The Megyn Kelly Show - Biden's Wealth Transfer, and Search Censorship, with Andrew Klavan, Nicole Levitt, and Todd Ricketts | Ep. 380

Episode Date: August 25, 2022

Megyn Kelly is joined by Andrew Klavan of The Daily Wire to talk about President Biden's "debt forgiveness" plan which is actually just a wealth transfer plan, the morality of the concept, how it subsidizes the "credentialed" in our society, the false promise of "free" when it comes to the government, victimhood in American society today, the reality of "effort," Pelosi's flip-flopping, what's really behind the left's focus on the Mar-a-Lago raid, Stelter's CNN exit and cultural changes, the collapse of the establishment in our culture, and more. Then Nicole Levitt, an attorney for Women Against Abuse, joins the show to talk about her lawsuit against the organization over a racially hostile work environment, and the woke drift at her organization. And Todd Ricketts, former RNC finance chair and co-owner of the Chicago Cubs joins to discuss his new search engine, Freespoke, and why he started the search engine that is unbiased and uncensored, the need to avoid tech suppression and search censorship, tech bias in email, and more.Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations. Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. Today we have an exclusive interview you're not going to want to miss. One woman's story about standing up to her employer after she says the company divided staff up into race groups and then asked white staff members to sign a contract that stated, quote, all white people are racist and I am no exception. Guess what? She had a problem with that. But first, President Biden officially announces his student loan debt forgiveness plan. It's a wealth transfer plan. And progressives say, thanks, but we want more. They're pissed. They want the number to be bigger.

Think this is a one and done payoff? Think again. Joining me now, one of my favorite guests, one of the most brilliant minds alive today, Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show for The Daily Wire. So happy to have you back, Andrew. Thanks for being here. It's great to see you, Megan. Can we just start with this? It's such a joke. I mean, it's like, I love the names that they give it.

It's like forgiveness. Oh, who's not pro-forgiveness? You know, this policy works very simple. You take out a loan and then you pay it back with interest. That's how it goes. It's how it's gone from the beginning of time up until this guy was facing a midterm prospect that he didn't like. And suddenly, in the way Barack Obama took out his pen and his phone and did things on illegal immigration that he said he couldn't have done for months and months prior, did something he and Nancy Pelosi and others, including in the Obama administration, have all said he does not have the power to do, which is just erased debt, which essentially means transferring

it onto the rest of us. What do you make of it? Oh, economically, obviously, it's horrible. But that's not the thing that bothers me the most. I mean, they're saying it's going to cost, it could cost up to $600 billion, which is just fuel on the fire of inflation. But it really is the moral part of it that bothers me. And it bothers me on a lot of different levels. The most basic thing in the world is you borrow money, you pay it back. I mean, that is one of the most basic obligations. It is lawless to just sweep it away with a wave of your hand. This is not a congressional act. This is not a law that's been changed. It's just a decision by one kingly chap who happens to be in the White House. And I don't see how it can withstand any

kind of judicial scrutiny, any kind of moral scrutiny. And it's just so wicked at that level. It's wicked to say you can borrow money, but you don't have to pay it back. And it's wicked to say it to anybody when Bernie Sanders says, well, they do it to corporations. Well, don't do it to corporations either. I mean, when you borrow money, you should pay it back. But it's also terrible in the sense that it is subsidizing this credentialized society, which has rendered, among other things, has rendered our press corrupt and idiotic. I mean, in the old days, when you were a reporter, you were probably a guy without a college education, but who was smart and who could write. And you probably had a bit of a chip on your shoulder and you wanted to take down

anybody with power. And that was a good thing. You didn't care if he was Republican or Democrat. I was a reporter, you know, in a small town newspaper. I worked with leftists. I worked with right wingers. All we wanted to do was make powerful people look bad. But once you started going to journalism school, once you started credentializing reporters, they became part of the ruling class. And so they support whatever supports the ruling class. journalists with their snap room hats and their press cards in the band. These are guys who are aspiring to be the people that they cover. And you also have people who don't know anything, but they have their credentials. I mean, we all remember Obama's aide, Ben Rhodes, telling the New York Times, frankly, you guys don't know anything, so we could sell you anything we wanted. You don't know anything because you're children. And meanwhile, those children can storm into the offices of the editor-in-chief and tell them the way they want

things covered because that's the way they were taught in college. All of that is being subsidized by the government to cover up the fact that it actually has made people more incompetent. It has actually made people's lives worse. And finally, why is college so expensive? It hasn't gotten more expensive because the professors are just so brilliant and really are educating our children at new levels. It's gotten so expensive because of these layers upon layers of administration, many of them with briefs like diversity or finding, rooting out bias. And they also make our lives worse and they make college life worse. If you pay somebody hundreds of thousands of dollars to find bias, the one thing you can bet is they're not going to find no bias. That's not what's going to happen because

their job depends on finding bias. It depends on stirring up trouble. I've had at least one riot start because of me giving a speech at a college. I've had people vandalize the places where I was going to speak. And every single time, people who incited that violence were not the students. It was not radical snowflakes who just got it into their heads that they had to take me down. It was always flyers that were sent to them by the administration, pulling things that I'd said out of context to make me sound hateful and small-minded and cruel, and that stirred the students up. So it really is funding.

What we now have is government funding people who want to be part of the ruling class and then get jobs in the culture. You have government funding these layers of administrative aides who do nothing but basically condone left wing points of view, the kind of thing you were just talking about, about people condemning each other for their races. And then finally, you have government subsidizing dishonesty, taking out loans and not paying them back. It's a moral disaster. It really is. I think it may well be the worst thing this administration has done up there with this chaotic retreat from Afghanistan. There's so much in there I want to talk about. I really want to get to your thoughts about

colleges and universities and the ruling class and what they're teaching now, because you're the best read person ever. So how do we get like that without going to college is one of my questions. But let's table that for right now, because I want to stay on the hard news before we get to the more philosophical questions. There was a report in March 2022 via the Bureau of Labor. The unemployment rate right now for people who have a bachelor's degree or higher, the people who are getting this, quote, forgiveness is the lowest of any group. It's two point two percent lowest. The unemployment rate for people 25 years and older who only have a high school degree is four point five percent. They will be paying for the other group. So the people who are the working class, Biden said yesterday, this is for the working class. No, it isn't. That's not true. The working class is going to be paying off the loans of the so-called upper class or upper middle class. This this helps people, families. It could be just a couple that makes up to two hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year that have advanced degrees from Wharton. They can get this relief. Why should some trucker listening to us

right now on Sirius XM have to pay for those two? Well, you get what you vote for is all I can say. I mean, listen, I have two sons-in-law who are attorneys. Both of them have had college debt, and I'm looking forward to Uber drivers paying off their college debt because that is exactly what's going to happen. You know, it is a remarkable thing, and it wouldn't happen if our press weren't so corrupt, but it's a remarkable thing that the Democrats and socialists in general have repeatedly been able to sell socialism to the people it hurts most. Socialism, every time it's put into operation, and even when it's only put into operation piecemeal, like we're doing it here, it eliminates the middle class. I mean, they've got $80 billion

to send to the IRS for new auditors. Who do you think they're going to be going after? Jeff Bezos isn't losing any sleep about that. But people who make $200,000 to $400,000 are definitely going to get hit because that's where the money is. So if you're making $70,000, $60,000, you can be sold on the idea that those people are rich. But if they were rich, they wouldn't have to worry about the IRS because they could dodge the payments. What happens is it's the middle class that goes. It's the people, the Uber drivers are going to lose their money paying for the college educated. The college educated are going to lose their money being audited by the IRS. And ultimately, what socialism always does is it leaves you two classes instead of a step of classes, several steps of classes. All it leaves is the poor and the powerful on whom

they depend. And that works really well for dictators. It works really well for socialists, but it doesn't work well for the rest of the country. The thing about capitalism is you can always point to the unfairness of capitalism, and life is unfair. There's no question about it, but it's a graded unfairness. There are people who are at the bottom, but there are also steps upwards, and you can move up those steps through capitalism. The more the government takes over, the more they pay for things, the more that middle class has to be sucked dry of its money to keep those payments afloat. And the more that middle class disappears, the more that middle class has to be sucked dry of its money to keep those payments afloat. And the more that middle class disappears, the more you have a poor class dependent on a powerful class. And that is exactly what the Biden plan is doing. You can see it. I mean,

you can see it. The IRS agents are there to take out the upper middle class. And these loan transfers are there to basically take out the lower class, giving their money to the upper middle class who will then be taxed, will have it taxed away. And so it really is a disturbing idea that people are so gullible that they can be ginned up emotionally by cultural issues and let their freedoms be taken away. The government is never, ever paying for something. It's always buying. It is always buying something. There's no such thing as free. The word free is not an English word. It doesn't describe any realistic thing except maybe the moon and the

stars are free to look at, but nothing else is free. And so when the government tells you free healthcare, your first question should be, what's it going to cost me? And what it's going to cost you is your independence. That's so true. Charles C.W. Cook of National Review was pointing out the guy who paid off his loans yesterday is not helped by this. The guy who's taking out loans tomorrow is not helped by this. But think if you were in that first category, you paid off your loans, you worked hard, you pay them off yesterday. If you had just waited, that's ten thousand dollars, potentially 20 that you could have done something else with. I mean, you could have gone and had a grand old party. I mean, just imagine like the penalty to those people for being these stupid chumps who paid their bills. That's the lesson Joe Biden would like America to learn. He was asked just a bit about this by reporters at the presser yesterday. Here's a bit of how that went. Listen to this.

I want. Is this unfair to people who paid their student loans or chose not to take out loans? Is it fair to people who, in fact, do not own multi-billion dollar businesses to see what these guys give them all a tax break? Is that fair? What do you think? What about people who paid their loans, so struggled to pay their loans, and now others don't have to? Yeah, so it's a non sequitur. It's a dodge, right? It's just corporations got tax breaks. Bye. It's not a dodge. It's the dodge. It's what they always do. It's the idea that some people are rich. You're supposed to resent them. And by resenting them, you let the am I going to get my money back because I paid up my loan? And she basically disdainfully said, no, you know, absolutely not. That punishment for honesty, that punishment for hard work is really part of the plan. It's always been part of the plan. I mean, the idea that people should be industrious, competitive,

that they should want to succeed, that they should get up a little early in the morning, that they should want their kids to do better than they do. Those are all things that get in the way of power for the powerful. And, you know, the people who want power, they don't think they want it just like a drug. They think they want it because they're going to do such wonderful things with it. You know, they're gathering together in Davos talking about, you know, they're flying their private jets to Davos so they can talk about how we shouldn't drive our Volkswagens. Or eat a cow. Yeah, exactly.

They point to the guy who is a little bit over us, the guy who's a little bit richer than we are, and say, oh, he's always them. It always is them because our independence, which leads to good behavior, our independence, which leads to hard work, our independence, which leads to paying off our debts, all those things get in their way. They do not want our good behavior. They're punishing our good behavior on purpose. When you punish something, you get less of it. And that's what they want. They are.

They are definitely teaching new lessons. And they're exactly the wrong lessons when it comes to integrity, honor, contract law. I mean, do you try this? Try doing this with any other loan, see how it works out. The question of whether this is just step one, they always want more, you say, they always want more. And already we're hearing that. I mean, they're open about it. I said in the intro, they're not happy. The Democrats aren't celebrating this. They're mad that the numbers as small as it is. Ten thousand per person is not enough. Could be up to 20. Still not enough. And here's a little montage of some of that reaction. Well, I keep fighting for more. Of course I will.

So respectfully, Uncle Joe, because I do love you, but you have not needed my money in two years, more than two years. So why do I have to give you anything? But what this is telling us is two things. Number one, Biden does have the power to cancel all federal student loan debt. He's just choosing not to. 10K is an arbitrary number. It could be 65,000. It could be 80,000 arbitrary number it could be 65 000 it could be 80 000 it needs to be all of it i'm him canceling some student loan debt is important we need more every penny of student debt should be erased because college is a public good and it should be free this is like iconic and truly historic i know a lot of us wanted more but i going to take what I can get. Why does everyone who comments in that way

look the same, right? I'm sorry. It's not nice, but they look like they could have used a turn through hair and makeup before they went on screen. I'm just going to say it. They also have those big bright eyes and that weird fascist smile. Have you noticed all these fascists, they have that weird dreamy smile on their face, kind of bright eyes. It's very strange. I think they may be possessed. I'm not saying they are. I'm just saying that they may be possessed. I love it. It's like it's the distinction between the people who work and the people who loaf. You know, it's like, oh, you just want the degree because you want to hang in the right cocktail party circus. You want to impress people

with the letters after your name. But you don't want to do the work that comes with that degree that would require you to pay off the loans that came with that degree. You want me to pay for it. You want Andrew to pay for it. You want the trucker to pay for it. And you want to sit back there and say, everything should be free

because it's what's best for America. So they'll look down at that same trucker who doesn't have a college degree who just paid off theirs. Right. You know, I believe that so much of the misery that comes out of politics comes out of this from the simple fact that human beings have a very sharp sense of justice and fairness. But the world is totally unfair. And that allows politicians to point to natural unfairness, the fact that LeBron James can play basketball and I can, which is naturally unfair, and then say, therefore, I am going to commit an act of because you got me out there instead of LeBron James. If you want excellence, you have to accept a bit of the unfairness of life because not only is life unfair, but unfairness is life. You know, it's the differences between us that make for competitiveness. It's the differences between us that make for marriages.

It's the difference between us that makes for creativity. All of that unfairness feeds into the actual lifting of humankind. So this kind of idea that you can eliminate all unfairness is where the misery comes from. And these guys have what even, you know, even welfare workers talk about welfare psychopathology. They talk about people going welfare insane, where they begin to believe that they deserve someone else's money. And that is the fact that you have the money. Why don't I have the money? And the idea, well, maybe I worked harder. Maybe I was luckier. Maybe I got born in a nicer place than you did. All of those things are unfair,

but the government can't fix them. It can't fix the past. It can't fix the present. It can't fix anything. All it can do is treat everybody equally and let people rise as they will. And that is what we've gotten away from. That was kind of the idea, the basic idea of the country, that the government to keep its hands to itself and let each person rise and fall on his own work and his own merit. And that idea is being crushed under this idea that somehow, somehow the government is going to make everything fair. It can't be done.

And the fact that we're helpless to do it is something that the press will never talk about. They never talk about the fact that you just can't do it. You can't fix the fact that there used to be slavery. You can't fix the fact that some people win and some people lose. You can't fix the fact that some people have talent or are better looking than other people.

All of those things are unfixable. And so when the government promises to fix them, hold on to your wallet because they're coming for your dough and they're not going to do anything. If I may say though, you can fix the fact that you do not look good before you post your Instagram video. You can, I'm telling you, just a little. Honestly, my friends have been talking to me. So since I've gone independent, I don't work for a channel, I get a hair person who comes every other day, but I do my own makeup. And my friends have been like, MK, you're doing a good job on your makeup.

Did you learn that from all your years sitting in the makeup chair? And I said, no, I followed some twit on YouTube. She was actually very interesting. She showed me how to do it. I mean, I was just some random video and I learned just like anybody else can learn. I'm just saying it's a small point, but it's indicative of a larger one, which is a little effort goes a long way. And yes, you might choose to put your efforts into getting a college degree or a law school degree or an advanced degree of some kind, and then work your

ass off because you want to make a lot of money. That's important to you. Okay, that's fine. Then you don't get to turn around and say, I want somebody to pay off all my loans. I'm mad that I had to do this. That's not okay. But to sit as somebody who makes a different choice, who says, I want to sit on my couch. I love watching reruns and I want to sit here with my chips and my beer and I don't really want to work very hard. I get it. But you can't then be resentful of the other people and think that you're entitled to something. Everybody sacrifices, right? That person's got a lot more fun time, free time, relaxation time, probably a lot less stress in his life than the people in the first category. Everything's a trade-off, right? Why is like the fact that you're making more money than I am necessarily an inequity that needs to be solved?

How about the people who have greater joy and relaxation in their lives because they're not stressed out all the time? What government authority is going to solve that for me? We could take this to an insane, nonsensical degree. Well, not only that, no one ever asks the question. It's kind of amazing. No socialist ever asked the question, where does money come from? It's like kids not wanting to know where children come from. They never ask that question. Where does the money come from? Why? Why is everybody in America richer than everybody everywhere else? Even the poor in America are still richer than the poor in other countries. Where does that come from? They never ask. And it's kind of, it kind of is strange that this kind of willed ignorance is spread through the media. It is encouraged by the media. And nobody ever

says, stops and says, well, you know what? The one person who does talk about it is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She's the one person who says, I don't care where it comes from. I don't care. If we can spend it on the military, we can spend it on everything. She just basically is openly socialist. I don't care where it comes from. Bernie Sanders says it too. They live in this fantasy where money, you know, you just print it and there's more of it and prices will never go up. And it has nothing, you know, that inflation has nothing to do with the fact that we've been printing money like crazy for 10 years. It is really weird that people don't question basic things like that. And while they're sitting on their couch, while they're playing video games all day, and while they're saying, send me the money,

nobody ever says, where does that money come from? Who do I thank? No, it's just a sense of entitlement, just raw entitlement. It's so unattractive. Weakness, apathy, laziness, grossly unattractive. In the meantime, there is a real question about whether this president can do that, can do this in the first place. And you need look no further than Nancy Pelosi, who's on record as raising this very question. Here she was in July of 2021, saying Biden doesn't have this authority. Watch. People think that the president of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not. He can postpone. He can delay. But he does not have that power. That would have to be

an act of Congress. The president can't do it. So that's not even a discussion that not everybody realizes that. Oh, really? Listen to her now. This was yesterday. Oh, it's a tweet. Oh, shit. Never mind. OK, hold on. I'll read it to you. Tweets from Nancy at POTUS's bold action is a strong step in Democrats fight to expand access to higher education. Strong step. Bold action. Really? What happened to he can't. By delivering historic targeted student debt relief to millions of borrowers more working families will be able to meet their kitchen table needs as they recover from the pandemic what happened to he does not have the power he can postpone he can delay but he does not have the power absent an act of congress well maybe maybe

it's that he's using this pandemic relief valve as the excuse to be able to do it. He's saying, you know, this has given me extraordinary emergency powers and that's how I'm sort of getting this power. Well, as far as I recall, the pandemic was underway in July of 2021 when Nancy Pelosi said he doesn't have the power. It doesn't exist. And so this will be challenged in court. And it's very likely to be struck down, this executive overreach. I actually, I'm not at all confident it's going to stand. And I'll tell you, I don't know if it does stand,

how we recover exactly. I'm not, I think this is like a deeply, this is a deep tear at our basic principles. That's part of the fabric that was holding us together. Rule of law, contracts, obligations that you undertake willingly and then must live up to. That is the way, you know, you're the lawyer, so I didn't want to go off about that, but it just seems to me that contract law is a kind of sacred vow between two people. I mean, obviously, if you're making a legal contract, that's one thing, but if you make a legal contract,

isn't that kind of part of the sacred relationships of freedom, one of the sacred relationships of freedom, that if you and I enter into an agreement together and sign that agreement and put our signatures on that agreement, that agreement stands. If I haven't cheated you in some way, that agreement stands. And so I don't understand. That's the moral part of it that just kind of baffles me. I don't understand where the president just says, oh, yeah, forget that. Forget that agreement. It's kind of like no-fault divorce. Is there really such a thing as no-fault divorce? I mean, if you have a vow that you are going to live together forever, isn't there some kind of fault that isn't somebody at fault when those vows collapse? I think that war on contract law is part of the war on freedom. It just seems to me, again, you're the lawyer here, so I don't want to step on your territory, but it just seems to me just something you study in law school. It actually is one of the binding relationships between two free human beings.

And to just kind of crush that with a wave of your hand seems incredibly morally dangerous. But then again, I'm not sure they care. And I almost feel like he's our fiduciary. This is our debt. This is this is owed to us, the American taxpayers. He's he's our fiduciary. Joe Biden is he's in charge of managing this debt, among other things. And he doesn't have our consent to just write it off. We didn't agree that we're owed the money. We want the money. And if he doesn't make them pay back the money, we have to pay the money. And we didn't agree to that. You know that there's a reason he doesn't have that power. So it's another lane of sort of legal reasoning that that should stop him from doing this morally. Yes, but also as a matter of law, he should be challenged. I'm not at all sure that he will win. He's lost several of these attempts at overreach under the covid emergency release valve. This could just be the latest in an effort to appease his base again right before

the midterms as the Democrats creep closer to doing better than they were to almost equaling Republican Republicans in the generic congressional ballot, which we'll get to in just a bit. By the way, the Department of Education also ruled in 2021, quote, The president does not have the statutory authority to provide blanket or mass cancellation, compromise, discharge or forgiveness of student loan principal balances and or to material materially modify the repayment amounts or terms thereof. That's exactly what he just did. This is a problem.

And you've got you. One of the thing I was going to mention is Jason Furman. He was the former chair of Council of Economic Advisors under President Obama, Joe Biden's old boss. And he pointed out a couple of things. Number one, pouring roughly half a trillion dollars of gasoline on the inflationary fire that's already burning is reckless. Number two, why design a policy that would provide up to $40,000 to a married couple making $249,000? Why include law and business school students if you want us to believe this is about the construction worker making $38,000. Why include law and business school students if you want us to believe this is about the construction worker making 38 grand? And so even people from his former administration are

saying this makes no sense. It's unfair. It's boneheaded. And it's obviously the messaging full of lies. OK, so I want to talk to you just for a bit about the raid, because today is the day down at Mar-a-Lago that this judge is waiting for the DOJ to submit its proposed redactions from the supporting affidavit in order to get a warrant to go in there and search Mar-a-Lago. They had to have an affidavit, presumably from an FBI agent who laid out the case against President Trump. We haven't seen it. Trump says he wants it released. The media wants it released. The DOJ is saying no sources, methods, confidential information, top secret, can't do it. Judge said proposed redactions. I'm not agreeing to just withhold the whole thing. The government said all of our redactions, you won't be able to read a thing. The judge said that's not good enough. Come up with something reasonable. It's due right now. It was due at noon down in this South Florida court. You know, still, I think Republicans are very fired up about this issue. But I also think that Trump being back in the news to the extent he has been for the past month

has been a good thing politically for Democrats, as much as it fires up the base to see Trump persecuted yet again, making no comment on whether he has records he shouldn't have. The guy, it's a string of persecutions against him. It's an unprecedented move. It wasn't warranted. It wasn't justified and it should have been done. But my point is, I think the Democrats and the media are loving having him back in the news, and I think it's helping them on that generic congressional ballot. So what are your feelings today about the raid, the court proceeding and the politics that are coming out of it? I'm wild-eyed about it with rage. I got to be honest. It drives me insane. I would like Trump

now to step off the scene. I don't think that's going to happen, but I would like him to crown his successor and say, MAGA is now part of the Republican Party. I've done my work, and now I'm going off into the sunset. It's time, if nothing else, it's time for younger men to take, and women, to take the helm of the country. So that's the first thing. And I agree with you that his presence is all in all probably a benefit to the Democrats. But the recklessness of this, you know, a million times during the Trump administration, I got emails from people saying, when is Hillary Clinton going to go to jail? And I would say, you know, Hillary Clinton has broken the law repeatedly, but you don't actually want her to go to jail. You don't want your political candidates to go to jail if you can help it.

You don't want the persecuted by the DOJ because it makes the DOJ more political than it is in danger of being to begin with. They would storm into a former president's home, a duly elected president's home, no matter what story they want to tell themselves, is so incredibly reckless that it genuinely makes me concerned that what they're trying to do is demonize half the country. They are trying to declare half the country terrorists. Already on MSNBC and other left-wing outlets, they're saying the civil war is here. We're not in danger of a civil war. The civil war is already on. And I'm worried that they're trying to do this, that they'll gin up a couple of nutbags, will go after the FBI in a violent way, and then say, see, we were right. It was these right wing

crazies who were showing up at school board meetings demanding that we can't change the sexes of their children. We knew they were terrorists and now we've proved that they're terrorists. Unless Trump, I don't care what papers Trump had and they can pull all these leaks to the press while he was holding the nuclear code. He was going to call up the White House and tell them to launch a nuclear weapon. Here's all the code, guys. So you've got to launch that weapon. I mean, it was insanely stupid, their ideas. But unless he's training a militia at Mar-a-Lago, I don't want to see the DOJ with armed men storming a former president's house. It is incredibly incendiary, incredibly reckless. We're already

at each other's throats. It just was unwise. And Merrick Garland, who had this reputation for being a company man, a guy who took care of the institutions, a guy who obeyed the law, has shown himself to be just an absolute pushover for the left. And not only did he go after parents and start investigating them as possible terrorists for taking care of their children, but now he storms the home of a former president. I mean, really, I understand that some of the people on the left are good people. I understand they're my fellow citizens. I have to pay them at least the respect of arguing with them. But the left just feels that they're going to snap their fingers and turn us and declare that we're all terrorists, we're all white supremacists. You know, January 6th is the violence to end all violence, but the violence of the George Floyd riots that burned

down half the country, that doesn't count. That was justified violence. I don't think that's going to turn out the way they want it to turn out. I don't think a civil war in this country is going to be as pretty as they think it's going to be. They think it's going to be them rounding us up, but I don't think that's the way it's going to shake down. And I don't want to see any more political violence in this country. Merrick Garland should be ashamed of himself. If Mitch McConnell gets into heaven, it's going to be because he kept that guy off the Supreme Court. He is violence in this country. Merrick Garland should be ashamed of himself. If Mitch McConnell gets into heaven, it's going to be because he kept that guy off the Supreme Court. He has let himself become completely corrupted. That's true. My old impressions of Merrick Garland when he was

nominated by Obama for that seat are so different from what they are today. And to your point about encouraging or baiting, baiting, you know, the Republicans or the MAGA crowd into doing something violent. Couldn't agree more. Jared Kushner was on the show on Tuesday. He has a new book out and he he makes the point in the book about how unfortunate January 6th was, yes, for the obvious reasons, but also for this reason, because the media had been painting the Trump rallies as this, you know, carnal, debased, disgusting, violent, awful gathering of people deplorables. Right. And if you if you actually looked at the Trump rallies, it was a bunch of truly patriotic people who loved Donald Trump and they loved the country and they were waving flags and they were wearing flag regalia.

And with one or two small exceptions, there really wasn't violence at these things. And yet this group got baited into January 6th, right? By what? It could be Trump's rhetoric. It could be the media. It could be, you know, Rudy Giuliani, take your pick. OK, but they did. And and that stain remains. It was the stain the media had been waiting for. Oh, they wanted it so badly, Andrew. And finally they got it. And that was like part of the horror of watching it is it's like, oh, my God, you've now you've now given the media the excuse to sit back. And they did. If you watch CNN on Jan 6, you know this. They sit back and say, like, I told you so. I told you and say like, I told you so. I told you this would happen. I told you this is who they are. Right. And so this is another one of those moments where the right cannot be baited into doing this. Like even right now, I think it's

contained. But if they indict Trump, we're back in another one of those moments where it's a before and after. And the whole narrative about a half of the country is going to depend on how people behave. That's right. There used to be a saying that there's the stupid party and the evil party, and we're clearly the stupid party. I mean, I think that if we really do feel, as I do feel, that we are the party more likely to stand up for the Constitution, more likely to stand up for American freedoms, more likely to stand up for American freedoms, more likely to stand up for American traditions, then we have to take conscious care of how we behave. They can stomp back and forth and they can rage and they can burn down cities and get away with it because they don't care.

They're not trying to preserve anything. To be a conservative is to try to conserve something. To be an American conservative is to try to conserve something extremely specific, which is the Constitution and limited government. And you can't do that. You cannot do that by losing your cool. It is hard to be the good guy. It's hard. You can't shoot a man in the back when you're the good guy. You cannot behave like the left behaves when you're the good guy. It's hard to do it. It takes a certain amount of restraint, a certain amount of self-discipline. Donald Trump has inculcated a lack of self-discipline in the right. And that is the worst. I think he's done some, did many, many wonderful things.

But one of the worst things he did was tell us that we could become them and get away with it. And we can't because we're fighting for something entirely different. We're fighting for a world of self-discipline liberty. That's a hard sell. People don't like being self-disciplined. They don't like liberty, really. What they want is to be taken care of. They want to be able to have their pleasure and exercise their lust and their greed and all the things

that human beings do. And what we're saying is, no, you have to actually be self-restrained. That's a hard sell from the very beginning. And once you start storming the Capitol, once you start looking like a bunch of idiots, once you start allowing the worst of the worst to join your movement, you basically weaken yourself. It feels like strength in the moment because it feels like, yeah, we're going to be just as tough as they are. But in the end, but I repeat myself, the press and the left, encouraged, not just said was okay, they encouraged that violence. Nobody cares, because they're not the good guys. We are the good guys, and we have to behave like the good guys. January 6th was a mess. But, you know, like, basically, it is the Reichstag fire. I mean, not to compare anybody to Hitler, but it was, you know, the socialist burned the fire to the Reichstag and Hitler used that to seize absolute power.

The left has played this January 6th card until it's basically run out. It's like a credit card that is way over its limit. Right. But they see it. They see a new application. They got an application for an American Express black card sitting right there. They're like, oh, yeah, I want it. Oh, Trump indicted. You're feeling angry. Storms and riots, you know, like they want to see it. They want another reason to dismiss an entire half of the country. All right. Andrew's got thoughts on Brian Stelter. He'll share them right after this. And then we've got to talk about this amazing message that he delivered to the Young Americans Foundation, this group of young conservatives, which my team and I read in every single word of it. Ions of hope coming through in your life right now. And one of them is Brian Stelter. comes from a wonderful old thriller play named Angel Street, which is about a husband trying to drive his wife insane by telling her that things she knows are happening or not happening. And that was Brian Stelter all over. He was one of the most biased observers of TV news there was. He was a total leftist, a complete... All he ever did was rant about the fact that Fox News got better ratings than he did. And then he would tell you that he wasn't doing it. He would tell you, no, there's nothing, absolutely nothing biased. I'm just

standing up for truth. And the truth happens to be that all my political opinions are correct, and anyone who doesn't agree with them is evil. And so his actual disappearance is firing. And it's nice to see somebody get fired from CNN for not sexually abusing women. It is. It's nice to see somebody get fired from CNN for not sexually abusing women. That's nice to see somebody get fired for some reason. We had Cuomo, we had Toobin, we had Jeff Zucker. You know, it's like, those are just the ones I can keep up with. I know, I know. At least he was keeping his hands, as far as we know, he's keeping his hands to himself. But, you know, it makes me wonder, it makes me wonder whether Chris Licht, I believe his name is, the new president of CNN, has discovered that the purpose of a television network is to have people watch the network on their television. So that hasn't been happening to CNN.

And it makes me wonder whether or not he's going to actually change the tenor of what used to be a pretty good spot news station. It used to be a good station for finding out what was happening in the moment. And now it's become, you know, subpar guys like Don Lemon and Jim Acosta, you know, ranting about their opinions and how much they hate Donald Trump and all Republicans. You know, it's not, they have no rating. So it makes you wonder if maybe it's part of a movement to get rid of some of the woke, get rid of some of this kind of self-satisfied leftism, which plays all across America from 49th Street to 63rd Street, but may not play outside of Manhattan. happening at Netflix too. They just fired a bunch of social justice warriors. They just killed a bunch of social justice woke projects like Ibram Kendi's Racist Baby. You know, I'm starting to wonder- Like Meghan Markle's stupid show.

I'm amazed. You know, I used to watch, I used to turn on Netflix and they would have the Black Lives Matter collection. Now I consider Black Lives Matter to be the Maoist anti-American movement. And I would think, I'm not going to watch that. And then I would notice it would be things like a Denzel Washington movie. And he's one of my favorite actors. And I thought, gee, Netflix is actually turning me into a racist. I never used to care who was in the movies. If they were good, I just wanted to see the movie. Now I sit and say, I'm not going to watch a Denzel Washington movie because it's under the Black Lives Matter banner. I think a lot of people were doing that because I've been watching the way they rearrange their films. And some of that stuff is starting to disappear. If that were to happen, I think it

would just be a really good thing. I don't believe that wokeness is wrong. I believe it's actual wickedness. It is racist. It's incredibly anti-female, disgustingly anti-female disgustingly anti-female it's just a way of exerting power over people the idea is not to convince you it's to make you afraid to say, to disagree and I think that if we could get rid of it from Facebook

if we could get it off Twitter if we could get it off all these venues it would just be a good thing for the country and maybe, possibly the firing of Brian Stelter is one step in that direction.

Yeah, I love the way you said that. I mean, I had the same feeling. I remember you turn on the news during the day and you see these Black Lives Matter protesters out there threatening somebody's dinner table or like taking their drink and drinking it unless they put the fist up, like mandatory, put your fist up. You know, you're on our team or I'll hurt you. And then you turn on Netflix at night and this group's being celebrated. Black Lives Matter all over New York City. They're painting Fifth Avenue. Black Lives Matter. I'm like, hold on. OK, because those letters do not mean what you think they mean. Right. It was infuriating. Even my kid's teacher was doing the Zoom. This is at our old school. And she had her big Black Lives Matter matter banner behind her.

I'm like, take that down. You don't even know what you're saying. You're you think you're supporting just some concept. You're not. You're supporting a Marxist group that wants to tear down the nuclear family. So take it down and take your politics someplace else. So, Brian Stelter, one quick story on this Mr. Journalism professor. Right. He's never actually practiced journalism ever, ever. He was like some snot nose kid who got pulled out of school and started writing a blog and then wound up being with the paper and then CNN. Um, he actually came to me after I interviewed Alex Jones and was getting blowback and actually had

the nerve to say, this is journalism, right? Pointed out to my audience before Diane Sawyer interviewed Charles Manson. Okay. Mike Wallace interviewed the head of the KKK wearing his white hood. Okay. So like there's a long tradition of journalists interviewing people who are, you know, controversial. He comes to me and he says, will you ever get another guest again? You'll never get another guest again. He asks and tells me this.

I'm like, are you, you gotta be fucking kidding me. Like this is what journalists do. Like put on your big boy pants, Humpty, and go back to your little school books and figure out what it is that we actually do. Some time on the playing field would have helped you out because your time on the sidelines has clouded your little eyes.

Anyway, good riddance. Let's move on because what you said at the Young America's Foundation deserves a moment here. Your theory and speaking to this group, okay, the title is, Who Do You Think You Are? And I'm just going to give a couple of highlights, Sandra, forgive me, because there's so much goodness here. People need to Google it. It's at the dailywire.com

and find it. You talk about how you felt kind of old. You feel like a traveler from an antique land from the America of the early 60s where, you, where America was a good place. We were proud of our greatness, of our moral goodness. We recognized we had failings, but we were confident that our traditions would make us better. But that America's gone. It's not coming back. And you talk about how the problem for today's generation is the establishment, capital E, has collapsed. And that's not like establishment Republicans. It's something very different. I'm going to read from what Andrew wrote and said. The old men, the political, intellectual and cultural leaders who are responsible for passing on to you the wisdom of the ages and the traditions of the West have utterly abandoned their posts. And in their stead, there has gathered the greatest collection of liars, frauds, and clowns it has ever been my pleasure to make fun of. Your professors are buffoons. Your cultural critics are vulgarians.

Your priests are cowards. And your journalists aren't fit to unlace the sandals of those professors, critics, and priests. I'm talking about the people who are supposed to be the grown-ups, the parent class. And you go on to say, yes, their job is to be a bit old fashioned, slow to accept the latest fad, but they have real responsibilities and they've failed generation after generation, the past couple of generations, which is how we got to where we are. Yeah, it is true. It is the one thing about this time that strikes me as very different than other times that I've lived through.

This has happened before in human history. But in my now long life, I have not seen the complete abandonment of the barricades by what I call the parent class. It's partly it's a fear of being left behind, a fear of being deemed irrelevant, a fear of being mocked by the youth who don't know anything. And so they mock what they don't like and they mock what they feel is restrictive. But that's part of the interplay of the generations. We're supposed to be, we old folks are supposed to be a little bit fusty. We're supposed to say, hey, you know, before you tear down that fence, you might want to find out why it was put up in the first place. But I've witnessed this growing and growing since the 60s when I was in college and people would challenge, why is this poem great? Why are you putting forward this great poem by a dead white man? And the professor didn't know what to say. The professor just didn't have the background to be challenged. They had just accepted what they had been given. You were talking about, we were both talking about Black Lives Matter. The worst thing that I've seen is Black Lives Matter banners on churches. In Christ, there are no black lives and there are no white lives. There are only Christian lives. We are all

one in the body of Christ. No church should be putting up a sign that says Black Lives Matter more than any other life. It is a complete, you know, dereliction of duty. It was a dereliction of duty when the government came to these churches and said, oh, there's a flu going around, you have to close, and the church is closed. Well, no, you know, actually, that's not right. The government doesn't have the right to declare that you will close, that you can no longer give the body of Christ to your parishioners. So I really feel that the loss of the people who are there to defend our traditions is a loss of everything that makes us who we are. The New York Times the other day ran an op-ed declaring by a Yale and a Harvard law professor, two law professors, declaring that the Constitution should be gotten rid of because it chains us to the past.

Well, it does chain us to the past. It chains us to our best wisdom and our best traditions. And those traditions have to be defended by old men and women. week. Now those are all demonized. I know we're excited. We love the Clavin family. Those are demonized. You're not allowed to teach them. It's not that it's problematic to have some or all white men on your syllabus. It's problematic to have any. You can't have any white men on your syllabus in today's day and age. Andrew's going to stay with us. We're carrying him over because you've got to hear some more about his messaging and how we've been failed by the quote establishment. And what do we do about it? It goes back to my question up top about do we go to college? Do we what books do we read if we don't go to college, if we don't pay these fees? Because Joe Biden's not going to forgive everybody. Then what? How do we get the knowledge that he has that we need to fight these battles?

Stand by because we'll pick it up there in just a minute. So back to your speech, Andrew. You write, you said, and I have the transcript, the establishment has collapsed. And you may say to me, so what? Who needs the establishment? They're just what the poet Yeats called old, learned, respectable, bald heads who all think

what other people think. After all, didn't Western culture begin when the establishments in Athens and Jerusalem executed Socrates and Jesus for failing to toe the traditional line? Why shouldn't a revolutionary country like ours have an establishment that calls itself the resistance, even if what they resist is free speech and equality under the law. And you acknowledge there's some truth to this. Priests and scholars and political leaders who become too wedded to the way things used to be sometimes fail to recognize legitimate innovation when it comes along.

But there's a downside to losing the establishment dedicated to the preservation of tradition. How so? Well, first of all, great revolutions don't actually come from revolutionaries. All of history bears this out. Great revolutions come from great traditions. Jesus was expanding the tradition of the Jews. He wasn't just trying to destroy it. Socrates was expanding the traditions of Athens. He wasn't trying to destroy it. That was the mistake the establishment made in those cases. The American

revolutionaries are the perfect example of this. They weren't actually revolutionaries in that sense. They weren't trying to destroy the British legal system, British legal rights. They were trying to claim them for their own and take them to the next level. It was the French revolutionaries who were genuinely revolutionaries. And that's why they ended up knee deep in blood, killing everybody they could get their hands on and wouldn't tow the utopian line. And so, yes, an establishment can be fusty. It needs to be a little bit traditionalist. And yes, sometimes people have to stand up to the establishment and say, no, in order to actually fulfill our dream, in order to live into the meaning of our creed. We have to do something a little bit new, but that's different. Innovation is different than tearing everything down and declaring a utopia. And you need an establishment to teach you, to teach you the tradition that you

are going to innovate in. And to innovate means to renew, and you can't renew something that's not already there. And what we have now is we have an incredible, incredible depth of ignorance. Professors, you were saying this before the break, the professors now not only don't teach something because it's written by white people, which is absurd, they also, they muffle it. They muffle, say, a Shakespeare by telling you what their theory is about it instead of what Shakespeare was trying to say. Listen, you can disagree with Socrates, you can disagree with Shakespeare, you can disagree with anybody you want, but you have to understand what they were trying to say. And that's what teachers are there to teach you. That's what the establishment is there to teach you. Not there how their brilliant new consciousness is going to reinterpret Socrates. But what the hell is Socrates

saying in the first place? If you don't know that, you can't argue with it. If you don't know what the tradition is, you can't actually innovate with it. And this is the thing. Ultimately, they're going to teach you to be somebody. All of us learn who to be from our tradition. We're born with a nature, we're born with an inner soul and somebody who we are, but that somebody lives in a tradition and that tradition shapes who he is. If you don't have that tradition, then basically you've left yourself open to being shaped by whoever happens to be in power at the moment. And the people who have been in power for the last 50 years are materialists who wanted to teach you that

basically you're just a meat puppet filled with a chemistry set. And therefore, the most important thing about you is how you have sex and when you want sex and whether you get the sex you want when you want it. That is a tradition in Western philosophy. Schopenhauer called sex the lord of the world. Freud obviously thought that sex was behind everything. The Marquis de Sade, from whom we get sadism, believed that sex was the essential engine. But there's an entire other tradition which teaches us that we are spirits. We are actually, our body is the expression of something greater than itself. And that tradition teaches us that love is at the center of everything. That's the Christian tradition.

It's the Jewish tradition. It is the tradition that really made freedom what it is. It made the idea of freedom what it is. And that's the tradition we have to learn. If the old people aren has two kids going off to college now, one going to the military, I think, and one going off to college. And they were very worried that they were going to be downgraded if they let their conservative freak flag fly, you know, if they were openly conservative in their views at these institutions for good reason, for good reason. And it just so happens that I read your remarks right after this. And I'd said in the gentleman was asking me, what do you think I should advise them? And I said, I know other people disagree, but I believe they should stand by their true beliefs. They should stand up for themselves. And if they get downgraded, they should confront the professor, ideally on tape. And they should wear that C like a badge of honor. And when they go out there into the real world,

applying for jobs, they can show that C with pride and explain how they got it. This is what you write. You have academics who either won't teach the great books or silence those books by smothering them under their own banal and unfounded critical theories. Even worse, they threaten you with bad grades if you don't lie and pretend to believe those theories. That's a sin. It is a sin for an old person in authority to coerce a young person into compromising his integrity. It is a double sin to do that to young men, because while integrity is good for both sexes, it is the essence of being a man. To be a man, you have to be who you say you are and do what you say you will do.

I love that. Can you keep going? Yes. I mean, I think that this is, you know, we talk about manhood nowadays as if it's about eating steak and punching people. It's not. Anybody can punch anybody and anybody can sneak up on anybody and anybody can eat a steak. But to be who you say you are and to do what you say you will do is the definition of manhood, as far as I'm concerned. I mean, you talk about my son, Spencer, that is what I taught him. That is what he exemplifies. That's why I'm so proud of him. That when you say, I will stand for this, you stand. And when somebody says, tells you to lie, you don't lie. And I've gotten

very disappointed in conservatives who say, keep your head down until you get out of college, because then you've got the degree and you can do anything you want. It doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way. I'm not talking, telling anybody to put their head in the cannon's mouth. I understand you have to pick your fights. I understand you have to act cleverly. You have to act intelligently. But you cannot, you cannot say what you don't mean. And you can't put what you don't mean don't mean. And you can't put what you don't mean down on paper. And you can't put your name to lies. You simply can't do it. And if it means it's going to cost you, that is the lesson of the Gospels. The lesson of the Gospels is if

you speak the truth, if you exemplify the truth, you're going to pay a price. That is the lesson for the Gospels, but you're also going to get a reward. And so I think you just have to live by that and take the hits. And listen, Megan, I'm not saying this. I lost millions of dollars in Hollywood by being who I am. I don't think that anybody can actually argue with that. No one ever said I'm blacklisting you, but I was making a whole lot of money writing screenplays until I started speaking politically. And then my phone stopped ringing on the instant. And so, and you know, I gotta be honest, like I wasn't happy about it, but I never lost a minute sleep about it. The idea that I should be going up to guys like Harvey Weinstein and pretending one thing when I knew something else was true, would just be despicable to me. And I feel really

good about my life because I've lived that way. And I know the people who didn't live that way. This is the other thing. I know the guys in Hollywood who basically mouthed off and said things they didn't believe. And I can look in their eyes and see that they paid a price that was much worse than money, a price that I would never want to pay. And so, yes, you don't actually start to teach yourself your tradition. Why do you believe what you believe? You're not just a conservative because you're a cantankerous, you know, bold person or because

you're crusty or whatever. You're actually conservative because you want, you know, American conservatives are very different than European conservatives. We're not supporting lordship. We're not supporting bloodlines. I don't care what color. I swear I do not care what color you are or where you're from. All I care about is that tradition of freedom that's embodied in the Constitution and the

Declaration. That's what I'm trying to conserve. And if you don't know what that is, and you don't know why it's good, it makes it very hard to stand up to people when they lie to you. And it also makes it very easy for you to be fooled by their lies. And so to me, you know, I'm a bit of a sexist on this. I think that men, if we lose men, we've lost. Actually, frankly, I think if we lose feminine women, we've lost our humanity. And if we lose men, we lose the front line of tradition and freedom. And I think that you just can't. You can't give it away. You have to hold on to it or you lose it for all of us. I love what you said. I've got to end on this point because it's sort of where we began. You end the piece as follows. The good news is this. The priests and teachers and artists of all the generations past are still right here, walking by your sides. For thousands of years,

the best of them have been working in the midst of life's suffering and evil to write books and compose music and develop religion that are still lying at your feet like a bright trail through the present darkness. It is up to you to do what the old men have not done for you. Read those books, listen to that music, practice that religion, follow that trail. It will lead you back to who you really are. I love the way you see the world. But here's the question. If we're not going to go to the colleges necessarily that they want us to go to, because we're all going to be indoctrinated. We do not have the professors of yore. Or even if we are going to go, we're going to have to find a way to sort of educate ourselves on the side. Or if you're somebody like me who I went to college and I went to law school, but I wasn't taught the classics. I want to know. I realize I'm a lifetime behind. I want to know what you know. I want to know what Spencer knows. I want a reading list. I want an assignment list. I want a syllabus from Andrew Klavan. So how do I get that? Well, I'll tell you something.

You know, I went to a very good college, but I was a very, very bad student and I didn't, I didn't get my education in college. I got it afterwards. I bought all the, but I was a very, very bad student and I didn't get my education in college. I got it afterwards. I bought all the books while I was there. And when I got out of college and realized that I squandered four years of my life, I surrounded an easy chair with those books and I spent the next 15 years reading them. Those books are there. They are there. You can still buy them. They haven't been edited. They haven't been blacked out. They haven't been redacted by the FBI. They're still there and you can read them. And there are wonderful self-improvement places like the Great Courses tapes that are,

you shouldn't never be ashamed to listen to those. They teach you what the books are and you don't have to listen to their opinion and not check it for yourself. Listen to their opinion and then go read the books. Reading books, I always tell people this, especially young people, you're not reading if you're just reading the Internet. You're not reading if you're just reading a magazine or a blog or a bite. You have to read books. You have to go to the places where people have expressed themselves in their absolute best way over a period of time, over a length of time.

So read, you know, make that part of your day. Make it something you exercise. You know, you eat right. You do all the things that you have to do to keep yourself around, uh, you know, make it part of your day to read. Like I said, it took me 15 years before I walked. I remember I was on a street in London and I thought, you know what? I'm now an educated person. I now know what I need to know to have a page. But, but let me ask you, cause for the people out there who, you know, like who, where do you start? Where do you get the reading list? There's only a limited number of hours in the day and years left in our lives. How does one choose what to prioritize? What I would do is I would go back to something like The Great Courses or something that was

written before wokeness. So even go back to the 1950s and just find a list of great books and start reading them. And one of the things that does is it makes you think like, well, I really enjoyed reading Plato. I love Plato. He's a wonderful writer. He's very entertaining, but what is he talking about? And then you find a book that tells you, well, what was Plato talking about? And maybe you find two books and they say something different and you start to think about it and go back and read them again. It kind of becomes like the branches of a tree. And that's how you start to learn stuff. Maybe go for what you're interested in. Maybe you're interested in history. Maybe you're interested in a period in history. If you start reading about World War I, which I was fascinated by for quite a long time, then you start to wonder, well, what happened

before World War I? How'd they get there? And you start reading about the Victorian era. You know, I would say start with the West because that's your tradition, but you shouldn't be afraid to branch out and read about other things too. You know, it doesn't take that long. If you can give a half an hour of your day to reading, you'll find that you get through a lot of books in a year. And I'm a very slow reader too. I mean, I don't have Spencer's gift. He just zips through that stuff. But I almost move my lips when I read, but I just sit there doggedly and get through it day by day. And at the end of the year, I've read maybe 50, 60 books. And that adds up over time. There aren't that many great books. There are a million great books. There may be a thousand, but there aren't a million. So you can read them all if you want to. And then

you will find that you actually know stuff that other people don't know. One thing that happened to me as I began to become an educated person, I would be reading magazines and think, oh, this guy's talking about Rousseau, but he's never read Rousseau. I've read Rousseau, but he just took a class in Rousseau. And so that was very- You make that point in your remarks about Ibram Kendi, who's got the nerve to let the words Thomas Sowell come out of his pen, but has clearly never actually read Thomas Sowell like you have. Listen, I want to even I sit up straight when I mentioned Thomas Sowell. I mean, we all we all have to know what he's national treasure. This is so wonderful.

Again, I encourage everybody to go and read the actual piece on The Daily Wire. It's well worth your time. It's a short eight pages. Clavin, who do you think you are at dailywire.com? I will say this before we go. You mentioned love. You mentioned World War II. You mentioned a love of reading and becoming an expert sort of organically. And that actually describes Doug Brunt, my husband, perfectly, the man I love, and the man who is obsessed with World War I and World War II and has read everything and now is a true authority on everything from Stalin to the Russians. I mean, I could go deep into that rabbit hole thanks to him. But I've seen his world come alive as he taught himself so much about that era. And I mention it in particular today because it's his birthday. So happy 51st birthday, Duggar. I love you. And Andrew says love is the way forward. It's what

matters in life. And he's a hundred percent right. Andrew, thank you. Always great, Megan. Thanks a lot. Yeah. Come back soon. And again, happy birthday, Doug. Doug Bryant, very proud of you. And you are somebody who's helped me understand the value of love and how it can change everything. When we come back, we'll meet with an attorney fighting back against a racially hostile work environment that was supposed to be about something very, very different. My next guest is a family law attorney who represents domestic violence victims in Philadelphia. Now, Nicole Levitt is suing her employer, Women Against Abuse, alleging that the organization created a racially hostile work environment in the aftermath of George Floyd's death. Nicole, so great to have you here.

Welcome to the show. Great to be here. Happy birthday to your husband. Oh, thank you. Thank you very much. I love when he turns 51 because I'm nine months older than he is. So on this day of the year, he finally catches up to me. You know, I love it.

OK, so your story is not unusual, sadly, in the aftermath of George Floyd when we lost our minds and our previous guest, Andrew Claven, was just talking about how, you know, when you when you hire a bunch of diversity consultants to come in and find diversity problems, they never walk out saying you're good, like they're getting paid to find them. So women against abuse, a group focused on domestic violence, nonetheless thought this was a good idea. And what happened after these equity consultants came in? So we had equity consultants and DEI consultants. And like in workplaces across the country, after George Floyd was killed,

they came in to start doing trainings. And what followed was discrimination, stereotyping, and scapegoating, which in my opinion is not what DEI is supposed to be about. And it ended up being very divisive for our organization. Now, I understand that one of the things they they took issue with was the messaging. W your group started to say to say to the messaging to women who have been abused needs to be very anti-police. Yes, that is something that we debated for a long time. My stance on that always was, well, the police are imperfect. We all know

that. We would all like to improve the police and their response to domestic violence, but we need them. So how can we make it better while still using them and not vilifying them? What was the response you got to that? The response was we need restorative justice. We need other programs. It's dangerous for black and brown people to call the police. And it's actually promoting white supremacy. To call the police. And it's actually promoting white supremacy. To call the police? Yes, because it's putting more black and brown people in jail or in jeopardy of getting killed by the police. Things like that. That's insane. So now this group that's supposed to be helping

victims of abuse is considering what's going to happen to the abuser who may or may not be black or brown. Yes, as well as the client. And and they did say, you know, if your client wants to call the police, call the police, but give them these other options. Well, there's no other options that are really ready. I don't know of any restorative justice program that's actually working and helping domestic violence survivors. You think of just on Monday, we had on Marsha Clark, a famed prosecutor in the O.J. Simpson case, which began with domestic violence and escalated into murder. And, you know, you think about those 911 calls with Nicole Brown Simpson, you know, scared out of her mind, desperate for

the police to come. Oh, let me refer you to our restorative justice unit, and somebody will come out there and give them a bunch of counseling. Sure, that's going to work. Right. Or even a social worker. We know that domestic violence calls are some of the most dangerous calls for police to attend to. So I don't see how adding an unarmed social worker is going to help that situation at all. So then internally, in addition to the messaging to how to handle domestic violence victims and the messaging toward them, internally, the dialogue started changing in a way that I understand was very negative, including this declaration or contract they wanted you to sign about white people in general and

yourself in specific. Can you tell us about that? The specific line was own that all white people are racist and I'm not the exception. And that's where I knew I had to act. I absolutely refused to sign that. I was not going to single out any race for this type of dehumanization. And I found it to be very regressive and racist. I couldn't believe what I was reading, honestly. So what kind of a contract was it? Was it an employment contract or it was just a declaration about your racism? Well, it was actually a contract that would govern our behavior in legal center meetings. So the rest of it was fine. It was things like,

you know, give your attention to the person speaking, things like that. But then number five was this egregious all white people are racist entry. And that ruined the whole thing. I'm just curious, what was the race of the people handling handing this to you, demanding that you sign it? White, mostly white, also um people of color as well it's always like that like we've had so many of these stories where these guilty upper west side type white liberals working something out and um it's inappropriate and it is illegal i mean that that's completely illegal and it's a luxury belief like we need to be helping survivors, not debating, you know, who's racist and who isn't what what whole race needs to be talked about that way. mission. And I find that these DEI programs completely get companies and organizations

off of their mission and they create more division and frankly, more racism. Yeah. You're not there for self-flagellation. You're there to help women who are really suffering. The focus should be on them. What kind of group is it? Is it a charity? Is it a state or a city run organization? Tell us about your group. It's a nonprofit-profit organization we get private donations we also get federal funding from the department of justice and um from VAWA and um so it's very clearly illegal I mean anything with federal funding cannot divide you by race or compel speech of any kind they cannot force you to say that all white people are racist and so are

you so you're going to win your case I know it's pending right now before the EEOC, which you have to do. That's a step you have to take before you can file in federal court, which good on you, because this is the only way to stop this nonsense. You know, if these woke administrators won't stand up for what's right, then you've got to go to the courts. And the law is still, thank God, the law. I mean, thanks to the civil rights progress we made in the 60s with a law, it still stands. And now we've gone so far the other way. Now white people are taking advantage of these laws. It's just like, it's insane. Yes. And I found that a lot of people don't

even realize that white people can and should take advantage of these laws, that the civil rights laws are for everyone. So in addition to being white, you are in a minority group, which is you're Jewish. And I understand there was an incident where there was a general sentiment. They circulated an article about anti-Semitism. A member of the legal center circulated an article about anti-Semitism in the Black Lives Matter movement. And you chimed in on this. Tell us what happened. I chimed in on this and expressed my discomfort that I had asked for an article on anti-Semitism to be included with our anti-racism resources and that that suggestion was shot down. And what followed from that was just a barrage of angry emails from my colleagues accusing me of furthering white supremacism and taking the spotlight away

from black and brown people by bringing up anti-Semitism within this movement. And the reason why I thought it was important is because they were asking us to espouse this ideology, hook, line, and sinker, while I found it to be hurting a lot of other minorities like Jews, like Asians. And I wanted that to be part of the discussion. That was shot down, however. White supremacy is whatever fear Jews feel, the staffer added, is, quote, nothing compared to what black Americans feel. Was that true for you? No, that was not true for me. And I didn't want to have an oppression Olympics.

I just wanted anti-Semitism to be part of the discussion. But I found that if any offender against any other minority happens to be a person of color, if you bring that up, then you're furthering white supremacy. That is the accusation. So that's why we have, you know, crimes committed against Asians and it's largely by people of color in San Francisco. And then if you bring that up, it's furthering white supremacy. That's wrong. I think we need to be able to, you know, say what is true and not sugarcoat anything. That's the only way we're going to get to the bottom of any of these issues. Washington Free Beacon did an article on this, and they pointed out, though I admire your reluctance to go there, but you actually did experience violence in your life based on the fact that you're Jewish. As I understand it, you lived in Israel during the Second Intifada and actually you were shot at and some of your friends died. So you probably weren't feeling so good about the lecture about how whatever Jews feel, nothing compares to what black Americans feel, most of whom have not been personally shot at or seen their friends killed based on race or religion.

Right. That was exactly how I was feeling. But I didn't want to make it about that. And it was a spotlight I didn't want. All I wanted was for that to be part of the conversation. And that was shot down because anything that wasn't about Black Lives Matter was not going to be part of the conversation. And that was shot down because anything that wasn't about Black Lives Matter was not going to be part of the conversation. It just wasn't. So in addition to trying to force you to say something that isn't true and you didn't believe and change the way you counsel victims to steer them away from law enforcement and the vitriol you experienced in trying to raise an issue that is legitimate

and deserves some scrutiny if we're going to go down the identity lane. They also started offering money to so-called BIPOC people and not white people. BIPOC is Black Indigenous People of Color, Black and Indigenous People of Color. So that was for the racial equity audit. The premise of the racial equity audit was where does white supremacy manifest in your organization? So not is it there, but where does it manifest? And for the racial equity audit, they wanted people to volunteer. And if you volunteered, you would receive a stipend. They said the stipend for black and brown people would be higher because of the emotional labor that they would have to do

in this audit. I was astounded. I was shocked. I knew that was clearly illegal. And I was wondering when the adults were going to rejoin the room because it was crazy. Yeah. You as a lawyer must have known this is not going to stand. They can't get away with this. So when you first went to them and said, I object, but also I want you to know you've crossed many, many legal lines. They didn't immediately fall on their swords? No. In fact, they doubled down on their commitment to being an anti-racist organization yeah whatever that means it usually means exactly the opposite so now you've filed in the kandian sense yes yeah you you have right exactly because candy believes the only solution to past

discrimination is present and future discrimination um now you're still working there. So that's awkward. It is. But I keep my clients and their interests in the forefront of my mind. I know that my colleagues do that as well. And we are still working for the benefit of my clients. Obviously, I really hope that we can settle this. But I need these practices to stop and I need a guarantee that they're going to stop. You know, and I think that this isn't about me at all. This is about whether the Civil Rights Act is going to continue to govern our country. And so since you filed your complaint, have you received more backlash? Not exactly, but I really just try to compartmentalize that away and keep my eye on the ball. What do you think is more important at your group right now, helping victims of domestic violence, or this obsession with so called racial justice? I think it would depend on who you're talking to. I think the legal center as

a whole would say that helping victims of domestic violence is more important. But I think they would also say that you can't truly help black and brown victims unless you're anti-racist. Wow. Wow. It's not enough for you to say this person's race is irrelevant to me. What's relevant to me is she's being hurt by someone she trusts and probably loves and doesn't see a path out. You've got to focus on her skin color and yours. Yes, exactly. This is horrible. I'm sorry this is happening to you. You know, you remind me of Jody Shaw, right? Just one woman who's at a large organization who just says quietly at first and then loudly, I'm not going along with this. I'm not doing this. I object. I refuse. And she's involved in litigation now too. Jodi and I have become friends and she's really helped me a lot throughout this circumstance. It's an unusual circumstance to find yourself in. So I really found her advice to be very helpful. There are other pioneers in this. Paul Rossi is also one. So I'm not alone,

but I couldn't abide by all this and keep my integrity. And that was more important to me in the end. That's right, Nicole. And if they don't do right by you, you're going to win. But if you don't, another organization is going to scoop you up who will treat you better and respectfully and within the bounds of the law. All the best to you. Keep us updated. Thank you. We're going to be right back with someone who's fighting back against Google censorship and suppression in a fascinating new way. There is now an alternative. Todd Ricketts, who used to run the finance. He was the finance chair at the Republican National Committee. He co-owns the Cubs. He's fighting back

and is on the side of the angels on this. He's up next. My next guest is Todd Ricketts. He's the co-owner of the Chicago Cubs, and he was the finance chairman of the Republican National Committee under President Trump. He recently launched a new search engine, a competitor to Google called Free Spoke, F-R-E-E-S-P-O-K-E, that provides unbiased and uncensored information to users and it doesn't track or spy on them. So novel. Todd, thank God somebody finally did this. How'd you get the idea?

You know, I got to tell you, Megan, thanks for having me, first of all. And I would just start by saying that I've always been a little skeptical of just large companies that have a lot of control. And really, when you get into the technology world, these companies that have these platforms have such control over the news we see. And oftentimes, I would find like when I was searching on Google, that I would get results that I didn't expect or that I felt like were manipulated or put out in a way to lead me into a way of thinking. Really, as the time went on, I thought I was alone at first. As I talked to more people, I started to realize I was not alone and that other people felt that same way. And really, you've seen that explode in the last few years where we have this idea of free speech is really under attack in our country.

And we need outlets that are willing to put up all sides and have that debate of ideas and have these intellectual discussions instead of, you know, a more Russian-style thought police that tells you what to think and tells you what to say and so on and so forth. So your idea is not to create a conservative search engine. It's to create what we all used to think Google was, which is just a fair search engine that doesn't censor one side. Well, that's exactly right. I mean, at its heart, free-spoken might attract more conservative people at first, but it's really for everybody. And we call all the people who use free-spoke, we call them free-fokers. What we're really trying to do is put everything in front of people so they can make their own decisions about the issues of the day. And really, if you search for something that's a little more mundane,

like maybe lawnmowers or cars or those things, you're going to find similar results as you might find on Google or other search engines. But it's really when you dig into the news a little bit that you'll see that we're trying to present content from multiple sources and label that content as best we can to put a little context in it. I know I like this. I'll get to that one second. I'll get to the label because I like this as an important piece. But can you just stay for a minute on what you noticed? I think it's interesting to have an actual conservative created a platform like this because, you know, so often it's just, if you have something that might appeal to the right or just fair minded people, it's somebody who's like a little squishy in the middle, like you're an actual conservative. So what did you see when you were Googling on Google that led you to say, I know I'm not getting, you know, fair search results? Well, the greatest was I was talking to someone who was like

contemplating investing in free spoke. And I said, look, look, let's just go on on Google, pull up your computer, let's go on Google and type NRA. And so he did. And the actual NRA website was below the fold. It was like the seventh or eighth thing on there after a whole list of like a couple of anti-gun ads and then anti-gun groups. And so it really just reinforced that idea. I was a little bit shocked myself. I didn't realize we were going to be down so far. And so that, you know, that, that changes over time and changes on like what, who Google thinks you are

and like showing you the results, which, um, it's just, you find out that when you start digging in deep and digging in deeper that you're seeing, you're only seeing one side of these issues. It's almost hard if you're more centrist to stay a centrist because you're being manipulated in ways you don't even know, whether it's Twitter trying to send the content it likes in front of you or Google trying to send the content it likes in front of you. Or we've had John Stossel on the program talking about how Facebook has has been censoring him and anything he posts on climate change. They challenge him. Even when the challenge falls down on the facts, they won't rectify the situation. It's like you have so many people working against you,

understanding different points of view. No, it's 100% true. I mean, there's a couple of things you hit on there. I mean, first and foremost, keep in mind that a lot of these platforms, they make their money by keeping you in their platform, right? And so they're going to show you stuff that they're going to try to get you to click on to stay inside of their platform. And so they're going to show you the stuff that is the most shocking thing that you might see.

And then conversely, on top of that, you see a lot of these platforms are saying things like, we're not going to show anything or we're going to suppress things that go against the consensus on climate science. And it's like, well, that is not the free flow of ideas. This country was built on free speech, and this country was built on the free flow of ideas. And I think that anything that harms that is incredibly dangerous to us. And really, especially when you get into climate change, for example, I don't think I'm a denier or anything, but I'm also an intellectual who wants to see the facts and lay it out and be thoughtful about it. And to say that there's some sort of consensus or that people who disagree with the consensus can't be heard, it's just dangerous. And really, science that can't be questioned isn't really science. It's just dangerous. And really, science that can't be questioned isn't really science. It's just it's religion in a different package. This is the perfect time for this service to be born. Free Spoke, again, is the name of the company and the search engine in the wake of COVID and all of the lies we were told and the suppression that we suffered and the, you know,

just inability to question anything. Right. I think YouTube this week just changed its policy. Now you won't get censored if you suggest that masks do not prevent the spread of covid. Finally, you can say that without getting said. And by the way, YouTube and Google, that's the same same company. Yeah. So, I mean, it's that's the that's the mindset of your competitor that we should be censored for saying things like that. So to pretend that YouTube would be doing that to us and Google would be totally open minded and there be no manipulation is naive. So you're actually providing both sides of it. And what I love is the thing we just talked about, which is you will if you Google climate change on FreeSpoke, you'll get a bunch of news articles. You can either hit all or hit news, just like you can on Google. And if you hit news, you'll get a CNN article, you get a Vox article,

what you may get a Fox news article. And Todd's service free spoke will say, right. If you click like the Fox news link shows in a little red, right. CNN will show, uh, I think it's left. Yeah. And that's not D I'm trying to think of it i think it's l and so finally people who used to think cnn was just the news get a warning a disclosure i guess warning or disclosure depending on your point of view this is leftist okay so proceed at your own risk take it in fox news same thing i love that yeah no so we thought it was important to try to give context to the news that we're putting out there too is like We're not trying to lead anybody down a particular path, but just wanted to note that the sources have bit of a guide to give the context. So when you're reading these stories, you have that background to know where they're coming from. Well, I laugh because I know that middle M is also an option.

And my first skeptical thought was, nobody's going to be in the middle. I don't know who he's going to cite for in the middle. So I actually did look and it was like us weekly okay i accept that actually that's my you know when i get a little personal for say my daughter and i were at the airport and she picked up an us weekly and she's like this is the only truthful news in this whole whole store she's not wrong well one of the i know as i pointed out used to be uh finance chair for the RNC. And I know. So you've lived this personally and found out after the last election, Google was indeed manipulating what its users were seeing and were not seeing. Can you expand on that? And specifically, I'll shift over to the emails that if you had a Gmail account and you received an RNC fundraising email, there was an 85 percent likelihood that that got put into your spam folder. And if you receive that same email from the Democrat National Committee, there was only a 10 percent chance it would go into your spam folder.

So they were actively working to to suppress the effectiveness of the RNC's fundraising abilities in the last election. And I just keep coming back to the same word. It's just dangerous and it's shocking. Our country should be about free speech. I think there was Patrick Henry said, I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it. And I feel that is under attack in our country today. And we need to have some outlets that are willing to say, right, no, we're going to show all the sides and let people make their own decisions. It's really what our society and our culture and our country were founded on. So Google's got, what, 90% market share? Something like that. I've seen some varying numbers, but that's probably a good guess of it. I think they have about a billion users around the world. And it's foisted on you, on everything you buy. You buy the iPhone, it's right there. You click on it, you're Safari,

and next thing you know, you're off to Google and your laptop and so on. So if people want to try FreeSpoke, number one, how do they do it? How do they get it as their default surgeon or engine? And number two, are they going to be getting as good a service by us to the side, you know, as plentiful results, as meaningful results as they would with this huge, massive corporation? Yeah, yeah. No, I would be willing to put our search results up against Google's. I think we have a pretty robust engine itself. We're still working on the product, you know, and adding things every day. Uh, uh, but the best way really to, to, to use our product is to go to free spoke.com or go into one of the app stores

and download the free spoke app. And then you can have it on your phone. Does it cost money? Or cause how can you not be monitoring people? How can you, if it doesn't cost money? Cause I, I've been using it and I'm like, I must've just, I must be paying a bill that I didn't realize I was paying. Cause I know you're not spying on people. So how can that work, right? How are you making your money if you're not charging me anything? Well, first of all, you're a smart person to know that when you're on the internet and you're not paying anything, you are the product. That's how Google thinks about you and your information.

And so what we do is we don't track people. We have a privacy policy where we're not tracking. And that does inhibit your ability to target ads the most effective way. But also, you're still going to get some ads. They're just not going to be targeted to you based on everything that we've been gathering about you for the last 20 years. Good. So you're a little less creepy than Google is. Even Eric Schmidt, I think, used that word about Google, but it's a little creepy. No, no. That was Eric Schmidt's own line. He said, we try to walk up to the creepy line and not cross it. And my response is like, well,

who gets to decide where the creepy line is? Who gets to decide what's creepy? And so I've always felt that what they decided wasn't creepy was creepy. No, it's like a woman walking down the street with a dress on and there's some guy trying to sneak underneath the dress like I stop before the line gets creepy. No, you're already creepy. Get up. Exactly. All right. So free spoke. That's how I did it.

I went to my app store. I typed in free spoke. I hit download and I was off to the races. But how do you make it your default? Because like how will people have to enter it each time? There is a browser extension that you can put in Chrome to make it your default browser. Uh, and, uh, it's a little bit more involved, but, uh, we'll put, we'll put it up on the side so people can find it easily. Okay. All right. Good. Cause we need to make an active choice to do this, to support this

organization so that we're not ruled by this people who hate anybody who's not a leftist. I mean, truly, that's how it is. While I have you, I would be remiss if I didn't ask you about politics a little bit, given your's 19 and for the audience members at home this is upstate new york where the democrat pat ryan has prevailed over the republican mark bolinaro the republic is 51.9 to 48.1 but it's a special election they're gonna have to redo it again in november but the thing is that the guy who won the democrat ryan was trailing by double digits last month. So, I mean, MSNBC was gleeful about this. Like, dobs, dobs, dobs. It's changed everything. The generic congressional ballot now has the Republicans up only 0.2, whereas in February it was GOP plus four.

So, for sure, their fortunes seem to be going down. Why do you think that is? And what do you think can be done about it? Well, I would call it all really, really normal. I feel like this is a narrative that we go through every two years in every election. And, you know, right around August, at some point, people start saying like, oh, well, it looks like Republicans were going to win, but now they're not going to win and so on. But really, ever since 1994, when Newt Gingrich became the Speaker of the House, he was the first Republican Speaker in 40 years. And really, before that, Democrats had really controlled Congress. And so that was the first time that everything just became razor thin. And ever since then, every House seat, every Senate race, every race has become just so razor thin and everything is decided in the margins there. And that's, I think, what has led to kind of like this viciousness of politics in our country that we've seen grow is that there's a real battle going on in our country about where the

direction of our country is is going to go. And it's close. It's like we're really split down the middle of 50 50. Cook Political reporting red wave now looks more like a ripple come midterms. What's your prediction? I won't I won't mock you if you get it wrong. What's your prediction on the House and the Senate? Well, I mean, I'm not big into making predictions, but I think it's pretty clear that Kevin McCarthy will be the speaker come January. I don't think there's a lot of question on that. And when it comes to control of the Senate, this was always something that was going to be up in the balance. I think there's four states where Republicans need to hold on to their seats and and then gain one more in either Georgia or Arizona and so on. So it's it's always it was always going to be like a kind of a tough year, I think.

And that gets I think it's showing itself to be that tough year. And then really we'll just kind of wait and see where it goes and come October. Now, what about presidential? Who will be the Republican nominee? What would you have to say right now? You know, I really I'm not going to say anything right now just because I don't I don't have somebody and I don't nobody's actually announced. And really, I feel like every election you have to focus on what's right in front of you because you can't count any chickens before they hatch. So give me top three names. What's that?

Top three names of who I think is going to run or who I think should run. Who do you think will run? Oh, well, I mean, as of today, I think that President Trump will run again. Ron DeSantis has made it clear that he's going to run. And then there's a whole bunch of people that are out there, you know, kind of like your Tim Scott's or your Greg Abbott's or your Glenn Youngkin's, who I'm sure are kicking it around right now that, yeah, wait and see what happens. But there's a lot of work to be done before then. And what do you think about the chances of a Republican overtaking Joe Biden if he runs again? You know, I think it's just such a long ways away. You know, a week is a lifetime in politics, as they say, and we've got a lot of weeks in between now and then. I think the administration has shown itself to be a little more left wing than the country. So we'll see. We'll see how that takes place in the next year or two to shape that up. So it's going to be so interesting. All right, listen, in advance of those midterms,

in advance of the presidential election, you want to make sure you're getting fair news. You want to make sure anybody's bias is flagged for you, right? Just in case you don't know some of the sites you don't know. And that's why you need Todd's new site. Free spoke.com will help you get through it. And so far, I agree with all of his classifications. So good to see you. Thanks for coming on. Yeah. Thanks for having me on.

Really good to see you too. Yeah. To be continued. We'll do it again. All right. Thanks to all of you for joining us today. Your calls next week. I promise.

I would love to do that. And I, as I mentioned, we are having Spencer, Spencer Cleveland next week, and we're going to have Michael Schellenberger back, Michael Knowles. And we'll have an have Michael Schellenberger back, Michael Knowles. And we'll have an exclusive interview with Richie McGinnis.

You may or may not know Richie McGinnis. When I explain to you who he is, you'll know him well and you'll enjoy it. Have a great weekend. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.