The Megyn Kelly Show - The Damaged Dem Brand, and Sophie Cunningham Says the Truth While Caitlin Clark Gets Smeared, with Emily Jashinsky | Ep. 1366

Episode Date: July 23, 2026

Megyn Kelly is joined by Emily Jashinsky, host of “After Party," to discuss Rep. Haley Stevens' shifting Michigan accent throughout her political career, her leaning way into her Midwestern roots, whether the political strategy will help her win her close primary, the left embracing more radical socialist policies, the growing influence of the Democratic Socialists of America, whether the Democrats are having their own Trump anti-establishment moment, Rep. Brandon Gill's brilliant questioning of liberal elites during congressional hearings, having leaders of institutions confronted about wild past comments over implicit bias and structural racism, WNBA star Sophie Cunningham speaking out on protecting women's sports and whether more athletes will join her, her defense of Caitlin Clark, the latest WNBA controversy involving Angel Reese, Reese claiming she was a victim of a racist incident when nothing actually happened, Nancy Armour's absurd column linking Caitlin Clark's flopping to Jim Crow and Emmett Till, the Caitlin Clark hate because she's straight and white, former CNN anchor Brooke Baldwin's oversharing Substack talking about her dating life, her bonkers TED Talk about caterpillars and "goo," and more.   Subscribe now to Emily's "After Party": Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/after-party-with-emily-jashinsky/id1821493726 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0szVa30NjGYsyIzzBoBCtJ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@AfterPartyEmily?sub_confirmation=1   Supersure Insurance: Upgrade your business insurance to a year-round SuperAgency at https://Supersure.com/Megyn SimpliSafe: Visit https://simplisafe.com/MEGYN to claim 50% off any new system! Herald Group: Learn more at https://GuardYourCard.com American Financing: Call American Financing today to find out how customers are saving an average of $800/mo. NMLS #182334 https://nmlsconsumeraccess.org. APR for rates in the 5s start at 6.327% for well qualified borrowers. Call 800-852-2010 for details about credit, costs and terms. Visit https://AmericanFinancing.net/MegynKelly . Average savings based on borrowers who save over $199.99     Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKelly Twitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShow Instagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShow Facebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at:https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome to The Megan Kelly Show, live on SiriusXM Channel 111 every weekday at New East. Hey, everyone, I'm Megan Kelly. Welcome to the Megan Kelly Show and happy Thursday. We have an incredible show for you today. WMBA star Sophie Cunningham doubling down on her position that men should stay out of women's sports while they put the strong arm pressure on her to reverse herself. While far left activist and former soccer star, now just unattractive wannabe, Megan Rapino says laws that protect women. sports are actually a gateway to attacking women on other issues. What?

Also, Democratic Michigan Senate candidate Haley Stevens is speaking out about her viral sticking it to them video and giving us some new Midwestern sound bites. This woman, she's not playing it straight. We'll show you the proof. This is not how she's always talked. She's Jasmine Crockett. That's what we're realizing. This is a new Jasmine Crockett.

But I don't get it because do Mishiganders, need you to speak like this in order to vote for you with back in your throat to have your heart aise she talked got some action out of Michigan no I don't think so I don't think they require that because that's not how any other Michigan politician talks so what is she doing?

Joining me now on these and other stories Emily Jishinsky she's host of After Party on the MK Media Podcast Network you can go subscribe at afterpartyemily.com and on YouTube and all podcast platforms, by the way. She also happens to host our MK wrap-up show on Series XM right after this show on Channel 111. When you sign your insurance policy for some brokers, that's the finish line. Handshake, commission, done. Then you may not hear from them again until it's time for renewal.

But your business runs all year, and so do the gaps and the risk, which is why I want to tell you about super sure. If your company has more than 25 employees, whether you're the owner, CFO, or HR manager, it can be too complex to just buy a policy online. SuperSure is the super agency built for you, licensed in every state for your business insurance and employee benefits. With year-round support for you and your team. At super sure.com, you can access tools like fine print facts, which translates your current policy into plain English, so you see what's covered and what's not. Plus a business value calculator so you can estimate what your business is worth and know what actually needs protecting. Go to supershure.com slash Megan, one super agency, one powerful platform,

all your policies in one place. Go to super sure.com slash Megan, paid for by SuperSure insurance agency LLC, a licensed insurance agency. EJ, welcome back. How you doing? That was such an offensive Midwestern accent from you, Megan. I can't even begin. Well, I am imitating this woman, Not Midwesterners. That's the problem for her. She's the offensive one. Honestly, literally one of my dearest friends in the world is from Detroit. She still lives there.

And she's 50 plus years old. She's lived her whole life there. She's got the hard A. Like I was, you know, she would say action. She would say action. But not this woman's, this is an affectation by her. And the reason we know that is because tape after tape keeps coming out. showing us that it's an affectation. Hold on. I'm trying to find the number. I don't see it.

My team can find it. Let's play the sound. Yeah, the side by side. How she was before. This is a brand new one that we found of her earlier versus how she is now. ...intelligence judiciary are going to be taking up those matters through hearings and different investigations. And those committees are going to do their work. And I am laser focused on my committees of jurisdiction. I worked really hard to get on those committees for Michigan and for my constituents that you know who I sound like I sound like the people who I talk to in Michigan who are getting screwed right now by down truck okay and I'm telling you I'm at the fish fry in Detroit it's a joyous day and the gals two minutes into the conversation what are we going to do

about our utility business yeah and so I sound like the people who I'm trying to fight for and I can't campaign right now because I'm in a government building but I am fighting for Michigan Fighting. What happened, Emily? I don't know. I was talking to a friend about this last night, and I was like, we call this the reverse Jashinsky, because when I moved to the East Coast, it just went away. Naturally, my Wisconsinian accent just kind of went away, and I don't really do it that often.

There it is. You slip into it every once in a while. But her, she has been in Washington. Her accent has changed since she's been in Washington. It's incredible. The mystery of what happened to Haley Stevens boggles the mind. I'm completely obsessed with her candidacy right now because she keeps saying hilarious things. Remember the time she said that Israel comes to her and her dreams?

I don't even know what it means. In that clip, the TMZ clip that you just played, she said that her friend Tracy can't afford meat. What? Wait, we have the longer. Stand by. So TMZ caught up with her in Washington. And here's, this is her trying to tell us that this is just her. I'm authentically Michigan.

That's why I sound like this. Notwithstanding, what we just played to you was her sounding very normal just a couple years ago. 2019 was the earlier version where she had a little Midwestern accent. It was there, but it wasn't pronounced. It certainly wasn't anything that would make a news headline. And here she is trying to like, I'm just a Michigander to TMZ yesterday. Can I have thought you just for something, honestly?

You're going to make fun of me on the internet. No, the opposite. No, honestly, the opposite. saw that video which was legendary. Thank you. I think it's widely considered like a legendary video. But do you know what I saw that you did? You took it and then we're like,

you know, I'm gonna lead into it, and I'm gonna make it a campaign ad. So tell me through that process. I'm authentically Michigan, that's the deal. And look, this internet, it's been, I don't know, it gets wild. We all know that. You know who I sound like?

I sound like the people who I talk to in Michigan who are getting screwed right now by Donald Trump. Not into trying to get on the podcasts and the major shows. I am writing bills and I am helping people. That's what I'm all up to. And your viewers who are tuning in and join us, you know, get involved. You know, come to a place focusing.

Yeah. Stick it to them. Thank you. All right. You made it onto the podcast. You did it. Again. I didn't have anything about her friend, but go on.

She is a sophisticated politician. And you can see that in the old club, I mean, maybe she's not a sophisticated politician, but this is all to say, like, the woman has been in Washington. She's fairly cosmopolitan. It makes zero sense. Like, I believe she had positions under Obama. Like, it just makes zero sense that she suddenly has rediscovered her Michigan accent while moving away for Michigan, at least part time to be in elite political circle. She has a huge, she has tons of cash behind her. She's been in politics for a long time. It is just an absolutely ridiculous. act that if she beats Abdul al-Sayed will bite her in the ass in this crucial Michigan Senate race for Democrats if she's nominated because that juxtaposition you just played is going to be

an ad for Republicans. If she wins them calling it now, they're going to say something like, Haley Siemens sounds different. Right. It'll be on a silver platter for them. She's a fraud. She's a fake. She's a phony. Let's play the first half of SOT 16 again, the side by side. I want to hear the 2019 version again. site intelligence judiciary are going to be taking up those matters through hearings and different investigations and those committees are going to do their work and I am laser focused on my committees of jurisdiction I worked really hard to get on those committees for Michigan and for my constituents that you know who I it's amazing it's it's not there really I worked really hard to get on my gosh you'd be like I worked really hard to get on the committees to help my constituents I mean like I'm like I worked really hard to get on the committees to help my constituents I mean like I I don't, it all happens way back here if you just move all of your discussion to like right in front of your epiglottis. You can sound exactly like Haley's teeth. Right from your what?

Right in front of your epiglottis. Of course. The thing that hangs, or the uvula, the uvula, the thing that hangs down in the back of your throat. Then you can sound just like her if you're moving way back here. This is where she's talking. And you have to have all heart aides. But I don't find that attractive at all. And nor do most Mishaganders who don't sound like that.

I don't know who she's trying to sound like. She's giving off a little Fargo vibe, you know, with her. Like, she's got her ooze. She's got her, like, soft oos going. I'm not sure what this woman is, but she's not what she would have us believe. So what's really happening now? Like, the Democrat establishment is getting behind her because they don't want this El-Said because he's more DSA, radical, progressive, doesn't like Israel.

But she's going to be the standard bearer for, like, the establishment types. Yeah, exactly. And that's who's lining up behind. here and they're fighting really, really hard to beat Abdul-Elsaid so hard, actually, that Mallory McMorrow ended up dropping out of the race. Now, I don't believe McMorrow has offered an endorsement of Haley Stevens, but that was clearly what was happening, is that, you know, they're trying to consolidate behind a candidate, just like they did in 2020 to consolidate behind Joe Biden when Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg dropped out of the race because they really,

really desperately do not want Abdul al-Syad, A, to be the candidate, or B, to end up in the Senate. And I think a lot of that does come down to Israel. You do see a lot of the money coming from pro-Israel alignment. And Haley Stevens, I guess, has taken the money and run it right into the ground by getting maybe the weirdest campaign in the history of Michigan politics. So, I mean, how do we think this is going to turn out? It's really close. I would give Al-Siyah the edge because there's a lot of energy.

She calls him Abdul, only Abdul. Oh, right, Abdul. Barack Hussein Obama, that's what she's doing basically at this point. Totally. But there's a lot of energy behind his campaign. And in obviously primary elections, that's a huge advantage because of turnout. I mean, he has a ton of momentum with grassroots voters in Michigan. Michigan, obviously, famously, has a large Muslim population that he has a lot of inroads

with for the state. It's a big deal to have that kind of momentum on your side, especially in a close to a close primary election. So I would say that the odds are in his favor right now. But boy, does she have a lot of money coming in behind her? I don't know that it's going to be enough to put her over the edge, though, especially in the last weeks of these campaigns, is she saying stuff like this? And you have the viral clips of 2019, Haley Stevens, circulating. Yes. So this primary is on August 4th. This happens relatively soon. So we are in the last dash efforts to shore up the Michigan vote. Meanwhile, while, like, the larger problem within the Democrat Party of like these really radical DSA types

who are, you know, they're not just like the Democrat Party's anti-Israel. I'm not sure why they're divided on that. She's, she's like an outlier. But like the Democrats hate Israel. They hate Israel way more than Republicans or even independents who are right behind them. They're over Israel. They've had it with Israel's, you know, foreign policy adventurism and get us getting dragged in there. But like the Democrat leaders aren't, aren't totally there. But, but like, like the Democrat Party is. But anyway, so the DSA, though, is controversial for far more reasons than that. They want to get rid of the U.S. Senate. They want to get rid of the Supreme Court. They want to get rid of prisons. They want to get rid of cops. Don't forget borders. No one to get rid of borders.

Borders, yeah. Like, it's just open season on Americans, basically. And that led in part to what Van Jones made headlines over the past week for saying. He tweeted about it, and then he doubled down on CNN. Here he is the other day. This is Monday. in SOT 19. This stuff is going too far. I am a progressive Democrat. You want to talk about prison reform? I've done it as well as anybody. Republican Democrats in the South with Trump.

I've done prison reform. I never said, have no prisons. Where are you going to put the Klan? I've done police reform. I never said no police. Where are you going to put the pedophiles? It's going to grab the pedophiles. This stuff is going too far.

And part of the thing that has to happen is we saw what happened in the Republican Party. When things started going in a nutty direction, and nobody stood up. I am happy that the young people are fighting for affordability, Medicare for all, all the good things. I've been waiting my whole life to see a youth movement do what it's doing. But it's being hijacked by people who are putting in nutty ideas, supporting terrorists, nutty ideas saying we don't need cops in prison.

We can't deport anybody even if they rape somebody. Who set this? Chevalier. Yeah, she's one of the New York DSA candidates endorsed by Mom Dani, who won. So, I mean, he's not wrong, Emily, that there is a true radicalism happening now within a strain of the Democrat Party. And they are going to have to deal with this for all these primaries and come the midterms and going forward. What is he, what strain of the Republican Party went completely bonkers that, and no one stood up? Like, I don't, the Republican Party has been divided for a long, long time, just pick the issue on which they've divided themselves. The latest happens to be

around Israel or just war hawkishness. But I'm not sure exactly what he's referring to there. But his party does have a serious problem right now. He's not wrong. Democrats structurally, I think, have had more control over their grassroots. I think that's how they were able to like squelch Bernie's run in 2016 and 2020. But they didn't squelch the momentum. And so in some ways, I wonder if they're just a bit behind what Trump was able to pull off in

2016 when the old guard of the Republican Party tried every avenue to shut him down. But because he's Donald Trump, he's a singular. political figure, they just could not pull it off. And I don't know what happens to the Republican Party after Donald Trump, but I think I know what happens to the future of populism in the next 10, 20 years, which is that it's actually not going anywhere. It's rising on the left. It's here to stay on the right. And what that means is these policy conversations are in a lot of the primary battle, secondary issues. Ryan Grimm and I interviewed a DSA-O-Line candidate up in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan yesterday, who said,

there's one thing worse than being called a socialist in the UP and it's being called a Democrat. Because trust in Democrats among Democratic voters, trust in the party is really, really low right now. And so that's where they get into this trouble with the policy questions like Abdul Al-Sayed coming out and saying he never supported defunding the police. When he clearly said that he supported defunding the police, that's been a problem for him. But it doesn't seem to be affecting his primary chances right now because so many Democrats, Democratic voters just want the middle finger to the establishment and then they'll sort out the policy questions later. We saw a similar thing with Trump voters. That's not to say Trump voters were not casting ballots on policy. It is to say for some people, what was more important than policy was the middle finger to the Republican Party and to the political establishment.

And so that's their problem right now is that the people who are giving the middle finger to the establishment come from a politically very difficult ideological agenda to pull off. then when you get into general election battles, because also a lot of it was forged in the woke cauldron of 2020. We saw Brandon Gill questioning the head of the National American History Museum on the white supremacy toolkit they put out. I mean, it was just so clear, it was so clarifying for him to be like, do you, are you polite? Do you believe that politeness is white supremacy? Do you then believe you're a white supremacist? And now they're facing these questions. Mom Donnie pulled it off

because he was facing a terrible candidate. But when you're juxtaposed with a better candidate, Maybe it's Mike Rogers in Michigan versus Abdul-El Sayed. That's really difficult. I completely agree. We're going to play some Brandon Gill in a minute. But the Democrats are having an interesting fracturing, and they're doing it at their own peril. Because you're right, the populism that we've seen arise on the right in the form of Trump. Now, you know, you could have a debate about whether he's delivered on that populist message that he ran on.

But in any event, it's happening on the left, like just dissatisfaction with. the established party and the leaders, like they are not pro Chuck Schumer at all over in the Democrat Party right now or their old party leaders. So you would think this would be a great time for something else to rise like a Phoenix from those ashes. But what's rising is something truly fucking crazy. Like I'm all for populism, Emily, like, okay, great, you want you want to be whatever. You don't want the A-PAC influence in the Democrat Party. I get it. And you don't want like all these elites judging or determining where we're going. And you want more populist economic policy.

They're Medicare for all stuff. Okay, I get it. I get it. But this is crazy stuff. No more prisons, no more borders, no more Senate, no more Supreme Court. Like, come on, just stop it. They're making fools of themselves by embracing a party that literally stands for that. It's in writing.

Like, why, how did they go from, let's be populist and form a new type of party or an offshoot of the Democrats to, we're loons now. We're fucking lunatics who only one teeny tiny faction of the population is likely to vote for. Right. Yeah. And a lot of it is that you have the postmodern leftism that grew out of the academy really during the 20th century has taken root. That's directly what we saw. And the public rejected it after 2020. I know other things that we're talking about today include Sophie Cunningham coming out against men and women's sports. Well, it was really hard to stake out a position against that, as you did, Megan, when the kind of elite gatekeepers were shoving that down everybody's throat. I mean, the Associated Press, I think it was in like 2017, when nobody even knew what a preferred pronoun was changed copy in papers across the country.

Well, why is that? Because the same people who are now aligned with the DSA-style candidates on cultural progressivism, not just economic progressivism, but cultural progressivism, which does have its roots in the in the Frankfurt School and these deep ideological intellectual trends fundamentally took over those circles. Charles Murray wrote a great book in 2012 about how we are coming apart. That was the name of the book because concentration of extreme wealth in superzips was having these massive cultural implications because people thought the same way and they dined the same

way, they watched the same things. They had all of these cultural preferences that were more in sync with their bubbles and less in sync with class bubbles, whether it was in inner cities or whether it was in rural areas. And that's kind of what Van Jones is getting at there. You can be for prison abolition, but take that to the inner city and see how the conversation about defund the police goes when you're talking to voters who are like actually in financially vulnerable positions in the inner city or in rural areas. Like it's a class bubble fundamentally and they haven't figured out a way to break free from

that on the cultural issues. If I were a mainstream Republican, I'd be feeling good about this development for the following reason. I think going into the next presidential election, we're going to have a group, like a candidate, maybe even a whole party that sees itself as the antidote to the current Republican Party and its coziness with APEC and so on, like on the hawkish war issues. Because Republicans are traditionally very hawkish. they are. Like, that's, they're very pro national defense and a strong Pentagon and that's just

kind of their thing. But the American appetite for knee-jerk war is waning. I mean, if it's not waned entirely in the wake of, you know, Afghanistan and Iraq. And so I think you're going to have a candidate rise up. If it's not, it might be JD, who's a little bit more of that wing, but I don't think so. I think he's probably not going to be that explicit because he wants to keep the Trump base, you know, he wants to keep sort of the core MAGA, which is. is as a result of Trump more hawkish. So anyway, I think there's a lane for a Joe Kent, Tulsi Gabbard, Tucker Carlson type right there on as a Republican. And that candidate could potentially be very devastating if they had support, crossover support from the left,

you know, like Glenn Greenwald, you know, would vote for such a candidate. I think way before he'd vote for another Chuck Schumer type person. So, but if the, if the, if the Democratic, party is going to, instead of splinter into something that's more reasonable, if slightly more socialist slash populist, it's going to go truly crazy, then that Phoenix-type candidate over here in the Republican lane is not going anywhere because the party's probably not going to nominate them. And then even if they did, they wouldn't have enough support on the other side. So I just, I think everybody's watching what's happening with the splintering of the Democratic Party and how I think personally, for the country, for the Dems, for everybody, it's landing in a very unfortunate place where they

didn't have to go this crazy, Emily. They just, they could have stayed just slightly crazy, and maybe they're going to win in New York City. I get it. They might win. I don't think they're going to win in Michigan, but I could be wrong. I mean, the general. They're not going to win on a nationwide scale because they're too out there. Well, they desperately need to break out of that class bubble on things like immigration and women's sports. Like women's sports is such a litmus test as to whether or not you're lying or you're crazy. Or just, I mean, I shouldn't say crazy, but I should say, like, whether or not you're radical, like, truly ideologically radical. And if you can't pass that litmus test for a lot of voters, the same thing goes for open borders. That is, and defund the police.

Like, those are big litmus tests on a class basis. And they're ones that we've seen, for example, Seth Moulton after the 2024 election, come out and say, we went too far. Gavin Newsom flirted with the idea of us, having gone too far. And they took it back. They walked it back on women's sports, like very quickly after that happened because they were rejected by staff in the party. They were rejected by kind of the pundit class in the party. And so they've kind of tried to break out on some of those things, but they haven't been able to. I think the dynamic you just laid out is interesting from the like conservative perspective. It's what Republicans here in Washington don't yet understand. I think the like Nikki Haley types are the ones licking their

chops about the DSA thinking it's what's going to usher them back into the conservative of mainstream and back into power in the Republican Party. But this is a really crucial mistake that Republicans can make. If you just call somebody a socialist, if you just call somebody a radical, that's not going to land with the average voter right now in the way that it would before institutional trust collapsed unless you couple it with what you're going to do to smash the status quo because the one thing everybody's unhappy with is the status quo. So if you just say this person is going to change the status quo, they're a radical. People are going to say, okay, well, maybe I'd rather take a bet on them than you.

And that's what people don't understand. That guy, Troy Jackson. Right, right. Who's now going to be the Democratic nominee in Maine is like, hey, I was endorsed by the DSA. I mean, he's touting it. Like, he knows that he doesn't call himself DSA, but he's touting it. I was saying to Paul Murray of Sky News, Australia, that's, that is, that's the kind of claim. That's like, you take the DSA to the dark bar at like 3 a.m.

And then you go right to the motel. You don't like parade the DSA around your, on your arm at the Oscars party. Like that is the, and you're only going to need the motel for an hour. You know, it's like, I don't know what. We're in a whole new world where you're touting that, like, openly as an endorsement of you that you're proud of in the Democrat or any other party. But that's, that's where we are.

Okay, let's talk about Brandon Gelb, since he is, like, MVP of the entire house. They had this, they had a couple hearings yesterday. One had, well, a couple witnesses there. One was the head of the Smithsonian and one was the head of the ABA. And he just did such a beautiful job on both of them. Let's play a little montage of what happened when the head of the Smithsonian, which has gone completely woke. President Trump, to his credit, has gone in there saying, stop that.

You will not, on the nation's dime, offer exhibit after exhibit that just take a huge dump on America. You will reflect the richness and pride of the American history. And I'm not telling you to get rid of our bad chapters, but they will not be the predominant theme that people walk away with, right? Totally perfectly appropriate and on brand and as promised. So Trump, check. Campaign promise delivered. The Smithsonian doesn't like that. They've been pushing back. They have a completely different agenda than he does. And this woman, she had her hands full with Brandon Gill yesterday. Watch. As part of this white supremacy document that your organization has

promoted, objectivity is a core in defining aspect of white supremacy culture. Do you think that it's the goal of the Smithsonian Institution to promote white supremacy culture? Sir, do you mind sharing with me which document? White supremacy culture right here. This is part of the mass action toolkit that your organization is promoted for several years now under your leadership. Are you promoting a white society? supremacy culture at the Smithsonian? Am I promoting a white?

Ma'am, is this a difficult question? No, sir. I'm just thinking about the mass action toolkit. We didn't develop it, but back to your question, no, we're not promoting any ideology. Does it concern you that your goal is objectivity? One of your goals is objectivity, and your mass action toolkit references objectivity is a defining characteristic of white supremacy culture? It's not our toolkit. It is your toolkit. You've been promoting it for quite some time. Is Mickey Mouse racist? Mickey Mouse is not racist. It's not racist. According to the Smithsonian institution, one of your exhibits referenced Mickey Mouse is representing, quote, vestiges of longstanding

traditions of blackface minstrelsy. Would you describe that as racist? No, the historical trajectory of the origins of Mickey Mouse tied directly through... So Mickey Mouse is rooted in racism. Is that your testimony? No, sir. It's rooted in minstrelsy. And you don't think that blackface menstrualcy is racist? It had certain unobvious racial overtones that have been well documented.

Do you think that that's problematic that Mickey Mouse also has those racial overtones? It's not for me to determine what's problematic. It's determined to me what's accurate. Is that right? Is it important to be polite? Excuse me, sir. Is it important to be polite? Yes, sir.

It's also interesting because the same mass action toolkit that your organization has been promoting references, politeness as a defining characteristic of white supremacy culture. Ma'am, are you a white supremacist? No, sir. You're not. Can you help me square why your organization says that being polite? is part of being a white supremacist? I'm not exactly familiar with that passage of the mass action toolkit,

which is not one that we developed. I don't, pardon me? I said I just read you the passage from it. And then your question was, sir? We're going to move on. Okay, that was Anthea Hardig, and she's the director of the Smithsonian, and she was completely dishonest and he had her on the ropes. It was a thing of beauty.

She was in case you missed it there, suggesting that Mickey Mouse is racist because he has his roots in minstrelsy. So she's against Mickey Mouse and she's also against politeness or so her documents say because she thinks that's a whiteness term. I guess whites are polite and blacks aren't. And if you think blacks might be polite, you're a white supremacist. I'm not sure I follow her logic. But when cross-examined, of course, she tried to dodge and weave and take notes and look down and not make eye contact because she was too ashamed to own and repeat that nonsense under oath in the halls of Congress, Emily.

Right. And again, like, she can believe all of this stuff, but she was put at the head of an institution that is in charge of, like, teaching our history to the country. It's completely insane that somebody with totally radical wacky beliefs like that was in. such a position of power. And actually on After Party, I went through the Smithsonian report page by page. It was probably a really boring segment, but the media was treating it in a crazy, like totally downplaying what they found and acting like Trump was trying to steal history and to pervert American history and to take away all of the bad elements of American history and whitewash it. And one of the, I think, instructive examples in the report is that it said, if you're going to teach about Alexander Hamilton's shameful history,

regarding slavery, why would you also not mention his history in abolition? Like, mention both of these things. And it's, because this is what Jasmine Crockett was at that hearing and was saying, we need to teach the complications of history. We can't be whitewashing history. And it's like, if you want to teach the complexities and the wrinkles of some of our historical figures, that's literally what the document is telling you to do. That's exactly what the Trump administration is saying you should do.

Instead, they had wildly inappropriate stuff. That white supremacy toolkit that Gill was questioning her on, that's a lot of the was on college campuses, things just like that, saying politeness was an aspect of white supremacy. They said the Protestant work ethic. Yeah, it's insane. It's so insulting to black Americans. And here you have a white leftist or maybe like a white progressive in front of Congress trying to defend it six years later in the harsh daylight. And it looks absurd. And it's so like she should be disqualified from everything. And yet she'll probably still have some position. She was terrible. Horrible. She should be fired.

honestly, we can't have this woman touching anything in the Smithsonian. Obviously, she is far too ideological to have this job. I mean, she was, she embarrassed herself. And by the way, it's like the not making eye contact and just like writing down your notes, it's such a sad little tactic and so obvious that you're just scared. You're a P-word. Like, fucking own it or don't. So, but I just feel like you're embarrassing yourself. And Brandon Gill was right to call her out. Then, okay, so that was Tuesday, actually. Then comes Wednesday when the head of the A.B. this is a thing of beauty for me because honestly, I've been watching this group for years

now, for years, and it's been so frustrating. They are completely captured. They are like the AMA. The ABA is the American Bar Association. The AMA is the American Medical Association. And they're both equally radical left. They do not represent lawyers and doctors at writ large and speak for us

writ large. It's a lie. They are far left progressives masquerading as some you know, fair and balanced trade organization in the middle representing, you know, the group. And they don't. They don't. It's been very frustrating to watch. Same for the, for the American Academy of Pediatrics. So finally, it was wonderful to see this Michelle Bankie get in front of Congress and have to answer some of their questions. Jim Jordan did a great job. So did Brandon Gill. Here's some of it. Watch. According to the ABA's website, quote, all of us have implicit biases. Would you agree with that statement? The ABA believes that diversity, equity, and inclusion improves the practice. Would you agree

with the statement that, quote, all of us have implicit biases from the ABA's website? The ABA believes that diversity in all of its knowledge is important. It's a yes or no question. Do you believe that all of us have implicit biases as your website says? The ABA looks to remove barriers and we examine. That's not my question, ma'am. Do you believe that all of us have implicit biases? I've I've expressed what the ADA is doing. That is the ABA's position as expressed by their website. Against which groups do you have implicit biases? The ABA believes that it's important to always explain.

Are you going to fill a buster because it doesn't make you sound very good? I'm going to ask you again, against which groups do you have implicit biases? It's important to always examine everyone's point of view and where they may need to consider It is. What about your point of view? I am here as the president of the American Bar Association. And I'm asking you what your implicit biases are. The ABA as an entity. Have you reflected on your implicit biases?

I think about how I operate the world constantly. Would you like to explain to us what they are? I am here speaking on behalf of the ABA. It's, I find that disgusting. Okay, we had this in our New York City private schools right after George, Floydo Pallusa when the country lost its mind on race. And the head of our girl school sent out this email to everybody saying, this school is racist, I'm racist, and we're going to have to, you know, revise our systems to address these implicit biases and so on. And truly, I just wanted

to respond with, what did you do? What did you do? Tell me, what's in your heart? You're racist? Why? Explain exactly what's in your heart. That's quite an admission. Tell me all. like, if you actually want to atone for your racism, let me hear it. Go on. Instead, what they want is this, like, fig leaf of, I've acknowledged there's implicit bias. So I'm, I'm absolved. Now you do it, because it's really you. It's you, white conservative, who truly I'm speaking to. And not me or anybody on the left. And certainly not a black woman of color, which Banky is. And the explicit construction of their ideology is that you cannot be reverse racist because you have to be part of the oppressing class, not the oppressor, to have these problems. And that's blood guilt, basically, by the way.

But this is the argument that it's structural racism that is baked in. And so it doesn't go the other way around. It can only go one way from the oppressor to the oppressed. Like, that is explicit in these arguments when you read the actual. text and dive down into them. And that's why she has a trouble answering, she has trouble answering that question, which is particularly disgusting and cynical because actually there's all kinds of social science research. We're talking about mainstream social science journals. You can find some of this research on MIT's website. We were reading it on the wrap-up show yesterday that shows

Americans have become closer and closer to race neutrality. We're never going to get rid of racism in the United States. But when you measure by her own term implicit biases through social science, Americans over the same time period where we've had all of these big conflagrations over Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, George Floyd, have actually become significantly less racist, which, by the way, is a remarkable world historic achievement that in the United States, we have so many people from so many different backgrounds living so closely together, and we have been able to stamp out bigotry to the level that we have, but because of this foolishness, we end up in these, like, divisive media cycles, and they can't even answer clear questions about it

in the light of day because their ideology falls apart is ridiculous and it's embarrassing. Well, and the studies also show that the more you study your implicit biases, the more racist you become. All the studies show that, that asking somebody to examine that, ruminate on it, ponder, what implicit biases do I have actually calls racism to the surface? It doesn't get rid of it. It kind of creates it. Like, geez, are there differences between the races? What are they? What have I seen about black people in the news lately?

What comes to mind? After this hour that you spend doing this kind of thing, you do not walk away less racist. You walk away more. The normal person does not sit around thinking about racial differences or applying a racial lens to every news item they hear, et cetera. They just, they base their opinions based on their own interactions with people. and to make them sit down and like categorize people and ask what does this group do and what is this group like is not helpful it's not helpful to race relations study after study has shown that a little bit more from brandon gill here trying to um it ask about diversity and whether it should supply apply on the u.s supreme court beyond um the black women or the black justices who are on there take a listen to sot yeah or wise latinas here's sot 24 right now there's a about two of nine of Supreme Court justices are black.

That's about 22% of the Supreme Court. According to your testimony, about 13% of America's population is black. If the Supreme Court should roughly resemble America's demographic makeup, as the ABA states is proper. In your opinion, regardless of qualifications, should the Senate refuse to confirm a third black Supreme Court justice? the ABA supports and encourages diversity in all of its forms.

That wasn't my question. My question was if a Supreme Court vacancy opens up, should the Senate refuse to confirm a third black Supreme Court nominee based on his race or her race. The ABA does not support quotas. The ABA does support some sort of, and we're going to hopefully we'll get into that. How about an Asian? Would you like to see an Asian American on the Supreme Court? Are you kidding me?

They won't even let them into Harvard. Never mind now the Supreme Court. It's like these standards are absurd, Emily. She's a liar. She would not. She would love to see another black woman or man for that matter as long as he was Lib make it on to the U.S. Supreme Court. She doesn't actually care about representation for any other group.

I mean, the concentrated power that they had in our institutions is now backfiring them in public because they're getting asked questions about it. and reminds me of like when I'm in my house trying to fix my bike, and I think I'm doing a really good job because nobody's there being like, no, that's not where you do it. Like, you're doing this all wrong. And then I take it out on the road and it falls apart on me. Not speaking from experiences, of course, never happened.

But when you are not challenged, you do a really bad job. And that's what was happening in faculty lounges for a long time, is that they weren't being challenged on the absurdities and the incoherences within their own arguments, first of all, because they created an environment where by their own ideological standards, it was racist, sexist, transphobic, whatever, to ask questions. Like, literally you can find from 10 years ago, it's probably still happening now, people saying that, like, the Socratic method is racist. And even, like, pulling at these threads was racist or white supremacist in and of itself. And then when you don't do it at all,

you take the bike out on the road, and Brandon Gill is watching as it falls apart. Like, he's there to laugh at you as he should be. And I just- You learn the hard way. Well, I wanted to read this quote from my friend Billy Gribben, who works for Mike Lee. He posted one of these gill clips, and he said, in all seriousness, a vital part of salting the earth and ensuring that peak woke never returns is making, quote, serious people answer humiliating questions about it that they never want to hear again. And I actually think this is a great point because it stigmatizes the ridiculousness. Like, it should, at least. It might not in her fancy circles, but with the public, it stigmatizes the absurdities. So hopefully it's a disincentive from people trying to. must feel it. Right. Otherwise, they'd be much more fulsome in answering the questions. Otherwise, this woman wouldn't be looking down over here of this Smithsonian lady and they're trying to write a note as opposed to just answer it. She'd be like, yeah, I do. Yeah, I stand by it. And these are my implicit biases, the ABA woman. She would have said it openly. And, but no, they're running because they know how dumb they sound. I got to play 24 back to the ABA president and Mr. Gill.

Do you think that it's a problem that the transgender community, has never had representation on the U.S. Supreme Court? The ABA believes in diversity, equity, and inclusion as... And I'm asking you about diversity, equity, and inclusion. I'm asking you about inclusion of the transgender community. We believe that people ought to bring their entire self to whatever role they're serving. You're refusing to answer my question. Do you think that it's important that we have a transgender Supreme Court justice?

I believe that it's important in order to include that community. I believe that it is always important. the ABA believes that is always important to support and encourage diversity. So we should have a transgender Supreme Court justice? Diversity has many forms and we believe that each... Do you think that you're not answering in a straightforward way? Do you think that's because of your own implicit bias? I believe that I'm trying to explain that the ABA does not set quotas and does not believe...

Do you have implicit transphobia? The ABA believes that diversity in all of its forms is important and helps the profession more globally. Oh my God. He's a master. He's so good. But wait, we've got to give the honorable mention to Jim Jordan, whose question I have to say, as a lawyer myself, I was like, thank God. It was just so gratifying, so satisfying to hear somebody ask this question in this way with his facts. God bless you, Jim Jordan. Saw 21. Third sentence of your written testimony, you said that the American Bar Association is a

nonpartisan organization. Is that really true? Yes, sir, it is. Really? Do you take any partisan positions as the American Bar Association? The ABA takes position when our House of Delaware... The Association opposes any law that restricts abortion. This came out after the Dobbs decision. That's pretty partisan. The American Bar Association opposes detention of individuals who are here illegally. Any migrants who break our immigration laws, you oppose detention. Those sound pretty partisan. positions to me. Would you agree? The ABA takes positions by our House of Delegates, which is made up of 600 lawyers from across the country. When we take positions, we do so based on the information that we believe is. How about men and women's sports? You have a position on that? I don't have a list of all of

our... I'll read from the American Bar Association adopted by the House of Delegates, August 9th, 2021 resolution. The American Bar Association opposes any federal, state, local, territorial, tribal regulation or policy that prohibits transgender students from participating in athletics in accordance with their gender identity. Sounds like you're for men and women sports to me. Yes, it's been so frustrating. And yet still, when we get like a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, what do you get? Well, the ABA deems this person qualified or not qualified. Who cares what they think. They're a leftist organization. Might as well check in with Planned Parenthood or Code Pink and see how they think. You know exactly what you're going to get. You know what their agenda is.

It's not explicitly stated, but it's been espoused in one way, shape, or form over the years. And those of us who don't share these values are left to just bang our heads against the table as they try to masquerade as some sort of independent, objective, fair, inclusive trade group that represents us all? They really thought nobody else was going to, they really thought that they had totally quashed the opposition to this. They really, because they're in their bubbles,

they really believed they had won over the public. They believed the moral arc of history was long, and it bent towards their version of justice, as Obama like to quote from MLK. And that's why I think they're now in these positions, because they did not expect other people would take back the power and have the courage in some cases to push back. It's courage that comes from the public. I mean, I don't think Republicans were

eagerly pushing back on all of this stuff probably as soon as they should have been. But the public has now put the wind in their sales because the public rejected this. When they believed, the left believed, they had intimidated the public out of asking these questions or pushing the representatives to ask these questions. And so now this is their bed. They made their bed. They have to lie in it because this is the circumstance that they created for themselves. Rama Manuel was just asked about the trans issue in a very interesting exchange with David Remnick of the New Yorker. And Rama Manuel was pretty explicit with me saying he does not want to see men and women sports and he doesn't believe a man can become a woman, which is crazy stuff to say for a Democrat who's probably running for president. But it was wonderful to hear somebody just say what was real.

And I really gave him a lot of credit for it. Well, now he's not across from MK. He's across from David Remnick of the New Yorker. And it went a little differently. He didn't backtrack on it, but he didn't answer it either. And he's kind of getting hit for doing that, for like getting out of balance. Watch. Our reading scores and math scores are in the tank.

50% of our kids cannot read or do math at grade level. And we're going to talk about bathroom access. So my view is if you want to win elections and you also want to help kids get prepared for the future, focus on the bottom line of what schools. I understand that, Brown, but all I would say that there were times and earlier times with other groups that didn't have their rights and they were told to be patient to

and the focus on their rights was distracting. That's what letter from Birmingham Jail is all about patience. Okay. Versus urgency. Well, as a country, we proved we couldn't do it because you haven't told me and asked me a single question how to get 50% of our kids. We'll get there.

We will get there. No, wait a second. Wait a second. You started where you thought was a priority. I'm going to tell you, you may not like it. I'm asking you, I'm asking you, Rahm, about what's become, and a lot of your speeches in interviews are kind of a tagline to differentiate yourself. I think that's the motivation.

It's not just a tagline. I passed a bill in 2016, 10 years beforehand. I made sure that kids had access to a bathroom. I just didn't let it distract from reading math or graduation rates. just to add one thing to that. So Dave Wigle, who's the leftist journalist, writes, Unenlightening Exchange. Emmanuel is very comfortable talking about the focus, but not the policy.

When I asked if the next president should undo Trump's executive order on gender, he pivoted and said he'd be focused on corruption. So when in front of his fellow leftists, he's not disavowing, he's getting out of bounds. He's kind of doing what Abigail Spamberger did in Virginia before she was elected governor where she just kind of keeps saying like, that's such a small issue. Let's talk about things that matter, which, you know, gave some people hope that she'd be reasonable on it. She has him. She's not. I don't, I think Rahm Emanuel is secretly or explicitly on our side on this. And this is a tactic to get away from these leftists trying to pin him down with more specificity on exactly

what he'd do, like on the Trump executive order. But I do think it's interesting that even in front of a leftist, he didn't disavow. Right. And David Remnick is doing what the head of the ABA didn't have the courage to do, which is explicitly compare the trans-identifying population in the United States to people suffering under Jim Crow. That is beyond offensive. Rahm Emanuel should have called him out on the spot, but he's clearly testing out this new line, which is that it's about getting test scores up. It's not about bathrooms. Wival's question is a good one. It reminds me of like asking Democrats exactly what they would reverse of the Trump immigration policy,

because what they're trying to do, and it works sometimes, if you have an opponent that's not up to the task, like Abigail Spanberger had, and you have low popularity for a Republican president, then yes, you can sometimes win lesser than two evil elections. If that's what the independent kind of swing voters are going off of, we just are going to vote for the person

that's the lesser of two evils, you can sometimes win with it. But it's, if that's the direction that Democratic, cannot get away from, in the long term, it is going to be a huge, huge problem for them. And the problem then for Republicans is whether they can put themselves in a position to capitalize on it. But that is what David Remnick is doing is what the head of the ABA and the Smithsonian American History Museum should have done if they had any honesty in them, which is say, yes, we believe this is the exact same thing as apartheid Jim Crow.

Yeah, it's crazy. I mean, letter from a Birmingham jail was an MLK letter. from in 1963 where he was saying injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere and it's time to stand up for civil rights and so on that that was with respect to race which is an immutable characteristic and thus gets special protection in the law as does gender another thing we cannot change which the law recognizes aging when you become older another thing we cannot change these things get special protections in the law if you get discriminated on the of them since they are immutable characteristics. If you have a mutable characteristic, which leads to somebody treating you differently, it gets a totally different level of scrutiny

by any court. And the court just found that the transgender thing is a mutable characteristic. It's not immutable. You're not born like that. It's a social contagion. For some, it's a sexual fetish. So we're not going to treat it like that. And how dare David Remnick compare the fight. for civil rights by these trans people, most of whom are enacting a sexual fetish on us, to the actual struggle of blacks in America under Jim Crow. It really was an outrageous comparison. Rom missed a chance to stake out the moral high ground against somebody who was trying to stake it out against him.

And it's just an absurd thing to bring up in this context. So, okay, we have much more to discuss with Emily. We've got to get to Sophie Cunningham, who's emerging as a hero in women's sports. and some thoughts. Well, we'll keep it going. Stand by. In the U.S., a break-in happens every 26 seconds. Most systems only alert you after an intruder is inside the home.

By then, the damage is done. Most of these guys smash and grab, and then they get the heck out of there. You don't have time to wait for the cops. But SimpliSafe is different. With their new outdoor camera series 2 and advanced AI, SimpliSafe doesn't just watch, letting the intruders try to break into your house, it acts.

If a threat is detected, U.S.-based live agents can intervene to deter intruders before they crush the threshold. Imagine them coming up to your house and getting yelled at by somebody over a loudspeaker, basically. I mean, would they choose your house still, or would they move on? Going on vacay, you can check your feed and know that professionals are monitoring your home.

Plus, the setup is a breeze. You can get your system running in under 30 minutes. No long-term contracts. SimpliSafe earns your business every day rather than locking you into a trap. It's a leap protection that fits your life, not the other way around. SimpliSafe has an exclusive discount for you. Right now you can get 50% off, 5-0, your new system by visiting Simplysafe.com slash Megan. That's half off at Simplysafe.com slash Megan.

There is no safe like SimplySafe. Back with me now, Emily Jashinsky, host of AfterParty, with Emily Jashinsky live every Monday and Wednesday night on YouTube. Go and subscribe now. Just type in After Party with Emily in the YouTube search box and it will come right up and subscribe. Okay, there's drama. You'll be shocked to learn in the WNBA today on multiple fronts. I mean, these women, they cannot keep their shit together. It's actually quite amazing to watch. There's a new controversy involving race or sexuality or the trans thing pretty much every other week. Now, this is kind of a good one, the one we're starting with first.

The Sophie Cunningham has spoken out against men playing in women's sports. And I have to say, first of all, obviously good for her. But this is on the heels of somebody I don't like it all politically, but I have nothing against personally. Martina Navratirola helping lead the way in women's tennis to keep men out of women's tennis. I completely applaud her on this. she got out there and made comments a couple years ago against men and women's tennis and she got her hand slapped and she kind of took it back initially and then she came around on this issue. I think she realized why am I letting people slap my hand on this?

I'm a world champion, you know, 10, 15 times over. I have a right to my opinion and this is what I think and she's been very fearless on it ever since. So while we've sparred politically many times, she and I, I completely applaud her on this unreservedly. and she has led to the rule being changed in women's tennis that will not allow men to play against women. So hurrah, good for her. Perhaps inspired by that, I can't prove it, but perhaps Sophie Cunningham, who is one of the stars in women's tennis,

sorry, women's basketball, best known recently for the pointing meme, which went everywhere. It was so good. She's decided, I think she's feeling, you know, sewing her oats, whatever. She's always pretty fearless. She's pretty bold. But she has decided to speak out against men in women's basketball, saying I don't think it's right. Or men in women's sports.

And given the chance to take it back, here's what she said just yesterday. Sot 1. On that same vein, in that story with ESPN, you talked about wanting to protect young girls who shouldn't have to go against biological men. Just can you expand your viewpoint on that? I mean, I think I said what I said. I think it's kind of common sense. and I think I'll always believe in that. I think it's really important to protect children,

and that's little girls who are also involved in that category. And so I stand on what I said, and I always believe that. Do you see your advocacy on that, like taking any form going forward? You know, I don't know. I didn't, I'm not a very political person, but I do have beliefs. I have morals, and I'll always stand on those and be true to who I am. And I think people are going to take it how they want to take it, but I've never even really said anything about that.

And so when it comes just to protecting young girls in sport and women in sport, I feel very strongly about that. I think that's why you have Title IX. That's why you have some of the grades in women's sports. If Title IX and women's sports weren't protected, then you wouldn't hear about any type of women in sport. And so I think in the future it's just really important to protect. I actually think this is a huge moment.

Like, good for her. She's not Martina. she's in the game right now. She's not retired. She doesn't have all the money and accolades and sort of lifetime revered status in her sport that Martina and Avertrola has in tennis. And so it's riskier for her. And she's the only one doing it. I mean, truly, no one else is doing it.

I can't think of another person who's doing it. It's certainly not in the WMBA. But really in women's like professional sports right now, who is speaking out on behalf of the little girls who are getting hurt by boys playing in their sports. The biggest name that comes to mind is Megan Rapino, who's on the other side and just doubled down on her nonsense and inanity this week on the View on Tuesday. That's like, women are not, the women speaking out on this are women who are not currently in the game. You know, Megan, obviously Riley Gaines got very active in this after she left college where she was a college swimmer. But like, it's very rare to see somebody like Sophie Cunningham.

in the game, making money as a headliner right now, come out and say, this is wrong and then standing by it when asked after, of course, she must have been deluged with accusations she was transphobe between then and now. And she stood by it and sort of said, I'm not political. This just makes a common sense, which is just so great to hear, Emily. It's like, of course. You hear it said and you're like, of course. That distinction, I think, is actually really critical with her saying she's not political. It's just something that she believes is a value for standing, a value about standing up for women, because it inverts what the cultural left likes to say about this issue, as we were talking about earlier, as a civil rights question, right? They say standing up for people who identify as trans as the new civil rights issue of our time. But as you were describing, this is a, your sex is an immutable characteristic, like a race. And that is exactly why the early, I should say, the sort of second wave of femininity. movement fought for as a civil right, things like Title IX, which said on the basis of sex. The Obama administration then read gender identity into that, which totally diluted the civil

rights protection of basis of sex. Those words were totally diluted by the cultural left. And so when they say that they're not doing anything political, they're just standing up for human rights or civil rights in defense of men playing in women's sports, it's actually the people like Sophie Cunningham, who they try to smear as MAGA bigots, who are the ones standing up for the explicit civil rights that second wave feminists fought for, civil rights protections, including Title IX, including same-sex spaces. And I mean, I was just talking to Jen Say of X, X, X, X, X, Y athletics a couple weeks ago. And I hadn't realized until I was talking to her that not one major current female athlete playing right now had done what Sophie Cunningham just did

in the last couple of days. I did not. realize that. It's so out of whack with public opinion and it speaks to the pressure. We've had some great, great women speak out in women's cycling, women's weightlifting, at the high school level. We've seen it in track and field. But in terms of like names in professional women's sports, no one's coming to mind. Forgive me if there's somebody out there who I'm missing right now. But we've been begging. I mean, I was recently at a Jennifer Say event with Chloe Cole and many others on this issue, but like begging somebody to speak out. Like we were saying at that event, maybe Serena and Venus will because they've got that

same exalted status in tennis. No, it took Martina to do it. But like, who will do it for their sport? And this gal, she's right at the apex of her sport right now. She does have a lot to lose. And she's pretty damn fearless, this Sophie Cunningham. It's actually kind of interesting because to me it's on brand for her. Not that I follow. the WMBA, but I do know that she prizes herself on looking out for others. And that includes

Caitlin Clark, who she's gotten very ticked off watching Caitlin Clark get fouled over and over and over again, and the refs never call it. And she's spoken to that. Here she is. This is from June 26th, so a month ago, Sot 3.

During real time last night, I did not see that happen. And like, I don't, none of our teams saw it happen because I promise you that if we would have seen that happen, we would have had her back. Unfortunately, this type of shit happens every single game to her. And the league and the refs do absolutely nothing about it. It's been a minute since you got fined on this podcast. I have, but then like you see the videos of like literally kneeing and in, in,

cheap shoting C in the throat. Like if she did that to any of our teammates, we'd be pissed. But like they are, they're definitely. targeting her and the league and the refs do nothing to protect her. This is amazing. Like, good for her. People within the WMBA, you're not allowed to say that, Emily. If you stick up for Caitlin Clark, they'll call you a white supremacist.

But this girl with the finger and the pointing does not give an F what these people are saying about her. Or if she does, she overcomes it with courage. And I admire her. Yeah, they call her Maga Barbie. Like she just, obviously, as a pejorado, she just gets completely smeared when the entire country can step back and watch what happens to Caitlin Clark. It's legitimately dangerous.

There's no question that it's legitimately dangerous. It also obviously puts the referees in a tough position where they are now litigating race relations with their calls on the court. That doesn't make anybody, anybody safer. It's really sad to see. And, I mean, Sophie Cunningham is actually totally unafraid to come out. You can tell. She's saying there, I don't care if I get fined, basically. Like it's genuinely dangerous.

And the WNBA fandom, honestly, is small and it's ideologically captured. Not everybody who watches WNBA is far left, but that's the case with the WMBA audience generally. And it has really created a dangerous situation where they can't celebrate one of the best people to ever play the game, Caitlin Clark, who's bringing new people into the sport, who is exciting audiences and who's just putting on great games because they're obsessed with this idea that there's some deep-seated racial discrepancy with the way she's treated versus the way other players are treated. Here's one of the reasons why it's so important. In basketball in particular, girls basketball, we have seen males play and think of that. I mean, it's not like track and field where it's galling and it's unfair, but it's not unsafe to have somebody do the long jump

next to you who's a boy. But in basketball, like volleyball, it's unsafe. Like boxing, by the way, and even at the Olympic level, we saw those women try to do the XX and then immediately reverse themselves because they got the pile on. Not the people saying, shame, shame, you're a bigot. And they folded. But Sophie Cunningham does not seem like the type to fold

and so far she's not folding. But we pulled the video of some of these high school matches, games, in which girls got brutalized by this six-foot tall guy posing as a woman. It's happened over and over and it's incredibly aggravating because look at this. He whipses her.

She falls to the ground. This one game, I think they had five female players get hurt. And they had to stop the game. So this has happened. Look at this girl. She needed Sophie Cunningham. She needed Sophie Cunningham. No one would stand up for her.

Look, it's obvious which one is the man walking around, towering over these women and hurting them. It's just incredibly frustrating and infuriating. And it was about time. we had Sophie Cunningham come along and lead the way. The question now, will anyone else follow? I'll get to Megan Rapino in a minute. She's not. She wants my daughter who plays soccer to get hurt by a man and have, she has no problem with it.

None whatsoever. But let me stay on the WMBA for second, Emily. It's very annoying. I would never watch the WMBA. I just feel like they're so annoying. I don't know how Sophie Cunningham works in this league. I don't know how Caitlin Clark does either. Portnoy saying that Caitlin Clark should go start her own league and she'd make gazillions of dollars and she'd have a lot of people follow, probably Sophie.

But there was a controversy on Monday, today it's Thursday, involving a ref. So there's a ref by the name of Sandy Brondello. And she is the coach of the tempo. The coach, did I say, I called her a ref. No, she's a coach. She's the coach of the tempo. And what happened was her team was playing the Atlanta Dream and Angel Reese is on that team. And Angel Reese is a black woman in the NBA who's been on the wrong side of Caitlin Clark a few times.

And she's been very controversial and she's quick to inject race into any controversy and seems generally annoying, if I'm honest. But what happened in this particular instance is I'm going to show you the play. but Reese, Angel Reese, secured an offensive rebound. She went to the basket against someone named Sabali. Reese put her shoulder into Sabali's chest to create space, but Sabali was called for the foul and collapsed to the ground in pain. A live Mike then heard the coach, Sabali's coach, call Reese, quote,

a protected species while addressing the officiating crew. It wasn't like she said it under her breath. She said it to the officials who were, roughing the game after Reese drew the foul. Here it is in SOT 7. She rolled over. Sandy Brondello pleads her case. Carl Smesko has walked over closer to the officials. Now Brondello, the coach who said this, is an Aussie. And that phrase is apparently very common in Australia in sports in particular. And it means over there that the athlete is getting protected or preferential treatment from the refs. That's what it means. So it was completely

apt the way she used it. It did reflect what she was suggesting was happening. But a shitstorm rained down on her as though this had to be a racist comment. There's zero grace in the WMBA for anyone. Any small perceived slight will be blown up into a career endangering offense. So this woman Brondello ever since has been apologizing. She got suspended for a game. She was suspended from the game on Monday. She issued an apology to Reese saying, I used a phrase that I shouldn't have. I take full responsibility. I'm deeply sorry. I used it in the emotion of the moment. She didn't even just say, like, this is something that's common in Australia. It doesn't mean what you think it. Like, she just fell on the sword. Fell. Now, did Angel Reese, given this opportunity, you know, to

to be magnanimous, to, you know, extend some grace to this coach, understanding that this is, this is not what it was being painted to be at all. It's the Australian thing. And honestly, like, you understand what she's saying, but whatever. No, no. This is what, how Angel Reese handled it. Listen, I don't know what sought it is, but my team's got it. Everyone, I'm sure everyone knows about the situation that happened last game,

and I'm going to address this one time. First, I appreciate Sandy's apology, but I also appreciate the love and support that I have had for the last 48 hours. It has been very overwhelming with a lot of love and also other things. But I am grateful that the lead did take action on what the situation had happened. There is no place for discrimination or hate in this league from anyone, from fans to coaches, to players. And I'm just grateful that we are able to move on from the situation and just play women. winning basketball, the WMBA is supposed to be positive, and we are going in a great light right now, so I just want to continue that and move forward.

Low Road. Once again, tries to pretend that a racist incident has taken place, and there's no place for hate in this league. She's got to lean into being the aggrieved victim of racism of this woman who did nothing wrong and paid a penalty for a completely innocuous comment that the substance of which appears to be totally right, that Angel Reese does get protected, whereas Caitlin Clark certainly never does. Yeah, I mean, I have great news for Angel Reese. There was no discrimination or hate at all from the other coach who sounded actually like Caitlin Clark's coach. When after that incident with the infamous incident where she basically got a punch to the throat, Caitlin Clark's coach came out and condemned hatred and discrimination that had been directed

against the opposing player instead of just like standing firm and saying the league is making my players less safe. You saw the clip you just played. It's not just Caitlin Clark who's less safe because of this. It's the black players as well. And in the United States, we have a proud tradition in recent decades of celebrating our black athletes, our white athletes. It's actually incredible how we've been able to neutralize bigotry and discrimination, particularly in sports. And so for the WNBA to be mired in this racial controversy that's actually making people less safe because Angel Reese has put herself forward as a martyr for racial causes. That does make it tough for refs who know that every call is going to get clipped. They understand that every call now

risks being clipped and put onto the internet and becoming a big racial controversy. And so, yes, they're probably less likely to call Angel Reese, to call files on Angel. when there are like flagrant follows. That's making everybody less safe. It's not good for anybody. And as somebody who is the probably closest thing to a man on my high school basketball teams, not because I was particularly good, but because I was particularly angry, you know how dangerous women's basketball can get because there's elbows flying everywhere. You saw it looked like a kidney shot there. The throat shot to Caitlin Clark, somebody is going to get seriously hurt. We are lucky that it has not happened yet.

Yes, and that's why the Sophie Cunningham's of the world are so important because she's saying what's real. She's standing up for her teammate, right? She and Caitlin are on the same team, and she's calling out nonsense. And she's standing up for other little girls who are in basketball and otherwise. Here was

Sophie Cunningham. The whole this dynamic that we're discussing right now is what was behind the famous pointing with the finger, you know, up and down. This was, this happened in June, and she, here she is explaining on the show me something podcast, explaining what was behind that now viral finger point in SOT2. I walked out there and I was literally talking to the ref, say your, say your DB. I was like this with the ref. I was like, now, Kayling got one, but why didn't she get one?

Because if Caitlin's going to get one, then she should got one. It shouldn't have been one or the other like the end. I was just kind of pointing and she's like, don't you, don't you point at me? And I was like, oh, shouldn't have said that. And I didn't say a word. Okay, that's. So stupid.

Like, that is the stupidest thing I've ever done. It's probably the number one meme, at least on Twitter this morning. It is special. It was pissing her off and like, I couldn't help myself. I could not. She was losing her shit and all I was doing was literally pointing. Because it was you, I think it just plays better on the internet.

But I think what agreed, and another thing is, too, why it played so well is because I literally did not say a word. So she's talking about how in that infamous exchange in which Caitlin took it to the neck that Caitlin got a foul, but the other girl who did it to her didn't get the foul until after the game was done. They came back and finally said, okay, that was a flagrant. But she's saying that she went and said, wait a minute, if Caitlin's going to get a foul, why aren't you going to get a foul? Why is Caitlin the only one getting a foul? Like this league, it's out of control. It is blatantly racist, just not in the way they say it is, Emily.

They really need a total reset. And I don't trust that they would be able to do a total reset in a good direction, because even as we've seen with the audience capture, like it's the coaches who then are coming out and groveling to the the left, to the cultural left after these incidents happened. So even if they tried to do a total reset, it would probably go in the exact wrong direction. But what they really need is a reset to just restore some normalcy, some sanity, to understand how amazing it is that this league even is able to exist and that the athletes, black and white, have so much support from people who, for whatever reason, just genuinely really love watching professional women's basketball. And, like,

have some gratitude for the fact that they're able to play the sport at professional level, with fans and able to get along on their teams. Like, it's actually historically remarkable, and they have no sense of perspective about it. They're just mired in these controversies, racial controversies that are genuinely making people less safe. And I think before any reset happens, someone sadly is going to get very, very hurt.

They may be white, they may be black, but it's going to happen. You know, we're told in defense of this conduct, well, you know, you have to remember that the league is predominantly black, and the players are also predominantly predominantly gay, like they're lesbians. So we have to like interpret all of their behavior through this lens and I guess, you know, cut them some slack. That's not the argument that they make when it's whites that are accused of being racist

against a minority group. No one says, well, you have to understand the majority in this group. They're white. So, you know, they don't, they don't like having this black person come in and get all the attention. I mean, imagine making that argument. when it involves whites as the majority. But when it's blacks as the majority, as it is in this league, we're asked to just, we have to

understand that it's a black majority league. And therefore, Caitlin Clark and the attention she gets is very annoying to them. And so we just have to really cut them that slack, give them that grace, because naturally, they're offended that she gets so much attention. What do you mean? What are you saying? Did somebody give that lecture to the white golfers when Tiger Woods was the star of the world? that's racist.

Like, that's what's actually racist. That's not even just soft bigotry of low expectations. That's the hard bigotry of low expectations saying you have to cut slack to the black players for committing these flagrant egregious fouls left and right because, you know, they are oppressed. They're a oppressed minority, which they're not even minority in the league. Like, it's just ridiculous. It's the kind of stuff that, again, falls apart when it's exposed to daylight with the majority of the public, which doesn't normally watch. the WNBA, but the temperatures have risen in the league among all players. And that's why we're starting to see these games.

I think spiral out of control because the refs don't know what to do about it. They're under immense pressure. They know they're going to get clipped. They know they can find themselves at the center of racial controversies. Some of the players want to be at the center of those controversies because there's an incentive among the audience captured fans. So it's a really, really, really dangerous situation. Well, enter Nancy Armour, who will always make it worse.

She is, I think, literally the worst journalist in America. She writes for USA Today. She's horrid. She's never seen a tranny she doesn't want playing against our daughters, ever. She is 100% on Team Trans. She has no kids. What a shock. She continuously writes inane pieces for USA Today on these socials.

called trans rights and how all the rest of us who don't want tranny's playing against our girls are bigots. So she's decided to write about Caitlin Clark. Okay, there's an opportunity here. Are you going to write about how she's being treated unfairly, about how she's constantly getting fouled, and she's probably going to get seriously injured unless the refs stand up and do their jobs. The articles should not be about the racist backlash to the players who hurt her. They should be about the players who hurt her and the injuries to Caitlin, right? Okay, obviously not. So she's just dropped a piece called Caitlin Clark's flopping isn't just annoying. It's becoming dangerous. It's it's becoming danger. Flopping is when you fake that you're injured and you're not,

i.e. C. World Cup. She criticizes the Indiana Fever star for what she calls habitual flopping and dramatic reactions to and the exaggeration of non-calls, arguing it endangers her opponents by inciting racist harassment from some of Caitlin Clark's fans. You can't make this shit up. Quote, the fouls they claim occurred, the contusion she says she suffered, the technicals that aren't deserved. Clark doesn't suddenly become invisible when she's involved in a physical play, so we can see what actually happened. She brings up some examples and goes through. She says, you know, basically she wasn't hurt in this incident, yet she collapsed to the ground as if she'd been hit in the stomach with a battering ram,

then yelled at the refs demanding a foul, they reviewed it and saw what everyone else had. There was no foul, barely any contact. Three days later, against the Golden State, Valqueries. Clark said she got need in the quad by Kia Stokes as Clark dove to the basket. Clark was livid when no foul was called, dropping an F bomb as she yelled at the ref. I got need in the quad. That hurts, Clark said after the game. The ref can't miss that.

then I have to play with a contusion in my leg for the rest of the game. That's ridiculous. You can't miss calls like that. Yet once again, according to armor, replays clearly showed if there was contact. It was minimal. She says, let's call it what it is flopping. Clark's hardly the only athlete to do it. Talks about the World Cup. It's been a staple of James Hardin's career. And she says, I'm not a Clark hater before you accuse me of that. And she's done all sorts of good things for the league, but it doesn't entitle to her a pass. Okay, here we go. It seems there is a white. nationalist element to Clark's fandom that is deeply, deeply problematic, made even more so because the WMBA is made up of predominantly black women, many of them queer. Here we go. Okay, the problem is the league is majority black and queer, so Caitlin's fans are bad. When Clark claims fouls that don't exist, when she goes on profanity lays tirades at referees, those racists see her as a white woman in need of saving and take matters into their own hands. This is crazy. Chelsea Gray of the Las Vegas Aces posted a message she got following the July 12th game against the fever in which a man called her a racial slur. Enough is kind of enough, Gray said on July 15th. These messages

are not the first of its kind. There was other stuff too. It was just time. I got fed up with it and I just decided to share it. That's called a day on the internet, madam. It's If any of us wanted to show you the hideous, racist, misogynistic, bigoted slop, we are all subjected to on any given day. If we say something or do something remotely controversial, we'd be here forever. Most of it's from me. It's not nice to you. Most of it's from me to you. I mean, we talked about it, but I thought it would stop.

Still, you go on. Anyway. Nevertheless, I persist. This is like, they're making it sound like this is a unique thing to the NBA. Yay, like they get nasty comments in their case, raise it. Like, it's 2026 America. If you have any presence on the internet, you've been subjected to this nonsense. Okay, and anyway, it shouldn't need reminding, writes Nancy Armour.

This country has an awful history of black people being harmed, even killed in the name of defending, in quotes, white women. The WMBA's All-Star Game this weekend is in Chicago. Emmett Till's hometown. and a local art gallery is currently hosting an exhibit, imagining his life if he hadn't been lynched. What is it with Emmett Till? Right? This just came up the other day in the Nolan Wells case

where Ben Crump was mentioning Emmett Till, as though Nolan Wells, a black young man in Mississippi, who is beloved by his white male friends, turned up dead on a beach, apparently drowned, though there's an investigation underway. Has nothing to do with Emmett Till. But they brought up Emmett Till.

Because of Emmett Till, we need to investigate these white boys who loved him and befriended him. But they're suddenly the same as all those Mississippi racists back in the day. Why again? Because they're white. Okay. So here she is. Now, Caitlin Clark can't say when a black person hurts her on the court because of Emmett Till. She has to zip it, suck up the injury because of Emmett Till.

And then she finishes while it's incumbent on the WMBA to do more to protect its players, there also should be an expectation on Clark to recognize the wider consequences of her actions. It ends with this line. Again, I'm not a Clark hater. She's great for the league and for women's sports. She'll be even better when she cuts out the Oscar auditions. Thoughts on that, M? Oh my goodness.

Well, speaking of art exhibitions, that column should be in an art exhibition. That is a work of art. Incredible stuff, well done. 10 out of 10 on the crazy spectrum. But I have a theory about the Clark flopping, because this is the new attack against her. And I think it is 100% true that you can see clips of Caitlin Clark flopping. Again, as the writer points out, not unheard of in the NBA or the WMBA, not unheard of in soccer, certainly. But I think the reason that Caitlin Clark, I think more and more, you see sometimes there's an exaggeration of what happened to her.

It's because when things that are genuinely dangerous happen to her, they don't call it. And so she's protecting herself. It might not even be conscious, but she's protecting herself by trying to call attention to fouls and trying to call attention to when she is getting attacked on the court because she has to get it to stop. If she wants to keep playing professionally, she has to find a way for them to actually call the aggression against her. So whether it's conscious or not. It's racist of her. Very racist. She has to, before she tries to protect herself on the court, she needs to consider the

cultural context in which she's playing, Megan, which actually instead of this- I would tell. The glass-half-full narrative about racial relations in America is so cynical and sad because the glass-half-empting narrative is A, more accurate and B, much more, like, beautiful, inspiring and true to the experience that we all have around us, which is that bigotry has has been largely stamped out in this country. We'll never go away completely. But in recent decades, we've had amazing strides.

That's why the WNBA has a multiracial fan base. And you have black players and white players playing next to each other, respecting each other. But they're blowing it up over the stupid Selma envy of white writers like this lady. Yes. It's so absurd. So she's supposed to go down. And by the way, isn't LeBron James like known for the flopping? Isn't he infamous for faking injury, over the top, faking injury all the time?

So he's allowed to do it because he's a black man, but she can't do it because she's a white woman in the WMBA. So she's got to go down. And when she's thinking about getting an advantage for her team, possibly by, you know, eliciting a foul, she's got to be like, Emmett Till, I'm fine, I'm fine, I'm fine. You're not allowed to do it because of Emmett Till. It's the rare exception to the flopping behavior that applies. only to white basketball players. I look forward to Nancy Armors addressing this in the NBA as well.

I mean, should the white male basketball stars not be allowed to flop because of Emmett? There should be like, it should be a universal principle to protect, because Black Lives Matter because of BLM. That's basically where Nancy stands. How is this idiot still employed by USA Today? What editor published that? Some editor got that in their copy. And like, it wasn't just her posting to a substack.

Like, some editor got that in the copy and was like, yep, we're going to run it. Sounds good. Airtight. Right on. Great argument. She should stop it right now because of Emmett. All right. Well, that's going to be our motto from now on.

Whenever she goes down, I'm going to raise Emmett Till. Like, how dare she? How dare she? How dare she in the wake of Emmett? Before we take our break, Megan Rapino on the view, continues to spew nonsense. She doesn't care who gets hurt. She's got her millions. F, the rest of you, ladies.

Here she is in SOT 5. There's been a lot of debate about trans women in sports, and you recently wrote an article basically saying that anti-trans legislation is not actually about protecting girls, but distracting from us from what really matters. Tell us what you mean by that. It's a beautiful article. Yeah, thank you. I appreciate that.

I think what I mean by that is let's just like pull back a little. At first it was like, well, nobody likes. women's sports and nobody wants to watch it or there was, you know, abuse happening and nobody seemed to care. Now all of a sudden we're going to use a vulnerable group of people in the trans community to be like, oh, well, we're just

protecting women's sports and we care so much about it when the Heritage Foundation is now going to go after Title IX. So is it about reproductive rights or is it about just women's rights in general? We're seeing the rollback of Rowey-Waid. Marriage equality, I feel like, is getting put back on the table. That was settled law.

And so all of these things, like yes, they're going after trans people in sports and they're using this as a wedge issue because we love sports and, you know, we don't want our little girls to be unsafe in sports and it's like unsafe from who, but okay. But now we're using this as like

an overarching thing when really we're attacking women. We're saying if you look like this as a woman, you can play. Huh? What? To quote Archie Bunker. Ha! I don't know what she's saying. She thought she sounds smart if she mentioned the Heritage Foundation and Title IX. It's it's it's actually gone all the way up

to the Supreme Court now, Megan, you might want to bone up on your legislative history if you're going to become a political pundit now. She's an she's she's an idiot, obviously, but she seems to be spewing something about there's not going to be any more gay marriage and the only reason people stand up for girls' rights in sport is I don't know. why she's saying we're doing it. She said it's not about girls' rights. I'm not sure why she says we're doing it, but it's not in her view about girls' rights. I love that line. Protect them from who. Ask that to Peyton McNabb, Megan. Take that to Peyton McNabb, Megan Rapino and see how she would answer that question. It's just stupid. You're right. She clearly thought she was being smart

by invoking the Heritage Foundation, which is on the side of feminists in fighting for the feminist past, Title IX, to actually have... actually protect people on the basis of sex. That's who the Heritage Foundation is standing with on that. As the feminists of the 1970s who pushed for Title IX, she's the one who's on the other side of it. And she went on in that view interview to talk about the horrors of now having to test athletes on hormones and other things to make sure that you can play in one's

where it's like, she's saying, why are we doing that? Because of you, Megan Rapino, because of the ideology that you thrust into women's sports. This is literally the only reason that we are now testing. people, which I don't think anybody wants to have to do. It's because you have blurred the distinction between men and women to the point of meaninglessness. And that's why the tests weren't happening until your movement became the primary defender of men playing in women's sports.

That's exactly why those tests are now happening. If you just said that women could play in women's sports, men couldn't play in women's sports, nobody would have to test anything. It's you that pushed this. It's so true. From like the beginning of time, we have been allowing, you know, you know, you know, you know, butch-looking women to play women's sports.

In fact, when one rolls up to your team, you're usually like, yes, because you know they're going to be strong and fierce and great. The women are never like, that's not a woman.

Let's test to see if she's a woman. Only now that we know actual men are coming into our sports. Has this become an issue of like, do we need to test? Like, do we actually need testing to figure out? And look,

I mean Khalif is a great example. That is a man who tried depose as a woman, along with a couple of others in Olympic boxing, and they were getting away with it until they did genetic testing, and it was revealed that our eyes were not lying to us. These were men. These were people with X, Y, chromosomes. So whatever. I mean, you're right. She's to blame, and she's losing. And that's what you're really saying is a loser's frustration out there, because we just got a huge Supreme Court decision on our side saying it is fine for 27 states in the that have banned boys from girls sports to have those bans.

And the next step will be to get the ruling that boys may not be allowed to play in girls' sports because of Title IX, because girls are legislatively entitled to have a safe, same-sex-only athletic environment in which to play sports. That's what's coming next, Megan. Hate to break it to you. It's not the breakup of your stupid marriage. It's that protecting girls nationwide. So brace yourself.

All right, we're going to take a break. We shall be right back. More with E.J. Right after this. Our sponsor, the Electronic Payments Coalition, says Washington politicians are always getting into your wallet and that now they're messing with your credit card. They say your credit card and the security it offers are under attack

and that senators Dick Durbin and Roger Marshall want to change the nation's payment system to benefit corporate megastores like Walmart and Target at the expense of everyday Americans. credit cards can keep your payments secure and provide rewards that families use to help make everyday purchases more affordable. The Electronic Payments Coalition says the Durbin Marshall mandates would let corporate megastores cut corners on credit court processing, credit card processing, routing transactions over cheaper,

untested networks with weaker security and fewer protections. Find out more at guardyourcard.com and consider telling Congress to guard your card. high prices might be here to stay. Gas, groceries, insurance. I mean, let's hope not, but they might. If you're a homeowner, you may have thought should I refinance to pay off this credit card debt that I've amassed. And then you second-guess yourself because of that low mortgage rate you currently have. Listen, that low rate, it's not saving you if you're drowning in credit card interest at 25% or more. If you are only making minimum payments, that debt can follow you for years. And this is why people are calling American financing, because they can save customers an average of $800 a month by using equity to finally break free from credit card debt. No upfront fees, no pressure. And if you start today, you may be able to delay two mortgage payments. Call American Financing to see if this is for you.

The number's 800, 852-2010. That's 800-852-2010. Or just go to Americanfinancing.net slash Megan Kelly. disclaimer nmLS number 182-334 nmLS consumer access.org APR for rates and the 5S start at 6.327% for well-qualified borrowers. Call for details about credit costs and terms. Visit Americanfinancing.net slash Megan Kelly, average savings based on borrowers who save over $199.99.99. Hey, everyone. It's me, Megan Kelly. I've got some exciting news. I now have my very own channel on Sirius X.

It's called the Megan Kelly Channel, and it is where you will hear the truth, unfiltered, with no agenda, and no apologies. Along with the Megan Kelly show, you're going to hear from people like Mark Halprin, Link Lauren, Morwin Callahan, Emily Jashinsky, Jesse Kelly, real clear politics, and many more. It's bold, no BS news, only on the Megan Kelly channel, SiriusXM 11, and on the Sirius XM app. We're back now with Emily Jhinsky, host of After Party with EJ and also the MK Wrap-Up show, which airs live on Sirius XM. XM right after this show in which she takes callers and it's actually a very fun listen. Oftentimes I'll hop right in my car after the show. I'm picking up a kid, et cetera. And I listen to it and I love, love, love the dynamic between you and the fans of this show. Emily, it's so fun. So here today they have you for three hours, which is extra special. Brooke Baldwin was CNN anchor for over 10 years.

We played some of this yesterday in which she has a substack now. in which she's bragging about casual sex and how she had the opportunity to sleep with four men this past month. One used to run a country. One literally flew in just to take me to dinner and then spends his days

trying to save our democracy, one congressional district at a time. One is just hot. That's all you're getting for now. She says that her online dating profile reads, integrity, brains, respect, big career, deeply

spiritual about herself, serial monogamist, but taking a break from that for the first time of my life, rare window. I'm sorry, but like, who talks about themselves like that? I have brains and a big career, just so you know, and I'm taking a break from my serial monogamy. And then she says, you know, this thing. Well, as it turns out, we should have paid to read the rest of her stupid substack, which we didn't, because who gives a shit about Brooke Baldwin, to be honest? And in the paid piece of the article, she confesses she actually did not have casual sex with these men. It was all just a teaser to get you to pay to listen to her lame recitations about her life. I don't know.

I got nothing. But her hypocrisy stands because this is the same person who went after Clay Travis. And now we've learned more about that incident. He was on her show at CNN and said he believes in two things, the First Amendment and boobs. And she, as it turns out, after that happened, wrote this long piece on CNN.com playing this virtuous card of how horrified she was at Clay Travis and painting herself as the hero, talking about how she wasn't prepared for this. But she was, they applauded her on set at CNN after she cut his mic and told him to get out. And men and women, men and women, they, they, both applauded me.

And then I got notes, like from Pat Benatar. Oh, M.G. Nice job cutting him right off. Asshole. From friends and others. Good grief. It's effing 2017. I love you. Ridiculous. She repeats all this. She wants us to know about all of her, because of her brains and her integrity. We need to know what a hero she was and how much everybody looked up to her. Then she talks about how she, her passion project is elevating women, talking to young women and seeing firsthand, how so many of them feel empowered

with a desire to be heard and get involved and she wants to help lift women's voices. Now she really just wants them to, I guess, have casual sex with random hot guys. Clay Travis will never be coming back on my show, ever. And she says he was demeaning to her. I mean, rather than just, like, laughing it off and being like, literally every man out there loves boobs.

All the straight men in the world. feel as Clay Travis does. He was having some fun. He was making a funny joke. But she takes herself so seriously, she had to have her feminist moment. Okay, anyway, you decided to put together a little homage to Brooke Baldwin's weird substack, musings, and her bizarre TED Talk. And here it is in part. America is at an inflection point.

Once one of the most powerful women in news. So many women, black, white, brown, progress. You all know the story of how a caterpillar becomes a butterfly? Now, thrust into a state of chaos, cast into the choppy waters of waning relevance. Flailing for a life raft, Baldwin took to substack. Reality, the truth is at an inflection point. Over the last month or so, she wrote, I've had the opportunity to sleep with four different men.

This is not a humble brag. Nor have I suddenly become Samantha Jones, though, if that's your lane, do you, boo? You got to see the whole thing on Emily's after party. Feed, so funny. She did actually give a TED talk, unbelievably. Here's a longer stop from it. Watch. You all know the story of how a caterpillar becomes a butterfly?

Or you think you do? I'm going to rock your world right now. It's not like a caterpillar is like, okay, cool, cool, cool, time to be a butterfly. No. Caterpillar's like, hey, I'm a caterpillar, I'm a caterpillar, and all of a sudden it starts turning into goo. What are these caterpillar cells fighting? They're fighting what's called imaginal cells.

What are imaginal cells? There are these teeny, tiny seeds of the butterfly. The guess what? Have existed in the caterpillar all along. They start growing and they start multiplying and they start fighting. And by the way, sorry, nerd alert, imaginal. The Latin root, amago, amago. What other words share the root?

Imagination. Imagine. Image. And the imaginal cells, they use the goo to reconstruct an entirely new organism. So the caterpillar cells dissolve entirely into itself. And what comes from this process is an entirely new being. I believe this biological metaphor is the most profound of any example of transformation that exists. So to bring it full circle to us, we are the catapy.

pillar. We're fighting the goo. This is the darkness before the dawn. It's unbelievable getting a window into who's been lecturing to us from the CNN set for almost 15 years, right? I was going to say there is a serious angle to this, which by the way, I didn't even finish that TED talk because I was so horrified by the beginning of it. Like, it was making my skin crawl. It was making me, it was inducing a level of secondhand embarrassment that I don't think was survivable for more than 30 seconds. But I guess we're just proved it wrong. I hear you. I mean, Lord of mercy, Brooke Baldwin is also clearly in the same category as Jim Acosta, as Don Lemon, as Terry Moran, as these people who were at quote-unquote mainstream

media purchase, very celebrated journalists at the top of their field who for years were telling us that they were just neutral observers. And then when they need to get money because they're thrust out of this high-paying mainstream, quote-unquote mainstream media gig, They turn and totally just reveal themselves to be left-wing ideologues. She's been thirst tagging James Tallerico in posts. She's been hanging out with Nicole Hannah-Jones of the 1619 project. Also there's the terrible confessional writing angle of all of this, which it reminds me of somebody who wants to be Alina Dunham but doesn't have any of the talent of Alina Dunham and just wants to kind of like exploit her exploits. It's all...

There's this novel from 1973 called Fear of Flying by Erica Zhang that I feel like really started this like feminist confessional writing in a way where it's like you're supposed to be very proud about your sexual conquests as a woman, which most women... Even though she's made none. If you paid for that, as I bet producer Steve did, you should get your money back. Send an email. I know. That's terrible. No, producer Steve would like you to know he did not. Debbie Murphy did it. Canadian Debbie did it.

God bless you, Debbie. This is like, look, this is what she keeps, she's posting this online of her, like, doing acrobetic yoga poses so we can see her ass. Those bikini photos are from her social media. She wants us to see her in a bikini. I'm like, I guess you've given up your news job because very few newswomen would actually post bikini photos of them. Even if they look great, they are too reserved, too professional, too intent on maintaining a professional relationship with the audience to do such a thing. she's referring to herself as a sapio-sexual, meaning she's attracted to brains.

What do you mean? Like, you're fucking human? Everybody is attracted to brains. What are you? Like, she's, anybody keeps telling you how smart they are and how, like, she'll only have sex with a smart guy, probably isn't. This is getting more pathetic by the day.

I don't know if CNN did this to her or just didn't catch this about her. But I'm starting to think Jeff Zucker was, he was on the right side. I think I'm on his side. Emily? He's the hero. of the story. I think she's stuck in 2020.

This might have worked with her small circle of New York City feminists at the time, but it doesn't anymore. No, Bell flat. Emily, great to see you. See you on the next hour. Tomorrow, Chris Hanson, formerly of to catch a predator. See you then. Thanks for listening to The Megan Kelly Show.

No BS, no agenda, and no fear.