transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:00] OnDeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team, or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $400,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A-plus by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five-star trust pilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes at ondeck.com. 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.

Speaker 2:
[00:30] Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. Live on SiriusXM Channel 111 every weekday at NewEast. Hey, everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. It's a Kelly's Court Day. Our top lawyers are gonna be breaking down Kash Patel's big defamation lawsuit against the Atlantic, singer David's arrest for murder and more. But first, there are some big developments in the political world today. More polling has just come out for President Trump and the Republicans, and it's more potential trouble. It's important to talk about it now when we're several months in advance in the midterm. Maybe something could be done. We told you earlier this week that President Trump had his worst poll of his second term, with the AP showing just 33% of Americans approving of his job performance. When you look at the cross tabs in the all-important independent voters, Trump has cratered. I mean cratered, not even present tense anymore. It's done. Just 23% approve of his overall performance. That ticks up to 30 when it comes to how he's handled immigration, and then from there it is all downhill. 21% of independents support this war on Iran, 21. You've got 79% of independents who are against. Folks, you cannot win elections like that. Democrat or Republican, you got 80% of the independents against you, you're F'd. You need to adjust something. ASAP. 19% support him on the economy, 19. And listen to this, how many independents approve of Trump's job performance when it comes to the cost of living? 12. 12. The problem is he was underwater with these folks on the economy and cost of living inflation prior to the Iran War. They were already suffering and they were blaming him. And then we launched a war of choice that was not necessary and their gas prices went up and energy prices are going up. It's already happening in Europe and elsewhere and it's coming to a city near you. The delay in pain is just that, a delay. It will come our way because the economy is connected. The world economy is connected. And the Strait of Hormuz is closed right now thanks to the Iranians. And they're pissed we won't lift our blockade of the Iranian ports. The Strait is closed right now. And what's happening, unfortunately, is that all those millions and millions of barrels of oil are just stacking up. And you get to the point where there's nothing, there's no place to put them. They stop then producing because there's nothing to do. They can't get them on ships. They can't get them out of there. They run out of storage room. They stop producing. And the lag on that could be truly catastrophic for the global economy. So the clock is ticking. This actually is a very serious worry for the world, including us, even though we don't buy our oil from countries that deliver it to us out of the Strait of Hormuz. That's irrelevant. We're all connected. So this pain is likely only to get worse. And this war needs to come to an end right away. At least now, President Trump seems to want it. He does seem to want to end the war. Unfortunately, as the old saw goes, it's very easy to start a war and very difficult to end one. The Iranians get a say and they're not rolling over. It's not just President Trump. The numbers are bad for the entire Republican Party. Look at this poll from Fox News yesterday, one that has Trump doing slightly better with a 42% approval rating, shows Americans prefer Democrats to Republicans on the economy for the first time since 2010, first time in 16 years. They're favoring Democrats on the economy. Democrats are the reason we're in this economic mess. The American public is so short-sighted, but it's just their frustration. They feel like they gave Trump a year and a half. He's done nothing other than make things worse. This is how they feel if you read the polls. And so, and they're pissed. They're not feeling pro-GOP right now for a variety of reasons. They don't tend to like the tariffs. I still am open-minded to them, but I don't speak for the independents even though I am one. They don't like the war. They don't like what's happening in their bank accounts. And they're starting to think the Democrats might be the better option on the economy. 52% say they prefer Democrats compared to 48% who say they like the Republicans when it comes to who should manage the economy. And the highly respected Cook Political Report is out today with new analysis ahead of the midterms. I'm just going to read you their opening sentence. It reads, quote, for Republican candidates running in competitive house districts, okay. The Cook Political Report's Battleground District Project, project, I should say, is a flashing red warning light for the fall, flashing red warning light. In their exclusive poll of Battleground districts, that President Trump won by an average of 2% in 2024, Democrats now lead by 6%. So, President Trump won them by 2%, Democrats now lead by 6%, so that's arguably about an 8% swing on the generic Congressional ballot. The Dems are ahead on nearly every important issue, but the numbers are particularly bleak when it comes to the economy. Again, this is every poll and it's every political report, it's everything. The economy is the driver, more than anything, of these economic, of these approval ratings. And there's precious little time to turn things around, but there's time to make it look like you are trying to turn them around, and that at least should be done. Our sponsor, the Electronic Payments Coalition, says Washington politicians are always getting in your wallet, and now they're messing with your credit card. They say your credit card and the security it offers are under attack, and that Senators Dick Durbin and Roger Marshall want to change the nation's payment system to benefit corporate megastores like Walmart and Target at the expense of everyday Americans. Credit cards can keep your payments secure and provide rewards that families use to help make everyday purchases more affordable. The Electronic Payments Coalition says the Durbin-Marshall mandates would let corporate megastores cut corners on credit card processing, routing transactions over cheaper, untested networks with weaker security and fewer protections. Find out more at guardyourcard.com and consider telling Congress to Guard Your Card. According to the Cook Political Report, Democrats in these competitive districts now hold a nine-point lead on the economy, and 57% believe President Trump and Republicans have, quote, failed to deliver the lower costs they promised, as opposed to 43% who think Trump inherited runaway inflation, which I mean, he very much did. But okay, so if you're a Democrat, you've got to be feeling pretty optimistic. At least until, well, I mean, there's some data in this report that might give you some pause, like Cook reports that Democrats in Congress are actually more underwater, with a net negative rating of minus 23% than their Republican counterparts, and one in five Democrats think their own party is out of touch. So what Cook is saying, I'll give you a line from the report, Republicans are hemorrhaging support from independent voters. And he goes through some of those numbers that we went through. And then he points out that, OK, right now, they've got, driving all these numbers with independent voters are, they're disgust with the economy. They give the president a 70% disapproval rating. And then he points out, Cook does, in 2018, the last successful midterm election for Democrats, independent voters opted for a Democratic candidate by a 12-point margin. Okay, so by 12 points, independence went for the Dems, according to exit polls. Today Democrats are winning independent voters in the generic ballot by 25. More than double. What happened in 2018 when independence went for Democrats by 12 points? Democrats gained 40 seats. It was the largest House seat gain for a minority party since 1974. It is when Nancy Pelosi became Speaker Pelosi. That was when Dems were favored by independence by 12 points. As of today, independence favored the Dems by 25 points. Okay, so there is a massive red flag over what's happening this November for Republicans. They better get their shit together. ASAP, one silver lining around the gloomy cloud for Republicans right now is the actual candidates who appear to be running in these races, in a lot of them anyway. And by the way, one of the big victories back in 2018 was, amazingly, notwithstanding those losses in the House, Republicans gained two seats in the Senate at that time. But they lost the House by a wide margin, and they lost the gubernatorial races, the state house races across the country, which do matter. They matter for, among other things, looking at the way elections are conducted and what the protocols will be and who will be ultimately in charge if a massive challenge has to be filed, like Bush v. Gore, the governors and the secretaries of states in Florida. You know, the places like that really matter. So the one good silver lining for Republicans right now may relate to one of those state houses, in particular, the one in California, okay? Because you're thinking, okay, I'm sick of Trump, I'm pissed about the Iran War, I hate the economy, I'm voting team blue.

Speaker 3:
[10:30] Whoa, whoa.

Speaker 2:
[10:32] Then you look at what happened in California last night, you pump the brakes hard if you are a normie. California, the home to the two frontrunners for the 2028 Democratic nomination, Governor Gavin Newsom and Vice President Kamala Harris, should have the deepest Democratic field in the country, right? Shouldn't it? This is where you breed Democrats. It's easy to come up with lots of Democrats there. The whole state is Democrats, or so we're told, it's not really, it's 40% Republican, they just don't have any representation. So they should have powerhouse, plentiful, smart, savvy, attractive Democrats. You know, they should be running cup Renathal over with them. But this is what they have to choose from instead. Take Javier Becerra, a Stanford grad. God, the older you get, the more you realize those credentials mean absolutely nothing. Former congressman, former attorney general of California, and not for nothing, but he was President Joe Biden's secretary of health and human services. Remember when everybody freaked out on RFKJ? Like, he's not even a doctor. He has no experience in the medical field. That second part's not exactly true. He spent his entire adult life suing Big Pharma and other companies that polluted our lakes and our oceans and our waterways. So, that's medical related, at least, and you do become a bit of an expert when you file those lawsuits and see them through for 15 years, as he did. But this guy was the attorney general from California. Hey, Xavier Becerra had zero experience in the medical field, and they were fine, these people who objected to RFKJ, when he was elevated to run HHS. It's just if your name is Kennedy and you've got some skepticism around Big Pharma, that they give you a hard time for not having that credential. In any event, you look at that resume from Xavier, right? Sounds like a serious guy. Until that is, he starts speaking. Watch.

Speaker 4:
[12:28] I remember when my parents would tell me the stories of when they came with $12 in their pocket. They had to make a life here. They needed to make sure California could work for them. Let's make sure Donald Trump is not starting reckless wars to keep the prices of gasoline down. By up to $2 a gallon, we can reduce the price of that war in Iraq that Donald Trump started would go away.

Speaker 2:
[12:48] Whoa, Iraq? Wait, that war Trump actually did oppose. Iran, Iraq, tomato, tomato. What about my favorite candidate? Congresswoman Katie Porter, who I'm totally rooting for, just so we can get more content. Some things are about us. First of all, she clearly is on the shot. There's no doubt in my mind she's taking Ozempic or one of the GLP-1s. And I applaud her for it. This is the last thing I needed on my Katie Porter. She needed to get slightly better looking. And she's working on it, my friends. Look at the difference, look at the before and after. Come on, you got to admit she looks better. Californians, if you're going to go Democrat for this role, for the love of God, just give me this one. Just make a Katie Porter. She'd be so fun to cover. Javier Becerra is a bore. Tom Steyer is a billionaire elitist prick. You don't want them, that guy from San Jose, he seems fine, but also boring and really doesn't have the credentials for this job. This is your only option. Come on, she went in the shot for you, quite clearly. She slimmed down, she got her hair did. And just in case you need to pick me up today, because why not? Here's one of her greatest hits from July of 2021 when she was berating her poor staffer who got in her live shot as she was on TV or doing a taping.

Speaker 5:
[14:20] That we're going to lose more than half a million Californians dying prematurely to air pollution and other problems. And the state could lose, get out of my fucking shot.

Speaker 6:
[14:32] I wanted to tell you that that's actually incorrect.

Speaker 7:
[14:34] It's not that it's electric vehicles, it's that if we don't need to pay us kind of court.

Speaker 5:
[14:40] Okay, it does.

Speaker 8:
[14:41] Okay.

Speaker 5:
[14:42] You also were in my shot before that. Stay out of my shot.

Speaker 8:
[14:47] Okay.

Speaker 5:
[14:48] I'm going to start again with electric vehicles saving us money. Perfect.

Speaker 8:
[14:52] Okay.

Speaker 2:
[14:54] Okay. I don't know how many times I had to tell you I'm on team, team Porter. Like that gal should not have been in the shot. When you were doing a taping with somebody for an interview and you have a staffer who thinks you've said something wrong, they, it's tough shit. It's the horse that left the barn. I've been with Abigail Finan for 17 years. Never once has she popped up behind me to interrupt a hit to say, oh, I think you made, you meant to say X and instead you said Y. She'd probably get a comment from me along those lines. Actually, no, she wouldn't. I'd be like, Abby, what the hell? Anyway, it would never happen. But Katie, you got to come on this show. I can rehabilitate you on your anger. I can. I can. And Californians, you got to soften on this lady. If you're not going to go with Steve Hilton or Chad Bianco, please, please do us all a favor of giving the angry lady a shot. She was asked about that video last night. Here's how that went.

Speaker 9:
[15:53] Ms. Porter, you've acknowledged that your interactions within aid and with a reporter captured on videos which went viral, were in your words, that you had a bad look and that you could have done better. What have you done to address those concerns? And as a person who frequently speaks about being a parent on the campaign trail, what would you tell your own kids if they ever faced a boss like that? You have 60 seconds.

Speaker 5:
[16:17] I apologized that day to that staffer four years ago, and I took responsibility then, and I have taken responsibility since, acknowledging that it was not the right way to treat someone. And I would say that if somebody is treating you rudely, you should speak up. And that's what I would want my children to do. And that's what I did when I was being pushed again and again and again to kowtow, to give in and defend Donald Trump when he was engaged in despicable action.

Speaker 2:
[16:48] That was a reference to the interview she had with that reporter. Let's play that one, too, just so people are reminded of what she was talking about in that second one. It's SOT 10. So fun. Love, Katy. Do you think you need any of those 40% of California voters to win?

Speaker 8:
[17:03] And you're saying, no, you don't.

Speaker 5:
[17:04] No, I'm saying I'm going to try to win every vote I can. And what I'm saying to you is that...

Speaker 10:
[17:10] Well, to those voters, okay. So you...

Speaker 5:
[17:12] I don't want to keep doing this. I'm going to call it. Thank you.

Speaker 7:
[17:17] You're not going to do the interview with us.

Speaker 5:
[17:19] Nope, not like this. I'm not. Not with seven follow ups to every single question you ask.

Speaker 2:
[17:23] Every other candidate has an answer in the works.

Speaker 5:
[17:25] I don't care. I want to have a pleasant, positive conversation which you ask me about every issue on this list. And if every question you're going to make up a follow up question, then we're never going to get there. And we're just going to circle around.

Speaker 2:
[17:38] I am an investigative reporter.

Speaker 5:
[17:39] I have never had to do this before, ever.

Speaker 7:
[17:41] You've never had to have a conversation with a reporter?

Speaker 5:
[17:44] To end an interview.

Speaker 11:
[17:46] Okay, but every other candidate has done this.

Speaker 5:
[17:48] What part of... I'm me. I'm running for governor because I'm a leader. I don't want to have an unhappy experience with you. And I don't want this all on camera.

Speaker 2:
[17:56] I don't want to have an unhappy experience with you either. Too late. Too late. I also would like to have a positive, pleasant experience in doing my interviews, whether I'm on the receiving end of the questions or the one asking them. Go, Katie. I feel you. She was annoying with the seven follow-ups. Katie Porter is misunderstood, my friends. She's misunderstood. She should be given a fair chance out there in California. It's amazing. It's so fun to watch. I love it all so much. As Piers Morgan may say, woke is dead, but not inside the Democrat Party. OK, the most absurd part of this debate last night, the most absurd by far, was when they got to the topic of whether cops are racist. If they pull over a Spanish-speaking truck driver for possibly violating a road sign, if they ask them if they can understand the road sign, OK? Like to 99.9% of humans on this earth, the answer is very obvious, no, they're doing their jobs, they're protecting the community to make sure how the, if the guy doesn't understand STOP, it endangers us all. It endangers our children, yield, take your pick. It's a relevant inquiry, especially this year, when we've seen multiple Americans killed by foreign-born, Spanish-speaking drivers who are here, often illegally, who get these commercial drivers licenses and then are reckless, either intentionally or because they don't understand. So who's going to enforce all these revisions like TSA or, you know, what's the exact organization? It's like Highway Patrol, I guess, but it's Sean Duffy and CHP, basically, in California. But they've been pushed by the feds to make sure these people can speak English before they're granted a commercial drivers license. But who actually enforces that? I mean, Sean Duffy doesn't have a little independent force out there pulling people over. It's cops. And they know very well that one of the requirements to get one of these licenses now is that you be able to understand the signs. You don't have to be fluent in English. You don't have to dazzle at an English speaking cocktail party. But you need to understand the basic signs. Merge, no U-turn. That's how one of these guys killed some American drivers. Stop and so on. So here's Javier Becerra and billionaire Tom Steyer's answers. This billionaire Tom Steyer is so fucking out of touch, this guy. I'm sure he's driven around in some fancy black car, some town car or some Mercedes by some driver. He doesn't ever have to even think about this stuff. But here's Becerra and billionaire Tom Steyer's answers. Because they showed him a video of a cop asking so politely, this one driver, Spanish speaking, if he understood a sign that the cop was holding in front of him. And they got into whether this was racist. So the question was, should there be English proficiency tests for truck drivers? And is this racial profiling that this cop did? Watch. Should the CHP be giving English proficiency tests to truck drivers? And if not, would US governor push back against the Trump administration on this policy? You have 60 seconds.

Speaker 4:
[21:23] I would definitely push back on the Trump administration on, again, a reckless policy. I would make sure that that officer understands that he cannot discriminate against any driver without having a basis to do so. We have to be very careful that we're not profiling consumers in California, drivers in California.

Speaker 8:
[21:39] But what I can say is this, racial profiling is illegal. And in fact, picking on people based on the color of their skin in the state of California is illegal.

Speaker 2:
[21:52] Racial profiling is illegal. By the way, look at Tom Steyer's feet. Look at this. You're so cool, bro. You have a gubernatorial debate and you just want to telegraph, I'm the cool millionaire, billionaire, excuse me. I don't need to wear shoes. I don't need to wear like a suit to a debate. I'm going to wear my sneakers, my trainers because that's just how cash I am. Okay. It looks disrespectful. Now, contrast Becerra's and Steyer's answers. With the two Republicans on that stage last night, pal Steve Hilton and another great guy, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, who I must say did very well in that debate. Watch.

Speaker 12:
[22:33] So I've discussed this with someone called Marcus Coleman from Bakersfield. His beautiful daughter Delilah was put into a coma by someone driving a truck, an illegal immigrant, didn't speak English and his daughter now disabled for life. That's what we're dealing with here. It is completely ridiculous that we have people driving on our roads who can't understand road signs and can't speak English. So yes, of course, and I've discussed this with my friend, Sean Duffy, the Transportation Secretary. We will not be issuing commercial driver licenses when I'm governor to people who are illegally here and who don't speak English. That is obvious common sense.

Speaker 13:
[23:16] Let's stop with this whole racism thing and racial profiling and all of this garbage. We have to get over this. You either violated the law or you didn't. End of story.

Speaker 2:
[23:29] He's a sheriff, so he knows what he's talking about. Must just be such a breath of fresh air for Californians to hear. This is completely ridiculous. What are we doing debating whether this is racial profiling? The man couldn't speak English and he's driving a semi tractor trailer. We have the right to know if he can read the signs, which are in English. Grow up, Ms. Moderator. All right. What about California's spiraling homelessness crisis? I mean, have you been to California in the past couple of years? Good luck going two blocks without having to literally step over a homeless person or a homeless encampment or tents, etc. I mean, it's everywhere. It gets worse and worse and worse. California is ranked number one when it comes to homeless people. Number one has the most homeless people in the country according to US News and World Report. California alone accounts for over 24% of all homelessness in America, at least based on the 2024 estimates. Over 24%. How about that? Gavin Newsom became governor in 2019. And it was just last week that City Journal revealed California now provides sex change procedures to homeless illegals. Illegals. Think of it. You come here unlawfully, you stay here unlawfully, you then can't get a job, can't support yourself, you become homeless, and you want California taxpayers to pay for your, you know what, to be cut off, to have sex change procedures for us to sterilize you. I mean, it's insane. And Gavin Newsom says, yes, I mean, this is what's going to come back to haunt him if he actually becomes the nominee. I get the hairline. It's good. He's an attractive man. He's tall. He is freaking backing this. Can you imagine this on a debate stage when this gets exposed to the American public? As City Journal reported, quote, when most Californians think about homeless services, they imagine that their tax dollars are going to support veterans, families, and those who have fallen on hard times. The reality is that some homeless shelters have apparently turned into havens for transgender identifying illegal aliens who can receive gender-affirming care, which is a misnomer, on taxpayers' dime. Here's, okay, on the homelessness issue, which is a nightmare in California. Again, they're number one when it comes to worse in the nation. Here's Becerra's grade of Gavin Newsom on that issue.

Speaker 9:
[26:01] Mr. Becerra, we haven't seen you issue a letter grade on Governor Newsom's overall performance. What grade does he get on homelessness, and what, if anything, would you do differently? You have 60 seconds.

Speaker 4:
[26:12] Frank, I would say that the governor has made efforts. We've seen him come down to Los Angeles, actually go out and try to clean some of the streets. On effort, I would give him an A.

Speaker 2:
[26:24] Oh my God, everyone gets a trophy. On effort. I mean, what is, that might be even worse. At least if he hadn't tried, you could be like, well, he has different priorities. And if we could get him focused on the right priorities, he would know what he's doing. That's not what, he's like, he tried super hard. He's just totally incompetent. He's completely ineffectual and doesn't know how to do things, get things done. I mean, it's almost worse. But I mean, what, you know, as you know, not I'm not afraid to swear, but I really don't like the P word. But if I were to use it, I'd be using it about Xavier Becerra right there. What a P word. Just say it. He sucks. He stunk up the joint. California is a mess, especially on this issue. Own some piece of it. So you've got just a modicum of respectability with the voters listening to you. All right. But we've got to end this back on Team Sanity again with Steve Hilton explaining what's really going on. Watch. Mr. Hilton, you've given the governor an F on his overall performance. When it comes to homelessness, has he done anything right? You have 60 seconds.

Speaker 12:
[27:31] My goodness. Of course, it's an F. It shames our state, the situation with homelessness. We have about 10 percent of the US population, around 50 percent of the country's homeless population. As for Xavier praising Gavin Newsom for the photo op where he tried to pretend he was cleaning up a homeless encampment, literally, Gavin Newsom did that three times in a row. Nothing changed and nothing will change if you have one of these Democrats in power. It will be more of the same.

Speaker 2:
[28:01] Steve, you're doing great. Keep going. Keep going. And Hilton even had a great answer on why Californians should like that he was endorsed by President Trump, right? The moderator knew exactly where to go to.

Speaker 9:
[28:16] Who?

Speaker 2:
[28:16] Why is that a good thing? California, everybody hates him. And here, watch how he handled it.

Speaker 9:
[28:22] Mr. Hilton, you said you were deeply honored to recently receive President Trump's endorsement. That's despite the fact that 62% of Californians disapprove of the job he is doing. Are those Californians wrong? You have 60 seconds.

Speaker 12:
[28:36] One of the proudest days of my life was the day I became an American citizen. It happened in a ceremony right here in San Francisco. So it is a deep honor for me to be endorsed by the President of the United States. And here's the thing that's going to help every Californian when I'm governor is that we will have a constructive relationship and partnership with the federal government, which would be the case, I would hope, for any party in that situation so that we can make things better in California, work with the president and his administration. It will benefit every Californian to have a governor who is a partner on these issues with the president and his team.

Speaker 2:
[29:25] So good. Right? So good. He, the president's endorsement will help Steve with the 40%, 39% of Californians who are Republicans, long suffering Republicans. And with the others, which still make up the majority, you know, the 60 plus percent, he's telegraphing, the reason I was proud of it is because I'm proud to be an American and it's a wonderful thing to have a president endorse you. That was a very clever way of explaining why he's so happy to have the endorsement. It's no wonder he still leads in the RCP average of all polls in this race. The June 2nd primary, you know, is now not far away, but the early voting is like a week away. So this thing's heating up. So just so we're clear, Steve Hilton is still leading, thrilled, it would be a miracle and so great for California if they would just elect him. Please, please my friends in California. By the way, our show has a ton of viewers in California. We can see where our viewers are. And I know you're out there and I know you're listening and you do have to make sure you vote. It's like not the national election, but this one actually does matter. You have a shot, he's leading. If you can keep him and God love you, if you could keep Chad Bianco also in the top two, then you're guaranteed Republican rule, which would be great for you guys, great. In any event, pay attention, please vote. And if we can't have both Republicans in the final runoff, please consider, get out of the fucking shot. She may be angry, but she's entertaining. And if any one of these Democrats is going to ruin California even more, let's be honest, we might as well go with the entertaining one. All right, up next, Kelly's Court is resuming. It's back in session and we've got some great cases. My gosh, there's a lot going on. Here's a question for you. How many brokers does it take to insure your business? If you're like most business owners, the answer is too many. Multiple policies, multiple applications, and no clear view of how it all fits together. And when questions come up, it's not easy to get the clarity you need at all. No one's there for you. But Supersure changes that. A one-stop shop for all of your business insurance, backed by a team that works with you year round, not just at renewal. You are not a burden to them. They will take care of you. They want you to be happy. And if you've ever stared at a policy, wondering what it actually covers, Supersure has a fine print fax tool that translates the legal jargon into plain English so you know what's covered and what's not. It's not some shell game that they seem to be enjoying playing at your expense. Right now, you can go to supersure.com and get a full report on your current policies with no obligation. Find out if you're overinsured, underinsured, or somewhere in between. Go to supersure.com. One superagency, one powerful platform, all your policies in one place. Imagine it. Go to supersure.com/megyntoday. That's supersure.com/megyn, paid for by Supersure Insurance Agency, LLC, a licensed insurance agency.

Speaker 1:
[32:39] Need to restock inventory, cover seasonal dips, or manage payroll? OnDeck's small business line of credit provides immediate access to funds, up to $200,000, exactly when your business needs it. With flexible draws, transparent pricing, and full control over repayment, you can tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. Apply today at ondeck.com and funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. 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.

Speaker 14:
[33:10] Looking for the best place to shop this Mother's Day? Go with the brand that makes it easy to send something thoughtful to everyone on your list. 1800flowers.com Right now at 1-800-FLOWERS, order one dozen roses and get another dozen free. More flowers mean more smiles, all backed by the quality, attention to detail, and trusted delivery experience that make 1-800-FLOWERS my top choice to send something beautiful Mom will love. Make Mom's Day at 1800flowers.com/sxm. That's 1800flowers.com/sxm.

Speaker 2:
[33:44] Now it's time for Kelly's Court with our favorites from the MK True Crime Channel. That's a podcast that you should go subscribe to called MK True Crime, and we've got some other options coming up your way because everybody loves true crime. On the docket today, Kash Patel versus The Atlantic, the sexual assault allegations against pop star Katie Perry, and whether we should be suspicious of one sailor's quick return to the US while the search continues for his wife in the Bahamas. First in the line up today, Mark Eiglarsh and Jonna Spilbor, hosts of Positively Legal, which is one of our new shows that we are officially launching on MK True Crime. You will see it in your podcast feed. Well, you should Google it. Guys, welcome.

Speaker 3:
[34:25] Great to be here, Megyn.

Speaker 15:
[34:26] We're having us.

Speaker 2:
[34:28] Congrats on Positively Legal. I love the name and it describes you perfectly. We're going to have a lot of fun.

Speaker 3:
[34:35] We're going to have a lot of fun. It's going to be unique. I promise or I ain't doing it.

Speaker 15:
[34:39] Yeah, you definitely know Mark picked that name, Megyn, that wasn't my name, but we are going to have a lot of fun.

Speaker 2:
[34:46] Mark is like the only lawyer we know who's like, choose happiness.

Speaker 15:
[34:50] The rest of us are like, what, get out.

Speaker 3:
[34:53] When misery is okay for the New Yorkers. Yeah, go ahead, enjoy your life.

Speaker 2:
[34:59] It's true, he's exposed to that Florida sunshine, which made him happy. I mentioned this to the audience the other day when we announced the new shows on MK True Crime, that you guys are Kelly's court, Kendall's court, OGs, back when my name was Megyn Kendall at Fox. And so every iteration of whatever show I've had, that you guys have been coming on, we've been doing crime analysis and legal analysis. And that takes me back to 2018 when I was on NBC. And Mark, you came to me and said, I've got this unbelievable story involving my client who went over to Spain as a student and something terrible happened to her and not just her. But we need to get the word out because this is happening over and over and they can't really get the story out. So, I'm going to play the trailer for what has now become a Netflix special involving your client. We did have her on. We'll show a little of that. But do you want to just set up the story and how it first came to be?

Speaker 3:
[36:02] Here's what people don't know. The only reason why I met Gabby Vega, the victim in this case, is because her mother was my kid's teacher at a school here in Fort Lauderdale. So she came to me and I'm like, well, I defend people who do this stuff. I don't really represent victims. But you know what? I'm going to see what I can do for you. And she wanted to get the word out. I said, are you sure? Absolutely. And Megan, we made a list. You were the top of the list at the time. And I figured, what are the odds that Megan's going to have us on? When you said yes, I got goosebumps. I was so excited because I knew things would change for her. At a minimum, the word would get out, this guy would be exposed. But something far greater happened. And that's where the Netflix documentary explains what happened.

Speaker 2:
[36:51] So Gabby comes on, I'm going to show that in a minute, but she comes on my show and she talked about how she was an exchange student or she went over to Spain to study. And she finds herself in the clutches of this tour guide. And this tour guide wanted to be much, much more than her guide around Spain. She talks in the following clip. This is from, not from our show, but from the Netflix show called Predator of Seville, describing herself waking up and finding Manuel. Well, I'll let her tell it here. This is Thought 27.

Speaker 7:
[37:34] I just remember, like, I woke up at some point, and no one was in the room, and I felt like shit. I had never felt that way in my life. I have not felt that way in my life since. It was almost like there was a disconnect between my mind and my body, where it was like my brain was working on such a slow level. Here, and I just remember leaning up against the wall and dragging my feet one in front of the other to get to the bathroom. I went to go open the bathroom door, and when I opened it, Nicole and Ashleigh and Manuel were all in the shower, the three of them. They were in their shirts and underwear, and he was in his underwear. I remember I closed the door. They all came out scurried out. It almost looks like they were all embarrassed. I just went in and I sat on the toilet, and I was facing the door, and all I remember. Is the thing that's haunted me for years. It's like that memory of just the door swinging open, and seeing his crotch come towards me, and then him putting himself in my mouth, and then me getting hit in the head, and then I just fucked out.

Speaker 2:
[38:59] Oh my gosh, it's so disturbing. So she had gone over there, Mark, to study abroad, like so many of us do in college, and she did the thing, I've done this as a tourist, not as a student, but where you're in Spain, and then you just pop down to Morocco, and this is her tour guide, who's now suddenly in her room at night, wanting to play games with her and other girls, and the next thing she knows, there's a serious possibility she was given a drug, and she was sexually assaulted by this man, whose name is Manuel, I don't get the last name, you probably have it, right?

Speaker 3:
[39:33] Bella Vega, yeah, he's got it.

Speaker 2:
[39:35] Vela, yeah, Vela, there we go, Manuel Vela. So, here's the trailer for the Netflix special, The Predator of Seville, which without Mark Eiglarsh, would never have happened, watch this.

Speaker 7:
[39:50] When I moved to Spain to study, I was an 18-year-old kid.

Speaker 10:
[39:54] I studied abroad in Seville. Seville, Sevilla.

Speaker 7:
[39:57] I really loved it. It was like an adventure. I was really excited by the whole thing and thinking about all the trips. Discover Expressions was recommended and they emphasize safety. The main tour guide seems like a nice guy.

Speaker 10:
[40:12] He was handsome, he knew everyone, a playful personality.

Speaker 7:
[40:18] The last night of the trip, he was like, oh, well, I can get champagne and we can all hang out in the room. I started getting really tired. I woke up the next morning. That's when I realized what had happened. The embassy said you shouldn't talk to anyone about this. Second he told me no, I was like, that's exactly what I'm going to feel. I started building an investigation. Story just kept getting bigger. I went on the Today Show. I had no idea what I was involved in. You feel like you were in the room with the devil.

Speaker 2:
[40:48] So Mark, what were the legal challenges for her in getting this thing to a criminal trial?

Speaker 3:
[40:54] I was speaking to her today, actually. She told me that they were not very interested in Spain. They were not going to do anything. And contrary to what you said before you played the clip, it wasn't me, Megyn, it was you. Had you not given her that format to show the world that she said unlocked the government folks over there because they care way too much about tourism and they didn't like the way that this looked, that's what did it. You did it, Megyn. And also there's a beautiful part where she gives you credit where she was freaking out and I remember those moments and I tried to calm her down, but you going over to her and saying you're going to be fine, you got this, meant the world to her. And she delivered her version of what occurred with courage and dignity and intelligence and passion. And that really opened the floodgates.

Speaker 2:
[41:46] Well, thank you for saying that. But I'm thrilled that these women found the courage to come forward because it wasn't just Gabby as it turns out, there were others, Jonna, as we've seen in so many of these cases. When one brave woman finds the courage to speak out, all these other young girls who, you know, he was a tour guide. They weren't expecting to get molested by this man, sexually assaulted by this man. But one after the other, they started to come out. So you tell me like whether you think the Spanish government did the right thing here or whether they had to be dragged, kicking and screaming just based on the fear of tourism losses?

Speaker 15:
[42:23] Yeah, I think it is the latter because we have all seen this movie, for lack of a better word, time and time again, seasoned predators always have a plan, right? This guy did not just wake up one day and decide that Gabby was going to be his first victim. So first of all, kudos to her because God only knows how many other women she saved by having the wherewithal to come out. Come on your previous show and save so many other people from this particular fate. And when you watch, like I watched the first episode of the documentary, and of course we see some signs the way they depicted it. Like, for example, he should not, no tour guide should ever go to some young girl's hotel room to want to play games in his underwear. Number one, red flag. Number two, apparently like they show him pouring some champagne. He came with champagne. She doesn't, Gabby doesn't have much of a memory of what happened. It's very, very foggy. So of course, there's a possibility that he drugged her, part of being the predator. So I applaud her very much. I don't know what Spain, how Spain takes sexual predators or sexual offenders or what they intend to do. But then I did hear even after he was convicted, he's out for now, at least while the case is on appeal. So they're not taking it as seriously as we do here in the United States. And that's shameful.

Speaker 3:
[43:46] Yeah, let me add something.

Speaker 2:
[43:47] He did get convicted. Yeah, Megyn. I mean, that's the other happy ending here is that he, they did ultimately bring charges. She testified and he was found guilty. And so that's happened. But as you point out, not yet in prison.

Speaker 3:
[43:59] So a couple of things. One, Gabby has agreed to come on to our first episode for an in-depth interview, not only about the documentary, what didn't make it into the documentary, but importantly, what happened after the documentary. Because I was getting a bunch of e-mails from new victims that I was forwarding to Gabby. There's now more than 10 victims who have come forward. Some people who weren't necessarily victims, but people were like, wait, now I recognize him. He's my landlord over in Spain. He's still having contact with young women. So us doing the show and us doing it on our show, Positively Legal, which airs on Wednesday for our first inaugural show. We're going to get into the weeds with her and she's going to tell you amongst other things that it was the prosecutors who said it was okay for him to remain out on bond while he goes through his appeals. The prosecutors agree to that, Megyn.

Speaker 2:
[44:58] Unbelievable. Well, some of the women came on that same show that we did on NBC because, you know, she started to realize something had happened to her. The word went out a bit on this, not a good tour company. This is not a good guy. So these young women, and this was just like, as the Me Too movement had just come underway. So I think women were starting to realize there was power and safety in numbers. But two other girls came on, Haley McAleese and Carly Van Ostenbridge. And here's a bit of that from our interview on NBC in April of 2018. Watch this. It's hot 36.

Speaker 16:
[45:34] We went to his room and realized we were the only people there. And he was like, We're just going to wait for everyone else to show up. And very quickly, he started being very sexual and asking really personal questions and wanted us to dance for him. And she did like this, you know, like a dumb dance to cut the sexual tension.

Speaker 2:
[45:54] Yeah, this isn't like we've all been there.

Speaker 16:
[45:55] Yeah. And then he was like, No, you need to do like a sexy dance on top of me. And that's when I was like, All right, no, we're leaving. And at that point, he took us and like pushed us against the counter and tried to like hold us and make us dance the way he wanted us to dance. And we obviously didn't want to, so we weren't making that easy for him. And then he ended up, he was like, You guys can't leave. And I was like, No, we're leaving. And he held me against the wall and started kissing me and then grabbed her hand and made her touch him. And eventually I like pushed through and got out of like his out of where he was. And I was like, No, we're leaving, but he wouldn't let go of her.

Speaker 11:
[46:36] She went and opened the door and she told Manuel, the door is open, everyone can hear what you're doing. And only then did he let me go and then I ran out after her.

Speaker 2:
[46:47] Manuel Blanco Vela. But here's the question Mark, is there any liability, so this is criminal charges of talking about, is there any liability for the tour company or anybody beyond that, the school, anybody who failed to protect these girls?

Speaker 3:
[47:00] Well, I know that there was an investigation into the schools, for example, my client went to, if you press me, I'll say it, but a very well-known, well-respected Florida state school, and that's how she picked this company, that's how most of the girls did. The Discover Excursions marketed these specific universities and targeted them, and the universities seemed to recommend them as vendors, and there's some argument that they knew that funny stuff was going on and they continued to recommend them as vendors. And so unfortunately, it's very difficult to prevail in the civil arena, and I don't think anyone's had to pay a nickel.

Speaker 2:
[47:38] So what's going to happen to this guy now that he's, why is he out? He's just out pending sentencing?

Speaker 3:
[47:42] Correct. It's all the way up to the highest court in the land in Spain. In fact, Gabby said, wow, from a Megyn Kelly appearance to now this case being in the highest court in Spain. She was very impressed and also grateful to the other two women who came forward on your show, who technically were also my clients. But what I called them my clients was me just being a mentor and a sounding board to help them get through this whole thing. That's really what I did. But yeah, there's possibly more charges going to be brought against him in Spain. Gabby, you'll learn in our interview, is working actively to make sure that that happens.

Speaker 2:
[48:22] Wow. It's crazy, John, when you think about this guy who had access to a bunch of 20, 21-year-olds, college students, they're young, 19, studying abroad, one of the most exciting experiences in their young lives. Your tour guide might slip you a mickey and sexually, not just harass, but assault you. When I interviewed Gabby, I remember this moment, we pulled it, she didn't know that she'd been in the bathroom with Vela for a half an hour because she believes she was drugged. This is the moment. Here, watch this, Sat 33. Gabrielle spoke with her friends in the morning and asked if they remembered anything from the night before. One told her Gabrielle had been in the bathroom with Vela for half an hour.

Speaker 7:
[49:10] It's difficult talking about it just because I've talked to a lot of girls now who have dealt with this at his hands and I could have done something different.

Speaker 2:
[49:30] That's an important thing to see because you see her feeling really great about the result. She's feeling more cocky as that happens to a lot of women when they find their voices. But that is all born out of a deep, deep unsettling pain that being sexually assaulted against your will, especially while under a drug possibly, can do to a young woman.

Speaker 15:
[49:51] Oh, absolutely. A lot of these women probably for a period of time, if not forever, feel, I believe, that somehow, someway, they're the ones who screwed up, that somehow they're to blame. We have to let women in their position know that, no, you're not to blame. The world is supposed to be a nice place. You're not supposed to get molested by your tour guide. You're not supposed to get molested by anybody, especially somebody who tries to eliminate your resistance by secretly drugging you. And this guy, you have to think about it. He didn't just meet these women by becoming their tour guide. I'm sure you have to fill out your name, rank, and serial number when you apply to be on this tour. He could have targeted them before they ever, ever met him in real life. Like, this type of predator plans this out, executed it perfectly, and if Spain doesn't do better and put this guy behind bars so that other people do not also get hurt by anybody who's got the same idea, then shame on them.

Speaker 2:
[50:50] Yeah, then they're going to get some more Megyn Kelly Show treatment. The whole situation reminds me of the, forgive me, but like the perverted Boy Scout leader who goes and works at the Boy Scouts because he wants to molest boys, like they insert themselves into certain circles where they know the victim pool will be plentiful. And it's no accident this guy was offering tours to college coeds, which was obviously the exact target group he wanted to get. Guys, thank you both so much. Positively Legal is available on the MK True Crime YouTube channel and podcast feed. Go subscribe and you won't miss Gabby's interview on their debut show next week. If your dog is scratching more than usual, licking their paws or shaking their head, it might seem like normal dog behavior, but it turns out those can actually be signs that your dog has allergies. A lot of those issues start in the gut. When a dog's gut health is off, it shows up in their skin, digestion, even their energy levels. But here's an option for you, BetterWild allergy relief soft chews. They're designed to help balance your dog's gut health to support their immune system. This is the first and only chew with Ancestral Advantage Wolf probiotics in it with natural ingredients. BetterWild says this is proven to help reduce itching and support gut, immune, and skin health. Plus, BetterWild uses clinically studied, veterinarian-approved ingredients. Consider giving it a try. Right now, BetterWild is offering you up to 40% off your order at betterwild.com/mk. That's betterwild.com/mk for up to 40% off your order. betterwild.com/mk. Katie Perry, now under investigation by police in Australia after claims by Ruby Rose, who's an actress, that the singer sexually assaulted her in an Australian nightclub nearly 20 years ago. According to TMZ, Perry would not be shielded by any statute of limitations in Australia if police do indeed find evidence of a crime. A spokesperson for the Office of Public Prosecution in Victoria telling TMZ, There is no statute of limitations on prosecuting indictable serious crimes in Victoria. The law at the time of the alleged offense was committed, applies to criminal proceedings and sentencing for historical offenses. Here to weigh in is Dave Aronberg, Phil Holloway and Ashleigh Merchant. They are all lawyers and hosts of the MK True Crime Show. Go and subscribe at mktruecrime.com. So just to be clear for our listening audience, you got Mark and Jonna, they've got a show. You got my three friends here, they've got a show. And then you're going to have Matt Murphy and Mark Geragos, who also have a show as part of the MK True Crime podcast feed and YouTube channel. So you don't have to subscribe to three different shows. Just go to your podcast, you know, search button, type in MK True Crime and hit subscribe. And then you can listen to all or any of their programs, whichever one you're in the mood for, whatever time of day it is, will determine which one's available. So it's all going to be on the same feed, just in case you didn't understand, because it's the way I said it before, I think was unclear. Okay, guys, welcome. Great to see you all, and congrats on the launch of the new show. Thanks, we're excited.

Speaker 17:
[54:07] Great to be here, thank you.

Speaker 2:
[54:09] Yeah, me too. Okay, let's kick it off with Katie Perry. So this is kind of a wacky story where I didn't know this Ruby Rose. She's stunning. She, I guess, was in Orange is the New Black, and she's claiming 20 years ago that she was at this nightclub in Australia, and she's Australian, with Katy Perry. And that, and it's graphic, but I talked about it with Katy Perry's ex-husband yesterday, that Katy Perry went over to Ruby Rose whose head was on the lap of a friend. Sounds like she was not feeling well, she'd been over-served. And that Katy Perry allegedly pulled her own underwear aside and rubbed her vag on Ruby Rose's face. It wasn't even just like an exposure, it was a touching, which in any world would be sexual assault, assuming it's unwanted, right? And Ruby Rose is saying it was 100% unwanted. And then adds another detail, which I have to say, I don't know. She then claims that she then threw up on Katy Perry. So disgusted was she. Now it's starting to sound a little unbelievable to me. I don't know, but she was drunk, so it's possible she threw up because she said she was over served. So now she's telling the story. I don't know why now. Katy Perry posted a comment under a Justin Bieber meme or post about his appearance at Coachella. And Katy Perry posted something online. And this Ruby Rose saw it and didn't, she just had a negative reaction to it. And the next thing you know, she's telling this story and has dredged up this whole thing saying, you assaulted me. I'm not going to file a police report, but you know you did it. And Katy Perry's team came out and said, no, she didn't. She didn't do it. You're a liar. You accuse people all the time and they always deny it. And she was like, girl, it's on. And now she did file a criminal complaint. And Katy Perry is being investigated. And Ruby Rose in the original statement, Ashleigh, had said, she has some sort of proof. I don't know what the proof exactly is. So what do you make of where we are and how we got here?

Speaker 18:
[56:22] I feel like they're going to get into a mud wrestling pit and fight it out. Like, that's what we have here. It's like, you were a hoe. You did this 20 years ago, but you did this. I mean, it's just crazy to me that this is happening. But so what we've got really is 20 years ago, she was apparently at this nightclub. This is one thing I want to pay attention to. She says Ruby Rose says she was in her best friend's lap when this happened. So I'm really curious what this best friend says, because if her best friend saw her being sexually assaulted, she's vulnerable, she's on her lap and she sees this happen, she's going to say something. I mean, that doesn't make any sense why she wouldn't say anything. So I'm really curious what her story is. And also the nightclub, I think it was the manager or the owner, they talked to him and I know it's been 20 years, but he didn't see anything. I mean, if you see Katy Perry literally take her vagina out in a public place and rub it on a drunk lady's face, someone's going to see that. Like someone's going to see that, right? And someone...

Speaker 2:
[57:11] Take it out.

Speaker 15:
[57:11] Like it's not normal.

Speaker 2:
[57:13] Like a set of keys.

Speaker 18:
[57:14] And just rub it around. This is not normal activity. Someone's going to say something. So I don't know. 20 years later, I'm just not thinking that it's going to get very far, but it's definitely hurting Katy Perry. I mean, now we've got other people talking about, hey, she molested me, she did this stuff to me. But Ruby Rose has a history of saying that other people have sexually assaulted her and just throwing it out. Hey, I was raped by a ton of men on the set, she said of her last program. When she left it, she said, I was sick of being raped by all these men on my show, but she didn't make any allegations. So I don't know, something's really fishy here, Megyn.

Speaker 2:
[57:49] Here's the club manager statement. It was a place called Spice Market. He's spoken out about the Wild Night saying as follows, quote, they were drunk, they were not paralytic or anything, just like any other person drinking at a nightclub, he told the Herald Sun. He claimed he did not see any alleged sexual assault take place or any vomiting, referring to Rose's allegations that she threw up when this happened to her. Ruby Rose is now saying that she's finalized all her police reports. She also does seem to say though, that she's got proof, Phil, that she's got, I think she suggested she might have photos and maybe even contemporaneous notes and a witness. Hold on, she says after it, I threw up on her. I told the story publicly but changed it to be a funny little drunk story because I didn't know how else to handle it. So I kept it a secret. But she says she's more than welcome to sue me if this is not true, but she won't because it happened. I have photos and it was literally in public and witnessed by multiple people. Plus, there's so much more that happened in the years leading up to her silly song that she won't want me discussing. The psychological manipulation was strong with that one. Okay, so your thoughts on her alleged proof and how she can make this case?

Speaker 17:
[59:14] Well, Megyn, maybe she's got a hotline. One eight hundred, if you've seen Katy Perry's lady parts, call this number. You know, I tell you, this whole thing on its face, it doesn't have the ring of believability to me. I'm sorry, it just doesn't. I understand that sexual assault is a terrible thing and nobody's denying that, but another thing is terrible. It's also terrible to falsely accuse somebody of it, and this person has a history of it. Look, we gotta start with the fact that she's drunk, admittedly drunk. And when you're drunk, you're unable to perceive things accurately when they occur, and you're unable to oftentimes recall them accurately later when you're called upon to recall them. And she's admitted that she was so drunk and she threw up, which suggests to me maybe that's more about the amount and quantity of the alcohol because even the manager there says that they were under the influence. So maybe that has something to do with the fact that she threw up if she did in fact do so. And then you have prior inconsistent statements. Now the things where she's claimed misconduct against other third parties, it's gonna be very hard to prove or disprove those because like this one, it's gonna come down to being a swearing match. But setting aside the fact that she's probably made false claims against other people and is a drama queen, you have a situation here where this woman has made false or prior inconsistent statements. And in the law, that is something that cuts directly to a witness's credibility. And you add to that, guys, the fact that a witness, this manager, remembers it and cannot corroborate any other details other than that they were there and they were drinking, you put all that together and what you've got is a big ball of nothing. You got probably a false claim, certainly one that's not able to be substantiated to the point of making any kind of claim in court, even a civil claim in my view.

Speaker 2:
[61:15] I mean, you definitely, the girl whose lap was holding Ruby Rose is critical. You know, you're right, Ashleigh, that girl's going to remember. You don't forget if Katy Perry, you know, takes out her badge as you put it and rubs it on your friend's face right in front of you.

Speaker 18:
[61:32] You do not.

Speaker 2:
[61:32] Which I don't even know how you do. As a woman, like, what do you do?

Speaker 18:
[61:35] You gotta get straddled.

Speaker 2:
[61:37] You gotta like, hold on, let me whip my leg up.

Speaker 18:
[61:39] Right, it's so weird to me.

Speaker 5:
[61:40] Like, it's just so odd.

Speaker 18:
[61:41] And then she's throwing up. Like, it's just, the whole thing seems bizarre. And now someone has a camera during all of this. I mean, they're taking photos of it. Like, it makes no sense.

Speaker 2:
[61:51] It seems like those photos would have leaked by now.

Speaker 18:
[61:53] Think about how much those would have been out there.

Speaker 2:
[61:56] Dave raises an interesting, or Phil raises an interesting point, Dave, on prior inconsistent statements. Because even Ruby Rose is saying, after I threw up on her, I told the story publicly, but changed it to be a, quote, funny little drunk story because I didn't know how else to handle it. Later, she agreed to help me get my US visa, so I kept it a secret. But I did tell y'all she wasn't a good person. I was in my early 20s. I'm now 40. It's taken almost two decades to say this publicly. And she's talking about how she's grateful she's found her voice and so on. But she appears to be stealing herself for on camera statements in which she's already told this story, Dave, in a way that, yeah, it certainly sounds like it's not going to be, I was sexually assaulted and I threw up in disgust at her.

Speaker 19:
[62:45] Right. And Megyn, it's good to be back on with you and my co-hosts Phil and Ashleigh. And this one is a tough one because both sides here have a rap sheet because both of them have made accusations or have been accused of things that will harm their credibility. The accuser here has alleged that others have raped her and it doesn't look like there was any corroboration there. And here, Katy Perry also has been accused of sexual assault in 2019 from this actor Josh Closs, who starred in her video and said that she bullied him and pulled his pants down and exposed his genitals to others. I mean, what's going on in Hollywood, right? I mean, this is like these accusations of her to go up to people. Also, there's a female TV host in Georgia who reportedly, she accused Katy Perry of harassing her that same year. And then there's video of Katy Perry grabbing Justin Bieber's butt and looking into the camera saying, sorry, Salina.

Speaker 2:
[63:43] We have that.

Speaker 19:
[63:44] Right? So you have...

Speaker 2:
[63:45] Wait, we have that.

Speaker 19:
[63:46] Yeah, okay. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[63:47] Hold on. Let me show that video with Bieber and then I'll let you finish your point. That's SOT39. She's hugging Bieber, she reaches down. She definitely grabs his ass and her hand stays there for a long time. She's a lot older than he is. Poor Bieber. He's been like, poor Bieber. He's been through a lot. Keep going, Dave.

Speaker 19:
[64:17] He did well for himself, though. He married well.

Speaker 2:
[64:20] I know, but he's clearly so damaged now from obviously his time with Usher and Diddy. This is my own supposition. I don't have proof, but it seems pretty clear. It's just like everybody abused Justin Bieber, like on camera, on late night shows. You can see he's walking around laboring under this. That's my belief. But anyway, keep going, Dave.

Speaker 19:
[64:40] Well, this all feeds into a narrative that Katy Perry just thinks that she has the privilege to grab people's butts and pull people's pants down, and perhaps put her vag in someone's face at a party. I can't believe I said that. I went to law school. I went to seven years of school. You can come on and talk about that. That's really unbelievable.

Speaker 17:
[65:00] I mean, we've talked about some crazy stuff on our show, but this is crazy.

Speaker 2:
[65:05] You can see it. It was coming at you like a freight train, Aronberg. We can see it. Is he going to do it? Is he going to say it?

Speaker 19:
[65:14] It's so true. I wonder what Justin Trudeau is thinking about all this right now. But the thing is, is that to prove a case in the United States, it would be a non-star. I mean, she said she said, and the witnesses are not fareable for the plaintiff here, for the accuser. But you can maybe do something more in Australia, which has no statute limitations. Maybe they have looser rules of evidence and a lower burden than we have here. But in this country, this case would go nowhere.

Speaker 2:
[65:42] Well, look at this one too. Here's Anna Kendrick in 2014, sitting down with Conan O'Brien with her own Katy Perry story. Watch.

Speaker 16:
[65:50] It was a crazy night.

Speaker 14:
[65:51] I've never been around so many.

Speaker 16:
[65:52] Katy Perry finger-banged my cleavage. It was a weird night.

Speaker 19:
[65:57] She's very mature. She just does that? She just does that?

Speaker 14:
[66:02] Well, my dress, I was kind of asking for it.

Speaker 10:
[66:05] If nobody had done it, that would have been a little sad.

Speaker 13:
[66:07] Paint the scene.

Speaker 19:
[66:08] So you're standing still and Katy Perry walks by and whoop.

Speaker 10:
[66:11] I have met her before and yeah, she's like- That's her thing.

Speaker 7:
[66:15] Yeah, you know, she's aggressive.

Speaker 10:
[66:17] I like it. Okay.

Speaker 2:
[66:20] Okay, so that is creepy. I mean, like, so they don't know each other. She's saying, Ashleigh, that she just walked by her and stuck her fingers down her dress, feeling her boobs up. We see her grabbing Justin Bieber's bottom and like lingering for a long time. She did write and become famous singing a song, I Kissed a Girl and I Liked It. Oh yeah. So there's, it's obvious she's got some sort of a penchant that way. And now you got this gal coming forward saying, you know, I didn't talk about it for a long time because I was young. And I'm going to be honest, she helped me out. I needed a visa. So I kept my mouth shut. But F her, I'm older now. Like I actually, I'm not sure she is lying.

Speaker 18:
[67:02] I'm not sure she is either, but this is really going to be a credibility issue because even that we're not sure she's lying, we're also not sure she's telling the truth. And, you know, I'm interested to see what this other evidence is, maybe some pictures, something like that. But what we really have is we have- Yeah, well, I mean, the friend would be really key, but why did the friend keep quiet all these years? It doesn't make any sense. And all these people-

Speaker 2:
[67:22] I mean, if you're not famous and your girlfriend is Ruby Rose and she's got this allegation against Katy Perry and Ruby Rose is like, don't tell anybody, she helped me get my visa, you would keep your mouth shut.

Speaker 17:
[67:32] Can I ask a question real quick of all of three of you? Who among us here can tell the world, sort of with any specificity, who we might have been hanging out with at a bar or a nightclub 20 years ago? Who might remember a damn thing to happen?

Speaker 2:
[67:49] I mean, I feel like if I were there with Katy Perry, I'd probably remember that. I went to a bar with Kid Rock one time, I remember that pretty vividly. I don't remember all the other bar times.

Speaker 18:
[68:00] The drinking definitely.

Speaker 17:
[68:03] Who could vouch for you and could be witnesses, that's the thing. It's like you may remember being there with a celebrity or a star, but as far as everything else, those details, I can't remember sometimes what I had for breakfast the same day because things get so busy. Go back 20 years and who knows.

Speaker 18:
[68:19] But that's why reputation matters.

Speaker 2:
[68:20] Perry's badge was not at your breakfast table.

Speaker 18:
[68:24] You'd remember that.

Speaker 17:
[68:25] As far as I know, that's true.

Speaker 18:
[68:27] You would remember that. I'm thinking.

Speaker 2:
[68:29] I shouldn't presume. Phil's led a big life.

Speaker 18:
[68:32] Mardi Gras, I don't know.

Speaker 2:
[68:34] I'm blushing. I can't leave this segment behind without letting you hear Russell Brand's reaction. He was on the show yesterday to this allegation against his ex-wife. They were married for two years. And listen to this, SOT38.

Speaker 20:
[68:48] I must say I feel a good deal of sympathy with the recent allegations around Katy.

Speaker 2:
[68:54] She's been accused of sexually assaulting Ruby Rose by allegedly exposing her badge to this gal's face, which she's denied. But there's a criminal inquiry underway in Australia as a result of these allegations.

Speaker 20:
[69:06] To me, that doesn't, I mean, this is probably the old school man in me. I don't even hear the crime there. What happened? I can't even hear where it is. Like someone would have to poke me with a stick. There, that's the bit.

Speaker 6:
[69:18] There's a crime.

Speaker 2:
[69:20] No 20-year-old girl wants another woman rubbing her badge on her face uninvited.

Speaker 20:
[69:25] That's the crime.

Speaker 2:
[69:26] There it is, Russell.

Speaker 20:
[69:27] I got it.

Speaker 2:
[69:28] I got you.

Speaker 20:
[69:29] Are you available for the trial? The talk is coming.

Speaker 2:
[69:32] Yes, I will come. Well, if the jurors feel as Russell feels, that could work out very well for Katy Perry. Again, she denies all of this. Let's keep going. Kash Patel has filed a defamation lawsuit now against The Atlantic because he's very angry about this hit piece they dropped on him on Friday. It was authored by Sarah Fitzpatrick, who's formerly of NBC, who's the one who brought us the Julie Swetnick allegations against Brett Kavanaugh, the most bullshit allegations of the bullshit allegations, the most bullshitty of all. So not great when it comes to the track record, but now here she writes with The Atlantic, and it's a deep dive on Kash basically allegedly being a drunk. Like he's drunk here, he's drunk there, he's drunk at the office place, he gets drunk at the clubs. One time he was so drunk and passed out and non-responsive, they talked about breaching his door with the FBI ramming thing. And Kash, and like they've had to move meetings that were supposed to be in the morning back to the afternoon because he's hung over. And he says, literally all of that is bullshit. It is all made up, these are all lies. You were told by me that these were lies. Before you published this, you gave me two hours to respond to this in-depth piece, right? It's multiple pages just as you print it out, which wasn't sufficient time because, you know, in his defense, maybe if you really want to deal with the Atlantic, you find a witness who's like, that's not true. You can find somebody to vouch for you. You put him in touch with the Atlantic, even on background to say like, these are lies. No. And now he's actually filed a lawsuit in federal court in DC saying, screw these guys, Dave, this is defamation and I'm going to fight back. So what do you make of it? Does he have a case?

Speaker 19:
[71:27] Well, it's a very Trumpian move to do that. Trump did that against The Wall Street Journal when they wrote about the birthday card to Jeffrey Epstein. And the problem for Kash Patel is that as a public figure, he got thrown out. That's correct. He got thrown out. And I think that in this case, it's not going to even go that far because I do think that Kash Patel, regardless of what the underlying facts here, probably does not want to go through the discovery process. Because if you sue someone for defamation, you open yourself up to a deposition and discovery about your drinking. And one thing, we saw the chugging of the beers at the US. Olympic ceremony when they were backstage, when they were getting the gold medal for the hockey team. And so when he was asked at a press conference, they asked him, is this true? And he said, he sort of evaded the question about whether he drinks too much. And I just wonder if he really wants to undergo this type of scrutiny. And if you continue with this lawsuit, not only do you open yourself up to discovery, but you have to show that the other side acted with what's called actual malice. And that's because Kash Patel is a public figure. It's not just a typical defamation lawsuit. You've got to prove defamation plus, which is that they intended to just destroy you, that they knew what the facts were and they went ahead anyways because they had actual malice. It's a high standard. And I just don't think this lawsuit's going to have much in the term of legs.

Speaker 2:
[72:50] Yeah. So they had, they either, you have to prove, they knew it was false or they recklessly disregarded the matter of whether it was true or false. They didn't give a shit, basically. It was like, I want to publish this and I'm going to publish it. Here's Kash Patel denying the allegations on Tuesday, South 20.

Speaker 21:
[73:09] I do want to give you an opportunity to respond directly to the allegations in the Atlantic article that your unexplained absences have created a national security risk. And beyond that, can you say definitively that you have not been intoxicated or absent during your tenure as FBI Director?

Speaker 22:
[73:28] I can say unequivocally that I never listen to the fake news mafia. And as when they get louder, it just means I'm doing my job. This FBI Director has been on the job twice as many days as every director before me. What that means is I've taken half as many days off as those before me. What that means is I've taken a third less vacation than those before me. I'm like an everyday American who loves his country, loves the sport of hockey, and champions my friends when they raise a gold medal and invite me in to celebrate. I've never been intoxicated on the job, and that is why we filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit. And any one of you that wants to participate, bring it on. I'll see you in court.

Speaker 2:
[74:10] OK, Phil, so I like cash. I know cash not incredibly well, but somewhat. My own personal take is this is definitely going to be dismissed. I don't see it going anywhere, because when you zero in on what she alleges in the piece, even though I don't have any respect for this author, it's things like this. His drinking has become a source of concern among government officials. She cites sources who worry his behavior has become a threat to public safety. I'm sure there are plenty of people within the FBI who can't stand him who did speak to The Atlantic to say he sucks, he's drunk, he's a threat to public safety. And that's all she really needs to prove.

Speaker 17:
[74:52] So I tell you what, I think that Dave did an excellent job in setting out for a lot of the legal reasons why you're correct, Megyn, this was not really going to go anywhere, his lawsuit. And look, for defamation, he's got to prove that it's a false statement of fact. And as the judge who threw this case out pointed out, how this might be rhetorical, hyperbole, and you know, that-

Speaker 2:
[75:15] Wait, he didn't throw out this case out. He flew, there was a different judge who threw out Trump's lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, and Kash had a separate defamation lawsuit against a different guy who raised the issue of his drinking, which also just got thrown out on the paper. So the administration is not doing that great on getting defamation verdicts in their favor. That's the point you're making.

Speaker 17:
[75:34] Rhetorical, hyperbole, and statements of opinion, things like that, do not rise to the level of defamation. What he might have, and this is, as we have a longer discussion on this, he might have other claims like fault slide and things of that nature that might survive. But in general, he's going to have a very tough time. But I'll tell you what we can do. Those of us here, The MK True Crime Show, the three of us here, Ashleigh, Dave and I, along with our colleagues from the other two new shows that are dropping next week, we're going to be in Las Vegas at the end of May at CrimeCon. What we will do is I volunteer that we're going to go to the Poodle Room out in Las Vegas because Director Patel says that it's false where he was claimed to, he said it is also known that he's known to drink to excess at the Poodle Room in Las Vegas where he spends parts of his weekend. So we're going to go out there, Megyn, and just for you, we're going to personally investigate and we're going to see if he's there and we'll report back.

Speaker 2:
[76:31] And also I expect drinking to excess, just so you can see what that's like. And whether you remember it.

Speaker 17:
[76:36] You can't judge something unless you're familiar with it. Right.

Speaker 2:
[76:40] Exactly. Exactly. It's method. You guys are method. You know how they're method actors? You're method lawyers in doing your legal analysis. Here's one thing I will say is in his favor. He's not going to enjoy this process at all. He probably is hoping that it gets thrown out on a 12b6 motion, which is a motion to dismiss before you've had to exchange any discovery, any papers with each other. And it probably will get thrown out on a 12b6. But he's probably hoping it will because if it doesn't get thrown out on a motion to dismiss, they're going to be able to say, give us all your receipts for every bottle of wine you've had over the past year and a half since you took this office. Give us every single receipt or credit card statement. When you charge drinks at the poodle room, this place, Ned's in DC, that they allege he goes to, we're going to depose witnesses who have seen you there. We're going to talk to your girlfriend about the level that you've drunk. We're going to actually start subpoenaing bartenders and figuring out just how drunk you are. Like, it's not going to go well for him because he's a drinker. There's nothing wrong with being a drinker. They're trying to paint something else, but just the whole process will be a humiliation, Ashleigh. But I do want to say one other thing. One thing that's good for him is that they only give him two hours to respond. Because generally when it comes to that, like giving somebody time to respond, unless you need to get the story on the air, you know, like they need a hit print on this, you know, like, we've got a scoop that they're about to launch an attack on Turkey. And it's going to happen tonight, it's sundown, you know, and it's noon. Then you would say, you've got two hours to respond. Like, I'm not holding my story, you know, because they can't hijack your story by saying, I need 24 hours. No, but like there was no rush to get, he drinks too much, and they had to use a ramming, you know, mechanism one time or thought about doing that, there was no rush. And what that is potentially evidence of is actual malice against him.

Speaker 18:
[78:34] Right, that's the best fact, Megyn. I mean, the fact that they did that, that they only give him two hours, that is probably his best fact. But honestly, I think both of these people, they've gotten what they wanted out, you know, the purpose has already served with both of them. She got her story out, people now are thinking, oh, well, he's a drunk, you know, we already kind of knew that, but there's some extra sources. So they're just, you know, that's validity for what people may have already thought because of the other stories. But Kash also served his purpose. He's filed a lawsuit. It's probably gonna get dismissed on the 12b6, probably, but it serves his purpose. He said it in that press interview, you know, if you come after me, I'm gonna come after you. And you can't make that statement and then not follow through. So he sort of had to file a lawsuit. And I think it also serves a purpose of warning other people, hey, you know, watch out, be careful, do your job, be a little more careful, especially smaller groups, you know, maybe don't do this because you can't defend against a defamation suit. So I think the lawsuit has probably already served its purpose. He probably knows it's gonna be dismissed. I'm not sure that he's really worried about the money that he's seeking. I think he's trying to curb this from happening again. And that's probably, you know, the end result of all of this.

Speaker 2:
[79:38] This is a manipulation of the narrative that he's trying for here. I don't think it was necessary. Like we all know, Kash, that they're gonna do a hit piece after hit piece. Like no one listens to The Atlantic. I've had so many hit pieces done on me over the past year. Who gives a shit? They've done absolutely nothing to me. Our people, the reasonable people, and I include you in that, Dave Aronberg, even though you're a lefty.

Speaker 14:
[80:01] Centrist.

Speaker 2:
[80:02] They don't listen to this. Like it's, yeah, centrist. Centrist.

Speaker 14:
[80:05] Sorry.

Speaker 2:
[80:06] I was just saying like, no one cares. Like stop, who cares? Don't waste your time and energy. One other fact in Kash's defense is the original title of this piece was Kash Patel's erratic behavior could cost him his job. But at some point, The Atlantic stealthily edited it to, the FBI director is MIA. They didn't note the change. They didn't apologize for what they clearly believed, I think was an erroneous headline, right? That he's been erratic and that his job is in danger. Clearly, they're no longer standing behind at least parts of that. So that's not good for them, that piece of it. And I will say, the other lawsuit that got dismissed was by a Houston federal judge. He had sued for defamation an MSNOW contributor, Frank Figliuzzi, over his claim that Kash was in nightclubs far more than he has been at the FBI headquarters. And that judge, to your point, Phil, said, that statement is, quote, rhetorical hyperbole that cannot constitute defamation. So he's failed to state a claim. So we'll see whether this, too, is rhetorical hyperbole or just not defamation because she does have sources who say the terrible things about Kash and, you know, seen him drinking here or there. We'll see. We'll find out. And in the meantime, you can get much, much more of our pals hosting The MK True Crime Show on The MK True Crime Podcast by going and subscribing. Great to see you all.

Speaker 18:
[81:38] Good to see you. Thanks for having us.

Speaker 2:
[81:39] Great to be here. It's super fun because they sit around, they talk about the news, the legal news of the day. And there's always so much of it, you know? I mean, we don't always get to cover it, but like there's so many juicy cases and you hear three actual trial lawyers, criminal lawyers talking about why did they do this? What was the highlight when we get all the news feeds? So if there's a video, you see it. It's a super fun channel to watch and you're talking to the best of the best right there. Okay, speaking of that, we have two more of them coming up next. Mark Geragos, Matt Murphy, don't miss them. Let's be honest, America can still be a dangerous place and you cannot afford to wait for help. Sure, you could use a firearm, but in today's America, defending yourself with deadly force could have legal consequences. According to FBI data, 99.99% of all altercations do not require lethal force. And that's exactly why so many turn to Berna. Berna is proudly American, hand assembled in Fort Wayne, Indiana. These less lethal self-defense launchers are trusted by hundreds of government agencies, law enforcement departments and private security companies, not to mention our family. Over 600,000 Berna pistols have been sold, most to private citizens who refuse to be victims. Wouldn't you like more options in your arsenal depending on the danger that comes your way? Berna launchers fire rock-hard kinetic rounds and powerful tear gas and pepper projectiles, capable of stopping a threat from up to 60 feet away. No background checks, no waiting periods, and Berna can ship straight to your door. Take responsibility and protect your future. Visit berna.com right now or your local Sportsman's Warehouse. That's byrna.com or your local Sportsman's Warehouse. Visit now and be prepared to defend.

Speaker 1:
[83:26] OnDeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team, or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $400,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A-plus by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five-star TrustPilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes at ondeck.com. 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.

Speaker 2:
[83:56] Hey, everyone, it's me, Megyn Kelly. I've got some exciting news. I now have my very own channel on SiriusXM. It's called The Megyn Kelly Channel, and it is where you will hear the truth, unfiltered, with no agenda and no apologies. Along with The Megyn Kelly Show, you're gonna hear from people like Mark Halperin, Link Lauren, Maureen Callahan, Emily Jushinsky, Jesse Kelly, Real Clear Politics and many more. It's bold, no BS news, only on The Megyn Kelly Channel, SiriusXM 111, and on the SiriusXM app. David Burke, better known as the singer David, it's spelled D4, the numeral 4, VD, has pleaded not guilty to a first degree murder charge in the death of a 14-year-old girl who authorities say was found dismembered in the trunk of his Tesla. Additional charges against David include continuous sexual acts, lewd and lascivious sexual acts with an individual under 14 years old and mutilating the human remains of a body, according to the DA. David will remain in custody without bail and in a disturbing new development. He appeared in court for a status hearing today where the prosecutors revealed they searched his phone and allegedly found a, quote, significant amount of child sexual abuse material, according to TMZ. Joining me now to discuss this and other cases are the hosts of In the Well. That's the third of our new MK True Crime shows. Mark Geragos and Matt Murphy. In the Well launches next week and it's very easy to find. It is right there on the MK True Crime YouTube channel and MK True Crime podcast feed. Type in MK True Crime in YouTube or in your search bar of your podcast feed and you will find these guys, their show is called In the Well, your one stop shop for the best true crime content anywhere. Mark, Matt, welcome back. So this is big. They finally arrested this guy. We've been waiting for it since her body was in the trunk of his car. But Matt, up until now, they hadn't been able to link him to the crime, at least not in a way that they felt was sufficient for charges to be brought. Do we know what changed?

Speaker 6:
[86:12] Well, what they did is they conducted an investigative grand jury, which is really interesting. Mark and I were talking a little bit about this yesterday. Essentially, there's two functions for a grand jury. One, you can seek an indictment. The other is you can actually use grand jury subpoenas to bring in reluctant witnesses that don't want to speak to the police and essentially force immunity on them and make them talk. And Mark knows the DA involved in this. I don't know her, but apparently she's a heavy hitter, according to Mark, and they've been working this case up for a long time. This is advanced prosecutorial work, and yeah, and they apparently have put together this case. The complaint itself tells quite a story with lying in weight and the stabbing and killing a witness, and it makes it appear as if they've got the goods here to show that he killed her because he was engaged in a sexual relationship with her. They knew each other or began seeing each other when she was only 13 years old, which is 288 under the California Penal Code. And it all kind of fits. I know Mark has some different theories on it. Mark probably has a better inside track on the case than I do, but this is very, very interesting, and he's in kind of an understatement. He's in a lot of trouble.

Speaker 2:
[87:29] He's 21 currently. So by any measure, having sexual relations with a 13-year-old would be illegal. So yeah, that's the alleged motive. What we last heard, Mark, was it was April 23rd, 2025 that he invited her to his home in the Hollywood Hills. Celeste was her name, Celeste Rivus, and she arrived there. She was never seen again, but then on September of 2025, that's when her remains were found in the trunk of a car that was registered to him. And so we kind of knew that they were having an affair. There wasn't like proof positive of it, but it seemed very clear from their little videos together. They were definitely friends. They were with a lot, with each other a lot. But getting from that to he's the one who put her in the trunk of that car is, that's where cases are made or fall apart.

Speaker 23:
[88:21] Well, Matt's right as usual about a lot of things. And in this case, he's right about the fact that the DA involved, Beth Silverman, to say she's tenacious is an understatement. I think, though, that there is a lot more going on here. And let me kind of set the stage for it, because I don't know that I've ever seen this all before. Not only did they have a medical examiner, we know today or yesterday, when the published reports were that the exam was released, and there was information as of December of last year, that the medical examiner had come to the conclusion that the cause of death was use of a sharp instrument, that there were fingers that were severed, and they had a toxicology that at least showed the presence of drugs. You combine that with the fact that what's being reported today also, if true, is that there was child porn, meaning images of females who were under 18 on David's phone. All of that would have been known to the DA last year, which leads you to why did the LAPD go in months ago, get rebuffed first, and then successfully later muzzle the medical examiner to the point where the medical examiner, something I've never seen before, came out publicly and pushed back against that, put on his website a statement saying, you know, that this is not transparent, that this shouldn't happen. Not once, but twice did he do that. And then yesterday, after the DA asked that the medical report be released, he thanked his partner agencies. I'm going to wildly speculate here that what happened was they arrested him on Thursday, so that I think the LAPD did that, so that they could force the DA to file this case. They did not have a criminal complaint. They did not have an indictment when they arrested him. There's this weird violation, I think constitutional violation, where you can arrest somebody on a Thursday and not put him before a magistrate until Monday, which is beyond what the Supreme Court says for 48 hours. That forced the DA to come in heavy and file this case on Monday. The defense did something, I think, very astute. They said, that's fine. You can dump terabytes of information on us. We're ready for trial, which was in contrast to what happened in the Reiner case, where they dumped terabytes of information and the public defender said, hey, I need two or three months. I don't have enough time. I think that the ball's back in the DA's court, and the DA may go get an indictment at this point.

Speaker 2:
[91:20] Matt, what do you make of that? That she was dragged to a kicking and screaming by cops who were like, it's time.

Speaker 6:
[91:25] You know, I had a conversation with Harvey Levin on TMZ about this. And of course, that's Mark's partner on another podcast, which is sort of funny.

Speaker 23:
[91:34] By the way, he called me.

Speaker 2:
[91:35] Well, Mark is always right. You're always right, and Harvey's always wrong.

Speaker 23:
[91:40] By the way, Harvey even called me a slut, to his words, for doing Megyn Kelly True Crime with Matt.

Speaker 8:
[91:47] I was called a slut.

Speaker 6:
[91:49] I told him in the miracles, cheating on him with me.

Speaker 2:
[91:50] Sheriff Harvey is one to talk. I have another ransom note. How many 50,000 podcasts can I tease it on? Please.

Speaker 23:
[91:59] I was slut shamed, so I'll leave it at that.

Speaker 8:
[92:01] Yeah. Well, you're a hussy.

Speaker 2:
[92:04] I'm honored that you're slutting it off with me.

Speaker 6:
[92:06] I will be doing all I can to lure you away from that man, just so we can set the record straight.

Speaker 2:
[92:12] Yes, Matt.

Speaker 6:
[92:14] Harvey and I went back and forth a little bit on that. And he was actually very pleasant, Megyn. I've never been on the show before. But I took a counter position, and he agrees with Mark on this. You know, I think I had some dealings with Nathan Hockman, and all of mine have been very positive. It is unusual. I've never seen it done quite that way, but I think you can. And they've been working on this thing for months and months. And I think that one move certainly is refusing to waive time. But on the other hand, there's a thing in California called Prop 115, where you can just throw on, you can put on hearsay statement to establish probable cause. All the DA needs to do here is basically call the lead and maybe one or two other witnesses regarding what happened in front of the grand jury, and they get the ball over the net on that. And then they're just in the discovery phase. That's what I would do if I was them.

Speaker 23:
[93:08] You want to know what I would do back, Matt, and you and I discuss this. There's this little known provision in the penal code called 866. California Supreme Court said, if you're going to go and try and just put on a bare bones prelim, the only way we're going to say that that gives you due process is if the defense can make an offer to the court and say, we're going to call witnesses because we don't think you're telling the whole truth. And that's what I would do if they try to bare bones what we call 115 prelim, which by the way, Murphy pioneered down in Orange County. I can't tell you how many times he hoisted me on a 115 petard of a prelim. But 866 is if you can convince the judge, then you can put the witness on. I don't think the DA is ready to put these witnesses on and subject them to the cross-examination. We'll see soon enough.

Speaker 2:
[94:04] Yeah, I mean, maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem like that confusing or complicated a case. If she's got child sexual abuse materials on his phone, Matt, he's not getting out. He's going to have additional charges filed against him. I don't know if they can prove murder, but it's very, very bad that he was having sex with a 13-year-old girl who is now dead and dismembered in the back of his car. That alone would be pretty circumstantial, but I'll bet you there's more.

Speaker 6:
[94:34] Yeah, well, I read the Corners reports yesterday, and one of the interesting things about this is that she was essentially, the decomp was very advanced, and so she was basically a skeleton inside the car. But they left her tube top on, and there were cuts in the tube top indicating, and I'll bet you anything, that when we get the full report, there's going to be nicks on the ribs underneath that. I think they're going to be able to prove a murder. I don't know if they're going to be able to prove that he was the killer or not, but he certainly, under the theory that they're advancing, was the one that stood to gain. And Mark has had this experience, and I have too. Juries, if you get in child pornography, that case, you're basically on third base, and all you need is a base hit prosecution-wise, because the jury will hate him so much for just such a child pornography. And it fits, look, that's corroborative to this idea that they were having a sexual relationship. And also, if that's true, and of course, we haven't seen it yet, I think that the vast majority of public sympathy for this guy is going to evaporate overnight, if that's true. Hopefully, we'll never see those images.

Speaker 2:
[95:42] If anybody has it.

Speaker 6:
[95:43] Yeah. And hey, can I just do a side thing here? Mark, as Mark is in the green room, Mark is a very busy man, he's very important. I was sitting there listening, Mark, you missed it, and I'm not sure what we're getting into, because all I heard was Megyn Kelly and Ashley Merchant, our friend, talking about Katy Perry's vagina. That was with it, the first segment.

Speaker 2:
[96:04] Which she took out and rubbed on someone. Hey, Mark's the one who brought up Penalty.

Speaker 6:
[96:10] Yeah. By the way, Dave Aronberg and Phil Holloway were sitting there, Mark, saying absolutely nothing. They did not.

Speaker 23:
[96:20] They were trying to be so careful.

Speaker 2:
[96:24] Aronberg started stuttering. It was amazing.

Speaker 15:
[96:27] I've never seen him like that before.

Speaker 2:
[96:30] He was coming right at him. Yeah.

Speaker 6:
[96:32] Then they go to Kash Patel, Mark, and then you arrive. So he was like the most serious Kash Patel staff.

Speaker 23:
[96:38] By the way, we talk about Kash Patel in the poodle room. I want you to know right now, Megan, in the last 45 days, I have been, I'm not going to reveal names, in the poodle room where alcohol was served with DOJ, members of the DOJ. So I'm just going to leave it at that.

Speaker 2:
[96:57] Oh, were they hammered? Did they get extremely drunk?

Speaker 23:
[97:02] I'm not a drug recognition expert. I'll leave that to Murphy.

Speaker 6:
[97:05] That's a good defense lawyer right there.

Speaker 2:
[97:07] This is like off topic, but isn't it, it's so weird. There's that story in the news right now about the Patriots coach and the ESPN reporter. And there was a picture online of them holding hands at some resort. It seemed pretty clear they were getting it on. I guess technically they're denying it. But in any event, she got fired from ESPN. They're both married. Okay, that makes sense to me because she's supposed to be covering him. And it's, you know, you've sacrificed your objectivity. You can't be sleeping with your source or the subject of your coverage. But now he's stepped away from the Patriots coaching job for a couple of days. He's going to like some counseling over the weekend. He's going to miss the draft. He's technically going to oversee it from afar. I'm like, has the morality, the morality police gone a little far? Like, why am I reading about this? Why do I need to know about, like?

Speaker 23:
[97:57] Lost our mind. You know, one of the examples I give with great frequency is Casey Wasserman, who's head of the Olympic LA 28 Olympic Committee. He's mentioned in the Epstein files as, specifically, he made a comment about Jelaine looking good in leather pants. Okay? I mean, he's now had to sell his business for a billion dollars. I guess there's worse things that could happen. But now they're trying to drum him out of the Olympic Committee, all because he made a comment, I don't know, over a decade ago that now has surfaced. I realize that everything Epstein is radioactive. But can we just take a step back and take a breath before we just cancel people for everything under the sun? It's unbelievable, to your point. It's morality police on steroids. It's like nothing I've ever seen. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[98:55] Isn't it just his business with his wife? Why is he having to take days away from the Patriots? Because he may or may not have gotten on with this reporter. By the way, my executive producer corrects me. She worked for The Athletic, which is owned by The New York Times. She was designed. But she's formerly of ESPN.

Speaker 23:
[99:15] If they would have told me that he took days off to recover from the black eye from his wife slugging him, I would say, okay, I get that.

Speaker 2:
[99:22] Got it.

Speaker 23:
[99:23] I'm there.

Speaker 2:
[99:24] Totally. There's a big interview of him, Matt online, where he's like, I had to talk to my team about not becoming a distraction and I'm sorry, I let them down.

Speaker 6:
[99:37] Those guys would high five them in a heartbeat if they could. We're still talking about a group of American football players in a locker room. Give me a break. Yeah, it's like this pearl clutching thing. I totally agree. It's completely out of hand. It really is.

Speaker 2:
[99:55] Then there was another article. I just want you guys to see this one as long as we're going down this lane. Why not? There's a DHS employee. She's at DHS, Department of Homeland Security. There's some guy who's complaining because she was asking him for a bunch of money. She was like, I want you to pay for my dinner and I want you to pay for my wardrobe and I want a few thousand bucks for this, and was basically treating him like a sugar daddy. Right.

Speaker 15:
[100:18] Again, there are gold diggers everywhere.

Speaker 2:
[100:22] It's up to you whether you want to do it or not do it. We all know how that works. If you give it up, she's probably going to give it up too, or you can just say she's terrible. Why am I reading about it in the paper, Mark Geragos?

Speaker 23:
[100:34] You explain that to me. You can also explain the other administration official who's in a yellow bikini, who was drummed out of the administration because the media claimed that she was taking a junket or having fun in Vegas. I don't understand it. Cancel Culture actually is too nice of a name for it. It's ridiculous. We have come to a point where people have lost their minds on these kinds of things.

Speaker 2:
[101:06] Truly. It's like these sort of, I don't know, it's its own court in a way, Matt. The court of public opinion, the media tries you, there will never be due process. You will just lose your reputation right quick.

Speaker 6:
[101:18] It lives forever. Anybody who Googles it, and these are high-profile people. But imagine the guy who has one thing on social media and that comes up over and over again. It's not just the super famous, there's other people that are in the lower ranks of notoriety, and it can destroy their entire life.

Speaker 2:
[101:40] Yeah. Where do you go to get your reputation back? Look, I don't condone the cheating, obviously. It's just like, I don't know why it's my business. It's the spouse's business, the kid's business, but it's definitely not my business. All right, listen, this is just a sampling of the kind of conversation you can get if you tune into In the Well, which is at the MK True Crime YouTube channel and podcast feeds. Again, just subscribe to MK True Crime, and you will get all of these amazing lawyers you have heard today. Guys, thanks for being here. We're back tomorrow with Jesse Kelly. We will see you all then. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda and no fear.