All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 18, 2017 - Sean Hannity Show
01:35:27
Senator Rand Paul Is Getting Angry - 10.17
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Let not your heart be troubled.
You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
All right, so I have insomnia, but I've never slept better.
And what's changed?
Just a pillow.
It's had such a positive impact on my life.
And of course, I'm talking about my pillow.
I fall asleep faster.
I stay asleep longer.
And now you can too.
Just go to mypillow.com or call 800-919-6090.
Use the promo code Hannity and Mike Lindell, the inventor of MyPillow, has the special four-pack.
Now you get 40% off two MyPillow premiums and two 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 and restful and comfortable and deep healing and recuperative sleep that you've been craving and you certainly deserve.
Mypillow.com, promo code Hannity.
You will love this pillow.
The Russia story is a total fabrication.
It's just an excuse for the greatest loss in the history of American politics.
That's all it is.
It just makes them feel better when they have nothing else to talk about.
What the prosecutors should be looking at are Hillary Clinton's 33,000 deleted emails.
And they should be looking at the paid Russian speeches and the owned Russian companies.
Or let them look at the uranium she sold that is now in the hands of very angry Russians.
Would you agree, though, that there's an appearance of a conflict, though?
One example being Uranium One, the Canadian company, you know, sold to Russia, something that required your approval as well.
And then later, some of the players involved in that deal wound up paying former president Bill Clinton, your husband, obviously, a half million dollar speaking fee.
Well, you know, I don't know if we have enough time in this interview to debunk all of the allegations that were made by people who are wielding the partisan acts, but there's no basis for any of that.
The timing doesn't work.
It happened in terms of the support for the foundation before I was Secretary of State.
There were nine government agencies who had to sign off on that deal.
I was not personally involved because that wasn't something the Secretary of State did.
Well, if you're talking in my ear, how am I supposed to hear the SOT, Ethan?
That's not the time.
All right, 800-941-Sean.
I want all of you to pay very, very close attention today because I want to give you details on a story that is the real Russia scandal.
And I want you to be aware of something.
You have been lied to by the news media, by the Democrats repeatedly about a Trump-Russia conspiracy.
By the end of this week, my sources tell me this is going to be even much bigger than the information that I am able to disseminate to you or to give to you today.
That this story is the Russia collusion story.
Let me just give you some headlines and then we'll get into the meat and potatoes of this.
We now know that the FBI has evidence in the form of documents, emails, financial records, eyewitnesses that prove that the Russians, the Russians, the evil Russian, Russian, Russian, Russia, Russians used bribery and kickbacks and extortion and money laundering to secure the Uranium One deal.
And that's the $145 million.
Remember, Peter Schweitzer first broke this book in Clinton Cash, this story in Clinton Cash.
Millions and millions of dollars benefiting Bill and Hillary's foundation.
It appears this goes way beyond the illegality of bribery and pay to play.
We have evidence now that Bill and Hillary got paid, that the Russians were the ones that got what they wanted through bribery, kickbacks, extortion, and money laundering.
And since a business is involved, it could also be called racketeering.
The RICO statutes may actually apply in this case, which typically involves using a business enterprise to carry out illegal activities.
My good friend Greg Jarrett sent me that note on that earlier today.
And Hillary, how she goes out, as we just played, insisting she had nothing to do with approving the deal to the Russians that gave up 20% of America's uranium, which is the foundational material for nuclear weapons, and her saying she had nothing to do with it is a lie.
And it makes no sense on the surface of it all because she presided over the Committee on Foreign Investment, which voted unanimously.
She voted unanimously along with others to approve the sale of one-fifth of America's uranium.
I repeat, the foundational material of nuclear weapons that she's giving to Russia and Vladimir Putin.
You're not going to hear this on NBC tonight.
You're not going to read about it in the New York Times tomorrow or the Washington Post tomorrow.
You're not going to see it on CNN.
You're not going to see it on conspiracy TV, MSNBC.
They're not going to tell you the truth.
There is a real Russia collusion conspiracy story.
And you always go to follow the money.
And we now have the money trail.
We now have the evidence.
And some of the more stunning revelations in this whole story is that the Attorney General of the United States at the time, Eric Holder, and his FBI and his Department of Justice hid.
They knew about this information for four long years.
They never informed Congress, and they allowed the Uranium One deal to be approved by Hillary's committee.
And Holder was a member of the committee, and he knew it was illegal.
He had to.
He knew it was corrupt.
He had to.
And he permitted all of this anyway.
The FBI in this period gathered documents and overwhelming, incontrovertible, substantive, and substantial evidence well before the committee ever made the decision to give the 20% of America's uranium to Vladimir and to Russia.
And you know what that means?
That means Holder and the Department of Justice knowingly and deliberately have jeopardized America's national security by letting this corrupt deal go through.
And this is only the tip of the iceberg.
It gets complicated, but it's really simple.
More simple than you would imagine.
And it even gets worse than that.
You've heard the name U.S. Attorney, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
He's the guy that appointed and is supervising Robert Mueller's investigation into so-called Russian collusion.
Are they going to do their job here?
Are they going to appoint a special counsel here?
Because what we're talking about is far worse with more evidence on top than they ever dreamed of getting because there was no Trump-Russia collusion, which is why they moved on to Paul Manafort's financial dealings.
You know, that's why they don't have anything and they haven't had anything.
Now, let me backtrack.
Anyway, so Rod Rosenstein supervising the Mueller investigation in a so-called Russia collusion with the Trump campaign and a year's worth of phony news stories and fake news.
Well, Rod Rosenstein was the person that supervised the uranium investigation, which was kept secret from Congress.
Well, that means he should recuse himself.
And he needs to get out of the way.
And he probably needs to be investigated along with Mueller himself.
And it gets worse.
The deputy assistant FBI director, Andrew McCabe, he also supervised this mess.
And he's currently under Congressional and Department of Justice Inspector General investigation for helping Hillary's pal, Governor Terry McCullough, get elected when McCullough was being investigated by the FBI.
And the DOJ continued to hide all of this when it announced the conviction and sentencing of a key Russian player in December of 2015.
And they simply said a former Russian official was sentenced today to 48 months in prison, but they didn't disclose what it was about.
And that's just the summary.
Now, let me give you some of the details.
Let me give you, here's the headline in the Hill today: Sarah Carter, John Solomon, working in conjunction.
Sarah Carter at circa.com, John Solomon with The Hill.
They'll both be joining us for an exclusive interview at the top of the next hour.
Here's the headline.
Pay close attention.
I'm going to go through this slowly because it takes time to understand it.
And I spent most of the day just going over this.
And I've got a lot of other information we'll get to today, but I spent a lot of time on this.
Here's the headline: FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama administration approved the controversial nuclear deal with Moscow.
You understand what we're talking about here?
The FBI knew about it.
And what you're going to discover in a second is they knew about it for years.
So before the Obama administration approved this controversial deal in 2010, giving Moscow, Putin, Russia, control of a large swath of American uranium, I'll fill in the blanks, you know, foundational material for nuclear weapons.
Before that ever happened, the FBI gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion, money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin's atomic energy business inside the United States.
They knew it.
They had evidence the whole time.
Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive, get this, they have financial records making secret recordings.
They have intercept emails as early as 2009 showing that Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
The FBI and court documents show all the evidence is here.
We can bring this case to a grand jury tomorrow.
They also obtained eyewitness accounts backed by documents.
I'll read it again.
Eyewitness accounts backed by documents indicating Russian nuclear officials, get this, had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton's charitable foundation, the Clinton Foundation.
At the time, Hillary Clinton, then Secretary of State, served on a body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow.
Let me slow you down here.
They obtained eyewitness accounts backed by documents indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. that were designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton's foundation during the time she, Hillary, was Secretary of State, serving on the government body that provided the favorable decision to give 20% of America's uranium to Putin.
I'm only three paragraphs in.
The rocketeering scheme was conducted, quote, with the consent of higher-level officials in Russia who shared the proceeds from the kickbacks.
One agent declared in an affidavit years later.
You know what they're saying?
The $145 million that came from the people involved with the deal?
It sounds like it came from Putin.
It sounds like it came from Russia.
It sounds like they money laundered the money in Latvia, and we got more details coming.
Rather than bring immediate charges, the Department of Justice continued investigating for four more years.
Yet they had enough evidence to prosecute.
Why would they do that?
Which essentially leaves the American public and Congress in the dark about the Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting Vladimir Putin's commercial nuclear ambitions.
Is the corrupt news media are they going to go with this story considering their obsession with Russia, except that it goes against Hillary and Obama and Holder and the Democrats?
Because it appears that they sold the country out for money and they knew about it and they gave away our nuclear energy, our plutonium.
800-941-Sean, please tell your friends to tune in tonight at 9.
We will blow this wide open.
So the headline, FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama administration approved the controversial nuclear deal with Moscow that gave Vladimir Putin 20% of America's uranium.
And what did they find?
Well, that industry officials, Russian nuclear officials, and the FBI gathered substantial evidence of bribery, kickbacks, extortion, money laundering, all designed to get American uranium and grow Vladimir Putin's atomic energy business inside the United States.
And they were successful.
And they ended up, they have federal agents using confidential witnesses working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records.
We have secret recordings.
We have intercepted emails as early as 2009 showing Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm and all the bribes and all the kickbacks, all in violation of law.
This is why it might also be a RICO Act because they had a business involved in all of this.
And it was conducted with the consent of higher-level officials.
This was all being designed by Russia.
And they all shared the proceeds from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit.
And then rather than bring immediate charges, why did Eric Holder, why did the Obama administration, for four long years, keep the American people and Congress in the dark about this Russian corruption and this deal that ended up giving 20% of America's uranium to Putin and to Russia?
And why did they ignore the fact that the Clinton Foundation benefited with literally millions and millions of dollars?
Because the whole Russian nuclear program here, this effort of theirs, you know, they have Russian nuclear officials routing millions of dollars to the United States to benefit the Clinton Foundation.
Now, we knew that Hillary had to sign off on the Uranium One deal.
We knew that the foundation got $145 million kickback.
We knew that it smelled to high heaven.
We know that it's a stupid deal if we're giving away 20% of the foundational material to build nuclear weapons.
And like the rest of the media, all they were fixated on is Trump and Russia, Russia, Trump.
And how many times have I told you this all is going to boomerang?
It's now boomeranging before your eyes.
And watch the media go silent.
Watch them, you know, head to their bunkers.
Watch the lack of coverage.
Watch the, oh, false flag stories over here.
Oh, Trump might have said this girl is hot in 1976.
Let's follow that story, not the truth about American security.
Hi, 25 till the top of the hour, 800-941 Sean.
Now, the authors of this investigative report, they've done more investigative reporting than every big newspaper, every major network, CBS, NBC, ABC, every cable channel, but for the Fox News channel putting Peter Schweitzer on, than anybody else.
That's Sarah Carter and John Solomon.
I want to give you a quick summary, and then we're going to take it to the next level, because this is the real Russia collusion story.
This sacrificing American national security and the Russians at the highest level infiltrating the government of the United States under Obama and Hillary Clinton as the secretary of state.
To the point where now we have the FBI had uncovered a Russian bribery plot before the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton approving this nuclear deal to give up 20 percent.
America's uranium to Putin, the foundational material of nuclear weapons.
I'll go through this part quick again.
So before they ever approved this deal to give up 20% of the uranium, the FBI already had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion, money laundering, by the way, that would make its way to the Clinton Foundation, designed to grow Vladimir Putin's atomic energy business inside the United States.
Federal agents used confidential witnesses working inside the Russian nuclear industry.
They have extensive financial records.
They made secret recordings.
They intercepted emails as early as 2009, all showing Moscow had compromised American uranium trucking firms and bribes and kickbacks in violation of numerous laws, the Foreign Corruption Practices Act, FBI, and court documents show.
They also have eyewitness accounts that are backed by documents that indicate Russian nuclear officials had routed millions and millions of dollars to the U.S. In other words, they laundered it, designed to benefit Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton's foundation during the time she served as Secretary of State and was part of a government body that gave that favorable decision to turn over 20% of uranium to Vladimir Putin.
Stay with me here.
This is important.
This racketeering scheme of bribery, kickbacks, extortion, money laundering was conducted with the consent of the highest official in Russia, Putin himself.
In other words, who shared the proceeds from the kickbacks, according to one agent declaring in an affidavit years later.
And rather than knowing this in 2009, rather than bringing charges, Eric Holder's Department of Justice, well, they just decided to keep the investigation open for four more years, which meant that you, the American public, and the Congress were all kept in the dark.
Congress is supposed to have oversight into all of this about the Russian nuclear corruption that's happening on U.S. soil while the Obama administration is making two specific decisions benefiting Putin's commercial nuclear ambition.
So, in other words, the FBI, the Justice Department, they knew all about the bribery.
They had evidence of all the bribery, all the kickbacks, all the extortion, and all the money laundering.
And they never told Congress.
They never mentioned it to the American people at all.
And the only person that first broke this open was Peter Schweitzer.
Now, Sarah Carter and John Solomon have taken it to an all-new level here.
And this was during the period the administration was making decisions.
So, what are the decisions they're making?
Okay, October 2010.
That's when the State Department under Hillary and government agencies on the Committee on Foreign Investment right here in the U.S.
This is the dumbest decision anybody ever made, except if you're getting something in return.
And that was to unanimously approve the partial sale of a Canadian mining company, Uranium-1, to the Russian nuclear giant that's called Rossestam, I think the way you pronounce it, giving Moscow control of more than 20% of America's uranium supply.
Uranium, the foundational material for nuclear weapons.
Now, when the sale was brought up by the Trump campaign, Hillary's spokesman said, Well, she's not involved in the committee review, and noted the State Department official who handled it never intervened on Committee of Foreign Investment in the United States.
She never had any knowledge of it.
It's a lie, and it's a provable lie.
In 2011, the administration gave approval to this Russian company and their 10x subsidiary to sell commercial uranium to U.S. nuclear power plants in partnership with the United States Enrichment Corporation.
Before then, 10X was limited to selling nuclear power plants, reprocessed uranium that was recovered from dismantled Soviet nuclear weapons under the 90s, et cetera, et cetera.
But the Russians were literally compromising American contractors in the nuclear industry, and everybody in the Justice Department and FBI knew about it with kickbacks.
And then, after they give him a kickback, then they offer him an extortion threat, all of which raise legitimate national security concerns.
And none of that evidence, nothing was told to you, the American people.
None of this evidence got aired before they made the decision to give 20% of America's uranium to Vladimir Putin and Russia, according to a person who worked on the case, speaking to John Solomon and Sarah Carter on the condition and anonymity for fear of retribution by U.S. or Russian officials.
This is how high up it goes.
And then the Obama administration's decision to approve this purchase of uranium-1.
Okay, we've all heard about that part.
That's Peter Schweitzer, wrote about it in Clinton Cash.
And he talked about how the Russian speaking fees of, of course, Bill Clinton doubled.
He's got $500,000 an hour.
His usual fee is $250,000.
And they collected $145 plus million dollars in donations to the Clinton Foundation.
Now, here's where it gets more interesting: the Obama administration and the Clintons defended their actions, insisting, oh, there's no evidence that any Russians or donors engaged in wrongdoing, that there's no national security reason for any member of the committee to oppose the Uranium-1 deal.
You've got to be kidding me.
There's no national security interest in giving 20% of America's uranium to one of America's biggest enemies that we're told is Russia and Vladimir Putin.
And Hillary's campaigning on it years later about what an enemy they are.
So it gets even more interesting.
The FBI, the Energy Department, and court documents that the Hill and Circa News found showed that, in fact, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence well before the decision to give 20% of America's uranium to Putin,
before that decision was ever made, that this guy, Vadim Mikarin is his name, the main Russian overseeing Putin's nuclear expansion inside the U.S., that he was engaged in wrongdoing.
And they knew it started back in 2009.
And then the Attorney General, Eric Holder, was among Obama administration officials joining Hillary on the Committee of Foreign Investment.
At the time, he knew everything that was happening of the Uranium One deal at the time it was approved.
In other words, all of these people knew about bribery, kickbacks, extortion, money laundering, and they all knew that it was designed to grow Vladimir Putin's atomic energy business inside the United States of America.
And they hid all the evidence that they had so that this kickback deal could be made.
In other words, multiple current and former government officials are now on record.
They don't know whether the FBI or the DOJ ever alerted the committee, which would have been their fiduciary responsibility.
Certainly, look, at the end of this, there are three people that need to go to jail, in my opinion: Eric Holder, Bill, and Hillary Clinton.
But I digress.
Now, this guy, who I just mentioned, which is Damon Mikarin, was the director of Rosta Stam's Tenex in Moscow since the early 2000s when he oversaw the nuclear collaboration with the United States and this program that they had and its commercial uranium sales to other countries.
Anyway, in 2010, he's dispatched to the U.S. and on a work visa approved by the Obama administration.
Anyway, between 2009 and 2012, he did knowingly and willfully, and I'm reading from The Hill, combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with other persons to obstruct, delay, and affect commerce and the movement of an article and commodity, enriched uranium, in commerce by extortion, according to a November 2014 indictment.
Let me read it again.
Between 2009 and 2012, this is according to a November 2014 indictment.
He knowingly and willfully combined, conspire, confederate, and agree with other persons to delay, obstruct, and affect commerce and the movement of an article and commodity, which was enriched uranium, in commerce by extortion.
Stay with me here.
His illegal conduct was captured with the help of a confidential witness who's an American businessman who began making kickback payments at this guy's direction and with the permission of the FBI.
This is how deep this all went.
The first kickback payment was recorded by the FBI through the informant.
This was dated November of 2009.
Why didn't they stop it?
They all knew about it.
They have more evidence than you'd ever want for any criminal case.
It's ridiculous.
In evidentiary affidavits that were signed in 2014 and 15, an Energy Department agent assigned to assist the FBI in the case testified that this guy supervised a, quote, racketeering scheme that involved extortion, bribery, money laundering, and kickbacks that were both directed and provided benefit to more senior officials back in Russia.
Putin's navigating the whole thing through the United States.
And who's benefiting?
Follow the money.
Well, that's where the Clinton Foundation comes in.
That's where Bill's speaking fees come in.
But I digress.
As part of the scheme, this guy was, with the consent of higher-level officials at 10X and Rostostom, both Russian state-owned entities, would offer no-bid contracts to U.S. businesses in exchange for kickbacks in the form of money payments made to some offshore bank accounts, according to Agent David Garden and what he testified in the case.
Now, this guy apparently then started to share the proceeds with other co-conspirators associated with these Russian state-owned entities, these nuclear entities, and elsewhere.
The investigation was then supervised by then U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein.
Remember him?
He's the Obama appointee who now serves as President Trump's deputy attorney general.
He's the guy, along with the assistant FBI director Andrew McCabe, now the deputy FBI director under Trump, according to the Justice Department.
Both men played a key role in the current investigation into possible collusion between Russia and Donald Trump's campaign.
McCabe is under Congressional and Justice Department Inspector General investigation.
My question is, why didn't they do this if we care so much about Russia?
And then, of course, it dealt with Terry McAuliffe.
I don't want to get too lost here in the woods.
The connections to the current Russia case are many.
And that is that this guy began the probe in 2009.
Guess who was in charge?
Robert Mueller, who's now the special counsel.
So you got Mueller, you got Rosenstein, and you got McNabe.
They all know about this deal and the evidence in this case, and they knew what was happening.
And anyway, putting all the twists and turns aside, the FBI nuclear industry case proved a gold mine in part because it uncovered Russian money laundering apparatuses that routed bribes and kickbacks through a financial system, instruments in Cyprus, Latvia, and other countries.
And a Russian financier in New Jersey was arrested for money laundering.
The case also exposed serious national security breaches.
This guy was given a contract to an American trucking firm and held the sensitive job of transporting Russia's uranium around the United States in return for more than $2 million in kickbacks to some of its executives or from some of its executives.
And one of his employees told the FBI that Russia specifically directed the scheme to allow for padding pricing to include kickbacks and bringing down a major Russian corruption scheme had both compromised the sensitive uranium transportation asset inside the U.S. In other words, the Russians have access to uranium inside our own country.
Justice Department, FBI, took little credit when this financier was arrested and charged.
And they basically hid the indictment, the case, and the charging of this because they didn't want the whole thing to blow up.
So at the end of the day, here, we've got more questions than we have answered.
But I'm going to tell you where this is: follow the money.
And my guess is this is going to lead that it was Putin who put the money in the bank account of Bill and Hillary Clinton for their foundation.
And it was all money laundered, and they all knew about it.
And they still signed off on the worst deal possible for the United States that compromised our national security.
This is what you call a Russian collusion scandal.
Now we have Sarah Carter, John Solomon coming up in the next hour.
We'll have more details tonight.
We're going to really break it down so that you understand it.
And then we're going to challenge the media in this country, Robert Mueller, Rosenstein, Congress, the Attorney General, and others to do their job.
All right, when we come back, you're going to hear directly from those that broke this story.
Sarah Carter and our good friend John Solomon, also Newt Kingridge, will weigh in on it.
Senator Ram Paul on the health care provisions.
Ainsley Earhart stops by from Fox and Friends and much more straight ahead.
The Russia story is a total fabrication.
It's just an excuse for the greatest loss in the history of American politics.
That's all it is.
It just makes them feel better when they have nothing else to talk about.
What the prosecutors should be looking at are Hillary Clinton's 33,000 deleted emails.
And they should be looking at the paid Russian speeches and the owned Russian companies.
Or let them look at the uranium she sold that is now in the hands of very angry Russians.
Would you agree, though, that there's an appearance of a conflict, though?
One example being Uranium One, the Canadian company, you know, sold to Russia, something that required your approval as well.
And then later, some of the players involved in that deal wound up paying former president Bill Clinton, your husband, obviously, a half million dollar speaking fee.
Well, you know, I don't know if we have enough time in this interview to debunk all of the allegations that were made by people who are wielding the partisan axe, but there's no basis for any of that.
The timing doesn't work.
It happened in terms of the support for the foundation before I was Secretary of State.
There were nine government agencies who had to sign off on that deal.
I was not personally involved because that wasn't something the Secretary of State did.
All right, if you listen to that, it looks like President Trump was right and Trump was right more than we knew.
Now, we have two pieces out today, and these two reporters, investigative reporters, have done more work than everybody in the mainstream media together combined, and that includes print, and that includes television, and that includes broadcast, and that includes cable.
This takes the entire Russia, Russia, Russia narrative, and it brings us to where people like myself and Sarah Carter and John Solomon and others were saying it's headed for a long time now.
And that is right in Hillary Clinton's lap, in Barack Obama's lap, in Eric Holder's lap.
Here's a headline: FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama administration approved controversial nuclear deal with Moscow.
All right, joining us from the Hill, John Solomon joining us from circa.com, Sarah Carter here with a legal perspective, Victoria Tunsing of DeGenova and Tunsing, although it should be Tunsing and DeGenova.
Welcome all three of you to the program.
Sarah, why don't I start with you?
This has been a story that has been in the works for a long time.
We've all heard about the Uranium One deal.
This is much bigger than we ever thought.
This is now a bribery scandal that is only getting bigger.
In your own words, explain what you guys have found here.
Well, what we were able to do was discover the dots, connect the dots, the dots that had been missing.
Even when the Uranium-1 story broke, and I remember, you know, Peter Schweitzer writing his book about Clinton Cash and the New York Times looking at the Uranium-1 story, there always seemed to be a kind of a missing element as to what was going on and why did the Uranium-1 deal go through.
And what we discovered here in our story was that, you know, 15 months before the 13 members of the Committee on the Foreign Investment, that's the CFIAS committee, approved the sale of Uranium-1, that the FBI was already investigating the Russian nuclear industry, Sean.
They were investigating bribes and kickbacks.
They had an informant within the system that was actually reporting to them what was going on.
And these bribes and kickbacks from the Russian industry were going through the whole world.
I mean, they were wiring money through Latvia, through the Seychelles, paying off people.
There was huge payola.
And remember, even at this same time, as CFIAS was being approved, and you played the clip of President Trump speaking, and you, you know, you played the clip of Hillary Clinton denying any, calling it a conspiracy theory.
Her husband, Bill Clinton, was in Russia, was in Russia and gave a one-hour speech and got half a million dollars from Renaissance Capital.
Who, by the way, was touting the Uranium-1 deal as a great success for the Russian government and for Vladimir Putin.
This was something that was unheard of.
So what we discovered was that there was this case that the FBI was building, that they had gathered enough evidence, enough evidence during that time to prove that it was just the wrong deal to make.
But what we don't know.
Wait, I want to stop you here.
So everybody knew.
In other words, we had all aspects of our government.
We had the FBI.
We had informants.
We had the Department of Justice under Eric Holder, the Obama administration.
They all knew that Moscow was literally bribing, paying off payola, everybody in their circle, because they wanted American uranium.
And is that a fair conclusion?
I think that's part of a fair conclusion.
I think they wanted to control the majority of uranium globally.
I mean, they were bribing everybody they could.
And with this case in particular, we saw tons of bribes.
I mean, this is based on actual factual court documents that were practically buried.
I mean, they didn't even announce it as a big thing.
They didn't even charge the people that they were investigating, and they only ended up charging four of them, including Russian nationals, until 2014.
So they basically buried it all away from the public eye, away from, you know, what Congress, who probably would have scrutinized this from the beginning, and apparently, we don't know for sure yet, away from the members of the Cypriots board.
We don't know what they knew.
And they didn't even bring charges until 2014 against Vadim Miakarin, who was this big Russian nuclear industry guy who was connected to these big companies and others, three others.
And it was basically a slap on the wrist and it kind of got buried and hidden away.
It was not exposed the extent of the bribery.
And now you have an informant, and I think Victoria is going to be able to speak to that, who really wants to be able to tell his story, really wants to be able to get the truth out.
Is the money that the Clinton Foundation received, where did that money come from?
Because I know there were people in Canada, the Canadian firm, when they wanted to merge companies together, which would have given 20% control of our uranium to Putin.
Did the money that they've kicked back to the Clinton Foundation, some $145 million, did it really come for them?
Is there a chance it came from Russia?
John Solomon.
Well, those are questions that our story raised anew today.
So we know that Bill Clinton, in June of 2010, just six months before the decision was made to approve Uranium One, got a $500,000 speaking fee directly from a Russian source, from a banker in Russia while he was in Moscow.
That is not in dispute, and that timing predates the decision to award the approval.
And his wife is the Secretary of State and one of the people that would approve that deal.
That's right.
She sits as one of the nine members of the Cypriots.
Now, as you played in the clip, she denies that she had anything to do with it and says she wasn't, quote, personally involved.
I don't know what that means.
But anyways, it got approved, right?
But we are told that the FBI, in the midst of this investigation, received eyewitness testimony that there was another stash of money going through an intermediary to benefit the Clintons in connection to the Russian effort to get this thing approved.
We're still reporting that out.
I think we're going to learn a lot more over that.
But I think there are more threads and more money trails to follow than we previously knew.
I think Sarah said something very important a little bit ago, and I think it's really the reason why this story is so important today.
For two years, we have been told, Congress has been told, the American public's been told, the Obama administration had no national security reason, no reason to reject the Uranium One deal.
We now know that they had a very good reason, bribery, kickbacks, extortion, racketeering, to not approve that deal because the main Russian representative in the United States representing Rosatom and 10X in the United States admitted to doing these things and doing it in the timeframe before this decision was made.
All right.
So what we have here is we had the Department of Energy, we had the FBI, we had the Department of Justice, and we have documents, emails, financial records of bribery, kickbacks, extortion that the Russians used at money laundering, and that all of this was going on and they knew it and they still made the Uranium One deal.
Is that what you're saying?
In other words, I'll put it this way, that it appears this is bigger than pay-to-play, although Bill and Hillary got paid over $100 million through their foundation and the Russians got what they wanted.
Is that what it comes down to?
And we now have evidence of such.
Did the Clintons know, and I'll ask the question of all of you: did the Clintons know where this money that they got paid to their foundation came from, and how do you not see it as a kickback?
Sean, let me say one thing.
We know as of that the first bribe payment or kickback payment that the FBI recorded was in the fall of 2009, a full year before the approval occurred on CFIS.
We now know after that moment, after the FBI had evidence of criminality by the Russian nuclear industry, they made three decisions.
The first was approving uranium one.
The second was giving Mekarin, the Russian man who was involved in the scheme, a visa.
And the third was they expanded his own company, 10X's own relationship with the U.S. Enrichment Court, which was the main uranium client in the United States for Russians.
Those three things are not in dispute, and that timeline is not in dispute.
And I think it speaks volumes to what we didn't know two years ago and we now know today.
Okay, stay right there.
We're going to come back.
I want to get Victoria Tunsing to weigh in on this.
It's getting more interesting by the day.
All right, as we continue, headline: FBI uncovered Russia bribery plot before the Obama administration approved this nuclear deal where Russia would get 20% of America's uranium.
Let me bring in Victoria Tunsing along with John Solomon and Sarah Carter.
Victoria.
Yes, sir.
All right, let's talk about the legality of all of this.
Look, if they knew about bribery, if Eric Holder knew about bribery and kickbacks and extortion and money laundering, and he did nothing to stop it, and then the Clintons benefited to the tune of $150 million plus dollars and they signed off on this deal.
How is it even possible she's not in jail?
Well, of course, the Obama administration wasn't going to investigate her, and for some reason, this present Justice Department thinks I think they think it's unseemly.
But let me just tell you, Sean, I have a client that's involved in this.
And during the Obama years, my client was the undercover person.
And after the criminal case was over, two years after the criminal case was over, my client brought a lawsuit.
And I won't get into the details of why he did it, but he was not a happy person that would have revealed all of this corruption.
And guess what?
Loretta Lynch's Justice Department did.
They threatened him.
And I have a memo, emails from his lawyer at the time that said the government was taking a very harsh position against you that threatened both your reputation and liberty.
And the government threatened him unless he withdrew that civil complaint.
They made serious threats to him.
Wow.
Wow.
According to his lawyer.
So he signed a non-disclosure agreement, which we call an NDA.
And the government threatened that they would put him in jail if he disclosed under the NDA.
And I've never, I've done a lot of NDAs in my life.
I've never seen one that's a criminal penalty.
It's always a fine or going to a court and stopping you from talking.
But what we're working on right now is my client wants to come forward and tell people on the Hill and our investigators more about this.
And he's being prevented because of the NDA.
All right.
Let me ask you this, all of you.
And this is important.
Where does this end by, say, the end of this week when everything is revealed?
Sarah.
Well, I hope it ends with Congress demanding some answers.
And I hope it ends with people answering the questions that both John and I and Victoria and others have about this case.
Did members of the CFIS board were they informed?
How high up in the government did the FBI take their information from the informant?
Did they let the president at that time, President Obama, know what was going on?
And what about our national security here in our country?
When we give up 20% of our uranium while the FBI has an ongoing investigation and enough knowledge to know that these Russian players in the nuclear industry were bribing people and committing criminal acts that could put us in jeopardy.
Somebody needs to answer those questions.
John, where are we going with this?
Tomorrow morning, 9.30, the Senate Judiciary Committee has the Attorney General of the United States, Jeff Sessions, on the hot box.
He's going to be answering questions.
It'll be our first inkling to see if any member of Congress has the courage to ask what went on.
Who's on that committee?
It's Senator Charles Grassley as the chairman.
And what's interesting about this is that Senator Grassley, for the last two years, has been one of the leaders in trying to find out more about what went wrong with how did we end up approving Uranium One and why didn't the government stand in the way?
He's going to have an opportunity tomorrow.
And here's one of the questions that Jeff Sessions is going to have to answer.
Your current Deputy Attorney General is Rod Rosenstein.
He oversaw this case for Barack Obama's Justice Department.
The current deputy director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, supervised the agents who worked on this case.
What did they know?
When did they know it?
And did they raise the right flags?
Those are going to be some of the questions that we'll have to see if they get asked tomorrow.
All right.
Appreciate you sharing this story.
Both of you will be on Hannity tonight.
Victoria, thank you for your insight.
And if your client can speak, we'd love to interview them because we think we need to get to the bottom of this.
This is the real Russia collusion story, and it involves bribery, kickbacks, extortion, payouts, and a transfer of 20% of America's uranium to Vladimir Putin.
Who knew what, when, and where?
And when are we going to get to the bottom of this?
800-941, Sean Tolfrey telephone number, Newt Gingrich, when we come back, and much more as we continue the Sean Hannity show.
All right, 25 now till the top of the hour, 800-941.
Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, let's play Mitch McConnell, the president, and talking yesterday about how great they're all getting along and on the same page, and they'll get tax reform done this year, if not maybe year two.
All right, this is from yesterday.
I want to underscore what the president said.
We have the same agenda.
We've been friends and acquaintances for a long time.
We talk frequently.
We don't give you a readout every time we have a conversation, but frequently we talk on the weekends about the issues that are before us.
Obviously, passing the budget, which enables tax reform and tax reduction, comes next.
Then the supplemental to take adequate care of those who've been harmed by the natural disasters we've been afflicted with lately.
And of course, the Senate's unique role that seems to me a lot of people forget.
We're in the personnel business.
There are 1,200 of the president's nominations subject confirmation in the Senate.
The House is not in the personnel business.
We are.
Legislatively, obviously, the top priority is tax reduction.
And I think what the President and I would both like to say to you today, contrary to what some of you may have reported, we're together totally on this agenda to move America forward.
Would you be okay if tax reform were not passed until next year as opposed to this year?
Well, I would like to see it be done this year, John.
I would like very much to see it be done this year.
So we won't go a step further.
If we get it done, that's a great achievement.
But don't forget, it took years for the Reagan administration to get taxes done.
I've been here for nine months, a little more than nine months.
I can say the same thing for health care.
If you look at Obama, first of all, you look at Clinton, they weren't able to get it done.
You look at other administrators, they weren't able to get it done.
President Obama, after a long period of time, was able to finally push it through, but push through something that's now failed.
We're really failing badly.
But again, we're meeting Democrat, Republican are meeting right now, and right now they're working on something very special.
But I have to tell you, I really believe that we have a very good chance, and I think Mitch feels the same way, of getting the taxes done, hopefully fairly long before the end of the year.
That's what we'd like to see.
Well, I hope to have a relationship.
If we don't, we don't.
I mean, we have races coming up, and as you know, in a year from now, I think we're going to probably do very well.
I can say this: if we get taxes approved, we're going to do unbelievably well.
Many of the senators are running in states that I won by massive amounts, over 20%, sometimes 30%.
I guess in one or two cases by over 40% over the Democrat.
Well, we're going to let you know that.
I would like to give you that answer in about seven years from now.
Is that okay?
Meeting one plus seven.
I hope to, John.
I hope to be able to because I like the concept of bipartisan.
But right now, they are doing nothing but obstructing.
And really, you know, if you think about it, they're against major tax cuts that's going to make our country stronger and more competitive.
That's a hard thing to win an election on.
And I believe that some Democrats will be voting for us when it comes to the tax cuts.
My relationship with this gentleman is outstanding, has been outstanding.
We are working very hard to get the tax cuts.
We will continue to work hard to get the health care completed.
I'm going to be surprising some people with an economic development bill later on, but I haven't even told Mitch because I want to focus on tax cuts and some other things right now.
Okay, I don't think everything is actually fine.
Joining us, former Speaker of the House, Newt Kingrich, author of the new bestseller, the novel Vengeance.
He stops by, and Mr. Speaker, glad you're with us.
I'm glad to be with you.
I don't believe for one second that Mitch McConnell and President Trump are really getting along.
I think it's, but it's what you have asked for, and that is they've at least got to try to get along and at least try and get this tax plan through.
Sure, look, I think you have two really big things where the president's leaning on McConnell.
One is all of the appointments, including the judgeships, where, by the way, Trump and McConnell have gotten twice as many judges approved so far as Obama did at the same point in his first year.
So they really want to put a big push on appointments and judges.
And then, second, they have to get the tax bill through.
And that means they've got to get the budget through, I think, this week.
And that's a huge assignment.
And, of course, it's compounded because if you have, for any reason, for example, several, at least two or three Republican senators who may be in bad health.
And if you only got a 52-vote, 52-48 margin, that gets to be very, very exciting, frankly.
Well, it gets interesting.
But, you know, I was told by Paul Ryan that October is the month for the House to get their job done.
He's confident he's going to get it done.
I'm pretty confident he can get it done.
I'm not confident.
I'm a little worried.
I think it's sliding to the first week of November, and that worries me.
Because now the calendar is bad.
That's right.
And because you've got to get the House done in order to get the Senate done, and then you've got to go to conference, and they start sliding this thing.
I didn't like the tone yesterday, and they said, well, maybe it'll take till next year.
Taking until next year is going to weaken economic growth in the first quarter, and that is not good for the Republicans running in the fall.
So I'm going to continue to beat the drum.
They need to get this done by Thanksgiving.
At worst, they need to slop it over to the first week of December.
But if they let it slide towards Christmas, it's going to be February or March before they get a bill.
And that, I think, makes it much harder for the Republicans in the fall campaign.
I agree with you.
Have you spoken with any of these people?
Oh, yeah.
I'm talking to them every day right now saying you've got to move.
You can't quit thinking and start legislating.
Well, you know, the House is on vacation this week.
The Senate was on a vacation again last week.
I mean, I don't know.
With all due respect, they take more vacations than you, and you're supposed to be semi-retired.
Come on, let's not be vindictive here.
No, no, no, I'm not being vindictive.
I take think periods.
I don't think of them as vacations.
They're think periods.
I like your vacations.
And by the way, there's hardly a vacation you've ever taken that I don't make you work.
Well, by the way, as you know, Callista was confirmed by the Senate last night.
And so it looks like we're going to have a long stretch in Rome here.
That's going to be quite exciting.
And I'm very proud of her becoming the ambassador of the Valley.
By the way, congratulations on that.
And the vote just took place yesterday, I believe.
It was yesterday at 5:30.
It was very emotional for both of us sitting there with our team at Games Productions, watching the Senate vote on C-SPAN 2.
And I have to tell you, it was a very emotional moment.
And she won a very nice victory.
I think it was 70 to 23.
And the seven who were missing, I think all six of the seven voted for her.
So very handsome victory for her.
Now she's honest.
I mean, the votes against her were probably votes against you if we're going to be totally honest about it.
Yeah, I mean, are just Democrats being Democrats.
No, that's true.
I want to ask you this.
So we've got this big-breaking developing story that we've been on all day today, and that is the FBI uncovered this Russian bribery plot before Obama approved the 20% of American uranium nuclear deal with Moscow.
And what we're discovering is Obama, the FBI, knew of this Russian plot to pad the Clinton charity, which is the Clinton Foundation, and expand their nuclear footprint.
And they had their fingerprints all over this from day one.
And in other words, that the money.
Go ahead.
I'm going to say, how can they not have indicted some people?
Well, now I think it's now being blown wide open today by John Solomon and Sarah Carter.
I mean, the work those two, and I know you have them on the TV show a lot, and I have to tell you, they have done more investigative work than all the major news outlets in the country combined.
It's amazing the stuff they're able to find that somehow the Washington Post, the New York Times, and all those guys can't quite find.
Let me read from the report.
Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings, intercept emails as early as 2009 showing Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm and bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
FBI court documents show.
They also have eyewitness accounts backed by documents indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions and millions of dollars to the U.S. designated to benefit former President Bill Clinton's charitable foundation during the time his wife, Secretary of State Clinton, served on the government body that provided the favorable decision to Moscow that would allow 20% of America's uranium to go to Vladimir Putin.
I don't think, you know, this, of course, is something which Clinton cash covered in great detail.
But this takes it to another level.
Peter Schweitzer is really being validated in everything he said about them.
Again, I want to know, when is the Congress now going to pick this up and dig into it?
Because this is extraordinary.
Let me continue reading.
Rather than bring immediate charges, the Department of Justice, this is Eric Holder's Justice Department, continued investigating for four years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about this Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during the period the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting Putin's commercial nuclear ambitions.
The first decision in October of 2010, the State Department, government agencies on the Committee of Foreign Investment in the U.S. unanimously approved a partial sale of this Canadian mining company, Uranium One, to the Russian nuclear giant Rastastam and giving Moscow control of more than 20% of America's uranium supply.
When this sale was used by Trump on the campaign trail, Hillary Clinton's spokesman said she was not involved in the committee review and noted that the State Department, who handled it, never intervened on any of the matters.
And then in 2011, the administration gave approval to Rasta Stomp's Tenex subsidiary to sell commercial uranium to U.S. nuclear power plants in a partnership with the United States Enrichment Corporation.
Before then, Tenex had been limited to selling U.S. nuclear power plants, reprocessed uranium recovered from the dismantled Soviet nuclear weapons under the 1990s deal.
The Russians were compromising American contractors in the nuclear industry with kickbacks, extortion threats, all of which raised legitimate national security concerns.
Then we're beginning to find out that, in fact, the money that was given to the Clinton Foundation was a direct quid pro quo and that the money may have been funneled through Latvia and laundered, but the money came from the Russians, not the people involved in the deal.
You read that, Stephanie.
I mean, don't you say to yourself at one level?
I mean, if you ever wanted evidence that there was a deep state and that it was deeply corrupt and that Donald Trump saved us from what would have been the most corrupt administration in American history, I mean, the Clintons would have entered the White House with an absolute passion for corruption and a willingness to sell out the United States again and again for money.
They knew that it's astonishing.
They knew it for four plus years and did it anyway.
And they gave them 20% of America's uranium.
And the Russians were all over it.
And yet, we're hearing about Russian interference in our elections.
This is direct benefit to the nuclear program of Vladimir Putin in exchange for money.
Right.
Well, that's why, I mean, I want to see how rapidly the House and Senate pick this thing up and what their justification is for not picking it up.
This is truly, I first saw this earlier this morning, and I thought to myself, you know, this is like a nuclear bombshell going off.
This is going to be because it gets you at every level.
It gets you at the Clintons being corrupt.
It gets you at the Russians offering money for assets to our uranium.
It gets you to the FBI being suborned by an attorney general who was clearly so political that he was undermining the entire process of the Justice Department.
All right, stay right there.
We'll take a break.
We'll come back more with Newt Gingrich at 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
A lot more coming up.
We have Senator Ram Paul going to join us.
Ainsley Earhart's going to stop by from the Fox News channel.
And as we continue with Newt Gingrich, by the way, his new book, he has a book tour that he's on, is now headed to the bestseller list again.
It's called Vengeance.
And you've been on the road a lot.
What are people telling you when you're out and about?
Well, I mean, first of all, they love the concept of vengeance and the whole fact it involves the North Koreans.
It involves terrorists.
This is the third volume in a series with Brooke Grant as our heroine, a Marine major.
So that's going very well.
And look, I live in a very unusual world because people know you and I are so close.
The number of people who walk up to me and are pro-Kennedy, you know, pro-us being together on Fox, pro-Trump, I'm sure is a very selective part of the world.
But I get tremendous positives everywhere I go around the country.
The New York Times, by the way, the New York Times wants to interview you about me.
I know.
And I've told them I will, and I'm going to go out on a limb and tell them the truth.
But then they're not going to it's probably not going to be reported.
It's probably cutting.
I'm very confident.
I've had friends recently.
I'm so positive there's no hope.
I've had friends from, you know, back 30 years interviewed, and they're like, do you want me to talk to these people?
And I'm like, I don't care.
Whatever you want.
Say whatever you want.
All right.
So the book vengeance, we have it up on our website, Hannity.com.
And are you going on the road?
Are you doing more book events or what are you doing?
No, nope.
I'm doing mostly radio and television.
And people can go to EuroSide or they can go to Gingrich Productions to get the book.
And we're very excited about it.
And of course, I'm also out here reminding people about Callista's new book because she's not allowed to talk about it because she's now an ambassador.
But she also has her seventh volume of Ellis the Elephant teaching four to eight-year-olds called Remember the Ladies.
It's about the president's wives.
And it's a great book for 48-year-olds.
I tell people, if you want to be happy, you get Ellis the Elephant.
If you want to be scared, then you get vengeance.
All right.
Thanks, Mr. Speaker.
We'll see you tonight on Hannity as we are going to blow wide open this entire corrupt bribery scheme that gave away American uranium to Vladimir Putin, and we knew it was happening.
This is the real Russia story.
Tonight at 9, Hannity on Fox, we have Ram Paul, Ainsley Earhart, coming up next.
Here the world we have organized and led the three-quarters of a century to abandon the ideals we have advanced around the globe, to refuse the obligations of international leadership and our duty to remain the last best hope of earth for the sake of some half-baked,
spurious nationalism cooked up by people who would rather find scapegoats than solve problems is as unpatriotic as an attachment to any other tired dogma of the past that Americans consigned to the ash heap of history.
No idea what has happened to just Senator John McKay, News Roundup Information Overload Hour, 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, we've been talking at length on how Donald Trump is totally, almost single-handedly now dismantling Obama's imperial presidency.
And the latest on the Iranian deal and the latest on the health care deal last week are just the two biggest examples.
Donald Trump and then, of course, we got Steve Bannon saying that what's happening with what happened in Alabama is just the beginning, declaring war on the establishment Rhino Republican Party that has yet to get anything done.
Mitch McConnell is literally ground zero in this battle and this fight.
Joining us now is Senator Rand Paul, who was very instrumental in getting the president to pay attention to this 1974 law that exempted corporations that had businesses in different states.
It allowed these businesses to buy their health care across state lines.
And basically, it was a cooperative and they weren't subject to the burden of state law, nor subject to the burdens of the ACA Obamacare rules and regulations.
And now people can form their own cooperations, associations, and they have the ability to have the same benefits that the corporations do.
That means the buying power that, let's say, restaurant workers would have or radio workers would have or any industry workers would have.
They can now buy across state lines.
Once this is implemented, they can have the buying power, purchasing power of big groups.
They can buy across state lines.
And they could even get plans like, for example, a catastrophic plan, which is illegal under Obama.
The single best thing that could have happened for Obamacare, considering the colossal failure of Republicans to keep their promise to repeal it and replace it.
Rand Paul was instrumental in all of this.
How are you, Senator?
Quite good.
Yeah, what the President did last week to legalize individuals to join associations and buy across state lines.
It may be one of the biggest free market reforms ever in the past generation.
It also may be the biggest thing that will allow people to escape Obamacare because people are going to be able to get out of those individual marketplaces out of these Obamacare plans, and they're going to be able to get the kind of insurance, you're right, that big corporations have.
This is what Pepsi has.
It's what Coca-Cola has.
It's what Amgen, Amazon, Microsoft.
These big corporations offer ERISA plans.
So what we're doing is saying, hey, the individual is going to be able to get ERISA plans now.
And through their size, they should be able to negotiate lower rates.
But also through their size, they should be able to negotiate good terms, meaning good insurance.
Well, I would think that this would allow a lot of the things that you and I have talked about real solutions for years.
And I think you're one of like two senators and then the Freedom Caucus members that actually discuss things that would work, like health care savings accounts, like cooperatives.
I mean, I think you and I have been the biggest supporters of health care cooperatives because they actually work, and you can couple those cooperatives with some type of catastrophic insurance if you have an accident, a bad accident, or get a heart attack or get cancer.
And what's the problem?
Yeah, the great thing about this is it doesn't cost any federal money.
The president mentioned this also.
This isn't a big federal program like Lindsey Graham's block grant thing that costs a trillion dollars in grants.
This costs zero.
This just lets you have the freedom to form associations and buy insurance, and it costs zero taxpayer money.
Well, I like the idea for all of those reasons, but we still really are just threading a needle here because Obamacare is still in place.
And if Donald Trump is president even eight years, that means the next person in is going to undo what the president did here, and then we would be back with Obamacare, no?
Yeah, but the problem is we had six senators who voted to repeal it in 2015.
I brought up the exact vote this time.
I made them vote on the exact same vote against it.
Same bill.
And exact same bill.
And it would have repealed the employer mandate, the individual mandate, would have repealed all of the taxes, would have been a trillion-dollar tax cut as well.
We could have done it with just Republicans, but we lost Republicans who were for it and then got weak need and voted against it.
So this is a real problem.
And we're struggling as a Republican Party trying to determine who we are anymore.
We've got a budget battle going on, and I told the president that I want to help the president on the budget, and I said I will vote for the budget as long as the spending doesn't exceed the caps.
But guess who's asking to exceed the caps?
John McCain.
John McCain and Lindsey Graham.
Both of them are insisting that we exceed the caps and that we spend money that is above the caps that we put in place.
And so we have conservative Republicans saying, no, no, the budget should stay within the spending caps.
But then you have John McCain and Lindsey Graham saying, oh, no, no, we want to spend above the caps, and we won't vote for any budget unless it spends above the caps.
Well, I've got to understand.
You said something that I've been saying now for a while, and that is the Republican Party does not have an identity any longer.
They really don't have an identity.
Well, there's a fake identity.
There's the identity that every congressman, every senator goes home on the Republican side and they say, we absolutely need entitlement reform.
And it's going to be in the budget, entitlement reform.
But mark my words, they will not do it.
They will not introduce any bills that will reform entitlements because they're afraid of their own shadow.
The actual budget has like $6 trillion worth of savings on entitlements, but it's a fiction.
They will not do it.
There are savings for next year.
And so this week when we get to the budget, I will introduce an amendment that says the instructions for the budget should allow us to do entitlement reform.
And you watch this vote.
It's going to be interesting to watch the Republicans squirm because they'll all say they're for it, but I promise you they'll vote against the amendment.
They will not vote to allow budget reconciliation to be used for entitlement reform.
So then you sound like me.
I mean, because I agree with you about Lindsey Graham.
I agree with you about John McCain.
I actually retweeted you last night.
I bet you're not even aware of it, are you?
Well, I am, but you caught me today.
I'm upset today.
I'm mad.
I'm mad at Republicans who really don't believe in anything they say they're not.
They'll join the club because I've been saying this, shouting this on TV and radio for months and months.
They suck, and they have no identity, and they don't work, and they have no vision for the future of this country.
I mean, it's pathetic, the Republican Party.
But it's worse than no identity.
It's a false identity.
They project that they are for some reason.
Why don't you say it a different way?
They are for entitlement reform.
They're lying.
They're lying.
They lie.
When they said repeal and replace, there were 100 Republicans in the House that never had any intention.
Those seven senators that voted to repeal in 2015, and all you needed them to do was vote for the same bill in 2016 when it would have happened, and they didn't do it.
So they were lying to the American people.
Isn't that true?
It's non-stop.
This goes on just every day.
It's one more thing.
But I promise you, they are going to vote for a budget that says they'll do entitlement reform, but I'm going to force an amendment vote.
And on the amendment, I will say, okay, let's have instructions in the bill as to how we could do entitlement reform with a simple majority through budget reconciliation.
And I guarantee they'll all vote no.
We're also going to do it on Obamacare.
I'm going to insist that they revisit Obamacare on the budget, and I'm going to say, let's put instructions in there that says that we can still repeal Obamacare.
I'm guessing that most of the Republican leadership will vote against me on both of those amendments.
Well, I'm guessing you're probably right.
So now we're stuck with what?
Now, the president signaled today that he might be willing to cut a bipartisan deal to stabilize Obamacare because it's spiraling out of control.
He called it a, quote, short-term solution, so we don't have to worry about this transition into what you encouraged him to do.
And he spoke for minutes after he met with Lamar Alexander and Patty Murray.
And those are not two people I have any confidence in.
And I'm going to tell you who the worst of them all is: your fellow Kentucky senator, Mitch McConnell, who can't get a darn thing done.
We shouldn't bail out Obamacare.
I won't vote to bail out Obamacare.
We shouldn't give the insurance companies any more money.
What should happen is the people who are trapped in the individual market should be allowed to leave, should be allowed to get group insurance through these health associations.
We should do everything possible to speed it up.
And I can tell you, I was with the president for a good while the other day, and the president said he's going to try to speed this up.
He wants people to, as soon as possible, be allowed to leave these individual markets, these Obamacare markets.
He wants them to get group insurance cross-state lines, and he's telling his people to expedite this and do it as fast as they possibly can.
Let me play your fellow Kentucky senator, Mitch McConnell, talking about excessive expectations because I don't think they were excessive expecting repealing and replacing Obamacare.
And I don't think it's excessive to get tax reform that we need in this country to get to jump-start the economy and incentivize businesses to invest in factories and manufacturing centers and energy so that we can get the forgotten men and women in poverty on food stamps and out of the labor force, you know, back climbing the trajectory to success.
Here's what he said.
I'm going to ask for a show of hands, but I know everybody's saying we've been there, haven't done anything, which I find extremely irritating.
And I'm going to tell you why.
Congress goes on for two years.
And part of the reason I think that the storyline is that we haven't done much is because, in part, the president and others have set these early timelines about things need to be done by a certain point.
Now, our new president has, of course, not been in this line of work before.
And I think had excessive expectations about how quickly things happen in the Democratic process.
And so part of the reason I think people feel like we're underperforming is because too many kind of artificial deadlines, unrelated to the reality and the complexity of legislating, may not have been fully understood.
And of course, our political adversaries would be love to say that anytime.
So what I'm asking of you is to judge this Congress when it finishes.
How much have we done?
to make America competitive again and to grow again.
And that's part of America, making America great again, which is what the president talks about so much.
Artificial deadlines, complexity of legislation, excessive expectations.
The president hasn't been in this line of work before.
Now, there was a kumbaya moment between the president and Mitch McConnell.
I don't believe it for a second, Rand Paul.
I couldn't disagree more on that.
This is an artificial deadline.
We've had six years.
We voted previously to repeal it.
What has to happen is voters in the states of the six or seven senators who changed their vote need to let their people know loud and clear, go back and do what you promised.
You promised to repeal it.
We promised to repeal it.
We didn't ever promise that we were going to replace it with Obamacare light.
We promised to repeal the damn thing.
We ought to vote.
And I'm going to continue to force them to vote as many times as I possibly can on repealing the thing.
Well, I mean, but they're not going to do it.
I mean, that's what we're doing.
Yeah, which perhaps it sends a message back to their voters that their voters need to reassess their choices.
I want to go back to this issue with John McCain, who took a jab at the president when he criticized half-bake nationalism of the president.
And, you know, you went after John McCain.
I thought rightly so on this.
You know, after what happened in Vietnam, we lost 58,000 Americans.
Then through the prism of politics, we stop fighting and we basically pull out after so many people die.
We did the same thing in Iraq.
5,000 people dead, we pull out.
If we don't have any intention to fight and win wars, why are we fighting them anymore?
And I think this is really the problem.
This is where John McCain's had it completely wrong.
He's wanted to be involved.
If he had his way, we'd be in 12 different wars right now in 12 different countries, but we wouldn't declare any of them.
One of the ways that our founding fathers said that we would unify and that we would rally around the flag is that we would vote as a body in Congress, and we just wouldn't go to war unless we voted in Congress.
George Bush, actually, even though I disagreed with the Iraq war, he did come and he voted.
We voted on the Iraq war.
I would have voted with him on the Afghanistan war because those people harbored those who attacked us.
But both times he came to Congress and voted.
Since then, we don't vote.
We've just gone on decade after decade, and McCain and Lindsey Graham are the chief architects of these wars.
They have never met a war they don't like.
They were everywhere all the time agitating for war.
They're bankrupting the country, and yet we fight in a half-assed way, and we are policing, and we become policemen.
Look, I've talked to our Navy SEALs.
These are some great guys, and when you talk to them, they say, we'll do anything that you need us to do anywhere around the world, anytime.
But the mistake comes when you ask us to go plant the flag and create countries for you because we're not policemen.
We don't want to be policemen and we don't want to be into nation building.
But that's John McCain, Lindsey Graham.
Nation building, wars everywhere.
Well, I'm going to tell you something.
I mean, if we're not going to fight wars with any intention of winning them, then let's not put these guys in harm's way to begin with.
And what happens every time now we fight, we begin a conflict, which we can win.
But we literally put handcuffs on our soldiers, rules of engagement.
They can't fight back.
And number two, I mean, we don't have the stomach politically to see it through.
And all those people that put us in those positions are running for the hills if it becomes politically unviable in their eyes.
It's all about how it affects them.
It's not about what the right thing to do is.
Well, and I think we have to be, you're right.
We have to go in, and when we do go to war, it should be rare.
And when we do go to war, we should go to win.
But then we really do have to come home.
To tell you the truth, we've been in Afghanistan for 15 years now.
It is nothing more than nation building.
If they will not stand up and fight for their country after we've given them billions of dollars of weapons and uniforms and you name it, we've given it to them.
And if they can't stand up and fight for their country, they're never going to have one.
So it's sort of a little bit like welfare.
You can't give people welfare forever because it saps their incentive.
It's the same way with supporting foreign countries.
They have to eventually stand up and fight for themselves.
And in Afghanistan, it is time.
Obama put 100,000 troops in there, and you know, the Taliban slink away, but they go and they wait and they wait.
They will always wait.
They will wait for a thousand years.
The people who live there need to stand up and fight the Taliban if they're going to fight them.
But we can't do their business forever.
I like Rand Paul mad.
You should stay mad more often.
You're definitely more effective when you're pissed off.
But by the way, my staff says I do a better show when I'm pissed off.
All right, thank you for being with us.
We appreciate it.
When we come back, Ainsley Earhart of the Fox News Channel is going to stop by in studio and much more as we continue.
I always struggled with, like, okay, so what's my story?
And it suddenly dawned on me that I was the beneficiary of these radical changes in women's rights and opportunities that began in the 60s and continue, and that I could have and maybe should have tried harder to tell that story.
But I quickly add, as you point out, I never thought there would be that receptive an audience.
And I think that what's happened since this election may have cracked that open.
I hope it has.
I hope, you know, I'm seeing tens of thousands of people on my book tour.
And I've now shaken, you know, about seven, eight thousand hands and book signings and spoken to you know 10,000 more and I've got much still to do.
There seems now to be a willingness by more and more women and girls to claim their rights in a very explicit way, not an apologetic way, not like, oh, you know, excuse me, let me express my opinion.
But no, I have an opinion.
I want to tell you what that opinion is.
You can tell you that the number one problem in Hollywood was and is and always will be pedophilia.
I was 12 years old and my publicist basically talked me into doing things that I didn't really want to do.
I hadn't had sex before and he kind of convinced me that this was the right thing to do and kind of told me like, don't tell your parents.
He seduced me and he started at 11 years old to 12.
We have to make people realize that children need to be safe on these sets and they're not safe.
Congratulations, you five ladies no longer have to pretend to be attracted to Harvey Weinstein.
Do you have any advice for a young girl moving to Hollywood?
I'll get lively.
Harvey Weinstein invites you to a private party and it's horsey must okay.
You hear of your own free will.
Has someone coerced you into being here?
Do you count Harvey Weinstein as a coercer?
No.
I'm not afraid of anyone in show business.
I turned down intercourse with Harvey Weinstein on no less than three occasions of five.
So the Harvey Weinstein scandal continues here and it's getting worse by the day.
Now here's the most fascinating aspect of all of this is how come you never hear all these people in Hollywood that supported the Clintons over the years.
Well I interviewed Juanita Broderick and she accused Bill Clinton of rape.
I interviewed Kathleen Willie, who said she was groped and grabbed and fondled and touched and kissed against her will.
I interviewed Paula Jones, who says that then Governor Clinton dropped his pants and said, kiss it.
How come the media never plays this and why were they so supportive of Bill Clinton?
Let's hit it.
You described a scene where he was biting on your lip, and then when it was all over, he was leaving.
Said, you better put some ice on that.
Yeah.
And casually put on his sunglasses and walked out the door.
It was a terrible ordeal for me, and I no woman should be subjected to it.
It was an assault.
He assaulted you.
Yes.
And he touched, grabbed, fondled, and kissed you against your will.
Yes.
And it's an allegation that is not made by one woman.
It's made by multiple.
I said, well, I may need to be going or something.
And next thing, you know, he pulled down his, he sat down, pulled down his pants, his whole everything, and he was exposed.
And I said, I'm not that kind of girl.
And I need to be getting back to my desk.
So beyond despicable, beyond hypocritical, Ainsley Earhart, the co-host of Fox and Friends on the Fox News channel each weekday morning, 6-9 is with us.
She's got a brand new book out.
This is number two in a series.
It's called Through Your Eyes, My Child's Gift to Me.
You know, it's fascinating.
I'm going to ask this question through this prism.
When you have a daughter, and I have a young daughter, and I saw your daughter on TV with your dad is in your Mr. Earhart, sir.
I know with the South, it's sir.
Yes, sir, no, sir.
Yes, ma'am, no, man.
Am I doing all right?
Like, can we put his mic on?
You got to get you got to.
Dad, you got to get closer to the mic.
Yeah.
Sorry about that.
There you go.
You got to talk a little louder.
You don't have to call me sir, y'all.
No, no, no.
I'm glad to call you.
But it makes a difference.
I mean, it literally makes such a big difference in life.
What are your thoughts?
You've been covering the Weinstein thing.
You know, when you play all those soundbites of the girls who are accusing Bill Clinton of this, it sounds exactly like the stories about Weinstein.
And I don't think any of us have ever thought about it because that happened so long ago until you've brought it up, Sean.
You know, could you imagine if the shoe were on the other foot, if this were President Trump?
Oh, the mainstream media would be playing it over and over and over.
Yet they're not really covered.
Not for a big portion of the newscast.
And you know, now we're seeing that it was a lot of these stars are coming out of the woodwork.
I think it's the tip of the iceberg.
I had two women on last night.
Tracy McCura was on, an actress that has been in movies and on soap operas.
And then we had Kaya Jones, who was with the Pussycat dolls.
And it's in music and it's in TV and it's in the movie.
It's the entertainment industry.
And these young girls go with hopes and dreams.
And this is how this is why my parents would never write, Dad, they never wanted me to major in theater and they didn't want me to go to New York at an early age.
Now, is that true, Mr. Earhart?
One big reason.
Yeah.
I remember there was a modeling.
Was she incorrigible growing up?
What did she behave?
She was in trouble all the time.
That is not true.
You're getting me confused with your son.
That's true.
Oh, whoa, so she was an angel and your son.
I don't know about an angel, but I was the middle child.
She was a middle of the road.
I put it that way.
You put it in middle of the road, middle child.
Is that right?
Well, you know, you think of it, and I know this is a second in the series.
By the way, the illustrations in these books that you do are phenomenal.
Thank you.
And your first book was Take Heart, My Child, and that was your dreams for your child.
I happen to see you guys on the show this morning.
Your daughter is an angel.
That girl is adorable.
Thank you.
And that's your granddaughter, sir.
That's right.
Okay.
And so now, through your eyes, my child's gift to me.
And I started thinking about it as y'all were talking about it this morning.
Say, I'm getting southern, y'all.
And this is what was interesting to me: is when you watch kids and it's raining outside, they love the rain.
You know, to us, it's an aggravation.
Right.
You know, if with the snow, it's an aggravation.
For a kid, it's heaven.
I know.
You know, and they, for example, you buy them a beautiful gift or a toy, and all they care about is the plastic that they can pop.
Right.
You know, and we think it's the greatest gift we ever got them.
I know.
I mean, so tell us about.
Well, that's really what the book is about, Sean.
It's just, it's watching your children and learning from them and being able to, as an adult, say, I can grow and learn the importance of life and what's really important.
And that's through the eyes of a child.
Because I'm sure your schedule is as busy as we live insane lives.
I mean, we just go.
It's just go.
It's go, go, go all the time.
Yes.
And does your child stop you?
And do you go, wow.
Your child's name is Hayden.
Hayden.
Hayden.
Does your child, you find yourself stopping and saying, I'm so stupid.
I do find myself, I've always been a worker.
And like you, I say yes to everything that Fox ever asks me to do.
And my schedule is packed.
I have, I mean, literally, minute to minute, it is packed.
Having a baby has slowed me down.
And the fact that I'm not afraid to leave work and go attend to her or go to her classes and just put my work life on hold for an hour.
Do you find you're getting better at saying no?
Because I got better as I, I'm now, I just started my 23rd year at Fox, believe it or not, last year.
Congratulations.
What would we do without you?
Thank goodness.
Who would have thunk it?
I'm the last man standing in Fox News.
I get them in a studio.
Dad, can you believe this if you really think about it?
We're from South Carolina.
I watched you.
I remember that was the last thing that we would do every night.
We'd watch your show and then go to bed and I'd get up and anchor the local news.
And now I'm working with you and have been a correspondent for your show and I'm on your radio show.
You've been there 11 years now, right?
Almost 11.
Almost 11 years.
What did you think, when you read this book, because I'm reading it, my kids are older now.
My son's 18, my daughter's 16.
And I'm realizing that there were those moments, I do have one regret that I wasn't home enough because I was working so hard.
But I remember my kids would like, they would stop and pick up a rock, and then I'd be like, come on, let's go, go, go, go, go.
No, then they'd pick up a flower.
And I'm like, stop with the stupid flower.
Then they'd pick up something else that was annoying me.
And I remember at the time, I was pretty good at realizing, all right, it's more important that they play with the rock than me to drag them along like they're a puppy dog and understand that that's of interest to them.
Well, Sean, I think that, you know, they always say the simple things in life are probably the best things in life.
And that certainly holds true in raising children.
And as I said today on the TV station, you know, they're gifts from God.
So no matter how bad they are, how good they are, they're yours.
It's your responsibility to care for them and love them and cherish them.
And, you know, the little moments that we had with all three of ours were probably moments that we were sitting together talking or at the beach somewhere, sitting around on the beach and just spending time with each other.
That was far more important than getting a new car or a new house or whatever it may be, some new toy or whatever.
Like you said, I think they had more pleasure playing with boxes that the toys came in and a toy.
That's right.
You know, and I'm looking through the illustrations and you have like a snowy day with an airplane and the kids are ecstatic.
You have a scene in the park, a fall scene, and the illustrations are beautiful.
Thank you.
Then you have a little girl chasing birds in the book and a story around that.
Then kids in a playground, which used to give me ajata because I thought my kid was going to break his neck.
And then kids hanging out at a pond and just running around and playing with the dog.
And then, you know, butterflies and flying kites and going on little boats.
I don't know about your life.
I don't get to do this anymore.
No.
You know, I barely get to breathe.
But I think we rob our kids of their childhood a little.
Well, you know, the book has, it's really, it's been interesting to see how all this has unfolded.
The first book was about all the little messages that dad would leave me next to my cereal bowl every morning, a scripture, a poem, and it was called Take Heart, because there's a scripture in the Bible that says, in this world, you will have trouble, but take heart.
I have overcome the world.
And I think about that when we talk about ISIS, we talk about, you know, North Korea.
Take heart.
I have overcome the world.
And that's kind of the message our kids teach us.
Learn to breathe.
Learn to take a step back and truly smell the roses.
You've been able to do that.
This has helped you.
It's helped me.
I'm working on it.
I'm not a perfectionist.
I mean, I'm not perfect at this.
I'm trying, but I'm learning.
I'm really just learning to take a step back and watch my daughter and appreciate her seeing a dog for the first time.
It's seeing rain for the first time.
I remember from the first book, you did tell that story that, Mr. Earhart, sir, you would leave notes for all the kids, right?
And Bible verses.
Did you have any idea it would have the impact to inspire Ainsley to do a book like this?
No, not really, Sean.
It just I was really surprised that Ainsley kept them all or wrote them down somewhere.
And I still have a file for the house that I would kind of run out.
I'm going to have to go back and start repeating.
Yeah.
See, my family's just shocked that I'm not in jail.
I mean, they're really, I was far more incorrigible in my life.
I won't go there.
No.
I guess you're saying it's your brother.
Okay.
He turned out okay.
How does it feel to, and this is just a fact now, that the president of the United States of America, that you're his favorite show.
There have been articles written that Fox and Friends is his favorite show.
Well, one of them, I think yours is too.
I think he's watched the show.
I love it.
Yeah.
It's cool, right?
It's great.
Yes.
You know, the mainstream media or the liberal press will want to write an article about, you know, we give soft interviews or we do that.
That is not true.
The vice president even told, one of his folks that works for him told me that my interview was tougher than the, he gave three of us interviews at one point.
One was Matt Lauer, one was me, and I can't remember who the other one was.
And he said that mine was the tougher one out of all three of them, which I took great pride in because I planned my questions the night before.
I talk about it.
Sometimes I'll call you and I'll say, Sean, can I run over the questions with you?
Or I'll talk to people on my staff and I'll come up with really hard-hitting questions and things that I think our viewers are going to want to know.
I don't want anyone to think it's a softball question, but I do want people to think we're fair.
And I think we are fair.
No, well, and you work very hard to get these interviews as everybody does.
And I noticed that Brian was there earlier today.
One of the things you should be proud of is by far, you double your competition.
You beat them combined.
And that's an amazing accomplishment, especially considering how tough morning TV is.
We have great, great.
I will tell you, this is the best illustrated book with an incredible message.
I think it reminds even those of us that are adults that we need to slow down a little bit and we can learn from our children that they're gifts from God and they have wonderful things to teach us and remind us about.
You're going to be out in Huntington tonight at Book Review signing books in about an hour and 15 minutes from right now.
I'll be at Huntington's 7 o'clock book review, Brooklyn tomorrow night at Brookmark Shop, which is on 3rd Avenue, and that's at 7 p.m.
And then I'll be at RJ Julia Booksellers at 6 p.m. on Thursday in Connecticut.
Then I go home to South Carolina to sign books in Myrtle Beach on Friday night, Saturday during the day in my hometown in Columbia.
And then on Sunday, I'm in Greenville, my mom's hometown.
So you can go on AinsleyEarhartBooks.com to see the schedule or any of my social media.
And if you want to buy a signed book.
It's on my website, too, Hannity.com.
Okay.
And then I also have the signed books.
So tonight at Book Review in Huntington, if you want to go to any of these other ones, it's on AinsleyBooks.com or Hannity.com.
Ainsley Earhart.
Ainsley EarhartBooks.com.
But if you want to buy a signed copy of the book, you can go on AinsleyBook.com.
Well, congratulations.
It's a great reminder for all of us.
And some of the money goes to Folds of Honor, which is the military charity.
That's right.
All right, Mr. Earhart, sir, God bless you.
Good to see you.
You've got to be proud of this little girl.
Very much so.
Proud of all three of them.
Not just her about it.
All three.
Which one do you like the best?
I can't go there.
All right.
Quick break.
We'll come back.
We have an awesome Hannity tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
We are going to blow wide open the real Russia conspiracy collusion story.
It's all happening tonight on the Fox News channel, Hannity at 9.
Now, Sarah Carter, John Solomon, our good friend Greg Jarrett, Newt Gingrich, and Peter Schweitzer will all break this down for you in an understandable way.
And I bet the rest of the media ignores it because they are corrupt.
You don't want to miss it.
That's happening tonight, 9 Eastern, Hannity on the Fox News Channel.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
▲
Export Selection