The Megyn Kelly Show - Media's "Don't Say Gay" Misinformation, and Durham Probe Reality, with Dave Rubin and Paul Sperry | Ep. 278

Episode Date: March 11, 2022

Megyn Kelly is joined by Dave Rubin, host of The Rubin Report, and Paul Sperry, reporter for RealClearInvestigations, to talk about media misinformation about a supposed "Don't Say Gay" bill and the truth about what the bill actually does, what elementary schools are doing when it comes to gender identity now, the destruction of meritocracy, what separates good and bad teachers, Jussie Smollett's latest outburst as he was sentenced to jailtime, the truth about the Smollett hate crime hoax, DA Kim Foxx's racism allegations, the shady cast of characters revealed through the Durham investigation, the revelations about spying on Trump, who Rodney Joffe really is, the media's complicity in the Russia-Trump probe, what's coming up next with Durham, and more.Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow 

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations. Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show and happy Friday. Oh, we made it, right? You're having that feeling like we made it. So, so happy to have with me today Dave Rubin, my pal and host of The Rubin Report. Dave, great to have you back. How are you? Megan, I'm doing well. You know, before we get going here on, you know, the serious issues of the day that I know we have to cover, I have to tell you that right now I'm missing a very important appointment to be with you because my dog Clyde, who when you came to my house, jumped on you, almost knocked you down.

You love dogs. You didn't mind. You were cool with it. But he is being trained downstairs right now. I'm supposed to be in the training. But I said, no, Clyde, you're going to have to figure this out on your own. I am with Megyn Kelly right now. So that next time you come here, he will not maul you.

Let me tell you something. I'm so jealous because I have Thunder. She's a good girl. She's going to be three. And then she was so good. We said, wouldn't two be even better? And along came little Strudwick, same dog, you know, their English labs. He's a red, she's a yellow. And he is a delightful, adorable, loving menace. He's such a menace. Oh my God. He's so bad, Dave. So bad. And we sent him away to military camp. He had to go to military school and he came back and he was amazing for a week. And then he lost it after a week. Totally lost it.

I thought about doing it. We discussed it. Are we just going to send him away for a while, but we're going to try to do it here. He's three also. And he's been great for two years, but something about, as you know, we moved to Florida, something about the lizards out on the streets. I think there's so many lizards out here and iguanas and peacocks and squirrels and also it's just, he's on edge. So we're just, we're going to work through it. It's going to be okay. What do you do to make him not not do that? My audience knows we got our dog trainer was like, you got to put the shock collar on. And I'm like, I wouldn't I can't shock my little.

And then as soon as he went over to eat my other dog's crap, I was like, we haven't we haven't done the shock collar, but we do have some treats that kind of take the edge off. I'm not going to say what's in the treats. This is a family-friendly show, but they're doing the trick. Oh my God, we have to talk offline about those. I'm perfectly happy. No, no, no. They're totally legit. I got them at Petco. It's got like ashwagandha in it or something. It's fine. I want it. I want it right now. Well, in any event, let me tell you, my dog's lucky he's so cute. Very lucky he's so cute.

Otherwise, I don't know what I'd be doing. Be getting a no love from me. Every day he destroys something new. I mean, literally every day there's something new. It's like, and now he's taken out just to get off of this. But like my three kids will sit at the kitchen counter in the morning. It's the kind of counter where like they can have a stool that pulls up to it, you know, like a kitchen island. And they'll sit there and they eat their eggs or whatever.

The dog will literally jump up in between them. He won't even go to the left or the right of them, which would be the easiest way. Jump up on his hind legs and he will grab their eggs on toast right off of their plates. It's the most rude thing. He's so rude. Megan, dogs are animals.

That's my main takeaway from the show today. Dogs are animals. Tell me if your guy, maybe you could slip that one in as if it were yours, since you're still on the pay clock and I'm not, you know, I got nobody to call. Maybe you could just slip that one in like it's Clyde's issue and get back to me on what he says to do. Oh, yes, yes. Clyde's been eating the kid's eggs off the table. He's been eating

David's eggs. The other Dave. It's Dave and David. Okay. So I have a challenge for you to kick things off. Don't say, are you going to do it right here? Look, I'm here in Florida. I've been told that if you even say the G word in the privacy of your own home, that Ron DeSantis' goons will burst through the door, put a black bag on your head, drag you out and bring you to the gulag. This whole thing is so stupid. I have no doubt that you're on the very short list

of people that have been covering it, honestly. But this is like just the perfect example of what the left and the media does with absolutely everything. They take something that is either nothing or really a pretty good bill, a pretty good bill, basically saying that if you're kindergarten to third grade, that teachers cannot talk to you about in essence about sex. It's about gender identity and sexuality, but that teachers cannot talk to you about, in essence, about sex. It's about gender identity and sexuality, but they can't talk to you about those things and that they certainly can't hide that conversation from the parent. That is the crux of this bill.

The word gay is not in it. It has nothing to do with homophobia or transphobia or anything else. And the media has just run with this thing. The fact that they call it the don't say gay bill and then everyone repeats it over and over and over again, that CNN brings on all of these people to talk about homophobia and suicided kids. Megan, you have young kids. I know they're older than first, second grade,

but it's like- Oh no, I have a second grader. Oh, you have a second grader, all right. So actually I was just at my seven-year-old niece's birthday party on Sunday. We made slime. You know, that's the thing that the kids are all doing now. They take, you know about the slime?

No, well aware. My sister's not thrilled with the slime, but you know, they take shaving cream and they color it and whatever. These kids, the idea of sexuality at seven years old or gender identity, the idea that anyone would be talking about it to them, uh, whether it's a friend or whatever, but that a state employee should talk to them about it and then be able to hide that conversation. Parents,

it's crazy, but the media just lies about everything, everything. They are so like they're in full woe is me mode. I'm looking for it here. Talking about like how sad this is. There was somebody on the house floor in Florida crying. Is this soundbite five to my team crying about like, how could they do this? And all what the bill says is it doesn't say don't say gay. It says, and I'll actually read it to the audience

so that they can understand exactly what we're dealing with here um it's not at all with of course what the media is saying they say um among other things not having to do with any of this they say um we're prohibiting classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels and then it goes on to clarify classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity to K through third graders. And beyond that, make sure the discussion is age appropriate. Totally fine. The way it's been represented. Yes.

Soundbite five. Did we confirm? Play the one where the person's crying. Oh, they're talking that crying. Well, I guess we don't have the one. Well, let's take a listen to it. Number five. Do we really think that teachers are engineering students to become gay?

You can't teach gay. Because we oppose the bill? We're pedophiles? School boards are not, in fact, conspiring to turn children gay. Free state of Florida? Not if you're gay. Yeah, you're not free. And you just just moved there why didn't they tell you that before you got there this is bullshit bull crap i'm not swearing for lent wow megan kelly is fired up on this friday holy cow it's hard not to swear dave do you do you i know you're not you're no

longer an atheist because of jordan peterson are you have you crossed over to celebrating lent to take it like because i gave up swearing. I'm doing so poorly. You know what? In times such as these, you have to swear every now and again. I really think so. Especially if you do what we do, where we're trying to combat nonsense all day long, right?

Like I'm really not trying and I don't think you are either. I'm not trying to demand that people really believe or have the exact worldview that I have. But I'm trying to just debunk some of the nonsense so people can think clearly for themselves, which really is the, it's the intro of your show. I mean, think for yourself, right? And, and when we're doing that all day long, every now and again, you got to curse because these people are so insane. That guy there, uh, who's that state Senator farmer is his last name.

And you may have seen the tweet about this. He tweeted out, he had the, he had the game. He had a sticker on his face and tape on his face. His mustache and beard. I was like, wow, he's really making a point with a duct tape on his face with a,

cause that's not fun. Cause I did it. We did it on. Oh, there you go. We did this on my show yesterday. I put that black duct tape on my face and ripped it off and it's not fun. But anyway,

he said, say gay. He might said gay. I wrote gay myself. We got a silver Sharpie. Yesterday, I put that black duct tape on my face and ripped it off. And it's not fun. But anyway, he tweets that out. Did you say gay? Mine said gay. I wrote gay myself. We got a silver Sharpie. I did it myself. But that guy, he tweets that out.

It got something like 200 likes. I then invited him on the show. And I really mean it. I invited him on the show truly to say why you think this is so important, State Senator Farmer. It got something like 25,000 likes. Now I'm not, I'm not doing this to get into a Twitter war of likes, but it's like, it's like, dude, you saw my tweet. I am a new, I said, I'm a new Floridian. I would love to have you on the show. So you can explain this to me. Cause maybe, maybe I'm missing it.

Um, I didn't mention anything in my sexuality, which by the way, is completely irrelevant to all of this. If anything, um, I think the average gay person should be more against this stuff than, say, the average straight person, because they're making us all look like like really crazy, radical lunatics. And most of the gay people that I know are just like you, Megan. They're decent people. They don't want kids indoctrinated. They just want to be treated equally. This has nothing to do with equal treatment. This is sort of psychotic state brainwashing or why would you want them to hide it? I mean, it's literally they're telling they're telling you they want to be able to have these conversations and that's bad enough. But then they're also saying and we shouldn't have to tell the parents about it like crazy.

And Florida law actually has an exception, which I thought was good for if you think that that telling the parents that such a discussion took place would endanger the child. Basically, it allows for school districts to withhold such information from parents. If a reasonably prudent person would determine that disclosure could lead to abuse, abandonment or neglect. So, you know, in other words, if a teacher knows you've got some lunatic parent at home who's like some crazy bigot, if that's out in the open and, you know, calling up the teacher to say little Johnny came home and he told me at school he's gay. You don't want to set the child up for abuse that I get that makes that just shows Florida legislatures are trying to find the right balance between parental rights and the well-being of the children. And this isn't about never teaching. It's about teaching when it's appropriate at age appropriate levels. But that's that's the key part of this. And the fact that the media is just not

explaining that properly. Again, no kid, literally no kid, no kid. Megan, I mean, tell me in all in your years of being a parent, did your first grader ever come home and start talking about gender identity? This is not something that kids are thinking about. Now, if this was about 11th graders who let's say it when I'm not that old, I'm 45. But when I was in seventh grade, we had health class. OK, and you started learning about some of this stuff. Now, maybe you knew about some of it because you had older siblings or your parents taught you at home or you had friends, whatever it might be. But in seventh grade, that's the way they used to do it. I went to New York public schools.

But let's say by 11th grade, Florida was really banning any discussion of sexuality in a health class or something like that. Well, then there would be something to discuss. And we could have an honest discussion about what should be discussed in a public school, what shouldn't, and what should the privacy laws be, which is really what you're referring to there. Like if there really potentially was a threat because of a really bad at-home situation, what is the responsibility of the teacher or the administrator, the school district to protect that kid. We can have a discussion about that, but that has nothing to do with any of this.

Yeah. Back, I also went to public school in New York state and we had the intro class to sexuality and health. They called it health in fifth grade. And then you had another one that was a little bit more advanced in seventh grade. And then 10th grade was, you know, the whole kahuna, but it doesn't bear any resemblance to what they're teaching today on this stuff. I mean, some of these classes actually enjoy promoting, quote, kink, and they get really specific. These teachers somehow think it's going to be beneficial to your 14-year-old for them to show sex toys at

the front of the class and then pass them around. I'm so old, Dave, not to put you on the spot. In my fifth grade, which was 1980, I guess, 1980, they literally were passing around still the sanitary belt with the sanitary napkin for girls who were about to get their periods. Is there any woman out there old enough to remember? You've got to call me later because that's how old I was. I don't know what the sanitary belt is and I don't want to know what the sanitary belt is. They hadn't figured out adhesives, Dave. They hadn't figured out adhesives in 1980 that you'd stick on your underwear. They wanted you to put like the napkin in your underwear and then hold it in place by some sort of a belt.

I don't know. I never did it. It's hard to be a woman. But really, it's like joking aside for one second, imagine what it would be like for a second grade teacher to sit down with a seven-year-old or maybe eight-year-old at that, at that grade and say, um, I want to talk to you about gender identity. You know, you identify as a female because you're, you're a girl, but you know, some kids identify as boys. And then to imagine the level of insanity, I mean, just of what you would be putting

into a child's brain. And by the way, and I'm sick of saying this qualification or this qualifier, and I'm going to stop doing it. I have no problem with trans people. If you want to live your life as you wish as an adult, that is completely fine. If you want to have whatever surgeries you want to have, that is fine. I actually have sympathy for someone that would be, you know, that their their their feeling of who they are is out of whack with, with what their biology is. I would want them to be treated equally under the law and hopefully find someone that loves them and all of

those things. Um, but this again has nothing to do with that and really think about what it would be like for an adult, not even the parents to be doing that at school. I mean, it's, it's crazy. Well, and I'm, I'm going to say something controversial, but the thing is about being gay. Let me explain to you what it's like to be gay, Dave. Tell me, Megyn Kelly. It's not contagious. And like people who are worried, oh, if my son spends time with a gay boy, he's going to turn gay. No, that's not how it works. That's not how it works. Your sexuality is driven from within you. And my gay friends are like, you know, I tried it. I tried kissing the girl at age 15. Nope, wasn't there. They knew. And while that's also true of many people in the

trans community, we know from books like Abigail Schreier's Irreversible Damage that the trans thing has become a social contagion. And hers is based on, in part, the work of Brown University professor, former Lisa Lippman, who's been really revolutionary in studying this. And so there is a social contagion factor to some instances of transgender, of being transgender. So I do think I can understand a parent being a little bit more uncomfortable with the discussion of the transgender thing is like, it's an option. It's out there. Some kids are there. It's like there for you. I don't know how they're going to talk about it to my seven year old, but I just see that one is a little bit more fraught than explain. Most kids when they're seven or eight have seen gay men or lesbian women and they naturally are like, what's happening there? And you're like, oh, they're gay. You know, sometimes two men love each other. Sometimes two

women love each other. And you move on. I want to be in control of those discussions, but I really want to be in control of the ones that might implant a seed that could grow into something in my child. Well, that's that's the key point, right? The planting of the seed. So, for example, I mentioned my seven year old niece's birthday party that we went to on Sunday. And actually, then David, my husband, yes, who's who's beautiful and wonderful and curious and smart and all the great things about about a young child. She knows that we're both her uncles. She comes to our house and she has sleepovers and hangs out with us. And, you know, we swim and do all the stuff that you do and we take her to the zoo. It's never once come up like something about us being different or something like that. Not and it's not because

we're hiding it from her, but she's seven years old and, and maybe there's some inkling of, oh, they, you know, these are two guys that live together or something like that. But when the moment comes or if, and we've discussed it with my sister and my brother-in-law, when the moment comes, or if she brings it up, if she ever said to the two of us, um, so you guys live together or you have one bedroom or whatever it might be, it's like then we can honestly have that discussion with her. But I don't know that I would do it without referring to my sister first.

And that's my own sister. And I'm related, obviously, to my niece. So again, handing this all to the state, especially when the state has shown it's so negligent regarding everything else, regarding critical race theory and all the other woke stuff. It's really, really dangerous. And and it's it's. And by the way, by the way, the only reason Florida is doing this is because of that. This isn't that DeSantis was just like, oh, let's do this out of nowhere. It's only because they keep encroaching on everything that we used to think was just sane. Let me tell you, for those who haven't heard it, what happened to my third grader. He's now in sixth grade. But this is this

began our journey out of our old school, which is literally one of the top three schools in the country. And he was thriving there. He was in third grade and we went to parent teacher night and one of the other dads at parent teacher night raised his hands and said to the teacher, and it was the science teacher who was nine months pregnant at the time, why did my son come home and ask me if it's true he can take a pill to prevent puberty and then when he turns, he can have an operation to chop off his penis if he decides he wants to be a girl. Who told him that? And who thought that was an appropriate discussion for third grade? And we were expecting this woman to say, you know, boys chat. It's an all boys school. I don't know. She was like, we told him that it happened in class. We discussed that as part of

our three week education program on trans people. And we were like, what? There was no permission slip. We didn't know it was going to happen. Apparently they had slipped something into like a mass email, which was not revealing of what actually would happen. They were showing videos. Of course, it had, you know, trans people, guys dressed in tutus with a heavy makeup, and the boys were confused. A lot of them had never heard anything about this, right? My child had, but a lot of these boys had never even heard the term trans, and it wasn't her business to introduce them to that concept and to talk to them about chopping off penises. That happened in our school. And if that teacher had tried that shit stuff down in Florida after this law,

she wouldn't have been allowed. The parents actually would have been able to sue if she had done that without disclosing. And they did it in my school without disclosing. And the boys were confused. They were so confused, Dave, that they started had to implement a system where the boys would hold up their hands like in a fist and they would make you hold up one finger two three four or five depending on how confused you were because they were all so confused about what was happening they were it was all the tropes that we've been trying to get rid of around the gay community uh and just gender roles forever. Like, do you like purple? You might be a girl. What? That's not true at all. That liking purple or pink or even a dress doesn't mean anything about your sexuality. So all of it was misinformation. It was confusing to the boys.

It was not sanctioned by the parents. And we couldn't yell at the lady because she was nine months pregnant. The whole thing was so frustrating. And for the first time in the school's 400 year history, they actually had to apologize to the parents. There was such an outrage in this liberal New York City community that when 86 percent for Joe Biden, even those parents were outraged and the school had to apologize. That's what Ron DeSantis is trying to stop. Yeah. And Megan, I remember when you took your kids out of school and I remember when you left New York City and the whole thing. Those are not easy things to do, right? It's like, you're doing pretty well. You have a great family and all that stuff and resources.

And some people don't and some people do, but it's never easy regardless. Regardless of where you're at, it's never easy to just pick up and say, I can't do this anymore. But you did what was right for your kids. So, yeah, DeSantis is defending that. And I think we I think we actually might have discussed this once before. But the other part of the trans discussion that, again, we're talking about such a small amount of people, and that's not to dismiss that amount that those people. But we're having big discussions constantly about a very small percentage of the population. But the other piece of this,

the other piece of this that's really dangerous. And I think people need to start thinking about is that it's actually very anti-gay too, because you just hit on something when you mentioned the colors. So people always say to me, Dave, Oh, you're straight acting, or you don't seem gay or something like that. And it's like, I have been married to a man for eight years. We've been together for 12 years. I assure you I'm gay. Now, do I still like Star Wars and Marvel movies and basketball? I do, but I happen to be gay. And that's just one piece of me. So when I was a kid, let's say fourth grade or whatever, I was playing with GI Joes and Transformers and whatever else. So the teacher may have thought that I was not gay. And I don't think I was thinking about it when I was playing with GI Joes and Transformers and whatever else. So the teacher may have thought

that I was not gay. And I don't think I was thinking about it when I was in fourth grade anyway. However, now take a, say a more effeminate little boy at fourth grader, who's playing with Barbies or just has longer hair or his affect is a little more girl-like or whatever it might be. The teacher would be inclined to push him towards becoming trans and becoming a girl. That's how warped the system is. So they're actually, in a bizarre sense, this is very anti-gay because that four-year-old who's maybe more effeminate is probably just going to grow up to be a gay guy and big damn deal. But instead, they're going to push him to something that's completely out of

whack with his biology. And, you know, if you do and this is exactly what Abigail's book is about that you referenced earlier, irreversible damage. You know, once you do these massive changes to your body, it doesn't mean that you're happier the next day. You know, I mean, people should watch, even though the show was sort of woke, the show Transparent, I think it was on Hulu, does a really good explainer of this, that this man decides or goes through the transitioning process sort of thinking that his life will magically get better because he had this secret or wasn't living as himself all the time. But in many ways, it gets much worse. And that's why I have a lot of sympathy there.

But we really, we're playing with something that's very dangerous here. And it should be left to the parents when the kids are little. It's like, you know, it's too much too soon. And I don't trust these teachers at those levels to understand what's appropriate for these young children, because a lot of these teachers are ideologically driven, and they have some mantle of being like some social engineer with my child that I've never given them. It's not appropriate. So and keeping it a secret is a real thing, too.

In New York, at least in New York City, I haven't checked in New York State, but at least in New York City, you send your kid to private school there and your kid decides to transition while at school. The school has absolutely no obligation to tell you. And in fact, I think the policy is they may not tell you. They may not. So we had friends of friends who had a kid at one of the best schools in the city. And at some point and then the child, who I think was a it was a boy transitioning a girl. I can't remember. But the kid came home and said, I want to be a girl.

And the parents were like, oh, OK. And they said, we're going to talk with the school. The kid said, OK. They went to talk to the school. The school's like, oh, we know he's been dressing as a girl and going by this girl name for a year, for a year. And they didn't tell the parents. And they literally believe here and in L.A. And I quote, this is from the L.A. school district, that the parents' rights stop at the schoolhouse door. Megan, my only sort of belief at this point related to all this is these people are not going to stop. I think we really do have to understand that they are not going to stop. There is no bottom to this pit. They are going to keep going. This is, this is a cult. Wokeness has become a cult and you have to give the devil is due. They have, they have wrought such destruction on all of the things that, that so many generations fought to keep us free and

keep individual rights and logic and reason in place to build the institutions to protect those things. They've done an incredible job of destroying all of those things. And I would say to you, and I would say to anyone that's a parent that's listening to this, if your child is at a school that tolerates any of this or allows for the teacher to have conversations with the student, your child, that they don't have to then tell you about, especially about something of this nature. You have to get your kids out of these schools. We need to build different institutions.

We really do. And I mean that educationally. I mean it culturally. I mean it technologically at every level. They are not going to stop. And I think in some ways we're wasting our energy trying to get them to stop and we should just be building different things. Right. It's on. And I'm so happy that there are governors like DeSantis who say effectively, if if these districts aren't going

to protect the students and the parents, I will. I'll do it with a stroke of a pen. And by the way, supported by the Florida legislature, he won. I want to say one other thing. So we pulled our kids, we sent them to school. That's why we're in Connecticut now, a different school. And let me give you another example of a great teacher. So my same little boy who had been in that third grade class, now he's aging up. Now here he is in fifth grade. And he was just telling me this last night, because we were talking about energy and green energy, all these uh in the wake of what's happening with ukraine and our gas prices and so on and i was making the point that i had made on the air which is um the germans in particular uh could have faced the wrath of

greta turnberg or they could have faced the wrath of vladimir putin and they chose wrong and he knows who greta turnberg is allberg is. All three of my kids do. They've all been taught about her. And my daughter said, oh, yes, my school said that she's a heroine and she's stood up for what's right. And she's made a real difference in making the world a cleaner, healthier, better place. Like, okay, not surprised that that's what you learned in your girl's school. And my son who, again, this is in his new school, his teacher in fifth grade said, Greta Thunberg is very courageous and she stood up for what she believed in. And everyone should do that. She's to be commended for standing up for what she believes in. And the boys, right now they're fifth grade, say, but was she right?

Did she have a point? And he said, it's not my place as your teacher to answer that question. That's a question you discuss with your parents. I'm like, yes, love him. There are good teachers out there who recognize where the line is. Go get yourself one of those. Find those teachers. And Megan, if I was you, I would start a new school with that guy. Just grab them, grab all your sane friends, grab their kids, let him be the principal of the school, run the curriculum and start new things. That's really what we have to do. I mean, I just think it's so obvious that these things are so infected. You know, you know this from New York City. There are just so many stories of all of these elite liberal institutions that have destroyed

themselves, that no longer grade in essence, that that if you do well and you're Asian, they'll punish you for it, that we are you can't do extra credit anymore because that might put you ahead of someone else. We've destroyed meritocracy. And and unfortunately, that's what equity is. You know, we should all be going for equality, and then it's hard work, and it's God-gifted skills, and all of that stuff. We've gone from that to saying, no, we're just going to destroy everybody, so we're all lesser, as opposed to,

let's start everybody at the same point and then see what happens. People are getting it. They know what's what. They're not believing these spinners who, in response, just try to tell us this is all about bigotry and hatred for gays or believe this demonstration this soundbite fora from the florida senate democrats who think they made a point doing the following Did I see you post online something like you're thinking you're reconsidering being gay? They're forcing you in the gay card. You know, look, I'm gay with one guy. We've got a couple of gay friends. But whatever that is, I just want nothing to do with it. It has nothing to do with my life. These people these people are crazy. No one cares that that, I think that woman was saying that her daughter's

gay. Okay. Fantastic lady. But that still gives you no right to do everything that we've talked about in this time with second graders, uh, privately from what their parents may or may not want. These people, most of them should be in mental institutions. I mean, we should have a mass mental health session. If you want to have, if we really want to sit down with people and figure out what's going on here, most of these educators should probably be sat down. Well, speaking of gay people who are going to institutions, I've got to talk to you about Jussie Smollett next because he got his sentence and had a few things to say on his way to the pokey.

You're not going to want to miss this. We'll squeeze in a break and back with the one and only Dave Rubin in just two minutes. Okay, so Jussie Smollett, he's going to jail and this is the right result. He deserves to months in jail. In addition, he has to pay restitution of more than $120,000 and a $25,000 fine as well for making false reports.

None of that money matters. He's got a lot of dough to him. But five months in prison, that means something to him. And the remaining months of probation does it as well. And here is what he had to say in court yesterday in Chicago. I am not suicidal. I am innocent and I am not suicidal. If I did this, then it means that I stuck my fist in the fears of black Americans in this country for over 400 years and the fears of the LGBTQ community. Your honor, I respect you and I respect the jury, but I did not do this and I am not suicidal. And if anything happens to me when I go jury, but I did not do this. And I am not suicidal.

And if anything happens to me when I go in there, I did not do it to myself. And you must all know that. I respect you, Your Honor. I respect your decision. Jail time. I am not suicidal. I am not suicidal! Stop laughing about plaques! I am not suicidal! And I am innocent. I could have said that I was guilty a long time ago.

I'm OK, Epstein. I mean, who does he think it's like? Are you at the center of some worldwide conspiracy where you have tapes on all these powerful people? And there's like, what is it? What? It's all about him and his weird narcissism to the very last moment of freedom in full disclosure i'm not fully aware of the catalog of all of his acting work but i am sure that was the best performance of his life because that's what that was that was nothing other than a performance i mean that was a script that he had been going through in his head that he just rolled out he was ready to roll it out and he rolled rolled out. First off, he did do it. He did do it. There's no shadow of a doubt. He did do it. He faked a hate crime. And in many ways, even though, you know, it's 150 days in jail and some of the other stuff, whatever it is, like that seems like, OK, we can argue it's too little,

too much, whatever. If you think of the cultural damage that this guy did to this nation, think of all of the politicians. We played the or we showed the clip this morning on my show. Kamala Harris's tweet when it happened about, you know, it's proof of systemic racism. I mean, I have it here. Let me read it. Yeah, let's jump to that. You want to jump to that? I mean, it's just incredible. At Jussie Smollett is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know.

I'm praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern-day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate. Can't wait until she walks that back and sets the record straight with America and apologizes for jumping on a bogus allegation that was obviously problematic from the start. But no, she's she won't be doing that. No, of course. And by the way, AOC won't Pelosi won't the rest of them. They use it when they

think it's valuable to them. And then when it always gets debunked as a hoax, which it always does, then then they go silent because the media run cover for them. So, you know, this was the biggest story in America for weeks when it looked like a lynching. But now you think, and I get there's other things going on in the world, this war or whatever. But of course, this is going to fly under the radar. But to your bigger point at the beginning there about, you know, I'm not suicidal. Like, who does he think he is? I mean, look, I don't want the guy to kill himself.

I think what he did was horrific. I wouldn't want anyone to kill themselves, but I'm pretty sure he's telling us he's going to kill himself because he now wants, he wants to be the ultimate martyr now. No, it's not. You said it. I mean, Epstein, there were reasons that people might want Epstein dead, right? Like there was evidence that there were people that he knew and things that he knew and probably other documents that he had access to if he had ever gotten out or whatever. Nobody there's no reason to think that anyone wants to kill this guy. So he's he's telling you this is the ultimate part I can play to instigate the further racial war that I brought to America. Look, the judge said to him yesterday.

And listen, this is somebody who sat there the whole trial, looked at him. Judge James Lynn spoke for nearly over more than 30 minutes before announcing that sentence and said, you, Jussie Smollett, you wrote the case. That's why you're getting jail time. And said, and I quote, there's a side of you that has this arrogance and selfishness and narcissism that's just disgraceful. You're not a victim of a racial hate crime. You're not a victim of a homophobic hate crime. You are just a charlatan pretending to be a victim of a hate crime. And that is shameful. And I agree with that too, right? The brother of Jussie Smollett, Jojo, came out and said he spoke about his arrogance. He doesn't know the struggles my brother's encountering. We don't care. I couldn't

care less what struggles he's encountering. You're going to prison because you did lie. You broke the law. You actually involved a lot of the Chicago PD's time, took up a lot of their time when they could have been solving murders and real crimes out in the streets of Chicago. That's what that black chief of police was saying in his very fiery speech when he announced that this was a made up hoax. And so I don't feel sorry for him at all. You know, Megan, we've all done things that we're not proud of in life. We've all made mistakes. We've all acted dishonestly. We've all done things right. And it's your job as a human to try to do those things less and live the best, honest, forthright life that you can. But I'm obviously

not sitting here as a perfect human. I know you aren't either. Everyone does these things now. But what you get within that in the adventure of your life, I think is you get these brief moments where you can set some of the stuff, right. And he could have had one of those moments yesterday. You know, it's not the worst thing in the world, 150 days in jail. Okay. Especially after knowing what he did and the strife that it caused in this country, he could have upon hearing that verdict, instead of doing what he did, which is exacerbate the situation, make it about him now more, and it seems like he's going to do even worse things in jail, he could have had a moment and said, you know, knowing that the whole

world's looking at him, and said, you know, I got caught up in something. We live in this oddly racialized society, and I've experienced racism in in my life and I did something that I should not have done. I did something that was illegal and immoral that mixed up so many people that would have led him to doing this. Someone who I think is a millionaire who has all the benefits in the world, right? He could have had a moment where he would have done that and then sort of set back some of the craziness that we're always fighting. But instead, he decided to set that craziness forward. And that's where we are. And then adding insult to injury, Kim Fox, the so-called D.A. out there, the Cook County prosecutor, who's just been a nightmare from the start. She's another George Soros backed D the community writ large when it turned out this was an obvious hoax. And Kim Foxx doesn't want to prosecute anybody. So she got big footed by Dan Webb, same guy who put my friend Rod Blagojevich in jail. He's my new friend. He came on a couple Fridays ago. He was great. So anyway, she comes out. She has to offer a statement. All right. To the Chicago Sun-Times. And she says on Thursday, the damaging, costly and disingenuous criminal prosecution of Jussie Smollett came to an end. As the Cook County state's attorney, it pains me the fact that he'd never been accused of a violent crime.

We decided not to pursue a criminal conviction further. That should have been the end of the story. Then she goes on to say, okay, my administration's vacated over 177 wrongful convictions, 87 of those in the last three years. Rather than working collaboratively to stem the rising crime or free the wrongly convicted, a small group of people hijacked the judicial system here to enact what is best described as mob justice. And here's the here it is. Sadly, these tactics have become common. Black women, elected prosecutors around the country have faced the same mob mentality. So it's all about her, Dave. It's about race and it's about her being big footed because of her race, not because she's a DA who won't prosecute crime. We have to give the devil his due and you have to be impressed by the damage that these people have created. The wokesters have created a cult like belief that victimhood is everything. So not only is Jesse Smollett a victim of his own doing, but still pretending to be a victim now. But now you've got the prosecutor, you know, pretending that she's the victim.

Everyone pretends that they're the victim because they put that at the height of the hierarchy of what's important. And if you can somehow perceive yourself to be a victim, then you are a victim. But, you know, these Soros backed DAs that are all over the place. This is not a conspiracy, by the way. I'm sure Media Matters is watching your show as they watch mine every day and they want to get us on every little thing that we say. It is not a conspiracy theory. We know that George Soros puts tons of money towards these crazy left wing DAs who end up in San Francisco. George Gascon in San Francisco. What did he do?

He destroyed San Francisco. And then what happens in the world of left wing California politics? You become the DA of L.A. and then you destroy L.A. And now San Francisco's got this guy, Chesa Boudin, who's even worse than him. And then it happens in Chicago and Seattle and all these other places. They make everything worse. And then you're not going to believe who has to come in and fix these cities. It's those scary, mean conservatives, sort of like in New York City back in the late 80s when progressive hero David Dinkins destroyed the city. And I remember, even though I

grew up in Long Island, I remember going to visit my grandparents who lived in New York City, and it was disgusting. And I literally remember once walking through Times Square and my mom putting her hand over my eyes because she didn't want me to see all the sex shops and the homeless and the whole thing. And then who had to fix it? This guy came in named Rudy Giuliani, and they said he was mean and he hated black people and all the stuff. And then what did he do? He gave New York City basically a 25 year incredible run that then Bloomberg pretty much worked with and continued. And then what happened? It came crashing down by Bill de Blasio, another lefty, I would argue, socialist. So this is a game that we see over and over.

Lefty socialist pothead who is sitting back in Gracie Mansion, toking up a doobie instead of worrying about the overflowing garbage cans, the homeless problem, the crime problem, and the fact that New York, which was a bunch of thriving metropolis with known internationally for its great restaurants and its mom pop stores and its amazing bakeries got reduced to one big starbucks cvs and city bank because of his policies and you can walk through exactly how he did it but he did it now speaking of la can we just talk about something out there do you believe so in new york finally they got rid of the mask mandate in

the schools and our lunatic governor who nobody voted for, Kathy Hochul, finally was forced to do that. But K through five still has to have it on. Little kids, sorry, under five, they still have to wear the masks. It's insane. They're the least at risk from COVID, but they refuse to unmask the littles. Oh, and by the way, there was one school in New York that tried to do an end around the new no mask policy, saying if your teacher says she's more comfortable with having the class in masks, we expect you to accede to her. No, no. F the teacher. No. Does that count? That doesn't F. F is not. That's like it's a placeholder. I really love the fact that you're struggling with this cursing thing too, because it's become a running joke on my show. Because as I said earlier, it's like, what else do we have left with these people? What other words are there than F these people? I can't even say the phrase that I call Kathy on my show. I'm not even going to degrade your show to the point because I don't call her by her last name anymore. I call her something else, but I'll text it to you when we're done here. You raise a good point. Why at a time like this, am I getting rid of my favorite vices? Well, anyway, so let's go fly cross country to LA.

And that school has basically the latest reporting is that they're not taking it off until the end of the year. All the kids are going to have to remain masked until the end of the year. And it's explicitly because of the teachers unions. They say we're not ready. We're not. Ah, Dave. Megan, did you see this thing on television? I saw it about two weeks ago. There was this elderly man who gave a big speech in front of a bunch of other old people. It was somewhere in Washington, B.C. He read off a teleprompter. There were two women sitting behind him. Does this ring a bell for you? Somebody clapped with their knuckles right behind him. Yeah, the woman that was going like this the whole time, really creepy. I believe it was Joe Biden, I think was his name. And it was the State of the Union that they did. And it was a whole bunch of people in a room with no windows

and none of them had masks. I think there was that one woman with the mask there. Joe Biden, 79 years old. Most of those people are elderly. We know that age is one of the major factors in how sick you'll get with COVID. These people are liars at every level. They have lied to us about everything. I don't know how to describe it any other way than that. There is no science, zero science that says that kids should be in masks at this point. Actually, the surgeon general here in Florida, as you know, I fled L.A. I'm an L.A. refugee who now lives in the free state of Florida. The surgeon general who we have here, who's absolutely fantastic, he's been basically reading reports during press conferences showing

that there is no science. So Fauci, who suddenly has disappeared over the last few weeks, he would go on Meet the Press and all the shows and he would never refer to data. He would always say, well, we need the numbers to be low enough. Well, that doesn't mean anything. That's just an idea, right? Yeah, exactly right. So people are lying, Megan.

They're lying about everything. And if you send, at this point, two years after two weeks to flatten the curve, if you send your kids to school in years after two weeks to flatten the curve, if you send your kids to school in a mask, three-year-olds, four-year-olds who are now having speech delays and their sores on their mouth. I mean, there's all sorts of stuff coming out that kids are not speaking properly. Literally the muscles in their mouths are not developing properly. If you are still sending your kids to schools in that situation, you're abusing your own child.

I don't know how to say it any other way. It's so we have to remember the kids who are masked. Don't move on. My kids, thank God, are unmasked now. But we can't just move on without them. We have to go back and get them like the kids in the L.A. Unified School District. And this nonsense and these terrible, terrible teachers unions need to be held to account. Dave Rubin, so delighted that the G word Florida resident Dave Rubin was here today. And I'm glad that you're loving Florida. I hope soon we can say the same for Clyde and get back to me on what we do when he jumps up on the kitchen island right in front of you. Megan, I love you. Clyde loves you. We can't wait

to cook some chicken parm for you, drink some tequila in the free state of Florida. Oh, right back at you, Dave. Lots of love. Thanks for being here. Bye-bye. If you haven't checked out the Rubin Report, you need to. That's obvious why. You should go download it now. He's always this entertaining. And don't forget, you can find the full video show and clips of our show when you subscribe to our YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Megyn Kelly. And go back and take a look at our old Dave Rubin episodes because they're all great. Thanks to the Durham investigation into the Trump Russia probe.

This is the guy who's trying to figure out how everyone got it so wrong. We now know that President Trump was, in fact, spied on. Investigative reporter and longtime media fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution, Paul Sperry, has been doing great, in-depth, fearless reporting on this topic, shedding light on the shady, and I do mean shady, cast of characters involved. And he's here with me now. Paul, thank you so much for being here. All right. So you're going to help us walk through it in the little baby terms, because this is so confusing. So let me explain how I want to do it. To remind our audience,

you got John Durham. He's probing. How did Russiagate happen? How did this lie get made up about a sitting president and distract the nation for over two years straight? And he indicted, among others, this guy, Michael Sussman, a lawyer who he says lied to the FBI and didn't disclose that he was in there trying to push negative information on Trump to the FBI, like, hey, you should investigate this. And how about this? He lied by not disclosing that he was actually a lawyer for the Clinton campaign, which would have been relevant. Now, most reports say that the FBI actually already knew that, but that doesn't excuse a lie.

And so Sussman, who is denied that he's lied, is facing some legal hot water. OK, so in the course of that piece of Sussman, of Durham's case, he files a motion. There's some sort of conflict of interest going on with the lawyers. I don't it's irrelevant, I think, for now. And in his latest motion, Durham says, let me tell you another little story about Michael Sussman and some people he hired that were inappropriately using data that they had legal access to the data because they were running White House servers and other servers that Trump was using. But they did not have the legal right to be plumbing those servers for data related to Trump

and then making it somewhat public, using it against him. And that is what Durham is alleging. This guy, Michael Sussman, who worked for the Clinton campaign, used unidentified tech executive to do. Who is tech executive? What tech executive had access to servers that Donald Trump, the candidate, was using, that Donald Trump, the president, was using, and then went to the FBI with data trying to make Trump look bad? Who is tech executive? Okay, enter Paul Sperry. Now, he's going to tell you the name of the tech executive. And before we get to that piece, the Durham and all that, we're going to walk a little bit through this guy's background because you do it brilliantly. So who is the guy?

Rodney Jaffe is quite the operator. Bit of a hustler. Originally from South Africa. the operator um bit of a hustler originally from south africa and uh he's supposed to be a big cyber security expert uh entrusted with government internet data uh and supposed to be protecting us from you know cyber creeps trying to snoop on us and hack us. But it looks like he's one of those creeps himself, spying on Trump and a number of his advisors as well. And we found that he has a pretty sketchy background

running mail order scams and online lottery scams, which begs the question, how did this guy get the security clearance to run contracts with the FBI, the Pentagon, even the White House, and get access to all of this sensitive, otherwise protected data, which also, by the way, raises a lot of privacy issues and concerns. So tell us about, let's take a walk down Memerline, and tell us about Rodney L. Joffe and the Grandfather Clock. Oh, yes. So the Grandfather Clock scam.

So Joffe was alleged to be fleecing. He he was actually charging these folks $69 for shipping and handling. And so millions got scammed and state attorneys investigated, as well as the feds. So the U.S. Postal Inspectors got involved. And Joffe and his partner ended up having to refund hundreds of thousands of dollars. And, uh, we tracked down his old business partner, uh, retired in Florida and she blamed everything on Rodney said, Rodney, this was all Rodney's idea. And she quit right after that investigation. So this is just to remind the audience, this is the same guy.

This is tech executive one. We're talking about, this is the guy who allegedly went to the FBI with the Trump data from his servers and the White House servers and said, hey, might be a Russia connection here. Might want to look into it. He did it through Michael Sussman, the lawyer. It's always better to do it through a lawyer because they believe people with nefarious motives and otherwise it might be privileged. Maybe the conversation won't be discoverable if you involve a lawyer so this is the guy this is tech executive one with his grandfather clock scam who somehow worked his way up to become the guy who controls the white house servers okay so you as you write in your piece for real clear uh investigations love real code politics dot com's got all sorts of good things on it you're right but joffy joffy pressed on with his direct mail marketing business um before packing up for arizona a few a few years later so he wasn't content after getting caught with a whole grandfather clock thing to just move on to a legitimate life well he you know there's some questions why why he left. We did find some pretty hefty tax liens against his property in Los Angeles, and he ends up in Phoenix and tries to recreate himself as a champion for consumers battling mail order scams and also spam and kind of garnered a reputation as such.

And then years later, he ends up in Washington as a cybersecurity expert and gets in with the FBI number of contracts. Now, but wait a minute. Can't that be a thing, right? You do some stuff that may be not totally above board, like the thing with the clock, but then you learn your lesson and you're like, you know what? I'm going to use my powers for good now and become the quote, as he put it in the name of his business, white hat hacker, to use the tricks of the trade for good. Doing this to protect you. Right, right. Yeah. But he ended up being involved with this freelotto.com.

So there's a pattern here in freelotto.com. Had to pay millions in fines for deceptive advertising. Freelotto.com. What's that? Freelotto.com. Is a lot of- Freelotto.com? Freelotto.com. Yeah, basically, instead of exploiting the retirees, now his company's involved with or exploiting poor folks.

And they ended up having to pay the parent company, PlasmaNet, millions of dollars to New York and other states for fines for deceptive advertising. So my point is that that's a pattern. That's why I was initially saying that he's a bit of a hustler, this guy. But he really cleaned up his reputation and repackaged himself as a cyber security expert. And a number of people in Washington, you know, they bought it. And, you know, he, the cyber forensics experts were colleagues that I've talked to said, this guy really isn't that good. He's not, he's not good at computer programming. And, you know, is a networking analyst. He's more of an operator.

And, you know, he brags about how much, you know, carrying around bags of money to make things happen. So we're continuing to dig into his background. We've also found some other things that are curious in his background that we're developing. How did this guy get, I mean, forgive my naivete, but how did he pass an FBI background check, which he would have had to, to have access to the White House servers? Right, that's the big question. You know, who are these people

and how do they have so much power? And who's vetting them? Because obviously this would have showed up in an FBI personal background check on him, which, you know, he's got top secret clearance, especially since the U.S. Postal Service was involved in that investigation. But somehow he passed.

And, you know, some Justice Department people I've talked to who know about this situation, in this case, say that he's got friends in high places. So, you know, he was an advisor to Obama in the White House, President Obama. He was an informant for James Comey's FBI. And we even dug up some old photos of him together with Obama and together with James Comey. What was he doing for James Comey? My God, it's like the web of people who are involved in Russiagate. It always comes back to the same few people.

Yes, that's true. Yeah. One big happy family. So he was working on some cybersecurity cases. And he also had a number of contracts with the FBI. And those contracts involved monitoring government computers for breaches and also the Justice Department and the Pentagon. And, of course, we know about the White House executive office of the president. Oh, and by the way, let me back up.

You were talking about things he was spying on Trump. Not just Trump Towers and the executive office of the president, he was also looking in the transition offices for the president-elect back then, but he was also looking at traffic involved with the internet servers connected to Trump's apartment building in Central Park West. All right, we're going to get to that piece, because that's, of course, what the audience is most interested in. What did he do to Trump, if anything, and how does it play in? But his background to me is fascinating. Nobody bothered to look. If somebody had done this to Joe Biden, all the media would be exposing the weird clock thing and the free lotto. And he's still on the board, I guess, of that company. And we'd be questioning why was such a character involved in this and what exactly did he do?

But no, this story has been buried since it broke. It's been totally buried. The mainstream media push back so hard on it. No one spied on anyone. Grow up, you losers. There there's no there there and the media got scared and shied away i mean basically everybody stopped covering it but we're not going to stop covering it um so now the guy the media is yeah they're running a lot of interference on the story so that it can't be covered and a lot of obfuscation and going with what they're fed by the defense attorneys for Joffe and Sussman and others instead of doing independent reporting and research. And the reason for that is primarily because there's Pulitzers on the line here. You know, if this thing, if the Russiagate hoax is unraveled and Durham's hitting a lot of pay dirt here and that is happening and it's completely unraveled, you know, you have to go back and look at some of these Pulitzers.

The New York Times, The Washington Post won. So, I mean, they were complicit in the scandal. And so they have a lot invested here to prevent the public from knowing about this, what these indictments and everything that Durr is covering. he's climbing the ranks in Washington, buddying up with President Obama, with James Comey. And then when he ultimately gets this role, overseeing the servers, and then he winds up in hot water things to Durham. Well, he's not named and he's not indicted. It's this guy Sussman. Again, it's in the context of the case against Sussman that his name came up. Those around him circle the wagons, Paul, and they say,

this is not a political guy. This isn't some Hillary operative tech executive one, meaning Joffe. And you lay it out in your piece very clearly. Indeed, he is. He's made it pretty clear where his loyalties were. That's right. Durham uncovered an email in 2016 where Joffe was telling a colleague, listen, I've been promised, I was promised a top job, cybersecurity job in a Hillary Clinton administration. So he had a vested interest in, you know, smearing trump and uh the crew that he had he had hired uh not hired but um uh he had enlisted and recruited to help with sussman and the hillary clan campaign go data mine all this uh information all these DNS logs on Trump. They, there was another email where one of the lead researchers from Georgia Tech,

whose pals with Joffe said, you know, the only reason we're doing this, once they couldn't find what Joffe was telling them, you know, the narrative to create, they would say, hey, he admitted the only reason we're doing this is because we all share a hatred for Trump. Yes. And just to back you up, this is from your piece posted at Real Clear Politics. Again, it's Real Clear Investigations. There's the email that you just referenced. Jaffe writes in 2016, shortly after Clinton's loss to Trump in November 2016, he writes, I was tentatively offered the top cybersecurity job by the Democrats when it looked like they'd win. And then he goes on, I definitely would not take the job under Trump. And then to your point, those who are helping Jaffe, his lead researcher, Manos Antonakakis, of the Georgia Institute of Technology,

revealed in one email obtained by Durham, you write, that quote, the only thing that drives us is that we just don't like Trump. So let's get to what they did, you know, that became the subject of this motion Sussman filed. Again, these people are not indicted. Sussman is the one who's indicted so far. Jaffe's not. And this guy, Antonin Kakas, is not. Who knows where the investigation goes, but he's certainly looking at all these people to figure out what they did so although joffy is pleaded the fifth he was subpoenaed and he's pleaded the fifth to protect himself from self-incrimination to be very right he's not been charged at this point but so what did they do walk us through it paul like what because you know there was a lot of you know trump's like it's worse than watergate what they did to us. And then the media,

they were like, this is bullshit. There's once again, I can't ring in my dirty mouth. I gave up swearing for Lent, Paul. The media is like, this is a lie. There was no spying. I saw I think it was Tom Winter on MSNBC on Morning Joe one day who I like and I respect Tom, but he was saying he didn't steal anything. He basically was like a doorman standing at the door who had access to certain things and then maybe just kind of passed on that same access to somebody else coming through the door. I'm like, what? He said it better than that in his defense. But they really ran cover for what actually happened, saying, you know, he had total access, he had rightful access to the data. That, okay, that may be true. So did Edward Snowden, sort of, right? But like, what you then do with the data matters. You take it from there. Okay, so Jaffe, even though he's near the top of this conspiracy that Durham is investigating,

which is Clinton campaign operatives were spying on Trump's internet traffic to try and make it look, and then data mining it, trying to make it look, cherry picking data, trying to make it look, creating this narrative that he was secretly communicating with the Kremlin in Russia, which Durham is completely debunked in his speaking indictments. But Joffe wasn't the guy actually doing the hands-on mining. He held the key to the data through his contracts with his Internet startup companies and also through Newstar, who was a big Beltway bandit with huge contracts with the government in Washington. And then he recruited and enlisted these Georgia Tech contractors, computer contractors,

who were vying for a very lucrative Pentagon contract worth millions of dollars at the time. So they also had fiduciary interest in helping the Clinton campaign, not just around personal political biases. And so they actually were tasked by Joffe to go through the holdings of DNS logs. this is domain name system records, basically, put it simply, this is the pinging back and forth between your phone, your cell phones and your computers the holdings of that that Jaffe had access to. And then eventually Georgia Tech researchers landed that contract with the Pentagon. This is the research arm of the Pentagon that they're working for. And now they've got their own access, you know, their own access to these holdings. But back then in 2016, that's what they were doing. And they were also tasked with looking, there was a five-page dossier that Fusion GPS put together for Jaffe and his crew. And Jaffe, in turn, gave that to his crew and said,

hey, also scoured the internet data for dirt on these guys. And I'm told that these guys, these other, and the document is called Trump's Associates List. And so that list included papadopoulos george papadopoulos uh lieutenant general flynn uh man paul manafort and um carter page and also steve bannon of course okay so they So they weren't just spying on Trump. They were looking in this data, which is pretty sensitive. Some of it is public. A lot of it was non-public.

And you're talking about millions of records. And these are the gatekeepers of the internet, these guys. You know, they're not just geeks. They have political agendas and access to crime. That's scary because who else are they spying on? You know, they're looking at millions of records that are generated, you know, you and I right now. And they are looking at them daily and they have access that other people don't have to because of these government contractors. And no one's vetting them. And that's that's scary because you're and i think durham has stumbled into a potentially even bigger scandal here and that is privacy rights violations

um you know on a massive scale um and i've talked to a number of their colleagues who weren't part of this operation, this confidential project assessment, build it as for Hillary. And they're pissed. You know, they, they want those Georgia tech guys, Jaffe, of course, their contracts to be canceled. Had they haven't been? No, they're still working on those contracts. And, you know, they still have access to all that data on all of us. Oh, that's unbelievable. prosecutors see that as a potential crime. But, you know, beyond that, you know, this raises a number of privacy issues, because these guys I talked to said, look, these guys were trusted

with this data. And these were clear privacy violations, they should not be anywhere near these contracts anymore. It's unbelievable that this guy is pleading the fifth and yet he still, as you put it, has the keys that he is perfectly willing to hand out from what we learned from Durham to those keys to anyone that he's still in charge. He still has all the access. And maybe Georgia Tech does too? He was, well, he's no longer at New Star. So a couple of weeks before the Durham indictment was unsealed, he left or was forced out at New Star. By the way, New Star, Durham's also looking at New Star and has already subpoenaed thousands of documents from New Star. And this is pretty interesting.

This is kind of buried in my story. And I encourage your viewers and listeners to go to realclearinvestigations.com and read the full article it's all the details are in there laid out well um but uh durham in one of his indictments uh actually said that sussman and Perkins Core, this is the lawyer for Hillary's campaign, build Newstar itself for the confidential project. And that's the alpha bank business that they were working on to try and frame Trump. Why? So Newstar's leadership knew about this project.

It wasn't just Joffey. So just to reiterate that, so Hillary Clinton's campaign lawyers billed Newstar, the company that was operating the servers. Or an opposition research project for the Hillary campaign. Yeah. He's got a document. She's got a billing record showing that. And this is another part of the story, which is huge, has a background as a trial attorney prosecuting fraud and money laundering cases which is very interesting well because what

they seem to be saying correct me if i'm wrong you're you've been following this way more closely. What Jaffe seems to be saying is that a he did nothing criminal, but be given the hack of the Democratic National Committee that had happened not too long before this, it was actually his job. This is what we've heard, you know, from his surrogates to monitor communications and make sure there was no red flag suggesting a hack or an inappropriate Russian presence. And that's what he and his team were allegedly worried about. And I'll let you respond to that. But even if you accept that, how does that explain him seeing a red flag? And instead of, you know, going directly to the fbi and saying there's a problem instead he goes to hillary clinton's campaign lawyers oh what right so yes you nailed it so

you know here you have these guys they're claiming that hey we're just looking out for national security interests here and we're worried about Russia. And so, okay, so their job typically is supposed to spot threats, you know, hacking, spamming, phishing, threats on the Internet. Okay. And that's what those contracts are for through the Pentagon and why they had that contract to monitor the EOP in the White House.

But as you said, so if you're finding some threats, like you claimed you saw, which, by the way, were not completely debunked, first of all, it's the first problem with that. But if they were finding genuine threats, you would go to the authorities directly with those threats and report them. Instead, they handed them off to Hillary's people, who they knew were doing opposition research on Trump. joffy is has apparently admitted according to durham that that was the team offering him a job if she should win i mean and to to our earlier discussion it's not exactly like this guy has this squeakiest you know resume prior to getting to this job that would make us think he would never he would never cross an ethical line and we certainly have some questions all right wait there's much more to discuss on this and some other issues that we're going to get to with Paul Sperry, a brilliant

journalist investigative who's actually doing the work on this case, unlike virtually everyone else. Again, he's with RealClearInvestigations.com. You can find his piece there. Let me get the actual title for you because it's so good. It's entitled The Checkered Past of the FBI Cyber Contractor Who Spied on Trump. So, again, Jaffe not charged with a crime, Sussman denying that he committed a crime. Were you able to get a statement at all from Jaffe, who now you say is pleading the fifth? Nope. He's not talking, just statement through his attorney who said that, hey, listen, this guy had access to this

data through his contracts and he was looking at threats. And that's their story. They're sticking to it. But he has refused to cooperate with Durham's investigators and his grand jury. And so to me that that shows that, you know, he's worried. He's worried. You know, he's he's pled the fifth. He's not cooperating. And he's really hunkered down right now. But he, I'm told, is near the top of this conspiracy and a central player. Now, when this story broke, it was covered mostly by more conservative media, Fox News, Daily Wire, and so on, and New York Post.

And immediately, as I referenced, you had MSNBC and you know sort of the more mainstream the new york times in a very lengthy piece tried to explain to us why this wasn't a story and took issue with the exactly and took issue with the term spying there was no spying there was no infestation of anything or invasion of anything and um this is a little flashback of some of what we heard um about how there was no spying there was no spying on trump it's completely wrong it did not it did not happen this was there was no spying there was it's it's pizza gate the conspiracy team is no more accurate than pizza gang.

No one was spying on the president through the microwave. No one spied on the Trump campaign. There was no spying. There was no spying. No spying. There was no spying. There was no spying. There was no spying.

There was no spying. There was no spying. There was no spying. Wow. By the way, there was no spying, of course. There was no spying. There was no spying. Wow. By the way, there was no spying, of course. There was no spying. There was no spying. On the Trump campaign.

On the Trump campaign. It's been a year and a half. There was no spying on the Trump campaign. Of this crap. No spying on the Trump campaign. Which is a conspiracy theory. No spying on the Trump campaign. Facts matter.

And oh, by the way, no, there was no. There was no. No. No. No spying on the Trump campaign. Facts matter. And oh, by the way, no, there was no there was no, no, no, no spying on the Trump campaign. Yeah. So you get the you get the picture. That was actually before I think this report dropped. But we heard similar stuff right after to saying no spying and the media has gotten this all wrong and there's no there there. Your reaction to it? Well, they parroted the talking points. They were fed really well. I guarantee none of those talking heads have read any of the filings, definitely didn't read the 30-odd page original speaking indictment, which is complex for anybody. You're talking about all this cyber forensics and DNS logs and everything everything so they're just talking at a

superficial level they have no idea what Durham is uncovered and what's really shameful is that none of the big media have have gone into those details and just reported the facts. They've just dismissed things at a superficial level without getting down and doing the spade work and finding out exactly what Durham is uncovering. And by the way, he's interviewed dozens of witnesses and you're talking about tens of thousands of pages of documents, text messages, emails, billing records that he's been able to subpoena with his grand jury. By the way, he's got two grand juries up and running, one in D.C. and another in Virginia,

in a different case involving the dossier, the primary source of the dossier, Danchenko. So this is a very elaborate, intricate, complex investigation that he's doing. And for political reasons, obviously, the talking heads just trying to dismiss it. And New York Times and Washington Post, you put that really well. They're not reporting on it. They're just trying to say why it's not a story to shoot it down. And again, they're trying to, Russiagate was their big, their Pulitzer Prizes. And they are

loathe to have that all unraveled. And that is exactly what's been happening. It started with the Horowitz Report. Actually, Mueller, who just found a big nothing burger in terms of the conspiracy, the Trump-Russia conspiracy,

and then Horowitz took it another level and discredited the dossier and now dermis finding even more pater um to refute all that and um his final report is going to be you know boil the oceans if biden's attorney general doesn't deep six it. Wow. Really? I mean, why? Because so far it's, you know, what, what you hear is it's a yawn. It's like so far they've got, okay, somebody related to the dossier and then they got, that's a lawyer who like told him, I mean, lying to the FBI is always the thing they get you on

when they can't get you on anything real. Right. So like that's I've heard even smart people I respect say things like that about the Durham investigation so far. So why are you saying it's going to be a boil the oceans moment? I've never heard that term. I like it. Well, Mueller, Mueller didn't come up with any big hits. You know, all of his prosecutions were for process crimes, essentially. But what Durham is up against is statute of limitations, you know, five-year federal statute of limitations. I'm told he's building a conspiracy case, may need to be seen. I have skepticism about that. But if he is building a conspiracy case, he's not affected by the statute of limitations. And, you know, aside from what other indictments

he comes up with, potentially, the final reports are going to be devastating to the whole Russiagate narrative. And it's imperative that the American people see it, understand it without it being redacted and blacked out. And it's up to Attorney General Garland whether or not he's going to do that and let the public see that report. I mean, he has to. If he does, it would be. If he doesn't, Durham probably won't have the report out before the November election.

And Republicans are expected to win back control of the committees, investigative committees, and the gavels for the hearings and subpoena power. So if it's pushed past that, it has a really good chance of seeing the light of day and being forced through the media cover up, through hearings and subpoenaing Durham to testify. If, you know, they try to, you know, deep six the report, it can come out, Republicans can push it out there after November, or actually after January when they get control, especially in the House, maybe the Senate. What does the timeframe look like that Durham's under?

These grand juries have limited time frames that they can sit. You know, everybody's complaining. That's why I think large part Fox News backed off the story until recently is because they felt like he was dragging his feet and there's going to be a whole lot of nothing. But his reputation for being, you know, methodical, fastidious to a fault and moving at a glacial pace. Plus, to be fair to him, he was hampered and hamstrung by COVID restrictions in D.C., which were off the charts, what they're doing in D.C. for COVID restrictions. So he couldn't panel his his grand jury for hearings. FBI agents couldn't do face-to-face investigations.

And so I think we'll see this thing speed up here as they remove some of these COVID restrictions going forward. What, I want to just, on the subject of the media covering it up and downplaying it. Here's an example. This is from the New York Times and a piece by Charlie Savage that got a lot of response. The headline was court filing started a furor in right wing outlets, but their narrative is off track and they try to excuse, you what joffy did and so on but this let me read you this line from his piece um he says upon close inspection these narratives being

pushed are often based on a misleading presentation of the facts or outright misinformation they also tend to involve dense and obscure issues. So dissecting them requires asking readers to expend significant mental energy and time, raising the question of whether news outlets should even cover such claims. What? Wait, why? Why does that? Do you write for a bunch of dumb asses? Because my audience can understand this just fine. Dumb people. Sorry. Go ahead, Paul. Crazy. Crazy. That's a classic line that should telegraph to everybody, the bias that's going on in

the New York Times in covering this story. It's the too complex to cover excuse. It's never been heard of in the history of journalism. A journalist's job is to take complex information and distill it down into its simplest terms so the readers can understand it. And I mean, that's her job. So he's basically saying, oh, we're we're committing malpractice here and we're not going to tell you what's going on with this case. I had to work too hard. I didn't I would have. We're going to have to work too hard and you're going to have to work too hard to figure it

out, even though it's our job to help you understand it. But we don't like it is what he's really saying is we don't like it. And so we don't want to cover it. And that's actually the most honest thing I've read in the times in a while. But all right, some pushback because the judge in the overall Durham case, the one that's looking into Sussman, didn't really like this piece of Durham's brief. Judge Christopher Cooper, D.C. District Court, that's the federal trial court there in D.C., apparently in a hearing, according to CNN, said this was unnecessary for you to include in this piece, said, including this material in this motion, it was not necessary for me, let alone for Mr. Sussman. I didn't see any link to areas that were relevant. I didn't need any of that ancillary information. I don't know why the information was in there.

And Sussman, he argued that it was incendiary and that he wanted it stricken. That was denied. That didn't happen. But this is the judge saying to Durham, what are you doing? Why did you go down that lane in this relatively simple filing about conflict of interest? Who are you trying to please with this stuff? So what do you make of that? Well, the judge is showing his hand a little bit there. Something that Durham is up against, you know, not just with the D.C. judges who tend to be Democrats. I think Cooper's a Obama appointee. Is that right?

Are you asking me? So he's not only having to deal with Democrat Trump hating judges to hear his cases, but if they go to trial, which these two are expected to go to trial, Danchenko as well. You know, he's dealing with with D.C. jurors, which is tough for him although the dan chango case he'll be dealing with um eastern virginia um district so a little bit different animal there perhaps he is by the way i know obama appointee this judge he is okay so there you go uh so he he's to he's going to have a rough time, just like he had a rough time. With the judge, you heard the Kevin Clinesmith, the FBI, senior FBI lawyer who was indicted, you know, related to falsifying information to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on Trump advisor Carter Page. So that guy got a slap at him you know they were asking for prison time uh the judge who's a real democrat activist from a long uh you know his family is a bunch of democrat activists and boesberg i think was his name judge boesberg

uh gave the guy a slap in the wrist. Okay. Let's zoom out there. Now that's too far down a rabbit hole that I didn't appropriately tell you. So there's another Democrat judge he faced. He didn't get a prison sentence for a huge case. I mean, this guy was lying to the FISA court and got slapped in the wrist where all he had to do is write for his favorite liberal newsletter in D.C. for to satisfy his voluntary time under probation. Oh, wow. OK, so let's let's zoom out in the minutes that we have left. If I had you over to a dinner party, Paul, and we had people

like my mom there who don't, she's definitely not reading Real Clear Investigations, and she probably doesn't totally understand what Russiagate was. She knows it was bad and that the media messed it up, but not much more. How would you explain what Durham is doing here? And what, basically, what happened here and what is the likely outcome of his investigation? Well, he, like, you know, his original scope of his investigation

was laid out. He's looking at the counterintelligence operation that the FBI primarily ran against Trump and his advisors and seeing if there was any criminal element to it. And he's finding that there's all sorts of stuff going on with the Hillary campaign being involved, including with the FBI, as we're finding. And he's got a lot that we don't know about.

And we won't know until we see his final report because his shop is airtight. I mean, this guy does not leak, unlike Mueller, whose office leaked like a sieve. So we'll have to see. But his final report is going to be literally thousands of pages. I mean, this guy, the amount of voluminous documentation that he's uncovered. But like I said, it's going to boil the ocean if it's allowed, if it's not just blacked out page after page after page. Right.

Yeah. We will anxiously look forward to that. Paul, thank you so much for the deep dive. Really interesting. I encourage everybody to go read the original piece and to read everything Paul writes because he's willing to do the work. It's been a pleasure. Monday, we've got David Leonhardt back of the New York Times. He's getting pummeled. We'll tell you why. And I want to tell you something else. Last night, I conducted the longest interview I've ever done for this show. Four hours. You'll know the name. It's going to be big. There's a tease.

Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.