Sean sits down with former Obama economic advisor Austan Goolsbee to debate the 3+ percent growth in the economy which is dwarfing the "success" that President Obama saw. Goolsbee and Hannity debate the merits of the Trump Administration's plan plus they cover Hannity's New York Times' appearance. The Sean Hannity Show is live weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
Let not your heart be troubled.
You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
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.
What an incredible these news days.
I gotta be honest, keeping up with all of this is a 24-hour job.
There's no rest for the weary here.
By the way, not complaining in any way.
I'll take busy over slow news days any day.
You know, I just will.
There's a lot going on here.
You know, a lot has been made over my comments.
I was on with Bannon last night on SiriusXM on the Patriot channel.
He hosts Breitbart News.
It's on after me and Levin.
And anyway, I happened to stop by.
There was a book event party last night over, you know, at some restaurant in New York right next to Fox.
So I stopped by and I just said hello.
And a lot of fun people there and people that I like there.
And anyway, I didn't stay very long, but I just went in there and he's actually doing his debut show.
And he asked what I think of the Republican Party.
And I said, it's a dead party.
It's a morally corrupt party.
What do I mean by that?
I mean, if you promise certain things for all these years, give us the House, Senate, and give us the presidency, and we'll do ABC and D, I expect those things to get done.
And it's something that it's funny how much news it's making, considering I say it here every day and that they're weak and ineffective and visionless and lacking identity.
That's all true.
I don't withhold anything from any of you.
And they have been the greatest disappointment.
And I didn't leave them.
They left us, meaning we, the people in this country.
They've left us.
And yeah, I'm happy about the economic bill, the tax bill.
I'm happy the middle class are getting some relief that they desperately deserve.
I'm happy that corporations, corporations never pay taxes, and it's a myth if you believe they do.
I'm happy the corporate rate is now going to be competitive around the world.
I'm happy the president on his own has gotten rid of all of these burdensome regulations he's getting rid of.
I'm happy that he has independently saved the coal industry and is moving to an all-of-the-above energy strategy, which will create millions of high-paying career jobs.
I'm happy about that.
I'm happy multinational corporations will now be incentivized to take their trillions parked overseas in these tax haven countries and that they'll bring that money back in the hopes that they'll build factories and manufacturing centers and create jobs and businesses and opportunities for those people that Obama left behind for eight years.
I'm really happy about all of that.
You know, I do think that they could have gone further.
And by going further, it's simple.
Follow the Reagan model, the Kennedy model.
Reagan dropped the top marginal rate 70 to 28 percent.
21 million new jobs created.
Longest period of peacetime economic growth.
He doubled revenues to the government, and we had GDP growth as high as 7.4% at one point.
You know, during the Obama years, one, one and a half, you know, remember, we even had negative growth some quarters with Obama.
And since Trump has done all of this on his own, we've seen 2 million jobs created.
We've seen the best consumer confidence in 17 years.
We've seen a seven-year high labor participation rate.
That means people finding jobs in the job market that didn't exist.
We see that he's effectively pressured and embarrassed companies into staying here in America because they were so quick and there was a mass exodus leaving and going overseas where they didn't have to deal with the burdensome regulations in this country.
It never was about costs.
It never was about labor costs in spite of what some people will tell you.
Although there are Republicans that have their nose up in the air, country club Republicans that they want cheap labor.
And I'm sorry, if you want the best labor, if you want American workers, well, you might have to pay a little bit more.
And the idea that you want to take your company south of the border or put it some other place is obnoxious.
But in some cases, government has so disincentivized corporations, they've had no choice if they want to be competitive.
And my next air conditioner is going to be a carrier.
You know, I'm going to try, I buy cars that I know are made in America.
That's it.
I just do it because I want to support the industries.
I'll hand it to your old-fashioned.
And by the way, it doesn't matter.
I mean, it could be a Toyota.
It could be a Honda.
Hyundai, I know, has a plant in America.
I don't care what you buy, but I want American workers to be building those cars.
That's just what it's just good for our country.
It's good for those families.
You know, we can revitalize a city like Detroit.
It's possible.
You can revitalize these old manufacturing centers, and we can adapt to the new economy.
We don't have to be, you know, it's obvious now that we're moving very quickly and expeditiously towards a high-tech world.
Means a lot of jobs in the high-tech industries and IT and all of those fields, but you're always going to need people to work.
And I prefer to hire American workers.
And I prefer that we not be competing with people that will work for pennies on the dollar that entered this country illegally and that could be taken advantage of by other people.
That happens a lot, too.
And if there are certain industries, we're told that I guess, you know, out in California, they have a need during certain times of the years that they can't get enough American workers.
Well, if we can't find them and help them get to where the work is, or they don't want to do that work, which I don't understand, if you get any job, you should take it if you don't have a job.
But if you have to, we can arrange, you know, work permits after we vet people from other countries and allow them in as a guest worker and just have to monitor them that they don't, you know, skip off and try and fade into the sunset and hope for amnesty 10 years later, which, you know, has happened.
You know, this is a pretty amazing statement by Jim Acosta.
When journalists are attacked, journalists have to resist.
Wow.
This is CNN.
The president gets two scoops.
You only get one.
Look at the inside of this dog's ear.
It looks like Donald Trump.
Did you see me when I play that?
Oh, yeah, they did a whole report on the inside of a dog's ear looks like the face of Donald Trump.
It's so unbelievable.
Did you put up the article yesterday on the American Thinker on our website, this person, this liberal?
I'm a liberal, but I agree with Hannity.
Journalism's dead.
And then he takes a shot because I give opinion, and I'm like, well, I'm a talk show host.
The talk show hosts are known to give opinions.
There's no secrecy here.
And I think now 30 years in radio and 23 years on the Fox News channel, it's not a surprise that people finding out that Hannity is not an objective journalist.
I'm a journalist, but I'm an advocacy journalist.
I'm an opinionated journalist.
I do straight interviews a lot of times, plenty of times, but I also give opinion.
All right, we've got some breaking news I want to share with you, but I want to backtrack a little bit here.
And I want to get into at length what we talked about yesterday, and that is, you know, the scandal that has now developed within the top ranks of the FBI and this guy, Peter Strzok, and the guy that was removed from Robert Mueller's apparently now one-sided and biased team that he put together this summer after it was discovered that he was sending anti-Trump texts, pro-Hillary Clinton texts,
to another woman that apparently he was having a relationship with, and she worked as a top FBI lawyer under Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
Now, since then, we've learned that the Office of Inspector General is reviewing Peter Strzzok's role in the Clinton email server investigation.
And from what we know, Strzok, you know, the guy that favors Hillary and hates Trump, that this guy, Hillary Clinton-loving official at the FBI, was intimately involved with investigating Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server.
And as Catherine Herridge at Fox pointed out, Strzok was on the ground floor of the server investigation, and that included participating in the July 2nd, 2016 interview of Hillary Clinton, where she was not put under oath.
And he was also involved in recommending whether or not Hillary Clinton should be prosecuted.
This is a guy that has a political agenda and a bias.
And then we can't.
He's also the guy that changed the language of Comey's draft exoneration letter.
Now, remember, this was in May.
They hadn't interviewed Clinton.
They hadn't interviewed the main people involved in the Clinton email server scandal.
And there's James Comey writing an exoneration of Hillary.
And he even put in the words gross negligence, which is the legal standard.
Now we find out this guy, Strzzok, who hates Trump and loves Hillary, he's the one that changed it to extreme carelessness.
And he also helped draft this exoneration statement.
You know what that is?
That's an abusively biased FBI guy that should not be investigating Trump nor Hillary Clinton.
And what happened here is, in my view, if you want to talk about obstruction of justice, I think we've got to ask about him and Comey.
Because if you're not doing a full investigation and having equal justice under the law, that is by its very definition obstruction of justice.
And then Strzok lie, I'm sorry, led the probe into Huma Abedeem's emails that were found on Wiener's computer.
And House investigators are now saying, too, they believe Strzok is tied to the FBI's handling of the Trump dossier, the phony Hillary paid for, bought, and paid for dossier with Russian propaganda and lies and the FISA surveillance of a Trump campaign associate.
This guy's up to his eyeballs and everything as part of Mueller's team.
And this is where it's getting interesting.
The fix was in for Hillary Clinton.
And the absolute desire to take down Trump is evidenced by this guy's own comments.
And then it raises the question: well, eight of the 16 people that Mueller hired, oh, they're big Democratic donors to Clinton and Obama.
Well, I don't see any of them donating to anybody else.
That's pretty outrageous.
Then you got the FBI deputy director McCabe is the key witness.
You know, Congress now wants to interview about the dossier, but McCabe will not show up to testify.
And he's thought to have been the FBI's key point person or handler of this British MI6 agent, Christopher Steele, who created the phony Russian paid-for dossier, the Russian propaganda dossier.
Hillary Clinton paid for dossier.
And then that you have the political action committee, you know, tied to the Clinton's BFF, Terry McAuliffe.
Well, they gave McCabe's wife a half a million bucks for her Senate run.
And she got another $200,000 from the Democratic Party, an obscene amount of money for a state race.
And the president, you know, he's reacting to all of this.
He said after years of Comey and the phony and dishonest Clinton investigation, he's right.
The fix was in.
Running the FBI and its reputation is in tatters, worst in history.
Says he'll bring it back.
Well, the president's 100% right about Comey and 100% right about this guy, Strzok.
And apparently, Strzok is also one of the guys that interviewed General Flynn.
This is beyond outrageous.
This is not a fair and balanced and objective and equal justice under the law scenario here.
Well, now we've got news breaking as we come on the air here today.
And that is, I keep telling you about this Andrew Weissman guy.
Andrew Weissman is the one that had the 9-0 Supreme Court decision against him.
He's the one that threw innocent people from Merrill Lynch in jail that ended up being innocent.
He's the one that came up with new laws that didn't exist.
He's the guy that was involved in the Enron case and the Anderson accounting case where tens of thousands of people lost his job.
Well, it turns out that Mueller, you know, again, Mueller put this whole team together.
Weissman has the most atrocious record of being unethical of all of them.
So the day that Sally Yates is fired through Judicial Watch, we now find out Weissman wrote to Yates, I am so proud, proud that Donald Trump fired her.
I am in awe.
Thank you so much.
Well, now he needs to go.
It's unbelievable.
Our Constitution now is in jeopardy if this is the banana republic they're creating here.
I'll get back to that also.
False reports about Mueller investigating Trump's finances.
Jay Seculo will clarify at the bottom of the hour in an exclusive interview.
All right, only two words you need to remember while making your list and checking it twice this holiday season: Tommy John.
They are the revolutionary men's underwear t-shirt sock brand, and they have redefined comfort for men everywhere, including and especially me.
All Tommy John underwear is crafted from the most comfortable fabric you'll ever use.
It's impossible to be uncomfortable in Tommy John.
Plus, their innovation never takes a day off of Tommy John, even during the holidays.
They're constantly thinking of new ways to give you the best product you've ever tried.
Like their patented undershirts I wear every day.
Well, they stay tucked in and literally pull perspiration right off your body.
And also, Tommy John, their underwear, is backed by the best pair you'll ever wear, guarantee, or it's free from TommyJohn.com.
So give the gift of life-changing comfort for the holidays, TommyJohn.com/slash Hannity.
You get 20% off your first order.
That's TommyJohn.com/slash Hannity.
Plus, you get extra savings with exclusive holiday daily deals only at TommyJohn.com/slash Hannity.
All right, so now, well, we'll get into this with Jay Seculo and Sarah Carter and Victoria Tunsing all stopping by today.
Other news: Brian Ross has been banned from covering Trump.
Well, if you have to do that with your investigative reporter, what is the point?
You know, PJ Media raises a point today, a source that they're quoting of the January 24th interview with General Flynn.
The FBI deputy director had contacted Flynn by phone directly at the White House, and White House officials had spent the earlier part of the week overseeing the training and security measures associated with their new roles.
So it was no surprise that Flynn told Flynn that McCabe had called.
Well, it turns out McCabe told Flynn some agents were headed over to the White House.
Flynn thought it was part of the routine that the FBI was doing.
It wasn't until after they were already in Flynn's office he realized he was being formally interviewed.
He didn't have an attorney with him.
That may become an issue.
And the FBI ignored congressional referrals to investigate Hillary for felony perjury.
It was an exchange with Jason Chaffetz over that.
I saw him on TV earlier today.
You know, Pelosi, by the way, Pelosi's warning that the world is going to come to an end if the GOP tax plan becomes law.
Really?
A little fear-mongering here.
We'll get to all of this.
Also, the Trump-hating FBI agent sent an urgent alert to Comey on Clinton, on the Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting.
Let me explain this to you.
Now, minutes after this guy Strzzok learned in 2016 that Bill Clinton had been caught secretly meeting with Loretta Lynch on that tarmac in Phoenix, he sent an urgent alert to the FBI director James Comey.
Shortly thereafter, emails obtained by Judicial Watch reveal that the Bureau launched a frantic attempt to track down the source of the information in a bid to, quote, stem any further damage.
Now, Jay Seculo is going to join us in a minute.
He discussed these documents on his radio show earlier.
I think it was either today or yesterday.
And he said Strzok sent an email within eight minutes of the information hitting the DOJ about the tarmag meeting.
They went to people within the FBI in eight minutes, it reached James Comey.
It was marked urgent and high.
The talking points are still redacted, he said.
There's some serious legal issues and conflicts of interest here.
Now, they were first obtained by Judicial Watch, and agents wanted to find the whistleblower who outed the tarmag meeting to local press.
Well, that's believed to be a law enforcement official.
We'll find out what this all means.
Jay Seculo, coming up next.
All right, 25 now, Tolf.
Let's play the Democrats' meltdown over the Republican tax bill.
This is pretty funny.
Democrats talk about this bill often in very apocalyptic terms, but isn't really what's going on is that many people are getting a very modest tax cut, and some people are getting a tax increase.
Well, a lot of this is also going to business, but it's not the end of the world.
No, it is the end of it.
This healthcare, the debate on health care is life-death.
This is Armageddon.
This is a very big deal.
Because you know why?
There's really a very hard way to come back from this.
They take us further, more deeply into debt.
What can you do but raise taxes?
They contend that their gift to corporate America of a trillion and a half dollars could be up to a trillion and a half dollars will be paid for by the growth it creates.
And even their own people say nonsense.
Not true.
Not true.
So let's be truthful with the American people about that.
They throw a few crumbs to the middle class, but they give with one hand, they take away in bounty with the other.
And why?
Because it is in their DNA to give tax cuts to the rich.
That's their purpose in coming to Congress.
The only reason it isn't the underworld is because America is a great country.
And the greatness of America and the fact that God is always with us is what gives us hope.
But it's very important for the American people to know how adversely they will be personally affected by all of this.
Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers responding to the tax bill and the impact that it could have on health care coverage.
And a new op-ed out overnight, it's called, Yes, the Senate GOP Tax Plan Would Cause Thousands to Die.
Well, do you want to explain your latest op-ed?
Look, I think this bill is very dangerous.
There's pretty clear evidence looking across different states, looking when health insurance has been phased in and out.
When people lose health insurance, they're less likely to get preventive care, they're more likely to defer health care they need, and ultimately they're more likely to die.
And it's very hard to quantify precisely.
My piece explains why an estimate that thousands will die as a consequence of this bill is actually a very conservative estimate, done much, much more carefully based on much more rigorous evidence than the absurd claims made by some that this bill will somehow pay for itself.
Doom and gloom, Republicans, conservatives, liberals and Democrats, libertarians, you're all going to die.
Your children are going to die.
Everybody's going to die.
And they only exist for tax cuts to the rich.
Prepare to die the moment that, in fact, this bill is passed.
Well, then Nancy Pelosi, by the way, suggested, she tells California Republicans to leave the state.
It's sort of like what Andrew Cuomo was saying.
If you're one of those conservatives and you believe in the Second Amendment, you're pro-life, you're not a New Yorker and you have no place in New York.
If you remember that one, Nancy Pelosi says, I want every single California Republican to understand this.
Your ideology doesn't come first.
Your party doesn't come first.
The people come first.
If you fail to recognize that, you do not belong here.
You disagree with her?
Gone.
Their problem is not me and the Democrats.
Their problem is themselves.
Who are they?
Are they these extreme conservatives who are right to life, a poor assault weapon, anti-gay?
Is that who they are?
Because if that's who they are, and if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York.
Because that's not who New Yorkers are.
No place in the state of New York.
Well, I don't care what people do.
I'm fairly libertarian.
It's your own life.
But I do believe in the Second Amendment, and I am right to life.
I believe that life begins at conception.
That's not who New Yorkers are.
And New Yorkers don't, you have no right to be here in New York.
Oh.
He thinks he's going to be president.
He thinks he's going to be president.
I'll leave.
Trust me.
There's no point at that point.
It's gone.
We're going to try to get Jay Seculo.
I assume he probably got caught up in a meeting.
So you've got the Trump-hating FBI urgent sending the alert on the tarmac meeting.
And now what we're finding out, it's marked urgent and high, and the talking points are still redacted.
But what we find out is Pete Stroke was involved in that.
This is unbelievable.
And within eight minutes of the information hitting the DOJ about Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton on the tarmac, well, they went to people within the FBI.
Comey knew in eight minutes.
Marked urgent.
Hi.
There's some serious issues involving the law here and conflicts of interest.
Judicial Watch now has gotten a hold of these emails.
It shows the FBI was not particularly concerned in any way with the scandalous meeting.
They were only concerned about hiding the details from we, the people, the public.
That's unbelievable.
And the FBI agents wanted to find who routed them on the tarmac.
The whistleblower is believed to be a law enforcement official.
Just days before the decision of Loretta Lynch, FBI agents wanted to find the whistleblower.
They didn't care about the meeting.
FBI officials, right?
We need to find that guy.
What did he do wrong?
The FBI Phoenix office was contacted in an attempt to stem any further damage.
The fix was in.
The fix was in from the get-go.
All right, by the way, Jay's available now, Linda, if you're paying attention.
You can call now.
Yes, I know.
I'm trying to get him.
Thank you.
All right, you're very welcome.
Not telling you to do your job.
I just got a text.
I'm sharing with you.
Anyway, so we got that on the plate.
Mueller fires this guy, Peter Strzok, you know, and he fired the mistress.
By the way, he's calling my phone.
I'll just tell him, hang on.
Linda is calling you.
Shorthand.
There we go.
Greg Jarrett has how an FBI official with a political agenda corrupted the investigations by both Mueller and Comey.
All right, let's get to Jay Seculo.
He is the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice and also counsel to the president.
How are you, sir?
I'm good, sir.
Sean, how are you?
Let's go over this guy struck that seems to be in the middle of everything now that we have.
And more importantly, he changed the words as it relates to the exoneration, which was written by Comey before the investigation of Hillary Clinton in the email server.
And he changed the words from gross negligence, the legal standard, to, you know, reckless disregard or whatever it was.
Extreme carelessness.
Extreme carelessness.
And I want to get your thoughts on this, and I want to get your thoughts.
He was involved in everything, and he hates Trump, and he loves Hillary.
Well, he's no longer involved in the case, in the investigation, so he's been removed.
But it raised, of course, it raised a really serious issue.
And a serious issue because if you go back to the Flynn investigation, evidently he was the agent in charge of that one as well back in January.
So it's not just as it relates to this one aspect, but it's multiple prongs of this.
The Hillary Clinton side, the aspect as it relates to General Flynn, and then, of course, was still on the team, I think, till July on Bob Moeller's staff until he was reassigned to human resources.
So this is, look, these are all issues that have to be raised.
They're all serious issues.
And, again, you look at the – Well, can I ask you a question?
I mean, if you're writing an exoneration letter before you've done the investigation.
Right.
Doesn't that sound like the fix is in?
And the person involved in it.
I mean, I've said that the whole time.
And James Comey, not only did he write the exoneration letter before he does witness interviews, many of these witnesses got immunity that he did not interview.
And he wrote this letter three months before because they knew where this was going.
So the whole process is ridiculous, Sean.
It's been ridiculous from the outset.
We've been saying it for a year.
It's still ridiculous.
I'm not sure if you heard this news.
This just broke with Catherine Herridge over at the Fox News channel that the deputy, Mueller deputy, apparently, and this is Andrew Weissman.
Now, Andrew Weissman, I've told the story about him.
And, you know, he was accused of making up laws that don't exist and pretty unethical behavior.
He had a 9-0 decision against him in the Supreme Court.
He was overturned in another case by the 5th District Court of Appeals.
This is a guy that was wrong on the Enron investigation.
Anderson Accounting, tens of thousands of jobs were lost.
Merrill Lynch employees that were innocent spent a lot of time in jail because of him.
And anyway, he, along with seven other Clinton Obama donors, were put on Mueller's team.
Now it turns out the day that Sally Yates was fired, that he sent an email to Sally Yates, the subject line, I am so proud.
And then he continued, end in awe.
Thank you so much.
All my deepest respects.
Well, that sounds like we have, just like in the case of Strzzok, somebody that's pro-Clinton and anti-Trump.
So here's the situation.
There are ways in which these issues are raised.
And the way in which an issue is raised is initially, if there was a concern about bias or improper action, the lawyers that are representing in the situation like with Manafort, his lawyers could raise objections both within the special counsel's office and with the Department of Justice, the Deputy Attorney General's office who's supervising it.
That's the way in which this, there's, in other words, there's a process in place for those issues to be raised.
Is it a problem for you that Mueller put together a team, Andrew Weissman's background, and this guy, Peter?
Sean, I'm not going to comment on that because of the nature of the thing.
So I don't want to, yeah, I can't.
But I will say this.
If I was representing Paul Manafort or Gates and you had these issues, I think those are the kind of things you raise.
What about you talked on your radio show about Strzok sent an email within eight minutes of the information hitting the Department of Justice about the tarmac meeting?
Yeah, so all of that ends up going right up to James Comey.
And it reached Comey about within about 32 minutes of the whole thing hitting.
And this was pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act litigation that we were engaged in on this that resulted in documents being disclosed, although still redacting some big ones, which were back filed reached on yesterday in federal court.
So all that's proceeding.
But yes, I mean, this guy was conflicted 100 different ways.
And I think it's created a real problem for the Department of Justice.
And they're trying to rectify it by moving him to, I guess it was human resources.
But at the end of the day, he was the number two in counterintelligence.
There was a lot of news made this morning, a report by Bloomberg that, in fact, Mueller had started investigating Donald Trump's finances, which I believe Deutsche Bank.
Is that true?
Well, I just issued a statement on that.
We saw that news report this morning.
And the fact of the matter is, and I'll confirm it here, is there are no subpoenas that have been issued regarding the president, the president's finances to Deutsche Bank.
That was completely false.
The media reports were false.
No subpoenas have been issued or received, and we confirm that.
My colleagues confirm that with.
Are they requesting information?
Nope.
So the whole thing was a false report, fake news.
Yeah, well, you know what?
It actually looks like it originated in Germany.
Wow.
How is it possible that Hillary Clinton escaped criminal indictment for the mishandling of these documents and the email server scandal when we have all of this evidence?
And how is it possible that an FBI director is writing this exoneration before he does the investigation?
Isn't that the very definition of obstruction from him?
Yeah, I'll tell you, Sean, in my view, James Comey has no defense.
What he has acknowledged doing, whether it was leaking the information about the president or whether it was the statement itself, as you said, writing the statement before the witnesses were interviewed, it tells you what this was.
Politics, pure and simple.
Is there any equal justice under the law?
And that has been my biggest claim here.
What is the best outcome when you're dealing with people that now are exposed as having political biases?
What's the best way to handle that?
Start over?
No, look, my goal in this entire process has been that we get a fact-based determination that there was no violation of the law here.
And I think that's becoming crystal clear.
I mean, you had the reports.
I mean, you're talking about the Deutsche Bank news today, two days ago, it was Brian Ross at ABC.
I mean, and all of these stories were incorrect.
So when you look at the facts, and if you look at the facts, there's no legal violation here.
Do you think that this is something we keep hearing speculation from the media that, oh, now they're on to Jared Kushner and all this deal with Flynn?
There's a lot of speculation about the deal.
I read the five-page agreement, and they did talk about one other person at the request of one other person.
The media has speculated it's Jared Kushner.
Yeah, but you know what?
Here's the thing with that.
First of all, if General Flynn were to have had a conversation with the Russians when the president was in this particular case, which was the president-elect, that's not the violation of any law.
And this argument that this somehow violates the so-called, well, not so-called, it's called the Logan Act, which has been on the books since 1799, but never prosecuted 218 years.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Suffers from serious constitutional problems, free speech being one of them, but also the fact that we have a Presidential Transition Act in 1963 that governs how this all operates.
So this was no wonder, of course it's not going to be a Logan Act violation or every president-elect would be violating it.
So it's nonsense.
I think this is, again, speculation.
General Flynn pled guilty, entered a guilty plea as it relates to lying to federal agents during the investigation.
All right, Jay Seculo, American Center for Law and Justice, special counsel to the president.
Thank you for being with us.
You'll join us on TV tonight.
I will.
We'll follow up more with Sarah Carter and Victoria Tunsay.
I know I'm running late here.
All right, hour two, Sean Hannity's show, 800-941.
Sean is a toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program?
We have been going over this whole story involving this guy, Peter Strzok, and how this guy basically had his hand in pretty much everything as it relates to the Clinton email investigation, as it includes the dossier, as it's everything.
He has his hands in.
And we find out that he hates Trump and that he loves Hillary Clinton.
But yet he's involved in changing the words from to extreme carelessness when it's gross negligence, the legal standard.
And now the story is getting bigger.
Sarah Carter, the investigative reporter, broke that story yesterday how this FBI supervisor was removed from the special counsel.
We have talked at length about half of the people that Mueller appointed.
They're all big Democratic donors, no Republican donors.
Then we talked about Judicial Watch releasing, you know, two productions of Justice Department documents showing strong support by top DOJ officials for former acting Attorney General Sally Yates and her refusal to enforce President Trump's Middle East travel ban executive order.
And she got fired.
One email, Andrew Weissman, we've told you all about him.
He's the guy that had the 9-0 decision reversal on obstruction of justice.
He was overturned by the 5th District Court of Appeals.
He's the guy that literally put innocent people in jail and made up laws and a whole bunch of other unethical and questionable conduct that he's been involved in.
Well, now we find out that, in fact, he's a big supporter of Sally Yates.
And on the day that she got fired, I'm proud of you and in awe of you.
Thank you so much.
All my deepest respect.
Wow.
So now we've got another guy, top deputy, hired by Mueller, the special counsel.
Anyway, the Judicial Watch obtained these documents through a May 2017 Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to a FOIA request seeking Yates' emails from her government account.
Anyway, the emails sent, several sent from the Department of Justice email addresses show very strong support for Yates, who was fired for disobeying her boss, a direct order from the President of the United States.
You know, you have one particular guy, U.S. Attorney for Maine, right?
You are my hero.
Then you've got a career service employee and chief of the Justice Department's special financial investigations unit telling Yates that she is inspirational and heroic.
You have Emily Grace Rice, the U.S. Attorney for New Hampshire, Obama appointee.
Thank you, as always, for making us proud.
It's truly an honor to work for you.
Another Obama appointee, Barbara McQuaid, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.
Oh, thank you for your courage and leadership.
This is wonderful news.
The Department of Justice, Civil Division, Appellate Attorney Jeffrey Clare.
Thank you, Attorney General Yates.
I've been in civil appellate for 30 years.
I've never seen an administration with such contempt for the Democratic values and rule of law.
The president's order is an unconstitutional embarrassment.
I applaud you for taking a principled stand and defending it.
Wow.
Joining us now, we welcome back investigative reporter Sarah Carter is with us.
And also with us, Victoria Tunsing.
She's a partner at the law firm to Geneva Tunsing and legal representative for the informant at the center of those investigations as it relates to the Uranium One issue, that guy that was six years working for the FBI and discovered the bribery and the kickbacks and extortion and money laundering.
Sarah, let's start with your report and the follow-up that we now have from Judicial Watch and what this means.
Oh, I think it's revealing so much.
I mean, think about this, Sean.
Andrew Weissman, you know, he plays an essential role in the special counsel.
And remember, it was Sally Yates that from the very beginning was the one that was pursuing Michael Flynn as well and had to go to the White House and report to him after she was privy to these tech cuts, to his unmasking, to his conversations.
And this relationship, I mean, it shows, according to sources that I've spoken with, real problems and conflicts of interest here in trying to be impartial.
I mean, these are supposed to be people that are stepping back and just looking at the facts and trying to be impartial.
And now you see that there's this behavior, and it's very blatant.
It's in emails.
It's incredible to me that, you know, they would be sending these emails after the election of the president and then, you know, talking about President Trump so openly.
And it really reveals how people within the government that are supposed to be working on behalf of the president really feel about him.
But it's worse than that.
Because he's pro-Hillary, he's anti-Trump, and he, along with Comey, are writing an exoneration before the investigation.
Yes.
And there's other questions here.
I mean, we now see all this information coming about FBI supervisory agent Peter Strzok, you know, and his central role and his involvement in the Hillary Clinton email investigation, his involvement in Flynn.
As I reported, you know, that he was one of the FBI agents who interviewed Michael Flynn as well.
And, you know, I've been talking to sources and they've said, well, have they spoken to the other FBI agent who interviewed Flynn?
And honestly, according to everyone that I've spoken with, I can't find one person that says yes.
So I don't know if the special counsel or even the grand jury even had the opportunity to hear the other agent.
So this is very interesting.
He took a senior position.
He was a senior interviewer.
So they took only his, possibly his testimony.
I mean, that's still, I'm still investigating this, but from what I've heard so far, they have not spoken to the other agent.
I think that's very interesting.
So now that the Inspector General has him in his sights and is investigating him, it's going to be fascinating to see what is revealed in that report by the Inspector General regarding Peter Strzok and regarding others inside the FBI.
Victoria, let me get your take on all of this.
If they're writing an exoneration of Hillary Clinton and the main participants, including Hillary herself, were not interviewed until months later.
Doesn't that sound like obstruction to you?
Like they're obstructing the real investigation?
Well, it's corrupt, Sean.
It's a corrupt way to approach any investigation.
They've got to half-ass backwards.
First, you interview the people and then you make a decision.
But this whole scenario that you and Sarah were talking about points out that Trump is great in many ways, but if you don't know the scrap, you don't know how to drain it.
And Sally Yates should not have been in office one minute after the President Trump took office.
All of those people should be gone.
High-ranking officials should never be left in office because this just shows you that she goes out and gets all this publicity.
And the U.S. attorneys who were still in office were all being very sympathetic with her.
This is not a way to run a railroad.
It's not a way to run a Justice Department.
You get your people in there.
And you know what?
They still don't have an assistant attorney general for criminal in the Justice Department.
What's wrong with the Hill that they're not pushing him?
I don't understand how you can draft a letter of exoneration and also change the language from the legal standard to something else.
I don't understand this is the same guy that interviewed Hillary, but not under oath.
I can't understand that this is the guy that was involved in Flynn.
I can't understand this was the guy involved in the dossier, and this guy has so much bias.
And then big picture, you know, what are your thoughts on these new revelations about Andrew Weissman and all of these other people congratulating, especially Weissman, with his.
Let me add to that about Weissman.
With my client, who you mentioned, who is the informant in the Uranium One case, I have told you that he was threatened by fraud section lawyers that if he didn't withdraw his civil case, they would prosecute him for violating his nondisclosure agreement.
Guess who those lawyers reported to?
Andrew Weissman.
You got it.
Wow.
Wow.
And then McCabe, I mean, he was the key guy in the other case.
What do you make?
Sarah, you broke this wide open yesterday.
I mean, you know, now that we have everybody else here and you look at his atrocious track record, now we have to ask the question about Robert Mueller.
Because this is now Robert Mueller's team.
These are the people.
These records were not that difficult for me to dig up.
No, they're not.
And I think there's a lot of concern, and you're hearing a lot of chatter in Washington.
What's going on here?
You know, is this a witch hunt?
How do you explain all these inconsistencies and problems within the special counsel?
You know, this started out as was supposed to be a Russia collusion.
They weren't able to find that.
And apparently, they're going in every single direction that they possibly can.
I tell you, what really was disturbing was the Andrew Weissman email and that relationship he had with Sally Yates.
You know, I have FOIA a number of documents from the Department of Justice, and I'm still waiting.
This is five months later, still waiting to get answers, but particularly with regard to Sally Yates, her relationship with Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
We know there's been a lot of issues there as well.
We've reported on that in the past, Sean, you know, dealing with Hatch Act violations, discrimination issues under Andrew McCabe, but most importantly, a report that had gone from Senator Grassley had asked the IG to look into whether or not he properly disclosed all of his wife's donations that had come to her when she unsuccessfully ran for state office here in Virginia,
and the money that had come directly from people associated and very close friends of Hillary Clinton, which was Governor Terry McAuliffe, and his PAC groups.
So there was a lot of very public political bias associated with people that are not supposed to show that publicly.
It's supposed to be, you know, very, the Bureau is supposed to be above board.
And when you talk to bureau agents and people who are down on the ground, that and they are working the beat and putting themselves on the line every day, they have that pounded into their heads daily.
And now they're saying, look, there were two sets of rules.
One set of rules for the officials in Washington, D.C., for the suits in Washington, D.C., and another set of rules for all of us, grunts on the ground.
We couldn't get away with what they've gotten away with, and they're getting away with it.
That's my biggest point, Victoria.
And my biggest point is that America's Constitution, you know, they ignored Fourth Amendment protections in the case of General Flynn.
Nobody seems to remember anymore that he was illegally surveilled.
He wasn't minimized.
He was unmasked, and raw intelligence was leaked.
And now it seems that not only are we weaponizing intelligence, but we're literally now weaponizing and criminalizing political differences.
Sean, I'm still perplexed, and I haven't really seen a rationale given by anybody in the Obama administration as to why somebody was going in and interviewing General Flynn prior about events that happened during the transition.
What crime was it that he could have possibly have committed, and what business is it of theirs?
All right, we've got to take a break.
Stay right there.
More with Sarah Carter and more with Victoria Tunsing.
We have so many questions, so little answers, and so little time.
All right, as we continue, Sarah Carter, investigative reporter, and Victoria Tunsing, who is the attorney for the FBI informant.
What is the latest with the FBI informant?
We are preparing to meet with the Congress.
We're just working out some dates and talking to them in the Senate.
Okay, so the FBI ignored, for example, there was a congressional referral, and Jason Chaffetz had an exchange with James Comey, Sarah, about did you ever review documents where Jim Jordan asked her specifically and she said there was nothing more classified on my emails, either sent or received.
And Comey says, I don't remember reviewing that particular testimony, et cetera, et cetera.
Isn't the evidence here, if the fix was in, doesn't it now mean that we have to reopen that investigation?
Yeah, I would think so.
And I think this is part of the reason why the Justice Department right now is looking at this and very closely.
And, you know, I mean, it's been back and forth.
We've heard different things.
We've heard Attorney General Sessions' testimony about this.
But one thing I do know is that within the Justice Department, they are taking this very seriously and they're looking at it.
We can only hope that once they do speak to the informant, once the informant is able to talk to Congress, Victoria is making that happen, that his information will then lead to a full investigation so that they can look at all of these issues and ensure that this is not buried again, but that it's available for the public.
The public should know what happened and how this happened so that it doesn't happen again, Sean.
And the basic bottom line question is, why knowing all these bad things about the Russian company, did our government say it was okay for this bad Russian company to buy Uranium-1?
I mean, all of that is true, but I mean, we need the dossier issue investigated.
Hillary Clinton bought and paid for lies from Russia to influence the election.
You know, we need now the email server.
We now know the fix was in.
They were writing the exoneration, didn't do an investigation.
Then we got James Comey himself.
I think he needs to be investigated.
Loretta Lynch needs to be investigated.
Then you got the whole Uranium One issue that needs to be investigated.
Where is the Attorney General?
And Sean, I wanted to go back with what I was just saying before the break, and that is that I think Flynn was set up.
He was being asked questions by Comey.
The FBI, there was no special counsel.
This was not a special counsel investigation, everybody.
This was prior to that.
They went in to his offices, did not prepare him ahead of time.
He thought it was something else.
McCabe set it up.
Sarah was reporting on this who could do more, but I'm looking at it, added legally.
On what basis were they going in to say to him, did you talk to the Russian?
Well, McCabe told Flynn PJ Media Reports that FBI agents were headed over.
He thought it was routine work.
And it wasn't until after they were in his office that he realized this was a formal interview.
But what was wrong with this talking to the Russian ambassador?
It's like saying, Sean, did you go to the business?
His counterpart.
His counterpart.
To be.
Yeah.
All right, I got a roll.
We'll see both of you tonight.
Thank you.
Quick break, right back.
Just because someone is accused, was it one accusation?
Is it two?
I think there has to be.
John Conyers is an icon in our country.
He has done a great deal to protect women.
Violence Against Women Act, which the left right-wing is now quoting me as praising him for his work on that, and he did great work on that.
The allegations against Congressman Conyers, as we have learned more since Sunday, are serious, disappointing, and very credible.
It's very sad.
The brave women who came forward are owed justice.
I pray for Congressman Conyers and his family and wish them well.
However, Congressman Conyers should resign.
Nancy Pelosi's statement, which I'm sure all of you all are aware of at this juncture, calling on the congressman to resign.
First of all, it is not up to Nancy Pelosi.
Nancy Pelosi did not elect the congressman, and she sure as hell won't be the one to tell the congressman to leave.
That decision will be completely up to the congressman.
He's not thought about that.
He's thinking about his health.
He's thinking about getting well.
That is the main focus of the family.
My legacy can't be compromised or diminished in any way by what we're going through now.
This too shall pass.
And I want you to know that my legacy will continue through my children.
I have great family here, and especially my oldest boy, John Conyers III, who incidentally endorsed to replace me in my seat in Congress.
And I am very proud of the fact that I am the dean of the Congress and that I will continue to.
Oh, yes, I'm in the process of putting my retirement plans together, and I will have more about that very soon.
Congressman, okay, and I want to get some clarity here, and I think I do have it, but for the record, for those who may not have understood or heard what you said, is that you're very confident in your legacy.
You are today, at this time, at this moment, in this period, preparing for your retirement, a date in which you are not prepared to announce at this moment.
Yes, I thank you for helping me get this into focus.
I am retiring today, and I want everyone to know how much I appreciate the support, the incredible, undiminished support I've received across the years from my supporters.
That's John Conyers stepping down, recommending that his son take his place as a congressman.
Nancy Pelosi, of course, referring to him as an icon.
Another allegation today, apparently in church, some woman claiming that he, I guess, put his hand on her thigh or worse.
I'm just so sick of reading all this crap.
Pastor Daryl Scott is with us, founder, senior pastor of the new Spirit Revival Center, the Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of Rebuilding the Family, Rebuilding the Man, author of The Antidote, Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, Victimhood.
Welcome both of you.
And Pastor Scott, I'll begin with you and ask you your thoughts on all of these issues in total.
And what do you do?
And I was consistent.
I said, okay, he's denying the allegations.
Obviously, there might be something to it, since he decided to resign.
I think at the end of the day, maybe this is going to be a good thing in that we're going to see people being more respectful to everybody else in the workplace.
Jesse Lee?
Well, you're right.
Most of the time, when we go through darkness in this manner, most people come out on the other side and they treat each other better and they do the right thing because sometimes pain brings on improvement in your life.
I think it's time for John Conyers to step down anyway.
He's been there a long time.
He's known for going to work in his underwears.
He's also known for reading the papers upside down.
And so maybe at his age, it's time for him to go anyway.
But what I find is hypocritical about the black caucus and the Democratic Party is that NASA Pelosi and members of the Democratic Party try to defend John Conyers and call him an icon who served for rights of women.
And on the same hand, they say that they are for women.
They support women and all that.
But when it comes to the Democrats, they tend to support politics and support their party rather than supporting women.
And we saw that once again with Bill Clinton when he was accused, they tried to destroy the women who accused Bill Clinton of what he did to them.
And also, there's another guy by the name of Al Green.
He's a member of the Black Caucus as John Conyers.
He's one of the founders of the Congressional Black Caucus.
And if this were going on, and if it's true that John Conyers paid off a woman, why did the Congressional Black Caucus allow these two men to stay there, knowing that these accusations were there, especially after they paid off a woman?
So it's exposing, Sean, really what the Democratic Party is all about and what the Congressional Black Caucus is about.
And that is they are not for the people, therefore politics, because as long as they can keep it political, it brings power and rough for them.
One other quick point about John, John represents Detroit, and it is one of the worst cities in this country.
He's been there since 1963, and there is no improvement in Detroit at all.
It has only gotten worse rather than getting better.
So if he should step down, I think that they should replace him with someone who's going to, you know, do what's good for the people and not good for the representatives.
You know, Pastor, it is, I remember covering the Duke La Crosse case.
I remember covering Richard Jewell in Atlanta.
I remember not rushing to judgment on the Cambridge police or in the Ferguson case.
It turned out hands up, don't shoot, didn't happen, or these cops are all going to be found guilty in Baltimore in the Freddie Gray case or, you know, all these examples.
Well, I take this position that if somebody makes an accusation, we've got to take it seriously.
You've got to give people, listen closely, and you've got to give their story credence.
And you've got to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I'm sure in cases, people wait because of a whole variety of legitimate reasons.
But on the other hand, I remember covering the Duke La Crosse case, and, you know, it turned out those boys were not guilty.
And the Bible says something about bearing false witness.
I mean, even if, say, 90% of the time people are right, I do think there's conviction by media now, and I think that's dangerous, too.
I think you're absolutely right.
But once again, I look at you, you take a lot of things into consideration.
You take in the credibility of the accusers.
And, you know, the Democratic Party tries to make itself the moral conscious of America unless it conflicts with their agenda.
Because in actuality, they're the moral conscious of liberal America.
Once again, until it conflicts with their agenda.
And then, you know, and I said this, and I hope I'm not overstepping here on the program when I say this, but right now, white people don't have free speech in America because this race card is being played so vociferously that if, you know, anyone that is white criticizes or condemns John Conyer's action, the race card is conveniently played.
I think even early on in this incident, he tried to play the race car in this, but I don't think.
Well, people around him did.
I mean, there was a comment made by Conyer's wife, and I'll play that for you just to remind everybody.
I think that you're allowed me to disclose who this person is or whoever this is.
But as I think that do you all go and stalk other people's houses?
Do you go and stalk white people's houses?
It just comes in white people.
But okay, but this is our private residence.
I mean, I don't know what that means, go to white people's houses.
I don't think this was about a race issue at all.
I'm not sure how to interpret that comment.
They always use race.
You can interpret it.
Yeah, they always use that when they want to get away with doing wrong.
We saw the same thing when Maxine Waters was accused with doing wrong.
Her husband sat on the bank, on the board of a bank, and Maxine did some dirty stuff there.
They cry racism.
Another thing that the congregation black caucus has done, which I think is insane, they are calling for the impeachment of President Trump when they haven't proved anything on this great president.
But because he speaks out, because he tells the truth, he deals with them, he put America first.
He put the country first.
He's an outsider.
And he is a straight, white, conservative, Christian male of power.
They hate him because he prevents them from doing what they have been doing for the last number of years to this country.
And so they accuse him when he was accused of harassing women.
They were all over it.
They saw him a racist because they want him out.
And so I'm glad that the Democratic Party is being exposed for what it really is.
It's a hypocritical party.
I'm glad that's been data shows that Obama's track record doubles the debt: 13 million more on poverty, 8 million more on food stamps, or 8 million more on poverty, 13 million more on food stamps, worst recovery since the 40s, lowest labor participation rate in the 70s, lowest home ownership rate in 51 years.
And minorities in America were disproportionately impacted by his policies.
And I'm looking at things turning around now, and I'm thinking this is good for everybody.
But it's bad for them, John.
The worst thing that can happen to the Democratic Party is for a white conservative Christian president to come in and improve the lives of the citizens, and especially the lives of black Americans, because you're right.
Obama did not do anything to help black folks, and they thought that he would.
And they got worse inspecting the area of employment.
They got worse rather than getting better.
And I honestly have to tell you that when I travel around to the schools and the urban areas around here, the young people, they are loving the president.
They love the way he speaks up.
They love the fact that he put the country first.
They love the fact that he's deporting illegal aliens and looking out for the people.
And that's not what Maxine Waters and others want to hear.
Got to take a break more with the Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson, Reverend Darrell Scott.
We'll get to your calls.
Also, we'll have a little bit of a shootout.
Austin Goolsby coming up.
800-941-Sean is our toll-free telephone number.
As we continue with the Pastor Darrell Scott, founder and senior pastor at the new Spirit Revival Center and the Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson, Rebuilding the Family by Rebuilding the Man, and the author of The Antidote, Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.
What do you both make, and we'll start with you, Darrell Scott, as you sit on the President's Diversity Board, National Diversity Board.
What do you make of the efforts since November 9th of last year to delegitimize and destroy this president, a duly elected president?
Well, you know, it's a concerted effort by the left and the Democratic Party.
And, you know, they'll play the race card.
Once again, as my brother, Reverend Peterson said, at convenience, you know, notice one thing, blacks are hesitant to criticize other blacks in public.
I don't care what they do, unless they're Trump supporters.
The only open season on criticism to blacks by blacks is if those Trump supporters are in line with this administration.
So they're trying everything that they can.
But if you look at the numbers, if you look at the statistics, I mean, I'll give you an example.
I had a young guy that came to my church recently, was involved in some street activity, and he came in and wanted to turn his life around and found a job immediately.
And he said, you know what, I've been trying to find a job for years and couldn't find one, but now I was able to find one.
And that seems to be the story throughout America.
Jobs are available now where there were no jobs.
And as Reverend Peterson said, the man on the street is not anti-Trump.
The man on the street likes him.
They like his personality.
They like his swag, his hutzbuy, his charisma.
It's the black leadership that's trying to convince the black laity that Trump is anti-black.
But the proof is in the pudding.
The evidence, you know, you quote numbers a lot, Sean.
And the reason you quote numbers a lot is because numbers don't lie.
But you know what?
It's more than that.
These are real people.
These are our neighbors.
These are our friends.
This is our American family.
And it crosses all boundaries.
You know what?
And when Americans are suffering needlessly because of government, we've got to fix it.
If we care about people, you've got to fix it.
Well, you know, Reverend Scott is absolutely right, especially when it comes to jobs.
I'm driving around L.A. and I'm seeing for work signs or, you know, job openings everywhere now.
And I haven't seen that in years.
And one thing that we do at Barn, my nonprofit organization, we help young men find jobs.
People can check us out at rebuildingtheman.com.
Rebuildingtheman.com.
But the reason they've been wanting to get rid of this president, Sean, is because he's put in America first.
They are shocked, and they haven't gotten over the shocked shock that an outsider like President Trump came in.
They thought he was going to lose.
They were relaxed.
They had no idea that he was going to win.
And then the president is outspoken.
He's tweeting.
He let us go.
I've got to run, but I agree wholeheartedly with you.
I don't know what's going on.
They want to destroy him.
And he really wasn't supposed to win.
And that's their shock.
And we saw it on election night and every day since.
All right.
Thank you both Reverends for being with us.
When we come back, Austin Goolsby, we'll have a little bit of a Hannity shootout, that and more straight ahead.
Out of 52 Republican senators, 51 voted, and we ended up doing it.
And we didn't need our great vice president to break the tide, Mike.
We didn't need Mike.
We didn't need anything.
We voted.
The Democrats left before the vote was even, somebody said started.
Somebody said before it was over.
I don't even care.
But we got no Democrat help.
And I think that's going to cost them very big in the election because basically they voted against tax cuts.
And I don't think politically it's good to vote against tax cuts.
But what we're doing is, if you look at it, we're going to grow the country.
We're going to grow jobs.
We're going to be growing everything.
We have companies now that are pouring back into our country even before this.
We've just set records in so many different ways.
We've set records with every conceivable, you know, if you look at it, consumer confidence at a 17-year high.
And I think it's an all-time high.
Consumer confidence.
Business confidence, all-time high.
Everything is like at an all-time high, including the big one.
It's called the stock market at an all-time high.
So I was backstage taking pictures with people far greater than my business people.
I love my business people, but these are called law enforcement people, okay?
Do we concede business people?
All my business friends.
And one great gentleman came up and he said, sir, I want to thank you.
I said, what did I do for you?
He said, my 401k is up 40%.
And I never thought of it.
You know, I tell you, he gave me one of the great campaign lines.
It's called, How's Your 401k doing?
Because I can say this, if the Dems won the election, in my opinion, and I feel strongly about this, the numbers right now, we hit record highs every day.
I think we had 66 times now where we've hit a record high since the election.
66 times.
66.
All right, news roundup information overload.
We'll get to the issue of this corruption, this big story we're breaking today.
Andrew Weissman saying, oh, I am in awe.
Oh, I am so proud of you to Sally Yates after she gets fired.
Another Mueller appointment that is obviously pro-Hillary, anti-Trump.
We'll get to that in just a second.
But that was the president talking about his tax package.
Of course, during the Obama years, we added 13 million Americans to the food stamp rolls, and 8 million more Americans are in poverty.
And, of course, he's the only president in the history of this country to never see 3% GDP growth in a single year of his presidency.
Last quarter was upwardly revised GDP growth at 3.3% as the economy, because of getting rid of regulation and the opportunities that the president have created, now turning the economy around.
And of course, we had the lowest labor participation rate.
We had the worst recovery since the Great Depression.
We had the lowest home ownership rate in 51 years.
And Obama single-handedly took on more debt than every other president before him combined.
But, you know, no point going back over old news.
The good news is the year-to-date growth in America is now over 3%.
You know, not only is the average annual growth of rate, you know, what?
It was 1.48% during Obama's business cycle, the weakest of any expansion since 1949.
The only president never to reach 3% GDP growth.
Unbelievable distinction.
And Austin Goolsby was one of the president's economic advisors at the time.
We don't hold it against him, but just a fact or just stating the facts.
When did you leave working for Obama?
Look, I left in 2011.
Nothing that you just said was true, but I still have a bone to pick with you, which is I'm going to send you a bill for my stress level.
I'm sitting down.
It's Sunday.
I'm going to have some tea, some cereal, talk with my kids.
I look at this picture.
I'm like, who is a screaming maniac on this magazine?
And then I look, I said, wait a minute, I know that guy.
Wow.
Wow.
That's where you're going today, really?
You look like a nut.
People are like, is that guy well?
And I don't know.
Are you well?
How could you look like that?
You know, it's really, that's your liberal.
I went back and I looked at a lot of New York Times magazine covers.
And guess what?
There's never been one like the one they put up of me.
No, that's the worst one.
That's the worst one ever.
I've never seen one worse.
Well, I just want to know.
I mean, you saw that.
Did it take a while for you to understand it?
To understand why you were yelling?
No, I wasn't.
I don't understand.
No, but what they did, they purposefully, they took a thousand pictures, and that's the one they chose.
Why do you, all right, Austin Goolsby, why do you think that is?
Maybe you were unhinged that day.
How do I know?
No, that's not it.
It's called liberal media bias, is what that is called.
And by the way, you know that's true.
And you know what the sad part is?
You know what the sad part is?
You made this faith.
Okay, because if they cared at all about being fair, they would have picked the one, you know, out of a thousand pictures, they picked the one god-awful one that they could put on the cover to make to make me look as evil as I can.
But I tell you, you know, unlike the anointed one who got, didn't he get a Nobel Peace Prize in like year one of his presidency?
Yeah, looking better if you're not.
But you owe me because I've been interviewed about you, and I lie and I say nice things.
Yes, you did, and I don't know why you did.
I have no idea.
People are still never going to forgive you for that.
Oh, my God.
You know, so did you really see it and you didn't know it was in there?
Yeah, I didn't know it was in there.
Then I saw a picture of you.
Actually, I thought the article turned out pretty good.
I was very surprised.
I thought they would be way meaner toward you than they were.
And there were some pretty good on the inside.
And even Linda's in the article.
That's right.
Linda is quoted extensively.
And guess who didn't agree to an interview?
Linda.
She didn't want to be in it.
Oh, really?
Yeah, really?
I swear to God.
All right.
She was a smart one.
Yeah, exactly.
I'm an idiot.
Thank you, Austin.
Yeah, thank you, Austin.
Great.
Like everybody else, saying, what the hell is wrong with you talking to the New York Times for?
Well, actually, I thought it did.
No, no, it was a lot of the Hannity greatest hits.
I mean, Hannity said this 39 years ago when he started his radio career.
Yeah, they did have some of that.
But you looked like you could dunk.
I know you can't, but you look like you could.
Excuse me.
Yeah, I can.
I can't.
I can on that basketball court.
Yeah, yeah.
I can in real life.
I was actually.
Didn't you like the picture of me as a baby?
I thought that was particularly good.
I was impressed.
I was like, how did they get this?
Did they break into your Facebook account or something?
No, no, no.
They asked for pictures of when I was young, and I gave them that.
By the way, that's one of like.
Pretty cute pictures.
I know.
I actually had a vote.
Which picture, the cover or my baby picture for my Christmas card this year?
Why not both?
Why not both?
Yeah.
Which was just the real Sean Hannity.
I got to talk to you about a serious matter here.
Okay.
So we've got some breaking news now the last couple of days.
And this should scare the living daylights out of you, too, even though you're a big liberal.
And that is, you know, we now know that Robert Mueller, you know, his number one deputy in this investigation.
Now, he picked 16 people to work for them.
Half of them donated to Clinton and Obama.
None of them donated any Republican.
All right.
And they donated tens of thousands of dollars.
Then we've got this guy that we now learn was sending out anti-Trump, pro-Hillary texts between him and another FBI agent.
I guess they're having some affair or something together.
And literally, his name is Strzok.
And this guy struck him from the team, right?
Fired him as soon as he found out.
Yeah, but here's the problem: James Comey wrote the exoneration letter of Hillary before he did the investigation.
He began writing the exoneration letter months before.
And this guy purposely took out the words gross negligence that is the legal standard and put in extreme carelessness.
And then it gets worse.
Now we have this guy, Andrew Weissman, another top deputy of Robert Mueller.
And this is the guy that was involved in the 9-0 decision against him in the case, remember, with Merrill Lynch and Enron and Arthur Anderson, and tens of thousands of people lost their job, and all those people were innocent.
When do you ever get a 9-0 decision overturn on obstruction of justice?
It doesn't happen.
And then the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, with that atrocious record, Mueller put this hack on his team.
And now we find out that the day that Sally Yates got fired, he sent a I am so proud email.
I am in awe email.
And thank you so much.
My deepest regrets because she got fired by that doesn't show a political alliance.
You're dreaming.
Okay.
How about we're going to put somebody that writes to Donald Trump on your case?
I'm in awe, and I'm so fired.
But my understanding is that as soon as Mueller found out that was the case, he fired that guy.
Okay.
That's the one guy, but not Andrew Weissman.
And my bigger question is: wait a minute.
Why did Mueller hire only Obama-Hillary donors, no Republican donors?
Why did he hire a guy that was overturned 9-0 in the Supreme Court, was accused of unethical tactics repeatedly, that was found to have created laws that don't exist, used every bullying tactic that we'd never want any prosecutor to use against anybody.
Why did he put this guy on his team?
No, no, no, no, no.
No, no, no.
Would you want him on the team?
I'm an economist.
It does seem to me.
Wait a minute, whoa, whoa, whoa.
You're going to take the Obama record as something to be proud of?
Yeah, there was no depression, which he was left to.
Stop for a second.
Wait a minute.
Well, there wasn't a depression.
It's the worst recovery since the 40s.
No, yes.
It wasn't anymore.
It started as that, but it has continued.
What do you mean it's continued?
He never had 3% growth in any year of his presidency, GDP growth.
The only president never to reach that.
Yeah, true.
He added 13 million more, 13 million more Americans on food stamps.
...recovery, about to become the second longest recovery in U.S. history.
And it's the tortoise and the hare.
It didn't get going as fast as some others.
Whoa, whoa, whoa.
So you're telling me that it took nine years for Obama's great economic policies to kick in.
How do you explain the doubling of our national debt under Obama?
How do you explain the tripling of the national debt under Ronald Reagan?
John, the unimportant.
Actually, Reagan doubled.
Wait a minute.
In fairness to Reagan, Reagan doubled revenues to the federal government, but for every new dollar he brought in, the Democrats, which he had for his entire presidency, the people in control of spending, they spent $1.35 every time he brought in a new dollar.
No, that is true.
Yes, that's a fact.
That is not true at all.
Ronald Reagan tripled the debt.
That's twice you called me.
Doubled the debt.
Ronald Reagan created 21 million new jobs.
Ronald Reagan gave us the longest period of peacetime and economic growth.
And Ronald Reagan got to 7.4% GDP growth by cutting the top marginal rates from 70 to 28 percent.
So I'll go figure for figure with you on Reagan any day, and you're going to lose.
This from Paul Volcker that you're forgetting, cutting the interest rate, but he did very well.
Who's in charge of the economy?
All right, stay right there.
We have Austin Goolsby taking cheap shots at me and that hideous picture in the New York Times magazine.
I think we should just leave it up there and put a big question mark.
Media bias on my website.
Quick break.
We'll come back.
We'll continue more with Austin Goolsby on the other side.
All right, as we continue, he calls himself an economist.
What do you do that makes you an economist?
How do you call yourself an economist?
Well, I got a Ph.D. in economics.
I study economics.
I do research.
I publish papers on statistics and data.
That's what makes me an economist.
And every time I point out 13 million more Americans during Obama's presidency went on food stamps and 8 million more went in poverty.
And then they went down.
You always forget that part.
Okay, I'm talking total throughout his presidency.
No, look, as I tell you, if I push you out the window so you're falling.
See, you're always thinking you're a sign from the bank.
You sound like an Occupy Wall Street leftist.
You want to throw me out a window.
That's me.
The unemployment rate on the day that Donald Trump takes office.
Well, look at it now.
It's down.
It's down to the unemployment rate in a half century.
With all due respect, Obama takes office.
We're losing a million jobs a month.
And how many, and at the end of the day, Donald Trump's already created 2 million jobs.
How many has created fewer jobs this year by 300,000 than Barack Obama did last year in the second year?
You know, it doesn't matter what statistic I bring up.
He never had 3% GDP growth.
He doubled the debt, and he said $9 trillion in debt is irresponsible and unpatriotic.
Here's a guy that literally gave us the worst recovery since the 40s.
All these millions more on food stamps.
That's what I'm telling you.
Wait a minute.
But you don't count the labor participation rate.
No, I do.
We've talked about it.
We now have.
It went down.
It has come back some.
It's continued to come down.
Yeah, since Trump got into office and started pressuring people to come back and build their factories in America, like Ford and Carrier and all these other companies.
It's continued to go down under Donald Trump.
I'm explaining, and he cut and ended your buddy Obama's burdensome regulations.
No, that would be an argument for why labor participation would rise, but it has continued to fall under Donald Trump.
Because Donald Trump is bringing business back to America.
That is the opposite.
What did they say?
I'm going to have to say Merry Christmas.
What are you going to do for Christmas?
I don't know yet.
Maybe I'll go hang out with you.
Where are you going to be?
Yeah, come down to Amiline, Texas.
Remember when you debated moving to Texas?
They want you to move to Texas.
Yeah, you know why?
Because I want to move to Texas.
They don't have a state income tax.
Yeah, well, your friends in the White House are about to raise the taxes for a whole bunch of middle-class people.
Yeah, by the way.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
No, they're raising taxes on people that live in blue states that have high state income taxes.
So now let's see what the people in the blue states do because the red states aren't going to carry them anymore.
All right, 800 nine.
Have a Merry Christmas.
We'll take a quick break.
We'll come back.
We've got Congressman Roger Williams going to join us and much more straight ahead.
Always worried about what comes out of the Senate.
But I think if they'll take this bill, once we fine-tune it, it will work.
And a lot of people are talking about phasing in the 20% corporate tax rate.
We don't need to phase it in.
Let's put it in there.
Let's let business grow.
Let's let business take risk, get reward, hire people, put people to work.
I mean, that's what it's all about.
And we don't need to just get our foot wet.
Let's jump in and create a tax environment that's good for not only us, but the world.
Democrats talk about this bill often in very apocalyptic terms, but isn't really what's going on is that many people are getting a very modest tax cut, and some people are getting a tax increase.
Well, a lot of us is also going to business, but it's not the end of the world.
No, it is the end of the health care.
The debate on health care is life-death.
This is, Armageddon, this is a very big deal.
Because you know why?
There's really a very hard way to come back from this.
They take us further, more deeply into debt.
What can you do but raise taxes?
They contend that their gift to corporate America of a trillion and a half dollars, could be up to a trillion and a half dollars, will be paid for by the growth it creates.
And even their own people say, nonsense, not true.
Not true.
So let's be truthful with the American people about that.
They throw a few crumbs to the middle class, but they give with one hand.
They take away in bounty with the other.
And why?
Because it is in their DNA to give tax cuts to the rich.
That's their purpose in coming to Congress.
The only reason it isn't the underworld is because America is a great country.
And the greatness of America and the fact that God is always with us is what gives us hope.
But it's very important for the American people to know how adversely they will be personally affected by all of this.
Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers responding to the tax bill and the impact that it could have on health care coverage.
And a new op-ed out overnight, it's called, Yes, the Senate GOP Tax Plan Would Cause Thousands to Die.
Well, do you want to explain your latest op-ed?
Look, I think this bill is very dangerous.
There's pretty clear evidence looking across different states, looking when health insurance has been phased in and out.
When people lose health insurance, they're less likely to get preventive care.
They're more likely to defer health care they need, and ultimately they're more likely to die.
And it's very hard to quantify precisely.
My piece explains why an estimate that thousands will die as a consequence of this bill is actually a very conservative estimate, done much, much more carefully based on much more rigorous evidence than the absurd claims made by some that this bill will somehow pay for itself.
Yes, it's doom and it's gloom and it's Nancy Pelosi dire predictions that the tax plan is like death.
You're going to die.
Your children will die.
Your spouses will die.
Anybody you like will be dead.
The only people that will remain will be the little animals that can swim in the ocean.
Otherwise, you're dead.
We will all die together.
It's like death.
Anyway, 800-941.
Sean, our toll-free telephone number, you want to be, by the way, Hannity says all Americans will die.
I can't wait for that.
Headlines.
Breaking news now.
All right.
Joining us is Congressman Roger Williams of Austin, Texas is here, and he says, where are we going to go now that the House has passed their bill, the Senate's passed their bill, and now we go in a conference?
Where is this going to end up?
Well, I think we hopefully, I'd like to see us get something out within the next 15 days.
I think we will.
I know we will.
And it's going to be a good bill.
And I will tell you, the Senate bill has a lot, has some things on it that I like better than what we put out, and vice versa.
But look, I'm a business guy, Sean, and this is going to be great for our country.
I was in business when Jimmy Carter was president.
I saw what the Reagan tax cuts did, the Bush tax cuts.
These tax cuts are going to put people to work.
And what was dying, I heard the Nancy Pelosi thing, what was dying was the free markets and the American dream.
This is going to bring it back together.
Risk and reward will let people begin to do some things, put people back to work.
And I couldn't be more excited about what we're facing.
Why are Republicans seemingly afraid of across-the-board Reagan-era supply-side cuts?
Look, I love the corporate tax cut.
I love repatriation.
I love a lot about this bill that I can go on in great detail.
I love the middle-class aspect, tax cut aspect of it.
I like the energy independence aspect of it, and I like that the president removed a lot of burdensome regulations.
But it seems there is fear among Republicans to go with an across-the-board tax cut for fear they'll be labeled as the party for the rich.
Well, look, first of all, when we cut taxes, nobody understands, or most people don't understand the power of Main Street America.
When we cut these taxes, the pay-for is going to be economic growth.
There's no question in my mind about it.
And we don't need to be afraid of that.
And so economic growth will bring us out of this.
And if we can ever couple it with reducing the size of the federal government, then we've got a program working.
But economic growth is the key, and I guarantee you that's what's going to happen.
They also punted on the estate tax repeal, and they really did.
2025.
What year is this?
2017.
Yeah.
Yeah.
You know what that means?
It's never going to happen.
Well, let me tell you, the estate tax, I know the Democrats want to say it's only for the rich and so forth, but it's the most unfair tax anywhere in the world.
It's double taxation.
Even I have a story about the estate tax out going to wipe a business out.
I'm not happy that it's not going to kick in fully this year, but it will phase out.
And I think the Senate's got doubles the threshold, but we're on the right path there.
But I wish all this was happening, and we don't need to put it off till 2019 like the Senate wants to do because a lot of businesses will take 2018 off, and it could stop.
No, it's the House bill that repeals it in 2025.
In the Senate, there's no repeal.
Right.
They have no repeal, but they double the exemption.
Right.
Well, but so does the House bill.
I mean, that's fine, but I agree with you.
It's one of the most unjust.
Why can't they repeal it immediately?
Well, I agree.
But we get caught up, Sean, in these pay-fors and revenue neutral.
And as a business person, nobody ever uses those terms in the private sector.
Revenue neutral means you're standing still.
That's why we get back to economic growth as the pay-for.
And frankly, massive cuts in the federal government, then there's your pay-for, and you don't have to play all these games with adding and subtracting.
And when do we start and when we don't start?
What about Americans that are worried about the property tax up to $10,000 and no income tax?
What do you think of that?
Well, that's salt.
And, of course, a lot of the eastern New York, New Jersey, California are primarily the states that are complaining that they're not going to be able to deduct their state and local taxes.
But one, they're so heavily taxed.
I mean, what ought to happen is they ought to demand to their leaders that they cut taxes and let the taxpayers breathe.
Listen, I'm going to end up getting killed by this tax bill because I live in a high-taxed state.
I mean, I got a 10% state income tax, a 3.5% city income tax, the second highest property-tax county in the country I live in in Nassau County in Long Island.
And it's not by choice.
It just is what it is.
I'm going to get killed.
And I keep telling my friends, well, I don't think states like Texas that live within their means and states like Florida that live within their means and they don't have state income taxes, I don't think they should be subsidizing the tax breaks of big spending states like New York, New Jersey, California, and Illinois.
I'm so honored.
Well, no, we should not.
We should not.
Of course, me being from Texas, I mean, I was Secretary of State.
I'm sticking up for you.
Yeah, you are.
And we want you to come to Texas, and I'm sure the Floridians want you to come.
But in business, if you want to sell more products, you cut your prices.
And they ought to be cutting taxes to keep people in their states.
It's just a simple business model.
That's their problem, and we shouldn't have to pay for it.
You know, and I've got to tell you something.
You know what they're not going to do?
They're not going to cut taxes.
So you're going to have ⁇ here's my fear.
I don't mind if people move to Texas, and I know there's great hospitality down south and in Texas and in Florida and all these southern states.
But if you're going to leave your high-tax state of California and your high-tax state of New York and your high-tax state of New Jersey and Illinois, and you're going to go to the Carolinas or Florida or Texas, don't bring your liberal policies with you because you already destroyed your state.
Don't destroy other people's states.
Well, that's a real concern.
We've had a lot of people move in from California to Texas, and that's a real concern.
And we'd like to remind them when they try to bring their liberal views to Texas, remember why you're here.
You're here because those liberal views did not work.
Well, then that's my fear is that all these people, they say, oh, this is ridiculous.
I can't save any money.
Then they go to Texas and they're like, somebody proposes a 5% state income tax.
Well, they still think that's low.
And I'm like, that's ridiculous.
So listen, I'm standing up, even though this is going to hurt me.
As long as the middle class gets their tax cut, corporate tax cuts will stimulate the economy.
Repatriation will work.
I wish you guys would fight for the end of the death tax, the biggest double taxation in history.
And I just think that at the end of the day, that this is going to continue the economic growth that the president started with all the things that he's been able to do on his own.
Do you think next year there's going to be anything done on health care?
Well, I would think so.
I hope that we get this passed so we can do away with the individual mandate with this tax plan we're in.
But I think we need to address health care.
I mean, I'm an employer.
I've seen health care go up 57% in our business.
We need to let the private sector begin to take over again, let individuals own their health care, not the government.
So I think we need to address that.
Are you a Freedom Caucus member?
You know, I'm not a member of the Freedom Caucus, but they're my buddies.
Listen, you're one of the few that I like outside of the Freedom Caucus.
You know, I had to talk Louie Gomert into becoming a member.
I'm going to have to talk you into being a member.
Louis and Meadows are some of my good friends and so forth.
But we think the same way.
All right, Congressman, God bless you.
Have a great holiday.
Merry Christmas to you.
You're allowed to say it again.
Merry Christmas to you, Sean, and all your listeners.
It drives liberals crazy when you say that.
You're allowed to say it again.
Why were you never allowed to say it?
What do you mean?
Hilarious.
All right, let's get to our phones.
As we say, I had a Greg in California.
13.5% state income tax.
Thank you, Jerry Brown.
What's going on?
Greg, how are you?
Hey, Sean, and Merry Christmas to you.
You too, sir.
Hey, my idea is, I'm surprised Republicans have passed anything here.
I'm glad they have, but I think that the Republicans and President Trump especially missed a great opportunity to educate the American people.
And that is they lowered the corporate income tax, which was great, but they really should have gotten rid of it.
Corporations don't pay income taxes.
The people pay income taxes.
And if they wanted to see the jobs come back in the United States, if they wanted to see the swamp drain, get rid of the corporate income tax.
You know, when you have corporate income tax, it just adds to the bottom line of the business.
So they either raise their prices, they lower their work hours, they lower their dividends.
I've been saying this for years.
Nobody wants to pay attention.
Corporations do not pay taxes.
All they do is pass the cost on to the consumers.
But that's not how government.
But you see, you're taking away government gets their power through the money that they confiscate from the American people.
And then they decide how to spend it.
Now, look, we certainly need to contribute to roads, bridges, highways, infrastructure, a national defense, et cetera.
But if there are states like Texas and states like Florida and a bunch of other states that either have low or no income tax, then you can't tell me that California with its population couldn't get away with the same thing.
What happens is these governments become big, powerful, greedy bureaucracies, and they decide what is best for spending people's money.
And the liberals are so generous with other people's money.
Here you have in California, your state.
Isn't Hollywood out there?
I believe it is, yeah.
And then you have liberal Hollywood out there.
Well, if they're so keen on helping people, why don't all these millionaires and billionaires in Bel Air on the Hollywood Hills or wherever else they're living, why don't they just contribute 90% of their income to people and help save lives and be generous to every cause they want to be generous to?
Why do I suspect they're not going to like that idea?
I agree.
And California, bear in mind, is the government of the government employee by the government employee for the government employee.
That's what it's all about.
That's why California is just in such dire straits financially.
Yeah.
All right.
Thanks so much, Greg.
God bless you.
I mean, you pay big time living in the state of California.
Big time.
Let's go to Chris's in St. John's, Florida, next on the Sean Hannity Show.
What's up, Chris?
How are you?
Merry Christmas, Sean.
Merry Christmas, sir.
How are you?
Good.
Look, there's some really great questions by you and your staff being asked every day about all the stuff that's going on.
And I'm upset that some of the people in Congress haven't been asking a couple questions.
In the early 1970s, they passed the Inspector General's Act.
That means every department, including the Department of Justice, has an IG that oversees them.
The Department of Justice includes the FBI.
So if someone is acting inappropriate from in the DOJ or the FBI, that IG can convene a grand jury and have that person arrested themselves.
Why no one has even asked the IG if there's any investigation going on to miss anyone acting out of order inside the FBI?
We have this guy, this stroke guy who seems to be all over the board.
I'd be curious to see if he's even part of the Petraeus investigation.
Where these same actors keep coming up and where they get this fake evidence, which they obviously had to use the fake dossier to get FISA warrants.
Now, when the transition team was given their computers and phones by the federal government, did that FISA warrant cover those computers and phones that transition team was given?
Probably.
Look, I just want to know if the phony Russian dossier with salacious lies in it that Hillary and Hillary's run DNC paid for, I want to know if that was used for the FISA warrant.
I want to know if, you know, this, I want to know how much James Comey wanted to pay them.
I wanted to know.
I want to know.
Look, we have so many questions.
I am now convinced that their house of cards is beginning the process of collapsing in spite of what you're hearing from your liberal media.
Anyway, I've got to run, Chris.
I wish I had more time.
Listen, Merry Christmas.
God bless you.
Appreciate the call.
All right, tonight, our Hannity investigation.
Why did Mueller hire all the pro-Clinton anti-Trump people to be involved in this witch hunt?
Tom Fitton, he has new information as a result of the Freedom Information Act.
Greg Jarrett, Charles McCullough, former Inspector General, Alan Dershowitz tonight, Pam Bondi tonight, and Dana Lash.
That's all coming up.
Hannity, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
Information you won't get anywhere.
Thanks for being with us.
We'll see you back here tomorrow.
See you tonight at night.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
