What Meghan Markle Really Knew About Shock Allegations Against Her Father, and Alex Cooper's Terrible Marriage Advice, with Glenn Greenwald | Ep.1426

Welcome to the Megan Kelly show live on Sirius XM channel 111 every week day at Nice Hey everyone I'm Megan Kelly welcome to the Megan Kelly show unbelievable program coming up for you today. I'm still reeling by what I am reading this morning about the Megan Markle story which we're going to start with just also letting you know we've got new evidence today that Ilan Omar has committed immigration fraud. Now Trump is raising a serious question about whether she needs to be kicked out of Congress immediately because at a minimum her, it appears she's been using a fake name. Her team denies that it does appear she's using a fake name. She was sworn into Congress under a fake name. Who did we elect? Who is she? Who did we elect to Congress? Trump has got a point and we'll get into that in a minute. If you run a small business you know that managing daily cash flow is one of your biggest ongoing hurdles whether you are handling unexpected equipment repairs purchasing bulk inventory or waiting on unpaid invoices timing is everything and traditional banks while they move too slowly everybody knows that between weeks of tedious paperwork and endless corporate red tape legacy lenders can easily stall your momentum when you need capital the most. That's why you need to check out Cardiff. They deliver high speed working capital directly to business owners without the delay. Their simple online application takes just three minutes and checking your options will not affect your personal credit score. With over 20 years in business and more than 12 billion dollars funded nationwide Cardiff understands how entrepreneurs operate and they stand behind American founders every step of the way. If your business has been open for at least one year and generates at least $20,000 per month in revenue you can secure up to $500,000 in working capital approval in minutes funding same day head to cardiff.co. But we have got to start with the breaking news about Megan Markle's father Thomas Markle senior. He is reportedly under investigation for possessing reams of child sexual abuse material at his home in the Philippines. As detailed in the UK newspaper the son Thomas Markle junior that's Megan's half brother discovered the illicit material he says while searching for an old phone in boxes that included Thomas seniors belongings. He the son had last year moved to the Philippines down the road from his dad. Now his dad is currently in Florida in a rehab facility. He had to have his leg amputated not long ago. So his father is not in the Philippines but Thomas junior is and Thomas junior reports the son went to local detectives to alert them to the fact that he found quote hundreds if not thousands of examples of child sexual abuse material. The son reports that Thomas junior has told friends he uncovered a 15 minute video of naked girls who appeared to be 10 or 11 years old on an abandoned mobile phone. The son reporting that the girls were engaged in sex acts and Thomas junior also says he found three still pictures of naked girls of around the same age. Thomas junior was left quote a shaking wreck. He says by this discovery and reported his father to the local authorities. Markle senior again has been back here since May we are told that the FBI has been alerted to all of this as Markle senior is currently he is a US citizen and is currently in the United States. The latest information we had was that he had moved back to Pennsylvania but now is down in Florida rehabbing from the leg. The FBI we are told is set to launch its own investigation. He will be under arrest soon if they believe that these are his images and that he was in possession of them. I mean I'm I'm not sure how the international jurisdiction piece of it will affect whose case it is and I've got real questions about whether the Philippines will care. I mean that's kind of where people go there in Thailand who are interested in this kind of thing disgusting as it is. They're not exactly known for their tough law enforcement on this issue. Meghan Markle telling the New York Post today quote I am deeply distressed at the news that has come to light in the last 24 hours and my thoughts are with any children who may have been harmed and quote she goes on to say that there were similar allegations eight years ago that she's known about about. She's admitting that she's known about this for eight years. I have so many thoughts on this. She writes quote in 2018 a letter was sent to London's Metropolitan Police and Royalty and Specialist Protection. That letter was subsequently shared with me. It made troubling and disturbing allegations against my father and I was given assurances that these were being investigated. I hope it can now be understood that despite certain media publications distortion over the years any distance from my father and my choice to not allow him to have contact with our children was for one reason to protect them and quote okay so immediately the question must be asked did the Metropolitan Police London's Metropolitan Police actually have information that Meghan Markle's father was a child sex predator as recently as eight years ago and were they investigating him. It is being reported right now that the Metropolitan Police is saying it did not investigate him. It has never investigated him and it is not investigating him now. If that is true why would there have been a letter as she claims as you heard there suggesting that they were investigating him. If the Metropolitan Police in fact did not investigate Thomas Markle and is not investigating Thomas Markle then why did she say in 2018 a letter was sent to the Metropolitan Police and Royalty and Specialist Protection that letter was subsequently shared with me. It made troubling and disturbing allegations against my father. So the Metropolitan Police was made aware that her father was a child sex predator and it did not investigate. Now at that time he was living in Mexico. So did they alert the Mexican authorities and was a US citizen. So did they alert the FBI in 2018? What if anything was done by the Metropolitan Police and Royalty and Specialist Protection about a Prince of England's father-in-law being a child sex predator alleged. What did they do? That remains to be seen. They put out a statement earlier today saying they're aware of her allegation in this statement and they are investigating to see who if anyone had contact with her and who if anyone received if at all such a letter. Again what we're hearing now through the British press in its reports is that they've gotten the Metropolitan Police on record saying they did not investigate him and they are not investigating him. Now as for whether they received a letter and possibly shared it with Markle though she doesn't say it was Metropolitan Police that shared it with her. She says a letter was sent to them and it was subsequently shared with her. So she knew that they had received it in 2018 and someone we are presuming the Metropolitan Police though she doesn't say it shared it with her. So what did they do? Two questions. What did they do and what did she do? I'm reeling at this news. She's known she says for eight years that her father may be a child sexual abuser. That's what you are when you look at we used to call it kitty porn. You look at images of children in sex acts. You're a child abuser. You're a child sexual abuser. A child sexual abuse pervert and it I mean there are more questions to be asked because if that's your thing that's how you get off looking at pictures like that. I mean what percentage of those have not actually abused a child in person? I mean like physically with sexual will abuse. I want to tell you right now, Thomas Markle, senior. It's junior who is outing these allegations is now vehemently denying all of this. He is saying these are all lies that he hasn't been in possession of these laptops or phones in a long, long time. They were left in the Philippines. Anyone could have had access to them. And his daughter Samantha, whose Megan's half-older sister is coming out and hurling accusations at her brother, Thomas Jr. saying there was a falling out between he and Thomas the elder and that he's bitter because the father has cut him off financially and suggesting that that may be a motive here to hurt him. The father has spoken out, I mean, passionately, for lack of a better word to the Daily Mail, saying, I'll get to his statement in more detail, but just want to tell you a front saying, where do I go to get my reputation back? You know, I understand very well once allegations like these are made, they're out there. There's no retrieving them. There's no recuperating from them. And he sounds extremely distressed. I believe he's extremely distressed. Is he distressed because he's been outed as a child sexual abuser or is he distressed because he's been falsely labeled as the worst possible thing? One can be labeled. I'm going to get, again, into all the details of this. I'm giving you the broad-based story to kick things off. The other question, though, is what did Megan Markle do? Let me tell you what I think happened here. I believe her that she was told this in 2018. I don't know by whom, since she didn't name them. And I cannot believe that she did not spend the last eight years trying to get to the bottom of whether or not this was true. Genuinely, in all of my criticisms of Megan Markle, in all the time that I have looked at this person and found her to be an egotistical, narcissistic, small-minded, selfish, nasty bully, I never would have dreamed. She wouldn't do what was necessary to be done to protect children, potentially being sexually exploited by her own father. And that's absolutely what he was doing. Looking at child sexual abuse material is not a victimless crime. Obviously, you are creating a market for that material with every image that you download, pay for, obtain, and "enjoy." And if she had reason to believe her father was such a man, what did she do about it? Now, maybe she was told say nothing as the investigation pans out, but it's been eight years. So what did she do to follow up on that report with whomever told her? The Metropolitan Police, her husband's got some connections. What did they do to satisfy themselves that this either wasn't true after all, or if it was true to make sure he was getting arrested? It was her brother who came forward, not her. Again, the father's denying it. Maybe the brother made it up, but when did he make it up? Because the falling out with the brother just happened, according to Samantha Markle, and Megan Markle's telling us she had a heads-up about this in 2018. So let's assume, for purposes of argument, he's guilty. If this guy's into child sexual abuse material, and she knew about it in 2018, wouldn't you be all over the Metropolitan Police from that day to this asking what did you find? Who is investigating? Who is making sure? Because it's not her responsibility as his daughter to investigate this. How could she possibly? I'm not putting that on her. I'm asking what did she do to make sure investigation was indeed underway, and how it had concluded. This isn't eight days, eight weeks, eight months ago. It's eight years. What was she told? Because if she was told the investigation came to nothing, than her excuse of, this is why I never spent any time with him, looks a little flimsy. If she was satisfied, he wasn't this thing because somebody told her, didn't pan out, then why is she now telling us this is the reason she hasn't seen him in eight years? And if she wasn't told that it all came to nothing, what did she do to make sure he wasn't hurting kids in Mexico or the Philippines or then Florida? Truly, I am genuinely searching for an explanation to that question. I'm really thrown. You ask yourself, okay, it's your father? Do you report your father when something like this is brought to you? I think you do. I think the answer to that is clearly yes. You know, I was like, I can't even imagine. I lost my father when I was very young. Not that my father would ever do such a thing, but I just can't imagine saying, I will, and you're estranged from him. He's an adult and so are you. He's living in a different country or two in a different state in the union and you just shrug your shoulders and say, I don't know whether that's all she. I'm asking the question, what did she do? She did not put anything in her statement. And here is what I think happened. She was, this was a colossally stupid statement to make. Colossally fucking stupid. She rushed to get a statement out to convince us all we said mean things about her estrangedment from her dad unfairly. She had a really good reason for not wanting to be around him with her children. And she was so determined to prove to the press in particular the British press which has been raising this point about her estrangedment from her dad. She was so determined to show them all how unfair they'd been that she did not realize she was making herself look monstrous on another front, a far more important front. I don't, maybe that's why I'm coming at it from this angle because we've never made a big deal out of her estrangedment from her father. I never thought it was a particularly nice thing didn't seem to support her alleged overall commitment to family that they abandoned her father and Harry's for all those years. That's a minor point that we've made. But I mean, the main issues of Meghan Markle are just, you know, I mean, they're documented in their legion. And we've talked about the Met nauseam here like referred to my adjectives about her at the top of the show. But that has been a big storyline pushed by a lot of the UK press about how she abandoned her father. And he bent, he had two heart attacks and I think he had a stroke and then he lost his leg. And she's never gone to visit him and so on. And so people have been saying, oh my god, what kind of a heartless person. And clearly that got to her. So she rushed to issue this statement saying, aha, unbeknownst to all of you trolls. I had a good reason without realizing she was telling us all she appears to have sat by for the past eight years doing nothing while she believed her father was potentially participating in the abuse, the sexual abuse of young children by looking at pictures, videos, and God knows what else. This is stunning. I cannot imagine what King Charles and the royal family are feeling right now. What did Harry marry into is one of the questions being asked. And Harry too is under scrutiny now. What did he know? Truly, what did he know? This guy who's all about mental health and both of them have just, they have gone on and on about this social media, the protection of children. What did he do to protect children? Both of them have also been telling us since 2018 that the reason for their estrangement from Thomas Markle is his bad behavior around their wedding that you remember he was caught right before the wedding getting his suit tailored, getting ready, and it was pretty clear that he had cooperated with the paparazzi taking those photos. And then he denied it to Megan. She later came out with this and said this publicly. And they were, they felt betrayed. And then they believed that he had been selling stories to the tabloids. And she just said, I'm done. You know, I don't want anything to do with him because he's not doing the right thing here. And a lot of people had issues with that saying, you know, he's like, not the most sophisticated guy. He needed the money that the paparazzi comes along and offers you thousands of bucks for a photo of Megan or for a photo of you just getting ready. What's the harm? And felt she had abandoned him pretty quickly in the lead up to their wedding, which was in, I believe, May of 2018, if memory serves, April or May of 2018. But since then, they've been telling us that they separated from him because of that. And they didn't say, and there are also some other troubling issues that aren't appropriate for public discussion, but one day will be like wink, wink. We're working with authorities behind the scenes. Nothing. Okay. Here, in fact, is Harry in a 2022 Netflix documentary, blaming himself for the astrangement. Watch himself. She had a father before this. And now she doesn't have a father. And I showed it that because if Meg wasn't with me, then her dad would still be her dad. If it wasn't for me, her dad would still be her dad. Okay. And that was just a couple years ago that by Meghan Markle's written statement, they knew, can we just listen to it one more time? Listen to that one more time. He, according to Meghan Markle, he and she knew, she doesn't say Harry knew, but obviously she would have told her husband at this point that her father was potentially a child sexual abuse connoisseur. And they had been actively keeping their children away from him for that reason. Listen to it to it again. This is 2022. That's four years after she says they knew. Why is he saying that? I mean, is there a possibility she's lying about being told this in 2018? I mean, that's even crazier. I believe her. I believe her that she was told in 2018. There was some sort of an investigation underway. I think if that's not true, then it's even more bizarre. She took a risk of being criticized for not protecting children for eight years in order to make up a story about why she kept her kids away from him. That doesn't make sense to me. But I don't understand why they've been telling totally false stories ever since, as opposed to just being ambiguous. Here's what Megan told Oprah the year before that in 2021, three years after she allegedly got this letter during their infamous sit down. Did it feel like betrayal when you found out your father was working with the tablets? We were going to use the word betrayal. It's because when I asked him, when we were told by the comms team, this is a story that was going to be coming out, which by the way, the tabloids had apparently known for a month or so and decided to hold until the Sunday before our wedding because they wanted to create drama. We called my dad and I asked him and he said, "No, absolutely not." I said, "You know, the institution has never intervened for anything for us, but they can try to go in and kill this story. But if they do this once, we're not going to be able to use that same leverage to protect our own kids one day." He said, "No, absolutely not. He hadn't been talking to them." Yeah. So he basically lied to you. Well, and so when I said, "We won't be able to protect our own kids one day," and I said, "So I just need you to tell me, and if you tell me the truth, we can help." And he wasn't able to do that. And that for me has really resonated, especially now as a mother. I don't get it. I mean, first of all, that is all of her narcissistic tendencies right perfectly on display. The institution has never protected us. They've never done a thing to protect us. More grievance. Yeah, they've been so horrible to you, letting you live in their castle on their private grounds, allowing you to wear the crown jewels at your wedding. Like, just fucking stop, okay? So we've been unprotected. We've been unprotected. The institution has never done anything for us, but what she's saying there is, we have one shit that we can use with the royal family to run interference with the press. Just one, a lifetime one shit. And that she went to her dad, this unsophistic lighting director from California, who's now an elderly man and said, "I'll use it for you. I will use it to kill the stories about you cooperating with the paparazzi if you want me to, but you better know that that's the end of my chip. Your future grandchildren will not be protected because the royal family is going to come back to me and say, you used it on your dad, Thomas Markle. That was the only time we could ever go to the tabloids and we did it for your dad, which is, this is all fucking made up. What is she talking about? Right. Like, the royal family would be less inclined if they had stayed in the UK and been working royals to protect Princess Lily Bet and Prince Archie, actual potential heirs to the throne because they gave Thomas Markle that cover, that one time about working with the paparazzi. These are fucked up lies. So all of that was untrue. Every word of it appears to have been untrue to Oprah, other than the business, I guess, of her father lying to her about cooperating with the paparazzi. But there's, it's not true that the institution never protected them. It's not true that there's one chip that you can ever use to get interference with the press over in the UK and that they never would have protected Archie or Lily Bet because they had done something for Thomas Markle back in 2018. And it's also not true to the extent she's offering this up as the explanation for why her father is no longer part of her life or it is true and her current story's false. You can't have it both ways. One of these is a lie. The two of them have been parading all over the world since 2018, warning about the dangers of social media, the online community, on multiple occasions since 2018 never disclosed is in particular the dangers of child sexual abuse material and a family connection, at least alleged to it. Watch how many more millions of children will be harmed by products that while innovative are still designed without sufficient safeguards. And as technology advances as extraordinary speed, we cannot simply stand by waiting for the damage to catch up with us. Right to your elected officials, ask what they are doing to protect children, generations from now. Children will look back at this era with absolute disbelief that adults once allow digital spaces to exist without basic protections for young people. This is a pivotal moment in our collective mission to protect children and support families in the digital age. Our children, our teen lily, are just six and four years old. Luckily, still too young for social media, but we know that day is coming. And like so many parents, we think constantly about how to embrace technology's benefits while safeguarding against its dangers. Our kids are young, they're three and five. They're amazing. But all you want to do is parents is protect them. And so as we can see what's happening in the online space, we know that there's a lot of work to be done there. Two years ago, I stood on this stage and announced the creation of the parents network. A network that my wife and I launched at Archwell after meeting the parents of children who took their lives or suffered serious harm after being engulfed by social media. I feel fortunate that our children are at an age again quite young. So this isn't in our immediate future. I'm sorry, but if they've known this entire time that they had a child sexual abuser in the family and did nothing about it, that is all unforgivable. It is the fakest, most two-faced thing they've done. What did you do to make sure the man you believed was a child's sexual abuse connoisseur wasn't hurting children in Mexico, in the Philippines, in Pennsylvania, in California and in Florida. Truly, what did you do? This statement is not going to cut it because let me tell you what she writes. I gave you the highlight at the top. I'm deeply distressed at the news. My thoughts are with any children who may have been harmed. She goes on in 2018, a letter was sent to the Metropolitan Police and Royalty and Specialist Protection period. It made troubling and disturbing allegations against my father, and I was given assurances that these were being investigated. Great. What did you do to find out how that investigation resolved? She goes on, I hope it can now be understood. This is the ridiculous whole point of her statement that despite certain media publications distortion over the years, any distance from my father and my choice to not allow him to have contact with our children was for one reason to protect them. Then she writes this, I trusted that the authorities were doing the same for other families. How? You trusted how? What did you do to make sure? Truly. That's what I want to know. Then she writes, although the breath of what has now been uncovered is more sickening than one could ever imagine. My sincerest hope is that justice will be fully served and that the priority remains the safety and protection of innocent children. I mean, I am sure that Meghan Markle does not support child sexual abuse material being looked at by anyone or the harming of children. But let's face it, if she did nothing over the past eight years, she has been complicit. And this is going to be very, very tough for them to recover from. I'm, I'm genuinely horrified. I do want to tell you what the dad is saying in fairness to him. It does, we know this family is very dysfunctional. I believe that Thomas Jr. is also dysfunctional. I believe he's got an axe to grind with the dad, potentially, as Samantha, the sister says. It's extraordinary what he is alleging and if he has gone to all this trouble to actually get his father in legal trouble at age 82, it's just, I have a difficult time believing it. But this is what Thomas Markle says. This is bullshit. It's just a bunch of lies. This is to the Daily Mail exclusively. It's sick. I have no idea why Tom is trying to destroy me with these lies. Asked about a quote from a source close to Meghan who reportedly told the son, "Now, maybe people will finally understand why she has nothing to do with her father since 2019. Thomas Sr. replied, 'I don't believe that,' saying he and Meghan had a great relationship until she met Prince Harry, and he stupidly posed for those paparazzi pictures on the eve of their wedding." When asked directly by the Daily Mail, "Did you download porn onto your computer's Thomas Sr. replied, 'Never, never, never, I have never done that.' He said he would welcome a computer expert to autopsy his word, the computers, later clarifying he meant that they could forensically examine the machines to determine whether he was in possession of the computers when the alleged vile content was downloaded." What these terrible lies are being made against me with no proof, he said, "How can you accuse a man of something like this with no proof?" He writes about his son or says, "I have not spoken to Tom in months. I don't know where this has come from. I can only think he's doing this to make money. I go between feeling very sad to feeling very angry." He has had a turbulent relationship with his son, writes the mail, who left his home in Oregon in 2022 to move to Mexico, where his father retired after his award-winning career as a lighting director in Hollywood. Thomas Sr. said, "Tom came to live with me after I had a stroke. I supported him financially. I've supported him financially for most of his life. That money stopped in July this year when a family member found he had been taking money from my account." Thomas Sr. said, "I welcome an investigation because I did not do this. I'm scared because I don't feel safe anymore. People believe accusations even if they are not true. This is the worst thing you can accuse someone of." "I would like to ask Tom why? I have not spoken to my son in several months, but our last conversation was friendly. He didn't ask for money. But if he had, I probably would have given it to him like I always have in the past." Then, as I reported, the sister Samantha came out and said that the brother and the father are estranged. Her brother's allegations are disgusting and have no merit whatsoever. She is her father's main caregiver. She called her brother a liar. She said he's making up the allegations to make money. She said, "There is no merit in these disgusting allegations whatsoever. My brother's disgusting for making them up. He wants to destroy our dad. Shame on him." My brother first came out with these lies a few weeks ago when the cash from my dad was cut off. He's used dad as a cash cow for years. Once the money stopped, he made up the most outrageous lies he could try and to make money from the media. Samantha said the son's story is factually incorrect. The accusations claimed the boxes were found at Tom's house in the Philippines. She says that is not factually true. The computers were packed up in Mexico and put on a cargo ship. They were then in storage in the basement of a building in the Philippines. Dad had no access to them. The boxes were then in Tom Jr's house. Dad had no access to those computers for two years. Who knows who could have had access to them? I don't believe any of it. Anyone could have set dad up. She said there is no proof my dad downloaded any images. Those computers were out of his possession for two years. That leaves a lot of room for tampering. These are unsubstantiated allegations. Anyone could have been in contact with the computers over a couple of years. Dad was in a rehab facility and did not have access to them. My brother has had this vendetta against my dad for years and when the money runs out, he makes up stories for cash. He made up a story a few years ago about my dad's Nordic cocaine with hookers in Thailand. My brother makes up lies about dad and sell stories because it's the only way for him to make money fast. When you talk to dad, he shrugs and says it is what it is. Dad is very disappointed in Tom. Samantha said, "Without any evidence that those images were not put there by someone else because those computers were out of my dad's possession for a couple of years, I don't believe that they are his. I have no reason to believe those are his because anyone could have been handling those computers." The actual allegations in the original report, the Sun, about what the Sun, Thomas Jr. allegedly found are extremely dark. I'm just going to give you some of them. He allegedly found a sickening hoard and they do report at the father's home in the Philippines. Again, Samantha is saying they were in a storage facility. He told police he discovered hundreds of thousands of child sexual abuse material images in four large boxes at his father's home, cops are now preparing to seize the evidence. He reported the father to detectives in the Philippines after making the find. Markle senior had been forced to leave the house in May and returned to the US after a stroke and a blood clot which led to the amputation of his left leg. He is alleged to have abandoned the enormous stash of violent content left in storage boxes. Thomas Jr. told cops he unearthed the horrific pictures and videos mixed up with innocent family mementos. He also contacted FBI investigators in the US who are set to launch their own probe. When I found the material I was horrified, I had no option but to report my dad. I have supported cared for him and helped him for years, but that stops now. I won't speak to my father ever again unless I'm called to give evidence against him. He tells the Sun. He triggered the investigation after searching for a phone for his Filipino girlfriend's father in boxes belonging to Thomas Sr. He told his friends he was shocked and disgusted when a 15 minute video of naked little girls flashed up on the abandoned mobile. Victims appearing to be age no older than 10 or 11 appeared in sex acts captured on video along with three still pictures of naked and scantily clad girls of about the same age. He alleges one of the six images on the phone was a photo taken of the screen of a Lenovo Thinkpad laptop that was in a room he recognized as in his father's former home in Rosarito, Mexico. In other words, he's saying he saw a screen grab of child sexual abuse material on his dad's laptop and what he he is identifying as his father's laptop in his father's home in Mexico. As he recognized the room that the laptop was in and that it belonged to his dad, which if true would undermine any theory that somebody planted somebody other than junior planted these photos on Markle's laptop. The socked shot son, the retired TV lighting director's caretaker, here says he's the caretaker after he suffered the stroke in 2022 told pals he was a shaking left a shaking wreck by the discovery. By the way, it was ITV news who reported the police are not investigating Markle and have never investigated him just reading my note at the bottom of this page. He says he felt betrayed angry and disgusted. He realized he had to report them. He did so to the FBI hotline, the U.S.-based National Center for Exploited and Missing Children and the state police in Pennsylvania where his father was living prior to the rehab down in Florida. He said there were many worrying items, old books that turned out to be full of naked little girls. The technician, he brought a technician with him and a local IT expert to help him access three computer hard drives because he said he received no calls or follow-up inquiries after he did all that reporting to the FBI Center for Missing and Exploited Children, state police in Pennsylvania. So he says then he got a local IT expert to help him access the three computer hard drives. There was an unbelievable amount of. old family home movies on VHS cassettes, books, nine mobile phones, phones along with the Emmy Awards he won for his TV work. He's setting the foundation for you to believe that Markle's personal belongings and family heirlooms were intermixed with the child sexual abuse material. Again, in fairness to Thomas Sr., we don't know how they got there. Is this an egregious son who planted this stuff, who just said he found this to make his dad look bad? Is that dysfunctional a family? I have no idea. I mean, we'll see when Thomas Jr. responds to Samantha's allegations that this must have been planted. She doesn't say by him. She says they just must have been planted. And the dad did not have possession. He says the desktop was full. He says the technician helped me turn on the first hard drive and I gasped when all of the icons suddenly appeared. His desktop was full of row upon row of thumbnail pictures linking to the most sickening child abuse imaginable, the worst of the worst. Very young children in horrifying acts is enough. More images of a man engaged in a sex act with a very young Asian girl appeared to have stored in the pages of an antique book. Another developed film negative showed two more naked schoolgirls. Other books found included lifelong photography, enthusiast Thomas Sr.'s most treasured family keepsakes and arti picture books. But innocuous covers featuring tasteful nude pictures of adult women led to page after page of naked little girls and sexual poses on the pages inside. Further analysis found there were also vile images on the same hard drive as some of Markle Sr.'s work files, including his professional CV note for the record that does not tell us who planted them there, who downloaded them, who looked at them if anyone. And so on other personal files and pictures on the same hard drive as the child sexual abuse material. Then the son reports that the FBI, this is the original son report, that the FBI confirmed receipt of the contents of Thomas Jr.'s affidavit and looks certain to conduct their own probe. That's it. Those are the latest facts. GB News says it has confirmed that the met police and royal protection officers did inform Megan of the disturbing allegations concerning her father in the summer of 2018 a few months after her wedding. So that tracks, I mean, as I said, I believed her that she was told that in 2018. I couldn't care less at this point about the reports that she was nasty for not supporting her father. What I care about is what did she do? What did she do over the past eight years? And what did Harry do to make sure he was innocent or if he wasn't, how the investigation was resolved? That's really the relevant question right now. One thing about the royal family, there was a question put via People magazine. They asked whether King Charles was aware of that 2018 letter. Buckingham Palace declined to comment saying this is a matter for the Sussexes. So obviously they want nothing to do with this scandal. Can you imagine such a CD thing so connected to the royal family? This royal family. I mean, obviously all royal families have had a lot of scandals in their past, but my God, this one's dark after on the heels of the Prince Andrews stuff with Epstein. I mean, this is just disastrous. I want to bring in our guest. He's been so patient, Glenn Greenwald. He's the first ever guest on the MK show Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and host of system update on substack Glenn. How dark is this? Yeah. Dark is the only right word. The word that I was thinking about as I was listening to you kind of lay it out. There's so many aspects here, Megan. So as you were going, I was sort of picking and choosing, which I thought there were most import to highlight. I think I'll begin with the relationship that this case has to so many of the other ones over the past couple of decades, where we have discovered that what are supposed to be our most elite pristine, you know, respected institutions so often ended up being associated with just the darkest, most degenerate form of behavior. I think that ultimately for me ended up being the primary lesson of the Epstein story, regardless of individual bickering over the facts, the fact that, you know, you had somebody who was indisputably arrested and convicted for soliciting a minor for prostitution ended up being so integrated into the world's global elite. Nobody seemed to mind. So many of the people were happy to go to the island, kind of gave a glimpse of what this culture was like and we've seen so many stories like this. Here, I think there's this other extremely interesting family aspect, which we don't exactly know what happened. And when I first heard the story and when I first heard you describing it, I think like a lot of people probably intuitively and sinktively, my reaction is no family members would make up something so hideous and horrific about another member of their family, because I think most of us have, you know, quite functional families. We love our families very much. They love us and we fight, but the idea that they would just invent something so despicable like this seems so unthinkable. And yet it actually happens all the time. You know, a very close friend of mine is a lawyer who does trust in a state litigation where, you know, rich, some rich woman dies and then her kids fight over the silverware and the money and they're all very rich, but they hurl the most hideous, fabricated accusations for each other about money. So this can happen in a family. But I think, you know, the fact that Meghan Markle has been revealed to be just such a, I don't even use too strong words for her like despicable, just kind of like such a sociopath, you know, like a vapid ethics free climber does make it seem kind of possible that she would know about this and for her own interest and no one else is buried, even if it meant that her father would continue to endanger other people. And then I guess the last question is, what about the royal family? You know, talking year about one of the richest, most powerful, most influential, prestigious institutions, as you've said, they already have a lot of scandal. Don't you think that if somebody like Meghan Markle is marrying into this family, someone who's kind of an outsider unlikely to be chosen to be so central when she marries Prince Harry, that they would do their own very extensive investigation into her family as well. And it seems like it would also be a question, not just what Meghan Markle knew, but also what would the, what did the royal family in its institutions know about this? Yes. It's a great point. It's a very good point because what are the odds that this metropolitan police and office of royal services didn't tell the actual royals what their son had married into? Again, this appears to have come out this summer of 2018. They got married in April or May. So they were already married at this point. And by the way, how would they know? Like what was that letter and that investigation based on who, who knew what, what was the lead? Who, who else has known about this? And how? Because the son just found these boxes, like within the past 10 days from the sound of it or at least the past month. So who knew what back in 2018? And what the hell has been done about it for eight years, Glenn? I mean, I realized if you're the metropolitan police and he's not in your jurisdiction, you're like, this isn't exactly my problem, but you certainly have an obligation to children to make some phone calls to your counterparts in Mexico where he was living at the time and potentially in America where he'd been living for most of his life. And that's where his citizenship is. Well, also, I mean, it may not be their jurisdiction. And of course, it's not, but this isn't just some like random woman coming around with some family problems. Again, this is a woman who she's marrying, not some like ancillary fourth cousin, you know, of, of, of, of, of Prince Charles, now King Charles, she's marrying the king's son. And I just don't believe that if somebody is going to be brought into the family that way and any capacity let alone that central that they don't do an extreme background check, I will say, you know, when you have a story like this, and I guess the discovery as we understand it was made in this case shortly before her wedding, when you talk about people who, you know, shortly after I think, right, it was over it. So what it was spring of 18 when Meghan Markle, 18 came the letter, but wasn't the letter. Well, then she got married to him in spring of 18. And she says the letter was brought to her attention in the summer of 2018. Right, right. So, you know, Meghan Markle, you know, was basically, you know, like a seamless actress, if that. And now she's marrying into one of the most, you know, wealthiest, endlessly resourced institutions on the planet. And I do think you start to get hangers on who start plotting like, hey, maybe if I invent a story, there's a way to extract money. So I'm not saying this all should be this. assumed to be true that the father did everything he's been accused of. But given the gravity of the allegations and the fact that it's not just coming from some random letter writer, it's coming from someone very close to his son and people in that family, how do they not immediately stop everything that they're doing and make it their number one priority to determine whether or not this person actually is guilty of these crimes, not only to protect themselves and their institution and everyone in it. But also if it's true, it means there's a very dangerous sinister child predator walking around them the streets when very powerful people and institutions know that there's at least credible claims that he's guilty. It's so mystifying and any answer she tries to give as you aptly pointed out will end up being contradictory to the other answer. This is not over by a long shot. We will be right back, Glenn stays with us for the full show. For many people starting a fitness routine, going to the gym without a clear goal or structure often leads to random exercises, minimal progress and a resolution never to go back. While traditional personal training offers structured strength training, it can often be very expensive and difficult to fit into a busy schedule. And if you don't show up, they still bill you. That is where the latter app comes in to transform daily routines. It acts like an elite personal trainer right in your headphones. Instead of random online workouts, members receive structured workout plans built by expert coaches with new programming updated weekly. The app automatically tracks reps and weights and features built in AI nutrition tracking too, all for less than a dollar a day. It can eliminate all the guesswork from your daily fitness journey. Use the guesswork with ladder and get a real coach in your ear, telling you exactly what to do for every workout. If you have an iPhone, head to ladder.fit/megan and take a quick quiz to find your perfect ladder plan. Use my link and get a free seven day trial with no credit card and $10 off your first month if you join. Glenn Greenwald is back with us now. He is the host of System Update on Substack. Glenn, I want to make one other point on Meghan Markle, which I forgot to make in the first hour. The other question I have is, what kind of a person upon news like this about one's father? Rushes out to say, I knew all about it. I was told in 2018 that they invested a fact that is not helpful to his defense, obviously, like the sister Samantha is going with our brother is a liar and these materials must have been planted because dad didn't have possession of these laptops and phones, et cetera. And you've got Meghan Markle out there. At a time when let's keep in mind Thomas Sr. is denying all guilt saying, I'm so distressed by this. I knew in 2018 there was already an investigation going on into him back then. So it's like, honestly, it's like diabolical. So she apparently did know for all those years. It looks like she did nothing to make sure if he was this thing, he wound up in jail. And now that it's come out, she decides to take off her stiletto and stick it into his orbital socket, dig it in nice and deep and be like, predator, I've known all along. You know, it's like there's really no, there's nothing about what she's done today that helps her PR wise. Really nothing because even as an excuse for why she's kept away from him all these years, it contradicts all of her other public statements and makes her look like more of a liar. Like there's just no, this is the most bone headed PR strategy ever. Yeah, exactly, I mean, I think clearly what she in that brain of hers, however you want to describe it, has reasoned that this would be a good thing to do is extremely entirely self-interested, which is, I suppose she's gotten a lot of criticism in the past for kind of abandoning her father when she became, you know, Megan Markle and into the royal family and kind of abandon her father in these dire circumstances, which most people find, you know, kind of ethically questionable at best. And I think she thought this was her big chance to find a tell everybody, look, all these years I've been struggling with this secret, even attacking me because I've allowed my father to have his legs amputated. I didn't do anything to help him. I've abandoned my father because I'm such a terrible person. The reality is the reason I did it was because he's a child predator. But then, you know, that's, it's like such a short-term self-centered way of thinking. I go, people are going to really not just understand, but love me. And somehow she has nobody near her or she herself can't figure out that there are real implications to telling the world that she not just heard it, but that she believes her father is a child predator for the last 18, the last decade and never bothered to tell anybody. Yeah, the last, a little under a decade and never bothered to tell anybody. Clearly, like, she, she so self-centered that she just like, I can't find yet to have a defense for why people have been criticizing me for abandoning my father without thinking about the way more serious moral implications of the defense that she decided to embrace. Yes, yes, exactly right. It's like, why didn't anybody stop her and say the only thing that you should issue and you don't need to issue anything? But if you feel the need to issue something, the statement should read, obviously I'm deeply distressed by the news today and I'll have nothing further to say about it, you know, like, that's it. I don't, that's it. Express your distress, your upset, and you know, maybe a generic statement against child sexual abuse material. But like, don't, don't give up facts, don't, don't give up facts that hurt your dad who's asserting his innocence and don't give up facts that show you were complicit by your own word. I mean, it's the, it's the biggest self harm. Like, if you were, you know, some sort of PR advisor, the reality is this would be a potentially valuable story for her if she had just stayed quiet. If she had just stayed quiet, people kind of retroactively would have said, Oh, wow, her father really is, you know, like this is a person. So now we finally understand where sorry for criticizing all these years, why she stood away from, why she stayed away from her father. He's just a terrible person, probably abusive, whatever. But by putting herself into the middle of it and offering this excuse, she like now implicates herself almost as much as her father, because as you said, she almost like becomes his collaborator or at least complicit in putting who knows how many people endangered or protect her own self image. It's so stupid on top of everything else. She, we were talking about this during the break during, with my producers, Debbie was saying that 2018 letter was likely never going to come out in the metropolitan police. We're not going to run to the tabloids with that. And she knew that and she was distressed by that. She wanted us to know about it because she felt it gave her cover for avoiding him and that she really wanted to rehabilitate that piece of the 20,000 things that people criticize her over. That one piece. She really wanted to be rehabilitated on it without realizing the fact that that 2018 letter was not going to come out is a good thing for you. You idiot. That's a good thing for you. You can just say this is very distressing. Clearly I knew my dad had issues, but I didn't know this issue. And no one would ever have asked the question again of why she'd steered cleared of him. You know, like you probably gave, gave off creepy vibes, her instincts to avoid him after that paparazzi stunt were dead on. That's what people would have been saying. No one would have been, would have left to she knew. And then if people had said she knew she had to know, she would have been in a position to say, how dare you? Absolutely not. I didn't know. If I had known, I would have jumped up and down and made sure something was done about it. She's made herself part of the child sexual abuse story, which is just a nightmare. But, but do you think that part of the reason why she did that despite it being so ill-advised and so obviously counterproductive is because she has such an insatiable need for attention that had she remained silent. She would have kind of been an ancillary to the story or at least not gotten a lot of attention by now coming out, you know, and just sort of like recounting her own victimhood. She gets to center herself in the middle of the story without having realized that what she's actually done is tied herself to her father by hiding whatever it is that he did for the last eight years purely for her own, for her own image. It's really, she really screwed herself in so many ways by just, I think it's that narcissism among, and that attention need that among, among everything else probably was the main factor. Yes. Glenn, you and I both know, I guess it happens with men too, but there, there is a certain woman out there that loves being the victim, loves any attention based on her victimhood. Anything that happens to her that is negative, she loves to run, tell everybody about it. Oh, poor me. My God. Feel like they get, I would rather die than like make a name. on people pittying me. That is like the last thing I want from anyone. But there is a certain kind of woman in particular that gets off on people feeling sorry for them. And she's one of them. She can't stand that people don't like her and they write negative things about her. And so if she can go on Oprah and say, they were worried about the skin color of my unborn baby and no one cared when I was going to kill myself in the castle. She loves that. She loves the sympathy that that engenders from people. It gives her like a surge of serotonin, makes her feral euphoric and victorious. And so here she saw the opportunity. One of the biggest criticisms of me, 'cause over in the UK, as I said, this has been a larger thread. And she abandoned the dad, this terrible thing. She stole Harry from his dad and abandoned her own. I can shove their noses in it. I can look like the aggrieved poor me victim. And sure enough, some British tabloid journalist has just written this big thing. Like, oh, Megan, I'm sorry. All the criticism, forgive me. I was wrong, I had no idea. So she's like, shoot it into my veins, I love it. And that motivation was so strong and all consuming, she did something colossally stupid, Glenn. - Yeah, just, you know, this is a really, this is a, it's a little, I'm sorry, but not really. It's, I think it's actually a major factor, which is, you know, we've had this kind of culture of the last, say, 10, 15 years, where these new diseases get invented out of whole cough that are extremely vague in their symptoms. And it does seem like, you know, I know you just did the story of at least Silverstone who went on this whole, you know, crusade about MS and she turned out, she didn't have it. Who knows? - Justina Applegate. - Oh, yeah, Christine Applegate, exactly. I confused my, my celebrities. But then also I watched Marine Callahan do one on Celine Dionne and her stiff person syndrome and whether or not that's a real diagnosis. But, you know, it's been this whole, you know, there's all these like, zillions of variance now of autism that people on TikTok love to apply to themselves. It's almost become like, it's kind of valorized, like it's your way to get social cloud. But what amazes me about it more than anything in these cases is, you know, it's kind of running joke here. We always talk about the Michelle Obama podcast because we can't believe that somebody so blessed and rich and powerful and lucky in every way has so victimized herself because she needs that victim. You're talking here about somebody who married into the royal family, who has no talent and gets massive wealth beyond what can imagine, be imagined, access to everything. And she has a need constantly to victimize herself. It's like people who have no real problems in life. Like, you know, the world is pretty ugly. People have some really horrific problems they have to overcome. It seems like the ones who don't or just have, you know, kind of ordinary life. They have the biggest need to announce to the world that they have all these abuse stories and diseases that this don't exist. Yes, and this woman has obsessed over her press coverage since day one. She was beloved. They celebrated her universally. And then the story started to come out about how badly she was treating people behind closed doors at the palace, how mean she was to Kate, how her behavior around the wedding, and her staff leaving, you know, one after the other, which is a trend that has continued to this day out in Montecito. She can't keep a PR person. She can't keep an assistant and so on. Reportedly that she, like she can't stand it. She was out there like, they were complaining about, you know, Harry complained about that one absolutely disgusting racist comment. It was, I'm trying to remember it. Forgive me, but it had something to do with the-- About the baby? About the baby? Or some nose? I can't remember that it was about their baby. It was about her. What was it about? There was no question. No, that's a separate issue. This was an actual racist comment that brought up monkeys in the context of his wife or their expected child. I don't remember, forgive me. But I remember it was one comment and it was horrific. Obviously nobody would ever defend such a thing. But Harry had to elevate it. He had to like keep repeating it and keep citing it as like the evidence that everyone's racist who's against my wife. All these people who criticize her are raging racists. Look at this one comment. And you and I both know. I'm like, OK, I as a woman, you as a gay man, we can-- in two seconds, scan our mentions and find tons of sexist-- There's one right now that works right now that are being said about us. It is very second. I mean, it's just part of having a public platform. Yes, we don't elevate them and come out and be like, what's again, the unfair, terrible press and the online trolling. And she says, I'm the most bullied person in the world. Like, come on. You know, as you say, if you're a public person, you're going to get trolled. You're going to get repeated the attack. You have to get a thick skin. But these two refuse to develop one. Yeah, and you would think like they're gigantic piles of money and all the palaces that they have and their worldwide fame and the private jets and the access that they go everywhere and all the like pointless awards that they get would in some way compensate for the fact that a few straight people here and there say things about them that are unpleasant. But it's like people with this kind of personality cannot stand that there's anyone. It's so, it's such molecular narcissism to not be able to stand that somebody somewhere said something unpleasant or do you or doesn't like you and you have to turn it into a worldwide scandal that becomes like the need for all of us to look at her and feel bad for her when 99.99% of the people have problems a zillion times worse. It's such a sick narcissism that drives her. Yes, honestly, like we just found out that dear friend of ours has got this absolutely debilitating disease. And the prognosis is very dim. And this is a young guy like that. There are people out there with real problems, you know? It's like, just stop. Like just stop with the nonsense. No one gives a shit. You don't need to rehabilitate yourself. And why you chose not to be with this family member. And by the way, for people like me and I would say, I'm a big critic of Meghan Markle's. That's never even been a main line of attack on her. It's her, it's her personality. It's her bully nature. It's the stuff you and I are discussing how thin skin she is. Like the woe is me, victimhood, the ridiculous, you know, reality show where she tried to be a Martha Stewart, which we all know she wasn't, you know, the stupid woke language about centering joy. All of that stuff is very alienating. By the way, my team forwarded me. It was a BBC journalist who had been who was fired for using a picture of a chimpanzee in a tweet about the royal baby born to Meghan. So that's what was done. The guy was fired. And then Harry brought that up in their Netflix documentary. It's like, as evidence of what? There are obviously there are races out there. There are sexists out there. There are homophobes out there. It's like, most of us ignore them and move on with our lives. You know, it's like, we don't elevate it. Like the thing with the guy on the vest. But like, we're under attack. He's just, we're just, it's all about safety. Get to the next garage. There's one dude on a vest, but calm down. So here we go again. It's that same instinct that made her, I mean, seriously stepping a landmine today. This was a very, very dumb thing to do. Okay, let's keep going. The Ilan Omar case. The latest today, I want to tell the audience, 'cause we haven't following this closely here Glenn, is Janine Piro, the DOJ released a legal filing that calls her not Ilan Omar, but Ilan, I always forget to say the whole thing, but it's Ilan Neurocyde Elmi, which appears to be her actual name. And they refer to her as Ilan Neurocyde Elmi, AKA Ilan Omar in a DOJ filing that was just submitted in the court in response to a media application to unseal the search warrant. And then Janine Piro went on with Jesse Waters on Fox News last night and confirmed that that's her real name according to Janine Piro's.4. Her real name is Ilan Neurocyde Elmi. And that name is almost identical to the name of the guy she married. Is that what is tipping you off? Well, obviously Jesse, I'm not gonna tell you what's tipping us off. What we're concerned about is whether or not she has followed the laws as it relates to the use of these names. And it's kind of like in Romeo and Juliet, remember the Catholics and the Montague's, matters not who you are, but who you are not. - Okay, I appreciate the reference to Shakespeare on Fox News, you don't see that every day. Now Jonathan Turley, respected law professor George Washington, law he was on as well last night and said the following is sought for B. - Well, it's very significant. And the fact is that you have to have your real name on passports and filings for campaign, for official offices, for as a member of Congress. All of those types of filings come with a representation that they are true and accurate. And that can create potential legal problems. The question is whether she could be stripped of her citizenship, that would obviously means she couldn't be a member of Congress. But also, it's true. that if she was elected on false pretenses, if she violated federal election law, that would also put her seat in danger. We just don't know. Representative Omar has the ability to put many of these things to rest. She's had that ability for years, and she really has done nothing but give these denials without offering anything to put them to rest. - So what do you make of it, Glenn? - So I may see things here a little bit differently than you. I haven't heard you talk about this yet, so I'm not sure, but the people in your audience. So it has been a longstanding assertion in many sectors of American right politics for many years that Ilya Omar married her brother. I don't, and that that was the basis of her obtaining of US citizenship, which obviously would be a fraudulent piece of doing so. - His, hit, hit, not her. - That's right, sorry, sorry, right, right, exactly. But there are questions to about her citizenship, which is why they have talked about her denaturalism, because if she helped him as an American citizen obtained citizenship, that wouldn't lead to the denaturalization of her citizenship, that you can't denaturalize for that reason. - Yeah, no, we're all up to speed up. - Okay, good, good. So I'm agnostic on this. I have an open mind. I've never seen evidence that is in any way conclusive. What we just heard is, you know, probative. It's an interesting fact. The reality is a lot of people from many parts of the world have very similar names, even though they're unrelated. I certainly would consider it to be some kind of a smoking gun by any means. And I'm going to see how the investigation unfolds. What I'll tell you what bothers me about it is that I spent four years during the Biden administration as one of the loudest people. I know you did too, took Carlson did. Many, many people did. Objecting to the weaponization of the just department against political enemies. And when I, at least I did that, it didn't mean that in every case, there was no criminality. I mean, I think Paul Manafort actually commanded crimes that they discovered and was convicted for. Maybe some other people did too and kind of perjury. But the problem was they were going after their critics, they were going after the people that they thought were the biggest threat to them. And that ultimately is a misuse of the justice department. And this is something that there's two, there's different investigations as well. There's a financial investigation that was actually started by the Biden administration, which makes me much more open-minded. I want to see what the evidence is there. And if there's something significant there. But the immigration part, the fact that people are talking about her being de-naturalized, it is almost unheard of to de-naturalize people. She's been in the U.S. - Trump's been doing it. - Since she's 13. - She's been doing it. - No, I know. I know. No, no. No, you mean, but not after, not after 25 years, not after 25 years. This is quite uncommon to do. - I don't know after how long, but I know that his administration has been breaking records de-naturalizing people. They are going after people who are here, who lied to get naturalized. - Okay, but she's been here since she's 13. She's been a U.S. citizen for 25 years, since 2000. And let me just ask you. Do you actually think-- - But Glenn, you know very well, if she was not naturalized lawfully, she can't be a U.S. Congress person. Article one of the Constitution makes that perfectly clear. - Absolutely, you have to be a U.S. citizen. - No, of course, you have to be a U.S. citizen. One way or the other, you have to be a natural born citizen or a naturalized citizen. That's, I agree with that completely. But what, do you, what's this get real for a second? If, if, if Ilion Omar were instead of being a left-wing Democrat, highly critical Donald Trump, it'd be one of the people who uses woke language and incuses everybody racism and sports policy. So aggressively had instead been a Republican supporter of Donald Trump and the general Trump agenda. Do you, do you really think the Trump administration would be digging back with all the illegal immigration cases? We have the violent immigration issues. Going back 25, 26 years to try and find out whether or not these rumors that have been around right-wing politics forever are really valid and spending the resources to try and remove her from Congress. A very popular Congresswoman who's been repeatedly reelected by her own district. That's what bothers me. I think, let me, let me answer it, let me answer it. I think if she had just done that, like if she had just had an improper naturalization and that was the end of it, then no. But the case against Ilion Omar is appearing to me, they've kept it all under seal and they're not speaking much about it. So this I'll, what I've gleaned, involves multiple incidents of immigration fraud. So what they appear to be getting ready to allege is that she came over, that her name was not Ilion Omar, that it was Ilion Neur Said Elmi, that she came over with her sister and I believe her father, that her brother and her other sister Layla stayed in the UK, the brother that she would eventually marry, that they lied and said that they were Omar's because the Omar family was getting refugee status. And so they claimed these three as part of their family and said that they were Omar's instead of Elmi's, which was Ilion Laughful. The father's naturalization would have been on Laughful. And then Ilion's naturalization would have been on Laughful as well. They also may have changed her birth date because even under the, you know, potentially legal scheme of, okay, we're gonna give you refugee status. She needed to be under 18 and it looks like she was 17. Her team went back after the fact to change her birth date in the official records, which seems very sketchy. That would be another instance. And then once she got away with it, rather than just like leading a private life, she decided to marry her brother. It is definitely her brother. She denies it, but that is her brother. I welcomed the lawsuit for defamation. Honestly, I really look forward to getting all the discovery on this guy because that's her brother. There are literally only three people with the last name, Nursaid Elmi in the UK. This guy, Ahmed, who she married is one. Layla, her sister is the other. And the third is Muhammad, who I believe might be another brother of hers. Those are the only three. >> Can I just have the guy she married? >> She admitted to be cleared. >> So what you're saying, there's an aspect of this case that is about her obtaining her citizenship illegally. And then there's a, once she got illegal immigration, you can sponsor people. If you marry someone as a citizen, they become citizens. You're saying she engaged in fraudulent behavior to get other people citizenship, as well, including what you say is her brother. >> Her brother. >> No, no, I get it. >> Yes, that at least. >> At least. >> At least. And then it looks like, I mean, then every passport application she filled out would have been unlawful. Any marriage benefit that she sought with the brother would have been unlawful like multiple felonies. She would have had to certify under oath the name of the person that she was marrying and so on. All of which she would have had to certify, she did. She did in 2017, she swore under penalty of perjury while divorcing Elmi, the brother, that she had zero contact with him since 2011. And she had no clue on how to find him. She was claiming basically abandonment in 2017, they married back in 2009. And by 2011, she was claiming abandonment, he was no longer in the picture. And she was having a baby with her real husband, who's the Muslim guy she married years before, though not in a legal ceremony, just in a Muslim one. So this was a lie. She did have contact with her brother. She did know how to find him. And I believe she committed perjury. The violations are, there's so many Glenn. And it may have gone beyond that. >> But some of them had to include imitations problems, right? I mean, some of them have to have to have some imitations problems. >> Agreed. Yes, they do have to absolutely have statute of imitations problems. And so that's been one of our big questions is because if there was a more current violation, something she swore under penalties of perjury about her name, about her marriage, about her immigration status, then they may have her. There was also a mention by Brian Kilmeade and Fox and Friends that this could potentially be a Rico case based on a source that had told him that, which would revive otherwise dead claims. So you can have dead felonies because of the statute of limitations that get revived under Rico, which is a more, it's an umbrella claim of racketeering conspiracy where you're like a crime boss that you've committed so many crimes. And they don't go, they don't need to prove that there were then the statute of limitations only that Rico has to be. So I think it's the multitude of flagrant immigration violations. And you mark my words, there is no doubt she married the brother. And I mean, you are too smart to have accepted that line with Chris Hayes, not to my knowledge. There's no way that didn't raise your, that happened. >> No, no, no, I know, I guess that I want, but I think it's important that we're getting clarity now because I know just from being around right wing discourse, that for a long time the argument was we have to deport her because she got citizenship by marrying her brother. And that's not actually the claim, the claim that she married her brother. >> She did it. >> She got citizenship. But anyway, let me just say this, and you know very well that this is the thing I say in every case, for every party, for every type of person of any politics and you do too. I do get uncomfortable with trial by leak and media. And right now the information is in the hands of the Trump Justice Department. It's being leaked to a lot of right wing outlets. I'm not saying all, I'm not saying all of this is a lie. I'm just saying, when you have what is on its surface, a politically charged prosecution. Meaning the people who are prosecuting are on one political side, the people they're targeting on the other. I do think height and skepticism is required. I'm not saying disbelieve at all, it's all I leave I don't know more alone. She's subject to the laws like anybody else's. And if she committed whatever crimes, including trying to get into the country, that's a legitimate source of scrutiny. Listen to remember, she got to the country when she was 17. She got citizenship, depending on the birthday, when she was 17 or 18. Glenn, you're your facts are outdated, it's become clear to me. She got to the country when she was 12 back in 1995, and then five years later, or 13, we don't know which, because that's the one of the disputes, because five years later was she 17 or 18. But she did not get here when she was 17. She got here when she was 12. No, I said one. No, I said five years later. She was naturalized. Derivatively when her father got naturalized. No, I said no. I said you got, but are you aware that AJ Kemp, who ran against Ilan Omar for a state representor back in the primary, I should say, for the federal congressional seat, went to DHS and citizenship and immigration services and foyered the naturalization papers for the father and they responded, no record found. They could not find any record of the dad's naturalization. Now we had on a reporter for Alpha News, who's been all over this story since 2016. She did not think that naturalization was going to be difficult to prove. She actually told our audience, I think they're going to be able to prove that. The Washington Post also said that. So I don't know what happened in the case of AJ Kemp and why she has it. She's made them public on the internet. She does have a certificate of no record from DHS when it comes to the dad's naturalization. So it is possible. There was no naturalization, which would mean Ilan has done, since hers was purely derivative. And it's also possible it was given, but it was given under false pretenses that were essentially fraudulent, which would undo it. I just want to say something, this is not our reporting has not been based on leaks from the DJ. The only thing I'm mentioning that about is what Brian Kilmead heard that this could potentially be a Rico case, the facts around Ilan Omar are not in any case coming from the government. They kept their lips sealed on this and trust me, I have government sources. So I can speak to you on that. This is coming from investigations that have been done by actual shoe leather reporting from 2016 to now. People like Scott Johnson, people like our guest the other day, Preya. People like this great reporter, David Steinberg, who's been on the Omar case for now, almost 11 years, who have pulled social media posts between Ilan Omar, her sister Laila, their brother Ahmed, who she married, liking each other's birth of the children. That's him holding up Ilan's niece, saying fresh out of the vagina that he's that's her husband calling Ilan's baby his niece, because that's in fact, what this baby is to him. It's not his baby. It's her baby with the first husband, the Muslim guy. Just today, there's David Steinberg has resurrected a piece of journalism he did in 2018 about Ahmed and his schooling. And he points out that on Ilan Omar's 2009 marriage document to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi and her 2017 divorce proceedings, she states that that husband, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, was born on April 4, 1985. He went back to the American high school that Ahmed and Elmi was enrolled in as a senior in the in the class of 2003 at Arlington Senior High School in St. Paul, Minnesota from September 2002 through June 2003. He graduated received a diploma. That guy was born on April 4, 1985. So this is the official high school record of Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, both her brother and her husband have exactly the same name and the same birthday Glenn. The same name and the same birthday. And he's all over the internet, holding up her babies saying meet my niece. And he celebrates Leyla's, who's her sister, birth of their baby as his niece is who Ilan has also called publicly her niece. They've since scrubbed the social media, but these intrepid reporters already grabbed the screen grabs and have them. So it's like the jig is up. This is a family. She married the brother to get him a green card. And when he tried to get his green card to go from temporary to permanent, they asked for more information about his obviously sham marriage. He withdrew the request. Okay. I'm not going to end to be perfectly honest. I can't sit here and let agate each one of these facts with you in part because this has been investigated primarily by people who are and this doesn't mean they're bad journalists. In fact, there are huge numbers of good journalists on the right, but people who are interested nearly a no more because they just like are politically not saying that impunes the reporting. I'm just saying that's true. That hasn't been a lot of people focusing on this, and quoting me, let me just add a couple of facts. You may think they're irrelevant. She got here when she was 12 or 13, her family entered the country legally. There's no doubt about that. I'm not saying you've disputed that. I'm just pointing that out. They got her on an asylum claim. The issue about. There's some. There's some debate if they changed the name. If they came, if they were, if only the Omar's were getting refugee status or asylum, and they glomed on the Elmys, glomed on and claimed falsely that they were Omar's in order to piggyback onto this, then there is a question, because her dad may have been working for a warlord in Somalia to whom we would never have given refugee status, so that isn't contestant. Okay. Okay. And I believe she got citizenship through her father when she was either 17 or 18, which is one day for her in question. Yes. We also went through the whole first Trump term four years where this was not uncovered or unearthed or investigated. And so all I'm saying to you, and I'm not defending Elian Omar, I'm not saying she was innocent in part because I don't have the facts and in part because I'd want to wait to see like an adversarial investigation of this first, like I've said in the Cornell case and Zillian of other things. But all I'm saying here is that this is a very old case and it just so happens to be that the target is one of Trump's most hated opponents. I see all that. I see all that. I cannot have a non-citizen serving in the U.S. Congress. It's a hard, no, no, but I don't think anybody, I mean, nobody thinks that a non-U.S. citizen can be serving or should be serving in the U.S. Congress. The question is, and it's certainly my question is, let's wait until there's like, and I'm not saying you shouldn't cover it. Everybody's covering it. That's totally legitimate. For me, I'm going to wait until I see a kind of fuller scale investigation right now. It's been journalists on the right doing their jobs to pursue. You don't know any of these facts. You're not looking. But I don't think you're interested because you didn't know any of this stuff. I just told you. No, but no idea about those social media posts. You don't know what the name is. I know. The siblings in the UK. I don't know when they came over that. I'm paying attention because this is not your story. No. I'm going to say that. I can't let it get these facts because I don't know them all enough to be able to let it get them with you. But I do know that this has been a huge interest on the right for a long time in part because the right H. Zillian Omar that doesn't mean she's innocent. And I would just like to see this place, this play out in a justice. She's not even the charge yet. So let's see what happens as the due process evolves and which of these claims are valid. That's all I'm saying. I hope that's not controversial. But you're right. I'm not here to say, Hey, I'm the expert on the Ilyan Omar case. So let me tell you what really happened. I admitted from the start, I can't let it get this case with you because I haven't defended these. I haven't said it. But I am becoming the expert. I am. I am no David Steinberg. But I'm getting close. But at the end of the day, it will be a court. It's got Johnson's reporting. He's reporting. Prey is reporting. Here is what Trump is saying. And I do find this very interesting. Stop five. She used the fake name to be sworn in. I assume she must immediately have to resign from Congress. So our great speaker of the House of Representatives that the Democrat Party has just conceded her seat, that Ilhan Nur, Syed Elmi, her real name is openly admitted to fraud. And she will not be legally allowed to be a member of that August body any longer. That does raise an interesting point. If her real name, and I believe he's 100% right, is Ilhan Nur Syed Elmi. And she ran for office as Ilhan Omar, and the people of Minnesota elected Ilhan Omar. I don't know whether she can continue serving. I actually think that's a very interesting question. And there's no formal name change. She never legally changed her name at some point that it's proven that that. I have no idea. Okay. But he's saying this is what this is the problem I have. He's saying these are the facts. And I don't think they're quite as proven. Well, he knows more than we know. But he's also a political actor on the campaign trail trying to convince people to vote for Republicans. And it's not like he is. But DOJ is saying, no, but DOJ is saying in a court filing to Judge Bozberg, no less, that she is AKA Ilhan Nur Syed Elmi. Now, they have not like filed suit saying there's no proper name change. But I don't think there would be a proper name change because they haven't charged her. No, there's been no charges yet. But she's at you and I both know there's something in there, otherwise that we wouldn't have gotten a search warrant. So like they're closing in on her around something. And the name, if she didn't properly change her name from Ilhan Nur Syed Elmi to Ilhan Omar before she ran for office, then we do not have the right person serving from this district in Minnesota. Like all these really are problems. But no, but that's a big if you know, it's like this reminds me and I think I talked about it on your show. But I thought I took an AOC stood up and said, these seven guys in this front house at Cornell gang rape the woman, they drugged her and they were allowed to get away with it. And I had a huge angry problem with what AOC did because when you're a public official, you can't condemn people without they're having been a trial and a certain facts that haven't been proven. I think it's irresponsible for a public official to do that. I would just like to see there be some more not journalistic investigation, but legal investigation. And yet her lawyers in, let's make the process adversarial and we'll see what really stands up to scrutiny. >> Yeah, I mean, I don't think these are the same situation at all. One is prejudging a criminal allegation of rape that had zero support. And one is simply pointing out she has a different name. There's, she definitely has a different name. if you look back, honestly, like people she has. So she's people changed their names all the time. They changed their names, but you have to look at the allegations in this case, Glenn. This isn't just, oh, gee, she changed it. This is the allegation is that the omars were getting refugee status or asylum here in the United States, and that the Elmys weren't. And the reason the family split is because the omars could only take so many Elmys. And that is why when she came over, she pretended, she was just a child, but the father pretended he was an omar and he had to omar daughters because he did not want them to know he was this guy Elmi who was a colonel in this very controversial military group. And so the whole thing was a fraud, there would have been no changing of the name because the whole thing was a fraud from the start. It was a, we're refugees, war torn country, accept our words, we're omars, we're not Elmys. And then the digging began. I want to say this in her defense that she, a spokesperson after the president's comments came out and said to Fox News digital, this is completely false. Ilan Omar is her real name, blah, blah, blah, blah. Yeah. That was it. Okay. I believe I'll be interviewing her, so I'll take all of these things you've presented here in elsewhere. I'm obviously going to be prepared. I'm not going to go in and be like, I don't know about this case. Tell me about it. Um, and hopefully, I'll talk to you offline before that, I love that, I love that. It's not 100% firm. But I think that's awesome. Good for you. Let's do that. Let's do that. She should sit down with you. You are truly one of the most fair journalists on earth she could do no better. Um, because you're like one of the few, you would never pull a Chris Hayes. If she said to you, not to my, did you marry your brother? Not to my knowledge. You would say, what does that mean? Like, that's all we ask our students are not that high. It's going to be adversarial. I want to present her with the things that people like you are saying. And, and press her on it and let her see if, if she has an answer for it. Otherwise, why do you the interview? You know that as well as anyone that's how you do interviews. I, I shouldn't have probably announced it because it's not 100% confirmed but very close to it. So, uh, yeah, I'll be going back and listening to our segment and writing down all your, your information. Honestly, Glenn, I, I said to the audience yesterday, I was so annoyed watching the Chris Hayes interview because, and I was pointing out when I interviewed Hegseth prior to his confirmation. And I had to confront him about this rape allegation that I defended him on on this program. I did not believe the rape allegation. I went through the complaint, you know, and, but then when I had him, I had to do my job. I had to press him on every allegation. I had to ask him tough questions about it. I, we had very uncomfortable moments on it. Did I do it because I enjoy putting a friend of mine in a very tough spot about alleged rape? No, but we, we have a duty in this business and it's like, yes, they don't, don't take the interview if you can't do your job, Chris Hayes. And also just quickly, I know I mentioned this before, but the very first time I ever started watching your show and then talked about you publicly, it was a 2011, 2012, I had seen you grilling the crap out of Republican senators. And I suddenly occurred to me, I was on MSNBC all the time in CNN. I never, ever see a Democratic Senator being adversely questioned like that. And I remember I did an interview with Politico and they say, oh, they keep saying foxes is like partisan hack channel. Go watch how Megan Kelly interviews GOP senators and go compare it to how, you know, the Chris Hayes is and Anderson Cooper's talk to Democratic senators and you'll see what the hack channel is. >> It's so, it's so annoying, you know, it's like, it doesn't have to be fun. You know, there are a lot of aspects of what you and I do that are fun. But like when you have to confront somebody you like and or are rooting for politically because, you know, what we all have preferences or favorites out there. And you have to go hard on them on an issue you know they'd rather not discuss. It is unpleasant, but it is part of the job and you cannot look at yourself in the mirror in the morning if you do what Chris Hayes did. So all of which means she's probably going to cancel on you. If she doesn't cancel on you, I'm going to give her a lot of credit. I genuinely will give her a lot of credit right here. So I fingers crossed that this comes through for you. >> Yeah, let me do it. >> All right, stand by. We're going to take a quick break, right? And then we'll be right back. More with Glenn right after this. Our sponsor, the electronic payments coalition says Washington politicians are always getting in your wallet and that now they're messing with your credit card. They say your credit card and the security it offers are under attack and that senators Dick Durbin and Roger Marshall want to change the nation's payment system to benefit corporate megastores like Walmart and Target at the expense of everyday Americans. Credit cards can keep your payments secure and provide rewards that families use to help make everyday purchases more affordable. The electronic payments coalition says the Durbin Marshall mandates would let corporate megastores cut corners on credit card processing routing transactions over cheaper untested networks with weaker security and fewer protections. Find out more for yourself at guardyourcard.com and consider telling Congress to guard your card. Glenn Greenwald is back with me now. So our friend Kamala Harris Glenn is back out on the campaign trail in Mississippi rallying down there. This is such as the state of the of the GOP's position right now that the Dems are trying to play in Mississippi. Not great. And she's done a few things here. She's she's tried to debut a new voice. Let's check in and see how that went. That era that era of feeling powerless like what can we do this just keeps happening? That era is over because we are now 13 days away from doing something about it to stop the pain. So that's where we are right now, and that's kind of exciting. Right? This is some good stuff. Like we're taking our power, we're using it to determine who all the offices like being the governor of Nevada, which is so important for the people every day on the most basic issues that affect our lives who will continue to walk those halls of Congress being an extraordinary fighter. Okay. That one was in Nevada. The next one is in Mississippi. Her critics think she was trying to sound like AOC there, Glenn. What did you think? Were you moved? Yes. I got to collect myself. I'm a bit emotional from having been so inspired by you. Do you remember this was probably the cringiest moment of the 2024 election was when Tim Waltz's wife, who I think is a, who is an elementary school teacher, gave that speech trying to excite the crowd, and she was basically speaking to them like fourth graders, which it was embarrassing being kind of understood because you spent our whole life talking to fourth graders, and I guess it's hard to break. This was called my hair is almost like talking to people like they were in kindergarten. You know, you speak really slow, but you're always happy so they don't feel that, Megan, how is she getting worse? She was already one of the most talentless, just immediately and instinctively repellent people to ever emerge on the political scene at a national level. How is she getting worse? What was that? That was crazy. Let's see how it went to Mississippi. Maybe she did better down there. What's not 11? Never let someone else's limited ability to see your capacity be a limitation on your ambition. Well, everything she says, she thinks she's Oprah, and she's not Oprah, she's no version of Oprah, not the current, not the old. Now she's been reduced to sort of occasional pundit Glenn. I don't think she's the answer to their problems. Yeah, you know, it's funny that you said about Oprah because I actually have thought before that would come, you know, like that thing she said about the past and not being constrain or whatever that or her quickly awkward observation she used to repeat, I used to think, and maybe I still do that, she actually thinks it's not even like she's Oprah self-help kind of a prophet, but she's actually some sort of like deep philosopher who's discovered these insights into how human beings and history proceeds. And in reality, it's basically like an elementary version of what you would pick up, like the worst self-help, you know, like grab a self-help book on the way to the airport to get a plane. I mean, it's so, it's so fortunate that these stuff, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, she's the worst. Uh, I believe. If I'm the ones who want to run, could it's good for us? And entertaining, and the other part, I don't think I can take it. Who would deploy her? What, what, who would be, I mean, I guess it's like, okay, Mississippi, there's a large black population. Maybe they're trying to get them excited. Um, like, who would say Kamala Harris is the answer to this for me running for office? Now, wait, I, I have other subject. I want to talk about what happened on call her daddy, got a couple of things I want to do. Can you stick around for a few more minutes, Glenn? Or do you go around? Oh, I always make it, of course, for you. Awesome. Okay. So we're going to stay over. We're going to take a break. There's news on Ellen DeGeneres and what a terrible person she is. There's like, there's stuff that we got to do with Glenn Greenwald. So, uh, we will take a quick break. We will come back and we will hit a couple of those before we sign off on this beautiful Friday afternoon. Don't go away. Veterans days coming up and Birch Gold Group is commemorating it with something I think you're really going to appreciate. From now through October 30th, for every $10,000 you purchase from Birch Gold, you will get a free patriotic silver round. And there's no limit on how many you can earn. Birch Gold can help you convert your existing retirement savings into a gold IRA without spending a dime in taxes or penalties. For current and former military, they will waive fees for the entire first year on purchases of any amount. And don't forget, if you do want to convert an IRA into gold, you can do that in whole or just in part if you want to hedge your bets. Birch Gold has earned an A+ rating with the Better Business Bureau and served tens of thousands of customers, including my listeners and viewers. Text MK to the number 989898 for a free infocate and declaim eligibility for your free silver on a qualifying purchase before October 30th. That's MK to 989898, check it out today. We have a bit more to get to with our pal Glenn Greenwald. So Glenn, baby Netanyahu is up for reelection in Israel. And Vice President JD Vance was asked to weigh in on it because President Trump endorsed him, which I guess shouldn't surprise me, but did. And like really endorsed him, hard, hard endorsed kind of suggested. If you don't, if you don't elect him, I don't know what I'm going to be doing when it comes to Israel, you know, without Netanyahu at the helm. And then our pal Mark Halperon asked JD Vance to weigh in, so I'm going to play his answer and then I'm going to play the reaction to his answer on Fox and Friends. Watch. I normally don't ask you no questions, but I'm going to ask you to and try to hold you to Netanyahu. Over the weekend, the president endorsed Benjamin Netanyahu for reelection in Israel. Do you endorse Benjamin Netanyahu? The president has the most effective endorsement in American or international political history. I endorse American candidates, and that's where I'm focused on is the midterm. So I'm not getting involved in Israeli elections. So, so you're not, you don't want to say one way or the other way or the other. I'm not anti-indoor. So yeah. I'm not pro-indoor. So yeah, I'm not getting involved in Israeli elections. Right. Okay. But he went out of his way to say, I even know the president endorsed Benjamin Netanyahu. I am not. He says, I'm not staying out of that. It's interesting because the rap on him is he seems to be a little bit anti-Israel. Right. Um, unforce air. Right. Unforce air. That's no reason to say that. Because you know who he did vote for? He, he wasn't in campaign for Victor Orbán in Hungary. So you can't say, I don't worry about other people's elections. Good point. When he goes, he Victor Orbán in Hungary, who lost. So it's not true that he went out of his way. Mark asked him directly, yes or no, are you endorsing? Like he, he was on the spot and he got out of bounds is what he did. You know, he, which, you know, I was joking the other day, Glenn. It was like, would you like to hold this plutonium and play with it? That would be so fun for you. And he is too soon. He was like, um, out, piece out, um, and that it was an unforced error. You know, I, I think the vice president's position on Israel is, he's pro-Israel. But with limits, he's not as pro as Trump is. And he's not as anti as some of the, you know, left and now parts of the modern right are. But he's somewhat skeptical about like just how close we are in doing their bidding militarily. But he is pro-Israel. I think he would describe himself as pro-Israel. Anyway, you can see that, you know, the, the guys at Fox and Friends were not, they were, and I love those guys, but they were, they were not happy with that answer. If you think about it, the whole issue is so bizarre. I mean, sometimes leaders do endorse, or maybe not as quite as overtly as Trump does, because that's just who he is when he does something. He does it very candidly and aggressively. You know, like Obama dorsed the crown when he was running against, uh, during the pen. This, this is not so unusual. But I think that, uh, in this case, you know, it makes sense when say you would like a far right leader and a left-wing leader and you have a right-wing government in the U.S. And, uh, yeah, we prefer the right-wing leader. That makes sense. Same with the Obama and the crown. You can understand why he doesn't want the pen. But in, in, in, in, in, in the case of Israel, none of that things that we fight about here in the U.S. about Israel are really in dispute in Israel. It's not like Netanyahu is running against, you know, Zoran mandami. I mean, all the people who may win, if not Netanyahu, feel pretty much the same way he does about Iran, about Gaza. It's not like these are, these are any real differences for Israel, they, they have a lot of, uh, disputes domestically. I think what JD Van said is, you know, Vice presidents are always in a little bit of a difficult position because he has to, he wants to run in 2028. But in order to do that, he can't have Trump opposed to him. But he also doesn't want to link himself to things that Trump believes that he thinks will be harmful to him or that he doesn't believe. This was clearly a case. And so we appeal to the America first view, which is like, look, this isn't my role as Vice president to tell Israelis who, who, who, who they should elect as the president. And like standing alone, I, I think that makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? Like, why should JD Van or, or Trump be involved in, and focused on Israeli politics? They were elected to represent the American people. And that's what makes that Fox, you know, panel so bizarre. If you don't endorse and it's support Netanyahu, your anti-Israel, more than half of the Israelis don't, he's probably going to lose. He's favored to lose most Israelis don't like Netanyahu. So how does that make you anti Netanyahu? It's not even like his opposed to Israel saying, I won't endorse him. Uh, yeah, I'm sorry. Anti-Israel. Yeah. And also, you know, this whole thing, an unforced era like, why is it an unforced era? It's sitting in the United States for the most part are the one who are caring about. I want to make sure JD Van is helping Netanyahu and they want JD Van's helping them and their family is not Netanyahu. But in Fox news world, yes, it's just so secondary that you love in and revere Israel. Yeah. No, that's, that's true. It was very interesting too, because it's like, I was listening to the Daily Podcast. I think it was yesterday and they took a dive into that election and what the issues are. But it was like, what I didn't know, one of the big issues is, I guess ultra conservative Jews in Israel don't have to serve in the military. Ultra-led Israel. And the other Israelis are mad. They're, they're fed up with it and they want, they, they basically collect all these, you know, tax benefits from, um, everybody else and they don't serve in the military like everybody else and they want to bring an end to that. And there's also a lot of anger toward Netanyahu over 10/7 because these reports came out that he knew he was notified that it was going to happen and they felt like his one big thing was always he was going to keep Israel safe and he didn't do that. So it's like, look, these, these are issues that these Israeli people are going to have to decide. But it's like, it's a good point. Like, why, why does our vice president have to say anything about it? He doesn't have to say anything about it and it's smart politics, not to say anything about it. Right. And I don't think Fox News would be angry if he refused a comment and say who should win in Indonesia or who should win in, like, Uruguay, you know, why does Israel always have this like special sacred status. And like I said, it's not like JD Vant said, Hey, let's cut off all of these are all weapons in aid to Israel and never have anything to do with them again. He just said like, I don't think it's appropriate for me to get involved and endorse one of the candidates and somehow they interpreted that. And they wanted to kind of say anti-Semitic since that's been brewing about JD Vant's as well, they didn't quite go that far, but it was like a sinister implication that somehow is refusal to endorse Netanyahu was indicative of something darker lurking. And there were so many, did bother some assumptions embedded in what and how they reacted. To me, it was indicative of where things are going in the next year and two years, which is like the Fox News, Brigade is definitely going to be behind someone not named JD Vant. JD is not going to get the support of the Fox News. >> Even if Trump and Doris is JD Vant's Fox News will be opposed. >> Yes, yes, 100%. I believe that. I think they will want Marco or in the longer discussion, I heard them just the other day we're talking about who's going to be the president or who are going to be the people running for president and they were like, JD, Marco and one of the anchors was like, don't forget Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz has zero, zero chance of becoming the Republican nominee, zero. But they made sure to mention his name because he's as pro-Israel as they come. It's very clear to me, Fox will get behind the most pro-Israel one who can win. And JD will be left with the rest, sort of the non-Israel Republicans. And it's going to be very, very interesting to see who wins control of the party because whoever's the actual nominee will have control of the party and then we'll see whether they win. I do think JD is going to say repeatedly, I consider Israel an ally. I think the United States should be close to Israel, you know, but I'm more focused on our problems. He's not going to want to lose the Israeli wing of the GOP. >> Right, but I also think he has the best argument because Trump rebranded the Republican party America first and there's no reason JD Vant has to ever say a word critical of Israel. This is actually something like El Said has been doing and mandami and other Democrats, like I think just giving them whatever your view of them as a side politically effectively. You know, the big moment in mandami's campaign that even a lot of people on the right cheered. was when they asked every candidate, what's the first country you're gonna go visit? They all said, Israel, Israel, isn't it? - That was good. - Tommy said, I'm gonna stay here and focus on our citizens, including Jews, in New York, 'cause that's what I'm, and I think that's a winning line. Like, you know, he doesn't have to advance opposed Israel. He can just say, we should work with Israel when it's in our interests, when it's not, you know, that's fine, and we don't have to, but our focus should be on the interests of the American people, and not this devotion to Israel independent of that, and I think that's a winning argument since conservative voters are primed to think of themselves as America first. - That's very good, very, very smart. Yes, he should listen to you. Okay, so the lady, the sex podcaster over at the call, her daddy podcast, I mean, just absolute filth coming out of that mouth and that production, filth on every front. I mean, just absolutely nothing redeeming is being produced from that set. And the latest example is she had on actress Sophia Bush, who I have to be honest, I had no idea whose Sophia Bush was, but this clip caught my attention because of just how ridiculous it was, and offensive, and how terrible the advice was. Turns out Sophia Bush is 44 years old. She played Brook Davis on One Tree Hill, which I have seen, but I don't remember her. I've only seen episodes here or there 'cause my daughter watched it. Just so you know, as you watch this clip, she's had three marriages. One was to Chad Michael Murray, who was also on One Tree Hill and Gilmore Girls. That marriage lasted five months. They separated after five months. He cheated on her with Paris Hilton reportedly. Then she married somebody named Grant Hughes. That marriage lasted 13 months. She filed for divorce 13 months later. And now she's gone full Lesbo. She is now married to a woman. And that's fine, but just a surprise twist at the end there. So she's had three marriages by the age of 44. And she's got thoughts on marriages and partners and so on. And she discussed those with the disgusting call her daddy podcast host. Let's watch. It's only gotten better. And I think that's such a beautiful message to leave women with because I do think we can get really, really in our heads about oh my God. I feel like maybe I shouldn't leave this marriage because can I even get better? And the answer is yes. The answer is always yes. And this idea that it's too late or you're too old or who are you to want more? That's patriarchy. That is crazy. We don't need it. OK. So can I do better? Should I leave this marriage? These two Nimrods would like you to know, Glenn. You know, I just I don't understand what this show even is because it's a bunch of people who have no apparent credentials to do anything other than act. I mean, they're like actors who are very not, but they don't get those kind of people. They get people to come on and talk about it. Every time I hear these clips, kind of about the like most caudry aspects of their sexual one intimate lives that aren't informative. They're just being done for like shock value almost. And when it comes to marriage, you know, we've had a lot of debate about marriage. We changed the conventions of it, not just over, you know, gay couples, but also, you know, divorce used to be extremely ostracized and difficult. And we've loosened that, you know, Ronald Reagan was the first elected, divorced, a person that would be elected. But we've gotten to the point where it's bizarre to me when you hear people say it to say, you know, I give you kind of annoyed in the marriage and things aren't working. Just just leave. Just go to the next one. It's like, what is the point of marriage? You know, to me, one of the most beautiful things of marriage is it's never easy. It's never easy to bring two complex adults together. And especially in this world, and have you far a family and a marriage and kids and like the foundation of it is is that you commit to creating love and building lives together. And this, what I just heard is I, yeah, the minute, you know, you feel like you're a little bit unsatisfied. Just pick up and leave. You're not the slave of the husband. Can I get even better? And the answer is always yes. I mean, that's just, you know, that's just a recipe for either dying with like 14 husbands. Or, you know, just never having the slightest amount of loyalty or commitment to your relationships. Who think, I know you guys were, I was on your back. Jocinski's show. And we talked about your conversation with her about this show, Holiday and the Effect on the Cornell case. This is the same thing. It's like encouraging women to just have a life of constant instability, constant promiscuity, no commitment of any kind because all of it's oppressive. Like, who do you think that's going to lead to anyone having this? - You know what this made me think of? That this, this made me think of Jordan Peterson, who he always raises such good questions when women talk like this. Like, what about you? What, what did you do to cause the marriage to be less than satisfactory to where you're sitting there wondering, can I do better? Maybe you are the problem in the relationship. Why is it all about you and whether you can do better? It's just so, it's narcissistic. It's short-sighted. It takes no responsibility for a woman's role in the partnership. And you do wonder how these two idiots would be reacting if it were two guys like sitting on Joe Rogan being like, when I sit around, you know, the guys, the husbands and we think, can we do better? Leaver, move on. Yes. You can always do better. - Get the number one. Get the next one younger. - Yeah, younger, bigger tits. Go for it. - And we don't really think it's noble. You know, like, I don't understand what this, it's not even a philosophy. It's just pure, libertinism. You know, just pure instant gratification wrapped up with some kind of enlightenment. And I do, I'm far from more or less, like as far as you get, but I think this kind of thing is doing a lot of damage to the centerpiece of our happiness, is our families, and this is a very, you know, destroy your own family. The minute there's a problem message to it. And if anyone's gonna be happy following that message, I have not yet met them. - I mean, as we've been saying, do not follow this podcast for anything enriching in your life. You will be a worse, you'll be an unhappy, dumber version of yourself. Glenn, a pleasure. Thank you so much for being with us. - Always great to see you, Megan. Thanks for having me. - Love you, pod father, to be continued. All right, I'm just gonna continue it for a minute because I want to tell you about this Sophia Bush. This is just so arrogant. Can I get, can I, should, and I wonder, should I, I feel like maybe I shouldn't leave this marriage because can I get even better, and the answer is always yes. And then that Bush agrees. The answer is always yes, it's always yes. Leave your marriage, do it. If you're wondering if you can do better, the answer is yes. Except what if it's not? Honestly, what if it's not? A lot of marriages go through highs and lows. Who was it? Dr. Joyce Brothers, who said something like the secret is staying married for 70 years was we never fell out of love at the same time. Something like that, it was a very clever line, but all marriages have highs and lows. And because you may have a moment of wonder whether you could have gotten even better, does not mean you should leave your marriage. What about your vows? What about your commitment? Like if you're chronically unhappy, or you realize that you've made a terrible mistake that you're not compatible with this person, that there's no way you guys should reproduce together and so on, of course, people get out of marriages. And I ended my first marriage and managed to do so gracefully. My first husband and I are still friends. His life is wonderful. He has a beautiful new family. And obviously this is all 20 years ago. But so I'm not trying to moralize on this issue. People do leave marriages for reasons other than abuse, et cetera. But the willy-nilly-ness of this, we did not end our first marriage willy-nilly. We had tons and tons of talks over it. And I was in therapy, intensive therapy for more than a year, and so on. But my point is simply, this is once again terrible messaging for young women. That if you're sitting around asking, can I get better? Fuck off, that's generally not true. Honestly, and as a woman ages, what do you think? Even less options out there. Fewer options out there for women to select from. And this kind of advice only endangers them. That's all it does. That's all that show does. So this Sophia Bush, she's a charlatan, clearly. She got married to the second husband there, who was the one that lasted 13 months. And she decided, she told Vogue, that when she got engaged to this guy, she said, when I thought about that spotlight that the engagement was gonna cause for her, my activist brain turned on. Global attention is a hell of a platform. And as someone who doesn't love attention, but does love collective activism, I knew that this could be an incredible moment to spin the privilege of attention. So I looked at Grant and I said, honey, I think we should get married in Tulsa. He blinked. Oklahoma, he asked. Yup, imagine what we could do if we turned our wedding into an event to showcase Tulsa, the cultural renaissance happening there. Tech, philanthropy, civil rights, justice, the art, the leadership. We could focus all this attention. turn the spotlight on them. And then during their actual wedding weekend down there, guests were, they went on a walking tour of historic Greenwood, the black neighborhood destroyed in 1921 that included talks from community leaders, stops by a black owned business and saw, I mean, you get the picture of who this woman is. Okay. So she hates attention. That's what she told Vogue. I, I do not love attention. We just took a quick look at her Instagram pictures of herself at the Oscars at the NAACP Awards with Malala, with Kamala Harris. Oh, but turn those cameras away. I hate drawing attention to myself, please. Look at her and with the boost EA, here I am again, maybe with Malala, you just highlight Malala. No, no. Back to me. Here I am. But she hates attention, trust her. So now she's very upset about all the blowback that she has gotten for saying agreeing with Alex Cooper that if you're thinking, can I get even better? And then she went on to say, it's patriarchy to be thinking otherwise. Patriarchy. Now she says the manosphere is big mad over something. One of their minions claims, I said on this podcast, but their rage bait quote isn't something I said. Nordic Alex, yes, you did both of you did. It's right there. Play the tape. You're really telling on yourselves and how much you hate a woman with agency, y'all, you are allowed to outgrow your life. You are allowed to be unhappy and make a change. You're allowed to get what you thought you wanted and realize you don't adjust accordingly. You're a human being, not a checklist and on and on. She goes, okay, like her, you could wind up with three marriages. And there's no question that the third one will fail too. By the time you're 44 and no children, by the way, only the most recent female partner has children who I guess are now her step, but she has no kids. She has two failed marriages. She's on the third. She's switched genders and I guess is now changed her sexuality and hates attention, except for all the pictures she's posted of herself online and really wants other girls to follow in her footsteps. On behalf of the mothers of America, may I tell you it's a no, a hard no. Okay, and we end with this, Ellen DeGeneres, of course, she is very nasty and she masqueraded as something other than that for years on her talk show. She was known as like the fun, lighthearted, gay one, both gay and attitude and an actual sexuality. And all she did was dance and make people happy and that was just Ellen. While those of us in the biz knew that Ellen was a raging bitch who her staff couldn't stand long before it broke into the public, I think I've told you that I know somebody who has a very close relative who worked for Ellen who said they were not allowed to look at her in the hallways. It was a specific edict she handed down that you were not allowed to make eye contact with her. And honestly, like if you treat all the people around you like shit, it will come back to haunt you. This is why I have people who have been working for me for literally 20 years, multiple people who have been with me more than decade, more than 20 years. Because when you treat people well and you show them respect, even if you're a tough boss, they enjoy working at your place of business. They trust you not to be a complete asshole who's going to pull the rug out from under them if they make a mistake or have a bad week, et cetera. And Ellen DeGeneres was exactly the opposite. And as it's so often the case, the ones who are over the top and their fake niceness are always the biggest bitches. So that's why Ellen now lives in the cotswolds with Meghan Markle instead of in LA filming her talk show. It ended because she got outed as a serial bully. And a former staff member of hers named Johnny Hillbrant Partridge, who's the creator behind PE Guy, another show, gave an interview on a podcast called the CEO series with William Salvey earlier this month. And this clip is making the rounds. Watch this. Okay. So I did see that you worked at the Ellen DeGeneres show. I sure did. How was that? That was. I met a lot of great people, did she? She was not. she just was not nice. She was just not pleasant. Like there was no, like, and it was like this weird, like, you know, double worse product, like she's coming kind of thing. Right. She, if you saw a bodyguard walking towards you, you knew she was behind him. The presentation of the world was like, woo, we haven't fun at the office and we're scaring each other. And like, and I was like, this is going to be fun. We're going to dance at work. And it was like, no, no, no, no. I started as an intern there in the summer before the show started filming season 10. And I was like, I'm so excited to, you know, like, meet Ellen and the other production assistants were like, no, you're not. You will not, like, do not meet her. And I thought they were kidding. I was like, oh, like, no, no, no, no, don't, like, don't walk up to her or don't. So we never interacted. But I would walk past her all the time and I just describe it as she would look through you. I kept saying to my friends, like, this is Hollywood's best kept secret. So when it all started coming out in the news that she wasn't very pleasant, I was like, wonderful. Okay. And now bring it all for full circle. Who is she hanging out with now? Megan Markle. Honestly, it's like these, these two nasty women found each other and at least put out, you know, propaganda paparazzi photos to show you, oh, I've got a list friends. Guess what? Neither of you is an a list person anymore. Megan Markle never was. Ellen DeGeneres was for a time. But I bet she can't get people to take her calls now because no one wants to be associated with that. I mean, honestly, you're not allowed to look at her in the hallways, both because I was told it was a specific instruction and also then just like hiding in your own place of business behind what multiple bodyguards so that your staff can't speak to you, can't come up to you. So things ended there as one might predict and look, she still got more money than God and it still is pretty embittered from what we hear just like her pal, Megan Markle, who as of today has got much, much bigger problems. We will continue to follow this saga and update you if there's something big over the weekend. We may update you on it, but we will certainly have the latest of it on it on Monday. In the meantime, I don't know about you, but we are getting close to Halloween. So we've got quite a few spooky events planned for this weekend. I'm very excited by it. My biggest project will be we are getting our big pumpkin and we are going to start a little candy corn pufferfish pumpkin. You know that we do every year that's strudwig constantly attacks and eats. Remember when I had to pay seven thousand dollars for an endoscopy, only to find out that the blockage in his body was the wax lips from our from our pufferfish pumpkin. He's so naughty. Anyway, this is the year that that's not going to happen. And we'd love to hear about your favorite Halloween traditions, send me an email. It's Megan at Megankelly.com and maybe I will show you some of what we have accomplished when we get back to set on Monday. Lots of love to you all. We'll see you then. Have a great weekend. Thanks for listening to The Megankelly Show, no BS, no agenda and no fear.