The 2016 Presidential election is shaping up to be uniquely important because of the open seat on the Supreme Court left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Today, Donald Trump made headlines today when he announced a list of potential candidates he would choose to fill the open vacancy. There is little doubt that this election could shape policy for decades to come. The Sean Hannity Show is live Monday through Friday from 3pm - 6pm ET. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
I think the big news by far today is Donald Trump has released, as he promised, a pool of names, candidates, potential replacements for Anton and Scalia and if other open vacancies open up on the Supreme Court.
And everybody that I have talked to so far in Washington, because it just got released, but I talked to a lot of people.
And Senator Sessions, I know, is on board.
And Senator Mike Lee, I know, is on board.
And a lot of people, the Heritage Foundation had a chance to look at the list ahead of time.
The Federalist Society apparently had an opportunity to look at the list ahead of time.
And Donald Trump has now named 11 potential Supreme Court justices.
Now, I have asked him many, many times, what kind of justice are you looking for?
He said he is looking for justices like Scalia, like Clarence Thomas, and he is now given names.
You know, I think this is a brilliant idea.
I can think of no other issue that is going to impact this country for generations more than the Supreme Court.
And the fact that he's willing to tell us ahead of time the type of justices giving names that he would put on the Supreme Court, his judicial philosophy, after conferring with some very well-respected conservative groups.
This is obviously not a list that Hillary Clinton would ever put out.
You know, I'm going to, I have Donald Trump for the hour tonight.
We'll talk about these people.
We'll talk about his judicial philosophy.
But more important, I think there's something bigger here that's going on.
And by that, I mean that Americans have lost all trust.
And this is not just Republicans.
Americans have lost trust in Washington.
They have no faith.
They have no confidence that the federal government is doing a job that benefits them and is helping their family as evidenced by all the numbers I give out every day about people suffering needlessly in part because of the government.
So if you're a conservative and maybe you're one of those never Trump guys, and if you can look at this list of Supreme Court justices, maybe this will open your mind.
Again, I'm not in the business of telling people who to vote for.
But maybe if you dug in a hard line and maybe if you said, oh, forget it, maybe this one issue that will impact this country for generations to come might be enough to persuade you not to vote for Hillary Clinton and to vote for Donald Trump.
But I think the idea that he's fulfilling promises, I think I'm going to make this a big part of the interview tonight.
Because in the course of interviewing all the candidates, including Donald Trump, I've asked and I've gotten answers on very specific things, like balancing the budget.
We can't keep robbing our kids, right?
He keeps promising about building a wall to protect American jobs and protect the American homeland.
How serious he is about those issues now that he's fulfilled this promise.
He said he'd do it before the election.
It's now even done before the convention.
He said he'd repeal Obamacare and replace with health savings accounts.
How important is that to him?
How important is energy independence to him?
We know where Hillary stands.
Hillary wants to put coal companies out of business and coal miners out of work.
And we know she's against all fracking.
And we know she's against drilling.
And we know she doesn't support nuclear energy.
Even the French get 75% of their energy through nuclear power.
They support new technology, but new technology is fine, except it's not ready for prime time.
You know, we know Donald Trump's position on the trade imbalances and demanding trade fairness.
I'll get into a little bit more.
Does that mean protectionist, or does that mean better deals that are negotiated?
We know that at least Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton, he'll acknowledge radical Islamic terrorism.
That's something Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama failed to do.
We know he's talked about rebuilding the military, fixing our broken VA, and finally taking care of vets and fulfilling a promise that we've made to all of them.
We know he's told me many times about ending Common Core and sending education back to the states.
I know he's talked about undoing executive orders of Obama.
But I think this is a great first step.
I've said that was one of my big, big items.
I think that releasing those names, you know, I want to know Ted Cruz's reaction to these names.
Mike Lee, I know, is favorable to it.
By the way, I'm sure his brother is actually on the list from Utah, Mike Lee's brother.
And I'm told by friends of mine in Utah that he is an extraordinarily brilliant justice.
I'm told by many people he's brilliant.
I talked to today.
He's also done something that I think is really smart that we don't often see in terms of picking Supreme Court justices.
He's actually taking justices on state Supreme Courts and put them on the list.
That's a pretty smart idea because they understand those positions and there's going to be a history of see where they're going.
I mean, John Roberts became a huge disappointment to conservatives.
I'd like to see that these promises once and for all might actually be kept.
I think that would be a pretty good idea.
So, well, anyway, we're going to analyze this throughout the program today, and there's so much else to get to with Donald Trump for the hour tonight.
You know, I watched Ivanka Trump was on with no, what's her name?
Nora O'Donnell.
Is your father a groper?
Now, keep in mind this 20-page New York Times expose, the New York Times that has been sued multiple times on race discrimination issues and gender discrimination issues and age discrimination issues.
They don't do 20-page exposés on themselves.
We've now, in the last three days, both on radio and TV, we have interviewed a vice president for the Trump organization, Sonata Adzom, and Roan Brewer-Lane.
And we interviewed Carrie Prejan yesterday, former Miss California.
And not only did they all deny it, they all said that their words were purposefully and maliciously taken out of context.
And so Ivanka Trump goes on CBS this morning, is your father a groper?
When are they going to ask Bill Clinton these questions?
You know, Bill Clinton was accused of rape.
Bill Clinton was accused of groping and grabbing and fondling and touching women against their will.
In that case, Kathleen Willey.
You know, Bill Clinton was accused of exposing his penis to a worker when he was, what, the Attorney General of Arkansas.
He ended up paying $850,000, losing his law license, being impeached over the whole issue.
It's pretty incredible.
And now, you know, you have to answer questions about this?
A debunked story?
Unbelievable.
Now, if you're watching last night, we don't even know.
I guess the final results are, what, that Hillary barely eked out Kentucky?
What, like 1,500 votes or something, 2,000 votes, less than that?
Well, I mean, it's pretty unbelievable.
Here's the sickest thing.
And if you're a Democrat and you support Bernie Sanders, you should be absolutely apoplectic and livid.
You know, I'll give you an example in West Virginia.
Bernie Sanders wins 5,136.
All right, so winning the state of West Virginia got him 18 delegates, and it gave, because it's proportional distribution, it gave Hillary 11.
Well, then you come in with the super delegates.
They don't care about the will of the people in West Virginia.
In other words, the people that maybe work in the coal industry or coal mining companies.
So even though he wins 5136, once you kick in the superdelegates in West Virginia, well, Bernie Sanders gets 19 delegates to Hillary's 18 delegates.
Could a system be more corrupt and rigged in a Democratic system?
Wow.
You know, you talk about Hillary Clinton.
You know, this woman on so many levels is just bought and paid for.
Look at the money, the story that we had coming out.
We have the Clinton Foundation, a global initiative.
Well, now they're funneling money to Bill Clinton's alleged girlfriend, the energizer, up in Chappaqua, a couple of million dollars.
Also getting government grants because Bill Clinton wanted them.
I mean, she's a horrible candidate.
Totally bought and paid for by Wall Street and these banks.
Why do you think, why do you think that they don't want to release these speeches that she gave?
Now, imagine this.
What's the average pay in America today?
About $50,000 a year, somewhere in their median income across the country.
Okay, she's getting $200,000, $250,000 for an hour speech and maybe a couple of pictures and a photo line?
Okay, that's like five times what the average American makes a year for an hour.
Well, why are they giving her all this money?
And what is she saying to them in these meetings?
Why does the Clinton Foundation take money from the Saudis?
The Saudis who don't let women drive or leave the house without male relatives and women are told what to wear and women can't vote.
I mean, women are treated horribly, abused.
And the same with other countries under Sharia that she's taken money from and the Clinton Foundation has taken money from.
So you got a rigged system for a terrible candidate that is corrupt up to her eyeballs.
And I'm not even talking about the email server scandal and the lies we know there.
I mean, think of all the lies.
I neither sent nor received classified documents.
I neither sent nor received classified documents that were marked.
And then it turns out all of that is true.
Not only were they classified, many were top secret and many even above top secret classification, secret access, special access program classification.
Then you got Benghazi.
We know she lied about Benghazi.
We know because she was emailing her own daughter in the Libyan president and the Egyptian prime minister, oh, this is a terror attack, while simultaneously telling you, the American people, oh, this was related to a YouTube video.
It appears that lie got started by the propagandist Ben Rhodes.
He lied about the YouTube video, according to the Wall Street Journal, back in April of that year.
And Ben Rhodes, we now know, also bragged about how he manipulated and propagandized the media to sell an Iranian deal they knew they wouldn't sell if they told you the truth about it.
Where's Hillary going to come down on this bill that was passed by the Senate yesterday unanimously?
That the Saudis apparently are up to their eyeballs in supporting the 9-11 terrorists that would allow the families of those murdered that day in the vicious terror attack to sue Saudi Arabia.
Great.
There's so many different issues here.
You know, the Saudis buy, you know, especially as it relates to women.
That's what makes this whole issue of this gender attack, Donald Trump, so outrageous because they could do weeks' worth of investigative work.
Why did Hillary take money from the Saudis and the UAE and Qatar and Kuwait that treat women horribly?
Why did she take their money and never criticize them for their treatment of women?
Why did Hillary Clinton never speak out about the many numerous women that say that Bill assaulted them?
Not just had affairs with them.
Consensual, all right, that's a whole different ballgame.
But when you drop your pants and you expose yourself, that's a sickness.
When you grope, grab, fondle, and touch and kiss against some woman's will.
That seems like a bigger story than this manufactured New York Times story about Donald Trump.
Same thing with Juanita Broderick.
That's an outright charge of rape.
Anyway, I'm going to ask Trump about it tonight.
We've got so much to get to today.
We're going to examine this list that Donald Trump has unveiled of 11 potential Supreme Court justices.
He'll be on tonight on Hannity.
We'll talk about the other promises he's made during this election, talk about Hillary Clinton.
We'll talk about cabinet officials, whether or not he likes the idea of a team of rivals, and much more.
Big announcement by Donald Trump today.
He has fulfilled his promise, and true to his word, he has released the list of people he intends to choose to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court, 11 people.
We're going to have more details on that coming up in a few minutes.
Now, but you've got to go back to last night here.
First of all, you got Bernie Sanders saying, wait a minute, there's a lot of election fraud reports from Kentucky, and he may demand a recount because it's a razor-thin margin.
I mean, Kentucky's a state that Hillary won by 35 percentage points over Obama in 2008, where her family has deep political roots that go back decades.
She only won yesterday.
I mean, she spent more time, more money crisscrossing the state of Kentucky, going to all these different events, and despite that, it's 46.8% to 46.3%.
I mean, it just can't get any closer.
It is not good for the Clintons.
It shows how weak she is.
Now, before making some observations here, I want to give you some of the delegate math.
According to the latest estimates, Clinton and Sanders will both win 26 delegates with three remaining to be decided.
In Oregon, Sanders will win 31 delegates, and Clinton will take 20, 10 remaining to be accounted for.
And to date, Hillary has 2,289, 1,768 are pledged.
She gets 521 of the superdelegates.
Go back to West Virginia.
Bernie Sanders wins the state 5136.
And because of superdelegates, he gets 19.
He wins the state by a massive margin.
They totally rip him off.
It's totally rigged for Hillary.
Why are you guys shaking your heads in there?
What's the matter?
Something's up.
What is it?
No, come on, what is it?
Because it's so distracting when you look so annoyed.
I'm not annoyed at all.
In fact, I was just saying to them, I was like, man, he is all over this list.
It's really good.
Okay, but my point to you is I'm looking at you guys, and you look like you're having a serious destruction.
I literally just said to the team, I was like, man, Sean is all over this.
This is really good coverage.
This is huge.
This list, I'm so glad that we're talking about it.
He was lying through your teeth.
I'm totally not.
Jason, did she say that?
Yes or no?
You're not going to lie.
Jason doesn't lie.
Why are you trying to cause a division?
No, I just want to.
Why are you doing this?
Because she's lying.
Okay, I just said that I'm having the worst day ever, and I just got a text from my building that they turned off my gas, and I'm not going to be able to use my gas range until further notice.
And I said, I'm going to go jump down the elevator shot.
I don't want anybody looking for me.
That's what I just said.
Would you like to bring Lenny and the baby to my house tonight?
You can.
No, thank you, but it's very kind of you.
I'll give you your own space.
Put us in the west wing.
They'll put you in the west wing of the Hannity compound.
I apologize.
You now have my uncle.
I'll give you Bob Beckley's room.
All right, so according to the estimates, so it's like West Virginia.
You know, he wins 5136, but they split the delegates.
And to date, Hillary has all of these.
She gets 521 superdelegates.
That's how corrupt this is.
Without the super delegates, you've got Sanders with 1,522, so it's 1768 to 1,481.
This is a much, much closer race than anybody anticipated.
Bernie only gets 41 superdelegates.
It's so corrupt.
It's rigged.
The whole thing is rigged for Hillary.
And the big story that's emerging is now there's a crackup as a result of this whole system in the Democratic Party being so corrupt.
I know the media's attention, they're focused on the Republican contest, but the Democrats are more divided than the Republicans.
Now, yesterday's results highlighting the deepening divide.
They split last night.
Clinton ekes out a victory.
I'm sorry, 46.8 to 46.3.
Sanders crushes her in Oregon.
Sanders has now won 21 states.
Clinton's won 27.
It's a neck and neck race.
And for another reason, Sanders gave no indication he's letting up, despite Hillary's lead in the delegates.
We are in until the last ballot is cast.
Sanders telling supporters in a rally in Carson, California last night.
But what really caught people's eyes was what I played for you earlier in the week, what happened during last weekend state party convention in Nevada, and there was just about a brawl that broke out there and the constant booing at the mere mention of Hillary Clinton's names.
And you have speakers shouted down during the convention, Hillary being booed repeatedly, a fight over the rules.
They slap the gavel down and they run out.
It's so corrupt.
Harry Reid said Tuesday that he spoke to Sanders about the incidents and he's confident that Bernie would speak out against the violence of his supporters.
He called it a test of leadership for Bernie Sanders.
No, it's not.
Bernie Sanders supporters are getting ripped off royally.
The system is totally, biasly rigged for Hillary.
And the notion that Harry Reid could admonish anyone and demand they pass a test of leadership, that's laughable.
And Sanders thought so too.
He responded not with an apology, but a pretty contentious rebuke.
He actually ended up saying in a statement that Democratic leaders must understand that the political world is changing and millions of Americans are outraged at the political and economic establishment.
He's right.
They're stealing the nomination from him.
They are absolutely giving it, handing it over to Hillary Clinton.
Now, later at his rally in California, Sanders suggested that there'd be consequences for these Democratic Party leaders if they don't change the rules to expand participation for independents and newcomers.
And if Democrats are to win in November, he said that it goes without saying that I condemn any violence, but they've earned the anger of the people, he went on to say.
Now, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, of all people, told CNN that Sanders' response added more fuel to the fire.
You know, after I heard that Senator Reed had had, that Leader Reed had had a conversation with Senator Sanders and he publicly announced that he felt that Senator Sanders was going to respond appropriately and issue a statement.
I was comfortable that one conversation was enough.
Unfortunately, the senator's response was anything but acceptable.
It certainly did not condemn his supporters for acting violently or engaging in intimidation tactics and instead added more fuel to the fire.
Like I said, you can be frustrated with the process, but in the United States of America and especially in the Democratic Party.
Play Barbara Boxer.
Let's get Barbara Boxer.
Now, I'm going to tell you something.
If you're Bernie Sanders supporters and you're at the state convention and your guy's getting screwed and Barbara Boxer is calling for unity and you're booing because you're getting screwed, that does not make you a bad person.
And the fact that one or two people got in a scuffle, you can't blame Bernie Sanders for.
He's a 74-year-old curmudgeon.
You know, you could push him over with a feather for crying out loud.
He's not the type of guy that's going to engage in violence.
I bring a message from Bernie Sanders.
And I bring a message from Hillary Clinton.
We need civility in the Democratic Party.
Civility.
Because the whole future of the country is at stake.
That when you boo me, you're booing Bernie Sanders.
Go ahead.
You're booing Bernie Sanders.
Bernie is my friend.
You want to boo Bernie?
Boo me.
Go on.
Go up.
You're booing Bernie.
You're booing Bernie.
Let's hear it for Hillary Clinton.
All right.
We have the vote.
We have the voice.
We have victory.
Yay!
That is Senator Barbara Boxer from California.
You know something?
I grew up in Brooklyn.
I am not afraid of bullies.
I'm for Hillary Clinton, but she's for all of us.
So keep on booing and boo yourselves out of this election.
Go ahead.
Yeah Wow That is amazing.
That's a crackup.
Unbelievable.
Anyway, 800-941 Sean is autofree telephone numbers.
We're watching all of this here.
By the way, Lori Wyndham of the Beckett Fund has taken a look at this list of possible Supreme Court justices, this list of Donald Trump.
Had stayed true to his word, and he just released a list of people he intends to choose to fill the vacancies on the Supreme Court.
Laurie, I've talked to a number of people.
I have every single solitary one of them appraising this list if you believe in originalism in the Constitution.
What's your thoughts?
Well, Sean, thanks for having me on.
I was happy to see this list today, especially looking at it from a religious liberty perspective.
There are some judges on this list who have written some really great opinions protecting, respecting the First Amendment and protecting the right of free exercise, protecting groups like Eternal Ward Television Network from having to comply with Obama's HHS mandate that would force them to provide abortion-causing drugs to their employees.
Would you say your early perusal of this list that Trump fulfilled his promise to appoint to name justices that are in the realm of Scalia and Justice Thomas?
You know, I would say that we definitely have some judges on this list who have made some great decisions that would protect religious liberty and uphold the Constitution.
I have a look at the history of every single judge on this list, but I would say that I am very encouraged.
Wow.
So as a conservative, if you liked Scalia and you like Clarence Thomas, they're my two favorite justices, and I'm sad we lost Scalia, you would say that it's likely that they are constitutionalist, originalists like those two.
You say your early perusal will tell you that.
Yeah, the early perusal shows that there are some excellent judges on this list.
All right, we really appreciate you telling us.
We're going to have more information and more analysis on this coming throughout the program.
Thank you.
Thank you, Sean.
Appreciate it.
And anyway, the Sanders campaign is being accused of being dishonest and starting violence.
We believe that the tactics and behavior on display in Nevada are harbingers of things to come as Democrats gather in Philadelphia in July for our convention.
Wow.
The state's party attorney wrote a formal complaint to the Democratic National Committee.
This comes from a Democratic State Party lawyer.
Bloomberg goes on to report Democrats, including some of Sanders' Senate colleagues, piled up complaints and admonitions to allow Clinton to concentrate on the general election against Trump.
So they're trying to get his entire group of people.
I mean, this is crazy.
Then there was a fight on CNN.
It was hilarious.
You got Bill Press as a walking talking point.
I don't know who's worse, him or Bagala, the two most unlikable people on television, maybe along with Chris Matthews, but Bill Press and Hillary Rosen butted heads on CNN this morning over Bernie Sanders' fight with the Democratic Party.
And I think Debbie Wasserman Schultz learned some lessons from Bright's previous about being impartial.
You've got to be kidding, Rosen said.
Rosen is a huge Hillary hack.
I think that's so funny.
And then you've got Senator Feinstein.
She commented on the Democratic chaos.
I don't want to go back to the 68 convention.
How much does it worry you that he wants to take this to the convention in July?
Well, it worries me a great deal.
You know, I don't want to go back to the 68 convention because I worry about what it does to the electorate as a whole, and he should too.
Wow.
Donald Trump demonstrated today that he meant business when he vowed to wage a no-holds-barred campaign.
I'll ask him about this tonight.
He's on for the hour, zeroing in on reports that former President Clinton is having an affair with this woman in Chappaqua.
Now, that story is important because the Clinton Global Initiative literally farmed all this money out to this woman, the Energizer, apparently has a Secret Service name.
Carl Rove and his group, American Crossroads, has called on the IRS to now audit the Clinton Foundation.
Judicial Watch has started grilling Hillary AIDS as of tomorrow, and that includes Brian Pagliano.
I keep telling you, remember that name?
And Uma Aberdeen and Cheryl Mills, and then hopefully eventually Hillary Clinton.
And Carl Rove also called on the IRS to audit the Clinton Foundation for other reasons.
You got a top liberal TV host calling on Debbie Wasserman Schultz to resign over the Bernie fiasco, Mika of the Joe and Mika show.
I don't know if anybody watches it, but that's who said it.
Yeah.
I mean, that's where it all started.
I mean, with rigging the debates.
And it all started with rigging the debates.
No violence is acceptable.
No violence is acceptable.
They've not only rigged the debates, they've rigged the whole system to go to Hillary.
Oh, you know what Ed Rendell said, a Hillary friend?
He said, well, you know, will he have some appeal with working-class Democrats in Pennsylvania?
Sure, he said.
For every one, he's going to lose one and a half, two Republican women.
You know, you can't be a 10 if you're flat-chested.
That'll come back to haunt him.
There are probably more ugly women in America than attractive women, and people take that seriously and personally.
So Ed Rendell said today that ugly women will back Hillary.
Good grief.
I will also say a word to the leadership of the Democratic Party.
It is that the Democratic Party is going to have to make a very, very profound and important decision.
It can do the right thing and open its doors and welcome into the party people who are prepared to fight for real economic and social change.
That is the Democratic Party I want to see bringing in people who are willing to take on Wall Street.
So I say to the leadership of the Democratic Party, open the doors, let the people in.
All right, one of two big stories we're following today, the deepening divide within the Democratic ranks.
That was the 74-year-old grumpy curmudgeon socialist from Vermont, Bernie Sanders.
And you have this deepening divide now, a crackup that's occurring within the Democratic Party.
We saw it on display not only last night, but last Saturday in Nevada.
And, of course, Donald Trump today, true to his word, has released a list of people he intends to choose to fill vacancies for the Supreme Court.
We have new polls out now showing Donald Trump up by three points in the latest national poll against Hillary Clinton.
A dramatic shift is now taking place right before our eyes.
Fran Coombs is the managing editor of Rasmussen Reports.
Doug Schoen, pollster, author, political analyst, Fox News columnist.
And welcome both of you back to the program.
Thank you.
Thanks so much, Sean.
Thanks, Sean.
Fran, what do you make?
Number one, I think it was a stroke of genius that Donald Trump unveiled the list of potential Supreme Court nominees.
Every single conservative I have spoken with is ecstatic with this list.
I couldn't agree more.
I think this will really give the Never Trump people pause.
And I mean, they're reduced at this point.
I think I saw one comment where somebody was saying, well, can you believe he'll actually do this?
By the way, it had to be Red State.
I'm not going to be able to get these kind of nominees.
Yeah.
Republicans.
Yeah, listen, this is massive because maybe even more than what any one president could ever get done, this is going to impact American culture and society for generations.
And it's not just one Supreme Court justice.
I suspect there's going to be many.
Yeah, I agree.
And I mean, some of these names are priceless, too.
The ex-wife of a guy, the radio host that criticized him in Wisconsin, Mike Lee's brother in Utah.
You know, this guy, Willett, who was firing out Twitter's attacking Trump.
So it's a very interesting list.
Yeah, a lot of thought obviously went into it.
I also thought it was fairly clever, and I think it's a pool of candidates that's not often considered, and that is state Supreme Court justices are on this list.
That was pretty smart.
Mike League's brother.
So I think you raise a good point there.
So while the Republicans, I think this is going to go a long way to maybe bring over some of the Ted Cruz people, Doug Shoan, and solidify support among the Republican ranks because it's such a big issue.
And meanwhile, you got a crackup.
You saw what happened in Nevada, and you saw what Bernie Sanders said last night and the reaction that got.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Party, she barely beat Bernie Sanders.
We don't even know if she really won Kentucky.
It's 46.8 to 46.3, and she got massacred in Oregon.
Sean, look, let me speak to the second point.
And let me be candid.
I, as you know, am a forthright supporter of Secretary Clinton.
This is very bad news, very bad news for her.
It is increasingly likely she will not be able to achieve unity at the convention without substantial discord and potential demonstrations, perhaps even violence.
We were concerned that this would be a problem for the Republicans.
It's now a problem for the Democrats.
With Trump surging in the polls, I don't think he's necessarily gotten all that much stronger.
But day in and day out, Hillary is looking weaker and weaker, and her candidacy is more and more in jeopardy.
I can't agree with you more.
Let me go over some of her problems.
She has no warmth like her husband.
She has no oratory skills like Obama.
She is, and I think I'm being charitable.
She's mediocre at best as a politician.
Now, you add to that the email server scandal.
We don't know how that's going to end.
You add to that Benghazi ads.
You add to that Bill's abuse and her enabling of the abuse of all of these women, which they thought would be a Trump vulnerability.
It's going to backfire on them.
You add to that the money she took from the Saudis and all these countries that have atrocious records for women on human rights issues.
You add to that, you know, the Clinton Global Initiative, you know, funneling money to Bill Clinton's girlfriend.
You add to that, you know, the polls now, and then Bernie Sanders supporters feel this whole thing is rigged, and it is rigged.
I mean, Bernie Sanders won 56 to 31 in West Virginia, and they split the delegates because the super delegates were all handed to Hillary for free.
And if I'm a Bernie supporter, I'm saying, screw this.
I'm out of here.
Yeah, there are two things, Sean.
Fascinating, Sean.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz actually said to CNN a couple months ago that the whole point of the superdelegate system was to basically ace out grassroots activists.
I mean, I was stunned that she was that honest about it.
To me, there are two implications.
First, the platform will be a hard left platform.
Bernie will demand it.
And second, Bernie is going to have far more say over who Secretary Clinton's vice president is than we would have ever imagined.
So, does she have to go to Bernie and say, Bernie, run with me?
A socialist?
A 74-year-old socialist?
She's going to have to say, Bernie, how do we do this?
I don't think she wants to run with him.
I don't think he wants to run with her.
But he's in the driver's seat now.
He is effectively the most powerful Democrat.
And you and I have talked about, Sean.
We saw in West Virginia, I suspect, yesterday as well.
The exit polls are showing the Sanders vote moving in Trump's direction.
All right, so now he's forcing her, and she spent all this time in Kentucky.
He's forcing her further and further to the left.
That's all going to be used in a general election campaign against her.
As, you know, who would have thought 17 Republicans would finish before Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders?
That's exactly right.
And now the Trump campaign is spending all their time preparing for the convention and strategizing how they're going to win states and raising money for the general election.
It's such a big advantage.
The only thing I can tell you is Secretary Clinton will have close to $2 billion.
She will run a huge, huge negative campaign on Bernie Sanders.
And look, I've worked with him, Sean.
These are serious people.
They play for Keeps.
You're talking about Donald Trump, not Bernie Sanders.
I'm talking about Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton.
They know how to fight.
So I'm not ready to concede anything.
And Donald Trump doesn't know how to fight?
Oh, he's done a remarkable job.
I'd be the first one to say that.
But she's got an infrastructure.
She will have unlimited resources.
And it isn't clear to me that Donald will be able to match her.
Yeah, the problem for her, though, is that she has to, as you've been saying very well, Doug, she has to hold the party together, though.
I mean, her biggest problem right now is not Donald Trump.
Her biggest problem is keeping the Democratic Party from imploding.
That's what I was saying, precisely.
So does that mean she has to go to Elizabeth Warren as VP?
She'd hate that.
She goes to whoever Bernie tells her to go to.
And who's Bernie going to tell her to go to?
I don't know.
Bernie has not been supported by Elizabeth Warren yet, but, you know, we will see.
But right now, the most powerful Democrat in America is Senator Santers.
By the way, I don't think he's a Democrat, isn't he?
A socialist?
Well, he is a socialist.
I'm a capitalist, Sean.
He doesn't think the way I do.
And most mainstream people.
Now, think about this.
Now, you got Trump who's meeting with Kissinger today.
You got Trump who announces, I think he's consolidating even people that are never Trump.
I think when they look at this list, if you're a conservative, if you like Scalia and you like Justice Thomas, and you're an originalist and you're a constitutionalist, you know, because remember, towards the end of this race, Ted Cruz was saying that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are exactly the same, and he's going to appoint liberal justices.
Well, this is not a list of liberal justices.
Don't you think this goes a long way to consolidating conservatives?
It consolidates conservatives and gives Hillary an argument for the general election for independence to get those who are not originalists.
Okay.
But honestly, are most people going to be that?
I think this doesn't necessarily impact the independent.
This impacts the base.
This impacts the Ted Cruz supporters that were disappointed.
The Democratic base does not want originalists and those who oppose choice.
They just don't.
So it's good for Hillary as well.
I get your point, but there's another side of it.
But every Republican, too, knows the type of justice she'd appoint.
That is it.
But the point, the key thing that Trump is doing right now is that he's pulling his party together at a time when everyone thought Hillary would be doing that, and she's having to do just the opposite.
So obviously Trump's getting a big jumpstart on her here by being able to do this.
Who do you guys think would be the best VP?
And I'm saying from my own knowledge, I don't see John Kasich doing it, and I don't see Marco Rubio doing it.
Take those two out.
Fran, who do you think would be the best person for him to pick?
You know, I'm guessing that he would probably want to go with someone like a Nikki Haley or a Susanna Martinez.
He puts a woman on the ticket.
He shows a little cultural diversity, if you will.
How about this?
How about if he picked Newt Gingrich and found another position for Susanna Martinez and Nikki Haley and Ben Carson and Bobby Jindal and Rick Perry and maybe even Scott Walker or Rick Scott?
Right.
Well, I think we can assume that's all those guys are in line for, I would think, pretty decent.
And by the way, I didn't mention Rudy Giuliani or Chris Christie either.
I just don't know what Newt brings to the ticket.
I mean, I think Trump is going to get more and more of the conservative vote as the time goes on, and I'm not sure that Newt brings that much more to him.
I think he's going to be bring the South and the best governing politician in our time.
Yeah, well, I mean, there's no doubt that Newt is a very savvy guy, but I think he can benefit Trump more, perhaps not as his running mate, but as a close advisor, and then he would get a key job, I would think, in the administration.
Sean, Newt's a friend of mine.
I like him a lot.
High, high negative.
Somebody we ran against successfully in 96.
To me, what I told you last night, I continue to believe the most important person to bring into his fold as the Secretary of State is John Bolton, who will address fundamentally the issue of national security, fighting Islamic fascism, taking on Iran, North Korea, and pushing back against Russia and China.
That will address huge, huge problems.
I don't think for vice president, though.
No, I said for Secretary of State.
Sean, we're in a war now.
You've said it.
I've said it.
You know it's going on.
We need to be assured that it's not this America First defense where we're cutting money, we're breaking up Europe.
We need to stand firm with our allies.
You know it.
I know it.
It's the central question of our time.
Hey, but America First is not synonymous with being weak and breaking up our defense.
And I don't agree with that, and I don't think voters agree with that.
I think America First is putting America's interests first.
That's really all that means.
That doesn't mean a weak military or anything like that.
So I think we have to be careful not to.
I mean, Trump is not going to repudiate America First, and I think that's what many voters find attractive in his policies.
I think it's time to pay our attention to America First, because you know what?
I got to tell you, I can't stand that wars have been politicized.
We win them, and then we give back our victory after we lose so much American treasure and our sons and our daughters, and they lose their limbs.
But you know what?
ISIS is coming, Sean.
They've said it over and over.
Yeah, I know they're coming.
The central organizing principle of our defense, we are all at risk because they're not going to ask ideology.
But I got to tell you.
I understand that.
But I honestly think America is going to have to come to grips with a reality.
Either we're going to go door to door with Humvees that aren't up armored and bang on the doors and watch Americans get their legs blown off again, or we've got to be willing to take collateral damage to knock these people out, meaning on their side, not our side.
And if we're going to fight a war, that means that innocent people are going to die, and we have such an aversion to it that we can't fight a war.
And then you add the rules of engagement on top of it.
We can't shoot till we're fired upon, and these guys are sitting ducks.
It's ridiculous.
That's a mistake Can be changed, must be changed, and needs to be changed if we're to stabilize the world, as you and I have discussed many times.
All right, Fran, thank you.
And Doug Sean, thank you.
We have Donald Trump for the hour tonight.
He has unveiled a list of 11 potential Supreme Court justices, the type of justices he's looking at to put on the Supreme Court.
And here to, well, give us a little bit more information about who these justices are and giving us some background.
Carrie Saravino is a chief counsel policy director of the Judicial Crisis Network.
And she knows a lot of the people on this list, and she's here to give us some insight.
How are you?
Great.
How are you doing?
Well, I noticed that Mike Lee's brother, Thomas Lee, is on the list.
I noticed William Pryor of Alabama is on the list.
And David Strauss of Minnesota and Diane Sykes of Wisconsin and Don Willet of Texas and Thomas Harridman of Pennsylvania.
And what can you tell us about these people?
Yeah, I think it's really, there are a few interesting points you can see.
One is everyone he's looked at is already sitting on the bench somewhere.
Either a state Supreme Court or a federal appellate court.
And I think that's a great sign because it shows you've got someone who has a judicial track record, who has a record we can really look at to see how are they going to judge things.
What is their judicial philosophy?
And I also think it's really significant to see that a lot of them are state Supreme Court judges, like Justice Lee, you mentioned, Alice A. Bride from Colorado, etc.
There's, I think, three or four of them who are Supreme Court justices in state.
That gives you an even better window into someone's judicial philosophy because they're already on a state court of last resort.
They don't have to obey.
You know what's fascinating to me?
You don't often see state Supreme Court justices nominated for the Supreme Court.
I thought that was actually a brilliant move because for the reasons you're citing.
Yeah, you don't have the, you know, at the appellate level, federal appellate level, they can just kind of, you know, pawn off.
They say, oh, well, I have to follow what the Supreme Court says.
And the state Supreme Courts do on federal issues, but on state issues, they've got a lot of free reign.
So you have a real great view of how they really approach these issues.
Because when they're on the federal Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court, that's what you'll get.
You'll get a really untrammeled view of their judicial perspective.
Here's what he told me in the past, that he was looking for justices that he viewed as originalist and constitutionalist, just like Scalia and Thomas.
Does this list from your perspective, and I know we'll learn more in the days to come, does that meet that criteria?
Yeah, well, I mean, he's actually got a lot of people on the list who have even clerked for Justices Scalia and Thomas in the past.
I noticed that.
I think he's got the, you know, I haven't had a chance to fully met the list.
I just saw it myself.
But there's some people with great histories and great record of standing up for principle when it counts.
I think that's really important, too.
Not just that you know how to say what the principles are, but then there's a tough decision that you actually stick to them.
And I think that's really important as well.
Plus, you see, it's interesting, a lot of them are from kind of the Midwest.
It's not just, you see people from New York City and the big coasts and D.C. You really see a cross-section of the country here.
And I think that that provides some interesting perspective that right now we don't have on the court where we've got all five boroughs of New York represented, but we don't have a huge swath of the country that you have anyone from.
That's an interesting thing.
So an early perusal of this list, if you're an originalist and you want somebody like Scalia or Thomas on the bench, you think this is a good list.
I actually do.
I mean, these are people who would have been on my own Supreme Court shortlist.
There were some really impressive people, some heavy hitters who are well-known in the conservative legal movement and are well respected.
So I actually think he did a great job.
I know that he was talking to a lot of people at groups like the Federalist Society, like the Heritage Foundation, asking members of Congress for their input.
And I think it sounds like he took some very good advice.
Well, it seems like the criteria that he had set out in past interviews with me, he followed.
Now, one of the things I want to ask Mr. Trump tonight, because I know that there have been conservatives.
For example, at the end of the campaign, Ted Cruz kept saying, oh, Hillary and Donald Trump are exactly alike.
Are there anybody on this list that Hillary would even consider?
Oh, no, no, no, absolutely not.
I think this is the issue where the contrast is the most market, because if you look at the list of things that Hillary Clinton has said she wants to do at the Supreme Court, it's incredible.
She wants someone who's going to undermine our Second Amendment rights, undermine our First Amendment rights, you know, the right to give political donations, the right to abortion, religious freedom, the immigration action that the president has done.
You know, almost you name the hot button issue, and she wants to have someone who's going to defend it the kind of policies President Obama has been doing in court.
And that's the opposite of what we see on this list.
So I think this is an issue that actually does provide a lot more contrast than almost any other between Trump and Clinton.
You know, Kerry, I can't thank you enough.
That's very insightful.
We really appreciate what you have to say.
And I think this will go a long way for conservatives in particular.
I don't think there's any more important issue than who ends up on the court, considering it will impact the country for generations to come.
And the next president is likely to appoint anywhere between one and at least one, maybe as many as five for crying out loud, Supreme Court justices.
So it's an important issue.
Thank you, Carrie.
Thanks.
Thanks, Abby.
All right, 800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
Ken is in Michigan.
Ken, hi.
How are you?
Glad you called.
Hi, Sean.
Glad to talk to you.
Yesterday you were talking about the ladies saying that the New York Times piece was turned around and wrote in a different manner than what it was spoke as.
I think the New York Times ought to be sued for a monitor, you know, for a small amount of money, and the ladies can donate it or do whatever they want with it.
And anything extra they get, they ought to be able to do a Republican, ma'am, sir?
It's the hardest thing to prove malice if you're a public figure.
It is so hard.
Although, I guess you could probably argue, you know, in the case of some of these women, I think now that I think about it, that they're not necessarily public figures.
No, sir.
Well, you know, it's just that you report the news and you write down what you're told and you put it out and make it into news.
You don't take the stuff, turn it around, twist your words around, take three or four words out of this sentence and three or four out of that sentence and slice them together and make the statement.
Yeah, very well said.
Wrong.
Look, to hear all of these women simultaneously say the exact same thing that they were purposefully taken out of context by the New York Times, it is such a stain on whatever reputation they may have.
I got to tell you, you know, look, I interviewed enough of these women, and I got to tell you, I interviewed Carrie Prajan last night on TV and here yesterday on the radio, Roanne Brewer-Lane, Sonata Adzom, all these women that work for Trump and are furious at what was said about them and how they were mischaracterized on purpose, and they all say the same thing.
That's pretty powerful.
And that story now has collapsed of its own weight.
It proves once again what I have always said, the media is abusively biased.
Journalism died in 2007 and 2008.
And the New York Times has all these lawsuits against them on issues involving gender discrimination and race discrimination, age discrimination.
And they're going to write a 20-page expose on Donald Trump.
It's pathetic.
Anyway, thank you.
I appreciate it.
800-941 Sean, you want to be a part of the program?
Lakeland, Florida.
Marsha next on the Sean Hannity Show.
What's up?
Marcia, are you there?
Just wanted to tell you that I'm a small business owner of about 300 clients.
Wow.
Good for you.
And all of them are for Trump.
And I have one couple that has been campaigning for Sanders.
And I was shocked to hear her tell me the other day that if she were me, she would vote for Trump.
So my thoughts are: if more people are thinking that way, that they don't want Hillary in there, then this may be a bigger landslide than expected.
Listen, if Mike Lee supports this judicial list, and I know his brother's on it, but I don't think that's why he's supporting it.
And if the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation have all signed off on this list, it shows, number one, that Donald Trump's serious about keeping his promises.
One of the things I want to do tonight, because I've had so many interviews with him, and I think a lot of people miss what he has said to me in these interviews.
I'm going to go through: do you really mean this promise?
Do you really mean that promise?
How important to you is it to get this done?
You know, because at that point, you know, one of the things that I think people are so frustrated about is politicians never keep their word.
I think by doing this, he's showing people he's serious.
Hey, this is my list.
These are my guys.
These are the types of people I want.
And I think it's very revealing.
So, anyway, good call.
Appreciate it.
John in California.
John, how are you?
Hi, Sean.
I love your program, but I want to respectfully disagree with the Paul Ryan issue.
I think Trump needs to appeal to the Republican Party, especially the conservative base, and show us who he is and what he stands for.
As you know, he's changed his mind on many issues.
He's for a minimum wage.
He's against minimum wage.
On the hypothetical, he thought women should be punished for abortion, then they shouldn't be punished.
His manager touched the girl, then he didn't touch the girl.
And then he made a comment that really irked me when he said, it's not the conservative party, it's the Republican Party.
And he's running that he is the conservative.
So he needs like a list or contract like you suggested.
He needs to come out and say, these are my values.
This is what I stand for.
I can respect, if I disagree with them, that's okay.
At least I can go out there and solicit my friends and say, I'm voting for Trump because this is what he believes in.
This is what he stands for.
But if I go to somebody, Trump says it's one thing in the morning and another thing at night, he's flip-flopping on too many things and I don't like it.
You know what?
I've clarified the issue.
For example, on tax cuts or raising taxes, he said, no, what I was saying is they will be lower, but I said it's negotiable, but it's going to still end up lower than what it is.
I asked him about the minimum wage, and he said, well, it's got to be the states that decide, not the federal government.
There shouldn't be a federal minimum wage.
Living in New York, you're going to pay $2,000 for a closet to live in.
Well, in Alabama, you're going to have a five-bedroom mansion for $7.50,000.
So it's a very different environment, and $15 an hour means one thing in Alabama and another thing in New York, I know, because I've lived in both states.
So anyway, I appreciate it.
Elizabeth and Virginia Beach, what's up, Elizabeth?
How are you?
Hi, Sean.
Thanks for taking my call.
Thank you.
What's going on?
Well, I'm a millennial, and I'm a Trump supporter.
And I just wanted to comment on his SCOTUS list.
I think as a millennial, something that we really kind of talk about a lot is transparency in government, and we feel like there isn't any.
And I think it's awesome that he's actually supplied a list like that.
So we're able to go, you know, I think it just allows people, you know, in our generation to be able to say, okay, look, he's being up front with us instead of this timeless ideology that politicians are just all liars and say one thing and do something completely different.
I think, and this is going to be a big part of my focus in the interview tonight because we have them for the hour, so I have a lot of time.
We'll talk about the New York Times, we'll talk about the hip piece, we're going to talk about a lot of things.
But the one thing I want to really get into is: okay, now you made this promise and you fulfilled it.
How important are all these other promises you've made?
Because I think if he can instill confidence that he means what he says about energy independence and balancing the budget and building the wall and these justices, I think that goes a long, long way to helping sort of bridge the gap of trust that has been broken because Republicans have failed so poorly.
Make sense?
Totally agree.
Yeah, definitely.
And Hillary's not going to do that.
You know, she's proven that she's lied time and time again.
And that kind of, you know, as a segue into the whole Saudi Arabia thing, I think that it's good that maybe they're going to be held accountable for their involvement in terrorism.
And Hillary Clinton's never going to do that.
I got a roll.
Thank you so much, Elizabeth.
We're glad you called 800-941 Sean.
You want to be a part of the program.
Thank you for being with us.
Oh, I meant to play this earlier.
Josh Ernest, the propagandist, trying to quell down all the internal intramural fighting within the Democratic Party.
Listen to this.
I do feel confident, though I did not specifically do this myself, that if you were to Google news coverage from May 18th, 2008, the tenor of the coverage would be quite similar to the tenor of the coverage today.
There would be all kinds of hand-wringing among party activists about whether or not the party would come together after a divisive primary between Senator Obama and Senator Clinton.
There would be pundits with decades of electoral experience posing difficult questions about whether or not it is even possible, given the passion of Clinton supporters, for even somebody with all the skills of Senator Obama to unite the Democratic Party.
There would be Republicans salivating at the prospect of a divided Democratic Party limping into a general election, giving an advantage to the Republican nominee.
I guess the point is that we've seen a lot of this before, and that's not to diminish anybody's candidacy.
It's not to diminish the passion and commitment of supporters for either candidate.
But it is an indication that the Democratic Party in a general election will be focused on a different question.
Well, I don't think that's going to work, unfortunately, for them.
And what about this legislation in the Congress that will allow families to sue the Saudi government and other governments in different circumstances.
Exactly.
I'm opposed because of that second clause in your sentence, and that is this is not just a bilateral U.S.-Saudi issue.
This is a matter of how generally the United States approaches our interactions with other countries.
If we open up the possibility that individuals in the United States can routinely start suing other governments, then we are also opening up the United States to being continually sued by individuals in other countries.
All right, here's the big problem: news roundup and information overload hour on the Sean Hannity show.
Well, there's a big difference here.
We've got 28 pages that are redacted from the 9-11 Commission report that apparently implicate the Saudi government for offering material and financial support to the people that attacked our country and killed 3,000 people.
Now, it passed unanimously in the Senate.
I'll interview Donald Trump tonight and ask him about this very issue.
I've got to believe he would support the right of the families of these victims to sue.
The only question is, why is the president, why does this country always seem to want to protect Saudi Arabia?
Joining us now, we have Pam Keller, president of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, editor and publisher of Atlas Shruggs, also Ron Christie, former special assistant to President George W. Bush and legislative director.
And Pam, let me start with you and ask your initial reaction to this.
Well, the National Archive just released a series of memos, previously secret memos, that clearly...
I read them on Drudge last night, the 46 pages?
Yeah, clearly, and I've uploaded the documents to PamelaGela.com, clearly implicate the Saudi government.
It's a remarkable document.
What it contains is explosive.
And no longer can the Obama administration claim that the 28 pages merely contains innuendo and rumor.
And the fact that the White House says they've never read it, I find to be equally astonishing.
Every road in the 9-11 investigation leads back to the Saudi government.
I don't know that suing the government is the way to go.
I don't know that we should have sued the Japanese after Pearl Harbor.
It's an act of war.
But why is this being kept from the American people?
I mean, the names include Osama bin Laden's brother, Abdullah.
The funding comes from Prince Bandar and the princess.
I mean, it goes all the way up.
And so to say there wasn't senior involvement is an out-and-out lie.
And it is astonishing the number of operatives.
This was an intense operation, Sean.
This wasn't 19 Muslim terrorists.
This is what is amazing.
I mean, they were taught how to acclimate to the U.S., they were given places to live.
They were given financial support.
And apparently, the oddest thing to me is the FBI had an informant that was living amongst them.
And now they don't even know the answer to the question of whether or not this person knew or didn't know.
Right.
And who tasked Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi national, who provided considerable assistance and was, as I say, tasked to provide considerable assistance to the hijackers after they arrived in San Francisco?
And he did.
He helped them find an apartment.
He co-signed their lease.
And he ordered Mohmad Abdullah, another operative, to provide them with whatever assistance they need him.
Mind you, this gentleman was employed, was an agent of the Saudi government.
And so, again, we are looking at a list.
You and I don't have the time to go through the 47 pages that the National Archive released, but there is no doubt it is not innuendo and rumor.
Well, it's not innuendo and rumor, but, you know, why does this country, because we now have a history of this.
Now, to me, I would argue that the Saudis bought Hillary Clinton's silence in this regard.
I mean, Hillary Clinton, we know the deplorable human rights record of Saudi Arabia and life for women under Sharia law, and they can't drive and they've told what to wear and they can't leave the house without a male relative and all these repressive rules and laws that they live under.
And it's not just there, it's Kuwait, it's the UAE, it's Qatar, it's other places.
And all these countries give money to either presidential libraries or to the Clinton Foundation.
They clearly have bought the silence of the top echelons of our government.
Right, or directly to the Clintons.
I mean, remember, they left the White House claiming they were broke.
They now have a net worth of $200 million.
They didn't build anything.
They didn't create anything.
They don't have a company.
But they get from these very sketchy governments.
Bill Clinton gets $750,000 to speak.
There's a movie coming out now called Clinton Cash.
It is a devastating, stunning indictment.
That's Peter Schweitzer's book.
Yes.
It is pure evil.
And anyone on the right whose hashtags never Trump and so on and so forth is aiding and abetting in the election of a clearly corrupt And not just her, but her husband.
So you'll have them both in the White House.
A clearly corrupt regime.
That movie should be, honestly, it should be devueur viewing for every concerned American.
It is devastating the level of corruption, the kind of money they received, and the kind of malfeasance what they did in Haiti, or I should say what they didn't do in Haiti, how much money they got when nothing was accomplished.
And the selling of uranium rights here in America, 20% of our uranium is now owned by Russia.
You and I, it could go on and on, but you're absolutely right.
I believe Clinton was paid off, and she will continue to get paid off.
There's no reason to believe that the past behavior for the 20 years, past 20 years, is going to change.
Based on what?
Listen, I can't agree.
I don't know what to say.
Now, I understand the whole, okay, well, maybe we'll work with the Sunni Saudis, and the Saudis will help us in defeating Iran, which is a bigger threat than the Saudis, but I don't like the fact that we're covering up for them.
I don't like the fact our government is covering up their role in 9-11, their complicity in 9-11.
I don't like that it's happened for many, many years.
And all of this, to be honest, is so it just reeks of despicable corruption.
Anyway, Ron Christie is with us.
Ron, why don't we release the 28 pages that were redacted that the Saudis, that implicate the Saudis on 9-11?
Well, I think it's a shame, Sean.
It's a shame to those loved ones, our friends, and those who lost their lives on 9-11 to know whether or not the Saudi government, which I believe they are, complicit in funding the terrorists that killed over 3,000 people on that horrible day.
And the fact that Congress won't act and that the president has threatened to veto, I think, is just disgraceful.
Yeah, I agree.
And I guess now the question is whether or not Hillary Clinton will ever criticize Saudi Arabia after they gave the Clinton Foundation all this money.
You know, I'm going to get into this in some detail.
We have Donald Trump for the hour tonight on Hannity, and I want some details.
He's been very clear in saying that Hillary Clinton and the Clintons' record against women is something, but nobody seems to want to bring up, well, okay, women are treated horribly in all these countries that donate to the Clinton Foundation, and she never criticizes them.
Of course not, because for her, it's all about putting more millions of dollars in that Clinton flush fund.
I mean, let's call it what it is, Sean.
This is not a charitable organization that's donating millions and millions for good causes.
It's lining the pockets of the Clintons.
It's allowing them to live their lavish lifestyle.
But more importantly, to what you said, look at where the Clintons are getting their money from.
These are countries that don't like America.
These are countries that I think have a hand in terrorism.
And it only shows that Clinton's loyalty is to their own bank, of course.
Don't you think, too, that the Saudis and OPEC have conspired to drive all of our oil companies out of, I'm sorry, our fracking companies out of business so they can get their monopoly back?
Oh, of course.
And, of course, President Obama is the one out there trying to take credit for the energy that we have right now.
But, of course, these are on state lands, private lands that he had nothing to do with.
I guarantee you, Obama and the Saudis would love nothing more than our oil production to fall down and the prices to skyrocket.
All right, guys.
Thank you both for being with us.
Appreciate it.
Absolutely.
Tam and Ron Christie, 800-941-Sean.
Lisa is in Cleveland, Ohio.
We'll be there for the convention.
Lisa, how are you?
Glad you called.
I'm great.
Thanks, Sean.
Hey, Sean, I'm one of those never-Trumpers, but I want to say that.
Well, what do you think of this list?
Couple things.
I'm sorry.
What do you think of the list of judicial names?
I mean, it's getting widespread praise by conservatives.
He's picked 12 people, the types of people he'd put on the Supreme Court.
Well, that helps a lot.
And that was one of the things I was going to say where there's a couple things that he could do to persuade me to his side.
And that was one of them.
In fact, I would go further, like you said the other day, if he could, you know, let's talk about who might be in his cabinet, who's going to be his campaign.
Well, I'm interviewing him for the hour tonight.
I'll ask him about the cabinet.
And I'll tell you another thing I'm going to ask you.
I said, okay, because he promised me now that he'd release this for a while.
Okay.
All right.
So he released these names.
And, you know, when he released them, he said it was a list of 11 potential justices that he thinks are like Thomas and Scalia.
He said that.
Okay.
All right.
So, and he gave the names of these people.
The Federalist Society signed off on it.
Mike Lee has signed off on it.
I mean, you can't get more conservative than those two.
I don't know all of these people.
I'm sure they'll be vetted.
I know a couple of them.
Thomas Lee is on the list from Utah.
That's Mike Lee's brother.
William Pryor of Alabama is on that list.
I mean, you have Supreme Court justices from states on this list.
I mean, it's a pretty impressive list, and everybody that I've talked to is pretty impressed by what they see.
Good.
Listen, when you talk to him, here's one of the two things I wanted him to do: to stop tweeting and to stop giving interviews until he really starts to more solidify.
You know, he's getting a lot of heat for kind of jumping around a little bit.
And, you know, it's his style to talk off the cuff, which I understand people like.
But, you know, the tweeting has got to stop.
It's crazy.
I saw his daughter on TV this morning.
Yeah, by the way, she has to answer about whether her father is a groper.
Oh, that's crazy.
And meanwhile, this is the thing.
I interviewed now three women mentioned in that piece, and they all are furious that they were purposefully taken out of context by the New York Times.
Right.
But, yeah, I just wish he would kind of rise above it.
I mean, the whole Clinton thing, I mean, we could go on for days about Bill Clinton and his rides.
Watch the interview tonight.
I'll tell you what I'm going to do.
I'll tell you where I'm going with this interview tonight.
How's that?
I'll give you a preview.
Okay.
Because he's also talked about many other things.
I'm going to ask him how serious he is about balancing the budget, how serious he is about building the wall, how serious he is about replacing Obamacare and making America energy independent and on trade and on ISIS and on fixing the VA and ending Common Core.
I'm going to ask him all that.
And then you decide for yourself.
Because if that's the agenda, that's a conservative agenda to me.
That's good.
But when, you know, the whole war on women thing, come at it with facts.
I mean, the facts that they keep, everybody keeps quoting the 72% per dollar.
That's all wrong.
I mean, forget trying to, you know, trash Bill Clinton.
Let's have the facts.
There is no war on women.
And, you know, use facts, not emotion.
You know, I know it's his nature.
And I saw the Megan Kelly thing last night.
I understand it's his nature to retaliate, but he's got to rein it in a little bit.
I mean, that's, you know, we're trying to teach my five-year-old grandson not to do that.
And so.
You know what?
He said something last night, though, in that interview that I kind of agree with.
And this is just my observation of politics.
If he doesn't fight hard, you don't win.
You just, you know, it's a, listen, everybody says they don't like negative ads.
Negative ads are used because they work.
Everybody says they don't like personal attacks, but when you use them, they work.
So, you know, I think partly it's, you know, we the public, I guess you can blame us, but I think it's deeper than that.
I have found my interviews deeper than what has been covered and portrayed by the media, so we'll see.
Lisa, thank you.
Appreciate it.
Let's go to Stas in Vegas, K-Dawn Radio.
Staz, you have a minute.
It's all yours.
How are you?
Sean, thank you so much for taking the call.
Thank you.
What's happening?
I want to speak to the electability of Trump and the insignificance of the subversives that are standing on the sideline or blocking.
What they don't understand, they still haven't figured it out.
The party's been taken over.
It's an American first party.
Okay, we've whooped them.
It has nothing to do with these subversives.
It has everything to do with Trump and we the people.
That's all it's between.
And after Hillary wins, that guy that actually won, but he didn't get the super delegates, those people hate the, half of those people hate the establishment more than anybody.
And they're not going to vote for Hillary.
I tend to agree with you.
I will tell you this.
I'll give you, let me say real quickly, because I'm running out of time.
Bernie Sanders is getting screwed royally.
He wins West Virginia 5136.
Okay.
The initial delegate distribution, it's proportional, is 18 to 11.
By the time they do the super delegates, Hillary, who gets clobbered in the state, says she wants to shut down coal companies and eliminate coal miners' jobs.
She got 18 delegates.
He got 19.
Almost even, even though the people in the Democratic Party did not want her.
It's unfathomable to me that that is allowed to happen, but that's, you know, there's your modern Democratic Party.
It's unbelievable.
Anyway, I appreciate your call.
You raise good points.
And, you know, she's so weak, I think this is a winnable election, but I take nothing for granted.
I just don't.
In the beginning, God.
Beyond all time and outside of all space, there was God.
But then the evil one, the father of lies, tempted them.
From this calamity down through the ages, man shakes his fist at his creator and says, I decide what's right and wrong.
God is dead.
I'm my own God.
With the fall, death entered into human history.
Now all creation is subject to its bondage to decay.
I will proclaim to you: the God who made the world is Lord of heaven and earth.
When men begin to determine what's right and what's wrong, oh my goodness.
In the absence of God, the man with the biggest stick determines your worth.
Caesar demands his speech of incense, violence, decadence, political anarchy, moral decay.
Welcome to the city of man.
Wow.
That's from a brand new documentary called Torch Bearer, that voice you heard.
It should be familiar.
Phil Robertson, the patriarch of the hit show Duck Dynasty, stars in this.
It debuted at the Cannes Film Festival yesterday.
And he joins us now.
How are you, sir?
I'm doing well, my man.
Now, you know, your background and your life is interesting, and I've got to spend some time with you.
I feel like I know you pretty well now, and you're a guy that found religion in your life, and it transformed you in a major way.
Tell us how that happened.
Well, I was 28 years old at the time.
I'm now 70, by the way.
So I ran with the wicked, Sean, for the first 28 years of my life.
I got high, I got drunk, and I got laid on a regular basis.
Well, that's one way to put it.
You know, that's a pretty broad way to put it there, Phil.
Geez.
Yeah, to put it bluntly, I was a rank heathen.
I'm coming out of the 60s, remember?
Yep.
But I didn't know anything about Jesus Christ.
So I'm rocking along there.
Finally, I get sober enough to sit down.
Miss Kay got out to me, and she said, just sit down and listen at least.
So I did.
And all I can tell you is, did it ever turn my life around?
Now everything, all my thinking is vetted through the Bible.
I can show you our America a mighty throng of individuals because of the gospel of Jesus, his death for their sins and his resurrection three days later.
I can show you, Sean, a mighty throng that went from evil men to good men and women.
So I'm just saying the way we're going now, come on.
The documentary just documents the historical fact.
Let me give you a good example.
A presidential decree from our president that says a grown man can come into a women's bathroom.
Sean, just think about that.
A presidential decree that tells someone where they can take a leak?
I've never in my life.
It's so bizarre.
And by the way, what percentage of the population, you know, does everyone have to change their values for?
I mean, do we really want to do that?
Do we really want men?
Or look, I understand people, I don't understand gender identity really, but okay, you're born a man.
You have male genitalia.
Should you be allowed to be in a bathroom with a young girl?
I say the answer is no, and that we ought to.
Of course not.
What this comes under the heading of is Romans chapter 1, about verse 28, where it says they invent ways of doing evil.
You got to remember, what's behind it is this major push.
Once you get male and female out of the way, and everybody's looking at each other, and everybody's claiming they're neither male nor female, or they're both at the same time.
What's fishing to ensue, once this gets full blown, this is the last leg of their journey.
What's fishing to ensue is a sexual free-for-all.
That's what they want to do.
You know, look, I can only speak.
I am not as religious as you.
In other words, I've been to your house.
I know you read the good book and carry the good book with you when you're on the road.
I know you wanted to dunk me in the back of your house, but that's a swamp, and in that swamp are alligators.
I'd be willing to do it.
But I do believe this.
I do believe that there is a God that created the heavens and the earth.
The majesty of creation is beyond my comprehension.
I do believe in the life of Jesus, the only Son of God.
I do believe that he sacrificed his life for our sins.
But I also know that I'm not worthy of all of those things.
I've been a big sinner my whole life.
Everybody has.
Well, I was probably worse than you.
Hey, all of us are sinners, and we're all going to go six feet deep at some point.
And here you have God coming down in flesh, taking away our sins and guaranteeing this we can be raised from the dead if we would but acknowledge him.
America will go the same way as all these other people.
Why do people, after they're saved, and I'm asking this out of curiosity more than anything, why do people still sin after they accept all of that into their heart?
Why do they keep doing the wrong thing?
Here's what you need to remember.
When Jesus went back into heaven, he's there at the right hand of God, Sean, to mediate for us, to remove any of the future sins we would commit.
However, he does demand, because of the grace of God, he does demand that we walk in the like.
In other words, we try our best not to sin.
Look, I don't get high anymore.
I don't get drunk.
And the only sex I have is between myself and Miss K.
But when I do make a mistake in a moment of weakness, the blood of Jesus is there 24-7 to keep me cleansed.
Therefore, you say, all your past ones removed, none of your future ones counted against you.
So let me ask this question.
This is a good radio show because we're into God Almighty here.
No, listen, listen.
You even said to me, Hannity, you want to get them ratings up?
Let me dunk you in that swamp with the alligators.
And I said, find me a swimming pool and I'll consider it.
You understand?
I got Willie trying to work behind the scenes talking to Mr. Trump, Donald Trump, so we can get some Bible in Donald because he's fixing to be the president of the free world.
And we need God's help for crying out loud.
You know, I don't dispute that at all.
And I worry about our nation in decline.
I know you originally supported Ted Cruz, but you are enthusiastically, you said, supporting Donald Trump now.
But this movie does touch on some very important points.
And I think, and people get uncomfortable when you talk about religion.
You know, we used to have Bible reading in public schools up until 1960.
We used to have, you know, people read the Lord's Prayer.
Now, you know, it can't even mention God in school.
But this is my point.
Our founders, our framers, as imperfect as they were, especially on the issue of slavery, they were still very deeply religious men, and they did believe our founding document, our Declaration of Independence, says we're endowed by our Creator.
And I believe that.
That's correct.
You are correct.
And that's why Thomas Jefferson said, and we've been endowed with certain unalienable rights.
The premise of the documentary is that our rights come from God.
We need to bow down to him and obey him.
He's where our rights come from, not from humans.
Sean, once you allow human beings to determine for you what's right and wrong, what's good and evil, and what your life is worth.
I'm telling you, every time from Greece to Rome to the Nazis to the Shintoists to the communist to ISIS, all the way up to history, you say, it's been a bloodbath.
I mean, so we're trying to warn people: look, don't forget your creator because when you do, the carnage is fixing to ensue.
And America's on the wrong path.
I'm telling you right now.
No, I agree with you.
But, you know, I tried, I wrote a book in 2004, and I called it Deliver Us from Evil.
And I actually quoted the Lord's Prayer in the beginning of the book because it has the words, and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
And I went through the history of the last century, which was, you know, the killing fields in Cambodia, Nazism, fascism, communism.
I mean, all told, evil killed over 100 million people.
That's evil.
Now, we have an evil today.
We have an evil today, and we have a president that can't acknowledge that radical Islamic terrorism is evil.
It's a modern-day evil, and that cancer is growing because we don't seem to have the wisdom, the wherewithal, or the courage to identify it even for what it is.
So, what you end up with is a human being, our president.
He is determining for us what's right, what's wrong, whether it be in foreign policy, whether it be where you take a leak.
These presidential decrees keep going out because he has taken it upon himself.
To him and his mind, he is God.
So he gives the decree and he expects it to happen.
We need to filter everything we do.
We need to filter it through God's word.
Because if we don't, and we don't bow down to him, we are headed for a pickle here.
What do you say to people that are not Christian?
And you're talking about Judeo-Christian morality here.
We remind them that they're sinners.
We remind them that.
But you believe everybody's a sinner.
We're all sinners.
All have sinned and fallen short.
Everybody on the face of the earth, all the Chinese, the Russians, the Africans, everyone, all the people in the Middle East and all Americans, we all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
You say, what's the solution?
Well, unless we do something about it before physical death comes along, our fate is sealed.
We die physically, dead in our sins.
That's the end of us.
It's described as a lake of fire, total darkness, hell.
So the bottom line is you say we remind them they're sinners, and we tell them, what are you going to do about the grave that's coming up?
Any hope beyond it?
Well, I heard a guy one time on the radio, and I thought this was pretty interesting.
He described human life, the span of your life, as a bridge between two worlds.
And at any point in your life, you can be on the good side of the bridge or the bad side of the bridge.
He was correct.
And at the end of your life, if you're in the middle or you're on the bad side, you're done.
If there is no God, Sean, we're going into a casket.
You are and I am and everybody else is.
And we are never coming back if there's no God.
My college professors said there's no God.
The ocean made us.
So the bottom line is you say, whew, so I'm godly for a reason because I have a great hope to be raised from the dead.
And what's required of me is to love you as my neighbor and to love God who created me.
So I'm going with it, and I hope maybe the documentary will change some minds about him.
You do scare me a little bit in this documentary.
It's kind of fire and brimstone-y.
It's a brutal film, and I don't cry much.
I seldom weep, but I did.
I wept when I saw the premier.
By the way, two guys met me outside of the theater in Cons, France, and they asked me after that movie, they asked me, would I baptize them in the river down there?
And I said, I surely will.
I thought of you when they asked me that.
Listen, just get me a swimming pool.
I'm not going in a swamp with alligators.
I mean, I'm going to die right there.
And if you don't finish the job, I'm going straight to hell.
Al told me a while ago in there, he said, tell Sean, we have a heated swimming pool, and it's waiting on him.
You know, I was raised a Catholic, and Catholics baptize at birth.
And I guess I think the difference is that you want people to make a conscious choice.
But I do believe in what I told you.
I believe that there's a God that created the heavens and the earth.
And I don't think we have the intellectual and mental capacity to understand God.
It's just too big for us.
You weren't a sinner as a child because...
Yes, I was.
I was incorrigible.
You didn't know what the law said until you got old enough to break it.
Once you hit about 13 or 14, you understood full well what it said, but then you broke it.
That's why you wait until you are of age.
You know what God says.
When you're an infant, I don't know how much immorality lying and stealing you can do.
You understand what I'm saying?
Not as an infant, but as a young teenager, I was, to use the words of my mother, incorrigible.
Yeah, by a teenager, you were of age.
So there you go.
That's why I said we better go down there and repeat this this time.
But we'll work it out.
How can people see the movie?
Is it in movie theaters now or what?
It'll be out about July.
Okay.
Well, send me a DVD.
Can I get a DVD?
I'll put you on home.
I'll give you my address.
We'll send you a DVD.
All right, hang on the line there.
Phil Robertson.
It's called Torchbearer, and it's a new documentary.
