The Megyn Kelly Show - 20211203_matt-walsh-and-adam-carolla-on-viewpoint-censorshi

All Episodes

Previous Next

Plain Text

Dec. 3, 2021 - The Megyn Kelly Show

01:29:44

20211203_matt-walsh-and-adam-carolla-on-viewpoint-censorshi

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
Attacking Freedom of Expression 00:15:17
	And now, we are from Kix.
	Kix can afford the grants with selfies.
	The students can also use the equipment to crush the data.
	We are going to the kitchen in the Nurstras.
	And we can also use the kitchen in the kitchen.
	So, welcome to the Grants with Your Beauty.
	Connect with your kitchen.
	Post Kix Beauty Unlimited.
	Fiken presentes here at Super Enkele Trends Class Program.
	For your ascend-facture and for your drifting.
	That's it.
	Fiken at Super Enkele Trends Class Program.
	Welcome to The Megan Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations.
	Hey everyone, I'm Megan Kelly.
	Welcome to The Megan Kelly Show and Happy Friday.
	We have a really fun lineup for you today.
	Later, I'm going to be joined by Adam Carolla, our old pal, but first up, somebody I've been dying to have on the program Daily Wire's Matt Walsh.
	I love Matt Walsh.
	If you haven't followed Matt Walsh on Twitter, you've been missing out.
	He's a provocateur.
	He's super smart.
	He's loathed by the far left and continues to take them on.
	He will not be bullied out of his opinions.
	And I don't agree with them all, but I love that he stands by them and he's just not going to be silenced.
	Amen.
	This week, Matt was in the headlines after facing off with protesters at St. Louis University.
	You know, nothing says we're getting back to normal life like young liberal college snowflakes once again being triggered by the mere thought of a different viewpoint.
	Ah, Matt Walsh.
	Kind of feels almost good.
	Right?
	Matt's also out with the new children's book that would really put them over the edge if they read it called Johnny the Walrus.
	Matt, thank you so much for being here.
	Hey, thanks for having me.
	It's great.
	Seriously, big fan.
	And I do love how you press people's buttons.
	You're just expressing, look, sometimes it's intentionally provocative, but as I read you and I've listened to your podcast too, it's basically you're just trying to say how you feel.
	It drives some on the far left insane and you just don't back down.
	I've never seen you back down.
	And what happened with St. Louis University this week was.
	Just the latest example of it.
	What say you about it?
	Yeah, I think, well, for one thing, I think that there is value actually in kind of provoking the mob almost intentionally.
	You don't want to say things that you don't believe.
	I never say anything that I don't believe.
	And if you get to the point where you're provocateur in the sense of you're saying things just to be inflammatory that you don't actually think are true, then you're a hypocrite and a fraud.
	But if I notice that there are things I believe and opinions that I actually hold that I'm not supposed to say and that will make people very upset, then I'm more likely to say those things and say them louder.
	Because the other alternative is what we found in our culture, which is people shirking away in fear, cowering to the mob.
	And the more that we do that, the more that we, this is what they feed on, you know?
	You apologize to the mob or you back away.
	It's like throwing slabs of meat to rabid dogs.
	You're just feeding them.
	And I think the only way, if we're ever going to get away from cancel culture and all this kind of stuff, away from this mob mentality, the only way to do it is for people to just stand up, say how they feel, and not be afraid of whatever comes next.
	And the good thing is that what I've found anyway, And there are exceptions to this, of course, but speaking of rabbit dogs, mostly it's all bark.
	And if you stand up and stand firm, they'll back away and go away and find another target.
	That's what I've experienced most of the time.
	And I see you'll give it to the left and the right.
	It's not, you know, you're a more conservative guy, but you don't see any sort of, you know, I don't know, holier than thou people on the right who you're not allowed to attack, because I've seen you do that too.
	And you really don't care.
	It's like you are who you are.
	And I love it because we do need a lot more people.
	Who are just like that, and I don't care if they're on the left or the right, but you know, people have to be able to express their opinions the way we used to in this country.
	Without constant fear of being silenced or fired or some sort of major penalty for having a viewpoint that doesn't comport with that of the mob.
	So you experienced it.
	I'm sure you experienced it a lot.
	But the latest was tell us about St. Louis University and what happened there.
	Yeah, this is a really sad situation on a number of levels.
	I tried to have some fun with it because what else are you going to do?
	But St. Louis University is a Catholic university in name only, it's a Jesuit school.
	And anyone who knows, if you're Catholic as I am, You know about the Jesuits, then you're probably not going to be surprised, that surprised by what happened.
	But as I said, I'm a Catholic, invited to speak at a Catholic university.
	I was originally invited to speak about the pro life issue.
	That's specifically the title, the topic that they asked me to talk about.
	Very timely this week.
	What's that?
	Very timely this week with the abortion case going up to the Supreme Court.
	Right, exactly.
	And so I'm a Catholic person, a believing Catholic, a traditionalist Catholic, which just means that I believe in the doctrines of the church.
	And I'm supposed to talk about the pro life issue.
	The church takes a firm stance on abortion.
	There's no getting around it, there's no equivocating from the church's official stance, which is that abortion is intrinsic evil.
	And even in spite of that, I was first protested.
	They put together a petition, 2,000 people signed it to have the event called off.
	And then I started my own petition to keep my event going, and I got 20,000 signatures.
	So I kind of won the battle of petitions there.
	And the next step was the university, rather than just canceling the talk, they took the more cowardly.
	Path every step of the way.
	And so they came up with a whole bunch of arbitrary, quote unquote, COVID restrictions that they had not put in place for any other public event.
	Like they decided, well, I'm going to have to wear a mask while I'm giving the talk.
	They put in all kinds of capacity restrictions.
	We got to check vaccine cards before the event, which of course I'm not going to do.
	And that was their way of trying to shut it down.
	We moved the event to a church on campus, which invited us to come.
	And then the next step was 300 faculty and staff signed a statement of solidarity.
	Not with me as the believing Catholic, but with the leftists objecting to my talk.
	And then the church backed down and they apologized for ever inviting me in the first place.
	And then we moved our event to a third venue and that's where it finally happened.
	But then, you know, dozens and dozens of protesters showed up in the street blocking traffic outside of the event.
	So this is a lot of effort to have to go through just to say what you believe when it comes to the issue of abortion.
	And by the way, you were invited.
	It's not like you got this whole thing started.
	They treated you so rudely.
	And, and, It wasn't even about, as I understand it, what you were going to say that night.
	It's about other, whatever, random tweets they didn't like.
	But to me, the worst part was the part you mentioned where the priest at the church backed down and issued this statement attacking you.
	I mean, I was really, I thought he was just going to be like, okay, we understand he's controversial and people don't, you know, we're not looking to stir up trouble, so we're not going to host Matt.
	That would have been bad enough.
	But he's like going through basically attacking your Catholicism.
	Like, he's got principles that aren't consistent with Catholicism.
	I'm like, what is going on?
	This is more than you bargained for.
	Yeah, he said, if I remember exactly, he claimed that, well, he finally decided to do his due diligence on me and check my background two days before the event.
	He hadn't done that before, he said.
	And I guess pretending he didn't know who I was, didn't know what I was all about before he agreed to host my event, which I don't believe at all, by the way.
	I'm quite certain that he knew exactly who I was and what I believe, and he was going to hold the event, but then the backlash was too intense, so he backed down.
	But as you say, rather than just saying, listen, we don't want to be in the middle of this, that would have been bad enough and cowardly enough.
	Instead, he demeans and defames and slanders me by saying that I hold positions that are contrary to the Catholic faith.
	In fact, he says that.
	That my statements about communities of color and Islam and immigration are contrary to the teachings of the Catholic faith.
	What have I ever said about communities of color that's contrary to the Catholic faith?
	What have I said about Islam?
	I'll tell you what I've said about Islam.
	I don't talk about it much, but I guess I've said that I don't think it's the true religion.
	And I don't think that because I'm Catholic.
	And so I think Catholicism is true.
	So is this bigoted now?
	The view that Catholicism is true and other religions aren't, is this not welcome in a Catholic church?
	Apparently, I love too.
	He also rips on, he also mentions your positions on members of the LGBTQ community.
	I'm like, the Catholic Church is going to rip on this Catholic priest?
	Doesn't like how you feel about the LGBTQ crowd?
	Because last I checked, I didn't see a lot of gay couples going down the aisle in advance of Sunday Mass.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I mean, if we are kicking speakers off of campus because they have views contrary to Catholic faith, well, then has SLU ever hosted speakers who believe in gay marriage?
	Who support abortion at any stage of pregnancy.
	I guarantee they have.
	And those are positions, however you feel about it.
	I mean, it's just a fact that those are positions that are contrary to official Catholic teaching.
	In fact, I know that they've hosted speakers like that.
	They pay those kinds of speakers because they've got 300 faculty and staff on the payroll who apparently hold those views.
	That's, I mean, it's just yet another example of what's happening in our country and how diehard the leftism is, campus after campus.
	And you're at the Daily Wire.
	Ben Shapiro, of course, has had.
	This happened to him many, many times.
	I've had similar situations where, you know, an article on me or some sort of presence I'm going to have at a university causes some sort of a stir.
	And to me, it's like kind of funny.
	It's like slightly amusing that people find you so threatening, you know, but it actually is a serious problem because what they're really doing is shutting down viewpoints.
	They don't want alternate viewpoints.
	And it's not just happening, as we know, at the college campuses.
	The new head of Twitter, he's already on record as being really not in favor of free speech, that he thinks as a country, we're really more in a place now where it's about.
	You know, proper speech and sort of having the right viewpoints and understanding culturally where we are.
	So the people who are running our big social media giants and so on feel just as that priest who kicked you off and those leftists who didn't even want you to speak feel, which is censorship is good and viewpoint discrimination is very much in vogue.
	Right.
	Censorship of certain views.
	And that's the one thing I think in some ways we almost undersell ourselves when we talk about this kind of backlash that we experience on college campuses or on Twitter or wherever.
	And we say that.
	This is an attack on differing viewpoints or on freedom of expression.
	It is that, like it is that for sure.
	But it's more egregious than that because look at the actual views they are censoring.
	I think what makes the reception that I got on SLU so outrageous is not just that I have a different point of view, but that what I've come there to say is not only in keeping with Catholic teaching, it's also just basically common sense.
	I mean, you and I don't agree on everything, but we're basically common sense people.
	And those are the views that are not welcome in society.
	It would be bad enough.
	I mean, I believe in freedom of expression and everything.
	So even if somebody has a view that is not common sense, they should still get a hearing and we should be able to, as adults, talk about that.
	But it's worse because specifically the common sense views are the ones that are not welcome.
	The view, for example, another issue they had with me is that I believe that biological sex exists and only women can get pregnant.
	And this is a view that every single person on earth throughout the entire history of human civilization has believed up until 12 seconds ago.
	And that's a view that's not welcome.
	So I think it makes it even worse when these are just basic, common sense kind of viewpoints that are being pushed down.
	And within the past two years, that wouldn't have been even.
	Close to controversial.
	You know, like the LGBTQ and in particular the T lobby and activists have gotten so loud and so nasty in their retribution that a viewpoint that men actually are men and women are actually women and gender is not a social construct that everyone held as recently as a couple of years ago is now so controversial you can't even say it.
	Well, guess what?
	I say it, you say it, and people don't like it too bad.
	They can pound sand.
	You know what?
	It's like the problem is conservatives.
	Or people who are more right leaning, they don't have a bunch of universities where people want to go and speak and express opposite viewpoints.
	If they did, they would allow it.
	The closest thing that there exists on television is Fox News.
	Fox News will allow the other side to come on and say the thing, unlike MSNBC.
	And so it's just so annoying that they'll take something that's perfectly mainstream, label it bigoted.
	And then within a couple of years, they've won because the conservatives have no equal sized platforms to fight that rhetoric.
	And the mainstream media just completely takes a knee and submits.
	And I think they use a tactic that proves very effective where they're not going to engage with your viewpoint as if it's simply something they agree with, or rather, as if it's something they simply disagree with.
	They're not going to approach it that way.
	If they disagree with you, they're going to act like what you're saying is not only wrong, but the most insane, bigoted, hateful thing that anyone has ever said.
	I mean, they're going to act like it's absolutely repulsive and repugnant.
	It's this massive overcompensation that they do.
	But it has the desired effect where normal people who just work normal jobs and they don't go and speak in front of audiences for a living, they don't share their opinion for a living.
	I think a lot of them, maybe they go out and they say publicly, oh, I think that only women can get pregnant.
	And then they have a mob of people screaming at them, how dare you say that?
	And then a lot of people just kind of back away and say, whoa, okay, if that's how you feel about it, I just won't say that anymore.
	And you can almost understand, I don't think anyone should have that reaction of backing away.
	For people who have just kind of normal jobs, you can understand that impulse, which I think makes it even more important for those of us who have platforms and who give our opinions for a living.
	It makes it more important for us to draw the line because if we're not going to do it and we do this for a living, then what hope is there?
	Yeah, listening to the Supreme Court arguments this week with the people who are representing the one abortion clinic in Mississippi and then folks on the other side and then the nine justices, they weren't talking about birthing people.
	They were talking about women, women's bodies, women' lives.
	So when you're not on slate.com, You might get some real talk.
	Yeah, that's why I always talk about how this change has happened in the last couple of years, and all of a sudden, you can't say something that everyone believed.
	That's why I always ask when I hear Democrat politicians, especially older ones.
	I mean, let's take Joe Biden as a prime example, 78 years old, and now he's out there talking about trans rights and all this kind of stuff, gender affirming.
	And my question for him is when did you decide that men could give birth?
	When?
	Because I know you never said that up until you're 78 years old.
	You didn't start saying that until you were like 70, maybe at the earliest.
Roe v Wade Political Winds 00:15:38
	So, you lived your whole life believing in biological sex and then you changed your mind.
	Why?
	What convinced you?
	Was there some sort of scientific revelation that I'm not aware of?
	Did someone discover something and they never told the rest of us?
	Do you have information we don't have?
	Of course, it's kind of a rhetorical question because the answer is nothing changed their minds.
	It's just the political wind shifted.
	But it is a question I like to ask anyway because.
	Just that.
	They can't answer it.
	There was nothing that changed their mind, but they changed their mind.
	It's absurd.
	I don't care.
	Like, you're a biological woman and you want to live your life as a man, go for it.
	That's up to you.
	But if you happen to get pregnant and have a baby, The reason you're able to do that is because you're a biological woman, period.
	That's what's real.
	If people don't want to hear it, okay, fine.
	But you can't silence speech.
	You can't call everybody bigoted just because they adhere to something that we've understood very fundamentally since the beginning of time.
	And to me, it's ironic because yesterday, after the Supreme Court arguments, you got Nancy Pelosi saying the Republican justices or the more conservative justices need a lesson on the birds and the bees.
	They need a lesson on the birds and the bees?
	It's your side that's trying to explain, you know.
	Just redefine everything about gender, sexuality, and so on.
	And you look at the right side of the country like they're nuts.
	So, in the wake of the abortion argument on Wednesday at the Supreme Court, yeah, Wednesday, and then we were doing the deconstruct yesterday.
	And just to get people up to speed real quickly on that, the biggest case challenging Roe versus Wade went up to the Supreme Court this week.
	The oral arguments did not go well for the people who are fighting to save Roe.
	They did go well for the people in Mississippi who are trying to challenge Roe versus Wade as a precedent, and then its follow up in 1992.
	Casey.
	And what they want is an overruling of this case law and for this to be kicked back to the states.
	And if that happened, abortion might be legal in some states and it might be illegal in other states.
	The way we think it would shake out is probably in most states it would remain legal.
	In some states it would be unlawful.
	And women in those states that wanted an abortion would have to cross state lines, cross state lines to do so.
	Okay, so we don't know how the Supreme Court's going to rule, but it was a good day for conservatives at the Supreme Court this week.
	So that's why some of Though people on the far left are really losing their minds.
	I want to talk in particular about Whoopi Goldberg and AOC.
	Whoopi Goldberg hit on a note that I've seen you take on before, Matt, on Twitter, which was basically to take issue with any man or male justice who thinks he gets to weigh in on this issue at all.
	Listen to her.
	The fetus has an interest in having a life, and that doesn't change, does it, from the point before viability to the point after viability?
	Do any of you men have any eggs or the possibility of carrying a fetus?
	How dare you talk about what a fetus wants?
	You have no idea.
	Thoughts on that?
	Where do you even begin?
	I mean, first of all, we were all fetuses at one time.
	So I think if that's the qualification here, then maybe we can all speak on that level from that experience.
	Also, I think if you have a person and you're not able to ask them, If they want to be murdered, then it's probably just best to assume they don't want it.
	So I think it's a safe assumption that no child in the womb, if given the option, would elect to have their skulls crushed or be dismembered.
	And we could ask every person who's living today if they're happy that didn't happen to them.
	And I'm pretty sure almost all of them would say yes.
	And also, there's just the fundamental absurdity of men can't weigh in on the abortion issue.
	Roe v. Wade was decided exclusively by men.
	So if men aren't allowed to have an opinion, Then that's reason enough to get rid of Roe v. Wade, I suppose.
	But then we find out that what they really mean when they say men can't have an opinion, what they actually mean is men can't have an opinion that differs from us.
	As long as men are echoing our points, then it's okay.
	But then we get to the biggest problem of all right now for Whoopi Goldberg, which is that she can't use this line anymore.
	That's gone now.
	I mean, what she just said there is outrageous rank transphobia, according to the new rules.
	Right.
	Because according to those rules, some men do have eggs, some men do carry babies.
	Maybe I could.
	Who knows?
	I mean, those are the rules, say.
	It's so true, Matt, right?
	If we're going under the new rules, then how dare she exclude men from being able to comment on this?
	And all Justice Alito was saying was that the fetus has an interest in being born and having its life.
	Not controversial, not even a little.
	But I don't think that's actually what she was upset about because that's such a no brainer.
	I mean, Whoopi can understand that.
	It's a lot of women think men shouldn't talk about the abortion issue at all, that they have no standing to say anything about it because they're not the ones who have to carry the baby.
	As if when the baby comes into the world, men under the law are somehow completely exempted from any responsibilities toward the child.
	That's not actually how it works.
	And it's frankly not how it works morally either, which is why men.
	Absolutely, have the right to weigh in, though ultimately, as the laws recognize as well, the final decision will be in the woman's hands.
	Yeah, if it's true that men have no interest here and should have no say, even though they were 50% of the ingredients that went into creating that shot, I mean, there is no quote unquote fetus in a womb who came into existence without the integral assistance of a man.
	Yeah, just based on eggs, as she says.
	Do you have eggs?
	Do you have eggs?
	Well, do you have sperm, Whoopi?
	I mean, like, it takes both.
	Exactly.
	But also, if that's the case and this is none of our business, we should butt out, then why aren't they calling for the end of child support laws and that sort of thing?
	Because they certainly want, if the child is born, they want the men to be on the hook.
	And I agree with that, by the way.
	I think men should be required to care for their children, but there's no reason why that shouldn't extend into the womb.
	That's what makes it ridiculous.
	And also, it's so irrelevant to the question because the question with this issue with abortion is well, there are a couple of questions.
	One is, The person in the womb, is that a human being?
	Is it a person?
	And if it is a human being and a person, could it possibly be okay to intentionally destroy that person?
	Those are the questions.
	And whether you're a man or a woman, you're perfectly capable of thinking about those questions and coming to a conclusion about them.
	That's right.
	AOC went a different way.
	She's trying to delegitimize the Supreme Court before they've even issued their ruling.
	And she took issue in particular with Justice Kavanaugh.
	Hold on a second.
	We can put the tweet up.
	I've got to actually find it because it's not in front of me.
	But oh gosh, I can't read that.
	I can't even read that.
	Stupid.
	My God, is anybody else losing their eyesight as they get older?
	I'll pull it in front of me and we'll do it right after the break so I can, my 51 year old eyes can help us get through this segment.
	Let's take a quick pause.
	I'll pull up the tweet and we'll have much more with Matt Walsh on Joe Biden, on Alec Baldwin, Jussie Smollett.
	You would not believe the antics in the Jussie Smollett courtroom yesterday.
	You will not believe.
	I'll bring them to you.
	Don't go anywhere.
	Okay, so here's the tweet from AOC.
	Reminder that Brett Kavanaugh still remains credibly accused of sexual assault on multiple accounts with corroborated details.
	And this year, the FBI admitted it never fully investigated.
	Yet the court is letting him decide on whether to legalize Legalize forced birth in the U.S.
	No recusal.
	The second one was out of nine justices, three were appointed by a man who tried to overthrow the U.S. government and elected via a minority.
	Those three will decide whether the U.S. will legalize forcing people to give birth against their will.
	Legitimacy requires consent of the governed.
	They are dismantling it.
	Matt, I laughed when I saw this because I thought, okay, there are no remaining credible allegations against Brett Kavanaugh.
	They were completely dismantled.
	We watched it happen before our very eyes.
	She's talking about people like Julie Swetnick, who's Claims fell apart on live television.
	I was at NBC when it happened.
	Kate Snow interviewed her.
	She fell down on every single claim she'd been making against Brett Kavanaugh.
	There were internal discussions within NBC whether we could even air the thing.
	It was such a disaster.
	But in the end, In a way, they did Justice Kavanaugh, now Justice, a service because she completely imploded.
	This was a Michael Avenatti client.
	Another one that NBC also put on the air was a claim about someone who was anonymous claiming they saw Brett Kavanaugh in his college years shove another person up against a brick wall, a girlfriend.
	Well, it turned out the mother who was allegedly the mother of the person allegedly shoved said that was a complete lie.
	The person was never shoved.
	All of it fell apart, but the media loved to report it and run with it.
	And Christine Blasey Ford, the main witness, was never able to produce a single witness.
	To corroborate any of what she said, anything that she was at a party with Brett Kavanaugh, that she ever knew Brett Kavanaugh, that there was ever an incident between them.
	She herself couldn't remember when it happened, where it happened.
	Even her own best friend didn't support her story, said, I don't know anything about it.
	I cannot support any of these allegations.
	Okay.
	So for the record, that's the Brett Kavanaugh piece.
	But the other piece of it is if you want to get into justices on the high court and who they were appointed by, right?
	So whether we should consider their viewpoints, let's talk about Breyer, who was appointed by Bill Clinton.
	Should we be discounting the opinions of justices sitting there today because those who put them on the bench had some checkered history or allegations against them?
	Because the ones against Bill Clinton were far, far more serious than the ones against Donald Trump, and I followed them all.
	Your thoughts.
	Yeah, well, on the Kavanaugh part of it, I think you covered that really well.
	But what we see is this alternative universe that the Democrats have created, the corporate media has created.
	Of course, I kind of repeat myself they're in the same club, but they create this alternative universe.
	With alternative facts, I suppose.
	And it just simply doesn't matter what happens in the real world.
	I mean, Rittenhouse is the perfect most recent example of that.
	And the fact that you want to talk about claims falling apart, that's what happened there.
	He was acquitted in front of the world.
	Everyone knows it.
	But if you ask any Democrat, they're going to say, as far as they're concerned, he's still a murderer.
	So we see that.
	And as far as the Roe v. Wade part of it, the interesting thing, whether it's AOC impugning this based on Kavanaugh and his alleged indiscretions or Whoopi Goldberg talking about how this is an attack on women or whatever else it is.
	You notice the one thing none of these people are doing is offering a constitutional defense of Roe v. Wade.
	It's all been stare decisis.
	You would never hear.
	Yeah.
	The whole argument, even in court, was like stare decisis, respect for precedent.
	It was less of a, let me point you to exactly where in the Constitution this right to abortion arises.
	It was more like, well, that's the Supreme Court said in 1973, and it was affirmed by Casey in 92, so we should stand by it.
	And as we know, the Supreme Court has said things that all civilized people now agree were wrong, like when they affirmed slavery.
	So we know that, as it turns out, the Supreme Court is populated by mortal human beings who can be wrong about things.
	And they were certainly wrong about this.
	And that's why the left, they just don't talk about it because it's absurd to suggest.
	I mean, if you're an honest person, even if you support abortion, the only honest stance to take is yes, I support abortion.
	I think it should be legal.
	But obviously, it's not in the Constitution.
	There's nothing in the Constitution saying a right to abortion.
	The founding fathers didn't have that anywhere.
	It was not anywhere in the ballpark of anything they were thinking about.
	And that's just, that's obviously clear.
	We know that it's clear because the left ignores it completely and doesn't even talk about it.
	Yeah, no, it's a legal fiction.
	It's based on the so called right to privacy, which also is not in the Constitution, derived from the right to liberty, which is.
	And Griswold versus Connecticut, which recognized the privacy right, has led to all sorts of social decisions, whether it's gay marriage.
	Or the right to use contraception, or the right to have sex the way you want to have sex in your bedroom, so on.
	None of which is at risk, depending on this case.
	The only one that is on the table right now is the abortion right and the crazy logic of Roe v. Wade.
	Even if you are pro choice, truly, I mean, I know a lot of pro choice.
	Women and lawyers who would tell you Roe is a disaster as a legal opinion.
	They know it, but they just want to see it remain legal for all sorts of other reasons, which you can argue either way.
	Jeffrey Tubin, I can't let this slide, I'm sorry, but he felt the need to weigh in.
	He is an expert on the Supreme Court.
	I will give him that.
	That is one of the reasons why he should have lost his job when he was caught masturbating on screen.
	He's a CNN contributor, but this is for his job at New York Magazine or The New Yorker.
	I can't remember.
	They're all the same to me.
	In any event, my point all along was he's too, his credibility, his gravitas is too important in covering that court for him to go on.
	You know, once you've seen his Johnson, that's it.
	Like him pleasuring himself in front of all his colleagues.
	Bye.
	Can't do that job anymore.
	He is, thanks to Jeff Zucker and CNN.
	And he tweets out something to the effect of for abortion supporters, the argument the other day was, quote, a wall to wall disaster.
	And there's a reason Jeffrey Tubin felt so personally offended by that not going in favor of the pro choice side.
	Which is, he himself has been in the news.
	It's been well reported.
	He got the daughter of a colleague pregnant and then insisted she abort the baby and told her he wouldn't be paying child support if she didn't.
	She refused.
	She had the baby.
	The child's alive and well right now.
	And he was dragged to the support issue, kicking and screaming.
	So, charming guy.
	Yeah, and you see how, of course, one of the features of cancel culture is that it is obviously not consistent, it's arbitrary, it's run by.
	Like people at CNN, for example, so they decide who to apply it to, which is how some, which is the way that somehow Jeffrey Tubin is not canceled, despite, I mean, we don't want to get too graphic about it, but I do think it's worth emphasizing what he did.
	I mean, we talk about how he was accidentally caught on camera doing that.
	And yeah, it was accidental in the sense that he didn't know the camera was on, but he was in a Zoom meeting with his colleagues and he did intentionally perform that act while in the meeting, presumably like watching his colleagues.
	And the only mistake was that he didn't realize the camera was on and they would see him doing it.
	So, this is workplace masturbation that took place.
	And even if it was at home, it was still on a Zoom call.
	And of all of the things that could get a person canceled, of all the things that we consider to be sexual harassment in the workplace, I mean, you could give a woman a compliment at the water cooler and potentially be accused of sexual harassment.
	And that doesn't qualify.
	He still keeps his job.
	Well, it just shows you, you know, CNN, they are one of the arbiters of cancel culture.
	And no, he's our guy.
	We want to keep him around.
	So we give him a look at what's happening with Chris Cuomo.
	I mean, Chris Cuomo has been suspended indefinitely, Matt.
	I don't know what that means.
	If they're going to fire him, why isn't he fired?
	I mean, there's a very good chance.
	And in fact, if you listen to what, you know, the hall monitor says, Brian Stelter, he's making it sound like Cuomo's coming back after the holidays.
Ethical Failings in Journalism 00:08:05
	So, okay.
	So you can, it's come out that he harassed Shelly Ross at ABC when he worked with her, a senior executive producer of his own.
	She had just left that role, grabbed her ass in front of her husband, in front of all of their colleagues at a Christmas party.
	I mean, grabbed.
	Like she came on the show, squeezed it.
	And it was a diminishing thing for what had been a male underling to do to a female superior.
	And that's the reason he did it, to humiliate her.
	Another female executive producer was forced to quit his current show.
	See the reports because she felt bullied by him.
	CNN didn't care.
	They turfed her off to like the digital world.
	She's no longer an EP of Primetime, but he's there.
	His fake COVID act coming out of the basement.
	And then all the stuff he's done with his brother.
	And I'm not somebody who takes issue with a brother helping a brother.
	I am somebody as a news anchor who would say, you just need to say, audience, Please forgive me.
	I need three weeks off.
	I'm going to help my brother do this thing and then I'll come back.
	Would have been very simple.
	He just couldn't, he was too drunk on his own wine.
	He needed to see his face on the air every night.
	So he wouldn't choose.
	And now it comes out he lied repeatedly about how deep he was into it and all smearing the accusers before he knew anything.
	And he should be fired, but they don't have ethics over there.
	Yeah, I think of all the things you listed, including especially the COVID stunt that he pulled there, I consider all of that, those are all worse, I think, than what he did for his brother, which obviously was not ethical from a journalistic standpoint.
	But I also agree that I tend to give people leeway when they're helping out family members.
	It doesn't make it okay, but I understand it on that level.
	But even so, all the other things, many other reasons to fire him.
	But he's going to get the exception.
	We have to understand this.
	Why I always emphasize about cancel culture that there's a couple of things about it.
	Number one, it is a left wing phenomenon because they run all the institutions.
	So, yeah, of course, there are people that those of us on the right don't like.
	But when we talk about how we don't like someone, you can't call that cancel culture because it's not.
	We don't run and own the institutions.
	Cancel culture is a power play, it's something.
	Where the institutions can basically erase you.
	And the left runs all those institutions, including CNN.
	So that's how it works.
	Meanwhile, cancel culture really didn't come for Jussie Smollett.
	You still have people on the left defending him and weirdly standing by his original claim that he was attacked in the middle of the polar vortex in Chicago at two in the morning while he was allegedly the star of empire going to get a subway sandwich.
	It was, I mean, it was very clearly a lie.
	I don't know who is trying to still delude themselves that this is in any way possible.
	The two guys who allegedly attacked, well, I mean, they did attack him, but he paid them to do it.
	That's what the allegation is.
	They've taken the stand in this trial, which is underway this week.
	They both testified that they were friends with him.
	He said, Can I trust you?
	They said, Yes.
	He gave him a check and they rehearsed it.
	They drove to the spot the night before.
	He was very specific, put a noose around me.
	Originally, they said he wanted them to pour gasoline on him, but the one brother said, I'm not comfortable with that.
	So they settled on bleach, rough me up, but not too bad.
	He didn't want to be punched.
	He just wanted some scratches so it would look good.
	And yell something homophobic and racist and then say, This is MAGA country.
	The whole thing was scripted.
	I mean, he's an actor, he's in the entertainment business.
	So he scripted it out for them.
	They did it.
	Everyone started to play their sad little violin, including Kamala Harris.
	And it turns out to be a big lie.
	So just the update yesterday from court it's unbelievable, Matt.
	Judge James Lynn.
	Denied a routine motion for a directed verdict, and the defense lawyer started crying in court.
	This woman starts crying and then accused the judge of like threatening her, saying like he came for her across the bench, like he leaned in as if he was threatening.
	They're losing.
	That's what's happening.
	The defense is imploding.
	They have no case.
	Their client's going down.
	They should have just admitted to it and tried to bargain on the sentence or the punishment.
	But nothing they've thrown at this defendant is sticking.
	And now even the lawyers.
	Are melting down.
	But you, I mean, I wonder whether Jussie Smollett, whatever happens, guilty, not guilty, he will not be canceled from finding another role, becoming a star, and he will never admit the truth, and the media won't hold him to it.
	Yeah, oh yeah, for sure.
	Because as far as they're concerned, well, this is what they always do with these hate hoaxes.
	And by the way, they're always hoaxes.
	Every single one of these, it's really kind of remarkable the unbroken streak we've had over the last, I don't know how many years, you know, many years, where you hear these sorts of hate crime stories and very high profile, and then they Always fall apart.
	But one of the excuses that you hear after the fact is that, well, you know, this didn't happen, but it could have happened.
	And we live in a country where this sort of thing does happen.
	And so we might as well just act like it did.
	And maybe Justice Smollett was trying to call attention to this great problem of white supremacists hanging out in Chicago at 2 a.m. and assaulting people on the way to Subway.
	So, you know, that's the way they'll look at it.
	It's like Fauci, the noble lie, the noble lie.
	Right, right, exactly.
	I just, on one hand, you want to laugh about it because when it comes to hate hoaxers, as always, they're not sending their best.
	And this guy, he knew that there were security cameras there.
	That's why he chose that spot and why he hired people to beat him up.
	But then he still drove by and did the little dry run thing in front of the security cameras that he knew were there.
	And also, just the fact that, listen, not to give anyone advice if you want to do it, because you shouldn't do hate hoaxes, but if you're going to do it, the best move is to don't actually do anything.
	Just claim that something happened and do nothing at all.
	And then it's very hard to prove that nothing happened, right?
	When nothing happens, it's hard to disprove that.
	But if you actually stage a real event and you involve other people, well, now there are things we can look at and there's evidence.
	Well, I haven't identified that.
	That's still you should be doing.
	If you choose to stage it, if you disregard rule number one, Rule number two is if trying to create the impression of a race crime, hire white actors to attack you if you are a black man, not two other black men.
	That would be one.
	That's another piece of advice to take into account.
	But also, I'm calling it a hate hoax, but really, I think that understates it a little bit.
	This is not just a hoax.
	This is a scam.
	This is a con.
	And it might have been planned poorly and stupidly, but it was planned.
	He had a financial motivation behind it, apparently.
	He wanted to.
	You know, allegedly, or at least that would be my theory, that he was looking for another contract or whatever.
	Yeah.
	That's been alleged.
	And yeah, so I would call this more of a con than even a hoax.
	He was caught.
	And I'd love to hear Kamala Harris reverse herself or all the media.
	There was a long butted soundbite we ran not long after it.
	And it was just all the media, like this disgusting, this country, how could they, you know, racist, the America, the MAGA supporters, you know, the guys in the hats.
	It was like, you are such chumps.
	It was a complete lie, and you fell for it because you wanted to, or maybe you didn't.
	You just loved the excuse to sort of show how woke you were and get your little accolades on Twitter.
	It's pathetic.
	They're frauds, or they fell for a fraud.
	Either way, it's embarrassing.
	Matt Walsh is staying with us, and we're going to talk about his children's book and what's on his shirt because I actually have some interest in that.
	I know what that's about.
	And you'll be interested to hear his theory of life and civility in America.
	That's right after this.
	And don't forget, you can find the Megan Kelly Show live on Sirius XM Triumph Channel 111.
	Every weekday at noon east, and the full video show and clips by subscribing to our YouTube channel, youtube.com/slash Megan Kelly.
	If you prefer an audio podcast, just subscribe and download on Apple, Spotify, Pandora, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Dangerous Game for Athletes 00:08:20
	I do still read the reviews there.
	Thank you all for weighing in.
	I love hearing from you.
	So you can go to the comments section and you can check out our archives there on the podcast history.
	Over 210 shows now.
	Don't miss those.
	Matt, a word on the transgender thing.
	There is a case, it's at the University of Pennsylvania, a story coming out of the University of Pennsylvania.
	A trans swimmer, so a biological man whose name was Will Thomas, spent three years in college competing as a man, as a man.
	Now, Will says he's a woman and he is now crushing, she now is crushing records in the women's events.
	There was an event on November 20th, a tri meet with Cornell and Princeton and UPenn.
	And Will, forgive me, I don't know the new name.
	No, now she's Leah, is competing as a female.
	In the 200 meter, the 500 meter freestyle, posting times that beat almost every other female swimmer across America, almost every single one across America.
	And advocates for trans athletes, one of them has come out and said, Oh, Leah Thomas is not dominating women's swimming in the US.
	Leah got a 49.42 in the 100 meter freestyle.
	The USA record is 45.
	Leah got a 1.45 in the 200 meter.
	The USA record is 139.
	So basically, this person goes to the records ever set.
	Right?
	The records set by any woman ever to say that Leah is really not a threat to the women who are competing now because Leah didn't manage to break every single record while swimming, but Leah crushed every other biological woman swimming in these meets and will continue to because Leah last year and for the rest of Leah's life was a man, Will, and doing pretty well as a male swimmer.
	So, and this comes at the same time, Matt, that the IOC, International Olympic Committee, is loosening its rules on trans athletes.
	According to The Guardian, the new guidelines that they're putting in place for the Olympics, it comes into place after the Beijing Winter Olympics, will suggest that trans women, again, biological men who transition to women, should no longer be required to reduce their testosterone levels to compete.
	They will not accept a presumption that trans women have an automatic advantage over other women.
	How do you think that's going to go?
	Well, right.
	We're told trans women are women, they're exactly the same.
	And so this is just a logical extension of that.
	If we're expected to believe, That Will is a woman just like any other, then why would you make requirements that he take pills or do anything else that any other woman doesn't have to do?
	So, of course, it was always headed in that direction.
	The argument that he doesn't have an advantage because he hasn't beat the world record is, of course, completely absurd.
	It also doesn't matter, by the way.
	I mean, even if he was losing to the girls, it still would not make any sense or be fair because he is not a woman and they are and he belongs with the men.
	But also, the real question, I think, is or the really revealing comparison.
	Is how did he rank among the men?
	And I'm going to, I don't know this, but I'm going to bet that he was not crushing the competition against the men.
	And what we find in Connecticut with the runners.
	In a case in Connecticut, these two boys started racing against the girls in Connecticut, a famous case.
	And these were middling athletes.
	I mean, they barely would have qualified for state tournaments and that sort of thing against the men.
	They certainly weren't winning anything.
	And then they go against the girls, and they're always in the top three.
	So you could take a poor athlete or a middling athlete.
	By male standards, put him against females, and he is the worst thing you could say about him is that he doesn't have the world record.
	You know, it's just, it's this is this is emperor has no clothes, or maybe the emperor is wearing women's clothes.
	I don't know how we want to put it, but it's this absurdity that we're all supposed to accept.
	I mean, this man, he raced against men for three years, and now he's a woman.
	He grew his hair out, and now we're supposed to pretend that this is a woman.
	It's and anybody who objects is called a bigot that I had those Connecticut girls on my show.
	It's in the archives that I was mentioning.
	And it was two young women who were, they're young.
	They're obviously totally open minded to all of these issues, you know, as all the new sort of young Gen Zers are.
	And they don't want to be called bigots.
	They just want a fair race.
	You know, these are girls who are up and coming, who had been winning, who'd been training their whole lives, hoping for scholarships to college.
	And then two boys who'd been running as boys the year earlier transition to girls with no hormones required, nothing required, and start crushing them.
	It's Ridiculous.
	Okay, so let's move on because there's so much more to talk about.
	And I wanted to get to before we get to your book.
	Can we talk about Waukesha?
	Because while we're on the subject of the media, of race, and so on, and how they cover these issues, we.
	We've been told that we can't be colorblind anymore, right?
	We've got to see color.
	We've got to call things out.
	Well, they got awfully colorblind in Waukesha, Wisconsin, when it turned out that the man who mowed down those 60 plus people, killing six, including an eight year old, was a black man who had made very anti white and anti Jewish statements on his social media.
	The media has totally abandoned this case.
	And Jason Riley in the Wall Street Journal has a great piece out this week, dated November 30.
	Talking about how these killings made the media colorblind again.
	He goes on to talk about how this is dangerous, what they are doing.
	They're playing a dangerous game, the media, the liberals, when they selectively invoke race to advance a political agenda, like we saw them do in Kyle Rittenhouse.
	And he went out and he wrote, okay, he's talking about what Glenn Lowry has said publicly.
	And this is Jason quoting Glenn, but they're both so brilliant.
	Once we go down this road and get into the habit of racializing such events, we may not be able to contain that racialization, said Brown University's Glenn Lowry in a speech.
	Soon enough, we may find ourselves in a world of instances where black thugs, this is Lowry, killing white citizens come to be seen through a racial lens as well.
	This is a world no thoughtful person should welcome since there are great many such instances.
	And Jason finishes by saying national cohesion in a country as large and ethnically diverse as this one has always depended on our ability to focus not on our superficial differences, but instead on what unites us as Americans.
	This is It is a dangerous game.
	Yeah, this is part of what I talked before about the alternative reality that the alternate universe that the media constructs.
	I've taken recently to calling it sort of a what they are is reality curators, and they curate a version of reality, taking bits here and there.
	I mean, we talk about fake news.
	Most of the time, most of the time, they're not just outright lying and inventing things that never happened.
	I mean, that does happen, or they'll elevate things that didn't happen, like with Justice Mallett.
	But usually, what they're doing, the bias is not so much in what they're reporting, but what they don't report and how they report the things they do report.
	And so, the reality that they've curated for us is one where all of the racial violence that occurs in America is always white on black, even if they have to invent it out of whole cloth.
	And black on white violence simply doesn't happen because that's the version of reality they want us all to accept.
	And we talk about this, Daryl Brooks being, you know, they're being colorblind towards Daryl Brooks.
	They're being, they really are being colorblind because he's apparently transparent.
	What they're really telling us is that he didn't exist and that the car is what caused this to happen.
	Yeah, the CNN headlines.
	The car mowed down the people.
	All right.
	Apologies for the short time left, but Johnny the Walrus, why is it number one in several Amazon categories and making you a very successful man?
	Yeah.
	Johnny the Walrus, which is available at johnnythewalrus.com right now, not on Amazon, because we sold out of Amazon in one day.
	We got all the way up to number three with our Johnny the Walrus book, which I think is hilarious.
	It'll be back on Amazon soon, but you can go to johnnythewalrus.com and buy it.
	Yeah, this is a book about a little boy who, you know, is very imaginative and he pretends to be a walrus one day as part of his imaginative play.
	And his mother learns from.
	Society and the internet and everything, and the woke mob.
	That if your son identifies as something, then you have to take that self identity seriously.
	And she tries through most of the book to raise him as a walrus.
Legal Maneuvering with Guns 00:13:43
	And I don't want to spoil the ending, but she does realize at the end that that's not going to be possible.
	You got to check it out yourself.
	It's brilliant.
	And so is Matt.
	Thanks for being here.
	Good luck with it.
	Let's do it again soon.
	Up next, Adam Carolla.
	Joining me today, Adam Carolla, host of the Adam Carolla Show podcast.
	And he has a new show now with, again, the Daily Wire.
	They've got great talent that premiered last week called Adam Carolla Truth Yeller.
	Love that.
	And Adam, great to have you back.
	How are you?
	I'm doing well, Megan.
	Thanks for having me.
	Okay, so I'm excited to talk about Alec Baldwin.
	You're a movie star as well.
	Your movie, No Safe Spaces, is the favorite thing I've seen in the movie theater in the past five years.
	But you understand Hollywood and you know how things go.
	So he's been under a lot of heat since the accidental shooting of the cinematographer on the set of his movie, Rust.
	This is his first interview, he gave it to George Stephanopoulos.
	And in it, he said a couple of newsworthy things.
	He was very contrite.
	He felt terrible about the accident.
	You could see that he was upset.
	But he made some news in saying that he actually never fired the trigger.
	He's saying he never pulled the trigger of the gun at issue.
	And I wonder what you make of it.
	Here he is making that claim.
	Take a listen.
	Your emotions are so clearly so right there on the surface.
	You felt shock, you felt anger.
	You felt sadness.
	Do you feel guilt?
	No, no.
	I feel that there is, I feel that someone is responsible for what happened, and I can't say who that is, but I know it's not me.
	Well, there are some who say you're never supposed to point a gun at anyone on a set, no matter what.
	Unless the person is the cinematographer who's directing me where to point the gun for her camera angle.
	That's exactly what happened.
	You're not worried about being charged.
	I don't.
	I've been told by people who are in the know, in terms of even inside the state, that it's highly unlikely I would be charged with anything criminally.
	Okay, that is a long soundbite.
	There's another one in which he says he did not pull the trigger.
	But there you heard him say, he kind of admits that he did point the gun sort of at the cinematographer whose life was lost, but he says he did it at her direction.
	What do you make of this whole thing?
	Well, you know, first I just want to preface it by saying, you know, Alec Baldwin cried.
	Some people said he's an actor.
	Maybe he summoned those tears.
	Kyle Rittenhouse cried.
	Some people said maybe his lawyer put him up to it.
	I think we should get away from that as a country.
	Alec Baldwin killed somebody and he was emotional about it.
	Kyle Rittenhouse killed two people and he was emotional about it.
	It kind of bothers me that we're accusing everyone of summoning fake emotions or putting a tack in their shoe to produce tears.
	When we're all pretty, you know, Kyle Rittenhouse, Baldwin, they're human beings.
	They have feelings.
	They killed someone.
	It brings up emotion.
	So, separate issue.
	You know, as far as being on set and having the DP or the photographer, I'm trying to think of what her film is.
	Cinematographer?
	Helena Hutchinson.
	Or DP, I guess we should call them DP's director of photography, whatever.
	It made total sense what he was explaining hold the gun, move it this way, move it.
	You know, there's shadows.
	There's a lot of like when you film stuff, there's a lot of cheating.
	There's a lot of like, you're supposed to be talking to this person, but you're talking to their ear.
	But on camera, it looks like you're talking to them.
	So you don't know instinctively what it looks like on the camera.
	So there is a lot of directing of move more this way.
	Get the light, hold it down, even if it doesn't look like it's pointing the right direction.
	So, from what I know of this story, and Alex, a friend of mine, and he's a volatile guy and he's a talented guy, and he's a million.
	Things.
	He's definitely not someone who would want to hurt somebody.
	It sounds to me like they had a very old pistol.
	It sounds to me like he was moving it around.
	And it sounds like, to me, like he pulled the hammer back on the pistol.
	That's what he said.
	And it sounds to me like he let the hammer go and it fired the bullet.
	That's, from what I know so far, that's what this sounds like to me.
	That's what he said.
	I am not a gun expert.
	What I hear from the gun experts I listen to on television over the past 24 hours.
	Suggests that that may well.
	I heard one guy say it's remotely possible for that to happen, but highly unlikely.
	There was a guy, um, on GB, um, Good Morning Britain, Piers Morgan's old program.
	Um, he did a kind of decent demonstration that I'll play for you, challenging that this gun could be fired off without a squeezing of the trigger.
	But listen to this this is a replica of the same gun that he used.
	And to work this gun, you have to perform two deliberate acts.
	First, you have to pull the hammer back.
	It makes three distinct clicks while you do that.
	And then to get it to fire, you have to press the trigger.
	However, you don't necessarily have to do it in that order.
	On these guns from the 1800s, if you depress the trigger and then pull the hammer back and release it, you can still get the gun to fire.
	However, in no circumstance, when you have the hammer cocked, will the gun fire.
	Without the trigger being depressed.
	So there's definitely two deliberate acts that were required there.
	He had to cock the gun and he had to press the trigger.
	And he maintains that he didn't pull the trigger.
	And now, if he had his finger on the trigger, if he had his finger on the trigger here and he's pressing it, he may not be aware that he's pressed the trigger.
	Then he pulls the hammer back.
	Right.
	And then he releases it and then the gun fires.
	Kind of interesting because I have to tell you from a legal standpoint, I see, and I did believe the tears when I saw him, but I also think there's some legal maneuvering going on there because the less pointing of the gun and pulling of the trigger he did, the better position he's in because he is being looked at.
	The sheriffs have not ruled out criminal charges against him, sheriff and his deputies.
	And you're not supposed to point a gun at somebody on a set.
	And the scene didn't call for pulling the trigger either.
	So, you know, let's be real.
	He kind of feels like he has to say he didn't do it.
	You know, also through that demonstration, which was interesting.
	It's possible, at least it could be argued in his defense, that the trigger was pulled in before it was handed to him.
	In which case, if he pulled the hammer back and let it go, it would fire the gun.
	At least that's what I'm saying.
	But wouldn't you have to keep your finger on the trigger pulled?
	Like, I don't know this gun, but like, don't, once you release your finger off of the trigger, it releases.
	It doesn't stay pulled.
	I think in that demonstration, they're saying if you pull the trigger first and then cock the hammer back, you have to hold it.
	He said if you held it.
	But he's saying if you pulled the trigger and you held it and you held your finger back.
	I'm sorry.
	It's very small on my screen.
	So I can't.
	It's like the size of a postage stamp.
	So I can't see.
	In any event, look, neither one of us is a gun expert.
	So I'm sure the gun experts out there are rolling their eyes saying, shut the hell up.
	Please don't touch us.
	But to me, you understand, you know Alec and you know the movie business and I know the law.
	And what I see is somebody trying to lay the foundation for an escape.
	Oh, yeah.
	Well, listen, look, I don't.
	You know, I think there's a lot of speculation that, you know, he's trying to get ahead of this.
	He's trying to put a narrative out.
	He wants to get a narrative.
	He's talked to his lawyers, so on and so forth.
	Yeah, that's how it works.
	Like, I, you know, it doesn't mean he's lying per se, but it means he does want to get out in front of this.
	And, you know, when people go, like, oh, he's talked to his lawyers, he's worked this out.
	I'm sure he has talked to his lawyers.
	I'm sure he has worked it out.
	Like, that is kind of how we roll.
	And, you know, if this happened to your husband or to your son or my son, I would, Do it the same way, or I would take the advice of the lawyers.
	It doesn't, you know, I think sometimes we do this thing where it's sort of like, oh, he won't take the stand in his own defense.
	He must be guilty.
	Like, well, not necessarily.
	Sometimes people just do what their lawyers tell them to do.
	I feel like his lawyers probably told him, shut up.
	You don't need to get out there.
	They're not going to charge you.
	I got to tell you, I'm doing a podcast with Mark Garibos in about an hour, and all he ever does is marvel at these guys doing interviews and goes, Why won't they just shut up?
	Yes, of course.
	That's what the lawyer always wants you to do.
	Just be quiet.
	Say nothing more.
	I don't know.
	We'll see.
	He's also fighting a few battles, right?
	Because he's got a legal battle, though I do think it's unlikely he gets criminally charged.
	He's going to get sued, 100% going to get sued, his production company.
	But I don't think he's going to get charged.
	And I do believe if somebody intentionally messed with his ammo, that's a different story.
	But to me, it seems like this is a series of, so far, tragic accidents.
	You know, people carelessness.
	I don't know that we're in even criminal territory.
	I think it's exacerbated by a lot of other blowhard actors who do the I always check the gun.
	George Clooney?
	I never check the gun.
	It's like, I bet I could find 100 examples of you on set with all the action movies you've made while you're talking on your cell phone and someone just hands you a gun and you go, yeah, okay.
	But they do this sanctimonious, holier than that thousand.
	So, you know, I got two points I wanted to make on that.
	Number one, that's George Clooney.
	He came out, he's on tape on this podcast saying, I've always checked the gun.
	Every time anybody gives me a gun on set, I check it.
	I open it up.
	So we don't know what happened.
	What we know is that that gun had dummy rounds in it and live bullets, a mixture that never should have been in there.
	How did it get in there?
	We don't know.
	But the thing about dummy rounds is they're made to look exactly like real bullets.
	That's why they're in the gun.
	In a Colt 45, like they were using there, you can see the bullets.
	So the whole purpose of a dummy is to look exactly like a real bullet.
	And so that's why you need somebody like an armorer, or in this case, they had a guy named Seth Kenny who was overseeing the ammo, apparently.
	Those are the people who should be able to understand and try to understand the difference between a dummy round and it.
	But you're going to tell me George Clooney, in his two seconds, he looks at his bullets, can tell the difference between a dummy round and a live round if it's already made it past an armorer and the other guy who's supposed to, and the, you know, the ammo guy.
	Bull.
	Bullshit.
	I listen.
	I guarantee if you talk to someone who worked as the gun wrangler on Out of Sight from 1997, he'd probably tell you the story about handing them a nine millimeter 15 times.
	And by the way, they hand you a nine millimeter.
	What do you do?
	You pull the clip out, you inspect it.
	I mean, he's not a Green Beret, you know.
	Anyway, I'm just saying, I don't like it when people do that.
	It's kind of reflective glory.
	Like they go, I never, I would always, I, you know, we always do this thing.
	But, you know, it kind of, it's kind of funny.
	I just thought of it.
	But, you know, when Baldwin got into all that trouble for calling his daughter a little piggy, like, thoughtless little pig, remember that?
	And then all the parents went, I would.
	Never, you know, like I'd love to show a two hour montage of you screaming at your kids.
	He does actually have a good relationship with her now.
	Um, I did the roast, I did the Comedy Central roast, and I was with him and his.
	Daughter, and they do have a good relationship.
	So much fodder for you there, then and now.
	I just wanted to make one other point, though.
	I think it was like the assistant director, one of the parties involved on that set came forward and said, No, he definitely didn't pull the trigger.
	I saw.
	And I was like, That is the biggest bullshit of them all.
	So you, in the moment, had your very eyes, not knowing a tragedy was about to unfold, on Alec Baldwin's finger to make sure that as he pulled the gun, You wanted to see if there was any squeezing or non squeezing, which wasn't even an issue at the time until after the accident.
	Bull, just be quiet.
	Don't help me with fake lies.
	Okay, let me handle the story.
	I'm the actor.
	Anyway, we can continue watching.
	I totally agree because if you were holding a gun and your finger was outside of the guard that went around the trigger, that thing's less than an eighth of an inch thick, or it's probably an eighth of an inch thick.
	So you couldn't really tell whether someone's finger was inside of it or outside of it.
Bizarre Approaches to Crime 00:04:57
	Anyway.
	Yeah.
	I mean, maybe they'll have some videotape that'll prove us all wrong, but I'm sure it's one of many things the sheriff's looking at.
	Okay.
	So, speaking of crime, there's a crime wave underway in your beautiful home state of California.
	And now it's changed.
	Well, I mean, the other stuff is still happening too.
	But now there is like a rash of, they call them smash and grab robberies.
	And what's happening, just to give you a couple of examples.
	Last week in San Fran, a Nordstrom department store in the Bay Area was targeted by 80 thieves and 10 cars, and what local police are calling A flash mob style robbery.
	This is all the rage.
	Flash mob robberies.
	So they pulled up, again, 10 cars and 80 thieves.
	You know, the store clerk doesn't stand a chance.
	They used the cars to block the front of the store, to block any parking.
	They ran inside with crowbars, smashed display cases, loaded up on the merchandise, took less than one minute.
	Similar mob stormed the nearby Louis Vuitton last weekend in San Francisco's Union Square.
	An Apple store in Northern California, targeted by four suspects, they stole 20 grand worth of merchandise.
	Louis Vuitton in Chicago.
	What's with Louis Vuitton?
	Chicago, hit by 14 looters at the same time, $120,000 in merchandise.
	CEO of Best Buy said he's seeing the same thing in his stores.
	And on and on it goes.
	This is supposedly, according to law enforcement, believed to be part of sophisticated criminal networks that recruit mainly young people to steal merchandise in stores and then sell it online.
	I guess that explains the Louis Vuitton.
	Don't buy your Louis Vuitton online.
	But there's a reason it's happening in particular in San Francisco as they take the break off of.
	Law enforcement and lower the threshold that's even considered a crime for shoplifting there.
	Well, you know, there's a fundamental problem to the democratic approach to life, society, and the sort of ills of society.
	That it's a theme, it's not just as it pertains to crime or school test scores.
	Or taxes, they don't really understand unintended consequences.
	They have a bizarre approach to problem solving.
	And they say, like, okay, what's going on?
	We have too many young black men in prison.
	It's disproportionate with the populace of the young black community.
	They go, how do we solve this problem?
	And they go, well, stop locking up young black men and then it'll solve the problem, which is sort of like, Their approach to everything, like, you know, raise taxes on corporations so we can have more money.
	Well, then they go offshore.
	There's problems in school testing.
	Some of these groups are not passing standardized testing.
	Lower the test threshold or get rid of the test altogether.
	This is essentially like saying you're morbidly obese, and someone says, well, then just get a new scale and make sure it's 50 pounds lighter.
	Like, okay.
	Or, you know, your car can only go 40 miles an hour.
	Well, then break the glass on the speedometer and turn the needle up to 80 miles an hour.
	Like, this is how the Democrats approach problems.
	Everything they approach is this sort of reverse engineered thing, and it never works.
	Like, what, you know, cops, what are they doing?
	They're arresting too many young black men.
	Well, get rid of the cops, get rid of the tests, get rid of everything.
	And then they wait around, and eight months go by, and it becomes chaos.
	It's their approach to crime, it's their approach to homelessness, it's their approach to everything.
	And then they step back and they go, wow, this is a shit show.
	And it's like, of course it is, because you got rid of incarceration, you got rid of cops, you got rid of the DAs who put these people behind bars, you turned things that were formerly crimes into non crimes.
	What did you think was going to happen?
	And by the way, aren't you people always talking about root causes?
	You sent Kamala Harris down to Guadalajara to figure out what the root cause is.
	Of immigration, you want to get to the root causes of crime?
	How come you never discuss that?
	You discuss what happens after the crime.
	You never, you never, no one ever asked the question, where are all these kids coming from?
	How come they're so recruitable?
	How can you round up 80 kids on a day's notice to come in and loot a store?
Focusing on the Children 00:12:19
	Why are those kids available?
	Where are their parents?
	Where's their dad?
	How come they're not in school?
	What's going on?
	Yeah.
	No, you're 100% right.
	This is actually, I'd mentioned this piece by Jason Riley in the Wall Street Journal on November 30th called Waukesha Killings Make the Media Colorblind Again.
	And this is what he was raising all of this to, just saying, like, let's get after it.
	If you want to get after it, you want to talk about problems in the criminal justice system and so on, let's be honest about what actually causes it.
	And Jason, as always, does such a good job talking about what they are and how we need to talk about them and so on.
	And by the way, if you haven't read his book, please stop helping us.
	You should.
	So, Omicron is dominating the news.
	The freak out remains everywhere, but nobody's getting it as bad just in COVID in general as Australia.
	I mean, it's crazy what's happening there.
	We haven't done enough coverage on what's happening in Australia, but the latest report, and this again is Daily Wire, my friends over there have been working hard.
	They spoke with these three teenagers who escaped.
	This, like, camp.
	You know, they're putting people who are COVID positive or suspected of being COVID positive in detainment centers surrounded by barbed wire.
	Adam, this is insane.
	This particular one was called Howard Detainment Camp.
	It's got 2,000 people in it.
	A woman named Haley Hodgson, who does not even have COVID, she was tested, I think she said three times.
	All three times were negative.
	Still, she had to stay there because she was a close contact of somebody who had it.
	And she and two other guys made a run for it, I guess.
	And the cops found her.
	They picked her up.
	She said, They took me away in a golf cart.
	They're wearing hazmat suits, you know, like she's got leprosy, and they don't want to get anywhere near her germs.
	And take her to this facility for 14 days.
	And in this facility, you get a $3,500 fine if you don't wear a mask.
	I mean, that's here's a soundbite.
	Again, this is number eight of what's happening there.
	Been told the trio scaled the fence in the early hours of this morning.
	Police receiving reports around 4 40 a.m.
	Now, major police checkpoints have been set up around Howard Springs for the past several hours.
	As you can see in these pictures, they've been conducting.
	Thorough searches in car boots, checking vehicle registrations, cars, and buses alike.
	I mean, just when you think we have it bad.
	Good gracious, can you believe?
	It's so bizarre.
	It's sad.
	You know, the saddest part of this chapter, you know, I live in California.
	We have Gavin Newsom.
	He's declared another emergency and he's going to keep his power going.
	The saddest part is how pliable most people are and how pathetic.
	Most people are.
	I've been yelling about this from the mountaintops for 18 months, and everyone's just been yelling at me to shut up.
	You know, I was yelling at the school teachers' unions for closing the schools down.
	I was yelling about we closed the beaches.
	We bulldozed sand over the beach volleyball courts.
	We welded bars over basketball hoops in parks.
	We're insane.
	And this to me, Has nothing to do with COVID, has everything to do with power andor defying them.
	They want power, they want to apply their power.
	And when you defy them, you know, I grew up with a guy named LaPagia.
	He opened a restaurant called Tinhorn Flats in Burbank.
	They moved all their dining outdoors.
	At some point, after being told what to do and all the protocols and everything, they said, no more outdoor dining.
	The guy owned the restaurant said, Give me some proof there's some outdoor spread.
	There is no spread outdoors.
	They said, Sorry, no outdoor dining.
	He said, You know what?
	I've had enough.
	We're going to stay open.
	I went there with my son to go eat just to support them.
	Two days later, the city came in.
	They built a fence around the place.
	They closed it up.
	They boarded it up.
	They're out of business.
	And there's literally an iron fence going all the way around this restaurant.
	And here's the thing.
	That's fine with the people who live in Burbank.
	That's the scary part to me.
	It's fine for them to have the government shut down businesses in Australia, essentially create camps, internment camps for people who defy the government.
	It's insane.
	But the insane part isn't the government.
	The government is doing what we let them get away with.
	Gavin Newsom wants power, he wants everyone under their thumb.
	My son is in the 10th grade.
	He was telling me the other day, When he gets a sip of water inside class, the teacher tells him to go outside.
	He has to go stand outside to take a sip of water because he has to pull his mask down.
	It's insanity.
	All they want is power, but really it's about the people.
	What are you idiots doing?
	Why are you going along with this?
	Why are you so malleable?
	What country do you live in?
	And what the hell happened to everybody, especially in California?
	You know what?
	And honestly, it's bad here too.
	Blue states, you know, I'm in a blue state now, I'm in Connecticut.
	My eight year old was telling me, He was at school and he said, Mommy, you know, in gym class, we run around and we play and we have to keep our masks on.
	He said, The other day, everyone was really sweating.
	They had wet masks.
	And the gym teacher said, If you need to take your mask down, you can go over to the corner.
	And he said, Just like this, pull it down up, down up, so you can get a fresh breath.
	Like, place that science.
	Right.
	Like that's science, right?
	Like, same with the airplane.
	You know, keep the mask up, keep the mask up, keep the mask up.
	Here's a box of hummus.
	Go ahead and take it down for 45 minutes, then right back up.
	Why are people here's the question What's wrong with everybody?
	I keep telling everyone all the time don't do it.
	Don't wear the mask.
	Everyone drop the mask.
	You know what I mean?
	Like, there's nothing we can do about flash mobs and looters because there's 80 of them doing it at once.
	Well, what if a whole state just did it at once?
	We're done with the mask.
	Hey, California, we're done with the mask.
	Hey, kids.
	Don't wear it at school.
	Good luck enforcing it.
	I don't get what's wrong with that.
	Let's talk that through.
	I would love to do that.
	I would love to do that.
	But the problem is, where we need to do it is the blue states.
	And most of the populace in the blue states is pro all these crazy measures.
	So it boils down to a small minority that would have to be willing to defy the rules.
	And realistically, if I told my son, don't put that mask on, do not wear that mask, he'd be kicked out.
	They'd give him demerits, whatever they call them.
	I'd get called.
	I have to go pick him up.
	They wouldn't let him show up.
	And then I'd have to homeschool him, which I don't want to do.
	That would end poorly for both of us.
	It's the same thing for me on the airplane.
	I'm like, screw you, Pete Buttigieg, you and your stupid ass policies.
	I'm going to keep this mask on forever.
	And by the way, we all are because they just extended that on TSA because of Omicron, which we don't have any idea does anything yet.
	But now we're stuck.
	And Biden's releasing yesterday, don't worry, I'm on it.
	Everybody's getting a booster now.
	And already they're suggesting you're not fully vaccinated unless you have your double vax plus a.
	Booster vaccinate your five year olds.
	We may expand it down to babies.
	Um, everybody should be wearing a mask and for an extended period of time.
	Now we're extending those mask policies.
	I mean, like my head was spinning, they're tripling down on all the policies, all the mandates.
	So, the uprising so far is not coming, and I don't know how it would work.
	Well, no, you're right.
	All the idiots in California voted for Gavin Newsom, and they can't just admit they made a mistake.
	You know, we had our power out.
	All of Thanksgiving.
	So, all of Thanksgiving, where I live and my sister's house, where she lives, where I was going for Thanksgiving, it's been out since Wednesday night, right?
	It went out the wee hours of Wednesday, it was gone out.
	Okay, here's my point.
	When Larry Elder was running against Gavin Newsom in the recall, Larry Elder was talking about the grid, the power system, the old antiquated system.
	They shut the power off.
	It didn't fail, they shut it off because they were scared another fire was going to begin on Thanksgiving.
	The whole point is this one guy is talking about the power grid, the other guy and the LA Times are busy calling Larry Elder the blackface of white racism.
	So, listen, voters of California, you have an imbecile who gas is six bucks a gallon, the power grid sucks, the schools are failing, but he's going to talk about racism non stop and get your vote.
	What year is it?
	Stop being an idiot.
	It's insane that they can pull this shit off every year.
	By the way, you're running against a middle aged black man.
	And you're still going with the racism.
	Now, as far as the kids go, here's my theory with all the COVID.
	And I talked to Dr. Drew about this once because he said, Adam, you're a pattern related person.
	You follow patterns.
	At the very beginning of COVID, All I was hearing is, you know, man dies in Covina, a woman dies in Arlita.
	And I wasn't hearing any ages.
	And I always was used to hearing ages.
	On the news, when a woman died in a car crash, she was a 39 year old woman from Buena Park, you know, and all of a sudden I was hearing no ages.
	So I got a little suspicious and I thought maybe this is about old people dying, not young people dying, but all their focus is on kids.
	And kids aren't dying of COVID.
	Statistically, it's not even chartable how many kids have died of COVID.
	It's that small a problem.
	With kids, but why all the focus on kids?
	Why is CNN always talking about the kids, the kids, the kids?
	They use the kids to get to the mothers.
	Once the mothers get scared, then they get to control you.
	So we don't need the kids, but we need the kids as a conduit to get to the moms.
	Once we scare the moms, then we control the household.
	That's why they're focusing on the kids.
	It's so goddamn sad and it's pathetic.
	And the reason they're trying to get to the kids is also they want to crate train them.
	This is something I was thinking about.
	Like, you can't crate train a middle aged dog.
	You've got to crate train a puppy.
	Get that dog young, get it in the crate, and get it coached up.
	And then you'll have that dog crate train.
	That's what we're doing with the kids and the masks and the vats.
	There's nothing going on at schools.
	There's nothing going on on airplanes.
	There's nothing going on with kids.
	Why all the focus?
	And how come when you watch CNN and they have the doctors on there, they have the lady that's kind of trying to scare the crap out of everyone all the time, and they have Sanjay Gupta who Never asked a real question, or Anderson Cooper, who never asked a real question.
	Why aren't they, when she's talking about protect the kids, we got to get the kids vaccinated.
	Why doesn't somebody raise their hand and go, what's going on with the kids?
	Yeah.
	The last to check it doesn't harm kids.
	More kids died of pneumonia last year than died of COVID.
	We don't make them have mandatory vaccines for the flu, and more kids died of the flu last year.
	So you could go on and on.
	No one's decided to question that.
	And scarily, the administration is really zeroing in on the children now in a way that feels really uncomfortable.
	The hypocrisy is maddening, right?
	Like, we, you mentioned Gavin Newsom in California.
	In New York, we've got this Kathy Hochel, who replaced our disgraced Andrew Cuomo.
Manipulating Progressive Movements 00:04:09
	She comes in there.
	Now, she's got a mandatory mask policy, right?
	So everybody's got to wear them.
	All the kids have got to wear them all over the state, right?
	She doesn't care.
	She spends her whole day mask free, but the kids have got to wear them.
	The kids in New York City, by the way, are still eating lunch outside six feet apart from one another while masked.
	They can pull their masks down in between bites.
	It's ridiculous.
	She's just fine with that.
	New York City mayor is just fine with that.
	But here's what she really doesn't want she doesn't want to offend anybody by calling a Christmas tree a Christmas tree.
	She doesn't give a shit that your kid is sitting outside in 39 degree weather or wearing a mask over their face all day, nine hours while she's mask free everywhere she goes.
	What she really wants to avoid doing is upsetting people by referring to a large evergreen with ornaments on it that's going to wind up in rock center.
	And millions of people from around the world are going to come see it and identify it as a Christmas tree.
	She doesn't want to label it as such.
	She sent out a tweet actually celebrating the tree coming down on its way to Rock Center, saying, celebrating the fact that her husband, quote, the first gentleman, selected the holiday tree.
	Yay for the holiday tree.
	I mean, this is taking happy holidays to a whole new level.
	It's irritating.
	It's irritating these people are in power.
	And who's it?
	Like, to what end?
	Like, oh, we're going to take down a statue of Jefferson.
	Okay.
	Why?
	What's next?
	I mean, we're going to look at the menorah and be like, it's a holiday candle holder.
	Like, what's so offensive about the word Christmas?
	Megan, please understand this, and your audience should understand this because I've been saying this for 15 years.
	It's called the progressive movement.
	It has the word progress and move in the title.
	What, and everyone like you, like me, goes, to what end?
	What's next?
	What's that?
	The answer is everything is next.
	There is no pumping up the brake.
	I mean, the Babylon Bee can't even write headlines anymore because it seems plausible.
	There is no stopping.
	That's the point.
	I think the point that folks like you and I and other sort of sane or rational people had a thought, our thought was sort of like, it's like dealing with terrorists.
	Like, okay, just show them some respect, give them their own land, they'll go away.
	Like, they must want something.
	They don't want something other than what's next.
	Is there any example of them pumping the brakes?
	You know, first thing is like, just look at statues in the last two years.
	They go, look, we want to get rid of some of these Civil War generals that were on the wrong side of history.
	And you go, I don't see why you need to do that, but all right.
	I guess it's sensible or something.
	And you go, fine, let them take down the statue and then we can get on with our lives.
	And then at some point they go, yeah, I want to get rid of Lewis and Clark.
	And you go, what?
	I go, yeah, they had an Indian.
	Okay, let them do that.
	Then they want to get rid of a boulder in Wisconsin because it's racist.
	Now they want to get rid of Jefferson.
	Do you guys understand what they're doing?
	It's not that they want to get rid of statues.
	They want to get rid of everything that existed before they were born.
	That's the plan.
	They're not offended by any of this stuff.
	They're just manipulating you.
	They're just curious to see how far they can bend you.
	And you go along with it because you think it's about the statue or it's about the issue.
	It's not.
	It's just about getting it.
	It's like, wear a mask outside.
	Well, that doesn't do anything.
	Yeah, I know, but I told you to do it.
	Like, I want to see how far I can manipulate you.
	That's what we're doing.
	They don't admit it, but that's what they're doing.
	It's so true.
	It is about control, like forced speech and forced silence that they will control, whether it's the head of Twitter, Facebook, the head of the country, the head of your state, your city, your school board.
Getting Rid of History 00:07:12
	We're seeing it up and down.
	And I agree with you.
	The answer is to fight.
	Speaking about our leaders, though, I've got to ask you about this because to me, it seems like, you know, there was a joke.
	God, who did this joke?
	It was about John McCain when he was running.
	And the thing on him was, he's too old.
	You know, he's too old to run.
	And one of the forgiveness to the comedian, I'm begging for it from the comedian who said this, but they said, John McCain really is a maverick.
	He's old and they criticize him for being old.
	And what does he do?
	He gets older.
	And that is what's happening with Joe Biden.
	And as it turns out, with Nancy Pelosi, she's 81.
	He's now 79.
	And man, oh man, is it showing.
	Let's start with her.
	You tell me whether you can figure out what in God's name she's talking about in this soundbite.
	Okay, I'm just going to let it play.
	Take a listen.
	Let me know.
	It's the McGovern bill.
	It's a stronger bill than the.
	It's a bill that we could have freestanding or a bill that is in the Eagle Act that is part of the.
	Mr. Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. Kendrick Meeks, no.
	Gregory Meek's bill, Kendrick, we're all very sad about losing Carrie Meek this week, so I referenced her son.
	But the Chairman Meek's bill in the House, so we will have that.
	But you see, in a defense, in a bill, whether it's in the WEE, whatever that thing's called that they have in the Senate, or in a DOD bill, the Senate does not have the right to have a revenue or an appropriations matter.
	You got it?
	Oh, yeah.
	Clear as a bell.
	I hope there was a sign language interpreter that was just out of the camera range that was putting her thumb up her ass at a certain point, just going, I don't know.
	It's sad to me.
	There was another moment with Biden.
	I don't know what was happening, but it was, was it at the Christmas tree lighting?
	He was late.
	Okay, to the Christmas tree lighting.
	Listen to this.
	Watch this.
	This is sound by 13.
	I believe it's holiday free, Megan.
	It is my tremendous honor to welcome our literal host, the actual host for this very American celebration, President Biden and First Lady Dr. Jill Biden.
	Sit down again one more time.
	All right.
	And now it's my tremendous honor to welcome our real host, our literal host.
	For this very America celebration, President Biden and First Lady Dr. Jill Biden.
	We don't, he missed his entry queue.
	Dr. Jill Biden apparently missed it too.
	It was the national tree lighting down in, I guess, DC.
	By the way, the forcing us to refer to her as Dr. Jill Biden is all part of.
	What we were talking about moments ago, which is Latinx, Dr. Jill Biden, we need your pronouns.
	It's all, I will force you to do what we want you to do.
	They don't care if she's Dr. Jill Biden or Latinx or not.
	That's all just part of the experiment of how much control do we have over you.
	We're the little lab rats running on the wheel.
	I am also Dr. Megan Kelly.
	I have a jurist doctor.
	I have more of a claim to doctor than she does.
	And you can refer to me accordingly.
	I hope to interview her one day and I'll.
	I'll introduce her as Dr. Jill, and I want her to refer to me as Dr. Megan.
	Dr. Drew gets it.
	Why not?
	Now, listen, all of this is going to be discussed, I'm sure, in full on your new show.
	You weren't busy enough.
	Is that the problem?
	You've got this hit podcast.
	When I got into podcasting, everybody said to me, I said, Who are the real giants?
	Of course, they mentioned Joe Rogan, our pal Ben Shapiro, and everybody mentioned Adam Carolla.
	Your show's a huge hit.
	You've been doing really well with it.
	So why are you adding another one with our pals again at The Daily Wire, who have been the star of this episode of The Megyn Kelly Show?
	I love doing stand up comedy.
	Obviously, I'm in Hollywood.
	From what you've heard of my opinions, you probably realize that Netflix is not beating down my door to get me up on a special.
	And HBO isn't either because we live in a horrible political time with people that never stop bellyaching about McCarthyism, but then apply it every chance they get.
	So enter the Daily Wire.
	And they want to diversify and they want to get into comedy.
	And we have the roller skate and the key, or the peanut butter and the chocolate, or whatever the metaphor is, but either way.
	I love the guys at the Daily Wire and I love doing comedy.
	So it's a perfect fit.
	I love that.
	I love their mission and they are trying to build something else, you know, in the same way Barry Weiss has been saying, build new lanes, you know, just stop trying to win back the old ones, build new ones.
	And she's got some pals doing a new university and, you know, she's on Substack and we're doing podcasting and we are slowly but surely building new lanes.
	This is part of it.
	All right.
	So I understand Jay Leno, was he the first?
	Did you already, you aired the first one?
	Jay Leno is the guest on the first one.
	Rob Riggle is the guest on the second.
	I think we're going to get Bill Shatner up there eventually.
	So I go up and do stand up at the top, bring the guest on, do a little free form interview with the guest.
	The guest will do a little comedy, and then we'll do an improv segment at the end.
	So it's got a stand up show, but also a little variety to it.
	And so far, I've been very well received.
	I love it.
	More Adam Carolla is the answer.
	Truth Yeller, Adam Corolla, Truth Yeller.
	Check it out at the Daily Wire.
	So fun talking to you again.
	I wish we had more time.
	Great to see you.
	Thanks, dear.
	A reminder that you can buy Matt Walsh's hilarious book.
	You've got to read this, Johnny the Walrus, at johnnythewalrus.com.
	Don't miss Monday.
	We've got Ennis Cantor Freedom, right?
	The NBA player who's speaking out about China and about LeBron James.
	I'm so excited he's coming on.
	Don't miss it.
	Download the show on podcast and check us out on YouTube.
	Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show.
	No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

Chapters

00:00:00 Attacking Freedom of Expression
00:15:17 Roe v Wade Political Winds
00:30:56 Ethical Failings in Journalism
00:39:02 Dangerous Game for Athletes
00:47:22 Legal Maneuvering with Guns
01:01:06 Bizarre Approaches to Crime
01:06:03 Focusing on the Children
01:18:23 Manipulating Progressive Movements
01:22:32 Getting Rid of History