The Megyn Kelly Show - Media Malpractice Covering Biden and Trump, and Embarrassing Immigration Spin, with Emily Jashinsky and Eliana Johnson | Ep. 620

Episode Date: September 5, 2023

Megyn Kelly is joined by Emily Jashinsky, Federalist editor, and Eliana Johnson, co-host of the Ink-Stained Wretches podcast, to talk about whether the Ron DeSantis campaign is in turmoil after a leaked donor call, DeSantis' declining poll numbers, if Trump might wrap up the nomination in January, Trump over-performing Biden in a new poll, a massive number of Americans (including most Democrats) saying Biden is too old to run for re-election, how Trump is a more favorable candidate because of the indictments, latest details about potential then-VP Biden corruption, a recent embarrassing podcast performance by The Washington Post's Philip Bump, Bump and others in the corporate press refusing to be even remotely curious about Hunter and Joe Biden corruption, the media’s hypocrisy when it comes to covering Sen. Mitch McConnell's health issues but ignoring the health issues of Sen. John Fetterman and Sen. Dianne Feinstein for so long, the latest terrible immigration numbers and Biden administration spin, consequences for blue states of massive influx of illegal immigrants, that Canadian shop teacher with the giant fake breasts showing up this year without them, and more.Jashinsky: https://thefederalist.com/author/emilyjashinsky/Johnson: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ink-stained-wretches/id1573974244Follow 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. It's September. We're back. We're back at our home base and things are looking a little different here at the show. For our listening audience, go check it out at youtube.com slash Megyn Kelly. Super excited to be bringing you the program from our new studio. Gone red. We've leaned into our devil may care media red. I like it because you know what? Nobody else is really using red as their background. And I'm kind of sick of the damn cityscape. The blue cityscape is everywhere. Have you seen that? Like it's literally the background of every Fox News show, half the CNN and MSNBC shows,

and you'll see sort of the larger studio as we zoom out and we'll take you through it. But anyway, super excited, love it, and hope you either love it or get used to it soon. Okay. In the meantime, let's get to the news. President Biden saying that he's vacationing so much because he just, he's homeless. You see, he can't go home is really what he said as more and more Americans, including a majority of Democrats say this guy's too old to run for office again. He's too old here for the full show. The EJs are back. Emily Jashinsky is culture editor at the Federalist and host of Federalist Radio Hour. And Eliana Johnson is editor in chief at the Washington Free Beacon and co-host of the Ink Stained Wretches podcast.

Ladies, welcome back to the show. Thanks, Megan. I'm so glad that I didn't have a cityscape behind me. I'm sick of it. Sick of it. It's like it was the background for every Fox news show I ever hosted. It's a background for every Fox news show still on. And I just, we kind of phoned it in when we launched the podcast. It was like, all right, let's just get something decent. And, uh, we're

not a cable show. We're not trying to be, we're happy about the fact that we're not. Um, you know, I was just talking with a friend of mine last night about how frustrating it is watching cable news, which I don't really do a lot of these days, but like the conversations are so surface level. They're so meaningless. You can't get to anything like in this format, you and I can sit here. I can watch you formulate the thought. I can see you wrestle with your own, you know, the counter arguments and come to a conclusion. We can, there's time for everything to evolve. And it's one of the beauties of the medium. Anyway, I know you know this because you're in it as well on your own and with me. Okay. Let's talk about Joe Biden because my God, the latest numbers, there's a Washington, a wall street journal poll

out today. Um, actually let's do the GO side first, and then we'll get to Biden and how old he is and how two-thirds of Democrats don't want him. Two-thirds of Democrats saying he's too old to run. We'll get to that in one second. But I want to start with what appears to be a five-alarm fire for Governor Ron DeSantis, not to mention the rest of the GOP field, anyone not named Trump. Wall Street Journal poll coming out released over the weekend shows that Trump is the top choice for nearly 60% of Republican voters. He's got 59% of their support. 59% of them support Trump. 13% supporting DeSantis. 13. Trump is up 11 points since April. DeSantis went from 24% to 13% in that same time frame. He's hemorrhaging the numbers and Trump is dominating in the numbers. And I ask you whether this is, is this surmountable? Because DeSantis' own super PAC was in the news, the guy who runs it,

Jeff Rowe, the strategist, speaking to rich donors, you know, a few days ago, a week ago even, saying it's time. It's go time. We need $50 million and we need it right now or he's going to lose. And that the Republican Party is going to lose the general election if Trump's the nominee. Again, this is DeSantis' guy. But he went through the states saying it's Biden's going to beat Donald Trump in these critical swing states. And DeSantis needs this money immediately. Five million dollars a month just to sustain Iowa. And we need it within the next 60 days because he needs to beat Donald Trump in that time frame in two months. And he needs to separate from his other rivals right now. So let's start with that, Emily, on the state of the race for DeSantis and Trump on the GOP side. Yeah, it's really interesting because in campaign world, the number one thing you want to avoid is

the stench of backsliding. You absolutely if your numbers start going down after being on an upward trajectory, which DeSantis's were before he started running, basically, the stench of failure is the one thing that turns off donors and it turns off voters. If we think back to 2012, when we had that carousel of candidates popping in and out in the Republican primary, what was helpful to a lot of them is getting these sugar highs. And the sugar highs were helped along by the fact that they had, you know, not big baselines. So they could jump up really quickly, really easily. And that's what made it, you know, pretty simple for them to get their names out there, sort of maybe in a Vivek type way. But with DeSantis, it's sort

of the opposite problem here. And so that's going to make fundraising a really uphill battle. It's going to make convincing donors a really uphill battle. And it just honestly, the fact of the matter is it looks like Republican voters are consolidating around Trump because he's been hit with all of these indictments. He might not be their favorite guy in the world, but they're consolidating around him now. And the DeSantis strategy to put all of the eggs in the Iowa basket is making a potential comeback even more difficult because he's still down like 25 points in Iowa. And even if you won Iowa, if you're down that big nationally, you're going to make it that much harder in New Hampshire and South Carolina. I mean, Eliana, these are terrible numbers, not just for DeSantis. I don't

mean to pick on him, but for the rest of the GOP field, anyone not named Trump who's running for president. These are terrible numbers. DeSantis has not been able to get anything going. Notwithstanding several relaunches, the skinning of his campaign staff trying to save money, the super rich super PAC that's backing him trying to generate interest with the bus campaign in Iowa and the nonstop door knocking. They can't, the numbers persistently going in the wrong direction for him. The Wall Street Journal poll contained a lot of really interesting information. The first piece of interesting information is that it was conducted in part by Trump's pollster, which I think we should keep in mind because that factors into the way questions are formulated. And it may be a little bit more

favorable to Donald Trump than it otherwise would have been. But nonetheless, Trump, of course, it's obvious, remains in the commanding position to win this nomination right now. DeSantis, his position has collapsed. And Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy are right on his heels, which is not where he wanted to be. And the DeSantis campaign has been plagued by the series of leaks from his super PAC. You mentioned Jeff Rowe, the DeSantis consultant for running the super PAC by name. You know, consultants are supposed to exist in the background. Do you know any of the other consultants running the super PACs or the campaigns? Are they names in the news in the way that Jeff Rowe is?

I think that's a bad sign for the DeSantis campaign. And then there's the content of what he said. He, on the eve of the first debate, told donors that super PAC has already spent over $130 million. He told those donors, I need $50 million from you guys now. The good news is that we have the money. The bad news is that it's all in your pockets. So for $130 million, plus the 50 he's asking for, that's $180 million. And they don't have a whole lot to show for it. Granted, DeSantis has been hit by an enormous amount of attack ads from Trump that the likes of Nikki Haley and particularly Vivek Ramaswamy have not been the subject of. But the second thing I would say was Jeff Rowe also said all of the stories you've seen from Vivek Ramaswamy, they came from us.

And it's just sort of a gross thing to say. And if I were DeSantis, it's not the type of thing that you want your guy out there making headlines for. You want to be the headline. You want to be making news. You want to be reaching voters. You don't want your consultant out there making headlines that way. And I think it's just a symptom of a camp of it's a symptom of the issues the campaign is having more broadly. Right. Definitely reveals that DeSantis, that his team sees Ramaswamy as a serious threat, and they should because Ramaswamy's numbers are going up and DeSantis's aren't. The just a little more color on the DeSantis problems in New Hampshire now. The latest poll, this is via

the messenger. Trump currently holds 47% support. Haley and Ron DeSantis are behind at 10% each. So they're tied for second place at 10%. As recently as June in New Hampshire, DeSantis had 37%. My God, what? I mean, I haven't been following the cases or the states, you know, that closely to realize he had that big an implosion in the past. What? I mean, it's three months now. He's gone from nearly 40% to 10% tied for second. And Trump is now at 47. This already today has got people saying it's over, Emily. I mean, there are a lot of people in Republican politics who believe it's over. And everything from this point to the actual voting that begins with Iowa in January is window dressing. Yeah, that's also really interesting because my boss, Molly Hemingway, made that point on Special Report last night.

And Mark Thiessen responded by saying, well, listen, the Trump consolidation is different in the earlier states. And it's true, you know, his numbers are lower in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina than they are nationally. But that trend is going completely in Trump's direction. And, you know, Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis, you know, to in fairness to them, they have not been slapped with four indictments. But because that's obviously a huge advantage for Donald Trump. But the direction that the number is amazing. I mean, just an amazing sentence that you just uttered. It's just like, right.

Every once in a while, you got to stop and remind yourself that that's incredible. But keep going. And in some ways, enviable. Like the other candidates are like, hey, hit me with an indictment. Like we can have some fun. I did bad stuff. Money. Why are you paying attention to

my bad stuff? Alleged bad stuff, we should say. But yes, it's almost enviable from the other candidates because the trend has been the opposite of what a lot of people wanted to see. And my understanding is that there's the frustration in DeSantis' world is that there's maybe an insulation, that the candidate is sort of insulated from maybe fair criticisms and is listening to all of the wrong people. Because about a month ago, we were talking about how the head of his campaign had been replaced. She was moved into another position, so not fired altogether. But he had been in the race for about two months, had burned through a ton of cash, and was replacing the person at the top of his campaign a month later. And the cash problem is arguably worse. And the leadership problem is clearly,

clearly still just as bad. So it's going in the wrong direction, not just numbers wise, but it's going in the wrong direction in terms of what the campaign looks like, too. So it's not as though there are signs of hope on the horizon. If anything, it looks like things just can't be turned around right now. Well, think about that. If what if what the super PAC guy, Jeff Rowe, says is true, Eliana, and they have 60 days in their estimation and they're the ones who have the deep pockets. It's not the DeSantis campaign that has them. It's the super PAC.

And he's not supposed to be coordinating with super PAC, but they are funding these buses that Ron DeSantis is riding around Iowa and going door to door and so on. So there's, it's not that there's coordination. It's just that there's definitely support that he needs. So if they're saying they've got 60 days or effectively he's done if 60 days for him to surpass Donald Trump, I mean, are you kidding? Right? Like that's, he said that right before the first presidential debate, which was in late August, I think it was on the 23rd. So that would bring us to October 23rd. The second the third debate should be happening by then. What's going to change it? What's what could I like? I could see an argument that over the next 18 months, DeSantis could edge up.

I mean, we don't have that long, but let's say a year as the Trump trials potentially get underway. Nothing's going to happen in this. What's what's even scheduled for the next 60 days that could completely change the game here? There are two more presidential debates that you have to think they're looking at, one at the end of September and one at the end of October that they have to be eyeing. But those are those are just two more inflection points. And we didn't see the numbers move enough in DeSantis' direction after the first presidential debate, I think, to make their case. What's not clear to me is how they're laying out. What exactly are they going to do with the money that's going to move the numbers in the way they need? And this poll also showed that the indictments have,

Republican voters say they're more likely to support Donald Trump, given the indictments, rather than less, which is also concerning. I think what Republican voters aren't quite realizing is that Trump is free to be out in camp and to campaign now. But by the time he secures the nomination a year from now, he's going to be tied up in court dealing with these things and be unable to campaign. And in 2020, we had Donald Trump out campaigning and Joe Biden in his basement. This time around, it may be, you know, Joe Biden campaigning with a walker and Donald Trump not in his basement, but in the courtroom. And I'm not sure that's a reality that Republican voters have fully metabolized. I mean, you've got the Fox business debate at the end of September. Then you have the third presidential debate in Alabama at the end of October. And we don't know whether Trump is going to be it.

We know he's not going to the Fox business debate. He said that. So what happened was he tweeted out or truth out on his social network. No more debates. I'm not doing any debates. Then NBC news found him and said, no, no debates. And someone close to Trump was cited in NBC news reports saying not definitely not the first two, but left the door open to ones that may come after.

But this now really does make you question how many debates are there going to be? Because if this like if we get to Iowa and Trump wins it by, you know, 25 points or what, I don't even like if he runs away with Iowa and then New Hampshire comes right after and he runs away with it's done like Super Tuesday in March. Are we really going to be looking at like it's done, Emily? So I just it's all happening a lot faster than I expected it to than maybe the DeSantis campaign expected it to. It's just the momentum behind Trump that very much feels unstoppable. Yeah. And there's one thing in my mind that could prolong this, and it's the sort of silver lining for DeSantis potentially. And maybe there's an argument that Nikki Haley or Vivek sees this as

something that could happen to them as well. But if you look at those numbers in Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Trump is not over the 50% hurdle, which is important because it calls to mind how Biden ended up winning, for instance, South Carolina and some of those early states back in 2020, which is that the establishment despised kind of Bernie Sanders, actually. In fact, it was Bernie Sanders so much that they said, Pete, Amy, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, you're getting out of the race. This is important enough that you need to sacrifice and rally behind Joe Biden so that Bernie Sanders can be wiped off the face of the electoral earth at this point. And that is potentially something that a Ron DeSantis or a

Nikki Haley can maybe bank on going into Iowa and South Carolina if they can say, listen, we pull all of our stuff together. This is an emergency situation. Even if you're okay with Donald Trump being president, he's not your first choice. I'm talking of like what donors might see or other people in high profile positions. It doesn't matter because he's going to be busy fighting these lawsuits, fighting these charges in court. And that's not good for the Republican Party period because you will lose. You won't have the opportunity to go face to face with Joe Biden. He's going to be bogged down by all these legal hurdles. Let's consolidate. So that option potentially still does exist for a DeSantis or a Haley. And that's something they can be banking on going into

this. But they would really have to be coordinated, organized and ready to compromise on that question. And I see zero will among them to do that in the way that the Democrats did back in 2020. Yeah, it doesn't seem like the Republican Party has any control over its people the way the Democratic Party does, right? Like the Republicans are, I think in general, are just more independent minded and they don't march to the beat of dear leader. And the Democrats have this iron grip. I mean, to the point where their top operatives are giving debate questions out to their candidates, as we now know. Hello, Donna Brazil, looking at you, you lied to my face. You denied it, but I knew you did it. You remember. Okay, so we'll see what happens on the GOP side.

But yes, if that's the only possible way, it seems at this point is for the other candidates to get behind one candidate, the non-Trump alternative, and put all their might behind him. I mean, good luck. Take it up with Vivek Ramaswamy, who does not seem in a mind to get behind anybody other than Trump and maybe himself. I don't know. By the way, this same article is saying this Jeff Rowe is saying Trump is a, quote, surefire loser who cannot win the four states that he says this race will come down to Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. And he said to the donors, we have Senate races there that also cannot overcome Trump on the ballot. I mean, those are the states, Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

He's not raising bad questions, Eliana. I mean, this is really the question for GOP voters right now, as much as they love Trump. And sure, he's well on his way to becoming the nominee, but can he get over the hump in those critical states when he's against, yes, an unpopular guy? Is he as unpopular as Hillary Clinton was, Joe Biden? You know, people are upset about his age, but do they loathe him as much as they loathed Hillary Clinton? And can Republican voters take that for granted? A couple of things on that, Megan. You know, it's great for Jeff Rowe to make that case. It would be even better for Governor Ron DeSantis to be out on the campaign

trail and on a debate stage making that case against Donald Trump. If you want to win, Republicans, if you want to win, you have to support somebody other than Donald Trump, who sandbagged Republican senatorial prospects in Georgia, who lost the 2020 election, who lost the popular vote in 2020, and so on and so forth. They need to be out there making that case. The other thing I would say is that in the polls and in this Wall Street Journal poll, their poll on the general election moving away from what it shows in the Republican primary was really interesting. It actually showed Trump in a stronger position going into the 2024 general election than in the 2020 general election. And by an 11 point margin, more voters see Trump rather than Biden as having a record of accomplishment as president. And, well, that's 51 to 40. And by an eight point margin, more voters said Trump has a vision for the future.

So it is if this is a vote on personality, Biden wins. More people view him as likable. But if it's about accomplishment and vision, voters support vote on personality. Biden wins. More people view him as likable. But if it's about accomplishment and vision, voters support Trump on that. So in a general election, I think it's hard. You know, Barack Obama is there warning Joe Biden and Democrats that they need to take the prospect of a Trump victory very, very seriously. Biden and the Democrats are angling for a Trump nomination. That's why they're hitting him with indictment after indictment. They know it helps his prospects,

but it is very possible that he will win reelection. Republicans need to be making the case that he's a surefire loser if they want to defeat him. I didn't hear that a lot on the stage in the first debate. I don't know about you guys. No, they didn't. I mean, the Trump numbers, Trump v. Biden, and let's talk about that piece of the journal. There was another journal poll on that piece of it, general election poll. The numbers are interesting to me because, of course, in 2016, there really was a secret Trump vote that was not accounted for in the polls. I mean, just go back and look at Google general election polls 2016 and you'll see everybody had it wrong. I mean, it was like Trafalgar had it right and nobody else had it right. Everybody was embarrassed. They completely expected Hillary Clinton to win.

I think the Washington Post or the New York Times said she had a 98% chance of winning that night as we went into the, you know, counting the numbers. And of course we know that's not what happened. She lost and Donald Trump won. And there was a secret Trump vote of people who were afraid to tell pollsters or speak publicly about their support for this person who was very controversial and who is in the news every day from every publication saying he was a racist and a misogynist and a bigot and all the terrible things. I think they've come out. They've come out of the closet now because there was not a secret Trump vote factor in

the 2020 presidential election. And it's less stigmatizing, I think, in today's day and age to say you like Trump. You know, they know they've seen the numbers. Half the country voted for Trump. You know, it's really not that controversial. Virtually all Republicans voted for Trump back in 2017. And I didn't get or 20. Sorry, 2020. He didn't get the, you know, 17000 that he needed to put him over the top. But, you know, the point is, it's not as bad to say it. So I don't know about these polls, whether there's a hidden Trump vote or not, because some people say the numbers for Trump are even more inflated and polls like the journal

are showing. The journal poll that you just referenced shows now that, stand by, the negative views of Biden's age and performance in office help explain why only 39% of voters have a favorable view of him. He's got just a 42% job approval. He's seen favorably by just 39%, 57% disapprove of him. Uh, 73% of voters, uh, say they feel Biden is too old to seek a second term. That's unbelievable. 73% two thirds of Democrats say he's too old to run again. That's amazing. Only 47% of voters say that Trump who's 77 years old, he's only three and a half years behind Biden is too old to run again. So the age problem is not being held against Trump. I would say you say that Trump, who's 77 years old, he's only three and a half years behind Biden,

is too old to run again. So the age problem is not being held against Trump. I would say, you guys, this is proof that it's not an ageism problem. The voters are not ableist. They're not ageist. They're taking people on a case by case basis and they see a vibrant man in Trump and they see a near corpse. Forgive me, but it's true in Joe Biden, Emily. I think that's a great point. I hadn't even thought about it that way, because that is the line the White House is going to use more and more. But there's just an obvious difference between people. And we've all seen this in our own personal lives. One person who's 85, one person who's even 90 could be dramatically different than somebody who's 70 or somebody who's 60. I mean, these things are just a case by case basis. And another really interesting point that you also just raised,

I think, is the secret Trump voter, perhaps the decline of the secret Trump voter. Another thing Republicans in Washington, D.C. are really worried about is that you just have Trump voters who don't even believe their votes are counted. They believe that, for instance, the situation in some of these key swing states is going to be rigged by vote counters. So what's the point in going out to vote if you're so disenchanted and disillusioned by the process and distrustful of the process? You could actually lose key segments of Trump votes in states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania because people are just like, what the hell, my vote's not going to count. So why do I show up anyway? But then at the same time, you have this huge problem for Joe Biden, especially with young voters. And I think it's just shameful, shameful to have numbers like that

and not debate. I get that incumbent presidents don't debate. It's not the norm. But to have numbers like that saying the country, even your own party thinks you're too old, thinks that you should debate, thinks that they should have another option on the table. Basically, they're just opening this giant hole for Joe Manchin to step into and play like Ross Perot spoiler, which is becoming a bigger possibility every single week, and especially the more that Biden's numbers look like this. It's so true. It's such a good point. Two thirds of his own party don't want him, Eliana, and he refuses to even debate the up and coming challengers. You know, I mean, I realize that neither side is particularly happy with the prospect of a Trump Biden rematch,

but Trump, he does have huge numbers within his own party, obviously, and we just went through some of them. And yet Joe Biden has got his fingers in his ears and his eyes closed and pretending there is no RFKJ. There's no Joe Manchin. There's no Marianne Williamson. Well, there's really there isn't a Marianne Williamson. But anyway, he's not going to I mean, he's not going to pay any attention to any up and comers. I do think there's a broad concern in the Democratic Party that Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump once. Barack Obama dissuaded him from running in 2016 and Hillary Clinton lost to Trump. Biden then ran in 2020 and beat Trump. And I think Biden thinks he's the only Harris can do it. And I don't think the Democratic Party thinks Kamala Harris can do it. And I think that's why you see the reluctance from Biden to cede the stage and open a primary. I think Democrats really worry that they don't have somebody ready to go on the sidelines, partially because there would be deference to Kamala Harris. They feel pressure to defer to her as the vice president, know that she would lose. But I do think that Biden Biden is selling himself as the only person who can defeat Trump and and Barack Obama.

The only person who could make him leave exit stage left is Barack Obama intervening and telling him, you know, I'm going to come out and say you got to go publicly unless you do it privately. We'll arrange for a graceful exit and everyone will celebrate you and your record. And you know, we'll arrange in the background for somebody to become the nominee. But I do think that his record of having defeated Trump once is is what he's running on this time. That and the indictments, right? having defeated Trump once is, uh, is what he's running on this time. That and the indictments, right? It's you pointed it out a second ago that, um,

the Republican voters don't care at all about the indictments. The Democrats are banking on them. And if he, if Trump gets to the general, the numbers are as follows. This is again from the wall street journal poll, more than 60% of Republican primary voters said the indictments are politically motivated and without merit. Each one, some 78% say Trump's actions after the 2020 election were legitimate efforts to ensure an accurate vote. They are not moved by the January 6th stories, period. 16% said Trump had illegally tried to block Congress from certifying an election that he had lost. 16. And that consists of Adam Kinzinger, Liz Cheney. I mean, that's 60. The Republicans are not interested in that story. About half, 48 percent said the indictments made them more likely to vote for Trump in 2024. So you've got one out of two Republican voters saying if any, I don't believe the charges. I think they're total bullshit. He had every right to protest the election. And if anything, it's made me more likely to vote for him.

The country's in an existential crisis, and I'm going to vote for team sanity. I'm not voting for the people who have weaponized the DOJ. That's what they're saying. Some 16% say they're less likely. Again, I refer you to the 16% who say he tried to illegally block the congressional votes, the same people. So here is George Stephanopoulos over the weekend trying to wrestle with the fact that Republican voters don't care. They don't care and Republican candidates don't care. Vivek Ramaswamy was his guest. And here's the sought for. Your hand shot up pretty fast at the debate when you were asked whether you would vote for Donald Trump in the general election, even if he was a convicted felon. Can you just explain why you would vote for a convicted felon for president? I'm asking you why you made the promise.

Why do you think it's okay for a convicted felon to be president? And you find his actions at porn around January 6th. You said he was wrong to take the classified information. You said you would not do that yourself. You still say you would vote for him for president. That's what I don't get. Sir, that man is the front runner for the Republican nomination right now. He's a former president of the United States. He's leading you by 40 points, yet you still say you would vote for him despite what you say about his behavior. That's the question I am asking.

So your bottom line is that you would vote for a convicted felon because other people are voting for a convicted felon. So, Emily, that's we cut that just to show he can't he doesn't get it like the whole left half of the country. It's like we had a plan. And why? Like, why isn't why aren't you responding to our plan? He's terrible. He's a criminal. It's amazing to me that exchange from George Stephanopoulos has to happen on air between him and Vivek Ramaswamy and not voters like as you

were pointing out, like millions of voters around the country who could give you a very articulate explanation of why that is a much lower level priority for them, why Donald Trump's, you know, whatever he did after the election, January 6th, is a much lower level priority for them than the fact that it's being weaponized by his political opponents to potentially put him in prison, not to mention levels of inflation that create real material concerns for them, the health care situation that create real material concerns for them, all of these higher level priorities that voters have that make it perfectly easy for them to reconcile in their own head, voting for Donald Trump, even though he did

some bad stuff in their minds after the election and on January 6th, and maybe even since, versus voting for Joe Biden or Kamala Harris or back in 2016, Hillary Clinton. It is so easy for the average voter who is, you know, maybe they're not even Republicans, but independents or Democrats in certain states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania who pulled the lever for Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020. This makes perfect sense to them. They see what's happening with gender ideology. They see what's happening with maybe their pro-life voters and they see what the Biden administration wants to do with abortion. These things are totally not mutually exclusive to them.

And all you need to do is sit down with a voter to understand that Vivek Ramaswamy is hardly crazy for echoing the exact same thing on the debate stage. And I think it's been a problem for the other candidates, DeSantis included, who I thought was going to be really good about this, to make that case on the debate stage as well in a way that resonated with those millions of Republican voters. The 58 percent, as Emily's ticking off the issues, Eliana, 58 percent of voters in that same journal poll saying the economy's gotten worse over the past two years. Only 28 percent say it's gotten better. Nearly three in four, three out of four people say inflation is headed in the wrong direction. They don't give a shit about Trump's indictments. They don't. They think that it's been a political weaponization of the DOJ. They're not persuaded that he did anything wrong.

And to me, it almost reminds me, Eliana, of the the E. Jean Carroll moment at the CNN town hall where Caitlin Collins was like, you know, this woman, she's won this verdict against you in a civil courtroom for, you know, sexual battery. And the audience laughed. And then the CNN panel panel after the fact and a bunch of Democrat writers in the press were like, oh, they left at a rape victim. And we sat back here saying, hello, they don't believe she's a rape victim. Why is everyone just jumping to the conclusion that because she got a 51 percent verdict in New York, a civil verdict, which is just a 51 to 49 percent standard, is it more likely than not that he assaulted her in some way that everybody must believe? As a matter of fact, this woman was raped in a Bergdorf

Goodman. Right. It's like, hell, they don't get, they don't believe it. Try to understand it. Biden is vulnerable. Okay. The journal poll shows that by basically by a factor of, by a margin of two to one voters disapprove of his handling of inflation, of the border and of the economy. He's vulnerable. Um, Republicans need a candidate who can aggressively prosecute the case against him. Unfortunately, I don't think the voters for whom the indictments are not an issue at all. And I understand why they wouldn't care. They're not significant. Some of them are not significant to me. I understand that. But the election is not going to be won or lost based on those voters and their feelings. It's going to

be won or lost by a handful of independents. We saw that in 2020 and we saw that in 2016. Those swing voters need to hear from a candidate who's going to be able to aggressively prosecute the case against Biden, not somebody who's going to be able to aggressively prosecute the case against Biden, not somebody who's going to be tied up in court from Super Tuesday on. That is just the reality. This is not fair to Trump, but life is not fair. Like it or not, Trump has put himself in this position based on irresponsible behavior, irresponsible if not illegal. And if I were a savvy Republican who wanted to win, I probably wouldn't nominate him. You may think the indictments are a load of crap. Some of them I believe are, but nonetheless, I do not think he is going to be in a strong position to aggressively prosecute this case against somebody

who is the polls are showing us an incredibly weak and fragile and mentally deficient Democratic nominee. That's the thing. I mean, Jeff, Jeff Rowe, Emily may have been a little too honest and a little too needy in that presentation to the super donors for DeSantis, but he's not wrong about the four states and what it, what it's going to come down to. Now he may be wrong about his conclusion that Trump is a guaranteed loser there. Surefire is what he is, uh, how it appears in the piece, Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania,

Wisconsin. That is the relevant question. I mean, you know, Eliana is not wrong. Like, does this, does any of the discussion we had matter, right? Who, it's almost like, who cares what the Republicans think about the charges? We already know that they don't think much of the charges. The only real question is what are the independent voters in the key swing states think of the charges? And I have one point of disagreement with Eliana and then one point of disagreement with Jeff Rowe, which is that it's that it will come down to a handful of independents. Absolutely true. But then also what has to factor into that as a variable is turnout. And that's where Jeff Rowe looks at a state like Wisconsin and says, you know, Trump is going to drag the Republican ballot down in Wisconsin. And at the same time, I think that's, you know, sort of stale beltway conventional wisdom. That's my home state.

And I look at what Donald Trump did to electrify voters who may not have come out in a presidential election in 2016, and he lost the state in 2020, but still put up decent numbers. There are people, especially in the Rust Belt, that just plainly don't vote. And then you have to balance that with young people who are not going to come out and vote for Joe Biden unless the Democratic Party is really able to successfully message the election as, for instance, abortion in a way as a referendum on abortion policy that gets young voters, suburban people in those like suburban, let's just say suburban Milwaukee counties, the wow counties in Wisconsin to come out. And so I don't think it's surefire at all, because what you need is a candidate like Jeff Rose's own candidate who on a state level was able to bridge these two disparate factions of Republican voters, the hardcore MAGA base and the sort of suburban people who are averse to Trump but would vote Republican if given a different option.

That is almost an impossible balancing act to pull off. Ron DeSantis did it in Florida, which is why, exactly why, everyone thought he would be able to do it on the national stage. Strong economy, great policies there, was competent as a governor, and also sort of aggressively pushed back on ideological excesses of the left. And that Ron DeSantis has not been the one that's been campaigning. And none of the other candidates, none of the other candidates, with the possible exception of a vague, are showing that they can talk to those two disparate groups of Republican voters that are absolutely essential to have both turnout and suburban voters. And this was DeSantis's attempt. This was DeSantis's opportunity to prove that it could be done nationally. And he hasn't made that case. I just keep going back to that. He had 37% in New Hampshire in June. DeSantis did 37% in June.

It's now September 5th and he's at 10%. That is not the stuff of a winning campaign. According to his people, he's got 60 days to turn it around. We'll see. More with Emily and Eliana right after this quick break. Okay. So it turns out that, you know, we knew that, that Joe Biden had a pseudonym that he was using. And now it turns out that Hunter Biden's firm, like while he was sitting vice president, Hunter Biden's firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners, traded more than 1,000 emails with Joe Biden's office during his time as vice president. And hundreds, quoting here from the New York Post, remain hidden because the White House is asserting executive privilege.

861 emails referencing Rosemont Seneca sent or received by the office of the vice president. Again, while he was the sitting vice president, America First Legal got this trove of documents and requested them in the first place. That's Stephen Miller's legal organization. And now they've gotten some of them, but have been stiff armed on some one thousand of them citing executive privilege. So is this a story, Emily, or is this a nothing burger? This sounds like emails in the virtual garage by the virtual Corvette. I mean, again, it's like echoes of Hillary Clinton in an almost precise fashion. It's not a private server.

That's true. But if this is government business, which in all likelihood a lot of it is, that's why you can't just assert executive privilege willy nilly. You shouldn't be able to, because it's true that a lot of these emails could have been potentially were private back and forth. But now we have to have the American people just trusting that's the case, given everything they know about both Joe Biden and Hunter Biden's involvement in these foreign businesses. Joe Biden showing up at Cafe Milano with Hunter Biden's clients, going on the golf course with Hunter Biden's clients, allegedly profiting from Hunter Biden's own profits based on what Hunter told his daughter Naomi in that text message from the laptop about supporting pop, something to that extent. So we're asking the American people

simply to trust that executive privilege was invoked reasonably here. But again, there's this really serious question about whether government business was being handled respectfully, responsibly. And it's another drop in the bucket when it comes to the broader Hunter Biden question. But it is a serious one for Joe Biden, given what it did to, for instance, Hillary Clinton, that she seemed to be hiding things on private email accounts that wouldn't necessarily have been foiable or accessible to the public. So it's not it's not a perfect one to one. It's not perfect apples to apples.

But in principle, there's some some serious similarities that the public is going to want answers to. Yeah, Eliana, I mean, he's he looks like he and his the public is going to want answers to. Yeah. Eliana, I mean, he's, he looks like he and his cronies Hunter and his cronies were regularly emailing the office of the vice president to get invitations for various events, to find out guests, guest lists for various events, who exactly is going to be at this state dinner or that state luncheon involving, uh, countries like Turkey, uh, and the UK, the 2012 UK state dinner, the 2013 Turkey state luncheon, the 2014 France state dinner. The bio, the bios of the guests all shared with Rosemont Seneca employees.

Like what? This really was Hunter Biden's little breeding ground, his hunting ground for future liners of his own pockets is the way that this is coming across. Never mind Joe Biden's. And yet what you get repeatedly from the press, from Joe Biden's defenders is one, nothing to see here. And two, absolutely no proof that Joe Biden did anything wrong or benefited from any of these relationships in any way. These emails, and there were three pseudonymous email addresses that Joe Biden used to evade FOIA, are now the subject of a lawsuit brought by the Southwestern Legal Foundation, I believe. I hope I'm getting that right. And the White House is citing executive privilege over them, which means they were discussing something substantive that the

vice president's office wants to keep private. Given the salience of this issue now and the vice president's repeated denials about what he discussed with his son and when. I do think the public deserves to see these emails. And by the way, if the vice president, given the salience of this issue in the Biden presidency now, if he really, truly there was nothing to see here. If I were him, I would release all the emails and say, look, here are all the emails we traded while I was in office. Go through them and surely you'll see there was nothing of substance that we talked about. There was no impropriety. But it does raise the question, why was Hunter Biden simply not emailing Joe Biden's normal email address? He was emailing

these alias emails. Some of them were Gmail's and not government email addresses. We, of course, the public, of course, deserves to see these emails. It's a serious question as to why they're asserting executive privilege over them. And by now, we, of course, cannot believe the White House's denials about them as Biden himself and his aides have shown to have lied about this. They lied when they said that Hunter Biden had never taken money from China. They lied when they said that Joe Biden had never discussed business with his son. And what we know, you know, who knows if we'll ever find out that Joe Biden got money or was in on this.

But I think it's obvious that any father is interested in the success, including the financial success of his child, and that he allowed, knew and allowed his child to profit from his government position for his own success, and that Biden had an interest in that. We all want our kids to do well, and that that was wrong, given his position in government. If that's all we ever find out, it's like Trump, whether he broke the law or not, what he did was wrong. I don't have a problem passing judgment on Trump about it, even though there may not have been a law that was broken. And I don't have a problem passing judgment on Biden about it, whether or not there's a law that was broken. He abused his office and the trust the American people put in him.

Yeah, I agree with you. It's quite simple. You don't need to go to the did he get a five million dollar bribe from Burisma in order to condemn Joe Biden and what he's done, Emily. But that like I want to get into what happened with the the guy who runs the comedy cellar. His name is Noam Dorman. And he's amazing. I've known this guy for many years. I met Coleman Hughes through this guy right after I left NBC and I was still licking my wounds.

And the wonderful Coleman Hughes was at the comedy cellar. And so was I. And Noam introduced the two of us and a beautiful friendship was formed and everything was great. But I love this guy. So he's started his own podcast. And like a lot of people in the comedy world, he's a genius. You know, like people who are attracted to this world tend to be extremely clever, high level thinkers, usually somewhat damaged, but awesome. You know, that's just the way it is. And Noam's got his own podcast now and managed to get Philip Bump of the Washington Post to come on. Unbelievable that Philip Bump went on there and they had an extraordinary exchange. I don't know

if I have time. How many minutes do I have, Steve? I don't have enough time to get it in before this break. I'm going to play it. That's a good tease. I'll play it right when we come back from this break. Before we go, ladies, I'll show you the studio. Guys, can we take like a wider shot so I can show the ladies, I can show off what I've done here. Um, it's kind of fun. If you see it on the wider shot, you'll see that there's the face of a woman over here on my right. And I said to the studio designer, cause I love the look of it. I'm like, is that like some bitchy model who's going to come back and be like, I don't want my face on the Megan Kelly show. It's AI generated. So I don't need to worry about that. Oh, so she's a demon. She's, she's the demon. It goes perfectly with my devil

make hair media approach. So what do you think? It's kind of, you see, I've got like the cocktails over there in the corner. So when you guys come in person, we can sit, we can drink together. I got the lady. I got my devil may care red. What are you thinking? How are you liking it? I was actually going to say it looks like a, like a super cool cocktail lounge where you could just like drink and have amazing conversations for hours. It's like a perfect look, especially what you're talking about earlier in the show for a new media platform that really wants to like have nuance and open conversations. Yes. See, she gets me Eliana. You, you feel it. Are you,

are you picking up what I'm feeling it? Megan, you need a signature cocktail to go with the studio. True. I do. Abby, how did we not think of that? My God. We got to come in. She's a teetotaler. Oh, we got it. I'm not, we got to come in. We'll inaugurate it. Uh, it'll be great. Yes. OK, awesome. It's a date on the zoom out shot. You can see we've got a little golden M in the desk. Had to pay extra for that. Not going to lie. It was worth it. OK, stand by. We're going to get to that gnome doorman sought with Philip Bump. Wait until you hear this is like the most amazing expression of cluelessness from somebody who's running political coverage.

I mean, he's like at the forefront of political coverage for one of our major publications, the Washington Post. This is living proof of why you don't trust the mainstream media. We'll have it right after this. Okay, so back to our friend Noam, who runs the Comedy Cellar and does a great podcast and somehow managed to get Philip Bump of The Washington Post. He's the writer, quote, focused largely on the numbers behind the politics, according to his bio. But he loses all ability to analyze anything when it reflects poorly on Joe Biden, his potential corruption. So we have a couple of soundbites from the interview, including where and he had gone on. I think Noam had openly said, I want somebody to come out and debate with me

whether there's evidence that Joe Biden is potentially corrupt and how high this Hunter Biden scandal goes. He was looking for somebody who would disagree with him. I think Noam sees corruption and he's troubled and he was looking for somebody in the press who would disagree with him. I think Noam sees corruption and he's troubled and he was looking for somebody in the press who would disagree with him. And Philip went on and it didn't go very well. It did not did not go well for Phil. Here's the first sound bite in which Phil is trying to defend Joe Biden on the claims of corruption. Sought to this is so silly. So then find me evidence that Joe Biden acted on behalf of Burisma when he called for the firing of Shokin. Find me evidence of that. There is none. I'm getting to the point. And the point I thought was to evaluate this charge that Joe Biden had acted corruptly in regards to Shokin and Burisma. And there's no evidence of that. And Devin Archer's own sworn testimony undercuts your argument,

regardless of his using the word spun or fed. OK, so that's number one. There's no evidence, no evidence that Joe Biden was acting on behalf of Burisma. First of all, that's just misstating the argument, right? It's a straw man. That's not what people are not on behalf of Burisma, but on behalf of his own self-interest and those of his son in pushing for the firing of this prosecutor. That's the allegation. Not that he was working for Burisma, but that he was influenced by what would benefit his son and what would benefit himself potentially in pushing out this prosecutor in Ukraine who was going after Burisma for corruption. And his son was sitting on the board of Burisma at the time. So Emily, his, that's how he framed, he misframes it,

first of all, to make it better for his side, which is a mark of dishonesty. And then secondly, he, what he wants, like the smoking gun. He wants the email of the Burisma CEO what led up to the firing of that prosecutor, you will see very clearly, we went through it just last week on the show, that it was not State Department policy nor the plan to call for the firing of that prosecutor. And as recently as like one month before Joe Biden had determined he was going to do it, it came to a surprise by anybody in the Obama administration that Joe Biden was about to make this guy's termination a deal term, a requirement for our giving aid to Ukraine. It seems to be the vice president's office that turned it, that said, you know what else? We need that guy gone.

And what was happening just as the vice president turned it? He had phone calls with his son, Hunter, who was on the Burisma board. And then in December of 2019, they had a meeting that he personally spoke with the head of Burisma, who we understand said, I get this guy off my back or said something to that effect. So this is what we've been learning so far. You know, it's not smoking gun right there pointing at the dead body, but it's getting pretty close. And that's the thing with influence peddling is that it's not smoking gun right there pointing at the dead body, but it's getting pretty close. And that's the thing with influence peddling is that it's strategic. It's set up this way so that there never is a smoking gun. For instance, unless there is literally a recording of Joe Biden at Cafe Milano or on the golf course with the Burisma executives, everyone has plausible deniability and

can just say, we were just golfing. We were just having martinis at Cafe Milano. So, you know, nothing to see here, which is exactly what Philip Bump is doing, because as much as you can tie this to Hunter and he does concede, he's like, you know what? I think Hunter was doing some stuff that was improper. So unless you can take that further step and go to Joe Biden, the media can continue to say nothing burger, nothing much to see here. And it's actually I mean, the way Noam sets this up, which I think is brilliant, is he's just like casually destroying Philip bump. And there's something in the media called nut picking, where you know, you go to the Iowa State Fair, find the craziest person and have some like Harvard educated journalists debate them on economic policy, whatever it is. This is the exact opposite of that, because Noam starts the podcast by saying,

I asked around, I asked my friend, who is the smartest person who disagrees with me on Joe and Hunter Biden? And they said it was you, Philip Bump. And he just casually destroys Philip Bump's argument and shows where he's wrong, calmly, casually throughout the entire like one hour of this podcast. And Philip Bump is an absolutely like precious commodity in Washington, D.C. media circles. He's seen as somebody who is at the top of his field, somebody who is really smart. And he is not willing to say that there is evidence that Joe Biden is tied to the scheme, despite the fact that, again, we all know there's not going to be a check from Burisma to Joe Biden and the memo line is going to say firing Victor Shokin. Nobody thinks that's

what's going to happen. It's the optics, which is the entire route of influence peddling in the first place. It's just being able to get, as we were talking about in the last segment, those White House visitor logs, the guest list for these parties that you can't do if you're Joe Schmo. You can't monetize that if you're Joe Schmo because you can't get your dad's Gmail, which who knows if that's even secure to say, hey, look who's coming and look what do they do? You don't get that if you're Joe Schmo, but you get it if you're Hunter Biden. It's so true. And Eliana, he he noam had Philip bump on the ropes the whole time, it ended with Bump getting up and walking out, which is pretty spectacular because I have to say the questioning, while smart, was not aggressive.

It wasn't, you know, he made a fool out of himself by getting up and walking out. It just showed how thin-skinned and eggshelled this guy is. He's not used to having to answer any questions of his sweeping defenses of the Bidens. Here's a little bit of that moment in SOT3. What do you take from the text message to his adult daughter? Hunter, I have to get 50 percent of my income to pop. I have no idea what that means. I don't. I have no idea what that means. It's it's I have no idea what that means. I know. It's circumstantial evidence and you prefer that. What could it be? I have no idea. I don't know.

Has anybody asked her? I don't know. I don't know. Don't you think somebody should ask her? I just said I don't know and I don't know what to make of it, so I have nothing to say about it. What do you want me to say? Yeah, but you say there's no evidence, but then there's a text message where he says I give Pop 50% of my money.

That's evidence. Okay, well, okay, fine, fine. It's evidence. I appreciate you having me on. It doesn't, something like that. Who do you think is being more, I listen to that and I'm saying, you can free to go.

I feel you want me to leave, like just walk out in the middle of this because that way you can like. You can go. Is this a standard really? This is the way the Washington Post handles people who disagree with when I agree to be on for 45 minutes and then I get on for an hour and 15. Yeah. After a while, I go. Thanks for that. Oh, my God, Eliana. I'm so embarrassed for him. I have secondhand embarrassment.

I'm I'm like of two minds about this, Megan. Honestly, like. If Philip Bump is the smartest person who, and the most qualified person who believes in Joe Biden, that's like a bad sign for Joe Biden. Just for your listeners who don't live in the Beltway, like Emily and me, I mean, Philip Bump is not a reporter. He's a political commentator who blogs on the Washington Post website. He's not out there breaking stories, as evidenced by the total and utter lack of curiosity events during this interview, where I think typical people, when confronted with that sort of information, would say, yeah, that's interesting. That's a pretty damning text message, and I would

be curious what they're referring to. The problem, I think, is that Philip Bump's attitude in this interview is indicative pretty much of the rest of the mainstream medias. And that's where we sort of run into a problem. The Biden White House has lied repeatedly, not just to the American people about Joe Biden's relationship to Hunter Biden, what they discussed about Hunter Biden's business, directly about Hunter Biden's business, what money he did and didn't take. They've lied to the press about this. And the press has not gotten their dander up about the lies that they, the bald-faced lies that the White House, Joe Biden himself, his aides, the White House press secretary have told them in the same way that they the bald face lies that the White House, Joe Biden himself, his aides, the White House press secretary have told them in the same way that they had gotten their dander up when it

was the Trump White House that lied to them. And I think that's where we run into a problem. And the sort of emotionality like you can see Bump getting angry and irritated is the way you get like when you're emotionally invested, when you're on a team. Yes. And well said. Like the mainstream media, they were they had that kind of emotional investment in going after Trump, in nailing their guy. And they just not only do they not have that in nailing Biden on this? They have that emotionality in defending him. And that's why we're not ferreting out a lot of information on this story. Like, really, it should be the mainstream press that has that feels it in their kishkas the way like James Comer does going after this story. The mainstream media should have that holding the

powerful to account. We saw that during the Trump presidency, like the number of weeks and stories that a motivated media can get. They camped out at the Trump hotel. They literally had camped out. We see the opposite in the Biden presidency where they're playing for the team and they're upset by people asking questions. And that, I think, is the difference and one of the main problems in our democracy. And then when conservatives ask questions, they say, well, you know, that's a case, that's only a story in the conservative ghetto. It should be a story in all of the media. We should all be asking questions of our leaders

and we should all be demanding transparency, whether they're Republicans or Democrats. We should all be interested in holding these people to account. And what Biden did with with his son is wrong, whether or not it was illegal. And it would be wrong if it was a Republican president to what Trump did on January 6th was wrong. And it would be wrong if it was a Democrat to whether or not there's a signature on the dotted line. We should expect more of our leaders than

not to break laws. We should expect them to uphold values and, you know, behave with dignity and honor. And I'm sorry, that is not what Hunter Biden did cashing in on his father's name at other people's expense. I mean, just for the listening audience to reiterate what is being alleged there that Noam's asking about is then Vice President Joe Biden was in charge of routing out Ukrainian corruption for the Obama administration. He was the point man on that very heavy task. At that time, his son Hunter was sitting on the board of a company being accused of corruption in Ukraine, Burisma. They were cashing checks, Hunter Biden definitely, for $85,000 a month from Burisma. Fact confirmed, undisputed, at that time getting paid.

And then we have an email from Hunter Biden to this sister talking about how he has to give 50 percent of his money to pop. And this is Noam saying to Philip Bump, who says there's no evidence that Joe Biden benefited at all from this relationship, saying, aren't you curious? Like all these things suggest Joe Biden has behaved inappropriately. You don't have to prove he broke a law. He's talking about a corrupt act, an inappropriate setup where he was cashing checks essentially from a, from a foreign company that he was charged with, with investigating essentially, right? By, because he was in charge of Ukrainian corruption. Um, so this is the allegation and just with that in mind and with what Eliana said in mind, again, what a normal reporter would do. Yes, I would like to get to the bottom of this.

Listen to that soundbite again. What do you take from the text message to his adult daughter? Hunter, I have to give 50 percent of my income to pop. I have no idea what that means. I don't. I have no idea what that means. It's it's it's I know it's circumstantial evidence and you prefer that. What could I have no idea? But doesn't it? I don't know. Well. I don't. I have no idea what that means. I know. It's circumstantial evidence and you prefer that. What could it be? I have no idea.

I don't know. I appreciate your... Has anybody asked her? I don't know. I don't know. Don't you think somebody should ask her? Okay. I just said I don't know and I don't know what to make of it so I have nothing to say about it. What do you want me to say? Yeah, but you say there's no evidence. But then there's a text message where he says,

I give Pop 50% of my money. That's evidence. Okay then there's a text message where he says, I give Pop 50% of my money. That's evidence. Okay, well, okay, fine, fine. It's evidence. I appreciate you having me on. It doesn't, something like that. Who do you think is being more, I listen to that and I'm saying,

you can free to go. I feel you want me to leave, like just walk out in the middle of this because that way you can like. You can go. Is this a standard really? This is the way the Washington Post handles people who disagree with them?

Yeah, when I agree to be on for 45 minutes and then I get on for an hour and 15, yeah, then after a while I go. Thanks for having me. Oh, it's so stomach turning, Emily, because we've all been immersed in this culture for years where this is what we're dealing with on the other side. I don't know.

I don't know. I have no idea. I have no idea what that means. I have no idea. I don't know. I don't know. I have no idea. I have no idea what that means. I have no idea. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I have nothing to say about it.

What do you want me to say? I have no fucking show some curiosity. That's what we're asking. Do your job. Be a man. Be a journalist. Don't embarrass yourself or your organization, which we used to really respect a long, long time ago.

You're an embarrassment to the profession. Show some professional curiosity. And then to the point where he's so weak and intellectually incurious, he's got to end it. He puts his tail thought he was going to breeze in there and just destroy Noam. You know that he was like, I'm Philip Bump. I'm a journalist. I do this professionally. I have looked into this. That's a great part of the interview where Philip Bump is like, Noam asks him for the evidence. And Philip Bump is like, well, neither of us was there. So I've debunked this. I've looked into it. And it's just like that. You think the fact that you, Philip Bump, have looked into this and say there's nothing there is enough for the public to be like, oh, let's all turn away like this has been solved. It's so arrogant and ridiculous. And it wouldn't be as obnoxious if he wasn't also dripping with sanctimony that he knows better. He's looked into

all of this. If he just came out and said, listen, I'm a partisan spinner. You know, I am a hack. Yeah, exactly. I'm a hack. Right. If he came out and said, like, listen, I'm a Democrat. I like Joe Biden. So maybe I don't see things as unbiased as I should. But of course, he doesn't. He says he's smarter than than absolutely everybody. And that's the other thing he says, you know, like we can't know. I don't know what that text message means. Well, all of the reporters at The Washington Post and elsewhere knew what it meant when various oligarchs and foreign leaders were coming in and out of the Trump hotel. It's the same thing. They know what it means that Jared Kushner had Saudi Arabia in his portfolio and then cashed out in a way that Joe Schmo certainly couldn't do after Trump left the White House and made this huge deal with Saudi Arabia. They all know what that means. But this, they're just like, well, we simply cannot know. And finally, the Ukraine stuff is infuriating because we as the United States of America have the audacity to go into Ukraine, which is a country that genuinely does struggle with the issue of

corruption and did in the Obama era as it does now and boss them around and tell them you need to fix this corruption. The messenger for that from the United States of America, his son is working for Burisma, the corrupt oil. So the guy who's telling them Ukraine, clean up your corruption. You're not getting any aid money from the United States is compromised because he's a part of corruption in Ukraine and in the United States. It's just outrageous. Yeah. Even today, Eliana, there's a item in the news about how Zelensky over there in Ukraine is replacing the head of his basically the defense department there for corruption. So we've been sending all this money and it's been very controversial over here. We're

sending billions and billions of dollars to them. And it's basically an admission that we don't know where it was going and that at least some portion of it was probably misspent because Alensky's not firing this guy as the head of their defense department for no reason at all. And the reports are he was corrupt. This is what a lot of people have been objecting to our, you know, unending and seemingly capless aid to Ukraine have been saying. We don't we don't trust the corrupt. This is what a lot of people have been objecting to our, you know, unending and seemingly capitalist aid to Ukraine have been saying. We don't we don't trust the system. This isn't like sending money to Great Britain. And we would like some people to kick the tires and give us some reassurances about whether our money is being well spent. But if you say anything like that, you're Tucker Carlson, as this guy says, right?

You're you're just some whack job who's not based in facts, who's a conspirator, a conspiracy theorist. Like, you're not allowed to ask those questions. Otherwise, you know, you're some sort of fringe character. Well, that was a separate part of the interview where he says, and he said it to Tucker Carlson, the least credible of journalists. You know, the guy could have said it to Hitler. It doesn't matter. Like the motivation motivations don't really matter in journalism. Devin Archer said it. His statement is a fact. And when you're impugning the motivations of a journalist, you're operating from a pretty weak spot. The other thing that I think that that conversation really made clear, and this is a broader point, is that it's pretty clear that the members of the mainstream press aren't really out mixing with people who disagree with them very often. Because, you know, the podcaster, and I'm forgetting his last name. Can you remind me,

Megan? Philip? I forget his name. Phil Dorman. Oh, Noam Dorman. Excuse me. And I'm sorry, Noam. And I love the Comedy Cellar. I've had some great nights there very recently, in fact. But it does go to show that like his views are not really outside of the mainstream. They're just out of the mainstream of our mainstream media. And they're not really used to debating and confronting those sorts of views. And these sorts of arguments don't really take place on point out, the Trump coverage versus the total dis comes to Joe Biden, Dianne Feinstein, John Fetterman. Absolutely not. Like I like Mitch McConnell. I know a lot of Republicans don't. I really to him and probably to step down. I do. I see it. It's obvious. He doesn't seem like he is well anymore. But I also feel like you first. He's not going anywhere until Dianne Feinstein's out, period. That's how I feel. Get her out. She's literally almost dead. She cannot function anymore. Why should he go? He's at least

on his own two feet. He's still lucid and able to communicate in the moments where he's not frozen. Can you say the same for her? Why should the Republicans lose their leader while she's sitting there, right? But the media, they're very, very concerned about McConnell in a way that was discussed as ableism, back to our earlier discussion when it was raised about John Fetterman. This is from Eliana's publication, The Washington Free Beacon. Look at this comparison. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell appeared to freeze again during a Q&A with reporters. It's all raising additional questions about the fitness of the 81-year-old to lead Senate Republicans. I don't know. It just seems like he's pushing himself in a way that might

be problematic. I don't want to be rude about it, but that's not somebody who just feels lightheaded. Senator John Fetterman has inspiring message for people who are simply too scared to ask for help. The president has found him to be an impressive individual. Better men's cognitive abilities have not been compromised. We have a man who was brave enough to talk about this. There was such intense scrutiny, often ableist scrutiny. Eliana, that's amazing. It's amazing. Credit to our team who put that wonderful video together. And of course, it's true. McConnell's health woes have gotten so much more attention than those of Joe Biden, whose obvious cognitive impairments, because he's the only person the Democrats are confident could beat. Trump have not gotten the same level of scrutiny. And John Fetterman

is really the best counterexample. The guy can't really talk. And not only is he not scrutinized, but he's been celebrated and held up as an example to emulate for his persistence and bravery in not dropping out of that Pennsylvania Senate race. You know, I will I will wait for the day when Mitch McConnell's persistence and bravery is celebrated by the Capitol Hill press corps. And I will say the New York Times has done some wonderful stories on Dianne Feinstein and her ailments and her inability to carry out the duties of the job. That being said, she's been non-compass mentis for the better part of, you know, five to 10 years. And we're just seeing that coverage, you know, after she turned 90. So there's certainly more scrutiny on Republicans. And it's because McConnell holds

such an important position in the party. This would really hurt Republicans were he to step down in the middle of an election season. Why should they sacrifice their guy? Right. And for the Republican haters of McConnell, look at the Supreme Court. You know, if there's one person, I think, aside from Donald Trump, who gets credit for a majority conservative Supreme Court, it is Mitch McConnell for holding out and refusing to nominate Merrick Garland. And I think if you look at the way the Department of Justice has been run under Joe Biden, you can thank Mitch McConnell that he is not on the Supreme Court. And instead, there's Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett instead of Merrick Garland.

We would have Justice Merrick Garland if it weren't for Mitch McConnell. I think the reason people don't like him is because he's on the wrong side of Trump. So the Trump fans instinctively are, we hate him. I guess we hate Mitch McConnell now. What are you saying? Look into what he's done. Judicial appointments alone. The guy's been absolutely critical in getting these more conservative jurists on the federal bench at the at the trial court level, at the appellate court level and at the Supreme Court level. You have him to thank along with Trump when they were getting along for there not being a Justice Merrick Garland. Anyway, that I just look at this and I again, I say, good. As soon as she goes, as soon as Fetterman goes, McConnell can go. That's it. That's fair. Sure.

You guys have had severe problems for a lot longer than Mitch McConnell had two freezing episodes. A lot longer, not to mention the sitting president of the United States, Emily, which we are told over and over. We're not allowed to discuss or we're ableists and ageists. And I was just going to pick up on that exact point, because when Eliana said that one of the reasons here is that Mitch McConnell is very powerful, that we're really like the reason for for some of the glee among media and Democrats right now is because Mitch McConnell is important to the Republican Party. That is exactly why they kept a lid on what was happening with Dianne Feinstein for a very long time. And the same thing that happened in the 2020 election with Joe Biden. So it is true that you've seen more and more media stories start to come out about Feinstein

and Biden. But oh, my gosh, did they have to become nearly dead to your point, Megan, for the media to even bat an eye and say, hey, maybe there's a problem here, because it was abundantly clear in 2020 that Joe Biden was having problems. And when the first Dianne Feinstein story dropped, that maybe she wasn't able, cognizantly able to do her job anymore. It was a huge deal in Washington, D.C. It was like the seal had finally been broken. Everyone can start talking about this thing that's been under wraps for years and years. Why is that? Because those two are important to the Democratic Party. And this is why double standards are dangerous. It's the media is just playing games with things that are actually fired. They're actually really serious to people's lives because you can't make the case that Mitch McConnell should step down while not making that case about Biden or Feinstein. It's just ridiculous. You can't make the case that Jared Kushner shouldn't be doing what he did with Saudi Arabia

when you won't say the same thing about Hunter Biden. It is actually having a seriously deleterious effect on the country, on the way we govern, on the way that we're providing aid to Ukraine. Biden doesn't have a leg to stand on because he has no credibility in this issue. And he's the one overseeing all of the aid going to Ukraine. So these things are serious and have consequences. It's not just like all fun and games like the media thinks it is. She didn't remember how to vote, Dianne Feinstein. She forgot how to vote. She forgot that she had been out of the Senate

for three months. She tried to tell a reporter she had in fact been there. It's time. I mean, like, it's just, why are we even engaging in this nonsense? Yours first, yours first. And then the Republicans can clean up their house. I don't blame them for standing for now behind McConnell.

Just FYI, the latest via New York Post this morning, a congressional doctor says there's no evidence McConnell has a seizure disorder or suffered a mini stroke after two troubling recent public freeze ups. conducted an exam and says he did cast doubt on some of the medical theories circulating online about McConnell's condition, but he did not publicly provide an explanation for the episodes. That's bullshit too. We deserve an explanation. He's not like, this isn't his little private fiefdom. It's our, it's our fiefdom. We're his bosses and we deserve to know. So there's that. Okay. Speaking of no credibility, Karine Jean-Pierre, there's no problem whatsoever at the border. The border? And Joe Biden's done more

to secure it than anyone else. That actually happened. I know it's overused. It's primo gaslighting. We've got to play it. Here it is. The president has done more to secure the border

and to deal with this issue of immigration than anybody else. He it is. The president has done more to secure the border and to deal with this issue of immigration than anybody else. He really has. June saw the single largest month to month drop in lawful, unlawful border crossing because of the policies this president put in place. I, I can't like, I don't, I think we should just laugh. Should we just do the LOL? I don't like, what's the proper response to that, Emily? I cringe up here should go to the border. I mean, the proper response would just be to have a just just go through a line of migrants at the border and ask them if Joe Biden is part of the if Joe Biden's policies, they might not name Joe Biden by name. Some of them will actually talk to them. And if you go down that line, they will tell you it is the policies of the Biden administration, the policies of the United States government right now that have pushed them up into these really dangerous circumstances, camping under bridges.

You know, we're dealing with cartels, which almost every single one of them does. Almost every single one of them pays a cartel to come up there. That's why it does get so violent. And that's why it gets so violent when they cross the river sometimes, because these cartel members are literally shepherding them through the water. If you talk to migrants themselves, if Karine Jean-Pierre actually went over to Mexico and or went to a shelter that wasn't cleaned up or sanitized, I think when Joe Biden went to, where did he go? He went to Texas earlier this year and didn't talk to any migrants. I mean, if you talk to them, they will tell you right away. Oh, yeah, we're up here in these violent, chaotic, dangerous circumstances because of the policies of the United States government that helped them from point A to point B. And then while they're at to migrants, they would tell you right away exactly why they're in New York City, exactly why they came up to the Darien Gap and through Central America. clear, are that he has basically done like a magic trick where he's allowed people through the CBP1 app that he did his administration debut to sign up for asylum hearings. And then they can disappear into basically sanctuary cities, never show up for those

hearings. So he's funneled them through, quote unquote, legal channels that are really extra legal, extra judicial in ways that make the illegal numbers look lower because he's just letting in more people, quote unquote, legally. Well, they did for a minute. They did for a minute when we knew that the Title 42 COVID restrictions were going to expire because there was no more pandemic. We recognized that there was probably going to be a surge across the borders because that allowed us to turn people away seeking asylum. No questions asked. We're not even going to entertain this. Then it was lifted at the end of May. And in anticipation

of that, he implemented this new program you talk about with the app saying, okay, I got to do something to stem this tide. Cause even my Democrat governors and mayors across the country are starting to get mad at me. And it worked a little bit in June, a little bit. People were like, oh, maybe we can do it legally. Maybe we'll use the app. And then by July, which is the other piece of the story that Karine Jean-Pierre totally ignores, the numbers had surged again back to record numbers. So while she's correct that it dropped in June, the number of illegal border crossings, it surged again in July, in August. Here we are in September, again on record pace. Fox's Bill Malugin, who's been doing a great, great job covering the border, tweeted this out, that she

ignores the new and recent surging numbers. Border Patrol apprehensions in June, some 99,000 in July, 132,000 in August, 177,000. That wasn't mentioned in Corrine Jean-Pierre's dishonest statement. Let me hear it again. Listen to her again. Listen to her lie, her misleading on an issue that's affecting millions of Americans. Listen. The president has done more to secure the border and to deal with this issue of immigration than anybody else. He really has. June saw the single largest month-to-month drop in unlawful border crossing because of the policies this president put in place. It's breathtaking dishonesty, Eliana. Well, what's so interesting about this, and by the way, August saw an enormous spike in the number of families coming across the border. But what's interesting is that this is not so much a fight between Republicans and Democrats right now as among Democrats

themselves. You have state and city officials who are at the president's throat about the number of migrants that they are being forced to house in their cities. And it's the relations between Biden and prominent Democrats in New York and in California and in many other places around the country. Democrats who have said we welcome all people. And during the Trump administration, we're able to virtue signal about this because there were not migrants pouring over the border are now at loggerheads with the Biden administration because the people in their states don't want migrants put up in hotels, in conference centers, and all over their states. And it's causing political problems for their city and state officials who are now looking to the Biden administration to do something. So this is a problem for Biden within his own party that he's going to need to

solve, though I don't have high hopes for the administration cracking down. He's not fooling anybody, this nonsense from Karine Jean-Pierre. They know they're suffering from the consequences of this, just like the southern border states are, thanks to Governor Greg Abbott, thanks to Governor DeSantis. By the way, something funny, I don't know if you're noticing it, but there's like a one second of delay between me and Eliana. So every time I ask you a question, I'm afraid I've made you mad. Like it's, there's like a long pause.

I'm like, oh, she doesn't like that question. Then you answer it normally. I'm like, oh, phew. She's like my pen to the debates. You know, you just like did these long dramatic pauses. That's Eliana was trailing. Right. I'm like, oh God, she didn't like that one either. I got to do better. OK, wait, let's talk about before we go to break. I want to talk about Governor Murphy of New Jersey because nobody better embodies this problem you just outlined than he does.

But this is we're going to play him. But we could do this with the New York governor. We could do this in California, in L.A. We talked about the LA mayor back there. All these places that only recently in LA's case voted to become sanctuary cities or in New Jersey's case voted to become sanctuary states. New York, same. New York City, same. Now we're having a change of heart, of course. Now that they're having to deal with the actual consequences thanks to these bus loads of migrants that are being shipped north, they see it very differently. Listen to New Jersey's governor during the gubernatorial debate when he ran for office back in 2017, sounding a very different tune than the one he's sounding today, SOP 14. Dreamers, we've got 22,000 of them are every bit as American as my four kids. This is a moral test, black and white. So this is Mr. President, not the state of New Jersey.

We will stand up to this president. If need be, we. Mr. President, not the state of New Jersey. We will stand up to this president if need be, will be a sanctuary, not just city, but state. OK, the first word there was dreamers, dreamers. We got twenty two thousand of them. Every bit as American as my four kids. It's a moral test, black and white. And in New Jersey, we're going to be a sanctuary state. Good for you. You're so you're amazing. You're pro immigrant. You're definitely not a bigot like all the people who have questions about this. Oh, wait, record scratch.

Here he is on Thursday of last week. I don't see any scenario, Eric, where we're going to be able to take in a program in Atlantic City or, frankly, elsewhere in the state. We are already seeing folks in New Jersey that have probably swelled into Jersey from New York City or from other locations. But you need scale, enormous amount of federal support, resources that go beyond anything that we can afford. Putting everything else aside, I just don't see it. And I would suspect that that will continue to be the case. Phil, Phil, what happened? Phil, I thought it was a moral issue, black and white. Emily, what happened? I mean, it is a moral issue, black and white. And that's what's so infuriating about all of this, that sanctuary cities are not pro,

they think they're pro-immigrant. They're actually anti-immigrant because sanctuary cities are a giant handout to cartels. I went to Mexico last year to actually talk to migrants themselves. And it's the same thing over and over again. They know that they can come to the United States. And it's actually similar to what was happening. What's happening with the CBP1 app is similar to what was happening with Title 42, which is that Eliana points out families coming to the border. You have patchwork policies in different places of Texas, Arizona, California, different things being imposed in different places or being enforced in different places. And in general, people found out with the CBP1 app, as they did with Title 42, that there are all kinds of exceptions being made because it's so

overwhelming. So you go up, you turn yourself in, and then you know that if you can make it to New York and if you can make it to New Jersey, if you can make it to San Francisco, then you can survive in the United States without possibly ever showing up at an asylum hearing. You can make money, send it back in the form of remittances, which are a huge part of the Central American and Mexican economies, huge, huge parts of it. So there's a lot on the line for these places. There's a lot on the line for cartels that can camp out in these sanctuary cities and send the money back home and then just leave before their asylum hearing, having made a bunch of money to sort of stabilize their lives back there. Or they could just continue to stay and hope that they're protected by these

sanctuary cities legally, which they are. And the left loves to virtue signal. You see that. It's just so disgusting when you're looking and you can remember the eyes of a little girl from Venezuela or Nicaragua who was kidnapped by a cartel because their parents had to pay the cartel money to get up there. And they were planning to get into the United States and have freedom. And they sacrifice so much they'll be scarred for it by life because of these allegedly pro-immigrant policies. That is, it's just a game for Democrats to virtue signal on them. Not to mention all these children who are in classrooms in places like New York City right now, Eliana, American children who now have twice the number of children in their class, half of whom don't speak any English whatsoever, who are being told the kids are they have to go to school with these

kids. They have to somehow find Spanish language speaking teachers to come in and they're already struggling post pandemic to learn. Now they've got to deal with this. We've had 100000 immigrants, migrants come into New York in the past year alone. Now the mayor of New York is warring with the governor of New York because everybody wants more money to deal with this problem. They're trying to ship them off to New Jersey. You heard the governor there saying we're not taking them there. And they're looking at the federal government, Joe Biden saying, help us out. And the solution, of course, because they're Democrats, is help us make it easier for them to get work permits. These some 60,000 of them are of adult working age, Eliana, and they're

the Democrat mayor of New York and the Democrat governor of New York want to waive the requirement that doesn't allow migrants like this who are here illegally and haven't applied for asylum, haven't gone through the process. They can't get visas to work. They can't get green cards to work. They can't get the permission to work. And now they're saying that's a solution. They need to be able to work. Sure. That'll, number one, send them home. And number number two definitely that's going to discourage other people just like them from flooding across the southern border we've made it easier for you to get we're going to put you on a bus i'm going to drive you up to new york or san fran la wherever you martha's vineyard is awesome you're going to love your and then we're going to get you a job

and that's going to do a lot for american wages too yeah yeah so that's the solution right i mean the reason that we're in this problem which became a problem when biden was inaugurated and on his first day in office first of all he campaigned on reversing trump immigration policies that he called inhumane and said that on day one in office he was going to begin dismantling those. And on January 20th, 2021, he did start dismantling those. And those amounted to, and analysts across the political spectrum have said this, a green light to migrants on the other side of the border that they were going to be treated very differently than they were in the Trump administration. And as a result, we've seen huge increases in the number of migrants across the southern border. And I think until the

President of the United States signals that there's going to be a change in policy and a move back towards the Trump administration's policy and make it clear that these migrants are not welcome and that there's going to be more strict treatment akin to the policies of the Trump administration, we're not going to see any kind treatment akin to the policies of the Trump administration, we're not going to see any kind of downturn. Certainly, doling out work permits is not the solution to this. Oh, my God. No, he has no solution. And thankfully, you know, Greg Abbott's plan is working. It was the most ingenious approach to this issue.

It's just going to take a little bit more time because at some point, the Biden administration won't be able to take the heat. It's the Democrats putting it on. And that's one thing tough for him to ignore. All right, stand by more with the EJs after this quick, quick break. All right, this is like one of my favorite stories the audience knows, and there's an unbelievable update in it. The Canadian shop teacher with the ginormous fake breasts with the fake nipple prosthetics at the end. We knew this. We reported this to you last week, had been hired to go to another school. This after this person has been claiming that it's a man, I mean, it is a man, but claiming that he's intersex and that those breasts are real. That's what he told the New York Post.

Yes, he said that these are real. He sat in front of the mirror and said, I must, I must, I must increase my bust. And he got these enormous, no, that's not, they look like two watermelons with two lemons at the end. He said he has some condition called gynomastia that makes the breasts just that makes Pamela Anderson look flat chested. Lies, lies, damn lies. We showed last week the tape of Rebel News up in Canada getting the guy on camera without the breasts. Hello. They're not real. And notwithstanding all this blowback, his parents don't want some guy working out a sexual fetish on their kids in the classroom, nevermind shop. That's what he teaches. They didn't fire him. And he's just moving to another school. That was the new, that was a report we did last week. Well, guess what? He showed up for the first day as a man and no breasts. He's, he's,

he's doing the new job. It's a miracle. Ladies, ladies. The gyneomastia has been solved. The breasts are gone. So are the enormous nipples. So is the weird wig. And I've got to tell you, if I were a parent in the new school, I would still, and maybe even more so, be jumping up and down saying, get him the hell out. It's an admission that it was a sexual fetish before. The guy is very sick, Emily, and yet has ongoing access to children and no one's doing anything about it. Incredible progress, level of progress to go from one to the other. That's simply amazing. But you're right, Megan. This is a sickness, obviously, obviously, obviously a sickness. And it reflects a sickness in our society that everyone couldn't come out and comfortably say this person belongs nowhere around children until just for

saying those boobs are real alone. This person belongs nowhere near children because that's a level of delusion that exists, that should exist and not exist in any professional, let alone like public atmosphere where they're getting taxpayer dollars or tuition dollars for their work or being around children because they're clearly out of touch with reality and have no business teaching other people to function in reality, serving as role models as teachers often do. Now, I'm curious how this situation unfolds, because today's the first day of school. Is there going to be a turnaround where this person says, listen, I was in the throes of a deep mental illness. The humiliating level of

public media attention to this, of backlash to this made me realize it. And, you know, maybe this person will end up having a story given what happened before. I'm not super hopeful of that, but it is something that is going to happen to a whole lot of people who got sucked into this insanity over the last five years, doubled down on it. And then 10 years from now, whatever, they'll look back and say, wow, the society really, really exacerbated my sickness. They didn't help at all. These social norms were destructive for me. I cannot imagine. I mean, this today's the first day of school for a lot of kids out there, Eliana, including

my own. Can you imagine going in for a parent teacher conference and seeing this guy? And it's like, and you know, a week ago, he's lying in the New York Post saying he had gynecomastia and grew breasts that were larger than any woman's breasts in the history of womankind. And he decided to show off big fake nipples at the end of them with his weird blonde wig. I'm like, can you imagine having to sit across from this guy? Like, hey, where are your boobs?

What happened to your breasts, sir? This is an outrage. I don't think you want your kid's teacher in the New York Post for anything. I got to say, this is probably on the milder side of what your kid's teacher could be in the New York Post for. But speaking of things you didn't rules, you didn't think you'd have to like write down in the rule book. You know, no enormous fake breastplates allowed for teachers in the schools I didn't see that one coming no enlarged nipples either that's also

a no go quickly before we go before we go did you see Kanye West apparently getting a blowjob from his wife in Venice what the hell unbelievable I should give credit to the Daily Mail who got the Kayla Lemieux as a man photos exclusively.

But what's the Kanye West like? Literally, he's in one of those gondolas in Venice, very clearly getting a blowjob. That's how it appears. His pants are off. And his wife, who seems to be some sort of a kidnap victim. She never looks happy. She's always wearing the weirdest clothes, appears to be fellating him. And this, I guess, passes as appropriate conduct. I don't they're looking into him now. The legal authorities, Emily, what do you make of it? Yeah, I mean, they're going to have to. It's also another sign that Kanye West clearly not doing so well, despite the fact that the whole world is kind of rooting for him. He's obviously not well because these pictures are insane. His full butt is exposed. It's very obvious what's happening. And frankly, I wish I hadn't clicked on them. happy what self-respecting woman would would go out in the nude clothes that she wears they're like she's nude and then gets down on her knees in public and fellates the the i just something on something not okay is going on there all right i admit that i had not followed this story but i thought he left kim because she wasn't he didn't like her unchristian behavior oh that's right yes you're right she you know what she snapped right to it on that answer look she's like i got that i've got

well i do follow the kardashians but i have not been following kanye's spiral post anti-semitic rant on tucker carlson um I am looking at these pictures right now. I don't know if we can trust you anymore. Right. So you think you know a person. They're shocking. They're disturbing. And yeah, something needs to be done, an intervention of some kind. Ladies, thank you. Great to see you. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.