All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 16, 2017 - Sean Hannity Show
01:36:18
A Scientific Corner for Roy Moore - 11.15
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeartPodcast.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carolyn Markovich.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful.
Try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes, inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So Dell a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
Let not your heart be troubled.
You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show podcast.
So like many of you, I have trouble sleeping.
I have insomnia.
No matter what I tried, it wouldn't work until I met Mike Lindell, and I got my very own MyPillow.
It has changed my life.
What makes my pillow so different is my pillow's patented adjustable fill.
In other words, you can adjust the patented fill to your exact individual needs so you get the support you need and want to help you get to sleep faster and stay asleep longer.
Just go to MyPillow.com or call 1-800-919-6090.
Remember, use the promo code Hannity.
When you do, Mike Lindell will give you his best offer ever.
Buy one pillow and get another one absolutely free.
MyPillow, made in the USA, 10-year unconditional warranty, and it has a 60-day no questions asked, money back guarantee.
You have nothing to lose.
So it's time for you to start getting the quality of sleep that you've been wanting and we need.
Just go to MyPillow.com or call 800-919-6090.
Promo code Hannity.
Take advantage of Mike's special two-for-one offer.
MyPillow.com.
Promo code Hannity.
All right, glad you're with us.
Right down on toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of this extra 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, we got so much habit.
Jim Jordan, who took on yesterday, the Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
He will join us.
Uh I have, I can't believe I'm actually starting the program with some good news for once today, because you know, I've I've just come to realize that there is absolutely nothing that is gonna stop the furious pace that is this news cycle in America today.
It's just it's absolute insanity.
It's just I've never seen anything like it.
I've been in radio 30 years.
I'm now on my 23rd year at Fox, and it's just fast and furious, and it never it just never seems to stop.
Um now, I want to talk about a lot of different things today.
Now we do have Congressman Jim Jordan on the program.
Also have legal analyst Greg Jarrett is gonna join us in the program today.
You know, there's so much legally at stake as it relates to Hillary Clinton and Fusion One, uh, Fusion GPS, and then we've got an update on Debbie Wasam and Schultz, but also Uranium One, and then of course the email server scandal that has never been, you know, we've never gotten to the bottom of any of these things.
So the good news today is the U.S. Senate today.
Yeah, that U.S. Senate that doesn't get a whole lot done.
This is this is momentous.
This is incredible.
They're on the verge of realizing a long-sought goal for those of us that know and understand the number of career high paying jobs that would be available to the forgotten men and women of this country that are in poverty on food stamps and out of the labor force, and that is all of the energy resources this country has.
I've always been an all of the above guy.
You figure out a better way to ta for energy that is cleaner burning and more efficient.
I'm all for it.
But in the meantime, the lifeblood of capitalism in our economy is energy, oil, natural gas, coal.
That's it.
Nuclear energy, which we could do and do safely if we wanted to, but you know, because you got so much environmental input on all of these issues.
You're not allowed to do the basic, simple, fundamental things that create jobs, high-paying jobs for people.
Anyway, legislation now to open.
This is a President Trump initiative, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration.
We've actually gone there, taken videos of it, showing them on TV, and it's a wilderness, a vast wilderness.
I actually talked about this in my first book, going back, however, 2000 and whatever.
You know, 2001 or so, I don't even what 2002.
Anyway, so it's going to happen.
Even Joe Manchin, a Democrat, he actually joined with GOP lawmakers.
Well, he's from West Virginia.
He's he's looking at his potential defeat, so I'm suing politics played a part in that.
Uh anyway, they passed it.
Uh the legislation, 13 to 10 vote.
Manchin was the only Democrat to join Republicans in passing the bill, and it is a one point one billion dollar budget reconciliation bill.
Now heads to the full Senate for a vote.
Clear sign that that likely will happen.
So we're gonna wait watch all of that uh carefully.
Um so a lot of you got annoyed with me last night, which by the way, I knew would happen when I said, you know, all of a sudden, Judge Roy Moore said there are two issues that concern me that I said he needed to address in 24 hours.
And I said, otherwise, you know, one of let me backtrack.
Let me just say this.
I have in these 30 years in radio, and I have in my twenty three years at Fox.
This is not my first rodeo.
Okay?
This is not the first time in my life we have dealt with what we call October surprises.
You know, what was the October surprise in 2016?
That was the Access Hollywood tape.
It was designed to be the not to use a bad analogy, a kill shot to politically destroy Trump.
That's what that was.
And there was digging and digging and digging into everything Trump every in have ever said, every interview he ever did, and then they got raw footage.
He doesn't know his mic's on, locker room talk, goes into the second debate.
Uh, this this broke what, two days before that debate, there were people even debating whether or not he'd show up that night, I remember.
And I thought by far that was his best debate, in my opinion.
And yeah, I'm guilty.
I said it, locker room talk, it was just stupid.
And that was that just totally diffused it.
Now, if you listen to the experts, the experts were telling you, oh, he's done.
That's it.
He's finished.
And by the way, mathematically, it's not a bad observation if a tape like that comes out uh on the eve of an election.
What is an October surprise though supposed to be about?
An October surprise is meant to manipulate the voting population on the uh uh at a close proximity to the actual election in the hopes it will tip the balance to the person that is sitting on the information or their associate that is sitting on the information.
It happens almost every election cycle.
And I'm hearing something in my ear uh back there.
Now, George W. Bush on the eve of the 2000 election.
I bet a lot of you probably forgot.
What happened to George?
Uh uh a DUI, a DW showed up from when he had been much younger.
And it comes up, it's like the weekend before the election.
Why was it released then?
Did people not know until the last day?
These elections now, you gotta understand.
Senate election, they go on for months and months and months.
Presidential elections, we begin the process.
We began it in March of 2015 for crying out loud, in terms of 17 candidates, rolling them out.
We traveled around the country.
So we've seen plenty of October surprises.
It also happens.
Look at the case of Clarence Thomas.
That's a classic case.
Clarence Thomas on the verge being a Supreme Court justice, and oops, last minute, you know, here comes Anita Hill.
And then, oh, you know, Democrats are giddy.
Politics is a dirty, Brutal, ugly blood sport.
There's nothing nice in the world, the politics.
Your opponents, politically speaking, I'm putting emphasis, politically speaking, want to destroy you and kill you off.
They want you done.
They want that power, they want to win.
And in the course, you know, of elections, basically, there are no lines for many candidates, none whatsoever.
And we saw it with Herman Kane, another example.
I look, I can go through these examples all day here today.
And so now we have, and I I have an affinity for Alabama.
Why?
Because my first professional radio job was in Huntsville, Alabama.
And I has somebody that grew up in New York, do you ever see the movie my cousin Viz Vinny?
You ever see that movie?
It's hilarious.
Buck Sexton is in the studio.
Hey Buck, how are you?
You ever see my cousin Vinny?
All right, Joe Petchy.
I'm in freaking Alabama.
You know, and then uh Marisa Tourmay, you know, posi traction, you know, you spin it and you clay.
You ever have that happen, and one wheel spins and the other wheel doesn't.
If both wheels spin, that's posy traction.
All right, that's my best image.
This is one of my favorite movies.
She's like, everybody knows you've been stuck in the mud in Alabama.
The other one does nothing exactly.
I love Alabama.
Now, I was a kid growing up from New York.
My accent was a shock to the people in Alabama.
And it was almost Linda like in terms of first of all coffee, much, much worse than yours.
Yours is yours is nothing.
Coffee, talk radio, how you doing, first of all.
So I'm down in Alabama.
I I love Alabama.
I came to love that state.
I know the people in that state.
It was so different than where I grew up.
Now they are hit with their own October surprise in a sense.
And that is these charges against Judge Roy Moore.
And here's where we are with this.
The charges are serious.
There is nobody in this audience that would ever want to vote for at all, somebody that in any way, shape, matter, or form, as a 32-year-old man, was responsible for groping and grabbing a 14-year-old girl.
And if you and if and if you knew that and you still wanted to vote for it, I'm sorry.
That is that is just morally repugnant.
And you hope somebody like that gets arrested because they're predators, it's evil, all the things that I have been saying.
Then you got to balance that between all of false charges that are often made as October surprises.
And that is now the people of Alabama, which I have faith in.
I really do have faith in the people.
This is real, this shouldn't be Mitch McConnell's decision or the Republican Party's decision.
And what I said last night is when the Gloria Allred brings out an accuser that said that then in his 30s, Roy Moore, well, that's not the word, assaulted her, and when she was 16.
And Roy Moore said that he had never met this woman.
And then we see an entry in a yearbook.
And I know everybody's been using the handwriting experts, et cetera, et cetera.
I already know.
So I said last night, I want answers.
I said, the people of Alabama, the Republican Party that he represents, the country deserves answers.
We have way too many problems.
And I have felt that the answers have been inadequate.
When the interview that I had, I felt up to that point.
And when he, when I first asked Roy Moore, I said, Roy, you know, I said, would it have been your practice to date a 32 as 32 to date a girl 17 or 18 or in her late teens?
Not my usual practice.
That would not be, and then I and I'm like, what does that mean?
Not my that's not a no.
And then I asked, okay, would you, you know, not without the permission of her mother.
And it creates in a lot of people's minds, including mine, confusion.
Now, the third time I asked him, he did say, I said, unequivocally, Can you tell me no?
Now, some people aren't good at interviews.
I'm not making excuse.
I don't know the full truth here.
I don't know.
And anyway, so without giving away details, you know, I have gotten an answer from the Roy Moore campaign on the questions that I had.
And like everything else, the sad part about any late allegation against anybody.
What if the person's innocent like the Duke Lacrosse kids?
What if?
What if it's George Zimmer and everyone thought George Zimmeren guilty?
What he was proven innocent.
You know, in the trial, jury of his peers.
What if in the case of, and I mentioned so many examples, this can happen.
You know, so unfortunately for the people of Alabama, they're now gonna have to listen to these answers.
I was told that explanations are coming today.
And at the end of the day, my thoughts are these.
It doesn't matter what the media says.
It doesn't matter what Mitch McConnell says.
Who cares what Mitch McComin?
He's tried to influence the people of Alabama the whole time in this election.
And I just have faith in the people of Alabama.
They're the ones that will and should decide.
Not Sean Hannity in a studio in New York.
And what I try to do is give you information that you can make an informed best decision.
And they're gonna give you that explanation will come out publicly today, and it's gonna be up to the people of Alabama, which is the right thing to do, or the people of any state.
And uh at the end of the day, you know, and then they're well, we won't see it.
We won't do it.
Well, you know, you have to deal with it at the time.
I have but I have gotten an answer.
And the answer is they will address this today.
All right, 800-941 Sean.
But at the end of the day, I I love the people of Alabama.
And I trust the people of Alabama.
And you know what?
If they decide this is the person they want, they believe this or they don't believe it.
I don't know if there'll be any more evidence, any more allegations.
Nobody knows.
Who knows with these things?
Hey, you know how I love hearing great American success stories and sharing them all with you.
Well, our favorite t-shirt, underwear, sock company, Tommy John.
Well, that's one of them.
Now, Tom Patterson grew up in a small town in South Dakota.
After college, he had a successful career.
He was selling medical devices on the West Coast.
But he quickly became fed up with the way his undershirt kept coming untucked.
So despite having zero background in men's fashion whatsoever, Tom sketched up some designs for smarter undergarments.
Now, starting out of his apartment and growing Tommy John to the globally recognized company it is today.
Well, he achieved Tom Did the American Dream.
Now, of course, they're super soft, they're undershirts.
Guess what?
They never come untucked.
Plus, all of Tommy John underwear is backed by the best pair you'll ever wear, guarantee, or it's free.
Go to Tommyjohn.com slash Hannity for 20% off your first order.
Tommy John.com slash Hannity.
You get 20% off your first order.
Tommy John.com slash Hannity, 20% off.
That's Tommy John.com slash Hannity.
So in light of all of this, let me tell you, there's a couple of stories today.
One is a female, female congressional staffers uh say that Capitol Hill has a creep list.
Wow.
But I want to say, I got a tape I'm going to play you at the bottom of this half hour, right after the news.
You know, and why does so many men get the idea that they could get away with sexual harassment, sexual assault, or worse?
Where did this all begin in our lifetime?
You know, it's an actual John Puthoritz, not exactly my biggest fan, points the finger at the world's most famous sexual predator who indulged in everything from indecent exposure, Paula Jones, to the Oval Office, Monica Lewinsky, and then the allegations by Juanita Proderick of rape, and thanks to, you know, all his adoring liberal fans.
Well, guess what?
Many of them female.
Bill Clinton got away with all of it.
Now this is a time of reckoning, and now most people are beginning to say, wow, all these Democrats that stand in their sanctimony, self-righteousness, et cetera, et cetera.
How many of them defended?
Wait, you hear what I'm going to play at the bottom of the hour?
And that is the New York Times published an op-ed this week.
I believe Juanita.
Thus accepting the most incentive.
He was charged with rape.
That was in the New York Times this week.
Now, this one was not about propositioning.
This was not about, you know, showing dropping his pants or having affairs with Jennifer Flowers or consensual sex or groping, grabbing, fondling, kissing against her Will Cavalier and Willie, although that was close.
New York Times, Michelle Goldberg said she believed Juanita Broderick, who said that Clinton violently raped her in 1978.
This was in the New York Times.
And it was painful, she acknowledged, to bring these matters up because she didn't want it to appear that she'd somehow surrendered to a right wing lynch mob.
Wait till you hear the tapes we've got.
And when you put it through the prism of what we discuss every day, it's going to be enlightening to you.
That's next.
All right, 25 till the top of the hour.
The president takes some questions.
We'll probably dip in and out of that in a second here.
So here you have now the New York Times publishing an op-ed, I believe Juanita.
I want you to just uh take this in through the prism of how the Clintons have been revered for all of these years.
And I brought some of this up yesterday, how they have been defended all of these years.
You can start, you can go back to the National Inquirer when Jennifer Flowers talked about the affair that they had.
By the way, he eventually admitted that, well, it was only one time under oath in the Monica Lewinsky case.
But for the for the interim period, all those years, they they referred to her as a liar.
That's what they did with Jennifer Flowers.
And then, of course, you have the case of Paul Jones.
Paul Jones was paid out a massive sum of money.
He lost his law license as a result, and he was impeached as a result against all of the Democrats that all surrounded the wagons and defended Bill Clinton on the issue of Monica Lewinsky.
Okay, you could say it was consensual.
She's is that not a position of power?
She's an intern, 20, whatever years old.
You know, is that is that not similar to what we're talking about today?
In that sense, the question of I'm asking Roy Moore about, and I'm I'm not listening, I'm just I am making a point about a double standard.
And how did we get here?
And can you thank Bill Clinton for the fact that, you know, people thought they can get away with sexual harassment as long as you have the right political point of view.
This are pretty this is a watershed moment.
I've got to give the New York Times some credit, although I gotta say, also a little late to the game.
But anyway, they, you know, it is um, you know, when you go on to read this, the Times Michelle Goldberg said she believed Juanita.
Juanita Broderick claimed that she was raped by Bill Clinton.
And I was the second interview of Juanita Broderick.
And this one was not about Clinton propositioning women.
This was not Jennifer Flowers, a consensual relationship.
This was not, as we are told, um, Monica Lewinsky.
In the case of Paul Jones, he had dropped his pants as and said, you know, whatever.
In front of somebody.
I mean, all like simple were all creeped out by Lewis C. K. That's what we're talking about here.
Exposing oneself to a woman.
So it was painful.
She said, well, she didn't want to surrender to the right-wing lynch mob.
I guess she's admitting that conservatives, I don't call conservatives right-wing lynch mobs, that they told the truth.
And what's more is Goldberg said that liberals were right to be skeptical of women's claims against Clinton during his presidency due to the right-wing campaign to delegitimize him.
In this environment, it would have been absurd to take accusations of assault and harassment made against Clinton at face value.
These Women withstood more smears, more slander, more besmirchment, more character assassination, and in many ways, they took more than anybody that I've ever said.
Now, I'm in that sense, for them to speak up and go through what they went through.
And it was done by Clinton's team.
It was done by all of those around him.
He was enabled by Hillary Clinton himself.
And I'm not even talking about Hillary Clinton taking money from countries that abuse women.
Practice sharia, kill gays and lesbians, people that persecute Christians and Jews.
Anyway, so she said she cannot keep herself from seeing the truth that was evidenced during the Clinton presidency to anyone with eyes to see.
Bill Clinton was a sexual reprobate whose ascension to the Democratic nomination after the revelation of his relationship with Jennifer Flowers during the primary was a hinge moment in American history.
No one before him would have survived it.
He did by denying it hotly.
Was saved by the by the flames of all this by Hillary Clinton.
And she sat there on 60 Minutes, supported him, even as she said she wasn't the type of woman who'd just stand by her man.
Remember that infamous interview.
1998, when the news of the liaison when Lewinsky became public, she did it again.
They did it again.
Bill said he didn't have sexual relations with that woman.
That woman, Monica Lewina, I'm going to get back to your job with American people.
Hillary goes on the Today Show and talks about a vast right-wing conspiracy.
Now, in that sense, how does this impact where we are today?
Now, I do think people can make charges later.
I said that since day one with this issue of Roy Moore.
I do think that people could be so traumatized by the evil of an assault.
Yeah, I do think that that can happen.
I've said from the beginning that I only want the truth.
And I guess, you know, if um, you know, and this is where these October surprises I was talking about become so difficult for everybody.
You know, you have a story, the Daily Caller in January of 2013.
Well, the Democratic media mounted a full court press to spread the allegations that, you know, on the on Roy Moore here, etc., etc.
But not only do court documents, you know, filed by the Obama Justice Department, do you know they actually claim that Senator Bob Menendez had sex with underage Dominican prostitutes?
Those same documents say Menendez encounters with these underage girls have been, quote, corroborated by federal investigators.
Reading from the Daily Caller.
January 2013.
Now we have a report where one woman who says she was 16 when Menendez first had sex with her, actually gives her firsthand account of what happened.
Anyone gonna ask Chuck Schumer about that today?
Anybody?
Then you have these groups like, you know, Media Matters defending Robert Menendez.
Let me go back to that line.
Quote, it says the Obama Justice Department contained they can claims that he had this sex with these underage Dominican prostitutes.
Same documents, say Menendez encounters with these underage girls have been, quote, corroborated by federal investigators.
He's on trial now, as we all know.
Senator also likes the youngest and newest girls, the woman wrote on April twelve uh twenty-first, twenty twelve, according to an English translation provided to the Daily Caller by a native Spanish speaker.
Little noticed email published online by the group crew, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington that this woman wrote nine months ago that she had slept with Menendez at a series of sex parties organized by this doctor guy that's involved in this whole thing, this mess.
You get where I'm going?
I want to just go back.
And this is what the this is what, you know, with all these October surprises.
This is what now the people of Alabama with an October surprise have to sort through and try to get to the truth.
And that's why I'm saying that it is, you know, for anybody looking on the outside.
You want to be sensitive.
Obviously, if anybody is guilty of something that he is being charged up, they've you you never want somebody like that.
They should be in jail if you offend a child like this or abuse a child like that.
I know I'm not talking about statute of limitations.
I'm talking about just truth.
On the other hand, you know, these October surprises, they pop up a little too often.
Anyway, so they're gonna explain it later today, and then I'm at the end of the day, it's gonna be the people of Alabama, as it should be.
And all these people in Washington that, well, I didn't hear the same criticism of Menendez, I didn't hear any criticism of Clinton coming out of these Democrats.
Just listen to what I we put together for you.
If a woman sleeps with your husband, you're not gonna necessarily embrace them.
I wonder why she didn't have...
That's why when he brought up these allegations, I wonder if she missed the opportunity to address it in a way that the public would understand...
That that's just not how you behave.
I would like to apologize to those uh tramps that have slept with my husband.
Maybe she could have said that.
Her husband's affair or affairs, alleged affairs.
He's going right for the jugular when it comes to Hillary Clinton and going after Bill Clinton and alleged misconduct with women.
Last night, Trump fired a shot squarely at Clinton's husband, former president Bill Clinton.
In one case it's about exposure, and another case it's about groping and fondling and touching against a woman's will and rape and rape.
Donald Trump using that word unprompted.
During an interview last night with Fox News' Sean Hannity, bringing up a discredited and long-denied accusation about against former president Bill Clinton.
Dating back to 1978 when he was Arkansas Attorney General.
I'm not going to let you all continue to say that she allowed him.
She facilitated her.
No, she didn't.
How did she facilitate her?
She didn't ask her about the hand block.
No, no, no, no, no.
Because it's not that that's rape culture, can't you're blaming someone who succumbed to someone committing adultery on her?
We're Christians, so let's talk about what that is.
She was accused of facilitating it last night, and she was haley and you're wrong.
She did not deny it.
But you know why?
Because it's effing ridiculous, dude.
That's so ridiculous.
That's crazy.
Do you think Donald Trump used you as a political prop today?
No.
You don't think she's there for to scare Hillary Clinton?
Their presence at the debate seen as a political stunt and distraction by top Clinton campaign officials.
Do you worry you're being used as a distraction by Donald Trump to change the conversation?
No.
Why not?
The rape accusation is decades old and discredited.
They were referring to a trio of women who say Bill Clinton made unwanted sexual advances in the eighties and nineties.
Mr. Clinton denies it.
Two of the cases were plagued by factual discrepancies.
And it would be if he were running for president, but he isn't.
Hillary Clinton is running for president.
But he's a chief surrogate for her.
So it's what do you do now that Trump has opened this up?
Well, I think that you stick with what is important to the American people.
And what is important to American people is their financial stability.
That's what this election should be about, not about what Bill Clinton did two decades ago.
She was not implicated in any misconduct.
She was not someone who uh was accused even of doing anything untoward with regard to these women.
I mean, there have been the Donald Trump is raising, you know, the specter of misconduct.
I mean, there is just not even an allegation that I'm not.
I mean, the women say that they felt intimidated by her.
There's no evidence of that, but Juanita Broderick says that, you know, she gave her sort of uh side glance and shook her hand too long and lingered and said something in a coded way.
The women broader, by the way, another matter investigated by Ken Starr, the alleged sexual misconduct of Bill Clinton with regard to one Juanita Broderick, which he did not decide to bring any charges from.
In your book, the three women brought on to stage by Trump attacking your husband.
And you kind of dismissed them.
Was that the right thing to do?
Are you sure about that?
Well, yes, because that had all been litigated.
I mean, that was the subject of a huge uh, you know, investigation, as you might recall in the late 90s, and uh there were conclusions drawn, and that was clearly in the past.
The great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.
Yeah.
Well, now the New York Times looks at it.
You know, so when people politicize these types of things at this point, I just think, and then I said this at the beginning of this whole thing is it related to the charges with more is that we've got to wait for the evidence to come in, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
So I said last night, all right, give me some.
I want these questions answered because it's too serious.
And uh they are gonna give answers today.
And you know what the bottom line here at this is when when you're balancing October surprises, believability of of women, the desire to get to the truth.
You know, now this is what the people of Alabama have to face, and it really is gonna be their decision at the end of the day.
But I you know, the fact that Liberals who defended the indefensible all these years are lectured lecturing everybody about oh, their sanctimony and they have the high road baloney.
They just voted for a woman that defended somebody she knew had to be guilty.
She knew.
And she took money from countries that abuse women.
It's unbelievable.
It's unbelievable.
I trust the people of Alabama.
They're gonna have some more time to sort through this.
And I hope and pray we get to the truth for their sake and the country's sake.
And that's my position.
It's gonna be up to them.
A lot coming up, Sean Hannity show.
We shall check in with Congressman Jim Jordan.
He's the one that had the shootout with uh attorney general sessions yesterday.
He'll join us.
Also, Congressman Biggs will join us.
Later on, we got analysis on uranium one, an update on fusion GPS, and we got an update today.
Investigative reporter Luke Rosiak will join us as it relates to Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
We have an amazing Hannity about democratic hypocrisy tonight.
I I'm telling you, wait till you hear it and see it.
Thanks.
The FBI pay Christopher Steele, the author of the dossier.
Those are matters you'll have to uh direct to the um uh I think maybe the special counsel.
And why is that?
It's just I'm just asking if someone's gonna be able to do that.
Well, I'm not able to uh reveal uh internal investigatory uh matters here that's under the investigation of anybody, but particularly I think the This happened in the summer of 2016.
We know the Clinton campaign, the Democrat National Committee paid through a law firm Fusion GPS to produce the dossier.
We know the author was Christopher Steele.
It's been reported that he was on the payroll of the FBI.
I'm just wanting to know if in fact that is the case.
I'm not able to provide an answer to you.
The FBI present the dossier to the FISA court.
I'm not able to answer that.
Do you know if the FBI did the established process protocol in evaluating claims made in the dossier?
I'm not able to answer that.
On January 6th, then FBI Director James Comey briefed President elect Trump up in New York about the dossier.
Shortly thereafter, that the fact that that meeting took place and the subject of the meeting was the dossier was leaked to CNN.
Do you know who leaked that information?
I do not.
Are you investigating who leaked that information?
That would be a matter within the investigatory uh powers of the special counsel you got a number of investigations going on, Mr. Attorney General regarding leaks.
Is that likely one of those that you're investigating?
I'm not able to reveal the existence of investigations or not.
But my concern is we sent you a letter three and a half months ago asking for a second special counsel.
And if you're now just considering it, I I what's it gonna take to get a special counsel?
We know that former FBI Director James Comey misled the American people in the summer of 2016 when he called the Clinton investigation a matter.
So obviously an investigation.
We know FBI Director Comey was drafting an exoneration letter before the investigation was complete.
We know Loretta Lynch, one day before the Benghazi report came out, five days before Secretary Clinton was scheduled to be interviewed by the FBI, met with former President Bill Clinton on a tarmac in Phoenix.
What's it gonna take to actually get a special counsel?
It would take a factual basis that meets the uh standards of the appointment of a special.
And is that is that analysis going on right now?
Well, it's in the uh manual of the Department of Justice about what's required.
We've only had two.
The first one was the WACO, Janet Reno, um, Senator Danforth, who took over that investigation as special counsel, and Mr. Mueller.
Each of those are pretty uh special factual situation.
Let me ask it this way.
We will use the proper standards, and that's what I only thing I can tell you, Mr. Jordan.
Well, I appreciate the question.
You can have your idea, but sometime we have to study what the facts are and to evaluate whether it meets the standard.
Well, we know one fact.
We know the Clinton campaign, the Democrat National Committee paid for uh through the law firm paid for the dossier.
We know that happened.
And it sure looks like the FBI was paying the author of that document, and it sure looks like a major political party was working with the federal government to then turn an opposition research document, the equivalent of some national inquirer story, into an intelligence document, take that to the FISA court so that they could then get a warrant to spy on Americans associated with President Trump's campaign.
That's what it looks like.
And I'm asking you, doesn't that warrant, in addition to all the things we know about James Comey in 2016, doesn't that warrant naming a second special counsel as 20 members of this committee wrote you three and a half months ago asking you to do?
Well, Mr. Come is no longer the director of the FBI.
Thank goodness.
We have an excellent man of integrity and ability, and Chris Ray, and I think he's going to do an outstanding job.
And I'm very happy to be able to do that.
He's not here today, attorney general.
I would say looks like is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel.
All right, that's from yesterday's hearing.
Congressman Jim Jordan was going to join us in a minute to discuss uh that exchange with the attorney general.
Joining us now, though, in the meantime, is Congressman uh Andy uh Biggs is with us.
Andy, how are you?
Welcome back to the program.
What did you think of that exchange?
Well, I think that uh first of all, thanks for having me.
But I I I think that I was a little bit um disappointed because I think what Jim Jordan was talking about when he said it looks like this, it looks like that.
What he was doing is he was laying out the factual basis for probable cause of a crime or multiple crimes that have been committed.
And if that is the case, which I think it is, then the attorney general at that point, when he says, Well, I we're gonna look at it on the factual basis.
Well, you've had it for months and months and months.
You should be appointing a special counsel.
That's that's the position I took yesterday when I heard that.
That's why my questioning went the way it did.
And it and I I didn't get that from uh Attorney General Sessions, who I think is a good man, but here he is he's he can't defer to his second in command who is Rod Rosenstein, for Pete's sake.
This he can't do that.
He has got to make the tough decision.
That tough decision is we need a special counsel to investigate this whole series, this litany of corruption.
And what I can what I've said is the scandal of our time.
He needs he needs to appoint someone.
Well, I I listen, I think so too.
Um, but I'm also being told, and uh I'm kind of getting very strong feedback that in fact there is an ongoing investigation that he never recused himself from uranium one or the the whole issue as it involves uh fusion GPS.
Um and he was asked specifically yesterday by John Conyers, you know, about the issue of whether he's recused himself of the investigations involving Hillary.
He said he couldn't answer that.
He said uh he didn't recall talking about George Papadopoulos, by the way.
He said he can't answer if recusal impacts investigation and diffusion GPS or uranium one.
Uh the man that was questioning him so uh in a tough way yesterday is Jim Jordan of Ohio Freedom Caucus, of course.
How are you, sir?
I'm Bill Fine, Sean.
Goodbye with you.
All right, let's talk about what did you think of those answers?
Well, I I I mean, I think maybe even the most telling part was when uh Matt Gates asked him a few questions, uh too in particular.
He said, Are you recused from the uranium one issue?
And he said no.
And then later in the in the question, later in that five minutes, he was asked the same question.
He says, I don't know.
So that's the point.
We don't know what Jeff Sessions is recused from what he isn't.
We do know Bob Mueller is inherently compromised on the Uranium One issue.
So I would prefer we didn't have to name a special counsel.
But I don't see how you can avoid it.
Logic says if the attorney general doesn't know what he's recused from or what he isn't, and if Bob Mueller is inherently compromised, we're not gonna get the answers to all those things Andy just talked about unless we have a special counsel.
And if it's someone with inside the department, right now no one will believe what those investigations produce because oh did Jeff Sessions appoint this guy, or was it a career person?
So the only way to get this done, and I think done in a way that Americans will accept the verdict of accept the findings of the investigation is to have a special counsel.
Well, I agree with you on the special counsel.
I've been calling it for for a long time.
What if it does turn out?
And I mean, you know, here's the difficulty when you interview Jeff Sessions.
I mean, okay, he he said, and then he clarified his remarks, as you know, after the exchange that he had with you, is that he was just talking about what the standard for a special counsel, which means that he hasn't decided if a special counsel is going to be necessary.
I'm also hearing a lot of rumors that there's going to be dramatic changes at the FBI in the next week or so, so that should be interesting.
But more importantly, you know, if he's sitting there knowing that there's an investigation into fusion GPS Russian interference as it relates to Hillary or Uranium One, he can't tell you that.
Yeah, but uh well maybe that's the case, but that was not the impression we got.
The impression we got is the facts have to be there to warn a special counsel.
And I would come back to how about these facts?
How about the fact that the Democrat National Committee and the Clinton campaign were paying for the for the dossier and at the same time it it sure looks like the FBI was paying Christopher Steele, the author of that dossier, and it was taken, we believe, to the Pfizer court to a federal judge, and it was the basis for buying on people associated with the Trump campaign.
How about that?
If that's not a fact pattern, everything points to that took place.
We don't know for certain, but it sure looks like it was if that's what happened.
If that's not the factual enough information to say we have to look at this in the requirements of special counsel, I do not know what does.
I do not know what does.
And that's what we were trying to get at yesterday.
It's what Andy was trying to get at, Mr. DeSanis and all of us who called for this.
Yeah.
Well, I I agree on so many fronts.
But so much has happened.
So much has, you know, gone on.
And every time the Clintons skate, Congressman Jordan, every time.
I don't think you know, at this point in time, you know, here we've spent a year investigating Trump Russia collusion.
Now we know Hillary and the DNC funded this phony dossier full of Russian lies and propaganda and salacious you know, misinformation to influence our election.
And then she says, Well, there's a difference between op research and uh and uh uh collusion.
Meanwhile, that's the very thing they were accusing you know Donald Trump of.
And yet we don't we don't see the investigation on the other side, and people like me, and obviously you are getting frustrated.
No kidding.
You you said it best, and you said this last night on your show, you just you said it there too.
Uh that they were doing the very thing that they're accusing us of.
And frankly, that shouldn't surprise us.
This is how the left operates.
So uh again, all the more reason why we need someone from the outside that everyone respects who can come in here and objectively investigate.
Well, we're gonna continue to investigate in Congress.
We're gonna f we're gonna we're gonna do everything we can to uncover everything.
But we need a special counsel.
That's that's obvious.
Let's let's make it happen and let's move on.
Yeah.
All right.
And let me go to you, Congressman Biggs.
Um, you know, w uh Congress has to get a response when they ask for a special counsel.
Isn't that the standard operating procedure?
Yeah, that would be normal.
That's right.
Okay.
All right, but so three and a half months ago the first request went in.
Yeah.
Okay, and now you get these answers yesterday, which is well, I can't talk about if there's an investigation.
I'm not sure this rises to the standard of a special counsel.
There's certain criteria that it's gotta meet.
Mm-hmm.
What's your reaction to that answer?
Well, I think it's it's inadequate.
I mean, and you couple that, Sean, with the fact that the day before the hearing, we got a letter from the attorney general saying that, well, we'll we'll we'll consider it.
That's pretty weak.
And then when he talks about who's gonna be involved in considering it, he's he's referring to Rod Rosenstein.
And so we have the same people uh who have the same conflicts as in the m in the Mueller incident, we have this going on over here.
It's it's in my opinion, it's woefully inadequate.
Yeah, well, I mean, uh it's really c this simple.
We know Killery mishandled classified information.
We know that that that information was picked up by five foreign entities and intelligence agencies.
Then we know that she destroyed classified top secret special access information.
Uh these were subpoenaed emails, and then she just destroys them, deletes them, acid washes, bleach bits them, and and bashes up devices with hammers.
Uh that to me is a classic case of obstruction, and I I I don't think I would not be in jail over that.
Would I be in jail over that?
Yes, you would, and so would I, and so would most every other American.
And uh, but for some reason uh people just jump on and protect the Clintons, and that's and that's what we have said.
Uh look, we just want a fair and objective investigation, and we haven't had it.
Clintons haven't had it.
If it evidence keeps coming out, we've induced all kinds of evidence indicating both obstruction on the part of Hillary Clinton and the election collusion everybody's talking about with Russia.
It turns out it's with these guys, the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign, and we want that to be investigated.
That that isn't too much to ask in a free society that uh honors and reveres the rule of law, I don't think.
All right.
Now may ask about James Comey in particular.
I mean, and Robert Muller, Jim Jordan.
Robert Muller was the FBI director in two thousand and nine.
He knew that Vladimir Putin was trying to get a foothold into the uranium market in America.
We know that those his agents in America were involved in bribery, kickbacks, money laundering, extortion, and other racketeering crimes.
And they knew in 2009.
And we have an informant that was on the inside asked by the FBI to stay there.
So we have first hand account.
We have documents, emails, and tapes.
And with all of that information acquired, knowing this is happening, why would anybody sign off on giving away 20 percent of our uranium when we don't have enough uranium in the country?
We have to import it anyway.
Well, exactly right, Sean.
It's been also reported that he didn't share that knowledge you just went through with anyone he didn't share it with Congress.
He didn't share it with the American people, but probably most importantly, it's been reported that it was not shared with the committee.
This committee on foreign investment in the United States, made up of folks from federal agencies, several federal agencies.
He didn't share that information with them.
You got an informant giving you all this kind of information at a time when there's this uranium one deal that's moving forward, and there's a committee who decides whether the deal happens or not, and you don't share the information with them.
Why didn't you share that information?
And now we have an informant who and the informant who gave them all this was put under a gag order.
Again, how can Robert Mueller, that special counsel, look into that situation?
He was part of the whole deal.
Part of the part of the investigation at the time.
So again, just uh underscoring why we need a separate special counsel to look at that issue in conjunction with everything else involving uh involving Mr. Comey.
All right, we'll take a break.
We'll come back more with Congressman Andy Biggs and Jim Jordan.
Oh, take it this way.
Well, back in two thousand and ten, yes, your federal government took over the student loan industry.
Well, guess what happens?
Wouldn't you know it?
Student loan debt explodes.
In fact, there's over forty-four point two million Americans today that have student loans and it totals over one point three trillion dollars.
To tell you how big this is.
As we continue, Congressman Jim Jordan is with us, Congressman Andy Biggs is with us.
You know, as it relates to Mueller, let me just dig a little bit deeper into all of this.
If he's involved himself in a knowing all of this about, you know, Putin and Russia and their desire to get a hold of uranium, and he didn't do anything about it, and might himself, if there ever is an investigation, have to answer questions himself.
Does that does that warrant a recusal of him uh in any way, shape, or form, Congressman Andy Biggs?
Uh yes, it does, Sean.
In fact, uh the uh the federal statutes are very explicit that you cannot conduct an investigation if you're either the subject of the investigation, which Mr. Muller would be, or if you're a witness in the uh investigated uh issue, which he would be, or or if you're affiliated or related to anybody that would be there, which he would be because it was his agency that he was overseeing.
So yeah, he has he has uh uh conflict in bright neon lights.
And so yesterday when I asked, I asked uh attorney general sessions, you know, do you even have a a formal system to evaluate conflicts of interest?
He said, No.
There is not one in the Department of Justice.
And I said, Well, how do we determine then?
Who determines it?
He says the individual attorney.
So so are you telling me that Mr. Mueller, it's it's all up to Mr. Muller to determine whether he has a conflict of interest?
That's a problem.
That's a real problem.
And that isn't the way it's done in private practice, I can tell you that.
So I was very disappointed by that.
All right, guys, I gotta let you both go.
I appreciate it.
Jim Jordan and uh Andy Biggs, 800 941 Sean is a toll free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
What are you doing to find out how the Russian takeover of the American uranium was allowed to occur despite criminal conduct by the Russian company that the Obama administration approved to make the purchase?
Mr. Chairman, uh we will hear your concerns.
The Department of Justice uh will take such actions as is appropriate, I know.
And I would offer that some people have gone to jail in that transaction already, and but the article um talks about other issues.
So uh without confirming or denying the existence of any particular investigation, I would say I hear your concerns and they will be reviewed.
I think I know why you're probably reluctant to go into some detail on that, but I would like to remind you that deputy attorney Rosenstein directly supervised the criminal case when he was U.S. attorney in Maryland.
I don't think it would be proper for him to supervise a review of his own conduct, do you?
It would be his decision.
He's a man of integrity and ability.
If he feels that he has a uh inability to proceed with any invis investigation, it would be his responsibility to make that determination and should consult as I told you I would, and as I have done uh with the senior ethics people at the department.
Uh reports suggest that the Clinton Foundation received millions of dollars from interested parties in the transaction.
Uh Bill Clinton received 500,000 for a speech in Moscow, June 2010 from the Russian government aligned bank the same month as a speech Russia gave began the uranium acquisition process.
This fact r uh pattern raises serious concerns about improper political influence by the Clintons during the Obama administration.
Has the Justice Department fully investigated whether the Russians compromise the Obama administration's decisions to smooth the way for transactions?
And if not, why not?
Mr. Chairman, we're working hard to uh maintain discipline in the department.
It wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment on any ongoing investigation.
Uh Mr. Attorney General, um, does your recusal from investigations related to the interference by Russia in the 2016 presidential campaign uh apply to any investigations regarding efforts by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign uh to secretly fund uh a scurrilous and widely discredited dossier on uh candidate uh Donald Trump.
Mr. Chabot, um anything that uh uh arises in this nature uh that may be or may not be connected to uh the my recusal on the question of the campaign in Russia uh would be discussed between me, uh the senior ethics advisor, uh, at the Department of Justice, and that's how I make my decision.
That's what I promised to do when I was confirmed before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and that's what I will do.
And I'm unable to uh provide information to you as to what decision would be has been made in this matter.
I 24 now till the top of the hour.
That of course Jeff Sessions uh back in October with uh Senator Grassley, and that was him yesterday talking about whether or not recusal took place, among other things.
Uh the question is, what is the Attorney General doing?
Uh my sources have told me that he has not recused himself from issues like uranium one.
And investigations are ongoing.
Joining us now is Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett.
Uh, Greg, welcome back to the program.
Um look, you we heard his answer, the exchange yesterday with Jim Jordan, the Congressman from Ohio, and it was pretty testy, and that was on the issue of a special counsel on the issue of whether or not there's investigation, that's a whole different issue because he wouldn't be able to comment on an investigation taking place.
My interpretation that also includes sources of mine makes me conclude that there has been and is an investigation ongoing.
Well, I think your sources are correct.
And indeed on Monday evening, just before his Tuesday testimony, he did finally, belatedly, three and a half months later, respond to the House Judiciary Committee's request for special counsel, uh, and he said that he had directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate whether there's a special counsel needed.
So he's you know, he's dancing on a very fine line here between his confirmation recusal and actually being involved in the decision making and overseeing an investigation.
But I think there is one.
It's pretty clear there is one, and he may be relying on those senior federal prosecutors to make a decision for him as to whether a special counsel is needed.
You know, as you and I have talked about, it's a no-brainer.
There is a plethora of compelling evidence that Hillary Clinton appears to have used her office to confer a benefit to the Russian government in exchange for money, and that would be, you know, bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud, and probably racketeering.
Let's go through the specifics, because one of the things that I love when you do your columns is you you take the evidence of what we're looking at and the things that we know and the facts that we know, and then you you sort of marry it together with with whatever the the laws that would be applicable in that case happen to be.
Let's stay on uranium one for a minute.
Um I guess we if we start at the beginning, now we know that there was an FBI informant that had infiltrated this network that uh clearly up Vladimir Putin had set up in America to get a foothold in the uranium market, and that's where the FBI informant discovered bribery and kickbacks and extortion and money laundering and a bunch of other racketeering issues.
That was in two thousand and nine.
Robert Muller was the FBI director.
Eric Holder was the attorney general.
Um this guy stayed in there at the request of the FBI for four plus years.
He accumulates his own eyewitness testimony because he's on the inside, he has documents, he has emails, and he has tape recordings, we're told.
And so all of this now is going to come out because he's been under a gag order.
Walk us through how we would ever sell or allow an anyone to have any control over twenty percent of our uranium, knowing these are Vladimir Putin actors that are involved in in this effort to do it.
Why would we ever do that?
Well, there's two answers to that stupidity and corruption.
Uh stupidity would be on the part of President Obama and the Obama administration to to think that it was a good idea to sell the fundamental elements of nuclear bombs to your enemy, which already has twelve hundred uh strategic nuclear missiles aimed at the United States.
So I mean, that's just plain dumb.
But it's the so the whole kumbaya President Obama method of dealing, you know, with foreign adversaries, you know.
Uh the corruption part would be Hillary Clinton's involvement, pay-to-play scheme, um which, as I mentioned, violates all kinds of anti-corruption statutes.
But it also involves the cover-up to which you just alluded.
You're talking about three or four people who knew about this within law enforcement.
Robert Muller, Rod Rosenstein, Andrew Weissman.
Uh, and they never told Congress what they knew, that they knew of the illegality by the Russians to secure the deal.
They had a legal duty to tell Congress.
Congress had they known would have stopped it.
Uh, and I'm not sure they they told all the members of the Cypheus Committee, even though Eric Holder sat on the committee, and he is the fourth person who knew.
And yet they all hushed it up.
That strikes me as a cover-up.
Uh it's clearly wrongful behavior.
Uh, and that is one of the reasons why Muller and Rosenstein and Weissman, all of whom are now involved in the Trump Russia investigation, must recuse themselves.
But it's not happening.
So there's nobody to force them, although Paul Manafort's attorneys uh can file a motion now that they have legal standing, have having been indicted, to argue to the judge that that Muller's appointment was unlawful and therefore he ought to be removed and the indictment set aside.
I wonder in the end, is that good or bad for everybody involved in this, considering that would probably be a reset, and then we just start all over again and who wants to put the country through this again?
Well, you make a strong argument um because so far it appears that there is no evidence that touches Donald Trump.
Wasn't that what I mean?
I mean, you look at the Manafort indictment.
What does that have to do with Trump Russia collusion.
Nothing.
Zero.
Nothing to do with Russia.
No, it all deals with basically tax fraud and his businesses that predate his involvement with President Trump.
So you're right about that, although, you know, you do wonder about people like Papadopoulos, um, which nobody had ever really heard of.
I'm not sure the President remembered that he sat on a council that met once.
But um it's interesting Papadopoulos was only charged with lying to the FBI, not charged with collusion.
Why?
Because his meetings with Russians violate no laws.
So you know it reminds me a little bit of Patrick Fitzgerald, you know, spends all this time, what, three years, and the only thing he came up with was scooter libby.
And yet when he first took the position, he was looking into who was the leaker in terms of the Valerie Plain issue.
And number one, she wasn't even a covert agent, but number two, he found out on day one that the leaker was Richard Armitage.
Now in my mind that was the express reason for the special prosecutor in that case.
And I don't know why he didn't close his doors, close up shop and say, okay we got the leaker, we know who it is and move on from there.
That never happens.
Right.
And the interesting thing about the special counsel statute is that if the special counsel finds evidence of unchargeable wrongdoing, he's n not even allowed to talk about it.
He can only reveal and talk about chargeable crime.
So in the Scooter Libby case, that's all he could ever talk about.
And nobody ever found out about Dick Armitage until later.
And you know this after after it's all said and done he knew from day one and then you know this is the thing that I worry about for people that go before you know grand juries or they they talk to the FBI and I know I don't have a perfect memory.
I I would have to scan my memory deeply and I don't even think I could tell you who was on my T V show last Thursday night, if you ask me.
I I honestly could not give you an honest answer.
Now if you want how the statistics on how Ronald Reagan, you know what he did for the economy and peace through strength and tear down this wall I can give you chapter and verse.
But I mean to ask somebody three years later and let's say they they don't remember it a hundred percent accurately then you charge them with perjury.
That becomes in my mind a perjury trap.
It is and it's it's been abused by the federal government and especially the FBI.
Look if if somebody's memory is different about a conversation than how the FBI interprets the conversation that's not a crime.
It never should be and yet the FBI uses that all the time to either bring frivolous prosecutions or they do it to try to gain leverage to get somebody to flip it's reprehensible and it's illegal but the FBI does it all the time.
And as we continue Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett is with us.
All right let me ask though we talked about uranium one what about the fusion GPS dossier?
I mean is it possible that the Hillary Clinton DNC bought and paid for salacious lies on Donald Trump is it possible that that was used as the pretense to go to a Pfizer court and get surveillance on Donald Trump the opposition candidate either candidate Trump or President elect Trump.
And what would that mean if if that was the case?
I mean basically bought and paid for Hillary lies opens up wide open surveillance against her opponent.
If Coney knew that the dossier upon which he relied to get the FISA warrant uh was not valid, then he has committed a crime.
That needs to be part of a second special counsel investigation as the House Judiciary committee has demanded.
And then of course the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign uh paying money to a foreign national to gain this information in a political campaign that's a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act and clearly they didn't account for it in their uh financial disclosure forms.
That is also a crime.
So the DNC and Hillary Clinton could be charged with two crimes there, not to mention Comey's alleged criminal activity.
Where do we stand as it relates even to the email server scandal?
Because I mean on all three Uranium one, the Fusion GPS dossier and on the email server scandal you have identified multiple multiple felonies.
Is this would this be under the heading of one special counsel, two special counsels?
Is there you know is there any way that we can is there any statute limitations issues at this point?
No, there are no statute limitations that were coming up against and the House Judiciary committee when they sent their July twenty seventh letter demanding the special counsel, laid it out pretty nicely.
I reviewed it again last night.
And insofar as the email scandal is concerned, the committee has asked that the special counsel reopen that case to determine whether Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director Comey obstructed justice in an effort to exonerate Clinton.
And the exoneration letter that he penned two months before he ever interviewed her is damning evidence of that.
All right, Greg Jarrett, uh Fox News Legal Analyst, thank you for being with us.
We appreciate uh all your expertise on all this.
We've got a lot more to cover here.
We are expecting momentarily Roy Moore uh as attorney, I understand it, is going to be given a press conference.
Uh we'll find out what that is all about.
I assume it's to address uh the issues involving what Gloria all read, the fifth accuser, and we'll see what they have to say.
And we'll uh also get to your calls 800 nine four one Sean is our number.
We go to Alabama now.
Well, Bill Armistead is the campaign chairman for Roy Moore, and Roy Moore's attorney are now just beginning a press conference.
As you know, Judge Moore's been falsely accused of things that he did not do 40 years ago.
This is a campaign, so you can expect most anything to come out, but you know, we can't just stand by idly and let false charges go without some answering.
We've had a lot of people tell us different things about some of these stories, and we're checking them all out.
But one thing I can tell you is we do have some information that we're going to share with you today, and we know that you're going to share it with those folks that you're communicating with about some of these charges.
I am Bill Armistead, chairman of the campaign for Judge Moore, and I want to introduce to you, Philip Giragi, who coincidentally uh was chairman of uh Judge Moore's campaign for Chief Justice back in 2000.
That's right.
He's an attorney, and he is representing us in this case, and I'd like now to turn this over to Mr. Giraghi, and he'll make some comments.
Thank you, Bill.
Thank you, folks.
Um appreciate y'all being here today.
This is very important, of course.
Uh, there's been some serious, serious allegations, and we really appreciate the media and what you guys do to help get the word out and spread the truth.
Um, just as an aside, I've known Judge Moore for 24 years.
When these allegations came out uh within the last week, it was incredibly incredibly painful for him, for his wife, his mom, his daughter, grandchildren.
Um, in these types of cases, there's always someone who's alleging and the other person.
And in those cases, when it's true, it's horrible for the person making the allegations.
But when the allegations are made and it's not true, it's also horrible for the person who those allegations are directed against.
Back in 2000, the Judge Moore asked me to be his campaign manager, campaign chairman, and it was one of the greatest honors and remains today and always will be one of the greatest honors of my life.
Um during that time and afterwards, he asked me to be his attorney, and I was one of the attorneys that represented him in the Ten Commandments case.
And as you know, there have been some other cases over the last 20 years.
And um, I've traveled with Judge Moore all over the state, different states across the nation.
I've been with him in probably over a hundred different meetings and been around probably in excess of ten thousand different ladies in Judge Moore's presence, and not once, not one time have I ever seen him act even remotely inappropriate against any woman, toward any woman.
Not when they were walking away, not when he and I were in private afterwards.
That's the man that I know and that I've known for the last 24 years.
Now, the the allegations that have come out, I hope you understand it takes time to work through this.
We don't have a 20 million dollar budget as a campaign.
It takes time, and we want to be correct.
We want to make sure that when we say something, it's proper.
Okay, so we're still working through some things, but there are some things that you need to know and that we want to make you aware of.
During the press conference that Ms. Nelson and Gloria all read had on Monday, they both said that Ms. Nelson, after the allegations, had never seen nor had Any contact with Judge Moore.
As it turns out, in 1999, Ms. Nelson filed a divorce action against her then husband, Mr. Harris.
Guess who that case was before?
It was filed in Etawa County, and the judge assigned was Roy S. Moore, circuit judge of Etawa County.
There was contact.
Judge Moore signed an order in that case as well, and we'll talk about that in a minute.
We've also had a handwriting expert looking at the evidence that was submitted.
You may remember on Monday, Ms. Nelson and Ms. Allred in support.
Really, the only piece of evidence they had in addition to the allegations was a yearbook where they claimed that it had been signed.
And they said very specifically, look back at what they said.
Everything on that page they said was written by Judge Moore.
Now, Judge Moore not only has denied everything she said before, but now flatly denies that.
And he says it's not true.
We have a handwriting expert, pardon me, that's looking at those.
But here's the problem.
A handwriting expert can't look at a copy on the internet, right?
They've got to look at an original.
So right now, Trent Garmin, our attorney, has sent a letter or is sending a letter to Gloria Allred demanding that the yearbook be released.
We'll send it to a neutral custodian who'll keep chain of custody, and our professional expert will examine it and we'll find out is it genuine or is it a fraud?
There are a couple things also that you need to know.
I'm not going to go into everything that's on that paper because again, we need to have our handwriting expert draw some conclusions.
I'm not going to draw them today, and I'm not going to make any allegations that we can't support with an expert.
There are a couple things that you need to look at.
Look at the 1977 after Merry Christmas.
Look at those two sevens.
And then look below at the 77.
And I want to ask you do you think it was written by the same person?
I want you to look at old Hickory House, which they say Judge Moore wrote.
Judge Moore says there's no way in the world that's his handwriting.
And I want you to look at it.
Look at some other writing of his and make your own determination.
That's what our expert will be doing.
But for now, I'm asking you all to take a look.
Use your judgment.
And then finally, after Judge Moore's signature, it has the initials capital D period, A period.
Remember, I told you about that 99 divorce action.
Judge Moore looked at that DA after his signature, which they allege was because he was the district attorney.
Well, he wasn't.
He was the assistant district attorney.
But Judge Moore says he can't ever remember ever signing his name with DA after it, but he had seen it before.
You know where he had seen it?
When he was on the bench, his assistant, whose initials are capital D period A period, Delbra Adams, would stamp his signature on documents and then put capital D period A period.
That's exactly how the signature appears on the divorce decree that Judge Moore signed, dismissing the divorce action with Ms. Nelson.
Knowing these things, I've got a question, Gloria Allred and Ms. Nelson.
Do you still hold that everything written in that yearbook was written by Judge Moore or was it written by somebody else?
That's not an allegation, it's a question.
And finally, we demand that you immediately release the yearbook to a neutral custodian so that our expert, you can send your expert as well if you'd like to, so that our expert can look at it.
Not a copy on the internet, the actual documents so that we can see the lettering.
We can see the ink on the page, we can see the indentations, and we can see how old is that ink?
Is it 40 years old or is it a week old?
Release the yearbook so that we can determine is it genuine or is it a fraud?
Thank you very much.
I have some information I'll be happy to pass out to you guys.
Uh we have, first of all, you've probably seen a lot of this on the internet.
Please step up to the mic.
You've probably seen a lot of this on the internet.
Uh this these are copies of what uh was shown uh by uh Mrs. Allred.
And I'll just let you all pass them out if that's okay.
And also what we have here is the copy of the uh divorce papers, uh, not the entire thing.
We show the cover page, and then what's so important is we show the final page, which has Judge Moore's signature on it with the D8.
Sir, I have two quick questions.
Are there any other things?
I see that we have the the Roy Moore signature here.
And the DA, which was added by his assistant.
The same DA initials that are written on the yearbook.
Bill, does Judge Moore plan to testify under oath?
Like Mr. And I'll be glad to start these on this side, sir.
He says this is a legal matter.
Thank you very much.
All right, there you have it.
There was the campaign manager for Roy Moore, as well as the attorney for Roy Moore.
The bottom line is is that they went through a number of issues here.
They want a handwriting expert to look at the actual yearbook.
These were the questions that I said they had to answer.
And they want that book, Gloria Allred will be getting a uh letter, and she's they are saying unequivocally it's not true.
They are demanding the release so a professional can actually look at the letter, and they won't draw a conclusion until their expert has a chance to do that, also encouraging the media to get their own experts on that.
And uh Judge Roy Moore apparently had an assistant, her name's Deborah Adams, who would sign for him and put DA in the instances when they signed, and that he wasn't the district attorney at that time, it was the ADA.
Uh and that's what they're saying at this particular point in time.
Now they did raise, I've seen all of this on the internet.
I've seen an analysis of the sevens.
One thing that any expert will be able to tell is okay, was that ink?
Old or new.
Very simple.
Find out in seconds.
This is not gonna be that's not going to be hard forensic discovery.
Uh we actually brought on a we have a uh forensic.
I told you earlier in the program, I knew what was coming out today, but I you know, because I had put this question out last night, because people don't need to know the truth.
This is too serious, too serious a time.
Forty-two years forensic document examiner specializing in handwriting.
Uh Carl Schaffenberger is with us, uh certified document examiner.
How are you, sir?
How long forty-two years you've done this?
Yes, sir.
Uh am I right in saying you'd be able to tell if the ink is new or old?
Well, that that's really a specialty.
This industry is becoming very specialized, and there is uh the person we call the ink guy.
And that's not something that I would do.
I would send it to him, but yes, that's something that can be done.
Okay.
And is it done with a fair amount of accuracy?
For example, would you know if it's in the range of forty years ago or say recently?
Yes.
Okay.
If if the issue was was this done today or last week, uh, I don't believe he could do that.
But when you're talking 40 years, yes, that's something that could be done.
Okay, let's talk about the sevens that were referred to, the two uh two different versions of 7-7 on the document.
I assume you've seen it at least on the internet, is that true?
I've just seen it on TV.
I haven't had a real real good look at it.
Um is that is i i I look at them and I've seen them on the internet.
I don't this isn't what I do, obviously.
Um can there be variations where you would know with a hundred percent certainty if it was if it was a forgery or accurate?
Well, uh a hundred percent certainty.
Uh I think so.
Uh but you have to remember also that this was allegedly written how many years ago?
Forty years ago?
About 38, 40 years ago, somewhere in there, yeah.
38 or 40 years ago.
If I were to do this case, I would want contemporaneous standards.
I wouldn't want to see his handwriting now.
By the way, it was forty 1977, so it's 40 years.
Right.
I would want to see contemporaneous standards for his writing.
I would want to see how he wrote then.
Uh a person's handwriting will evolve over time.
And uh uh standards that he wrote today or samples of his handwriting from today may not be helpful.
You know, it it's funny because over the course of my career are signed many books for people, and then so you know, by the time you start a book signing three hours later, your signature is very different.
Um but the bottom line is you think that what they said today, is this something that you think that you'll get to that that experts and professionals will get to the truth and the bottom of.
That's what people, I think the people of Alabama deserve and need the truth.
Will they be able to get to the bottom of it based on what you just heard?
I believe so.
I think if uh the powers that be are cooperative and give uh w whatever expert uh is dealing with this case what they need, I absolutely think they could get to the to the bottom of this.
Yeah.
Um by the way, 42 years.
Wow.
You must um you must really be good at what you do.
That's a long time.
I think it's fascinating that you can it's an art, it's a science, right?
It's both an art and a science, yes.
Yeah.
Well, Carl, thank you for taking the time.
We really appreciate it.
800 941 Sean is a toll free uh telephone number if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity show 800 941 Sean.
All right, if you missed it.
Now, one other thing, if you uh didn't see this press conference by the attorney for Roy Moore and his campaign manager.
One thing they pointed out that Gloria Allred and her client, Miss Nelson, at this particular time after the allegation, she said she had never had or had any contact with Roy Moore.
And in fact, uh Roy Moore's people now claiming that well, in fact, he was the judge and signed their divorce that the a divorce that Ms. Nelson had had sometime in 1999, and they're now demanding a handwriting expert, and Joy Moore uh Judge Moore says it's not true, and they're demanding to look at the original copy of the yearbook.
Um and this was the question I had yesterday.
He said you never knew her, never met her, never.
Okay, now there's two instances where this contact.
All right, so they address that.
And now the second part to me, this has now come down to simple science.
Is anyone in there disagree?
Because you're gonna be able to tell us we just had a uh forensic expert on on handwriting.
You're gonna be able to tell if the ink is old or new.
You're gonna be these handwriting experts, they are masterful.
This guy, 42 years, and he's a forensic document examiner.
This is what they do.
Now, I look at it, and I've seen these things on the internet.
I'm looking and I'm looking and I'm looking, and I'm like, uh, I can see a little difference.
I don't what do I know?
But they're gonna be able to, as he said, he thinks it's a hundred percent certainty that he is gonna be able to ascertain the truth.
And what did I say from day one?
I said the people of Alabama deserve the truth.
I said, the people of Alabama deserve the truth.
And ultimately now, this is all gonna be in their hands.
And uh, you know, I will say one thing.
It gets very arrogant for the people in Washington, uh, or people in their comfortable studios in New York to make a determination for the people of Alabama.
But um I have great faith.
I live there.
Love the people of Alabama.
I know some are asking roll tide, war eagle.
Or time.
Well, we'll talk about that another day.
All right, we'll come back.
Wide open phones.
We'll get your reaction to all of this.
We're gonna take very fast calls next hour uh half hour of the program, 800 941 Sean.
We have full details.
And Bill Clinton, you can thank him for a lot of the sexual harassment that's rampant today.
I'll explain tonight.
Yeah, I'm here.
Relax, relax.
800 941 Sean.
If you just missed the uh press conference, Roy Moore.
Uh, what part did you want to play?
You want to play a part of which part did you want to play?
No, that ship has sailed.
I just wanted to.
We just ran it at the top of the last hour.
I know, but it you know, I just wanted to enumerate the one part.
I just think it's it's they're I mean, listen, they've put their cards on the table and they're asking them to supply the yearbook and they'll all examine it together.
I think that's I I think in one sense they've now you can see you I think you can argue they have now put themselves back themselves into a scientific corner.
Especially, how did you find this handwriting expert?
That guy's fascinated me.
His name's Carl uh Schaffenberger, and we just had him on.
If you just missed the last half hour, you missed a lot.
That's why you gotta listen three hours a day every day.
That's all we ask.
In other words, you gotta be like those Soros and billionaire millionaire funder people, the the paid hit people out there.
You gotta listen.
They get paid to listen to this program.
Can you imagine getting paid to listen to this program?
And imagine if you hate what I say every day.
I uh you just it's it's you know, it would be very hard.
Uh oh, hang on, maybe breaking news here.
Let me see.
Hold on.
On the top of Drudge.
Okay, a new Roy Moore accuser.
Is this just breaking?
Gadston woman says Roy Moore groped her while she was in his law office on legal business with her mother in 1991.
Moore was married at the time.
This is literally just broke seconds ago.
In the past week, Moore has been accused by five other women of we all know what the charges are.
Anyway.
So she says that woman's name, they put it, I'm not going to give her name uh that in the fall of ninety one she sat in the then law office of of then attorney Roy Moore, gives the street address in Gadston, Alabama.
Her mother sat in the chair next to her.
Moore sat behind his desk across from them, and she remembers she was wearing a black and white dress, and almost from the moment she walked in Moore's office, Moore began flirting with her.
He kept commenting on my looks, telling me how pretty and I was, how nice I looked.
He was saying that my eyes were beautiful.
It made her uncomfortable.
I was thinking, can we hurry up and get out of here?
And she says she was 28 years old in a difficult ma marriage headed towards divorce, unemployed.
She was at the office to sign over custody of her twelve-year-old son to her mother with whom he'd been living, and her mother had hired Moore to handle the custody petition.
All right, so that's what they're saying.
Now hang on a second.
Let me get this pick this up here.
Um didn't and the custody position.
Anyway, so it's Johnson had two daughters at the time that were young with her then husband and her son and wanted to live and said the son wanted to live with his grandmother at that point during the meeting.
She said Moore came around the desk, sat on the front of it, inches from her.
He was so close, she said that she could smell his breath, and according to Johnson, he has questions about her young daughters, including what eye color they had, if they were as pretty as she was.
She said that made her feel uncomfortable.
Once the papers were signed, she and her mother got up to leave.
After her mother walked through the door, she said more came up behind her.
It was at that point she recalled he grabbed her buttocks.
That's what it says.
He didn't pinch it.
He grabbed it.
She was so surprised she didn't say anything.
She didn't tell her mother.
Okay, now this is that just broke a few minutes ago.
All right, let's get to some phone calls here.
Um let's say hi to Sherry is in New Jersey.
Sherry, hi, how are you?
Glad you called.
Hey, Sean, how are you?
I'm good.
How are you?
All right.
I just want to say thank you for all that you're doing with uh bringing out everything about the Clintons.
It's just it's fantastic.
And that board that you had up last night was stunning and disgusting at the same time.
Uh I really appreciate looks and you know, I've I love to meet you know, they put these memes out on uh what do you call those things on uh Twitter and they put yeah, the meme.
It's it's just hilarious because you watch people they're filling in this name and that name and this name and that people are funny.
People are so funny.
Uh I appreciate it.
But you know what?
We're gonna have more on that tonight as well on Hannity, nine Eastern Fox News Channel.
Uh George is in New York, the all new AM710 W O R the Talk of New York, New Jersey, Long Island.
What's up, George?
How are you?
I'm doing well, thank you, Sean.
Uh just one comment about Judge Moore.
If he steadfastly denies all these allegations, I think the simple recipe or remedy would be to take a lie detector test test, and if he passes the thing, then he's passed the biggest test, uh, the court of public opinion.
I I think it would be that simple.
Uh I know that's uh look, there's mixed reviews on lie detector tests, but I actually think there's something to it, but it's just not a hundred percent precise.
I think if it was me, I probably would do it.
That's that's what I would do.
But I mean it, you know.
I think now did you hear our our forensic handwriting uh document examiner?
He's an expert.
You know, that to me is you know, he's now basically thrown it in the hands of science, and they said this is probably what happened, and we don't think this happened then, and so on and so forth.
And I think in that sense, they just hand it over to the scientist, and if he's thinking he can get it done a hundred percent certainty, then I I say, you know, Vom Gloria all red, and and uh I would hand it right over.
I'd let them absolutely have somebody that can monitor it, be with it the whole time so it can't be altered, and and let it out there.
Don't you think that would be one remedy, but I uh again I think they've come a long way in polygraph detection as well.
They have, they absolutely have.
And but it's not it's not perfect.
That's the point.
Well, no, but they can good get within a 10% margin of certainty according to everything that I've said about it.
And about it, I'm sorry.
No, no, I think you're right.
I think you're right, and I don't think it's a bad idea when you're under fire like this.
Uh good call, George, Diane in Ohio.
What's up, Diane?
How are you?
Diana, you've got honor to speak.
It's a it's uh it's an honor to speak to my game.
Honor to speak to you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So I just want someone, one of these Congress people to ask Sessions when he says on another subject, and he says that he conferred with senior ethics people at the FBI.
The question is, are those the same senior ethics people that didn't see anything wrong with one of the top people at the FBI, McCabe's wife getting what, around $700,000 from Terry McCullough while he was supposed to be investigating Hillary, his McCall's clients?
I mean, we're talking about McGabe, yes.
That the wife of this guy.
Right.
And then and then finally, Sean, you ought to be up for a Pulitzer Prize.
You know, the legacy of Woodward and Bernstein, you're the only one doing it.
Certainly not the Washington Post.
So thank you so much for what you're doing for our country.
All I want to do is get to a lot of truth, and we've made a lot of of inroads on a lot of these issues.
I appreciate it, Diane.
Thank you.
Uh back to our telephones as we say hi to Patricia in Saratoga Springs, New York.
What's up, Patricia?
How are you?
Hi, Sean.
I hope you can hear me.
I can.
I want to say thank you so much for what you do and for putting the truth out there.
And this I'll make this short.
I just thank you for having our back.
I think we should get to the truth regarding the Void Moore issue and move forward with the handwriting analysis and see what happens.
Yeah, listen, I mean, I think in in that sense, scientifically, they boxed themselves in in a lot of ways.
And uh I don't know about this new accuser, but I'm sure all of this needs to be vetted, and he needs to answer the questions.
You know, I I it's this is so important, I've said and believe this should all transcend politics, in my opinion.
This, you know, you know, uh Ivanka Trump said today, there's a special place in hell for child predators.
I agree with that.
There is a special place in hell.
And you know, I've read Dante's Inferno.
I'd put it in a lower rung, lower circle, if you will.
And when you're talking about something this serious, you want the truth.
And the people of Alabama deserve the truth.
Uh Jen in Cincinnati, 55 KRC.
What's up, Jen?
Hey, Sean, thank you.
Thank you for remaining objective about Judge Roy Moore.
I think there is a pattern where the left fights harder than the right to take somebody out.
And if you remember from Attorney General Phil Klein, who was the first prosecutor to go after Planned Parenthood with felonies, nobody realizes this because it's eight years later.
They went after a license, Trump got surges against him.
They took him out because he went after a billion-dollar industry.
Judge Moore has stood up for the abortion issue, he stood up for the gay rights issue, and there's no question in my mind, this is a way of trying to keep him out.
And the status part, Sean, is if the cooperation of the establishment republicans is going on with this, he is very, and I believe he will end up winning this race, and his reputation is ruined.
Wait till you see tonight's show.
I'm gonna do something obviously no one else in the media will do.
You know, I think you can really think, you know, and this is separate and apart from from Roy Moore.
I'm not talking about that issue here.
You know, all these issues of sexual harassment that are now rampant, and the left with their feigned outrage.
It is feigned, because you know what?
For all these years, they protected the biggest predator out there.
The president of the United States at the time.
And they defended and they lied and they lied and defended and they smeared and they slandered and they besmirched and they used character assassination against all these women.
Well now finally, this week the New York Times says I believe Juanita.
Okay.
Progress a little late.
A little late.
Um and that's why, you know, people say to me, Well, why did you ask for answers?
Because the people of Alabama deserve answers.
They deserve truth and they deserve to know the truth before they go into the ballot box.
I love the people of Alabama and I want them to know the truth.
And you know, one of the reasons these October surprises are so so sinister.
You know, all these last minute oh, a DUI for George W. Bush the weekend before the two thousand election.
Oh, access Hollywood just a couple of weeks outside of Trump's, you know, uh election against Hillary.
Uh oh, let's bring in all of a sudden Clarence Thomas is horrible.
Don't forget the borking of uh of Judge Robert Bork.
You know, I've said I have a pattern and I've been very, very, very consistent.
And that is, you know, I wait and before I rush the job.
I don't believe in rushing a judgment.
And for that I've been excoriated this week.
I've been excoriated by everybody this week.
I've saying not rush the judgment and saying that more needs to answer these questions.
The people of Alabama have a right.
They started the process today.
You know, listen to let's go after, you know, let's go after let's play this montage again of of how the left treated the women and the media treated the women that accused Bill Clinton of his actions.
If a woman sleeps with your husband, you're not gonna necessarily embrace them.
I wonder why she didn't have wh that's why when he brought up this these allegations, I wonder if she missed the opportunity to address it in a way that the public would understand that that's just not how you behave.
I would like to apologize to those uh tramps that have slept with my husband.
Maybe she could have said that.
Her husband's affair or affairs, alleged affairs.
He's going right for the jugular when it comes to Hillary Clinton and going after Bill Clinton and alleged misconduct with women.
Last night, Trump fired a shot squarely at Clinton's husband, former president Bill Clinton.
In one case it's about exposure, and another case it's about groping and fondling and touching against a woman's will.
And rape and rape.
Donald Trump using that word unprompted during an interview last night with Fox News' Sean Hannity.
Bringing up a discredited and long denied accusation against former president Bill Clinton dating back to 1978 when he was Arkansas Attorney General.
I'm not going to let you all continue to say this.
She allowed him.
She said, Wait, no, she didn't.
How does she facilitate the case?
No, no, no, no, no.
Because it's not that that's rape culture case.
You're blaming someone who succumbed to someone committing adultery on her.
We're Christians.
So let's talk about what that is.
She was accused of facilitating it last night, and she was dead.
And you're wrong.
She did not deny it.
But you know why?
Because it's effing ridiculous.
It's so ridiculous.
That's crazy.
Do you think Donald Trump used you as a political prop today?
No.
You don't stay for to scare Hillary Clinton.
Their presence at the debate seen as a political stunt and distraction by top Clinton campaign officials.
Do you worry you're being used as a distraction by Donald Trump to change the conversation?
No.
Why not?
The rape accusation is decades old and discredited.
They were referring to a trio of women who say Bill Clinton made unwanted sexual advances in the eighties and nineties.
Mr. Clinton denies it.
Two of the cases were plagued by factual discrepancies.
The issue of Bill Clinton's past is that is that fair game.
And it would be if he were running for president.
But he isn't.
Hillary Clinton is running for president.
But he's a chief surrogate for her.
So it's what do you do now that Trump has opened this up?
Well, I think that you stick with what is important to the American people.
And what is important to American people is their financial stability.
That's what this election should be about, not about what Bill Clinton did two decades ago.
She was not.
All right, I gotta bail out of this cause only for the uh c constraints of time that are on the program here.
You know, uh wait till tonight's monologue.
Well, all the breaking news.
We have updates on uranium one and and the dossier, but more importantly, I'm gonna show you how the media and liberals in this country, how they defended to the ends of the earth Bill Clinton on the issue of what he did as a predator.
And Menendez is another example.
In other words, news and information you won't get anywhere else.
But at the end of the day now, it's going to be the people of Alabama that take all this in, and they decide all these outside influences.
You know what?
I trust the people of Alabama.
They're going to sort through this.
All right, Hannity, tonight at nine.
Hey, guess who you can thank for sexual harassment?
Well, being so widespread.
Maybe the left supporting Bill Clinton tonight at nine.
See you then.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markovich.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
▲
Export Selection