Sean Hannity Show - Continuing Resolution - 9.2

Sept. 3, 2016 - Sean Hannity Show

01:34:51

Continuing Resolution - 9.2

Congressman Louie Gohmert filled in for Sean and immediately went to the task of explaining the importance of a continuing resolution in Congress. This resolution would be designed to curb spending by setting a maximum spend. 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.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart Podcast.
	Let not your heart be troubled.
	You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
	In a congressional hearing on July 7th, Director Comey directly contradicted what you had told the public.
	I had uh not sent uh classified material nor received anything uh mark classified.
	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.
	Right.
	That I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received.
	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.
	I never sent um classified uh material on my email, and I never received any uh that was marked classified.
	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.
	People across the government knew that I used one device.
	Maybe it was uh because I am not the most technically capable person and uh wanted to make it as easy as possible.
	Secretary Clinton said she used just one device.
	Was that true?
	She used multiple devices during the four years uh of her term as Secretary of State.
	But we turned over everything that was work-related.
	Every single thing.
	Personal stuff, we did not.
	I had no obligation to do so and did not.
	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.
	All I can tell you is that when my attorneys conducted this exhaustive process, I did not participate.
	Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive.
	Did her lawyers read the email content individually?
	No.
	He directly contradicted what I'm saying.
	Well, I let me just just he not only directly contradicted what you said, he also said in that hearing that you were extremely careless and negligent.
	Well, Chris, I looked at the whole transcript of everything that was said, and what I believe is number one, I made a mistake, not using two different email addresses.
	I have said that, and I repeat it again today.
	It is certainly not anything that I ever would do again.
	I take classification seriously.
	I relied on and had every reason to rely on the judgments of the professionals with whom I worked.
	Welcome to the Sean Hannity Show.
	This is uh obviously not Sean's beautiful accent.
	Uh this is Lowley Legislator Louie Gomert, and I'm honored once again to be sitting in for my dear friend that I love, Sean Hannity.
	And uh what an amazing montage.
	And you know, I think uh I think I must have suffered a concussion back in high school football, and uh yeah, I just don't recall.
	I had a great lineup uh sitting in for Sean today, and I just don't recall all the good things that we were gonna get into.
	But fortunately, uh Sean has a fantastic staff, and they're gonna get me through this.
	And so uh that's despite all the lack of recollection I have.
	You know, uh folks uh welcome to the Sean Hannity Show, and we're gonna take calls.
	You know the number 800-941 Sean, 800-941-7326.
	And uh oh, yeah.
	Lauren says, mention your website.
	I always forget to plug myself from my website, but it's just gomert.com, G-O-A-Jimmy R T. But look, folks, uh, I've seen and heard over and over again.
	I know you have, on television, on radio, all over the media, uh Clinton apologists say the same thing.
	Well, she's the most investigated.
	She's been asked more questions, and what they fail to say is she's been investigated.
	She's never turned over anything voluntarily, and it has to come from other sources, and she lies about what happened to it, where it went.
	Uh Yes, she's been questioned a great deal, but she has given more non-answers, more non-disclosure, more non-recollection.
	And uh this goes back well before the so-called concussion she had.
	But folks, you know, in another life, before I was uh congressman in U.S. Congress, before I was a chief justice of a court of appeals, before I was a felony district judge, be f uh I I had a life as a lawyer trying mainly civil cases.
	And I can tell you uh that lawyers constantly told their clients, you know, look, you can get prosecuted for lying under oath, you can get prosecuted for all kinds of things, but you can't be prosecuted for saying you don't recall.
	You can't be prosecuted for asking the question, what difference at this point does it make?
	But folks, uh, this is serious stuff.
	We can't have a president uh who has uh this many problems recalling just important details.
	Can you imagine her meeting with Putin?
	Oh, you know what?
	I forgot to mention in our discussion with Putin, this that or the other.
	I mean, holy cow.
	Uh she not only didn't answer the phone at two or three in the morning, she doesn't remember it ever ringing.
	And I I still would like to know.
	We've never gotten an answer.
	We know uh that there was real-time video being streamed from Benghazi that were showing American patriots, American heroes giving their lives for their country under attack.
	We know there were requests before that for help for sick additional security, hundreds of times that never came.
	And we know during that 13-plus hours, there were repeated requests.
	It was made pretty clear that there were some people that wanted to send them, and that didn't happen.
	I still would like an answer to the question, what Hillary Clinton did you do that night when you found out your so-called dear friend, Chris Stevens, was under attack, was missing, and others at the consulate were under attack.
	What did you do?
	I I guess to some people, you could say what difference at this point does it make whether Hillary Clinton just went to bed and slept soundly while people under her command and control were being killed.
	Uh we don't know what Obama did.
	Wish he would answer the question.
	Were you able to just go to bed while people were dying in the first uh ambassador dying in decades under your watch?
	Or did you stay up and watch the live stream and still refuse the whole time to send help?
	Uh I know to some people it wouldn't matter, but to most Americans, we want to know just how calloused are you.
	Are you calloused enough you could sit there and watch live streaming of people that you could have helped you could have saved watching them die?
	Or did you do what uh the President Obama's body man uh had said, you may remember sometime back he was speaking at a university out in California, and somebody asked him in essence, what was it like to be with President Obama when they were the SEALs were going after Bin Laden, and basically he just well, you know, he stuck his head in.
	Apparently there was a picture taken sometime.
	It may have been a setup afterwards, but if it was before, and if his body man, who had not no reason to lie, uh was telling the truth, um, he just stuck his head in, was so callous, so uncaring, uh, that he says, Ah, I'm on another room, and they played, I forget, Many hands of cards while our SEAL team members, their lives were on the line.
	Folks, it's incredible what this country has been under the leadership of and from or lack thereof.
	But now it's hitting the news, and as Lauren was pointing out earlier when when I was asking her to get the updated articles on Hillary's what's now being disclosed, she told the FBI she didn't understand the classified intel.
	She could not recall the briefings due to her concussion.
	All this stuff is coming out, Lauren said.
	Well, of course it's coming out now.
	This is the Friday before Labor Day, and therefore this is the big Clinton and Obama news dump.
	This is when you put all the worst out when people are not likely to be watching.
	Well, folks, uh I also see headlines.
	Uh Republicans are up in arms saying, you know what?
	The Democrats need to be held responsible for this Iran uh nuke deal.
	Well, you may remember my dear friend Sean had me substitute for him, guest host a year ago.
	It was immediate the day after Labor Day weekend, I believe, because I had just I was told at the time I was the only uh member of Congress who was allowed to meet with the head of Egyptian intelligence, and I think we met for well over two hours,
	and I came back right after that and came straight back and did the show, and and I was going, what could I do to possibly get Republicans in the Senate to stand up and stop this the monstrosity?
	It was an Iran treaty.
	They wouldn't call it a treaty, and yet Republicans could have stopped this disaster.
	And and so I pled.
	Okay, I don't have any money.
	I gave up making money to to come to Congress.
	Um what what have I got that McConnell might want that I might could lure him and John Boehner into doing?
	I went, well, of course, they want me out of Congress.
	I mean, they're recruited somebody to run against me this year.
	They talked to a number of people trying to get them to run against me.
	Somebody finally did.
	They're going after Tim Hules Camp.
	They were able to get him.
	They weren't able to get Paul Gosar last weekend.
	Bridenstein, some of our friends that were really stand-up people.
	But you want me out of Congress, then you set aside the cloture rule by using the read rule, and that means if it's something important, then you take 51 votes, you set aside the cloture rule, and then um you vote through whatever it is.
	And they could set aside cloture, they could have brought the Iran Treaty up as a treaty, and it would have required two-thirds to ratify the treaty, and it would have been dead on arrival.
	It wouldn't have not been ratified, but instead, Republicans got too cute, and the world hell hangs in the balance, and we're about to come back into session in September, and what are we gonna do?
	Are we gonna take up the Iran Treaty and stop it once and for all?
	No, I I I'm hearing that we're going to take up sentencing reform so that we can change the law after judges like I used to be agonized over what's an appropriate sentence, and we're gonna come back without knowing the facts in each individual case, and we're gonna pass laws that allow them to cut thousands and thousands of felons in this case from federal prison.
	And guess what?
	You think there will be other governors out there like Terry McCaulliff who'll say, oh, great.
	The Republicans in the House and Senate have a majority both places.
	They cut loose thousands of um inmates just in time for us to give them their voting rights just in time so they can give Hillary the uh the presidency and replace Scalia with someone who has no clue what the Constitution really says and means,
	and our rights, starting with religious freedom, freedom of speech, it'll be subjugated to Sharia law, gun rights, Tenth Amendment.
	There will be so many rights, not to mention fourth and fifth, as the government continues to intrude.
	Folks, this is a serious, serious time in American history, and we got to do something about it.
	We'll be glad to take your calls uh 800-941-7326, and we will be right back at the Sean Hannity show.
	Come on back and join us.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show, and this is Louis Gomer, member of Congress sitting in for my friend Sean.
	Uh let's go to the phones.
	Chris, uh, understand you're a pastor in Florida, is that correct?
	That's correct, Louis.
	Well, it's great to have you on.
	Welcome to the Sean Hannity Show.
	What's your comment?
	Question.
	Well, I just wanted to speak to the evangelicals who are never Trumpers, and said that they're not going to vote this year because they refuse to choose between the lesser of the two evils.
	But as evangelicals, Jesus himself said that none is good.
	None but God alone.
	No one is righteous.
	So it's always been us choosing between two evils.
	So really as evangelicals, that is not an excuse.
	Right.
	Well, uh, and and a point I used to make to people when I was qualifying them for juries, and they would say, Well, I'm a Christian, so I can't really serve on a jury.
	I would walk them through and end up at uh Romans 13.
	Uh, you know, i if you do evil, be afraid because God doesn't give the sword to the government in in uh vein.
	And actually, if you get a jury summons, then you've been handed the sword.
	If you have a right, if you're allowed to vote, and you refuse to participate, then you have walked away from your obligation as the government.
	You know, I mean Congress, but we're not really the government.
	The people are supposed to be the government, and they're supposed to show up on hiring day to participate in who they hire.
	And staying home is not a good option because people you're not going to like the way it goes.
	And yes, if Donald Trump's elected, then I'm gonna have some hard head knocking because I'm sure we're gonna disagree on some things, but you can't stay home.
	You gotta get out and do your job.
	This is Louis Gomert.
	I'm gonna have my friend Thomas Massey come back and join us shortly.
	This is indeed the Sean Hannity Show.
	I'm Louie Gomert, uh member of Congress sitting in for my friend Sean Hannity, and the number is 800-9417326.
	And uh by the way, uh here here's rundown of the breaking Hillary Clinton news.
	Hillary told the FBI she did not recall all the briefings she received on handling sensitive information as she made the transition from her post as U.S. Secretary of State due to a concussion suffered in 2012, according to a report released Friday.
	That's today, the news dump day.
	Wonder how she remembered she had a concussion in 2012.
	Oh well, she remembers that she didn't remember anything else.
	Uh Clinton did not recall receiving any emails.
	She thought should not have been uh or be on an unclassified system.
	Uh she relied on State Department officials to use their judgment when emailing her and could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information.
	She was folks, she didn't have the intelligence to know when something put Americans at risk.
	She doesn't need to be president of the United States.
	You remember Bill Clinton lost the nuclear code uh must have left the code in his another pair of pants or maybe in somebody else's pants, whatever.
	But anyway, Hillary tells the FBI in July she thought the classified C markings on emails recovered from her private emails were just a way to put paragraphs in alphabetical order.
	She didn't realize that meant classified.
	She also lost several mobile telephones carrying emails from her private server during her time in office, according to newly released FBI documents.
	And FBI agents said they recovered 17,448, quote, unique work-related and personal, unquote, emails, Millard Clinton's private server, not provided by her legal team, I mean, folks, this is incredible.
	Uh this lady does not need to be president of the United States when she can't remember anything.
	Can you imagine her trying to remember who it was she was going to bomb and why?
	Well, look, I am so fortunate.
	One of the greatest Americans in Congress is named Thomas Massey from Kentucky's fourth district, and uh he's gonna be talking with me about some of the things we're gonna be taking up uh right as we come back into session next week.
	Uh Thomas Massey, welcome to the Sean Hannity Show.
	Louis Gomer, it's an honor to be on Sean Hannity show with you.
	It's an honor to be on the Sean Hannity show, but you and I are friends.
	We see and talk to each other all the time.
	But uh I've missed you during August, and I know you and I have talked about we love August, not because uh some people say, Oh, you got a month vacation, but because even people that never like to leave Washington and go back to their district have to go back to their district in August because everybody knows we're not in session,
	and that usually means we're gonna have a good September with taking up good legislation because people have gotten hammered when they go back home and talk to their constituents.
	But now we're hearing well, we've known this, and you and I have met, we've talked about it, we talked to some of our close friends.
	Uh Jim Breidenstein wasn't able to be with us today, but uh I mean we are about to have to decide how we're gonna go about funding the government.
	Uh most of the listeners there they listen to Sean Hannity, and they know that the federal fiscal year ends at midnight on September 30th.
	Uh the House has passed a bunch of appropriations bills, the the Senate hasn't, so it looks like we're stuck again since the Senate doesn't do their job.
	We're stuck again with either doing some kind of continuing resolution, and just as background for the listeners, uh there's discussion that gee, what we need to do is basically what we've done a number of times, just in my uh the last eleven years I've been in Congress, and that is oh, look, guys, we'll just do a continuing resolution and keep funding all of the government at the current level.
	When you hear that, keep in mind that means with the automatic increase that only the federal government gets every year in every department.
	Uh, let's let's do this continuing resolution, fund it till December, and then we'll come back and we'll finish funding for the rest of the year.
	Uh Congressman Thomas Massey, graduate of MIT, representing Fourth District of Kentucky.
	Why is that a bad idea to come back in December in a lame duck session and do the funding at that point?
	Well, it's a it's an absolutely horrible idea.
	But let me touch on something you said before.
	August is great because we get back in touch with our constituents.
	I've done 20 town halls this summer.
	Some congressmen don't even go meet their constituents anymore because they're they've got such horrible voting records, they're afraid to be taken to task for what they've done to their constituents, so they won't even do the town halls, but I've done them, and you're right.
	When they come back in September, it's like they got refilled with common sense.
	Um, and so it usually is a good time when we come back in in September and we work on things, but the worst time for Congress to pass anything is in the lame duck session, which you just mentioned.
	It's between November 8th and let's say December 31st.
	Now, what's special about that period of time?
	Well, we will have elected a new president, but Obama will still have his pen and his phone.
	And he's gonna be looking at extending his legacy as you know, putting a cap on his legacy, a capstone.
	And there's some members of Congress, Republicans, in fact, who are gonna you know be willing to deal with the president in that period and they'll be willing to increase spending to get their stuff as long as he can get his stuff and the thing about that lame duck session is you and I serve with colleagues in the House and in the Senate who will have lost their elections who are not coming back who are untethered from their constituency.
	Or like Carrie Reed that didn't run for re-election.
	And I can't help but think Thomas uh talking to Thomas Massey, Kentucky, but I can't help but um but figure as powerful as Harry Reed continues to be, even though he's technically minority leader, uh he's going out, Obama's going out.
	I just figure we can count on them chalking that uh continuing resolution full of so many presidents uh it it will light up that Christmas tree with all the giveaways that will be in there.
	That that's what we've seen.
	Let's talk about a few of those.
	Uh while we were on break, our colleague, I don't want to call him out by name, but he's the chairman of a powerful committee, reintroduced the internet sales tax.
	And he's looking to get this done in the lame duck session.
	And I expect they if they find out that Trump got elected in November, then in December they may pass an internet tax knowing that he wouldn't sign that once he's sworn in.
	And another piece of legislation that uh Trump is averse to is the TPP.
	They may try and slip that through after November and before the new president is sworn in.
	You know that Thomas did you go down to the uh the classified area and review the TPP at least what they allowed us to see.
	Do you have a chance yeah and so I went and reviewed it.
	Yeah.
	And they and I came back I said this thing's eight hundred pages and some people made fun of me.
	They said it's not eight hundred pages.
	Well Louie it's grown to five thousand pages now and it my problem with it you mentioned I went to MIT.
	You only have one problem with it?
	Well let me talk about one of the problems with it.
	All right our intellectual property and it'll make our patent system like the rest of the world's patent system.
	That's a problem.
	We don't want China's intellectual property law.
	Well and and Vietnam still is sitting on uh information about our MIAs and our POWs they never disclosed the location of all of them.
	They never disclosed the information they had.
	And I found out after I got to Congress that Nixon knew that back after the Paris Peace Accord was signed and they provided a list.
	Our leadership in Washington knew at the time they still had POWs in captivity.
	And anyway, they were at least going to give us a location of their remains.
	And by golly, I cannot agree to anything that gives Vietnam special trade status when they still are keeping secret and holding under wraps.
	What happened to our POWs and MIAs, at least for heaven's sake, give closure to the family members.
	But then that was only one of the problems.
	As you know, the president is given special immigration powers that he...
	he should not have uh there is just so much power that the Congress gives away in the TPP that uh we shouldn't be giving away.
	Well it's it's not just the TPP.
	There may be other things in that omnibus and Louie you're right I've been in Congress uh not as long as you but I've been there for three December and each December they've punted the the uh spending bill from September to December using a continuing resolution.
	And then they come to us and you've been in this meeting too there's no we're not allowed to bring our staff and there's no media in there but they walk in the room and they say if you'll vote for this omnibus you can go home for Christmas.
	But if it doesn't pass you're gonna be here with Nancy Pelosi.
	And you get Republicans that are chanting to vote for the omnibus.
	Yeah, that they've never seen and they will not have a chance to read.
	And but the unfortunately there are people on both sides of the aisle involved in uh the establishment for the Republicans and Democrats that are perfectly fine with Republicans breaking their pledge that they made.
	And you remember 2010 when uh uh Republicans played up Pelosi saying, you know, uh we got to pass Obamacare so we can find out what's in it.
	And I was given a hat with the words read the bill on the hat, and you and I do all we can to read the bills, but you get that bill uh sometimes it's right before uh we're gonna vote, say we get it on Tuesday night and and it's gonna be a vote on it on Thursday.
	Nobody has a chance to read that.
	And they say, oh, don't worry about it.
	And then over and over, every time that's been done, we find out there are things in it that would never have passed if they'd been standalone bills.
	So it is a it is a great concern that just for the system.
	Yeah, let me explain the math and the way math works in DC.
	I'm afraid they're using common core, but you know, when uh Nancy said you gotta pass it to find out what's in it, Republicans said, give us the majority and we'll give you three days to read a bill.
	Well, the way they count three days in Congress is they and they come up with 36 hours.
	I thought it was 72 hours.
	But what they do is they'll introduce the bill like the omnibus at 11 p.m. on the first day, and they said, Oh, well, it touched the first day, so that counts as a day.
	That would be Tuesday night.
	Then Wednesday we might get a read it, but by the time the media knows what's in it, Thursday morning, we're voting on it.
	As long as it touches three days, they say that's we've been given three days, and that's not enough time to read it, though.
	We've seen that.
	Well, look, we got to take a break, and I understand you can come back after the break with us, Thomas.
	Stay tuned to the Sean Hannity show, uh, Congressman Thomas Massey.
	This is Louis Gomer.
	We'll be right back.
	Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
	This is Congressman Louis Gomert.
	Uh, have on the line with me Congressman Thomas Massey.
	And uh we we don't have much time before the end of the hour, but uh we have a caller on the line, Bert in Sacramento.
	You have a question or comment for me and Thomas Massey?
	Yeah, it's an honor to speak to both of you today.
	Well, thank you.
	Um Representative Gohmert, I I wanted to find out if there's any possibility that um there could be a leadership change uh this year in in the um house.
	Well, that's a that's a good question, and thanks for the call, Bert.
	Thanks for listening.
	But let me explain to you a lot of people have asked, you know, gee, why couldn't you be speaker?
	Why couldn't why didn't it work out better?
	And actually, folks, uh, we've only got a minute, but Thomas Massey and Jim Breidenstein called me after weeks of trying to get to 29 people to vote for somebody besides Boehner.
	That would have thrown it to a second ballot, and we could have had an emergency meeting.
	The 29 of us said we're not giving in.
	And so, Thomas, why did you and Jim tell me I needed to announce?
	We just got a minute.
	Well, because the future of our country is at stake, and we need somebody with common sense.
	No, but Thomas, the you told me that there were members of Congress, and you and I knew this, there that they were telling their constituents that look, uh, I would vote for anybody but Boehner if somebody announced, but nobody's announced, so I'm gonna vote for Boehner.
	Remember that?
	I told you let me let me explain to your caller what the problem is.
	The speaker is so powerful that people are terrified to vote against whoever they think is the most likely person to win.
	Imagine if the presidential race worked that way, and you were terrified of the retribution.
	And that's what happens in the House of Representatives.
	But there are a few people like Louis Gomer and Jim Breidenstein and Dave Bratt who are not scared of anything who will stand up for you.
	And and Tim Hules camp, and unfortunately, that's why Tim will not be there.
	They came after him and spit millions.
	Uh Thomas Massey, you are an awesome addition to U.S. Congress.
	Come on back.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	This is Louis Gomert, member of Congress sitting in for my friend Sean, uh website Gomert.com, G-O-H-M-E-R-T.
	And uh I I tell you, uh it just amazes me that somebody would run for president who has straight faced says what difference does it make at this time that four people died while I let them die.
	Uh or I I I've had a lot of respect for FBI director Comey.
	But you know, basically he's saying, Well, there's no evidence of intent.
	Folks, this is a smart audience I'm speaking to.
	Uh you think about it.
	If you go online and buy soft mail uh software uh for something like bleach bit, and then you use bleach bit to try to completely and forever erase email and erase content.
	Uh do you have then respect for a prosecutor or an FBI agent who says, Well, gee, yeah, they they went online, they bought this uh software, this bleach bit, and then uh but but see they say they accidentally erased all this email.
	Are you kidding me?
	You ought to get convicted number one for lying like that to law enforcement by saying we didn't do so intentionally.
	What other reason would you have for buying software that allows you to completely get rid of email?
	I mean, to me, as a prosecutor way back in my career, I can't imagine an easier case to make to a jury.
	Um, but as a guy in Colorado or from Colorado told me recently, he said, you know, the Hillary supporters, they're like OJ jurors.
	They don't care what the evidence is, they're gonna say she's not guilty of anything.
	Well, folks, I have on uh with us here on the Sean Hannity show um a couple of people that I just have tremendous respect and admiration for.
	One is Heather McDonnell.
	She's a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author, well, I said she.
	I didn't ask Heather whether she felt like a she or a he today, uh, so I wouldn't make uh make it in the universities around the country today.
	But anyway, she's author of New York Times bestselling book, The War on Cops.
	She has been very outspoken on so many critical issues to us.
	And we also have Steve Cook, who is the president of the National Association of Assistant U.S. attorneys.
	And uh he's had two recent pieces in the City Journal and a quote from one of these uh um let's see, Heather McDonald has had piece that says, the war on the police must end or we will lose the crime gains of the last two decades.
	We may also be losing the very thing that makes civilized life possible.
	Um Heather, great to have you on the show.
	Uh and uh Steve Cook um appreciate your service to the country as an assistant U.S. attorney.
	Uh I know that's uh a tough job and appreciate your doing it, but uh give me your impression uh when I tell you that an issue we're being told that we're probably going to take up in September in uh the conservative House of Representatives,
	where we have a conservative majority, is sentencing reform, and yes, they're gonna try to put some things in there that will draw yes votes uh like you know crime uh perhaps putting mensrea in, making it a requirement that nobody can be sent to prison unless they violate a law passed by Congress rather than regulation.
	There's some good things that we need to do in um criminal justice reform, but tell me what happens uh in the process of people pleading guilty and being convicted in federal court uh if a Congress is gonna later come back and say we're cutting them loose early.
	Talk to me about that, Heather, Steve, whoever wants to go first.
	Well I'll I'll just say I'm gonna leave Steve to talk about the actual uh gory details of of sentencing decisions and and the high bar that prosecutors set for themselves uh to even bring a case.
	But what I want to address, Congressman Gomer, is the rationale for this entire wave of sentencing reform, which is something that President Obama keeps saying about the criminal justice system, which is that it's racist.
	And that the reason that there is an overrepresentation of blacks in prison is that there's racism in the police and prosecutors and judges.
	And that is simply a lie.
	And it's a dangerous lie that is eating away at the legitimacy of the police and and of what is in fact the the most fair criminal justice system in the world.
	The reason that blacks are overrepresented in prison is because their crime rates above all their violent crime rates are so disproportionate.
	Just to give you one example and then I'll turn it over to Steve, blacks commit homicide at eight times the rate of whites and Hispanics combined if you take Hispanics out of that equation you get a black white homicide differential of about eleven to twelve times.
	So the only way that we could remove racial disparities in prison is to simply get rid of our criminal code.
	Well, and then as you pointed out before, that's actually what makes civilized life possible.
	And there were times when I was on the bench as a felony judge, and I would point out to people, this may be the last bastion of civility, but we're going to come in here, we're going to hear from both sides, and then we're going to make decisions.
	But I just can't tell you how offensive it is to me as a former judge to have agonized the way I did, struggled each night before I was going to take up sentencing.
	I would review the evidence carefully, the pre-sentencing report.
	I would hear any evidence that people would present.
	And then I would come to a conclusion on sentencing.
	And in Texas, we have what's called...
	a range of punishment.
	For example second degree felony is a range of two minimum of two maximum of twenty years, first degree, minimum five years, and uh maximum ninety-nine years to life and what we keep hearing is we have got to get rid of these mandatory minimums.
	Uh folks to me that that's what you call a range of punishment.
	And if you don't have a bottom threshold to your range of punishment then you can have some wacko judges that just do a slap on the wrist of very heinous crimes.
	But Steve what what do you see uh in this push for a sentencing reform where we're gonna cut people's sentences.
	Well you've touched on a couple of issues.
	Let me start first if I may by thanking you for for highlighting this issue and for your stance against the sentencing reform.
	Um sentencing reform in the federal system is is would be a huge mistake and let me start off with the fundamentals.
	The statutes that are being attacked by uh primarily the left are statutes that came into law in the mid eighties as you remember probably violent crime was spiraling upward it had it had tripled over the preceding two and a half decades.
	Congress said we're gonna do something about it and what they decided to do about it is impose mandatory minimum penalties with a really simple notion that if we put criminals in jail crime will go down to nobody's surprise by nineteen ninety one using these laws we had taken a lot of the violent crime a lot of the violent gangs, repeat offenders.
	High level drug traffickers and we began to fill the federal prisons up with them.
	By 2014 uh this by nineteen ninety one the trend turned around and by twenty fourteen we had cut violent crime in half.
	It was an incredibly successful program.
	And uh as you suggested a second ago, there are those who are trying now to dismantle those mandatory minimums, and doing that would be uh would be disastrous.
	Not only do they want to uh undermine them for the future, but as you just alluded, they also want to make those changes retroactive, which means we're gonna go back into the federal prisons with all these folks that we've convicted under these mandatory minimum penalties, armed career criminals, habitual drug traffickers, serial violent offenders, and we're gonna reduce their sentences and make them eligible to get out to get out early.
	Um that that would, as you just suggested a second ago, would have a a uh a serious impact on the long-term uh uh use of penalties because it when any time and the Supreme Court has said this, any time you uh uh undermine the finality of a conviction or convictions, you know.
	The deterrent effect is adversely effective.
	It really is.
	And and you know, I saw an op ed here recently that was saying, look, uh Texas has done this kind of uh justice reform and sentencing reform because they realize that we just can't keep going on like we are.
	And that's why Republicans in the House and Senate need to go ahead and pass this sentencing reform.
	Well, Steve and Heather, let me tell you, the Congress, the House and Senate uh of the United States, I can tell you because I'm there, it's not as conservative as the House and Senate in the state of Texas.
	And the President, President Obama, is not as conservative as uh the prior governor or the current governor, Greg Abbott.
	And so when we have done uh criminal justice reform in Texas, uh there were some good things done, but this is not the way it's gonna turn out for a president who is already granted massive amnesty to people that I don't believe should have had it, they were violating the immigration laws, and uh he's on his way to cutting people loose.
	And I and I want to touch one other thing before we need to take a break, but uh from my own experience back uh uh having been court appointed time to time to have to go over to federal court, uh there are people there used to be when I was there,
	there were people who maybe committed a crime with a gun, uh maybe uh were involved in delivery of drugs, not simple possession, but the prosecutors would say, Look, we want to get your boss.
	If you will plead to simple possession and you agree to testify against the kingpin, then we will let you plead to simple possession, and we won't pursue the gun charge, we won't pursue the delivery, we won't cons pursue the robbery.
	And there were violent criminals that ended up getting simple possession charges because uh they helped get the the Mr. Big.
	Had you experienced that, Steve?
	I do, but not not quite as drastically as you described.
	Everything you said is exactly right.
	Critical to the federal system and us our ability to dismantle and disrupt large drug trafficking organizations is the ability to do just what you said, and that is take lower level offenders and work up the chain.
	We do that regularly, and these mandatory minimum penalties give us the tools to do that.
	That said, less than a half a percent of the federal prison population is in custody for possession.
	Uh the vast majority of drug traffickers pled guilty to serious drug trafficking offenses, uh many of which carried mandatory minimum penalties because they trafficked in the large quantities of drugs, for example, to trigger a ten-year mandatory minimum, you have to have trafficked a ton of marijuana.
	Wow, five kilos.
	Well, and I had seen that for fiscal year 2015, uh nearly fifty percent of all federal drug trafficking offenders that were subject to a mandatory minimum did not receive the mandatory minimum.
	They got a higher sentence.
	Uh So that doesn't sound like the mandatory minimum is really the problem that needs to be fixed, correct?
	That's that is absolutely right.
	And not only is it not a problem, it's central to our ability to to pursue high-level drug traffickers.
	Taking it away will hurt yeah Heather, you have been so good at pointing out what really has turned into a war on cops.
	From your experience and I know you've talked to a lot of people in the system, what does it do to law enforcement when you have would have legislature come in after the fact and retroactively cut sentences for the people that they put their lives on the line to put behind bars.
	Well certainly it demoralizes law enforcement a lot but what it really hurts is the law abiding residents of communities that have the scourge of open air drug dealing.
	I have never been to a police community meeting in the inner city Congressman Gomart, whether it's in the South Bronx or South Central Los Angeles where I have not heard those law abiding residents say you arrest the dealers and they're back on the corner the next day why can't you get them off the street?
	Well I I'm excited we're I understand both of you be able to hold on with us through this break.
	Come right back this is the Sean Hannity show.
	This is Louis Gomert with Heather McDonald and Steve Cook.
	Come on back this is the Sean Hannity Show and this is Louis Gomert uh member of Congress sitting in for my friend Sean.
	And look folks uh we are going to be able to have Heather McDonald and Steve Cook um uh hang on with us into the next hour and so call 800-941-7326 that's 800 941 and also I couldn't believe it I saw this article I never saw this coming daily caller this week uh Scott Bland says George Soros quiet overhaul of the U.S. justice system
	he's been funding getting out good solid prosecutors folks they're coming after us in ways we gotta stop stay tuned there's more for Sean Hannity call in 800 nine four one Sean we'll be right back this is the Sean Hannity show and he does have more friends behind the scenes and Hillary Clinton's got more behind well I don't know.
	We'll just look uh Hillary Clinton it turns out signed a statement saying that she received the security briefing but then she tells the FBI she didn't it's it's incredible.
	But we have back with us Heather McDonald senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute Steve Cook, president of the National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys that means he's out there prosecuting, investigating and uh just wanted to have a chance thanks for hanging in there with us give us uh your best reasons why we should not at this time be doing a sentencing reform if you're waiting
	for me I the the answer to that's easy sentencing reform right now will undermine uh our critical and and take away the critical tools federal prosecutors need to uh to infiltrate drug trafficking organizations.
	Of course we all know that we're in the middle of one of the worst heroin and opioid addiction crises in our nation last year 47 I'm sorry, 2014 47,000 people died in the United States from from drug overdoses.
	We're working as hard as we can to take part these drug trafficking organizations and sentencing reform will take away the tools we need to prosecute those drug traffickers.
	Well Steve do you think there's anybody that'll be cut loose early that might sneer and laugh at you when they get out of prison early?
	Well they're all gonna it's gonna make a mockery of our system especially given the seriousness of the offenders you were talking earlier about state sentencing reform and there are two things that that your listeners should know about that.
	One it ain't a working in the states if you look to California Proposition 47 there has been a disaster violent crime all categories of crime since Proposition 47 have skyrocketed and the sheriff there in in uh Los Angeles has said you'd have to be naive not to recognize there's a connection.
	You mentioned Texas, your your home state.
	Violent crime, especially homicides, are up in all the major cities.
	And uh that's a trend that we've seen across the country.
	Well, I heard a Democrat say that just wasn't true, that violent crime is not up, but it sure looks like it from the statistics I've seen as well.
	Uh Heather, your thoughts?
	Well, it's absolutely it's it's a problem that is affecting overwhelmingly cities with large black populations because that's where cops are under the most assault for this phantom claim that they're racist.
	And so when President Obama keeps telling the police that they're racist for arresting criminals and and making pedestrian stops and enforcing low-level public order offenses, we shouldn't be surprised when the cops back off of that kind of policing.
	And as a result, homicides last year in the 56 largest cities rose 17%, but in cities with large black populations, they range the homicide increase range from 54% in Washington, D.C. to a whopping 90% in Cleveland.
	Wow.
	And President Obama keeps saying, oh, nothing to see here, folks, just move on.
	Even as his own FBI director, you mentioned James Comey earlier, uh, Congressman Gilmer, and I know people are upset with him for the Clinton emails, but he has been one of the most honest and courageous voices in saying that there is a very serious problem going on now with inner city crime because the police are backing off.
	And and he has spoken eloquently about the fact, as you said, describing your own experience as a judge, there was no such thing as mass incarceration.
	Everybody is put in jail one by one with full due process of the law, and that is what people in inner city communities want to happen.
	They want to get the criminals, the felons, the robbers, and the drug dealers off the streets.
	Well, that uh thank you so much for your work in trying to make sure Americans know what's coming.
	And uh folks, listeners, you need to let your members of Congress and your senators' offices know how you feel about uh cutting loose early people that are in federal prison right now.
	I just can't imagine anything that would be much more discouraging to law enforcement and prosecutors that worked so hard to get them there.
	Heather, uh oh, we have uh let me take uh we got a call from Mary Sue in uh Louisiana.
	Mary Sue, I love your name.
	Hey, hey, Congressman Gomery, how are you?
	Well, as far as I know, I'm okay.
	Uh did you get flooded?
	Yeah, it's it's pretty bad down here.
	Well, sorry to hear that.
	You have a question?
	Yeah, I wanted to know why people talk about um people being in federal prison for for dru for drug possession.
	Well, and uh it is a crime to be possessing certain uh uh drugs, but personal experience uh uh including in my days as a judge, normally, if it was not a massive amount of possession, uh like Steve was talking about a ton of marijuana, the the uh the federal prosecutor said you state guys take that up.
	We we're only gonna take the big possessions.
	Uh uh Steve, what's your answer to Mary Sue?
	Why would somebody be federal prison for drug possession?
	Well, I'm so glad she asked, because that's one of the myths that the other side keeps spinning is that the federal prisons are full of uh drug users and low-level nonviolent offenders.
	The truth is, and for those people who uh like Judge Gomer when he was on the bench, know that isn't who's in federal prison.
	We're the DEA and our local partners work together to focus and to use federal tools to dismantle these international interstate drug trafficking organizations and the violent inner city gangs.
	Here's what I ask people to do when they ha when they think that the federal prisons has have low-level nonviolent offenders in them.
	Ask them to go to their local law enforcement officers and ask them, are you taking your low-level drug fi offenders to federal court to be prosecuted?
	They will uniformly I'll I'll I'll guarantee it.
	They'll uniformly tell you no, that's ridiculous.
	The offenders going to federal court are the big boys, the bad guys.
	Yep.
	That's well, the biggest example of that, of course, is the Obama commutations.
	If it were the case that prisons were filled with these harmless sad sex who got caught with a joint, uh, it would have been easy to find just those people to say, okay, we're committing your sentence, we're pardoning them.
	In fact, about a third of the people in the last round of communications that Obama uh gave out had their most recent convictions included gun crime.
	Uh so you know, he's already scraping the bottom of the barrel to come up with anybody who fits this myth of the harmless drug possession that is simply not out there.
	He's letting out people that have been in possession of guns, and you can ask anybody in Harlem what they think about that drug dealer on the corner with the gun in his pocket.
	He may not be using it at the moment, but the very fact that he's packing heat uh means that he is holding that community in a hostage.
	Great, great points.
	Well, I want to thank you, uh Heather and Steve for for educating folks.
	Uh it is an important issue, and we thank you so much for being on uh just keep up your good work, both of you.
	You're really an asset to this nation.
	Uh but I want to pose a question.
	Uh I I don't mean it to be rhetorical, but just to a listening audience, and this is Louis Gomert.
	Um political party was dependent upon getting felons out of prison and getting them the right to vote in order to give you a better chance to win,
	and you also wanted to get people who have come into the country illegally, and especially if they don't speak English, you want to get them the ability, the right to vote.
	What does that say about your party?
	Uh I mean, if you're counting on people who don't speak English, so they don't know what the Republican candidates are or most of the Democratic candidates are saying, uh, they have to rely on some democratic uh operative to tell them their version.
	Uh really, if that's what you're counting on to take over the House and Senate and to win the presidency.
	Shouldn't you be looking at an overhaul of your party instead?
	You need felons, you need people that don't know who they're voting for or why, in order to secure your win.
	That's what you need for your party.
	Uh folks, this is really serious.
	It's all at stake.
	And no, uh, I did not uh endorse Trump in uh in the Republicans uh nomination process uh for a year or so.
	I was out there making speeches for Ted Cruz.
	But um we're gonna talk a little more about what this race means to the country when we come back.
	Uh this is Louis Gomert.
	You can check me out at Gomert, G-O-H-M-E-R-T.com.
	But this is the Sean Hannity show.
	Please come back.
	We've got a lot to talk about.
	Call 800-941-7326.
	And we will be right back.
	Mold-inspired solutions for America.
	Thank you.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	The Sean Hannity Show.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show, and this is Louis Gomert, uh, member of Congress sitting in.
	Or Sean, uh check it out.
	Gomert, G-O-H-M-E-R-T.com.
	Uh look, this is an article from the Daily Caller by Scott Bland this week, and it says, quote, the prosecutor, talking about elected uh district attorneys, the prosecutor exercises the greatest discretion and power in the system.
	It is important, said Andrea Dew Steele, the president of Emerge America, a candidate training organization for Democratic Women.
	Quote, there's been a confluence of events in the past couple of years, and all of a sudden, the progressive, meaning socialist community, is waking up to this.
	Soros has spent, talking about George Soros.
	I knew he was influencing elections across America on a national level, but I I had no idea.
	Soros has spent on district attorney campaigns in Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Texas through a network of state-level super PACs and a national 527 unlimited money group, each named a variation on safety and justice.
	And apparently, he and the groups he's funding, they're going in, they've realized a local state prosecutor has so much discretion on whether or not to bring charges, whether or not to prosecute someone.
	And uh they've realized, wow, we can create more chaos.
	Uh gee, if we can get uh Congress to go along and help with the jailbreak of felons in federal prison, then on a state level, if we can get the liberals who don't want to lock anybody up, uh, much to the great uh danger of law-abiding citizens, then basically they get to the chaos and the anarchy they want in order to have a full government takeover of this place.
	This I had no idea that he was investing millions and millions of dollars in local DA races.
	Uh this this is shocking to me.
	Uh, we got Chuck in Idaho.
	Chuck in Idaho, thanks for listening to the Sean Hannity show.
	You have a comment.
	I do.
	Thank you, Congressman.
	I am a former federal prosecutor.
	I just retired last year and had the pleasure of serving with Steve Cook on the association.
	Wonderful.
	One of the methods that the administration is using to characterize these offenders that it's releasing as possession offenders comes from a form that we were required to file with the court when we filed an indictment.
	Uh when you have a drug investigation that goes federal, generally it starts with four or five undercover buys.
	Those would be charged as distributions, but they're small quantities.
	We were required to charge the most serious offense or to take a plea or conviction on the most serious offense.
	And that was always determined by weight.
	But in a normal investigation, what would happen is following those four or five undercover buys, you would follow the pusher to his house or his stash house, where he would keep the majority of his drugs.
	You might only be buying an eighth of an ounce of cocaine on the street, but when you hit the house, you would find five or ten kilograms.
	The charge that you would hit the offender with at that point is called possession with intent to distribute.
	And if you go to the uh DOJ's own press releases where they describe these people they're letting out, the vast the vast majority of the drug offenders were charged with possession with intent to distribute.
	The problem is that the court form that we had to fill out doesn't have a blank of possession with intent to distribute.
	You had manufacture, you had distribution, but you had possession.
	And so that's what you even with intent to distribute.
	Well, I'm so glad that you uh got that out there.
	Of course, I was talking about just before uh Chuck came on talking about state prosecution, and now Soros is is getting involved in his organizations to get liberals who won't people be putting people in prison.
	Um Chuck, thank you, Chuck, for your service to our country as a federal prosecutor, and I didn't realize that that uh that blank was there uh that you didn't allow you to say with intent to distribute.
	Folks, uh if Obama wants it, then I think this is not something we should be passing here in the last few months of his presidency.
	But this is the Sean Hannity show.
	Folks, it's 1976.
	Reagan said the word in order to save America, what must we do?
	He used the word unite.
	Come back and unite with the Yon Sean Hennessy show.
	We'll be right back.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	This is Louis Gomert, um lowly legislator, member of Congress sitting in for my friend Sean.
	And I was asked uh last night in Van Alsting, Texas, is uh Sean uh how different is he from what you see and hear and uh Sean is Sean.
	What you see is what you get.
	I love that about my friend I I love it when people don't put on air.
	Sean is uh the same guy behind the scenes as he is in front of the camera or in front of the microphone and uh that makes it just a pleasure to have friends like that.
	Right now, here on The Sean Hannity Show, I have a guest with me that I have the utmost respect for.
	He is so plugged in, President of Americans for Limited Government.
	But he also happens to have written about the nicest article that I've ever had anybody say, because I had a couple of media places, you know, run by liberals.
	they're saying you know Gomer tried to to challenge uh John Boehner as speaker and he only got three votes and one of them was his own and Rick actually did some digging and I hadn't I I really appreciated the kindness but he pointed out that I didn't know people overheard me but I was urging Republicans look, you know if you vote for me you'll make Boehner extra mad.
	We just need 29 people to vote for somebody besides Boehner that gets us to a second ballot that's all I'm trying to do.
	And uh so it's a pleasure to have uh the inevitable Rick Manning on the Sean Hannity show.
	Rick, welcome to Sean Hannity Show.
	Thanks Louis I don't think I've ever had a better introduction I'm gonna tell you.
	Well, thank you.
	Well, I wanted to have you on because you have really been digging into this issue about President Obama wanting to give away control of the Internet, or at least the Internet Corporation for assigned names and numbers, which to me is really the most powerful control that anyone could have over the Internet when you decide who gets a website.
	who gets these things so give us give us a background give us what's going on with this issue sure um here's what the president what President Obama's trying to do um under the there's a contract that the U.S. government has with ICANN um that to manage certain internet functions the naming functions as you mentioned what your what your internet website is called the dot com the dot org the dot web all that kind of stuff so they manage that it's supposed
	to be a value-neutral management, and the U.S. government has oversight to make certain that things don't get out of control.
	Well, the Chinese and the Russians and the U.N. all want to try to take control of that function.
	They want to be able to control content on the web.
	And President Obama is attempting to delink the United States government from ICANN, which is a vendor, and give ICANN all the property in the United States that under the contract should go back to the United States and give them so they can move forward independently.
	that puts them in danger of being captured by the UN but even just as importantly ICANN can't be trusted as a content protector to make sure we have a free and open internet.
	After all next year they're they're actually have a resolution for their bylaws that would put internet would put in is one of the fundamental parts of their founding doc of their documents would say that they had to take international human rights into consideration on any of the things they did.
	And all they do is decide what what names are on the internet so it is a very very dangerous situation and if Congress does not step up to the plate before September 30th that transition will occur.
	And and it is shocking and as much uh research and as plugged in as you are to what's happening in Washington it is a bit consistent with what this president's been doing.
	Our our military's weaker than it's been, you know, and about to be since before World War II.
	Um it does seem that this president has a philosophy that uh you know, he grew up with and is uh you get uh glimpses of it in his book, Dreams from my father.
	Um that the United States being powerful has been one of the problems in the world, and if you bring down the United States power and and let that be shared around the world by caring loving countries like Iran and Russia and China, then the world is a much better place.
	Uh but Rick, I d I don't unless this is a continuation of what he's doing, bringing down the United States power, I I don't know why you would do this.
	In fact, I I I had a barber in Tyler, Texas tell me uh, you know, that uh gosh, I've seen that the president wants to give away this control, uh I guess I'm gonna have to start going back to paying my bills with checks, because uh if we're not controlling important functions on the internet, I I don't know that I can trust it.
	There's enough hackers already.
	What's your thought?
	Well, I I think that the president is uh effectively going along with Eric Schmidt from Google, who is a regular visitor at the White House and has been in integrally involved in both his election campaigns and now Hillary's.
	And so I I that's and Google is all for uh I mean they've been able to work with the censorship uh say of China, haven't they?
	Google Google's actually stood up to China.
	Um some other c companies have not, but Google so far has stood up to China to their and it's hurt them in the in that market.
	But the truth of the matter is, Louie, any company there's a a consortium of companies that are uh kind of par the ICANN governance structure.
	And every one of those companies is doing business internationally.
	They're doing business with all these different countries, they're trying to enter Chinese market, the Russian market, um be able to do business in the Middle Eastern markets, and if they're control if they are prime controllers over what happens at ICANN in terms of where if we're gonna have content restrictions on the web based on what ICANN says, the minute that occurs, they are they're subject to massive amount of economic pressure.
	The only thing that stands in the way of that content control that they're trying to push for is the fact that ICANN currently is a U.S. government vendor and as a US government vendor, ultimately if they do something to me in terms of violating my First Amendment rights, I can sue them as as a an actor of the United States government under First Amendment grounds.
	But the minute that link gets cut, there's no longer First Amendment protections and Katie Barr the door in terms of content controls.
	And once again, to just think about this.
	They're in the midst of trying to get control of the internet, and at the same time they're actually considering putting language in their bylaws that would dictate that they do content controls based on international human rights concerns.
	So think about what international human rights concerns, Louie, and you know this.
	The UN Human Rights Council consists of countries like China and Saudi Arabia on those human...
	Venezuela, Cuba are all on the UN human rights council.
	Those are the people who are going to create the international human rights concerns that will dictate what happens on the internet.
	Yeah, they're not really all that many truly free uh Democrat forms of government uh out there, you know.
	Uh and I know you remember, heck uh Libya was uh chair of the human rights commission for heaven's sake, what's I mean it it it is insane to think about uh and I don't know if you if you're looking at it strictly from a Republican standpoint, gosh, look at all of the the Democrats who have become filthy rich through the internet, uh you know, and being entrepreneurs through the Internet.
	But the fact is, I don't care who gets wealthy from being an entrepreneur.
	I think it's fantastic.
	But to take away this incredible free market gift the way it's been, and turn that into a place where there will be content censorship.
	You know good and well that's coming.
	It happens in China, it happens in Russia, it happens in uh most all places outside the United States.
	Uh man, that ceases to be uh that amazing free market driven entity that we've come to know and love about the internet.
	Well, and as we know, the internet was developed as part uh by the U U. S Department of Defense under DARPA.
	Right.
	And so we're the ones, our company, our country, our our taxpayer dollars were spent to develop the internet at its core.
	And to then give away the the asset that we have given the world to use for free and open for as a free and open entity, the Gutenberg Bible of our or the Gutenberg printing press of our of our time.
	Of our generation, yeah.
	That's right.
	And we're and that has led to a democratization of information unlike anything that's ever been seen in the history of man.
	And we're going and we're gonna say, oh, we're gonna turn that over away from the first amendment protections that have made it great, and we're gonna turn that over to people who want to control it.
	We tell you, China is already working on manipulating the internet in their in their country.
	And they went to a a domain name, people owned a domain name called .xyz, and they said, You can come into China, but you have to not use these two thousand words and now allow any website with these two thousand words in it.
	Were words like 1989, uh, the letters T and S were disallowed.
	And they were disallowed for a simple reason, because TS 1989, which while also stood for a well-known singer's uh album, Taylor Swift, was also Tiananmen Square 1989.
	And so they wanted to prevent that from being as anywhere in China.
	And so they said the XYZ, you come in here, but you can't use let anybody have any of those domain names anywhere in the world.
	I had a daughter that was living in China for a while, and she said it was amazing.
	You had to be really careful of what you said in emails.
	Uh, if you were critical at all of the Chinese government, your internet immediately got cut off.
	Uh it's incredible.
	I'm so glad you're on top of it, Rick.
	But uh this is one of those sleepy little issues that people say, uh, nobody's gonna take away our internet.
	It is about to be taken away and given to people we can't trust.
	It it's incredible.
	And it just brings me back to that uh saying in Washington, Rick, no matter how cynical you get, it's never enough to catch up.
	Well, it says it's sad but true.
	But any of the listeners who want to be able to contact Congress because they have to act this month, um I know you'll be acting, but if they would go to stop the internet giveaway dot org, that's not the internet giveaway.org, um that would be there's uh a lot of information and a way to contact members of Congress,
	and very specifically, if you know your member of Congress, they need to tell their tell them, call up Paul Ryan and tell him to file suit against file a lawsuit to stop it.
	That's our that's our best chance of getting the Paul Ryan step up to the plate.
	And you and I know that's not always easy.
	Well, it gets a whole lot easier if people across the country let their members of Congress and their senators know, don't you dare let control of the Internet get away from the United States.
	Rick Manning, President of America's for Lindman the Government, thank you so much, man.
	I appreciate all you do and the wisdom you bring to any issue, especially this one.
	Thanks so much.
	Anytime you just uh keep fighting, don't get discouraged, we will win.
	God's in control, man.
	Yeah, but uh as uh Pastor N. Denton said just because God's in control doesn't mean he wants us to lean on our shovel and pray for a hole.
	So uh come on back.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	We'll be right back.
	Louis Gomert will be with you.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	This is Louis Gomert, uh member Congress sitting in for Sean, and uh let's go to the phones right quick.
	Uh Cindy in Iowa, thanks for waiting.
	Thanks for listening to the Sean Hannity show.
	This is Louis Gomert.
	Uh you have a question?
	Yes, I was waiting so long my phone almost went dead.
	Oh, I'm so sorry, Cindy.
	But you're from Iowa.
	Thank you.
	Uh Love Iowa.
	I've grown to love it so much more than I ever knew possible through my dear friend Steve King.
	But uh what's your question?
	I love Steve.
	Anyway, um, and you but uh the question I have is I've been seeing this on online a lot about a constitutional convention.
	I was wondering, I'm so nervous.
	I was wondering if you could split Cindy, you're talking to me for heaven's sake.
	That ought to be the least intimidating thing you ever do.
	So you are very plain spoken.
	I love that.
	Anyway, if you could explain it in that plain spoken language, because I I can't get legal ease.
	If you could explain the constitutional convention, and could the Democrats somehow take over one of them and then take all of our rights away in one tells.
	Well, that's a great question about constitutional convention, and uh that's from Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
	And actually, Cindy, back after Obamacare passed.
	I I'm a Christian, I don't try to shove that on anybody else, but it's part of who I am.
	And so I'm you know, basically that night, just so depressed.
	All right, uh, you know, I know that God can work all things together for good for those who love him and are called according to his purpose.
	But, you know, I know with Obamacare's passage now, there are people that are going to lose their doctor, they're gonna lose their insurance despite uh the lies that we're told to get it passed.
	I know this is a problem.
	What can we do?
	And what hit me was Article 5.
	Maybe we could this will be the push to get us to take control.
	But Cindy, you nailed it.
	That's something Phyllis Slaffley's worried about.
	If you had a constitutional convention, it is possible liberals could take it over, and we'd end up with a worse constitution.
	We'll talk about that and other things when we come back.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	This is Louis Gilmert.
	Member of Congress, check me out.
	Uh Gomert.com, G-O-H-M-E-R-T.com.
	Uh folks, it is such an honor to sit in for Sean.
	I'm telling you, this country is in so much trouble.
	And most Americans believe that the next generation uh will not have the opportunities that we've had.
	Of course, I heard a female uh comedian in her twenties say, isn't that ridiculous to say our generation's not gonna have it as live as good as our parents?
	I mean, how ridiculous is that when we're all still living with our parents?
	Uh she did have an interesting point with that.
	But uh we are in trouble.
	And when uh I I went over and listened to the oral argument and the Little Sisters of the Poor case, and a number of the attorneys judges uh were um have made the point that you know what, Little Sisters of the Poor is not actually a church.
	It's a nonprofit organization organized under the tax code.
	And uh so it was like, oh gee, it's okay to tell uh a Catholic organization that's not technically a church that they have to pay for uh policies that will take that will fund abortion, you know, so totally 180 degrees contrary to their religious beliefs.
	Uh but I uh I'm telling you, Alito brought up um gee, he said you could also uh it can also be said that this is a case in which a great array of religious groups, not just Catholics and Baptists and evangelicals, but Orthodox Jews, Muslim groups, the Church of Jesus Christ, the Latter-day Saints, an Indian tribe, the Church of Lukimi Babalu, I have said that this presents an unprecedented threat to religious liberty in this country.
	What would you say to that?
	And Obama's lawyer said, uh, well, what I would say to that, Your Honor, is that I think essentially um a sensible balance is essential in a pluralistic society like ours, in which people of every faith on earth live and work side by side, and the government has got to administer rules that are fair to everyone.
	You get that?
	The Obama lawyers, and if she wins, they'll be the same Hillary lawyers.
	They believe that the government should administer what rules churches and religious groups have to follow.
	It's not their job to enforce or create and administer rules that are fair to everyone.
	They're not supposed to get involved when it involves religion.
	That's why the first amendment says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
	The Supreme Court has previously indicated that uh human secularism is a religion.
	And that is exactly what the U.S. Supreme Court has been making laws from the bench, uh establishing the religion of human secularism and prohibiting the free exercise of the Christian religion.
	And I I became so concerned, and look, I was not uh I was not on the Trump bandwagon.
	I was on the Ted Cruz bandwagon.
	But when having sat there through the oral arguments and contemplating what will happen if Hillary Clinton replaces Justice Scalia, um the world changes.
	The First Amendment, the second amendment, the Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, so many of our amendment, our prized rights are going to go away if Hillary Clinton is elected.
	I have with me a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, Hans von Spokowski.
	I am so thrilled to have you on the Sean Hannity show.
	Uh are you there, Hans?
	I I'm here.
	Oh, good, good, good, good.
	I I was concerned we had trouble getting you on, but it is great to have you on the Sean Hannity show.
	Would you explain to our listeners the means of people that are listening, or the at least the three or four that are still listening because Sean's not here, but uh tell them what we're looking at in the way of our freedoms if Hillary's elected and she replaces Scalia.
	Well, I'll put it to you this way.
	If a liberal uh justice is put on the Supreme Court by whoever gets elected, uh, yeah parts of the Bill of Rights will be basically be written out of the Constitution.
	I mean, the most obvious one is the Second Amendment.
	Look, the two the two decisions that upheld our Second Amendment rights, the Heller decision out of D.C., the McDonald decision out of Chicago, those were five, four decisions.
	And and Scalia was that crucial fifth votes.
	And if you look at the dissents written by the liberal justices, I mean, to them, the second amendment is just an inconvenience.
	And uh they would quickly with a five uh five-member liberal majority, they would quickly override those decisions, and I can guarantee you that that no restriction that any city or state wanted to put on gun ownership would get thrown out by by uh the Supreme Court.
	Um similarly, uh when it comes to another listen, very important issue, uh election integrity.
	Oh, voter ID.
	That's right.
	That's a great point.
	I didn't bring it up.
	You know, in 2008, the Supreme Court upheld voter ID as being perfectly constitutional.
	It's not a burden on voters.
	Um that was a six-three decision, but two of the justices who were in that majority are gone.
	Scalia unfortunately passed away, Justice Stevens retired, and it's very clear, we got uh evidence of that this week, That the four Liberal justices on the court will vote against any voter ID law.
	This week the court split four four on an emergency appeal from the state of North Carolina trying to get a stay of a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that threw out the state's voter ID law.
	They get a fifth judge to join the Liberals.
	That uh 2008 case will get overturned.
	Well, Hans, uh it's been amazing to me.
	You know, around the world is as different countries get the right for the first time to vote.
	Uh remember um in Iraq when they had their first election, uh, they were so proud to hold up their finger that showed they had stuck their finger in permanent ink.
	You know, it would be there for two or three weeks anyway, to ensure that they did not vote more than once.
	Uh it is our one of our most sacred rights, the right to hire and fire who is and will be our public servants, and it's amazing that liberals think it is more important that you show an ID to get cigarettes than it is uh for you to cast the vote that may be the deciding vote on who gets hired and who gets fired.
	Uh I I tell you my right as a voter is diminished by the failure to have some kind of uh ID required, and uh boy, uh I'm glad you brought that up.
	That was not one that I had mentioned, but man, is that important.
	And and look at the amnesty.
	You know, um uh judge, federal judge in South Texas, uh Andrew Hainen had said uh, you know, this is an unconstitutional amnesty.
	You can't do what the president did.
	The Supreme Court went 4-4 on that, and uh there's no question they go the other way and say the president can give blanket amnesties to anybody he wants to, even if it is millions and millions of people.
	Uh it's scary.
	What are the thoughts?
	Uh I'm so glad that you're pointing some of these things out that you have.
	What are the thoughts you have on the dangers that lie before us?
	Well, you you were you were talking before about uh religious freedom and how important that is, uh obviously a key part of the First Amendment.
	Uh look, two years ago, uh, in a case involving uh Greece, the town uh the little town of Greece, New York, uh the court said uh no, it was not unconstitutional for the city council in Greece to start their city council meetings with a non-denominational prayer.
	Right, that's right.
	That's something that has that is a tradition for hundreds of years in this country that legislatures, you you know that, to start off their meetings with a print.
	That was a five-four decision.
	Once again, crucial fifth vote by Justice Scalia.
	The four dissenters, the four liberal justices, if you again if you read their dissents, if they get a fifth liberal vote, um, they will put in a rule that basically says that religion and religious beliefs cannot be expressed in the public arena.
	Wow.
	Well, and of course, we have federal judges across the country that have been so bold as to say, I'll put you in jail if you mention the word God at your graduation, things like that.
	I mean, it it's insane how far we have come from that uh amazing beginning.
	And um Hans, how can people get in touch with you and read and learn more about the dangers that you're uh uh talking about here?
	Uh they they can find my uh writings at uh heritage.orgheritage org.
	Uh I you know, I also write for National Review and conservative review, but but most of that stuff also then gets uh published at Heritage.
	Well, it's fantastic.
	And that's Hans von Spokovsky, and uh that's SPA, like you're going to the spa spa K-O-V, S KY.
	And you are an asset to heritage, you're an asset uh, and we have precious few in Washington, D.C., but thank you so much for staying on top of this issue, Hans.
	And uh I urge the listeners to take a look.
	This is a man with some wisdom that knows what he's talking about.
	This is the Sean Hannity show.
	This is Louis Gilmert sitting in.
	We'll be right back.
	This is the Sean Hannity show.
	This is Louis Gilmert uh sitting in.
	It is such a pleasure to be with you.
	Folks, let me tell you, we are in so much trouble.
	If you don't come out and vote, if you don't let your members of Congress and Senate know you don't want these federal felons out of prison early against the will of the prosecutors, the juries, the federal judges.
	And uh you don't want them voting in this election and throwing it in battleground states to uh Hillary Clinton.
	As you've just heard from Hans von Spotkovski, this is gonna be an election if Hillary is elected, or as he says, anybody appoints liberal judges, there are rights that will actually go away.
	Um I'm telling you, it's a dangerous time.
	Our rights are hanging by a thread.
	And uh we don't need somebody.
	Um I I have great sympathy and empathy for people with mental disabilities, and apparently Hillary has one from her concussion, and she can't remember anything.
	Look, I think those are the kind of people we need to help, and we passed a mental disability bill recently that will allow her to get the help she needs.
	We'd accessing uh resources she didn't have before with the Republicans pushed this mental health bill through.
	I think it'll be a big house, uh big help to her and the nation, but she doesn't need to be running this country with these mental disabilities, whether they're resulting from her concussion or you know, a life with Bill, whatever it was, but I want to take you back.
	1976, Ronald Reagan had made very clear to the Ford people, I'm not gonna speak at your convention.
	There were many people who felt like it was stolen from Ronald Reagan.
	He said he didn't want to speak, and yet Ford gets down at the podium.
	President Ford said basically help me uh get Ronald Reagan down.
	He knew that Reagan didn't want to speak, he had no speech planned.
	And so I want to just uh finish with Reagan's words here for the for the three hours we've had together.
	And he starts off saying, you know, I'm gonna say, fellow Republicans here, but also those who are watching from a distance, all of those millions of Democrats and independents who I know are looking for a cause around which to rally and which I believe we can give them.
	He goes on for that, he says, whether it's different this time than it has ever been before.
	I believe the Republican Party has a platform that is a banner of gold, or I'm sorry, bold, unmistakable colors with no pastel shades.
	We have just heard a call to arms based on that platform and a call to us to really be successful in communicating and reveal to the American people the difference between this platform and the platform of the opposing party, which is nothing but a revamp and a reissue of a running of a late-late show of the thing that we have been hearing from them for the last 40 years.
	He goes on further down and he says, we have got to quit talking to each other about each other and go out and communicate to the world that we may be fewer in numbers than we've been, but we carry the message they are waiting for.
	We must go forth from here united, determined that what a great general said a few years ago is true.
	There is no substitute for victory.
	Ladies and gentlemen, transgender, whoever you are, the country is hanging in the balance.
	You've got to you can't stay home.
	You gotta step forward.
	You gotta make a difference.
	Bring your neighbor to vote.
	Let's get America back.
	This is Louis Gilmert, in for Sean Hannity.
	I love Sean.
	I love you.
	God bless you in America.

▲