The Dana Show with Dana Loesch - Absurd Truth: Megyn Kelly's Questionable Appearance On Tucker Carlson

Episode Date: January 8, 2026

 Dana reacts to Megyn Kelly’s recent interview with Tucker Carlson where she praised Nick Fuentes and peddled Candace Owens’ baseless conspiracy theories. GOP Rep. Brandon GILL completely DOMINATES Minnesota lawmakers over the Somali fraud scandal. Tim Walz insinuates Minnesota is at war with the federal government as AOC shoves herself in the situation. Thank you for supporting our sponsors that make The Dana Show possible…Relief Factorhttps://ReliefFactor.com OR CALL 1-800-4-RELIEFTry Relief Factor's 3-week Quickstart for just $19.95—tell them Dana sent you and see if you can be next to control your pain!Patriot Mobilehttps://PatriotMobile.com/DANA or call 972-PATRIOTSwitch to Patriot Mobile in minutes—keep your number and phone or upgrade, then take a stand today with promo code DANA for a free month of service!Humannhttps://HumanN.comKick off the New Year with simple, delicious wellness support—pick up Humann’s Turmeric Chews at Sam’s Club next time you’re there and see why they’re such a fan favorite!Byrnahttps://Byrna.com/DanaMake 2026 the year you protect your family with solid options—Get the Byrna today.WebRootTake your cybersecurity seriously! Get 60% off Webroot Total Protection at https://Webroot.com/DanaSubscribe today and stay in the loop on all things news with The Dana Show. Follow us here for more daily clips, updates, and commentary:YoutubeFacebookInstagramXMore Info

Dana Lashes Absurd Truth Podcast So what are some of the big podcasters talking about? I'm sure they're all over this story, aren't they? Let's play it. Aren't they all over this story? Let's play cut 23.

Let's just see if they're focusing on these very important stories as well. This is cut 23, please. He's very interesting and he's very smart and on a lot of things, there is value to be derived from that guy's messaging. I'm sorry, but he actually has a lot of things he talks about

that you're like, oh, this is not a bad point about our country? So that is, and I'm friends with both of them, friendly with both of them, Megan Kelly and Tucker Carlson, and they're discussing Nick Fuentes. Oh, and that was just yesterday, wasn't it? I mean, it seems like there's a lot of stuff happening that apparently they're not talking about. That's kind of interesting. What is, I'm curious as to what is the value to be derived from Nick Fuentes? What specifically are the points that he's making that are in any?

good. Is it when he talks about how he effed TPSA and then he gyrated on the camera like he was physically sodomizing it? Is that what he's talking about? Is that the fair point that he's making? Or is it when he's talking about how much he loves Stalin and admires Stalin? Is that a fair point? Is that one that people find community with? Or when he praises Hitler and says Hitler was a cool guy. Hitler actually, he was a weak fag. That's what Hitler was. And he was horrible at strategy, which is why he got his backside handed to him multiple times. And he got fooled by inflatable tanks because of the ghost army. But whatever. So really, we're supposed to find great insight from a gay Nazi twink who talks about how much you love stuff.

Dahlin and only understands just like the top layer, the top foam of history. Okay, I mean, I guess anybody will do anything for clicks now. Good night. Or what about maybe, I don't know, maybe it's later on. Let's be fair. Maybe it's later on in that discussion. Let's go ahead and play Cut 21. Go ahead.

And then came Candace Owens. And that she really drives people crazy. She drives them crazy. They were very angry. But I didn't call her out for what she said about Israel, possibly being involved with Charlie Kirk. Well, I didn't call her out because I was totally fine with those questions being raised and still am. Like, I'm sorry, but I am. I'm sick of this bullshit.

I am allowed to have questions about what if anyone aligned with Israel or from Israel might have had to do with Charlie's death? That's a fake out. No one's questioning anybody's speech. They're questioning the logic behind it. and a failure to be able to logically defend the motive, that's not, that's not anyone calling anybody out for using their free speech. They're just pointing out that it seems silly and anti-Semitic for the sake of anti-Semitism. She wasn't questioning either. She was just making declarations that were crazy, kooky, and were completely and utterly debunked. Like, I mean, do we want to

talk about all the plane stuff because she apparently couldn't even read flight paths. I mean, it's kind of embarrassing. And that's probably why nobody's listening to her podcast anymore. People listen to it a lot in the beginning, Candace Owens' stuff, because it's like, you know, you drive slowly past a car wreck or for the same reason, people watch the wild and wonderful whites of West Virginia. You were just wondering how far this nuttiness is going to go. But then, you know, after a while, especially when you fail to deliver receipts, that interest wanes. And, criticizing that is not the same thing as criticizing someone's speech on it and pointing out that someone doesn't, I mean, regularly call out and isn't consistent in this. And I think that's the

big thing. I don't understand why people go after, for instance, Ted Cruz, if they don't like something that he says, while proclaiming no enemies on the right, and that's okay. But criticizing someone like Owens or Fuentes is apparently that's not allowed to happen. Because that's the gatekeeping that's happening. You're being told that you're not allowed to criticize the backwood single cell almost incestual product of thinking that is demonstrated by Owens and Fuentes on their podcast. You're not allowed to criticize that. And if you criticize the people that platform it or that err it and they don't even do their due diligence of asking tough questions about it, you're accused of trying to cancel that individual or control their speech.

We're just simply, we're just simply pointing out the, the inconsistency and the hypocrisy of criticizing some and not criticizing everyone or pretending that you're a hard ass and that you ask tough questions, but then when you have someone that called your friend's wife a jeat and you don't even ask them about that, that seems like that's cowardice. That's not journalism. That's being a female copulatory organ. That is being afraid that you're going to lose clicks from that. audience and you're being too, you're being a digital prostitute and you're too afraid of losing

that, that digital share, that slice of the pie for audience. People are talking about the inconsistency and it is, I find it to be an obscenely intellectual dodge to complain that somehow asking for consistency is the same thing as trying to cancel someone. I mean, people need to stop flattering themselves. No one is calling to cancel anyone. They're simply remarking accurately on the inconsistency and not asking hard questions of everybody. I feel like that that's pretty safe. I mean, I don't have to depend on anybody. I don't have to depend on Katari investors. I don't have to depend on, you know, business partners or anybody else in order to make my bottom line. And I would never debase myself by trying to pander to the audience of a

a Nazi twink in order to make my daily bread. So I don't have to play those reindeer games, so to speak. So I just think it's just completely unfair to present a refusal of consistent practice as it pertains to hard questioning as being canceling. It's not. It's not that at all. People should know better, you know, speaking as friends. And now, all of the news you would probably miss.

It's time for Dana's Quick 5. All right, so we're still talking about 3-Eye Atlas. It's a close, it's approaching the sun. A new image now shows that it's glowing green. It's glowing? Green. Oh, God. It's glowing green.

I'm just saying, I, you know what? Maybe it was, and maybe it is like, an alien space turd and they got close to us and then they saw how, you know, we were so idiotic and they're like, nope, this, no, they're doomed. I wouldn't stop by either. Let me honest with you. Let's see here. I think I did the wrong headlines at a second. Did I do the wrong headlines that segment? I think I did. Hold up. Let me go back to my correct ones. Apologies. So apparently U.S. population growth is projected to slow further than it is already slowed. They said the population is forecast to start shrinking after 2056. So I want all the people

that I like to have more kids and all the people who think things like driving into ice agents is okay to not have kids. You know what I'm saying? Like I'm totally fine with that. I'm totally fine with those with that kind of a setup. But yeah, we need to not. And you know what? The answer to this isn't to pay people to have kids because that's welfare. And we already have that for these quote unquote Bush League companions and conservatives that we have in the Republican Party already. It's actually to make it economically better in the United States

so that you don't desperately have to have two full-time incomes in order to support just a normal sized American family so that people can afford everyday basic things and go on vacation every summer. Things like that, right? You don't pay people to have kids. You make the economy better for everybody.

That's how you do it. That's the way to approach this. Also, So let's see here. The, I got a couple of other things. Ooh, a woman received a letter in the mail 72 years after it was sent. Yeah, 72 years after it was sent. She finally got it. That sounds like how mail works here in Texas because I just got a Christmas card that a member of my family sent like weeks ago.

Not kidding. Listen to this. This doesn't help. This is cut seven. Governor Tim Walls, who by the way is trying to see. save his fat ass. Because he's implicated in this fraud. You know how many people are implicated in this fraud? Before I play this real quickly, I want you to realize this is what this is a distraction for. It is a distraction for the insane amount of fraud. Do you know that the Attorney General

Keith Ellison, this is from the Wall Street Journal. I said this yesterday. A.G. Keith Ellison, his councilman's son, his Nepo Baby, the mayor, Jacob Fry, Ilan Omar, and others directly received cash from the Somali fraudsters. Their cut came out of the $250 million scheme of, quote-unquote, feeding our future. Each one of these lawmakers personally met with the fraudsters. They did events with them. They dined with them. They knew them personally.

So this is one of the reasons why they're clinging to this so hard as a tool of distraction. Now, cut to Tim Wals. This is cut seven. This kind of language doesn't help. Listen. Well, I said this yesterday. We've never been at war with our federal government. I think in this case that the National Guard is their main mission.

They have a dual mission. There's there's. Yeah. You're not at war with your federal government. Although I, you're not at war with the federal government. They want to be. They desperately want to be. they need this. No one loves violence more than the left. No one loves it more than the left.

So, I don't know, I just, I, someone said, well, you know what, this woman, give her the Ashley Babbitt treatment. Just saying. Ashley Babbitt, though, wasn't armed. I mean, it's horrible. This is, you know, you, that's what Tim Wall says. I'm going to counter, contrast him with Tom Homan. this is cut 33 you want to hear a voice of reason listen to this this is cut 33 i think the city of minneapolis is on edge i think the country is on edge right now you say the investigation is ongoing investigations just started just started you say you can't comment on the video which many americans are seeing and reacting to i'm not going to make a judgment call on one video when there's a hundred videos out there i'm not i wasn't on the scene i'm not an officer that may have body cam video, I'd be, I'd be unprofessional or comment on what I think

happen in that situation. Let the investigation play out and hold people accountable based on the investigation. There you go. Right there. What can be said, I'm fine with it being investigated. I have no problem with that. Yeah, that's common sense. Me looking at it right now, unless there is something else to be seen, I mean, this is entirely justified. This is self-defense. There's no other way that it plays out. Well, he shouldn't have been standing in front of a car. She shouldn't have been blocking in ice agents, you dumbasses. What are you talking about? She was the one blocking in ice agents. Do people not understand this? What is there I don't get it. What is there that you don't understand about this? She was blocking in

ICE agents with her car. This is not hard. And then you have people like AOC doing everything that they can to incite this. This is cut 10. What we saw today was a criminal, a criminal, murder a woman and shut her in the head while she was trying to escape for her life. And I think what we saw today was a manifestation of every American force in there.

Which is their government turning into a tier. Do you believe you should be arrested, the officer involved? I think what we saw was a murder today, and I think that we need, of course. You said that she was fleeing for her life? Do you know, like, do you know that that she was fleeing? I think we saw this vehicle. And listen. She wasn't fleeing.

She blocked them in. Part of the true process is to allow an investigation of what transpired. No, she doesn't. They say this. They pay lip service. Oh, we should have investigated. They don't mean that the way Tom Homan means it. but they don't really care. They don't care. She wasn't murdered. She was trying to flee and

escape for her life. She blocked them in. She was the one who, according to witnesses, was stalking them all day. All day. If you would like the receipts on that, this is why you need to sign up for my newsletter at Substack, because those people got that this morning. All day. So the lead car blocking them in and then the moment they're going to arrest her, she decides to run them over. Entirely justifiable. So as you know, yesterday, members of Congress began the hearings questioning Minnesota lawmakers about the massive fraud, billions and billions of dollars. And even though I think he's a millennial, I think we need to claim him for Gen X. congressman brandon gill from texas simply because of the way he questions people it's just so

reality bites i don't know how right it has that whole aesthetic to it which makes it comical so this is representative gill grilling these lawmakers and they're trying to they're trying to push back with a lame semantics argument that he's not having watch this Let me ask you, does large-scale Somali immigration make Minnesota stronger or weaker? Certainly stronger. Certainly stronger. Do you know what percentage of Somali-headed households in Minnesota are on food stamps? No.

54 percent. Do you know what that number is for native Minnesota-headed households? Well, to be clear, a majority of the- It's 7 percent. There's a big difference between 54 percent and 7 percent, is there not? Excuse me, sir, could I answer the question? Let me move on. We've got a lot of questions here.

What percentage of Somali-headed households in Minnesota are on Medicaid? I don't know. It's 73%. Do you know what that number is for Minnesota native households? Again, you're using the phrase Minnesota-Native households, but the majority... The number is 18%. That's quite an astounding difference. I think we would agree.

Can I answer the question, please? Let me ask you one more, and then we can go on to that. What percentage of Somali-headed households are on welfare in general? I don't know. It's 81%. What about... Let me just ask you, after 10 years of being in... in the United States, what percentage of Somali immigrant households

are on, continue to be on welfare? I don't know. The number is 78%. So even after 10 years, 78% of Somali immigrant households continue to be unwellfare. Do you know what that number is for Native Minnesota headed households? Again, you're using a phrase, non-Somali immigrant-headed households.

If I can just answer the question, you're using the phrase native Minnesotans, the majority of the majority of. Somali Minnesotans are, as Minnesota as any of us, they were born in the United States. It's only 8,000 of the 108,000 Somali. And nevertheless, the welfare usage is astoundingly different. Let me ask you again, does that make Minnesota stronger or weaker? Again, I'd like the opportunity to answer the question here.

Go for it. So again, the majority of Somali and Minnesotans are born in the United States, as I understand it. Okay. What percentage of working age Somalians who have been in the U.S. for 10 years or more? 10 years or more. How many of them speak English very well? I don't know. About half. The answer is about half. That seems pretty low, doesn't it? Again, I keep trying to It doesn't sound like something that makes our country stronger to me. And I think most Americans

would agree with me on that. The guy keeps trying to do the semantic. Well, when you say native-born, I mean, some of them were born here, okay, but why can't they speak English then? Why is it that the majority are on welfare? I mean, that's the point that the guy, and Congress McGill, is not allowing this guy. And this guy, by the way, was a former DOJ prosecutor under Biden Harris, and he also worked with DOJ under Obama Biden. And he's in Minnesota.

He was trying every which way that he could. And he actually ended up making it worse for himself because he's like, well, we're talking about people born here. Well, that makes it even worse that if they've been born here, or if they've been here for over a decade and they're still on welfare,

to that extent, or they still can't speak English, to that extent. I can't imagine. I cannot imagine going to another country and demanding to be taken care of refusing the language, rejecting the culture, and demanding to be on government assistance. I can't even imagine that. That is just heinous. That's so awful. So that was excellent line of questioning. I don't even know why the guy. The guy should have just sat there and said, hit me. That's what he should have done. Thanks for tuning in to today's edition of Dana Lash's absurd truth podcast. If you haven't already. Make sure to hit that subscribe button on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast.