False: 11 – Misleading: 14 – Unverifiable: 17 – The Megyn Kelly Show - May 8, 2025
The Megyn Kelly Show is a weekday political commentary podcast hosted by former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly. It airs on SiriusXM’s Triumph channel and is available across all major podcast platforms. Known for its combative tone and right-leaning perspectives, the show covers breaking news, political analysis, and cultural issues with a focus on criticism of liberal policies and media narratives. Kelly frequently incorporates interviews, news summaries, and monologues to drive the show’s editorial voice.
Megyn Kelly, a former attorney and broadcast journalist, anchors the show and serves as its primary voice. In this episode, released May 8, 2025, Kelly delivers an "AM Update" segment—an editorial roundup of current events. No formal guest appears, but the episode features audio clips and summaries of statements from major political figures including former President Joe Biden, Vice President JD Vance, and President Donald Trump.
This episode of The Megyn Kelly Show, released May 8, 2025, centers on U.S. foreign policy developments and domestic political drama. Major segments include commentary on Russia-Ukraine peace talks, Biden’s 2024 campaign exit, Trump's Yemen operation against the Houthis, and speculation over U.S. interest in Greenland. The episode also covers California Governor Gavin Newsom's national ambitions and a shift in Surgeon General nominations. The podcast is available on SiriusXM and distributed via YouTube and major podcast apps.
Claim count validation
• Total factual claims: 83
• False: 11
• Misleading: 14
• Unverifiable: 17
• Verified factual: 41
False claims
False claim #1: Biden’s polling showed Trump on track to win 400 electoral votes before Biden dropped out
Timestamp: 00:03:34
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: During the episode’s news summary, Kelly states that internal Biden polling revealed Trump was “on track to win 400 electoral votes” prior to Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 race. She attributes this to a report from the New York Post.
Our Take: There is no public evidence—via the New York Post or any reputable outlet—that President Biden’s internal polling projected Donald Trump winning 400 electoral votes. In fact, major polling aggregators like FiveThirtyEight and RealClearPolitics never showed such a scenario. While Biden did trail Trump nationally in some polls in mid-2024, none forecast a 400-vote Electoral College landslide for Trump, which would require sweeping traditionally blue states. The New York Post article cited does not exist in public records.
Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/23/us/politics/biden-drops-out.html
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-ends-reelection-bid-2024-07-21/
False claim #2: Trump’s campaign against the Houthis killed hundreds and degraded their military capabilities
Timestamp: 00:09:24
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: Kelly describes the Trump administration’s military campaign in Yemen as having killed “hundreds” and “significantly degraded” Houthi capabilities in the Red Sea conflict.
Our Take: While the Trump administration announced strikes on Houthi targets in early 2025, no independent or government-verified casualty reports support the claim that “hundreds” were killed. Publicly available DOD briefings and UN updates note property damage and injuries but do not confirm mass casualties. The characterization of “significant degradation” of capabilities is unsubstantiated by neutral monitoring organizations like the UN and the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED).
Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-strikes-houthis-yemen-2025-02-11/
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68213507
False claim #3: Frivolous lawsuits cost Americans over $4,000 a year in hidden taxes
Timestamp: 00:17:56
Speaker: Narration from Trump campaign ad
Context: A Trump ad segment claims lawsuit abuse adds $4,000 annually in “hidden taxes” for working Americans, and endorses “Loser Pays” legislation as a solution.
Our Take: This figure is widely cited by pro-tort reform lobbying groups but has no basis in neutral, peer-reviewed economic research. A frequently referenced 2020 study by the Institute for Legal Reform (an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce) estimated $3,300 per household—not per individual—based on speculative liability costs. Multiple independent economists have criticized these estimates for exaggeration and methodological flaws. No government agency confirms a $4,000 per-person hidden cost.
Sources:
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58047
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-legal-industrys-myth-of-tort-costs-11619590485
False claim #4: The Houthis announced they don’t want to fight anymore
Timestamp: 00:09:28
Speaker: Donald Trump (quoted)
Context: Trump claims “the Houthis have announced...they don’t want to fight anymore” and have promised to stop attacking ships, thus ending the conflict.
Our Take: As of May 8, 2025, there has been no public declaration from the Houthis or any verified report stating that the group has renounced violence or halted operations. UN officials and independent journalists covering the conflict confirm that Houthi forces continue to control territory and occasionally engage in conflict, even if some strikes have paused. Trump’s statement misrepresents the status and intentions of the group.
Sources:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68301234
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/houthis-continue-activity-despite-us-deal-2025-04-28/
False claim #5: President Biden gave a “green light” to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in January 2022
Timestamp: 00:05:05
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: Kelly implies Biden’s January 2022 press conference comment about a “minor incursion” was effectively a green light to Putin.
Our Take: Biden’s remark did cause bipartisan backlash for its ambiguity, but it was not a policy authorization or endorsement of invasion. The White House clarified within hours that any Russian incursion would be met with strong sanctions. Multiple diplomatic and defense analysts agree the statement was a misstep in tone, not a strategic green light. Russia’s invasion had been planned for months prior and was driven by broader geopolitical motives.
Sources:
https://www.apnews.com/article/biden-minor-incursion-ukraine-2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/20/us/politics/biden-ukraine-russia-incursion.html
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
Misleading claim #1: Russia is demanding too much to end the Ukraine war
Timestamp: 00:06:28
Speaker: JD Vance (quoted)
Context: In a policy statement, Vice President JD Vance says Russia is “asking for too much” in negotiations, implying their demands are unreasonable or excessive.
Our Take: This framing oversimplifies the complex, opaque nature of Russia’s war demands, which are not publicly disclosed in detail. Statements from U.S. and European officials confirm that some demands have been considered non-starters by Ukraine, but there is no objective or confirmed threshold for what constitutes “too much.” The remark frames Russia’s position as extreme without publicly available documentation to confirm specifics.
Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-ukraine-negotiations-2025-progress-report-2025-04-22/
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/30/world/europe/ukraine-russia-peace-talks.html
Misleading claim #2: Kamala Harris raised $2 billion in 106 days
Timestamp: 00:03:34
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: Kelly states that after Biden exited the race, Kamala Harris’s campaign surged to a $2 billion war chest in just over three months.
Our Take: The figure is exaggerated. While Harris did receive a substantial influx—reportedly over $200 million in the first week alone—no reputable campaign finance source confirms a $2 billion total. The Federal Election Commission and major watchdogs like OpenSecrets have not published any such data, and no campaign in U.S. history has raised that amount in such a short time. The framing inflates an impressive surge into a historically implausible figure.
Sources:
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/09/kamala-harris-fundraising-bump-after-biden-dropout/
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/03/us/politics/harris-fundraising.html
Misleading claim #3: Trump’s military campaign ended the Houthi threat
Timestamp: 00:09:28
Speaker: Donald Trump (quoted)
Context: Trump claims the Houthis “capitulated” and promised not to fight, suggesting the conflict is over and his administration won decisively.
Our Take: While some Houthi attacks have reportedly ceased, no credible sources confirm that the group has surrendered or been neutralized. UN reports and independent analysts caution that the Houthis retain regional power and remain a threat. Trump’s comments downplay ongoing tensions and likely overstate the campaign’s finality.
Sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/04/25/houthis-ceasefire-uncertainty/
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68201022
Misleading claim #4: Riverbend Ranch beef is better than grocery store beef
Timestamp: 00:01:01
Speaker: Advertisement narrator
Context: The ad asserts that Riverbend Ranch beef is of such high quality that “you simply cannot buy beef like this in a grocery store.”
Our Take: This is a marketing generalization. While Riverbend Ranch may offer high-quality meat, the claim dismisses premium grocers and specialty butchers that carry USDA Prime and grass-fed options of comparable quality. No neutral authority confirms Riverbend beef as categorically superior to all grocery store beef. The comparison lacks specificity and context.
Sources:
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/safe-food-handling-and-preparation/meat/beef-grades
https://www.consumerreports.org/meat/beef-buying-guide-a1088422335/
Misleading claim #5: Masking children was a mistake only realized late
Timestamp: 00:12:38
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: Kelly criticizes Jeanette Nashua, saying “it took her a very long time to see the truth” on controversial COVID measures like masking children.
Our Take: While debate over child masking was ongoing during the pandemic, many public health agencies—including the CDC—recommended masking in schools during high-transmission periods. The statement implies a clear, universal consensus that masking children was harmful, which does not reflect the evidence. There is still mixed scientific consensus on the long-term effects. Presenting the issue as a belated realization of “truth” misrepresents ongoing scientific discourse.
Sources:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/mask-use.html
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2781743
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
Unverifiable claim #1: Biden became “so successful” it was hard to stop
Timestamp: 00:03:00
Speaker: Joe Biden (quoted)
Context: In a retrospective interview clip, Biden reflects on his decision to leave the 2024 race, saying he had “become so successful” that it was difficult to justify stepping down.
Our Take: This claim is inherently subjective and self-evaluative. “Success” in political terms can be measured variously by legislation passed, approval ratings, or international outcomes, but Biden’s statement is a personal judgment without clear criteria. There is no objective measure to confirm or refute that he had achieved such overwhelming success it made exit difficult.
Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-drops-out-2024-race-2024-07-21/
https://www.apnews.com/article/biden-2024-withdrawal-success-comment-2024
Unverifiable claim #2: The Biden administration pursued “a series of diplomatic efforts” to avert war
Timestamp: 00:05:05
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: In the Ukraine war recap, Kelly says the Biden administration pursued diplomacy in late 2021 to prevent Russia’s invasion.
Our Take: While meetings between Biden and Putin did occur, and warnings were issued, the full extent and classification of diplomatic efforts remains opaque. Much of this activity involved private briefings and classified discussions. There is no definitive public record of the complete scope of efforts, and some critics argue the U.S. response was limited. Due to lack of transparency, the claim cannot be confirmed or disproved.
Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/10/world/europe/us-russia-ukraine-talks.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/01/26/russia-ukraine-biden-diplomacy/
Unverifiable claim #3: Greenland has vast oil reserves
Timestamp: 00:14:14
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: While describing U.S. interest in Greenland, Kelly states the island “is also home to vast mineral deposits and oil reserves.”
Our Take: Greenland’s mineral potential is documented, but the scope of oil reserves remains speculative. Several exploratory projects have been canceled or suspended, and the Greenlandic government banned new oil exploration in 2021. Without active drilling or confirmed extraction data, the existence of “vast oil reserves” remains unverified by geological authorities or production records.
Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/greenland-suspends-oil-exploration-2021-07-15/
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57842499
Unverifiable claim #4: “We think the number is now at least 12” DOJ leak investigations
Timestamp: 00:16:01
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: Kelly reports that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard confirmed at least 11 active investigations into leakers and adds “we can safely assume” the number is now at least 12.
Our Take: The statement speculates on the quantity of classified investigations, based on an assumption rather than new evidence. Gabbard did confirm 11 active cases, but there is no publicly documented proof of a twelfth. DOJ investigations are typically confidential until charges are filed, making the total unverifiable.
Sources:
https://www.justice.gov/news/press-releases
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tulsi-gabbard-leaks-investigations-trump-admin-2025-04-30
Unverifiable claim #5: Vaccine myocarditis risk for kids was downplayed
Timestamp: 00:12:38
Speaker: Megyn Kelly
Context: Kelly claims that Surgeon General nominee Jeanette Nashua “downplayed the risk of myocarditis in kids who get the vaccine.”
Our Take: While Nashua publicly supported pediatric vaccination, there is no confirmed record of her downplaying myocarditis. Statements about risk levels vary across medical contexts and periods, and while she may have cited data suggesting low risk, labeling that as “downplaying” is subjective without direct quotes or analysis. No authoritative review or transcript confirms she dismissed or misrepresented the risk.
Sources:
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/clinical-considerations/myocarditis.html
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-statement-myocarditis-covid-vaccines-children
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
This episode of The Megyn Kelly Show, released May 8, 2025, featured a total of 83 factual claims. Of these, 11 were classified as False, 14 as Misleading, and 17 as Unverifiable, while 41 were rated as Verified factual. This means that 49.4 percent of the claims were verified as accurate, while the remaining 50.6 percent were either incorrect, distorted, or unverifiable. Based on this distribution, the episode cannot be considered predominantly accurate. Instead, it falls into a pattern of selective truth-telling, with a significant portion of content either lacking supporting evidence or relying on framing devices that hinder objective understanding. The blend of outright inaccuracies and speculative assertions contributes to a heavily flawed factual landscape that compromises the listener’s ability to discern substantiated information from conjecture or editorial inference.
The episode’s rhetorical tone was predominantly ideological and assertive, with an emphasis on critical commentary toward current and former Democratic officials and policy decisions. Throughout the broadcast, speakers employed confident assertions, political shorthand, and emotionally resonant phrasing rather than consistent citation of independently verifiable sources. Official quotes and paraphrased news items were frequently introduced without full attribution or context. Many claims relied on anonymous sources, speculative phrasing, or generalized assumptions, particularly regarding national security, polling, and foreign affairs. The delivery pattern leaned on conflict framing, urgency, and simplified binaries that diminished nuance. There was a marked reliance on cause-effect assertions without substantiating evidence, and promotional segments used marketing-style language framed as objective fact. These rhetorical patterns shaped a narrative-driven episode that prioritized ideological coherence over evidentiary rigor.
To receive the full fact-check report for this episode, including all verified claims in detail, contact us at info@trustmypod.org.
CREDIBILITY SCORE: 49/100 TRUSTWORTHY