The Megyn Kelly Show - Tulsi Gabbard on Investigating the Leaks, Fighting the Deep State, and Whether She'll Run in 2028 | Ep. 1061

Episode Date: May 1, 2025

Megyn Kelly is joined by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard for an exclusive to discuss her new role in the Trump administration, the vacuum of leadership and deep rot in the intel community, her fight against the Deep State, her push for transparency and accountability through declassification, her work on getting to the origins of COVID, her partnership with RFK Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya to see how gain-of-function research connects to the COVID pandemic, what she's learning about whether Dr. Fauci lied under oath, the illegal leaks coming out about internal Iran discussions, the pressure to act against Iran from inside the intel community and the forces in the GOP, the status of the leaks investigations, Trump's courage to choose peace, why the cartels are her number one security concern facing America, how the Biden administration made the challenges much harder, the failures of the war on drugs, the Ukraine mineral deal the Trump administration signed today, Dems refusing to support it, all the Ukraine money that could have helped Hawaii and North Carolina, whether she could run for president in 2028, how she found herself endorsing Trump and in a Trump administration, what qualities she admires about him, and more. Birch Gold: Text MK to 989898 and get your free info kit on goldSimpliSafe: Visit https://simplisafe.com/MEGYN to claim 50% off & your first month free!120Life: Go to https://120Life.com and use code MK to save 15%FYSI: https://FYSI.com/Megyn or call 800-877-4000Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow 

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at noon east. Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. We have a very special program for you this morning, all about Tulsi Gabbard. When I first met Tulsi, she was still a Democrat. And it was early on in her career. When she first came on this show, we didn't even have video. It was an audio-only podcast. And you could hear her with the birds tweeting in the background from her home state of Hawaii. And the two of us were wondering what our next move was in life. This podcast was fledgling.

She had been ostracized by the Democrats and the Democrat Party. And here we are five years later, both in very different places. She's now running at the top of 18 intelligence agencies. And I'm down here interviewing her at the office of the director of national intelligence. So many did not want her to get this post because while Hillary Clinton and others accused her of being Putin's puppet, etc., what crushes them about Tulsi Gabbard is she's no one's puppet. She won't be bought, she won't be bullied, and she won't be cowed in saying how she really feels by the military industrial complex or anyone else. So we just completed a fascinating hour-long talk about so many different things.

It's Tulsi, like you've seen her a bit before, you know, still straightforward and moving and honest in her commentary, but in a brand new, really big role. Enjoy. This July, there is a global summit of BRICS nations in Rio de Janeiro, the bloc of emerging superpowers, you know, including China, Russia, India, and Iran. They're meeting with the goal of displacing the U.S. dollar as the global currency. They're calling this the Rio Reset. As BRICS nations push forward with their plans, global demand for U.S. dollars will decrease, bringing down the value of the dollars in your savings potentially. While this transition won't happen overnight, the Rio reset in July marks a pivotal moment when BRICS objectives move decisively from theoretical possibility toward

inevitable reality, according to many experts. Learn if diversifying your savings into gold is right for you. Birch Gold Group can help you move your hard-earned savings into a tax-sheltered IRA and precious metals. Claim your free info kit on gold by texting MK to 989898 with an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau and tens of thousands of happy customers. Let Birch Gold arm you with a free no-obligation info kit on owning gold before July and the real reset. Text MK to 989898 today. Message and data rates apply. Kelsey Gabbard, I'm so excited to be here with you.

There's significance to where we are. Why? Yes. So we're sitting here in the lobby of the building's known as Liberty Crossing of the Office of Director of National Intelligence. This organization was formed because of the disaster of the intelligence community that led, that could have prevented the attack on 9-11 had there been an integration of intelligence, had the CIA been talking to the FBI and all of these different people who had different pieces of information but weren't talking to and sharing that information and intelligence with each other, followed by the

intelligence failure of the Iraq war that ultimately led to the creation of this organization. So we're sitting here in the lobby. This is the very first interview that's ever been done in this lobby and potentially in this building anywhere. I'm honored. It's a special day. And this is the 20th anniversary of the founding of this organization. Wow. Yeah, your role was created after 9-11. Yes.

As a result of all that. Now you oversee 18 intelligence agencies. Can I just ask you as a practical matter, you come in, you had a background in intelligence when you were in the House. It's not like you'd never touched it. I was on the Armed Services and the Foreign Affairs Committee. So it was interesting as a member of Congress there for eight years on those subject matter committees, I was a customer of intelligence very frequently, some of the highest levels of intelligence, as well as kind of the broader intelligence briefings that we had. And so I, at that time, experienced a level of frustration that's common, if you were to ask most members of Congress,

in that the briefings that we received then, more often than not, were things that we had already read about in the newspapers, seen on the news the night before, and just didn't get much value from it to better inform the decisions that we had to make related to our military or military operations or foreign policy decisions. And that was, you know, I left Congress and my last day was January 3rd of 2021. And as I was going through the confirmation process for this job and I was meeting with the different senators, it was interesting that they expressed that same frustration to me. And many of these senators were members of the Intelligence Committee, which really spoke to how much work there is to do still. So you show up here, you get confirmed. I mean, what's the first thing that happens? As a practical matter, do you say like,

let me see the JFK files? What do you do? I have a long list of things I'm working through. But honestly, the first thing that I did was actually send out an email to all the people who work here and said, I'll be down here in this lobby where we are right now I think it was at 12 o'clock and if you're free I'd love to come and introduce myself and say hello it was standing room only here I was grateful to be able to have the opportunity to just immediately address those who work here, intelligence professionals, analysts, people who are subject matter experts in different areas, some of the support staff who are here and kind of

keep the lights on. And they gave me a very warm welcome. And I laid out who I am, my background, and the mandate that the American people delivered by electing Donald Trump and why I'm here. The purpose that we all are here for, to serve the American people, to ensure their safety, security, and freedom, first and foremost. And let me just tell you this. I got a number of notes. I told them, let me know what you think is going right. Let me know what you think needs fixing. You can find my email address. You can find my number. And I started to get notes from people, one of which came from a guy who has worked here since its founding. And it really, I'll never forget it because he said, not once has any other director ever come and done anything like this. Wow. And second, he said, I'm so happy that you're here and the changes that you seek to make.

Now I can finally breathe. Oh, wow. So a simple gesture of coming and saying, this is who I am. I look forward to working with you to serve our country, to refocus the intelligence community back on its core mission, to get rid of the distractions, the weaponization, and all of the other noise that has undermined the trust that the American people may have had long ago in the intelligence community. It just speaks to the vacuum of that leadership that unfortunately has existed for so long.

So how do you, I have no doubt that the people in this building like you as a person, to the vacuum of that leadership that unfortunately has existed for so long. So how do you, I have no doubt that the people in this building like you as a person, but you have to fight the deep state's loathing of your boss, right? I mean, there's no question there's a fair amount of loathing by Democrat, you know, lifers that work in these buildings for him. Yes. And that's why I think we see leaks, you know, whether it's at the Pentagon or from here. And you've had a couple and you've handled them very well and very firmly. But how do you battle that? I mean, it's like they have an agenda. Yeah. Well, I'm sure there are people who work here and within the intelligence committee community who probably don't think or speak very kindly of me either, specifically because, again, through the president's leadership

and the mandate of the American people, I know exactly what I need to do here and how deep the rot is within the intelligence community that has to be rooted out. So, yes, bringing about transparency and accountability, shining a light in areas that haven't seen the light in a very long time, if ever, really pushing for the declassification of documents that the president has listed in several of his executive orders, and reminding people here, especially in the area of declassification, there's so much protection.

We've got to hold on to all the secrets instead of really thinking about what is in the best public interest. And so obviously starting with the assassination documents related to President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr. is the starting point. But there are many other areas where we have to bring about transparency. We have, in order to achieve accountability and deliver that to the American people, reminding people here every single day that the American taxpayers pay for this building. Yeah, there are secrets. Exactly. They keep the lights on. They are the ones who are funding your paycheck. That's paying for your rent, your mortgage, your ability to feed

your family. The American people are who we work for. So any other level of protectionism of like, well, we don't want this agency to be embarrassed by what we are going to expose. And the truth to the American people, it's a wrongheaded mindset and speaks to the huge culture shift, the mindset shift that has to take place here. And this is the bigger thing that we are tackling here and that the president is tackling and we're tackling across the entire federal government. Did we learn something new in the RFK and JFK documents in particular? I didn't follow it that closely, to be honest, but my takeaway was most people thought it didn't add that much. Am I wrong? I got to say, I'm not someone who has studied these over the years, so I'm probably about

where you are. There were new pieces of information. Did you get a briefing from somebody who said, holy God, it really was the CIA? No. Okay. And those who are experts on this, who've studied this for a long time, did not find what they were looking for. So yes, there was new intelligence and information that was declassified that had not ever been seen by the public before. There were new revelations

that came through. But in both of those cases, and in a few days, we're releasing another, I think, 50 or 60,000 pages related to Senator Robert F. Kennedy's assassination because we had to go out and hunt and find those files stuck in other warehouses. But whether or not it delivers the quote unquote smoking gun, the important thing is that the transparency is there. Well, it's even more reason to release it if it doesn't have anything. You know, it's like you must have looked at some of this and said, why was this kept a secret for so long? Exactly. It just sends people spinning. Exactly. On the subject of documents that we'd like to see but haven't, COVID and its origins. I'm sure you saw that just before we sat down tonight, the Chinese State Council Information Office, I don't even want to know what that is, but it sounds bad.

They have determined that COVID came from us, that it's more likely than not that COVID originated in the United States and not in China. I'm wondering whether you have any dispute with that based on what you've seen over here. The intelligence community has been responsible for trying to figure out in part how this thing started. So I created a kind of a special teams group, the Director's Initiative Group, that is focused on investigating a number of the president's top priorities and the things that the American people really deserve and want to know the truth about. The origins of COVID-19 is one of them. So they are actively working on that. A lot of the work

that's been done is on COVID.gov. Have you had a chance to look? Oh, Trump changed it. It's quite a transformation of the website. For anybody watching, if you haven't seen it, check it out. It's the annoying website to which YouTube and all social media used to refer people with Fauci talking points, and now it's been completely taken over. Completely reversed. So a lot of what's been found is already there. But the thing that we are working with Jay Bhattacharya, the new NIH director on, with

as well as Secretary Kennedy, is looking at the gain-of-function research that in the case of the Wuhan lab as well as many of these other bio labs around the world was actually U.S. funded and leads to this dangerous kind of research that in many examples has resulted in either a pandemic or some other major health crisis. Let me ask you specifically, because we already know that EcoHealth Alliance was partnering with this Wuhan lab to create, to do gain-of-function research. That's right. We just have never been able to have somebody say, and it was that exact experiment that led to this COVID bug. But have we gotten there?

What's the new thing that you're digging in on? We are working on that with Jay Bhattacharya and look forward to being able to share that, hopefully very soon. Okay. That specific- Link. Correct.

Between the gain of function research and what we saw with COVID-19. I mean, that would be extraordinary because just so the audience knows, if that's true, if it was Peter Daszak's research with the Wuhan so-called bat lady that caused this pandemic, then we did fund it. Then Anthony Fauci helped fund the pandemic. The thing that he denied over and over and over to Senator Rand Paul's questioning. That's right. Under oath. Under oath, exactly. So is it any wonder that he sought a preemptive pardon for anything during a certain period of time by President Biden before he left office?

And then strong-armed and smeared people like Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, anybody who came out and said, I don't know if that's natural. This actually smacks of lab. And the reason why this is so important is not just what happened in the past. It's because this gain-of-function research is happening in biolabs around the world. I got attacked, and I think you saw this, we've probably talked about on your show before, when I warned against U.S.-funded bio labs in Ukraine when the Russia-Ukraine war kicked off for this very reason. Who knows what kinds of pathogens are in these labs, and if released, could create another COVID-like pandemic. And for that, I was called a Russian asset. You're, you know, trumpeting Putin's talking points, all of this nonsense simply for speaking

the truth and stating facts that, by the way, are still on U.S. Embassy Ukraine's website today about how the U.S. has funded these bio labs in Ukraine. But in order to, my point is, in order to prevent another COVID-like pandemic or another major health incident that could affect us in the world, we have to end this gain-of-function research and provide the evidence that shows exactly why and how it's in our best interest, the American people's best interest, to bring about an end to it. Can I just ask you one other question on that? Why did the intelligence community, why were they so reluctant to just say that? You know, under Joe Biden, it was split.

The FBI eventually said, well, we kind of think it was the lab. The Department of Energy said lab. But then the other agencies were like, no, we think more natural origin. Long past the point when it did not look like natural origin. They tested 80 or 90,000 animals. They never found this version of the virus. So what was going on with the intel community? You know, it's a good question, and I don't have a specific answer to it, but I want to point to

the contrast of how, in some cases, they are very unwilling to come to express a view or a certain opinion on something. And in other cases, even if they don't have decisive or conclusive evidence per se, they're very quickly to come to an assumption. And this gets to the real heart of the challenge here and the problems that we've seen is the politicization of intelligence to meet a certain objective or to influence a certain policy. And that is what has been the problem. This goes all the way back to why this organization was founded. When you look at the so-called intelligence that really was used to spur the Iraq regime change war and look at what that has cost our country in lives, in treasure. Look at what it's cost the world. Look at what Iraq is today,

now essentially a proxy of Iran. When Iraq, that would not have happened had that regime change war not occurred. That's right. So again, this is really what is at the heart of what needs to be addressed within the intelligence community and why leadership matters

so much. Just as a reminder to our audience, you were a young 21-year-old state assembly person in Hawaii. And two years after that, you signed up, you enlisted in the National Guard, and you were deployed to Iraq. So you know firsthand about the blood and treasure. And I served in a medical unit. And it was with a unit out of Hawaii, Infantry Brigade Combat Team. And my first task every single day was to go through a list of all of those who had been casualties a day before, those who were injured. I was the first one notified when there was someone who was killed in action. And ultimately to make sure that those who were injured either got the medical care they needed, that they were evacuated as quickly as possible,

and then making sure that they were getting that care all the way until they got home or getting them back out into the field. But every day, going through this list of names and thinking about those at home who I knew because I heard from my parents, were worrying and terrified of their phone ringing and the most terrible outcome of their loved one, their husband or wife or son or daughter, brother or sister, being in a position where they have paid the ultimate price in service to our country. And this is such an important thing because too often, as you know,

very well covering all of these issues for so long that you have politicians who debate whether do we go to war here or there? Do we go topple this government or that government? And too often it is so detached from the real consequences that come from those decisions. And we see the same reflected here at times, again, when we have people who are working within the intelligence community who perhaps in some cases have become too detached from the impact of their work on those who are making life and death decisions for our country and the potential to either go to war or to prevent war, as President Trump is trying to do on many fronts. And you have those who are co-opted by the military-industrial complex, abusing their position to feed or manipulate intelligence, as we saw with the Iraq war, to start a new war. This intelligence community, the work that gets done in places like this every single day,

has that power to be the fodder, the fuel, the seed that can lead to yet another unnecessary war. You're overseeing the group that could cause it. Pete Hexeth overseeing the group that would have to do it. Right. And both of you are in very powerful positions in advising President Trump about the risks and rewards. Right. There was a New York Times article within the past month

saying you, he, J.D. Vance, and his chief of staff, Susie Wiles, were all together in urging him to not go too far on our actions against Iran, that we should not give Netanyahu what he wanted by either participating in or boldly and robustly supporting Israel bombing Iran, that that's a proxy for us and there's no way we wouldn't be heavily involved. And that is not a position the United States wants to be in. And President Trump did not do it. He did not give Netanyahu the answer he wanted. I know you're not going to get into the specifics of what you advise the president, but can you explain your

view of the dangers of barreling toward a potential conflict with Iran? Yeah, the New York Times article was a result of an unfortunate, unauthorized, and illegal leak of a very private conversation between the president and his advisors. I won't get into the details, but it was a very robust discussion that really speaks to President Trump's care and thoughtfulness as he makes his decisions around these very serious issues of war and peace. Ultimately, what we are doing is providing the president with the facts, the intelligence. Here is what the intelligence is telling us as the Secretary of Defense. Here are the options that are on the table and the likely outcomes that could occur if you go with course of action A, B, or C. And ultimately, it's the president who makes the decision. And he has made it clear time and time again that his goal with Iran, first of all, they cannot be in a position where they can develop or have a nuclear weapon.

And that he believes and is confident in the opportunity that this moment provides to be able to achieve that outcome through peaceful means, through diplomacy and through negotiations. And he knows that that's what's in the best interest for the American people and for the world. On the Iran front, here's the argument that the more neocon crew makes. All right, this is from Mark Dubowitz of Defense of Democracies, one of these think tanks in Washington that wants a hard line toward them. He recently tweeted, quote, the Islamic Republic is weaker than ever, hated by most Iranians, hammered by the IDF and Mossad. Its terror armies, meaning Hamas, the Houthis and Hezbollah, air defense, missile production capability are in ruins. Never a better time to dismantle its nuke program and finish off the regime. Will another president blink? How is he wrong? First of all, the military option is always

on the table. The president often talks about peace through strength, and he means what he says when he talks about his objective, which is also Prime Minister Netanyahu's objective, and I think many countries in the world would agree that Iran cannot be in a position to have a nuclear weapon or to develop a nuclear weapon. That is unequivocal. How we get there is really the question. The president is of the mind, as he has been consistently through his first term in office, as he is now. achieve what is in our best national security interests through peaceful means, through negotiations, not blind trust, like, okay, we're just going to believe whatever they say. Not at all. Any deal that is potentially made with Iran will have to come with a very, very rigorous set

of verification means. Nothing like the failure that was the JCPOA that President Obama negotiated. The deal that President Trump, through his very talented and exceptional ambassador in Steve Whitcoff, is negotiating is a deal that will best serve the security interests of the American people. Do you feel the push, Tulsi, the push of this strong neocon strain that's still within the Republican Party and probably in these agencies, that's much more hawkish on an issue, including war in the Middle East, which we've just done for 20 years? Yeah, of course. The pressure's there. The debate is happening in the public, which I think is a good thing. It's a positive thing that we're hearing from different elements.

Yes, even within the Republican Party. Even if they're leaking? I mean, because we're hearing from them that way. The leaks should not, the leaks have to end. If the president can't have the confidence that he can sit in a room with his closest advisors without it leaking to the public, then that is something that really undermines his being best served with the best possible information, with debate, robust debate around the table, which you look at the team of people he's assembled,

he likes that debate because he sees the value in hearing different perspectives so that he can make that best informed decision. But when we look at this debate that's happening kind of in the public town square, whether it be digital or TV or whatever the platform is there, I think it's important for the American people to see the contrast and the difference between the neocons who are very ready to rush into war without allowing what President Kennedy spoke about in his historic speech at American University, which was to choose peace, to do the hard work of diplomacy, to recognize the true cost

and the serious cost of war, and that it requires strong leadership to do the hard work of diplomacy in order to achieve peace however and wherever possible and that it's not something that you just go okay good we got peace and then you walk away no it requires consistent engagement and that strong leadership that once again strikes that balance and recognizes that we cannot be prosperous unless we are at peace as a nation and ensuring our nation's security. We have the strongest and most capable military in the world. And I can say as someone who still serves in the Army Reserve and has now for 22 years. You're too busy for that. A little bit. But my, you know, those who I've had the privilege of serving alongside, I had the chance to go and do some PT with Pete Hegseth and some

Marines the other day. You still got it? Are you still there? You know, I'm giving the kids a run for their money. And I'm good with that. But it's recognizing again, yes, we have the capability to defend our safety, security, and freedom anywhere, anytime. But it takes a strong leader and a strong president to choose peace and diplomacy, recognizing that war and the use of our military because of the sacrifices of these young men and women from all across the country that is required when you go to war. President Trump takes that very seriously. I mean, I appreciate it.

As a mother of an 11-, 14-, and 15-year-old, I appreciate that. I do not want somebody with their foot on the gas pedal recklessly pushing us into yet another war, and I think I speak for most people in the country on that. The leaks, we touched on it. It must be very disconcerting to be in a private meeting with the president with only top, top people, and then a day later see it on the pages of the New York Times. Clearly, I assume you trust your fellow cabinet members and so on implicitly, but everyone has to speak to a staff about what happened and what

needs to happen. And I wonder how rattling that is, because you're in the same position in a way that Pete Hegstaff is in, where people underneath you appear to be leaking even top secret information that you can go to jail for leaking. That's right. But they clearly have such an agenda, it's worth it to them. Yeah. So how has that affected you? And you're dealing with it with a firm hand, but how has it affected you when this happens?

You know, you mentioned that example of that New York Times article. There were a number of things in that article that were completely inaccurate, which speaks to, again, and there is an investigation that's underway to try to figure out the source of this leak or sources of this leak around that specific incident. But the effect is, I mean, it makes things much harder in constantly questioning and looking over your shoulder, okay, who's in the room? I have to be careful about everything that I say because ultimately we're in a situation where these things being leaked, either by people who are just trying to show a we don't like Trump or someone who has a problem

with President Trump and his policies. Really what is happening when they do that is they're undermining our democracy because what they're doing in whatever tactic they use is saying, well, I'm doing what's best for the country and I know what's better for the country than the majority, the vast majority of the American people who chose this duly elected president, Donald Trump. And that's where you can agree or disagree with his policies. But when people cross that line who are in these positions of power and influence, they are actually undermining our democracy and our security in doing so. You've referred three people now to DOJ for criminal prosecution. Do you think they will be prosecuted? That's the goal. That's the goal.

The only way we bring about accountability is that we can actually prosecute these crimes. Do the people know they've been referred? Do they still work here? In some cases, they know. In other cases, they are likely not aware. We have another 11 cases that we are still conducting our own internal investigations around. Some will be sent to the Department of Justice for further investigation and prosecution for criminal charges because it is a federal crime and others depending on the situation will be dealt with internally where people will be fired and have their security clearance revoked. One of the leaks was, it spoke to what

Trump is trying to do with the deportations, not the securing of the southern border, but the deportations. And he has declared under the Alien Enemies Act an invasion or incursion, in part saying that the Venezuelan government has dispatched Trenda Aragua, this gang, to come into the United States and commit mayhem. And one of the things that was leaked from someone in the intel community was that didn't happen. There is no official link between the Venezuelan government and Trenda Aragua. Therefore, it's not an incursion. It's not an invasion. It's very clear why somebody would leak that to try to undermine the president's use of the Alien Enemies Act.

Is that one of the leaks being investigated? It is being investigated. There's a few things to add to that to kind of color out the picture. One of the most often tactics that these leakers use is they will take, let's say it's a six-page top secret classified document, And they will pull a line from page one and a line from page two and a line from page three that when put together supports the narrative that they are trying to push, but is not at all reflective of the kind of conclusive analysis in that report. And that's exactly what happened in this case. So they very selectively and intentionally left out what was really the most important thing, which was that the FBI very clearly is the intelligence element that is responsible for domestic security. So it shouldn't be a surprise then that they are the element that said, yes,

the Maduro Venezuelan government is supporting Tren de Aragua and their criminal activities here, enabled by President Biden's four years of open borders, where they very freely came in and out of our country and were able to begin to control territory here in the United States. The CIA doesn't collect intelligence here in the United States because that is not within their writ or their authorities. So again, this is why we look at the ways that intelligence leaks are politicized is by the selective picking and choosing and very clearly leaving out the thing that actually supports what the president is doing here. I'm listening to you. I'm rolling my eyes at the thought of a judge trying to overrule, effectively, you and President Trump,

on whether it's been an incursion, whether the intel supports this link without having any access to any of these materials. I mean, when you see the courts really trying to get involved in this and seeming to be on a road towards saying we are allowed to declare whether there is an incursion or they're not, what's your reaction? I mean, it's such a dangerous thing. And again, it's preposterous in my view that these judges, the judicial branch obviously plays an important role in our three, you know, co-equal branches of government. But they should understand what their role is. And these activist judges who now somehow believe that they're in the position of making policy by undermining the president's legal authorities and orders bestowed upon him by the American people. He did the hard work and put his name on the ballot and ran for office. If these judges want to run for office and be president, go ahead and do that. Go make your

policies. Go state your views and your opinions. But they are politicizing the bench and showing how through their activism, they are undermining really, frankly, their own credibility in doing this. And again, another thing that undermines the American people's faith and trust that these institutions, that the judicial branch in some of these cases is actually doing their job. You do a presidential daily brief every day. You don't do a judicial daily brief every day. You don't sit with Judge Boasberg or the U.S. Supreme Court and tell them all the things that he hears. No. That's what's so absurd about it. It's crazy. One more thing I'll add on that because you mentioned of leakers within the intelligence community. Unfortunately, we have

them and they have been there for far too long and we are trying to root them out. But there's also another source of leaks in coming from Congress, where certain staffers and members of Congress have access to this very same intelligence. And as you can imagine, some may find it in their interest to selectively leak intelligence, once again, to support the talking points that they are delivering that are undermining the president's actions to root out these cartels and these gangs to keep the American people safe. When we just take a step back and look at the arguments that many of these Democrats in Congress are making and how hard they're fighting and these judges, it makes zero sense in really President Trump's mission is very clear. We are trying to make our country safe. We're getting rid of the most dangerous of gangs and criminals and cartels. How is this not the most bipartisan issue? They say they need due process.

They need more due process. Right. But not when they illegally came across the border. We didn't get any. You guys have been helping with that. I want to ask you about this. This is the National Counterterrorism Center's border security has actually helped President Trump quite a bit in nabbing a bunch of these gang members, from what I can see. Leads on approximately, what, 750 individuals in the U.S. who have ties to some of these gangs, like Trenda, Aragua, MS-13, and also the Sinaloa cartel. Can we spend some time, let's first speak about that, and then let's spend some time on the cartels, which I saw you recently listed as your number one security concern.

Above Iran, above China, above Russia, the cartels. So let's do it in that order. Sure. The wins at the border and how you guys are helping. So as we started the conversation, we talked about why this organization exists. The ODNI exists to be that integrating element, pulling together information, in this case from the DEA, who's been focused on these cartels for a very long time because of their counter-narcotics trade.

The intelligence that the FBI has collected as they're looking at the criminal activities that these cartels are conducting right here in communities all across the country. You look at the databases that we already have in place and have had in place for a very long time in being able to keep track of known and suspected Islamist terrorists from different parts of the world who may be trying to come into our country. Or did come in under Biden. Well, that's exactly the point. And so this is kind of the nucleus for all of the intelligence and information that's being collected about all these different individuals. And it allows us, our National Counterterrorism Center, great people who work there, they deliver almost every day on keeping the American people

safe. In some of the examples that you mentioned of providing information on these over 750 individuals who we know are members of these three major cartels. Just yesterday, identifying almost 600 people who are known or suspected terrorists who illegally came into our country, who applied for asylum under Joe Biden's administration, and who were then released out into our country. And so being able to get their names and work with the FBI, work with Department of Homeland Security, for the cartels working with the DEA so that we can find them and either prosecute them or immediately deport them and get them out of our country and to stop them from entering into our country in the first place,

either by legal or illegal means. Before we get to the cartels, what's your level of confidence? You can't speak for DHS, but within the intel community, the ones that you guys are identifying, what's your level of confidence that they actually are gang members or cartel members? Because some in the public have been led to believe it's very willy-nilly. You're picking up random hairdressers and deporting them. How high is the bar before you communicate to the Tom Homan's of the world? It's this one and that one and the other one. When it's, by the time it comes to us here at our National Counterterrorism Center, extensive work has already been done by the DEA, by the FBI,

in order for their names to even be entered into our system. So my level of confidence is high because it's high because of the work that I know that these DEA agents are doing, that these FBI agents are doing. My office as the Director of National Intelligence, we have 12 regional representatives all across the country, and I've been spending time getting out to them and having conversations not only with them, and it's usually the FBI special agent in charge of that FBI office, but we have people from every element of the intelligence community, every element of Department of Homeland Security, DEA, all of the domestic law enforcement agencies,

and they are working together as a team, sharing that information, working together on these cases to be able to identify who these people are and ultimately to track them down and deport them or arrest and prosecute them. On the subject of the cartels. Yes. The fentanyl remains the number one killer of Americans.

I think it's 18 to 44 now. I mean, it's not just the super young. It's like those are the main years of your life. That's when you're totally thriving. You're making a family. Number one killer. And we just did a long special on this the other day, because yesterday was National Fentanyl Awareness Day. And we were talking with these documentary

makers about how they'll flood the border on one side so that the border agents will go over here, and then they'll send the fentanyl over on screen right, where nobody's covering it. Because that's their main goal, is to get the fentanyl into a country that's desperate for it. Where we have some, we're 4.5% of the world, and we're 40% of the fentanyl consumers. So it's crazy. Sounds good, taking on the cartels. Evil, very dangerous.

Also sounds like a nightmare of a never-ending war that could turn into some sort of homegrown terrorism problem here in the United States. So how do you calculate the risks here? Well, first of all, it's already happening. These cartels are already finding their emplacements here, having their own version of a headquarters in different cities and towns across the country. The capabilities of these cartels, we are not underestimating at all. It is quite an eye-opening thing when we look at how their operations are running and their capabilities. And I won't go into detail here, but it really speaks to why President Trump recognized this as this greatest domestic threat, which goes back to the annual threat assessment and where I detailed this and why, and also how the Department of Defense is now working with Department of Homeland Security

really to secure our border and will play an integral role in going after and defeating these cartels, working very closely with Mexico and their government and their officials. Can you just speak to, it's not just coming from the southern border, right? Now they're going around, they're using the northern border. That's right. They're shipping things in from the west coast, the east. I mean, we like to think of ourselves as isolated, but we're really not that isolated from these cartels. That's right. And that's where taking this very expansive approach all at once is so essential.

No one is naive at all in thinking that this is just going to be like, oh, we'll conduct a few operations and then just knock this all out. But also thinking through very carefully kind of the lessons learned from, you know, the last like war on drugs that ultimately ended up just being a prolonged war that we never really saw much progress on. Number two on the list was China. Number three was Russia. If memory serves, number four was Iran. Let's skip to Russia for a second. With longer daylight hours, you might be spending more time away from home, giving burglars more opportunities to strike. That's a good news, bad news situation. FBI crime data shows that break-ins are more likely during daylight hours

than at night. Protect your home with SimpliSafe's proactive security designed to stop threats before they happen. Millions of Americans trust SimpliSafe for the new standard in home security and enjoy greater peace of mind every time they arm their system, whether heading out in the morning or locking up at night. Traditional security systems only react after a break-in occurs, which is too late. SimpliSafe's ActiveGuard outdoor protection helps prevent break-ins before they happen. AI-powered cameras backed by live professional monitoring agents watch your property and detect suspicious activity. SimpliSafe offers a 60-day satisfaction guarantee or your money back with no long-term contracts or cancellation fees. Visit simplisafe.com slash Megan to claim 50% off a new system with a professional monitoring plan

and get your first month free. That's simplisafe, S-I-M-P-L-I, safe.com slash Megan. There's no safe like Simply Safe. One in two adults have high blood pressure. Many don't even know it. That could be a ticking time bomb. But here's the good news. You have the power to take control naturally with 120 Life. 120 Life is a blend of great tasting super fruit juices

that can actually help lower your blood pressure naturally. 120 Life is formulated with ingredients that have been shown to support healthy blood pressure levels. It's trusted by hundreds of health professionals and people have seen real measurable results. You can try it yourself risk-free with their two-week trial. Just go to 120life.com and use the code MK to save 15% and get free shipping. You can track your progress with a simple blood pressure monitor. Watch your numbers drop and feel the difference MK to save 15% and get free shipping. You can track your progress with a simple blood pressure monitor, watch your numbers drop and feel the difference. They're so sure that 120 Life can noticeably lower your blood pressure in two weeks

that they will give you your money back if you're not satisfied. So you have nothing to lose but those high blood pressure numbers. Go to 120life.com, that's 120life.com and remember to use code MK to save 15 percent. I'm Megyn Kelly, host of the Megyn Kelly show on Sirius XM. It's your home for open, honest and provocative conversations with the most interesting and important political,

legal and cultural figures today. You can catch the Megyn Kelly show on Triumph, a Sirius XM channel featuring lots of hosts you may know and probably love. Great people like Dr. Laura, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace, Dave Ramsey, and yours truly, Megyn Kelly. You can stream The Megyn Kelly Show on SiriusXM at home or anywhere you are. No car required. I do it all the time. I love the SiriusXM app. It has ad-free music coverage of every major sport, comedy, talk, podcast, and more. Subscribe now. Get your first three months for free. Go to SiriusXM.com slash MKShow to subscribe and get three months free.

That's SiriusXM.com slash MKShow and get three months free. Offer details apply. Big news today as President Trump announces that he has struck this deal with the Ukrainians for a minerals deal where we're going to have access to some of their rare earth materials. And it's not necessarily a repayment for all of the aid that we've given them, but it gives us a reason to be involved in Ukraine, to look out for Ukraine. And President Trump thinks it'll be a deterrent to Putin in starting things back up again if he's able to put this to bed. The critics say, these are former Biden people, there's nothing to be gained in Ukraine. They don't have the rare minerals that we need. That's why we're all buying the stuff from

China to begin with. So we've bought a pig in a poke. What do you say? Uh, I don't know why they can't find a single thing that they can agree with the president on not a single thing. Um, you know, this deal was very important to the president to get done. And today was a big day. A lot of work went into getting this deal signed today because he values the fact that, as he talked about earlier in the cabinet meeting today, about how the American taxpayer has provided overall, when you look at all of the aid that's been given to Ukraine since the Russia-Ukraine war started, $350 billion. And when you look at some of the deals that some of the other European countries made with the aid they provided with Ukraine, A, either they used frozen Russian money, so they weren't using their taxpayer dollars.

They found a way to give them, you know, frozen money from Russian funds. And in other areas, they said, OK, we'll loan you this money and we'll figure out a payback plan for the future. But not us, not the Biden administration. This money was just given and that's it. So President Trump understood that, was very, very, very bothered by it, that the American people are just out of pocket on this without any means of any kind of repayment whatsoever. And so this minerals deal is a way for the American people

to get some form of, not return, but some kind of a repayment based on the taxpayer dollars that have been expended and used to pay for someone else's government to be run, to pay for someone else's infrastructure, even outside of all of the weapons system, while we still have communities here who have failing infrastructure, who have poisonous water, who have people still in Western North Carolina who are homeless and don't have the basic needs that they have. And so this deal, yes, of course, he wouldn't have made the deal if they don't have these rare earth and minerals that still need to be mined. But of course we checked. He's not going to go and make a blind deal based on just a handshake. And so this is a win for the American people. And it's a win for

the Ukrainian people because this joint partnership is something that is mutually beneficial for the people of both of our countries. You think about the things we could have used some of that money for with all due respect to the Ukrainians. I mean, we're talking about the southern border, how porous it is, more agents, maybe at the northern border, more agents, maybe to inspect some of the cargo that gets shipped in, maybe some treatment programs for people who get addicted to this poison and will be dead, if you play the odds, within 18 months. Maybe more immigration judges so we can give all that due process the Democrats want us to give. You know, like there's so many other ways we could have spent that money.

So I want to go back on on you. You remember the tragic wildfire that hit my home community of Lahaina. It was I didn't live there, but it was within my district when I was in Congress. And how many lives were lost and an entire town just raised to the ground. And when I went there just a couple of days after that fire happened and went out and talked to the people there on West Maui, and the fact that so many of them, not connected to each other, completely different conversations, different households, different locations, said, gosh, if only we were Ukraine, maybe somebody would pay attention to us. And that just speaks to what we're talking about here. And so this is this community of Lahaina

now, who is only now, by the way, just starting to rebuild homes in communities and places where they have lived for generations. We talk about Western North Carolina and the very, very, very slow rebuild process that's going on there, that people who lost their homes are still paying property taxes and mortgages for the land and the home that they have, that they are not able to live on in any way at all. You look at... I don't think I'd do it. I don't think I'd be doing it. That's the thing, is those are two of many examples.

You have a level of poverty in West Virginia that I think many Americans would not see if but going to a third world country on the other side of the planet. The needs that we have here are very real. And part of the dissatisfaction that the American people have had for so long in our government is that the government, by and large, FEMA is a great example. You take all of this money, so much of this money, and it feeds into this bureaucracy. And you have all these officials going to places like Western North Carolina. I

went there and you hear the angst in people's voices when they say, no, FEMA hasn't been here. And they're hoarding supplies here or there. They're saying, hey, here you go. Here's 500 bucks. Like what a freaking insult that is. And then they see what's going on with, oh, we sent another 50 billion to Ukraine today. and the next, oh, we sent another 100 billion, and how people are celebrating that when they're not even looking at what's happening in our own backyard. And this is what I saw and experienced when I was helping President Trump during his election campaign, was that there was a spark of hope in people's hearts when they saw that he was addressing the very things that they

were most concerned about, their health and well-being, securing our borders, not allowing boys to play in girls' sports or allowing them into girls' bathrooms, things that are common sense and address the everyday needs of the American people, our security, him being the president of peace and trying to prevent war. This is a shift. This is the beginning of a shift to what we are all seeking to bring about, which is in this 250th anniversary of the founding of our country. How about let's have a government that actually serves the people, a government that is of, by, and for the people. We were talking about Russia briefly. You and I have talked before about how Hillary Clinton labeled you a puppet of Putin, a Russian asset. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, shamefully, said the same. And I saw recently President Trump withdrew Hillary Clinton's security clearance, which you had to do. Yes.

That must have been a little fun. Right. Just a little fun. I smiled. Of course you did. You're only human. Yeah, I am. So, yeah, that's over for her. And a number of other people, by the way, when you look at the 51. Mark Zaid. I love that. Intelligence officials who signed that Hunter Biden disinformation letter and never apologized for it, never held themselves accountable for it. Yes, Mark Zaid, you had Letitia James and others. Why did she even have one? Well, some of them didn't have clearances, but they had access to classified information. And so we took away that access for those. Yeah, Alvin those who didn't have clearances. Yes.

Okay. And there are more to come. And this is part of what we're doing in our investigative work as we go back and look, for example, at Crossfire Hurricane. And how there were assistant U.S. attorneys who were knowingly using manufactured testimony. That they would interview a witness, for example, and know that the witness was lying to them, either because they set up the lie or they knew that the witness was lying, took that lie and used it as evidence to get a warrant under FISA to go and surveil on Americans, which is completely illegal. And so these are the kinds of things,

those types of people, those assistant U.S. attorneys or those FBI agents that were involved in this kind of stuff, these are crimes that need to be prosecuted and these people need to be held accountable. Will that happen? That will happen. Wow. I mean, it's called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. That's right. That's what it's supposed to be used. I mean, it's called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. That's right. That's what it's supposed to be used for. Yeah, it's a good reminder. Yeah.

On the subject of saving money, you're doing some of that right here. Yes. And in part, it relates to enacting President Trump's DEI directives and pulling back on some of the nonsense that I know you and all the other agencies were spending money on, not you, you, but the intel community. Can you speak to a little bit of like what you found? Because you're doing your own Doge. You're doing DIG. Yes. So that's under you. You didn't out. This is not one of the areas that Elon and Doge came into. You did it on your own. And I understand why there's a lot of them. They are helping us. They have incredible tools and a lot of lessons learned through the work that

they've done. OK. And so they are helping us and allowing us the opportunity to be able to apply those here. So we're not trying to reinvent the machine at all. And we're able to get after the things we're looking for. So how much is going out the door on DEI programs and hires and so on? So there was a DEI office that was immediately shut down. And that alone was a savings of around $20 million. But the thing that we just announced today, in fact, was the closure of this office of human capital, a completely different part of the organization and one that sounds like, okay, well, maybe this is like talent management. You're trying to go out and see, well, where is the best talent and where are the gaps we need to fill, which is what I thought. But it turns out that

it was an office where the previous administration kind of hid a bunch of their DEI people, knowing that this action was going to be taken by President Trump. And there was a slush fund there that they would use to fund people millions of dollars to go to DEI conferences and talk to other DEI people. And so we shut that down at a savings of $150 million today. But the thing that I think a lot of people would be surprised by when people talk about DEI and you hear, you know, whether it's CNN, MSNBC, they talk about DEI and they criticize the president for his action and the actions that we are all taking to get rid of this, claiming that we're against diversity and all of this other crap. When I came in here, I was able to talk with some of the people who work here. DEI was such a priority that it was baked into the incentive structure

for people to advance professionally here. And I would imagine it was very similar across the federal government, where some employees told me that they were put in a position where they had to spend half of their time working on DEI initiatives in order for them to be able to put it on their annual evaluation. And therefore be noted as, oh, you are more likely to get promoted if you are spending this significant amount of time on this diversity, equity, inclusion initiatives. And for me, I'm like, how in the world would you spend half of your time on that? What were you creating? And I don't really know the answer to that, but I do know the answer to our national security on that question. Because what that means is in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and we have people here who work from all across of these 18 intelligence elements being put in a position where they're

told, if you want to get promoted, if you want to advance in your career, the priority is not, are you delivering the best quality intelligence assessments and analysis to best inform the president's most critical decisions. No, you will advance professionally if you show that you're dedicating half of your day towards these DEI initiatives. Your implicit bias. Exactly, exactly. And so when we look at why this was a priority for the president, this is not some superficial thing. There are national security implications to what the Biden administration was doing in centering almost their entire administration around DEI initiatives. You can

take this towards any domestic agency. Look at the Department of Education. Shouldn't they be focused on educating our kids? Well, wasn't there a group, which intel agency was it that had the people talking about transgender surgeries and non-binary this. This is the National Security Agency. Yeah, there's sex groups, polyamory. I mean, on and on. This is a great example. So there was someone who snuck into that chat that was not an employee there, and they screenshotted what they saw and leaked it out

on X. And again, this is a chat group that was created and administered by the NSA, one of the premier intelligence collection entities that we have. And it was obscene. It was obscene. Yes, it was about all of those things. It was talking about sex toys and sex tricks for people who had gone through some kind of transgender surgery. This is during the workday. This is during the workday on an intelligence-hosted work chat group. And the supervisors, obviously, as soon as I found out about it, I said, anybody who's involved with this is getting fired and getting their security clearance revoked. Which there were some who were like, oh, gosh, aren't you? Like, that seems extreme.

Like, no. Imagine you're in any office and you're having these kinds of sexually explicit conversations in the workplace. It is, I don't care what your sexual orientation or whatever your private choices are, this cannot be happening in the workplace and it must not be happening in our premier intelligence agency that has people who have the highest clearances that anyone can hold. The plot thickens as many of the leaders feigned shock and surprise at this revelation. Well, this chat group had existed for over two years that this kind of stuff was happening in. And again, this is where transparency and accountability matters so much. As soon as I made that announcement

that we will be investigating and holding these people accountable, I started hearing from people who are within the workforce saying, I work at the NSA. I filed a written report with evidence of what was going on in these chat groups a year ago, two years ago when this thing first kicked up. And basically because of President Biden's DEI initiatives, they were essentially told, shut up. It's none of your business. Wow. And then there was the cover up and then there was the leak. So this is one example of many how we can see what the ramifications have been when we have, in the last administration, one that is seemingly focused on everything but the most important things. Speaking of the last administration, one question for you on Signalgate. As I heard you say this recently, is this the first administration to use Signal

for confidential chats? Absolutely not. I mean, you actually saw something that told you this was in fact being used by the Biden administration, who are out there all over X and other social media ripping everyone who was on that Signalgate thread to shreds. That is correct. So there's no question in your mind this was used during the Biden administration by officials? I know for certain that it was, to include national security officials. Is there another way to communicate? Are we stuck with Signal? So the main means of communication for all of us, like in this building, this entire building is a secure facility. That means that if you go outside of this lobby, there's a bunch of lock boxes over there where you got to lock your phone in, you got to lock your Apple Watch or your Oura Ring,

anything that transmits a signal gets locked up by everyone who works here and everyone who visits here before you leave this lobby. How are you supposed to count your steps? Good luck. Take the stairs. The old-fashioned way. Exactly. But so the vast majority of the communication that happens is through secure telephones and secure computers and things that are built in to our work environments. However, I do have to leave the building at times and things have to keep moving and rolling. Same goes for

those who work in the White House and those who work across the administration. So at times for practical purposes, you have to be able to communicate on the go. Signal has been recognized by the federal government during the Biden administration, by the way, in December of 2024 as the preferred messaging app because it provides that end-to-end encryption that makes it, you know, nothing is completely secure, but it is the most secure option if you need to use it. You feel like it was unfair to Pete and Mike Walsh? I mean, they took the brunt of it. Yeah, I mean, you know, it shouldn't have happened. There are sensitive conversations that occur in these signal chats. But ultimately,

it was not at all what those who are opposing the president's policies and those in the media made it out to be. And I can tell you that there are some of the most vocal critics of that whole situation who also use Signal and communicate things that they would not want released publicly as well. Not surprised. Exactly. As I've listened to you over this hour, I've had one thought recur to me over and over and over, and it is first female president. That is what I, like, I look at you and I see it. And I know they put you through the meat grinder

the last time, but that was the other side. Now you've crossed over. And so I just wonder. Thank you for not saying transition. People use that word. It's like, okay, that's one of those words that's like for a certain thing. But notwithstanding how rough that was when you ran for president the first time, have you ruled out ever doing it again? Could we potentially see a Tulsi 2028 try? I will never rule out any opportunity to serve my country. I would not have, if we had talked a year ago, the thought would not have crossed my mind that I would be here and that we would be having this conversation. My decisions in my life have always been made around how can I best be of service to God? How can I best be of service to our country? And that is what has led me here. I'm grateful for this opportunity, and I will continue to chase those opportunities where I can make the most positive impact and be of service. And now you and I sit here having done something

the two of us back in 2016 never would have thought we would have done, which was stood up on a stage and endorsed Donald Trump. Now you're working for him. I endorsed him too. Yeah. It was so great. I was there. I remember. It was such a powerful moment and speech that you delivered because of your history with him. You are very generous to even mention that. What you did for President Trump was huge. And seeing you up there and announcing your partisan change with Trump, that was like the team of rivals or the Marvel Universe coming together. The Avengers.

Yeah, the Avengers. You're one of them. You're one of the most, and the gray streak is part of it. It just works. But I wonder if you do decide to do something, you know, in the future, running for president or individual executive leadership,

what have you learned from him? What would you want to take away from the kind of leader Trump is? He's a very bold leader. And as we see, he's making decisions without care for what the media chirps about him or what his so-called critics may say about him. And he's quite masterful at it, by the way. You know, he's been so effective at connecting with the American people in ways that I think a lot of the politicians or the so-called political pundits here in Washington, D.C. never really understood, and maybe a lot of them still

don't, but it really comes from a place of care, his care for the American people. He doesn't need to do this. He didn't need to put himself through all this. He didn't need to put himself in a position where there were two assassination attempts on his life. And the kind of bold change that we're seeing happening now across the government, it's never happened like this under any other president. So I really respect his boldness and his courage in doing things that sometimes people don't understand or see how it's going to turn out. Those are things we see in you too. Boldness, courage, and you share something else with him, which is fearlessly independent.

That's what's going to take you forward. Thank you so much. It's so good to see you. Thank you very much. Good luck with everything. Thank you. I mean, all of you are going to get in this environment. Yeah, my money's on you.

I appreciate that. Thank you, Megan. That's on you. I appreciate that. Thank you, Megan. It's a love. Thanks for listening to The Megan Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear. You've likely heard me talk about FYSI. Well, if you're a business owner and paying too much in taxes, listen up. FYSI's tax planning and asset accrual strategies have helped thousands of businesses legally reduce tax burdens, build valuable assets, and create tax-free income. This is what separates billion-dollar companies from small businesses, and FYSI can help you protect and grow your wealth. Don't leave money on the table. FYSI can help.

And right now, they're offering a free $5,000 risk assessment with my promo code Megan at FYSI.com slash Megan, or call 800-877-4000. That's promo code Megan to schedule your assessment for free. Visit FYSI.com slash Megan or call 800-877-4000 today.