Donald Trump made headlines with his proposals today to build an active Army that will reflect the demands from senior management in the Armed Forces. Donald Trump was clear that he is looking to develop a defense that puts America first. The point of his message was, if we're not going to enforce a military strategy that is about winning and we're not ready to equip our soldiers with the latest technology, we shouldn't be waging war to defend America. 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.
Glad you're with us.
Happy Wednesday.
There is a forum tonight.
Matt Lauer, NBC News, 8 Eastern, 5 Pacific, is going to have Hillary for an hour, Trump for an hour, before military members in preparation for all of this.
At the Union League in Philly, Trump outlined a 10-point national security plan, which I actually thought is really good, saying NATO will pay its fair share as they should.
He went on to say as part of his 10-point plan, he will build an active army of about 540,000, build a state-of-the-art missile defense system.
He'll ask the nation's generals to present a plan within 30 days of taking office to defeat and destroy ISIS.
The plan will also substantially expand the U.S. defense arsenal of submarines and ships.
He's talking about a new foreign policy focused on advancing U.S. interests, building regional stability, easing global tensions.
He said he wants a stable, peaceful world with less conflict, more common ground.
He said our action in the Middle East will be tempered by realism.
I do think it has been a mistake in some ways by some people to think that they're going to single-handedly change the Muslim world.
I'm going to tell you what will change the Muslim world.
Don't know what's going to change it.
Oil.
You know what's going to change it?
Independence.
In other words, being energy independent, the world weaning itself off of Middle Eastern oil will have a dramatic, deep, profound impact on the entire Middle East.
And it's in our best national security interest.
Hang on.
I am.
One hour total, not one hour.
What are you talking about?
You got to.
I can't.
Tonight's broadcast, Sean, with Matt Lauer.
It's one hour each at 8 o'clock.
No, incorrect.
It's one hour total, 30 minutes each.
It's a faster format.
Yeah, that's it.
That's hardly even worth watching.
Yeah, they're trying out some new format.
It's some, you know, commercials, at least.
I guess it's going to be one hour continuous.
They each get like 90 seconds of two minutes to answer a question.
That's it.
But I thought they were speaking individually.
They are.
30 for her, 30 for him.
Bada bing, bada bing.
All right, thank you.
It's all right.
I thought it was an hour each.
I stand corrected by my producer who tries to send me a long note with a lot of details in it, and I can't read it and talk to you at the same time.
It's impossible, even though I'm probably the best multitasker you've ever met in your entire life.
Anyway, so the proposal is that he will ask these generals to put a plan forward in 30 days.
He will ask Congress to eliminate the defense sequester.
He will build an active army of 540,000, as the Army's chief of staff said he needs.
He will build a Marine Corps based on 36 battalions, which the Heritage Foundation notes is the minimum needed to deal with major contingencies.
He will build a Navy approaching 350 surface ships and submarines, as recommended by the bipartisan National Defense Panel.
He will build an Air Force of at least 1,200 fighter aircraft, which the Heritage Foundation has shown to be needed to execute current missions.
He will seek to develop state-of-the-art missile defense.
He will modernize our nation's naval cruisers to provide ballistic missile defense capability.
He will also enforce all classification rules, enforce all laws related to the handling of classified materials.
And one of his first commands after taking office will be to ask the joint chiefs of staff, all relevant federal departments, to conduct a thorough review of U.S. cyber defense and identify all vulnerabilities in our power grid, et cetera.
Vital infrastructure.
By the way, we better pay attention to this stuff.
I interviewed Julian Assange last night.
And you know what?
When he first came out, I was, I said, look, you broke into our defense systems.
You know, I was pretty critical.
I actually have a greater appreciation, although I expressed it at the time, and I saw liberal news media.
They purposely take out your comments.
It says, part of me at the time was torn.
Yeah, but this is vital defense information.
And I'm also a big believer in privacy.
And, you know, where does this end breaking into and hacking into everybody's stuff?
But on the other hand, Julian Assange and WikiLeaks may have done us the biggest favor in our lives.
He's exposed just how vulnerable our deepest security secrets are.
Well, if we didn't know about the vulnerability, we couldn't take the steps that are going to be necessary to fix it and prevent it from happening in the future.
And the other thing he did was reveal, even though I'd rather it not have happened, but just the deep level of corruption and lies that exist between the government and we, the people.
And that was exposed as well.
Anyway, and he was very clear that he has no intentions of doing this only for those that have power that can wage war and things like that.
And it was an interesting conversation.
And he'll be with us on the program tomorrow.
So we'll get to that.
One thing that I will say as you think about and maybe watch this town hall tonight with the two candidates is one thing we better really get a grip on.
If we're going to send America's national treasure, our children, to go fight wars in the future, after 58,000 dead in Vietnam, 5,000 plus dead are Iraq and Afghanistan, after the many limbs left on the battlefield, sending them into conflict without even up-armored Humvees, knowing IEDs are a huge problem and playing catch-up from day one.
That if we're not going to enforce a military strategy that is about winning and defining winning and defining an exit strategy that will protect the gains that our brave men and women make when they won Baghdad, Ramadi, Fallucia, Mosul, to Crete.
And then it just created a vacuum for ISIS when the war became politicized.
Hillary Clinton is as guilty as anybody.
She voted to send these guys to war, and then she goes through, then it becomes politicized, then it becomes unpopular.
And rather than just win the war and maintain the peace and maintain what you've won, they end up giving it all back.
And then if you're a parent that lost a child in a war and a conflict or a loved one, you got to be asking yourself, for what?
Why do we keep doing this?
We can't do this anymore.
And I think there's got to be strategic, tactical planning for future wars where we're not going to be sending kids from Omaha and Middle America and all over the country into Baghdad and Mosul and Ramadi banging on door after door.
There's got to be a better, bigger way to fight and win a war.
And that is that you've got to think of the next advancement in warfare.
And that means that I don't think, especially with the onset of drone fighting, there's so much that we can do that we're not doing to win wars and conflicts.
Look, if half the battle is just chasing ISIS members back into their caves, that would be a good start or wherever else they're going to hide in a bunker underground somewhere.
And if they pop their head off, they know they're going to get popped with a missile on their head.
There's got to be better intelligence gathering.
There's got to be better ways to fight wars than sending kids door to door in these godforsaken regions where they don't want us there anyway.
And the only reason, in large part, we end up going back again and again to the Middle East is because we're not energy independent.
Energy independence is great for so many different reasons.
We are the Middle East of natural gas.
If we would allow drilling, fracking, coal mining expansion, use of nuclear technology, which is nearly impossible to get any permits because of the Democratic Party and their unholy alliance with tree huggers and those global warming, global cooling, you know, maniacs out there that frankly would stop all human progress and we'd be riding bicycles and living in tents, I guess.
You know, if we're going to cater to their needs, then we're going to always be dependent.
And yes, then what happens in the Middle East is going to matter to us.
Now it's even gotten worse because we've given the worst, number one state sponsor of terror, these radical Islamic mullahs in Iran, the ability to build nuclear weapons and the money to build it.
And then the ability to build a conventional weapon system from where it is today.
And the ability to partner with Vladimir Putin and build missile defense, that even if the Israelis felt it was in their national security interest to take out their nuclear facilities, they wouldn't be capable of doing it.
We make some really stupid decisions as a country.
It's frustrating.
And if you're a parent of a military man or woman that lost their life or lost their legs or lost their arms, you've got to be livid today.
You have every right to be livid today because this is preventable.
I supported the Iraq war, still think it was the right thing to do.
But after we won, you've got to keep the gains you made.
And Trump was probably right from the beginning in saying, take the oil.
We should have taken the oil.
And the first thing I would have done with it is taken the proceeds of that oil and give it to the military families.
And if we're going to fight for the liberation of Baghdad and Iraq and Afghanistan, they ought to be paying us.
I don't think that happened either.
Anyway, on the political front, Nate Silver today has Donald Trump's odds of winning the election at 30.9%.
I would say my own gut tells me with the shift in momentum that it's probably higher.
But that is the mindset that I think for the next 62 days, the Trump campaign is going to need to have.
You've got to act like you're behind, and you've got to take bold, courageous steps like Trump has been doing.
I thought his speech today was phenomenal on national security, national defense.
He's basically offering to do everything that every smart military analysis has said we need to do as a country to protect ourselves against our enemies.
And we've allowed under Obama the military to deteriorate.
And I think it's all smart.
He needs to continue to take chances.
Go down to Baton Rouge when he sees people in trouble where the president and Hillary are too lazy to do it.
Go do it.
Go to Mexico.
Go do it.
Keep reaching out to black churches and black America and say, I want your vote.
You're not doing well under Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
So I think he's doing all the right things, making very few mistakes in the last three to four weeks.
And I think that's a good sign and hopefully preparing well for these debates that are coming up.
But I think fighting like you're behind, it certainly doesn't help when you've got this coalition of Republicans that are just hell-bent on doing everything they can do to sabotage Trump.
But I'm not going to get back into that.
I promised you I wouldn't.
Did a little bit on Twitter today against Jonah Goldberg, but frankly, I've got better things to do with my time now.
It's a little too late for me, but I see that Republicans on the Hill are actually doing some things that interest me.
You got House investigators.
Byron York, writing for the Washington Examiner, points out, Government House Reform and Oversight Committee, they're trying to determine whether Hillary Clinton gave the order to this IT company to destroy thousands of her secret emails.
Remember when Ed Henry of Fox asked Hillary, well, did you clean the server?
Did you wipe the server clean?
Did she wipe the server?
What, like with a cloth or something?
No.
With a cloth?
No, she used bleach-bit software.
As Trey Gowdy said, that God himself couldn't find it.
Well, if that doesn't show that she acted intentionally or with criminal intent, I don't know what does.
Anyway, so if they can prove she gave the order, that would be an obstruction of justice case.
And you've got Jason Chaffetz.
He wants to know why an employee at the Platte River Networks, this is the company, the mom and pop shop bathroom server location place, was under contract with Clinton to handle the server, why they deleted these large amounts of emails after the Clinton team received a congressional subpoena for the material.
And why Platte River Networks, a technical employee, apparently the one who performed the actual deletions, actually asserted a legal privilege and refused to tell the FBI what was said on a conference call that he took part in with Clinton's attorneys on March 25th, 2015, around the time the deletions were performed.
This stinks to high heaven.
It just, the whole thing stinks to high heaven.
And then James Comey's cover-up and James Comey's document dump.
Unbelievable.
Also, the House has put forward a bill that would ban further cash payments to Iran.
Okay, a little late, but they're calling it the Prohibiting Future Ransom Payments to Iran Act.
At least they're doing something.
But I mean, so far in this campaign, I've not heard enough talk about the genuine dangers of electing Hillary Clinton president.
William Sapphire was right.
She's a congenital liar.
I would argue she's a pathological liar.
I mean, he applied that to her 20 years ago.
We know she has, as far as I'm concerned, there's all the evidence one would need for criminal intent here.
And it didn't just start with the email scandal.
You know, she became the only first lady in American history to be summoned to testify before a criminal grand jury.
And based on that testimony, Ken Starr's Whitewater prosecution team actually drew up a draft indictment against her.
But then the key prosecution witness against her, James McDougall, guess lucky for her, died.
And Starr then decided not to, he didn't have a case without him.
So email gate is not the first time she's escaped indictment by the skin of her teeth.
But what I don't hear discussed in this election year by the Wall Street Journal, the NRO guys, the Romney people, and all the anti-Trumpers out there that are trying to encourage people to, I guess, half-elect Hillary, what I don't hear from them is what are the actual consequences of putting a lying criminal in charge of the country where her actions could have a devastating impact, not just on our lives, but the lives of our children and grandchildren,
and somebody that seems perfectly comfortable with the state of affairs under Obama.
And that includes the lowest home ownership rate in 51 years, the worst recovery in 41, the lowest labor participation rate since the 70s, 12 million more Americans on food stamps, 8 million more in poverty, one in five American families, not a single family member working.
And of course, taking on more debt than every other president before him combined.
Never mind Iran and Iraq and Afghanistan and Egypt and Libya and Benghazi, North Africa.
It's a mess.
A friend of mine listening to the program working out just sent me a list of things that, well, we were just talking and having a conversation and a list of things of which, if I said, would just ruin me in about 10 seconds.
I can't do that.
I just can't.
I've got to think of the future.
I've got to think of the impact we've got to have together.
If Nate Silver says it's 30.9%, let's go with that.
Let's say Trump is behind.
Let's say that it's really a pivotal election in terms of, I don't know if you can resolve it after four years of Hillary, after eight years of Obama.
I mean, you know, look, there is a reason why Democrats are so hell-bent on immigration.
Why are they so hell-bent on immigration?
Why do they want all of these refugees?
For example, there was Fox News Latino today, thanks to the Obama-Clinton open borders policy.
You, the taxpayers, it doesn't matter that you paid $300, whatever, billion dollars a year in terms of the impact of the health care system, the criminal justice system, you know, the educational system.
That's all money that could be spent on your kids.
That's a better educational system for every American.
Now, we're not against immigration.
I personally like people from Mexico.
We're asking that you come legally.
We're asking that we be able to vet you.
We're asking that America gets to decide.
If you have 95 million Americans out of the labor force, you know, maybe we just need to slow down immigration until we get Americans back to work.
It doesn't mean we're selfish.
It means we can only absorb so much at any given time.
But there has been a long-term calculation that is being made by the Democrats.
They are viewing refugees, illegal immigrants that eventually will be legal in their minds as potential Democratic voters.
They probably assume 75% will be Democrats.
Now, because of the open borders policies, you know, regardless, it was interesting to read this morning.
Somebody, I guess, I don't know, whoever the fact-checker checkers are, that usually say, Hannity lied when I don't, actually said that my figures on immigration were 1,000% correct about crime being committed by illegal immigrants.
I've been saying it for years.
Nobody in the media tends to pick up on it.
They haven't told you the story about illegal immigrants.
They should.
I sat through the security briefing with then-Governor Rick Perry.
I've been to the border 12 times.
I've been on horseback, all-terrain vehicle.
I've been in helicopters.
I've been out on boats.
I've been there when criminal aliens are arrested.
I've watched families cross the border right in front of me.
And then I stepped over the border into Mexico once and you had this local Arizona lawmaker that wanted me arrested for entering the country illegally.
I took one step into Mexico.
One step?
Turns out I didn't do that.
Anyway, so, you know, with open borders, you know, they now want 30,000, another 30,000 refugee children.
Now, remember, 99.3% of immigrants that have been coming from Syria and Iraq and elsewhere as a result of the Civil War and Syria in particular, they're Muslim.
There's been Christian genocide going on in northern Iraq and the Yazidis and all throughout the region, frankly, and nobody pays any attention to it.
They represent 0.5% of the refugees that we take into the country.
Anyway, a research group has put forth an estimate that the U.S. will see an influx of more than 127,000 children entering the country from abroad this year, either as refugees or unauthorized illegal immigrants, up from less than 100,000 last year.
They're just doing this on purpose.
There's a reason that when Republicans say, give us the Senate, We're going to stop the president's illegal, unconstitutional executive amnesty that it mattered.
The fact that they ended up funding it is another story.
It just shows how weak, timid, feckless, spineless, gutless, you know, a bunch of cowards Republicans have been.
In Great Britain, Prime Minister, well, earlier this year, former Prime Minister David Cameron tried to ban Donald Trump from entering Britain.
Why?
Because of his immigration reform plan, the most prominent of which was to build a wall.
I want to talk about 180-degree reversal.
The Trump ban failed in Parliament.
Cameron is long gone, and now the Brits are building their own Trump-style wall.
The Daily Mirror points out that a huge concrete wall is being built by the Brits to stop migrants making it across the channel.
Oops.
I think you're going to see a lot more of that too.
By the way, how ironic is it?
Hillary Clinton, you know, the one that uses bleach-bit software after she said, you mean like with like a like a cloth?
You mean like with a cloth?
What, like with a cloth or something?
No.
You mean that, like, do you mean did I wipe it with a cloth to get the dust off it?
Is that what you're saying, Ed?
No, they didn't use a cloth.
They used bleach-bit software so they can get rid of all the 33,000 emails.
Why?
Because what?
They didn't want us to know about her yoga routine.
Well, frankly, I don't really want to know about her yoga routine.
The thought is not particularly appealing to me.
A wedding, a funeral, that's not particularly appealing to me either.
But it does show criminal intentions.
And you've got this, we are welcoming in.
Look, you've got the never Trumper people, and I've said about all I can say to them because they're making a choice.
They're going to sabotage Trump.
And I say they own Hillary's Supreme Court nominees.
They own what these unvetted refugees will do to Americans and the jobs they'll take.
They own what illegal immigrants will do to the economy and whatever else happens, because Trump's going to build the wall.
They own Obamacare because that will stay in some form or shape.
They own education, top-down, NEA-supported, Common Core education, which is failing, especially inner city kids.
We're destroying their opportunities.
You don't have an education.
That is your ladder to success in life.
We're destroying their chances.
It ends any hope of energy independence.
Coal miners, Hillary promises they're going to be out of work.
Coal mining company's out of business.
She's not going to allow fracking.
She's not going to allow nuclear technology.
And she's certainly not going to allow any drilling.
She buys into this whole global warming, global cooling, you know, temperature change, human-cause whatever emissions, et cetera.
But she flies around the world in a private jet.
She buys into it all, and she will give in and keep our dependence on foreign oil.
So we're going to lose the millions of jobs there as well.
And I'm just saying to the Never Trumpers that they own that.
But also, I'll say that you own this next era of lawlessness.
Whatever Hillary does won't surprise me.
Email Gate is not the first time she's escaped indictment.
I don't hear anybody talking about it.
You get a pretty good idea what Hillary's America is going to look like.
Just examine recent headlines.
For example, one headline: Clinton Foundation skipped identifying foreign donors.
That was in the New York Post today.
And the state attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, gave the Clinton Foundation a pass on identifying foreign donors and charitable filings, making it impossible to know if they got any special favors while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.
Now, isn't that nice?
The same Eric Schneiderman that's going after Donald Trump over Trump University, the same media that ignored the $18 million that was paid by Laureate College, a for-profit college to Bill Clinton at the same time they were getting invitations from Hillary State Department to come to special meetings in Washington.
Really, that's pay to play.
Anyway, Scripps News Service found out that the foundation and its subsidiary, the Clinton Health Access Initiative, took in $225 million in government donations between 2010 and 2014.
Now, in New York, we have a charity law.
New York's charity law states clearly: organizations that received a contribution or a grant from a government agency during the reporting period shall include the name of each agency from which contributors and contributions received and the amount of each contribution.
But both the foundation and they failed to do that.
And of course, Eric Schneiderman, friend of the Clintons, a member of Clinton's leadership council in New York, fierce critic of Donald Trump, did nothing about it.
Another headline: ethics wall between State Department and Clinton Foundation didn't exist.
McClatchy News.
An official at the Clinton Global Initiative sent top State Department aide Melanie Verveer a 63-page list of individuals, groups, and companies that had pledged money to its programs.
An employee at another Clinton Foundation offshoot emailed Verveer looking for a job for a former colleague.
And another asked whether Verveer could persuade the internationally acclaimed so-and-so so-and-so to attend.
Vevere, by the way, is a longtime Clinton confidant, served as chief of staff at the White House before becoming ambassador-at-large for global women's issues, was in regular contact with Clinton and Foundation officials during the four years at the State Department, according to dozens of emails.
You know, Hillary signed an ethics agreement to largely remove herself from issues involving the foundation.
The document did not apply to her aides in the State Department.
Her lawlessness, by the way, didn't just infect the State Department.
You got a headline from yesterday's Daily Caller: DOJ official who led Clinton email probe is an Obama donor.
I told you that story yesterday.
You know, if, you know, thanks to Hillary's criminality or status within the Obama Justice Department as someone who is absolutely above the law.
You got another headline.
This one, you know, says, Congressman, meaning Jason Chavitz, says FBI is withholding information the public needs to see.
Of course they are.
All right.
And beyond the damage that a Hillary Clinton presidency would do to the institutions of government, you know, remember her repeated attacks on law enforcement.
Remember, she aligned herself with the Black Lives Matter movement.
You know, what do we want dead cops?
When do we want them now?
Heather McDonald in the New York Post today, the Black Lives Matter movement has literally been feted repeatedly at the White House, honored by the Democratic National Convention, and Hillary has incorporated its claims about racist, homicidal cops into a presidential campaign pitch.
Recent assassinations of police officers in the name of Black Lives Matter ideology have not slowed down the anti-cop demonstrations or diminished the virulent hatred directed at cops during these protests.
Meanwhile, the Black Lives Matter narrative has had an enormous impact and effect on policing and public safety.
Yeah, murders of officers are up 52% this year compared to last year.
Cop assassinations are only a more extreme version of this inspired hatred.
Yeah, so Hillary becomes president.
Well, I guess Black Lives Matter will have their seat at the Oval Office dining table.
There goes my chance.
By the way, why would a president, our president, isn't it embarrassing, meet with this guy, this who called him an SOB?
He met with the Philippine president Rodrigo Duarte after an initial meeting was scrapped after the Southeast Asian leader called him a son of a bitch.
Obama and Duarte, they met on the sidelines of an international summit in Laos.
Anyway, according to the Associated Press, I wonder if Obama apologized to him.
All right, let's go to our phones as we say hi to Kevin in Minnesota.
Kevin, hi, how are you?
You are on the Sean Hannity Show.
Thanks for taking my call, Sean.
Sean, you talked about the half-hour interview coming up with Hillary Clinton.
I have a special insight in that interview that's coming up.
Yeah, what is it?
It'll be a half an hour of coughing and no questions afterwards.
Thank you, sir.
Betty Ann in Somerville, South Carolina.
How are you?
Good, Sean.
How are you?
Thanks for taking my call.
You got to pick up.
You're on a speaker.
Sean, I'm up, Sean.
All right.
Thank you.
Okay.
Thanks for taking my call.
I just wanted to say I worked in corporate America for 25-plus years in the ITT department.
And if anything, anything was done that was not work-related or that was confidential at all.
You did not have an investigation or any questions asked.
Security came in and walked you out.
How do people want to vote for someone who is this crooked, who is such a liar?
She's just.
I am telling everybody, I believe probably Nate Silver is close to the estimate in terms of Trump's chances.
I think it's probably 50-50, 60-40, 65-35.
And I think it's a very difficult electoral map.
And the only way this is going to happen is for all of these crybabies, pick up their toys and go home Republicans to do their job and support the far better, infinitely better candidate and stop whining.
And also, if Trump can get outreach, he's doing very well with independence.
If he can reach out to the black community, which has fared very poorly under Obama, that would be helpful.
Dave, but I can't answer why people do the things they do.
Dave, in New Mexico, we have about 30 seconds for you.
How are you, sir?
Good.
Fine, Sean.
Listen, I think the whole problem with our government and the way it's not working for us and protecting us from the criminals in office is to get right to the senators, congressmen, and governors of the Republican Party that aren't backing up Trump.
So what I did was I wrote a letter, hand wrote a letter to every one of those.
It's nine representatives.
Listen, they don't care.
I wrote John Kasich.
John Kasich has been a friend of mine for years, and he goes, I said, can I call you?
And he goes, not if you want to talk about Trump.
I said, okay, I can only talk to you about golf and our kids, and I can only talk to you about superfluous nonsense, but I can't talk about Supreme Court nominees vetting or unvetting refugees about immigration, about Obamacare, about the debt and the deficit.
You want me to have a superficial relationship with you?
I said, no, thanks.
That's what I said to him.
What I said was, I said, although I can't vote you out of office directly, I will be following you and your opponents for when you come up for election.
And I will be sending back to your opponent.
They don't care.
They're too full of themselves.
You know, it's all about them.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court alone ought to convince any anti-Trumper where to vote.
Anyway, good call.
Dave, we keep trying, though.
We do.
We're not going to give up.
We've got 62 days to go.
We've got Newt Gingrich, Michael Bidden, when we get back.
We also have our friend Jeffrey Lord, Jessica Tarlov, coming up.
What have we gotten from the horrible, horrible decisions made by Barack Obama and Secretary Clinton?
Libya is in ruins.
Our ambassador and three other brave Americans are dead.
And ISIS has gained a new base of operations and taken their very valuable oil.
Syria is in the midst of a disastrous civil war.
ISIS controls large portions of territory.
A refugee crisis now threatens Europe and the United States.
And hundreds of thousands of people are dead.
In Egypt, terrorists have gained a foothold in the Sinai Desert near the Suez Canal, one of the most essential waterways anywhere in the world.
Iraq is in chaos, and ISIS is on the loose.
And Iran, by the way, will be taking over Iraq and their vast oil reserves.
ISIS has spread across the Middle East and into the West.
Iran, the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, is now flush with $150 billion in cash being released and released by the United States, plus another $1.7 billion that we just learned about last evening in cash ransom payments.
We thought it was $400 million.
Turns out that it's now $1.7 billion in cash.
In other words, our country was blackmailed and extorted into paying this unheard of amount of money as ransom.
And our president lied to us.
Worst of all, the nuclear deal puts Iran, the number one state sponsor of radical Islamic terrorism, on a path to nuclear weapons.
And that path will go very quickly.
This is Hillary Clinton's foreign policy legacy.
Failure and death.
All right, that's Donald Trump earlier today laying out, by the way, second hour, Sean Hannity Show, 800941 Sean, a 10-point national security plan full of specifics.
He did it at Lincoln Hall at the Union League of Philadelphia, and he said he will build an active army of about 540,000 state-of-the-art missile defense system.
He will ask the nation's generals to present a plan within 30 days of taking office to defeat and destroy ISIS.
And he said the plan will also substantially expand the U.S. defense arsenal of submarines and ships.
He said our actions in the Middle East will be tempered with realism.
And he went on to blame both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for creating these power vacuums, as you just heard right there.
Joining us now to react to this, also in preparation of tonight's, well, back-to-back town hall hours with Matt Lauer on NBC as former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.
How are you, sir?
Well, I'm doing well, and I think that for any reasonable person, Trump has answered the question about whether or not he could handle national security.
He clearly has had very good military advisors.
The proposal they have put together is specific.
It's real.
It outlines a much stronger American military, and it outlines a much more cautious use of American troops in a way which I think the country will resonate to.
It's a very compelling story.
I'm looking forward tonight to seeing how he does because I think that he has spent a lot of time with some key generals, and he has a much better grip on what needs to be done than any of his opponents think.
You know, I think, and also he called for an end of the defense sequester.
He's talked about, he almost sounds a little bit like Ronald Reagan talking about the gap of vulnerability in terms of our military and its operations and its decline.
I think it's a pretty accurate analysis.
When we say it, people don't like to hear it.
Well, it's very funny.
I just finished rereading the Reagan-Carter debate of 1980 because I think that's the closest to what the Trump debate's going to be like with Clinton because of the tremendous gap between Reagan and Carter in ideology and values, which will be similar to how big the gap's going to be in the debates this fall.
And Reagan's quite clear that peace comes through strength, that America has never gotten into a war by being too strong, that Carter had cut the defense system dramatically, and that Reagan actually stood for a safer, more peaceful America because he would be strong enough that no one would attack us.
And, of course, that's what happened.
We spent eight years with Reagan, had very limited military engagements, but built up our military to such a point that we defeated the Soviet Empire.
So the Reagan-Carter debate's a very interesting thing to look at and then think about what a similar gap in values there are between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
You know, I've had a shift in my thinking, and I've expressed it to this audience and to my television audience, and I want you to hear me out, and I want you to see if you agree with me or you disagree.
After Vietnam, and we allow politics, we allow at least the conflict or battle or wars that we engage in to be politicized, and through the prism of politics, we end up losing wars.
I was a real believer in the Iraq war.
I still am to this day.
I still feel that there were probably weapons of mass destruction.
I do believe they were likely moved to Syria in the long lead-up to the war.
I think that that probably represented the type of weapons that Assad was using against his own people when, of course, Obama drew that infamous red line in the sand.
But I have a very different view if we're going to continue to ask American treasure, young men and women, to fight, bleed, and die and win cities like Mosul, Ramadi, Fallucia, Baghdad, and Tikrit, only to allow these wars to be politicized.
People like Hillary vote to send them there, then vote to pull them out.
You've got to ask yourself when ISIS takes over the very cities that these Americans died in or lost their limbs in, what's the point?
And I don't know in good conscience if I don't have confidence that the war or effort to engage an enemy is not going to be fought to victory.
I don't think I can support it anymore.
Well, that, of course, was the principle that Reagan set up and became both Weinberger and Colin Powell's operating principles, that the war had to be so important that it was worth American lives.
The war had to be one where we were going to bring to bear overwhelming force, and it was going to be a very short, sharp engagement.
And I think they felt that very, very deeply, and they were very cautious about it.
And I have the same feeling.
I'm working on some writing I'm doing about the anniversary of 9-11.
And I feel very deeply that here we are 15 years later, still engaged in the same war, still facing the same opponent.
The opponent has multiplied, grown more complex, and is on offense all across the planet.
And we still have in our elites absolute, total confusion.
It's not the young men and women who risked their lives.
It's not the heroic young men and women, as you point out, who liberated Fallujah.
It's not the folks who have suffered terrible wounds and have become wounded warriors that we are all proud of.
And yet we spent all of this money, we risk all these lives for what?
And you have to say, and this is one of the reasons that I'm comfortable supporting Trump, is that I think having somebody ask tough questions is exactly what we need right now as a country.
But I believe you supported the Iraq war.
I supported the Iraq war.
I still think it was the right thing to do.
The mistake was pulling out early because of political reasons, and it became politically uncomfortable.
I mean, I think we can go back and argue whether or not it was fought the right way in the first place, but certainly George Bush made the adjustments.
The surge certainly worked.
I think that's incontrovertible.
But he warned himself what would happen if we pulled out early, that a worse enemy would take over.
I support the Powell doctrine.
I agree with the Powell doctrine.
Maybe we didn't do it in that particular instance, which allowed the forces, the anti-war forces, to, I guess, emerge as a powerful voice of dissent.
Well, I think, but I also think it goes deeper than that.
We did not have, I mean, first of all, the Iraq war was actually a second war after the Afghanistan war.
And we did not mobilize our forces in a way that would allow us to fight both wars.
If you read Jake Tapper wrote a terrific book called The Outpost, which is about a year in the life of one particular small outpost of Americans.
And you read this book and it infuriates you.
I mean, my dad was infantry.
He spent 27 years in the Army.
And here are this handful of people we're putting out at the very end of a long line, inadequate artillery, inadequate air power, inadequate helicopters, etc.
And you think to yourself, how could the greatest power in the world allow itself to stumble into this kind of a policy?
And we had no strategy.
I mean, I was for the war in Iraq until Ambassador Bremer decided that he was going to play MacArthur and we were going to redesign Iraqi society.
And I had argued all along and had written a paper in 2002 as part of my Defense Policy Board activities saying, look, you need to have an Operation Switch.
You need to go in there decisively, eliminate Saddam, hire the regular army, and pull out of the cities as fast as you can, because American kids don't know anything about the politics of Fallujah or the politics of Tikrit or the politics of Baghdad.
And instead, Bremer decided to disarm the regular army, leaving hundreds of thousands of people with no income, no dignity.
And the whole thing began to fall apart in the summer of 2003.
And it was entirely a mistake.
And it just got worse.
And I agree with you, Bush was courageous in going to the surge, but they still didn't realize how deep the problems were and how long this effort's going to be.
And we need to design a strategy for what could be 50 to 100 years of conflict.
And that means you've got to reduce the American exposure so that the American people will tolerate it.
Because we're not going to tolerate 50 to 100 years of losing young Americans.
It will not happen.
You know, and I also think that now brings us to a different stage.
And that is we've got to rethink warfare altogether.
And with the advent of technology and the ability to have drones fight these wars for us, I don't think that's the be-all end-all, but it certainly, to me, seems like a better alternative than having American men and women go door-to-door in Baghdad, you know, not knowing what they face on the other side of every door and going with up with Humvees that are not even up armored, which they went into in the beginning.
Right.
I mean, you really have to make dramatically different investments, and then you've got to be willing to use those investments.
You know, I've said the last couple of years, the fact that the Obama administration rules of engagement require you to leaflet an oil tanker convoy to let the truck drivers know that they should get out of the trucks before you kill them with predators.
Now, a guy driving an oil truck for ISIS is an enemy combatant.
And the idea that we're going to say, oh, we really don't want to make your day bad, so we're telling you right now that you should get out of your truck so that we can take your truck out.
That's not warfare.
That's an absurdity.
It's a black comedy.
Yeah, well, you know, that's the reality.
That's what these guys have fought under.
You know, and I know I took some heat when I said I just wouldn't want my son or daughter fighting under this commander-in-chief for those very reasons you're outlining.
All right, last question.
Do you think, you know, I know you're a big believer in Alvin Toffler and future shock.
Is it time that we really, really go back to the drawing board?
And is it a time where America needs to lead a military revolution?
As long as Trump and Hillary are talking to the military tonight, this is an appropriate day to ask this question.
Where we come up with the new technology that puts as few boots on the grounds in any conflict as possible.
Isn't that the time for this now?
Yeah, and I think we want a revolution in military capabilities, and that requires, and here I agree entirely with Trump about dropping the sequester on defense.
That requires focusing resources.
It requires overhauling the defense procurement system so that we can actually buy technology as rapidly as possible.
And I suspect we could leapfrog all of our competitors in the next decade if we were willing to be serious about it and to resource it.
And then you could help sustain this sort of thing.
But we're not going to sustain it by reducing our guys to carrying rifles and driving past IEDs and getting them blown up.
I mean, that is not a war we're going to win.
Yeah, I think well said.
All right, we're going to be watching tonight.
I think this is a conversation for future shows, and I love the idea.
I think anything that's going to save the lives of American men and women and our national treasure and prevents them from getting their legs blown off of them shedding blood only to see the land that they fought, bled, and died for handed over to a worse enemy.
That's got to stop.
I mean, that's just unacceptable for anybody.
Mr. Speaker, thank you so much for being with us.
We appreciate it.
Thanks.
We'll be on right after Matt Lauer with both Trump and Hillary, the not appearing together before the military talking about these very, very important issues.
All right, 800-941 Sean is on number.
Our great senator, a decent, progressive human being, Hillary Rodman Clinton.
Thank you all.
Wow.
Oh, I think we could go home right now.
Excuse me.
Too much to say.
Thank you, Cincinnati.
I am really delighted to have this opportunity to be here at the Jewish Federation of Greater Des Moines.
Excuse me, just one second here.
A loss.
I have one.
I am so happy to be back here in Youngstown.
when I'm president, with your help, I could use some water.
Water would be good.
Now, she did release a two-page letter from her doctor with real medical information, including some of the things you mentioned, cholesterol, things like that.
It also talked about the incident in December of 2012 when she had a concussion and a blood cut in her brain.
And in this, the letter says she had follow-up testing in 2013, which revealed complete resolution of the effects of the concussion, as well as total dissolution of the thrombosis.
Mrs. Clinton also tested negative for all clotting disorders.
Is that enough?
No.
There are a number of questions I have.
First of all, she's also 68 years old.
And I think, well, I think that medical letter was well written and was very professional, unlike Dr. Bornstein's, it's not enough.
For example, she is on Coumadin, a medication to prevent blood clots.
And you have to monitor that, and it says that she's being monitored regularly.
I'd like to know how well she is being controlled.
That's a difficult drug to use.
Also, I think she should have had a neurological examination, a thorough neurological examination in 2016.
We know what happens to football players who have had concussions, how they begin to lose some of their cognitive ability.
I think both of them should release their records.
But the fact is, she released her medical record some time ago.
And if you listen to my show last week, I just called a friend of mine, Dr. Robert Heisinger, who's an excellent internist pulmonologist, and we just dispassionately sat and evaluated the medical record that she had released.
And based on the information that she has provided, her doctors have provided, we were gravely concerned, not just about her health care, not about her health, but her health care.
Why?
Well, it's hard for people to understand.
Both of us concluded that if we were providing the care that she was receiving, we'd be ashamed to show up in the doctor's lounge.
We'd be laughed out.
She's receiving sort of 1950 level sort of care by our evaluation.
So we took a look at her record, and here are the basic facts.
She had two episodes of what's called deep venous thrombosis.
Common problem, blood clots in the leg.
She also has hypothyroidism.
And she's being treated for hypothyroidism with something called armor thyroid, which is very unconventional and something that we used to use back in the 60s.
And both he and I went, hmm, that's weird.
And by the way, wow, armor thyroid sometimes has some weird side effects.
Oh, well, okay.
So she goes on coumadin.
That's weird because coumadin really isn't even used anymore.
Now we use Eloquis or Zeralto, things like this.
Certainly somebody, the presidential candidate, would get one of the newer anticoagulants.
Then she falls, hits her head, and as a complication of that, has something called a transverse sinus thrombosis.
This is an exceedingly rare clot.
I've only seen one of these in my career, which is a clot in the collecting system for the cerebral spinal fluid.
And it essentially guarantees that somebody has something wrong with their coagulation system.
Well, she's had two clots, a transverse sinus thrombosis.
What's wrong with her coagulation system?
Has that been evaluated?
And oh, by the way, armor thyroid associated rarely with hypercoagulability.
So the very medicine the doctors are using may be causing this problem, and they're using an old-fashioned medicine to treat it.
What is going on with her health care?
It's bizarre.
I got to tell you, maybe they have reasons, but at a distance, it looks bizarre.
All right, that was Dr. Drew Pinski.
And before that, that was Obama's doctor, Obama's doctor, saying Hillary should undergo a thorough neurological examination.
Poor Dr. Drew, who I actually think a lot of, and I've met him, and I think he's a nice guy, very smart.
He has very prestigious positions within the medical field.
Anyway, I don't think he ever thought that as a result of him stating his opinion, he was apparently pressured from day one to retract his statements.
This was in the New York Post.
He wouldn't do that.
And what followed, according to one report, was a series of nasty phone calls and emails to him.
And, quote, it was downright scary and creepy, a source close to Pinske said.
And according to CNN, the firing had nothing to do with talking about Hillary Clinton's health.
Well, it just happened to happen right after he said it.
So it seems bizarre.
Now, we do have the admission to the FBI that Hillary Clinton couldn't even recall if she had security briefings because of the concussion.
She cited her concussion as the reason for this memory loss that she has.
So to what extent is that a problem, and how deep do we need to examine that if she wants to be president of the United States?
On top of that, she keeps having coughing fits.
She had two of them on Labor Day on Monday as she was addressing reporters aboard the campaign plane and then one when she was in Cleveland.
And she said, quote, I just upped my antihistamine load to try and break through it, she responded.
But this has happened many, many times.
She acknowledged taking medication.
Anyway, the only person, apparently 10 doctors now question Hillary's health.
This fit lasted for four minutes and 22 seconds.
You have Dr. Jane Orient, an author executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
Well, she was quoted in a Breitbart article about this and about her coughing fit.
You know, they say it was four minutes and 22 seconds.
That's a long time, she said.
And then she further goes on to say it wouldn't be so severe if it was caused by allergies.
And there's a bunch of other doctors that have weighed in.
Anyway, do you, the voter, have a right to ask?
Does she have thyroid problems?
Does she have coagulation problems?
Why is she using Coumadin when she could be using Xarelto, other anticoagulants?
What about deep vein thrombosis?
What about the impairment that caused her to forget if she even had a security briefing?
Well, there's only one person up for this task, and that's our friend Dr. Michael Boden.
He's the former chief medical examiner for New York City.
He has been a medical examiner for 45 years, performed more than 20,000 autopsies.
He literally is in the forefront of this science that we call forensic pathology, and he's a good friend as well.
And how are you?
Good to talk to you again, Sean.
Thanks for watching.
Listen, if I ever died under suspicious circumstances, there's only one person I want doing my autopsy.
That's you.
I'll take that as a compliment.
Well, it's meant as a compliment because you're so good at it.
Now, think of what it is that you do.
So here you are tasked oftentimes with trying to find the cause of death for people.
Right.
Okay, not an easy task, right?
All the time?
That's right.
It's not always cut and dry.
That's right.
All right, but in your 40-plus years experience, you've learned a lot.
Absolutely.
You've learned a lot about head injuries and concussions.
You've learned a lot about deep vein thrombosis and coagulants and how difficult it is to monitor these things, correct?
That's correct, Sean.
All right, so if Hillary Clinton can't remember, she told the FBI she couldn't remember being briefed by the State Department on security issues involving email and servers, et cetera.
Does that indicate to you that there was some type of severe concussion, neurological event that caused her to forget?
Well, there's good documentation, apparently, that she did suffer a concussion, that she did have thrombosis of the sinus vein surrounding the brain, and that requires important workup, full workup, to see how serious the condition was and also follow-up, as Dr. Drew said, to see how it's progressed.
Most people who have concussions, which is temporary loss of consciousness or due to trauma of some kind, in this instance with Hillary Clinton, it was a fall, will recover completely, but you don't know if they're going to recover completely or not.
Let me ask you this.
Follow-up.
I remember playing a lot of sports as a kid, especially hockey.
You know, the saying, you know, you're getting your bell rung.
Right.
I mean, literally, I remember getting hit, even knocked out, and waking up and literally, you know, you just don't know what happened.
That's right.
But I don't remember any memory loss associated with that type of incident.
Would that have likely have been a concussion except nobody took me to the doctor?
Well, if you lost consciousness, that definitely was a concussion.
Most concussions, and this is changing, as in the football situation, have been diagnosed as being transient.
And the individual, if he regains consciousness and starts, appears normal, that he's fine.
We do know now from the work being done on the traumatic brain injuries and the football players that that isn't always the case, that there can be long-term consequences of concussions that we're just finding out about.
But I agree with your previous doctors there that the important thing here is for full transparent, medical transparency on anybody who's running for president.
And I say that, Sean, because we know from bad experience that there have been presidents who have had serious illnesses, like John F. Kennedy with adrenal hypoplasia, Addison's disease, like Woodrow Wilson, who had a massive stroke and was, while president, was 14 months in bed with his wife and doctor covering up and causing serious problems.
And even Grover Cleveland had a big cancer of the mouth that was covered up.
All these things indicate that, especially when somebody runs for president, despite HIPAA laws and all that, the public has a right to know the health of the individual.
What do you make of the confidence?
We seem to, for example, my brother-in-law was a radiologist, and I remember many a holiday at Thanksgiving or Christmas, and he gets called into work, they would send it over a computer line, and I'd watch him as he looked at the x-ray, and he'd be able to say, yeah, this person had a stroke.
It's right there, and I'm looking at it the same way he's looking at it, and I don't see anything.
Right.
And he'd try to explain it to me, but you have to have a trained eye for something like that.
I mean, if she were to have some type of MRI, you would be able to tell if she had some type of TIA maybe or a stroke or neurological.
You had a lot of information, yes.
And what could you likely find if you had an opportunity to look at that?
What would you look for?
What we'd look for in a concussion is to see if there's any brain damage of any kind, you know, any contusions of the brain.
But sometimes there are things and concussions that you don't see under x-rays because they just have to do with individual neurons that get damaged.
And that's what they're finding out now 20 years later in some of the football players who had their heads rung, their bells rung a number of times.
But you don't know.
Most people who have concussions fully recover from it.
But as you say here, if she has memory loss, that's a more serious kind of concussion.
Well, she's admitting herself she had memory loss.
Now that it's up to the doctors to determine how to treat it and how to evaluate whether or not everything is cleared up or not.
Now, presumably what's been said is that a doctor wrote a very professional form, your previous guest said, indicating that she'd completely recovered.
However, that should be released.
On what basis is he saying that?
Did they do an MRI?
Did they do a CAT scan?
Did they have a full neural network?
And then listen, let's be honest here.
If it's a doctor that supports her politically, if it's a doctor that's a friend, the doctor might be more inclined to go lenient on something like that.
True or false?
That's absolutely true.
And that happens all the time in doctors' offices when people apply for sick leave or apply for workman's compensation.
And the patient, the doctor has allegiance to the patient.
I'm running out of time.
Tell me about the deep vein thrombosis, the Coumadin versus Arelto, and tell me a little bit about the coughing, and we only have a minute.
Yeah, the Coumadin has been the workhorse of blood thinners since the 1950s, 1960s.
Now some new ones have come in that were mentioned.
But most doctors, if somebody does very well on a drug, often it's better to keep the person on the drug rather than try a new drug, which is better for some patients, but not for everybody.
As far as the coughing goes, unless she's bringing up something like blood or pus, yellow-green phlegm, it doesn't seem to indicate any serious underlying illness.
And of course, with coughing, a simple chest x-ray tells you a great deal of information.
Is it possible because it happens so frequently, it's worse?
But if it's only coughing without bringing up phlegm or pus, it could be allergies.
It could be benign.
Cigarette smokers often cough a lot.
I don't know if she's a cigarette.
I don't think she was a cigarette smoker.
I don't know.
But where you get irritations of the lungs, but they aren't serious.
But it's not like, by the way, do you like the new vaping trend over cigarettes and cigars?
Is that better or no?
I think it's just as bad, and it's bad in the sense that it seems to encourage people to get started on.
But it's not as bad as tobacco with additives and all that stuff.
It's better than tobacco if they don't go on to tobacco as the years go by.
Oh, in other words, you think it could be a gateway to.
A gateway, as long as it's not a gateway drug, right?
All right.
Dr. Bodhim, I always love having you.
Thanks.
It's great to talk to you.
With respect to classification, on classified documents, there is what's called a header.
It says this material is top secret, secret, or confidential.
There were no headers on the thousands of emails that I sent or received.
There just weren't.
And the FBI has not in any way contradicted that.
There were a couple of emails with a tiny C in a parentheses, which did not have a header saying that means confidential in this circumstance, and which the director of the FBI has said, and the State Department has said, those couple of emails were improperly marked, even with that.
So, yes, I take classification seriously, and I think the record shows that I have.
But authorities say that C stood for confidential.
There was no header that the document that the little C appeared in was marked confidential, which is the lowest form of classification.
But what you're saying is deeper in the email.
Of course, absolutely.
And that's what the director said.
Last question.
It's not really hard to hack into these even secure systems, is it?
I've talked to some real smart computer friends of mine.
They say it's far more simple than anybody would ever know.
Is that true?
It is.
I just want to say one thing.
In the FBI report released Friday, I agree with your analysis.
It is very strange that that was released Friday afternoon on a labor weekend.
I do think it draws questions as to what sort of game the FBI is trying to play.
But Hillary Clinton says that she can't remember what a C in brackets stands for.
Everyone in positions of government and in WikiLeaks knows it stands for classified confidential.
And in fact, we have already released thousands of cables by Hillary Clinton.
Here she is, Clinton.
See, that's her signature, Clinton, with the C in bracket right there.
Wow.
Thousands of examples where she herself has used this C in brackets and signed it off.
And more than 22,000 times that she has received cables from others with this C in brackets.
So it's absolutely incredible for Clinton to lie.
She is lying about not knowing what that is, but it's a bit disturbing that James Coney goes along with that game.
All right, that goes to the heart of Hillary's lawlessness and whether she acted with criminal intent.
Now, if you look at the expensive bleach bit software that they used to erase, as Trey Gowdy said, to the point that God couldn't find them, the emails, does that not prove she, quote, acted intentionally and with criminal intent?
And she also, if you go back to the hearings, 39 times, she could not recall.
And her aide destroyed a number of old BlackBerry phones.
Apparently, she had some 13 or 14 of them, breaking them in half or smashing them with a hammer.
Her email was targeted by hackers multiple times, including a porn link that she clicked on.
And she also thought the C marking unclassified emails, as Julian Assange, who you just heard right there, was part two of our interview with him tonight.
But the fascinating thing, he'll be with us on the program tomorrow, was he saying, everybody knows.
What did she think?
The C stood for crooked in some way?
So if you compare all of this, I think that, in fact, this bleach bit proves that Clinton obstructed justice.
I don't think there's any doubt about it.
I also think that, you know, her aides saying 327 times they didn't recall details about the private server, that's a lie too.
As is her 40 claims that she says she can't remember either.
Or her saying that she can't remember if she had a security briefing because after all, she had a concussion in 2012 and that wiped away parts of her memory.
Well, she remembered losing a memory of the briefings.
What else does she remember losing?
None of that makes sense either.
And Clinton aides telling the FBI they didn't even know about the server, but emails now suggest they knew otherwise.
Now, it's obviously upsetting Democrats enough because Nancy Pelosi was out on the Sunday shows this weekend on CBS News.
Oh, too much is being made of the Clinton emails.
And crazy Uncle Joe Biden is offering unsolicited advice that she better start talking with some passion to fix this trust problem she has.
And nobody really seems to be talking about in the weeks following a publication from the New York Times in 2015 that revealed that Hillary Clinton was using a private email setup.
Well, after that was revealed, her aides began deleting the emails from the server that she used to conduct official State Department business.
Well, that's called a cover-up.
That's called breaking the law.
Now, the Trump campaign is calling on the FBI to make additional Clinton email investigation records public.
Even Paul Ryan has said that the FBI involved in this by releasing this on a Friday on a holiday weekend is playing politics in Hillary's favor.
Clinton charities have been ignoring the laws requiring them to disclose millions from foreign donors.
That's another issue.
And then, of course, we've got Hillary's health issue.
Joining us now is Jeffrey Lord, former associate political director of the Reagan administration, columnist, of course, with the American Spectator and author of the book, What America Needs, The Case for Donald Trump.
Jessica Tarlove is a senior strategist at Shoan Consulting.
She says I'm mean to her on occasion, and I'm really not.
How are you?
You really think I was mean to you one day?
Did you really complain to Linda I was mean to you?
I mean, talk to Linda.
You were definitely mean.
What do you mean, talk to Linda?
What do you mean, talk?
I'm asking, did you think I was mean?
Oh, I thought you were a little bit harsh, but I know you get, you know, all hot and bothered about Clinton sex scandals.
So it totally made sense.
It was fine.
Oh, I get all hot and bothered.
You don't think that's code language there, Jeffrey Lord?
She's allowed to take shots at me, but I can't fight back.
That's right.
We're always in a difficult position.
Oh, you two are the real victims here, for sure.
Definitely.
All right.
So do you remember when Ed Henry asked Hillary Clinton at that press conference, did you wipe the server clean?
Let me play it.
Let me refresh your memory.
And then Hillary gives her infamous answer.
You mean like with like a cloth?
Did you wipe the server?
What, like with a cloth or something?
No.
Like with a cloth or something?
No, they used bleach bit software.
Don't you think that shows criminal intent?
Don't you think that shows that they intentionally wanted to make sure that nobody could ever find those emails?
Doesn't that put into question that Hillary broke the law?
And then the fact, and I think this gets very interesting, the fact that the New York Times breaks a story about the emails and about the server, and after the story breaks, they start racing in there again and start erasing everything else they can get their hands on.
Shouldn't that bother a Democrat like you?
I assume you believe in honesty and integrity, right?
Yeah, no, I do, absolutely.
And I think, you know, it's very clear that they've mishandled the issue.
I mean, there should never have been a lot of people.
Let me ask if they mishandled.
Is that an intention to break the law?
Does that not prove criminal intent?
No, I mean, I'm not a lawyer, so I can't speak to that, but from analyses that I've read, and obviously there are analyses on the other side as well, the intent was to get rid of all of the emails that they decided, and yes, they decided it.
Did not.
But James Comey admitted that they didn't go through every email like they had claimed.
Right, and then there's another 15,000, right, that's coming in October.
So, I mean, we're going to see what happens there.
But, you know, Hillary Clinton was definitely not the bleach bit mastermind here.
I mean, I don't believe that this woman.
Well, wait, wait, wait a minute.
Wait a minute.
How do you know that?
It seems completely different.
So that's speculation.
Let's admit that speculation on your part.
She definitely did not tell me that the delegate was a lot of money.
So in other words, why would you use, remember what she said about the deleted emails, though?
She claimed that they were all about yoga, a wedding of her daughter, a funeral of her mother, and emails back and forth with Bill Clinton until we all found out Bill Clinton does an email.
So 33,000 emails about yoga, a wedding, and a funeral.
It wasn't enough just to delete them.
She had to bleach bit them so nobody could find them.
She was being funny about that.
I mean, those were examples of things that she didn't.
You think that's funny?
No, I don't know.
You think that's funny?
I don't think Hillary Clinton should ever make jokes.
Honestly, I don't like the wiping closing.
I don't like the barking.
I don't think that was my order to talk about policy.
I agree with you on that, but I don't think that's a good idea.
But you don't think Bleach Bit shows if it was really only about yoga, a wedding, and a funeral, then why wouldn't you just go through the normal process that the rest of us go through?
And when we delete emails, we just delete them.
And I assume they're probably somewhere that the FBI can find, but I don't care if the FBI is looking at my computer.
I don't do anything on my computer.
Yeah, I understand your point of view.
I don't use Bleach Bit.
Have you ever used Bleach Bit?
No, I mean, I use Gmail.
You could hack me right now for like $100.
You know, I mean, do you use Bleach Bit, Jeff?
I've never used Bleach Bit.
You know, I'd never even heard of it.
And, you know, I have to say this, Sean, when I was in the Reagan White House, we were in the middle of the Iran Contra affair.
And Ollie North, whom we both think very highly of, admitted that, yes, there were some emails and he had tried to delete them.
He'd done this erroneously.
Well, there was hell to pay for this.
There was hell to pay for this.
And now, here we are all these decades later.
And this, I mean, what he did was, in essence, the electronic equivalent of putting them in a wastebasket when he sort of put them in a shredder.
What we now have is this very high-tech system and a very low-tech system.
On the one hand, she uses this bleach bit to delete her emails.
And then when it comes to her phones, they're using hammers.
I mean, you can't make this stuff up, all of which gets to intent.
And speaking of Doug Shoan, who wrote a great piece in the Wall Street Dad this morning, saying that the other side better wake up here because President Trump can be in the offing, and there's a reason for that.
It's because people have a very clear idea of Hillary Clinton's character.
And this is totally within character.
It doesn't matter whether it's Whitewater, whether it's dealing with the various bimbo eruptions in Bill Clinton's life or anything else.
She always comes back to a dishonest situation.
This always happens, and it's happened here.
And the only difference is we're using high-tech to discuss it.
But, Jeffrey, I mean, I understand your argument, and obviously the numbers, as of late, especially, have painted a picture where she's not trusted and she's not liked.
But Donald Trump also has tremendous favorability and trustworthiness problems.
And if you want to read the CNN poll, we can, and we can talk about how it was weighted towards, you know, white voters without college degrees or finder.
I can even accept it as fact that he's up two right now in that one poll.
But how do you explain the fact that he has these low numbers and you think he's just going to coast in there because she's the dishonest character?
I mean, look what's happening now.
Finally, the press is getting him to the Pam Bondi thing.
And also, Ronald Reagan said, I don't recall 88 times in eight hours of testimony about a race.
That was after he was president, if I recall correctly.
And years after.
Wait a minute.
But hang on.
I mean, but it was at a point where he might have had the beginning of Alzheimer's.
Why would you attack Reagan like that?
That's horrible.
That's really not.
That's horrible.
That is such a low blow.
I mean, I can't believe you do that.
Look, the reason Ronald Reagan is venerated today by so many Americans is because they knew and know his essential character.
And that's what's at issue here.
And what Donald Trump has done or not done in his life, it's never been in government.
Every single thing Hillary Clinton's got a problem with is because of her government service.
She got a clean slate when she became Secretary of State.
And yet here we are once again on issues of integrity and honesty.
And this is why you see these polls that say there was one this summer, I think it was a Quinnipiac poll, and they asked for one-word descriptors from voters that the voters supplied.
And the number one for Hillary Clinton was liar, and the number two was dishonest.
There's a reason for this.
But can I just ask, and obviously that's all facts, and I take your point.
And I like Ronald Reagan just fine.
I'm saying people say I don't recall.
But as to what you're saying about the fact that she was in public service and he wasn't, so you're saying that if he did broad Pam Bondi with this donation, right?
She didn't become too much.
Whatever.
I mean, she didn't even know this thing was bubbling around in her own office.
All right, let me go to another issue here.
Donald Trump has made a big transition in the polls, and it seems to be a dead even race right now by every objective measure.
If you look collaboratively at all these polls, what do you think the difference is, Jeff Lord?
I think he's staying on message.
I thought I think his teleprompter is his best friend.
I also think Hillary's ethical issues now have come to the forefront, and I think they're only going to get worse.
Where does it go from here?
I don't think anyone can predict accurately, but I'm curious where you think it's going.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, I really do think that he has a real shot at winning this election.
Absolutely.
Because she is such a known quantity and negatively so.
And let's not forget the sort of pullback here.
What she's attempting is admittedly hard to do.
She is trying to win a third term for President Obama, in essence.
And this, I mean, Bill Clinton, Al Gore couldn't do this for Clinton.
Richard Nixon couldn't pull this off for Dwight Eisenhower.
The only president to make this work was Reagan, again, who pulled it off for George H.W. Bush, his vice president.
But beyond this, this hasn't been done since the 1940s.
This is a very hard thing to do.
People want change.
They are longing for change.
You see these polls where they think, say, 70% of the people think the country's going in the wrong direction.
They are going to hold her accountable for this.
Absolutely.
And that's what gives him the upper hand here.
I appreciate you both being with us, Jeff Lord and Jessica Tarlov.
It was at the U.S. Open the other day.
You know who they put up on the screen?
My favorite talk show host in the whole wide world, Alec Baldwin.
Do you have that old tape of Alec Baldwin trying out at our affiliate in Philly, WPHT?
This is probably the most riveting talk radio in the history of the world.
Alec thought he was going to be the liberal antidote, sort of like Al Franken, to conservative talk radio.
And so he decided he was going to give it a try.
Now, there was one moment where he walked out of the studio.
My old buddy Brian Whitman, he's a great guy.
He's now doing a morning show with our old producer, Alicia Krause.
And who else is on the morning show?
Oh, so Ben Shapiro, Alicia, and Brian Whitman do the show together.
And it's doing really well.
They're friends of mine.
I'm happy for their success.
And anyway, they're all good friends of mine.
And Brian Whitman was co-hosting kind of babysitting for Alec Baldwin.
That didn't work out too well when Alec had promised my PD at the time, Phil Boyce, that he was going to absolutely do my show before he did his fill-in-hour, tryout hour with Brian Whitman.
So I decided to call in.
And then Mark Levin called in.
And then he walked out of the studio and he had a fit, an absolute fit.
Anyway, so this is Alec trying out at WPHT in Philly.
This is a real show.
This is Alec Baldwin hosting.
It is the finest radio moment in the history of the medium.
When we come back, oh, we've got some time.
Oh, great.
We're going to.
When can we take some calls, Ivan?
Whenever we want.
We have calls that are on there now?
No calls?
No, no, no.
No calls yet.
What number do people call to get on the air, Ivan?
Do we have that number?
It's right there.
Oh, do I have the call number in front of me?
Oh, I'm so sorry.
Interesting.
At 1210 at PHT.
Of course, any other questions you have, any other comments you have, call us to the what else?
Call us, please, at 215-1210.
Now, if you don't call, we're going to keep reading from the Scientology manual.
You might not feel it.
You might not feel the energy right now.
You might not feel the swell of what's happening here.
Do we have any calls yet there, Ivan?
No calls.
Let's read some more about Scientology.
Is Sean Hannity a Scientologist?
Alec Baldwin posing the big questions tonight here.
Do we have any calls here yet, Ivan?
None.
Boy, it's just incredible.
Unbelievable.
Well, you leave us no choice, listeners.
Now, I know this is horrible when I'm about to say that is the greatest moment in the history of radio.
You know, look, for those of us that actually started at the bottom in radio like I did, I know what it's like to not have phone calls and having to fill time.
Now, I come in here every day.
I never get to, I get to maybe 20% of the things I bring into the studio.
But that's just the nature of what I do.
I mean, when I started out in radio, there was like two local newspapers and then maybe national magazines and then whatever you picked up on TV.
And short of that, it was whatever you had to say and you had to do an entertaining show.
And you had to be able to go on for hours and hours and hours.
And maybe you didn't get any calls.
I remember one 4th of July in Huntsville, Alabama, at WVNN.
They made me do a three-hour show on the 4th of July.
Nobody was calling in.
Anyway, I remember I just ran out of steam by the third hour.
And it was like no commercials that day.
It was like three hours uninterrupted me.
And I think I got one call in the entire three hours.
Well, what do you think?
So I started doing movie reviews of movies I'd never seen.
But Alec thought he was going to be a talk show host.
Maybe it's a little harder than everybody thinks.
Everybody thinks they have a talk show in them.
My advice to anybody that wants to do this, listen, the water's warm.
Come on in.
Good luck.
It's a lot harder than I think most people think.
If you don't think it's that hard, then take out your iPhone at some point today.
And after you get over the sound of your voice and asking yourself, oh man, do I really sound like that?
That sounds horrible, horrible.
Everybody says that when they hear their voice for the first time.
But then I just want you to do 15 minutes straight.
You can prepare, just pick a topic that you like and go do research.
I mean, we do a lot of that on this program.
It's the basis of this show: news and information.
And so just try it.
See if you can do better than Alec Baldwin.
And then he went on.
It got so bad for him in that hour that he ended up calling his own mother to be a guest on the show.
Are there any calls?
No calls.
Interesting.
Do you have the number?
It's right in front of you, Alec.
Interesting.
The number's right here.
Interesting.
Interesting.
And then, of course, he went on to host the ever-so-popular Alec Baldwin TV show on MSNBC, and that flopped too in like no time at all.
All right, let's get to our busy telephones.
Thank goodness.
Don't have to worry.
We have as many people to talk to as we possibly could ever get in, and then many more.
Let's go to Julianne in Sacramento, California.
Julianne, how are you?
Glad you called.
What's going on in sunny California?
Sean.
Hi, Sean.
How are you?
I'm good.
How are you?
Glad you called.
I'm great.
Oh, my gosh.
I'm over the moon excited to speak with you today.
Oh, over the moon.
I've listened to you every day and watch you every night, and you are a great American.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
A lot of people don't like me right now, Julianne.
A lot of people are angry with me.
A lot of Republicans hate me.
You know what?
That's good because you're stirring up emotion.
America needs to wake up.
Listen, I'm just saying to all of those anti-Trump people, you own her.
You're so blind and stubborn and ignorant, and you won't look at the profound differences between these candidates for whatever reason.
And you think you're so pristine and pure, some of them, that you're going to help Hillary get elected.
And my answer is you own her Supreme Court nominees.
You own what these unvetted refugees do.
You own Obamacare.
You own top-down Common Core.
You own open borders and whatever happens in any jobs that are taken and whatever happens from a security standpoint.
And you own what happens to the economy because Obamaism failed, so will Hillary Clinton's economic plan.
Anyway, go ahead.
It's your turn.
I mean, I could talk to you about a hundred things.
One thing, I can't even believe she's allowed to run for president, but that's beside the point.
One of the reasons I'm calling is I am very alarmed at her health issues as well and these coughing fits that she keeps having.
I just, I, yesterday I was listening to your show and listening when you put it on, and all of a sudden I had an aha moment.
We went through this with my family.
My father was diagnosed with throat cancer, and the reason that we were able to diagnose it early and be able to cure him from it is because we caught his coughing fits.
So similar to what she does.
Two or three minutes, he would go into these coughing fits, constantly clearing his throat, a little bit of a scratchy voice.
And I don't think it has anything to do with allergies.
I think that there's something seriously going on with her throat.
It is not normal for somebody to go into two, three, four-minute coughing fits like that.
The only other person that I have experienced that has done that was my dad.
And that was the result of it.
So I'm not trying to insist on that.
By the way, did your dad survive that, by the way, as a side note?
He did, and he's cancer-free, but we caught it early because of those coughing fits.
You know, it's funny because a friend of mine just yesterday, and I'm not going to make any speculation about Hillary's throat or what's really causing this.
I don't know.
I just say that the American people have a right to know.
And now that she used the concussion as an excuse not to remember that she was even briefed on security issues, I think it's now important that we understand her cognitive abilities.
I think we need to know what this neurological event consisted of.
And I think making public MRIs would be a helpful first step so that doctors can examine this.
The second thing is CNN needs to hire back poor Dr. Drew, and they probably need to fire that idiot pip squeak, Brian Stelter, who said anybody that raised a question about Hillary's health was a conspiratorial thinker, theorist.
So, yeah, look, I hope, look, I'll be honest.
I don't care what people's politics are.
I wish her the best of health.
But I think we have a right to know if she's capable up to the job of being president.
She certainly doesn't show anywhere near the stamina, the energy that Donald Trump has.
I mean, she makes Jeb Bush look like the energizer bunny.
I mean, I've never seen somebody that low energy.
She takes a lot of time between events.
She takes off more time than any candidate I've seen.
I think she feels that she can run on her name ID and recognition and hope that Donald Trump messes up.
I mean, I don't think that's a vision for the future of the country.
And the media has given her a pass.
But I do think that she certainly should be.
I think I want to see her Wall Street speeches.
I want to see speeches she gave to insurance companies.
And I'd like to know what she was saying behind closed doors to people that are paying her $250,000 an hour.
And everyone says, well, let's see Donald Trump's IRS records, his tax returns.
I'm like, okay, well, get the IRS off his back and they'll release them.
I mean, the guy's been audited the last 10 years, which, by the way, shows a fundamental unfairness and dishonesty in that system.
All right, Julianne, thank you.
You raised good points.
I'm glad your dad's okay.
That's good news.
All right, let's go.
Tim in Houston, KTRH.
What's up, Tim?
How are you, sir?
Hey, Sean.
Good to talk to you.
I actually got to see you and Donald Trump in Austin a couple weeks ago.
It was a great show, by the way.
Thanks.
It was fun, right?
That was a rowdy crowd in Austin.
You see all those people being taken out?
It was pretty funny.
Actually, I assisted one on the upper level getting out.
So, yeah.
Did you see that one lady?
She wasn't a cop.
That one lady by herself picked up this protesting woman, was holding like a voodoo doll, it looked like, or something bizarre.
She literally took her by the back of her shirt, pulled her up, walked her out like she was a professional officer.
It was great.
It was terrible.
It was, yeah, that was a great, great moment, great for the state of Texas.
Anyway, why I call Sean?
I know everybody's upset that the director did not elect to prosecute or bring charges forward.
But, you know, being a former police officer and being a former military person with the security clearance, I started doing some investigation myself, and I elected to actually sue Hillary Clinton civilly.
I went to small claims.
Go ahead.
You're suing Hillary civilly.
Yes.
Because she, follow me on this, because she acted, or all this was brought to light after her tenure as Secretary of State, she's not covered under what we call color of law.
So she's not protected.
That's why she hired David, whatever his name was, to represent her in this case here.
So what I did, I went down to small claims court and I filed a civil complaint or civil lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for my taxpayer portion of the estimated $7 million that cost to do the investigation and the congressional hearings by the Democrats-owned admission of an estimated $7 million.
Well, there's 240 million taxpayers in the United States, so naturally, I had to sue her for a penny.
I actually filed a lawsuit.
I sent a demand letter, certified, certified, and then went down and filed it.
They actually have to hear the case.
And I've actually done this before against the Department of Defense and one, by the way.
But long story short, went down and filed a suit, and they have to respond.
Worst case scenario, they asked for a change of venue, and I had to come to New York, which I'm willing to do that.
I want them to acknowledge the fact that she owes the taxpayer $7 million.
Plus, I want them to also give me an admission that she definitely mishandled classified dollars.
Listen, I don't want you.
Look, I get it.
I hear where you're coming from.
You have way much more time on your hands than I do.
But, you know, look, if it's important to you, I'm just a big believer.
Follow your heart in life.
Follow wherever your heart takes you.
That's what you're doing.
So good for you.
Anyway, 800-941-Sean, let's go to John is in Florida.
John, how are you?
What's going on?
Sean, doing great.
Thanks for taking the call.
I was just listening to our caller from Austin, Texas.
He has a valid point, but I'd like to back it up with something slightly different with the Commander-in-Chief Forum that's going to convene this evening.
There's a question you have to ask, whether you're a former veteran or a DOD employee like I was for over 40 years.
How in the world can the Defense Security Services support a renewal or even to maintain a security clearance for someone who went through an FBI investigation where it was clearly stated, in fact, it was concluded that the person holding that security clearance at the time, namely Ms. Clinton, was careless, extremely careless in handling classified information.
Not only careless, but there was an intent, obviously through bleach bit, to cover it all up.
That is criminal intent.
If that doesn't prove criminal intent, I don't know what does.
And all I can say is you wouldn't get away with that.
I wouldn't get away with that.
No other American would get away with that.
And the real disappointment is James Comey.
He's now allowed the FBI to become a politicized arm of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton.
That's the only conclusion I could make here.
I mean, because they knew all of this and they decided, you know, to buy her excuse that her concussion prevented her from remembering what she had been briefed on in terms of security.
I don't believe it.
And I don't think Comey believes it either.
And Comey even admitted, if you go back to that presser 14 minutes, and I thought for 13 of them, he was actually going to go forward with an indictment or criminal referral.
But at the end, he even suggested this might get other people in trouble.
Well, if it gets other people in trouble, why doesn't it get her in trouble?
I don't know.
You know what?
I just don't have faith in our institutions anymore.
