The Megyn Kelly Show - Tulsi Gabbard on the Afghanistan Withdrawal Hearing and the ‘Woke-ification’ of the Military | Ep. 169

Episode Date: September 28, 2021

Megyn Kelly is joined by former Congresswoman from Hawaii and 2020 presidential candidate, Tulsi Gabbard, to discuss the Senate hearing on the Afghanistan withdrawal, General Mark Milley and General Kenneth McKenzie’s advisement against pulling all troops, Biden’s bald-faced lies about the exit, how to regain worldwide credibility after the failure of Afghanistan, the problem with mixing “woke” politics and our military, the pork inside the bloated “human infrastructure” bill, and much more.Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations. Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. What a day we have for you. Joining me today, one of my listeners' most requested guests, and we interviewed her not long ago, and still is one of our most downloaded episodes because everybody's interested in what Tulsi Gabbard has to say. Tulsi is a former 2020 presidential candidate on the Democratic side and former congresswoman from Hawaii. She is also a member of the U.S. Army Reserves, currently serving as a civil affairs officer for a California-based unit. She's here with me and we're very happy because there's a lot of breaking news right now. At this hour, the Democrats are scrambling to try

to save President Biden's domestic agenda as Biden's top defense officials are testifying right now before the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee. And boy, they're getting it from both sides, seeing a lot of intra-party fighting. The Democrats taking aim as well because Afghanistan has been a little bit less partisan than so many of the other issues that we debate in our society. So lots to discuss. Tulsi Gabbard, thank you so much for being here. Thank you, Megan. Always great to talk to you.

So it's been interesting watching this morning. Some Democrats sort of running cover for Biden, like Elizabeth Warren. But a lot saying, you know, got real concerns about how this went down. And I want to ask you about the biggest sort of reveal, which isn't a shock, but it's still interesting to hear it actually said on the record and on camera, which is these generals basically putting the lie to Biden's crazy bald face claim to George Stephanopoulos that no, no general, none of his guys, his top military guys told him not, not to pull all the troops out. And, um, here's how, so first let's just listen to what Biden said to George Stephanopoulos in mid August. Military advisors warned against withdrawing

on this timeline. They wanted you to keep about 2,500 troops. No, they didn't. It was split. That wasn't true. That wasn't true. They didn't tell you that they wanted troops to stay? No, not in terms of whether we were going to get out in a time frame all troops. They didn't argue against that.

Okay. I don't even know what that dance was on the second part of his answer, but he's saying, no, they were split and they were questioned by Tom Cotton, the generals today about the troop levels and whether they advised said that no military leader advised him to leave a small troop presence in Afghanistan. Is that true? Senator Cotton, I believe that, well, first of all, I know the president to be an honest and forthright man. And secondly, it's a simple question, Secretary Austin. He said no senior military leader advised him to leave a small troop presence behind. Is that true or not? Did these officer and General Miller's recommendations get to the president personally? Their input was received by the president and considered by the president, for sure. In terms of what they specifically recommended, Senator, as they just said,

they're not going to provide what they recommended in confidence. And if you listen to more, Chelsea, General Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, for the first time acknowledged publicly that he advised President Biden not to withdraw all the troops from Afghanistan. General McKenzie, who was running CENTCOM, said the same thing, told him not to withdraw the troops. Lloyd Austin, Secretary of Defense, said, I advise him not to withdraw. I was against withdrawing the troops. They all said, we made very clear in our positions and our positions at the time, well, they wouldn't repeat their exact quote to the president. They said our position at the time was do not withdraw all the troops. That's all of

his top military advisors. They were not split. They were uniform. They told him not to do it and he did it anyway. And then he lied to George Stephanopoulos about it. Am I wrong? Uh, no. I mean, that, that seems like a very clear kind of sequence of those events. I think it just, it points to what a failure this withdrawal has been. I think failure is a generous term to use. It's been an utter and absolute disaster. So, you know, I mean, I think, I think this is, this is kind of one, one issue or one layer of that, but we've got to go back and look at, you know, look at this agreement that was made with the Taliban without the Afghan government. We've got to go back to the fact that we when the United States goes into another country on a nation building mission and tries to create an American style democracy and create a military that's a, a close to a mirror image of the U S military when, uh, it's completely out of touch

with just the reality of, of this country, their culture, their history, their hierarchy, their tribalism, how they have traditionally worked, the things that they care about, the things that they will be able to sustain for their own security and their own stability in their own future. So I think that, I mean, there's so much to cover here, but going to the disaster of how this withdrawal was executed, yeah, I mean, from start to finish, I find it inconceivable, Megan, I find it inconceivable that these military leaders and this administration and the State Department are saying that they were completely, completely surprised by how quickly the Afghan government fell and how quickly the Taliban took over. And the fact that a massive evacuation of non-combatants of American citizens, green card holders, Afghan partners, allies, these SIVs who worked with American troops on the ground, the fact that all of this was such a shock is completely inconceivable to me. And I don't believe it for a second.

That's because there's so much being dissected right now. You hit on a couple of points. We can get to all of it. But one of them is they didn't spare President Trump. They said the agreement that he struck with the Taliban really undermined the fighting capacity or will of the Afghan army. And that was sort of the beginning of or will of the Afghan army. And that was sort of the beginning of the end of the beginning of the disaster that we're looking at now. The generals seem to be in agreement on that. But they did all go in on that point real quick. I think the key thing there is, is that how do you have an agreement about the future of a country without that country's leaders being involved with that agreement? Yeah, it's a problem. It's

set up for failure from the start. So they all condemned that all these military leaders and then and then they said that they they were very clear when they found out that Biden, President Biden wanted to stick to this withdrawal date, that that was not a good idea that we should not be taking out all the troops. We only had 2,500 troops there when President Biden took over. And they all thought we should leave them as just as a residual force. And they made clear that they conveyed that result, that advice. He overruled them and said, you have till September 1st, basically, to get everybody out. And given that amount of time and the very few troops they had, they had to make choices. What do we defend? They were talking about why they had to abandon Bagram. It's airbase. It was basically they had to choose

between the embassy where all of our diplomats were and the airbase. And they were making an assessment. They said that the Afghan troops would hold the Bagram and sort of make keep it secure for a while after we left. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Things fell one after the other. And then it wasn't until August 25th, August 25th, that Biden went to them and said, so could we come up with a plan that would allow us to stay past the 31st of August?

You heard Tom Cotton saying, are you, is this insane? Wait, we have Tom Cotton asking that question here. Listen. I was asked to make an assessment, provide best military advice. I'm sorry, my time is limited here. You gave me the answer that I needed here. August 25th? Correct. Kabul fell on August 15th. That's correct. You were not asked before August 25th? On August 25th, I was asked to provide best military assessment as to whether we should keep military forces past the 31st. Secretary Austin, was anybody asked before August 25th if we should keep troops at the Kabul airport? The President tasked us to provide an assessment on whether or not we should extend our presence beyond August 31st.

And as General Milley just said, that assessment was made. We tasked him to make that assessment on the 25th, and he came back and provided his best military advice. Secretary, Kabul fell on August 15th. It was clear that we had thousands of Americans. It was clear to members of this committee were getting phone calls that we had thousands of Americans in Afghanistan behind Taliban lines on August 15th. And it took 10 days to ask these general officers if we should extend our presence. I suspect the answer might be a little different if you were asking them 16 days out, not five days out.

So explain to the audience, Tulsi, what the point he's trying to make, Tom Cotton. I mean, the point is, the underlying point here is a clear lack of leadership. It makes no sense to me when this house of cards has fallen. It's already fallen. The house of cards being the Afghan government, the Taliban has already come in and taken over. And I don't know how you explain a 10-day gap

between that happening and a question saying, hey, military leaders, what's your advice on whether or not we should extend our troops presence there. You know, the whole place is falling apart. They're quickly trying to get people out. You know, I would like to see if what, what, what more is there to the story, but given that exchange right there,

it, it again just points to this utter disaster in the execution of this withdrawal to be, to be clear, you know, I have long said and continue to agree with the fact that this withdrawal needed to take place. It should have taken place long ago. When you look back at the Afghanistan papers that were revealed back at the end of 2019,

it shows how for so long, the initial mission of going into Afghanistan to go after the jihadist terrorists, Al Qaeda, who had declared war and attacked us on 9-11 was a clear and necessary mission. Our special operators, our service members went in, essentially decimated Al Qaeda at that time very quickly, within months. And then President Bush shifted the focus away from that very clear and necessary mission towards, hey, let's go topple Saddam Hussein and go to war in Iraq and have this other regime change mission. the highest levels within our Pentagon, within the State Department, within leadership across different administrations really didn't know what our objective was in Afghanistan, what we were trying to accomplish. So when we look at this within the context of that history, and I've

talked to a lot of my friends who are still serving today, a lot of my veteran friends who've deployed to Afghanistan many times, they agree that this withdrawal needed to take place. But it is heart-wrenching and maddening to see how completely disastrous this execution of the withdrawal was and continues to be. It's not in the headlines every day now, but it's still happening. We still have American citizens there. We still have green card holders there. We still have some of our Afghan partners and allies there who are still stuck and who are still unable to get out. But can I ask you, I understand President Trump, when we had 15,500 still over there saying, we're not doing that. We're getting our guys and gals home. But I don't really understand as well, we can't keep twenty five hundred there. Why not? Why not? There weren't protests in the street

here. That's not a forever war. That's being strategic, keeping an eye on Al Qaeda, making sure they don't reestablish a foothold. Right. I mean, Dan Crenshaw was on the program saying, you know, people like these pinpoint strikes. You know, we go in, we get bin Laden, we get out. They love missions like that because the risk of blood and treasure American is lower. He's like, how do you think we were able to do that? We had advanced teams. We had a presence there. We had troops on the ground, boots on the ground that helped us understand where to go, how to get in, how to get out. You can't do that as a Navy SEAL, which he is, without some sort of meaningful force there. So what was wrong with 2,500? I think you've got to look at that within the larger context of the Afghan government and the

Afghan military forces and the Taliban and the reality of that threat on the ground there. And what would be required of the American people, our taxpayer dollars and our servicemen and women to be able to sustain that, how much we have been putting in to prop up this corrupt government. So I agree that we need to make sure that we keep an eye on any growing or budding presence of other jihadist terrorist groups, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, etc., and make sure that we maintain the capability to go in and eliminate that threat as early as possible before it's allowed to metastasize and grow again and grow into an increased threat. But we have and we have the capability to do that just as we have in different parts of the world

with this over the horizon, with this over the horizon, very targeted strategic strike and using our special forces, our special operators to be able to go in and carry out these missions, I think that's critical. I know. I mean, I would like to believe that over the horizon will work just as well. But too many people who I trust have said that's a bunch of bull. We don't have anywhere near the intel capabilities that we need now. There was a report today in the Wall Street Journal denied, I should say, by I think it was Milley just now that we're negotiating with the Russians, that the Russians made us an offer saying, hey, you can use our bases to spy on Afghanistan. And that were that Milley actually spoke with his Russian counterpart about it. My God, what? I mean, OK, but he's denied it.

So I don't know that it's true. And there's a real question about whether, you know, how safe we can keep people when you got people like Milley saying 12 to 24 months, we're likely to see an attack back here, thanks to al Qaeda from some base in Afghanistan. My guest today is Tulsi Gabbard, former presidential candidate, former congresswoman from Hawaii. General Milley was defiant today in his defense of his call to his Chinese counterpart while President Trump was still in office. And he speaks to that Nancy Pelosi phone call to him in which she allegedly told General Milley that Trump was crazy how he responded. We'll play you that moment and we'll get Tulsi's response to. Welcome back to The Megyn Kelly Show, everyone. My guest today is Tulsi Gabbard, former 2020 presidential candidate and former congresswoman from Hawaii. Tulsi, so let's just talk about some of these Biden deceptions, because it's not just

the claim about nobody told me that they didn't want to withdraw all the troops, which we now know is just completely untrue. But he was cross examined or the generals were cross examined on a couple of other Biden statements today, including the statement, we will stay until we get out all Americans. Well, that did not turn out to be true at all. He told Americans in mid August that Al Qaeda was gone from Afghanistan. And both General Milley and General McKenzie, again, McKenzie is Frank McKenzie, General Frank McKenzie, head of Central Command, which oversees Afghanistan, said Al Qaeda was absolutely present in Afghanistan. When President Biden said that, I mean, he just throws these things out there. Like, oh, Al Qaeda is gone. Oh, great. It's that's a significant lie. It's not true. And he said it so cavalierly. And then they were asked about Biden's claim that this operation was, quote, an extraordinary success. And the generals, all of them did their diplomatic best not to outright call him a liar, but had to admit it was nothing of the sort. And so you tell

me why we have a president who decides to lie on significant matter after significant matter, but that's not something he repeatedly gets called out by the press for, like we saw with President Trump. You know, all of those statements that you just read out align also with the phone conversation that's been widely reported that he had with the Afghan President Ghani, where he basically told him, hey, why don't you make it sound better than it actually is on the ground in Afghanistan, make it look like it's a better situation than it actually is. Why he is, as the President of the United States, our commander in chief, trying to paint this rosy picture that is not a reflection of the reality on the ground is beyond me, but is also success. I mean, a kid in grade school who watches the news, you know, in the evenings with mom and dad over dinner could tell

you that that is absolutely not the case. 13 Marines are dead. Not to mention the drone strike we dropped on a bunch of civilians, including seven children. The nerve to come out and call it an extraordinary set, the nerve, right? There's hyperbole. There's looking on the bright side. There's not creating panic when news is bad. And then there's just outright telling us not to believe our lion eyes. And it's outrageous because we're talking about American military personnel. It's, it's, I don't think there are words enough to convey the feeling of betrayal and anger and heartbreak that my brothers and sisters in uniform feel. Those who deployed to Afghanistan, not once, not twice, but multiple times. Those who have been spending these last several weeks, sleepless nights, working day and night on their

own, working their own contacts on their cell phones nonstop, doing their very, very best to try to get their Afghan partners out to try to get American citizens out. They getting phone calls, phone calls from people in the State Department saying, hey, buddy, can you help us get this person out? Getting phone calls from people high up in this administration saying, hey, can you give us a hand? Because we need your help, Sergeant so and so to get somebody out of Afghanistan. Utter, utter failure and a betrayal, betrayal to the thousands who put their lives on the line in service to our country. And now even General Milley. And it was interesting to see the generals kind of try to dance to protect Biden. I would say the only one who I didn't feel was doing that was General Frank McKenzie, who seemed to me like the straightest shooter.

The other two seemed to be trying to thread the needle so they didn't say anything bad about Biden, which is not really their job. A couple of senators pointed out, it's not your job to run cover for President Biden. But in any event, General Milley made clear that American credibility around the world has been damaged by the way we left. I think that might even be an exact quote, American credibility around the world, that it's been damaged. And there's really no getting back from it. What do we do? How do we get that back, start another war and then live up to the promises on not betraying anybody who helps us? I mean, once that ship is sailed, Tulsi, how do you recall it? Well, you know, the very first thing that has to be done is being honest and being straightforward,

being straightforward with the American people and with the world and taking ownership and responsibility for the disaster that has and continues, that has been playing out and is continuing as we speak. That's the very first step towards being able to earn that kind of credibility before being able to earn that kind of trust that our commander in chief needs to have from the American people and from our force. and what he allegedly did with the generals underneath him when it comes to stopping a crazed Trump from launching nuclear weapons in his waning days in office. I mean, that sounds like an insane story, but it actually appeared in Bob Woodward and Bob Costa's latest book. And I wouldn't say it was an outright denial. That's not really what we heard from General Milley today. In fact, it was more of defense saying I was ordered to do all that. I was totally fine within the chain of command because

the then Secretary of Defense told me I should. So here is, let me just make sure I have the right thing. This is General Milley defending his phone call to his Chinese counterpart. Listen. With respect to the Chinese calls, I routinely communicated with my counterpart, General Lee, with the knowledge and coordination of civilian oversight. I am specifically directed to communicate with the Chinese by Department of Defense guidance, the policy dialogue system. These military to military communications at the highest level are critical to the security of the United States in order to de-conflict military actions, manage crisis, and prevent war between great powers that are armed with the world's most

deadliest weapons. The calls on 30 October and 8 January were coordinated before and after with Secretary Esper and Acting Secretary Miller's staffs and the interagency. The specific purpose of the October and January calls were to generate or were generated by concerning intelligence, which caused us to believe the Chinese were worried about an attack on them by the United States. I know, I am certain that President Trump did not intend to attack the Chinese. And it is my directed responsibility, and it was my directed responsibility by the Secretary to convey that intent to the Chinese. My task at that time was to de-escalate. My message again was consistent. Stay calm, steady, and de-escalate. We are not going to attack you. So there you have it. On the record, Intel was suggesting that the Chinese were worried

about an attack by us. It was in the course of my normal duties. I talked to my Chinese counterpart all the time. And by the way, I was directed served in Congress for eight years, largely on the armed services and foreign affairs committees, this is not an uncommon thing for military leaders for commanders, to make sure that those lines of communication are open between themselves and their military counterparts, whether they be allies, partners, or even those that we may have adversarial relationships with for that purpose of preventing miscalculations, preventing misunderstandings that could lead to conflict or that could lead to war. And I think that's a very important function that our military plays, that even as things may be heating up on the the diplomatic side or the non-military side those lines of communication from military

leader to military leader are are very important and critical okay but what what the book the woodward costa book peril is the name of it reports is that that he said this is a transcript quote-unquote transcript i don't know if it's exact but it's what they report in their book uh general lee this is millie on october 30 2020 general lee i want to assure you that the american government is stable and everything is going to be okay we are not going to attack or conduct any kinetic operations against you you and i've known each other for now five years i could i could be with you on it so far i could say okay you know he's he they got some intel he's trying to say we're not we're not

planning an attack contrary to what you may be here then there's this if we're going to attack i'm going to call you ahead of time it's not going to be a surprise what yeah i don't you're in the military i'm not but that's that doesn't seem normal. No, no, period. And and that's the part where I don't know if if General Milley was asked or if he commented on that in the course of this hearing. Not that I've heard so far. Woodward book. I haven't read the book myself. But any military leader making that kind of statement, it just doesn't make sense. Because let's say that were to happen, what would be the first thing that the country you're saying, hey, we're going to come and attack you, or we're going to launch a nuclear attack, or we're going to take this aggressive action against you. What's the first thing they're going to do? Take a preemptive action against us. So to me, it doesn't make sense. I don't

want to comment on it because I haven't heard General Milley comment on it. And I think he- He did admit- He should. In questioning by Marsha Blackburn, Republican Senator of Tennessee, he did admit that he spoke to Bob Woodward for his new book. He said he's unsure if he is accurately portrayed in the book. But that's I mean, it'd be pretty extraordinary if he owns the first half of that, but then not the second half. That's where Woodward went off the rails. And that's that's what's problematic about the call. So hopefully they're breaking in just a

few minutes for lunch, but hopefully today or when they resume over the house side with this same kind of questioning tomorrow, someone's going to get specific with him and make him say whether he said that. Now, the second piece of reporting in the Woodward book that got Milley in some trouble, though Biden standing behind him, is a January 8th call from Nancy Pelosi in which Nancy Pelosi reportedly said she thinks Donald Trump is crazy and she wanted some assurances from Milley. Okay. So here's, I'm just now trying to report what was said initially. Two days after the Capitol riot, Speaker Pelosi reportedly initiated a call with General Milley aimed at preventing a quote, an unhinged President Trump from accessing nuclear codes. So she calls out of the blue

because it's two days after the riot and says Trump is crazy. They say Pelosi circulated a letter noting, quote, the situation of this unhinged president could not be more dangerous and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy. She said Trump should not be allowed to initiate military hostilities or access the nuclear launch codes to order a nuclear strike. CNN reported that after her call with General Milley, Pelosi told her caucus she received assurances about safegu and then summoned senior officers to review the procedures for launching nuclear weapons, saying the president alone could give the order, but crucially that he, Milley, also had to be involved. Looking each in the eye, Milley asked the officers to affirm that they had understood the author's right, again, this is citing Woodward and Costa, in what he considered, quote, an oath.

Then just another piece of it, Tulsi, according to the reporting on the book Peril, Milley agreed with Pelosi's evaluation that Trump was unstable. The call, again, quote, air quote transcript, because I don't know if it's a real transcript obtained by the authors, shows Nancy Pelosi telling General Milley referring to Trump. And this is a quote now in the same context. he's crazy. You know, he's crazy. He's crazy. And what he did yesterday is further evidence of his craziness. Milley replied, quote, I agree with you on everything, and then summoned the senior officers. So here is Milley today responding to some of that. Later that same day on 8 January, Speaker of the House Pelosi called me to inquire about the president's ability to launch nuclear weapons. I sought to assure her that nuclear launch is

governed by a very specific and deliberate process. She was concerned and made various personal references characterizing the president. I explained to her that the president is the sole nuclear launch authority and he doesn't launch them alone and that I am not qualified to determine the mental health of the president of the United States. Your thoughts on that? I mean, I definitely don't want to get into litigating what was written in a book versus what General Milley said. What I can comment on is the fact of, again, having served on the Armed Services Committee, I'm very familiar with the process and the layers of actions that would need to take place should a nuclear strike be ordered. And there are a number of layers. Can we talk about

that? Because a viewer once or a listener once called me and asked me about that, like, would Milley be involved in that at all? And frankly, I didn't know the answer. General Milley, or the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whoever that may be, is not within that chain of command. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is that chief military advisor to the president, but he is not within. And that's why he said he, I'm sure that's why he said he's not best qualified to answer those questions. And it's why he had to call in and bring in the general officers who are actually very specifically responsible and who you read about him calling in the different chiefs of the services and saying that he must be involved. If that's true, that's not the way that the process is set up. Because he's saying not part of chain of command, but part of the chain of communication. And the way the Woodward book reportedly spins it is this was his chance to

say to those who might actually be responsible for pressing codes or what have you, nothing happens until you run it by me, that this was his assurance to Pelosi. He was going to sort of run it, notwithstanding what a crazed President Trump might say. And I'm not sure whether Milley's going to get away with answering again, the way he just did there. I mean, the question is really, were people forced to take an oath to run this by you as Bob Woodward is reporting? Yeah, again, can't comment on the Woodward book. But I know with regards to the process, yes, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is that communicator providing information and advice and

so on to the President of the United States. But when you're talking about the execution of a military, a legal military order, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is not within that chain of command. It's really pretty out of line for Nancy Pelosi, right? I mean, it's like, what are you doing? You're calling up the chairman of the Joint Chief Pelosi, right? I mean, it's like, what are you doing? You're calling up the chairman of the joint chief to say he's crazy. He's crazy. He's cray cray. I'm like, what is she doing? That part doesn't surprise me. I don't, you know, and it doesn't surprise me, Megan, because having, you know, been a member of Congress through the Trump administration and

through the Obama administration, the end of the Bush administration, the hysteria around Donald Trump was, I mean, it was off the charts so much so that, hey, you can agree with some of his things, you can disagree with some of his decisions or his positions or things that he says, but it's important as elected leaders in our country, responsible for serving all of the American people, not just people of your party or people of your district, but responsible for serving all of the American people to be level headed and to be able to examine each issue on their on their merits or not. And unfortunately, a lot of folks in the Democratic Party were so consumed by their hatred of Donald Trump that it got to a level of hysteria where I think that, you know, you lose that kind of objectivity that really the American people deserve in our decision makers, in our policymakers. It shows her hysteria, not any lunacy by Donald Trump. Even if she had called, I don't know, somebody involved in elections and said, I'm really worried that Donald Trump is going to

try to mess with the tallies of the Dominion voting machine. I'd say, all right, now, now, maybe I don't think she's a lunatic for raising this because he was so focused on it and he was making all these claims to his lawyers and other way, but he's going to launch a nuclear weapon. Like what, what do you, what do you say? Like it does show the Trump derangement. Even if you have, even if you have that, even if you have that concern, uh, I think, I think the, It does show the Trump derangement. We still have a lot of nuclear missiles pointed at each other that can be launched within minutes notice. So from the national security and foreign policy perspective and trying to prevent nuclear war, all of our leaders should understand what that process is, what the legal authorities are, and act responsibly in the best interest of the American people to try to prevent nuclear war. That's one thing. And I think that's an important thing, something that I care and have worked a lot on. It's another thing to kind of allow your hyper partisan politics and hysteria to cloud your judgment as a leader. That's where we get into dangerous territory. And that's where we've seen so much of the toxicity and the divisiveness over the last,

you know, I would say under the Trump administration, but it's continuing on now. Still, it's tearing our country apart. It's undermining people's faith in our democracy and our leadership. And it's setting us down or making it so that we are continuing down this kind of dangerous downward spiral. And there's a whole host of issues we can talk about with that, the direction of our country. I want to talk to you about General Milley in general. And he was asked today, again, by Tom Cotton, who really was punching him up pretty good, about why he hasn't resigned, even under his version of things. Why has he not resigned, given the debacle that was the Afghanistan withdrawal, given the fact that he's pretty

clear he told the president not to do this, given the fact that he's pretty clear he told the president not to do this and the president did it anyway. And it resulted in such an awful scenario. And we'll play the soundbite of what Milley said when it comes to why he didn't resign. And then there's the separate question of we appear to have a very woke general in this position and whether General Milley is going to withstand the test of time, given all he said about white rage, etc. And then later, we're going to get to Biden's domestic agenda with Tulsi Gabbard. So stay tuned for that. Welcome back to the Megyn Kelly show, everyone. My guest today, Tulsi Gabbard,

former 2020 presidential candidate and former congresswoman from Hawaii, a Democrat who, like yours truly, isn't truly a hard partisan. I mean, just, you know, you call him as you see him and that's what's gotten you in such trouble when one of the things we love about you. Or let's talk about Milley and whether he should resign given what's reported in the Woodward book, given the fact that he's sort of admitting that the president didn't take his advice. And then this debacle followed. Tom Cotton put it right to him. Why not resign? And here's what he said. But if all this is true, General Milley, why haven't you resigned? Senator, as a senior military officer, resigning is a really serious thing. It's a political act if I'm resigning in protest.

My job is to provide advice. My statutory responsibility is to provide legal advice or best military advice to the president. And that's my legal requirement. That's what the law is. The president doesn't have to agree with that advice. He doesn't have to make those decisions just because we're generals. And it would be an incredible act of political defiance for a commissioned officer to just resign because my advice is not taken. This country doesn't want generals figuring out what orders we are going to accept and do or not. That's not our job.

What do you make of that? Civilian control of our military in our country is essential. I think the question about resignation as an act of political defiance is one thing. I would, here's what I would, here's what I think is important to see. There needs to be accountability for the disaster and the tragedy that the execution of this withdrawal from Afghanistan was and continues to be. So I think the better question to ask, rather than why don't you resign as an act of political protest, is who is going to be held

accountable who needs to resign uh because of what we've seen play out who is going to be held responsible they can't answer that because it's joe biden that none well obviously that the commander-in-chief is ultimately responsible but again again, in addition to that, I will go to the fact that General Milley, Secretary Austin, they're all sitting there saying that they were completely surprised, completely surprised by how quickly the Afghan government fell, by how quickly the Taliban came and took over, and that this massive evacuation effort would have to occur. The reality is that there are commanders on the ground who a month before, who in July said, hey, Kabul is going to fall by next month and we need to have an evacuation plan ready to execute. Why wasn't that heated? There are commanders on the ground who months before said, hey, things are going to go to shit really quickly. We need to be prepared and have a plan in place for that worst

case scenario of the Afghan government falling and the Taliban taking over and an evacuation having to occur. And this is where in one part of the hearing, I think someone asked the witnesses there today whether or not in their plans, in their tabletop exercises, did they include that possible eventuality, the fall of the Afghan government? And I believe Secretary Austin said no, that was not included. I'm a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserves, obviously here speaking to you today as a civilian, but I can tell you from my military training as an officer and as a leader, when you go through the most basic levels of training and planning, it's called the military decision-making process. One of the things that you lay out is what's the most likely course of action and what's

the most dangerous course of action, meaning what's the most likely course of action and what's the most dangerous course of action, meaning what's the absolute worst case scenario that could possibly occur. And you plan for both of those and other possibilities in between. So how, again, it's inconceivable that given what commanders on the ground were telling their leaders and sending up the chain of command about what they foresaw happening in Kabul and in Afghanistan with regards to the government and the Taliban, and just the basic planning requirement that you've got to plan for that most dangerous, that most terrible possible course of action. How can Secretary Austin sit there and say, no, in our exercises, in our tabletop rehearsals and exercises,

we did not run through and plan for that possibility that the Afghan government would fall and the Taliban would take over. Well, and they're also clever about it, Tulsi, right? Because they're like, no one said it was going to be in 11 days. Oh, exactly. Okay, sure. Well, that excuses it. Maybe 15, maybe 15 days, 16. And you heard that you heard that from General Milley when, when Tom Cotton said, you know, Kabul fell on August 15. General Milley said it was August 16. Like, come on, give me a break. That makes a big difference. Now wait, I'm being told by my team that Senator Josh Hawley

really got into it just a minute ago, I think with Milley. I had, I don't know about what, but I trust my team. You got it? Oh, Austin, Secretary of Defense Austin. Let's listen to what happened. Please don't tell me that we're not leaving Americans behind. You left them behind. Joe Biden left them behind.

And frankly, it was a disgrace. Let me ask you this, though. Senator, thanks for your help in continuing to help get American citizens and Afghans who have helped us out of the country. But as you've seen, we've continued to facilitate. Well, actually, I didn't ask you a question, but since you seem to want to address the issue. So since you do, isn't it true that you left Americans behind on August the 31st? There are Americans. There were Americans that were still in Afghanistan and still are.

We continue to work to try to get those Americans out. It's another failed promise by Joe Biden, who said we would not do that. He said we would get everybody out. We clearly didn't. And now the press is basically telling us it's time to move on. They won't continue to cover it because they'd much rather shift to a story that's more favorable to him. Yeah. And you see that happening from within the administration themselves in wanting very quickly to shift the attention to just about anything else other than this tragedy of the withdrawal in Afghanistan. Worse, and it's a shame that Secretary Austin refused to appear before the U.S. Senate Foreign Affairs Committee when Secretary Blinken was there, even though the senators from both parties had requested that he be there. Because what we see as a result is

Secretary Blinken says, well, I don't know, you've got to ask Secretary Austin. And today, Secretary Austin, or, oh, I don't know, you've got to ask Secretary Blinken. It's such crap where these guys are playing like finger pointing games when there are such high stakes and there needs to be answers and accountability for the American people. If you talk to the veterans and those who've been volunteering their time and energy to conduct this massive evacuation on their own time, on their own dime, because of the failure of this administration to do so properly, and I've heard this from different groups of people completely separate from each other, how the State Department was

actively standing in their way, actively blocking their efforts at evacuation. So it's worse than this administration's failure to do its job and fulfill its responsibility to the American people, to our partners and to our allies, but to actively go that next fulfill its responsibility to the American people, to our partners and to our allies. But to actively go that next step and stand in the way of those who are filling the gap and stepping up and making it happen, again, is, I don't know what other word to call it other than betrayal. That's what part of what's so infuriating is it's like, okay, we get it. We get that Austin, that Millie, that McKenzie all went in and said to Joe Biden, don't do this. Do not. We are not ready to do this. Do not pull out all the troops. Do not do it by August 31st. This isn't going to end well. And Joe Biden, who's the commander in chief, said you're you've been heard and you've been overruled. Now go do it. But you're talking about endangering our troops. I mean, and not to mention our diplomats and the other American citizens who are left in Afghanistan. And one would like to think that somebody in Milley's position, somebody in Austin's position would have done something,

would have, you know, jumped up and down, done massive leaks to the press, something, I don't know. But to say, you can't do this, you're going to endanger the lives of American military personnel. Instead, now we just see sort of the, you know, the coat hanger shoulders like, well, I tried, I tried to tell him, you know, we did the best we could. And like you say, now nobody is being held accountable. Nobody, they're all going to keep their jobs. Yeah, that's the travesty here. And I think that's where it's important that we, the American people don't allow this to go and like be swept away as though it never happened, as though this is not still a continuing crisis

with American citizens who are still overseas, which, by the way, we don't know how many. The State Department will give us a straight number. They say, ask the DOD. The DOD says, well, the State Department's in charge of the evacuation. That alone. We keep getting misled. All right, let me pause you right there because we're going to pick it up.

One other question I want to ask you about Afghanistan, and then we're going to turn to domestic issues like COVID next. Stay tuned for that. Welcome back to the Megyn Kelly Show, everyone. My guest today is Tulsi Gabbard, a former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and former congresswoman from Hawaii. Okay, so let's just talk about General Milley for a minute and our woke military. And I realize he's said he doesn't like that claim, but there's plenty of evidence for it. And it's growing increasingly disturbing. So General Milley, of course, came out, he expressed support for Black Lives Matter. He, as reported by Carol Lenning and

Philip Rucker of the Washington Post in their book, I Alone Can Fix It. He said President Trump was preaching the gospel of the Fuhrer in his rhetoric about the illegitimacy of the 2020 election that he merely feared a Reichstag moment in the period immediately prior to the Capitol riot. He reportedly referred to Trump supporters in November rallying on Trump's behalf as, quote, brown shirts in the streets, saying, quote, These guys are Nazis. They're proud boys. These are the same people we fought in World War Two and said in the Woodward book, reportedly in peril on the Capitol riot, that it was indeed a coup attempt, nothing less than treason. Same guy said he wants to understand white rage. And I could go on. So, I mean, I feel like this guy's shown us his politics, which you're really not supposed to do in that position. And it's the reason Biden won't can him, even though it definitely appears he did the thing withs of Staff talk so much and president and for people to recognize and

trust him as such. I think that's a very, very big problem. You know, again, to me, in my mind, this is unprecedented. Then you've got Admiral, okay, hold on a second. Let me get let me get it to two examples. Admiral Michael Gilday, chief of naval operations, bristled when he was questioned about why they're having the military read Ibram X. Kendi's How to Be an Anti-Racist. They're having the sailors read that just as General Milley defended it as well. And then the defense secretary, Lloyd Austin, who we've been watching here all afternoon, he initiated sessions for military members to attend to discuss extremism in the ranks after the Capitol riot. It included establishing a counter countering extremism working group. OK, that's what he wanted to do. Counter. It sounds good on paper. What did he do? Well, he got this guy, Bishop Garrison, a senior advisor to Austin and the head of the Pentagon's countering extremism working group to start talking to our troops about how to do this. This is a guy who in July 2019 tweeted, this is a quote, support for President Trump, a racist, is support for all of his beliefs. He's dragging a lot of bad actors, misogynist, extremists,

other racists out into the light, normalizing their actions. If you support the president, Trump, you support that. There's no room for nuance with this. There is no more. But I'm not like that talk. This is the guy who's going to be training our troops on how not to be an extremist. I mean, what's gone like was the military always like this and we just didn't know like like what promoting and propagating the yeah no the answer to that is no and and the fact that uh this this woke ism and this focus on quote unquote extremism is being kind of inculcated throughout our military. But even worse, that so many members or extremism is being used as an accusation against people in the military. Let's start with the basics, Megan.

What is extremism? How is it defined? Because I've listened to a lot of these briefings and I've listened to a lot of leaders talking about extremism now in the military because of those decisions that were made at the highest levels that this is now a big focus, extremism in the ranks. strong views on a particular topic. One could assume that for an individual, for an American to say, I am willing to die for my country, some might say that's kind of extreme. That's an extremely strongly held commitment to service, to our country, to our constitution, to the ideals and freedoms that we hold dear? What is extremism? If you are a deeply religious person, if you are very disciplined in your religious or spiritual practices, could that be considered extreme? Some could argue, yes, it could be. And so for this term to be so loosely paraded about in such a negative light without any very specific definition on exactly what they're talking about, what they're essentially doing is casting this broad brush across people in the military and saying, well, hey, this is a real issue.

Extremism in our ranks without any kind of definition. What they're doing is um i mean it's offensive it's offensive and and it dishonors that very decision that every single man and woman who serves in our military and wears the uniform has made saying yes i'm willing to die for my country i'm willing to die to support and uphold and defend uh our constitution and so for our military leaders to forcibly exert this this woke ism on our military and to jump on this bandwagon which appears to be very popular these days in in this administration and in kind of the mainstream media and the woke leaders it's it's it's dangerous and it undermines it undermines the

cohesion uh that's necessary within our ranks it's crazy to have him go i mean a military leader where all people go right to the nazi place right like these are brown shirts and it's it's not totally dissimilar from what we're hearing about these border patrol agents now down in texas the the lie that they whipped people, which they did not, and the singling out of these guys who don't make a lot of money, who are just trying to control an uncontrollable situation that they had no hand in creating, right? Joe Biden created it, and he takes no accountability. But now these guys are probably going to lose their jobs. You know, their lives are going to be ruined. They're being dragged through the mud by Joe Biden,

who's saying, you know, I'm basically I'm going to get them before the investigations even happened. Trust me, they'll pay. They don't care that all Ilhan Omar, all the squad calling them out as racist brown shirts. We've heard terms like that for these guys, too. I mean, they just throw these terms out like it's going to have no impact on their lives. Exactly. And that's where, you know, I've considered Joe Biden a friend and it pains me to see how deeply divisive our country is continuing to become under his leadership. And specific to these Customs and Border Patrol officers, as you said, who are carrying out his policy, doing their job under his administration, the first thing that he says is, I'm the president, I'm responsible,

and then goes on to say how horrible these officers are and that they will be, he says there's going to be an investigation, but I guarantee you they're going to be punished. They will be punished. And so for Joe Biden and all of his lofty speeches about democracy and criticizing autocrats and how we can't afford to be an autocracy in this country, he is in that moment, that living embodiment of what we fear, which is the loss of our democracy and moving towards autocracy with the President of the United States completely dismissing the rule of law, the idea that we are innocent until proven guilty and single-handedly on national television acting as judge jury and executioner taking away any hope that these civil servants

these customs and border patrol officers may have of a fair hearing of a fair investigation and a fair outcome and analysis of their actions we don't even need an investigation you can see on the tape they didn't do anything i mean it's like people are just making that up because they saw something that looked like a whip and then stopped to remind themselves that they're all yankees who have never been south of the mason dixon and don't understand a rain when they see one but there is nothing to suggest there's no whipping. They continue to show the same video saying it's whipping and it's not. And it's because it goes in line with their belief about a Border Patrol agent, same way as they anybody who showed up at the Trump rally. Right. I get if you were storming the Capitol, you're problematic on some level. But

anybody who showed up at the Trump rally on January 6th, the so-called stop the seal steal. I know people I know, very smart, professional people who were there who did not riot, but they were there because they love Trump and they believe there was some shenanigans in that they're not brown shirts. How offensive to just go and throw these terms out willy nilly like they mean nothing. They mean something. These Democrats who throw them around are the ones who are making them meaningless. this this points all all of these examples uh point to leadership and the lack the lack of it how we have people in positions of power uh the biden harris administration political leaders leaders in the media people who are in these great positions of power and influence, who do not care about the detrimental effect that their words and their actions are having

on the American people, our security and our democracy, and are solely focused instead on their power, their profits, their selfish political interests, and willing to do whatever it takes to increase that power for the media to increase their profits without a care again for how this is not only damaging to us as the American people now, but the real toxic and divisive impact that this is having that their actions and their words are having on our country as a whole for the long term. Two points on that. Just an update for our audience on, we call them our moral arbiters over at CNN.

Don Lemon, we did a big thing on his law, his sexual assault lawsuit against him. And then Chris Cuomo has been accused by his former executive producer of grabbing her rear end, only to be horrified to see her husband was sitting right behind her and caught him. So he apologized in an email form, which she published in the New York Times. Then we hit news hit last night that

Chris Cuomo was accused by his current. She was up until recently his current executive producer. She said he bullied her right out of the job. CNN found another place for her to go. But this these are our moral arbiters who are saying everybody's a racist. Everybody's a sexist. These same guys who are behind the scenes are allegedly doing this stuff to vulnerable people, want us to believe that they know better, that we should be listening to them. And honestly, Tulsi, the same is true of someone like Ilhan Omar,

who would love to see the Israelis lose funding for their Iron Dome and see bombs rain down on them while she has the nerve to say things like this about the border patrol. This is a butted soundbite of her. And listen, Congress must do the work of investigating and ensuring accountability of the egregious and white supremacist behavior of border patrol agents in Del Rio, Texas. What we witnessed takes us back hundreds of years. What we witnessed was worse than what we witnessed in slavery. Cowboys with their reins again, whipping black people. Because I was not aware that whips, which come from the slave era, slavery era, were part of the package that we issue to any sort of law enforcement.

And I am quite appalled, you know, when it comes to our immigration policy for so many years, cruelty has been very much embedded in it. There is obviously systematic racism at play here. Ayanna Pressley, Maxine Waters, then ultimately Ilhan Omar. Systematic racism is at play, and this is worse than slavery, says Maxine Waters. Help me. is the tool that they are weaponizing, that they are using to divide us, to tear us apart as Americans for their own political gain, to get them more clicks, to get them more fundraising, to get them reelected to their positions or to get to a higher position, again, without any regard

for the impact that that's having on the American people. Wait, so that's that's very interesting to me because so what you're saying is it's not a genuinely held belief by them because i look at somebody like a joy read she sees everything through a racial lens so i mean i dismiss everything she says but these women that we you know the butted soundbite of the politicians you're saying it's not sincere that that they're doing it for votes and clicks i can't see how it is sincere when they are so directly dismissing facts. You know, I can have a disagreement with someone on their views,

but if I see that they are sincere and objective and looking at the facts, I mean, you use the situation on the border as a perfect example. If you look at this situation and you take a sincere examination of the facts and what has actually occurred, then you and I can come to a different conclusion on what needs to happen or what should happen. That I understand. But to have them stand there and deliver a press conference, making these accusations and pointing to systemic racism and pointing to things that actually just did not happen, that can only point to another motive. And their motives, I think, are very clear. Again, to racialize everything.

Everything these days is about race. There's not a single thing that anyone can say. People can't criticize Vice President Kamala Harris for her positions on issues or her lack of leadership without being called racist or sexist. There are so many examples of this throughout our politics today. And it is an intentional decision to use race and identity politics to separate us, to divide us, to foment fear and anger and hatred for their own political gain, for them to be able to continue to hold power, to sit on their high horse and cast judgment on others who don't hold their same kind of puritanical views on things. And therefore, they feel they're in a position to judge everyone else. It's such a dangerous thing. Obviously, it makes me so angry to sit there and hear that because it's irresponsible at best.

But at worst, it is having a detrimental effect on our country at a time now and always where we need to find areas where we can be united. We can and must stand united on our constitution. We can and must stand united on Dr. King's wonderful speech about how we should judge each other on the contents of our character, not on the color of our skin, that we can have different ideas on how we solve the challenges we face. But when we see each other as children of God, as brother and sister, as fellow Americans, and treat each other with that respect that goes with that recognition, then we can actually solve problems. Then we can actually move forward rather than what we're seeing now with political leaders only focused on how they can either preserve power or get power back and are willing to sacrifice our country, sacrifice our country in their selfish, selfishly expeditious aims. I was thinking about you on this because we talked the last time about how I want to make

sure I say it right. You're the first Samoan American and the first Hindu member of Congress, right? And so you were this rising star of the Democratic Party. Everybody loved you until you started having these more heterodox views on certain things and pushing back on these narratives and maybe wanted Bernie Sanders to get a fair shake and not to put the thumb on the scale only for Hillary Clinton on the aim at you and suggested you were a Russian asset when you were running for president and so on. And now you were one of the first people I thought of the other week when the John Durham investigation, he had to get his indictment against this where his investigation and where it's going is that Hillary Clinton is behind it, that Hillary Clinton is the one who put out what she knew to be false propaganda about Trump, the Russians, people around Trump and the Russians suggesting that there was some some server in Trump Tower that connected with a Russian bank. And this is how they were back channeling with Putin about how to get Trump elected and so on. It was her. It was the DNC. It was her operatives. And she had so many people from lawyers to political operatives doing her bidding. It's no it's no wonder that's how she tried to take your legs out. She just went right back to her favorite go to the Russian

thing. Russia, Russia, Russia. And so many on the left side of the aisle in particular fell for it and still believe it. Tulsi still believe it. So so many on the left side of the aisle in particular, fell for it and still believe it, Tulsi, still believe it. So your thoughts on that and what we saw with the Durham investigation? Well, first of all, Megan, I'm sure that you were just as impressed as I was to see how the mainstream media covered this story and blasted it all over their airwaves, right? Every headline, revealing the truth. Revealing the truth. Shock. Amazing.

Yeah. Maybe in an alter universe that occurred. Right. But it's people like you and others who've been really drawing attention to this, which is not such a big reveal for those of us who've been involved directly with it. I mean, it points to and the reason why,

why isn't the mainstream media covering this? Why aren't they pointing to Hillary Clinton and holding her responsible and accountable for her actions and those of her associates, their collusion with the deep state? I know you've talked before about how this guy was, was, you know, supposedly duped the FBI, duped the FBI about who he was working for. They claim they had no knowledge of it, working with the mainstream media to sell these lies. I mean, it points to the playbook that they use, the power elite. It points to the playbook that they use to silence, censor, and eliminate those who they view as a threat to their power. Those who are outsiders, Democrats and Republicans, people like me, people like Donald Trump, who dare to challenge them, who won't toe the line, who's not going to go along with the establishment talking points and

policies, and who dare to say, hey, you know what? I'm putting country first. I don't care if you're a Democrat or Republican in power. I'm interested in putting our country and the interests of the American people first. They see people like us who are outsiders as threats. And this this the actions that are being shown now through this indictment of what we saw play out throughout the last elections. This is this is exactly what they do. And the worst part about it is they get away with it. And so they keep doing it. And they're working in cahoots with each other to accomplish that. It reminded me of what we saw when Time's Up just imploded. I mean, the entire board was forced to

resign. Everybody. They're all gone. Alyssa Milano, Gretchen Carlson, they're all gone because their leaders were exposed as being more interested in rubbing elbows with power than actually helping any woman, especially any woman accusing a Democrat like Andrew Cuomo, who Time's Up decided to help, like Joe Biden, who remember they wouldn't help Tara, because she has no money and needed somebody to help her, you know, tell her story or just run cover for her, because she was being assaulted in every single way that the press and her finances and so on. And they were like, Oh, we don't take political cases. And it turns out Anita Dunn, who's doing comms for Joe Biden is behind the scenes pulling all the strings, making sure she doesn't get her help. So it's like,

to your point, wherever you look, these Democrats who are trying to tell us that they're, again, our moral betters, are secretly are interested in one thing, and that's maintaining power. And that's something to remember when you see the Ayanna Pressley's out there and the Ilhan Omar's out there. Is this a sincerely held belief or is this somebody who wants votes and is manipulating, I would say, earnest people, right? I know a lot of liberals. All right. They're earnest. And they really a lot of them really believe this is like BLM and yay. And, you know, but they're getting manipulated by grifters just to make sure that they vote correctly. untold story around our elections and influence in our democracy is the power of these people and the power of the media, that they decide who gets to be heard from and who doesn't. They decide whose character they want to smear and who they want to uplift and put in front of the American people.

Of course, they're not going to point the mirror at themselves to say how big of a problem they are in influencing our democracy, but it is completely a disservice to the American people who are busy working hard every day, trying to support their families, live their lives, and want to make that best informed decision about who they want to lead our country, that the information that they're receiving is absolutely manipulated and not with their interests in mind. It's within the interest of this power elite who will do anything and everything to maintain their stranglehold on power. Mm-hmm. Up next, we're going to talk about how a bunch of teachers, bus drivers, and military

members are about to get fired unless they take the vaccine, even if they have natural immunity. I want to get Tulsi's take on that. And then we're going to talk about whether President Biden's domestic agenda is completely imploding this week, thanks to infighting between the so-called squad, you know, the far left progressives and the more moderate Democrats. And then in 20 minutes, we're taking your calls. What are your thoughts on General Milley's testimony today? Do you believe him that he didn't actually talk about President Trump being crazy with Nancy Pelosi? That was all her. That was he didn't weigh in on this. This guy who reportedly talked about Trump supporters is Nazis. Let me know your thoughts. 833-44-MEGYN. That's 833-446-3496.

Welcome back to the Megyn Kelly Show, everyone. My guest today is Tulsi Gabbard, former Democratic 2020 presidential candidate and former congresswoman from Hawaii. And I would love to hear from all of you. Call me at 833-44-MEGYN. That's 833-446-3496. Should General Milley be forced to resign? What do you think? Call me, let me know. Okay. So let's talk about what his critics are describing as the collapse of his domestic agenda. It hasn't happened yet, but there's an interesting fight brewing on Capitol Hill right now about money. There's the

$1.2 trillion infrastructure bill that the Republicans are supporting too. And then there's the 3.5 trillion. Did I say, I said trillion on the first one? I hope one point two trillion dollar infrastructure and three point five trillion dollar spending bill. And that's got all the Democratic wish list in it. Now, the progressives are basically threatening that they're not going to support the one point two trillion dollar infrastructure bill unless everybody gets behind the $3.5 trillion spending bill. And Nancy Pelosi was forging forward with a vote, a standalone vote on just the she wasn't going to forge it forward with the $1.2 trillion infrastructure package. And now she is. Now she's reversed herself. Biden and Schumer. They all said one cannot pass without the other. One should not pass without the other, which was the progressive line. And now they're,

they're folding. And it seems like they're only focused on the $1.2 trillion infrastructure. And they realized $3.5 trillion spending is in serious jeopardy because of people like Joe Manchin and Kristen Sinema. And you tell me what all of this means for america and for the average person sitting at home i think i think it's important to look at um you know some of the things or i guess what these two major spending bills represent and kind of the difference between the two as you said this 3.5 trillion is kind of the democratic party's wish list of all the things uh including things like immigration reform including things like immigration reform, including things like what they're now calling, quote unquote, human infrastructure,

a term I had not heard before this introduction of this. Right. I mean, because and I think the reason why they've tried to brand this in this way is because, you know, Democrats and Republicans, Americans across all political persuasions recognize, hey, yeah, my roads are in really crappy condition. We've got a lot of bridges that really do need to be addressed. There are basic infrastructure needs that we've that are that are have been kind of extreme in this country for a long time, we need to invest in our basic infrastructure. So I think they're saying, oh, well, hey, let's pull a fast one on the American people and say, well, this is infrastructure too. When we talk

about immigration reform, when you talk about how to address environmental issues, or what they're calling the climate, the climate change package, which is essentially AOC's Green New Deal, what they're talking about with regards to free childcare for all America. All of these social proposals that they have, they've packaged into this thing they're calling human infrastructure, which it doesn't make sense. But it's also something that if they have these policy proposals that they want to put forward, they need to make sure that they stand alone and have the debate that the American people deserve about how their taxpayer dollars are spent. You don't put them in a $3.5 trillion spending bill, slap a sticker on it that says, hey, this is human infrastructure. And if you don't like it, you don't support people, I guess, humans. I don't know what their logic is. And we're not going to go and fix your bridges unless

you support this comprehensive Democratic Party policy proposal, essentially. So it's no surprise to me. It's massive. equity. They want to make sure trees are planted in all the right neighborhoods. Bias training, of course, all that DEI stuff is in there. And it seems to me that the squad, she's calling their bluff. They're about to lose unless they fold and vote the way Nancy Pelosi wants them to. I'm not sure what's going to happen here because they might wind up with nothing if they don't. I don't know the Republic. There might be so many Republicans who support the one point two trillion that that gets through even without the squad. And it doesn't look right now today on this Tuesday. You tell me like the squad's going

to get their three point five trillion. Am I wrong? I don't think you're wrong. You never you never know what happens in Washington. But I don't I don't see how that happens, given there are a few sensible Democrats who are holding the line and saying, yeah, this does not make sense to the American people. It does not make sense to try to shove this massive package through, which, by the way, I saw in the House that their budget committee had passed it out unfinished. So for members to say that they know what they're voting on or that it is a responsible piece of legislation, I think is just not true. You mentioned tree equity. I don't know what tree equity is. I don't either. But I like trees. I think we should plant more trees. One of my former colleagues, Bruce Westerman from Arkansas, he also agrees. We do need to plant more trees. There are things that we can agree on. He introduced a bill that says, hey, we need to plant more trees. Let's invest in our environment. He's a conservative Republican.

I'm a Democrat. I said, yeah, man, I support that. But again, when you try to shove all of these different things in a $3.5 trillion spending bill, it takes away the accountability to the American people of knowing where their taxpayer dollars are going, how much more debt these people are going to put our country and future generations in, and for what. It is a completely irresponsible thing to do. And I hope that there is a basic infrastructure bill that's passed because I think that it does have bipartisan support to a certain degree. No one's ever going to agree on everything, but I think it would be very, very irresponsible and detrimental to shove

through this major spending package and again well partisan politics on all of it right biden's out there saying the cost will be zero okay three point where they're going to spend 3.5 trillion in addition to 1.2 trillion in addition to all the trillions that we've already spent during the covid year he says we will pay for all we spend that's nonsense there aren't enough rich people to tax. There just aren't. That's not true what he's saying. to see prices on basic household necessities continue to rise. And so to say that there is no impact on the American people is just it's it's it's false. And it's disrespectful to us, the people to think that we're even going to believe that for a moment. It will be I mean, I love the National Review podcast, the editors, I listen to those guys all

the time. And they have been very skeptical that the Republicans or anybody could do anything to stop this $3.5 trillion spending. They had all eyes on Joe Manchin for a long time. Joe Manchin, sure enough, pushed back after Afghanistan. It was like chips were taken out of the Goodwill Bank for Joe Biden. Kyrsten Sinema, too, she started piping up. One by one, the dominoes started to fall. And now suddenly what seemed to be an inevitability when it comes to spending the American people's money doesn't appear to be a foregone conclusion at all. So it's a big week when it comes to money. I want to talk about COVID because it's also a big week. Every week seems to be when it comes to COVID. A couple of headlines to run by you. Number one, Pfizer has submitted the data regarding its vaccine being allegedly safe and having a robust response in five to 11 year olds. And I understand living

in New York now I'm in Connecticut, but I was living in New York for 17 years. There are a lot of people who are like, I want it for my kid. I want it. I want it. You want it for your kid. I get it. Okay, fine. I'm okay. If Pfizer says, and the FDA says five to 11 year olds can have it. What, what makes me nervous about this is because if the FDA gives them, it would just be emergency use authorization. It wouldn't be the full Magilla yet. They're going to mandate it. That's what's going to come next.

They're going to mandate it. And the next thing you know, I've now got my oldest son just had his birthday. So I have an eight, 10 and 12 year old. We already just got the email from the school about my 12 year old and my eight and 10 year old are going to be forced to get this damn jab once they make it permanent after emergency use. And I feel like my choice is going to be taken away and I don't want that. Yeah. I think that's the key point there is choice. I chose to get the vaccine early on back in whatever it was, March or April. That was my choice.

Anytime you have the government trying to exercise their mandate and force people to do something, force people to get this vaccine, you take away people's individual right to choose. And you also kind of spur a reaction from people saying, hold on a second, you're not even allowing me the possibility of examining information, doing my own research and making the decision that's best for me and for my family. And oh, by the way, you're going to tell me that if I don't do what you're telling me to do, that I'm going to lose my job or that I can't go out to eat with my family, that I can't do what you're telling me to do, that I'm going to lose my job, or that I can't go out to

eat with my family, that I that I can't, you know, go into certain places that I can't get on a plane and fly somewhere. And my kid can't go to school. It can't go to school. This is I mean, all of this, all of these rules and things that they're putting out are a means for government control. And where does it end? Where does it end? And so again, for me, yeah, my personal choice, I got the vaccine. I'm glad I got it. Other people, for whether it's religious reasons or personal reasons, or because they've had COVID and their antibodies are so strong that they don't feel that they need to get the vaccine. You know, medical reasons. I mean, there's so many different situations that individuals will take into account. They need to be able to make their own personal choice, and they should not be put on lists, essentially, to dictate what they can do and where they can go. It's just set such a dangerous precedent. It's so crazy where, okay, today, for example, New York City has set this Friday as its vaccine deadline for all school staffers. So they say there's roughly 7,000

teachers who are about to be fired, roughly 17,000 Department of Education staffers overall. These are, you know, janitors and so on. These are not rich people who are going to lose their job. By the way, no unemployment insurance. Our government, our governor has said you don't get unemployment, you get fired and you get no unemployment insurance. These people have already been through hell these past couple of years thanks to COVID. And it doesn't matter if they have natural immunity. Meanwhile, I look at what just came out of the news in Italy. Italy's pushing vaccine passports, for lack of a better term. If you want to be in Italy, if you want to work in Italy, you got to have had the vaccine unless you can show that you've got the antibodies from natural immunity. They recognize that's another way of protecting oneself.

And it's the only benefit of having gotten COVID. Then you look at the UK. They say, we don't feel comfortable giving the vaccine to 12 to 15 year olds. That's we're not there yet. As 16 and up, we recommend one jab, one jab, because all the complications come after the second jab. You say you take either of those positions here in America. You're an anti-science freak who wants to kill people.

Yeah. And there's two things I want to say on this. Number one is exactly that the, the, how this co how everything surrounding COVID has become politicized where, Hey, if, if I want to go out or if I, if I say, yeah, I want to wear a mask or if I'm going to get the vaccine, then, uh, obviously I'm a Democrat, right? Or if you don't want to get the vaccine, or if you don't want to wear a mask, then you're Republican. And both sides are attacking each other because these are the characterizations that are being put out there. And there's no understanding really between the two. You're either for or against. You're this or you're that. And these two sides are

pitted against each other. So politicizing this, I think, from the very beginning, been a big problem. The lies that we've been told from the very beginning about COVID have furthered kind of the distrust that people have from the very beginning with Fauci saying, well, masks don't work. Masks don't work. Meanwhile, his real motive was, hey, we've got to save these N95 medical grade masks for our healthcare workers because they need it for protection because they work. Yeah. The so-called noble lie. Exactly. The hypocrisy and the lies and the recent thing. Well, hey, big tech and some in our government, they don't want us talking about natural immunity. Why? Why aren't they looking at

the studies from Israel? Why aren't they doing studies themselves to recognize, hey, these antibodies that come from those who have had COVID, natural immunity is a scientific effect. It's not some made up thing. We should talk about it. We should examine it. We should study it. And so you look at how they wonder, why are people so distrustful of things that are coming out of our government? It's because of the lies and the misinformation, disinformation that they themselves are propagating, the stuff around the monoclonal antibodies, Regeneron, the things that we see DeSantis doing in Florida, the federal government and the Biden-Harris administration, criticizing, criticizing, criticizing, rather than recognizing, hey, this is a scientific treatment that make sure that everybody has access to Regeneron, which really leads to the point here about how we need to make sure that the American people are getting facts,

that they're able to make the best decision for themselves, and that they have the freedom to do so. You mentioned the Biden-Harris administration. A couple of things on that. The borders are, that's not going so well. She came out publicly and said, I was the last person in the room with Joe Biden when he decided to pull out all the troops from Afghanistan. Okay, know when to hold your tongue. That was probably not one of those moments you wanted to wave the flag and say i did it on okay um and i also don't think she's commented on afghanistan since i may be wrong that's right no no she's gone she's gone quiet you know she's the end which is obviously a political calculation but in the meantime you look at the guy in the top spot uh there was a poll out pew uh biden's dropped 11 points since just last March when when people were asked, do you believe the

term mentally sharp describes Joe Biden? Well, people are really starting to doubt him. The longer he is out there and exposed to the American people, the more doubts people have about his mental acuity, his age and so on. There's been tons of examples that would give you reason to doubt. And frankly, just some of the things we discussed, like are these lies or are these like the signs of a guy who no longer remembers what was said or what the facts are? Because the fact that he would say Al Qaeda was gone from Afghanistan in mid-August is really kind of nuts and seems like more than a lie. It seems like just insanity. That's just like, what do you, what, of course they're not. Everybody knows that. But anyway, so what do you think now about his old one- term promise, whether she is the standard bearer and whether we're going to see a Harris Trump race in 2024?

We'll see what 2024 brings. It's 2021 now. I feel like a lot happens in the span of a week. What to speak of a month or the coming years. I think it's important that we recognize what the American people are seeing and what they're saying in some of these polls is that, unfortunately, President Joe Biden is not keeping his promise to unite the American people to bring us together around our shared ideals. And instead, the Biden-Harris administration is choosing, again, as we talked about earlier, to use race and identity politics to divide us for

political reasons. You see how they're open. Essentially, it's an open border policy that's having such a detrimental effect in a in a humanitarian creating a humanitarian crisis as well as a security crisis where you know we have all of this vetting these vetting procedures in place for people who want to fly into our country they've got to go through customs they're checked off of terror watch lists you've got all of these visas they've got all these different things but if someone really wanted to come here really all they'd have to do is get into Mexico and come across the border. And the security threat that that poses, you look at the impact on the economy, how inflation is continuing to rise. We're talking about these massive spending bills that no one is talking about what the actual costs and implication on our economy will be should these bills are passed. You look at big tech, you look at the wokeism, the cancel culture, you look at all of these different things. And sadly, for our country's sake, it's pointing how the leadership under the Biden-Harris administration is taking us

in the wrong direction. And it's something that they are going to, both of them, regardless of where they are, who's running, both of them will have to be held to account for come 2024. Yeah. And even before that in the midterms. Exactly. Tulsi Gabbard, what a pleasure. Great to see you. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Tulsi's leaving us now, but I'm still taking your calls. And that's next. Call me now. 833-44-MEGYN. You can still get here. You can get on the queue and I'll speak with you in two minutes. 833-446-3496. Welcome back, everybody. The phone lines are open. Call us at 833-44-MEGYN.

Let me start in Virginia with Andrew, who's got some thoughts on a presidential ticket that are interesting. Hey, Andrew, what's on your mind? Well, first of all, thank you for the unnamed mention in the show today. I'm glad I was able to add. I was the guy who called about Milley being out of the chain of command. Oh, yeah. Oh, you got on twice. Look at you.

But the other thing is, this is exactly why when the Democratic nomination process was going on, I kept looking at my wife. I go, if they're smart, they'll nominate Tulsi. And it would be even hard for me to choose between Tulsi and Trump. She is brilliant. She is the middle road Democrat that my parents were. And I'm telling you, I don't care if it was Gabbard and Crenshaw or Crenshaw and Gabbard, I would vote that ticket in in a heartbeat. And then maybe exactly what heals this country, because both of those people come at it. First of all, both former military that probably has a lot to do with it,

but they also come at it common sense. Dan Crenshaw says stuff all the time that i go oh as a republican it just makes me mad but he but he's he's honest yes why he's why his only problem as a politician is he may be too honest but we can't beat that out of him we've got we've got to reward that even if it goes against you know your sensibility of the day you you do need honest brokers. That's what she is. That's why she didn't last in the Democratic primary, because people like Hillary Clinton were horrified she was telling the truth about things like them. But I like that idea, Tulsi and Dan Crenshaw. I agree. I'd vote for that, too. All right. Thank you, Andrew, for your your. How about that? Twice. Andrew's got luck of the draw. Let's go to let's see, Will in Pennsylvania. What are your thoughts, your, how about that twice? Andrew's got luck of the draw. Um, let's go to,

let's see, Will in Pennsylvania. What are your thoughts, Will? How you doing? Ah, it's great to talk to you again. Now we got twice, twice. I'm going to try and say this. You guys are so lucky. Go ahead. Yeah, go. Yes, we are. We are. Cause it's you that we get to talk to. First of all, in 30 seconds, I'll try and get this, uh, set. It's not so much the general, I mean, it's obviously Woodward It's not so much the general. I mean, it's obviously Woodward and what he wrote and crazy Nancy. I mean, let's remember she ripped up those papers right during the State of the Union. That's how crazy she had. Secondly, fully vaccinated. It should become our identity when we're not vaccinated.

Because back when I took a flu shot a couple of years ago, I said, you know, that's the last one. This doesn't do me any help. I'm sick and tired of this hurting our children. I have a 16 year old son. It's killed him in high school already. And I feel so bad for your three young ones. So let's just say, Hey, we're, I'm a truck driver. I'm willing to get fired because I am fully vaccinated. I had my last one and that's what I'm writing on the paperwork. I'm already fully vaccinated. Same. I'm fully vaccinated. And I think it's different for adults than it is for kids. I don't want to see mandates for adults either, but I really don't want to see them for children and they're coming. Okay. How about, let's see, Pam in Texas. What's on your mind, Pam? Oh, Megan, it is so good to talk to you. I'm so thrilled you're on the radio. And you're a segue to my other

favorite person, Dr. Laura. But I'm just so happy you're on the air. I just love you to death. And I'm just so pleased that you have this show. Well, I wanted to talk to Tulsi and ask on behalf of one million other conservatives, the big question of why she can still be a member of the Democratic Party since they are against everything she stands for. She's the opposite, polar opposite of everything and every initiative. And I just don't understand why she doesn't, if nothing else, become an independent. I mean, not that she has to get an R behind her name, but I would have voted for her. I mean, if Trump had not gotten nominated. Yeah, she could definitely get crossover votes. I don't know. I don't want

to answer for her, but I did hear her on special report with Brett Baier and he asked her a question about that. She said she's still a Democrat. And I think just knowing what I know about her, she is definitely more liberal when it comes to economic policies. You know, she likes like free college tuition, quote she's bred on a lot of things. And that's what we need, right? We need more people who are blue and red, who are purple. We don't need all hard, hard partisans going into elected office. That's one of the problems with redistricting and corporate money and so on. Anyway, listen, thank you for your calls. I want to tell you tomorrow, don't miss the show. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who General Milley said authorized him to have that phone call with the Chinese. Pompeo is going to be here to respond. Download the show today on Pandora Stitcher, youtube.com slash Megyn Kelly to watch it.