The Megyn Kelly Show - DeSantis Declares, and Target's "Tuck-Friendly" Backlash, with Victor Davis Hanson, Beth Karas, and Peter Tragos | Ep. 557

Episode Date: May 24, 2023

Megyn Kelly is joined by Victor Davis Hanson, author of "The Dying Citizen," to talk about Gov. Ron DeSantis declaring for president on Twitter on Twitter with Elon Musk, DeSantis' messaging and whether he has a shot to beat Trump, what "The View" and Joy Behar don't get about their inherent privilege, the prosecutors targeting Trump right around the GOP primary schedule, the Los Angeles Dodgers reversing course and welcoming and honoring trans activists who mock religious people, Target's Pride clothes for kids and "tuck-friendly" bathing suits, the backlash they are facing and the corporate response, the NYU professor fired after holding a machete to the neck of a reporter, and more. Then, Beth Karas, former prosecutor and legal analyst, and Peter Tragos, host of "The Lawyer You Know" on YouTube, to talk about chilling new details about Idaho murders suspect Bryan Kohberger, a "trans woman" suing a yoga studio in New York for discrimination, new details about the "CitiBike Karen" case, and more. Plus, Megyn gives an update on Tucker Carlson, Fox News, and Elon Musk's Twitter embrace of conservatives.VDH: https://victorhanson.comKaras: http://www.bethkaras.comTragos: https://www.youtube.com/@LawyerYouKnow/ Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow 

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest and provocative conversations. Hey, everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. A major moment today in the 2024 race for the White House. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis will officially announce he is entering the presidential campaign. And the way he's doing it is absolutely fascinating. He's going to have a live Twitter spaces event. This is a way of speaking on Twitter about something with Elon Musk. And that conversation will be moderated by friend of the MK show, David Sachs. So it's going to be really interesting. It's today at 6 p.m.

I'm really looking forward to seeing how this goes down. He's in good hands with David moderating for sure. And what this says about Elon is also part of the equation. He's one of the most popular people in America right now. And that's tough to be like who who can get support from both sides. Oh, yes. The far left, like the Twitter left, doesn't like him. But he's a popular guy, Elon Musk, for a good reason. So this is a savvy move by Ron DeSantis. The battle between DeSantis and Donald Trump is officially on,

and apparently so is the battle between Elon and Fox News. That's part of what's interesting about the story. Joining me now to discuss it all, Victor Davis Hanson. VDH, is back with us today. He's a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of The Dying Citizen, How Progressive Elites, Tribalism, and Globalization Are Destroying the Idea of America.

Victor, welcome back. Great to have you. Thank you for having me, Megan. So we'll get to what Elon's doing here. Axios has a headline saying he's taken over from Rupert Murdoch as the new it guy in conservative media. You know, the new power broker in conservative media. It's an interesting theory. But what do you make of DeSantis and this move to announce via and with in conversation with Elon Musk? I think it's kind of a wise move. It kind of removes him from the whole psychodrama going on with Tucker and Fox. So he doesn't come down on one side or he gives all of his,

you would think he would give an interview or come on Fox like the other candidates have done. That was wise. I think it really helps Elon Musk's Twitter brand, of course. And I think that's in Ron DeSantis' favor. But I think more importantly, he's trying to come across as somebody who has completely new ideas on all of these problems. And one of them is the media. How do you deal with the media? And I think that's Donald Trump had mastered the idea of getting free media, billions of dollars of free media, as we learned in 2016. And with that CNN fiasco where he just dominated them and got a lot of free. And I think DeSantis knows that he's not that's that's Trump's brand.

So he's looking for alternative but equally effective media strategy. So it's pretty smart, I think. Especially because Trump's he's over on True Social. He hasn't reemerged on Twitter, even though he's been a lot back on, you know, per Elon. Some speculating that maybe Trump will use tonight around 6 p.m. or maybe 6.20 to come back on Twitter and offer some thoughts on what we've just witnessed between Elon, DeSantis, and David Sachs. I don't know. That's going to be a, that's kind of a dilemma though, isn't it, Megan? Because that's his, that's his company. And Devin Nunes is doing Herculean labors to get it, you know, mainstream.

And it depends on that mass following. So anytime he goes on Twitter, he's diluting his own house brand and his own company. And yet if he doesn't go on Twitter, he seeds out an entire venue to his, his rivals. So I don't know what he's going to do. It's it's, that's why it's a clever move. Um, so, and I want to talk about the candidates reaction to him. Nikki Haley has sort of emerged as Trump's right fist, right? She's like the punch, uh, to a lot of these other candidates, in particular DeSantis on behalf of Trump. So to me, that's a clear angling for a VP role for her in the Trump administration, right? She came out and said in response to the suggestion that

DeSantis is Trump without the controversy. She said, no, he's Trump without the charm. She comes out against DeSantis. So she's already getting on him. Trump's tweeting out or truthing out what Ron DeSantis needs is, quote, a personality transplant. Goes on to say, and to the best of my knowledge, they are not medically available yet.

Finishes it with a disloyal person. It's a theme that we are going to hear a lot about DeSantis because he's like a little socially awkward, even though his policies would probably be acceptable and pleasing to 90 plus percent of Republicans. Yeah, you know, that's not I don't see any original critiques of DeSantis. It's just boilerplate that he's not charismatic. Even in the Trump ads, there's nothing new there that is going to appeal to somebody and say, wow, I didn't know this about DeSantis. I didn't know that. I think he's got his record in Florida, and he's going to defend it but this idea that uh nicki haley she said she did she played the same role you remember with disney and she said if disney's welcome to come over and that was i

think that was a very stupid thing to say because disney had 48 40 acres of free stuff worth billions of dollars and it was abusing that concession and she just missed that. And so I don't think it's going to work to say Ron DeSantis is not as charismatic as Donald Trump. His message is, I'm going to get even, I'm not going to get mad, and we're looking forward and not back, and we'll see how that goes. As far as the other candidates, I don't see any, I think you're right, they're all running for either top cabinet posts or vice presidencies, and I don't see any of them breaking out. The big critical thing is if you add up all the non-Trump percentages, it's pretty much equal or ahead of Trump, but that's exactly what happened in 2016, and they never coalesced.

And so it'll be interesting to see to what degree DeSantis will appeal to everybody and say, you know, lend me the support or they're going to say he doesn't have a chance and I'm not going to do that because I want to be a vice president or secretary of state or attorney general. So that's going to be a lot of positioning. The Disney thing is becoming an issue for him.

A lot of conservatives love it. Some are learning to dislike it. And that's some of the messaging we're hearing from people like Nikki Haley. Even Carrie Lake, who's firmly in the Trump camp, came out with a line that you could have predicted that that is he couldn't even win over Donald Duck. How is he going to win over Donald Trump? Because Disney has dug in now. And I think it was Nikki Haley said, look, he could have had 2000 jobs in Florida. He ruined that opportunity because of

this stupid fight. Some saying, look, he Disney was critical of this allegedly don't say gay bill, which of course it wasn't anything of the sort, but that's what the left named it. Let Disney say what it's going to say. Whatever. It's a woke corporation. Why pick a fight like this that's going on and on? It's cost Florida jobs now. How big an issue, if any, do you think the Disney thing is going to be for him? I don't think it might be now, but I don't think it's going to be an issue. It depends also on how well he's able to stream this criticism of Disney and to criticize the general repugnance at what the LA Dodgers did with the Sisters of Perpetual, those people, and Bud Light, and this pattern

that these once successful corporations, once they go woke or once they enter into controversial issues that are all anti-traditional America, they lose. And if he can say, you know what, I'm just standing out for not just traditional values in Florida, but we're not going to give exemptions for these people if they're going to be political. If he can make that argument, why do they get 40 acres where they basically rule as a private medieval fiefdom, exempt from all statutory regulations in Florida government control if they're going to weigh in on things that are highly controversial. And if he can say, this is exactly what Bud is doing, this is exactly what they did with

the airlines on the All-Star game two years ago, this is exactly what the Dodgers are doing, and if they want to do it, fine, but we're not going to give them any extra exemptions or any extra help. I think that's a winning message. And I don't think it's going to help for conservatives to start defending Disney on this matter. Because if you look at the polls, they're pretty evenly split. And Disney's losing a lot of money on subscribers and attendance and stock value. And so I think long term, it's in DeSantis'

interest, I think. I know that, you know, the messaging from Team Trump is the way it is for a reason, you know, a political reason. And it's a good reason to attack him. But the truth is, one of the reasons people love Trump is he showed Republicans how to fight. And that's what DeSantis is trying to do with this Disney fight. I mean, he maybe he will lose. Maybe this won't wind up in a perfect solution. But he's trying, as Ben Shapiro said the day after DeSantis picked the Disney fight to teach the F around and find out message to these woke corporations. And that's one of the reasons why people are cheering it. It's not really about the outcome. It's about punishing them and teaching them.

There will be consequences to you that could be potentially painful, maybe long term, but definitely short term if you do this kind of thing. Yeah, I think you're right. I think what's happening now is that they push the envelope so much, the left, on every issue. And the right has been solemn. And now they're waking up and they're saying, you know what? We have power. We have almost destroyed Bud Light.

We're 24% down. And with the Los Angeles Dodgers and a community of greater Los Angeles that has 12 million people, 6 million of whom are either Mexican-Americans or Mexican nationals, the vast majority Catholic, and many of them LA Dodgers that has a lot of Latino players, if they're going to go out and deliberately offend that constituency, that's insane. And we're going to boycott that. And we're going to tell them that we do not want that.

These people who basically have pornographic street theater where they emulate sex with the Holy Trinity and Catholic ritual and all of that. So in the long term, it's not a winning issue. And all they're doing is galvanizing conservatives to say, you know what, we don't have the institutions, we don't have the money they do, but we have the people. And once we get going, it becomes almost a snowball effect. And I don't think anybody in Disney thought they were going to suffer. I don't think anybody in Bud thought they were going to suffer.

I don't think anybody at Fox News thought they were going to suffer. I don't think anybody at the Dodgers thinks they will suffer. And I think they'll suffer the most. Let's talk about the Dodgers because we haven't run that story by our audience yet, though.

They may have heard it elsewhere by this point. So the L.A. Dodgers on their Pride Night invited this group to come and be honored. And it turned the Catholic church and they think this is just downright hilarious. Well, Catholics don't really agree. And they complained a little. Marco Rubio sent a letter saying this is really offensive. He wrote the sisters, quote unquote, are men who dress in lewd imitations of Roman Catholic nuns. The group's motto, go and sin some more, is a perversion of Jesus's command to go and sin no more. The group's motto, Go and Sin Some More, is a perversion of Jesus's command to go and sin no more. The group's Easter ceremony features children's programming,

followed by a drag show where adult performers dress in blasphemous imitations of Jesus and Mary. The group hosts pub crawls mocking the Stations of the Cross, even the Eucharist, the sacrament that unites more than one billion Catholics around the world. Now, that's all well and good. This is America. You can mock religion if you want to. Bill Maher did a whole movie doing exactly that. But to be honored at Pride Night by a mainstream group like the L.A. Dodgers with the accompanying statement, mission statement of the night, which is we want to be as inclusive and welcoming to everyone as we can, is extremely controversial. So Marco Rubio sent a letter and the Dodgers backed down and said, hey, we didn't mean to cause controversy. We disinvited them. Well, then the trans community stood up and they

are the most vicious activists in America. And they caved. The Dodgers caved, brought them back. Now they're being honored in particular. They're getting some sort of award. So they've actually been elevated. And this is because what? Because Catholics don't tend to march in the streets. They wrote a letter via Marco Rubio, one of our most famous Catholics. But that's it. We're not going to threaten them. We're not going to be vicious the way these trans activists are. That's not the way we tend to behave. And they know it. Yeah, up to now, they do. And again, I think they're going to have a bud effect because that community,

anybody goes down to Los Angeles the last 20 years, it's one of the largest Mexican communities in the world. And they're staunch Catholics. And they've already expressed outrage when trans activists broke into, and abortion activists have broken into masses in Los Angeles. People, Mexican American people in attendance forcibly remove them. And I can tell you that's one issue here where I live in a community that's 95% Mexican-American, and I have siblings that have been married to Mexican-American women, and I can tell you that is an issue that does not resonate with the Mexican-American community, the Latino said, and honoring them as if they're valuable social activists in the sense of equity, inclusion, but that's not what they really do. They mock people, they try to hurt people.

And you know what, they act like they're very brave and on the barricades of social and cultural change, but they would never do this and mock Muslims or Hindus. If they did this against Islam, they would be terrified. So they're very selective in their targets of outrage. You can argue that the Islamic community is less tolerant of transgendered issue than is the Christian community. And yet they won't say one word, globally or in the United States. So all of these people, and then they're reacting to the Hollywood, Malibu, Los Angeles entertainment pressure, which does not represent 50% of the people. And I think they just don't understand that if somebody from Hollywood calls them up

or some big Finans here from Malibu, and they react to that on issues of transgenderism. They don't know about the people that make LA run. These are the people who are taking out your trash or waiting on tables. They're, they're in construction. They're fixing things. They don't have any idea what those people think. So I think it's, it's going to be a disastrous turn of events for the Dodgers and the fact that they caved and look very weak. I mean, everything they said initially by revoking that invitation, what does that mean now?

Does that mean they weren't sincere the first time or they put their hand and finger in the wind and just decide who, where the perceived money and influence was? Yeah, well, so we'll get back to the other controversies that you ticked off because there are updates on all of them, Bud Light and Fox News and so on. But I want to stay on DeSantis for a minute. The reaction to him, I mean, just for the people who think he's Trump without the baggage. OK, he will be Trump without the tweets. I think, you know, to some extent that may be true. I don't know. You know, some people think he's going to be more like a Paul Ryan type Republican. I don't know about that, but I don't think he's going to have the errant tweets. But Victor, you tell me, I don't think it matters because the left will paint him as just as erratic and incendiary and racist and sexist and all the ists as Trump.

100%. It's already starting. I'll give you an example. This is from the NAACP president, Derek Johnson, who had these thoughts on DeSantis on CNN. Listen. Unfortunately for a large percentage of the Floridians, that's what he has done. Therefore, we are advising African-Americans and others that if you travel to Florida, beware that your life is not valued. We didn't end here overnight. It was because of the election. So we have to prepare for the next election so we can get rid of him once and for all. It's unbelievable. You know, all the narrative like, but Trump, you know, he doesn't, he incenses people more than DeSantis will. Guess again. It's the little R after your name that makes them really upset. Yeah, I mean, it's absurd. We have 10 cities where blacks are being slaughtered in the inner city.

And he didn't mention any of those places. Why doesn't he have a travel work to Chicago or Baltimore or Los Angeles? That's a dangerous place if you're a young Black person to walk anywhere. And as people have pointed out, they have the second number of Black businesses. They had a Black gubernatorial candidate. They have 3.3 million Blacks living there. The chairman of the NAACP board lives in Florida. And then he was embarrassed and said, well, I've lived here my entire adult life. What do you want me to do? Well, why don't you just say, I don't want any African-Americans visiting me here in my home because it's too dangerous.

They can't come and visit me. That's what I've advocated publicly, but it's not dangerous apparently for me to live here. And that, you know what, it's this jumping the shark on all of these issues that people are starting to say, you know what, this is surrealistic. This is pushing the envelope so far that we're in a cultural malice revolution, whether it's the Dodgers and the transgender or Bud Light or the NAACP or what we saw on the subway and every, the common denominator on all of these themes is it's absolutely absurd. And people are saying, you know what? What can't go on won't go on.

Here in California, Megan, we had the $800 billion reparations, and we're $32 billion in debt on our annual deficit. Nobody knows where the money comes from. Nobody knows after eight generations who's a victim and who's a victimizer. We were not a slave state. And so the head of the reparations board said, well, you know what? We're willing to take installment payments. We're willing to take installment payments. What kind of mindset in this country has led to this craziness? And we all were honoring BLM and BLM, and then it was just announced

that it's lost millions of dollars because of rampant indiscriminate spending, mansions for the former leadership, and crony hiring of their own siblings. And it can't leverage corporations anymore about guilt or protection money after the riots. That doesn't work anymore, So they don't have any. And that was the big cause celeb all for the last two years.

So I think it's all coming to a head and people are saying, these people are crazy. They're detached from reality. And they're pushing these cultural, social, revolutionary changes. It's Maoist and they're not going to get away with it because now people see that if you were to enact what they're doing on energy and the border on race, you wouldn't have a country left. So I think we're on the verge of a great revival or something or correction. The constant messaging on race, as we saw there, okay, black people, it's not safe for them to go

to Florida anymore. Got it. Okay. Nor OK, black people, it's not safe for them to go to Florida anymore. Got it. OK. Nor LGBTQ, whatever people. That's not OK either. It's really gotten to the point of absurdity, as evidenced by this view clip. Forgive me for playing Joy Behar. But this was her reaction to Tim Scott entering the race as well, suggesting he really just doesn't understand what it's like to be a black man in America. This is from Joy Behar. Listen. And he's one of these guys who, you know, he's like Clarence Thomas, black Republican who believes in pulling yourself by your bootstraps rather than to me, understanding the systemic racism that African-Americans face in this country and other minorities. He doesn't get it. Neither does Clarence. Right. And that's

why they're Republicans. Yeah. They don't get it, Victor. They need to be like, unlike Joy, who's actually worn blackface and ABC celebrated it by putting it on the air. I guess she has a better idea of what it's like to be a black person in America than Tim Scott or Clarence Thomas. Yeah. She wouldn't last one day in a house without indoor plumbing the way that Clarence Thomas grew up. And so I think that's another thing that people are really tired of. And that's the bi-coastal, wealthy, white, liberal elite that's never subject to the consequences of their own crackpot ideology. It's easy to spout all of that stuff. But if you look at the way that Joy Behar lives, her income, and who she associates with, it's pretty much an apartheid existence as all these people. And they're totally discredited. And so, you know what?

It's just like Joe Biden who lectured us on, hey, junkie, you ain't black. Barack Obama is the first black person that can speak well and clean. James O. Eastland was a great guy. And Robert Byrd, I'll give the eulogies to. I don't want my kids growing up in a racial jungle. Call his assistants, boy. And then Biden gets up after all of that and lectures us about the great danger of white supremacy and racism. And it's all reduced down, I think, Megan, to the fact that they have completely lost. The left has the white working class. It's overwhelmingly not for the left anymore. And they need not the black vote, but they need 96 percent of the black vote and any slight defection of that or a fall off in turnout and they're dead. And they know that they have a thin margin of error.

So what they do is they just keep pounding that issue, pounding that issue that without this white bi-coastal privilege elite, that black Americans would be at the mercy of i don't know people in east palestine ohio or something and i i think that's not going to work but they're gonna they're definitely gonna try to say they're gonna try they're gonna try it they're gonna try it i turned on the television today megan and the uncle of jordanely, the person who was killed on the subway, was lecturing us about Penny. He just got arrested for theft. He had not 42 arrests. He had 70 arrests, and he had two outstanding arrest warrants.

And he's lecturing us about what Penny did to his nephew, and he has trumped his nephew's lawlessness. And the idea that the left can make this perpetual criminal into some Christ-like figure, and Penny, who was a Marine and tried to, I think, perceived he was protecting people who were otherwise vulnerable on the subway into a demon, it's beyond surreal. And again, I don't think all this, I say it's not sustainable, not that I think that it's going to collapse and they won't, they'll quit.

But if they were to win, the country wouldn't be functioning because it's ultimately nihilist. All of the topics we've talked about, they're nihilist. They don't, they don't, they intrude into our very lives and they alter them to such a degree that it's not any longer an America.

And it has a lot of ramifications globally. The Chinese are delighted about all this. Yeah. Do you do you think, though, that DeSantis has a chance? Because, you know, the latest poll shows Trump's average of all polls. He's up. I think it's 33 points over DeSantis. The most recent poll has him up. He's at 61, DeSantis is at 16. Let me give you a flavor for where we think DeSantis' message will go, because they've released a campaign video yesterday called America is Worth the Fight. It's a little preview probably of what we're going to hear tonight and how he's going to

kick off the campaign, the messaging. Listen to that and then you tell me whether you think he can get past the 800 pound gorilla. They call it faith because in the face of darkness, you can see that brighter future. A faith that our best days lay ahead of us. But is it worth the fight? Do I have the courage? Is it worth the sacrifice? America has been worth it every single time. Okay, good ad. Makes you feel a little something. Doesn't have him speaking.

Doesn't have him speaking, probably for a reason. But what do you think? Yeah, I think the big question is, if we were to go back in time to 2016, we were looking at America's governor, Scott Walker. He was in a purple state. He turned it red. He took on the unions. He was divisive within a state, but everybody said he's a can-do guy. He has this record, and he got on the debate stage, and Donald Trump destroyed him in the first debate. I don't think that's going to happen. But my point in raising that is that I think DeSantis knows that. And I don't see why we don't want an open primary. I think it would be good for the party. The only thing I would advise DeSantis is I think it would be wise for him

to say now when he's down in the polls that he will support the nominee and he expects, more importantly, that every candidate will support the nominee and pledge so now. Because in 2016, they did that pledge and they all reneged on it, or I shouldn't say all, but many of them did, to Trump's, it hurt Trump. And I think it would be good for Trump to say, and I think he would probably feel no compunction about saying it, that he would support the nominee because he's assured that he thinks it's going to be himself. But it would help everybody in the party to just, for DeSantis to say that especially. And I think that would, because I think he's going, we're going to see, I think we're going to see a surge. We're going to see a Spurgeon as fundraising and we're going to see a surge as his candidacy continues. I'm not sure that it's wise for those,

these Trump nightly commercials to attack him from the left almost. They're attacking him on social security, on budgeting, on attack and going after Disney. And I don't know how you can say that he's not on one hand a lot of the operatives are saying he's not a true conservative but when you actually look at on abortion and on disney and on budgeting and social security trump's commercials are attacking from the left and they're saying he's too much of a right-wing zealot. And I think it would be much smarter for Trump to run commercials that don't attack DeSantis personally and just say, we've got a lot of people that want to inherit the MAGA mantle, but it's like having sunshine without the sun. You need the sun and the sun is me and something like that. But otherwise, the idea that in that midterm election, that the one bright spot was Florida and how we changed that state and everybody agreed with him left right independent and then to go after him.

I don't think it's viable. I know the I understand the strategy to strangle the baby in the cradle right away, hit him so quick, so hard that he implodes or says something stupid. But I don't think if he survives this initial assault, I think he's going to gain traction. And I think in a strange way, all of these timed left wing unfair, vicious ads against Trump, Bragg hands off to Lita James. She hands off to Willis. Willis hands off to Smith. A thousand cuts, and you're going to see Trump in court or being sued or government indictments from now until the election. And at some point, if he can't stop that, people are going to say, this is so unfair, but I'm tired. It's monotonous. And so he's got to find a way to circumvent that and attacking on social media, these particular DAs rather than, you know,

there's a way to defend himself and gain empathy without playing into their hands. So you can see what the left is doing. They're going back to 2016, and that is build Trump up, give him empathy, but at the same time ensure that when he gets the nominee, he's not going to be a viable candidate. Well, and on that front, Victor, we just found out that this trial of the Alvin Bragg criminal case against Trump, his bookkeeping around the story, Daniel's hush payments, um, has now been scheduled for March 25th, 2024, which would make it

three weeks after super Tuesday, the New York times reports that Trump who appeared, uh, video via video at the hearing appeared to react angrily when the trial date was announced by the judge that was microphone was muted and it was unclear what he was saying to the lawyer seated next to him. There's no video of it that we've seen. It's just the Times reporters in the court saw it that that's all by design. I mean, this is 100 percent a political prosecution of Trump. And it's as you point out, you listed the names of the prosecutors sniffing around him as well. The one in Atlanta, the special counsel, they are going to come for him. Those other two

cases, if anything, are stronger. This New York case is a joke. I don't believe in the other two cases either. But if you had to stack them, you'd say the other ones have a better shot legally just on the papers. And so they are going to come for him. And you're right. This is going to be the albatross around. I mean, maybe that's what DeSantis is thinking, too, that I don't need to take down the gorilla. You know, Alan Bragg's going to do it. I think that's what he's going to do it. I've looked through all of what he said, and I think I can I think you and I can see a pattern with DeSantis. And it's sort of I get even he mad, or more like, this is horrible what they're doing to Donald Trump, but they're doing it to you as well as to Donald Trump. He is the avatar, but they're going

after you. And at this late date in this republic, we have no margin of error. We can't afford to give them any ammunition. So I can tell you that while they'll go after me, I'm not going to have the same exposure as Donald Trump. There's not going to be a stripper in my past time suggesting that it's really, it's not all about Donald Trump as Donald Trump, as he will say, is making it. It's about an attack on traditional America and any resistance against this progressive project. And more importantly, I'm not going to give him the exposure and endanger you guys. And so that's the messaging. But also for DeSantis, it's a waiting game.

Just wait, you know, while the little boat is bobbing next to you in the water and some third party just keeps loading it up with heavy weights. All you have to do is wait long enough for the boat to go down and then you're still there. I mean, that's got to be part of his strategy because Trump's biggest threat is most likely these Democrat prosecutors and Ron DeSantis can count on them. He can condemn them. He can say they're terrible.

But as a political matter, let's face it, he's probably rooting for it. You know, as we find out tonight at 6 p.m., he wants the same job Trump has. All right. Stand by, Victor. There's so much more to get to. We're going to squeeze in a quick break. Much, much more with BDH on the opposite side of this. So a couple of updates for you. Victor Bud Light remains, as you point out, down 25 percent in its sales. That was as of the

May 13th week ending, which is the most recent data we have. Meanwhile, the Human Rights Campaign, which is the group that gives these corporate equality index scores, and it's an absurd thing. They used to be sort of a normal gay rights group. Now they've gone completely over the line when it comes to trans issues. And unless you believe a man can become a woman and has access to all women's spaces, they're going to downgrade your score. They're threatening Bud Light. They're now threatening Anheuser-Busch saying we have suspended your corporate equality index score while you consider your behavior in not more vocally supporting the Dylan Mulvaney campaign. No response as far as we can find yet from Bud Light to that, but they're hemorrhaging,

hemorrhaging, hemorrhaging sales. The woman who runs human rights campaign, by the way, Kelly Robinson. She worked as a political organizer for Obama's campaign in 08. She recently tweeted, trans women are women. That's it. That's the tweet. So what do you think Bud Light is likely to do now while under threat on its corporate equality index from the human rights campaign, understanding that its sales are evaporating. Yeah, I think they're going to run an internal survey or they're going to conduct, I should say, an external survey and find out who is the more responsible for the drop off, whether it's the trans community or middle America, and then they're going to make the necessary adjustments. And they should understand, they should learn from history about the wages of appeasement. You can't appease these

people. The more that you appease them, the more they look at that weakness to be exploited rather than to be returned with magnanimity. They don't look at it that way. For them, it's power. And people who are weak deserve to be exploited. And same thing with the Dodgers. Once you give it to them, and you know that, Megan, when they come after you or me or anybody, that when you start to apologize, if you try to contextualize it, you're just asking for more. And anybody who does, you lose your supporters. And I think, why should I support him or this company when they won't support themselves? And so they cross the Rubicon. And whether they like it or not, their constituency is middle America

and they're going to have to win it back or they're going to be in big trouble. So Target is dealing with a similar incident right now because Target decided it would be a great idea to partner with a company that, as far as I can tell, one of its main lines seems to be some sort of pro-Satan line of clothing.

They decided to willingly partner with this clothing manufacturer to make Pride Month gear that includes bathing suits that are, quote, tuck-friendly, that have extra material around the crotch, which no woman needs because we don't have penises down south in Rio. We don't need extra material and we don't need tuck friendly. But the Target CEO is out there defending this, saying, look, the extra crotch wear and the tuck friendly bathing suits are important. That this whole line in the pride department is a good business decision. It's the right thing for society. That's why they decided to do it. But if you look at the individual targets across America, they're feeling the wrath of the consumer. So much so that Fox News reported yesterday that states like South Carolina, Georgia, the more southern, more conservative states are now having to move the entire display into the back corners because they've had so many irate customers. I'm sure it includes a lot of

parents going in there saying, get this out of here. I don't want to look at it. I don't want my kid to look at it. And I don't want to shop here if you're promoting it. Yeah. So Megan, the question is then why did they do these things? And I think part of it is the vast transformation in corporate culture. It used to be that if you made it to an ad executive or a corporate, you were a guy who started delivering Coca-Cola maybe. And then you worked up. You were a salesman.

You were in delivery. You were in ads. But now what they're doing is they're bringing right out of the schools of business on the two coasts. And we saw that, as you remember, with the person who dreamed up the Mulvaney commercial. She had no experience in the actual working or the clientele of the corporation. But if you look at the schools of business, and I can tell you, being on the Stanford campus, it's a good example. They are bringing very young people that are woke, and

they're letting in people who are woke and their curriculum is woke. And then these corporations are hiring them at very high levels. And these people have never worked their way up. They have no affinity or contact with middle America or working class America. And they've made, they've almost ensured that these corporations are out of touch with anybody other than their own class and income. And so then they, what sounds really brilliant and, you know, I'm going to outwoke you in a board meeting and we're going to have a brainstorming and I'm more left-wing than he is. And I might get a, that's a prescription for suicide because they have no idea how they sound to normal people outside their small,

their small little groups. Even the, you know, the, the partnering with this group that makes satanic clothing. I mean, it's reminding me of what's happening with the Dodgers. Like who cares if it offends Christians would not us, um, this group that these were not sold at target, but this group, Ab Prowling that they partnered with has made products like, um, uh, a pin with the following statements. Heteronormativity is a plague times up for transphobes join my gay cult. All right. So target turned to them to make their new line of clothing, including baby onesies with rainbow patterns. And at one point selling their pride related

merch that read things like we belong everywhere across the trans flag to too queer for here, cure transphobia, not trans people, and so on. And now they are having to have emergency meetings, according to this Fox report, because the customer base is so upset. And here's Gavin Newsom's response. All right, lest your governor, lest he missed the opportunity to weigh in on something like this. He writes, CEO of Target, Brian Cornell, selling out, selling out the LGBTQ community to extremists is a real profile in courage. This isn't just a couple stores in the South. There's a systematic attack on the gay community

happening across the country. Wake up, America. This doesn't stop here. The gay community. So conflating the gay community with the trans community, whereas he knows very well those two happen to diverge dramatically. Just read the Andrew Sullivan piece that was posted this week. So, yeah, him trying to take issue with the fact that these stores are having to have emergency meetings

because it's getting so, so, so dicey and so, so, thanks to this boneheaded decision in Stores in the South in particular. Yeah, you know, Gavin Newsom is the political counterpart to what we were just talking about with this corporate culture related by marriage to Nancy Pelosi. The Getty family subsidized him. They gave him all of these companies, corporation starts. He's been a corporate left-wing artifact his entire life. He's never been outside of that small Pelosi, Feinstein, Barbara Boxer circle. It's very closely allied with Silicon Valley money now, Stanford University. And it's a very arrogant, insular group of people. And so when he weighs in on this, he has no idea about the trans, as you said, the tensions between working class gay people and this trans movement. Nor does he understand how the trans people affect women's sports and how they've destroyed the aspirations of thousands of young girls that are competing from high school on the way up to college.

Nor does he have any idea how average people feel about it. And so they're getting very, I guess I'm trying to get back to that theme. They're getting very risky because they're pushing a lot of these constituencies, African-American, adult males, Latino groups, working class whites that had voted for Biden. And they're pushing them and pushing them and pushing them as if their loyalty is guaranteed, no matter what they do. And I think there are many revolutionary groups is that their attitude is yesterday's, today's revolutionary is tomorrow's sellout.

They just keep getting more and more radical each iteration. Okay. So we got to talk on the subject of radical. And you pointed out, you mentioned Stanford, obviously not the only university to embrace the woke left. And that brings me to Hunter College in New York and this lunatic who just got fired, thank goodness, for holding a machete up to the neck of a New York post reporter. Now, what was the New York post reporter doing at this person's house? He went

there because she was in the news yesterday for having, it happened earlier this month that the video just went public. Thanks to the student group, a pro-life group had an, had a table at an, on a display at Hunter college. She went over to them. She flipped the table. We have that sound, but I think we're that original confrontation where she was very angry at the pro-life students just for saying, hey, we're talking about abortion. This is bullshit. This is violent. You're triggering my students. I'm sorry about that. No, you're not. Because you can't even have a fucking baby. So you don't even know what that is. You don't even know what this is. Get this shit the fuck

out of here. Look at this angry, angry, disrespectful person. Her name is Shaleen Rodriguez, professor again at Hunter College, adjunct professor in the School of Visual Arts, who decides the students for life may not have a display. She says it's triggering and that it's violent. The very display is violent. The guy's so respectful. I'm sorry, ma'am. Sorry that, but we're talking about abortion. So the New York Post goes to say, hey, you know, how about this controversy? That was, you know, I suppose not so cool what you

did to the kids. And she pulls a machete on the reporter. Here is the video that we have via the New York Post. It's not seven. Let's let's get out of here. You can't do that. Let's let's get out of here. You can't do that. Yeah. So then she chased them to their car, reports the Post, kicked the reporter in the shins after having pulled

a machete to his neck. That's what it took for Hunter College to say, we're parting ways with this professor. Victor, it literally has to be this bad for them to acknowledge who they're employing. You know, this is sort of the bookend to all of these corporate executives. Why does she do these things? Why does she think that she can go into a student union and overturn and destroy people's property? Or why does she think that she can commit a felony? And that's what it is, an assault. And then that's a neol okay? And the answer is she looks at prosecutors throughout the United States, and they feel that if you're of a protected, marginalized group status, you're going to be exempt, and there's no deterrence left. So criminally, she thinks she can do whatever she wants.

And then I've been in academia for 50 years, and they always prided themselves on something they call retention, promotion, tenure. This was a very exhaustive process where they went through your teaching, your scholarship, your behavior to audit you continually. And the same thing was true of admissions to go in, test scores, GPA, the ranking of your high school, you know, the whole drill. And we have destroyed all of that under the guise of diversity, equity and inclusion. And the result is that all these people are coming out of the woodwork and saying, you know what, it worked. All we have to do is call people racist and be in passive aggressive fashion. We can say, oh, I'm triggered. I'm a victim. And then I can

victimize other people. And that's what they're doing. And when you destroy all sense of standards, criteria, meritocracy, and the criminal justice system follows suit, then you have, we see this almost daily. And they made a mockery of the university. At Stanford University, it's the same thing. And it was, again, that thing was triggered, to use her term term by transgendered students. So that's these are the wages of what happens when you destroy institutions and then you need them in extremists. I mean, now we need them. They're gone. And these people have taken over. I mean, her radicalism was on full display, but I doubt that incident with the table would have gotten her fired. I think that's no, there's no way She would have been honored on campus for that. No, it should have.

Yeah, absolutely. Five years ago, she not only would have been fired for doing what she did at the table, but she would have been unhirable. Now, if she had not done the machete incident, she not only would have been lauded, but she probably would have got job offers or a promotion for what she did. Yeah, this this just in. Apparently, she's she's going to be honored by the L.A. Dodgers at their net. But that's how it's going. Victor Davis Hanson, it's always a pleasure, my friend. Thanks for coming on. Thank you. All right. And up next, we have an in-depth edition of Kelly's Court for you. But first, I'm going to bring you an update on the Tucker situation when we come back after this break. And don't forget, folks, you can find The Megyn

Kelly Show live on Sirius XM Triumph Channel 111 every weekday at noon east. And if you listen to the show live, often we take callers and we can chat about the news together. So please consider doing that. If you prefer to watch the video show and see the actual visual presentation, go to YouTube.com slash Megyn Kelly. You can watch it and see our clips there. And if you like an audio podcast, you can get that too. Follow or download on Apple, Spotify, Pandora, Stitcher, wherever you get your podcasts. And there you can find our full archives with more than 555 shows now. My goodness, 555 shows now. My goodness. Five, five, five.

I want to start with an update on Tucker Carlson, the Daily Mail reporting based on these pictures that he is rebuilding the studio in his main home that Fox dismantled after booting him off the air. Good for him because Fox would have taken its camera and its lighting and its other equipment. And they've got pictures of Tucker and his family trying to change it up. That's good news for those of us who would like to see him back on the air and using his voice. And he seems to be getting his act in order. Meantime, I had some thoughts on the Elon Musk, Ron DeSantis thing and how it relates to Fox News. Axios had a very interesting article today, and I agreed with a lot of what was in there. The headline is Musk moves in on Murdoch. Elon Musk has displaced Rupert Murdoch and Fox News as the king of

conservative media in recent weeks. Why it matters, they write. Fox News used to be the place where conservatives went to break news. But the right wing ecosystem has turned on the network, leaving Twitter as the center of media gravity for the Republican Party. Just as the 2024 election heats up. Their examples of this are the fact that Tucker's ratings have cratered in the APM since he left. That Tucker's bringing a new version of his old Fox News show to Twitter. It's really it's it's going to be a subscription model, but he's going to post it via Twitter. And Ben Shapiro just announced that all of the Daily Wire podcasts are also going to be posted on Twitter beginning at the end of this month. And then on top of it all, you have Ron DeSantis.

Now he is going to sit for an interview with Trey Gowdy over on Fox News, but he's making the announcement on Twitter. He's not making the over on Fox News, but he's making the announcement on Twitter. He's not making the announcement on Fox News. That is a sea change for these Republican candidates. Trust me, I was the one in the anchor chair when a lot of these people came on to announce their candidacy back when I was still at Fox in the 20, 2016 race. I mean, I could go down the list for you of the candidates who announced on our show and who we did in-depth profiles on sort of bringing their backstory to the viewers. No more. This is the way it's going to be done now.

They're bypassing what was once unbypassable Fox News to make the actual announcement and get the news out. As you know, all that matters in TV news is who has it first. It doesn't matter that he's going to trade out a second. What matters is he's breaking the news with. As you know, all that matters in TV news is who has it first. It doesn't matter that he's going to trade out. He's second. What matters is he's breaking the news with Elon on Twitter. It's a significant shakeup when it comes to media and how Republican conservative politicians see Fox news. They no longer have to kiss the ring. They understand that it's not just Rupert's show anymore. We brought this to you yesterday after that Harvard-Harris poll that showed more independents now are turning to alternative media sites for their news than any other news site, than ABC, NBC, CBS, any of these,

Fox News, all of them. More conservatives now than ever before, are turning to alternative news sites like us, like digital media, not just us, but places like The Daily Wire and Glenn Beck and so on. And this is a very good development. Carlson actually spoke with Axios and said the old system is collapsing. And I agree. He said, you can't claim you've got a democracy if all the information voters receive before a presidential election has been curated by the people already in charge. And the Axios piece goes on to point out, look, on Monday, I mentioned this

report to you, the Daily Signal had a really good, really good report about how Fox has gone super woke on all the trans ideology. I mean, not just their employee handbook, which they say, well, we have to comply with the laws in New York and California where we do business. I get that. That's true. But you don't have to crack down on Tucker's producers who want to refer to Dylan Mulvaney as a he, which the reporting in The Daily Signal says you did. You don't have to demand certain of the things that are in that report of all employees. You don't have to use words like gender affirming care, which plays into the left's narrative. You don't have to air reports talking about how if you don't let your daughter transition to a boy, you're going

to wind up with a dead daughter instead of a live son. Those are left wing lies about the trans situation. And look, in 2022, when that report aired, we knew that. We knew that by that point. But Fox is leaning in. And that's why the Daily Signal, which is owned by the Conservative Heritage Foundation, took a shot, a major shot at Fox News with that good reporting that I just mentioned. Then you've got Daily Wire's Matt Walsh reacting to that report, saying Fox News is fully woke on trans ideology and saying now that Tucker's gone, there's no stopping Fox's march leftward. They also point out that Carlson is preparing to unleash attacks on Fox News. We saw that report

in an earlier piece by the Daily Beast where Tucker was threatening that he's got a very large oppo research file on Fox News and is not afraid to use it if this thing gets even uglier. So that's where we stand now. I think it was a clever move by DeSantis. Yes, he'll go on Fox, but it's different. And had he just done this on, you know, the old 8 p.m. time slot without fronting it first with Elon, it would be sending a message I don't think he wants to send right to the Tucker Corps viewership, which once again has not watched Fox. Just the latest update on the ratings because I always bring them to you. Last night or Monday night is the most recent data we had. Terrible night up and down the channel. Laura Ingram at 10 in the tank. I mean,

just dreadful number. She lost the entire night. She was down at 149 in the key demo. Tucker's number still horrible down in the key demo. 157. 9 p.m. goes up just a tick to 162, then Laura down at 149. Absolutely horrible. Maddow beat Hannity in the overall numbers and in the key demo, as she always is doing now, every Monday, I think, since Tucker left. MSNBC beat Laura at 10 and in the total. CNN did a little better than Newsmax, but it was a horse race. And that's just never been the case. Newsmax has been beating CNN in that 8 p.m. time slot. We are seeing a seismic shift in the media landscape right now. And it's great. It's good for America. It's good for you. It's good for our ecosphere and our reporting. And I told you this

long ago that the future of media is going to be the relationship between the audience and individual personalities. You cannot trust these large corporations that have an agenda. They have too much control over what you see and what you do not see. You need to figure out who you trust and who you don't trust, who will be honest with you, even when the facts are not pleasant for your side, but who will understand what's important to you, the consumer in actually choosing stories, uh, and reporting on them. That's, that's what we do. That's what this whole ecosphere has allowed. And that's why it's gaining steam. And the days of Rupert Murdoch having a monopoly on the conservative right are over.

Okay, we move on now to Kelly's court with an excellent legal panel today. There is tons of legal news to get to, including the latest in the Brian Kohlberger murder case, an unbelievable lawsuit by a trans woman challenge out of New York, More details on the City Bike Karen case we brought to you yesterday. And also E. Jean Carroll trying to take another shot at Trump based on that CNN town hall. Lots to get to. Joining me now to discuss Peter Tregos, managing partner at the law offices of Tregos, Sartes and Tregos, and host of The Law, you know, on YouTube and Beth Karras, former prosecutor and legal analyst. You guys welcome back to the show. Great to see you. Good to be back. I mean, Beth is like, I didn't spend enough time on Beth's many accomplishments,

but she's been a prosecutor. She was on TV. She's I know you're ABC. I listened to you on 2020 all the time. Now they've scooped you up and that was a good decision by them. But anyway, uh, great to have you both here. So, um, let's, let's start with my God. So, so much, so much that we can get to, let me see, where do we want to begin? I guess Kohlberger because the chilling details that were reported on this Friday night's dateline were shocking. This guy's accused of murdering four Idaho college students. Most Americans have seen the story by this point. Three young women and one young man, the boyfriend of one of the young women, while sleeping in their beds last November, November 2022. Here's the suspect, Kohlberger. The defendant was said to have sneaked into their house in the middle of the night with a knife,

a K-bar knife, and he sliced them to death. He stabbed them to death, all four of them. There were two other roommates inside the house, one of whom we believe slept through the whole thing, one of whom has told the police she woke up at some point and saw him leave the house. She had heard some sort of oral exchange, we believe, between the defendant and one of the victims, where he said something to the effect of, it's okay, you know, I'll keep you safe or I'll protect you or something to that effect. Someone said that. And now he faces the court to figure out what's what. They were going to have a preliminary hearing where the prosecution was going to have to show all of its cards. They decided not to do that. They just got a grand jury indictment, which prevents the prosecution from having to put witness after witness on the stand

and allowing the defense to cross examine them. I think that was a wise move, but what's come out, what's come out now is shocking, including you guys. The biggest revelation from the dateline to me was that this guy apparently bought a K-bar knife and sheath. Remember, they found the sheath of the knife that was used by the murderer at the scene. They found him buying one of these knives and its accompanying sheath seven months before the murders on Amazon. Beth, on Amazon. What? Well, I mean, it is seven months before, so I suppose the defense will say that's too attenuated.

But it is good evidence that they can now place a knife in his possession, something that if he bought, presumably he was possessing, not giving away. And consistent with what they believe to be the murder weapon, although the actual knife has never been recovered. The sheath has been, though. And another detail that came out, if I can, if I may, is that he apparently burglarized another home in the past and sort of switched things around to just kind of play psychological games with the owners, not really stealing anything. And when I was reading about that and hearing about it, it immediately made me think about the Pettit family that was killed in 2007 in Cheshire, Connecticut. One of the two murderers, the house, they were killed and then the house was burned down. The father, the doctor survived. One of the two, Joshua Komar Sargevsky, was a cat

burglar who used to do just that. He would burglarize people's homes, switch their paintings, sometimes steal things, not always, but just mess with people's heads. And he perfected the skill of burglarizing. And then he committed the ultimate act of raping and killing these two young members and two young girls and their mother. But you got to wonder if Koberger also was sort of perfecting his burglary skills so he could stealthily get in homes without detection. I got to tip my hat to the Dateline team. They were my favorite people at NBC, for what it's worth. I love the Dateline team. They were just total pros and kind people. Keith Morrison, my God, like the greatest. He was born to do the job he's doing, is he not? In any event, they report that there's a couple of things here. He broke into this is the case you're referencing, I assume, a female colleague's home. Yeah. He broke into a female colleague's home months before the murders.

According to a source with Dateline, he's considered a strong suspect in this case. They don't have the proof positive yet, but this is all brand new. Allegedly broke into the apartment of a female colleague. This is while he was at Washington State University. He'd only gotten there months before. He'd only started his graduate studies program there. I think he got there in August. The murders were committed in November. So he didn't have a lot of time to start this alleged crime spree. Allegedly broke into the apartment of a female colleague there at Washington State University, moved items around as part of an elaborate ploy to manipulate her, according to Dateline.

He befriended her months before the murders, then broke into her apartment, jostled things around, did not take anything. They write, it worked. This is via the New York Post. The unnamed woman then asked him to install a video surveillance system. This is so sick and creepy, you guys, which authorities believe he could have accessed remotely since he knew her Wi-Fi password. This is crazy, Peter. So can you imagine how this young woman is feeling now? The reaction she must have had when she realized when we all heard that shocking news that they arrested a suspect in this case of the four murders.

And she found out it was this guy who had installed the cameras. This is crazy. And it was it would be totally consistent with what eventually happened inside that other house a couple of months later, if true. Yeah, I mean, I hate to be the one to throw cold water on some of it, but I think that's what you're here for when. Yeah, I think this happens. And this is kind of another aspect of this case that I think is a really big deal. And that's the gag order, the non-dissemination order, where these leaks are not supposed to happen. And sometimes when the leaks are not supposed to happen, sometimes there are reaches and

there are stretches. And we hear if he's a suspect somewhere else, now it fits into his serial killer profile perfectly. And it proves that not only did he commit these crimes, but he committed that crime. There is another way to look at it, that he was at least trustworthy enough for this female student to ask him of all the people she could have asked to put the system in her home. It also begs the question that if he already had that access to her home and he had practiced it before and he had set up a security camera and had this

information on her, why not choose her as the potential victim? I'm not saying he didn't do that, and I'm definitely not saying he didn't do the Idaho murders, because it seems like there is a lot of evidence. I just caution everybody to not jump to conclusions. Wait till we see what actual evidence comes out, because there is a gag order, and wait to see if those other similar bad acts, like breaking into other young females apartments comes into this trial, because I think it would be relevant if they can prove by clear and convincing evidence on the other bad acts that he did, in fact, commit those crimes. And then you start piling up evidence that proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

I'm just not there yet piling on with all of these additional things we're hearing. Hmm. Beth, the other piece of new information, this is also interesting, is that, you know, he was this T.A. at Washington State University where he was getting his graduate degree at the time he allegedly committed these murders. Now we learn again via NBC that he had been fired. He'd been fired from that job in December. So it would have been right after the murders. They're reporting that he was counseled over a verbal altercation he had with a professor and his conduct had been investigated with women. They were investigating his conduct with women around the time of the killings. He was ultimately fired from his job as a teaching assistant in December before his arrest at his parents' home. In one of those instances, he was accused of following a female student to her car. In the case of the female students, the university's investigation did not find him guilty of any wrongdoing. Clearly, they had an investigation open on him. They cited the potential unsatisfactory performance as a TA,

including his failure to meet the norms of professional behavior in his interactions with the faculty. Beth, what we're seeing here, in my view, is a pattern of behavior leading up to these horrendous acts. Right. His things seem to be spiraling in his life if he's losing the TA position. Was he planning something like this? I don't know. But he did have odd social interactions with women. It has not been established that he actually knew the victims in this case. And for him to commit the ultimate act of four murders, is that his first crime?

Because it's pretty severe. Generally, we see escalation in crime. Certainly things are not going well, perhaps in some parts of his life. But I don't really have an explanation for why he would kill four people. And certainly we don't know a motive either. But we've heard other problems with women that he didn't do well with women. There's been speculation that he might've been a so-called incel involuntarily celibate man who has never been with a woman, but not because he doesn't want to be. Um, now we see here negative interactions with women at Washington state. There was an earlier report that he had negative interactions with women at a bar to the point where the bartender

or the guy who runs the bar said, I don't want you coming here anymore. Something's off with you. Then there was another report out that he had yet another pullover in his car. This is in addition to the ones that we already knew about after the murders. This one was before where he was sort of pushed by this cop. But in any event, that happened right by the house in which the murders. This one was before where he was sort of pushed by this cop. But in any event, that happened right by the house in which the murders took place prior to the murders. It's just like a lot of circumstantial evidence. It doesn't alone. None of these proves anything together. To me, it paints the picture of a man who had issues, serious issues with women and who were his main targets, these women inside this house. Go ahead, Beth.

I do want to add that because you do mention this is circumstantial, that most murders don't really happen in front of a lot of witnesses. So there's not often direct evidence or confessions or eyewitnesses to murders. Murder cases are built routinely on circumstantial evidence. And this is no different. So and it's great evidence. Circumstantial evidence is every bit as good as direct evidence, sometimes even better because it can be incontrovertible, unlike eyewitnesses, because they can get things wrong. Peter, the prosecution is going to say seven months before these murders where we've got his car circulating right around the house. We've got him, which he never did, turning off his phone right before the murders and turning it back on right after the murders. And we've got his touch

DNA on the knife sheath that was left behind. Seven months before all of that, he bought a knife sheath that matches exactly the knife sheath found at the murder scene. The weapon itself that was used to kill these four young promising college students has not been found, but it would match. They'll have forensic testimony. The knife he bought via Amazon. They're going to have that. And by the way, if he didn't use that knife, where's his knife? We searched his house. We searched his parents' house. We searched searched his car we didn't find it where is it that is so damning that's the type of evidence i think i would focus on if i was prosecuting this case um you have the amazon purchase you can get the exact same knife from

amazon or from the manufacturer test it law enforcement can test it to the autopsy wounds that was on the victim's bodies. They'd be able to match that knife up. And again, just like you said, just like in the Murdoch case, if it wasn't you, where are the clothes? And that seemed to work. If something is missing, then where is it? And we think you ditched the knife. And again, it fits right into the story the prosecutors are going to try to use to convict him. And that, I think, is a huge piece of evidence. And the direct evidence that comes in some cases that I think is very damning is when they do have a murder weapon and they can attach it to the defendant with DNA or whatever it may be. In this case, this might be the second best type of circumstantial evidence with the purchase. Yeah, they've got I realize touch DNA is not as

ideal as, you know, a bodily fluid being conclusively matched, but they've got his touch DNA on that knife sheath. That's how they found him. They found the touch DNA. They ran a genetic search for who might this belong to. His dad came up in the database before they ever knew the name Brian Kohlberger. And they recognized that the person that they were getting a hit on was the son of Mr. Kohlberger. And that was Brian Kohlberger. Then they found his car and so on. It all unfolded. So the jury's going to hear all of this. It's going to be extraordinarily compelling. I want to get to one other piece of evidence before we talk about what happened when he was arraigned the other day, Beth, um, post the indictment. And that is the family. My God, so chilling. So he has, I think two sisters, his family is in the Poconos, Pennsylvania, more rural part of Pennsylvania. And the one sister was a counselor. I don't know whether this is that sister, but she was apparently laid off from her counselor job in the wake of all this. I mean, can you imagine like,

let's be honest, nobody wants to get their counseling services from somebody who might be the sister to a mass murderer. Um, so this is again via Dateline after returning to his family's home, because that's where he went in December after the murders with his daddy at that cross country trip, where he got pulled over a couple of times by the cops. Kohlberger started wearing latex gloves,

even in the home. Hello? I mean, very creepy. I mean, who wouldn't be looking at him like, holy shit. One of Brian's sisters, who was home for Christmas, noted, yes, his use of the latex gloves,

that he, and noted that he lived just miles away from the murder scene, only 10 miles away, and that he drove a white Hyundai Elantra, which is what the police were searching for at the time. She thought that the Kohlberger family should consider maybe it was Brian. She knew, Beth, she knew. Yes, that was really chilling to learn that. Now, the fact that he was wearing gloves in the home is a huge red flag, but that his sister, who's a little bit of a trained observer, put it together, the car, the make of the car and

where he was living together with the gloves. That alone, that's great stuff, but there's got to be something more about him. Obviously, she knows her brother. She may have other things. She knows other things about his behavior, his interactions or lack of interactions with women. Perhaps he's done something inappropriate in the past. I'm not saying illegal, just perhaps inappropriate. That made her think, wow, maybe he really is. Cause those three things together are, are pretty compelling, but I think that it's, um, against, you know, just sort of all the knowledge she has about her brother and his, um, you know, his psychology. You're 100% right, Peter, because you know, I like, you know, the people in your life and think

about the people in your life right now, if they came home after a murder had happened nearby where they normally live and behaved a little odd, most of us wouldn't be like, he did it. Clearly there was something about this guy that led the sister, you know, his past that led her to say, Oh my God, I think he might've done it. Yeah. I mean, I think it indicates that we just don't know so much in this case and what is like beth said the entire context of her statement you know she's going to be sworn under oath and either giving a deposition or at a trial or wherever it may be and giving an official statement as to what she saw what she heard post murders but also maybe throughout his life as we've heard so many people talking about how there may have been signs or patterns throughout his life. And his sister may be able to shed light on that. But I also

just want to mention real quick at the end, the fact that she lost her job and you're right, Megan, that who wants to go to Coburger as their therapist or somebody that helps them with a problem. To me, that is the importance of innocent until proven guilty and why the nation as a whole should wait until we hear things specifically that are going to come in as legitimate and reliable evidence before we condemn the entire family. I want to ask you whether this is admissible. But yes, I mean, it's like, can you imagine you're going to, you know, Beth Dahmer as your counselor? OK, it's over between me and Beth. Sorry, Beth. You've been helpful, but no, I'm moving on. Okay. Let me ask you whether this is admissible, Peter. Is this admissible? Because here's what they say happened next. This is so creepy. The family knew. They

knew. Of course they knew. And this guy had a long history of mental health problems. He was addicted to heroin, say the reports, Brian Kohlberger. He had the visual snow problem where he would see like the, I call them the ant races on TV for no reason in his eyes. He's talking about feeling like a dead bag of meat. He feels nothing when to get his graduate degree and so on this um dateline report goes on a source said brian's father said so the sister said to the family we should consider whether brian committed these this quadruple homicide the father said no i don't believe it the same source told dateline that several members of the family went outside to look for evidence in Brian's white Elantra and that they did not find any. But police by that point had already observed Brian cleaning his car with bleach. We knew that the FBI was was watching him at the time that he the arrest at one in the morning, wearing latex gloves, putting his belongings in little Ziploc baggies in a trash bag that he was going to dump as he had the nights before in the neighbor's trash. So they had let him get away with a fair

amount of stuff because they weren't quite ready to make the arrest, including cleaning his car with bleach. But is that admissible, Peter? Is there a way of getting in that the family suspected him to the point where they went out and searched his car? Yeah, I would say it's probably going to be admissible, especially when pieces of evidence can be used by both sides. It's more likely that they're going to come in a trial. And I think the defense would use this to say his family went and looked and there was nothing in the car. And the prosecution will use to say even his family thought it was him for all of these reasons. And then because there is missing evidence, like a missing murder weapon, and depending on exactly what they can find or gather from the car as far as DNA evidence, I definitely think that's going to be a topic of conversation throughout the trial. The evidence that's missing and why it may be missing and his actions post-crime.

Beth, do you agree? As a former prosecutor, do you agree that this comes in? I do agree. And everything that the police did in observing the family and what the family did, yeah, it's totally admissible. That's not good either. I mean, as a juror, I would find it very compelling that the sister believed he did it and that the family, so more than the sister, felt so compelled they went out and searched that car. I mean, in the midst of all this other evidence, so it's like it builds okay so now when he was uh arraigned the grand jury indicted him and he had to go and stand and say whether he was guilty or not guilty

beth and he did something i have not seen before but i heard our pal nancy grace talking about this on her podcast talking about how bK, the serial killer with whom Brian Kohlberger may or may not have a relationship or may see him as a mentor with speculation. He also did the same thing where he refused to say the words not guilty. And then the judge said those words. Hey, Ms. Taylor, is Mr. Kohlberger prepared to plead to these charges? You are not. We will be standing silent. Because Mr. Koberger is standing silent, I'm going to enter not guilty pleas on each charge.

Counts one, two, three, four, and five. The judge is named Judge. So it's a little weird. He's Judge Judge. Judge John Judge. I mean, that's what. And Judge John Judge was the one who said, not guilty, not guilty. So what's that about?

So I've had that happen in my experience when I was prosecuting where a judge enters a plea on behalf of the defendant because the defendant can't enter it for whatever reason. Maybe an incapacity or just refusing to speak. So the judge enters it because there has to be something, you know, in the record, guilty, not guilty, almost always it's a not guilty plea. Now, I've heard an Idaho attorney give some analysis about this, that if you're going to challenge a grand jury presentation, it's better if you don't speak to that indictment at all, even by uttering the words not guilty. Not a good argument, but maybe that's part of the strategy. Maybe not. He may just not want to cooperate at all. Failing to cooperate with the attorney could maybe stall the case a little bit.

But he did speak. They asked him other questions like, do you understand this charge? Yes. Do you understand this one? Yes. He said, and forcefully, he was like, yes. Do you understand the charge in count two, murder in the first degree? Yes. Do you understand this one? Yes. He said, and forcefully, he was like, yes. Do you understand the charge in count two, murder in the first degree? Yes. Do you understand the maximum penalty? Yes. Do you understand the charge in count three, murder in the first degree? Yes. Do you understand the maximum penalty? Yes. But when it came to not guilty, nothing. Correct. But you know, there not guilty, nothing. Correct. But, you know, there's two parts to competency, right? Understanding the proceedings and then assisting in your defense.

And I'm actually looking at a case right now where a woman was found incompetent for five years because she refused to talk to her lawyer about the case, even though she understood the proceedings. So I don't think that's where Kohlberger is going. But it made me think about the story that I'm looking into right now. In any event, standing mute is not unheard of. And so the judge just enters it on his behalf and they move to the next step. It's very weird. I don't know if this is laying the groundwork for a plea. He thinks like I never lied about it.

I never said like I don't I don't know what this is about. Nancy had some experts on her show speculating maybe it was an attempt not to give too much voice evidence because that one roommate heard the voice. And he's already spoken in court and he did speak in this court proceeding as well. Just not on that question. Maybe there was a question about whether it would sound better if the judge is up there saying not guilty. Maybe it's his attempt to control because this is a very controlling guy. We just don't know. But it was an oddity that jumped out at me. The case is looking very strong against him, in my opinion. This this guy is not getting off. He is getting convicted, in my view. We'll see. He remains, you know, committed to proving his innocence. He his latest statement from his lawyers was he will be, know, committed to proving his innocence. His latest statement from his lawyers was he will be, quote, exonerated. We'll just see about that. So many more great cases to

get to with Peter and Beth right after this quick break. Hot yoga in Chelsea is in trouble in a civil suit brought by someone who says they are a trans woman, biological male, was Dylan Miles, now goes by Allie Miles. And this is the third gender identity discrimination lawsuit that Allie has filed in 13 months. This is Allie. Three lawsuits in one year. And the latest is based on an incident in hot yoga. Chelsea, would anyone care to relay the facts that happened in hot yoga? Chelsea, happy to do it, but happy to let you guys have the airtime. Peter, take a shot. I think Beth's taking this one. Go ahead, Beth. she is transitioning. But that's how she identifies born male and still has, you know, male genitals. And a lot of the women, other women in the locker room were really offended by

Miles's conduct, because she was just letting it all hang out. And the other women were like, she's a man, like she's just 150 percent male. So they were really offended. And the club was like, yeah, you can't use this facility when you read the law, though. And I was reading the law because it's not my area. I really know crime and this is civil. But, you know, gender identity is how one perceives themselves regardless of their birth sex. In New York City. She's defined as transitioning. And so, of course, in my mind, my practical mind, I'm thinking, well, if you're transitioning, you're not there yet, right? You're in the process. And years ago, I covered a case. I was telling Peter off air in Clearwater, where he is. I

covered a case involving a transgender person transition from female to male and then married a woman. And, you know, I won't go through that whole story, but the judge had to determine if this couple was in a legal marriage. And he went through a transition and then had his birth certificate changed. And it seems like if you go and have your birth certificate sex changed, then that has to be honored because you are legally now a woman, not a man, not the woman you were born. So but that's not the case anymore. And reading the law, you don't have to have gone through the birth certificate change. You just proclaim yourself as a woman and everybody has to honor that. So like this, every person at the yoga studio, these women who were offended in the locker room, they have to honor it too. I'm not

so sure. I'm not so sure either, because I think you can make a case for harassment for there's definitely a peeping Tom law in New York city where you're not allowed to creep around and look at naked women. And that's apparently what this miles was doing. Peter, they say that, the person who claims to be transitioning is, I think this is a, this is a quote from Chelsea hot yoga to the Washington or to the New York

post. This person who claims to be a transitioning woman came into the female locker room. Number one in male shorts that were down to his knees. Although there could be some hormonal addition because his bust is bigger than mine. said one witness. He did not wear any feminine top to cover his bust. He also de-robed and he is a full male. There's 150% man, as Beth said. There were things hanging out. Then they go on. It wasn't even like he was just standing there. He was crouched down on the

floor in front of the shower stalls. That is creepy. That is what you do if you're trying to see in the shower stalls. It was very uncomfortable for one of the women that was in there, and she was completely naked, as one does when one showers after hot yoga. Then this person started in immediately by reciting the law to the people who objected and they could see this miles person could see that there were other women. This is a quote again, amongst myself that were notably upset. And, and the female witness said, this person came there. It looks with the, with the intention of starting a problem. This cannot be protected by the law.

So I, a couple of thoughts on this case, just generally big picture. These are things that are going to have to be decided in court. And I think that's part of when we go down the line that he's filing or she's filing all of these lawsuits. It reminds me of back in the day in Florida, when the ADA policies changed and there will be people that were wheelchair bound that would hook up with a lawyer and go to every establishment and see if they had the proper ramps and elevators. And if they had made the updates and if they didn't, they would file lawsuits. And again, we'd have to decide in the courts would have to decide, did it apply retroactively? Were they in violation right now? I think that's probably part of what is going on. But I think the hot yoga studio also is going to have to look into the actions of the plaintiff

in this case. And if her being barred from the showers has nothing to do with her gender identity, but instead her actions while in the locker room. And if they ban her from the locker room because of her actions in the locker room, that's different than banning her because she's transgender. But let's face it, that the law should not protect this person and allow this person to enter the female locker room, even if there wasn't weird behavior inside the locker room. No woman wants to look at a penis in the women's locker room. That's a fact. That's the truth. And Beth, you know, as well as I do, that there

are real reasons why they created female only spaces to begin with, whether it's a bathroom or a locker room. And that is because women have traditionally been the victims of sexual assault repeatedly in these types of locations. And so now I feel for hot yoga, Chelsea, because they say, look, we've allowed a lot of trans people into the locker rooms, but this one's really upsetting people. So we drew the line there, but they have to let even the ones who aren't upsetting people. Well, they probably are, but I'm just saying not doing this weird stuff. They have to because of the New York city law. And what they've said in this article is we've been informed by our lawyers. This is somebody who oversees six commercial buildings in Manhattan, just giving color

commentary. We've been informed by our lawyers to change everything. Everything has to be a neutral bathroom now in order to avoid this problem. And that's not a solution either because I was just in a, I just had to go to a neutral bathroom last week in New York city. You were like, there's just a bunch of stalls and you come out and you have to wash your hands next to a man that doesn't protect women any better. I don't want that. It's a confined space. It's in the back. It's behind closed doors. And I don't want, honestly, to be pulling up my skirt or down my pants in a stall next to a man. And I don't know who's in there or how he plans on using this space. This law cannot stand, Beth. So I think, and I agree with Peter, there need to be challenges to the law and every case is sort of fact specific.

But I think that we will find more definition as time goes on because the terms are pretty vague. I understand what you're saying about your own use of bathrooms. When I'm given a choice, I don't like to go into a bathroom that has a urinal in it. I just don't like to go into a bathroom that has a urinal in it. I just don't. And I totally get what you're saying, because we're of that generation that's living through this transition. Younger people are very accustomed to it, but it's just not my life experience. So it is taking some getting used to, although I know plenty of people who are transgender, That's fine. But I think the law does need to kind of be a little more specific. Look, you can create a third bathroom. You can create a third

locker room. Okay, that's fine. You want to do that. But women can't lose at every turn. What they're doing right now is every time the woman loses, track meet, swim race, bathroom issue, locker issue, Women lose. You're afraid of sexual assault? Too bad. Check all your instincts. They're not dangerous. Bullshit.

I'm not saying every trans person is, but there's enough of a faction there that we have legitimate cause to be concerned. And there's enough of a faction of actual biological men who identify as men who will use this as an invitation to get into our spaces, whether it's a prison or elsewhere, that we have every right to object. who will use this as an invitation to get into our spaces, whether it's a prison or elsewhere, that we have every right to object. This law must change. And we need a case like this. Good. He wants to test the law by by going into all these places and becoming a serial litigant. Let's do that. Let's find strong lawyers who will actually stand up for women and their rights, because it's just a matter of time before somebody gets hurt. This is absolutely outrageous. All right, let's

move on to Trump. Trump got sued by E. Jean Carroll, who claimed that he raped her some 30 years ago in a Bergdorf Girdman in New York. The civil jury, she didn't sue him for rape. She sued him really saying you defamed me by saying it didn't happen and that I was a con, a con artist in making this up. The civil jury said, we don't, we don't think that he raped you. We do think he sexually abused you. So something short of rape. And we also think he defamed you by denying your claims and calling you a con artist. And so they awarded her $5 million. Trump said all along, didn't happen. Didn't know her. This is a lie. Then he goes on post-verdict to CNN to do this town hall. And here's what he said. This woman, I don't know her. I never met her. I have no idea who she is. I have no idea who

the hell she's a whack job. She's a whack job. So, Peter, she's now refiling, trying to get an additional I think it's another five million from Trump for what she sees get an additional, I think it's another $5 million from Trump for what she sees as an additional defamatory statement. Is she right? So theoretically, she could have an additional count for another defamatory statement and potentially she could ask for even more money in punitive damages because she can say that punitive damages are in place to punish and to create a scenario where the wrongdoer stops doing that. We think about it in my world and corporations. It's got to be enough to hurt the corporation for them to make a change so that they do what is right. And she can argue that whatever they awarded against Donald Trump the first time was not

enough because he doubled down right afterwards. So it needs to be more money in punitive damages. And theoretically, she could have an additional count of defamation because he doubled down on his prior statements. I don't get this. I don't get this either, Beth. You're allowed to say it didn't happen. So like a man accused or a woman accused of something she didn't do just has to in the wake of a civil verdict, which is 51 percent more likely than not just exceed.

Yeah, OK. Like, why can't he say, this is a lie? She's making it up. She's a whack job. She's a whack job is not, that's not a defamatory, suable statement. So let me just back up a second and tell you that New York State passed a statute called the Adult Survivors Act. For one year, regardless of when the sexual assault happened, you can bring a lawsuit. And so E. Jean Carroll brought her lawsuit for rape and sexual abuse under the Adult Survivors Act. It expires this end of November this year, which is one year. So she did sue for rape and sexual assault. What I meant to say was it was a civil claim,

not criminal. Correct. Correct. All right. Not criminal. Right. There's just civil claim. But the jury did find that statements he made were defamatory. And he went and he made the same statements again. Right. So that's the problem. And he just needed to back off of those statements. Because a jury, because a civil jury said that we believe that he can, he just has to not deny it ever again. I don't think that's the case. I think he can absolutely deny it. I think people can deny

things all the time and that can't be held against them for defamation. I think that, um, cases get overturned all the time. That's why we have appellate courts. Um, people lose trials that shouldn't people get convicted. Those convictions get overturned and thrown out. But I think when you make factual statements, like I've never met her and she's a whack job and kind of put those together. That's an opinion. That's not a factual statement. She's a whack job is a non-actionable statement of opinion.

I've never met her and she's a whack job. Again, some context based on the claims she's making because I've never met her is arguable. I'm not telling you he's going to lose at all. I'm not telling you he's going to lose. I'm just saying when we attach factual statements with opinions, sometimes those opinions can be related back to the factual statements. And there's an argument before Johnny Depp, very rarely did these defamation cases go forward and have these multimillion dollar verdicts left and right. And people seeing this as an opportunity to go after somebody that said something you didn't like. But today's day and age, I feel like I've seen

more defamation cases and big numbers from juries on defamation cases than I've ever seen before. I don't I don't. This is not America, Beth. If he's not allowed to say it's not true, I don't know her. And I think she's a whack job. Like that's that's America. He is allowed to have his negative opinion of this person who he says is making this whole thing up. And by the way, not for nothing, but he has an appeal pending. He's going to file an appeal. We're still within 30 days, I think, on this entire verdict. Listen, I mean, her lawyer, she's got a great lawyer. Robbie Kaplan is great. And she said that she and her team were researching this issue on whether or not they could that they are in and, you know, have have a base, have a good case to ask for additional money because he keeps repeating it. I'm betting against her 100 percent on this one. She's not going to win.

And no matter how good she is, she can't turn this one into an actionable civil action. It's just not it's just not or this is not America. OK, let's end with the city bike. Karen, sorry. I was like, that's how she's just not. Or this is not America. Okay, let's end with the city bike. Karen. Sorry. I was like, that's how she's been known. This poor woman, a nurse, 36 years old, six months pregnant, leaves her job at Bellevue where she's a physician's assistant, gets caught on tape in a confrontation.

She's white and she got in a confrontation with some black, they say teenagers. They must be on the older side of the teens because they look like men to me, over whose city bike it is. It's like a rental bike you can get in New York. As it turns out, it's hers. Her lawyer has produced receipts to show the exact identification mark on the bike matches up with her receipt. And it was hers. And these guys surrounded her and she felt threatened and started yelling for help and was probably called a racist by all these people online. I mean, it was, it was, I mean, deeply offensive. Do we have a soundbite on this or is this a full screen? Oh yeah. Here's just a, here's a sampling. This is from Dr. Rashad Ritchie of the Young Turks. Okay. Just like a sampling of what they sounded like.

He's of the left and many people on the left just condemned her as a racist right off the bat. I think it's 19. Check it out. The Karenicity is unbelievable. Put up the picture. We got her name, where she works, her boss. I want to remind you of a couple of things that happened in this video. Obviously it is telling, right? You know, she said, and I quote, you are hurting my fetus, my unborn child. Did you all hear that part? She said that. Why did she say that? Because that bolsters her argument to do what she's attempting to do, which is theft under any other circumstance. We will call this attempted theft if the black male went up to the white female who paid for

her opportunity to utilize the device and he decided to grab it and try to take it. We will call that clearly attempted theft. So let's call it as it is. Okay, that's one sample. Yahoo headline, white woman caught on video trying to steal black youth's bike in New York. Not true. The independent New York city health worker placed on leave after she falsely accused a black man of bike theft. The Bellevue authorities confirmed the Bellevue hospital employee was caught on camera attempting to hijack a city bike that a black man had already paid for, according to reports. OK, so, Peter, her lawyer now is saying he's going to sue them all. He's going to Nick Sandman them all and for defamation

for saying she was a thief when she was nothing of the sort. And this is why it's important, regardless of who the accused is, what they look like, what they say, what they're accused of doing, why we don't jump to conclusions. We don't convict on the first thing we see or hear. We wait to see what's actually produced to prove the truth. Because I think if everybody would have done this in the situation, and they may have even said, it looks really bad, or it sounds really bad on the video, but we need to see what actually comes out to prove the truth. This is just a highlight picture of what we should do to wait until we see what actually comes out to prove the truth. I mean, I didn't even think the video looked bad. I thought the

video, I mean, my guests yesterday were pointing out that what six month old, six month pregnant woman picks a fight with a bunch of strange men. It's really not something we do. That's right. And I agree with Peter. We just have to not jump to conclusions and learn the facts before having an opinion like this. I mean, it's very, very unfortunate that this happened. And one good way of making sure that you don't get sued for defamation is to be careful, be careful in rushing to judgment in a case like this, but they don't learn. The mainstream media sees a narrative, they pack it into their priors,

and they're off to the races. Beth, Peter, thank you both so much for being here. Before we go, don't forget to tune in tomorrow. We're talking to Jillian Michaels live from SiriusXM. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.