The Megyn Kelly Show - Kamala Glitches on Colbert, and if Diddy Will Get Out on Bail, with Batya Ungar-Sargon, Arthur Aidala, and Mark Eiglarsh | Ep. 911

Episode Date: October 9, 2024

Megyn Kelly is joined by Batya Ungar-Sargon, author of "Second Class," to talk about the cringe Kamala Harris appearance on Stephen Colbert's show, the shocking moment when she glitched and ended up discussing dreams and aspirations, the decline of Colbert as an entertainer, Harris' ridiculous framing of the Russia and Trump story, the cringe and unpresidential moments of Kamala's appearance, the bizarre choice to drink beers on-air, Howard Stern talking about how mad at SNL he is for gently making fun of Kamala, the idea that liberals might leave America if Trump wins, and more. Then attorneys Arthur Aidala and Mark Eiglarsh join to discuss the serious charges Diddy is facing and whether he could actually get out on bail, the news that Tupac Shakur's family is now looking into Diddy's involvement in the rapper's death, the challenges the prosecutors face, the rape allegations against country singer Garth Brooks, the questionable details about the accuser and her relationship with Brooks, breaking down Brooks' denial, the possibility of a new trial for the Menendez brothers, if the supposedly "new evidence" is actually new and relevant, and more.Ungar-Sargon- https://www.amazon.com/Second-Class-Betrayed-Americas-Working/dp/1641773618Aidala- https://omny.fm/shows/the-arthur-aidala-power-hourEiglarsh- https://www.eiglarshlaw.com/Ground News: Use https://groundnews.com/megyn to get 40% off the Vantage subscription to see through mainstream media narratives My Patriot Supply: https://PreparewithMegyn.com Home Title Lock: https://HomeTitleLock.com and use the promo code MEGYN Blackout Coffee: https://BlackoutCoffee.com/MK or use the code MK for 20% off your first order 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, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at noon east. Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. I got so much paper on my desk, I am trying to keep track of it all. There's so much news these days, which, you know, for a news person is a blessing. For the country, you tell me whether what you hear today is a blessing or not. We are tracking the ongoing absurd media tour of Vice President Kamala Harris. I mean, it's basically, let me tell you what happened. She took off her shoe. Okay. For the listening audience, I'm holding up my runner's shoe. My favorite part of my job is I wear my stretchy pants every day.

She took off her shoe and pretty much everybody she sat across from has taken that shoe. I'm not that flexible and licked it. They have licked the shoe. That's what she does. She gives them the shoe and then they lick it. And that's basically how the media tour is going. It is a shoe licking boot licking tour, um, via podcast, via radio, via CBS, via ABC. Um, take your, take your pick. Let me just sum it up by saying, I have this weird feeling. If it had been Donald Trump in those same forums, it would have gone a little differently, would have gone a little differently. Honestly, I've got to ask myself as I watch her, is she getting worse? Like she might be getting worse instead of better. I've always said about TV, it's like typing. The more of it you do,

the better you get. And there's no way of getting from zero words a minute to 60 without going through all the necessary steps. I've never seen anybody get worse at typing the more they type. But honestly, I think this is what's happening to her. She does not improve upon acquaintance. She's not getting smoother. She literally just has her script and she reads off her script and she repeats those few lines. And it's like a computer that is programmed like, oh, this is the part where I talk about the dreams and the hopes and the aspirations. This is the part where I talk about my middle-class background. This is the part where I talk about how I prosecuted transnational drug gangs while I

was the prosecutor in California. It's, there's no extemporaneous expression, thought, musings where you can see her thinking. I mean, this is actually one of the things that makes someone more credible in an interview where they pause and you can see them thinking it over. Like, hmm, let me give that question thoughtful consideration. Never. She would be in a full panic because she doesn't have the confidence to do that. Her appearance on Stephen Colbert last night was next level. He's so gross. So gross. I remember the Stephen Colbert who tried to just make us laugh, who is like kind of fun and who, while we always knew he was leftist, didn't realize he hated the other half of the country so much. Boy, we've traveled a long way. Okay. So we're going to get to all that. And then later today, oh, we have such a good Kelly's Court. I read through all

my Kelly's Court stuff today. I mean, it is so good today. And there's so much political news. I was like, oh, shoot, should we do a court? Yeah, we're doing a court. There are big updates in the Diddy case, Scott Peterson case, believe it or not. The Menendez brothers may be getting out of prison for reals. Garth Brooks is being accused of rape. He denies it. And we'll see if we get to the other cases, which are equally compelling on my list. But, uh, Martha, the original OGs of Kelly's quarter here, Mark Eglers and Arthur Idalla. Okay. But we start today with Batya Angar Sargan. She's opinion editor for Newsweek and author of second class, how the Elites Betrayed America's Working Men and Women, which could not be more relevant. This show encourages honest conversations,

which is not always easy in today's media environment with big tech companies deciding who and what gets amplified and who and what gets censored. But there's a new platform that prioritizes free speech and transparency without controlling the narrative. It's groundbreaking, and it's called Ground News. Ground News is an app and website that aggregates related articles from around the world, highlighting each source's political bias and corporate influence.

Ground News reveals for every single story how media narratives are shaping the conversation and who is covering the topic. It makes it easier to navigate the news and may even be helpful to you for the next time your liberal friends send you a headline from their favorite biased news source telling you this is real news. They are offering our viewers 40% off their Vantage plan, which gives you unlimited access to their website and app. Ground News is independent and supported by subscribers, not corporate interests. Check them out at groundnews.com slash Megan. That's ground, G-R-O-U-N-D, news.com slash M-E-G-Y-N, groundnews.com slash Megan. Batia, welcome back to the show. All right. So let's, let's talk about Colbert. All right.

She goes on Colbert last night and once again, she arrives as she did on the view yesterday to thunderous applause. You know, of course they stack the audience with New Yorkers for the most part and Kamala fans. So it makes it look like she's got this same sort of support everywhere. It's 50-50 in the country right now. The polls are very, very tight. We'll have an update on just how tight in a bit. And Colbert asks her the question she's been getting asked, would you do anything differently than what Joe Biden did? She was asked that on The View, and she gave Trump a campaign ad, which as we predicted, Trump would make an ad out of within an hour. He did, where she said,

no, we're the same. I was in on every major decision, which is a disaster for somebody who's running on, you know, move forward. We can't go back. So now Colbert gives her another bite at the apple. And here is how that went in Saudi. Polling shows that a lot of people, especially independent voters, really want this to be a change election and that they tend to break for you in terms of thinking about change. You are a member of the president administration under a Harris administration. What would the major changes be? And what would stay the same? Sure.

Well, I mean, I'm obviously not Joe Biden. I noticed. And so that would be one change in terms of... But also, I think it's important to say with, you know, 28 days to go, I'm not Donald Trump. And so when we think about the significance of what this next generation of leadership looks like, were I to be elected president, it is about, frankly, I love the

American people and I believe in our country. I love that it is our character and nature to be an ambitious people. You know, we have aspirations. We have dreams. We are, we have incredible work ethic. And I just believe that we can create and build upon the success we've achieved in a way that we continue to grow opportunity and in that way, grow the strength of our nation. Oh my God. Oh my God. Oh my God. I asked my team to send me that her interview. I didn't stay up and watch Colbert and they sent it to me in four chunks. I Debbie Murphy, I missed that chunk.

I missed the chunk. I saw it written down in the packet as a highlight. I that's the first time I've seen that it's better as a surprise. You're right. That's Canadian Debbie in my ear. But yeah, she had a brain glitch. She forgot the question she was asked. You could see she ran out. She was a blank. And then she went back to hopes, dreams, aspirations, and work ethic, which this audience knows we've gone through it umpteen times. That's her fallback. That's what she likes to say in response to almost everything. She's not a smart person. I watched that clip like 30 times because it just keeps getting better and better. It's so amazing how her first answer is, well, I'm not Joe Biden, you know, and then I

don't think she realized that was going to be right, like an applause line. They all laughed. And then, and I'm not Donald Trump, right? It was so amazing. And then you're totally right. There was a glitch. And then she moved into the stump speech, right? Here's the thing, Megan. She's not doing this media blitz to convince anybody to vote for her. She's doing the media blitz to reassure the rich people who are already in her camp that she can land this thing, right? She's not actually out there trying to convince swing voters. She's out there speaking to the very wealthy people who are already in her corner. And why do I say wealthy people in her corner? Well, here are a few statistics, OK?

In 2020, a quarter of billionaires went for Joe Biden and only 14 percent went for Donald Trump. And since 2020, venture capital donors have donated to Democrats at 75 percent. Hedge fund donors, 68 percent. Donors of the big three management consultant companies, Megan, 95 percent of their donations go to Democrats. We talked last time about the Oprahs and the Meryl Streeps. This is who the Democratic Party is. It is rich people who don't have real problems. So how do you get them to feel excited about you? Wurtz salad is fine for them because all they want to see is their own vanity reflected back at them. And just as proof of this, you know that this is an election of one side representing the rich and one side representing the working class, because one side is talking about real problems and one side is talking about made up problems. Right. What's Kamala Harris running on? An abortion ban that Donald Trump promised he was going to veto, right?

A threat to democracy, allegedly, in the form of Donald Trump, the most popular politician in America, right? And the so-called divisiveness of Donald Trump, who has unified working class Americans of all races for the first time in generations. These are made up problems to make rich people feel like they're backing something important. Now look at what Donald Trump is running on, a wide open border, which has resulted in crime, but more importantly, the absolute plummeting of the wages of working class Americans. Donald Trump is running on offshoring of manufacturing. Donald

Trump is running on wages and working conditions for working class Americans. And most crucially, Donald Trump is running on the fact that for most working class Americans, the American dream has become a fantasy. Okay. So you look at the platforms of both sides and it immediately tells you not so much who the candidate is, but who their base is, who they're speaking to. It could not be clearer. That's so interesting. Now, speaking of billionaires, this came up between Colbert and Kamala last night. Would you look at this? Suck to.

There are quite a few billionaires who support you. You are from Northern California, after all, where they grow them in fields out there. Who's your favorite billionaire? Because we all have a favorite billionaire. On three. One, two, three. Oprah. I'm sorry. I claimed Oprah. You can't take her now. It's stomach turning to me. He what what's happened to him is what happens to virtually every news personality and late night personality and host of popular shows, podcasts, etc., which is they start getting invited to parties with Jennifer Aniston, etc. And they start getting invited to parties with Jennifer Aniston, et cetera. And they start thinking they're finally one of the cool kids. Everyone likes them. They can go to parties where they see very well-known Hollywood stars who make them feel important, like they're on the inside circle.

And then they drink the Kool-Aid and they start talking like that in a way that really projects. I have no balls. I'm sorry. I don't know what happened to my testicles. Um, perhaps you would like to take them, madam. I see you've taken them from your vice president. Um, it's amazing to me that he would embarrass himself that way and that they would think it's good politics to get up there being so chummy chum chum about how close they are with billionaires like Oprah. Somebody tweeted this. I wish I remember who it was, but it is so smart. He said Colbert came up and made his name playing a loving portrayal of a sort of useful idiot, you know, a sort of dumb dumb on the right who meant well, but was, you know, a real idiot. And now he's playing a useful idiot in a very loving portrayal of the left, a real dum-dum

who means well, but doesn't know anything, only he doesn't realize it this time. And I thought that that was so apt. It is so sad what has happened to him because his initial portrayal of the sort of useful idiot of the right was truly very lovable. I mean, he managed in his iteration on the Daily Show to sort of have a kind of compassionate take on, you know, the side he didn't agree with. But now that he is stuck, as you say, sort of licking the boots of those in power on the left, all of the charm has sort of seeped out of it. And all he is right now is an apparatchik of the Democratic Party. Effectively, he's Pravda for the Democratic Party. He exists in order to sanitize the worst parts of their agenda. And it really breaks my heart, Megan. It's crazy because he's at least news adjacent over there at CBS. I mean, literally news adjacent,

like the whole organization is a stone's throw from his studio. So he understands what's in the news because that is what he bases his monologue on at night. It's always one sided, but he understands what's in the news. And so you would think he would understand one basic fact about foreign relations, no wars under Trump and wars under Harris Biden. Okay. Like Ukraine, for example, you don't have to be neck deep in foreign policy. You don't have to be going to the Council on Foreign Relations to an idiot. He's the useful idiot in their hands. He gets played. On the latest Woodward book, he always drops these books right before elections and people freak out. Oh, my God. Oh, look at it. And then they mean nothing. But there's a tidbit in there about Trump allegedly sending Putin covid tests in 2020.

Literally, nobody gives two shits whether he did that or not. I mean, truly, no, nobody who's not a far left Democrat cares about. So what? Look at this. He has said he he wants to be a dictator on day one if he were elected again as president. He he gets played by these guys. He admires so-called strongmen and he gets played because they flatter him or offer him favor. Everything I've heard about Bob Woodward's book is is is right. Donald Trump secretly sent COVID test kits to Putin for his personal use. I ask everyone here and everyone who is watching, you remember what those days were like? You remember how many people did not have tests and were trying to scramble to get them?

You remember how rare it was to have when you remember people by the hundreds were dying every day and this man is giving COVID test kits to Vladimir Putin? I do remember what those days were like. There was no war. There was no invasion by Russia and Vladimir Putin of Ukraine. And no one gives a damn whether he, in an effort to maintain a relationship with Putin, which might be potentially important for a president, gave him, the leader of another country, some tests to figure out whether he had COVID. This is what she thinks she's slamming the ball here. She thinks she's having an end zone moment, Batya. It's so funny. She's talking like COVID tests are COVID vaccines. You know what I mean? Like the outrage in her voice, it's as if they had the ability to like cure somebody. You're totally right, Megan. You are totally right.

In 2020, there was no Ukraine war because Donald Trump had good relationships with Putin. And when he becomes president again, if he becomes president again, he will again have a good relationship with Putin, which is what you want when you're trying to end a war with somebody like Putin who has nuclear weapons. I mean, they act like what you want is to be at war with everybody. That's not what you want. You want peace through strength. You want peace through deterrence. And Donald Trump was the first American president under whom there were no new wars. And they just have to erase that because they cannot stand what he accomplished, which was to take a quite pro-war party in the Republican Party before Trump and say, actually, we're going to be the anti-war

party. And it is so amazing, Megan, the Democrats have so much Trump derangement syndrome. Whatever he does, they have to do the opposite. He controlled the border. They opened the border. He was anti-war, suddenly they have to wage this war. And really make no mistake about it, the reason that Joe Biden was such a cheerleader for this war in Ukraine, and so insistent on poking the Russian bear in such a way that I think it was Kamala Harris herself who insisted that Ukraine was going to join NATO, which of course was one of the main reasons that Putin gave for why he invaded Ukraine in the first place. It's because they blame Vladimir Putin for Donald Trump's victory in 2016 in a totally free and fair

United States election that the Democrats, for all their talk of where the defenders of democracy never accepted the veracity of, never accepted the legitimacy of, so much so that, I'm sure you remember this, Megan, but when Barack Obama and Mitt Romney were debating in 2012, they got asked, what is the greatest threat to the United States? And it was Mitt Romney, the Republican, who said Russia, and Barack Obama basically laughed him off the stage. So the 1980s called they want their foreign policy back. Exactly. Who could possibly think of Russia as anything but a potential ally in our fight against our true greatest threat, which is China.

Right. That was the reasonable Democratic take until Donald Trump showed up and Hillary Clinton became convinced that it was Vladimir Putin who got him elected. And that is the source of their cheerleading and their rah, rah, rah for this war and refusing to even countenance the idea that you get out of a war through diplomacy. They have cut off every avenue possible for that. And of course, when Trump says he will be able to resolve this quickly, it is completely, completely the case. It's amazing how no matter how friendly the forum, she doesn't seem comfortable being with people like she doesn't seem to have the gear where you can really connect. She certainly doesn't have the Bill Clinton like I feel your pain. She doesn't talk about people's economic problems in any way, shape or form like that because she created them. I mean, honestly, that's not just a line. She and her boss, Joe Biden, created their problems. So maybe that's why she doesn't feel like she can express empathy for what people are going through. It's more about, you know,

mostly gaslighting that they're not, that the economy's back except for these grocery prices, which she's going to fix with her magic wand. So she gets asked by Colbert, oh, about the hurricane, about Helene and about Milton, which I have to say, my friend Donna, she was saying Hurricane Milton, she's got a home down in the Target area. She was saying, Milton. She's got a home down in the in the target area. She was saying it just it sounds like your sweet old uncle, you know, Milton. It's not it's not a name like you would attach to a monster hurricane, but he's not sweet and he's not old. He's young and robust and he's coming for us. Everybody needs to pay attention. She got asked about the hurricane and would you let she unveils a new Jamaican accent among other problems here? Listen, tell you, there are plenty of leaders who are working in a bipartisan way. I've talked to governors of both parties who are working in a bipartisan way to get the aid to people on the ground.

And I know the governor of Cooper and Governor McMaster and Governor Kemp are doing what's right. People are state. They are. They are. And they should be commended. They should be commended. This kind of manipulation is a cynical and corrupt luxury that people are using. And it's crude. Have you no empathy, man? Yes. You know, for the suffering of other people.

Have you no sense of purpose if you purport to be a leader, to understand that being a leader means lifting people up in a time of need and not manipulating them? Have you no empathy, man? Yeah, pass the ganch. That was kind of Indian instead of Jamaican. It doesn't matter. She tries a new one out every week. It's like, really, it is like going to Epcot with Kamala Harris. You hear a new culture or accent debuted every other week. And then did you catch his job?

You catch him? He's like, oh, yeah, sure. The governors of North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, they've been doing a great job. Hmm. Who is it who he left out? Remind me again, Baja. Who does he think is not doing a great job? Only the one person who has protected more Floridian lives than probably anybody ever

in history. Of course. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's amazing. And it's such a split screen with Donald Trump who can go in into any situation in front of any crowd and totally be himself. You know, it's always Trump. And I was watching there was a clip that went around yesterday of Senator J.D. Vance, and he was at a rally in Michigan. He was asked by a reporter, you know, there are millions of black people living in this state. Why should they vote for you? And his answer was just so beautiful. It was very humble. The story of black Americans, especially in the city of Detroit, is actually very similar to the story of Appalachian white Americans. We moved to places like Detroit, black and white together because there were good jobs for people who were willing to work hard and play by the

rules. And it wasn't always perfect, but for a generation in this country, people, black and white, worked together, raised their families, build things in this country, and create a prosperity for the entire country. It was also all about how more unites us than divides us, how Black Americans and Appalachian Americans have had a very similar story of following the jobs, have had the same kind of devastation to the middle class due to offshoring of manufacturing, how he has a real plan to elevate every American. And it was both so sensitive to the unique needs of certain communities. He talked about how Black Americans, of course, want safe streets for their children. And somehow the media acts like that's not the case and that you can't have safe streets while

also having a good relationship with the cops. So it was both very, you know, tailor made to answer the question about why specifically Black Americans should vote for their ticket. But it was also very unifying. And it was exactly the kind of extemporaneous answer that like you started with Megan, you could see him consider the question and just show his heart. I mean, that's really what's inside, which is every American deserves the American dream. It's such a stark contrast between the two tickets. Well, it makes perfect sense because he truly lived it. I mean, he truly she wants us to think she was born middle class. All of this is nonsense story. I mean, she grew up upper middle class at the lowest in Canada, by the way. But

OK, we've heard that. But he actually did. He wasn't middle class for most of his life. He was working class. He his grandmother had a little bit of a better life. And so when he was living with her, he moved up to middle class. But everything thereafter was completely his own doing. He's entirely self-made and defied all odds, despite his adverse childhood experiences to become first a U.S. senator and then the vice presidential nominee. So speaking of showing your real character when you're in these settings, she can't do it. She's all over the place with her weird accents and her rehearsed lines about the dreams and the aspirations and trying to engender real outrage, outrage over the fact that Putin got COVID tests. And then here you see their mistake. Because someone on the Kamala Harris team must have

realized it's a little risky putting her on a late night show because ostensibly the whole purpose of those shows is to make you laugh. This is a problem for her. Everyone knows why they've stifled the laugh. We joked on this show that they put her on some sort of tranquilizer or downer or made sure she was hung over for her first interview with her emotional support governor, Tim Walz, when she sat with Dana Bash. Now she's loosening up a little bit more. They're letting her out there. They went too far. The cackle returned. And let's not forget who her main problem is with men, men, men. And unlike the sex podcast and the view Colbert probably does have men watching. Like it's probably a split audience, if not more heavily favored

toward male. I don't know, but there's no way it's just for women. So you got to be careful about her coming across as unlikable or shrewy or just like nails on a chalkboard to somebody who reminds them of their annoying like seventh grade math teacher. The return of the cackle. I'm sorry because I can't just be given a drink to the vice president of our life there you go so

you know, it made me laugh at how cringy it is. Look, I know it's a late night show. I don't look. I don't know if this is sexist. I'm trying to figure out whether I'd be saying this or male. I think I would. But there's also the image of the first potential female president and trying to maintain your image, or in her case, build it, of a serious person, of being a serious person who is, yes, you can laugh here or there. You can have a good time, but not to come across as a giggling, cackling schoolgirl, especially while people are about to die. I mean, we're going to have hundreds of people, unfortunately, die as this hurricane hits. And that is the subject that they were about to discuss, and she well knew it.

Yeah, I think it's very interesting how you phrase it, Megan, about, you know, a question of competence, right? I think when Hillary Clinton would laugh, right? There's a clip that was recently circulating of her at an event where Donald Trump was, it was one of these dinners where there was a roast and Donald Trump made a joke about how, you know, Hillary Clinton bumped into me. And then she said, pardon me, you know, it's a great clip. And she laughs very hard at it. Yes, yes, exactly. And she laughs very hard and it's very charming that she's able to laugh at herself in that moment. But I think it's because she's obviously incredibly smart.

I mean, I don't agree with her about anything. She would have been disastrous, but she's obviously smart and competent and would have been competent at enacting a policy that I very much disagree with. Right. And so when someone like that, you know, laughs, right, Like it's, there's something about it. We can all partake in it. The problem here is that, you know, it, one really worries that there's not much beneath that, especially because so much of what Harris appears to be doing is acting right. She's trying to act like a presidential candidate rather than actually. What do you mean, man?

Right, exactly. And, you know, and I think the reason she's acting is because nobody actually thinks she will be the president. They think that the sort of permanent bureaucracy of the Democratic elite class will be telling her what to do and what to say. And she will go out and do and say whatever they tell her to do. Right. Nobody thinks that any of the ideas she's presenting are her own. Nobody thinks that as president, she will be in charge, right? They think that the exact same people who have been running the show for Joe Biden

all this time, Alejandro Mayorkas, Tony Blinken, right? All of these like massive disasters will probably stay in place and keep doing what they're doing exactly. So I think that's kind of what people are reacting to. I was really, really, really put off by the beer moment. Like, just be real. Like, nobody thinks you drink Miller Lite at home. Like, just be normal. Like, okay, you want to do a beer moment? Get a craft beer. Like, something we could actually picture you drinking

in your fancy home. Let me show them that. Let me show them. Here's the beer moment. First became the nominee and named Tim Walz as your vice president nominee. People are calling it the vibe election. All the vibes were all good. But elections, I think, are won on vibes because one of the old saws is they just want somebody they can have a beer with. So would you like to have a beer with me so I can tell people what that's like? Okay. This was... Now, we asked ahead of time,

because I can't just be giving a drink to the vice president of the United States, but I'd ask you... You asked for Miller High Life. You were asking for Miller High Life. I'm just curious. Okay, the last time I had beer was at a baseball game with Doug.

Okay, so cheers. There you go. Cheers. There you go. Ooh. That tastes like the beautiful city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The champagne of beers. There you go.

Oh, my God. So we've answered the question. We do not want to have a beer with her. I appreciate the public service. Keep going. She comes off to me kind of like a party girl. I think she would be fun to have a beer with. I just think there's not much. I bet she's had a lot of drinks. Yeah. I mean, but the way she says like the champagne or beers and suddenly you're like,

oh yeah, this is a person who probably drinks champagne much more than they drink beer, right? Like it's the fakeness of it, all the overplayed fakeness and pandering of, you know, it just doesn't quite come off the gap between who we're supposed to think she is and who she actually is. Like there's always just a little bit of friction. And I don't know. And you know what else can I just add to that? Here's the problem. I blame that on him mostly. He's 80% to blame and she's 20% to blame because as he pointed out, they asked in advance for sure. They asked about the whole gag, the whole beer thing in advance. And she said, yes, which she shouldn't have done

because I mean, I do believe she's a drinker. That's fine. A lot of Americans drink. I feel like she might drink more than the average person, but okay, that's my own speculation. So I wouldn't highlight it necessarily. It's been a meme on the left because she sounds kind of drunk at a lot of these appearances. So I don't think I'd be like, yeah, let's lean into the alcohol thing. And I do think I'd anticipate one, it's going to bring out the cackle, which we don't want to, it's going to undermine her seriousness, which we actually are trying to establish. So it's not a good idea. And three, it isn't authentic to who she is. She's probably not a beer drinker. So why do this? Like pick another gag, do something that's closer to home, but she doesn't have the confidence to know who she is, you know, to say

that one's not for me. I think it's probably a case of going along with the handler saying, it'll be great. Yeah. I think that the crisis in confidence is very real. She is being undermined probably by everyone around her. I mean, before these interviews, right, somebody on her team had to explain to her, oh no, Madam Vice President, we don't think you're up to this. Right. I mean, like, can you imagine what those conversations were like? I think men are really put off by that, by the crisis in confidence. But also, of course, like when you look at this gender divide, you look at the two campaigns and you have the Harris campaign, which is really going for the female college educated vote. And then you have the Trump campaign, which is really, really doing well with working class men of all races. And I think a lot of that

has to do with, again, the economic policy. Harris's plan is to tax the rich, take all that money and hand it out to people who are below the poverty line or what have you. And Trump's plan is to create an economy in which people who work hard will make more money and be able to keep more of the money that they made. Those are two fundamentally different understandings of how you treat the economy, how you elevate people. And I think obviously one of those models appeals to men much more because it's based on autonomy. It's based on confidence. It's based on freedom, right? You work, you get your money, you live your life, right? And the other model is based on a much more paternalistic model, right? You rich people are going to feel much better about yourselves because we're going to raise your taxes, which of course rich people love paying higher taxes if they're liberals. We're going to take that money and then we, the nanny state, are going to give it away to the people who we consider to be deserving.

It's a much more feminine female model. Right. And I think that that's really what you're seeing here is this big gender divide mapping onto the class divide. That's interesting. I mean, the Democrats for a long time took the working class for granted as a voting block, as they did black voters who are slowly but surely greater than they used to, migrating toward, if not the Republican Party, toward Trump and the working class and the union vote. I mean, it's been so interesting to watch what's happening. We talked about another incident this week, but the Teamsters head went on the Theo Vaughn podcast and really let it rip about why they did not endorse Kamala Harris, a Democrat. And they chose just not to endorse because 60% of their members

wanted Trump. And he spoke a bit to the damn sense of entitlement these Democrats have when it comes to the union vote. He, and it sounds like his members, are sick of it. Here's Sot26. I'll be honest with you. I'm a Democrat, but they have fucked us over for the last 40 years. I've been in office two and a half years. We've given the Democratic machine $15.7 million. We've given Republicans about $340,000, truth be told. So it's like, you know, people say the Democratic Party is the party of the working people. They're bought and paid for by big tech. And the Democrats, if 60% of our members aren't supporting you, the fucking system's broken. I mean, I had a heated debate with, heated discussion two weeks ago with Chuck Schumer. And I'm like, you had no problem taking $550,000 from me three weeks prior to me going on the Republican National Convention. And then you want to be a fucking tough guy on Twitter or X or whatever it is and throw shit out there about me? Like, whatever.

I love, love, love his accent. And he's wearing a t-shirt that reads Teamsters versus everybody. What did you make of it? First of all, I think that man belongs on People Magazine's Sexiest Men Alive. I'm not the only woman who feels that way. That's what a man looks like, okay? That is what a man looks like who stands up for men and stands up for their rights and stands up for an economy that rewards hard work. And I just think that's great. I think Republicans, you have such an opportunity with Sean O'Brien. He is a leader and he represents 1.3 million Teamsters. And we have seen that this man has balls of steel. He is not going to let anybody mess around with him or shove him around or push him around. He's going to represent their interests. Whatever side of whatever labor issue Sean O'Brien is on is on the right side. And there is just such an opportunity here for

the Republican Party and Republican leadership to understand who their base is. Their base is the 60% of Teamsters who are voting for Trump, who are in a union, because you cannot take on this economy alone. So I just think that this is so great. Every word out of that man's mouth is gold. I watched the whole interview. It's so fabulous and really, really worth watching. But Megan, we're seeing a realignment here. These are people who the Democrats took for granted and they will no longer accept that. He's the first union, major national union not to endorse a Democrat. He will not be the last. I mean, this was a watershed, watershed moment. The firefighters union she was just trying to court came to the same conclusion. Absolutely. And if the GOP after Trump, you know, God willing, you know, in four years, if the GOP tries to go back to the

pre-Trump version on foreign entanglements, on questions like economics, forget it. It's dead in the water. It's dead in the water. I mean, they have to be paying attention to this. You know, I mentioned at the top of the show that there's some interesting polling information out right now, and it's got the Democrats scared. Some Democrats very scared from swing states. Mark Halperin was talking about it on two way in the in the blue wall states. There are still Republicans who are scared about what will happen if Trump loses. But it is interesting to hear people express themselves when it comes to their fear about the stakes of this election. And that brings me

to Howard Stern and his interview of Kamala Harris, where he put the cards on the table about how he was feeling, in particular about her latest media tour, which did not include Saturday Night Live, but she was lampooned on it a little. A lampoon may be too strong, but she was mocked, as they usually do just to Republicans. Take a listen. When you said you don't nap, I get it because like what you've taken on is extraordinarily difficult. And I mean, do you feel the pressure of the moment in the sense that like I when I met you out in the hall, I said, I'm really nervous because I want this to go well for you. I want it to go well for the country. Even when I watch them on Saturday Night Live with the

where they have Maya Rudolph playing you. I hate it. I don't want you being made fun of. I there's too much at stake. I believe the entire future of this country right now. I mean, as America landed the free home of the brave, I think it's literally on the line. And when I see them, how did you react to the Saturday Night Live bit? Well, I just saw it, actually. And it was funny. I am a huge fan of Maya Rudolph. I think she put a lot of time into doing the piece and the character. Okay. So I do think it's interesting. He's very scared. A lot of Democrats, I hear this from a lot of my Democrat friends, they're scared of Trump winning again. They're scared of Trump.

Republicans are scared about what's going to happen to the country if she winning again. They're scared of Trump. Republicans are scared about what's going to happen to the country if she wins again. But then back to Sean O'Brien, you got him talking about Trump like this. Listen to SOT 27. No other nominee in the race would have invited the teams into this arena. Now, you can have whatever opinion you want, but one thing is clear. President Trump is a candidate who is not afraid of hearing from new, loud, and often critical voices.

And I think we all can agree whether people like him or they don't like him, in light of what happened to him on Saturday, he has proven to be one tough SOB. That was at the RNC. It's interesting to me, right? It's like Trump gets up after being shot with the fight, fight, and you got the Teamsters Union president saying he's one tough SOB. And on the left, you have like real fear that she's being mocked on Saturday Night Live.

Like, it's crazy, right? It's crazy, the split narratives. First of all, the portrayal of her on SNL is so flattering. It really turns my stomach. It's just so, it's such a pretense of making fun of her on SNL is so flattering. It really turns my stomach. It's just so it's such a pretense of making fun of her. All the jokes are flattering and nice. You know, they're so careful. It's so gross because it's such a contrast, Megan, not only with how they portray Republicans, but now that Biden's off the ticket right now that Biden is like the butt of their jokes, they can joke about him,

right? Like he also now gets a very cruel, I found portrayal very nasty and mean, like, don't talk that way about an old person. I don't know. I'm sorry. It's just, and they would never do it. I mean, he speaks, it shows to me that they, that he no longer has power, right? They're not afraid of offending him. Cause like basically all of their portrayals of people who have power in their minds are incredibly flattering. Like the whole pretense that this is like taking on power is like. But the Howard Stern thing, I mean, my God, you know, this is maybe harsh, but people who say they're going to leave this country if Trump wins, people who say this country will no longer be this country if Trump wins or if Kamala wins, leave. Get out. We don't need you. We need Americans who are in love with this country and who will do anything for this country. And that doesn't mean leaving if you lose a free and fair election. You stick around and you fight for your country. And I am so disgusted by people using such extremist language.

Yeah, you might not like what they do. Trump was in office for four years. The country was doing great. Everybody knows it. They might not admit it, but they know it. Do you know, Megan, in 2019, the bottom 25% of wage earners saw a 4.5% wage increase. You know, like that was the first time in 60 years. And meanwhile, the top 25% only saw a 2% wage increase, meaning Trump was the first president in 60 years to shrink the wealth gap. I thought leftists are supposed to care about

that stuff. I thought they're supposed to care about the middle class. Wages went up for the lower middle class and taxes went down. I mean, it's like, it's a pretty good combo. And he managed to cut taxes for the people who are the job creators too, which makes them create more jobs. The reference you make to leaving the country was another piece of their discussion. Here it is, 12. If he wins, God forbid, would you feel safe in this country? Would you stay in this country? Howard, I'm doing everything I can to make sure he does not win. What if he does? How can you be safe?

He's saying, no, I'm just going to do whatever the hell I want. This time I know what I need to do. You know what? All of those former officials from national security, the over 200 republicans who worked with both presidents bush mitt romney john mccain who are endorsing me the former vice president this is not responsive voting for me along with his daughter liz cheney we are building a coalition of people that are republicans independents democrats libertarians all stripes of americans who are coming together to say, you know what? This election is about putting country before party, that this is about saying,

do we want a president who's going to abide by the oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States or someone who is full-time engaged? But here's the thing, Baja, there's only one answer to that question from somebody who's asking us to make her commander in chief and president. Of course, I am not leaving the country. Of course, I actually believe in America and I'm not going anywhere. Trump already won once, was president for four years. And you know what happened? We won it.

That's how she should have answered. We won it on the back end. And we've had four robust years. However, she wants to spend her years as vice president and Biden's as president. And we will have another rough four if he wins. But we will be OK. She can't say that given how they've worked so tirelessly to turn Trump into Hitler, a true existential threat to America. So she's got to keep it open. I might leave. It's so insane. You know, when he says,

will you feel safe in America? Like, what does he imagine Trump is going to do to Kamala Harris? The DOJ. We've seen them espouse this on her media tour. They're all worried that he's going to use the DOJ to go after his political enemies. Hello.

Exactly, exactly. And as is always the case with Democrats, every accusation is a confession. Right. Trump didn't do that to Hillary Clinton. He will not do it to Kamala Harris. But Joe Biden did it to Donald Trump. Right. I mean, it's like they're pretending like, you know, he came up with this idea that has been used against him. It's so infuriating. And again, you know, if you are now willing to fight for this country, leave. You know, we don't need you. Trump is the one who should be asked, will you stay? Because they actually are trying to put him in jail

in four different jurisdictions. He should be asked, if you lose, will you stay? My God, what they've already done to you never mind what they might still um all right finally i want to get to mark halperin on his two-way youtube show they got into polling problems on team blue listen and what i'm telling you is happening in private polling is she's got a problem now. It's not predicting Trump will win. She's got a problem. There's no path without Wisconsin. So you see here, Tammy Baldwin's Senate campaign poll shows Harris down three in Wisconsin. Why is the Baldwin campaign sharing its polling with the Wall Street Journal? Good question. You are sounding the alarm bell in the party. For you Harris people on here complaining that we're talking about problems in the Harris campaign, you're welcome to put your head in the sand about it. If you want to

go watch MSNBC primetime and hear how great things are going for the Harris campaign, you're welcome to do that. I just saw some new private polling today that's very robust private polling. She's in a lot of trouble. The conversation I'm having with Trump people and Democrats with data are extremely bullish on Trump's chances in the last 48 hours, extremely bullish. And he's saying in particular in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, but he went on to say, think of the seven battleground states, which ones is Harris in danger of losing? I would say Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, North Carolina, and Georgia. I'm not saying she'll lose all six, but she's in danger.

Simon Rosenberg, a Democrat, his latest newsletter says, don't believe any of that. She's ahead in the following 10 or 12 national polls at the national level. And then says, as for Michigan, we've got a Detroit news poll showing her up three in Michigan. But again, you've got a state senator there saying that don't believe that she's down. Something's gone wrong here. So what do you make of it? I think it's a very, very, very close election.

It's going to be decided by, you know, 40,000 votes and every vote matters. And this is great for people in our business, right, Megan, because everybody's paying really close attention to everything that's happening. I will say I spoke to an undecided voter on Sunday from Ohio, didn't know who she was going to vote for, has never voted for a Republican before. She called me on Sunday and said, I'm voting Trump. Why? Because of the Vance VP debate, the Vance Walls debate. She just felt that Vance had landed it for her. So I don't know how representative it is. I try to talk to as many swing voters as I can, but look, it's very, very, very tight. I think that's kind of the only thing

we can say about it at this point. And it's less than one month to go. I can't believe after this lengthy campaign, we're finally at less than one month. Batya, thank you so much. We are back with a great Kelly's Court. Don't miss it. Let me ask you a question. Do you think our country's going in the right direction or does it feel like things are falling apart?

If you are feeling alarmed, you're not alone. In fact, Americans from all walks of life have taken action to prepare for whatever's coming next. And that could start with having an emergency food supply. My God, with the news, what it is, doesn't that sound like a good idea? Just look at the storms alone, not to mention the political storm coming. Storing food in your home can be valuable in this crazy time in our country, which explains why so many people are preparing. Right now you can get ready too with a three month emergency food kit from MyPatriot

Supply. It comes with delicious foods like creamy stroganoff, honey wheat bread, and mushroom rice pilaf. The entire kit offers over 2,000 calories every day. This food kit lasts up to 25 years. Who knows what our country's going to look like then, but you can know you'll be ready for it. Go to preparewithmegan.com right now to order your three-month emergency food kit from My Patriot Supply. That's preparewithmegan.com. Now we turn to Kelly's Court. We have a lot to get to, so let's just do it. We've got the OGs of Kelly's Court way back when it used to be Kendall's court. These guys were making this segment a star. Arthur Idalla, trial attorney and managing partner at Idalla, Bertuna and Kamens PC and host of Arthur Idalla Power Hour. And Mark Iglar, criminal defense attorney at Iglar Law, which you can find at speakt to mark.com. Welcome back guys. Honestly, here's a scary fact for you.

We've been at this together for 20 years. Yes. Yes. We started way back when I was a correspondent in the DC bureau of Fox. That was 2004 19 at least, but at least we are about to be hitting our 20 year anniversary. Can you believe that guys? Nice. Yeah, I was, um, I think it was October of Oh four. It was one of my first Fox news appearances. My first one was actually with, um, Shep and, um, who's the wife of the NFL commissioner. Um, uh, she was a Jane Skinner, Skinnerville. Yes. Yes. Wonderful. That was the first time.

Two nicer people. Then you wandered over to Kelly's court and you're like, what the hell is this? Kendall's back then. It wasn't Kelly's court. It was Kendall's court. At a minimum. I've heard Kelly win. You were a part of the Supreme Court on Supreme Court decisions at times, correct?

I've made a wonderful friend in Arthur over the years. It's been great. Ah, I take no offense that you didn't mention me in that. But you and me, come on, we're tight, Megan. We're good, we're good. Of course, party Miami. All right, so here is, I guess, I don't even know where to start.

So I guess we'll start with the thing most in the news, which is Diddy. But we've got Peterson to go through. we got Menendez, Garth Brooks. So Diddy, the biggest headline out of his case is he's getting a new judge. A new federal judge has been assigned to his case, sex trafficking and conspiracy and racketeering against him. And what's interesting about it is according to reports, that will allow him a third bite at the apple of trying to get bail, which has been denied by the first two federal judges overseeing his case. And man, he's fighting hard to get bail, insisting that he's no flight risk and that he's not a threat to the witnesses. Like the other judges seem convinced he might actually try to intimidate a witness, which really led them to say, you're not going anywhere. I think everybody's

watching this because if he gets out, who knows what he'll do. Mark, should he get bail? No. In fact, the prosecutors are going to simply say you're judge shopping. What, what changed since the last time, right? A judge made a ruling. What change in circumstances occurred since the judge found that there was no possible way that he would somehow return to court if bail was ordered? So I think it's a real easy argument for prosecutors. Nothing has changed except the judge. I know that that's often the case, Mark, but I think this is the appeal that's being filed is an abuse of discretion. So what you're saying is that the judge- Just to make that clear, he's appealing the denial of bail by the earlier

judges and will appeal to this third judge to give him bail. Go ahead, Arthur. So it's not that typically when Mark and I are in state court and you're going from one judge to another, you have to show that something has changed. A witness disappeared or he didn't get indicted or something like that. And you want the bail to be lowered. But here you're just saying, listen, this judge did not weigh the factors appropriately. I respectfully disagree with my brother, Mark. We're talking about $50 million, and that's a lot of money for anyone. But besides that, so let's just say for him, it's not a lot of money. He's wearing an ankle bracelet with GPS. He volunteered to pay for his own security, who would report directly to the

United States Marshals and to the U.S. Attorney's Office if he left his house for any reason except an authorized trip to the doctors or to his lawyers. So he's basically saying, let's just make my house my prison. And they were willing to do anything, Megan, in terms of giving up his phone, giving up access to technology, just like let him sleep in his own bed in his own room. He is still innocent until proven guilty. Why should they all want to stay in their own house? Why should he get it? Because we're

all innocent until proven guilty. And he's known about getting presumption, but they don't get Arthur. Arthur's argument she's known they were coming after him since March. He had the financial resources to say, hey, I'm going to Google what places are not extraditable. I'm going to go hang out with Roman Polanski in France,

and I'm going to live the rest of my life there. He didn't do that. Yeah, but they're not just worried, Mark, about him fleeing. They're worried about witness intimidation. Of course. So Arthur makes a compelling argument. It's the same one I make in federal court repeatedly. In this particular case, you have a history of alleged witness tampering.

If he's at home, no one's recording the conversations like they would be if he's in a jail. So it's something that can continue to take place. And secondly, I do not one of the witnesses, we believe in this case, his ex-girlfriend. He's accused of throwing a Molotov cocktail in the car of some rapper he thought was flirting with his girlfriend or more. This guy is not afraid of hurting people he thinks are betraying him. And so I think these judges have very good reason to think he might intimidate somebody. Here's what his lawyers are saying, though, Arthur. They're saying he will agree to live under highly restricted conditions with no phones, no access to the Internet and video monitoring if necessary. The judge, the previous judge said he could still operate

through employees, quote, through even coded messages if necessary. And in the appeal, the lawyers say there's no evidence that he used coded messages. But you can see these judges don't trust this guy not to do something. But the bottom line is they're making it so difficult for him to do something, number one. And you know who his cellmate is right now, right? That's all over the materials. And what happened to him? He was allowed out, and then he called one of the witnesses.

I don't even think it was an intimidation. He just called him, and the judge took away his bail, and he's been in the MDC since. So it's not like Sean Combs doesn't realize what will happen if he is let out and then picks up the phone and tries to intimidate a witness. He'll wind up right where he is. And trust me, with all due respect, with all due respect, he, this guy, Sean Combs is now, his name is being mentioned in connection with not just physical harm to others, but possible murder. That was not the case for Sam Bankman

Freed, the nerdy, altruistic, philanthropic, whatever, who stole a bunch of money. Sean Combs is alleged to be very dangerous and not only a serial rapist. No, a serial. Yes. Not yet charged, but you've got civil, a civil attorney who's going to bring, he says he's got 120 plaintiffs who are going to allege that they were sexually assaulted or raped by Sean Combs. He denies it. Um, but you also have Tupac Shakur's family hiring heavy hitting legal teams to now take a very serious look at whether he was involved in Tupac's death. And the guy who's accused of being the shooter is saying that that's a possibility. I don't exactly know what he said, but he said something like he was, he offered to pay him a

million bucks to do it. These are all allegations Sean Combs denies. But my point is these judges have no reason to say, yeah, he'll be fine. Go ahead, Mark. OK, so, Megan, let me give you a little pushback on that. I'm OK in deciding and declaring that with what they've got, with what he's accused of and and the potential risk of flight danger to the community and the other things, there's no abuse of discretion holding him no bond. But you start bringing in all this other stuff. There are mere allegations. At the end of the week, they may say he was O.J.''s partner in the slaughter of his ex-wife. You know, everybody. We all know,

having done this for close to 20 years of all the money grabs. Right. I'm not saying a lot of that. You know, it's not a scenario where people now feel more comfortable coming and telling their truth. But it's also a scenario where they know this guy's circling down the toilet. He's still got money and people want to cash in. So I don't know about this linking him to murders that that is that shouldn't be considered right now. What should be considered for the court? And there's the Tupac thing is is interesting. I grant you this one attorney who's got 120 plaintiffs. But by the way, they include a nine-year-old boy, which is very disturbing. We don't know whether it's true. And he's a very rich man. And yes, it is true that probably some portion of those people see an opportunity to, you know, like you say, engage in a money grab. I doubt all of them are in that boat. I just have a difficult time

believing that given what we know from, you know, the tapes and so on he was into. But on the Tupac thing, it's interesting, Arthur. They say, this is reporting now, that the family of Tupac has hired powerhouse lawyer Alex Spiro, or Spyro, according to Rolling Stone, Spyro, to investigate any potential links between Sean Combs and the murder of Tupac Shakur. The news follows reports that the late Los Angeles rapper's family have hired a team of investigators to ascertain if the bad boy entertainment founder, meaning Combs, had any involvement in Tupac's death.

During the height of the East Coast-West Coast hip-hop feud, a 25-year-old Shakur was gunned down in a drive-by shooting in Las Vegas, September 96. His murder has gone unsolved, but a break in the cold case came in September of 23 when Compton, the Crips gang member, the Crips gang member, Dwayne Keith Davis was arrested and charged with Shakur's murder. Davis, who heads to trial this March, has made claims that Combs offered him $1 million for a hit on Shakur. This is, I mean, this is actually quite interesting. And I don't know if how you prove a murder, you know, this many years out and take this guy who's been, you know, charged with the murder, Arthur, take his word for it. Yeah. In terms of a money grab, and I believe you used that term, Megan, when, remember, Puffy went on trial here in New York, I don't know, 20 years ago, something along those lines. My dad represented Jennifer Lopez in that case.

And my dad's whole thing was, his direction was keep her off the stand, which he did. He was there for the closing arguments, and Johnny Cochran was there, and Ben Broffman was there and I was with Sean Combs. There were, I want to say, and don't hold me to this, $800 million in lawsuits against Sean Combs from that incident that took place. And that was 20 years ago when $800 million meant something. So I agree with you, Megan, that there may be a portion of this, a percentage of this, where there's some truth to it. But I would also say, once those sheep start coming in and you're, oh, how much are you suing for? How much are you suing for? And these are not very sophisticated people. Let's face it. They're people who hang out at three in the morning in these sex raves. Sean's lawyer, Mark Ignifilo, who's an excellent attorney, has been on the air saying he's spoken to, I think, 15 people who are supposed to be witnesses on this trial.

And a lawyer is allowed to do his own investigation. It's not just the government. And not one of them said, was there any degree of force used? There was a party. There were drugs. There was alcohol. There was prostitution. But everyone was there,. There were drugs. There was alcohol. There was prostitution. But everyone was there for their will. No one was forced to participate or partake.

But do you need that? I mean, honestly, if you if you've got a tape of a woman passed out and unconscious and you've got or a man and you've got P. Diddy having sex with that person, he's toast. Well, that's that that is different, but that's not what's being alleged. It looks like what Arthur was saying is the best best path to defense's freedom in this case. And that is, no, all these people were voluntarily participating, albeit arguably immoral and outrageous conduct. But that's not what he's accused of. It is forcing these people to engage in acts through physical contact, physical threats and assault. And listen, that comes down to great cross-examination of these witnesses. There's also the allegations, and I'm sure you can appreciate this because of your status in our society, that because of his fame and his power in that industry they felt coerced if they didn't do this they weren't going to be a star if they didn't do that he wasn't going to

sign into a record label and i'm sure that you we all know people who have been confronted with that situation and they've told whoever confronted them great i won't sign with your record label bye-bye and then there's other people who say all, I'll acquiesce and you make me a star. And then when they're not a star, that's when the accusations come out. Yeah. Well, you know about that because I think that's the position some of those women were in with Harvey. Not all, but at least some, you know, I've spoken with women who turned on their heel as soon as Harvey was like, come on into my hotel room. They were like, peace out, brother.

And then there were others who willingly went in there knowing exactly what was going to follow and only later decided that it was something that was nonconsensual. But I also know some non consenting victims of his. Arthur would disagree. Go ahead, Mark. I was going to say that both Arthur and I, having done criminal defense work for so long, we deal with so many alleged victims where regret turns to rape, right? Yep. It's the final line. Regret isn't the same as no consent. Correct. It's not the same.

Yeah. And they're going to flesh all that out. Yeah. It's in all aspects of society. And Megan, you know, in my firm here, where we're seeing it the most, and it's terrifying because we all have kids around this age, is in the colleges where a young woman does something with a young man. And then a week later, a month later, or a year later, it wasn't a consensual act. And now I have a young man on the other side of my

desk with his mother and father. They're all absolutely distraught. I had a kid thrown out of college only to buy the college, only to have the court in an Article 78 proceeding, which is when you go to the court and say the school is wrong. Who turns it? Since there was no evidence that this kid did anything wrong. And where does he go to get his two years of life back that he got thrown out of college? But then they accepted him back into college only for him to be ostracized. There's no thing, no disrespect about, believe all women. It's insane. No, there should be disrespect around believe all women. It's ridiculous.

Excuse me? No, I agree with you. By the way, article 78 proceedings, surprise question on my bar exam. It was like, what's that doing there? What? And a very tricky, um, in any event, I agree with you that there may be holes in this case to some extent, but I think there's, as far as whether this is a guy who violated the law, I don't think they're going to have any trouble proving that with the amount of drugs that were on site. Apparently there may have been illegal guns on site. And if they've got any person on cam passed out or in some sort of a state who's engaged in a sex act with Sean Combs, he's toast. The complaint, the indictment will be amended.

And I'm sure they've seen it all right now. This is making the, do we have this? Yeah. Look at this. This is a, a, a film he put out a video he put out. It's a man, it's a DJ who was at one of his big parties and look at how like just nonplussed he is that this person is unconscious. Watch. Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, um, for all those in London that don't know what happens to the white man when he comes to a P. Diddy party, this is what happens to the white man. Oh, it's so unfortunate. You gotta pull back, though, so they can see. That's Craig. Matt, move out of the way. You're still alive. Look at that. Look at, look. He had the drink on his head.

And that's James from Simeon Mobile Disco. He is a actual DJ that I'm supposed to pass out. But when they come to one of my parties, this is what happens to him. Oh, really? You put the drink on his head. Megan, that doesn't, that doesn't work. I mean, why did you become a Puritan? Are you kidding me, Megan Kelly? Why did you become a Puritan? That guy's unconscious, Megyn Kelly? Why did you become a Puritan?

That guy's unconscious. We had a big old party where someone- That guy drank a lot. At a P. Diddy party, which is what people do. There's no surprise there. I don't know, guys. Look, that's one thing. That's one thing.

But you're telling me there's not going to be any video of a woman in that condition having relations with a man. Bullshit. I'll make you both- It may not be official, Megyn. I'll make you a thousand dollar bet right now. I'll bet both of you a thousand dollars. There will be. They better have it because let me tell you something. The word of cinnamon, amber, fallopian, toiletta ain't going to carry today. I'll tell you that right now. There's videotapes. It's all over the post and other papers today.

There are at least three A-list celebrities who are on camera having sex, allegedly with Diddy. And then another tape of some celebrity whose celebrity dwarfs everybody else's celebrity, who's also on camera having sex, not with Diddy, but with somebody. If he's taken videotapes of A-list celebrities, he's definitely filming the lower, lesser known sex trafficked girls he allegedly brought over for these parties. And I guarantee it was not all, I am awake. I am consenting. I am here by my own will to have sex with these 40 strangers. But you got to look at what he's charged with in the indictment. Now you mentioned the mending the indictment. Sex trafficking. Now, there may be a superseding indictment that comes down and adds more charges. That's a different story.

But as of right now, the sex trafficking, passed out DJ, that's not admissible. And some A-listers who— I know, this is anecdotal on a podcast. Hello, I'm not trying to admit an evidence. All right, we've got to move on because there's so many other things we've got to get to. But the bottom line is, Did he could he could get off, but he's probably not going to get bail and to be continued on whether they add charges to the indictment. All right. Let's talk about Garth Brooks for a minute. I mean, I don't want to start this with speaking of money grab, but this one. Thank you. All right. I don't. So he's being accused of rape, not in a criminal court,

not by the police, not by a D.A., but by a woman in a civil lawsuit against him who says she worked as a hair and makeup stylist for him from 2017 to 2020 that he allegedly harassed her. She described graphic sexual fantasies reading from the New York Times and in one instance allegedly placed her hands on his erect unit when he came out of the shower. In a statement he provided on Thursday night, he said for the last two months he's been hassled to no end with threats, lies, and tragic tales of what my future would be if I did not write a check for many millions of dollars to this person. Hush money, no matter how much or how little is still hush money. In my mind, that means I'm admitting to behavior I'm incapable of ugly acts. No human should ever do to another. And, um, this woman,

you know, the problem for her is going to be that after the alleged rape, because then she said he actually raped her, she went on working for him for years, for years. That's the biggest problem right there. You said it doesn't mean it didn't happen. And there are reasons why people do that. They need the money, whatever. But that's a tough sell to a jury, particularly when the bulk of the evidence is her word. What I want to see, however, are the things that don't lie. Her alleged text messages that he didn't delete, she claims some were deleted. Okay, well, there's got to be a way to get those back. But secondly, let's see what was not deleted. And does that corroborate anything that she's alleging?

Mark, five years ago, I would have agreed with every word you said. I really would have until I sat there and watched what happened in the Harvey Weinstein case, because a woman who he's doing 20 years in prison for, the day after the alleged sexual assault, and it was not rape. The alleged sexual assault. He flew her to California to see her best friend give birth. And then a week later, she flew back. Her testimony at the trial with the jury convicted said we had dinner together. We went to his house and we had we had sex. We had intercourse. And then we continued our relationship there forward. And then years later, she said, well, that one time that sexual assault, that was against her will, not the other times, but that one was, and he was convicted and he's doing 20 years in jail. So we don't know what jurors do anymore with these facts. Well, I mean, it is possible just because you say no,

you say yes. One time doesn't mean that you've given permission every other time. So that is possible. But this is weird to be raped by your employer with whom you work very closely, hair and makeup, their hands are all over you. I mean, that is a, you know, in its own way, an intimate relationship. And then she continued doing that like for years after an alleged brutal rape that was so bad, she claimed she went to seek treatment from her OBGYN and considered suicide. Like, I don't know, guys, that that's going to be a tough sell. And I would suggest that is why, Mark, there is no criminal complaint against him. There is no legal body. If this allegedly happened in 17, we're within the statute of limitations for a rape claim. Doesn't seem like she got any bites down at the police station if she ever even went.

Proof beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt is a very high burden. Getting money from someone in the civil arena, 51%, kind of low. And my guess is that the cops said there just isn't enough here. He probably had a great lawyer to argue on his behalf. It didn't happen. And so there's reasonable doubt. A prosecutor looked at it and said, I'm likely not going to get a conviction. And if he can show that she's shaking him down for money, you add that to the list of things that she did, including returning to intimately put makeup on his face.

That doesn't mean she's lying, but it just makes it a tougher sell to a jury. things that she did, including returning to intimately put makeup on his face. That doesn't mean she's lying, but it just makes it a tougher sell to a jury. He went into a civil court first and tried to get a declaration that he didn't do this while she was trying to shake him down. I mean, whether it happened or not, but I'm trying to get him to pay. He went in and tried to keep it anonymous and get a declaration that his identity would be protected and that the woman's accusations against him were false. And then this week, it looks like she responded and argued that that lawsuit was a preemptive move to silence her. Then she filed her complaint naming him. I mean, I will say one thing, Arthur, I don't love his denial. I don't love his denial. And my Phil Houston spy, the lie background tells me it's not a great denial saying if I, you know, basically hush money

saying in my mind, that means I am admitting to behavior. I am incapable of ugly acts. No human should ever do to another. That's not what you would say. You would say, I did not do this. When you start to say, I would never, I'm not capable of it. I could never rob a bank. Why would I? I have plenty of money. I wasn't raised like that. That's an ugly act. No human should do. Now you're on thin ice that I have to tell you, my little radar went off when I read that piece of his denial. Go ahead. Well, as you know, I represent our mutual friend, Alan Dershowitz, who was accused of a sex act. And I haven't been able, I've been very unsuccessful in getting him to shut up about the denial. Same. think I'm going to be able to keep my mouth shut because, but he used some of these terms. Like I wouldn't, I would never do that. I think nobody should do that. She was clearly a troubled person

and she was taking advantage of it. And he said everything under the rainbow. Do I believe every word that comes out of his mouth? I do. I don't, I don't think he, Alan Dershowitz had sex with this woman in six different places, six different, no way, shape or form, but his denials. I mean, I've gotten plenty of texts from people like can't you get your client to be quiet and i'm like no no i can't so i don't really judge everyone about how they deny it but you know i mean someone said eric adams didn't deny his charges in the new york city as being mayor because he said if i there's the day before the indictment came out if i am a child

if i am indicted i am innocent i said that's not a denial they're like no that's not he didn't say i didn't do it he said i am and that's enough of a denial but it should have been more forceful you know where the script is on the proper denial i don't know what you're missing about alan versus this it's like there is there was a very clear forceful denial by Alan as the first response. I didn't do it. I don't know this person. I've never been alone with this person. I've never had sex with this woman. And then the flowery language might follow, but his denials on her have been consistent and clear. And he sounds like a truth teller. Let me open up all my date books. Let me provide all video of anything that I can get my hands on.

I'm suing everybody who says that I did do it so that I will then be subject to deposition. So I've got to tell the story under oath. I'm glad to. Alan sounded like a truth teller. I'm not saying Garth Brooks isn't. I'm just saying, well, I mean, a little red flaggy on that statement. The difference may be there may have been sexual interaction between Garth Brooks

and this woman. It just wasn't great. Alan is saying he didn't even know the person. That's right. Different story. Okay, let's keep going because there's so many big cases. Menendez. These guys, they might be getting out of prison, you guys. Like, for reals.

This docu-series, you guys. Like for reals. They're this docu series. That's what they call them now. It's such a bullshit term. I hope the audience knows at this point, there is a difference between a documentary and a docu series. And frankly, even the documentaries that are documentaries these days may or may not be a documentary. It's more like Ava DuVernay's view of how this case went down. So whatever, this is like a docu-series and it's Dominic Dunn's view of what likely went on in the Menendez family. He was a famous writer for Vanity Fair, whose daughter was tragically killed. And then he became very big in the crime space. Anyway,

it's a Ryan Murphy production and it re-imagines the Menendez murders. It definitely concludes that they killed their parents, which they admit to, but it also writes in like an incestual relationship between the two brothers, which is a weird term, a turn. And now notwithstanding all that, it's back in the news and there's a new push to let them out, to say this wasn't a fair trial. At worst, this was manslaughter because as I understand it, I'll start with you on this one, Arthur, the whole defense, Leslie Abramson, for those who are our age, they remember her with her great curly blonde hair for the younger generation. She was just as ball busting lawyer who represented the younger brother, Eric. We knew they killed their parents. The question was whether there

were mitigating circumstances. She went in their balls to the wall and was like, Jose Menendez was an abuser. He abused Eric. He abused Lyle. Eric is somebody who was protecting his own life. He was in fear that his father was going to kill him. And that's why this happened. And they got a hung jury for both boys on the first trial. And then they were retried and they were both convicted and sentenced to life because her abuse defense was not allowed. It was not allowed. And so now the DA out in LA, this George Gascon, I mean, this is right on brand because he hates prosecuting crime. He hates keeping bad guys in jail. I'm not saying they necessarily deserve to stay in jail. We'll debate that, but he loves letting criminals out of jail. He has said he's reviewing new evidence, a letter,

which we can describe, and that they're going to have a hearing on this new evidence this November to see whether they should get a new trial or whether he'll just reduce the charges as is from murder to manslaughter and they could just walk without a retrial. So what do you make of all this, Arthur? The reason why we're talking about this particular case is because of the notoriety got when it was going down. Actually, we started the show talking about our beginnings at Fox News. If I'm not mistaken, this was right around that time.

I forget when the trial was. Wasn't it around 2004, somewhere in there? Yeah. Okay. But it was around that time. I forget when the trial was. Wasn't it 2004? Yeah. Okay. But it was around that time. But it has become, and look, sometimes I agree with you, prosecutors are too lenient. But sometimes, and there's a case before the Supreme Court of the United States right now out of Oklahoma, where it is a guy on death row. And this is why I don't believe in the death penalty. It is a guy on death row. And this is why I don't believe in the death penalty. It is a guy on death row. And everyone from the government is asking the Supreme Court, because apparently the way the jurisdiction is,

they're the only ones who could stop the execution. So I believe it's the attorney general of the state of Oklahoma, the DA who tried the case, the judge who tried the case, is saying it was not that he didn't do it. Not that he didn't do it, but he didn't get a fair trial because of something similar to Menendez. Evidence that was presented shouldn't have been or vice versa. And please don't kill this guy. Give him a new trial.

And look, Netflix and popular opinion with an elected district attorney has a lot of power. And they're going back and saying, hey, these guys maybe didn't get a fair trial. And we're reading about it all day long in Brooklyn, New York, in Manhattan. Look at the Central Park Five, the kids who were doing major time for a rape in Central Park. And they threw that case out altogether. And now one of the guys is a city councilman with a big microphone here in the city of New York. So, I mean, I'm interested to hear what my buddy Mark has to say. But it's not so rare anymore that dictates of being

overturned. I have a lot to say. Oh, by the way, my, my, my trusty producers actually informed me that the first trial ended in 93. And then the second trial was 95. I think we, you and I must be thinking about Peterson. Peterson, that's all right. Go ahead, Mark. Okay. I have a lot to say. My wife and I've polished off that, that docu series, which was just dreadful because you really don't know what the truth is. There's only three people who know whether sexual abuse ever really took place. One is dead, thanks to the two boys. And the other two were facing, you know, the death sentence. The gas chamber. If I don't, you know, jump in on what they're saying. OK, but let's just talk legal for a second. If the judge found at the time in their second trial

that there wasn't sufficient evidence to allow the defense to argue that sexual abuse took place, but now newly discovered evidence, which was not available at the time, seems to suggest that there was alleged sexual abuse, then they would have been denied a fair trial at the time. So what you've got is a letter that was recently discovered, authored by a cousin, where one of the brothers, I think it was Eric, the younger one, wrote to his cousin sometime before the shooting, where he complains to the cousin. Nine months before. There we go. Nine months before that the father is going to to the cousin, the five months before. There we go. Nine months before that, the father is going to come in and do it to me again. That kind of thing suggesting it doesn't come out and say sexual abuse, but it suggests it's strong

evidence that it might be sexual abuse. The standby. Hold your thought. Here's what the note read the letter. I've been trying to avoid dad. It's still happening, Andy, but it's worse for me now. I can't explain it. I never know when it's going to happen and it's driving me crazy. Every night I stay up thinking he might come in. I need to put it out of my mind. Go ahead. Yeah. I mean, a very reasonable inference is that that's the sexual abuse that he's talking about. The second thing is you've got an original member of Minuto who's coming forward to say that when he was 13 to 14, somewhere in there, that this guy, the father allegedly sexually abused him as an executive for, I think it was Sony. Standby. Sorry to keep interrupting you, but it flows better this way. His name is Roy

Rossello. He was in a documentary about Minuto. And here is what he said on cam. We played this and talked about it at the time. That's the man here. Doesn't rate me. This guy does the pedophile. How old were you there? 14 years old. And he's pointing at Jose Menendez. Go ahead, Mark. Okay. So the prosecutor, first of all, has an obligation to look at this stuff. Everybody's making a big deal about it. All he's saying is we'll look at it. Well, of course, that's exactly what a politician slash prosecutor who seeks the truth must do. Now he has to first discern is this guy Minuto from Minuto is even really picking out the right guy. Did it really

happen and get into the weeds to see if that's even true. Second thing is, what about this letter? Is it authentic? We know, well, we don't know. We don't know anything from that docu-series, but they allege that Lyle, at least, was going around writing letters and trying to convince people to lie on their behalf. So we know that manufacturing evidence

is not beneath these guys. So is that letter authentic? Is it real? If all that's real, did the D.A. afford them a fair trial by arguing that the defense of sexual abuse was complete malarkey, completely manufactured? It was all about money. It was all about greed. Were they really given a fair trial? And if they weren't, whether you like these guys or not, it's not about them. It's about the system. Everybody should be given a fair trial. Here's the thing, though. To Mark's point, Arthur, in the first Menendez trial reading here from a Fox News report, there's this the cousin

who was on the receiving end of that letter from Eric nine months before the parents were murdered. The cousin is named Andy Kano. And in the first Menendez trial, Kano testified that Eric had told him about his father's sexual abuse at age 13. So this witness did testify that there was abuse at the first trial, which resulted in a hung jury. And then the second judge did not want to entertain this defense at all. Maybe the letter wasn't available, but the witness took the stand and said the stuff that's in the letter. So is it really grounds for a new trial? Well,

in the world, I practice law and that would not be newly discovered evidence. The letter would not be enough. In other words, they had the testimony. The testimony, if it came across as credible, I mean, as long as the guy is not a heroin addict who's falling asleep on the stand. And then the judges look, I'm sure I know that there were appeals here and they must have looked at the appellate courts out west. And the appellate courts must have said, no, the judge in his discretion felt that in this particular trial, it wasn't admissible. That's not newly discovered evidence.

Newly discovered evidence is we all know what newly discovered is someone just popping up out of nowhere. Like you were talking about in the Puffy case and they arrested a guy 20 years, 30 years later. And he's like, yeah, I did it. But Puffy paid me to do it. What about the Menudo guy? That's newly discovered evidence. Would the Menudo guy be newly discovered evidence? Maybe.

Yeah, I mean, that's different because that wasn't, yes, maybe different. But there's a whole standard. Again, it's California law, so that's why I'm hesitant. There's a whole standard about whether a defense team did their due diligence to try to unearth these things. You know, you can't say it's newly discovered evidence if it was sitting right there and you just neglected it. That's not newly discovered evidence. The letter, Arthur, was found by someone who was looking through recently, looking through some old stuff and found it.

So the letter wasn't available. We do know that that letter amazingly corroborates the testimony of the cousin, even though he did testify, not having that letter, you know, significantly hurt the defense trial, but it's, it's so, so let's, let's actually, let's just show a little bit of what we're talking about. So the, the, it's hard to recommend this Netflix series because it is so dark. I mean, I thought it was going to be kind of like true crime and a kind of murder mystery where, you know, the outcome it's like every episode is about child sexual abuse in great detail. It's dark. I was trying to watch it while I was on the treadmill. I'm like, I can't, I cannot handle this anyway. Um, here's just a little bit. I'll show you the trailer. Okay, take a look

at SOT 42, part of the trailer. Part of this process is the two of you reconnecting, growing closer as brothers. Eric and I killed our parents together, so... I'd say that makes us pretty close. Our life was one thing. Money. And we decided we weren't gonna take that anymore. I'm bigger. Starting right now.

Money. We're gonna demand more out of life. And we are never going to fucking go back. The acting is amazing in it. But here, what I wanted to do in showing it, just like zoom out, zoom out like 30,000 feet. Kim Kardashian wrote a letter. The Innocence Project has now taken this. All right. She's not a lawyer. She made a billion dollars off of a sex tape and clothing that actually is quite good. Didn't she apply to law school? There's something about

she tried to do the apprenticeship way, you know, where you have to take like the baby bar and she failed it. She's not a lawyer. Um, at least not that she's publicized. How do you really feel? I feel that she's a force for evil. That is how I feel. I wish, I wish she had just stayed on the sidelines, notwithstanding her very cute tops and undergarments. Um, okay. Having said all that, she's written a letter, uh, innocence project. So 30,000 foot letter. What do you think this guy does? Like people will look at this and say, it's been 35 years or something that they've been in jail. Like, is it time? Because as somebody wise, once put it to me, when the kids kill the parents, it's the ultimate F in parenting. And so at some level, this is their fault.

I got to say one thing. I got to get something off my chest. And I don't think anybody's saying this. Let's spell this out for a second. Okay. Let's say the sexual abuse took place. And I'm not convinced of that. I have no idea. And no one really knows. People think they know. They don't know. But let's say it did for argument's sake. Also, we know factually that this wasn't a spontaneous, oh my God, he's going to harm me again. Let me go get a shotgun right now and kill him. That they took weeks. They planned this. It met every element of premeditated murder. So you don't get to kill your parents under the law. Your mother, by the way, too, who wasn't involved in the sexual abuse, but allegedly knew of it. I'm not even convinced

of that. But that you get a free pass to brutally murder your parents. The way you do get a pass is if you reasonably fear imminent death or great bodily harm. So what they said in the docuseries was, well, we thought then our parents would kill us. They, they, they, you know, assuming they even argued that no one believed that. They did argue that. Yeah. That's their link because they know you don't get to kill your parents out of retribution. It must be. What is this here? I get it. But that that doesn't answer the question of what Gascon is likely to do with, you know, the pressure of Kim Kardashian and and the Innocence Project, which is taking a hard look. I guess we don't know, but we will learn more at the end of November. I have to take a quick break. When we come back, we'll do Peterson. Imagine waking

up one day to find out your home no longer belongs to you. That someone somewhere has stolen your property right out from under you. It sounds unthinkable, but it's a sad reality for some American homeowners and a risk for anyone that owns property. House stealing. That's what the FBI calls it. It's a form of real estate fraud where scammers leverage loopholes in the system to fraudulently transfer your home's title into their name, and then they take out loans against your property or even sell it behind your back. By the time you find out, the scammer's long gone,

leaving you, the legitimate homeowner, to clean up the mess. But right now, Triple Lock Protection is available through hometitlelock.com, offering 24-7 tile monitoring, alerts, and restoration services. You can sign up today at HomeTitleLock.com and use promo code Megan for 30 days of protection for free and a comprehensive title scan to make sure you're not already a victim. That's promo code Megan and HomeTitleLock.com or by using the link below.

If you're tired of the same old coffee from those mega corporations pushing their woke agendas, listen up. It's time to take a stand and support a brand that truly embodies American values, Blackout Coffee. They stand with hardworking Americans who believe in family, faith, and freedom. They roast some of the most incredible coffee you will ever taste using only premium grade beans, roasted and shipped to you within 48 hours. And for the cold brew fans, Blackout Coffee is excited to announce the launch of their two new ready to drink cold brew coffee latte options. Don't settle for less. Make the switch to Blackout Coffee. Head over to blackoutcoffee.com slash MK or use

the code MK for 20% off as you check out off your first order. Blackoutcoffee.com slash MK, or use the code MK for 20% off as you check out off your first order. Blackoutcoffee.com slash MK. The code is MK. Join the movement. Taste the difference. Remember, with every sip, you are supporting a brand that stands for America. Be awake, not woke. I'm Megyn Kelly, host of The Meg Megan Kelly Show on Sirius XM. It's your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations with the most interesting and important political, legal, and cultural figures today. You can catch the Megan Kelly Show on Triumph, a Sirius XM channel featuring lots of hosts you may know and probably love.

Great people like Dr. Laura, I'm back, Nancy Grace, Dave Ramsey, and yours truly, Megyn Kelly. You can stream The Megyn Kelly Show on SiriusXM at home or anywhere you are. No car required. I do it all the time. I love the SiriusXM app.

It has ad-free music coverage of every major sport, comedy talk, podcast, and more. Subscribe now. Get your first three months for free. Go to SiriusXM.com slash MK show to subscribe and get three months free. That's SiriusXM.com slash MK show and get three months free. Offer details apply. I want to correct something. The Innocence Project, I think I screwed up my two cases. They're involved in the Scott Peterson case, not the Menendez case. Yeah, that makes more sense. I mean, we know they're not innocent. It's just a question of what level crime it was,

murder or manslaughter. But Scott Peterson does have the Innocence Project now taking on his case. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. But it's happening. Okay, so they're taking on, showed my conclusion. He, for those of you who are young, he is a disgusting pig who murdered his wife, Lacey, and their unborn son, Connor, who she was eight and a half years pregnant. I'm not objecting to Megyn Kelly. I'm not objecting to Megyn Kelly. He's convicted. He killed his wife and his unborn son so he could stoop Amber Fry, who he lied to and told her he wasn't married. She was a heroine who came forward when she saw him all over the news as they were searching for his missing wife and said, what in the actual, this guy and I have been dating for two months.

He told me he was unmarried. And then she wore a wire for the cops. And we got all sorts of, he was at Lacey's Memorial being like, Amber, I'm in Paris. You should see the fireworks. They're amazing. That's who Scott Peterson is. So he got convicted. What about the burglars?

Megan, the burglars. What about the burglars? What am I talking about? Megan, there's burglars. This is what Scott Peterson's sister has been saying. The burglars were in the neighborhood and they allegedly also wanted to burgle Lacey or were seen burgling by Lacey

and murdered her and just happened to drag her down to the same marina to which Scott took his newly purchased boat for the very first time. He needed to take it out on Christmas Eve and also had found like the castings for anchors, multiple anchors that were never found, like concrete anchors that might wave down on body. And the burglars amazingly went to that very same marina, which was like an hour away, and dropped Lacey's newly murdered body in that same marina. And who knows why Scott actually wound up being at that same marina the same day with the anchors

disappearing. Okay. That's what's happening. Megan, I know who it was. It was the two burglars from Home Alone. It was the guys from Home Alone. He saw them trying to bring into little McAllister's house

and they kidnapped her in that van that they drove around with Joe Pesci. Joe Pesci. And then they threw her in the water. That's who did it. Here's what's actually happening. He's been granted access to crucial evidence, reading from the Daily Mail,

by a California judge in a bombshell ruling that could open the door to reevaluation of the case. He's now allowed a discovery period on the basis of this new law that gives discovery rights to defendants who are convicted of serious or violent felonies and sentenced to 15 or more years in jail. It allows him to access materials in possession of the prosecution and law enforcement authorities to which he would have been entitled at the time of trial. So somehow it casts a wider net on what he could get from the cops and the prosecutors, Mark. So does this I mean, what does that tell us? Why is this bombshell?

It gives people hope. But Arthur and I were talking during the break. We both kind of think it's a reach. We don't think it's going to go anywhere. The police, for what it's worth, said it was completely unrelated and they have their reasons why the burglary had nothing to do with Lacey's disappearance and subsequent murder. So, you know, for those who want to see him out, the groupies, you know, it gives them hope. But I don't think it's going to go anywhere. They're claiming the whole thing with the burglars and that it wasn't properly investigated, Arthur. On Christmas Eve. And they say basically the cops like gave up on that theory too quickly.

And they didn't really look and see what the burglars were and what their record was and was there any violence in their past and is that a real theory that she was kidnapped and then killed it's thin but as mark said probably the most it does is give 51 year old scott peterson a glimmer of hope and the innocence project doesn't just make any case so they don't just sign up for anything. So they must smell a little something. They're not always right. They're often wrong. I know they're not always right. They're even more in the business of getting people out of jail than Gascon. And they take on their pet causes. And his sister's been everywhere trying to say he's innocent. Oh,

what a shocker. His sister doesn't think he did it. Well, you're wrong, sister. I think he did do it. I think the jury got it right. Look at his behavior after the fact. He didn't even look for her. He couldn't have given two shits about his dead son who was eight and a half months in utero. Anyway, I'm convinced 100 percent this guy did it. And if I'm wrong, I'll admit it. But I won't be. I won't be. I think it would make your show more watchable if you really you should express your opinions a little more. Come out of your shell. You know, I mean,

you're really buttoned up and you really pulled them close to the vest. I mean, Kardashian's coming over in a little while. If you want me, I'll get you a phone.

Yeah. A lot more shy and meek over the years, I've noticed. I gotta go. It's over between us. Goodbye. Love you guys.

Bye, Martha. Okay, tomorrow, Glenn Greenwald. Don't miss that. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda,

and no fear.