Shock New Reporting About Biden and Wheelchair, and Disturbing Diddy Trial Details, with Buck Sexton, Mark Eiglarsh, and Mark Geragos | Ep. 1071
01:38:35 Share

Welcome back to Listen to Your Heart. I'm Jerry. And I'm Jerry's heart. Today's topic, Repatha, Evalokimab. Heart, why'd you pick this one? Well, Jerry, for people who have had a heart attack, like us, diet and exercise might not be enough to lower the risk of another one. Okay. To help know if we're at risk, we should be getting our LDL-C, our bad cholesterol, checked, and talking to our doctor. I'm listening. And if it's still too high, Repatha can be added to a statin to lower our LDL-C and our heart attack risk.

Hmm, guess it's time to ask about Rupapa.

Do not take Repatha if you're allergic to it. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing or swallowing, swelling of the face, lips, tongue, throat, or arms. Common side effects include runny nose, sore throat, common cold symptoms, flu or flu-like symptoms, back pain, high blood sugar, and redness, pain, or bruising at the injection site. Listen to your heart. Ask your doctor about Repatha. Learn more at Repatha.com or call 1-844-REPATHA.

Welcome to the Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at noon east. Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to the Megyn Kelly Show. Later today, Kelly's Court is back.

We'll be right back.

But we begin today with the news as President Trump begins his Middle East trip. President Biden is back in the spotlight. And how? The first details from the book by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson, Original Sin, which comes out next week, have hit the public. The Guardian got a copy and they include the detail that President Biden's aides were so worried about his, quote, physical deterioration beginning in 2023 that

that they discussed plans to potentially use a wheelchair if he were reelected, but understood that they could not put him in one during the campaign because it would be politically devastating. The extent of the fraud that was committed upon us by these absolute ne'er-do-wells remains shocking. We should not lose our ability to be shocked just because he lost.

This is a true outrage. What they tried to do to us, F these people and their massive fraud. Where is the commission that's getting to the bottom of all this? I mean, I'm starting to turn my view on these leftist reporters who are suddenly doing these books because they actually do have good connections inside Team Biden. And we're getting some very telling details. Why didn't we know this in 2023? Why didn't we know this in 2023?

We're going to get into all of this with Buck Sexton. He's our first guest today, co-host of the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton show and a new dad.

If you haven't heard about Riverbend Ranch, it's time you did. They have just introduced their Riverbend Ranch steaks to the marketplace. Riverbend Ranch raises their beef on beautiful mountain meadows only a few miles from West Yellowstone. Unlike most ranches, Riverbend Ranch never uses growth hormones or antibiotics. They treat their animals humanely and with respect.

There are advantages of buying directly from the ranch. They can track the health of every animal from the day it is born and can guarantee that it has been healthy every day of its life.

Riverbend Ranch has its own state-of-the-art processing facility on the ranch that has received several national awards as one of the best in the U.S. But most important is the quality of the beef. They age their beef to perfection for 21 days. You simply cannot buy beef like this in a grocery store. Shipped directly from the ranch to your home, you get a much better price than going through the middlemen. Order

Order directly from RiverbendRanch.com. Use promo code Megan to get 20 bucks off your first order. That's RiverbendRanch.com, code Megan, and be prepared. Once you taste it, I think you're going to be coming back for more. Again, that's RiverbendRanch.com, code Megan. Buck, welcome to the show and congratulations. Thank you. Being a dad is awesome. It's been a lot of fun. A few weeks in, it's great. Good. How's your wife?

She's good. I have to stop telling her that I want to have at least three or four kids. I think I got to wait like six months until I continue that conversation. Like she's still recovering from the hospital, but she's amazing. She's a trooper. Yes. And kids are, you know, a kid is fantastic. Here are three words you should never say to your wife during this period of having a new baby. I'm so tired.

Do not say those words, Buck Sexton. Only your wife is allowed to say those words when the baby is an infant, assuming she's breastfeeding and the one primarily getting up with the baby overnight. I remember looking at Doug saying, you could say that to your friends. You can go say that to your mom and your brothers and sister. You may not say that to me.

I try to take care of everything non-baby related. So I'm now primary on kitchen cleanup, the dog, you name it, because I'm so thankful that I get to sleep most nights. But my one thing, can I just, this might be a little controversial. I'm a little surprised. I mean, I'm a new parent, right? So it just happened. And I was really excited for it, waiting a long time. So many people act like,

I'm about to sign up to be in the trenches in World War I or something. They're like, oh man, you better get ready for it. I'm like, it's an amazing little guy who looks like me and my wife. It's like the greatest thing in history. And people act like when they're talking to you about it,

It's like a calamity that your life will never be the same. I mean, I know that a little bit of it is tongue in cheek from everybody, but it's the best. It's the best. I don't know. I just, I wish I'd done it earlier. That's my only regret is I wish I had started a family younger.

I think a lot of people who feel that way did do it earlier. And they went from having these amazing like party lives as young people in their 20s to like, whoa, I'm at home all the time. You know, you're not in your 20s. I'm not in my 20s and wasn't when I had my first baby. So like my life had already downshifted into something more reasonable.

So when the kids came, I was like, yeah, this is fine. This is the natural next step. But I think if you were like 24, it would be much more of a shock. Yeah. When you're 40, you've had enough boozy brunches like you get it. You know, like I've been to the mountaintop with like staying out late at night. And now I'm like, oh, baby wants to go to bed at 930. Buck wants to go to bed at 930. This is great. Same. OK, let's talk about Biden. There's this.

This really is pretty shocking what is in this Tapper book and not just Tapper, but Alex Thompson about Joe Biden. So here's a couple of highlights. First of all, the Guardian, again, which got his hands on the book.

says as follows. Joe Biden, according to David Plouffe, who worked for to get Barack Obama elected and then came in late to. Well, I mean, came in early ish to help Kamala get elected, but was saying the whole process of Kamala happened too late. This is a quote. Joe Biden totally fucked us by leaving it too late to drop out of the 2024 presidential election.

Um, Plouffe describes Harris's 107 day sprint against Donald Trump as quote, a fucking nightmare. That's how we felt on the outside, but I think for different reasons and it's all Biden, he adds, he totally effed us.

Um, let's see. They said, well, you remember that Plouffe had tweeted on X right after she lost that the Harris campaign had begun in a quote deep hole and later deleted his account because he got so much blowback for saying what was obviously true and goes even further, obviously with those comments to the authors of this book.

The book describes how Plouffe had received calls from donors worried about Biden's diminishing energy, cognitive skills, and ability to deliver a speech. He in turn pressed the White House and Democratic Party on whether they felt sure that the then president could win another election and was repeatedly told he could. An unnamed senior aide admits we shielded him from his own staff. Quote, we attempted to shield him from his own staff so many people did not realize the extent of the decline beginning in 2023, 2020,

An unnamed unnamed Democratic strategist tells the authors it was an abomination, his decision to seek reelection. He stole an election from the Democratic Party. He stole it from the American people.

And they reveal that President Obama visited the White House in 2023, warning Joe Biden, make sure you can win. Make sure you can win. On top of that, Axios reports that Biden's aides discussed using a wheelchair if he were reelected. They understood they could not do it until after the election, particularly because of the significant degeneration of his spine,

and his aides alarm over it as he sought a second term at age 81. His aides believed it was politically untenable to have Biden use a wheelchair during the reelection campaign, but they understood he was likely to need it afterward. And here is the response from Team Biden to that report in Axios. So far...

We are still waiting for someone, anyone, to point out where Joe Biden had to make a presidential decision or make a presidential address where he was unable to do his job because of mental decline. In fact, the evidence points to the opposite. He was a very effective president. Even Dave Weigel, a leftist, is online saying they had six months to come up with a statement. They knew these books were coming and that's where they landed. Point to a decision that he made

uh, made or, or couldn't make because of mental decline. So what do you make of it all?

I reject wholesale the narrative that they're trying to peddle now. And I'm going to be very hard on this with anybody who comes forward and tries to act like they're a truth teller. And I have the receipts, as the kids say, Megan, because everybody, everybody knew that Joe Biden was in a state of cognitive decline from just watching him on television for years. On my show with Clay, the Clay and Buck show, we were making comments about

about how this was the weekend at Bernie's presidency. People were writing in their reviews of the movie from the eighties weekend at Bernie's in response to us talking about it so often because, and for those who don't know, it's a, it's a very bad movie, but these guys carry around somebody who's a debt is a dead body. And they pretend like he's alive the whole weekend. I talked about the historic, uh, L Sid, which is a Charlton Heston movie. It's a,

based on a guy in the Iberian Peninsula who's fighting against the Moors. And at the end of the movie, he's dead and they put him on a horse and he leads the final charge while he's dead to scare away the enemy. We were making these jokes, Megan, starting in 2021. This was obvious the whole time. And what you're seeing right now from the people writing the books and the people who are giving the leaks and everything else is a circular firing squad within the Democrat Party because here's what really happened.

They tried a con and it didn't work.

If it had worked, you know what we'd be sitting around here talking about right now? If Joe Biden had managed to stay in and managed to win, they would be talking about how, oh, what an incredible shift it is now that Kamala Harris is going to have to ascend from vice president and take over for him. The plan, I think, was quite obvious all along. Why is it that conservatives, and I think really across the board, I'm not pretending like on my show or what I said earlier,

we were ahead of the curve on this. It was a laugh line for years that Joe Biden was in some state of cognitive decline. I used to apologize to my audience because I said, look, I don't know what else to do. I remember what it was like when my grandfather was going through this and it was deeply saddening. And I see this with Joe Biden. I don't want to talk about this. I don't want to talk about his brains being scrambled eggs, but it is obvious that

We all knew all these reporters knew they are lying now because they have to figure out a way to regain some credibility and to regain some ground, even within their own side, because they made a mockery of their own audience. I mean, look at someone like Morning Joe over on Joe Scarborough. He said, I think it was in.

March of last year, that this was the sharpest version. And he stared into the camera and he lectured people, the sharpest, smartest version of Joe Biden I've ever seen. Not Joe Biden is okay. This is the best Joe Biden I've ever seen. These people are liars.

I knew what was going on, Megan. You knew what was going on. They thought they could pull off the swindle. There is no credit for trying to rewrite history now and say, oh, did you know they were hiding it from AIDS? This is the emperor's. The emperor's got no clothes. He was walking around naked. We could all see it. It's not new. There's I mean, the stories will be interesting, but they're just trying to tear each other down and shift the blame.

Oh, no, I'm I'm interested in the details. I mean, the fact the wheelchair that he was about to go into a wheelchair, but they were just like, just get across the finish line to the election. We can't put him in that. Good gracious. Right. And it is interesting to finally see like I've been waiting for the book about the Kamala Harris disaster and what happened during that camp. That's never come out. You know, this is getting a little closer with David Plouffe talking about it being an effing disaster. What? But that's not about her. That's about Biden.

waiting too long. But Biden's still denying that. He denied that just last week when he went on The View. So it is there is some advantage to having these Democrat insiders go beat up their own side. For me on the outside, it's fascinating to read. But no, that's going to be fun. No, I'm going to I'm going to want to read it. I want to know it. I'm just saying there's no like, oh, I'm speaking through the power. Yeah, it's no excuse. I mean, this is nonsense. No, that's why

last week I was ripping Alex Thompson who got this award for, you know, his coverage of the Biden mental infirmity, which he did more than any other on the left. But when he accepted the award at the radio or the Washington, the white house correspondence dinner, he was like, we missed it. You know, the, the, the,

the people in this room miss it. They didn't miss it. You didn't miss anything. They didn't miss, exactly. They didn't miss it. They sold their souls to defeat Trump and they failed. And now they're trying to buy them back off of, you know, layaway. Like this is not something that's hard to understand when you look at it in the totality. And again, like I said, all along, Megan, my bet with Clay, which I ended up having to take him out for the most expensive steak in South Beach, which I didn't even know at the time involved people dancing around and like

Gold, oh yeah, the video is good. It was like, I didn't want to tell you how expensive that steak was, you know, anyway. But the point is, I lost our bet, but my bet with him was, and I'm not kidding, Clay, you don't understand, and this was a two-year long bet, okay? This was for two years, I was saying, leading up to the election. If they have to wheel him out in a wheelchair, and I use those words, they will do it because Kamala is such a disaster. Now, I ended up not being right, although, as I like to point out, it was very, very close,

They they would have pushed Joe out and they could have pushed Joe out with these stories. But they recognize that Kamala was a uniquely untalented and incapable politician. They made a calculated decision. The thing that that the only shock here to me, by the way, I think they would have gotten Biden through the election if they had just said what I told them they should say all along, which is we will not platform an insurrectionist and an election denier in Donald Trump.

They would have been able to do it. And here's the craziest thing of all, Megan, had they refused to debate, they would have at least gotten him to election day. And I think it would have been closer than it was against Kamala. I really do. I think the whole Kamala debacle. Yeah, I totally agree with you. Now, wait, do you want to shock? You said that that was your only shock. I'm going to give you another shock. Ready for this? Oh, shock. Yes. I like it. Guess who's coming on this show on Tuesday? Joe Biden.

No, that really would be amazing. Oh, OK. I was like, that would be amazing. He'd be amazing. Meghan Markle would be amazing. No, Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson.

I mean, look, Jake, Jake said, I'll tell you this. And I know you guys are friends. Jake and I are not friends. He wants to come on our show. He's going to get lit up if he does, because there's no way for him to tell this story in a way other than why didn't you go on? I have rants on air for three years, three years talking about how Joe Biden clearly has the signs of dementia, clearly is too old for this clearly. And I'm not the, and it's not even like I'm the, you know, turn on Benchmark

Pirro show and, you know, Dan Bongino was talking about, I mean, turn on everybody in this space. You were talking, everybody knew. We did a whole episode on it in June of 2022, a whole episode. I mean, it's rare for us to devote an entire episode to something like this. No, but you assume too little of your humble correspondent because I am going to ask all the tough questions of both of them. I'm not saying you're not going to ask tough questions. I'm just

I'm just making, I'm just mining, I'm just mining my tongue because I think that the whole thing is kind of an outrage and an insult to intelligence for all of us that they're now writing this book. And it's like, huh? Yeah. Turns out they were hiding from his aides that he had senility.

Well, this was the whole thing. You got, they had a, they had a puppet president for four years. Megan, they were lecturing us about our sacred democracy. And I mean, you go back and see those, look, look at their reportage. Look at whether it's Jake and Alex or others, look at what they have, what they were reporting on with Donald Trump and the insurrection, everything else. The guy who had the nuclear codes had a non-functioning brain.

And we all know that. And they had it for years. They let him finish out the presidency. Why not the 25th Amendment? We heard about the 25th Amendment endlessly. When Donald Trump is sharp as a tack, actually. That phrase now we can never use again, by the way, because of Joe Biden. Now it's become like a laugh line. But Donald Trump-

Last time I saw him, he comes off of 18 holes. He's like high-fiving, you know, high-fiving Clay. He's hugging my wife. He's like telling funny stories. Never once has someone said, oh, wow, I saw Donald Trump and it looked like, you know, he needed a sippy cup at nap time because he doesn't, because his brain is fine, because he's different than Joe Biden. I

Not this, this whole story of, because I can see this now too. Like we were misled by the, we were misled by the big, bad Biden White House people. Well, then you're a moron. And you shouldn't work in journalism. Like the New York Times said about COVID, we were misled. No, no.

we actively misled you. That's your proper headline, New York Times. These media people after the fact, now that we all on the right have been proven correct yet again, now want to glom on to our correctness. Like, oh, we saw too. We were part of the right narrative all along. No, you weren't. We were there. You were on the other side. We documented it. Well, welcome to the party. Johnny come late, Lise. But you are very, very late.

Oh, and by the way, complicit late, late and complicit. I mean, this is like we've got the two guys from the bank heist in two different rooms and they're both saying he made me do it. The media and the Biden White House. It was all and we all know, too, they they changed their directive for what they there's a reason CNN in specifically is a giant scam.

dumpster fire. It has no credibility anymore because Jeff Zucker allowed it to turn itself into, and it's not just him, but that was a big part of it, into an anti-Trump battleship. And guess what happens? If you lose, your battleship gets sunk. And that's where CNN is. No one should believe that this is an honest network that's trying to provide facts to the public. That's an absurdity. They let a president with dementia go unchallenged

for years. In fact, the only, I'm sure you'll play it, the only clip of Tapper that anyone's seen about this is him actually challenging Laura Trump when she brings up Biden's cognitive client. He's like, how dare you? Are you a psychiatrist? No, Jake, we're not all morons.

We can see and hear and have for years that this guy is a puppet and the people around him are all playing a game. This is a, Megan, this is a sea change moment in the public's understanding of journalism, of the media, of who is honest. And we should not let this go. By the way, I totally agree with you on COVID too. It's the same thing. They went from being the little like commissars of COVID enforcement in the media to, oh,

but big bad Fauci told me that this was true. Somehow I was not fooled by any of that. Somehow I knew that all this was crap and that it came from a lab, that masks are a joke and that lockdowns are moronic. But I'm supposed to, you know, why is it that these people, you know, I went on Bill Maher's show back in October and I appreciate some of Bill's

you know, more recent commentary on these subjects, because I think at some level he really just he just realizes the Democrat Party's just gone insane. And he says Republicans are worse. You know that. Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. No, I always say this. He's right on about 40 percent of things these days. I'd say about 40 percent. He gets it about 60 percent. He's still living. And so on any woke issue, he's correct. But

but he definitely suffers from TDS. I mean, I like that he's got the TDS. This is the one moment where we really had a sort of at cross purposes or just, I said, you know, he's really not a fascist bill, right? Like it's going to be fine. The country, he goes, no, I don't know that. I was like, dude, come on, get, you know, you're a smart guy. You're successful, get a grip. Anyway, but I remember when I went on that show, we're talking about this. It was still considered some kind of right-wing talking point to say that the Democrats

had tried to essentially swindle the American people by leaving Joe Biden in as long as they did. And the thing is, everyone can kind of figure this out. You leave Joe Biden in and then, oh my gosh, you debated. Now we can't continue the lie anymore. You go with Kamala. Why didn't they put Kamala in before? Because they knew that she was a disaster. She was a train wreck.

without dementia. It all played out exactly as it should have under the circumstances. And this is just for me now to look back on this. No, here's the thing. Does anyone say I'm sorry to their audience? Does anyone ever go and say, you know, hey- Oh, look at Rachel Maddow.

After Russiagate fell apart, did she come out and say, I got it completely wrong. I misled you for two years. No, she just rode that into a $30 million a year contract for one day a week. And she's still the leftist goddess and revered for her factual fact-based reporting. So I agree with you. I would add to this, though, that in the case of Maddow, the Russia collusion thing, while

while not entirely successful for the left, it slowed him down in the first administration. You know, it was a it was like an obstruction tactic. So the fact that they were lying about that to their to their audience, I'm talking about if you're an MSNBC watcher, it's tell me more about Russia. Talk about how Trump and Putin were like, you know, taking Turkish baths together, like make up whatever you want, as long as it's hurting Trump. I'm in, you know,

The problem they have in this case, in this story, is Joe Biden's fine. They're lying to you. He doesn't have dementia. Joe Biden's fine. Oh, Hitler just won the election.

And now we're going to tell you that we were lying to you about the dementia the whole time. They have made a mockery of their own audience and they failed. Do you see what I mean? Like, that's the. Yeah, there was no upside to this. This was a catastrophe politically for they're fine with lying. But if you lie and you lose now, people who watch Maddow at home. Well, that's a whole other kind of like who's watching Maddow at home. But people who are watching these individuals. Yeah, they they.

need to have a reckoning. The reckoning needs to happen. And I don't know if it will. There are real consequences to those lies. Well, I'm shocked. I have to say that it's like, I guess I'm not shocked. I mean, I'm not shocked. He was about to go into a wheelchair. He looked like he was about to go into a casket. That's the truth. But it is interesting to read these people coming out with the progressive levels of how bad it was. And

The more I read, the more I just think what I've been thinking, which is F these people. They should never be trusted again. There needs to be a federal investigation into how bad he was, whether he was competent while in the office and making the decisions and signing the executive orders and the pardons. Who was making the calls? We still don't know. We need subpoena power over his top aides who need to be forced under oath to tell us

who was governing the country. That hasn't happened so far and it needs to. Okay, I want to keep going because we don't have that much time. Can I just say one quick thing? It's just that I think Jill Biden is going to emerge as one of the big villains in all this. Jill Biden should have pulled her husband out of this. Anyway. And she's a doctor. I mean, she should know better.

Okay, let's talk about, I know you're big on this subject and I find it fascinating too. Trump is going to bring, is bringing white Afrikaners from South Africa to the United States as refugees. We've had some, what's the number, like 59 arrive in the past day. And this is because in South Africa now they have turned on refugees.

white people and decided that because of the history of villainous behavior there, that the current whites in South Africa must be punished, up to and including taking their land away from them and just giving it to black South African residents and citizens. So now Trump has said they can come here. There's some 8,000 of them who want to leave. And so he's not saying yes to everybody, but he's saying we're going to take a look.

They can come here. This is what a true refugee looks like who is under threat because of his race, of losing his property, his livelihood, and potentially worse. I mean, claims of violence and threatened death. And the first shipment of folks arrived yesterday, and there they were literally standing there waving American flags,

Look at this. Look, I mean, I'm sorry, but they look like people who would like to assimilate. I'm very encouraged by their American flag shirts, their American flags that they're holding and waving, and full of gratitude to President Trump and to this country for giving them a place to go after being persecuted for no reason other than the color of their skin. But now, Buck, we've got the left saying,

saying this has gone too fast. They're allowing in these refugees too quickly without adequate investigation of who they are and whether they deserve to be here. We should have involved the UN, say some of these Democrats, and the hypocrisy is dripping, dripping from the sides of their mouths as they make these claims. Your thoughts on it? Well, first of all, it's just beyond parody that for four years of the Biden administration,

you had 10 plus million illegals piling into the country, overwhelmingly claiming false asylum, right? I mean, these are people who there's absolutely no basis to believe that they really need asylum. They just come from generally poor, crappy countries, just the way it is. And they'd rather be in America, especially in America that gives them $400 a night hotel rooms in midtown Manhattan and gives them culturally sensitive meals and preloaded debit cards, right? Like,

That sounds better than wherever they come from. 10 plus million. And this is, oh, but we're a nation of immigrants. We're not a nation of illegal immigrants, by the way. But that's a whole other part of the conversation. Now we have 50 people who come

to this country legally, lawfully at the invitation of the executive branch of the president himself. And the media is completely freaked out. These are people who bring skills with them, particularly if they're Afrikaners who have a farming background, a high level farming background, that means that they would be productive right away.

and also people that speak English and love this place. They're not coming here because we're a giant welfare camp or a soup kitchen. They're coming here because they love this place. I'm just gonna say this. I live in South Florida. Cuban Americans are some of the most patriotic Americans you'll ever see in your life. People that fled the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot in Cambodia, they love this country. Former Soviets, you get what I'm saying. People that have fled injustice and tyranny and come here lawfully love this place.

Millions of people scammed the system under Biden. These people are actually coming here the right way. Here's why it's such a problem for the Democrats. And I mean, I've been talking about this issue for years because what you really have in South Africa is an end state

an end state affirmative action country, if you will, where instead of just being this amorphous, which the Supreme Court just, of course, shut down, but this amorphous like, well, we need to take these things into account. You have explicit quotas in South Africa.

you have, you must have, I think, 85% of your company must be black employees or must the managerial managerial set must be black. If you want to get certain loans, you have to actually be black or at least partner with somebody who is black. There's all of these rules and laws that explicitly disenfranchise the roughly 7% of South Africa that is, that is white. And that's

predominantly Afrikaner. I mean, they can get a Dutch East India Company, comes around 1653. There are Dutch and Germans who are there. And then the English end up taking it over later. But point being, the 7% of the country that is white has not only state-sponsored disenfranchisement going on now, but there's also an unwillingness to police and protect, particularly these farms,

that have been the subjects of clearly anti-white violence of the most gruesome and horrific kind. And if you look next door to what happened in Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia, with Mugabe who died some years back, but he was the dictator there, they had a land expropriation campaign.

There's talk of that happening now in South Africa fully. It has not happened. I believe it's come up in the legislature. But they say, you know what? The land belongs to the black people in this country, not the white people. That was what happened in Zimbabwe. It went from being the breadbasket of Africa to being a place that cannot feed itself as a country and has inflation rates in the trillions of dollars. I mean, you can't even, you know, no one can conceive of the numbers of inflation that happened in Zimbabwe. Basically destroyed the country.

And there's talk of doing that in South Africa. There's also rolling blackouts in the country. There's corruption that would make what happens in some parts of Latin America look like it was Switzerland. The place is a mess and there's still tremendous blame and resentment on the white. I even saw it on the MSNBC panel. This is what I do with my mornings. This, you know, earlier today where there's tremendous blame for the white people who live there like

Some of them are, you know, they were born after apartheid ended. Like, why are they being punished for this? And what it really goes to, Megan, is they cannot, the Democrat leftist mind cannot conceive of a situation in which there is discrimination against white people. They believe racism is an ailment.

specific to white people. And it is impossible for non-whites to be racist. And so this just, this is an absolute circuitry breakdown for them mentally. They can't process and handle this and it completely freaks them out. It's really good for the American people to see, oh, so that's what the game is here.

You're so right. That's exactly right. Well said. Here's another example of exactly what you're talking about. Her name is Ashley Allison. We've shown the audience this woman before. She goes on the CNN panel on the Abby Phillips show that Scott Jennings appears on. And she was the former National Coalition's director for Biden-Harris 2020. This is the woman who was out there not long ago saying Biden's

Black women are the most educated people in the world. And I still can't get ahead. I don't understand. Like, I've still been left behind even at CNN when I should have jumped ahead of others alleging, I guess, that CNN is a bunch of racist, sexist pigs.

But in any event, or I guess it was Obama. She was saying like under Obama, she, she didn't get ahead. Notwithstanding the fact that she was clearly the most qualified woman in the room because she's a black woman with all this education. Okay. Well, maybe you're not that impressive. Maybe you didn't wow people. I hate to break it to you. You don't seem that impressive to me. I watch you on CNN and these clips. I'm never like, wow, this is a really intelligent, thoughtful person. And it seems like Obama's administration felt the same. Well, she's back with thoughts on this South African situation. Watch this.

Thirty five, 30 plus years ago, they went through a revolution. The apartheid system ended and they reformed their constitution under the great leader of Nelson Mandela. And that allowed for a racial reconciliation, one that this country has yet to do. But.

South Africa did it and they reformed their constitution. And part of that is that the people who are native to that land deserve their rightful land back. Constitution in South Africa is discriminatory. They have their checks and balances in that land, just like we do. And that is for them to. So if the Afrikaners don't actually like the land, they can leave that country. They are. They're leaving to come. No.

They can actually leave and go to where their native land is, which is probably Germany. Are you against them coming here? Holland. Holland. Are you against them coming here? I'm against the hypocrisy of this administration. No, no, that's not the question. What I am against is that they are being given special treatment when there is not a genocide happening in South Africa, and they just don't like the law of the land.

Amazing. Amazing. Is, is there a genocide happening right now in Venezuela or Mexico? Cause you really seem to love the immigrants who come from those countries.

and not just those countries, but Bill Mellugian, Fox's immigration reporter. He tweeted out, Buck, similar to what you were just saying. Did the media networks now criticizing a few dozen South Africaners coming to the U.S. legally as refugees have anything to say when Arizona was overrun with thousands of African aliens crossing illegally every day in December 2023? Because I sure didn't see them down there covering it.

Oh, first of all, Bill does fantastic work. And second of all on this, if you come to this country illegally from Haiti or from Ghana or from Bangladesh or wherever, the Democrats believe that you're as American as American can be day one. That's just the truth. You shouldn't be able to vote.

Now, you should be able to vote. You don't speak the language, who cares? You don't know anything about this country, what's the difference? You're not white, we should give you everything that you could possibly need courtesy of the taxpayer who if they don't pay their taxes, they go to prison. We should give you everything you want. You should be open arms.

Because there's, well, there's a lot of reasons for this, but one of them is because of America's history of, you know, exploitation, colonialism, and slavery. So whatever we have to do to help the non-white population of the world, the Democrat party believes should be done via immigration. And yet when you have that woman from CNN, she's talking about they should go, meaning the Afrikaners, they should go back to where they came from. They've been for 300 years in South Africa.

300 years. I mean, you know, I hate to break this to people. This is part of the of the massive ignorance of history that exists on the left. I mean, even the people that are supposed to like people that are involved in writing the 1619 Project and people that you see. She's educated, though, Buck. She's one of the highest educated.

They don't know anything about history. They know about propaganda and how to tell people that they're not accountable for their own decisions. They're not accountable for what's going on today. It's all about historical wrongs. I see this and I see people who somehow have set up a double standard in their mind whereby it doesn't matter that South Africa is openly discriminating against people based upon skin color

because of what happened a long time ago. And I sit here and I say, hold on a second. I mean, the Dutch have been there for hundreds of years. The Zulu tribe, for example, which people say, well, I saw someone on Twitter, like, why don't the Dutch learn how to, or, you know, the Afrikaners learn how to speak Zulu? They were, they came...

like 150 years after the Dutch arrived there. They were conquerors from neighboring tribes who showed up. It wasn't like the Dutch and the English took over some Shangri-La here. It was like a well-functioning Jeffersonian democracy. It was...

a largely uninhabited piece of land. And at what point do you get to say that this is actually your homeland too? Again, if you come here and you're not white and you illegally arrive here, you, it is, Megan, if you're an MS-13 gang member who's not supposed to be here, as American as you and me and everybody listening, how dare you not give him like seven different court hearings or whatever?

But the guys who have been living in South Africa, their generations, their families go back for six, seven, eight generations now, hundreds of years. They're supposed to go back to to Germany. And by the way, why is that not a racist comment that she says on that show? Go back to where you came from. And why and why? Why does she have such a strong objection to them coming here? No, not here. No, she she says the nation leave. And then Scott Jennings says they are.

And she was like, no, not here. Go back to Germany or go to Holland. Like, what is it? What is it about them, Ashley, that you find so objectionable? Yes. You know, when when normal law abiding Americans, including overwhelmingly Hispanics, are

objected to the waves of illegals coming in, mostly from South America, Latin America. You called them all racists. You said all these, the left said, it's all about racism. You hate brown people. But now this one small group of whites who actually are facing massive racial discrimination comes and she says, it's a no, get out. Why? It's obviously because of skin color. And by the way, live by the sword, die by the sword. We'll play by your rules.

Oh, absolutely. And what you see here is that the left

believes in intersectionality. They don't use the term very much anymore because it sounds too nerdy, but intersectionality is just different groups, if you will, racial groups in particular, but different groups within society are all constantly vying for dominance and power over each other. And that it's the role of the state to play this kind of arbiter that says, well, no, you need to be suppressed and you need to be elevated. This is antithetical to

the most core American values and principles. This is antithetical to what we fought a very bloody civil war over and had to have constitutional amendments to clarify, which is that all men are created equal and we're all to be treated equally under the law. South Africa is failing that, and we all know it openly. And what you see in South Africa is the problem is

You know, the problems of the past are going to continuously be addressed into the future. And you're going to disenfranchise people in this case, the, you know, the Afrikaners because of what their grandfathers did or their great grandfathers did. And you're going to say that a legal regime that discriminates based upon historical narrative

is just why? Well, because it's black people doing it to white people. And, you know, this is- It's amazing when you look at the reaction, you've got the New York Times literally saying this is going too fast. The refugee process often takes years, but only three months have passed from the time Trump signed this executive order. It's happening too quickly. Time Magazine, refugees coming into the US are typically vetted by the United Nations.

which routinely refers people fleeing persecution and violence in their home country to safer countries like the US. The arrivals from South Africa were not vetted by that office. Suddenly they're so concerned about the vetting and the speed of the arrival of the refugees.

Give me a break. All right, wait, there's a lot to get there. So I got to switch now to the UK where there's a similar switcheroo happening with Keir Starmer, okay, who was completely in favor of open borders, just like the rest of his left wing party. There are statements after statement after statement by him. I'll just give you a montage of a few of how he's been sounding in the prior years to this one. Listen.

So we have to make the case for the benefits of migration, the benefits of free movement. We have to make the case for freedom of movement and we have to make it strongly. We welcome migrants. We don't scapegoat them. Low wages, poor housing, poor public services.

are not the fault of migrants and people who've come here. They're political failure. Political failure. I think we should welcome people wherever they come from, thank them for their contribution, and see them as part of our families, our communities, and our society, and embrace that. The Labour Party has been a bit scared of making the positive case for immigration for quite a number of years, and I think we need to turn that around. Okay, great, Keir. Had that work out. I'll show you. Listen to what he's saying now.

Today we publish a white paper on immigration, a strategy absolutely central to my plan for change that will finally take back control of our borders and close the book on a squalid chapter for our politics, our economy and our country. The experiment is over. We risk becoming an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together. But when people come to our country,

They should also commit to integration, to learning our language. You're an idiot. Our system should actively distinguish between those that do and those that don't.

What an idiot. We've all been saying that for decades. And he and his party and their counterparts here in America have been challenging us, saying those kinds of statements are racist. Now this asshole finally realizes that he's been on the wrong side without doing a mea culpa, right? Just kind of comes out there like, gee, now it's gotten really bad. And by the way, Buck, it has gotten terrible over there. In recent years,

The immigration numbers in the UK have illegal immigration have reached nine hundred and six thousand in the year from June 2022 to June 2023. Back when David Cameron was prime minister in 2010, they were in a freak out about the fact that annual net immigration had exceeded one hundred thousand.

Now it's at 900 plus thousand. And finally, after their country is gone, it's gone. The UK is no longer what it once was. And I don't think it will ever be again. Finally, Johnny come lately. Keir Starmer is like, oh, gee, they're not assimilating and we should do a crackdown.

Yeah, this was predictable. And in fact, you and I and many others predicted it for many years. As you pointed out, this was the most obvious thing in the world, taking people in in huge numbers who have

You know, isn't it interesting, Megan, you can finally say these things now and there's not this sense that you can just be shouted down and deplatformed and everything and be called a racist. Having people who share your language and your culture and people who are going to bring something to the table and not be welfare cases, the entire mass immigration really tragedy

of the last, call it 25 years, has been an abject disaster for Europe and for the West and for America. It's been a disaster for Canada. And it's all based in lies. It's based in lies and the moral coercion of idiot mobs of leftists shouting at you, how dare you,

We have all these slogans. We're a nation of immigrants. Like I said before, they do the jobs Americans won't do, or they're doing the jobs that Brits won't do. This is all bull crap. And the numbers now show it. You look at Canada, for example, we've been led to believe that Canada has a

point system for immigration, and they're only going to take the best of the best. Somehow, Canada's economy has stalled out. Their prices for housing is through the roof. They got a mess on their hands over there. And we look here in the United States, and we've seen, does anyone really believe that the 10 million plus illegals who piled into this country under Biden are doing the jobs Americans want to? And by the way, even if they would,

I don't want them here. They are illegal and they are going to be a massive net drain on the economy because they're going to have to get Obamacare and Medicaid. They're going to get state resources and all the rest of it. I mean, the fact that you have so many people who have come into the country in violation of our laws is...

erodes each day the sovereignty of this place. We are not an economic zone. This is not a giant refugee camp, which we saw in a place even like New York City. There were literal refugee camps that were popping up in places, but they're not even refugees. They're just skipping the immigration line. Over in Europe, they have had been so brainwashed with this woke nonsense.

Meg, I'll tell you, I was actually with, when I was in the CIA, I spent time with the Swedish and Danish national police, counterterrorism police. Do you know what they were doing all of the time? And this is going back over a decade. Dealing with the terrorist attacks

who had fled from the Middle East, who were now using their countries as staging grounds for attacks in the West, for raising money to send back to terrorist groups back home. This was their full-time job all the time. And I remember looking at them, thinking to myself, you guys brought them here.

You brought this upon yourself. This is completely insane. And in those countries, by the way, the numbers are massive. I mean, a place like Sweden has, I think, 10 million people live there and like a million of them come from Iraq and Syria now. And I mean, let me just give you the numbers.

on that point, Daily Mail reporting that on Britain's asylum seekers, quote unquote, asylum seekers, Pakistan was the most common country of origin, followed by Afghanistan, Iran, Bangladesh and Syria. These five countries alone made up almost 40 percent of all asylum applications. Good luck.

Yeah. Well, I mean, you also this is this starts to force some pretty difficult conversations as well. Show me where there's been a large migration of Muslim migrants in the last decade.

I would probably say ever, but in the last 50 years where things have really done, when I say large, I mean massive numbers that everyone can recognize are changing the cultural and demographic makeup of the country, right? We have not had that for Muslim immigrants in this country. They have had it in some European countries.

But how has that tended to go? I mean, has there been cultural cohesion? Has there been rule of law adherence? Has there been a sense- Have women's rights been advanced? Have women's rights been advanced? I mean, you know, last time I went to Scotland on vacation, there were women walking around all over the place in Edinburgh in beekeeper suits, you know, the full burqa. And I'm just like, you know, guys, this isn't going to end well.

And I know we're not supposed to say this because, oh, no, all cultures are the same. That's not true. If that were true, the countries that these people are coming from wouldn't be crap holes. Right. It would actually be a situation where they would come and you would say, hold on. They're doing all these amazing things. We are better at this in America. We're better at assimilating. We've been better than Europe has.

But Europe is a harbinger of things to come. Europe is showing us what the future of America is going to be if we don't get a handle on this. And isn't it interesting, too? Oh, I'm not allowed to talk about the quality or the skills or whatever it is of migrants coming in

unless if there's 50 guys coming in from South Africa, Megan, everyone could say this is horrible. And their grandparents were racist and they're not allowed here. Well, hold on, which one is it? Are we allowed to judge whether people should come into the country or not? So yeah, look, I think Europe is toast. I just hope America learns the lesson.

I know. And I think it's too late for Europe. I mean, what's really sad is it had to get to a truly dangerous, irreversible point before the Keir Starmer's of the world started paying attention. And I really think it's too late for them. It's too late for them. And it's too late for France, too. People like Ion Hersey-Ali have been jumping up and down about this for years. You didn't. I can't wait for the Keir Starmer book. Like my aides lied to me about this. I didn't realize mass migration was such a bad idea for the West.

You're right. I'll read that book. Tying it all together. A pleasure to see you, my friend. Be well and kiss that beautiful baby for me. I will. Thank you so much. All right. Coming up in Kelly's court, we're going to get to the explosive first day. And now we're in day two of the Diddy trial. My God, the shocking developments in the Brian Kohlberger case and whether the Menendez brothers are about to be set free. All that and more in just a minute. Great.

Grand Canyon University, a private Christian university in beautiful Phoenix, Arizona, believes that we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. GCU believes in equal opportunity and that the American dream starts with purpose. By honoring your career calling, you can impact your family, friends, and your community. Change the world for good by putting others before yourself.

Whether your pursuit involves a bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree, GCU's online, on-campus, and hybrid learning environments are designed to help you achieve your unique academic, personal, and professional goals. With over 340 academic programs as of September 2024, GCU meets you where you are and provides a path to help you fulfill your dreams. The pursuit to serve others is yours. Let it flourish. Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University. Private.

Christian affordable. Visit gcu.edu. Spring is here and summer's around the corner. With sweatpants season officially over, it's time to swap those winter sweats for outfits that turn heads. When you are looking to refresh your wardrobe, Daily Look has you covered. A

a fantastic personal styling service for women. With Daily Look, you get your own dedicated stylist to curate a box of clothes based on your body shape, preferences, and lifestyle. These are real personal stylists, not an algorithm, and you get the same stylist every time. You start by filling out their style quiz and sharing your price range and lifestyle preferences. Then they send up to 12 handpicked items straight to your home.

You try them on, you keep what you love and you send back the rest. And the best part, Daily Look covers shipping both ways. Whether you need something chic for the office or you want to upgrade from last year's sundress, Daily Look has you covered. Head on over to dailylook.com to take your style quiz and use code Megan for 50% off your first order. That's dailylook.com for 50% off and make sure you use our promo code Megan so they know we sent you. Dailylook.com promo code Megan.

Hi, everyone. This is former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer. We all know that Americans are still recovering from the record inflation of the past four years. Now, some in Congress want to make cuts to Medicaid, a program that provides critical health care to 72 million struggling Americans, including veterans, people with disabilities, kids, and your friends and neighbors.

40% of American births are actually covered by Medicaid, and Medicaid covers health care costs for a third of children with cancer. Working families rely on this program. It has 77% support. Nearly 9 in 10 Americans oppose Medicaid cuts.

Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to protect Medicaid. As president, he's still promising to love and cherish Medicaid. Did you know that 12 million Medicaid families live in rural communities? Many of these people voted for Donald Trump and they didn't vote for this. If Congress cuts Medicaid, a lot of rural hospitals could close and a lot of rural families will be hurt. No matter how you look at it, cutting Medicaid just doesn't make sense. Stand with President Trump and tell Congress not to cut Medicaid.

You get the store clerk's attention and point to your favorite lottery scratcher. You prepare your lucky quarter. And work that popcorn shell out of your tooth. Quarter meets scratcher and... Scratch away. With the Illinois Lottery. Be smart, play smart. Must be 18 years or older to play.

Now we turn to Kelly's court back in session. The universe might implode because everyone is in court today. Everyone. The Menendez brothers, Diddy, Weinstein, and some of our panelists are involved in multiple of these cases, plus some incredible new Kohlberger reporting ahead of that trial that starts tomorrow.

this summer. Mark Iglarz is with us today along with Mark Garagos. Iglarz is a criminal defense attorney at Iglarz Law, former prosecutor. Garagos is a trial lawyer and managing partner at Garagos and Garagos. Mark and Mark, welcome back. Great to see you both. What a day. I'm going to start with you, Garagos, because your daughter is one of the lead lawyers defending P. Diddy. So

How do you think it's going so far? They picked the jury last week. They had opening statements yesterday and their first and second witness. And they're in the middle of crossing that second witness right now.

On a personal level, I was in court yesterday. I watched her deliver the opening statement. And I had told somebody who was sitting next to me, I only wish my father was alive to have watched it because he was my partner. And the talent skips a generation. I mean, I know she's my dog. She hit it out of the park.

That's sweet. She was making. I will criticize. I will criticize the the courtroom artist because that no resemblance to my daughter. They're never very good. There's a very funny modern family episode where Mitchell is in court arguing and the person who's the sketch artist is somebody who he like dissed in a former life and just makes him look ridiculously bad.

And his whole goal is to be drawn more favorably by the sketch artist. We have to rely on sketches because it's federal court and they don't allow cameras in federal courts. Very annoying. But I would say this, I'll go to Eiglars on this. I thought she made the only and best argument that's available to Diddy, which is he may be a bad person who you can't stand, whose sex life is bizarre and offensive to you. But that doesn't make him a criminal under the RICO acts

And you can't confuse your disgust for his personal choices as a human with seeing him as a violator of the criminal law. That's right. No, content wise, she was perfect.

She took that video and said, you're not going to like him. You may not find him abhorrent. You may find his conduct deplorable, but he's not charged with domestic violence. He's charged with other acts. She also did a great job of saying, look, his lifestyle is maybe not one that you might endorse. Maybe you don't engage in. He's a drug user. He's this and that. She got out all

the wind out of the government's arguments, all that bad character stuff. And I think that she's got a shot. Here's what she these are highlights from her opening, as reported on the Law and Crime podcast. First of all, they keep calling him Sean, not P. Diddy, not Puff Daddy, just Sean. He was wearing a gray sweater in court yesterday, just like a little, you know, Catholic schoolboy and actually was seen reading the Bible before the. OK, OK, OK.

But she said the government has no place in Sean's bedroom that he can get angry. And there's been some domestic violence, too. But that's not criminal racketeering. Baby oil is not a crime that essentially. By the way, by the way, sitting in the courtroom, the only time I saw a

jurors actually laugh during both the government and the defense openings was when she made that little kind of snide remark about the baby oil. Oh, God.

That is the only time you saw a stone face kind of melt. Well, ask any woman or man who grew up in the 1970s. It used to be slathered all over us as we search for the perfect tan, which somehow both of my panelists today have managed to achieve.

She said, and this is really this gets to the heart of it. Women, these women are adults who made their own choices. And here it has real parallels to the case that our other panelists frequent on Kelly's court is not is now trying to.

That's the reason Arthur Idalla isn't here today, which is the Harvey Weinstein case. It's a similar defense. Like we know you don't like our defendant and we know he seems like a terrible man to you, but being a terrible man morally is not the same as committing a crime. And in both cases, both Diddy and Weinstein, you had women claiming that they were abused or raped or mistreated who kept coming back over and over and over in some cases for years and

And I think that it may be hard, Gary goes for some jurors to get past that, you know, to like, you can understand if a man rapes a woman and she runs to the police, it's much harder to get your arms around why she would have a years long relationship with this person. And that that's a, that's an issue in both of these big trials.

You know, obviously, I've known Sean forever. I've represented him for years. Actually, currently represent his mother in an unrelated action.

I will tell you one of the things as I'm sitting there and it's obviously full disclosure, I'm watching my daughter and I'm watching people that I know. But one of the things to me that was most stunning about this case is if you've been listening to all the noise running up to this case, if you've been listening to everything, if you're on Twitter and you have a feed or exit, you have a feed.

Instagram, you assumed so many other things were at play in this case. And when you get up there and you listen, actually listen to the opening arguments and realize that what we're talking about is

What this case is now boiled down to is two long term ex-girlfriends and one employee. That's who the gravamen of the four or five counts, depending on how they're going to reframe this. Now that the third so-called accuser is not going to be called. That's stunning. She took off.

The third accuser is nowhere to be found. I don't know that that's accurately being portrayed. I won't go there. I'm not so sure they ever had her. Oh, fascinating. Okay, Mark's got some insider information. He's just going to be a tease, not give it to us straight. But I think I hear you. By the way, Megan, how often is it that as a lawyer you've ever been sitting in the audience, had somebody tap you on your shoulder and say you're going to the principal's office? So I'm very attuned.

You mark our our friend here got in trouble with the judge, even though he's not even a lawyer on this case. Only you, Garagos, you get called into the judge because he was mad about a comment you made on a podcast you do with Harvey Levin of TMZ. Oh, we've got your comment that got you in trouble. My team's way ahead of me. Let's hear it. Let's hear what you did. Your team is so much. Let's talk about the lawyers.

So the prosecution now, we know, just came out today, that they have five lawyers on the team, all of whom are six? Six. Now, the ones I know of five, all women. Is the sixth a woman? Yes. Okay, so six women, all white. Correct. That's my understanding. I've only seen a couple of them or know of a couple of them, but my understanding is you've got a six-pack of white women. That's not coincidental.

You know, it's very interesting to me. But, you know, when prosecutors try to get too cute, you referenced O.J. Simpson, sometimes it comes back and backfires on you.

Okay. So judge, how is that Megan? How is that not constitutionally protected speech? I can't imagine that Garagos didn't give it back to the judge unless he just said, all right, fine judge. I want to know what you told him. This is protected. You're allowed to say that. Well, let me just tell the audience first what the controversy is, even though sadly we're both on Garagos's side on this particular controversy, because it'd be much more fun if we could beat down on him. Um, so the judge super

Romanian called you in there again, even though you're not a lawyer in this case, you're the father of a lawyer in this case. And obviously it seems you're consulting, but, uh, and he says to you, according to, um, I don't know the source from this article I'm reading from, um, Oh, NBC news.

that in his chambers, he'd be listening and watching you to make sure that you don't say anything else that could interfere with a fair trial. Hi, judge. Great to have you watching Kelly's court. I think this is ridiculous, he said. I think referring to the prosecution in this case as a six pack of white women is outrageous. This would not be tolerated in any court from any lawyer anywhere across the nation. Why? Why is he so offended at that comment, Mark?

Well, I'm not going to... I really enjoy him. I mean, I think he's been very fair. I might have. I didn't realize until I read the transcript. He basically said, I'm going to be watching you. I'm going to be watching the podcast. And I said, well, as long as you subscribe. And that's where the transcript ended. So I did not mean to be flip, but I'm a little... The optics of this case...

I will tell you, watching the jury selection and everything else, the optics of this case are kind of bizarre to me. And somebody had reported yesterday, so I'm going to repeat what was reported yesterday. We've already discussed what the prosecution looks like. The prosecution is being brought by the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice,

It regards two other girlfriends. It is a black man. And yesterday, the government exercised peremptories out of their nine peremptories. Their first seven of those nine or at least seven of those nine were against the blacks. So the optics here to me. And by the way, I didn't know they were going to do that when I when that when we had that discussion. But I don't know why. I mean, Mark.

What was the race of the what's Cassie's race? What's the race of this? This guy who claims he was a sex worker brought in there. The other girlfriend.

Yeah. I mean, most of the accusing witnesses against him are black, too. This is not this is not this is we're not going to O.J. this case. Let's let's keep going here. I hear you on the defenses, but I have to say this. So he's been charged with racketeering, sex trafficking, transportation to engage in prostitution. These are very high bars, racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution, prostitution.

Now, Mark, I think Mark Eichlar, now we're in business. Now I'm liking the prosecution's case better than on the RICO count because the defense was saying yesterday with respect to because there was testimony from one of the sex workers repeat like this guy. This guy is a witness in the case and his name is Daniel Phillips. Philip.

He was the second witness. The first was, um, a security guard at the intercontinental who was there in the aftermath of that beating where, where Sean Combs did beat down Cassie. We all watched it on camera. It was absolutely disgusting. He's a pig and I can't fucking stand him, but I'm open-minded to him not being a criminal, just saying in the way alleged here, Daniel Phillip was witness. Number two, a male dancer who said he received money repeatedly from Cassie, the woman who was beaten on that tape to have sex with her in front of, uh,

Diddy at the Gramercy Park Hotel that she opened the door in a red wig, that there was a man already there. She claimed was her husband said he would just watch them. The man had a bandana over his face and was wearing a hat. He was referred to as baby. It was Sean Combs. He claimed that he was working in import export business.

Cassie and Daniel had sex. He was getting paid for the sex. Daniel was, did he watched and pleasured himself, baby oil all over each other. Did he complain? Not enough baby oil. He was obsessed with the baby oil. Um, that did he's daughters. Again, this is per long crime left the room. When the courtroom, when this testimony is being given, they didn't want to hear this about their father. His son stayed that no sexual protection was used that Cassie, um,

messaged him after the fact for, forgive me, but a dick pic, um, that it happened multiple times over 2013 and 2014. He saw Diddy physically abusing Cassie, or at least heard him slapping her behind closed doors at doors. Diddy, um, would direct the sex saying, slow down, you know, finish off if you will here or there on her body. Cassie wanted him to urinate on, on her. And then I saw another report saying Diddy instructed him to urinate and

in her mouth. Forgive me, this is very tawdry stuff. And then Diddy would be pleasuring himself to it that they wanted a copy of Daniel's driver's license. Therefore, he felt threatened or like Diddy could come back to hurt him, that he urged Cassie to leave Diddy, saying that, you know, he's going to hurt you. This is I tried to explain to her she was in real danger if she stayed. OK, so that's this guy's testimony. And the reason I'm going to you, I gosh, on this is that

The defense to this seems to be he was paying these sex workers like Daniel, and there'll be others who claim that they were paid. I think there have been in the press. We'll see whether they actually call him. He was paying sex workers not for sex,

but for their, and I quote, time and experience, time and experience, that it was not transportation to engage in prostitution so much as, I guess, to gain their expertise as sex workers to like advise, I guess, on how it can be done in the most filthy, offensive ways possible. Thoughts on all that?

Okay, well, if it's believed, then that's a pretty good defense. Why would it be believed? Because it's bizarre enough, like everything else they're going to hear. This is not reality as they would consider reality. The reality to Diddy is a completely different world. So if his defense is a little off, a little bizarre, uh,

Yeah, that would be fair and consistent. Most of the things you just read, by the way, are things that that can be overcome by arguing consent. Everybody's playing along. Not the prostitution, not the prostitution, Mark.

Not that. Not transportation to engage in prostitution. I'm not so sure about that, Megan, because... Yeah, they're arguing consent, Megan. Everybody's involved. Everybody's okay. What do you mean? The hooker's always involved and okay with it. She always consents. Mm-hmm.

Yeah, but when you take a look at the statute and you interpret the statute, what you're doing here is you're actually trying to turn it on its head. It's designed for the so-called way. I'm old enough to remember when you used to call this pimping and pandering.

This is designed for the pimp. It's not designed for the John. And that's where they've turned it on its head. That's why the elements don't make all that much sense when it's applied here. And I think you're going to see that when you get the jury instructions. I don't. How is it not? How is he not the pimp in this scenario where he's paying this guy, Daniel, to come into the room at the Gramercy Park Hotel and have sex with Cassie in front of him? How is that not? How is that legal? Yeah.

Well, if you were to if you go on to the back of one of the newspapers, this also betrays my age and you get you call somebody to come to your location. I've had cases where that's happened. The prosecutor does not charge you as the person who who does.

goes and acquires the escort to come to you. They don't charge you with pimping or pandering. They charge you as prostitution or the person who is acquiring the prostitute or the sex. That's the way traditionally this has been applied. This is a whole new, you know, special ditty exception, if you will, to the statute.

How is it lawful, Mark Eichlarsch, for Diddy in this alleged scenario to be hiring sex workers over the course of years and in some cases transporting them to his location to have sex with Cassie or other women right in front of him? How on earth is that legal?

It may not be. And that's what the government's offering. What do you mean may? Why are you wiggling? How is it legal? Everybody knows prostitution is illegal. It's no less illegal to order up the prostitute and have them come to your place and pay for them to have sex there. It depends on what the facts are. Go ahead, Gary. No, it doesn't. Is OnlyFans illegal? Is the Cowboys free? I'm not an expert on OnlyFans, but OnlyFans, my understanding is they get naked on camera and you pay to watch it.

Okay. And what's the... That's not the same thing as prostitution. Well, I know, but I'm asking you why, and you seem rather heated on it. That's because your client or friend, your guy who you consider your close friend, is an absolute pig cretin who I desire to see suffer. So that's why I'm heated. I understand that. I would hope that you can just... Move to excuse her.

Yeah, I could not serve in this jury. That's for sure. Yes, I write the court would think it. Excuse me. Yeah, he's watching right now. Judge, listen to me. Don't let him off. No, sorry. Sorry.

Okay, let's keep going. I don't agree with you guys on this. I see what you're saying. You're saying the charge that was brought against him, the elements of it may not line up with those particular acts. And I haven't looked at each element to see whether that's true. But I'm aware that you cannot do by phone what you could not do in person. You're not allowed. It's no more legal for the person to order the prostitute and pay him than it is to be the prostitute and do it, period. Okay, let's keep going because

The there's a lot of other things to talk about. Let's do Menendez next, because that's another one. That's another Garagos case. I can't keep up and not just Garagos, but my lawyer and friend Brian Friedman is now involved in trying to get your two clients out of jail on any number of ways. Like there's a there's a few different ways now where you might be able to get them out, because what originally happened was the old the outgoing Gascon attorney said, you know what?

I'm going to, I want to take another look at whether these guys should be held. Like maybe we need to take a fresh look at this case. And it was clearly a ploy to stay in office while he got booted. And now the new DA is like, nevermind, we don't want to do that. And you guys first said this new DA should recuse himself. He shouldn't be part of this case. And

I think that's where all hell broke loose. Mark Garagos, what happened? Now, do you now do you want him? This guy, Hochman, do you want him gone or don't you? Because it seems like you then backed off of your motion to have him booted from the case. So and I said this on the record.

Brian, your lawyer, my friend, had discovered right before court last week, somebody had come up with, because we've both been kind of perplexed by the idea of why is this guy so personally invested in this case?

And I'm meeting Nathan Hockman. As it turns out, Brian had discovered that he had engaged a crisis management firm that arguably had been doing a social media campaign against the brothers. And then I said, well, if that's true, and I said this on the record to the judge, I then did some Googling. And it turns out that Mr. Hockman, when he was in private practice, he and his father, who were very close,

accomplished tax defense lawyers in Los Angeles had represented Jose's ex-business partner in a tax dispute regarding a transaction that took place months after Jose was killed. And so this whole kind of Jose rehab tour, that reputation rehab tour that Hockman has been on, all of a sudden comes into focus. They say, well, why didn't we pursue that?

I want, and as we're taping this, Megan, I'm about to cut you off and say goodbye to my friend Mark because I've got to get to court. I don't want to delay the resentencing. I want to get in there. I want the judge to hear the evidence. I want the judge to engage with the victims because, by the way, Brian represents all of the victims and every living victim is uniformly shoulder to shoulder. Of Jose Menendez.

Yeah, of Jose, Jose's older sister, all of Jose's relatives, of Kitty, Melinda's her older sister, all of their relatives. Everybody wants them out. Everybody says they are rehabilitated. Everybody who has in that family who understands what this statute is and what a resentencing is, all are uniformly in lockstep with us. They want them out.

But let me ask you, OK, so as I understand it, there are three. Let me just ask this first. There are three possibilities to get him out. One, that they're just resentenced. That's what George Gascon initiated last fall. The second is clemency from governor from Governor Gavin Newsom. Governor Gavin Newsom. And the third is.

a habeas corpus petition filed by you guys claiming that there's new evidence unearthed about the sexual abuse by Jose Menendez. Um, and we've discussed some of that in the past, like the Menudo, uh, singer who said he, he molested me and so on. So which one is the, is your best path here, Mark? Which one is the most active and most likely to get them out?

Today, today, as we're taping this, when I go to court, which is which is the resentencing thing started by Gascon. Correct. Correct. And I mean, I go ahead. So I wanted to ask Mark and I say this with love and friendship. Those who have challenges with them getting out primarily point to their mother. And, you know, why did she need to be killed? And that just complicates the whole thing. And I'm wondering what your response is.

My response is that the focus of the statute is the 35 years since the crime. And one of the things that I've been so frustrated by is the current DA's conflation of that issue that Mark talks about with what the statute says. The statute says basically minimizes looking at the crime and maximizes what have you done since then.

Now, to answer your question more fundamentally or on the merits, far be it for me to be the one who kind of seizes the moral high ground on Kitty. I have sat numerous times. I put her under oath in this courtroom in November, and I put her under oath a year, but more than a year ago in what's called a conditional exam with Joan, her older sister, who

describes herself, look, I was not only Kitty's older sister, I was eight years older than her, and I kind of was a surrogate mother to her, to Kitty as well. I loved her more than you can love your own child, and I have forgiven them, and I want

them out before I die. That is one of my fondest wishes in this case, is to get them out so they can get out so they can hug Joan. So I could get into a detailed explanation as to all of the facts of the crime. We don't have enough time, but I will tell you, far be it for me to put myself in shoes other than where Kitty's own sister has said, please, please, Judge, let them out.

Okay. There's a lot more to get to. I want to do quickly, um, a fast one, which is the Blake lively, Justin Baldoni case, which is being handled for Baldoni by our friend, Brian Friedman. And he has just dropped a subpoena on Taylor Swift, um, saying she needs to participate in this trial because she was alleged to have been at this, um,

meeting at Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds' New York City penthouse, where they discussed a scene that Blake had rewritten. Justin has said that the meeting got very heated and that he felt ambushed because Blake's husband, Ryan Reynolds, was there. And then Taylor Swift showed up. Not to mention Blake also

Sent Justin a text message claiming Taylor Swift was her dragon and she, Blake Lively, was Khaleesi. And so to me, I'm not surprised at all. I mean, I'm biased towards Brian, I admit, but I actually don't find this surprising at all. I think most lawyers would subpoena a witness to this critical meeting. And the fact that she's Taylor Swift doesn't allow her to be treated any differently from somebody who is named Barbara or something.

Taylor, I guess, Taylor Smith instead of Taylor Swift. I'll start with you on that, Gary Goss. Well, look, I readily concede, as you do, Brian is probably one of my closest friends in the world. Having said that, and it seems like every case we have this time, there's some connection, but the fact is...

That when somebody says, and I saw this yesterday, I don't know if it was Taylor or her people saying, we just licensed the song. 19 other people have licensed the song. Well, excuse me. To the movie.

Yeah, to the movie. If you're a percipient witness to a meeting that is essential to the allegations in a case, I understand that it's a pain in the ass. I understand that you don't want to be involved and you want to get dragged into it. But the fact is you're a percipient witness and that's what litigation is all about. Do they care, Eichlar, that it's one of the biggest stars in the world? Will the judge factor that in when deciding whether or not she should be forced to testify in this case?

It shouldn't matter if she's a key witness and has relevant information, then there's no way that she doesn't have to testify and get involved. So when do we know when that trial is, Mark Garagos? No, we don't. And probably if I had to bet, Brian probably will slap me when I go see him in about an hour. I don't think this will ever get to trial. They can't afford to have this go to trial. Who's they?

They meaning the other side, Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds cannot afford to and not not financially afford. They cannot they cannot weather the collateral damage that will be done at a trial. That's already being done.

Yeah, it's already, I was going to say, it's already been, I don't know, I mean, you can manage your way, I suppose, out of anything from a crisis management standpoint. But the amount of self-inflicted damage in this case, so much on their side, not just laying it at Brian's feet, kind of their tone-death responses to things has just been astonishing to me.

So but well, how does it end then? Because she's suing Justin. Justin's suing The New York Times. And has he also brought a counterclaim against her? I'm trying to remember the specifics. He's definitely in The New York Times.

I believe so. At some point, everybody's going to get into a room. There's going to be a retired judge as a mediator. He's going to sit there and he's going to do shuttle diplomacy. It's going to end the way that almost all disputes in Hollywood end, which is a mediated settlement.

Let me tell you a story about Brian Friedman. They can't. They have to resolve this. I've told the audiences before, but I met Brian Friedman when he was suing me. He was suing me. He wasn't the plaintiff, but he was the lawyer for somebody who was suing me. It was a dispute I had with a former agent. And...

He took my deposition. At the beginning, I was like, I can't stand this guy. I want to punch him in the face. And by the end of that deposition, I was like, I'm in love with him. I need to know him on a personal level. He's like one of my favorite people ever. And a beautiful friendship was born. But-

But when he was still adverse to me, we had a mediation to try to settle. Whenever you're on the way toward litigation, usually you do a mediation, and then ultimately you either have an arbitration or a trial. So we went to the mediation, and he showed up. He flew all the way in from California. He flew all the way in. We talked to this retired judge. We're like, all right, this is whatever. I said what I thought. And then he went over to talk to Brian Friedman, who represented the other side. He came back to us within 30 seconds.

And like they hadn't moved at all, like nothing, not even a good faith, you know, movement, which is, you know, we both thought we were totally right. And I'm like, well, what do you say? And he goes, you know, basically telling us to pound sand. And I'm like, well, what what did you say? And the mediator had said to him, like, what are you doing here then, Mr. Friedman? And he said, no.

I love to visit New York this time of year. I just love New York. I'm like, I want to kill him. So that's Brian. He doesn't care. I don't think the mediation is going to pressure Brian into doing anything he doesn't think is in Justin's best interests. And, you know, whenever I look at Blake Lively now, as she continues this self-immolating, all I can think is that line from, what's his name? Jack Nicholson from A Few Good Men. You effed with the

the wrong Marine. You F with the wrong Marine. That's how I feel about Blake Lively versus Justin Baldoni. Okay, let's keep going. Let's do Kohlberger, Mark Eichler, because this is a big one. The allegations that Dateline and Keith Morrison, as their lead reporter on it, broke this past Friday are just...

And though I can't stand NBC, I like the crew at Dateline, so we're allowed to discuss them favorably. They got a lot of new exclusive details about this case as it barrels toward trial this summer. First of all, they revealed that NBC

this is disturbing that Kohlberger allegedly, this is upsetting, carved the legs of Ethan Chapin. They described this murder of these four Idaho college students back in November of 2023. Um, I always stumble on whether it was 23 or 22. It's been so long now. Um, 22. Um,

That he went, the allegation that Brian Colbert went at this house, that he was casing the house, that he went by the house multiple times that night, including multiple times in the 3 a.m. hour. The murders happened in the 4 a.m. hour between like 4.06 and 4.19 a.m. That he went in through the sliding door of the second floor, which we know, which is sort of the ground floor. That he went right upstairs, that the main target was not Kaylee Gonsalves, which is what some of us previously believed and had been told, but was Maddie Mogan,

who was in bed with Kaylee, they were best friends and sleeping in the same bed, that it was Maddie Mogan, that unfortunately Kaylee, who was there visiting, was collateral damage in the moment, that he killed the two of them and that they believe that he then was spotted by Zanna Kernodle, who was down one floor.

as he was leaving, that he went to kill her, did kill her in the hallway that they fought, that there was, she fought for her life. That then Ethan Chapin was asleep and either slept through this. It was unclear to me exactly what the sequence was, but he then murdered Ethan Chapin with his knife and quote carved. And they make a point in the Dateline show of saying it was a carving of

This young man's legs, which is just beyond sick, then went to leave, bumped into the one surviving roommate. And she heard him say something effective. Don't worry, you'll be okay. And she just froze. He left and immediately she and the other surviving roommate who was down the hall or on a different floor started texting. They knew immediately something terrible had happened. It was apparent to those two roommates who lived like that.

They texted for the next couple of hours and then the texting resumed. Very strange sequence of events there. But also pointing out that he had all these like bikini shots of girls around his campus and the Idaho campus on his phone. Buxom girls in bikinis was Googling Ted Bundy and stories about Ted Bundy took a lookalike photo of himself looking like Ted Bundy, Mark and

I mean, we can get into some more of the details, but the case against him just it's even stronger than we knew. It's colossal. And what you just described will be the words flowing from the prosecutor's lips to establish that this crime was especially cold, calculated and premeditated. CCP, which is one of the aggravators. The other one is hack.

heinous, atrocious and cruel. And that's why I predict that his attorneys will go to the nearest sports goods store and purchase knee pads and get down on their knees and beg for life as opposed to death. Mm hmm. The um, we'll go through some of it in more detail.

And let's be honest, we haven't heard as much from the defense. Dateline didn't really play up how the defense is going to handle each of these. They did feature Howard Bloom, who's on this show a lot, who is very fair to the defense. Not as fair as Brian's fans want him to be, but I think he's very fair. But my point is simply we haven't been given like a close up preview of the defense and how they're going to argue all this. Here's Keith Morrison. And in their defense.

You know, each one of these search can be innocuous. Searching Ted Bundy doesn't make you a serial killer and looking up certain things. But when you put it all together, I mean, you know, again, he enjoys the presumption of innocence like anybody, but there's only one picture that emerges.

Yeah. I mean, it's not abnormal for young college age men to have pictures of beautiful girls on their phone. It's also not unusual after this crime happened for everyone

any American to Google Idaho murders, which they found him doing. Like that doesn't make you the killer. I certainly did it. Um, so like that, some of it is more innocuous, but you know, some of it is leaving your knife sheath with your DNA. That's problematic. That's all I'm saying. Yeah. Deeply. And we got more on the car footage, uh, his car on the night in question here is sat 27. Oh,

This video obtained exclusively by Dateline shows a white car on King Road in Moscow, Idaho, on November 13th, 2022. At the wheel, the state will allege, was Brian Kohlberger making repeated passes near a house where minutes later, four students were stabbed to death. OK, and then there's more. They had on an FBI profiler named Greg Cooper, who spoke to a little bit more about this. Watch. It's not 28.

That same week, the week after the killings, Kohlberger began viewing or saving on his phone photos, videos and news updates about the murders. He did that at least 60 times. He was collecting everything, all the reporting about the incident. It's very common. He's been watching all these things. And last but not least, the Ted Bundy thing. Here's stop 30.

In late December, six weeks after the murders of Maddie Mogan, Kaylee Gonsalves, Zanna Cronodal, and Ethan Chafin, record show Kohlberger, a criminology student, was again on his phone playing a clip from a YouTube program called Ted Bundy, The Essence of a Psychopath. Within 24 hours of that, two selfies. Kohlberger dressed the same way Bundy is pictured on that program.

It's so creepy. It's just so creepy. Again, you can explain it away. Every single fact doesn't mean that he's guilty of anything, but you put it all together. It's not only bad for the defense, but it's so creepy and disturbing. Does that even come in, though, the fact that he was Googling Ted Bundy and took a lookalike picture of himself as Ted Bundy?

I'd want to I'd want to put that in. Are you kidding me? I think it goes to the weight and you let the jury decide how much weight, if any, you're going to give it. You don't keep it out. Well, what on what ground is it relevant? He's interested. A lot of people are interested in true crime and serial killers. I mean, I can see the defense actually keeping this out.

I can see the defense not wanting it in for sure because it doesn't help them. And I could see a judge saying, why should I exclude it if I'm doing a 403 balancing? Is it more prejudicial than probative? I don't know. I think there's value to it. I think you let the jury decide on this one. It's not good. OK, there's more.

Weeks before the murders, he searched for dozens of photos of female students from both Washington State and University of Idaho. And pictures from some of these accounts were of friends or followers of the three female victims. They don't allege that they were of those three female victims. So that that's interesting. He in late September 2022. So this is two months before the murders.

He was a PhD student at nearby Washington State University. He searched terms such as sociopathic traits in college student and pornography containing keywords drugged and sleeping. And

And, you know, Mark, as far as we know, there was no sexual assault. I mean, honestly, I don't think there was time for a sexual assault. The murders took place since like over 12 minutes, 12 to like 18 minutes at the most. And he killed four people. But one does wonder if he's searching that.

Whether he had some other plan, you know, if he hadn't found Maddie Mogan in bed with another woman, he, we also had to kill like, what, what was he planning in October, 2022, he's getting closer to the murders. He searched, can psychopaths behave differently?

pro-socially, which is very disturbing. But the thing is, Mark, a lot of this, the defense is just going to say he was a PhD student in criminology. Of course, he was interested in Ted Bundy, the murders and questions about psychopaths and sociopaths.

Absolutely. There's definitely going to be an explanation for every single thing, even the bizarre behavior of circling his vehicle around the crime scene. They're gonna bring in as soon as they possibly can, although the judge has made it a little bit difficult that he suffers from autism, albeit mild, but maybe that's consistent with that type of behavior. They're gonna explain away all the bizarre behavior.

But, you know, just like you can explain away slurred speech, you can explain away bloodshot eyes. You can explain somebody having difficulty driving when you put all the pieces of the puzzle together. You know, it equals DUI. And in this case, it equals a really abhorrent offense. The K-bar knife. You mentioned that the knife sheath was left behind. Dateline speculated that

It may have, it may have like fallen out in a struggle. It may have been in the context of that struggle that happened on the second floor. But, but my understanding was that they found that with the first two victims on the third floor, Maddie and Kaylee. So I'm not sure now it raised questions for me. Was the knife sheath found on,

underneath one of the two girls and their bodies, or was it down on the floor beneath them with Ethan and Zanna lost during a struggle? We'll find out more this summer when we hear actual testimony as opposed to speculations. But this was revealed prior to Dateline. We found out that after the murders, he had searched on Amazon for another K-bar knife.

Which is just shocking. And Howard Bloom broke that news here on the show. He talked to us about it. And I asked him, do you think he was looking for a replacement knife sheath so that if the cops came, he was like, that's not mine. And he said maybe or maybe he wanted to commit more murder. And he had disposed of the murder weapon and it worked so well. He was looking to do it again. Here is a little bit from the Dateline special on that knife, SOP 29.

After the murders, investigators discovered a sheath from a K-Bar knife apparently left by the killer in one of the victim's beds. DNA found on that sheath has been linked to Brian Koberger. Dateline was the first to report that Koberger bought a K-Bar knife seven months before the murders. And now we've obtained records showing that after the murders, Koberger was back on Amazon looking at K-Bars. He even clicked buy now and began the checkout process before exiting.

Okay. So that last part is interesting that he clicked by now because what Howard told us was that Ann Taylor, the lawyer had initially suggested, Oh, that K-bar knife thing only came up in his Amazon because like, if they hear you mention knife in the context of a conversation, you know, they do target to get targeted ads. And that, so, but if he clicked by now, it's a different story.

Of course. And of the defense, obviously you're not just going to go, all right, you got us. So there's going to be an argument. Likely it's not going to be to challenge the, you know, the effectiveness of DNA. They'll say, all right, it's, it's DNA on there, but someone somewhere. And again, don't kill the messenger wanted to frame him like the Mona Lisa and somehow got a hold of, of his DNA and somehow the sheath and, and, and put it there and, and wanting to frame him. Now that would be a, a,

I don't know, an okay argument if there wasn't all this overwhelming other evidence supporting his guilt. Well, what if you're the defense lawyer and you're thrilled that they did not find a murder weapon, right? Somehow he did manage to get rid of the knife if in fact he did it. He denies doing it.

How damning is it that then of all the knives in the world, two days, 48 hours after the murders, he's online searching for the exact knife that happened to have been used in this quadruple homicide. It is so bad and so overwhelming that again, I think how quickly can I get to the prosecutors and, and beg and plead with them to offer life and end this.

Well, do you think they'll take that? So far, the reports are he doesn't want to plea. There's absolutely no discussion of a plea. And if anything, his lawyer is maybe planting the seeds for an argument that he's too incompetent to make this call. He's too, there's something wrong with him. And that he should, she should be able to allow to like Trump him into negotiating a plea. So, so far, we don't believe there's going to be a plea because he doesn't want one. I don't know where the prosecution stands, but do you believe the prosecution would take

a life plea in exchange for a trial when they have evidence this strong and they want the death penalty.

I don't know. The first and foremost, you go to the family members and you ask, what do they want? Right. Because they deserve to be heard. And I consider that not the end all be all, but a lot of weight should be given to their wishes. You know, there's some finality to it. He would love to have a big trial. He would love to have his face go everywhere. But you deny him that you say, all right, fine, we'll consider giving you life. And then you just go away and you don't appeal at all. And that's it. We're done.

You know, finally, Mark, there was reporting in the Dateline special that Kohlberger called his father's phone the morning after the murders, like two hours after the murders, 6 a.m. in the 6 a.m. hour.

I mean, the bodies were still warm at that point. It's like very early in that morning and had a long conversation with him between 30 and 60 minutes. We think it was him. They point out his phone could have been, you know, could have been somebody else in the house. That for the first time raised for me the question of, are we looking at a, like a Gabby Petito situation where the Brian Laundrie, like he called his parents, his parents knew that seems clear. That's our opinion that they knew that,

But like for the first time, I started to have questions about whether this dad or somebody in his family received some sort of a confession from him or some something that really gave them cause to believe he did it. I don't know. I'll defend him on that. I don't know. I think it's fair speculation, but I don't know that that's factually accurate. Well, Mark, that's not additive. Of course you don't know. I don't know either. I'm asking you to how that will be spun and argued in court.

Yeah, I think they'll argue it maybe the way you say, but I don't think they need to. I don't think they need to get into arguments that are total speculative. You just stick with what you got, stick to the facts and let go of those things like that where you really don't know what his intention was.

I feel like we have to get to the bottom of what the father knew and when he knew it. And the rest of the family, too, is there. Howard Bloom, too, was reporting that Brian's sister started to suspect he did it and that the father may have as well, at least at least on that cross-country trip back home. All right, Mark. Thank you. Thanks for sticking around and doing extra duty after your partner in crime had to leave to go get to Menendez brothers out of jail. We're back tomorrow with the fifth column, and we look forward to seeing you all then.

Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

Done with debt, they have negotiators who go head to head with your credit card and loan companies. They have one goal, to drastically reduce or eliminate your debt altogether. And unlike others, done with debt can move lightning fast. Most clients see more money in their pocket month one. But a word to the wise, hurry, because some of their brilliant debt erasing strategies are time sensitive. Do not make another bill payment until you speak with a done with debt strategist. It's free. Visit donewithdebt.com. That's donewithdebt.com, done with debt.

You may get a little excited when you shop at Burlington. Oh, price! Ah-ah! Did you see that? They have my family like a whore! You are out of my town!

I'm saving so much! Burlington saves you up to 60% off other retailers' prices every day. Will it be the low prices or the great brands? Burlington. Deals. Brands. Wow! I told you so. Styles and selections vary by store.