UPDATE: Megyn Kelly is under intense scrutiny after controversial remarks on her SiriusXM show this week regarding Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes. Kelly controversially argued that Epstein should not be labeled a “pedophile,” instead asserting he simply preferred “very young teen types,” specifically girls aged 15.
During the segment, Kelly claimed that a source “very, very close to the case” told her Epstein “liked the barely legal type,” which she insisted differentiates him from those who target younger children. “He liked 15-year-old girls,” Kelly stated, while calling the behavior “disgusting.” However, she controversially maintained that this distinction raises questions about the appropriateness of the term “pedophile.”
This alarming commentary comes at a time when the public is increasingly sensitive to issues of sexual abuse and exploitation. Kelly’s remarks have ignited swift backlash, with critics accusing her of minimizing Epstein’s egregious actions against minors who are legally incapable of giving consent.
“How the hell was Megyn Kelly ever an attorney?”
Josh Johnson, host of The Daily Show, responded sharply to Kelly’s statements on air, expressing disbelief and mocking her argument as a form of “diet pedophilia.” Johnson emphasized that while there is a difference between a 15-year-old and a 5-year-old, there is never a valid reason to discuss that difference.
Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who has claimed that Epstein possessed thousands of graphic videos involving minors, also faced scrutiny as Kelly expressed doubt about her credibility. Kelly noted that she once believed Epstein was “an actual pedophile” but has since lost trust in Bondi’s reporting.
Critics on social media echoed Johnson’s sentiments, emphasizing that Kelly’s framing of Epstein’s actions is harmful and dismissive of the serious nature of sexual abuse. Advocacy groups for survivors have condemned her remarks, stating that minimizing the severity of Epstein’s decades-long pattern of coercion and trafficking poses a dangerous narrative.
Kelly has not issued any follow-up comments in response to the widespread backlash, leaving many to wonder what implications her statements may have for public understanding of sexual abuse.
This developing situation highlights the urgent need for responsible discourse surrounding sexual violence, particularly given the ongoing conversations about consent and accountability in society.
As the fallout continues, observers will be watching closely for Kelly’s next steps and any further reaction from advocacy groups and public figures. The conversation around these critical issues remains more relevant than ever.
