The Megyn Kelly Show - Dems EAT Their Own in California, with Ana Kasparian, and Trump's "Softer" Deportation Approach, with Gregory Bovino | Ep. 1317

Episode Date: May 14, 2026

Megyn Kelly is joined by Ana Kasparian, host and producer of "The Young Turks," to discuss the top Democrats in the California governor’s race spiraling, Katie Porter taking wild shots at Tom Steyer, Xavier Becerra embarrassingly trying to avoid tough questions, Kennedy offspring loser Jack Schlossberg struggling to explain his actual qualifications and role as a “content creator,” backlash to his congressional campaign, the massive campaign against Thomas Massie, how powerful donors are targeting him over his stance on Israel and Epstein push, and more. Then Gregory Bovino, former Border Patrol Commander at Large, joins to discuss concerns the Trump administration is taking a softer approach now on deportations, shifting rhetoric from immigration officials since Bovino left his position, how Trump’s deportation policy shifted after the Minnesota killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, why Bovino believes the administration backed off aggressive enforcement, why “self-deportations” are one of the most effective immigration enforcement strategies, how interior enforcement impacts border security, the role of E-Verify, and more.   Kasparian- https://kasparian.substack.com/ Bovino- https://x.com/GregoryKBovino   Birch Gold: Text MK to 989898 for a free info kit and to see if you qualify for up to $10,000 back through May 29. Herald Group: Learn more at https://GuardYourCard.com Veracity Health: Head to https://VeracityHealth.co and use code Megyn for up to 65% off your order Relief Factor: Break up with pain—Relief Factor targets inflammation so you can move better and feel better; try the 3-Week QuickStart for just $19.95 at https://ReliefFactor.com or call 800-4-RELIEF.     Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKelly Twitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShow Instagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShow Facebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow  Find out more information at:https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome to The Megan Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at New East. Hey, everyone, I'm Megan Kelly. Welcome to the Megan Kelly Show. Later today, a first-time guest on the show, Gregory Bovino will be here. We've covered him a lot. And now on the outside, he's able to speak freely about his role in the deportations and border policies of the administration for which he worked. This is going to be a very compelling exchange. He is ready to talk about, what he was doing to enforce the border and why he got pushed out. And who was like-minded and who isn't? And what is the policy right now as he sees it? He's going to be very frank and we're really looking forward to having him. But we're going to start today with two high-profile races in California, where Spencer Pratt continues to gain ground in the L.A. mayoral race. And then there's the story that we've been teasing for a couple of days in the governor's race with Katie Porter firing off a shot at her fellow Democrat Tom Steyer. Go Katie. This is the way to channel

your rage, sister. You got it. Now you pointed at your opponents and you let loose, not at your lowly staff risk, because that makes you look bad. Plus, a brutal interview moment with the Democratic candidate who is becoming the frontrunner. We'll tell you who that is. Joining me now for all of this, Anna Kasparian, she is the host and executive producer of the Young Turks. When there are supply constraints on commodities, prices surge. You see it with the fuel prices happening right now, right, as a result of what's going on in the Strait of Hormuz. And you know what else is a limited commodity? Gold, they mine it out of the ground and when it's gone, it's gone. Governments cannot just print more of it, and that is why everyone from central banks to savvy savers

consider diversifying with gold. If you've been thinking about it for years but have never moved some of your savings into physical gold, consider Birch Gold Group. Now through May 29th, Birch Gold is giving first-time gold buyers a rebate of up to $10,000 on qualifying purchases. For details and a free information kit on diversifying into gold, text MK to the number 9898-98. Birch Gold can help you convert an existing IRA or 401K into a tax-sheltered IRA and physical gold.

Text MK to the number 9-8-9-98 to see if you qualify for a first-time gold buyer rebate of up to $10,000. Anna, welcome back. Great to have you. Thank you for having me. Happy to be here. I've been watching you all over the internet, setting everybody on fire. It's been fun to watch. I love it. I love Pierce Morgan and I love watching you on there because you take no guff from anyone and I'm always rooting you on. Thank you. Okay, we got to start with Katie Porter. You and I were on the air when we first dissected her viral videos and it was a very fun segment and I think our audience enjoyed it. Now here she is again and she goes on CNN. She gets cross-examined gently by Dana Bash about some of her low moments and she hurls out an allegation

about where that tape came from in which she berates the staffer, get the F out of my shot. And it was sort of an odd tape because clearly she wasn't live in the moment because she says, get the F out of my shot, then the staff are like kind of just talks in a way you wouldn't if they were live on the air saying, no, you said that thing wrong. This is the way you need to say it. And, you know, she's still annoyed. So it did suggest that it was being pre-taped with a friendly, some sort of a friendly. And we didn't really know or ask who that was on the other side. But she's offering facts now. What she says are facts. And here is what she said to Danabash. He just did an interview with Pod Save America where he said he was the only candidate who

could stand up to corporate interests he was asked specifically well what about katie porter this is what he said she's hostile to special interest but she doesn't have your money to get ads up right that's a real thing so the question is can someone win and do this that is the actual question john not can someone be good-hearted there are lots of good-hearted people who i would be happy if they won the question is can someone actually do this what's your response to him well given that tom steyer is the person who leaked the video with me and the staffer from five years ago. He pretty clearly didn't think that I would he pretty clearly wanted to be governor bad enough to knock me down to do it.

And I do you know that. I apologize for that video many times because I am confident that is the case. I've been told by many people. It's a Department of Energy video. It was only held by the Department of Energy and people can follow the trail to who his campaign staffers are and understand what happened there. And the truth is, look, Tom Steyer is a corporate special interest. He's made his billions off being behoove into corporations, making money off fossil fuel, oil, coal.

Don't shots fired. So she's blaming Steyer for the release of that video, suggesting it shows he's worried about her. So what does the Steyer campaign do? They issue the following statement, saying, Tom has nothing to do with that video. This is an attempt for. from Katie Porter to deflect from her past mistakes. Katie Porter only has one person to blame for her standing in the race, and it's herself, which I must tell you is a non-denial denial. Tom has nothing to do with that video could be absolutely true, and yet he may have leaked it. Like, he, of course,

he has nothing to do with the actual video. He's not in the video. He didn't touch the video. He wasn't responsible for it leaking from the Department of Energy necessarily, but he might have received it and leaked it. And what most likely happened was it was leaked. It was leaked to a staffer and he could keep his hands clean and this statement could be factually true in every way. In other words, you would say, if you really had nothing to do it, he would say neither Tom nor anyone on his team had anything to do with leaking this video. We don't need to leak videos of Katie Porter to make her look bad. She just has to be Katie Porter for that to happen. So I think he did it. And we did look to see his staff. We could not find evidence that current

staffers of his gubernatorial campaign worked at the DOE. However, we did find that a 2025 hire out of one of his companies did indeed come from DOE. There was a Bloomberg article that his galvanized climate solutions company hired Chris Creed, who oversaw investments for the DOE in its loan office, not accusing Chris Creed. We don't know whether he had anything to do with this. However, it is not true that they have no DOE people working for Steyer. In any event, what does all of this tell us about the state of the state of the state of gubernatorial campaign in California where the latest polls, I'll tell you, show us something

interesting. There has been movement. Xavier Bacera, Javier, is now in first with 19%. That puts him two points above Steve Hilton, who is tied for second now with Tom Steyer. Those two guys, Hilton and Steyer have 17. Javier has 19. Fourth is still the other Republican check. Bionco at 11 and Katie is bringing up the rear at 10.

Chad Bianco is doing better than Katie Porter. That actually blows my mind. Okay, so my honest opinion, I am not enamored with any of these candidates. I'm not a fan. Because you are sane. Well, I mean, honestly, if you take the time to watch the gubernatorial debate that's happened already, oh my goodness. I just, there was one particular moderator who,

In the very beginning, I couldn't decide whether I liked her or hated her because she was actually very aggressive. In the end, I decided, no, no, I love her. She should be the moderator for every political debate in the country because she really held these candidates feet to the fire and didn't let them get away with simply saying that they're going to do these amazing pie in the sky policies. She wanted to understand, okay, how are you going to carry out those policies? And I remember Tom Steyer in particular really struggled in answering those questions. I don't remember exactly what the policy was, but there was something he wants to implement if he wins as governor. But what he wants to do has already been struck down by the Supreme Court. So the moderator asked him, how do you propose to do this knowing that you're going to run into this massive legal hurdle?

With Katie Porter, I'm actually shocked at how poorly she's doing, to be honest with you. Chad Bianco had no policy solutions at all. And I'm open-minded to a Republican as long as he actually has well thought out policy proposals. And California honestly needs a little more balanced, politically speaking. But he was, he was awful in the debate. He hasn't thought through anything. He's just very angry at Democrats and made that very clear. And, um, okay. Yeah. We accept. Right. And so, but Javier Bacera didn't perform well either and seemed to kind of be stuck in the 2020 era of politics, which made me worry because I think California in particular needs to kind of move away from that and start really thinking about the revenue that's coming in through

taxes and how much we're hurting ourselves by, we are overspending. And the reason why we're overspending is because money is going to certain nonprofits and certain programs without any real oversight of those programs. This is something that the California state auditor has put out many reports on. And so we are in debt. The state of California is in a massive amount of debt. We owe money to the federal government. And so we can't have a clown leading the country. I'm sorry, the state. We need someone who's actually smart, who understands, yes, we need to take care of Californians, but we also need to increase our tax revenue by making this a desirable place to do business in.

And I just, I don't see many good solutions or solutions at all from these candidates, which really worries me. Go Steve Hilton. He could still do it. If he got Chad's 13%, that would give him a running chance at, least right now if you add all the Democrat numbers together, it's an easy Democrat win in the general. But you never know. You never know because I feel like the more Californians get exposed to Steve, the more they're going to properly fall in love with him. I want to tell you this. So now, Bacera's in first place, which is just stunning because that's a real come-from-behind

moment for him. He was down in the bottom not too long ago. And so he's, I guess you could call the frontrunner now. He sits down for an interview with KTLA's Annie Ron. And look at what happens. Watch this. Not five. This is the start of our interview with Javier Bressetta in Highland Park. By the way, this is a profile piece. This is not a gotcha piece, right? Well, look, I think these questions are fair. It's in order to learn about you as a candidate. So long as about the profile. I don't know how you define profile, but I'd like to begin the interview.

The way I describe profile is you talk about all the things that I've done, things I want to do, and along with some tough questions. But not only tough questions. Wow. No. Wow. Disqualified. It's great to be a Democrat. No, right? It's great to be like no Republican would ever sit down with press and be like, so of course, this is going to be a nice profile of me, right, with just a couple hard questions. Well, look, to be fair, I mean, I'll give you two examples on the Republican side, obviously on a federal level, but I hate this behavior, regardless of who does it. So, you know, on the Republican side, we know how Trump treats journalists who ask him questions he doesn't like. He just called a journalist stupid this week because she asked. a question about how the cost of the White House ballroom has doubled. And then he just said, it doubled inside. You're stupid. It doubled in size. I doubled it in size. You're stupid. You know, woman. Pete Higgsith, I mean, it wasn't reporters in this case, but he's sitting before members of Congress to answer questions, important questions about what's going down in Iran. And he just, you know, he excoriates them whenever they ask a question he doesn't like and

he accuses them of acting in bad faith. In regard to Democrats, though, no, you don't get to dictate. Javier Becerra doesn't get to dictate which questions are asked in a journalistic interview. We need to see how he answers and handles difficult questions. So across the board, I don't care what your political ideology is. If you are willing to sit down before a reporter and answer questions, again, you don't get to dictate what they ask you. You don't get to tell them how they do their jobs. I will say this, in his defense, in setting up such an interview, the reporter, the journalistic team, will normally pitch to the person what they have in mind.

Like, I've been pitched many times that we want to do a long profile of you. And I can see how you would think, yes, okay, so you're going to do bio, you're going to talk about arc of career, as opposed to just an interview where we talk about your policies, if you're a politician. That's not an unusual conversation to happen in setting it up and pitching it. and getting it and agreeing to it, but to have the actual candidate sit down and telegraph openly and on cam, I don't want to be asked too many hard questions. I want the puff piece. I have a profile that I was promised. It's pretty extraordinary and suggest the guy's not ready for prime time. Here is a former Biden administration official who seems to feel the same, not about the interview, but about him. Listen to this. This is on CNN, SOT 5B.

whoever is going to be governor will have to stand up to Donald Trump. Can I tell you, after working in Joe Biden's administration, I do not trust have you ever set out to do that? Can I, can I just say, whoa, whoa, what? I don't trust that he would be able to do that because, and that is the feeling in trust that he'll be able to stand up to Trump. I don't think that he will be able to stand up to drop and lead. And the reason why anybody on that stage who, who is, before she answers that, can I, can I ask

you why? Because when I saw him in the administration, and I think a lot of people did, and it's, it's, people understand this. It's he was not effective in governing. And I think that a lot of people in the Biden administration are talking about this because they realize that he was not an effective HHS secretary. And if you ask any cabinet secretary, they would tell you the same thing. Wow. How about that? This makes a lot of sense. Okay, so I wasn't familiar with that woman. I've actually been on Abby Phillips's show with her on the panel. And she, like, gave me the stink eye the entire time, but didn't really debate me on anything.

So I couldn't figure out what was going on. Now I realized she was in the Biden administration, and I was criticizing the Biden administration at the time. Anyway, I just, I don't know what to make of what she has to say there. It seems like she has a favorite that maybe she's looking to promote. Who knows? But I just, I wasn't impressed personally by his. debate performance. He served in the Biden administration. I didn't see anything stand out that was

worthy of praise, to be honest with you. And I think that we are currently dealing with a political system where these politicians think, like, this is how it's supposed to work. I rise up. I pay my dues. I start low and then I work my way to a gubernatorial position in the country without proving a damn thing about my accomplishments. That's a huge problem. No, you're not entitled to that. But it looks like people are going to go for him based on how he's doing in the polling. It's kind of surprising. Like, I couldn't tell you what Javier Bacera is proposing to do to make California a better state. And that's a problem.

No, he's like vanilla pudding. It's like, that's what I think. It's fine. It's not, like, exciting. It's not ice cream. It's not, like, it's just pudding. It's, like, kind of squishy and kind of just goes down without any effort, but, like, it doesn't excite anybody.

Right. So we'll see. We'll see what happens with that, but it is interesting to see the knives coming out for him and him feeling defensive. He's not used to being at the pointy end of the spear. But on brand here, as we're talking about Democrat candidates who get a pass or who, you know, the machine gets behind. And then they, then you look at them and you're like, that's what the machine is pushing on us. That brings me to Jack Schlossberg, who is perhaps better known as JFK's grandson. He's the son of Caroline Kennedy, who was.

the sister of JFK Jr. and the daughter of Jackie and Jack. He is the son of Caroline Kennedy. And he's an absolute idiot. He's 33 years old. He is a total idiot. He went to Harvard and Yale. He's got a law degree and a business degree. And it just, if there's better proof that those things mean nothing when you've got a family connection in particular, I don't know of it. So he decided to run for a U.S. House seat for the Upper West and East Side of Manhattan, my old hot, where I used to live for many years. And this is because Jerry Nadler said he was retiring. It's a safe Democrat seat. There are, I think I was the last Republican on the Upper West side, although I lived in a building with a bunch of Orthodox Jewish people who tend to vote Republicans. So maybe not the last, but one of the last. And this, This is the seat he's running for. So the New York Times, Anna, does a pretty lengthy hit piece on him. And what a mess he's been in this campaign.

And I'll just give you some highlights. They say, okay, he announced his campaign. His aides teed up calls with frenzied media outlets, Democratic luminaries and a roster of wealthy donors. They wanted to project that he was a serious candidate ready for what was promised to be a grueling race. But just hours into his day one launch, the candidate abruptly announced a change of plans, according to three people familiar with the events. Forget dialing for dollars.

Mr. Schlossberg said, he needed a nap. Real. Who hasn't been there, to be honest? Wow. He then effectively disappeared for the day, keeping his team reeling. And it turns out this is evidently they write par for the course. They go on to say that he can't keep anybody on staff. They've described an operation so erratic and plagued by turnover that it raises questions about how he might handle himself as a member of Congress.

Early on, he would regularly blow off weekly strategy meetings, called for his benefit. He made a habit of disappearing for long stretches with little notice or explanation. He did carve out time to swim or paddleboard in the Hudson most days. So don't get too attached to Josh Lossberg, because he obviously must have contracted some hideous disease. No one swims in the Hudson. Don't do that. he's pushed boundaries on social media. Oh, that's one way of putting it. Talking about his jizz, forgive me, but like making cocktails with it. Okay. Yeah, sorry that came out of nowhere.

He's never held a job. Like, end of story. Hello. That's it. Never. Never. And they actually, they point this out. Like, the Times is ripping him to shreds, talking about all the only thing he's accomplished is he worked for Vogue as a correspondent for like a couple of freelance articles that went nowhere. and then work for John Kerry for four months at the State Department doing absolutely nothing. So like that's it. He's 33. By this point, you should have something.

Oh, for sure. I mean, 33, you've never held down a job. You think that it's told. I mean, the fact that he says out loud, I need a nap, tells you everything you need to know. I mean, try telling your boss that. Okay, you're going to get no sympathy.

Am I starting to like him? Something's happening inside of me. But I got a lot of years on him. Well, you've got to at least appreciate that he's saying the quiet part out loud. I mean, there's so many politicians who think the same things and still do the same things, but get away with it. So I don't know why the New York Times has it out for him, but I'm glad they do because it's important for people to know this.

What gives him the entitlement to a house seat when he hasn't been able to prove himself in any place of work. He has never worked for anyone. What makes anyone think he would work for the American people in New York? Exactly right. And Nancy Pelosi endorsed him. Of course. Of course she does. He's not qualified for this position. He's got the former Ted Kennedy people advising him. He's got Ron Clayne, who was Biden's chief of staff for a time, helping him out, advising him. Like, he's got all these sort of luminaries within the Democratic Party because he's a Kennedy, although nobody knows that because his last name is Schlossberg, because he's, you know, he's the son of a female Kennedy.

Here he is, apparently he got, nobody paid attention to this candidate for him that he participated in because no one gives a shit who represents the Upper East and West Side of Manhattan. But he did participate in one, and the Times went and reported on it. And he got rather irritated, Anna, when the subject of his lack of any credentials or experience came up. Watch. The last six months I've run a campaign that has introduced me to thousands of New Yorkers that I've met and gotten them incredibly excited about politics in a time when a lot of people feel very disillusioned. I think some people who know of you are wondering about your sort of your resume and what you've accomplished. And I think perhaps your answer to that question about your top accomplishment citing the campaign might, again, raise flags for people about inexperienced.

Do you want to say a little bit more about qualifications for Congress and what you've done? those people, but I'd love if you introduce me to them. I've been working in politics and in government since Obama ran in 2008 and I went to volunteer on his campaign. I worked at the State Department for Secretary of State John Kerry. I was a volunteer EMT in college. While you may not think that content creation and building a following based on speaking out for what you believe in at a time when others were unwilling, taking on your own family members, traveling across the country to every single swing state serving as a delegate at the DNC is an experience. I do. I participate in giving the Profile Encourage Award out

every single year at the John of Kennedy Library and I passed the bar in the top 1% of the country. Anna. Painful. He was a content creator. That's the public service. The question was what public service dev you had that would recommend you for this job?

He's a content creator at a time when few wanted to do it. Well, look, let me ask you a serious question about this because I've been thinking about this issue for a few years now. I feel like we're having a very serious competency problem in the United States in our political class. Oh, yes. And what has definitely highlighted this for me, yet again, is how the war against Iran is going. And it's not about like, oh, let's put the question of whether or not we should have done what we did away first.

I can just talk about the two different sides, the United States and Iran, and how both sides are carrying out this war. Iran has been incredibly strategic, incredibly strategic, and they are winning this war as a result of that. And so it's not just Trump. Trump is surrounded by advisors. Trump is surrounded by career politicians in his ear telling him what to do. And I just do people understand how stupid our government looks on the international stage? And I don't think that's fair to the American people. I don't think that there are, I don't think our country is full of dumb people. I just think that, I just think that, Our political system for some reason seems to incentivize or attract some of the dumbest people to raise their hands and say, I want to be a public servant. But they're never really public servants. Even if they wanted to be public servants, they wouldn't even know how.

They don't care. They just don't care. They're not really educated on how our government works. What international law is. They don't care about any of that stuff. They just want a position of power. And for what? Insider trading?

A lot of that's going on in Congress. So right now the American people are furious. We look embarrassing on the international stage. And it's just not right. It really isn't. I mean, our fall from grace didn't happen overnight. And I think we really do need to invest in better schooling and education. And we got to bring back home economics.

Like we need to teach Americans and civics. And civics, yes. Like there's so many elements of public education, for instance, that have been cut out that I think we need to reintroduce again. So we raise people who can compete with people in China, who could compete on the international stage. We can't do it when other countries rising superpowers are investing everything they have into future generations. We're not doing any of that here in the United States. These are all excellent points. I mean, and look at it, it doesn't matter where you go to school, because this guy, as I point out, is a Harvard law or Harvard and Yale law and business graduate.

I mean, he's got all the credentials in the world. It didn't take. It didn't work. So it's not necessarily about where you get to your degree. It's about actually learning and becoming a smart person and being attuned to what's happening around you. When you were talking, the thing that came to mind really was social media. But social media could be both the death and the resurrection of good people in Congress. I think on the one hand, people don't want to run because they don't want all their mistakes or their missteps to be thrown in their face, you know, ad nauseum, people who have made

whatever mistakes in their personal lives or their professional lives know that they're going to get dragged. And they don't want to do it. It's so brutal. It's so brutal. And then at the end, even if you get the prize, what happens? You're not respected. It's not a position that's respected anymore. So why put yourself through it? And then even if, like, the presidency is still generally respected, but you get that, you probably, you know, you might get a bullet in the head. Like, geez, this doesn't sound that great. Yeah. Well, also. So there's that problem. But maybe on the other hand, just the second piece of it was, like, our kids, they've, they've grown up immersed in social media. They're used to having all, not mine in particular, but most have had their

lives out there since the time they were tweens. And it's like, it's past embarrassment territory. Like everyone's had all their thoughts and lives on the internet forever. There's no embarrassing anybody or doing, so maybe we'll get a better crop in about 10 years when you get to these kids who are like, oh, fuck it. I'm good. Yeah, I mean, I would, I would love for people to be able to see through the obvious political smears, right, when people bring up, like, if you're showing me a post by someone when they were like 14 or 15 years old, how about you fuck off? I'm not interested, right? Like, we need to create a culture that stigmatizes that kind of dirt. Yes. Right? And so, because we do

need to incentivize good people who want to improve the country to run for political office. And by the way, what's happening to Congressman Massey right now with these... No, we're going to talk about that next. Okay, yeah, because it's just, I think it's sick. I think it's absolutely sick. And I'm saying this as someone who disagrees with him on a lot of policies. But what I love about Congressman Massey is that he's real. He's authentic. He's a good faith actor and he's principled. It is nearly impossible to find anyone in Congress like that. So to lose him to, you know, a Israel lobby funded candidate would be absolutely awful.

But we could- Would make perfect sense. I mean, it shows you how our elections actually work, right? How money in politics is really a terrible. Wait, hold that thought. Sure. I want to do Massey, I want to do that discussion properly. But I just have one more for you on Schlossberg before we leave him.

So one of the other things the Times points out. is that, you know, he's got his famous social media feed, which is very nasty and had some of the examples I just mentioned. But apparently, as he's been running for office, he's been using it for among other things to plagiarize the posts of other Democrats he likes without credit. So I guess Seth Moulton, a Democrat of Massachusetts, posted something after the Maduro raid. Can we, let's, do we have the Seth Moll? Oh, we have it spliced. Okay. So I'm, I'm going to show you here, Seth Moulton's post, and it spliced with the one Schlossberg, posted, like, the next day, which was clearly copied off of Seth Moulton without credit or attribution. Watch. I'm recording this today with a serious message.

Tonight, I have a serious message. This week we learned two disturbing things. Two things happened this week that should make you feel disturbed. First, President Trump's announcement this morning that airspace over Venezuela should be considered closed as he weighs military actions. First, Trump ordered that airspace around the country of Venezuela be shut down, as he considers whether to take additional military action there. The U.S. does not have the authority to close airspace over another country. Trump is preparing for war. A war Congress has not declared...

The U.S. has not declared war on Venezuela? And the U.S. does not have the authority to shut down the airspace around another country. Second, yesterday news broke that Secretary Hexas allegedly ordered the Joint Special Operations Command. to conduct a second strike to kill two survivors. If we were at war, that would be a war crime. But we are at war, so it's murder. If we were at war, that would be considered a war crime. Since we aren't, some are calling it murder.

It's identical. He copied him almost word for word to the point where Seth Moulton's office noticed, reports the Times, and called Schlossberg's office saying WTF. and they had to admit that he did it, they were like, well, he liked it. Oh, my gosh. His excuse was, well, I liked it. Yes.

I can't. I can't believe it. Add an addendum that he copied Seth Bolton. He's an idiot. Well, I was looking for, I always try to give people the benefit of the doubt. Like, think about all the other possibilities before you assume that the person did the bad thing, right?

So we all know that when it comes to political parties or political groups, they'll pass around talking. points and they'll literally just read the talking points or tweet or post the talking points. So I thought maybe there's a possibility that they were sent the same script. And so they both read the script. But no, that's not what happened. This is unbelievable. I mean, how did this guy get into Ivy Leagues?

I wonder, gee, could it be his connection? I know. I know. Wow. It's so annoying because think about it. You know, there are so many kids out there right now in like lower to middle class. communities who are working their asses off with like a dream of improving their station in life by getting into one of these Ivy League colleges. Yeah. Like the thought of getting an education at Yale

and Harvard, getting a law degree, right, is truly, it would be truly life-changing for said young man or woman and their family. And they don't get to go because this prick, for no reason other than his mom is who she is and his grandparents were who they were, takes the slot. And what does he do with this this rich asshole, entitled jerk, does absolutely nothing. He futses around with it, does some tour in a van, pumps up his social media, works for John Kerry for four months, and yet another rule that probably should have gone to somebody else, does some limited stint for vogue writing about the Democratic National convention and then wants, it thinks that he's entitled to represent a very large community with,

by the way, a lot of heavy hitters on the Upper East Side and Upper West Side of Manhattan, and it goes beyond that district. So like, fuck him is in his entitlement. I really look forward to his humiliation. And honestly, if the residents of Upper New York, Upper Manhattan vote for this guy to represent their interests, they're going to get exactly what they deserve. which is to be embarrassed. He will implode. He will not make it past the first year in office. He won't. It's very clear to me, and I've said before, he's mentally ill. He's not just weird.

This guy is very obviously mentally ill. He was reportedly urged by his own mother not to do this. They knew within the family, he's off. There's something wrong with this guy. And it took only time for it to be exposed. We need to worry more about the ones for whom it's never exposed until they get into office. and then they unleash their crazies on their proposed legislation. Okay, so let's talk about Massey, because that's actually the most interesting story, I think, of the news today. So Thomas Massey has easily won his prior elections, and he's beloved as a Republican in the state of Kentucky.

However, this time around, thanks to two factors, I think, it's fair to say, he could lose his primary. He might not even be the Republican nominee. And I think those two factors, you tell me, he'd probably been following it more closely, but are President Trump, who's very annoyed that Massey has continuously bucked the president's demands, whether it's on Epstein or other matters. Like, I don't think he voted for the extension of Trump's tax cuts. You know, he's like a fiscal hawk and so on.

And the Israel lobby, which he's been critical of Israel, which is like very, very rare now for a Republican. and he's had the full power of the Israel lobby, whether it's APEC or Miriam Adelson and other pro-Israel, pro-Jewish groups who are just unleashing cash to promote his primary opponent who's been backed by the president in the, again, Republican primary

that's about to take place. So now as we inch up to that vote, we get, of course, the 11th hour drop of a woman alleging he was somehow emotionally abusive to her. It's like he was dating her for a couple of months. He was emotionally abusive and he offered me $60,000 hush money. And then Thomas Massey has a lawyer come out to say, she was alleging this about her ex-husband and their divorce proceedings at the same time

and the judge found her so not credible. He threw out the allegations. So spare me. But man, the heft of the campaign that's been unleashed against Massey tells us what? I mean, it tells you that our elections are bought. And if you don't play nice with the Israel lobby, they'll do whatever it takes to crush you.

And they'll have smear pieces written about you. I mean, that's what's happening right now as we speak. I mean, you look at the campaign funding for Galp, what's his name, Galprin? I don't even know. Galprin. Yeah, Galprin. He's, most of his money is from out of state. and it's from people who prioritize Israel over the American people.

I'm kind of shocked to see that his challenger is rising in the polls. In fact, yesterday for the first time, there was one poll that showed that he not only closed Massey's lead, but he has now, you know, passed Massey in the polling. And so what this communicates to us is that our elections and our so-called democracy isn't real, right? that moneyed interest are the ones who control everything. They get to decide who they elect. And a lobby that is far more concerned with a foreign country has more power than ordinary Americans who live and care about this country,

live in and care about this country. So we really, like, I just, I am terrified that he's going to beat Massey in the primary, not only because I think it's unfair to Massey, who's a principled politician, a unicorn, really, when you think about it, I'm worried that this is going to disenfranchise voters to a point where they're just not going to participate in any election. And then what? And then what happens? Right. So there's, I just don't know how to solve this other than calling for a constitutional amendment that takes money out of politics. We shouldn't allow corporate interests. We shouldn't allow pharmaceutical companies or defense contractors who are just loaded with cash. to buy our elections. We shouldn't allow a lobby for a foreign country to buy our elections,

but it's happening on a regular basis. And if people are wondering why Americans, you know, have lost trust in our institutions, this is a big reason why. It's so true. I want to correct myself, the opponent is Gal Reign, G-A-L-L-R-E-I-N. And he has received at least $4 million. or they've spent it on ad supporting him from the Republican Jewish coalition. He has received money $2.6 million, at least has been spent on ad supporting him by the APAC Super PAC, United Democracy Project, all according to ad impact. And then there's more. This is one example of an APAC super PAC ad against Massey that's airing now, 17.

What happened to Thomas Massey? He's flipped. Massey started out as a conservative Republican, but now votes with liberal Democrats. Massey flipped and voted against funding Trump's border wall. He voted against increased border patrol. And on Israel, Massey votes with AOC and Ilan Omar again and again. Massey's a flippin disaster. That's why President Trump supports Ed Galrine for Congress. UDP is responsible for the content of this act. We're 40 trillion dollars in debt. 40 trillion dollars. The Pentagon wants us to believe that the war against Iran is just going to cost, you know, somewhere between $25 billion to $29 billion.

That is a lie. And it's going to add to our devastating federal debt, which we are spending a trillion dollars a year servicing at this point. So, I mean, we're, we go ahead. I was just going to say, we also just got to. the latest inflation numbers, it's up 3.8%. Just to go back and see, when President Trump took office in January of 2025, the inflation rate was 3.0. But then by January of 26th, he had gotten it down to 2.4%. And now it's up at 3.8%. And it is because of energy prices. That's obviously

related to the war. Gas is up 28.4%. These numbers just came out yesterday. Food is up 3.2%. Shelter is up 3.3%. So all these costs are factored in. Inflation is going the wrong way. And yeah, we're worried about, you know, Massey and some woman who obviously is trying to take him down a week before the election. I don't know what's going to happen in this race, but I do, I agree with you that a super PAC that's whose number one concern is the dollars that we send to Israel and what the United States' stance on Israel is

should not be determining what's good for Kentucky or Kentucky voters or the United States of America. I mean, this is just, you know, we allow it. We allow care to spend. We allow APEC to spend. It's just fucking bullshit

because they spend and they spend a lot. And it's not for domestic interests at all. It's for their own interests. And, you know, there's just, the other thing I was going to say when you were like, why do we get such shitty politicians is I remember where I was at Fox News. I was sitting in my office, which I shared at the time with Major Garrett, when Citizens United was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. And it was this decision that declared its free speech for these companies to spend as much as they want in these political elections. And I didn't disagree with the ruling as a legal matter. But it was a watershed moment, not just in our like political spending, but in the, the way politics would be and who would be in them in America. Because now, Anna, what we have is like, every jurisdiction is just controlled by big money donors. Yes. You don't have to make deals with people across the aisle because your little jurisdiction is going

to be funded by two or three very rich Republicans or Democrats, depending on where you live. And you really just have to answer to them. And oftentimes they don't want you to make any deals. And they're your daddy. So, like, you fucking do what they want. And it doesn't matter how much pressure gets put on you. And it allows things like this, for groups like this to spend unlimited amounts and, you know, get you to bend the knee for them. Now, if this guy gets, you know, the nomination, how's he going to vote when it comes to funding for Israel, which is actually becoming one of the issues that they're debating in more and more political campaigns, given the changing sentiment on Israel in America?

It's like, this is how it's done. And this is a massive problem. And I don't know what the solution is to that. Well, I mean, like I said, I think that it's important to rein in the money in politics through a constitutional amendment. That's really the only way to do it. I, okay, so let's go back to the Citizens United ruling, which I agree with you was a watershed moment. I just find it strange that the argument in favor of that ruling was that, well, you know, corporations are engaging in free speech by spending unlimited amounts of money in these elections and all. on these particular candidates. But what about the speech of the ordinary citizen? How is the ordinary citizen supposed to compete with a billionaire or a group of billionaires or with a well-funded lobby that is far more concerned with a foreign country than our own?

How are you supposed to compete? And don't our speech rights matter as well? And, I mean, one of the issues... Well, that's a policy argument. You're right. I would totally support a constitutional amendment along these lines. But, you know, the Supreme Court can't. They're, basically you have the right to speak, but you don't have the right to have your voice be the loudest one in the room.

And so they wouldn't factor that in on how it's going to affect the little guy. That's for our lawmakers who are a bunch of P-words. You know, there's just no leadership. There's no leadership. And that's, I mean, I got to admit, I don't know that much about Thomas Massey. I know he's been a thorn in the president's side. And I've seen people I respect on the right say they can't stand him because he has backed the president. agenda and they found it really frustrating. But I would say, in a personal matter, like, I respect

that he has principles and he votes them. That's what I like about Rand Paul, too. He doesn't go with the wind. He seems to have a real worldview, and he sticks by it when he's in office. You know, I like that in my politicians. I do. I'm much more amenable to the latest argument because I'm a lawyer. And so, like, I'm always trying to upgrade my information and my opinions. politicians, they run on a platform and then we expect them to govern based on what they promise. So I, and I see what's being done to him. They're clearly trying to tear him apart because of his stance on Israel, or at least that faction is trying to tear him down.

And they're pouring so much money into this race. And they're, it's working. And it's disturbing. It is disturbing. One final thing I'll say about Massey, you know, people keep bringing up that he is afforded in Trump's side. But make no mistake. This isn't because they have like significant,

ideological differences per se. The only areas in which Congressman Massey votes against Trump's agenda is when he sees that the legislation is going to add to our federal debt, which is a problem. It just is. And to be honest with you, Megan,

I mean, ever since I've been an adult and I've been working in the field I work in, I've heard Republican members of Congress talk about the federal debt, talk about the deficit over and over again, but they never seem to really care about it after they get elected. Thomas Massey, though,

they don't care. Thomas Massey is different. And so that principled stance, I think, is relevant. And also, he's willing to work with the other side when there is common ground on behalf of the American people. And yes, I'm talking about the release of the Epstein files. That was promised to the American people by the Trump campaign, but Trump didn't want to release the files.

And Massey was brave enough to step up to the plate, work with Marjorie Taylor Greed, work with Rokana, do what was necessary to get those files released. Now, we don't have the full files yet, but still, what he managed to do is admirable. And there's no way in hell his political opponent in this primary race would do the same. Yeah. And we have seen actual things happen as a result of it, more so in the UK than in America. But a lot of folks have been outed as doing nefarious things in those files, and we wouldn't know about it if it weren't for the push to make that law, now that the law has a huge exception in it that they're exploiting to withhold certain documents. But, I mean, they should be careful in withholding too much because when we get a Democratic

administration in there, if they're withholding stuff that makes Republican donors look bad, et cetera, what do you think the next administration is going to do? So in any event, it's good that we got the law passed. We'll see what happens with this particular primary. I want to mention, we talked just a second ago about inflation and how much it's rising now. And obviously, everyone's looking at this just because they care about their wallet. And they also care about it politically. What is it going to mean if it keeps going, you know, through the summer, into the fall and into the midterms?

Well, President Trump was on camera on Monday. And he was asked, was it Monday? Yeah, I think so. He was asked to question, do we have it? yeah, about whether he thinks about Americans' financial situations when he's dealing with the Iranians in the context of these settlement talks. And this has gone everywhere now as a potential campaign ad that's going to be used against him. I have my own thoughts on it, but I want to get yours too. It's not 21.

When you're negotiating with Iran, Mr. President, to what extent are American financial situations motivating you to make it feel? Not even a little bit. The only thing that matters when I'm talking about Iran, they can't have a nuclear weapon. I don't think about American financial situation. I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing. We could not let Iran have a nuclear weapon.

That's all. That's the only thing that's the only thing that's. Okay. So there's no question that that answer will be cut and will wind up in ads by all Democrats opposing any Republican going into the midterbs and maybe beyond, right? Anybody who work for the Trump administration may have to answer for that in 28. I don't think about the concerns of Americans at all, the financial concerns. But I do think the president is being taken out of context a bit on this because the question was about when you're doing the negotiations with Iran in trying to settle the war.

And I think it's fair for a commander-in-chief to say, in that moment, no, I'm just thinking about I can't let this opponent, this country I see as an opponent as an enemy, get a nuclear weapon. That's why I launched the war. This is Trump's story. So I actually think he should be more careful with his language because it's going to get. get used against his people. But I do think on this particular one, the president's being unfairly bashed. However, it's also true that he needs to be more focused on what's happening with the people's economy, with their pocketbooks, Anna, because that's all they seem to care about. They don't like this war. They don't like what he's doing on virtually any issue, not virtually, on any issue. He's not

above water on any issue. And we've got six months to go for him to try to change that. Your thoughts on it? I definitely disagree with you in terms of him being taken out of context because he's the president of the United States. And so he has to consider the context of what he's doing. And he genuinely believes, and I can't even believe this because the whole thing with the enriched uranium is a cover story by the Israelis. Israelis just wanted to go to us into war so we do regime change or turn Iran into a failed state. But I guess he has been surrounded with so many. pro-Israel people, fear-mongering and pretending to care about Iran's enriched uranium, that he's starting to believe it. And to the point where he thinks that is more important

than the absolute devastation and destruction that he is bringing to the American people by being involved in this illegal war. So I just, I'm not going to give him a pass on this at all. Any president who says, I don't think about Americans' financial situation, not even a little bit, that's not a good president. Your number one priority needs to be the American people. But he wasn't saying macro. You know, he was saying in this particular context, that's not where I think. I think if she had phrased it, do you ever think about American's economic situation, question mark?

The answer would have been very different. I hope so. He's got to be careful. He's the president. And it's going to be held against him. Right. I hope so too. Always a pleasure, my friend.

Great to see you. Keep giving him hell. Thank you. Good to be here. All right. Up next, really looking forward. to my very first conversation with Gregory Bovino. He's ready to talk very openly about the border patrol,

what happened between Nome and Homan and Trump, and where our actual deportation strategy truly stands now. Our sponsor, the Electronic Payments Coalition, says Washington politicians are always getting in your wallet. And now they're messing with your credit card. They say your credit card and the security it offers are under attack, and that Senators Dick Durbin and Roger Marshall want to change the nation's payment system to benefit corporate megastores like Walmart and Target at the expense of everyday Americans. Credit cards can keep your payments secure and provide rewards that families use to help make everyday purchases more affordable.

The Electronic Payments Coalition says the Durbin Marshall mandates would let corporate megastores cut corners on credit card processing, routing transactions over cheaper, untested networks with weaker security and fewer protections. Find out more at guardyourcard.com and consider telling Congress to guard your card. Gregory Bovino was one of the most visible faces of the Trump administration's hardline border strategy. If he had it his way, there would not be even one illegal immigrant left in this country. Right on. So it made him the perfect fit for the Trump administration. And earlier this year, at the height of the immigration crackdowns, it was Bovino serving as President Trump's Border Patrol commander at large. But after the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minnesota, which they brought on themselves, Bovino was sent back to California. And then in March, he retired. A total loss for us.

So now he's on the outside, and he's not holding back, giving the inside story about where the promise of mass deportations stands now. Gregory Bovino, welcome to the show. It's a pleasure to have you on. Well, Megan, thanks for having me. It's good to see you. Yeah, you as well. Thank you so much for your service and for taking the PR beating that came with your very difficult job. I mean, it was, of course, going to happen, but it was particularly nasty and it was undeserved and you were doing something truly noble and brave. Let me start it off right where we are as a show because we were shocked to hear Tom Holman go on CBS News and sound like the door was potentially open in a Trump administration to amnesty. Here he was on CBS on May 5th, SOT 58. Would you support a compromise, sir, that involves giving legal status to the millions of people who are here illegally, but are otherwise law-adining, including dreamers?

I'm not going to get ahead of the president. I'm not. I work for the president. So, you know, that's- But something has to be done to address that population, or is a solution to support them all? I'm not going to get ahead of the president. that's in the president's talking to various members of his cabinet. There's discussions going on. I'm involved with some and not others, but I'm not going to get ahead of the president.

So he says he's not going to get ahead of the president when asked if they're getting ready to give amnesty to some faction of the illegals. Which, you know, everybody was like, what? Does somebody jump into Tom Homan, who we love, into his head and like reprogram things? What's happening? And then he came out with Will Kane over on Fox and suggested that he'd been taken out of context in that exchange. We went back and looked at it. There was nothing out of context. The question was very simple.

The answer was ambiguous. He wouldn't just say we want all the illegals out. And that's our goal. He said, I don't want to get ahead of the president when specifically asked whether there's an amnesty deal potentially in the work. So then I asked my team, Gregory, I'm pretty sure that Holman has said in the past when asked this same question, no, all illegals have to go and was never hesitant to say all illegals have got to go and didn't try to hedge like I'm not going to get ahead of the president. And this is what we found when we look back to see his rhetoric on that issue. If you're in the country illegally, you're on the table. Every time you enter this country illegally, you violated a crime under Title 8, United States Code 1325.

It's a crime. So if you're in a country legally, you've got a problem. If you're in the country legally, it's not okay. It's not okay to violate laws this country. But when we find him, he's going to be with others, most likely. Many times you're with others. If they're in a country legally, they're coming too. We're going to have a mass deportation, but we're going to prioritize the arrest of criminals and public safety threats. I'd say from day one, if you're in the country legally, you're not off the table. No one's off the table. If in this country in violation of law, we will deport you when we find you. It's that plain and simple. If you're in the country illegal, you're never off the table. Let me say this. If the message we send is you can

enter this country illegally, it's a crime. Don't worry about it. You can have you due process, show up in court, not show up in court, get order to move. Don't worry about it. Unless you commit a serious crime, you're good to go. If that's the message we sent to the world, you never going to fix this problem. Okay. So how did we get from that to a question, would you support a compromise that involves giving legal status to the millions of people who are here illegally but are otherwise law abiding, including dreamers. Homan, I'm not going to get ahead of the president on that. I work for the president. Megan, the first thing I would say on that is don't be a politician. Borders are, it's not a politician. A board of its agents aren't politicians. It's black and white. you said, that's a black and white subject. You're either here illegally or you're not. If you're here illegally, then those mass deportations make sense for everyone, every single one of those illegal

aliens here. Going back and hedging on that or not wanting to get ahead of another politician on that, vastly different than what we heard a year ago. And when we heard that a year ago, we heard that loud and clear, not just from Tom Holman, but all through the administration. We heard that loud and clear, and we acted accordingly. It does seem like things have changed over this past year. And whether that's towards amnesty or less deportations, I think the book still open on that. There is reporting, including from the Atlantic, that reports in January, the labor department's Foreign Labor Certification Office announced it would cut the number of approved visas for seasonal workers by about 50%.

Stephen Miller had been trying for a long time to get these things cut. He did not want a lot of seasonal workers coming in. But they report that after those two people were killed in Minneapolis, Trump reversed the visa cuts and that Miller was not even aware of the walkback, that Trump made the decision with Homan. and they write the reversal was one of the earliest signs that Stephen Miller's influence is on the wane. Others have followed the president, for example, dismantling the roving Border Patrol strike forces, his turning on gnome and ejecting of her from the administration, and handing of control of the deportation program back to career law enforcement officials. These are signs they write that the softer wing of the immigration deportation issues is winning and the more hardliners like Stephen Miller are losing. Is that your belief too?

It is. It's definitely a softer approach now, much softer than it was a year ago when we hit Bakersfield and Operation Return to Sender. That softer approach, but what's really happening here is that softer approach means a much harder approach for U.S. citizens, for Mom-Pah America, the ones that are going and it's going to happen. It sure is. the sun rises today, Megan, American citizens are going to die at the hands of illegal aliens, as well as many other terrible crimes against American citizens. It's going to happen. That's what the softer approach brings. If you note what happened in all six of those cities, that those roving patrols that you just mentioned were taking place, what happened in all six of those cities

is you didn't see a lot of these heinous crimes by illegal aliens. They were too afraid of either being apprehended and deported, or they just buttoned up and wouldn't even come out. That's what we want to do with roving patrols, with mass deportations, is make it so hard on them that they don't harm American citizens, and then they self-deport. The softer approach does not do that. Increasing visas does not do that. It's black and white. It's a very simple concept, and it does seem like things have changed that we're going towards that softer side. But again, the Atlantic reporting that we've dismantled the roving patrols of which you speak, that we decided, I guess, because of Minneapolis, that we were going to take the pedal way off of the gas,

take the foot way off of the gas pedal. And this is a distinctive shift in policy that they didn't announce, Gregory. They don't really want us to know. Because after this interview with CBS, Tom Homan gave a separate interview where he started to amp up his rhetoric again, and he started to sort of talk tough again. And the administration reportedly doesn't really want to own explicitly that they've gone softer. But it seems very clear they have. So why? Did the Democrats win? Did the crazies on the streets of Minneapolis win? You know, I think it's got a lot to do with those that are advising Trump. I've always said

that President Trump was the best case scenario we've ever had for. both Board of Security and that interior enforcement piece. And I still think he is. It's just those individuals advising him, including many of those politicians that maybe they're in bed with big labor. I call those rhinos. I think you know what a rhino is, Megan. And I think that he gets a lot of pressure or a lot of bad advice from some of those individuals that don't truly see what's at stake or perhaps they don't care what's at stake. So when they disdemeanor, So when they dismantle a roving patrol, when they dismantle that hardline immigration enforcement, the effects are noticeable immediately.

Look at the border numbers now. They're actually moving border patrol agents. Actually, the second iteration of several hundred border patrol agents to Laredo, Texas, because that border is starting to get out of control. Look at our border numbers. Just two days ago, about 490 border crossers. If you take a look at approximately a year ago, when we were doing those roving patrols in the interior, oftentimes this border crosser numbers would be 90 to 100 a day. Now they're 490 approaching 500 a day and a lot more gotaways coming across the border.

And the reason why you stated it, and we pulled this article, which I feel like you're going to agree with every word of this, but you'll tell me, is this? follows. This was posted to the substack Old Patrol H.Q. Old Patrol H.Q. is a retired Border Patrol agent of 25 years who just delivers unfiltered truths. And this is what he wrote. He wrote an article about you, why Gregory Bovino had to go. He writes as follows. For decades, the U.S. has operated under an unwritten but ironclad understanding. If you manage to sneak past the Border Patrol agents and CBP officers at the border, you've effectively bought yourself a tick it to stay. Call it what it is. A social contract with illegal aliens. The message is clear. Play by the rules of this unspoken deal. No other crimes or any other serious crimes. And the

system leaves you alone. They write, he goes on to say, let's say, I'm just going through the highlights. Men like former ICE director and Borders are Tom Homan and CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott are widely respected and revered for their careers in immigration enforcement and their public stances on immigration, especially during the Biden-O-Pen presidency, and they've spent years sounding tough on TV. They say publicly how all illegals everywhere are, quote, on the table, but then says, and while it's absolutely true that the border has been more shut down, secured as another matter entirely, in this administration, even they are firmly loathe and reluctant to break the boundaries of this social contract. Enforcement priorities have almost always

focused on criminals. Recent border crossers with detainers are those already in the system. And then reiterates, though, that illegal aliens have to commit rape, murder, or some type of heinous crime before they are targeted for arrest and deportation. Because we've agreed. We've basically agreed that if you don't commit an additional crime, you can stay. And he goes on to say, this is exactly why you became radioactive. Because you were pushed out because your approach exposed the uncomfortable truth everyone else had been ignoring. America no longer seems to have the will, the stamina, the driver, the desire to chase down millions of illegals who are now already on detainers or warrants. The country has quietly accepted a de facto amnesty for anyone who stays out of trouble.

That's so true. Is that totally true, Gregory? It is in many aspects. I'll tell you, it's easy to talk tough when Biden's in office or Hussein Obama was in office. or Bill Rie Clinton in office, it's mighty easy to talk tough. But when it comes to actually putting hands on those illegal aliens and deporting, you start separating immigration officers from politicians, immigration officers from people that like to talk tough. But when it comes down to actually doing that work, missing an action. You know, a lot of those individuals you mentioned,

I never heard from them for a year, for a year while we were in the field, operation at large throughout those six cities, never heard from them for an entire year. It was on us, on us to do this mass deportations, which was fine. That's good. We'll accept to that. But, you know, a lot of work to be done as far as the will. Do we have the will to do this? Well, if you talk to everyday citizens, it sure seems that we do. I run into citizens every day that say, hey, you're going back in the field to do that, right? This isn't over, right? 90% of the people that I talk to want that done. 95% of all immigration officers.

I'm talking the rank and file there. Let's make a distinction here. The rank and file, they want it to be done. So there's a lot of will. It's just, I think that will gets lost in the talking points of those who have lost their will, the rhinos, the politicians, the people that it scares to get outside of status quo. And that's what this is all about is outside of status quo. How are you going to move the ball down the field?

Moving the ball down the field sometimes is a very difficult, unpretty, dirty process. And, you know, you've got to get your britches dirty, in other words. So I think that scares a lot of people. It puts them outside their comfort zone. What happens to bureaucrats and politicians when they're outside their comfort zone? All they see is risk. And a lot of them don't do well with risks. Life's a risk.

working's a risk. What you're doing right now is a risk. So what made the difference here? What made the difference here? Because President Trump, he doesn't scare easily. That's true. And but, you know, the stories out of Minneapolis were dominating the news, the lies that were being told about those encounters with Renee Good and Alex Pretti. I mean, we're used to that, though. We're used to the mainstream media, so-called lying about anything having to do with border enforcement or deportations. So, and the president's poll numbers, on immigration were going down, I mean, not unexpectedly as a result of what the media was doing around these protests and what the Democrats did in Minneapolis in particular. So I could understand

from a political standpoint, which he does have to consider, how he was like, at least for a while, we got to take the temperature down and we got to get this off the front page of the newspaper. But what should he have done in your view? I think he should have went harder. Some things in Minneapolis. that perhaps he doesn't know is those roving patrols that were so instrumental in quelling that same type of violence in Chicago, Los Angeles, Charlotte, New Orleans, and many other cities was largely absent for those first several weeks of that Minnesota campaign. I'll tell you, I would love to Who is there? That was Border Patrol on ICE. Ice was there first. Border Patrol came to assist ICE on a

two-day operation. It's just, Megan, on that two-day operation. While we were were in the air, in those Coast Guard aircraft, on the way to Minneapolis, that's when René Good was killed. And that changed everything. That two-day operation then turned into a several-week operation with the Border Patrol. However, those roving patrols did not take place. And I think that- Who made up, sorry to keep interrupting, but who made up the Roving Patrol? Like, who was in them? Sure. Roving Patrol. That's a term specifically for U.S. Border Patrol. That's our ability to conduct what we call total spectrum immigration enforcement. That means everything. That means we go out

of patrol. We do targeting. You've heard of the targeting. We do special operations, use aircraft. That is a total enforcement package that goes after anything immigration related, not just one specific subset like targeting or worse or the worse or something like that. So that is, in essence, what a roving patrol is. And we really didn't, we never got to the roving patrol. That also includes crowd control, riot control, that type of thing. And if you look back at Los Angeles or Chicago, we did very well with that crowd and riot control to the point they didn't test us at all in Los Angeles after that very first day. Same thing in Chicago. You may have heard of the Broadview facility.

The riot control there, they didn't test us. They didn't march downtown Chicago like everyone was worried about because we set that standard very, very. very soon. That did not happen in Minnesota. The ice folks, they do a great job. Their leadership looks at things on a different plane than we do a different way. And when you let those rioters and those anarchists get out of control, you've got to put that genie back in the bottle at some point. We didn't do that. So I think Mr. Trump, I think he would have done that had he been advised correctly, but I don't think that he was getting the proper advisement from whoever was advising him. And that's too bad because...

And I don't mean to be dense, Gregory. Just help me understand because I genuinely want to get it. So would there be a Border Patrol group that's there and an ICE group that's there and a separate group from Border Patrol called the Roving Patrol? No, Border Patrol is the Roving Patrol. That's one of the tactics or strategies that they use for that total special. spectrum immigration enforcement. Remember, the Border Patrol is your uniformed law enforcement agency. They have uniforms on. They're sort of like your street cops. Think of Border Patrol as your street cops. Street cops, say in New York City, for instance, they go out and they knock down street crime. The detectives in New York City, which are more akin to ICE in Homeland Security investigations,

they investigate. They do targeted enforcement, that type of thing. Would you send your detectives out to do street crime? No, you would send your uniformed border patrol agents, your uniform cops out to do those roving patrols, to take on that street crime, to take on those everyday duties, to take on those millions of illegal aliens walking the streets with impunity. That's definitely a uniformed law enforcement mission, something the border patrol's done for 102 years. And, you know, I think that that sort of got upended there in Minneapolis. And I hope it comes back because that's the key to all of them. is total spectrum immigration enforcement, mass deportations. You have to have a uniformed law enforcement agency on the streets doing that.

Remind me, if memory serves, ICE was involved maybe in the Renee Good death and Border Patrol in the Alex Preddy. Is that correct? That is correct. Renee Good used a vehicle, and then Alex Preddy was in the streets attacking Border Patrol agents while they were conducting a law enforcement mission. They were after an aggravated felon who actually got away because of Alex Freddie.

I think that's something that a lot of people don't realize is that individual that Border Patrol was actively seeking, ended up getting away because Alex Freddie injected himself into that situation. One of the things that went wrong

in the wake of those deaths was the messaging around it. I think, my own belief, is Christy Gnome, And what I think was a well-meaning effort to have the backs of her guys overstated the defense. You know, she went hard against Alex Preti in a way that the facts just didn't support, like that he was there to kill a bunch of cops. I can't remember her exact language.

But it went too far and there wasn't factual support for it. How do you see what Christy Nome said around those two incidents? Because I believe you're a fan of hers, but what do you make of the messaging? One of the things I think the secretary, Secretary Nome wanted to do there was get information and messaging out as soon as possible. In many of these shootings that we see throughout law enforcement, you wonder what happened. Those conspiracy theories and stories start percolating up rather quickly. She wanted to get out ahead of that. And I thought that was a pretty smart move on her part is to get out ahead of it, get some information out there as soon as possible.

where she got her talking points from, what higher entity that she collaborated with for those talking points. I understand that did take place, and she put those talking points out there. I think that was in a good faith effort to put information out there so that the American public could understand that, one, there was a problem there in Minneapolis, and that there were responsible parties for that. It didn't just happen. So she didn't come up with that on her own. You're saying somebody gave her those so-called facts. Who?

You know, I think that she worked with individuals on that messaging within the administration. And I think she- White House people or ICE or Border Patrol people? Probably all of the above. And that was with the best. Do you know what you're just being diplomatic? No, I think that's the best information. Remember, there was a lot of information that no one had it.

that point, like what type of a weapon Alex had or, you know, what exactly was going on. So she put that information out as soon as she could and based on what information was available at the time. And, you know, I think that that was definitely a good faith effort on her part to put some information out regarding the situation. Yeah, you can't, that's the problem is like putting information out is great, but don't Don't say facts he can't support because then it undermines everybody involved. That's what happened. Do you think, I mean, how would you describe your departure from the administration?

Well, I tell you, I certainly missed my mean green team. A lot of folks said I was up for mandatory retirement. I actually had a year left. So I had some more gas in the tank there for mass deportations. I would say that I'm a mass deportations kind of a guy. And many in the administration are not. So we definitely came to loggerheads on how we go about deporting individuals from the United States. I'm ready to go at it, cause self-deportations.

And if they don't self-deport, then we'll deport them ourselves. And I think a lot of folks saw that as maybe overly aggressive there in the administration. And I'm not a politician. Those poll numbers you mentioned earlier, I don't care about a politician. This confuses me. President Trump seems to be on board with that, at least we think. Christy Noem was certainly on board with that. Tom Homan may not be totally on board with that, but he was an equal.

He was a lateral to you, right? So it's like, who, who wants the illegals to stay? I think that goes back to the influences that surround Trump. And again, I'm not, I wasn't in the White House. I was more in the field and not on Capitol Hill or engaged in a lot of those discussions. but I think the rhinos that came out and attacked Christy Trump. I think that's probably a good starting point. I think that...

Christy Noem? Yes, Christy Noam. And I think that, you know, there's a lot of folks there that did not believe in mass deportations on the scale that we were ready to put that into effect. And whether that was Tom Holman, Rodney Scott, you know, certainly I didn't hear from them for a year during that operation. So what was going on? Neither one of those. Not once. Wow.

So, you know, I think that it's probably, you know, two different strategies. And I guess they were mutually exclusive. I think they should have been integrated, but probably mutually exclusive. Well, Tom Homan came out and said once he swooped into Minneapolis named Paul and said, you know, I'm going to handle it. and said, I'm going to get these, I've gotten the attorney general to agree that the sheriffs can cooperate with ICE. And before they release anybody from jail, whether they've been arrested temporarily or they're actually getting out of serving a prison sentence, they now can, he said he got the AG to acknowledge,

call ICE, work with ICE on affecting any ICE detainer that may be on that criminal. so that before we just sent the loose out in the street, after they've bailed out or they've served their terms in prison, they'll give ICE a call if there's a detainer or there's a deportation order, et cetera, for this person. Now ICE will swoop in and arrest them to have an immigration proceeding on them. But we pointed out of the time, Gregory,

that's not going to happen in Minneapolis and St. Paul because they're sanctuary cities. By law, they don't cooperate with ICE. And so we actually paid very close attention to see whether Tom Homan had pulled a rabbit out of a hat that we had underestimated his ability to do. And there wasn't. The sheriff of the Minneapolis main lockup facility came out and said, I'm not doing that. We haven't changed one word of our policy. We are still sanctuary. And our policy is not to

cooperate with federal immigration officials on detainers or anything else. So nothing's changed. I don't know why he's saying that. Of course not. It's a complete capitulation in Minnesota. And what that does is that emboldens other sanctuary cities, other blue states. It also emboldens those transnational criminal organizations to guess what? Traffic more people across the border into the interior because there is no interior enforcement of meaningful impact taking place. Mayor Fry there in good old Mayor Frye there in Minneapolis, he was caught. for people to fight Border Patrol in the streets. Now, if it's going from that to, hey, all of a sudden, we're going to start turning illegal aliens over to ICE.

You know, we scratched our head at that one. You know, that was never going to happen. And that was why we were in those communities in the first place, going after that fraud, the leering center, the illegal aliens walking the streets with impunity, just like we did in every single other city. Yes. Okay, so I'm just trying to pull the actual statement from the local sheriff. Let's see. I'm looking for it. Where is that, Deb? I'm It says, yeah, I can hear you. Sorry. Okay, stand by because I want to read the audience exactly what the Hennepin County Sheriff said. This is not Megan Kelly's interpretation. This is from the sheriff directly. you know, they're not doing what Homan suggested they were doing. And here it is, per the Henneman County Sheriff's website, as of May 4th. In our jail, we do not honor administrative detainers or administrative warrants. These documents are not criminal warrants signed by a judge.

We will only comply with a judicially signed warrant, which is, that's sanctuary city policies. That is not at all consistent with what Homan is saying. Now, he may have gotten an agreement from other lesser sheriff's office around, in terms of size, I mean, around the state of Minnesota. I don't know that. But the big one in Minneapolis, which we had all the fights over, has not changed a thing. It seems to me we have just waved the white flag there, and you seem to be confirming that. Can you spend another minute on Laredo? Because this story hasn't gotten a lot of attention. President Trump just keeps declaring the border's closed. Absolutely no one's getting through. And unfortunately, I think because of that, you know, I read the blog,

post, the substack post, because of that unspoken de facto amnesty that we have actually been offering, even under President Trump, which is, we're only going to get rid of you if you commit an additional crime. Like if you come, if you make it past Border Patrol and sneaking in, and then you don't commit an additional felony, we're going to leave you alone. There's a lot of employers who need you in the hotel industry, some other construction industry, retail, what have you. We're going to let you stay. We're going to allow you to go on the public dole if you need it. And we're not going to bother you. And therefore, the incentive to sneak across the border is kicking back in in the wake of our downshift. It's kicking back in, which is why what's happening in Laredo matters. Can you explain that? Exactly. What happens in the interior directly correlates to what happens on the border. So interior enforcement, those roving patrols, those mass deportations in the interior, that directly affects what happens on the border. You know, for many years, Megan, we heard.

heard, you know, we have to cut the spicket off. We have to shut the border down before we go into the interior. Us and the Border Patrol, we always knew that was a fallacy. That was not true. And you know what? It's been proved now. It's proven. That's a proven fact now. What happens in those cities and in the interior as far as interior enforcement is going to either encourage or discourage folks from coming across the border. Now that meaningful large scale interior enforcement stopped, you're seeing places like Laredo start to spark up a bit. And this is just the beginning of that because this is worldwide now. Immigration is worldwide. It's not just folks, say, from Mexico or Central America. This is worldwide now. And you have drug cartels and transnational criminal

organizations that are keeping a close eye on what's happening there in the interior because they make a lot of money smuggling illegal aliens across that border. You know, $10,000 ahead for just your run-of-the-mill illegal alien and a lot more than that if they come from, say, Red China or from some of those other countries. So that's what's happening there in Laredo. Again, we're on our second iteration of Border Patrol agents. I believe approximately 200 Border Patrol agents were taken from other parts of the southwest border piped into Laredo to quell that part of the border down. But what we're going to see if these mass deportations and this interior enforcement doesn't kick back on in the interior, we're going to see other parts of the border. It's like whack-a-mole. They're going to shift to another

part of the border and another and another and another and pretty soon it's going to be just like what it was, a very chaotic environment with a lot of people coming across the border because if they make it past the border patrol, there's nothing else in the interior that they have to worry about. And let me tell you, they're not worrying about targeting or worse to the worst. That's the least thing they're worried about is targeting or worse to the worst. Because, again, they don't look at themselves as worst to the worst. They say, I'm here to work on the hotel room or in the fields or collect welfare. Whatever they're coming to do, they're not looking at themselves as worst to the worst.

And that just begets more immigration or I'm sorry, more illegal migration. And then, you know what? We've got that de facto amnesty. We've always said that's de facto amnesty. They get past the border patrol. What's next? Amnesty, that in itself begets even more illegal immigration. It's game on for the bad guys right now.

Yeah, what are they? They don't really care about becoming a citizen. They don't actually have to become a citizen. They want to live here. They want to work here. They want to possibly go on the public dole. And they want to send checks home to Mexico. And we're allowing it.

We're allowing it. Shipping the prisoners off to Seacott in El Salvador, that was the kind of stuff that scared people. Like, Christy Noam going down there, like doing the selfie video in front of all those prisoners, it may have been sort of in rough taste, right? Like it was a little jarring to see. But that was the point to make it uncomfortable.

Everyone's going to see, like, that could be me behind those bars. This episode is sponsored by Veracity, whose founder and CEO, Ali Egan, has a story you should hear. She is a certified hormonal health coach who experienced the effects of compromised metabolic health firsthand. For years, she struggled with undiagnosed Hashimoto's. That's an autoimmune disease that impacts the thyroid. It was functional medicine that ultimately treated the underlying root causes, and now she's Hashimoto's free and the mother of two beautiful children. Allie created Veracity so that everyone can access the holistic solutions and optimal health we deserve. Veracity says its metabolism ignite formula is the number one doctor recommended GLP1 booster and natural GLP1 alternative made from a unique blend of hibiscus extracts, green coffee bean extract, and magnesium.

They say there are no side effects and no allergens. just two capsules with breakfast, safe, simple, and natural. So consider trying Veracity. Head to veracityhealth.co. And use the code, Megan, when you're checking out, which will get you up to 65% off your order. Once again, that's V-E-R-A-C-I-T-Y-Halth.C-O for up to 65% off, and make sure you use my promo code, Megan, so they know we sent you and you get that 65% discount. When it comes to supplements, there are two things that matter most. You need it to work and you need to trust it. Both are absolutely essential. Many hosts have been taking and authentically endorsing relief factor for these two reasons for over a decade. That's over 10 years of lending their voices to help get you out of pain, drug-free. Why? Because relief factor does work. It offers a quick start option. They actually lose money on this first offer, but they do it so that people can try it and see for themselves. That's how confidence is. they are in their product. More than one million people have tried Relief Factor. I'm one of them.

And about two-thirds go on to order more because they've gotten such relief from it. The creator of Relief Factor actually returned home from Vietnam as a combat veteran and decided to become a doctor simply to help people. He is the one who created Relief Factor originally to help his patients with pain. When he saw how well it worked, he decided to make it available to everyone. If pain has been holding you back, maybe it's time you found out why so many people make relief factor part of their routine. You see, it helps fight the inflammation that causes pain. It doesn't just treat the symptom. It goes after the underlying source of the symptoms. Try it for yourself. There's a three-week quick start. You can start today and see how it works for you.

Visit relieffactor.com or call 800 for relief. Hey, everyone. It's me, Megan Kelly. I've got some exciting news. I now have my very own channel on Sirius XM. It's called the Megan Kelly Channel, and it is where you will hear the truth, unfiltered, with no agenda, and no apologies. Along with the Megan Kelly show, you're going to hear from people like Mark Halperin, Link Lauren, Morin Callahan, Emily Jashinsky, Jesse Kelly, real clear politics, and many more. It's bold, no BS news, only on Megan Kelly channel, SiriusXM 11, and on the Sirius XM app. What the stats show, Gregory, is that now, under Trump's presidency, we've gotten more than three million illegals out of the country. That's 713,000 deportations. This is per the Department

of Homeland Security as of March, 26, 713,000 deportations and estimated 2.2 million self-deportations. So the self-deportations dwarf the actual ejections by, you know, Homeland Security and Border Patrol, et cetera. But the reason those numbers are going to go down is because of the softer touch, because we seem to be returning to de facto amnesty, you make it past Bovino's guys. You're good. No one's coming to find you. How many times have you heard of the CBP home app used since I left Minnesota?

I've heard it one time. I think Mullen mentioned at one time, the CBP home app, something that I think would be interesting for your viewers is Secretary Nome actually listened to us as far as those ads that she put out. One of the things we said is when you get on there and you talk about the CBP Home app, the $2,600 and the free plane ticket and all that, to self-deport to whatever country you came from, that is having an effect. And we knew it was having an effect because we talked quite closely with our partners there at the ports of entry, whether that was an airport or an actual land port of entry. And the lines going south out of the country whenever she would get on, whenever she was on TV talking CBP Home App or myself talking CBP Home App, it was having an effect.

That coupled with that good, tough, hard-nose immigration enforcement, hey, that's what we wanted to happen, Megan. We want them to self-deport. We would rather them self-deport, rather than me put handcuffs on 100 million illegal aliens. Let's just have them self-deport for us. But for that to happen, it has to be so very tough on them here in the United States that they can't work, they can't recreate, they can't go to the grocery store, they can't do anything. And we proof tested that in Los Angeles, operation at large.

That whole city was locked down for almost a year. Unfortunately, I talked to some of my Border Patrol colleagues who are still active. many of those areas in Los Angeles now, specifically the fashion district downtown Los Angeles, they're back flourishing again. They were not flourishing while we were there for that year of occupation there in Los Angeles. What about E-Verify? What about E-Verify, Gregory? You can't hire this person unless they actually produce proof of citizenship.

Many people believe that would be the greatest thing to lead to self-deportation, but it won't get implemented across the board. You have to implement it first. That's the number one thing. If you implement it, that's going to be one facet. But remember, immigration enforcement, and that's why we call it total spectrum immigration enforcement, e-verify would be one facet of total spectrum immigration enforcement. You've got a whole bunch of other things, shutting down remittances, making it difficult for an illegal alien to own land, mass deportations, a whole slew of things, anything you can bring to bear to close. pause those self-deportation. So E-Verify is great. We need it. Big fan of E-Verify and workplace or website enforcement. Definitely, that would definitely have an effect. But there's a lot of illegal

aliens who are on the dole who don't go to a workplace. We got to cut that off also. Total spectrum immigration enforcement. It's not that hard, Megan. We've got a great strategy there in the border control. We spent years writing this strategy before we went into those cities. That's one of those things. I would love to have talked to President Trump on. I don't, he got bits and pieces of that strategy. He's getting bits and pieces of things that sound good to him. And I think he acts on those bits and pieces. Again, he's the best president we've got for for immigration and that type of thing. But I don't think he's getting the whole story. He hasn't gotten the whole story over the past year. So there's a lot more things we can do,

e-verifying being just one of those things that we can do to cause people to self-deport and say, you know what, I think I need to do this the right way. If you remember, Nome always said, hey, go back to your country, do it the right way, and you still have a chance of immigrating legally to the United States. You never hear that now. I never hear that message now. And that's why our self-deportations are plummeting as we speak. They're plummeting.

No one's scared. They're just going to say, you know what, de facto amnesty. Well, and the other problem we have is there's no. No wall. We did not build the wall. And when President Trump leaves office, there is no guarantee that a Republican is going to replace him. So we could have a situation where, other than Rahm Emanuel, I don't hear any of the Democrat candidates talking about holding on to Trump's border policies, which have been so much more effective than any of his predecessors. No one's talking about doing that. So more than likely, we're going to get, if a Democrat wins, another open border situation,

which we wouldn't have to worry that much about if we had a wall. We just spent, the administration says it's $25 to $29 billion on this war. The true estimates, according to people who are watchdogs, of what we're actually spending is more like double that, over $50 billion on this war. The Pentagon is back asking for well over a trillion dollars for its budget. I mean, for a fraction of that, we could complete the wall at the southern border and set ourselves up for decades.

of a more successful border policy down there, Gregory. Why? Why don't we have a wall? Because the war is not here at home. That war needs to be here at home. That war is those 100 million illegal aliens here that are sucking us dry, are culturally changing our society. That's the real war that needs to be fought here. So once that is taken into context as the real threat to America, then perhaps we can get that wall built. When you speak of the wall, The wall is not just the wall. It's the wall and all the accoutrements associated with the wall, all that detection technology, all those things in people that make it so very difficult to cross that border.

So you're right. A completed wall with all that technology and infrastructure and workforce, that would make it very difficult, even if there was a Democratic administration that came into office, it would make it very difficult for another mass migration to occur. I'll tell you what, quite frankly, it scares the heck. out of me to think what could happen if another liberal administration came in because guess what? They're going to take a look at what Joe Biden did with those tens of millions of illegal aliens that came across. And I think we've seen nothing yet. I think we could see a lot more than that because they come across and what we're going to wave the white flag yet again and not conduct

mass deportations. Well, you know what? You've got an America that has been made over into something that you and I will not even, will not even recognize. That's what scares me. Do you think the numbers are that big? You think there are 100 million illegals in this country? You're saying on top of the 330 million American citizens, so we've got 430 million in the country, 100 million of which are illegal? I do. I do believe that. Megan, let's look at the numbers from 1975. 1975 Pew and all the other ones were talking 12 to 15 million. When I came into the board total 30 years ago, 12 to 15 million. 2015, 12 to 15 million.

But the only thing that was not making sense is working on the border, seeing this mass incursion of illegal aliens every single year coming into the United States. We all knew, well, there's no possible way it's 15 million. And, you know, in my research, I looked at some other folks that have done some research, Bear Starons, and then that Yale MIT study. Those were two of the first studies to put that at above $15 million. I believe theirs was approximately $25 million. And wow, for them, just to say $25 million in 2016, that was huge.

Definitely still too low. And since then, look at what came in under Joe Biden. 80% of that border was wide open. 80%. A lot of we don't even know what came in. 80% of your entire southwest border had no detection, no border of its own. nothing. And there is no telling what came across that we didn't detect. And then what we did detect was in the millions, many that were still unvetted, but the millions that came in on top,

yes, I do put that number at 100 million. And what we saw in those major cities, those six cities, as well as many other regions in the United States, what we saw there as far as traffic patterns, children attending school, or not attending school. when we are in those cities, correlates pretty, pretty well with that $100 million. Take a look at Charlotte, 153,000 commuters.

30 to 40% of that 153,000 quit commuting when we are in Charlotte for Operation Charlotte's Web on that four-day up. Wow. Oh, really? Four-day operation. And when you've got 30 to 40% taken out, well, that correlates pretty darn well with $100 million.

Same thing with the school children. They just revamped that essence. Not a lot of people know this. They just revamped the estimate of absenteeism in the Charlotte Mecklenburg schools 30% plus while we were there for that four-day operation. Look what a four-day operation did to that two-state area. Completely shut it down. I would say there were probably a lot of self-deportations getting ready or already occurring there in Charlotte. So 100 million, absolutely. I stand by it. And a lot of people are saying, well, that's too high. He's crazy. Oh, Chief Bovino. is absolutely crazy, doesn't know what he's talking about. Well, you know what? Show me another number. No one else is even daring to throw another number out because it's definitely looking like that $100 million is a quite definable and achievable number

as far as the number of illegal aliens here in the United States. Your use of the word chief reminded me to ask you, the current Border Patrol chief, Mike Banks, is resigning, effective immediately. This is just breaking per Fox's bill, malusion. He says, it's just time. I feel like I got the ship back on course from the least secure, disastrous chaotic border to the most secure border this country's ever seen. Time to pass the reins. 37 years, it's time to enjoy the family in life. I must mention that in April, the Washington Examiner did a report on him allegedly taking regular trips abroad to engage in sex with prostitutes, like to Columbia and Thailand, which doesn't sound like a great idea. I don't know whether that's true, but maybe it had a hand in his decision to step down. What do you make of the resignation of Chief Mike Banks? Several things there, Megan. I talked to Chief Banks about 30 minutes before coming on your show, and he was quite gracious in what he was saying there. What I will say is that

Chief Banks and I are both mass deportations people, just like Christy Knoem, Corey Lewandowski, and others, mass deportations folks, and we're all no longer employed by Department of Homeland Security. What does that tell you? So when we talk about politicians and politics, none of us were politicians or engaged in politics. But that's a very dirty business, a very tough business. We're all no longer working for Department of Homeland Security. We are all mass deportation hardliners. And I use that term with great pride.

Am I an immigration hardliner? You bet. Mike Banks was a fantastic immigration hardliner. And the same thing that happened to Christine Dome is now happening to Mike Banks. All of a sudden, they pull a rabbit out of their hat and these individuals, you know, oh, my gracious, they're the worst thing since sliced bread. That's what I think about what just happened to Mike Banks. As a matter of fact, I think that prostitution thing had been.

That had been investigated many years ago, and he was cleared. So that's what they're not telling you there. There's a reason that that wound up in a conservative newspaper, Washington Examiner, when it did. In other words, weeks before he would resign. Absolutely. You bet. You bet. This stuff doesn't happen just by chance.

This doesn't happen by chance. There's a lot of snakes, a lot of swamp creatures still out there. So careful America, still some swamp creatures. out there. And before we go mass deportations, and before we return to hardline immigration, those snakes need leave. Greg, Reed, thank you. Can you please come back? I love talking to you. That was fantastic, Megan. Thank you for having me. Thank you for your service to our country, too. We need you. We need a lot more just like you. Wow. We're back tomorrow with Glenn Greenwald. Thank you all for being with us today. Thanks for listening to The Megan Kelly Show, no BS, no agenda,

and no fear.