Dangers of Mamdani, Shapiro vs. Tucker, and the Strong Case Against Comey, with Matt Walsh and Victor Davis Hanson | Ep. 1186

26:02If we don't do that, we're going to be London. We're going to wind up like Germany. We're going to have the same problems that they're having now with their cities, their most beloved cities, being overrun by Islamists whose values are completely antithetical to those of the West. I mean, that's you tell me, Matt, what is the solution to preventing our great American cities from falling in the way we've seen London fall, where there are calls to take down the British flag now because it's triggering to all the Islamists? Well, the only solution is what we've talked about is you have to cut it off.

26:38You have to cut off the spigot. You have to just turn it off. And we have to greatly raise the bar for who we allow to come into this country. We have to have some real pride in our country. the way that these immigrants apparently have pride in their homeland and they wave the flag and they talk about how great their country is and in a certain way I want to say in a certain way I admire that party, I admire if you're a patriot for your home country and if you can love your country even if it's a total cesspool, even if it's just an absolute hellhole and you still love it I admire that that's loyalty to your country, I admire it so I think you should go home and have that kind of loyalty for your country.

27:21In fact, if you love it so much, then go home and try to fix it. And that's the other thing too. I know this is a little bit sidetracked, but if we're being told that, oh, well, you know, we're importing Somalis, but we're importing the best ones. We're importing the best Somalis. Well, I don't know if there's any evidence of that. And I don't know what qualifies as the best Somali. But if we are, then if you really care about Somalia, I mean, I don't, but if you do, then that's all the more reason to not bring them here. Send them back. Why are we importing the best ones? Let the best ones go back to their country and fix their country if they're so great.

27:52I mean, if they can contribute to our country, if that's your claim, they can help build our country. I don't really see that they are. But if they can, well, then what could they? They could work wonders in their own home country. So for their own country's sake, you should send them back. But anyway, having patriotism for your homeland, I support that. I think every person should love their country. And so we should love ours and we should have pride in it. And we should have an attitude that says, look, coming here is a privilege. You don't have any right. You have no right to come here. It's like the entire, there's 8 billion people in the world.

28:26Do they all have a right to come here? I mean, it's impossible. We can't have them all. So you don't have a right to it. It's a privilege. And so if we're going to let you come here, you got to prove to us that you have something to offer us. Yes, as Americans, right, we should have the attitude, be a little bit selfish as Americans, selfish for our country and say, what's in it for us? You know, when we bring in someone from Somalia or anywhere else or Uganda, what's in it for me? Why? Why are we what's in it for my family? I got my my my American family. We've we've lived here our entire lives.

28:58My children were born here. What's in it for them to bring you in here? That's my question. And that's the question we should all be asking. And and when we have that attitude, then it becomes obvious. OK, we just have to it doesn't mean that we can never have another immigrant into this country ever again. Now, I tend to think that there should be an immigration moratorium, that we should just shut it off for a period of time. We're at our limit. Right, we're at our limit. But eventually you're going to open it up again. And when you do that, I think we need to greatly raise the bar for who we allow in.

29:29Yeah. And I think the other part to this is we have to get honest again about what Islam is and what its tenets are and whether this is actually the profile of the future leaders we want in our American cities. I mean, just take an honest look at it and not be shamed by the made up term Islamophobia. That is not a thing. You are allowed to criticize Islam. There's absolutely no problem with it. It's a political doctrine as much as it is a, quote, religion. And it's absolutely subject to being criticized. And who cares if you get called an Islamophobe? I mean, whatever. We've all been called worse.

30:05OK, let's keep going. So unfortunately, there's a there's a war unfolding on the right amongst people you and I both love. And our pal Ben and our pal Tucker are not getting along. They haven't been getting along a long time. I saw a very interesting discussion you guys on The Daily Wire did about it with the whole crew there, kind of talking about what was happening on the right and whether people needed to be excommunicated from the right. Well, this all exploded into the public forum even more over the past few days because last week Tucker hosted Nick Fuentes, who is, I mean, an open white nationalist.

30:42He said extremely racist things. It's kind of his bread and butter and anti-Semitic things. And not like the kind that's now the flavor for some, where it's like if you say anything about Israel, you're considered an anti-Semite. Genuinely anti-Semitic things. I mean, he's questioned whether six million Jews actually died in the Holocaust. He's praised Hitler. He called—this isn't anti-Semitic, but he called J.D. Vance's wife Usha a jeet, which I didn't even know what that was, but I know enough to know it's not a compliment. Sounds like a racial slur. We could be here all day. Tucker put him on, I think because Tucker puts on a lot of provocative people.

31:18He interviewed the president of Iran. He interviewed Vladimir Putin. He interviewed Andrew Tate. He's not afraid of, like, quote, platforming people who are controversial. And also, Tucker and Nick Fuentes have been going at it themselves for quite some time. And I think he thought it might be interesting to just have him on and have it out, which he did. But then he came under fire by a lot of people for, quote, platforming, which you're not allegedly allowed to do. And one of the reasons I don't like Nick Fuentes is because years ago I saw him play a little video game in a clip that was circulating on XMAP in which a young man was running wearing a yarmulke.

31:54And he was shooting this man in his video game, calling him Ben Shapiro. And it was really vile stuff. um so chucker came under criticism because it wasn't a confrontational interview it was more like a joe rogan approach you know where you just kind of ask the guy how he feels what he stands for what he doesn't here's a little bit of how it went i mean as far as the jews are concerned i think that like i said you cannot actually divorce israel and the neocons and all those things that you talk about from Jewishness. There's a deep religious affection for the state. It's bound up in their identity.

32:34The story of the exodus from Egypt, the promise of the land, all these things. So let's say in the United States, for example, somebody like a Sheldon Adelson, he's not Israeli. Is he an ideological neocon? Does he believe in the promise of democratic globalism? I don't think necessarily his heart is in Israel and it's because he is a proud Jewish person. And I guess what I'm saying is that if you are a Jewish person in America, you're sort of, and again, it's not because they're born, but it's sort of a rational self-interest politically to say, I'm a minority, I'm a religious ethnic minority.

33:13This is not really my home. My ancestral home is in Israel. There's like a natural affinity that Jews have for Israel. And I would say on top of that, for the international Jewish community. Sheldon Idelson, by the way, is dead. He died in 2021, but was a big donor. And his wife Miriam is now a big donor. OK, so cue the Internet pile on Tucker. Like he's got to be he's got to be excommunicated from the right because he hosted Nick Fuentes, which was a sin in the eyes of many. Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation weighed in backing Tucker, saying we don't cancel people for platforming others.

33:52And then a lot of people said it doesn't matter. Like it's it's not about canceling Tucker. It's about ostracizing him, you know, sort of cutting him out of polite conversation. And then yesterday, Ben and Ben's been attacked by Tucker. Tucker's attacked. Ben has gone back and forth, back and forth. Ben did a whole show on this issue. And here's a little bit of how that sounded. it. Americans hate Nick Flentes's philosophy. They think it's trash. Republicans, by the polling, think it's trash. Independents think it's trash. Democrats think it's trash. And here's the other thing. Americans hate Tucker Carlson's laundered anti-Americanism.

34:27If they get their way, they will hollow out the Republican Party, lead it to electoral catastrophe, and empty it and the country of any semblance of decency in the process? My answer is no. No to the Groypers. No to their publicists like Tucker Carlson. No to those who champion them. No to demoralization. No to bigotry and anti-meritocratic horse shit. No to anti-Americanism. No. This is our country. This is our party. And this is our conservative movement. And I will not stand by while it is handed over to those who betray the most fundamental principles I've spent my entire life defending and advocating.

35:07That is a path to defeat and a path to moral oblivion. I reject it because if we lose the right, we will lose to the left. And either way, we'll lose the country. Okay, just quick programming note. Tomorrow, we have Tucker Carlson on our next leg of my tour. And the night after that, we have Ben Shapiro, which is something I pride myself on being a show where both of those guys could come and trying to do as little as possible to divide the right, which I think is a force for good in this world, unlike the left. However, this controversy is front and center and virtually every right wing website there is, Matt, and you're right in the middle of it, as am I in a way, both of us.

35:47So how are you looking at this? Yeah, look, there's a few things here. And yeah, I do find myself and I know that you've caught plenty of flack also in a similar way being sort of in the middle of this. And it's, you know, look, both of those guys, Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson, they're both friends of mine, as I know they are you, Megan. And so when I get this, people on both sides that are constantly screaming in my ear, and it's been this way for a long time, but in particular over the last couple of weeks, and in particular over the last like 24 hours, demanding that I disavow, you know, disavow, denounce one or the other of those guys.

36:34And I'm just not going to do that. It's just not ever going to happen. I mean, not not ever. It's not ever going to happen. And is that because, you know, I agree with everything that either one of them say? No. I mean, we don't we don't have to agree on everything at all. We can have disagreements. We should have disagreements. As you pointed out, Megan, we've talked about some of this stuff at The Daily Wire. We've talked about it with Ben. We've had these debates in the open. So yeah, we can have disagreements. But when it comes to disavow, condemn, denounce, that's an entirely different thing.

37:10And I'm not going to do that because I don't do that to my friends. And it really is that simple. And you can either respect that or not. I don't really care. But loyalty is a principle that is incredibly, deeply important to me. And so when I hear the response, oh, but you need to stand on principle. Well, loyalty is a principle. And to me, it's as a man, it's one of the most important principles that you can hold. As a human being, it's one of the most important principles. And so if there's someone who I know in person, like this is not all just on Twitter. This is not, we're not just talking heads, you know, talking to cameras.

37:50We're also like people and we have actually have lives outside of all of this stuff. And so if there's someone who I actually know and I've sat down and had dinner with them, I've sat at their dinner table, I have their phone number, I can call them. If I have a disagreement, I can call them privately and I can tell them and we can hash it out. Someone who's supported me, someone like that. The idea that I would stand in public and condemn and denounce and disavow is just totally anathema to me. I cannot do it. I won't ever do it. Um, not to someone who's, who's a friend. Uh, I just, I won't. And when someone does that to me, as, as has happened, uh, I consider it to be just unforgivable treachery, um, that you, and I've had this happen to me where I say something and, you know, sure, people can disagree with it.

38:46I say a lot of things people can disagree with, but I'll have someone who I know personally, and they have my phone number and they could just call me. But instead I go on Twitter and I see that they've issued this like denunciation. And it's like, dude, I just saw you a week ago. What's going on here? I consider that to be just treacherous and I'm not going to do that to anybody else. I will just never. Yeah, that's the first thing. And the second thing also, and I've one of the reasons why I'm catching a lot of shit is that my stance has been. that I want to focus our fire metaphorically on the left, that we are dealing with people who truly, truly want us dead.

39:36And they just killed my friend, your friend, Megan, and Charlie. And they spent a month, they spent two months, they're still celebrating it, like dancing on his grave. And so that's what we're dealing with. And that's where I want to focus. I mean, I think about I think it was a day after Charlie was killed. I put out a tweet where I said this, where I said, you know, that that, look, I'm not focused. I know there are a lot of disputes and debates on the right. And I'm not saying that they're totally unimportant. But I want to put that all off to a different day. And right now, you know, it's very clear who the enemies are.

40:19and they are the people who are trying to kill us and want us to. And I want to focus on that. And I said that a day after Charlie was killed. And the response I got was wide agreements. I mean, there were a few people that were upset about it, conservatives, but it was almost like 98 % approval to that sentiment a day after Charlie was killed. The tweet got like 150 ,000 likes or something like that. Well, I said the exact same thing only a month later, just the exact same sentiment, almost verbatim, certainly the same idea. And the reaction was 180 degrees the opposite, where rather than wide agreement, it was everybody screaming at me on both sides.

41:05Well, how dare you say that? How could you, assuming that I'm taking someone's side or the other side by saying that? And it's like, it's only a month later. I mean, have we already? This time of unity lasted for four weeks? Really? And we just can't afford this right now. I mean, they just killed Charlie Kirk, one of our most important leaders on the right, and he's gone now. And do we really want to let them win? Do we really want to tell the left that, hey, it worked because you took out one of our most important leaders and now we're going to spend the next however many months or years eating each other alive?

41:48No, we can't do that. We can't afford that. And so that's where I want our energy to be focused on these people who, again, like really, truly want us dead. But here's what I know. Here's what I know for sure. There are plenty of conservatives who don't like me. They've made that clear. And that's fine. And there are a lot of people on the left who don't like none of them. But what I know for sure, and this is what makes it really clear for me, this is the clarifying thing for me. What I know is that if I walk outside of my house tomorrow and I get shot and killed, which I'm not saying is likely to happen.

42:27It could happen. I mean, but, you know, it could happen anyway. If that were to happen, I don't think any conservative would be celebrating that. I don't think any of them would. I think even the ones who have an issue with me would not be celebrating it. They would be mourning. But what I know for sure is that 99.9 % of the left would not be able to contain their glee. OK, they would piss on my grave and laugh in the faces of my grieving wife and my and my six children. That's what they would do. And we all know it. OK, so it's really easy for me to look at that dynamic and look at those people over there who are just waiting for an opportunity to laugh at my children who just lost their father.

43:16It's easy for me to look at them and say, OK, well, that's the enemy. And those are the people that I'm going to oppose with every breath in my body while I still have breath. OK, that's it. That's the fight. And and that's where I am just going to stay focused. And I don't care. People can be mad about it all they want. But that's where my focus is going to stay. I think it's where all of our focus should be. I love everything you said. I totally endorse and agree with all of it, Matt. It's been so frustrating. And I've been thinking about there's this young podcaster who's just starting out, a female and she got attacked recently.

43:52And I sent her a text saying, here's what you need to know. The right will attack you, but it'll be temporary and fleeting and they'll move on. But, and when the chips are down, they'll have your back. They will have your back. The left will attack you and will actually want you dead. They will want you destroyed and, and or dead. So it's like we have intra, you know, squabbles over on the right, but when push comes to shove, we tend to back each other, you know? And I was talking about this, I think recently with Ben, even, you know, you and I, We've had dust ups around like women, that kind of thing.

44:21But you've always had my back in the big picture and I have yours, too. And same with Tucker and Ben, with respect to you, with respect to me. Those two really don't like each other for other reasons. But to me, it's so sad to see like the right on right violence, you know, rhetorical violence, violence, because we need each other. Those two are both huge powerhouses. And, you know, we don't want a house divided when we're fighting the true enemy, which is these radical leftists. And I think what they're really fighting over is Israel. When you boil it down, they're fighting over Israel. I know people call Tucker an anti-Semite.

44:57I genuinely don't believe that. He's gotten very critical of Israel and he's allowed to have those views. And Ben is very defensive of Israel. He'll he'll criticize Israel, too. But as a general matter, he's defensive of Israel. And I just feel like how are we letting that? Yes, it does relate to America. Yes. Right now, it's very much in the news. But it's like such a small percentage of what we need to be worrying about. Like when you look back, you zoom out at America and its problems. This is not this is not even in the top three. And yet we're spending so much energy on it more than I think is warranted.

45:31And I think you and I in particular may be feeling that because your show, like mine, does not really focus that much on foreign policy. We're worried mostly about America, about politics in America, about culture wars in America. We don't get neck deep into like exactly how the IDF is fighting its foreign wars, you know. And so it's extremely frustrating for people like you and me to when people try to drag us kicking and screaming into some very complex, longstanding battle about a foreign country that we're really not covering day to day. Yeah. And I look, I have been there are things I've changed my mind about.

46:09And that's part of being a person, part of being a human being and having a brain to change your mind on stuff. And my views have evolved on certain things over the years. But I think for the most part, I have been, you know, very consistent on most things. And if anything, if you want to criticize me, you should criticize me on that end. Like, if anything, I'm too stubborn and unwilling to change my views on things. And the more that you scream at me to change my view, then the more likely I am to just hold on to that view, sometimes out of spite. I'll admit that I do that sometimes. That's just how I'm wired.

46:41All that to say, when it comes to Israel, my position on this has always been the same. I mean, you could go back to the days when I had a blog that hardly anyone read back in like 2013. and you'll find the same sentiment. And the sentiment is this, I don't care. I just don't care about this foreign country. I really don't. And that's why the other thing, if you go back and you go check my record, what have I said about Israel? What you'll find is I've said very little about it. That's the other thing. I very rarely talk about it. I had a blog that I ran independently for two years. I didn't work for anybody.

47:21And I had, I think, one post about it, just one of hundreds, just one time, one time. And it's always been that. No matter where I've worked, no matter if I work for myself or anyone else, I rarely have ever talked about it. And the reason is that I just don't care. And it doesn't mean that you can't care, right? It doesn't mean that other people can't care. It doesn't even mean that it's not important, you know, sort of objectively. It's just not important to me. It's not what I focus on. I don't focus on foreign countries. It's not it's not what I'm worried about. I'm worried about America and American culture.

47:57And that is really, truly my view. And it always has been. And and I agree that for this to be like the central issue that's ripping us apart, that just makes the whole thing even harder to swallow, because I don't want us to be ripped apart over anything for the reasons I just stated. but especially over this of all things, because look, no matter what's going on with Israel, most of the problems that we have in our country and in our communities, the problems that like really affect you and affect your family and your children, those would all be the same regardless. And so that's why I'm focused on that.

48:42And, you know, and that's it. I mean, that is really just the truth. And the other thing that's frustrating is that, because every time I say that, it's like, well, you're just saying that because, and I get it from both sides. It's like, well, you're just saying that because you work for Ben Shapiro or you're, or from the other side, you're just saying that because you're trying to appease the anti-Semites. It's like, have you ever considered that I might be saying it just because it's what I think? I mean, I might just actually be what I think. And I, I'd love to be, to get to a point in this country where we can have conversations where you just like, you take someone's argument and you engage with it rather than trying to read their mind and figure out what really motivates it.

49:24Because to me, that's like 90 % now of political debate. This is why debates are totally fruitless, is that 90 % of it is this, where someone doesn't respond to the argument. Instead, they say, well, you're really saying that because, no, okay, you can't read my mind, OK, and why don't you just just take what I said, take the argument itself. Let's talk about that. Let's engage with that. Not everything is like a conspiracy. Not everything. Sometimes people really just give their opinion about something. And that is my opinion. And it has been my opinion. Literally for as long as I've had any kind of platform at all.

50:06Yes. And the other point is we have to take a break, but we're coming back with Matt. But the other point is you, Matt Walsh, are responsible for what you, Matt Walsh, say. I am responsible for what I say. Neither one of us is responsible for Ben or Tucker. And I think I speak for us both when I say, and we will not let you shame us into adopting, defending, or whatever anyone else's words. We're responsible for our shows and the content they're on. We'll be right back with more content right here. Let's be blunt. Gold is up around 40 % this year. That's not speculation. That's reality. And if a portion of your savings is not diversified into gold, you could be missing the boat.

50:52Here are the facts. The U.S. dollar is still too weak, and the government debt is insurmountable. This is why central banks are flocking to gold. They're the ones driving prices up to record highs. But it's not too late to buy gold from Birch Gold Group and get in the door right now. Birch Gold will help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in gold. You can do it in whole or in part. You don't pay one dime out of pocket. Just text MK to the number 989898 and claim your free info kit. There's no obligation, just useful information. The best indicator of the future is the past, and gold has historically been a safe haven.

51:33Text MK to 989898 right now to claim your free info kit on gold. Protect your future today with Birch Gold.

51:44It's finally here. All right, let's get this party started. Megan Kelly live on tour across America. I was like, we have to go. And then after what happened to Charlie, I'm like, we definitely have to go. The best way to honor Charlie's legacy is to be out here, to be unafraid, to not back down. Stand firmly. Do not waver on the truth. Next stop, White Plains, Jacksonville, Miami, and Atlanta. So go get your tickets right now before they sell out. MeganKelly.com. Presented by Y Refi and SiriusXM.

52:20Here with me today, Matt Walsh. He's host of The Daily Wire's Matt Walsh Show. And really, probably the best person in the United States when it comes to the trans issue and has made the biggest difference in the United States. He's our J.K. Rowling, in many ways, who was calling out this bullshit ahead of its time. Matt, there's more in the news on this front. And it was a great it was a great post by this woman who was going to the Gold's Gym in California. Her name is Tish Hyman. She says she's a lesbian. She you know, so she's not anti LGBTQ. That's her point. But she went to the Gold's Gym in Los Angeles over the weekend.

53:00I think this was the video posted yesterday and she got kicked out because she objected to a man. I would say posing as a woman, but I mean, just barely. He's making very little effort at the gym using the women's locker room and bathroom. And she was naked and he was in there staring at her. And they asked her to leave when she complained. Here's first. Here she is in the Gold's Gym getting kicked out and complaining. I think that's not one to chime in. At Gold's Gym, men, grown men with big dicks in the women's locker room. And that's why I'm getting kicked out. And I want to make sure the girls know.

53:48The fuck? Everybody saw that man in the fucking locker room. No one's saying shit. And I'm fucking done with it. It's fucking stupid. and danger right. Me naked in front of a man without my permission. I'm the one who can kick out the gym, y 'all. I'm terminated for not wanting men in the locker room. She was understandably upset. And then I don't know if it was Tish or somebody else, but somebody filmed Tish confronting the man right outside of the women's room moments later. Watch. I think it was moments later or moments before. But did you tell me or not that women like asking you fucking question?

54:40No, now he knows how to be a man right now. He knows how to be a man No don't want it. He needs to have his gym membership evoked with that shit. And the woman told you, he assaulted me. The girl told already. We already filed reports. No, no. That's fine. I love the video. You can't get rid of me for this. I'm a woman and I have every right to not want a man in the restroom when I'm naked. Now the man's walking into the women's locker room. Look at him walking in there like it's okay. It's not okay. I understand. Matt, the reason this is happening is because the state law requires it. Much as I'd love to blame Gold's Gym, Gavin Newsom and his pals have made it state law that every, every facility, public or private, has to allow this.

55:31It's insane. It's deeply wrong. And the voters of California don't seem to give a damn. Your thoughts? Yeah, I do blame Gold Jim also, though, because we blame the law, blame Gavin Newsom, certainly. But also, I mean, you're a business owner in that state. You're a business in that state. You just you can't allow this. You cannot allow. You cannot put women in this position, children in this position. You just you can't allow it. And so, you know, if I'm a business in that state, I'm just not going to allow it. And then you kind of dare the state to what are they going to do? You want to shut me down?

56:09Well, go ahead. Let's have that fight. I know kind of easier. There are times in life we have to draw a line. And this is like clearly, clearly one of them. I'll also say, though, that the reaction from that woman is exactly correct. And this is how everybody should react. And I think if everyone had reacted that way from the very beginning, when this madness first sort of started in earnest like 10 years ago, then it would have been shut down very quickly. because like usually I'm not, I don't agree with like making scenes in public, but there are times when that's called for and you go into a locker room and there's a man in there, it's a women's locker room.

56:52That should be a scene. I mean, you should be, that's how a normal person reacts. This is totally unacceptable, completely wrong. And I'm not gonna go along with it to be polite or whatever. And that's, too many people were willing to do that for too long. That's how we ended up in this position to begin with. so I think she deserves a lot of credit for that. Somebody posted online yesterday, not all heroes wear capes. That's how I felt too when I watched Tish come out there. She posted a follow-up, just her on cam, after it all went down and you could feel that she, it was somewhat traumatic.

57:28The whole thing was traumatic for her. Here's a bit of that in SUT2. I just had the worst experience ever at the gym, at Gold's Gym. today i was naked in the locker room i turned around and there's a man there and boy like boy clothes lip gloss standing there looking at me i'm butt naked so the first thing i think is maybe there's a work doing here maybe i missed the sign i say the word sir to say sir what are you doing in here he goes don't talk to me i'm a woman i have a right to be in here immediately i'm pissed because i'm butt naked i feel violated and then i talk to the people that work at gold's gym and they don't really have anything to do.

58:06They just like, oh, we can file a report about an incident report. What the fuck is going on? I'm a lesbian. I've been a lesbian my whole life. I treat people I want to be treated, regardless of whatever their sexual orientation is or whatever they decide. So I'm not transphobic and I'm not homophobic. I'm not straight phobic. I'm not racist. None of these things. Why do you guys think it's OK for men to be in the women's restroom? You know, Matt, Gavin Newsom follows me on X, and I tweeted that out. And I tagged him saying, help her. Help her. He won't. He has absolutely no courage on this front.

58:46And while he talked a good game with our pal Charlie when he had him on about how it's unfair to have men in women's sports, he later just said, oh, it's just such a complicated issue, so confusing, and threw up his hands. He's not going to help Tish. He's not going to help girls dealing with boys in his sport. And it's really going to come down to President Trump and just how intrusive he can be on these states that insist on fostering this harassment. Right. And it should be. I mean, this is a place for federal law. There should be laws passed on the federal level. because this is not a state's rights thing.

59:25This is a human rights thing. This is an infringement on your rights as a human being, as a woman, just like a basic level of privacy and safety and security when you're in your most vulnerable state in the locker room. Yeah, you do have a right to that, and that is being infringed upon. And so it is a federal issue. And I will say that she asked that question, well, how could anyone think that this is right? And the answer to the question is that no one thinks it's right. I mean, no human, almost none. But aside from the actual trans activists themselves, and even some of them, I don't even think it's right, but everybody else, like no one else thinks it's right.

1:00:07Gavin Newsom does not think that that's right. There's no way that Gavin Newsom could look at that situation and come to the conclusion that the woman who is objecting to the man in the locker room is in the wrong. He doesn't actually think that. He knows that that's totally crazy. And that is why Democrats have, especially over the last couple of years, for the most part, have run as far as they can, as fast as they can from this issue. I mean, Kamala Harris went through her entire abbreviated campaign and barely ever talked about it. She only talked about the trans issue when she was absolutely forced to.

1:00:40And then she jumped off of it as fast as she could. It wasn't like that five years ago. Now, five years ago, Democrat politicians, you couldn't stop them from running out in front of any camera they could find and talking about trans rights and trans women are women and all this kind of stuff. because for a very brief moment in time, for a very brief moment in time, it seemed like that. It seemed like that was the popular position, although it never was. But now, you know, the culture is just entirely against them and they know it. And so - And then came the wonderful What is a Woman? by Matt Walsh and the Daily Wire, which really was a game changer.

1:01:13It just completely changed the conversation by calling out the insanity and questioning the proponents of it in a very fair, matter-of-fact way. They were humiliated, but there are still hangers on. Okay. Last but not least on this same front in California, there is a women's soccer team. It's part of the national women's soccer league. It's angel city. And it has at least one obvious man who I guess says he's intersex. It's, it's another one of those like boxing situations like we had with that boxer. This is him. He, quote, identifies as female and is reportedly intersex, meaning may have female genitalia on the outside, but has X, Y chromosomes and is developing as a male post puberty.

1:02:01And this is I haven't obviously seen any direct tests, but this is what's been reported about this person. And a woman on the team named Elizabeth Eddy wrote a very thoughtful op-ed in the New York Post saying, look, our league has gotten very big, but there's a real question. How do we preserve women's rights and competitive fairness when we're fostering while still fostering meaningful inclusion? And she said, what we really need in our sport is clear eligibility processes and policies. The uncertainty is serving no one. and in particular we've got questions and controversy over intersex and transgender athletes saying our league has to adopt a clear standard one is that all players have to be born with ovaries another is that there should be a gene test like those that the world athletics and world boxing have now implemented where when you go for your annual physical and you get a blood test looking at cholesterol they would include a test checking your chromosomes or a non-invasive cheek swab, which is how they do it in a lot of other sports to make sure that in fact you have XX chromosomes playing in the women's league.

1:03:07And then she finishes it by saying, look, I don't have all the answers, but I do know we're all in this together. It'll take time, space, and creativity to cooperate as we move forward. The New York Post ran the piece with a picture of one player who's been questioned over whether this person is trans or intersex and I guess won't publicly say and wouldn't publicly test. And that person happens to be black. So that's relevant because now the blowback that this one writer, Elizabeth Eddy, got for writing her op-ed includes that she's somehow racist. She didn't pick the photo, but this is one of the players whose, she plays, this player plays for the Orlando Pride.

1:03:45And this player, according to the Zambia Football Association, quote, did not meet the criteria for gender verification, which seems to be a nice way of saying this person did not test female. In any event, here are fellow players from Elizabeth Eddy's Angel City's league piling on her. This is Angel City Sarah Gordon response to the Eddy article, Sot3B. That article does not speak for this team in this locker room. I've had a lot of combos with my teammates in the past few days, and they are hurt and they are harmed. by the article and also they are disgusted by some of the things that were said in the article.

1:04:31Mostly the undertones come across as transphobic and racist as well. The article calls for genetic testing on certain players and it has a photo of an African player as a headline and that's very harmful and to me it's inherently racist because to single out this community based on them looking or being different is absolutely a problem. And as a mixed woman with a Black family, I'm devastated by the undertones of this article. Amazing. Your thoughts, Matt?

1:05:04Where do you even start? Look, I'll tell you one thought that comes immediately to mind is kind of bringing this all full circle to something we talked about earlier in the hour, the conservative civil war. Well, this again kind of shows, it's another example that shows who the real enemies are and what we're actually fighting. Because this is pure madness, just total absolute lunacy using charges of racism and quote unquote transphobia, which is not a thing at all, to try to get people to ignore biological reality. reality, just what is actually real, a total rejection. It's a total rejection of reality itself and using this emotional blackmail to get people to go along with it very much to their own detriment, the detriment of their families and their children.

1:05:57That's what the left is doing. And there really is no analog to that on the right. There is no analogous position to men or women. That is a total rejection, as I said, of reality itself. It is unique to the left. and this is what we're fighting. I mean, that's my first thought. It's genuinely dangerous, both to those women and to young girls coming up the ranks in soccer. Hello, like my daughter, behind them. Matt Walsh, great conversation. Thanks so much for being here. Thanks, Megan, appreciate it. See you soon. Wow, covered it all there. Love to know your thoughts on it. What a great, thoughtful guy.

1:06:37You can email me, Megan, at megankelly.com. Coming up next, another great thoughtful guy, and that is Victor Davis Hanson. VDH is next. Don't miss that.

1:07:09crafted from the purest tea leaves. It provides a smooth, sustained energy for a calm mind and a radiant glow. The nutrients in their matcha can help curb sugar and hunger cravings, making it easier to stick to your wellness goals. This ceremonial grade matcha is 100 % organic and grown in a pristine valley, ensuring you get a clean, pure cup every time. Unlock your healthiest glow and feel the difference. Get up to 20 % off for a life, 20 % off for life. a complimentary gift, and explore Peak's clean, pure, intelligent wellness rituals at peaklife.com slash Megan. That's P-I-Q-U-E life.com slash Megan.

1:07:49Try it and glow from the inside out. Ever notice those creepy ads that pop up on your phone and seem to know exactly where you've been, what you've bought, even what you've been talking about? You've probably asked yourself, is my phone spying on me? Well, the truth is your smartphone is constantly collecting, and leaking data without your knowledge or consent. Every day, it builds a detailed profile of your life, your location, your habits, your interests, even the people with whom you communicate. That info is tracked, analyzed, and sold to the highest bidder. It's not just annoying, it's invasive, and it's happening all the time.

1:08:27But the UpPhone by Unplugged is really different. This thing's very cool. It's designed to protect your privacy from the ground up. No hidden trackers, no data mining, just a secure, streamlined smartphone experience that puts you back in control. It's the phone for people who are sick and tired of being watched against their will. Ready to take back your digital privacy? Visit unplugged.com slash MK and get 25 bucks off a phone case with a purchase of a phone. Learn more and order your UpPhone today. That's unplugged.com slash MK because your life should be yours, not theirs.

1:09:33message that we will not be silenced. It's Megan Kelly Live, presented by Y Refi and SiriusXM. Go to MeganKelly.com to get your tickets now. You can stream The Megan 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.

1:10:16Here with me now, Victor Davis Hanson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of The End of Everything, How Wars Descend into Annihilation. VDH will be joining me on the Megyn Kelly live tour in just a couple of weeks. You don't want to miss him. Go to MegynKelley.com to get tickets to our remaining tour stops. We have seven to go, seven to go. You could still get there. Many are selling out, so go check it out now. Victor, thank you for being here. All right, we've got something very interesting to start with today. The case against James Comey just got a lot hotter. So he's moved to have it dismissed, just to set the scene for our audience.

1:10:58Okay, there's a two-page indictment against him. It's pretty straightforward. And they allege in the Eastern District of Virginia that on or about September 30th, 2020, James Comey willfully and knowingly lied, lied to Congress, telling a U.S. senator that he, James Comey, had not authorized someone at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports regarding an FBI investigation. Okay, so that's basically what the whole thing is based on, and there's really not much more to the indictment than that. Two counts that we think are based on just that one allegation that he lied to Congress in September of 2020.

1:11:36Now, in September of 2020, what happened was, in an exchange with Ted Cruz, Jim Comey reaffirmed testimony he gave to Chuck Grassley three years earlier in 2017 and doubled down on those assertions that he had not leaked to the media about an FBI investigation and he had not authorized a person at the FBI to leak to the media about any investigation into Trump or Hillary. And I'm just going to play you those testimonials just so we're really clear. All right. First, we're going to go in chronological order because they're both at issue very much in this case against him. Here he is in 17, 2017.

1:12:22The date was May 3rd. Speaking under oath to Senator Chuck Grassley. Listen. Director Comey, have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation? Never. Have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation? No. Has any classified information relating to President Trump or his associates been declassified and shared with the media? Not to my knowledge. Okay, so it's that middle question that is at issue. He very clearly testified.

1:13:16Yet the question was, have you ever been an anonymous, sorry, have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Hillary investigation? Answer, no. Now that was May 3rd, 2017, which was just a couple months after the period of June 2015 through February 2017, where his good friend Daniel Richman, who was a Columbia law professor, had been deputized by Comey to act as a special governmental employee at the FBI on Comey's behalf, who he used to both advise him, James Comey, and now we do know to leak to the media. OK, so this testimonial to Grassley was post that, you know, year and a half period where he had been using Daniel Richmond to leak to the media.

1:14:13So it would appear to be a very clear lie. He had been using him. He'd been using him for a year and a half. And the guy had been an employee at the FBI, special governmental employee. And that's what Grassley asked. Ever authorize someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about Trump investigation or Hillary? So he said that. He said in May of 17, no, never did. Then Ted Cruz, it's a little convoluted. Hold on to your armrests there. Gets them to double down on it three years later in 2020, September 2020. And the only reason they use the September 2020 exchange with Cruz as the basis for the indictment is because the 17 exchange is barred as time limited.

1:14:56The five year statute of limitations on that lie ran out, but he renewed his lie to Ted Cruz. It's more convoluted, but it's there. I urge you to listen to this exchange, but pay attention, most importantly, to the last part of it. Listen. On May 3rd, 2017, in this committee, Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, quote, have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation? You responded under oath, quote, never. He then asked you, quote, have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton administration?

1:15:40You responded again under oath. No. Now, as you know, Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the Wall Street Journal and that you were directly aware of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what Mr. McCabe is saying and what you testify to this committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who's telling the truth? I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by what the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017. So your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak. And Mr. McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling the truth.

1:16:22Is that correct? Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine is the same today. Mine is the same today, which is a very good hook for prosecutors to say. not only did he reaffirm the testimony as of 2017, but he expanded it from 2017 forward to 2020. So both time periods would be covered where James Comey is on the record saying he never authorized someone to leak on his behalf while at the FBI. Okay, that's clearly his testimony. In any event, there's no doubt he stood by that Grassley testimony, at least through his testimony on May 3rd, 2017. So if he did authorize somebody to leak for him at the FBI prior to May 3rd, 2017, they've got him.

1:17:14They've got him. And we were speculating when the indictment first came out, who's the indictment even talking about? You heard, you know, Ted Cruz there was talking about Andy McCabe who worked for him. Was that who it was? Or was it somebody else? Was it the Trump investigation? Was it the Hillary? Who knows? And now it appears, I mean, And I don't want to limit them, but it appears that at least we have clear evidence that Comey did use Daniel Richman, who was an employee of the FBI again from June 2015 through February 2017, to leak to the media about the Hillary Clinton email investigation prior to the time he denied it under oath to Chuck Grassley.

1:17:54The reason I say that is today in the news is an explosive report from John Solomon based on documents provided by Kash Patel at the FBI that they found at the FBI that show correspondence between James Comey and Daniel Richmond, his BFF and employee for that year and a half. making clear Comey wanted Richmond to leak and that Richmond did then act as an anonymous source to the New York Times and possibly others. All right. And we'll just go through a couple of them. First, he points out this is Mike Davis summarizing some of it. Comey had a burner Gmail, which he named himself Reinhold Niebuhr.

1:18:41I don't know who that is, Victor. You're a historian. Does that name ring a bell to you? Yes, it does. He was a very famous Protestant clergyman, public intellectual in the United States. He was the father of Elizabeth Sifton, the head editor for a while at Alfred Knopf, and at one time my book editor, so it's kind of a coincidence you asked that. But he was very well known as a voice of morality in America. Oh, you're so smart. I love that you knew that. Yeah, sanctimonious Comey would always try to identify with a higher moral authority. Okay. So that's his alias. And he's corresponding with his BFF, Daniel Richman.

1:19:20And okay, I'm going to try to make this clear. It's not that easy. Hold on. first just to set the scene for the audience again it was October 28th 2016 that Comey wrote a letter um saying that the FBI had discovered new emails relevant to the Hillary Clinton use of private email servers that was just like a few days before the election that was the final like in July of 2016 Comey came out and he was like Hillary sucks she has a private homebrew server it's very problematic but we're not going to indict her because we can't meet certain elements of a crime. And Republicans were pissed, like she should be indicted.

1:20:01Then October comes around, and we're just like a week before the vote now. And he says, ah, we found more emails on Anthony Weiner's laptop, who's married to Huma Abedin, who was Hillary's right-hand person. And then the Democrats lost their minds saying, this is election interference by the FBI, which works for the DOJ days before an election. And Comey's like, I had to tell people I kind of exonerated her in July. And then just before the election, now I find all these other emails. And look, I felt a moral obligation to tell America. We didn't find other stuff. And you can hear him. He's upset because then the left wing press went nuts on him.

1:20:44And the left wing press was important to James Comey, who wanted them to love him. And what he's doing is using Daniel Richman to massage the press into thinking Comey was moral, like you point out, like this Reinhold Niebuhr, that he did the right thing. And he's writing to his BFF here about how, look, you know, I did something noble, saying, first his friend says, do you want me to respond, basically? And then Comey responds from his burner account, no need. At this point, it would be shouting into the wind. Someday they'll figure it out. And as Jack and Ben point out, I don't know who that is, my decision will be one a president-elect Clinton will be very grateful for, though that wasn't why I did it.

1:21:36So he's anticipating Hillary's going to win and that ultimately after she wins, she'll forgive him for doing the October thing. The next day, Daniel Richman sent Comey an email regarding an op-ed he'd been asked to write for the New York Times about the Comey letter regarding Hillary's emails. Richman stated he was not inclined to write something, but that he would if Comey thought it would help things to explain that the defendant owed Congress absolute candor and that Comey's credibility with Congress could be, would be particularly important in the coming years of threatened congressional investigations.

1:22:10That's when Comey wrote back, no need, it would be shouting into the wind. Someday they'll figure it out. And Hillary Clinton, president-elect, will be very grateful for me having done this. Then Comey appears to have reconsidered that view very shortly thereafter, alleges the government. On November 1st, 2016, he emailed Daniel Richman again, saying, when I read the Times coverage involving reporter one, I'm left with a sense that they don't understand the significance of my having spoken about this case in July, it changes the entire analysis. Meaning he's like, his point is having said something in July about how she should be, she can't be charged.

1:22:46I owed it to the public to, to update my statements in October when I found the Anthony Weiner laptop. And then he says to Daniel Richmond, perhaps you can make him smarter. And he goes on about why he's so noble. And this needs to be explained to the press. My inactivity was not an option here. The choices were act to reveal or act to conceal. Richmond responds the next day stating, this is precisely the case I made to them and thought they understood. I was quite wrong. Indeed, I went further and said mindless allegiance to the policy and recognition that more evidence could come in would have counseled silence in July to have let Hillary twist in the wind.

1:23:28Richmond emailed Comey shortly thereafter writing, I just got the point home to reporter one who we think was Michael Schmidt of The New York Times probably was rougher than you would have been. Then Comey emails Richmond shortly thereafter, entitling the message pretty good, sending a link to The New York Times piece regarding the defendants, Comey's purported options in late October 2016 about the Clinton email investigation. Comey wrote, someone showed some logic. I would paint the cons that I was facing in not disclosing more darkly, but not bad. So this clearly he says to Richmond here, Victor, perhaps you can make him smarter in writing this piece.

1:24:10Then he writes the piece. And we have the piece, by the way, from the New York times where they weigh exactly what Comey had to do with the pros and the cons. And Richmond says, okay, I just got the point home. I was rougher than you would have been. And then Comey forwards him the piece saying, someone shows some logic, forwarding the piece to him with which Richmond participated at Comey's behest. And that is just one example. There are other examples as well between Comey and Richmond that predate his testimony to Grassley, denying he had ever done it. It's very clear, according to these filings, Victor, he did.

1:24:52And so just like the Tish James case that we talked about at length yesterday. Check our YouTube feed if you missed it. If you missed it, you shouldn't. This case against James Comey looks a lot stronger than the media would have us believe. Well, I think it's very strong, but I'm not as optimistic that because this is going to be tried in the New York Washington corridor. And I remember in the Latina James case, there were experts who testified that the Deutsche Bank had no complaint. The loan was paid on time with interest in full, and they would loan to him again, and they didn't let it. They said it was not relevant to the case.

1:25:30The E. Jean Carroll case, they brought in all sorts of testimony that proved that she was, and they said it's not irrelevant. They're going to say, and I hope they don't, but they're going to say, we're talking about a particular authorization to McCabe. Just take one example. This is irrelevant. Or they're going to say, well, James Comey never authorized it. It was brought to his attention that people were freelancing and leaking, and he didn't authorize it, but he was under no compulsion to stop it. He just thought, wow, I don't know what they're, I'm aware of it. That's what they're going to do, and it's going to depend on that, you know, if it's in Washington, a Washington grand jury indicted him, apparently, and it's going to depend on the judge and the prosecutor.

1:26:16But there is a common denominator, two of them, with all of this, Megan, and that is he had no business doing any of this. He is a FBI director. His job is to investigate and present evidence to a prosecutor. The prosecutor was Loretta Lynch, and she was conflicted, and Obama knew it, so she bowed out. Remember, she had met with Clinton on the tarmac in Phoenix. Tarmac. Yes. Yes. And so James Comey, who had been a prosecutor, he was the one, remember, a long time ago that went after Martha Stewart. He was a glory hound and he really trumped up that thing. And they said, you know what, James Comey is such an egomaniac that we'll bow out.

1:27:00And then he took on the role. They didn't have a subordinate in the DOJ. He took on the role as the investigator and the de facto attorney general to determine whether these charges would go. and that's not right. He should have said, here's the evidence. On the one hand, she's obviously guilty on the case of Hillary. On the other hand, maybe it would be hard to prove to a jury, you make the decision. But he was getting the evidence and then making the decision in public to himself. And that was the problem. And then the other thing is, he's a narcissist and an egomaniac, and he's always too smart by half.

1:27:38He always tries to outthink and manipulate. So he's thinking, Hillary's going to be president, but I'll get a lot of criticism if I don't bring this up like I was one of her toadies. So I'm going to kind of sort of bring it up and then kind of sort of bring it down. And then when she's elected, I can kind of say, you know, I have a disinterested reputation. And that's the same thing he did all the time. He told Donald Trump, you're kind of sort of not the object of an investigation. and then he would go out and memorialize it, put it in a safe, and then leak it through a third party. So it's really disturbing because he's always trying to, if he had just told the truth, if he had just told the truth, he might be okay.

1:28:24But he tries to manipulate and go into all of these self-righteous, narcissistic, egocentric conspiracies, And he, you know, if you start lying, oh, what a terrible web we weave when we try to deceive. And that's what he does. And I hope that he gets, they have a good prosecutor and I hope they have a good judge because he's obviously culpable. But given what we've seen with Alvin Bragg and Latita James and Jack Smith and Fannie Willis, the judges and the prosecutors have been, it's a very high bar. if you're representing the Trump administration. I'll tell you something. They may get this dismissed as vindictive prosecution, though I don't know that they will.

1:29:10I actually don't think that's got high hopes. It's a very tough claim to prove. I hope not. They may get it booted because they're arguing that Lindsey Halligan, the acting, or the U.S. attorney wasn't properly appointed and that's being handled by another judge. That could be a way out for them, we'll see. but I no longer believe they have a shot of getting it dismissed on the four corners of the pleading saying that they did not plead a viable criminal complaint against him, that we are going to have to get into this because they do have very clear evidence that James Comey lied. I actually wasn't as sure about it before because the indictment is so vague.

1:29:48But now that I see the case coming together and this supplemental filing, they've got it. Like, we'll see whether the jury finds it material and relevant, all that stuff, but if they get to a jury. But I don't think the judge can dismiss this on the paper, on the four corners of the document, or throw it out for failure to state a claim, because they did plead a very obvious criminal complaint here of him misleading Congress. They've got the evidence. It's going to be very interesting what Andrew McCabe, because he had been found culpable, guilty to lying on four occasions to federal investigators.

1:30:24I think two of them were under oath. So his credibility was not very good if he was going to testify that he had been authorized by James Comey to leak. And he said he wasn't, that he leaked spontaneous. He did not leak spontaneously. He had leaked with the nod of James Comey. And people, I think. That's not even the case. People were mistaken into thinking that this case brought against Comey was about McCabe. It's not. It's about Richmond. Yes, I know it. But my point is that if you can show that Comey was using other people to leak and lying about it, and then when Ted Cruz says, McCabe said this, you said this, and that's going to come up, then McCabe, in a weird way, his credibility is enhanced and Comey is diminished.

1:31:14Well, there's more. Yeah. There's more. So there's another soundbite I want to play for you because this is also undermined by the documents just released. It's James Comey testifying at that same hearing where Ted Cruz cross-examined him, September 30th, 2020, in response to Senator Lindsey Graham asking him about whether he received intel, which we know he did thanks to the documents that have been declassified through Kash Patel. whether he remembers receiving intelligence about Hillary Clinton's plans to try to connect Donald Trump to Russia. This came out over the summer where we saw that they had received intelligence showing that Hillary had this plan.

1:32:01And then lo and behold, what did she try to do? She tried to connect Trump to Russia. So this is Senator Graham in September of 2020, long after it's all happened, asking James Comey whether he remembers being told that by the intel agents. Watch this. Side eight. September the 7th, 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral of FBI to FBI Director James Comey and Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's approval of a plan concerning U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S.

1:32:45elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server. You don't remember getting that or being taught? That doesn't ring any bells with me. Okay. Well, that's a pretty stunning thing. It didn't ring a bell, but it did come to you. Didn't ring a bell, James Comey wanted Congress to believe. And yet now they've produced the actual handwritten note showing it right here on screen. James Comey's own handwritten note, which I'll read to you. It's dated September 26th, 2016. And there's a line item that reads HRC plan to tie Trump. HRC plan to try to tie Trump. And then there's a note a couple of doors or a couple of lines down saying, carry Trump finance debts.

1:33:40I think it says for Moscow. I mentioned New York Times and Russia. It's very clearly in the context of Russia, he's saying Hillary Clinton planned to tie Trump. And we know we know that she had that plan because we've now seen all the intel that was circulating at the FBI and CIA who had unearthed thanks to the Russians who had been. It's a long story, but basically somebody had been spying that the I think it was the Australians had been spying on the Russians and found talk of this plan. And they brought it to our intel agents saying, hey, FYI, Hillary Clinton's up to some dirty business. in case you're interested.

1:34:22And our intelligence agencies discussed it. We learned that over the summer. And now you see the James Comey notes saying it. And then you see the testimony that he didn't remember, Victor. This isn't like, hey, do you know what salad you had four years ago on a Friday? This is, did the Democrat candidate for president have a plan to try the Republican candidate for president to Russia, which is an investigation you then pursued for months and tried to ruin his first term with. Yeah, but remember that he testified, I think it was to the House Oversight Committee, and that doesn't ring a bell, not aware of that, couldn't quite remember that.

1:35:04People had maybe said that, but I never heard it. That's what he said 245 times under oath. And they went through all of these questions, and there was no perjury referrals or anything. So I agree 110 % with everything you've, your analysis, but I'm a, given that he, what he's done and what McCabe did and what Brennan did and what Clapper did, all of them. And yet, uh, all we hear is retribution, revenge for revenge for when the real issue is not that Donald Trump in a revenge fashion, although he maybe he had vengeance on his mind and that weighed into it, but that doesn't really matter. The matter is whether they're culpable or not.

1:35:48And for the entire Biden administration, they were given exemptions. And the whole purpose was so that the statute of limitations they thought would run out in the small chance that Donald Trump would ever be elected again, they thought. But they're all culpable. And they're so, James Comey is so, he's the most grating because he is the most sanctimonious. You know, he's always saying, I'm wandering on the beach reading Nietzsche, and I'm reading Kielgaard, and I'm reading all of these philosophers. Oh, by the way, I just saw this 8647 on the beach. I have no idea what it means. You've right. He's a pathological liar.

1:36:32He really is. And is a narcissist. He's a narcissist. We only have a few minutes left, but I want to get to this because you mentioned Brennan. There was news about him. So Brennan went to some conference over the weekend, and he was confronted in a great exchange about him joining with the 51 intelligence analysts to try to dismiss the Hunter Biden laptop as possible Russian disinformation. And he got very angry. Here's thought 10. I would like to hear what your justification was for supporting the dossier that was known to be false, being used as source material in the second ICA. I don't know who put you up to this.

1:37:16Nobody put me up to this or I'm here on my own. I don't know what role you played or who you are, but it's a bunch of bullshit that you just passed on. The emails are clear, sir. The emails are clear. The emails are clear. The second question. Next, next, next, next, next, next, next, next, next. Look, we can talk about it in the reception. No, we didn't say that. No, we didn't say that. You said it was likely Russian disinformation. No, we did not. Yes, you did. No, read the letter. I'm excited. And I just, I know I'm going to get uninvited. Yeah. It'll be after hours. No, you're done. Come on, all right, we're going to go over here.

1:37:57Let's go over here for a question. Okay, that was Thomas Speciale, a conservative national security consultant, putting him to it. And then just another quick one. Then John Brennan was confronted outside the conference on the same subject, SOT11.

1:38:20And you misrepresented that. We never said it was disinformation. We said it was Russian influence operations, which is what they do. There's a big difference between influence on earth and the big difference. No, you don't know that. Yes, Colby knew. Colby knew. Finger in the chest.

1:38:37You see how he walked away? Yeah, he walked away. He was very angry. Keep going. When Mike, yeah, when Mike, when Anthony Blinken on somebody's prompt, we probably know who that is, cooked up this idea that it was going to be very embarrassing on the last debate in 2020. And Joe Biden was going to be asked about this laptop, which the New York Post had pretty much shown it was genuine. And I think the FBI, who'd had it almost a year, was leaking that it was genuine. They sprung into action. So Blinken called Mike Morale, the former interim director of the CIA, and said, get the gang out. And they got Hayden, and they got Leon Panetta, but especially Clapper and Brennan.

1:39:20And then they had a problem because they knew that it was genuine and it would hurt Biden because you know what was in it, the big guy, Mr. 10%, besides all the pornography and the drugs. So they came up with this word game, this gymnastics. It has all the hallmarks of a Russian information campaign. And, of course, the synonym for all that was disinformation. So when Brennan is confronted with that, he says, well, I didn't say it was disinformation. I didn't say that it was disinformation. I said that it was just the Russians were trying to pass something off that may or may not have been. and an influence operation that's all yes yeah so how are they trying to influence like but you saw him blow up about the dossier which he was told was bogus and obama he said to obama and so did clapper and so did comey and to others our uh subordinates know that it's bogus and they were told to go back and get back and that it was not and to run with it i.e to the press and then the laptop and the disinformation laptop thing and the dossier are really going to hurt him.

1:40:36So if he can't even answer that and he blows up and he gets angry and he uses all of your bull crap and he storms off. And he did the same thing when he was caught lying to the Senate about the Senate computer staffers. They said, you've been the CIA director, Brennan, you've been, you've been tapping into these. And he blew up. No, I haven't. We would never do that. Same thing about targeted assassinations about collateral damage. He lied twice. But I hope that he does that if he gets indicted, because I don't think a good prosecutor will allow that blow up and those psychodramatics to work. And it's so revisionist.

1:41:16Every headline, every headline at the time, I just pulled one, Politico, Hunter Biden's story is Russian disinfo. Dozens of former Intel officials say That was the headline everywhere. Did John Brennan run around trying to correct it, saying, no, not disinformation. It's just an influence operation. And let me explain to you the difference. The guy is a liar. He's caught. And I agree with you. I hope he gets a come up. The FBI knew that. Remember Christopher Wray, they had the FBI, they had the laptop, they had already done authentic, see if it was authentic, they had done forensic on it. They knew that it was Hunter's.

1:41:54The laptop owner knew. He had the receipt that Hunter had left it there. So it wasn't even a question of doubt at all. Yeah, it's just he's been humiliated now, so he wants to revise history. Victor Davis Hanson, he tells us real history every time he comes on. And for that, we are always grateful. Thank you, VDH. See you soon. Thank you. Thank you. We'll see Victor live out in California. And you can come watch that too. Go to MeganKelley.com tomorrow. Our friends from Real Clear Politics and all the big election results. Thanks for listening to The Megan Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

1:42:38.