The Lie That Took Down Jimmy Kimmel | Episode 68

So you know you've reached new lows when half of society views Jimmy Kimmel receiving a slap on the wrist, a bigger atrocity and tragedy than Charlie Kirk's political assassination.

But unfortunately, that's just where we are as a society.

So in case you missed it, just a few days ago, Jimmy Kimmel was indefinitely pulled off the air by Disney and ABC after he made comments about Charlie Kirk's political assassination.

Now, these were not just comments.

These were not just, you know, a joke that Jimmy Kimmel made.

He was intentionally misleading his viewers, his audience, about what was going on in this ongoing investigation.

I feel like I kind of jumbled that sentence there, but he was intentionally lying to his audience.

If you have not seen the clip, we will go ahead and play it now.

We had some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.

I'm sorry, Jimmy.

People on the right were trying to figure out who this shooter was.

We were not intentionally trying to distance ourselves from this individual, especially because at this point in the investigation, when you went on air and you did this monologue, we already knew that, yes, Tyler Robinson's family was Republican.

We had heard that, but we had also heard from his family that he said that Charlie Kirk was full of hatred, that he had moved to the left.

We knew what was engraved on the bullets.

We knew that one of the bullets said, hey, fascist, catch.

We knew that another one of the bullets had an Italian song that was critiquing the fascist regime.

All of this information was readily accessible.

It was out there.

It was being talked about extensively.

It was viral on social media.

And yet you still went on air and said, oh, they're just doing it to, you know, to win brownie points.

That's what they're doing.

They don't want to be associated with this.

No, we don't want to be associated with it because it was not one of us.

And we're not doing that to secure political points.

We're doing that in search of truth.

Unlike what you're doing here, ironically, you are, you know, accusing us of doing this, but I would argue that you going on air and making this joke is just trying to save face for you and your political party.

Anyway, that is my rant about what Jimmy Kimmel said.

Obviously, this caused a firestorm online from the political right, everybody on X, TikTok was up in arms about this incredibly offensive and misleading comment that Jimmy Kimmel made.

And people were, you know, calling for him to be canceled.

They were calling for him to apologize, have to retract his statement.

And I don't think any of us expected that ABC would actually take any steps to discipline him.

Because if you've lived in America over the last five years, that simply just does not happen to people on the left.

And so when this headline went viral on September 17th, you could say that we were all shocked.

So this is what I saw first.

I saw this announcement.

ABC pulls Jimmy Kimball live indefinitely after hosts Charlie Kirk comments.

And so immediately my response was, Oh my lord, like the world has completely turned on its axis.

Again, if you've lived in the States for the last five years, honestly, not just in the States, if you've lived in the world for the last five years, you have known that the right has been, you know, has faced the brunt of censorship, has faced the brunt of cancel culture, has been kicked off lines for things that we have said.

We have, you know, faced accusations of misinformation.

And so now to see somebody somebody be held accountable on the left by Disney?

I mean, it was completely and utterly shocking.

We'll get back into the story in just a second, but first, I want to take a quick break to tell you about today's sponsor.

Now, as you guys know, I am always looking for new ways to stay on track of my wellness goals, and Balance of Nature always makes it easy.

Their supplements are made with ingredients like whole apples, spinach, mango, and turmeric, real foods that I actually recognize and can pronounce.

And I love how convenient it is to add more fruits and veggies and spices to my routine without overthinking it.

Because let's be honest, I never actually have the time to eat all of the fruits and vegetables that I need to eat on a daily basis.

And that is where Balance of Nature comes into play.

So if you're ready to take charge of your health and make your routine even easier, visit balanceofnature.com or call 1-800-246-8751 and use code BRET to get a free fiber and spice supplement plus 35% off your first preferred set with free shipping and a money-back guarantee.

That is an amazing deal.

Start your journey with Balance of Nature.

Again, just use code BRET at checkout.

Like I said, this is what I saw first.

I saw the announcement first.

Unbeknownst to me, Brendan Carr, who is the head of the FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, earlier that day had gone on to Benny Johnson's podcast and talked about Jimmy Kimmel.

And his comments created a completely new type of firestorm.

Let's just watch.

They have a license granted by us at the FCC.

And that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest.

And we can get into some ways that we've been trying to reinvigorate the public interest and some changes that we've seen.

But frankly, when you see stuff like this, I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way.

These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action, frankly, on Kimmel.

So that was earlier that same day.

on September 17th on the Benny Johnson show or on the Benny show is what it's called.

And so Brendan Carr is saying, we know, we know that there is an uproar.

We know that people are upset about this.

We know that Jimmy Kimmel lied based on the information that is readily available about this ongoing investigation.

He lied to his nationwide audience, and that goes against FCC guidelines.

And the way that this all works is that the FCC controls the American airwaves, and they give licenses to ABC and its partners to be able to broadcast their shows and channels to, you know, televisions, cable networks, whatever you want to call it, around the country.

And the FCC has specific regulations in order to get and keep those licenses.

And one of the things you must do in order to keep being able to be on the airwaves is not lie to your audience, is not harm the public with misinformation.

So Brennan Carr is coming on and saying, hey, listen, he lied.

And so we can do this the easy way or the hard way.

Disney can, you know, figure out what they're going to do with Jimmy Kimmel, have him apologize, X, Y, Z, or the FCC is going to have its work cut out for it.

Now, I saw Brendan Carr's comments immediately after reading the announcement about Jimmy Kimmel, and suddenly the floodgates opened and I saw all the comments and the videos and the posts and the screeching from liberals and people across the aisle saying, this is a free speech atrocity.

The First Amendment is being taken away from us.

How could Trump do this?

This is so awful.

They were basically saying that this was a greater free speech violation.

Jimmy Kimmel being pulled off the air indefinitely was a bigger free speech violation than the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

A man being held accountable by his employer for spreading falsehoods about an ongoing investigation, an ongoing murder investigation that was rocking the country was a bigger atrocity than the man who had actually gotten shot.

For simply trying to have civil dialogue, for simply trying to speak to people across the aisle with empathy and understanding.

This, Jimmy Kimmel, finally, after years being held accountable for spreading lies about the right, about politics, that was the bigger issue.

And if you think I'm I'm joking about how insane they went, just take a listen to what Mark Ruffalo said, the actor Mark Ruffalo said, immediately in the aftermath.

Buckle up because this is truly insane.

Okay.

It is the United States government that is now suppressing the freedom of speech.

It is the United States government, not your neighbors, not someone on social media.

It is the government doing it now.

And that's,

that's where we all have to come together.

Think of yourselves living under the Taliban because that's where we're headed.

Okay, Mark Ruffalo.

So, the things that you need to take away from that video are the fact that he's saying, it's now the government that's doing this.

Can you believe it now?

They are infringing upon our First Amendment rights.

Can you believe that it's not your neighbors?

It's not your employer now, it's the government, simply because Brendan Carr went on Benny Johnson's podcast.

We're going to go into whether what Brendan Carr said was right, whether he should have talked about it.

But what I want you to focus on here is that Mark Ruffalo is acting like this is the first time the government has ever gotten involved in media, that the government has ever gotten involved in speech or misinformation.

Like, buddy, is your bubble like

that unpoppable?

Like, do you truly live under a rock?

Do you truly live in that intense of an echo chamber?

Like, I just pulled up one example right here.

Like, wake up, buddy.

The government has already been doing this.

Zuckerberg says the White House pressured Facebook to censor some COVID-19 content during the pandemic.

What about the Biden administration pressuring these social media companies to kick people off?

to censor content.

What about right-wingers getting debanked, being told they cannot have their money at certain financial institutions because of things they believe?

We have been on the receiving end of this for years and suddenly, because it happened to you sort of one time, really not the exact same thing here, you're saying that you live under the Taliban.

Second of all, that is so incredibly offensive.

Like it never ceases to amaze me how low these people will go.

Do you actually know what it would be like to live under the Taliban?

The fact that you would not be able to make that type of video.

You might not even have access to the internet.

I would not be able to be sitting here making this video.

I wouldn't be able to be showing my face, not just online, but in day-to-day life.

I wouldn't have access to education.

And you're saying because Jimmy Kimmel was held accountable for intentionally lying on air to score political brownie points, that is equal to living under the Taliban.

Again, how low can you go?

That is my question.

And if you're really...

Like if this is really what is stunning you, like buckle up, buddy, because again, this is what we have been experiencing for five plus years.

We'll dive back in, but first, a quick word from our sponsor.

So, like most of you, I thought I knew what I was buying at the grocery store until I learned that over 4 billion pounds of meat were imported into the U.S.

last year and were still labeled product of the USA.

That is where Good Ranchers come in.

All of their meat is 100% American, raised on local farms and delivered right to your door through their subscription service.

This process is simple, it's hassle-free, and the quality is incredible.

But best of all, you can rest easy knowing that you are buying from real American family farms and that your subscription and purchase helps them stay in business while big companies continue to buy from overseas.

So start shopping American Meat You Can Trust and visit goodranchers.com.

Use my code BrettToday and you will get $40 off plus free meat for life.

That is code Brett, $40 off plus free meat for life when you start a new subscription today.

Every day, women walk into abortion clinics planning to have an abortion feeling scared and alone and out of options.

But because of pre-born, these mothers are offered free ultrasounds.

And when they see their child and they hear that heartbeat, everything changes.

Ultrasounds double the chance that a mother will choose life and thousands of women do thanks to Preborne's network of clinics and services.

And this year alone, over 38,000 babies have been rescued through Preborne's work.

But they don't just stop there.

Pre-born cares for the mother too, providing counseling, classes, and ongoing financial support for two years after her baby is born.

That is the type of support that makes motherhood possible.

And support from people like us makes all of that possible.

By giving $28 to sponsor an ultrasound, you are giving a mother the chance to see her baby and choose life.

And so if you're ready to get involved and be part of the solution, go to preborn.com slash brett to get involved.

Again, that is preborn.com slash brett.

Give a gift, $28, save a life, and be the first voice of hope that she hears.

Now, back to the point, back to the story, back to what everyone is up in arms with.

Conservatives are completely split on this Jimmy Kimmel issue.

But they're not split on Jimmy being held accountable.

They are split on the FCC's involvement or alleged involvement.

because after Brendan Carr made those statements, a lot of people came out and said, okay, we don't want to do to the left what they did to us.

We want to be better than that.

We want to, you know, actually protect free speech.

We do not want to infringe upon the First Amendment.

We do not want to give them ammunition to come against us.

This is completely ridiculous.

If ABC and the broadcast networks and the advertisers, if they want to give Jimmy Kimmel a slap on the wrist, they are more than welcome to.

But the federal government, the Trump administration, Brendan Carr, the FCC, they should not be doing that.

Now, people on the other side are saying, I really don't give a crap.

He, you know, was in the wrong.

He intentionally lied.

That goes against FCC regulations.

And whether or not Brendan Carr actually did anything with the FCC, they are in the right to do that.

Interestingly, Dave Smith, who is a libertarian and is more hard line on these issues, he is actually in favor.

of Jimmy Kimmel's slap on the wrist.

He is in favor of the FCC's involvement simply because the FCC does have the power to do this and because Kimmel crossed the line.

However, he did acknowledge that it maybe was not the best strategic move from the FCC, but he said, I oppose the FCC threatening ABC, but not for libertarian or moral reasons.

I oppose it strictly on strategic grounds.

It's a bad idea.

We were already destroying Kimmel.

No need to have the refs cheat now.

It only gives the liberal media class a boost of energy.

I would morally and on libertarian grounds oppose the government pressuring a company to fire a comedian for telling a joke, no matter how awful or inaccurate the joke was.

That's not what this is.

To be saying, he would oppose it usually, but this is not what happened.

Jimmy Kimmel stopped being a comedian years ago.

He became a regime mouthpiece willingly and knowingly.

He is part of the cathedral.

This is closer to the CIA feuding with the FBI.

It is two criminal elements of the regime fighting, both of whom are enemies of liberty.

And then he said full podcast on this today.

Now, other people like Cernovich, like Betty Johnson himself, were saying, you guys need to just, you know, man up and deal with this.

We are going to go after people.

They've done this to us, so we don't care.

We are going to use, you know, the full extent of our power now that we are in office to hold people accountable, to discipline them.

We really don't care.

So obviously that is happening on social media.

And interestingly, this just cracked me up.

There are two people that fully oppose what Brendan Carr said, what the FCC was doing or possibly did, allegedly did.

And that would be Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens.

Now, I don't think these two have agreed on anything in a very long time.

And so it cracked me up to see this, but they both agreed on the fact that what the FCC allegedly may or may not have done, because again, we don't know if Brendan Carr actually took any steps or whether this was just kind of like a soft threat, you know, if they did anything.

But this idea of what the FCC could have done to pressure ABC to take Kimmel off the air, they disagree with.

This is what Ben had to say, and then I'll show you what Candace had to say.

The FCC should not be threatening action against ABC or its affiliates or Disney.

based on Jimmy Kimmel being a jackass.

He's been a jackass his entire career.

Social censure is perfectly appropriate.

The blowback from the public, totally natural and in fact, good, because Jimmy Kimmel is in fact a schmuck who should have been taken off the air 10 years ago.

I do not want the FCC in the business of telling local affiliates that their licenses will be removed if they broadcast material that the FCC deems to be informationally false.

And again, he and Candace actually agreed.

Here's what she had to say.

I want the reaction, if you're angry about what Jimmy Kimmel said, is for the free markets to take him out, right?

He doesn't have a show because nobody's watching him anymore because they're so disgusted by what he said.

That's what I want.

I want us to be in control, right?

Of where we spend our dollars, of what we're saying, and not like the government to press a button and say, you lose everything because we don't like what you said.

Now, on principle, I obviously agree with both of them.

I don't want somebody kicked off air because they say something that I disagree with or that offends me.

That would make me a complete and utter hypocrite.

Even if Trump is in office and it's somebody that I don't like, I don't want that power to be wielded.

However, the nuance here is that the FCC does control the airwaves for better or for worse, and they are in their power.

They have the ability to do this.

And again, Jimmy Kimmel lied and therefore went against regulations.

So whether or not the FCC did this, they had the authority to do so.

My take, logically and rationally and trying to be consistent, is that the FCC just shouldn't have gotten involved even if it was just verbally, which it seems like is what happened.

It seems like they didn't actually file any paperwork or actually go in to, you know, to deal with these broadcast distributors.

It seems like it was just a comment made on a podcast.

But even just that, I also don't think that they needed to get involved because similar to what Ben and Candice are saying, the free market was already deciding.

The public was already having massive backlash against Jimmy Kimmel.

There was massive backlash against ABC, against Disney, for not holding him accountable, for not requiring that he apologize and, you know, address the situation because of how ridiculous and insane and offensive, just completely flat out wrong his comments were.

So I don't think Brendan Carr actually helped the situation at all.

I think he just kind of muddied the waters a bit more.

And based on what I'm reading, ABC and Disney were already taking steps to handle the Jimmy Kimmel situation.

And I am taking this from the Hollywood Reporter article about what happened.

The joke kicked off a social media shitstorm.

A source of information tells Hollywood Reporter.

It died down temporarily, but almost immediately after the FCC chair Brendan Carr's appearance on Benny Johnson's podcast, the storm of shit became a bigger swirl.

So I know this is going to sound so ridiculous, but I'm reading into this.

I'm like, okay, well, there was already a storm of shit.

It simply just got bigger, but there was a problem already brewing.

They were already trying to figure out how they were going to address this with their, you know, broadcast networks, with their advertisers, with their audiences.

Obviously, Jimmy Kimball's show is also just like, ooh,

if you looked at the ratings, I'm sorry.

That's just a fact.

They were already trying to figure out how to handle this situation.

Brendan Carr, I think, just gave the left ammunition to be angry at us.

And just on a cultural level, I think if we were able to say, you know, cut and dry that this was simply a decision made by Disney and ABC, that this was purely a decision made by the free market, it was a decision made by an employer, no comments from the FCC, no comments from Brendan Carr muddying the water, that would have been so much more powerful.

That would have shown a significant cultural shift.

That would have shown that businesses are actually listening to their audiences now, and we would have no back and forth about what actually happened.

That it would simply be a business decision based on what was good for Disney and ABC, based on what the market was telling them.

And on top of all of this, if the FCC actually did get involved and did pressure ABC and Disney, this just continues the history of politicizing the FCC.

This has been happening for years and years and years.

Actually, I don't want to say politicizing the FCC, but the FCC using or wielding political power is what I'm trying to say.

Because, yes, like I've been describing, the FCC does have the authority and the responsibility to protect the airwaves and ensure that false information is not being spread, which Jimmy was obviously very clearly spreading.

That accountability has not always been held or wielded equally.

And a great example of this is everything that happened with Rush Limbaugh and the fairness doctrine.

So, if you've not heard about this, this is something that I have just learned about recently.

I was doing research about this last night as I was trying to figure out my own take on this situation.

But there was a fairness doctrine that was within the FCC from 1949 to 1987.

And this fairness doctrine required broadcast networks to share all political and cultural viewpoints equally.

So if you had a conservative commentator on with a hour-long radio show, the same network had to have a progressive with an hour-long show in order to equally distribute ideologies.

However, even though that sounds nice, the equality sounds great.

It sounds like it is in the public interest and trying to make things equal.

Very quickly, this became used to silence conservatives.

And conservative leaning networks would be asked to highlight more progressive viewpoints, but the same was not asked of progressives.

And this really came to a head under the Kennedy administration.

And this is something that Rush Limbaugh talked about consistently.

He started his show the year after the fairness doctrine was eradicated.

And he credits a lot of his success to the fact that this doctrine did not exist when he started on the radio because he was able to blow up as conservative and create conservative talk radio, which is why conservative podcasting is what it is today.

It's why I'm here talking to you guys on YouTube.

It's why this kind of weird niche industry actually exists.

It exists because of Rush, and he credits that to the eradication of the fairness doctrine.

In a recent article, they talked about this, and they said the FCC's commitment to the concept prove equally notional.

In the early 1960s, the Kennedy administration quickly realized that the fairness doctrine could be useful as a tool for suppressing political dissent.

If the fairness mandate was applied selectively, only forcing stations with conservative programming to increase the amount of liberal programming they aired and not vice versa, the administration could simultaneously punish their right-wing critics and extract pro-administration airtime, extract free pro-administration airtime.

Suffice it to say here that the fairness doctrine enabled the most successful government censorship campaign of the last century.

It might with greater accuracy be titled the unfairness doctrine, given its use to suppress political dissent and protect the lives of incumbents from both major parties, including Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon.

This is coming from the FCC.

So my point in bringing all of this up is that the FCC has a history of using their regulations in order to silence political discourse.

Now, obviously, like I said, Rush came on after the fairness doctrine was eradicated.

He became an unstoppable force.

Again, he pioneered this entire industry.

And as he grew and became more and more powerful and speech became more and more free in the media, Democrats consistently, time and time again, fought to bring back this fairness doctrine.

They wanted that power back in their control.

And Rush obviously spoke out against this.

He believed that this was a slippery slope.

And he successfully, time and time again, with his influence with his audience, was able to defeat those efforts.

The Reason article goes on and says by the early 1970s, the targeted conservative broadcasters had largely been silenced.

But the memory of the fairness doctrine era left an impression on a young Rush Limbaugh.

It remained one of his most common topics of conversation until the the end of his life.

He mentioned the fairness doctrine on more than 140 episodes of his show since 2007.

As he said in a 2010 interview during a previous wave of interest in reviving the mandate, he said, just like the fairness doctrine, I know what these guys have in mind.

I know what their game plan is.

Use intimidation, license renewal, fines, all of this kind of thing.

These were the tactics used in the 1960s.

These were the kinds of tactics used in the 1960s to suppress conservative broadcasters, something that Limbaugh never forgot.

And obviously, it's something that a lot of people have not forgotten even today.

I mean, just listen to that.

License renewal, fines, intimidation.

You could argue that that is what was happening on the Benny show, that that is what was happening with Brendan Carr wielding his power, even just verbally, with the FCC.

So that is why there are a lot of people who are pushing back against this and saying this is a slippery slope.

Now, with the FCC today, obviously, Brendan Carr has the ability to punish ABC and Disney, even though the Fairness Doctrine does not exist.

And that is because there is still a public interest clause within broadcast law.

It just hasn't really been used regularly in the past 20 years or so.

Probably because we see more control of misinformation on social media.

That is where the bulk of that censorship and political power wielding usually happens today.

But obviously, with this new FCC, with the Kimmel situation, the FCC is being brought back into, you know, a massively viral conversation.

Now, ironically, the liberals who are crying over this slap on the wrist are the very types of people who have advocated for bringing back the fairness doctrine or something like it to come back into modern day politics.

This is a Medium article that I saw actually talking about Rush.

The headline reads, it all started with Rush Limbaugh.

By now, the only way to prevent political violence is to exercise the rule of law to punish the demagogues who incite it.

We may or may not find the wisdom to restore something akin to the fairness doctrine, the wisdom, the wisdom.

to censor people that we disagree with, to the nation's airwaves and news feeds, but we must realize that US presidents, other government officials, and radio and television announcers who spread lies that poison the minds of otherwise law-abiding citizens, rousing them to distrust of free and fair elections and violence against the Constitution, also deserve punishment.

We are not going to lose our precious right of freedom of speech.

That's a lot of drama, okay?

Simply because the American courts hold lying demagogues accountable for the harms that they perpetrate against the United States.

Carefully, deliberately, we must counter the political lies that drive Americans to fury and violence with the force of the rule of law.

So my point of bringing this up is that they are in favor of censorship.

Obviously, we know this, but they are literally in favor of the type of power that allegedly Brendan Carr was wielding, that they are accusing the FCC of wielding.

They want it done to people on the other side of the political aisle.

They just don't want people like Jimmy Kimmel, people on their side, to be held accountable.

I mean, talk about hypocritical.

So you know what?

Whatever the author of this article is, Eli, I hope you are cheering on social media.

I hope you are cheering on social media that the FCC is now wielding its power because obviously this is what you wanted.

So again, that is the more logical side of me.

That is the level-headed Brett that is trying not to be hypocritical, that is saying I do not want free speech infringed regardless of who is speaking.

However, there is another side of me.

There's the side of me that is angry.

that is grieving Charlie Kirk.

There's the side of me that gave birth two weeks ago and is still very, very hormonal.

And that side of me says, screw you.

Like I really do not care.

People online are saying, oh no, you know, this will set a new precedent.

The FCC can't wield its power.

I'm sorry.

We literally just went through it.

The precedent has already been set.

The precedent has been set with the FCC dating back to the 60s.

The precedent has been set with the Biden administration pressuring Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook to censor people on the right.

The precedent has existed for years.

So now people on the right, people in the Trump administration, the FCC, they are playing by the very rules that you established.

So I'm sorry, but deal with it.

it.

It might feel like this is overreach.

It might feel like this is unfair, but you are getting a very small taste of what we have experienced for the last five plus years.

And honestly, I'm not really that mad that you're experiencing it.

And Chris Bruffo summed up my feelings very well.

Again, the emotional Brett.

He said, I'm sorry, but the FCC was established by FDR to impose public standards on broadcasters and used by JFK to pressure station managers into dropping right-wing radio programs.

The shoe has been on the other foot for for almost 100 years.

Turnabout is fair play.

And it's fine to argue for privatizing the broadcast spectrum, but until then, we cannot accept the idea that history started in 2025 or that only the left can legitimately use state institutions.

The only way to get a good equilibrium is an effective strategic tit for TAT.

And honestly, even though I'm in favor of protecting free speech, even though I don't like overreach, this is an incredibly, incredibly strong argument.

Because this political power exists, the FCC is allowed to do what Brendan Carr and the FCC allegedly did to Jimmy Kimmel.

So why not use it?

Genuinely, why not?

The last thing that I'll say is that I would hope Jimmy Kimmel being held accountable would be cause for some kind of self-reflection, self-awareness over the last couple of years, going, man, I really don't like it when somebody that I love is deplatformed.

I really don't love this feeling.

And maybe think about what we experienced for the last five years.

But clearly, based on what you saw with somebody like Mark Ruffalo, that type of reflection is not happening.

And if Charlie Kirk getting shot in the neck for simply trying to have a conversation with somebody on the other side, for going out of his way to try to understand,

going out of his way to spread goodness and morality, if that did not wake you up about the hypocrisy that we are experiencing in our country, about the true free speech violations, I don't know what will.

Obviously, Jimmy Kimmel getting a slap on the wrist will not wake you up.

And the fact that you are more upset about Jimmy Kimmel being held accountable for a lie that he intentionally spread during an ongoing murder investigation that rocks the entire country, if you're more upset about that, then I don't know what to tell you.

Like we are truly sicker than I ever thought possible.

So who knows?

I don't know if Jimmy Kimmel is coming back.

There are viral photos of him pulling up to a law office in California.

So people are saying that he might be lawyering up against ABC or Disney or the FCC.

Who knows?

There was something revealed today.

This is Saturday when I'm filming this.

Just came out that he is in talks with ABC to come back on.

Maybe he will be making an apology finally.

I have no idea.

Who knows?

What I will say, though, is that late night is truly in a tizzy.

Stephen Colbert is already gone.

Now Jimmy Kimmel is indefinitely off the air.

Jimmy Fallon is probably going to have to bring on another Republican.

He had Greg Guttfeld on the other day.

He's going to have to bring on another Republican to try to stay in the good graces of his executives.

So who knows?

All I know is that Greg Guttfeld is blowing past all of them with his views, with his humor, with his insights.

So, I recommend watching him instead of anybody else.

Go vote with your views and your dollars.

Go support Greg, not these insane individuals.

All right, I'll talk to you guys later.