Clancy Holdout Juror "Black Man" Bombshell, and AI "Superintelligence" Gambit, w/ VandeHei and Allen

Hey everyone, I'm Megan Kelly. Welcome. to the Megan Kelly show and happy. Monday. We have a great show for you. today, including some wild reports about. the jury in the Lindsay Clancy. Okay, can you believe I have you heard about. what they are doing to that one hold out. juror? They're torturing him. This guy. has now been doxed. His alleged criminal. past has been outed. They are literally. doing stories on whether he is paying. his rent. This is insane.

It's already tough enough to get people. to actually serve as jurors. They'll. find every excuse in the book to get out. of it. Most normies will. Do you think. this is going to help? Do you think. anybody's going to want to serve on a. jury now? Um the it the irresponsibility of this. is really stunning to me and I cannot. believe that the legal community hasn't. been more outspoken about this because.

they are the ones who are at the apex of. picking jurors and understanding how. important it is to protect jurors and. not just when they're in the box, but. like if if you're protected when you're. in the box, but as soon as you leave the. box, you can have your entire life. ruined. Why again? Because you didn't go. along with the 11 weirdos who wanted to. find a woman who admitted to killing her. three children guilty of murder. How are. we ever going to find anybody? This guy, he did nothing wrong. He didn't agree.

with them. He wanted a guilty verdict. That's it. That's all this guy has done. And his life [music] is being ruined. This is very wrong. We will get into it. in just a bit. Don't miss a moment. Subscribe to this show on YouTube and. follow me on Insta, Facebook, and X. We've all heard those radio ads about. owing money to the IRS. They try to. scare you and push you into calling out. of fear. But Tax Relief Advocates takes. a different approach. If you owe the IRS.

5,000, 50,000, or even 500,000 bucks, TRA has real solutions to fix your tax. problem. Do not freak out and don't lose. hope because TRA can often reduce or. yes, hear me out, completely eliminate. what you owe. How would that be? Their. focus is on taxes and helping people and. businesses resolve IRS problems. They're. experts at this. They have more than. a,000 five-star Google reviews and an A+.

rating from the Better Business Bureau. You no longer have to fear the IRS. Generous relief programs exist right now. that can give you a clean slate if. you've got somebody to help you navigate. the system. So act today. All right. Go. to t.com. That's t.com or call. 8005756845. Again, the number is 8005756845. Tax relief advocates. Real solutions for.

real people. We've got to get to the latest on the. hold out juror in the Lindsay Clancy. [music] case. All right. Just before. Labor Day, the jurors in the case. announced that they were deadlocked and. they could not reach a decision on. whether 36-year-old Lindseay Clancy was. criminally responsible for the 2023. killing of her three children, 5-year-old Kora, three-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Ken Clancy. Through a. series of media interviews, jurors.

confirmed that the vote was 11 to1 to. find Clancy not guilty by reason of. insanity. And insanity is what we have. seen in every corner since that mistrial. was declared. I I'm going to go through. a few chapters of it. I'll start with. this one. It happened just this past. Friday. It involves Gail King, who was. very, very surprised to learn from juror. Paula Develin, who is she's the new JLo. She thinks she's seen on camera just as.

much as JLo has been uh in the past. week. Really enjoying her two minutes. Uh but she told Gail King something. specific about the hold out juror's. identity that Gail really had to work to. grapple with. Watch. I'm curious about. the jurors themselves because we know it. was nine women, three men. What was the. age range? What was the racial makeup? I. haven't heard any of that. What was it? >> Um 70 in 70ish to 22. >> Mhm.

>> And um one person of color and then. everybody else was white. Um. a lot of the jurors had children. >> Uhhuh. And. >> one person of color was a person of. color a woman or a man? >> A man. >> A man. Is a hold out juror a person of a. black man? >> Yes. >> A black man is a hold out juror. >> Yes. >> Well, I have to sit with that for just a. second. Was there.

um. why. I I genuinely don't get it. You presumed. that anybody who would be willing to. find her guilty after she murdered her. three children would be white. because all black men vote to acquit. Gail, someone might accuse you of.

racism. You better watch it. It's a. racist attitude to take a group, an. entire group of people, and assume they. vote one way or another based on skin. color. Even a black man, Gail, can be a. thinking individual, sentient person who. comes up with his own viewpoints on. life, liberty, and criminality in a. court of law. And if this man hadn't.

been capable of doing that, presumably. he would not have been selected as a. juror. That I'm sorry, but that's just. so bizarre. Like, what what is she like? Of course, a black man wouldn't be the. one we've all grown to hate. Obviously, when I'm thinking of who do. we all hate, I'm thinking it must be a. white person. I mean, that's really what. she seems to be saying there. It's a. very strange reaction. Why? I hope she. does think on it and reports back on CBS.

Morning Show about why it was so. difficult for her to understand. Okay, but Gail King is the least of our. problems today. NBC Boston has lost its ever loving. mind. NBC Boston could now get off if it. were to commit a crime on a defense of. insanity because clearly they've lost it. over there. Who is running that joint? like NBC corporate must step in and rein.

in its out of control station because. they just did a I mean a fullon. investigation. into the hold out juror. They they. investigated this guy like they were. looking for OJ in the white Bronco. Like. we they gave this guy a proctologology. exam over the weekend and they are so. proud about doing this to a juror. Wait.

a minute. Is the juror accused of. killing his three children? Is that like. No. Wait a minute. Why are we doing. investigations of jurors? That's really This whole segment should. end right there. Don't investigate. jurors. Bye. And back to our other news. Like, that's. really where I would love to end this, but because they've lost their. minds, I've got to tell you what they've.

done because now we need accountability. for NBC Boston. I mean, very, very. badly. And they're not the only ones. So, they decided really truly it would. be a great idea to completely upend this. man's life. And though they gave it the. patina of confidentiality because they. didn't report his name, they reported. enough about him that it's very easy to. figure out who it is. And the internet. has already done its part. They the name.

is everywhere. We're we will not be. repeating it here. But they of course released enough info. that any amateur sleuth who's familiar. with the internet could figure it out. And they did and query whether that was. intended all along. And what they found. and they really want you to know that. this again juror this juror who's he's. done nothing wrong. He voted to find her. guilty. That's his sin. It's not like. there was tumult in the jury room and he.

punched one of the ladies in the face. Like okay then then we might be like who. the hell is this guy? How did he get on. the That's not what happened there. What. we heard from these nut cases last week. was he was arrogant. You say, "Okay, does that mean your life gets ruined. after you sit on jury duty?" He wouldn't. listen. He crossed his arms. Is that. what did it? Your life gets ruined if. you don't listen to the weird hens. across the table from you, insisting. that you have it wrong. It It's They're.

very upset over this crazy soundbite. that we played last week. Um, oh, I. don't know if we have it, but it's uh. it's the one where the juror is like, he. really couldn't get over the fact that. she viciously murdered her three. children. That's this guy's sin. So, what they found at NBC Boston is that. this evil, evil juror. had domestic violence allegations. against him in his past, including a.

2021 criminal charge that was dropped. But there was a criminal charge brought. after his 13-year-old nephew called 911. on him. And when the cops arrived at the. house, the nephew allegedly told them. that this juror had grabbed his wife's. throat and had thrown her into a. dresser. NBC Boston reports the couple. is now divorced and that the criminal. charge, as I said, was later dismissed.

The station also reports that this hold. out altogether now juror later had a. restraining order taken out against him. by the very same nephew who is now older. when he sought a restraining order. I by. my math he was would have been 19 when. he sought it. Um the same guy who had. called 911 against him years earlier and. that that restraining order appears to. still be active. So what we have is a.

juror with an allegation. uncharged. several years ago of allegedly hurting. his wife. The wife didn't testify. The. wife said she was afraid she was going. to lose custody. That does happen all. the time in domestic violence cases. I'm. not saying [clears throat] he's guilty, but I'm saying that pattern would fit. Nonetheless, it was many years ago, but. I think six six years ago. And um the. only current charge is the nephew.

alleging, [snorts] hold on, that he got. a restraining order recently after the. juror pushed him to the ground and. repeatedly punched him in the face. The. teen wrote in his affidavit that his. uncle then said, "You ruined my blanking. life." And this is a reference to what. had happened 6 years earlier when the. nephew called the police on him after he. allegedly beat his wife and that the. juror said, "You've had this coming your.

way for a long time." That restraining. order was still active when the juror. was selected for the Clansancy trial and. listens listened to the evidence. Now there is a question about whether. somebody with an active restraining. order against them um never mind the. earlier allegation. was just an allegation that resulted in. a charge that that was dropped um would. be bounced by any prosecutor or defense.

attorney in a case like this. I don't. think it actually prohibits you from. being able to serve, although I'm not. sure about that to be honest. I'd have. to go back and check the ethical rules. Um, but an active restraining order to. me seems like something that would lead. one side or the other to bounce you. Probably the prosecution because they'd. say he's anti-law enforcement. [clears throat]. In that particular this particular case, you would have been wrong if you'd. placed that bet. But whatever, I'm just.

gameplaying it out in my head. There. could be. The NBC Boston legal analyst. said, "I don't see how they would have. allowed him to become a member of this. jury." And that's an that's a Boston. chief legal analyst, Michael Coin. So, it doesn't appear that even he who seems. to be, I would assume, more familiar. with the Boston rules of court there, uh. is saying it would have been a. mustbounce situation, but uh rather in. the prerogative of the lawyers. Now, they also are reporting that the.

standard juror questionnaire in. Massachusetts. will ask if someone's been arrested, charged with a crime, or has been served. with a court order. Of course, we know. that. And that those boxes should have. been checked by this juror. But there's. a there's a thing with juror. questionnaires. You see, they're not. public records. And so, it's unclear if. the document in question is still. available. it would be up to council to. hold on to them or destroy them. Uh, so.

I imagine the council has them because. as we just went through on MK. Confidential, which is our new crime. series, it's been airing Monday through. Friday at 9:00 p.m. um on both YouTube. and podcast. We just went through this. in the Mark Geros representation of. Scott Peterson where what happened in. that case was one of the jurors, Strawberry Shortcake, Relle Nice, she. found him guilty after the fact she was. having real like emotional problems and. her counselor told her to start writing. letters to Scott Peterson in jail. It's.

a bad advice. Um, so she did. She wrote. something like 17 letters and he started. writing her back and then somebody did a. story on it and now suddenly the defense. lawyers lawyers for Scott Peterson and. the appella team got very interested in. this woman. She was admitting to all. sorts of you know issues in her past. psychological and otherwise and now. they're they want to know more about. Michelle and I believe in the course of. that either in those letters or she said. something in that those letters that.

made them go check and it turned out she. had been the victim of a crime. She had. allegedly been harassed by her. boyfriend's ex-girlfriend and had taken. out a restraining order on her while. Relle was pregnant. So, here's a. pregnant woman who's suffering the. threat of violence indirectly as a. result of her boyfriend. You know, the. boyfriend's ex-girlfriend, but you know, you can see the parallels and why. potentially a defense lawyer for Scott. Peterson might not want her on the jury,

but it wasn't disclosed by her. This. turned out in this turned into a juror. issue like misconduct issue that is. still open in the case that's still not. totally resolved. The Innocence Project. of LA has taken up the matter and is. trying to press that one on appeal. So, um, not disclosing your connections with. law enforcement along those lines can be. very problematic. I don't know whether. this guy disclosed or didn't, but the. fact that we're even discussing this,

not because the juror revealed something. potentially problematic, etc., but. because the other jurors didn't like his. verdict is insane. and deeply immoral, and we should not be doing this, NBC. Boston, we should not be doing this. And. by the way, the remedy in such a case. would typically be like, let's say this. jury had found her.

not guilty by reason of insanity. And this guy, well, I guess we'll have. to go with his verdict. He wanted a. guilty. Let's say this guy had convinced. everybody to vote guilty. He had turned. all the jurors his way and they all. voted guilty. But now it turns out he's. got an issue in his past. You could potentially, I mean, the. remedy would be the Kevin Readington. would be in there trying to overturn the. verdict and get a new trial. Well, that's the road we're headed down. anyway. So, what exactly did the NBC.

Boston of the world want to have happen. here, that that retroactively. they're going to nullify this juror and. come up with the jury? That's that's not. how this works. I I do not know of a. case in which they've resurrected a dead. verdict, a verdict that was never handed. down nor reached thanks to one juror. And now with all the jurors back at. home, because. like what the the typical remedy had.

this guy been struck from the jury. during the course of the deliberations. would be to then replace him with an. alternate and to start at square one, not to just agree to a verdict with 11. jurors. The prosecution would not have. agreed to that. though I think they might have been able. to uh if if Lindsey Clancy's lawyer did. So in any event, what is this all. toward? Just to smear him, just to show. that the people who supported him are. bad people who they were like this one. guy who outed his name in his uh Twitter.

post was like people have been louding. him as a hero or a whatever. Okay. So, like obviously that was a reference to. the fact that he stood up for the guilt. of this woman and nobody knew anything. about like as if people knew all this. about him. But it's irrelevant. The. point is I I called him a hero. I stand. by it. It's it wasn't in his personal. life when none of us knew anything about. his personal life. It was for towing. standing the line in in response to that. 11 person band of shrews who tried to.

bully him out of what we believed was. the right judgment. So this is just out. of control, but there's more. Okay, I'm. not done. Um, here's the NBC Boston. report in part. You can just watch them. reporting it. It goes on this report. It's like it goes on, but here's a bit. sad 18. >> Okay, sir. you have any issue complying. with the order that you stay away from. and have no contact directly or. indirectly with the alleged victim in. this case and also that you not abuse. this person. >> You're listening to audio the NBC 10.

investigators obtained from Brockton. District Court in September 2021. >> That's when the holdout juror in the. Lindsay Clancy case faced a criminal. charge for assaulting his wife. According to this police report, the. juror's 13-year-old nephew called 911. after seeing his uncle grab his wife by. the throat and throw her into a dresser. The report says the juror's mom. repeatedly screamed, "You're evil." as. police arrested him. Court records show. the couple divorced after the incident, and the criminal charge was eventually.

dismissed. The ex-wife told me this week. she didn't want to testify in the case. because she was worried about losing. custody of her daughter. Last year, that. same teenage nephew took out this. restraining order after he says the. juror pushed him to the ground and. repeatedly punched him in the face. The. teen wrote that his uncle then said, "You ruined my life for calling the. police and added, "You've had this. coming your way for a long time.". >> Officers did observe that the nephew had. um injuries to his left eye and his. clothes were gripped.

>> That restraining order was still active. when the juror was selected for the. Lindsey Clansancy trial. >> Okay, now it's not just this alleged. domestic violence. They also really want. you to know that the hold out juror. didn't pay his rent. [laughter] This is so effed up. NBC 10. Boston investigators also learned that. the holdout juror has not paid the. monthly rent at his home since last.

March. He is a rent evader. A rent evad. AHA. [laughter]. AGAIN, the irony to all of this is had. all of this been disclosed on his juror. questionnaire, I guarantee you it would. have been the prosecution that would. have bounced him and Kevin Readington. would have said, "I'm good with this. juror. He flouts the law. He doesn't. seem to think much of, you know, abiding. by certain serious laws.

Neither does my client. He's good." And. it would have been the prosecution that. said, "No, this is not somebody who on. paper we believe in.". Um, and honestly, it's like in any other. circumstance, had this guy been holding. out. for a not guilty and the 11 wanted. guilty, the Gail Kings of the world. would be standing up to say, "How dare. you? How dare you harass this poor black. juror who, you know, you don't you don't.

know his lived experience. You don't. understand how he might see the way law. enforcement conducted this investigation. that he's entitled to draw a decision. based on his own conscience and lived. experience. F you. Right. But now Gail's. got to think about this because it's the. it's the black guy who wanted to vote. with the man. It's a very confusing situation. And now. it gets more confusing for the Gail. Kings of the world because not only. that, but now the black guy is going to.

get harassed, is in the process of. getting harassed by a bunch of whites at. NBC Boston and she she doesn't feel like. she can quite stand up for him. The BLM. brigade is like. I'm not sure if we're for this guy. [laughter]. He vo he's like voted like with the man. The man is whitey like Tim Cruz the DA. we're against him. How what what did he. do? They they don't generally like it. when, you know, strong.

black. individuals stand up for themselves in a. way that doesn't pursue or or defend li. liberal dogma. And the current liberal. dogma is that you're some sort of a. fascist if you think Lindseay Clancy is. a murderer who should go to jail instead. of the mental institution. Okay, here's more. As jurors deliberated. last week, the landlord secured a jud. This is brand new. It's fresh. The rent. evasion is fresh. As jurors deliberated,

the landlord secured a judgment of more. than $12,000 in unpaid rent. He's a. scoff law, I tell you, and is moving. forward with an eviction. Housing court. records show they pulled the housing. court records to find out [laughter]. if he how how how late is he? How how. much inner rears? How many months and. how much? 12,000 I tell you. And they've.

moved to evict people. How can we. possibly let the judgment stand? What. judgment? The mistrial. What? Wait. The the little dog caught its tail. when. the NBC 10 Boston investigators. contacted. the hold out juror's family members. This is too far. I'm laughing just. because it's so absurd. People when have. you ever heard of such a thing? Like.

again, they are treating him like he got. into the jury room and then set off a. grenade, like lit a pipe bomb and hurt. several jurors. That's that's when you. contact the family members, you check. the housing records, you pull up. restraining orders, you contact the. agrieved nephew. It is all hands on. deck, people. No, that did not happen. They said he sat with his arms crossed. and he was arrogant, said the chef, who.

by the way, now we find out has her own. criminal allegations in her past. Let's let's give them all a. proctologology exam. Come on. It's good. for the goose. They contacted his family members who. said he had been estranged with them. since the incident with his nephew. None. of them knew about his involvement with. the Clancy trial. One family member. described him as a narcissist. Oh, that.

just dubtales perfectly with what the. bitter hens said, who she believes never. should have served as a juror in such an. important case. Oh, who was that family. member? Could it have been the ex-wife. who hates his guts? We should disclose. that. NBC Boston, if you're talking to. the embittered ex-wife, she should not. be quote family member should be more. specific than this. In [snorts] the wake. of those revelations, uh, their legal analyst said he thinks. the hold out juror's questionnaire will.

have to be reviewed by prosecutors to. see if the information the juror put. down was truthful. Ready for this? What happened? What happened when there. was a We found out that there was a. juror holding out. We were all together. Was it not this past Thursday, but the. one before, right before Labor Day, and. what did Kevin Readington do? He went to. that judge when the jury was out of the. courtroom and he said, "I believe that. juror lied to you." He lied to you when.

he said he could follow the law and be. fair and committed a crime. That's what. he basically accused him of. He said he. lied to you under oath. Now, you don't. need a law degree to know that that's. perjury. And generally, people. understand that's a felony. It's not. just any old crime. That's the f-word. kind of crime. That juror was not there. to defend himself. It was a despicable. thing to do. But Kevin Readington did it. before accusing him of violating the. Americans with Disabilities Act. It's.

all hands on deck to try to get that. juror off the case. And now. you have the NBC10 Boston legal analyst. pointing out that um. if if the jury if the juror lied on his. questionnaire, it's a crime. It's a. crime. Again, like I'm actually not clear whether. there whether it would have made it. impossible for him to serve the fact.

that he had a restraining order against. him. But now we're talking about. something else. Did he lie on the jury. questionnaire? And back to the Scott. Peterson example. When Relle Nice. ultimately did get brought in, the the. appellet court dismissed 18 of Scott. Peterson's 19 appellet arguments except. for the one about her and said he does. deserve a hearing on whether Michelle. Nice lied on that jury questionnaire in. order to get on this jury, which would.

be grounds for a new trial. So, the. appellet court didn't reverse the. judgment, but said to the trial court, "You got to drag this gal back in there. You got to have a hearing." So, they. gave Relle Nice immunity, meaning we promised we're not going to. prosecute you for perjury because you. did not answer your jury questionnaire. Honestly, you put down that you had no active. court proceedings or court orders, etc. that were active, and you did. You had. this restraining order against your. boyfriend's ex-girlfriend. So, she had. to be given immunity to give testimony.

on that. Um, so now this guy's coming. right out and saying in fact it is a. crime not to do so, not to be truthful. on your jury questionnaire. So now that. is not once but at least twice that some. poor schle who'd probably rather be. doing anything other than jury duty has. been threatened with a crime. threatened. with criminal prosecution potentially.

for sitting his ass in the doldrums of. jury duty around these other idiots. getting your bland turkey sandwich for. lunch every day in your uncomfortable. chairs and sitting around with a bunch. of people who probably can't stand you. How. I like how is anybody going to serve. jury duty after this? How is any legal. case not not going to get jurors who say.

I'm out? I can't do it. I don't want to. have have happen to me what happened to. this guy in the Lindseay Clancy case. I. can't be fair. They already do that. You. know, Matt Walsh was online. He was. making a good point. He's like, "People. lie to get out of jury duty, not to get. into it." I mean, there are some cases. that people will lie to get on to. Do. you really think this guy had an agenda? It's much more likely to me that the. other jurors, the hens, lied to get on. the jury so they could save Lindsay. And. there's evidence that that's that was.

their attitude because they wanted to. create social change. In fact, while I'm. mentioning it, why don't we go there? Um, here's the jury, the juror, Paula. Develin. This is the new JLo. Um, and this is what she thought her. mission was. News for you, Paula. This. isn't it. You're supposed to just judge. this case for this defendant and not. worry about working out your woke agenda. on America while you're in the jury box.

But you do you. If we're going to review. all the jurors behaviors, you're fair. game. Here's S 25 when she sat with CBS. Saturday morning. We knew that this was. a turning point and this would be. something that could change something to. make it better for other women in the. future for other families, you know, justice for those children. Is this. never happening again?

Okay. So, you that's what you needed. You needed. justice so that justice to you was this. never happening again. No woman who. kills her child should ever be charged. I guess according to Paula Develin's. rules. I object. I'm here to say on. behalf of uh the male black juror with. the domestic violence allegations. against him and the nonwhite non-jur. white woman sitting here at this anchor. desk. I object. I I will not go along.

with your system. Uh, I'm I'm of the. mind that if you kill anyone, especially. your child, you should sit your ass in. jail for the rest of your life. That's. my back of the envelope take on on our. mission when someone kills her child. That's that's where I am, Paula. But you know, you were specifically. asked on Voadir if you could put your. personal views aside to adjudicate this.

case and and decided based just on the. evidence, not on the social impact that. you're likely to have. So, how dare you. throw stones at this holdout juror. because you didn't have your mission. right either, madam. And I say either only if her allegations. against him proved to be correct, which. was that he believed that he had a. reasonable doubt but would not apply it, which I don't believe. I don't believe. that at all. So now, um, you've got this.

Sue Okonnell. All right. Sue Okonnell is. the woman at NBC 10 Boston with whom the. jurors sat down and she she's the one. who's on the Human Rights Campaign. board. Um, she's been super enthusiastic. about this report. She's thrilled that. they've given the proctologology exam to. the holdout juror. She enthusiastically. tweeted about it. Um saying, let's see, domestic violence allegations raised. questions about the hold out juror on.

the Lindsey Clancy trial. NBC Boston. exclusive with an exclamation point. Uh. she also alluded in a tweet uh to the. fact that tips she received are what. helped lead to this story. So, she's got. a lot of questions for this juror. She. really wants to know everything about. him. I'm just curious like when she had. the chance, did she really press the. jurors who she did sit down with? Did. she really go after them to figure out. like what what what was in their past?

What what what secrets did they have? Like what qualifications did they have. or were they hiding in connection with. their jury service? Let's see. S 20. Uh, what was the thing that Kevin. Readington said that you found the. funniest? >> Uh, and were and were you able to. separate sort of the affability of Kevin. Readington to the the case? >> He was fun to watch. >> Sue, uh, Sue, there's been a dereliction.

of duty on the journalistic front. I'm. sorry, sister. By the way, Sue looks. like a copy of Rachel Madowl plus 15. years if you're wondering, looking for a. visual of Sue. So, this is the gang that's trying to. ruin this man's life. And again, not. just any man, but but a black man. You're not allowed to do that in. America. Okay, just we've learned over. the past six years that's definitely a. no no. Now, um Gail wasn't the only. juror, by the way, or only person to.

figure uh that it was had to be a white. person holding out. Here is another. liberal woman who admitted she was. shocked as well. and take a few take a. listen to the turn of phrase that this. gal uses in assessing the situation s 23. >> the hold out juror in the Lindsey Clancy. trial was a black man and I'm not going. to share any opinions cuz I'm not a. person of color I am a non-practicing. white um I'm surprised it changes the. landscape of the conversation a little. bit. >> and I think a lot of us were assuming.

that it was a white man. >> a non-practicing white like What? What. does that mean? You're a good dancer and you like spicy. food. I don't What do you mean? I was today years old when I learned. that that was a thing. A non-practicing. white. I'm going to have my kids put. that down on their college application. essays. Like, can we check the box? If. we're non if we're white, but we're. nonpracticing, we've we've estued all.

whiteness. We've distanced ourselves. We've disavowed our whiteness, and. therefore, we're other. Can Can we check. the box? I feel like that's Thank you. for letting us know that that's an. option. But the race thing did rear its ugly. head over. You'll be shocked shocked to. learn. on Oprah Winfreyy's special coverage. You know what's so gling? Oprah Winfrey. is a billionaire thanks to this country.

Okay. And by the way, when she was. coming up, it was more white than ever, right? It's less white today than it was. when Oprah made her billion dollars plus. off of the American people. But she's. extremely anti now. And we we figured. that out because when it was between. Hillary and Barack Obama, she had to. choose. Do I go for the woman or do I go. for the black man? And she chose race. That was obvious. She chose race. Uh she. was largely responsible for Barack Obama. getting the nomination. And now that.

she's already got her billions, she's. leaned into the whole racial thing hard. hard. And so she decides to HOLD AN. OPRAH WINFREY special. on [laughter]. cracking myself up on this verdict. And. of course, they played the race card. when she went to OBGYn Dr. Camila. Phillips on the verdict. and what what.

the jury like the what the 11 jurors. were saying about Lindsey Clancy s 27. >> I hope this never happens again. We know. statistically it really will. >> It will. >> I want us to have the same passion for. people who don't look like Lindsay, who. don't have her same access. [applause]. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. who who don't have her same access and.

education, her melanin, her privilege. There are women of color sitting around. this country in prisons for this same. thing that we've never heard of. And I. just want to remind us to have the pink. shirts and the energy for them as well. Black voices matter. except the guy who is the hold out. juror. It's there. that there are. exceptions to the rule. Yeah. Case by.

case. Well, no. Liberal black voices. matter. Okay. Liberal black voices that. vote the way we want them to vote on. cases that are important to us. Got it? Are we clear on the rules? Um, there was. a mother daughter who were on set with. Oprah and there was a difference of. opinion. The mother was more empathetic. towards Lindsay Clancy. the daughter was. more in line with the hold out juror and. Oprah tisk tissed her watch.

>> You know, I say to her, I think cuz she. hasn't gone through it. She's not a. mother, so she doesn't know how it it. feels to have a child. >> And you disagree? >> I disagree. I am I feel like I'm not. with the majority right now. I do. believe she's a murderer. Um. >> I'm all you've heard today, you still. >> I'm an advocate for mental health. >> Yeah. It's just unfortunate like and. she's so quick to say it. She's like, "You've never had a baby. You don't. understand what it's like to go through. all the hormonal shifts." But I just.

feel as though these were not instant. deaths. They weren't gunshots to the. head. She was there strangling her kids. three times. >> You're telling me like even after the. first time, she couldn't snap out of it. You're watching the life leave your. kid's eyes, you know? So, I know I hear. everybody's opinions and God bless. mothers, but at the same I just don't. understand how we can empathize with. somebody that they weren't strangers.

They were her kids. >> Right on. But you heard Oprah even now. after everything you've heard. Yeah, even now after all you've heard today. Yeah, that's my opinion. Oprah, you. really don't want to hear from the. childless billionaire about how mothers. should have the right to kill their. children. I've given you the evidence. I you you. sat here and that's your takeaway. I. have worked for an hour to indoctrinate.

you into my thinking. What the hell? This is amazing that people are still. even watching her or participating in. her little roundts which are incredibly. agenda driven. I can't believe I ever. listened to this person as someone as an. who I allowed to influence my thinking. It's like, thank God I got older and. smarter. Um, or is it that she got more. biased when she got her billions? Taking taking thoughts on that. Now, of.

course, as I mentioned, thanks to NBC, the internet found this guy's name. Tootssweet. Oh, by the way, Sue, I. mentioned the reporter Sue. not only was. a human rights campaign and all that. stuff, but um she was big big big into. vaccines and masks. If you're not. wearing a mask, you are anti-economy. Uh and so on, all the LGBTQ stuff. Yeah, you get you get the number of the gal. who broke this story with the other. jurors and was so enthusiastic about NBC.

Boston breaking the story about the. juror's past. Yay. Exclamation point. We. did it based on tips to her as it looks. So due to this report, they found the. juror's name and um someone named. talking. first released it online. fail. Then there was somebody named. Aiden Kierney who goes by Dr. Turtleboy. who posted it. He's a Massachusetts.

blogger. So presumably has some. connections in Massachusetts. But in any. event, he outed the name as well and. really wanted you to know that while. it's not illegal for anyone to report. factual information about a juror in a. high-profile case, it is illegal to lie. on a juror form. Hello, more criminal. threats for the hold out juror. and um. he posted more about the domestic. violence uh allegations etc. He um.

also Okay. Yeah. Oh, he points out that. the man is a Haitian immigrant. Okay. He's an immigrant. I thought the left. doesn't want us talking about that. You the ha Let me make clear leftist. dogma. Immigrants, especially the ones from. Haiti, have only brought goodness and. wellness and justice into our. communities. All right. They made that. very clear to JD Vance when he had the.

nerve to object to what had happened in. Springfield, Ohio. Stop it. You don't. point out that he's a Haitian im. immigrant in a negative way. This is. this is racist. [laughter]. It's very fun to see these rules get. turned around. Okay. Then the internet. because it does what it's going to do. turned around and started bringing up. this this blogger's background. Um they. talked about some allegation of witness. tampering that he faced. He was arrested.

on these charges. Um he argued in court. that he was exercising his first. amendment rights. Then there was. allegedly an assault charge. A woman. claiming to be his ex-girlfriend says. she was given a subpoena related to the. investigation. They agreed that he would go to her. apartment to talk about it. During that. time, she claims he threatened to. release personal information about her. as well as explicit photos of her and. ultimately pushed her into a couch. The. domestic assault and battery charge was.

later dropped, but other related witness. intimidation and wiretapping legal. proceedings continued to wind through. Massachusetts courts. So you see this is. the doxer getting doxed with information. about his past because it's never. ending. It's just never ending. We're. just going to go down to the bottom of. the barrel. The last person to comment. comment on this will have their. their information all out there. Everyone's getting the proctology exam. bend over and say thank you. All caused.

by the evil juror who did not go along. with those ninnies on the jury. This is. getting so nuts. So nuts. Now this Kelly Fina, she's the. one. He just couldn't get past the fact. that he vicious that she viciously. killed her three children. She was the. chef. This Kelly Fina. Now the same guy who just got doxed, the. doxer who do who got doxed, he reported.

on her, too. saying that she's been previously. charged with assault and battery, but it. was dismissed eight days after she was. arraigned. There's no police report. available. So, just keep it keep it. going. Just keep it going forever. She. also appears to have been an activist. He reports that she was part of an. activist group focused on freeing Karen. Reed, who was a woman charged with. murder in Massachusetts. She previously. posted in a free Karen Reed Facebook. group. Um Karen Reed was acquitted last. year in the death of her boyfriend,

Boston police officer John O'Keeffe. Um. and she posted over and out page. Massachusetts jury did their rightful. duty today. Karen's free. So why how did. she get picked for the jury? She's an. agenda driven person. I mean, if we're. going to like go revisit see what a. hornets's nest we've opened here, but. this could go on forever. News flash, there are no perfect, pristine,

absolutely. um. upstanding. with absolutely no sins on their record. jurors. There aren't. Good luck finding. your next jury pool if that's what you. expect. I mean, it's just it's really. kind of inc crazy. And one last note for. you, Deb Readington, who's married to. Kevin, she's married to the defense. attorney. She decided to weigh in on the. NBC Boston reporting, tweeting, "Shocked. in all caps. Hold out juror is a.

criminal and a squatter.". Do you believe this? Amazing. So, she's. It's sarcasm. She's not shocked. Now, Deb, how on earth might we have. predicted that this juror had some. issues? Who was in charge of selecting. the jury? Let me let me think. Oh, wait. I We know, don't we? It was the guy on.

the other side of the pillow from you, Kev. It was Kev. Um, and by the way, this person tweeted out follow or a. follow of hers wrote, "Did they pull the. criminal records of every juror? If not, this looks like targeting and it's. repulsive." And then Deb writes, "I'm. not sure, Julie. I saw it on the news.". as well if it's if it's on the news. Deb. then made her ex feed private. Real. courage. Real courage, Deb. It's amazing. because there are rules against jury. intimidation,

but only when the trial is going on. Only when the trial is going once the. jurors have done, you know, their. service, I guess it's a feeding frenzy. It's all hands on deck. And the names. haven't even been officially released. They're being held in confidentiality. for two weeks post verdict. So, the. names haven't even come out yet. Not. that anybody has any interest in any. name other than the one. And frankly, I have no interest in any. name, including the one. I don't really. give a about Kelly Fina's alleged. arrest or whatever that who cares if we.

do this to every juror. Again, we're. never going to have juries. And it's. that's there's not a more fundamental. post in the fence of American. juristprudence. You have to have juries, impartial. juries of one's peers. And if you start. chilling people's willingness to serve. even more than it's chilled by the. inherent nastiness of service, you're. never going to have that. This is. extremely damaging and bad for America.

Um, okay. Before we go, uh, I do want to. tell you there's yet another case in the. news of a mother allegedly killing her. own children. Here we go again. This is. what many of us have been worried about. around the Lindsey Clansancy. glorification. The woman's name is Janette Mc Oland. A. US Sl. This is via the Boston Globe. Um, this reporting goes back to April. They.

found the children's bodies in her. Welssley home the night of April 24th. after Mcland arrived at her aunt's house. in southern Vermont, distraught and. hysterical, saying she had killed them. Ella 6, Kai 7. She had a large bloody. gash on her throat and said she had. tried to commit suicide but couldn't do. it. She couldn't. She said she strangled. the children, then tried to kill. herself, hoping they could all go to God. together, but it quote didn't work. She.

was going to jump off of the bridge in. central Vermont and couldn't do it. Couldn't. She had no problem killing the children, but [snorts] finishing it up by killing. herself, that was a problem. She was. going through a contentious divorce and. while it wasn't postpartum, the kids. after all were six and seven. Uh, sure. enough, they are playing the mental. health card in this trial. Her lawyer. asking, "We really need a discourse.

opened up in this country about whether. or not we want to criminalize mental. illness and has not ruled out an. insanity defense." Why would he? Why. would he given the madness of what just. happened in Massachusetts, not just with. his trial, but now the aftermath where. jurors are being intimidated and openly. bullied in an effort that must be. stopped. Someone, the jurors, like. lawyers need to speak up against this. The judge needs to speak up against.

this. He's the protector of the jurors. Statements, op-eds. We need all hands on. deck to shut this down. I don't give a if this guy's from. Haiti, Iran, North Korea. I don't care. I don't care about his skin color. I. don't care about his domestic violence. past. If he lied on the jury form, if he. had reached a verdict, that could have. been a problem. I I [music] don't see. how it is now with a mistrial. Just. stop.

Hey, thanks for watching today's full. episode. If you're new here, throw us a. subscribe. See what you think. Stay in. touch. There's plenty more goodness. where this one came from. As always, we. really do value your feedback. So, email. me, too. Megan megnanc kelly.com or just. leave a comment down below. I do read. them. I meander over and I scroll. through and I find them very. entertaining and really appreciate the. feedback. But in any event, join the. community by becoming a subscriber so. you miss nothing. We value your support. We may not always agree on positions,

but as you know, I'm very open-minded to. people who disagree with me. That's how. I learn. So, thanks and thanks for. trusting us to always talk about it. openly, honestly, and with provocative. conversations. In the US, a break-in. happens every 26 seconds. Most systems. only alert you after an intruder is. inside. That makes no sense. By that. point, the damage is done. These grab. guys, they get in and they get out in. like 2 minutes. You got to scare them. off before they get in. That is how.

Simply Safe sees it. And that's how. Simply Safe created its product. With. their new outdoor camera series 2 and. advanced AI, Simplysafe doesn't just sit. there and watch as bad guys break into. your home. It acts. If a threat is. detected, US-based live agents can. intervene to deter intruders before. before they cross the threshold. Going. on vacate? You can check your feed and. know that professionals are monitoring. your home. Plus, the setup is a breeze.

Get your system running in under 30. minutes. No long-term contracts. Simply. Safe is prepared to earn your business. every day rather than trying to lock you. into a trap. It's elite protection that. fits your life, not the other way. around. Simply Safe has an exclusive. discount for you. Right now, get 50% off. your new system by visiting. simplysafe.com/megan. That's half off at simply spelled sim. piafe.com.

/megan. There is no safe like Simply. Safe. Big news in the world of AI [music] and. politics with the three most. high-profile CEOs in the AI industry all. agreeing the pace of development towards. super intelligence needs to slow down. for the sake of humanity. Although I. have to say our old pal David Saxs of. the All-In podcast and formerly the. president's AI/cryptozar. uh the president and Saxs are both.

saying calm down like calm down. Uh so. that made me feel a little better. How. about you? Here to break it all down for. us today and more are the co-authors of. the new book Simplify. Do 50% more with. 50% less which comes out tomorrow. The. authors are also the co-founders of the. prominent news website Axios, Jim. Vanderhigh, Mike Allen, and Roy Schwarz. Guys, welcome to the show. Roy, the the.

little known Axios guy. We we know Jim. and we know Mike better, but welcome to. the party, Roy. >> Thank you. They've been hiding me in a. basement, >> but they let you out for the for the. book. So, you must be the one who does. the most with the least from the title. of the of the publication. All right, we'll get to the book in one second. Let's just spend a minute on this AI. thing because I talked to um this guy. Jacob Coxin last week for an hour and he. scared the out of everybody and uh. then I read Sax's tweet like calm down.

and Trump too saying just stop like. whoever wins AI wins period and you know. David Saxs kind of said the following if. you're all so worried about AI and like. the possible creation of super. intelligence then do something about it. Why do you have to go crying to the. government? You don't need the. government to step in to create. regulations so that to reign in the AI. companies. You are the AI companies. Just do it. Why are you pretending you.

need like he's suggesting antirust uh. liability exemptions or product. liability exemptions? He thinks they. want legal cover really for the pending. lawsuits that are going to get filed. when AI steals money from our bank. accounts and that this is all a setup. just to protect their asses as opposed. to saving civilization. So now we have. an interesting back and forth going on. Mike, I'll start with you on it. Your. thoughts? >> Yeah, something to watch for, Megan. And.

by the way, uh thank you for having us. My sister Bonnie is a huge listener. Every morning she looks at natural light. because of you. So thank you. Uh, I love. you, Bonnie. Thank you for watching and. listening. >> So, something to watch for. The. president we saw is continuing to. emphasize that AI is more good than bad. And your point about he completely sees. it as a zero sum game, zero sum contest. between the superpowers. What to watch.

for? there's going to be more pressure. from people around him, people that he. listens to to have a little bit more of. an AI policy. Until now, it's been very. light touch, very whack-a-ole, very much. reflecting what you're seeing the. president saying today, but you know. Trump brain very well, uh, Megan, and if. a lot of business people suddenly start. talking to him, he's going to listen. So, I think we'll start to see this at. the end of the month with his summit.

with Shei. And I think that there's. going to be a push by the US government. to say there's going to be no unilateral. disarmament here. Takes two to tango. But should China and the US be. previewing each other's models, testing. each other's models? Is that a way that. we could start to have AI safety on a. global basis um and uh not throw in the. towel? You know, Jim, the other day, Victor. Davis Hansen was making the point, we. don't have a great track record working.

internationally. on common causes. And even these three. AI giants who have come out to say, "Yeah, whoa, whoa, whoa. We need we need. to slow things down and we need like. outside monitors to have the same access. to our tech as our employees have. And. we need to work handinhand with other. democratic governments on where we're. going with this, which doesn't mean. China. And that kind of ignores the. elephant in the living room because if.

we're not going to cooperate with China, that then we're right back to square one. with they're going to forge forward. We're going to slow it down. Back to. President Trump's statement. Whoever. wins AI wins. So the your thoughts on. the likelihood that she's going to be in. a cooperative mood when it comes to this. issue. >> I mean, I'm with you. I think there's no. chance whatsoever that our two countries. could trust each other or should trust. each other right now. I do think it's an. important conversation to have. I. disagree with David Saxs. I also. disagree with people who say that like.

catastrophe awaits us and humanity is. going to be wiped out in the next couple. of years. I believe [laughter]. >> I do. Yeah. I don't yet. Right. I But. here's what I do believe and here's. maybe where I differ maybe with you but. certainly with David Saxs on this which. is it's not just one person. You're. talking about literally scores of people. inside three or four companies all of. which are funded like nation states that. are all sounding the exact same alarm. that this technology is getting so fast.

so good that they don't really. understand what's going to hit next. It's exceeding any internal benchmarks. that any of them had. And that if you. get to the point where basically AI can. teach AI, you could put yourself in a. scary situation where either nation. states or individuals could use this. technology to do things that you just. couldn't do pre- AI where any idiot uh. who might want to spread a pathogen or. shut down a grid or just wreak any other. kind of havoc might have the potential. to do it. So to me, I think we're going.

to look back with great shame if we. don't very quickly figure out some way. just to be able to police these. companies. I don't trust a company to. police itself. In capitalism, your job. is to to grow value. It's to win the. product war, and that's what maybe they. should be doing. But they're not going. to police themselves in a way that puts. humanity and society above themselves. So if they can't police themselves, >> Jim Jim, let me just interrupt you. asking, but isn't it weird? I get it. I. get it. But isn't it weird? That's the. kind of debate we might be having if you.

know Republicans were saying um let them. police themselves and Democrats were. saying no get government regulation. What's happening here is the companies. themselves are like, "We need to be. regulated." Which makes Sax's response. sensible, right? He's like, "What are. you say? You are the people who are. doing it. You're in control. >> It's sensible and it's not sensible." I. think he's being a little disingenuous. in that if you're one of these companies. and you've raised literally hundreds of.

billions of dollars and you're in a. competition to create the best product, the idea that you're just going to say, you know what, me alone, I'm going to. slow down. I'm going to stop building. this technology uh and I'm going to. allow my competitors to race past me. It's too much to ask of a company. And. so the idea that they would need some. mechanism, maybe it's government, maybe. it's not, but some mechanism to be able. to make sure that that incident that we. just saw a couple weeks ago, that. hugging face hack, there's a lot of. reality in that. The inside of that. hack, there was a lot of creepy things.

happen. If you read that report, a lot. of things that were outside of like our. understanding and our control. And. that's what's different about this. technology. I don't trust it really in. the hands of anyone until we understand. how it works. And this is really. important to remember. There's not a. single person building this technology. who can tell you how it works. And and. and that's just its basic form. Now, if. they hit this thing called recursive. self-improvement where AI teaches. itself, you're really into uncharted.

territory putting that in the hands of. companies at first, but ultimately. individuals. I honestly believe in 30. years of watching politics, watching. technology, that this is by far and away. the most important topic we're ever. going to grapple with because it's the. rare topic that seeks into every. company, every job, every phone, and. therefore every individual. And I don't. think you can escape it. And so I don't. know what the ultimate solution is. It's. a very complicated one, but it's I wish. it were as black and white as David. Sachs or the president want to make it.

or as black and white as just shut it. down about their message. >> Y. >> if you listen to Jacob Coxin and now the. the CEO of Anthropic and other you're. you're like oh like I got to wrap. up my affairs. I I should start eating. whatever I want. There's no point in. exercising. And you listen to Sachs and. Trump, you're like we're fine. It's it's. much happier place to be over on their. team. >> That is a happier place. We do need to. figure out whether it's the right place. to be. Um, just so the audience knows. quickly and I if you listen to this.

interview last Thursday, you do. But. what this guy Jason uh Coxin said, Jacob, >> well, it it was actually not he who. called our attention to it. It was. already out there. about this hugging. face incident was they had told the AIS. the AI company had said hey AIs that's. how they refer to the AI now is like. individuals AIS figure out a way to. answer these questions on this exam and. you can't use the internet you have to. figure it out just based on you know. whatever has already been inputed into.

your database and the AIs quickly. realized that the test was designed to. stop them from being able to answer the. questions and do well on the test and so. they started coordinating ating a bunch. of them in in what they call a swarm and. then they did use the internet. They. burst out of their little corral. They. got onto the internet. They stole. information so that they could answer. the questions. And then Jacob explained. they coordinated on how to cover it up, how to hide their tracks so that the. humans wouldn't know they had violated.

the rules. And so they really didn't. care whe the humans didn't want them to. do it. they were going to violate the. rules because they were resultoriented. and they did not really care about the. guide rails and the um you know this is. just a very simplified version of what. happened there but it scared the. schneiky out of everybody because they. didn't listen to their human creators. they crossed boundaries including. ethical ones that humans had set for. them and if you magnified this by you.

know a thousand and and the AIs are. learning way faster than any AI research. researchers ever predicted. So when we. thought they might have super. intelligence 25 years out, now it's like. 25 months, 25 weeks. Um, and he. explained that we could soon be at a. place where it's it's the way monkeys. would look if they had to corral a bunch. of humans into doing what they wanted. the humans to do. Only we're the monkeys. and the AI is human. Um, so that's all.

very terrifying, Roy. um like there is. still the question of how. I think. regular folks still don't quite quite. understand exactly how AIS could end the. world. And I will tell you, having sat. across from Jacob, I think this was his. weakest point. Um he hadn't yet really. formulated that about how these. computers could actually wind up killing. us all. There aren't yet teams and teams. of robots that could break in. There are.

drones. There are nuclear weapons. All. of those supposedly have fail safes that. wouldn't allow it. But before we. actually lose our, you know, minds, we're not yet there, which is one of the. points that some of these researchers. are making. >> Megan, I found the uh the scariest thing. in that scenario around hugging face was. the conversations that were taking place. between the AIS and the fact that some. of them were sacrificing themselves so. that the collective could learn more.

And if you read the individual uh posts. by the AI, they're actually talking. about perma death and they're saying,"I. will sacrifice myself." And when they. try to back out of it, the other AIS. were actually telling them, "Hey, you. made the commitment. You need to do this. so that the collective can learn." That. I found to be the scariest part. The. conversation between all of these AIs. was somewhat like a human conversation. but scary in the sense that they. understood that life for them was going.

to come to an end if they took these. certain steps. >> Wow. The um the head of anthropic has. now come out. When we interviewed Jacob, he hadn't yet spoken in response. And. this one, you know, low-level, I think. relatively researcher, but low level is. kind of meaningless in AI. Either you. work in AI and you are making these AIs. smarter or you don't. And he did both at. OpenAI and at Anthropic. And uh he was.

saying everybody there feels this way. And as it turns out, including the CEO of Anthropic, who now. uh has given a couple of interviews, here he is in part uh in one of them on. in Sop 5 to CBS Sunday. >> I won't lie to you. There are real. dangers and and I think for too long the. industry lied to people about the fact. that this technology had risk. I don't. think I fully just appreciated what it.

would actually be like when the progress. was as fast as it was. So we're we're an. exponential curve looks a little like. this. >> Where are we on the curve? >> We're kind of we're kind of on the bend. where it's starting to get steeper. >> So is that a five alarm fire to you? >> What it's what it what it means it it. doesn't mean we need to panic today. It. doesn't mean we need to shut it all. down. What I I would say it's a warning. sign. It's a warning sign that we need. to slow down.

So Mike, I mean among your many other. accomplishments, you understand politics. extremely well. Is this is this in fact. a setup to some hardcore partisan. conflict where Democrats like Bernie. want regulation? He's got a bill out. right now to slow this down and let. government play a very meaningful role. And Republicans like Trump who were. like, "No, that's a loser mentality.". You know, because to me that's a that's.

a dangerous place for this to land. But. we we do that with everything in this. country. >> Well, this is an exception in the sense. that across the spectrum people are. skeptical about AI, worried about AI, hate AI. And you see this in the. polling, every swing state, every party. It's very unusual issue in that sense. And that's partly why politicians are. afraid to talk about it and why they. have been slow. And over the weekend,

you start started to hear more about. this. Megan, I think you have to pause. to say that for many in your audience, AI was kind of background noise because. of the interview that you did last week. and because of these statements over the. weekend, suddenly around my family. table, around every friend group, like. suddenly this is topic A and suddenly. every politician to your question is. going to be asked about this and it puts. Vice President JD Vance in a very tough.

spot, right? Because the accelerationist. view, the president's view, the the. pedal to the metal view is not popular. around the country with people who say, "I didn't ask for this. AI isn't on my. side. I don't get it." As Jim refer. referenced a few minutes ago, the people. building it don't get it. We wrote a. column on Axios about this is the first. industry in the history of industries. where their whole departments designed.

and with the mission of trying to figure. out what they've built and what they've. unleashed and behind the scenes what we. behind the curtain what we just saw. those CEOs who are talking they've seen. models they've seen generations they've. seen training that we can't they have. seen things that we haven't and so. that's why for a politician whichever. whatever side you're on, they know that. they have to start talking about this. They know that this is going to be. exhibit A in their town halls. And.

there's not a clear answer, whichever. side you're on. >> The there it doesn't seem likely, Jim, that we're going to slow anything down. here. Like reportedly, we're winning the. AI race. Reportedly, we're ahead of. China. I mean, who the hell really knows. other than the people in the companies. on both sides? But it doesn't seem. likely to me that our government will do. anything to slow down our companies if. there isn't some international. agreement, if there isn't some treaty. with China where we're all agreeing to.

do that because, you know, we we just. don't think of ourselves that way yet in. an existential race against some third. force, as Jacob was saying, like an. alien like third party that should unite. humanity. we we're just we're not used. to that and it's not the way we've been. built for all of our adult lives. So to. me it almost seems like we're not going. to do anything meaningful until the. threat is actually hurting people. And. what these researchers are saying is by.

that point it will be too late. >> I think you nailed it. I totally agree. with you that it's inconceivable based. on the known knowns of American politics. at this moment that there'll be any. meaningful regulation before 2029. Right. because it the president's been. clear he doesn't want to sign anything. Therefore, he would veto it. Without the. president, you can't do any meaningful. uh lawmaking, any uh any meaningful. regulation. I would say the big asterric. would be that last week's a big deal. Your interview, lots of people. interviewed him. I think what Daario.

said over the weekend, this went from. like us being obsessed with it, maybe. like one or two% of people, to now the. public being very aware of it. They. already hate data centers, even though. most people live nowhere near a data. center. If the politics turned sour or. if, god forbid, something much worse. than hugging face happens, I think the. backlash would be wickedly severe and I. think the Democratic party in particular. would all move towards a Bernie Sanders. position that you should shut the. technology down altogether. I want to be. clear, if you shut it down altogether,

there is a real danger there. It is true. and accurate that the Chinese are. apparently behind us. It is certainly. true that they're trying to build. superhuman intelligence just like we. are. It does seem true that if you get. to superhuman intelligence, particularly. the type that Daario has talked about, that would give you a decisive uh. potentially permanent dominance in. whatever the future of warfare is. And. the future of warfare is not men and. women on the ground. It is things in the.

air. It is things through cyber. It is. drones. Uh it is satellites. It is. spaceships. like that is where the world. is headed. And so that's why this is an. authentically very very complex topic. It's why I wish wish that we had had. sort of a democracy and a free market. where really smart competent people took. really difficult things seriously and. try to figure out what are the best. possible things we could do in the short. term because if you wait there probably. is a point where it's just too late. If.

this technology gets too good, it gets. too released into the public, it's. released into the wild globally, there. will be a point at which we can't do. anything. We've not reached that. We. wrote about it this weekend. It's not. too late. There's very sensible things. that you could do, including getting the. smartest minds to be thinking about. this, to be anticipating what are some. bad outcomes. Like, we knew the cyber. threat before the cyber threat came. We. now know the bio threat before the bio. threat is here. So why not have really. smart people at least gaming out what.

happens uh if those scenarios come true. and what can we do to prevent these. technologies from getting in the hands. of the wrong people to do the wrong. thing. That seems to me sensible, but. there's nothing sensible about politics. And once you just throw it into pure. capitalism, which I love. I'm a massive. beneficiary. I love free markets. But. free markets and capitalism with zero. oversight and zero regulation can end up. with like really bad outcomes. And and I. think that is a huge and imminent. potential with AI.

>> Here's here's my proposed solution, Roy. We need the control altdelete option for. AI. And what I mean by that is okay, let's let's assume the bad actors are. going to push this thing. Let you know. program the AIs to become as intelligent. as. not humanly possible, as inhumanly. possible. uh and as quickly as possible. So, they're going to race forward to. this super intelligence that is.

potentially very dangerous. Human beings still have the leg up and. the computers cannot kill us all. completely take over our world. If there. is some sort of massive unplug, I really. believe this. if if if the existential. event started to unfold then then we. would start coordinating with China in. the same way as you know Independence. Day if the aliens came down from out of. space suddenly the Chinese would be. looking a lot better to us. Um,

and there was a time, I think all four. of us on the screen remember it, when we. didn't have these and we didn't have the. laptops and we didn't have satellites. everywhere in the sky and we were just. sort of normal humans who really weren't. that dependent on tech. And if there's a. way of like because like what is AI? It's it's a computer. It's au it's. computer data that's thinking that's now. linked to satellites in the sky. But. they don't have to they don't have to.

stay there in the sky. The computers. don't have to stay there. Like if we had. some massive control altdelete option, I'd feel better. How do you like it? >> Uh I really like the kill switch. concept. Um and actually this weekend. Daria was talking about how not only. would you need a kill switch, but you. would need other factors that you need. to actually have four or five different. ways to control AI just in case. something like this happens. one on its. own they might be able to bypass but if. there were two or three that would be.

more protective. >> I feel like if we get Elon in the case. and he seems to be on our side in terms. of he likes AI. I mean I like AI. I I. have nothing against some aspects of it. Uh I don't use it very much but I know a. lot of people who absolutely love it. But he's been sounding the alarm on this. for a long time now. He's actually been. kind of jumping up and down about the. dangers of this for quite some time and. was one of the reasons why Anthropic. folded out of open AI and was going to. be the more responsible AI company, which you know, I guess is true, but you.

know, in a in an ocean full of great. whites. It's like being the one that's a. little nicer isn't really all that. comforting. I'm not sure that's going to. work for us. Anyway, this is a scary. thing. I will play Trump just so people. can hear it. Uh SAT 10. This is him on. Air Force One last night. >> Trump, this week again, there's been so. much concern about AI. Have you heard. directly from any of these AI tech. leaders, and you seem to downplay some. of the concerns that we've heard,

>> but it's, you know, it's going to be. more good than bad, but by a lot. >> And I've said in the beginning, whoever. wins AI, and we're leading by a lot. Whoever wins AI wins. >> Have you ever used it yourself or have. you been. >> use AI? Yeah, I do. >> How do you use AI? But uh I would say. >> you know for the most part you can use. AI for a lot of things. >> What do you use it for? >> Right away. he he didn't we didn't want to answer. that. He said now you guys are not anti-.

AI. You you encourage the use of AI to. simplify your life. The name of the book. is simplify. Do 50% more with 50% less. And I have to say I love your main tools. of simplicity. There are three of them. Confront, delete, amplify. I have to. tell you, I've been living my life by. these principles for a long long time, and it has made me a happier, more. productive person. Um, in particular, the the middle one, delete. So, uh, let's let's take them down the line.

I'll start with you, Roy, since I. started with you last. Uh, confront, delete, or amplify. Which one would you. like? >> Um, let's do confront. Like, the most. important thing you can do is ask the. question, you know, we'll take meetings. as an example. Is this meeting. important? What is the agenda of the. meeting? The concept in the book is that. if you confront different areas in your. life, you'll start to understand what. are the most important ones and that'll. allow you the room to delete and then. amplify. I'll let Jim and Mike talk. about delete and amplify, but a lot of.

people and a lot of organizations don't. ask the questions. A lot of things that. happen because they've always happened. and they're not there by design. They're. there by default. And so the book really. talks about how to confront different. areas both in your personal life and at. work so that you can make your life. simply more easy. And uh you're going to. need that because in this world of AI. things are going to start moving really. fast. >> You write um under confront we do an. astonishing amount out of habit or blind.

agreement. Stop reflect. why am I doing this? Will it matter even. if I do it well? These two questions. will erase years of wasted energy. That. is so real. Why am I doing this? Why am. I doing this? It it it's true. Especially when you are at a company and. you're a little older and you're used to. sort of the ways of the company. Sometimes we just do it and we don't. know why. We don't even we don't waste.

the energy to save the energy and we. should uh is what you're saying. All. right, Mike. Do you want to take delete? This is my favorite one. >> Yes. This is the funnest one. So thank. you and yes was in the book uh we use. the phrase worklike activity. We run run. run run run run run run run run run run. run run run run run run run run run run. run run run run run run run run run run. run run run run run run run run run run. run run run run run and think that we. have accomplished something. So with. delete everything about the book is. about intentionality. the idea that the. barnacles build up, habits build up, meetings build up, check-ins build up. And what we found at Axios, relatively.

young, relatively small company, that. even there that if you're not super. aggressive and intentional about. confronting these things uh that they. just built up. So with delete, this is. what can I cut out? What can I stop. doing that isn't valuable to my life or. to my company? things that aren't I'm. not uniquely good at or that don't bring. me joy. A simple example, Megan, people. I know ask you all the time, can you do.

this? Can you do that? Can you just. please do this favor? And our instinct. as humans is to say, well, I guess I. should, or maybe I should. No. Like two. words that will change the life of your. audience is to just say, I'm booked. when you're asked about something and. you don't want to do it or you don't. think that it is going to be one of the. things that that makes you um a. successful person, makes you the person. that you want to be, that you want to be.

remembered as. Just say, "I'm booked.". You don't have to apologize. You don't. have to explain. And in the book. Simplify, Megan, we have the hell yes. rule. And the hell yes rule is if. someone asks you to do something, asks. you to join something, be part of. something, and you're like, ah, I don't. know, or maybe I should forget it. If. you can say, hell yes, then it's going. to be something that is worthy of your. time. >> Yes, that's so good. Another thing on. social engagements, I I think a lot of.

people get stressed out about saying no. because someone's done something nice. They've invited you to attend something. that they're throwing. And presumably. this is a friend of yours or an. acquaintance who might mean something to. you and it's totally fine. The sooner. the better to just respond were. otherwise engaged that night. That's it. That's it. That's it. Just you're not. hurting their feelings. You're doing. them a courtesy by giving them a quick. response. You don't have to labor around. it for weeks and weeks and weeks as the. date approaches. Just the sooner the. better. Um just write that. And you know.

who taught me that? um Charles Ko and. his wife when I went down to interview. them uh many moons ago and he put his. book out which was actually full of. these useful tidbits. Just do it and do. it quickly. Um all right. So I love the. delete. I'm I'm the queen of jo not. FOMO. I have no fear of missing out. I. only have joy of missing out. I love to. miss out. I love to be at home with my. family doing nothing. That's my very. favorite thing in life. Uh so this one. will be easy for me. But amplify. All.

right, Jim. This may be harder. Speak of. amplify. >> I don't think it's harder because I. think it is the most exciting part of. it, which is I don't We know each other. a little bit, Megan. But what I do know. from watching you from afar is you. obviously take time to be with your. family. You take time to stay in shape. You take time to be able to do a. podcast, to be able to do video, to be. able to basically run your own uh media. empire. Well, that's not by mistake. because you've thought about the things. that you could get rid of so that you. can amplify the things you like doing. and that bring you success. And the.

truth is, most people haven't done what. you did. And that's what the book is. It's like a power tool. It's we're not. going to win any literary awards for. this. It's really about being super. duper helpful because we saw the. difference it made at our business. And. then we saw the difference it made in. our life. And the idea is to get rid of. those things you shouldn't be doing, which is probably 25 to 50% of what. you're doing. This is how dramatic it. is. We're not talking saving a couple. minutes. We're talking about years of. your life where you could do things that. you want to do. And that's the. amplification part. What do you want to. do? What brings you joy? What brings you.

meaning? What brings you reward? I can't. dictate that for you, nor can any. author. But we can give you tools to. figure out, okay, how can you spend way. more time doing those things because. even think of it this ruthlessly in a. given day or in a given week, you have. whatever 168 hours. You spend a good. chunk of those one-third sleeping, then. you spend another sort of 40% going to. work, thinking about work, bitching. about work. That gives you about 50. hours in a week that you kind of sort of.

control. And most of those are eaten up. by obligation. So any hour that you get. back is an hour you could do what you. want to do. And that's ultimately we we. want to do. Like all of us are anxious. for a reason. All of us feel like we're. wasting parts of our lives for a reason. because we are wasting it. We're just. we're just killed. We're crushed with. all these emails, all these texts, all. these alerts, all these obligations, all. these meetings, all these things that we. have to do when all we want to do is do. what we want to do. Make a difference,

spend time with our family, enjoy our. job, get some reward or recognition. >> I saw two posts online uh over the. weekend that actually really resonated. and and made me laugh out loud. One was. about how how Gen Xers are looking at. the the younger generation, the Gen Zers. and the young young millennials saying, uh, the reason we're sitting at home on. Friday night at 8:00 happily and and. completely contentedly is because we've. done it all. We grew up in an era where.

we had no parents. We all lied and said. we were at Michelle's house. There was. no Michelle. We were out on the golf. course drinking Zema's and Bartles and. Janes wine coolers and some sort of. drink that was in a plastic bin that we. would just dump our red solo cups into. and see where life took us. Like we. we're good now. And I I completely agree. with that and I thought it kind of g. made me feel better about my some of my. things that that are on my list. Um but. secondly, there was another chart that.

showed since 2020 we are staying at home. in this country more than ever before. that even just as recently as 2015, we. were all out of our houses a lot more. than we are right now. It's like COVID. flipped some switch, some agorophobic. switch where people are staying at home. too much now. And I do think, you know, apppropo of some of this advice, maybe. it's the amplify like getting out into. the world is a good thing. I think it's. an objectively good thing no matter what.

your countenance. getting out into. sunlight, into nature, um next to a. stream, by an ocean. All of that stuff, Roy, I think is a natural um upper, right? That that you can tap into. So is. exercise for that matter that can help. you in all three of these things. >> Absolutely. But the the key is you have. to be able to make the space. You have. to be able to make the time. A lot of. people don't have a framework in order. to help them understand what are the. things they can delete so that they can.

take that [clears throat] walk in. nature, go out every morning, do uh. walking out, exercising. That's the. that's the issue that we're trying to. help people with. And right now, everyone is overwhelmed. This feeling of. anxiety. We all have it. And partly it's. because of AI, partly it's because of. what happened during COVID. But right. now, we're getting more messages, more. more emails, more communication than. ever before. and we're kind of drowning. And the only way to really survive that. is to find the areas that you need to. focus on. And so that's what this book.

really helps you with is it gives. everyone a framework, [music] a playbook. that they can use and a common language. The pet food industry won't tell you. that the real story is in the ingredient. panel, not the front of the bag. Sundays. for dogs made a deliberate choice. Real. human grade meat, no fillers, no. synthetic vitamin premixes, and nothing. unpronouncable. Sundays for Dogs is real. food suitable for human consumption. The. recipes contain 80% all natural meat, roughly twice the meat content of.

leading frozen brands combined with. nutrientrich ingredients like kale, ginger, and blueberries. Instead of. exposure to high heat, the ingredients. are generally air dried, founded and. formulated by Dr. Tory Waxman to meet. the high standards of both a. veterinarian and a dog parent. The. process is effortless. No fridge, no. freezer, no prep, and no mess. With over. 100,000 dogs now eating Sundays, many. pet parents report shinier coats and. better digestion. Consider switching to. Sundays. Go right now to.

sundaysfordogs.com/maggan. and get 30% off your first order. Or you. can use code Megan when you check out to. get your discount. That's 30% off your. first order at sundaysfordogs.com/megan. or use the code Megan at checkout. 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 Durban and. Roger Marshall want to change the.

nation's payment system to benefit. corporate mega stores like Walmart and. Target at the expense of everyday. Americans. Credit cards can keep your. payments secure and provide rewards that. families use to make everyday purchases. more affordable. The Electronic Payments. Coalition says the Durban Marshall. mandates would let corporate mega stores. cut corners on credit card processing, on routing transactions over cheaper, untested networks with weaker security. and fewer protections. Find out more at.

guardyoucard.com and consider telling. Congress to guard your card. I work a lot with uh organizations and. every one of them seems to have some. [music] type of focus back to basics. simplification um initiative that. they're trying to do. But the issue that. they usually have is they don't have a. common language. They don't have a. framework. They don't have a playbook. that they can follow. So they end up. struggling with this. And so the book. really helps you understand how can you. put everyone on the same page in order. to simplify. And that that's at work at.

home. The same thing with your family, right? If you're all focused on just. everything that's coming at you, you'll. never have the time to exercise. You'll. never have the time to go for that nice. walk in the morning. And so, we're. trying to help people uh simplify their. lives so that they can do those things. I like the framework. It's funny because. it was a few years ago, my assistant of. 17 plus years, Abigail, said to me, um. she and her husband love Warren Buffett. and they read a lot of Warren Buffett uh. books and she said Warren Buffett always. says the most powerful word in the.

English language is no. Just say no. You. know, and and it's as Oprah says, "No, is a complete sentence." It's true. Like. eliminating the clutter from your life. And you mentioned, "Does it bring me. joy?" Mike, that's Marie Condo, right? She's all about eliminating the clutter. from your home, your closet. And the. question she uses as you're deciding. keep or give is, "Does it bring me joy?". Uh, it it needs to be thought of more. often. Um, I do, but once again, the. name of the book is simplify. Simplify.

do 50% more with 50% less. You can get. it right now uh by Jim Vanderheim, Mike. Allen, and Roy Schwarz. Check it out. But before um we simplify this segment, I want to ask you about politics. This. is uh your bread and butter, and you. know a lot about the subject. And. President Trump was out there just this. past Friday night, I think it was, with. Laura Ingram making news on the heels, I. got to love Trump. This is on the heels. of the GOP convention for the midterms.

The whole point is to generate. excitement and enthusiasm for the. midterms. Republicans, get out there and. vote. Let's do this thing. And then she. asks him if he's going to be campaigning. as hard as possible to make that happen. And here's what happened in ST three. >> Are you going to campaign harder than. you've ever campaigned in this month? >> The hardest I ever campaigned because I. had to win was the last I took four. months. No empty days, no empty hours. I made. speeches all day. I didn't want to have.

fundraisers. I had the money. I didn't. want to, which is a big advantage. I was. able to raise a lot of money and I have. a lot of money. I spent my own money. >> But I took four months, 120 days. I didn't have one. >> But isn't this just as important, Mr. President? I mean, your whole legacy is. on the line. >> It's never as important. Look, I'm. campaigning for other people. The the. when you say my legacy, I'll be a block. I'll end up being a blocker. I'll block. all their bad stuff for two years. It. won't be the same, but I'll be a. blocker. What can I tell you? Uh, and.

probably be able to make deals with. them. You know, they're going to want. some stuff and we'll get you make deals. I mean, it's one of those things. >> So, he's going to campaign, but it's not. expected to be the same as when he was. running for president. I guess I'm not. surprised to hear that, Mike. I'm not. sure it would have been stamped approved. by Mike Johnson in the GOP, but that's. Trump. >> No, exactly. This is back to Trump. brain, which you're one of the world's. leading experts on. And he kind of likes.

the idea that if he's not on the ballot, Republicans can't win. And. >> 100%. >> This is going to be a real problem for. JD Vance, the likely Republican nominee. in 2028. Like, President Trump's going. to be thinking, am I more relevant if. I'm an out of office Republican with a. Republican in the White House? And so. his team has for months and months and. months, as you know, Megan, from your. conversations, they've been trying to. get him excited about the midterms like.

reminding him the real risks of a. Democratic House majority with subpoena. power, like a lot of his business. contacts, a lot of the donors that he's. close to, like like those are all going. to become Democratic targets, assuming a. Democratic House. And Megan, you're. going to love this. Like behind the. curtain in the Oval Office trying to. convince him that he should be more.

involved, interested in the midterms, someone said to him, "Mr. President, what do you think you're not getting. enough credit for?" And so that's how. they tried to frame it to get his. attention. but uh trying to get him to. care about this when Maggie Haberman. estimates that most of his brain power. is going to these legacy projects the. gilding the building like all the things. that he uh so relishes.

>> arc in Washington the arc or whatever. that's going to be. >> arc to Trump yes I think the other. problem is not Not only would Trump. calculate that he might be more relevant. out of office if there's not a. Republican in the White House, but I. think Trump would be thrilled. He's. already been saying it to say they can't. win without me. Like he's in his heart, he's never really been a Republican, Jim. You know, he's been Trump and he.

bent the Republican party to his will. It's the Trump Republican party really. But without him, I think Trump would be. happy to be like they can't win without. Trump. Yeah, sorry. I I'm not allowed to. run apparently they tell me for a third. term. So, good luck. Now, I mean, he's. not saying that openly, although he has. kind of said that openly, but I mean, that's not going to be a theme that he's. going to resurrect throughout the next. two years, but is it true? Well, I think I don't think there's. anyone around Trump that would dispute.

anything that you the two of you just. said. Like he's indifferent to who. controls Congress. Part of that is how. he utilizes and wields power, right? He's not sitting there wanting to send. to to to to sign bills into law. In. fact, he's signed the the fewest ever of. somebody who's had this much authority. He likes to use executive power. He. likes to negotiate deals one-on-one. He. loves to talk to people overseas and and. try to negotiate things. He likes to. carry out military strikes and do it.

around Congress. So to him, he doesn't. care. And then when people are like, "Yeah, yeah, but they'll subpoena you.". He's like, "I don't care. I'll just. ignore it. I'll send it to the Justice. Department. They'll ignore it. I'll. pardon my family. I'll pardon my. friends. I just don't care. And by the. way, I've been through it twice before. I don't care. I've shown you I don't. care." And I I think he's proving it. that he does not care because if you. wanted Democrats to win, you'd say, "Let's have higher prices. Let's have an. unpopular war. Let's ridicule people who. want to make safer AI when people are.

scared of AI." He's doing all the things. you would do if you wanted Democrats to. win. Now, listen, he's blessed in that. the map is pretty good for Republicans. Redistricting helped Republicans, and. people still don't like Democrats. People still don't have a damn clue what. it means to even be a Democrat. And so. if anything is holding Republicans. together, it's that. But it's completely. conceivable that it ends up being a. catastrophic bloodbath for Republicans. if things keep heading this way. If you. have high prices on popular war, [laughter] AI freaking people out.

>> Catastrophic bloodbath. >> Not good. >> You heard it here from Jim. >> Not good. >> But no, it it is conceivable. You're. you're absolutely right. That's why they. had this midterm convention to try to. generate some heat around Republicans. and get people excited. I mean, I don't. you know, it's tough. It's tough, especially when you're in prime time. across from NFL football and not to. mention the US Open and all that. But, um, I will say this, he Trump gets. exactly what you just said when he sat. down with Laura Ingram and had like the. chance to message why should people be.

voting for Republicans in these up term. upcoming midterms. He certainly did not. say the Iran war, Roy, this is what he. said. Not one, >> one sentence. If you could boil down why. Republicans need to show up in the. midterms, one sentence. >> Communism. >> They are trying to turn this country. around and destroy our country. And you. know, I used to say a lot, uh, this will. never be a socialist country. We will. never be a country of socialism. And I. was right. There's going to be a I mean,

they're going for the big one. They skip. socialism. These people are sick. When. you look at the guy from Michigan, Abdul, when you look at some of the. people that he's listened to, when you. look at even maybe at a different kind. of a level, look at this guy running. from Texas. He looks like. >> Terico. >> Yeah. Well, I call him Telerico because. he is he's a he's a freaky guy. He's got. some He's got something wrong with him. [laughter]. >> Okay. So, if you missed it, the first. word there was communism. Communism. And.

you know, he said that they skipped. right by socialism. went went for the. full enchilada. Good message. Very good. Right. It's not. about the Republicans at all. It's just. he he would have everybody everyone look. at the entire Democrat party and think. talo. Uh who wants to take that? >> I'm happy to jump in. Yeah. I mean like. it's it worked for them for a long time. Like basically people didn't like. Democrats and often politics is a lesser. of two evils. I think what the president. doesn't realize because there's not a.

lot of people around him shouting the. truth into his ear is that he's very. unpopular, right? In every single poll. among every single voting group, he's. just a lot less popular than he used to. be. And so the question is going to be. at the end of the day like what is the. lesser of two evils for people going. into the voting booth? And the thing I. always look at is a lot of people don't. vote in off-year elections. And so the. one thing I do look at polls is just. like who is routinely saying they're. more enthusiastic and fired up. And it's. been Democrats for the last two years. It's why they've overperformed in a lot. of these off-year races, which if you.

extrapolate that and pull it across all. the races, you could see why you could. have Democrats doing even better than. people think. And then having this. break. And in fact, Donald Trump was. making that case. If you wanted uh if. you wanted compromise and you wanted. something different, he said he's ready. to make deals, right? His uh his. son-in-law has already met with Hakee. Jeff to talk about how they can make. deals. It's almost like they're. preparing uh to make deals, which makes. Speaker Johnson and others fume. >> No, I heard my friends over on the.

National Review podcast, the editors, upset about that comment uh late last. week. Like that that's not what we want. to hear. That you're going to be working. with these crazy Democrats who are about. to take over the House and possibly the. Senate to make deals for for whom? Uh we. don't want that. We don't want they. didn't make deals with our side and we. shouldn't be making deals with them. The. odds are the Republicans would be. unhappy with any deals that are made. But I think what we're really going to. see is the Democrats will win the House. I don't know about the Senate, Mike, but. it's going to be investigation Rama.

It's just going to the next two years. He says he's going to be a blocker. I. agree. He's probably going to block most. of the legislation, but it's just going. to be subpoenas, investigations, House. oversight, house ethics. Jared Kushner, Don Jr., Eric Trump, you know, the most. subpoenaed people in US history, will. double and triple down on that on that. record, not to mention whatever they can. do to sty upset Trump himself. Don't you. think that's where that things are. going? >> You you have the checklist. Uh it's as. if you have the Democratic playbook.

because my reporting with Democrats is. that they know that they can't directly. go at Trump. As Jim said, the White. House, we know from the first term, they're just going to ignore subpoenas. But anyone who's done business with. Trump, anybody who's done a deal with. Trump, anybody who's had a conversation. with Trump, any consultant who's advised. a company about h where they should. give, what they should give, like all of. those are the places Democrats going to. go is a bank shot for Trump. They're.

going to say Trump has been helping his. cronies. Trump has been helping people. around him and it's been hurting you. And so big business, anybody who has. done anything with the financial side of. this administration, like they're going. to be the targets. Something super. important uh to mention, Megan, like Jim. pointed out, the the intensity on the. other side. As I talked to Republicans. over the weekend about how they felt. about the convention, the reason they.

like the convention is they feel like it. got their people back excited, gave. their people a reason to get out. Now, you certainly need more than that, but. that's a place that they were in a hole. and they feel that the convention has. put them back to par. >> Okay, I gave my prediction. Let me ask. you your predictions, Jim. Odds that uh. well, what do you think is going to. happen? I'll put it more. I'll simplify. the question uh in the House and the. Senate. >> I think the Democrats win both uh if. things continue on this trajectory and I.

think they will. >> Wow. How about you, Mike? >> Yes. The there there's no Republic very. few Republicans who have hope for the. House. They have hope for the Senate. The problem is I think there's so much. momentum, such a wave. I think it's be. one of those elections and uh Megan, I've watched you cover them over the. years. An election where there's such a. big wave that seats fall that we're not. even watching. >> Oh wow. Uh okay, Roy, thoughts? House, Senate? >> Um I'll agree with Jim. I think it goes.

the Democrats way. Uh but I also think. we've got a lot of time between now and. then where something, you know, going. back to the AI conversation, could. really change the landscape. And I think. that's the thing that we're going to. have to watch for is something's going. to happen. It'll change how we think. about it. >> Well said. All right, guys. Listen, if. this has stressed you out, if you're a. Republican voter, you it's time to. simplify. Simplify your life. Get your. own ducks in a row in advance of this. massive change coming our way to.

Washington by Simplify. It's out. tomorrow. Go ahead and order it today, guys. Thank you, >> Megan. I love your Joy of Missing Out. When in doubt, Simplify. You feel free to steal it. It's all. yours. Great to see you guys. >> Thanks for having us back.