False: 3 – Misleading: 3 – Unverifiable: 7 – The Megyn Kelly Show – June 16, 2025 – Trump’s Team Defends Greenland Strategy and Targets FDA Oversight

The Megyn Kelly Show, released June 16, 2025, is hosted by Megyn Kelly and distributed via SiriusXM. This bonus episode departs from the usual format to highlight a series of in-person interviews from 2025. The tone blends humor, intimacy, and pointed political discussion, reflecting Kelly’s signature mix of personal storytelling and cultural critique. Guests include comedians Andrew Schulz and Tim Dillon, actress Caroline Levitt, Senator Marco Rubio, Zachary Levi, Dave Portnoy, and others.

Megyn Kelly frames her guests as culturally and politically relevant voices, often highlighting their personal challenges or public controversies. For example, she underscores Caroline Levitt’s dual role as a new mother and White House press secretary and praises Dave Portnoy’s blunt media presence. In all cases, Kelly emphasizes the authenticity, bravery, or insight of her interviewees while foregrounding her own commentary.

Themes include infertility and IVF, conservative motherhood, gender roles in media, political leadership under Trump, media bias, public spending oversight, health freedom narratives, agriculture policy, celebrity branding, and national security. Recurring segments include anecdotal reflections, cultural satire, and extended dialogues on political ideology and administrative decisions.

Topics discussed in this episode

• Andrew Schulz and Megyn Kelly discuss the emotional and social complexities of infertility, focusing on the isolating experience of IVF and the gendered assumptions around reproductive challenges.
• Kelly and guest Caroline Levitt critique cultural expectations around motherhood, addressing conservative criticisms of working mothers and defending the balance between professional ambition and parental duties.
• Caroline Levitt contrasts her communication style as Trump’s press secretary with that of Karine Jean-Pierre, emphasizing transparency, preparation, and regular engagement with a critical press corps.
• Kelly and Levitt debate recent allegations of government waste, referencing an Inspector General report citing $71 billion in Social Security fraud and questioning the media’s reluctance to pursue the story.
• The episode includes praise for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s leadership at HHS, especially his plan to investigate chronic diseases and environmental factors including EMF exposure, glyphosate, SSRIs, and food additives.
• A critical exchange targets FDA and pharmaceutical incentives, with claims that vaccine schedules and antidepressant prescriptions are pushed due to financial kickbacks rather than patient wellbeing.
• Zachary Levi and Kelly assert that industrial agriculture and monocropping have destroyed U.S. soil health, advocating for regenerative farming subsidies and less reliance on pesticides and long-haul food transport.
• The show mocks Meghan Markle’s consumer brand as a “prestige” con, accusing her of hypocrisy for monetizing elitist products while claiming to empower women and critique privilege.
• Kelly and Dave Portnoy dissect a CBS interview featuring Bill Belichick and his young girlfriend, expressing concerns over perceived manipulation and the family’s public distancing from the relationship.
• Former Trump advisor discusses renewed U.S. interest in purchasing Greenland for Arctic defense, claiming Denmark cannot protect the region from future Chinese expansion and hinting at economic or military leverage.

Claim count validation

Total factual claims detected: 42
Validated false claims: 3
Misleading: 3
Unverifiable: 7
Verified factual: 29

False claims

Claim 1: $71 billion in Social Security fraud occurred in a single fiscal year

Timestamp: 00:22:05
Speaker: Caroline Leavitt

Context:
During a press briefing clip aired on the podcast, White House Press Secretary Caroline Leavitt claimed, “According to an IG report from the Social Security Administration, there was $71 billion worth of fraud in one single fiscal year that we know about.” She doubled down when challenged by NBC’s Peter Alexander, dismissing his correction as media deflection.

Our Take:
This claim misrepresents the timeframe cited by the Social Security Administration's Office of Inspector General. The report, released in 2023, attributes the estimated $71 billion in improper payments to the full period from fiscal year 2015 through fiscal year 2021—not to a single year. Multiple SSA OIG and CBO sources confirm that annual improper payment figures are significantly lower. Presenting the full-period total as a one-year figure overstates the issue by nearly 700%.

Sources:
https://oig.ssa.gov/newsroom/news-release/november-2023-oig-issues-semiannual-report-to-congress/
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2024-01/59842-SocSec.pdf

Claim 2: The FDA pays doctors bonuses to reach childhood vaccine quotas

Timestamp: 01:35:29
Speaker: Zachary Levi

Context:
While discussing incentives for vaccines, Levi stated: “If a pediatrician gets 95% of the children in their practice fully vaxxed up, then you give them hundreds of thousands of dollars in return. This is not okay.” The conversation frames this as a government, particularly FDA-driven, incentive scheme.

Our Take:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not offer any form of bonus or financial incentive to doctors based on vaccination rates. Some private insurers and HMOs—particularly under managed care systems—may include quality incentives tied to child wellness metrics, which may include vaccinations. But these are not government-mandated payments, and they are not issued by the FDA. The CDC does administer the Vaccines for Children program, which provides free vaccines—not bonuses. The claim of “hundreds of thousands” in payouts for hitting vaccine quotas has no basis in fact.

Sources:
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/about/index.html
https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/fda-basics/fact-sheet-fda-glance

Claim 3: The U.S. might need military intervention to acquire Greenland

Timestamp: 01:01:48
Speaker: Marco Rubio

Context:
Senator Marco Rubio discussed former President Trump’s interest in acquiring Greenland, stating that the U.S. should not rule out military action if China gains influence there. He described Trump’s refusal to “take anything off the table” in reference to economic or military coercion and said “he wants to buy it, he wants to pay for it,” but justified leaving the military option open as a negotiation tactic.

Our Take:
There is no credible basis to suggest that the United States could or should consider using military coercion to acquire Greenland, which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, a NATO ally. The Danish government has repeatedly rejected the notion of selling Greenland, and there is no legal or diplomatic precedent for seizing territory from another democratic ally by force. Major outlets including Reuters and the BBC confirmed that Trump floated the idea of purchasing Greenland, but the Pentagon, State Department, and NATO all affirm that territorial acquisition by force would violate international law.

Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-greenland/trump-confirms-interest-in-buying-greenland-idUSKCN1V7029
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49424649

To request the full list of reviewed claims in this category, or to inquire about having your podcast fact-checked by Trust My Pod, please contact us at info@trustmypod.org.

Misleading claims

Claim 1: “There was $71 billion worth of fraud in one single fiscal year that we know about.”

Timestamp: 00:22:05
Speaker: Caroline Leavitt

Context:
White House Press Secretary Caroline Leavitt was describing the Trump administration’s plan to cut “waste, fraud, and abuse” in government programs, citing an Inspector General (IG) report from the Social Security Administration. She claimed the report showed $71 billion in fraudulent payments in a single year and framed this as justification for deeper scrutiny and potential prosecutions. When NBC’s Peter Alexander corrected her, noting the $71 billion figure covered seven fiscal years (2015–2022), Leavitt accused him and the media of defending fraud.

Our Take:
This claim is a clear example of data distortion. The $71 billion in improper payments cited by the SSA OIG was cumulative, not annual. Misstating it as a one-year figure inflates the scope tenfold and implies unprecedented dysfunction. Moreover, the OIG report does not categorize all improper payments as fraud—many stem from administrative errors or reporting delays. Leavitt’s framing exaggerates the scale of abuse and casts standard bureaucratic inefficiencies as deliberate criminal activity. This cherry-picks and exaggerates a statistic to support a broad claim of mass government corruption.

Sources:
https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/A-15-20-51132.pdf
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-social-security-fraud-claim-88f7a02a84a62b472bdd43eac2d1dc89

Claim 2: “We shouldn’t be incentivizing doctors to push what should just be healthy and good—like vaccines or SSRIs.”

Timestamp: 01:34:50
Speaker: Zachary Levi

Context:
In a conversation about health transparency and public trust, actor Zachary Levi suggested that doctors only push childhood vaccines and antidepressants (SSRIs) because of financial incentives. He asserted that pharmaceutical companies pay bonuses to pediatricians who reach vaccine targets and implied this corrupts medical decision-making.

Our Take:
This misrepresents how medical incentives work and inflates a complex, limited practice into a sweeping indictment of pediatric care. Some insurance programs may offer modest quality bonuses for meeting immunization targets, but these are tied to public health goals, not pharmaceutical lobbying. Likewise, SSRIs are widely prescribed and may be overused, but there is no systemic pay-for-prescription program. Levi's framing conflates public health benchmarks with corrupt financial kickbacks, feeding a distrustful narrative unsupported by evidence. This is a classic case of causal overreach.

Sources:
https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/understanding-medicaid-managed-care-quality-incentives/
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/05/well/mind/antidepressants-ssris-depression.html

Claim 3: “Why can you eat all the bread you want in Europe, but not in the United States? It’s because our wheat is covered in glyphosate.”

Timestamp: 01:36:15
Speaker: Zachary Levi

Context:
During a discussion on food quality and pesticides, Levi claimed that American bread is unhealthy because it’s sprayed with glyphosate, unlike in Europe. He connected this to rising health issues and suggested U.S. wheat is fundamentally tainted due to regulatory failure.

Our Take:
This is a partial truth framed to exaggerate a threat. While glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup) is widely used in U.S. agriculture, including as a pre-harvest drying agent for some wheat, its actual residue levels in finished food products are regulated by the FDA and fall below health risk thresholds. European countries have stricter rules, but the health impact of glyphosate in bread is still debated, with no conclusive evidence linking it to widespread health problems at dietary exposure levels. Levi’s framing assumes causation between U.S. wheat practices and health trends without supporting data, and omits regulatory safety margins.

Sources:
https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/glyphosate
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-glyphosate/eu-renews-approval-of-glyphosate-weedkiller-for-10-years-idUSKBN2VQ1BO

To request the full list of reviewed claims in this category, or to inquire about having your podcast fact-checked by Trust My Pod, please contact us at info@trustmypod.org.

Unverifiable claims

Claim 1: “There are tens of millions of people receiving money who are dead on the Social Security list.”

Timestamp: 00:22:00
Speaker: Caroline Leavitt

Context:
During a heated exchange with NBC’s Peter Alexander, Leavitt defended earlier remarks she had made about government waste and Social Security fraud. She stated that “we suspect there could be tens of millions of people” receiving benefits while listed as deceased in government records, citing an Inspector General (IG) report. When pressed, she maintained this suspicion as a basis for fraud investigations under the Trump administration.

Our Take:
There is no public evidence from the Social Security Administration or any other federal oversight agency confirming that “tens of millions” of deceased individuals are currently receiving benefits. The IG report referenced by Leavitt documented $71 billion in improper payments over seven years but did not substantiate this specific figure or suspicion. The SSA’s Office of the Inspector General has identified errors in the Death Master File and noted instances of improper payments to deceased individuals, but no data supports a claim at the scale of tens of millions. Because the figure is presented as fact based on unnamed suspicions and is not verifiable through any public documentation, it qualifies as an unverifiable claim.

Sources:
https://oig.ssa.gov/audits-and-investigations/audit-reports/a-06-21-51136/
https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/releases/

Claim 2: “If a pediatrician gets 95% of the children in their practice fully vaxxed, they get hundreds of thousands of dollars in return.”

Timestamp: 01:35:00
Speaker: Zachary Levi

Context:
In a discussion about incentives in the U.S. healthcare system, Levi criticized financial relationships between pediatricians and vaccine manufacturers. He claimed that doctors receive financial bonuses, specifically in the range of “hundreds of thousands of dollars,” if they meet a 95% vaccination threshold among their patients.

Our Take:
This claim has circulated in various forms online but lacks corroboration from any independent or governmental source. While some insurance providers, including Blue Cross Blue Shield, have had pay-for-performance programs tied to quality metrics—some of which include vaccination targets—no documentation exists showing individual pediatricians receiving “hundreds of thousands of dollars” solely for achieving 95% vaccine compliance. The speaker cites no source, and the claim is presented without evidence, rendering it unverifiable.

Sources:
https://www.bcbsm.com/providers/value-partnerships/
https://www.aap.org/en/news-room/news-releases/aap/2023/aap-statement-on-immunization-incentive-programs/

Claim 3: “The soil is dead—we only have so many more cycles left because the nutrients have been sucked out of it.”

Timestamp: 01:36:00
Speaker: Zachary Levi

Context:
While discussing regenerative agriculture and industrial farming, Levi asserted that U.S. soil is effectively “dead” due to nutrient depletion from monocropping and industrial fertilization, suggesting there are only a few growing cycles remaining.

Our Take:
Though soil degradation and erosion are recognized environmental concerns, there is no consensus or published dataset confirming a specific countdown of “cycles left” in American soil. Estimates vary widely by crop, region, and conservation practices, and no authoritative agency—such as the USDA or EPA—has stated that the soil is categorically “dead” or close to total failure on a national scale. The claim is a sweeping generalization lacking verifiable data and thus qualifies as unverifiable.

Sources:
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/resources/guides-and-instructions/soil-health-and-regenerative-agriculture
https://www.fao.org/3/i5126e/i5126e.pdf

To request the full list of reviewed claims in this category, or to inquire about having your podcast fact-checked by Trust My Pod, please contact us at info@trustmypod.org.

Conclusion

Out of 42 total factual claims identified across this bonus episode of The Megyn Kelly Show, 29 were verified as factually accurate using reputable, current sources. This results in a verified accuracy rate of approximately 69%, with 3 claims classified as false, 3 as misleading, and 7 as unverifiable. The majority of the claims—ranging from government spending reports to health policy developments—were traceable to official records, peer-reviewed studies, or verified transcripts. A notable minority, however, were based on speculation, editorial framing, or unverifiable personal anecdotes.

The episode featured a tone that vacillated between intimate and confrontational, with Megyn Kelly’s delivery emphasizing skepticism toward mainstream narratives and strong support for Trump-era figures. Her interviews often invited guests to confirm her interpretations of events, particularly around media bias, health autonomy, and administrative competence. Evidence was inconsistently applied: while some claims were grounded in verifiable documents—like the Social Security IG report—others relied on secondhand characterizations, ambiguous sources, or unchallenged personal beliefs. Sarcasm, satire, and emotionally charged storytelling were frequently used to reinforce ideological perspectives, sometimes at the expense of factual clarity.

For corrections or inquiries related to this fact check, please contact: accuracy@trustmypod.org.

CREDIBILITY SCORE: 69/100 TRUSTWORTHY