Sean covers the agreement between the European Commission and The United States over trade. "This is a preview of what will happen with other countries," explained Sean, "President Trump got other world leaders to stand up to the plate." Nobody wants a trade war but nobody has stood up and asked for fairness. Liberals has predicted a huge trade war... something that we don't see in agreements like the one today. The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
If you're like me and suffer from insomnia, you know what?
That's not fun.
You know, I tried everything.
I couldn't get a good night's sleep.
And this is neither drug nor alcohol-induced.
That's right.
It is my pillow.
Mike Lindell invented it, and he fitted me for my first MyPillow, and it's changed my life.
I fall asleep faster, stay asleep longer.
And the good news, you can too.
Just go to mypillow.com, promo code Sean, and take advantage of one of Mike Lindell's best offers, his special four-pack.
You get 50% off to MyPillow Premium Pillows, two GoAnywhere pillows.
Now, MyPillow is made in the USA, has a 60-day unconditional money-back guarantee, no risk to you, and a 10-year warranty.
You don't want to spend more sleepless nights on a pillow tossing internee that's not working for you.
Just go to mypillow.com right now, use the promo code Sean, and you get Mike Lindell's special four-pack.
You get two MyPillow Premium Pillows, two GoAnywhere pillows, 50% off, and you'll start getting the kind of peaceful, restful, and comfortable, and deep healing, and recuperative sleep you've been craving and deserve.
Mypillow.com, promo code Sean.
All right, glad you're with us.
All right, we got a lot on our plate today, including the Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, just sat down and has said that the president and the United States does not recognize the annexation of Crimea.
Nobody ever said that.
And Pompeo did rightly defend Trump's statement about the Putin summit.
And now they're talking about, well, maybe bringing Putin after the Mueller investigation, which I think is probably very smart.
But if you're watching your media, you know, we go from crisis to crisis to crisis to, you know, and even if it's just a tweet day and they can't say, wait, Russia, oh my God, how's that?
Oh, the world is falling.
The world is hysteria.
I mean, it's by the way, that guy actually did that in front of Barack Obama because he so worshipped it, worshiped him, like the media worshipped him.
We'll go to Pompeo in a second, but I see Senator Corker is speaking.
Pompeo is a great Secretary of State.
The guy's brilliant.
And it will be interesting to hear what he said.
Then you go from Russia, then you go to, oh, John Brennan, the former communist that's calling the president a traitor and treasonous.
Then we go to that hysteria.
Now it's the tape, the Cone Trump tape, which, by the way, I have no idea why it was ever taken or released.
But, you know, when you actually, if you actually look at it and listen to it objectively, I'm not going to get into, okay, you know, we might as well be arguing whether or not it's Yanni or Lanny Davis or, you know, cash or check.
There's zero significance in that tape, nor is it any new knowledge in that tape at all or any criminal statute in play in this Tape, but that's not the way the media is reacting to all of this.
There's no significance either, if you're going to be blunt, whether or not the payment was by cash or by check.
And whether people want to acknowledge or admit this or not is really up to them.
But there are decisions made by almost every big corporation, and I would probably venture to say all of them, that they decide is it worth litigating or is it worth just making a deal to make something go away whether true, in some cases it is true, and people were mistreated.
In some cases, it's not necessarily true.
And those things happen every single day of the week.
And that's why, you know, this would not surprise me to be a conversation in any way, shape, matter, or form.
You know, as I have listened to this, I've tried to listen with my headphones on.
I have tried to listen to an enhanced sort of we took the static out of it a little bit version of the tape.
I'm trying to, it's ambiguous to me.
I think Rudy's interpretation is right.
You know, that the president is actually saying, well, you wanted to memorialize it by paying, quote, a check.
Some hear it the other way.
I don't even think there's dishonesty in some people hearing it because it's very hard to hear.
But again, you might as well, what are we going to call Lanny Davis?
I've known Lanny Davis for years.
It doesn't matter.
The only thing that really matters is, is there anything illegal as it relates to the story of itself, or is it just more of the pile on, which is to destroy Trump?
And when you start to make the comparisons of how your media treats any issue involving Donald Trump and then how they have ignored the biggest abuse of power scandal in history to steal a presidential election, it's kind of breathtaking to understand where their priorities are here.
And what really is at stake is everything that I tell you about what's at stake for 2018, which is what I call the most important midterm in your life.
Because if you can't tell, the Democrats, they do have a specific agenda.
They've actually been able to pull members aside and say, yeah, we agree with you, but stop saying it publicly.
Impeach 45, impeach 45, impeach 45.
Like Maxine Waters, she's not saying it anymore because she's been, I would assume, anybody that's been saying it, that's not good for the country, that's not good for them running.
And as they get pulled so hard to the left, what's the rest of their agenda?
Impeach the president.
They want open borders and to abolish ICE, which is to me an amazing statement about how far left the Democratic Party has gone.
They want to keep Obamacare.
Okay, with all the rate increases, all the keep your doctor, keep your plan, save less lies, you want to keep it?
Because it's been a disaster for every American.
And, you know, at least we got rid of one part of it, the individual mandate, which happened in the tax bill.
So they want open borders.
They want to keep Obamacare.
They want to keep impeach the president.
And they want their crumbs back.
Nancy Pelosi said it.
Now Elizabeth Warren has said it.
You know, that money that is in your check every single week, they want it back.
They refer to it as crumbs.
But that's, you know, for some families, thousands of dollars a year.
And we'll find out Friday what the second quarter GDP growth numbers are.
We're expecting something in the four plus percentage range.
Remember, Obama's the only president in history that never got to 3% GDP growth in a single year.
And of course, he added 13 million Americans to the food stamp rolls.
We now have lost over 2 million since Trump is president.
You know, millions more, 8 million to be specific.
Additional Americans in poverty after eight years of Obama.
Now we've got a chance.
Now we finally got some economic momentum.
Barclays, I mean, had a shocking revision to their second quarter growth GDP estimate of 5.3%.
If we get anything near 4, it's going to be a massive, massive story for the American economy.
We now have more jobs available in the country than we have people on unemployment.
You know, we actually have the dismantling of a nuclear test facility by Kim Jong-un, hostages returned, no more missiles being fired over Japan.
None of this matters to the media.
Then you have Hillary Clinton, you have a rigged investigation when a certain indictment, if it was you or me, it was all fixed and we know who fixed it.
And nobody, there's literally no pulse in the media, no appetite to point that out.
Well, Hannity's talking about Hillary.
No, I'm talking about our Constitution, equal application of our laws, equal justice in our legal system, and whether or not we have a two-tiered justice system.
Because if we don't, as a country, as a constitutional republic, we're screwed.
You know that.
It is the end of America as you would know it.
And then we're no better than one of these banana republics, you know, or the former Soviet Union or Venezuela, where it's lawlessness, and you got the elite with their justice system, and the rest of us, good luck to you.
And I'm not even talking about the biggest confirmation of everything that we have been telling you about what happened with the FISA courts, the same people that exonerate Hillary, boom, right into going after Donald Trump.
We have a Russia scandal in the 2016 election.
Hillary buying Russian lies through a foreign national with funneled money through a law firm that hires an op research group that hires the foreign national that puts the Russian lies in a dossier that then becomes the basis of the top FBI DOJ officials in the country that literally lying to the FISA courts to get this application.
Because as Andrew McCabe said, if we didn't have the dossier, which is Russian lies that Hillary paid for, then we also wouldn't have the FISA warrants.
Okay, that's pretty revealing.
Then we wouldn't be fine.
They never told the judges, the FISA court judges Hillary paid for it, but they knew it.
That's an important piece of information.
They never told the judges that it was unverified.
Rod Rosenstein even said in May, well, yeah, when we put our signature on this, You know, we're testifying to the truthfulness of it.
None of it was true, and it's debunked.
And it was, we have not only the original application FISA warrant to the FISA court, and we got three subsequent applications.
Again, nothing from your news media.
But when it comes to, you know, what ostensibly turns out to be, you know, whatever, however long the tape is, and I'll play it for you, you know, the only thing that really should matter is the rule of law,
how a criminal investigation was fixed for a presidential candidate, how courts were lied to by the top FBI and DOJ officials, how the people that paid for the dossier, even Brennan leaking that he's the CIA director, and he's taking unverified, bought and paid-for Russian lies and handing them over to Harry Reid.
And look at what it's done to the country in the meantime.
I mean, but they're going to focus on something that every lawyer in the country is saying is not a crime.
You know, the only thing that matters, is there anything illegal in what Michael Cohn and the president were talking about?
The answer is no.
And unfortunately, there is a cottage industry of Trump hate in this country right now.
There's an information crisis that is so bad that they would ignore the biggest abuse of power scandal because of their absolute pathological daily hatred of Donald Trump.
It's pretty amazing at the end of the day.
You know, it really doesn't, on a level that you just can't even really understand, except that it's that corrupt in the country right now.
So, you know, that's where we are.
All right, Mike Pompeo speaking.
Let's dip into this.
Interest to this committee, North Korea, NATO, and Russia.
On the subject of Russia, I want to bring something to your attention right off the bat today.
Today, the Trump administration is releasing what we're calling the Crimea Declaration.
I won't read the whole thing.
I will submit it for the record.
It's been publicly released as well.
But one part reads as follows, quote, the United States calls on Russia to respect the principles to which it has long claimed to adhere and to end its occupation of Crimea.
End of quote.
I want to assure this committee that the United States does not and will not recognize the Kremlin's purported annexation of Crimea.
We stand together with allies, partners, and the international community in our commitment to Ukraine and its territorial integrity.
There will be no relief of Crimea-related sanctions until Russia returns control of the Crimean Peninsula to Ukraine.
This Crimea Declaration formalizes United States policy of non-recognition.
There's another indicator of diplomatic progress I want to mention.
This morning, Pastor Andrew Brunson, who was in prison in Turkey for nearly two years, has been let out of jail at Buka.
He's still under house arrest.
So our work is not done.
But it's welcome progress, one that many of you have been engaged in, something the State Department has been working on diligently as well.
We will continue to work for the speedy return of all Americans unjustly held captive abroad.
President Trump will never forget about our own.
Our diplomacy on these issues is advancing the goals of President Trump's national security strategy, which laid down guiding principles for American foreign policy in December.
In late April, I started executing on the strategy of Secretary of State.
I'm glad to take a break.
We're not going to stop our coverage of this.
By the way, the announcement of this pastor that was held in Turkey all this year, Jay Sekulo is that guy's attorney and has been for a long time.
Andrew Brunson is his name, a Christian pastor.
That's a big deal and a really big announcement.
Also, Pompeo is saying that he won't recognize Russia's annexation of Crimea and said there'll be no sanctions relief until Russia returns control of the Crimean Peninsula to Ukraine.
And now it's official policy and that the sanctions will stay in place.
Oh, so much for they've got.
He's a Russian agent, MSNBC has been saying.
Good grief.
I mean, that's how insane that represents NBC news these days.
All right, let's get back to Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State, in his opening statement before the Senate.
You've had private one-on-one meetings in your life as well.
You've chosen that setting as the most official.
I wish to ask you a simple question.
I can't eat up my seven minutes.
I'm not sure if I can do this.
Did he tell you whether or not what happened in those two hours?
Yes, Senator.
The predicate of your question implied some notion that there was something improper about having a one-on-one meeting.
I completely disagree with you.
I didn't ask your predicate.
I asked you a simple question.
I hope we're going to get through it.
Did he tell you what transpired in the time?
I had a number of conversations with President Trump about what transpired in the meeting.
I was also president when he and President Putin both gave us a sense of what they discussed in the meeting that followed immediately after.
I also had the chance to speak with Sergei Lavrov twice about the Russian view on what takes place.
I think I have a pretty complete understanding of what took place in the middle of the day.
Did you speak to the translator who was at that meeting?
No, I haven't.
Have you seen any of her notes?
Senator, I have never, I've been in lots of meetings.
I've had lots of note-takers and lots of translators.
I've never relied on the work that they did.
Did the president understand what took place in that meeting?
And it does not need to be.
Did the president discuss relaxing U.S. sanctions on Russia, including CATSA sanctions?
Senator, the U.S. policy with respect to sanctions remains completely unchanged.
So the President did not, is what you're telling me that I ask a very specific question.
Did the President tell you that he discussed relaxing Russia's sanctions or not?
Yes or no?
Senator, presidents are entitled to have private meetings.
I'm telling you what U.S. policy is.
I came here today.
No, but you told me that he had a conversation with you in which he told you what transpired.
I think the nation and all of us who are policymakers deserve to know so that we can fashion policy accordingly.
Did he tell Putin that I'll release or ultimately relax sanctions?
Senator, what you need to conduct your role, your appropriate role, I will provide you today.
That is United States policy with respect to the issues you request.
You asked me about U.S. policy with respect to sanctions, and I can confirm to you that no commitment has been made to change those policies in any way.
Did the President at this meeting call upon President Putin to withdraw from crime?
This is getting very interesting.
We'll pick it up right there.
You won't miss a second of Secretary of State Pompeo, in this case, being grilled by the Honorable Senator Menendez of New Jersey.
All right, 25 till the top of the hour, 800-941-Sean is our number if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, let's get back to, we're going to pick up right where we left off, the Secretary of State Putin, really just being haranged by Senator Menendez.
I'm sorry, Secretary of State Pompeo being harangued by I'm trying to do two things at once.
You can't work your computer and talk.
My brain doesn't work that well.
Secretary of State Pompeo being grilled by Senator Menendez, the honorable Senator Menendez.
I understand the declaration.
I welcome it.
I'm glad that it seems like we had to do a lot of effort to get there.
But the question is, when he had a chance, did he confront Putin and say, we don't recognize your annexation of Crimea.
We don't recognize your continuing hostilities in eastern Ukraine.
And there's consequences for that.
Senator, the President was very clear with Vladimir Putin about U.S. positions.
They're the U.S. positions that are the Trump administration's positions, and he spoke about them very firmly and clearly when he met with Vladimir Putin.
And he told you that.
Senator, I'm telling you what he had a conversation with Vladimir Putin about, and I'm telling you what U.S. policy is today.
Senator, I understand the game that you're playing.
You know, Mr. Secretary, with all due respect, I don't appreciate you characterizing my questions.
My question is to get to the truth.
We don't know what the truth is.
And the only way that we will know what the truth is, what transpired in those two hours, in a highly amazing period of time to spend alone one-on-one, is by understanding at least that if you were briefed by the President, what he told you, I don't think that's unfair to know, to understand what policy is.
Let me ask you this.
Did the President say they were going to change our force structure in Syria?
Senator, presidents are permitted to have conversations with their cabinet members that aren't repeated in public.
I owe the President the capacity for him to have conversations with him, provide him the best foreign policy advice that I can.
It's what I was saying.
Let me ask you this, Mr. Secretary.
Here's something you can answer for me.
Great.
Because you're not going to answer any of the questions that would get us to the truth.
As CIA Director, you stated in an interview with the BBC that you fully expect Russia to continue its attacks on our democracy by attempting to interfere in our midterm elections as we speak.
In his conversation with Putin, I hope the President laid out the consequences of interference in the 2018 election, but I know you can't tell me that.
Actually, I can't tell you.
Did you want to share that one with me?
That one you want to share with me?
No, Senator, I can tell you that because the President has disclosed that.
The President disclosed what he said to Vladimir Putin about Russian interference in our elections, and he said that he is confident that as a result of that conversation, Vladimir understands that it won't be tolerated.
I wish he had said that in public in Helsinki.
Let me ask you this.
Senator Graham and I and others are working on a new bill to hold Russia accountable.
Given that you assert the administration is tough on Russia, will you commit to working with us on a new Russia sanctions bill?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
North Korea, when you last appeared, I asked you a series of critical questions about what's our policy in North Korea.
And to your credit, I must say that I largely agreed with what our goals are.
Now I want to ask you, since we haven't heard anything, not a classified briefing, not anything as it relates to North Korea, did North Korea agree with our definition of denuclearization, meaning the dismantlement, removal of all nuclear weapons, facilities, technology, and material from North Korea?
I think I can answer your question, but let me begin by saying I'm engaged in a complex negotiation with the North Koreans, and so I don't intend in this public setting to share the details of every conversation that took place in those, but I will attempt to answer your questions without disclosing the contents of the negotiation.
I am very confident that the North Koreans understand our definition of denuclearization, a very broad one, that it goes from infrastructure, nuclear warheads through chemical, biological weapons.
We understand it because you laid it for the record.
Have they agreed with you that that is?
I believe they thoroughly understand that and they understand it, but they didn't agree.
Did they agree to end the production and enrichment of uranium and plutonium for military programs?
Senator, I would welcome the chance to respond to your questions.
If you'd let me finish, it would be most simple.
I think it would be most illuminating for the folks who are.
It's a simple yes or no.
Could you repeat the question, please, Senator?
It was the previous question I didn't have the chance to answer.
Surely.
Did North Korea agree to end the production and enrichment of uranium and plutonium for military programs?
They have agreed to denuclearize fully, yes, Senator.
Okay, we don't have to.
Yes, it certainly includes the following.
I would love for you to come to a classified setting and tell all members what exactly transpired, because we don't know.
Thank you.
Senator Rish.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for doing this job.
The President made a wise decision appointing you as Secretary of State, and you are acquitting yourself very well here today, and we appreciate that.
You've always been straightforward with us, and I appreciate that.
I know many of my colleagues, not all, but many of my colleagues fully appreciate that.
I want to talk.
You're prepared to say most, Senator, are you just going to go with many?
I'm going to stay with many.
Let me say that as far as what happened at the NATO summit, very few Americans heard anything except the argument that went on about funding.
Now, I know the President believes, and I know you believe, and I believe, and I think most everyone believes that NATO is the most successful military alliance in the history of the world.
And as you pointed out, it's certainly one of the pillars of our national security and one that we need to support and one that we need to work well.
There are very few downsides of NATO, but there is one blemish.
And the President has underscored that publicly and well.
His predecessor attempted to do it.
All their predecessors attempted to do it.
All those of us that meet with the Europeans from time to time underscore it.
And that is the funding or the lack thereof that the Europeans have done.
Only eight of the NATO nations are actually meeting the commitment of 2%.
First of all, the President is to be commended for underscoring this, as only he can do in his unique way, and actually getting them to start talking about it and now finally starting to agree to that.
But there were other things that were lost as far as that meeting is concerned, and I'd like you to talk about those things for a few minutes.
Number one is on the deterrence side, the 430s commitment to increase NATO readiness and speed up the time it takes allies to assemble and deploy forces, and that's a huge step forward.
The efforts to improve mobility and establish a process to enhance the speed at which NATO can make decisions, the fight against terrorism and increase in Allied resilience against terrorist threats through a new framework to share biometric data is a major accomplishment.
And finally, the opportunity for Macedonia to receive an invitation to join NATO and fulfill the promise from the Bucharest summit.
That was a positive step for the alliance and for the Balkans.
Could you comment on those very important steps forward that happened at this NATO summit?
Senator Rish, it was an incredibly productive NATO summit.
From my conversations with Secretary General Stoltenberg, he said among the most productive that he had ever been part of.
And he's been doing this a little while.
You talked about the 430s, 30 squadrons, 30 battalions and 30 naval combatants ready to go in 30 days.
It's something NATO has not been able to do for quite some time.
There's now a real commitment we have to follow through to make sure that the implementation of that occurs.
It would be a great thing to deter Russia if we can get those countries and our allies to get to that level.
You talked about the increase in burden sharing.
It seemed to get all the focus.
It's certainly important that the Europeans are as committed to deterring Russia as the United States of America and need to demonstrate that through their defense, not only dollars, but readiness as well.
We've seen reports about the absence of German readiness.
They need to truly be ready.
The President also raised another issue about energy and energy security at the NATO summit.
He talked about the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and the risk that that creates to the alliance in the event that Russia should decide to use energy as a weapon to coerce either formally or informally Germany or other European countries.
He raised it to the forefront and frankly there are European countries that understand that risk and support America and our position on that as well.
And then finally you talked a little bit about the NATO mission, its new role in fighting terrorism.
I want to say thanks to so many of the European countries that have stepped forward.
Even just this past few, I guess it's now two weeks since the NATO summit, over 1,000 additional commitments from allied NATO partners headed to assist us in Operation Resolute Support in Afghanistan.
That's a great commitment, something that President Trump worked hard on at the summit, and really good outcomes for America.
Well, thank you so much.
You're to be personally commended for those great successes, as is the President for leading in that regard.
It's unfortunate that our friends and allies' feathers were ruffled a little bit just because we said they weren't paying their bills, but that's been going on for some time, and I think we're going to tolerate that, but they've got to step up, and I know you underscored that, and the President has certainly underscored that with him.
I want to talk about Iran for just a moment.
One of the big unreported stories as far as foreign relations is concerned is the issues and the difficulties that the Iranian people are having internally, financially and otherwise.
And I know we're not in a classified setting, but there is some open reporting on these sources.
And the regime that's there is struggling with this.
Indeed, I think that's probably why they tried to poke the President the other day to try to take the heat off of the heat they're getting at home.
Could you talk a little bit about what's going on internally, again, knowing that we're in an open setting?
Senator, there is enormous economic challenge inside of Iran today.
It's an economic structure that simply doesn't work.
When you're a country of that scale that foments terror through Lebanese Hezbollah, through Shia militias in Iraq, into Yemen, conducts assassination attempts in European countries, provides enormous support for Hafez Assad outside of Lebanese Hezbollah in Syria.
That's expensive.
And I think the Iranian people are beginning to see that that's not the model that they want, that the Iranian expansionism that the Supreme Leader and Qasem Soleimani so favor is not what they're looking for.
And I think you're beginning to see the economic impact combined with understandings inside of Iran of the kleptocracy that it is leading to fundamental decisions that the Iranian people will ultimately have to make.
You agree with me that that acceleration of that understanding by the Iranian people has been very rapid over the last six months.
Yes.
I think it's been going on longer than that, but yes.
It's been going on longer, but I'm talking about the acceleration.
Yes, Senator, I think that's a fair statement.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If I could, just one interjection.
I know the phrase paying their bills has been used.
And every NATO country needs to be contributing 2% to defense.
And I've noticed those near the Russian border always do.
But that's a misnomer, is it not?
What we want them to do is contribute at least 2%.
These NATO countries are not paying bills to the United States as sometimes is projected.
Is that correct?
The shortfalls that the President identified really are in two buckets.
There is a NATO common fund that is contributed to by every nation, and the United States is by far the largest contributor to that fund.
And then there are monies that are paid for nations to raise their own militaries and to defend themselves.
That's the 2 percent number to which we've been referring to.
It would be a mischaracterization to say, to make it appear that they're not paying bills to the United States.
That's correct.
That's correct.
Senator Cardin.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here.
It's my understanding that the president is going to invite Mr. Putin to the United States to follow up on the understandings reached in Helsinki.
Can you just briefly tell me what those understandings or agreements reached in Helsinki at the meeting?
Sure.
I can certainly share with you the things that we've been tasked to follow up on by President Trump following that meeting.
There's a handful.
So there is an agreement to establish some business-to-business leadership exchanges that historically had been undertaken but had fallen away.
These would be business leaders that would participate in this.
I understand that this went on for years and years and was ceased handful of.
If we could do it briefly, I understand you want to give a complete thing, and I appreciate that.
It's what you asked for.
I understand that.
Business to business.
Next issue.
The president has asked us to look at reestablishing a counterterrorism council that was held at the level of the Deputy Secretary of State for many years, but had also ceased to happen.
I think at this point, I think that makes sense in counterterrorism.
We are working to see in Syria what are the possibilities that can be achieved so that the now between six and seven million displaced person externally displaced persons have the opportunity to return.
We made clear this should happen through the political process in Geneva.
But we are working to see if we can't get Russia to be more cooperative in terms of driving towards a political resolution there that would take.
And I'm way more interested in this than I thought I would.
What we'll do is we're going to take a break.
The White House, by the way, the President is expected, he's been meeting with European leaders, issues of trade, and of course, the pastor, this pastor has been held hostage for a long period of time, has been released from Turkey.
And his name is Andrew Brunson.
By the way, Jay Seculo is representative all this time.
And that's really big news, actually.
And thank goodness we may get an update on that.
You know, I didn't think I wanted to air that much of this.
This is getting fascinating.
Not only is the Secretary of State Pompeo talking about Russia, but Iran and North Korea will monitor that.
The President is expected to make an announcement as it relates to EU trade, which is amazing.
And that American pastor, Andrew Brunson, has been released from Turkey.
We've got a lot of news to get to.
Straight ahead.
All right, hour two, Sean Hannity.
Show we're waiting.
The White House is going to have some announcement.
I think it's going to have to do with the concessions that the President has secured from the Europeans to avoid a trade war.
And this is interesting because I'm looking at it, and this is pretty amazing.
And it's what I said would happen.
How many times, Linda, did I not say over and over again, there's not going to be a trade war?
The president's negotiating.
Well, we now have some of the details that finally emerged and that the president secured concessions from Europe.
There's not going to be a trade war.
Dow Jones reporting, and it just came before the Trump European Commission president.
You know, they're going to have this joint presser coming up.
And the major averages rallied on the news.
Nobody, he negotiates.
It's what he does.
And anyway, so the NASDAQ went up about 1%.
The Dow Industrial went up about a half a percent.
Way to these GDP numbers on Friday are going to be pretty amazing from all indications.
We'll see for the second quarter.
But here's what the President got.
The Europeans agreed to lower industrial tariffs and import more U.S. soybeans.
The Europeans agreed to work on more U.S. liquefied natural gas exports.
And Trump also said he's hoping to work something out on a fair trade deal with Europe.
And they're going to have probably more details when they speak.
We're literally watching a little box outside of the White House.
I think it's on the South Lawn.
And in the meantime, we got news today, and I think this is great news.
I've known about this case forever.
We've talked about this case.
And that is the American pastor, his name is Andrew Brunson, U.S. citizen from North Carolina, spent nearly 21 months imprisoned in Turkey because he's a Christian.
And the pastor has been on trial for the crime of Christianization.
And our friend Jay Sekulo in the American Center for Law and Justice, we have confirmed that the Turkish government has now issued an order releasing Pastor Andrew Brunson from prison, allowing him to be returned to his home in Turkey.
This is the first critical step that we believe will result in the freedom of Pastor Brunson so he can return to the United States and be reunited with his family.
And while all of this is going on, a really contentious hearing with the Senate and the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
And let's go back to that and we'll go to the White House when that announcement happens.
Thoughts on that?
So I have a personal experience.
I had a private conversation with North Koreans.
We didn't issue a readout on the conversations quite intentionally.
And the North Korean press chose to characterize it.
We thought it was in America's best interest not to respond tit for tat about the nature of that conversation.
We knew the truth.
We knew what had taken place there.
And, you know, it's the North Korean press, and so I assume that most reasonable people will discount it fairly significantly in the same way that one might the Russian press.
These are important decisions about how much disclosed about private conversations we're had because everyone knows that you may have an expectation that you'll have another private conversation one day.
And the absence of their belief that that private conversation has the capacity to remain in that space reduces the freedom to have those conversations.
I know you've had this in your life too, Senator.
I know you've had private conversations and you valued them.
It was just you and someone else in that room and it was important.
And you didn't give anyone a readout from it because you wanted to have the chance to do that again because you thought you could make real progress with that person.
Let's talk about North Korea.
You brought it up.
You mentioned that you traveled to North Korea to continue on, as you put it, I guess, to follow up on commitments made in Singapore.
Let's talk about those commitments for a minute.
You mentioned that they have committed to denuclearization.
They may have a different readout than we do on what that entails.
But so far, they seem to be walking back any commitment, a real commitment that was made there.
What commitment, firm commitment, other than discussion of returning remains, I'm not discounting that, but in terms of denuclearization, what real commitments were made?
Yeah, I'm not going to get into the private commitments that have been shared.
I don't think it's fair to characterize them walking back from commitments.
Remember where we were, right?
So it all depends what you draw as the projected line to say, are we in a better place or a worse place than we would have been absent the Singapore summit?
One can draw a counterfactual reference.
We'll never know where we might have been.
But I will concede there is an awful long way to go.
I'm not trying to oversell the accomplishments that we've had towards the path of denuclearization to date.
There remains a great deal of work to do.
It will be highly contested.
That is, the modalities, the means, the timing of this will be things that I'm confident we'll be discussing for a period of time.
There have been public reports, and I know the United States is tracking the disassembly of a missile engine test site, something that Chairman Kim committed orally.
It wasn't in the written agreement itself, but Chairman Kim committed in his conversation with President Trump to do.
They're beginning to dismantle that.
It has to do with their missile program.
It's a good thing.
Steps forward.
Okay, thank you.
Quickly, before the time is out, something completely different.
The country of Rwanda right now, and you may be familiar with this because of this week's focus on religious freedom, has indicated a move toward severe restrictions on religious freedom, particularly from outside groups.
What are the plans of the State Department to let them know that that is not in their own interest nor ours?
Senator, I share your concerns.
I'll need to get back to you in terms of what actions we think we take.
I know we'll call it out.
I know we'll label it for what it is.
We do need to see what we, it is tragic.
And anyway, I share your concerns, Senator.
It's a huge challenge for us.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Senator Kaine.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Secretary, just a couple of thoughts.
I was very discouraged at the Helsinki summit when the President basically was offered a choice in some of the questions.
Did he believe U.S. Intel or did he believe Vladimir Putin's protestations that he had engaged in hacking of the election?
And he basically said, my own people have made a great case to me.
Vladimir Putin has made a great case to me.
I don't see why Russia would have done this.
He came back and corrected it the next day in the United States, but at the end he said, I believe my Intel community, but there's a lot of people out there.
It could have been someone else.
And then this dragged on for a couple of days.
You know where I live.
You know I have a lot of constituents who used to be your employees at the CIA.
People come up to me all the time in Virginia and say, I'm with the IC, and they are very demoralized by this.
They're very demoralized that when standing next to Vladimir Putin, the President's words were to suggest that he trusted Vladimir Putin over them.
There was the suggestion when President Trump said it was an incredible offer about Ambassador McFaul that he was also potentially willing to throw not just Intel folks under the bus, but State Department diplomats under the bus.
They live in Virginia, too.
They feel the demoralization of your comments today that we're going to go to bad for current or former, that's very, very helpful.
But what I want to ask you about is our military and our military leadership.
There was an article yesterday in the Washington Post.
General Joseph F. Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as of Monday, Dunford still hadn't been briefed on Helsinki, even though it directly affects more than one million troops Dunford overseas.
Do you know why there would have been no briefing of General Dunford about the discussions that took place at Helsinki?
Senator, you have to ask the Department of Defense or Chairman Dumford.
But you don't dispute that that was ⁇ you have no knowledge that there was a briefing of General Dunford today about the Helsinki discussion, do you?
Senator, you just read me a piece from the Washington Post.
Yeah, but I'm asking your knowledge.
Do you have any knowledge that the administration has shared discussions about U.S.-Russia military issues with the head of the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff?
I've actually spoken with Chairman Dunford about it.
I was with him yesterday in a series of meetings, and we had a chance to have a conversation about it, yes.
Okay, so about our plan.
Absolutely.
Okay, so yesterday may have been the first time he was briefed about it.
I want to ask about General Votel, the information that Gene Shaheen, Senator Shaheen, mentioned earlier.
He expressed wariness about working with Russia and the Russian Defense Ministry.
This is an interesting statement.
They went after General Votel, the head of CENTCOM, who oversees, as you know, U.S. military operations in the Middle East, including Syria.
Quote, with his statements, General Votel not only discredited the official position of his Supreme Commander-in-Chief.
Are you aware what the official position is that is being referenced in that statement?
You'd have to speak with the Russian Ministry of Defense to know what it was he was referring to.
But you can understand why we're concerned.
If it's being reported in Russian presses, Secretary Flake and Senator Flake and Senator Shaheen said that they're talking about official positions that the President has outlined.
As far as you know, General Votel's statements did not violate any official position in the United States, did they?
You seem to be giving a great deal of credit to the Russian Ministry of Defense for truthfulness.
Let me ask you about General Votel.
I might not share that same.
Let me ask you about General Votel.
I have great belief in his truthfulness.
So you do not believe that any of the statements that he's made, including those that I read, violate any official position in the United States, do you?
If you would, that's the best approach to General Votel, the Department of Defense.
I mean, we're now three orders removed.
If I could introduce for the record, there's an interesting article in BuzzFeed News just recently, today, that just lists a whole series of headlines.
And I think these are instructive, Mr. Chair.
Trump's announcement that he will end U.S. Korea drills catches Pentagon off guard.
Pentagon and Seoul, surprised by Trump pledged to halt military exercises.
Pentagon caught off guard by Space Force announcement.
Trump signals withdrawal very soon of U.S. troops from Syria, surprising Pentagon and State Department.
Pentagon caught by surprise by Trump's travel ban pushes for some Iraqis to get special consideration.
U.S. Joint Chiefs blindsided by Trump's transgender ban.
NORTHCOM caught off guard as Trump orders troops to U.S.-Mexico border.
If I could introduce this for the record, Mr. Chair.
I worry about an administration that would take the Putin position over our Intel community.
I worry about the administration that would suggest it might be a great deal to consider handing over a former diplomat for questioning.
I worry about an administration that is catching the Pentagon off guard, that is not consulting with General Dunford or briefing him for a week after a summit of this importance to our military.
Mr. Secretary, you're aware of the NDAA prohibition, the current prohibition on Russian and military, Russian and U.S. joint military operations, are you not?
I'm aware of the existence of that provision, yes.
The provision prohibits any use of funds, it's in the NDA, any use of funds to support joint Russia and U.S. military operations, and it also gives the Secretary of Defense the ability to undertake a national security waiver if he thinks that that's the right idea.
Does the administration accept the legality and binding nature of that provision of law?
Senator Hyde.
I think the DOD general counsel will be the right person.
We're going to step back from this Pompeo hearing with the Senate and the President meeting with European leaders and has come to a trade deal as he takes to the podium.
Deal potentially with John Bozeman.
John, you're here someplace.
Hi, John.
Thank you.
Senator Mike Crapo.
Thank you, Mike.
Senator Steve Daines.
Senator Hovind.
Thank you.
They're all here.
Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith.
Cindy, thank you very much.
Senator James Lang.
All right, we're going to stay with this as the president, the European Union president, literally his name is Junker.
He's now at the podium with the President as they announce these trade deals and trade talks.
The EC President.
Thank you.
Representative Kevin Brady with our new tax bill.
How's it coming, Kevin Good?
Representative Mike Conaway.
Mike.
Thank you, Mike.
Representative Dan Newhouse.
Thank you, Dan.
Representative Christy Norm.
I have to call her governor now.
That was a great win.
Thank you, Christy.
Representative David Reichert.
David, thank you.
So we had a big day, very big.
We met right here at the White House to launch a new phase in the relationship between the United States and the European Union, a phase of close friendship, of strong trade relations in which both of us will win, of working better together for global security and prosperity, and of fighting jointly against terrorism.
The United States and the European Union together count for more than 830 million citizens and more than 50% of the global GDP.
In other words, together we're more than 50% of trade.
If we team up, we can make our planet a better, more secure, and more prosperous place.
Already today, the United States and the European Union have a $1 trillion bilateral trade relationship, the largest economic relationship anywhere in the world.
We want to further strengthen this trade relationship to the benefit of all American and European citizens.
This is why we agreed today, first of all, to work together towards zero tariffs, zero non-tariff barriers, and zero subsidies on non-auto industrial goods.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
We will also work to reduce barriers and increase trade in services, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, medical products, as well as soybeans.
Soybeans is a big deal.
And the European Union is going to start almost immediately to buy a lot of soybeans.
They're a tremendous market.
Buy a lot of soybeans from our farmers in the Midwest primarily.
So I thank you for that, John Lord.
This will open markets for farmers and workers, increase investment, and lead to greater prosperity in both the United States and the European Union.
It will also make trade fairer and more reciprocal, my favorite word, reciprocal.
Secondly, we agreed to a strengthen and strengthening of our strategic cooperation with respect to energy.
The European Union wants to import more liquefied natural gas, LNG, from the United States, and they're going to be a very, very big buyer.
We're going to make it much easier for them, but they're going to be a massive buyer of LNG, so they'll be able to diversify their energy supply, which they want very much to do, and we have plenty of it.
Thirdly, we agreed today to launch a close dialogue on standards in order to ease trade, reduce bureaucratic obstacles, and slash costs dramatically.
Fourthly, we agreed to join forces to protect American and European companies from better and really better than ever.
We've never done like we're doing, I can say from the standpoint of the United States, we've never done this well, but we're going to do a lot better after we do this deal and other deals that we're currently working on.
Likewise, the European Union is going to do better, stronger, bigger.
We will therefore work closely together with like-minded partners to reform the WTO and to address unfair trading practices, including intellectual property theft, forced technology transfer, industrial subsidies, distortions created by state-owned enterprises, and overcapacity.
We decided to set up immediately an executive working group of very intelligent people on both sides.
They'll be our closest advisors, and they're going to carry out this joint agenda.
In addition, it will identify short-term measures to facilitate commercial exchanges and assess existing tariff measures and what we can do about that to the betterment of both.
While we are working on this, we will not go against the spirit of this agreement unless either party terminates the negotiation.
So we're starting the negotiation right now, but we know very much where it's going.
We also will resolve the steel and aluminum tariff issues, and we will resolve retaliatory tariffs.
We have some tariffs that are retaliatory, and that will get resolved as part of what we're doing.
And with that, Jean-Claude, please.
Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, when I was invited by the President to the White House, I had one intention.
I had the intention to make a deal today.
And we made a deal today.
We have identified a number of areas on which to work together, work towards zero tariffs on industrial goods.
That was my main intention, to propose to come down to zero tariffs on industrial goods.
We've decided to strengthen our cooperation on energy.
The EU will build more terminals to import liquefied natural gas from the U.S.
This is also a message for others.
We agreed to establish a dialogue on standards.
As far as agriculture is concerned, the European Union can import more soybeans from the US and it will be done.
And we also agreed to work together on the reform of the WTA.
This, of course, is on the understanding that as long as we are negotiating, unless one party would stop the negotiations, we hold off further tariffs and we reassess existing tariffs on steel and aluminium.
This was a good, constructive meeting.
Thank you, Donald.
Well, thank you very much, Jean-Claude.
I just want to conclude by saying this was a very big day for free and fair trade.
Very big day indeed.
Thank you very much, everybody.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right, that's the EC President Junker.
The EU can import more soybeans.
They're going to try and get natural gas.
A trade war looks like it's averted.
And the U.S. and Europe working towards zero imports, et cetera, et cetera.
Now, It's pretty interesting because the president was especially looking out in both cases for energy, the industrial concessions that they gave too, and energy as it relates to natural gas, which, by the way, would be in Europe's best interest for national security purposes.
You know, it's hard.
I got to make editorial decisions here.
And these hearings with Secretary of State Pompeo were so good.
What just happened is frankly amazing development and great for the economy.
And probably a preview of what's going to happen with other countries.
But after the president met with European leaders earlier today and demanding a fair trade deal, yeah, he actually got them to step up to the plate.
I mean, you know, because the president had put tariffs on imported steel, aluminum, saying that they pose a threat to national security.
And he also threatened to slap tariffs on cars.
Nobody wants a trade war.
By the way, the president never wanted a trade war, but nobody's ever stood up to these countries and said, yeah, we want fair trade.
We want something fair.
And the president's been pushing the EU, which includes many of our oldest and, yeah, most committed allies, the same people that don't pay their fair share as it relates to NATO, even though it's defense for them.
And they were warning they were going to retaliate on American products with $20 billion if Trump puts duties, et cetera, et cetera.
But, well, it looks like now the concessions that Trump secured is now avoided the trade war that everybody in the media was predicting.
Just like they predicted doom and gloom over North Korea, little rocket man, fire and fury, and my button's bigger than yours, and mine actually works.
Just like they did with Vladimir Putin and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said, no, we're not taking sanctions off of Putin and Russia, and nor are we going to recognize the annexation of Crimea.
But now the Europeans are agreed to lower their industrial tariffs, import more U.S. soybeans, which helps our farmers.
Also, the industrial concessions the president got, that helps in steel and aluminum.
And then, of course, the Europeans are agreeing now to take in more U.S. liquid natural gas exports.
And if the president had followed the advice of everybody else, don't rock the boat, we wouldn't have gotten these trade concessions.
So somebody's fighting for American workers here.
And I know it's a little uncomfortable when you get in a fight.
I know it's uncomfortable when you say that this isn't fair and we expect reciprocity and we're tired of one-sided deals and you got to wait it out and everybody's sweating.
Well, but it helps America.
It helps people in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and all these other states.
Anyway, so it was pretty interesting to watch this joint presser with this guy Junker from the European Union who was representing them and he made his first visit to the White House.
The guy's name is the European Commissioner President.
His name is Jean-Claude Junker.
And anyway, so they finally spoke and yeah, they reached their goal.
And that's now good for the American workforce.
And then everybody that predicted a trade war now has egg on their face again.
Just like they said the economy is not going to work.
Let's find out what the second quarter GDP is going to be on Friday.
Because Barclays had it at 5.3%.
I don't think it's going to be that high.
But remember, Obama never had a single year at 3% GDP growth, the only president in history.
And we can see the growth of the economy.
The Fed saying that it's roaring at this particular point.
Wall Street reacting positively, the Dow up 200.
And then we've got NASDAQ up, you know, literally 100.
It's all good news for investors on top of the, you know, there's always going to be, I'm not the big stock market guy.
I don't trust the stock market.
So you've got all that good news today.
We've got in Turkey an American pastor.
His name is Andrew Brunson.
Jay Secular, the American Center for Law and Justice, have been representing him, and the Turkish government has finally issued an order to release him from prison.
He's returned to his home in Turkey, and it's the first step towards bringing him home to the United States.
That's big news.
Then you've got Mike Pompeo just laying out senator after senator.
And we're going to dip back into these hearings.
Senator Ram Paul is up now with the Secretary of State.
We're going to move on to other issues probably at the top of the next hour because, you know, this is where I'm balancing all this news breaking today.
Let's listen in.
Instead of a smaller group of issues, we have a bigger group of issues.
The nuclear issues are back on the table if we have to renegotiate the nuclear agreement and the ballistic missile issue.
And the point that I think that we need to think through in discussions with Iran is that I think Iran, from their perspective, would see getting rid of their ballistic missile program as basically unilateral surrender.
It's not my viewpoint.
I think it's what I believe to be their viewpoint.
I think they also see Saudi Arabia as a great adversary, and I think they see Israel as a potential adversary.
And so I don't think unless, you know, it would be great if you got all three to come together and have a multilateral agreement on not developing nuclear weapons and not having ballistic missiles, I don't see the other two coming to the table, frankly, to do that.
And so I think in moving forward, I think it's just important that you understand this isn't going to be easy.
The first Iran agreement also was a multilateral agreement.
You had multilateral sanctions.
You now have more unilateral sanctions, and you're going to have a unilateral agreement that's sort of your own agreement.
So I just think we shouldn't be so optimistic.
And I guess I'd like to hear from you.
How do you, what makes you believe that Iran will come to the table to discuss ballistic missiles?
Senator, I'm under no illusions about how important Iran views its ballistic missile program.
I agree with you there.
The question for President Trump faced was, was the JCOPA good enough?
He concluded it wasn't remotely good enough.
I think he said it was one of the worst deals in history.
I don't want to get the language wrong.
And so he concluded we would find ourselves in a better place with an opportunity to revisit all of these issues, the broad spectrum of issues, not just the nuclear portfolio, but the missile program, their malign activity around the world, all of them in a package.
It did accept the understanding that there would be those that wouldn't come alongside of us.
But you should know there is a coalition.
It's not America and America alone.
We have others who believe that this was the right decision too.
The Israelis, the Saudis, the Emiratis, the Bahrainis, other smaller European governments, not the E3 themselves.
But there are a number of folks who are beginning to coalesce around an understanding of how we can appropriately respond to Iran to take down the nuclear risk to the United States as well as the risk from these other malign activities.
Thank you.
Senator Udall.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Secretary Pompeo, for your service.
Secretary Pompeo, we have quite the record of President Trump's business relations with Russia.
Extensive reporting and public records show a large amount of money from former Soviet states and Russia into Trump projects.
Trump International Tower and Hotel in Toronto, the Trump Hotel in Panama, the Trump project in Soho and New York City are a few of the big examples here.
And here's another one.
Russian oligarch bought a property from President Trump for 95, candidate Trump at the time, or maybe a little before, for $95 million in 2008, less than four years after President Trump paid $41 million.
So he more than doubled this money.
Donald Trump Jr. in 2008 stated at a real estate conference in New York, and I quote here, Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets, end quote.
Donald Trump tried to build a Trump tower in Moscow for 30 years.
He even tweeted in 2013, Trump Tower Moscow is next.
That's in quotes.
In 2015, answering a question from indicted Russian operative and alleged spy Maria Butina, candidate Trump made clear his desires with Russia, stating, I would get along well with Putin and that I don't think we need the sanctions.
Now, the Russian ambassador to the United States has said the President made, and this is his quote, important verbal agreements with President Putin.
And he seems to know more about Helsinki and what happened there than the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
As we saw in Helsinki and throughout his presidency and the campaign, this President is extremely sympathetic to the very Russian government that attacked and continues to attack our democracy and those of our allies.
It's a fact of political life today that many Americans are concerned about the unthinkable that a U.S. President could have compromised a compromising relationship with a foreign power.
President could clear this all up in three simple ways, releasing his tax returns and those of the Trump organization and the taxes from the various family businesses, some of which we don't even know about.
After Helsinki, do you think that the American people deserve to know what's in President Trump's tax returns and business interests that are intertwined with Russia?
Senator, I'm going to try to stay out of the same political circus that you and I ended up in last time I was sitting here and simply respond by saying this same president with which you seem to express such deep concern is engaged in a massive defense buildup which threatens Vladimir Putin's regime.
He instructed us to put together a nuclear posture review that has set Vladimir Putin on his ear because of its robustness and the recapitalization of our nuclear program.
He has kicked out 60 spies.
We have banned Kaspersky.
We put $11 billion in the European defense.
No, no, no, but you have already answered my question, so let me try it a little different way.
Wouldn't you want to know as Secretary of State, I mean, I am taking you in your sincerity here as Secretary of State, whether all these Russian financial interests oligarchs and others are part of the decision-making of the President.
I mean, wouldn't you want that out in the open and to understand what went on at Helsinki?
It sits an easy kind of yes or no question.
Senator, I don't need secondhand understandings of what President Trump is instructing his administration to do to push back against Rust.
I have first-hand understandings and directives.
Let me ask the question a little bit about the Speaker.
We have opposed Nord Stream 2.
We have got a 4 by 30 out of NATO that also is a big setback for Russia.
I mean, I am happy to continue the list.
I am happy to see her there, but I will submit the entirety of this administration's actions against Russia for the record, if I might pull back a truck up and get it on in here.
Candidate Trump has failed to keep his promise to disclose his tax returns.
Every presidential candidate since Richard Nixon has disclosed.
Jimmy Carter even sold his peanut farm to avoid a conflict of interest.
The situation with President Trump's potential foreign policy conflicts of interest is unprecedented and unacceptable.
And under the Emoluments Clause, I think it's unconstitutional as well.
But let me just ask a couple of questions about Helsinki.
You talked about what you were tasked with.
The Director of National Intelligence Coates stated that at the Aspen Security Forum that he did not know what happened during the one-on-one meeting in Helsinki.
Did the President personally debrief you on this conversation?
Are you 100 percent confident that you know everything that President Trump discussed with President Putin?
That's a very reason yes or no.
If you don't want to answer it, I'll move on to the next one.
Yes or a no?
I'm very confident that I received a comprehensive debriefing from President Trump.
Good.
Okay.
Now, do you know for a fact whether President Trump or President Putin discussed any investments in Trump properties or any Trump projects such as the previous attempt to build a Trump real estate project in Moscow?
Senator, again, I'm going to try and stay out of the political circus.
No, but were you tasked with that?
You gave us a list of what you were saying.
I came here to talk about American foreign policy today.
I have attempted to articulate President Trump's business interests are entwined, sir, with our foreign policy.
Yes, a foreign policy that has led to a massive defense buildup, a nuclear posture review that has frightened Vladimir Putin, 60 spies, I mean, 219, 213 sanctions.
Let me also ask you about an additional question on Helsinki.
When I was a member of Congress, I tried desperately to get President Obama to do one of those things.
When President Trump hosted top Russian officials at the White House last year, he bragged about how he had fired James Comey.
At his press conference with Putin, President Trump called Special Counselor Mueller's investigation a disaster for the country.
Can you tell us what President Trump discussed about the investigation during his private meeting with President Tumpa?
I'm not going to talk about private policy.
Were you tasked with anything in that respect?
Senator, when I'm tasked about something for American foreign policy, I promise you this committee will know.
Okay, and you weren't tasked with anything there.
Senator, when I am tasked with something by the President that relates to foreign policy, I assure you that this committee will be made aware of it.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Senator Gardner.
I want to do that round upon.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your service to the country and your time with us today.
When you were last here, I asked you a question about whether or not you agreed with Secretary Mattis that North Korea is the most urgent security threat the United States faces in light of recent developments.
Do you still agree with that at the time you said that you did?
Yeah, it's still a real priority.
We also talked about what do you believe it's the most urgent national security threat?
I do.
But having said that, I don't recall the precise timing when I was here.
I think it was in April, perhaps.
Yeah, so it is.
The fact that we're having conversations and we haven't had additional missile tests and nuclear testing.
All right, we're going to leave it there.
We'll have full coverage of this.
Fascinating hearings all day today as it relates to Secretary of State Pompeo.
I'm not going to turn this into the circus that it was the last time I was here.
He's got some great answers.
He really has been handling himself well.
We'll show you the highlights tonight.
Also, media breathless hysteria about everything.
But great news as it relates to the not going to be a trade war with Europe, that also coming out today.
This American pastor held, what, two years, 21 months, in prison in Turkey because The crime of Christianization.
He's actually now been set free, and now we just got to get him back to the U.S.
So we'll get to all that.
Sean Spicer comes up in the next hour of the program.
And, you know, they had to cancel his book event because of the environment in Massachusetts.
Unbelievable.
Please don't just come here today and then go home.
Go to the hill today.
Get up and please get up in the face of some congresspeople.
If you take me around, you're now you ain't seen nothing yet.
Oh, yadda.
You have members of your cabinet that have been booed out of restaurants.
This is taking up at the house.
God is on our side.
On the side of the children.
On the side of what's right.
That if we can't protect the children, we can't protect anybody.
And so let's save the cause.
Let's make sure we show up wherever we have to show up.
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.
They're not welcome any more.
Get in their faces.
Remember, Obama said that.
We'll send Mr. Burgess tear up Sean Hannity.
But think about this.
Cabinet members, oh, we're talking about Secretary Nielsen.
We're talking about Pam Bondi.
We're talking about Sarah Sanders.
You know, we're talking about, I mean, it's never been this bad.
And then you got so-called leaders of Congress encouraging this.
Our friend Sean Spicer has a brand new book out.
It's actually phenomenal.
I've been reading it.
It's great.
It's called The Briefing.
And anyway, he shares a lot of the stories in his new book, but he just actually had a book tour stop canceled at what's called Massachusetts BJ's Wholesale Club over apparent concerns about the political climate, which, by the way, is pretty bad out there.
And anyway, Mr. Spicer, so tell us about what happened here because I thought in America you're actually allowed to go out and do book tours and you should be able to do so in a safe environment.
Obviously, they don't think it's particularly safe in light of what I guess we just heard in past instances.
Good afternoon, Sean.
Thanks for having me.
I don't know exactly what's changed in the last few days.
We've got, I think it's close to 50 book stops on the book tour right now.
I've sold out a stop in San Francisco, another one in California.
We've got three in Rhode Island in the next couple of days.
But for some reason, these guys pulled back and said that they wanted to, because of the political climate, didn't want to go through with it.
I think it's unfortunate that the left is able to do that and try.
I mean, if you notice, every time someone comes out with something that talks about what really happened during the election, which is, you know, my book, I think, pulls back the curtain on what was going on during the campaign and the convention and the first key months of this new administration.
I think there's an attempt to try to silence.
The left is trying to silence our voices on this.
And, you know, God bless your outlet and others, your show and others, for actually engaging in discourse on such these important matters.
But I'm just, I'm literally shocked that the left is, that always talks about transparency and engaging, you know, literally wants to shut down the discourse.
Well, look, this has been now a little secret that we conservatives have known about for years, and that is, you know, all started on left-wing college campuses where they wouldn't even let conservatives speak or talk.
You know, look, your book is phenomenal.
The briefing, politics, the press, the president.
But, you know, everybody kind of forgets that these are real people.
Sarah Sanders has real children in her particular case getting thrown out of a restaurant because she works for the president and you don't like her views.
I'm in business.
If I owned a restaurant, I'd say, oh, welcome to the restaurant.
Can I get you a drink?
That's, you know, whoever walks in, who cares?
You know, their money's as good as anybody's.
But, I mean, that's just one indicator of how bad things are.
But now people are being told.
Really, you were at the tipping point of all of this in your work in the campaign.
And then you became the first press secretary for Donald Trump.
And then it was, you know, full-on attacks all over pop culture, Saturday Night Live, you know, culminating, I guess, in your cameo at the Emmys.
But it does take a toll on an individual.
And you have a family and you have friends and they're watching you go through this every day.
Yeah, I mean, look, Sean, I talk about this extensively at the book.
I didn't think it's appropriate as a spokesman to go out there and be talking about, you know, exactly the intensity that the job had and the toll that it's taking, because that's not why you're there and you're there to serve the president of the United States and further his policies and advance his agenda and make sure that you're conveying what his views are.
But, you know, I talk about one instance in the book where I tell people, you know, a bunch of folks on the left put my house up for sale on Zillow.
You know, my wife gives me a call and says, you know, what do we do?
And, you know, it's that kind of, you know, intimidation.
It's that kind of attempt to go after people that I just, it's amazing to me if anyone on the right, if you or I, and shoot, we've had our own experiences where they attack and criticize and scrutinize every single thing we do.
Somebody does, you know, goes after us on the left, and it's excused.
Well, you know, they always talk about, oh, well, they had to do it, or here's why it's not that bad.
You played the clips at the beginning of the show, or this segment rather, about them, them talking about getting in people's faces, pushing back, resisting.
I mean, we have now gone from peaceful protesting and expressing ourselves peacefully to now trying to encourage and incite intimidation and potentially violence in some cases.
You know, why is it that I, in many ways, for myself, and I'm speaking for me, and I get all of this, believe me, and I've had it going on for a long, long time, but I also kind of view it that I signed up for it.
In other words, you know what?
I purposely went into radio.
I give four hours of opinions every day.
I know there are people that don't like me personally, don't like my opinions, and they still listen, a lot of them, or some never listen and they just have false impressions.
But, you know, I feel like you or Sarah Sanders, you're doing a job as a White House spokesperson, and they want to engage and fight you at a level that I've never seen before.
And by the way, that job has always been horrible.
It's the worst job in any administration, which is me, you were crazy to take it.
Well, it was an honor and a privilege to do it.
And part of the reason I wrote the book is to give people an insight into what it's like, what it's like to do that job every day, what it's like to get there, how I grew up in Rhode Island and ended up standing in front of the podium serving the president of the United States.
But I wanted to be able to pull back a curtain.
And also, I think the other thing is, and here's why I thought it was really important.
If you go through this section on the campaign and it talks about how the RNC and the campaign were working together and the data that it saw, the media will have you believe that every reason in the world, as many as Hillary's gone through, is why Donald Trump's elected.
There is actual decisions that people like Brad Carscales and others during the campaign were making decisions based on sound data.
We knew where to send our team.
And I wanted to codify that so that people could look at that and say, see, these guys actually ran a smart campaign.
They had a great data operation.
They had a smart field operation, going door to door, bringing people to the polls, getting them to cast absentee ballots or vote early.
But the reality is that it was a well-run machine.
The media didn't want to talk about it.
They don't want to acknowledge it.
I needed to write this book to make sure that history recorded how well that operation actually worked.
How has this impacted your own family?
Because one of the facts that I found out, and I think I had known it and forgotten it, because I lived five years in Warren, Rhode Island, which is the adjacent town of where you grew up in Barrington.
And, you know, the three towns, actually, you know, Barrington, Warren, and Bristol is sort of like the midway point or Portsmouth between Newport and Providence, which people would know.
And I know that, like, Bristol has the biggest Fourth of July parade I've ever seen in my life.
I mean, it's really amazing.
And Barrington is an amazing place as well.
Right.
And so, and I, and we had that in common, and it's like, you know, this is, you know, small town USA, and then you find yourself standing at that podium.
Well, the irony for both of us, too, is that it's not exactly the hotbed of conservative or Republican.
Oh, no, not at all.
And so I get a kick out of, you know, when people ask me, I just never thought it was possible to get this because of where I came from, my background.
And I constantly pinched myself when I was at the White House going, this is an honor that I never thought was possible considering where I was from.
My background, my parents weren't political.
We weren't well connected.
But I had a great family that was.
But you also served in the military.
You have a very strong family.
Yes.
And again, what I loved about writing this book, Sean, was the ability to share that with others.
People ask me all the time, what was the greatest thing you liked about serving in the White House?
And honest to God, the best part was sharing it, whether it was family, friends, or sometimes there's like a complete stranger on a tour and I could that said, hey, can I, is there any way I can see the briefing or whatever?
And they might forget who I was, but they will never forget that moment.
And to make their lives have that special moment was something that I always will treasure.
That was awesome.
Being able to share it, knowing how special it was for me and being able to write a book that talked about my trajectory from growing up in Rhode Island to ending up at the White House, it really is special to be able to share those experiences with others.
You know, look, I know it's been hard in particular.
What would you want people to know about Donald Trump being so close to him in the campaign and in the White House that they don't know?
Because there's an image of the president that I know is very different than the man.
And the guy that I saw in the campaign and know as president, I mean, if you read the, if you listen to the media, which is now all opinion, there's no reporting anymore.
This is all a bias against him I've never seen in my life.
And under the so-called guise of journalism, what would you want people to know?
Two things.
Number one, when it comes to the man, I write about this extensively, both personally in interactions that we had and watching him deal with some others.
He can be unbelievably empathetic and caring and concerned.
It's a side that doesn't get out.
Number two, there's this view that I get in a lot of interviews that, you know, I heard he doesn't listen to anybody, and nothing could be further from the truth.
He invites input.
He wants a rigorous debate on the issues, but ultimately he's the decider.
And I think what happens is often the media says, well, because they don't like the outcome, that clearly he didn't listen to anybody.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
He invites critique, debate.
He encourages it to hear from all sides.
But ultimately, yes, he does make that decision and makes it clear once he's heard everything.
And I think those are the two big takeaways that I have.
What do you make of this tape that was released by Michael Cohn of him and then candidate Trump?
Honestly, you know, I look at it, obviously the content piece of it, which is what everyone's talking about.
I'm really disappointed that somebody that he trusted is running around taping him.
I just, I think that that is a betrayal of trust that I wouldn't do.
I think it's a betrayal of trust.
The idea that you're secretly doing this is something that I'm rather disgusted with.
Yeah.
As for the substance of it, I mean, a lot of this was known as far as I'm concerned.
I didn't see every legal scholar on TV, but we're in an environment.
I don't care if it's the Putin press conference or maybe after that, the idea that John Brennan, a former communist that is calling the president treasonous, might lose his security clearance, which I think he should, or this particular tape and the media's reaction to it.
I mean, it is head-on, non-stop, you know, just go for the juggular every second of every day hysteria.
You lived it in that room.
I mean, I watched the exchanges.
I'm like, again, I'll debate anybody, but I couldn't do your job without telling them to go blank off.
But here's the thing.
It didn't start then.
It started well before then.
And that's the thing.
I think everyone wants to look at everything in isolation.
I walked through this in the book, that this was something that started well before he became the nominee, that this idea of taking him down and coming after him in very, very personal and visceral ways and then anybody around him started well before that.
And what happens is everybody wants to stop and say, well, this all began with Donald Trump's inauguration.
It didn't.
It happened well before this.
It happened the day that he and Melania came down the escalator at Trump Towers.
All right, stay right there.
Sean Spicer with us.
His new book is out, and he's obviously in an environment where I guess people are afraid to talk.
It's called The Briefing, Politics, The Press, and the President.
And it's on Amazon.com, Hannity.com, bookstores everywhere.
And as we continue, Sean Spicer with us, his brand new book, The Briefing, Politics, The Press, and the President.
All right, so let's talk about some of the people in that room you saw every day, you know, like Jim Acosta, as if he's a real objective and balanced reporter.
I don't, you know, how do you deal with somebody that obviously has an agenda, obviously wants to pick a fight, so it's on TV that night?
What do you do?
I mean, I think what I really thought was concerning me is that the behavior that he exhibited, the antics, I think are unbecoming.
I think if you're a journalist and you don't call that out and say that's not representative of who we are, our industry, and how we should act, that's the biggest problem there.
I think Acosta gets away with it because his colleagues not only encourage it, but tolerate it.
And the idea that that's why that's how a journalist should act.
I mean, when a conservative did this to Obama in the Rose Garden, the media called it out and said that it was unbecoming.
But now when Acosta does it on a daily basis, and he did it last week to the president himself, he does it on a daily basis in the press briefing room, that it's tolerated and it's acceptable.
I don't know where we've lost the decorum in the press room that you raise your hand, you get called on.
There's a level of entitlement and elitism that he believes he is entitled to as many questions as he wants, as often as he wants, when he wants them.
And I think that that is unbelievable.
And it leads to the decay and why people really.
Now it's like a cancer that metastasized and spread all over the room.
I mean, I see it almost every day.
Well, listen, congratulations on the book.
Go to, when you're in Rhode Island, you want to go to the Black Pearl for their clam chowder.
It's my favorite place on earth.
And we always appreciate you being with us.
The book's phenomenal.
It's called The Briefing, Politics, The Press, The President.
We'll take a quick break.
We'll come back on the other side.
We'll get your calls in.
Final half hour.
Sean Hannity show straight ahead.
Top of the hour.
We're going to get to your calls here in just a second.
You know, one of the things that really ticked me off about the Republicans after seven and a half years of repeal, replace Obamacare, for 20 years we talked about big ideas like Musgrave and Goodman and patient power and healthcare savings accounts.
And, you know, for almost a decade for crying out loud, we've been harassing poor Josh Umber, the doctor down in Wichita, Kansas, as he was explaining the paradigm he created, which is a medical co-op where adults pay 50 bucks a month, kids 10 bucks a month, unlimited care.
He literally negotiates directly with the major pharmaceutical companies.
You leave the doctor's office with the medicine in hand, and at a 90% discount that he gives back to you, and he's not making money on this, but it is the best concierge care at the most affordable rate.
And if you couple that, your daily average medical needs with catastrophic insurance that would take care of a bad accident or, God forbid, a cancer or a heart attack or something horrible, well, then that would be covered, but you pay a low rate because, you know, as high as the deductible that you're willing to pay, but your everyday doctor needs are handled as an adult for 50 bucks a month.
There's now hundreds of these co-ops that he's helped develop around the country.
And apparently now they're at risk because of a bill that passed in the Senate, and I didn't even know about it.
And that's why I wanted to have you on.
Dr. Umber, how are you?
Yeah, thank you very well, Sean.
Thanks for having us.
And I appreciate you bringing attention to the cause.
Yeah, there was a bill that came out of Ways and Means Committee that's just maybe not great for supporting the direct care movement and patients overall.
And so a whole coalition of doctors have been working hard to try to educate legislators on the best way to move forward and ways to do it.
Well, who is responsible for this?
Because I know Ram Paul is very cooperative in the Senate for health care cooperatives.
And we're hoping to fix it in the Senate.
It came out of Ways and Means Committee.
And I think there was a bit of lobbying in the background by more corporate groups who are less standard DPC.
The only one you're lobbying for is the patient to get better care at a lower cost and concierge attention.
And, you know, for 50 bucks a month, I could see you every day of the week if I was in your co-op.
By the way, I would harass the living daylights out of you.
Oh, I banged my foot.
Oh, I banged my knee.
Oh, I got a bruise on my head.
Oh, Linda hit me again.
Those all might be connected.
Absolutely.
Yeah, the bill said for the sake of the federal definition that direct care is a form of insurance and then tried to give it an exemption as to not be regulated as insurance for the time being and then put some caps on how patients can use health savings dollars to pay for affordable care.
And it just completely messy and confuses the issue because we're clearly not insurance.
Insurance is insurance.
We're just doctors providing affordable care.
And so this really is a roadblock to patients being able to access just high quality, affordable care.
Have you gotten in touch with the Freedom Caucus guys?
Because they're the ones that I think would understand this the most and be able to help fix it for you.
Have you talked to any of them?
We are.
We're working diligently behind the scenes and working with John Goodman and other fathers of HSA to maximize this.
And I think we'll get there, but it's going to be, patients might need to really be involved and let their senators know that they want a free market in their health care system.
Well, we'll put up the number if people want to call just to save.
Listen, I don't care if they bring health care savings accounts in, which they should have done a long time ago.
Anything but Obamacare is going to be better.
But these healthcare cooperatives, it's the best idea I've ever seen in medicine.
And you know what?
I just know that all these other doctors that are duplicating your model and you're generously helping them, you're not getting paid for it.
Right.
It just shows how committed you are to healing your patients.
Anyway, 202-224-33121 is the number.
We'll put it up on Hannity.com.
Keep us in the loop.
And if you need any help getting in touch with these congressmen, let Linda, you know, we'll just open up the phones for her.
And they run for the hills.
Absolutely.
That's right, Josh.
I'm in your corner.
Right, Josh.
I'm in your corner.
Josh knows how I roll.
First of all, I roll harder than anybody.
I never tell lawyers either from Singapore.
That's right.
I'm fighting for the freedom of health care.
That's true.
That's it.
I mean, that's a great thing.
I mean, everybody can afford 50 bucks a month.
And that's the thing, in unlimited care, and it takes care of the blood pressure.
It takes care of cholesterol.
It takes care of cuts and bruises and even broken bones in most cases.
I mean, for crying out loud.
We've done all those things.
You know, I just, in fact, today we had a patient.
She's 21-year-old with a brain tumor.
Her insurance was charged $24,000 for a Medicaid.
They denied it.
We were able to get it down to $41 per treatment.
Over the course of the term, it'll be $1,900.
But, you know, that's what we're fighting for, the ability to help our patients.
And that's not partisan.
Josh, you got to say that again.
Can you just say those numbers again?
That is unbelievable.
Okay, is this your show or mine?
I'm just helping.
I'm just helping out.
I don't need your help.
It's a Sean Hannity show.
Go ahead.
Insurance was charged $24,000, and we can get it down to as low as $41 to treatment, but over the course of the six-month treatment.
Yeah, but you know what?
$200.
Why does the insurance companies embrace you?
I mean, that would be the best thing they ever did.
They should.
And I think often that's why we're confident we can fix a lot of this because we're on the right side of it.
Everybody wants to support affordable care, but we do got to get the legislators to be knowledgeable about how this system works and ultimately get employers and patients and then eventually insurance companies to see that we're all on the same side and we're innovating in the direction that helps patients improve access, lower costs, the really dramatic stuff here.
All right, appreciate it.
Dr. Umber, Atlas MD, Wichita, Kansas.
I wish you were in New York.
I would use you in a heartbeat, although one of my best friends is my doctor, so I couldn't leave him hanging.
I just harass him.
I just, you know, I sent him a picture the other day because, you know, my poor mother-in-law turned her ankle.
I'm like, what should she do?
What do you think?
He diagnosed it on the phone, and just to be safe, we go to her picture, but she's better now.
All right.
Thank you, sir.
Absolutely.
All right.
Appreciate it.
800 9.1.
Sean, let's go to, let's say, hi to, is it Howdy in Florida?
Howdy, how are you?
Hi, Sean.
How are you doing?
You're a great American.
I'm good, sir.
Thank you for joining us, and we appreciate you calling.
Great.
So keep it short and sweet.
Yes, sir.
What do you got?
Like Linda said, well, you know, I'm a problem solver, been a problem solver all my life.
And so I look at this problem of the whole FISA court and all that kind of stuff.
And I think that the recourse we should use is that the House of Representatives should impeach the FISA court to be able to flip it up into the open air so that the way that it does business shows up.
I mean, you got to know that in the first, what, 35 years, 38 years of the FISA court, they only turned back 12 applications.
And then somehow, mysteriously, in 2016 and 2017, they turned back 34 in each of those years.
But it's assuming, the FISA court assumes that the applicant has got the best interest of the United States and that they're honest.
Well, remember, it was first rejected, according to reports.
The only thing that put it over the top, and Andrew McCabe even said so, the only thing that put it over the top was the dossier.
Without the dossier, there's no FISA warrant.
Now we know the dossier was never verified.
Now we know it's full of bought and paid for Russian lies, and everybody knew it, but they didn't tell any of the judges.
So the judges were lied to and manipulated, and it's unbelievable to me that there's not consequences for this.
Who's going to do the consequences?
It would have to be the judges on the FISA court would have to turn around and say, and they would have to be the ones that would put the pressure back on the Department of Justice.
They would have to do it.
So the only way to do that is to get the House of Representatives to impeach them so that that pressure is there of, okay, tell us what happened, who did it, why did it happen?
And this doesn't need to be in a public forum, but it needs to be to the House of Representatives who they are accountable to, and then turn all that upside down so that the FISA court goes, hey, we can't let them do this to us.
They're making us look bad.
And then you get the pressure on the Department of Justice.
Listen, I don't think your idea is bad in any way.
I just think that, you know, the sad reality is what we talked about with Jason Chaffetz earlier and what Monica Crowley said, is that they're not going to do their job.
And here you got Meadows and Jordan fighting like hell to get that job done, and they're still not doing it.
Let's say hi to Bob is in Florida, too.
Bob, how are you?
Glad you called.
Thanks, Sean, for taking my call.
I want to make a couple of quick comments on the Greg Jarrett book.
Yeah.
I ordered the Russian hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump from Amazon in advance.
It showed up yesterday afternoon.
Oh, that's great.
You got it on release day.
Good for you.
Yeah, and I really wanted to tell you a couple of surprises.
Why I ordered the book was primarily because I wanted to support Greg Jarrett's effort.
And, you know, I've paid attention to this matter since it first started.
So I felt I was knowledgeable on it.
So I didn't think I would learn much from his book, but I encourage everybody to order it because I've learned a lot already.
And this guy has written something that's very important here.
And everybody who is unhappy about this whole hoax thing should order a copy today.
Look, it's number one in the country right now on Amazon.
Well, it was the last time I looked.
And there's a reason for it.
And I watched this guy write the book.
I mean, I have no financial interest in it except to get the truth out.
And I watched him literally footnote and pound out every word of this book.
And it's got everything.
It's like the Bible of this, the biggest abuse of power scandal in U.S. history.
And he's got it all there.
I couldn't agree more.
And intelligent people are going to read it.
And then the case is so overwhelming.
And then you're going to read it and you're going to think, well, what about all the fake news people that don't cover this?
Why?
And you'll know why.
Because they don't care.
And they don't care about equal justice.
And all they care about is the political destruction of any conservative at the end of the day and protecting their precious Hillary.
Sad.
But anyway, I appreciate your call.
I'll make sure that Greg hears about your endorsement.
Big time, AJ, Houston, Texas.
What's going on, baby?
Big time, Sean.
What's happening?
First of all, first of all, as my girl said, the fake media ought to know nobody's paying attention to them anymore.
Second of all, the rhino Republicans better know if a good Republican running against them this November, they gone.
They can kiss the goodbye.
Because we the people, Sean, we the people are tired of all the talking.
You and the rest, Joe, all these guys, y'all got the news out.
Y'all got the truth out.
What is taking them in there?
Congress don't know to do their job.
It's big time.
Let me tell you real quick.
Well, here's the problem.
If they get elected, they want their crumbs back.
They want open borders.
They want to keep Obamacare.
They want to impeach Donald Trump.
They want to end investigations into the truths.
Now, I got to tell you something.
This is a horrible choice for conservatives because that means you're going to have to hold your nose and vote for weak people, a lot of people.
That's why I say they better hope a good Republican not running against them.
I know if they're running against a Dem, we got the whole I know.
Just keep what's going on.
But at the same time, Sean, we the people, they giving them people chances to hide, bleach bit, and get rid of all.
Sean, don't you know almost all that them hiding all the information while Congress sitting on their butts doing nothing?
Don't go to y'all got it out there.
Why don't they do their job, man?
That's all we're asking.
Just do your job, keep your promises.
It's not that hard.
It's not that hard.
Do you know what it's like?
If I say to my kid, my kids, all right, if you do good in school, I'm going to take you to Disney.
Well, they're past the Disney.
I guess you're never past the Disney age, except I am.
I'm over it.
And my kids do whatever it was that I needed them to do.
Then I don't take them to Disney.
My kids would rightly be pissed off at their dad and think their dad doesn't keep his word and his promises.
And it won't be slightly.
They would like, same with mine.
They will be pissed off.
It ain't no slightly to it, big time, Sean.
And the fake news, they won't even tell the truth about the shooter in Canada.
I mean, come on, people.
We all know.
Come on now.
Hey, Sean, good work.
Y'all gotta keep it up and keep the truth coming.
All right, big time.
I got a roll here, though.
But listen, we love you.
You're a great American.
Keep up the fight, all right?
All right, let's check in.
Amanda is in North Carolina.
Amanda, hi, how are you?
Glad you called.
We have about a minute, Amanda.
It's all yours.
It was such a joy to hear your daughter yesterday at the studio.
That was so fun.
Yeah, my daughter beating up on me, too.
But yeah, thank you.
By the way, she's not that shy in real life.
I can tell you that part.
Oh, well, she did come across a little bit as shy.
My question is: I'm just curious: what is the end game here?
I mean, we all know it's bogus.
We all know, I mean, but who actually I can tell you what the end game is.
It's simple.
This is why this is the most important midterm election in our lives.
The endgame is simple.
They want to impeach Trump, absolutely do everything they can do to destroy him.
They want their crumbs back.
They want open borders.
They want Obamacare.
And they don't want the deep state that helps them get exposed.
It's that simple.
It's all about power.
I got to run, though, Amanda.
We love you.
Thank you for being with us.
All right, Hannity, tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
We'll load it up.
We have Rudy Giuliani, Alan Dershowitz, Joe DeGeneva, who's been on fire.
Jesse and Jessica, Herman Kane, Sarah Carter, and so much more.
As we literally break down these hearings with Mike Pompeo, the tapes that show nothing.
And then, of course, we have a freed hostage.
Nobody talks about that.
Oh, and we don't have a trade war with Europe tonight at 9 on Hannity, Fox News.
News You Won't Get Anywhere I'll see you tonight back here tomorrow.
