Dems Smear Dissenters as Russian Assets, Nashville Shooter's Manifesto Revealed, and Stelter's CNN Return, with Glenn Greenwald | Ep. 878
01:41:46 Share

Building a business may feel like a big jump, but OnDeck small business loans can help keep you afloat. With lines of credit up to $100,000 and term loans up to $250,000, OnDeck lets you choose the loan that's right for your business. As a top-rated online small business lender, OnDeck's team of loan advisors can help you find the right business loan to fit your needs. Visit OnDeck.com for more information.

Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

We all want to see our loved ones living their best lives, but it's hard when they're struggling with drugs and alcohol. For nearly 70 years, Karen has made it possible for so many to imagine a life beyond addiction. We combine advanced neuroscience with life-changing care. Visit CARON.org. Karen, where the science of treatment meets the heart of care. Now in network with most insurances. That's CARON.org.

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at noon east. Hey, everyone. I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. Today, we've got a great show on tap with the perfect guest as one of the bedrocks of the free world comes under increasing attack, including by the very people who promised to support and defend it. We're talking about free speech. Right now, Elon Musk's ex is banned in Brazil.

While flashbacks of VP Kamala Harris's attempts at censorship are making the rounds. Plus, guess what partisan journalist, and I'm using that term in quotes, has been rehired at CNN. I know my guest today is gonna be thrilled with this news. Joining me now, Glenn Greenwald, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and host of Rumble's System Update, who is based in Brazil.

I have to tell you about the Daily Wire's documentary. It's amazing. That is exposing the left's precious DEI industry. It is called Am I Racist? And it hits theaters like real theaters nationwide on September 13th. Go. And honestly, I'm going to go and I'm going to bring my kids. I think my kids will laugh and learn. This is from the same team that brought you What is a Woman? And this film proves that the only way to take DEI seriously is to laugh it into oblivion.

Matt Walsh goes deep undercover, man, bun, and all in the twisted world of diversity training, and the results are as hilarious as they are shocking.

here's the deal. Let's pack these theaters. This is more than just entertainment. It's a counterpunch to Hollywood's woke propaganda. Every ticket sold is a blow to the left's ridiculous narrative around race. The more tickets sold, the more theaters will show it. That's how it works. Go to amiracist.com and get your tickets right now. Bring your friends, your family, even bring a liberal. They might learn something. They might realize that they're actually on our side.

Let's show conservatives can dominate the box office and make opening weekend a huge success. Don't sit this one out. I promise you, you are going to laugh. You're going to learn. You're going to be horrified and you'll be glad they made this movie. Head to amiracist.com and get your tickets now.

Glenn, welcome back to the show. I have too much self-respect to actually start with the news of Brian Stelter. So we're going to table that for a bit and we will speak instead. Oh, I was so excited. All right. I'll contain my excitement and we'll get to it when you're ready.

We can't. We have too much self-respect to do it. No, we're going to start with Elon Musk in a battle now as Brazil, where you happen to live, is kicking X out of Brazil, threatening Elon, saying he has to pay $3 million in fines because he won't do what they tell him to do. But meanwhile, X, unbeknownst to me until the story broke, is huge in Brazil. It's in fact one of its biggest forums.

And Elon so far standing firm on not doing what the government wants him to do. So put this in perspective for us. So first of all, I think when a lot of people hear what's happening in Brazil, people in the United States think, oh, that's a little bit distant from me. It doesn't have a lot to do with me. But Brazil is one of the world's top five democracies. It's the second largest country in our hemisphere.

215 million people, landmass almost the size of the United States, huge geostrategic importance because of oil and the Amazon. And it's also always played the major role in South America. But more importantly, Brazil has been being used as a test case of how far online censorship can go

People in Western Europe, even the United States, have conferences. They invite these Brazilian judges, these Brazilian prosecutors and officials who are implementing a system of online censorship that may be a couple of steps ahead of where Europe and the United States is, but on that same path. So it has great relevance because a lot of censors in the West are watching how far it can go. And the fact that

X, which is it's not the biggest app in Brazil, just like it's not in the US. You have Instagram and YouTube that are bigger. But in terms of politics and news and free speech and the like, it is the epicenter and has long been the epicenter of Brazilian journalism, activism, dissent. And for you to now have a single judge in Brazil with the support of the Brazilian political class,

Banning the app, not only banning it, but making it a crime to use a VPN to access apps. If you're in Brazil, a VPN allows you to disguise where you are. It's used in a lot of authoritarian countries. The Chinese use it. The Russians use it to access prohibited sites. It really gives you a sense of how extreme states are becoming in terms of their determination to control the flow of information on platforms that they currently can't control.

They demanded that Elon appoint a local representative of X who is based in Brazil. He refused to do it because he thought, you just want to threaten me by arresting my guy. You want me to appoint Glenn Greenwald? And next thing you know, Glenn's back in jail where you've already been, thanks to the Brazilian government. They don't like Glenn because he reports on them and he's unsparing. But anyway, he sees the game that they're trying to play and he's a step ahead of them. But-

right now he's been shut down. And this really is an important means of allowing free speech in a place like Brazil. So how do you see this ending? Yeah, so I think this is the crucial point is, you know, in theory, it isn't that unreasonable for a country to say, if you want to operate in our country, you have to have a physical representative in our country. In theory, that's a sort of reasonable thing to do. Most countries will have that. If you want to operate in the United States, of course, you need a physical office and a representative.

The problem is that every time there's an order of censorship that is given, not by the government, by a single judge, and X doesn't comply with it immediately, the judge threatens X executives that it will imprison them. They did it to Facebook a few years ago too, and Facebook was starting to become resistant. So who in their right mind would agree to be the representative of X when the judge has already said, and I'm talking to a Supreme Court judge,

If you are the representative of X and they don't censor immediately, then you will be imprisoned until they do. He basically wants a hostage to force them. Now, let me just about these censorship orders, Megan, let me just tell you.

Many of the people who are being ordered censored and off the internet are not just random extremists, which would still be wrong. We're talking mostly about elected officials of the federal Congress, the federal Senate, the most known people in Brazil whose crime is that they, number one, support Jair Bolsonaro and the right wing movement, and number two, that they frequently criticize the Supreme Court.

The mentality of the Supreme Court in Brazil is any criticism of us, any questioning of our legitimacy is an attack on Brazilian democracy itself. And this is becoming...

The mentality in the broader West that if you question our decrees on COVID, you question our decrees on war on January 6th, on election integrity, it's not just wrong. You have to be banned because you're threatening the security of our society itself. And that is the mentality that is being implemented first in Brazil, but is being deeply watched and monitored by other countries who want to do the same.

including potentially our own. I mean, we just had Mark Zuckerberg come forward in a letter that he penned saying we regret that we submitted when we were pressured during COVID by this government into banning certain memes, certain questioning of things like vaccines. It's been happening under the Biden administration. It will continue happening under a Harris administration and

as she has basically admitted, she says her values haven't changed. Here she was talking to Jake Tapper about social media needing oversight and regulation in 2019. It's hot for. And the bottom line is that you can't say that you have one rule for Facebook and you have a different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply, which is that there has to be a responsibility that is placed on these social media sites to understand their power.

They are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation. And that has to stop. That's scary.

Well, it's such a remarkable revelation. When the internet was first starting to develop in the mid-90s and into the early 2000s, the excitement around it was that, oh, we're finally going to have an instrument that not the government or big corporations will control, but that the citizenry will control. So we can communicate with one another, share information with one another without needing a huge corporation to pay for satellites and printing presses. That was the promise of the internet.

And I think that what happened was after 2016, first when the British voted to leave the EU by approving Brexit, and especially when Americans voted for Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton, Western elites realized, and you hear it in Kamala Harris's statement there, that they can no longer allow

a weapon in the hands of the people that is free, that allows a free expression of ideas, a free exchange of information. As she said, we need to start regulating it. We need to start controlling it.

And I'm sure you saw today, Megan, there was some sort of trumpeting by CNN of this exclusive breaking news that the Biden administration is about to announce that the Russians intend to interfere in our election once again in 2024. Yeah. So but what I want to say is the biggest and worst and most egregious interference in the 2020 election was when the Biden administration pressured big tech, including Facebook and Twitter, to censor reporting of

Not that was questionable, but that turned out to be true about Joe Biden and how his family was exploiting their name for profit in China and Ukraine by having the intelligence community, which isn't allowed to interfere in our domestic politics, lie and call that Russian disinformation. And based on that lie, there was mass

censorship of a major story two or three weeks before a very close election. I don't think we've really come to grips with how significant that story is because it presaged this notion that that is the real interference on the part of our U.S. security state and our government to censor and control the internet, much like we're seeing in Brazil.

And Zuckerberg mentioned the pressure he was receiving over at Facebook from the government to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop, saying it's one of the things he regrets doing. You still have some publications holding on to the fact, to the lie, that this could be Russian disinformation. Those 51 intelligence analysts are still holding on to, well, you never know. It's been verified they can't admit their mistakes, but it's somewhat promising that you've got somebody like Zuckerberg saying,

I see now. I see what they did, and I see that I took the knee too fast, and you've got Elon standing up like these social media companies maybe are finding their spines. Kamala Harris,

has a long history of wanting to censor the internet, people on the internet who she finds objectionable, even people who happen to be president of the United States. Here she was back in October of 19 when Donald Trump was in the White House and she was mad about his so-called perfect phone call that led to his first impeachment. Listen to her.

I know you wrote to Twitter and the CEO, Jack Dorsey, and asked him to take away the president's Twitter handle, his account. How is that not a violation of free speech? How would that not just be a slippery slope where they have to ban, you know, half of the people on Twitter?

I've heard that argument, but here's the thing, Jake. First of all, a corporation, which is what Twitter is, has obligations, and in this case, Twitter has terms of use policy. And their terms of use dictate who receives the privilege of speaking on that platform and who does not. And Donald Trump has clearly violated the terms of use, and there should be a consequence for that.

I mean, think about that. Trying to get the president of the United States banned from expressing his views on one of the biggest public platforms we have because she thinks this is an outside person at that point that he's violated the terms of use.

Well, Megan, when she ran for president, and it was about six seconds because her campaign was such a failure in 2019 for the Democratic nomination, she made as one of her central planks a demand that Donald Trump be banned from the Internet. I remember very well she was on a stage with people like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. And she said, Senator Warren, I challenge you to support my argument that Donald Trump should be banned from the Internet. And even Elizabeth Warren was like, I don't know.

I don't know. That seems kind of radical to ban the elected president of the United States. You're too crazy for me.

And remember, they did ban him. Twitter, Facebook, Google all got together after January 6th, and they forcibly banned the sitting president of the United States to the point that even the Western European countries who hated Trump said, this is alarming. This is scary. This should not be happening. Much of the world reacted that way. And I think it's sort of the thing where we're all

inculcated from birth to believe that the United States is the home of freedom, that one of the things that distinguishes us is free speech. But if you start gradually eroding that one incident after the next, after the next, you can get very, very far to a sort of authoritarian or tyrannical situation where

without really realizing that you're there. When you have people talking about banning, obviously they wanted to put their political opponent in prison. They wanted to ban him from the ballot. But the first step was let's ban him from the internet. Remember, these are the people saying, if you don't vote for us, democracy will die. And yet

that every single thing that is the hallmark of tyranny in other countries with their political opponents is everything they've been trying to do. And in 2019, Kamala Harris led the way on that. That was how she tried to distinguish her political campaign and gain support among Democrats. Absolutely right. And here's that moment that you just referenced from that debate back in 2019. Watch. Here we have Donald Trump

who has 65 million Twitter followers and is using that platform as the president of the United States to openly intimidate witnesses, to threaten witnesses, to obstruct justice. And he and his account should be taken down. We saw in El Paso

that that shooter in his manifesto was informed by how Donald Trump uses that platform. And this is a matter of corporate responsibility. Twitter should be held accountable and shut down that site. It is a matter of safety and corporate accountability. Thank you.

I don't just want to push Donald Trump off Twitter. I want to push him out of the White House. That's our job. Join me in saying that his Twitter account should be shut down. Let's figure out why it is that we have had laws on the book. She's like, okay, crazy lady from California. Even I'm not that nuts over here in Massachusetts.

Yeah. You know, this is I mean, this is incredibly alarming. If you look at polling data, Megan, and you ask Americans, do you support either having big tech censor the Internet in the name of disinformation or the U.S. government censor the Internet in the name of Internet in the name of disinformation? Seventy five to 80 percent of Democrats want not just big tech.

but the government to regulate and censor the internet in the name of stopping disinformation, which is what George Orwell warned about, the idea that the government becomes the minister of truth, no longer allows free debate because they say this is truth, this is false. That's the basis of Brazil.

Elon Musk is allowing opinions that are false and therefore that's fake news and illegal. One of the things Zuckerberg said about COVID was that so much of what he was being pressured by the US government, by the Biden administration to censor about COVID

not only was entirely debatable, meaning they wanted him to censor things like it came from a lab leak. And he was saying, obviously, at the time, there was no proof on where the other people were debating it. They wanted to take down anything that might have come from the lab leak. But he said also they ended up demanding we censor things that turned out to be true about the efficacy of masks, the dangers of vaccines, the absurdity of social distancing.

So it would be one thing if the government were saying, we only want to censor things that are demonstrably false. That would still be bad enough. That's what Orwell warned about. But the censorship push is to censor things that are true or that are debatable. They really do want an internet that is dissent free, just like so much of their media is dissent free. And what is more alarming than trying to turn the United States or any democracy into a system of closed information?

What's crazy is a couple of the points you just mentioned are in the news today and on my agenda to go over with you. But that's why this story about, you know, kicking it off with what's happening with Brazil and X and then Kamala's position on censorship is so important. It ties into so much of what's already happening in the United States. So, um, the Russia thing, right? Like

there's danger out there and therefore we must censor, whether it's the Hunter Biden laptop, which was censored wrongly, or, you know, these evil forces who are trying to interfere with our election. Just Monday, this is in the news this week, the DNC called the Democratic, well, the Green Party presidential nominee, a useful idiot for Russia.

citing Jill Stein's upcoming event in Tampa, in which she is expected to lend her support to three members of a black leftist group federally charged for allegedly acting as malign foreign agents of Putin's government. The quoting here from the bulwark dart.com. So they almost, they ignored this person for the better part of a year, Jill Stein. But now that she's doing this thing, they're coming out, calling her a useful idiot for Russia. This is basically her own party. And this is what

they did to Tulsi Gabbard too. When she became a threat to their chosen nominee, she had to be dismissed as a Russian asset, not to mention what they did to Donald Trump. This is their favorite trick. And the Jill Stein thing and what we're about to talk about with respect to this CNN report is

It's just this is their go to bag of tricks, Glenn, that it's all the Russians. Anybody who gets under their skin or potentially takes away one percent of the vote in a critical swing state is a Russian. And any problems of the Democrats own making that's a Russian as a disinformation campaign.

Yeah. So let me just mention really quickly this case of a black socialist who are being now federally prosecuted because I covered it a lot. Tucker had put them on his show quite a bit as well. Obviously, a lot of people's audiences would disagree with a lot of these people's views.

But these are like 70 and 80 year old guys who are like old standard leftists who are spent their whole life opposing what they call NATO imperialism, U.S. militarism. And of course, it follows that they are against U.S. funding of the war in Ukraine. That's consistent with their lifelong beliefs. But because the tactic of the Democratic Party now is to accuse all of their enemies, not just on the right, but as you see with Jill Stein,

or anybody who threatens their power. They just accuse everybody of being an agent of the Kremlin. They prosecuted these people because they were speaking out against the war in Ukraine and they had these very tenuous connections to a couple of peace activists in Russia. And it's so obviously an attempt to stifle free speech by saying that even if you speak out against our war, which is as foundational to the United States as possible, your right to oppose the government's war policy, we can now prosecute you.

And it was AOC who led the charge against Jill Stein because they're obviously petrified she's going to take away Democratic votes. And I've seen this now, Megan, for eight years. Our country from 2016 until 2018 was drowned as the main story in this false allegation that Trump conspired with the Russians to hack into the DNC. They unleashed Robert Mueller, Superman, prosecutor, FBI director with a team of

unlimited resources and prosecutors. And at the end of that investigation, he concluded there was no evidence to support the core central conspiracy theory that the media gave themselves Pulitzer's for ratifying that the two had collaborated and the media just moved on as if nothing had ever happened. And then in 2020, as you mentioned the same thing,

Megan, there's not one media outlet that in 2020 put people on the air to say the Hunter Biden laptop is fake. It's Russian disinformation. Every media outlet, once Biden was safely elected, not only admitted it was real, but began using it in their reporting. The FBI used it to prosecute Hunter Biden. Everyone knows it's real. Not one media outlet came forward and said, no.

We got this wrong. Here's why we got this wrong. Because they're not in the business of telling truth. They will say what they need to say based on whatever their DNC or CIA or FBI sources are telling them to say in order to sabotage Trump. And that is the truth.

Even those 51 so-called intelligence agents, it's like the FBI agents took the stand and under oath in the Hunter Biden trial testified that the laptop had been verified. Where was Leslie Stahl? A 60 minutes. It can't be verified. It can't be verified. Where was she saying?

I am very sorry. Actually, I was wrong and I was wrong at a crucial time in advance of that election. She's in the same bunker that Judy Woodruff of PBS is in right now trying to avoid coverage of the fact that they got caught

I'll be charitable, making massively consequential mistakes on the air and failing to own up to them. So just to put some meat on the bones of the DNC versus Jill Stein attack, because Stein, while nobody's talking about her, she does have something approaching 1% in a couple of these swing states. And the Democrats,

fervently believe that she played a role in costing Hillary the election in 2016. So the DNC releases this statement that reads it in part, quote, as follows. Jill Stein is a useful idiot for Russia. After parroting Kremlin talking points and being propped up by bad actors in 2016, she's at it again. This is from the DNC spokesman, Matt Corradone.

Quote Jill Stein in a statement to the Bulwark. Jill Stein won't become president, but her spoiler candidacy that both the GOP and Putin have previously shown interest in can help decide who wins. A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump.

So this is them going, I mean, truly balls to the wall against this woman, the DNC, because they will kill any Democrat actor who deigns to get in the way of their chosen nominee's clear path. Ask Bernie Sanders, ask Dean Phillips, ask Tulsi Gabbard, ask RFKJ, and

and ask Jill Stein. This is the party of democracy, Glenn. I think one of the things that reflects about the Democratic Party is that they have this arrogant entitlement that they believe all of these voters are theirs. They also still blame Ralph Nader for George W. Bush's victory in 2000 over Al Gore. And all these voters for Nader and Stein will tell you until they're blue in the face that even if Jill Stein or Ralph Nader were

weren't running, I still wouldn't vote for the Democratic Party. I know it's a newsflash, but there are a lot of people in the United States who really don't believe in our two party system. Most democracies have a multi party system. And Jill Stein is an outlet for a lot of people on the left who think that the Democratic Party is not worth voting for, for all sorts of reasons. And they think if they get rid of Jill Stein, those people will loyally march behind them.

And also, I think the other important thing to realize here, Megan, is that in 2016, the DNC cheated to make sure that Hillary beat Bernie. That came from Elizabeth Warren and Donna Brazile. This is hardly speculation or a conspiracy theory. Yeah, I mean, the WikiLeaks releases proved that at the time.

five DNC officials, including W. Wasserman Schultz, had to resign right before the DNC because they got caught red-handed doing it. In 2020, Obama drove everybody out of the race, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, to make sure Joe Biden won. And then this year, not only did they say that they would not allow a primary or any debates, even though you had RFK Jr. and Marianne Williamson and Dean Phillips wanting to run against Joe Biden,

Once they saw that Joe Biden was going to lose because of the polls after the debate, they said in a back room, let's just get rid of him and impose on the party in the country a candidate who never once campaigned to be president, who never got one single vote. The anti-democratic entitled mentality in the Democratic Party is impossible to oversee.

Yes, we just pulled, I don't have the soundbite, but what they did to Tulsi. And here's the quote. I don't know what article I'm quoting from. My team will tell me in a second. Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton said the Russians are currently grooming, that's a quote, a Democrat running in the presidential primaries. This was the 2020 primary back in 19.

Um, it's grooming. The Russians are grooming a Democrat running in the presidential primary to run as a third party candidate and champion their interests. The comment appears to be directed at Hawaii representative Tulsi Gabbard. Uh, she's been accused of being cozy with Russia in the past, just being accused reference or warrants it being raised again, right? You remember that time you were accused random person of being a pedophile and we'll just keep raising it in every article about you as though it was actually proven. Um,

I'm not making any predictions. This is quoting Hillary Clinton. But I think they've got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third party candidate, Clinton said, speaking on a podcast with former Obama advisor David Plouffe. She's the favorite of the Russians. This is how it's done.

Now, first of all, let's just recall that that prediction was completely false. Not only didn't Tulsi run as a third party, she endorsed Joe Biden in the 2020 election. Kind of a weird thing to do if you're a Russian asset. But beyond that, I know Tulsi reasonably well. Look at it from her perspective, Megan. She has been in the military since 2002. She deployed in combat in Iraq. She continues to be in the Army Reserves, sacrificing to defend her country. And here she is being accused by the Clintons

who famously avoided any military service, including in Vietnam, for all sorts of strange reasons, who never once did anything to benefit anyone but themselves, questioning her patriotism and her loyalty simply because she was a critic of the Democratic Party.

This is what they do now. When you start accusing somebody of being a secret agent of the Russian government, working on behalf of the Kremlin, of course what you're saying is you're not just against us, you are a disloyal American. And just like I was telling you before about Brazil, where they think that any criticism of the government is tantamount to a criticism of Brazilian democracy itself and therefore a crime. The Democrats believe that any opposition to themselves, any questioning of them, even

from somebody who four years before was the vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, Tulsi Gabbard, that the minute you criticize them or don't fall into line, it means not just that you're a bad person, but that you're actually disloyal and somebody who can be called with no evidence a foreign agent of an adversarial power. It is remarkable how quickly and pervasively this tactic has spread, not just among the party, but among all their media allies as well.

Okay. There was, um, another piece of information on Tulsi just recently. This is reading from the daily mail. They, that it was that she's, she's on a government watch list and connection with all this nonsense. She's been labeled a quote,

Domestic terrorist, according to a whistleblower watchdog who's demanded an investigation into government surveillance on this. OK, empower oversight, said the U.S. Federal Marshal Service was improperly targeting individuals for enhanced surveillance on flights and named victims, including the former presidential candidate.

And so this is the allegation is that she has been placed under surveillance at airports and on planes per these whistleblowers who spoke to, this is Daily Mail UK, the Air Marshal National Council saying her name appears on the quiet skies.

program. Under the program, federal air marshals follow U.S. citizens who pose an elevated risk to aviation security through airports and on flights. As a result,

There are at least five agents stalking her on every flight she takes. This is incredible. This has not been independently verified by us, but I remembered the report as we got talking about Tulsi. And frankly, it's not hard to believe given the amount of crap they've thrown at this woman. And what is her sin? What did she do? She did not go along with the party line. She was being groomed to be part of Democrat leadership. She told us that herself and

And then she objected to them trying to railroad Hillary Clinton down our throats and what was being done to Bernie Sanders behind the scenes. Right. And she had become a critic of things like the Obama administration's attempt to do regime change in Libya and Syria because as a member of the military, she actually understands we should only deploy our military, especially having seen Iraq, when there's a direct threat to our homeland. So she began to be kind of a dissident about Obama administration policies and then trying

certainly just didn't fall into line in 2016. She supported Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton. I can't confirm this story. What I can tell you, Megan, is having done the Snowden reporting in 2013, 2014, 2015, I saw so many instances of the part of the U.S. security state, the NSA, the CIA, that from the beginning was banned

from targeting American citizens in any way who put people on watch lists for making films, writing books, for all sorts of things that they regard as subversive in some way. In fact, the journalist with whom I most closely worked in the Snowden story who won the Oscar for the film she made, Laura Poitras,

was on a watch list ever since she made a film about the Iraq war in 2005. Every time she crossed a border into the United States where of course she's a citizen, she was detained for hours. They would take her film footage. They would question her about with whom she spoke.

This is a very real thing. And after September, after January 6th, you had people like Bernie Thompson, the head of the January 6th commission say, anybody who was at the Capitol on January 6th should be put on a no fly list. Not, not without, when I was being convicted of a crime with no proof that they, Benny Thompson, exactly. Not with any proof that they, uh,

are guilty even without any proof that they're a threat to a plane, just as this kind of punishment that the state now pulls out that they put you under the watch and take away your liberty of the US security state. It's an incredibly dangerous thing for that part of our government that's unaccountable, permanent, operates in secrecy, to have so much influence on our domestic politics.

Even that instance of the DNC cheating to help Hillary back in 2016 is still that they, if you talk to any Democrat or any journalist, they'll say the headline is the Russians interfered. The Russians through WikiLeaks, you know, released those emails. That's the issue. It's not that we cheated in a presidential debate. And of course, I've made this point before, but I can't get over it. That's why I keep mentioning it.

Donna Brazile cheated and she then got hired by Fox News and now is at ABC News. No one cares that she cheated in a presidential debate. She was on my show on Fox News right after this came out. And did she come clean and own up to what we all had seen in the WikiLeaks release? Here's the moment.

You were accused of receiving a debate question before a CNN town hall. You had this question on March 12th that verbatim, verbatim, was provided by Roland Martin to CNN the next day. How did you get that question, Donna?

Well, Kelly, since I play straight up and I'll play straight up with you, I did not receive any questions from CNN. The WikiLeaks released a March 12th Podesta email showing you messaging the Clinton campaign with the exact wording of a question asked at the March 13th CNN TV1 town hall debate. Where did you get it?

You know, as a Christian woman, I understand persecution, but I will not sit here and be persecuted because your information is totally false. What you're telling the American people. I'm getting it from Podesta's email. Well, Podesta's emails were stolen. You're so interested in talking about stolen material. So you deny it. You're like a thief that want to bring into the night the things that you found that was in the gutter. When you said from time to time I get the questions in advance, what were you referring to? A lot of those emails, I would not give them a time of the day.

Classic, Glenn. Yeah, I think she thought your name was Kelly or maybe calling you Kelly was her way of being a little bit disrespectful. But anyway, this is what happens all the time. I mean, as you know, Megan, some of the most important journalism comes from sources who aren't necessarily the most noble people, but they're still providing accurate information, which is what happened in the Pentagon Papers and the Snowden reporting with the WikiLeaks releases. Nobody denied the authenticity of those emails.

And so what you were essentially saying was it's in the emails that you received the question ahead of time as part of CNN and passed it to the Clinton campaign, but not the Sanders campaign. And she was saying, I wouldn't give those emails the time of day. Of course not, because they show serious wrongdoing on our part. But the more important point is the one you made. It's the same as the people who lied in the 2020 election about the Hunter Biden laptop being Russian disinformation.

There's no accountability for these people. In fact, their careers thrive because

the more they lie on behalf of the Democratic Party. And it shows you what the mission of the actual media, of a great part of the media is, which is obviously if it were journalistic and you told a liar, got caught doing something unethical, your career would be impeded, if not destroyed in a healthy, normal world of journalism. In our world of journalism, if you're lying for the right reasons, you shoot up that ladder and get rewarded and promoted. And that's what everyone knows is the incentive scheme.

That answer is a classic collection of lies. Phil Houston, spy the lie, CIA 25 years invented the deception detection program used all over the country and the world to spot liars. We'll tell you, one of the things that a liar does is often they invoke religion. You heard her there. I'm a Christian woman and I guess you're persecuting, right?

Uh, they will attack the question. You heard her do that there and they will engage in convincing behavior. She did it all, all of it. What does a truth teller sound like? No, I did not give Hillary Clinton the question. That email is wrong. I don't know what he's referring to.

That's it. They don't feel the need to convince you of anything. The truth is their ally. They don't have to bring God into it. They don't have to attack the question or the questioner. They just run to the simple, clean truth. She's a liar and she's a paid liar at ABC News right now. The network, not for nothing, that is hosting probably the one and only presidential debate in this contest on September 10th.

Let's hope she doesn't get access to the questions, Glenn. Well, also, and just along those lines, all the people, first of all, Donna Brazile in her book was one of the people who said that the DNC rigged the election in favor of Hillary Clinton, one of the only truthful things she's ever said about her role in the Democratic Party. But the other thing about it is, Megan, this is what innate this is why I keep going back to this is such a crucial issue.

When the Hunter Biden reporting began, and it wasn't about Hunter Biden's private life, it was about Joe Biden's profiteering off his influence in various countries. Whenever anyone asked about it, a media reporter, even when Donald Trump raised it in the 2020 debate,

He did exactly what Donna Brazile just did, which was say, oh, these emails were stolen by Russia. This is all fake and never had to account for why it is that his name was appearing in deals in China and Ukraine to receive profit based on all of his massive influence. That's exactly what the point of that lie was, was to say, you don't have to pay attention to the substance of this reporting and what it reveals about Joe Biden and his ethics.

Because all you have to know is that this came from Russia and therefore not only should you ignore it, it's further proof that's why you shouldn't vote for Donald Trump because he's using Russia or Russia is using him to shine light on who Joe Biden really is. And now we get to the CNN and MSNBC reporting today, which is that I'll give you the CNN headline exclusive though.

not sure if that's true, Biden administration to accuse Russia of sustained effort to influence the 2024 election. The report says that the Biden administration today will accuse Russia of trying to influence this election right now by using Kremlin run media and other online platforms to target U.S. voters with disinformation, citing six sources familiar with the matter. They

They say the U.S. will make a series of moves today aimed at addressing the Kremlin's efforts, including the White House publicly condemning the actions and Justice announcing law enforcement action targeting the covert Russian campaign. RT, the Russian state media network, is a major focus of the U.S. announcement.

They go on to say the actions would be the Biden administration's most significant public response yet to alleged Russian influence operations targeting American voters. A reminder that U.S. officials continue to see Russia as a prominent foreign influence threat to November's election. Today, Merrick Garland is going to meet with senior law enforcement leaders, including FBI Director Christopher Wray about this.

And I go, I'm reading and reading and reading. I don't know how many paragraphs in I am before I get to, let's see, one of these last, okay, one of the last paragraphs of the piece, Glenn, which reads again on CNN.

But any foreign or domestic attempts to sow discord during the U.S. election and shape voters' opinions don't change the fact that the voting process is very difficult to tamper with and protected by layers of defenses. They go on from there. What do you make of what they're doing now? I think everybody knows what to make of it, given the discussion we just had over the past 33 minutes. I was just laughing because Jim Acosta went onto Twitter and he had this big capital letter, BREAKING EXCLUSIVE.

The Biden administration set to accuse Russia of interfering in the election as though no one could have predicted that coming. Only Jim Acosta was the one who got that information. You wind up a Democrat and they accuse everybody of being a Russian agent. There was an interview with Nancy Pelosi at the beginning of January where there were pro-Palatinian protesters

outside of her house. And she said, I think these are sent by Vladimir Putin by the Kremlin. Now ignore whatever you think of pro-Palestinian protesters. The idea that young college students are protesting a war because somehow the Kremlin engineered that is like a form of psychosis. But this is what they do. But the other really interesting part of this, Megan, is that there is also a

evidence that the CIA, that the intelligence community has affirmed that both China and Iran are also both trying to interfere in the election. And in part it's because, I hope this isn't shocking, but all great powers, including the United States, try and interfere in each other's domestic politics.

But if you look at the reason they're highlighting Russia is because it's already in the public mind that Russia wants to help Trump. But what about Iran and China? Iran looks at the Democrats and the Republicans and see that it was Trump that terminated the Iran deal.

And the Democrats want to reenter it. Who do you think they would favor in the 2024 election? Obviously, the Democrats who want better relations. You look at the Chinese and they see Trump as having instigated this kind of trade war, imposing massive tariffs on China. And then they see the Democratic Party completely in bed with a lot of the funding that comes from China. But that's not useful to the media narrative because both of those countries, if really given a preference, would probably want

the Democrats to win. If I were trying to enter on, I know I would. But the bigger issue is that in the context of the billions of dollars that are spent on our election, of the endless amounts of American media propaganda that emanates from every pore of the American media, of all the information that American gets, these quote interference campaigns, a few fake pages on Facebook, a few bots on Twitter,

in comparison to everything else, have a trivial, minuscule, barely measurable effect on anything. It's all about the narrative though, that if you vote for Trump, you're essentially voting for the candidate that Vladimir Putin wants to win.

And also setting the stage for someone to blame if she loses other than themselves. Here's just a bit of the media coverage today in response to this reporting and the reporters, they know what to do. Watch. The Biden administration is expected to accuse Russia of a sustained effort to influence the 2024 elections. Sources now telling us exclusively that...

that the Biden administration is set to accuse publicly, accuse publicly Russia of extensive and prolonged interference in the 2024 election. The Biden administration taking a series of actions to target what they allege are attempts by Russian-backed

actors to manipulate public opinion here in the U.S. ahead of the presidential election. This is an effort by the Biden administration to get ahead of what the Russians are allegedly doing ahead of this 2024 election. The tools that they are using to do so are Kremlin-run media and online platforms. We know that RT, which is one of the Russian state-run media TV outlets, is going to be a focus

of the announcement today. This is being described by our sources as a whole of government action designed to target Russian propaganda and disinformation aimed at interfering in the 2024 election. It is said to include sanctions by the Treasury Department, law enforcement action by the Justice Department. Okay.

I don't do drugs, but I can only imagine that this is what it's like. It's the same thing as a heroin addict shooting heroin into his arm. That's what those guys are like when they hear Russia. You can see the euphoria wave over them, Glenn. They can't get to their cameras fast enough. Oh, yeah. The glee pours out of their pores. I mean- First of all-

They're blaming RT. Do you know anyone who watches RT? It's almost impossible to find RT, even if you wanted to. In fact, the EU made it illegal at the start of the war in Ukraine, even to platform RT. The reason a platform like Rumble is unavailable in France is because they refuse to remove RT. But RT is out of Google. It's not on any cable channels. What is RT going to do to influence the election?

But I think there's something more sinister here, Megan, which is if you look at how the Europeans have justified censoring the Internet and how the United States also is starting to censor the Internet. One of the main pretexts they use is that there are foreign countries trying to interfere in our discourse. And we have to make sure that we're constantly monitoring the Internet and have the ability to stop it.

And I think not only is it helpful politically to the Democrats in 2024, and again, why aren't Iran and China being promoted equally with Russia in terms of their story? The reason is obvious. But also, you always need a pretext of censorship. Every crisis or perceived crisis over the last eight years has been used to justify censorship. Russia gate, January 6th, COVID, the war in Ukraine, on and on.

and on and on. Every single time there's some threat or perceived threat, the companies use the government's use that to say, this is why we need to protect you by censoring the internet. And that's absolutely a major part of the motivation here. That is so interesting. That makes actually perfect sense because going back to our earlier discussion,

When did the Hunter Biden laptop story come out? It was October of 2020 and right before the election. And they used that setup, their obsession with Russia to dismiss something that clearly wasn't Russian disinformation and that the FBI knew.

was legit at the time. They had known for a year, and yet they let all these former intelligence agents come out, and those agents knew too, that it was legit and that it wasn't. So they had set the table, and then when they needed it to tamp down this, quote, October surprise, they used it. And

Back to Mark Zuckerberg and others, they went along with it. The Jack Dorsey version of Twitter went along with it, suppressing the story, which polls show when voters are asked actually might have made the difference for Trump in that election. But Democrats refuse to acknowledge any of that. I mean, at the time, and remember what Twitter did was brute force block

any attempt to link to the New York Post, to discuss the New York Post article. If you tried to use a link, it would say this link is prohibited on Twitter. They barred and censored any attempt to use it. Facebook sent out a person named Andy Stone, who has spent his whole career as a Democratic operative, worked for Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, the DCCC. He now works at Facebook and

he said in this very snide way, I won't even dignify this story in the New York Post. But what we will say is Facebook is now suppressing the stories. You cannot spread it on Facebook, pending a third party fact checking review that, by the way, never came. And you know why? Because the story was true all along. And that's what the fact checking would have shown. That to me was one of the most alarming escalations of... Because...

It wasn't just about a standard debate. It was an attempt by the government, by the CIA, which is where these 51 intelligence agents, of course, come from. You never leave the intelligence community, even if you now work at a consultancy. Of course, you're tied in pressuring big tech successfully and the media, not just to lie about the story or to underplay the story, but to censor it, to prevent it.

potentially millions, but certainly hundreds of thousands of Americans from even knowing about it or seeing it in an election that ended up being decided by about 70,000 votes in three states. That level of free election censorship

based on a complete lie that came from the intelligence community, ratified by the corporate media and ultimately censored by big tech is why I continue to say that I think that story, though it's been discussed a lot, is still not appreciated in terms of how menacing it actually was. And then remember PBS came out, no, it was NPR came out saying,

We're not, we're not going to share this story. We, we stick to actual news and facts and that's what our audience is interested in. We don't talk about stories that they have no interest in like this false disinformation again, like they get our public money and that's, I guess, just fine. And we're supposed to just go along with that. But I think I had, I confess Glenn, I had not even considered that.

that this push is setting the stage for censorship between now and the beginning of November. That makes absolute sense. And it's terrifying. That's not their role. They're turning into Brazil. All right, Glenn, standby. There's a lot more to get to. You mentioned two other things in your answer about sending their opponents to prison and about blaming a

a shooter's motivations as espoused in a manifesto on the opposing party. Well, they're doing something else now. They're censoring one that didn't turn out their way. We'll get to it next. If you're tired of those same old coffee options from those mega corporations pushing their woke agendas, listen up. It's time to take a stand and support a brand that truly embodies American values, Blackout Coffee. They stand with hardworking Americans who believe in family, faith, and freedom. They

they roast some of the most incredible coffee you will ever taste using only premium grade beans, roasted and shipped to you within 48 hours. And for the cold brew fans, Blackout Coffee is excited to announce the launch of their two new ready-to-drink cold brew coffee latte options.

Don't settle for less. Make the switch to Blackout Coffee. Head on over to blackoutcoffee.com slash MK, or just use the code MK when you're checking out for 20% off your first order. That's blackoutcoffee.com slash MK. The code is MK. Join the movement, taste the difference, and remember, with every sip, you're supporting a brand that stands for America. Be awake, not woke.

Thank you.

just like you get started. No get-rich-quick schemes. This is honest perspective and advice. Enroll today at yourvoiceadventure.com. Use promo code radio for 50% off. That's yourvoiceadventure.com, promo code radio. All right, we're going to do it now. On the subject of Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, guess who CNN just hired back?

The hall monitor, Brian Stelter's going back to CNN because CNN apparently looked at its dumpster fire ratings and thought to itself,

What would be the solution to this? I've got it. Mr. Potato Head. That's what people called him. Mr. Potato Head. What movie is that from? Name that movie. Audience members, email me, megan at megankelly.com. Mr. Potato Head. Anyway, here is, I guess, why they look back fondly and thought, we want, yeah, we want Brian Stelter for this critical period in American history. Some of his greatest hits right here.

- Trump might have committed treason. You say the president is using mind control. What does Putin have on Trump? The US president possibly working for the Russians. Is President Trump a racist? Is the Trump presidency a criminal presidency? There's no way to tweet yourself out of impeachment. Impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment.

What I hear on Fox is that the media is obsessed about impeachment. -Impeachment. -Impeachment. -Impeachment. -Impeachment. -Impeachment. Entire media companies essentially exist to tear down Joe Biden. Dana Milbank, here's his column for The Post this weekend, and he says he has data to show that the press has turned more negative against Biden than the press was against Trump. What do you think about that? Trump and some of his allies are promoting a hate movement against the American press.

All right, so he's back, which I really see as a clear surrender by CNN to its year and a half long mission of trying to convince us they had gone back to straight news, middle of the road reporting. It was in the context of that goal that he was fired to begin with, Glenn. Yeah, but before I say that, I just want to use this opportunity to recall one of the funniest things ever to happen in media news, which was CNN decided that

that even though nobody was watching their network, that it would be a good idea to create a CNN plus streaming service where people were forced to pay to watch the very people that no one wanted to watch for free. And then it opened and 21 days later, it closed and died because nobody had any interest in it. And that was the Brian Stelter era. But what you said is so important, which is that one of the reasons CNN

has way even less viewership than MSNBC, let alone Fox, is because it's like an MSNBC light version that kind of pretends to be neutral, but everyone knows it's not. That's why even Stephen Colbert's audience laughed at the idea that there was something objective about CNN. And as you say, when executives decided,

What can we do to save CNN to make people watch it again? We have to get rid of the perception that it's a purely partisan network. And they had so many people to choose from who are pure partisans. But even at CNN, Brian Stelter stood out as an obsessive DNC anti-Trump hack. And that was why he ended up getting fired. And as you say, I guess they figure, well,

Well, it doesn't really work that way either. So why not just bring him back? And I think obviously part of it is to bring him back before the election as well to let him do his constant drumbeat of criticizing the media for somehow being insufficiently pro-Kamala and anti-Trump.

This he's never been a journalist. He's never been a journalist. All he's been is a little critic, a little armchair critic who wants to be taken seriously. And now you've got CNN's current CEO, Mark Thompson from the New York times, who says, I'm very happy to welcome Brian back to CNN in this new role. Brian is one of the best global experts in media commentary.

He is? Mark, did you ever actually watch Brian? Here's the thing, he probably did. But since he was at the New York Times, he was like, yes, nailed it again. You go, guy. And when he got to CNN, he said, you know what we're missing? We're missing that important, objective voice of Brian Stelter. And now he's been brought back. And what he says is, I've changed a lot. I

I'm thrilled that I'm returning as the lead author of CNN's Reliable Sources newsletter. The media industry has matured. CNN has evolved. I'm quoting here. And I have changed a lot. I've changed my habits and tuned out for a bit. He says he moved to a farm.

I've changed my vantage point going from Manhattan to a horse farm near one of Donald Trump's golf clubs. That makes you fair and balanced. You see, I can see his golf club from my house. I experienced the news more like an everyday consumer. And in doing so, I learned a whole lot. I'm looking forward to sharing what I learned with you. And so now we will see.

whether Brian Stelter is going to try to convince us that he is now fair and open-minded and sees Donald Trump and his supporters as something other than what he said for all those years, which was very different than what CNN wants to believe it's reasonable.

you know, saying right now. We're going to get the rural farming Brian Stelter. He's going to show up like in a cowboy hat and he's going to give up his suit for something like corduroy jeans and plaid shirts. Really excited to see that. I'm sure that's going to come out very authentically. The problem is in all these life changes, these profound life changes that Brian Stelter made, one of the things he forgot to do was to stop sitting on Twitter and commenting all day long.

So if anyone can show me a single change between anything Brian Stalter now thinks and anything he thought before, I would defy anyone to do so. The thing that always amazed me, Megan, is that just to show you how much of an alternative universe people in media are capable of living in, I promise you this really is true, that when you look at what are called the top media critics, the self, and it's true, like,

Where did Brian Stelter ever get his credentials to talk about journalism? He's never reported on anything. He's wrote little bitchy media essays, and mostly it's to complain about Fox News. But their central view, and it's...

I know it's shocking for people to hear that it really, but I'm not, I'm not, I'm not exaggerating. Their real core belief is that the biggest failure of the media is that they don't do enough to show people the evil of the Republican party and the benevolence of the democratic party. They justify it on the grounds that Democrats are so objectively better that the, if you want to be an objective journalist, you have to go on the air every day and

only focus on promoting the Democratic Party in the Republic and bashing the Republican Party, that Brian Stelter is one of the leaders of that philosophy, a term I'll use very loosely. And there's nothing that's changed about it as evidenced by his daily Twitter feed from his farm. I know that you were calling attention to I mean, it's so hard to pick, but one interview he did with Jen Psaki in his role.

And of course, she was with the Biden White House before she went over to MSNBC. And I don't know, was this, do you remember where this was in her path, whether she was still at the White House? Where was this? She was the press secretary for the Biden White House. It was maybe like three or four months into her tenure. And Brian Stelter got one of the first interviews with her. So he had the opportunity to question the representative of the president of the United States on anything he wanted to ask.

Okay, and we have a little bit queued up of where he went with that. Watch.

What does the press get wrong when covering Biden's agenda? When you watch the news, when you read the news, what do you think we get wrong? So I want to know what the job is like versus what you expected it to be like. More likely, the things that get under my skin are when a question, the premise of a question is based in inaccurate information, misleading information. That can be frustrating. I know a lot of liberals don't want Fox News to get called on.

I think they should be, but I know a lot of liberals, a lot of emersed don't want it. So why do you call on Fox News and Newsmax? For journalists who watch what you do, what's your advice for them about trying to stay hit close to the truth in this world of lies? I know this is often adversarial, but it also has to be functional. Is the relationship between the White House and the press corps now at least functional in ways it wasn't in the Trump years? I think so.

Yeah, do you there's Dora the Explorer? That's who she reminds me of it will show you the clip but she said but she's lying unlike Dora She's lying the kitty cat dance. We need to scratch our kitty paws Stomp our feet and wag our kitty tails We got made free

And that's his tough cross-examination. So he treated her as though she were the same kind of high-level expert on journalism as he was, like critique the press. But her whole life has been serving as a spokesperson for the U.S. government, which everyone knows is not a job where you're supposed to tell the truth. It's supposed to be where you spin on behalf of the government. But the worst thing, Megan, and I found it so creepy at the time, was that that first question was basically saying to her,

Please, please, Jen, tell us how it is that we can better serve you. What is it that we're doing that's insufficient to advance the interest of the Biden White House? What are you angriest with us about? And even she was kind of uncomfortable with that question. Like, I don't really think I should be telling you how better to behave. It was it was such a obsequious kind of creepy act.

I want to almost say psychosexual attempt to create this dynamic between him and her where she got to lecture him. And again, you're a journalist, at least in theory, being able to question the spokesperson for the most powerful politician on the planet. And that is what you spend your time doing. Please tell us how we can better serve you, how we can better behave.

But I forget. I want to mention that that clip of Stelter was put together by newsbusters. So good on them. He also asked her, do you ever worry like I do about how the GOP is ruining the country? And I think to myself, what what kind of country is this going to be when they are our age? Do you do you fear that given the craziness we're seeing from the GOP? Do you fear that for our kids, your kids and mine?

Yeah, OK. That's basically what he's saying. And that's how he still feels. I mean, that's how Brian Stelter sees the media and sees the right half of the country, just like most of the people at CNN who are now nightly trying to confuse us into thinking that they've suddenly become fair. The Dana Bash interview proves

They're not fair. They're 100% in the tank for the Democrats and they have one goal, which is to get Democrats elected. So that is Brian Stelter. Good luck to him. We'll look forward to watching his reform. Now in your- Welcome back, Brian. Yeah, welcome back, Brian. Actually kind of look forward to covering what he's going to do. Can't wait to see the new and improved Brian.

On the subject of the media, a big piece dropped today, and this is big. In your top answer, you talked about how, you know, the Democrats are fond of these tactics to take down people they don't like, and one of them was in connection with that Buffalo mass shooting. They blamed Republicans for...

for the shooting, citing items that appeared in the shooter's manifesto about the great replacement theory. And we just pulled just for our audience's edification, a couple of examples. The Atlantic,

Why Tucker Carlson should want the Buffalo manifesto made public. Salon mass shooting in Buffalo. Tucker Carlson, another right wing conspiracy theorist, share the blame. L.A. Times white terrorists have Tucker Carlson syndrome. Rolling Stone, the Buffalo shooter, is not a lone wolf. He's a mainstream Republican.

That was all based on what they found in the Buffalo shooters manifesto about the so-called great replacement theory. This was a shooting at which he killed multiple black grocery store goers. Okay. Now let's go to the mass shooting we saw in Nashville at a school, um, in on March 27th, 2023, where this, uh,

trans person. It's a, it's a female who said that she was a male showed up and killed three nine-year-old children and three adult staff members ever since. Where are we now? It's September 4th today. That's March of, of 2024. This is March of 2023. They have not released this shooter's manifesto.

Journalists have tried to get it. Independent media on the outside have tried to get it. Stephen Crowder is the one who actually made the biggest progress between then and now getting a leak of at least some of this person's writings. But since then, we've been told by the officials, state and federal, no, it's too dangerous to share. Like it's too...

You can't see it because it'll endanger others. Well, what does that mean? They're all full of nutty ramblings. We've seen that in almost all the manifestos. None of them is a great thing that you want to share with children, but we're adults who would like to understand motivations and how to prevent the next one. And how are we going to do that if we don't understand what this person's

mindset was. Maybe it was just a loon. Maybe it was political violence. We let's find out that take our word for it. Take our word. We're not going to, well, now the Tennessee stars editor in chief, Michael Patrick Leahy has gotten his hands on it and he's released 90 pages of this person, the shooters 2023 journal.

They say that they legally obtained the journal from a source in June and that it was written by the shooter between January and March of 2023 when the shooter conducted the violence. It was recovered from the shooter's vehicle by officers with the Metro Nashville police. And we believe, of course, that the reason they weren't disclosing this manifesto for all this time is that they didn't want to make it look like somebody who had said that they were a trans person

uh, was mentally unstable and had any motivation that would reflect poorly on the trans community. You're not going to see headlines about trans shooters like you had about the Tucker Carlson, uh, alleged link to the manifesto, which was a disgusting smear and lie, disgusting smear and lie. Tucker's been on our show and many others explaining how that is a Democrat theory. That's the Democrats think the great replacement theory. He talks about it and then they blame it all on him anyway.

Um, some of the newly released line items in this journal include again, sourcing here at the star Tribune. Uh, sorry, the, uh, I want to make sure I get it correct. The Tennessee star writing quote, if God won't give me a boy body in heaven, then Jesus is a F word. It's a derogatory term for gays.

I can't be happy. I meant to die. No Brown girls, no love because this person was supposedly obsessed with, um, a person of color, a girl in, in her school. And she didn't have a boy body that could perform with this Brown girl who she was obsessed with from the sound of it. Brown love is the most beautiful kind. It goes on and on. And there were plenty of other writings that support that this person was obsessed with getting her boy body, uh,

And this is the stuff that was deemed so untouchable, Glenn. We weren't allowed to know about it. A very different treatment of this manifesto or this shooter's thoughts than we saw in Buffalo, which involved racial violence and an alleged link to Republicans or Tucker.

This is one of the issues that I focus on a lot going back to my days as a constitutional lawyer. Because first of all, embedded in constitutional law is the idea that if you give a speech, a protected speech, you cannot be held liable for what someone does after hearing your speech. Because obviously, any political view can inspire some crazy person to go do violence. If you say abortion is murder, maybe someone will go kill an abortion doctor. If you say restrictions on abortion are

an attack on women, maybe somebody will go bomb a pro-life clinic. This is for every opinion that you could ever wanna possibly think about. And so the whole principle of trying to do this, I think is outrageous. On top of that, you have this extremely inconsistent application. Let's remember in 2017, someone who was a huge fan of Bernie Sanders and Rachel Maddow and who posted every day that Republicans are fascists and Russian agents went to a softball field

in order to murder as many Republican members of Congress as he could and almost murdered Steve Scalise. And nobody blamed Bernie Sanders or Rachel Maddow for inspiring that person. And yet, as you say, somebody goes to Buffalo and kills 10 African-Americans and leaves a huge manifesto that never even mentions Fox News or Tucker Carlson, no indication that he even ever

knew about it or watched it express views that not only did Tucker never mention, but has explicitly renounced and advocated with great contempt and passion. And yet the whole media theme was Tucker Carlson has blood on his hands. So you have this huge inconsistency. We were one of the people who tried to retain counsel in Tennessee and did to try and get that manifesto exactly for the reasons that you said, but also because

It should be fair whenever there's some killer that can be blamed on somebody on the right, they pour over the manifesto. They use it to accuse not the murderer, but somebody who expresses views of having done so. We wanted to see, okay, let's see if it could be done fairly. The FBI, the local police have the most absurd justifications

for refusing to release it, namely like they're still investigating if it were a conspiracy theory, it would be too dangerous. And of course, as it turns out, there's elements of trans ideology that clearly was part of the motive as usual, along with mental illness. And because it's a year and a half old, as intended, nobody's really paying attention to it right before an election.

And that's the thing that, you know, kind of sickens me. I hate the whole principle of blaming people who express political ideas and then someone goes kills them in their name. In 2002, there was a big right wing politician who was gay, anti-immigrant and some radical left wing environmentalists murdered him. Nobody blamed the environmental movement for that.

but it always on the other side happens. But if we're going to have that kind of theory, let's have it openly. And the fact that they kept that under lock and key for so long, whereas every other manifesto that's more useful is immediately released and poured over shows you exactly what this is all about.

The double standard is disgusting. It's so apparent, but people get manipulated. God bless them. It's not their fault. They don't live, sleep, eat, breathe the news like you and I do. And they don't have that many honest journalists out there that will help them separate the lies from what's real.

So this is important work and good on these reporters for actually getting it and having the temerity to publish it irrespective of the blowback. And you know what? Shame on those media outlets that don't now report on it and, and get really honest about what's in there. Um, there's another double standard. I mean, it's the same double standard, but another example of it just today. So I have been watching, I don't know how many years has Trump been in the public eye as a

with amazement as they make Mary Trump into Taylor Swift. Every word this person utters gets linked online. She's got like hundreds of thousands of subscribers to her newsletter. She's constantly on the media websites like Mary Trump says Trump can never win. Mary Trump says Trump is a narcissist.

gives a shit what Mary Trump thinks about anything. I couldn't care less. She's not like, it's not like Trump, like Ivanka has come out to turn on her dad, you know, or Tiffany. Okay, that might actually be something. She's like a

do well. The interaction between these two is as thin as this piece of paper. But they treat her like an expert. Then

Then RFKJ endorses Trump. Every Kennedy they can find is on television and all over the print press. Kerry Kennedy and Kathleen Kennedy and all the other Kennedys who want us to think they're real Kennedys, but really there's so many generations removed, we don't care. And by the way, we don't even care about the JFK kids or grandkids anymore. It's like, it was another era, move on. What have you done? Absolutely nothing from what I can see other than serve as a Democrat mouthpiece on random charity boards and live off your grandfather's name. Anyhow,

That's what happens when you are critical of a Republican or somebody who's supporting a Republican. Tim Walz's brother was outed yesterday by the New York Post as having made some very unhappy posts about Tim Walz on Facebook.

saying the stories I could tell and saying he was seriously considering endorsing President Trump in this race, wanting to make clear he does not support Tim Walz's policies. And it turns out he actually donated to Trump in 16. So he is a Trump supporter and donor and may go so far as to support him in this race against his own brother. He and Tim Walz are apparently estranged eight years now, going back, I think, to the death of another family member. It might have been another brother. And they don't speak. I don't know why.

On top of that, it breaks today, this picture on, uh, on X was originally posted. Now the daily mail reporting by a friend of the walls family for the listening audience. It's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight people wearing blue t-shirts that read walls is for Trump, meaning walls is family members for Trump. And, uh, behind them, it's, it reads Trump 2024, take America back.

Uh, this former Nebraska gubernatorial candidate, Charles W. Herbster first posted the image to X on Wednesday. It was retweeted by end wokeness and many others. Those in the image, according to daily mail are members of the Minnesota governor's family through his grandfather's brother, the Herbster, uh, contact confirmed to the daily mail. And, uh, they, he took captured it. Tim Walsh's family back in Nebraska wants you to know something. Now I don't think, uh,

I don't think, Glenn Greenwald, that we're going to get the same star treatment of Tim Walz's brother or the family members in that picture that we got of the Kennedys, Mary Trump, and now there's a McCain son who's out there ripping on Trump too. Like any family membership will do as long as you hate Trump. If you hate Tim Walz, I didn't see it.

Yeah, you have a feeling that the Waltz family won't get as much attention, just kind of an intuition. Yeah, I would join in that. Let's remember, too, Barack Obama had a brother from his father's side who was vehemently critical of Obama, very pro-Republican, very conservative, and he was treated as some sort of irrelevant clown, even more so-

anytime Hunter Biden was brought up, not again for his personal life, which I don't think a father should be necessarily held responsible, but for again, business transactions that traded on his father's name, we were told, who cares? Hunter Biden's not on the ballot. That has nothing to do with Joe Biden.

And again, in general, I would say that if you're related to somebody who's in public life, who's running for political office, it really doesn't matter what your opinion is. It's like anybody else's opinion. It's valued the same. But they turn every single critic of a Republican candidate who has a family member against them into a Mary Trump's book was number one on the bestseller list for months because of all the publicity that it got.

I can't. Yeah, of course. And now you have McCain. They're praying that Liz Cheney ends up endorsing Donald Trump. Imagine if you had an entire group of Trump or J.D. No, but imagine if you had a group of Trump. Oh, yeah. Right. They're expecting Liz Cheney to endorse Kamala. Imagine if you had a group of J.D. Vance's relatives, a big family group, or Donald Trump's relatives posing in a picture saying Kamala.

Kamala should be our mamala or something like that. Those people would be all over the view. They would be on every single cable network celebrated as these courageous and important people. And here you have the Waltz family, you know, ordinary Americans, but who are from the very close relatives of Tim Waltz.

wearing Trump shirts, basically, and they will be absolutely ignored. Again, you have a principle that you might oppose, but if we're going to have this principle, you have to apply it consistently. And it just never is. The hypocrisy of it is so glaring.

That's the thing. It's like I wouldn't normally be talking about Tim Walz's brother. I don't know what their family rift is, but if we're going to play by the leftist media rules, then he's fair game. He should go on some TV station. He did give a comment clarifying to News Nation. I think Elizabeth Vargas broke this last night that.

Um, he doesn't want to come out any further. Like he was expressing his feelings on Facebook, but he doesn't want to get any further involved. And that when he said, you know, the stories I could tell, he was talking about things like Tim Walz's car sickness as a kid when they were sitting next to each other. So it seems clear he's afraid now and he's been probably browbeaten and he doesn't want to become the center of the media. He didn't, you know, he posted online, but he didn't give an interview to anybody. Anyway, that's where we stand with that.

In your brilliant opening answer, you also touched on yet another technique that gets used against you if you oppose a Democrat candidate for president, etc. And that is you could be thrown in prison. If you are the candidate yourself running under the GOP ticket, you could get thrown in prison. And they're trying to do that right now to Donald Trump. There's two updates in the cases against Trump that which are interesting. I'll start with the first one because it's most consequential.

The September 18th sentencing hearing in the New York state criminal matter against him, like this is the one brought by Alvin Bragg, New York City's case against him in which he was convicted.

is going forward as of now. The judge has not yet ruled because Trump filed a motion to delay it. You know, he's got he wants to sort out whether he's immune from these charges altogether. They did introduce evidence against him from his time during his stint as president, which was not admissible now under the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. And so Trump's team went in there and said, Judge Mershon, you got to undo this. Like this verdict is not going to stand.

And finally, Alvin Bragg has weighed in saying we oppose his effort to further delay his New York hush money case because now he's trying to move the case into federal court. Trump is too, because to get this resolved.

And they're opposing that. They don't want any further delay. They say, go ahead with this ruling and with this hearing, whether Trump will get sentenced and that any concerns Trump has about timing are a function of his own strategic and dilatory litigation tactics. He's been the one delaying is what they're saying. So it very well could be that in two weeks from right now,

Donald Trump gets sentenced to prison. That's what Andy McCarthy thinks will happen, that it'll be suspended. He won't actually have to go into jail yet, but that Kamala Harris will be given yet another card to run around with saying he's going to jail. We have a sitting U.S. president, if you reelect him, who's going to have to serve time. Is that what you want? Independence in Wisconsin and Georgia and Michigan? What do you make of it?

First of all, for the last year, Democrats have been open and explicit that one of their main strategies, and when Trump was running against Biden, in a sense, their only strategy was to try and get Donald Trump convicted in as many of these cases as possible. And that would be their only chance for winning the election. That's why they were so upset every time there was a delay in the documents case or in the Jack Smith case. They were outraged at the idea that this might not happen.

until after the election. They were open about it. Everything Jack Smith, the prosecutor, has done in two of the cases has so clearly been engineered in a way that no other defendant would have been treated to accelerate the trial to make sure that it happens prior to the election as well. This is an overt

explicit political strategy on the part of the Democrats. That's number one. Number two is, when we were young, we were inculcated with the idea that one of the things that makes those tyrannical countries bad countries is that there are no free elections. You can actually imprison your political opponents instead of having to defeat them at the ballot box. That's the difference between say, democracy and tyranny.

And we have watched Donald Trump, the Democrats, first try and ban him from the Internet, then try and remember they got him banned from the ballot. They wanted him off the ballot so that nobody had the chance to vote for him. And then they have now four cases still.

obviously not going as fast as they want, but still very much a tool that they're trying to use against him. Now, I question this little case in Manhattan specifically because it's in Manhattan where everybody knows that they're Democrats, whether this will fortify the sort of persecution narrative that Trump has been able to exploit every time something happened in his case, he got stronger.

But if you actually get to the point where a judge sentences someone to prison, even if they suspend it until after the election,

The idea that we're going to elect a president who then faces a prison term, I do think can be very politically damaging. And Megan, I worked in Manhattan in the judicial system as a lawyer for 15 years. The whole thing is dominated by the Democratic Party machine. Every prosecutor, every judge, you don't get to be a judge. You don't get to be a prosecutor unless you're part of the Democratic Party machine and not like a nice moderate Democratic Party machine, but the Democratic machine in New York City.

So the whole thing is so tainted with political objectives that it's hard to overstate. I mean, it really will be shocking. He shouldn't be facing jail time. I'm just saying any defendant not named Trump would not be facing jail time for this. That would be a joke. That would not be what's happening. They would never have been charged with a felony. That would have been a misdemeanor at best, at best. Correct.

And certainly once the US Supreme Court has ruled that your defendant is immune from most

virtually all acts that involve his official duties and that no trial can take place against him that uses evidence from his time in the Oval. And you did that in your case. Most judges would be like pumping the brakes going, holy shit, I'm in trouble. I don't want to be reversed by anybody, never mind the US Supreme Court and what could be a unanimous decision against me because I have integrity.

And so far, we have a ruling by Judge Marchand, but he's so far done everything Alvin Bragg has asked him to do.

And now we have Alvin Bragg saying, please go forward with the September 18th hearing in your court. Don't let this case get transferred to federal court. We don't want it to be transferred. And let's go ahead with the sentencing. We'll see. The second update is about Fannie Willis and an unbelievable thing that just broke. I'm going to take a quick break and we will come back and I will show you the video of Fannie and a surprise guest in her car.

I'm Megan Kelly, host of The Megan Kelly Show on Sirius XM. It's your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations with the most interesting and important political, legal, and cultural figures today. You can catch The Megan Kelly Show on Triumph, a Sirius XM channel featuring lots of hosts you may know and probably love. Great people like Dr. Laura, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace, Dave,

I'm Dave Ramsey, and yours truly, Megyn Kelly. You can stream The Megyn Kelly Show on SiriusXM at home or anywhere you are. No car required. I do it all the time. I love the SiriusXM app. It has ad-free music coverage of every major sport, comedy, talk, podcast, and more. Subscribe now. Get your first three months for free.

Go to SiriusXM.com slash MKShow to subscribe and get three months free. That's SiriusXM.com slash MKShow and get three months free. Offer details apply.

Anthropics Cloud is AI backed by uncompromising integrity. Cloud is run by responsible leadership who have an ethical approach to the development of AI while providing strong data security and putting humanity first. Whether you're brainstorming alone or building with a team, Cloud can help you do your best work securely. Discover how Cloud can transform your work and business at anthropic.com slash cloud or find Cloud on Apple and Android app stores.

Earn money doing voiceover from audio books and commercials to training material and a lot more. Believable voices are in high demand and most work from home on their own schedule.

Join us for a special live Zoom discussion and question and answer and learn how people just like you get started. No get-rich-quick schemes. This is honest perspective and advice. Enroll today at yourvoiceadventure.com. Use promo code radio for 50% off. That's yourvoiceadventure.com, promo code radio.

Okay, so Glenn, you are not going to believe what just happened with Fannie Willis down in Georgia. So Fannie Willis has been mostly out of the news because that case is dying quickly. I mean, it's dead for now. It could be resurrected if the Georgia Court of Appeals, the appellate court, weighs in, when they weigh in, if they say, you know what, she shouldn't be disqualified. The lower court had it right. And this case can now be revived.

then they're still going to have to go through the immunity evaluation that I just discussed in connection with the New York case. But in any event, right now it's dead as her DQ goes up on appeal, the decision not to DQ her.

Well, one of the interesting things is she testified and so did Nathan Wade that their relationship, their affair ended a year prior to all of this. Like they, they understood at some point before they got in trouble, it wasn't appropriate and they cut it off. And what happened was in late August, August 24th, her daughter got

I think, forgive me, but I think she was arrested for having a suspended license. Because what we see in the video I'm about to show you is the mom, Fannie Willis, show up and the daughter's not there. And the cop is explaining to her that the daughter who was pregnant has been, I think, taken away. That's what I heard. Because she'd been pulled over

for allegedly using a cell phone behind the wheel. And then they found that she had an earlier run-in with a law that had not yet been resolved. And that's how they wind up arresting you. She'd been on the phone with Fannie Willis, reportedly. And I guess her license had been revoked a few months earlier. She said she was unaware of that. In any event, this kind of thing can happen. This isn't about the daughter and whatever her traffic issues are. This is about the fact that Fannie Willis comes to the scene

And guess who got out of Fannie's car with her and dealt with the officers? Ladies and gentlemen, here they are together, the dynamic duo, Nathan Wade and Fannie Willis.

I'm dad who, okay. Nice to meet you. So, um, apparently, apparently her life is driving on the suspended, uh, basically a traffic citation. She's got to have her fingerprint is done and picture taken. Then she can make her bond.

There they are. Yes, indeed. By the time Willis and Wade pulled up, the daughter was already en route to the county jail. I think this is fast. Look, I know they could still be friends. I don't drive around with my male friends. And when a kid got in trouble, I certainly would not be, you know, they...

These two are still together. That's my strong opinion. And they never weren't together. They've been together the whole time. I believe it's yet another instance, incidence of personal

perjury for them to have gotten up there and falsely claimed that they hadn't started this affair back in 2019, long before she brought him in. And they lied when they said they had broken up because they're running around together, putting out fires with the daughter, super casual in the car. That's my take, Glenn. What do you make of the whole thing? Megan, have you ever seen in all your time as a lawyer or as a journalist, a

prosecution blow up in the face of a district attorney more than this one. The whole proceeding has been a joke when she would go on the stand and she would be asked about the vacations they took together and one of them paid. And she would say, oh no, we split the charges. Well, where's the proof of that? Oh, I have a ton of cash in my house. I don't know if you know this, but black people are taught to have cash in their house. So I paid him in cash. The whole thing has been a joke from the start. Everyone understands that she's been lying.

And I think this goes back to what we were just talking about in New York, too, with Alvin Bragg, which is when you have these cities that have one party rule and you have all this power in the hands of, you know, very powerful people, being a prosecutor is a very powerful position. The district attorney.

there are no limits on it. And they begin to think that they can do whatever they want without consequence. And yeah, maybe it's a gigantic coincidence that she happened to be having lunch or dinner with her friend who used to be her boyfriend who decided to go help her out with her daughter. But in general, that is not the way things happen, especially given the public scrutiny that you know you're under. And even the whole attempt to go to the scene afterwards

as the district attorney to intervene in the daughter's case, seems to be throwing her weight around as well. And I just think it reflects on the entire mentality that has governed the prosecution, just like in New York, of the case in Atlanta from the very start.

Yes. Our old friend Phil Holloway is the one who tweeted this out and caught my attention with it, but it was broken by the Daily Mail. And, you know, once again, we get an update on these two that doesn't reflect well on them. I forgot to mention when we were talking about the manifesto, and this is important, the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, ABC News, Associated Press, no reporting.

on the Tennessee star story in the manifesto, nothing, nobody's picking up that huge exclusive and even reporting on it, nevermind reporting honestly about what they found. It's actually just absolutely gross. Um, so they don't want that out there. And, um,

When that story about Fannie and Nathan first broke, we covered it here on the show. Yes, we covered the story in depth, but we covered also the New York Times' reaction on their daily podcast, which was like, this seems like a nothing burger. This kind of isn't anything. And it wasn't until she really started to get in legal trouble down there for this very serious allegation that they were like, oh, who could have seen that coming? And we were laughing at them with our audience. All of us saw that coming. We've been talking about it for weeks.

And I mentioned earlier, here is NPR on the Hunter Biden laptop story when it first broke. We don't want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories. And we don't want to waste the listeners and the readers time on stories that are just pure distractions.

So there you have it. They are they don't think a Hunter Biden laptop is news. They don't think Fannie and Nathan is a thing. They didn't think that until the whole case got killed and we were proven right. Right. Those of us who believed, oh, it's a thing. This is actually deeply problematic. And they apparently don't think the manifesto is a thing either. Glenn, that's today's corporate media.

Go and compare how much attention those media outlets you just mentioned lavished on not just the Buffalo Shooters manifesto, but the attempts to blame people like Tucker Carlson for having inspired the killing based on absolutely nothing and compare it to their ignoring of the manifesto of this trans killer. It will tell you all you need to know. Remember, Megan, in 2020,

I was at the media outlet that I founded, and I wanted to write about the revelations of the Hunter Biden laptop because the one thing I've done in my career is work with very large archives, and I know how to authenticate them. I knew from the start that archive was –

authentic and genuine. It was very easy to prove using the same standards you would authenticate other archives. And I was prevented from publishing stories about the revelations of that laptop because the week earlier, the intercept where I had worked printed the CIA lie that it was Russian disinformation. I saw from the inside how...

How willing they are to abandon basic journalistic values in pursuit of a political agenda, especially after 2016, when they felt like part of the media, they did felt like part of the media for doing their jobs and reporting on Hillary was what was to blame for Trump's victory. And they decided we're not going to make that mistake again, meaning we're not going to do journalism again that might end up harming the Democrats.

and helping the Republicans, even if the story is relevant and true. That was the radical change inside newsrooms after 2016.

Maybe it will be solved by one of the best global experts in media commentary, Brian Stelter, when he returns. Maybe that is the solution to our problems. In the meantime, the issue of race. Okay, this is also a tool that is used by some in the media to try to shut their critics up. And Democrats in general do this, try to shut their critics up. And I

Kamala Harris is out there working her fake accents. She talks differently in front of a crowd that is largely black than she does in front of a crowd that isn't. It's very obvious. And

Peter Doocy actually asked about it at the White House. And now he's getting all this blowback from people like Jamel Hill. Here is an example of Kamala first in Detroit and then a few hours later at a rally in Pittsburgh. This is via the Trump campaign advisor, Alex Brewitz. Let's just get through the next 64 days. So friends.

64 days until the most election of our lives. My God, listen to that difference. And here's another example. Here she is saying thank a union member differently in Detroit versus last month when she was down in Houston. You better thank a union member. You better thank a union member for sick leave. You better thank a union member for paid leave. You're from Canada.

You may not be a union member, but thank unions for the five day work week. She found her hours for the eight hour work day. Thank unions for sick leave and paid family leave and vacation time. She's such a phony. Here's Peter Doocy raising it at the White House press briefing with Kareem Shafiq.

A different topic. Since when does the vice president have what sounds like a southern accent? I have no idea what you're talking about. Well... I mean, this is... She was talking about unions in Detroit using one tone of voice. Is this something that you think... Same line that she...

She used the same line in Pittsburgh, and it sounded like she at least had some kind of a Southern drawl. I mean, do you hear the question that you're... I mean, do you think Americans seriously think that this is an important question? They care. You know what they care about? They care about the economy. They care about lowering costs. They care about health care. I'm not even going to entertain some question about the president. It's just... Hearing it sounds so ridiculous. Well, but hearing it...

The question I'm talking about, the questions is just insane. Is that how she talks in meetings? I'm just Peter. We're moving on. We're still moving on. And then here's the final piece of it, Glenn. Jamel Hill on X. Ain't no way Ducey wanted to say Southern accent.

Two, again, this entire conversation around VP Harris's dialect is rooted in how little some white folks know about black people. Three, this is shitty journalism. You see the fact that you and I think she's, well, at least I, but I think you think she's a faker, that she's false, a fraud. Um,

is because we're white. So that's the leftist response to this, Jamel Hill, a far left black journalist.

I mean, I think the time to be concerned or intimidated by those kinds of accusations is long over. I don't think anyone cares anymore about these cynical attempts to accuse you of racism for raising questions or saying things that people want to intimidate you out of saying. I don't you probably have heard AOC do this. She actually does it all the time. Like out of nowhere, she'll just break into a black dialogue. She'll just start talking as if

Yeah, yeah, exactly. From the suburbs. And it's like offensive. Honestly, it's it's it's like blackface. And Kamala Harris says she's from Oakland. She never lived in Oakland. She was raised by her Indian mother, which is totally fine. But the idea that she spoke like that ever, that she speaks like this ever. She has never sounded like that in public until about three months before an election when they absolutely have to solidify the black vote.

is so cynical. It's so grotesque. It's so artificial. So of course, that's the sort of thing we talk about with our politicians, which is whether there's authenticity to it or whether there isn't. And I would suggest that adopting certain kinds of lingo or forms of speaking that are not your own simply to appeal to a certain group is painfully cringeful and

And condescending. It's what Hillary Clinton used to do when she would pretend to have a Southern accent as well. And of course, it just reflects so much on the fact that Kamala Harris, what she really is, is nothing more than an opportunist, totally craven with no fixed beliefs or even a fixed personality. Imagine having the desperation for power to being willing to degrade yourself in that way to stand up and speak like that when everyone knows that you don't.

It's not just embarrassing. I think it's actually more sinister than that. She's the daughter of two PhDs who was raised mostly by her PhD Indian mother in Canada.

And yet she wants us to believe that that's how she talks. She wants the mostly black audience to believe that that's how she talks. And what kind of an insult is that to the mostly black audience? I'm like, what, what is she trying to say that all blacks sound like that, that they'll only like her if she sounds like that? Absolutely.

I mean, like the black people that I know would be sitting in the audience like, why is she doing that? What does she think of us? What is she trying to telegraph here? We're only going to get behind her if she starts doing a fake accent and tell you better and losing her eyes.

And I mean, it would have been better if she'd been in the South. At least then we would have understood, oh, it's like a regional thing. That's not what this was. This was about color. This is about race. Right. And I do think it's true that what Peter Ducey was really asking was about that, even though he didn't quite ask. I agree. Because look at what happened to him just for asking the question that he did ask.

But, you know, I think there was an interview. I don't know if you saw they went into like a barbershop, a black barbershop in CNN, thinking that they were going to hear all these great things about Kamala. And one of the questions was, do you think Kamala is black?

And almost to a person, everybody was like, not to me, she isn't. And, you know, I think that they understand that that's a problem. But you could talk about the fact that she went to Howard, which is a traditionally black college. You could talk about her relationship with her father. But to just adopt a new lingo to speak that you've never used in your life before, like

It is, I think, not just condescending. It is racist. It's like saying this is the only form of speech that you can understand and relate to. So I'm going to use the kind of language that is the only one you're capable of connecting to. You're a phony panderer. Glenn, always great talking with you. Thank you so much for being here. Great to see you, Megan. Thanks.

All right. And coming up tomorrow, our pal Dave Rubin joins the show. Looking forward to that. And while I've got you, listen, you got to go to megankelly.com and you sign up for our American News Minute. I only send you one email a week. I put some personal stuff in there and we have highlights from the show. And I think you're going to enjoy it even more than Mary Trump's. So go ahead and sign up and we'll see you tomorrow. Thanks for listening to The Megan Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda and no fear.

UMBC's programs in geographic information systems translate to career growth. GIS jobs have increased 98% over the last few years across a variety of industries. At UMBC, you'll go further. Getting technical leadership experience as well as advanced knowledge of emerging GIS applications, UMBC brings it all together at the Rockville and Baltimore campuses. Learn more at further.umbc.edu.

This lasagna was so cheesy. My plate was filled with saucy slices. Then a flimsy store brand plate... No, no, no, no! ...ruined it. Next time, get Dixie Ultraplates. Three times stronger than the leading store brand 10-inch paper plate. Dixie. Make it right.