This "Best of Hannity" focuses on the many stories and controversies that began under the Obama Administration's Department of Justice. Draining the swamp can ruffle a lot of feathers and President Trump has done his share. Listen as Sean talks with members of the Freedom Caucus about the ongoing DOJ documents and the latest IG reports. Plus Sara Carter and David Schoen discuss the Strzok, Wray and Rosenstein hearings. 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.
The Thread is a new hit podcast from Ozzy Media that explores history's surprising connections in order to discover how one thing leads to another.
Like how John Lennon's murder connects all the way back to communist leader Vladimir Lenin.
Get it on iHeartRadio or wherever you listen.
The best of Sean Hannity is on now.
The laws are the worst of the whole country.
Our immigration laws are a laughing stock all over the world.
ICE has strayed so far from its mission.
What it's turned into is frankly a terrorist organization of its own.
They're not going to be able to restaurant.
They're not going to be able to stop at a gas station.
They're not going to be able to shop at a department store.
The people are going to turn on them.
Holding them accountable.
Sean gets the answers.
No one else does.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
We're burning down the mashing bullets at the moon, baby.
This is how we move.
Sean Hannity, the new Sean Hannity show.
More behind the scenes information on breaking news and more bold, inspired solutions for America.
All right, glad you're with us, 800.
I'm watching.
I'm paying attention.
I'll shush up in there.
Good grief.
800-941-Sean is our toll-free telephone number if you want to be a part of the program.
So, Sunshine, your soon-to-be sister-in-law is leaving the program.
I know.
And you have a friend of ours here, Kylie Kramer, Amy Kramer's daughter, who we've known for how long?
How many?
Yeah, put your microphone.
It's a mic.
It's radio.
You got to talk, shaking your head.
Doesn't work on radio.
Okay, talk.
Pull it down.
Yeah.
Oh, yes, that's it.
You know, okay.
So I'm here.
You're here.
All right.
And so I loved your mom forever.
I remember when I first gave your mom a hug, it was in a tea party.
It was in April 15, 2010.
And we were doing Hannity in Georgia.
And there was 25,000, 30,000 people showed up because your mother organized it.
And I'm like announced that I'd be there.
And I'm thinking, well, maybe there's like a few hundred people show up.
The street was packed.
John Rich performed at the end of the show.
So you're filling in.
There's another liberal girl that Linda's auditioning, apparently, for your job that you're applying for.
So how many people have you now whittled it all down to?
Can you tell us?
How many did I start with?
Or how many do I have now?
How many did you start with?
17.
How come everybody wants to work for me?
Well, that wasn't even all the people, but you know.
Did you tell Kylie that she has to sign a non-disclosure where all of George Carlin's seriously?
Yeah, seriously.
And in it, you have to put in every curse word you say.
I'll have David write every outrage you say.
Thank you, David.
You know, and you're responsible, and you're going to put in there Linda's.
Listen, people like my vernacular, all right?
Can you hand you, you've heard only a small well, here's the question.
Are you hiring her?
How many people are you down to?
First of all.
First of all, because I don't do the hiring around here.
Correct.
You don't.
I don't want to.
I've never made up my mind.
You're welcome.
It's a woman's prerogative.
How many are left?
So the liberal and Kylie.
That's right.
And she's a conservative.
That's right.
And you're thinking about a liberal for this show.
We're an equal opportunity job.
So what is Kylie?
Is it 50-50 or are you leaning towards one or the other?
Tell the truth.
I think Sarah and David have some things to offer.
I ask you, are you leaning towards one person over another?
Yes or no?
Answer.
I'm your boss.
That's like saying, what do you like better in a TV show?
You like the peanut butter?
You like the jelly.
You know, it all makes, it's a beautiful thing together.
So right now, if you had to pick today, which one would you pick?
I would pick to go home early and not have this conversation with you on radio.
How come your face is so red?
Because I'm Irish.
Anyway, joining us, we're so pleased and proud and happy to have back with us investigative reporter and Fox News contributor Sarah Carter, David Schoen, civil liberties attorney and criminal.
What are you doing?
Criminal defense attorney.
How are you?
Good to see you both.
He's a civil liberties attorney.
I said that.
If you would have paid attention and stopped yelling at me.
I was interviewing someone.
I'm sorry.
But anyway, good to hear you both.
You know, there's a lot of news, actually, on the whole Russia Gate front today.
Let me give a few headlines.
Well, we got the troll farm.
What was it, an 80-page rebuttal beatdown of Bob Mueller?
Because Bob Mueller, when he indicted the 13 companies, actually never thought they'd show up in court.
And now that they've showed up, they actually believe in discovery.
And they're demanding to see the Rosenstein memo in total.
And by the way, now we have Thursday, Peter Strzzok is testifying behind closed doors.
But tomorrow, what testimony is tomorrow, Sarah?
Somebody's testifying tomorrow.
Well, Thursday is going to be Ray and Rosenstein.
Oh, that's right.
And then Wednesday is tomorrow is going to be Strzz behind closed doors.
And the House Judiciary Committee, if I'm not mistaken, correct?
Correct.
And it's also a joint committee, I think also Trey Gowdy's committee.
Noam or am I wrong on that?
No, I think you're right on that.
Yeah, look, everybody wants to know what Strzzok has to say, right?
And even if it's behind closed doors, I think it's unfortunate, and I think the president was right, Sean, that the American people should hear this testimony as well.
We should have a right to hear it.
Strzzok was at the center of one of the biggest scandals in modern American history.
He should explain himself to the American people.
It's the U.S. tax dollars that were paying his salary.
And, you know, here's the thing.
Why would they allow Strzok?
Why would they agree to behind closed doors?
Because the president tweeted out last night, and I agree completely, Peter Strzok, the anti-Trump hating individual at the center of it all.
Why does he get to go behind closed doors?
And will he be under oath?
That's another question I want answered.
Well, I don't, this is the thing.
Yeah, he decided to not go.
They said, look, you don't need to subpoena Peter Strzzok.
His attorney came out and said, don't subpoena him, don't subpoena him.
He'll more than willingly go and talk to you.
He'll speak to you.
Well, it's also a little bit tricky here.
It isn't that Peter Strzzok just wants to clear his conscience and tell the truth about everything.
I mean, I don't know what his intentions are, what he's actually thinking.
It was a maneuver on his attorney's part.
Because if he is subpoena, it would be much more rigorous.
The questioning could be much more rigorous, and he wouldn't answer all of those questions.
So now he's going in voluntarily.
He can try to explain himself.
He cannot answer questions.
So I think David Schoen would be able to explain the legalese behind this, but it was definitely a calculated move on his attorney's part to try, one, to make him look good, if that's even possible, in front of the public, and two, to basically give him more of an opportunity to either not answer questions or to evade questions once he's behind closed doors.
All right, well, let's talk about the legal side, David Schoen.
You all called it.
You forget, maybe.
You all called it just a couple of days ago.
You said on this show, Strzz's lawyer says Strzzok wants to testify openly, et cetera.
You said it will never happen.
Let's see what happens.
It will never happen.
I thought, you know, if the lawyer really was going to put Strzok forward to testify publicly, he should give back his law license.
The rank and file of the agents hate it when another agent comes forward and testifies and takes the fifth.
Strzok should have been put in that position.
He should have been put in a position.
His lawyer said he wants to testify.
Give him a choice.
Testify publicly or take the fifth.
That's up to you.
The American people now know what you did, part of what you did.
We still don't know his private emails.
There's a whole other server out there we don't have.
The American people are entitled to the full story.
He is a public servant, and that's the end of it.
You know, the thing is, it's absolutely right.
And, you know, only until recently, even knowing everything we knew, this guy still has a job.
And I'm thinking, why?
And if he works for the American people, I think we have a right to know.
And I think we have a right to get to the bottom of all of this.
And the reality is, is they're keeping it from the American people.
Now, by the way, Sarah, you have a breaking story.
Literally, I just got hot off the presses.
I just saw that you posted it on your website that the House Judiciary Committee now approved a resolution today demanding the Deputy Attorney General turn over all requested subpoenaed documents regarding the FBI's handling of the Russian investigation during the presidential election after seven days or the impeachment and contempt move forward.
Well, it's about time.
I've been waiting for a while.
And of course, the people that are at the forefront of it are the Freedom Caucus because they're the only ones that really give a darn about what their agenda is and standing up for principle and fighting for the country.
You know, the rest of them are frankly just pathetic, but that's a different story.
Yeah, so the resolution went through today.
I have been told by a number of people that they've been sitting on this for quite some time.
It was a long party line vote.
So it was 15 to 11.
They passed the resolution, and they are requesting, they're demanding actually that Rosenstein turn over all the documents that they have been requesting over the past year.
And if he does not turn those over, they're giving him up to seven days, so they're going to have to wait till everybody comes back from the break, from the 4th of July break.
And once all the members return, then it'll be up to leadership.
If they haven't turned over the documents, it'll be up to Paul Ryan and others to take that to a full House vote.
Now, Ryan says he's going to do it.
And Ryan and Gowdy and Goodlad and Nunes met with Rosenstein, and they were supposed to produce documents the following week.
And that kind of came and went, didn't it, with a few documents sent over?
Oh, that's right.
I mean, it came and went.
I know that they're not the only ones frustrated.
Chairman Nunez is absolutely frustrated with this.
A number of other lawmakers that have been sitting back waiting for Rosenstein to turn these over.
I've also been told, and this is breaking news, I guess, as well, that last week Senator Grassley's office approached Rosenstein for documents, and they actually met with Rosenstein.
And not to your surprise, Sean, because you say it all the time on the show, there was actually a shouting match behind closed doors again, and Rosenstein refused to comply at that time with what they were requesting and was told them basically, go ahead and take me to court.
Remember, that's one of the options that they can, you know, pull the contempt, do the impeachment, or go to court for these documents.
And apparently, Rosenstein feels that he can wait out all of this.
And maybe he's trying to see if they're serious.
Maybe he says, you know, let's see how serious these guys really are.
If they're serious, they're going to move forward with this.
And if they're not, well, then I've won this battle.
But right now, it looks like they're pretty serious because this is the first time.
How many do we know FBI rank and file, who I'm predicting are going to be the heroes of this story?
How many of those guys are waiting, hoping, begging to be subpoenaed?
When they talk, they're going to expose a lot of corruption at the FBI.
And I'm also being told that as many as 20, 30 more anti-Trump people were actually working on a lot of this stuff.
Is that true?
I have been told that, Sean, yeah, as well.
There's a number of anti-Trump people still working.
I mean, this is the reason why they want to know everybody.
These are lawmakers.
Our Congress wants to know who are the people working on Mueller's team.
Who are the people that we need to investigate?
I mean, if you look at Kevin Kleinsmith, do you know another name that's just popped out?
There was a very anti-Trump bias on his part, and he was with the FBI.
There's other FBI agents that they're investigating.
And remember, one of the questions you had is: why was Peter Strzok still working at the FBI?
There could have been a number of reasons, but a really important one, too, is the fact that he didn't leave.
He didn't just walk away, which left him open to talking to the Inspector General.
Remember, Inspector General Horowitz can oversee those investigations for the people that are still employed, still with under the Department of Justice.
And that gave him the ability to really grill down and interview Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and the others who are still employed with the FBI.
But he did lose his security clearance, and eventually, of course, he was walked off.
But he was working.
I mean, I knew people who saw him.
In fact, he was traveling the country.
Last place I was told was Alabama, where he was doing some work.
And David, let me ask you a legal question.
So Robert Mueller files against these charges against these 13 Russian bot companies, but clearly never thought they'd defend themselves.
And they're actually arguing, Robert Mueller, is they don't deserve the right to discovery, which is the most idiotic argument I've ever heard.
Why did they file charges, if only I argue, to get the name Russia in all of this and thinking that they'd never show up in court?
And now that they not only showed up in court, but they got a pretty kick-ass attorney who filed an 80-page beatdown of Mueller.
What does he do now but drop the charges because he doesn't want discovery?
Well, that's another point you've made, a very important one all along since this thing first surfaced.
Listen, due process requires that they get this discovery, and specifically the Rosenstein memo.
If there's no authority for the course the investigation took, then they shouldn't have been in court in the first place.
They shouldn't have been in the court in the first place for many other reasons.
But you're right.
I mean, he's got to make a choice.
Are you going to drop it?
Let's just hope so.
You have a judge who holds their feet to the fire.
So I want to say this.
Is there any judge you can think of that wouldn't allow discovery on behalf of somebody charged?
Because that doesn't sound like they have the ability to defend themselves.
I mean, isn't that kind of basic?
Does they follow the law?
Absolutely.
Are there judges who don't follow the law?
Also, absolutely.
Political appointees often don't follow the law.
Unfortunately, I want to say this.
You know, we've talked about Strzok and what he said, what we know about him already.
The IG report is very important for many reasons, but one of the reasons also is what's not in it.
And you know what we never see in there?
Anyone at any point saying to Strok McCabe, who we also know was in the meeting, or Paige, guys, this is dead wrong what you're doing.
This is not about a political agenda.
I didn't see that in the report.
And at any time, any official, so that tells you something about the team that's been compiled.
Remember, Mueller had a universe of capable attorneys from around the country to choose.
He only chose people with a political agenda.
And I hope Rosenstein is asked that question when he comes before Congress.
There are many things he needs to answer.
But one is.
All right, stay right there.
We got to take a break.
Also, we're going to get into the developments on the absolute meltdown by the left.
We'll continue with Sarah Carter and David Schoen.
Making America first, safe and great again.
This is the Sean Hannity Show.
Meadows and Ron DeSantis coming up at the bottom of the hour as they now move towards, yeah, the possible impeachment of Rod Rosenstein.
We continue with Sarah Carter and Greg Jarrett.
You know, one of the things, you know, is the DOJ, this was a report that came out earlier today that information remains so secret that the Justice Department Inspector General had to censor it from his 500-plus page report.
Not even members of Congress with top security clearance have been allowed to see unverified documents from presumed Russian sources in which the head, DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, allegedly implicates the Clinton campaign in Loretta Lynch.
Yeah, you're on radio.
That's Sarah Carter.
I know.
Is that Annalise?
Hi, Annalise.
Luke, Annalise is actually still at summer camp.
She went to Six Flags today, so she's having a great time.
Okay, and she's on all the roller coasters, throwing up as we speak.
I got it.
But real quick, is that true, do you think?
Oh, well, yeah, absolutely.
I mean, I think that they're trying.
Well, I think they're trying to keep information from the lawmaker, Sean, but I also believe that there's some things in there that may be classified that they may feel they can't share because of sourcing and methods.
And that's very common.
What about this?
What about the FBI began investigating the Trump campaign, possible ties to Russia, cross-fire hurricane, and Clinton-connected informants approached the Trump campaign seven times before the FBI launched RussiaGate?
That's real clear investigations.
Did you see that?
Yes, and I did see that story.
And I think that's so important.
That story is not, I think it's just the beginning of the iceberg.
But let me bring something else up.
We talked about the necessity to keep those things classified, but they leaked the majority of that information that led people to see what was going on.
All right, David Schultz, Sarah Carter.
Thank you.
Mark Meadows, Ron DeSantis, next.
This is the best of the Sean Hannity Show.
Don't forget, stay tuned for more right after the latest news right here on this radio station.
You are listening to the best of The Sean Hannity Show.
Alec Baldwin's favorite radio talk show host is on the air right now.
Right, Mr. Baldwin?
Here's Sean Hannity.
Well, Peter Strzok is a key figure in both the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails and other investigations regarding the former Secretary of State and presidential candidate, and a lead instigator and the leader of the investigation for quite some time into the so-called Trump-Russia collusion matter.
And his text messages between himself and Lisa Page have been very enlightening, but they raise as many questions as they answer.
And therefore, we have a lot of questions for Mr. Strzzok about his involvement in both of these investigations and the apparent bias that those text messages reflect.
And so we indicated we wanted him to come.
We've been working for quite a few weeks to have this happen.
His attorney recently said, well, he'll come voluntarily.
But then when we had everything set, it became apparent that he was not committing to the time and place that we had thought we had agreed upon.
So I issued the subpoena last Friday, and he is commanded to appear on Wednesday.
All right, that was Bob Goodlatt of his committee and asking what to ask Peter Strzok on the hearing tomorrow.
And I just want to know why this is not a public hearing because this is the person at the center of all of this.
And considering he's the guy that interviewed Hillary, he's the one that wrote the exoneration before investigation.
He's the biggest Trump hater of them all.
And then he began and was a key investigator, which might have rendered it legitimate from the get-go the whole so-called Russia collusion where there's still no evidence after all this time.
Anyway, joining us to discuss is the Freedom Caucus Chairman, Mark Meadows.
He's from North Carolina and gubernatorial candidate, our friend Ron DeSantis of Florida.
I actually think I'm going to see you down in Florida over the vacation, and I look forward to it.
Welcome both of you to the program.
And I want to know why, Congressman Meadows, why is this private?
Why can't the public see?
And is he going to be under oath?
Well, he should actually be in public.
We should have a transparent hearing.
Candidly, I have fought for that, believe that we should be there.
And yet, most of the other transcribed interviews we've had have been in private, but it leads a whole lot for interpretation.
And so, you know, I guess the chairman, Goodlatt, has said that he will be coming back and doing a public interview then.
But I think both Ron and I believe that transparency is the best medicine for what ails us with this DOJ-FBI debacle.
Well, I want to understand Congressman DeSantis.
I want to understand, number one, do we know yet if he's under oath tomorrow?
I think he will be under oath, but I agree with you, Sean.
It should be made public.
What he did goes far beyond just his individual circumstances.
I mean, he tried to influence a presidential election illegitimately, and his conduct did cast a cloud over Trump's initial presidency.
I mean, he started this whole collusion narrative by opening up the counterintelligence investigation.
And he did it because, as he texted a week after he opened the case, he wanted to stop Trump.
And so this was his insurance policy.
So this, the public needs to see him, answer tough questions.
And I'm not opposed to doing depositions, but we've just moved so slow on this thing.
I think the public wants answers now.
I think the public deserves answers now.
And considering that Congressman Meadows, he's been at the heart of this whole thing.
You know, there are a lot of reports flying all over the place about what's going on in terms of Washington, not the least of which is that we have the DOJ now sitting on a bombshell evidence that would implicate Loretta Lynch.
And that apparently there's a report, real clear investigations via the Washington Times saying that Clinton-connected informants approached the Trump campaign seven times before the FBI launched RussiaGate.
What about the fact that an FBI informant in May, remember this whole Trump-Russia collusion thing didn't officially start to the end of July, right after Hillary was exonerated.
How is it that Michael Caputo was approached by a guy that said he had information that he had from Russia and he wanted to meet Roger Stone and Roger Stone met him for 15 minutes and the guy wanted $2 million and it turns out he was an FBI informant.
Is this just another spy that we didn't know about?
Well, a lot of those unanswered questions, Sean, are exactly that.
What happens is the timelines are not actually adding up.
And no one's been more focused on it than Ron DeSantis and Jim Jordan and Matt Gates and I.
You know, when we've looked at this and we've looked at these documents, and here we do know, before the investigation was open, it appears that there were a number of other contacts that bring real question into was there really an investigation in informants before the July 31st date where the Russia investigation started.
Here's the other interesting thing is, we also know Peter Strzok, who's being interviewed tomorrow, had a number of conversations and exchanges about impeachment of this president, and that was before the investigation really got underway.
I mean, it's very troubling that the bias that is out there, and yet somehow we pretend like this was a legitimate investigation.
I am told there may be as many as 20 or 30 more people involved in both the Clinton email server investigation and the so-called Trump-Russia collusion investigation that haven't been identified.
We don't even know the five people that have been recommended for further investigation.
You mentioned the name of, what is it, Gladstein is now the third person.
Who's the next person?
How many people do we know of that are involved in this?
Go ahead, Ron.
Yeah, well, no, look, Mark has done a good job of identifying some of the folks that the IG report wouldn't because the FBI and the DOJ illegitimately said that these were people in counterintelligence and therefore they couldn't have their identities released.
That is not true.
Mark blew the whistle on that, so we do know the names of some of them, including one of the FBI attorneys who was mourning after Hillary's law, saying, what could we at the FBI have done different to elect her?
And then he said he's going to dig in because viva ra resistance.
So he's going to use his perch in a position of power in the FBI to try to resist, actively resist a newly elected president.
And that is really, I think, synonymous with how this whole investigation has been.
It's been run by people who were out to get Trump, and it has no more legitimacy left.
Let me ask about what is now the resolution that the House Judiciary Committee has drawn up.
And I know Congressman Meadows and DeSantis, both of you, are very aware of this, that we now have had active obstruction by the Department of Justice where they refuse to listen to congressional subpoenas.
And there's, you know, this has now gone on.
This game has gone on for well over a year.
And it even goes back to when Jason Chaffetz was sitting on a committee and that the DOJ refuses to turn over the documents so that Congress can do what it is constitutionally authorized to do and required to do, which is oversight.
And they have used, you know, basically they just don't comply or they use heavy redactions in the name of national security.
And then it turns out it has nothing to do with national security.
And then after that, they just lie.
So my question is, are you serious?
Is this real what the Judiciary Committee has now approved for the first time this resolution demanding Rosenstein turn over the requested documents or face possible impeachment or contempt?
Well, It was voted out of judiciary today.
Actually, Ron and Jim Jordan did a great job in their efforts there.
But it wasn't just today.
They've been at the very forefront of all of this.
And I'm here to tell you, we'll break the news on your show.
It appears that we're going to be able to vote on Thursday in the House, before the entire House, a sense of Congress that gives DOJ a very short timeframe to turn over the rest of the documents.
How was it a week?
I heard it's a week.
It was proposed to be seven days.
And so obviously, voting on that, it's incumbent upon every freedom-loving, transparency-loving member to vote for that because it's time that we get the documents.
So the bottom line is now Rosenstein and Ray, they're set to testify.
Here's my question.
So they're going to testify on Thursday.
So tomorrow, are there any Freedom Caucus members that will be able to ask Peter Strzzok questions or any go ahead?
Probably just Jim Jordan.
I mean, that's one of the things, Sean, when you do this stuff behind closed doors, the way the judiciary chairman has handled it is there's only a hand certain people can even ask questions.
And Jim initially wasn't allowed to ask questions.
He's been really fighting to do it.
So he's going to be asking questions.
I'll be in there probably telling him, hey, what about this?
What about that?
But it's not conducive to, because what you want in this are the people who really know the facts well to be the one doing most of the questioning.
And that's not necessarily going to be the case if the chairman just picks random people.
So I'm glad Jim's in there because Jim's a bulldog, and Jim will go after Strzzok, and he will confront him with the truth.
But we're not going to be able to hear.
We won't hear one word of what goes on there.
Well, I don't think so.
I mean, unless they release the transcript, which I think they should do.
I mean, obviously, I think it should be before the cameras.
But if it's not, at a minimum, you've got to release the transcript so that the American people can see what went on there.
So, yeah, I'm very concerned if we just do this and then it's kind of buttoned up and no one is able to access the truth other than the handful of people who were in there.
Well, I know that there are people that actually have a great skill at a transcription that can actually do it in real time.
And literally, we could be getting reports every hour about what is happening in there.
Who would be the person that makes that decision?
Or would there be a vote on that?
Well, there's not really a vote on it, Sean.
Ron's right.
It's basically a call that Chairman Gowdy and Chairman Goodlatt make on that and to keep those confidential.
I think there has been real pressure.
I know that I mentioned something to Chairman Goodlatt earlier today that I felt like that Peter Strzok, of all individuals, should be the one where we have really this transparency for the American people to hear for themselves what went on.
And yet, as of right now, it is going to be a confidential transcribed interview with things that candidly would have to be leaked out in order for you to be able to report on it.
You know, it is a little bit disconcerting to me that this guy gets to go in privately and hide behind closed doors and not in front of television cameras.
And he says he's willing to testify.
Are we sure he's not getting any sweetheart deal, that he's not getting any immunity?
There's no proffer involved in this, nothing?
Well, no, they're certainly not from the Congress, but I don't think we can be sure.
I think he needs to be questioned about how he was handled in the FBI and Justice Department.
And don't you think it's odd, Sean, that the guy who probably most clearly had no business being in the FBI is the last guy to get fired?
I mean, Comey fired, McCabe fired, James Baker out of the government, Rabicki out of the government, all these people, and yet Strzzok has been there.
Lisa Page gone.
So I'm not saying there's anything there, but we definitely need to ask him that question and figure out what the heck were you doing on a taxpayer's salary this whole time after you got demoted?
Because it seems to me, once his first text messages came out many months ago, he should have been fired the next day.
Doesn't this whole thing with the beginning of the entire Mueller investigation, does it not begin as illegitimate when it's the guy that we know hates Trump?
That literally, we know Hillary committed felonies.
We know that they wrote an exoneration before investigation.
We know that she obstructed.
There's never been a more clear-cut case for obstruction of justice.
Others have gone to prison for far less than what Hillary we know did, and Comey admits she did.
And the question is, now that he begins the Russia investigation, doesn't that render the whole investigation illegitimate under the circumstances under which it was the beginnings of this whole thing?
Well, it obviously does.
I mean, Ron is a very gifted attorney and very credentialed, so he can maybe speak to this better than I can.
But here is the problem.
When you have someone with that much inherent bias, as Peter Strzok has displayed in his text message and his emails, and where the investigative team was a very small group.
Now, you mentioned 20 or so other people.
Here's the thing: the people who controlled this investigation were a very small group of people who have displayed bias through their text messages and email exchanges.
And yet they're the ones that put forth the evidence for Bob Mueller to look at this collusion.
It's very troubling.
Doesn't stop Trump, doesn't an insurance policy sound like collusion at the highest levels of the FBI?
Yeah, I mean, think about it, Sean.
Strzok was famously, when Hillary, when Trump sorted up the Republican nomination, he texted Lisa Page, now we've got to bring the Hillary thing to an end.
And of course, he helped do that.
He's the one that starts the counterintelligence case against Trump's campaign.
He says we'll stop him a week later.
And then a week after that, he says, well, look, you guys say he can't get elected.
We can't take that risk.
We need an insurance policy.
So what he is saying is he had this investigation specifically as an insurance policy to kneecap Trump.
That is not a valid pretext for an investigation.
And it wasn't just any investigation.
It was unleashing the counterintelligence powers of the federal government against an American campaign, massive abuse of power.
And I think he absolutely should face justice for abusing power.
Are there many more people that we're going to hear about that hated Trump and that were involved in these investigations and supported Hillary?
Last question, Mark Meadows.
Yes, you'll see additional names that will come out other than just the Klein Smith and Moyer and some of the others.
You'll hear additional names that will come out in the coming days.
But I think you've only seen the tip of the iceberg.
These text messages were bad, but the emails that I'm starting to review actually are into question.
They're even worse in a way.
So it is very troubling, but the American people have waited too long.
Hopefully, justices are around the corner.
Mark Meadows, Ron DeSantis, I'm not letting go until we resolve this.
And it's not funny by people that actually had the power.
Sean Hannity.
Hey, there's still a lot more ahead on the best of the Sean Hannity Show.
Stay tuned for more right after news on this station.
The best of Sean Hennedy is on now.
This is how we rule.
We light it up with our hands.
This is how we rule.
The laws are the worst of the whole country.
Our immigration laws are a laughing stock all over the world.
ICE has strayed so far from its mission.
What it's turned into is frankly a terrorist organization of its own.
They're not going to be able to restaurant.
They're not going to be able to stop at a gas station.
They're not going to be able to shop at a department store.
The people are going to turn on them.
Holding them accountable.
Sean gets the answers.
No one else does.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
We're burning down the mashing bullets at the moon, baby.
This is how we rule.
Sean Hennedy, the new Sean Hennity show.
More behind the scenes information on breaking news and more bold inspired solutions for America.
All right, glad you're with us, hour two.
There is a vacancy on the Supreme Court and Anthony Kennedy is retired.
And let me just warn you, the left, the Borking, the Clarence Thomas-like style attacks, it's all coming because that's all the left does.
It's so predictable.
Just like, you know, everything that we've been watching with Sarah Sanders and Pam Bondi and Secretary Nielsen and even attacking Baron Trump and even going after Don Jr.'s little girl, a four-year-old named Chloe, the president's granddaughter.
That's how bad it's gotten.
Never mind the regular attacks on Melania Trump, a first lady and the first daughter of Anka Trump.
That just, that goes now without saying.
But this election now just got even bigger.
I said it's the most important midterm election in our lifetime.
Well, now it's even more important because with Justice Kennedy out, the left, whoever the president chooses, you better buckle up because they're going to smear, slander, assault you verbally, assassinate your character because that's what they do.
Every two and four years, Republicans are racist.
Republicans are sexist.
Republicans are misogynist.
They're xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic.
Republicans want dirty air and water.
Republicans want children to die.
And of course, they want to throw your grandmother in a wheelchair over the cliff.
That's what we get.
And I prove it because I keep playing the ants.
Elect a Republican, black churches are going to burn.
And it goes on from there.
Anyway, there is some other news that has gone on today.
Peter Strzzok, yeah, the Peter Strzok, has now testified behind closed doors earlier today.
And Freedom Caucus members, Andrew Andy Biggs of Arizona, Congressman Matt Gates of Florida, here to talk about this and so much more.
And apparently, I'm hearing reports, Matt Gates, you were in the room, that, in fact, Peter Strzok actually was never questioned by Robert Mueller, even though Robert Mueller knew about all these text messages that he had the anti-Trump bias that this man had.
Well, Sean, we can't get into the specifics of the questions or the answers.
We can share our reactions.
What I can say in response to your question is that I am shocked at the lack of curiosity with Robert Mueller.
I mean, Sean, if you were in Mueller's shoes and you had found these text messages, I would think that you would want to ask whether or not they impacted the investigative decisions that were made, whether there was bias, whether there was contact with other members of the FBI regarding the investigation and where it was going and who was making the critical judgment calls.
And I just cannot believe the lack of curiosity on the part of Robert Mueller.
It was the strongest reaction I've had today from Peter Strzzok's testimony.
Let me ask you this.
If I was in the room, and you know how closely I'm following this case, and Peter Strzok is in the heart of all of this, he was writing the exoneration of Hillary long before they did the investigation, interviewed her.
He was part of that interview, part of the interview with General Flynn.
He immediately started the witch hunt against Donald Trump.
We've seen all the text messages, insurance policies.
We'll stop him, loathsome human being, and it can go on from there.
Can you give us a headline?
What would my reaction, knowing how passionate I am about the corruption here, because this involved literally saving somebody guilty of felonies, ringing an investigation, and then trying to tear down the other candidate and impact a presidential election?
How do you think I would have reacted if I was in the room?
I don't think you would have been surprised because the Inspector General's report says that when he spoke to Peter Strzok, Strzok reflected, you know, personal feelings that he was sharing with his personal lover, but that those weren't impacting the decisions he was making in the investigation.
Those were the assertions Peter Strzok gave to the Inspector General.
And so none of his responses when confronted with those messages have really surprised us today.
You know, the thing that A, the out-of-with what we saw in the Inspector General's report deals with how this investigation was started.
Sean, you will know that we have been demanding documents from before the 31st of July to determine whether or not there was intelligence collected on the Trump scene and whether or not people were paid to collect that intelligence.
In those types of questions, we have not gotten clear answers from Peter Strzok.
And if it were true that no intelligence collection occurred prior to opening up on Papadopoulos, then you would think Strzok would just clearly state that if there was nothing going on.
But the fact that he was obtuse in his responses, it really raises a lot of suspicion that that intelligence has in fact been going on.
I can ask you your impression.
Did you feel he was telling the truth?
I felt like in some cases he was not being clear in his responses.
You know, I don't think that it is ever truthful to reflect on the text messages as anything other than a bias and a willingness to take official action based on that bias.
So in that sense, no, I don't believe that Peter Strzzok has been truthful to the Inspector General or to Congress today because it's so obvious that this was someone who held bias and who was willing to take action based on that bias.
Do you agree with me in my characterization that this is the biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in American history and that we had a number of high-ranking FBI officials and others that were involved in an effort to literally frame Donald Trump,
to attack him unfairly, create a phony narrative about Russia while simultaneously and previously saving Hillary Clinton from what other Americans would have gotten, which is an indictment.
I think it is entirely correct that this represents an unprecedented abuse of power.
But Sean, that's not just your view.
When my colleague Jim Jordan asked the Inspector General if he'd ever seen anything like this, where essentially the entire leadership of the FBI has to be swept out at once because of firings, demotions, criminal prosecutions, conflicts of interest.
They're leaving days after they have to give testimony to Congress because they don't want to have to account for that testimony.
This is unprecedented.
Those aren't your words and my words.
Those are the words of Michael Horowitz, a Democrat Inspector General.
Let me go.
There's a lot of other issues now happening in Washington today, and Congressman Andy Biggs with us.
And I know you weren't in the hearings, Congressman, so I'm not really going to ask you about that, but you are a part of this effort on two different issues.
Number one, the move for censure as it relates to Maxime Waters, number one, and number two, the immigration bill, the more liberal bill, and whether that has a chance of getting more votes than the conservative one, which I hope not, and where it's going.
Well, let's take a first, I have been in that hearing all day, Sean, but second of all, the immigration bill, the liberal immigration bill that provided amnesty, the first vote for general amnesty, failed with about 100 and they only got 120 votes there.
So the more conservative bill, 193.
So big, huge difference there.
The other aspect is I filed the motion to censure Maxine Waters for her verbal tirade and her inciting and inflammatory language.
And Matt, of course, co-sponsored with me.
And we have got that's pending right now.
I've worked with leadership trying to get some motion on it.
They've asked me to do a couple things.
I'm going to try to do a couple things because she needs to be censured.
She needs to know.
A censure really is an official reprimand, and she needs to be reprimanded for her misconduct.
Well, and what happens with that?
What does that ultimately mean?
What it means is that the body itself has said, you have brought discredit to yourself and to the body.
And so we are officially sanctioning you.
But it doesn't remove her from office, of course.
It doesn't expel her from the body, nor does it even necessarily remove her from committee assignments.
That would be left up to her leadership at that point and her conference based on the fact that she was reprimanded by the body.
Let's talk about the immigration bill.
Now, the Goodlap bill, which had, I think, far more, was far better and far closer to the four principles that the president outlined, Congressman Gates.
We didn't get enough votes.
Why can't we get Republicans to, and it's simple.
Fund the wall, give the president all the money from the wall up front because any money promised down the road is never coming.
Number two, it would give the Democrats things they say that they want.
You know, protect would be a DACA fix, separation of families fix.
The president, I know his executive order the other day, I don't think it's going to pass muster in any court, but putting that aside, it gives Congress time to do their job.
This is Congress's law.
This is a past president that put this into law.
It's not Donald Trump.
Donald Trump's the only one that stood up and fixed it.
Well, Sean, there are two key questions that are dividing the Republican Party right now on immigration.
The first is whether anyone who came here illegally should have a path to citizenship.
You know, it's my view, and it's the view of the good last year and the president that there is a way to be compassionate with legal status with people who've come here through no fault of their own.
But when you give people citizenship, a first-generation illegal entry into the country, you build all the wrong incentives into the system, in my view.
The second key question is whether or not the parents of the DACA kids ought to be given some opportunity to live here legally and obtain citizenship.
A lot of us think that the problem that you have with children that we all want to be compassionate for is that their parents are choosing to illegally enter our country against the wishes of our country and against the dignity of our very border.
And so the conservatives believe that we can be compassionate to children, but that we cannot reward their illegal alien parents with citizenship, and we cannot create broad pathways to citizenship.
And I hope that we can make the conservative case on those points so that we can persuade our colleagues.
You know, I don't think this is difficult, but I don't think the Democrats want a solution either because they want to keep this as a campaign issue.
And as I said, every two and four years, the playbook is the same.
It's, you know, the four things that Democrats, I think, are certain, Congressman Biggs, that they're going to do.
They want to impeach Trump, but they don't want to tell us.
They want open borders.
They're pretty transparent about that.
They want to keep Obamacare pretty transparent about that.
And they want to take back the crumbs, as Nancy Pelosi calls them.
In other words, the tax cuts from the hardworking men and women in this country.
That's right.
And, you know, we're looking at a, you said it.
This is the most serious and important midterm election in perhaps my lifetime.
And it's because of the very things that you're talking about.
They want the open borders.
They don't want to give us money to build the wall or secure the borders.
They want to take away the tax reform, which has now produced this robust economy, the foundation of an economy that, remember, it wasn't too long ago that President Obama and Hillary Clinton said, hey, look, we'll never get above 1.8% GDP growth.
We're not going to see that kind of growth ever again.
And all it takes is reduction in regulation.
All it takes is reduction in taxes.
And then people, the great creators that Americans are, create jobs.
They create wage increases.
The first real wage increase that beats inflation in like 40 years.
And the American people know it.
And so the Democrats, they're left with throwing bombs, which is, which is back to Maximum.
But they do that every single election season.
This is the silly season because they don't have ideas.
All right.
We'll have more on Strzok's testimony today.
I'm getting tidbits from my sources that I will never reveal.
Thank you, Matt Gates.
But thank you, Congressman Biggs, 800-941-SHAWN is a toll-free telephone.
Making America great again.
Sean Hannity's on the air.
All right, let me get to our busy phones here.
Joe has been really patient.
Now, Joe apparently is a union guy in where, Altoona, Pennsylvania.
What union are you in, Joe?
Utility Workers, United Utility Workers of America.
By the way, you guys work hard.
Thank you for what you do.
I mean that.
I mean, I know how hard you work every day.
Thank you.
So what's on your mind, this decision today?
I know you want to talk about.
Oh, yeah, real quick.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought there's a COPE fund, which I have opted out.
I thought that was the only money that went to the politicians that you had no control over.
Listen, that option is available.
You're absolutely right.
But on the other hand, if we're going to be realistic and honest about it, there's a lot of pressure.
Well, first of all, you've got your initiation fees that you pay for unions and union dues that you pay, et cetera, et cetera.
And you know and I know that there's a lot of pressure that is brought to bear on a lot of people and a lot of unions to do exactly what I was talking about.
Am I wrong?
I'll admit I'm wrong, but I know a lot of union guys.
And the problem.
You're right.
And the problem is I love rank and file guys.
I really do.
They're the heart and soul of the country.
You know, I view myself as the dishwasher and the painter and the contractor because that's two decades of my life.
And I know how hard you guys work.
I want you to get the best salary and the best benefits.
I hate bad bosses.
And I wasn't putting my staff on to pat myself on the back, but a lot of these companies, if they would just treat people the right way, nobody's going to go to a union.
Nobody that works for me is going to join a union on this radio show because they're not going to do better with a union.
It's just not going to happen.
Why are you rolling your eyes just to annoy me?
You're rolling your eyes to annoy me.
Oh, okay.
Let's lynch being funny.
But you know what I'm saying?
There's a way to treat people.
And if you're doing well, then the employees should do well.
If the company's doing well, let them benefit.
That's why these tax cuts have been so amazing for the forgotten men and women that have jobs that are now getting raises.
Look at, what was it, Walmart or Target this week?
$14 an hour is now their starting wage.
Their minimum wage is, we don't need the government to tell us it's $8 an hour, $10.
We don't need that because the companies are doing it because now they have more money because the government's getting out of the way.
Does that make sense?
Oh, I agree 100%.
I thought you were going to have one other quick.
Yeah, go ahead.
What's that?
Go ahead.
One quick question.
I guess there was a vote something today on the Social Security.
I don't know if you can explain that.
Tell me your thoughts.
I really don't know what it meant or what it was about.
All right.
I'll tell you what.
I think you're talking about the, well, first of all, they have the big immigration vote that's going on today.
Let me pull it up when we get back and we will and we'll literally just give him the details on that because we have another segment we got to do here.
And I don't want him to have to wait a half hour.
We'll come back.
We've got Jim Jordan of Ohio coming up and much more.
straight ahead.
You are listening to the best of the Sean Hannity Show.
Sean's got more behind-the-scenes information.
More contacts than anybody.
More friends behind the curtain.
Sean Hannity is on.
All right, 25 till the top of the hour.
All right, Jay Seculo.
Yeah, Jay Seculo will be joining us as well in the next hour.
Also beckon, checking in Greg Jarrett.
I see him in the next room over there.
He'll be joining us, and David Schoen will be joining us.
So we'll get into Justice Kennedy.
If you're just getting in the car today, there's now a vacancy in the U.S. Supreme Court.
You know, I just want to stop for one second here.
You never Trumpers out there, I want to address you.
You know, you people that were so critical of me for supporting Donald Trump, and you're not voting for Donald Trump under any circumstances.
I want people to understand there's something deep and profound here because there's a lot of those people that are trying to hide who they were and who they really are.
And what they're kind of trying to do now, and there's a part of me that says, well, better late than never.
But the reality is all those outspoken, I'll never vote for Donald Trump, and I said, well, that's a half a vote for Hillary, now all of a sudden are trying to make their living, sounding as if they're the most pro-Trump people that have ever existed.
I want to actually name names.
Maybe I'll do that tomorrow because they're all full of crap.
You should do some of them now.
But you want to know the sad part of this is the only reason some of them now are on board is because they're not doing what we do.
When I vet Barack Obama and I do Alinsky and I do Acorn and I do Reverend Wright and Frank Marshall Davis and Ayers and Dorn and the Church of GD America, I'm getting calls from people like Newt Kingridge telling me that I'm about to end my career.
It's over.
I'm going too far and you need to let it go.
And then, of course, I'm like, no, my principles guide me in my decision making.
And I was called an unprincipled conservative when Donald Trump, as I predicted, is governing as or more conservatively than Ronald Reagan.
It's actually the comparisons are eerie.
You've got evil empire.
Mr. Garbert, tear down this wall.
You got that.
And then you got, let's see, fire and fury, little rocket man, my button's bigger than yours, and I'm going to blow you to smithereens if you dare try it.
Now look what happened.
Peace through strength actually works.
He didn't bribe dictators like Clinton or like Obama.
You know, now not only do we have, we wouldn't have had the court decisions the last two days if Hillary were president.
We wouldn't have now another opportunity to put another originalist on the court if Hillary Clinton won.
You know, and then you got, I mean, you got the same old predictable people, starting with Bill Crystal.
Not that he's supporting him or George Will.
Oh, we've got to defeat Donald Trump in the November.
Okay, then what are you going to get?
You're not getting tax cuts.
The crumbs are going to be taken back.
You get to keep Obamacare as if we haven't had enough damage to the American people and their health care system with Obamacare?
Keep your doctor, keep your plan, and save money.
None of that came true.
Then we're going to have open borders because that's what they want.
And they want to impeach the president.
For what?
And none of these people have had the courage to go out on a limb like we do every day.
We went out on a limb and I stand by where I stood because I knew Trump.
I knew him.
And I interviewed him.
I looked him in the eye.
And my gut told me, wow, this is a no-brainer.
He said he'd pick originalists.
He said he'd cut taxes.
He said he wants to build the wall.
He said he'd get rid of burdensome regulations.
He said, if we're fighting wars, we're stupid.
He tried to talk to people, and he wasn't going to do any more bad deals or blackmail deals that never work anyway.
Where a little rocket man is not firing missiles at Japan, and he's now literally dismantling missile launch pads and facilities, gives us our hostages back.
He's purging the old guard of his father.
He's not having his yearly hate America rally.
And things are getting better.
By the way, Jerusalem is now the capital of Israel.
And the Iranian deal, well, we're out of it.
We just need our $150 billion back.
Thank you, Obama.
And I just, I sit here and I'm watching some of these people.
You know, and Ann R. Rowe was as bad as anybody.
And I say that with great, great deference to people like Andy McCarthy.
And I mean that, and Victor Davis Hansen and some others.
Even Rich Lowry, to his credit, has come around quite a bit.
Some of the other ones, oh, I mean, these, I just can't take it.
But you know something?
Those people that they will never be leaders, unless you have skin in the game in this, you know, this is what we do differently.
This is why this show, I think, is different.
This is why I don't mind going out on a limb.
I'm willing to risk my career.
I'm willing to put it all on the line for what I believe in.
And trust me, there were people that wanted me dead when I was vetting Obama.
There were people that thought I was crazy, that Trump had no chance to win.
There were people that didn't believe that he'd be this successful, that he would govern with the conservative principles he's governing with.
And now that he put Neil Gorsuch on the court, my question to you, I'll never vote for Donald Trump people is, why?
Where are you now?
And some of you are actually trying to jump on the Trump bandwagon today, because if you had your way, Hillary would be making this choice.
Hillary would be negotiating with Iran and Little Rocket Man.
Hillary would never have made Jerusalem the capital.
Hillary would never have cut taxes.
Hillary would have nothing but open borders.
Hillary would now have her second Supreme Court nominee.
So I really don't have a lot of, you know, some of the people that I'm, well, because I'm saying it behind, yeah.
You know why I don't want to do it?
Because I'm just, there's a part, I know people that I could ruin their lives today because of their stupidity, and I just don't do it.
Somewhere deep inside of me, my parents taking me to church every Sunday.
The name of the Father and of the Son, of the Holy Spirit, amen.
It got in.
Somehow God got in there.
And I was fighting it tooth and nail.
I didn't want to be in church.
I didn't want to, I was causing trouble in church.
Then my father made me be an altar boy.
That was worse.
You know, we're drinking the wine behind the, it was not good.
I was incorrigible.
But, yeah, I really do believe strongly in a God.
And I believe the whole story of Jesus.
And I just, and I believe that there's, that he created all of this.
And I don't think God made us to be timid and weak.
I think God, you know, if I'm going to have this microphone and the honor of this microphone that you give me every day by listening to this program, yeah, I'm going to vet Obama.
Yeah, I am.
And I'm going to do the best job I can, even if nobody else is doing it.
Yeah, I'm going to, I'm going to vet every presidential candidate, and I'm going to tell you the truth about how I think they're going to govern.
I'm not going to hold back.
And even though there was probably at least 50,000 versions of Hannity's career is over written before the November 8th, 2016 elections, I'm glad it turned out right, not for my sake, for the country's sake.
And I'm doing the same thing now with Robert Mueller and his witch hunt and Rod Rosenstein.
And we're doing this exactly.
We're going out on a limb.
I mean, I was kind of happy this week when the Wall Street Journal jumped in.
Gee, a little late, guys.
But the reality is it is the biggest corruption scandal in the history of the country.
It's the biggest abuse of power scandal in the history of the country.
And there have been a few of us that have been willing to go out on a limb and do real reporting and get to the truth.
And a part of me should be satisfied in as much as we have corroborated everything.
Hillary broke the law.
She committed felonies.
Hillary, in fact, used bleach bit to acid wash her hard drive.
Saying it that way.
What's the name of that stupid publication that didn't understand?
The Hollywood Reporter.
I don't have to go to one of their stupid red carpeting.
I don't know why you went the first time.
What a waste of time.
I did.
Yeah, she did the biggest, the clearest obstruction case ever.
Yeah, Christian Saussier went to jail a year for six pictures.
And then we see the FISA warrant issue is true too, but Comey and Strzok and McCabe and Paige and Loretta Lynch, all of them abused their power because they put the fix in to save Hillary from an indictment in jail because she was the favored candidate.
And then they actively, purposefully went to undermine Donald Trump with lies.
And FBI spies inside the Trump campaign and then lying to FISA court judges, violating the FISA law, which is so crucial if you believe in the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution against unreasonable search and seizure.
That's all true, too.
We told you March 7th, 2017, there was a FISA warrant against the Trump campaign.
And we haven't stopped.
And everything that we've said has been right, accurate, and true.
And I'll be honest, I don't want any credit.
I do think people like Sarah Carter deserve a Pulitzer.
But of course, that will never happen in this corrupt world.
And the media, basically just an extension of all things liberal.
What have they done?
They have advanced a lie and a narrative designed to undermine a duly elected president of the United States.
It's the biggest story ever in our lifetime.
If we don't get it right, we're going to be Venezuela.
If we don't get it right, it's going to be the former Soviet Union.
If we don't get it right, equal justice, equal application of our laws are done.
It's finished.
It's over.
And the foundation of this great republic, this constitutional republic is the Constitution.
That is the foundation of all of our laws.
You know, that's why, I mean, it's almost a little ironic, all the cuts of Obama that we've been playing.
He actually understood the truth, but he didn't live by the truth.
I'm not an emperor.
I can't do these things by executive.
You know, funny, people think that I could just, with the magic wand of a pen, fix the law.
No, we have co-equal branches of government.
We have in this country separation of powers.
And that's why, for example, the vacancy now at the U.S. Supreme Court matters.
And Hillary would be choosing.
I don't, I am never going to be a Republican again.
I vote for the person I am a conservative.
I'm not a populist.
I'm not a nationalist.
My entire career has been one of consistent Reagan conservatism.
I've not changed an iota.
And I know people in this industry, for whatever reason, maybe ratings up and down, there's always cycles in news.
And sometimes it's slow news and busy.
But they feel like they've got to remake themselves.
And all it is is a means of manipulating you.
The American people.
But you know one thing I have learned, and I said this to Mark Levin recently, you can't really fake it for three hours a day on radio because like in the election that just passed in 2016, the American people are too smart.
You know the phonies.
You know the showmen.
You know the conmen.
You know the liars.
You know the Johnny come lately's.
You know when people put it on the line and when people don't.
You know what all I want to do for the rest of my life?
I just want to serve any way I can.
That's it.
Do my little part and be a spoke in the wheel and just do my part every day.
And part of my part is to do what I always do.
And that's climb the tree, go out on the smallest limb and the smallest branch and find the one leaf that didn't fall during the last fall and hang on to that because I know it's the truth.
That's what we do on this show.
For all the people in the media that don't understand Hannity's number one in cable, why?
That's the secret.
I tell the people the truth.
And I have respect for the people of this country because you make it great, not me.
You get up every day, you work hard, play by the rules, pay your taxes, raise your kids, obey the laws, serve other people every single solitary day, and you don't bitch whine and complain about it, but you're screwed over by your government.
Well, you kind of do complain.
We all do.
And you're screwed over by your government.
Finally, now we're cleaning up the mess.
That's it.
You want to understand who I am?
That's it in a nutshell.
And I don't give a flying rip what any of these people think.
They disgust me in the media.
Johnny come lately's, I have no respect for you at all, and you know who you are.
Final hour roundup is next.
You do not want to miss it.
And stay tuned for the final hour free-for-all on the Sean Hannity Show.
All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity Show.
There is a Supreme Court vacancy.
Justice Kennedy is retired.
There's going to be a fight.
The borking of whoever gets chosen has already begun.
We will go to battle soon.
When we come back, Jay Seculo, David Schoen, and Greg Jarrett.
More of the best of the Sean Hannity Show coming up.
The best of Sean Hannity is on now.
This is how we rule.
We light it up with our hands.
This is how we rule road.
The laws are the worst of the whole country.
Our immigration laws are a laughing stock all over the world.
ICE has strayed so far from its mission.
What it's turned into is frankly a terrorist organization of its own.
They're not going to be able to restaurant.
They're not going to be able to stop at a gas station.
They're not going to be able to shop at a department store.
The people are going to turn on them.
Holding them accountable.
Sean gets the answers no one else does.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
We're burning down the machine.
Bullets at the moon, baby.
This is how we do the world.
Sean Hannity, the new Sean Hannity show.
More behind-the-scenes information on breaking news and more bold inspired solutions for America.
Now, is it the same Peter Strzok who was put on the Mueller special counsel team?
Yes.
All right.
St. Peter Strzok.
And this is not the only time he managed to find the text feature on his phone either.
This is the same Peter Strzok who said Trump is an idiot.
Hillary should win $100 million to zero.
Now, Mr. Inspector General, that one is interesting to me because he's supposed to be investigating her for violations of the Espionage Act at the time he wrote that.
In March of 2016, he's supposed to be investigating her for violations of the Espionage Act, and he can't think of a single solitary American that wouldn't vote for her for president.
I mean, can you see our skepticism?
This senior FBI agent not only had her running, he had her winning.
$100 million to nothing.
So what if they'd found evidence sufficient to indict her?
What if they had indicted her?
Is this the same Peter?
He wasn't part of the interview of Secretary Clinton, was he?
He was present for the interview.
Huh.
I think the overarching point here is that this whole issue has got to come to resolution.
At some point, Special Counsel Mueller and his team, I hope, will wrap up the investigation and clear the air one way or the other whether or not there was a collusion with the Russians.
This is a cloud that's hanging over the country and certainly hanging over this presidency.
And I do hope that happens.
All right, our two Sean Hannity show 800-941.
Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, Trey Gowdy, yeah, rightly pointing out everything that we have been asking, questions now that we've had that go back for many, many months.
And it's interesting to me, very interesting to me, the Trump critic and, of course, CNN commentator, fake news commentator, James Clapper, is out there saying what he's saying.
I think he wants it to end.
I think it's wishful thinking because I suspect that he knows when they get to him and his work and handiwork, if you will, and that of Brennan and others and the unmasking scandal and the spies that were inside the Trump campaign, that it's going to get a little too hot in the kitchen for him.
And he probably wants this to go away, which it might eventually now happen.
Joining us now, his book is out in next month, early next month.
It's called The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump.
Greg Jarrett is here.
You know, I guess the thing that is so amazing, I'm looking right now at the particular chapter where you actually have the text messages between Strzzok and Paige.
Right.
And Peter Strzok is the lead guy in the Clinton investigation, is there in the interview of Hillary Clinton, is there in the interview of General Flynn, and he's also at the forefront.
He's the leader of the Russia investigation that we're now finding started way before the official start date because we know that Michael Caputo, who's going to join us in the next half hour, that he was approached by a Russian with a felony record through the Yazoo as an FBI informant and basically saying they had dirt on Hillary Clinton.
And then that's how the meeting with Roger Stone took place, but nothing ever happened or came of it.
You know, Peter Strzok is the guy who changed the language of the exoneration statement, which initially found that Hillary Clinton violated the law and committed crimes, grossly negligent.
He got on his computer June 6th and changed the words gross negligence to extremely careless.
And who was bending over his shoulder, helping him with that language?
His mistress, Lisa Page.
And then two other people were in the room helping, but they're concealed by the inspector general.
And nobody asked the IG, why are you hiding their names?
All we know about them.
I know about one of them now.
Yes.
What is it, Gladstein?
Yes, but there's several.
One is called a lead analyst.
The other is called lawyer number one.
The other one's lawyer number two.
So we're not quite sure which is which.
I hear there may be as many as 25 other agents that are in the same boat as Struck and Page that also had involvement in a lot of this.
It may be.
You know, the interesting thing about the changing of the statement that found that she was guilty and then changed the language is that James Comey was asked about that and confronted with his initial statement in which he found her grossly negligent.
And he said, you know, I don't remember writing that.
I don't remember writing that.
How could you not remember the most important part of the entire investigation?
So the Hollywood reporter had a hit piece out on me today, and apparently they're upset with the use of the word acid wash when I talk about the hard drive.
Actually, the headline is, Sean Hannity can't stop repeating one of Trump's biggest lies.
And then they go through that I said, how many times I say acid wash.
I usually say delete, acid wash, bleach bit.
Right.
It's a term.
Do you see any difference between using a software program bleach bit that is designed to remove all forensics, meaning any ability for anybody to find old emails or anything on a computer?
Is there any difference?
Would it be an accurate description to say you're acid washing the hard drive clean?
They are functionally synonymous terms.
And if you ask the founder of Bleach Bit or the designer of it, he'd tell you that.
I've interviewed him.
And as a matter of fact, he has told us that.
Yes.
So they're identical terms, synonymous.
But this is typical media trying to pick apart small things because with no difference at all.
But here's how they say it.
They don't deny my claim that it happened.
They write, the FBI, in a report released in September 2016, two days before Trump's first reference to acid washing, explained what happened.
This is their explanation.
An unnamed employee of the company that maintained Clinton's private server, they could have added illegal private server.
They could have said the one that was hacked by at least six foreign entities, including confidential top secret information.
They didn't put that in there.
Anyway, Platte Rivers Networks, they forgot to comply, forgot.
Yeah, you don't.
With a December 14 request from a Clinton aide to delete emails older than 60 days.
They forgot to comply then.
And then in late March of 2015, the employee realized the mistake and sometime between March 25th and 31st, 2015, deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the server and used BleachBit to delete the exported PST files that he had created on the server system containing Clinton's emails.
And then they write, BleachBit sounds like a chemical product, but it's actually a free online deletion service, or as the company puts it, it doesn't matter, because at the time they deleted it, it had been subpoenaed.
That's right.
And they knew it had been subpoenaed, and they defied a subpoena and they obstructed justice and should have been charged.
Instead, these guys were given immunity in exchange for nothing.
What prosecutor gives immunity for free?
That never happens.
Just like, look, we actually had Andrew Zeem.
He was on this program.
Let me play for you what he said to us.
It certainly is a sophisticated device.
Of course, a cloth can only wipe fingerprints, but Bleach Bit can wipe that information.
So as Trey Gowdy said, not even God can read it.
Yeah, so in other words, it really works.
Your technology.
In other words, for example, if I delete my computer right now, a bunch of emails, if I delete a bunch of whatever, it's still on my computer.
It would be recoverable by a computer forensic expert, by the FBI, for example.
They'd be able to find every single thing I did on my computer if I just deleted it the old-fashioned way.
The old-fashioned way, you're right, doesn't permanently delete information.
In the case of email, things are a lot more complicated, and that's why Hillary took a two-pronged approach, right?
Her aide smashed her mobile devices with a hammer because there's a copy of the emails on the mobile device.
And then the IT guy from Platte River Networks ran Bleach Bit on the server, and that deletes another copy of the emails that were on the server end.
So this was a ⁇ would Bleach Bit or the use of Bleach Bit, if you found out I was under investigation by the FBI.
And let's say I called you.
You're the founder.
You're the lead developer of Bleach Bit.
I call you and I say, Andrew, Andrew, it's Sean Hannity.
The FBI wants to look at my computer.
What do you think I ought to do?
And you tell me to use BleachPit.
And you say, if you really want to hide stuff, you want to erase stuff, Bleach Bit works.
You tell me that, right?
And you're confident in your product.
BleachBit can, yeah, definitely delete information so that people can't hide it.
Oh, sounds like acid washing to me.
I'm sticking with acid washing.
Well, and you called it a program.
And I've been with you repeatedly when you have referred to it as a program.
Let's go back to your book, and you put all of the comments of Struck and Paige.
Right.
And then you see that the very same people that it's obvious Hillary obstructed justice.
You have no doubt.
She obstructed justice and she mishandled classified documents and destroyed them.
Yes.
And those are all felonies.
All felonies.
And do you believe, as I do, that the fix was in which struck Paige McCabe?
Just a year before Comey cleared Hillary Clinton, he prosecuted Brian Nishimura, a naval reservist, for doing exactly what Hillary Clinton did on a smaller scale.
And in the FBI press release, it literally says he did it without intent and they prosecuted him under gross negligence.
How could Comey then a year later say there are no such cases in which a prosecutor has brought such a.
Are there statute of limitations or could Hillary still be charged for these.
She could still be charged.
Not all of them have run, but some have.
What could she be charged with now?
Well, if you backdate from now all the way to the later classified documents out of 110 of them, some of them have the statute has not run.
So she could be prosecuted on those.
But on the early ones, no.
So this guy, Brian Nishima.
Nishimura, or in the case Christian Saucy.
He was gross negligence and forced to plead guilty.
And he did what Hillary Clinton did.
So when Comey stood in front of cameras July 5th and said no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case, his prosecutors and his FBI had brought such a case.
And all of this is in your book.
Sure.
So that is the scheme.
It's called the Russian hoax, the illicit scheme to clear Hillary.
All right, you explained the clear Hillary part and frame Donald Trump.
What's the framing Donald Trump part?
Everything that we've seen?
That and a whole lot more.
They began the investigation, a criminal investigation, without evidence of a crime, which violates FBI rules.
They then decided, let's make it a counterintelligence probe because we know we have no evidence of a crime, and yet they had no intelligence.
And Peter Strzok signed the documents on July 31st, officially launching the probe, but the FBI began it long before that, and they were using confidential informants.
Unbelievable.
So we have confidential informants.
We have Hillary bought and paid for Russian lies that have been debunked, put together by a foreign national, paid through funneled money through a law firm, to an op research group, to the foreign national.
She's not being investigated for using a foreign national.
Trump, which didn't use a foreign national through payments, is being investigated.
It's a pretty sick world we're living in.
Oh, it surely is.
It's a double standard world.
Hillary Clinton can do anything she wants.
That's why we always talk about equal justice under the law, equal application under our laws, and how if we don't fix it, this is going to end very badly for the country.
We'll continue more.
Greg Jarrett, his new book, it's out just a couple of weeks now, The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump.
Guaranteed number one New York Times bestseller.
You can pre-order it on Barnes ⁇ Noble or Amazon.
And Hannity.com.
Yes.
Fighting the Trump-hating liberal media one day at a time.
This is The Sean Hannity Show.
As we continue, Greg Jarrett is in studio with us.
The Russia hoax, the illicit scheme to clear Hillary Clinton, frame Donald Trump.
And I'd be honest, I watched you write the whole book.
A lot of people sell books.
They don't write it all.
You wrote every word yourself.
You know, the tough part of it was all of the footnotes.
There are 700 footnotes because I wanted to source everything.
And I made the conscious decision, even though I have anonymous sources who are very well placed and very reliable.
I chose not to use them for the book.
So everything in that book, all the laws, the case laws, the statutes, all of the facts are in the endnotes.
You know, I'll just want to give chapter titles because it's sort of like I watched you give birth to all of them and events were happening as you were writing the book, which is amazing.
And then so I'd go in, I'd say, well, you got to alter chapter six now because something had just happened that day.
But, you know, you first talk about the insidious abuse of power.
And this is the heart of our constitutional republic.
Are we going to be a country that is based on a rule of law predicated on a constitution?
It's either yes or no.
We're going to either have equal application of our laws or not.
You give the full rundown on a chapter on Hillary's email server, Comey contorting the law to basically rig the investigation, how the fix is in there.
You do have one chapter on Clinton greed and uranium one, which we're going to get back to eventually.
Then you talk about the fraudulent case against Donald Trump, the fabricated dossier used against Trump, the government abuse of surveillance, and, of course, FISA meeting with Russians is not a crime, which nobody wants to hear.
And then, of course, firing Flynn, Sessions' recusal, and obstruction of justice, and the illegitimate appointment of Mueller.
It's a full, comprehensive, I'm going to call this the Bible for those of us that care about the biggest abuse of power scandal in our history.
We will refer to this book for years to come.
You know, I think it is a thorough and complete examination to date of all of the evidence that the FBI decided for political reasons to absolve Hillary Clinton in the face of obvious clear-cut crimes.
And then on the very day that Hillary Clinton was cleared, the FBI first met with the British spy who had compiled this completely laughable, phony dossier.
And they never told four FISA court judges the truth.
That's right.
They never verified, and it turned out to be false information.
Even Comey himself says it's unverified.
And the only reference.
That was the bulk of applications.
That's right.
The only reference they make to it is buried in two footnotes, and you would have to be able, you'd have to be clairvoyant to discern what it meant.
So the FISA judges were left in the dark.
It's called The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump.
It's just a couple of weeks now from its debut.
Greg Jarrett, who's been all over this, it will be a book we refer to a lot as people get indicted in the next year to come.
All right, we'll take a quick break when we come back.
Michael Caputo, well, it appears that an FBI informant tried to set him and Roger Stone up, according to their story.
They'll tell us all about it next.
More of the best of The Sean Hannity Show coming up.
You are listening to the best of The Sean Hannity Show.
The liberal vitriol and hatred now.
Well, Maxine Waters completely unhinged.
She wants people, you know, stalked at their houses in public places.
No peace, no sleep.
I don't even know what that means, but she wants people followed at their house, in public places.
She wants them confronted.
We saw what happened with Sarah Huckabee, of course, the other day.
And then we saw what happened, Peter Fonda threatening the child, the 12-year-old of Melania and President Trump.
And it gets worse than that.
Now we have Pam Bondi can't even go watch a movie for Crying Out Loud.
Maxine Waters telling people, confront them at restaurants, gas stations, public places, even their own homes.
We saw what happened to the Secretary Nielsen, and she got chased out of a restaurant.
They chase her down at her house.
Then, of course, Tommy Laron gets water thrown on her.
Then you got MSNBC hosts asking, you know, if women are dead inside and whether or not, how do you resist the temptation to run up and wring Sarah Huckabee Sanders' neck?
I mean, it is creating nothing but an atmosphere of hatred and violence.
And guess what's going to happen?
Something is going to happen.
And when it does, you'll see a correlation with this rhetoric and what actually happens.
Let's play the montage.
We're oddly influential with the guy who wants to kill us.
And to our detractors that insist that this march will never add up to anything.
F you.
F ⁇ you.
But this is the hallmark of revolution.
Yes, I'm angry.
Yes, I am outraged.
Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.
You know, I had a dream the other night about that I was playing golf with Donald Trump and I was standing beside him with a club in my hand and I was, you know, considering my options when I suddenly woke up.
You know, it's one of those dreams where you want to just get back to sleep so you can finish it.
You know?
Put Mr. Burgess up against Sean Hannity.
Go tear him up.
I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors.
I want you to talk to them whether they're independent or whether they are Republican.
I want you to argue with them and get in their faces.
Press always asked me, don't I wish I were debating him?
No, I wish you were in high school.
I could take him behind the gym.
That's what I wish.
What we've got to do is fight in Congress, fight in the courts, fight in the streets.
Ordinary people who simply saw what needed to be done and came together and supported those ideals who have made the difference.
They've marched.
They've bled.
Yes, some of them have died.
This is hard.
Every good thing is.
We have done this before.
We can do this again.
As far as I'm concerned, the T-Potter can go straight to hell.
In fact, the only thing your mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin's holster.
Oh, Ivanka's going to be our saving grace.
You know, when he's about to nuke Finland or something, she's going to walk into the bedroom and, you know, yeah.
Daddy.
Daddy.
Don't do it, Daddy.
He's a punk.
He's a dog.
He's a pig.
He's a con, a bull artist, a mutt.
He's an idiot.
He talks how he wants to punch people in the face.
Well, I'd like to punch him in the face.
We're graced with Sarah's presence tonight.
I have to say, I'm a little starstruck.
I love you as Aunt Lydia and the Handmaid's Tale.
Hey, f that.
Gracious ass.
Why are you even out here?
Get that out of here.
F that b.
Shame!
F ⁇ Trump!
It's no longer down with trumpets.
F ⁇ Trump!
Already!
You have members of your cabinet that have been booed out of restaurants.
Who have protesters taking up at their house?
Who sang no peace, no sleep.
No peace, no sleep.
And guess what?
We're gonna win this battle because while you try and poke the Bible, Jeff Sessions and others, you really don't know the Bible.
God is on our side.
And if you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd.
And you push back on them.
And you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere.
All right, joining us now, she's the Attorney General of the Great State of Florida.
Wendy, your term is coming to an end, right?
I am.
I'm out of a job.
January 2019.
The liberals will be happy, right?
No, I think actually you might take on a bigger role somewhere else if my gut tells me.
Well, I would think you're a natural selection.
Maybe you've gotten along with the president.
You've been friends with the president a long time.
I adore the president.
And his favorite.
You guys ever talked about maybe you joining the administration?
You know, I'm not going to talk about that.
You're not going to tell me anything.
All right.
I felt really bad.
So I guess there's a movie out about Mr. Rogers.
A documentary about Mr. Rogers and Sean.
He practiced tolerance.
He was ahead of his time.
Anti-bullying?
I was never the big Mr. Rogers fan.
Anti-bullying?
There's nobody in the world that's as nice, kind, and sweet as Mr. Rogers.
And I'm like, all right, that's a little too syrupy-sweet for me.
I mean, at least cartoons like Tom and Jerry had real-life violence in it or The Roadrunner.
I did like Red Renner, but it was kind of cool, though, because he was ahead of his time.
It was a nice battle.
Bullying is a big deal for me now with these school kids.
Right.
And he was anti-bullying back in the 60s.
I mean, crazy.
You know, before that was even a word.
And all the other things he did about you can have differences, but be tolerant.
So I find it very ironic that I chose to be accosted in a Mr. Rogers documentary.
All right, so let's go through what happened.
I mean, you have security as a highly elected official in Florida.
What do you have?
I do.
And I think, frankly, I was getting a bit complacent.
Pulled up.
There was a line outside.
And so my trooper, who's wonderful, I said, oh, just park the car and we'll jump out and grab the tickets waiting in line.
You know, families out there.
And all of a sudden, out of nowhere, a woman walks up to me and says, You're Pam Bondi.
I'd like to talk to you.
And I said, Sure, hi.
And she said, you know, I knew right off it wasn't going to be pleasant, though.
And so I tried to have a dialogue with her.
And she said, you're ripping babies out of the hands of mothers.
Oh, my God.
And I said, okay.
So then there are two big guys, like really big or three next to her.
You know, I didn't even make eye contact with them because they were so big.
And I'm looking at the market.
Looking at your security guard.
He was parking.
He's parking.
And it's not his fault.
It was mine.
I got out and said, hey, we're fine.
We're in line at a movie.
I have been in crowds with you, and everybody, 90% of the people of Florida, love you.
All right.
So how fast did he get there?
So, so, so, so, um, this, this dialogue, not dialogue, sorry.
So I tried to have a dialogue with her and I said, well, I'm glad you're filming this.
I'm glad you're taping this because let me tell you, I'm not in favor of those mothers being separated from their children.
And I'm glad the president signed an order correcting that.
And I said, this is the thing that Congress needs to act on.
She didn't even know who her congressman was.
So that's when basically all heck broke loose.
And these big guys, because they knew they had lost.
And so they've never shown that video.
They just laid into me, F you, at the top of their lungs.
And so try being the person with me, you know, they're in his face saying, calling him the P where, you know, come on, aren't you going to protect her?
Come on, come on, come on.
They wanted him.
They wanted him to move.
They wanted him to hit them so he could be on the front page of the paper the next day.
And so I'm trying to calm him down saying, This is what they want.
This is what they want.
This is what they want.
The rule is, is they can't touch you.
The minute they put their hands on you, then you have a right to defend yourself.
They were inches.
They weren't, they were probably six inches away from my face at that point, but they were trying to get him to protect me.
These are big guys, and they really think they're so tough that they're literally trying to physically confront a woman.
Now, oh, it gets worse.
Listening.
It gets worse.
Okay.
So, so, you know, they're having it out with him.
So a gentleman and his wife, like an older gentleman, and if he's listening, thank you, walked up and said, Hey, it's Friday night.
Come on, come on.
And they got in his face, and his wife pulled him away.
I mean, people were people were frightened.
And it was, it was, it was an interesting.
So go buy the tickets, ignored him, tried to walk through the vestibule.
It was at Tampa Theater and all the people, try to walk through.
And then that's when they surrounded me.
And so then by then.
How many people were there then?
I think three guys, only three at that point, I think, because they were around.
They blocked me from walking in.
And I don't know if the woman was with them or not.
So then my trooper came and I thought it was over.
So we went in and waited in the concession stand and waited in line.
And so then all of a sudden out of nowhere, I think my trooper thought it was over and he had thought we had walked into the theater, I believe.
So he walks and they, this is when it got really ugly.
They come up out of nowhere and he was super tall, this guy.
And then the other one, they were big.
And you can clearly see him on the later video.
So screaming in my head, Spit on me.
Now, I couldn't prove, and I'm very fair.
By the way, that's assault.
It is, but he was yelling and like he was yelling so hard my hair was blowing.
So I couldn't tell if it was an intentional spit.
So we ordered the video from the theater and they didn't have video.
So, you know, and frankly, they assaulted me when they surrounded me.
But, Sean, that's what they wanted.
Is there any law, though, you're not allowed to intimidate and harass people this much?
We have to file an order of protection.
They can yell and scream, but if they come near me again, we've identified the three of them now.
I will get a restraining order.
So, go in the movie.
After the movie, by then, there are four marked units there, and they said, We're going to take you out the back way.
And I said, Oh, no, you're not.
Right.
You went out the front way.
I'm walking out the way I walked in.
And then that's the video that you saw posted.
Well, good for you.
I mean, I don't, it's, it really bothers me as I've always felt like, all right, if you want to pick on me, I'm game.
I put myself in this arena, but you're going to pick on children.
Baron Trump, we're going to pick on a 12-year-old kid who can't defend themselves.
Right.
You know what?
You come up to me.
Well, when I was a prosecutor, I got robbed by two gang members on a bike.
Not only did I get my purse back, I got their bike.
But I can't do that anymore now that I'm elected.
Well, listen, there's nothing that anyone would like for me to throw the first punch because then they think they're going to be rich.
But I'm prepared for them.
C.L. Bryant is with us, the pastor, and a conservative.
And, you know, I know when you wrote and created the film, The Runaway Slave, you took a lot of heat also.
What's going on in society, sir?
Everything is good, Sean, and thank you so much with me, but thank you so much for having me on because what happened to Attorney General Bundy should have never happened.
And Maxine Waters does not care anything about the children at the border.
In fact, America has done those young people a favor by taking them in, feeding them, giving them medication, and protecting them from people who have placed them.
But I want to stay focused, but now they're going after women and children.
Now they're actually saying meet them in restaurants, meet them in their homes, meet them in gas stations, confront them the way the Attorney General was confronted.
That has to stop.
But stay right there.
We'll take a break.
Still waiting to fly out all those libs who promised to leave if Trump were elected.
The jet is ready.
This is the Sean Hannity Show.
What would Mr. Rockley think about you?
And you're legacy in Florida.
Take it away from her.
And as we continue with Pastor C.L. Bryant, Pam Bondi, the Attorney General of Florida, she was literally surrounded, screamed at, somebody speaking, spitting, if you will, on her face.
And this is happening to all these women now.
It is.
And Sean, when that video, the aftermath video, which was tame compared to what they did, came out, a state senator, Dana Young, contacted me and said, whoa, this happened to me.
And that's the same guy that did it to me.
Do you think this is going to lead to violence?
Is this rhetoric now going to lead?
I'm getting very nervous now.
Absolutely.
And then a state rep, Jackie Toledo, was at a coffee shop with her little kids.
Same thing, screaming at her.
I don't know all the details, screaming in her face, but I do.
Sean, those people that accosted me, the violence in their eyes, the person I always said the same thing, never seen anything like it.
If they had had a weapon, they would have used it on me.
I have no doubt.
Pastor, why are things so heated up right now?
There is a design, Sean, to unravel the fundamental principles of our nation.
And they're turning it into a racial football, even with the Central Americans that are coming up here.
And that is what we have to pay attention to, is the fundamental unraveling of why are they attacking young kids?
Why are they attacking Melania Ivanka, Secretary Nielsen, Pam Bondi, Sarah Huckabee Sanders?
Why are they going after these people?
Why are they going after women?
Tommy Laron gets hit with water and attacks.
She goes out, she does Man on the Street for Hannity, the TV show.
And these people are, not only the vile things they say, but the advocation of violence in a lot of instances.
They have nothing else but to create the chaos.
Donald Trump has surprised every one of them in being as successful as he has been.
And so this type of vitriol has to be launched.
I deal with that in the book you endorse, the search for freedom.
So what do you do next, Pam?
Well, you know, I want to call on Americans to, I want to call on Maxine Waters to back off what she said and say, you know, you want to protest, protest, but do it with tolerance and dignity and civility.
All right, Pam Bondi will be on Hannity tonight.
We've got the video.
We'll show you.
We'll also chronicle all of the insanity that is now unfolding before our eyes, all because they lost.
That's what it all comes down to.
And their little Russia investigation failed also.
All right.
And don't forget, C.O. Bryan.
Thank you, sir.
And by the way, the race for freedom and runaway slave are some of his work, and you can always get it at his website.
We'll take a quick break.
We'll come back and we'll continue straight ahead.
