Sean Hannity Show - Playing with America's Safety - 3.16

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 17, 2017 - Sean Hannity Show

01:36:31

Playing with America's Safety - 3.16

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart Podcast.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	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 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.
	When I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked why.
	From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Listen to Fiasco Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or 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 mypillow.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, three top stories we're getting to today.
	We're gonna dig so deep into this deep state and new developments by Sarah Carter and John Solomon.
	And we're also going to get a very interesting perspective from a former KGB spy and his book Deep Undercover, which is uh coming out in a couple of days here.
	And he also consults on different TV shows just to get maybe that side of it.
	So that's a big part of it.
	We've got the key points from Donald Trump's America's America First Budget announcement.
	Drastic cuts to things we don't need and that we should get rid of.
	So we're gonna get to all of that, and we're gonna get into another court shopping example on FISA.
	And you know what?
	We have i i we have so the left has so taken over the judiciary in this country to the point where you know what they can go judge shopping anywhere they want, get it to the ninth circuit, and they will use the most obscene, absurd, unconstitutional arguments to advance their liberal agenda.
	That which they could never get done at the ballot box, that which they could never get done legislatively, they don't even seem to care a bit that they are gambling with the lives of the American people.
	We told you last week about, you know, what do we have?
	We had a refugee brought into the country, plotting, planning, scheming on killing you.
	Every national security, top national security person under Obama.
	How's Homeland Security Committee chair?
	Uh McCall.
	Uh we had the CIA director, the FBI director, the assistant FBI director, the former chief envoy to defeat ISIS, all saying ISIS will infiltrate the refugee population.
	Donald Trump wants to keep Americans safe.
	He wants a temporary ban to we figure out how to vet them, and yet we are using the establishment clause to the Constitution as a means of stopping it.
	Never mind that we have not only does the president have the constitutional authority, uh, he has the statutory authority as well, and it's his job to keep you safe.
	And he's doing the things constitutionally has the right to do.
	What's shocking about this, you know, the court indefinitely enjoining Section 2, ordering the pause of nationals from these six countries, and Section Six, you know, uh, which is the executive order pausing the refugee administration for 120 days across the nation.
	You know, you got the ACL uh J, Jay Seculo's group have put out a great analysis of all of this, but they're basing this on the establishment clause.
	Plaintiffs have met the burden of establishing a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their establishment clause claim.
	Well, yeah, before a liberal judge, apparently friend of Obama, sure, I guarantee, no problem.
	Doesn't matter how unconstitutional it is.
	You know, the Ninth Circuit overturned, what, 80% of the time?
	One of the highest overturned courts in the country.
	Are you listening, Washington Post fact checkers?
	Um, what's so sad about this is they literally are stomping on the Constitution here.
	There's no respect for executive authority.
	There's no respect for coequal branches of government.
	This is literally taking away, usurping the power of the president to be the commander in chief of our country.
	I'll give you some examples here.
	You know, in if the court says nationwide relief is appropriate in light of the likelihood of success on the establishment claim, meaning the establishment clause.
	Well, no analysis of presidential authority under the Constitution as commander in chief or statute statutes over immigration or national security matters, in other words, what is law and what is constitutional authority of the president is not even examined by this judge.
	That's how bad this decision is.
	That's how dangerous this is.
	And I'll give you two, I'll give you three or four examples.
	For example, there is eight U.S. Code 1182.
	There is eight U.S. Code 1187, which is A12, paragraph uh twelve.
	The statute explicitly gives the president the authority over all immigration determinations.
	He has the statutory authority, he has the constitutional authority.
	That would be respectful of coequal branches of government.
	This decision is not.
	Or for example, the eight USC 1157, that gives the president all the broad authority he would need over all refugee programs.
	In other words, the right to do this legislatively, constitutionally.
	There's no analysis of executive order second section six, the refugee pause beyond a mere description of it in the introduction section of this ridiculous opinion.
	Though the court enjoins section six.
	That's all they said about it.
	Do you see how absolutely insane this is?
	You don't have to be a lawyer to figure out how dangerous this is.
	If every major national intelligence, law enforcement official, those that know more than we do, have all warned that the refugees will ISIS will infiltrate the refugee population.
	Why don't we listen to them?
	Why is the left in this country so hell bent on gambling with your life and obsessed with conferring constitutional rights on people that would be blessed to be guests in our country?
	Why do they prioritize their rights over your right to safety and security in your home and your country and your community?
	Because that's exactly what the bottom line choice is here for them.
	Now, the court declined to hold its ruling in this particular case.
	The court intends to set an expedited hearing to determine whether this temporary restraining order should be extended, and it goes on from here.
	Now, there was a key quote from the court, as my friend Jay Sekulo pointed out to me last night.
	He sent me an email on this.
	Any reasonable objective observer would conclude, as does the court, for purposes of the instant motion for this particular order, this temporary restraining order, that the stated secular purpose of the executive order is at the very least secondary to religious objective of temporarily suspending the entry of Muslims.
	Well, over ninety percent of the world's Muslim population is not impacted by this.
	It goes on, the court cannot they cannot find the actions taken during the interval between the revoked executive order and the new executive order to be genuine changes in constitution being constitutionally significant.
	That's what they're saying.
	Now, I it's I don't even know what to say here.
	They're basically conferring rights.
	The court should not even be considering evidence of national security motivations, and they went into that.
	You know, when considered alongside the constitutional inquiries and harms described here in the questionable evidence supporting the government's national security motivations, the balance of equities of public interest justify granting this idiotic decision.
	By the way, this judge who issued the travel ban ruling is an Obama law school classmate.
	Maybe he should have recused himself from the case.
	Just a just a maybe were they best friends in Hawaii?
	Were they part of the chom gang smoking pot and hanging out and doing a little bit of weed and maybe even a little blow?
	It's unbelievable here.
	Now, just to put a fine point on this, Obama made a surprise visit to Hawaii 48 hours before the judge blocked the Trump travel ban.
	Did he see his buddy?
	Not saying he did, but considering NBC CNN and every other, you know, abusively biased alt-left propaganda destroy Trump media outlet is into conspiracies these days, I guess nothing is off the table.
	Anyway, so the plaintiff had alleged, according to them, that the executive order would result in their having to live in a country and in a state where there is a perception that the government has established a disfavored religion.
	No, we're looking for terrorist, radical Islamic terrorists, you know, people that sympathize with them, like in the Boston bombing or at the Pulse Nightclub, or at Fort Hood or at Chattanooga, Tennessee, or in San Bernardino.
	You understand, I'm gonna get into this tonight.
	I'm actually gonna show pictures.
	Because this is what they're willing to do on the left.
	If something happens as huge as 9-11 and it turns out to be a refugee from one of these countries, are they gonna do they not have blood on their hands?
	If San Bernardino happens, Chattanooga, Fort Hood, any of the other instances that have occurred, the Pulse Night Club, the Boston Bond, are they gonna take responsibility for the death, the damage, the destruction, the loss of life, limb, and happiness for individuals?
	And why, oh why is the left so willing to gamble with your life?
	That is the key question here.
	Because if you want to be a guest in our country, that is a privilege.
	It is not your right to come in here.
	The first duty of the president is to protect the citizens of this country.
	You know, that's why he says Americans first, America first.
	That is his constitutional mandate.
	And this court is taking away, usurping his power as commander in chief, his statutory authority on immigration and refugees, and they basically are taking it upon themselves to write whatever it is they want, interpret whatever they want.
	This is the definition of judicial activism.
	This is legislating from the bench.
	This is not coequal branches of government.
	This is not respect for the executive branch, certainly not respectful of the legislative branch either.
	And now we're gonna go through this dance.
	Go to a go judge shopping, get a liberal judge.
	Okay, get a liberal judge where when it gets appealed, it goes To the Ninth Circuit, more liberal judges.
	And then after the Ninth Circuit, maybe you get a hearing at the Supreme Court.
	In the meantime, how many people sneak into this country, unbeknownst to you and your family, and what damage do they do?
	Is it possible?
	A lot of damage is done, and if it happens, is anybody going to take responsibility for that damage?
	Is anybody going to say, oh, I'm sorry, oops, we shouldn't have gambled with the lives of the American people?
	Is anybody going to apologize to the victims of the next attack?
	Is anybody really that hell bent on being so politically correct?
	Listen, I even take this a step further.
	You want to come visit our country, you should be vetted to the fullest.
	I would just make it a worldwide vetting program.
	I don't give a rip where you're coming from.
	And you gotta pay for your own vetting if you want to get into the country.
	You want the honor, the privilege, the experience of America, you're gonna have to pay for it.
	And what you're gonna pay for, you gotta prove to us that you are not gonna represent a threat to the citizens of this country.
	That you are here as a guest that is peaceful and respectful and honors the country that is allowing you in for your own personal enrichment or whatever reason why you're coming here to do business or whatever.
	You can pay for your own vetting.
	Why should the American taxpayer pay to vet people?
	If you have family here that can vouch for you, that should be part of the process too.
	That they will be able to prove that you have no ill intentions towards this country.
	All right, one of our top three stories.
	We'll stay on this today.
	Also, we'll go over the Trump budget, and we are gonna do a deep dive today into the deep state.
	Sarah Carter, John Solomon have two blockbuster columns since we last convened yesterday, and I will update you on both of them.
	Prices are for base buildings only.
	Do not include windows doors or accessories.
	Warning, don't let your business get left behind in what is likely to be the biggest economic boom in recent history.
	If you need to build to grow your business, call General Steel today.
	Steel prices are expected to rise, but you can still lock in your price on a general steel building if you call now.
	For example, a 40 by 60 foot building is still less than 25,000.
	Even an 80 by 150 foot building is under 99,000.
	Imagine 12,000 square feet for under 99,000.
	This building is designed for your needs, no wasted space.
	And you get the general's quality and 50 years structural warranty at a price you can afford.
	You can still save as much as half the cost and time of conventional construction by calling General Steel today.
	As much as half.
	So don't let rising steel prices put your project out of reach and stop you from making your company great.
	Call now, 877-81 Steel.
	It's not too late.
	Call.
	877-81 Steel.
	That's 877-817-8335.
	All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity show, 800 941 Sean, you want to be a part of this extravaganza.
	You know, look, last night we got new evidence as it relates to this deep state shadow government, Obama holdover, saboteurs, breaking laws in an effort to delegitimize the president.
	It is now focus one of the left.
	They are obsessed in spite of no evidence, and as a matter of fact, now emerging news to the contrary about a Russia Donald Trump connection.
	Now, one of, and this was what all that happened at NBC the other night.
	You got all these alt-left propaganda, destroy Trump media people.
	They they got their hands on a Trump 2005 tax return, and you saw utter, complete, breathless reporting nonstop.
	Now, the problem is is when you get somebody's tax return and you make it public, news people have protection, journalists have protection.
	That's not MBC's problem.
	But it is a problem for whoever got the tax return and leaked it that like in the case of these intelligence leaks, those are called felonies.
	In this case, five years in prison a felony.
	Now, that can result in a lot of people now, potentially, when this investigation moves forward, it's a great potential that a lot of people will be charged and probably spending jail time.
	That's how bad that is.
	Now, when you have criminal offenses, you know, and then the then the whole substance of the issue, we paid 38 million dollars on a hundred and fifty million dollars in income, not a scandal, a higher rate than the parent company over at MBC.
	And the bottom line is that if he pays more of a rate than a Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders, and NBC Comcast.
	Why is this even such a big story?
	Now, if I'm Donald Trump, if this is how they're going to react to two pages of his tax returns, I I wouldn't release the thing to them.
	Now, by the way, it threatens our democracy.
	We see now felonies being committed on a weekly basis.
	You've got deep state saboteurs that are trying to prevent the president from doing the job that you, the American people, elected him to do, aside from the president's taxes.
	Look at all the other leaks that we have had.
	Now we have all these deep state actors, Obama holdovers, career bureaucrats.
	They're spending day and night, night and day, trying to bring the president down.
	Now we have new information today, and that's what we're going to get into next, all right?
	Because then we're going to do a very deep dive into this in our second hour of the program today, and we'll continue our other top stories, and that is the key points from Donald Trump's America First Budget announcement, and what you were talking about earlier, and that is, yeah, they went judge shopping again, and they would rather gamble with your life than protect you.
	Holding them accountable.
	Sean gets the answers no one else does.
	America deserves to know the truth about Congress.
	Let me give you the bad, the sad news.
	Moments ago, I learned that a district judge in Hawaii, part of the much overturned Ninth Circuit Court.
	And I have to be nice, otherwise I'll get criticized for speaking poorly about our courts.
	A judge has just blocked our executive order on travel and refugees coming into our country from certain countries.
	The order he blocked was a watered down version of the first order that was also blocked by another judge.
	And should have never been blocked to start with.
	This new order was tailored to the dictates of the Ninth Circuits, in my opinion, flawed ruling.
	This is, in the opinion of many, an unprecedented judicial overreach.
	If he thinks there's danger out there, he or she, whoever is president, can say, I'm sorry, folks.
	Not now.
	Please.
	We got enough problems.
	We're talking about the safety of our nation, the safety and security of our people.
	All right, 25 now till the top of the hour, 800-941 Sean is our toll-free telephone number.
	You want to be a part of the program.
	Look, last week, when I said that the president needs to purge the deep state, I never said the U.S. attorneys on any form.
	I was talking about all these leakers, all the intelligence leakers.
	Now we got tax uh records being leaked.
	Now, there has been an amazing bit of reporting that has been done, and we're now beginning to get a better picture of this false narrative that keeps getting echoed in this destroy Trump echo chamber as it relates to the deep state.
	And the reporting really is by two veterans, investigative reporters with amazing contacts, John Solomon and Sarah Carter, decades of experience, both of them.
	And John Solomon's case, the AP, is he was laughing when I said he's not a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy.
	Anyway, so we have a the one thing that they broke last night is you had a computer science uh scientist raising concerns about this connection between Trump and a Russian bank.
	Uh, we found out, well, there's connections and deep support to Hillary Clinton, a Hillary Clinton supporter.
	In other words, what are the origins of this false narrative?
	Anyway, Solomon and Carter go on to say that the woman's name, or university professor in the Indiana University, L. Jean Camp, a recognized expert whose work includes federal research on security of internet connected devices, you know, becoming a prominent spokesperson last fall for a group of computer researchers who reported they had detected a series of communications between a commercial email server registered at Donald Trump's office in New York City and a server at Alpha Bank in Russia.
	Now logs of the computer communications that apparently hang on one second.
	I somehow this went weird on me, my phone.
	Anyway, so logs of computer communications, known as domain name system lookups, were originally put on the Reddit social media site by one of the researchers, and then by camp on her personal website.
	Now that became the grist for a series of stories suggesting that there may have been a secret channel of communications between one of the largest private commercial banks in Vladimir Putin's country and the Trump campaign.
	Now they did have, remember the first part of their story.
	They did break the story of a Pfizer warrant.
	They did say another warrant was in fact issued.
	And it had to do with the fact that maybe Russia was trying to impact, not Donald Trump.
	Well, now we have a new update today.
	Where this is the very latest circuit piece on this.
	The headline is Russian banks tell the Department of Justice mysterious Trump computer connections may have been a hacker hoax.
	Now, again, you got to work your way backwards.
	They first discovered that in October there was a Pfizer request, although it wasn't against Trump.
	Then the Pfizer request dealt with, all right, looking into the very specific nature of whether or not there was any type of attempt by the Russians to influence our elections.
	James Clapper said that never happened.
	They impacted no part of our elections, but put that aside for a minute.
	Then Solomon and Carter say, but yeah, but there was also another warrant, not a Pfizer warrant.
	That was going on simultaneously.
	They confirm as part of their investigative reporting that the servers for Trump Tower were absolutely positively surveilled as an ancillary investigation, and that zero evidence was found.
	Okay, now last night they begin to get to the deep origins.
	Where did this narrative begin?
	It began with a Hillary campaign supporter and donor.
	Now they have a new column out today that the bank has reported to U.S. authorities and the Department of Justice that mysterious communications, I'm reading verbatim, resumed recently between one of its computers and an email server tied to President Trump's business empire, and it has developed evidence the new activity may be the work of a hacker trying to create a political hoax.
	Now let's just stop for a second.
	If this turns out to be true, that there never was a Trump Russia connection, the same media that colluded with Hillary, the same media that never vetted Obama, the same media that was never honest about Obama's failures.
	Will you then conclude with me that journalism is dead?
	Because up to this point, in spite of the breathless reporting and hysterical reporting, there's not been a shred of evidence at all, except the New York Times and other papers and other people in the news, so-called mainstream alt-left propaganda media, they're the ones that say that Trump Tower was wiretapped.
	They've claimed that on January 20th, blazing on the on the front cover of their paper.
	Now, Alpha Bank, the Russian bank, well, they have now gone to the U.S. Justice Department as I continue with Solomon and Carter's latest column.
	They're trying to ask them to help solve the mystery.
	The bank has pledged their full cooperation.
	The bank in Russia wants U.S. authorities to help unmask a computer inside the United States that it believes has been used to launch these cyber attacks, spoofing, and that's the actual techniques that they use and what it's called, the Appearance of a backdoor communication channel between Moscow and Donald Trump's campaign at the time and even now, according to a source directly familiar with the bank's request.
	Now the bank believes, quote, these malicious attacks are designed to create the false impression that Alpha Bank has a secretive relationship with the Trump organization.
	Now, Alpha Bank is insisting since media stories began appearing last fall about the commute computer communications known as domain name server lookups, that it has never had a relationship to Trump or any of his companies, and that any computer connections between the two parties, computers was innocuous.
	In other words, there was never any collusion.
	None whatsoever.
	That means, by the way, whatever information Hillary had a week before the election, whatever information that Harry Reid was talking about before the election, was all based on a narrative being advanced by a Hillary Clinton supporter.
	Not based on facts, not based on evidence, not based on a FISA warrant that wasn't even really looking into the Trump Tower.
	Trump was ancillary.
	They looked into it and debunked any connection with the Trump Organization.
	according to Solomon and Carter.
	Now the attacks attempted to trigger verification signals between Alpha Bank and the server that we know law enforcement, according to Solomon and Carter, looked into and debunked.
	But that's what it was trying to do.
	In other words, when you spoof, you try and hack in using malware.
	By the way, this now goes to the WikiLeaks revelation.
	I hope I hope I'm making this clear.
	This gets hard to follow.
	And when WikiLeaks revealed just less than one percent of the documents that they have, nearly 9,000 pages, and they said the CIA has the capability to do this spoofing, in other words, put the fingerprints of malware that they're using to hack people onto another country and make it appear like that country did the hacking.
	Well, who that now we now this mystery gets deeper.
	Now, do I think the CIA did it?
	No, I actually believe in our intelligence community.
	Is there a possibility of a deep state intelligence rogue intelligence official that has this capability of doing this because they don't like Donald Trump?
	Absolutely.
	And I think that that possibility is getting greater by the day.
	Anyway, so the source is saying the spoofing attempt, in other words, attributing your attack, making it seem like it's coming from somewhere else, is the equivalent of somebody in the U.S. sending an empty envelope to Trump Towers, but putting on the back of the envelope a return address in Russia.
	That's the best analogy that I think they used in this, which would cause the Trump server to falsely return the communication back to Moscow.
	All right, so it gets complicated for those of us that have a hard time, you know, with apps.
	I mean, it's ridiculous.
	Now, the source did caution to Solomon and Carter that it doesn't have yet enough evidence that the same activity occurred between last May through September, causing this Pfizer warrant and another warrant.
	In other words, the first generation, if you will, of these first server pings that computer scientists reported last fall might be evidence of the communications between Trump and Russia that was being advanced by a Hillary supporter.
	That they may not all be the same.
	Now, the bank in Russia's working hypothesis about those earlier connections had been just routine commute computer communications caused when an email server responds to a commercial spam mail.
	The new evidence may lead to a total reevaluation and a new conclusion.
	In other words, this all could have been set up a long time ago with a very dark deep state intention by people that are very good at their jobs with computers.
	In other words, they're basically trying to deliver an envelope.
	Now we're talking about computers.
	Deliver an envelope.
	It comes from the United States, but get a postmarked from Russia.
	That's basically what they're Saying here.
	Now the computer scientists' allegations last fall became so widespread, in other words, the Hillary supporter theory that they spread became so widespread that it appeared in media reports and slate.
	CNN reported it.
	The New York Times, the BBC, McClatchy, that the FBI investigated them because of all of the reports.
	And that's what Sarah Carter and John Solomon were saying.
	There were two warrants issued.
	One was FISA, one was non-FISA.
	And listen to this next line.
	After the investigation, quote, agents concluded there was no evidence from the pings, meaning the envelope, if I'm you, if you're following this analogy, of any nefarious relationship, and they were probably the result of routine computer behavior.
	And CERCA reported last night that one of the scientists who raised media concerns that got the false narrative started about Trump Russia connections was this L. Indiana University researcher who made 22 donations last year to Hillary Clinton.
	And she told Circle News that her political donations had no bearing on her concerns about the data, blah, blah, blah.
	Now the bank in Russia has not been able to determine how the computer scientists gained access to the computer logs last year, but they hope it's cooperation with the Justice Department may in fact identify, may be able to identify at some point on these computer logs.
	All right.
	Now the source said that the first cyber attack detected by the Russian bank this year occurred on February 18th.
	An unidentified third party connected to a U.S. internet provider sending out suspicious DNS queries to from servers in the U.S. to a Trump organization server.
	You see how deep this is?
	This capability is pretty unbelievable.
	All right, let's hit our phones really quick here while we have a moment.
	Kevin is in Wisconsin, then we'll do our deep dive into the deep state.
	What's up, Kevin?
	How are you?
	I'm very good.
	It's an absolute honor and a privilege to speak with you today.
	I'm a longtime listener, uh long time caller.
	First time I've gotten in.
	So I appreciate it.
	I just wanted to uh a hundred percent agree with you on the privilege uh again uh that you said about the refugees.
	Uh all fired up with when you said it is a privilege to be in this country.
	And as an American citizen, I would like to say out loud to everyone by President this is I I'd like to say it loud and probably Kevin, you're breaking up on me.
	We got to get a better line here.
	Let's say hi to Lucy is in Texas.
	Hey, Lucy.
	Hey, Sean, this uh this is Lucy, and I wanted to call and say that I think President Trump needs to start fighting fire with fire.
	These activist judges need to be stopped.
	And what I believe President Trump should do is disregard their uh decision to block his ban and just go forward with it.
	And I think that these activist judges, if they cannot rule on the law, if they're if they're ruling on their feelings, then they need to be impeached.
	Well, I agree with that.
	And the Ninth Circuit, I love the president last night.
	You know what we're gonna do?
	We're gonna play the president in his own words later, because last night's speech shows number one, he hasn't changed from when he was campaigning.
	Number two, our committee committed is to getting all this done.
	And number three, he even mentioned the Ninth Circuit being broken up, which I actually think is a good idea.
	All right, when we come back, don't miss this interview.
	I'm gonna let Sarah Carter and this former KGB guy talk about the deep state in ways you've never heard.
	I was born in 1949, it was after World War II.
	I was born into uh Soviet-occupied East Germany.
	Somehow uh I got into under the radar of the KGB for this kind of work that they recruited me for was you know making making connections with others, make you know, getting to know people, getting into their heads and so forth.
	There was a number of things that uh uh that I liked.
	I knew I would be able to travel.
	I knew I was I would be operating outside the law.
	And I never liked rules.
	You know, I like to break them.
	And I would be doing all of this in support of a great cause to defeat the evil West Germans and the Americans that couldn't get any better than that.
	And here's something that I don't mean to freak you out with, but I think it's true.
	Even our memories are not absolutely private in America.
	Any of us can be compelled in appropriate circumstances to say what we remember, what we saw.
	Even our communications with our spouses, with our clergy members, with our attorneys are not absolutely private in America.
	In appropriate circumstances, a judge can compel any one of us to testify in court about those very private communications.
	And there are really, really important constraints on law enforcement, as there should be.
	But the general principle is one we've always accepted in this country.
	There is no such thing as absolute privacy in America.
	There is no place in America outside of judicial reach.
	That's the bargain.
	And we made that bargain over two centuries ago to achieve two goals.
	To achieve the very, very important goal of privacy and to achieve the very important goal of security.
	Widespread default encryption changes that bargain.
	In my view, it shatters the bargain.
	Are you saying that every American can be wiretapped against their will without any warrant at any point?
	No, I'm saying they are.
	You're saying every you mean I'm be I have been wiretapped.
	That's right.
	Repeatedly.
	Yes.
	And by wiretapping, that means what?
	Recording my phone conversations, taking my emails, my texts.
	It's all done under executive order 1233, Section 23C.
	Well, one two triple three is the one that Obama put in place just two weeks before he left.
	Well, he opened it up to all the other agencies in the intelligence community.
	Originally it was just uh restricted.
	Uh the only ones who had uh access were NSA, CIA and FBI.
	You're saying that every American listening to this program and every American in this country is being surveilled by our government without any type of warrant.
	Isn't that against unreasonable search and seizure, sir?
	Yeah, it's a violation.
	This is why I left NSA in 2001.
	They're violating the first, fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments of the Constitution, as well as any number of laws.
	All right, glad you're with us.
	Hour two, Sean Hannity Show, and we are getting back into the deep state, and this is really important what you're about to hear.
	Jack Barski, former KGB spy, has a brand new m memoir out.
	It's called Deep Undercover.
	It comes out well the twenty first of March.
	Sarah Carter back with us, Circa News, the senior national correspondent for circa.com.
	And we have been discussing all of these developments of the deep state, the ongoing investigation in the Trump administration, possible connections to Russia, and wiretapping or surveillance of Trump Tower.
	So welcome back both of you.
	Sarah, let me you and John Solomon, friends of mine, you've been leading, you know, out front on all of this.
	There's new breaking news today.
	Why don't we start out with what you have?
	Uh yes, thank you so much for having me on, Sean.
	I am uh right now in the process of putting together a story that the Russian bank that apparently was uh the move for the for the investigation by the FBI into the Trump server, the Alpha Bank is asking for the Justice Department to investigate what they believe is a significant cyber hack into their bank to make it appear as though the Trump server was communicating with them.
	They said in statically they had no communication with this Trump server, and their investigation revealed that they had been cyber hacked, that it was a malicious attack designed to create a false impression that Alpha Bank um has this secretive relationship with the Trump organization.
	Uh they're quote, quote unquote, we have gone to the U.S. Justice Department and offered our complete cooperation to get to the bottom of this sham and fraud.
	And that's significant because you're looking at a Russian bank, a Russian bank asking the United States government to investigate what they say is a cyber attack on their computer that emanated from the United States.
	They say these things came from the United States.
	And in fact, it wasn't just last year.
	They revealed to us that they have had numerous other attacks as recently as early as this month.
	Um significant attacks that they were able to gain a lot of information from.
	That's why they brought it to the U.S. Justice Department.
	All right, so go let's go further.
	Ha how do you feel about the Senate intelligence leaders?
	This was that they're out there yesterday saying there's no evidence on surveillance on Trump Tower, which contradicts what you've been saying.
	Where does that stem from?
	Well, I think it stems from the use of the word, right?
	Wiretapped, right?
	If you you know, under perjury, they basically said, look, we did not wiretap Trump tower.
	I mean, that's that's what they're saying.
	We didn't wiretap, but that's a very different.
	That's that's mincing words.
	I mean, we don't know which the future is going to reveal.
	When we hear that people are able to access that all sixteen intelligence agencies without warrant can dip into past emails, telephone calls, uh, you know, communications on hard lines uh on cell phones between various people all over the world.
	I mean, there is this back door, and we saw it with um Lieutenant General Flynn, right, Michael Flynn, when his transcripts of his phone conversation were revealed to the Washington Post uh with the ambassador to Russia.
	So it was almost as if, okay, we're monitoring Russia, but now look, we have Flynn's name exposed, unmasked, and now leaked.
	And that is probably one of the most significant leaks because it reveals so much more.
	There is so much to that leak, and it's it's the reason why Chairman Nunez from the House Intelligence Committee is so set on finding out what are the details that allowed this leak to happen.
	Who is unmasking these names?
	All right, Jack Barski, let me let me bring you in on this.
	Now, from your perspective, what's your take on all of this?
	I assume as an ex KGB guy you're following this closely.
	I'm following it, and I'm flabbergasted by how much politics is uh nowadays uh reaching into uh a realm where politics should not be.
	And we're talking about intelligence.
	Now this goes in many different ways.
	But once we make make intelligence gathering and intelligence uh the protection of of intelligence uh subject to a political football game, we're defeating ourselves.
	All right, so and as a computer analyst, I I know you have strong background in cybersecurity, is is that fair to say?
	Uh I I never had hands-on experience doing uh security, but as a as a manager in in in the computer uh realm, I've certainly had a lot uh of interaction with experts, so I I know a little bit about this.
	And how do you feel then about the possibility of just how real a hack like that could be to make up that it appears as something that it's not or from someone that didn't send it?
	And how do you feel about Trump's claims of the surveillance of Trump Tower?
	No, you you you got uh right.
	Uh there's so many ways of uh masquerading at somebody else in in in this in in cyberspace.
	It gets very, very difficult to really trace things back to to the original source.
	So, you know, I I can't speculate.
	I think in my view, there's way too much speculation in in in the in in the news media and uh and in you know in the twenty-four by seven uh news nowadays as to what's going on.
	Very few people really know what's going on.
	And you know, I I don't want to uh add the chorus of uh people who speculate on things.
	Uh the bottom line is in in the intelligence realm it is almost never what it seems to be.
	All right, I have a quote here by you, where you actually share the opinion that you feel that the Russian intelligence did align itself with independent hackers.
	That quote is absolutely correct.
	That's not a surprise.
	All right, then how much of a of a threat do you think this plays against the U.S. and what we've been covering a lot, the ongoing cyber war we have?
	Well, let me tell you something.
	When we we're talking about uh what happened what transpired yesterday uh yesterday, the uh the indictments uh against the folks that uh orchestrated the Yahoo hack.
	This is stealing of data.
	That is comparatively minor compared to the damage that hackers could do to the infrastructure of a country.
	I mean, literally, you could in incapacitate a country by uh by hacking the right systems, and that's where the real danger is.
	This is really the the word war is certainly very appropriate in in uh in describing what's going on.
	Very, very dangerous.
	And I think the country uh the the population really doesn't quite is not quite aware of that.
	All right, so then the next logical question, why do you think it is that our government isn't focusing in more on the threat of cyber warfare and and just what exactly can be done about it?
	At some point it's our fault.
	Do you have an opinion on that as it relates to our government?
	And by the way, I also love to get your opinion on on that with regards to the Russian government and why they seem more advanced in cyber warfare maybe than we are.
	I don't think they're any more advanced.
	Uh you know, again, this the uh I don't know if if there's any evidence that they're more advanced.
	Uh we uh just complain a lot more when we are hacked and they don't.
	Um but with regard to not taking it as seriously as we should, and my answer again is politics.
	This is the you know it's right in the Bible.
	Uh a house divided against itself cannot stand.
	And what we're doing right now, we're playing political football with national security, and it's really um it's it's really uh disconcerting and and and it's it bothers me a whole lot.
	Let me go back to Sarah for just a second here.
	Sarah, in this recent piece last night with John Solomon on circa.com, you talked about this Indiana University professor, a liberal L Gene Camp, big Hillary supporter, donor, raised concerns about a possible connection between President Trump and a Russian bank.
	Explain that.
	Well, yeah, L Gene Camp, I think one of one of the most interesting things that we discovered, and you know, we did reach out to her, we did speak with her, she did respond to us, um, is the fact that she is so partisan, and I think Jack brought up such an an important point.
	Um, you know, this is such a divisive time, and there are so many people within the intelligence community, those that I've spoken with with regard to cyber warfare and and and those issues that are very concerned about the threat that this poses to the stability of a country, to a nation, to the republic.
	And and what is the response, you know, from in an attack such as these.
	I mean, how does the US or how do the Russians respond?
	I mean, how do we respond to each other?
	Is this warfare?
	I mean, these are questions that people at the highest levels are looking at.
	And you know, here we go, L Gene Camp, she says she found these pings, you know.
	Her and her colleagues discovered these pings.
	They were first reported on Reddit.
	So we know they first po posted them on Reddit, then she posted them to her site.
	And uh they went to the FBI and they they asked for an investigation into this because they saw these what they assumed were these nefarious pings between uh Trump and this Russian bank, you know.
	All right, Sarah, those let me interrupt you real quick.
	Hang right there.
	We'll be right back.
	A lot more to get to here on the attacks on the Trump administration, the deep state and their so-called ties to Russia.
	Making America first safe and great again.
	This is the Sean Hannity show.
	Let me start with the President's tweets uh yesterday.
	Um this idea that maybe President Obama ordered an illegal wiretap of his offices.
	If something like that happened, would this be something you would be aware of?
	I would certainly hope so.
	Uh I I can say obviously I'm not I can't speak officially anymore, but uh I will say that for the part of the national security apparatus that I oversaw as DNI, there was no such wiretap activity mounted against uh the president uh the president elect at the time or as a candidate or against his campaign.
	Uh I can't speak for uh other title three authorized uh entities in the government or uh a state or local entity.
	I was just gonna say if the FBI, for instance, d had a FISA court order of some sort for a surveillance, would that be information you would know or not now?
	Yes.
	You would be told this I would know that.
	If there was a FISA court order on something like this.
	Um something like this, absolutely.
	And at this point you can't confirm or deny whether that exists.
	I can deny it.
	There is no FISA court order.
	Not not to my knowledge.
	No.
	Are you saying that every American can be wiretapped against their will without any warrant at any point?
	No, I'm saying they are.
	You're saying every you mean I'm B I have been wiretapped.
	That's right.
	Repeatedly.
	Yes.
	And by wiretapping that means what?
	Recording my phone conversations, taking my emails, my texts.
	Right.
	That's that's correct.
	And also storing it for mining.
	It's all done under Executive Order 1233, Section 23C.
	Well, one two triple three is the one that Obama put in place just two weeks before he left.
	Well, he opened it up to all the other agencies in the intelligence community.
	Originally it was just uh restricted.
	Uh the only ones who had uh access were NSA, CIA, and FBI.
	You're saying that every American listening to this program and every American in this country is being surveilled by our government without any type of warrant.
	Isn't that against unreasonable search and seizure, sir?
	Yeah, it's a violation.
	This is why I left NSA in 2001.
	They're violating the first fourth, depth and sixth amendments of the Constitution, as well as any number of laws.
	And here's something that I don't mean to freak you out with, but I think is true.
	Even our memories are not absolutely private in America.
	Any of us can be compelled in appropriate circumstances to say what we remember, what we saw.
	Even our communications with our spouses, with our clergy members, with our attorneys, are not absolutely private in America.
	In appropriate circumstances, a judge can compel any one of us to testify in court about those very private communications.
	And there are really, really important constraints on law enforcement, as there should be.
	But the general principle is one we've always accepted in this country.
	There is no such thing as absolute privacy in America.
	There is no place in America outside of judicial reach.
	That's the bargain.
	And we made that bargain over two centuries ago to achieve two goals.
	To achieve the very, very important goal of privacy and to achieve the very important goal of security.
	Widespread default encryption changes that bargain.
	In my view, it shatters the bargain.
	All right.
	So there more deep state information as we talk to Bill Benny.
	You know, he is a 32-year NSA vet, and what's amazing about what he says is that everything that you have is being stored.
	Every phone call, every text, every email, all of it.
	Anyway, we'll get to that and then James Comey.
	Well, you know, no absolute privacy, he says.
	Unbelievable.
	Uh we're going to continue our debate, our discussion, our dick deep dive into the deep state with Sarah Carter and Jack uh Barski, who's with us.
	And we're going to even carry this into the next half hour because there's just so much that is breaking and so much that is not being reported.
	And this is the stuff that I think is going to eventually come to fruition.
	That's all straight ahead.
	The Central Intelligence Agency lost control of its entire cyber weapons arsenal.
	What do I mean by cyberweapons?
	Those are weaponized viruses, Trojans, and malware designed to penetrate the smartphones, smart TVs, uh, computer systems of the world, and then control them, disable them, insert information to them, extract information from them.
	Now this is a historic act uh of devastating incompetence to have created such an arsenal and stored it all in one place and not secured it.
	WikiLeaks uh discovered the material as a result of it being passed around a number of different members of the U.S. intelligence community out of control in an unauthorized fashion.
	It is an unusual time uh in the United States to see uh an intelligence agency so uh prominently involved uh in domestic politics as a sort of level of principle that's that's quite problematic.
	CIA developed a giant arsenal, the uh what appears to be the largest arsenal of Trojans and viruses in the world that attacks uh most of the systems that uh journalists, uh people in government, politicians, uh CEOs, and average people use, uh, didn't secure it, lost control of it, and then uh uh appears to have covered up that fact.
	So if the CIA, which is certainly is highly motivated to try and keep control of its cyber weapons arsenal, if it can't even control its entire cyberweapons arsenal, uh because information can uh flow without oversight, then what is the chance that it can control how that arsenal is used?
	It it doesn't it can't.
	There's there's absolutely nothing to stop uh a random CIA officer uh or contractor or liaison uh agent working for the British using that technology against whoever they like for whatever personal reasons they like.
	And we have quite a lot more material that talks about these um attempts to throw off uh attribution to discover who is really uh behind a particular cyber attack.
	Already an antivirus expert has come forward to say that a uh sophisticated malware that he had attributed to a state, either Iran, uh China uh or Russia, uh now he believes actually is from the Central Intelligence Agency because the uh type of attack system it uses uh corresponds directly to a description that we published of that attack system,
	and it's rare enough that it seems unlikely it would be independently discovered discovered.
	Unless, of course, that China has already gotten hold of these parts of the CIA arsenal and that China uh is using them to pretend to be the CIA.
	So the CIA was so careless to produce this material, this enormous cyber weapons um arsenal and lose control of it at least once and then it has spread.
	So does the cyber various cyber mafia already have it?
	Do foreign intelligence agencies already have it?
	Well, I think that's a serious question.
	They weren't securing it very well.
	So it's quite possible that numerous people could have it.
	Also it has spread uh or appears to have spread uh within the number of individuals within the US intelligence community.
	There were there are numerous press reports in the New York Times and Washington Post, some in Politico, that people close to Donald President uh Donald Trump had been monitored in a counterintelligence activity, possibly by some parts of the US government.
	Possibly FBI.
	FBI had been mentioned, NSA had been mentioned.
	On the other hand, it seems that many of the leaks to the media are coming from the Central Intelligence Agency based upon how they're described.
	There are a number of collaborations that are evidenced by the material that we publish between the FBI and CIA, National Security Agency and CIA.
	So I think there's a real question whether that technology is being used or has been used in these types of investigations.
	800-941-SHAWN.
	You want to be a part of the program as we continue with Jack Barsky, former KGB spy.
	His memoir, Deep Undercover, releasing March 21st.
	And Sarah Carter is back with us, senior national correspondent circa.com.
	All right, sir l Sarah, let's reiterate this news from today, and we'll have more on this on Hannity tonight, so that everybody understands that this entire Russian uh can Trump campaign collusion is just not true.
	Yeah, uh Sean, uh what's uh it's it's quite shocking, and it's definitely a very significant development.
	What we have found is that officials with Athletic Alpha Bank, that is the Russian bank that apparently had the communications with the Trump server.
	Officials with Alpha Bank have told John Solomon and I that they have been cyber attacked.
	That was a cyber attack last year on their server that may these were malicious attacks.
	They were designed to create a false impression that Alpha Bank has a secretive relationship with Trump.
	Now, they've gone so far that they have asked the U.S. Justice Department to help track down the hackers that they believe are in the United States.
	And the only reason they were able to prove this was because the hacks started up again in March.
	So they had the same significant hacking in March, and they were able to see that, and they were able to save those that those data sheets, those spreadsheets, and now they've brought them to the U.S. Justice Department and they want them investigated.
	They have said to us that they have no uh communication with the Trump server, that this is malicious attacks, these are cyber attacks, and they've had at least at least three significant ones that show an unidentified third party um and and suspicious activity involved in their computer servers.
	This is such an unbelievable story to me.
	I mean, and it gets deeper and deeper.
	Now when we add the the WikiLeaks information that we've gotten, and we now know our government has the ability to use malware and put the fingerprints on any country they want and make it appear as if those countries attacked us.
	Now I'm not saying they did this, but do you think the likelihood is there that they did?
	I mean, we don't know, do we?
	It has to be investigated.
	And obviously, I mean, when you have a Russian bank coming to the United States Justice Department and saying investigate this, well, they're open to all kinds of scrutiny when they do that, right?
	I mean, they're coming to the United States.
	And uh so they say their evidence is strong.
	And what they said is that they believe uh these unknown individuals are you it are using some kind of US based server, and uh that they're behind this attack and it's triggering these verification signals that makes it look like Alpha Bank is connecting to the Trump organization.
	Um so this is I mean, this is unheard of.
	I can't think of a time.
	It imagine if, you know, Bank of America was going to Moscow and asking, you know, uh their judicial uh offices to investigate, you know, some of the attacking.
	I mean, this is this is this is very, very significant.
	And I think it shows if if what they're saying is true, if what they're saying is true, that somebody or some group or some entity was trying to fabricate, fabricate data to show collusion between Trump and this Russian bank, and that is something that definitely needs to be investigated.
	Very, very I mean, I watch Homeland.
	This is like beyond any episode of Homeland at this point, if all that turns out to be true.
	Jack Barski, let me let me go to you and get your thoughts and you weigh in on this from your perspective as a former KGB sp uh spy.
	Uh yes, sir.
	The the when uh when it was stated that it has to be investigated, number one, who is gonna do the investigations?
	Number two, uh, when it comes to intelligence, uh there are very often multiple layers of deception, and that's why you we never know what we don't know, and we never know what we do know.
	Ultimate knowledge uh resides maybe in the heads of two or three people.
	And and so this is why I'm saying that you know, this this uh this this playing political football with national intelligence is extremely dangerous.
	And and somehow, I mean I don't know what the the two parties ought to uh get together and and and declare the real enemy, the real enemy, and not the Democrats or the Republicans, depending upon whose side of the aisle you're on.
	Well, I agree, and it certainly does create diplomatic issues if one government is using or creating a false perception that the ever other government is hacking into an election and vice versa.
	I mean, you know, I I was really against what President Obama did, Sarah, when when he went ahead and he tried to unseat the Prime Minister of Israel, our closest ally.
	I mean, you you weren't the only one.
	I mean, uh, there was a lot of there was a lot of concern coming out of Israel.
	I I talked to the ambassador of Israel, and uh I know that there was a lot of concern on his part, you know, for U.S. involvement in in foreign affairs and particularly with Israel, which was a longtime ally.
	I mean, look, I think Jack brought up such an important point.
	I mean, we have such vast knowledge and technology and it's growing exponentially, and the American public and people all over the world don't know how far the reach is.
	What are we being monitored for?
	Could someone dip into you know the raw data and see what we've been talking about?
	How is the intelligence community being used by political parties?
	And I think that's something that really needs to be addressed.
	And unfortunately, I think Jack's right.
	How are we gonna find the truth out?
	I mean, the the these capabilities allow people to mask themselves, hide behind these cloaks, and it is very cloak and dagger, and you're right, it is like an episode of homeland.
	I mean, we just don't know, but we know one thing.
	We know we've got to keep digging at the truth.
	We know we've got to keep exposing it because eventually this uh the mud the muddy waters, I think will get cleared, Sean, and I think the truth will rise to the surface in one form or another, because there are people out there that know the truth.
	And there are people out there that I believe are still good and still willing to take those risks to protect our country and protect our citizens from this type of abuse.
	I agree.
	I agree with w with with this statement all uh completely.
	I've had quite a few, not surprisingly a few dealings with the FBI.
	And to my knowledge and my experience is the FBI is an organization that plays by the book.
	They quite often complain about the book, but they still follow the rules.
	So and and I bet you that that that that applies to a lot of folks in other intelligence agencies as well.
	All right, guys, stay right there.
	We've got to take a quick break.
	We'll come back, we'll wrap this up.
	News roundup and information overload.
	Rick Ungar, Jonathan Gillum, that's always entertaining and fun coming up at the top of the next hour.
	Up next, our final roundup and information overload hour.
	Let me give you the bad, the sad news.
	Moments ago, I learned that a district judge in Hawaii, part of the much overturned Ninth Circuit Court.
	And I have to be nice, otherwise I'll get criticized for speaking poorly about our courts.
	A judge has just blocked our executive order on travel and refugees coming into our country from certain countries.
	The order he blocked was a watered down version of the first order that was also blocked by another judge.
	And should have never been blocked to start with.
	This new order was tailored to the dictates of the Ninth Circuit's, in my opinion, flawed ruling.
	This is, in the opinion of many, an unprecedented judicial overreach.
	If he thinks there's danger out there, he or she, whoever is president, can say, I'm sorry, folks.
	Not now.
	Please.
	We got enough problems.
	We're talking about the safety of our nation, the safety and security of our people.
	At the very core of Obamacare was a fatal flaw.
	The government forcing people to buy a government approved product.
	There are very few people.
	Very few people.
	And by the way, watch what happens.
	Now you just booed Obamacare.
	They will say Trump got booed when he mentioned.
	They're bad people, folks.
	They're bad people.
	Tonight I'll go home, I'll turn on, I'll say, listen, I'll turn on that television.
	My wife will say, darling, it's too bad you got booed.
	I said, I didn't get booed.
	This was a love.
	I said, no, no, they were booing Obamacare.
	Watch.
	A couple of them will actually do it almost guaranteed.
	But when we call them out, it makes it harder for them to do it.
	So we'll it's the fake, fake media.
	We want Americans to be able to purchase the health insurance plans they want, not the plans forced on them by our government.
	The House has put forward a plan to repeal and replace Obamacare based on the principles I outlined in my joint address.
	But let me tell you, we're gonna arbitrate, we're gonna all get together, we're gonna get something done.
	Remember this.
	If we didn't do it the way we're doing it, we need 60 votes.
	So we'd have to get the Democrats involved.
	They won't vote no matter what we do, they're not gonna vote.
	So we're doing it a different way, a complex way, it's fine.
	The end result is when you have phase one, phase two, phase three, it's gonna be great.
	You know, this president probably more than any other does, I think, his best work when he just bypasses the media.
	I think when he as he said in his interview to Tucker Carlson last night, he can reach eighty, ninety, hundred million people just through social media and then going directly to the people and advancing his agenda because the media is out to destroy him.
	Why not?
	Why should he ever talk to these people again?
	He doesn't need them.
	And by the way, they they hate him because of that.
	Now he's talking about repealing and replacing Obamacare.
	We've been talking at length about that, but this court decision in Hawaii, you know what's fascinating about this is they try to use the establishment cause clause of this.
	Um it's almost as if that they themselves are conferring on people that are not Americans constitutional rights.
	And then, of course, if you want to look at the legal authority, you know, no analysis of the presidential authority under the Constitution or statutorial uh statutes uh and the authority given by individual statutes over immigration and national security matters.
	If you look at eight U.S. code, 1182, eight U.S. code, 1187.
	Well, those statutes give the president authority over immigration determinations.
	If you look at eight U.S. C. 1157, it gives the president broad authority over the refugee program.
	There's no mention or analysis of the executive order section six, the refugee pause, beyond mere description of it in the introduction section of the opinion part of it.
	This is wrong on so many different levels.
	Anyway, news roundup information overload.
	Rick Unger is a senior political contributor at Forbes and co-host of the Steel and Unger show at Sirius XM, Jonathan Gillam is a host of the experts, Navy SEAL, former FBI agent, former Air Marshal.
	What do you do?
	What are you doing?
	Well why what are you starting with?
	We're playing with each other.
	That's what we do.
	I know.
	Even you've got to Unger, I know you by the way, had you like Matt House.
	If my mother wanted to call me Unger, she would have named me Unger Unger.
	Okay.
	Unger.
	The name of your show is Steel and Unger.
	Yes.
	Typical Democrat.
	I don't call you Hannity.
	You can call me shock.
	You can call me whatever you want.
	I'll call you some other things when I'm not here.
	No, you call me things to my face when you are here.
	So let's stop.
	Let's stop the lies.
	You got to isn't he probably the greatest communicator directly to the American people.
	It just I can't disagree with that.
	And you asked me about Rachel?
	What a bunch of bull that was.
	I got to tell you, I finished my show.
	I finished at nine o'clock.
	And I, you know, normally I'll veg out for a couple of hours, right?
	I'm tired.
	But I went right to my TV set, and I'm watching the first 20 minutes and the build-up is huge.
	I'm going, geez, this is going to be something.
	Goes to break, comes back, and she has two pages, top pages of it, 1040 that tells me he paid more taxes than any president I can remember.
	Exactly.
	And I'm like, what in the world was this?
	$38 million, a higher effect even more than you might pay.
	Tell me about it.
	A f higher effective tax rate than her parent company, a higher effective tax rate than the Obamas than Bernie Sanders, and he didn't even deduct his used underwear like the Clintons.
	Let me tell you, being the poorest person in this room.
	We didn't see the schedules.
	He might have deducted his used underwear.
	I doubt it.
	He might have.
	I doubt it.
	Being the poorest person in this room, I'll tell you that the majority of people uh at my pay grade don't care.
	They don't care about this nonsense.
	And when as soon as she said uh that this is uh covered by the first amendment, so there's nothing illegal here.
	I just I just stopped right there because I knew what they were doing first and foremost was made up or they had gotten this stuff nefariously because what you were just talking about with health care and with all these other things, these pe or not with health care with the immigration issue.
	These judges, these media people, they just make stuff up.
	And people made anything up on the other.
	Listen, they doesn't know that.
	She doesn't know she doesn't know and has never dealt with First Amendment issues when it comes to the income tax laws.
	I have dealt with that when I was in the FBI.
	They are so strict.
	And it's against the law to take somebody's taxes and hand that out.
	Oh, uh.
	And why in the middle of the city?
	Well, that's a felony, just like the intelligence was.
	Yeah, absolutely committed a felony.
	By the way, do any of us believe it showed up in a mailbox.
	No, he sent it.
	That guy.
	He sent it.
	Here we go.
	It's stamped client copy.
	Okay, but that doesn't mean personally, but somebody acting under his direction.
	And do you have any evidence of that?
	No, but it was really smart.
	It was really smart.
	And and MSNC too.
	Jonathan, another conspiracy theory.
	It was really smart.
	We've now debunked the Russian conspiracy.
	Can you cite Oh no, we haven't.
	Oh, yes, we have.
	Oh, yes, we have.
	It's done.
	Listen, I know more than you.
	Trust me.
	You know, everybody who I've talked to today from the conservative side says, oh no, I know more than you know.
	Everybody has a different thing.
	Okay, that's that's that's a standard though.
	And I think you know my sources are pretty credible.
	Yeah, your sources are good.
	And my and it goes pretty deep, doesn't it?
	Well, here's my advice to you, Unger.
	I'm gonna help you in your career.
	Stay away from the conspiracy Russia thing.
	Actually, I've been really careful about it.
	You know why?
	Because I don't know anything.
	You're the only one that's admitting it.
	Yeah, I don't.
	Until we get it from the FBI, until we start to hear stuff next week.
	And I'll tell you what's really got me curious.
	If You saw uh Senator uh California uh Diane Feinstein coming out of that meeting yesterday with the FBI director.
	Right.
	She looked like she had just kicked in the head, man.
	No.
	And she couldn't talk about it.
	And the less a senator has to say after a meeting like that, the more serious it is.
	Now the question is Is it serious in that there's nothing, or is it serious that there's something?
	There's something.
	There's something.
	But there's some fascinating theories out there that don't make the president the bad guy.
	It could make somebody else.
	Well, this is what this is what John Solomon and Sarah Carter are reporting, which is why I spent all this time on the air today with Sarah Carter.
	Listen, here I there's so many different theories when it comes to this, and and I'm eager to see the reality because even what the director of the FBI or any of these people in the know are saying, it doesn't account for um what uh Tony Schaefer said on your show.
	It doesn't account for what I wrote about in the Daily Caller, which was that I I'm almost positive that people from the prior administration, just people in government in general, have sources that uh belong to the or used to work for the Russian government and are able to do these things.
	Uh I still think that the DNC hacked themselves.
	And and and on an uh to go out to see that.
	Well, listen, to go out and make themselves look like the victim card because they knew that Podesta's email was going to be hacked.
	I think there's something to this that it is not just using our intel forces to go and spy on the president.
	I think that there's other groups and nefarious people in place, sources in play, and I think this is very deep.
	All right, you guys, I don't know.
	I I I actually think that Sarah Carter and John Solomon are gonna be the ones that have nailed this at the end of the day.
	And and because Sarah and John saying, Well, what just did a whole hour on it if you'd listen to the show instead of sitting there yakking away with Linda?
	Well, she was talking about the you know the the Russian bank saying.
	But that's the point, but that there were two warrants given and that there was ancillary views into the server of Donald Trump, and they found nothing.
	And that now we're beginning to put together pieces that show that it's politically motivated.
	Sure it is.
	Yeah, it all right.
	Stay right there.
	We'll take a and by the way, the FBI's found nothing.
	That's what she's what that's what they're saying.
	I don't know.
	We'll see.
	If you're ready to get out of the media spin room, you've come to the right place.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	All right, as we continue more news roundup information overload, Brick Ungar, Jonathan Gillam.
	Then we're gonna play a significant portion of Donald Trump's speech for last night because you know what?
	It's just better you hear it from him than all the pundits and analysts and the the Trump hating media, the destroy Trump alt-left propaganda media.
	All in other words, all of Rick Ungar's friends.
	But I have friends who are alt-right, too.
	What is alt-right mean?
	I don't know.
	What is alt-left mean?
	It means you.
	People like you.
	It means all right must be people.
	I mean, you have to admit the media is out to destroy him over every little thing.
	Well, first of all, you have to separate the media.
	The liberal media, yeah, they don't like this guy.
	There's no question about it.
	The uh conservative media, on the other hand, or the alt-right media, they certainly aren't out to destroy him.
	Well, I think he has been separated.
	It's it's just a fact of life.
	Okay, so there is no such thing really anymore.
	You don't think NBC, certainly, or ABC certainly, or CB You know, we saw the collusion.
	None look, I'll go let me give you a backup.
	They never vetted Obama.
	They never told us what a failure Obama was.
	They never gave us an accurate accounting of his record.
	They colluded with Hillary Clinton, and now they're trying to destroy Trump.
	What else do you need to know?
	Who's the they?
	Everybody in the mainstream alt-left propaganda destroy Trump media.
	I just never really bought that.
	There are certainly some.
	I don't.
	There's certainly some.
	The media is driven by the same thing, all business in America is driven.
	The media is not blue for the most part.
	The media is not red, the media is green.
	They are there to make money.
	You just nailed it, and that's why I think that President Trump needs to take this press briefing room, close it down, turn it into whatever he wants, and push the press outside the fence where every other American is at.
	If they are a business, uh they need to be outside the the The thing is with media now and these journalists that are in the White House, they are looking for a scoop so they can make green.
	You just said they have no more place in the White House than I do.
	Well, here's where that here's where that changes.
	As you go down the green order, you go to websites that really aren't making a lot of money, but you may think they do good research on either side.
	That the less green you get, the more you know, blue or red it seems to get.
	What we're lacking is truly objective journalism.
	We don't have enough of it.
	And I'm not subtracting anybody out of that equation.
	We need more.
	There are some places that that do it.
	Who?
	George Stephanopoulos, Rachel Maddow.
	It's it's ProPublica.
	It's it's pro-Republica.
	Of course I've heard of them.
	They have so far radical left.
	They're the ones saying Reagan and Bush, well, maybe that's Pacifica Radio, but you know, but listen, then you're gonna tell me MPR is fair next.
	No.
	No.
	You can tell them I'm fair.
	Who?
	I'm fair.
	You're you're oh, you're so by listen, as a human being.
	Go ahead, Jim.
	You're an effective thinker.
	I will give you that.
	And the fact is he is an effective thinker, and but he's a pain in the ass because he's so likable.
	And he admits though.
	He admits when he doesn't when he doesn't know something.
	You know what's possible?
	I want to hate him sometimes, and I just kill it.
	You're right.
	And it makes it makes it harder for me.
	But oh, geez.
	You just ruined my career now.
	That said, it's over.
	I've been trying forever.
	But you see, you're not on opposite me, so I don't go too hard on you.
	Oh, okay.
	But if you were really going opposite me, then I would forget it.
	My career would be in a different time period.
	Would be over by over there.
	Oh yeah, you be toast.
	You know, one thing though one thing about this whole thing with the media and all these people is that clearly over the last year, all these people identified themselves.
	And I don't think that uh that the president should even entertain any of this stuff.
	A good example of this is the guy who came out with these papers, it was on Rachel Maddow's show.
	He said the president uh leaked this, and and then two words later he said, may have leaked this.
	They constantly do that.
	He did this, may have done this.
	He said this, may have said this.
	You have to understand.
	You know what?
	That is a really serious allegation.
	And to be honest, I doubt it.
	I really look, somebody got a hold of him someplace somewhere.
	Now, maybe it came from the IRS.
	Maybe they purposely put client copy on top of it.
	Maybe.
	Maybe it came from uh uh an accountant that he worked with some year that happens to be a hardcore leftist like you.
	But see, here's here's the so hardcore.
	Here's the problem though.
	Here's where this president gets himself in trouble.
	His his response to that was some journalist, no-name journalist that no one's ever heard of.
	He knows the journalists, they've known each other for 20 years.
	Why say that be it?
	It's not required.
	It's really entertaining.
	And he does it all the time.
	It's very entertaining.
	So when Obama BS's, it's it's death.
	But when Trump meets the words.
	Yeah, agreed.
	All right, we got to take a break.
	Uh love you both.
	I'm not gonna touch that.
	All right, we're gonna go do Trump in his own words from last night's speech, which I think was one of the most effective since he's been president.
	That's straight ahead.
	Holding them accountable.
	Sean gets the answers, no one else does.
	America deserves to know the truth about Congress.
	You know, I decided to play some of Trump in his own words from last night.
	Why?
	Because he's the exact same person he was on the campaign trail.
	He speaks best for himself.
	Listen in.
	So let's begin tonight by thanking all of the incredible men and women of the United States military and all of our wonderful veterans, the veterans.
	Amazing.
	There's no place I'd rather be than with all of you here tonight with the wonderful, hardworking citizens of our country.
	I would much rather spend time with you than any of the pundits, consultants, or special interests, certainly or reporters from Washington, DC.
	It's patriotic Americans like you who make this country run and run well.
	You pay your taxes, follow our laws, support your communities, raise your children, love your country, and send your bravest to fight in our wars.
	All you want is a government that shows you the same loyalty in return.
	It's time that Washington heard your voice, and believe me, on November 8th, they heard your voice.
	The forgotten men and women of our country will never be forgotten again.
	Believe me.
	Thank you.
	We are going to reduce your taxes.
	Big league.
	Big.
	Big, and I want to start that process so quickly.
	Got to get the health care done.
	We got to start the tax reductions.
	We are going to enforce our trade rules and bring back our jobs, which are scattered all over the world.
	They're coming back to our country.
	We're going to support the amazing, absolutely amazing men and women of law enforcement.
	Protect your freedoms and defend the second amendment.
	And we are going to restore respect for our country and for its great and very beautiful flag.
	It's been a little over 50 days since my inauguration.
	And we've been putting our America first agenda very much into action.
	You see what's happening.
	We're keeping our promises.
	In fact, they have signs.
	He's kept his promise.
	They're all over the place.
	I have.
	I think maybe more than anybody's done in this office in 50 days, that I can tell you.
	And we have just gotten started.
	Wait till you see what's coming, folks.
	We've appointed a Supreme Court Justice to replace the late great Antonin Scalia.
	His name is Judge Neil Gorsuch.
	He will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.
	We are proposing a budget that will shrink the bloated federal bureaucracy, and I mean bloated.
	While protecting our national security, you see what we're doing with our military.
	Bigger, better, stronger than ever before.
	You see what's happening.
	And you're already seeing the results.
	Our budget calls for one of the single largest increases in defense spending history in this country.
	We believe, especially the people in Tennessee, I know you people so well, that we believe in the United States.
	In peace through strength.
	That's what we're going to have.
	And we are taking steps to make sure that our allies pay their fair share.
	They have to pass.
	Thank you.
	We've begun a dramatic effort to eliminate job-killing federal regulations like nobody has ever seen before.
	Slash.
	Slash.
	We're going to protect the environment.
	We're going to protect people's safeties.
	But let me tell you, the regulation business has become a terrible business, and we're going to bring it down to where it should be.
	And Okay, let's go.
	One person.
	And they'll be the story tomorrow.
	Did you hear there was a protest?
	We're going to put our miners back to work.
	We're going to put our auto industry back to work.
	Already because of this new business climate, we are creating jobs that are starting to pour back into our country like we haven't seen in many, many decades.
	In the first two job reports since I took the oath of office, we've already added nearly half a million new jobs.
	And believe me, it's just beginning.
	I've already authorized the construction of the long-stalled and delayed Keystone and Dakota access pipelines.
	A lot of jobs.
	I've also directed that new pipelines must be constructed with American steel.
	crowd cheers
	They want to build them here, they use our steel.
	We believe in two simple rules.
	Buy American and hire American.
	On trade, I've kept my promise to the American people and withdrawn from the Trans Pacific Partnership disaster.
	Tennessee has lost one-third of its manufacturing jobs since the institution of NAFTA, one of the worst trade deals ever in history.
	Our nation has lost over 60,000 factories since China joined the World Trade Organization.
	60,000.
	Think of that.
	More than that.
	From now on, we are going to defend the American worker and our great American companies.
	And if America does what it says, and if your president does what I've been telling you, there is nobody anywhere in the world that can even come close to us, folks.
	Not even close.
	If a company wants to leave America, fire their workers, and then ship their new products back into our country, there will be consequences.
	That's what we have borders for.
	And by the way, aren't our borders getting extremely strong?
	Very strong.
	Don't even think about it.
	We will build the wall.
	Don't even think about it.
	In fact, as you probably read, we went out to bid.
	We had hundreds of bidders.
	Everybody wants to build our wall.
	Usually that means we're going to get a good price.
	We're going to get a good price, Polypa.
	We're going to build the wall.
	Some of the fake news said, I don't think Donald Trump wants to build the wall.
	Can you imagine if I said we're not going to build a wall?
	Fake news.
	Fake fake news.
	Fake news, folks.
	A lot of fake.
	No, the wall is way ahead of schedule in terms of where we are.
	It's under design, and you're going to see some very good things happening.
	But let me give you the bad news.
	We don't like bad news, right?
	I don't want to hear.
	And I'll turn it into good.
	But let me give you the bad, the sad News.
	Moments ago, I learned that a district judge in Hawaii.
	Part of the much overturned Ninth Circuit Court.
	And I have to be nice, otherwise, I'll get criticized for speaking poorly about our courts.
	I'll be criticized by these people among the most dishonest people in the world.
	I will be criticized.
	I'll be criticized by them for speaking harshly about our courts.
	I would never want to do that.
	A judge has just blocked our executive order on travel and refugees coming into our country from certain countries.
	The order he blocked was a watered down version of the first order.
	That was also blocked by another judge and should have never been blocked to start with.
	This new order was tailored to the dictates of the Ninth Circuits, in my opinion, flawed ruling.
	This is, in the opinion of many, an unprecedented judicial overreach.
	The law and the Constitution give the president the power to suspend immigration when he deems, or she, or she, Fortunately, it will not be Hillary she.
	when he or she deems it to be in the national interest of our country.
	So we have a lot of lawyers here.
	We also have a lot of smart people here.
	Let me read to you directly from the federal statute.
	212F of the immigration and And you know what I'm talking about, right?
	Can I read this to you?
	Listen to this.
	Now, we're all smart people, we're all good students, we're all everything.
	Some are bad students, but even if you're a bad student, this is a real easy one, let me tell you.
	Ready?
	So here's the statute, which they don't even want to quote when they overrule it.
	And it was put here for the security of our country.
	And this goes beyond me because there'll be other presidents.
	And we need this, and sometimes we need it very badly for security, security of our country.
	It says, now listen to easy how easy this is.
	Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or any class of aliens would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may, by proclamation, and for such period as he, you see, it wasn't politically correct, because I should have said he or she, you know, today they'd say that.
	But that's over.
	Actually, that's the only mistake they made.
	As he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
	In other words, if he thinks there's danger out there, he or she, whoever is president, can say, I'm sorry, folks, not now, please.
	We got enough problems.
	We're talking about the safety of our nation, the safety and security of our people.
	Now, I know you people aren't skeptical people, because nobody would be that way in Tennessee.
	Not Tennessee.
	You don't think this was done by a judge for political reasons, do you?
	No.
	This ruling makes us look weak.
	Which by the way, we no longer are, believe me.
	Just look at our borders.
	We're gonna fight this terrible ruling.
	We're going to take our case as far as it needs to go, including all the way up to the Supreme Court.
	We're going to win.
	We're going to keep our citizens safe.
	And regardless, we're going to keep our citizens safe.
	Believe me.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markowitz.
	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 down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	When I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Listen to Fiasco Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

▲