On the heels of the tragedy in Dallas, Sean covers the breaking news of the tragic shooting in Michigan. The news broke today that two bailiffs and a county sheriff were shot in a courthouse in St. Joseph Michigan. The message needs to be, loud and clear, that Americans support the brave men and women who serve as law enforcement officers. Is that message being sent clearly? The Sean Hannity Show is live Monday through Friday from 3pm - 6pm ET on iHeart Radio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
All right, this portion of the Sean Hannity podcast is sponsored by Audible.
Now, by signing up for a 30-day trial with Audible, you'll be able to get that audio book you've always wanted to read for free.
Now, discover where Audible audiobooks can take you.
To get started, just go to audible.com slash Hannity.
That's audible.com/slash Hannity.
All right, happy Monday.
This is Trump VP Choice Week.
We have every angle of that covered.
We have a lot more fallout from what happened in Dallas.
A lot of shooting incidents at police stations around the country over the weekend.
Sadly, we will update you on that front.
We have more fallout from Hillary Clinton, the liar and proven liar above the law, and we'll hit that in the course of the program today.
I want to start with where we are in the VP stakes.
Probably by Thursday or Friday of this week, Donald Trump will announce who his vice presidential selection happens to be.
And I know everybody has strong feelings about it.
And, you know, I have already said who I think would be the best person for the job.
And I think that would be Newt Gingrich.
Among the names that we are hearing are Newt Gingrich and Mike Pence and Chris Christie and Joni Ernst and, you know, what, General, what's his name?
General Flynn.
I don't think that's the way to go.
But, you know, look, everyone's got their own feelings, choices about it.
But I want to lay out the reason why I think, from my perspective, that I think that Donald Trump would be wise to pick Newt Gingrich.
Some of you say, well, Newt's old.
Well, Newt's, you know, let's think back.
Has there been any other political figure that has transformed Washington like Newt Gingrich did since Ronald Reagan?
Now, we can talk about Donald Trump's agenda.
Donald Trump has a bold, transformative agenda.
He's going to have to get this agenda through Congress.
And he already has a hostile speaker in Paul Ryan if he remains speaker, assuming that they hold on to the House and has a hostile Senate majority leader in Mitch McConnell.
They've not exactly been the most supportive people.
The conditions aren't exactly perfect for Donald Trump.
And I don't know what's going to happen.
But if he wants to build the wall, if he wants to deal with immigrants from countries that practice Sharia law, if Donald Trump wants to transform the VA, build up our nation's military and spend the money that it's going to take and yet move towards a balanced budget and cut spending and maybe adopt the penny plan, which he's talked about, if he wants to get rid of health care savings accounts,
if he wants to appoint these conservative justices whose names he's given us, if he wants to expand coal mining and oil production and fracking and nuclear power plants and all the above, that's going to take a lot of support from members of Congress.
If he wants to send education back to the states, which he does, that's going to take a lot as well.
So the reason I picked Newt is manyfold.
Let me give you a few of them.
I remember I was there.
I was the MC the night that Newt Gingrich became the Speaker of the House.
I was in Georgia.
I was at the Cobb Galleria in Georgia.
I was the MC.
I ended up losing my voice that night.
I was on radio like that the next day.
Welcome to the program.
You know, it was a pretty bad day the next day.
I remember it well.
But more importantly, it was the first time Republicans took control of Congress in 40 years.
And there was a foundation that Newt Gingrich himself had laid out, and that was the renewing of American civilization tapes.
And what it did was for the first time, it actually set forth a positive agenda that was conservative, that broke away from this traditional way of doing politics.
And as a result, he was able to put together a winning coalition.
First time in 40 years.
And then as speaker, he did a couple of other things.
He was able to balance a budget.
He created a surplus.
He made promises.
They were called the contract with America.
He promised, the promise was they would vote on those 10 items in the first hundred days if they became, if they got power.
If the American people gave them power, this is what we'll do.
And with one exception, they've been able to maintain power for most of the years since, with a couple of hiccup years in there.
And America was better off.
Now, nobody in politics today, in my opinion, and it's one of the reasons that he's a regular guest on this program.
Nobody commands attention the way Newt Gingrich does when he speaks.
Now, I think he's the smartest political strategist in the country.
Since the years in which he has been Speaker, I've known him personally and know how he spent his life.
He's been traveling the world.
He gives speeches and he spends every spare moment that he has reading.
I've never met anybody that had such an insatiable appetite for growing their intellect and a curiosity like Newt Gingrich has.
So, in other words, maybe for those of you that say, well, he's older, young people don't know what he's done.
Well, in the course of the campaign between this week and November, they will learn about what the contract with America was about.
They'll learn about how he's the last speaker to give us a balanced budget and a surplus.
They'll learn about transformational changes that they made to Washington.
They'll learn about welfare reform and some of the other important items that were very successful and also contributed to the success in getting our budget in balance and restraining government spending.
Now, that's just one thing.
You know, I think one problem that Donald Trump currently has is the base of the party.
Not only is he dealing with establishment Republicans in Washington, but for whatever reason, and it was a pretty contentious primary season, if you look at the polls, only 73% of the base, meaning Republicans, say that they're going to vote for Donald Trump.
He needs to increase that number.
Historically, you want a candidate to get at least 90%.
And I think Gingrich is one of those people that is so well liked and such a national figure that he will be able to move that needle.
And I would suspect that the 73% of Republican number would go up to 90, 93% if he was put on the ticket as a vice president.
I can't think of any of the other people who are named.
By the way, they're all good people.
General Flynn, Mike Pence, Joni Ernst, and any of the other names Chris Christie, I don't think would be good because he's a Northeastern liberal in a lot of ways.
And he's had his own problems with the legislature in Trenton, in New Jersey.
And I think he'd have a hard time transforming this in a way that would be successful for him.
And, you know, how is he going to play in the South?
He didn't play that well in a primary matchup against Trump.
So I think that Trump needs a number of things here.
I think Newt would bring with him his intellect.
He'd bring his strategy side with him.
I don't think he'd have a better strategist than in Newt Gingrich in terms of strategizing against the Clintons.
He's done it before going into November.
I also think that Newt would bring back a lot of the base that has been hesitant to jump on board with Donald Trump.
And you need that base if you want to win the election.
Also, I think there's nobody that commands attention when speaking than Newt Gingrich does.
For those people that don't know Newt, you're going to hear him speak for the first time.
You'll watch him give a speech.
And I would imagine even the most liberal person is going to say, that guy's really smart.
That background is, you know, that he commands attention when he speaks.
He really does.
And if you're looking in a vice president, somebody that can grab attention and prosecute the case against Hillary Clinton, of all the names that are mentioned, I can't think of anybody better than Newt Gingrich that is going to prosecute that case, which is strong against her, and lay it out in a way that people will say, amen.
Yeah, we agree.
And on the other hand, you need a vice presidential candidate who's going to be able to lay out the case for the person at the top of the ticket.
And I don't think that there's anybody that can lay out the case, the agenda that Trump has put forth, articulate that case, that message, which I think for the most part, Newt supports.
They might have differences here and there, but for the most part, he supports than Newt Gingrich.
I also think that, you know, at some point, if Donald Trump becomes president, there's going to be a moment.
In other words, there's going to be a time, and this is for any president, when something serious is going to have to be dealt with.
Maybe it's financial related.
Maybe it's an international, you know, maybe it's a 9-11, God forbid, moment.
Maybe it's a Pearl Harbor, God forbid, moment.
Maybe it's a financial crisis, God forbid moment.
Maybe it's a stock market crash moment.
I don't know what it is.
But Donald Trump or any president is going to need somebody that's bright and smart that can help them navigate through those troubled times.
So the question is who would be best sitting in that room with you that you want to turn to and get counsel and advice?
Another issue is: who do you want debating in that one vice presidential debate that you know will decimate any Democrat?
Who's going to be the best campaign strategist, your best advocate, both advocating for you and prosecuting against Hillary?
In other words, I think that probably Newt is the best person that can help.
And then if you get elected, then you've got to govern.
So we have a group of Republicans led by a hostile speaker in Paul Ryan towards Donald Trump and a hostile Senate majority leader in Mitch McConnell, again, against Donald Trump, who is going to be able to command their attention.
And of all the names mentioned, I can't think of anybody better than Newt Gingrich.
And I think if Donald Trump wants to govern successfully, if he wants to get the agenda that I just mentioned passed, well, then I think that Newt's the guy that can help him accomplish that.
That's not a small endeavor.
I think, you know, I know that it seems, I think it was on one of, was it on Breitbart or maybe it was on WorldNet Daily today that 95% of Trump spokesperson leaking that it's going to be Pence.
I've known Mike Pence for years.
I think he's a great governor of Indiana, pretty strong conservative.
I think that if Pence is picked, and I'm just being blunt and honest here, I don't think he will prosecute the case as effectively as Newt could.
I don't think he's as good a political strategist as Newt is.
I don't think he would advocate as well for Trump as Newt can.
And I think probably it would be perceived as a safe choice, a more boring, more vanilla choice.
And I wonder, too, I don't know, is he willing to go up against Paul Ryan and bang on the table and try and force Paul Ryan to do things that maybe Paul Ryan doesn't have the stomach to do?
Is he willing to do the same thing to Mitch McConnell?
Does he have the ability to command attention when speaking?
You know, Donald Trump's campaign has been bold the entire time.
Saving the country is going to be far more difficult than beating 16 other candidates in a primary or beating Hillary Clinton.
If you can beat Hillary and get the White House and you have Republicans and you want to get this agenda passed so you can create a legacy of success that, yes, Washington can be governed successfully again, then I can't think of a better partner for Donald Trump than Newt Gingrich.
I know a lot of you probably have different views.
I see somebody up here that wants Pence.
Somebody else wants Jeff Sessions.
Jeff Sessions is a great guy.
I don't think he's the force of Newt Gingrich, though.
Pence is a great guy.
I think that, you know, I just don't know if he has that ability to transform the country the way Newt Gingrich would.
And that's the one thing that I think Trump and Newt have in common.
If Trump governs the way he has promised, he will be transformative in terms of what he would do and accomplish for the presidency.
If Newt's able to accomplish, like he has in the past, the things that he was able to accomplish, that's transformative for the country.
I don't think it's time for half measures.
When Trump talks about building the wall, I want the wall built.
When Trump talks about building up the military, it needs it desperately.
When he talks about balancing a budget, I want the balance, I want a balanced budget.
When he talks about healthcare savings accounts, we need to get rid of Obamacare.
When he talks about all the jobs and energy independence and how energy independence is good for national security and job creation and expanding coal and drilling and fracking and nuclear technology, it's important for our safety, security, and the jobs that will be created will be high-paying jobs that will last for decades.
Education belongs back in the States.
The VA deserves to be fixed.
It's a pretty bold agenda.
You're going to need somebody that's strong and powerful to help you accomplish it.
Newt's the only guy after looking at the list of people that are available that I would pick that could accomplish that.
I'll take your calls on it if you want to weigh in.
800-941 Sean.
You know, for example, I like Lieutenant General Flynn.
He's a great guy.
He's a lifelong Democrat, sympathetic to Putin, pro-choice.
I don't think that helps with the base in any way.
You know, when a book just really hooks you and you just can't put it down?
Well, with Audible, well, you don't have to.
Discover where Audible audiobooks can take you.
Now, maybe it's a book you've been wanting to read for a long time.
Now, Audible has something special for everyone.
So download your books or shows on your mobile device and listen anytime, anywhere.
And with an unmatched selection of audiobooks, original audio shows, news, comedy, Audible is your best source for everyday entertainment.
The Audible app makes listening a breeze with features like chapter navigation and narration speed control.
So access your books, your shows, anytime, anywhere, right from your smartphone or your tablet.
Join Audible today and explore the world's leading provider of audio books, all beautifully performed by talented actors and narrators.
Now, you can start a 30-day trial and download your first audio book for free.
Just go to audible.com slash Hannity to get started.
That's audible.com/slash Hannity for a 30-day trial and audiobook.
We're following a story now over the weekend.
We had a number of incidents occur, again, with police officers, more protesting on Friday night, Saturday night.
But for the second time in a, well, now the third time in three days since Dallas, we've had a mass shooting attack on the police.
Now, over the weekend, there were shots fired, and gunfire hit the San Antonio police headquarters, leaving bullet marks on the building and shell casings in a nearby alley.
San Antonio police still investigating reports of a suspect seen fleeing from that alley.
And so that happened on Saturday night.
And also coming on the heels of that, we have the Chicago Tribune making a report that a person of interest is now in custody after shots were fired at police on the far south side on early Sunday.
Someone fired at 3.45 a.m. shots of police officers responding to a shots fired call on the Eastside neighborhood.
I brought this up last week.
3,459 Chicago residents killed since Obama became president, but he only spoke out about that, what, nine times.
Now we've got some news today of a shooting that took place in St. Joseph, Michigan, where four people were shot at a courthouse today, and one of them appears to be an officer.
Conditions not currently known.
Three people are, well, here we go.
This just came in.
Three people are dead now in this shooting.
And an employee at the, according to an employee at the county prosecutor's office, and three of the dead people, one person's injured, and Michigan State Police confirmed the shooting just moments ago.
Two of the people dead are court bailiffs.
And there was one report.
It's a local report.
I haven't confirmed this part of it, that they might have actually taken over the gun from one of the officers there.
There's an officer down too.
We don't know if the officer is one of the three people now being reported killed in this particular incident.
It's unbelievable.
Anyway, so that happened at the Berrien County Sheriff Courthouse or the Berrien County Courthouse.
The sheriff is still dealing with an active shooting situation there.
And that happened just this afternoon.
So the war on police now continues.
By the way, the president will go down to Dallas tomorrow.
Now, the president spoke out again like he had done in Cambridge with the Cambridge police incident, the Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman incident, the Ferguson incident, Michael Brown, and of course the Baltimore incident with violence, the Freddie Gray case.
And the president spoke out on foreign soil three hours before this latest event took place.
It's so reckless and it's so irresponsible for this president to keep talking about things that he knows nothing about.
And he's supposed to be a constitutional attorney.
Actually, he said two days after this Dallas shooter told police he wanted to kill white people, especially white cops.
Obama said to reporters that the motive behind the shooting was unclear.
I'm wondering if you could help us understand how you describe his motives.
Do you consider this an act of domestic terrorism?
Was this a hate crime?
Was this a mentally ill man with a gun?
How should Americans understand why that happened?
I think it's very hard to untangle the motives of this shoe.
As we've seen in a whole range of incidents with mass shooters, they are, by definition, troubled.
By definition, if you shoot people who pose no threat to you, strangers, you have a troubled mind.
Oh, okay.
It's unclear.
He wants to kill white people and he wants to kill white cops, but it's unclear what his motive is.
And he was a radical.
Good grief.
Hillary says, pretty much, white America to blame.
I'm going to be talking with white people.
I think we're the ones that have to start listening to the legitimate cries that are coming from our African-American fellow citizens.
Yes, there are still racist people in this country, but they are a tiny minority of people.
And there's white on black racism and black on white racism, and it exists, but it is shunned by most civil society, the majority of society.
Minnesota police chief says anti-cop protesters have now turned into criminals.
Obama won't even look at the hate crime statute.
Can you imagine if it was a white person saying he wanted to kill black people and black cops and liberals not saying that this is a hate crime?
They're the ones who are likely to do that.
Heather McDonald has a new book out, but anyway, she points out, statistically speaking, after looking at FBI data, that blacks are more likely to kill cops than to be killed by cops.
No one ever talks about that side of the equation.
Black and Hispanic police officers are more likely to fire a gun at blacks than white officers.
This, according to a Department of Justice report in 2015 about the Philly Police Department, further confirmed that by a study conducted by the University of Pennsylvania criminologist Greg Ridgway in 2015 that determined black cops were 3.3 times more likely to fire a gun than other cops at a crime scene.
It gets ridiculous the way we demographically break everything down.
Then there's an AP story about how militants are directing people and inspiring people to do this.
I'll give you another example of all this.
You got former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is under fire for saying the Black Lives Matter movement, he said, when you say Black Lives Matter, that's inherently racist.
Sir, you said that the Black Lives Matter movement has put a target on the back of police officers.
When members of the African American community see videos as they have this week, they feel like there is a target on young black men.
Explain your response about how they put a target on police officers, how that can match up when people see these videos.
Well, when they talk about killing police officers.
But they don't.
When they sing, they sure do.
They sing rap songs about killing police officers and they talk about killing police officers and they yell it out at their rallies and the police officers.
Mr. Mayor.
But, Mr. Mayor, what you seem to be doing is taking...
Please, please let me finish.
And when you say Black Lives Matter, that's inherently racist.
Well, I think they are.
Black Lives Matter, White Lives Matter, Asian Lives Matter, Hispanic Lives Matter.
That's anti-American, and it's racist.
Of course, Black Lives Matter, and they matter greatly.
But when you focus in on 1% of less than 1% of the murder that's going on in America, and you make it a national thing, and all of you in the media make it much bigger than the black kid who's getting killed in Chicago every 14 hours, you create a disproportion.
The police understand it, and it puts a target on their back.
Every cop in America will tell you that if you ask him.
All right, Mayor Giuliani, and thanks so much for being with us.
Thank you.
The Black Lives Matter group, you know, the group that got invited to the White House chanting pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon.
What's wrong with these reporters?
Who is that?
CBS reporter?
What an idiot.
Where is he living?
That people, oh, they don't say these things.
Yes, they do.
Former Philly police commissioner Charles Ramsey said this weekend that America's sitting on a powder keg amid outcry over these police shootings.
But Rudy's point is my point from last week.
You have 3,459 Chicago residents killed, thousands more injured in shootings, and Obama's mentioned it nine times.
But if it's a high-profile racial shooting or perceived racial shooting, boy, Obama's all over the cops.
But he's not addressing the majority, the overwhelming vast majority.
If you care about black lives and all lives, these kids that are getting killed, he doesn't talk about it.
Why not?
Now we have every police agency in the country on guard.
Now that we've got this ongoing shooting happening here, Arab social media gloating over the cop murders in Dallas.
That was another thing that came out.
Heather McDonnell wrote a piece, the Ferguson effect is destroying Chicago.
It absolutely is.
It's unbelievable.
And by the way, for those of you who say, oh, Rudy Giuliani is racist, he looked at a 2,500 or 400 number of murders in New York City when he became mayor, and he said, I'm going to save these lives.
And so what he did is he moved police focus into the neighborhoods where most of the crime was happening.
And as a result, that number dropped to about 300 murders a year after it was continued by Michael Bloomberg, Stop and Frisk, which now is going away and the murder rate in New York's going right back up again.
Pretty unbelievable.
By the way, Donald Trump said today in a major speech in Virginia, Virginia Beach, that he told the crowd, I am the law and order candidate.
And it went over really well.
Really, really well.
So that happened today also.
Now, I got to tell you some things here.
You know, there's so much going on on so many different levels, not the least of which is all of this stuff.
You have this event that happens in Dallas.
You have this event unfolding now in Michigan.
You have San Antonio.
You have, you know, all these other cities that are now experiencing violence against police.
You know, the president makes a comment at a press conference in Warsaw, Poland, where he issued another call for gun control in the wake of this Micah Johnson.
By definition, if you shoot people who pose no threat, you have a troubled mind, he said.
The problem with what Obama's saying, the black police chief of Dallas, David Brown, said that the killer himself wanted to gun down white people and white officers.
His motives were not very hard to untangle here.
Now, for the double standard, remember Dylan Roof, racist, gunned down innocent people at a black church in Charleston?
Obama then had no hesitation.
And by the way, he was right.
He didn't have a hard time untangling and identifying the racist motives of the killer.
He said the fact that this took place in a black church obviously also raises questions about a dark part of our history.
This is not the first time that black churches have been attacked.
Why is he so unwilling to speak the obvious here?
You know, see, when a black declares he's going to kill whites and he does so, and the motives are impossible for Obama to untangle.
A white declares that he's going to kill blacks and does so, the motives are obvious and taken at face value.
It's a game this president plays.
He's upset at all the high-profile cases.
Cambridge police, Trayvon Martin.
That could have been me 35 years ago.
That could have been my son, Ferguson.
You know, he jumps in, weighs in.
Before, black eyewitnesses pointed out that, yeah, Michael Brown fought for a police officer's gun, charged at a police officer, after he had robbed a convenience store and bullied a clerk.
Wall Street Journal put things in perspective.
It said, and Chief Brown and many like him, law enforcement don't think they get much support.
It's because they don't until after the cops are dead.
Then, as always, come the official condolences.
Wow.
Anyway, the editorial goes on to say: instead, what most people hear, most of the time, from groups like Black Lives Matter or Al Sharpton is inflammatory rhetoric that distorts reality and indiscriminately demonizes the police.
Well, I say Obama's guilty of this when he rushed to judgment in Cambridge and in Ferguson and in the Freddie Gray case and in the Trayvon Martin case.
I think he's as guilty of this as anybody.
And they even said Obama said it's possible to express support for the police while also saying there are problems all across our criminal justice system.
And Obama brings Black Lives Matters, the same group chanting pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon, to the White House.
You know, this belief promoted by Black Lives Matter, which is American 2016, is the same place as the Jim Crow South, is a lie.
That doesn't mean there aren't individual cops that are racist or even that blacks, because they're black, face challenges and obstacles and maybe suspicion that other people don't face, but that's all.
I'm not disputing that there are people like that.
And that would bother me.
But Black Lives Matter is not the answer.
They only make things worse because their advancing narrative is killing cops.
And Hillary wants their endorsement.
New York Times reported a new study that says when it comes to the most lethal form of force, police shootings, there is no racial bias.
Quote, it's the most surprising result of my career, said Roland Fryer Jr., the author of the study, professor of economics at Harvard, and the youngest African-American to receive tenure at Harvard.
The study examined more than a thousand shootings in 10 major police departments, Texas, Florida, California.
And according to the Times, the results contradict the mental image of police shootings that many Americans hold in the wake of the killings, some captured on video, Michael Brown, LaQueen McDonald is in Chicago, Tamir Rice in Cleveland, Walter Scott in South Carolina, Samuel DuBose in Cincinnati, Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, and this guy in Minnesota.
The study confirms that black men and women are treated differently in the hands of law enforcement.
They're more likely to be touched, handcuffed, pushed to the ground, pepper sprayed, even after accounting for and how and why and where the encounter with the police is.
But again, on police shooting, there's no evidence of racial bias.
So saith an African-American professor from Harvard.
So Mayor Giuliani, who's Probably saved more black lives by being the mayor of New York than would have happened.
So many people would have died if we continued on that path.
So he says they're racist.
Black Lives Matters.
Well, why are they saying pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon?
Why are they invited to the White House?
Why is Hillary and Bernie seeking their endorsement?
Good grief.
It's unbelievable.
You've endorsed the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald Trump, but from reading your book, you have an awful lot to say in here about candidates trashing the so-called Republican establishment and saying incendiary things just to get a rise out of voters, not thinking about the long game and not thinking about winning the general election, no respect for process and responsible deliberation of serious issues.
You'll have to forgive me, but it sounds an awful lot to me like you're talking about Donald Trump.
Am I wrong?
Well, here's the deal.
You know, he won it fair and square.
Right.
He got the most votes.
It's no secret that he's struggling.
As you and I are talking today, we just saw his latest finance report, and there's not much money in there.
And so, you know, he's earned the nomination, but in order to be elected president, he needs to pivot and start acting presidential, you know, for example.
There's nothing wrong with using a script.
Most candidates use it for president, use a script.
It's how you remember everything you want to say.
And I think just kind of going from rally to rally and winging it may have worked in the primary, but it's not going to work in the general.
So I've endorsed him because he's earned the nomination, but he needs to start acting like a serious candidate for president if he wants to win the election.
All right.
Glad you're with us.
Hour two, Sean Hannity Show.
That was Mitch McConnell in late June talking about the candidacy of Donald Trump.
This is the week Trump will announce his VP selection.
We're on VP Alert Watch.
And joining us is the chairman of the Republican National Committee, and that's Reines Priebus.
One of the things that has annoyed me more than anything else are people like McConnell and Paul Ryan not being supportive of the nominee to the point where they seem more hostile to Donald Trump than they've ever been to Obama or Hillary.
Well, I can tell you this past week was a good week for the relationship of Paul and Donald Trump.
They actually had a very good day together on the Hill, and I know that that night Donald and Paul talked.
So they're getting along fine.
And I think McConnell as well, you know, that interview was a bit old.
And, you know, to give him some credit, I mean, Donald Trump had made some serious changes on the campaign since that interview.
And $51 million in two and a half weeks in June prepared remarks, which I do agree are a good thing for Donald Trump.
And I think he is enjoying it as well.
And I think the people out there are enjoying seeing it, both off the cuff and prepared remarks.
So I actually think the last few weeks on the Trump campaign have been a very positive few weeks.
And I think people are getting confident.
And we're preparing here in Cleveland.
I'm here right now for a good convention.
And it's really coming together.
In spite of, you know, the media likes to play up all these wild narratives, but it's actually going very well.
Well, I guess this is VP Week.
So the names we keep hearing, General Flynn, we hear Mike Pence.
We hear former Speaker of the House, Newt King Rich, we hear Joni Ernst.
Clearly, all of these people have been vetted and others that I know.
But who do you think would best serve Donald Trump?
Well, only Donald Trump knows the answer to that.
I mean, some of this comes down to just, you know, your gut feeling as far as who you can work with, who you think could be president, if something should happen to yourself.
They're all great choices.
You know, look, I think that I think he's looking for experience.
I think someone that understands Washington, someone that understands governing, you know, and someone that's probably an established, experienced person.
That's what my guess is.
You know, look, it's his decision, and I'm not going to press too much, but I'm involved.
I talk to Donald Trump about this quite regularly.
But you're right, it is coming down to the wire, and it's an important decision for us and the party and the convention.
And obviously, we're going to run out of time here sooner or later, and we'll know.
I've been told that there's still efforts among the anti-Trumper crowd that they're going to try and take the nomination on the floor, and they want a big fight on the floor.
And we keep hearing that there's going to be other issues coming up as well.
They expect a lot of protesters in Cleveland, et cetera.
What do you first make of those people that have been so adamant against Donald Trump?
And what do you think, for example, about people that broke the pledge that they made to you and to their party?
Well, on the pledge piece, I think it's wrong.
And I think that many of the folks signed the data exchange agreements.
That was where the pledge was embedded.
It wasn't just a pledge on a blank sheet of paper.
It was a pledge in exchange for the data operation from the RNC.
And even if you used just part of it and you pledged to support the nominee, I believe you should live up to the data exchange agreement and the pledge of support that the campaign signed.
That's one piece.
The second piece is in regard to your question on the unbinding, so-it's called movement.
Look, he earned it fair and square.
And in fact, it wasn't even close, okay, if we're being honest about this.
It wasn't close.
And I don't think there is enough support, well, there's not enough support to take a nomination from a person that got 14 million votes and earned it.
So I don't see it, Sean.
I think it's a lot of hype.
And sure, I'm not saying to you that there aren't going to be a motion.
You know, there ain't going to be a motion in the Rules Committee, but I don't think there's enough support to go that direction.
What do you expect to happen this week?
Because you have the Rules Committee meeting and all these other events that are going on this week.
What do you expect is going to happen this week?
Do you expect any problems at all?
Or is this all chatter and talk among some people that are sore losers?
Well, I think it's mostly chatter among sore losers.
But I think that it's ⁇ if you look at the evidence so far, we've had platform committee today.
You didn't hear a whole lot.
I mean, it's fairly smooth.
Is there going to be any changes that stand out in your mind?
I don't think in particular.
I mean, I don't think there's a whole lot of major shifts in our party platform or beliefs that we've held dear for a long time.
I think that you look at some of the evidence.
We have something called the Contest Committee, and I won't bore the listeners, but the Contest Committee is the place that if you have delegate fights or who's the delegate and who's not the delegate, it's like a court.
And so the contest committee hears all of the cases of all these disputes over delegates here in Cleveland.
To give you an idea, four years ago, we had 21 contests that were heard.
This year we have five.
So you would think from listening to the media that we have a fiasco brewing when in fact we've got a quarter of the arguments filed with the contest committee than we had even four years ago.
So the evidence just at this point isn't there.
And I'm not telling you there isn't going to be maybe some drama on rules, but it's not going to be anything that's, I don't think, catastrophic or earth-shattering, to tell you the truth.
Yeah.
What happens?
Walk us through the week and what goes on this week so people can follow it if they want.
Well, today it's platform, and the committees are all meeting right now.
We're about to go down and talk to the entire platform committee to start public debate after the subcommittees have met.
They'll meet again tomorrow if necessary.
We'll have the rules committee on Wednesday.
In between that, we'll have the RNC meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday at the same time.
So the actual Republican National Committee conducts summer business in our own rules committee and platform and resolution.
So we'll have our own meeting within all of these convention meetings.
Wednesday, Thursday will be rules committee, Friday rules if we need it.
And then we're going to head into the weekend, and then all of those committees will meet again on Monday morning at the queue to finalize all of their reports, and then the gavel will come down at 1 o'clock on Monday, and the start of the convention will proceed.
That's fascinating.
All right, so it's going to be, do you know, I've actually gotten a glimpse at what the outline looks like.
It looks like a pretty exciting convention.
I don't want to give it all away because I don't think I have the authority to give it away.
Well, it's going to be packed.
And, you know, there were reports a few couple weeks ago that, oh, they're filling in.
Look, every six minutes is filled.
And so producers and the folks doing the production and the line by line are working with all of the participants.
And, you know, we have a shortened calendar.
I mean, the convention's seven weeks sooner, which means everything's, you know, normally we'd have another month and a half to go before we have to worry about all this.
But I think it's better that we're getting it done now and we can move on to the general election.
And I think it's going to be a great week.
You know why I want Newt Gingrich to be picked as VP?
I'll tell you my reasons.
Okay.
Well, whether you want to hear it or not.
No, no, I didn't.
I didn't.
Okay, go ahead.
Because I think that the person, I think Donald Trump being outside of politics is an advantage.
And I think having somebody that also shares his values in terms of really wanting transformative action in Washington is important.
And I think, you know, a vice presidential candidate has got to be able to be president.
We can check that box, certainly.
I think when Newt speaks, he commands people's attention.
I think he's really good at that.
And I think people understand how smart he is.
His track record of success with the contract with America, bringing Republicans to power for the first time in 40 years.
He's a great campaign strategist.
And I also think there's nobody more effective at communicating or prosecuting the case against Hillary and probably even making a better case for Donald Trump than he could make for himself.
That's a lot of reasons.
He'd be a great candidate.
And I think he would also govern.
And, you know, the other side of it, you've got to govern.
And I think people in Washington have to listen to Newt because he's got that power behind him.
He's very persuasive.
Well, he's an extraordinary person.
He's been wonderfully supportive to me and the party.
You know, he's one of these guys, too, that, and I mean this sincerely.
There are things that the party does that I know some folks in the grassroots either take issue with or don't like.
One of the things great about Newt is he's a grassroots guy who understands the party and is always willing to roll up his sleeves and help fix problems and always build any bridge that's ever necessary between the two entities.
And that's a good teammate.
There's no question.
But he's one of many good options.
And that's certainly not favoring him over others, but I just share your admiration.
That's for sure.
All right.
I know you have to run to another meeting.
I'll be in Cleveland on Thursday of this week, and we'll be starting our broadcasting on Thursday.
We'll be working Thursday and Friday from Cleveland.
We'll be there, a special Hannity edition on Sunday, and then all next week during the convention on our regular TV time, our regular radio time.
So hopefully you'll come see us, and we look forward to being there.
I'd love to.
Thanks, Sean.
All right.
That is the RNC Chairman Reines Priebus on the Sean Hannity Show.
All right, 800-941-Sean is our toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
Sean is in Palm Beach Gardens.
What's up, Sean?
How are you?
Glad you called.
Hi, good.
Thank you.
How are you?
I'm good.
What's going on?
I'd like to talk about the fact that I think President Obama has divided this country more than any other president in my lifetime.
And I think he instigated the killings in Dallas with his comments without knowing any of the specifics of the two shootings by police officers.
He came out.
Listen, I don't blame him, but the power of the pulpit of the president is so powerful, so influential.
And when he does what he has done many times and come out there without any facts, information, rush to judgment like he did in Cambridge with Trayvon Martin in Ferguson, in Baltimore, and he constantly gives these speeches about police misconduct when you're talking about less than one-half of 1% of cops being bad.
He certainly creates an atmosphere where people feel that their suspicions have been confirmed, that cops are corrupt.
And I don't buy that.
And I think it's unfair.
He mentioned the racial disparities within our justice system.
And he didn't know the fact.
No one could judge at that moment.
And no one should judge.
And, you know, I just like to say the media has talked about this race issue and how Donald Trump is creating racism.
No, Obama has created racism.
I was just recently at a gas station in West Palm Beach, not in a great area.
I'm a white blonde girl.
I had a black Jamaican man see my Trump bumper sticker on my car, and he said, I love Trump.
He said, Obama has destroyed this country.
And if Hillary becomes president, I am going back to Jamaica.
And then five minutes later, as this man was talking to me about how our president's a Muslim and this and that and how he's destroying our country, I had a man from Guyana, and he said the same thing.
He saw my sticker and he said, I love Trump.
He said, you know what?
He said, the people do not understand.
He said, the blacks and the Hispanics that are not supporting Trump do not understand.
The Democrats want to keep us down.
They want to keep us so that we have to be under their control.
With Trump, we will make money.
We will prosper.
And he said, if Hillary Clinton becomes president, he said, I'm out of here and I'm back to Guyana.
Wow.
And, you know, and I'm just tired of the whole racist issue within this country because I personally feel like it's not.
Yeah, but you have, as I mentioned earlier today, you have this police chief, this black police chief in El Paso, Texas, that said Black Lives Matter is a radical hate group.
You know, Rudy Giuliani under fire for saying the Black Lives Matter movement puts a target on the back of officers and that the Black Lives Matter movement is inherently racist.
There's nobody in New York history, New York City history, that did more to put in place measures to protect the thousands of people that were being killed in New York, most of which happened to be minority than Rudy Giuliani.
He wanted to save their lives and he did.
And then people raced to use that R word, which is we're now rendering it meaningless because people so overuse it and inappropriately use it.
I don't know what to say.
To anybody to make anything better.
I didn't see it coming.
Oh, my God.
He was a good son.
He was a good son.
I love my son with all my heart.
I hate what he did.
Did he ever talk about any of his experiences in the military that maybe made you question that something happened?
Was it the war?
I don't remember anything.
I don't remember anything about it.
He just the military was not what Micah thought it would be.
The disappointed.
He was very disappointed.
Very disappointed.
But it may be that he, the ideal that he thought of our government, of what he thought the military represented.
It just didn't live up to his expectation.
All right.
That was the parents of the shooter in Dallas, Texas, Micah X. Johnson.
Those were his parents saying they had no idea that this was happening.
Now, we had a lot of high-profile incidents and comments made over the weekend.
You know, cops are 18 times more likely to be killed by black suspects than vice versa.
I know the media doesn't want to tell the whole story or the percentage of cops that are good cops.
That never gets talked about.
Hillary says white America to blame for deteriorating race relations.
She said, I will call for white people like myself to put ourselves in the shoes of African American families who fear every time their children go somewhere.
We have to talk about how to really protect themselves when they're the ones who should be expecting protection from encounters with the police.
I'm going to be talking to white America.
I think we're the ones who have to start listening to legitimate cries coming from African American citizens.
Now, over the weekend, now, for the second time in three days since Dallas, we have had a mass shooting attack on the police that thankfully this time failed to injure or kill any cops.
Gunfire hit the San Antonio police headquarters on Saturday night, leaving bullet marks on the building, showcasings in a nearby alley.
They're investigating that case.
The Minnesota police chief says the anti-cop protesters have turned into criminals.
Obama administration says hate crime charges are unlikely in the case of this guy in Texas and others that may ultimately be involved.
How could it not be a hate crime when he said he wanted to kill white people and kill white cops?
Micah Johnson.
Anyway, joining us now, we have Sergeant Gilbert Fishblock.
He's a former squad leader, platoon mate, tactical trainer of the Dallas cop killer, Micah X. Johnson, and Brian, who we had to conceal his voice, he's a former NCO from Mika Johnson's platoon.
And so I appreciate you both being with us.
Gilbert, tell us a little bit about what you know about this guy.
Well, he's always been a pretty good kid.
I mean, when he first came to the unit, my initial analysis of him was he was just kind of goofy.
He just seemed like he was looking for attention.
That was my opinion.
But all around, he was pretty good.
When we asked him, that, you know, told him that we needed to get stuff done.
He was usually there to do it.
Very little trouble out of him.
But he was kind of gluty and clumsy with a lot of things.
And certain things he showed some enthusiasm and other things he didn't.
Now, I understand there was a report on Breitbart that shows that Micah Johnson literally scrawled a black revolutionary message in his own blood.
He was kicked out of the Army for stealing panties, which is a bizarre charge to me.
But anyway, he plotted a bigger assault, taunted officers and the police chief.
We know that, you know, in fact, in spite of people reporting that it was an assault weapon, it was just a common SKS, not an assault rifle.
Is there anything, Brian, you can tell us about him that stood out in your mind, having known him for that amount of time?
No, not really.
I mean, there were times that things came out, but they were so spread out and random that it would have been very difficult to put them all together and say, hey, this guy's got some issues that he doesn't need to be here anymore.
Well, what made you think, what would make you think that?
He made comments that I was told about anytime somebody was talking about dying or death that he would say, well, you know, whenever my time comes, I'm going to go down in history.
Don't you think that's pretty profound that somebody's talking about going down in history?
Doesn't that sound like they have a plan to do something horrible?
It would if there were more incidents that occurred pointing towards that, but there weren't.
He joked around a lot.
He always had a big smile on his face.
He just never put off that persona that he was.
And I've known some people in the military that I am, you know, if something like this happened, I could say I could have seen that coming.
But not in this case, even though he had said he's going to go down in history.
Right.
Like I said, there would be months and even years in between any kind of comment he would make.
Gilbert, what did you want to say?
I believe that comment came much later on.
I think that was during a conversation, if I'm not mistaken.
That came while they were close towards the end of his time in Afghanistan, if I'm not mistaken.
Am I correct?
Brian, do you believe that came at the end of his time in Afghanistan?
I think it was sometime around mid-tour, from what I understand.
Is there anything else you could tell us about him?
Anything else that you think stands out in your mind?
Brian.
No, not really.
I mean, he was never your model soldier, but he also wasn't one that was in much trouble.
He had a lot of friends in the platoon, mainly white.
The whole white-hating thing that's come out, something had to have happened after he left the service.
Because it didn't show up earlier.
Gilbert, anything else that comes to your mind?
No, I mean, it's just, like I was saying, you know, it's difficult for me to really kind of soak all this in.
I mean, I was as shocked as anybody else, especially when I found out that it was Micah that did that.
Mainly, I guess the hard thing was for me, and I talked to Brian about this on several different occasions shortly after the incident happened, was that, you know, for years I've asked and practically begged for us to be more tactically proficient.
And being that myself, Brian, and maybe one other in our company that had any kind of tactical experience, training, or what have you, you know, it was left up to us to do that.
And when the order finally came through, of course, I was all enthused about it.
Now, Micah, he just, like, again, he just was somewhat clumsy.
He didn't seem to be too enthused about anything tactical.
We worked with him more to try to get him to do the movements and some of the actions and, of course, some of the techniques properly and to understand them.
We've actually had other soldiers that have worked one-on-one with him to help him out during some of the practical exercise.
But he just never, it just never seemed to me or occurred to me that somebody like him who never seemed to be enthused about anything tactical, he would actually take heart of it later on and actually go with it and use it in such a way.
All right, guys, we really appreciate it.
Thank you both for being with us.
800-941-Sean is a toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
We got Eddie is in Virginia.
Eddie, you're on the Sean Hannity show.
We're glad you called, sir.
Hey, Sean, good afternoon.
Thanks for taking my call.
Thank you.
Hey, just wanted to call.
Okay, let me lay the ground what I'm calling for is that, you know, of course, you know, I mean, I follow you and I listen to everything that is being shared on both sides of this whole Dallas issue.
The uniform of veteran, retired veteran, or whatever stuff.
I absolutely have sympathy for people in uniform because I was one for 22 years for my nation, just like these loyal cops.
But, you know, the problem I'm having with this right here is instead of having balanced scales and we're looking at what's going on in the minority community as well as in the police community, you know, everybody's jumping in their corners, you know.
You know, people are really trying to downplay what's going on with black people.
All right, can you just pick up your phone?
You're like on a speakerphone.
You got to get up close to the mic there.
Go ahead.
Oh, can you hear me?
I'm sorry.
Yeah, pick up the phone because it sounds like you're on a speakerphone.
You got to pick it up.
Yeah, can you hear me better, sir?
That's better.
Go.
Yeah.
But anyway, yeah, so like I said, you know, we're jumping to our corners.
You know, I was watching your show the other night when they were, you know, having on the ground talking to the different people in the Black Lives Matter Matters movie.
And Sean, I'll be honest with you.
I didn't like how you were trying to find people that were going to say things inflammatory.
I mean, what do you mean trying to?
What do you mean trying to find them?
They were there.
Well, you kept in sight, you kept insisting on the matter.
Because they had Black Lives Matter's t-shirts on.
Let me ask you a question.
Do all lives matter or do Black Lives Matter?
All lives do matter.
Thank you.
So to have a Black Lives Matter movement, you know, it seems to isolate and separate and not unite.
You're talking about uniting here.
Isn't the best way we can unite saying all lives matter?
And it's just a basic, simple, fundamental point that I would expect a presidential candidate like Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders to understand.
But do you understand it?
Have you ever lived in black?
Have you ever been black, Sean?
Let me see.
I woke up one day about a year ago.
Do you realize how stupid your question is?
I mean, it's really ridiculous.
No, no, this is what Sean Hannity knows and believes to be true in the way I was raised.
And that is that every human being is created by the same God and that we were all born with talent and all born with abilities.
And I know that everything's broken down demographically throughout every even political campaigns and rating services for crying out loud.
I understand all that.
But the reality is, yeah, there are some racist people.
And yes, slavery was an evil, a horrible evil.
And thankfully, our framers and founders put in place a plan that we can overcome evil, wrong, and injustices.
And we did.
And there were brave people, many of whom I got to meet when I was broadcasting in Atlanta, that stood up against people that were turning dogs and fire hoses on them and throwing rocks at them for justice for all people.
And there were white people and they were black people fighting for the rights of individuals.
Racism in any form is evil.
I would agree with that.
But, you know, the problem here that we're having is, you know, if we look at the president, for example, he invites Black Lives Matters to the White House and they're chanting pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon.
And he only talked about Chicago nine times during his presidency.
3,459 people have been killed since he's been president in his own home city.
So if Black Lives Matter, why doesn't he speak about that?
But I got to go.
Elisa, next in Florida.
How are you?
John, it's so good to talk to you today.
I am calling to say I think Newt Gingrich will be an awesome, outstanding VP.
He is a statesman.
He is smart.
He loves his country.
He respects our Constitution and the rule of law, which we need someone like that.
And that brings me to the antithesis of him, which I think is Paul Ryan.
And what I originally called you for was to tell you that I've come up with an answer.
I found out the answer to a question you've been asking for weeks on your radio show as well as your TV show.
The question has been, why is Paul Ryan so quick to criticize Donald Trump but silent on criticizing Hillary and Obama?
What's the answer to my question?
I called Speaker Ryan's office, spoke to one of his assistants, and asked that, and they said that the lady said to me, he endorsed Trump, but Paul has a moral compass to uphold.
And so when Trump says something that he doesn't agree with, he has to when he says that somebody's racist, but I'm going to vote for that person that I think is racist.
And he's never been outspoken, never challenged the president's agenda, which has been bad for the country, the way I and others have challenged Obama's agenda, and they have literally signed off on it.
That's a problem, a huge problem.
And the same with Hillary.
They're more critical of Trump than Hillary.
Look, if Trump loses this election more than anybody else right now, I will blame Republican establishment type for that happening.
Remember what she did, right?
She sets up this unique server arrangement.
She alone controls it.
On that server, on that email system are her personal emails, her work-related emails, Clinton Foundation information, and now we know classified information.
This gets discovered.
We find out this arrangement exists.
Then what happens?
Her lawyers, her legal team decides which ones we get and which ones they get to keep.
They made the sort on the front end.
And then we find out the ones that they kept and didn't give to us, didn't give to the American people, didn't give to Congress, the ones they kept, they destroyed them.
And you don't have to take my word.
I'll take what you said on Tuesday.
They deleted all emails that they did not return to the State Department, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.
Now, that sounds like a fancy way of saying they hid the evidence, right?
And you just told Mr. Gowdy, thousands of emails fell into those categories.
Now, that seems to me to provide some context to what took place here.
Did Secretary Clinton know her legal team deleted those emails that they kept from us?
I don't believe so.
Did Secretary Clinton approve those emails being deleted?
I don't think there was any specific instruction or conversation between the Secretary and her lawyers about that.
Did you ask that question?
Yes.
Did Secretary Clinton know that her lawyers cleaned devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery?
I don't believe that she did.
Did you ask that question?
Yes.
Do you see how someone could view the context of what she did?
Set up a private system.
She alone controlled it.
She kept everything on it.
We now know from Ms. Abedeen's deposition that they did it for that very reason so no one could see what was there based on the deposition Ms. Abedeen gave.
And then when they got caught, they deleted what they had and they scrubbed their devices.
Is that part of the context in evaluating this decision?
Sure, sure.
And understand what inferences can be drawn from that collection of facts, of course.
You want something that's classified to put a marking on that paragraph.
Right.
And there were three that bore C in parens, which means that's confidential classified information.
So a reasonable person who has been a senator, a secretary of state, a first lady, wouldn't a reasonable person know that that was a classified marking?
As a secretary of state.
A reasonable person.
That's all I'm asking.
Yeah, before this investigation, I probably would have said yes.
I'm not so sure.
I don't find it incredible.
Director Comey, come on.
I mean, I've only been here a few years, and I understand the importance of those markings.
So you're suggesting that a long length of time that she had no idea what a classified marking would be?
That's your sworn testimony today?
No, no, not that she would have no idea what a classified marking would be, but it's an interesting question as to whether she ⁇ this question about sophistication came up earlier, whether she was actually sophisticated enough to understand what a C in perenns means.
So you're saying this former Secretary of State is not sophisticated enough to understand a classified marking?
No, it's not.
That's a huge statement.
No, I'm saying you asked me, did I assume that someone would know?
Probably before this investigation, I would have.
I'm not so sure of that answer any longer.
I think it's possible, possible, that she didn't understand what a C meant when she saw it in the body of an email like that.
Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her private email.
Was that true?
Our investigation found that there was classified information sent.
So it was not true.
That's what I said.
Okay.
Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails, either sent or received.
Was that true?
That's not true.
There were a small number of portion markings on, I think, three of the documents.
Secretary Clinton said I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email.
There is no classified material.
Was that true?
There was classified material emailed.
Secretary Clinton said she used just one device.
Was that true?
She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as Secretary of State.
Secretary Clinton said all work-related emails were returned to the State Department.
Was that true?
No, we found work-related emails, thousands, that were not returned.
Secretary Clinton said neither she nor anyone else deleted work-related emails from her personal account.
Was that true?
That's a harder one to answer.
We found traces of work-related emails on devices or in Slack space, whether they were deleted or whether when a server was changed out, something happened to them.
There's no doubt that they're work-related emails that were removed electronically from the email system.
Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive.
Did her lawyers read the email content individually?
No.
All right.
You heard there from Congressman Jim Jordan, who is the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus.
You heard from Congressman Mark Meadows of North Carolina, founding member of the Freedom Caucus, and you heard from Trey Gowdy.
And Trey Gowdy just devastating.
James Comey, the FBI, who had to acknowledge that Hillary said multiple lies, repeatedly lied to the American people as she made excuse after excuse after excuse that turned out not to be true.
Anyway, news roundup information overload hour, 800-941.
Sean is on number.
You want to be a part of the program?
Congressman Jordan and Congressman Meadows are with us.
There is an ABC News Washington Post poll that finds Congressman Jordan a 21-point landslide margin that the American people, a majority of them, believe that Hillary Clinton deserved to be indicted.
I think a lot of prosecutors would have taken the case to a grand jury, too, Sean.
Seven different false statements she made publicly, and four of them, at least four of them, were made under oath to a congressional committee last October in front of the Benghazi Committee.
So when you have that fact pattern, and as Mr. Comey said, the inference that can be drawn when they set up this situation, this unique server situation, did it for the very reason to hide information according to Ms. Abedeen's deposition.
And then when they got caught, they got to sort on the front end, her and her lawyers.
And once they decided which ones they'd keep, which one would come to Congress and which one would come back to the State Department, they destroyed the other.
And they did so in such a way, I love the language he learned.
Lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic discovery, which is a nice and fancy way of saying they hid the evidence.
So when you have all that, it's kind of logical for Americans to infer what you just described and what the poll describes.
Well, why do I think that if this was me, I would have been arrested for obstruction of justice.
Yeah, that's the sad takeaway, Sean, is right now.
So many Americans.
Why did James Comey do this, in your opinion?
Now that you've had a chance to interview him and talk to him, and I watched these hearings, I was stunned.
You know, he laid out a case for prosecution that went on for over 13 minutes.
I said, wow, he's really going to do it.
And then at the end, he said, but forget it.
While, yes, we would act in other cases.
We're not going to act in this case.
He acknowledges she lied, as you point out seven times, to the American people.
Everything was designed for the purpose of preventing congressional oversight.
Clearly, she wanted to, you know, I can think of multiple criminal statutes that she, in fact, broke, and she got away with it.
So we just have to accept this is over now.
And Trey's point that, you know, no one ever just declares and puts in an email, I'm going to break the law.
You have to infer that and figure that out from what facts you have in front of us.
And it's a logical inference, a logical conclusion, when they set it up the way they did, and when she made this many false statements regarding what actually took place that are directly contradicted by Mr. Comey's investigation, and then everything points right to, okay, here we go, and then he doesn't do it.
And so, again, I have to take him at his word, which is he talked in committee about he didn't feel that he could actually prove intent.
Where the rest of us were looking at all these facts and we say, sure, it looks like intent right there in front of us.
Congressman Meadows, you agree with that assessment?
Well, I think for most of the American people, Sean, it is that willful intent that we somehow question.
We say, how in the world can you look at this set of facts and come to this conclusion?
And I think that that's the troubling thing.
And most Americans believe that there's a double standard, one for Washington D.C. and another for Main Street.
And it's just problematic.
It's like suggesting, Sean, that I am speeding past the speed limit.
And I didn't do it willfully.
I was just extremely careless, and I shouldn't get a ticket.
But yet we're dealing with national security.
It should have a much higher standard than that.
Well, I would think so, too.
Is Congress going to move on this idea that Hillary should have a security clearance removed?
Yeah, we're calling for a special prosecution.
Speaker Sean has spoke out on that.
And I also think the question of her providing false answers under oath to Congress is going to be examined as well.
So we're trying to push on all three of those accounts.
Yeah.
Let me move on and talk about some other things.
There is a lot of anger.
And I'm one of the people that are pretty angry at Congressman Paul Ryan for his treatment of Donald Trump.
And it's very frustrating to me that the Republican establishment seems to be unwilling to accept the fact that Donald Trump won more votes than any other presidential nominee in a primary than anybody else in history.
And they seem to be unhappy with the votes of the American people.
Why is that?
Well, Sean, I think the vast majority of the American people have spoken, and it's very clear at this particular point.
There was a jury.
The jury has come back with a verdict.
Donald Trump is the nominee, and it's incumbent upon all of us to make sure that not only do we support the nominee, but we go even further than that and to push back against some of the media hits that come from some on the left that would suggest that somehow Donald Trump is not speaking for the vast majority of Americans.
I believe that he is.
I do think that you're starting to see some in Washington, D.C., including Speaker Ryan, come around.
And part of that is that just when you have a difficult enough time of suggesting to control what we say when we're running for office, it's tougher when you have somebody like Donald Trump saying a few things that perhaps are more difficult to get your arms around.
But I do think that you're going to see a very unified message coming out of the convention.
I know Congressman Jordan and I both will be there and look forward to it.
Some people have said they're not going to go.
I mean, you have past presidential candidates that are not going to go.
I find all of this very disturbing and frustrating.
And I would make the argument, and I think both of you being parts of the Freedom Caucus, which is really the only part of Congress that I have any respect for, and both of you, in part, are responsible for Speaker Boehner being ousted.
I think I speak for most Americans, and it showed up in every exit poll that they feel betrayed by the Republican Party, that they didn't combat the Obama agenda in the way that they had promised that they would.
They didn't repeal the aspects of Obamacare they said they would.
They didn't stop executive amnesty like they promised they would.
They never had the willingness to use the power of the purse, their constitutional authority.
They ceded that to the president.
All the president had to do was threaten a government shutdown, and it looked like Republicans would cave out of fear they would get blamed.
Well, you're right, Sean.
And that's why I think it, when you look at this race, let's go to Cleveland, let's get behind our nominee, and let's make sure he wins.
And remember, the person we were just talking about, that's his opponent.
So that's an even more reason why we should do everything we can to help him win.
The very person who set up this arrangement, the very person who testified under oath in front of Congress and made false statements, the very person who publicly made other false statements, the same lady who, on the night of the Benghazi attack, thought it was more important to focus on the political spin even before the attack was over.
So, yeah, let's get behind our nominee and let's go win this thing and get the country headed back in the right direction.
Well, certainly, I mean, the agenda that I have interviewed Donald Trump many, many times.
I could tell you what he's going to do on the border.
I can tell you what he wants to do with health care.
I can tell you what he wants to do with the economy.
I can tell you where he stands on energy independence and the VA and ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism and on trade and everything else.
And I think for the most part, it's a very conservative agenda, more populist than conservative in some places like trade, but certainly an improvement.
We know where he stands with Supreme Court justices.
Why this mysterious reluctance and resistance to get the Republican Party to support him, Congressman Meadows?
Well, I think part of what you have, Sean, is that you have a number of people who are afraid that things in Washington, D.C. will change.
And that's what people across America are cheering for: they will change.
And yet, you've got the establishment party in Washington, D.C. saying, please don't change this, don't change that.
And watch what you say.
I think Americans and you and I both agree that it is time that we get a few things done.
And even if Donald Trump is only successful on two or three of those things that he says that he's willing to address, we can cheer.
That's two or three things.
Hey, energy independence.
Judges, repealing Obamacare, getting our balance, getting a balanced budget would be massive.
Let me ask you both this.
This is VP Selection Week.
If you could pick one person for Donald Trump to be his VP, who would you pick?
Jim Jordan?
I'd pick Mark Meadows.
All right, stop.
Who would you pick?
John Hannity, because now you're an honorary member of the Freedom Caucus.
Why not pick Hannity?
That'd be good.
Yeah, by the way, just another reason most of these guys in D.C., Republicans, won't come near the show anymore, which is interesting.
You ruined your reputation here even more.
No, you didn't ruin my reputation.
All right, how do you like this argument for Newt Gingrich?
Newt Gingrich is the smartest guy I know.
He's been there and he's done it.
He's balanced the budget.
He gave us welfare reform.
He's the smartest political strategist.
I can't think of anybody that could prosecute the case against Hillary better than him.
I think he could probably even sell Donald Trump better than Trump can sell himself.
He'd be great in debates.
And I also think that he'd be able to go to Congress and give these guys a backbone and a spine, which they need.
I think Newt would be great, Sean.
And I don't know if you saw Donald Trump speech in Cincinnati last week.
I did.
That was a great speech where people were fired up and it was kind of all over the place, but it was typical Trump.
And he was talking, they had Newt there with him.
So I think if that's the problem.
Well, I keep hearing Mike Pence.
Who's better, Mike Pence or Newt Gingrich, in your opinion, Mark Meadows?
Yeah, both of those are real good selections.
I know Newt have talked to him quite a bit over the last couple of months about really coming forward with a good plan.
I loved his contract with America.
You know, when you really look at it, you're right.
He's one of the smartest, well-informed debaters.
And so whether Donald Trump picked Newt or Mike Pence, I could be satisfied with either one of them.
Who would be better at prosecuting the case against Hillary?
I think you've got actually Newt probably more in tune with that because he's been following it.
You've got Mike Pence as the governor.
He's been focused on the pressure.
Who's the guy of the two?
Who's the guy you want in the room if there's a huge crisis, economic, national security?
Who would you prefer?
I think they're both.
I mean, look, Sean, I'm not going to pick.
I think they're both.
Mike Pence is a friend of mine.
I think Newt's been a great leader for our country and someone I have utmost respect for.
I think either one would be tremendous, a tremendous asset to the ticket.
Thank you both.
The only few people in Congress that I have any respect for.
Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows.
Thank you guys.
I was in your home state, Mark Meadows, last week, and then I got called back to work.
So anyway, great to be in North Carolina as usual.
All right.
Thanks so much, Sean.
Take care.
All right, guys.
Thank you.
Let's get to our phones.
A lot of you standing by very patiently.
Joe in LA J, Georgia.
Joe's been a longtime friend and caller.
Joe, how are you?
Glad you called, sir.
Sean, I'm doing great.
And I think that Trump, I'm really fired up now about Trump, and I think with Steve Moore as his economic advisor, and I think Newt Gingrich would be the best vice president.
Of course, I'm from Georgia.
I've known Newt for years personally.
He would be fantastic to take the case to the American people that we need Trump's plan of less government, less taxes, more freedom.
So I'm really fired up about Trump.
And with Steve Moore as his advisor and Newt Gingrich as vice president, I think Trump will be the next president and would have the best economy and the best growth in the history of America.
He's done it before, as I said.
I can't think of anybody.
I mean, Newt just commands.
When he speaks, he commands people to listen.
He's that compelling.
He's that bright.
He's that smart.
He's had the most transformative speakership, I think, of any speaker in modern times.
And I can tell you that, you know, if I'm Trump and I want to prosecute the case against Hillary, I want Newt leading the way.
If I'm Trump and if I want somebody to advocate for me and make me look good and lay out my case, I think there's nobody better than Newt.
Go, Newt.
Go watch on.
All right, Joe, appreciate it.
If I'm somebody, if I'm Donald Trump and I want my agenda laid out and somebody to articulate the vision that I have for the country, it's Newt.
If there's somebody that I want debating on debate night, vice presidential debate night, it would be Newt.
If I want a strategist, somebody that can help me win that, remember, he literally spent years developing the foundation for the contract with America, which brought Republicans to power for the first time in 40 years.
He knows how to win.
If I want somebody that's going to govern and that wants to govern in a bold, transformational way, well, that's the guy that's done it.
For me, it's a no-brainer.
I'm not saying that Pence isn't a nice guy.
He is.
I'm not saying that General Flynn isn't a great man.
He is.
I'm not saying that I don't like Joni Ernst.
I don't have a problem with Joni Ernst.
But we'll see what happens.
Let's go to Jeff in Brooklyn.
Jeff, hi, how are you and glad you called?
Hey, Sean, how are you doing?
I'm feeling great.
I think Trump and Newt would be the great dynamic duo.
I mean, Trump will shake up the political world, and there is nobody out there that is smarter than Newt Gimrich.
And Newt Gimrich beat the Clintons 20 years ago, and he will do it again.
You can't double-talk him.
You can't back him into a corner.
You can't fall over him.
He just has the answers for everything.
That would be the greatest duo there.
He'd be the greatest vice president ever that we've ever had.
There's no doubt in my mind.
I think Trump needs somebody like Newt, somebody that's going to go into the Capitol that they know and like and respect.
And some people don't like Newt, but that's too bad for them.
That's going to advocate forcefully the case for Trump because if you don't get the Congress to go along, you can't do anything.
We can't transform the country if we can't get the Congress to have a backbone.
I agree.
Well, Newt showed he could work with both sides and get it done.
Absolutely.
He's not going to do seven out of ten items on the contract with America.
And more do you need than that?
He kept his promise on those top items.
He kept the promise in the first hundred days, and that was kind of refreshing.
We really haven't seen it since, have we?
No, it's great because anytime Republicans run and hide under the table, except for Trump, and Ginrich is not going to run and hid either.
He's going to do what he says.
All right.
I appreciate it, Jeff.
We have Michelle in Colorado next on the Sean Hannity show.
What's up, Michelle?
How are you?
And we're glad you called.
Thank you, Sean.
How are you?
I'm good.
I like Newt because I'm old enough to remember that he was able to get a lot done.
He was able to bring the parties together.
And I think, you know, if you look at it in an entertaining way, wouldn't it be fun to have Newt assist in going up against Hillary Clinton, who he knows better than most probably do.
My biggest concern is the younger generation on many levels, but there's a lot of younger people that don't know who he is.
Let me ask you a question.
I think that's true, but I guarantee you they don't know who Mike Pence or General Flynn is either, right?
No, no.
All right, so when Newt Gingrich speaks, can you not walk, don't you think he is an impressive intellect?
He is.
And in fact, I was having this conversation with my husband, and he said, people aren't going to get Newt.
They don't understand.
And I said, you know something?
If you really look at people, you look at humanity, children crave discipline.
Children crave structure.
And right now, this country needs discipline, and we need structure.
And we need that coming from someone with that level of class, that level of intellect, that level of understanding.
So in other words, more than anybody else, when he speaks, for example, let's say they pick Newt on Thursday or Friday this week.
And let's say Newt gives a speech.
Don't you think that people will say, wow, he's a pretty impressive speaker, even if they don't know him?
How could you not be listening to Obama?
And don't you think that would give confidence to maybe people that say, well, Donald Trump doesn't have the background and experience, and then people will learn that this guy actually is the last speaker to have balanced the budget and give us a surplus?
Absolutely.
And this is the guy that knows how to win.
He was the architect of Republicans gaining power for the first time in 40 years.
Absolutely.
And then they're going to learn about welfare reform.
I mean, he was a truly transformative speaker.
And all this happened during the Clinton administration.
How could that not be beneficial from a marketing perspective?
I agree.
I'm sold.
All right, Michelle, thank you.
Mo is in Brooklyn, New York, listening to the all-new AM710, W-O-R, The Voice of New York.
How are you?
I'm fine, Sean.
It's good to hear that.
Now, Mo is a crazy liberal.
Mo's been calling me for years, but I like Moe.
Do you still think I'm the most dangerous guy in America or is that past?
Oh, you're becoming so dangerous.
It's the trumpets and your heralding, and it's just very, very dangerous what you're doing, Sean.
If I was really concerned that America was going to take two steps backwards, I'd be really frightened.
But America's not going to go backwards, Sean, no matter what.
We're not going back to the days of Clinton.
We're not going back to any of that stuff.
These kids, they're not going to fall for this stuff.
Well, we'll see.
But, you know, from my perspective, you know, Newt's the last guy that balanced the budget.
Newt's the last guy that did anything remotely transformative for the country.
And Newt's the last guy that was a great success.
So if I'm Donald Trump, I can't think of anybody that would prosecute the case against Hillary Clinton as well as he would.
I don't know anybody that could advocate for Trump.
I think Newt will be more effective in selling Donald Trump than even Donald Trump can be.
And who's the guy you want in a debate?
Who's the guy that you want in the room the day that there's a financial crisis or an international crisis or a foreign policy crisis of some kind?
Who do you want there?
I want him.
Anyway, Mo, thanks for the call.
All right, back to our busy telephones we go.
Staz is in Vegas listening to K-Dawn Radio.
What's up, Staz?
How are you?
Glad you called.
Doing great.
Thanks for taking the call, Sean.
Hey, thank you.
What's going on?
I wanted to comment on Trump's candidate, vice presidential candidate.
You know, I was disappointed years ago when Newt Gingrich didn't run for president.
I think he'd make a fantastic vice president for a number of different reasons, some of which you've already mentioned, but also, and he's proven, but also because if one of these wackos successfully takes out Donald Trump as a threatened, who better?
Who's more qualified to be president of the United States?
Newt would make a fantastic president.
Well, that's the number one criteria.
If you're looking for a VP, can that person be the president if, God forbid, something happens?
You have to ask that question first.
Once they meet that threshold, then to me, in this election year, and tell me if you think my thinking is wrong, I think you've got to ask, all right, who is going to, first of all, I think he would help with the base, and Trump needs help with the base.
There's only about 73% of Republican and Republicans that, at least according to the polling, that are voting for Trump.
I think Newt would increase that number significantly because he's loved by conservatives.
The second thing, who would best prosecute the case against Hillary?
I can't think of anybody better.
Who would you most want to be in a vice presidential debate that you'd have confidence in?
Who do you think could best advocate for Trump?
I think Newt might advocate better for Trump than Trump can for crying out loud because he would articulate what his vision is.
Yeah, I think you're spot on on all those topics.
One other thing about Newt is he has a great crossover appeal.
You know, I was looking at Van Jones' Facebook page, and they just, you know, it's very well connected to Newt Kingrich.
I think he's going to help them on many, many levels.
I saw that as well.
And you know what?
He also has another post that he put up there that I thought was pretty impactful as well.
But, you know, look, Newt is a powerful personality in his own right.
But if I'm Donald Trump and you really want to transform the country, I want a partner that's going to be able to help me get that dramatic change that America needs.
I don't think it's a time for half measures.
And while I think the names on the list that we keep reading about, there's many admirable people on there, but I don't see anybody that could be as effective in any of the categories in which I'm looking at this from.
Yeah, I completely agree.
Newt is definitely the guy.
Donald, got to go with Newt Kingrich.
All right.
Thanks, Staz.
Appreciate it.
800-941 Sean.
Leslie is in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Leslie, hi.
How are you?
Glad you called.
Thanks so much.
Thanks for taking my vote.
I'm doing well.
I had some thoughts about the vice presidential pick, too.
First, I'll say I will vote for Trump no matter who he chooses.
He is now my candidate.
Rubio had been my candidate during the primary.
And so here's my question for you.
I do think that.
Rubio doesn't want the job.
I know.
I know.
All right.
Rubio's now back running for the Senate.
So you've got to look at some of the realities of what the political situation is now.
So not everybody's available.
Okay.
And John Kasich is governor.
He said he doesn't want to be considered.
He would not be my pick.
Yeah, okay.
So, all right, but he's not available either.
So if you're looking for geographic choices, I'm looking for the guy that can prosecute intelligently and forcefully and passionately the case against Hillary and that can advocate for Trump and can explain Trump's positions in a way that Trump can't.
I think definitely that Newt can do that.
I think he's the man.
Here are my two concerns about Newt: one is his age.
I'm not sure that he would, I'm afraid that might be a problem for some people.
The other thing I have is his history with the Clintons.
I think he gives Hillary a perfect opportunity to say, you know, to brush aside any sort of criticism.
Well, here Newt goes again, always after the Clintons.
So I don't, that part makes me a little bit uneasy.
You know, the best offense is a good, excuse me, the best defense is a good offense.
So rather than answering questions, it gives her an opportunity to go on the offense to Newt and try to demean his remarks, just saying, well, historically, you've always gone after the Clintons.
So that's the little bit of uneasiness I had with him, too.
Here's my case.
Okay.
He's been the most transformative political figure since Ronald Reagan, just a fact.
So he brings that wealth of knowledge and experience with him.
He's older, wiser, and smarter because I know him.
He reads every second of every day.
He's the most intelligent and most articulate guy that I interview on a regular basis by far.
That's why I like that mon so much because he's so smart, so insightful.
He has this knowledge, this base of history that is inspiring, in which everything that he says is sort of filtered through that prism of history that he has such great knowledge of.
I think he would dissect and literally take piece by piece, make the case against Hillary Clinton in a way that's so far effective above his nearest competitor.
I think he would lay out in his very commonsensical speaking style why Donald Trump would be a great president.
I think that he would be behind the scenes the best strategist for the team.
And I think in terms of governing, if they win, he's the guy that could help get things done.
And frankly, winning is part of it, but then governing is the biggest part of it.
And bringing transformational change to Washington is not going to be a simple task.
Well, sign me up for the Trump Gingrich team then.
Wow.
I just, you're going to put a sign in your yard.
All right.
Thank you.
Big time, AJ Houston, Texas.
What's going on, baby?
Big time, John Hannity.
Hey, baby, our country's hearts are heavy this time.
And Trump and Trump is going to be the ones that fix this, doggone.
They got to do the operation to get this country back.
We have fallen back 50 years after what Hillary and Obama have done to us.
And I'd rather have Mr. Sheriff Clark speak tomorrow instead of Obama because all the rhetoric, and nobody else ain't going to say it.
They're going to call me what they want, but all the rhetoric comes out since this guy walked in.
This has been against the police department.
And Lord help us all because without the police, this country and the world would be a mess.
And doggone it, why in the world media letting them get away with this?
I don't know the ideology that they're doing.
But Newton Trump, they're going to be the ones that fix this mess.
And with our help to vote them in, to make sure Hillary don't get in there to finish up what Obama has done to this country, boy, I tell you, America, we got to take this back and take it back with vengeance, baby, because this is a shame what's going on with our country.
I said our country.
Because all lives matter.
I'm sick of the race thing.
All lives matter.
God made us all bleed red.
And doggone it, we tired of people picking and choosing who they're going against.
People, we all matter in God's eyes.
And doggone it, we better make the choice right this time.
If we don't, well, you know what, John?
I just don't want to say what because I believe in God, and I believe we're going to do it right.
