Unprecedented: SCOTUS Leak Reveals Roe V. Wade to be Overturned

From the Fox News Radio Studios in New York City, giving you opinions and facts with a positive approach, it's Brian Gilmead. Hi, everybody. Brian Kilmead here. Thanks so much for being with me. And again, we appreciate, we know you have a lot of options.

We appreciate so much our growing audience here. Carrie Sebarino will be with us. Perfect for today. We're talking a lot about the Supreme Court. She's president of the Judicial Crisis Network, co-author of the book Justice on Trial, the Kavanaugh Confirmation, the future of the Supreme Court.

We're talking about a massive leak, maybe the biggest one in Supreme Court history. And Congressman Darrell Iso will put everything in perspective. He sits on judiciary, also foreign affairs, so we'll talk a little about Ukraine. Let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. You know, it's still the case in that Ohio race that every one of those Republican candidates has raced to embrace Donald Trump as much as they can. And so he's still, even though he may be showing some signs of weakness, he still has enough power to shape the conversation in every one of these Republican primaries that we're seeing right now. Yeah, midterm primary mania begins.

Yep, Trump put the power of his reputation on the In multiple races, the biggest perhaps the endorsement of J.D. Bance at Ohio. Number two. He's not making any real gains on the battlefield. Ukrainians are making some significant advances up near Kharkiv and also to the south, to the east of Odessa.

And every day that goes by, actually he does not gain ground, he loses ground. And I don't see him gaining any more ground going to the west. I think he's going to basically hold what he's got. Land grab. That's what Russia plans on doing in Kiracan and perhaps Mariupol, despite massive losses of men and prestige with the West.

Tolerate him acquiring or annexing two more pieces of Ukraine? I hope not. As more rumors of Putin going under the knife for cancer surgery, I'll bring you the latest on this brutal war in Ukraine. Number I've covered the court for years and I teach a class on the Supreme Court and I really didn't think this day would come. That's a strange thing to say in a city that literally floats on leaks.

And it existed on a level of integrity that is all too foreign today in politics. That is Jonathan Turley, and he hopefully will be joining some part of the Tuesday show. But he's weighing in last night on the stunning news: Roe v. Wade overturned an unprecedented leak from SCODA. Shows the court is about to possibly return the decision to the states.

We're going to look at the leak, the massive protests around the country, and how it could affect families and the midterms. You know, Justice Alito, who evidently wrote this in February, no one said it's not true. There's got to be a massive search now who leaked this out about this decision out. It's raw. It's not done.

It reads great. Even I can understand it. I'm not a law student or a great legal mind. Even I can understand exactly the thought process going into it. But it looks like Kavanaugh.

Uh Amy Cody Barrett. Uh Justice Thomas. Gorsik and Alito all agree that it should be returned to the states and that there was a problem with Roe v. Wade back in the nineteen seventy three, where thirty states had called abortion illegal.

So, you go elsewhere, or force into back rooms. Whatever the situation was. The question is: I think there's three elements to this story. I think, number one, It is the decision. Roe v.

Wade. What is the impact on the country every single day?

Some say it's healthcare, some say you're killing a baby. Number two. Who leaked it? And is this going to be just the beginning? Major controversial decisions on, I don't know, guns and abortion and state trade, everything are going to leak out ahead of time?

I thought you were screening these clerks that this would never happen. Evidently, in the past, they've been pretty effective because this never has happened before. And the third is, what are the ramifications on the midterms and long term when it comes to Roe v. Wade being overturned? Supreme Court justices, the mostly conservative Supreme Court at this hour, because Mitch McConnell held out for a year and said in the final year, it's never been done before, Barack Obama, Merrick Garland, will not even get a hearing.

And then it comes out, Donald Trump stuns the world and wins, and he puts three Supreme Court justices in place. Really, people have put out a whole list of Supreme Court justices he would name. That list was okayed, and he went ahead and did it. That's why decisions like this are happening. There's going to be a big push now to fatten the Supreme Court.

Let's go pack the court and make sure these Republicans don't have control of this branch of the government.

So those are some of the things. First off. On the ramifications of the leak, Senator Mike Lee talked about how he's always wanted to get rid of Roe v. Wade, but not the way he heard about it, cut through. This is a night of sharp contrast.

This is bittersweet. On the one hand, it's sweet because we're finally vindicating the Constitution and the babies who have been unprotected by the law because the Supreme Court of the United States has told states that they may not protect unborn human life. That's the sweet part. The bitter part is the way this was leaked. This was an utter disgrace in terms of how it was released.

This entire kerf kerfuffle has been brought about as a result of an unscrupulous person trying to subvert two hundred and thirty five years of tradition. And that's with this person. Evidently, the name is being circulated out. When we get confirmed, if it is confirmed, we'll share it with this hour. But if it is a person that we think it is, he is on a Supreme Court justice's staff.

And this name is as soon as we get confirmation on it. Evidently, who has a relationship with Josh Gerstein, who got this Mabboth story. Remember. Uh they couldn't ver verify the the laptop. Right, so we're not gonna run with it.

We're not gonna run with it.

So Politico get this story and they feel as though they can run with it, even though the ramifications are awesome. And really, and pervasive. John Sago is the legislative director for the Texas Right for Life. who's been on the state's strict law for who's been there for the straight strict long banning abortions after six weeks, right? He's worried.

He says he's worried about why the draft, which was published by Politico, was leaked in the first place. Here's his quote. There's obviously a goal to have backlash and large enough response in the news and in the real world to get some of the justices to back away from this kind of vote. He said that, describing one of the theories of why the draft leaked out. Democrats are beside themselves.

So you have the opinions out there, but among the Democrats reacting negatively in a combined statement, Schumer and Pelosi came out condemning what would be the rule. Here's Bernie Sanders comes out and says, as you know, he says, I urge colleagues to use this leaked draft opinion as motivation to end the use of the filibuster. In a tweet, he says, Congress must pass legislation that codifies Roe v. Wade as the law of the land of this country right now. And if there aren't 60 votes in the Senate to do it, then there are not.

We must end the filibuster and pass it with 50 votes. What makes you think all 50 Democrats are going to go for this? Outrageous. Here's Ari Fleischer, cut seven. What really troubles me, not about the ruling itself, if that's the ruling itself, I accept and respect that ruling, but the leaker.

Make no mistake, Sean, this is an insurrection against the Supreme Court. I've already seen people on the left celebrating this leaker, calling him brave, trying to throw a Hail Mary to stop the ruling from being issued. Who at the Supreme Court will trust each other now if they know that their drafts are going to be leaked, just like everything else in Washington? The Supreme Court seemed to be the last institution standing that had internal integrity. Um Couple of things.

That's true. And I still think they have great integrity. They just have to do a better job screening their clerks. That's what it seems like. And it seems like you had well are politically motivated Man, if this is in fact correct.

Who feels as though it would in order to stop Roe v. Wade, he wants to leak it out and cause massive uproar.

Now maybe this would have just postponed it, made it put to June. You know, a lot of these states were trending that direction. We'll discuss it. In fact, if you look right now at the states where abortions would be illegal, it would be Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, Missouri, also Arkansas, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. That's where state uh that's where abortions would be illegal.

But you have the rest of the country. It would be a state-by-state issue, and it has a lot to do with elections. What does this do for the midterms? We'll discuss that. With Kerry Severino.

In fact, I'll take a timeout. But before we do, just a quick note on the midterm elections. The big story is J.D. Vance in a very large field got the endorsement of President Trump. You know, Hillbelly Elegy.

He was a guy who was in a Democratic area and gave a perspective on what it was like in rural, poor areas.

So many people thought he was going to be a Democrat, then he was going to be a Republican, then he became an anti-Trump Republican, and then he became a pro-Trump Republican.

So to the point where, thanks to Melania and Donald Jr., the president was persuaded to endorse J.D. Vance, extremely bright guy, Ivy League educated, served in the military, served in Iraq.

So he's got a wide perspective, and of course, grew up in a rural background with less than ideal circumstances as a kid.

So it's. The candidates vying for the Senate. And this is the prestige of Donald Trump, J.D. Vance. J.D.

Vance is one of the candidates. Mendel is the other. We have a few others that are going to be solid. Matt Dolan has a shot. Josh Mandela, as I mentioned.

Jane Tinken has a shot, so we'll see what happens. All of them except one, except Dolan, was firmly in. The Donald Trump camp, even after he endorsed J.D. Vance. We'll see what happens.

It's about a three-point race going in. You'll listen to the Brian Killmeat Show. Back with you in just a moment. Don't move. Expanding your knowledge base.

It's the Brian Killmeat Show. From the Fox News Podcasts Network. I'm Ben Dominich, Fox News contributor and editor of the Transom.com daily newsletter, and I'm inviting you to join a conversation every week. It's the Ben Dominich Podcast. Subscribe and listen now by going to FoxNewsPodcasts.com.

A talk show that's real. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. in the event that we had a Republican president in 2024. That's where we'd be. We'd be at a South America-style nationwide abortion ban in America.

Women are losing their rights in this country. We do not want to give individual states the autonomy to decide pretty much the nightmare scenario if you believe in the ultimate efficacy of the constitutional order. It's just devastating to read.

So people don't like what the ruling is going to be in June. It seems Justice Alito, who wrote these notes and began to write up his point of view, write up his papers, and write up the decision. On Roe v. Wade, eliminate Roe v. Wade, saying it's unconstitutional.

And here's the reasons why. Even I can understand it in reading it, but they say it's not quite done yet. And who knows if people are going to change their mind? And it looks like on board is Justice Thomas, on board is Corsic Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barron. And if I didn't mention in Clarence Thomas, not there is Sotomayor, obviously, Kagan, and possibly John Roberts.

Carrie Severino joins us now, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, co-author of the book Justice on Trial, the Kavanaugh Confirmation, and the future of the Supreme Court. Carrie, what's the bigger story, the decision or the leak? Wow. You know, I think unfortunately, you know, they both are sides of the same coin, because I think the leak isn't just a story, because wow, this never happens. I don't think you've ever had a a Supreme Court opinion leaked in full like this, and it's rare you'd have any aspect of it leaked, but it's the fact that it was leaked as a political play, and that is so much the story of how this issue has affected the court.

All, you know, since 1973, is this has politicized the court, and this is why now the clerks, even themselves, apparently, I mean, that's the assumption is that's one of the few people who would have had a copy of this, would be a clerk. The clerks themselves are treating this as a political play to affect an incredibly political issue. And as Justice Alito's opinion, States. It's simply not the court's job to be making these political judgments, and this opinion puts it back. in the hands of the American people and their elected representatives.

So hopefully, this means that now we don't have to continue to have this politicization of the court because we can have those political debates in the political sphere where they belong.

Well, I'll just read some excerpts from what Alita wrote. It's time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people's elected representatives. The permissibility of abortion and the limitations upon it are to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting. This is what the Constitution and the rule of law demand. He just believes this was a faulty decision, and the Supreme Court should not be dealing with this.

States should, right? Yes. I mean, he doesn't spe specify states. He says legislatures because there are could potentially be a role for federal legislatures on some aspects of this as well. But the idea is that the Supreme Court can only trump A law, and in this case, it was Trumping state laws when it's the Constitution actually gives it the authority to do so.

They don't get to just say, hey, we think that was a bad idea, or we think it should go a different direction, only when the Constitution says so. And it is beyond clear. There's no language in the Constitution that actually explicitly addresses abortion. And as he carefully documents, there's nothing that implicitly supports abortion. And Roe versus Wade itself, even, doesn't really commit to where exactly in the Constitution it finds this right.

It is simply made up. And it goes contrary to all of American history.

So anyone who says, well, this was just an implicit right, that is ludicrous. And, you know, Justice Alito goes through a very long historical analysis as well, showing how, you know, there's a 30-page appendix giving the history of state laws. Outlawing abortion, which were in 75% of the states in effect at the time the 14th Amendment is passed, which is one of the places they're pointing to, saying that somehow endorses a right to abortion. And by the time Roe versus, or by the time the beginning of the 20th century, even it was outlawed in every state in the country.

So you simply can't say this is longstanding American. Right. It simply wasn't. You know, there may be some states that want it to be a right, and they're certainly able to do so under this opinion.

However, Um, that's, you know, it is not the Supreme Court's role to reach out and try to decide this issue itself. And when Casey seemed to think it was going to then settle this issue by Trying to do that by saying, well, let's just go with Rogue because that's going to settle this issue. It just shows the folly of that. effort because it clearly the issue was not settled by Roe. It was not settled by Casey.

It is more contentious than ever. And I think it's time for the Supreme Court to just admit it never was its job in the first place, less less the political branches. come to their their conclusions on this issue. Here's what Alan Dershwit said on the theorizing on why this would leak out now, what it means and what they hoped when the person emerges, and we'll see what you think about if we will get that person. Cut 15.

I have a theory, and it's only a theory. I think this was leaked by a liberal law clerk who is trying to change the outcome of the case, either by putting pressure on some of the justices to change their mind or by getting Congress to pack for court even before June, which is very unlikely, or to get Congress to pass a national Right to abortion law. which would apply to all the states, and that would have to come to the Supreme Court to see whether that could be upheld under the Commerce Clause. But I think this is real, and I think that my theory is that it was leaked by somebody who wants to change the outcome.

So they think that the public pressure and the protests we're likely to see today might pressure a Supreme Court justice to change him or her opinion. Yeah, I mean I think that's the assumption that even a lot of the liberal activists are taking, you have some people who are praising this and saying more people should be doing these kind of institution destroying attacks on the court or on other long-standing institutions because the ends justify the means, apparently, in any case.

So I think that must have been the hope of the leaker in this case. I think that was actually misguided. I think if anything, boy, are the justices gonna wanna flip-flop at this point on such a major and now completely explicitly publicized event? I don't think so. And I think it's just the idea that this would have been done in a way that was such a breach of trust.

Would further strengthen their spines. I'm curious how this affects the Chief Justice, who has got to be outraged. At what this is doing to the institutional inexpensive. Carrie, do you think they're going to find the person? I think they're going to look really hard.

And I think my understanding is if this was printed on a printer, we can hopefully trace where that is. I hope we'll be able to find out who did this. And you got to wonder, they say it's a very small group that could be the culprit.

So if we'll see if that person has a conscience or maybe wants to take a bow. And think, look what a great thing I did. Carrie Severino, always great to get your insight. I know. Back in a moment.

Precise, personal, powerful. Is America's Weather Team in the palm of your hands? Get Fox Weather updates throughout your busy day, every day. Subscribe and listen now at FoxnewsPodcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts. A radio show like no other.

It's Brian Killmeade. This opinion does not reflect the majority of people in this country. Millions of people, men and women, Republicans, Democrats, Christians, people of all faith, have benefited from access to safe abortion in this country. Abortion is a moral good. It is still available and it is needed by women and families and people all over the place.

And so we have to fight against this kind of ruling. We have to affirm. That abortion is part of regular healthcare. It is essential medicine.

So that was Amy Hagstrom Miller on a show on a channel you never watch, MSNBC, the CEO of Whole Women's Health.

So it's a public good to have an abortion. I never heard that perspective before. But it looks like Roe v. Wade is going to make every state in charge of whether abortions will be legal and when. If that, of course, the February opinion is the same as we expect to be a June opinion.

With Merritt now in studio, Congressman Darrell Issa, Republican, on the Judiciary Committee, as well as House Foreign Affairs Committee. Congressman, welcome back. You've been on every committee just about at least once, haven't you? You know, in my 22 years, I've gotten around a little bit. I missed the Select Intelligence Committee, but it's not as bipartisan as it once was.

And the Judiciary has never been one of those committees where you assume that everyone gets along on everything. Issues like abortion have been an underpinning of that committee for a long time. And one of the interesting things with this leak is. Congress has a right to legislate the standards for abortion, just as all the states do, but they've been lazy. They've allowed a single Decision to essentially create a constitutional right where there wasn't one, and as this draft leaked draft Puts out very well.

It's a weak argument. It's probably as good an argument that there's a right of privacy as there was under Dred Scott that African Americans were property. The fact is, you can make an argument for political purposes, but constitutionally it's much easier to find or much harder to find that argument because it doesn't exist in the Constitution. I mean, some of the excerpts from you're talking about what Alito wrote and the reason why he's looking to strike it down. They say Roe is egregiously wrong from the state.

It's resonating. Was egregiously wrong from the state. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision to, he had. Has had damaging consequences as for bringing about a national sentiment on the abortion case. Roe and Casey have inflamed debate and deepened division.

If you want to persuade Alito, don't look for that. He also has been stating in the past, Alito says he will not give in to our decisions, cannot be giving in to public opinion. He goes, We cannot have that play a role in the decisions that we make.

So the public is going to see a lot of protests around the country today to probably try to persuade the Supreme Court justice not to get through with this. Will it be effective? I don't believe it will be, although whoever leaked it might have thought that with Justice Roberts' Obama decision that perhaps he was malleable as to public opinion. I am hoping they are not, because I think that those protests, those discussions, they need to go on at the state capitals. In my home state of California, the law that we operate under was signed by Ronald Reagan.

It is much more liberal and will not be changed in any way by a reversal of Roe. And the same would be true of New York and Connecticut and many other states where the laws are very clear giving abortion legality. What was the Supreme Court breakdown on party when they ruled Roe v. Wade positive for Roe v. Wade?

It was a 7-2. And the reality is it was Nixon and other Republican appointees that helped find this, craft this idea that privacy was.

Somehow in the Constitution, and that privacy of the mother preempted the rights of the child. As you see in the Alito report, that's not the case. The real question is: is an unborn child a human being? Does it have rights? And are those rights at least to be considered by the states, which historically make the decision about what doctors can or cannot do?

Do you think the FBI should be involved already to find out who this leaker is? And from what you know about the Supreme Court justice setup, is it going to be relatively easy to find out who did it? It may be very difficult. Really? People work for the justices.

They are almost like islands, nine islands. And so if one of the justices wants to cover for a staffer, it could be very difficult. But let's understand the court has separation of powers.

So as much as I'd like to call for an investigation and demand the FBI go in, it's up to Chief Justice. Roberts to call for and ask to have whatever assistance he needs if he believes that these rules have been violated in a way that I believe that's the right way to do it. Congress is a separate body, the executive branch is a separate body, and particularly the court has to be allowed that deference that it makes its own decisions. Remember that as far as I know, this was not a breach of the law, but rather a breach of the rules and the oaths that these people take.

So you don't even know if it's illegal. I don't know of a particular law that was violated by leaking it.

However, the history and the tradition of the court was clearly thrown in a trash can by whoever did this.

So Jonathan Choley tweets out: the alleged leak of opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization is nothing short of breathtaking. It will continue, it will constitute one of the greatest breaches of security in the history of the court. Of the court. And he's a constitutionist, constitutionalist, and he teaches it at Georgetown.

And you've been watching him all day. He's outraged by this. He said he never thought it would ever happen because of the thoroughness in which they screen these clerks. You're absolutely right. It takes a clerk wanting to do it and a justice who that clerk believes will not mind.

So it is egregious. It is unfortunately, though, a direction we have to be careful about. The court has to be above public opinion so that a leak doesn't matter. And I hope that all those justices that are on one side or the other of the opinion continue to work for a final document and not be dissuaded or persuaded by some outrage of one side or another. Remember, and I'm going to go to a sticky point.

January 6th, people say that somehow I would have changed my vote because of a crowd outside my door. It would have been a constitutional violation for me to do so. The same would be true of these justices. The decision they've made, they've made because of their belief of what the Constitution means. It should not be affected by public opinion.

So a couple of things. Let's talk about the midterms today. How much power do you think President Trump has with Republicans? And do you think it's going to be on display, whether it's there or not, on these midterm elections? Oh, absolutely.

The Trump wing, if you will, of the party is the majority of the party. And so in primaries, it makes a huge difference. Ohio today. Ohio today. And Indiana.

But it also makes a difference in another sense in that we are having a referendum on the Trump policies that gave us peace and prosperity versus the Biden policies that have given us war, failed war, and inflation and an economy that for the first time. Time is now in a downward spiral, including heading toward restrictions. It's interesting, Congressman Biger Wood with Congressman Darrell Aces. Because you saw the study, this John Angelon said in March of last year, hey guys, you're in trouble. I'm doing some pollsters for Democrats.

He's a Democratic pollster, and America doesn't trust you on inflation and crime and the economy overall. And they said, this is a warning because the midterms are coming faster than you think. And they said nothing. They did nothing to combat it. In fact, they made statements that have proven to be wrong about inflation being transitory.

So with now rates going up, prices going up, inflation going up, but wages not going up fast enough, the President has decided, evidently, with his people to go after Trump and say, look how much better I am anyway on my worst day. You at least don't have to deal with Trump, that lunatic anymore. Do you think that that could be, judging by what you just said, a troublesome argument for them? It's a hopeless argument. What he's really saying is, are you better off today than you were a year and a half ago?

And since the answer is no, that qu it would be almost like if in the debates, instead of Ronald Reagan asking, Are you better off? The other side of the- Jimmy Carter did. Jimmy Carter obviously did not have a good economy. He had inflation, he had recession, and he was unable to control it. He was even unable to spur the American people to believe in the future.

And that's where we are with Joe Biden. He's telling us that the future is bright, but there's no basis for anyone to believe that. Do you believe that this country is becoming a little bit more rational? Over the last year or so, as they look around, and I give you an example: I look at Bill Maher, I look at Joe Rogan, I look at Elon Musk. I don't think.

Political firebrands, but yet they're pointing out what we've been pointing out for a long time. There's arguments on the left that are so anti-American and so ridiculous, teaching gender studies in third grade, that America was built in 1692, really, really launched, built on slavery on stolen land, that CRT and whites should apologize for the color of their skin, even though obviously some fourth grader is not guilty of anything. And then look what's happened with these teachers, these teachers' boards, these education boards.

Now you see this uproar on the grassroots and what happened in Virginia. I just think it's not a rise of republicanism. It seems to be a rise of rationalism. You're absolutely right. It's a rejection of policies that make no sense or are proving to fail.

And it's that combination of. Things that make no sense, and people shake their head, but also. The idea that these things have been tried in the last 18 months and they didn't work. You know, there's one other one that I think is just. bugging the American people.

The broken supply chain, some of it is real. It's over in China. But when they look at the rise of fuel prices here, even though we have the ability to not only produce all of our own oil and natural gas, but even export it, and they're asking, where's the President's leadership on that? And all they're being told is climate change has to be fought, fought with higher prices, fought on the back of working Americans. You live in California.

How do you deal with it? You know, in California, they are embracing that absurdity. We literally have power outages on warm days in the afternoon because when the sun goes down, they are deliberately not producing enough power and they won't allow other generators to be turned on.

So sometimes you deserve what you get. And to a certain extent, we're getting it in California. But the rest of the nation, for the most part, is rejecting it. You know, in New York State, where they don't have, right here, where they won't allow fracking, what a surprise. That they don't have enough natural gas.

But for most of the country, if you will, the flyover States, they know they have it better when they don't have Biden in the White House. Right. And we used to debate on a pathway to decision shift for people who have been here.

Now we are debating on if the border is broken, whether we should secure the border at all. I mean, we let what, eight thousand to fifteen to eighteen thousand a day illegals coming in. We used to all agree that that was a problem. We don't agree the the parties don't agree on that anymore. You know, it used to be if you got over the border and you didn't get turned back, you'd have to run and hide and try to make a living.

Now you get picked up, you get an airplane ticket, you get $3,500, and you get the right to get health care and medical, sorry, and you go to an NGO and get a fresh set of clothes, get a nice sleep, get some toiletries, and you hop on a bus.

So, what do we have right now? We have better than an immigration policy. The Ukrainians coming over the border have special dispensation, but you know what? They're not getting anything more than people from Honduras who come here illegally. And by the way, the term illegal immigrant, we may have to give up using that because the president has made.

Basically, over 2 million people that you and I would call illegals, he's made them legal. He's granted them a parole. He's said, You're here for two or three or four years, and if we get around to having an evaluation. On top of that, we're still talking about Title 42. I was at the border less than two weeks ago, and they are already undoing Title 42.

I saw that. They're bringing people in and processing them.

Well, the court has not even allowed that. But let's remember, this is a president who undid the Remain in Mexico policy. And when the court told him that he had done it wrongfully or illegally, what did he do? He slow walked the fact that as of today, they still haven't gone back to Remain in Mexico.

So this is a president that won't obey the law, even when the court orders him to. Yeah, they said there's about 125,000 over there now, which should be about a million. And now when they go to expel people, they said they don't want to go. They said, why? Because Title 42 is going to be out.

I'm going to be allowed here anyway. I'm not going to go remain in Mexico. Can you believe this? Illegal immigrants refusing to leave our soil. You've got to lock them up and throw them out into the Rio Grande if you have to.

So Darrell Ice is here. Congressman, I want to talk to you about what's happening in Ukraine, too, when we come back. Don't move. Learning something new every day on the Brian Killmead Show. The more you listen, the more you'll know it's Brian Killmead.

That steel plant is not just a plant that you and I would say is a normal block-long steel plant, it's quite large. It's got a lot of underground tunnels and places for people to move and hide. And there's about 2,000 soldiers plus in there as well. And frankly, I don't think they should. This may be one of those fights to the deaths because simply the Russians are either going to not take them prisoners or going to transport them back to Russia.

Hopefully the civilians can get out. The first hundred got out. You saw some pictures of that with them getting on buses. But I would hope the UN will help us get those civilians out of there. Congressman Darrell Issa with me.

That was Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg talking about Mariupol. And they're trying to get the civilians and the soldiers out of the steel mines where they're in the catacombs there underneath the old steel mill, Soviet era.

So far, I think this is kind of interesting, Congressman Issa. Moscow is preparing to annex the vast new swaths of Ukrainian territory. They're going to take Kirasan. They said, okay, now we're going to trade in rubles and look at our little sign that's on the mayor's office. And they're going to do it with Mariupol, I think, shortly.

Are we going to let that stand while they're? Our Army continues to be devastated regularly? The United States Congress, by the way, on a bipartisan basis, will never let it stand. Do we have control of the UN? Do we have control of these other areas?

Maybe not. But this is a fight that will go on until that land is returned. I don't think there's any question that's where the Ukrainian people are, and that's where they should be. The real question is: will we give them the ability to bring this war to a quick close, or will we continue to give them just enough to let them fight and die? What do you think?

So far, we have not been willing to give them the kind of heavy armor that would allow them to fight with a little bit more offense. Absolutely. They have a right to. The Germans gave them tanks.

Well, they need an awful lot of heavy vehicles. And, you know, the reality is they have a right to retake their land, the sovereign land of Ukraine. Unless they can do that, Russia is not going to back off. Ukraine released a video of them blowing up two ships right by Snake Island. Real quick, on top of that, Vladimir Putin evidently is going to undergo cancer surgery.

There's two separate sources saying that. I hope it's brain cancer. I hope it's painful, and I hope he dies. I'm not sure about hope he dies, but I hope it's brain cancer so we can have a reason for him being a megalomaniac, for him being crazy, because otherwise there is no basis for him to say anything except he's a murderer. Is he doing this himself, or is there a nucleus in the Russian government that says this is a good move and a great risk to take?

When you look at Putin at that table with everyone, you know, 10 feet away from him, it says a lot about him. He, by definition, has isolated himself. He's never allowed anyone that could challenge him to be in the circle. It's Putin. Congressman Darrell Ice, always great to see you.

California is lucky to have you. Glad you're back in the game. Thank you. Maybe you'll be back in the majority next time we speak. We will be.

From the Fox News Podcasts Network, in these ever-changing times, you can rely on Fox News for hourly updates for the very latest news and information on your time. Listen and download now at FoxNewsPodcast.com or wherever you get your favorite podcasts. Live from the Fox News Radio Studios in New York City, fresh off the set of Fox and Friends, it's America's receptive voice. Brian Killmeade. Hi everybody, coming to you from 48th and 6th in Midtown Manhattan, heard around the country, heard around the world, especially in the Ukraine.

I'm so glad you're here. George P. Bush is going to be with us in a couple of weeks. He's going to be up. To see if he can get the nomination to be the next Attorney General from Texas.

He's the land manager now. And Jonathan Turley at the bottom of the hour in the stunning news about would-be a decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. That leaked out, which has got many facets to it. And of course, the president of the United States is going to be in Alabama because he thinks he could win the state.

No, he wants to go to a javelin factory where the javelin factory, he'll say, look at what great things you're doing over in the Ukraine. Can you imagine if the javelins were there before the war? A lot of them, we might be done with this already.

So let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. You know, it's still the case in that Ohio race that every one of those Republican candidates has raced to embrace Donald Trump as much as they can. And so he's still, even though he may be showing some signs of weakness, he still has enough power to shape the conversation in every one of these Republican primaries that we're seeing right now. They want to keep saying Donald Trump has lost power and sway.

We'll find out. J.D. Vance is somebody that was in third place when the president endorsed him.

Now he's up by a couple of points according to the latest polls. Ohio is doing their primary voting today. Number two. He's not making any real gains on the battlefield. The Ukrainians are making some significant advances up near Kharkiv and also to the south, to the east of Odessa.

And every day that goes by, actually, he does not gain ground. He loses ground. And I don't see him gaining any more ground going to the west. I think he's going to basically hold what he's got. But he is bombing Odessa, land grab.

That's what Russia plans to do with Kirasan and perhaps Mariupol, despite massive losses of men and prestige with the West. Would the West stand for this? Would the United States stand for that? As more rumors of Putin going under the knife for cancer surgery, I'll bring you the latest. Number one.

I've covered the court for years and I teach a class on the Supreme Court and I really didn't think this day would come. That's a strange thing to say in a city that literally floats on leaks. And it existed on a level of integrity that is all too foreign today in politics. Uh that is Jonathan Turley, Roe v. Wade, overturned.

An unprecedented leak from SCODA shows the court is about to possibly return the decision to the states. We look at the leak, the massive protests around the country that are expected, and how it could affect families and the ultimate decision in June. Let's bring in George P. Bush. He is the land manager over in this place called Texas.

Welcome, George. Good morning. Thank you for having me. I know you're aspiring to be the next Attorney General. You win the runoff.

It's you against Ken Paxton. How's it going? It's going great. Every day we pick up new endorsements, particularly in the law enforcement community. We're obviously dealing with an insecure border in South Texas, but you know, people forget Houston is on the verge of having more homicides than Chicago, New York and Los Angeles.

Have vacancy rates in cities like Austin of over 400 first responders. We have a defund the police movement. We have rogue DAs and judges that refuse to follow criminal sentencing guidelines. And so to get the endorsements of Now 54 law enforcement organizations. Texas State Firefighters Association, and also the National Border Patrol Council, which is the union.

That represents the 19,000 agents that keep the watch. It's just a great Way to achieve momentum as we get closer to the big day on May 24th. Yeah, I mean, it's not a big story when a Republican gets an endorsement, but when you get it in a Republican primary, it is a big story.

So, you know, one of the big things you're doing is help build the wall. You're providing the land, making it available in order for Texas to build a wall. George, I was actually on a plane a few days ago with one of the guys building the wall. And he was supposed to do the federal wall, the Trump wall. And then when they moved him off that, he was about to put up stakes, but now he's building your wall.

How much is done?

So by last count on state acreage, we've completed a twelve mile gap, and this was the basis of my lawsuit against the Biden administration last year. We actually, on behalf of the state, lease out to ranchers and farmers on a daily basis. And our farmer in Stark County, regretfully, has had such a trampling of his crop that it's destroyed his business. And so we brought suit on his behalf. against the Biden administration to compel This government to spend the money that was appropriated for the Trump Wall.

People forget that 300 miles is still not constructed, billions of dollars. diverted to other parts of DOD and the Corps of Engineers. And so it's an important constitutional case that says that under Article II of the Constitution, the President just can't wave a magic wand and divert monies. But we went to work last year working with the governor and the Texas legislature on our acreage. We have more money than actual wall to build on.

And so as a candidate for AG, but also as land commissioner, I'm reaching out to ranchers and farmers where they can go to the governor's website and sign easements to allow us for further construction of the wall. But we've got enough funding to build, by last count, upwards of another 100 miles if needed in highly trafficked corridors. And people forget Texas receives about 70% of all illegal encounters in the Rio Grande Valley, about 40% of the nation's entire encounters with illegal immigrants.

So it's important that we plug these holes as soon as possible, knowing the federal government's not going to do their job.

So how amazing was it to see, in a bad way, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Mayorkas, just flat out lie? An example right here. Look at what he talked about the board. Yeah. You, as the Secretary of Homeland Security, don't have an opinion on whether Title 42 should or should not be in place?

I do not because I am not a public health expert. But it is my responsibility to plan and execute as it is in place and plan, prepare, and execute for the day when it won't be. Our border is not open. What happens now is individuals are either expelled Under the Title 42 authority, or they are placed in immigration enforcement proceedings. And they are removed if they do not have a valid claim under our law to remain.

And so the border is not open. Is the border open? And did he describe what happens accurately? No, absolutely. I mean, it's more bureaucratic doublespeak that frustrates everyday Texans and everyday Americans because as the Chief guardian of our nation's homeland security, he should view this.

As a loophole, the loophole that is being abused by cartels, by smugglers, coyotes. and illegal themselves. And yes, when somebody comes to our country, they get a notice to appear, but over a majority, Brian, of those that get that notice to appear blend into the shadows. And so essentially we have a catch And release program. If he was being honest and sincere with the people of America, he would say we need to keep Title 42 on the books.

If you listen to actual law enforcement officials within his chain of command, That tells me and others every day in the public square that we need Title 42 to immediately remove, because if you don't have that deterrent factor, You will have, based upon Biden's own administration, three times more illegal encounters. And for a state like ours, We just popped. possibly can't sustain this amount of undue expenditure on our schools or hospitals are roadways. And so FAIR, which is a conservative think tank, in Washington, DC estimates that the total cost of illegal immigrants to the nation's taxpayers is in excess of one hundred twenty billion. And with lifting Title forty two, it could go up to one hundred forty billion.

And as I've mentioned, it goes from two million to maybe three million illegal encounters. It changes the face of the country in a way that doesn't respect the Constitution or the rule of law. Yeah, it's amazing that he's able to try to pull this off. George, as Attorney General, as you become a candidate there, what made you think that would be the next step? Was it something you wanted to do with your law background, or was it the vulnerability of Ken Paxton because of these investigations that he's dealing with?

Well, I'm a lifelong conservative. I'm a military veteran. I'm a public servant, coming from a family that puts service before. Anything else, and it's been an honor serving as land commissioner for seven years, but I really feel like I've pressed my agenda as far as I possibly can, especially on energy independence and taking care of our military veterans. Yes, I do think that Ken is vulnerable, and that's why I've made it very clear to the voters: this isn't about me or my name.

It's about making sure that the state remains resilient. The only way we do that is to beat the bed tour work. wing of the Democrat Party that's taking over our state. As I mentioned, we have an elected judiciary, we have elected DAs, and George Soros. I'm not exaggerating, has placed millions of dollars In these races in Texas.

And it's changing our judiciary to a point where we've gotten soft on crime, soft on illegal immigration, soft on the issues in a state that prides itself on being conservative and following. The law. And so if you just look at the raw politics, Brian, four years ago, he underperformed the governor by 10%. Governor, by recent estimates, is up on Veto by seven.

So by my math, Ken is already underwater. Against a hypothetical Democrat. And speaking of the border, Rochelle Garza, who's the leading Democrat. On the other side, argued against the Trump administration as an ACLU attorney to legalize abortion. for illegal immigrants.

So you're probably familiar with your Miranda rights, but as an illegal immigrant, when you are detained in a DHS facility or an HHS facility now, you are advised of your right to have an abortion. That's the type of Democrat we're going up against. And I'm not just going to sit idly by and allow Ken to abuse the office and lose. to the Democrat. Let's let the merits of this case Be cleared up in the court of law, but he needs to clear that air suspicion, sit down for his multiple jury trials.

Deal with the FBI investigation and do the right thing for the Republican Party.

So right now, I guess several of Paxton's top aides in 2020 accused the Attorney General of bribery and abuse of power in connections with some of his actions on behalf of a real estate developer and campaign donor. A lot of times they hit, hence the Russian Oaks, people with charges. They just want to see them stopped, maybe the other side. What makes you think there's substance to this?

Well, I happen to know several of his former deputies, fine upstanding members of the Texas Bar, one, a long serving military veteran before he joined the Texas Bar. In addition to Jeff Matier, who is his right-hand man, an outstanding Christian constitutionalist that Is the one bringing these charges.

So these aren't folks that are from the deep state or hold a grudge or charges from the media. These are his eight hand-picked lieutenants that he brought personally. into the agency. And we have to take these allegations very seriously. And so, like I said, everybody's entitled to their day in court, and we will see if the U.S.

Attorney for the Western District of Texas will indict him. But I believe that the Biden DOJ led by Merrick Garland is inherently a political body, and they will drop indictments after hoping for Ken Paxton to be nominated, perp walking him to jail for the second time in as many terms And then of course opening the door to Rochelle Garza, a left-wing beto-style Democrat to be our next attorney general, the first Democrat to hold a statewide office potentially in over 30 years. And so it it's very clear to me that this is an elaborate scheme that's being set up by the left. to take advantage of the weakest statewide candidate that we've had in a very long time.

So my only argument to Republicans is why not just clear the air, go with a proven constitutional conservative like me. I've been successful in the courthouse against Both Obama and Biden. And most importantly, I'm going to beat the Democrats. I'm a proven vote getter. I did so in 2014, and I'll do it again this time around.

George P. Bush, our guest lastly, George, you're going to help me out with what made America great with doing the history of oil and gas, and you helped me out in the fields that day. And I didn't grow up in that business, but learning so much about it as of late. Right now, Europe needs natural gas and they need oil. The Russians are beginning to cut them off, which I think is foolish on their part because it's funding their war.

The answer from people in Texas and who produce oil and gas, they need to know that if they start producing at a higher rate, that somehow they need to be backstopped to know the government's not going to pull out the rug from under them, or if the world price drops, that they'll be backstopped. Evidently, the magic number is $80 per barrel of oil. Would Would you be for that, for uh for setting up a warp speed-like approach to this, where we've got your back now that oil is over 100, and if it drops lower over the next three years, we will help you so you don't have to fire a bunch of people and don't end up going out of business. What would you suggest?

Well, you know, I'm actually leery of government intervention when it comes to pricing of oil, but I would. be open to the idea of backstopping the incremental delta. Between existing US oil and gas production and the additional production necessary to help our friends. in Western Europe. I I want to give a tip of the hat to former Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, who talked about during the Trump days to actually export more natural gas because it's plentiful.

We have it in readily amounts to be able to transport and liquefy. To Western Europe, but Germany, by the way, did not accommodate that. They have yet to build an import terminal on their side. Poland has two terminals.

So the transportation of the commodities equally is important. And what the Biden administration can do as well. in addition to encouraging production. Is to allow for the transportation of the commodity, and that's getting rid of the FERC permitting on export terminals in the United States. That would help to alleviate the bottleneck that we're seeing in many parts of our country, including in the Adirondacks, the mid- West and also in the Northeast.

If it is correct, it's Samuel Alito's opinion that was written in February that leaked out incomprehensibly yesterday. If it is true that Roe v. Wade is about to be overturned, what is George P. Bush's reaction? It's one of joy.

Honestly, Brian, I call you today from our nation's capital. I did a Facebook Live in front of the steps of the Supreme Court, and many of my supporters. Join in on prayer. We thought. And reflected upon the 50 years of abortion that we have allowed, I believe, a genocide on the unborn and their rights.

In our country, and that this case originally was inappropriately decided. You can't just invent rights out of the Constitution under the Fourteenth Amendment and Due Process Clause. And so I think Justice, assuming the opinion holds up, Justice Alito is absolutely right. And saying that the role of the judiciary is to interpret the Constitution and that these decisions need to be made by the states. And so I'm proud to report to you that Texas does have a trigger law that says as soon as this opinion is ordered, hopefully in June, that our law of our land in Texas will be to ban abortion entirely because we believe life begins at conception.

And frankly, this is the way it should be under our federalist system instead of just nationalizing everything and creating rights out of our Constitution. George, always great to talk to you. Best of luck in your three-week sprint to the 24th. Appreciate it. Thanks, buddy.

Okay, runoff election there for Attorney General in Texas, George P. Bush. When we come back, I'll take your calls: 1-866-408-7669. Then I'm going to go to Jonathan Turley and then end with some more calls. Also, I'm on outnumbered.

You'll get to see what I look like. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. If you're interested in it, Brian's talking about it. You're with Brian Kilmead. Hey, welcome back, everybody.

I want to get a couple of calls. Let's go to Steve Listener on the Fox News Radio app. Hey, Steve. Good morning, Brian. You know, I just had to talk about this Supreme Court leaked document.

If people are sitting there thinking that this was leaked, Because they thought they were going to change the Supreme Court justice mind. You're thinking on the micro. You have to think macro like the Democrats do. This is a long-term leak. They're going to use this.

For the midterm elections, because what they've just done is they've energized the part of their base. That was dormant. Republicans, the part of the base that wants to see Roe v. Way overturned is already energized. This isn't going to do anything more for us.

You need to understand something. Republicans better play this smart because the Democrats are so much better than us at the long game. They always find that October surprise. And I have to tell you, as somebody who's a political junkie, I'm a former state committee man here in Massachusetts. And I have to be honest with you, this scares me more than any October surprise I've ever seen before because I have a sinking feeling that we've just gone from a veto-proof Congress, which we probably would have had at the midterm election, to maybe just squeaking by.

We'll see because it also motivates the right because it's what they wanted for so long, right? Like you. Radio that makes you think. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. Would there be a litmus test on abortion?

Yes, look, here's the deal. Polypmus tests and abortion relates to the fundamental value of the Constitution. A woman does have a right to choose. I would, in fact, if they rule it to be unconstitutional, I will send to the United States Congress, and it will pass, I believe, a bill that legislates Roe v. Wade adjusted by casey.

It's a woman's right to do that, period. And if you call that a list of test, it's a litmus test. And that's what he's done. In a statement from the President now, from the White House, he said: if this, in fact, leaked document is true, my administration will argue strongly before the court in defense of Roe v. Wade.

We said that Roe is based on a long line of precedent recognizing the 14th Amendment concept of personal liberty against government interference with intensely personal decisions. I believe that a woman's right to choose is fundamental. Secondly, shortly after the enactment of Texas law SB 3. SP8. And other laws restricting women's reproduction rights.

I directed my gender policy council, yeah, he's got one, and White House council official to prepare options for an administration response to the continued attack on abortion and third. If the court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation's elected officials at all levels to protect the women's right to choose, and it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. At the Federal level, we will need more pro-choice senators and pro-choice majority. He's going to look to codify it as well.

So, Jonathan Turley, what do you think about the developments that have happened and that the White House's response?

Well, in many ways, the response tends to confirm the suspicion that this leak was done for political purposes to energize the Democrats to codify Roe and with a look towards the midterm elections. I almost immediately, Senator Sanders and others came out and said, all right, let's codify Rao and possibly eliminate the filibuster.

So the question is, if someone codified to him, what does that mean?

Well, what they're suggesting to do is that if the court decides that there is not a constitutional right to an abortion, Congress would come in and mandate that all states must Uh guarantee the right to abortion. That itself could be challenged. There are grounds to say that, particularly in light of this opinion, that, that would go too far into an area of state authority. But there are arguments, good faith arguments, that the federal government has jurisdiction under the Interstate Commerce Clause. Got it.

Uh, were you shocked by this news last night? I was appalled. Uh you know the I cannot uh put into words how Deeply unethical, this act was. It's strange. for some of us who have been in the city for so long, you tend to get hardened you tend to get cynical.

But m most of us didn't think we would see this day that even in a city that is floating on leaks, The Supreme Court has always been the exception This is the the institutional touchstone of the court is the civility and confidentiality of this process. It was unthinkable that even a judicial clerk or a staff member would shatter that tradition. And that's been the case for hundreds of years. The number of leaks out of the cord, you could count on one hand, but this is a actual leak of an actual draft of a major opinion. And I'm not too sure the court will fully recover from this.

This is the greatest crises That the Chief Justice has faced in his tenure, but it's also the greatest security. breach in the court's history.

So what do you mean we'll recover?

Well, why don't you think it'll recover? Because this, the Supreme Court's a unique environment. It's obviously. a very small number of justices and a relatively small number of clerks. that work together in a almost monastic uh environment.

And as divisive as these cases often are, as raging as the debates tend to be outside the Supreme Court, There is a calmness and a civility that reigns within the Supreme Court. And the court has really worked hard to preserve that, its close identity to the institution. That's what's been shattered. And the question is. Is the court going to have to implement new measures that will interfere with the flow of ideas, the participation of clerks in this process?

Will there be a lack of trust? Yeah. I mean, it it this is really shattering that cultural norm. Yeah, we'll see. Have you heard of anybody that they're starting to zero in on?

Because I've heard some things. I'm waiting to see if a name emerges. Because people like you who know how the swimming court is set up say there's only a finite amount of people who could be, so they could get into this quickly. Yes, I've heard a couple of names coming out. Obviously, none of us want to talk about them until there is substance behind them.

What's going to be interesting is that this person is facing one hell of a choice in the next twenty four hours. because the number of people involved is relatively small, The FBI is going to immediately contact virtually all of them.

Now that person, whether it's a clerk or a staff member, is going to have to make an instant decision. Releasing an opinion of this kind is not necessarily a crime. You could try to create some attenuated theory of a crime, but it'd be hard. But lying to a federal investigator is a crime under 18 USC 2001.

So when an FBI agent knocks on your door, And asks if you're the leaker. You will have to choose between just coming out and saying, yep, it was me. and face disbarment and other professional consequences, you also will probably be lionized by the left, so it won't necessarily be all negative. Or you can lie, but then an unethical act will become a criminal act. and it gets far, far more serious.

What are the ramifications? If abortion is, Roe v. Wade is overturned, the states where abortions would be illegal would be Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.

So that's the list that already have limitations on it, right? Right. I mean, some people say they could go up to about 20 states with limitations or bans. But what's clear is that there's at least 30 states where it would be abortion would be protected. In those 30 states, is the vast majority of people who live in the United States.

So for the most people in the United States, abortion is going to remain protected simply as a matter of state as opposed to federal law. In the other states, this will become a pro an issue for the democratic process. And in states like Texas, for example, this is a close. closely divided issue in the state, and they will have to debate it among Texans. What do you think the ramp?

Why would someone do this looking at motivation? Is because if you expose it, if there's net world station nationwide protests, if they see overheated debate, they'll say, Hey, you know what? Maybe I don't want to do this. Even though we have Justice Alito saying we cannot allow our decisions to be affected in any way by influences such as public opinion.

So even though he's on the record of saying that, do all the Supreme Court justices feel the same way? Are they bound by that thought? I think that they are. I think that the Supreme Court justices will be uniformly appalled by what's occurred. I was somewhat critical of Justice Sotomayor in the oral arguments of this case because she referred to smelling a stench of politics in the case.

This was a reference to the three Trump appointees and her statement that they that there is a belief that they were put on the court to reverse row in other cases. I thought that was a violation of decorum, but it turns out it was prophetic. Obviously, the stench is much stronger now But I think that all of the justices, including Justice Sotomayor, would be appalled by this. What's also interesting is that just the day before the court handed down. Yeah.

that on a tough issue of religious speech, Or at least a tough area, I should say. Um and they really countered critics that say that they're this divided, dysfunctional court. They have come forward to say that they're not. That even Justice Breyer said he rejects the idea that people say it's a conservative court. Even Justice Soda may yours come forward to say that these are good faith discussions.

So from the perspective of the justices, what this person did was truly horrific.

Now, that's one of the reasons why. This court is going to pull out all stops to find this person. And the FBI has a finite number of suspects, and that always makes things easier. Could a justice, do you think a Supreme Court justice could have done this, been behind it?

So abhorred about what could happen? This is one of the biggest decisions in modern Supreme Court history, right? Yes. I mean, it is possible if someone I mean, obviously, anyone can be grossly unethical. It's hard to it's hard to say when someone decides that nothing matters to them except this political agenda.

That can that moment of weakness can hit a justice as well as a clerk. It's just it's so unlikely in a justice for a jurist who has spent much of their life in service of the courts. This is really that sort of nineteen nineteen World Series moment. I mean, many of us. Are standing here saying, you know, Satan so Joe, you know, that who this is beyond belief.

And I think that the justices will likely have that same Response And the question is, how much broken China there's going to be in pursuing this? I think Chief Justice Roberts. is going to burn Every structure down to try to find who's responsible because he knows. That unless they hold someone accountable, the court will never recover from this.

So we're talking to Jonathan Turley about the leak brief. opinion that it looks like in June probably, according to what Alito wrote, and no one's denied he wrote it in February, that there'll be uh Roe v. Wade will be overturned. Jonathan, you'll need five Supreme Court justices, right?

So you have Thomas. You have Coney Barrett, you got Alito, of course, you got Gorsik, you got Kavanaugh. Do you need Roberts? No, you don't. In fact, when this thing first broke last night, the thing that immediately made sense was That it was authored by Alito because many of us had assumed that Roberts would get sticker shock.

In overturning Roe. He is the ultimate institutionalist, he's an incrementalist. He doesn't like These types of shocker decisions.

So most of us were not counting on Robert's vote when we were doing a headcount on this.

Now that if Roberts said that he was not voting with the majority, he might be considering a concurrence or even going with a dissent. It would fall to the most senior member on that side to select who would write the opinion. If someone like Thomas is already writing a major opinion, and he could be very well writing the opinion in the New York gun case, from November, it may have fallen to a leado. Interesting. Yeah, I guess we'll see what happens.

I mean, wouldn't be surprised if we got some type of statement from the Supreme Court. I mean, do you expect anything?

Well, that was the big gulp moment last night when we got those five words from the court that it would have no comment. That's when I said it it appears to be legitimate. Because if this was a hoax, the core very likely would have stomped on it pretty quickly. There's been no indication from the court that this is not what it appears to be. Obviously, they're in a tough position.

They don't want to confirm basically a stolen draft opinion. It gives it value, but they're also not denying its legitimacy. Is it well written? In your view? You know, that's the other funny thing is that I had a disagreement with some legal experts.

Last night, because they're like, Well, this doesn't really read like Alito, it reads exactly like Alito. The style is very Alito-esque, it's very direct. There's no frills about it. He doesn't try to protect the feelings of anyone. He just comes out and says it.

And one of the things that the opinion. really is based on, and this is where Alito's signature is so clear, is this is the clarity. Abortion has always been this area that's been mired in nuances, ambiguities, you know, fractured decisions. And what I think Alito is saying is, look, either it's in the Constitution or it's not.

So sort of Buck up, you know, that you know, if you don't believe it's in the Constitution, you need to join us and say it's not in the Constitution. That's a very typical Alito voice to hear in the opinion. He's saying, forget about whether abortion should be done or not. It should not be the federal government's decision. It should be not a federal issue.

It should be a state issue. Is that a layman's interpretation? Is that correct? Yeah, and one of the things he said in the opinion, he just said, look, this hasn't gotten any better. This hasn't unified the country.

In polls done by Fox and other groups, it's the country's still split right down the middle on abortion. More people say they didn't want to see rogue overturn, but when you ask them, should abortion be lawful, it tends to be a much closer vote. And what Alito's saying is that this hasn't moved the needle. We still remain divided. And what this opinion has done is created a lot of uncertainty as to what the Constitution means.

And he's drawing a very bright line here, but that line is drawn in a place That the Democrats obviously will rally to oppose. But I expect that many of these Democrats are, you know, see this as an opportunity. You know, they finally have. a rallying issue going into the midterms, which may be the motivation of the weaker. Jonathan, fascinating time.

Nobody better to talk to. Jonathan Turley, thank you. My pleasure.

Well, when we come back, I'll take your calls. 1-866-408-7669. Brian Kilman. Diving deep into today's top stories, it's Brian Kilmead. Breaking news, unique opinions.

Hear it all on the Brian Kill Me Jo. Last night in Nebraska, any comment or reaction to the President's J.D. Mandel remark? No. I mean, look, he gives, what, thousands of words of speeches every single week.

Sometimes he's going to misspeak. Everybody's going to do that, but he's doing a teletown hall with us tonight here in the state of Ohio, so I'm not worried about it at all.

Okay, that is J.D. Vance. He's hoping for a big win today in the Republican nomination. I cannot believe how much anger and support that J.D. Vance has gotten.

For some reason, people are disappointed that he didn't disavow Trump, or he did early and got it back. And he trailed for the longest time, but yet he's the most high-profile name. If you flip to another channel, you see how angry the left is that he is not. On the left. Or, at least, was this new type of Republican that they thought he would be.

So, right now, we understand he's got a lot to run on should he emerge as the winner. 28% of the country, that's it, approve of Joe Biden's economy. 94% are concerned about inflation.

So, look at that 28%, think that Joe Biden's the right guy, 94% concerned about where we're at. I think that the Joe Biden move, and evidently it's the Democratic Party move, to say, yeah, winter and bad boo would have been much worse under Trump because of the way Trump is Trump. I think that could blow up in their face because his policies are so different, and the results have been so terrible. Not many people would be worried about what Trump was tweeting. They care more about what his policies were.

Four seat. These are the political experts that put everything on the line and get a lot of money to do it. Live from the Fox News Radio Studios in New York City, fresh off the set of Fox and Friends, it's America's receptive voice. Brian Killmead. Thanks so much for being here, everybody.

It's the Brian Killmeat Show. If you're looking for President Biden, he's going to be in Alabama. He thinks he can win the state. No, just kidding. He wants to thank the people that make javelins and he'll say, Good job to himself.

Little by little, they're putting more and more into this war to the chagrin of some Republicans. Dan Hampton is going to be with me at the bottom of the hour, a historian, guy who served our country as well. A time in which maybe this is the second most dangerous time in the last hundred years that World War II probably was, but this is getting a little bit scary. Dan Hampton, somebody who was a 20-year Air Force veteran, wrote this book, Valor, the Astonishing World War II saga of one man's defiance and indomitable spirit. It is out today.

So that'll be great. And I'll be going on with Harris Faulkner. We'll do a simulcast. We'll share each other's audiences in about 12 minutes.

So let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Sponsored by LifeFact, save a life in a choking emergency. Visit lifefact.net to learn more and use code BK10 to save 10%. Number three. You know, it's still the case in that Ohio race that every one of those Republican candidates has raced to embrace Donald Trump as much as they can.

And so he's still, even though he may be showing some signs of weakness, he still has enough power to shape the conversation in every one of these Republican primaries that we're seeing right now. And if he shapes a lot of races and turns a lot of races, I think he's more than likely to run. Midterm primary mania begins. Trump puts the power of his reputation on the line in multiple races, the biggest in Ohio, perhaps. J.D.

Vance is his pick. He's in a tight race. Number two. He's not making any real gains on the battlefield. Ukrainians are making some significant advances up near Kharkiv and also to the south, to the east of Odessa.

And every day that goes by, actually, he does not gain ground, he loses ground. And I don't see him gaining any more ground going to the west. I think he's going to basically hold what he's got. That is General Kellogg talking about what the Russia is doing, and that's losing a lot. But they're about to do a land grab.

They plan on doing grabbing Kherson, making them use the ruble, putting their flag over the Ukrainian flag, and taking Mariupol as well. Despite massive losses, they're going to look to annex that area. Will the West take it? Will the U.S. take it?

Number one. I've covered the court for years, and I teach a class on the Supreme Court, and I really didn't think this day would come. That's a strange thing to say in a city that literally floats on leaks. And it existed on a level of integrity that is all too foreign today in politics. That is Jonathan Turley.

Not only did he join us live, he was on O last night. Roe v. Wade overturned an unprecedented leak from SCOTIS shows the court is about to possibly return the decision to the states. We're going to look at the leak, the massive protests around the country that are expected, and how it could affect the families in the midterms.

So, real quick on this, because I have to get out a little bit early now, but Think about this. The president's already spoken out, and I'll just paraphrase. He came out and said we have to elect more pro-choice senators and congressmen, and we have to find a way to codify Roe v. Wade into law. And now he's going to be, you could be sure, in Alabama, and he's going to overstate the impact on this and make it even more polarizing.

And he could do that. Think about this: the Jim Crow 2.0, how he ridiculed Ron DeSantis taking on Disney. He sees this as an opportunity, and I think a lot of Democrats do. And the fact is, if you look at this story, it's got three parts: the political ramifications for the midterms. Number two, the leaker, what the leaker was hoping to do, why they know they probably have destroyed any legal career or law career that they wanted once they're exposed.

And by almost all accounts, he'll be exposed or she will be exposed. And number three, Roe v. Wade about abortion. It's not banning it in the country, it's returning it to the state.

So there were about 30 states at the time of Roe v. Wade in 1973 that banned abortion.

So you had 20 states that didn't.

Now there's about roughly 28 that would probably ban abortion to a degree. And a lot of them are pulling back from six weeks, from eight weeks to six weeks because as technology gets better, more and more proof of life possibly gets better. I'll add another stat. There's about 121 unintended pregnancies. I don't know how they even.

Quantify that each year, and about six in ten of them end an abortion. The procedure remains legal or restricted in dozens of countries. But it is trending towards being pro-choice, pro-abortion. If you look at the very Catholic countries like Argentina, uh like Mexico, they are teen they are trending towards Some type of uh legalization of abortion. The fear is among prolife.

John Sega, the legislative director of the Texas Right to Life, says this. There is obviously a goal to have backlash to make it large enough in its response in the news and the real world to get some of the Supreme Court justices to back away from this kind of vote. That's what he said, describing the theory on why the leak came out. And what the leak is essentially a document, it is an opinion. It looks as though it's from Justice Alito, not denied by anybody.

You heard. Uh you heard Jonathan Turley come out as a constitutional expert and say this no, this is absolutely Justice Alito. And if it wasn't him, believe me, that we would have known by now. But politico standing behind the story, Supreme Court justice, um Not saying this isn't my writing, which would have been very easy, and I'm sure they would prefer to do it.

So we'll see where it goes because it looks like Thomas would be in that column, Coney Barrett would be in that column, Kavanaugh would be in that column, and of course, Clarence Thomas would be in that column, and Kavanaugh would be in that column.

So you look at all that. You wouldn't even need the Chief Justice in order to have it nullified. This is the Brian Killmee Chow. We come back with the Wasamo Cast with Harris Faulkner. But get on board now because when she hangs up with us, I'll go to you.

The fastest three hours in radio. You're with Brian Kilmead. Hey, welcome back, everyone. It's the Brian Kilmey Show. And about our moments, we're going to go live with the SamoCast on Fox News channel.

Got a lot to discuss with Sandra Smith filling in for Harris Faulkner, the Faulkner Focus. And now, Luke, I'm going to be on, I'm going to be a host Jesse Waters' show. His back's still bothering him, so I'll be on Waters World tonight, and I'll be able to expand on a lot of these topics. Hope you'll join me at that point. And of course, One Nation, we're already getting ready for it on Saturday night at 8 and then 11.

Right after I'm done with Sandra. And she hangs up on us, or we hang up on her. I'll be able to go to call.

So line up now: 1-866-1666. Four oh eight seven. 7669. And there we go.

So we'll look forward to coming to her. Right now, they're going to. Washington to get the latest on what's happening with Roe v. Wade and possibly be overturned. We see that the Supreme Court Justice, Supreme Court Justice.

Roberts came out and just condemned the leak.

Okay, just find out who it is. Don't blame us. Find out who it is within your midst. Who got screened and was told to be trustworthy to be that prestigious position of a clerk.

So many people or clerks ended up becoming Supreme Court justices. Let's find out who that is. And then And then go forward.

So you have a situation where probably the most famous. Modern-day Supreme Court Justice decision could be. Three or four weeks away from being overturned, because in February an opinion was written from Justice Alito to say that it should be done.

So we'll discuss that as well as what's going on in politics with a lot. uh the disinformation uh what the disinformations are and what the disinformations are and the whole little panel. They claim that this is going to be neutral. You know, Mrs. Mary Poppins, who's singing her little uh sing-along about uh about secrecy, she now is About eight months previously.

So let's listen in. Here's Sandra Smith. Kilmee's on deck with his take, and the New York Post editorial board sums it up like this: the left no longer has any idea what neutral even is. And now to Brian Kilmeek, host of Fox and Friends and host of One Nation with Brian Kilmeek. Brian, great to have you here.

I'm sure you have nothing to say about this, but please go ahead.

Well, I mean, it's just amazing that people think. That this is going to be somebody that is a neutral observer when you look at her background and this disinformation czar came out and said that. Came out and said, Well, the dossier looks authentic. We have a situation where Christopher Steele is going to give a speech. Everyone should look into it.

Really? Christopher Steele? And then we find out, too, about the Hunter Biden laptop. No curiosity to find out if that should be sidelined or not.

Now, they just roll out and say this is going to be part of it. Then on Sunday, they quickly put Mayorkas, they send him to the White House Christmas, the White House correspondence dinner, and then they quickly put him out on the Sunday shows and go, Yeah, I could have done that a little bit smoother. The rollout could have been better. But the bottom line is, we need to know that give the American people the right answers. And then he goes on to say, that it really is the Working class and minority communities that are hurt the most by the mistruths.

Who's going to judge about mistruths? I mean, we just, it's such a joke. To me, it was such an outlandish decision, and knowing it was already in place for two months, and the Jensaki really couldn't explain it, or who was in charge of it. One of the few times she had no answer. What does that tell you, though?

What does that tell you? I want to get your reaction to this. Media coverage of this story. Since last Wednesday, all three networks have ignored the disinformation board on their morning and evening newscasts. The one exception was NBC's Sunday show, which spent under a minute and a half discussing it.

So they're avoiding it, Brian. And they avoided most of a lot of them avoided the illegal immigration at the border and the breakdown of the border, the drowning of the National Guardsmen in Texas to saw the chaos that's going to be happening, Title 42 being rescinded, and they ignored the disinformation czar. Really? That you have an issue? Let me ask some, Sandra, how many meetings do you go in with producers and they tell you what are the top five biggest stories in the country?

That's one of the top three. Yet they said I'd rather not do it and get less ratings, do something that people care less about in order to do something that could make the administration look bad. That's what indeed that is about. And if you look, some Democrats are upset by it. Think about this.

Mark Penn was just on our channel. That's not really how a Democrat acts to accept a disinformation czar without any screening process and a new division of Homeland Security. Think about Harold Ford. You're going to tell me that that's a Harold Ford Democratic Party, where you look at Joe Rogan, who voted for Obama in the past, or Bill Maher, who will vote for every Democrat. He doesn't even recognize this party, nor does he recognize.

the media's treatment of what our major stories are. And I think we're seeing this over and over again. My hope is there's a degree of rationality that begins to rise up and demand that shows like that do the stories that matter. We'll see if there is any further information provided on this board, how it's going to operate, because Maorcus on Sunday also saying that the board will just focus on foreign disinformation, Brian, making that what they saw as a very important distinction, saying that it will not monitor American citizens. Noting, quote, the board does not have any operational authority or capability.

You believe it?

Well, put it this way, Sandra. Hunter Biden is a domestic issue. I guess on the service, we wouldn't look into that. But wait a second, it's classic Russian disinformation. Therefore, it's in the purview of the disinformation czar.

Anything that pops up, you can say, it looks like China did it, even if it involves an American citizen.

So everything could have a foreign entity to it because they don't know. It could be disinformation.

So when in doubt, suspend the accounts that do it. Stop people from reading it. I actually don't want anyone screening what I read, period. I think the average American, they're pushed back and so their lives regularly. For the last two years, the last thing we want is information regulated by some would-be musical theater star that says she should be trusted, even though her track record reveals just the opposite.

Very interesting. Last question on this. Oh. I'm told President Biden is now speaking, let's listen. No graph, but what you need is that.

So this is President Trump, excuse me, President Biden, who's using this opportunity, as expected, before he gets on Air Force One and go to Alabama to salute the people that make the javelins. He's going to use this opportunity to go out and say how outrageous it is that the Supreme Court justice is on the Supreme Court is on the thresholds of Of overturning Roe v. Wade. And that is going to talk about if the draft of his remarks are the same as the remarks he's making now, and a lot of times there's dramatic differences. He is going to talk about the need to give pro-choice legislators and be able to codify eventually Roe v.

Wade so this never happens again. This is Joe Biden's opportunity, just like he did with Disney going after DeSantis, just like he did with the Georgia election law, calling it Jim Crow 2.0. He'll overdo it, overstate it, overplay it. But the one thing is clear: one of the three big things that happened with the leak of this story of the Supreme Court justice decision, which has not been denied, it's been condemned, is politics. What does it mean for the midterms?

Number two is, what does it mean for abortion in this country? And number three, what does it mean for the future of the Supreme Court? Because people are saying now you're as a political body as anybody else. Scott, you're listening in Spring Hill, Florida. Hey, Scott.

Good morning, good afternoon. What's in your mind? I just wanted to go and sit there and talk about the leak and how I want to go and say that in my opinion, it is a look the other way kind of leak. It is done at a time where I don't think it's more or less the midterm elections. but more the like you were talking, the disinformation board.

how unconstitutional it is as well as we have the Nancy Pelosi going over to Ukraine. They're talking about giving them a blank check and another 20-year war. We have so many different things that are going on that I really think. that it's more of a Look the other way, kind of thing. Here's the thing.

Here's why I'll differ with you. It's a solid theory, but this is so much bigger domestically than those stories. The Ukraine is ongoing. The disinformation story not picked up by two-thirds or nine-tenths of the media. And this story is something that resonates with everyone.

It's almost like inflation. I don't care if you're a truck driver or a CEO, it affects everything you do. Alex, thanks. WABC is where we find Alex in Brooklyn. Hey, Alex.

Hey, good morning, Brian. Thanks for taking the call. And I have a question about this court decision to give the choice to the states about abortion, because it sounds very positive, but how much of a gain is this really? Because say I live in Texas and I want to commit abortion, then I'm just going to go give birth to New York or in California and then go follow through with abortion. Alex, I think that's a good point on abortion, period, which is very uh which is a personal issue.

But when it comes to the legal portion of this, letting states decide is typically the way it is. Hey, I want to go to Texas or Florida. I don't want to be wearing a mask and be forced to get a shot. I want to go to New York because I want to be around like-minded people who think the way I do about homelessness and domestic programs. I want to make sure I put more of my money into a state government.

So now you'll make a decision too: is, well, I'm going to go to Texas because I agree with Texas' mindset that abortion should be illegal. I am going to go to New York because I want to be able to have an abortion. That's really how we run the country. I mean, it's a state-run country. Nick, Virginia Beach.

Hey, Nick. Hey, Brian. Hey, Brian. Republicans are making some great legal, constitutional, logical arguments about the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

But Honestly, Democrats and the media don't go by logic, they don't go by constitutional, they don't go by legal, they're going to lose their minds over this. They're going to be in the streets. They're going to be rioting. They're going to be looting. They're going to go to the polls.

They're going to throw Republicans out. I mean, this could be our water loop, brother. I don't think so. I j you know, the country evidently 46 percent to 46 percent on pro-choice, pro-life. or pro-abortion, pro-life.

And this is not, this is something that people are passionate about deeply, but it doesn't necessarily mean is. A right or wrong issue. And I think it's going to get a lot of people on the right who are saying we're going to coast to a midterm victory to say, wait a second, this is exactly why I worked so hard to get Republicans in office to make sure when Roe v. Wade popped up that we'd be able to Roe v. Wade popped up, they'd be able to overturn it.

And if they didn't do it, that's when Denver Republicans throw up their heads and say, this is a waste of time. This, I think, will energize Republicans. Not as much as Democrats, but will energize Republicans too. Joe Biden just concluded his remarks. If he said anything interesting, we'll bring it back.

This is the Brian Killmee Show.

So glad you're here. The talk show that's getting you talking. You're with Brian Kilmead. And I think he's kind of hard on the 9th May date, which is a victory day over Nazi Germany. And I think he's going to hold till that day, but he's not making any real gains on the battlefield.

Ukrainians are making some significant advances up near Kharkiv and also to the south to the To the east of Odessa. And every day that goes by, actually he does not gain ground. He loses ground. And because we are supplying him, we in the West, with enormous amounts of armament that is going to make some equivalents on this battlefield, it's going to be an attrition fight that he is not going to win. And I don't see him gaining any more ground going to the West.

I think he's going to basically hold what he's got. Maybe, uh, but he is making uh Gains in the East. And uh he is bombing Odessa in the West. And it looks as though Vladimir Putin, although he's lost maybe a third of his fighting force, who knows how many are wounded, they say at least 20,000 dead, maybe up to 25,000 dead. And Ukrainians are out fighting him in many ways on the battlefield.

Their communication is still terrible. Their coordination is still bad. They're still trying to kill their commanders. It looks as though Russia is going to look at a few towns and just basically say, start using the ruble. Understand that the mayor's off, this is the new mayor.

You'll answer to him or her, and that's the story. Will the Ukrainians ever accept it? Absolutely not. Will they have a choice? Lieutenant Colonel Dan Hampton joins us now.

Twenty years in the Air Force, served in Iraq, Kosovo, and the First Gulf War. New York Times best-selling author has got a brand new book out we'll talk about in a second: Valor: The Astonishing World War II saga of one man's defiance and indomitable spirit. It's out today. Colonel, welcome back. Hey, good morning.

Good morning, Brian. It's always good to talk to you. Yeah, so first off, what's your take on the Russians just trying to annex some more of Ukraine? I think the Russians are going to try to outweight us. They're going to try to outlast everything.

They think, and rightfully so in some cases, that the West has a relatively short attention span. And since they border the Ukraine, they don't have the geographical problem that we do. I think they're going to try to outlast us. Whether that's going to pan out or not, you know, who who knows? Nobody would have foreseen that the Ukrainians.

would do as well as they have. And if and if the United States and others continue to support them the way that they should, then anything can go at this point.

So what happened to the Russian fighting force?

Well, it was never there, Brian. I mean, I had to train to fight the Russians way back when they were the Soviets, and we were never worried about them for precisely all the reasons that everybody has now seen. They don't have much imagination. They're not very good at logistics. If things don't go their way right away, then they tend to lose momentum and fail pretty badly.

And they heavily use Conscripts. That's why you've seen so many of their officers, especially the top officers, get killed because they have to go up into the front lines and tell people what to do because the people underneath them aren't really capable of doing that themselves.

So, Walter Russell Mead writes this in the Wall Street Journal today. Here's an excerpt: During the Cold War, the West used nuclear deterrence to offset the Soviet superiority in conventional forces in the European theater. Moscow had huge armies. At least initially, they thought they would initially prevail in an attack across Germany. But the threat that NATO would retaliate with nuclear weapons kept Russia, the Soviet aggression, in check.

Now, it's evident, the evident weakness and disorder of the Russian conventional forces suggests a new possibility that a weaker Russia might try to deter NATO in Ukraine by nuclear threats and maybe nuclear use. Do you let do you think this accurately describes the change? I do. I think that the more desperate Putin becomes, the more likely there is that he would resort to something like that.

Now you have to make a differentiation between an intercontinental ballistic missile aimed at the United States with a multiple nuclear warhead on it and tactical nukes that are used on the battlefield. I used to carry those on my fighter. I mean, we have a whole array of small nuclear weapons that can be used, and I think that's entirely within the realm of Here's possibilities unless somebody within his own circle stops him. What does that look like? Nuclear weapons.

I mean, what do you mean? What w is this something that can be sh like uh shoulder fired? No, no, no. They you can put them in artillery shells among other things. And we used to carry we used to carry your tactical nuclear weapons on jet fighters.

We carry two of them at a time if we had to. It's a nasty, dirty weapon, and I hope nobody ever uses one. But again, you back somebody into a corner, especially Putin, with with really no other way out at the moment because he's his hold on publicity and his spin is beginning to slip badly, then we don't really know what he's going to do.

So I mean, what was the purpose of them then? What makes them better than normal ordinances?

Well A tactical nuke can take out a city. I mean, the one that I carried, each one of them could take out an entire city if I had to, but it's not going to. destroy a continent.

So if you end up with waves and waves of people coming at you that can't be stopped in any other way, then a tactical nuke would certainly do it.

So would would would the fallout be go on for hundreds of miles like Chernobyl? No, no, they weren't that big. But again, I could see Putin actually doing a false flag. type of operation and blaming the Ukrainians, maybe detonating one of his own nukes in Russian territory and saying it's the Ukrainians using one of theirs as justification for starting something like that. Do you think this is the closer we've been to uh to a world war since World War Two?

I do. But there's a lot of differences between now and World War two. And Russia does not have The economy. They don't have the military to pull this off. The only reason the Russian army really defeated the German army was the Germans were besieged on all sides.

And the Russians marched into Berlin on, you know, ten million pairs of American boots and Chevy trucks. They couldn't have done it without us.

Well, this time they don't have us on their side. That's true. The other thing is the Germans got got kind of mired in Russia. No one's going to be doing that. They got killed by the winter.

Yeah, and like Napoleon. Yeah, I like Napoleon. Yeah, but they should have had liners in their suits.

So let's talk about your book. How did you discover it? Tell us about the story and how you discovered it. Bill Harris is an amazing man. Yeah.

And I discovered it like I like you do too, Brian. I'm sure with your books, you find things as you're researching that set you off in another tangent. And that's what happened here. I was researching vengeance. And I ran across a Marine general who had a son who was also fighting in the war, and I thought that was intriguing.

And when I looked into Bill's story and realized that he'd spent three years basically behind enemy lines trying to get away from the Japanese and fight him in the jungles before he was captured, I it it just it just intrigued me. And I got a hold of his daughter, who's actually pictured on the cover of this book, and she had a 1,500 page unpublished manuscript that her father Had written. I mean, you're a writer. That's just a writer's dream, isn't it? Yeah, from first-hand expression.

So he has passed away, but he survived a lot in the war.

So in the Philippines, he got captured, right? Mm. Yeah, he got captured on Corrigidor. And then he escaped by swimming across Manila Bay with the sharks, which is a very gutsy thing to do. And then he tried to go to China, couldn't get there.

He tried to go to Australia and he got betrayed and captured by some locals. Down in the Spice Islands, and he ended up in the same POW camp that Lou Zamparini from Unbroken was in. In fact, Bill was mentioned. In that book, too, but I delved a lot deeper into what happened to him. And he survived.

you know, well over a year as a POW uh and then went back to fight in the Korean War. Wow, but also, wasn't he at the signing ceremony when when Japan surrendered? Yep, absolutely. Um they They came and got Got him out of the POW camp, realized who his father was, and said, Hey, would you represent Marine POWs on the deck of the USS Missouri?

So he saw it all. I mean, he was in the Philippines on December 7th when Pearl Harbor was attacked. He had his own nasty, dirty war doing what he did, and then he was there for the surrender of Japan in Tokyo Bay. Just an absolutely phenomenal story and one I think is important these days, Brian, because it gives us It gives us hope. You know, it's sort of like your discussion this morning about the rise of the reasonable.

That gives us hope. This gives us hope, too. There are still people in this country that would come through and act like this if we had to. Yeah, I think so. But by the way, not many people are critical of our fighting force today.

I mean, if you see what they've done in Afghanistan and Iraq, the way they have adjusted to the battlefield, this is a volunteer force. They're pros. And now, when you see the other armies in action, you realize how great we are today. Yeah, and you know, one thing is since you mentioned it that people need to recall with all of this. is the care that we take when we do go to war to not just become the butchers that the Russians are.

I mean, they don't care. And look at all the civilians they've killed. Can you imagine if an American military unit did any of the things they're doing? We don't do that. We don't fight like that and yet we still win.

Right. And by the way, I'm talking to Lieutenant Colonel Hampton about his new book, Valor. Talks about a great American story that very few people know about. Dan Hampton is already a New York Times bestseller. Colonel, when you see that, remember we put a Koran in the wrong place as an investigation.

One guy goes off, even if you're a Navy SEAL, we put him in jail. This is the Russian tactic. Let's level an entire city, and if we can't beat your army, we'll kill your grandmothers and your children. That's really what has happened. They've leveled cities in a way the Vikings would, in a medieval fashion.

Yes. And again, people need to recall that and they need to give our guys a break. First of all, if you're not there, you don't really get to critique somebody. That's what I've always believed in. And the Russians are just barbarians.

This shows it, this graphically illustrates it. Anybody that's ever had anything to do with their military or trained to fight them has always known that. But this is a visual depiction that can't be denied. All right, so pick up Dan's book. It's called Valor, the Astonishing World War II Saga of One Man's Defiance and Indomitable Spirit.

It'll inspire you. And it all happened. And Lieutenant Colonel Dan brings it all to life. Thanks, Dan. Appreciate it.

Always broke. Always a pleasure. Thanks. Talk to you soon. 1-866-408-7669.

I do want to share this with you. As we know, we're looking at, ever since last night, it came out that. Uh It looks like ju uh Justice Supreme Court Justice A Supreme Court Supreme Court Justice came out and announced that the opinion has been written to overturn Roe v. Wade. Now John Roberts has put this out as Chief Justice.

He said, To the extent that the betrayal of confidence of the court was intended to undermine the integrity of the operation, it will not succeed. The work of the court will not be affected in any way. We at the court are blessed to have a workforce, permanent employees, and law clerks alike, intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting confidentiality and judicial process and upholding the trust of the court. There was a singular, egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the court and the community of public servants who work here.

I have directed the marshal of the court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak. My sense is they're going to find it. Uh they also say the document's real.

So there you go. When we come back, that is just Supreme Court Justice Alito. When we come back, we'll take your calls and find out if there's more to know. Educating, entertaining, enlightening. You're with Brian Kilmead.

He's so busy, he'll make your head spin. It's Brian Killmead. I'm looking for something that's like, like I said, as broadly inclusive as possible, that's as trusted as possible as a system, and I hope we are successful in that regard.

Alright, there you go. What was that? Oh, that was Elon Musk.

So yeah, so he was at the The big galley yesterday, the met Galli yesterday, showed up with his mom. And came over and talked about Twitter. He also went after NBC for going after him.

So he also pointed out, hey, how'd you miss Matt Lauer? Said an unkind thing. And how'd you miss Harvey Weinstein? You held that. You're worried about me squelching different opinions on Twitter?

Don't worry about it. If you're going to mess with this guy, he's going to come at you hard. Let's find out if there's more to know. More. To know.

Not a surprise. Rob Gronkowski says he'll only return to the NFL for the Buccaneers. It's just the Bucs. Love the organization. Love the guys.

It's like family over there. At this point, he's praising Joe Burrow so heavily, though.

Some wondered if he was going to go to Cincinnati. He really loved Burrow. I guess it reminds him of this buddy, Tom Brady, but at 32-year-old, he's going to be in the Hall of Fame. He said, I'll come back, maybe, but only for the Bucs. I guess the money's got to be right.

Next, by the way, he'll go right to any network he wants. Fox had him once. Then he unretired. Huge break for Adrian Peterson, the future Hall of Famer. I don't think he's a futroller family.

You think he's a futroller famer? I'm going to disagree with you. I don't think he is. Had a city attorney hearing in Los Angeles. The former Minnesota Viking running back and prosecutors met beforehand to resolve the matter of domestic violence.

Prosecutors declined to criminally charge him, and Peterson agreed to complete 20 sessions of domestic violence and alcohol counseling within the next six months. It's a huge deal for Peterson because he could have been hit with a misdemeanor charge, an alleged role in the altercation on a plane with his wife on Super Bowl Sunday back in February. He had other problems with his kid. When I met him, he seems like the nice guy in the world. He did our radio show, too, you know.

Oh, that was a while ago. Yeah, that was. Right on 18, on the 18th floor.

Next, Netflix cancels Megan Markle's animated series, Pearl, amid cutbacks. Netflix have problems, right? They're cutting a lot. They've spent too much and they're losing a lot of subscribers. Markle and Prince Harry established their Archwell Productions in autumn 2020 in an effort to create a scripted series, documentaries, features, and children's programming.

Pearl was expected to be the first animated series created by the production company, but they've dropped it. What experience does Harry have? Right? And what is she? I mean, she's just an average actress.

You're giving it to her. But when people actually look at a cartoon, they're not saying, well, a famous person produced it.

Well, yeah, but they're thinking the parents are putting that on, right? Because they're like, ooh, it's Megan and Harry. But they also said, despite dropping Pearl, insiders claim that Netflix remains optimistic about the deal overall. And one of the documentaries is going to be Heart of Invictus, which. They'll follow the invictive schemes, right?

Which warriors who compete against each other country to country.

Next, Americans are ready to spend big on vacations, weddings, and concerts more this year. This, according to a poll, 62% have more goals, they have more life goals than they're hoping to accomplish this year than ever before. More than anything else, traveling tops the list because we haven't. Domestically, 44% listen to taking a vacation here at home. Abroad, 39%.

Buying a home might be change, 35%, or having a baby, 26%. Of the polling planning to travel in 2022, just over 1,100 people were polled. 64%, a family road trip, 50% Um A bucketless vacation. That's kind of a weird thing. Why?

A bu you don't think a bugless vacation. Can't that be a domestic one? I mean, it could be a Grand Canyon. It could be going to Yosemite or something, or it could be something more broad. Do you have a bucket list vacation?

I'd like to go to Italy and Ireland the same year. I want to see Scotland and Wales. Nice. Right. By the way, my uncle gave me a picture of a bar he claimed.

that my father's My grandfather's father owned a bar in Longford, and he said this is a picture that they found in genealogy that he owned. That he held on to it, held on to was to 92 years old.

So, are you gonna go to Island and go bar hopping looking for this bar? I'm gonna bar any here, it's not a bar anymore. Oh. But I did hear from a good source, my son, that the only thing really to do in Ireland besides having the nicest people in the world is to go to bars and drink. I mean, I feel like that's how you really get and experience the culture.

Exactly. Because they talk and they sing. You got to admire that. And have a goodness. Yes, next.

Six in 10 American parents believe their children under 13 should not be on social media. Wow, that's pretty significant. But nearly half of all respondents have allowed their kids to access the social media. Another 31% don't allow them to create accounts on any platform. Kids are already online.

69% of the parents think the children are mature enough to be there. Another 60% say it's important for them to feel connected. See, parents were making this up as they go along. It used to be easy. Come in when the streetlights go out.

You know, don't do this, don't run in traffic. You can go across major highways at this age. When it comes to social media, I think parents were just lost. They're lost, but I mean, I'm actually shocked that four in 10 are okay with kids under 13 being on social media. That's insane.

No? I think they're how they communicate. I mean, you can pick up the phone or text. You don't need to be on social media. But that's like you're using, I mean, isn't that very archaic?

Hey, I had a birthday party. I put it on Snapchat. Where I put it on Facebook for the nine-year-old birthday party. But the parents are coordinating that, not the nine-year-old. Right.

Sorry. Oh, so you're saying if the parents coordinate it, the parents can email it out and it just doesn't. Do they want their kids to look at it, other nine-year-old kids to look at it? I think the kid just needs to show up at the party and have a good time. But don't they want to reflect back at the good old days?

Yeah, the parents can do that for them. No need. Put the power of over 100 meteorologists and the worldwide resources of Fox in your hands with the Fox Weather Podcast. Precise, personal, powerful. Subscribe and listen now at FoxnewsPodcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts.