Sean Hannity Show - Release The Memo - 2.1

Feb. 1, 2018 - Sean Hannity Show

01:35:27

Release The Memo - 2.1

Sean reacts to the latest panic by the Democrats who're lining up to protest the release of the Russian memo. Why does the truth hurt so much for them? Plus, Michelle Malkin stops by to react to the State of the Union Address. The Sean Hannity Show is live weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart podcast.
	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.
	What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	Let not your heart be troubled.
	You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
	All right, glad you're with us.
	800-941-Sean Artoffrey, telephone number.
	All right, this is where you're going to get some truth.
	This is where you're going to get some common sense.
	This is where we are going to remain focused and not be distracted.
	Let me set the table by reminding you that for the last year of your lives, the mainstream media, the left in this country, has been actively involved in a wholesale lie that has been pushed day in and day out, hour in and hour out.
	And the lie is about Trump and Russia collusion.
	We have no evidence a year later of Trump-Russia collusion at all.
	Now, it was about a year ago when Sarah Carter, when we began our investigation and things started to unravel very quickly.
	And what we have discovered is the single greatest case of government abuse of power, the single biggest political story in our lifetime.
	And it has virtually been ignored by this corrupt mainstream media that has just married into this destroy Trump psychosis that they have.
	And they have never gone near it.
	And we have been unpeeling one layer of the onion after another.
	And it's gotten us to the point now where all the evidence on only one investigation.
	This, we could be, look, I can't wait to be finally hearing from the Uranium One undercover agent that was there for six years and witnessed Vladimir Putin's gang of uranium corrupters here bribing, extorting, involved in money laundering, kickbacks, and racketeering.
	We had an FBI undercover agent watching all of this.
	By the way, Robert Mueller was the FBI director at the time.
	And yet that didn't stop 18 months later, knowing all the corruption existed, CFIS from granting approvals for Vladimir Putin to take over 20% of America's uranium and the Uranium One deal, and then the kickbacks to the Clintons, and then the understanding we don't even have enough uranium.
	We shouldn't be exporting any uranium.
	And yeah, it was exported.
	It was sent to Canada.
	It was sent to Europe.
	And we also believe it was sent to Asia.
	We're not talking about that.
	We're not even, we still have to go back now that we know that the fix was in for Hillary Clinton.
	We still got to go back with the email server scandal.
	We still have the whole unmasking.
	Well, first, surveillance, the lack of proper protocol and minimization of Americans and spying on Americans.
	You're supposed to minimize if they're picked up in some type of, for example, the government should be using our tools of intelligence to spy on America's enemies, and we have plenty of them.
	But if an American is caught up in that call, once you see the American's not a traitor, well, you're supposed to minimize what that person says.
	And when you write up a report, you don't mention who that person is.
	But then we had a person unmasked a day, basically, by the Obama administration in an election year to destroy Donald Trump's chances to win.
	And it is, these are pretty chilling moments that this corrupt, you know, it's sort of like I say this about education all the time.
	It's an unholy alliance between the media in this country and all things anti-Trump and pro-Democrat.
	And it just is what it is.
	This is the environment we live in.
	So we have to get to all of that.
	But fundamentally, by the way, we are expecting that the memo will, in fact, be released tomorrow without any redactions, according to the White House.
	We have now watched in the last 24 hours the mainstream media, the left wing in this country, the Democratic Party, the Unholy Alliance get together, knowing that the story that they tried to ignore, the cover-up that they were involved in for an entire year, the biggest example in our lifetime of civil rights abuses, something that makes Watergate look like nothing, look like stealing a Snickers bar from a drugstore.
	Now that we're on the verge of releasing the evidence, the memo that summarizes the documentation, they're now going insane.
	Now, House Republicans have been hinting that the surveillance memo is going to rock the FBI and the DOJ to its core.
	And when everything is said and done, the memo, I'm telling you, is only step one.
	Then we'll get the documentation supporting the memo.
	That will be step two.
	Then we'll see other examples where FISA warrants were issued in cases without any verified information.
	That's going to be step three.
	And there's going to be many other steps behind that as well.
	But, you know, you have Congressman Jeff Duncan.
	He gave a pretty big hint about the contents of the memo, but why the FBI is fighting valiantly to prevent its release.
	Remember, Devin Nunes was asking for this documentation for a year.
	Devin Nunes got literally to the, it was 11.30 that night of the deadline.
	Earlier that evening, Rod Rosenstein begged Paul Ryan in a private meeting not to release this information.
	This is the information that's supportive of the memo.
	And Paul Ryan, to his credit, stood firm and said, no, let the American people see the information.
	But, you know, having read the memo, says Congressman Duncan, the FBI is right to have, quote, grave concerns, as it will shake their organization down to its core, showing Americans just how the agency was weaponized by the Obama officials, the DNC, and Hillary Clinton to target political adversaries.
	Now, if you go to Devin Nunes, when the FBI is whining and complaining about it, by the way, this is not the FBI rank and file.
	I keep saying that, and the media says he's attacking the FBI.
	You know, I love the FBI, which is why I want to root out any corruption within the FBI so it can be the great agency that we as a country need.
	And the same in the intelligence community.
	And the same with the CIA for that matter.
	This is a dangerous world with evil people and evil countries that want to bring us harm.
	We need all of this, but you can't use the powerful weaponry of intelligence gathering against presidential candidates in an election year.
	But I digress.
	So the FBI, he goes with regard to the memorandum he said, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review the memo, blah, blah, blah, blah, before they voted to release it.
	Devin Nunes writes, having stonewalled Congress's demands for information for a year, it's no surprise to see the FBI, DOJ, issue these spurious objections to allowing the American people to see the information related to surveillance abuses at these agencies.
	You know, there used to be a time when the left, liberals, the media cared about the right to privacy and not wanting the government to spy on American citizens.
	There was a time, but not in the age of Trump.
	Their hatred of Trump, no pun intended, Trump's everything else.
	That's all they care about, destroying this president.
	The FBI, he writes, is intimately familiar with material omissions with respect to their presentations to both Congress and the courts, and they're welcome to make public to the greatest extent possible all the information they have on these abuses.
	And then he says this, regardless, it is clear the top officials, meaning the FBI DOJ, used unverified information in a court document to fuel a counterintelligence investigation during an American political campaign.
	Once the truth gets out, we can begin taking steps to ensure our intelligence agencies and the courts are never misused like this again.
	Now, let me backtrack.
	FISA is, remember, the FISA law came into play post-9-11.
	The idea is, is that if we have any indication that we need to target specific Americans, the FISA court, based on evidence, would issue a surveillance warrant.
	And again, we have a Constitution, unreasonable search and see.
	The government's not allowed, and nor would you ever want to live in a society where the government is listening into every phone call, taking every text message and every email yours, although it does happen more than anybody knows.
	So here's the situation.
	This is a sidebar.
	Hillary puts the fix in and rigs the election against Bernie Sanders.
	Nobody cares about that on the Democratic side.
	That's your business.
	I don't care how you run your business over there.
	All right.
	Now we know that James Comey, Peter Strzok, you know, Lisa Page's mistress, the ones that called the president loathsome and all these other names and F. Trump and this and that pro-Hillary, and that they had an insurance policy, and Andrew McCabe and likely Loretta Lynch all knew that Hillary Clinton, no matter what facts were shown on the email server investigation, they thought it best, not you,
	not the rule of law, not equal justice under the law.
	They made the decision to ignore her mishandling of classified information, fact when she put it on a mom-and-pop shop server in a closet that was infiltrated by at least five foreign intelligence agencies.
	Then, when it was subpoenaed, she deletes 33,000 emails.
	Then, to make pretty darn sure they're really gone, she acid washes and bleach bits the hard drives, and then she has an aid breaking up devices like Blackberries and iPhones with a hammer.
	That's called obstruction of justice.
	She committed crimes.
	They covered up the crimes because they thought it best to allow Hillary to remain as the presidential candidate.
	The rule of law was not going to be applied to her.
	It is incontrovertible she broke the law and committed felonies.
	Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe, and James Comey put the fix in for Hillary.
	You don't exonerate an investigated, somebody you're investigating before you actually investigate.
	And that's what they did.
	Then it gets worse.
	Then we've got Hillary.
	Why not?
	She rigged the primary electoral.
	She pays for a Russian dossier.
	It took us a year to find out.
	Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC finances that she was running, according to Donna Brazil, they paid for this dossier.
	This dossier has salacious, unverified, inaccurate, untrue accusations against Donald Trump that he had two hookers in a Ritz Carlton in Moscow urinating on his bed.
	GPS said they never even verified it.
	Now, here's the worst part.
	Now, Fusion GPS, according to one testimony, I think it was before the House Intel Committee, they're admitting, oh, yeah, they tried to coordinate where to leak these lies to the media so they can manipulate the American people in an election year.
	That's bad enough.
	But then they use that phony dossier in part to get a FISA warrant to spy on an opposition presidential candidate.
	This is what Devin Nunes was referring to, using an unverified, bought and paid-for Hillary Clinton Russian lies to get a FISA warrant on the Trump campaign and then spy on an opposition candidate in an election year and a president-elect, which leads to this phony Robert Mueller investigation.
	So on the eve of all of this, now that it's about to happen, Nancy Pelosi and Chucky Schumer and let's see, oh, John Brennan, James Clapper, they're all in a panic.
	And the media finally is covering the story.
	This is outrageous.
	It's not outrageous.
	Where are those in the media that care about truth, civil liberties, the Constitution, our rights against unreasonable search and seizure?
	All right.
	We were right and they have been wrong.
	Now they're trying to destroy the messengers of what is the biggest political scandal in American history.
	And I'm not exaggerating.
	This is not hyperbole.
	It's not Trump-Russia collusion.
	800-941-Sean Ozon number.
	We got a lot of people.
	Sarah Carter.
	So many people coming up today.
	Greg Jarrett, Michelle Malkin and Studio, much more.
	These are amazing times we are living in.
	And informational crisis overload as the media now is in overdrive because they're basically an extension, an arm of the Democratic Party.
	That's why when Pelosi demands, oh, get rid of Devin Nunes and Schumer weighs in.
	And then the media just, that's all they care.
	Now they're going after Hope Hicks.
	Hope Hicks suggested.
	This is what the article is.
	It's so stupid.
	A witness to tell Mueller he was concerned that Hope Hicks thought about obstructing justice.
	No, they're not gonna, they're not gonna find the emails.
	They're not gonna find the emails means, does not mean, you know, delete them, bleach bit them, acid wash them, and then bust up your hard drives.
	Really?
	Is that the standard we're now going to look at?
	And the media is running wild with all of this, and it is a certain insanity that's taken over.
	Look, they have ignored this story for an entire year, these people.
	You know, now we're now told that the White House will probably release this memo tomorrow.
	And that the White House, as I told you, they took great care and diligence to do as much.
	We have seen nothing but nonstop lying and leaking in the last 24 hours.
	And the media, the compliant media, the left-wing media, the destroyed Trump media, that's all they do is run with, I could feed them that there's a black donut in the sky or a chocolate donut in the sky or a vanilla covered donut in the sky, and they'd report it as long as it advanced their message that they hate Trump.
	You know, you saw it on display at the State of the Union address.
	You have a CNN anchor, you know, the shh, all network, fake news, CNN, literally claiming, you know, the firing of top FBI officials that comparing it to the Holocaust.
	This was in Breitbart using in her unverified Twitter account.
	You know, they claim one of the CNN anchors said something that's stupid.
	That's how insane they've gotten.
	Nunes, you know what?
	He made changes.
	The changes were requested by the FBI and by soon-to-be MSNBC host Adam Schiff.
	The most dangerous place in America is between you and Adam Schiff and a TV camera.
	You're dead.
	All right, one funny note.
	I guess Super Bowl Sunday is a Sunday.
	So there is a New York Post writer, Michael Kaplan.
	Did you see the piece he had out today?
	He goes, Being Brady.
	It's really hard to be as perfect as Patriots quarterback, as one Bray Post reporter learned in a week-long experiment.
	So he tries to live like Brady for an entire week.
	Now, Tom Brady sleeps apparently nine hours a night.
	And I didn't like reading this because he goes to sleep at nine o'clock every night.
	My show is on at nine o'clock every night.
	I prefer you watch my show and then go to bed.
	But anyway, he likes to wake at six, describes the process as uninterrupted therapy and natural regeneration without enough sleep.
	I don't know when, well, when I went on vacation, I slept for like two days over Christmas.
	I was dead.
	I was exhausted.
	I was burnt out, fried, and just needed the rest.
	Do you sleep?
	No, I talk to you at two in the morning.
	You're just getting started to fall asleep.
	Do you fall asleep?
	What time?
	How many hours do you sleep a night?
	Usually about five or six, only because of my pillow.
	Before my pillow, only three hours.
	You're sleeping beauty number two.
	Blair is sleeping beauty number one because when I needed him, you know, during our, what did Twitter say that our account had been compromised?
	Yeah, Blair, our web guy, was asleep for the nine entire hours that it was compromised and nobody could wake him from the dead.
	And you were nowhere to be found either.
	Lauren and Linda are the only two that answered.
	I didn't drag Jason into this because I don't think you know much about Twitter and computers and that sort of thing.
	So I stay off of Twitter.
	How many hours do you sleep a night?
	I almost never get to sleep before 3.30.
	Okay, and what time do you get up?
	About 8.30, 8.45.
	So about five or six hours a night.
	That's normal for anybody that works for me, except for Ethan and Blair.
	And Sunshine, you probably sleep a lot, right?
	How many hours do you sleep?
	Would say a solid 12 hours a night.
	You're lying through your teeth.
	How long do you sleep a night?
	Anywhere from six to seven hours.
	Madam Linda, how many hours do you sleep a night?
	I wouldn't call it sleeping.
	I call it casual napping.
	You have a two-year-old that you said never sleeps, right?
	My son doesn't like to sleep.
	My cats don't like to sleep.
	The dog doesn't like to sleep.
	Cats can't sleep because they're so bloated from all the food you feed them.
	You have the fattest cats in the world.
	Shush.
	It's disgusting.
	You're abusing those cats.
	You don't even like cats.
	What do you care?
	I especially hate fat, overfed cats.
	Clearly, you're making that very cats.
	Don't fat shame.
	Excuse me.
	You turn them into what the size of one cat is.
	Imagine the size of five cats.
	You're the only person that I know that had to send a cat to a lose-weight fat cat.
	It's like I get your lunch every day.
	I feed the cats.
	Okay, yeah.
	What do you get me every day?
	I get a salad.
	It depends on the diet of the week.
	What's the diet this week?
	This week is leaves.
	Now you're going to have to send these cats to turning.
	So drink 20 ounces of water upon waking.
	That's a lot of water when you wake up, but that's apparently what Brady does.
	It says avoid night shade vegetables.
	Fearing small amounts of inflammation, Brady avoids eating night shades, including eggplants, strawberries, mushrooms, bell peppers, though he might loosen up one day.
	Brady says, I can't imagine any large changes in the future.
	He uses resistance bands.
	I use those too because I've got, I had a bad shoulder, but because I'm not lifting and I use the bands, it's much better for my shoulder.
	And of course, when I fell three stories off a roof and busted up my arm and my elbow and broke the radial head and dislocated the thing, it's never been the same.
	And every time I do 100 push-ups every day, it hurts like there's no tomorrow.
	And he has the power of positivity.
	Anyway, so this guy actually lived like Brady for a week and nearly killed him.
	He said, I thought that was funny today.
	He hasn't had sugar in like a decade or something like that.
	Yeah, well, you shouldn't eat sugar.
	Don't you think most people would die even on your schedule, to be honest?
	You know, people tell me all the time, I don't know how you do it.
	I don't know.
	And like, even Dan Bongino.
	Dan Mongino's hosted this radio show.
	He's been on my TV show on the same day.
	He goes, I don't know how you, man, how do you, and Dan Mongino's a rock star.
	I mean, he's in.
	Listen, there's very few people.
	I think with all my training, I could probably beat 98% of people.
	But there's that 2% that would kill me.
	And he's in that 2%.
	You know, my sensei would kill anybody in terms of, you know, street fighting, martial arts, which is, you know, the stuff that I learned.
	You know, obviously pros in any pro could kick my ass.
	But I mean, the average person in a fight, in a situation, that's what we train for.
	And Bongino is, I'm telling you, he is tough.
	He's trained for 25 years in the arts.
	I have great respect for Dan Bongino.
	But he's like, how do you do it?
	I'm like, what do you mean?
	How do I do it?
	I just do my show.
	I like it.
	I love it.
	I don't feel like this is work.
	It's what I do every day.
	It's in my DNA.
	Do I sleep a lot?
	No.
	But I sleep more because of my pillow.
	And that's not a joke.
	I never slept at all.
	There would be nights I'd come into work having slept maybe an hour.
	And I just wouldn't sleep.
	I just, you know, sit and that's my mind spinning like a top.
	And I just, because I'm not normal.
	I don't think.
	I don't think you're normal and you do this job.
	Most people I know in the talk radio business, they're off a little bit.
	You're the most normal person.
	How do you know?
	Do you know everyone else?
	I've met a few, right?
	Yeah, you have.
	All right.
	All right.
	So let's get back to the important news of the day.
	So we're on the verge of getting this memo, and all you have is nothing but lying, nothing but panic, and nothing but distortion, nothing but distractions and misinformation.
	And you have a full-fledged panic that this is coming out tomorrow.
	Now, here's the problem.
	Do we, as a country, do we want to live in a country where elections can be rigged, where crimes are covered up for only the special few, Comey, Strzok, Paige, McCabe, maybe Loretta Lynch.
	Do we want to live in a country where others decide who should be your president and not we the people?
	Do we want to live in a country where one candidate can buy Russian lies and propaganda, work with different groups in disseminating such false information, and then actually have people in the deep state or the upper echelon and the intel community and the FBI and the Department of Justice working to advance a FISA warrant on a false Russian propaganda.
	I thought everybody was wigged out about the potential that Russia influenced our elections.
	That's what the whole year was about.
	Well, it did.
	They tried to influence the country, except Hillary bought and paid for the Russian lies.
	And then she used it as a foundation to spy on a presidential candidate.
	That is what we're going to learn tomorrow.
	Now, knowing the media as corrupt as they are, you know, and as weak as they're, this is what they're going to say.
	They're going to tell us, oh, that's it?
	That the dossier that Hillary bought and paid for that had Russian lies was it used in part to get a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign?
	That's all?
	That's all you got?
	And I'm like, if that doesn't rock and shock the media's conscience, nothing will.
	You know, I'm convinced that there are people that live their whole lives and have no ability to see truth.
	This is the truth.
	Now, if we got all worked up about, let's say, a break-in of a presidential candidate of the opposition candidates, you know, headquarters, and when they got in there, they tried to get information.
	By the way, an election they were going to run away with anyway.
	And then they covered up that they had broken in a third rape burglary and they covered the whole thing up.
	It resulted in the end of a presidency, the presidency of Richard Nixon.
	Now, think about this.
	But if you're going to have a candidate pay for Russian lies, the big bad Russian bear, you know, the bad, they are bad actors.
	I don't want Russia influencing our elections.
	Nobody should.
	Nobody wants that.
	They did try.
	There's no doubt about that.
	What's missing is there was never any collusion, as we have been told for an entire year.
	But you buy Russian lies, you don't verify Russian lies, then the Russian lies get exposed, but that didn't stop you from using the Russian lies to get a FISA warrant to spy on your opposition in the lead up to an election.
	And then they take it further and then they spy on the president-elect and his team.
	And then all of this leads to a special counsel and an investigation.
	Well, the investigation ought to be right at Hillary Clinton's doorstep.
	And that's where more corruption comes in.
	You know, one of the narratives besides, oh, Devin Nunes has to go.
	Nunes is a hero in this story because Nunes is fighting to expose what is an abuse of power at an unprecedented level in this country and let the American people decide for themselves.
	And he even said, release all the documents.
	And I'm in favor of releasing all the documents.
	Unlike Rod Rosenstein begging Paul Ryan at the final hour after a year of being subpoenaed these documents, you know, now we've got every other FBI guy begging the president not to release it.
	And if you release it, you got to redact the names of the people.
	Well, we have a right to know who was involved in all of this.
	We already know a lot of the story.
	Now, I'm just going to warn you one other thing.
	Because when the media tells you tomorrow, oh, well, you mean the dossier Hillary bought and paid for used to spy on Trump is, oh, that's not a big deal.
	Here's the problem.
	There's a lot more coming after this.
	This is the tip of the spear and the tip of the iceberg.
	You might say, Hannity, how do you know that?
	Well, a year ago, I told you that, in fact, there was a Pfizer warrant on Trump Tower, and I turned out to be right.
	The media laughed at the idea Donald Trump could win.
	We did not.
	We told you that Obama was a rigid radical ideologue, and they ignored that story.
	They ignored eight years of failure of Obama and praised him every step of the way.
	We beat to our own drum here.
	And the work of Sarah Carter, John Solomon, Greg Jarrett, Victoria Tunsing, Tom Fitton, Jay Seculo, they all deserve Pulitzer Prizes for the work that they've been able to uncover.
	You know, McCabe, what we have here is the intelligence agencies now joining the FBI push against informing the American people.
	Now, there used to be a day and a time when journalists were not as abusively biased.
	Let's reverse it all.
	If Donald Trump rigged a primary the way Hillary did, if Donald Trump had the fix-in, like Hillary did, he had Comey, Strzok, Paige, McCabe, and probably Loretta Lynch exonerating him months before they even did the investigation when we know crimes were committed.
	It's overwhelming.
	It's incontrovertible.
	Mishandling classified information, top secret, special access program information.
	That's all a felony.
	Espionage Act 18, U.S. Code 793.
	You look at the varying provisions.
	We've laid it out for you forever.
	And then you delete 33,000.
	If Sean Hannity deletes 33,000 subpoenaed emails, acid washes my hard drive.
	And then from there, I break up BlackBerries in case there's any remaining evidence on a BlackBerry or an iPhone.
	Trust me, Sean Hannity's in jail, handcuffed, perp walked, mugshots, begging for somebody with a cake and a file.
	I'm gone.
	They would put me in jail forever.
	She did all of that.
	Hillary Clinton.
	And she did it because she wanted to avoid oversight.
	And she did it because she's covering up a lot of things, probably with the Clinton Foundation.
	So if Donald Trump did any of that, if Donald Trump paid for Russian lies and a phony Russian dossier that accused Hillary of hiring hookers at the Ritz-Carlton in Moscow and the hookers were peeing on her bet.
	Hannity, that's very graphic.
	But that's exactly what was in the dossier about Trump.
	If Trump did it to Hillary, the media would care.
	Then you've got, if that phony dossier is then used in part to get a FISA warrant against Hillary by Donald Trump, I promise you, there's no doubt about it.
	The media would be demanding the release of this memo.
	They would be demanding that Donald Trump be charged with crimes.
	There would be heads rolling all over the place.
	And the only reason it's not happening is that the pathological hatred of this disruptor that this country elected, they tried to stop him from winning, and then they tried to undermine him from doing his job and being in that office.
	And they used the intel community, they abused their power, they abused FISA, they abused the offices that they have, and they abused the trust of the American people.
	Now, the media can distract and scream and yell and rant and rave and ham and haul all they want, but they don't care at all.
	Their hatred of Donald Trump is their only priority.
	That is sad.
	It's sick.
	It's twisted.
	And it's just sad.
	I'm going to tell you something.
	If we don't get to the bottom of this and we don't change this, if this is allowed to continue, then the rule of law as we know it is meaningless in this country.
	That means that there's no equal justice under the law.
	That means Americans will be spied on upon will, the weaponization of our powerful tools of intelligence.
	You know, I just got to say one thing.
	It is just stunning to me in so many different ways that you have the left so against the public's right to know.
	Speaks volumes, doesn't it?
	I asked FBI Director Comey, as you mentioned, for his loyalty in an Oval Office meeting.
	According to Comey, President Trump denies it.
	Later, he asked Comey to drop the probe into National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, whom he had fired.
	We've also learned that the president asked Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who was shown the door earlier this week, who McCabe voted for in the presidential election.
	So it does seem to be fitting a pattern.
	I'm not a lawyer.
	Does this look like obstruction of justice to you?
	I'm not a lawyer either.
	And I can't say legally or technically whether this meets the threshold for obstruction of justice.
	But as a layman, it sure does.
	What do you know about the changes that have been made to this Devin Nunes memo?
	What we know for sure is that they are unauthorized by the minority on the committee.
	They were made without their knowledge for approval, exactly.
	And so the memo going to the White House is different from the one that was approved by the committee.
	But we also know, very, very importantly, that the Department of Justice has said that it would be extraordinarily reckless.
	And the release of this memo is really reminiscent of the darkest days of the McCarthy era with characteristic assassination.
	It endangers methods and sources of the intelligence community.
	And it reflects an effort to distract from the Mueller investigation, which now is tightening its vice with this interview with Mark Corallo.
	All right, as you can hear for yourself, there is a death grip of fear now taking over.
	Oh, Corey Booker.
	Oh, this is treasonous.
	You know, whatever happened to the idea of transparency.
	Yeah, they don't want any transparency.
	The level of fear within the FBI is mind-numbing.
	James Clapper, Trump is asking Rod Rosenstein for loyalty pledge.
	Looks like obstruction.
	I can't wait till we start investigating James Clapper's role in a lot of this stuff involving, let's see, surveillance, unmasking, not minimizing, leaking raw intelligence.
	Yeah, let's get into that.
	Anyway, so look, the left is panicked.
	The FBI is panicked.
	The DOJ is panicked, but none of it is going to matter.
	Anyway, joining us now, two of the people that have been in the forefront.
	It's funny how the media is now finally caught up to where we have been now for months and months and months.
	Basically a year.
	Greg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst, Sarah Carter, investigative reporter, Fox News contributor.
	Sarah, let's start with the new information in your column today and work our way backward.
	Well, let's just start with that.
	More text messages coming out with, you know, from Peter Strzok and Lisa Page that exposed how far they were willing to go to basically obstruct what is a rule and what is a law that's been put in place by the FBI and other government agencies to be able to retain their text messages.
	They were trying to figure out a way how would they get around this.
	They purchased, asked about purchasing iPhones.
	They went to the head of their IT department.
	And stunningly, they have decided among themselves that they would get a separate phone in order to circumvent the ability for the Bureau to retain their text messages so they could continue talking.
	And I think it was kind of one of his messages, Sean, was just incredible, where he said, well, if I was going to take classified information out of here, I certainly wouldn't use this phone to do it.
	I mean, why would you even think that to begin with?
	And now what we're hearing is, of course, everybody is in a panic about the release of this memo and this FISA memo that's going to expose all these abuses.
	And now the FBI, what I'm hearing is that FBI Director Christopher Ray and the DOJ, Rod Rosenstein, are putting extraordinary pressure on the president as well as others to not release the memo, others inside the House Intelligence Committee, unless all the names are redacted from the memo.
	They're saying that, and there is a major push.
	Now, the reason for it, Greg, is pretty obvious and transparent.
	And I think Devin Nunes was very clear in his letter in response to the FBI that, you know, is now pushing hard, and you see massive leaking going on as a means of trying to prevent people from getting any information about this and to muddy the waters as much as possible in light of the fact that this is all likely coming out.
	But I think when you really look at the heart and soul of all of this, this is all true, that the dossier was in part used to get a FISA warrant against an opposition party candidate.
	They knew it and they covered it up.
	Which is a crime, abuse of power.
	And, you know, it's so interesting now that the FBI and the Department of Justice, and in particular Rod Rosenstein, are so obviously trying to cover up the wrongdoing that appears to be contained in this four-page Intel memo, which I'm told by somebody who's seen it, is absolute in its facts and testimony gathered by the committee.
	There's no speculation, no hearsay, no gossip or innuendo.
	These are just the facts.
	And, you know, for the FBI and the DOJ to think that they can suppress this from the American people is pure sophistry.
	I mean, it just won't happen.
	And only making themselves look worse.
	You know, this is only a summary, but then we have all the supporting documents behind it, Sarah.
	All right.
	So in other words, these are all based on documents that were finally given at the last hour that were subpoenaed about a year ago that they never wanted to hand over.
	Once we get the memo, I would say the next logical step would be to get the supporting documents with it so we can see it in its raw form and learn from it.
	Well, this is what's so fascinating, Sean.
	Not only are they trying to suppress this FISA amendment, they've been screaming mad about how this violates national security, how this will expose our national security apparatus with regards to the FISA applications.
	I have talked to numerous people, not just one, but numerous people who've had direct knowledge of this memo, direct knowledge of putting together this memo.
	They insist that there is nothing in there that violates national security or the processes by which we obtain the FISA application.
	This is incredible.
	They said not only does the memo not violate national security, but the supporting documents don't violate national security.
	So this is apparently a big push by the DOJ and by the FBI to not release the names that are in that memo, to not expose the people that were involved in this.
	And I think at this point, and I've talked to a number of sources, they're asking Nunez, Devin Nunez, the chairman, to stand strong, to continue fighting this and to release the memo with all the names in there unredacted.
	But who knows how this will play out once the White House makes its final decision.
	Well, and you got Adam Schiff, future MSNBC host out there, trying to smear and slander and besmirch, and now he has enlisted Nancy Pelosi with him.
	But, you know, the minimal changes that were made, as I understand it, one was asked by the FBI, one was over like an error in a grammatical error, but nothing factually at all was changed in any way, shape, or form.
	You're absolutely right.
	It was Schiff and a couple of other Democrats on the Intel Committee who requested the changes.
	So Nunes, the chairman, makes the changes.
	And now Schiff is trying to pretend, oh, these are material changes.
	You've altered the document.
	It's nefarious.
	There's some sort of dastardly conspiracy going on here.
	Schiff is simply making it up as he is prone to do.
	And by the way, Congressman Peter King, who probably knows more about classified information and intelligence of anybody on Capitol Hill, says that he's seen the document.
	It does not reveal sources and methods.
	So that is yet another canard perpetuated by both the FBI and the DOJ, not to mention Adam Schiff.
	Where does this go from here, Sarah?
	And I'll ask you in this sense.
	In other words, we're going to find out these massive FISA abuses, and this is not the only case, as I understand it.
	So what is the next step?
	Because obviously, if we're going to empower FISA courts and lies and propaganda, political propaganda can be used as a foundation to spy on political parties and American citizens, then we're not going to have any liberty or freedom left in this country at all.
	That's why getting this right and getting this fixed is so crucial.
	So assuming the memo comes out and the media will scream bloody murder and they'll try to distract as they're trying to do now and everybody else will complain about it.
	My question is, what's the next step after this?
	I think the most important step, Sean, the most important step in all of this is once this memo is released, remember this is only one part of a major investigation, both on the House intelligence side, House Oversight Committees, as well as the Inspector General Michael Horowitz at the DOJ, looking into all of this.
	Once that memo is released, whistleblowers, remember, this is not just based on a memo written by Devin Nunez.
	There were a number of whistleblowers from within the ICE intelligence community, as well as the FBI, that have already spoken to Michael Horowitz, the IG, have already spoken to people on the committees and discussed what's been going on.
	I think there needs to be an extensive review.
	I think we need to see the changes that Dan Coates says he's going to implement, and we need to hold them firm to that.
	And, you know, unfortunately, there were so many people in Congress so afraid of voting against FISA Section 702 and the renewal of that that they just voted for it.
	It passed.
	But now we need to see what changes will be implemented and whether the president himself will sign an executive order to ensure that those changes are not.
	But now we also have to get back.
	We expect the IG report to come out, and that's investigating the Clinton email server scandal.
	So we're not even talking about that.
	We're just talking about the dossier, the FISA warrant, spying on an opposition candidate, and then this all resulting in Robert Mueller being appointed.
	That would seem to me to say that Robert Mueller needs to disband immediately and end this witch hunt.
	Well, the foundation upon which the entire FBI investigation was originally launched in July of 2016 was in violation of the law and the Department of Justice guidelines, which were enacted into law.
	I just reviewed them a few minutes ago.
	You have to have evidence of a crime and articulable facts.
	Well, at the time, the FBI had neither one of those things.
	They had some contacts between members of the Trump campaign and Russians, but that's not a crime.
	And they had no facts that would suggest there was some sort of espionage going on or anything at all.
	And so it's clear to me, Peter Strzok launched the investigation, signed the papers right after he exonerated Hillary Clinton.
	And it appears he did it for political reasons to destroy Trump's candidacy and if he won, to destroy his presidency.
	And I believe you'll find when all the facts are brought forth from the Inspector General and others that that is the case.
	It was the Russian hoax.
	We'll have more on this tonight.
	You're abusively biased media.
	You have this frenzied effort to change the subject and avoid what is in the memo.
	And it's actually entertaining to watch.
	And finally, the media is about a year late catching up with all of us.
	We'll continue with Sarah Carter, Greg Jarrett on the other side.
	And as we continue, Sarah Carter, Greg Jarrett are with us.
	The battle, the fight, the distractions, the all-out onslaught by everybody to prevent the memo from being released that the House Intelligence Committee has voted out that the public can see, and now the president would just need to sign off on it.
	We expect it's going to happen either today, tomorrow, no later than Monday, I am told.
	And there is a strong push now to get changes in this, as now the media and their willing accomplices that they are to the Democratic Party are pushing hard.
	I don't see this pushback is going to ultimately have any impact on this, Sarah Carter.
	It's so transparently political to me.
	It is.
	It's transparently political.
	But remember, there's a lot of pressure now coming from the Department of Justice and the FBI, who have now pressured the intelligence community to put pressure on the president.
	So the president's going to want to do his due diligence here.
	It's probably going to slow down the release of this memo.
	They're going to ensure that there's nothing in there that can come back to haunt them, even though there isn't.
	I'm sure they're going to go over it numerous times.
	But, Sean, I think really what we need to remember here is that when they had this dossier, let's go back to the dossier.
	In the very beginning, when they were briefing both then President Obama and then President-elect Trump on this dossier, there was no problem for people in the DNC and others to try to shop this dossier around to the media, to leak this dossier that was used as part of a FISA warrant to monitor members of the Trump campaign.
	So they had no problem going after and trying to leak this dossier, but now they have a problem with the country viewing this FISA abuse memo for national security reasons.
	I find that really perplexing.
	Yeah, Greg, your take on the distractions that are going on and the all-out assault on transparency, because that's what this is.
	Well, it's obviously hypocritical, as Sarah so appropriately pointed out.
	You know, here's the problem.
	The FBI has always viewed itself as the law.
	We can do anything.
	We have unfettered discretion.
	We are answerable to no one, even though the Constitution gives Congress oversight.
	But whenever they were asked questions by Congress in the past, they simply obstructed and diverted attention.
	They refused to answer questions or turn over documents.
	And the more they did that, the more empowered they felt so that they could do anything, which is why people like Peter Strzzok and McCabe and Lisa Page and the whole gang that manufactured the case against Trump, it was purely fictitious, and absolved Hillary Clinton notwithstanding incriminating evidence.
	That's why they thought they could get away with it.
	It's unbelievable.
	All right, great work.
	And we really do owe both of you a debt of gratitude.
	There's not been a lot of us, and we've been so far ahead of the curve.
	And here we are, and then in comes the lying media that wants to protect their own false reporting over the last year.
	They're trying to protect their malfeasance, their absolute malpractice and what it is they supposedly do.
	All right, thank you both.
	When we come back, Michelle Malcolm will weigh in.
	And we have Jonathan Gillum and Geraldo Rivera is back.
	We'll check in with him as well straight ahead.
	Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, First Lady of the United States, and my fellow Americans, less than one year has passed since I first stood at this podium in this majestic chamber to speak on behalf of the American people and to address their concerns, their hopes, and their dreams.
	That night, our new administration had already taken very swift action.
	A new tide of optimism was already sweeping across our land.
	Each day since, we have gone forward with a clear vision and a righteous mission to make America great again for all Americans.
	Over the last year, we have made incredible progress and achieved extraordinary success.
	We have faced challenges we expected and others we could never have imagined.
	We have shared in the heights of victory and the pains of hardship.
	We have endured floods and fires and storms.
	But through it all, we have seen the beauty of America's soul and the steel in America's spine.
	The United States is a compassionate nation.
	We are proud that we do more than any other country anywhere in the world to help the needy, the struggling, and the underprivileged all over the world.
	But as President of the United States, my highest loyalty, my greatest compassion, my constant concern is for America's children, America's struggling workers, and America's forgotten communities.
	I want our youth to grow up, to achieve great things.
	I want our poor to have their chance to rise.
	So tonight, I am extending an open hand to work with members of both parties, Democrats and Republicans, to protect our citizens of every background, color, religion, and creed.
	My duty and the sacred duty of every elected official in this chamber is to defend Americans, to protect their safety, their families, their communities, and their right to the American dream.
	Because Americans are dreamers, too.
	All right, that was the president's State of the Union address, 800-941-SHAWN, toll-free telephone numbers.
	So after eight years of failure, oh, let's see, 13 million more Americans on food stamps, 8 million more in poverty.
	You know, the only reason I'm going to tell you again and again is because nobody else will do it.
	All these Democrats, you know, harping on the president, and we've been in one year, we've had more economic success.
	I got a story out today by the Fed in Atlanta, and they are predicting GDP growth literally at 5.4% to start the first quarter of 2018.
	Now, those numbers tend to be adjusted, but it means we are going to have the best GDP growth we have had in a decade and longer.
	And that means jobs, and that means opportunity.
	That means economic growth.
	That means prosperity.
	That means money in your pocket.
	That means the American dream.
	And that all we've got, even when the president says, wow, it's the lowest level of black and Hispanic unemployment in American history.
	And Democrats just sit there as if that's transformative for this country.
	That means people that have suffered, that have been left behind, the forgotten men and women, are now successful.
	Anyway, here to go over all of this and so much more is a rare in-studio appearance.
	I affectionately refer to her and have for many, many years because I feel this way about her.
	I love her like my sister.
	Michelle Malkin is with us.
	And, you know, she has a new series with Conservative Review.
	Michelle Malkin investigates on CRTV.
	You know, I never get to see you anymore.
	How are you?
	Good.
	It's so good to see you, big bro.
	I get to see you on satellite, and people have no idea about this conversation that we have, that we're like brother and sister.
	Yeah, I know.
	Before we do anything else, I know you went public, and I followed the story closely.
	And as a loving mom, you went through a lot there.
	There was a couple of year period.
	You know, your life was tough.
	And you handled it with such grace.
	You also wrote about it, which was beyond touching.
	And your daughter is now thriving and going to college next year.
	And I'm just so happy for you and happy for her.
	And I know that's the scariest thing in your life if your kid faces an illness and you didn't know what it is for a long time.
	Yeah, that's right.
	And I know that you probably have a lot of listeners and viewers out there who can identify as a parent of a child with chronic illness or chronic conditions.
	And if I could trade places with my daughter in a second, I would.
	But she's been such an inspiration to me.
	Her courage and her candor.
	I did not write about her publicly without her consent and permission.
	And her belief was that this would help other kids and other parents.
	And it has.
	And she's made incredible friendships with people bonding over the conditions that she has and the plight that we've gone through.
	But she's mentally tough.
	And I have to say for myself.
	I don't know where she got that from.
	I don't know.
	But I have to say for myself, you know, as a parent, it's, you know, you just feel so weak and helpless.
	And the power of prayer, I can attest to.
	You know what's amazing?
	I'm not afraid of anything at this point in my life.
	I don't care.
	And I feel like I'm missing a chip.
	Somewhere along the line, the chip that cares about what other people think of me is long gone.
	Yes.
	Criticism means nothing to me.
	Yes.
	And I really believe that I want to serve my audience every day and be the best that I can be and do the best job I can do and be the best parent I can, although I'm working too much and my kids yell at me for that.
	But the reality is that there's only two things, there's only two things that make me weak in my life.
	My family and my kids.
	That's it.
	And there's our weakness, although it's also our greatest source of strength.
	I think that I can say for both of us, we do what we do to make sure that our kids have in part.
	Of course, we love our country.
	Absolutely.
	And it's going straight to hell in a handbasket.
	What do you make of this?
	We've been friends for so many years.
	I've interviewed you so many times.
	What do you make of I'm a conservative?
	I've always been a conservative.
	My values haven't changed.
	I'm not a nationalist.
	I'm not a populist.
	And even the Heritage Foundation looked at Trump's first year and said he had a more, by far, actually, a more conservative first year than Reagan.
	Yes.
	And then you got the Never Trumper crowd.
	If he parted the waters and saved lives, if he found a cure for cancer, they wouldn't give this guy credit.
	Yeah, it's true.
	And I think that the warped sense that so many of these anti-Trumpers have, it's almost like I had a suspicion that they really weren't on the side of the right and good in this country.
	But the salutary effect that President Trump has had is that he has exposed the true colors of so many of the enemies of this country.
	And so many of them weren't just on the far left and part of the crazy extremist resistance of the progressives.
	So many of them were the same people that we would see in green rooms or salons or at think tank conferences.
	I've never been to a salon, but go ahead.
	And unfortunately, I did have a tour of duty in Washington, D.C., where I got to be on the inside of that.
	And it's part of the reason why I left the swamp, you know, as a refugee for the last 10 years when I have to go back like I did this week in D.C., it just reminds me of all the reasons why things are so screwed up in this country because you have the Republican establishment types that forget why they were sent there in the first place.
	See, I always knew there were weak rhino Republicans.
	I never knew how deeply embedded the establishment was until Trump disrupted everything.
	And then to see 100 House Republicans not really wanting to repeal and replace Obamacare, and then seven Republicans that vote to eliminate Obamacare in 2015 when it doesn't matter, and they change their mind in 2017.
	Yes.
	And then to see their reaction to Trump and their hatred for his iconoclastic approach to governance and his desire to really fix things.
	You know, I've looked at the Republicans.
	I've said often they're weak, spineless, visionless.
	But it seems like the more that they follow the president's lead, they're getting a spine now.
	They're getting some identity back that was missing.
	I think so.
	I mean, we saw a preview of just how feckless the Republican Party establishment can be during the 2006-2007 fights over amnesty, for example.
	And then during the Tea Party revolution, so many of the establishment Republicans who joined with the liberal media and the liberal Democrats in trashing an honest, limited government conservative movement.
	So, yeah, some of them are getting late epiphanies, but this is what the establishment always does.
	They have these election cycle epiphanies, and then what's the first thing they do after they get re-elected?
	Throw conservatism under the bus.
	Yeah, you know, and it was funny.
	Go back to 2013.
	I remember I really liked what Ted Cruz did.
	I mean, well, we have the power of the purse.
	It's constitutional.
	We can defund Obamacare.
	And he was excoriated.
	They beat the hell out of this poor guy.
	Oh, we're never going to win in 2014.
	That didn't happen.
	I do think that those of us that are trust and verify people, I don't trust them still in any way.
	And I do think that if they don't follow through further, we got rid of the mandate of Obamacare in the tax bill and the tax decrease bill or the tax reduction bill.
	If we don't finish that job, if we don't build another 300 miles of wall so they can campaign on it, I think they're in trouble.
	I absolutely agree with you.
	We are limited government conservatives who operate on empirical evidence.
	And the evidence over the last 25 years is that there's always been the dangling of immigration enforcement and building the wall.
	And it's like Lucy and the football and Charlie Brown.
	87, 2006, 2013.
	I mean, look, the 2006 Secure Fence Act was supposed to have built 700 miles.
	And it was a fraction.
	I called it Fino.
	They never funded.
	A fence in name only.
	That's funny.
	What do you make of what the president proposed?
	I know that, listen, there's a certain reality that any conservative faces is that you got to, if you want the wall, you want an end to chain migration, you want an end to the Visa lottery, it seems like the price of that is going to be DACA.
	Is that a bad deal if that's the only way you get the wall?
	Because from my perspective, I think that's probably the only doable deal.
	But the Democrats don't want DACA.
	They want to run on DACA.
	Yeah, that's right.
	Look at them.
	I mean, Trump offered amnesty to 1.8 million people, and they called it racist, xenophobic, and nativist.
	Wow.
	So that alone, I think, is very valuable, again, for exposing true colors.
	Let me say this about President Trump and chain migration.
	I never thought in the 25 years that I've been writing about immigration that we would be at this point where not only was it finally public that has to be changed, that no other country runs their immigration system like this, and that we could say it out loud.
	Of course, there are those crazy open borders zealots who consider chain migration some sort of racist slur when it is a neutral term for a very bad public policy.
	If in fact, and he has stuck with that, he has made it a fundamental, it is non-negotiable.
	And so for those of us on the strict immigration enforcement side, that is an astonishing accomplishment.
	Stay right there.
	Michelle Malkin, she is in studio with us.
	She's the host of our new series on CRTV.
	It's called Michelle Malkin Investigates, a regular on Hannity and on the TV show.
	We don't get to see her very often.
	It's great to have her in studio today.
	Sean Hannity Shelby, Michelle Malkin is with us, CRTV.
	Michelle Malkin Investigates, 800-941.
	Sean, what do you make of the battle for the memo?
	We're going to get it.
	You see, the media is in full hysteria mode today.
	They hadn't even talked about a lot of this.
	But what we discovered a year ago and broke with Sarah Carter and John Solomon that, yeah, Trump Tower, it was a Pfizer warrant issued, but now we know it was in part because of Hillary Clinton's bought and paid for phony dossier.
	It's very dangerous if an opposition party can be spied on with phony paid-for information.
	It is.
	And you would think that all of these open government sunshine groups and journalists who are always demanding more and more information would be out there clamoring with you for transparency and disclosure.
	And yet they're the ones, like vampires and ghouls, standing in the way, obstructing it.
	You know, I mean, I thought whatever happened to the journalists that actually, you know, a third-rate burglary was a big enough deal that they would dig and dig and it eventually resulted in our president resigning.
	Right.
	I mean, there's a movie about it right now celebrating the Pentagon.
	Well, where is the media on spying and issuing FISA warrants based on Hillary Clinton bought and paid for lies?
	Russian lies of all things.
	Here's what I want to know.
	How many other FISA warrants have been secured?
	Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.
	You're way too smart.
	How many others?
	Way too.
	Well, that's the thing.
	It's widespread abuse.
	Yes.
	And then after that, then we have to figure out: okay, there wasn't a real investigation because it was fixed and rigged her email investigation.
	We got to go back to that.
	Uranium One, I'm dying to hear from the guy that was in the FBI for six years that blew the whistle.
	And then we've got unmasking leaking raw intelligence.
	You know, it should be a gold mine for honest investigative journalists.
	They're nowhere to be found, and you and your team are filling the vacuum.
	Listen, a lot of the people that I'm working with, including yourself over the years, deserve Pullets or Prizes.
	All I want is a pay raise.
	No.
	Honestly, you know what I want?
	I want my country saved.
	That's all I want.
	Michelle, we love you.
	It's so good to see you.
	Thank you, Tom.
	So happy about your daughter.
	It's such a relief, I'm sure, for you and her.
	And we're praying for both of you.
	Thanks for being with us.
	All right, when we come back, news roundup: information overload.
	Geraldo versus Jonathan Gillum on the memo.
	When are we going to get the memo?
	Release the memo.
	I've read it and I've read the underlying source material.
	It is profoundly misleading.
	So you read it and you weren't concerned about things.
	You don't have further questions about the FISA process.
	No.
	We are now being victimized by what is the biggest lie propaganda campaign and effort, and it's all designed to keep alive a phony investigation that they have been wrong about, which is Trump-Russia collusion.
	When we eventually get the memo, tonight, tomorrow, the latest, we're told, Monday.
	When we get the memo, here is what you got to understand.
	It all goes back to fundamentals and all goes back to basics.
	Is we have these problems.
	You had the fix in on Hillary Clinton's email server investigation and exoneration before even the investigation began.
	This was done by people that viewed the president as, quote, loathsome, F him, that are involved in literally thinking they know better than the American people.
	Nobody gets exonerated before you investigate.
	It doesn't happen.
	Then you've got on top of that.
	By the way, she did rig the primary election.
	We'll put that off to the side.
	But it was rigged, the email investigation, so she could remain the candidate.
	Other Americans would go to jail for mishandling classified information.
	They would go to jail for deleting 33,000 subpoenaed emails.
	They would go to jail for acid washing and bleach-bitting their hard drives so that nobody could get them.
	They would go to jail for obstruction, having people hammer their personal devices like their iPhones and their BlackBerries.
	So the fix was in with Bernie.
	The fix was in with Comey Struck, Paige, McCabe, and likely Loretta Lynch in terms of the investigation and not charging Hillary.
	Then Hillary Clinton pays for a Russian, of all things, a Russian propaganda, salacious dossier that was never corroborated even by the people that put it together.
	And then that dossier, those Russian lies, were the foundation of a FISA warrant against a presidential candidate and soon-to-be president-elect.
	Anyway, joining us to weigh in on all of this, Geraldo Rivera, of course, with the Fox News channel.
	Jonathan Gillum is the host of The Experts and author of the best-selling book, Sheep No More.
	Geraldo, I want to start with you.
	You're a lawyer.
	This is corruption on a level we've never seen before.
	We had a president removed from office, had to resign because of a third-rate break-in and cover-up.
	You know, using the intelligence, the powerful tools of intelligence to spy on opposition candidates based on phony information the other candidate paid for is beyond scandalous to me.
	Some people need to go to jail on this.
	You know, I appreciate the sincerity of your rage, but I think that if you keep bringing up the 33,000 deleted emails and all that kind of stuff, you risk taking the spotlight off what I think you personally have discovered with your team, which is the most incredible scandal of all, the fact that this salacious, never-documented,
	partisan, sponsored dossier became the basis for a sacred FISA warranty with all of the indictment of Carter Page and everything else.
	But the problem is, Geraldo, is that the fix was in by the very same people in the upper echelons of the FBI and the intelligence community that saved her.
	And that's part of the story, is that they didn't follow the rule of law.
	We can't have a two-tier justice system where the elite get one set of rules and the rest of us get another set.
	And then those same people were responsible for accepting this phony dossier full of lies, salacious Russian lies that they paid for to spy on an opposition candidate and then a president-elect and his entire team, which then leads to an investigation and a special counsel that has hurt the country for an entire year, all predicated on lies.
	I hear you, but the last thing the country needs is for another special counsel to distract us for another year, going back over everything that you have mentioned.
	Why not focus?
	The allegation was the president of the United States colluded with the, as the candidate, colluded with the Russians to fix the election.
	We know that is not true.
	There's been no evidence of that.
	All the special counsel or special prosecutor has come up with is anything that happened after that.
	Did someone not tell him the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
	But the fact is that everything that Mueller is doing, vis-a-vis the president of the United States, when you all trace it back, it comes to that steel dossier.
	Let's take it from there.
	Let's rid the history books and the country of the world.
	But you don't doubt that Hillary committed crimes deleting the subpoenaed emails.
	You don't doubt that mishandling and destroying classified top-secret information.
	For example, we know five foreign intelligence agencies were able to hack into that information.
	They stole it.
	That put people's lives in jeopardy.
	And I understand you're saying move on almost, but move on means that's never going to happen to Sean Hannity if he's in trouble.
	Sean Hannity is going to be begging Geraldo Rivera for a cake with a file.
	And you know I would be there for you.
	I know, but you'll get caught with a file.
	Hillary Clinton now, to me, is as remote as Richard Nixon.
	It is so, it's ancient history.
	I care nothing.
	I don't mean to be disrespectful to the former Secretary of State and Senator from New York, but I care nothing about Hillary Clinton in this context.
	I care deeply and profoundly about the 45th President of the United States, and he deserves a clean slate to move forward with his agenda and get this special counsel off his back.
	I think the American people need government going back to the ordinary, normal, reasonable, prudent people.
	But you're accepting a premise that I don't buy.
	I've never seen the press so abusively biased, so wrong on the facts.
	I agree with that.
	And so unwilling to look at the biggest abuse of our Fourth Amendment constitutional rights in our history, they're ignoring it.
	Let me bring Jonathan in, though, first here.
	Jonathan.
	Well, what is being missed in all this with Raldo?
	All due respect with Raldo.
	He's a great investigative reporter.
	You know, I grew up watching everything that he's done.
	And I think what he's missing here is something that I'm a little puzzled by a lot of people: is that you can't just start at one point in an investigation and go forward.
	You know, when I was in the FBI, if we get a case, we get a clue on something, somebody comes in and makes a complaint, we don't just start from that point and go forward.
	And I think there's clear evidence when we look at what happened with the dossier and what's happened with all these other things with Strzok and McCabe and the whole group of people is that they didn't just do things from the point of the dossier forward.
	There is a whole history that is slowly unfolding the more we dig, the more we see there's a whole history of things that these people are doing.
	And the difference between, and I've said this before, the difference between like with Nixon in that case was you had a White House administration, a group of people that did something, and then the White House Nixon tried to cover that up.
	But what we're having now is you have a group of people that are creating evidence to entrap a president and his administration.
	So this is completely different where there's a president being accused of doing things where he didn't do it, but a whole group of other politicians are creating the evidence.
	And that, to me, goes far beyond whatever happened with Nixon or these other things that we've ever seen because those were things that they did and then they covered it up.
	But this is literally taking the power that we entrust these people with, and they are using it to formulate a case to entrap a president of the United States.
	And this goes far beyond just this dossier.
	It goes back all the way, I believe, with Clinton, with the 33,000 emails, with Comey.
	And he came out and gave a 14-minute speech telling us how guilty she was, and then one-minute speech telling us that she was innocent.
	It goes far beyond that.
	And my sources in the FBI that I've talked to, the agents are enraged with the way these things occurred because they put their faith behind Comey, and now they're seeing the reality of how deep this goes.
	And I got an email the other day after doing a show from a retired agent that was, he'd been in, he retired back in the early 2000s.
	And he was telling me that there were signs of this happening all the way back then, where these senior executive service agents maneuver a lot of the cases that are political for whatever political entity that they are favoring.
	And I think this is something that in the FBI and the DOJ and in politics is they've learned how to master their authority and the authority of the FBI to create, and maybe not to this extent before, but to definitely create the illusion of somebody being guilty or not guilty.
	And in this case, I think they're even creating evidence to entrap the president.
	I want to take it more technically.
	I don't disagree with anything Jonathan said.
	And I think that you could do 100 shows, Sean, about how you call it the D-State, whatever you call it, how there are within institutions as absolutely exalted as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, these cliques with political biases one way or the other.
	But as a lawyer, here's what I say: you have Carter Page getting trapped and basically pleading guilty and then wearing a wire and getting conversations.
	We don't know with whom he spoke, but you can imagine because months passed after they got him and they turned him.
	So he's gotten a lot of dirt that we don't know what, and we don't know from whom, but we can assume that it gets closer and closer to the president, if not the president himself, although I doubt that.
	But he gets close and he gets people involved.
	What you've got to do, though, is look at the Carter Page indictment.
	Look how they squeezed him.
	Did that indictment, was that indictment the fruit of the poison tree?
	In other words, did that indictment come down because of the Pfizer warrant that was based on the phony dossier?
	If you can attack the Carter Page indictment and guilty plea, everything that he's dug up, everything, whoever he has spoken to, because there is an illegal foundation, there is an unlawful beginning.
	You can purge everything.
	There's nothing.
	What can Mueller do to rehabilitate the Carter Page situation when his whole criminal, but it was a pretext to Raldo?
	It was all designed to spy on an opposition candidate.
	I agree.
	And it was the irony in all of this, with all the talk about collusion, Trump-Russia collusion, there was collusion.
	And the collusion with Russia, the lies from Russia, were bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton.
	I mean, and this is the media is so abusively biased and corrupt that they've missed the biggest story in their lifetime.
	I got to take a break more with Geraldo Rivera.
	We'll have full coverage of the media meltdown, the assault on the people getting to know the truth.
	That's tonight on Hannity, 9 Eastern on Fox.
	Or with Jonathan Gillum and Geraldo next.
	We continue.
	Geraldo Rivera, Jonathan Gillum are with us.
	Geraldo, I hate to tell you.
	The email server is now going to be investigated.
	The IG report is expected in March.
	And then from there, then we still have a Uranium one.
	We had an FBI agent inside of Putin's network for six years.
	And he knows about the bribery and extortion and kickbacks and money laundering.
	He was there for a full 18 months before they ever signed off on CFIS.
	And Robert Mueller was the FBI director.
	And then we have the abuse of surveillance and unmasking and no minimization and releasing the government releasing raw intelligence on American citizens like General Flynn.
	I think, Sean, first of all, as I have said before, Nixon never would have been forced to resign if you existed in your current state back in 1972, 73, 74.
	Geraldo, I was literally 11 years old.
	I know.
	It's too bad for Nixon because nobody like you existed then.
	I say that because I believe that our prime responsibility now is to unshackle the 45th president of the United States, is to rid Donald Trump of the But aren't you assuming they'll stop what indication is there that they'll never they're never gonna stop trying to tear this man down they are they are a toothless tiger now once once now it is exposed that the dossier was bought and paid for That it was the fake basis of the FISA warrant.
	That everything from there forward is invalid, I would submit as a constitutional lawyer.
	Everything from the fake FISA warrant or the cancerous FISA warrant forward is absolutely inadmissible, irrelevant.
	It should be thrown out.
	I want the president first to get a note from Moch.
	I don't get the memo, all that stuff is BS.
	All I want now is for him, Donald Trump, to be free of this, to go on with his agenda, and I'll fight with him on specifics on the agenda with DACA and et cetera.
	But I think that what we have seen is a president who has been unfairly attacked for a year with law enforcement, a premier law enforcement agency, and some high-flying, long-standing civil servants who had taken it upon themselves to attack a man unfairly and have crippled this administration.
	And whatever he's done, he's done despite them.
	I look that way.
	I look forward.
	I look to 2018, 2019, 2020, and forward.
	If we go back, the danger is we get, we'll be in this.
	It's not about us going back.
	Trey Gowdy and Emmy is not running for office.
	Why?
	Because of the Benghazi thing, weighed him down until it drowned his political ambition.
	I don't want the Republicans to look back.
	I want them to look forward.
	All right, I got to let it go here.
	Thank you both for being with us.
	We appreciate it.
	But Mr. Clapper then went on to say that, to his knowledge, there was no evidence of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians.
	We did not conclude any evidence in our report.
	And when I say our report, that is the NSA, FBI, and CIA with my office.
	The Director of National Intelligence had anything, any reflection of collusion between the members of the Trump campaign and the Russians.
	There was no evidence of that in our report.
	Was Mr. Clapper wrong when he said that?
	I think he's right about characterizing the report, which you all have read.
	We did not include any evidence in our report, and I say our, that's NSA, FBI, and CIA with my office, the Director of National Intelligence, that had anything, that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians.
	There was no evidence of that included in our report.
	Have you seen anything, either intelligence briefings, through intelligence briefings, anything to back up any of the accusations that you have made?
	They have the documentation that they did the hacking.
	The hacking.
	On the DNC.
	Right.
	And on some of us, you know, that have been.
	But the collusion, though.
	No, we have not.
	Do you have evidence that there was, in fact, collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?
	Not at this time.
	Have you seen anything that suggests any collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign?
	Well, there's an awful lot of smoke there, let's put it that way.
	People that might have said they were involved, to what extent they were involved, to what extent the president might have known about these people or whatever.
	There's nothing there from that standpoint that we have seen directly linking our president to any of that.
	Did evidence exist of collusion, coordination, conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors at the time you learned of 2016 efforts?
	I don't know whether or not such collusion, that's your term, such collusion existed.
	I don't know.
	The big question is, of course, is: is there any evidence of collusion you have seen yet?
	Is there?
	There is a lot of smoke.
	We have no smoking gun at this point, but there is a lot of smoke.
	Diane Feinstein has said there's no evidence of collusion.
	So collusion between whom?
	Can you tell us that?
	I'm not prepared to say that there's proof you could take to a jury, but I can say that there is enough that we ought to be investigating.
	At the time you separated from service in January of 2017, had you seen any evidence that Donald Trump or any member of his campaign colluded, conspired, or coordinated with the Russians or anyone else to infiltrate or impact our voter infrastructure?
	Not beyond what has been out there open source and not beyond anything that I'm sure this committee has already seen and heard before directly from the intelligence community.
	Well, no, I mean, I learned about the dossier a few days ago.
	How is that possible?
	Well, because you hire a lawyer, and we hire lawyers all the time who hire third-party vendors to do their work.
	And so we knew that we were paying for opposition research at the DNC, but we didn't ask questions about who they're hiring in the context of doing their research.
	You don't believe Hillary Clinton knew about this either.
	Is that right?
	Oh, I don't know.
	I up in the campaign be informed of this.
	Well, I mean, she may have known, but the degree of exactly what she knew is beyond my knowledge.
	For instance, it could have been that a decision was made to authorize Perkins Cooey to do some kind of commission, some kind of research, but then decisions about, you know, going out and finding Fusion GPS, finding Christopher Steele.
	I mean, she may or may not have been aware of that level of detail.
	I don't know.
	When did you learn the DNC and the Clinton campaign were behind the dossier?
	I wasn't aware of the arrangement at all.
	And then how can you, could you have led the DNC and be in the dark about the dossier?
	I wasn't aware of the arrangement at all.
	But do you see these things, Senator, as equivalent of the Hillary Clinton campaign, looking for dirt from Russians and Russians offering dirt to the Trump campaign?
	If you're asking about the dossier, that was funded by a conservative online publication, Washington Free Beacon.
	At first, let me finish.
	Let me finish.
	And they hired a firm that was working with a British Secret Service agent.
	And then when they decided to drop it, apparently we now know that some of the funds to continue the investigation were paid for by the Clinton campaign.
	Hillary, is there a difference between your team paying for this opposition research and Donald Trump's people working with the Russians to influence the election?
	Is there a difference?
	Of course there is.
	And, you know, I think most serious people understand that.
	This was research started by a Republican donor during the Republican primary.
	And then when Trump got the nomination for the Republican Party, the people doing it came to my campaign lawyer and said, you know, would you like us to continue it?
	And he said yes.
	He's an experienced lawyer.
	He knows what the law is.
	He knows what opposition research is.
	I've never seen anything like this in my life.
	And we've never been more right in our lives than we are now.
	And I've never seen a media that is so corrupt as it is now, nor Democrats.
	I mean, when you have Pelosi and Schumer, I mean, you expect them, you know, and all these others, all this group now trying to attack anybody that wants to expose what is the biggest case of fraud, abuse, corruption, abuse of power in our entire lifetimes.
	And weaponizing, literally weaponizing the intelligence community to spy on an opposition party candidate using bought and paid for phony Russian information from the other candidate, the favored candidate.
	And then the people that want to tell the American people the truth now are being assaulted.
	It is the single greatest threat to constitutional government we've seen in our lifetime.
	And if we don't get the truth out, if we don't get to the bottom of this abuse, and this is allowed to continue, let me tell you, spying on Americans, you're going to do it to a presidential candidate in a presidential election year, and then you're going to use it as a basis to try and destroy that individual, and you're going to let it go under the heading of, oh, let's move on, and you're going to let Hillary get away with crimes that nobody else would get away with,
	then we don't have a constitutional republic anymore.
	You don't have the rule of law anymore.
	And that is what is in play here.
	And a media that has been wrong for an entire year has now shifted and turned, and they are defending what is indefensible lawbreaking, an indefensible assault on the Constitution and the rule of law.
	And the people that are telling the truth, that are exposing the truth, somehow have become the enemy in their minds.
	And that means they can say pretty much anything they want to say with impunity, which they are now doing.
	The amazing thing is, we have been right for an entire year.
	We're the ones that have been all over this for an entire year.
	We reported a year ago that there was a FISA warrant issued against then-candidate Donald Trump, and the media ignored it.
	They mocked the president when he said they spied upon Trump Tower.
	They wiretapped Trump Tower.
	Well, we knew what he was saying.
	And I think most Americans can shift through all the noise and all the clutter, as you did on the Russia investigation.
	Now, the same people that have lied to you for a year are trying to convince you this is horrible, telling you the truth, that all of this happened, that a phony, bought and paid for Clinton Russia, Russian, lying dossier became part of the reason that, by the way, had never been verified,
	part of the narrative to get a FISA warrant to spy on an opposition party candidate.
	I would tell you, if you reverse any of this, if Donald Trump stole the primary from 16 other people, just reverse it all.
	If Donald Trump had the FBI director and FBI high-ranking people in the FBI exonerating him without investigating him so he could go on and continue his candidacy, if Donald Trump paid for Russian lies and propaganda about Hillary, if those lies were then the foundation to spy on Hillary in the middle of an election year, and those lies were the foundation of spying,
	and then spy on Hillary as she's a president-elect, if God forbid she ever won, what do you think the media would do today?
	They'd be on the exact opposite side.
	It shows just how deeply rooted this corruption is in this country.
	Look, all my life and career, I've known big government as a conservative, as Thomas Paine said, you know, in its best state, a necessary evil, in its worst state, an intolerable one.
	Our founders and framers fundamentally understood in their solar plexus, their inner being, that big government and power corrupts in the United States of America at the highest levels in the Intel community,
	even the great institution that I love, the FBI, there are real heroes that work in the FBI, have been corrupted by power and politics, and they've been exposed.
	And in the process, as we're now getting to the finish line to show you the deep level of corruption, they can't handle it.
	They don't want to be exposed.
	And so their willing accomplices, the provida of our day, the propagandists and liars in our time in the mainstream media, they are trying to flip the narrative.
	They won't tell you they've been wrong the entire time.
	You know, but it's going to get interesting because if God forbid they ever won the day, what would it mean for the country?
	Maybe they're next.
	Maybe they'll be spied on.
	Maybe they'll be the ones that have warrants against them.
	Wouldn't that be interesting?
	Wait, this is the United States.
	We can't spy on people without a warrant or with a warrant that's based on, you know, my worst enemies' lies.
	It's almost like you can't even believe it, but it all happened.
	And we're now this close to getting the truth.
	And so the only thing, the only bullet in their propaganda arsenal, if you will, is to attack the memo, attack the people telling the truth and exposing the truth.
	That is desperation.
	Now, I assume there's going to be people on the left.
	You know, I used to think liberals cared about civil liberties.
	I thought they cared about unreasonable search and seizure.
	I guess maybe if it was a pot raid, maybe if the government was spying illegally on a pot dealer, maybe they wouldn't be so upset.
	Well, it's only pot.
	And, you know, how dare you spy on that pot dealer?
	They're not civil libertarians.
	And by the way, we saw the other night, they don't really particularly like the fact that Donald Trump is successful either, because it makes all their policies look awful.
	800-941-Sean Tolfrey telephone number.
	Let's get to our busy phones.
	Let's say hi to Evelyn is in Illinois.
	Evelyn, hi, how are you?
	Glad you called.
	Hi, Sean.
	Hey, thanks for taking my call.
	Thank you.
	I have an observation here regarding the Democrats, and I suppose you could throw the media in with this about this four-page memo.
	And that is, I feel like the Democrats have actually implicated themselves in what this memo is going to reveal just by their behavior and just by their reaction to it.
	This 10-page supposedly rebuttal memo that they've come up with, why is it theirs to rebut?
	I mean, I'm a believer in hearing both sides to a story, but wouldn't the other side of this story be the FBI?
	The facts.
	The facts are the facts in all of this.
	You've got to understand that.
	The facts here are the facts.
	And the facts are that we know the dossier that Hillary Balton paid for was used to spy on Donald Trump's campaign.
	That's a fact.
	This can happen in the United States of America, or it shouldn't happen without severe consequences, right?
	Right.
	And I agree completely.
	I just feel like if the Republicans had produced a memo about the Democrats, and maybe they are going to be more specifically implicated in this memo when it comes out, and maybe that's what they're afraid of.
	But I feel like the way they're reacting, they're just proving that they're guilty.
	I always have believed that they were, but I feel that their behavior and the way they're reacting is proving their guilt because to me, in an ideal world, the FBI is apolitical.
	And in an ideal world, the Democrats would be standing alongside of the Republicans and wanting this to be revealed and wanting the truth to come out.
	So the fact that they're going to great lengths to try to defend the FBI, to me, just proves it.
	By the way, this is not an attack on the FBI.
	This is an attack on the upper echelon.
	I make that distinction every time because that was a talking point, too.
	They ignored the issue for a year, and here we are in the verge of everything I've been telling you being confirmed, and they can't handle it.
	And just like, and they can't handle being so wrong on Russia, they can't handle that Mueller's, Mueller must be disbanded as a result of all this.
	All right, Hannity, tonight, Nine Eastern Fox News.
	We have an unbelievable show.
	All right, on the eve of the release of the memo, we are going to show just how psychotic, pathological the media and the left in this country is.
	Michelle Malkin, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Carter, Greg Jarrett, Jason Chaffetz will also be checking in with Ron DeSantis, Jesse Waters, and Jessica Tarlow.
	Nine Eastern tonight.
	Tomorrow, we release the memo.
	We'll have full coverage.
	Hope you'll join us.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	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.

▲