Sean Hannity Show - The Sky Isn't Falling - 2.6

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 7, 2018 - Sean Hannity Show

01:38:04

The Sky Isn't Falling - 2.6

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 with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, 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.
	When 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.
	Let not your heart be troubled.
	You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
	So for a few years now, I have been working with Express Employment Professionals, and they've been helping you, my listeners, know where to turn in your job search.
	Now, Express offers local connections to the good jobs where you live in a variety of industries.
	So if you're looking for a job, go online, find the nearest express office at expresspros.com and let them help you.
	Now, recently, one Express associate shared this, quote, after applying everywhere for work, I called ExpressPros.
	After going into the office, I had a job that day.
	Now, when you turn to Express Pros, you benefit from 35 years of experience in putting people to work.
	They help more than a half a million people find jobs each and every year, and job seekers at Express Pros never pay a fee whatsoever.
	Just go to expresspros.com, find the location nearest you.
	And another Express associate said, Express called me to come in for an interview right away and then sent me to interview with the company that same day.
	So don't go it alone any longer in your search for a job.
	Find your local Express Employment Professional's office at expresspros.com.
	All right, glad you're with us.
	So much breaking news.
	It's hard to keep track of it all.
	I said that last night.
	Oh, that became a con, it's so complicated, but yet so easy.
	As if that is a it's sort of like a paradox.
	There's a lot of information, but the information makes a lot of sense when you begin to piece it all together.
	You know what the amazing thing is?
	This is only a small, small sampling of what's coming.
	This is nothing.
	There's so much more to come.
	You know, let's start out today with this.
	Democrats like to argue Robert Mueller, Russia Gate, the investigation is making serious progress by pointing out that he's already indicted four people.
	Michael Flynn plat out.
	There was an, I guess as Roger Stone said today, and I don't blame him, General Flynn plans to file a motion for the court to dismiss all charges.
	If I'm Michael Flynn's attorney, I would do that yesterday.
	But anyway, so you have Democrats arguing, well, look at what's happened.
	We've got four indicted people.
	We got Michael Flynn.
	We got Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, and George Papadopoulos, who nobody knew.
	But since the Manafort and Gates indictments, you don't have any, they don't have anything to do with Russia.
	Nothing to do with collusion.
	And the number of Mueller's relevant indictments really stands at two people that are charged so far.
	And for minor things here, we're not talking about anything that is, oh my God, this is the smoking gun about Trump-Russia collusion.
	The media has had egg on its face for a year because there's no evidence of any collusion.
	And they're now just fishing for anything that they can get on anybody to try and salvage the phony narrative that they've been pushing to the American people now for the last year.
	But with that said, if you take a look at what has happened to the anti-Trump Mueller-Comey team, let's see, Andrew McCabe was fired after the Inspector General implicated him in the Hillary email cover-up.
	I can't wait for this Inspector General's report to come out.
	You know, Nunes was on last night on TV.
	He's talking about a number of other memos that this is really what we've learned in this memo, how the FISA court was pretty much lied to and purposely misled to create this FISA warrant against an incoming president by an opposition party.
	Anyway, so you've got Andrew McCabe.
	He was fired.
	The Inspector General implicated him in the Hillary email cover-up.
	You got Peter struck.
	He was thrown overboard by Mueller after his anti-Trump, loathsome F him texts were discovered with his mistress girlfriend, Lisa Page, who was also tossed overboard by Mueller based on these anti-Trump texts.
	Career also now in shambles.
	Both of them should be fired sooner than later.
	Bruce Orr has been demoted.
	He should be fired also, you know, from two top FBI posts after being tied to Fusion GPS.
	His ultimate destination probably is going to end in a firing.
	You got Christopher Ray's chief of staff, James Rabicki, he left the bureau after being tied to Hillary Clinton's letter, the Hillary letter.
	And you got top FBI lawyer James Baker was reassigned after secretly communicating with the media about the Trump dossier.
	So if you're looking for a scoreboard here, you know, in perfect Super Bowl style, you've got Robert Mueller, two Russia Gate indictments, and they're minor.
	And frankly, I don't even think they are worthy of mentioning, to be honest.
	But as of now, we've got six top Justice Department FBI officials either fired, reassigned, demoted, or retired.
	And it's only the beginning of all of this.
	You know, there was a story out in the Hill today that the Inspector General report on Hillary Clinton's email server scandal is expected to set off shockwaves.
	Now, you've got this guy, Horowitz, now, who's been doing this.
	His name is Michael Horowitz.
	And the Hill reports today that he's going to be releasing this report very soon as it relates to the FBI's Hillary email cover-up, which is now being investigated by the Justice Department Inspector General.
	His name is General Michael Horowitz.
	And according to the report in the Hill, that is expected to set off shockwaves.
	Now, Horowitz, the Department of Justice Inspector General, is an increasingly critical player in all of this, especially with the controversy surrounding the FBI and the DOJ and President Trump and the Russia investigation.
	Anyway, for over a year now, he has been conducting a sprawling probe of the FBI's handling of the 2016 investigation into Hillary's use of the private email server.
	His full report, if it's truthful, could literally be a game changer in all of this.
	Now, Horowitz's year-long investigation already reportedly contributed to the early resignation of Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and his work has been felt apparently in other ways.
	Horowitz also was the guy that uncovered the series of text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page that led special counsel Robert Mueller to remove Strzok from his team and Page from his team.
	Now, those texts have fueled accusations among GOP lawmakers that Mueller's probe was tainted in partisanship.
	Well, we already knew that because he only hired Clinton, Obama, and DNC donors, and he didn't find one Trump supporter.
	And he hired people like Andrew Weissman, a guy that once withheld exculpatory evidence in a particular case, and then a guy that was responsible in the Enron Anderson accounting case, that he was the guy that was responsible for tens of thousands of people losing their job.
	And then that case got overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court 9-0.
	He put four Merrill executives in jail.
	That was overturned by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
	You know, so you got Robert Mueller picking a bunch of losers, you know, from the get-go because those are people that are aggressive, and those are people that he wanted on his team, because it seems like Mueller from the get-go has had a big agenda himself.
	But I digress here for a second.
	So those who know Horowitz say that he's an independent voice.
	We'll see over time.
	Quote, he's really one of the smartest, fairest people I've ever had the pleasure to work with, said Bill Hamill, who served as an assistant inspector general for investigations at the Department of Education.
	He's a straight shooter and a fair guy.
	He's an honest broker.
	But Horowitz's reputation will be put to the test when he releases the findings on the Clinton email investigation because no matter what he concludes, it's likely to create a political firestorm coming at a time when both Republicans and the White House are charging all of this political bias being rampant at the DOJ and the FBI.
	And the Inspector General is examining whether then FBI Director James Comey broke FBI procedures in his public disclosures about the Clinton case, including the letter that he sent to Congress a few weeks before the election and before Trump fired Comey.
	Democrats were outspoken in their criticism for those decisions, saying that he violated procedure and cost Clinton the election.
	Lanny Davis has a brand new book saying as much out there today, but Horowitz is looking into the allegations.
	But here's some facts we know.
	18 U.S.C. 793, the mishandling of classified information.
	This is part of the Espionage Act.
	That's a crime.
	Destruction of top secret special access program and classified information.
	That's a crime.
	Hillary did those things.
	And why she would get a pass is beyond any understanding I have if we have equal justice under the law.
	And then when 33,000 emails were subpoenaed, you know, good luck to all of you listening to this program right now if you decide to delete them.
	And then you decide to super delete them and acid wash your hard drive with bleach pit.
	And then to make tripoli short, take a hammer to your devices because some of those emails may have been transferred there.
	Because that's exactly what Hillary did, all of which are crimes.
	And I think on top of the acid wash and the hammer game that she's playing in the deleting game, that sounds like obstruction of justice to me.
	So to me, a lot's going to be writing on what this Inspector General says.
	If he has any fidelity to the truth and to the law, it should be a no-brainer that, in fact, Hillary got special treatment by James Comey and Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe and Lisa Page and everybody else because they wanted to make a decision that she could continue running in that race.
	And if they would have charged her, it would have upended an American election at that time.
	Now, Steele is still dodging Trump dossier lawsuits in London and Florida.
	Fox News reporting that Christopher Steele, the guy who was paid by Hillary Clinton to compile this phony, salacious Trump dossier, that we now know from the second memo that was released by the Grassley committee yesterday, that, you know, we now know that, in fact, a lot of this money came from sources.
	Oh, let's see, the Russian government.
	The exact line in the memo said Mr. Steele gathered much of his information from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	He can't make this stuff up considering I thought this was such a horrible thing, which led to this whole investigation about Trump and Russia.
	Anyway, Christopher Steele was a no-show yesterday for a long-requested deposition in London in connection with a multi-million dollar libel case brought against BuzzFeed.
	And the news comes as the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham have announced a criminal referral on Steele.
	Now, Evan Frey Witzer is a Boston-based attorney that's representing a Russian tech tycoon in this multi-million dollar civil litigation described Monday in UK court action to Fox News.
	My understanding is Mr. Steele's lawyers spent a good deal of their time arguing why they thought that Steele should not be required to sit for a deposition and that ultimately the court took the entire matter under advisement.
	And meanwhile, records obtained and reviewed by Fox News from related civil litigation in Florida reveal Steele maintains that even showing up for a deposition would implicate state secrets in London.
	And Frey Witzer stressed in the hearing that the British government has not asserted Steele's claim.
	And the attorney has said Steele is asserting that he can't speak about other things.
	We have pointed out that he's spoken to anyone who's willing to listen, every journalist and the FBI.
	And Steele's business partner, a guy by the name of Chris Burroughs, declined Fox News's request for an interview in an email stating, I regret that for a number of reasons, Christopher Steele is not available to speak on or off the record about this subject.
	I bet he's not.
	All you have to do is flip the script.
	Now, one other piece of information, according to NBC News, the FBI Director Christopher Wray has acknowledged for the first time that the corruption that was uncovered by the Justice Department, that the Inspector General Michael Horowitz, again, we're expecting the IG report to come out sometime in March, is so serious that this is what prompted Ray to confront his top deputy, Andrew McCabe, with some of the findings, which then caused McCabe to resign.
	This is NBC News saying that Ray made it clear in a message sent to all bureau employees on Monday night that Andrew McCabe's decision to step aside was the result of the forthcoming information to be detailed in an Inspector General report, according to a copy of the message obtained by NBC News.
	And Ray alluded to having seen aspects of the IG's report into the way the FBI handled the investigation into Hillary's email server.
	And several sources familiar with McCabe's move said he made the decision as a result of meeting with Ray in which the Inspector General's investigation was discussed.
	So we have a lot more to come there.
	And I'm going to explain something in the next half hour.
	I'm going to explain that let's flip the script.
	You know, we have everybody in the media is attacking Sean Hannity.
	Sean Hannity actually ended up being right.
	Sean Hannity's been correct.
	The ones that have been wrong for an entire year are the very people that don't like Sean Hannity or any of us that are doing our job and getting information to you.
	All right, 800-941-Sean is a number.
	You want to be a part of the program?
	New Kingrich is going to join us today.
	Also, we'll check in with Senator Ram Paul.
	And we'll also, who else do we have today?
	We have a lot of people.
	Oh, we're going to talk about finances today because everyone's wigged out about the stock market, which, by the way, is up 350 points right now.
	You see, John McCain's immigration proposal is, why don't we study, we'll give DACA, and then we'll study in 2020 how to secure the border.
	Yeah, okay, that's going to really work.
	The Washington Free Beacon had an interesting point about Chuck Schumer, who has proved, once again, that he'd rather spend the 2018 congressional campaign demonizing Trump.
	They don't want a deal on DACA.
	Let me just set the record straight.
	They don't want anything done that's going to further improve the economy or the country.
	And the White House briefing, look, we may have another shutdown by Friday.
	I'm like, good, shut it down.
	I'm all in favor of shutdowns.
	What happened the last time?
	Nothing.
	Absolutely zip all the fear-mongering about government shutdowns that they put out there.
	Essential services stay up and they stay running.
	You even get the mail.
	You get your Social Security check.
	Veterans get paid.
	Veterans hospitals stay open.
	Essentially, the military stays open.
	You know, and then the people that are furloughed end up getting paid anyway, so it's not a big deal for them anyway.
	It just shows we could probably use a lot less people that work in Washington, D.C. Anyway, Schumer said that during a human rights campaign gala address on Saturday, that President Trump was probably the most dangerous and worst man to ever occupy the White House.
	Okay, he's only said that 400,000 times, as if anybody cares.
	Nobody really does.
	General Kelly, though, did make Schumer an offer I think that he can't refuse, and it's a really simple one.
	Anyway, he said that he just made Schumer an offer that Democrats can accept the president's DACA deal, or the only thing the Dreamers are going to get is a one-way bus ticket back home.
	Well, that's what it's going to be.
	I mean, you know, for whatever reason, Chuck Schumer thinks he's in the majority and he's not.
	And the top White House advisor said that he doubts President Trump will consider extending the deadline that he set for Congress to codify protections for young illegal immigrants, even if lawmakers fail to come to an agreement.
	So DACA is going to expire in March.
	That, of course, created by former President Obama when he used this extra constitutional power that he didn't have, and he admitted dozens of times he didn't have, but he did it anyway.
	And so Obama established the program.
	It is and was and remains unconstitutional.
	It's not based on any law.
	And Kelly said after meeting with Mitch McConnell, so the extension, I'm not sure the president has the authority to extend it.
	Well, he actually doesn't, if you listen to Obama's original words.
	All right, what if everything in these memos was flipped?
	I'll explain next.
	He uncovers the real truth about the politics of D.C.
	He's your watchdog on Big Brother every day.
	Hannity is on right now.
	All right, 25 till the top of the hour, 800-941 Sean is our toll-free telephone number.
	You want to be a part of the program here.
	Now let's just slow down and look at what we have discovered between Friday and yesterday.
	And I want to start by playing a montage.
	You know, it's fascinating to me that no matter what the media is going, look, you got to start this way.
	For a year, let's get the anti-no evidence of collusion memo first.
	No evidence, no evidence.
	Because for a year, the media is trying to convince you of something that's not true.
	For an entire year, they have advanced the narrative for political purposes.
	For an entire year, they have lied to you.
	They have breathlessly hyped conspiracy theories.
	For an entire year, they have been wrong, dead wrong.
	No evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
	And we know because all the top people involved, well, they've actually told us, oh, there's smoke, but there's no fire.
	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 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 had to be.
	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 had no smoking gun at this point, but there is a lot of smoke.
	Dianne 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.
	So for an entire year plus, the media has been wrong.
	So here we have now an entire other narrative that they have ignored.
	And now we've got a lot of evidence to back up everything that we've been suggesting to you now for a while is true.
	If you go back to when Donald Trump had tweeted out, I've been wiretapped, maybe not the exact words that he should have used, they did wiretap.
	There was a FISA warrant that was issued on Trump Tower.
	We broke that about a year ago, and we've been unpealing the layers of the onion.
	And then it culminated on Friday with what we discovered is, you know, the main concerns about the legitimacy and the legality of the DOJ and the FBI and their interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and what information did they use and were they honest with the court in obtaining a FISA warrant to spy on an opposition candidate in a presidential election year.
	And then it raises the whole issue of the dossier that was compiled by Christopher Steele.
	And Christopher Steele, let's see, Fusion GPS, all right, they're hired by Hillary Clinton and the DNC.
	They're both funneling money over there.
	They're funneling the money through a law firm known as Perkins Coy.
	And you have Fusion GPS.
	You have their founder, Glenn Simpson, saying he never verified the dossier.
	The dossier is basically 16 separate memos that were put together by Christopher Steele.
	Now, yesterday we've got the Senate report out of Grassley's committee.
	And what is one of the things we learned?
	That Steele gathered much of his information from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	Oh, wait a minute.
	We do have a Russia conspiracy right before our eyes.
	And then we go on to discover that when they applied for the first time for the FISA warrant, it was denied.
	That was in the early summer.
	Then they came back for a FISA warrant.
	And this was in October of 2016, just before the election.
	Anyway, now we know that through the memo of the Intel community, Intel chairman Debin Nunes, now we find out that in this initial inquiry and in any of the renewals, they never disclosed that the DNC and the Clinton campaign and a political party and a political effort funded Christopher Steele's efforts.
	Now, granted, they didn't pay him directly, but they paid Fusion GPS.
	They funneled that money through the law firm.
	Fusion GPS takes care of Christopher Steele.
	Okay, that means basically that Hillary paid for it.
	And the DNC that Donna Brazil says she was controlling the money of, that they paid for it.
	And the initial FISA application noted that Steele worked for a named U.S. person, but not the Clinton campaign, and not Fusion GPS, and not Glenn Simpson, who was paid for, who was paid by a U.S. law firm, Perkins Coy.
	So they were hiding the money.
	In other words, you know, three times removed so that the FISA judge doesn't put up together that, in fact, this is Hillary Clinton's op research and that it's filled with, let me go back to the Senate memo, that Steele's information mostly came, was gathered from information from the Russian government sources he had inside of Russia.
	So that's what Hillary Clinton was paying for.
	Now, when they applied to the FISA court, there was no mention that Steele was working on behalf of and paid for by the Clinton campaign or the DNC.
	And nor was it told the court that it was verified.
	And even in the, we're told that the only thing they said, well, there might be a political component to some of this.
	The FBI knew at the time.
	And this is where the problem comes in.
	The FBI absolutely knew that Clinton was paying for that Russian dossier of Christopher Steele and that his information came from the Russian government and Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	How ironic it is that everything everyone was bitching about for a year actually turned out to be true.
	Except it was Hillary Clinton that did it and not Donald Trump.
	And then, of course, then they get more deceptive.
	They try to, Christopher Steele tips off Michael Izakoff with some of the information he has.
	He writes a Yahoo piece and it's presented to the FISA court as a separate entity when meanwhile the source is the exact same source as the dossier.
	Oh, well, we have a corroborating article that says what everything in this is true because it came from the same person.
	That's dishonest before the FISA court.
	And then we've got Steele's numerous encounters with the media.
	We have Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson admitting that he was trying to coordinate with the Clinton campaign as to where to take the phony Russian information and disseminate it to the media.
	Now, there's two things at work here.
	One, they're trying to do this to lie to the American people and manipulate the American people before an election.
	And then the second thing they're trying to do, then they're using it to get a FISA warrant against an opposition party candidate to spy on them in the lead up to an election and then undermine a duly elected president thereafter, which is why this is tied to, in every way, Robert Mueller, because if all of this had not happened, we wouldn't be in the position we're in today and an entire year wasted.
	You know, nobody told the FISA court judge, even though Bruce Orr stayed in touch with Christopher Steele.
	And Bruce Orr's wife, Nellie, is building this dossier.
	In a way, Bruce Orr's wife is being paid for by Clinton, just like Steele is.
	Oh, you're being paid by Fusion GPS, but who's paying her?
	Who's paying them?
	But this was a guy, Christopher Steele, that was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected, passionate about him not being president.
	Or his wife is employed by Fusion GPS.
	So Hillary's campaign and the DNC are paying Fusion GPS because she's cultivating the op research on Trump.
	And Orr then takes his wife information and gives it to the FBI.
	But if you look at the time, the FBI's counterintelligent division, the assistant director, literally said that the Steele dossier was in its infancy at the time of the initial FISA application.
	Well, if it was in its infancy, why was it ever presented to the court if it's not verified?
	Why would you use any information?
	And then months later, Comey even said to President-elect Trump in January of 2017 before he became president, it's unverified and it's salacious.
	That's all they said.
	But that's not what he was telling the court when he's signing off on part of this dossier is being used.
	And we know that because the former deputy director McCabe testified before the House Intel Committee that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from FISA without the Steele dossier.
	It's unbelievable what we're discovering.
	Then now go to the Senate.
	Then you've got, and go to Sarah Carter's piece.
	Well, now we have a situation where Clinton associates like Winters and Sid Vicious Blumenthal apparently are up to their eyeballs feeding information to Christopher Steele.
	Basically, it's all fabricated, either through phony Russian sources or Clinton allies verifying, which is absolutely without any credibility, all the claims they can against Trump, and then the effort to get it out to the media.
	The FBI director telling Trump it's salacious and unverified.
	Well, that's an interesting point because four months earlier, he was telling the FISA court, signing off on that information being used.
	He has some questions he's got to ask.
	And this whole Papadopoulos thing, you've got a London professor with Papadopoulos drinking in a bar.
	An unknown person in Moscow says that they might have had information on Hillary.
	Then the Australian diplomat hears about it, and then the Australian diplomat tells the FBI, oh, that's a great source of information.
	You can't use single hearsay in a court of law.
	So it would be meaningless there.
	So we got a second memo out.
	We got the Nunes memo from Friday.
	Now we've got the Grassley memo from last night.
	And then we've got the dossier.
	Now we've got another bit of memo or dossier being created by Christopher Steele.
	And everyone believing all of it.
	Imagine if this was all Donald Trump.
	And Donald Trump was doing this to Hillary.
	Imagine Donald Trump rigged a primary election.
	Imagine Donald Trump had broken, had committed felonies by putting his email server in a mom and pop shop bathroom closet.
	Imagine Donald Trump took 33,000 subpoenaed emails that turn out to have top secret, classified, and special access program information and just deletes the subpoenaed emails.
	Imagine Donald Trump acid washes the hard drives with bleach pit.
	Imagine Donald Trump tells Hope Hicks to go out there.
	Hope, go bust this Blackberry up with a hammer so nobody can get any information on it.
	I mean, it begins to now all fall together.
	We'll find out more on the IG report.
	Imagine Donald Trump is paying for, I'll say it again, to steal information from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	Let's say that was Donald Trump paying for that, $12 million against Hillary Clinton.
	And let's say that that same dossier was then used to get a FISA warrant to spy on Hillary in the middle of a campaign.
	And let's say Donald Trump associates, I don't know, who can we think of?
	Any Donald Trump associates, well, they're actually feeding Steele the information about Hillary.
	Salacious details about hookers and a bet and Ritz in Moscow and whatever other garbage they're reporting here.
	Because it goes on to say in this Grassly memo that reports that information obtained by the committee during witness interviews in the course of the investigation indicate that Steele provided dossier information to bleep, it's redacted, to numerous media organizations prior to the end of, and in Steele's sworn testimony court filings in London, he admitted he gave off the record briefings to a number of journalists about the pre-election memoranda.
	So they're feeding all this garbage to the New York Times, the Washington Post, Yahoo News, New Yorker, and fake news, the whole network, CNN.
	And they were briefed by the end of 2016.
	How convenient.
	Then, of course, in British litigation, you know, he's either lying there or he was lying to the U.S. What if Donald Trump had done all this?
	Because every time I come under fire, I've got to laugh about this.
	We've got proof.
	We've got evidence.
	We've got information.
	They've got nothing.
	And they've had a year and a half to do it.
	All right, when we come back, we'll get Newt Kingrich's take.
	Biggest political scandal missed by your corrupt news media.
	They're too busy chasing the Russia-Trump collusion rabbit.
	All right, hour two, Sean Hannity show.
	Write down our toll-free telephone number.
	We'd love to have you be a part of the program.
	It's 800-941-Sean.
	You know, I just can't believe we're living in these times.
	I mean, being assailed as I have been in the last 72 hours by the very people that have gotten everything wrong for an entire year plus, that there is no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
	It's interesting to me as a phenomenon that the media is just a bunch of sheep.
	They're overpaid.
	They live in a bubble.
	And they live in this little echo chamber, and they just regurgitate back to each other what they say, and they try to outdo themselves.
	If one person in the mainstream media goes, Trump is demented.
	The next one will say, no, you're wrong.
	He's really, really, really, really, really demented.
	That's what you meant to say.
	And it goes on from there.
	But we do have evidence now of collusion.
	We have two memos.
	The memo that came out in the Senate committee of Charles Grassley yesterday, the Judiciary Committee there, where it literally says that Christopher Steele gathered as much of his information or much of it from government, from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	Let me repeat.
	Steele gathered much of his information from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	And by the way, Steele is not an American citizen.
	I thought that was something that would be shocking to some people and something that we heard the last year that people didn't like.
	And in the House Intelligence Committee report, what did we find out?
	That neither in the initial application, or remember, the first application to spy on the Trump campaign was denied.
	And then remember, it's in the Nunes memo, the House Intelligence Committee memo, that the deputy director Andrew McCabe testified before the committee that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from FISA without the Steele dossier information.
	And then we find out that as part of the application process, neither the initial application on the second go-around in October 2016 or any of the three renewals, they did never at any point reference the role that the DNC, the Clinton campaign, and the party in the campaign apparatus in funding Steele's efforts.
	Clinton campaign and the DNC that Hillary was controlling, according to Donna Brazil, funneled all of this money to this law firm Perkins Coy.
	Remember, Fusion GPS.
	Okay, they're getting the money from Perkins Coy, not directly from the Clinton campaign, not directly from the DNC, but that's where the money's coming from.
	Then they hire Christopher Steele, and now we learn from the Senate memo that Christopher Steele is getting his information from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	And then they not only use this to lie to the American people and manipulate the American people with phony Russian salacious information to win an election by lying about their opponent Donald Trump, then they take it a step further and they use that Hillary Clinton bought and paid for dossier to get a FISA warrant and then not telling the FISA court that it was Hillary Clinton and the DNC that bought and paid for the thing.
	Imagine if this was Donald Trump.
	And then being even more deceptive, Christopher Steele leaks to Michael Izikov.
	He writes an article based on Christopher Steele's information and that is handed in as though it is some type of corroborating evidence when the source was identical.
	Well, that's fairly manipulative.
	And one has to wonder how a FISA court judge would feel if he found out that the little footnote that said, oh, it might be a little politically tainted, you know, turns out to be it was the opposition party candidate, Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC paying for all of this, and the FBI knew it, and the DOJ knew it, and they never told the FISA court judge.
	Here to weigh in on all of this, and then the added information is now we discovered yesterday that, in fact, Clinton associates were feeding some of this false information to Christopher Steele, also, like Sid Blumenthal and this guy, Jonathan Winter.
	I don't think I could even make up a novel this twisted and sick and despicable.
	This still is the United States of America, and that Christopher Steele was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected, was passionate about him not being president.
	And then you got the deputy, Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Orr.
	Oh, his wife is building the dossier.
	I guess you can argue she's being paid by Clinton and the DNC, and that he's out there with Rosenstein and others.
	He's renewing the FISA, the FISA warrant every 90 days.
	You can't make this stuff up.
	Newt Gingrich is here to help us sort it out.
	Former Speaker of the House, how are you?
	I'm doing well, but I think you've done a pretty good job.
	The fact is that all of this, by any normal standard, would just be unbelievable.
	I mean, what if it was Donald Trump?
	Just reverse the names.
	Donald Trump did all this.
	Well, that'd be open shut.
	I mean, obviously, at that point, you'd have to say he has to leave the presidency.
	He has to resign.
	He has to go home.
	We probably ought to have John Kerry as the interim president to clean up the tainted office.
	I mean, look, this is simply unimaginable.
	Here you have the Clinton campaign paying a British former secret agent who hates Trump to write a fantasy that makes him feel good, taking that fantasy to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which without, and I saw a very, very interesting analysis today, which points out that he apparently, the FBI never tried to truly validate what he was saying.
	The FBI then takes this totally tainted fantasy, goes to a Pfizer court judge, and says, look, this is clearly proof that we need to have an ability to wiretap into the Trump team.
	The judge says, well, I'm not quite sure.
	And they say, well, here, we have some extra proof.
	And the extra proof is an article, which is an interview with the very same British agent.
	I mean, you can't make this up.
	We've spent an entire year.
	Go ahead.
	All weekend long, Mr. Speaker, I've been under fire.
	Oh, the memo didn't prove anything.
	The memo showed that they lied to a Pfizer court.
	The memo showed that they were purposely deceptive to a Pfizer court.
	And we know they knew that this was Hillary Clinton's bought and paid for dossier.
	They never told the court.
	If this had happened to a liberal Democrat, every American civil liberties union lawyer in the country would be going crazy.
	The New York Times would be editorializing every day.
	The Washington Post would be editorializing every day.
	We'd be getting warnings about a police state.
	We'd be told, you know, if the federal government can start eavesdropping on American citizens based on false information from a politically paid-for document, all of us are at risk.
	It just tells you how deeply the country is divided, that as long as the target is Donald J. Trump, anything goes.
	They don't care.
	I mean, they just simply refuse to engage on whether or not This is a question which I think virtually every liberal I can remember for at least 40 years has worried about this precise case.
	And now that we have the case, they can't worry about it because it involves the wrong guy.
	Let me ask you for a historical comparison because I've been getting beat up over the fact that I say this makes Watergate look like stealing a Snickers bar from a drugstore.
	And by that, Watergate was a third-rate burglary, okay, to get op research from an opponent's, I guess, headquarters, and then the cover-up that ensued.
	This, to me, is—go ahead.
	No, no, I know.
	I mean, I'm going to say, having lived through that and having campaigned, my very first campaign was during 1974.
	And so I was right in the middle of the whole Watergate problem.
	And, of course, I'd been Nixon's chairman for the 6th District of Georgia in 1972.
	So, I mean, I sort of was living this stuff close up.
	There's no question that there were things that were done in Watergate that were totally wrong and that the president and the attorney general and other key people did things that were wrong.
	But here you have two things that are very different.
	One, which is similar, is I have no doubt personally that President Obama knew what was going on.
	The Attorney General knew what was going on.
	The fix was in.
	They were going to protect Hillary Clinton no matter what.
	And that the head of the FBI was part of the same problem, which is why Comey is as guilty as all the other people.
	But there's a second thing going on here that was the opposite of Watergate.
	One of the characteristics of Watergate was that when they came down to it, civil servants actually obeyed the law and refused to do what the president told them to do.
	They said, no, that's illegal.
	I'm not going to do it.
	What you have here is just the opposite.
	Here you have some of the key players are career civil servants.
	They are the deep state.
	They're everything people talk about.
	And I think there's no question that you had senior people at the FBI and some people in the Justice Department who were colluding first to protect Hillary Clinton and second to set up the destruction of Donald Trump.
	And that's what makes this frightening.
	I mean, it's one thing to say, okay, we have some politician who's bad.
	We have six or eight people at the White House have done really bad things.
	Let's clean it up.
	And the truth is, at the end of Watergate, everybody who was tainted was gone.
	This is much, much different.
	This is the core of the bureaucracy itself.
	And the core of the bureaucracy itself here decided that it was its job to protect Hillary Clinton, and it was its job to destroy Donald Trump.
	And that, when you start thinking about the people they were going to destroy on the way through, there are innocent people being run over by the power of the government in a way that is, I think, very, very chilling.
	Doesn't it sound to you like laws were broken here?
	Look, isn't it bad enough?
	Every election season.
	Okay, every election season there are lies that politicians tell.
	But in this election season, Hillary Clinton is buying, again, I'll go back to the Senate and Charles Grassley's committee release yesterday.
	Literally, she paid for Mr. Steele gathering his information from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	So that's what she wanted to influence the American people with.
	And then it was used as at least in part of a measure.
	They never told the FISA court judge that she bought and paid for this phony information, while the FISA court judge is making a determination to spy on an American citizen, which, you know, we put a great priority in people's right to privacy and our Fourth Amendment constitutional rights, sir.
	Well, look, there's an old rule called follow the money.
	So what I'd like to know is it's not just Hillary Clinton.
	Who in the Clinton campaign authorized paying for it?
	Who actually contacted Steele to get it done?
	Well, who knew this was going on?
	And by the way, when the Pfizer warrants came due, did Barack Obama know?
	Isn't that a good question?
	I have no doubt.
	If you look at the Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, meeting with Bill Clinton at a private airplane in a totally inappropriate meeting, you look at the notion, you look at some of the text messages that Strzok is sending to his girlfriend, where he is saying, well, Loretta Lynch can do all this because after all, she knows the fix is in.
	She knows Hillary's going to be exonerated.
	I mean, you read this stuff.
	If you put the dots together, there is zero doubt in my mind as a historian that when this thing all comes out in the open, it's obstruction of justice.
	Obama will be involved.
	Obama will be involved.
	The attorney general will be involved.
	And senior people in the FBI will be involved.
	And all of them will, in fact, have been tainted by having broken the law.
	We'll take a break.
	We'll come back more with Newton Kingrich, 800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
	You want to be a part of the program.
	Newt, along with Sarah Carter, Dan Bongino, Lanny Davis tonight, Sebastian Gorka tonight, and much more.
	Nine Eastern, your best coverage.
	We are not the Destroy Trump media.
	We're the opposition media in the country today.
	All right, this is just breaking from the Daily Mail.
	Russian pranksters spoof Adam Schiff by telling Democrat that Putin has naked blackmail pictures of Trump, and he gets his staff to try and collect classified materials for the FBI.
	And we actually have the email exchange that goes back and forth.
	Sergei, I understand Mr. Schiff had a productive call with Mr Probly and that he would like to make some materials available to Mr. Schiff through your embassy.
	Please let us know how best to arrange pickup.
	We've got the phone call.
	Okay, and so Bousova met with Trump in New York at some point after the 2013 Miss Universe pageant.
	Absolutely.
	And she got compromising materials on Trout after their short relations.
	Okay.
	And what's the nature of the compromise?
	Well, there were pictures of naked Trump.
	Okay.
	And so Putin was made aware of the availability of the compromising material?
	Yes, of course.
	Bouzava shared those materials with Sobchak, and Sobshark shares those materials with Putin because she's a goddaughter of Putin, and Putin decided to press on Trump.
	And the materials that you can provide to the committee or to the FBI, would they corroborate this allegation?
	Sure, of course.
	When they were in Ukraine, we got their conversation by the phone where they discussed those compromising materials.
	We are ready to provide it to FBI.
	All right, I just got to give.
	So now, Mr. Speaker, I got to ask you.
	So you hear this.
	Oh, wait a minute.
	You mean they want information from a foreign entity about an opposition party candidate?
	I thought that was horrible.
	That's him.
	I think one of the most amazing things historians will study for decades is you had the Democrats.
	Remember, this whole thing in a way starts on election night when the shock of knowing at 8 p.m. that Hillary Clinton's going to win and learning by 10 p.m. that Donald Trump has won, the shock is so enormous that nobody in the Clinton campaign has the guts to go say there, you know, you lost.
	We're going to see you tonight on Hannity.
	We'll have a lot more.
	That tape cracks me up.
	Today posted the greatest single same-day drop in stock market history, 1,600 points.
	The Dow plunged almost 1,200 points, a more than 4.5% fall to finish below the 25,000 mark and erasing a lot of our retirement savings.
	U.S. stock futures have been swinging wildly all morning.
	They are currently pointing to a major loss at the open one day after the worst point drop in Wall Street history.
	Doom and gloom and plunder of the market, which, by the way, stabilized throughout the day today, with ups and downs pretty much going on all throughout the day.
	Nothing that dramatic as we saw the previous two days.
	So I mentioned this on the radio show yesterday, and I give a long explanation.
	It wasn't good for the stock market.
	And my gut yesterday was this seemed like a natural correction because you don't always go straight up in the stock market.
	If you look at the history of the stock market, it goes up, it goes down.
	Sometimes it gets artificially high, and other points people take their winnings and their money and their profits, and they leave, but then they come back.
	You know, there are a lot of different factors to it.
	Anyway, so as I was thinking about it, I was actually watching Shep Smith had somebody on his show when I decided to talk about it.
	It was Ashley Webster was on with Shep, smart guy.
	And anyway, so we've had all these historic stock gains since he entered office, and it was just up, up, up, up, up, up, up, up, up.
	And those two days that we had were definitely adjustment days and an opportunity for people to take some of their profit money, et cetera.
	Anyway, so I went on the air in the program yesterday, and I said, you know, in a lot of ways, this is probably evidence that the economy is getting strong.
	Now, just yesterday, it happened to come out that the Atlanta Fed was predicting 5.4% GDP growth in the first quarter of this year.
	That's astronomical growth.
	That's Reagan-era-style growth.
	And I said, a lot of that is because, you know, we're seeing the impact of the previous administration and their impact on the economy.
	I said yesterday, and I went into all of this, the Obama economy, he's the only president in history that never hit 3% GDP growth in a single year.
	He doubled the national debt, mate, took on more debt than every other president before him combined.
	It was the worst recovery since the 40s.
	13 million more Americans on food stamps, 8 million more in poverty.
	You had the lowest labor participation rate since the 70s.
	And so my point yesterday was, well, the Obama economy was so weak all these years.
	And I made the point that in those years, as a result, the Fed kept trying to artificially influence the economy with what is called cheap money.
	What is cheap money?
	Cheap money is when you get to borrow at ridiculously, insanely low rates.
	And that's what cheap money is.
	You know, when you can borrow at those low rates, and it's in the hopes that people will start to jumpstart the economy.
	And, you know, even Yellen, when she was leaving last Friday, had suggested, oh, that point is coming to an end.
	So anyway, the era of cheap money at some point does have to end.
	And in other words, the economy has to have its natural flow.
	And the government has for all these years under Obama, because his economy was so weak, the Fed has artificially kept the price of money down and the price of borrowing down.
	And now that that's coming to an end, and the only reason it can come to an end is because of all the good economic news and the plans that have been put in place to have further economic growth because of President Trump.
	And so the cratering of the stock market, I make the case, would probably represent the strength of the economy, noting that Main Street is doing very well.
	These companies have a lot of confidence in the economy.
	They're investing more money.
	Corporate tax rates now are way down.
	That means they'll be investing more.
	Repatriation is going to kick in.
	And I think a lot of it is just a natural flow of it.
	Anyway, some of you are very worried.
	So I first started investing when I was in Atlanta, and I was the poorest person at the firm.
	I was more of a charity case for them to take me on.
	And I've met this guy, Gene Hensler.
	He worked at the local radio station I was at.
	And ever since, he has kind of been my money manager.
	And his right-hand man, Bill Laco, is pretty much my guy that I go to.
	And we have some differences on investments and so on and so forth.
	Is my analysis anywhere near correct, or I don't know what the hell I'm talking about?
	No, I think you're dead on, Sean.
	You know, I mean, I listened to the opening segment there.
	It made me want to open up a window and jump out of it.
	I mean, you know, I think the reality of where we are in the stock market is we have not had a 10% correction in the stock market since three years ago.
	We normally have one every year.
	Normally, you have a 15% correction in the stock market every two years.
	We haven't had one since 2011.
	And normally, you would have a 20% correction in the stock market every three years.
	And we haven't had one since 2009.
	Now, we did surpass 5% yesterday.
	You know, big whoops.
	You normally have that three times a year.
	The worst performance we had last year was about 2.8% down.
	So, you know, depending upon where you are and the stage of your life, you know, a decline is not a bad thing.
	It gives you an opportunity to buy.
	So I completely agree with what you're saying.
	And I absolutely believe that what you said about the Atlanta Fed and 5.4%, the reality is fourth quarter earnings for the SP 500 look like they're going to come in up 15%.
	You got inflation below 2% and you got unemployment below 4.1.
	How much better can it get?
	How many years of your life have you been doing this investment, studying the market and all the financial management that you do?
	25 years.
	All right, 25 years.
	And you basically, for 25 years, you watched me start with nothing, right?
	Pretty much?
	Yes, I do.
	Yes, I did.
	And I am probably the biggest pain-in-your-ass client that you have.
	Is that true?
	Next to Gene Hensler, that's probably true.
	Okay, the owner of the firm.
	Okay.
	No, but the reality is, over the years, I have made it known to you that I don't have the great appetite that others do for the stock market and the ups and downs.
	I would rather, you know, money's too hard to make to me.
	And in a lot of ways, I look at the stock market as gambling.
	Now, you have certain rules that you tell people when it comes to investing in the stock market.
	For example, if you're going to need the money in 10 years, what do you tell them?
	Don't put it in stocks.
	All right.
	Tell everybody the simple rules that you use while investing because you're a pretty conservative guy.
	Yeah, okay.
	So look, here, bottom line is: if you sit down and you're looking at your portfolio, this is a good time to make sure your portfolio is balanced the way you want it balanced, that your financial plan is in order the way you want to have it in order.
	If you're a day trader, this segment isn't for you.
	But for most people who are working, saving their 401ks, you know, and they're trying to decide what do I do, well, at the end of the day, if you don't need money out of the portfolio in the next 10 years, there's no other place to be but stocks or real estate.
	Now, I view real estate as a growth investment as much as I do stocks.
	Now, the difference is stocks are completely liquid.
	Sean, as you know, I can't sell one of those apartments tomorrow, but I could get out of Coke today.
	So there's a little difference.
	But back to the portfolio, if you need money in the next 10 years from your portfolio, you cannot put it in stocks.
	Why?
	Because of what just happened here.
	I mean, Murphy's law is when you need the money, the market will be upside down.
	So time takes care of you as much as picking the right investments.
	And quite honestly, we only buy the quality stuff.
	You know, I was looking today, Sean, Chevron, right?
	I don't believe we're not going to have gas.
	Do you believe we're not going to have gas sometimes?
	No, we're going to have gas.
	And you always use the example of Johnson and Johnson.
	And we're going to need soap.
	Yeah, I got Procter Gamble in here.
	So Procter Gamble is down 11.62% and it's yielding 3.4%.
	What does that mean?
	That means today, if I went and bought a 10-year treasury, it will pay me 2.7%-ish, right?
	So that's all I'm going to get for 10 years on that bond.
	Or I could buy Procter Gamble that makes toothbrushes and toilet paper and all the different products that you and I both use.
	It's going to pay me 3.4% while I wait for it to come back.
	And I got it on sale.
	You know, the stock market's the one place in America, Sean, where people want to pay full price or more.
	I mean, when you go shopping for clothes, don't you go to the discount rack?
	I mean, the first place I go is a sale rack.
	I go to Kmart.
	By the way, I don't even go shopping.
	If I do go shopping, it's like Kmart, Walmart, and Target, my favorite stores or Costco.
	So my guess is you go to the sale rack first.
	You know what I mean?
	There's always something on sale.
	Hey, maybe I need that.
	Maybe I don't.
	But the stock market people do the exact opposite.
	For whatever reason, they want to sell when it's down.
	Well, how many of your customers in the last two days have been panicked and you get these panic calls?
	Not as many as you would think.
	I mean, I think I talked to two or three clients, but that's nothing compared to 08 or 09.
	And I think most people realize we've not had a really good correction, and this is probably the start of it.
	And I don't know where it's going to end, but listen, as far as I'm concerned, 10% down is healthy, and it would actually bring some of the prices in line.
	What about interest rates?
	Do you agree with me that interest rates have been kept artificially low to help up the bad recovery of Obama?
	Oh, 100%.
	100% that interest rates were down, have been artificially kept down.
	The Fed's going to roll off $4.4 trillion over the next several years in terms of bonds and whatnot.
	And that's going to cause an issue with interest rates.
	It's going to cause them to go up.
	But what you have in Europe across the pond there is they're still in a quantitative easing over there.
	So some of that capital, money tends to flow wherever it's going to be treated the best.
	Well, you know, the changes that President Trump has made for capitalism has been good.
	You know, it's not.
	Let's go over some of your basic rules that you have for investment for people in all economic backgrounds.
	You know, some people are just starting out.
	Some people have a little bit put away.
	Some people have a lot put away.
	You know, let's go through the scenario for everybody.
	All right.
	So we talked about the 10-year rule.
	So if you need money in the next 10 years, don't put it in stocks.
	If you don't, there's no other place to be.
	So if you're in a 401k plan, if you're working for somebody and you have a 401k plan and you're not going to retire anytime soon, then why would you own a bond fund paying one and a half, 2%?
	Why would you do that?
	There's no reason to do that.
	You're losing money based on inflation.
	So you want to be long-term growth, but you have to be able to say, I don't care what happens in the stock market today.
	That's number one.
	Number two is I run into a lot of people who are starting out, they're saving, or they're not saving because they're spending too much.
	Well, look, if your employer is matching you dollar for dollar on the first 5%, you have to put 5% in your 401k, right?
	I don't know any other place, Sean, in America where you can get a guaranteed 100% return on your money.
	So if Coca-Cola or, you know, pick a company, our company matches like that, dollar for dollar on 5%.
	Well, why wouldn't you put at least 5% in?
	You just got double your money.
	So that's really where I would start.
	Well, what about other investments?
	Like, I always like to touch and feel an investment.
	You know, one thing I will say about you, I remember when I first talked to you about Bitcoin, you were like, stay away from it.
	You don't know what's going to happen.
	What do you think of these cryptocurrency investments?
	I don't know where they're going to go long term.
	If I'm a drug dealer or a money launderer, I understand why I want to be in Bitcoin and some of that other stuff.
	But until you can take Bitcoin or even gold for that matter to Kroger and buy milk with it, it's not a currency.
	So at the end of the day, whatever Bitcoin is, you've got to convert it to green dollars.
	And by the way, Sean, there's only one color in this country, right?
	It's not black, it's not white, it's not yellow.
	It's green.
	Dollar bill is green.
	That's all you can use to spend in this country.
	And I promise you, once the regulators decide they've had enough of Bitcoin, they'll do the same thing they did to Napster.
	All right, stay right there.
	Bill Laco is with us.
	He's with Gene Hensler and Associates down in Atlanta.
	They basically have been my financial advisors for 25 years.
	I am not the biggest stock market investor, and he and I have had some knockdown drag out fights because I don't have the risk.
	I'm more risk-averse than he would like.
	All right, as we continue, Bill Laco is with Hensler and Associates.
	And I've known these financial guys.
	They've been my guys down in Atlanta now since I, well, acquired pretty much my first dollar in life because I didn't have a whole bunch when you met me.
	I guess the most important thing is if for the people that get worried when we have these disruptions in the stock market, what is your advice to them?
	I think, you know, the simplest thing is don't watch it.
	If you don't need this money anytime soon, 10 years is our rule, but even five years, what do you care?
	You know, most people are dollar cost averaging today because they're saving to their 401ks or they're putting their money in their ROS.
	Just keep doing whatever your plan was.
	The people who end up really making huge mistakes are the ones that don't follow the plan that they put in place because they get scared.
	Well, I could just assure you, unless you think this country is going down the tubes, and when I say down the tubes, I mean we're going to be speaking a different language, then I'm not really worried about McDonald's going out of business.
	I'm not worried about Disney going out of business.
	I'm not worried about Home Depot going out of business.
	Stock price may change, but if I've got a long enough time to wait, who cares?
	It'll come back and be even better.
	You know, Sean, the reason we have a 10-year rule is pretty simple.
	There's only been two 10-year periods of time.
	So there are 83 rolling 10-year periods of time since 1925.
	There's only been two 10-year periods of time where if you'd thrown all your money in the stock market at the beginning of the time and took it out at the end, you would have lost money.
	Two.
	That's a 98% probability you will not lose money in 10 years.
	So that's good enough.
	By the way, if you want 100%, all you got to do is wait 11 years.
	True.
	Time matters.
	You know what I mean?
	So, how high will interest rates be in a year from now, two years from now?
	Because, you know, I would want to lock in my home mortgage now, right?
	Well, you just said it.
	I mean, that was one thing I was going to talk about.
	I thought about through the break.
	Now is the time if you're going to buy a house to buy it.
	Now is the time if you haven't refinanced at these historical lows to refinance because I think you're going to wake up a year from today and rates are going to be a percent higher.
	I don't have a crystal ball.
	If I did, you know, you and I would be in the Bahamas right now.
	But at the end of the day, rates were up last year.
	I don't see any reason my rates aren't going to continue to go up.
	I don't think we're going to see huge increases.
	But what happens is you wake up three years later and realize, holy cow, I could have had a 4% mortgage and now I can only get a 6% mortgage.
	And so that changes the dynamics of what it costs you to fund your housing.
	So I like people who lock in their borrowing costs fixed.
	All right, Bill Laco, thank you.
	Hensler and Associates, it's up on Hannity.com.
	This is his weekly columns.
	We add him.
	I think he offers great advice.
	And as I said, I've worked with him now for years, and he's done a good job for me.
	All right, when we come back, news roundup and information overload hour here on the Sean Hannity show.
	We'll check in with Ram Paul and much more straight ahead.
	I think maybe the FBI should do their job, but maybe be a little quieter during election seasons so they don't influence elections one way or the other.
	Yeah, I mean, look, I think there's clear evidence of collusion that the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign colluded with the Russians.
	Okay, you don't get to hire lawyers and pretend like that didn't happen.
	It goes to what they accuse you of is what they actually were doing.
	But did the judge know that this dossier was specifically backed up by Clinton campaign money, that the DNC was involved?
	Or did they just know, did the judge just know generally that there was a political source to this document, or political backing, rather?
	You know, I can't get into the specifics until they're declassified by the committee.
	But I think that the FBI certainly gave important information about bias to the FISA court.
	There are a lot of reasons why the names, the specific names of U.S. persons or U.S. organizations are not used.
	And we have testimony about this in the committee.
	The majority members know about this.
	The same people that are complaining about the unmasking of names are complaining now that things weren't unmasked.
	All right, there you have it.
	As we continue our coverage, 800-941-Sean is a toll-free telephone number if you want to be a part of the program.
	News Roundup and Information Overload Hour on the show.
	So here's the situation as we now have it.
	We have the House Intelligence Committee, and their memo is out.
	Charles Grassley's committee, the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, now they have a memo out.
	We got not only the original dossier full of lies and salacious materials bought and paid for now by Hillary Clinton.
	Now we have a second memorandum slash dossier, whatever you want to call it.
	This one coming from and influenced by friends of the Clintons.
	Now, if it's not bad enough that we have bought and paid for, Hillary Clinton bought and paid for, DNC bought and paid for lies to influence and mislead and propagandize the American people before election and to spy on an opposition candidate because those Russian lies were then used to go to a court and get a Pfizer warrant against an opposition candidate.
	Now, then it gets worse because then they're looking at all the activities of an incoming administration.
	And I don't think we'd be anywhere near Robert Mueller had all of this not happened.
	But you can't really put it any other way.
	When they applied for the Pfizer warrant, now remember the initial application, October 2016, because the one over the summer was denied.
	Well, then they come back for another opportunity.
	The first approval comes in October of 2016, just before the election.
	They never disclosed the role of the DNC, the Clinton campaign, in terms of the funding of this phony, salacious dossier, this Russian propaganda.
	And the initial FISA application noted that Steele was working for a U.S. person.
	It doesn't mention Fusion GPS.
	It doesn't mention Glenn Simpson, who was paid for by a U.S. law firm, and taking out any counting that Hillary Clinton, that the real money came from the Clinton campaign and the DNC.
	And on top of all of that, we learned that none of this was verified.
	It was only in the infancy stages of being verified, according to the assistant director.
	The corroboration of Steele's dossier at this particular time was in its infancy stage.
	Now, it's interesting that James Comey signing off on all of this in October, and then in January, he goes and tells then-President-elect Trump, oh, we have this salacious dossier, but it's unverified.
	Well, if it's unverified in January, why was he arguing in October that it was valid enough to be used in part to get a FISA warrant?
	Now, remember, if you go to the Senate memorandum that was released yesterday, you know, what is one of the main findings that Steele gathered much of his information from the Russian government, Russian government sources inside of Russia?
	Well, that speaks volumes.
	And if you look, you know, particularly, you got a lot of problems here with all of this.
	And one of the things that we should be cherishing the most is our Constitution and the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure.
	This has always been the danger as it relates to FISA.
	And now we're weaponizing the intelligence community to go after opposition party candidates based on one candidate's bought and paid for phony information.
	Senator Ram Paul of Kentucky joins us.
	He's probably been one of the more outspoken people talking about the potential for FISA abuse.
	Well, here we are.
	Well, and you know, the thing is, one of the great ironies here is that the only money that we know that has exchanged hands is from Hillary Clinton to a British spy to Russian agents.
	So really, the only money that went from a presidential campaign to Russia that we know of actually went from the Hillary Clinton campaign to Russians, stopping, you know, midstream with a British spy.
	And isn't it amazing that these people can stand up with a straight face, Adam Schiff and these others, and pontificate about how there's a collusion problem between the Trump campaign, when in reality, the only thing we know is that Hillary Clinton actually did pay Russians for dirt on the Trump campaign.
	So what do we do from here?
	I mean, you're reading these memos.
	And I talked to somebody that read the Democratic memo, and there's nothing there.
	They're not contradicting anything of what I'm saying in all of this.
	Right.
	Well, here's the sad thing, and this is the real truth that people need to know.
	Well, Nunes has done us a service.
	Chairman Nunes did us a service by releasing this memo.
	He also held that memo until the debate was over on FISA reform.
	A bunch of us who wanted to reform FISA and make it to where people like Strzok and Lisa Page and Bruce Orr could not search this database without a warrant, Nunes blocked us on this.
	So he saves this memo until the debate is over.
	So the only chance for meaningful reform of FISA happened a week before the, or even just a couple of days before Nunes released this memo.
	So right now, the idea that the Congress would reform the intelligence community and put more controls on them so they can't use political bias to search Americans, that doesn't exist because Nunes waited on this.
	And Nunes really was part of the opposition.
	He was opposed to the reform that we put forward.
	So that's the only thing that disappoints me is that, you know, some are saying, well, now it's all partisan politics.
	And it does appear to be a little bit because we're no longer able to do the reforms because the reforms were blocked by Nunes and others in the establishment.
	Well, I've talked to people on this program, guys like Bill Benny and some people that have served the country, you know, like, for example, in the NSA for 34 years, he's a whistleblower.
	And he makes the claim that every single phone call of every single American and every text and every email is captured and is stored against our will.
	Did you know that?
	I don't know it for certain.
	I do know that if you talk to anyone overseas, in all likelihood, you're in the database.
	So this would include thousands of American journalists who talk to their correspondents in the Middle East.
	It would include thousands and thousands of American businessmen and women.
	It includes the president.
	It includes almost every representative that's ever had a phone call.
	Now, what we don't know is there's also another database that was based on an executive order from a long time ago.
	And that order may well have another database.
	So there may be databases that even most members of Congress are not aware of.
	We are aware of one they call the 702 database, and we think millions of Americans are in there.
	And what I've said repeatedly is Peter Strzzok and Lisa Page have showed how incredibly bigoted and biased they are against President Trump.
	They should not be allowed to search this database, not to be able to use their political bias to search this database.
	So I sent a letter to the FBI director last week, and I've asked him, can Peter Strzok and Lisa Page still search this database?
	Bruce Orr from the Justice Department, whose wife worked for GPS, and they concealed that fact when they were getting the FISA warrant.
	He shouldn't all these people should not work in government any longer, is my opinion.
	But if they're still there, they should be absolutely prevented from any access to classified data that they could use for political reasons.
	Oh, I agree wholeheartedly.
	All right.
	So here we are, and I'm not sure everything that you said, but it seems that the FISA court was misled in a number of main and conspicuous ways because the FBI knew at the time.
	And again, I'm not talking about rank-and-file FBI special agents.
	They do a great job for us, and I'm not talking about rank-and-file intelligence community members.
	I'm talking about the higher echelon, the deep state that were high up that had power and authority that the average person in the FBI would never have.
	But the fact is that they knew a lot of things, and in this FISA application, you know, to spy on Carter Page and get into the Trump campaign and then an incoming president, they didn't tell the FISA court judge that fundamentally this money came from Hillary Clinton and the DNC.
	And then they included in it, apparently, according to the memo out of the House intelligence community, an article by Michael Izakoff.
	And Michael Izakoff got his information from the same source.
	And so what they're doing is they're acting like this is presenting before a FISA judge things that seem to be independent.
	The senators have to really get this.
	The substantiation, the proof that the dossier was really valid came from a journalist who got his information from the same British spy who wrote the dossier.
	So they're using as proof that it has validity the same guy who wrote it, just talking to the media.
	The other great irony here is Christopher Steele, a British spy, is being paid by the Clinton campaign and the FBI simultaneously.
	They're both paying him.
	Meanwhile, Christopher Steele is being paid to go around and leak to liberal media outlets stuff on this to trash Trump and to get the dossier out there.
	So he's being paid by the FBI and being paid by basically a firm, a media firm that is wanting to get dirt on Trump out to different media outlets.
	And so, I don't know, it's really pretty galling.
	And I think without the text messages between Strzok and Lisa Page, his mistress, we would have never known.
	I mean, so this is an amazing thing that we know this much about how much bias was going on, McCabe's involvement in this.
	And then really the idea that someone at the high level of the Department of Justice who's involved with the investigations' wife works for the firm that is hired by Hillary Clinton, it just boggles the mind.
	No, he's actually getting $700,000 from the Clintons for her Senate run, and then you got, on the other side, you got Bruce Orr's wife working on the phony dossier, basically being paid for by the Clintons.
	It's unbelievable.
	It's hard to believe this much bias was out there.
	Well, now, but it goes even a step further.
	Now in the second, if you look at the Senate memo that they put out and the Senate memo, we're learning a lot of other things.
	And this gets back to my point, though, that there needs to be an incredibly high bar for the FBI to announce investigations during the presidential election.
	So I think the Democrats actually have a valid point that when he makes a big announcement that we're not going to indict Hillary Clinton and then damning her by saying all this stuff, really, people knew this and they could have made a decision, but by the FBI getting involved with press conferences, it elevated it to another level.
	And so the Democrats have a point that the FBI might have tainted the election and cost Hillary the election.
	And then, though, we come back and now the shoe's on the other foot.
	And then, you know, weeks before the election, somehow they decide to investigate Trump.
	Really, these are so politicized that the FBI needs to be doing their job.
	If it involves politics, it needs to be very quiet during election season.
	Otherwise, they're going to influence the election.
	Agreed.
	And now in the second memo, we have Hillary Clinton's buddies we find out, like Sidney Blumenthal and others, they're actually feeding dossier information to Christopher Steele.
	So you've got Clinton friends feeding false information to Christopher Steele for the dossier.
	He's, you know, according to the Senate memo, we know that Steele gathered much of his information, quote, from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	All right, so Hillary Clinton's paying for all of that.
	Then it's used to influence the American people.
	She's bought Russian lies, and then it's being used to get a FISA warrant to spy on a presidential candidate.
	I don't see any Robert Mueller in our future if none of this had ever happened.
	Senator Ram Paul, do you?
	Yeah, in some ways, I feel like we've been punked.
	I think we've been punked by the Russian government, and they're sitting around drinking vodka right now, laughing to high heaven how they got involved with our election, feeding fake stuff about Trump.
	It becomes a fake investigation, this big, huge investigation, all based on them just having a good old time feeding information.
	And we're all consumed.
	I think they're laughing as our entire country is consumed with this.
	Meanwhile, no one's paying any attention to the great stuff that's going on in our country, the tax cut, that 3 million workers have gotten a bonus and getting increased wages, 3 million people in the country.
	It's going to grow.
	It'll probably be 5 or 10 million by the time we're done.
	We have so many other issues we haven't gotten to as it relates to privacy in this country.
	I mean, look at all of why would Samantha Power unmask 300 people in the final year while she's only the U.N. ambassador?
	You know, what about Brennan and Clapper and their role in this unprecedented amount of surveillance, unmasking, not minimizing, leaking raw intelligence?
	I think just based on the law, the fact that General Flynn was surveilled, was unmasked and surveilled and leaked intelligence illegally, to me, he should never have pled guilty in any way to any crime because it seems to me that that information was obtained illegally.
	Well, I've asked about the investigation into the leak of General Flynn's conversation because that's a felony.
	And the question I've been asking over and over again, I have not gotten a good response to, is, have they brought people in who had access to General Flynn's conversation, and have they asked them to take a lie detector test on whether or not they reveal this information?
	When you join the FBI or the Department of Justice, you acknowledge in your contractual relationship that you will be asked lie detector tests to make sure you're not leaking things to foreign enemies or leaking things illegally.
	And this is a big deal.
	If our private conversations can be leaked to the media, the intelligence community has the ability to soak up everybody's conversations.
	I don't know if they're doing it, but they have the ability to do it.
	And then the other problem with this is if the FBI can bring you in and not tell you they have your conversations and then try to get you to make a misstatement or a statement that contradicts your private conversation.
	Can you imagine what kind of world we would live in if everybody's being brought forward, if private citizens can be brought forward or government officials and be asked whether or not their comments or their interview is consistent with a private conversation?
	That's a terrible, rotten world of invasion that I think we shouldn't want as Americans.
	All right, we appreciate you being with us.
	Senator Ram Paul, 800-941-Sean, our toll-free telephone number.
	If you want to be a part of the program, when we come back, wide open phones, final half hour, we have an amazing Hannity tonight at 9.
	Tell you more about that.
	Newt Gingrich among our guests and much more.
	Read the memo.
	What do you think?
	Might the FBI be in trouble?
	No, I think this is an absolute disgrace.
	I think this is a dark day in American history.
	This is an embarrassment.
	The Republican Party and its and the enablers of the Republican Party, basically with President Hannity over at Fox News, hyped this thing into the sky.
	The first rule of politics is always underpromise, over-deliver.
	They turned this into something where they had people believing that today you would see Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Jim Comey, Susan Rice marched off in handcuffs, and instead you've got people laughing at Devin Nunez like he's Tommy Wiseau.
	This is an absurdity.
	This thing is the weakest sauce I could have imagined.
	For those of us of a certain age, we remember the big nothing burger of Geraldo and Al Capone safe.
	And so this memo is like Al Capone safe and Geraldo, it's a big nothing.
	I think that would go beyond what Jeffrey just said.
	And I think, I mean, it's pretty much a dud.
	I mean, Sean Hannity on Fox News has been sort of flogging this idea that this document was going to be bigger than Watergate.
	As a matter of fact, he said this is more Watergate than parking ticket, right?
	And I think the opposite is true.
	The president's take, though, to borrow a phrase, is fake spin.
	The memo deals only with a sliver of the investigation.
	And it in no way vindicates the president.
	In fact, even as it questions FBI methods, the memo details contacts between Trump campaign advisors and Russians.
	That's it.
	That's all they've got.
	When you read the four pages of the memo, do you see a problem here as alleged?
	No, of course not.
	My reaction was the same as everybody else's.
	Where's the beef?
	I mean, what is this great scandal?
	There's absolutely nothing whatsoever there.
	This memo with regards to the Mueller probe is a dud.
	And let me just repeat that, having read it and covered the story for a while.
	As to the Mueller probe, this memo is a dud.
	But it is nothing, a nothing burger.
	And less interesting about this memo is what, what is in it.
	It's pretty much a nothing burger.
	Quote, dishonest, misleading, partisan nothing burger.
	When you look at this memo, what you see is this really is the C-team.
	I mean, America, I think, is entitled at this point to expect high-quality, artisanal obstruction of justice.
	It is getting this kind of mass-produced junk.
	Bill, I asked your staff to print it out because I thought maybe something was wrong with my internet.
	This is all bullshit.
	Is this the memo itself?
	Bill, don't read this.
	Get a people magazine.
	Get style.
	Get in fact, get Ebony and go into the bathroom.
	This is a way for the president, Dana, to discredit the Mueller investigators and thereby, without directly poking his finger in Bob Mueller's eye, discredit the special counsel.
	We may well have not seen such dark days for American democracy and its institutions since the days of Joe McCarthy.
	The reviews are in.
	And Congressman Nunes' memo was a dud.
	Let's start with Sean Hannity.
	Not to be undeterred by the sort of dud factor of the memo.
	You know what?
	The only thing better than one whack memo?
	More whack memos.
	All right, there you have it.
	All the hacks that say that they are journalists, that they are above the fray, the ever-so-elite.
	You know, I don't know what else you can do.
	There is no desire or at this point, even capability of them recognizing simple, basic, fundamental truth when it's right in front of their face.
	Because when you look at the memo, what do we find out in the memo?
	That the memo raises massive concerns.
	And remember, you have the underlying documents supporting all of this about the legitimacy and the legality of DOJ and FBI interactions with the FISA court.
	You know, let's put it this way: many of them never cared that Hillary Clinton and her email server.
	If Donald Trump set up a private server as Secretary of State in a mom-and-pop shop bathroom to circumvent congressional oversight and then gets caught and then the emails get subpoenaed and he deleted 33,000 of them,
	and then he took the hard drives and he acid washes them with bleach pit, and then he took the devices and busts them up with a hammer, you know that every one of those voices you just heard would be going apoplectic.
	They'd be going insane.
	Can't wait for the IG report coming in in March, coming very shortly.
	And the IG has been looking all into this.
	And if there's any truth in the IG, then all of this is going to come out.
	And then if you had Hillary Clinton, if Donald Trump had rigged a primary, the way Donna Brazil said that Hillary rigged the primary, but Donald Trump did at this time, I think you would see that the mainstream media would go apoplectic on that too.
	This is all incontrovertible truth and facts.
	And then if you had with all of the yelling and screaming about Russia, Russia, Russia for the last year without any evidence, evidence, evidence, if Donald Trump, and I'll go to the Senate memo that came out yesterday that says that Christopher Steele gathered much of his information from Russian government sources inside of Russia.
	If it turned out that it was Donald Trump that paid $12 million for this Russian information from the Russian government, Russian government sources inside of Russia, it would probably be a big Russian scandal.
	And they would be going apoplectic.
	But they are so hyper bitter and partisan and so locked into their hatred of Donald Trump.
	And then if it was discovered that it was Donald Trump that paid for this dossier, and Donald Trump had already rigged the primary, so Donald Trump now is paying for Russian government lies that are full of salacious details.
	And he spends $12 million, except he's spending it on Hillary, and it talks about things like hookers in a bed and urinating in a bed and things that are not true, things that were never verified to be true.
	I guarantee you that that would have been viewed by the mainstream media as the biggest scandal in American history.
	Because the sad thing is, and then if you take it another step, if Donald Trump's bought and paid for Russian government-sourced lies, salacious lies, were then used in part to get a FISA warrant during an election to spy on Hillary Clinton, and those that brought it before the FISA court never told the FISA court that it was Donald Trump's campaign,
	the Republican Party, funding the efforts through Fusion GPS funneled through a law firm, funneled to Christopher Steele, I think they would be going beyond apoplectic.
	And when you look at the initial FISA application in October of 2016, the three renewals that came thereafter.
	But anyway, the original FISA application noted that Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but they didn't name Fusion GPS.
	They didn't name Glenn Simpson.
	He was paid for by the law firm that both Hillary's campaign and the DNC funneled the money through, Perkins Coy, representing the DNC, representing Hillary's campaign, even though the Department of Justice knew at the time that it was the Trump campaign paying for it, the RNC and Reince Priebus paying for this.
	Well, then the application didn't mention that Steele was ultimately working on behalf of Donald Trump.
	And then that was used to get a warrant to spy on an American citizen.
	Are you telling me that that wouldn't be viewed bigger than Watergate by your media?
	Now, even they know that that's the truth.
	And to add some insult to injury here, then they used Carter Page or used Michael Isakoff's column.
	Michael Izakoff's column came directly from Christopher Steele.
	And they tried to present it as two separate sources of information corroborating the same thing.
	And we didn't, you know what?
	It was the same information.
	That was done to mislead the court.
	You know, a footnote that says, oh, it might have some political underlining.
	It might be some politics involved in this in some way.
	Okay, that doesn't, that's lying and misrepresenting to a FISA court too.
	And then it gets worse.
	Again, imagine if it's Donald Trump and Steele's numerous encounters with the media.
	Well, then we found out from Glenn Simpson he's coordinating with the Clinton campaign where they want to leak this specific information to.
	And then before and after Steele was terminated, because he was revealed as leaking to the press, and that supposedly violated one of the FBI's rules, well, the FBI, that didn't stop them from being in contact with Christopher Steele because the Deputy Attorney General Bruce Orr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Yates and later Rosenstein, although shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Orr,
	documenting his communications with Steele, and then it was discovered that Steele was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.
	And then during the same period of time, Orr's wife is pretty much being paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign because she's working for Fusion GPS and she's working on the phony Russian dossier full of Russian lies and salacious details.
	And the FBI even knew at the time that the information they had that was going before the court was never verified.
	And to quote the assistant director, Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its infancy at the time of the initial page FISA application.
	So you have an unverified Hillary Clinton bought and paid for propaganda, which we now know was full of Russian government sources inside of Russia, that she pays for all of this, one, to manipulate the American people and lie to them about who Donald Trump was, and two, then to get a FISA warrant, and none of this information is given to the FISA court judge.
	And then we find out in a committee meeting December of 17 that the deputy director McCabe testified that the committee, that no surveillance warrant would have ever even been sought without the Steele dossier information that the FBI never verified.
	You can't make this stuff up.
	And that's what they're telling you is not a big deal.
	That's what they're trying to convince you is a big nothing burger.
	You know, that's what they're trying to convince you doesn't matter.
	Well, it does matter.
	You know, it matters when James Comey tells a president-elect Donald Trump that the dossier is salacious and unverified in January of 2017 before he becomes president.
	But yet, three months earlier, he was signing off on that same dossier before a FISA court to get a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign.
	And there's substantial evidence suggesting that Steele materially misled the FBI about key aspects of the dossier's efforts, which bears on his credibility.
	And in Steele's own court filings in a litigation case that he had in London, he admitted he gave off-the-record briefings to a small number of journalists about pre-election memoranda.
	This was in the summer and autumn of 2016.
	In another sworn filing in that case, Steele further stated that journalists from the New York Times, The Washington Post, Yahoo News, New Yorker, CNN were all briefed at the end of September 2016 and Fusion at Fusion's instructions.
	And then we heard from Glenn Simpson that he was working with the Clinton campaign to coordinate which news outlets they wanted to get this lie and this propaganda to.
	And it's pretty amazing.
	So he either lied to one or the other.
	And that's how this election went down.
	Basically, Hillary Clinton's Russian lies.
	There is a Russian scandal.
	For a year, we've heard all the dangers of Russia, the danger of outside entities influencing our election.
	It doesn't matter as long as the person that's doing the influencing is supporting Hillary Clinton, then it seems to be okay.
	Mr. Steele conducted his work for Fusion GPS, his pre-election memorandum, and it becomes a series of memos, which then become known as the dossier.
	And then apparently he's working on another memorandum, which we don't know becomes a dossier, some of which was never put forth.
	But anyway, Steele's memorandum states his company received this report from the U.S. State Department.
	And now we got a new twist in all of this.
	And that information literally was fed to Christopher Steele from friends of the Clintons.
	That's where Sarah Carter's article comes in.
	You know, like Sid Vicious Blumenthal and others.
	So you have Hillary Clinton's friends feeding Christopher Steele the phony information, as well as the phony information he's getting from Russian government sources, all to come up with a salacious dossier that Hillary can wave in her hand and her surrogates in the media can wave around and say, you can't elect Donald Trump.
	Look at what I paid for.
	And then it gets used to get a warrant.
	Unbelievable.
	All right, 800-941-Sean is our toll-free telephone number.
	You want to be a part of the program.
	And our investigation continues that the mainstream media ignores.
	Tonight, Hannity, new information with New Kingridge, Sarah Carter, Dan Bongino, Lenny Davis, Sebastian Gorka, Jessica Tarlove, Jesse Waters.
	That's all happening tonight.
	Set your DVR, 9 Eastern, Hannity, on the Fox News channel.
	And we will see you back here tomorrow.
	Thanks for being with 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.

▲