Sean Hannity Show - Heat Turns Up on Clinton - 10.27

Oct. 28, 2017 - Sean Hannity Show

01:40:37

Heat Turns Up on Clinton - 10.27

Guest Host Dan Bongino fills in for Sean and is joined by Congressmen Jim Jordan and Rod Blum to discuss the investigations into the Clinton Foundation's role in Uranium One. The heat is turning up as more information is released. The Sean Hannity Show is live weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart podcast.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markowitz and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	Let not your heart be troubled.
	You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
	All right, so I have insomnia, but I've never slept better.
	And what's changed?
	Just a pillow.
	It's had such a positive impact on my life.
	And of course, I'm talking about my pillow.
	I fall asleep faster.
	I stay asleep longer.
	And now you can too.
	Just go to mypillow.com or call 800-919-6090.
	Use the promo code Hannity and Mike Lindell, the inventor of MyPillow, has the special four-pack.
	Now you get 40% off two MyPillow premiums and two Go Anywhere pillows.
	Now, MyPillow is made here in the USA, has a 60-day unconditional money-back guarantee and a 10-year warranty.
	Go to mypillow.com right now or call 800-919-6090, promo code Hannity, to get Mike Lindell's special four-pack offer.
	You get two MyPillow premium pillows and two 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.
	All right, welcome to the Sean Hannity show.
	I'm Dan Bongino at eBongino on Twitter, contributing editor over at Conservative Review.
	In for Sean today, by the way, if you've not checked out the promos and the trailers for the movie Sean's involved in, Let There Be Light, do it now.
	Do it, check it out, letTherebeLight.com.
	I know I'm going this weekend.
	There's a couple studios, one in Port St. Lucie.
	By the way, it's funny about Port St. Lucie.
	I'm always getting off trail.
	This is my thing.
	Like tangents are my thing.
	I specialize in tangents because I have a higher order ADHD.
	My daughter came home and said PSL the other day.
	She was talking about a pumpkin spice latte, and I thought it meant Port St. Lucie.
	But that's where I'm going to go see the movie.
	Go check it out, Let There Be Light.
	I haven't seen it yet.
	I'm going to see it this weekend, but the reviews have been spectacular.
	If you listen to some of the people and their testimonials, they're incredible.
	So let there be light.
	But I'll be in for Sean today.
	We got a number of really terrific guests.
	I'm kind of stoked about Steve Moore coming in.
	Can you say stoked when you're 42?
	Lauren, is that weird?
	I think it's totally normal.
	It is?
	Okay.
	All right.
	I was just, because I was a little worried.
	My wife sometimes comes home.
	She's like, you're 42.
	You should really not say things like stoked.
	You sound super rad.
	Super.
	I don't even know if rad is rad anymore.
	When I was a kid, everything was mint.
	My locals used to laugh at me, like, mint, that was a Long Island thing.
	In Queens, you had to say awesome.
	But 4P, I got Steve Moore coming in.
	We're going to talk taxes.
	Steve Moore's probably forgotten more about taxes than most people know.
	And we're going to dispel and debunk a lot of stupid liberal myths about taxes because that's what liberals do.
	They lie.
	5P, I've got Chris Hahn.
	Now, if you've seen me debate Chris Hahn, Chris is a lib, but he's a nice guy.
	I mean, listen, I'm a conservative.
	I think people can have different ideas.
	But if you've ever seen me and Chris debate on Fox, we usually rip each other's heads off, but we don't dislike each other.
	But he'll be in a 5P for what I promise will be a very spicy debate about the issues of the day.
	Liberal callers, by the way, you're always welcome too.
	You know, I like that.
	And at 5:30, we have Congressman Jim Jordan and Rod Bloom.
	So that'll be fun.
	All right.
	Folks, you know, we've been told for six months about this X-Files Trump-Russia fairy tale conspiracy theory, collusion narrative.
	And I'm going to break some news for you right now about Russian collusion.
	Deep breath.
	It was true.
	Now, if you're a listener out there, you're like, wait, what?
	The Russian collusion thing was true?
	Folks, it was true.
	Was true the whole time.
	Six, seven months, eight months.
	Turns out looks like four or five years.
	This Russian collusion thing was absolutely true.
	But it's a little wrinkle to this story.
	Yeah, you were thinking fastball.
	We're going curveball here.
	Maybe knuckler.
	The little wrinkle to this story is the Russian collusion was a story of collusion between the DNC, Hillary Clinton, and the Obama administration and the Russians the entire time.
	So thanks to the Democrats.
	Nice job.
	I have never in my life seen such a stupid political strategy to advance a knowingly garbage, nonsense, made-up, fake conspiracy theory about Trump's relationship to the Russians that turns around and boomerangs in your face and turns out to be an accurate scandal.
	Just wipe out the Trump portion, get the whiteout out, and put DNC Hillary Clinton.
	What a bunch of imbeciles.
	I think people still use that word.
	And I'm pretty sure that's FCC compliant.
	What a bunch of colossal imbeciles.
	You know, I love Twitter.
	They have that hashtag epic fail.
	This is an epic, epic fail.
	Of all the epic fails I've ever seen in political strategy, this ranks easily number one or two.
	I cannot think of a scandal that is so backfired on these dopes in the liberal movement than this Russian collusion thing, which is true.
	It is a Democrat collusion scandal.
	Now, I've got a theory on this.
	I got a lot I want to get to.
	This Adam Schiff is at it again, this just Joker in Congress who's becoming a one-man comedy act, right?
	But I have a theory on this, and you're free to tweet me about it.
	You're free to call in 1-800-941-7326.
	Liberals are free to call in, too.
	I really don't care.
	They usually have nothing substantive to say, but I don't mind yelling at you once in a while.
	My theory on it is this: the Clintons aren't dumb.
	Either is Barack Obama.
	They're not.
	I don't agree with their politics, but these aren't stupid people, folks.
	Don't do your, you're doing yourself a strategic disservice if you think that.
	I was there.
	I worked there.
	For those of you who know me, I was a Secret Service agent, started with the Clinton administration, worked with the Obamas.
	These aren't dumb people.
	They have really dumb ideas, but they're not dumb people, okay?
	They had to know the entire time.
	They had to know that this Russians collusion scandal, when at least the Trump end of it, was nonsense.
	All right, they understood that.
	They also understood, because I don't believe for a second that the Clinton campaign did not know what was going on with this dossier, that the DNC, because I want to just get this down to nuggets, because this is a very complicated case.
	The DNC and the Clintons were basically paying for bad Russian intel.
	They had to know they were involved in that, Hillary included.
	I don't see any plausible way Hillary Clinton did not understand that millions of dollars were being funneled to a lawyer to essentially, in essence, pay for bad Russian intelligence from Russians.
	I'll get into more of this as the show goes on.
	But here's the takeaway, the 30,000 foot for you here.
	You should be asking yourself, well, what the hell did they advance this Trump-Russia fairy tale for if they knew the entire time that they were the guilty ones?
	You know, folks, if you go into a local bodega or deli and you steal something off the shelf and you walk out, you don't walk back into the deli or the bodega and go, hey, somebody just stole something.
	Go get them.
	Let's go look at the videotape.
	They do the Water Wolf.
	Do the videotape.
	You don't do that.
	Right?
	I mean, why would you bring attention to Russian collusion if the Russian colluders the entire time were you?
	Here's my theory.
	And I think there's something to this because I know these Clinton people.
	They're not stupid.
	The Clintons had lived through this before.
	They have lived through intense media scandal before, whether it was Whitewater, whether it was Travelgate, whether it was Vince Foster, whether it was Monica Lewinsky.
	They have lived through all this before, and the media has always found a way to cover for them.
	Clinton left office, folks, regardless of all these scandals.
	Bill Clinton left office with an approval rating hovering near 60% because the media painted it as a right-wing conspiracy.
	Ken Starr was the bad guy going after them, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	You remember, most of you know what happened there.
	The Clintons have lived their entire life with the understanding that no matter what they do wrong, no matter how guilty they are, no matter how many, no matter literally biological evidence of the act appearing that Bill Clinton was lying, it doesn't matter.
	The media has always covered for them.
	Hillary needed after this election, this devastating loss.
	She needed a convenient excuse.
	I'm not sure if she's going to run again.
	I know she says she is, and I'm not sure about that, but she needed a convenient excuse to maintain her political umth because she's not done with politics regardless because she can't be because she's a creature of politics.
	She feeds off power.
	She's like, you know, that guy from Spider-Man 2, whatever, Electro, where they feed off electricity.
	She feeds off power.
	They need power and they need a flow of funds.
	So she needed to reestablish her political credibility.
	The only way she could do that after this absolutely horrifying, humiliating loss, where she was destroyed by the Electoral College.
	Destroyed.
	I mean, she was running for the governorship of California.
	She would have done great, but she got destroyed using our rules.
	She fabricated from the start in conjunction with her political consigliaries a false narrative to save her image.
	And that false narrative was that the Russians colluded with Trump to win the election.
	They never believed it.
	They never had any evidence.
	There's still no evidence.
	And no evidence will appear.
	It's nonsense.
	It's a made-up narrative.
	But they needed it.
	And even though they knew that they had gone into the bodega and stolen the loaf of bread, they knew when they went back in that the media would help them, help them gaslight the owner into believing someone else did it, even though they were watching a video of them stealing it themselves.
	They knew the media would advance the narrative.
	They understood that the entire time because they've lived through it, folks.
	They've lived through it.
	I'm not speaking with forked tongue here.
	I'm telling you the truth.
	They've lived through before the media protecting them from obvious guilt.
	Not only that, Bill Clinton leaving office with a high approval rating despite defiling the office and defiling people in the office.
	They had always covered for them before.
	And I think what is shocking to her now, being a creature of old politics, is she's stunned, I think, at the development of social media and the evolving of the conservative content ecosystem through, you know, Breitbart, Conservative Review, Drudge, social media, Twitter, Facebook, and the ability to have alternative voices out there on TV.
	You got Fox News.
	You have other outlets out there as well.
	She was blindsided by the fact that the story and the truth would come out.
	Folks, I'm not crazy because there's only two explanations to this.
	Only two.
	Explanation number one are these are the dumbest people in the history of politics.
	No, I'm serious.
	They invented a false narrative about Russian collusion, knowing the colluders the entire time were them.
	That has to be the single dumbest decision in political history.
	And I don't believe it.
	I don't believe they're that stupid.
	I know I'll get emails and tweets on it.
	That's fine.
	You're free to disagree, obviously.
	I'm putting it out there to Sean's millions of listeners.
	These are not dumb people.
	I've worked with them.
	I genuinely believe option two, that they were absolutely convinced the media was going to multiply this false narrative and cover for them because that was their experience in the past.
	All right, I'm Dan Bongino, in for Sean at DeBongino on Twitter.
	If you want to give us a call, 800-941-7326.
	We'll be right back.
	Hey, guys, you know how much I love Tommy John's underwear, undershirts, and their socks.
	They are the best.
	Yet, you know what?
	We're getting a lot of feedback from Hannity listeners too.
	And guess what?
	Tommy John sent me a few testimonials from real live Sean Hannity show listeners.
	So I'm going to share them with you.
	Dave says, I can't believe I'm saying this, but they have actually changed my life.
	Mark says, great materials, great fit, a great example of how doing something very basic, very well can make a surprisingly positive impact on the quality of life.
	And Gary says, my grumpy stepfather actually thanked me for the gift of Tommy John's.
	That's a first in the 40 years I've known him.
	Louise says, my husband is walking, bending, and lifting all day.
	This is the first pair of underwear that doesn't roll down and ride up.
	He loves them.
	Now you've heard the reviews.
	What are you waiting for?
	You have nothing to lose with Tommy John.
	It's the best pair you'll ever wear or it's free, guarantee.
	Just go to tommyjohn.com slash Hannity.
	You get 20% off your first order.
	TommyJohn.com slash Hannity, 20% off.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
	Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter.
	Filling in for Sean, that is the song from his movie he's involved with, Let There Be Light.
	Go check it out, Hannity.com or lettherebelight.com.
	You can see theaters that are showing the movie.
	There's a couple by me in Florida.
	Like I said, I'm going to go check it out in Port St. Lucie this weekend.
	So if you're up and around the area, who knows, we may run into each other.
	But the feedback on the movie has been terrific.
	And folks, let's be honest, Hollywood's been feeding us a steady diet of death, carnage, and destruction for the last, what, 30 years?
	It's time to start supporting movies that represent American values and, you know, things that matter to us, faith, family, freedom.
	So go check it out.
	Let There Be Light.
	Go to letThereBelight.com or Hannity.com.
	Check out a theater near you.
	I think there's hundreds of theaters.
	So I went on there this morning and it's not hard to find one.
	Go check it out.
	There's tons of them in Florida down by me.
	It's the great part about Florida, man.
	And it's 70 now.
	Nice.
	I know Sean's got a place down here, but I was up in New York recently and it was a little cool.
	But Florida, this is when it gets sweet.
	You pay for it in August, where it's about $175.
	But now it is nice, 70 or 80 degrees.
	So the sunsets are just amazing at night.
	Enough about that.
	I'm not like the Florida tourist office representative or anything.
	All right, getting back to this Russian collusion story, which I told you, which may have shocked you as I opened up the show, that the Russian collusion story is true.
	It's just a Democrat Hillary Clinton collusion story and the Obama administration.
	Now, here's a comical turn of events that I saw right before.
	And when I mean comical, I mean like the sad clown.
	You know the sad clown, right?
	Maybe like that pennywise clown from that Stephen King movie, like the horrifying clown, too.
	Adam Schiff, who is a one-man comedy act up on Capitol Hill, who's a Democrat.
	You know, Democrats, you know, I always like debate this.
	Like, I want to rant, but I don't want to lose my marbles right now.
	So I'm going to hold this in for a second.
	You know what?
	I'm just tired of Democrat.
	And I'm not talking about Democrat voters.
	I'm sure there's a lot of good people out there.
	I know there are because I have friends who are Democrats.
	I'm talking about the establishment wing of the Democrat Party elected politicians.
	You're a disgrace.
	You frankly disgust me.
	I mean, disgust.
	Like, I read your stuff on Twitter and I have to see it.
	And I'm embarrassed for you.
	I mean, listen, I can go after the Republican Party when we violate our principles because I know a good number of people up there on the Hill actually still care about the country.
	I'm wondering outside of like Joe Manchin, are there any sane Democrats left?
	So getting back to Adam Schiff, the Democrats are crazy.
	They're just crazy.
	You have Schiff now.
	I'm not making this up.
	Adam Schiff is now calling for an investigation of Trump, who pulled a gag order on an informant in the Uranium One case who was threatened by the Justice Department over telling the truth about what happened with the Clintons selling, signing off on at least Hillary and the Obama administration, signing off on 20% of our uranium nuclear fuel being sold to our adversary in the Russians.
	Wait, wait, wait.
	Get the pencil, put it in the tape for you old folks.
	Rewind that thing.
	We'll save some batteries on the tape recorder, right?
	Did I just say that right?
	Adam Schiff, a one-man walking clown show, Bozo the clown himself, now wants an investigation into Trump because Trump, the president of the United States, last time I checked, although John Lewis wished Mrs. Clinton happy birthday and said, happy birthday, Madam President.
	I think he missed the election.
	But now Trump wants the informant to be able to talk to Congress about the sale of our nuclear fuel to a foreign adversary, and Schiff wants to investigate Trump.
	Folks, these people are insane.
	The Democrats have lost their marbles.
	They are crazy.
	We are, it is complete chaos time.
	It's like, remember the Mr. Bill show?
	It's the Mr. Bill show.
	This is what it's like up on Capitol Hill.
	This guy is nuts.
	Adam Schiff.
	And then you have his buddy, Brad Sherman, goes on Fox last night.
	Did you see that?
	Folks, listen, I can lose my marbles pretty quick when I get upset.
	I've never seen a guy go on television and just make a fool out of himself last night like Brad Sherman, another Democrat on Fox.
	They're losing their minds, folks.
	They're right in front of us.
	The Democrats are losing their minds.
	Maxime Waters wants Trump to be taken out.
	This is crazy talk.
	All right, I'm Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter.
	We'll be right back.
	What do you think of when you hear the word Lutheran?
	Do you think liberal, women in clerical collars, gay marriage, social justice warriors?
	Find out how the 16th century Lutheran Reformation was really a conservative movement intent on reform, not revolution.
	With the podcast, Issues, etc., issues etc.net, Real Reformation Radio, issues etc.net, issues etc.net.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
	Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter, filling in for Sean.
	Again, if you haven't checked it out, lettherebelike.com.
	Don't miss this movie Sean's involved with.
	Go check it out, Hannity.com.
	You can check your local theaters.
	Folks, we have to support a new type of entertainment ecosystem out there.
	The one now is nothing but pollution.
	I stopped going.
	Well, I don't want to say I stopped.
	I don't want to be disingenuous with the audience.
	But I almost stopped going to movies about four or five years ago when they did a drastic turn to the left.
	I'll go occasionally once in a while if I see some doozy where there's an actor I like.
	But other than that, this is the kind of movie, Faith, Freedom Family, the things we need to support.
	Go check it out.
	Let There Be Light.
	The reviews on it so far have been amazing.
	So go check it out.
	LettherebeLight.com for your local theaters.
	Like I said, I'll be up in PSL, Pumpkin Spice Latte, Port St. Lucie this week.
	I said my daughter came home with a PSL.
	I said, wow, Port St. Lucie?
	No, Pumpkin Spice Latte.
	I'll be checking it out.
	All right.
	Listen, here's the big deal about this case that I think is escaping a lot of folks out there.
	When I say this case, I'm talking about the exploding Russian collusion scandal, which is a collusion scandal just with the Democrats and Hillary.
	Many of you know me, some of you don't.
	I was a former federal agent.
	I'm intimately familiar with the process for putting people in jail, prosecuting them with federal crimes in conjunction with the U.S. Attorney's Office.
	Folks, I've done this before.
	It's on a pat on the back.
	It's just a fact.
	I'm just trying to establish a base level of bona fides here.
	Here's the problem I see with this case: the Democrat-Russian collusion case, which, by the way, is, again, it's exploding in front of our very eyes.
	And in my humble opinion, is the scandal of the century right now?
	Here's why.
	There are two takeaways from this.
	And here's the first one: it is now confirmed, no reasonable person disputes, that the Democrats, through multiple vehicles and conduits, paid people affiliated with the Russians for false intelligence on Donald Trump.
	Okay, this is where it gets important, folks.
	The Democrats want that story to stop right there.
	Because sadly, but again, let's be candid.
	If the story stops there, it stinks.
	It's ugly, but it's not necessarily illegal.
	The Democrats' pitch would be, oh, okay, whatever.
	So we paid for bad information.
	It's called OPPO research.
	Candidates do it all the time.
	And yes, folks, to be open and honest about it, they would be correct.
	Oppo research happens everywhere.
	It's happened to me.
	I've run for office three times.
	It's ugly.
	Believe me, it stinks when people start digging through every single facet of your life.
	Like, I saw him blow his nose in public once.
	Oh, my gosh, they know everything about you, these people.
	Oppo research, they're right.
	There's nothing illegal about it.
	That is not controversial.
	Okay, so the liberals listen because I know Sean has them, and I know those imbeciles over at Media Matters listen all the time.
	So for the imbeciles over there at Media Matters, this is where the story gets interesting.
	Try to take the cotton out of your ears and stick it in your mouth for just a moment, okay?
	That's not controversial.
	We get it.
	Points stipulated.
	There's nothing illegal about opposition research on a candidate.
	It's not, that's not the controversy.
	The controversy is what happened with the OPPO research.
	That's the scandal, man.
	And woman, that's the scandal.
	Not that the oppo could because everybody, all the liberal talking heads, they're all out there.
	You know, we got Chris Hahn coming up later.
	We're going to debate.
	We'll see if he says he may not.
	I shouldn't wait for him to get on the air.
	But this is their thing.
	Oh, opposition research is normal.
	Yes, point stipulated.
	The question you should be asking your liberal friends is: what the heck happened with the OPO?
	Oh, oh, the opposition research made it into the presidential daily brief and onto Barack Obama's desk.
	Wait, wait, wait.
	Wait, what?
	Come again, please.
	Rewind the tape.
	Let's go under the hood for review.
	Throw the red flag.
	Did you just say political opposition research made it onto the president of the United States desk and he was briefed by the IC intelligence community on fake Russian intelligence that Democrats paid for?
	Now comes that moment where the fingernail chewing starts.
	Like, how do we weasel our way out of this one?
	Adam Schiff, get on Twitter and say we're going to start an investigation into Trump about uranium one.
	This is, folks, they are in a panic.
	How do you explain this away?
	I'm not kidding you.
	When I was working federal cases, for obvious reasons, I can't give any of the details, but there was one particular credit card fraud case I worked.
	I cannot even imagine using intelligence I gathered from, say, a source on this credit.
	It was a big credit card fraud case.
	They were printing bogus credit cards.
	They had managed to get CVVs and all kinds of card verification value and all kinds of stuff they needed for fake credit cards.
	I cannot even imagine walking into court for a search warrant, no less a wiretap on a political campaign that actually happened.
	Nobody disputes that, okay?
	I cannot imagine walking into court on a credit card case with an affidavit for a search warrant on a credit card case with information we paid for that had been debunked six different ways from Sunday and came from the Russians.
	Folks, I'm not kidding.
	I probably would have been fired if not potentially locked up for colluding with Russians.
	That's about a stupid credit card case.
	Can you imagine that this was done to gather intelligence, fake news intelligence on a presidential candidate who was your political opponent and the information made it onto Barack Obama's desk?
	i'm sitting here like i i know there's no camera here but i'm like here's gonna be scratching my head Do you hear that?
	I have short hair, so you might be like, what?
	So that's only part one of this.
	This gets better.
	This is part one, question one for your liberal friends.
	How the heck did bogus Russian intelligence make it onto the president's desk?
	Was anybody doing their homework?
	Now, I love the guys and the ladies at the FBI.
	I mean it.
	This is not me like throwing sugar out there because the vinegar is coming later.
	I'm not doing it.
	I work with them.
	I don't know all of them, obviously.
	There's quite a few, but I've met more than a handful.
	And I can tell you with no uncertain terms that they are unbelievably hardworking, super smart, and they do a great job.
	I don't think the rank and file men and women had anything to do with this.
	I think this was the bureaucrats at the top of FBI management and someone in our intelligence community as well that had to have known something really stunk with this information.
	And if they didn't, why didn't you?
	How do you not vet this on a presidential candidate?
	You have information on a presidential candidate.
	Guys, ladies, when I was a federal agent, right?
	If we had a treasury check case, that was like the lowest case we had.
	You know, no one wanted to work treasury check cases because every time the tax returns got mailed out right around April, people would have their treasury check stolen.
	Now they do direct deposit and the Secret Service investigates that.
	Everybody hated those cases.
	Everyone.
	But once in a while, this is how it really worked.
	Once in a while, someone with political connections would call up the local congressman and say, hey, it's May and my Treasury check refund tax refund was stolen and nothing's happened.
	And we would get a call at the office from a congressman or one of their representatives.
	And folks, it was like all hands on deck.
	Like, you better go find that treasury check from Joey Bag of Donuts, man, because he's really pissed.
	And he called, you know, Congressman Bag of Donuts, and they're pissed too.
	So you better go find that teach and work that case.
	This happens all the time.
	Sadly, everybody, you know, it's all about connections everywhere.
	I wish it weren't.
	That was the way it was when I was there, right?
	That's over a teacher case.
	In other words, we had to go the extra mile when a congressman called because somebody called the congressman's office about a missing tax refund.
	You have information, though, on a presidential candidate with the stature and status of Donald Trump and at one point the nominee?
	And you do no homework on it?
	You're like, Trump peed on a bed in Russia.
	Really?
	Let's get that in front of the president tomorrow.
	Did he actually do it?
	Who cares?
	Let's just bring it on.
	You got more?
	What else you got?
	Oh, we heard he did this, but I can't even talk about it because it's a family-friendly show.
	We heard he did this with this and he defiled a hotel room, Obama stayed.
	Whoa, how do we get that to Obama tomorrow?
	You vouch for this.
	You do no homework on it at all?
	You don't follow up with the source?
	Or did you?
	Is that what we're missing?
	The source doesn't follow up with the source.
	You don't ask yourself, hey, who paid you for this?
	Oh, the Democrats and the DNC.
	And by the way, I already know the liberal listeners because they never do their homework.
	You're saying, well, didn't a Republican donor start?
	Yes, a Republican donor started this.
	The dossier portion of this, though, which is what we're talking about, was funded after the Democrats took over the OPO research file.
	So yes, a Republican opponent of Trump who still remains nameless did start this.
	The dossier, the controversial portion of it, the information, the false Russian intel did not appear until the Democrats got involved.
	That's a fact.
	Chew on them, apples, right?
	You don't follow up?
	Listen, I know, like I said, I know a lot of these men and women in the Bureau.
	These are not political animals.
	There is no way that information would have come through to them.
	Zero.
	And they would not follow up before embarrassing themselves and putting their name on a signed affidavit if that was the case.
	And that leads me to point number two.
	Point number one, how did it get into a presidential daily brief?
	Point number two is this.
	God forbid, and I am not using his name in vain.
	I mean it because I am genuinely concerned.
	God forbid, this fake dossier, fake Russian intelligence that the Democrats paid for, actually made it into an affidavit to wiretap components of the Trump presidential organization.
	Ladies and gentlemen, if that's the case, you have a scandal of, I mean, it makes Watergate look like a Ren and Stimpy episode.
	This thing is a catastrophe.
	I mean, Watergate, we had a crime.
	These amateurs break into the hotel room at the Watergate and steal information on Democrats.
	And listen, everybody went down for it, rightfully so.
	Now you have the Russians feeding intel.
	They're paid by Democrats.
	That fake intel the Russians provided makes it into a wiretapping document for a presidential candidate.
	And the Democrats are like, nothing to see here, folks.
	Move along.
	It reminds me of, what was it, the naked gun when Leslie Nielsen, that scene where everything's blowing up behind him, the ammo factory, the fire and everything's exploding.
	It's a Giphy on Twitter now.
	I know Jiff, whatever.
	I call him Giphys.
	Don't tweet me about it.
	And he's like, nothing to see here, folks.
	Nothing to see.
	Everything's exploding.
	Bombs are going off.
	Guys, ladies, I'm telling you, take my word for it.
	This is the scandal of the century.
	There is no way around it.
	And Democrats are going to go down hard.
	I can't, I cannot envision a scenario where careers aren't ended by this once the information is fully vetted.
	And the key, and I got to take a break here in a second.
	But the key to this is going to be the bank records from Fusion GPS.
	Once they find out who paid them, they are going to be unable to run away from the undeniable fact that the Russians played the planned intel at a presidential campaign.
	All right, I'm Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter.
	In for Sean, if you want to give us a call, 800-941-7326.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
	Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter, contributing editor over at Conservative Review.
	That's always a tongue twister for me every time.
	Forgive me.
	I know.
	Spit it out.
	Just spit it out.
	All right, if you want to give us a call, 800-941-7326 to join the show.
	Let me get a quick call in here.
	Let me take Nina from Virginia.
	All right.
	Nina, what do you got for us?
	Hi, Dan.
	Big fan of yours.
	Oh, really?
	Wow.
	Get that on tape, Lawrence.
	Send that my way.
	I don't have any fans.
	I do.
	I appreciate that.
	Three of your books for Christmas for.
	Oh, cool.
	Well, thank you.
	I only have three, so you bought them all.
	Thank you very much.
	It's very nice of you.
	Okay.
	Well, a lot of my friends are saying this will never happen.
	So I have three quick questions for you.
	One, do you really think that Hillary Clinton will be prosecuted?
	And if so, who will prosecute with the DOJ and FBI so deep in it?
	And my third question is: what if Obama's involved?
	Who will prosecute an ex-president?
	Oh, man, that's a lot.
	Well, let me just get to one because one and two are interrelated.
	Will she be prosecuted?
	You know, I was sure of it.
	I mean, I'm on video saying it multiple places that the email scandal was, and I had a very credible source on that.
	I know a guy who knows a guy who actually looked at the server from my past work experience.
	I was sure she was going to the clink or someone.
	There was going to be a charge for the email scandal, and it didn't happen, which was amazing because every element of the crime was met, which Jim Comey laid out in the speech and then proceeded to say, and by the way, no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute this case.
	Everybody was like, wait, what?
	So I don't know.
	I mean, my heart says, gosh, she's done so much wrong.
	She screwed us over so much.
	There's got to be some cosmic justice here.
	But I don't know.
	I don't have, I don't, you know what?
	Let me just be straight with you.
	I don't think so.
	The Clintons have been the Teflon Dons of politics for a long time.
	But remember, and thanks for the call, Nina.
	Even John Gotti, the original Teflon Don, eventually didn't get out of the clink.
	All right, folks, I'm Dan Bongino at Debon Gino on Twitter.
	If you want to give us a call, 800-941-7326.
	We'll be right back.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
	Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter, filling in for Sean.
	And as I've said, make sure you go to Hannity.com and check out locations where you can see this movie he's involved with.
	Let There Be Light.
	It's an incredible story.
	Faith, family, the things we need to support in Hollywood rather than the cesspool of culture we have now.
	Go to Hannity.com.
	Check out where you can see it this weekend.
	It's out today, out today.
	Go check it out.
	Check it out today.
	Check it out.
	I'll be seeing it this weekend.
	All right.
	I'm really excited about this guest, Distinguished Visiting Fellow for the Project for Economic Growth at the Heritage Foundation, a good friend of the conservative movement, Steve Moore.
	Steve, thanks for joining us.
	Hey, Dan.
	Steve, you know, I feel like I already know you because I've been reading your stuff and briefing.
	Likewise, my friend.
	And the stuff you've been doing on the uranium scandal has been so first rate.
	Thank you for what you're doing.
	I mean, it's like, you know, I do CNN now, and I don't think they've ever even covered that story.
	Yeah, I'm not surprised.
	I think, given my background as a federal agent, I'm just really perplexed at how there seems to be a bifurcated system of justice in the country.
	And it's just disappointing.
	I mean, if this was a case of a Republican doing this, I think you and I both would be saying, hey, this smells bad.
	Can we give this a look?
	But, of course, because it's Democrats.
	Especially because all they talk about MSNBC and CNN is this so-called Russian collusion story between Trump and Putin.
	I mean, there is a Russian collusion story here, but it doesn't involve Donald Trump.
	Right.
	That's how I started the show.
	I said, I'm going to blow you away, audience.
	The Russian collusion narrative is true.
	It's just true about the DNC and Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration.
	Well, I love your work, and there's an article you wrote.
	I think it was at the Washington Times, gosh, four years ago.
	I don't even know.
	But I've linked to this thing probably 20 or 30 times on my own website because it's such a great piece.
	And I wanted to have you on today talk about the tax cuts.
	Because one of the points you make in the piece that I just wish was out there and shouted from the rafters is when you look historically at what actually happened, Steve, like real data and facts, something liberals have a tough time with, and you look at major income tax cuts, Reagan, George W., Calvin Coolidge, John F. Kennedy, that tax revenue afterwards went up.
	And the rich actually paid more, not less, in many of those cases.
	This is just, this is accepted by conservatives who know what they're talking about as fact because it is, but liberals ignore it every time.
	Well, you're absolutely right.
	And in fact, it's interesting.
	I've been doing a lot of research as my buddy Larry Kudlow.
	I know a lot of your listeners know Larry, one of our great economists in this country.
	And Larry's written a great book.
	I'll do a quick shout out for it.
	It's called JFK and the Reagan Revolution.
	And people, especially liberals, like to forget, they love to forget that John F. Kennedy was promoting the biggest tax cut ever at that time in the 1960s.
	And he said, when we cut the tax rates, we will go more revenues.
	We will get more incomes.
	We'll get more jobs.
	Doesn't that sound like Donald Trump?
	I mean, John F. Kennedy, when it comes to taxes, would probably be a Republican today.
	And it worked.
	We had the boom in the 1960s.
	In fact, the tax revenue soared after those rate cuts.
	And of course, that's where Reagan came up with the idea.
	He saw what happened under Kennedy.
	So we did it again in the 80s.
	And, of course, it's just so funny.
	I mean, I am on CNN, and he said, we don't want to repeat the trickle-down economic policy of Reagan.
	I'm like, are you kidding?
	I mean, that was one of the biggest economic booms we ever saw.
	We stopped inflation.
	We had 20 million new jobs.
	And I seem to recall, Dan, that the policy worked pretty well because Ronald Reagan squeaked by in his reelection campaign.
	Yeah, yeah, he barely, barely won.
	Right.
	And remember, he lost Minnesota by only 3,000 votes.
	Sorry.
	He only lost Minnesota by 3,000 votes because it was Mondale's home state.
	Real squeaker.
	He didn't want to have the slaughter roll.
	But, you know, it was an amazing.
	And people say it didn't work.
	Well, if it didn't work, how did he win 49 states?
	I mean, the American people love that policy, and we can do it again.
	And what Trump recognizes is, you know, back when Reagan was president, the problem was our taxes, our sky-high individual income tax rates.
	Now, our biggest problem, I mean, our tax rates on individuals are too high, but the big problem to me as an economist, Dan, and I used to tell Trump about this all the time when I worked with him on the campaign as a senior economic advisor, I said, you know, Donald, our big problem is that we've got the highest business tax rates in the world.
	It's unbelievable.
	Most people don't even understand or realize that, but we charge our businesses a higher tax rate than Japan, than South Korea, than China, than India, than even Cuba has a low rate of tax on their businesses.
	So it's insane.
	And we get that rate down, Dan, from 40%.
	Trump wanted a 15% rate, by the way, and now they've compromised it to 20%.
	I hope they don't go one percentage point over 20.
	But if you can cut that tax rate down to 20, I guarantee you, Dan, it's going to be like a reverse magnetic poll.
	Of all those businesses that have left, a lot of them are going to come back to the United States.
	So instead of outsourcing jobs, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to start insourcing jobs.
	And Steve, the irony, we're talking to Steve Moore from the Heritage Foundation, by the way.
	Steve, the irony of a corporate rate cut is that known, well, I want to call them left-leaning, but definitely Democrat administration economists, Larry Summers, people like that, were actually advocating in the past for the benefits of a corporate tax cut.
	And Larry Summers actually said it's the closest thing to a free lunch you're going to get because that money will wind up back in the, you'll have productivity enhancements through investment back in the company.
	The corporations aren't going to burn the money, which will enhance worker productivity, which, by the way, will give workers a de facto raise.
	I mean, this was Democrats arguing for this under Barack Obama, and now, conveniently, they've changed their mind.
	And I don't know if you saw it, but the Wall Street Journal op-ed where Casey Mulligan totally called him out on that and said, wait, what happened, Larry?
	You were arguing for this a little while ago.
	Incredible.
	And now he says, now that Donald Trump is proposing it, he says it's a mindless policy.
	And, you know, to cut to the chase here, I believe, and I think my buddy Larry Kudlow agrees entirely with this, that when you cut the business tax rate, that benefits the workers.
	In fact, my friend Kevin Hassett, who's now working as the chief economist for Trump, has just come out with a report saying that you do this policy and the average middle-class worker will get a $4,000 increase in their after-tax income.
	Now, if you're living on $50,000, $60,000, $70,000 a year, $4,000, boy, that's enough, Dan, even to pay for the increased premiums under Obamacare.
	Right.
	I mean, imagine if we actually got rid of Obamacare and let free market principles and competition, I mean, you could potentially double that to your take-home pay.
	You know, Larry Kudlow makes a great point as well when he talks about the JFK tax cuts.
	You know, we didn't say that wrong.
	The John F. Kennedy tax cuts.
	He says, listen, folks, this was one of the largest take-home pay tax cuts in American history.
	He cut the top rate from 90 to 70 percent, meaning you essentially tripled at that marginal rate your tax-free returns on that.
	I mean, this was a massive tax cut by JFK, and I'm glad you brought that up because it seems like the Democrats forget that.
	I mean, even Bill Clinton cut the capital gains tax rate.
	And by the way, we hike the income tax rate there when he did it.
	I was working for Newt Gingrich at the time.
	We finally got Clinton to sign that bill.
	And one of the reasons we were able to balance the budget, the only time in the last half century that happened, was that when we cut the capital gains tax rate, we got such a surge of revenues.
	We increased revenues because people started selling stocks and taking capital gains.
	And we had such a tidal wave of revenues, lo and behold, we actually balanced the budget.
	A tax cut increased revenues, and it happened under Reagan.
	I'll give you an amazing statistic, Dan.
	When Ronald Reagan came into office, the highest income tax rate in the United States, a lot of Your listeners will remember this, a 70% tax rate in 1979 and 80 under Jimmy Carter.
	Reagan came in, first he cut it to 50%, and then he cut it to 28%.
	So the rate went from 70% down to 28%.
	Now, what do you think happened to the tax revenues?
	I'll tell you what.
	It doubled from $500 billion to $909 billion.
	They doubled.
	Now, how do you explain that if you're a liberal?
	Well, here's what they'll say, which I find ironic.
	They'll say, well, correlation doesn't mean causation.
	Okay, I totally get that.
	I'm an avid believer in the modern statistical method.
	But, Steve, the point is the correlation doesn't, you're trying to make the exact opposite argument.
	You're saying as a liberal, oh, these tax rate cuts are going to lead to decreases in revenue despite providing no correlational or causal evidence at all.
	It's almost like silly making this argument.
	You're right.
	Now, I want to ease the mind of your listeners because there's a false story going on out there, if I may, Dan, about this tax cut.
	I just want to make clear to your listeners.
	So have you heard about this story about the 401ks?
	And the liberals say, oh, they're going to take away your 401k plan.
	I want to assure every person listening to this show, we are not going to take away your 401k plan.
	There are 55 million Americans who have tax-free savings accounts.
	We are in favor of tax-free savings accounts.
	I mean, this is a great way to build up saving and owning America.
	And by the way, those 55 million Americans have trillions of dollars in the stock market.
	You know, the stock market is now up, what, 28% since Trump took effect.
	And I argue with these liberals on CNN, and they say, oh, well, that's only rich people who benefit when the stock market goes up.
	And I said, what are you talking about?
	They've never heard of pension funds.
	All these millions of Americans have their, where do they think they're putting their money?
	That money goes into the stock market, just like pension funds.
	Sure.
	Yeah, that's just silly.
	That's just silly liberal talk.
	Hey, Steve, I've got about a minute and a half left here.
	But one more quick thing I wanted to address with you.
	The Tax Policy Center, they've been the propaganda leaders on the left here, putting out how this is going to blow a hole in the deficit and claiming how we're going to lose all this money.
	Can you just debunk for that nonsense for a second?
	The Tax Policy Center put out this paper on it without having any of the actual data about who or what was actually going to be taxed.
	Am I correct in saying that?
	You are.
	Dan, you're in the news media business now.
	So let me ask you this question.
	When was the last time you heard somebody from, let's say, the New York Times or Washington Post or CBS News refer to the Heritage Foundation as a nonpartisan organization?
	Never, ever?
	Never.
	But yet the Urban Institute, which is the most left-wing think tank in America, which puts out these numbers because they own the Tax Policy Center, every report you're going to read calls the Tax Policy Center a nonpartisan organization.
	They are a far left-wing group that always gets the numbers wrong.
	You described it as a propaganda group.
	I believe that's a good description.
	But I get so angry at the media.
	They call our conservative groups conservative, but their groups are nonpartisan.
	It's stunning to me because liberals will actually use tax policy center talking points.
	And when you say something very simple to them, like, well, when they scored this tax cut, what tax rates were they using and at what income level?
	Oh, well, we don't know yet.
	What do you mean, you just guessed?
	Well, basically, I mean, they just won't admit that.
	And it's just a lot of people.
	And you know what they do, Dan, is they assume in that model that by cutting these tax rates on our businesses and our workers, that the impact of doing that in the economy will be zero.
	Now, you and I could have an argument about whether it's going to be a big impact or an immediate impact or a low impact, but we do know it's not going to be zero, right?
	Right, right.
	Yeah, I mean, that's the whole dynamic scoring should be the way we do all kinds of scoring.
	But Democrats, of course, will never give that up.
	Steve Morris from the Heritage Foundation, thank you so much for joining us.
	You always have fantastic talking points.
	Keep up the good work.
	I use your stuff all the time.
	Thanks for joining us.
	Thanks, Dan.
	Have a great weekend.
	You too.
	All right, folks, that was Steve Moore from the Heritage Foundation.
	I cannot encourage you in strong enough terms to Google Steve Moore myths about taxing the rich and read some of his stuff.
	It's just incredible.
	All right, I'm Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter, filling in for Sean.
	We'll be right back.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
	Dan Bongino at Debongino on Twitter, filling in for Sean.
	Go check out his movie that is opening today, Let There Be Light.
	I know he's told you about it, but you got to go check out the early reviews on it.
	They've been incredible.
	Let There Be Light opening today, lettherebelight.com, or you can go to Hannity.com, see a theater finder there, find a theater near you.
	There's, like I said, tons of them down by me in Florida.
	Go check it out, Hannity.com or lettherebelight.com.
	You know, that was a, that was kind of like a fanboy moment, if I can say, I know that doesn't sound like so.
	I'm 6'1, 225, but you know, I like academic pursuits and I followed Steve Moore's work forever.
	So, by the way, that was Lauren's idea for a guest.
	So huge shout out to Lauren.
	I didn't even think of that.
	He's really great.
	And I was glad he came on, Steve Moore from the Heritage Foundation, to dispel some of these common myths about these tax cuts, folks, which I'm going to get through.
	I want to talk to Chris Hahn about it later on in the show and Jim Jordan and Rod Bloom as well, that these are just myths that the Democrats, let me be nice, are not telling you the truth.
	I know it's gauch to call them liars, but ah, whatever, they're liars.
	They're just making it up on taxes, folks.
	They have no evidence at all that what they're saying is actually true.
	The Tax Policy Center, which has put out this damning account of the Trump tax cuts, has openly acknowledged that they have no information on said tax cuts.
	So let me get this straight.
	You did a mathematic, econometric, rigorous analysis of the tax cuts.
	What are the tax cuts?
	We don't know, but we can really guess and guess better than anyone.
	And liberals are running around.
	Liberal jokers like Paul Krugman, who pretends to be an economist.
	This guy won a Nobel Prize.
	What was the Nobel committee doing on that day?
	They run around saying, this is going to blow a hole in the deficit.
	Okay, here's the question for our liberal friends.
	When has that happened where tax cuts have resulted in a loss of revenue?
	Don't tell me about the deficits.
	That was on the spending side.
	Tell me where an income tax rate cut has happened.
	Tell me.
	Sean's got millions of listeners.
	Surely someone out there, here is my open dare to liberals.
	I'm daring you to call 800-941-7326.
	If you didn't have millions of listeners, I'd give you my cell phone too.
	Call me.
	Call me.
	You know how they do the thing?
	Call me after a day.
	Call me.
	I actually mean it this time.
	Call me and tell me where an income tax cut happened in the history of the United States that led to a long-term or frankly even short-term loss in tax revenue.
	Tell me where it happened.
	Don't tell me about the deficits.
	That was government spending driven.
	That was not a revenue problem.
	That was a spending problem.
	This is liberals.
	This has a name.
	It's called math.
	You really need to try it sometime.
	And if you call up and you quote the tax policy center or their left-leaning propaganda about the Trump tax package, you are going to be promptly laughed off the air because my first question to you is going to be, how do you know what the tax package is?
	Are you Carnack?
	Do you have some kind of psychic powers we don't know about, you fools?
	Liberals lie.
	That's what they do.
	That's what they're best at.
	All right, I'm Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'm coming.
	You're drunk?
	Oh, young pull of all over your eyes.
	The basic tenet of Christianity.
	Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
	Don't you dare tell me about the love and the compassion of your so-called God.
	What do you think it does to the boys to take the death of their brother and use it as part of your carnival act?
	Ace the bills.
	Clinically dead in the ambulance.
	Four minutes.
	It's a miracle.
	I saw Davy.
	Well, all I wanted to do was put my arms around them.
	I don't possibly.
	You've gotten the best scientific explanation.
	It hasn't brought you any comfort.
	Would you consider consulting a different source?
	Doc is your God, and he's holding out his hand to you.
	All you got to do now is take it.
	Jesus gets whacked, right?
	I've never exactly heard it put that way, but yeah, follow me here.
	This ain't brain surgery.
	Do you believe that God hears?
	God always answers prayers.
	Sometimes we just don't understand the answers.
	This better be good.
	That's what I said.
	I don't want to lose you.
	So my first question is, are you guys ready for the amount of heat that'll be coming your way with this?
	All right, folks, welcome back.
	That was the trailer for movie Sean's been involved with producing called Let There Be Light.
	I strongly encourage you to go check it out.
	I haven't seen it yet.
	I'm going to check it out tomorrow.
	If you go to lettherebelightmovie.com or Hannity.com, there are a number of theaters showing the movie.
	The preliminary feedback on it has been incredible.
	You know, I know Sean's really passionate about it, folks.
	And, you know, we have to support movies that support our values.
	Hollywood's been crapping all over us for a really long time.
	You know, I do know Sam Sorbo, though.
	I never met Kevin, who's in the movie, her and her husband Kevin.
	And Sam's terrific.
	She really is.
	They're both really passionate about the things that matter to you and I. She's great.
	I met her at a dinner one time, and I was really taken aback.
	She's a very passionate person.
	She's in the movie.
	Go check it out.
	Lettherebelightmovie.com or Hannity.com and check out the theater near you.
	Go see it this weekend.
	It's out today.
	Go check it out.
	Again, the movie's Let There Be Light.
	The trailers, you know, people are looking from what I've heard.
	I was up at Fox yesterday, and I heard Ainsley Earhart say she got choked up watching the movie.
	So I need a little bit of that.
	I need to go Tranquilo this weekend a little bit.
	So I'll be checking that out up in Port St. Lucie.
	Pumpkin Spice Latte.
	All right, enough with the Spice Latte.
	Sorry.
	Inside joke.
	Inside joke for me and Sean's 10 million plus listeners.
	All right.
	So that last segment, I was talking about the tax cuts, the Trump tax cuts, and how the liberals have nothing but nonsense, garbage, lies, made-up fabrications, and propaganda to fight back with.
	And I just want to start with this question and this premise for our liberal friends.
	And I encourage all the conservatives and libertarians out there, especially the ones on college campuses, to go to their liberal friends and ask them this basic question I'm putting out to the audience.
	And by the way, the call-in number is 800-941-7326.
	Sean's got millions of listeners.
	No liberal is yet to call in and challenge me on this because they can't.
	Here's the question.
	When has an income tax rate cut, what Trump is proposing and a corporate tax rate cut, when has an income tax rate cut led to a loss in revenue to the federal government?
	Tell me when it happened.
	Tell me.
	Come on, Libs.
	This can't be that hard.
	You're all the, you're the science party, right?
	Science.
	I got to, this is incredible.
	I got to use the dreaded air quotes for this.
	Science, because they have no science.
	They have nothing behind them.
	Surely you can tell us that Reagan tax cuts how the government lost so much revenue, right?
	Surely you can produce the numbers.
	Come on the air.
	Produce the numbers.
	Show us the numbers.
	Guys, ladies, listeners, loyal patriots.
	Do you think I would humiliate myself with Sean's audience if I wasn't absolutely sure what I'm telling you is true?
	Ronald Reagan cut the tax rate from 70 to 28 percent.
	It happened over the course of his presidency.
	It didn't happen overnight.
	When he entered the presidency, the government raised about $500 billion in tax revenue.
	When he left, they raised $909 billion.
	Let me, hold on.
	As I usually joke with on my show, do we need an abacus here, liberals?
	Do we need an abacus?
	$505 or so billion, $909 billion.
	I'm pretty sure $909 billion is greater than $505 billion.
	Please tell me how that's a loss in revenue.
	By the way, it's not even an inflation-adjusted loss in revenue.
	Meaning, Ronald Reagan cut taxes, and in fact, government revenue went up.
	And that's not the goal of it.
	I'm not arguing for that.
	I'm not telling you the goal should be for the government to raise revenue.
	The goal of tax cuts should be for you to raise revenue, should be for your own take-home pay to increase, should be for your own wallet to fatten up, your own business to fatten up, and your own ability to spend resources that you have worked to acquire.
	I'm asking you, please, please produce some evidence to me.
	Tell me how the George W. Bush tax cuts, tell me what they cost the government money, and we'll make a fool out of you.
	I'm telling you, go back to Calvin Coolidge.
	Go to John F. Kennedy's tax cuts.
	Tell me where you want to go.
	The Bill Clinton capital gains tax cut.
	Yep, I said that right.
	All right, you know what?
	Let's take a call.
	Lauren, what do you think about taking Tim there?
	That sounds good.
	He disagrees with me.
	I'll give it a shot.
	All right, let's give it a shot.
	All right, let's go to Tim and Biloxi.
	Did I say that wrong, Tim?
	Well, it's more of a you sound, but you got close enough.
	Enjoy that.
	People understandably get very upset when you say the name.
	I once said Oregon, and forget it.
	I got like 500 emails to my account the next day because people know my email.
	It's Oregon.
	All right, let's clear that up.
	All right, so you disagree with me about this Trump tax plan and revenue.
	Tell me why.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	Be careful.
	And I tried to explain to the call screener.
	I am a died-in-the-wool conservative, and I think taxes are far, far too high.
	I'm a retired CPA.
	And yeah, you had the Bush tax cuts and the capital gains tax cuts, but the last really significant tax cut we had in this country was under Reagan, 1986, TEFRA 86.
	Now, the liberals will, I mean, they're going to pick and choose whatever they can.
	And at this point, you're right.
	There's not even a framework of what they're going to be proposing out there for them to be picking and choosing that.
	But liberals are liberals, and so they're going to do it anyway.
	And I'm not trying to, in any way, downgrade your point.
	Sure.
	If it's a true tax cut, TEPRA 86, actual tax revenues to the government did decline in 1987 and in 1988, okay?
	Marginally.
	Very, very small.
	But what the liberals will never tell you, what the liberals will never tell you is, Tim, that's not right.
	That's not right.
	I'm looking at the numbers right in front of me because I keep a handy-dandy pocket reference guide because I deal with this all the time.
	That's not right.
	I'm sorry, but the tax revenue when Reagan got into office was $517 billion, $599.
	It went down one year from $82 to $83, from $617 to $600, but went up every single year after that and never even approached anywhere close to the year when Reagan got in office.
	In other words, it went up every, other than a blip on the radar, it went up every single year and nearly doubled by the time he left office.
	That may be total revenue to the government, but we're talking about taxes here.
	One of the things.
	I think that's what I'm talking about.
	So, Tim, just to be clear, because I don't want to get into the wonkery.
	I don't want to bore the audience to that.
	Just to be clear, the liberal argument on this against tax rate cuts is that it is going to drive up the deficit because it's going to starve the government of revenue.
	That is not true.
	We have cut income tax rates before, and government revenue has gone up and up and up every time from a growing economy.
	That's the only point I'm making.
	I'm not making a causal inference.
	I'm just telling you that the liberal talking point is garbage.
	It is not factually correct.
	Can we agree on that?
	We do agree on that.
	We do agree on that.
	But you also, and this is going to get wonky, okay?
	Keep it short, right?
	Okay.
	I can cut tax rates across the board by 40% and give nobody a tax cut.
	And that is the danger that we are facing right now with the establishment Republicans that are in Congress.
	If I reduce the rates by 30%, but I increase, excuse me, I decrease the tiers at which those rates are charged, I can cut the rates and raise taxes.
	Right, right.
	I understand where you're going with that.
	I mean, there's a number of other ways to do it as well.
	I mean, there are deductions out there that are going to weigh, and basically you may see a nominal increase, some people, especially in northeastern states, of their tax load if they lose the state and local deduction.
	So I got to run, Tim.
	I appreciate the call.
	Always appreciate a, I don't want to say contrarian point of view, but an educated point of view from the other side.
	But folks, the bottom line is this.
	This is the point I'm trying to make that your liberal friends simply cannot refute.
	And Tim was not a liberal, to be clear.
	He's a good guy.
	But ask them this simple question.
	Did tax revenue go up or down after the tax cuts?
	That's the only thing.
	This is what's so frustrating about being a conservative in this modern media environment where they say things patently false and just unbelievably stupid, and it's parroted over and over again.
	The liberal talking point is not true, folks.
	It's not true.
	It is, meaning there is no evidence for it at all.
	We have cut taxes in the past.
	I'm not saying it was causal.
	I'm telling you the tax revenue has gone up.
	I don't know how any easier way to say this.
	Gosh, what is this?
	TaxpolicyCenter.org.
	Go look at the tax tables.
	I keep it handy.
	I actually have a screenshot on my phone because I get this all the time.
	They will torture the statistics till kingdom come.
	They'll say, oh my gosh.
	No, but as a percentage of GDP, and well, when you adjust it for inflation, it's smaller than the nominal one.
	Well, of course, that's the case.
	But they cannot refute the very simple question I put out there.
	Show me where tax revenue has gone down after a tax cut.
	Show me.
	Show me the money.
	Remember Cuba Gooding Jr.
	Show me the money.
	Show me.
	You can't because you're making it up.
	Therefore, the entire premise of the liberal talking point is just bunk.
	It's nonsense.
	And folks, this is for a very simple reason.
	This is my explanation.
	It's not proprietary.
	It's certainly shared by many, I think, mainstream economists out there as well.
	You know, Milton Friedman, who was a genius, Friedman had a really elegant way of explaining what happens to money in the free market economy.
	He said, when you spend your money on yourself, a free market, you earn it, you spend it.
	This is important.
	Cost and quality matter.
	Why?
	Well, it's quite simple, folks.
	It's your money.
	So the quality of what you're buying is going to matter with your money.
	You don't want to buy crap.
	And the cost of what you're purchasing matters too, because it's your money.
	Therefore, you buy hopefully good products and you go and shop for the best and most effective cost, which incentivizes, by the way, providers to provide an effective cost and quality products because that's what people do when they spend their own money.
	Well, Friedman had this continuum, the four ways to spend money, and the fourth way was the government, other people spending other people's money on other people.
	And the reason money multiplies in the free market economy and divides when the government takes it is because when other people spend other people's money on other people, which is government spending, taking your money and spending it on others, neither cost nor quality matter.
	It's not your money, and it's not your product either.
	So what do you care?
	What do you care about the cost?
	You're spending taxpayer money.
	What do you care about the quality?
	You're not even buying anything for yourself.
	You're buying it for taxpayers.
	Who cares if the quality of the product's any good?
	That's why government spending divides money, while free market spending multiplies money.
	Therefore, when it multiplies money, even at lower tax rates, we are taking a bigger cut of a bigger pie.
	Folks, this is not complicated.
	It's only complicated to silly liberals who are absolutely obsessed with the idea that government should control the economy.
	They are obsessed with big S state tactics, control of your education, control of the economy, control of healthcare, control of the bureaucratic red tape machine.
	They are obsessed with control.
	I can make the case to you strongly.
	Liberals don't care about increasing tax revenue to the government.
	They care about controlling the tax revenue that comes into the government.
	How can I make that case to you?
	Because tax revenue has gone up after tax cuts in the past.
	This is not complicated, folks.
	All right, I'm Dan Bongino in for Sean at DeBongino on Twitter.
	If you want to send comments, criticisms, whatever, I take them all.
	If you want to give us a call, 800-941-7326.
	We'll be right back.
	Let there be light if the Bible says it's so.
	Let there be light as above so below.
	Let there be light so all in love.
	Let there be light so that we may see again.
	Let there be.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity show, Dan Bongino, at DeBongino on Twitter, filling in for Sean.
	Make sure you check that movie out.
	That was the song from Let There Be Light.
	Sean's producing the movie.
	Go to lettherebelightmovie.com or Hannity.com and you can find a theater near you.
	I know I'm down in Florida.
	There are a ton of theaters down here, so go check it out.
	Feedback on the movie has been amazing, and we have to support movies that support our values, not Hollywood values, which is a moral black hole of values, which has sucked values in and jettisoned them to another string theory universe.
	So support the movie, Let There Be Light.
	The feedback on it has been tremendous.
	I was watching Fox yesterday and a couple of the hosts really, really, really enjoyed it.
	Let There Be Light.
	Go to letThereBelightMovie.com and go check it out.
	Folks, one more thing here.
	I'm going to tweet this out during the break because I got a minute here during the break.
	I'm going to tweet out an article.
	I'm going to beg you to read because the trickle-down thing is going to come up at some point.
	Oh, trickle-down economics doesn't work.
	Trump and the tax cuts trickle down.
	Listen to me and listen clearly because I only got a couple seconds left here.
	There is no such thing as trickle-down economics.
	It's made up.
	There is no such thing.
	I want you to read this article by Thomas Saul.
	Read it after the show.
	Don't go anywhere because I got a lot of good stuff coming up.
	But there's no such thing as trickle-down.
	It is a made-up theory.
	There's no econometric theory of trickle-down.
	It's made up.
	I'm Dan Bongino.
	We'll be right back.
	All right.
	Welcome back to the Sean Hannity show, Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter.
	Filling in for Sean.
	Hey, if you're just getting in your car, you're turning on the radio or the app or the Apple CarPlay or whatever, and you're thinking of something to do tonight or tomorrow with your kids.
	Sean's movie is out, Let There Be Light.
	Go to letThereBelightMovie.com.
	Go find a theater near you.
	As I've said repeatedly, because it matters.
	This is a solid movie.
	A lot of great positive feedback.
	I was watching an interview on Fox the other day.
	One of the hosts said they got choked up watching it.
	Go check it out.
	Faith, family.
	This is the kind of stuff we need in Hollywood thematic stuff.
	And we don't have enough of it.
	It's all crap.
	It's all shoot-em-up garbage or some superhero thing.
	It's like a new superhero every week.
	It's like garbage man, part six coming out this week.
	Check it out.
	Go to lettherebelightmovie.com or Hannity.com.
	Find a theater near you.
	Be a great movie to go to.
	Take your kids.
	Go check it out.
	All right.
	With us is one of my favorite liberal guests of all time.
	Can I call you my friend Chris Hahn?
	Is that all right, Chris?
	Chris, that's the problem.
	Dan, we got to all be friends.
	You know, you and I have had some, shall we call them, spicy debates on Fox.
	I think we've had some very almost as spicy as some of the cooking I've seen you do on your website.
	You know what I'm saying?
	Oh, you watched that.
	You saw that?
	My wife's empanadas?
	I didn't think anybody checked that out.
	That's pretty cool.
	Well, now I'm super impressed.
	Well, listen, I needed someone to come on to passionately defend the Democrat position on tax cuts and this exploding Russian collusion scandal.
	And I said, we got to go get Chris.
	So now let's put our sparring gloves on, which you and I are used to doing.
	So let me just start with the Russian collusion thing, okay?
	So for months, Chris, six months or more, we have been told by any Democrat with a pulse that there was this unbelievable Trump-Russian collusion scandal that Donald Trump Jr. met with a Russian and it was about Appo.
	And oh my gosh, this was treason.
	Treason, I say.
	Go get him.
	Trump Jr., find him, lock him up, right?
	And now we find out that the DNC and Hillary Clinton, in fact, paid for fake Russian intelligence that may have made it into an FBI affidavit for a wiretap and we know made it into a presidential daily brief.
	I'm asking you, seriously, defend this for a moment as a liberal as why we shouldn't all be in a panic over this.
	You know, you and I have both been creatures of campaign, Dan.
	You do Appo research.
	You do Appo research on everybody.
	You, that's how I know about your empanadas.
	I mean, it is the way it is, man.
	No, no, no.
	All right, Chris.
	Wait, let me stop you there because I knew you were going to say that.
	Matt, by the way, your phone connection is absolutely what are you in, the bat cave?
	Try to move to someplace.
	I'm literally sitting in the parking lot.
	My daughter's playing soccer.
	I do call here all the time.
	I can't believe I'm having a hard time.
	I'm sorry about that.
	No, no, it's all right.
	I'm not going to let you go because I've been looking forward to this all week because I enjoyed debating you.
	It's always fun.
	No, let me just stop you there, though.
	I get it.
	Point stipulated because I don't want to waste any time on that.
	Yes, I've done OPPO research.
	Candidates have done OPPO research on me.
	I get it.
	I am not suggesting OPPO research is even bad.
	I'm trying to get you to comment on what happened with the Appo research.
	They paid for information.
	We can agree, both agree, the majority of which was bogus.
	It's been debunked.
	Trump was not using golden showers or whatever.
	I don't even care what.
	I don't even wonder.
	It's a family-friendly show.
	That information, Chris, made it into a presidential daily brief on Barack Obama's desk and may have been used in affidavits to get wiretaps for a counterintelligence investigation.
	That doesn't concern you even a little bit.
	Well, look, not everything in that dossier has been debunked.
	I mean, I'll give you the salacious route.
	But a lot of the stuff tells the things that have been going on, that hasn't been debunked.
	And I think that there still needs it still needs to be debunked.
	It hasn't been debunked.
	My bigger problem with the dossier and the Apple research is it seems that the Clinton campaign was inept to use it with any good effect to get elected.
	You know, so it is a big problem to me how incompetent that campaign was.
	Chris, I have a big problem with what you said there, though.
	Listen, I'm just being candid with you because, again, we throw blows all the time here.
	But that is a crap excuse, and I think you're selling out here.
	If this was Barack Obama, and God forbid, let's just say the McCain campaign for the original Obama-elect, if the McCain campaign had a dossier on Obama that said he was born on Mars, and that made it into a presidential daily brief, and some component of the dossier was true.
	They said, like, by the way, his middle name is Hussein, which is true.
	Not who cares, but that's true.
	So that's true.
	But the fact that Barack Obama was born on Mars made it into a presidential daily brief on the desk of the sitting president and was used to then in turn potentially wiretap the Barack Obama's campaign.
	Chris, come on, don't be SEO.
	You know you'd be pissed.
	Dan, but I think you're skipping a step here, okay?
	I don't think we know exactly why wiretaps were issued against Paul Manafort.
	Well, we do know why.
	Paul Manafort was clearly in bed with the Russians.
	He was clearly working for a Russian oligarch.
	And it was odd how he became all of a sudden the chairman of the Donald Trump campaign.
	I don't know that Donald Trump intentionally hired a guy who was colluding with the Russians, but Paul Manafort was colluding with the Russians.
	And it does appear that Michael Flynn was, too.
	Now, I'm not here accusing the president of that.
	I don't know what the president knew.
	But what I do know is that there were other things here.
	So we can't just jump.
	Now, look, how opposition research from a political party that is not necessarily proven, especially wind up in a presidential daily briefing, there needs to be some answers about that.
	But there's some other things that led to wiretapping during the campaign.
	Well, Chris, but that's not true.
	You don't have evidence that Mike Flynn or Manafort colluded with the Russians.
	You may have some evidence that there was some lobbying and there was some administrative oversight there.
	And I'm not their lawyers.
	I'm just saying that you don't have any evidence they colluded.
	How do you know that?
	I don't think that anybody on the right wanted to defend Paul Manafort.
	And I did notice that nobody on the right is.
	Chris, I'm just defending the facts.
	Look, the facts that I know right now, Paul Manafort was in bed with a person who paid him millions of dollars.
	With Tony Podesta.
	Well, forget about Tony Podesta.
	No, no, no, no.
	Oh, wait, wait, wait.
	Timeout.
	A red flag under the hood for review.
	What?
	Tony Podesta, who is, by the way, the brother of John Podesta, the Hillary Clinton concigliary, was involved in the exact same lobbying efforts as Manafort.
	So you only care when it's Manafort?
	Come on.
	Come on.
	What?
	I missed that.
	Sorry.
	Is he his brother's keeper?
	You and I both have brothers.
	But you're making the case that Manafort's Trump's keeper, even though he fired Manafort.
	No, no.
	Manafort was Trump's campaign chairman, and Manafort was a fire.
	And he fired him.
	And he fired him.
	But the fact that Tony Podesta is John Podesta's brother, forget that.
	That's 62 times removed, seven degrees of Kevin Bacon.
	He also put Michael Flynn in a position of great national security knowing that Michael Flynn had some issues.
	So we have to wonder, that's really, you know, look, those two things are the things the American people need to understand.
	And I'm not necessarily saying the president did anything wrong, but I think the American people need to know how that came about.
	And the people who put the president in that position, the president himself should be hoping that the people who put him in that position are brought to justice.
	All right.
	Well, if you want information on that, can we all agree that we should at least get information as well on the trail of money that flowed to Russian intelligence operatives and how that information made it into potential affidavits in front of a court for wiretaps?
	Can you agree?
	You know what's going to be most embarrassing when we find out that Reince Friebus is the first person who started this dossier.
	That's going to be the most embarrassing part.
	Well, we don't know that.
	I don't know that.
	All I know is the dossier part was the Democrats.
	The initials, I know the dates.
	Chris, listen, don't embarrass yourself.
	In April, the Republicans forfeited the case and the Democrats took over the fusion GPS file.
	And it was after April that the dossier and Christopher Steele were hired.
	That is absolutely true.
	Dan, it was started by Republicans, not just one single candidate, but a consortium of Republicans.
	And we're going to find out who paid for it.
	And not just on the Democratic side.
	I think we're going to find out on Monday, actually.
	They're going to release some information.
	And we're going to find out who paid for it.
	Let me tell you, I think I know, but I'll leave that for another day.
	All right, listen, because I only got a couple minutes to say.
	It might have been a low energy candidate that paid for it, something like that.
	I have my suspicions about what Republican was involved in this one.
	I think I'm pretty.
	And I know a group of people who get very, very nervous anytime I tweet them about it.
	But listen, I got to get your take on this as well because I want to talk about two things.
	I only have a couple minutes.
	The tax cuts.
	Trump's fighting for these tax cuts.
	The Democrat talking point are these tax cuts for the rich.
	There's no evidence for that at all.
	When we've done tax cuts like these in the past, the rich have actually paid more and tax revenue has gone up.
	Why do liberals continue to lie about this when they can just research the data themselves?
	Well, the data is very clear.
	80% of the tax cut goes to the top 1%.
	80% of the dollar value of the tax cuts goes to the top 1%.
	Well, Chris, who pays the taxes?
	Look, I am not against tax cuts.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	Time out.
	You just did a different.
	How can you give tax cuts to people that don't pay taxes?
	What do you think the percentage of the tax load the top 20% pay is?
	Just give me a guess.
	80% goes to the top 1%.
	No, no, no.
	Chris, you can't give tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes.
	The people who pay taxes, the top 20%.
	Wait, wait, answer this question.
	Because this will establish going forward.
	What percentage of the tax load do you think the top 20% pay?
	I know the percentage and it is very, very high.
	Yeah, it's 95%.
	So how can you give a tax cut to people who don't pay taxes?
	Dan, here's my problem.
	Okay.
	Just be honest about it, then.
	Why are the president and the Congress saying that this is a tax cut for the middle class and the working class?
	The guys showing up at the Trump rally.
	It's not.
	It's a tax cut for you and me.
	And that's a problem for me because it's not being honest.
	I'm not against tax cuts.
	I do not want to see the state and local deduction removed.
	I'm not for that.
	And I want to see more of the money going into the middle and working class, people who do pay taxes.
	Yeah, but Chris, they are talking about lowering the tax rate from people.
	No one has the numbers, by the way, the Brexit.
	So I can't comment intelligently on it because neither I nor you know what the numbers are yet.
	But the conversations that have been happening behind the scenes are clearly a reduction in the rates for middle-class earners.
	I mean, why is that?
	I don't understand where you're going with this.
	The president said he wouldn't benefit from it.
	Is that true?
	The president's middle class?
	He's a billionaire.
	The president said he wouldn't benefit from the tax breaks.
	Now, I did the math just on the estate tax, and it seems like he's getting a couple of billion dollars.
	Well, I don't know his personal finances, so I can't tell you.
	He says he's worth $11 billion.
	So, if he's leaving $11 billion to Dodd Jr. and the others and Ivanka, and hopefully Tiffany gets some, they're going to send some money.
	All right, one last question.
	So, let me, because clearly you're going to go down that route.
	I dispute strongly that this is a tax cut for the rich, but the wealthy pay the overwhelming majority of taxes.
	Let me just ask you this question, and we'll roll from here because I got to run after this.
	I'm talking to Chris Hahn of the Chris Hahn show, by the way.
	Chris, why does the government, why should the rich, as you say, why should the rich give more of their money to the government?
	What is the government going to do to it that the people who earned it won't?
	Look, I want the rich to pay their fair share.
	Oh, here we go.
	I want them to pay their fair share, and I want to see working-class people see some tax release, particularly from the typical payroll taxes that they pay every single week.
	That takes a large chunk of their salary.
	Brother, that was painful to hear.
	The fair share.
	Did you have that on an index card?
	I just told you the top 20% pay 95% of the taxes.
	What's the fair share?
	100%?
	Dad, Dan, Dad, that is your go-to line when it comes to me.
	You always accuse me of a talking point.
	Come on.
	I do.
	I nailed you with that one on Fox.
	You didn't like that, did you?
	You were pissed at that.
	I could see it.
	No, no, I want you to get back right up.
	I want you to come up with something new.
	I want you to be a better person.
	I'll try.
	You know?
	All right, I'll try.
	All right, I like you.
	I get it.
	You don't like, I understand.
	I did.
	I called you Captain Talking Point or something.
	That was not cool.
	So you have my on-air apologies because you are a nice dude, and I like you, and you really defend your position, although I think you are unbelievably misguided in it.
	So, hey, Chris, I got to let you run.
	I got a break.
	Thanks a lot for coming out.
	It was Chris Hahn of the Chris Hahn Show.
	Really appreciate it.
	I'll talk to you soon.
	All right.
	All right, folks.
	Sorry about the connection there.
	It was good at the end.
	A little bit shady in the beginning.
	But Chris, I disagree with him.
	I think he's wrong, but I appreciate them coming on, defending their position as passionately as they can always make for a good radio.
	All right, I'm Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter.
	We'll be right back.
	Bold inspired solutions for America.
	Sean Hannity is on.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
	Dan Bongino, filling in for Sean.
	Folks, at DeBongino on Twitter, if you want to send me comments, criticisms, whatever, I take them all.
	You know, it's obvious I'm really passionate, again, about this tax thing.
	I appreciate Chris Hahn coming on.
	But I know where the Democrats are going to go with this.
	I know there are liberal listeners out there.
	We actually had a caller before.
	If we have time, we may get him back.
	But calling in about Kansas and the tax cuts in Kansas saying, oh, look what happened in Kansas.
	Number one, I'm talking about federal tax cuts.
	I thought that was clear.
	Ronald Reagan was not the president of Kansas or a state.
	Ronald Reagan was president of the United States.
	I'm talking about federal tax cuts.
	The dynamics of tax cuts at the federal level work far differently than at the state level for obvious reasons, liberals.
	States can't print their own money.
	Last time I checked, right?
	Am I wrong?
	There's no Federal Reserve Note, colon slash New York only, right?
	It doesn't work that way.
	States can't print money.
	A lot of them are obligated by their own constitutions to balance their budget.
	There was a tax cut in Kansas.
	Long and short of it is this.
	It was designed.
	There was a flaw in the design that allowed people to recharacterize their income as business income, which wound up in a tax shortfall.
	I'm not going to deny at all, just so we're crystal clear on the data and the evidence here that there are states who've come up with tax shortfalls all the time.
	Tax cuts, tax hikes, it's all over the place.
	No matter how high California raises its tax rate, it seems to always have a shortfall.
	Same in New York State and other places.
	I'm talking about the federal government.
	Because again, I find it funny that liberals keep bringing up Kansas and they ignore the positive effects of the Kansas tax cuts as well.
	Like unemployment dropping, the lowest level they had in 16 years, job growth.
	Like they ignore all of that.
	And by the way, government spending in Kansas did not go down because a bunch of rhino Republicans and a lot of liberal Democrats insisted on spending the same amount of money they spent before.
	Surprising absolutely no one then that there was a shortfall.
	But that's their thing.
	Kansas, they avoid Texas.
	They avoid Florida.
	You know, it's just ridiculous.
	All right, folks, if you haven't checked it out yet, by the way, please go look at Sean's new movie.
	Coming out today, he's a producer on this movie.
	It's Let There Be Light.
	Go check it out at lettherebelightmovie.com or Hannity.com.
	There are multiple theaters, tons of them down here in Florida where I am.
	Again, Hannity.com, lettherebelightmovie.com.
	Go check it out.
	See it this weekend.
	Bring the kids.
	It's going to be terrific.
	Go check it out.
	I'm going to see it.
	I think tomorrow or Sunday.
	I'm Dan Bungino.
	Be right back.
	Sean gets the answers no one else does.
	America deserves to know the truth about Congress.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'm coming.
	You're drunk?
	Oh, young pull of all over your eyes.
	The basic tenet of Christianity.
	Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
	Don't you dare tell me about the love and the compassion of your so-called God.
	What do you think it does to the boys to take the death of their brother and use it as part of your carnival act?
	Pays the Bills.
	Completely dead in the ambulance.
	Four minutes.
	It's a miracle.
	I saw Davy.
	Now, all I wanted to do was put my arms around them.
	I don't want to do with that.
	You've got the best scientific explanation.
	It hasn't brought you any comfort.
	Would you consider consulting a different source?
	Doc is your God, and he's holding out his hand to you.
	All you got to do now is take it.
	Jesus gets whacked, right?
	I've never exactly heard it put that way, but yeah, follow me here.
	This ain't brain surgery.
	Do you believe that God hears?
	God always answers prayers.
	Sometimes we just don't understand the answers.
	This better be good.
	That's what I said.
	I don't want to lose you.
	So my first question is, are you guys ready for the amount of heat that'll be coming your way with this?
	That was a really touching trailer.
	I know I've heard it twice, but I'll be honest with you, folks, the first time I was writing something down for the first half and I missed some of it.
	What a, gosh, it kind of took me aback a bit.
	What a great trailer.
	That's Sean's new movie, Let There Be Light.
	Really, we need more movies like that.
	I'm a devout Christian.
	I'm a sinner like everyone else, but I'm going this weekend to see it.
	Folks, if you want to find a movie theater near you where you can see Let There Be Light, go to lettherebelightmovie.com or Hannity.com.
	And there's a theater finder in there.
	You'll see a whole list of them.
	Go check that out.
	Starring Kevin and Sam Sorbo, two really incredible people.
	Like I said, I've met Sam in the past.
	She's really phenomenal.
	Go check it out.
	The reviews I've heard on the movie have been just incredible.
	Bring a tear to your eye.
	Go check it out.
	Let there be light.
	Lettherebelightmovie.com.
	All right.
	Good stuff to come back from that.
	It was a very emotional trailer.
	Guys, good job there.
	Welcoming to the show two friends of the show, Congressman Jim Jordan and Congressman Rod Blum from Iowa and Ohio, respectively.
	Guys, thanks a lot for joining us.
	We really appreciate it.
	Good to be with you.
	Congressman Jordan, if I can.
	Yeah, sure, absolutely.
	If I can start out with you, Congressman Jordan.
	Listen, the budget yesterday passing was a kind of a watershed moment.
	I think there's obviously a lot of disagreements on spending levels, but at least for the tax reform component of this, I guess my question to you is after the failure to get rid of Obamacare, which I know you're really in touch with the grassroots.
	I've spoken with you before.
	You're a great guy.
	They were very upset.
	Please tell me the chances of this tax reform are pretty good.
	I mean, what's your take from behind the scenes?
	I think they are pretty good.
	I think if it gets this House, you never know about the Senate, but I think they've been home.
	And I hope they've had a little come to Jesus moment with their constituents because remember, and you know this, six Republican senators voted against on the health care bill, voted against the very same legislation that they voted for 20 months ago, the clean repeal legislation that we put on President Obama's desk last session.
	So I don't know how you do that.
	I don't know how you vote against the very thing you voted for and what you told the voters you were going to do.
	And then when it's time and it really counts, you vote against it.
	So I think they probably got an earful from their constituents.
	And I think the tax bill will get out of the House and then over to the Senate and hope that they've seen the light and they're going to do the right thing.
	Oh, gosh.
	I'm glad to hear you say that.
	Congressman Blum, from your perspective here, now we've seen some incredible economic numbers since the presidency's transfer from a Democratic administration to obviously President Trump.
	Now, the economy has been, frankly, on a tear.
	Remember when the secular stagnation people, the Democrats told us we'd never see 3% growth again, and now we've seen it in two consecutive quarters.
	So, I mean, from your perspective, I guess I'm asking you a question.
	You already know the answer to.
	But don't you think we need these tax cuts to send it over the edge?
	I mean, it's good to be in overdrive, but if we're in fifth gear, we can take it to sixth or seventh gear, the economy, if we can get these through.
	What's your take on that?
	Absolutely, Dan.
	This economy, the eight years of President Obama, has grown at 50%.
	Let me repeat that.
	50% of the post-World War II average.
	We've grown at between 3% to 3.5% GDP growth annually on average since World War II.
	Under former President Obama, we've grew somewhere between 1.5% to 1.7% GDP growth.
	So, yes, we need to reignite this economy.
	And one of the biggest reasons, Dan, is our working families in this country haven't effectively had a pay raise in over 20 years.
	20 years.
	Right, and you know what's increasingly frustrating about this, Congressman?
	That Democrat economic advisors, Larry Summers comes to mind right away.
	I have the quote right in front of me from years ago.
	It suggested that the tax cut proposals, some of them on the Republican tax cut plan now, were, quote, a free lunch and were a quick way to juice the economy.
	And now you have some of these same set advisors now that President Trump is in office saying, oh, no, this is an absurd idea.
	It's a tax cut for the rich.
	It's insanity.
	I have a really hard time with this.
	Oh, I agree.
	In the Washington media, Dan, it's fascinating.
	And I've been telling them this.
	It seems like there's only one time they care about the deficit, one time they care about the debt, and one time they care about the cost to the federal government.
	And that's when we're talking about letting working folks keep more of their own money, more of their own take-home pay.
	It's not a cost to let people keep more of their own money.
	That's not a cost.
	No, no, it's like someone not robbing you as they walk down the street and then acting like you cost them a dollar.
	It's like, it's my money.
	We earned it.
	So, Congressman Jordan, question for you on this.
	So, yesterday I was doing a cable news hit, and I was talking to one of the hosts who's really bright, and she brought up a great point, which has concerned me, and I know you for a very long time, along with most of the members of the Freedom Caucus.
	The budget blueprint, we all get it, it's not the formal budget that passed, but you know, I hate to use this ridiculous term, kicking the can down the road because there's no road even left anymore.
	But I know you guys are on this and ladies in the Freedom Caucus over there, but when is the Congress at large, the Republicans out there, going to get their arms around the fact that mathematically we are headed down an absolutely certain course to bankruptcy if we don't course correct?
	Well, let's hope sooner rather than later because you're absolutely right.
	$20 trillion debt.
	But Rod made the right point, and you know this as well.
	You can't deal with a $20 trillion debt when you're growing at 1.5%, 1.3 quarters percent annual growth rate.
	You have to get to 3, 3.5%, 4%.
	Donald Trump's presidency, we're on that track right now, hit 3%, as you said, the last two quarters.
	You can't get that kind of growth rate if you don't cut taxes and let people keep more of their money, lower the corporate rate, all the things that are going to be in this tax bill.
	So that is part of dealing with this debt burden that we currently have that is so high.
	But at some points, you're exactly right.
	Once we get the tax code right, we're going to have to cut spending.
	We're going to have to reduce the rate of growth of the government, reduce the rate of growth of spending so that we can deal with it.
	But you have to grow at a better rate, and helping us get to a better rate of growth is going to be putting in place the right kind of tax code and letting people keep more of their money.
	But, Congressman Jordan, do you think we're talking to Jim Jordan and Rod Blum from Ohio and Iowa, respectively?
	Do you think there's any momentum for, you know, forget for a second even about cutting spending?
	Is there any momentum for even cutting the rate of growth of spending?
	I mean, that would at least be a baby step forward.
	Unfortunately, certainly not amongst Democrats.
	And frankly, I think there are probably too many Republicans who don't want to do that now.
	But I do think we will get there.
	But let's go one step at a time.
	Let's get the tax code in place.
	Rod's exactly right.
	This whole revenue-neutral idea that somehow letting people keep more of their money is a cost to the government is just ridiculous.
	And in the revenue-neutral world, never forget what happens.
	If you function in that world, what it means is the burden stays the same.
	You just shift around who pays what.
	And in that scenario, what always happens is the people with the big fancy lobbyists and all the folks with all the political capital, they get a good deal, and middle-class families get a bad deal.
	So let's just do one thing.
	Let's talk about the business.
	Yeah, I mean, baby steps.
	I agree.
	I mean, after eight years of Barack Obama and Congressman Blum, as you accurately stated, substandard historical growth.
	I mean, these are not partisan talking points.
	You can Google these yourself.
	The post-World War II rate of growth was significantly higher than we saw under Barack Obama.
	And I think what's really bothering me about this is now, you know, Democrats, like I said before, who were advocating for some of the same policies are throwing out their disingenuous talking points about these tax cuts, saying they're standard old-class politics nonsense, that this is a tax cut for the rich, when you and I both know that there are mounds of economic data out there showing that a corporate tax cut would benefit, in fact, the middle class and not just the rich.
	I mean, that kind of infuriates me.
	How do we battle this stuff?
	Yeah, you just keep talking about it.
	Go ahead, Jim.
	This isn't theory out of a textbook, Dan.
	Every time it's been tried, it has worked.
	We gave huge tax cuts in the 20s.
	Revenues of the government went up.
	GDP went up.
	Jobs went up.
	Kennedy, Kennedy, a Democrat, lowered the high tax rates, created 9 million jobs, 9 million jobs in the next five years.
	His GDP growth was over, listen to this, 5%.
	And the revenues to the government, you want to talk about costs.
	The revenues to the government went up over 60% under Kennedy.
	Now let's fast forward to Reagan.
	Same thing.
	We had once-in-a-generation tax cuts there.
	12 million jobs.
	12 million jobs created, 5% GDP growth, and revenues to the government for people that want government to grow doubled under Reagan because of these tax cuts.
	Congressman Blum, nothing you're saying there is even remotely controversial.
	Everything you're saying can be easily researched by going to the internet.
	But what's frustrating to me, and if I can ask both of you a small favor, and I don't know if this will ever happen, but can someone just go on the House floor with a chart of tax revenue and ask the liberals there to show us where, after a tax cut, tax revenue has gone down?
	Well, I wonder, and I'll leave this to you, Congressman Jordan.
	A serious question, though, for a moment.
	I'm not trying to be sarcastic or silly about it, but why has no one done that?
	Why has no one just gone up there and highlighted tax revenue?
	The government said, here were the tax cuts.
	Here's what happened to tax revenue.
	Notice, liberals, tax revenue went up because the economy grew.
	I mean, none of this is hard to figure out.
	It's just frustrating.
	No one does it.
	I think Congressman Blum's going to do that here in the next couple of weeks.
	He's going to go on the floor and do just that.
	If you do that, I will be all over that on my social media.
	It would be great.
	But the class warfare guys, Dan, love to talk about the rich are going to get richer and businesses, the benefits are going to go to the businesses.
	Once again, if you look at the economic facts, Dan, when businesses get tax cuts, workers in those businesses make more money.
	Most of the tax advantages that go to businesses end up in workers' pockets.
	Congressman.
	It was Barack Obama's economic advisor, one of them, Larry Summers, who was the old Treasury Secretary, who made that point himself.
	Like I said, to anyone listening to the Congressman who thinks, oh, he's a Republican, he's making this up, just Google it.
	Larry Summers, a Democrat advisor, economic advisor, and the former Treasury Secretary, made the exact case Congressman Blum just made.
	And Congressman, this is what's increasingly frustrating.
	Facts and data have become partisan.
	I mean, two plus two is four, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat.
	I always say you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.
	And the rich have done quite well under President Barack Obama.
	And I'd say it's the middle class that hasn't done well.
	I'm absolutely convinced this once-in-a-generation tax reform that we're going to end up passing through the House and Senate is going to help predominantly the middle class who hasn't had a pay raise in 20 years.
	Yeah, you're darn right.
	Income inequality got worse under Barack Obama, frequently left out of the mainstream media.
	I got about a minute left, so Congressman Jordan, I'll throw this one to you.
	I just wanted to hit on Uranium One.
	Do you is this?
	I want to be very delicate about this because I don't want to do what liberals do to us, which has become a conspiracy theorist, Trump, Russia, all that nonsense.
	But with Uranium One and the exploding connection right now between bogus Russian intelligence and this dossier, do you think we're going to see any substantive action on this?
	And I'm not, you know, I'm not getting into like people going to be in handcuffs or anything, but this is really concerning a lot of grassroots people, as you probably know.
	You are so right, Dan.
	This smells to high heaven, and that's why there's investigations that have been announced.
	I mean, they pay, Clinton pays for the dossier.
	The dossier becomes the catalyst for doing the investigation of President Trump.
	And we find out when this is all going on, this deal, that the FBI is looking at extortion kickbacks and bribery and all this stuff, and they don't tell anyone, don't tell the Congress, don't tell the agencies making the decision.
	And who was running the FBI at the time?
	And it's all shook down.
	Bob Mueller.
	And who was the justice overseeing this whole operation?
	Ross Rosenstein was overseeing the whole thing.
	So this smells as look, it may all just be one big coincidence, but it sure doesn't look that way.
	And that's why there's investigations that started this week, and we're going to get to the bottom of it.
	This is what I always appreciate about calm conservatives out there, that we're actually willing to get the facts before we talk, unlike this nonsensical X-Files conspiracy theory that they made up for six months.
	It's really disturbing.
	But I just want to thank you guys as Congressman Jim Jordan.
	I really appreciate your time, Congressman Rod Blum.
	Thanks a lot, guys, for joining us.
	We really appreciate it.
	Thanks for your insight.
	Thanks, guys.
	Appreciate it.
	All right, folks.
	Again, that was Jim Jordan from Ohio and Congressman Rod Blum from Iowa.
	Go check out their website.
	Check them out on Twitter.
	He's a good guys.
	House Freedom Caucus is always fighting the good fight, especially on the government spending issue, which is just out of control.
	And I'm glad we got to talk about that.
	All right, I'm Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter.
	for sean we'll be right back has left the building we can get back to bringing jobs home That's Jobs, J-O-B-S.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	All right, what a pleasure being with you, folks.
	Thanks to Jason, Lauren, Linda, and the Hannity team for allowing me to sub.
	It's always great sitting in the command chair here.
	I am Dan Bongino at DeBongino on Twitter.
	And that was the song from Sean's new movie, which he produced, Let There Be Light.
	Please go check it out this week.
	And I will be there.
	I'm going to go see it in Port St. Lucie.
	And if you want to find a theater near you, here's the website.
	It's lettherebelightmovie.com.
	That's lettherebelightmovie.com or Hannity.com.
	There are theaters all over.
	You'll find one close to you.
	Go check it out.
	The trailer is just amazing.
	I was telling Lauren during the break how it legitimately got me choked up.
	I'm a believer, folks, and I need more movies like that.
	It's really been a pleasure.
	Thanks for all the tweets, folks, and thanks again to the team up there for always putting out a great product.
	I appreciate it.
	See you all soon.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.

▲