Ben Shapiro exposes glaring weaknesses in Kelly's Epstein analysis

Political Ref | July 15, 2025 | Permalink

Megyn Kelly often wins debates on her show. She did not win this one. You can view the debate here.

Perhaps the most frustrating part of Megyn's argument came early when she scoffed at Ben's suggestion that her sources should identify themselves and present their evidence. Yes, they might suffer blowback, but it's grossly unfair to make allegations in the shadows, perpetuating a media firestorm that threatens to derail Trump's presidency and refuse to offer oneself for cross-examination. Kelly knows that, but she's bending the rules here because she knows the anonymous sources. She would call out legacy media for doing this.

The Debate

Kelly cites anonymous sources. Shapiro cites five named sources. Shapiro says the only evidence we have indicates a legal case can't be made. Kelly says she's not going to trust government to determine what is credible evidence, preferring to substitute her sources' judgment on that question. She again does not identify her sources. Shapiro says he doesn't trust government either as a matter of course, but he trusts Trump, Vance, Bongino, Patel and Bondi. Kelly says Bongino may have not seen all the evidence but she merely asserts this possibility. Again, she offers no evidence.

Shapiro wants more information as well, but says there's no proof that Patel and Bongino haven't seen all the evidence. Shapiro says Bondi's incompetence has made this look worse than it is, but he ultimately trusts Bongino and Patel. Kelly implies Bondi is hiding something with no evidence. Kelly says she's not going to cover for Trump, implying Shapiro is covering for him. Shapiro states that being careful about pulling innocent names into a charged story about a child sex ring is not covering for Trump.

Kelly says nobody is making those allegations. Shapiro thinks Kelly doesn't understand that she's implying there is a child-sex ring coverup, (see minute 8:30). Kelly suggests it's fine to allege Epstein was an Israeli agent working for Mossad without evidence. Shapiro says that nobody is willing to allege that Trump is working for Israel in covering up a child sex ring, but they are implying it.

He says they should just say it and provide evidence. Shapiro attacks the credibility of Vicki Ward's second-hand 'evidence' of Mossad involvement. Megyn suggests she has credibility but then says she's not defending her. After discussing various possibilities, both conclude that there's a lack of evidence. Shapiro says where there's a lack of public evidence he believes the evidence-based conclusions of Bongino and Patel, but he acknowledges more evidence should be released.

Bottom line, Kelly implies a grotesque coverup of a child-sex ring by President Trump, JD Vance, Bongino, Patel and Bondi. Perhaps she doesn't realize the implications, but she should. Regardless of the length of time of this controversy or the number of online personalities she knows who have staked their credibility on finding a massive Epstein coverup, evidence is required. If they want to allege a coverup by Trump and his team, they should do that. Don't claim evidence exists for which no proof exists based on anonymous sourcing.

This is the tactic that many liars in legacy media use to push phony stories and Megyn Kelly needs to have a higher standard. Let's see the evidence. That's not too much to ask.

But I too trust Bongino and Patel to determine if its worth moving forward on this case. The press would openly lie about any conservative named as an associate of Epstein. We know this because they do it now with Trump. If ultimately no legal case can be made and no charges will be brought, it's unfair to release names of potential defendants. That so-called evidence can't be challenged in discovery where the court can compel cooperation, so don't release it. Evidence untested by the discovery process is not really evidence of anything.