reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Megyn Kelly discusses a significant day for Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election, focusing on a hearing that could potentially expose misconduct by Fulton County DA Fanny Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade. Allegations suggest that Wade engaged in a kickback scheme with Willis, whom he allegedly had an affair with, raising questions about conflicts of interest in the prosecution of Trump. Testimony from Robin YY, a friend of Willis, claims the affair began in 2019, contradicting the prosecutors' statements that it started in 2022. The defense has obtained phone records showing over 2,000 calls and nearly 12,000 texts exchanged between Wade and Willis before their claimed affair began, suggesting a close relationship. The judge's ruling allows for further examination of Terrence Bradley, a witness who has previously expressed reluctance to testify. The stakes are high, as the judge could disqualify both prosecutors if they are found to have lied under oath about their relationship. Kelly emphasizes the ethical implications of prosecutors lying to the court, which could lead to serious consequences, including disbarment. Phil Holloway, a legal expert, joins the discussion, highlighting the importance of due process and the potential need for a new prosecutor if Willis is disqualified. The conversation shifts to the broader implications of the case and the political motivations behind it, with Kelly suggesting that Willis's ambition may have influenced her handling of the prosecution. Later, Kelly covers the tragic case of Laken Riley, a nursing student murdered by an illegal immigrant, discussing the implications of immigration policy on public safety. Mary Katherine Ham joins to analyze the political responses to the incident, criticizing the left for downplaying the connection between illegal immigration and crime. The discussion also touches on the disturbing reactions to the self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell, who protested against perceived injustices in Palestine, and the valorization of his act by some political figures, raising concerns about mental health and societal values. The episode concludes with reflections on media bias and the challenges of free inquiry in journalism, particularly in light of recent controversies surrounding the New York Times and political discourse.

Megyn Kelly discusses a significant hearing in Fulton County regarding former President Donald Trump, focusing on testimony from Terrence Bradley, a friend and former lawyer of special prosecutor Nathan Wade. Bradley's testimony was marked by evasiveness and a lack of recall, raising suspicions about his credibility. He claimed not to remember key details about the romantic relationship between Wade and Fulton County DA Fanny Willis, despite having previously communicated specifics via text to defense attorney Ashley Merchant. Kelly highlights that Bradley had previously told Merchant that the affair began before Willis hired Wade, contradicting their sworn statements. The texts exchanged between Bradley and Merchant reveal that he was confident about the timeline and details of the relationship, including where they met. Despite this, on the stand, Bradley claimed he was speculating and could not recall the information he had previously provided. The judge ruled that Bradley had to testify, dismissing claims of attorney-client privilege. Kelly emphasizes that the texts serve as substantive evidence that contradicts Bradley's courtroom testimony. Phil Holloway, an attorney and guest on the show, notes that the text messages are crucial for impeachment, as they show inconsistencies in Bradley's statements. He explains that the judge can consider these prior inconsistent statements as evidence, potentially impacting the case against Willis and Wade. The discussion also touches on the implications of the Georgia State Senate's investigation into the Fulton DA's office, which has issued subpoenas for text communications related to the case. Holloway suggests that if the judge finds evidence of fraud, it could have serious consequences for Willis and her team. The conversation concludes with speculation about the motivations behind the prosecution and the potential need for an independent investigation into the conduct of those involved.

Megyn Kelly opens the show discussing various legal cases, including the Kansas City Chiefs fans found frozen outside a friend's house, and the trial of Michelle Traconis, the alleged affair partner of a man accused of murdering his wife. Traconis is on trial for allegedly helping dispose of the victim's belongings after the husband died by suicide. Kelly emphasizes the importance of free speech, promoting a bottled water company, Freedom 20, which supports the right to offend and express oneself. She then introduces her guests, Arthur Idala and Mark Eiglarsh, who discuss a recent incident in New York City involving migrants arrested for allegedly assaulting police officers. The guests express frustration over the leniency of the judicial system, particularly regarding bail policies that allow suspects to be released without bail. The conversation shifts to the case of Daniel Penny, who is facing charges related to a subway incident. Idala highlights the disparity in treatment between Penny and the migrants who assaulted police officers, noting the lack of accountability for the latter. The discussion touches on the broader implications of crime and bail reform in New York. Next, the hosts discuss a bizarre case involving three Kansas City Chiefs fans who died from fentanyl overdoses after visiting a friend known for making drug cocktails. Toxicology reports reveal the deceased had lethal doses of fentanyl in their systems. The conversation raises questions about the responsibility of the friend, dubbed "the chemist," who was inside the house during the incident. The dialogue transitions to the ongoing legal troubles of Fanny Willis, the Fulton County District Attorney, who is facing scrutiny over her personal relationship with a special prosecutor involved in the Trump case. The hosts speculate on whether this relationship could affect the integrity of the case and whether she should recuse herself. The show also covers the trial of Jennifer Crumbley, the mother of a school shooter, who is being charged for her alleged negligence in not recognizing her son's mental health issues and for providing him access to a firearm. The guests debate the merits of the prosecution's case against her, with differing opinions on parental responsibility in such tragic circumstances. Finally, the discussion shifts to Alec Baldwin, who has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter charges related to the shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the set of "Rust." The hosts analyze the complexities of the case, including the responsibilities of actors and crew members regarding firearm safety on set. The episode concludes with a focus on the Alec Murdoch case, where a judge denied a motion for a new trial despite juror testimony suggesting influence from a court clerk. The guests reflect on the implications of the case for the legal system in South Carolina and the importance of accountability within the profession.

Megyn Kelly discusses the ongoing Fani Willis case involving former President Donald Trump and his co-defendants, highlighting a hearing that could impact the case's future. The defense claims that DA Fani Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade financially benefited from the case and were in a romantic relationship before Wade's hiring. The judge is not expected to rule immediately, but the hearing may indicate whether Willis and Wade will be removed from the case. Jesse Kelly joins Megyn to discuss the implications of the case, emphasizing the corruption at the local political level and the potential consequences for the country if Trump is legally destroyed. They express skepticism about the integrity of the legal system and the motivations behind the prosecution, suggesting that political ambitions drive these actions. The conversation shifts to Trump's legal challenges outside Georgia, particularly the Mar-a-Lago documents case, where trial dates are being debated. Jesse speculates that Trump's team may be strategically delaying trials to avoid conflicts with the election timeline. The hosts then address the Biden administration's handling of immigration, noting a shift in public opinion as illegal immigration becomes a bipartisan concern. They discuss the political ramifications of immigration policies and how they may affect future elections. Finally, they introduce a docu-series by the Independent Women's Forum that examines the dangers of allowing trans-identifying males into women's prisons. Amy Ichikawa, a former inmate, shares her experiences with a trans-identified male in her prison, highlighting the emotional and physical safety concerns for incarcerated women. Kelsey Bowler emphasizes the need for women's voices to be heard in this debate, advocating for their rights and safety.

Megyn Kelly opens the show discussing the New Hampshire primary, highlighting Nikki Haley's campaign and her recent victory in Dixville Notch, where she received six votes against Donald Trump. The conversation shifts to the significance of this primary for Haley, with New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu emphasizing the importance of a strong showing. Rich Lowry and Charles C.W. Cooke join the discussion, expressing skepticism about Haley's chances against Trump, who leads significantly in the polls. Lowry notes that polling in New Hampshire can be unpredictable, but the momentum appears to favor Trump. Cooke agrees, suggesting that it feels inevitable Trump will be the nominee, despite potential legal challenges he may face in the coming months. They discuss Haley's shifting messaging, with her now claiming she is running to win rather than just to perform well. Lowry believes Haley's chances are slim and predicts she may drop out soon if she does not secure a strong result. The conversation then turns to Ron DeSantis, with Cooke reflecting on his campaign's failures and mistakes, particularly his inability to connect with voters and his focus on niche issues rather than broader concerns. They discuss the importance of charisma and performance in presidential campaigns, contrasting DeSantis's executive abilities with his lack of engaging communication skills. As the discussion progresses, they touch on the implications of Trump's legal troubles and how they may affect his candidacy. Lowry argues that the indictments could energize Trump's base, while Cooke expresses concern about the potential fallout from these legal issues among moderate voters. The hosts then pivot to the border crisis, discussing a recent Supreme Court ruling that favored the Biden administration over Texas's efforts to secure its border. They criticize the federal government's handling of immigration and the political ramifications for the Democrats, noting that the issue is becoming increasingly pressing for voters. Finally, they address the ongoing developments in the Fanny Willis case against Trump, highlighting allegations of impropriety involving Willis and a special prosecutor. The discussion raises questions about the integrity of the prosecution and its potential impact on the case against Trump, with both Lowry and Cooke expressing skepticism about Willis's ability to continue as the lead prosecutor. The episode concludes with a reminder of the importance of the New Hampshire primary results and their implications for the Republican race.

Megyn Kelly opens the show celebrating the disqualification of Fulton County DA Fanny Willis from the Trump election interference case by a Georgia appeals court, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battles against Trump. The court confirmed that the indictment against Trump and his co-defendants remains intact, raising questions about who will take over the case. Legal experts, including Ashley Merchant, who played a crucial role in Willis's disqualification, discuss the implications of the ruling, emphasizing the impropriety of Willis's relationship with a co-prosecutor, Nathan Wade, which compromised the integrity of the case. Merchant expresses her excitement over the ruling, noting that it validates their claims of impropriety and suggests that an independent prosecutor would likely dismiss the case due to lack of probable cause. The conversation highlights the potential for the case to "die on the vine" under a neutral prosecutor. The panel discusses Willis's intent to appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court, though they predict the court will not take the case, given the strength of the appellate ruling. The discussion shifts to the broader implications of the ruling for Trump and his co-defendants, with legal analysts asserting that the case is effectively over and that Willis's actions could lead to further scrutiny of her conduct. The panel reflects on the political motivations behind the prosecution, suggesting that bias against Trump influenced Willis's decisions. As the conversation continues, the hosts and guests express concern over potential disruptions from political adversaries as a new administration approaches. They also touch on the broader context of Trump's legal challenges, including ongoing cases and the implications of his presidency on these legal matters. The show concludes with a discussion on the media's portrayal of Trump and the shifting political landscape, emphasizing the resilience of Trump's support despite the legal challenges he faces. The panelists express optimism about the future, suggesting that the ruling against Willis could restore some faith in the justice system and benefit Trump politically.

On the Megyn Kelly Show, the discussion centers around the Georgia election interference case involving Donald Trump and others, focusing on District Attorney Fanny Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade. The court is set to hold an evidentiary hearing regarding motions to disqualify Willis and Wade due to alleged improprieties, including a personal relationship that may have led to financial benefits for Willis. The defendants, particularly Michael Roman, argue that the relationship between Willis and Wade creates a conflict of interest, as evidence suggests Willis has paid Wade over $650,000 in taxpayer money since he was hired. The defense claims that the couple took multiple trips together while prosecuting Trump, with Wade allegedly covering most expenses. Willis denies any financial benefit from hiring Wade and asserts they were not in a romantic relationship at that time. However, Wade's sworn affidavit contradicts this, claiming their relationship began after his hiring, while the defense argues it started earlier. The judge has allowed witness testimony to explore these claims, including from Wade's former divorce lawyer, who may testify about the timeline of the relationship. If the defense can prove that Willis and Wade lied under oath, it could lead to their disqualification from the case and potential criminal charges. Legal experts on the show express concerns about the implications of these developments, suggesting that if proven, both Willis and Wade could face serious consequences, including disbarment. The discussion also touches on the broader political ramifications of the case, with implications for Trump's legal battles and the integrity of the prosecution. The conversation shifts to the political landscape, discussing the implications of recent elections and the potential for changes in leadership within the Democratic Party, particularly regarding Vice President Kamala Harris. Speculation arises about possible replacements, including Susan Rice, but doubts are raised about her viability as a candidate. The episode concludes with a critique of societal trends, particularly regarding the treatment of older individuals in volunteer roles and the pressures of modern identity politics, exemplified by a 90-year-old woman who was dismissed for not understanding the need to include pronouns in her communications. The hosts express concern over the prioritization of political correctness over experience and reality.