The Megyn Kelly Show - 20230601_tara-reade-reveals-what-led-her-to-russia-and-bide

All Episodes

Previous Next

Plain Text

June 1, 2023 - The Megyn Kelly Show

01:46:57

20230601_tara-reade-reveals-what-led-her-to-russia-and-bide

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
Tara Reed Returns to Russia 00:01:51
	Welcome to the Megan Kelly Show, your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations.
	Reached out to her, and she agreed to sit with me for an interview.
	Tara is a former congressional aide that worked under President Joe Biden when he was then just a senator.
	Tara alleges during her time working for then Senator Biden back in 1993, she was sexually harassed and then assaulted by him.
	Tara decided to come forward in April of 2019 after Mr. Biden launched his campaign for the presidency, saying she was inspired by other accusers and a desire to advocate for herself.
	Many in the media and those on the left turned a blind eye to her accusations and then went so far as to actively smear her name, deciding suddenly not to believe all women.
	But Tara continued to speak out.
	Last month, two Republican congressional members said that Tara would be called to testify about her experience with Joe Biden in front of the now GOP-controlled House of Representatives.
	But in a stunning move this week, Tara announced in a press conference from Moscow that she is now in Russia and is seeking Russian citizenship over what she says are threats to her safety here in the United States.
	Joining me now to discuss her story in this exclusive interview is Tara Reed.
	Tara, welcome back to the show.
Facing Airport Pickup Threats 00:12:33
	Thank you for having me.
	It's been a while and I'm glad to see you.
	Oh, I'm glad to see you too.
	And I want to get into all of it.
	I really hope you are okay.
	This whole thing is extraordinary.
	When we sat together three years ago, who could have foreseen this is where it would wind up?
	So, first of all, are you okay?
	Are you all right?
	I'm more than okay.
	I'm safe and I'm very grateful to the Russian Federation.
	They are keeping me safe and I feel safe.
	And yeah, I'm not being targeted in this country.
	And it's beautiful here.
	I have to say, you know, I've been to a lot of cities around the world, and this is one of the most stunning cities I've ever been to.
	It's really gorgeous.
	It is.
	It's spectacular.
	So you did not go over there to flee.
	You went to Russia when?
	You had never been.
	When we met, you said you'd never been there.
	This was you took your first trip just recently.
	So when did you go?
	Well, to take you back just for a second, during COVID, which you mentioned, I tried, I published a book, and nobody's book that was published during COVID really did that well, to be honest.
	And so it's been kind of limping along and I just decided, you know, I have the opportunity to have it translated.
	And so I was coming here to oversee the translation and then it was being internationally distributed.
	And I was invited on an interview for channel one.
	And so I was here for about a week.
	You know, that was the plan originally.
	So I packed that way too.
	In late May?
	Correct.
	May 20th.
	Okay.
	I know that you have a lawyer now.
	She released a statement this morning saying that the plane ticket was paid for by, I believe it was Russian television.
	Who paid for it?
	It was Channel 1, Russian television.
	So yes.
	So why did they pay for your ticket to Russia?
	They wanted me there for the interview and we discussed my book and my case.
	Okay.
	And then where were you staying during that week?
	I stayed at a very modest accommodation.
	So, yeah.
	A hotel or the home of someone?
	Yeah, in Moscow.
	I don't really want to say.
	Okay.
	No, you don't have to get specific, but wasn't it full of security issues?
	No, no, I understand that.
	But was it a hotel or was it the home of somebody?
	Yes, yes.
	It was just like a hotel and a very modest one at that.
	Okay.
	And so you're over there.
	And at that time, was your intention to return to the United States?
	And if so, when?
	Well, yeah, I was actually coming back probably, you know, it's a couple of days travel because you can't go directly into Moscow, as you know.
	So it required me to go to another country and then have a layover and then come back.
	So it was about a two-day, 11-hour flight from the secondary country.
	So five hours to that country, a flight, and then another 11 hours back to the United States.
	So I was going to leave that Saturday and be home probably by Sunday night, if I made my connections correctly.
	So you had a round trip ticket?
	No, I had a different, they gave me a one-way and then I was getting another one way because I think I was going to go through a different country on the way back home.
	Yeah, because I had come through Istanbul and I wasn't sure about leaving through Istanbul because at that time there was having the elections and whatnot.
	So I was thinking about leaving through Dubai.
	So when you were in Moscow, had they purchased you a return flight home prior to you receiving the calls that were?
	Yeah, they actually, while this was going on in the middle of the week, they were about to purchase my ticket and I was deciding if I was going to go through Istanbul or Dubai.
	And then we were in conversation and then I started getting information that if I returned, that I might be at risk of being picked up at the airport.
	Okay, so let's talk about that.
	What was the first inkling you had that you might be in danger of being arrested or worse?
	I was getting some feedback from people that, you know, and I, and this is, and, you know, I don't conceal anything.
	Megan, with you, I've been very open and I don't like to do that.
	But when it comes to other people's safety in their cases, I can't out them.
	But there are other people who have sought safety in this area and they're former journalists, former intelligence, and they've had to not be able to go back to their home of origin.
	Anyway, but they still have intelligence ties.
	And I was given two separate messages that there may be, you know, that the U.S. government wasn't happy with my vacation choice and there may be something happening if I flew back in.
	I was given a very specific message around the middle of the week when I was about to purchase the ticket.
	In fact, it was that day and I was in conversations with a person to get it, you know, arranged.
	And then I got a message from someone else who said, you know, if you please think about staying because there may be a red notice interpol warrant for your arrest if you go to an airport.
	So not even necessarily at the home airport.
	It might have happened at the connecting flight.
	Now, when you say somebody told you this, is this loose talk in expat circles in Russia by somebody saying, you know, Tara, you came over here on the Russian's dime.
	That could get you in trouble given all the sanctions.
	You better look into that before you go.
	I mean, was it loose talk or was it a specific threat by somebody who would be in a position to know that you were actually in legal danger?
	It was two people with specific knowledge that I was in specific danger.
	And now I have, you had mentioned I have a lawyer.
	He's a American lawyer.
	His name is John Levy.
	And then Radha, who you mentioned, Sterling, is helping with finding out where these warrants are.
	So exact, so she's contacting me.
	And I don't really understand all the process.
	It's very complicated, Megan.
	I know, you know, you know, I have a law degree and you do too, but this is a very specialized area of law.
	And I'm not really familiar with inter-poll international warrants, but there is a mechanism to find out.
	And we're in the process of doing that now.
	Right.
	And you're trying to find out whether there is a red notice on you through Interpol, which is an international organization that helps make arrests when a citizen from one country travels elsewhere and might be a fugitive or a potential criminal.
	And you're trying to find out whether there is a, quote, red notice for you with Interpol right now.
	Exactly.
	And not just that, but I have a case that's sealed by the DOJ that was opened in 2020.
	And I can't, I mean, the case was opened by the DOJ and FBI.
	They pulled all my Twitter communications.
	That attorney informed me that all of my communications were taken under sealed warrants, meaning that other companies like Google, Gmail, phone, whatever.
	But Twitter had chosen to go to court to inform me.
	And they had to make several motions in court to even tell me that there's a sealed case.
	They impaneled a grand jury.
	And I thought, because it's been three years, it's been since 2020, maybe this was over, you know, because it had to do with, you know, Joe Biden, you know, and all of that.
	And I thought, well, if nothing happened, maybe that's the case.
	And what I found out is, no, actually, you know, it can sit there for as long as they want and then they can choose to indict, like they did Julian Assange.
	His sat there for 10 years and then they indicted.
	In my case, it's been three.
	And I was advised that that needs to be looked at.
	I've had journalists try to get that information.
	I've had a member of Congress.
	I've had tried to look.
	I've also had, you know, obviously, I've gone through different methods with an attorney to try to get it opened.
	I have no information, but it's just sitting there.
	So you believe that you're under an, you believe you're under investigation right now by the Biden DOJ prior to going to Russia, that this was an investigation open, a grand jury investigation opened looking into something about you back in 2020?
	Correct.
	It's been sitting there.
	And I thought maybe it was over.
	And it wasn't until I was on this trip that I was informed when I got more educated about all of this that, no, that it could be indicted, that could be activated at any time.
	And there was also some other things that went on.
	When I made my decision, as you know, Megan, because you've known me over the years and you know, I'm pretty methodical.
	I don't, I'm not impulsive.
	I make decisions based on analysis and data points.
	And I looked at the cases that are, you know, and the activity since the elections ramping up as far as people making threats, all of that thing.
	And then those two warnings that I got, and then there was one more conversation that I had, which I know you want to get to, that put the seal on it that I decided made my decision.
	And I decided to err on the side of caution and not get on that plane.
	Can we talk about the two warnings?
	Because how did they find you?
	You know, you're over there promoting a book.
	You give an interview to channel one.
	That's, I mean, all media in Russia is basically state run.
	But so you give this interview and how did they, what, did people come to you personally?
	Did they call you?
	How did they reach out to you to say there may be danger of you being arrested?
	They took great personal risk, professional risk and personal risk and reached out through a friend.
	I did not know them directly and gave me the message.
	And may I ask if these are American citizens?
	All American.
	Okay, so former, former Intel people from the American Intel intelligence agencies.
	Absolutely.
	Yeah.
	And were these people in Russia?
	Again, I can't.
	Okay.
	I can't say that anymore.
	No worries.
	Okay.
	And so they're saying, Tara, you might be arrested if you leave Russia.
	And what did they specifically mention for violating sanctions?
	Because we, as the audience probably knows, we have a bunch of sanctions on Russia right now because of the war in Ukraine.
	And your lawyer was pointing out this morning in her statement, Radha Sterling, one of your lawyers was saying this would be basically a joke because the sanctions that are in place right now against Russia would make it inappropriate for companies to advertise on these Russian television stations to offer professional services to said channels, but do not include a ban on receiving a plane ticket.
	So did you feel that the sanction threat or the arrest threat was real?
	Yes.
	And the sanction issue, we're still trying to sort through.
	And then I made several phone calls and nobody seemed to have the answer.
	And I called lawyers like in New York and DC that had federal backgrounds.
	And they literally said that some of these sanction laws are pages long.
	They're relatively new.
	Megan, as you know, they're 2022, 2023.
	So some of them haven't even, you know, really been enacted or they haven't been litigated in any way.
	They're just sitting there sort of.
	But in my case, I had accepted this plane ticket from channel one, and I was told that that could be considered a violation.
	Now, what people need to understand is a violation of sanctions could lead to prison time.
	Like it can lead to actually not just financial penalties, but actual prison.
	So you've got that potential violation of sanctions.
	So, you know, your lawyer says that's a bunch of BS.
	You're not a company advertising.
	You're a citizen going over with a plane ticket to give an interview.
	That's one piece of it.
	And then there's the possibility of some grand jury investigation, some DOJ action in connection with something else started back here in 2020.
	On that front, do you believe that the government suspected you of being a Russian agent, that that investigation had anything to do with that?
Putin Credit and Sanctions 00:15:37
	Do you recall our conversation when we got, we kind of talked about this?
	Yes.
	The first thing, yeah, right.
	The first thing that Joe Biden did when the New York Times called him, apparently, according to Lisa Lehrer, was she asked the campaign about me and about that.
	And their first response was to send them blogs and statements I made about Vladimir Putin and about Russia that were considered pro-Russia and inferred that I was a Russian agent.
	And Edward Isaac Dovere, who worked for the Atlantic, did an article about me possibly being a Russian asset.
	So it was that wild connection.
	And you and I had even joked about that, right?
	On your show, because of how absurd it was.
	I was this girl who grew up in Wisconsin, lived, you know, born in California, lived all my life in America, and then all of a sudden I'm, you know, this Russian asset because I simply came forward about Joe Biden.
	But that, but, you know, we were also in the thick of the whole Russia gate, which has now been proven to be all false and a narrative that's been overturned, you know, by several outlets that those were outright lies.
	And now it's been proven in hearings in Congress.
	So I was sort of swept up in that.
	This is so crazy.
	I want to show the audience this when we sat together, again, right in the heart of the COVID pandemic.
	I remember flying out to see you.
	There was no one in any airport.
	It was completely desolate.
	I was like the only person we met.
	We did our own hair and makeup.
	It was like the world was shut down, but you wanted to speak and I wanted to hear it.
	And I asked you about your past writings about Putin.
	And here's part of that exchange.
	Okay.
	You've said he's a genius with athletic prowess that's intoxicating.
	He has an alluring combination of strength with gentleness.
	His sensuous image projects his love for life, the embodiment of grace while facing adversity.
	And that like most women across the world, you like President Putin a lot, shirt on or off.
	Well, that was a joke, but that was humorous, meant to be humorous.
	You sound pretty enamored with it.
	You know, I've never been to Russia.
	I don't know what it's like to live there or the human rights violations that, you know, he is accused of.
	And what I would say now is that I don't appreciate his views about, for instance, domestic violence programs.
	Like there's not a lot of support for women, from my understanding.
	And it changed my heart on him.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	And then your heart's changed back since then from the sound of it because you were saying very well, you know, I'm not going to speak to anything about Russian laws or anything because I've just been here a week.
	So I can't really speak to anything, actually, except tourist stuff and how pretty it is, but here.
	But what I can tell you is that I've been, it's a very efficient city.
	It's very good.
	You know, Moscow itself.
	And I really enjoy it here.
	As far as Vladimir Putin goes, the president of Russia, I don't know him.
	I still haven't met him.
	And I probably will never meet him.
	It was just a blog that I was doing for a novel that I was writing.
	And you and I kind of, if people watched that interview further, we would talk about that as well.
	And still posted on our YouTube account.
	People should go back.
	It's one of the first posts.
	You should go back and look at it.
	Keep going, Tom.
	But what I was going to say is you should definitely give President Putin credit right now for protecting or taking in people that have no place to go.
	I mean, when you look at the world right now, if there is an inter-pole arrest warrant, I literally have no country I can go to for safety except Russia and I think just a couple others.
	So there are people here whose only crime may be just to simply tell the truth or to present what's going on in Ukraine, like filming in Donbass and talking to the residents of Donbass about how horrible it's been to have the Kiev regime attacking them, that there are neo-Nazis in Donbass and that there is the Azov battalions, which are Nazis.
	And that, you know, I mean, so you have people that have been bringing that truth that have been to those places and talked to the residents that are happy the Russians are there to protect them.
	And that's not being allowed in the Western media.
	It's being suppressed.
	And the journalists doing it are being demonetized if they're independent.
	They're being harassed.
	Look what just happened to Kate Clarenberg.
	Kate Clarenberg does deep investigative reporting, but he's not following the narrative of the Great Britain, you know, or the State Department from the U.S.
	And they detained him in London, England, and took his DNA and took all his electronics.
	And he didn't commit a crime.
	He's a journalist.
	So, you know, we're, you know, I have to give President Putin credit for allowing a safe haven for people that are trying to, you know, tell the truth.
	Wow.
	I understand that's your perspective.
	It is only part of the story, obviously, about what's happening in Ukraine as children are dying by the thousands.
	And the tapes are absolutely deeply disturbing.
	And there are very good reasons to see Putin in a very different way as a villain, as the aggressor, and as his actions entirely unjustified.
	That's not the purpose of our debate today.
	Okay, so I don't.
	But yeah, and I don't see him as a villain.
	I see him, you know, that's simply not true.
	I don't, I think that that narrative, and that's been the problem, is the Western has been controlling the narrative so, so hard that they're not allowing the truth to come out, which is that the case.
	Or we see the truth and we have different opinions on it.
	I mean, that's, that's, there's another, there's no reason for you and I to, I see your point, but that's that's a debate for a different day.
	We've been having it ad nauseum on this show and others.
	Um, okay.
	So I do want to ask you, at the time we sat and we talked about your allegations against Joe Biden, had you ever been in contact with anyone from Russia?
	At the time that we talked, no, of course not.
	No, so there was no because now there's speculation back then you were a Russian agent.
	Back then, you were being used by Russia to smear Joe Biden.
	Absolutely not.
	No, I was writing a novel, as you know.
	So no.
	Okay.
	And you were, when you did a press conference about your circumstances just the other day, you were with Maria Butina, who was convicted here in America of being an undisclosed Russian agent and went and was sentenced to, I think, 19 months in prison, then went back home and is a journalist over in Russia now.
	Or actually, she's a representative of the state Duma, which is the lower house of the legislature.
	And she, when was the first time you met her?
	I actually met her because, you know, I have a podcast called The Politics of Survival, and I try to bring on stories that, you know, weren't told very often.
	And she, the focus of that story, because she wasn't a Russian spy, and that, and there was even an American journalist who did a good piece called Maria Butina, the spy that wasn't.
	I'd encourage people to read that.
	She was sort of used politically, again, caught up in that Russia gate narrative that Hillary Clinton was rabid about at that time.
	She, our focus of our interview is about prison conditions because she was put in solitary confinement for months, which is considered by the UN and by most as a form of torture.
	She talked about the systemic racism.
	She talked about the women she met in prison and just the conditions and what she saw.
	And, you know, like she mentioned one woman had been in solitary for six years in solitary prison, you know, solitary prison.
	I mean, no one would defend that.
	I got a feeling it's not much better in Russia.
	They're not exactly known for their human rights championship over there, Tara.
	I hate to tell you, but you may have jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire.
	We don't know.
	We don't know because the narrative is so controlled.
	We're not allowed to know.
	I hope you don't find out.
	I hope you don't find out.
	I really do.
	I don't think you're going to get arrested over there, but let's face it, Putin's record on human rights is abysmal.
	That's the truth.
	Okay, that's not to excuse anything that's being done to you, possibly by our country, because you don't deserve to be any retribution for speaking out about Joe Biden.
	And the DOJ investigation back in 2020, seeking your Twitter account correspondence, I'll be in there, among others, is highly suspicious, highly suspicious, unless they had real evidence you had done something criminal or were actively coordinating with some known Russian agent.
	Like, let's have it.
	We've been three years now.
	Let's have it.
	So, do your lawyers feel that they can unearth anything that's happening there?
	Do they have any right to know what's happening there?
	Well, what my lawyers were told is no, and they may never know, and they don't.
	And, you know, my hope was that a member of Congress could get it opened with higher, you know, status for intelligence, I guess, or like, you know, being able to open it.
	So, you know, that was my inquiry.
	Right now, of course, the international lawyers and the one that's in DC area will be looking into that to see if they can get it open.
	But as far as I know, what the main thrust of that is when they seal a file and seal the grand jury, it's really hard to open it unless they choose to indict.
	Okay, so let's go back to the week of, I think you said it was May 2021st, that week.
	Right.
	Well, yeah, I landed May 20th.
	So I love it.
	May 20th is Saturday, just looking at my calendar.
	So that you said around that Wednesday, you got these calls or you were contacted.
	Later, no, yeah, so later in that week.
	So it would have been, what is that, the 25th or whatever, the 23rd?
	Wednesday's the 24th, Thursday's the 25th.
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	So you get contacted and you reached out to Congressman Matt Gates' office.
	Now, the reason you reached out to Matt Gates' office is because Gates and Marjorie Taylor Greene, as I said in the intro, were working with you to potentially have a hearing on the sexual abuse allegations against Joe Biden.
	You're not the only woman to accuse him of harassment.
	There were at least seven plus who came forward when he was running.
	Yours are the most egregious.
	And I should state for the record, he vehemently denies them.
	So they, as I understand it, Tara, wanted to take you.
	And this is my understanding, according to a Matt Gates source.
	Their plan, because they had sent a letter to the Senate on behalf of you requesting any and all records relating to your allegations of sexual abuse when you worked for Joe Biden.
	You told me you did complain at the time, not about the abuse allegation where he allegedly stopped you in the hallway and hurt you, but about harassment that you were enduring at his hand.
	And you did go, you wrote it down, you made a formal complaint, and yet we've never found those records.
	And my understanding was that Gates' office and Marjorie Taylor Greene's office were trying, they had sent a letter to the Senate on your behalf, seeking any and all records of those allegations.
	And then they were responded to by the Senate saying, we're going to protect the privacy of Tara Reed.
	We're not giving you your records because we need to protect her privacy.
	And that the next move was going to be to go with you to Capitol Hill where you would sign a waiver in person saying, hello, they're acting on my behalf.
	I want those records.
	I've been trying to get those records every way I can.
	Now I'm going to try to get them through these two congresspeople, turn them over, and that that was the next planned step for you here in the United States.
	Is that correct?
	Correct.
	But I think you could sign the waiver.
	Yeah.
	And they were going to hand in the notice, but I did sign a waiver as well online, but it's just a matter of if they, you know, require it.
	So you were going to go in person and do that and then have a press conference to tell people what had just happened.
	Correct.
	With Matt Gates.
	So you're coordinating with his office about that possible next move, which may or may not lead to congressional hearings and so on.
	Laying the foundation, trying to get your documentation, which you were trying to get back when we talked three years ago as well.
	Um yes, and and then you fly to Russia, you're promoting your book, that those wheels are still in motion back on Capitol Hill, and when you get this warning, you call Matt Gates.
	What happened in that convo?
	Well, you know, I have to give him credit.
	Um, he's.
	I now think of him as quite a noble person because, you know, he didn't advise me um, he simply gave me information.
	I said hey look, I told him my information about the warnings I was given about being arrested at the airport or in transit and um, I asked for immunity.
	Can I be, you know, immune from this?
	Because I haven't done it, committed any crimes.
	All i'm doing is talking about the truth and I feel targeted by the DOJ and FBI.
	This is part of and, and ironically, one of the cases that I was gonna.
	I was gonna testify about my case, but I was also asked to testify with other whist, about the whistleblowers that are being persecuted by the DOJ and FBI, by Joe Biden, on a panel, and I was going to also participate in that right.
	Um so, you know, I we had that conversation about it and he basically said, look, I can't can't uh, promise anything about blanket immunity or immunity.
	But he said, but i'll tell you this Tara, you know um, i'm really concerned for your personal safety here because I know how these people operate, and I found that stunning.
	You know, he's a U.s congressman and, as you know, one of the whistleblowers has disappeared um, and I think they're trying.
	I think, as of today, there was new news that they're trying to locate that person, but they are so scared I guess they they are trying to do this from underground, kind of like i'm trying to testify from Russia, but this tells you, the mafia state that the United States is in right now under the Biden regime um, that we're well, literally.
	Let me ask you about that, let me press you on that, because does it?
	I'm not.
	I don't know what they've done or what they haven't yet, but so far, all we have is, you know you, you interview so many people and you are so good at reading them right, and people always tell you who they are.
	Don't you remember when Joe Biden had his mic off and he said um, or he didn't know that he had the mic still on, excuse me.
	And he said on a hot mic.
	He said nobody with a Biden and I mean who says that that, but but that's his mentality and that's how this team works.
	That I mean I have been under so many and you know how many threats i've been on over the years.
	Oh, they've tried to destroy you, the media has tried to destroy you and stuff.
	And I can't put it on Biden, but yeah, the audience should know that is real.
	I, I witnessed that firsthand.
	The left, the organized political left, went after you with a vengeance and tried to smear you because you'd filed for bankruptcy, looked into your college records, counted up the credits did she really quite get over the line on her degree?
	She held herself out as an expert.
	Was she really an expert?
	I mean they, you were trying to help domestic violence victims and they treated you like you were chief abuser of of truth and look, that's what they do.
	But it was such a juxtaposition from from believe all women that it was absolutely telling.
	So I I validate that whole experience for you.
	And it's also true that the Biden Admin administration has been targeting its enemies for sure, from parents who speak out at school board meetings, who get the FBI potentially involved.
	On down, we've covered all of that.
Malley's Confirmation Conversation 00:02:51
	But here what we have is proof is two people we don't know who you say were former American Intel who said, be careful, there might be an interpol red notice on you that could lead to your arrest for violating sanctions.
	Matt Gates saying I don't know.
	Maybe he's saying I don't know, but I know how these people operate and that you know.
	I hope you're safe.
	That's not exactly proof, proof positive of the Biden administration doing anything to you.
	Well, you know it.
	It was for me as far as making a decision about whether I felt like I could just go home and not be walking into a very bad situation because right now, under the current new laws, like if they were charging me with say, the Fara Act, which the, that's the foreign registration act um, which is um, you know, kind of speculation.
	If that's sealed case, if that's what that is, um and just that just means if you're acting as a Russian agent here in America and you haven't disclosed it, you could violate this act.
	Go ahead right, it's an administrative act that's kind of a backdoor into the espionage and it wasn't really ever even enforced until Maria Button's case, but also january 6th, a couple of the cases you know, where they designated people as terrorists.
	And now with chairman O'malley that, the black socialist group um, they've now been indicted.
	They're facing 10 to 15 years in prison maybe um, and they've had their passports revoked.
	Uh, and that's chairman O'malley.
	He's 80 years old, he's been an activist, a Black African, um American activist for 50 years and he's not a Russian agent, but that's what the charges are.
	And they've been.
	And in the indictment they said he was sowing discord um, and because he was?
	Um pushing back against the proxy war that the?
	U.s and NATO is waging against Russia via Ukraine, and for that they three of them in that or I think four, excuse me, are now facing prison time.
	They've been arrested indicted, whatever.
	So with this new law, they could hold people up to 18 months without even charging them, and you may not even get access to counsel.
	Well, guess what the?
	The election's coming and i'm just about to testify.
	What would Joe Biden love more than anything else than to have me silent, to have me put away, to have me not testifying before Congress right?
	So I made my decision alone, without anyone coercing me.
	So you're right I, but I did.
	It was looking at several data points and looking at, listening to people and weighing it out, and I even like, took notes and wrote it down and did pluses and minuses.
	I mean, I really thought about this.
	Um, you know, I didn't sleep one night just thinking and thinking about my options and I really so I I analyzed it, but also I went with my gut and my gut was telling me, don't do it, you're gonna walk into something bad.
Seeking Citizenship Amidst Bashing 00:14:41
	We He reached out to Congressman Gates' office to try to get confirmation of this conversation.
	We were unsuccessful in getting any comment on that, though a Matt Gates source told us that he did express sympathy to you when you called him.
	No ownership.
	Well, he's a target.
	And I don't want him to become a target again because he was honest with me, because he could have said, yeah, Tara, come on, get on that plane.
	And then I, you know, I would have had a different fate.
	And by the way, did he know you were going to Moscow?
	Did he know?
	I told him.
	I told him exactly where it was.
	He asked me.
	No, but did he know that you were going before you went?
	No.
	Okay.
	So you called him up.
	He says, where are you calling from?
	And you say, I'm in Moscow.
	I mean, that must have been a moment.
	I'm in Moscow, Russia.
	My God.
	I mean, was there like, I just, as a human, was there like a holy right moment?
	People are like, what?
	No, he just said, he knew I explained that I was there for the book and for an interview and that I was trying to get the translation done.
	And it was going out to not just Russian, but it was going out to French, Spanish, Italian.
	It was going out to all different, being distributed internationally.
	And we should see what give me the name of the book.
	Yeah, that was unfortunate.
	I think he said, I can't remember his exact words on that because I, but I think he said something like, that's unfortunate.
	And then I think he said something like, well, I can't go there because it's sanctioned.
	And I said, well, apparently I can't go either.
	Something like that.
	But other than that, you know, he focused more on what he was trying to do to further the investigation into Joe Biden.
	And that was his focus of his conversation.
	And then he gave me a little bit of a chance.
	Give me the name of the book again, just so people know why there's interest in it.
	Sure.
	It's left out when the truth doesn't fit in.
	And it's about this whole experience you're talking about.
	Yes.
	And I'm having to add three chapters.
	So this will probably be a chapter.
	At least.
	At least.
	Okay.
	So that, so you're over there.
	You decide.
	Can I just say, though, I know from our previous dealings, you have a, you have a daughter who you absolutely adore.
	You have all these pets.
	Oh, I know you're like a diehard, lifelong animal lover.
	I mean, it's not, what about your daughter?
	What about Michaela?
	Yeah.
	You know, it's been, it's been horrendous to make that decision.
	And I'm going to get emotional.
	I miss her.
	But I'm not going to do her any good if I'm in a cage.
	And she wouldn't see me anyway.
	And I feel like I'm so targeted right now.
	And I feel so unsafe in the United States and how it started amping up.
	And the election hasn't even really started in earnest.
	And Joe Biden apparently is running that I don't feel, you know, that I can go back safely.
	And I feel she might be at risk because I'm in that proximity.
	And, you know, it's hard.
	It's the hardest decision.
	One of the hardest decisions I've ever made in my life.
	But, and I miss my pets desperately.
	And it was sudden.
	So I'm still scrambling to try to sort everything.
	But all I can tell you is that somehow there's a piece inside me that I know I avoided something really negative.
	And I refuse to be intimidated and bullied and pushed out by Joe Biden from trying to get justice.
	Now, and I say that knowing I might not get personal justice, right?
	But I at least want to be able to testify under oath in Congress about what he did and see an investigation.
	I don't even care anymore at this point of the results.
	I want to raise up the issue that Joe Biden is weaponizing the FBI and DOJ against private citizens.
	Look what they're doing to like Matt Taibbi, who exposed the infiltration of the DOJ and FBI into social media and Twitter by Hamilton 68 and all that reporting.
	He had IRS.
	Yeah.
	So IRS after him and everything.
	Rather than retrading that ground, because we've talked about that a lot on the show, but what, can I ask you about when you did you have to call your daughter at some point and say Michaela, I'm in Russia and I'm seeking citizenship here and staying.
	So how did that go?
	It didn't.
	Okay, that wasn't one conversation.
	That was several.
	And, you know, there's a time zone difference and it was hard and it was heart-wrenching.
	And I didn't tell her right at first.
	I told her in increments because I wasn't sure what I was doing.
	Like, you know, I wasn't sure what my options were.
	Right.
	And I still completely don't know.
	Like, I don't know how long I'll be allowed to stay if I would be granted citizenship.
	I don't know the answer to these questions.
	And they have a, you know, they have a complicated process just like the United States does.
	They have their own focus.
	And I don't.
	Why seek citizenship?
	Why give up your, I mean, this is sort of how a lot of people over here have reacted.
	Like, why is she seeking Russian citizenship?
	And why is she bashing the United States on a Russian stage?
	Well, first of all, I've been saying the same thing about I'm not bashing the United States.
	I love my country.
	I don't like the elites and the corruption that's running it.
	I don't like the military industrial complex that has hijacked it.
	We're spending a trillion dollars next year on defense alone while our infrastructure is falling down.
	You know, you know, there's a difference, Tara, between saying that from California or Seattle and saying that from Moscow.
	It has a difference.
	You're saying the same thing.
	I know, but when you're on Russian soil asking for Russian citizenship and you start bashing the United States as a current American, people get rather upset and see you as a traitor.
	I'm not a traitor.
	And I want to remind everyone, too, that, you know, that would think of me as a traitor, that I worked as a Democratic, you know, aide, like on congressional races.
	I worked for Leon Panetta.
	I worked for Joe Biden.
	I worked in public service.
	I helped people in social services that needed help.
	I testified in legislatures to try to make laws better, you know, in Washington state.
	I did a lot of pro bono public service work.
	And then when I needed help, when I came forward about Joe Biden, look how I was treated, Megan.
	My country betrayed me.
	I haven't betrayed my country.
	You're criticizing me.
	And I feel, and it's not even the country itself, it's the elites.
	And I know who it is because the people of the United States are good people.
	And most people do not want to be close to World War III.
	Biden is, and you know, I said in 2019 that Joe, if Joe Biden became president, he would take us to war with Russia.
	And here we are.
	And I got a lot of flack for saying that, but here we are.
	We're in the most dangerous moment in history.
	And while my case is important to me and it's important, I think one of the most important conversations we all need to be having is why aren't our leaders using diplomacy?
	Why do you have Lindsey Graham talking about it?
	Okay, I get it.
	But we're rounding back to a policy debate that is for another day.
	I understand it's important to you and it's important to the country.
	But it is.
	Again, why seek citizenship in Russia?
	Why not?
	I mean, like, why can't I be free to seek citizenship, dual citizenship wherever I want?
	Like, people have European passports and they have American passports.
	Why not?
	I'm doing a book thing here.
	I also got another book that's coming out in September, a manuscript that got approved.
	So I needed to do research here.
	And I wanted to go back and forth.
	And I wanted the benefit.
	You go back and forth as an American.
	I've been to Russia a couple of times over the past five years.
	You can go back and forth as an American.
	You can go back and forth, but I wanted to explore doing both.
	And I think there's nothing wrong with that.
	I think there's nothing wrong with that.
	It doesn't sound right.
	I got red flags all over it when you say that.
	There's got to be a reason, Tara.
	What is the reason?
	The reason is that I personally find this country beautiful.
	And for the first time, I felt safe and I felt free.
	And I wasn't feeling that in the United States.
	And I think that the geopolitical world is changing.
	I think that it is becoming a multipolar world.
	I think that the East is becoming strong and economically.
	And I think there's opportunities.
	So I wanted to have the experience of having both places.
	And there's nothing wrong with that.
	But also how you're going to support yourself.
	Well, I'm a writer.
	So, you know, I just got the book approved and I'll do other writing jobs and work, you know, in that realm.
	But I hope.
	And I already have offers to do that.
	And, you know, I'm going to pursue those offers to write.
	And to, as I said, I have a manuscript that's due in September.
	So I have that project that I'm working on.
	And I think you speak Russian?
	I do not speak Russian.
	Well, this is going to be a problem.
	This plan had some holes in it.
	Yeah.
	And I have plans to have tutors and to learn and to they have classes here, just like they do in America.
	And of course, I even have an app and I've been learning.
	Like I can say, you know, private and I can say a couple words.
	Spaceba.
	Spaceba.
	Yeah.
	But, you know, it's, I don't, I just don't buy into the russophobia.
	It's like, it's like if I decided to make a second home in Italy, which a lot of people are doing, actually, they're retiring in Italy or Mexico or other countries that maybe have a better cost of living.
	You know, no one questions that.
	Why question Russia?
	I understand.
	And listen, you said this to me back when we interviewed three years ago, you know, that you didn't like the Russophobia.
	And look, having been there, having been to St. Petersburg, having been to Moscow, it is spectacular.
	It's absolutely beautiful there.
	The people are lovely.
	I know that they get demonized because of the Russian politics and the Russian behavior.
	You have to be able to separate the two, you know, the people of Russia from the politics of Russia, same as we hope they do for us.
	So I don't mean to.
	Yeah.
	The food?
	Is that what you said?
	The food is really good.
	And you know what's remarkable about the food is it really shocked me because no one really talks about this, but it tastes like it does.
	Food tasted like when I was a kid.
	And I was like, what is that?
	So I asked Rand, and what it is, is they don't allow GMOs.
	They don't allow hormones.
	They don't allow any of that Monsanto, anything.
	That's lovely.
	But they also don't allow gays.
	So it's like, it's a trade-off.
	Look, I want to ask you whether you think you can come back because you still say you're going to testify.
	So if Gates and Taylor Greene get this hearing going.
	So how are you going to do that?
	Oh, I'm glad you asked that.
	The lawyer that I spoke to is going to prefer, I think is the term, prefer, Congress, and request that I be able to come in video link.
	And so I can do so safely.
	And I would like to testify that way.
	And we'll see if it's accepted.
	And then, yeah.
	Yeah, I want to ask you this because John Kirby, who's the Pentagon spokesperson for the administration, has been for a long time, was asked about these allegations that your life is at risk here as a result of policies by the U.S. government or at the hands of the U.S. government.
	Here's what he said, Satanai.
	She announced yesterday she's seeking citizenship in Russia and she feels safer there.
	Does the White House have any reaction to that announcement given the accusations that she's made against President?
	We'd be loath to comment on the musings of a potential Russian citizen.
	That's really up for her to speak to.
	Does the White House believe that her allegations may have been motivated by her allegiance to affinity for Russia?
	Difficult to say.
	One thing I will say is that the allegations that her life was at risk by the United States government, absolutely false, baseless.
	There's nothing to that.
	Does that reassure you?
	Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, you know.
	I mean, come on.
	If you speak out against the empire, and besides, like, how many times have they stood up there and been lying to us?
	And that's those lies have been revealed recently about Russia Gate.
	So, you know, no, I don't trust the words of John Kirby.
	And he knows very well why I'm frightened.
	He knows very well.
	And by the way, Megan, why didn't they just have the press secretary answer?
	Why would they have someone from the NSA?
	Well, we may get questions there as well as the news cycle unfolds.
	I want to show the audience a picture you sent me of you sitting in the Russian Duma, which is beautiful.
	It's incredible.
	The state Duma.
	This is, again, the lower body of the legislation.
	And I'll put that up on the board.
	But it's not going to help with the people who think this is all part of your Russian agent, secret agent operation.
	For the record, what are your ties, if any, to the Russian government, the Russian Federation?
	Absolutely none.
	I think it's so silly.
	It's so ridiculous.
	I mean, I got a tour of the Duma.
	That was pretty exciting, but like, so do school children there.
	I think, though, for foreigners, it is different.
	Like, I think I'm, because there are not many Americans visiting, I was like the second one.
	But I wanted to bring up something, you know, you brought up something about homosexuality earlier.
	You know that it's legal in Russia, that it's not illegal here.
	So I don't know why that there's this myth that that's illegal in Russia because it's not.
	But anyway.
	Because, well, there's a history of persecution.
	But going forward, as far as like what I saw.
	You can promote homosexuality.
	As far as like what I've been able to see, I've been typical kind of tourist things, Red Square.
	You've been there for a week.
	So let's not, it's anecdotal stuff on that.
	It's fine.
	It's not that it's illegal.
	It's that there's a history of persecution.
	You're not allowed to openly promote prosecution.
	Sorry, you're not allowed to openly promote homosexuality.
	And there are very different approaches when it comes to these and other human rights in Russia, as you'll undoubtedly see the longer you stay there.
	I'll say this too.
	John Kirby said for the record, the question was, does the White House believe Tara is part of a Russian influence operation?
	And he said, I've seen no evidence or proof of that.
	Finally, your lawyer says you are filing a case with the United Nations.
Freedom of Speech in Exile 00:02:39
	What help do you hope to get from them?
	To talk about freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and that because I do feel because I came forward about Joe Biden and because of the corruption that has gone on and speaking freely about that, that that's made me a bit of a target or more of a target.
	And so that is a mechanism to address it and to address the fact that if they did put out these, you know, these different interpol, you know, that it was basically political targeting, because that's what I think it is.
	And we, and we all know when that's been happened to whistleblowers, you know, John Kiriako, you know, we can name so many, right?
	Well, I certainly hope you get resolution of it.
	I would love to see you come back here.
	I feel like this is a battle you can fight legally through lawyers right back here at home with your daughter and your animals, your pets, and your country, Tara.
	I hope you're able to do that.
	I hope you're open-minded to it.
	I hope so too.
	But we need to ask, you know, we need to ask that the Biden regime basically is what has become.
	They need to stop targeting people the way they are.
	I mean, and look at the domestic terrorism, the way they're going after people that are considered MAGA.
	You know, I'm not a Trump supporter and I'm not a MAGA, but I don't believe they should be persecuted any more than I should be persecuted for my political beliefs.
	You know, I love my country too, but I want it to be better.
	And right now, we're slowly seeing our freedom of speech being pulled away from us.
	And, you know, the whole movement towards disinformation and deciding, being a filter, and deciding who gets to know what.
	That's not healthy.
	And it's not, you know, it's not good.
	So I mean, I will say, like, Tara, you realize you understand where you've moved, right?
	In terms of the citizenry being targeted, not being able to access information.
	I have never.
	Wait until you try to access the internet.
	Wait until you try to do a Google search on Putin's background.
	Things are very different over there.
	And you may come to learn firsthand that, as I said, you've jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire.
	Our two countries are going to be able to do it.
	Well, let's bring it back.
	Let's bring it back, though, to the fact that Joe Biden was a U.S. Senator and I was a U.S. Senate aide.
	He raped me in the U.S. Congress.
	I had nothing to do with Russia or any other foreign country.
	I try to get help.
	I try to come forward.
	And instead, I'm being sidelined and being silenced.
	And when I try to go through a process of, you know, testifying, you know, I get targeted.
	And he's weaponizing the DOJ and FBI, not just against me, but others.
Jumping Into the Fire 00:02:40
	Your particular circumstances, I understand.
	I understand.
	But there is no comparison when it comes to human rights on the record of the United States of America and the record of Putin's Russia.
	Period.
	As you know, I wish you all the best.
	I want to stay in touch and please let us know how you do with all of this.
	All right.
	Thank you very much.
	Thanks.
	All right, to be continued.
	When we come back, Greg Jarrett from Fox News is here.
	He's a lawyer as well.
	He's going to talk about this, his new book, and much, much more.
	Okay, so fantastic.
	HBO Max, Prime Video, Sky Showtime, you name it.
	You get the whole family, and it works over the whole.
	On the phone, on the phone, on the phone, on the phone, on the phone, on the phone, on the phone, on the phone, on the phone, on the phone, on the phone.
	Alente works in the whole EU and EUS.
	All you need is net.
	And Alente, then.
	Three months, 79 kroner per month.
	No binding, just TV and streaming.
	Just like you want to have it.
	Gå inn på alente.no og teste i sommer.
	Tilbudsprisen på 79 kroner får du i tre måneder.
	Deretter gjelder normalpris på 499 kroner per måned.
	Greg is out with a new book titled The Trial of the Century.
	And it's not about O.J. Simpson, it's about something else which we'll get into and which has a lot of lessons for what's happening right now in the United States.
	Greg, so good to see you.
	Hey, it's great to see you, Megan, and congratulations on your wonderful show that is so popular.
	And I'm, you know, grateful that you have me on.
	Oh, thank you.
	You look amazing.
	You look the same.
	You don't age.
	Hey, I'm two years away from 70 years old, which I'm dreading, but it's kind of you to say so.
	Oh, all right.
	So I know you've been listening, and Tara Reed there was, you know, tense at times.
Preying on Fears and Lies 00:09:53
	She made a lot of allegations.
	She said at the top that she only had a one-way ticket to Russia, which is kind of interesting.
	She went on to say all sorts of positive things about Putin and Russia's human rights, which was a bridge too far.
	But what did you make of the crux of her allegations here?
	Well, I was glad to see you, Challenger.
	We learned some incredibly interesting things.
	For example, the food in Russia is great.
	You can't beat that borscht.
	She seems to miss her pets more than her daughter, which I thought was interesting.
	Look, I know she loves her daughter.
	She misses her daughter.
	When you attend a Sputnik event with Maria Butina, who Enquire, I recall, magazine referred to as the international woman of whoopee, you know, convicted Russian agent.
	When you're doing all of that, you're claiming that you're there because Biden was going to put you in a cage.
	What you have done is put yourself in one gigantic cage with wolves at the door.
	I mean, Russia is one of the most oppressive societies on earth.
	Their human rights abuses are just egregious.
	I mean, they put political dissenters in, you know, the gulags.
	People still disappear in the dark of the night if they dare to voice opposition to Vladimir Putin.
	You know, look, I've been to Russia.
	I know what it's all about.
	It is not the place of refuge.
	It is a place of, frankly, of evil.
	Now, look, there's some great parts of Russia that are worth visiting.
	And as you pointed out, Americans are free to go there.
	We have American businesses who've set up offices there.
	You've got more than 100,000 Americans working in Russia and so forth.
	She's entitled to go there, but applying for citizenship and claiming that she's only there because she'll be put in a cage by Biden in the United States.
	Sorry, but I don't buy that.
	That's the thing.
	So it's like, I feel for Tara Reed and what she's gone through since she came forward as a Biden accuser very much.
	But to then take it to, I'm going to go to this lovely place where they respect human rights as opposed to America, you know, pointing out Maria Butini was in solitary confinement.
	Why don't you talk about like Alexei Navalny, who's looking at a year in prison with zero visits from anybody, who's been poisoned, you know, he says by Putin, we believe by the government over there, the torture of citizens over there, we got into the gays.
	Yes, now it's technically not illegal to be gay in Russia, but it was just a few years ago they were trying to cleanse gays from existence in Chechnya.
	You're not allowed to openly praise homosexuality or describe it as normal over there.
	We could go down the list of what they do.
	And not to mention, like when I was there, the Russian citizens were saying to me, We can't get outside information.
	They shut down the websites.
	So we can't.
	And just in the Ukraine war, Greg, they shut down Telegram because Telegram would not comply with the Russian mandate that it open up all of its user files to the Russians, give them the keys so they could see the private communications of all Russian citizens.
	I mean, this is the kind of thing they do over there.
	And she's been there for a week and is kind of saying like, it's so pretty and the food is so good and I'm home.
	Yeah, wait till she spends a Russian winter.
	And, you know, she doesn't speak any Russian.
	Yeah, Gaboro Poruski, maybe that's about all she knows how to ask.
	I sense that she will pretty quickly come to regret her decision and likely will reverse course.
	It can be a very lonely place there for an individual such as herself.
	But, you know, and she's she's intelligent.
	I mean, your conversation was in ways interesting.
	I totally agree with her when she argues that the Biden administration has weaponized government for political purposes.
	And we've seen that with the FBI, Merritt Garland's Department of Justice, the IRS.
	You know, I think they're running a protection racket for the Biden family.
	And of course, they always have the witting accessories, the mainstream media that is more than willing to do their bidding.
	So, you know, her point about that was absolutely valid.
	But Russia is not the answer.
	I mean, literally, they've killed journalists in Russia for reporting the wrong information.
	They lock them up.
	They don't have free access.
	I mean, you go over to listen to a Russian press conference and it's truly like, Mr. Putin, just as wonderful as we think you are, are you even more wonderful?
	Could you tell us about that?
	That's how Russian state TV is.
	That's how the Russian press is.
	It's all controlled by the Kremlin.
	So, I mean, it's just, I don't, I feel like the odds of Tara Reed, and of course, I don't want to get ahead of my skis because I have no firsthand information about what contacts she's had with the Russians, but the odds of the Russians finding this poor single mom who had publicly made allegations of abuse against her first husband.
	She had to flee.
	She had to change her name, who devoted her life to helping abused women.
	She's got her cats.
	She loved her horse and said, oh, she wrote some nice things about Putin in a blog or a book.
	Let's turn her into an agent.
	Like, how?
	Who is she going to exploit out there in her house in California for information?
	It's just, it makes no sense.
	To me, what makes more sense is they're taking advantage of a woman who's been all but destroyed by the vicious left and media in this country and preying on her fears to lead her to believe something is afoot at the hands of the U.S. government.
	Yeah, I think you've put your finger on it, as you always do, Megan.
	And I think that's a pretty fair analysis of what's going on here.
	And I, you know, I do fear that she's led a troubled life, but she is now being manipulated and she doesn't see it.
	And you tried your best to sort of point it out to her.
	And Tara, there's some holes in your plan, you said.
	Yeah.
	Some gaping holes as big as a Grand Canyon.
	She's just been through it, Greg.
	You know, this is what the media does.
	They destroy you.
	She, she, yes, as I pointed out, there were other accusers against Joe Biden.
	We're all familiar with his weirdness when it comes to young women.
	But her allegation was much more explicit, that he stopped her in a Senate hallway.
	She was trying to give him his gym bag.
	She was one of his aides, that he shoved her up against the wall, that he said, come on, man, I heard you like me.
	That he then digitally penetrated her, lifted up her skirt right there in the middle of the Senate corridor, which is what many people found unbelievable.
	I asked her about all of that in our 2020 interview.
	It's on our YouTube feed, one of the first offerings we had.
	And she says it happened.
	And then she said he threatened her.
	He threatened her at the end of the exchange.
	So the media turned.
	She had to be destroyed, Greg.
	Whether she's telling the truth or not, she had to be destroyed.
	No, and we certainly saw that unfold.
	And I do have empathy for her.
	I have no inside information about the truth of her accusations, but she was certainly treated different by the mainstream liberal media than comparable accusations toward Donald Trump.
	Or Christine Blasey Ford.
	Yeah.
	And yeah, excellent point to make.
	And so, you know, I do think she has been victimized in a great many ways.
	And I'm, you know, concerned that she's being victimized yet again in a very different way.
	Yeah.
	I want her to come back here.
	If they try to slap some BS charges on her, the lawyers will handle it.
	That's the way it's supposed to be done.
	I don't think she really wants to be a Russian citizen.
	I think she's gotten herself spun up into a real fear cycle that's proven very damaging to her and her family.
	And, you know, I've spoken with friends of hers.
	By the way, her story about Joe Biden was confirmed.
	She told, I shouldn't say confirmed, but it was repeated as told to them by friends who knew her at the time.
	And I've spoken with one of them.
	Now, that was considered dispositive when E. Jean Carroll came forward against Trump with that story about Bergdorf Goodman.
	But in the case of Tara Reed, no, she's a psycho.
	She's a Russian operative.
	And anyway, so I hope she comes back home and people can find it in their hearts to forgive the things, you know, whatever they're holding against her.
	She doesn't.
	I hope so too.
	And I wish her the very, very best.
	You know, because if you read any profile about her, it's abundantly clear she's had a very difficult life and you can't help but have sympathy and empathy for her.
	So let's talk, though, about the broader scope of what she was trying to say.
	You know, her comments about what's happening right now in America to whistleblowers with our intel agencies, you know, very extraordinary pushback by the administration on those who are trying to come forward and say things about Hunter Biden, about alleged influence peddling by Biden's family members when he was VP, all of which gets suppressed, mocked by the mainstream media.
Whistleblower Pushback Intensifies 00:15:30
	I mean, it's normally just totally ignored, but to the extent they cover it, they just mock it.
	And yet there have emerged some real questions over the past month alone, Greg, about whether there really was an influence peddling scheme going around, at least around the then VP, and that may have actually involved then-sitting Vice President Joe Biden.
	Yes.
	And in fact, the Oversight Committee has in the course of four and a half months dug up more information and made public than Joe Biden's Department of Justice and Christopher Wray's FBI.
	And that's, I think, just the tip of the iceberg.
	You know, they disclosed $10 million flowing into, you know, some 20 shell companies and LLCs that was then shuffled around throughout a bunch of them and then distributed to up to nine members of the Biden family.
	Now, the question, there were a lot of questions.
	You know, what was this country buying?
	What was Joe Biden selling?
	What was Hunter Biden and Jim Biden selling?
	And why were these family members getting this money?
	You know, as Chairman Cummer pointed out, there appears to be no other legitimate purpose for these LLCs than to be a receptacle for truckloads of cash coming from foreign adversaries.
	And, you know, I keep laughing every time I see a television host or a member of the media say, well, it's legal to have an LLC.
	Sure, it's legal.
	But if it exists for the purpose of hiding the original source of cash, that's money laundering.
	And the other excuse that members in the media love to say, well, there's no evidence that Joe Biden received any cash into his bank account.
	As you know, you're a fine lawyer, Megan.
	That's irrelevant under the law.
	It is a crime for a public servant to misuse his office to confer a benefit in exchange for money to himself or his family.
	He doesn't have to receive the cash.
	If the cash goes to his family members, it's still a crime.
	It's a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
	It's conspiracy to commit bribery, not to mention the FARA violations that are involved, the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
	So these are vacuous excuses, but the media is always ready to offer them up at every turn to protect Joe Biden.
	The first thing they go to is, okay, no proof about Joe Biden, not a hint about Joe Biden as opposed to his many family members, and no proof that he worked to change policy as VP to help China, to help Romania, these countries that were funneling the money according to these allegations to Biden family members.
	So, you know, where was the bribery must include a quid pro quo?
	What were these countries getting?
	My reaction to that is, well, why?
	Let's have an investigation.
	Why is it just, there's no proof.
	Right, of course there isn't.
	We're just starting.
	Yeah, no, you're absolutely right, which is why it is so vitally important that both the oversight and the judiciary committees in the House, which just commenced in January their investigations because Republicans retook control of the House of Representatives, why those hearings and investigations are so critical.
	You know, Americans need to know, as Richard Nixon said so famously, is their president a crook.
	And, you know, the House, as well as the Senate, they have constitutional authority under their oversight duties to conduct these investigations.
	They are not a witch hunt.
	They are an attempt to uncover more evidence that already exists that the Biden family, particularly Hunter Biden, was engaged in the selling out of America.
	You know, promises of influence, promises of access in exchange for money.
	And, you know, it's important, I think, this confrontation between Christopher Wray and James Gomer over what appears to be a very important document, a document.
	Let's talk about that.
	I don't know if my audience is up to speed on that, but things are getting very tense between House Oversight and the director of the FBI because House Oversight said to the FBI director, hand over this document.
	The document is hard to decipher from where I sit.
	They haven't released that much info on it.
	It's called an FD-1023 form, and it is submitted by a confidential informant containing unsubstantiated allegations about President Biden and his family.
	The FBI has it, and the House Oversight Committee wants to see it.
	And Christopher Wray has not even been confirming that it exists, that he has one of these confidential informant documents alleging misdeeds by Joe Biden himself and family.
	He hasn't been confirming it even exists until now.
	Now he finally, as the House was zeroing in, pushing him, saying, we've given you a subpoena.
	You answer to us.
	Give us the document.
	He said, you can come here to review it.
	So now he's confirmed it does exist.
	And the House is saying, that's not good enough.
	You can't make us come there to review it.
	The FBI is saying, oh, it involves a confidential informant.
	So you got to come here.
	Otherwise, the name could get out.
	And FBI's or House Oversight is saying, no, that's not okay.
	And we will hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt of Congress if he does not fork over the document, which at least we now know exists.
	So what are we supposed to glean from all that?
	The FBI is taking the position, trust us.
	I mean, who with an ounce of intelligence would ever trust the FBI after the evidence of misfeasance and malfeasance that we have seen unfolding over the last several years?
	And it's not just the malicious, aberrant behavior of the FBI during the Russia hoax, using a phony dossier as a pretext to try to destroy a sitting president of the United States.
	No, it's more than that.
	It's the FBI directing and pressuring social media companies to censor a story to help Joe Biden get elected.
	And it succeeded.
	And you've got, you know, a whole host of whistleblowers lining up to talk about how the FBI buried incriminating evidence of Biden family influence peddling schemes, put it under lock and key with nobody able to see it.
	So, you know, when the FBI says, oh, we looked into this allegation in the 1023 form and there's nothing to it, I wouldn't believe Christopher Wray for a moment that the FBI exercised due diligence in properly investigating.
	And that's why James Comer and the Oversight Committee aren't trusting the FBI either.
	They've squandered trust.
	Trust is earned.
	They don't have it anymore.
	Just look at the polling data.
	You know, the FBI has an abysmal approval rating because Americans are smart and they've seen what they've done.
	So look, right now, this is not responsive to the subpoena.
	There's no legitimate basis to resist.
	It's an unclassified document.
	If there's concern about a confidential informant, you can redact the name.
	But there are two choices here: criminal contempt of Congress or civil contempt of Congress.
	If it's criminal, that's problematic because it goes to the U.S. attorney in D.C. who reports to Merrick Garland.
	And that U.S. attorney was appointed by Joe Biden, who is the subject of the disputed document.
	Oh my gosh.
	And, you know, the person who would be held in contempt also reports to Joe Biden and Merrick Garland.
	Merrick Garland won't do anything about a criminal contempt.
	So the alternative is civil contempt.
	You file a lawsuit, you go to a federal judge.
	And if you're lucky and find an impartial one, he might just well order Christopher Wray to cough up the document that Congress is entitled to have.
	Let's talk about this document.
	Is this the same document that Comer was touting about two weeks ago, saying, I've got it, there is a document.
	It came from a whistleblower who is saying that they might be able to prove bribes, that Joe Biden accepted bribes.
	This is the same document that they're arguing over right now.
	It is.
	It is a document, if you could just put it into one sentence, that is based on a reliable confidential informant that the government has used before to the government's benefit.
	And he says there was an agreement, a bribery agreement.
	Joe Biden would institute or confer a policy decision in the United States that would benefit this foreign government in exchange for money.
	As I say, that's bribery.
	It's also, as you well know, selling out to a foreign government if it's supported by evidence.
	That's a big if.
	We don't know that, granted you.
	But if it is, it's also an impeachable offense.
	Remember what that is, treason, bribery, high crimes, and misdemeanor.
	So bribery is a basis for an impeachment proceeding against the president of the United States, even though the action is.
	Just to trace the origin.
	Just so I'm sure I'm clear on where this came from.
	So that allegation was a whistleblower.
	Some whistleblower came forward and said, look at this document.
	I got this document, and this document has information from a confidential informant that allegedly shows a bribery scheme, including the then Vice President Joe Biden.
	And then Comer, the head of oversight, went on with Maria Bartaromo, and she asked him about all of this document and so on.
	And he told her that they could not track down the actual confidential informant, that the whistleblower, I think he knows the whistleblower, and like the person who turned over the document, but that he couldn't track down the actual confidential informant making the allegations inside the document and said, look, these guys don't tend to want to be on the front page or be all that findable because they're operating inside of the intel world.
	And then it made all like, then people were mocking Comer, like, you lost the confidential informant.
	You're such a dope.
	That's not really what happened at all.
	He's saying, how am I supposed to find essentially this spy who's producing the document?
	I only know from the whistleblower that there is a document and I want to see the document and have the FBI investigate whether any of this is true.
	Which justifies the subpoena, which was duly authorized by Congress.
	They're, you know, they're entitled to see it.
	They're entitled to know it.
	Christopher Ray is essentially saying, well, you can come over here, maybe a handful of people, and we'll put you in a skiff and maybe we'll show you the document.
	I'm skeptical of all that.
	But again, the subpoena is duly authorized.
	And in my judgment as a lawyer, and I don't know if you'll agree, but you're a great lawyer.
	You got to comply with the subpoena.
	You got to comply with it.
	Steve Bannon had to comply with the subpoena, was held in criminal contempt when he didn't and was prosecuted for it.
	So, you know, you can't have it both ways that it's only enforceable against a Republican, but not, you know, against, you know, a Democrat or somebody that Democrats embrace.
	Now, she, Maria, was asking him about, well, I mean, you could, you could bring forth maybe the whistleblower, you could do something.
	And Comer had some thoughts on what's been happening to whistleblowers right now coming forward with allegations against Joe Biden or top officials in the administration or Joe Biden's family, what have you, because we have a whole separate investigation into Hunter Biden and his alleged crimes when it comes to taxes, when it comes to guns, et cetera.
	And there have been whistleblowers there who are saying that they're slow rolling the investigation into Hunter on those.
	So we have a bunch of whistleblowers.
	And there was an interesting exchange.
	And this is kind of what Tara Reed was talking about on what's happening to the many whistleblowers.
	Listen to this.
	Nine of the 10 people that we've identified that have very good knowledge with respect to the Bidens, they're one of three things.
	Maria, they're either currently in court, they're currently in jail, or they're currently missing.
	So it's of the utmost importance that the FBI work with us to be able to try to identify what research they've done, what investigations they've done, because we have people that want to come forward, but honestly, Maria, they fear for their lives.
	I'm sorry, but that does go back to what Tara Reed was saying, that she sees herself as a whistleblower, that she doesn't trust this administration, and she doesn't want to be in one of those three categories he just listed.
	Sure.
	Look, James Comer knows a whole lot more than he's disclosing, and in fact, said so last night on our air.
	I suspect he has a pretty good idea of who the confidential informant is, but he is worried about the backlash, the punishment, the retaliation that many of these whistleblowers have faced.
	And all you have to do is look at the FBI whistleblower who came forward and he is and his entire team that was investigating for years the Hunter Biden IRS case, failure to pay taxes, tax fraud.
	They were removed from the investigation after he blew the whistle and said the Department of Justice, Joe Biden's team, was interfering and exercising political favoritism and slow walking an investigation that has now gone on for more than five years.
	So, I mean, it's self-evident that it's been slow walked, right?
	I mean, how do you explain a five-year-long investor investigation of Hunter Biden and his influence peddling and his tax fraud and so forth in the face of overwhelming evidence on his laptop alone and no criminal charges have been brought?
	You know, charges against people who broke the law on January 6th were brought very quickly.
The Hunter Biden Tape Mystery 00:11:54
	Somebody on our air last night said, you know, so quickly, in fact, that some of them have already been convicted and served time and been released.
	Right.
	And yet Hunter Biden, nothing.
	Absolutely nothing.
	So I will say for the record that, again, Kirby, responding to questions about Biden corruption, weighed in.
	This is what he said.
	There was a Harvard Harris hole this month that found that 53% of the public, including a fourth of Democrats, believe, quote, Joe Biden was involved with his son in an illegal influence peddling scheme.
	There's, of course, evidence that the president interacted with his relatives, associates from China, Mexico, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine.
	So what do you say to the majority of Americans who believe that the president is himself corrupt?
	Wow, yes.
	Can I take that question?
	The president has spoken to this.
	The president has spoken to this.
	And there's nothing to these claims.
	How does he know?
	How does he know?
	And can you believe the snickering by the White House press corps?
	Yeah, of course.
	You know, they're on Joe Biden's side.
	They are, as I described earlier in our discussion, witting accessories to the cover-up and the protection racket that's being run.
	Joe Biden has already, there's nothing to it.
	He's already spoken about it.
	Joe Biden has consistently said that he knew nothing about his son's business deals overseas and was not involved.
	Really?
	White House records during the Obama administration show that more than 80 of Hunter Biden's business partners and overseas clients had meetings with Joe Biden at the White House.
	There are photographs.
	There are other records that demonstrate that Joe Biden, the big guy, was not just involved.
	He was the cornerstone.
	He was the pivot point for these influence peddling schemes.
	And it's ludicrous to claim otherwise.
	And yet, I saw an interview on MSNBC the other night questioning Joe Biden.
	It was a sit-down.
	And of course, you had nothing whatsoever to do with any of that, the host said.
	You know, I just laughed.
	I mean, all you can do is laugh.
	They are so in the pocket of the Democratic Party and Joe Biden that, you know, they just do his dirty work for him.
	Okay, now we have agreed that when one receives a subpoena, unless one has valid legal objections that are registered by a lawyer in response to said copina, said subpoena, one must respond and comply.
	And this is what Trump is accused of not doing in connection with the Fed's probe into documents he took with him from the White House and kept at Mar-a-Lago.
	There's news on that today as well.
	The media is hyperventilating over an alleged tape that they say Trump is on that they admit they haven't heard.
	But on this tape, reports CNN, reports the New York Times, reports the Washington Post, is allegedly Trump in 2021 discussing a sensitive military document he kept after leaving the White House.
	They say, again, having not heard the recording, but they report that Trump suggested on the recording he knew the document was secret and admits that he had not declassified it.
	They say this was held, this was this happened during a meeting he held in July 2021 with people helping his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, write a memoir of his 10 months in the White House.
	They met.
	Meadows wasn't there, but Trump reportedly began railing about the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Mark Milley, and then began referencing a document he had with him saying it had been compiled by Milley and was related to attacking Iran.
	On the recording, allegedly, Trump's comments suggest he would like to share the info, but he is aware of limitations on his ability post-presidency to declassify records, which they are suggesting is an admission that that document and presumably the others from which it came in the trove at Mar-a-Lago had not been declassified by Trump as he now claims in excusing his behavior in connection with this.
	And aha, this is the gotcha moment.
	You've got certain legal experts like former Mueller probe investigator Andrew Weissman saying if this is true, the game is over.
	There is no way he will not be charged.
	Do you agree?
	I never agree with anything that comes out of the mouth of Andrew Weissman, who is a hyper-partisan and to me, one of the most unscrupulous and unprincipled lawyers I've ever witnessed.
	He was leading up the Mueller witch hunt.
	Look, as for the tape itself, I reserve judgment and I am skeptical.
	Why?
	Because this is the same media that spent three years promising us that Trump was a Russian agent who colluded with Vladimir Putin in the bowels of the Kremlin.
	And of course, it all turned out to be wrong.
	But the New York Times, the Washington Post won Pulitzer Prizes for getting the story fundamentally wrong, while those of us who wrote books like The Russia Hoax and Witch Hunt were mocked, ridiculed, and demeaned and declared liars by the mainstream media.
	Well, turned out everything in both my books were 100% correct.
	Somebody sent me a message the other day.
	We could have saved a lot of time and money if John Durham had simply reprinted your books.
	You know, so I'm not sure that I trust the context of an alleged tape and what is contained therein.
	Moreover, Trump's position has always been that he is authorized to take whatever he wants under the Presidential Records Act, which is a civil, not a criminal statute.
	And indeed, that was the position for the last 10 years until the Mar-a-Lago raid of the Department of Justice established in the Bill Clinton case, in which he took that's why they like this alleged admission that he's allegedly admitting, I don't actually believe that.
	I don't have the ability to declassify post-presidency, which is another alleged admission that he didn't do it while president.
	But I'll tell you something, Greg, when I look at this, I like you want to see the actual actual tape.
	Yeah.
	But what does it mean?
	So it could be a, maybe he forgot.
	Maybe he forgot that he had issued a declassification order on something like this.
	I don't know where the document came from.
	Did it come from those same Mar-a-Lago files or someplace else?
	And secondly, how do we know Trump just didn't want to show him the document?
	So he's just like, oh, I can't show that to you.
	It's classified.
	Like, how, who the hell?
	I don't know if this is an admission or a manipulation by Trump to sort of dangle something sexy and exciting in front of the minions around him, but say, I'm not showing it to you, losers, right?
	Who the hell knows?
	You've got to know the context, as you say, Megan.
	You got to know who's there.
	Why are they having this discussion?
	What's the purpose of it?
	And, you know, if you've ever spent any time around Donald Trump, you know, in casual conversation, he's very loose with his words and free with his thoughts.
	And, you know, I'm concerned that the reporting so far on this is based on no knowledge of the context and the intent behind the words spoken.
	And that's critical, you know, in criminal law, as you well know.
	You know, it's intent and deliberation and willfulness and so forth that are key to things like that.
	Well, the other question is: how do the Washington Post and the New York Times, how do they have it?
	Where'd they get it?
	Where'd they get this tape?
	His Trump's lawyer spoke out last night on CNN and kind of raised that point.
	Take a listen.
	You won't even say whether this document was declassified.
	And in fact, there is a tape that your client has said that the document is still classified.
	So you can make that argument, but only if you are also trying to establish that this document is declassified.
	No, I am not going to sit here and dignify leaks that are incomplete, that are unfair, and that are dishonest.
	This is a leak campaign.
	And you guys have the access to somebody from DOJ or FBI.
	You're touting the official line that they want you to pursue because they want to legitimize something that was never criminal.
	And for no other president has there ever been a document retention issue that's been treated as a criminal investigation.
	DOJ is trying to justify this persecution of the current administration's leading opposition by saying, oh my God, he had these sensitive materials that he shouldn't have had.
	And then they leaked to you guys vivid details of a document that they say is classified.
	Remember when Merrick Garland after the Mar-a-Lago raid was like, we don't leak, you know, trying to protect the integrity of the Justice Department as stories about what was in the documents kept popping up in the Washington Post and the New York Times.
	And here we are again.
	Yeah.
	I mean, Jim Trustee, who's a fine lawyer, was making the same argument I was alluding to a moment ago.
	You know, the Department of Justice in the Bill Clinton case went to federal court.
	And a judge agreed with their arguments that, you know, a former president can pretty much take whatever he wants.
	The other thing you have to understand is that Trump didn't pack up the boxes and send them off to Mar-a-Lago.
	He's actually under law not allowed to.
	That is a service by law performed by the Government Services Administration, which is the GSA.
	And they're an incompetent agency to decide what's classified, what's not, what goes where.
	And that's the reason, Megan, why, you know, we've seen so many other, you know, wayward papers end up in locations where they likely shouldn't be, whether it's, you know, Joe Biden in four different locations, whether it's Mike Pence.
	We saw it in the Bill Clinton case, Barack Obama, apparently.
	You know, that is a system that needs to be fixed.
	But the overriding point here is that Merrick Garland decided he was going to criminalize a civil statute, the Presidential Records Act.
	The proper remedy under the law is if you're not getting documents you want under a subpoena, you go to a civil judge and you file a motion to compel production of the documents.
	You don't turn around and send a phalanx of armed FBI agents under a warrant that was overly broad to a former president's house to seize the documents.
	And there were people reportedly at the FBI, top officials, who told Garland, you really can't do this.
	He offered to give us everything we want.
	All we have to do is go back there and take them.
	But that foiled Garland's plan.
	He wanted to criminalize a civil violation.
	This is so much sexier.
	And, you know, the Democrats think it's their ace in the hole, this investigation and the other criminal investigations that they're launching against him right now.
	All right, stand by.
Daily Wire vs Elon Musk 00:03:33
	More with Greg Jarrett coming up, including his new book, The Trial of the Century.
	I love this.
	And Greg will tell us who his very favorite lawyer of all time is and how he would be looking at some of the biggest legal issues we're debating right now in this country.
	Here with me today, longtime Fox News host and legal analyst and friend, Greg Jarrett.
	Greg's out with a new book titled The Trial of the Century.
	It's a book about a trial that lasted only a week back in the 1920s, but still has wide-ranging implications today.
	Before I ask you about Trial of the Century, can I ask you about a dispute that's unfolding right now on Twitter that it's getting a lot of conservatives upset and concerned?
	It's between the Daily Wire and Elon Musk.
	And tonight, the Daily Wire, they struck a deal with Twitter to air Matt Walsh's What is a Woman?
	It was going to air on Twitter.
	They were going to offer for free.
	Normally, you have to subscribe to the Daily Wire to get it.
	They're going to offer for free.
	And they paid Twitter, I guess, for this opportunity.
	And then according to Jeremy Boring, who's CEO of Daily Wire, they were told, nope, never mind, because there's two instances in this movie in which someone is, quote, misgendered.
	And that just means you refer to a trans person by their original, you know, their actual gender, not the one that they claim to have adopted.
	That is crazy to me.
	I can't believe Elon himself knows about this and is allowing it because he bought Twitter in part to resurrect the Babylon B account, which had been suppressed for tweeting out Rachel Levine, that Biden administration trans person is a man.
	So how can it be that what do you make of this?
	Because conservatives are freaking out that Elon is not running the ship the way they thought.
	Yeah, well, my idol, Clarence Darrow, would be outraged.
	He cared more about free speech than any other individual right in America.
	And Elon Musk has arguably betrayed the free speech principles upon which he decided to buy Twitter because it was being abused.
	Conservatives were being shadow banned.
	There was wholesale censorship, suppression, silencing of dissent and so forth.
	And he bought it to turn it around and change it and make it a venue for the free exchange of ideas and information.
	So if Walsh's accusations are true, then he's violated the very principles that he was advocating.
	Now, I agree with you.
	I'm not sure Elon Musk knew anything about it.
	And, you know, he may be unfairly tarnished and feathered here without an opportunity to properly respond and look into it.
	And I hope he does, because I do think that Twitter has a golden opportunity to adhere to the principles of free speech.
	If you can't refer to a trans person by the pronoun that captures their actual biological gender, we've crossed a bizarre and troubling Rubicon on Twitter.
	I have to believe he's off-focused on Tesla today or SpaceX, whatever, you know, like the Rockets.
	He's got like, there's just no way that Elon knows about this.
	I just can't believe it.
	But Twitter right now is saying in the Daily Wire, all right, you can air it, but we're not going to support it.
	We're going to suppress it.
	We're not going to, even your supporters who follow you, your followers won't be able to see it.
	So what is that?
	Anyway, more to follow on this tomorrow as we see what actually happens.
	All right.
Evolution of Trial Tactics 00:04:05
	Let's talk about the book, Trial of the Century, and Clarence Darrow.
	I remember growing up, if I had an argument with my Nana, she'd say, who are you?
	Clarence Darrow?
	What do you think you are?
	Clarence Darrow.
	And there's a reason his name is the equivalent with the standard for great lawyering.
	It's captured in this book.
	Yeah.
	You know, I was a young teenager when on a summer day, I plucked a book off my father's densely packed bookshelf.
	And it was a biography on the great Clarence Darrow, who I'd never heard of.
	And, you know, I sat down and I started reading it.
	The more I read, the more fascinated I became.
	And it was 520 pages by the great writer Irving Stone.
	And as soon as I finished the 520 pages, I turned back to the beginning and started all over again.
	I've revisited that book throughout my life.
	So I guess you could say this Trial of the Century, my new book, is more than 50 years in the making.
	Towards the end of the biography, there was a chapter on the Scopes Monkey Trial, 1925 Dayton, Tennessee.
	It was actually Darrow's most famous trial of the many famous trials that he had.
	And it told the story of how in the 1920s, the religious fervor sort of swept the nation and they began banning books in science, particularly evolution.
	And the state of Tennessee took it a step further and made it a crime for a school teacher to utter the word evolution in a classroom, even though there was a subchapter on evolution in the state approved textbooks.
	There's a picture of 25-year-old John Scopes, school teacher.
	He was promptly arrested, handcuffed, taken away, and criminally charged with teaching evolution.
	And the great fundamentalist leader, William Jennings Bryan, three-time presidential candidate who had helped pass the law, was so happy about it.
	He volunteered to prosecute and convict Scopes.
	That incensed Clarence Darrow as he's sitting in his Chicago office.
	And he volunteers to, for free, defend John Scopes in what became a trial of the century, a titanic clash.
	There they are together at the beginning of the trial, sitting in the courtroom, Darrow and Bryant, this titanic clash between two epic figures in American culture in the 1920s, both lawyers, both poetic orators.
	And the climactic moment in the trial came when Darrow realized he's losing.
	He's got a biased judge, a biased juror.
	And he decides to call Brian, the prosecutor, to the witness stand.
	And the judge says, wait a minute, you can't do that.
	He's the prosecutor.
	Brian stands up and says, Your Honor, I have nothing to fear.
	I'm happy to testify as an expert on the Bible that everything in it should be taken literally.
	So the judge says, well, okay, but there are too many people in this courtroom.
	People are feigning because of the heat.
	I'm fearful that the courtroom is going to collapse onto the first floor.
	So he moves the trial outdoors to a stage leftover from July 4th activities.
	And you can see I printed 38 photographs from the trial in the book, 1925.
	Thousands of people standing out on the lawn in front of the courthouse.
	They are listening to this withering cross-examination by Clarence Darrow, who utterly destroyed William Jennings Bryan.
	The crowd, of course, they were all Brian's supporters.
	By the end, by the time the gavel bangs down, the crowd is surrounding Clarence Darrow and congratulating him.
Darrow's Indispensable Propositions 00:03:07
	They've changed their opinion.
	And Darrow looks back and there he sees Brian, a solitary figure standing alone, not a friend in the world, utterly broken.
	Days later, Brian lays down for a nap and he never wakes up.
	It's an incredible story.
	The New York Times at the time described it as the most amazing court scene in Anglo-Saxon history.
	It was the trial of the century then, and it still is now, Megan.
	I only have a short time left, Greg, but how do you think Clarence Darrow would see some of these issues that we're debating right now in this country, like the bans on critical race theory in schoolrooms, some of the stuff that DeSantis, who's anti-wokeness I support, but there's a question about whether he's gone too far in trying to shut down this kind of speech.
	I talk a lot about it in the book, especially the epilogue.
	Darrow would fight against the partisan censorship and political discourse, the polarizing disinformation campaigns, classroom indoctrination, the punitive cancel culture whereby, you know, conformity of thought now supplants robust debate in America.
	He would wage war against all of that.
	And you know what?
	My idol, Clarence Darrow, would win.
	You think that Darrow would be against the forced indoctrination of our children with messages about our country, how awful it is, and all the rest.
	How do you think he'd view the pushback?
	You know, this is something I've been divided on myself.
	Do we ban CRT because it's so pernicious and it's racist?
	Or do we let the teachers teach it and just leave it up to the parents to counterbalance?
	You know, I feel like Daryl wouldn't want just one side, America's terrible, being forced on children.
	But would he support the bans, do you think?
	Well, the problem is that there are disparate versions of critical race theory being taught in America.
	The more benign aspect of it teaches that, you know, we have to give lesson plans and our history books have to properly account for the shameful legacy of slavery and racism and segregation and Jim Crow laws and white supremacy.
	We cannot sanitize that.
	And Darrow would agree with that.
	But there are other aspects that are more extreme, such as, and I cite these in the book, specific examples, where students are being told that they fall into one of two groups based on the color of their skin, oppressors and the oppressed.
	And thus classrooms have become, in some places, venues of guilt and shame.
	Daryl would say that is fundamentally wrong.
	He would argue against it.
	Along the way, he would seek common ground because that's what Darrow always did.
	But paramount would be free speech, the indispensable proposition that no one should be told how to think.
Roger Ailes' Kindest Letter 00:03:50
	His personality jumps off of these pages, thanks to you.
	The stories about him make you fall in love with the guy in the way Greg Jarrett has.
	One of the things you write about him is as follows.
	I also found in Darrow the same human frailties and foibles that afflict us all.
	I identified with his flaws and failures just as I struggled with my own.
	And you write that despite devastating defeats that led to bouts of disillusion and anguish, Darrow persevered.
	Over time, he evolved into a heroic figure.
	That leads me to a story I've been dying to talk to you about, and that is what you've said publicly about Roger Ailes.
	I've been talking to him about talking to him, talking about him on the show quite a bit lately because of what's happening at Fox and all that.
	But I have been quick to point out that despite Roger's flaws, which have been, of course, well documented, the man obviously was a television genius, but he also had a huge heart.
	And your story that you've spoken about publicly is one of the ones that's always stayed with me about the goodness of Roger Ailes and how he was such a complicated figure.
	And I wonder if you'd be willing to talk about it here.
	Well, I've only talked about it once before publicly, but it's well known.
	I am an alcoholic.
	I've been sober now for nine years, and Roger saved my life together with the love and support of my two daughters and my wife, whom I adore.
	But Roger could have given up.
	What people don't know is you contacted Roger and said, you need to help Greg.
	And Roger was already doing that.
	And then you, I was away for three months at the Betty Ford Center getting the treatment I so desperately needed.
	And you sent me the kindest letter I've ever received.
	You took the time in longhand to send me a letter, which I still have.
	And that lifted my spirits and sustained me in my recovery process.
	And it was really one of the kindest acts anybody has ever conferred on me.
	And God bless you for doing that.
	I still have your letter and I will keep it always.
	I'm so touched by that.
	No, I don't want to make it about me.
	But people should know how thoughtful and kind and generous you are.
	And, you know, Darrow cared about humanity and charity and decency.
	Those were the principles he embraced.
	I didn't care that he was a liberal or agnostic.
	I'm neither one.
	It was his values that mattered to me.
	And it animated my own.
	And, you know, in many ways, you're just like Darrow.
	You care about people, Megan.
	Oh, well, you know what?
	It takes one to know one, Greg.
	You were always so kind to me at Fox through everything, thick and thin.
	And the story with Roger really embodied, I think, why a lot of us enjoyed working there for so long and enjoyed working for him, you know, warts and all, because when you fell down, he was there.
	He viewed it as a we problem, not as a you problem.
	Right.
	And there's just so few bosses like that out there today.
	There's so few who would see somebody who is faltering and arguably embarrassing the channel and say, let me help.
	Let's tackle this together, as opposed to you're done, 10-foot pole between us.
	And now having had, you know, other bosses past Roger, I see it all in an especially appreciative way.
Measuring a Man by His Best 00:01:16
	Yeah, absolutely.
	You know, he called up my wife and said, don't worry about a thing.
	The checks will keep coming.
	We're not going to pull the financial rug out from under you and your two lovely daughters.
	Roger's wife, Elizabeth, you know, said, would you like me to come over and sit with you?
	You know, these are the same Christian values that Clarence Darrow embraced, albeit as an agnostic.
	And, you know, you got to love somebody like that.
	Yeah, I know.
	It's complicated.
	You know, we take the measure of a man not by his lowest moment, but by the lifetime contributions to this earth, to our country and so on.
	And I want people to remember that about him and about all of us, hopefully, you and me included.
	I'm so glad to have you here and see you looking so well and doing so well.
	Thank you.
	Good luck with the book.
	Thank you.
	Trial of the century in bookstores nationwide and available online.
	And I appreciate your taking an interest in the book and your willingness to talk about it.
	I'll come back anytime.
	It's great to see you, my friend.
	Good to see you.
	Thanks for listening to the Megan Kelly Show.
	No BS, no agenda, and no

Chapters

00:00:50 Tara Reed Returns to Russia
00:02:42 Facing Airport Pickup Threats
00:15:16 Putin Credit and Sanctions
00:30:53 Malley's Confirmation Conversation
00:33:45 Seeking Citizenship Amidst Bashing
00:48:26 Freedom of Speech in Exile
00:51:06 Jumping Into the Fire
00:53:47 Preying on Fears and Lies
01:03:40 Whistleblower Pushback Intensifies
01:19:10 The Hunter Biden Tape Mystery
01:31:05 Daily Wire vs Elon Musk
01:34:38 Evolution of Trial Tactics
01:38:43 Darrow's Indispensable Propositions
01:41:51 Roger Ailes' Kindest Letter
01:45:41 Measuring a Man by His Best