And, but, but I think to, to the point, to one of the points you made earlier, this was

00:33:26.520 a termination.

00:33:27.220 I mean, Fox put out a press release saying we've parted ways.

00:33:30.280 What does parted ways mean to you?

00:33:32.160 It means to me, they fired someone there.

00:33:34.920 It's a separation there.

00:33:36.200 They're done.

00:33:37.340 So, you know, in Silicon Valley, we would call this a constructive termination, whether you

00:33:41.940 have formally terminated someone you've constructively terminated them.

00:33:45.300 You've basically put them on the bench, you've canceled their show, you have announced to

00:33:52.060 the public that you're no longer in business with this person, and then you're, you know,

00:33:57.360 presumably leaking things that hurt them.

00:33:59.860 This is a constructive termination in California.

00:34:02.500 At least I know that this non-compete would never be enforced.

00:34:05.000 I can't speak to New York law, but I do know in California, because this is where we do

00:34:09.800 business, there's no way that this non-compete would be enforced.

00:34:15.300 And I feel pretty confident that this would be seen as a constructive termination.

00:34:19.120 Well, you know what else?

00:34:19.660 Let's say it's not a constructive termination.

00:34:21.160 Let's say, no, it wasn't.

00:34:22.860 He's still employed at the company.

00:34:23.840 And we know technically he's still employed at Fox.

00:34:26.780 Okay.

00:34:27.300 So he, and let's say there was no quote constructive termination.

00:34:31.060 Then it's a hostile work environment.

00:34:33.040 He's sitting there and an executive vice president of the company is leaking under his lawyer's

00:34:39.120 good faith belief and mind for whatever it's worth.

00:34:41.960 Um, day after day, confidential documents about Tucker, confidential tapes involving

00:34:48.220 Tucker and his staff trying to smear him with the New York times and other outlets day after

00:34:53.600 day after day while he has to sit there.

00:34:55.200 She's created a hostile work environment for the guy.

00:34:57.300 How's he supposed to go to work every day?

00:34:59.680 Uh, knowing this woman's there doing nothing other than ginning up bad will for him inside

00:35:05.260 the building and out.

00:35:06.360 Yeah, I mean, I think this is just, uh, it's an untenable situation for Fox.

00:35:13.080 I would just assume they want to be done with it as soon as possible.

00:35:15.860 Um, you know, it's weird.

00:35:17.600 Yeah.

00:35:17.960 I mean, you would think they just want to move on.

00:35:19.940 Um, so yeah, they don't because I'll tell you how I know they don't.

00:35:23.520 Um, this is from the New York times.

00:35:24.860 Uh, on Monday, they report Mr. Carlson had a conversation with the Fox Corp executive

00:35:30.960 chairman, Lachlan Murdoch, to discuss a possible exit from the company.

00:35:36.060 Okay.

00:35:36.800 If that happened, then obviously Lachlan Murdoch did not solve it.

00:35:42.780 Obviously Lachlan Murdoch did not say, you know what, Tucker, we'll let you go.

00:35:46.340 You know, thanks for your service.

00:35:47.680 Let's shake hands.

00:35:49.020 You know, we'll pay you out or we won't pay you out, but yes, you can have your freedom.

00:35:52.240 Um, that didn't happen because it was Tuesday that Tucker had to send the nasty Graham to 0.87

00:35:57.780 the general counsel and to Irina Briganti.

00:36:00.080 So Lachlan obviously didn't get it done on Monday night and they're, I don't know that

00:36:06.120 they know what they're doing, but I think what they're, they're operating David to me,

00:36:09.580 like the old Fox, like the Roger Ailes Fox, the swagger of the Roger Ailes Fox when they

00:36:13.840 were the only game in town.

00:36:15.140 And if you were conservative, you had to go on Fox.

00:36:17.160 And if you were a host who had all leaned right or wanted to say right wing things, you

00:36:20.440 had to go on Fox.

00:36:21.300 There was no other place to go.

00:36:22.540 And if you were a viewer, you had no other options.

00:36:24.920 Those days are gone.

00:36:26.080 They are not the behemoth they used to be.

00:36:28.560 There are plenty of other places for a Ron DeSantis, for a Trump to get their message out,

00:36:33.560 for viewers to consume media that's fair and balanced, uh, and for hosts to, to plant their

00:36:38.880 flag, whether it's Twitter or independent media, what have you.

00:36:41.980 And they need to understand that they just, they don't have the power to be the bullies.

00:36:45.740 They once were, we're too powerful over in our lane.

00:36:48.680 It, it, it's a whole new world.

00:36:50.560 All right.

00:36:50.880 I still, the last word stand by much more to discuss with David Sachs quick break.

00:36:54.060 And then we're back.

00:36:56.780 Twitter was already under fire from misinformation, disinformation, all out lies, anti-Semitism,

00:37:02.100 racism.

00:37:02.440 Before Elon Musk took over.

00:37:04.820 I think this is the point.

00:37:06.060 It is a free fall.

00:37:06.880 It's what Elon Musk wants to provide.

00:37:08.900 This move by Tucker may cement the idea of Twitter as a right-wing website.

00:37:13.740 And then they asked who is going to police Tucker now?

00:37:18.220 Welcome back to the Megyn Kelly show.

00:37:19.760 David Sachs of the All In Podcast and Craft Ventures is with me now.

00:37:22.940 Who, David?

00:37:23.600 Who, who will police him?

00:37:25.700 That's the left freak out over this deal.

00:37:28.440 Right.

00:37:28.840 Well, I remember when the New York times, uh, criticized, uh, unfettered conversations.

00:37:33.280 Remember that?

00:37:34.200 Um, it's similar.

00:37:35.260 I mean, the structure of the media industry that they want is they want all the major

00:37:40.200 creators to be working for big media companies that they either control directly or that they

00:37:45.160 can discipline through vexatious litigation.

00:37:47.600 That basically is a media structure that they want.

00:37:50.080 And what we have here is something very different, which is that, uh, creators like, uh, like

00:37:56.480 Tucker can simply self-publish, put their, um, content on a distribution platform like

00:38:02.340 Twitter and get an enormous distribution.

00:38:04.280 And so, yeah, of course they're freaking out about it.

00:38:06.360 Now, in that circumstance, uh, Tucker would still be liable if someone wants to sue him

00:38:12.200 for defamation or something like that, but Twitter would not be.

00:38:16.460 I think this is another very interesting, uh, ramification of the fact that there is no

00:38:21.480 signed contract here.

00:38:22.780 Tucker is just another user of the Twitter platform.

00:38:26.520 There is no rights deal.

00:38:27.780 There's no upfront payment.

00:38:29.280 And so therefore, uh, Twitter has section two 30 protection.

00:38:33.580 They have distributor liability.

00:38:35.360 They are not a publisher.

00:38:37.460 And I think that's going to be really important going forward.

00:38:40.760 I think we're seeing that companies that are subject to publisher liability will be subject

00:38:45.820 to a never ending stream of litigation.

00:38:49.260 And, um, I mean, this is where maybe I feel a little bit of sympathy for, for Fox, even

00:38:52.660 though they totally mismanaged the whole Tucker thing is that it seems like they're being sued

00:38:56.620 in a never ending way.

00:38:58.300 Now, Tucker could still be sued, but at least Tucker will control his lawyer's decisions that

00:39:04.340 he will be able to defend himself.

00:39:06.340 He will be able to decide if and when to settle and what the terms of any settlement would be.

00:39:11.400 He's not going to be subject to the Fox litigation department.

00:39:14.500 I think that's really important.

00:39:16.360 I think it's gonna be a really important part of independent media going forward.

00:39:20.800 And I think it's really important that all conservatives and Republicans understand the

00:39:25.540 importance of section two 30 in this alternative media structure.

00:39:31.020 It is kind of funny to see the left freaking out that Tucker so soon has resurfaced.

00:39:35.500 You know, AOC said she worried that like the hand and a Marvel movie coming back out of the

00:39:39.920 grave, he'd be back.

00:39:41.260 Of course he's going to be back.

00:39:42.440 And you as a public figure, as a, as a congressman shouldn't be lamenting that this should still

00:39:48.280 be a country where you can hear alternate views.

00:39:51.180 Even if you find them terrifying, no one brings these points home.

00:39:54.480 Like my friend Gad said, I played a soundbite last week of him over the, the Navy drag queen

00:40:00.400 spokesperson.

00:40:01.160 You know how this is a whole new approach by the Navy.

00:40:03.900 They're now going to twerk their way out of military confrontations.

00:40:08.140 He hayweighed in on the, the freak out by the left on the Tucker Elon collaboration.

00:40:13.020 I got to show you just some of it just for fun.

00:40:14.700 As you all know, I was very, very afraid when Elon Musk took over Twitter because he was

00:40:22.300 going to support the very dangerous and white supremacist idea of freedom of speech.

00:40:28.820 So that already was terrifying, but now I find out that the ultimate white supremacist and

00:40:38.700 real anti-Semite Tucker Carlson is going to be relaunching his show on Twitter.

00:40:47.780 This is unbearable.

00:40:50.660 I hope that occasional cortex AOC weighs in soon and puts an end.

00:40:56.100 We cannot, it is too dangerous for a free society to support the ethos of freedom of speech.

00:41:04.260 I think Tucker is coming to take me.

00:41:06.300 I got to go by.

00:41:08.340 He's under his desk.

00:41:10.720 But who is this?

00:41:11.720 Who is that?

00:41:12.360 His name is Gad said he's a professor in Canada fighting the good fight from inside the belly

00:41:17.540 of the beast, David, with all these woke professors, which he's not.

00:41:21.320 So it takes courage for him to post these videos.

00:41:23.860 I love them because no one has quite the humor and intellect combo that he has.

00:41:29.000 All right.

00:41:29.360 Well, he makes an interesting point there, which is that he says that in a free society can't

00:41:34.160 tolerate freedom of speech.

00:41:35.260 That is the view of AOC and the, you know, the former censorship department at Twitter and

00:41:42.640 the Senate, you know, Judiciary Committee and on and on.

00:41:46.400 I mean, all the people who want to restrict free speech and don't want to see Tucker be

00:41:51.220 able to use Twitter as a distribution platform.

00:41:54.880 I mean, this is, these are the tactics they use is they do not want to have the debate.

00:41:58.740 They want to suppress the debate.

00:42:00.400 As you know, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

00:42:02.680 is the one Democrat who is vocally opposed to censorship and in favor of free speech.

00:42:08.320 As he recently said throughout the history, if you're the ones who are on the side of censorship,

00:42:14.500 you're always the bad guys.

00:42:16.700 The good guys are never in favor of of the good guys are never in favor of censorship.

00:42:22.360 They're always in favor of free speech.

00:42:25.000 And so, you know, this is really a matter of these these ruling elites basically do not

00:42:30.700 want to have a debate in our society.

00:42:31.960 They really want to suppress the debate.

00:42:33.620 Well, it's the same thing as the left now freaking out that Trump's doing a town hall

00:42:38.920 on CNN tonight, freaking out.

00:42:41.300 They are very angry.

00:42:43.120 I'll give you just a couple of examples.

00:42:44.860 Roland Martin, just so we're clear, CNN is about to do a town hall with Donald Trump,

00:42:49.200 a twice impeached man who openly cheered an attack on our government and who was just

00:42:52.420 found guilty of sexual assault, defaming the same woman and lying about it.

00:42:55.960 This is your guy at GOP.

00:42:57.780 You've got Andrew Cuomo accuser Lindsay Boylan retweeting, quote, CNN will soon host a sexual

00:43:03.580 abuser who's under indictment, being investigated for both insurrection and mishandling top secret

00:43:08.420 documents.

00:43:09.420 Shameful stuff pushing for boycotts of CNN by people like Keith Olbermann and so on.

00:43:14.740 They don't want to see him.

00:43:17.040 Can I get you to comment at all on the verdict we got yesterday by a civil jury, not a criminal

00:43:22.780 case, finding that Trump did not rape anybody, but did abuse E.

00:43:28.260 Jean Carroll back in 1996, we think, exercised wanton disregard for her and defamed her, awarding 0.93

00:43:36.340 her some five million dollars in damages.

00:43:39.080 They are going to appeal.

00:43:41.020 Your thoughts on it?

00:43:41.580 Because some are saying this is it.

00:43:42.640 This is it.

00:43:43.380 Trump cannot.

00:43:44.120 He cannot be the nominee.

00:43:44.880 Well, I wouldn't go so far to say he can't be the nominee, but I do – so I understand

00:43:53.960 what Trump supporters are saying is that they're saying that this is part of a larger witch

00:43:58.300 hunt that includes Alvin Bragg and all these other prosecutions, that Trump has a better

00:44:03.540 case that he was actually the one who was defamed, that Trump can't get – or conservatives

00:44:10.040 in general can't get a fair trial in New York or Washington, D.C.

00:44:13.580 So – and that, you know, they point to the many holes in this case.

00:44:17.900 There was no real evidence other than her telling a couple of friends this happened, you know,

00:44:24.920 27 years ago.

00:44:26.160 So I understand all those arguments.

00:44:28.940 Nonetheless, I do think that this is just a little bit more incremental baggage for Trump

00:44:35.140 to drag into a general election.

00:44:37.520 And, you know, Ryan Jerdusky had a good Substack post today explaining just the electoral math

00:44:44.840 on what's required for Trump to win in 2024 if he's the nominee.

00:44:49.120 He has to flip three of five states that he lost in 2020.

00:44:55.000 And when you actually look at, you know, what those states are and what it would be – what

00:44:58.640 would be required for him to be able to do that, it is a pretty uphill battle.

00:45:02.380 I mean, Trump does have electability problems, particularly with, I'd say, suburban voters,

00:45:08.960 suburban women voters.

00:45:10.420 I know a lot of centrist business types who would be willing to vote for DeSantis,

00:45:16.100 would be willing to give really any new Republican a chance, but they just consider Trump to be

00:45:22.660 beyond the pale.

00:45:23.780 And, you know, I'm not saying that this in any way, you know, justifies the – you know,

00:45:30.080 all this litigation that's been brought against Trump.

00:45:32.320 You know, in fact, I think Democrats are doing it for a reason.

00:45:35.220 I mean, you read Hoffman, who funded the litigation as a big Democratic donor, and he's not a dummy,

00:45:40.260 so he's doing this for a reason.

00:45:42.580 But nonetheless, I do think that Republicans could nominate somebody who is more electable

00:45:47.740 than Trump in 2024.

00:45:49.660 I'm a little concerned they're going to blow it, to be honest.

00:45:52.720 I know a lot of your viewers won't want to hear that, but that's kind of where I come

00:45:56.080 out on this.

00:45:56.820 They're used to hearing all sorts of views on this show, so that's a good thing.

00:46:00.120 I will say he won't be helped by the lapdog media for the left.

00:46:04.860 Here's just one example of how Gayle King, who's supposedly a straight news journalist, 1.00

00:46:08.820 reacted to the news that he was found liable when E. Jean Carroll went on her show this

00:46:15.520 morning, and E. Jean Carroll revealed what Gayle King had just said to her.

00:46:18.620 Watch this clip.

00:46:20.160 You have never wavered over these years.

00:46:22.500 The jury came back for many people surprisingly fast.

00:46:25.560 What did you think when you heard their decision?

00:46:28.180 I had the exact reaction you just had before the camera came on.

00:46:32.460 You said when you heard it, you went, hooray!

00:46:35.320 That's how I felt inside.

00:46:39.380 Tells you everything you need to know.

00:46:40.700 Yeah, you know, there's going to be a steady stream of this litigation against Trump, and

00:46:47.320 I, you know, I think he makes some valid points that he's being subject to persecution that

00:46:53.000 no other candidate's ever been subjected to, that, you know, I think especially with the

00:46:57.620 Alvin Bragg case, which was extremely weak.

00:46:59.480 I think, I think, on the other hand, I think that there are ways in which Trump, to some

00:47:04.760 degree, brings this on himself because he, you know, he's a little bit undisciplined in

00:47:10.500 his statements.

00:47:11.460 So...

00:47:11.700 You think?

00:47:12.060 Um, yeah.

00:47:14.460 Yeah.

00:47:15.060 Well, I do think it's interesting, like, that clip was interesting to me because it does

00:47:19.100 show what Trump's up against.

00:47:20.160 The media is 100% rooting against him.

00:47:21.980 They hate him.

00:47:22.740 And, you know, saying to the plaintiff in this case, yay!

00:47:27.460 It espouses, shows her bias.

00:47:30.420 By the way, this woman is part of the two-person team that is supposed to be CNN's answer to

00:47:35.560 its fair and balanced problem.

00:47:36.840 Remember, they're supposed to be getting more fair to Republicans.

00:47:39.440 What did they do?

00:47:40.080 They hired Gayle King to do a once-a-week show partnered with Charles Barkley.

00:47:45.160 That's your answer?

00:47:46.440 Okay.

00:47:46.960 Well, it doesn't seem like she's all that open-minded to the man who's probably most

00:47:51.360 likely to be the GOP nominee.

00:47:52.980 You might want to work on it.

00:47:54.660 David stays with us.

00:47:55.500 I have got to ask you about this crazy profile of the new Liz Holmes in the New York Times. 0.94

00:48:00.900 No longer Elizabeth.

00:48:01.820 Now Liz.

00:48:05.640 So, David, a couple of numbers I wanted to get into with you before we leave the discussion

00:48:09.080 of Trump and his legal troubles.

00:48:12.380 There's a report.

00:48:14.160 This is also via Axios today.

00:48:16.660 They say, for the first time in a long time, top Republicans and Democrats telling us the

00:48:19.440 same thing in the same words.

00:48:20.640 Trump looks impossible to beat for the Republican nomination.

00:48:23.340 A stunning finding in that Washington Post poll.

00:48:25.820 Even though majorities think Trump should face criminal charges, you, of course, you know,

00:48:33.080 he's been indicted and arraigned by New York DA Alvin Bragg in connection with the Stormy

00:48:37.260 Daniels payments.

00:48:38.740 Even though majorities think he should face criminal charges, 18% of those who want him

00:48:46.340 arrested still back him over Joe Biden, 20% who think he's a criminal still would pull

00:48:56.760 the lever for him over Joe Biden.

00:48:58.820 And I'll tell you, I mean, my own belief is because of things like the economy that that

00:49:05.160 Washington Post poll that they referenced showed, among other things, on the economy.

00:49:08.920 Americans say Trump did a better job than Biden, 54 to 36%.

00:49:14.200 So they might plug their nose and vote, but they're ready to vote non-Biden one way or

00:49:19.060 the other.

00:49:19.580 What are your thoughts on how the economy is going to affect the decision the voters are

00:49:22.520 facing right now?

00:49:24.280 Well, it is going to have a huge impact for sure.

00:49:26.520 It always does.

00:49:28.360 But let's go back to the midterms that we just had around.

00:49:33.840 It was May of 2022.

00:49:38.780 Biden was also at historically unpopular poll numbers.

00:49:42.640 His polls were at a low.

00:49:45.160 And then we had the Dobbs decision.

00:49:47.560 And nevertheless, what was expected to be a red wave petered out and kind of turned into

00:49:52.400 a puddle.

00:49:53.520 And so things can change fast in politics.

00:49:55.620 I wouldn't just look at today's poll numbers.

00:49:58.080 The reality is we've A-B tested this, as we would say, in tech land.

00:50:05.380 Trump's candidates, preferred candidates, all lost, every single one of them, in the

00:50:09.560 midterms.

00:50:10.320 He himself lost in 2020 to Biden.

00:50:14.060 And so it's – and let me just say about the midterms, at that same time that those

00:50:20.820 results came in, three-quarters of the country thought we were on the wrong track and we're

00:50:24.780 already in a recession.

00:50:25.660 So the fundamentals did point to a red wave.

00:50:29.420 There should have been a red wave.

00:50:30.580 The out-of-power party always gains in the midterms.

00:50:33.660 And yet the Republicans lost the Senate, even to an even bigger majority.

00:50:41.020 So things can change rapidly in politics.

00:50:43.920 And the fact of the matter is that Trump is – he's extremely unpopular too.

00:50:49.320 I mean he's maybe the only politician in America who's more unpopular than Joe Biden.

00:50:53.200 Those same polls show that.

00:50:56.460 So it's pretty clear that I think the public would love a choice other than Biden-Trump again.

00:51:00.920 I think they're fatigued by that choice.

00:51:02.600 Yep.

00:51:02.680 And I think that as unpopular as Biden is, Trump is the one politician who could lose

00:51:08.900 to him.

00:51:09.300 Now, it's true that if we're in a very deep recession by 2024, that that does change the

00:51:15.700 game and it may swing some states into Trump's column.

00:51:19.080 But I think he's going to need something like that, quite frankly.

00:51:23.040 Are we likely to be?

00:51:24.380 The buzz now is that – keep your eye on the commercial real estate sector because they're

00:51:29.140 getting hit worse than anybody with these federal interest rate hikes that we continue

00:51:32.860 to see from the Fed.

00:51:35.060 Plus, nobody's working in the buildings now thanks to the COVID hangover, the banking crisis

00:51:40.240 that is or isn't, depending on your viewpoint.

00:51:43.540 We had you and Vivek on debating that not long ago.

00:51:46.080 So how do those two things play out over the next few months, well, year plus?

00:51:51.060 Yeah.

00:51:51.380 I think there's a very substantial chance that we'll be in a deeper recession or just

00:51:56.820 a major recession by next year.

00:51:59.540 So you're right.

00:52:00.160 The last time I was on your show, we were discussing this banking crisis and I was debating

00:52:04.860 Vivek about that.

00:52:06.980 And his claim was that there is no banking crisis.

00:52:09.380 This was a Silicon Valley problem and that I was exaggerating the problem because I wanted

00:52:15.020 a bailout and this was – the situation at SVB was uniquely caused by a bunch of reckless

00:52:22.860 startups and it was sort of Silicon Valley fat cats who were pushing for this Fed intervention.

00:52:27.880 And I was making the point that SVB was a canary in the coal mine and that we do have

00:52:32.660 a larger crisis in the banking sector as a result of higher interest rates.

00:52:37.240 That has caused both sides of the banking ledger balance sheet to be challenged.

00:52:42.820 On the one hand, you've got deposits fleeing the system.

00:52:46.300 So over a trillion dollars deposits have left for things like money market funds because

00:52:49.880 they're paying 5%.

00:52:50.940 And then on the other side of the ledger with respect to their assets, they've all been

00:52:56.080 massively impacted by the increase in interest rates.

00:52:58.960 So first, at Silicon Valley Bank, the reason why they went insolvent, the reason they went

00:53:05.180 under, it was not because they invested in risky derivatives or some other crazy product.

00:53:09.580 It was because their T-bills, their long-dated bonds went down massively in value as a result

00:53:16.760 of the interest rate increase.

00:53:18.620 Now, the Fed created a program to solve that.

00:53:21.140 It was called the Bank Term Funding Program where they would loan money to banks at par value

00:53:26.920 of these bonds to help provide more liquidity.

00:53:29.180 But the Fed has not solved the other problem on bank balance sheets, which, as you mentioned,

00:53:33.640 is commercial real estate.

00:53:35.740 A lot of these regional community banks, they've made huge numbers of loans.

00:53:40.720 They're the main lender for small business borrowing and for commercial real estate.

00:53:47.520 And the commercial real estate sector is extremely challenged right now.

00:53:53.020 And they are carrying these loans on their books still at par value.

00:53:58.240 And the reality is, if they had to mark these things to market, I think it would show huge

00:54:02.960 losses.

00:54:04.080 So I do think that there's still an enormous amount of stress in the banking system.

00:54:08.560 None of the sort of underlying currents that are causing that stress, the high interest rates

00:54:13.900 on the one hand, and then the challenged asset portfolios on the other, none of those things

00:54:19.840 are really getting better on their own right now.

00:54:22.080 So I think there are still likely more shoes to drop here.

00:54:26.800 It's interesting because, of course, before it could ever be a Biden versus Trump or a Biden

00:54:31.080 versus DeSantis, those two guys are going to have to hash it out with people like Nikki Haley, 0.93

00:54:34.720 like Vivek, like Tim Scott on the GOP side.

00:54:38.700 And this has potentially advantaged Trump.

00:54:41.260 Tell me if you think I'm wrong.

00:54:42.320 Just because the economy was so booming under him as president, DeSantis doesn't have that

00:54:47.740 to point to yet.

00:54:49.700 Florida's doing well, but, you know, it's not a national test.

00:54:52.720 Just to give you a couple more numbers, there's a new morning consult poll out today.

00:54:59.080 Trump has his biggest lead yet over DeSantis.

00:55:01.480 Certainly things can change, but we're getting we're getting into the process now.

00:55:04.760 We're going to have presidential debates in a few months.

00:55:06.480 Trump, 60 percent, DeSantis, 19 in December.

00:55:11.020 That same poll had Trump up with a 20 point lead.

00:55:13.540 OK, but now it's 31.

00:55:16.980 So that's wait a minute, 40.

00:55:19.440 Is that 41?

00:55:20.640 60 minus 20 is 40.

00:55:23.040 Yeah, so it's 41 and it was 20 before.

00:55:26.420 Could be a slight outlier.

00:55:27.580 The average of all polls has Trump up by 30.

00:55:31.260 But man, oh man, you know, if you're telling DeSantis what he should do, looking at this number,

00:55:36.000 these numbers, what's the answer?

00:55:37.980 I mean, I guess number one, get in.

00:55:40.780 Right.

00:55:41.620 Well, yeah.

00:55:42.300 So in fairness to DeSantis, he's not in the race yet.

00:55:45.540 And so he's been a punching bag by Trump and his surrogates.

00:55:49.400 They've been beating up on him and he hasn't really been responding.

00:55:52.080 So, yeah, he's got to get in the race and he's going to have to start punching back.

00:55:55.480 He's going to have to start making the case for why Trump shouldn't be the nominee.

00:55:59.180 I think the electability issue is one of them.

00:56:02.440 I think there are also things you could point to about Trump's record.

00:56:04.420 I mean, so it's true that we had a much better economy under Trump.

00:56:08.560 But it's also the case that we had trillion dollar deficits every year under Trump.

00:56:12.500 He was a big spender.

00:56:14.240 He did not focus on budget discipline.

00:56:17.420 Biden's been even worse, to be clear.

00:56:19.420 Biden's running two trillion dollar deficits.

00:56:21.520 But, you know, DeSantis can make the argument that, hey, I presided over a state budget where

00:56:26.520 we balance the budget every year and we've had a booming economy.

00:56:29.800 And we've you know, we understand the things that it takes to create that economy in Florida.

00:56:35.000 So, you know, being pro business, having a favorable tax environment, things like that.

00:56:40.420 So I think, you know, DeSantis has arguments to make.

00:56:42.860 There's no question.

00:56:43.540 Obviously, the polls show that he's an underdog.

00:56:46.020 But, you know, in fairness, he hasn't he's on the race yet.

00:56:49.220 So he's going to have to get in there and make the case.

00:56:51.980 The effort to rehab Kamala Harris, since she's nobody's idea of a lift on the ticket, has begun.

00:56:58.820 Now that the Democrats seem to be accepting that Biden is running again, as he said in his little

00:57:03.040 video announcement, and she's going to be his running mate. 1.00

00:57:05.840 We've seen it popping up a little bit more.

00:57:07.720 A couple of things here.

00:57:08.700 They're naming her AI czar, AI.

00:57:12.120 She's going to be the artificial intelligence. 0.98

00:57:14.420 Oh, God.

00:57:15.000 The plan is to launch 25 research institutes across the U.S. that will seek assurance from

00:57:20.720 four companies, Google, Microsoft, ChatGPT.

00:57:23.940 I don't know who the fourth is to participate in a public evaluation of AI.

00:57:30.540 She like I think my dog Stradwick might know more about AI than Kamala Harris.

00:57:36.060 I'm concerned about this choice.

00:57:38.720 Elon Musk tweeted out, maybe someone who can fix their own Wi-Fi router wouldn't be too

00:57:43.540 much to ask.

00:57:44.940 Do you have faith that Kamala Harris is the one to oversee this particular challenge?

00:57:52.460 No, no.

00:57:53.940 This has been my concern all along about the haste with which we are moving into seeking

00:57:59.060 to regulate AI.

00:58:00.640 I understand that there are some dangers associated with AI.

00:58:04.960 There's things you can point to like the potential for people to create deep fakes, create fraud

00:58:09.540 or other crimes using those deep fakes.

00:58:12.520 I think Elon has a much deeper concern, which is at some point, the pace of innovation could

00:58:17.420 give rise to an AGI, artificial general intelligence, that is effectively a new species.

00:58:23.540 It's a super intelligence that could decide it wants to replace humans.

00:58:27.080 It would be smarter than us and it might have the capability to do that.

00:58:30.900 I think that's a more far off sort of risk of AI.

00:58:35.040 I think that's not something that's going to happen in the next few years.

00:58:37.720 But I understand why he thinks that.

00:58:40.540 I mean, there are a lot of smart people who think that is a real danger.

00:58:44.880 But the problem I have with regulation is we just don't know yet how to even approach that

00:58:49.400 problem from a regulatory standpoint.

00:58:51.600 There's a lot of conversation in the industry around this topic of what's called alignment,

00:58:55.700 which is how do you create an AI or an AGI that is aligned with humans as opposed to something

00:59:02.280 that might want to replace humans.

00:59:03.760 But even the people who are working on the alignment problem don't really understand it

00:59:07.180 yet.

00:59:07.420 They don't really know how to proceed.

00:59:08.880 So the idea that people in Washington are going to understand it better than the industry

00:59:13.380 and know how to regulate it, you know, and I think Kamala Harris is not unique in this. 1.00

00:59:18.840 I think, you know, we've seen it at all these tech hearings that, you know, they barely

00:59:23.700 understand how these products work.

00:59:25.540 So, no, I don't think Washington knows how to proceed at all in terms of regulating AI.

00:59:30.240 And instead, I think what's likely to happen here if we do try to regulate it is industry

00:59:34.880 capture.

00:59:35.440 It's going to be the big tech companies who are able to afford all the lobbyists and the

00:59:40.420 political contributions, and they are going to influence the conversation and they're

00:59:44.600 going to skew it towards themselves and their interests.

00:59:47.520 And it's going to be like all these other industries where, you know, whether it's,

00:59:52.280 it's, you know, like, again, what Bobby Kennedy Jr.

00:59:55.380 points to is, you know, the, the, the FDA seems to be controlled by big pharma and the,

01:00:02.120 the EPA seems to be controlled by Monsanto and so on.

01:00:06.520 Now, the line, he points, you know, the, the military industrial complex seems to have

01:00:09.860 a huge influence on our foreign policy.

01:00:11.700 It's going to be big tech that effectively controls or influences whatever new regulatory

01:00:16.960 agency we create for AI.

01:00:18.540 And the, the, the, the person who's going to pay the price for that is the, the entrepreneur.

01:00:23.120 It's going to be the, the two founders who are working in a garage trying to create something

01:00:27.400 new who now have to go to Washington to get permission for their new business idea instead

01:00:32.900 of something they could have just done without permission.

01:00:35.220 And that's going to be, that's the big risk that I see here.

01:00:37.920 If we move too fast in regulating this and creating some new regulatory agency over AI,

01:00:42.840 I think it'll, it could really destroy the thing that makes the American economy special,

01:00:48.540 which is a permissionless innovation.

01:00:51.940 I'm really not that comforted by your assurance that we're not going to have the supercomputer

01:00:55.120 intelligence in the next few years, the next few, how long do we have?

01:01:00.120 Like a few hundred, that would have brought me some comfort, get, get my, my, myself and

01:01:04.560 my kids.

01:01:05.620 All right.

01:01:06.300 While we're off over in the tech world, I've got to ask you about this New York times profile

01:01:09.880 of not Elizabeth Holmes, Liz, Liz Holmes.

01:01:14.160 She's just like you or me.

01:01:15.900 She's just like any regular citizen mom helping people out. 0.99

01:01:20.680 Although she's been convicted and is supposed to go to prison for 11.25 years. 0.60

01:01:26.100 This is what the times rights.

01:01:28.500 I mean, it's clearly an attempt to re by her, by Holmes to rehab her image as she's looking

01:01:32.740 at heading off to prison.

01:01:34.640 Liz Holmes wants you to forget about Elizabeth is the headline. 0.99

01:01:37.600 The black turtlenecks are gone. 0.80

01:01:39.120 So is the voice.

01:01:40.200 As the convicted Theranos founder awaits prison, she's adopted a new persona, devoted mother.

01:01:46.300 This is the person behind the Theranos thing.

01:01:48.680 Like you can just with a finger prick of blood, do the same kind of testing as a tube of blood

01:01:53.180 that you would get at quest labs or someplace like this.

01:01:55.900 And she at 19 years old came up with a revolutionary technology to do this.

01:02:00.420 And it was a fraud.

01:02:01.580 That's, that's basically how it imploded.

01:02:04.360 Ms.

01:02:04.580 Holmes speaks in a slight, slightly low, but totally unremarkable voice.

01:02:08.120 No hint of the throaty contralto she used to use while running her defunct blood testing

01:02:14.080 startup Theranos.

01:02:15.480 They go on to say, I tell her that I heard Jennifer Lawrence pulled out of portraying

01:02:20.100 her in a movie.

01:02:20.620 She replied almost reflectively, they're not playing me.

01:02:23.600 They're playing a character I created.

01:02:26.820 I believed it would be, she said, this public persona she created, how I would be good at

01:02:33.160 business, how I would be taken seriously and not as a little girl or a girl who didn't

01:02:36.660 have good technical ideas.

01:02:38.120 Uh, they go on to say to point out she was found guilty in January, 2022 on 11 count 11

01:02:42.540 charges that she defrauded Theranos investors out of more than a hundred million dollars

01:02:46.340 by saying she had working technology when she didn't.

01:02:49.160 Uh, and then the writer goes on to say, okay, she's Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes just filed

01:02:53.600 a last minute petition to remain free pending an appeal.

01:02:56.320 And that automatically delayed her report date to prison by an undetermined amount of time. 0.90

01:03:00.620 This is all BS because honestly, this woman, I think she had her second baby who was only 1.00

01:03:04.880 days old when she gave this interview, so she could avoid going to prison.

01:03:07.260 Who has a baby knowing that they're going to be without their mother when they know they're

01:03:10.940 going to prison for a decade.

01:03:12.000 I'm sorry, but it's extremely selfish.

01:03:13.620 But according to the piece, we're supposed to feel sorry, I guess for her, because what

01:03:17.980 it says is.

01:03:18.920 I realized I was essentially writing a story about two different people.

01:03:22.660 There was Elizabeth celebrated in the media as a rock star inventor whose brilliance dazzled

01:03:26.320 illustrious rich men and whose criminal trial captivated the world.

01:03:29.800 And there is Liz as her husband, Mr. Evans, and her friends call her the mom of two who

01:03:34.660 for the past year has been volunteering for a rape crisis hotline.

01:03:38.560 I can't.

01:03:39.420 I mean, come on, David.

01:03:40.940 Don't they all go volunteer for the rape crisis hotline as they're about to go off to jail

01:03:44.640 and asking the judge to keep them out?

01:03:46.280 This is such a fake, obvious attempt at rehab.

01:03:48.780 The writer's somewhat self-aware about it.

01:03:51.040 But will it work?

01:03:53.500 Well, this rebranding reminds me a little bit of when Philip Morris changed his name to

01:03:57.680 Altria Group.

01:03:58.860 Whenever you feel the need to do a rebranding, it's usually not a good sign.

01:04:02.440 And I think the thing to understand about Elizabeth Holmes or Liz Holmes, I guess, now is that she's

01:04:09.340 in no way representative of female founders in Silicon Valley.

01:04:14.360 I don't really buy this argument that she was required or even pressured to engage in the fraud

01:04:21.480 that she engaged in.

01:04:22.340 Let's remember it was a fraud.

01:04:24.880 You know, you're allowed to sell a big picture and a big vision.

01:04:28.720 That is not illegal in Silicon Valley, even if it doesn't work out, even if it ends horribly.

01:04:34.720 But she did a lot more than that. 0.75

01:04:36.680 She basically forged documents. 1.00

01:04:40.940 She doctored lab results.

01:04:44.160 She misrepresented the current state of her product to investors.

01:04:47.820 I mean, she engaged in a fraud. 1.00

01:04:49.600 And I think it's...

01:04:50.140 Patients were hurt.

01:04:51.900 Yeah, exactly.

01:04:52.920 And it could have been even worse.

01:04:55.380 So she caused real harm here.

01:04:57.220 And I, you know, we have invested in lots of female founders in Silicon Valley. 1.00

01:05:04.020 None of them have felt the need to engage in any of this kind of conduct or behavior.

01:05:08.740 And I think it's really, it's pushing an agenda.

01:05:12.020 And it's really demeaning to give any credence to this idea that she needed to do this because

01:05:18.000 it's so hard for female founders. 0.99

01:05:20.720 You know, every other female founder that we've worked with in Silicon Valley, they, you know, 1.00

01:05:25.360 they do not engage in this kind of behavior or fraud or this sort of fake personal rebranding.

01:05:32.280 So...

01:05:32.600 You're right.

01:05:33.200 I mean, you're right.

01:05:34.500 She's playing the woman card, right? 1.00

01:05:35.720 Like, I had to do all those things because I was a woman.

01:05:37.600 I wanted to be taken seriously.

01:05:39.200 Oh, and by the way, I'm now a new mother.

01:05:41.160 Oh, and also I volunteer on the rape crisis line.

01:05:43.840 She's desperately playing the woman card to try to keep herself out of prison. 1.00

01:05:48.460 Well, once again, what she's doing is appealing to the media.

01:05:51.340 So, you know, Silicon Valley actually wasn't fooled by Elizabeth Holmes.

01:05:55.480 If you go back and look at who actually invested in Theranos, major Silicon Valley firms did

01:06:01.580 not lead her funding rounds.

01:06:03.880 And I can tell you that nobody in my poker game in Silicon Valley invested in the company.

01:06:07.920 There were conversations, like skeptical conversations about the company.

01:06:11.900 People thought it was suspicious.

01:06:13.660 Some of the things we were hearing from, you know, job candidates who interviewed there

01:06:18.180 and thought there was something funny going on.

01:06:20.560 You know, none of the professional investors in Silicon Valley at major firms who could actually

01:06:25.460 diligence the company were fooled by Elizabeth Holmes.

01:06:29.040 This is before, you know, the, you know, before she was brought down.

01:06:32.820 And the people who are fooled, quite frankly, were the media.

01:06:36.340 It was all those media outlets who put her on their cover where she was wearing like the 1.00

01:06:42.540 Steve Jobs turtleneck because they want to promote the story so badly that she was the

01:06:47.640 next Steve Jobs that we'd have this female Steve Jobs. 1.00

01:06:50.340 I think not really understanding what it was about Steve Jobs that made him so special and

01:06:54.460 nothing to do with the way he dressed.

01:06:55.900 It was about the products he created.

01:06:57.820 But this is the story that the media wanted to promote.

01:07:00.660 And so I think, you know, and so really the people who caused Elizabeth Holmes and allowed

01:07:06.740 her to get so big and for that fraud to be so much larger than it otherwise should have

01:07:12.100 been, it was not Silicon Valley that did this.

01:07:14.300 It was the media who really blew her up into a much bigger figure.

01:07:18.740 And in a way, this is what the New York Times is indulging.

01:07:21.220 And again, they're allowing her to spin this narrative that it's not, you know, that again,

01:07:25.800 that she in some way should be absolved for her crimes because she had it so tough as

01:07:33.060 a female founder. 0.99

01:07:33.940 And again, I would just point to the fact that she's not representative at all of female 1.00

01:07:38.620 founders in Silicon Valley who don't feel the need to engage this behavior.

01:07:43.840 They go on to say, just to the point, she said she believed that making herself the poster

01:07:47.660 girl for women in tech put a huge target on her back. 1.00

01:07:50.460 She regrets being the subject of fawning magazine covers.

01:07:55.640 What does she think would have happened if she hadn't garnered so much attention as the

01:07:59.440 second coming of Silicon Valley?

01:08:01.280 Ms. Holmes does not blink.

01:08:02.560 We would have seen through our vision.

01:08:04.340 In other words, she thinks if she'd spend more time quietly working on her inventions and

01:08:07.660 less time on a stage promoting the company, she would have revolutionized healthcare by now. 0.97

01:08:11.600 Word of caution, she is still working on healthcare related inventions and would continue to do so

01:08:16.900 behind bars.

01:08:18.180 Okay, good luck with that.

01:08:19.500 Buyer beware.

01:08:20.460 And I'll just end with this.

01:08:21.880 The writer says that one person that Liz and her husband, Mr. Evans, suggested the writer speak

01:08:27.540 to, she went.

01:08:28.980 One of these friends said Ms. Holmes had genuine intentions at Theranos and didn't deserve a

01:08:33.420 lengthy prison sentence.

01:08:34.880 Quote, then this person requested anonymity to caution me not to believe everything Ms.

01:08:40.800 Holmes says.

01:08:42.060 There you have it.

01:08:43.600 David Sachs, we believe everything you say.

01:08:46.400 Thanks for coming on and saying it.

01:08:47.740 Yeah.

01:08:48.320 Thank you.

01:08:48.740 Thanks for having me.

01:08:49.440 Great to see you.

01:08:50.460 Okay, we're going to have our legal panel up next on a couple of things going on in the

01:08:53.880 news.

01:08:54.100 The latest on that subway death with the Marine who's now potentially facing charges and also

01:09:00.620 on the E. Jean Carroll verdict.

01:09:02.740 What does it mean?

01:09:03.700 Also, George Santos just got arrested and he's in federal custody.

01:09:06.480 Whoa.

01:09:06.920 We'll tell you why.

01:09:07.460 There's more legal news to get to, including the verdict in the E. Jean Carroll, Donald

01:09:14.760 Trump civil case that came down yesterday, which I mentioned to you.

01:09:17.180 Trump announced that he does plan to appeal and we've got George Santos now under indictment

01:09:22.980 and in custody.

01:09:24.920 How's that going?

01:09:26.220 We've got an excellent Kelly's court panel to break it all down for you, plus some other

01:09:29.200 legal stories.

01:09:29.760 Joining us now, two criminal defense attorneys, Jonna Spilboer and David Wall, two longtime

01:09:35.160 favorites of the Kelly's court franchise.

01:09:38.520 All right.

01:09:38.680 So the viewers are pretty much up to speed on what happened with E. Jean Carroll.

01:09:41.380 Thanks to my discussion with David Sachs.

01:09:43.260 Want to give you just a little flavor of E. Jean and her lawyer on the morning shows

01:09:48.700 today, how they sounded and what their messaging is in the wake of this civil verdict in her

01:09:53.820 favor.

01:09:54.780 I feel fantastic.

01:09:57.220 I have.

01:09:58.140 It is.

01:09:58.880 Yesterday was probably the happiest day of my life.

01:10:01.560 It was this five foot three and wily female attorney and this elderly 79 year old advice 1.00

01:10:10.940 columnist who are finally holding Donald Trump libel.

01:10:15.440 I promise you that we will collect those damages.

01:10:17.620 What would you want to say to him now?

01:10:20.220 I said it to Joe Takapina yesterday.

01:10:23.840 He came over to congratulate me.

01:10:26.020 He put out his hand and I said, he did it and you know it.

01:10:32.340 Way to stay classy in the bit in the wake of your big win.

01:10:36.360 All right.

01:10:37.020 So, David, I'll start with you on this because we haven't seen you in a while.

01:10:40.000 Welcome back.

01:10:41.000 What do you make of the chances Trump has on appeal?

01:10:46.580 Well, he's got a great chance on appeal.

01:10:48.340 I don't think she'll ever collect a penny of this ridiculous award, Megan.

01:10:53.840 You know, I found fascinating about it yesterday was this jury said that Miss Carroll was lying

01:11:00.980 about being raped by President Trump.

01:11:03.160 But on the other hand, because President Trump said she was lying about him raping her, he

01:11:10.000 defamed her and ordered him to pay $3 million.

01:11:13.920 Now, how does that work?

01:11:15.680 Exactly.

01:11:16.160 The other thing is, Megan, for good measure, they decided, well, you know, we'll concoct

01:11:21.640 a verdict of sexual battery because we've got to find some way to damage him for 2024.

01:11:28.260 And so they came up with that verdict as sort of a gimme.

01:11:31.020 And, you know, none of this is going to hold up in a court of appeal.

01:11:34.360 I suspect that if it isn't resolved in lower courts of appeal, it will end up in the Supreme

01:11:39.100 Court, just like everything regarding Trump does.

01:11:42.880 And honestly, this is what you get, you know, when you have a jury poll that's 80 percent

01:11:48.160 hates Trump, 80 percent people that vote against him.

01:11:51.820 And here you are.

01:11:53.720 87 percent.

01:11:55.020 87 percent for Joe Biden in the borough of Manhattan.

01:11:57.700 And so but, John, the allegations by E.

01:12:00.760 Jean Carroll, though, you know, it was 30 years ago.

01:12:02.960 She couldn't even remember the year.

01:12:04.400 She confessed to the jury.

01:12:05.760 She she didn't say no.

01:12:08.880 Nonetheless, they went with her.

01:12:10.300 She alleged that he penetrated her digitally and then raped her.

01:12:15.160 So it is possible that this could be upheld on appeal saying, OK, maybe they believed the

01:12:20.420 first allegation, which wouldn't necessarily could be that would be sexual battery, not rape,

01:12:25.500 but not the actual rape claim.

01:12:27.680 And therefore, that's what all this award was for.

01:12:30.620 I don't know.

01:12:31.540 I think, you know, for me, the fact that they let in the Access Hollywood tape, the fact

01:12:36.660 that they let in all these other women who said me, too, which New York is doing more

01:12:40.520 and more.

01:12:40.820 They did in the Harvey Weinstein case.

01:12:42.160 I mean, it just makes it impossible for a defendant to win these cases.

01:12:45.380 I agree.

01:12:48.060 And look at the legislation to begin with.

01:12:50.480 You know, I have to get this off my chest.

01:12:52.360 Kathy Hochul will not sign the Grieving Families Act, which would give an avenue for the 15,000

01:12:59.500 people who lost loved ones in nursing homes because of the mishandling of COVID under

01:13:03.380 Governor Cuomo.

01:13:04.140 She won't sign that, but she'll sign this Adult Survivors Act, which gives a small window

01:13:09.200 for people who allege they were sexually assaulted as adults.

01:13:12.600 The statute of limitations has run.

01:13:14.800 It gives them a small window to go after who, Megan. 0.95

01:13:17.220 It only gives relief to people who have a deep pocket to go after.

01:13:22.940 If Joe Schmo sexually assaulted somebody in college and now whoever that is wants to get

01:13:29.780 relief in the courts under this act, is she going to bother?

01:13:33.560 Is she going to bother going after somebody who assaulted her in college allegedly, now is 1.00

01:13:38.300 on divorce number two, making $1.20 a year selling insurance?

01:13:41.460 No.

01:13:41.760 So this is just a virtue signaling legislation that Kathy Hochul signed.

01:13:46.780 For what reason?

01:13:48.020 It's perfect.

01:13:49.220 Now it's perfect because now this will follow Donald Trump well into the 2024 campaign and

01:13:56.000 he won't ever pay a dime.

01:13:57.400 And if he does, it'll be well after he's reelected or this 2024 or somebody else is in office.

01:14:03.320 It just won't.

01:14:03.800 You're right.

01:14:03.920 We're going to hear about it.

01:14:04.780 It's going to be it's going to be put into the questions that he gets asked at the primary

01:14:11.600 level debates.

01:14:12.400 And if he becomes the nominee at the at the general election debates as well.

01:14:16.360 I mean, you're right.

01:14:17.120 It is going to haunt him.

01:14:18.440 But, you know, the thing is, and he can say it's unfair and he can say he didn't know her.

01:14:22.000 But the whole process to Trump was really unfair because how are you going to defend somebody

01:14:30.200 as a criminal defense attorney or as a civil defense attorney with a 30 year old charge?

01:14:35.360 How we saw this unfold live when Brett Kavanaugh got accused.

01:14:39.060 Thank God that guy had those detailed little notebooks as a Supreme Court future justice might.

01:14:44.700 But I wouldn't have notes at 30 years ago where I was or what I was doing.

01:14:48.400 How is a man supposed to defend something like that?

01:14:52.000 No, and you're seeing right now, Megan, why this was not filed in a court of criminal

01:14:56.920 jurisdiction, because there's no way in hell it would have been sustained beyond a reasonable

01:15:01.940 doubt as a conviction.

01:15:03.480 That's that's what's going on.

01:15:04.540 There was no we don't have any surveillance video of that day in Bergdorf Goodman.

01:15:08.140 And the idea that somebody as famous as Trump would go into Bergdorf Goodman, into a dressing

01:15:12.380 room, rape a woman, then just walk out, saunter out the store like nothing happened.

01:15:16.960 She would never report to anybody, although her friends say they told her.

01:15:20.380 Her own sister said that she never told her no police report was ever made.

01:15:26.560 She decided to come forward with it in 2019, right in the heat of a political season that

01:15:31.820 when Trump was running for reelection and the incredible thing.

01:15:35.220 And Megan, you talked about a video being played of Trump during this trial.

01:15:38.940 I wonder if the video was played of Miss Carroll's appearance on Anderson Cooper a few years ago

01:15:43.400 when she said most women feel that, you know, rape is a sexy thing. 1.00

01:15:47.360 The rape is something they fantasize about.

01:15:50.140 And even even Anderson Cooper was stunned and had to go to a commercial.

01:15:53.160 We have that.

01:15:53.840 David, let's show the audience what you're talking about.

01:15:55.680 Stand by.

01:15:56.180 And then you don't feel like a victim.

01:15:58.480 I was not thrown on the ground and ravished, which the word rape carries so many sexual

01:16:03.600 connotations.

01:16:05.080 This was not this was not sexual.

01:16:08.220 It just it it hurt.

01:16:10.120 It just what it just you know.

01:16:11.700 But I think most people think of rape as a I mean, it is a violent assault.

01:16:16.440 It is not.

01:16:17.000 I think most people think of rape as being sexy.

01:16:20.780 Let's take a short break.

01:16:21.720 Think of the fantasies.

01:16:24.100 You think?

01:16:25.240 Go ahead.

01:16:27.520 I mean, Megan, was that played at the trial?

01:16:30.140 Because I'll tell you what, this entire claim, at least from Trump's perspective, is a fantasy.

01:16:35.640 And if she thinks that way, you've got to put into serious question whether she's got

01:16:40.940 all her marbles.

01:16:42.080 I mean, no sane woman would say something like that. 0.98

01:16:45.040 That was one of the most horrible, violent offenses you could suffer.

01:16:48.600 So what was that about?

01:16:49.940 She did have two contemporaneous witnesses who she told the story to, Jonna, at the time,

01:16:54.280 one of whom was a well-known newscaster who's got a lot of credibility in Manhattan, who

01:16:57.940 said, yeah, after it happened, she came to me and told me it happened.

01:17:00.400 I said this yesterday.

01:17:01.300 I stand by it.

01:17:01.900 It's amazing how the left totally credits those two witnesses in this case.

01:17:05.360 But when Tara Reid, Joe Biden's accuser, said she had a witness who came forward, and I've

01:17:11.140 spoken with this woman, said she came to me right after it happened and told me.

01:17:16.160 And there was a second witness Tara Reid had to. 0.99

01:17:17.940 Totally dismissed her.

01:17:18.920 Oh, that's not true.

01:17:19.680 You're a liar.

01:17:20.260 OK.

01:17:20.780 And that's where the politics may come in, because E. Jean Carroll also claims that she

01:17:26.840 was sexually assaulted by Les Moonves, another big media guy who used to run CBS.

01:17:30.720 She didn't sue Les Moonves, even though he, too, came out and said this was a lie.

01:17:36.260 That's what Trump said about E. Jean Carroll.

01:17:38.360 So why why Trump and not Moonves, who's also a deep pocket?

01:17:42.180 Could it be one is a politician who she doesn't like the politics of and one isn't?

01:17:47.720 That's got to be the only reason why.

01:17:52.640 You know, I can imagine I'm not saying this has happened, but I can imagine that we are

01:17:57.480 now in a place where somebody could approach her like Kellyanne Conway's ex-husband, like

01:18:03.580 a George Soros and say, look, do this for us and win or lose.

01:18:08.580 We'll take care of you.

01:18:09.920 But there's no need to do that with a Les Moonves who's not running for anything.

01:18:14.220 There's no need to do that for somebody who's not Donald Trump.

01:18:18.100 So was she motivated by financially and politically to do this?

01:18:23.860 Maybe.

01:18:24.380 We'll never find out, Megan.

01:18:25.920 Well, we kind of know.

01:18:26.920 We don't we kind of know because George Conway went to her and then you had this guy read.

01:18:31.960 What's his name?

01:18:32.800 Funding the litigation.

01:18:33.760 Who's this big Democrat activist?

01:18:35.520 I mean, we kind of know.

01:18:37.140 Hoffman, you know, I think I think it's a very strong possibility.

01:18:42.260 And it's you know, it's fascinating that that E.

01:18:46.800 E.

01:18:47.000 Carol can get on TV and compliment her lawyer for her size. 1.00

01:18:51.080 Like, what the hell is wrong with you?

01:18:53.400 Seriously.

01:18:54.500 So this is a farce.

01:18:56.000 It's a reason why Donald Trump didn't even bother to show up to defend this case.

01:19:00.460 He didn't want to be bothered.

01:19:01.820 It wasn't worth it.

01:19:03.280 You tell me, David, because there are a lot of even Republicans, but it's kind of the

01:19:08.260 never Trump or Republicans.

01:19:09.300 It's the anti-Trump Republicans, which are not necessarily the same saying, no, this is

01:19:13.680 going to be a serious issue for him.

01:19:14.900 This is going to be a serious issue for Donald Trump.

01:19:17.080 I don't know.

01:19:18.100 I just feel like he didn't even show up to defend it.

01:19:20.540 I feel like if I were Trump, I'd be like just saying what he's saying.

01:19:22.520 I don't know this person.

01:19:23.720 I didn't show up to defend it because it's B.S.

01:19:26.020 It was an anti-Trump judge, which is true.

01:19:28.640 And, you know, this woman, she didn't she didn't she said even in her mind, she couldn't

01:19:33.780 remember when it happened.

01:19:35.020 She didn't have any witnesses to it happening.

01:19:36.760 And even in her fantasy world, this is Trump's alleged defense.

01:19:40.920 She didn't even say no when this is like, is this really going to be held against him

01:19:45.440 by people who aren't already against him?

01:19:47.260 Yeah, a rape happening in a major department store.

01:19:50.400 Nobody saw a thing.

01:19:51.460 Nobody heard a thing.

01:19:52.480 No, it's not, Megan.

01:19:53.320 You remember the last time when the information came out with his conversation with Billy Bush,

01:19:59.040 I think it was, grabbed him by the P word.

01:20:01.820 That didn't hurt him.

01:20:02.900 I mean, then he just said, I'm sorry, I shouldn't have said that.

01:20:05.100 He admitted to that.

01:20:06.500 And it just strengthened his campaign.

01:20:08.200 People know at this point, the more piling on that goes on, the more unlikely it is that

01:20:14.620 any of these allegations are true.

01:20:16.760 Trump was impeached twice.

01:20:18.140 I mean, he's the leading candidate for the GOP now.

01:20:21.320 If those two events didn't hurt him, this sure as hell is not going to hurt him.

01:20:25.900 It's just going to energize his base, Megan, like most of this garbage does.

01:20:30.060 And so I suspect that next time we see some polling numbers, he'll be further up on DeSantis

01:20:35.120 and further up on Joe Biden.

01:20:36.920 Yeah, we just got that today.

01:20:38.380 He's up 40 points over DeSantis in the morning console, 40.

01:20:42.580 I've got to play the Trump deposition excerpt again, because it's just, I mean,

01:20:46.040 sorry, but it's TV gold on the Access Hollywood comments.

01:20:49.320 Can we watch this again?

01:20:50.280 It's unbelievable.

01:20:51.920 Sot 7.

01:20:53.820 I just start kissing them.

01:20:55.420 It's like a magnet.

01:20:56.740 Just kiss.

01:20:57.640 I don't even wait.

01:20:59.220 And when you're a star, they let you do it.

01:21:01.580 You can do anything.

01:21:03.140 Grab them by the pussy. 1.00

01:21:04.420 You can do anything.

01:21:05.480 That's what you said, correct?

01:21:06.320 Well, historically, that's true with stars.

01:21:08.980 It's true with stars that they can grab women by the pussy? 0.99

01:21:11.480 Well, that's what it's.

01:21:13.180 If you look over the last million years, I guess that's been largely true.

01:21:17.180 Not always, but largely true.

01:21:20.220 Unfortunately or fortunately.

01:21:22.860 And you consider yourself.

01:21:24.700 Yes, he considers himself a star.

01:21:26.320 It's unbelievable.

01:21:27.420 You know, unfortunately or fortunately, and it depends on your point of view.

01:21:30.720 You know, now this you you in any average race that would doom a man that would doom 0.75

01:21:38.320 any potential candidate, Jonna, but it doesn't doom Donald Trump.

01:21:41.360 It barely got even pick up even by the left wing media, which I actually found rather surprising.

01:21:48.420 Well, he's owning it.

01:21:50.360 And look, it's old news, right?

01:21:52.160 We heard this years ago before we elected him as president.

01:21:56.360 So, you know, who cares at this point?

01:21:58.960 It's nothing new.

01:21:59.840 It's nothing shocking.

01:22:01.680 So it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme.

01:22:04.880 All right.

01:22:05.040 Let me ask you a follow up on it, Jonna, though.

01:22:06.680 If you've cross examined many, many people in court, in deposition and so on.

01:22:11.020 Here is this other remark he made to the lawyer.

01:22:13.280 The female lawyer who, despite being short, did it all. 0.85

01:22:17.600 Here he is in the most infamous exchange from that whole deposition.

01:22:21.200 It's you guys know what it is.

01:22:22.820 Sat 8.

01:22:23.220 When you said in that video that Ms. Leeds would not be your first choice, you were referring

01:22:30.860 to her physical looks, correct?

01:22:33.600 Just the overall.

01:22:34.540 I look at her.

01:22:35.960 I see her.

01:22:36.700 I hear what she says.

01:22:38.460 Whatever.

01:22:39.320 You wouldn't be a choice of mine either, to be honest with you.

01:22:41.760 I would not, under any circumstances, have any interest in you.

01:22:47.900 I'm being, I'm honest when I say it.

01:22:50.500 She, I would not have any interest in. 0.96

01:22:53.360 So, Jonna, would you have let that, like, how would you have handled that?

01:22:59.120 I would have throat punched him because that's a big insult to any woman. 1.00

01:23:05.380 He should have, he could have used a little more charm against this adversary, but he knows

01:23:11.460 exactly what he's doing.

01:23:12.680 He knows how offensive it is to, to basically call a woman ugly, uh, and especially in a

01:23:18.380 professional setting.

01:23:19.360 He did that on purpose, you know, and what's it for whatever it's worth.

01:23:23.780 That's what he did.

01:23:24.920 Megan.

01:23:25.320 She's also an open lesbian. 0.95

01:23:27.280 So she, she's really not his type.

01:23:28.640 Go ahead, David.

01:23:29.720 When I'm sitting next to my client in a deposition like that, I wouldn't have throat punched him,

01:23:33.680 but those are the moments when you're kicking him, kicking his foot repeatedly, trying to

01:23:38.060 get his attention, trying to get him to stop.

01:23:39.700 Um, I, I love, I love president Trump.

01:23:42.320 I worked for him in 2016, as you know, he's a great guy, but he's sometimes brutally honest,

01:23:46.860 uh, to a fault.

01:23:48.120 And there's a great example.

01:23:50.100 Okay.

01:23:50.480 Let's move on to George Santos.

01:23:52.700 George Santos has been indicted, um, via the New York times, as well as the daily mail.

01:23:57.400 He surrendered to authorities at the federal court on Long Island Wednesday morning.

01:24:00.820 This is a U S congressman, of course, from Long Island after being indicted on 13 federal

01:24:05.760 charges, Eastern district of New York unsealed the indictment today.

01:24:09.240 24 hours after he appeared, um, to have no idea that he was even being charged seven counts

01:24:14.700 of wire fraud, money laundering, making false statements, public funds theft.

01:24:20.280 And it appears to cover just, I mean, a whole span of activity when he ran for Congress in

01:24:26.020 2020, when he ran for Congress this last time and one, um, taking people's public donations,

01:24:32.120 allegedly first campaign and allegedly using them for private funds, like his suits, um,

01:24:37.800 lying about his whole, like, or all of them.

01:24:40.160 I mean, this is the lists, like half the stuff he got accused of publicly about a year ago has

01:24:45.120 now come out as criminal.

01:24:48.460 You know what?

01:24:49.300 I got to say, I like this.

01:24:50.460 I like this prosecution.

01:24:51.620 Am I wrong, Jonna?

01:24:52.400 I hate to admit it.

01:24:55.560 You're probably not wrong.

01:24:57.120 I mean, he is a Republican and he's an unlikable guy.

01:25:01.460 Like we've known from the get go that he lied on his resume.

01:25:04.300 Now it seems to have gone well, well beyond that.

01:25:07.300 We can't tolerate that from a Republican or a Democrat.

01:25:10.420 So we're going to have to see how this plays out, but he doesn't have a lot of support

01:25:14.980 from either side, right?

01:25:17.300 So, uh, he's probably going to go down, um, fairly easily is my guess, but I don't know.

01:25:23.280 This is brand new.

01:25:24.060 So we'll have to wait.

01:25:24.600 Just to fill it in a little, David, they say he, um, at the height of the pandemic in

01:25:28.600 2020, he allegedly applied for and received unemployment benefits while he was fully employed

01:25:32.880 and running for Congress.

01:25:34.360 Uh, he, during his second run for Congress, pocketed campaign contributions and use that money

01:25:38.900 to pay down personal debts and buy designer clothing.

01:25:41.520 Again, these are allegations.

01:25:42.540 He'll have the chance to defend them.

01:25:43.980 At the time he was getting these unemployment benefits.

01:25:46.500 He was pulling in $120,000 a year from his Florida based investment firm and so on.

01:25:51.620 Then they say, uh, he told a political consultant to inform donors.

01:25:56.100 Their contributions were to elect him to Congress that led at least two donors to transfer 25,000

01:26:00.520 bucks to his campaign bank account.

01:26:02.400 He then took those funds, transferred them to his personal bank account and use them for

01:26:06.060 personal expenses.

01:26:07.140 They go on.

01:26:08.300 The indictment does says he overstated the income he got from one firm and altogether

01:26:13.060 failed to disclose the income he got from an investment firm during his first campaign.

01:26:18.300 He did the same thing during his second run for Congress on and on and on.

01:26:23.600 I mean, this is the same guy who remember he said his mother, he said she died on nine

01:26:29.320 11 that she was in her office in the South tower on September 11th.

01:26:33.380 And then he said, oh, she passed away a few years later when she lost her battle to cancer,

01:26:37.260 suggesting, you know, the fumes from ground zero.

01:26:40.460 Then he claimed on Twitter, nine 11 claimed my mother's life.

01:26:42.880 Okay.

01:26:43.260 Well, which is it?

01:26:43.960 Was she there on nine 11 and died?

01:26:45.280 Was it the fumes and the toxic waste?

01:26:47.140 No, it was neither because public employment records show only one employer for Santos's

01:26:51.680 mother.

01:26:51.940 It was imports by Rose, a company based in Queens, not lower Manhattan that closed in

01:26:57.140 1994.

01:26:58.560 Not 1994 was well before 2001, September 11th.

01:27:01.620 And there's also this is quoting from a Vanity Fair or Forbes piece.

01:27:05.400 I have both his sources.

01:27:07.000 There's also the awkward matter of documents indicating the mother was in Brazil on the

01:27:12.380 day of the attacks.

01:27:13.240 She wasn't there at all.

01:27:14.360 That's just one example.

01:27:16.620 I mean, Megan, if I were defending him, I may well be looking into an insanity play at

01:27:21.840 this point.

01:27:22.640 I mean, he's so off the charts with these claims and they're so obviously false on so

01:27:27.860 many levels.

01:27:28.920 That may be a good, that may be a good defense for him.

01:27:31.180 But Megan contrast this, however, with the, this speed and ferocity with which these charges

01:27:37.080 have been filed, contrast it with Hunter Biden, his ongoing, what, five, six year, seven

01:27:42.620 year investigation into also obvious wrongdoing.

01:27:45.840 They have the goods on him.

01:27:47.100 They're dragging their feet forever.

01:27:48.720 And for some mysterious reason, I'm sure it's not politics.

01:27:52.460 He has not even been charged.

01:27:54.920 So, hey, Merrick Garland, I know you're bitter.

01:27:57.920 I'm not making it this to the Supreme Court, but come on, let's see a little fair and balanced

01:28:04.340 administration of justice.

01:28:05.900 We are not seeing that here at all.

01:28:08.000 It's a great point, David, because this is a federal prosecution.

01:28:10.040 This is, this is, you know, that's under Merrick Garland's purview, as is the Hunter Biden

01:28:14.520 thing.

01:28:14.940 They've got Hunter Biden on tape, admitting he did some of these things, and yet they can't

01:28:18.880 make that case.

01:28:21.100 Exactly.

01:28:21.700 They've got the, they've got the document he signed to buy a gun.

01:28:24.320 We obviously falsified information.

01:28:26.400 It's right in front of them.

01:28:27.600 They're just dragging their feet and just throwing it on the back burner and hoping it

01:28:30.920 all goes away.

01:28:32.100 Nothing.

01:28:32.620 And you've got the president of the United States weighing in on that case, saying he did nothing

01:28:36.180 wrong.

01:28:36.480 Really?

01:28:37.120 Maybe you should keep your mouth shut about a potential criminal investigation of a family

01:28:42.100 member.

01:28:42.480 But no, he didn't.

01:28:43.920 All right.

01:28:44.060 Let's talk about Jordan Neely.

01:28:45.600 He is the man who was, I don't know if the word is choked out, but on the New York City

01:28:50.620 subway last week, he went on the train.

01:28:54.120 He was threatening the passengers.

01:28:55.960 He was loud.

01:28:56.780 He had been arrested in New York.

01:28:58.260 I've read both 44 times and 42 times, but over 40 times.

01:29:02.000 He heard a 67 year old woman. 1.00

01:29:03.760 He heard an elderly man.

01:29:04.780 He tried to kidnap a seven year old child, long, long record of run ins with law enforcement,

01:29:10.300 suicidality being put in mental health facilities, leaving drug use.

01:29:15.240 We could go on.

01:29:17.040 So the former Marine who got him down, had him in this chokehold, and there were two other

01:29:22.780 men, one of whom was a man of color and Jordan Neely was black and the Marine was white.

01:29:26.820 He is now saying, you know, I'm very sorry, but he was threatening me and he was threatening

01:29:32.100 other passengers on board that that train.

01:29:34.780 Now, the latest is that the Manhattan grand jury could reveal the could review the case

01:29:40.760 this week.

01:29:41.680 They are expected to be meeting this week in the case of this Marine veteran.

01:29:45.320 Um, and, you know, we could see an indictment as a result of that grand jury meeting.

01:29:52.220 The medical examiner has ruled this case a homicide, homicide.

01:29:58.020 And so what does that tell us, John?

01:29:59.980 The fact that the grand jury is going to convene and it's been ruled a homicide.

01:30:02.580 Yeah, that means that the grand jury is going to come back with something.

01:30:07.760 It's not murder as AOC has so ineloquently put on Twitter.

01:30:12.620 It's not anywhere near that.

01:30:14.340 We do have a right to defend ourselves and third persons in New York, uh, with an amount

01:30:21.060 of force that is relevant to the amount of force that is coming our way.

01:30:26.200 Now, I will say this as a, as a real person, not just a lawyer for a minute.

01:30:29.980 I was on a train three weeks ago, could have been Jordan Neely, could have been him.

01:30:35.400 The same exact scenario, Megan, same exact where a man was terrorizing the entire train

01:30:41.280 car, not because he was hungry, not because he needed a drink.

01:30:45.060 He was terrorizing the entire train car and nobody was around.

01:30:49.200 There wasn't a conductor to be found.

01:30:50.460 I sat there and plotted how I was going to use my product as a weapon, because that was

01:30:55.160 the only thing I had that could remotely resemble what I, and I'm serious.

01:30:59.120 I was going to put it between me and him, like get off the train.

01:31:02.060 I was scared.

01:31:03.280 And if I was scared, so were other people in that car.

01:31:06.320 What do you do?

01:31:08.140 And I'm sure that Jordan Neely probably had drugs in his system at the time he was being

01:31:12.420 subdued by this.

01:31:14.260 I'm going to call him a good Samaritan.

01:31:16.540 And I'm sure that that contributed to his death.

01:31:18.920 This is sad.

01:31:19.880 It's unfortunate.

01:31:21.160 And it didn't have to happen, not because we didn't need this good Samaritan.

01:31:24.560 But why are so many people with mental illnesses going unchecked in a city that's got a zillion

01:31:32.020 programs for them?

01:31:33.620 Why?

01:31:34.120 Why wasn't he behind bars?

01:31:35.540 Why didn't he stay behind bars when he was supposed to a year ago when he punched an elderly

01:31:40.020 woman in the face? 1.00

01:31:41.180 Why was he let go?

01:31:42.900 So if you want to start pointing fingers, not you personally, if we as a society want to

01:31:46.840 start pointing fingers, how about point him away from the good Samaritan and point him

01:31:50.660 to the reason why the Jordan Neelys of the world are allowed to terrorize law abiding 1.00

01:31:55.940 people?

01:31:56.760 Why?

01:31:57.700 We're down there like sitting ducks.

01:31:59.300 And meanwhile, his lawyers, of course, go on Al Sharpton's show with the following message

01:32:03.740 to the Marine, Daniel Penny, who is sorry that this man died, but says he was defending

01:32:08.340 himself and the other passengers on board.

01:32:10.160 Here's the lawyers for Jordan Penny's family.

01:32:13.920 Jordan Neely.

01:32:14.320 And I've made clear in my capacity as head of National Action Network, there is sufficient

01:32:19.820 evidence in this case to at the very least consider criminal charges against Mr. Penny

01:32:24.980 and the two holding down Jordan.

01:32:29.100 Daniel Penny's regret is coming too late.

01:32:33.080 And the police who showed up had access to Daniel Penny right there, the killer right on

01:32:37.620 the spot, had access to every witness that they needed to question.

01:32:41.340 This is an open and shut case.

01:32:44.480 The killer, David, open and shut.

01:32:46.740 You know, Megan, Mr. Penny is a decorated Marine as well.

01:32:53.040 He had to make a split second decision.

01:32:55.400 Could have been life or death.

01:32:56.820 What if Mr. Neely had pulled out a knife, pulled out a gun and killed someone?

01:33:01.460 How would Mr. Penny live with himself then?

01:33:04.120 And also, Megan, the big thing is this has to be done in the backdrop of every single day.

01:33:09.020 Twitter, on air, online, seeing videos of people being violently attacked by mentally ill, homeless,

01:33:17.540 violent people on subways, on trains, near subways, on the street.

01:33:22.420 It happens everywhere.

01:33:24.000 And it has to be considered as part of this evaluation by the grand jury.

01:33:28.280 And as John has said, did he have drugs in his system that precipitated his death?

01:33:32.840 I wouldn't be surprised at all if that's the case.

01:33:34.680 But you can't start calling someone a murderer who may have actually saved lives in what he did.

01:33:40.820 And clearly, there was no attempt or no intent to kill anybody.

01:33:46.020 He was trying to restrain him until they could figure out what to do with him.

01:33:49.420 And for whatever reason, he died.

01:33:52.340 But this is not a murder in any way, shape or form.

01:33:54.920 Otherwise, it's not, you know, manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter.

01:33:59.200 We, you know, you didn't intend to kill him, but you behave so recklessly and holding him for 15 minutes while he was down.

01:34:04.320 And at some point toward the end, not moving, that it was criminally reckless to the point where you're looking at a manslaughter charge.

01:34:11.540 Yeah.

01:34:11.900 And it might be.

01:34:13.320 Yeah.

01:34:13.560 If I had to predict if the grand jury is going to come back with anything, it'll most likely be that.

01:34:17.920 That, and, you know, and it's a shame that Daniel Neely has to, I forgot his name, sorry.

01:34:25.040 I know it's Jordan Neely and Daniel Penny.

01:34:27.040 They're so close.

01:34:27.960 I mess them up too.

01:34:28.840 Keep going.

01:34:30.120 It's a shame that he's probably going to have to face some sort of criminal prosecution for this because, again, he likely did save lives or save somebody from being harmed.

01:34:42.240 But how do you argue he feared for his life?

01:34:45.500 Because deadly force is only appropriate if you feel fear for your life.

01:34:48.940 It has to be that level.

01:34:49.940 How does he argue that on minute 13, on minute 14, on minute 15?

01:34:53.300 That's how they'll analyze it.

01:34:55.760 Well, I have a couple of things.

01:34:57.480 Number one, he did not think he was using deadly force, I guarantee you.

01:35:01.020 And if there had been some law enforcement, if we had cops again in the city and he didn't have to sit there for 15 minutes trying to subdue somebody,

01:35:09.640 then maybe this would not have happened.

01:35:11.540 But I'm sure he didn't intend to kill him.

01:35:14.200 He intended to hold him along with the other two helpers until police could arrive.

01:35:18.600 Where were they?

01:35:19.680 So I don't think the level of intent is going to be anything beyond an involuntary manslaughter if it's unfortunately that.

01:35:27.040 And those comments about being down there.

01:35:28.920 And Mr. Neely flat out said he would hurt somebody.

01:35:30.520 You know, he said it flat out.

01:35:32.080 That's true.

01:35:32.580 And how is he supposed to know how severe the hurt is?

01:35:35.260 Those comments about, you know, like, look what we all have to deal with, that really could go to jury nullification.

01:35:39.820 Even if they have him on the elements, it's like good luck finding a Manhattan jury that deals with what we all have to deal with down there and convincing them to put this guy in jail for protecting them.

01:35:49.180 You guys, it was a pleasure as always.

01:35:51.480 Thanks for being here.

01:35:52.820 All right.

01:35:53.260 Now, I want to tell you that tomorrow on the show, we are going to be joined and we're very excited to have Robert F.

01:35:58.320 Kennedy Jr. back.

01:35:59.300 Don't miss that.

01:36:03.120 Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. 0.94

01:36:05.300 No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

01:36:07.780 Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. 0.94

01:36:08.780 Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. 0.94

The Megyn Kelly Show - May 10, 2023

Tucker Carlson vs. Fox News Legal Battle, and George Santos Arrested, with David Sacks, Jonna Spilbor, and David Wohl ｜ Ep. 547

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript