The Best of Sean Hannity hits for the holidays and sits down with Greta Van Susteren to discuss the importance of Social Media and her new book, "Everything You Need To Know about Social Media." Van Susteren continues with the future of her career after she has left MSNBC. Was she fired for her political beliefs? Sean thinks so... 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 at 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.
Look, I support the general thrust of what you and certainly Tesla are saying.
People were disenfranchised, but I want to go a step further tonight.
The entire Democratic Party stinks from the head down.
The whole process, everyone has really stained on their hands.
And with this new revelation tonight on the emails that it probably involved gross negligence, it strengthens my call and that of others for a special prosecutor to look at that, Comey, the gross negligence, to look at the email deal more generally, to look at Uranium One, the dossier, all of it.
Because at this point, what we know is getting more and more troubling.
I say this is a loyal Democrat.
I know Teslin's a loyal Democrat.
But as she said, and I would say, this is not partisan.
This is about preserving our democracy.
You know that this book is being used against the party.
Say it.
Well, I'm trying to say it.
You know, against everybody.
So, so, you know, people are upset, and you know, you understand.
So, so explain why you didn't realize people would take the idea of Hillary bailing out the party years before, or whenever she did it, as something that was bad and robbed Bernie of his ability to be president.
I mean, that's how, that's the message that is being put out in your name.
Well, first of all, I never used the word rigged in my book.
I said that I used the word cancer and that I was uncomfortable with the cancer that I found when I became chair.
Look, I was an officer.
I didn't know how deeply in debt our party was.
Okay, and when I learned that Hillary was bailing us out, I want to call that Secretary Hillary Clinton, but I also know it's Hillary because I have great affection and respect for him.
When I learned that Hillary was bailing our party out, giving us $3.5 million a month to keep us floating, I appreciated that.
But what I wanted control over, Whoopi, was that if I raise a dollar, $1.50, I wanted to spend my money without asking permission.
There are a lot of questions about this Russian dossier, and there are evidence that has come out that the DNC helped fund it.
Did you know that was happening, and were you surprised to hear it if you didn't?
I asked one question on November 4th, and I was told that I did not need to know, and so no, I did not know because I did not control my money.
But you're waxing poetic a lot up here about Russia and Russia's involvement in the election, which is deeply important to me.
But when you see that the DNC was funding it, I'm funding reasons for an advertisement.
So, Megan, Megan, you know campaigns.
So, the line item is called legal.
The line item is called research.
The line item, if you ask me today, because I have a list of all of the DNC consultants, do I see Fusion GPS?
No.
But if you ask me, was this a question that came up during my tenure as chair?
It did on November 4th.
Do you think it's wrong?
Do you think it sets a bad precedence to do legal research for opposition research?
I was not involved in the contracting.
I don't know.
Megan, I was not involved in the hiring of this firm.
I did not know about the existence of this contract.
But in terms of opposition research, people go after things that I must tell you in America, they go after dirt.
When they go after dirt, you saw what Trump Jr. did, but no, I did not go after it.
But just think it's wrong to go to Russia to ask for opposition reasons.
You're asking me about the dossier and how it was compiled.
I don't know how it was compiled.
I don't know who went after it, Megan.
All right, that was on the view today.
Man, pretty blockbuster stuff.
I was told I didn't need to know any of this.
And she goes, she actually had used the word rig, which, by the way, is somebody who's authored a book.
Let me tell you, by the time you finish your book and it actually gets published, you don't even remember it.
And I know it sounds weird, but it's true because it becomes such a painful act to be out there writing books.
Speaking of which, my friend and colleague, Greta Van Sustran, has a new book out, everything you need to know about social media without having to call a kid.
I want to talk about, you know what's funny about that?
Is I have to ask my daughter to download all of my apps.
That's not funny.
I don't think that's why are you mocking me?
Oh, are you listening to me, Sean?
Yes, of course.
How are you?
I'd say, of course I'm laughing at you, but you know what?
You're like everybody else.
I mean, that's the problem.
You know why I wrote this book?
It's because I thought I was asking a 25-year-old a rather sophisticated question, one of my nieces, about Instagram.
And I asked her the question, and her response was, seriously?
And I said, yes, I mean, seriously.
She said, you don't know that?
I said, actually, I don't know that.
And I used to change your diapers, so be nice to me.
No, it definitely.
It's amazing what they can do.
I mean, my son has been so crafty and so tricky.
You know, for example, he would play his game a lot, and he likes like Madden football, for example.
And the smartass son that he is.
So he knew every once in a while if I was getting sick and tired of him playing too much, I'd go in there and I'd grab the disc and I'd take it away and I thought I was ending his game.
And he didn't get mad because he had the whole thing downloaded in the machine, the whole thing.
Of course, of course.
But see, that's what the interesting thing about my book, people say, who's it for?
It says for everybody over 40 who thinks that he knows everything about social media or has any questions or wants to get started and just wants to understand it.
It's also for everybody under the age of 40 who's sick and tired of answering questions to those of us who are here.
It has less than 15 bucks.
You can't go wrong.
You really can't go wrong.
I actually, when I saw the title, I said, this is hilarious.
And by the way, it is a timely book and one that is necessary and needed for people like me.
How have you been lately?
I know you spent a little time over at MSNBC.
We met you at Fox.
How did that work out there?
How did that work out for me?
Well, I got fired.
But let me say this.
No, no, no.
I didn't mean that.
I didn't mean it that way.
I mean, I'm asking in a nice way, what happened?
No, I got fired you out, you jerk.
Yeah.
No, no, no.
I actually don't know what happened.
If it's not for a personal reason, I have an absolutely perfect personnel file.
The only thing in it is my contract.
It's not for the ratings because my show was up 94% overall in the show I replaced a year earlier and 92% in the demo.
And by the way, I replaced Mark Halperin's show.
And no one's ever suggested I did anything wrong, any bad behavior.
And nobody ever accused me of being unfair or not getting the facts right.
So the question is, why did I get fired?
I have my suspicions.
I would love to know that.
I can tell you.
Look, you've always been, and I've known you for years.
And obviously, everybody on TV and radio has different personalities.
Everybody does it differently.
But I always looked at you and your show as the curious show.
You would ask questions and you'd let people answer the questions.
I always love that about your show.
Now, I obviously have stronger political opinions, but your show provides a valuable service by saying, okay, well, explain this to me.
Explain that to me.
I mean, as a lawyer, you always had these deep, penetrating questions, and you weren't asking with any mouths or any agenda.
And people would answer or duck or dodge.
And if they tried to dodge, you usually go in two or three more times.
But I never got the sense where you are politically.
I honestly don't know where you stand politically.
It depends on the issue where I am politically.
But as for your question, but I think they didn't want anybody that wasn't hardcore conspiracy theory left-wing.
There's my answer.
Well, but the thing is, I was no surprise when they hired me.
I've been in the business 25 years.
I kept my side of the bargain.
And the only thing that I don't like is the fact that they let the narrative out there that it was somehow the ratings, but I had less than six months and my ratings were up 94% over the show that I replaced, when it just simply is not true.
That it was the ratings.
They let that narrative go out there.
The show was a successful one.
Viewers liked it.
I still get emails.
They liked it.
And all I wanted them to be fair to me.
I'll let the chips fall as they may, but they ought to be fair to me.
And so I'd love to know why I got fired.
You know, this business that we're in, more than people know, can really suck.
I mean, it has a dark side.
It's fun, though.
You know, well, we're very blessed.
You and I have discussed this many times together.
I mean, it's a blessing to do it, but I don't think people understand how much work goes into like three hours of radio and an hour of TV and grinding it out every day.
But it's my honor to do it.
It really is.
And like every other business, it's a service business.
I mean, I did all those blue-collar jobs all my life, and nobody said, thank you.
Can I have your autograph?
I don't view it as any different except that we're in the public eye.
And in that sense, you lose your anonymity, which I think a lot of people would probably like to keep their anonymity.
But, well, I'm sorry that happened, but I know you.
I mean, you can do whatever you want.
You'll write your own ticket.
I know you.
Sean, as long as I go out of a job, and I did go out of the job this way, is with my head high in that I always did my best, always tried to be fair.
I took the job very seriously and getting the facts for the American people.
I tried to call every fall as I saw it.
And frankly, that's why it's so stunning to me because it wasn't, you know, that.
Greta, you want me to sum it up for you?
You did not hate Donald Trump enough.
That was your problem.
You did not hate Donald Trump.
But you know what the problem is, though?
Is that that would be very bad because we're not supposed to tilt the news.
We're supposed to be honest.
Okay, have you ever watched that network?
They hate Donald Trump 24-7.
You were the one hour that didn't hate Donald Trump.
My job was always, as I saw, is to be responsible for my hour, to do my very best for the viewers.
I think you know in your heart.
And I'm only saying this, I think you know that I'm right.
I'd love to hear from them.
No, it's like, you know, it's like, I still don't understand.
There wasn't one criticism of me, and all of a sudden one day they called me in and fired me.
No, I'm sorry to hear that.
I really am.
And not even an explanation.
Listen, this is like what happens, though.
The explanation they put out there, though, is the thing that bothers me is the explanation they put out there is simply not true.
Well, you're too smart an attorney for them to be that stupid is all I would say on that front.
You're too good an attorney.
Yeah, I mean, if they said something that was factually inaccurate, I would imagine that's going to come back and hurt them.
Yeah, I try to walk out of there with my dignity and realize that, you know, I've been very lucky in this business, had some great jobs and great colleagues.
And I see that more as a reflection of others who might not want to be talking about than of me.
Let me move on.
I want to press your legal mind here.
What do you think of Donna Brazil saying Hillary stole the primary, basically, and had the fix in and rigged it?
All right, first of all, full disclosure, down on our front, we've been friends for years.
I've been listening to Donna's book since it got released today.
I'm about two hours into it.
Actually, I recommend if you're going to read the book that you actually download and listen to it because she reads it herself.
Donna is painfully honest.
People may disagree with her, but she's painfully honest.
And she paints a rather disturbing picture of the DNC and its financial situation.
And one way you can look at it is that the Clinton people were scrambling to try to rescue it and avoid the embarrassment that it was going under financially.
Or you can look at it the other way is that the Clinton administration was looking for an opportunity to control it.
They did it by controlling the money strings by bringing a lot of money into the DNC.
Take your pick how you want to explain it.
If I were Bernie Sanders, I'd be furious.
But then again, Bernie Sanders never wanted to be a Democrat.
He was always an independent president.
But Donna told him the truth and he did nothing.
I think that's what I'm saying.
You know who actually is more full disclosure is that John Cole, my husband, is friends with Martin O'Malley, former governor of Maryland, and that he's the one who should be angry because in politics, the way that you get your traction is through the debates.
And that's how you get name recognition, get a chance to show yourself off, raise money.
And it looked like, these are my words, the fix was in, that they had a limited number of debates.
Debbie Washington Schultz was close to Hillary in 2008.
And the thing is in Washington, is that they were controlling the number of debates so as to help her.
Unbelievable.
The fix was in with the superdelegates and everything that Donna says.
All right, stay right there.
Greta Van Sustran is with us.
Brand new book out, Everything You Need to Know About Social Media Without Having to Call a Kid.
Quick break, right back.
We'll continue.
As we continue, Greta Van Sustran with us, her brand new book, Everything You Need to Know About Social Media Without Having to Call a Kid.
Let me ask you some legal questions.
If there are emails that are subpoenaed, 33,000 of them, you know where I'm going.
Right.
And you delete them, acid wash, bleach pit them, and destroy the BlackBerries with hammers.
Is that a crime?
I think it is, but I'm not sure you have the facts exactly right, as I recall.
And I actually said this on the air when I was at the Fox News channel, is I think that Congress notified Clinton's lawyers in October, what they wanted them, I don't know if to preserve them, and then they destroyed them.
If I were Hillary Clinton's lawyer at that time, I never would have destroyed them.
And I've always thought that the lawyers would be in trouble in hot water with the bar because I felt enormously uncomfortable with the fact that as a lawyer, I never would have destroyed them.
So once I was notified by Congress, I don't know if it's a crime, but I think it's a bar problem.
Isn't it also an obstruction issue?
Because you obviously had the equivalent of Congress telling you to preserve these things.
You don't do it, and then you destroy it.
I don't know if you ever, I think at the U.S. Attorney's Head, I don't think if Congress notifies these unnecessary obstructions.
I don't know.
I can tell you one thing.
I don't know if it fits, you know, where it fits within a particular statute.
I can tell you I'm extremely uncomfortable with the idea because it's deceitful.
What did you think about effort to hide something?
The gross negligence statute that we see in early writings before Comey had basically exonerated her without even interviewing her or most of the witnesses.
And he had used the term gross negligence, which is the legal standard.
And we know that the Espionage Act says knowingly and willfully mishandling classified information.
I assume that would be putting it on a private server, which she told others in the State Department not to do, and then destroying those things.
And we know five foreign actors were able to access it.
Any of those ring as crimes to you?
I know you're referring to that the press conference, there's a press statement that Comey gave, I think it's late June or early July.
He used extreme recklessness of the earlier drafts.
And I'll tell you, I thought that made lawyers look bad because I thought it made no sense the way he was trying to sort of do the sort of the gymnastics around that.
I don't know what was going on in his mind.
I mean, it's just stunning to me the way he handled that.
I mean, that is not the way I would have handled it.
I don't even know why he made a statement.
I don't even know why they, I don't, even the sort of the weird thing later when he met with the attorney general at some point, or she called him, and they all wanted to get on the same page to get the right language as to how to refer to it.
Well, I mean, there's a lot of explaining that needs to be done here in my opinion.
I've got to let you go.
Well, not because I want to, but anyway, congratulations on the new book.
We're going to post it at Hannity.com.
Everything you need to know about social media without having to call a kid.
Greta Van Sustran.
Well, that thing.
I miss you, Sean.
We miss you too.
Anyway, we're proud of you.
You're doing amazing, and good luck with the book tour.
I know you're doing a lot of work with Franklin Graham, which I admire immensely.
Waiting to see my app.
Oh, I can't wait for the app.
Great.
The app's going to be fun.
That's the tease.
All right.
Thanks, Greta.
800-941, Sean.
We'll continue.
We know you never want to miss the Sean Hannity Show.
And now you never have to.
Just sign up for Hannity Headlines, a bite-sized version of the show that you can take with you on your laptop, your mobile phone, everywhere you go, even to your liberal-in-law's place in Vermont.
So, yeah.
And after a few hours of that, you'll be glad you brought Sean along.
To sign up today for Hannity Headlines, go to Hannity.com.
The Christopher Steele dossier, which is a controversial document for lots of reasons.
Quoting from that, though, a lot of it has been proven home.
Do you believe anything about that dossier?
Oh, I think it should be taken a look at.
I think they should really read it, understand it, analyze it, and determine what's fact, what may not be fact.
We already know that the part about the coverage that they have on him with sex actions is supposed to be true.
My focus today is to explore how many claims within Steele's dossier are looking more and more likely as though they are accurate.
The dossier definitely seems right on these points.
A quid-pro-quote relationship seems to exist between the Trump campaign and Putin's Russia.
There's a lot in the dossier that has yet to be proven, but increasingly, as we'll hear throughout the day, allegations are checking out.
The famous dossier, which is getting a lot more credibility now than it did.
Well, I think that's important, right?
That the dossier, right, which looks sort of out there at first, is getting truer and truer and truer as facts come out.
The Clinton campaign apparently conducted opposition research, as every campaign does, on their opponent.
They got back, apparently, this very salacious and now infamous dossier, which they never used.
In fact, didn't even reach the press until after the election was over.
They never used it.
What I have learned, I've heard about the dossier.
It's about his involvement with women.
It's about possibly prostitutes.
We were able to corroborate in our intelligence community assessment, which from other sources, in which we had very high confidence.
So, when the president just refers to the spake dossier, that is false.
I don't think that is an accurate characterization for the entirety of the dossier.
Jerry Kushner or anybody else who met with a Russian in the last year, he knows it all.
If he had a little excitement in some hotel room in Moscow, X many years ago, according to that dossier, he's got those pictures.
He's looked at them a million times.
That said, Wolf, we do want to hear from Christopher Steele.
So far, a lot of what he has alleged in the dossier has been proven.
We reported a number of weeks ago that the intelligence community had, in fact, confirmed some of the elements in the dossier, including the particular meetings and conversations detailed in the dossier took place in the places and at the times as described there.
So it directly contradicts the president, who has repeated from the beginning that the dossier, like many parts of the Russian investigation, is a hoax.
All right, 23 now till the top of the hour.
So there you have all these Democrats, all of them, going on and the media pushing the steele dossier.
Rachel Maddow, Maxime Waters, and Andre Carson, Chris Matthews, Paul Bogala, Donny Deutsch, you know, James Clapper, and it goes on from there.
Non-stop.
They just go with it.
They wanted to believe every salacious detail that was paid for, that was made up by the Russians.
Oh, I guess they're colluding to help get Hillary Clinton elected and impact the election.
And Hillary funded the whole entire thing.
Thor Halverson is with us, and he's the CEO of the New York-based Human Rights Foundation, and he's here to shed some light on Fusion GPS, with whom he had a previous interaction with and dealings with that were pretty much unspeakable.
He says they are smear artists, he said.
And what they've learned is if you want to kill an investigation, if you want to destroy a law enforcement investigation, go after the witnesses, go after the whistleblowers.
Wow, shocking.
Now, he also testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee in July of this year against Fusion GPS, which, of course, they're not going to testify before anybody, and they're fighting a congressional subpoena.
Thor, sir, welcome to the program.
Thanks for being with us.
Thank you for having me on your program, Sean.
All right, let's talk about what you know about Fusion GPS.
Tell us how you got involved, what you know, and what people need to know.
Sure.
Well, how I get into this was accidentally.
I was made aware of a massive government contract fraud that was taking place in the dictatorship of Venezuela.
In other words, someone gave me information about a theft, a theft of $3 billion that took place in the Chavez government in Venezuela.
So I took the information.
I thought it was outrageous.
A bunch of guys in their 20s were awarded power plant contracts to build these power plants in Venezuela.
And they built faulty power plants and walked off with the money.
So I figured I would write about this circumstance in the United States and alert the authorities in as much as the stolen Venezuelan money was being laundered through American banks.
Well, to make a long story short, the targets of my investigation, the people that I was blowing the whistle on, ended up hiring Fusion GPS.
They hired Fusion GPS to go after those of us who had been talking about this investigation, talking about this company, pointing out their crimes.
And what Fusion GPS did for them, in the case of four different people, they couldn't come up with anything tangible about us that was negative.
So they just simply made it up and they created these dossiers, pretty similar, each of these dossiers, making the same allegations over and over again.
Salacious allegations of outrageous conduct that range from extortion and rape to drug abuse and pedophilia.
And then they shopped these dossiers around to the media.
So whereas we are trying to expose a crime, they figured, here's what we'll do to eliminate the whistleblowers.
Here's what we'll do to go after them.
Let's create dossiers and accuse them of all sorts of horrible things.
I read Catherine Herridge's piece and Pam Brown's piece on Foxnews.com.
And, you know, what's amazing about this is that you're saying that they have a track record of intimidation and smear tactics, but it's beyond that because in your congressional testimony and your first-hand account here, you're saying that they labeled you a pedophile, an extortionist, a drug trafficker, because you criticized one of their clients.
Now, how do you know that they did all of this?
Okay, well, it starts off with the fact that their clients were being investigated by the Wall Street Journal.
As you know, the Wall Street Journal is a serious outfit.
They were doing an investigation.
They were writing a story.
The story was 4,000 words long.
How do I know the story was that long?
Because the reporter and I were in touch constantly.
We were sharing information.
I was telling him about what was going on.
Before you know it, the reporter was asked to visit Venezuela and meet with the men who he was writing about.
When he gets to Venezuela, into the conference room of these guys who stole billions of dollars, there's one of the partners of Fusion GPS sitting in the conference room.
He also happens to be formerly the bureau chief for Latin America for the Wall Street Journal.
In other words, the reporter walks into the room, and there's his former boss, who's now a partner at Fusion GPS, saying to him, all of these allegations are lies.
These are good men.
They're just excellent businessmen.
You know, they earned these billions and billions of dollars.
And you're being played.
Here's a dossier about the men who are feeding you information.
Don't ask me how I know that they are the ones feeding you information, but I do know that here's the dossier.
That's the first time I heard the word Fusion GPS.
When the Wall Street Journal says to me, I can't believe my former boss is working for them.
By the way, they gave me a file on you.
That's the first time I learned.
And of course, after that, I started learning more and more about them.
Did you get the file that they had made on you?
No.
The reporter read it to me.
I know what it contains, but he did not give me a copy.
I think the Wall Street Journal has internal.
I mean, because I think based on what you're saying that you'd have a lawsuit here if you just can't make up out a whole cloth that somebody is a pedophile, an extortionist and a drug trafficker.
I mean, you're you're.
You're in the right neighborhood.
I can't really tell you what I'm doing next, but let's just say that subsequent to this, the Wall Street Journal did nothing with this.
In fact, the reporter in the journal said, this stuff is hot air.
We're not going to pay any attention to it.
We're going to keep doing our story.
But then they kept shopping it around.
And Sean, they found an out-of-work journalist in Washington, D.C., someone who'd been dismissed from job after job by the name of Ken Silverstein.
They paid Ken Silverstein, and Ken Silverstein published it on a left-wing website, one of these fringe websites.
He published an article with these allegations in it, and then they paid, Fusion GPS paid, one of these SEO companies, the ones that focus on where things rank on a Google search, and they pushed the story way, way up so that when you Google my name, it's the first or second thing that pops up.
That's what Fusion GPS did.
By the way, a lot of people don't know.
You can do, there's a whole, there's a whole group of people you can pay to either bury stories on Google and Yahoo or put them up on top.
And there's, I guess, some particular methods that they use.
So what you're saying, that is true.
So what happened since this all happened to you?
I mean, what is your human rights group about, by the way?
What do you – I mean, do you work on issues involving – We focus on dictatorships.
We focus on the struggle against dictatorships, whether it's Cuba, North Korea, Russia, China, Venezuela, Angola.
Our goal is to do, is to enter that vacuum where the establishment organizations aren't really focused on.
A lot of them spend most of their time focusing on democracies like the U.S. Stay right there.
We'll have more with Thor Halverson is with us, and he is saying he's a victim of Fusion GPS.
We'll get more of his story on the other side of all of this as we continue here on the Sean Hannity show.
Welcome back as we continue.
Thor Halverson is with us.
Hey, Thor, how are you?
All right, so I want to get back to this.
Everybody in the media is going with the same talking point.
Well, a Republican, a GOP operative paid to begin the dossier on Trump.
And the fact of the matter is that person got out long before Steele, who made up all of these allegations by paying Russians about Donald Trump and the more salacious details.
So what they're saying isn't true.
This was, we now know that Hillary Clinton and the Democrats paid for the smear.
Right.
Her campaign paid for the whole smear.
So you're saying that this whole group, is that why they're unwilling to talk to Congress?
And I know that there's now they're trying to get into their bank accounts to find exactly where the money came from that led to the dossier that was used by the media and used by Democrats to try and impact this election, even though all of the information and the propaganda and the misinformation came from Russia.
Well, ask yourself, Sean, why did they admit to paying for the dossier?
They admitted to paying for the dossier because of the subpoena.
They want to get ahead of the subpoena and say, Judge, don't go forward and open the bank accounts of Fusion GPS because we don't need to know that anymore.
Because now they've fessed up and the DNC has claimed and the Hillary Clinton campaign that they paid for the dossier.
The reason why is very simple, Sean.
That bank information contains the information about payoffs to dozens of journalists inside and outside of the Beltway by Fusion GPS.
I am convinced that Fusion GPS is engaged in regular payola with journalists in order to ensure that some stories get coverage and some don't.
In addition, what that banking information contains is information about the criminal entities, most of them from abroad, that hire Fusion GPS to kill stories, to go after witnesses, to blow up concepts when the criminal entity is suffering or potentially going to get in trouble.
This is what happened in the Venezuela case.
Derwick Associates paid Fusion to end with the credibility of the witnesses and to obstruct justice.
Fusion GPS doesn't make a lot of money from its American clients.
It makes the bulk of its money from criminals abroad.
This is like the most unbelievable story I think I've ever heard.
It really is.
Well, you know, but and listen, I'm just going to say something, and this is on a personal level.
I mean, you have no recourse.
I'm a public figure.
I'm on radio three hours a day, TV one hour a day.
And when people lie about me, the standard is so high that I actually, I have to prove that what they're saying was actual malice.
And to get there, it is such a high legal bar.
It's nearly impossible.
So if you're a public figure, they can pretty much say anything, and they do say anything they want.
And I've just finally just compartmentalized in my mind that, okay, this is my chosen profession.
I didn't think that this was going to be a part of it.
But people telling lies about me on a regular basis is just part and parcel of what I now have happening in my life.
Well, and you know this better than anyone.
Even though they're lies, it still hurts.
It's still nasty when family members and whatnot look at this stuff and say, of course it is.
They don't mean what they're saying.
And yet they get away with it.
They get away with it.
You know, it was really, you know, despite the fact that Fusion GPS did this and hired this loser, Ken Silverstein, to write about it.
The fact is that it felt really good to know that there's a collection of us that are being the targets of Fusion GPS because finally these accusations can be explained.
Finally, you know, whether it's William Browder, myself, or in this case, President Trump can say, look, there's a pattern here.
It's the same company engaged in the same behavior again and again.
These are former journalists who lost their way and decided we will do anything for money.
They don't care about the truth.
They care about making money, which is why they work for criminals.
So I'm just assuming.
I'm not going to engage in this.
I'm assuming you're going to do a lawsuit.
Well, look, a lawsuit's going to cost millions of dollars.
And suing this person's daughter.
All right, I've got to break it.
Thor, come back and tell us more as you get more information on it.
And we'll let people decide on their own.
And I could tell you, smear campaigns against conservatives are just part of our everyday business.
It's unbelievable.
It's like a – and by the way, they're well-funded.
All those people.
I come from poor people.
And I've been here working my whole stinking career for people who don't have a chance.
And I really resent anybody saying that I'm just doing this for the rich.
Give me a break.
I think you guys overplay that all the time, and it gets old.
And frankly, you ought to quit it.
Mr. Chairman, the public item is just I'm not through.
Okay.
I get kind of sick and tired of it.
Not true.
It's a nice political play.
Well, Mr. Chairman.
With all due respect, I get sick and tired of the richest.
Regular order, Mr. Chairman.
Getting richer in.
Regular order.
Richard Order.
We do a tax.
Regular order.
Middle class.
Regular order.
And over and over again.
How many times do we do this before we learn this?
Listen, I've honored you by allowing you to spout off here.
And what you said was not right.
That's all I'm saying.
I come from the lower middle class originally.
We didn't have anything.
So don't spew that stuff on me.
I get a little tired of that crap.
And let me just say something.
If you didn't, if we'd worked together, we could pull this country out of every mess it's in.
And we could do a lot of the things that you're talking about, too.
And I think I've got a reputation of having worked together with them.
But start with Chip.
Not starting with Chip.
I've done it for years.
I've got more bills.
Start with Chip today?
I've got more bills passed than everybody on this committee put together.
And they've been passed for the benefit of people in this country.
Now, all I can say is I like you personally very much, but I'm telling you, this bull crap that you guys throw out here really gets old after a while.
To do it right at the end of this was just not right.
And I just, it takes a lot to get me worked up like this on the roll.
Remember when Democrats knew cutting taxes creates jobs?
Every dollar released from taxation that is spent or invested will help create a new job and a new salary.
And these new jobs and new salaries can create other jobs and other salaries.
Do the Democrats in Congress today really like writing welfare checks more than creating paychecks?
A JFK Trump tax cut will create jobs for America.
I've got to say, this is nothing short of extraordinary.
Let me just tell you, getting 218 members to agree on something as complicated as the most.
Well, we needed 218.
Okay, let me rephrase it.
Getting 227 members to agree on something as complicated.
This country has not rewritten its tax code since 1986.
The powers of the status quo in this town are so strong.
Yet 227 men and women of this Congress broke through that today.
That is powerful.
Of course, I want to thank not just the members who made this possible today.
I want to thank the president.
I want to thank his administration.
I want to thank our partners in the Senate who are doing their work as well.
You will admit now, for the sake of this discussion, that some Americans under this Republican plan will be paying more in taxes.
Correct?
There will be people who make more than a million dollars in high-tax states that will be paying more.
And as the president has said, this is not a tax plan to cut taxes for rich people.
This is a tax plan to make businesses competitive and give middle-income taxpayers.
When I hear that M-word, I think it's code, you know, and I'm used to hearing it from the left for many years.
I think you are as well.
I think you would admit that.
But this is a Republican majority in the House and in the Senate and the White House.
And you're admitting that for some Americans, they will pay more in taxes.
Well, but again, is this what the American people have waited a generation for?
Again, just to be clear, what we're doing is getting rid of the state and local tax deduction, which is a loophole for high-tax states.
That's the reason why New York, California, and others have taxes as high as they are, because the federal government is subsidizing those taxes.
And for most Americans, the vast number of Americans that don't have high-tax states, it's not fair that they're subsidizing a few states.
So again, the people's taxes who are going to go up are the rich people in high-tax states.
But again, there's a lot of benefit to the New York economy of lowering the corporate rate to 20%.
That's a huge boom for the financial services industry.
They can hire more people.
They can pay more people.
They can create more jobs.
All right, our two Sean Hannity show toll-free.
Our number is 800-941.
Sean, you want to be a part of the program?
I have known Arn Hatch for all these years.
I don't think I've ever heard him that animated ever because it is an absolute lie that this bill that they're going to hopefully pass in the Senate, the Republican bill, has anything of any benefit to anybody that is, quote, rich.
That is one of my biggest complaints about Republicans, that you have 20% of Americans that pay most of the taxes in this country.
50% paid no federal income taxes.
None.
Zero.
So we have redistribution.
Now, if you believe in supply-side conservative economics, Reaganomics, which I have always believed in and continue to believe in, I would argue that the Republicans have abandoned that.
And while what they're doing on the corporate side is phenomenal.
Middle-class tax cuts is phenomenal.
Repatriation is phenomenal.
When they passed, you know, drilling in ANWAR and energy independent, that's phenomenal for economic growth, the engine of economic growth that will get people off of food stamps, out of poverty, and back to work.
What this election was really all about.
You know, we spend an inordinate amount of time against the never-ending attacks against the president, but this is what's going to make the difference on top of the growth that we've already gotten because of the end of burdensome regulation that the president did on his own.
Anyway, here to weigh in on all of this, Larry Kudlow, CNBC host, former Reagan administration economist, author of the new book.
It's a must-read if you want to understand economics, Reaganomics, the supply-sized conservative argument of how to create growth in the economy, the JFK and Reagan Revolution, A Secret History of American Prosperity.
Also, Stephen Moore is with us, Distinguished Visiting Fellow for Project for Economic Growth at the Heritage Foundation.
Gentlemen, welcome back, both of you, to the program.
Hi, Sean.
Larry, when you were on last time, we both agreed this is great in terms of the corporate tax cut, the repatriation, the push towards energy independence, the end of burdensome regulations.
But any notion that this is a tax cut for the wealthy is just patently false.
I agree.
I would only add the immediate expensing for new buildings and technology.
But I thought your intro was great.
You have the story late.
The growth, we're going to get good growth from this, and we're going to get it from the business side.
Steve Moore and I, among others, drafted this back in the campaign.
Ironically, it's still holding up.
My biggest disappointment is the top rate wasn't lowered.
Trump just said he wanted to go to 35.
That's where we were originally.
But one quickie, Sean: your take on Oren Hatch: every single Republican, every single Republican should listen to Oren Hatch fighting back against class warfare.
Everybody should hear that.
We've all known Orrin many, many years.
He is a supply sider.
And all I can say is good for him.
Don't let the left Mau Mau him and push him back.
And what you need for this country, you need growth, and that growth will benefit Sean.
Everybody, everybody will benefit from growth.
Well, that's the whole point.
I mean, the reason I support the bill has nothing to do with me individually because I'm going to end up paying a lot more in this bill.
What frustrates me is that my argument, Steve Moore, welcome back, is that the Republicans have the stomach for what Aaron was arguing yesterday.
They don't have the stomach to say this is a tax cut for the rich and explain to people that if you cut taxes across the board, Reagan doubled the revenues to the government.
Reagan helped create 21 million new jobs.
We had, till that point, the longest period of peacetime economic growth.
Everything that happened with JFK and Reagan that Larry writes about works.
And I think as it relates to cutting top rates, Republicans don't have the stomach for the fight.
Am I wrong?
Well, look, I think this is a pretty darn good bill the Republicans passed yesterday.
I mean, I have some reservations as you do and as Larry does, but my goodness, this was a pretty historic day for Congress to pass the biggest tax cut since Reagan.
It's about time.
Shame on the Democrats, by the way, Sean.
Shame on the Democratic.
Not a single Democrat in the United States House of Representatives voted to cut taxes on American families and American businesses.
I mean, I'm just disgusted by that, you know, by the Democratic Party and how far they have moved to the left.
I think there are a lot of good things in here.
I agree with Larry that the heart and soul of the growth comes from reducing our business taxes.
And it's very simple, Sean.
You know, if you look at those people, you know, you were talking about in the top 5% of income, those are people, you know what they do for a living, Sean?
They own, operate, and invest in small businesses.
Now, as my old boss, Dick Army, used to say, you know, liberals love jobs, but they hate employers.
You can't have jobs and good-paying jobs unless you've got healthy employers who are making money and reinvesting that money in the business.
And so I think this will do a world of good for the economy.
And I just want one other quick thing, Sean.
I am so proud of the Republicans for putting in this bill.
I hope it remains getting rid of this individual mandate under Obamacare, because by the way, that's a tax increase.
That initiative in Obamacare is a tax on low-income people.
Nevercasts don't want to get rid of that either.
Let me ask, you know, we have a different version in the Senate, and then eventually they'll try and reconcile all of this, and then hopefully it ends up on the president's desk.
Larry, talk about the differences you see in the bills and what you would like to see in the final product.
Well, actually, the House bill is more front-loaded, and I like that a lot.
I think the Senate is making a mistake holding back the corporate tax cut to 20% to 2019.
I think that's a mistake.
And the House bill gets all that stuff started in the early years.
So that's something.
I think the pass-through of small business subchapter-esque companies should get a bigger tax break.
I'd like to see that.
Ron Johnson is making the case.
But I think they should get a bigger tax break, although it's been improved somewhat.
I would have had much larger marginal rate cuts for individuals.
I guess that's not going to happen.
It's too bad.
You know, real Reagan-style tax reforms, Sean, is slashing the personal rate.
I mean, slashing.
And then you don't need the deduction so you can take it away.
What they're arguing about now, because there was no slashing of marginal rates, three percentage points at the bottom, the deductions are more painful.
And they're going to have to work out the small deductions.
But you know, you see people like Darrell Issa.
Listen, I can sympathize with Darrell Lisa, voted against the bill because, you know, it's not his fault that the people of California elected a governor that put the state income tax at 13.5%.
And the same goes for New York and for New Jersey and for Illinois.
And all these liberal states now have a little reckoning, and maybe they'll hold their local governors and legislators accountable for raising taxes as high as they do and as often as they do.
You know, you're so right about that, Sean.
I mean, if you look at, if you compare, you know, Texas and Florida with New York and California, I mean, in New York and California, the highest income tax rate is now about 13.5%.
It's zero in Texas and Florida.
You know, you've got states like New York and New Jersey, Sean, right now that spend almost twice as much per person on state and local government spending as, say, a state like Tennessee and New Hampshire.
So why should people in Tennessee and New Hampshire be subsidizing 40% of the flabby government in New York and California, the pension costs, all of this stuff?
So I like that feature of this bill.
I think it's a long time.
I mean, I wish Reagan had done this.
He tried to do it in 86, and Republicans are finishing his agenda here of closing that loophole in the tax code that I think is just not fair for people who live in low-tax states to have to pay for high-tax states.
So well said.
I mean, and the ways they're being punished, I stay right there.
We'll continue.
Steve Moore, Larry Kudlow, 800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of this extravaganza.
Luke Roziak, the investigative reporter from the Daily Caller, will join us the next half hour as we have updates on W. Wasserman Schultz that you need to know.
Quick break, right back.
We'll continue.
As we continue, Larry Kudlow and Steve Moore are with us.
We're talking about the House.
And you've got to give the House credit.
The House has passed 300 bills that have not been even picked up by the Senate.
The House passed their health care bill.
I got to give them credit for that.
I assume if the Senate doesn't get this done, it will impact everybody politically, both House and Senate.
But I don't think it would be fair.
I think it's up to the Senate to keep their promises.
Larry Kudlow.
You know, Sean and Steve, I think the senators will do it.
I spoke at the Republican Senate breakfast 10 days ago.
Their demeanor, their whole attitude is: we are going to get this done.
We are going to get this done.
This is different than healthcare.
Steve and I were talking earlier about this.
There may not even be a conference.
If the Senate writes a bill, they're not that far apart.
The Senate writes a good bill, gets it through the floor.
You don't need a conference.
That'll take things.
They can get it done before Christmas.
One little glitch, Sean.
This whole Alabama business, and God knows what's going to happen there.
If Moore loses, you'll have a Democrat.
All right.
That could hurt the vote.
If Moore wins, you'll have a Republican, but he said he's opposed to the tax bill.
So it's baffling to me.
Be better to get this whole thing done before December 12th election down there.
What do you think, Steve Moore, politically?
Yeah, I think they're going to get it done too.
I think Larry's exactly right.
And, you know, as Larry just said, he and I worked with Donald Trump during the campaign to put the framework of this together.
And look, I think it's about 80% of what Donald Trump originally asked for.
I would have liked 100%, but we got most of what we wanted out of this.
And I just want to say one other thing because it's so important, Sean.
I mean, getting rid of the individual mandate on Obamacare will cause the unraveling of Obamacare because people don't want it.
They keep saying all these people are going to lose their health insurance.
These are people, these are 13 million people who don't want Obamacare, can't afford it.
And if you don't have to stick a metaphorical gun at their head and force them to buy it, they don't want it.
So I think that's a great thing.
I think we're going to get this is going to settle Obamacare and give us the biggest tax cut.
That's a big deal.
All right.
I'm going to have to leave it there.
Thank you both, Steve Moore.
Thank you, Larry Kudlow.
We appreciate it.
800-941 Sean is a number.
You want to be a part of the program.
A lot more coming up.
Luke Roziak, investigative reporter for the Daily Caller, is next.
We have my favorite guest of all time.
He's more fun and is going to make your holiday so fun that you don't want to miss John McLemore coming up.
Peter Schweitzer also at the top of the hour, straight ahead.
Congratulations, you five ladies no longer have to pretend to be attracted to Harvey Weinstein.
Do you have any advice for a young girl moving to Hollywood?
I'll get lively.
Harvey Weinstein invites you to a private party and it's horse season.
You're here of your own free will.
Has someone coerced you into being here?
Do you count Harvey Weinstein as a coercer?
Now, Harvey Weinstein is a, I don't know whether he's in some kind of organized crime now.
Yeah.
And in return, what will Harvey do for you?
Nothing.
Really?
Well, what's wrong with that equation?
I'm not afraid of anyone in show business.
I turned down intercourse with Harvey Weinstein on no less than three occasions out of five.
All right, that music can only mean one thing.
Twenty-five now till the top of the hour.
800-941 Sean, toll-free telephone number.
We'll get to Katie Hopkins, the gobby one, in just a second here.
All right, so here's what has come out today.
First, broken by Breitbart.com, and because they knew that this Washington Post piece was coming out, and their headline is: After endorsing the Democrat in Alabama, Bezos, Washington Post, you know, Bezos owns the Washington Post, for those of you who don't know, plans to hit Roy Moore with allegations of inappropriate relations with teenagers.
Judge claims it's a smear campaign.
Now, I'll go back and I'll give you the specifics of all of this.
But anyway, it goes on.
And the Washington Post headline is: Woman says Roy Moore initiated sexual encounter when she was 14 and he was 32, just a shy of 40 years ago, 40 years ago.
Anyway, and it goes on to tell the story about how 1979 that Moore, who's now the Republican nominee in Alabama for the U.S. Senate seat, was a 32-year-old assistant district attorney.
Struck up a conversation with a girl and her mother, offered to watch the girl while her mother went inside for a child custody hearing.
And he said, Oh, you don't want to go in there and hear all that.
I'll just stay out here with her.
He said, Anyway, so the mother says, Well, I thought how nice for him to want to take care of my little girl.
Now, alone, Moore chatted with the girl, they go on to say, asked for her phone number.
Days later, he picked her up around the corner from her house in Gadsden, Alabama, drove her about 30 minutes to his home in the woods, told her how pretty she was and kissed her.
On a second visit, she says he took her shirt and her pants and removed his clothes.
He touched her brawn and underpants and guided her hand to touch him all over his underwear.
Remember, we're going back 40 years ago.
And I want it over with.
I want it out, she remembers thinking, Please just get this over with.
Whatever this is, just get it over.
Now, two apparent friends of this childhood childhood friends said that she told them at the time that she was seeing an older man.
And one says that she identified the man as Judge Moore.
Anyway, it goes on to say that her daughter told her about the encounter more than a decade later when Moore was becoming a more prominent as a local judge.
Now, they then go on to talk about other people, and they talk about specific allegations that one was a 17 years old.
Moore spoke to her high school civic class, asked her out on the first of several dates that did not go beyond the progress of kissing.
All right, then another girl says she was 18 years old, a cheerleader when Moore began taking her on dates, including, you know, bottles of Matus Rose wine.
The legal age was one year old or 19 in Alabama.
Of the four women, the youngest was the woman that's making this sexual allegation and accusation.
And then it goes on: Roy Moore says this: These allegations are completely false and are a desperate political attack by the National Democratic Party in the Washington Post on this campaign.
Moore is now 70.
This allegedly happened when Moore was 32 years old.
And then he goes on to say that the campaign said in a subsequent statement that this garbage is the very definition of fake news.
All right.
Now, as we came into this segment, we were playing all of these people in Hollywood that knew of Weinstein's reputation.
Now, all of this is now, it's sort of like a cascading impact.
We've talked about the casting couch, we've talked about, you know, young girls want to get into modeling or music or the TV industry.
And I said that, and I said, this is only the beginning.
And how right I was.
Since that, let's see, you have Jeff Bezos of Amazon Studio Head, the guy that worked for him, Roy Price, a victim was a TV producer.
Kevin Spacey, all the allegations we've heard about him.
You had the National Inquirer picked up all over the country yesterday that Charlie Sheen had, in fact, raped Corey Haym, who later committed suicide.
Then you got Ben Afflack, Ben Afflack in his particular case, two specific allegations against him.
Then there were allegations against Dustin Hoffman that go back to 1985.
Then you got Jeremy Piven.
Then you got the case of Roman Polanski.
And because I just wondered, everyone knew about Weinstein, they didn't care.
Roman Polanski was accused of plying a 13-year-old girl with alcohol and quales and raping her.
Listen to this.
Goes for Roman Polanski, for the pianist.
And that was the reaction when the guy that has been living abroad and avoiding justice in America got his Academy Award.
That's Hollywood's reaction.
Accused of a 13-year-old girl.
Anyway, here's some really, you know, fascinating questions.
How do you know if it's true?
How do we, what's true?
What's not true?
How do you ascertain the truth?
What happens when it's 38 years later?
And it's a serious topic.
And because if it's true and people act like this, it's disgusting.
It's despicable.
It's criminal.
If people, you know, some people, do people lie?
Now, we do have 10 commandments.
One of the commandments is thou shalt not bear false witness.
We know human beings break with regularity the other nine commandments.
Do they break this one?
I mean, it's something to think about.
Why is it so bad?
Because you can ruin somebody's reputation with an allegation.
Katie Hopkins is with us of the Daily Mail across the pond.
I mean, you're always outspoken.
How do you tell, how are we, the American people, to ascertain what is true and not true?
It's starting to be an impossible question, isn't it, that doesn't have an answer.
But what I would say is that women, and I am loosely a woman, women have never been so disappointing.
Like, the idea to me that someone comes out, what is it, 38 years later, allegedly, and is suddenly remembering how terribly traumatized she was.
If she was stood right next to me now, I would be saying to her, that's not good enough.
You've taken this many years to remember how upset you used to be.
That is not good enough.
You are disappointing as a woman.
I can't believe in an era where, you know, I watched the pussy marches after Trump's inauguration, marching through the street, how strong women were, all their banners about how strong they are, how their bits and bobs are made of steel.
We are so tough.
If you're that tough, women, then why aren't you at some point standing up for yourself?
We've got British politicians here.
But, Katie, listen, I love you to death.
I'm going to tell you what people are going to say to you, feminists in particular.
Are you blaming the victim?
Are you doubting the victim?
That's what people are going to say.
Yeah.
And immediately, when people say, oh my God, you're victim blaming, you're victim blaming.
Immediately, you're supposed to lie down, quake in your boots, like when people throw the term racist about, you know, at me for no reason.
You're supposed to lie down and go, no, of course I'm not victim blaming.
Well, guess what?
Actually, yes, I am at this point.
I am pointing the finger straight at.
Let's just pick this one woman that's been talking about with Roy Moore allegedly.
You know, I am pointing my finger at her, and I'm saying to that woman, you disgust me.
You spent 38 years thinking about this before you said anything.
Now you decide to speak.
You disgust me because what you're doing, woman, is you're making it so that every other woman like me who likes working with men, who's happy just cracking on next to men, who actually finds men rather better to work for than women because the sisterhood doesn't exist.
You're making women poison to work for.
If I was employing someone now, would I employ a woman, especially if I was a man?
No, I would not.
And women like this do women like me a massive disservice.
I am sick.
And I'm sick of all of the Hollywood lot coming out and, you know, screaming about Weinstein after the event.
You took his Oscar.
Let me just take the other side of this for a second.
You know, listen, if any woman is abused, there is a violation.
I think it's violence more than it is, you know, when people say, I don't want to get into definitions here.
Yeah, of course.
But there are predator people out there.
There are evil people.
And maybe for years there was a stigma associated with telling the truth.
And maybe, you know what?
Maybe people now feel emboldened because some women have told the truth.
But then also, you know, are there false allegations?
And when it's he said, she said, or whatever, how do you tell the difference?
You know what I mean?
I mean, because I actually, in all these cases, I'm sure some of these women are telling the truth.
But how do we determine who are and who aren't?
And in an age where we cannot, we have to, I think, maybe get to a point where we cannot determine initially who's telling the truth, who isn't, who's been deceived, who's being manipulated by the Democrats or otherwise.
What we, I think, need to do and what we perhaps can do is agree that due process has to be followed so that people are innocent and less proven guilty.
And what we've just had in the UK in the last 24 hours, because we're seeing exactly the same pattern happening over here as you have there, we've just had an MP.
He was hauled in.
He's a Welsh MP.
Hauled in.
He was told about the nature of allegations against him, which were unwarranted, no, sorry, unwanted attention or groping.
He wasn't told what they specifically were.
And within 12 hours, that man was dead because he has a wife and two children.
And he killed himself because of the shame and the pressure and not knowing what the charges were.
And yet he was already seen as guilty before he'd even had a chance to defend himself.
And that's what concerns me is we're going to see more people lose their lives, I think, because this sort of thing is so all-pervasive and we can't tell who's lying and who isn't.
And the mob just decides that people are guilty as soon as they hear an allegation made.
I think that's a terrifying thing.
I got to take a break.
We'll come back.
The gobby one, Katie Hopkins is with us.
All right, as we continue, Katie Hopkins is with us, the gobby one from the Daily Mail.
Is it more credible when there's a series of people making allegations?
Like, for example, as I read the Washington Post piece, you know, one girl was 17, one girl was 18.
Neither said that there was anything other than him asking them out on dates and kissing them.
That's as far as it went in those cases.
So I think they included that to make the original allegation from nearly 40 years ago bigger.
And I think there's no doubt that the Washington Post has an agenda.
One has to ask, why didn't this come out during a primary campaign?
Judge Moore has been one of the most controversial figures in Alabama for years.
Years.
Of course.
Of course, he was on our news here in the UK with them portraying him in exactly the same way last night.
Very biased across our media, the portrayal of Roy Moore, very biased in terms of what he's going to bring, that he's an extreme version of Trump.
That's the messaging that's being played out on this side of the Atlantic.
I don't think it makes it any more credible when you get multiple stories coming out about the same person.
I think credibility for me is women that report things within a week, two weeks, a month, or when they found the time and effort and energy and support to report something.
That's credibility for me.
If you reported the incident when it happened, do you not give any credence to the idea that this is such a horrific act of evil violence and so traumatizes people that they live in fear?
They live in fear of, you know, A, how they don't want people to know this horrible thing happened to them.
So they bottle it up.
They keep it up inside.
And then fear that they're not going to be believed, fear that they're going to be blamed.
I mean, I think there's legitimate reasons why, you know, and personal reasons why women wait.
I hear you, Sean, and you're kind, and you're...
No, I'm...
I want to get to truth, and sometimes...
Yeah, well, okay.
But I think we spend too much time talking about, you know, these women feel this or these women feel ashamed.
These women feel this.
You know, speaking as someone who's played the system, Sean, I am, you know, my moral bar, as we both know, is very low.
I have exchanged at times my youth when I was younger, my whatever I had back then, I exchanged that for power sometimes.
Women make exchanges winningly.
Now, you might go back and try and make that the man's fault.
You know, I've worked in multiple offices where very old, unattractive men are dating the most attractive woman in the marketing department.
And that actually is a willing exchange between those two individuals.
I think the idea that somehow it's always men preying on women, women are very calculating.
Women are very determined about what they want.
And women are not weak.
This idea that we're all massive victims, I think that's what I find so offensive about this.
This is setting women back decades because it makes us sound like we can't stand up for ourselves.
We've got politicians here.
We managed to get our defense, our Secretary of Defense, Michael Fallon, has left his job in the cabinet because he touched someone's knee.
If that's me, I'd be getting my other knee and kneeing him right where the sun don't shine and saying do that again and I'll just do that again.
You know, women are, it's just, it's desperate to me that women are portraying themselves as victims, as weak, as defenseless, as vulnerable.
And I just am sick of it.
And I understand your kind point, which is that there are real victims out there.
But then, you know what, Sean, what really annoys me, all these feminists, they never have one word to say about the victims of Muslim grooming gangs because it's not politically correct to talk about that.
So it seems that some victims matter more than others.
And that partly is fueling my anger at these women who look for sympathy now 30, 40 years later.
All right.
I'm going to have to let this.
So I honestly think that this is just the beginning of what's going to be a cascading impact.
And we're going to have to try and sort this out and get to truth.
That's my goal in all of this.
Katie, we always love having you on.
Thank you for being with us.
800-941-Sean Tolfreak telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
News Roundup.
Information overload hour coming up at the top of the hour.
We'll get back into this.
Jonathan Gillam, Geraldo Rivera.
We have the latest on what's happening with the dossier in Uranium One, Sarah Carter, Victoria Tunsing.
Straight ahead.
The FBI pay Christopher Steele, the author of the dossier?
Those are matters you'll have to direct to the, I think maybe the special counsel.
We know the author was Christopher Steele.
It's been reported that he was on the payroll of the FBI.
I'm just wanting to know if, in fact, that is the case.
I'm not able to provide an answer to you.
Did the FBI present the dossier to the FISA court?
I'm not able to answer that.
Do you know if the FBI did the established process protocol in evaluating claims made in the dossier?
I'm not able to answer that.
On January 6th, then FBI Director James Comey briefed President-elect Trump up in New York about the dossier.
Shortly thereafter, the fact that that meeting took place and the subject of the meeting was the dossier was leaked to CNN.
Do you know who leaked that information?
I do not.
Are you investigating who leaked that information?
That would be a matter within the investigatory powers of the special counsel.
You said you've got a number of investigations going on, Mr. Attorney General, regarding leaks.
Is that likely one of those that you're investigating?
I'm not able to reveal the existence of investigations or not.
But my concern is we sent you a letter three and a half months ago asking for a second special counsel.
And if you're now just considering it, what's it going to take to get a special counsel?
We know that former FBI Director James Comey misled the American people in the summer of 2016 when he called the Clinton investigation a matter.
It's obviously an investigation.
We know FBI Director Comey was drafting an exoneration letter before the investigation was complete.
We know Loretta Lynch, one day before the Benghazi report came out, five days before Secretary Clinton was scheduled to be interviewed by the FBI, met with former President Bill Clinton on a tarmac in Phoenix.
We know after that meeting, when she was corresponding with public relations people, the Justice Department, she was using the name Elizabeth Carlisle.
You know, as I've said before, it seems to me if you're just talking golf and grandkids, you can probably use your real name.
We know that Mr. Comey publicized the investigation, and we know he made the final decision on whether to prosecute or not.
And then when he gets fired, he leaks a government document through a friend to the New York Times.
And what was his goal?
To create momentum for a special counsel.
And of course, it can't just be any special counsel.
It's got to be Bob Knuller, his best friend, his predecessor, his mentor.
The same Bob Muller, who was involved, we've now learned in this whole investigation with the informant regarding Russian businesses wanting to do business in the uranium business here in the United States regarding the uranium one deal.
So I guess my main question is: what's it going to take, if all that, not to mention the dossier information, what's it going to take to actually get a special counsel?
It would take a factual basis that meets the standards of the appointment of a special counsel.
And is that analysis going on right now?
Well, it's in the manual of the Department of Justice about what's required.
We've only had two.
The first one was the Waco, Janet Reno, Senator Danforth, who took over that investigation, the special counsel, and Mr. Mueller.
Each of those are pretty special, factual situations.
Well, I appreciate that.
have your idea, but sometime we have to study what the facts are and to evaluate whether it meets the standard that requires a special counsel.
Well, we know one fact.
We know the Clinton campaign, the Democrat National Committee paid for, through the law firm, paid for the dossier.
We know that happened.
And it sure looks like the FBI was paying the author of that document.
And it sure looks like a major political party was working with the federal government to then turn an opposition research document, the equivalent of some national inquirer story, into an intelligence document, take that to the FISA court so that they could then get a warrant to spy on Americans associated with President Trump's campaign.
That's what it looks like.
And I'm asking you, doesn't that warrant, in addition to all the things we know about James Comey in 2016, doesn't that warrant naming a second special counsel, as 20 members of this committee wrote you three and a half months ago asking you to do?
Well, Mr. Comey is no longer the director of the FBI.
Thank goodness.
We have an excellent man of integrity and ability and Chris Wray, and I think he's going to do an outstanding job.
And I'm very happy.
He's not here today, Attorney General.
And I'm asking for a special time.
I would say it looks like is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel.
All right, that's from yesterday's hearing.
Congressman Jim Jordan is going to join us in a minute to discuss that exchange with the Attorney General.
Joining us now, though, in the meantime, is Congressman Andy Biggs is with us.
Andy, how are you?
Welcome back to the program.
What did you think of that exchange?
Well, I think that, first of all, thanks for having me.
But I think that I was a little bit disappointed because I think what Jim Jordan was talking about when he said it looks like this, it looks like that.
What he was doing is he was laying out the factual basis for probable cause of a crime or multiple crimes that have been committed.
And if that is the case, which I think it is, then the Attorney General at that point, when he says, well, we're going to look at it on the factual basis, well, you've had it for months and months and months.
You should be appointing a special counsel.
That's the position I took yesterday when I heard that.
That's why my questioning went the way it did.
And I didn't get that from Attorney General Sessions, who I think is a good man, but here he can't defer to his second in command, who is Rod Rosenstein, for Pete's sakes.
He can't do that.
He has got to make the tough decision.
That tough decision is we need a special counsel to investigate this whole series, this litany of corruption.
And what I've said is the scandal of our time.
He needs to appoint someone.
Well, listen, I think so too.
But I'm also being told, and I'm kind of getting very strong feedback that, in fact, there is an ongoing investigation that he never recused himself from Uranium One or the whole issue as it involves fusion GPS.
And he was asked specifically yesterday by John Conyers, you know, about the issue of whether he's recused himself of the investigations involving Hillary.
He said he couldn't answer that.
He said he didn't recall talking about George Papadopoulos, by the way.
He said he can't answer if recusal impacts investigation into fusion GPS or Uranium One.
The man that was questioning him so in a tough way yesterday is Jim Jordan of Ohio, Freedom Caucus, of course.
How are you, sir?
I'm doing fine, Sean.
Good to be with you.
All right, let's talk about what did you think of those answers?
Well, I mean, I think maybe the most telling part was when Matt Gage asked him a few questions too in particular.
He said, are you recused from the Uranium One issue?
And he said no.
And then later in this, in the question, later in that five minutes, he was asked the same question.
He says, I don't know.
So that's the point.
We don't know what Jeff Sessions is recused from, what he isn't.
We do know Bob Mueller is inherently compromised on the Uranium One issue.
So I would prefer we didn't have to name a special counsel.
But I don't see how you can avoid it.
Logic says if the Attorney General doesn't know what he's recused from or what he isn't, and if Bob Mueller is inherently compromised, we're not going to get the answers to all those things Andy just talked about unless we have a special counsel.
And if it's someone with inside the department, right now, no one will believe what those investigations produce because, oh, did Jeff Sessions appoint this guy?
Or was it a career person?
So the only way to get this done, and I think done in a way that Americans will accept the verdict or accept the findings of the investigation, is to have a special counsel.
Well, I agree with you on the special counsel.
I've been calling for it for a long time.
What if it does turn out?
And I mean, you know, here's the difficulty when you interview Jeff Sessions.
I mean, okay, he said, and then he clarified his remarks, as you know, after the exchange that he had with you, is that he was just talking about what the standard for a special counsel, which means that he hasn't decided if a special counsel is going to be necessary.
I'm also hearing a lot of rumors that there's going to be dramatic changes at the FBI in the next week or so.
So that should be interesting.
But more importantly, you know, if he's sitting there knowing that there's an investigation into fusion GPS, Russian interference as it relates to Hillary or Uranium One, he can't tell you that.
Yeah, but well, maybe that's the case, but that was not the impression we got.
The impression we got is the facts have to be there to want a special counsel.
And I would come back to, how about these facts?
How about the fact that the Democrat National Committee and the Clinton campaign were paying for the dossier?
And at the same time, it sure looks like the FBI was paying Christopher Steele, the author of that dossier, and it was taken, we believe, to the FISA court to a federal judge, and it was the basis for spying on people associated with the Trump campaign.
How about that?
If that's not a fact pattern, everything points to that took place.
We don't know for certain, but it sure looks like that's what happened.
If that's not factual enough information to say we have to look at this and it requires a special counsel, I do not know what does.
I do not know what does.
And that's what we were trying to get at yesterday.
That's what Andy was trying to get at, Mr. DeSanas, and all of us who called for this.
Yeah, well, I agree on so many fronts, but so much has happened.
So much has gone on.
And every time the Clintons skate, Congressman Jordan, every time.
I don't think, you know, at this point in time, you know, here we spent a year investigating Trump-Russia collusion.
Now we know Hillary and the DNC funded this phony dossier full of Russian lies and propaganda and salacious misinformation to influence our election.
And then she says, well, there's a difference between op research and a collusion.
Meanwhile, that's the very thing they were accusing Donald Trump of.
And yet we don't see the investigation on the other side.
And people like me and obviously you are getting frustrated.
No, Kiddon.
You said it best, Sean.
You said this last night on your show.
You said it there, too.
They were doing the very thing that they're accusing us of.
And frankly, that shouldn't surprise us.
This is how the left operates.
So, again, all the more reason why we need someone from the outside that everyone respects who can come in here and objectively invest.
We're going to continue to investigate in Congress.
We're going to do everything we can to uncover everything.
But we need a special counsel.
That's obvious.
Let's make it happen.
Let's move on.
Yeah.
All right.
And let me go to you, Congressman Biggs.
You know, Congress has to get a response when they ask for a special counsel.
Isn't that the standard operating procedure?
Yeah, that would be normal.
That's right.
Okay.
Say yes or no.
All right, but so three and a half months ago, the first request went in.
Yeah.
Okay, and now you get these answers yesterday, which is, well, I can't talk about if there's an investigation.
I'm not sure this rises to the standard of a special counsel.
There's certain criteria that it's got to meet.
What's your reaction to that answer?
Well, I think it's inadequate.
I mean, and you couple that, Sean, with the fact that the day before the hearing, we got a letter from the Attorney General saying that, well, we'll consider it.
That's pretty weak.
And then when he talks about who's going to be involved in considering it, he's referring to Rod Rosenstein.
And so we have the same people who have the same conflicts as in the Mueller incident.
We have this going on over here.
It's, in my opinion, is woefully inadequate.
Woefully inadequate.
Yeah, well, I mean, it's really this simple.
We know Hillary mishandled classified information.
We know that that information was picked up by five foreign entities and intelligence agencies.
Then we know that she destroyed classified top-secret special access information.
These were subpoenaed emails, and then she just destroys them, deletes them, acid washes, bleach bits them, and bashes up devices with hammers.
That to me is a classic case of obstruction, and I don't think I would not be in jail over that.
Would I be in jail over that?
Yes, you would, and so would I, and so would most every other American.
But for some reason, people just jump on and protect the Clintons, and that's what we have said.
Look, we just want a fair and objective investigation, and we haven't had it.
The Clintons haven't had it.
Evidence keeps coming out.
We've adduced all kinds of evidence indicating both obstruction on the part of Hillary Clinton and the election collusion everybody's talking about with Russia.
It turns out it's with these guys, the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign, and we want that to be investigated.
That isn't too much to ask in a free society that honors and reveres the rule of law, I don't think.
All right.
Now, let me ask about James Comey in particular.
I mean, and Robert Mueller, Jim Jordan.
Robert Mueller was the FBI director in 2009.
He knew that Vladimir Putin was trying to get a foothold into the uranium market in America.
We know that his agents in America were involved in bribery, kickbacks, money laundering, extortion, and other racketeering crimes.
And they knew in 2009.
And we have an informant that was on the inside asked by the FBI to stay there.
So we have a first-hand account.
We have documents, emails, and tapes.
And with all of that information acquired, knowing this is happening, why would anybody sign off on giving away 20% of our uranium when we don't have enough uranium in the country?
We have to import it anyway.
Exactly right, Sean.
It's been also reported that he didn't share that knowledge you just went through with anyone.
He didn't share it with Congress.
He didn't share it with the American people.
But probably most importantly, it's been reported that it was not shared with the committee, this committee on foreign investment in the United States, made up of folks from federal agencies, several federal agencies.
He didn't share that information with them.
You got an informant giving you all this kind of information at a time when there's this uranium-one deal that's moving forward, and there's a committee who decides whether the deal happens or not, and you don't share the information with them.
Why didn't you share that information?
And now we have an informant who, and the informant who gave him all this was put under a gag order.
Again, how can Robert Mueller, that special counsel, look into that situation?
He was part of the whole deal, part of the investigation at the time.
So, again, just underscoring why we need a separate special counsel to look at that issue in conjunction with everything else involving Mr. Comey.
All right, we'll take a break.
We'll come back more with Congressman Andy Biggs and Jim Jordan.
As we continue, Congressman Jim Jordan is with us.
Congressman Andy Biggs is with us.
You know, as it relates to Mueller, let me just dig a little bit deeper into all of this.
If he's involved himself in knowing all of this about, you know, Putin and Russia and their desire to get a hold of uranium and he didn't do anything about it and might himself, if there ever is an investigation, have to answer questions himself.
Does that warrant a recusal of him in any way, shape, or form, Congressman Andy Biggs?
Yes, it does, Sean.
In fact, the federal statutes are very explicit that you cannot conduct an investigation if you're either the subject of the investigation, which Mr. Mueller would be, or if you're a witness in the investigated issue, which he would be, or if you're affiliated or related to anybody that would be there, which he would be because it was his agency that he was overseeing.
So, yeah, he has conflict in bright neon lights.
And so, yesterday when I asked, I asked Attorney General Sessions, you know, do you even have a formal system to evaluate conflicts of interest?
He said, no, there is not one in the Department of Justice.
And I said, well, how do we determine then?
Who determines it?
He says, the individual attorney.
So are you telling me that Mr. Mueller, it's all up to Mr. Mueller to determine whether he has a conflict of interest?
That's a problem.
That's a real problem.
And that isn't the way it's done in private practice.
I can tell you that.
So I was very disappointed by that.
All right, guys, I got to let you both go.
I appreciate it.
Jim Jordan and Andy Biggs.
800-941 Sean is a toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
I-25 till the top of the hour.
It's always what?
What?
Well, I just thought before we get into the business of Mr. Daniels, the legend here.
Well, I was going to introduce my buddy, my friend, my pal, the great patriot, the great football fan, one of the greatest country artists.
You only have an hour in the history of any kind.
It's only a half an hour.
Charlie Daniels is here, and you already interrupted the interview and you're wasting time.
But I think a real proper welcome to Mr. Daniels would be if you sang him his greatest song, Devil Went Downey.
It's not complete unless you're singing, right?
Well, you mean a version that I've already signed.
Well, a version that you can sing with him.
Go ahead.
All right, the Dipper went down to Georgia, and he was looking for a soul to steal.
He was in a buying because he was way behind, so he was willing to make a deal.
When he came across this young man song on the fiddle and playing it hot, well, the devil, he jumped up on a hickory spot and he said, Boy, let me tell you what.
Yes, you didn't know it, but I'm a fiddle player too.
And if you care to take a dare, I'll make a bet with you.
Now, you play pretty good fiddle boy, but give the devil his due.
I'll bet a fiddle of gold against your soul because I think I'm better than you.
Boy said, My name's Johnny, and it may be a sin, but I'll take your bet, and you're going to regret because I'm the best it's ever been.
Johnny, you're honest up your bow and play your fiddle hard.
Cause hell's broke loose in Georgia, and the devil deals in cards.
And if you win, you get this.
I can't ruin the whole song.
I'm butchering it.
Gets your soul.
All right, so Charlie Daniels is with us.
You know, you came out with this.
Never look at the empty seats.
Right.
And I have spent so much time with you.
And we've done so many events together.
And I've watched you perform so many times.
And the thing is, you, I don't even know how old you're.
You are doing 100 some odd dates a year.
I'll be 81 in four days.
You look amazing.
Thank you.
And the energy you bring to the people that come to your shows is phenomenal.
I feel the same way about my profession you feel about yours.
We both love it.
Love it.
And you put your best into it every day.
I do every night.
And it's just, it's a joy.
It's a joy to do.
You know, I've actually been to events, and maybe the crowd size wasn't what we thought it was.
That's happened to anybody, I guess, in performing, right?
Yesterday.
You know, sometimes you don't have enough notice.
Sometimes the word didn't get out.
They didn't promote it right or whatever.
And that used to bother me.
I'm like, why didn't you fill the seats?
And then I learned it doesn't matter.
If there's 10 people there, you give your all for 10 people.
If you're all for whoever's there, and you're not concerned with the empty seats, you're concerned with the ones that have people in them.
If you please them, then that's the way you build a following.
They'll come back and bring somebody else with them and kind of snowballs.
Yeah, but you don't ever hardly have empty seats.
I saw you.
Well, I do.
I have occasionally.
We have some empty seats, yeah.
Especially when we first started.
This is about really, it's kind of an accentuate to positive type thing.
If you can't get what you want, take what you can get and make what you want out of it.
You have a lot of things that guide you in life.
One is your faith, your love of music, your love of football, and you have a love of politics.
I watch you.
You write your blog and you go out and you're tweeting up a storm.
And you're passionate about this country.
You're passionate about everything you do.
What are you most passionate about?
Your music?
My priorities are God, family, and country music and country.
Yeah.
God, family, country, and work.
That's me.
I'm curious because I know what a great patriot you are, and I know how much you love our troops.
How many times do you go see the men and women when they were out fighting?
We've been to Iraq three times.
We've been to Afghanistan and we go, of course, you go to Iraq, you go to Kuwait because that's a jumping-off place.
Sure.
We've been to Kosovo, Sarajevo, been to Guantanamo, just all over it.
But wherever we can get to them, you know, we can never do enough for our troops.
Anybody put their life between us and our enemies?
How do you reconcile the great patriot, lover of our military, because they give you the freedom to play, me the freedom to rant on the radio and on television, and they put their lives on the line for us.
How do you reconcile that with your passion for football?
I know you like college football probably better anyway, but what's going on in the NFL?
You know, I'm still kind of wondering if I'm going to renew my season tickets next year.
I found myself in this.
Love the Titans tickets.
Right.
This just happened.
It used to be football was on.
I had TV on.
Right.
It's kind of lost a little bit of its glow to me.
And you know what gets me about it is you want to protest something, you feel something's wrong, please do.
It's a free country.
You can do that.
But the guy holding it or the gal holding that flag out there in that color guard may well be a veteran or maybe not even a veteran, maybe still an active duty person who has put their life on the line in Afghanistan, Iraq, or someplace we don't even know about.
And you can't take 30 seconds to honor them, the flag that they served under, and the song that signifies the whole thing in our country.
You know, that's my point.
And listen, I make my living, you know, giving my opinions and strong opinions.
A lot of people don't like us, Charlie, trust me.
And I respect people that have different views.
I really do.
I'm fine.
I'm cool with it.
Even people that don't like me and want to write horrible things and lies about me, which happens pretty much every day.
But how many, we can't unite on this issue?
Yes.
How many fought?
How many bled?
How many died?
How many sacrificed for you to have the right to get paid millions to play the sport you love?
Absolutely.
And be loved by the crowds.
But you used, you took the words out of my mouth.
I'm not watching NFL football.
I'm watching college football.
It's pretty good too.
Oh, my.
You know, isn't it fun to like ascertain only the minuscule differences in terms of talent level?
And then you think there's only a few of those college kids that are ever getting the pros.
And I'm like, I think they're all good.
Yeah.
You know what's amazing is you get it.
There's a whole mindset to college football that you don't have when you watch pro.
It's like these kids are doing it.
They're giving it their best wanting to make it to the pros.
And to watch him, you know, Alabama should have to play in the pro league after what they did about Tennessee Balls the other day.
But it's great.
College football is a great thing.
Every Saturday I got TV.
I don't know how Nick Sabin does it every year.
Every year that puts a championship team on the field.
I wish I did.
I'd teach it somebody else.
So you're a volunteer fan?
I'm a volunteer fan.
Well, listen, I admire that.
What is it?
How many years now is it total music for you?
And were you musical when you were born, when you were young?
I cut the apron strings in June of 1958, and I left home.
That's all I've done since it had something to do with music.
How old were you then?
I was, well, 1958 would have been coming to me 22 years old.
I was 21.
That was it.
You went out on your own, never looked back.
Went bowed my own, never looked back.
And I've done it on all different levels, of course, but it's all been music related.
Except for five weeks, I worked in a junkyard in Denver, Colorado.
How was that?
I couldn't get, well, it brought me very much down to earth.
It made me realize, appreciate my, you know, I came from a labor type background, blue-collar people.
Same here.
Tobacco and timber, you know, that sort of thing.
And so I was no stranger sweating.
I mean, I've done it, you know, and I got to have empathy for everybody.
I ride down the street and see the truck drivers unloading the trucks.
I got empathy for that person.
It's hard.
I did all the construction work and restaurant work.
But I'll tell you this: it was looking back, I think it saved my life in a lot of ways because it gave me the empathy, the perspective, real-life experience.
And, you know, look, I mean, if I get tired and I'm grinding it out on the road like you are sometimes, and I'm flying from, I was in five cities in three days recently, you know, this past weekend.
I have no reason to complain, Charlie.
You're grounded.
You're grounded.
I mean, and a faith in God does that too.
Oh, yeah, definitely.
When you perform, is that the time that you feel the best in your life?
It's one of the few times I ever feel in my life that I know exactly what I'm doing.
I have devoted my life.
I know when you sit down in front of a microphone, you take on a whole persona.
I mean, you're Sean Hannity on the air, and it's very obvious that you're at home back there.
I'm at home when I walk on stage.
Just the way you correlate the way you feel when you sit down behind that microphone.
And that's the way I feel when I walk on stage.
It's funny because my kids, Charlie, I have a studio near my house, and sometimes they'd come in when I'm doing the radio show from home.
I'm in New York today.
And they'd come in and they're like, Daddy, you just, your veins are popping out of your neck and you're screaming.
And I'm like, well, let me do the radio show this way.
Hi, welcome to the Sean Hannity Show.
And our number is 1-800-941.
I said, nobody's going to listen to that.
But here's the interesting thing to me.
And I want to know if you can relate to this.
The first time I got behind a microphone, I did that.
I just, I started talking like this.
And I have no idea why.
I have no idea where that came from.
Because you're doing exactly what you want to do.
That's when you put your whole heart and soul into it.
When you're doing exactly, I would not change places, and I know you wouldn't either.
I'm looking you straight in the eyes.
I want to be Garth Brooks or Kenny Chesney in my next life.
Charlie Danny.
There's already one of them.
You can't be that.
But you're doing exactly what you want to do, and you put your heart and soul into it.
And I'm the same way.
When I learned three chords and I could play a whole song, I was ruined.
That's all I wanted to do.
You know, one day I was with Billy Graham.
It was his last crusade, and it was in New York.
It was in Flushing.
And look, he's very, was old at the time.
I think he's in his, he's like headed towards 100 now.
Yeah.
And he's in a wheelchair.
And then all of a sudden, it was rally time.
Right.
And I watched him.
It's like a force drove him up the stairs behind that podium.
Absolutely.
And I watched you too.
And it's the same thing I watched with you.
All of a sudden, you're just Charlie, you're taking pictures, you're doing selfies, and then it's game time, and you're just like, let's go.
And you start twirling that bow and boom, time to roll.
Time to do it.
You're giving advice in this book.
What do you tell people?
The first thing I tell people, you know, young people ask me, what about a music career and about how long you longevity and this sort of thing?
First thing I tell them, make sure you love it enough to put up with the sacrifices, to put up with the rejection, to put up with all your failures, what you're going to do, and to put up with people just being mean to you, that you can put up with all of that.
Because if you have any success, people are going to be jealous of you.
They're going to try to bring you back down.
If you can't do that, if you can't put up with those people, those situations and those circumstances, stay home.
It's not the business for you.
Stay home.
Play the lounges on the weekend.
You know, come on.
Don't come out on the road and break your heart because that's going to happen to you.
I think I've learned more from my failures than my success.
Well, you do learn from your failures.
It's like burning your fingers on the stove.
Seriously, it's like I ain't going to do that no more.
No, I'm not doing that again.
Zach, I heard him singing the devil the other day.
A lot of people sing.
In fact, Garth Brooks opened the Mercedes Dome in Atlanta.
Yeah.
And of all things, he did that.
He went down to Georgia first.
Did he?
I was very honored.
Yeah, definitely.
But the thing is, is because I know a lot of these countries, everybody loves you.
You're like the father of country music now.
I mean, I don't know if you ever, if you set out to have that happen.
Why are you able to survive the temptations on the road?
I mean, I've been out with these bands, Charlie.
A lot of girls with a lot of, well, not so many clothes on throwing themselves at these guys.
A lot of booze.
Some are doing drugs.
You never got into any of that.
Well, my career is the thing to me.
You don't go on the road to party.
That's a common misconception.
Anybody has another thing you have to understand.
If you're going to go on the road to party and pick up girls and that sort of thing, stay home.
Because you can do that at home.
Don't go on the road and ruin your career.
Maybe they don't like the girls in town, Charlie.
I don't know.
I've seen so many careers ruined from drugs.
It all kind of works together after a while.
People get alcohol habit or drug habit or they just fall apart.
They take their focus off of what they love.
And all of a sudden they're doing stuff that they're doing.
But everybody thinks that you want to party with them in the city that you're in.
You don't even want to party with me anymore.
So how many dates are you going to do this year?
We'll do 102, 10 Grando Opry appearances and a couple of charity things.
Wow.
But you know, it sounds like a lot.
But actually, I can handle that.
That's no problem.
102 is a piece of cake, Creole.
Basically, it's not a piece of cake, but it's about, we're getting up to about the limit right there.
But yeah, accounting at Grando.
You know, when you're a member of the Grando Lopry, they want you to do 10 shows a year.
So I have so much respect for the thing I do.
You know, I got to MC that once.
Yes, ma'am.
That was an honor.
Wouldn't you come back and do it again?
I have come out to see if they didn't ask me the Grand Dole Opry.
Charlie, every time, listen, it was such a great honor.
I would sing the devil with you.
Yes.
And I butchered the song.
It don't matter.
Did you notice that?
It matters to me.
Did you notice I was leading the band?
We were playing with you, so you have to sing with us.
I think you're probably right.
There was one day I missed an entire verse, an entire verse of the song, and I'm like, and you look at me, you look at your band members, and you're laughing.
And there's nothing I could do at that point.
But, Sean, do you realize what an incredible charge our crowds got?
That was the last song we do, remember?
It's always the early days.
And we go build up to that.
And all of a sudden, Sean Hannity comes out and gets, and you were like, you look like Garth Brooks.
You're jumping on the mic stand, jumping on the drum stand, running all over the stage.
But they got the crowd got such, how many people got to hear that?
Now, how many people?
Only the people we played for.
You were live that got to hear Sean Hannity do double went down to Georgia.
Which, by the way, I'll tell everybody, it's on YouTube.
It's all over the place.
That's good.
And I have looked at it myself.
You know, over these many years, it's been my honor.
It really has to get to know you.
And every time I called you, Charlie, I need you for, we're raising money.
We need you here.
We need you here.
We need you.
You're always there.
You have been a mentor, a life mentor, an example for all of us.
I love your music.
I love who you are more as a person than anything else.
I love this book, by the way.
Never look at the empty seats.
Just out today.
It's on Hannity.com.
It's on Amazon.com.
It's in bookstores everywhere.
And it's always a pleasure to see you, my friends.
God bless you always.
Thank you.
God bless you.
Never look at the empty seats.
Our friend Charlie Daniels, Hannity.com, Amazon.com, bookstores everywhere.
We have an amazing Hannity tonight on the Fox News channel.
Sarah Carter, John Solomon, Victoria Tunson, Greg Jarrett, and Jay Seculo all back.
We have massive developments as it relates to the dossier and the uranium one issue.
News you won't get from anybody else.
We'll break it all down for you.
All these new developments, and it's all coming up tonight at nine on the Fox News channel, Hannity.
And we hope you'll always set your DVR.
But that's all the time we have for today.
Thanks for being with us.
Back here tomorrow.
See you tonight at nine.
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 download Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
