Megyn Kelly knocked it out of the ballpark - she is definitely NO PHONY however not sure about the NYT interviewer. Thank you for posting it on FREE THINKING.
MK didn’t give 2 sh*ts about the interviewer subtly tried to shame her about negative personal experience w/ DJT and then how she came to publicly support him (in part due to strong Title 9 support). Loved that. I also really liked at end where she said the Right is so good in the new podcast media ecosystem because they had so much more practice at openly debating and defending ideas and then updating their thinking when better ideas emerge. While the Left is not yet used to this because the MSM is an echo chamber of reinforcing propaganda and too few of them (Gavin?) have even ventured out. MK then subtly jabbed back by saying her audience can smell BS a mile off, and it’s MK’s authenticity that drives her success. Which begged the question, how about you NYT? There’s a reason why Grey Lady and MSM are discredited and experiencing a slow death. Sasha, I’d also say it’s your authenticity that has me subscribing to you I think now going on 4 years straight. Love your site, your content and most of all your honesty.
My favorite line was when Megyn said regarding all the "credible" accusations against Trump "the most credible was E Jean Carroll and I didn't believe a word she said". Lol
Hugh Hewitt Is a master at this. Often I've seen him with a smile interview someone on The Left. About 10-15 minutes in the person looks down and realizes their legs have been chopped off.
My guess is MK doesn’t want to alienate or pile on to Lulu. That would be counterproductive to gaining new listeners, or to be invited back into NYT platform where MK could be heard even more, by those still in left bubble.
Sasha. I was not a Megyn Kelly fan - especially after the trump debate - but I listened to you on her program the other day and because of your recommendations I listened to this and totally enjoyed it. I found it very amusing that as Megyn just answered the questions politely and frankly about today's media it became apparent that she was describing that interviewer! And obviously the woman became aware of that as well and was disturbed enough that she had Megyn on again the next day to have another go at her. Unfortunately for her, she just succeeded in demonstrating what Megyn accurately described as leftists not being adept at defending their points of view because they never have to practice that in their sterile environments. That woman did not get what she thought she was going to get. I found it very entertaining.
I’m a big MK fan and even more so after listening to that interview. I avoid anything associated with the NYT like the plague so would have missed it w/o Sasha’s heads up. Thanks!
Sasha, Megan would be smart to have you join her platform. You have a unique, intelligent and courageous view that you deliver with wisdom, humor and empathy.
I so appreciate people saying this but I'm not right for her platform. I'm not dynamic enough. I'm not a pundit. I like what I do and am not really wanting to do more in terms of putting myself out there, ya know?
Sasha, Yes, to thine own self be true. You work for your conscience, your conscience is a stern taskmaster, and that is the only boss that’s up to your standards. I don’t think you’ll ever work for anyone else. Am I right?
Keep doing what you do, Sasha.i appreciate your keen, intuitive, insight into culture. MK is brilliant, I usually agree with her, but she's mainly another talking head. You tap into something much deeper and human.
This makes me audibly laugh because Sasha is the most ego driven attention seeker there is. It's bullshit. She is right, however, that she isn't dynamic enough. She'd sell her soul to be on Megyn's show--also why she tags her in every poorly articulated tweet. Y'all will find out eventually.
Lulu’s choice for President in 2024 is no secret to anyone who is paying the least amount of attention. Yet she sits there in front of the audience and pretends to be a hard-nosed, unbiased journalist. Could she have been so deluded as to not understand that Megan Kelly was describing “journalists” like her who pretend to report the news while having an implicit (but obvious) bias behind the words and the images? The cute little “gotcha” moment at the end with Pete Hegseth (which is supposed to inform the Kelly interview how?) shows exactly where Lulu and her fellow Lu-sers are coming from.
thanks for posting this I would’ve had no idea Megan Kelly had done an interview with Lulu Garcia Navarro as I haven’t listened to NPR in a few years. just hearing Navarro‘s voice give me a little bit of PTSD as a recovering lefty. It’s amazing to see over and over again just how the left does not get it. They do not see they are complicit in their own demise whatsoever.
Really good interview. Both Lulu and Megyn are impressive and the time flew by because it was interesting and insightful. ... Sasha, you do such an outstanding job writing and narrating your substack articles. Your voice is so mesmerizing and to me reveals so much about you. I sense melancholy, hurt, anger, sheepishness (did I really used to believe that?) and yes, blessed relief because you've figured out a bunch of "stuff" and are now more than happy to share that new knowledge with the rest of the world. Keep doing it! You are very very good at it!
Whoa, Sasha.... THANK YOU. I had NOOO idea about this until you announced it. I didn't know that the NYT even has a podcast until now. Coupla' observations:
1. The interviewer was fair. Now bookending that interview w/ the profile they did of yours (and yeah, they put up shitty pics of you a la CNN & Joe Rogan, so you're in good company, right?) anyway, that's TWICE now that the NYT has been fair in dealing w/ this side of the divide.
'The Times, They Are A Changing'... (couldn't resist)
but... more importantly...
2. This has been up for 11 hours, and doesn't even have 10K views...
WHUT? This isn't some schmoe in his Momma's basement, this is the Freakin' NY Times! And those numbers? Are you kidding me? Good grief, even B lister YouTubers like Breaking Points get 20K and more AT THE DROP! 11 hours later they'll have 30K or more. And fuggedabout the next day- 100K in many cases... and they're vacuous people who are sooo inauthentic. Go to Triggernometry, and it's even worse (and they're based out of the UK)...but then, those guys over the pond are genuine peeps.
Sure, maybe the NYT gets people watching it from their home page, but...
I didn't see this there yesterday or today and I look it over daily. Now, I'm not a paid subscriber; if I see a story that piques my interest I have to spend 2 extra clicks at archive.ph to get past the paywall and read it. But I DO look over the entire homepage, and this interview was NOT posted on it.
Frankly, I think this data point is important, especially if you note in the interview Megyn told the reporter early on that the NYT way of doing 'news' is dying. The proof of her statement is right the hell right there.
Extrapolating from that... I now have serious questions as to the health of even the NYT. WaPo is sinking, as is the LA Times... Now, just the quick look over these numbers tells me all is not well on 8th Ave in NYC.
How many of those ~10K views were due to the new independent news media directing eyeballs there? I’d venture to guess ‘most’. Speaking for me, I’d never have viewed this if not for Sasha posting. I avoid the NYT pretty much in all ways.
Megyn is the shit!! Sometimes I disagree and turn off her show with many expletives but tomorrow I will turn her on because she is genuine.. Doug Brunt is a lucky man..
Just a minor dissent to add here, about Megyn and not directed to this specific topic. I like a lot of what Megyn brings to the table too, but I was recently very put off by her "debate" with Glenn Greenwald about where to draw the line on free speech. She reminded me of those showboating house members who talk down to and talk over those whose views might differ. It looks lazy and like weakness to me when the convesation falls back too heavily on emotion. I don't see Megyn hitting every ball out of the park, and I'm hoping for better, from everyone, including myself :-).
I agree with Megyn. She gave Glenn some points but he's wrong on this one. The US has every right to deport Kahlil and take away his green card. Glenn is a purist which I appreciate but there is no purity as it pertains to foreign students leading Hamas protests. And we find out he lied on his green card application.
Hi - thanks for responding. I wasn't intending to imply agreement or disagreement with either Megyn or Glenn. I respect both, which is why I bothered to watch their discussion. I'm not an expert. On my own I don't trust that have enough verified information (out of all the noise) to be sure about one side of the argument or the other. I'm suspicious of possible hidden agendas and a tendency toward groupthink.
I'm interested because blocking individual freedom of expression is a big deal that deserves sober consideration. I've heard differing viewpoints from respected sources. I want to learn as much as I can, trying to keep an open mind, so that I can come to my own conclusions.
Megyn disappointed me by shouting Glenn down rather than engaging in an intelligent discussion, like two good journalists who respect each other might do. Maybe Glenn had information that needs to be heard? He's pretty good at that. Your example is of the guy lying on his green card application. If true that absolutely justifies it being revoked. But just because someone's said it's true doesn't necessarily mean that it is. I'm just sick of being lied to by lying liars, and shouting down a dissenting view from a respected source doesn't sit well with me.
I too listened to their debate and do not share your perspective of what transpired. I thought it was a fine example of two respected journalists debating, authentically, a complicated topic. Glenn is a purist and made me think about aspects of the situation that I had not. Megyn was her usual self, clear eyed, full of passion, and well documented. I thought it was an example of two friends who respect one another but who are not afraid to take an opposing position and come out still feeling the same towards each other at the end, maybe with even more respect for each other than before.
The whole time you could just feel the desperation in that interviewer's face. She's trying to be nice, but dying on the inside. Wanting to scream at Megyn "Orange man bad, Orange man bad".
My favorite part was when Megyn says (I'm paraphrasing) 'Trump's trying to save the country, so I DON'T GIVE A SHIT about a 20 yr. old sexual harassment accusation' with no evidence.' That's how everybody who voted for him felt.
Excellent! Thank you for sharing this. Megyn is another much-needed voice in this fight to expose the truth.
Megyn Kelly knocked it out of the ballpark - she is definitely NO PHONY however not sure about the NYT interviewer. Thank you for posting it on FREE THINKING.
MK didn’t give 2 sh*ts about the interviewer subtly tried to shame her about negative personal experience w/ DJT and then how she came to publicly support him (in part due to strong Title 9 support). Loved that. I also really liked at end where she said the Right is so good in the new podcast media ecosystem because they had so much more practice at openly debating and defending ideas and then updating their thinking when better ideas emerge. While the Left is not yet used to this because the MSM is an echo chamber of reinforcing propaganda and too few of them (Gavin?) have even ventured out. MK then subtly jabbed back by saying her audience can smell BS a mile off, and it’s MK’s authenticity that drives her success. Which begged the question, how about you NYT? There’s a reason why Grey Lady and MSM are discredited and experiencing a slow death. Sasha, I’d also say it’s your authenticity that has me subscribing to you I think now going on 4 years straight. Love your site, your content and most of all your honesty.
My favorite line was when Megyn said regarding all the "credible" accusations against Trump "the most credible was E Jean Carroll and I didn't believe a word she said". Lol
Yes, that was savage. She did it with a straight face too.
Hugh Hewitt Is a master at this. Often I've seen him with a smile interview someone on The Left. About 10-15 minutes in the person looks down and realizes their legs have been chopped off.
Megyn takes no prisoners. She got there the hard way, and she can't be owned. Brilliant.
Your comment caused me to wonder what might have been cut out of the interview.
I can't help but wonder if Lulu pushed MK on her EJ Carroll position, and didn't want to hear or air why this accusation was a pile of horse manure.
I wish I knew when this interview was held and if MK has discussed it on her podcast.
No, she hasn't discussed it on her podcast. I'm a daily listener and Sasha's post is the first I've heard of it.
Home run for MK.
My guess is MK doesn’t want to alienate or pile on to Lulu. That would be counterproductive to gaining new listeners, or to be invited back into NYT platform where MK could be heard even more, by those still in left bubble.
Megyn's podcast today talks about the interview. It had only dropped Saturday.
My guess was wrong ;)
Very Well Put!!!
Megyn discusses the interview today in her podcast. It was dropped by the NYT on Saturday.
Sasha. I was not a Megyn Kelly fan - especially after the trump debate - but I listened to you on her program the other day and because of your recommendations I listened to this and totally enjoyed it. I found it very amusing that as Megyn just answered the questions politely and frankly about today's media it became apparent that she was describing that interviewer! And obviously the woman became aware of that as well and was disturbed enough that she had Megyn on again the next day to have another go at her. Unfortunately for her, she just succeeded in demonstrating what Megyn accurately described as leftists not being adept at defending their points of view because they never have to practice that in their sterile environments. That woman did not get what she thought she was going to get. I found it very entertaining.
Disappointment and disdain, yes. probably.
But also maybe a bit of envy and jealousy. How can Navarro compare herself to Kelly and not feel diminished?
Navarro and Bari Weiss shopped at the same glasses store.
I’m a big MK fan and even more so after listening to that interview. I avoid anything associated with the NYT like the plague so would have missed it w/o Sasha’s heads up. Thanks!
Same.
Sasha, Megan would be smart to have you join her platform. You have a unique, intelligent and courageous view that you deliver with wisdom, humor and empathy.
I so appreciate people saying this but I'm not right for her platform. I'm not dynamic enough. I'm not a pundit. I like what I do and am not really wanting to do more in terms of putting myself out there, ya know?
To thine self be true. She’d be fortunate to have you but you know yourself better than anyone. Thanks for all you do. Much appreciated.
Understood. I expect that MK will ask Sasha back as a guest on her podcast. The two hit it off well on the MK show recently.
Hey Libertarian, have you seen Seva around? Haven’t see him post in a while and hope he’s okay.
Hey Matt, I see that he “liked” something as recently as two days ago. I hope he’s ok also.
Sasha.
You are correct. What you do, you do very well.
Keep up the great work.
Sasha, Yes, to thine own self be true. You work for your conscience, your conscience is a stern taskmaster, and that is the only boss that’s up to your standards. I don’t think you’ll ever work for anyone else. Am I right?
Keep doing what you do, Sasha.i appreciate your keen, intuitive, insight into culture. MK is brilliant, I usually agree with her, but she's mainly another talking head. You tap into something much deeper and human.
Lol
This makes me audibly laugh because Sasha is the most ego driven attention seeker there is. It's bullshit. She is right, however, that she isn't dynamic enough. She'd sell her soul to be on Megyn's show--also why she tags her in every poorly articulated tweet. Y'all will find out eventually.
Then why are you here shitposting on her column?
Take your meds hon.
Lulu’s choice for President in 2024 is no secret to anyone who is paying the least amount of attention. Yet she sits there in front of the audience and pretends to be a hard-nosed, unbiased journalist. Could she have been so deluded as to not understand that Megan Kelly was describing “journalists” like her who pretend to report the news while having an implicit (but obvious) bias behind the words and the images? The cute little “gotcha” moment at the end with Pete Hegseth (which is supposed to inform the Kelly interview how?) shows exactly where Lulu and her fellow Lu-sers are coming from.
“I see your true colors shining through…”
Thought the same thing. What on earth did the Pete thing have to do with MK interview?
Yeah, that's what I thought too. Was she going to ask Megyn if she was still "friends" with Pete after SignalGate? It's so absurd!
thanks for posting this I would’ve had no idea Megan Kelly had done an interview with Lulu Garcia Navarro as I haven’t listened to NPR in a few years. just hearing Navarro‘s voice give me a little bit of PTSD as a recovering lefty. It’s amazing to see over and over again just how the left does not get it. They do not see they are complicit in their own demise whatsoever.
Sasha, you’re the berries. Without your post I’d never have seen this, and probably lots of others wouldn’t have, either. Great work, and don’t stop.
Eric, thought only my grandmother said , “you’re the burries.”( that’s how she said it.)
We probably heard it on the same radio drama.
Really good interview. Both Lulu and Megyn are impressive and the time flew by because it was interesting and insightful. ... Sasha, you do such an outstanding job writing and narrating your substack articles. Your voice is so mesmerizing and to me reveals so much about you. I sense melancholy, hurt, anger, sheepishness (did I really used to believe that?) and yes, blessed relief because you've figured out a bunch of "stuff" and are now more than happy to share that new knowledge with the rest of the world. Keep doing it! You are very very good at it!
Whoa, Sasha.... THANK YOU. I had NOOO idea about this until you announced it. I didn't know that the NYT even has a podcast until now. Coupla' observations:
1. The interviewer was fair. Now bookending that interview w/ the profile they did of yours (and yeah, they put up shitty pics of you a la CNN & Joe Rogan, so you're in good company, right?) anyway, that's TWICE now that the NYT has been fair in dealing w/ this side of the divide.
'The Times, They Are A Changing'... (couldn't resist)
but... more importantly...
2. This has been up for 11 hours, and doesn't even have 10K views...
WHUT? This isn't some schmoe in his Momma's basement, this is the Freakin' NY Times! And those numbers? Are you kidding me? Good grief, even B lister YouTubers like Breaking Points get 20K and more AT THE DROP! 11 hours later they'll have 30K or more. And fuggedabout the next day- 100K in many cases... and they're vacuous people who are sooo inauthentic. Go to Triggernometry, and it's even worse (and they're based out of the UK)...but then, those guys over the pond are genuine peeps.
Sure, maybe the NYT gets people watching it from their home page, but...
I didn't see this there yesterday or today and I look it over daily. Now, I'm not a paid subscriber; if I see a story that piques my interest I have to spend 2 extra clicks at archive.ph to get past the paywall and read it. But I DO look over the entire homepage, and this interview was NOT posted on it.
Frankly, I think this data point is important, especially if you note in the interview Megyn told the reporter early on that the NYT way of doing 'news' is dying. The proof of her statement is right the hell right there.
Extrapolating from that... I now have serious questions as to the health of even the NYT. WaPo is sinking, as is the LA Times... Now, just the quick look over these numbers tells me all is not well on 8th Ave in NYC.
How many of those ~10K views were due to the new independent news media directing eyeballs there? I’d venture to guess ‘most’. Speaking for me, I’d never have viewed this if not for Sasha posting. I avoid the NYT pretty much in all ways.
Megyn is the shit!! Sometimes I disagree and turn off her show with many expletives but tomorrow I will turn her on because she is genuine.. Doug Brunt is a lucky man..
Just a minor dissent to add here, about Megyn and not directed to this specific topic. I like a lot of what Megyn brings to the table too, but I was recently very put off by her "debate" with Glenn Greenwald about where to draw the line on free speech. She reminded me of those showboating house members who talk down to and talk over those whose views might differ. It looks lazy and like weakness to me when the convesation falls back too heavily on emotion. I don't see Megyn hitting every ball out of the park, and I'm hoping for better, from everyone, including myself :-).
I agree with Megyn. She gave Glenn some points but he's wrong on this one. The US has every right to deport Kahlil and take away his green card. Glenn is a purist which I appreciate but there is no purity as it pertains to foreign students leading Hamas protests. And we find out he lied on his green card application.
Hi - thanks for responding. I wasn't intending to imply agreement or disagreement with either Megyn or Glenn. I respect both, which is why I bothered to watch their discussion. I'm not an expert. On my own I don't trust that have enough verified information (out of all the noise) to be sure about one side of the argument or the other. I'm suspicious of possible hidden agendas and a tendency toward groupthink.
I'm interested because blocking individual freedom of expression is a big deal that deserves sober consideration. I've heard differing viewpoints from respected sources. I want to learn as much as I can, trying to keep an open mind, so that I can come to my own conclusions.
Megyn disappointed me by shouting Glenn down rather than engaging in an intelligent discussion, like two good journalists who respect each other might do. Maybe Glenn had information that needs to be heard? He's pretty good at that. Your example is of the guy lying on his green card application. If true that absolutely justifies it being revoked. But just because someone's said it's true doesn't necessarily mean that it is. I'm just sick of being lied to by lying liars, and shouting down a dissenting view from a respected source doesn't sit well with me.
I too listened to their debate and do not share your perspective of what transpired. I thought it was a fine example of two respected journalists debating, authentically, a complicated topic. Glenn is a purist and made me think about aspects of the situation that I had not. Megyn was her usual self, clear eyed, full of passion, and well documented. I thought it was an example of two friends who respect one another but who are not afraid to take an opposing position and come out still feeling the same towards each other at the end, maybe with even more respect for each other than before.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
The whole time you could just feel the desperation in that interviewer's face. She's trying to be nice, but dying on the inside. Wanting to scream at Megyn "Orange man bad, Orange man bad".
My favorite part was when Megyn says (I'm paraphrasing) 'Trump's trying to save the country, so I DON'T GIVE A SHIT about a 20 yr. old sexual harassment accusation' with no evidence.' That's how everybody who voted for him felt.
Rush was the most talented broadcaster I'd ever heard. Megyn takes it to a whole new level. Nobody comes close.
"Endorsing Donald Trump.
As if The New York Times an All its staff/reporters don't doesn't do the opposite.
I don't know for sure , but I doubt Lulu Garcia-Navarro has Ever written anything remotely positive about Donald Trump.
Much enjoyed! Thank you for sharing it.