Last night the hit show Roseanne returned after 21 year hiatus and the numbers suggest over 18 million viewers tuned in. This is a huge audience these days and a huge affirmation for the show. What was the secret? Perhaps it was the Pro-Trump tone that really tried to capture the average American. Perhaps it's because it didn't follow the traditional Hollywood mold? Sean shares some of his thoughts on this and entertainment in general. The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
If you're like me and suffer from insomnia, you know what?
That's not fun.
You know, I tried everything.
I couldn't get a good night's sleep.
And this is neither drug nor alcohol-induced.
That's right.
It is my pillow.
Mike Lindell invented it, and he fitted me for my first MyPillow, and it's changed my life.
I fall asleep faster, stay asleep longer.
And the good news, you can too.
Just go to mypillow.com, promo code Sean, and take advantage of one of Mike Lindell's best offers, his special four-pack.
You get 50% off to MyPillow Premium Pillows, two Go Anywhere pillows.
Now, MyPillow is made in the USA, has a 60-day unconditional money-back guarantee, no risk to you, and a 10-year warranty.
You don't want to spend more sleepless nights on a pillow tossing in tourney that's not working for you.
Just go to mypillow.com right now, use the promo code Sean, and you get Mike Lindell's special four-pack.
You get two MyPillow Premium Pillows, two Go Anywhere pillows, 50% off, and you'll start getting the kind of peaceful, restful, and comfortable, and deep healing, and recuperative sleep you've been craving and deserve.
Mypillow.com, promo code Sean.
All right, glad you're with us.
Happy Wednesday.
Did you see the numbers that Roseanne Barr pulled with a renewal of her show?
This is 20 years later, and Roseanne Barr, good for her, good for her.
She pulled in over 18 million viewers.
The biggest TV launch by far of the season with the 20-year revival premiere.
And Roseanne Barr in the show is pro-Donald Trump, and she is in real life.
Good for Roseanne Barr.
I'm so happy for her.
We have communicated in the past.
You should see if she wants to come on.
She doesn't need my show, but if she wants to, I'd love to interview her and congratulate her.
I think that's great news for her.
You know, I am just telling you that there's something happening here that we never have seen before.
Hang on a second.
This is very important that I send this out.
This is very, very, very, very important.
I hate to do this to you, but I got to send this.
Dot, dot, dot.
All right, sent.
So I am watching everybody in the media hates Donald Trump.
They just hate him.
And I think we blew out of the water all this hypocrisy.
I'm beginning to think journalism is so dead that it's going to become what happens all of a sudden daytime TV died, the soap operas died off, and the only thing, the talk shows died off.
Most of these talk shows are doing horrible in daytime.
You know, but you still have, I guess Jerry Springer's still at it, right?
He's still doing his thing.
Maury Povich is still doing his thing.
I mean, I'm really beginning to wonder if CNN Fake News is going to have an edition of who's the father, or maybe 60 Minutes will start doing editions of that.
But, you know, you look at the tawdry, salacious, unprecedented questioning of porn stars about an alleged consensual relationship 12 years ago.
And then you look at the treatment of women who were really victims of Bill Clinton, but because Bill Clinton was politically where they wanted, that's all that mattered.
Fake news is so bad.
I'll give you a quick story.
So all over the news today, New York Times reporting that Donald Trump's lawyer raised the prospect of pardons for Flynn and Paul Manafort as the special counsel closed in.
And you're thinking, wow, that's a big story.
Well, the only problem is within seconds, Ty Cobb, the president's attorney, said it's absolute bogus BS.
It's not true.
You know, there was a report that the president's going to clean everybody out.
And I watched the president in the Oval Office tell everybody in the media that what the Washington Post wrote was false.
And it didn't happen, but they still, literally, they still printed it anyway.
It's unbelievable.
And that's how your media is.
And this, by the way, then it becomes exactly what they're going to put on TV all day and all night, and it's not going to matter.
It is so unbelievable to me.
Here's the, it goes on.
It goes, a lawyer for Donald Trump broached the idea of Mr. Trump pardoning two of his former top advisors, Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort, with their lawyers last year, according to three people with knowledge of the discussions.
First of all, I doubt the president is meeting with his lawyers where he has privilege with a bunch of strangers in the room talking about sensitive matters like this.
It sounds on the surface implausible and impossible.
Because if you know lawyers, if you've ever dealt with lawyers, I've dealt with them way more than I'd like to mention.
And by the way, I don't even care.
I'm all for lawyers, especially good ones.
But anyway, it wouldn't happen that way because otherwise you're surrendering your privilege.
It's incredible.
But anyway, so the discussions came as the special counsel was building a case against both men.
And they raised questions about whether the lawyer, John Dowd, was offering pardons to influence their decisions about whether to plead guilty and cooperate in the investigation.
Okay, what they're discussing here would be illegal.
John Dowd is a seasoned top Washington, D.C. lawyer, as is Ty Cobb, as is Jay Seculo, and the entire team that Donald Trump has put together.
These guys are not going to be bantering about these topics and these issues, especially if they're strangers in the room.
Because you always assume in life, you never want a text tweet, blah, blah, blah, something that you don't want to be seen in public.
Anyway, the talk suggests Trump lawyers were concerned about it, Flynn and Manafort, and that they'd cut a deal with the special counsel in exchange for leniency.
Mueller's team could investigate the prospects that the prospects that they could, you know, in exchange for some type of, you know, inquiry thwarting, although legal experts are divided about whether such offers might constitute obstruction.
They're not talking about it.
The president's never been talking about it.
Everybody knows that the power of the pardon, just like the president being the commander-in-chief, those are absolute constitutional powers of the president.
And in spite of people saying, you know, is there going to be a pardon?
Well, look at the people that Bill Clinton pardoned.
You know, the FALA guys and Mark Rich, you know, look at the people Obama pardoned for crying out loud.
I mean, presidents make controversial pardons, but they don't usually do it in their first year, second year.
If they lose, they might do it on the way out the door.
Or if their term is up, they might do it on the way out the door.
So it's just the only one that I really was very happy that the president pardoned Kristen Saussier, especially in light of we know all the crimes that Hillary Clinton committed.
This poor Navy guy was put in jail for a year because he dared to take a photo inside an old 50-year-old submarine, which I'm sure our enemies have complete full knowledge of anyway.
And he just kept it for his own personal use.
It's not like he was giving it to people.
And he sadly lost his phone and they found it on his phone.
They put this guy in jail for a year.
Well, he was pardoned by the president.
Thank goodness.
And I remember because the president saw the mother on my TV show and he mentioned it during the campaign.
So it finally happened.
We have a lot of other new news that we're going to get to today.
One of the biggest issues that keep coming up here is, you know, what is going to happen as it relates to the president and the wall.
Now, I am making the argument, and attorneys that I have discussed this with agree with me.
If the president is the commander-in-chief and the president has control over national security decisions, and he alone gets to decide if he's going to use military actions.
I mean, usually they might consult with Congress.
They'll give Congress a heads up.
We know I'm not going to turn this into a debate over the War Powers Act.
But if a president decides that he needs to do something for the safety and security of the American people, that's part of the power that we, the people, give him as the commander-in-chief.
And if Donald Trump decides that it's a national security issue, which it is, securing our southern border, and our military feels that it's necessary for the safety and security of the American people in our country to take defense dollars and allocate them towards building the wall to stop human trafficking, drug trafficking, gangs crossing over the border, potentially even, which is something that I've always been the most concerned about.
I'm not concerned about people necessarily that want a job and a better life, but if they can get through, so too can members of al-Qaeda and members of ISIS and terrorists that do not have the best interest of the American people at heart.
And that would be a huge scandal.
And that would be a big deal.
So I do think the president has the authority.
I'm sure that it's going to be challenged.
As a matter of fact, I know it's going to be challenged by people like, you know, Chuck Schumer, et cetera.
And by the way, the President Trump's approval rating is the highest it's ever been.
So much for Russia, Russia, Russia, stormy, stormy, stormy.
It's not working.
You know, I saw that Congressman Kinziger actually said, is Donald Trump's probably the most hawkish anti-Russian president we've seen in some time?
Wasn't it just last week we were all discussing the possibility of what Brennan's comments were?
John Brennan out there saying, well, they must have him compromised.
There's no way that he's not.
He's afraid of the president of Russia.
Why?
Well, I think one can speculate as to why, that the Russians may have something on him personally that they could always roll out and make his life more difficult.
Clearly, I think it's important for us to be able to improve relations with Russia.
But the fact that he has had this fawning attitude toward Mr. Putin has not said anything negative about him, I think continues to say to me that he does have something to fear.
Oh, he does have something to fear.
Then why did he do that anyway?
By the way, Roseanne Barr's numbers prove that all-in-the-family type of shows like this could do so well in the day and age and era of Trump.
I'm really happy for him.
But we have one of the biggest national security issues in the country, and we have a media that has no interest.
Anybody in the media that ever talks about anything involving the wall, they're so afraid they don't even want to.
It's unbelievable to me that we can't build a wall on the southern border.
You got Jerry Brown now, Moonbeam, signing into law the sanctuary state law that he has.
So California basically has legalized lawbreaking because we do have federal laws as well.
I think the president and Congress would be within their rights to say, okay, if you're not going to obey the laws of the land as a matter of state law, then you're not going to get any funding.
And I would be all for that showdown.
And if California wants to pick up their toys and go home, I'm fine with that also.
And you have local localities also in California now fighting back.
You have the city of Los Alamitos in Orange County voted earlier this month to defy the state's sanctuary city law.
You have this Orange County supervisors following suit.
They voted to join President Trump's lawsuit against California.
In the meantime, you got the county sheriff down there implementing a new plan to skirt California's insane sanctuary laws.
And the way he's doing it, I think, is absolutely brilliant.
And it's simple.
And what he's doing is he's now going to name the names of people in jail and their release date.
In other words, every prisoner publicly available is now on an online database called Who's in Jail.
I hope my name is never on that database.
Just a thought.
Random thoughts.
Anyway, this will then allow ICE to cross-reference that information and cross-reference identities and report those illegal immigrants convicted of those crimes.
And in response, the Attorney General of California is now issuing a veiled threat against this Orange County sheriff.
What is it going to do?
Arrest him?
Well, then the federal government should go arrest the Oakland mayor for aiding and abetting law breaking.
And this California lunacy just goes on and on and on because they're now going to sue the Trump administration because they dare to want to ask a question whether or not you're a citizen or not.
Well, only citizens by law have a right to vote.
And congressional districts are drawn based on population numbers of people that can vote.
So you can't count non-citizens as people to vote.
I think I had heard the last time they asked this question was 1950s.
That's not true.
Apparently he asked it in 2000.
And you would think that it is the single most racist thing that anybody has ever done.
And it's not.
We live in the strangest, most unprecedented times.
I've never seen a division like this in the country.
And it's never going to stop when Donald Trump's president.
You have all of these forces, the deep state, the media, the Democrats, weak Republicans, never Trumpers.
They're just not going to stop.
Donald Trump doesn't tweet about Stormy Daniels, and it's like they need rehab.
It's like they're addicted to hating Trump and they haven't gotten their drug in three days and they don't know what to do.
All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity Show 80941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, this is pretty interesting, and this just passed the wires.
The DOJ Inspector General, remember, we've been waiting for his report on Hillary Clinton, the email investigation, all the shenanigans that went on involving that.
That, of course, led to Andrew McCabe being fired and the subsequent retirements and subsequent demotions of many people over at the FBI and DOJ.
There's a lot happening that we don't know about.
We should learn a lot more when his investigation is completed and his report is submitted.
It'll be interesting to see if the public gets a hold of it and how long it's going to take to get a hold of it.
But anyway, that Inspector General at the DOJ, Michael Horowitz, announced today that he's going to be investigating the foreign intelligence surveillance abuses by the DOJ and the FBI as requested by Congress and the Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
He said the DOJ, the announcement is the DOJ OIG, the Inspector General, announces initiation of a review department, Department of Justice, Inspector General Michael Horowitz, announced that in response to requests from the Attorney General, members of Congress, the Office of the Inspector General will now initiate a review that will examine the Justice Department's and the FBI's compliance with legal requirements and with applicable, well, as it relates,
and with applicable DOJ and FBI policies and procedures and applications filed with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court relating to a certain U.S. person.
Okay, we know who that is, Carter Page.
As part of the examination, the OIG will review information that was known to the DOJ and the FBI at the time of the applications were filed.
Well, they knew Hillary paid for the information.
They knew it was a political document.
As it relates to procedures, they know the FBI never verified any of the information.
They never corroborated it.
And they allowed this political document that was never verified to be used as the bulk of information for a FISA warrant against an opposition party campaign associate in an election year.
And it goes on to say, at the time of the application, what did they know?
An alleged FBI confidential source.
That would be Christopher Steele.
Additionally, the OIG will review the DOJ and FBI's relationship and communications with the alleged source as they relate to the FISA court applications.
If circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider including other issues that may arise during the course of this review.
Let me just put it very simply.
Everything we've been telling you for a year is now coming to fruition.
It's all coming out.
It's the year of the boomerang.
Like I've told you.
Yeah, fake news.
Everybody has been wrong.
And little old Hannity has been right.
Let me just give a big TikTok to the Inspector General.
All right, we have some breaking news tonight.
I can't break it yet.
We're putting it all together now.
Let's just say it has to do with Strzok and Page and the Obama White House and others in the Department of Justice, the FBI.
It's pretty amazing how this keeps unfolding.
Look, you know, for all the people out there that expect that one day this is all going to end, it's not.
That's not how it works.
Look at this new story that just came out about the Inspector General of the DOJ now going to be looking into FISA abuses.
That's a whole new level of investigation that's beginning.
Now, Sessions ordered the FBI director to stop stonewalling as it relates to the Clinton scandal documents.
We know there's 1.2 million of them.
And so it looks like the Attorney General now is getting his gear now, understanding the gravity of everything that we're facing here.
But he's now directed the FBI director Christopher Wright to stop stonewalling in terms of the FBI on congressional subpoenas for documents related to Hillary's email scandal.
Inspector General Horowitz is going to be releasing this report anytime, and he has 1.2 million documents.
Anyway, he's voiced his concern over the unacceptable pace with which the FBI is working, telling Director Ray he's fed up with seeing his department criticized over it.
He said that he told Ray that the pace is unacceptable and the FBI needs to double the number of people working on this and that's what they need to do.
But, you know, he's done seeing the department criticized for the FBI's slow walking of requests from Congress like the last administration when these requests should be a top priority.
Well, maybe he needs to have a discussion with Rob Rosenstein because of the 3,000 documents that were released, Rosenstein was begging Paul Ryan not to even release them.
But Bob Goodlatt, who we had on yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee, you know, all these guys, I mean, I almost think they should bypass the request phase and go straight to the subpoena phase because it just is going to save time.
Politico is complaining that the truth is now coming out about Robert Mueller.
This is pretty amazing.
Maybe they've been watching some Hannity editions and watching our investigative reports with Sarah Carter and David Schoen and Greg Jarrett and some other people.
But anyway, they're upset over the fact that the truth about Robert Mueller is finally getting out there.
I'm a little disgusted in myself that I didn't go back and do a deeper dive into him earlier.
I didn't know he was so perfect, but apparently he's not.
So Politico writes: when Donald Trump lashed out against Mueller by name earlier this month, the president supporters sprang into action, treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style op research.
Oh, in other words, we actually started doing our job.
And within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel's leading, leading the Justice Department's Russia probe for the FBI's clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the Bureau.
Well, that's only the beginning of things.
And by the way, clumsy is the wrong word.
They got the wrong guy, Stephen Hatfield.
And then, by the way, leaked it to the media.
According to the LA Times, Mueller, quote, personally managed the case.
And the FBI destroyed Hatfield's life because of Mueller's mistake.
And Hatfield sued the FBI and won $5.8 million.
And you know, the FBI pays out like the city of New York.
You slip and fall in New York.
You file a lawsuit, you're getting paid.
Oh, my God.
You didn't see that article going back?
Oh, my gosh.
The number of amount of millions paid out by New York City every year?
Oh, it's insane.
Anyway, the Politico goes on, the independent pro-Trump journalist Sarah Carter.
Poor Sarah.
She's as independent as they come, and she's a real journalist in an era where journalism is dead, especially at the Politico, posted a story charging that Mueller as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s had cover up the FBI dealings with mafia informant Whitey Bulger.
Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
Well, there's the kiss of death if you're associated with me.
To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets.
No, it just was a reminder that we hadn't done this.
Anyway, the barrage.
What are they talking about?
A barrage?
Now, in the Whitey Bulger case, you got to remember Mueller was in charge.
Remember, four people got sent to jail for murder.
Murder.
And Whitey Bulger, the FBI guy that was assigned to Whitey Bulger, was tipping off Bulger about all law enforcement activities against him, which you're not supposed to do.
And then he ended up getting in trouble.
And then anyway, it turns out four innocent people got sent to jail, Mr. Mueller, and a lawsuit ensued.
Two of the guys died in jail that were innocent.
And then a lawsuit ensued, and $100 plus million dollars were awarded because of the mistreatment that happened there.
You know, by the way, compared to what we're doing, I mean, Politico and the Destroy Trump media, it's like thermonuclear war.
I'm watching the media literally have a meltdown because Donald Trump hasn't tweeted about Stormy Daniels.
They just, they are addicted to waking up and hating Trump, and there's not been a lot to hate in the last 48 hours.
And it's like they're heroin addicts, and they don't know what to do.
And they're beginning to sweat, and they're going through withdrawals, and they can't handle it.
Don't worry, I'm sure that fake news, CNN, they'll have an edition of Who Is the Father?
They'll hire special correspondent Maury Povich to work with Anderson Cooper.
You told Donald Trump to turn around and take off his pants.
Yes.
And did he?
Yes.
So he turned around and pulled his pants down a little.
He had underwear on and stuff, and I just gave him a couple slots.
This was done in a joking manner.
Yes.
Did you two go out for dinner that night?
No.
You had dinner in the room?
Yes.
What happened next?
And you had sex with him?
Yes.
You were 27, he was 60.
Were you physically attracted to him?
No.
Not at all.
No.
Did you want to have sex with him?
No.
But I didn't say no.
I'm not a victim.
I'm not.
It was entirely consensual.
Oh, yes.
In an industry where condom use is an issue, did he use a condom?
No.
Did you ask him to?
No.
After you had sex, what happened?
He definitely wanted to continue to see you.
Oh, for sure.
Did you smoke a cigarette?
At that point of business meeting, it was just a matter of time.
What does that mean?
After sex, what did you do?
He came really close to asking.
The only question he didn't ask in this tawdry, salacious, ridiculous tabloid interview of his, and he did two of them back to back, is, well, do you, when he did ask, you know, you could describe it, right?
I mean, I felt like I was watching Jerry Springer or Maury Povich.
This is CNN.
Fake news, you're a soft porn network.
Might as well add that.
Maybe we can get a new liners cut for fake news, CNN.
You know, I really could do something to them today, and it's holy week, and I'm not doing it.
You should do it.
They deserve it.
They deserve God's righteous anger.
If Linda was here, she would be telling you to toss some tables at CNN.
I just, I have a conscience.
But in that interview, their headline the next day was the one line where she said, I didn't want to have sex with Donald Trump.
And they put that up as the headline.
I understand all of it.
I'm not consensual.
I don't know why I have a conscience.
I would feel guilty.
You shouldn't feel guilty for people that deserve it.
The person deserves it.
Trust me.
I'm going to be very patient.
But I am holding a major TikTok.
Well, actually, multiple TikToks, not just a TikTok.
I think you should ask me.
I'm trying to stay focused on the issues is what I'm trying to do.
You know, I've got, as if I don't have enough enemies coming after me.
I got the entire deep state, the upper echelon of the intelligence community, the CIA, the FBI, the Department of Justice hating my guts.
Everybody in media.
The only people that seem to like me right now are you guys and my kids and my family.
That's it.
Anyway, so the attacks on Mueller, I mean, why did they get in bed with Whitey Bulger?
Why was Whitey Bulger committing all these crimes allegedly, including murder and not being held accountable?
Why was the FBI guy that they put in with work with, remember, this was under Mueller's watch.
Anyway, the special counsel's unfavorable rating is now at 43%, according to Morning Consult.
And then the political goes on to say, on Fox News, Hannity gave Mueller a thorough drubbing, too.
One of his podcasts last week, the conservative pundit questioned why Attorney General Jeff Sessions was recused from the Russia probe while Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein gets to appoint his buddy Robert Mueller.
Then the political piece goes on.
Hannity's also devoted television airtime to the special counsel each night last week, including an interview with Sarah Carter, in which he asked her to elaborate on her story about Mueller's work as a federal prosecutor in Boston and criticism that the FBI withheld information about their interactions with Bulger, a former organized crime boss and federal government informant who evaded police for 16 years until his arrest in 2011.
You know, here's part of the case, though, the political describes as, quote, the FBI withheld information.
Oh, that sounds like Mueller.
I always wondered why he hired Andrew Weissman.
Andrew Weissman does not belong on any level, any whatsoever, working for any special counsel.
Why did Mueller only appoint Democratic donors, Clinton donors, Obama donors, DNC donors, and no Trump donors, if he wants to be fair?
Why did Mueller appoint a guy that so screwed up the Anderson accounting case when he was the lead counsel there, and tens of thousands of Americans lost their jobs, and he ended up getting overturned in the Supreme Court 9-0.
Those people didn't deserve to lose their jobs, have their lives ruined because of over-aggressive prosecutors.
And then the same Andrew Weissman sent four Merrill executives to jail for a year.
It doesn't matter if you like Merrill executives or not.
They were innocent.
They didn't belong in jail.
But they spent a year of their life in jail only to have that case overturned by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Now we see, and in both cases, twice Andrew Weissman was excoriated by a judge for withholding exculpatory evidence.
I mean, that's not once, that's twice.
Then we find out the same thing when Mueller was in Boston.
What is it with their obsession and withholding exculpatory evidence?
Now, the judge that took care of the Ted Stevens case, Ted Stevens lost his entire career only to have a judge finally say, no, he never did any of this.
Well, in that particular case, now that judge is taking over for Rudolph Contreras.
Rudolph Contreras accepted Michael Flynn's guilty plea and then recused himself after accepting the plea.
And then remember, they delayed the sentencing.
Well, now the new judge in this case is the judge that presided over fixing the mess that was the Ted Stevens case.
And he's now demanded and now has all the, quote, exculpatory evidence that might have been withheld as it relates to General Flynn.
I'm almost certain, I'm convinced, at some point that General Flynn's guilty plea deal is going to be thrown out.
And General Flynn's going to be a free man.
And I'm pretty certain, if we get to the bottom of it, that they probably threatened the general.
Well, look, we're going to just keep investigating you, and you're going to spend years in jail.
And we're also looking into your son.
Now, what father is not going to fall on the sword for their son?
Every father is going to do that, and they know it.
That is like the dirtiest trick in the book.
Okay.
We're going to probably put your kid in jail, too, unless you plead guilty to lying to us.
The only problem in that case, even James Comey didn't think that General Flynn lied.
And Peter Strzok, who interviewed him, didn't think he lied.
And I'm told from sources that the other FBI agent that interviewed him didn't think he lied.
Now, back to this political piece, the Boston FBI sent four innocent men to jail for the murder of a local bookie in Boston who was actually killed by an FBI informant, the one that was connected to Bulger.
And those four innocent guys were sentenced to die until the Supreme Court overturned the death penalty, after which their sentences got changed to life in prison.
Two of them died in jail.
And when the other two went up for parole, Robert Mueller, who by then was overseeing the Boston FBI as a U.S. attorney, wrote letters to the parole board to make sure that these guys who were framed by the FBI never got out, even though Mueller knew they were innocent at that point.
And they got $100-plus million dollar settlement.
Okay.
I guess he's not beyond reproach.
And in a really weird, roundabout way, the Politico is actually acknowledging Hannity's right.
All right, well, have the latest breaking news.
When we come back, Freedom Caucus members, Dave Brett and Ron DeSantis will join us.
Later on, Jonathan Gillum and Danielle McLaughlin will also get a lot of calls in here.
I am loving this, that Andrew Cuomo, the governor of New York, saying that the New York City mayor should have been indicted.
And anyway, his reelection campaign weighed in on all of this.
And anyway, if that's what Governor Cuomo says, and that's what Andrew, that's what, in fact, the Comrade de Blasio did, I'm saying, I agree with Andrew Cuomo.
Let's indict him for bribery.
Anyway, 800-941-Sean toll free telephone number.
Quick break.
We'll come back.
And the other news of the day, Freedom Caucus members Brat DeSantis next.
Johnson, let's be clear.
There are 1.2 million documents.
You've only seen 3,000 of them.
You've been stonewalled for five months.
We have seen some documents.
We've seen more than we saw from the Obama administration, Justice Department, but we need more documents and we need them now.
And we need them unredacted, by the way, Maria.
These latest revelations about Peter Strzok and Lisa Page talking about a federal judge, a Judge Contreras, who was appointed to serve on the FISA court, and they're talking back and forth about how good that is and how Peter Strzzok needs to be catching up with him and talking to him.
That was made available to us earlier in a redacted form.
It was only just recently that we had the opportunity to see that text unredacted.
That clearly does not draw any conclusion about what that judge and Peter Strzzok may have done or not done, but it's clearly material to what was going on in the FBI regarding how they were treating this court.
So if I was Chairman Goodland, what I would do quickly, because I had to go through this for the last year, fighting Department of Justice and FBI for documents.
I think the American people now know that they stonewalled for many, many months so that we could actually figure out that Fusion GPS was paid by the Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign to collude and interact with Russians to get dirt on President Trump.
That took us a long time to find out.
And what I would recommend to my colleagues on the House Judiciary Committee, and I applaud Chairman Goodlatt for what he's doing, but don't wait.
So when we get back in two weeks, if the 1.2 million documents aren't in the Capitol, then he should immediately move to hold Department of Justice and the FBI in contempt.
And if we have to vote on contempt, then we should immediately move to impeach those officials.
That would be using the full power of the Congress.
All right, that's the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes.
And yeah, there's 1.2 million documents.
We know a lot of this has gone into the research that the Inspector General has had now for somewhat 14 months.
We expect, hopefully, any day now, that his report will be forthcoming.
But we know that we had House Judiciary Committee Chairman Goodlatt on the program yesterday discussing this.
But what we're finding, even though they only have 3,000 or a little over 3,000 of these documents, every single day we're getting more nuggets out of them.
Although, of course, Rod Rosenstein and the Department of Justice have made it next to impossible for anybody to go over there and actually read them or even make copies of the information that they have in the 3,000-plus documents.
But what we discovered today, and we're going to get into some detail about all this, is we've got agents repeatedly referring to a joint investigation of the FBI, which has utilized their cyber and counterintelligence divisions to open up a joint investigation into that DNC hack in July of 2016.
The initial assessment within the FBI was done by its Inside Threat Center, which is run by the Director of National Intelligence.
That would be James Clapper.
And then you get all these new messages between the lovebirds, Strzzok, and Page.
First, we have the White House running the meeting.
That was the first time the DOJ and the FBI met to discuss interagency coordination in the case.
And a text from Strzz to Page says, thanks so much for having the discipline to wait another 24 hours to have the first meeting about the case with the DOJ.
Now, remember, we're talking about deep state operatives, Strzok and Page.
Well, in the case of Strzok, he was writing Hillary's exoneration before the investigation.
He also interviewed General Flynn.
We know how much both of them loathed Donald Trump and were working in their positions to get rid of Donald Trump or prevent him from winning.
And then, of course, we have the deep state and the FBI.
Everybody knew that Hillary paid for the phony Russian propaganda dossier that was then used to secure a FISA warrant and put together a FISA application based on an unverified, uncorroborated document that Hillary paid for, and never telling the FISA judge who, in fact, was behind that document, knowing full well who was behind it, which means they were lying to a FISA court judge in that particular case.
But you got documents demonstrating the highest-ranking officials at the FBI, the CIA, and the Obama White House involved in this initial investigation.
And that's Director Comey, and that's Brennan, and that's Dennis McDonough, and evidence that at least one other agency outside of the State Department was involved in the initial effort.
And the documents demonstrating that the FBI leadership was aware of all of this as they turned it into an investigation into Donald Trump, even though Donald Trump didn't have access as foreign intelligence agencies did to Hillary's email server.
And remember, the original May draft of the exoneration of Hillary, Comey himself admitted that foreign intel agencies had hacked into Hillary's unsecure server in that mom-and-pop shop bathroom closet.
Who knows where Julian Assange Godifrey could have gotten it from China, could have gotten it from Russia, could have gotten it from North Korea, could have gotten it from Iran.
We don't know exactly.
We should have figured out by now who, in fact, hacked into Hillary's server before she deleted it, acid-washed it, and beat up her blackberries with a hammer.
Anyway, the CIA director Brennan, he was sent to the Hill to brief members of Congress on the possibility of election interference in August of 2016.
Devin Nunes had warned Obama about this in 2014, and Obama did nothing.
And two weeks outside of the election, Obama was lecturing Donald Trump to stop whining that no serious person would ever believe that our election could be tampered with in any way.
The FBI used allegations of possible interference as it relates to Hillary's server in the upcoming presidential investigation to broaden their investigation into Trump campaign associates.
And by doing so, that gave them access to the entire Trump campaign and all of their emails.
And at the time, Lisa Page was incredulous regarding Strzzok's confidential sources, providing the FBI with information into Trump's campaign Russia contacts, which, by the way, we still have no Trump-Russia collusion.
And this is only a small snippet of the new documents that we've been able to get today from the Freedom Caucus.
Joining us now is Dave Bratt from Virginia, Ron DeSantis from Florida.
By the way, Congressman DeSantis is now running to be the next governor of the great state of Florida, and I fully support and endorse him.
Unless, of course, he doesn't want my endorsement because he thinks it'll hurt him.
But I think you'll be a great follow-up to your current governor, who's been absolutely amazing.
Well, thanks, Sean, and I very much appreciate your support.
And we want to get you down to do some type of an event down in southwest Florida next time you're down there.
Well, listen, Florida, how is it that Florida lives with no state income tax, lower property taxes, and New York has a 10% state income tax?
They tax everything to death, the highest property taxes in the country, and they have the most dilapidated, broken-down infrastructure you've ever seen in your life.
It's amazing.
And we have more population than New York right now, and their budget is twice the size of Florida's budget.
And as you said, people are taxed up to Wazoo.
They spend all this money, and yet you pay $20 to go over a bridge, and the roads and the bridges are still dilapidated.
No, no, no.
If you pay both ways, it's $28 over certain tunnels and bridges now, $28 a day.
Oh, man.
Unbelievable.
All right, Dave, Bratt, let me go.
What is your takeaway from this new revelation that we got from only the 3,000 of the 1.2 million available documents that they haven't handed over yet?
Yeah, well, your show is the best at putting together these lists, and what's going on is the work is politicizing every aspect of American life, right?
So the FBI, 10 people have been fired or stepped down.
The CIA Blennon is making the most caustic political remarks about this sitting president of the United States.
The State Department is next.
They're politicizing the schools.
They socialized our health care.
And that's the goal of socialism and the left right now.
They want the state to run everything.
And American exceptionalism, as Ron was just saying, is the exact opposite of that, right?
We want a smaller federal government, and that's my takeaway.
The conservatives have to get on the same bandwagon again.
In spite of the budget, we're going to have to, the president can weigh in tomorrow and tell the Senate to do a budget this year, which they're not going to do.
Then we can do reconciliation.
We can do another round of tax cuts.
We can do welfare reconciliation.
Well, who's preventing that from happening?
I mean, Paul Ryan is the Speaker.
Mitch McConnell is the majority leader.
What's stopping him?
Yeah, well, they deemed, no one knows this, not in the algorithms, but in the budget a month ago, the House and the Senate agreed to deem the budget numbers, which means they don't have to do a budget, right?
Because the Senate doesn't want to have to take a tough vote before November.
And so that means you don't get reconciliation.
And you know, that's how we got tax cuts through.
So we've given up our most powerful tool where you only need 51 votes unilaterally, right?
The Republicans handed our most powerful tool away because the Senate is scared to vote.
So Paul Ryan, we did a budget.
McConnell, they failed on health care.
They failed on the budget.
They failed on spending.
And so we better get it right.
The president needs to use the bully puppet to tell the Senate and shame them into doing a budget ASAP next week.
Well, I don't think it's going to happen because I know Ryan and I know McConnell, and I think in their minds, they think this is done.
I love what the president is saying, Congressman Brad, and that is that our number one national security issue right now is right down on our southern border.
We have drug trafficking and human trafficking and gangs crossing.
You have the threat of America's enemies crossing into this country, and that would mean al-Qaeda and ISIS, et cetera.
Why don't we use part of the military budget, build the wall and build it fast?
Oh, I'm all for that.
I mean, if we could do that.
Well, wait a minute.
He's the commander-in-chief.
Why would he not have the right to allocate as commander-in-chief the money from the Defense Department to do such?
Yeah, no, I think he can, and I think he ought to.
But the Goodlap bill and anything else, right, that Republicans ran on will require nine votes in the Senate to become law before November.
None of that's going to happen.
So he can move as an executive on wherever he has latitude, and I hope he does all of what you just said.
But we've got to do more.
The Goodlap bill will not become law unless we do a budget, and this is a trick move of the swamp, and we need to make it very public yesterday.
What do you make of these latest struck page emails, Congressman Ron DeSantis?
Well, Sean, I'll tell you, it shows you why has DOJ and FBI, you know, kept some of this stuff redacted?
Why are they making it so difficult for Congress to be able to identify this stuff?
I think what you played at the top of the interview with Devin Nunes, what he said is exactly right.
Rosenstein needs to comply with Goodlatt's subpoena from Judiciary Committee.
And if he doesn't, we need to immediately move to hold these officials in contempt.
I want to know why Rod Rosenstein, now Rod Rosenstein is interesting to me because if we're to believe reports are true, didn't he have a hand?
We had the original application for a FISA warrant.
They used the bulk of information from the Clinton bought and paid for dossier.
Without it, Andrew McCabe said there wouldn't have even been an application.
But the three subsequent renewals, didn't Rod Rosenstein have a hand in those renewals?
And if he did, doesn't that conflict him out?
And shouldn't he have recused himself as it relates to appointing Mueller, considering that's part of the investigation?
Well, he certainly, I think, signed or was privy to the fourth extension, which happened in the middle of 2017.
It may be the case that the third extension happened just before he got confirmed.
So that would have been done by an Obama holdover.
But he did sign an extension after he appointed Mueller to be the special counsel.
And so one of the problems that I've had with how he's handled the whole discovery process is he's fought tooth and nail to give Congress anything with any of this stuff.
We've gone on months and months for stuff we're entitled to.
And the fact that he was one of the guys that signed off on the last extension, to me, he's not necessarily somebody who can just call balls and strikes on this personal interest in this.
We wouldn't have had the Nunes memo, the Grassley Graham memo, if Rosenstein had his way begging Paul Ryan not to release the measly 3,000 pages of the 1.2 million pages available.
So there must be something really damning in there that they don't want out, although the FBI Director Ray is now saying that he's going to push harder and double the number of workers and the amount of time they spend a day on it.
But to me, that's still not fast enough.
But we'll take a break more with Congressman Dave Bratt and Congressman Ron DeSantis, Freedom Caucus members, the only people I'm trusting these days in Washington.
As we continue with Congressman Dave Pratt of Virginia, Ron DeSantis from Florida, Freedom Caucus members, both of them.
All right, so we now have the FBI Director Ray saying, all right, well, we're going to double the number of people to keep up with the document request of Congress, and they're going to work two shifts, not one shift.
I'm like, okay.
But when are we going to get the 1.2 million documents, Dave Bratt?
And number two, when is this Inspector General's report coming?
You know, we heard it was going to come out in early April.
Now they're talking about May.
And, you know, how much longer does this guy need?
Yeah, well, I think the key point you're making is the American people are just screaming out for closure on anything.
We got evidence on the Hillary Foundation.
We got evidence on the Hillary campaign.
We got the dossier, everything you go over every night, and there's no closure.
So, yeah, we're going through all these process arguments.
And basically, after this budget shenanigans, I think there's more pressure than ever on our leadership to get some closure to prove that there's not two systems of justice, right?
One for the elite where you make trades, right?
Well, we do know that the FBI field office in Arkansas has opened up a case under the Clinton Foundation.
I have the Uranium One informant that literally got himself as an operative within Vladimir Putin's network in America before the Uranium One deal.
We know that Comey and Strzzok and Page and McCabe and all these other people were involved in covering for Hillary, and we know the whole FISA issue now.
So, I mean, this my question is, when do we get to the finish line?
Well, and I think that's a matter of leadership.
Leadership has to get the green light to cross the finish line.
And once they do.
So I need to be talking to Paul Ryan?
Yeah, no, that's what we got to do.
And our guys own law, right?
Ron's doing that.
Neuto's.
We've got to use our powers.
When Congress makes a request for these documents that we're entitled to, if they're not forthcoming, then there's got to be a sanction for that.
And so Nunes is right.
This stuff isn't done.
There needs to be contempt.
I mean, first of all, this isn't a matter of not having enough manpower assigned to produce this stuff.
This has been deliberate on the account of some of these high officials to not want to give Congress any of it.
They haven't wanted to give it to us.
They said that all the stuff in the Nunes memo would devastate national security.
They had all these different things they were saying.
None of it was true.
So it's time to put up or shut up.
We have the April 5th deadline that's next week.
If it's not turned over by then, I'm going to be 100% pushing in support of contempt for those officials.
And until we see it, all right.
Thank you both for being with us fighting a good fight.
Freedom Caucus members, Dave Brad of Virginia, Ron DeSantis of Florida.
Thank you both.
When we come back, wide open telephones, our news roundup information overload hour, Jonathan Gillum, Danielle McLaughlin, and much more.
As we continue, this is the Sean Hannity Show.
It's my little princess.
Or senator, or doctor, or captain of industry, because girls can be whatever they want to be.
I want to train Castle Bark.
Good.
I think it's cool.
And Jackie thinks every girl should grow up and be president, even if they're a liar, liar, pantsuit on fire.
I think we know who's a liar and who's on fire, Roseanne.
Hey, Jay.
DJ!
Welcome back.
Thank you for your service.
Thanks.
But I've been out of the Army for three months.
Oh, I've been off the force for years, but I can still taste the adrenaline.
How's the missus?
She win the war over there yet?
Not yet.
Okay.
Well, thank her for her service.
I brought salad.
Thank you for your salad.
Hey, everybody.
This is the first dinner together we've had as a family in a long time.
Let's try to survive it.
Yeah.
First, let's say Grace.
Jackie, would you like to take a knee?
Thank you for this food and for bringing our son DJ home safe from Syria.
Please protect his wife Gina and all our troops still overseas.
Please watch over our son Jerry, who's on that stupid fishing boat where apparently they don't get phone calls.
But most of all, Lord, thank you for making America great again.
That is from Roseanne.
This show blew everybody out of the water yesterday with over 18 million viewers.
The biggest TV launch of the season, a stunning premiere revival.
I mean, you don't see numbers like this in television anymore because of cable and obviously Netflix and other options that people have.
Those numbers don't exist.
I mean, that's crazy numbers.
And I think there's a reason for it.
And I think the reason is pretty simple.
You know, if you look in recent years about all these different shows that have gone on, isn't it interesting Roseanne being very pro-President Trump and people watching it?
This is why I did the movie that I did.
And by the way, it's on DVD and Walmart and Hannity.com.
If you haven't seen it, I think you and your family will enjoy it.
We did it because it's different than everything that's produced in Hollywood.
We didn't follow the same formulaic, you know, same old, same old, you know, oh, sex, violence, and cartoon characters, which is pretty much every movie.
Or Jennifer Aniston falls in love with a new first guy for the 4,000th time, then breaks up, then gets married, then breaks up, then gets married again.
I mean, I can't watch.
And you see, you know, the movie, pull it up, Jason.
There's a really, it's sort of like a Christian anthem that's called I Can Only Imagine.
That song is amazing.
And they turned that whole story into a movie.
And I watched the movie.
It was amazing.
And they got a new movie coming out.
A friend of mine in Idaho saw it.
And he said that movie's great too.
It's called Paul.
And all of a sudden now, you have, and I think in a lot of ways, the success of Let There Be Light has led to a lot of this.
You know, we got the trailer.
You got the trailer for I Can Only Imagine Play It.
It's an amazing song.
Just kind of happened.
Took about 10 minutes, I guess.
Bart, you didn't write this song in 10 minutes.
Took a lifetime.
How'd you do this?
You know, I've never told anybody my story.
When I was 11 years old, life was tough.
Where's Mama?
She's gone.
She don't want me no more.
She doesn't want you neither.
And I've always loved music.
And I found some songs that I just held on to.
They gave me hope.
Mercy me, that can't be his real voice.
Because I needed it.
Dad, I can do this.
Hell, you can.
And you're going to blink your eyes and you're going to realize that life has gotten you nowhere because you chased some stupid dream.
I can.
I'm leaving.
I want you to know that I pray for you all the time.
And I hope that you find whatever it is that you're looking for out there.
What are you running from, my dear?
You've been right about it.
Let that pain become your inspiration.
I have some stuff I need to sort out, and I deal with it the only way I know how.
And that's to write a song.
You hungry?
Set the table.
What is this?
I want to make things bright.
You and me.
Dad was a monster.
And I saw God transform him.
Give a gift, the real gift.
I didn't think that God could do that.
And so I wrote this song for my dad.
Now let me play a little bit of this song.
This has become an I can't believe, first of all, it's a story.
I didn't know the story behind the song, but it's, I guess it really was written in 10 minutes.
And somebody was doing an interview, and he said, no, no, no, that's not 10 minutes, that's your whole life.
And then you find out the life of this kid.
His father was a frustrated football player, really bitter and angry.
And eventually the mother walks out, and this kid's life is a mess.
And out of that came what is one of probably the biggest Christian anthem song ever.
I could listen to this song over and over again every day.
And if you haven't heard it, I can't believe it, but you're going to love it.
I can only imagine what my eyes will see when your face is before me.
I can only imagine.
Surrounded by your water.
What will my heart feel when I dance for you, Jesus?
Or in all of you, be still when I stand in your presence.
Or to my knees when I fall, will I sing?
Hallelujah.
Will I be able to speak at all?
I can only imagine.
I can only imagine.
I can only imagine when that day comes and I find myself standing in the sun.
I can only imagine when all I would do is forever forever worship you.
I can only imagine.
I can do it.
Or to my knees will I fall?
Will I sing?
Hallelujah.
Will I be able to speak at all?
I can only imagine.
Yeah, I can only imagine.
Surrounded by your glory.
What will my heart feel?
Will I dance for you, Jesus?
Or in all of you, be still, will I stand in your presence?
Or to my knees, or will I fall?
Will I sing?
Hallelujah.
Will I be able to speak at all?
I can only imagine.
Yeah, I can only imagine.
I can only imagine.
Yeah, I can only imagine.
I can only imagine.
Is forever, forever worship you.
I mean, it's just an amazing song.
The name of the band is called Mercy Me, and Bart Millard is the guy.
I guess I'm assuming that it is about his real life and where that song came from.
I got an early copy of the movie.
The people that put the movie out have no idea how I got my copy.
I'm not telling them either.
I have my ways, which by the way is totally horrible considering it's a faith-based movie, and I'm stealing a copy of it.
I'll pay for the movie.
I'll give them the 15 bucks.
It's just I don't have the time to go to movie theaters.
Perfect time for Jesus to absolve you of your sins with Easter weekend coming up.
Well, it is holy.
You know, I will say this about Holy Week.
I mean, I really could have been horrible to somebody today, and I didn't do it.
I could have been awful.
There's a side of me that I'm just a natural-born fighter, and I just thought and thought and thought and thought and thought.
And I just said, oh, I could take such a hard shot at somebody.
Me?
What are you talking about?
Why would I ever take a, are you out of your mind?
No.
Mama Bear is out.
I didn't know if you meant hard on me, but you decided to be nice today.
I'm nice every day with all due respect to everybody.
I get 100 today, like I do every day.
But the point is, I don't know why.
I just, I'm not the most religious person in the world.
I'm not.
And I don't go to church after the Catholic scandal, but I listen to songs like that, and I see people that are so engaged in their faith.
And I do believe in Jesus.
I believe God created everything.
And here it is this song that's imagining what life is going to be like when we pass on to the next world.
And I'm like thinking, well, is there any way I can sneak into the anthole inside one of those mansions that he's building for everybody else?
Because that's about where I would belong if not the other place.
Don't discount what you do.
You do a lot of great stuff that no one knows about.
No, I'm not looking for a pat on the back.
If you really believe Christianity, it's we've all sinned and fallen short.
Okay, so I don't deserve to go to heaven, period.
End of sentence.
And I know you three don't either, except maybe Sunshine a little bit.
Anyway, the movie's great.
And I want to see the other movie I want to see is that movie Paul.
I don't know if it's out yet.
I have to ask my friends and get a stolen copy of that.
I mean, it's really bad that I'm stealing faith-based films on Jesus and everything.
It's terrible.
What is wrong with me?
All right, 800-941, Sean.
Right back to your calls as we continue.
Big news tonight on Hannity, 9 Eastern.
Let's get a couple of calls in here: 800-941, Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, Mark is in Indiana.
Hey, Mark, how are you?
Sorry to keep you away.
Did you like that song?
Isn't that a great song?
It is.
And I was just going to pull your chain a little bit and say, you know, Hannity, it's easier for me to talk to God every day and get answers than it is to get a phone call to you.
So Joe Hayhart probably thinks I'm evil.
But anyway, a couple things.
Last night was refreshing, Roseanne Barr.
There is some sane people out in Hollywood.
That was very refreshing.
But I think you need to hang your cleats up, and you need to be the general to lead the movement in this country of the silent majority because you know better than anyone we are at war.
And the things that you and your team are doing, and don't discount this comment, you would be surprised how many silent majority people in this country appreciate what all of you are doing.
But at the same time, we have nobody to lead us out to counteract all this crazy stuff that's going on.
It's just crazy.
Listen, I can only tell you this, and I know people want instant gratification.
Remember, if we weren't doing all this work, McCabe wouldn't have been fired.
All of these things with Struck and Paige, all these things that we wouldn't have discovered that the fix was in on Hillary.
We wouldn't have discovered the deep state and their insurance policy.
We wouldn't have discovered who paid for the dossier.
We wouldn't discover that the FISA application was based on the phony Russian bought and paid for dossier, that the judges were lied to.
I'm talking to the Uranium One informant tonight.
Listen, I'm trying my best.
I can tell you this.
I am not going to stop.
They can put handcuffs on me and put me in jail and put me in solitary.
And I guess they could stop me that way.
But short of that, I'm not stopping until I take my last breath because I know everything we're reporting is the truth.
And I know the media is lying to you.
And I know these people are corrupt.
All right, so why do we need to call a convention of states?
Well, really, $1.3 trillion in spending, full funding for Planned Parenthood, no real funding for the wall.
The president's going to have to do that on his own as he does most of the heavy lifting.
And of course, we need law enforcement.
And we need a better, more balanced budget.
Now, how much more clear will it ever get that DC's never going to fix anything on their own?
They're bankrupting the country and they don't seem to care.
So I guess that means it's up to us.
Now, I've been telling you about the Convention Estates project, and if this ridiculous spending bill hasn't convinced you, well, I don't know what will, because now is the time.
So join me, my friends, the great one, Mark Levin, and Governor Huckabee, Mark Meckler.
We want to drain the swamp.
Just go to conventionestates.com, conventionestates.com.
Here's the bottom line: the politicians will never ever do it, but we can.
And if you're sick and tired of DC like I am, get involved and please sign that petition at conventionestates.com.
All right, Hannity tonight, Nine Eastern, the Uranium One Informant, also the top news of the day, and we'll be breaking not one but two big breaking news stories tonight.
You don't want to miss it.
Hannity, Nine Eastern on the Fox News channel.
All right, news roundup information overload our Sean Hannity show.
All right, let me play.
This didn't go very well for fake news CNN, the Jerry Springer network, as they did a focus group of Dallas evangelical Trump supporters, all women, and their reaction to Stormy Daniels.
Listen to this.
What was your first impression of Stormy Daniels?
I feel sorry for her.
My heart hurts for her.
This is a poor star.
Why are we giving it any credibility?
Exactly.
Why would she come out and give this interview if she wasn't telling the truth?
Based on this interview, do any of you believe that Stormy Daniels did have sex with Donald Trump?
I don't believe it because I haven't seen any hard proof.
I know that when I voted for him, I wasn't voting for a quiet boy.
He had to change as a person in order to become a president.
Stormy Daniels, if you the lifestyle that she's leading right now, I mean, I wish she would turn her life over the way that Trump has.
And then on top of that, you got creepy Anderson Cooper that maybe we should just rename the show the Anderson Springer Show, because I mean, when we did the back and forth, you know, with the questions, it's so creepy.
And especially considering CNN ignored all of the accusations against Bill Clinton because they are the Clinton News Network, it's so obvious how phony and abusively biased they are.
Let's play that.
Would he call you?
He would call me.
I would call him, vice versa.
So you had his phone number.
When he called, did his number show up on the phone?
Were you attracted to him?
So the sex was consensual.
Did he actually try to hand you money?
Did he bring up his wife?
Would he talk about his child, his son?
Were you in love with him?
I was, yeah.
And do you think he was in love with you?
Did Donald Trump ever say to you that he loved you?
Did he have any nicknames for you?
What did you think of the apartment?
And he showed you around the apartment.
How did you feel being in his apartment?
Did he ever compare you to any of his kids?
Did he ever use protection?
You told Donald Trump to turn around and take off his pants?
Yes.
And did he?
Yes.
So he turned around and pulled his pants down a little.
He had underwear on and stuff, and I just gave him a couple swats.
This was done in a joking manner.
Yes.
Did you two go out for dinner that night?
No.
You had dinner in the room?
Yes.
What happened next?
And you had sex with him?
Yes.
You were 27, he was 60.
Were you physically attracted to him?
No.
Not at all?
No.
Did you want to have sex with him?
No.
But I didn't say no.
I'm not a victim.
I'm not.
It was entirely concentrated.
Oh, yes.
In an industry where condom use is an issue, did he use a condom?
No.
Did you ask him to?
No.
After you had sex, what happened?
He definitely wanted to continue to see you.
Oh, for sure.
It wasn't at that point of business meeting.
It was just watching Sharkwick.
Yeah.
All right, joining us now with Reaction, Jonathan Gillum, author of the bestseller, Sheep No More, Danielle McLaughlin, attorney, constitutional expert.
Danielle, I'll start with you.
Did you find, you know, are we going to now have on CNN coming up next Who's the Father?
Are we going to be doing those episodes on 60 Minutes now?
We'll hire Maury Povich as the next big correspondent at CNN.
You know, Sean, this is awkward, and I don't think that most Americans want to be dealing with this.
But ultimately, this is something that happened in the president's past, allegedly, and CNN is looking into it.
You know, they got the highest ratings they've had in about 10 years.
I think it was 22 million viewers on Monday night.
So people are interested, I guess.
Well, they're interested, but I don't think they got what they wanted.
Now, remember, they had one of the biggest lead-ins ever because you had Duke playing Kansas in the lead of to determine who was going to be part of the final four.
And the ratings for that were through the roof and astronomical.
So, I mean, but at the end of the day, was there any question there that you felt was appropriate, especially in light of the media ignoring the stories of assault, exposing oneself, groping, grabbing, fondling, touching, kissing against one's will when it comes to Clinton, and then ultimately the rape allegation by Juanita Broderick?
Well, at the end of the day, Bill Clinton was impeached, right?
He was impeached for lying.
He was impeached for lying over a sexual affair in the White House.
So Bill Clinton has paid his dues, I think, in many respects.
This is all just tawdry and terrible.
And believe me, I don't want to be hearing about this on late night news or regular news.
But this is being looked into because this is the behavior of a president.
He's the leader of the free world.
Yeah.
You know, well, the bottom line is, do you think that these allegations about a consensual relationship going back, what, 12 or 13 years, do you think that what CNN in 60 Minutes is doing is appropriate?
I think that it's newsworthy because he's the president.
I wish that we didn't have to hear about this.
And I will say from a political perspective, we can see.
Will you acknowledge a double standard how they treated allegations of rape and exposing oneself and groping and grabbing and fondling and touching and kissing against another woman's will?
Do you see a flagrant double standard in the news media today?
You know, I don't because this was, you know, 20 years ago with Bill Clinton.
And then it was.
Okay, that's right.
No, Monica was huge news.
Paula Jones, Juanita Broderick.
Juanita Broderick was only interviewed three times.
That's it.
And I was one of the three.
So you can't say that's 20 years ago.
And you're trying to say, well, because he's the president.
Well, Bill Clinton was the president, Jonathan.
And that then came out.
And he did lose the case against Paula Jones in court and came to a settlement of $850,000.
He did lose his law license for five years, and he was impeached.
Yeah, I tell you what, Sean, to me, this kind of stuff is just another grasp of CNN and other mainstream media in the Democratic Party to try and defame this president.
And none of the news reports have had anything.
I don't know if you realize this over the past year, none of the news reports had anything to do with the job that he's doing, good or bad.
CNN doesn't cover that.
They just covered Russia stuff.
That started to go away.
It said nothing.
A burger, as Evan Jones would put it, and this is nothing either.
I mean, we're sitting here in a crisis situation where a Supreme Court justice, a former Supreme Court justice, is saying that we should do away with the Second Amendment.
We're listening to 18-year-olds tell us how we should run the country.
And at the same time, we're listening to basically a prostitute tell her story that has no credibility whatsoever with an attorney that's as sleazy as they come.
And that's what we're going to focus on?
It's a crazy, this world is upside down.
I think it's all part of an effort that Russia, Russia, Russia didn't work.
Now we'll do stormy, stormy, stormy.
And I can tell you right now that most people, if you listen to that focus group, it was very revealing of these evangelical women who voted for Trump in Dallas.
They watched the interview.
They were asked about it.
Some didn't even believe it.
Others didn't think it was anybody's business.
I think now if this is now the new media standard, are we going to now go into the lives of journalists and start putting on ex-wives and husbands and boyfriends and girlfriends and start interviewing them about their relationships, every intimate detail?
I mean, the only question he didn't ask basically was what did it look like?
But he did ask if she could identify it and describe it.
I mean, it's pretty creepy, Danielle, that you don't see the creepiness factor in this.
No, I completely do.
And like I said, I wish that I wasn't watching this stuff.
I wish this wasn't in the news.
And actually, agree with Jonathan.
We've got far more important things to deal with.
We might have a different perspective on what's happening with the gun reform issue.
But these are important conversations to have.
I think the issue that people really care about is the hush money.
Okay, he was a private citizen.
He could do whatever it is that he likes.
But the hush money, you know, within 10 or 20 years.
Well, you could call it hush money, but that was done apparently without even Donald Trump's knowledge or consent as Michael Cohn.
I assume in an organization where your boss is a billionaire, that probably there's a lot of latitude given to lawyers to take the insignificant issues of the day and make them go away.
And you know, and you know, and I, hang on, you know, and I know every day that there are all sorts of decisions made by corporate America.
It's just not worth it.
We're going to spend, you know, $500,000 on lawyers, or we can pay $130,000 to make it go away.
You know that happens every day.
Absolutely true, Sean.
But to your prior point, there is no way that a lawyer will conduct and execute a contract on a client's behalf without that client knowing about it.
That's no problem.
It's unethical to the ground with disparate.
You cannot do it.
I have had lawyers do deals for me and I go in and I said, OK, here are the parameters.
And I don't know what the deal is until later.
But my only point.
No, but but in the case, but I'm not a billionaire either.
And I'm saying that I think a lot of lawyers are given a lot of latitude, especially a personal lawyer, and the relationship that Michael Cohn and Donald Trump have.
And I've known Michael Cohn for so many years, I know Michael Cohn doesn't lie.
And if he said he did it because he didn't want his family dragged through the mud or his wife and child hurt, I believe him.
And so he made the decision to do it on his own.
Ethical guidelines.
Number one, you cannot execute a contract on your client's behalf without your client.
But it wasn't made on the client's behalf.
If you look at it legally, that's not true.
Cohen was a signatory, and Trump was the second signatory.
Number two, you cannot loan or give it away.
Trump never signed the agreement.
That's the point.
But they took the money.
Once you take the money, doesn't that execute a contract?
Not necessarily.
Not necessarily.
You have to have a meeting of the minds with a contract formation, which means that there is the people who are involved in the contract.
But it was made with an LLC that was put together by Michael Cohn, and on behalf of the LLC, he signed it.
Trump was not a part of the LLC.
Why was there a signature line for Trump then?
No idea, because I don't think it was significant.
Why was there things that Trump was required to do in that contract?
He was at the end of the day.
You're sitting here arguing.
I can't believe that we're getting sucked into this, Jonathan, because at the end of the day, you have a woman that alleged Bill Clinton raped her.
You have another woman that says she was abused by him.
Another one that says that he exposed herself to him.
And numerous other women that claim this type of abuse, and nobody cared.
Now you've got to talk of a consensual relationship, and this is all the media wants to talk about.
You know, meanwhile, we do have North Korea, China, Iran, and an economy that needs to get moving along, and nobody in the media ever talks about it.
Not even one night do they ever talk about it.
That's because what they're trying to do is they're trying to discredit the president and make people look at him further as though he's an immoral person and things like that.
So what they do is they'll take a story and they will make accusations publicly in the media.
And these aren't like people they're interviewing.
This is like the actual journalist, quote unquote, make accusations.
They say, oh, this may have broken campaign finance laws, whatever.
And they'll put that stuff out there so that people can, because people aren't going to watch every one of these stories.
They're tuning out of the news more than they're tuning into it these days.
So they're going to tune out of it.
But in their mind is going to be, well, he probably did break some kind of campaign finance law.
I got to take a break.
We'll come back.
We'll continue 800-941 Sean Tolfrey telephone number news roundup information overload.
Does the president have the authority as the commander-in-chief to use defense dollars to build the wall for national security reasons?
We'll delve into that question and your calls at the bottom of the half hour.
Hannity, tonight, we're going to be breaking news.
We have something the rest of the media doesn't have.
That's all I can say at this point.
Nine Eastern on the Fox News channel.
All right, as we continue, Jonathan Gillum and Danielle McLaughlin.
Danielle, you agree that the president is the commander-in-chief, correct?
Yes.
Constitutionally, he makes the decisions, correct, about what is in America's national security interest, correct?
Yes.
And if the president deems that the border and not being secured is a national security threat because of drug trafficking, human trafficking, gangs, and possibly even enemy combatants coming into the country, he would have every right and authority to say that our military needs to protect that border, does he not?
Well, he has the right, but I'm not sure on the authority because Congress has the power to tax and spend.
So we have to direct Congress to do it, but I think Congress also, but yeah, Congress has the power of the purse, but they also, if they fund the military, then he as commander-in-chief gets the decision-making as to how to fund the military, unless specifically otherwise authorized, correct?
I believe it to be the case.
So the president, therefore, would then have the right, if he views not having a border wall as a national security threat, he would have every right, Jonathan Gillum, to build it.
I agree with that.
I think one thing we're also losing sight here is that all these politicians are elected by, especially the congressmen, and congresswomen are elected by the people to represent them.
And the majority of people in this country want a wall.
So whatever happened to doing their job and representing the people, and when the president, who is basically the CEO of this country, sets out to do what the people want and what needs to be done for a matter of national security, he's blocked.
He's blocked every step that he takes to do what's right in this country.
And all they do is talk about what they appear, what they think appears that he's doing wrong.
It's just as dumb as what we were talking about earlier with the media.
Yeah, no, I agree.
You know, I actually think that if we don't secure the border, don't we risk more drugs coming into the country?
Don't we risk more human trafficking?
Don't we risk the possibility al-Qaeda or ISIS members could cross that border illegally into this country and do us harm?
Is that all true, Danielle?
Yes or no.
You know, many drugs come through.
How can you say yes or no?
They come through the ports.
Because you asked me a three-part question.
Many of the drugs come through.
But the reality is without a border wall, we're less safe.
Is that a fact or not?
Possibly.
I want to say a couple of things.
Are you capable of answering a question?
Does a border wall make America more safe?
The answer is obviously yes.
Why don't you just say yes?
It's possible.
I don't have the data.
All right, I got to let you both go here.
You can be one of the nicest, but yet most frustrating human beings I've ever known, Danielle.
And I say that with the greatest respect.
I have enormous respect for you and for both of you, and it's a privilege to be on here.
I know what you're saying.
No, no, no.
Stop being nice when I'm mad at you.
I really just stop because it doesn't get far today.
Anyway, 800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number, you want to be a part of the program.
When we come back, we'll do wide open phones.
Final half hour.
We have breaking news tonight on Hannity.
We'll tell you all about it, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
And I will be interviewing exclusively the Uranium One informant.
First time I sit down with him on Hannity tonight.
All right, 25 now till the top of the hour.
You know, it's amazing the media's reaction to a citizenship question.
Are you a citizen?
It's like, this is the media reacting to that simple question.
I mean, you would think it was like Anderson Cooper, you know, asking if you wore condoms, like Jerry Springer.
You know, I'm assuming the next shows on fake news CNN are going to be about, you know, are you or are you not the father?
That's probably 60 minutes of special.
Are you the father?
Maybe they'll bring in Maury Povich as a special correspondent.
Anyway, here's the media reacting to that simple question.
What do we want from the census?
We want an accurate count.
Let's defer to the experts.
Will this help with accuracy?
It will not because people will not answer the question.
Let's be realistic about this.
Do we think this is about getting an accurate view of the census and protecting voting rights, or is it to, in fact, suppress minority voting?
So the Justice Department's motivation here seems to be quite so a ruse for adding a question that could very seriously depress participation and result in a failed census altogether.
What do you say to critics who argue that ultimately this is a way to target immigrants, that it's going to be fewer resources for immigrant communities?
Really?
I mean, I'm just trying to understand here.
We're trying to get an accurate reading so we can accurately have congressional districts that represent those people, those Americans that can vote.
Illegal immigrants can't vote.
And that's all they're trying to do.
This is outrageous.
This is racist.
I mean, it's crazy.
Now, Hogan Gidley speaking for the president and how the president will, in fact, or may in fact use the military funding for the purpose of building a wall.
And when you think of it, it's a national security issue as it relates to drugs and gangs and all sorts of illegal activity, human trafficking at our nation's border.
This is what he said.
The president is now saying, or he kind of hinted around at least on Twitter over the weekend, that he could use all of that military funding.
There was a lot of military funding going into the pocketbooks of those men and women that are fighting for our country.
But there's a lot of extra money to be used, more than what they asked for, more than what the White House asked for.
So there's talk that he might use that extra money to build the wall since he didn't get the funding.
He only got 1.1%.
His Twitter.
You're right.
His Twitter was saying we might use the military money to fund the wall.
Is that going to happen?
Well, I don't want to get ahead of his announcement, but I can say this is one reason that the announcement.
Well, if he's going to make an announcement, how he spends that money to build the wall, but I can say that's one of the major victories for the American people in this piece of legislation that the president pushed, which was actually building a wall.
Oh, there you go.
And there's the president, actually building a wall.
Anyway, that's what the president promised.
This is a national security issue.
And as a matter of fact, it's right on our border.
I think you can make the case that it's one of the most pressing issues as it relates to national security, period.
All right, as promised, let's get to our busy telephones here: 800-941-Sean.
You want to be a part of the program?
Bart is in Mississippi on the Sean Hannity show.
Bart, hey, how are you?
Glad you called.
I'm doing fine.
And you?
I'm good, sir.
What's going on?
Thank you.
I just want to kind of let you know that moonshine you tried yesterday.
Yeah.
Wasn't quite the real thing.
No, moonshine is clear, and it's pretty much straight alcohol.
And it's like, I don't know, like people that I know that have tried real moonshine, and I've watched the show about moonshiners, one of these reality shows, and I'm fascinated by it.
I don't know why.
And just like The Last Frontier and all of these Alaska shows that I watch.
And I'm watching the show, and then a listener sent us some moonshine, but it's flavored.
So, yeah, it's watered down.
But from what I understand, if you drink it straight, it's like rot gut.
Yes, one of its other names is White Lightning.
Yeah, White Lightning, Kentucky Clear.
I mean, they got all sorts of names for it, don't they?
Oh, yeah.
Well, it depends upon what part of the country you get it from.
Yeah, do you drink moonshine?
I've had some given to me.
I've been working on it.
I've had some given to me.
I'm like, okay, I had a best friend once asked me to take a sip.
I've never actually had it myself.
Well, if you took a good swig of the real straight-up stuff, depending upon how strong they made it, it will set you on fire.
Well, I can imagine the burn through your esophagus, your mouth, your stomach.
I mean, I honestly would think it would burn a hole in your stomach.
That's what I think.
I don't know how they do it without cutting it some way.
You know, this is something that kids in college have to watch out for because they pour this clear right into, you know, fruit punch.
You don't even know how strong it is.
I mean, by the way, there's a rule: never drink any punch that you don't know what's in it ever.
Especially when you're sending your kids to the college party.
All right, here you go.
Here we go.
Kentucky Clear.
Yes, Kentucky Clear.
Get your shine on.
I may not remember what tomorrow is.
Super Scott.
Turn your party light on.
Get your shine on.
All right, our friends at FDL.
They're the most fun to watch in concert of any band I've ever seen.
They're so fun.
Because all they're son is make you feel good and they're fun.
It's just a great, great, they're great guys, too.
And they're just a lot of fun.
We love them.
All right, let's get to our phones.
Donna is in Staten Island.
What's up, Donna?
How are you?
Welcome to the all-new AM710 in New York.
What's happening?
Hey there, Sean.
How are you?
I'm good.
How are you?
You have never had Kentucky Clear.
You've never had moonshine.
Moonshine's not that big in Staten Island, New York.
No, I have to say I've never had that.
Yeah, but the sad reality is if you wanted any drug or heroin, you could find it in Staten Island.
Yeah, that's unfortunate.
That's true.
It's sad, but true.
By the way, that's every small town and big city in America.
These drug cartels literally are targeting America to become a bunch of heroin addicts.
It sucks.
And you get addicted to opioids and your life is over.
It's done.
Staten Island has a major problem with heroin addiction.
Horrible.
It's horrible.
Yeah.
What's on your mind?
The reason I called is because I wanted to point out that the same people who are so aghast at a possible trift with a porn star actually considered slick Willie Clinton to be a rock star.
And those same people that have a problem with the lack of gun control, but not about murdering babies who slumber in the womb.
By the way, I was not offended at all by these kids marching last weekend.
I'm not offended that they have a position that differs from mine, but I would like to sit down with them and say, guys, I want to save your life, and I want every kid to go to school and be safe.
Here's my plan.
And my plan is.
I wouldn't have.
Go ahead.
Am I.
And my plan I've described.
A full threat security assessment.
The perimeter of every school has to be locked up tight so nobody can sneak in some other door someplace.
You've got to have identification.
You've got to have metal detectors.
And you need two concealed carry retired military or police guys on every floor because these things are over in three minutes.
And I would just, I would say to them, I want to make sure no kid ever gets shot in a school again.
I have more of an issue with the fact that they don't know our history, so how can they even comment on it?
Yeah, but you got to.
They're really clueless.
Well, they were also, I mean, you have these left-wing groups that try to, you know, infiltrate and influence these kids.
But listen, they're young.
I think that if they have an open mind, I think they can be persuaded.
I really believe that.
Yeah, but I think a big part of it is that they really just, they kind of jump on a bandwagon and they don't appreciate the freedom and they don't appreciate that we got our country came about because we were able to arm ourselves against the British and fight for our freedom.
They don't even know that.
And then you have people that like that retired justice that want to change this, they want to take out the Second Amendment.
You know, you can't do that.
They don't understand why things were implemented the way they were and the genius behind our forefathers.
Listen, here's my question to anybody that wants to discuss the issue.
If you're in a municipal building and there's an active shooter, would you prefer or not prefer to know that there are trained, armed, retired military and law enforcement officials that have concealed weapons with them as a front line of defense?
And I don't think any intelligent person would make the argument, no, I don't want anybody there that would confront the shooter with a weapon to stop them.
I mean, because that's it.
And the reality is you've got to ask yourself a question.
What's going to happen, God forbid, the day that somebody enters your house against your will and there's a big break-in and this person wants to kill you and your family?
What are you going to do?
I know what I'm going to do.
I'm fully protected.
I'm going to war.
That's it.
It's my last stand.
I'm going to do everything in my power to protect my family.
So, you know.
I agree with you.
Yeah.
I agree with you.
But I think the problem is they're so naive.
They don't understand that.
See, they're thinking that they could probably, you know, they could cure everything with peace and love and understanding.
You and I have lived a long time, so we know that unfortunately that sounds great.
You know, it's a great fantasy concept, but it's not reality.
And that's the difference.
They're young.
They really don't know.
Well, but you know what?
Take heart in the fact that they're engaging, and you got to hope that, you know, the old adage, if you're 20 and not a liberal, you don't have a heart.
If you're 40, not a conservative, you don't have a brain, take that into account in their feelings.
I think I could convince them.
I mean, some of the stupid statements that even conservative and pro-Second Amendment people make, I'm listening to them, I'm like, that's not the argument.
The argument is protect the kids.
How are you going to protect them?
And if you explain to them, okay, common sense gun legislation, that's what most of them were saying.
Okay, common sense means banning AR-15.
Well, what are you going to do in Virginia Tech when they use pistols and that was the biggest mass school shooting in history?
Well, then we're going to ban pistols too, then.
Well, then you're basically saying, like, you know, former Justice on the Supreme Court's, what was it, Stevens, that you don't want the Second Amendment.
Well, at that point, you're going to lose your country because we are a constitutional republic, and you don't get to pick and choose which constitutional rights you want to take away.
You want to take away the right of freedom of religion, free assembly, freedom of speech.
Where does this end?
Our framers and founders, in their wisdom, they understood.
You know, and what nobody ever wants to do is take the time and do a little research.
And if you actually listen to these radical founding fathers and framers of ours, well, they were actually talking about an armed citizenry to protect against the tyrannical government or the emergence of tyrannical government.
That's why they wanted an armed citizenry more than anything.
Anyway, let's get to our phones.
As we say, hi, MJ is in Fort Lauderdale, beautiful Florida.
What's up, MJ?
How are you?
Glad you called, and happy Wednesday for you.
Well, thank you.
Semper Fi Sean, how are you doing today?
I'm great today.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Yeah, take away the freedom of the press from creepy Anderson Cooper.
I mean, you know, look, I don't want to pick on Anderson Cooper that much.
No, no.
But I'll be honest, I mean, it's like the only question, and he came close to asking it.
The only question, well, what did it look like?
But he came pretty close.
He did come pretty close.
I was outside.
I walked in.
My son was watching the basketball game, and it must have just ended.
And I'm like, what are you watching?
Close your eyes.
Close your eyes.
As a lady, and I walked in and I witnessed some of what I was watching.
How I feel about Donald Trump now, our president.
Well, first I had to ask my husband how I felt.
And then I had to ask my son.
And then I called out my male boss.
And then I even coughed my daddy to see, make sure how I felt about Trump.
And I feel the exact same way.
I love Trump.
He's the best.
My goodness, I lived through.
I worked under President Clinton when I served in the Marine Corps.
That was my boss.
So how do you think I felt?
There's no evidence.
This woman, I mean, she couldn't get out her yeses and her no's faster than Anderson asked the question.
It was so scripted.
It was so son.
Yes.
And also.
I mean, she could not, I mean, yes.
And her lawyer, oh my goodness, he has the nerve to call Mike Cohen a thug.
He is the biggest thug.
Michael Cohen is loyal.
And if you can't tell that President Trump keeps loyal people around him, that guy is a thug.
Michael Cohen is a what he seems like a wonderful thing.
This is what I look at.
I look at this guy.
He's doing his job.
He wants as much television time as possible.
I've not seen a single interview where he's interested me, even one little minuscule bit.
Nothing.
All right, that's going to wrap things up for tonight.
All right, we have a full two investigative stories we're breaking tonight on Hannity.
Can't tell you all about them now.
I'll give you a hint.
Part of it has to do with the all-new struck page emails the Lovebirds have been sending back and forth.
And also, we'll have a deep dive into all other deep state investigations that we've been following.
And we'll have the Uranium One informant.
Now, this guy infiltrated Putin's network in America.
He was there when the bribery, extortion, and money laundering and kickbacks all happened.
And the FBI and the DOJ did nothing, and then they approved the Uranium One deal.
It's ridiculous.
All of that and all the news you can handle, you won't get in the mainstream media.
At 9 Eastern tonight, Hannity on Fox.
We'll see you tonight at nine, back here tomorrow.
