President Trump made headlines this morning with the announcement that he will end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that allows special considerations for immigrants living in this country who arrived before their 16th birthday. President Trump has asked Congress to "do their job" and replace this executive order with clear legislative action that is tied to immigration reform. Sean breaks down what this means for immigration reform efforts. The Sean Hannity Show is live weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
All right, 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 GoAnywhere 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 GoAnywhere pillows for 40% off.
And that means once those pillows arrive, you start getting the kind of peaceful, 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.
Hope you had a great Labor Day weekend.
Write down our toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of this extravaganza because we've got way too many topics to get to and way too little time.
The revelation when I was away, James Comey, before he ever interviewed the key witnesses in Hillary Clinton's email case, and Hillary herself had already started writing her exoneration.
Wow, this is beyond unethical and irresponsible.
And it is frankly now a classic case where now the Attorney General needs to reopen this case so that we don't have a dual system of justice.
It's what I keep saying.
You can't have a system of justice where you don't have equal justice under the law and one system for the Clintons and one system for the rest of us.
You can't have it.
We'll get to that today.
You've got, we're going to get into DACA in great detail here in a minute because the media is so wrong on their coverage of this, like everything else.
We've got now North Korea moving possible intercontinental ballistic missiles, more saber rattling, and of course, the latest that we had, I forget the day now, but it's almost like once every three or four days, where latest events are now showing that they have no problem firing their missiles over Japanese islands.
We have now shown them that we have the capacity to shoot these things down.
And there really is only going to be one option, and that is we've got to start taking out their missiles either on the launch pad or as soon as they go up in the air, because there's no telling unless you have inspections whether or not they have the capacity to launch a nuclear weapon against another country.
And this now becomes a clear and present danger.
And this is the worst case scenario that all of us mourned about while Bill Clinton was out there trying to bribe them into being good people.
And it didn't happen, just like Obama's been bribing the Iranians into trying to be good people.
You cannot deal with evil by bribing them and them saying, oh, yeah, give us the money.
We'll stop our nuclear program.
Well, they never stopped.
They got everything they wanted and they got the money from us to help build this thing.
It's really ridiculous.
So we'll get to all of that today.
Republicans now back in session.
And I'm just going to be very blunt.
This month, September, next month, October, and November and two weeks into December, assuming they don't want to stay late, although they probably should.
I can tell you right now, we're going to see a lot of last-minute happenings as usual.
They better get their act together here.
Their agenda items are simple.
And I'll start with this today before I get to DACA, is Republicans better think about the men and women that put them there.
They better start focusing in on the fact that their approval rating is in the sewer.
Mitch McConnell's now down to 18%.
We've had Congress in general down in the teens.
And the presidents, you know, with his handling of Hurricane Harvey, where the media is their only criticism was Melania's shoes, which he didn't wear to Texas.
He just boarded Air Marine One to take that helicopter to Air Force One.
And that's how, you know, that Trump scored a victory because that's all they really could criticize.
So if Republicans can do the following, I think they might be able to salvage this last year.
And by the way, I'm talking about salvaging a C plus, or maybe maximum.
I'm not talking about an A here.
That opportunity has slipped through their fingers.
But if they want to keep their jobs and they want to instill confidence and they want to show the American people that their word means something, then the following things need to be done before Christmas of this year.
And this is their day back.
And they don't have a lot of scheduled workdays, believe it or not, between now and Christmas.
I've got to believe that that's going to change because they love their vacations, as we all know.
But if they can think about the forgotten men and women, those in poverty on food stamps, out of the labor force, that have been a victim of the worst recovery in 40 years and the lowest home ownership rate in 51 years, that's who they ought to be thinking about.
So if they offer the middle class tax cuts, that will be a great first step because middle class Americans that work hard, play by the rules, pay their taxes, obey the laws, are literally suffocating under burdensome taxation and regulation of their government, both state, local, and the federal government.
Now, the president is undoing a lot of the Obama-era regulations on his own, which is extraordinarily helpful.
If they can give a corporate tax rate.
Now, Hannity, why do we give a corporate tax rate?
Well, first of all, it's a myth that corporations really pay taxes.
You know that.
Corporations don't really pay.
Corporations just increase the price of whatever good or service they're providing and pass the tax increases on to you.
So in essence, you pay for the corporate taxes.
But when the regulatory environment and the tax environment, and we're like one of the highest tax countries in the industrialized world, when you lower those taxes, you're incentivizing corporations to build and invest in this country.
Now, why is that a good thing?
Because if corporations now are incentivized to bring their money here and build their factories here and their manufacturing centers here, well, that means people in Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, North Carolina, Missouri, Missouri, and Florida.
And by the way, we're watching Irma closely.
All of these, all of that investment results in opportunity for the forgotten men and women in poverty on food stamps and out of work to get jobs.
And the same argument goes for allowing multinational corporations.
You know, it's estimate, the estimates are trillions and trillions of dollars.
They are parked overseas in tax haven countries and being taxed and being tax-free.
Why should they bring that money to America when the federal government's going to take 40%?
We're saying bring it back at a low rate, maybe 7%, 10%.
Bring it back to America.
There's no safer place to invest than America.
That too would incentivize because corporations are in business to make money.
They're not looking for a 2% return on their money.
They want to invest in factories and manufacturing centers, and they want to produce their goods and services, but they don't want to get robbed.
And if you have excessive regulations and excessive taxation, it kills the prospects of them being willing to do that.
So that's got to get done.
All right.
Then I would go from, you can simplify the code from seven brackets to three.
You can get rid of double taxation, which is the death tax.
You pay taxes your whole life on the money you earn, only to have the government come in when you die and take another 40%.
And if you live in New York State, another 10% in the state.
So your money that's been taxed all your life ends up being taxed again.
And it's not the government's money.
They don't have a right to confiscate it.
And that's what they're doing.
So the next thing I would move is Congress has got to do their part to incentivize, assist, and help those companies in the energy sector that we can become energy independent.
Now, if we do this one thing, number one, it helps our national security.
How does it help our national security?
Because we're not dependent on foreign countries that hate us for the lifeblood of America's economy.
Now, the great thing about the energy sector, and I don't care if it's fracking natural gas, I don't care if it's drilling, I don't care what it is, but we've got more natural gas, we've got more oil, we've got more energy resources, clean burning coal than we'd ever need in hundreds of years.
Now, we can simultaneously be looking for new sources of energy.
I'm fine with that.
But in the meantime, let's not import the energy from other countries.
And in the process, we're not dependent on them.
And we could even be selling to our allies and friends in Western Europe the energy that they need and maybe even be helping China out.
And maybe that betters our relationship with China.
And by the way, Putin's not going to be too happy with it because Putin makes the whole Russian economy is dependent on energy.
And if he ever gets mad and turns the spigot off, God help Western Europe.
So it's great for national security.
And the better part is in the energy sector, you're talking about high-paying career jobs for Americans that desperately need them.
And there'll be training associated with it.
And you're talking about, and we did this when we did our whole partnering with all these energy companies.
We were getting people paid $100,000 a year and just starting.
People that were making nothing, they had no job, or people that were making $25,000 a year saw their wages triple.
You know, guys with Paul's Pack, I just bought a new truck.
I just, I finally put a down payment on my house.
I changed my life.
And we could have that and institutionalize that in a way that's going to be amazing for every man, woman, and child.
So they got to get that done.
The other thing is, and we'll get to DACA throughout this hour, but you've got to build the wall.
Why?
Because Republicans have promised it over the years.
Number two, it's good for national security.
And building the wall will create jobs.
Just as a side note, they're not permanent career jobs, but certainly it's going to take a lot of time and a lot of resources are going to be spent in building the wall.
Now, the big question we're dealing with on DACA is really simple because then President Obama, and I'll play it later in the program, he repeatedly said he never had the authority to not enforce the law.
He never, why, 25 times he said it.
We've got a nearly three-minute montage of him saying he doesn't have the authority to do it.
It was in the beginning, by his own admission, unconstitutional.
Every Republican, Paul Ryan, told me in multiple interviews, it's unconstitutional.
The president doesn't have the authority to do it.
Well, now Donald Trump is taking the first step towards restoring constitutionality and the rule of law and not usurping the legislative branch.
Now, if the legislature, if Congress, if they want to pass some type of DACA bill, they can do that.
They're free to do it.
But as of today, it's not the law of the land.
Now, the president, to his credit, gave Congress a six-month window where they can do their job.
Whether or not they do it or not is going to be, at the end of things, up to them.
You know, but the idea that President Obama, by his own admission as a lawyer, said he didn't have the authority to do it and did it anyway, and then used some contorted prosecutorial discretion argument on his behalf when all he was really doing was coming up with a justification to breach his own sworn duty and said he was forced to act because Congress failed to act.
That's not how co-equal branches of government work.
You know, that's not what the rule of law says.
That's not what the Constitution infers on these different branches of government.
But the way laws are written in this country, you don't get to overturn the laws you don't like and the laws you don't respect and laws that you don't think should be on the books.
And because he couldn't get it done legislatively, he just decided to use executive fiat, his own words, in doing something that he knew he didn't have the authority to do.
And I'll explain this in more detail with some appropriate and accompanying audio when we get back.
800-941, Sean, it's great to be back.
I hope you all had a great Labor Day weekend.
Newt Gingrich is coming up here today.
Also, Sarah Carter is going to check in.
James Comey is a disaster.
We'll get to the Comey.
Basically, Comey had exonerated Hillary without doing his job.
Then we'll have more on DACA.
Then we'll have more on Republicans' need to get their job done.
We also not only have the aftermath of Harvey, but now we got Hurricane Irma barreling towards Florida, South Florida, well, as a cat-five hurricane.
This could be a disaster, according to Joe Bistardi.
He'll check in with us at the bottom of the hour.
So for just one corporate job, only four to six people even get an interview for every 250 resumes received.
Now, those are not very good odds if you're counting on getting a job when you're only uploading your resume.
Now, the fact is you need a real person advocating to a real employer that has a real job available.
And that's where our friends at Express Employment Professionals come in.
Now, ExpressPros is your local resource to help you get a brand new job.
And ExpressPros has more than 18,000 jobs available weekly.
That's 18,000 jobs that need to be filled right now.
So find the nearest office at expresspros.com.
And ExpressPros never charges a job seeker to help find employment.
Just go to expresspros.com and find jobs in manufacturing, accounting, customer service, sales, distribution, information technology, you name it.
They've got it.
So just visit the nearest ExpressPros office today.
Speak with the hiring professionals connected to the available jobs in your community.
Just go to expressprose.com today to find the location nearest you.
All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity show 800-941, Sean.
So much happening.
Sarah Carter's going to weigh in on Comey.
I mean, it's, if you think of everything that's corrupt, if you think of everything that's wrong in law enforcement sometimes, and I backtrack here, I'm the biggest supporter of law enforcement there is.
It's sad when politics enters a legal decision such as, look, if any of you mishandle classified information, you'd probably go to jail.
There are people that have gone to jail for this.
There is a guy in jail now, Christian Saussier, because he took six pictures inside a submarine that he worked at, and he's away from his wife, mother, and baby girl.
Six pictures.
That's it that he kept just for himself.
He didn't give it to anybody.
So we know top secret classified special access program information for Hillary.
We know she mishandled it, putting it in the mom and pop shop bathroom closet.
We know that she destroyed such when she bleach bit the hard drive and the computers.
We know that she destroyed such when she broke up Blackberries and iPhones.
And we know she was obstructing justice when, in fact, she didn't hand over Blackberries and iPhones to the FBI that had been requested and subpoenaed, and they didn't have the SIM cards.
All of those represent an obstruction of justice.
So Comey doesn't even bother to interview Hillary or 17 other witnesses, and he's writing her exoneration.
There's something wrong with the rule of law.
And it goes the same with the DACA decision.
You may not like, you may not like that we don't have DACA as the law of the land.
Okay, we don't have DACA.
But even Obama multiple, dozens of times said he didn't have the power and the authority under the Constitution with co-equal branches of government to usurp what the law of the land is.
And then you can go to Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
And then you can go to, well, okay, why isn't Mueller, why did he hire so many people biased against the president?
Why doesn't he go see Julian Assange, who knows who gave him the information when it comes to the DNC and the emails and Podesta?
We have so many things wrong here.
It's almost, it's incomprehensible.
My hands are too big.
Yeah, for like a nine-year-old.
But anyway, Willie, do you see that relief?
The president's getting involved in relief efforts.
And it's heartening to him.
I mean, you can tell that he's done this.
I don't know if he did it with AmeriCares.
I don't know if he's a Red Cross guy.
First thing he did, he actually put in the cab.
Well, that was obviously a photo for the president who did a nice job going down there twice.
Let's give him credit for going down there.
But he was asked to put, I think we have the video somewhere, put the bucket in the back of a pickup.
Mr. President, put this in the pickup.
So where do you put that?
You just write back.
Put it back in the bed.
In the cab.
Wait, why?
Where do you put it?
What does it have to do with anything?
So we'll show the video of exit.
Look at the video.
He hands it into the front window of the guy trying to get it.
Yeah, yeah, I got you.
It's better when you see it.
But you have to just take it because if the president's putting it in the wrong place, you know, here's your bag of cement, you know.
And you're like, okay, well, you got a whole like back there.
The flatbed part, you mean, that's where you're supposed to turn it off.
It's where you're supposed to be if you have like bags and carrying stuff in a truck.
That's why they call it a truck.
It's like you put it right here.
There you go.
Okay.
There you go.
Wait.
That's totally.
Okay.
I'll put that on the gear shift.
Okay, we'll put him there.
I bet they're not breaking this down on Fox and friends.
Wow.
I don't even know what to say to that.
I mean, except that these two, I guess they came off their summer vacation, which seemed never ending.
You're not allowed to play this rich.
So bad.
There's something wrong with this, too.
I don't know what it is.
We need a psychoanalysis of Joe and Mika.
This is not okay.
Yeah, her too.
We can do some psychoanalysis of that.
All right.
800-941, Sean Tollfrey, telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program?
Our friend Joe Bastardi back with us.
And that never is good news because that means something horrific weather-wise is about to happen.
The official meteorologist of the Sean Hannity show, Weatherbell.com, and by far, he was the most accurate about all things Texas and Hurricane Harvey.
And I hate to say this, but you've been writing me notes now for days, and you've really pinned this thing down, and you don't think this is going to be good at all.
No, I don't.
In fact, last week when I left you Monday, I said, you know, you're going to have me on again this week because this is going to be a big, big deal.
And the pattern, you could see this coming.
It's like seeing a freight train coming down the track when this thing came off Africa.
And the overall pattern in the Western Atlantic Ocean is ripe for all this.
It was, you know, it's a break from previous years where storms would come toward the coast and weaken.
We had the exact opposite pattern set up this year.
We saw it in the spring.
We let as many people know as possible.
And so that when this started happening, it wouldn't be a big surprise, but apparently it is a big surprise, especially the people that want to push the issue the other way.
I'm a little bit worried about the, you know, look, even Cuba.
Cuba seems to be in a direct hit path of this in terms of the track, but also Puerto Rico worries me.
The Bahamas and the Dominican Republic.
And tell me what's going to get hit here.
Oh, my goodness.
We've been, you know, I have friends on Puerto Rico, very good friends.
They're on the Puerto Rican wrestling freestyle wrestling team, and they train over here in State College.
And one of my dearest friends, we've been warning him since Tuesday.
So they know what's coming at them.
The Virgin Islands are just, some of the Virgin Islands may get the worst hurricane that they've seen in modern memory.
It may beat Yugo.
That's how bad this is going to be.
However, in Puerto Rico, this is going to go far enough north of Puerto Rico.
So while they have a bad hurricane, they are spared the worst of this hurricane, which is just, you know, I can't even describe how bad a 170, 180 mile-an-hour hurricane is.
So it goes north of Puerto Rico.
It's mainly north of Hispaniola.
It's the Turks and Quecos Island that are going to take a direct hit, and it's going to be absolutely devastating there.
Now, here is where the problems start.
On tonight's forecast from six days out, my company is going to have a zero-mile error because it's been easy to see this.
There'll be no error on 144-hour forecast.
144 hours from now, which is five, six days down the road.
What day are we talking about it hitting the U.S.?
Right.
No, what day specific?
Is it going to hit Monday or Sunday?
Well, it says Sunday, Monday, into Tuesday.
What happens is this.
I want people to understand what's going on.
As the storm comes through the Bahamas, there are all sorts of nuances that start showing up that haven't been there before.
For instance, the influence of land on the storm can actually change the storm's path.
When a storm is accelerating up the eastern seaboard, Sean, they like to stay offshore.
Around Hispaniola, Cuba, the Yucatan, believe it or not, the storm moving westward with those big islands to the south and their mountains, it's been known to pull the storm in.
That's not going to happen with Hispaniola.
It could happen with Cuba.
The way the United States escapes the worst case scenario is that it gets into Cuba for a while, then comes back out.
And as bad as that is, it would not be as bad as it just threading the needle through the Florida Straits and on into what could be very close to Southwest Florida, Fort Myers, Naples.
So we are talking about the.
By the way, he's saying this on purpose because he knows I have a condo down in Naples.
Look, I love that.
Listen, listen, John.
Here's my advice.
I have friends in Southwest Florida, in Naples Florida.
Well, I do too.
And Miami.
Only thing I'm going to say to everybody is I'm in this with you.
I don't care about anybody's property.
I want to make sure everybody stays safe and heeds your warning because if this lands as a cat five, we're talking about serious high winds, damage, flooding, the whole bit.
I'm going to tell you the same thing.
I told you this is a catastrophic storm for Florida.
I'm not sure exact details of where it's going to make landfall.
I keep going back and forth between the southeast coast and the southwest coast, but it's coming.
And once it, wherever it makes landfall, it's going to move north.
The worst case scenario, the absolute worst case scenario, in my opinion, is the landfall near Miami and then north up along, just hugging the coast and just going at one site after another all the way up the coast until you make another one.
That would be the western coast of Florida, the southwestern coast, right?
Well, no, the worst case scenario is the southeast coast and then up.
If it hits on the southwest coast, what happens is it weakens quicker, and I'll tell you why, because it's pulling in air off Florida, and we look at a 1935 hurricane as a benchmark, folks.
It went through there with the strongest hurricane ever to hit the United States.
But by the time it got to Cedar Key, it had weakened to a category one.
So here's the bottom line: that once we get to late Saturday, Sunday, into Monday, the state of Florida, remember what I said about Harvey, would go into Texas weather lore, hurricane lore.
This is going to go into Florida hurricane lore also.
And the exact details of that are very tough.
We're looking at a hundred-mile window in there, back or forth.
And so we will keep you informed on that.
But a catastrophic event, in my opinion, is on the way for that area of the country.
Where it makes exact landfall, I can't tell.
I can't tell exactly yet.
I suspect the southwest coast.
This is the only thing that's going to be a little bit more.
Do you think it's likely, if I can interrupt for one side, do you think it's likely to hit at a cat five stage?
Well, see, there's a problem.
If it threads the needle and comes through the straits without monkeying around with Cuba, then yes.
I think it could even be on top of what 1935 was.
It's going to be a very big hurricane.
So nobody knows what 1935 was.
Nobody was alive.
There's only a few of us that are alive then, and that wasn't me.
I explained a couple of times that is the benchmark hurricane for the United States.
200 mile-an-hour winds in the Florida Keys, the Labor Day hurricane, barometric pressure, 892 millibars.
This could get that bad if it doesn't monkey around with Cuba.
I'm very worried about that.
But the other thing, the hurricane force winds are going to extend out 150 to 200 miles from the center.
Not the 150 mile-an-hour winds, but 75, 80-mile-an-hour winds.
So when you were looking at Andrew, where Hurricane Force winds are only out 50 miles to the north of the center, this is a much bigger beast when it comes at you.
Still have some time to be wrong.
Like I said before, you prepare for the worst, pray for the best, and I hope I'm wrong, but it really looks to me like this is coming on.
All right, pretty scary.
If you're going to advise people now, I know it's six days out.
What is your certainty that you'd think you're right on this?
Well, certainly I think that it's going to hit the bottom.
By the way, we love when you're wrong because then there's less destruction and there's less misery and less people's, you know, life dream destroyed.
So we actually hope you're wrong and then we can make fun of you.
But in a lighthearted way, I just, you know, all your notes this weekend to me is scaring the crap out of me, to be honest.
Well, I think you have to take very, very seriously what the governor is saying.
All right.
There have been times where, you know, there's a tropical storm someplace and they go, state of emergency.
I'm like, what the heck is that?
You know, this is not, this is completely opposite that.
You know, I've had people, people email me, say, well, look at this.
We've got a state of emergency from Governor, you know, Darth Vader or whatever.
I go, this is nothing to monkey around with.
This is absolutely, absolutely has the potential to be as bad a hurricane as we've seen in Florida.
I mean, you know, if you look at those tracks in the 1940s, I mentioned 1935, Florida was ground zero for all these major hurricanes.
People don't understand that.
So this has the potential to be as bad as those big, massive Atlantic hurricanes that we had in the 30s and 40s.
So you folks, you just listen to authorities.
And, you know, in this particular case, I think they are right spot on in making sure people are prepared for the worst.
Well, all right.
Joe Bastardi, official meteorologist of the Sean Hannity show.
I'm assuming you're on every day this week.
And I don't think the country's going to start paying attention to it until towards the end of the week.
But I want people to at least, and I know some people down in Florida are, and this sounds like the potential to be a real, real dangerous disaster.
So we do appreciate you giving us early warning.
We're going to watch it closely and pay very close attention.
I actually, and thanks so much, Joe, appreciate it.
I also talked to people in the White House and I said, somebody that works inside, not the president.
Everybody in the middle, you talk to the president.
He's stupid, right?
He talks to you, a college dropout.
I mean, the fact that the media tries to tie me constantly.
Well, he's a right-winger.
The president's his friend.
I'm like, I like the president's policies.
We'll get into this later in the program today.
And I've been advocating the same for my entire career in some way, shape, matter, or form.
Yes, I've gotten more mature over the years.
Yes, I've evolved over the years.
Yes, my study and reason and understanding of what conservatism is and isn't is it drives me.
Principles drive me.
Good principles drive me.
And I'm more libertarian than I've ever been in my life in terms of other issues, right?
Wouldn't you say that's an accurate statement, Linda?
Yeah, I think that's very accurate.
How was your week on?
You didn't even say hello to me.
Hello.
Welcome back.
Can we tell the secret about somebody on our team?
I would love that as she very much protests next to me.
Am I allowed or not?
You're allowed.
I think the audience would love it.
Look at that face.
She's not happy.
I'm going to be hated for the rest of my life if I do this, you know.
Get started.
Why stop now?
I'm always going to love you.
Stopping me.
Well, is that you in my ear or on the air?
I'm here on the air.
I love you and I always will love you.
No matter what I say or do right now.
No matter what, Sean.
No matter what.
No matter what.
You sure?
I might not like you.
I'm still going to love you.
You have about a minute and 30 seconds, so make up your mind.
I think I'm going to let it go.
You know what?
She's probably the only one person on the team that I know doesn't like all of this public.
And I'm just, for now, it's only going to be a short while.
There's only so much I can contain myself because once the thoughts begin to bubble in my mind and my brain, you know it's coming out.
I love you even more than I thought I could.
Oh, I get another 100.
Is that what you're saying?
110.
And look at it's just such an awesome story, though.
I mean, it's family love.
It's all I know is we'd be talking about it right now.
We'd be talking about it.
We'd be getting all the details out, but because it's going to say, congratulations.
Linda did get a new home over the weekend.
And our first, you bought your first house, and I wrote you that is a huge milestone in your life.
And you're like, yeah, whatever.
I have to furnish it.
No, first of all, what I said.
Didn't I say it was a huge accomplishment?
You did.
Well-deserved.
You worked hard, and you should be so proud of that.
You were.
By the way, then I said Obama built that.
That actually was very funny.
You're like, you didn't build that Obama building.
Obama built that.
Then I said, I'm not talking to you if you mention him again in a text message because that's not nice.
But no, yeah, it's great.
It's scary.
It's wonderful.
You know, it's all those things.
Okay, there's nothing to be scared about.
Worst case scenario, I fire you, and the bank takes it back.
Exactly.
That's exactly something to look forward to.
Thank you, Sean.
You're not getting fired.
You're under contract.
You can't leave.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I'm proud of you.
800-941, Sean is a number.
All right, we've got a lot to get to.
Sarah Carter, we have a lot of top stories we're following today.
We're going to get into the Comey issue, a predetermined conclusion before any fact-gathering or evidence was gathered.
We have more on the DACA issue that I've been discussing, and I'll play the cuts of Obama saying it's unconstitutional, Ryan saying it's unconstitutional.
Then we'll have an update on North Korea with Newt Gingrich and the need now, I think, to take their missiles out of the sky preemptively and how Republicans need to get their work done.
So that's all coming up.
And as we roll along, Sean Hannity show a lot coming up in the program today.
Stay right there.
James Comey had the fix in for Hillary.
What's that all about?
Also, DACA, we have old cuts of Obama.
Paul Ryan will play for you.
Newt Gingrich weighs in and so much more.
Welcome back.
Glad you're with us.
Hope you had a great Labor Day.
I had not sent classified material nor received anything marked classified.
Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her private email.
Was that true?
Our investigation found that there was classified information sent.
So it was not true.
And I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received.
Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails, either sent or received.
Was that true?
That's not true.
There were a small number of portion markings on, I think, three of the documents.
I never sent classified material on my email, and I never received any that was marked classified.
Secretary Clinton said I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email.
There is no classified material.
Was that true?
There was classified material emailed.
People across the government knew that I used one device.
Maybe it was because I am not the most technically capable person and wanted to make it as easy as possible.
Secretary Clinton said she used just one device.
Was that true?
She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as Secretary of State.
But we turned over everything that was work-related.
Every single thing.
Personal stuff, we did not.
I had no obligation to do so and did not.
Secretary Clinton said all work-related emails were returned to the State Department.
Was that true?
No, we found work-related emails, thousands that were not returned.
All I can tell you is that when my attorneys conducted this exhaustive process, I did not participate.
Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive.
Did her lawyers read the email content individually?
No.
This is not okay.
All right, 800-941, Sean, you want to be a part of the program.
I mean, that's Trey Gowdy and James Comey and Hillary Clinton and juxtaposed together.
You see that Comey is admitting that numerous crimes were committed by Hillary Clinton because that's what the law says.
Just like DACA is not the law of the land and Obama recognized he didn't have the right to use executive action, although he then ended up doing the very thing he said he couldn't do.
Do we have a two-tier justice system?
Is there equal justice under the law?
That question keeps coming up again and again and again.
And the only answer we keep getting is, oh, there's a two-tier justice system.
Anyway, Sarah Carter and John Solomon are with us to address these new developments.
James Comey, we found out late last week, made the decision on Hillary Clinton long before the investigation was even done or concluded.
And as most on the inside know, this was never a real investigation.
Clinton never stood to suffer any consequences or actions because the fix were in.
Welcome both of you, Sarah Carter, John Solomon.
Appreciate you both with us.
Sarah, of course, is with circa.com and John Solomon is with The Hill.
Let's start with you, Sarah.
I mean, when you read this, and this was before she was even talked to, this was before, you know, 17-plus witnesses, key witnesses were ever talked to.
That sounds to me like the fix is in.
What else can you say at this point?
I mean, when you blatantly hear her make statements that are completely false on their face, and this is according to the former FBI director and to others who are investigating, and then you have to ask yourself the same question, which is the one you've been asking, Sean, over and over again.
You know, is there a two-tiered system?
And according to people I've been speaking with inside the FBI, people who were very closely involved in this investigation, who feel that the rug was pulled out from under them, they believe it was.
I mean, there was intent.
They kept going to intent.
There never needed to be intent of the law.
There needed to be, they just proved gross negligence.
And that's what people kept saying over and over again.
Anybody else would have been charged.
Anybody else would have been charged under Section 793 under the Penal Code Title 18.
And that is a felony.
Well, it's a felony, and it's one that Comey himself, as the FBI director, this is incontrovertible.
This is overwhelming evidence.
And how he reaches this conclusion, John Solomon, is beyond any understanding I have, except to conclude the fix is in.
Yeah, and it raises another question, which is that James Comey's given sworn testimony to Congress, and he said that he had not made the decision to clear Hillary Clinton until that learning about the Clinton-Tarmack meeting, right, between Bill Clinton and the Attorney General, Loretta Lynch.
If, in fact, he had made that decision months earlier, his congressional testimony in one of his final appearances before Congress could also be called into question.
And it raises the question, was the cart before the horse was the decision made, we're not going to indict her, and then the investigation run to fit that final conclusion.
There's a lot new that this revelation from last week brings to light.
Andy McCarthy Carthy writes for National Review, and he's somebody that I happen to have a lot of respect for, one of the few people over there, to be honest, at this point, because there's so many never-Trumpers there, and they are on like their own little war that they're waging so that one day they can point their finger in everybody's face and say, see, we warned you.
We're so superior to you.
You should have listened to us and elect an establishment person as president.
But what he's pointing out is that it really wasn't Comey's decision to exonerate Hillary.
That when Obama went out in April, before Comey had begun writing this thing, and Obama stated publicly that Hillary had shown, quote, carelessness in the use of the private email server, but he insisted that she did not intend to endanger national security, which is the criminal statute element of all of this.
One has to wonder if that impacted Comey.
Now, it's the theory of Andrew McCarthy, it did.
And my attitude back, Sarah, is it doesn't matter what Obama said or did.
Isn't this the James Comey that was lecturing the president about how those in the FBI and Justice Department are separate and apart from the executive branch?
Absolutely.
When you think of it in those terms, and you brought it up just before I could bring it up, I mean, he was making those lectures.
He was telling everybody this is how you're supposed to behave.
And President Trump had no business allegedly asking him for loyalty.
But then you look at this, and he seems extraordinarily loyal to the statements that were made by President Obama because on July 5th, he comes out and starts talking about extremely careless use of her emails.
And, you know, I want to go back to something that she said earlier in the montage that you ran, where she said, you know, she's not very good with technical things.
She's not very good with electronics.
I can honestly say that I'm not very good with electronics.
I don't have a server inside my bathroom, you know, where I'm transmitting emails.
It's not even your bathroom.
It's not very good.
Yeah, well, it's also the fact that we're told that five foreign intelligence agencies were able to hack into that.
And that means classified top secret and special access program info was on it, John Solomon.
So her doing this, the mishandling is in and of itself a law.
The destruction is also a law.
And when they decided to bleach bit the 33,000 subpoenaed deleted emails and then bleach bit the server and then destroy devices like BlackBerries, I think there's a pretty clear intention of obstruction there.
Yeah, that's the question that we never got to.
I mean, unfortunately, the investigation never looked at those things.
It looked at whether she originally intended to break the law.
A lot of people argue you didn't need intent to break classification laws.
You just have to release improperly classified information or mishandle it.
So once the investigation got short-circuited, the idea of obstruction or other things never really got fully looked at.
And I think that that's one of the things that critics of Comey and the FBI can clearly see a lot to complain about.
Yeah, I agree.
All right, let me move on to something else that because I think at this point, the Attorney General now needs to reopen this investigation.
Is there any statute of limitations aspects that could complicate this, Sarah?
I think for some, yes, there are some statute of limitations aspects that could complicate it.
But I don't think in any way, shape, or form that should stop them.
I believe in January there's kind of a final date for some of the statute of limitations.
But one of the things that I think is most important is to go back and look at the law itself.
I mean, when you talk about gross negligence under the law, gross negligence means that, you know, anything you remove, anything classified that could be intercepted by an enemy state is the reason why that's a felony.
It's the reason why the law stands.
So it's important to look at it in that aspect.
It's not that she intended it to end up in the hands of enemies, but removing it from a classified setting allowed it to possibly end up in the hands of enemies.
And this is why we need to look at this further, I think.
Also, there needs to be some type of special prosecutor called in.
I know there's a lot of FBI field agents out there, special agents in charge who were working on this case that would like to see this reopened again and would be willing to testify.
So if they move in that direction, I think we're going to have a lot more answers.
Let me go to, we know that Dana Rohrbacher is the first congressman to go meet recently with Julian Assange and apparently has a message for the president.
My sources are telling me it's complicated because anything, because of the ongoing Mueller investigation into Russia, Russia, Russia, that it's complicated if the president were to receive such a message.
But nevertheless, he is the one guy that knows where the information came from.
This all began, the special counsel, again, with Comey, you know, purposely leaking information for the hopes that a special counsel would be appointed.
Then it becomes Mueller, and then Mueller appoints eight Democrats, big Obama-Clinton Democratic donors, no Republican donors.
And now it's gotten to the point where the only one person that would really know is Julian Assange, and he keeps saying both to me and he apparently said to Dana Rohrbacher, who I interviewed, that it wasn't the Russians.
What does that mean for Mueller's investigation?
What does it mean for Congress's investigation?
And what does it mean for the American people and their right to know the truth, John Solomon?
Well, if Bob Mueller is going to do a thorough investigation, and he has a long record of doing things very thoroughly, you would think that if someone who's in a first primary position to know disagrees with the current intelligence assessment and has the ability to prove that the current intelligence assessment that Russia hacked the DNC emails isn't accurate, you should give them an opportunity to find out.
Now, there are many ways that can happen, right?
It sounds like from what Congressman Rohrebacher said that there's some deal that Julian Assange wants, but there are other tactics and capabilities that the FBI and the intelligence community have to explore where Assange may have gotten his documents that may not be public.
And you would think that this investigation would re-examine that finding based on what Assange just said publicly since the January finding came out.
There's no evidence that that has happened, and there's no evidence that the Hill committees have shown any interest.
This is true, though.
I mean, the whole special counsel, correct me if I'm wrong, Sarah Carter was predicated on Trump-Russia collusion.
Doesn't that basically blow the entire cause for the investigation to blow up?
You would think so, Sean.
But remember, they've expanded this.
They keep expanding what this first started out.
It was Trump-Russia collusion.
And I mean, there's a lot of questions out there.
There's no proof.
As John said, right now they're still searching for proof as to what the Russians actually did.
We've seen a lot of evidence pointing at a lot of other players who could have hacked into the DNC server and did get access to the DNC server from the A1 to members within the DNC.
So there's a lot of questions here that have to be answered.
And they haven't answered those yet.
But as we can see, the special counsel is expanding.
I mean, they're reaching and reaching and reaching into business dealings with Trump, into his associates and their business dealings.
So it's just like Patrick Fitzgerald.
Patrick Fitzgerald spent three years and he knew on day one that Richard Armitage was the leaker.
And instead of shutting down shop, and that was related to the Valerie Plain phony case, he knows who the leaker is.
He should have shut down, but he eventually got, wow, he couldn't get Scooter Libby to flip and turn on Vice President Cheney.
Than they went after Scooter Libby for lying, not for anything with the underlying crime that they were originally supposed to investigate, which is my big problem with these special counsels, investigative creep, just like Mission Creep in terms of military efforts that the country gets involved in.
Stay right there.
We'll continue.
Sarah Carter, John Solomon, 800-941, Sean.
All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity show glad you're with us.
800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, still a lot of news that we are going to be getting to today.
We'll check in with Newt Gingrich at the top of the next hour.
We'll get to some of your calls in the next half hour.
Also, we'll tell you about a case of kids being told we've got the audio and video in a classroom, you can't wear a Trump shirt or hat.
It's like being a Nazi.
Anyway, but we continue with Sarah Carter of circa.com and with the Hill, John Solomon is with us.
All right, so we went over these two big issues.
I can't believe that there's evidence out there that might prove that, in fact, Russia-Trump collusion and that it was never any collusion as it relates to the leaks that came out just before the DNC convention, Sarah Carter.
And that there's nobody that's showing any interest in getting to the bottom of that question, which I think would tell us that we might have been lied to for 11 months.
Yeah, I think it's really disappointing.
In fact, it's kind of chilling when you think about it because that's the answer that we're all seeking.
That's the answer that supposedly they're all seeking.
So you think they would leave no stone unturned, right?
They would look through everything.
I think that there are reporters out there like John and I that want to get to the truth and want to expose that truth to the public so that people know and understand what really happened there, whatever the answer be, whether that be people within the DNC, whether that be the A1 brothers, whether that be Russia, or a combination of all three of them.
And I hope we do get those answers.
And I hope we can deliver that to the American people.
I mean, that's the least that they deserve.
I mean, considering that this entire presidency has been up in turmoil because of that one particular question, the one that they, the special counsel, apparently does not want to answer.
What about the unmasking surveillance and those scandals, John Solomon?
Are we going to hear more about them?
Will we hear more about Uranium One?
What is on the horizon?
Absolutely.
I think there's a lot of things that we're going to learn about this fall.
I think the House Intelligence and Senate Intelligence Committee has developed some new evidence on unmasking and who was behind it and also how the process worked.
And maybe several steps were short-stepped in that process so that the normal ways that a name was unmasked were short-circuited when it came to Trump or political figures.
I think we're going to learn more about that.
Do you think crimes were committed?
I'm up on the clock.
Do you think crimes were committed?
Both of you, real quick.
Don't know yet.
I do.
Okay, there we go.
we'll continue.
Information download.
Sean Hannity and the breaking news you might have missed today.
It's Sean's insider information.
Hannity is on right now.
You cannot wear a spot to go to school.
Please go back.
They didn't mean that before, though.
Let's go, at least for this class.
I don't care what you do in other classes, but in my classes.
Wait, so both of them want to.
Both of them have to flip their shirts inside out because it says Trump on the top.
They got to flip their shirts inside out because it just got Trump on it and it's supported by me.
Okay.
Neo-Nazis.
I'm not saying about Charlie's Nazi.
Why can't a kid in school have a t-shirt that has the name of the president?
Or what's so offensive about any t-shirt or hat that says make America great again?
Just like you can't wear a swasti sticker to school.
You can't wear Make America Great Again like that.
The teacher says, I don't care what you do in other classes, you know, but for this class, you can't do it.
And then, of course, the teacher pretty stupidly is answering the question about the whole thing.
I mean, it's hard to believe this is the day and age we live in.
And anyway, the issue came from Cherokee County School District, a math teacher at River Ridge High School.
You know, erroneously now, we find out, telling two students they can't wear their shirts with campaign slogans.
They're not permitted in class.
And joining us, he's been highlighting a lot of what's going on in the classroom.
Charlie Kirk is back with us, founder executive director of Turning Point USA, and it's an advocacy group for young conservatives.
You know, every time you guys get involved and every time they get exposed, it ends up you guys keep on winning.
And what happened in this case?
That's exactly right.
Well, we got the school district to initially issue an apology.
Something tells me there's going to be a lot more activity around this teacher and the policies in the local school district.
But just so that your listeners appreciate what happened here and the audio they just heard, I mean, here is a public school teacher in Georgia, which some would think is a pretty patriotic part of the country, where she just shamelessly says that wearing Make America Great Again is neo-Nazi comparable to wearing a swastika.
And she doesn't really even think anything of it for saying it.
And in the actual video, which thankfully one of our students helped record, she makes the students actually get up out of class and turn their shirts around.
And Sean, you've pointed this out for so long.
This is the intolerance of the left.
They're doing everything they possibly can to silence conservatives, young and old, but especially the conservatives in our school system.
They are shamelessly calling us racists and bigots and now Nazis.
And this is what our young conservative movement has to experience every single day.
And you've done a wonderful job.
But Charlie, I think the reason for the apology goes way beyond whether or not they care.
I think it mostly has to do with, uh-oh, there's a video of this.
Uh-oh, we're going to get sued.
Uh-oh, we better act quickly.
But does she get to keep her job?
Because obviously she is, there's something really off with a teacher that is that politically driven that she would even make a comparison of a swastika and a Trump t-shirt being on a student.
And so she's got some agenda here, and she's trying to literally proselytize, as I always say, a captive audience because these kids have to go to those classes.
They can't get out of them.
It didn't break any code or violation whatsoever in terms of the kid being able to wear what they want to wear.
And it's not even incendiary.
That's right.
And yeah, they're not sorry that this happened.
They're sorry they got caught.
They're sorry that there's a video and they're sorry they got exposed.
And they're trying everything they can to cover this up.
And you bring up a great point, which is, look, this teacher, unfortunately, is nothing out of the ordinary.
There are millions of people that are teaching the next generation that hold these values and these sentiments.
It's just, luckily we got this on video.
I mean, I hear these stories every single day from the front lines of math teachers.
By the way, this is a math teacher.
What this had to do with mathematics class, I can't figure out.
But math teachers and language arts teachers making conservatives stand up in class and shaming them and ostracizing them for having a viewpoint that they don't hold and they don't share.
And this school district is really scrambling.
There's a couple of candidates running for governor in Georgia that are openly calling for her termination.
But it does beg the question is, what kind of people are teaching America's youth?
I mean, is this a value system that educators hold?
And what is actually going to be done to hold these people accountable?
Well, I think it's a great job.
I'm glad that these kids know to go to you, and I know that they have places to go to expose all of this.
Charlie Kirk, always good to talk to you, sir.
Thank you for being with us.
We appreciate it.
Thanks so much.
800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
All right, let's get to our phones.
Donna in Frederick, Maryland wants to weigh in on this.
Donna, how are you?
Glad you called.
Hi, Sean.
It's a pleasure to speak with you.
And I want to say your guest was amazing.
My Trump happened to be one of those kids on the front lines fighting for conservatism.
And he was isolated and berated in classes.
And he's long since moved on.
He's in college.
But, you know, it says a lot about what we need to do to fix this education in America and what needs to do about not having government involved in the education process and letting people take their communities back.
But that being said, the other story that's amazing today is A.G. Sessions, his Americans First policy.
I think it's amazing.
You know, DACA obviously cannot defend itself in court, and we don't have to contend with no more Obama buses and lawlessness and people that don't belong in here taking from those who do belong here.
And I think it's really an amazing thing to finally see some lawfulness coming back.
Listen, the president even gave an additional six months for Congress to get their act together.
And, you know, when you go back over history, and we've got the history of Obama saying so many times he did not have the authority to, through executive fiat, just sign something and take away and change the law or not enforce the laws of the land.
DACA was never the law of the land.
It was executive fiat.
And so for seven months, you had General Kelly was in charge of the borders.
And General Kelly, you know, said, hey, get your act together in Congress.
If you don't like it, change the law.
Well, now the president wants funding, and this gets to the heart of what Congress needs to do in these next three months and two weeks, and that's get their job done.
And one of the things they need to get done, if they want DACA so bad, fine, but I don't think they're getting DACA without funding the wall.
And I think a lot of Republicans, you know, backed off on this.
I mean, I had multiple interviews with Paul Ryan.
He said it was the use of executive amnesty DACA was plainly unconstitutional.
Many other Republicans said it as well.
And so at the end of the day, I just think these guys have got to stay by their word.
Obama himself said he didn't have the authority to do it.
Anyway, good call.
Appreciate it.
Back to our busy phones as we say hi to Lee is in Oklahoma.
Lee, hi, how are you?
Welcome to the program.
Hey, thanks for having me.
No, I'm doing pretty good.
What's going on?
I'm going to watch you on TV and listener.
Well, I worked in the media, and I wanted to just make a comment on the media bias.
What did you do in media?
I run the soundtech package.
Okay, for a particular organization, or you don't want it to say.
Well, I'm freelance.
So I'm an independent contractor.
And that's what I wanted to comment on is everybody is down on the media and how biased it is.
But what you don't realize is what a lot of people see on TV.
One, it's usually independent contractors like me and a lot of the photographers.
And a lot of what we see and what we shoot, it disgusts us because we'll shoot, you know, hours worth of role video, and then it gets edited by a couple of producers down to just a couple minutes of what they want you to see, not necessarily what you're doing.
And how often do you watch your work get distorted?
In other words, when they finally take out, it's sort of like edited fake news.
And I use Ted Coppel as an example.
I did a 50-some-odd minute interview with Ted Compel, and he broke it down to 70 seconds.
And he just made himself look as good as possible as I was being respectful for him, to him.
And he didn't run.
And I said, well, you got CBSnews.com, put the whole interview up, let people see it.
And they never wanted to do that because it was so distorted.
And so, you know, all these outlets, you know, think they're playing these games.
All of them do.
Oh, yeah.
No, we see it all the time.
You know, we'll spend, we were in Louisiana last year for all the flooding in South Texas.
And, you know, we'll shoot video all day and interviews with city officials.
And, you know, then you've got correspondence that their goal is to try and make somebody cry because that makes better news.
And then at the end of the day, you see about three minutes out of maybe six hours worth of stuff that you did all day.
Yeah, it's true.
You know, let me go back.
Listen, it is beyond deceptive.
There's so many ways.
Number one, the story selection itself is indication of bias.
If they'll never talk about the Ukraine election interference and they'll only talk about Russia election interference, the fact that the media has ignored Julian Assange and him saying he's got evidence that in fact it never came from Russia, you know, law enforcement, Congress, and the American people would love to hear that because it would change the narrative totally.
But there's nobody in the media that has proposed that I know of going to the Embassy of Ecuador in London and asking Julian Assange these questions or what the evidence is.
He says he has it, and he said it numerous times.
You know, but go back in time.
Listen, you know, on the issue specifically about DACA, listen to how Obama said so many times we cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, unchecked, and I don't have the authority through executive fiat to do these things.
Here's what he said.
We all agree on the need to better secure the border and to punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants.
You know, we are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.
We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants.
When we get back, I'll play on the other side.
Obama himself, before he did something he himself admits was unlawful and unconstitutional.
And that goes to the whole heart of the issue of DACA, which I've been discussing earlier in the program today.
To halt deportations for all 11.5 undoed immigrants in this country right now.
We agree that we need to have immediate reforms at the same time.
You have a power to stop deportation for all undocumented immigrants.
Actually, I don't.
And that's why we're here.
Here's the problem that I have, Jose.
And I've said this consistently.
My job in the executive branch is supposed to be to carry out the laws that are passed.
Congress has said, here's the law when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they allocate a whole bunch of money for enforcement.
It's something that I've struggled with throughout my presidency.
The problem is that I'm the president of the United States.
I'm not the emperor of the United States.
My job is to execute laws that are passed.
And Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system.
And what that means is, is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place, even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic.
Now, what you need to know, when I'm speaking as President of the United States, and I come to this community, is that if, in fact, I could solve all these problems without passing laws in Congress, then I would do so.
But we're also a nation of laws.
That's part of our tradition.
And so the easy way out is to try to yell and pretend like I can do something by violating our laws.
And what I'm proposing is the harder path, which is to use our democratic processes to achieve the same goal that you want to achieve.
But it won't be as easy as just shouting.
It requires us lobbying and getting it done.
But if we start broadening that, then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally.
So that's not an option.
And I do get a little worried that advocates of immigration reform start losing heart and immediately thinking, well, somehow there's an out here.
If Congress doesn't act, we'll just have the president sign something and that'll take care of it.
We won't have to worry about it.
What I've said is that there's a path to get this done, and that's through Congress.
And we've kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can.
And that's why making sure that we get comprehensive immigration reform done is so important.
It is going to require work.
It is not simply a matter of us just saying we're going to violate the law.
That's not our tradition.
So that's Obama really admitting everything we've been saying.
Number one, it's temporary.
Number two, it's not the law.
It's only their interpretation, if you will.
And you cannot widely interpret a law to actually not enforce the law.
And that's what they were trying to do here.
Now, Sarah Huckabee Sanders was asked to comment on this earlier today, and she rightly pointed out it's not a law, and it was never designed to be permanent or that they could receive benefits that other citizens, that only citizens receive.
Listen to this.
We expect people who live in this country to play by the rules.
We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded.
So we're going to offer the following deal.
If you've been in America for more than five years, if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents, if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you're willing to pay your fair share of taxes, you'll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation.
You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law.
That's what this deal is.
Now, let's be clear about what it isn't.
This deal does not apply to anyone who has come to this country recently.
It does not apply to anyone who might come to America illegally in the future.
It does not grant citizenship or the right to stay here permanently or offer the same benefits that citizens receive.
Only Congress can do that.
All right, they hear Obama himself saying that.
So now the president gave six months to Congress after seven or eight months now that they could have fixed it to get their act together.
Newt Gingrich will weigh in on this next and much more.
Our final hour of free-for-all is straight ahead.
If the president follows through on his threat for executive amnesty, what do you have in terms of tools at your disposal to stop him from doing that?
Well, first of all, it's unconstitutional.
So we're already going through the court system on other unconstitutional executive orders that he has worked on, and we would add this to the files.
I have little doubt that he'll do it.
Well, I don't know the answer to that question.
We'll find out.
But if he does do that, it's not constitutional.
It's going around Congress.
If you want to change a law, then go to Congress and work with Congress to change the law.
You can't unilaterally write a law as the executive.
All right, that was Paul Ryan on with me in 2014.
And, you know, he said now that the president should not end DACA, that Congress should try and fix it, which is what basically the president is allowing them to do today.
And that is if Congress wants to do their job.
They've had eight months to deal with DACA.
The Speaker believes it's not constitutional.
As he just pointed out, the president did it anyway.
Nothing was ever done to stop it.
And joining us on this and so many other issues today is the former Speaker of the House, author of the best-selling books.
What is it now?
12 Weeks on the Bestseller List Understanding Trump, Newt Gingrich.
How are you, sir?
I'm doing well.
How are you?
Very good.
I actually had time off like you for once, and I actually know how it feels to be on vacation for a couple of days.
It's kind of fun, isn't it?
I like work too much, and I actually work during my vacations because you should put a big, fat, branded L on my back that says loser.
I was going to say, you need to actually slow down.
When you slow down, you need to actually slow down to slow down.
Well, I slowed down, but then I upped my physical activities, which is why I could barely walk today, but that's a different issue.
We did the same thing.
Klist and I ended up golfing nine out of ten days.
Oh, wow.
What's your best score?
My best score was about 100.
Oh, my gosh, you're terrible.
I am terrible.
I'm not a golfer.
I'm a hacker.
I'm not.
I'm not a hacker, but I'm lucky my brother-in-law is such a good golfer that when I play with him, he adjusts me every shot, and it works better.
I have like my own personal coach out there with me.
He's scratching.
I know we have mutual friends who've played with you who say you're tough.
Well, not only that, if you put a dollar in the cup, I'm going to hit the putt.
If you don't put a dollar in, I'll never make it.
Pressure works for me.
Well, look, we've known from the beginning.
Obama, I played it just before the break.
Obama himself recognized he didn't have the authority under the Constitution to do what he did on DACA.
He did it anyway.
Congress was furious at the time.
It's now in the position it's in.
And the president, I think, was being pretty nice to Congress, saying, all right, I'll give you six months.
Fix it.
Do it whatever way you want.
I thought it was a very, very effective solution to a hard problem.
The president knew, all of his senior lawyers had told him, it's unconstitutional.
He campaigned it being unconstitutional.
The vice president, as governor of Indiana, instructed the Attorney General of Indiana to join the lawsuit saying it was unconstitutional.
Well, you couldn't turn around and suddenly say, well, we didn't mean it.
On the other hand, you do have, I think, 690,000 people who would be affected overnight if you just jerked the rug out.
And the big argument about constitutionality is that Congress didn't approve it.
Nobody disagrees that if Congress were actually to pass an appropriate law and the president were to sign it, then it would all be fine in terms of legality.
You can argue without the policy, but it would certainly be legal at that point.
So I thought the president by saying, look, he actually gave him more time than I thought he would.
I mean, I would have been comfortable if he'd given him three months.
Six months is more than generous.
They ought to be able to get the job done.
Both, I mean, Orrin Hatch, who's very senior on the Judiciary Committee, has said he's going to do everything he can to pass it.
I think you're going to be burdening them.
I mean, I think you're setting your expectations too high because Mitch McConnell thought eight months to keep their seven and a half year pledge on health care was just beyond anybody's realistic expectations.
So maybe you're putting too much pressure on these poor people.
This is a lot tinier bill.
Lindsey Ground's already got a bill in.
I've had some friends drafting a bill I'm going to send over that's very clean, very narrow, because I think this is one of those deals where their job, and the same thing, by the way, is true of the tax bill.
Their job is to get it done.
Perfection later doesn't work.
They've got to meet the six-month deadline.
They ideally should meet it this fall before they adjourn for the end of the year.
And they should take care of the DREAMers and then set up the right kind of standards, the right kind of programs.
Shouldn't the president get funding of the wall as part of this?
Well, I think there are five or six things that ought to be packaged that that could be part of.
I wouldn't use it as a bargaining chip because I think there's something really insensitive about using the lives of human beings.
It's either the right thing or it's not the right thing.
If it's the right thing, let's get it done.
Well, is it the right thing to protect America's borders?
Sure.
And the Congress ought to pass that.
And I think the president has already indicated he's going to be very tough in getting that done.
And I think he will get it done, actually.
You know, it's ironic.
Most of what he's doing in immigration is very popular.
I mean, people get the idea you shouldn't have these sanctuary cities where the politicians side with the criminals.
They get the idea you ought to have a focus on MS-13, the Self Salvadorian gang, which is so deadly and so dangerous.
They get the idea that there ought to be a CATES law enforced, that anybody who comes back in after they've been deported faces really severe penalties.
So there's a broad coalition building here that in most of these cases I just cited is in the 70 to 80 percent range.
And that poses a real problem for the Democrats because in these areas they're just isolating themselves more and more from the average American.
All right.
So I would argue now moving forward with Congress back in session and they really didn't accomplish a whole lot, especially in the Senate in terms of advancing legislation that the president can sign.
And I mean on the big agenda items.
Right.
And now we have a debt ceiling vote coming and then we have certainly a vote on the president's economic plan.
And I don't think it's that complicated.
I think if they took the rate seven brackets to three and a 15 or 16 percent corporate tax rate and middle class tax cuts and repatriated money and make sure we're energy independent to create millions of high-paying career jobs, I think on the economy that's a pretty easy do, and it sounds like everything that every Republican would ever want.
Why do I expect they're going to screw that up too?
I think because you're a little bit pessimistic.
Or am I realistic?
Well, you might be, although I must say, I thought Secretary Mnuchin, the Secretary of the Treasury, was very good this weekend in describing the bill, describing the way in which economic growth would score it.
I mean, one of the points I've been making is the Congressional Budget Office baseline is down at around slightly less than 2% real growth.
You get the economy up to 3% real growth.
You create trillions of dollars in government revenue that allows you to have a tax cut that's dramatically bigger than anybody dreamed of.
And I think the administration is currently moving in the right direction.
I do believe that there is going to be a drive in September to get the bill out of the Ways and Means Committee and through the House, and that the Senate, by the time they finish a continuing resolution by September 30th, the Senate will pivot.
And I think they will take it up the first two weeks in October.
And I'm very hopeful, I won't say optimistic, I'm very hopeful that we will actually see a bill signed by the president by Thanksgiving.
And that would be just a huge boost to the economy and a huge boost to the Republican prospects in 2018.
But on these two issues, getting the economy that the president wants on track to create jobs and increase revenues and economic growth, I think is so important.
But also, they kind of failed.
It was a colossal fail on health care.
I think Republicans need to focus on getting their jobs done here.
And I also think building that border wall is going to be imperative because they promised this.
And if they don't have 300 miles of it built, I think people will be angry.
No, I think that's right.
And I think that President Trump knows that, and I think he's going to focus on it.
And my guess is you're going to see that be part of the package before the end of the year, that there will be some legislation that comes together that includes the wall.
I think that there's no question the people I talk to in the White House all understand that this is literally unchallengeable.
It has to happen.
And they are trying to communicate to the Hill, look, you tell me what you want, and I'll tell you how many miles of the wall it's going to take to get it.
You know, I guess I'd never seen such incompetence.
And I know you have cut them a little more slack, although you're becoming as impatient, I think, now as I am.
I'm drifting your way.
I'm drifting your way.
I'm out on a sailboat drifting my way.
I mean, if the winds are blowing a little quicker and they're blowing quick everywhere now, maybe they'll get some urgency, which I wish they would have.
On top of that, at this point, after North Korea has done all that they've done, firing a missile over a Japanese island, and now we have shown them that we can take their missiles out of the sky and the pledge by Kim Jong-un to keep doing this.
It seems to me the next logical step for the United States is when he launches another missile that we probably ought to be prepared to take that sucker out of the sky.
Good idea or bad idea.
It's a necessary idea.
I think we should actually dramatically enhance our anti-missile capabilities, and we should communicate publicly that only when missiles have been inspected will they be allowed to fly and that any effort to fire a missile without inspection will kill the missile starting with killing it on the launch pad.
I mean, if you think about how these missiles work, the slowest and easiest point to kill it is the first 100,000 feet because it's going straight up.
Agreed.
And so what you want to do is develop a combination of laser weapons and hypersonic weapons and set up a doctrine that be very clear about it.
No, we don't trust you.
No, we're not going to take any risk that you're going to take out an American city.
We're not going to take a risk you're going to use an electromagnetic pulse attack on Tokyo or on Seoul.
And so we're just serving notice that, you know, we're not going to start a preemptive war.
We're not going to try to knock off your regime.
But unless you agree to have us inspect each missile before it is fired, we're just going to kill them and put him in a box.
We have the technology.
I love the idea.
I don't think we have any choice.
And then it gets into bad choices upon bad choices.
What I don't want to do is either rely on some kind of real approach.
You know, if all we do is talk loud, we'll be like the presidents who have failed.
On the other hand, I don't want us to talk ourselves into a box where we decide that we have to have a full-blown war.
You know, a full-blown war, because as you and I have talked about before, there are so many thousand artillery pieces and missiles aimed directly at Seoul.
There's no good option.
But if a war is going to start, it's going to be Kim Jong-un that starts it.
That's right.
There's a part of me that believes he probably does want it, which is dangerous for everybody because the net result of that is there's no good options.
All right, stay right there.
Number one best-selling author, Understanding Trump, Newt Gingrich, is with us.
We'll get to more of his insightful comments when we get back.
All right, as we continue with number one New York Times best-selling author, former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, his book, Understanding Trump.
So while I was away, we discovered that James Comey, in fact, had written long before he ever interviewed Hillary Clinton or 17 other key witnesses, the exoneration of Hillary.
And to me, it just screams of a political fix being in.
And to me, it also would mandate, in my mind, that the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, reopen the case about Hillary and emails.
And now maybe we can get some truth and get to the bottom of this.
Well, it was certainly pretty startling, I thought, to discover, as Andy McCarthy said in the column this week, it's clear that the person who exonerated Hillary is Barack Obama.
And he cites exactly what Obama said in April of 2016.
And then he shows you exactly what Comey said in that July press event.
And it's like Comey's reading off of Obama's notes.
And it's just, it's unbelievable.
And I couldn't agree with you more.
I did notice with some encouragement that the Senate leadership has sent a very strong letter to Justice asking for a series of information that pushes this thing, that reopens this whole case.
And I think that's, frankly, very encouraging.
Well, I think there's a lot of things that ought to be reopened here.
It appears by every account.
I want to ask you this question.
So I've interviewed Julian Assange five times.
He's the one guy that knows where the information on the emails came from.
And he's the one guy that knows his sources.
Now, keep in mind, like or not like Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, they've never been proven wrong in over 11 years.
So my question is, now that he's saying to Dana Rohrbacher and said to me it's not Russia in terms of the DNC email hack or the Podesta hack, my question is, doesn't Robert Mueller have an obligation to find out where the truth is in this and find out whether or not it might have been Bernie's Sanders supporters that were disgruntled?
Well, of course.
And I think he has an obligation to follow the information wherever it leads, including trying to find a way to interview Assange.
I mean, you know, it is interesting, and I have no idea where this is going, but it is interesting how much quieter the news media has gotten about Mueller and about the whole notion of this heroic figure who was going to do everything right, et cetera.
Somehow, that's gotten just much, much quieter than it was just a few weeks ago.
Well, it's gotten quiet.
We've gone from issue to issue.
Remember, it was Russia, Russia, Russia.
The president's going to start a nuclear war.
Then the president's a racist.
And then Melania's shoes because they had nothing else to pick on as it relates to Hurricane Harvey because the federal government, the state government, and beside the Houston mayor, everybody kind of did a great job on Hurricane Harvey.
Well, I have to confess, it was a little bizarre to watch the shoes issue, particularly since she had taken sneakers and came out of the airplane when she got to Houston dressed exactly appropriately for what she was doing.
I mean, you almost had to think to yourself, these people are so petty that it's almost embarrassing.
And how do they go home in the evening and actually think that what they're doing makes any sense?
Well, I'll tell you one thing.
With all the media chatter, all the deep state, all the Democrats against the president and weak Republicans, they really are hurting the American people that did vote for a positive change in the country.
It is preventing a lot of good work from being done.
And at some point, I think the American people are going to see this in a boomerang's back.
Do you believe that?
Absolutely.
And there have been some very interesting articles.
As you know, one of the most interesting reporters who has covered Western Pennsylvania for years and years, now working in New York, is Selena Zito.
And she wrote a great article the other day about going back to this one town.
And the people there are more pro-Trump than they were during the campaign.
And then their view of it is that all this noise is the opposition to the change that they want.
So it's not that it weakens their grip with Trump.
It's actually reinforced their belief that he must be doing the right thing because look how mad all these people are.
Yeah, well said.
All right, Mr. Speaker, good to talk to you again.
And I only got a little smidgen, a little taste of what your life is kind of like when you're not working.
I'll just say, not that I'm jealous or anything.
I'm happy doing what I'm doing, but I'm just saying it's pretty amazing.
Well, it can be good.
Oh, it can be great.
All right, sir.
Thank you.
When we come back, wide open telephones on this Tuesday, post-Labor Day edition.
We're back.
Sean Hannity's show.
Hannity tonight, 10 Eastern Fox News.
Quick break, right back.
We'll continue.
All right, 25 to the top of the hour, 800-941-Sean.
You want to be a part of the program?
Following our top stories here, James Comey, well, he had already decided Hillary was innocent before he even searched for evidence.
We're going to get to that.
What to do with North Korea?
That's big.
Republicans need to get all their work done.
And yeah, we have Hurricane Harvey, now Hurricane Irma, headed right to Florida as a cat-five potential as we speak.
So obviously a lot going on today.
Let me go back to the DACA issue, though, because nobody in the media will ever follow up and follow through.
I want to play for you three things.
One, I want to play Obama saying he never had the legal authority, the constitutional authority to change unilaterally by executive fiat DACA.
And then I want to play Paul Ryan acknowledging same.
In other words, that this is the president may not like the law.
If you don't like the law, you can't just, you know, write it away, which is what Obama did and what Obama said he couldn't do.
And Paul Ryan acknowledges that.
And then you've got the flipping and flopping and flailing of Hillary Clinton on the issue, which, you know, it's almost breathtaking as you just listen to interview after interview the contortions that she would go through as it relates to illegal immigration.
She admits they're taking jobs from Americans.
She didn't want driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.
She said she's adamantly against illegal immigration and against people employing illegal immigrants.
You know, so just listen to this over the years.
Nobody else is going to remind you of this.
Then we'll get to your calls.
Here's the problem that I have, Jose, and I've said this consistently.
My job in the executive branch is supposed to be to carry out the laws that are passed.
Congress has said, here's the law when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they allocate a whole bunch of money for enforcement.
It's something that I've struggled with throughout my presidency.
The problem is that, you know, I'm the president of the United States.
I'm not the emperor of the United States.
My job is to execute laws that are passed.
And Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system.
And what that means is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place, even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic.
Now, what you need to know, when I'm speaking as President of the United States, and I come to this community, is that if, in fact, I could solve all these problems without passing laws in Congress, then I would do so.
But we're also a nation of laws.
That's part of our tradition.
And so the easy way out is to try to yell and pretend like I can do something by violating our laws.
And what I'm proposing is the harder path, which is to use our democratic processes to achieve the same goal that you want to achieve.
But it won't be as easy as just shouting.
It requires us lobbying and getting it done.
But if we start broadening that, then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally.
So that's not an option.
And I do get a little worried that advocates of immigration reform start losing heart and immediately thinking, well, somehow there's an out here.
If Congress doesn't act, we'll just have the president sign something and that'll take care of him.
We won't have to worry about it.
What I've said is that there's a path to get this done, and that's through Congress.
We all agree on the need to better secure the border and to punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants.
We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.
We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants.
If the president follows through on his threat for executive amnesty, what do you have in terms of tools at your disposal to stop him from doing that?
Well, first of all, it's unconstitutional.
So we're already going through the court system on other unconstitutional executive orders that he has worked on, and we would add this to the pile.
Second of all, if we can get the power of the purse, we will explore every option we can to exercise that power of the purse.
I have little doubt that he'll do it.
Well, I don't know the answer to that question.
We'll find out.
But if he does do that, it's not constitutional.
It's going around Congress.
If you want to change a law, then go to Congress and work with Congress to change the law.
You can't unilaterally write a law as the executive.
The president might be looking at pulling back the Dreamers Act.
Yeah, I mean, I actually don't think he should do that.
And I believe that this is something that Congress has to fix.
Let me back up for a second.
President Obama did not have the legislative authority to do what he did.
You can't, as an executive, write law out of thin air.
And so that's very, very clear.
We've made that very clear.
Having said all of that, there are people who are in limbo.
These are kids who know no other country, who are brought here by their parents and don't know another home.
And so I really do believe that there needs to be a legislative solution.
That's one that we're working on.
And I think we want to give people peace of mind.
And so I've had plenty of conversations with the White House about this issue.
And I think there's a, and I think the president as well has mentioned that he wants to have a humane solution to this problem.
And I think that's something that we in Congress are working on and need to deliver on.
We've got to do several things.
And I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants.
I made this exception basically on humanitarian grounds because of the individual stories.
But certainly we've got to do more at our borders.
And people have to stop employing illegal immigrants.
Come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand in the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx.
You're going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work.
You know, it, this is not a problem that the people who are coming into the country are solely responsible for.
They wouldn't be coming if we didn't put them to work.
Why does it make a lot of sense to give an illegal immigrant a driver's license?
Well, what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform.
We know in New York we have several million at any one time who are in New York illegally.
They are undocumented workers.
They are driving on our roads.
The possibility of them having an accident that harms themselves or others is just a matter of the odds.
It's probability.
So what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is to fill the vacuum.
I believe we need to get back to comprehensive immigration reform because no state, no matter how well-intentioned, can fill this gap.
There needs to be federal action on immigration reform.
Senator Clint, I just want to make sure what I heard.
Do you, the New York Senator, Hillary Clinton, support the New York governor's plan to give illegal immigrants a driver's license?
You told the National Hampshire paper, it made a lot of sense.
Do you support his plan?
You know, Tim, this is where everybody plays gotcha.
It makes a lot of sense.
What is the governor supposed to do?
The hypocrisy is beyond breathtaking.
It's everything we've been telling you forever.
And yet we stay in the same position and that, oh, you're a racist.
You're anti-gay.
Well, the Clintons were the ones that came up with Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
They just move all over the place.
All right, let's get to our phones.
Sandy is in California.
Sandy, hi, how are you?
Glad you called.
Welcome to the show.
Hi, Sean.
Trump did exactly the right thing.
What I love is that he's following his agenda, which we voted for, and that is that you need to follow the rule of law.
And Jeff Sessions did an excellent job in content and delivery, you know, getting that message across.
I'd suggest anybody who didn't hear it needs to hear that because that was very well done.
Trump wants to put Americans first.
The Democrats don't agree with that, and we need to always remember that.
I just see Trump is always wanting to enforce the law, promote the Constitution.
He wants to keep his promises.
Yeah, I mean, you know, I was arguing this.
I had a couple of days off, and I can't get away from work.
I just can't mentally, emotionally, spiritually.
I'm just so engaged.
I just can't stop looking at the news.
I'm obsessed.
And I ran into somebody, and we started arguing about Trump, and he's not a conservative, and you're no longer a conservative.
And I said, okay, what part of his agenda is not conservative?
Tell me what it is.
And he couldn't answer.
And then I said, well, let me give you my list of what is conservative because I don't know if you remember our conservative solution caucus.
We put it out at the end of 2013.
We wanted Congress to run on it in 2014.
And it's basically the Trump agenda.
And what do we care about?
I care about the forgotten men and women.
I care about people.
I've lived through this, out of work, you know, in poverty on food stamps.
I've never been on food stamps or on welfare, but you get my, I had no money.
And if you do these conservative things, those tax cuts are conservative.
You know, middle-class cuts are conservative.
Corporate tax cuts and repatriation money goes to build factories and manufacturing centers.
That helps the forgotten men and women.
You know, everybody forgets all these people that are suffering and the media doesn't care because they're just too busy trying to take the president out, just like the Democrats and just like the deep state.
But if you really care about people, his energy policy is conservative.
His Supreme Court appointment was conservative.
His position on borders is conservative.
His position on vetting is conservative.
So all these people that say, he's a populist, a nationalist.
I'm like, no, he's basically a raging conservative, and he's advocating there's not one.
Look, there are positions I probably disagree with him on.
One would be, you know, where his trade policy eventually ends up.
I'm a free trade person, but I'm also a free and fair trade person.
And you can't be imposing massive tariffs on the United States or putting burdensome regulation on American businesses that they can't be competitive in your market.
And meanwhile, you have full, complete, unfettered access to our market.
So, you know, it's tough.
People are uneducated because they actually listen to the fake news media.
Well, Sean, don't you find it interesting that people like you were right about the election.
And the people that are wrong are the same ones that are on TV.
They're spouting the same thing.
In fact, they could hire some of us to just spout what so-and-so says every week.
They never say anything differently.
They never want to do what's right for America.
And that's what I see Trump doing.
Trump every single day is working to make America safe and great.
And every single day, the Democrats are promoting hate and violence and resistance.
Well, not all of them, but certainly resistance, certainly opposition.
Oh, no, no.
The Democratic Party won't lift a finger to help the president.
They won't lift a finger.
And by doing so, they don't have any agenda items they're pushing.
And they just adopted a new slogan, what, a better tomorrow or something like that.
Anyway, thank you, Sandy.
Linda and I have had this conversation so many times.
I do not hesitate to go out and do my own work, our own reporting, our own research.
And more times than not, we can point to very specific instances where we were viewed as nuts by the mainstream media only to be proven right.
You know, the election of Trump is only the latest example, but also how bad Obama would be in the vetting of Obama and what a rigid ideologue he would turn out to be as president based on his background that nobody in the media dared to investigate.
We did, you know, before we took a position on George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin.
You know, once we got evidence, we found out we were right.
They were all wrong.
The same in Ferguson, the same with Duke La Crosse, the same with Baltimore, the same with the Cambridge police.
You know, early in my career, it was Richard Jewell.
Look, I'm not patting myself on the back.
I'm just saying that I know I don't make my opinions based on what this media reports.
They lie all the time.
You know, all these reporters that want to interview me lately, oh, Hannity, why are you supporting Trump?
Because I support and have always supported a tax-cutting agenda.
I've always said secure the borders first.
I've always said that America needs education sent back to the states.
I've always supported identifying radical Islamists as an enemy.
So, I mean, it gets frustrating.
But on the other hand, I feel like we're unique and we're doing their job and we've got a far better track record than they do.
Nobody's perfect.
I'm not saying I'm perfect, but I have absolutely zero confidence in what I read in the New York Times and Washington Post.
I have zero confidence in cable TV, but for the channel that I work at, and I have zero confidence in the networks.
And I think they just resent like hell the fact that there is even one alternative voice out there, which is why they tried so hard to silence conservative voices.
That's why there's a whole cottage industry that has been developed to monitor every conservative host on radio and TV in the hopes they say one thing wrong, that they can jump on and that they can get somebody fired and that they can grab their scalp and then they feel their job is that much more secure.
And then one monolithic group think opinion exists and permeates the entire country.
It is the antithesis of what this country is supposed to be about, which is rigorous, passionate debate and the free and the open exchange of news and information and ideas and opinion.
All right, Hannity, tonight, 10 Eastern.
Hope you will join us.
I have a really important opening monologue about James Comey, about the Republicans, about DACA.
We now have two hurricanes to deal with, and Republicans better get their work done.
We have Newt Gingrich who's going to be on.
James Calstrom, Jay Secula, will be on tonight.
Also, I'll shoot it out with Jorge Ramos and David Clark and Monica Crowley.
