The Megyn Kelly Show - Lia Thomas as "Woman of the Year," and Political Hypocrisy, with Kari Lake, Jamie Kirchick, and Eddie Scarry | Ep. 359

Episode Date: July 18, 2022

Megyn Kelly shares her thoughts on Lia Thomas being nominated for NCAA Woman of the Year, how harmful that is for women's athletics, and more. Then she's joined by Kari Lake, Arizona GOP candidate for governor, on what led Lake to support Trump (and Trump to support her), her opponent and the current governor of Arizona, the media coverage of her campaign, the state of America in 2022, massive influx of illegal immigrants at southern border, the ramifications for Americans, the legitimacy of the 2020 election, the homelessness crisis in America, and more. Then Eddie Scarry, author of "Liberal Misery," joins to discuss the psychology behind liberals who are miserable, the hypocrisy over political violence, the elitism of those in power, why the hardest partisans are on the left, what we can do about the divisiveness, and more. And Jamie Kirchick, author of "Secret City," joins to talk about the secret history of gay men in D.C. politics, the elite power structure at play, how the homophobia related to McCarthyism and Reagan, and more.Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest and provocative conversations. Hey, everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show and happy Monday. We have a ton of news to get to today and we have three great guests to tackle it all. President Biden back from Saudi Arabia where his fist bump with MBS is drawing criticism and not just from the right. Democrats in the media were out in full force over the weekend critiquing his trip. But we begin today with a GOP gubernatorial race in Arizona that feels a bit like a referendum on 2020, 2022, 2024 and for the Republican Party. Former President Donald Trump has endorsed Carrie Lake, while his vice president, Mike Pence, just endorsed Lake's opponent. Now,

this happened in Pennsylvania as well, but the race is a lot tighter out in Arizona, and it's Trump's endorsed candidate who is ahead in the polls. The current governor of Arizona, Doug Ducey, has endorsed Lake. She's the one who's ahead in the polls opponent. And he critiqued Carrie Lake during a CNN appearance yesterday. Interesting that you have a Republican governor sitting on CNN ripping on this Republican candidate backed by Trump. Ms. Lake has made waves in the media during her campaign with a CNN reporter on Fox News with Brett Baier and on Twitter. And now the former longtime TV news anchor in Arizona joins me today.

Carrie Lake, welcome to the show. I am so thrilled to be here, Megan. It's great to be here. Lots happening in Arizona. Who would have thunk that we'd have a duel in the desert? I know. Well, first of all, I love the fact that you were in my line of work and then decided to actually do something for a living.

You know, I loved being a journalist. I was a fair journalist, an old school journalist. I learned a long time ago that you tell both sides of the story and you keep your opinion out of it. Sometimes there's three sides of the story, but you basically keep your opinion out of it. You don't try to tell for 27 years and and wrap my arms around the biggest issues that we face here and get to know the people. And I'll tell you, the skills I learned on my job and the information I was able to learn have equipped me so perfectly for this run for governor. Well, that I can see that because with the way you do battle with the media, suggest somebody who knows it from the inside, you know how dishonest the media can be, how they only want to go to the places that will make you look bad. They don't really want to talk about who you really are. They just want to talk about the latest scandal of the day. And I know you, you know, you were on the other side of that, so you know it better than anybody. But before we get off, get to all that, can I just

ask you, so you were from, not from, but you spent time in my hometown of Albany, New York on air as well, right? I didn't know you're from there. Yeah, I did about, I did about a year in Albany and then we came back to Arizona. It was my first year of marriage to my husband and we had a great time in the capital region and covering politics. Talk about dirty politics. New York is about as crazy as it gets. Yes. And it was just a wonderful year to spend in New York. But we really missed Arizona. We came back home. Of course you did. Could you have gone from a colder place to a hotter, you know, with all due respect to my hometown, because I'm from Syracuse, first 10, then Albany, the rest. We're freezing our asses off up there.

And you got smart and went to the greener pasture. They're tough people up there to handle that winter. I'll tell you, never cross a New Yorker. They handle a tough winter, especially upstate New York. I think we had one snowstorm that year that was 10 inches and we were we were pretty shocked by it. But everyone said, oh, that's nothing. A 10 inch snowstorm is absolutely nothing. True. It's a day ending. And why? So, OK, so then you go back to Arizona. You're on the air when you are a major news anchor.

You do stay steeped in the news, obviously, and in politics and you get to know the community and all of that. So I kind of like this background for a future politician. It makes sense to me. And that's one of the reasons why I'm preparing for today. I saw one of the local papers. Somebody went and talked to your former colleagues at, I think it was one of the Arizona, your Arizona station. And I don't know if you saw it, but they were lamenting you going pro MAGA like it was a dissent into the KKK. You know, like, sadly, we think it's real. You know, unfortunately, she got sent down the rabbit hole when they put pressure on us to get clicks on social media and she just became addicted to the clicks.

It can't be that you had a genuine attraction to President Trump and his messaging. It has to be you lost your mind. You know, President Trump in many ways reminded me of Ronald Reagan, the president of my youth. I mean, I grew up in the 70s and 80s. So I had Jimmy Carter. And then when I was, you know, I guess it was 10 till I graduated from high school. It was the amazing Ronald Reagan, who actually grew up in a town about an hour from my hometown, obviously a few decades apart, Megan. And so I just, I loved his policies. I loved his demeanor. I loved his ability to communicate with the people of America. And most importantly, I loved his policies that brought people together, helped us pull ourselves out of a steep recession.

And I love the patriotism of that time. So when President Trump came on the scene, I saw something in him that I hadn't seen since Ronald Reagan. And I love his policies. I love the man that he is. He's a great human being. I've gotten to know him. I call him a friend, even a good friend now. And his family's

amazing. The media, however, has disparaged him and tried to destroy him for seven straight years now. And it's so unfortunate. And I see what they're doing because they're doing it to me now. Here I have people who I used to work with who are now trying to destroy me in the media. And I just try to rise above it. I really do because we have something so big here in a movement unlike they've ever seen in politics in Arizona. And we're at a very important point in our history. And I'm not just talking about in Arizona state history. I'm talking American history and human history. We are either going to, we the people, take back this country and take back our states, or we are going to forever lose this country. So I don't care about the noise on the outside. I don't care what they

call me. I'm on a mission to try to save Arizona and keep it going in the right direction and save it from becoming the policies that California had that destroyed that state. Yeah, because Arizona's I don't know, is it getting a little bluer? You know, they've had a Democrat governor. They you know, they had Jan Brewer's about like the concern by some of the right is that it's getting a little bluer and that you or Robeson is your main competitor to get the GOP primary nomination could very well lose to the person on the Dem side. No, I mean, no one's going to lose to Katie Hobbs. She's been twice convicted in court for being a racist. She's cost us three million dollars as a state

for her racist policies. When she was secretary of state, she has absolutely dead end policies. If you like what you're seeing in California, you'd like her policy. So no one's going to lose to her. This race will be run, won rather, in the primary. And my opponent is lagging far behind us. Our internal polling, we're getting polling every week. We're 12 points up right now. They're trying to act like it's a real race between us. And what it is, is a rhino who's married to a 95-year-old billionaire trying to buy this election. Absolutely nobody likes her. Nobody's interested in her policies. They're written by the consultants, the high-priced John McCain consultants. And she could not fill a living room if her life depended on it. We are filling

arenas. We're filling stadiums. We're filling places to the gills. We're standing room only. We had a group of a thousand people a couple months ago in Tucson, which is one of our most liberal cities, who came out to see us because they like our america first policies and we have a movement and and she's the most unethical person i've probably met in politics and that's saying something megan your gop opponent for the nomin for the nomination yes we you know we uncovered and it's been uncovered her ploy to try to make it look like she had grassroots support just wrap your head around this it's so disgusting. She obviously has the donor class and the rhino class. And so they're making the big donations

and that's who she's going to be beholden to. Well, she recognized that we had a massive movement on our hands and we had thousands upon thousands of grassroots donors donating 20, 50, a hundred bucks. And she knew she was going to look terrible when she rolled out her donation. So she hired a firm to go and trick people into making donations to her. And they would click, and it was primarily elderly people. They would click on a text message saying, help President Trump get his social media off the ground or help build the wall in Texas. And unbeknownst to them, when they clicked and made a donation

for those type of issues, they were actually making a donation to a rhino running for office in Arizona. And it was a monthly donation. She's had about 1200 people demand refunds. These are elderly people. Our team have talked to them. They don't even know who the hell she is.

Yeah, she's not Team Trump. Yeah. So to suggest like I mean, obviously, she's trying to parlay like my as a Republican, my support of his policies. But she doesn't have his endorsement. You're the Trump back candidate. But the sad thing about doing a tactic like that to try to make it look like you have grassroots support and donors is that she doesn't even need the money. She's married to a billionaire who's giving her a blank check to run. And in an order to trick the public into thinking she has grassroots support, she tricks senior citizens into donating money to her. I just find that despicable. Look, I want to win this race because I care about Arizona. But if somebody told me you're going to have to swindle and steal money from Social Security, you know, people on Social Security and elderly people. No, I would never do that. I'd rather lose than have to swindle senior citizens out of their money. It's disgusting. We can't have somebody who is

that unethical anywhere near the governor's office. What do you make of the fact? I know you call her a rhino, but she's got a long history in conservative administrations, Reagan, I think one of the Bushes. And she just got the endorsement of the sitting governor, Doug Ducey, who came out in an interview on CNN and as you know, is not your fan. Well, we have a soundbite cut, so I'll let him speak for himself. This is not your guy, as you know, but I'd love to give you the chance to respond to what he said on CNN. I can't wait. Karen Taylor Ropeson is the real conservative. She's the real deal. She started her career working for Ronald Reagan. She's pro-wall, pro-gun, pro-life. She's the mother of four. She's been a community leader

and a successful business person. Her opponent, on the other hand, bears no resemblance, her campaign or even her personal interactions with me, to anything she's done over the past 30 years. This is all an act. Well, Carrie Lake's misleading voters with no evidence. She's been tagged by her opponents with a nickname, Fake Lake, which seems to be sticking and actually doing some damage. So that was just this weekend. Your response? Well, I travel this state every day, all day, and he is probably the most unpopular person in the state right now. Democrats hate him, the independents hate he is probably the most unpopular person in the state right now. Democrats hate him, the independents hate him, and the Republicans can't stand him.

I'm not going to sit here and trash him, but I will say I'm reading a message that he sent me the day that I resigned from my career. And by the way, I was always fair to him in my career. I interviewed him on several occasions and I was always fair to him. I took great pride in being an honest journalist. And he said, Carrie, congratulations on your great career to date. You are really one of the good guys, tough, fair, talented, and a real person. Notice he didn't say fake Lake. It's all in such short supply today and you will be missed. If I can be helpful in any way, please ask. Excited to see what's next. Maybe Lake 2022.

You know where to find me, which is hilarious because I hadn't even thought about ever running for office. But it was after I walked away from my career, Megan, that I put out a video to tell the great people of Arizona why I was leaving. I didn't want them to think I was just leaving to pursue other opportunities. I was leaving because I was very disillusioned with the direction that journalism had gone. It had become propaganda. And after I put that video out, it went viral. And the amazing people of Arizona started reaching out to me in droves, asking me to consider running for office. They said, we need somebody who we trust, who understands Arizona, and who has integrity. And it was only

after dozens upon dozens upon dozens of Arizonans reached out that I even considered it. And to be honest, I looked at the field of Republicans running, and I saw Karen on that list, and I said, none of these people can get us past the finish line to beat Katie Hobbs. And that remains true today. I'm the only candidate who the polling shows will beat Katie Hobbs. We can't have a Katie Hobbs governor here because she will destroy Arizona.

And frankly, I think Karen, my rhino opponent, and Katie Hobbs, the socialist running, are the same. They're open borders globalists who want to destroy Arizona. What do you make of the fact that Mike Pence has split from Trump and endorsed Robeson, not you? So there's a split with you and your opponent, and there's a split with the president and his vice president, former, on this race as well. I woke up to that news this morning. It didn't shock me at all. I mean, we're really at a crossroads here in this country. And Arizona is the microcosm for

what's happening in this country. We are either going to go the direction of the rhino swamp that President Trump exposed and showed us how dirty it is. And that's Karen, my opponent. We are going to go the socialist, radical leftist Democrat direction. Or we are going to go we the people and we're going to go America first. And I think I know which direction Arizona wants to go. And our polling has showed from day one. We've been up up since day one. We've never slipped down in the polls to any other position than number one. And I've had nearly $26 million thrown at me in negative ads and attack ads. I've had the media, including international media, attacking me relentlessly. They only write negative things about you. I mean, that's one

of the things that makes it interesting to me is when every article about a candidate is negative, that tells you something about the media, not the candidate. Truly go for those candidates, the one that the media is attacking. But the interesting thing is all of that coming in that incoming and we have we're still up double digits. Yeah, they don't know what to do. They're in a complete panic. If you looked at Doug Ducey's face in that interview, he looked scared to death. Like he knows his days are numbered. He knows his his days for his type of leadership and lack of leadership, actually. And the the Rhino establishment section of the party are over. America doesn't want that.

They don't want that. They are over. He's he's leaving because of term limits. So, you know, just in case people are wondering why he's going, he does. His days are numbered as governor, for sure. Just to fill in the polling picture as of Friday, you have this is from Real Clear Politics polling, a plus eight point five average over Robeson, Neely, Tuliani, Zen, everybody. The last poll is listed as from Ohio Predictive Insights, showing you with just a five-point lead, but that's still enormous. Let me tell you about OH Predictives. It's OH, it's not Ohio. It's Owens Harky. And that's what we call an influence pollster. They put out polls. They've been putting out BS polls since the beginning. One of the guys on that team was actually on the committee for one

of my opponents. And so they try to put up polling, making it look like we're not way ahead because they're actually partnered up with our opponents. You get what I'm saying? Yeah. So they're not reliable. They put out these BS polls to try to sway the public into thinking, oh, we're faltering. We're not faltering. We are growing. And as people start to really understand who Karen Robeson is, which is an unethical, swampy woman who married a 95-year-old billionaire in order to buy this election, when they realize that she is who she is and that she's been for giving illegal immigrants a reduced tuition over American students, that she's voted pro-abortion, she's been for giving illegal immigrants a reduced tuition over American students, that she's voted pro-abortion. She's voted to take away our gun rights.

She's voted 70 plus times for tuition increases on hardworking Arizona families. When they realize who she is, she's actually started to go down in the polls. And our internal polling this week has shown amazing growth for us. And it's also shown that people are waking up to who she is. I want to tell the audience, too, that right before that OH Predictive Insights poll, the last poll prior that we had was two weeks earlier from Trafalgar, which had you up plus 12. So and from the beginning, you've been up on this. I mean, no one's ever been up over you in the Republican primary, at least not in any of the polls I've seen. But but the problem with respect to your candidacy, as I see it, is can you win the general? Right. And I know you say, yes, that the Democrats not

going to win. But I wanted to get your your way in on this. Representative Matt Salmon, he dropped Salmon. He dropped out of the race in June and supported your opponent, Taylor Robeson. And he said the reason was because he fears you will prove unelectable beyond the Republican base in November. Because, you know, among other things, I think some of the Republican side, some who would otherwise run to the polls for you, are worried about the whole Trump MAGA contested election piece of it and whether that's going to play well with the general base in Arizona when you get to the general election. Democrats don't want to hear talk about that. Yeah, well, first of all, Matt has saddled up. He's a he's a career lobbyist who saddled up with my opponent, who's

also a career lobbyist. It's there's no shock there. I unfortunately, you know, destroyed Matt's plan, which was he was going to try to run for governor again, and he failed miserably. He ran 20 years ago and lost. And then ever since then, he's been lobbying for all kinds of unfortunate folks, including the CCP. And when you lobby for the CCP, it's really going to be hard to be governor. So we exposed him for who he is and he had to bow out of the race because it was looking so bad for him. So that's that. But the issue is, can I win? The polls have shown I'm the only one who can win. And it's actually kind of comical, Megan, because Karen is spending, like I said, $26 million to try to, to try to, you know, you know, destroy us and stop us. And the funny part, many of her ads, she's running

saying that I'm too liberal. And then in some of the ads she's running, I'm too conservative. What is it? Am I too liberal or too conservative? I think that puts me perfectly in position to represent Arizona. They're attacking me because you said you said you're a $300 donation to a Democrat 15 years ago. I'm the only one running who's actually been a registered independent at one point in my life. So I think I can relate to the people of Arizona. I've been in the homes of independence. I've been in the homes of Democrats and I've been in the homes of independence. I've been in the homes of Democrats and I've been in the homes of Republicans for 27 years. I'm pretty sure Arizona knows who I am.

That's an interesting point. That's an interesting point. In a way, you have the same advantage that Dr. Oz had in and still may have in his Senate race out in Pennsylvania, another another race where Pence and Trump split. But wait, you say you're the only one who can win. But you just said a minute ago that the Democrats definitely losing and that either you or your opponent would beat her. No, my opponent, I don't think my opponent can beat the Democrat. I really don't. I mean, I am the only one who can beat the Democrat. I'm the only one. If I don't win and we have to put Karen up against Katie Hobbs, I think we may end up with Katie Hobbs and it scares the hell out of me because

then we're all going to be looking for a U-Haul, renting it, loading up and trying to find a red state. This is the reason I jumped into the race. The people of Arizona asked me to get into the race. And I looked at the field of people who were running, and I said, none of them can beat Katie Hobbs. They can't. What about, and I take your point about you've been a registered independent, but your opponent points out that you, I guess you voted for Barack Obama. You've got somewhat of a history supporting, I guess you supported John Kerry, right? So they say that's why they think you're too liberal, that you're a Johnny come lately, a Jane come lately to the Republican agenda, that you didn't support the NRA for years until you did in 2021. You know, that you're the

one who's more wobbly when it comes to true conservative values. It's funny. So they are saying that. And then they're also saying I'm too conservative. Make up your mind, Karen. You know what? Do you know how President Trump won? 10 million Obama voters crossed over to help us elect and get the greatest president ever, Donald J. Trump. waking up every single day, every single minute to the lies of the Democrat Party, the lies of their policy that are dead-end policies that destroy our cities, that destroy our states. And so I welcome every single Democrat who has woken up to the lies of that party. You are welcome to come running into the Republican Party. The America First Republicans welcome you, and I want your vote. I've been a registered Republican since I was 18, Megan, and I thank Ronald Reagan for that, except for four years when I registered as a Democrat and two years when I was registered as an independent. And you know what? I think a lot of people looked at who was running somewhere in between Reagan and Trump and saw a uniparty. And I wanted the wars to end. I wanted the Iraq war to end. I thought it was started. I thought we were lied to the way it was started. I had two little kids on either hip. And I said, who's going to end this war? And I looked at a guy named Obama. And I looked at a

guy who I'd covered for 20 years at that point, John McCain. And I knew it wasn't going to be John McCain. Let's face it. we didn't have a lot of good choices. But what I will say is people are waking up to the lies of the Democrats. I welcome them. And if my opponent wants to run millions in ads trying to shame Democrats who are waking up, I think that's a pretty pitiful way to go. That's interesting. That's an interesting response that this this history of being not hardcore partisan in your politics will help you when you get to the general. You know, if you get past the Republican primary to help you in the general, because you can look at these Democrats, more and more of whom are saying, maybe I'll cross over and say, I get it. I've been there. I've done it.

Yep. Absolutely. And you know what? I just I welcome every liberal, every Democrat who's waking up. This party is not the party you thought it was. And it's not too late to wake up. We don't want our gas prices to get to ten dollars. They're already close. We can't afford food. We're seeing what Democrat policies do. They destroy not only cities and states, but now we're watching with Joe Biden as his terrible policies are destroying our country. And that's why I jumped into it. I have high likability in Arizona because people know me. They trust me.

They've invited me into their homes. You don't remain 27 years covering a state, 22 at the Fox affiliate, where I was number one pretty much the entire time as the main anchor there. I'm one of the most recognizable faces, probably the most recognizable face in the state right now. I have 90% name ID, but it goes beyond that. And Karen's trying to buy name ID. I actually have a relationship with the people of Arizona. I was in their homes for 27 years. This isn't just, Oh,

we know her. It is. We really know Carrie. And so she's trying to now twist things and, and lie about who I am and the people aren't buying it because they know me. Okay. I want to pause it there.

I'm going to squeeze in a break, but I want to tell the audience when we come back, speaking of policy, we're going to talk about the latest immigration numbers, which are just horrific. We finally got June and it's not good. And this is one of Carrie's main issues. And she wants to do something about it in Arizona, but it matters well beyond Arizona. And most of the mainstream will not touch it. We'll begin there. More with Carrie Lake right after this quick, quick break. A question for you on the polls on the general election, though.

I don't know this group. Sometimes when you get to these state polls, they're well known to the people running, but not to people like me who cover more national politics. Target Smart poll taken at the end of June, the 28th to the 30th, suggests that the Democrat would beat either one of you. It says that she has 46 percent, that you and your opponent both come in around 38 percent. It says Hobbs versus Lake would be 51 to 39, Hobbs' favor. Hobbs versus Taylor Robeson, 47 to 41, so a bit tighter, but still shows the Democrat winning. What do we know about that poll? I don't know that pollster. All I know are the polls that I've seen, which are independent,

showing that I beat her and the others don't. So I don't know about that poll. I mean, the problem with these pollsters, as you know, and covering politics forever, is that a lot of them are really push polls. They're trying to sway the person who they're polling to answer a certain way. So you really have to be careful when you put forth polling. We're the only campaign putting out our internal polling. That's the good stuff. That's where you say, hey, tell it to me straight. Give it to me straight. I just want to know where we really stand. And we've been putting that out since the beginning. Karen never has. And I know it's because hers is dismal. She tried to throw a poll out last week, which was laughable, saying that she was ahead. And we found out what the

pollster was and what they did. They polled like 250 landlines. Well, first of all, A, who has a landline? And B, who answers their landline? So, you know, the methodology on every poll that she tries to throw out there is questionable and not good and laughable, to be honest. The policies, let's talk about what's happening in Arizona and in many of these border states, because we did finally get the numbers in June. And while they weren't worse than May, so that we've got that going for us in terms of illegal crossings. That's how they have to frame it. We're in trouble. But they're still at record levels and far, far worse than they were a year earlier.

Border Patrol is getting just swamped with attempted crossings and the Biden administration has done nothing to change its policies to help. So, you know, states like Arizona are really kind of on their own. It's like you're on your own and dealing with this. And I know you've made the point many times, but believe it or not, you know, you live in New York, you live in Iowa, you live. It's your problem, too. And you need strong lawmakers, governors and so on in these border states or nearby with strong policies. If the feds aren't going to do anything about it's supposed to be a federal issue. But as we all know, when they have a lax policy, it falls to the states. So what do you think? What are the differences between how you would handle it and how Taylor Robeson would write? Most people think

you get a Republican in there. It's going to be the same. Well, if you like what's happening right now on our Arizona border, then you're going to love her policy. It's doing nothing. It's status quo. It's Doug Ducey's policy, which is lay down like a doormat, let the cartels trample all over you and let the cartels take control of Arizona. This all happened on Doug Ducey's watch. Now, I know we have an illegitimate moron sitting in the White House, but Doug Ducey is the governor of Arizona and the states have the right to protect their citizens. And damn it, we're going to do it starting January of 23. My border policy is the strongest border policy that this country has ever seen.

And we are going to take back control of our border. We have a constitutional right to do so, Article 1, Section 10. When the federal government fails us at the Guarantee Clause, Article 4, Section 4, there is a remedy right there in that beautiful document called the U.S. Constitution, and that is what our Defend Arizona Border Policy is all about. We have the right to take it on right now, secure our border, and we don't have to wait on the federal government. And Doug Ducey needs to grow a spine and do something about it. I gave him my policy when we came out with it at the beginning of the year, and he did nothing with it. Now he's saying, oh, Karen's going to be great on the border. Well, if she's so great on the border, why don't you take her policy, which is a bunch of

talking points that the high-priced McCain consultants she's hired have come up with. Her border policy has, there's no teeth in it. There's nothing to it. Mine calls for on day one, we issue a declaration of invasion and we get the ball rolling. We're going to put boots on the ground. We will be sending our Arizona National Guard troops to the border and we're going to stop people from coming across Megan. Right now, the border patrol, which is controlled by Biden and his illegitimate administration, they're forced to just process people. We're not going to allow them to do that in Arizona anymore. When we catch people, when we stop people, we're sending them back to Mexico. And most of these people aren't even coming from Mexico, but they're coming through Mexico. We're going to need to have the cooperation of the Mexican government.

And we will work and play hardball with them until we get that cooperation. But in very short order, as we start constructing President Trump's wall, we're going to finish it here in Arizona using the materials that the federal government abandoned on our border. We're going to take those back and we're going to use those materials that we, the people paid for, finish the wall. And we're going to stop people from coming across illegally in Arizona. I'm a mom and I'm not okay with fentanyl pouring across. I've talked to way too many moms and dads on the campaign trail who've lost a 19 year old, a 22 year old, a child to fentanyl poisoning. And the fact that Joe Biden and Doug Ducey is sitting there doing nothing and allowing the cartels to control our border is disgusting, unconscionable, and they really should be run out of office.

The on those on that front, the update on drug seizures just June compared to May. OK, and Maeve's numbers were horrible. Cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, fentanyl, marijuana by weight were up 25 percent in June compared to May. Cocaine seizures had increased 62 percent month over month. Maybe that maybe you could argue that that means we're doing better. But this is all the Border Patrol agents doing the best they can, being outmanned and under underpaid and then criticized at every turn by the Biden administration for the work that they do do. But, yeah, that's it's not just the question of illegal immigrants sneaking across the border.

It's the drugs, too. And I just stop one second before we go on to acknowledge the word illegitimate, because that's obviously a hot button word. I know that Trump believes that. I know you believe that, too, about Joe Biden and his election without without relitigating that whole thing. Can we just talk about how's that going to play in the general election? Because as we sort of rounded to earlier, your opponent, if you if you get the nominee, let me just finish. If you get the Republican nomination, your Democrat opponent is going to hit you with this at every turn. Right. Like is is Joe Biden legitimate? Hasn't this already been litigated? Donald Trump, he would have won the presidency even if he'd won Arizona or if, you know, like going on and on and on.

If even if he'd lost Arizona and so on. Do you think Arizonans want another relitigation of that? I think they want it litigated initially. We haven't had it litigated. We have a lot of evidence, a mountain of evidence. And every time someone asks me, I'm happy to provide them that evidence. The media has failed us on reporting on the biggest story in our lifetime, which is a stolen election, a rigged election and a corrupt election. And we're at ground zero. So I really take issue with anybody from anywhere else in this country trying to come in here and tell us how our elections were won. They were corrupt. And our governor sat there and watched the election be run in a corrupt way.

And then he certified a corrupt election. Listen, I just want honest elections for all people. Arizona, if you're a Democrat, independent or Republican, I want a level playing field. I don't want people taking ballots and stuffing ballot boxes. And I don't want mail-in ballots floating around out there and sitting on top of mailboxes and people then filling those out fraudulently. We don't want another case where we have 740,000 ballots that have no chain of custody that can't be authenticated, yet we're counted. We've just got to follow our election laws and our election rules and have a level playing field for everyone. And I think for the Democrats as well and they go, well, either my guy won or my guy lost, but I can sleep. I know it was honest. That's all we want. OK. That election was not honest. It was it was a disgusting mess. And we're going to fix it when I'm governor. I hear you. But even your Republican opponent says, yeah, no, it wasn't honest and it wasn't perfect, but it wasn't stolen. And that's the difference. Right. And just a couple of facts.

Biden would have won the national election even if Trump had won Arizona. Biden won Arizona by about ten thousand and a half. No court found evidence that Arizona's or any state's election results were inaccurate. And Maricopa County, that's where two thirds of the state's votes were cast, has been the most contentious. Republicans could not believe that Biden had scored a forty five thousand vote victory in a county that was once solid GOP. But the hand counts there in Maricopa, which started the Saturday after the election, wrapped up two days later. Not a single discrepancy was found, not one. But make it one more. One more fact.

The majority Republican Maricopa County Board of Supervisors hired two separate independent firms to perform a forensic audit of the voting equipment. This is the Sidney Powell Kraken thing, an audit which found zero irregularities, none. And the thing is, back in 2018, back in 2018, that's how Kristen Sinema won, a Democrat. She won. Things had already been going a little bluer in the state. And not all Arizonans were in love with Trump. So they elected this Democrat, Kyrsten Sinema. And that's my point is that the regional vote patterns in Biden's victory mirrored those of Kyrsten Sinema. We had hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes that were pumped into this election. So, yes, if you count fraudulent votes, you're going to get the same count when you do a hand count. Pumped in how? The problem is we had hundreds of thousands pumped in that should have never been counted

in fraudulent. How? How? Mules trafficking them. It's estimated by True the Vote that we had at least 200,000 votes that were pumped in through mules. If you haven't seen 2,000 mules, I highly suggest you see that. I've seen it.

I've interviewed Dinesh. We got into it at length. But there's no actual proof of that. There's supposition. Hundreds of thousands of votes with no chain of custody. You cannot count votes with no chain of custody. Where do they come from? There's only supposition in that. He did not, and I did interview Dinesh, and I like Dinesh, and I've been interviewing him for years, but they almost get you there, but they don't close the loop. They don't have video cameras on the voting sites. They can't prove that mules actually changed the vote. Well, and shouldn't that be a big red flag that our Maricopa County drop boxes had no cameras on them?

It's a problem, but you can't go back and say from that that the election was stolen. Yes, you can. I have a ton, but there's no proof. We can litigate this whole thing if you want to spend the time doing that. Well, I don't think people do want to. That's my point, is that when you get, I think people care about what their pocketbook issues,

they care about inflation, they care about gas prices. They don't they want to move past. Even Republican voters want to move past. And I talk about those issues all day, every day. But what I will say, Megan, we had fraud and corruption in our election. We obviously can't go back in time. But what we can do is shore up our election laws and follow our election laws. And that's why I'm saying we're going forward. We are going to shore up our election laws so that Arizona has the most secure and honest elections in the entire country. And if you're denying that we had fraud in the 2020 election, you're really not looking at what happened. And my opponent either has her head in the sand or I don't know what's wrong with her.

She thinks it was just unfair. It was fraudulent. There was corruption. But all I'm saying is, I can't go back in time, but going forward, we're going to make sure we get rid of those loopholes for cheating and have the most honest elections in the country. I would love to talk about policy

because I have the best policy of anybody running. We have the best policy. And the media refuses to talk about my policy. They want to talk about a bunch of other garbage rather than cover it. Well, I don't care about the bullshit, the drag queen. That's such a nonsense story.

It's like, they're just for the audience at home. I have the only policy to deal with that. Because at one point you had a friendship with somebody who was a drag queen and enjoyed occasional performances as an adult at like a birthday party. They want to say that you're pro drag queens for children at school. It's a lie. You've been unfairly targeted on that in my view. So I don't even want to go there. I would love to talk about my policies. I'm the only person in the country that has a policy to tackle homelessness and restore quality of life. But before we get to that, though, because

let me finish up this one topic, you know, as a news anchor, we need to close the loop for the audience. Otherwise, they feel like the itch went on scratch. Because I think this is legit for Republican voters to try to figure out who they want. There was just a soundbite that Fox News was running today showing voters in Arizona. These are Republican Trump fans. These are your people saying we got to move past Trump. We got to move on to DeSantis because he doesn't have the same baggage. They're sick of his constant need to relitigate. Right. And so like whether you believe it or you don't believe it, the question is, is it politically savvy to keep doing it? Here's just a little bit of what they were saying.

If he did, I would vote for him, but I would not recommend he runs. I voted for Trump both times and I love him. I think he was a good candidate, but I think his time has passed. I couldn't care less about President Trump personally. I prefer somebody different. But if he is the nominee, I'll probably vote for him. We're from Florida. DeSantis is, we're big fans of DeSantis on this one.

He seems to be much more common sense and able to communicate better to both sides to get those people back that switch. I'm a DeSantis fan as well. Donald Trump had a great run. I thought he was a great president while he was president. After the fact, I think we've seen a lot of divisiveness that's come from things. And again, I wouldn't vote for him in a primary, but the policy that he was able to do, I would probably vote for him in an election, but not a primary. What do you make of it? Those are Arizonans. Well, I mean, you probably saw my interview with do you make of it? Those are Arizonans. Well, I mean, you probably saw my interview with Fox. First of all, Fox has been having my opponent on since she was polling at two points. She was like fourth or fifth place, and they've been

having her on. They've obviously picked their horse, and that's who they've picked. And they do not like Trump. They called that election within seconds of the polls closing in Arizona. People were still standing in line voting and they want to make sure they get rid of Trump. And so that doesn't surprise me. I know how to do creative editing. I just I worked in TV. That's creative editing. You only find people saying what you're trying to bolster. They're trying to bolster that. They're trying to say people are sick of President Trump and they're not. People believe and want to see his policies back. They want to see him back in the White House. Let's talk about homelessness, because that's a that's a problem plaguing not just you, but New York and California. And that is one of the issues that I think in turn

some blue voters read, you know, who have just had it with a look at San Francisco, these far left policies that have really ruined people's lives, homeless people and people who are, you know, well off. So what what can there possibly be done? You know, what could you do differently to address that problem? We have an amazing homeless policy, and I'm so proud of it. And it all came about when I was at a gathering of voters in Arizona and we had a mother who she raised her hand to ask a question. And she said, I feel so bad asking this question because I because it's beautiful. We have a park down the street. Now we finally have children and we can't use the park. There's needles there. It's been overrun by people who are homeless and using drugs.

And I thought, oh my gosh, how sad that she didn't feel she could even ask that question without being castigated for having no compassion. And I said, you absolutely have the right to ask that question. And dang it, we are taxpayers. We pay to build these parks and take care of them when we should be able to enjoy our communities, the quality of life. And if we let the quality of life slip because we allow our homeless population to grow out of control like they did in California, then we will become a state with hollowed out cities where nobody wants to live or work or have a business. So we brought together some of the greatest minds and we put amazing policy together on homelessness. And we are going to actually put some money into mental health

programs and addiction programs. And we're going to give people the option to get off the street and get help. God did not envision any of us living in the depths of despair. And we are going to help people pull themselves up from the depths of despair, get off the drugs, get help for their mental illness, get job training and become a contributing member of society. And for those who refuse that, for those who say, no, I just want to live on the street, use and take advantage of the system. Life's going to become very difficult for them in Arizona. We're not going to put up with that. We want to get people help, but we will demand to have quality of life. And that's how we're going to go about our policy. We'll have enough shelter beds for everybody to have a shelter bed. And

we're going to ban urban camping. We will not become a city or a state where our streets are lined with tents and people are using and shooting up on the streets. That's not what we're going to be here in Arizona. It seems so sensible. You know, it's like when you say it, it seems like such a no brainer. And yet it's happening in state after state. Some people view this as compassionate. It's absolutely absurd. So you know why it's happening? Because there's been an industry created around homelessness. And whenever you create an industry around a problem, a lot of people see dollar signs and they go, wow, for every homeless person we're helping, we're getting ten thousand, fifteen, twenty thousand dollars. There's no incentive to help that person. There's only the same with covid. Same with abortion. You know, you're right. You could go down the list. They're enabling people to continue to use drugs. It's the saddest thing I've ever seen.

Rather than, you know, you look at, you've seen the video, I'm sure out of California, where they're giving them drugs and they're giving them needles and, and giving them a little bit of food that keeps them living on the street. If you've ever had a loved one, who's been an addict and you say, Hey, look, why don't you come and live in our guest room and you don't have to do anything. Just live there and don't worry about it. Pretty soon that guest room is going to become a drug den. You have to have skin in the game. And we're going to require that people put some skin in the game. And we are also going to help them.

I got like a minute and a half left. So a couple of quick hits. Who's your favorite female politician? Oh, that's a good one. You know, I really, I like Kristi Noem a lot. What I like about- I was going to ask you about her. I had her on recently.

She was great. I like that she did how I, she handled COVID how I think I would have handled it had I been governor. And that is lay it out. Here's what we know. Here's the issue. Here's the risk. Here's what you can do to protect yourself.

And you have the information now. Now you go out and decide how do you want to proceed? How do you want to protect your own health and your family's health? And how do you want to handle your business? And she didn't shut down the churches and she didn't force our children to wear masks. She's got a great book out now called not my first rodeo, which is a great read. Okay. Next question. A lot of people have questioned whether since Trump very much backs you and you very much back him, whether there could be a Carrie Lake vice presidency under another Trump administration. Is that something you would ever consider since he's clearly out of running mate? We do not think Mike Pence will be the guy. I don't think Mike Pence will. You know, it's funny.

The same people who are saying, oh, I can't even I can't even do it. She's not qualified. All this are now saying, oh, she could be VP. I'm not looking to 2024. I'm looking to this election. I believe this election is our last election if we don't get it right. If we put a rhino or a socialist in there, we're going to lose our whole state. I am dead focused on saving Arizona. I don't like Washington, D.C. I love Arizona and I want to save this state. And then I want to, frankly, get out of politics and enjoy my life because I don't want to live in the swamp. I know it is very swampy. She's been saying you could exchange the swamp for the lake. Carrie, it's going to be fascinating to watch the primaries.

Is it August 6th? August 2nd. But we have voting season here. So people are voting right now. So get out and vote. August 2nd, but we have voting season here, so people are voting right now. So get out and vote. Fill out your ballot if it's on the kitchen table or go to the polls August 2nd. And let's bring America First policies to Arizona.

Well, we would love to have you back after the vote and all the best to you in the meantime. Thank you, Megan. It was a pleasure to be on with you today. OK, coming up, two authors here in our next hour. Plus my thoughts on the latest about Leah Thomas, now nominated by her school, University of Pennsylvania, to be the NCAA Woman of the Year. I'm not kidding. And don't forget, folks, you can find The Megan Kelly Show live on Sirius XM Triumph Channel, 111 every weekday at noon east. The full video show and clips by subscribing to our YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Megan Kelly. You can get the audio podcast at apple spotify pandora stitcher or wherever you get your podcasts and near you find our archives want to tell you too that uh ms lake's

opponent uh ms robeson is welcome on the program as well would love to hear her point of view on the issues we discussed we begin this hour with the university of Pennsylvania disgracing itself once again. After a season of dumping on its female swimmers, forcing them to compete against a biological man who now says he is a woman, forcing them to share a locker room with said swimmer, dismissing their and their parents' concerns summarily at every turn, even telling the female swimmers what they needed if they objected to the trans swimmer was therapy, the university now sticks a final thumb in the women's eyes, nominating this trans swimmer who goes by the name Leah Thomas as the University of Pennsylvania's NCAA Woman of the Year. This is a disgrace. Leah Thomas is not a woman. Leah Thomas is a trans woman who lived the first 20 years of her life as Will Thomas, a man. She only decided to transition in 2020 after swimming three seasons as a middling competitor on the men's team,

ranking in the mid 500s. On the women's team, the very next year, ranked number one. How does a person who lived 20 years as a man, two as a woman, and in those two stole several female swimming records wind up anyone's woman of the year? This must be some kind of sick joke meant to increase resentment towards trans people. That is one of the reasons it's so stomach turning. Most trans people, and I know plenty of trans people, including in my own family, want to be left alone and not have their gender constantly discussed or made somebody else's cause or to worm their way into a sport in which they know they have a physical advantage. The law has already changed to make sure that trans people may not be legally discriminated

against because of their gender identity in the workplace setting. As for sports, it's a much trickier debate, given the physical advantages post-pubescent boys and men have over women. This used to be a given. It is why we needed Title IX, which is supposed to protect girls' equality in the field of athletics. But the Biden administration wants to change all that, making it unlawful to exclude trans athletes from girls' sports. It's pushing a reform of Title IX right now that does not yet specifically focus on sports, but make no mistake, it's coming. And Team Biden has already made clear that's what they think is fair, not to create a third category for trans swimmers, not to find a more fair way of letting them compete, but to making the girls team accept

biological men who say they're trans women in their swimming lane and other sports. The female swimmers at UPenn worked hard as young girls to make it in swimming, to make it to Ivy League swimming in the case of UPenn, swimming at the elite level. I mean, not for nothing, but they swam with growing breasts, growing hips, more fat on their bodies, less upper body strength than their male competitors. They swam with shorter legs, for the most part, than the boys, thinner upper body strength than their male competitors. They swam with shorter legs, for the most part, than the boys, thinner and weaker muscles than the boys. They swam with periods and cramps and bloating. And the women on that team and the others at the college level did it all, despite these relative physical disadvantages when compared to their male colleagues.

Then at UPenn, in the course of one year, they saw their medals, first place finishes, NCAA tournament spots, and records stolen from them by a person who was a crappy male swimmer on the men's team months earlier. When they quietly objected, they were called bigots or sent to therapy by their school. Leah Thomas, meanwhile, enjoyed every minute of the spotlight. Thomas was allowed to swim with the women only because the NCAA only required one year of hormone suppressant therapy for a trans woman to compete in women's sports. No one cared about the fact that Thomas is over six feet with far greater lung capacity, wingspan, muscle and bone mass, etc. than Thomas's female competitors.

Shut up about it or we'll ruin your future swimming and professional prospects. That was the clear message by the university to the women. Thomas told ABC News she was having a great time. This is a dream come true and that she would love to keep swimming right into the Olympics. To argue against that, Thomas contended, was to be an anti-trans bigot. Thomas went on to crush the 500 freestyle at the NCAA championships and is now the women's title holder. And there is UPenn yet again, ready to shiv Thomas's female teammates with this latest nomination. Leah Thomas is not woman of the year. That title belongs to one of the women who dealt with all of the physical and emotional challenges and opportunities that come with being an actual woman.

All right, from cramps to crying to being smaller and yes, often weaker and yet triumphing over it all. Not to a six foot three biological man who within the last two years declared that he was a woman, period. My next guest is Eddie Scarry. He's the author of Liberal Misery, How the Hateful Left Sucks Joy Out of Everything and Everyone, and a DC columnist for The Federalist.

Eddie, welcome to the show. What better place to start than right here? I mean, with all due respect to trans people and even to Leah Thomas, I understand Leah's desire to compete. This is a gross offense by the University of Pennsylvania on the heels of two years of offenses that they've committed against their girls. Yes, 100 percent agree. I hope that your entire monologue goes viral. It deserves to be viral. And I will tell you and your audience, I don't know if you knew this or not, that I am a gay man. And I have always taken offense to the idea that somehow we were, gays and trans people were natural companions. I mean, I believe this is a free country. And

once you're an adult, you can do whatever you want. You can call yourself whatever you want. You can dress whatever you want. But this whole trans issue, and as you were saying, there are so many who do not want you in any way to, like, they don't want to talk about it. They don't want to talk about their gender and their sex. They just want to live perfectly normal lives. However, there's this segment of our culture, a very large and becoming very domineering segment of our culture that says, it's not so much about acceptance. This is something

you need to accommodate. And as you were saying in your monologue, that this now means every other woman, actual woman in the locker room now needs to be okay with a biological male there, seeing them, seeing them being seen. In our military, taxpayers now are expected to fund these freak experiments with hormone therapies and actual genital mutilation. And yes, I think that the sports element has captured our imagination, but it really is an offensive topic and people need to think more about it. Yeah. I said this when we were talking about Rachel Levine, who works for HHS, as the first female four-star admiral to hold this position. And I was making the point of, okay, Rachel Levine, like Leah Thomas, lived the first, I think, 55 years of Rachel Levine's

life as a man, came up in medicine as a man during a time when it wasn't that easy for women in med schools. And so women who got into med schools, you know, back in the, whatever it was, would have been, I guess, late sixties, early seventies. They, they, it was a tough haul. And so they climbed this mountain and they climbed it despite boulders coming down on them and cuts and bruises and all sorts of physical challenges and emotional challenges and intellectual challenges that were thrown their way that weren't necessarily thrown the way of their male counterparts in med schools. And they got to the top of the mountain. You know, they, they created a presence for themselves in medicine. And meanwhile, Rachel Levine, as a man, was over

there on the neighboring mountain going up in a chairlift. And you go to see if they see each other at the top. And Rachel's being celebrated as the first woman to ever do it. And all the women with the bumps and bruises are looking over at Rachel Levine saying, what the hell? You were in the chairlift. This is not fair. It's the same thing for Leah Thomas, who was Will Thomas, who's got all of the physical attributes of a male swimmer minus one year of hormone therapy. And to pretend that that erases Leah Thomas's advantage over these still reeling women by saying she's the woman of the year, Eddie. I can't like we've lost our ever loving minds. Well, Brian, it's bad enough that everyone is expected to participate in these weird fantasies. But but to shower and rain upon these people, you know, maybe Levine at the HHS, maybe she is actually a really smart, intelligent person.

I'll take that for granted. But to then push it in everyone's face and say, no, these people deserve the recognition. You're going to call them record breakers. They broke the glass ceiling. No, that is, as you just said, rubbing salt into the wound and people don't deserve it. And, you know, this is nothing to say of when we're getting to the issue with children

and talking about children and how, you know, affirming these ideas they have in their head because they're confused or because they're maybe suffering from certain anxieties or neuroses. No, this is, we're just at the tip of the iceberg of this whole thing. But again, this culture we have that is becoming so and elsewhere, because people will think, oh, you know, these trans people, they think they, you know, they have the right to be everywhere, like having a man swim against women, a biological man swim against women. And honestly, I do not believe in my heart that most trans people want that. If UPenn wants to nominate Leah Thomas as trans woman of the year, great. I can get behind that. I understand that brings with it a whole host of different challenges that Leah Thomas has had to overcome.

But this is where the difference between a woman and a trans woman actually does matter. And to eliminate the terminology is meaningful. It really is meaningful and diminishing of the struggles that biological women have overcome. I'll say this. Riley Gaines, she's at University of Kentucky. She's a swimmer. She was also nominated by her school as Woman of the Year. And there are 577 women nominated. Riley Gaines comes out and says, this makes the NCAA awards absolutely worthless. She comes out and says, by the way, this is this Riley finished behind Leah Thomas in the 200 freestyle at the NCAA championships this year. And she says, this award combines athletic performance with academics, service and character.

What character has Thomas shown other than sheer selfishness and entitlement? And, you know, Eddie reminded me of when Leah Thomas sat down with ESPN. And I mean, not a word of empathy for what her choices have put her her teammates through. To the contrary, it was all about Leah. Watch. The women who signed the letter anonymously said that they absolutely supported your right to transition, but they simply think it's unfair for you to compete against cisgendered women. only to a certain point where if you support trans women as women and they've met all the all the ncaa requirements and then i don't know if you can really say something like that trans women are not a threat to women's sports really really right so what about character you know what what about character right like why why does the empathy only go one way on this issue? And why is there beholden and so elevated by the left in our

society that, well, they used to be the feminists. They were the feminists who said, we got to protect women, make sure women have all the full rights and entitlements that men have in this country. And yet now they're saying, nope, we're actually just going to erase all of that. And just that clip is so funny to me because I'm sure many of your listeners and many of your viewers have, I've never actually heard or seen Leah Thomas talk. And I just wondered to myself, are you even trying? Are you actually even trying to make yourself clear to make us think you're more feminine? But Leah Thomas looks like a man. She's six foot three. And I mean, I know a lot of my listeners like don't call her. She I am perfectly willing to be respectful of Leah's life choices and go with the pronouns

that she chooses. And if I met Leah Thomas, I would be supportive and kind to her. But this is a different issue. And this is where we have to draw the line and hold the line, because her attempt to erase the rights of biological women in this sport matters and is worth fighting against. And if she considers that disrespectful, so be it. So let me ask you, as a transition, your book's called Liberal Misery, How the Hateful Left Sucks Joy Out of Everything and Everyone. I mean, I would say, knowing a lot of liberals, they're not all like that.

The woke left is the group that does this. So why do they do this? Why? Why do they why does you pen stick the finger in the eye and say not only does she get to compete and take all the titles and so on, which is a no brainer, you know, she's going to do it. She's woman of the year and screw every other woman who had to suck it up and race against her and all the other women in the other sports that you play. Why? Why did they do it? Well, to your first point, yes, I would not say not every liberal and not every Democrat is miserable. However, if you are a miserable person, you are almost certainly a liberal and a Democrat. And I proved that in my book, Liberal Misery.

To your second point is you're asking why they do that. There is a psychological factor to this that I that I really wanted to get to the bottom of when I wrote my book. And it just so happened that I had no idea until I started researching it that there's all this data, all these surveys, all these studies that actually prove in every facet of life, every question you could ask a liberal, a Democrat, an independent, and a Republican, conservative across the political spectrum, liberals and Democrats will time and time again be the ones who are most likely to say they are unhappy. They are unhappy with their lives. They are more likely to block someone on social media because they said something they didn't like. They're more likely to express dissatisfaction with their marriage, with their friends,

their families, where they friends, their families, where they live, their jobs, over and over and over again. And this goes through a course of years. And I noticed it in my own personal interaction. That's what really made me want to write the book is especially going into 2020. I kept coming, having these social interactions, oftentimes with strangers, sometimes with friends who decided they didn't want to be my friend anymore because of things I believe and things I said. Simple arguments that should just be a matter of a difference of opinion. And you see it your way, I see it mine, but hopefully we still believe each other are good people. No, that was not the case. And to find all this data that backed it up. And that's why also I was adamant of using the word

misery for the title because misery is something that spreads. Misery is something that the people, there's a phrase for it. Misery loves company. That's something you want other people to feel and other people to experience because you have it. And that, that's the case I'm making with liberal misery. Why, why do they want people to feel this way? Because that's what misery does.

And that's, that, that is a quality that is on the left and exclusive to the left. And the hypocrisy, you know, like these people who are constantly lecturing the rest of us on how, you know, we need to be non bigoted, i.e. except Leah Thomas without objection or in women's sports, whatever. You always see the other side of them, right? It's Jill Biden suggesting Hispanics are unique as little tacos, which I saw you tweeted about that to these leftist politicians who want to defund the police unless they're facing a security threat, in which case they need private security tax payer funded details. Right. And I'm not the first person to make this point. I'm sure you've heard the point, but it has become so eye opening. And it is it really does cut to the quick on this particular topic. At The Federalist, where I work full-time, we do not use the word hypocrisy really anymore. This is hierarchy. This is the idea that I'm

special. I get to do things. I get to have a security detail because I'm special. You are the dirty ones. You don't get to have the same things that I have. You saw it time and time again. And I talk about it in my book, Liberal Misery, where some Democrat mayor, attorney general, whatever, would say, everyone, you need to stay home. Don't go out and do anything. You can just stay home, wear your mask. And yet, you would see them at a restaurant. You would see them at a party. And I think it honestly did not register in their minds that this was not okay, you're telling people to do something, and then you're going and doing it. And I really believe I think this was captured so well with that clip that became very popular of john Kerry, the special climate envoy for the Biden administration. He's they asked him,

why are you taking? Why are you flying private? And he said, Well, someone like me can't fly commercial. He really honestly believes why don't you well, someone like me can't fly commercial. He really honestly believes, why don't you understand that? I'm me. I'm important. And I think that is another one of those qualities of the left. And if you don't comply with it, they are angry. And of course, this is America. People are free. We're not supposed to work that way. Of course, people are like, no, we're not doing that. We have a difference of opinion. But I think the anger and bitterness and resentment of the left that you see time and time on the left and that is is proven, borne out through studies and data, as I cite in my book, I think that it's just another quality, another factor of liberal misery. Well, I know it's in the news today that Representative Jayapal, she's part of

the squad. She's asking for a private security detail, taxpayer funded. She did have a security threat outside of her house. That sounds legit. The guy got arrested. He was with a gun. He was saying threatening things. So I hear that. But this is the same person who's been in favor of, quote, diverting money away from the police that said law enforcement as a whole has a culture of brutality, which cannot be denied. And she and AOC were among the 27 House Democrats to reject enhanced security measures for Supreme Court justices after all the protests at their homes and so on. So she has no problem telling Brett Kavanaugh he can't get increased security. But when she has a guy outside of her house, who does she want?

She wants cops and she wants you to pay for the cops and she wants me to pay for the cops. But she doesn't want women in the inner city who have a guy outside of their houses with a gun to have the same right. Yep. And I think this is the most shocking development, I think, in probably the history of our country. I honestly believe that, that there is one side of our politics in this country that actually believes that political violence has become OK and it has become justified. We saw it all through 2020. There's like two chapters in my book dedicated to this, where rioting, violence, vandalism, destruction of public and private property, bashing windows of small businesses in. And that's supposed to be totally okay. Because why? Because one side said,

we're upset about the way things are going. And probably you remember this was just another example in 2020. The boarded up storefronts and businesses had started to kind of come down. But as we're leading up to the election day, there was this idea that Trump really could possibly win. He might likely win even despite everything that was going on. All those boards in every single Democrat city, every, I live in Washington, D.C., so I saw it here. Those boards went right back up, probably twofold.

It was even worse because why? It wasn't because there was an anticipation of a Biden victory. It's not that Trump supporters were going to take to the streets. I mean, we saw January 6th, obviously, but they weren't going to take to the streets and then start blowing things up. Those storefronts of businesses, small businesses were boarded up because they thought there was a possibility of a Trump victory. And we have seen now how the left, how liberals and Democrats, how they react when they don't get their way. We're seeing it right now with sitting Supreme Court justice was chased out of a restaurant, threatened to be assassinated. Why? Because some decisions came out of the court that the left didn't like. So this, again, I think is

the most shocking development that we have seen in this country, where the left, one side only, honestly, truly believes that a certain type of political violence, when it comes from their side, it's totally justified. And it is interesting to see when the shoes on the other foot. So AOC, we talked about this on Friday, was irritated by a heckler who went up on Capitol Hill and said she was a big bootied Latina and made some other questionable comments about her. That's how I describe myself. I don't see what the problem is. And proud of it. So she was irritated. OK, fine. You know, it's not the nicest behavior I've ever seen. But the thing that got my attention was she was mad

at the Capitol Hill police for not doing something to this guy. And it turns out, and she posted about it, like, it's sad that women have to live like this. Hold on, I'm trying to find the normalization of this event. And this dismissiveness is dangerous. She went on to say, this is not a place that is designed to protect women and added in or LGBT people. And I fear for all the journalists here too. And the Capitol Hill police, who we now know were called five times by her staff about this guy. All he was saying was,

hey, you're my favorite big bootied Latina. You know, you like abortion, but you don't like me, whatever. He's a heckler. The Capitol Hill police had to release a statement that reads as follows. The comments, although inappropriate, are not criminal. In the

video, the man never threatened or touched the congresswoman. Out of an abundance of caution, our officer stopped the man and ran his information, which did not show any warrants. So she wants the cops to be all over this guy, but she doesn't want the cops to be there again in the inner city, et cetera. And I saw your tweet, which reads as follows. Let the homeless turn public spaces into needle parks. Let the delinquent youth jump the turnstiles. Let BLM season shut down a major street. Call little Jenny from the block.

Vic, where are the police? It comes to her. We need all men on deck. Right. And I think, again, that the left, including AOC, including the Ilhan Omars, the most ungrateful refugee in the history of this country, the idea that harassment is OK if we say it's OK, if it's targeting the people we don't like, a sitting Supreme Court justice, chase him out of a restaurant, make him and his family feel completely unsafe, which they are. We'll say nothing about that. In fact, we'll be, in some ways, even approving of

it. We saw, I think it was during the Kyle Rittenhouse trial when the verdict was coming. I don't know if it was Maxine Waters or who it was. It was like, yeah, we need to see more taking to the streets. We need to see more intimidation. They truly, honestly believe that that is okay when it comes from their side. But truly, honestly believe that that is okay when it comes from their side. But again, why is that? Liberals and Democratic voters just tend to profess a greater anger about things. It's very easy to set them off. And again, when it came to my book, when I really started thinking about this was because of personal interactions. I bet maybe not everyone, but a lot of your viewers and a lot of your listeners are going to say, you know, I've gone to a party before

the person who got the, when politics came up, when it became contentious, it was the liberal who honestly, who really showed up thinking that one, what they have to say matters to everyone should agree with it. And if they don't, I'm going to make you really, really uncomfortable for the rest of the night. I ran into that so many times through 2020. And just to find that there's all this data, all these surveys, all this, all these studies backing up that idea, that feeling I had that, why is every person Democrat, liberal that I run into, and I run into many in Washington, DC, why are they so angry all the time? Well, it turns out that is just their nature. Well, that's part of the problem in Washington, D.C., because you've got the hard partisans there. You know, like I have so many

liberals in my life who aren't like this at all and who would who would love this book and who will laugh right along you and me at these outrageous stories. But this woke collection gives the party a bad name. But that's why they're losing. They're losing Hispanic voters and they're losing more center minded liberals in New York City, even because of this craziness, whether it's the COVID authoritarianism or their positions on things like, you know, latinx and stuff like all that stuff is a turnoff to just normal people who may vote Democrat because I like when I was growing up, my family voted Democrat because they thought Republicans were for the rich and we weren't rich. Right. So it's like more and more people are sort of

opening their minds to the red party messaging because the blue party sounds insane. Now, wait, I want to ask you a question. This jumped out at me when I was looking at the Jayapal, whatever, however you pronounce her last name, story. So what happened was a 48-year-old man allegedly drove past her West Seattle home

three times last Saturday, July 9th, yelling obscenities. One neighbor told cops she heard the man yell, go back to India. I'm going to kill you. She called 911 around 11 p.m. that night, saying someone was outside her house using obscene language. She thought her husband, her husband thought he may have shot a pellet gun, but she was unsure. When they got there, they found a man in the middle of the street with his hands in the air and a handgun holstered on his waist. He had a gun. They said the man knew who lived at the residence and wanted to pitch a tent on their property and that he was going to target a victim of Indian descent. OK, so they got him.

He was released on jail from jail on Wednesday. But a hate crime investigation is going on. His his handgun and firearm license were temporarily confiscated over mental health concerns. And all I could think was, I would love to ask her. They confiscated his handgun and his firearm license. So they got his gun. Does she feel safe now? He's out, right, while they do the investigation. Now that she's gotten the gun, does she feel perfectly safe inside of her home?

Or does she think the guy's mental health might bear some further digging into and possibly some restraint and that she might actually need a private security detail with guns? Like the less incessant focus on the handgun as the source of all evil. And if we could just scrub the nation of the 400 million guns we have, that somehow we're not going to have to deal with violence anymore or murders or what this guy's mental health is the issue. That's the issue here. And him being free without the gun is better than him being free with a gun. But I'm sure she's not feeling so safe right now, even though they confiscated it. All right, for sure. The whole debate, to the extent you can call it a real legitimate debate over handguns, that has nothing to do

really with any well-thought point that the left has, that Democrats have over guns. The mental health issue is something that they almost never acknowledge. That's never a factor here. And they also don't, it's also true that this, this, uh, the idea that if you have a gun, that's the only thing that somehow makes you, makes you a threat, just as you were saying, as if we're not going to have violence, if you have, um, if you get rid of guns, I mean, the, the, the guy who just, I forget his name. He was just, um, it was another case of NPR headlines.

Unarmed black man shot 60 times by police. This black man, one was not unarmed. I forget where this was. It was very recent. He was dry. Do you remember it? Yeah. Was it in Ohio?

I'm trying to remember. I think. Yeah, that's right. It was an it was in Ohio. I can't remember his name. I wrote about it at the federal. He was not unarmed. He was not at police.

He shot his gun out the window. You can hear it. You can see it on video. You can hear it on the police body cam. But on top of that, he reached up to 85 miles per hour in a 35 mile per hour neighborhood, you know, and like the idea that he could have struck someone, a child walking home, you know, for at night. And then he jumped out of his car while it was still moving. You can't tell me that's not a dangerous, that becomes a weapon. And yet they're like, Oh, he was not unharmed. That was, that was excessive force. Well, maybe shooting him 60 times is, but he put everyone around him, himself, the police, any pedestrians that might've been around, he put all of their lives at risk. So this, this, this hang up on guns, I think I find it just, just one of those things that they think that it's politically potent. And maybe it is, I suppose it has had some potency. But no, that's that's a whole sham. All right. So before I let you go,

what's the solution? Like, what's what is the solution to, quote, liberal misery, the name of his book? I think it's here to stay, first of all, and as bad as it's gotten, I think it's only gotten worse after 2020 of all. And as bad as it's gotten, I think it's only gotten worse. After 2020, did Democrats become nicer people? No, they started prosecuting legally prosecuting their political opponents. That's what we're seeing with these January 6 hearings. But I will say at the end of my book, to the idea that there is something to be done about it, don't feed the animals. You saw in 2020 that giving them what they want, giving them the White want, giving them the

White House, giving them all of Congress, that in any way your life would get better. No, the opposite has happened. So do we have to coexist with them? Yes. Liberal misery is here to stay, but don't feed the animals. Eddie's last name is Scary, but it's spelled with two R's. He's a great writer. So happy to see you connect with The Federalist, another great organization. Eddie Scary, and the book is Liberal Misery. Always a pleasure. Please come back. Thanks, Megan.

Okay, next, another author is with us. His name is Jamie Kerchick. And he has written, I mean, he's like the only person I've ever read who's written for both like the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and the Atlantic, but also National Review, like all over the board. So the guy's not particularly ideological and he's got a fascinating story to tell you.

Jamie Kirchick is a columnist for Tablet Magazine and author of the New York Times bestseller Secret City, The Hidden History of Gay Washington. Jamie has collected and recounted in amazing detail the immense contributions and sometimes unjust and tragic outcomes of gay men and women serving in our federal government in the 1940s and onward. Jamie, welcome to the show. Thank you, Megan, for having me. Okay, so let, instead of me trying to describe it that way, you tell me, what is the book about? What are you trying to bring to light? Well, during this period that I write about, which is really the Cold War, or really World War II until the end of the Cold War, there was no greater secret in Washington or American politics that was more dangerous or more destructive to a political career than being gay. And so I figured that this would make a fascinating subject for a book and just exploring all the many ways in which homosexuality impacted American politics, the scandals, the personalities, how the presidents dealt with it. And that's what I've spent the past several years researching and writing. Well, it's fascinating because if you

were born in the last 20 years, this may be new information to you, right? I mean, I was born in 1970. So I grew up in a time when if you were a gay man, you were probably closeted for most of your teenage existence and then ideally found the strength to come out. But, you know, I remember the time when it was like that it was not OK to be gay. And and if you go back 20, 30 years prior to my birth, it was really not OK to be gay. And to the point where like murders and I mean, other really bad things would happen. In fact, from The New York Times review of the of the book, it reads, this book is also a whodunit to rival anything by Agatha Christie. How did so many promising men in government wind up dead before their time

by such variously violent means? How did they? I mean, and why did they? Well, suicide, unfortunately, was a leading reason, particularly in the 1950s when there was something called the Lavender Scare. We're all familiar with the Red Scare, which was the purge of real or suspected communists and leftists in the federal scare. We're all familiar with the red scare, which was the purge of real or

suspected communists and leftists in the federal government. There was a gay purge as well, as many if not more people were purged from the government just for if they were suspected of being gay. And that resulted in a fair number of suicides. There were also murders in the sense that, you know, in this era of time, if you were a gay man and you were looking for sex, it would often be in dangerous places, public parks, public bathrooms. This was an era when homosexuality was criminalized. Right. And so when you criminalize something, if you look at prohibition, what happens? It's driven underground into a criminal element. And you would see a fair number of gay men would be taken advantage of and killed in this way. So yes, there's a vast human toll to the societal homophobia that reigned really for most of the 20th century. And it's something that I document in the book. How did we get so puritanical? You know, I just got back from a vacation in Italy

and there was a fair amount of time, obviously talking about Michelangelo and Da Vinci, both of whom were believed to be closeted, but, you know, died late in life without ever having taken a wife and so on. Michelangelo was like 90-something. Anyway, so there was at least a look the other way attitude back then. This is the 1500s. Here we are in the 1900s, and so puritanical. So what happened? Well, so I started the book at World War II for a specific reason, which is leading up to that period, homosexuality was a sin. And that actually answers the main part of your question, why are we puritanical? Well, this was a country founded by Puritans, right? By very religious people. And homosexuality is condemned in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

And so that's where a lot of this comes from. But homosexuality was also viewed as a mental illness. And it was also a crime in every state. And many people were arrested. But the reason why I started the book around World War II and why I think it made for a rich subject to study is that around World War II is when homosexuality becomes securitized, by which I mean the United States is becoming a global superpower. It's entering this world war. It's building a national security bureaucracy, and it needs to manage secrets, which is a part of running a superpower and having a national security state. And it's believed that gay people will be more susceptible to blackmail, because they have this terrible secret that they will do anything to protect,

right? So if there's a gay government official, the fear is that he could be easily blackmailed by the Soviet Union or the Nazis or whomever we happen to be fighting at that time. And that is when this sort of obsession with gays and government and gays in politics really takes off. It's with the rise of the national security state. And I don't think it's a coincidence that I decided to end my book in 1995, which is after the Cold War ends. And that's the year when Bill Clinton lifted the ban on gay people receiving security clearances. You could not get a security clearance if you were gay until 1995. Wow. I think about that. I mean, given the position that Rick Grinnell held under the Trump administration, you know, and it's crazy how far we've come.

There's also some fun, interesting stories about names people will know in the book, like Gore Vidal going to the White House with Tennessee Williams. I didn't know, first of all, that Gore Vidal had any sort of a relationship to Jackie Kennedy. Oh, yeah, they were related by by I'm forgetting. I think it was his stepmother. Yeah, I think you say a stepfather. He shared a step stepfather with her. And he, of course, you know, was well worth your time if you haven't seen any of the documentation of them. But he tells a story about when he went to see JFK with Tennessee. Well, yeah, they weren't at the White House was actually in Palm Beach, I believe. And it was in 1960. And he's preparing to run for president.

And he and Tennessee Williams are sort of walking behind John F. Kennedy on the beach. And they're sort of walking behind John F. Kennedy on the beach, and they're sort of admiring his posterior. And Gore Vidal tells this to Kennedy afterwards. And Kennedy's reaction is he's rather flattered, and he says, that's exciting, which I think tells you something about him as a man, because you have to understand this is 1960. Most straight men, if they were told this by a gay man, would not respond so charitably or humorously. And I think it says something about Kennedy. And, you know, he's one of his, actually his best friend, Jack Kennedy's best friend was a man named Lem Billings, who was a gay man. They met at Choate in high school, the very fancy prep school.

And, you know, Lem came out to him when they were teenagers, and it had no bearing on their friendship. I mean, they were best friends for, you know, their entire lives. And they also, and Jackie Kennedy also sort of cultivated some gay friends. So there's kind of a small circle of gay men around the Kennedys. I also think Jack Kennedy, you know, he had his own sexual secrets that he had to protect, obviously. We now know about them, but at the time, of course, the media, you know, kept all this secret. And so I imagine that Kennedy felt, you know, when he's thinking about gay people, you know, there but for the grace of God go I, right? I mean, they both have sexual secrets to keep.

And I think that maybe made him relate more to gay men or perhaps have to be more sympathetic to their plight. So, yeah, you write in the book, Vidal brought along his friend, Tennessee Williams, as Kennedy sauntered in front of them. Williams turned to Vidal and gaped. Look at that ass. The response. You can't cruise our next president, Vidal replied with mock who we didn't know about?

You know, like who was the most who's was the most interesting story to you? I'd say there are two stories and they're both, I could say, scoops or sort of things that I discovered. One is a story of a man named Bob Waldron, who was around my age. He was in his mid 30s from Texas, and he worked for LBJ, for Lyndon Baines Johnson, when he was the Senate Majority Leader and then as Vice President as an aide, and he would travel with him across the country and around the world. And then in the weeks after the Kennedy assassination, Waldron was preparing to join the White House staff when there was an investigation, because he had to go through a background check, obviously, if you're going to

join the White House staff. And this was conducted by the Civil Service Commission, which did these sorts of procedures. And they discovered that Waldron was gay. And like that, he was gone. He was kicked out. His White House pass was revoked. He was fired. And I was able to obtain the Civil Service Commission report of their investigation, as well as an FBI investigation that they also did into Waldron. And it was about a thousand pages of documents that they had to go through, but it told the story in a really compelling and just tragically sad way. And this was a man who was very close to LBJ. And then he was gone in an instant. And it just showed you the power, again, that homosexuality had in the public imagination that someone's entire life and career could be destroyed over it.

And I would say the other most fascinating story was what almost was a scandal. It didn't become a scandal. But in the summer of 1980, just a couple of weeks before Ronald Reagan was nominated to be president, there were a group of sort of liberal to moderate Republicans who didn't like Reagan because he was a conservative. And they basically collected these sorts of scattered accusations from various people, alleging that Reagan was being controlled by a right-wing anti-communist homosexual cabal. And it sounds kind of crazy, but you have to remember, you know, in 1967, when Reagan was governor, he did fire two men on his staff who were accused of being gay,

and this became public. It was really sort of the first scandal of Reagan's political career. So he had this sort of scandal lurking in the background, and this basically came back when these Republicans collected these accusations, and they actually brought them to Ben Bradley, the legendary editor of the Washington Post. And Bradley took it quite seriously a story about it because they discovered that, yes, there were a couple of gay men who worked for Reagan, but there was no nefarious conspiracy going on. But it does show you, I think, again, the power of these accusations that they could wield. And I found all this information in Ben Bradley's papers, in his paper collection, which is at the University of Texas. There's just a folder in a box that I came across one day doing my research, and all the notes from the various reporters and the documentation was in that folder.

It's very witch-hunty. I mean, today we do different kinds of witch hunts for people. Like, do you have secret implicit bias someplace in your head? We'll find you. But this feels very witch hunty to speaking of, you know, the way the narrative goes today. I wanted to ask you about some of the reaction to the book. Lots of positive reaction from both the left and the right. Hugh Hewitt said literally every page is a revelation to me.

But then you've got reviews like The Washington Post that felt it was too white. It's and too focused on men. It's just a book it was too white. And too focused on men. It's just a book about gay men. You focus too much on men. Well, it's a gay book. It's a book about gay people. It's about gay men and women. But I'll just say, look, I was writing a book about Cold War Washington.

And the reality is, is that people who had power, and that's what I'm writing about. I'm writing about political power. I'm not writing about the local community of Washington, D.C. I'm writing about. I'm writing about political power. I'm not writing about the local community of Washington, DC. I'm writing about the federal government, with Congress, Senate, the executive branch, the presidency, the defense department. The vast majority of people who held political power in our country in this period were white men. There were very few black people, very few women in any positions of seniority in Washington. Of course.

I think our country would have been a much better place if we had more women and people of color in positions of power in the 20th century. But that's not what our history shows. That's not what the facts are. It's not what the facts are. So I was writing about facts. I'm a journalist and I'm a historian. I'm concerned with facts about the way things were, not how we perhaps wanted them to be. Of course, the world that I wanted in the 20th century would have been much nicer to gay people, a more hospitable place for them.

But that's not that's not the reality. It's just like the Post writes, unlike earlier secret cities, Kirchick's says next to nothing about black Washington. Two black people, it goes on to say, are given a combined total of 17 pages. But that's not enough. They think you should. I mean, it's just the constant, constant focus on identity. And it's like it, like, remember Lin-Manuel Miranda was going through this on Hamilton. Like, no, you know, you gave lots of black actors wonderful roles, but you didn't quite demonize America. It's just like you can't win, so you've just got to do your thing, which you've been doing. As I was saying in the intro, you've written for magazines and newspapers across the ideological spectrum. New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal. Oh, this is the other example I was saying. Very few people have written for both The Atlantic

and The Spectator. I don't think I've ever seen that on somebody's bio. So to your credit, you try to check some of that nonsense and just stay factual. Yeah, I'm sort of ideologically centrist, I guess, in the center. And I, as a writer and a journalist, I'm curious about the world. I want to discover new things. That's what I did with this book. And that's why I try to speak to audiences of various ideological hues, people on the right, people in the center. And I don't think you're going to understand much about the world if you cloister yourself in one sort of ideological box. So as long as I can continue doing it, I will continue

writing for publications on the right, on the left, in the center, whoever will publish me. Well, it's great. You'll learn something historically and it reads like a mystery. I agree with that assessment. Jamie, thank you so much. Well, this just in, Representative Jayapal coming out and saying what happened to her with a stalker in Seattle. It's President Trump's fault that he unleashed, he mobilized all of that violence and white supremacy using the tools of the federal government, bans on Muslims, bans on trans folks, etc. And that is what led to this lunatic being outside of her house, threatening her. So she'll take similar responsibility, I'm sure, for what happened to Brett Kavanaugh with that guy showing up to kill him. I'm sure she's about to release the statement saying, I take it all back. That was irresponsible and I should have been more careful in my rhetoric. I should never have endangered a

sitting Supreme Court. Oh, well, wait, it's just it never ends. Right. We're going to have much more on that. And then tomorrow we're going to get into the news that just broke on Megan and Harry. Do you believe these two had the nerve to go to the United Nations and try to lecture us all on the United States at rolling back constitutional rights and in our global assault on democracy? Can you just shut up and be a prince? Just shut up. Shut up and raise your little prince. Start lamenting, continue lamenting the lack of title that you wanted for little junior. I liked him better when he was just helping the veterans. What does he know? He's been in the United States a year. Okay. Before that, he was running around in his Halloween costume with a swastika on the arm.

Now he wants to lecture us about global assaults and democracy. Sit down. OK, so there's my preview for what you'll hear tomorrow. In the meantime, don't forget, later this week, we're going to have our friends from the Ruthless podcast back on. Plus, we're going to have one of the most notorious cyber criminals ever who switched sides and is now helping the FBI and others catch the bad guys. Brett Johnson, he's going to be here. So don't forget to download The Megyn Kelly Show on Apple, Pandora, Spotify and Stitcher.

And yes, I do read the reviews. You who wrote wink wink to me on Apple comments, I'm reading them. I'm telling you, I really do read them. So if you got something to say to me, you can go there and post a review. Also go to youtube.com slash Megyn Kelly, where we get tons of downloads and we really appreciate it. Thank you all for listening and for watching. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.