Sean Hannity Show - RyanCare - 3.8

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 9, 2017 - Sean Hannity Show

01:43:09

RyanCare - 3.8

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart Podcast.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carolyn Markovich.
	And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So Dell a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	Let not your heart be troubled.
	You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
	All right, so I have insomnia, but I've never slept better.
	And what's changed?
	Just a pillow.
	It's had such a positive impact on my life.
	And of course I'm talking about my pillow.
	I fall asleep faster, I stay asleep longer, and now you can too.
	Just go to my pillow.com or call 800-919-6090.
	Use the promo code Hannity, and Mike Lindell, the inventor of MyPillow, has the special four-pack.
	Now you get 40% off, two MyPillow premiums, and two go anywhere pillows.
	Now, MyPillow is made here in the USA, has a 60-day unconditional money back guarantee and a 10-year warranty.
	Go to MyPillow.com right now or call 800-919-6090 promo code Hannity to get Mike Lindell's special four-pack offer.
	You get two MyPillow premium pillows and two go anywhere pillows for 40% off.
	And that means once those pillows arrive, you start getting the kind of peaceful and restful and comfortable and deep healing and recuperative sleep that you've been craving and you certainly deserve.
	MyPillow.com, promo code Hannity, you will love this pillow.
	All right, glad you're with us.
	Happy Wednesday on the Sean Hannity Show.
	We have a lot coming up today.
	One of our big stories today is, of course, the well, intramural battle fight over the health care bill.
	I saw all of this coming.
	It's infuriating to me, because it didn't need to happen this way.
	We'll check in with Congressman Jim Jordan, Congressman Dave Bratt of the Freedom Caucus, Dr. Josh Umber will join us.
	The vice president will be checking in one hour from right now in the second hour of the program.
	Ann Coulter will also weigh in today.
	And we've got two award-winning journalists.
	John Solomon was with the AP for 20 years.
	Sarah Carter uh was uh with the Washington Times along with John Solomon.
	They have a blockbuster story that I'm gonna share with you in in just a couple of minutes, so stay tuned.
	I want to start with this health care debate and frustration that I feel and that I have and why I believe this rollout was not handled properly.
	And look, at the end of the day, do I think it's all gonna probably work out?
	Are we gonna get a repeal and replace?
	Are we gonna get a better health care system?
	Are we gonna undo the mess of Obamacare?
	None of the promises kept.
	Keep your doctor, keep your plan, save twenty-five hundred dollars a year.
	Yeah, I do believe that we're gonna get there.
	But in the lead up to all of this, this is one of the most important pieces of legislation.
	And here's what I don't understand.
	And I and I'll say this respectfully, but I'm really annoyed about it.
	Respectfully, the fact that eight years later that this has been their their rallying cry to win the 2010 win control of the House in 2010, and then moving further and and getting control of the Senate in 2014 and getting the presidency in 2016,
	and that there's not a consensus bill, and that i i i I guess in my world, the world I live in and the way I run my life, knowing and we had put all these people on beforehand that never saw the bill, but were hearing about the bill and their concerns about the bill.
	In other words, does it really fully repeal Obamacare?
	Well, that's one of the arguments that was used all day yesterday, or that it has a new entitlement, which is subsidies, Or it's not block granted, but but tax um credits that are given to people so they can afford to buy their own health insurance.
	You know, health care savings accounts are included, money's not going to Planned Parenthood.
	There's all the things that I said yesterday that are good about the bill that everybody agrees on.
	But here's my problem.
	Now here just imagine in my own twisted mind, I actually think that Washington can work this way.
	Maybe all of the people in the Freedom Caucus, the study group, the people now that are angry, these these conservative groups like Club uh Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Works and Heritage Foundation and the Heritage Action Group,
	and then you have Senator Rand Paul and Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, and then you have Congressman Louis Gomer and Congressman Mark Meadows and Dave Brad and Jim Jordan and so many others, they were all saying what they were going to disagree with before the bill ever got released.
	And I remember, and I won't tell everybody who I talked to, but I told a lot of people, I said you need to get everybody in a room.
	And wouldn't it have been better instead of having a public fight among Republicans over the repealing and replacing of this bill if they had gotten together, worked out their differences, and maybe the way it was rolled out would be a big monumental ceremony with every Republican in the House, every Republican in the Senate.
	The president gives a speech, he outlines what's in the consensus bill of Republicans, how they are going to do it, and how it's going to benefit you, the American people.
	Instead, it the bill was marked up, nobody knew what was in it.
	Then when they found out what was in it, it was the very things they were suspicious were going to be in it.
	And now you've got the Freedom Caucus against it.
	And they went out and they had a press conference yesterday, and Rand Paul was with them yesterday, and Ted Cruz is against the bill.
	All those groups that I just mentioned, they're now having to be talked into the bill.
	There's all these discussions about the president having to strong arm people and use the power of the presidency and the pulpit to get this thing rammed through.
	We don't want it rammed through.
	You know, I I just would have hoped that after eight years of of Republicans running on this, that they'd have their darn act together and they'd get a bill that they all agreed on that would fix the problem using all the principles of conservatism, free markets, um health care savings accounts, maybe even being as innovative as our buddy Dr. Umber and bringing him into the mix and creating cooperatives.
	You know, he has what?
	Five doctors in his practice.
	Each doctor has 600 patients.
	Every patient gets to see the doctor any day they want, unlimited care, unlimited checkups.
	If you get stitches, you get them there.
	If you need medicines, you get them there at a 95% discount.
	If you need chemotherapy for crying out loud, they'll give you those drugs for a 95% discount, which by the way, they're very expensive.
	Because he went directly to the pharmaceutical companies and said, We've got a big practice, and we want to negotiate individually with you to get the rates down for our patients.
	There's so many different things, and I'm not saying these things aren't going to happen.
	I'm just saying they just they just made themselves a huge created for themselves a huge headache, and this to me is an unforced error.
	And now you got everybody in the media that is now fighting over this, you know, on in the public in public view, it's an internal intramural, you know, mini civil war within Republican ranks.
	When it need not have gone down this way, it could have been handled differently.
	It could have been handled behind closed doors, get it right, get together, unify, come out with a plan and celebrate your great success as one.
	Now, maybe there's five people that say no, okay?
	You can't please everybody.
	There's no way when you're doing legislation that everybody's going to be happy.
	At the end of the day, it's good, you know, as Newt Gingrich describes it, just here's a box within the box, you have health care savings accounts, you have health care cooperatives, you have full repeal in there.
	Um you have a means of somehow block granting money to states so they take care of those people that have no money, cannot afford health care, that we're never going to turn away.
	It's a truth, it's a reality.
	That's just a fact that they're going to need help.
	That has to be factored in.
	Okay, and the president made that promise that nobody's going to be laying in the street.
	I don't think The president means to go back on his promise.
	So I just think there was a better way to handle this, a better way to roll this out.
	I think that, you know, I don't know how long this battle goes on.
	Now there's meeting after meeting after meeting with this individual group and that individual group, and now it's taking the president's time, the vice president's time.
	It's taking, you know, the time away from putting a budget together.
	They're gonna have two budgets put together.
	And I just, you know, I'm just saying, I just I don't roll this way.
	That's not how I do things.
	I I just don't understand.
	This is so unnecessary on so many different levels.
	Now, yeah, there's a good chance they'll get it right, but they they come off as being unprepared.
	They come off as not knowing what they're doing.
	And they had eight years to build a consensus plan that everybody would be satisfied with.
	Not completely satisfied, but something that everybody would would deal with and that would serve the republic servants, the American people.
	And I think it would have been a hell of a lot better than the nonstop battles that are now gonna go on.
	I I'm I'm naive, right, Linda?
	I'm naive.
	This couldn't have possibly happened the way I say, right?
	There's no way they could have done this beforehand.
	Because at the end of the day, if a bill's gonna pass, they're gonna need the Freedom Caucus, they're gonna need Cruz and Lee and Rand and Rubio in the Senate.
	Am I right about that?
	So maybe it would have been a good idea.
	Maybe if the Club for Growth supported it and the Heritage Action Group supported it, and Americans for Prosperity supported it, and Freedom Works supported it, all strong, independent conservative groups.
	Maybe not all, let's say three of the four or three or four of the five, whatever the group's number happens to be.
	Maybe they if they came out and praised the bill and said this, this, this, this, and this, that this is what we've been waiting for, it would have maybe caused fewer headaches, given the Democrats less ammunition against the Republicans.
	And I don't think I I don't know how this gets resolved at this point.
	You know, the my answer would be throw everybody in a room.
	Bring the freedom caucus.
	Oh, this is how I do things.
	You got a problem?
	Just get in my office, close the door, lock it.
	That's what I'll do.
	Lock the door, take everybody's phone away.
	There's no better negotiator in the country than the president.
	Let him negotiate right there.
	Nobody leaves that room until they all agree.
	How's that?
	And it has to be on the principles and the promises that they all made when they ran what?
	Since 2010 against Obamacare.
	That's seven years ago.
	It's just it's just unfathomable to me that this was not produced earlier.
	That this wasn't read until it was released two nights ago.
	And now you have all the opposition coming out, and they were all telegraphing their opposition.
	It's not like we didn't know they were gonna be opponents of the bill if it was what they were saying, what they were hearing, what they were believing.
	I, you know, my job here is to hold them accountable.
	Well, they made a pretty stupid, this is a pretty dumb way to uh unveil or roll out a bill.
	Do I think they can get there?
	Yeah.
	But you better get like 50,000 bottles of excedrin extra strength because it's not gonna be easy.
	And you might as well have done it beforehand rather than doing it publicly.
	I get that there's disagreements.
	No two people are alike in the Republican Party.
	But this to me was the worst possible way to put it out there to roll this thing out.
	All those people were on this program telling me exactly what they didn't want to have in the bill, and that's exactly what ended up in the bill.
	You know, what what do I do?
	I I you know, I I feel like banging my head against the wall.
	Because I was telling everybody to get together and meet and talk and resolve and fix and make it right.
	It's not that complicated.
	Repeal the old bill, replace it with pre-market solutions that include healthcare savings accounts, cooperatives.
	Uh maybe the government now goes to pharmaceutical companies.
	Maybe they buy like Atlas MD in Wichita, Kansas is doing.
	Maybe they buy the pharmaceuticals that if Josh Humber can get it for 95% off.
	I'm not sure if that includes Cialis and Viagra, but whatever.
	But they buy all the major medicines.
	All right, you laugh.
	The Cialis ad is my favorite.
	Two people and two separate tubs.
	How does that work?
	That That that's gymnastics that I can't even conceive of.
	That is the dumbest ad I've ever seen.
	In a in a she's in her tub, he's in his tub.
	Anytime you're ready.
	What is one person move to the other tub and they just leave it with the two tubs individually there?
	Whose tub gets picked?
	That could be a big fight among a couple.
	No, you come to my tub.
	No, you come to my tub.
	I'm not going to your tub.
	Your tub has dirty water in it.
	You come to my tub.
	My tub has cleaner water.
	I have roses in my water.
	It's so dumb.
	But if Josh Humber, Dr. Umber, I'm glad I'm crack, I'm cracking everybody up.
	If he can get the pharmaceuticals and for all the major drugs, including chemotherapy drugs and blood pressure medicine and diabetes and insulin, and he can get cholesterol medicine and anxiety medicine.
	I mean, we have pills for everything.
	Pills to wake up, pills to sleep, pills to be skinny, pills to be fat.
	I mean, it's ridiculous.
	We got pills for everything.
	Happy pills, not happy pills.
	It's amazing how many pills people take.
	Crazy.
	It's nuts.
	Anyway, 800-941 Sean.
	Wait till you hear.
	I'll give you a preview that in fact confirms what we've been saying that a Pfizer warrant was issued in October.
	Donald Trump was right.
	Surveillance took place.
	Now he said wiretapping.
	The New York Times said wiretapping, but it's really surveillance of the computer server, Trump Tower.
	And we have confirmation of that today.
	And those authors will be with us in the final hour of the program today.
	Fighting the Trump-hating liberal media one day at a time.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	So I want you to follow me, and I'm gonna set this up and then we'll take it into the next half hour.
	So a headline today by John Solomon, 20-year AP, Washington uh examiner reporter, well known, Sarah Carter, same thing.
	FBI monitored computer server in Trump Tower at the end of the election.
	No criminal charges expected.
	Well, wait a second.
	So President Obama says he didn't order it, but that they confirm in this report.
	I'll give you a summary.
	They confirmed the Pfizer warrant in their reporting, citing U.S. officials, intelligence professionals, who they are describing as watching in horror, as they say, I've never seen a case so misrepresented, leaked so damaging to a process that was meant to be conducted in secret so that foreign powers don't know what we know, and people's reputations aren't tarnished unfairly.
	He is saying that everything in the media, left wing, all propaganda media destroy Trump at all costs.
	Media said to you, this article contradicts that there is no evidence whatsoever.
	In other words, Hannity right again, mainstream media wrong again.
	That in fact, yes, there was surveillance at Trump Tower.
	They confirm and corroborate it.
	They confirm it wasn't technically a wiretap, but the New York Times, McClatchy, BBC, all the initial reporting that said wiretap, well, it depends now we're parsing words.
	Does wiretap mean surveillance on the server in Trump Tower?
	Could it be the same server where I know for a fact that every single Trump surrogate during the campaign was using a Trump organization email?
	How do I know?
	Because I emailed them.
	So I guess my emails were surveilled too.
	Great.
	Can't wait till they're made public.
	No, I can't.
	Make them public.
	Go ahead.
	And that the Russian narrative was never really the focus at all.
	And that this narrow allowance they, you know, and you gotta think back.
	Remember Hillary tweeted it out a week before the election.
	Remember the letter from Harry Reed just before the election.
	Remember all the associations, they were tipped off.
	They knew it was happening.
	And they knew the investigation going on.
	And they wanted it leaked.
	And they had people within the intelligence community telling them when we come back, I'm going to tear this apart, and we're going to tie it to the WikiLeaks revelations from yesterday.
	Because I think there's a connection.
	One of the big developments that I see in that, well, that was actually a headline on, I think Breitbart today.
	CIA uses stolen malware to attribute cyber attacks to other nations like Russia.
	Could this all have originated in our own government?
	Wow.
	Holding them accountable.
	Sean gets the answers no one else does.
	America deserves to know the truth about Congress.
	All right, 25 now till the top of the hour.
	Now we're going to have an exclusive interview, and I have an early copy, and I'm told I'm allowed to share it because it's just breaking.
	John Solomon, I said the what I said, the Washington Examiner, he's really he spent years with the Washington Times, as did Sarah Carter, and John Solomon worked for the AP about 20 years.
	So they have a column out today.
	FBI monitored computer server in Trump Tower at the end of the election, but doesn't expect criminal charges.
	Well, I thought, wait, first of all, we didn't know it happened.
	Donald Trump falsely said that he was being surveilled or that he was wiretapped.
	Now what's the difference if if you find out a sitting president and his administration sought FISA approval and Pfizer warrants to surveil an opposition candidate in the middle of a presidential campaign?
	I want to know what did they know?
	Did Loretta Lynch approve this?
	She would have had to.
	You know, Loretta Lynch who met with Bill Clinton and the Tarmac and they talked about their kids for 50 minutes.
	Who talks about their kids for 50 minutes?
	With all due respect to your kids, how are your kids?
	They're doing really good.
	Susie's doing well.
	She's playing lacrosse.
	Johnny just got into such and such college and he's really happy, and or they broke their leg and their healing, or, you know, whatever it is.
	Does that go on for 30 minutes?
	No.
	No.
	I mean, but it's like half the time when people ask you, hey, how are you doing?
	They don't really want you to say, I'm awful.
	I'm having a crappy day.
	What they want you to say, I'm good.
	How are you?
	And then they say, I'm good.
	What's going on?
	Then nobody wants the answer.
	We're so wrapped up in ourselves.
	So it's just nonsense.
	You know, that's why everybody, you know, talks about, well, other people have different sexual orientation.
	I did like I care?
	I don't care about anybody's sex life.
	Except my own.
	That's it.
	Seriously.
	I mean, it's ridiculous.
	People think that they actually care.
	Anyway, putting that aside, I digress.
	So they wrote this piece.
	Let me read some of it to you.
	The months-long FBI counterintelligence investigation into Russian efforts to influence the U.S. election briefly monitored a computer server inside of Donald Trump's office building near the end of the election.
	Let me let me stop there.
	So there was a, in fact, a surveillance that took place inside a Trump Tower in his office, and it wasn't officially a wiretap.
	What do you call it when you're surveilling the server of a presidential candidate's company?
	Anyway, it goes on.
	And um at the end of the election, but has gathered, but is not gathered evidence to warrant any criminal charges at present.
	In other words, everything the media has been hyping, hyperventilating over, hysterically reporting, apparently none of it's true, according to John Solomon and Sarah Carter And circa.com, which is their website.
	Now, U.S. officials who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the information said there is widespread frustration among intelligence professionals who have watched in horror as a normally secretive process has now been distorted by media leaks and politicians, uneducated about how counterintelligence operations actually work.
	Well, you know, with all due respect, the leaks are severe.
	The leaks ruin the career and hurt the reputation of General Flynn.
	What happened to him was a thousand percent a felony and a violation of the espionage act because while they were using surveillance against the Russian ambassador, which they're supposed to do, once an American is identified on that call, they're supposed to minimize.
	Now you might say, well, they had security clearance because he had security clearance that makes it legitimate.
	Okay.
	If they did, it's unprecedented that they would leak the conversation.
	Usually, standard operating procedure is such that if they an American is picked up on an intelligence gathering, you know, signal uh monitor such as that, then they say in in their actual write-up of the conversation, they will say an American.
	Okay, he had top security clearance, maybe he's different.
	And then it said we have people spouting off who don't know the difference between Pfizer surveillance and a wiretap or counterintelligence probe.
	I explained the difference earlier, Michael uh uh Andrew McCarthy's piece versus a special prosecutor criminal case, and it has hurt our ability, meaning intelligence, the intelligence community to get to the truth and has wrongly created the impression that intelligence officials have a political agenda.
	Well, there's some in the intelligence community that have an agenda.
	And I don't want to I just like you get an occasional bad cop, doesn't mean all cops are bad.
	I I support police officers.
	I admire them.
	They serve their communities, they risk their lives.
	People involved in intelligence similarly risk their lives oftentimes.
	And they're doing deep, deep undercover covert operations.
	This is not a game.
	This is about life and death and securing the homeland.
	It's not a game intelligence.
	But if people are leaking sensitive information in part because the president changed the rules as he's walking out the door, it's a problem.
	And anyway, it goes on to say many of the leaks have surfaced since President Obama in his waning days in office, signed an executive order.
	They're referring to Executive Order 1233.
	What he did is put an addendum on there, which vastly expanded the number of federal agencies and workers with access to this sensitive surveillance.
	In other words, if they're if if they are monitoring the Russian ambassador and they're monitoring his phone call, it used to be that very few people would ever have access to that information.
	But because Obama, two weeks before he left, redid Executive Order 1233 and allowed that it that secret information to be shared with 16 other agencies, it means it's in a million people's hands.
	Now, why would that matter?
	Because it makes it more difficult to find out who the leaker is.
	That's what's so that's when I say shadow government, deep state.
	Now he's understanding where I'm coming from here.
	Those leaks have created a false narrative that the FBI has been predominantly focused on Trump's ties to Russia, officials said.
	In fact, any FBI activity involving the president's associates or advisors was mostly ancillary to a wider counterintelligence probe into Russian efforts to influence the election or curry favor with U.S. figures.
	He wasn't the target.
	In other words, everything that has been reported is false, according to this report.
	The Trump Russia narrative in the media has not been our primary focus and mostly involves pieces of information that came out incidentally.
	We check item, we'll check an item out.
	We move on.
	Adding most of the work has involved old-fashioned investigative tactics, not surveillance.
	But in this case, there was surveillance of Trump Tower and one of their prime servers.
	And I know because I emailed during the campaign, everybody that was working for Trump, all the people you know, Kelly Ann and Hopix and Corey Lewendowski, they all had Trump email addresses.
	Trump organization email addresses.
	Is this The server that was connected that they were spying on, surveilling, wiretapping as the New York Times, I'll use the New York Times term.
	They wiretapped it.
	Because that's what they said.
	Trump is right.
	This article says he is correct.
	And there's no way on God's green earth that Obama and his surrogates didn't know about it.
	Anyway, they added another official.
	I've never seen a case so misrepresented and leaks so damaging to a process that's meant to be conducted in secret.
	So foreign powers do not know what we know, and people's reputations aren't tarnished unfairly.
	Oh, you mean like General Flynn, President Trump by a media, alt left propaganda, destroy Trump at all costs media?
	Of course they want to destroy him.
	Several sources, it goes on with direct knowledge of the FBI's interest in investigating possible Moscow efforts to influence the 2016 election was borne out of its long expertise on Russian players gathered back from 2001 and Robert Hansen and the espionage affair in the 2010 and a Chapman spy ring scandal.
	Other intelligence agencies were also gathering similar evidence highlighting Russian activity like computer hacking and propaganda.
	Well, we know that.
	We spy on them, we hack them, they hack us.
	And it's just the way the world rolls.
	Now the Bureau, it goes on, along with other intelligence agencies, had early signs of politically motivated hacking by Russia and uncorroborated information from, among others, the former British intelligence officer about possible contacts between Russian intelligence and people close to Trump.
	By the way, that's the dossier that CNN and BuzzFeed ran with that talked about Trump had may they may have compromising information that he had hookers in the Ritz Carlton that was, you know, peeing all over the bed.
	Urinating over the bed, if that offends you.
	Really?
	Donald Trump, the germ phobe?
	Not happening.
	So ridiculous.
	And it was proven to be false.
	Anyway, and it says there were indicators Russian activity uncorro corroborated, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	Associate allegations of Trump associates having contacts with key figures.
	We needed to know if they connected or not, one source said we'd be remiss if we did not answer that question for the national security community.
	They found nothing.
	Officials decided the best course of action was pursue a classic counterintelligence investigation focused on what the Russians were actually doing and whether anyone in the U.S., including the Trump team might be encouraging or facilitating those actions or financially benefiting from them.
	One of the documents that agents tried to corroborate became known as the Trump dossier.
	The work of this trusted ex-British intelligence agent, by the way, the FBI wanted to pay this guy, hired by political operatives to find damaging evidence on Trump in Russia.
	Some of the information in the dossier was explicit and salacious and key word uncorroborated, like an alleged interlude between Trump and a prostitute in Moscow a few years back and an alleged Russian bribe that could have spelled millions of mis that would have meant millions, billions of dollars for Trump's companies.
	None of it was true.
	Trump wasn't in a bed with hookers that were urinating in the bed.
	But CNN breathlessly reporting what buzzfees reported.
	So sick what these people do.
	You think I'm wrong in saying they're alt-left propaganda, destroy Trump at all cost media?
	That's who they are.
	They're all hacks, they're all lazy, and they're all agenda-driven, on top of being overpaid.
	Agents were able to corroborate some details in the dossier, mostly public source intelligence, in other words, already available about meetings and decisions involving Russian figures, but much of the information about Trump and associates could not be corroborated, and some was disproven, and other facts took new connotations when additional investigation was concluded.
	In other words, it found nothing.
	Then it says the FBI Justice Department requested and received a Pfizer warrant to monitor a specific computer server inside of Trump Towers.
	Trump is right.
	They surveilled him.
	The Pfizer story is corroborated by their sources as being true.
	The towers is the home of Trump's business, personal residence, and then Campaign headquarters.
	The court approved the FISA application, as we said, in October, weeks before an election.
	That's the opposition party.
	Do you understand how dangerous this is?
	Including just as the election was turning the in Trump's way and other controversial FBI probe into Hillary Clinton's email was ending.
	Well, he'll that explains where Hillary got all this from.
	That explains where Harry Reid came out.
	Remember Chuck Schumer in January said Trump really is dumb for attacking intelligence agencies.
	They have six ways from Sunday to get back at you.
	Is that what our intelligence community does?
	Remember all that?
	Very quickly, agents concluded the computer activity in question involved no nefarious contacts, bank transactions, or encrypted communications with the Russians, and likely involved routine computer signals.
	They exonerate Trump.
	Exonerate completely and corroborate that he was being surveilled.
	Now let me take it a step further, just something to think about.
	I I won't go any further here because I don't have time, but they're going to join us in our final hour today.
	Let me take it a step further.
	WikiLeaks, let's go to this headline in Breitbart, and a similar one was in where was it, the Washington Post today.
	WikiLeaks.
	Well, there's a lot here.
	In other words, they tried to make it so that you couldn't secure your phone.
	One of the reasons I like iPhone is because of its encryption.
	Well, according to the WikiLeaks, WikiLeaks hasn't been long wrong in almost 11 years.
	Never proven wrong once about the information they disseminate.
	Okay, so they put the Android phones, Apple phones, and even smart TVs can become listening devices even if they're shut off.
	That's just some of the revelations that came out.
	But here's the one that interests me the most.
	That the CIA, according to these WikiLeaks leaks, uses stolen malware to attribute cyber attacks to nations like Russia.
	In other words, what they're saying is the CIA can actually blame Russia for an attack on an American and because they'll put their fingerprints all over the attack.
	Meanwhile, it came from within.
	Well, did that happen in this case?
	Or do you think Hannity's really paranoid now and losing his you know what?
	Maybe I'm not so paranoid.
	Is anybody in the media, CNN tonight, gonna highlight John Solomon and Sarah Carter?
	No, they're exclusively going to be on my radio show and my TV shop.
	All these news outlets are going to apologize for being wrong.
	Are they gonna say Trump was right about he was being surveilled?
	I doubt it.
	They're a bunch of hacks.
	The whole bunch of them.
	Sean Hannity.
	The whole bunch of them.
	All right, a lot to get to today, a lot of top stories.
	Now the vice president will join us next to talk about the health care bill, then Jim Jordan and Congressman Dave Bratt and Dr. Josh Umber.
	The people that I just read the story of John Solomon, Sarah Carter, and Ann Colter all coming up.
	Stay with us.
	busy day today.
	Thank you.
	It's a consensus plan that's now being scored by the CBO.
	Correct.
	Dave Bratt's seen it, but I haven't seen any plan at this point that uh has been rolled out.
	Dave Bradley.
	No, yeah.
	Yeah, I'll second in the first time.
	I was asking him specifically, where's the consensus plan?
	Well, in the healthcare, I don't think there is one because we haven't seen it, right?
	Uh much of it was modeled off the Tom Price legislation, which which we as conservatives have always seen as sort of the gold standard for replacing Obamacare.
	He's now the Secretary of HHS.
	That is the bill, the plan that we ran on in 2016.
	We told America, here's our vision for how we replace Obamacare after we repeal Obamacare.
	We're all working off the same piece of paper, The same plan.
	So we are in sync.
	The House, the Senate, and the Trump administration because this law is collapsing.
	And you can't just repeal it.
	You have to repeal it and replace it with a system that actually works.
	And that is exactly what we're doing.
	And I am perfectly confident that when it's all said and done, we're going to unify because we all, every Republican ran on repealing and replacing, and we're going to keep our promises.
	Is there a consensus bill?
	Because when I interviewed the speaker, he said there was, and it was being scored, and after it was scored, he said, of course, there's going to be amendments to it, but why the secrecy at this point?
	Well, there is a consensus of ideas and a consensus bill, but it's not the leadership bill.
	The leadership bill is Obamacare Light, and they're embarrassed about it, so they keep it in secret because they don't want any of us to point out the Obamacare light features.
	Hopefully they will not put forward a bottle care light.
	But the bill they're keeping under lock and key that they won't let us see, they would not let me have a copy of this morning.
	That bill is Obamacare Light, and that's why they don't want conservatives across the country to see it.
	All right, there you ha hear of varying opinions.
	Uh yesterday, of course, the health care bill or late the night before was released on Monday night, and there is opposition to it.
	Obviously, it was not a consensus bill in the sense the Freedom Caucus and others, some in the study group, uh Senator Ramp Paul, Senator Ted Cruz, Senator Mike Lee, Senator Marco Rubio seem to have problems with it.
	Here to help sort all of this out is the Vice President of the United States, and that is Vice President Mike Pence, who's back with us, Mr. Vice President.
	It's always an honor to have you on the show.
	Thank you for being with us.
	Thank you, Sean.
	Great to be with you.
	This is an exciting time in the life of our nation.
	It is truly historic that after the after Democrats and and the Obama administration passed a government takeover of health care, that we are literally on the cusp through uh a vigorous legislative process uh of repealing and replacing Obamacare, and I'm I'm just uh uh truly humbled and grateful to be a small part of that.
	The only thing in my mind that maybe it was wishful thinking on my part, because I know legislation you once told me is like sausage making in that sense.
	And Newt Gingrich describes, well, you work within a box.
	What what do you need to pass a bill?
	What do you need to pass a bill?
	And within that box you come to agreement, nobody gets everything that they want.
	I guess my own my only confusion and and concern is considering this started eight years ago.
	I'm just uh I'm a little bit frustrated that there wasn't a consensus bill, and now we've got a public fight going on between Republicans, and this is only one item of the Trump agenda, the Trump Pence agenda that needs to get passed.
	We've got to get the economic bill passed.
	We got to get energy independence, we've we've got to get the vetting done and the wall built.
	There's a lot of work to do, and I just wish that maybe these these public battles we're seeing now could have been resolved behind closed doors, and everybody could have got behind the president from day one and said, Yeah, we agree this is our bill.
	We all vote we're all going to vote for it.
	Well, and I think I think one of the sound bites that you played from from uh Speaker Paul Ryan reflected on the fact that they had a working group in the Congress last year.
	Uh they built uh this legislation at the President's direction, uh around a framework included in then Congressman Tom Price's legislation, which was very broadly uh endorsed by conservatives and and Republicans uh in the Congress.
	But look, this is this is a different kind of legislative process than happened in two thousand nine.
	I was there.
	Uh, you were you were on the airwaves of America trying to stop that freight train called Obamacare, and we came pretty close, remember, Sean, we almost stopped the thing.
	I remember.
	But the way it was written, it was hard for us to argue against it because literally Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House and the Obama team, literally wrote Obamacare in a back room, and that almost the day of the vote brought it out onto the floor of the House of Representatives.
	And Nancy Pelosi famously said, quote, we have to vote for this bill so we can find out what's in it.
	Close quote.
	Now the American people found out what's in it, higher insurance premiums, lost the ability to choose your doctor, losing your insurance coverage.
	Uh literally, it is a spiraling disaster in health care.
	And Republicans with the President's strong leadership are determined to keep our promise to the American people.
	We're going to repeal this this disastrous policy.
	And what's been presented is just f this is the most important thing I could tell you, Sean, uh, is what's been presented in the Congress and has begun to be debated is simply phase one of the president's three-phase process, which by this summer will succeed in repealing uh Obamacare and replacing it with health care reform that lets um the American people choose their health insurance, purchase health insurance across state lines.
	It'll lower the cost of health insurance through free market choices.
	It'll respect the doctor-patient relationship.
	It'll give states literally, as the Wall Street Journal said today, unprecedented freedom and flexibility in tailoring their own Medicaid systems on a state-by-state basis.
	And we really do believe that at the end of the day, at the end of this three phase process, the American people will will see that President Trump and Republicans in Congress kept their word and seized this historic health care moment to literally improve the health care economy based upon American principles and the free market.
	I guess Mr. Vice President from my perspective all of the people that came out yesterday opposing the bill within the Republican Party had telegraphed their very arguments long before they got an opportunity to see the bill and I guess maybe wishful thinking on my part I I would have hoped that maybe a lot of those differences could have been resolved behind closed doors.
	Look at just even the lower third on on any of these news channels all day.
	It talks about a in internal strife, civil war within the Republican Party, and um I'm not so sure that's helpful and and all these things now are going to be played out in public apparently that's I think playing into the Democrats' hands a little bit or should the American people understand this is how legislation is made and are you confident you're going to bring these guys along first off I I'm I'm very confident we're going to keep our promise to the American people with the with President Trump's strong leadership and the support of Republicans in the House and Senate we're we're going to repeal and
	replace Obamacare.
	We're going to give the American people a health care system based on individual choice, personal responsibility and freedom.
	Remember the very core offense of Obamacare was that they decided to solve the problem what they perceive to be of coverage in America by ordering every American to buy health insurance whether you want it or not.
	We always believe that the issue of cost could be dealt with by by increasing the amount of choice that Americans had.
	That's the present the core of the president's vision be begins with repealing the the tax penalties at repealing the you know the mandates and the heavy hand of government in Obamacare, letting people purchase across state lines and then sending Medicaid to the states so that states like my old home state of Indiana have the ability to tailor those programs for the underprivileged in ways that will serve their best needs,
	their best health and and truly and truly it it advance the the choices that uh that our most vulnerable citizens have in a health care economy in ways that will improve their lives.
	That that all I believe is going to happen.
	But look we're we are it is early in the legislative process.
	The President has said this is the bill but he's also he told leaders in Congress yesterday, I told them when I was on Capitol Hill in the House and we're certainly open to improvements.
	The the House proposal we believe you know you know is you know can be improved.
	We're going to listen to thoughtful recommendations to do that.
	But the overall framework of this process, we truly believe as the President said, has to begin with our effort to simultaneously repeal and replace Obamacare and that's what this first bill does, begins to do, and at the end of this three-phase process,
	I truly do believe that your listeners and and frankly I think the broad broad mainstream of the American public will see that we have we took what was a disaster in health care and we turned it around to put it on a pathway for uh more for better health,
	better health care choices and a more prosperous future for every American the argument of the Freedom Caucus, both them and and Senator Paul for example is that this does not represent a full repeal and it creates a new entitlement and that is the subsidies that would come from the federal government and set be sent in the terms of in terms of uh tax credits to individuals.
	Do you feel they're right on that or do you agree with the free do you think the Freedom Caucus is right or do you think Paul Ryan has that right?
	Well I I to be honest with you in Obamacare they they subsidize the purchase of health insurance through these exchanges.
	I I think that giving people a credit on taxes is a better way to go if if if people don't have coverage through their employer and they're purchasing on the individual market, allowing them to have a credit against their tax liability, that's to me that's always been a good free market means of encouraging and creating an incentive for behavior.
	Remember, the core difference between Obamacare and what's been proposed in the Congress today is freedom.
	In Obamacare, the federal government ordered every American to buy health insurance or pay a tax.
	We're essentially saying we'll we'll create incentives for people to to be able to better afford health insurance, but whether you buy health insurance is your decision and it's your call.
	And to me, that's more than a small matter.
	That's it really goes to the heart of when I was in that battle in two thousand nine against Obamacare, to me it was the intrusion on freedom that I found most offensive.
	I mean, if if the federal government can order you to buy one thing, whatsoever to say down the road in the future, they can't order you to spend your money in other different ways.
	You know, this to me that's the where we all begin.
	And in this bill, remember, this is a budget bill.
	I don't want to be too granular here, but this is a bill that only requires fifty-one votes in the Senate.
	There's there's a that's a real challenge.
	By the way, that is a real hurdle.
	That well, that that's right.
	But but it's not sixty votes.
	Okay.
	The next the uh phase three of this will take sixty votes, and the president and I and our whole team are committed to go across the country and fight hard for all the balance of reforms, like uh, you know, completing the authority to buy health insurance across state lines, of uh creating association health plans so that people can join insurance pools on a nationwide basis.
	Uh you know, bringing together medical liability, legal reform to uh to to to bring some common sense uh to to litigation that drives up the cost of uh of health insurance across the country.
	All those things we'll have to get we'll have to get sixty votes to do them and and spring, I promise you we're gonna fight for 'em, but in this bill, we can repeal the taxes, we can we can start down the road of replacing Obamacare, and that combined with what Dr. Price can do at HHS and our phase three bill can deliver a great victory for the American people.
	Stay up to date with the latest news and expert opinions as Donald Trump takes office.
	Stick right here with The Sean Hannity Show.
	The Sean Hannity Show.
	We continue with the Vice President of the United States, uh Vice President Mike Pence.
	Mr. Vice President, I guess the next question I have is, you know, we've been following this guy in Wichita, Kansas.
	He's going to join us later in the program, and and I know you're pretty busy and you probably don't have time to watch my TV show ever, but we had him on last night.
	And this guy in Wichita has a system where people pay kids pay ten bucks a month, the adults pay fifty bucks a month.
	It includes as many visits as you ever need, takes care of stitches and broken bones and MRIs, and e they even have a ninety-five percent he negotiated directly with the pharmaceutical companies and gets ninety-five percent reduction on the cost of most medicines and keep including chemotherapy medicines.
	And they have five doctors in his practice, six hundred patients per doctor, and then the patients usually get a catastrophic plan, which is very inexpensive, depending on what your deductible is.
	And that would be in case God forbid you have an accident, God forbid you had a heart attack, or God forbid you got cancer.
	These cooperatives, there are about a thousand of them now that have popped up around the country.
	Between that and health care savings accounts, are we on to something that could really in in his case he cuts the cost for his patients at sixty percent?
	He cuts cuts the cost of pharmaceuticals ninety-five percent.
	And it seems that these innovative ideas that are popping up around the country could be utilized.
	Thoughts?
	Well, nothing false about it at all, and health savings accounts are are at the very center of the president's vision here.
	Uh, you know, we introduced uh really for the first time ever health savings accounts into Medicaid when I was governor of the state of Indiana.
	When when people are able to to make a deposit into a health savings account that they can pay a first dollar out of to pay for their their health care, it creates an incentive for preventive medicine and encourages people to to you make better health care choices and then you add to that a catastrophic plan that's much more affordable.
	It all makes sense.
	But everything you're talking about, I know to your bone marrow, Sean Hannity, you're a free market guy.
	Yes, sir.
	You know there's there's no pro I love what Phil Graham said one time.
	He said there's no problem in America, too big or too complex, that the market can't solve if we let the market solve it.
	What what happened in two thousand nine that we're committed to repeal and replace was that it it was nothing short of a government takeover of health care.
	They they looked at the issue of uninsured in America, and instead of freeing up the marketplace, allowing people to buy health insurance across state lines, giving people more freedom and more flexibility to innovate programs like health savings accounts and association health plans.
	Instead they came out with this massive government mandate ordering every American to buy health insurance, whether they want it or need it or not, and then layered on top of that, a tax penalty if you didn't pay that.
	And that was the that's the core of Obamacare.
	That goes away in the bill that was introduced this week.
	With a tax penalty is gone.
	And by the end of this three-phase process, everything about Obamacare will be swept away.
	Well, and we will replace it with exactly the kind of framework that'll invite the innovation that you're talking about in Wichita.
	I'm just really hoping and praying that Republicans can come to consensus quickly.
	There's so much on the agenda, and as a credit to both you and the President, you have gotten so much done in such a short period of time, and many big items remain, and I know you will get to them expeditiously.
	Mr. Vice President, thank you as always for your time.
	We appreciate you always being on the program.
	Thank you, sir.
	Thank you, Sean.
	Great to be with you.
	800-941 Sean, our toll-free telephone number.
	Ann Coulter will get her thoughts on all this when we get back.
	Straight ahead.
	Holding them accountable.
	Sean gets the answers, no one else does.
	America deserves to know the truth about Congress.
	The plan is repealing.
	Like we said, we ran on a plan to repeal and replace it.
	Tom Price helped write that plan.
	He is now Donald Trump's Secretary of the City.
	It is a consensus plan that's now being scored by the CBO.
	Correct.
	He said there's a plan currently being scored by the CBO that was a consensus plan.
	That's what he told me.
	Well, I understand that, and and uh it is not a consensus plan.
	I haven't seen it.
	Maybe Dave Bratt's seen it, but I haven't seen any plan at this point that uh has been rolled out.
	Dave Brad, what are we No, yeah.
	Yeah, I'll second and I was asking him specifically where's the consensus plan.
	Well, in health care, I don't think there is one because we haven't seen it, right?
	We have been running on repealing and replacing Obamacare since 2010.
	In 2016, the House, in a bottom-up way, set a working group together, the Commerce Committee, the Ways and Means Committee, the Education Workforce Committee, and then any other member of Congress who cares about this issue, participating in a working group to come up with a plan for what we would replace Obamacare with.
	Uh much of it was modeled off the Tom Price legislation, which which we as conservatives have always seen as sort of the gold standard for replacing Obamacare.
	He's now the Secretary of HS.
	That is the bill, the plan that we ran on in 2016.
	We told America, here's our vision for how we replace Obamacare after we repeal Obamacare.
	That's the bill we're working on right now.
	That's the bill we're working on with the Trump administration.
	We're all working off the same piece of paper, the same plan.
	So we are in sync.
	The House, the Senate, and the Trump administration, because this law is collapsing.
	And you can't just repeal it, you have to repeal it and replace it with a system that actually works, and that is exactly what we're doing, and I am perfectly confident that when it's all said and done, we're going to unify because we all, every Republican ran on repealing and replacing, and we're going to keep our promises.
	Is there a consensus bill?
	Because when I interviewed the speaker, he said there was, and it was being scored, and after it was scored, he said, of course, there's going to be amendments to it.
	But Why the secrecy at this point?
	Well, there is a consensus of ideas and a consensus bill, but it's not the leadership bill.
	The leadership bill is Obamacare Light, and they're embarrassed about it, so they keep it in secret because they don't want any of us to point out the Obamacare light features.
	Hopefully they will not put forward a bottle care light.
	But the bill they're keeping under lock and key that they won't let us see, they would not let me have a copy of this morning.
	That bill is Obamacare Light, and that's why they don't want conservatives across the country to see it.
	All right, 24 now till the top of the hour.
	You know, I just want to reset the table here, and we're gonna get to Ann Coulter.
	So for eight years, eight long years, repeal and replace.
	So here Donald Trump wins the election, and they had all these show votes, phony votes that would absolutely meaningless.
	Ted Cruz filibusters in the Senate and says, Let's use our enumerated constitutional power of the purse and we can repeal Obamacare.
	We can stop it.
	We cannot fund it.
	And they had that option.
	Oh, Ted Cruz has gone off the deep and we're gonna lose seats in 2014.
	Well, you didn't lose seats in 2014.
	They won seats in 2014.
	So this is their their signature, and we get in January.
	It's now March, and they still never had a consensus bill.
	Now let me tell you how I would have rolled this bill out.
	Because I had interviewed everybody and I knew there wasn't consensus.
	The Freedom Caucus is against it, Americans for Prosperity are against it, uh the Freedom Works is against it, heritage action is against it, Forbes' group is against it, everybody's against it.
	Rand Paul's against it, Ted Cruz is against it, Mike Lee's against it, Freedom Caucus is against it, Rubio's against it.
	And why didn't they work out all of these problems behind closed doors, then as a united Republican House and Senate and President reveal it and say we're gonna pass this bill.
	Anyway, Ann Coulters were it's infuriating.
	I mean, i it's almost dereliction of duty how bad this was rolled out yesterday.
	Oh, I know, Sean, I know.
	It's a joke.
	And uh sad.
	First of all, you can't I don't understand why no one in Congress understands the free market.
	We constantly have this ratchet effect where Democrats are in office, they push through massive socialist schemes, and then Republicans come in with a Republican House, Republican Senate, Republican president, and what do they do?
	They keep the the overall framework of the government running our lives in this or that area, take Department of Education, invented by Jimmy Carter as a SOP to the teachers' unions, Ronald Reagan ran on eliminating the Department of Education, and twenty years later George Bush is tinkering around the edges.
	We'll have no child left behind.
	No, we don't want tinkering.
	We want a free market.
	And whenever you hear people saying, as as they always do, well, how are we going to make sure everyone has health insurance?
	Okay, for most of the last century, Soviet Union couldn't clothe its people, couldn't feed its people.
	Here in America, we totally solved the everyone be clothed problem.
	Everyone have shoes, everyone have food.
	In fact, an infinite variety of food, even of something something like orange juice.
	That that is, as I wrote in a column recently, pre Russian President Yeltsin walked through a supermarket in Austin, Texas, and was blown away by the orange juice aisle.
	How did we do that, Sean?
	We did that through the free market, not by the government saying, Well, if you're going to make orange juice, we have a series of mandates for you, and we're going to have the state orange juice commission tell you that it has to have a spout and an easy pour spout and only pure orange juice.
	You can't make mixed-in mango juice.
	Please just give us a free market and health insurance.
	Yes, there are people who will not be able to afford that health insurance, or they either because they're irresponsible or they're not making enough money or they're young people, or because they just drew a bad lottery ticket in life.
	Okay, that's probably at most three percent of the country.
	Let's say it's something wild, like seven percent, ten percent.
	That doesn't mean you deprive the other three hundred million of us of being able to buy health insurance on the free market.
	And I would also add, we already have a model of this here in America, not only with car insurance, that's sold on the free market, that cute little gecko commercial.
	Number two, Obamacare, um, thank heaven for the establishment clause, was forced to give waivers to Christian groups who provide something they're not allowed to call insurance, but it's insurance.
	And you know how much that is?
	And that's with a teeny tiny little pool.
	If if health insurance for young people, for healthy people, for the risk averse, if you could get catastrophic health insurance just in case you're hit by a car, you have a terrible skiing accident, you get a dread disease.
	If if it were $50 a month, so many people would be buying, it would probably go down to $20 or $30 a month.
	Please just give us a free market and stop putting mandates or sending it back to these state insurance commissioners, the most corrupt institutions in the country.
	Could you imagine and uh meanwhile, all of this?
	I'm being told there's a consensus bill being scored by the CBO.
	And then I put on, let's see, Dave Brad and Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows and Louis Gomer, and then Marsha Blackburn, and I put on Rand Paul, other people, and they all say, nope, we're hearing this is in it, this is in it, this is in it, this is in it.
	Then I go and I I write people, and I'm like, guys, they're not on board, and they have enough votes to kill it.
	I'm like, why aren't you talking together?
	Could you imagine if they actually got had gotten in a room, they put together a bill that everybody agreed on and supported, nobody gets everything they want.
	That's the way bills are written.
	But at the end of the day, it was on the principles you just described.
	Simple, basic, fundamental, conservative free market principles.
	And imagine that if the president held a big event with all members of the House and Senate that are Republicans supporting the bill and say, we are unified.
	This is our bill.
	Now, may I I'm not maybe I'm maybe I'm just too outside the bubble.
	It's uh I mean there are complications, but not for ninety percent of the American people.
	If you can make ninety percent of us happy, wouldn't you do it?
	You could do it in a single sentence in the bill.
	There shall be a free market in health insurance, period.
	The rest of the bill is all dealing with with Medicaid, with trial lawyers, with laws that require hospitals to treat anyone who walks in.
	Um you have to have fraud investigators, but that's the ten percent of people who are going to need either fully subsidized or partially subsidized health care for one reason or another, often not their fault.
	I'm not saying this with any with any venom here.
	Some people are just born with horrible problems.
	Of course, we're going to pay for that.
	You have to make sure there isn't fraud.
	There's a lot of fraud in Medicare and Medicaid right now.
	Again, thanks to our hardworking immigrants mostly.
	Um but 90% of us just let us buy it on the free market.
	It is the most baffling thing.
	I always feel like I'm talking to, you know, an old Soviet woman, circa 1985, explaining how bread will get to the market.
	No, we don't need the government to write these regulations.
	And and don't tell me health care is important, food is important, housing is important, clothes are important, and we are just, you know, we're rolling in all of it.
	Why?
	It gets better and cheaper every year because of the free market.
	As with as with car insurance, as with the Christian health insurance, it isn't allowed to call itself insurance.
	I I just to me it's very, very simple.
	You repeal the old bill, you replace it with, you know, I had this guy on TV last night.
	I put him on radio today, j uh uh Josh Umber is what his name.
	And he's a great guy.
	He has the very type of of what you call uh cooperative that you're discussing.
	Ten bucks a month for kids, fifty bucks a month for adults, all the medical care testing you want, and he negotiated directly with the pharmaceutical companies, and he has ninety percent reductions in what you would pay at Walmart.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh yeah, just sell it on a flea m free market.
	Let people compete.
	Um let the pharmaceutical companies compete for the businesses.
	Uh no, it's it's magic, the free market.
	I don't understand why Republicans don't understand it.
	Um I I I I am glad to see Rand Paul.
	Um, he seems to have imbibed well from his father, Ron Paul.
	He he appears to be the only one who grasps the concept of the free market, which again solves the problem of health insurance as it has solved the problem of clothing ourselves and and and buying food.
	It solves it for 90% of the people.
	You don't screw 300 million people because you have special cases with another 10 million.
	Well, well, I think at the end of the day, there's a way to get this right.
	And you know, Donald Trump is the great negotiator, and it looks like he's gonna have to go in and clean up the mess that Congress created.
	Well, what's frustrating about that is Donald Trump is one man.
	He's he's working on the wall, he's imposing the travel bans, bringing jobs back.
	Um he's just a whirlwind of activity.
	We have hundreds of Republicans in the United States Congress.
	They can't do this one thing because there are complicated portions to it.
	Again, the part that deals with the 10% of Americans who are incapable of being covered by insurance on the free market, either because they have some very expensive disease or they're just they're just incapable.
	As Trump said, we don't let them die on the street.
	Don't worry, we never have.
	We have Medicaid, we have Medicare, we have veterans' hospitals.
	All of that stuff needs to be fixed.
	But you don't wreck the free market for 90% of the public.
	Can you imagine if they had done this with food and clothes?
	And Colter, I gotta tell you.
	Listen, we love having you.
	Come back often when you're back up in New York.
	You did great on TV the other night.
	Thank you as always for being with us.
	Absolutely.
	Good to talk to you, Sean.
	Bye bye.
	800-941 Sean Tollfree telephone number.
	Up next, our final roundup and information overload hour.
	Up next, our final roundup and information overload hour.
	All right, let's hit our busy telephones here.
	Michelle is in Hampton, Virginia, listening on W O NIS.
	What's going on?
	How are you?
	Yes, sir.
	Thank you so much, Mr. Hannity, for taking my call.
	Yes, ma'am.
	Um, what I want to just share with you American people is had we forgotten that that compassionate, loving speech that he gave that address to Congress who the gentleman and the women who had to sit and ignore him as he spoke to us, the American people and them to try and get their act together.
	And now those are the same ones that are standing up here attacking him with lies and falsehoods.
	I think they should come out and show the proof of their attacks and their lies.
	If they can't show it, they all get a year in Guantanamo along with the owner and CEO of that news media outlet.
	Put them all over there for a year.
	Listen, let me tell you something.
	The best thing that Trump can do, you know, I was interviewed by Ted Cobbell, ABC, this is nightline, uh, yesterday for you know, he interviews me for an hour, and then literally three minutes will show up on the show, he told me.
	I gave him my first answer.
	He goes, none of that's gonna get in.
	I'm like, well, why am I even here?
	You know, I mean, I get along with Coppel, you know, he loves to be a hard ass with me, but I I said, all right, I'll sit down.
	I'm like, why am I sitting here for an hour for three minutes?
	It's such a waste of my time.
	Anyway, and one of the things that uh we he he just wanted to focus, well, does Trump telling the truth?
	Do we need journalists?
	I said, not really.
	We we journalism's dead, it's not coming back, is my opinion.
	But anyway, yeah, they've all hell's broken loose.
	The media is calling him a liar every day, and it is absolutely repugnant to me how abusively biased, how lazy, and how wrong the media is.
	They're the ones that said wiretapping, not the president.
	They first.
	They said it first.
	And it turns out, and we'll learn this later in the program.
	Don't miss this interview at the last half hour of the show today.
	John Solomon and Sarah Carter.
	They have a piece that confirms that Pfizer warrant was issued.
	They go into great specificity in detail.
	It did target servers at Trump Tower.
	I do know the servers for the campaign were in Trump Tower, and there's no way on God's green earth that President Obama didn't know about it.
	He may not have ordered it, but he knew about it.
	And that is the question that he should have been asked, and everyone runs with the statement and says the president lied.
	No, there was surveillance according to John Solomon.
	He worked 20 years for the AP in Sara Carta and both spent time at the Washington Times, reputable mainstream newspaper, that they're saying, yeah, the in fact the Pfizer Warrant was issued.
	And they found out in the Pfizer warrant that in fact they targeted servers in Trump Tower.
	So maybe he was wrong in say a wiretapping, but now we're just dealing with a technicality for crying out loud.
	And it's driving me insane.
	All right, 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
	All right, when we come back, news roundup information overload, Congressman Jim Jordan, Congressman Dave Bratt, both against the health care bill and Dr. Josh Umber, who came up with one of the most innovative creative solutions.
	That's all coming up next.
	This is how we move.
	We lied in with our hands.
	This is how we move.
	This is monumental, exciting conservative reform that fixes these problems.
	I've been working on this for 20 years.
	This is exciting.
	Well, our plan is different.
	The House plan is Obamacare a light, keeps subsidies, keeps taxes, actually keeps an individual mandate.
	I think amidst the um horse excrement, we can find a pony around here somewhere.
	Holding them accountable.
	Sean gets the answers.
	No one else does.
	Freedom is back in style.
	Welcome to the revolution.
	We burn him down the mass at the baby.
	This is how we roll Sean Hennedy.
	New Sean Hannity Show.
	More behind the scenes information on breaking news and more bold inspired solutions for America.
	Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
	All right, our top story, what is emerging as an intramural battle, even verging on the precipice of a civil war over this health care bill.
	Congressman Jim Jordan of Ohio is with us, and uh he's one of the founders, former chairman of the Freedom Caucus, Congressman Dave Bratt is with us as well.
	Congressman for Rum Virginia, also with the Freedom Caucus, and also Dr. Josh Umber of Atlas MD out of Wichita, Kansas, who I've been talking a lot about.
	And uh Congressman Bratt, let me begin with you, and Congressman Jordan, I'll begin with you as well.
	Uh here's what I don't understand.
	I interviewed all of you.
	I interviewed other Freedom Caucus colleagues.
	All of you had concerns before they released this bill.
	All of you expressed them, articulated them, and he didn't even have access to it, but the things you were hearing were in the bill.
	Then the bill is released, the president sent out to sell the bill, and none of you guys at the Freedom Caucus, and there are enough of you to stop this bill from ever becoming law.
	And I don't understand why things weren't fixed before the bill was released.
	Can you explain that, Congressman Bratt?
	Yeah, well, uh, the language was strong early on, and as Jim Jordan always says, we need to do what we promised we're gonna do.
	And so the promise was very clear.
	We're gonna repeal Obamacare.
	President Trump ran on.
	We're gonna repeal Obamacare.
	And we all voted on a full repeal of Obamacare, and all Republicans voted yes in the House and the Senate a year ago.
	And so now uh the voters are just learning what's going on, and it turns out we're not going to repeal Obamacare.
	And so the the language in DC, and you're familiar with it, you do with politicians talking to you all day.
	It all hinges on that word.
	If you get rid of Obamacare, you get rid of the regulation.
	And so we assumed uh that's what's gonna be in the leadership bill.
	We're gonna repeal Obamacare, we're gonna get rid of the regs, we're gonna get rid of this bronze plan, silver plan, all that.
	We're gonna get rid of all the stuff that stifles your individual choice.
	And instead of just dealing with coverage issues, which is what Obamacare did, we're gonna finally focus on getting the price of health care down by uh giving people the freedom.
	But but I but I don't understand you know, now there's gonna be a big public fight over this, although I heard that you guys are meeting with the president later this evening or sometime today.
	Is that true?
	No, not today, but we're but I think it's going on catching meet with him tomorrow, uh, Sean.
	Yeah, and you met with the vice president yesterday, and is the vice president sympathetic to your point of view, Congressman Jordan?
	Yeah, he said, look, this is the this is the start of the debate, and this is how it works in American uh government and American democracy.
	You got a bill, and now it's time to debate it.
	I mean, frankly, the bill was introduced about 36 hours ago and they're already marking it up.
	I don't know if that's the one.
	Well, I I don't understand, but tell me maybe I'm just because I'm not a Washington guy, maybe I just think differently.
	Why, if I if I'm putting out a bill and I know that a significant portion of the caucus doesn't like the bill, that why wouldn't I resolve those issues behind closed doors together as a team, come to consensus.
	Not everybody's not going to get everything they want, but at least do it behind closed doors, and then maybe when you release the bill, maybe this is just you know you're right.
	You know, maybe But the president goes out with all of you guys, every Republican in the House and Senate behind him and says we all agree this is our bill, this will fix Obamacare, repeal it and replace it as we promised.
	Why not do it that way?
	I guess I'm I've guessed I'm way out of touch if I thought.
	No, no, you're right on target, and we would have appreciated that, but that wasn't what happened.
	Remember we had the leaked version a few weeks ago, and we were critical of that.
	In fact, we took a position against the leaked version uh a few weeks ago, and then lo and behold, thirty-six hours ago we find out the introduced version is not in any ways really different from the leaked version.
	So that it would have been nice if we could have got together and supported a plan.
	So what we're doing today, so now all of you go out yesterday and publicly say you can't support the bill, and then their answer is well what this is coming out in three phases.
	When when couldn't it all have been done united in one phase?
	That's my frustration, and with all due respect to Congress.
	You guys have had eight years of saying you're gonna repeal and replace this, and we still don't have a consensus plan.
	We still have a cons here's the consensus plan.
	It's the plan we introduced.
	We introduced uh today we introduced the bill that says do the same thing we did a year ago, clean repeal, and then a separate piece of legislation which is replace it with what will what what Dave talked about, which will bring down the cost of insurance.
	is the only plan consistent with what we told the voters.
	This plan is not.
	This plan says we're going to repeal Obamacare, but we're going to keep the Obamacare taxes in place.
	It says we're gonna repeal Obamacare, but we're gonna take the Medicaid expansion and extend it.
	And it also says we're gonna repeal Obamacare, but we're gonna keep in place this mandate in a different form, which is insur uh surcharge of thirty percent that insurance can charge you.
	So that's that's not what we told the voters.
	So we make this way too complicated.
	You know, we said, if our plan doesn't...
	I just, you guys have, this has become a nightmare headache that need not have happened.
	This is an unforced error in my mind.
	Now, the reason I brought Dr. Josh Umber on, he's out of Wichita, Kansas.
	Dr. Umber, say hi to Congressman Jim Jordan and Congressman Dave Bratt.
	Dr. Umber has come up with a cooperative system.
	Can you just, in as short a way as you can, a synopsis of what you do down there and how big this is?
	Absolutely.
	Uh we have fixed health care with the free market in the shortest way.
	Um yeah, uh again, we need to change the conversation over to what we actually need to insure, because what Sean's talking about is our business model of insurance free for primary care, ten dollars for kids, fifty dollars a month for adults, for unlimited office visits, no co-pays, free procedures, wholesale meds and labs up to ninety-five percent savings.
	And did you negotiate with the labs and the pharmaceutical companies to get a ninety-five percent discount?
	Absolutely.
	Yeah.
	And you were able to make deals with them on on the drugs that most people use, you know, like Cialis and Viagra.
	I'm kidding.
	Like like broad By the way, isn't that the Ciallas commercial the dumbest thing you've ever seen?
	You got a guy in one tub and a woman in another tub, and I'm like, they're holding hands across the tubs.
	It's well that's before the medicine kicks in.
	Yeah, I guess apparently some doctors, this is not my area of expertise.
	But in but I'm talking about serious blood pressure medicine and cholesterol medicine.
	In other words, chemotherapy, cholesterol medicine, diabetic uh i if you imagine we all know the health care system's broken.
	We all talk about the waste, but then when there actually is an opportunity to show those savings, I think somehow we are resistant to that idea taking place.
	How many people are a part of your practice?
	How many people do you and your practice serve in the Wichita area?
	We have uh five doctors in our practice, and each doctor has close to six hundred patients.
	Wow.
	We have hundreds of unlimited care.
	I could walk into your office as as a member of your cooperative any day, and if I need stitches, if I need a test, if I I'm gonna get it done that day.
	That day you have uh twenty four-seven access to your doctor by phone text, email.
	We we broadened the the idea of what care is because now you don't have to just come in and pay for a copay.
	You don't even have to leave work or go to the urgent care.
	You even offer some cancer treatment, but God forbid somebody gets in a bad accident if somebody has a heart attack, if if or if they need chemo, you know, you can even give them the chemo, but they can get catastrophic insurance that would cover all of those really big items that maybe uh uh uh a local office couldn't handle.
	It it truly is the perfect blend there where where we want to work with insurance companies.
	We understand that they're a critical uh uh part of the system, but we need it to work more efficiently.
	Again, we are pro efficiency, not anti government or anti insurance.
	So the insurance companies are actually healthier, more profitable by working with this model because their waste goes down too.
	And how many other doctors around the country did you educate them on this model and they've duplicated it?
	We've personally helped over 230 doctors convert to this mall in the last two and a half years, but there's probably five hundred to a thousand uh doing it or starting it.
	It is a wave of coming across the country because patients and employers are begging for a solution.
	You know, maybe I'm I'm just a dumb old talk show host, Congressman Bratt, but you know, what the hell do I know?
	But that sounds like a genius idea to me that would benefit everybody.
	We why can't we duplicate that?
	Well, that's the free market.
	That's what the free market does, right?
	It takes creativity and innovation and allows you to execute without having to go through the red tape.
	So the doctor's a genius.
	He just told the country the solution.
	The rest of the world who can't afford our exorbitant insurance, that's the way they operate.
	That's how healthcare's always operated.
	And it's the exact doctor whose reputation is good at a low cost, they're gonna be good for you and your family, and you pay for it.
	If I lived in Wichita, I'd be a part of this cooperative.
	That's what I would do.
	And then you can decrease employers' insurance by thirty to sixty percent day.
	Well, I wanted to say that as the doc looked at the leadership plan, because the leadership plan in my judgment is is subsidizing unaffordable insurance.
	It's like it's like breaking your tail and it just keeps driving up costs.
	Would you agree, Doc?
	I I would agree the Republicans are guilty of the sin of unoriginality.
	Um they they took something, they they spun it around, they put a new hat on it, but it hasn't changed.
	It's not making health care great again.
	Exactly.
	More of the same.
	What we really need is to have a conversation that um most care can be provided outside of insurance, 80-20 rule here.
	Insurance is still a vital part of that, but now we can afford to do have less insurance, help employers.
	If seventy percent of small business or seven percent of jobs come from small businesses, and we can decrease insurance costs by thirty to sixty percent for small businesses, Trump could have an economic boom the likes that Reagan would be jealous of if we could fix that going forward, and then there'd be more jobs, more people have health care, more people have everything they need, but then we're even more efficient for Medicaid dollars.
	Block grant that out to the states, let them do fifty experiments, but if the state's paying fifty dollars for a blood test that I get for a dollar sixty-five today, then look then we can do a whole lot more blood tests for Medicaid while at the same time being budgeted.
	And you know, I I have passed Dr. Umber's name and number on to a lot of important people, and nobody's gotten in touch with you as far as I know you, Doctor, right?
	You're the only one leading the charge.
	Uh this is all coming down on on your shoulders, broad as they may be.
	Thanks.
	Thanks a lot.
	Uh, you know, you know how many people you know how many people hate me today?
	Uh well, maybe maybe more, but but at least now they have good reason because you're trying to fix something that not everybody wants fixed, I think.
	Congressman Jordan, are you trying to get in, or is that Congressman Bratt?
	Yeah, Dave Bratt here, and the doctors just making a point, right?
	And in every economics textbook across the country, the fundamental error slipped in, and the doctor just talked about the eighty twenty rule.
	You insurance is for insuring catastrophic events.
	But when when after World War II, we went to the employer provided health care deal, then you start with insuring all of health care provision.
	So then you put your co-pay in, and everything else is free to you.
	And once you co-pay and the rest is free, well, guess what you do?
	You overconsume.
	Right.
	And that's the fundamental problem in health care.
	And so the doctor is saying, let's break that up and let's get insurance back to being what it's supposed to be for, and then let's let people put money in their HSAs and pay for just regular health care.
	All right, guys, stay stay stay right there.
	We're gonna continue.
	Freedom Caucus members, Dave Bratt, Jim Jordan, and Dr. Josh Umber.
	We'll take a quick break.
	We'll get to more of your calls and the final half hour.
	Wait, you hear the story we're about to break?
	There is no Russia connection.
	I'll explain with the reporters breaking the story that's next.
	Voting America and Americans first.
	Now there's a novel idea.
	You're on the Sean Hennedy Show.
	Showing the Dr. All right,
	as we continue, Congressman Jim Jordan of Ohio and Congressman Dave Bratt of Virginia and Dr. Josh Umber, Wichita, Kansas, Atlas Medical, or Atlas MD.
	All right, now that we've heard Dr. Umber explain all of these things, uh, Congressman Jordan and Congressman Bratt, I guess the question for you is you know, how how do we get not only health care savings accounts, a full repeal, get rid of another entitlement, and get these cooperatives as part of the solution because it sounds so amazing to me and it's being duplicated sort of underneath the the health care system that we have now.
	How does this all get incorporated based on the release of this bill?
	Well, the first thing you gotta do, Sean, is is repeal Obamacare.
	I'm sure the doctor would agree with us.
	You can't do free market until you get rid of the Affordable Care Act, which is driven up the cost, fewer choices, higher costs.
	You have to get rid of that.
	So that's why we have the clean repeal.
	You do that, you repeal it, and then you focus on passing legislation that would empower people in the conference.
	Are you confident that you can get to the president, the vice president, and get this done right?
	Because here's the problem, Congressman Jordan.
	If as soon as you repeal and replace, you own it.
	Republicans own it, the president owns it.
	If it doesn't work, the blame will come on all of you.
	Right.
	Well, well, the we'll understand the repeal, the effective date.
	We said we're going to repeal it, but it's effective on December 31st, 2018.
	So you've got to have an off-ramp so you can begin to form a market and and people the transparency that exists under under the doctor's program, that that that will exist in the full market.
	You have to give us some time for that.
	That's what we passed just a year ago.
	So we're saying, why not do what we all said we were going to do, what we all voted for, get rid of Obama.
	What is the answer that the leadership in the House and Senator giving you because that's not what they wrote?
	It's what John Kensey talks about.
	It's oh, we got to make sure these folks on Meditate Medicaid can stay there, this expanded population, we can extend that, and we can put more people on Medicaid.
	The approach we would prefer is no no no no.
	Let's bring back a market, let's bring back affordable insurance.
	Instead of measuring success is how many folks we can keep on a government Medicaid program, why don't we measure success by bringing back a marketplace like the doctors doing in Kansas and have more people get the insurance they need for catastrophic care and then have the kind of health care they need at a low cost with good quality documentary?
	What about those that are saying that there are, well, I guess congressional legislative obstacles because the original Obamacare was passed by reconciliation, nor do they feel that they're going to get eight Democrats in the Senate to buy into what the Republicans do.
	How's what's your answer to that?
	That's a legitimate concern, and I understand that.
	But we're also hearing that Dr. Price at HHS is going to be able to change some rules and help us with the regulations that are driving up the cost of the economy.
	There's a lot of discretion in the health care bill that he can change almost everything.
	So let him do that.
	Nothing we're doing would preclude him from doing just that.
	All we're saying is repeal Obamacare, effective date in two years, time for the marketplace to start to form, let Dr. Price get rid of the regulations, which we think will bring down the cost of insurance, and then let's pass the legislation in the normal legislative process, health savings accounts, association health plans, the things that will help with the marketplace and help bring back affordable insurance.
	That seems like a reasonable plan in the case.
	Congressman Bra uh Brad will give you a final word here.
	You have 10 seconds.
	Yeah, well, and and you know, President Trump is from New York, you've got the big heart, and so he says, look, we want to take care of everybody.
	And I think that's part of the big tension here, right?
	And so you're talking about breakaway in the Senate.
	We want to cover everybody, but you gotta do it the right way.
	So what Jim just laid out, what the doctor just laid out, that's the best health care system.
	And then about about five percent of the serious cases, right, the pre existing conditions account for over half of health care spending in the country.
	So that's a separable issue where the president can still say, look, we're gonna take care, we have compassion, uh, but you don't arrange the whole health care architecture for the whole country based on five percent of the people.
	You say, look, here's our safety net, here are the welfare programs we have, here's what we're gonna do for pre-existing, and you can take those block grant the money to the states to take care of that, and then Trump's a win-win-win across the board.
	Oh, I hope you'll tell that to the president when you meet with him tomorrow.
	Thank you, Congressman Jordan, Congressman Bratt, and Dr. Umber, good to talk to you all.
	800-941 Sean toll free telephone number.
	Wait, you hear the investigative report that just broke, John Solomon, Sarah Carter, and what they have come up with here explaining the FBI found no criminal activity between the Trump campaign and Russia.
	They confirm a Pfizer warrant was issued in October, and they confirm that Donald Trump's entire campaign was surveilled in the closing weeks of that campaign.
	That's next to the holding them accountable.
	America deserves to know the truth about Congress.
	All right, 25 now till the top of the hour, 800 941 Sean.
	If you want to be a part of the program, so many unanswered questions.
	Here's what we do know as it relates to all the leaking that's gone on.
	We heard and we know the New York Times and we know the BBC and we know McClatchy, and we know other news networks, Washington Post.
	They all talked about wiretapping at Trump Tower, and we heard about the June request that was supposedly denied as it relates to a Pfizer request, ultimately culminating in a more modified request that was granted in October.
	Again, this would be people within the Obama administration.
	And Obama's statement was was more than parsed when he said he or nobody at the White House ordered any type of spying or surveillance on Donald Trump and Trump Tower.
	Well, there's a blockbuster article out today.
	And it's written, co-written by John Solomon and Sarah Carter.
	And what's fascinating about this is well, you have John Solomon is an award-winning investigative journalist, chief operating officer at circa.com, Sarah Carter, senior national correspondent there as well.
	Um thank you both for being with us.
	John, didn't you write for the AP for a long time?
	I did, for twenty years.
	Twenty years.
	And and what other places did you work before you you went to where you are now?
	I worked out with the editor of the Washington Times for many years.
	And Sarah, what's your background?
	Oh, I traveled uh all over, worked with John at the Washington Times.
	I spent most of my time on the U.S. Mexico border, and then later in Afghanistan and Iraq, and I cover national security now for John here at Zirka.com and with Sinclair Broadcast Group.
	Now, in this piece, tell me if I'm reading it properly.
	You both confirmed that a surveillance warrant was issued for the main server at Trump Tower.
	Is that true?
	For a server, yeah.
	I'm not sure it was the main server, Sean, but it was a server that had to do with email marketing, and the FBI wanted to take a look at it because it was apparent to have some sort of communication with a Russian entity.
	Well, I know as a matter of fact that everybody on the campaign, with maybe one or two exceptions that I know, all got on the Trump email.
	In other words, the the Trump organization email server.
	Right.
	So there is a possibility that everything involving the campaign was possibly surveilled once that FISA warrant was issued.
	Is that possible?
	It's possible, though.
	Our understanding is that this server was actually narrowly construed to do email marketing.
	It predated the campaign and wasn't specifically a server that was used for campaign email.
	That's that's our understanding.
	Okay, then let's talk a little bit about what you discovered, Sarah.
	Yeah, one of the things that we discovered was that actually this investigation into the server was very brief.
	It was a very brief investigation, and they found nothing in the server at that point in time that would warrant kind any kind of criminal charges towards anyone on the Trump team.
	Uh I thought that was very interesting.
	Uh they we also discovered uh throughout the process of this investigation that in the in June we hear all these reports about a June FISA warrant.
	Uh what we were told was absolutely not.
	There was no June FISA warrant with Trump's name on it.
	Um, and uh they did it it didn't work.
	Well was there a request for the server?
	Was there a request of any kind brought to the Pfizer courts or no?
	Um I believe uh John would John would know that part of the story much better.
	Yeah, Sean.
	So I think in October they did go to the FISA court and asked specifically to check the records of this one server that appeared to be corresponding with a bank in Russia.
	When they when they looked into it, they found out there was an innocuous explanation for the the data pings going between New York and Russia, and that's what we're doing.
	The media, Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party, all the talk about Russia and the Trump uh campaign, they haven't found a shred of evidence at all with and yet the media keeps regurgitating this narrative.
	Is that True.
	That's true.
	And in fact, I think that's one of the reasons that our sources work so closely with us, which is to dispel a narrative that the FBI has been obsessed with Trump connections to Russia.
	We were told time and time again over the last few days that the FBI really only incidentally in a in and uh on an offhand it way stumbled onto a couple things that involve Trump and that none of it has been a primary focus of the Russia hacking investigation.
	How high up can you tell us are your sources?
	In other words, for example, one official you quoted as saying, I've never seen a case so misrepresented and leaks so damaging to a process that was meant to be conducted in secret, so that foreign powers don't know what we know and people's reputations aren't tarnished unfairly.
	Yeah, it's a great question.
	Their sources are in a good position to know what was really going on as opposed to what's been reported.
	And one of the things that we highlight in the story is that a lot of this leaking began right after President Obama in his final hours in office issued an executive order that allowed FISA and surveillance intelligence data to be shared with a lot more people than it normally had been shared with and sixteen other agencies.
	But by the way, I've talked a lot about this.
	This is exact executive order twelve three three, which had been on the books for some time, and what Obama did is add to that that executive order, and as much as he allowed the sharing of, you know, SIG netelligence.
	In other words, when General Flynn, when they were were surveilling, which they should do, the Russian ambassador, isn't it true that once say an American is identified on such a call that they're supposed to minimize the listening of the American speaking and then not supposed to identify that American and certainly not leak it?
	Aren't they all felonies and violations of the espionage act?
	Certainly the leak.
	This type of classified information is guarded heavily very few people.
	I was told by a very high ranking intelligence official that when they do surveil and Americans are identified, that they are to minimize the the listening of the American because they don't have a warrant, and number two, when they write up their report, it's standard operating procedure that they do not mention that person by name.
	They use the term generally an American.
	That is true, Sean, but uh uh General Flynn um uh at the time uh is under a security clearance.
	He has a high level security clearance when you s when you sign up for a high level security clearance, basically when you're granted one, you kind of find a way you're right.
	So the government has the right to surveil people with high-level security clearances in an effort to minimize harm.
	Uh, for example, if you go back to the Robert Hanson uh situation with espionage in the FBI.
	So there is this kind of disclosure.
	But but all of that, all of that laid out, you still do not disclose any information on those type of classified uh monitorings.
	And that would be leak them and it is federal.
	That would be a a felony by my understanding of the espionage act.
	So certainly General Flynn Well, let me go back to the leaks.
	Do you both agree with me, based on your understanding of the president fourteen days before leaving office, revising executive order twelve three three three to allow the CIGNET intelligence, like in the case of General Flynn to be shared with sixteen other agencies?
	Could that have been done as a reason to make it more difficult to find out who leakers are, or is it a strange coincidence that as soon as they did that and left the administration and a new min administration comes in that all these leaks stop happening from the intelligence communities?
	That seemed to be a connection of dots, or is that a step too far?
	Well, I think the people on the front line, Sean, the people who actually guard this intelligence on a daily basis are entrusted, were were surprised by the expansion, and they immediately saw the impact.
	There were people that started to leak transcripts that were never intended to be leaked.
	And so just take the Flynn intercept per septon.
	As a result of that leak, the Russian ambassador now knows a phone that he might have thought was clean is now being monitored by the U.S. government.
	And also uh Director Flynn or uh National Security Advisor Flynn's reputation is impacted in a process of the U.S. His career was ruined over a felony that was committed against him.
	Did you see James Clapper on Meet the Press this weekend?
	Did James Clapper lie when he said he had no knowledge of this FISA warrant?
	Well, he narrowed it, right?
	He said he needed no night knowledge of a FISA warrant against the President's phone.
	And all of our reporting indicates we there's no indication that the President's.
	Okay, so perhaps Donald Trump misspoke when he said wiretap, but surveillance did happen.
	You're telling a hundred percent that Pfizer warrant was issued in October and it had to do with servers and Trump Tower, correct?
	That's correct.
	Correct.
	So that's spying on an opposition candidate.
	Is there any possible way based on your background and experience that the President of the United States didn't know about it?
	Well, that's a good question.
	We know he definitely knows about it when he's briefed in December, because we were told that it was part of his briefing that this went on.
	When he knew in October, uh it is still the something we want to report on.
	And also, how did the FBI find out about this server information?
	We're still reporting who tipped off the FBI to to that server and its activity.
	That's something that we'd still like to report on.
	And they found nothing.
	Again, there's nothing to the Russian story, and the FBI looks at it as nothing at this point, correct?
	Uh right.
	They do believe that the Russians tried to influence the election, but that there was nothing untoward about what we're on.
	Now let me take with the WikiLeaks revelations yesterday, and I want to be very, very specific in what I'm talking about.
	Right.
	WikiLeaks was was very, very specific, and even the Washington Post had a very interesting article about this today.
	And uh, you know, basically they're saying that the CIA uses stolen malware to attribute cyber attacks to nations like Russia.
	So in other words, is there a possibility that it could have that all of this could have originated, all of this Russia talk, all the Russia hacking, that Russians were influencing the election.
	Uh could it have been within our own government, except they they just basically put a fingerprint of the Russian uh uh attack on it, because that's what they're saying they can do.
	Well, let's keep in mind that WikiLeaks has always said that a lot of the materials that it received did not come from the Russians, right?
	They've always mandated that.
	Well, I interviewed Julian Assange, John, and I I asked him in great detail, and he said absolutely was no state.
	There was an un another report that those documents as it relates to Hillary and the email server and Podesta were handed at American University in a wooded area.
	Did you read that?
	That's right.
	That was been out there.
	So I think we we don't know a lot about how all this all came to game, and as you know, the espionage game is a game of smoke and mirrors, and so we may not know the full story.
	And and I think we need to keep digging to get to the truth of questions like you just asked.
	So would uh uh would it be wise for President Trump to to rescind that change fourteen days out to Executive Order 1233?
	Would it be wise of President Trump to get rid of Obama holdovers?
	Would it be wise to get to the bottom of who's committing felonies and violating the the the espionage act among other things?
	Yes, I think that's one of the most important things that they need to start looking at.
	I mean, one of the things that you brought up, Sean, earlier, and I think that it requires a lot more investigation, and John also touched on it as well, is that we need to go back and we need to look and see who originally tipped off.
	Where did they get the tip off that there might have been something on the server?
	I think that will answer a lot of questions.
	And I'm also in agreement with you that it's something that needs to be investigated is when Obama issued this executive order, was it to expand it so that leaks, you know, would appear shortly afterwards and that it would be difficult to find out who the leaker was, or were those people already leaking?
	That is something we don't know right now.
	We're looking at it and we're investigating it.
	But you know, could this be a ruse to expand the the the agencies so we can't pinpoint which agency leaked this or which person leaked this from which agency?
	That's something that really needs to be looked into as well.
	And I'm sure they're they're investigating this.
	I mean, this is something that the Inspector General is going to be looking at at the DOJ, as well as others who are um looking for the leaks into this uh into this uh Russia hacking issue.
	Bill Benny was on this program.
	I'm not sure if you both are aware of him.
	Thirty-two-year vet, NSA, whistleblower, resigned because and he claimed right here on this radio program this week and on TV this week, that in fact every email, every text message, every phone call of every American citizen is being gathered and monitored and and put in this big made uh metadata storage units that the government has access to.
	Is that possible?
	Yes.
	In fact, it is based on congressional testimony that that is what goes on.
	And then what happened?
	Well, that means by the way, that James Clapper committed perjury because he said it was not happening.
	Well, uh th there's a difference between storing it and then accessing it and reviewing it.
	And what happens a lot of times in these FISA warrants is that data has been captured and it's stored.
	No one's allowed to look at it.
	Then they go get permission from the court to go look at a period of time in the past where they weren't monitoring, but where it was captured by the NSA.
	And so that's how the intelligence community since nine eleven has been able to solve a lot of crimes.
	Can we then say that Donald Trump with his tweet that the remember the New York Times, all these major news organizations, mainstream, not not conservative talk radio or the Fox News channel Hannity program, but when the all of them reported wiretapping, those were their that was the words that used in the New York Times, not by and then it was reiterated by the president.
	But the president in principle, it turns out that he was right, that surveillance took place at Trump Tower, and it's very likely that many in the Obama administration, probably the president himself, knew that there was at least something, some type of surveillance going on, and perhaps he thought it was wiretapping because the New York Times said so and it turns out to be surveilling a server at Trump Tower.
	Is that a fair statement?
	Yeah, I think our reporting confirmed that there was surveillance of a computer uh inside the Trump Towers at the end of the election.
	There's no doubt that that is true.
	So you're confirming a hunting connecting.
	Well I'd like to know what Obama knew when and and uh what did he know and when did he know it?
	What did Ben Rhodes and Valerie Jarrett and David Oxarott and Pfeiffer and Road what do all these people know and when did they know it?
	Yeah those are all good questions and did they and did they share it with Hillary Clinton because a week before the election Hillary Clinton suggested so much in a tweet.
	That's right.
	That's very true.
	I guess I'll be more than Hillary Clinton we also saw that Harry Reid also suggested the same thing in October.
	That you're absolutely right I mean I guess Sean Hannity's not so paranoid after all I was right Obama was a horrible president I was right that Trump could win and I'm right that there's something really stink that's something that stinks to high heaven here do you agree with that?
	There's a lot more stuff that needs to be dug up before we know the truth.
	Well, you guys got to get working.
	You're not working hard enough.
	Go out and get more information for the country.
	Go call President Obama.
	He won't take my call.
	And by the way, Solomon, why are you not coming on with Sarah on TV tonight?
	You need to come.
	Unfortunately, I'm on a train.
	I'm going to miss you there, and I'm sorry.
	Get a later train.
	What's the big deal?
	I should.
	Step up.
	Oh, he's putting you on the spot now, John.
	Hey, John, you got to come on.
	Step up.
	Move your train.
	All right.
	Let me see if I can move my train.
	I'll pay the I'll give you the 25 bucks when you get here.
	All right.
	You're awesome.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	Thanks, guys.
	Hannity's paying for interviews.
	Headline tomorrow.
	Still waiting to fly out all those libs who promised to leave if Trump were elected.
	The jet is ready.
	This is The Sean Hannity Show.
	The Sean Hannity Show.
	that's gonna wrap things up for today let not your heart be troubled Hannity on the Fox News channel that's coming up 10 Eastern tonight.
	Okay is there sabotage we will break down the deep state the shadow government and how Russia there's zero proof but the FISA court did issue a warrant we have proof we'll get reaction from Sarah Carter and John Solomon also Newt Gingrich weighs in on that the healthcare fiasco the latest on the WikiLeaks dump William Binney is going to be with us Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer tonight.
	See you back here tomorrow see you tonight at 10 You want smart political talk without the meltdowns we got you.
	Now I'm Carol Markovich and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently normally is about real conversations thoughtful try to be funny grounded and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day join us every Tuesday and Thursday normally on the iHeartRadio app Apple Podcast or wherever you get your podcast I'm Ben Ferguson and I'm Ted Cruz three times a week we do our podcast Verdict with Ted Cruz nationwide we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday Wednesday and Friday we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House inside the Senate inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.

▲