The Megyn Kelly Show - Putin's Madness and Next Moves, and Biden's Massive Speech, with Michael Knowles and Garry Kasparov | Ep. 271

Episode Date: March 1, 2022

Megyn Kelly is joined by Garry Kasparov, former chess champion and pro-democracy activist, to talk about how Vladimir Putin is displaying the characteristics of a madman, why the Ukraine invasion already signals we're in World War III, why dictators never ask "why" and always ask "why not," how Europe and the world is reacting to Putin's invasion, what Putin's next moves are, America's role in the world, and more. Then, Michael Knowles, host at The Daily Wire, to talk about Biden's consequential speech tonight for the State of the Union, the COVID restrictions suddenly being dropped now, the hysterical response to Ukraine invasion media coverage, and more. Finally, Seth Huston, swimming coach at Rice University, joins to talk about transgender swimmer Lia Thomas breaking records, what the NCAA will and should do next, 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. As Ukraine fights for its very existence, and President Biden prepares for the biggest speech of his career, we are witnessing an historic story of Vladimir Putin versus the free world, with Mother Russia even turning against him in ways we've rarely seen before. It comes as horrifying images emerge out of Ukraine. This is what war in Europe looks like in 2022. And for those listening, you can see it on YouTube on our channel later. Video here capturing the moment a

rocket destroyed a government building in Ukraine's second largest city. Smoke and debris flying into the air, vaporizing a large, beautiful building. Satellite images from the U.S. company Maxar Technologies showing a Russian military convoy zeroing in on the Ukrainian capital of Kiev, the convoy more than 40 miles long, made up of armored vehicles, tanks, and artillery, with serious questions about whether the Ukrainians can withstand that. But perhaps nothing is more shocking than the stories of the youngest victims of this war. Earlier today, Ukraine's President Zelensky appealing to all of humanity in remarks to the European Parliament. were killed. Again and again, President Putin is going to say that is some kind of operation and we are heating a military infrastructure. Where are our children? What kind of military

factories do they work at? What tanks are they going with or launching cruise missiles. He killed 16 people just yesterday. Among the victims, a beautiful schoolgirl named Polina. She and her parents were shot dead, trying to leave Kiev by car. Oh, look at her face. Her brother and sister are currently in intensive care. Britain's The Sun newspaper asking Putin how many children must die. And then there's this heartbreaking image from The Times, a paramedic trying in vain to save a six-year-old girl who had been injured in a rocket attack. You can see the anguish on the face of the man next to this child, his body completely covered in blood. The Daily Mirror is summing it up this way. Putin is a coward who kills little girls in slippers and unicorn pajamas. My next guest has sounded alarm bells about Vladimir Putin for more than a decade. He is one of the most famous Russians today.

Garry Kasparov captivated the world as a chess champion, I mean, in a class of one, and has gone on to use his voice to fight for democracy and human rights. Gary, welcome. So great to have you here on a day like this. Thank you for inviting me. So help us understand what Putin, what his game must be at this point. You know, the speculation about whether he would go into Ukraine or not is done. We've seen him do it. And with his 40 mile long convoy, it's only going to get worse from here. What do you think his end goal is at this point? What we are seeing now is the last chapter of Putin's war in Ukraine, and even a larger war on democracy and on our civilization. And it hasn't started recently. It's as long as Putin is reigning in Russia. Let's not forget,

Putin claimed in early days of his rule in Russia that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century. And at one point, he believed that it was his messianic role to restore it. And then he went even further. 15 years ago, in February 2007, in Munich, at Security Conference in Europe, he laid down his vision for the future of Europe and the world, speaking about so-called spheres of influence, which meant in his language that we had to go back to the 19th century world where big guys, big countries were in the position to dictate to their smaller and weaker neighbors how to run their domestic and foreign affairs. And Putin was not just talking. He backed his

words by his actions. In 2008, he attacked the Republic of Georgia, annexing part of its territory, and the free world swallowed it. He was very active in the world stage, supporting every dictator who was in danger. He played an instrumental role in saving Bashar al-Assad in 2013, using Russian air force to carpet bomb Aleppo and other rebel strongholds in Syria. In 2014, he decided that he was strong enough to attack Ukraine directly and annex Crimea and incited violence in Eastern Ukraine that led to a short war and part of Ukrainian territory had been de facto annexed as well, though he failed with his main objective to create so-called new Russia, cutting Ukraine in pieces and creating

an unbroken line of territories ranging from Lugansk to Odessa. And he also was never shy of buying favors from Western politicians and business people and personalities, and of course, assassinating his political opponents, both inside Russia and outside of Russia. And the problem is that he never paid for his crimes. And seeing no consequences for his actions, he eventually believed that it was time for him to move against Ukraine most decisively. Because he never recognized Ukraine as an independent state. Russian propaganda for the last eight years had been diminishing Ukraine as the failed state that was just waiting for Russia to come in and restore what they call historical justice. And we all know he has been preparing his invasion of Ukraine in plain sight. It was not that his

attack from three directions, from north, south, and east against Ukraine a week ago was a surprise attack. He even brought his Pacific fleet to the Black Sea. And again, the free world wasn't silent, but nobody or very few people took him seriously. I've been saying for many years that while Putin was our problem in Russia, at one point, as every dictator, he would be everybody's problem. And now what we're seeing took him seriously. I've been saying for many years that while Putin was our problem in Russia, at one point, as every dictator, he would be everybody's problem. And now what we're seeing, and let's not deceive ourselves, this is already World War III, and this is not just a war against Ukraine. Vladimir Putin is attacking the very foundation of the world we used to live since

World War II. And if he succeeds in Ukraine, all bets are off. And for those who think that we can escape confrontation with Putin, look, read history books. And that's why I think that the measures that are being taken, they are important, but still more can be done. But the most tragic, you know,

Megan, portion of these sanctions eight years ago, even six months ago, could have saved thousands and thousands of lives if Putin believed that the world would act. But unfortunately, it was a failure after failure. And now we're dealing with a mad dictator and Russian army is shifted from so-called liberation mission, as it was originally proclaimed, to a total dissemination of Ukrainian cities, because Putin is absolutely getting crazy.

Since his original plan of taking over Kiev in three days and installing puppet government and going back to negotiating table with America and Europe, this plan miserably failed. There's so much brilliance in there. I mean, so many good points. Let me start with one of the last ones. Do you believe he's a madman now? Do you believe he's lost his own mental faculties in a way that we haven't seen prior to right now? absolutely look he's in power for 22 years it's a long time even for the most intelligent person with the noblest intentions that could be very damaging and putin was not one of this kind of guys so his education uh came from the streets of leningrad and from KGB school. And for the last few years, he has been increasingly isolated.

As every dictator, he is relying on a very small, ever-shrinking inner circle. We know that he doesn't trust internet and open sources, which means he relies on the information brought to him by this inner circle. And his vision of the world is outdated.

And also, we know that Putin believes, it's not I'm saying, I'm just simply quoting what he has been saying for four years. He believes that violence, it's a necessary tool to rule whether his own subjects or imposing his will to other countries. That's why we should not be surprised that his favorite historical characters are Joseph Stalin and Ivan the Terrible. That's the way he sees himself, a man above the law, A man who is the law. And now he thinks that he can do whatever because he feels that with one finger pushing the red button, he can destroy the entire world. He said it already. If we have a war, it's about a year ago, they all will die like dogs and we will go to heaven. It shows the mental instability of this person.

And I've been, again, saying it all along that forget about Putin. It's not about him. It's about sending message to people around him, those who haven't lost their mind and value their lives and their well-being. And only now I think the free world came to the conclusion that we are dealing with a madman. Imagine Adolf Hitler in bunker, in Berlin bunker in 1945. Imagine if he had this red button.

Do you have any doubts that he would push it? You know, some of the earlier things you mentioned, I'm not excusing them. Let me make that clear. But you could understand what Putin might be thinking, right? In the 2014 situation, there was a pro-Russian leader of Ukraine who got pushed out, and then was replaced with a pro-Western leader, and Putin didn't want that. He didn't want Ukraine getting closer to the West, and looking more democratic and less like, you know, an offshoot of Russia. And okay, so that's how we got Crimea, Right. You can sort of look at the end.

And it sort of made not sense. But if you're you could see the reasoning that he was following. This one seems almost out of the blue. Gary is like Ukraine wasn't about to join NATO. Ukraine was slowly inching more toward the West and Europe, but there wasn't. What was the catalyst? What? Why now? Why? Why did he choose suddenly to invade a sovereign country?

You know, there's a lot of countries that used to be part of the USSR that are fading away, that are getting closer to the West. Why now? There are not so many countries, actually. The three Baltic nations already joined NATO. Thanks God they're in NATO, because otherwise, I think you have no doubts that Russian tanks will be rolling in the streets of Tallinn, Vilnius, and Riga in these three Baltic nations. Republic of Georgia, under former President Mikhail Saakashvili was trying to move westward,

and it was attacked in 2008, and next was Ukraine. But I have to say that you asked the wrong question, because you asked three times why. Dictators never ask why. It's always why not. Why not? Ukraine was a threat to Putin's rule in Russia, it's like, you know, Arab Spring and a domino effect. Independent, sovereign, democratic, prosperous Ukraine is sending a message's false point that we're the same people. But we're close. We have enough of common history.

Of course, there were many animosities, but still close. The language is close. The cultural similarities, religious. But for Russian people, seeing Ukrainians changing their lifestyle and moving to the West, that could be a big, big problem for Putin. So that's why he always wanted Ukraine to be subdued and eventually taken over. So he failed to impose his will through normal process, through political process. His stooge, Viktor Yanukovych, was removed from power by the popular unrest in 2014. Actually, it was a revolution.

But the problem actually between Russia and Ukraine started earlier because unlike Russia, Ukraine had peaceful transition of power all the way back in 1994. I think that was a turning point, actually, where unfortunately the ways of Russia and Ukraine, we just, you know, we moved in different directions. In 1994, first president of independent Ukraine, Leonid Kravchuk, lost elections to the contender, Leonid Kuchma, and he walked away. So Ukrainians, already more than one generation of Ukrainians, almost two generations of Ukrainians,

they grew up in a country where the power belongs to people. They know that if the president acts against their interests, they can reelect him or they can rise against oppressive measures by the government and defend their dignity and their rights. In Russia, it's very different. The fragile democracy under Boris Yeltsin has been replaced by brutal KGB dictatorship. And Putin always wanted Ukraine to join not just Russia, but to become part of his newly built KGB mafia-like empire. So that's why his attack on Ukraine was in the books. But can it happen? Let's say he succeeds, however we define success, in this military endeavor,

and he establishes a puppet government in Ukraine. The hearts and minds of the Ukrainian people, he's never going to rule those. I mean, what does it look like? What does the endgame look like? He doesn't care. What do you mean it's the minds and hearts of Ukraine? Of course they'll fight, and I don't believe he will succeed. Ukraine is a big country. It's a big territory, 44 million people. Though you always can find a few hundred thousand traitors here and there, but it seems that nation is united. Even people in East or West, you know, they sometimes separated by, there are some religious differences, or in the East, most of them speak Russian. And by the

way, Russian language was kept as the normal working language in Ukraine. Most of Ukrainian television was actually conducting their programs in Russian. But Putin doesn't think that far. So again, his goal was simply, you know, destroy Ukrainian sovereignty. Vladimir Zelensky is his personal enemy. And when Putin talked about decapitating Ukrainian government, I don't think it was just a political term so it is seeing you know ukraine as an obstacle in his way and he wants to destroy it and i think he was shocked by the unified response from the free world all of a sudden he lost almost all if not all support that he has been building over two decades because we we have to give them credit. For 20 years, he built the most sophisticated network of agents and lobbyists working throughout the entire free

world and included former prime ministers, former ministers of foreign affairs, not only politicians, but captains of business, famous personalities, luminaries. The Russian money infiltrated every layer of Western society, political, financial, social, cultural, sport. And all of a sudden, it's all gone bust. I think he's shocked now. And that's why he's shifting from this, what I call liberation mission, following the Russian propaganda language, to indiscriminate attacks on Ukrainian civilians. He is mad. And Ukrainians, Ukrainians people now are feeling the horrors of his wrath because now Russian troops are shelling civilians. He cannot take over Kiev or Kharkiv. And he wants to destroy the cities to turn them into the rebels. Let's talk about the European response

for a moment because it has been unified. It's been shockingly unified Europe and beyond. And I mean, we talked about yesterday how he actually managed to get Switzerland off of the neutral position and joining in the sanctions, Switzerland, not to mention Sweden and many others. And I want to ask you in particular about Germany. I know you've been very critical about Germany essentially bending the knee to Putin for quite some time now and telegraphing all the wrong messages. And I wonder if what you've seen from Germany yesterday now pledging to spend 2% of its budget on its military, upping the, canceling permanently the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from Russia, which is a very big deal, and stepping in and sending arms to Ukraine.

What do you think is going on there? But before you answer that, can I just show you this moment? This is out of the UN Human Rights Council as Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov spoke its video. And he so he spoke and there was a walkout. There was a mass walkout just when he got up via video link and spoke from all these countries' representatives who would not even hear it. So spend a minute on what appears to be a very unified, certainly Europe and beyond, world, perhaps. China, questionable. Obviously, places like Belarus, not so much. And their response and Germany in particular.

Yeah, it's a very important moment because it shows solidarity and isolation. Political isolation is a very important element of fighting Putin back. I think that it's it's a wildly step was important, symbolic step. But more can and must be done. One of the measures I've been asking from day one was recalling ambassadors from Moscow and reducing diplomatic missions to bare minimum. That's important, again, to continue this policy of isolation. And by the way, when we're speaking about isolation, even China has a very tepid reaction to Putin's aggression. It restated its support for Ukrainian territorial integrity and sovereignty. Again, I'm not sure we can trust China because China is watching Putin's aggression very closely because they have Taiwan in mind.

But it's a tricky game. So China believes Taiwan is a part of China. So I think China doesn't want to go full-monthly supporting Putin. Even Kazakhstan, the dictatorship that was saved by Putin just months ago, demonstrated its distance from Putin's aggression. It's very aloof. And even the top TV provider cut Russian channels from Kazakh air. So Putin is increasingly isolated. He can rely on support of Assad, Maduro, Cubans, Nicaragua.

And Iran, not wholeheartedly. So that's a unique moment. That's a unique moment of isolation. And you pointed out Germany. Absolutely. This is a key. The Germans' behavior over the last 20 years shifted Europe in the wrong direction because Germany, yeah, it's unofficial leader of Europe. And Anglo-American government that succeeded Gerhard Schröder, who is still, by the way, working for Putin, is on Putin's payroll. He hasn't resigned yet, as far as I know.

Anglomerical government used very aggressive rhetoric, sometimes belligerent rhetoric, condemning Putin's actions, but never did anything to hurt Putin's commercial interest. Yes, Germany supported sanctions after annexation of Crimea, but at the same time doubled the amounts of Russian gas it has been buying. And of course, despite all the protests, German politicians have been fully supportive of the Nord Stream 2. That's a parallel gas pipeline that was important for Putin to secure, as he thought, the gas supply to Europe after his attack on Ukraine. It's probably not coincidence that he decided to attack Ukraine when the Nord Stream 2 was ready to receive Russian gas, because that was an alternative that he wanted to build. And German politicians were very, very reluctant, I would say even aggressive, speaking to people like myself and deflecting criticism about the political

aspect of Nord Stream, saying it's all about business. And even on the next day of Putin's attack on Ukraine, Germany still refused to sell weapons to Ukraine and try to mediate. But what we saw, public opinion has changed. And that's what means, you know, that means democracy is working. All of a sudden, people that were not ready to rally behind Ukraine, they recognized that it's something that we can no longer tolerate. And German government immediately shifted. And I have to give credit to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. He looked like a bureaucrat, you know, the gray suit,

somebody who was missing the charisma of Angela Merkel or Gerhard Schroeder or Helmut Kohl, but he acted decisively and he changed, not the German policy in the last 20 years, we can say that he shifted German policy that goes all the way back to 1969, so-called Ostpolitik, started by social democratic chancellor Willy Brandt. And it immediately changed the European position. So, and I have to say I'm astonished by not just by European response, but the fact is that the European Union, the union of 27 countries, came up with a more decisive sanctions against

Russia than the United States. We have been hearing it for so long that America prepared the package, devastating sanctions. You know, it's unheard. It would ruin the Russian economy. Yes, America is doing it. But if you look at the scorecard, America is still lagging behind. It's leading from behind, if we use this infamous phrase. And actually, we are working now on a new website, you know, just to have the scorecard. It's fightforukraine.com that will be alive by the end of today. So fight for, like a number, Ukraine. And we want to show as every country and every international institution responded to Russian aggression with sanctions and military supply of Ukraine. Oh, that's great. Fight for the numeral for Ukraine.com, hopefully live by the end of the

day. We'll definitely be checking that out. All right, Gary, staying with us past this break, we're going to squeeze in a quick commercial. And up next, we're going to discuss the power of Zelensky, whose words have even brought professional interpreters to tears repeatedly. That's next. The powerful appeals for help from Ukrainian President Zelensky have touched hearts and minds across the world, even bringing veteran interpreters to tears. Never heard anything like it. Take a listen here as one is overcome with emotion as Zelensky spoke to the European Parliament earlier today. Can you imagine this morning two cruise missiles hit this Freedom Square? Dozens of killed ones.

This is the price of freedom. We're fighting just for our land and for our freedom. Despite the fact that all large cities of our country are now blocked. The parliament giving that speech a was on a path of evil. A Ukrainian translating on German TV could not go on. The words here are not in English, but they don't need to be. Listen.

Ukraine, we know exactly what we are defending. Glory to each of our soldiers. Glory to Ukraine. The words that got her. Ukrainians, we know exactly what we are defending. We will definitely win. Glory to each of our soldiers. Glory to Ukraine. I'm joined once again by Soviet Union in 1963, became the under 18 chess champion of the USSR at the age of 12, and the world under 20 champion at the age of 17. International fame at the age of 22, is the youngest world chess champion in history. Back in 1985, a title you defended five times. You broke Bobby Fischer's rating record in 1990, and your own peak rating record remained unbroken all the way through 2013.

You since fled the Soviet Union, the Russia, in Moscow, and have become a target of President Putin, who wanted to arrest you and perhaps more, and have been pushing for democracy there and abroad ever since, and been a fearless advocate for reforms, and slow they have been to come. America. And I've heard you just really smart observations about how those young kids today who think America is, they compare it to a third world country. They talk about us being oppressive, about how we have no civil rights in this country and we don't understand the way to treat people and to advance humanity. And you've basically said they don't know what they're talking about. Try living in some countries around the world and then come back and tell us that America is not the leader of the free world. It's not perfect, but it certainly is the leader when it comes to freedom. And there's a reason so many people want to come here.

So understanding that that's been our role, what do you think our role here should be? What should America be doing right now that it's not? Yeah, those emotional moments you showed. And every time I hear this, I, this, this testimonies and, and this emotional reaction, even from the interpreter. So I, I feel ashamed that I'm Russian. So though I always opposed Vladimir Putin dictatorship, and I've been warning about his horrors, but it's this, we all know, we'll bear responsibilities that this monster is ruling our country. And it's threatening not only Ukraine, but the whole world with total destruction. As for America, sometimes I'm frustrated, annoyed, you know, pick up the right word and democracy and protesting against injustices. Yeah, no country is perfect.

American democracy is not perfect, but there is no perfection in the universe. There's nothing is even close to 100%. But you always should look at the relative strengths and weaknesses. And American democracy today and America as a country is a force for good. As it was 50 years ago when people like me who were born and raised in the Soviet Union on the other side of Iron Curtain always looked at America as a beacon of hope. And today we have millions, tens of millions, hundreds of millions of people still looking at America this way. Yes, we know that America is trying to improve

and America is looking at its past and being highly critical. But we never had the same kind of freedom. Today, millions, maybe even billions of people in the world, because according to Freedom House, you know, it's two- thirds of the world population live in unfree countries. So people would be dying for their portion of freedoms that Americans always take for granted. And what is happening now in Ukraine is a demonstration that people are willing to die for freedom. And in America, you have so many opportunities to advance the cause of freedom, but you have to fight for your own democracy. But to fight for democracy and to regain American leadership in the world, you must respect your democracy. You

must recognize the role of America. And it's tragic that on the both sides of political spectrum, the extremes on the right or the left, for different reasons, they challenge this American role. And they do not understand that attacking America's leadership role in the world and finding excuses for thugs, terrorists and dictators on the globe, they are chopping pieces for American democracy. Because if you are not ready to defend democracy worldwide in the 21st century, it's globalization, which means we know instantly what's happening in Ukraine, in Indonesia, in Argentina, all over the world. And if we are not ready to fight for democracy worldwide, we are endangering our democracy here in this country. So what does that mean for us in Ukraine? You know, the American people are war weary. They don't have a lot of trust in their generals after the way Afghanistan went and news emerging of the Afghanistan papers about how we've been lied to by our leaders for so for so long about how that war was going. Never mind the disastrous exit, never mind the disaster in Iraq, and I could go on. So that's the mindset right now of most Americans when it comes

to, oh my God, we can't get involved in another war. Certainly don't want a war with Russia and nuclear armed country. So, okay, we'll stick to the sanctions and we'll hope that they work. And we'll try to be a part of this international coalition, not lead it, but be a part of it, cracking down on Vladimir Putin and Russia. But what more should we be doing in your view? Yeah, it's an American concept over the last 50 years or so, leading from behind. And I can remind you and our listeners that back in 1951, President Harris Truman said we cannot lead force of freedom from behind. And without America reassuming its leadership role, the world is in trouble. Right now, we see the coalition of European nations led by Germany. And again, it's a very powerful message. But we still need America to participate aggressively in the war

because it's not a war of our choosing. But we are at war already. Vladimir Putin, again, listen to his rhetorics, listen to his propaganda. He's attacking Ukraine, not just as Ukraine, but as an American puppet. He is at war with America. He is at war with democracy. He is at war with democracy.

And he believes that the world must accept his conditions. His ultimatum that he issued a few months ago, by the way, after seeing President Biden at the summit in last June and then having these two conversations with him just over Zoom or whatever uh communication they used he felt arrogant and emboldened to issue the ultimatum demanding the more or less we can read it between the lines the end of nato uh the capitalization of america and capitalization of the west uh and giving you know giving him full power to decide how to act in his spheres of influence. And now he's trying to impose his will. That's why he's threatening a nuclear weapon to become a factor in this game, because he

knows, as an experienced poker player, that he has a very weak hand. Russian conventional force is no match to NATO. It cannot win a war even against Ukraine. They're stuck. So facing NATO on the battlefield is not an option for him.

So he's trying to raise the stakes. And as he did before, for him, it's a game of nerves. He expects America and Europe to blink. And then he wins. I think if he takes over Ukraine, even with Ukrainians refusing to accept his rule, that could be disastrous because he will not stop. Dictators never stop. They are stopped. And it's just a matter of time before Putin will test American resolve on NATO territory. And that's why I'm not comfortable hearing President Biden repeating, we would not fight for Ukraine, but we would defend every inch of territory of NATO countries. It's not about me believing him or not. I don't think Putin believes him. Because there was a meeting, summit I mentioned in June, and we heard that America laid down an ultimatum. They had a meeting where Biden looking at Putin's eyes said, we would punish you for your aggression against Ukraine.

So it seems that Putin didn't believe him. And then they had two more conversations. And then every Western leader visited him. He didn't believe them because they were so weak. Why do you think that Putin would believe Biden when Biden talks about Estonia, Latvia, or Poland? I think it's time to recognize we are at war. And while I'm not advocating just immediate intervention,

but we should do more. And isolation of Russia must be complete. Oil embargo, gas embargo, total isolation everywhere and stop every conversation with Russia. I also wonder if Americans

are trying to bring Russia into Iranian deal because according to many sources, Russia was a country where Iranian uranium, enriched uranium, had to be stockpiled. Bad, because that means Russia is still at the table. Cut all the ties. Green deal, Iranian deal, Russia must become a pariah. And that's the way to demonstrate to Russian people and to Russian elite that America and Europe are serious. So far,

I still hear doubts and witnesses, and Putin also is hearing them. And that's why he will keep raising stakes. My gosh, I could talk to you for two more hours, and I would like to. Will you agree to come back soon? And let's have a longer discussion. I'm always available, Megan. I just, you know, I think we are facing, you know, it's one of the turning points in history, a milestone. And it's what happens today may decide our lives for months, years, maybe decades. Wow. All right.

Before you go, give us the name of the website again so people can check it out. It's fightforukraine.com or.org, fight for number Ukraine, and it will be ready by the end of the day. All right. We'll keep refreshing. Gary, thank you. Thank you so much. We appreciate it. Thank you very much for having me. Wow. Extraordinary man, right? Extraordinary man. He knows of what he speaks. Now, tonight we will be hearing from President Joe Biden. He's finally going to deliver the State of the Union address months after he was supposed to. We expect what? I guess it's not an end to covid, but he's definitely going to be taking some sort of a victory lap.

And what's he going to say about Ukraine? What kind of credit is he going to want for what's happened there? Michael Knowles of The Daily Wire joins us next. Joining me now, Michael Knowles, host of The Michael Knowles Show for The Daily Wire. Michael, great to have you here in advance of the long-awaited State of the Union address. And I said at the top of the show, this is probably the most important address that Joe Biden will have given to the nation since he became president, given everything that's happening at home and abroad. You know, the naval gazers in Washington have been beating themselves up asking, will he say the word inflation? Will he say the word? I mean, would you shut the hell up, right? Like, who gives a shit whether he says the word inflation or not?

We know that we're dealing with record inflation. What's he going to do about inflation is the question. And what I'm gathering from what I'm reading is he's basically just going to restyle all of his to recast BBB as inflation solution in the form of, you know, taking care of eliminating barriers to well-paying jobs, promoting fair competition, helping families and protecting the right to organize act and a bill to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Spend, spend, spend, spend, spend. And that somehow is going to solve our inflational problems. Right. I think that's an astute observation, Megan. His policies have been so disastrous and so deeply unpopular that he couldn't even convince his own party to go along with his

budget. He can't even get a budget passed. And so his only option is to use that to some sort of advantage. He'll say, well, you know, the reason things aren't perhaps as good as they could be right now is because I've been stymied in my plans, which are so wonderful and so popular that not even Democrats want to support them. And then he'll hold out that carrot for the future. I mean, I don't think it is a hyper-partisan exaggeration to say that everything the man has touched has turned to ash in some cases, literally. So on foreign policy, obviously the world has fallen apart because of specific decisions he made in Afghanistan with regard to Russia, the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Obviously we're seeing that play out in Ukraine right now

on the economy. It's gone to pot in terms of inflation, in terms of energy. The list goes on and on and on. So his best bet for the State of the Union is to look toward the future. He can pump up the new Supreme Court nominee. That's something that could seem possibly positive for him. He can talk about how he's a wartime president now and how he's united NATO. He's united NATO because of a dereliction of American leadership that has basically left Europe and NATO on their own. So I guess in that way, it's sort of damning with faint praise, but he can make that claim. And then you saw last night, this last ditch effort by the Democrats to do anything. And that was them tilting at windmills.

They passed a law to criminalize lynching, lynching, which last time I checked is already illegal. It's been illegal for a very long time. Hasn't been a problem in America for at least, what, 70 years now. And so they're tilting at windmills and imaginary problems. Meanwhile, the world burns. They've got massive problems. I mean, the polls and we asmills and imaginary problems. Meanwhile, the world burns. They've got massive problems. I mean, the polls, we as a country have massive problems, but Joe Biden and the Democrats have massive problems.

If you look at the latest polls, I'm trying to pull it up here. It's 38 percent approval. That's his latest numbers. Just OK, here it is. Yeah. ABC News, Washington Post poll released just this past Saturday. He's had a career low of 37 percent approval rating on his job performance overall. That includes a 30 percent approval rating amongst independents. 30. I mean, needless to say, the Republicans can't stand him. He's got a 10 percent approval rating amongst Republicans, but 30 percent amongst approval amongst independents does not spell reelection and it does not spell good things for the midterm elections either. He's not killing it with his own party either. Even within the Democratic Party,

nearly a quarter either disapprove or say four percent say they are withholding judgment. For those who are likely to vote, they're actually say they're certain to vote in November, there's a 54 to 41 percent gap with respect to who they would choose, Republicans over Democrats. So he's got a lot of ground to make up tonight and in the next eight months. I mean, I don't know where he begins. Well, he has one great advantage, at least as as pertains to the Democratic nomination in 2020, 24, if he wants it. And that great advantage is he's no less popular than anyone else who could get the nomination. Incredibly, Kamala Harris is less popular than he is. The only person who's even close to him in his administration is Pete Buttigieg, and Pete Buttigieg has roughly the same approval rating. So I know that Democrats keep trying to

make Pete Buttigieg happen, just like mean girls try to make Fetch happen, but it's not going to happen. And so Biden is in a relatively good position with regard to the Democrat party. It reminds us, too, that Joe Biden is not some singular evil. Actually, Joe Biden's selling point in 2020 is that he's an empty suit. He's kind of nothing. He's just a return to the old establishment normal. The man wakes up in the morning, licks his index finger, puts it in the air and figures out which way the wind is blowing. So as an avatar for the Democrat establishment, it means he's only going to be as popular or unpopular as the party broadly. And right now the party is really, really unpopular, puts him in a terrible position

for 2024. And there's really no alternative to the man in office right now. You know, it's I think a lot of Republicans said, all right, who voted for Biden instead of Trump 2.0 said, OK, I'll take the empty suit, you know, over the flamethrower. I'll take the empty suit. I like small government. At least you probably won't do much. Seems old. Doesn't seem inspired to be like a huge change agent. Let's go that way. Now, we know, of course, domestically, he's gone an entirely different route. And that's why, in part, we have such huge inflation problems. And the spending numbers are just out of control, though. Now, apparently tonight he says he's going to work on the deficit. OK, All right. Sure. But with all these spending plans.

But you see the dangers of an empty empty suit when you get to a foreign policy crisis. Right. I mean, we just had Gary Kasparov talking about how we are leading from behind again. And that's in part how we got into this mess. People forget that Joe Biden is responsible for this crisis in Ukraine. You know, I don't really think this is just a cheap partisan shot. We've been calling this out on the conservative side of the aisle for months now. Joe Biden made very specific decisions that essentially rolled out the red carpet for Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine. Notably, he took the energy sanctions off of Russia. So Donald Trump, love him or hate him, the man was actually pretty tough on Russia,

contrary to what we were told by the left. His rhetoric was nice, but his behavior wasn't so nice. Bingo. It's those policies. And a lot of it hinges on this one issue of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. So Putin had been trying to build this oil pipeline so that he could get out of Ukraine, sell his energy straight to Europe. Then there is no reason he's taken away all the leverage from Ukraine. He can invade. He has said that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century. He believes that Ukraine has no right to exist as a sovereign nation. He has wanted to conquer it for a very long time. So a lot of the leverage that Ukraine had to remain

a sovereign nation was this energy issue. What did Biden do? Biden lifted the sanctions on Nord Stream True. Biden gave it the go ahead. These were, there were bipartisan sanctions on it before. Biden comes into office. Four days later, Putin starts rebuilding the pipeline. So, So Biden takes all the pressure off of Vladimir Putin. Then he literally invited him to invade. Biden was asked, what will you do if Vladimir Putin invades Ukraine? And he says, well, as long as it's just a minor incursion, I suppose that would be just fine. But he better not go further as if to say, hey, crocodile, only eat my little pinky, but you better not eat the whole hand. Don't you do it.

Control your appetite. Of course, that's not going to happen. And so now Biden imposes these toothless sanctions on Russia going after every Russian industry, except for oil, except for energy, the only industry that actually matters in Russia. So I guess Russian haberdashers are going to be in trouble. I guess the people who make those little dolls that stack one within the other, I guess they're not going to be able to sell their goods. But in terms of oil that actually enriches Putin and pays for the invasion, that's going to be just fine. And so what are you going to have? You're going to have the

most significant disruption to the post-war political world order that we have seen. And that is going to be when Putin gobbles up Ukraine, which at this point, unfortunately, seems inevitable. And what's so tragic about it is it could have been prevented with clearer leadership, better policy. That failure lies at Joe Biden's feet. Wow. Just one of the many challenges he's up against. We're going to talk about COVID and the lies we're about to be told on his success. I'm sorry, but that's that's just the way it's going to be. And whether people the American people will forget what's been done to us right after this. Don't go away.

Coming up, we have an exclusive interview with a collegiate swim coach speaking out on Leah Thomas, the transgender swimmer breaking records. This is the first time a Division One swim coach will be speaking on the record on camera about this. We'll bring that to you shortly. But first, back with me now, Michael Knowles, the one and only host of the Michael Knowles show for The Daily Wire. OK, so here's the news on tonight and covid, according to Politico, Michael. The headline is Biden wants to declare a new chapter in the covid fight, but he's trigger shy. He's shy. He's afraid of what part of the course he's expected to stop well short of the mission accomplished moment on covid political reports that many members of his own party would like to see, stressing instead the need to remain vigilant, remain vigilant against

the virus. And they say, if you're if you're waiting to rip off your masks, this is not that moment, said one of the people familiar with the planning. By the way, 70 percent of the country is now maskless. So I'm not sure how that can be the message tonight. But he's afraid, which no one's surprised at. A lot of people thought it was maybe Jill Biden really stoking his fears and making him so covid crazy. Who knows? Excuse me, Dr. Jill Biden, doctor. I, too, am a doctor. I have a generous doctor. I'd like you to refer to me that way. In fact, I forget to remind people in any event.

The Democrats writ large are preparing to take a victory lap on covid and have completely shifted their messaging. You tell me whether it is an accident that the day before the State of the Union, the CDC finally comes out and says, OK, you can take the masks off in 70 percent of the country with Rochelle Walensky finally apparently willing to relinquish her hold on us, saying we want to give people a break from things like mask wearing when levels are low and then have the ability to reach for them again should things get worse in the future. Megan, how dare you question the science? Don't you know that the science says that the State of the Union is the cure to COVID,

that it is the political science and the medical science follows the political science. This has always been at the heart of the COVID issue, is that people like Rochelle Walensky, people like the exalted Dr. Fauci, peace be upon him, people like the other public health bureaucrats, they have pretended that they are merely clinical, scientific, scholarly sorts of people, when in fact they are political apparatchiks. They get their paychecks from the government. They make public policy for 300 million people, more than 300 million people, because their policy affects people around the world. The masks have always been a political symbol. Now, at least, we're

allowed to say that the masks are little more than facial decorations. Now that Leanna Wynn, the CNN medical analyst, has admitted that on TV. We previously were not allowed to say that. That would have been dangerous misinformation. But at the heart of this, there has always been the capricious and arbitrary use of power. That capricious use of power, the neurotic symbolism of the masks and all the rest of it, had previously served the Democrats' political interests. It gave them a lot more power, particularly during 2020 and in the lead up to that election. It's no longer serving their political interests. And so they're itching to get

rid of it. As we were discussing earlier, Joe Biden does not have a single accomplishment, not a single one for his entire presidency. Everything has gone to pot on foreign policy, on domestic policy, on domestic policy. The man can't even pass a budget. So he needs some sort of win. I think he's going to try to get that win tonight in a maskless sort of state of the union. But as you can tell, they're vacillating. They go back and forth because the COVID lockdown gave them so much power. Even when they were pushed at the extremes, the Supreme Court, for instance, shut down the OSHA private employer mandate. But they took much more power on the healthcare

workers, on government contractors, on the way we live our lives. And so they don't want to give it up entirely. And they're trying to have their cake and eat it too. And like most things this administration does, it's just probably not going to work. You know, today for the first time in two years, I sent my children off to school without masks. Two years. My eight-year-old son was in kindergarten when they had to mask up. Now he's in second grade. And I resent these people. I do not accept Rochelle Walensky and then have the ability to reach for them again. Keep your hands off of me and keep them off of my child's face. No one's listening to you anymore. You are a political operative.

You made that clear so many times. One that comes to mind is when you refuse to condemn Sonia Sotomayor, a left-leaning liberal jurist on the Supreme Court for grossly overstating the number of children who'd been hospitalized, who were in the hospital at the moment, thanks to covid, allowing suggesting it was one hundred thousand. It was an absurd misstatement of fact. And you refuse to even correct her because you're a partisan hack. So but here's what's happening, Michael. Now we're going into tonight in advance of the State of the Union. Finally, even New York State, even California are getting rid of their indoor mask mandates, including in schools. I mean, it's like they've been holding on to that with their

cold, dead hands. The House has dropped its masking requirement. The White House has dropped its masking requirement. All of this has dropped its masking requirement. All this begins on March 1st, day of the State of the Union today. California, Oregon, Washington, all ending school mask mandates as of March 12th, trying to create this illusion that he can have a spike the ball in the end zone moment. He is trying to. Unfortunately, though, Joe Biden has a habit of putting his foot in his mouth, and he already admitted a few months ago that there is no federal solution on COVID. Do you remember? He started his campaign. He said, I'm not going to shut down the country. I'm going to

shut down the virus. And then what did he do? He shut down the country, and then he admitted that there was no way for him to shut down the virus. So I think that people have woken up to this. I don't think that the Democrats are exactly in control of this narrative anymore. You mentioned, Megan, it's been two years, two long years of 15 days to slow the spread, which was initially to slow the spread, then flatten the curve, then find a cure, then take the jab, then stop the surge because there was a surge again because the jab didn't do everything we were told the jab would do. Then slow down and then just keep going on and on and on. We were told that the vaccines would stop infection and transmission. That turned out not to be true. Then the story changed to the vaccines are going to minimize hospitalization and death. Perhaps they did. We were told that two

would be sufficient, then three, then four. We were told we had to jab the kids, even though the kids are at low risk of the virus. Now we find out five to 11 year olds basically do not have much protection from the coronavirus vaccines. Then we were told we had to mask to protect other people, then to protect ourselves. And then they've just totally lost the narrative. And so I think for them, it's probably best to cut their losses and move on to the next contrived crisis. But people are angry. I am still angry over what was done to my kids. Never mind me. If I didn't have kids, I'd be sitting here mad about what happened to me and other people's kids.

But we chose the most vulnerable, the little ones and the working class people, you know, the waiters and the waitresses of the world and people who couldn't object and said, you will wear them. In fact, they're still wearing them in so many places. And and I do think that there's still going to be accountability for this because like real damage was done. There was a memo within the DCCC trying to warn, you know, sort of the the Democrats about the pending election losses they're likely to face. This one actually came from a research group that works for the Democrats. And they said two thirds of

parents and 80 percent of teachers say the pandemic caused learning loss and voters are overwhelmingly more worried about learning loss than kids getting covid. Yes, you can't fix that with one victory declaration or something short thereof at a state of the union. What you've really hit on here, Megan, is the one calculation, the political calculation that I think the Democrats didn't make, which is that the entire COVID narrative gave them a lot of political power. It allowed them to say that the Republicans are murderers and they're killers and they're traitors and they're insurrectionists. And they're probably racist too. Why? I don't know, because that's what we always say.

And that is the regular old playbook and it was working just fine. What they didn't count on was the parents in particular, because the Democrats are in the pocket of the teacher unions. That's a very important constituency. And so that kept the school shut down. It kept the masks on the poor little kids who had no need to wear them. It kept all of these things in place that were driving the parents crazy. And parents cut across ideological groups, partisan groups, racial groups, geographic groups. You saw that start to spring up in the election for the governor of Virginia, where Glenn Youngkin beat Terry McAuliffe. He won that not because he was a regular old Chamber of Commerce Republican. He won it running on the parents movement. That parents movement shows no sign of stopping. And it plays into what's going on with COVID. It plays into the

Democrats' radicalism on critical race theory, on the Democrats' radicalism on radical gender theories. This was another side effect of the COVID regime, is that when you lock the students down, especially for remote learning, all of a sudden the parents are going to see what's going on in those schools. The parents have not liked what they've seen, and it has not voted well for Democrats. Yes. So two things coming out that people should keep in mind as they listen to Joe Biden tonight. One, I mentioned a DCCC research, which I'll get to in a second. And then this other research memo by Impact Research, sending out the notice to Democrats on how to improve their standing months ahead of the midterm elections. And the latter focuses on COVID strategic thoughts for Democrats positioning

themselves on COVID-19 after nearly two years of the pandemic. Number one, declare this crisis phase of COVID over push for feeling and acting more normal. Thanks to Democrats were nowhere near where we were two years ago or even one year ago. And they go on on from there but listen to this recognize that people are worn out and feeling real harm from the years-long restrictions and take their side six and ten americans describe themselves as worn out by the pandemic the more we talk about the threat of covid and onerously restrict people's lives because of it the more we turn them against us and show them that we're out of touch with their daily realities. Stop talking about restrictions and the unknown future ahead. When 99 percent of Americans can get vaccinated, we cause more harm

than we prevent with voters. But going into our third year talking about restrictions, this is all political. I don't know what they believe. They've been so paranoid for two years. I believe they probably are still as paranoid as Joe Biden and Joe Biden are. But they've just decided to totally change the messaging because they realize it's going to be a everything going on in the world right now, right? You're too young to know this, but back in the 70s, when I was a kid and we were still in the middle of the Cold War, we had to do those. I actually did duck and cover drills where you have to duck and cover under your desk because there might be a nuclear bomb coming your way. The modern equivalent is the masks. That's right.

There's a similar efficacy, I think. That's exactly right. Okay, so that was that one. But to your point about critical race theory and so on, the other thing that came out was that DCCC memo. And here is the Democrats warning their own party that the voters in swing districts think the party is preachy, judgmental and focused on culture wars. And in particular, what they said was, OK, for example, Democrats recognizing

here that voters do not support defunding the police. And the response to their members is you should respond by reiterating your support for law enforcement. OK, like today, because yesterday and the day before and all the days where it mattered, you were on exactly the opposite side. OK, then it goes on. When facing an attack on the illegal immigration crisis, Democrats should deny that they support an open border or amnesty and instead talk about their efforts to keep the southern border safe. OK, so you're going to lie like you're just going to deny your what your policies are and hope people don't go ahead and investigate it. And the same way they've been doing on CRT, just it's not happening. And if you object to CRT in the schools, which is just a catch all term for this race essentialism that they really want to do is teach history. And I've said before, it's not about CRT. I don't care what you call it. All I know is in my children's by, as you say, speaking out of both sides of their mouths and just denying what they really believe. You saw this with Senator Casey Jr., Bob Casey Jr., who said that he is personally pro-life, but politically he is pro-choice,

which is a meaningless phrase. It was popularized by Mario Cuomo when he was governor of New York. And it's a way of trying to hold both sides of the issue. Because unfortunately, the actual views of Democrats right now are not popular. Not a single one of them is particularly popular with the American people. And so instead of just lying about it or downplaying it or speaking out of both sides of their mouths, they've gotten a little prideful. They seem to think that they're firmly ensconced in power. They're the ruling elite. They have the right to rule and the people don't really have anything to say about it because the people are deplorable and irredeemable. What they have lost is the common sense. There was a brilliant leftist theorist, I think a couple of times ago on

your show, Megan, I mentioned him. Antonio Gramsci is probably the most important leftist intellectual cultural thinker of the 20th century. And Gramsci pointed out that you can't win a political movement if you lose the common sense. For a long time, the Democrats positioned themselves as the party of the common sense. Those crazy Republicans, they wanted to deregulate everything and let billionaire robber barons get away with what they wanted. And they were going off on crazy religious crusades and they wanted to bomb the Middle East. And wow, boy, weren't they crazy. We're the party of the working class and the common sense. Now they've lost that. They are now they are the party of the global elite that doesn't care very much about America, that defunds the cops, that gets rid of our borders, that lets crime run wild, that has all these crazy theories. The GOP has become much more the party of the working class, of the ordinary

American. That's a huge problem for Democrats. It is a result of their pride. But pride goes before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall. You know, that's a good point about the working class, because what we're seeing now is they know it like the democrats know they're starting to lose the working class vote to republicans and not just while trump is president because biden's president now and it's still happening just today there was a an article talking about it was in the new york times actually not today but within the past week talking about this texas border town where the all these democrat officials are officially becoming republicans um there are. This is a working class

border community, fewer than 1,000 people. And conservative Hispanics are not only realigning in presidential elections, they write, but also in contests much closer to home. The Democratic county judge saying she will seek another term as a Republican. The county clerk, the treasurer, deciding they too would abandon the Democratic Party, which has long held sway in local elections and run as Republicans. A county justice of the peace felt the urge to switch parties as well. And on and on it goes because the working class gets it. And Joe Biden going out there tonight and talking about strengthening the ability to unionize and demanding a $15 minimum wage, which I believe working class

people understand ultimately hurts them more than helps them because it costs jobs. The few who can remain at said companies may have an increase in pay. Maybe, maybe not, but it costs jobs. It will eliminate headcount at most of these firms. They get it. And I think these paltry measures are not the solution for the Dems. You know, immigration is a big issue as well. This is one area where Bernie Sanders has had a really good political gut his entire career. And Bernie Sanders representing much more of that old left working class solidarity. He doesn't really venture into the racial and sexual culture wars all that often. The establishment Democrats have totally lost sight of that. You've got elites in the Democratic Party and many in the Republican Party too,

who have pushed open borders policies for a long time. The Democrats, because they believe that it gives them an electoral advantage, and it does. And the Republicans, because they can get cheap labor that way. But the people who are lost here are the working class of all races, of all ethnic and national backgrounds for that matter. And I think they've woken up to that a little bit. So if the Democrats really want to help the working class, they should probably stop flooding the country with cheap labor that drives their wages down. I think also you're going to see Republicans running on the fact that during the brief Trump presidency, you saw real wage growth for the first time in decades. And that has now gone away. And you're seeing a return to the regular decline of wages and purchasing power.

And especially with the skyrocketing Bidenflation, that's a big problem. One thing that the elites tend to misunderstand is they think that ordinary working class people who don't pay attention too much to politics, they don't know anything about what's going on. They just need to sit down and learn what the Davos set is going to teach them. That's simply not the case. They have a much better sense of the cost of eggs, the cost of gas, the way that wages are growing or stagnating or declining. And they are going to hold them to account. If the polls are to be believed at all, it's going to be a tidal wave for Democrats in November. And they deserve it. Yeah. And the working class voters, whatever their historical or their ethnic or their racial

background, they don't buy all this nonsense about that we're getting taught through CRT and so on. But then then there are the people like Nicole Hannah-Jones, the elitists within the Democratic Party. And she is taking a Michael at the media's coverage of Ukraine as racist. She says, if you basically she's saying, if you care, you're if you're particularly upset about what's happening in Ukraine, that's because of your racism um she is explaining that uh basically it's hold on i'm trying to find the exactual the exact uh tweet that uh okay these admissions of shock that this is happening in a european country are ahistorical and also serve to justify the lack of sympathy for other invasions other occupations and other refugee crises

involving peoples not considered white uh and goes on goes on to talk about the racialized analysis and language that the reporters need to look internally um because racialized analysts and analysis and language uncovering ukraine is. She doesn't like people referring to Ukraine as a civilized country. You did that in a tweet. She's probably going to say you're a racist because that shows you only care about the Ukrainians because they're white because they're white. And Nicole Hannah-Jones insists that we need to only focus on people with a history of slavery, which is ironic when

we're talking about Slavic regions of the world, because last I checked, Slavic is where we get the very word slavery. But to take her point on its face, as you mentioned, Megan, I got in trouble for a shocking, controversial, amazing tweet that I made that I did not think was controversial at all. Namely, this war between Russia and Ukraine is the first major war of my lifetime between civilized nations. There have been other minor wars. I think of the, I don't know, Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, not a major war. Even Kosovo. I remember Kosovo quite well, but not a major war. When you look at the civilized part of things, left-wing flattery aside, I don't think anyone believes that Gaddafi's Libya was the most civilized place or Assad's Syria. I don't think anyone is going to go honeymoon in Aleppo over

Paris. The reason this matters, I'm not making any sort of value claim about the relative worth of Libyans versus Ukrainians. The reason it matters is because you're talking about a nuclear former superpower now conquering what had been a buffer state between Russia and Europe. World wars have started for much less than this. And you've got Putin who is committing the invasion is now actually threatening to use nuclear weapons. So the reason I mentioned this is because the global effects of this war, if it continues to escalate, as I think very stupidly, the Europeans are encouraging it to right now, the effects could be catastrophic at a far greater scale than the relatively minor wars that we have seen for the past several decades. Moreover, it's just not true to suggest that there is there's been no caring by the American people when war breaks out in countries where

people aren't all white. I mean, you could go down the list. I was at Fox News covering most of them while they were happening. And so this is another tweet that she sends out. What if I told you Europe is not a continent by definition, but a geopolitical fiction to separate it from Asia? nation being invaded is, wait for it, a dog whistle to tell us we should care because they are like us. Why are we listening to her about anything? How can any self-respecting American university employ this moron? Well, Megan, you know, the thing about dog whistles is that the creatures that hear the dog whistles, well, they tend to be dogs. You notice the conservatives here, they're never the ones talking about these dog whistles. You say, hold on, if you're hearing that, maybe that says more about you than it does about me.

The irony, of course, with Nicole Hannah Jones is that she is not a real historian. She is not a real scholar. She is a propagandist and a political activist. Actually, the main thing that the American Revolution began to protect slavery in the colonies. And it's just not true. And even leftist academic historians pointed out it's not true. She's never really apologized. The New York Times sort of kind of tried to kind of retract it some months later, but they still spent millions of dollars pushing it. They took out their little eraser. Exactly. And it's not going to work. And so no one should take her seriously. And the only reason

anyone really should care about what she says is because she's a very effective political activist who has transformed curricula around the country and totally misrepresented history and geopolitics. And unfortunately, when people are ignorant of history and geopolitics, you find yourself in sad situations, history repeating itself as tragedy and farce. And Joe Biden, months ago, was getting ready to award or reward school systems that taught her nonsense. Then they had to back off of that once there was such backlash. But that's, you know, that's how he sees her messaging tonight. The great unifier. We'll see what he has to say on subjects like that if he dares touch them.

Michael, always a pleasure. Love you. Love your show. Thanks for being here. Megan, great to be with you. Thanks. Now to a broadcast news exclusive regarding the controversy surrounding UPenn transgender swimmer Leah Thomas. We are now just two weeks away from Thomas vying to break all-time NCAA records

set by Olympic gold medalists Missy Franklin and Katie Ledecky. We have heard reports of young female swimmers being upset with having to compete against Thomas due to the natural physical advantages she has against them. She was born and raised as a biological man. She actually swam for the University of Pennsylvania as a man and then just switched and started swimming as a woman. Many of these female swimmers, however, are afraid to speak up. And for good reason, we have seen what the mob can do. But they've been begging for people within their sport, those with positions that are secure, who can make a difference, to speak up for them.

Now one man is doing so. Joining me now, Seth Houston. Seth is the head coach of swimming at Rice University. He's the first active Division I coach to publicly take a stand on this. Seth, thank you so much for being here. Thank you for having me. So let's talk about, just set the stage. Why do you think it's unfair for a swimmer like Leah Thomas, who, as far as I can tell, when swimming as a man, she was ranked 462nd in the country.

Now swimming for the Penn, that was when she was on the Penn's men team. Now swimming for the Penn's women team is ranked first among the nation's college women. So what about it is unfair? Well, I mean, I think it really goes first towards just trying to protect women's athletics. and swimming in this case, what's unfair is, in the long and short of it, is Leah Thomas was born a man and biologically went through puberty and everything as a male. So there's some significant differences in the development between uh male and female uh particularly during puberty uh physiologically and so you know just the long and short of it is is that is why there is women's sports and men's sports and that was created to create a level playing field so women could thrive and excel in their own arena.

Isn't it crazy that you have to be careful talking about how there are biological differences between men and women when you get on this subject? Like, you have to be careful not to say that men are different from women physically and have different physical advantages over women. Like, that's the crazy place we're at now. That's not disrespectful to transgender swimmers or athletes or anybody else to say there are biological and physical differences between the two sexes. The fact that Leah has chosen to transition in her social world to female doesn't

undo all of that. That's just, that's the reality of this situation. It's why people like you are in an uncomfortable position and having to acknowledge what is clear without being intentionally offensive, which I know is not your goal. Well, I mean, absolutely. I mean, in the classroom, in the workplace, more power to Leah being who Leah wants to be and being her true self. Absolutely. Support that 100%. I think where it gets kind of murky is, you know, I mean, this is a, there's a place where in the community where it's all or nothing.

And again, I think there have to be some areas where we've carved out and protect. Women have been a protected class in sport. And now with, sorry to like this, but a biological male coming in at a high level among women is going to take opportunity and really change kind of, you know, if this happened over and over and over again, it's really going to change how women would even approach sport. Some might leave the sport. There's just all sorts of negative things that can ultimately happen to women.

And so that's not to state that Leah should not be included or any other transgender athlete. I mean, absolutely. We want everybody to have an opportunity to compete and to learn and do the things that they're passionate about. It's just what is fair competition? And I think that's been the question that's come up this year. Included where and how? What would you say is the solution to a you know a swimmer like leah well i i feel like usa swimming came out with some with some good guidelines about

a month ago uh and the ncaa uh said that they were deferring to governing bodies um and and so lo and behold, USA Swimming appropriately came up with some, I think, a good start to addressing this. And we'll obviously have to see how that ultimately plays out, but they have a two-tier system, kind of an elite level athlete tier that, you know, you have to demonstrate that, uh, kind of your, your biology has been mitigated, uh, you know, with lower testosterone levels, uh, over time, um, you know, other, you know, other ways that you have mitigated your, your male biology to compete fairly as a woman. And, uh, and then at the lower level, just for those who want to participate and, and, and just be in the sport, we're giving them an opportunity, USA swimming to swim is, is who you identify as. And I, I totally agree with that. I think it,

at some level, you know, you want, especially at the elite level, you want to assure a level play fairing view level and fair playing field. So it's a couple of things. The NCAA then stepped in after USA Swimming did that and said, OK, those are going to be the standards next year. But this year, Leah Thomas swims. She swims at the NCAA championships. She swims at the meet you guys just had. And she's breaking records left and right. And this, despite some swimming observers who believe she's phoning it in on something like she's holding back to try to keep it closer than she could make it. I read several reports about that because those who observe swimming say you can tell when a swimmer is not giving it their all. under the national spotlight now. Leah Thomas is doing just enough to make it tight, but place herself as the winner in most of these races.

I don't know if you've observed that too, but the point is she gets to swim. She's going to swim in the NCAA championships this month in two weeks. And I wonder if you think that's okay. Here's where I kind of stand on that at this point. I feel like Leah played by the rules as they were written with the NCAA when she appealed and went through the process to be eligible.

And at the time, you know, the rules, which and that's where I've had a problem with the NCAA not being out in front of kind of this kind of issue. You know, this is not on Leah. This is kind of on governing bodies and that to, to have taken care of these things and protect women athletes and, and kind of the, the fairness of sport at this point. I feel like if, if I were coaching it, or if I was, if there was an issue like where they changed the rules in the middle of the season that, that maybe was, had benefited my athletes and now that was going

to disrupt their opportunity to compete, I would really have an issue with that. I think in this case, I would take the same stance. At this point, NCAA is a collegiate season. Leah started it. Leah should finish it. What about... Why would it matter? Okay, so let's say Leah goes and dominates NCAA championships and wins everything and sets records. Let's say she beats the records held by Ledecky. And the other girls who might otherwise have won are now second placers. Why would that matter to those girls? Why, you know, do they have a right to be upset? Absolutely. There's going to be I mean, I've said it before. I think Leah goes through the championships and swims. I mean, there's going to be a lot of people in the in the sporting world, in the swing world, from the fans to parents to to the athletes that are going to be shaking their heads saying, how did this happen? You know, this isn't fair. It'll be interesting to see at NCAAs.

Again, it's on national exposure. It'll be, you know, well attended by athletes and coaches from all over the country who haven't been in person to compete and see everything happen. So, you know, my hope is that it honestly, again, it kind of reinforces why rules have needed to be changed and updated. You know, and hopefully that'll only make it more obvious why things have had to be done. All right, so how people who are not competitive athletes understand it, right? Because I've heard and I've read a lot of statements from like GLAAD to be done. All right. So how people who are not competitive athletes understand it, right? Because

I've heard, and I've read a lot of statements from like GLAAD and others saying societal good is more important than the good that one swimmer feels this in this scenario, the biological girl who comes in number two, societal good is more important. And you know, you, you may not like it, but you're going to have to suck it up because society is moving forward and this is the right result. And too bad. And we've even seen one of the competitive swimmers, not at UPenn, at another organization. She's at Stanford. Brooke Ford come out and say something similar. She's apparently in these competitions and expected to do well. And she says, I believe treating people with respect and dignity

is more important than any trophy or record will ever be, which is why I will not have a problem racing against Leah at NCAAs this year. I think in that case, I would say any competitive athlete, especially at this high level, there's certain things you have control over and there's things you don't. And in Brooke's case, she can do what Brooke can do.

And if Leah is going to be there, it's in Brooke's best interest just to focus on Brooke and get up and race and do her best. And, you know, maybe she'll come out on top to, to, to kind of make an issue as, as an athlete and get too vocal about it over something that you have no power over with the NCAA rules and that would really, really kind of help that individual then self-destruct. So, you know, I'll have someone competing at the meet and our focus is on that athlete doing her absolute best and being prepared to do her best despite the other things going on around that are again not within her power um it and so for that i i feel like i i don't necessarily what i would say kind of in the other piece of that what brooke said is uh of course we want

to include we want to support leah uh we want i want all We want to support Leah. We want, I want all of those things. But in sport, I mean, there are rules that are created to create a fair competition. And that's why we update rules from year to year. That's why an umpire should be calling balls and strikes for one team the same as another team. You know, that's, there's, you know, you step over the line and you're out of bounds. That catch doesn't count, things like that.

So, you know, to just say, get used to it. This is where we're going as a society. Again, in the workplace, in the classroom, uh, 100% agree. Uh, I want that should have no bearing on whether someone could perform their duties, uh, do a great job, uh, live and learn and thrive. But again, sport is just, it's different and it is different because it's been created again, separate, but, you know, honestly, it's equal. There's men and women's sports, uh, women, uh, but honestly, it's equal. There's men and women's sports.

Women, you can go down studies and studies and studies where it's illustrating and showing the physiological differences that happen for male biology and female biology. Yeah, and it's not all hormonal either. If it's not all about the level of testosterone. Yeah, if it was all one sport, you wouldn't see very many women at the top of podiums and that if they were exclusively competing against, well, it was all mixed together. So, again, that's the change. I know that you gave an interview to SwimSwam.com. And I know you said in there, ncaa isn't is not leading um they're not even really following they're just sort of going along um what about upenn because

as far as i can tell they've actually said that if leah's kept out of these competitions they according to one of the swimmers who spoke out anonymously, have threatened to sue on Leah's behalf to make sure she can swim. And then when angry parents of the female swimmers sent a letter to UPenn saying, would you please do something to protect our daughters? This has gone too far. The response was, and I only wish I were kidding. The response was, we fully support all of our swimming student athletes, and we have encouraged them to utilize the robust resources available to them at Penn, in particular, providing links to counseling services,

counseling and psychological services, and the LGBTQ Center. In other words, Seth, they're telling the girls to go get therapy to deal with their anger, as opposed to doing anything to deal with the source of the anger. I'm not really following what the Ivy League schools are doing. I guess I could tell you I'm very happy to be coaching at Rice. And I feel like we're having debate, literally, about what I've said and, you know, kind of my right to speak.

And then again, you know, am I, you know, I think some of it is like, am I being transphobic by expressing this opinion? And that's what some people choose to think I've had. I just think it's too bad that we're not like it at Penn or an Ivy League school. They're not really even allowed to express an opinion and said they're kind of being muted and just go along and get along. That's too bad. That's really I don't feel like what what we're really all about. I think we can have an open and fair dialogue and disagreements come with the territory. You were called transphobic by the paper at Rice, the student newspaper, the Thresher. The Student Association Equity Council introduced a resolution denouncing you, calling for you to publicly apologize to Leah Thomas and the student body for your, quote, transphobic comments, which simply mirror the ones you've made here, for Rice to make a monetary donation to the Houston Trans Legal Aid Clinic,

and for you to undergo allyship training and an anti-discrimination course. So are you prepared to do any of that? I think we'll just see how all of this plays out. I've completely stayed out of it. I really don't, you know, the student government's going to do what the student government does. What I've seen here, and again, I understand why a lot of people won't speak out. I mean, I sure as heck didn't say something even thinking that this would go to like, I would even be sitting here talking with you or any of that. It was just me stating an

opinion. And I think what has happened is, you know, this is a very sensitive issue. People get really wound up kind of defending, you know, their ideals or what they think and can be very offended by something who's speaking out or saying something different. And that's what I'm seeing here. What has happened, quite honestly, I feel like a number of people are kind of, I'm going to say, coming out of the woodwork at Rice, a number of students that have been silent and kind of feel like they're seeing that this is not really a very fair process or it's kind of been one-sided. And they've kind of been speaking up and some people are actually gaining a voice from this. And so it's been kind of interesting to kind of sit back and watch it unfold. Usually that's what we see when one person speaks up.

There are many others who have been too afraid who might then find the courage. Can I ask you, though, frankly, do you feel that you need allyship training or an anti-discrimination course? No. I really live very much by a rule of everybody who I meet first is I'm going to be very respectful to. It would take a lot for me to, for that person to kind of lose my respect. So I really value people. I think anybody who comes across my path, I'm greeting, I'm hello, I'm treating really very fairly. And that's just, you know, that's really just kind of my, my Christian background. And I feel like that has given me the opportunity or ability

to kind of love everybody. Uh, now I can meet people where they're at. They, you know, and again, we're going to be different, uh, and people are going to have different ideas and opinions. And I can tell you coaching 18 to 22 22-year-old women, they do not think like I do in a lot of ways. And that doesn't mean I think any less of them. Honestly, I really value kind of the things they say or where they're coming from, and I'm willing to listen and learn still. Well, let me ask you that, because to the girls, we know that the girls at UPenn have been afraid to speak out, the young women, because they've done so, but anonymously to various publications. What is your message to them?

The ones we know are unhappy with the situation. They don't want to swim next to a biological man who's now a transgender woman. They don't want to share a locker room, 35 young women, with someone who is still biologically male. And what they have reported is that Leah Thomas doesn't seem to care at all about the fact that they are uncomfortable and they are losing and they don't think it's fair. They report that she's enjoying the attention and enjoying the wins. And I'm sure it does feel good to go from 437 to number one. But what is your message to the young women at UPenn who are too afraid to speak out? I hadn't really thought about what I would deliver for a message to them.

I believe, you know, one of the things I just spoke to my team about, you know, when I wanted them, for instance, when what I had came out and then the student government, I wasn't encouraging anybody to speak up for me. I wanted them, if they have a comment, if they wanted something to share, you know, if they're comfortable with it, do it. And it didn't have to be in support of me. And if it was great, but, but, you know, I just, for the most part, encouraged them to speak up. But I, I really do understand, at least in part, you know, some of the things you hear is if, as a young person, if you speak up, it could cost you, you know, a job later or you reputation are, you know, very, very important kind of in your self-esteem and who you are. So, I mean, I do understand where people are quiet and trying to be an anonymous, but it's in some ways that just seems to be what's been reinforced and forced upon them. I would imagine if it wasn't like that, there probably would be some voices speaking out. Correcting myself, Thomas was ranked 462nd in the country on the men's team, now number one on the women's.

I will say this. I'll steal the last word on it, Seth. Go for it. I've been through a lot publicly when it comes to cancellation. I've been a young woman who's been in a lot of battles that are dicey. And I will, I land in a different place on this, having been through all that. And I say these young women, if they don't speak out now, will regret it for the rest of their lives. That this is a character defining moment. They're not 12, they're 19. And this is one of those moments where taking a principled stand, just like we saw those girls do in

Connecticut, in the face of being called names, when you know what you're really calling for is fairness, not just for you, but for womankind, for womankind, is not bigoted. It's brave. And I think there's sort of a before and after moment happening right now for those women. And there is not an employer in the nation that. That will refuse to hire them, that is worth working for, and there are a lot of employers who will hire them for standing on their principles, having the courage to speak out. And those are the places they should land as opposed to the former. That's I'm out of time, but I am very grateful for you speaking out on it and coming on this program and speaking your mind.

I hope the blowback is not too, too fierce, but call us if it gets there. All of that. Yeah, you bet. Thanks for listening to the Megyn Kelly show. No BS, no agenda and no fear.