Shock New Details About Guthrie Kidnapping, and Don Lemon's Absurd Kimmel Appearance, with Rich Lowry, Charles C.W. Cooke, Jim Fitzgerald, and Randy Sutton | Ep. 1244

27:31But the reason to be fine, I agree with Randy. This is not coincidence. They knew she was the daughter of this prominent news person in the U.S. worth some money. I'm sorry, the mother. And her daughter was, of course, the newscaster. And if money is not a factor, then it has to go back to some personal issue. And there has been research done over the years. Of course, there are some men out there who get kicks out of sex with much older women. And the research was the older the woman, the younger the offender. So we have her at 84. What does that say about this case? but there may be so much more involved here.

28:10We're not going to lock into someone in their teens or early 20s necessarily because of that research. But nothing can be ruled out at this point. I would urge if the person is listening to us out there, you make it look like this is so random and meaningless. You must have a meaning. You must have a purpose for doing this. Let the authorities know. Put something out there somehow. And and hopefully give us a proof of life that this woman is alive. She doesn't deserve to be killed. She didn't do anything to you. I can assure. Do you know, Jim, they brought dogs in, all sorts of dogs. And I'm just assuming they brought both rescue dogs, you know, bloodhounds and also cadaver dogs.

28:47But would a cadaver dog get a hit if a person had only been dead in the house for a half an hour? I think, and Randy can perhaps discuss this too, but cadaver dogs are so well-trained and they have such an expertise. I mean, and there's some dogs even better than others, that I think they could pick up the scent, whether recently dead, dead in the house, or down the line somewhere. But I believe a dog, a cadaver dog, well-trained, with a proper master, if you will, or trainer, they would find the remains if they're somewhere in the area. Maybe it's a good sign so far that hasn't happened. Because, Randy, the one thing from that sheriff is he's not talking like she was killed in the house.

29:31He's he clearly doesn't know whether she's alive or dead right now, but he's not talking like he thinks she was killed in the house. He did bring in homicide detectives right away. But like there's an urgency to him and him covering the field with the press yesterday afternoon suggests he thinks there's still time to save her. Yeah. And if that is that's all correlation to what they found at the crime scene. I remember very early on, they did they did couch this as a crime scene and they talked about droplets of blood later on. When when a body, when a killing take place, a murder takes place, it is it is it is very messy.

30:12OK, you know, whether it's from blunt trauma for hitting someone with an object, if it's a stabbing, if it's a shooting, it is. it leaves a lot of evidence around. And so when he talks about that it was a crime scene and that they found evidence, and especially the droplets, that indicates to me that there was not a major crime scene found here, that there was not a pool of blood, if you will, or tissue or things like that. And that would be, that would, I mean, if you look at all the different ways that that a body can lose, you know, its life. It's from blunt trauma. It's from gunshots. It's from stabbings.

30:59It's from strangulation. But generally, it's going to leave a lot of forensic evidence behind. And there's been no indication that there was a major scene found here. I think that probably would have been something that would have been told. And then that would have changed the way the sheriff sounds when he's talking. You know, Jim, there's a possibility that they did kidnap an alive Nancy Guthrie and that she did pass after the kidnapping. I mean, good God, I think about my own mom who's the same age. And I don't know if my mom could handle that. You know, like, I don't know if her heart could handle that, that sort of trauma.

31:45And poor Nancy Guthrie had the pacemaker, was on some sort of medication that they said she needs every 24 hours or it could be fatal. And I guess that's a possibility that could explain why we haven't had a ransom. Well, a few things here, Megan, and good points. The minimal blood, and it's too much, of course, for anyone, but the minimal blood of the scene could have been used a form of control early on, slap across the face, punch to the nose, and that's where that blood came from, just to get her to cooperate or get her limp and bring her out to the car. And I hate to be this graphic, but let me go back in time to when I was an FBI agent in New York City.

32:24Right across the river was the Exxon executive who was kidnapped from right outside of his door. That was 1992. His name was Sidney Riso and high ranking Exxon executive. And it turns out he was put in a box, taken away back of a van, then eventually put in a box, put in the Pine Barrens. He died. But the husband and wife team still carried through on the attempt to get the ransom. And eventually, within a few days to a week, they were identified and arrested and they took they took FBI agents to the body. So I don't want to make this predictive or is something that we know it's going to happen in this particular case.

33:01But with older people, the stress and the strain of a forced kidnapping. I mean, think about it. Your mother yourself. I mean, how would you handle this? even above 50 years of age. It could be very, very traumatic. And if you already have preexisting medical conditions, pacemaker, as she does, you're not getting the meds. It only exacerbates all the problems that can go wrong. But there have been, my point is here, there have been kidnapped victims who have died and the kidnapper said, well, we did what we did. We still want to get the money. Of course, I'm hoping the family would ask for proof of life.

33:38The old days, they would hold a newspaper up with the current headline to show that they're alive. Nowadays, with technology, you can do it different ways, but there's also AI, which can make them look like they're alive, and they're not. So that part gets kind of iffy. So I'm just hoping, I'm going to be positive here that she's alive, and the kidnapper's just finding a way to either release her, get the money for her, then release her, and go from there. But since we're all on the same page that none of us here thinks that this was coincidental, that it just so happened They targeted an 84-year-old who was Savannah Guthrie's mom.

34:13It does make it—so back to your theory. So it's either for money, potentially, or to punish her for a report, potentially. This is raw speculation with no support, but possibly there was some report she did. I'm sure the FBI is combing through all of her recent reporting for the Today Show, any in-depth interview she did. I would imagine they're looking at all of that. But I also wonder, you tell me, wouldn't somebody that high profile be a huge risk for kidnappers, even south of the border kidnappers where it's more frequent? Like, you got to know if you go for a woman like that, it's going to be on every television station in the country and the heat is going to be really, really high, which I feel like would be a deterrent.

35:04Like, maybe that's an argument against them knowing who this was. Either of you guys have thoughts on that? Yeah, I agree with you. When you look at the high profile nature of this, you know, I would venture to guess that most of America is now aware of this situation and they're not operating in a vacuum, right? They they have a landlord, whoever took this, whoever took this one. They don't live in a vacuum. They they have a life. They have relatives. They have friends. They have business associates. They have an area that they need to cover. So it's really worrisome that they have taken this action.

35:54Megan, if I may add, Willie Sutton used to say, he was asked, why do you rob banks? Well, that's where the money is. So why would someone kidnap a high profile person or their heir or whatever? And that's because that's the best chance of getting money. Look, Patty Hearst, that was a political kidnapping in the early 70s, but they knew the Hearst family had tons of money. Frank Sinatra Jr. was kidnapped in the early 60s. That was a high profile person. There was an heir to the Coors brewery company, I believe late 50s, early 60s kidnapped. He was eventually found dead. So and this happens across Europe and South America all the time.

36:35A lot of soccer players or football players in other countries, they come from Ecuador, Brazil, wherever. And the kidnappings occur there, even though they're making their money elsewhere. So it's high risk. You're right about that, Megan. But it's also high reward because, as Willie Sutton said, that's where the money is. So they think it's worth a shot here. We don't know this is a kidnapping for profit yet. They're very, very rare in the U.S., but 65 miles from the Mexican border, it certainly can't be ruled out. But where's that ransom note or ransom demand that we're waiting to hear about?

37:07And like cartels, you know, we've been ramping up our efforts against them. You know, it's not it's not Mexico. It's America. It's Tucson, Arizona. But it's very close. And, you know, you've got to factor in what's happening down there. Speaking of possible politics, the White House just put out a post on X about it that reads as follows. The search for Savannah Guthrie's mother, Nancy Guthrie, is ongoing and authorities are requesting assistance from the public. Anyone with information is urged to contact 911. Our prayers are with the Guthrie family as we hope for Nancy's safe return home. And they posted the picture of her.

37:45If you have information, call 911 pointing out this is what she looks like. She's five foot five. She weighs 150 pounds, blue eyes, brown hair, last seen January 31st. And then this just also in, hold on, Brian Enten, who works for News Nation, just posted a video from Nancy's home. He's saying the first thing he noticed coming out there is how incredibly remote the area is, that everyone lives on an acre or more. There are no streetlights. He was out there last night. It was very dark. And we were also told that this is a neighborhood with mostly elderly people, reportedly, Randy, that it's one of those sleepy retirement communities from the sound of it, this particular area where she lived.

38:30But with a house that's a million dollars, that's got acreage around it, we've seen the aerials, it clearly had some grounds. You're going to have to have groundskeepers. You're going to have to have most likely a maid or a maid service that comes in. you're probably going to have somebody who comes in and helps you with your meals. You know, I mean, if Savannah was taking care of her mom in any way close to the way I take care of mom, my mom, I'm sure she had all of those things, you know, because she's, both of our moms were widowed at very young ages and didn't have a husband to do any of that.

39:03And even an 84 year old husband is not totally capable of doing all that. So would you imagine that's where they're going to start, not to blame the staff. But look, the odds are that's close to Mexico. You're going to have a fair amount of people who are volunteering for those roles. And I don't know, I feel like if I were a cop, that's where I'd start. There's absolutely no doubt that that is paramount in the investigative process here. And I spoke to a law enforcement officer yesterday who has jurisdiction down there. Just tell me about this, about the area. And exceedingly dark. There's not a streetlight anywhere near.

39:43It's a hilly area. If you're even going out for a walk, then you're going to be straining. So, yeah, the surrounding area would be inhospitable for any length of walking. That's why when Jim talked about a vehicle being utilized at the outset, there's absolutely no doubt that that was a mode of transportation that will play a key role here. But you did hone in on something critically important, and that is the people who work there, who would be most familiar with the property, who would be most familiar with the actions and the scheduling of the victim here. So, yeah, they will not only look at them, but they will look at everyone that they know.

40:33Because remember, nothing happens in a vacuum. There's conversations that take place between friends and relatives. So you can bet that the landscapers, that the maid, whoever was working over there, and just like Jim said earlier, was a plumber there earlier in the week. every one of these people has to be vetted and they're going to, they're going to have to undergo some serious questioning. I mean, I was thinking about it. Cause like, again, if her mom's anything like my mom, she was shouting from the rooftops about her well-known daughter. I mean, I was kid, my mom, when I go home to visit her, we'll go out to eat and she'll say, stand up so people can see who you are.

41:16She loves it. It's like, you know, it's vicarious, you know, and affection. And she enjoys telling people that, but it can be potentially dangerous. And I'm sure that Nancy Guthrie had pictures of Savannah all over her home. So she wouldn't even have to shout it from the rooftops for somebody who had been in there as a service personnel, as, you know, a temporary worker, what have you. And that's another form of exposure. I don't know. I just feel like what kind of a plan is that? I listened to Ashley Banfield talk to the sheriff yesterday. She asked a lot of good questions, Jim. She asked, were there any footprints that were recovered, like outside, you know, if there were gravel or some sort of sand?

42:00Nothing. He said the driveway was not that kind of driveway. And so he clearly does think they used the driveway. Nothing, no footprint, blood, nothing like that. she asked about the cameras. He said he actually, I think he said there were not cameras inside, but there were outside. And then there was a report today that they had, when he talked to Ashley, he said, I'm hoping that we can find the data on the cloud, but if not, then from the manufacturer, like the service provider. And then today it hit that there is no cloud database for these cameras. So now they're dependent on whoever maintains the cameras.

42:38And I suppose We also have to wonder whether the cameras were on and operational and not just for show or the contract lapsed. You know, there's also just because there's a camera doesn't mean it was on. But how long would that take? Right. It's like, what's the point of having the security camera if they can't get back to you with what happened in your driveway at 2 a.m. on Saturday morning? You know, if they can't do that within a day or two, if you've got to wait a month, forget it. Yeah, I mean, lesson learned here for a$99 investment and$99 a year subscription, get a security system, whether you're wealthy or your daughter's wealthy and famous or not.

43:18You know, that's an idea for everyone out there. And look, it's very likely, again, I'm not going to paint whoever took Mrs. Guthrie as a criminal mastermind, one or more people, but they probably had enough common sense to know whether in advance, whether there was a camera system or not. because that would be a dead giveaway. They know the police, the first thing they would look at is the ring camera, blink camera, whatever it is, and try to get information off of that. So they even knew how to disable that, or they knew in advance it wasn't operational, or perhaps in advance they disabled the system there.

43:52So, because so far we're not getting any breaks there. I think it's going to come down to other cameras, you know, from other neighbors' houses, even down the street. There had to be an ingress and egress to that property. East, west, north, south, whatever direction it is. Whether they came back the same way they went, of course, we don't know. But every single camera system along that way has to be looked at. And Megan, you said very early on in our talk today that, you know, at 2 a.m., I don't know what time the bars close in that area, but, I mean, you will think the roads are a lot less crowded at 2 a.m.

44:23on a Sunday morning than certainly 2 p.m. on a Saturday afternoon. So that could be an advantage also. So it may be technology. It may be DNA. We didn't talk about fingerprints. They probably wore gloves to the scene, which would have prohibited those being left behind. But other forensic evidence of old school kind, forensic kind, as well as technology are hopefully going to put this together. And they're going to take every path they can from that house in any direction and look at cameras in that regard and see who they can find that may somehow become a suspect. Those license plate readers, those license plate readers, that's like only on the highways.

45:01I mean, that's are they not you tell me, I mean, how are they going to be helpful? Well, police cars have them, too. And and they can pick up tags and they can look at them, retrieve them and archive them for days, weeks afterwards, depending on the department. So there are always yet it's going to be a Herculean task. And I tell you, whether because she's a famous the mother of a famous person or not, that can be a whole different discussion. but there is going to be a large task force here. We're at least at dozens of people now, maybe approaching a hundred, bringing people in from all over the country, certainly on the federal level to help out on this case.

45:35And they're going to be just like with the Boston bomber back in 2012, I think it was, you know, all the video they were going through then, they eventually found the two brothers and these things. And with the Idaho killer, they made a car stop on him somewhere in the Midwest when he was driving back with his father. That was a plate recognition software that got him at least pulled over then. So that will be put to use. It's being put to use right now, 24-7. And hopefully they're going to get a break in that regard. Someone is where they shouldn't be. That plus a cell phone. Throw in cell phone information.

46:07It could be helpful. The towers. And that's going to help. I mean, I'll guarantee you the NSA knew almost immediately who was in that area at 2 a.m. Like the NSA has got those records time after time, we're told, in a way that's very helpful. But this is not helpful, guys. this just crossing my desk from the Daily Mail, quote, a doorbell camera Nancy owned was removed by the time investigators arrived on Sunday. Now, that's very odd wording. I don't know whether that means they think the bad guys took out the camera, right? Like, I mean, that would certainly track with what they're saying, Randy, evidence of foul play, including they've said like around the door, like around they think there was a breaking and entering, you know.

46:56So like it's possible now, I mean, if if this person actually knew enough to go like take out the ring camera or the Nest camera before they went in there, that's I don't know. Is that sophisticated or isn't it? Does everybody think every crook would know how to do that? Well, with the advent of these security cameras, you know, for years now, they're they're so commonplace. It is not an unusual set of circumstances for a crook to know about how to disable those cameras. It really is not difficult. So, but it does show the nefariousness of this. It's interesting that it's coming out now that that ring camera was removed, not just disabled, it was removed.

47:40And the question that, of course, I have is, is that because the sheriff mentioned something about a search warrant yesterday when he when he was referring to the security footage. You know, I'm not familiar enough with with the ring camera to know whether that that information was, you know, centralized somewhere within the ring system. I know that, you know, to access it from your device, you know, generally speaking, it's your phone, you know, that you can go back and you can see what took place. So that's a but that's a critical component now that that's been released, that it just brings more and more attention to the fact that this was a planned abduction.

48:26And this was not a crime of passion. This was something that was planned, that was, you know, that was, and I agree with Jim too. I don't think it's one person. And, but here's where that plays a role. You know, we all know that if you want to keep a secret, you got to kill the other person, right? So the fact that we believe that there is more than one person involved could lead to a, you know, an ability to solve this through through some information that might surface from that. Somebody talks. Exactly. Or makes a mistake. This just in on what to expect at 130. Per a spokesperson at the Presser later this morning, Sheriff Nanos is expected to talk about some of the evidence recovered at the Guthrie home to clarify what steps are being taken in the investigation and to address information regarding a potential vehicle of interest.

49:27Let's hope they actually have one. Guys, thank you both so much, Jim and Randy. All the best. Really appreciate it. You're welcome. Thanks for having us, Maggie. Wow. And if you have any information, any whatsoever, even if you don't think it's relevant, call 911. That's easiest. I'll tell you, I called yesterday. I thought I had some information that might be relevant. Probably not. But just don't be the person who keeps it to themselves. Let the law enforcement officials figure out whether it's relevant. Coming up, we turn to politics with Rich Lowry and Charlie Cook from National Review. How are you showing a little extra love this February, whether it's for someone special or just for you?

50:06For many, it starts at home with Cozy Earth. Their bamboo pajama set is a classic Cozy Earth favorite and the sleepwear upgrade you will love slipping into night after night. They're lightweight yet cozy and unbelievably soft. Fall asleep faster, stay comfortable longer, and honestly, look forward to putting these things on every night. This Valentine's Day season, Cozy Earth is offering a buy one, get one, or BOGO pajama deal you won't see any other time of the year. And it's totally risk-free. You see, you get a 100-night sleep trial. So you can really try them out, plus a 10-year warranty. If you don't like them after 100 nights, you send them back in and get a refund.

50:41These viral PJs are so good, they sold out during the holidays. And now they're back with an exclusive deal only available through February 8th. Hurry up. Head to CozyEarth.com. Use my code MEGANBOGO to get these PJs for you and someone you love. And if you get a post-purchase survey, be sure to tell them that you heard about Cozy Earth right here on the MK Show. Celebrate everyday love with comfort that makes the little moments count.

51:13I want to tell you big news. Tomorrow, we will be heading down to Washington, D.C. for an interview with Vice President J.D. Vance. It will be our first sit down with him since 2024 during the campaign. There's a lot to discuss and we're very excited to bring that to you tomorrow. We're going to try to get it on the air during the 12 to 2 live Sirius XM show. But you know how these things go that may or may not be possible, but we'll definitely release it on YouTube and via pod tomorrow. Anyway, stay tuned. We are going to aim to get it on during our live slot on Sirius XM. So that ought to be fun.

51:52Why don't you send me an email if you've got something that you want me to ask the vice president? It's Megan at Megan Kelly dot com. So much more news to get to before we do that. Don Lemon went on Jimmy Kimmel last night and played the victim. And the ladies of The View are speaking out about this case to giving their brilliant legal analysis, as always, because, of course, you ask yourself, well, but what does Ana Navarro think when you look at any complex legal case? I know that's what Rich and Charlie do. They're here. It's an NR day. Rich Lowry is here. He's editor-in-chief of National Review and Charles C.W.

52:28Cook, senior writer for National Review and host of the Charles C.W. Cook podcast. Find all of their work by becoming an NR Plus subscriber. Highly recommend I am. And I subscribe to the, all of it, the paper magazine and NR Plus online profiles, and it gets rid of almost all the ads, and it's wonderful. Guys, great to see you. Charles, did you or did you not text Rich this morning or the morning of Don Lemon's arrest and say, what does Anna Navarro think? Well, I didn't because it's just an assumption between us at this point that we wait for her take and then we both echo it and usually incorporate it into National Review's editorial line.

53:11If only someday you could actually get her so you didn't have to go through this farce. Now we're on pins and needles. It would be a lot easier. I don't think Charlie or I know what she said, so we need to know. We're going to come down on this issue. We need to hear the clip. I got you covered, Rich. Who looks after you better than I do? She went on The View, and she discussed the grand jury indictment of Don. And this was her take in SOT 21B. He was at that protest like a week ago, right, in the church. and then a week later they sent... They got a grand jury to indict him. To indict him. But this is after they had gone to three different courts trying to get judges to sign off.

53:55And the judges, in all three previous cases, said to the DOJ, get the hell out of my courtroom, you clowns. There is no case here. So they basically did it themselves. They did it. They released the news at the exact same time that they released the Epstein documents. So make no mistake about it. This was about gaslighting. This was about going against Don Lemon and other journalists, by the way, all who happen to be black. Happy Black History Month. And it's I think it's, you know, to send a chilling message to anybody who is covering facts. So she's not a big fan of the Minnesota grand jury.

54:33She doesn't appear to believe in the sanctity of that organization or the indictment it handed down. That's not how she felt when President Trump was indicted when he was a candidate. Just just for old time's sake. Let's take a look at 21C. I want to thank this special grand jury because they have been meeting for weeks and weeks. They've done this incredibly seriously. These are not people with a political agenda. These are regular New Yorkers. Donald Trump finally won a popular vote yesterday. The grand jury voted to indict him. So there's a bit of an inconsistency there, Rich. But for the record, she she doesn't think much of the grand jury and its indictment of Don Lemon.

55:16And they appear to believe that it's a race thing on the set of The View. Yeah, well, they seem to think he was just picked up randomly walking down the street. And if you're being arrested just for being annoying and being Don Lemon, there would have been so many offenses prior to this where they could have gone to a grand jury and got some supposedly bogus indictment. indictment, he was indicted because he has likely committed a crime. Now, whether he'll ultimately be convicted of this, I'm a little skeptical, but he was conspiring with these people. He knew about it beforehand. He was helping conceal it.

55:48He went into the church. He was part of the disruption. He was asked by the pastor to leave. He didn't leave, at least not when requested by the pastor, and those are the facts that led to this indictment. So, I understand saying, look, I think journalists have a special status or he was a journalist in this instance. And it's an ambiguous case. And I don't think he should be indicted. There's some reasonable people to say that, but say he was indicted because he's a black man or he's a Trump critic. No, he was indicted for what he did. And the First Amendment is not this special badge you get to hold up as a member of the press that makes you immune from laws that are applicable to everyone else in the United States.

56:27That's just not how it works. That's so that's exactly right. So it's so infuriating to hear these inane discussions, Charlie, because the three of us know if we said we're members of the press and therefore we can accompany this group storming an abortion clinic, we have a microphone and we have a little thing that says press pass and they are storming, they're chaining themselves to the door. They're blocking women from entering the surgery room. And we're part of it. Like we're not chanting. We're not saying don't have an abortion, But we're right there. We're also looking at the women who are in the clinic and just by being there, posing somewhat of an impediment to their exercise of what they want to do.

57:07But we have a microphone. We said, well, I'm a member of the press. I'm documenting this historic protest that they're doing inside of it. They're so brave. They're in here. This is what protest is all about to make people feel uncomfortable. Trauma is part of it. You crying lady over there. Does anybody think that the Joe Biden Department of Justice would have said, well, Charlie, Rich and MK, you're members of the press, so we're not going to bother you? No, I don't think so. I think one of the annoying parts of this, and I do think it will be close when it goes to trial. It's hard to convict people.

57:42It should be. There will be arguments advanced on both sides that might be persuasive to a jury. But I think the most annoying thing about this is that the defense of Don Lemon thus far has been to shout the First Amendment. And as you say, not only is it the case that that is not a blanket warrant for anyone who considers himself to be connected to the press to get away with crimes, but the First Amendment is on both sides of the ledger here. the reason the faith act at least the second part of it which relates to churches was passed was to deal with circumstances in which the first amendment rights of churchgoers are being violated by protesters if you must call them that these people went further than that and the local government does nothing about it in structure this is the sort of post-reconstructional civil rights era law that in other circumstances, Democrats like.

58:42And in this case, for good reason. You don't want a scenario in which people can storm into a religious service and stop it and intimidate the churchgoers. And then the local government, because it happens to approve of the cause, says, well, we're not going to deal with it. The federal government in this case is acting to uphold the civil rights of those churchgoers. So if you're going to look at the First Amendment in Don Lemon's case, that will be his defense, that he was merely there as a journalist. You also have to look at it on the other side of the ledger. But the people who are making this argument don't care about the other side of the ledger.

59:14They don't think that that counts. And in one case, Julian Castro, they excised it from the First Amendment. You see this? Julian Castro tweeted out the First Amendment. And he did dot, dot, dot, where all the religious bits are. because yeah so he said he said when he was asked why he thought Don Lemon was in the right the first amendment and they said Congress shall pass no law and he went dot dot dot and then he said respecting and then he just did the bits to do with freedom of speech in the press he missed out the religious part so you can't look at this if you don't look at both sides of it now in a courtroom they will look at both sides of it it is quite complicated but the notion that Don Lemon is is presumptively the victim here, I think is absurd.

1:00:01Yeah. I mean, the part of the problem is many of the people who have chosen to opine on this case have not actually watched what Don Lemon actually did inside that church, how he sounded, how he behaved. I mean, I saw a debate between Harvey Levin of TMZ and Mark Garagos. Harvey was on Don's side and Mark was on the prosecutor's side. And Harvey was like, he had absolutely every right to go in there. It's a public place. It's a public place. It's not. A church is not a public place. It's a private place. And you get invited for a specific reason, which is to worship here as a Baptist. You can't just storm in there and start getting a manicure.

1:00:41That would also be trespass. You have a limited invitation to come in for a specific purpose. And if you're there for a different purpose. You are trespassing. But on top of that, as everybody who's been in journalism for two minutes knows, as soon as they tell you to get out, even if you do have the right to be there, even if it were a public place, if you don't, you're in trouble. Now you're in trouble. And he was told, he was explicitly told by the pastor, I want you to leave. It's on camera. And we went back and actually watched exactly what happened after that moment. He went on to interview because he kept sticking his mic in people's faces at least two more people he continued his questioning he did not even come close to immediately leaving the church several more minutes passed with him in the church and then even when he finally did leave that's when he made his infamously stupid comment watching the people run and cry saying trauma's part of it trauma's all part of it which is what the three of us are going to say with the crying abortion seekers.

1:01:41Sorry, you're going to have to feel the trauma. I'm just here as a journalist. This is what we journalists do. We enjoy other people's trauma that we helped cause. Here's part of what he did inside. I've played this for almost everybody because it's just so clear what he's doing. This is SOT 20. Our church had gathered for worship, which we do every Sunday, and we were interrupted by this group of protesters. We asked them to leave, and they obviously have not left. What do you think of this? I mean, this is unacceptable. It's shameful. It's shameful to interrupt a public gathering of Christians in worship.

1:02:22But there were folks who will say... I have to take care of my flock. Listen, we live in a, there's a constitution in the First Amendment to freedom of speech and freedom to assemble and protest. We're here to worship. We're here to worship Jesus because that's the hope of these cities. That's the hope of the world is Jesus Christ. I want to be very respectful. Please don't push me We're here to worship Jesus. That's why we're here. That's why we're here. That's what we're about. Don't you think Jesus would be understanding and love these folks? We're about spreading the love of Jesus. But did you try to talk to them as a Christian?

1:02:54No one is willing to talk. Okay. I have to take care of my church and my family, so I ask that you actually would also leave this building. You don't want us to chronicle whatever? Unless you're here to worship. I'm always worship. I'm a Christian. It's right there. He explicitly tells him to leave. And he starts it off by saying, I've asked everyone to leave. And he just keeps going and going and going. And then the ongoing commentary about how this is what it's all about. This is protesting. You can just protest wherever you want, whenever you want. That's what the Constitution provides, Rich.

1:03:25Yes. He went to the Anna Navarro School of Law. Yeah, he used the term we at one point. We're going to do this operation. It wasn't a royal we, although given a self-regard, you know, you might want to account for that possibility. I'm part of this group. we. And he cites the First Amendment with the pastor. He also showed the scene of these people, again, worshiping in accord with their First Amendment rights, getting disrupted and braided by these protesters, saying, oh, this is what the First Amendment is, okay, when they're actually violating the First Amendment. My other favorite moment of his from inside the church, he's talking to one of the parishioners, you know, about what's going on.

1:04:00He says, well, there's a rumor that one of the pastors might be with ICE, and the parishioner's like, well, shouldn't you know? I mean, it's not you shouldn't have no right to go in there regardless. But why are you going in there on the basis of some idiotic rumor? So the whole thing is so moronic and wrong. Again, maybe he gets off. But if he gets off, it still doesn't really mitigate the offense. This was a terrible thing to do. It was a violation of our civil society and other people's rights. And he should be ashamed. but he I'm sure he's enjoying it because more attention and he's getting celebrated by all the people he care cares about whether it's Anna Navarro or Jimmy Kimmel.

1:04:40Oh yeah. I'll say, so he went on Kimmel last night and this, I mean, speaking of Don Lemon loving Don Lemon, here's Sot 18. when did you realize that this was a very very big story I had no idea I had a little bit of an idea when I got when I asked to use the restroom and you know sort of early in the morning and there was CNN on a monitor and on the thing I could see former CNN anchor Don Lemon arrested in Los Angeles and I said to the guy I was like that he goes I said is that happening a lot he goes you've been on all morning yeah and he says this is a big deal my attorney said to me I prepared a statement you can rewrite it and edit it but you need to deliver the statement.

1:05:27I'm like, delivered to who? Like, what are you talking about? And they said, the people who are waiting outside. And so I go, my husband and I walk out and I see this, like, I mean, I don't know how many reporters and paparazzi and helicopters. I had no idea. And I asked my husband, I said, what happened with the channel today? Because I was concerned about, that's my livelihood and my channel and my viewers. And he said, the channel has been going all day.

1:05:57I'm sorry. He also didn't finish either his live stream at the church or his interview with Kimmel, Charlie, without reminding people to like and subscribe. That clip underscores one of the other problems with the commentary around this, which is common in the media, which is the belief that the First Amendment treats journalists who have press passes and W-2s differently than it does anyone else, that it applies to the press, that it's a protection of the press. It's not. The First Amendment applies no differently to Walter Cronkite than to some guy with an iPhone. But I do think that the way that the Walter Cronkites of the world, obviously he's dead, but would expect to be treated, it's different than the guy with the iPhone.

1:06:50And I suspect that if this had been a right wing protest, let's put it in a mosque just to make it more salient. And some guy who had never been a CNN anchor, and wouldn't have been covered by CNN subsequently went in and did every single thing precisely the same as Don Lemon, except he wasn't famous and he wasn't on the right, I don't think there would be any outcry at all if a Democratic administration brought a case under the FACE Act. I think part of this claim that Don Lemon and others have made is, but I'm famous. But that's not how it works. Now, again, I think it will be 50-50. I do think there are strong defenses.

1:07:30I think that the facts will be difficult to pass out in front of a jury. But I just think the idea that there is something intrinsically wrong about this is crazy. And the analogy I've been drawing is with the Wisconsin judge who tried to help the illegal immigrant escape. If you remember at the time, the first line was, oh my God, the Trump administration's arresting judges. As if judges are immune from being held accountable for breaking the law. She did it. She was then charged and she was convicted by a jury of her peers because she committed a crime. There's nothing about a judge that is sacrosanct and there's nothing about a journalist that is sacrosanct.

1:08:07They are subject to the same laws and the same protections as the rest of us. It's what Harmeet Dillon said on this show last Friday, which was, you don't have a magic invisibility cloak just because you declare yourself a journalist while you are participating in a crime. And we all know that. I mean, even just the basic prospect of trespass, which is not what he's been charged with because that's a state crime. but I mean, how many times, you know, in, in our journalistic careers, have we not been able to enter a certain venue? We have to stay on the, on the sidewalk. If I had a nickel for every time my photographer is like, I, my sticks are on the sidewalk, they're on the sidewalk, you know, like to protect us because we, we know we're going to get in trouble if we go any further.

1:08:51We can't, we obey that. There are laws that my point is simply not that he should be charged with trespass, though he should. But just there are laws that apply to us, even though we're journalists. And we all know that. And when you say that to, you know, these NBCers or ABCers or CNNers who are trying to defend Don Lemon, they know that's true because that's at least one that they all know they have to abide by. Like our news organizations will make sure because there's the ones they're the ones who have to pay the bill. But somehow when it when when it's a law other than trespass, when it's a law that's on the books to protect a religious organization, they stop being able to understand.

1:09:31It's like, but what do you mean? He was just there to document the anti-Ice protesters' important work is really the unsaid piece of it, Rich. Yeah. So he could have documented it, maybe not just as well, but he could have documented it on the sidewalk and waited for everyone to come out. He could have had them prior to going in and heard all their planning and whatnot, and then talked to everyone when they came out. But he was part of the disruption. And I just want to underline what Charlie said. Scalia is so good on this, was so good on this, as so many other things. He pointed out freedom of the press, we tend to think, well, it's the press, like CNN.

1:10:06But at the time of the founding, that term, kind of institutional press, wasn't used. They were thinking more of a printing press, which anyone could have access to. Was Benjamin Franklin a journalist, or was he a guy with a printing press? So it's meant to protect the freedom of speech of everyone, not just people who work at CNN. Now, Don Lemon now is more like the guy, as Charlie alluded to, he's the guy with the iPhone camera rather than the guy with CNN. He's just now delighted he gets covered by CNN in an instance like this. But again, it's meant for everyone, freedom of speech. There are all sorts of other First Amendment freedoms.

1:10:40And just because you have that iPhone camera and you say you're covering it doesn't provide immunity to the law and from the law and doesn't mean you can go violate other people's First Amendment rights. Which they all knew when the J6 reporters got charged by Joe Biden and tried to raise the defense that they were First Amendment press and were just there covering it, which the DOJ did not tolerate or believe. And through the book at those that handful of journalists that was trying to cover January 6th saying you crossed the line. It is not a shield in the way that you are trying to use it, the First Amendment.

1:11:21Just for the record, again, it's not exactly required as proof to get Don Lemon, but for the record for the Harvey Levins of the world, after the pastor explicitly told him to get out, which we all heard, he said in the beginning, I've asked everyone to leave. And he said at the end, and I want you to leave. He spoke to two more parishioners. He continued to describe the scene. He told viewers to like and subscribe. I can't, you guys. He talked about the music being very loud and the pastor not offering a prayer to calm things down, which he didn't appreciate, that he didn't calm things down the way Don Lemon wanted in response to the upset Don helped cause.

1:12:00He talked about a young man being in the corner looking upset. He finally leaves about seven minutes later. The whole thing was only about 15 minutes, if that, because he wanted to see what was happening outside as parishioners left. He never said he was leaving because the pastor asked him to. Just at a human level, who among us would not leave a church if we were asked by a priest or pastor to leave? Right? I know. Legal questions aside, put First Amendment aside, who would stay after a pastor in good faith asks you to go? It's reprehensible. Was he waiting for an exorcism? Who would then go, he could use it, but who would then go on the Angry Ladies podcast within 24 hours and say, those are all white supremacists in there?

1:12:48He tried to justify it by then completely disparaging everyone in that church. The children, no one had done anything. As far as he knew, there was absolutely no support for ICE. There may or may not have been one pastor who had an affiliation. Charlie, that was like doubling down on stupid. But, you know, I think that is a calumny and I think it is outrageous that he said it. So please don't get me wrong. But let's just assume for the sake of argument that it had been a white supremacist church. The First Amendment protects that. You don't get to do bad things and then go on television and say, but the victims were mean.

1:13:30The victims are still the victims. That's the whole point of having a constitution that is small-l liberal and neutral and covers everyone It doesn't matter whether those people are the best people who have ever lived in the history of the world or the worst They're still protected under the FACE Act and you point out that it is Should have been a trespassing case at root But the point is as you know the reason the FACE Act has been invoked here is because the state didn't bring trespassing charges that is exactly why the FACE Act exists it's a civil rights law the only point at which the federal government gets to pass laws and enforce laws that protect civil rights is when the local laws are not enforced that was true in the 1960s in the south and it's true in Minnesota in 2026 and that's why I say it doesn't matter because the left often thinks that unless the victims of a crime are African Americans in the 60s, then civil rights don't apply.

1:14:34But that's not true. This is a misconception that has actually corrupted a lot of our civil rights laws. So civil rights don't apply to Asians who are being discriminated against in education. Civil rights don't apply to Christians whose rights are being abused by progressives. But that isn't true. You don't have to... Or to whites who get fired for their skin color. You do not have to raise an affirmative defense in a civil rights case to say that you're one of the good guys. You're covered if you're an American citizen whose rights have been violated. So it's especially annoying that he went and did that because what he wants the audience to hear is, oh, they're bad guys then.

1:15:11Well, they're not. And that's a horrible slander. But even if they were or the audience doesn't like them or Anna Navarro thinks that they're undesirable, who cares? The federal government still should uphold the the law in their defense. I'll tell you what, the other thing that needs to happen here is a civil lawsuit must be filed in particular against Don Lemon. If I were any one of those parishioners, most especially a mother of a child who was terrified or the woman who either broke her arm, they alleged it was broken in the indictment, but clearly hurt, which is what Pam Bondi said later, I'd be suing because it helps.

1:15:52An intentional infliction of emotional distress claim can be brought, but they're much stronger if you can tie it to some actual injury, you know, like a physical injury. And certainly eyewitnesses seeing somebody hurt her arm or eyewitnesses seeing strong evidence of emotional distress, like a child crying in his mother's arms, would be very helpful to this claim. And Don Lemon has plenty of money from his multiple lawsuits He continues to file against anybody who tries to fire him. And they should make him pay. They should make it at a minimum. He should be made to pay for the trauma he helped cause those children.

1:16:27He's bragging about how he's the most famous. He's the biggest name. You know what that gets you? You get listed as the first defendant in the lawsuit against everyone who went in there. So we'll watch as that unfolds. All right, let's keep going. Speaking of crazy things in courtrooms, This judge, this judge who late yesterday tried to stop the Trump administration and for now has stopped the Trump administration from removing temporary protected status from Haitians. So Joe Biden let some nearly 400 ,000 Haitians into the country and said, with my magic wand, I declare you temporary protected status, which means you're not an illegal.

1:17:10You can't be kicked out because you've got my magic designation. And Trump came in and said, I'm lifting that. We're not going to wait that out. I'm lifting that right now. And this judge has said, and this is the same judge who said that Trump wasn't allowed to say transgender people can't serve in the military. And she was reversed for a hysterical opinion she issued there. And now she's at it again, saying Trump, as the sitting commander in chief, does not have the power to remove with his pen what Joe Biden granted with his. And on and on, you can hear the woman's ideology. Angela, Anna Reyes is her name, Federal District Court of Washington.

1:17:54where she says there's a there's a hostility to non-white immigrants that Kristi Noem has shown. She goes on to say the government has not cited any reason to end temporary protected status for Haitians abruptly. And its approach is not in the public interest, she's decided. Quote, the government does not cite any reason termination must occur post haste. Secretary Noem complains of strains that unlawful immigrants place on our immigration enforcement system. Her answer, turn 300 ,000, 352 ,959 lawful immigrants into unlawful ones overnight. She complains of strains to our economy. Her answer, turn employed lawful immigrants who contribute billions in taxes into the legally unemployable.

1:18:40She complains of strains to our health care system. Her answer, turn the insured into the uninsured. This approaches many things. In the public interest is not one of them. What? Who died and elected her president, Rich? Yeah, she's the new DHS secretary, I guess. So we saw this in the first term as well, where some judges apparently consider unilateral executive action a one-way ratchet. So Obama could do things unilaterally, and then when Trump just wanted to reverse it, judges said, no, no, you can't do that. That would be crazy. And this is a version of that made even worse by the fact that this is temporary protected status with emphasis on temporary, which means eventually it's supposed to go away and be reversed.

1:19:23Look, I don't think it's great. It's a bad situation for these Haitians. You had an administration letting them in with the assumption, oh, you get to stay forever. That's the way temporary protected status is very often work. But under the law, Trump obviously can revoke it. And this just goes to the broader aspect of this whole immigration debate over the last year. where the left and Democrats and Biden, they created facts on the ground by letting a bunch of people in, either legally kind of laundering people who otherwise wouldn't get in through these various means, the CPP app or this TPS status for Haitians and others, or just let them flood in and give them a notice to appear that was going to be ignored.

1:20:02And then when Trump comes in and says, OK, I'm going to revoke the temporary status, I'm going to end CPP, I'm going to go after and deport these people, they're like, no, You can't do that. This is the status quo. And a big problem are Hollywood celebrities, folks in Minneapolis. They now take it as a given that the status quo of ignoring the law, the black and white letter of the law was a status quo such as that it's an intolerable act of aggression if someone actually dares to do what the law says should be done. You detain the illegal immigrants until their proceedings reach a final conclusion.

1:20:40And if they can stay, fine. If they go, you deport them. That's what it says in the law. And Trump's offense here is just trying to actually apply the law for a change. I mean, now we have a pair of rulings over the past 72 hours. This one we discussed yesterday a bit with Jonathan Turley, the one from the judge in Texas, who who decided that the little boy and his dad who were arrested by Border Patrol in Minneapolis and shipped down, getting ready for removal back to their native country, that he had to be released. They both had to be released and finished his opinion with a picture of the little boy in the in the dog hat with the wrong date, said it was dated February 31st, was lecturing and sanctimonious throughout the opinion.

1:21:30I mean, speaking of Scalia, Charlie, he would be horrified at the attempts to legislate from the bench we are seeing these days. Yeah, that second opinion you mentioned was honestly one of the most unhinged things I've ever read from a judge to the point at which I initially thought it had been faked. The February 31st made me wonder if it was a joke. That was not law, and he's not a judge. the annoying part of this I think is that these decisions are given the imprimatur of law and so those who favor them can say look the Trump administration once again has been struck down by a judge but what is conspicuously missing from the first case we were discussing the Judge Reyes' case with temporary protected status, is any specific references to the statute.

1:22:34Now, I am, as you know, a big critic of the way that Congress has over the years delegated powers to the president. There are far too many laws, in my view, that say in the judgment of the president or in the estimation of the secretary, all that just hand sweeping powers that were reserved to Congress to the president. But Congress has done that, and it's done that a lot in the area of immigration. And one of the things that it has allowed the president to do, for example, is determine if there are any countries from which immigrants might pose a threat. You can shut those down. Another thing that Congress has allowed the president to do is determine whether or not people deserve temporary protected status, and when that temporary protected status stops.

1:23:21The laws here aren't particularly complicated. They don't say the president has to file a report that meets 17 different criteria. They say in the public interest, they say in the judgment of the president. And the Supreme Court has historically treated this area as non-justiciable. That is to say that the Supreme Court does not decide whether or not the president's judgment was correct, only whether or not he got to make it. This isn't like the tariffs area where it is much more cabined. So Joe Biden was allowed to determine that Haiti and Haitians qualified for temporary protected status. And Joe Biden did.

1:24:00And Donald Trump is allowed to say that they no longer do. If I think it would be silly. But if Donald Trump tomorrow said Britain is such a mess, the British are entitled to temporary protected status. No judge could say that that was wrong. And no judge could say that a subsequent president who made the opposite determination was wrong either. We've already had a Supreme Court case that is almost identical to this one. We know what the Supreme Court, this Supreme Court thinks about this matter. It has come up before. It will come up again. This will be appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court.

1:24:38And the Supreme Court is going to say, I think what I just said, which is, this is an unjusticiable question. The same power that allowed Biden to let them in allows Donald Trump to send them home. It doesn't really matter whether people like that think it's fair or mean or great or bad. She mentioned insurance, employment, economic contributions. Those things are not in the law. If they were, she'd have a point, but they're not. So he gets to do this in the way Biden got to do it. And the judges do not get to second guess him unless there is a law that says to the contrary. This is the second time now that she's tried to overturn a decision by Trump or his secretary, thanks to, quote, animus.

1:25:21The trans opinion she issued was all about his alleged animus and Pete Hegs says alleged animus towards trans people. This one's all about the alleged animus of Kristi Noem to people from third world countries. And they quote her saying stuff similar to what Trump has said. Like, I don't think she used the term shithole countries, but she came close. Like, we just don't want these people here anymore. They leech off of us and they're out. And she's using that to say this is a racial animus that's motivating this. Meanwhile, good luck with that. If they actually do look at, I mean, Trump very clearly wants to stop these immigrants from everywhere.

1:25:58I mean, he's look what he did at the southern border. He doesn't want anybody here on temporary protected status. Like, I don't know if there's another example of a group of white immigrants from like Denmark who he's allowing. They probably got shipped off to Greenland by Trump anyway, and a dog sled. So this is this woman's a problem. She's an activist and she's using her own priors to try to sweep Kristi Noem and Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump all under this, you know, you're full of hatred banner. And she's going to have to get her hand slapped again by the Supreme Court. You're right. Tricia McLaughlin, who's the DHS spokesperson, tweeted out, Supreme Court, here we come.

1:26:36This is lawless activism that we will be vindicated on and went on from there. All right. Stand by, guys. We're going to take a quick break and we will be back. And I have a special, special treat for you guys on Billie Eilish. We did a story on her yesterday and there's been quite a development and you are just the perfect guys to discuss it with next. One of the biggest problems in American healthcare right now is access. You usually can't get medication until you're already sick. Healthcare should not only work when it is convenient for the system though. It should work when people actually need it.

1:27:08And that's where all family pharmacy is different. They let you plan ahead by ordering prescription medications before you're sick. Wouldn't that be nice? You order online, a licensed doctor reviews your request and writes the prescription and your medication strips straight to your door. Doesn't that make sense? It's not like people are getting high off of ivermectin. You know, like they want it because they're traveling, they don't want to have to wait, but they treat it like it's like some sort of contraband. Thanks to All Family Pharmacy, you won't be dealing with waiting rooms, insurance delays, last minute scrambling, and they offer antibiotics, antivirals, Tamiflu, ivermectin, yes, and hundreds of other prescription meds.

1:27:48This is about access, responsibility, and being prepared, giving you the ability to plan ahead. Go to allfamilypharmacy.com slash Megan. Use that code Megan10 to get 10 % off your next order. You've seen those red light panels, right? But this is totally different. Let me tell you about the Glow Infrared Therapy Light from Sauna Space. They say it helps with screen fatigue, your skin, your mood, and energy. It's incandescent light, not LED, which makes all the difference. In the morning, it's like natural sunlight, and at night, it helps you relax and get ready for seriously deep sleep. They say you can even use it for pain relief on sore muscles or cramps.

1:28:27And the real game changer is their Firelight Sauna, the future of saunas. It's portable, it's gorgeous, and it's powerful. And you're getting red light therapy as well as an infrared sauna all in one. All made in the U.S. with pure organic materials and zero EMFs. sauna space spent over a decade perfecting their firelight spectrum and thousands of studies support the benefits elevate your at-home wellness with sauna spaces firelight infrared technology visit sauna.space slash megan and use code megan for 10 off your entire order that's sauna.space slash megan code megan for 10 off Hey, everyone.

1:29:09It's me, Megan Kelly. I've got some exciting news. I now have my very own channel on Sirius XM. It's called the Megan Kelly Channel, and it is where you will hear the truth, unfiltered, with no agenda, and no apologies. Along with the Megan Kelly Show, you're going to hear from people like Mark Halperin, Link Lauren, Maureen Callahan, Emily Jashinsky, Jesse Kelly, Real Clear Politics, and many more. It's bold, no BS news. Only on the Megyn Kelly channel, Sirius XM 111, and on the Sirius XM app.

1:29:42Just FYI, that presser on the missing mom of Savannah Guthrie has not yet started. We are monitoring. If it starts and breaks news, we will bring that to you. Back with me now are National Reviews, Rich Lowry and Charlie Cook. So yesterday we discussed some of the antics at the absurd Grammys on Sunday night. And one of the people we discussed was singer Billie Eilish for saying the following. Watch. No one is illegal on stolen land.

1:30:17I love that.

1:30:26And yeah, it's just really hard to know what to say and what to do right now. And I just I feel really hopeful in this room and I feel like we just need to keep fighting and speaking up and protesting. And our voices really do matter and the people matter. And I say sorry. In that blacked out part, she said F ice. Her voice does matter, guys. It matters a lot. It matters to the Tongva tribe, which is actually technically under her logic, the owner of the land on which her$14 million house sits. It's worth much more than that. It was bought for that a few years ago. And here is what has happened since Sunday night.

1:31:10Her lavish mansion located on land that belongs to the Tongva tribe, the indigenous people of the greater Los Angeles basin. They're upset about this land. It's theirs ancestral land. They have issued the following statement. We appreciate the opportunity to provide clarity regarding the recent comments made by Billie Eilish. As the first people of the greater Los Angeles basin, we do understand that her home is situated in our ancestral land, they said, adding, she has not reached out to the tribe herself. Eilish has not contacted our tribe directly regarding her property. We do value the instance when public figures provide visibility to the true history of this country.

1:31:52Additionally, the tribe said they've contacted Eilish's team, quote, to express our appreciation for her comments. It is our hope that in future discussions, the tribe can be explicitly referenced to ensure the public understands that the greater L.A. basin remains Gabrieleno Tongva territory. And so the real question here is when is she going to return her mansion to the Tongva? Rich, I mean, three, two, one, no time like the present. There's no such thing as an illegal, unstolen land. I'm sure it'd be a great community center for the tribe. And she can go someplace else that she thinks was rightfully secure.

1:32:34Now, so many levels of absurdity to this. One, stealing land is what human beings did almost throughout the entirety of our history, very much including Native Americans, right? And this is – in some ways, it speaks well of us as a Western society that you have people thinking this in these terms. We stole it. That was bad because no one – no Comanche was thinking, oh, we really shouldn't have done that to the Apaches when we pushed them out. No Iroquois, after they bought a bunch of rifles from the Dutch and the English, were thinking, no, we shouldn't do this to the Mohicans, right? They just took the land.

1:33:06So if you kind of peel the onion, every tribe that – Ben and Jerry say the Lakotas need the Black Hills back or whatever it is. They stole it from someone else. They moved in there and displaced other people. So this is how it works. And then it was through American leadership that you get a post-World War II situation where we take national sovereignty seriously. We take borders seriously. And this just goes to how radical some of the contentions are on immigration. It's not just that borders don't have any legitimacy in terms of excluding people. We have no right to be here ourselves. It's a criticism of the United States of America at its foundations.

1:33:44Charlie, Billie Eilish will never give back her mansion to the Tongva, nor will any of these Hollywood celebrities who try to lecture us or make us do a land acknowledgement before we can hear them perform ever do such a gesture. As stupid as her comments were, and they were made all the more so by the fact that for some reason she seemed to be wearing an academic gown of the sort you would expect the commencement speaker to wear. but the thing that you can identify it as anything I thought it looked like a domino it was odd wasn't it but she clearly had just heard that sentence somewhere I was sitting on a fortune cookie or something and decided to say it but I thought the more disturbing part was when the camera panned to the audience the expressions on their faces were so vacant there was this sort of Yes.

1:34:38Look, in their eyes, that honestly kind of worried me. It was weird. And I think as a result, we'll perhaps not take them too seriously, because they're not going to do anything about it. As Rich says, though, the core idea there is, if taken to its logical conclusion, exclusive of the sovereignty and authority of the United States government and all of the 50 states as well. So while Billie Eilish might not worry me, those sentiments when expressed from within the institutional left, as they often are and within academia, do. Because if there is no such thing as an illegal person, then there's no such thing as a citizen.

1:35:21And if there's no such thing as a citizen, then there's no such thing as a government, because we live in a representative government and a constitutional republic. So she hasn't thought it through. it's very silly, but it is actually quite destructive of everything else that we believe in. And then if you look at the behavior in Minnesota, you can sort of see how one leads to the other. Because if, right, because if there is no such thing as an illegal person, well, then all immigration laws are illegitimate, and there's nothing wrong with nullifying federal law. And then you kind of get rid of everything we've built up.

1:35:56Yes. Okay. Now, speaking of someone who hasn't thought it through, a couple years ago, this guy was in the news for getting married and Taylor Swift went to his wedding. He's written a bunch of songs for her. Apparently, he's a prolific songwriter and he's very well known in the music industry. And his name is Jack Antonoff. and he was there at the Grammys and he did have on one of those little ice out pins. And unfortunately for Jack, he got asked about it. And here's how that went. Watch. Can you talk to me a little bit about the pin that you're wearing tonight? I mean. Why is that important?

1:36:36It's just terrible. You know, I mean, it's time to. is just for every reason you could imagine I would think but yeah, I'm a bit speechless trying to even talk about it yeah it's like hard to talk about anything else at this point but we can do both and find a way to I don't know, it's just a really good time for people to come together and figure out how to move through this because it's only going to be small communities that can really help. Rich, he has no idea why he's wearing that. A Greenland-related protest, maybe? The ice in Greenland? This is why I've written about this. This is why so many of those people, when they complain, use the phrase, you know, with everything that's going on, because they don't know what's going on.

1:37:35So they've just heard there's something bad, And they say it's very hard to talk about anything else with everything that's going on. Then you ask what's going on and they say, you know, everything. And then the moronic reporter is supposed to realizing, oh, my God, this is actually a great moment. I could actually really expose him. She's like, oh, you know, like who does have the words? Neither of them know what it is. No. And of course, for the listening audience, he's wearing the ice out pin. But normally you put that on your lapel. He has it way down on his like his hip pocket. it's almost like he didn't even want to wear it, but they were handing them out when you walked in.

1:38:11He's like, okay, I guess I have to put this thing on. And then had the misfortune of being asked about it. It's like a skip from Arrested Development or something. So dumb. And honestly, Justin Bieber, I mentioned him. He was out there with one of those pins yesterday. Truly, I mean, honestly, one of the dumbest people in public life. He sings well. I wouldn't take that away from him. But for him, who was like a week ago in his tighty-whities doing a concert to try to lecture us, we pulled a couple of pictures of Justin Bieber. Because like when you see Justin Bieber walking around in these paparazzi shots where like literally the only part of him you can really see is just the little circle of his face because he's covered in his sweatshirt from head to toe or he's wearing his bizarre.

1:38:56I don't know what – like Justin Bieber is kind of like a Britney Spears figure to me. He's like kind of gone. He became too big a star, too rich at too early an age. And now I don't I mean, he's like probably about six months away from a conservatorship from the look of it. Who now wants to lecture us on immigration policy, Rich. Should we ask him perhaps about temporary protected status and the latest decision based on alleged racial animus? Yeah, it's a little bit like the French French Revolution. You had to wear a cockade to show you're with the revolutionaries. And a lot of people just did it because they're scared or because everyone else was was doing it or they're forced to do it.

1:39:32I think at one point the king was wearing it because, you know, he's afraid of getting executed. But, you know, there's an elite that decides what the cause is. And these are all lemmings. They, of course, pride themselves in their great independence of mind and courage, but just nothing of the sort. They just do what everyone else thinks they're they do what they're supposed to do and play act. And a lot of them are, you know, actors and they sing the words put in front of them. And this is just a version of that. All right, guys, I got to go. but you guys tell me, you've got my phone number.

1:40:04Show me a text. You tell me what you think I should ask Vice President J.D. Vance about in our sit down tomorrow. Looking forward to this. It'll be super fun. It's gonna air on the program tomorrow. Definitely, it's gonna air tomorrow and we hope it'll air during our two hour block on Sirius XM between 12 and two. Okay, Charlie Rich, thanks. You guys are the best and we'll have full coverage of what's happening in the Nancy Guthrie case as well. And for those of you listening, I would love your thoughts on what I should ask the vice president tomorrow as well. You can email me, Megan, at MeganKelley.com.

1:40:39Keep them pithy. As O 'Reilly used to say, keep it pithy, please. Name in town if you wish to opine. No, that's not really necessary. We'll see you tomorrow. Thanks for listening to The Megan Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.