Back by popular demand, following their interview on this new, blockbuster information, Peter Schweizer, author of Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends and President of the Government Accountability Institute and Seamus Bruner, author of the new blockbuster book tapping into the truth behind the wealth of Comey and Mueller, and the corruption they have had their hands in for many years; are here to discuss the new book, Compromised: How Money and Politics Drive FBI Corruption is out 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 Go Anywhere pillows.
Now, MyPillow is made in the USA, has a 60-day unconditional money-back guarantee, no risk to you, and a 10-year warranty.
You don't want to spend more sleepless nights on a pillow tossing interney that's not working for you.
Just go to mypillow.com right now, use the promo code Sean, and you get Mike Lindell's special four-pack.
You get two MyPillow Premium Pillows, two Go Anywhere pillows, 50% off, and you'll start getting the kind of peaceful, restful, and comfortable, and deep healing, and recuperative sleep you've been craving and deserve.
Mypillow.com, promo code Sean.
All right, glad you're with us, Sean Hannity Show.
Write down our toll-free telephone number.
We'd love to hear from you today.
It's 800, it's 941 Sean.
If you want to be a part of this extravaganza, you know, it's some people like this was a hangover from all the frenzy of news that came out yesterday.
And it is very, very interesting.
And it's something that we have chronicled at length on this program.
It is a meeting.
They just love anything anti-Trump.
Exactly.
It is a breathlessness, a hysteria that has taken over.
Let me tell you what the media is not going to tell you.
And that is there's it's it's now Wednesday by Friday, by Monday, by Tuesday.
There's nothing that this is not in any way, shape, manner, or form ever going to impact Donald Trump the way these insane people in the media are hoping and praying and wishing that it's going to happen and come out that way.
It's just not going to work out that way for them.
Now, they don't know it yet, and they don't want to be wrong.
What they do every single time is they overreact to whatever the news of the day happens to be.
And the news of the day is, well, Paul Manafort and Michael Cohn, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, and loan applications and loan applications, and they're just wrong.
If you really just stand back and think about this for a second, when all of this started, we were supposed to be investigating Trump-Russia collusion.
Well, guess what?
There's no Trump-Russia collusion.
There's nothing.
And this almost 500 days of this has evolved into what?
It's evolved into, oh, let's go long before Donald Trump ever knew Paul Manafort because Judge Ellis got it right.
Judge Ellis said, you're not after Manafort and his taxes, and you don't care about his bank accounts at all.
This is to put the screws to him to get Manafort to sing or compose for the purpose of prosecuting or impeaching Trump.
And Robert Mueller doesn't care in any way.
Robert Mueller, he just wants to build the biggest case possible.
If the Democrats in 76 days somehow get the House of Representatives, how long have I been telling you this, that they will want to begin the process of impeaching Donald Trump?
And that the deep state, remember I've talked about five forces against the president.
It's liberal Democrats.
It is your corrupt news media.
It is the deep state.
It is establishment Republicans.
It is these never Trumper people.
They have been against him from day one.
And it has been, and we now see that a lot of the corruption and it was so deep on a level that none of us ever even could conceive or imagine in terms of the level of vitriol and hatred and abuse of power to achieve their goals, both before the election and then during the transition and after the election.
So if you think this is a big win because Robert Mueller got the widest possible mandate, basically if your dog poops on the street in New York, Robert Mueller's mandate allows them to come after you.
That's how stupid this has now become.
The problem with the stupid part has nothing to do with Russia.
You know, we can look at all the charges and all the hype and all the noise from yesterday and go back and start with General Flynn.
General Flynn was interviewed by all people, Peter Strzok.
Peter Strzok didn't think General Flynn was lying.
James Comey said he didn't think he was lying, nor did the people that interviewed him think he was lying.
Then why would General Flynn cop to a plea deal that said he lied to the FBI?
Because he was being pressured and the pressure was coming in this form.
Well, we'll go after your kid.
And well, you know, you don't have enough money now.
How are you going to possibly deal with us down the road?
And I hate to say it.
I mean, money plays a big part in whether you can defend yourself in this world.
If you don't have money, and here's a guy that served his country for 30 some odd years.
By the way, thank you very much.
Sign this paper.
You're now going to jail.
If you don't have money, he had to sell his house.
But it had nothing to do with Russia.
It had not lying to the FBI.
That's what it became.
George Papadopoulos lying again to investigators.
He's faced, now they want him six months in jail, even though as his wife said to me on Monday night, he'd been cooperating the whole time.
He feels betrayed.
He thought, well, if I cooperate and if I do everything they want me to do, then maybe they'll, well, that's part of the deal.
No, they're recommending six months in jail anyway, which he could have gotten that deal anytime.
And so now they're thinking about withdrawing that plea deal.
By the way, I would consider, I hope General Flynn does the same.
And then we move on to the Manafort, trial one.
There's trial two coming up.
Nobody in the media seems to even give any focus 10 of the charges they couldn't get guilty verdicts on.
This was a very suspect jury here.
Now, there's a certain amount of follow the money in a tax case.
There's a certain amount of information that you put on a loan application.
And so in that regard, you have five specific tax years, tax fraud charges, and he didn't accurately do his taxes for five years and the accusation that he's trying to hide some money, et cetera.
And then, of course, not telling the truth on a loan application.
Okay, these are all good lessons for your kids.
Never lie to the FBI or law enforcement.
Never lie in your taxes.
Pay your taxes.
By the way, it sounds, you know how many conversations I have had with my financial guys over the years?
Pay it.
Pay it.
Pay it constantly.
Well, you probably, in all fairness, could get this deduction.
Pay it.
And you're paying more than you should.
Pay it.
That's always been my answer because I've always suspected that during the Obama years, they'd be coming after me being in this position.
It's sad that you're a public commentator, you got strong opinions.
In the back of your head, you're thinking, yeah, they'll come after me.
And you don't believe that?
Well, look at what happened to all those conservative groups and Tea Party groups.
And during the Obama years, targeted.
Nobody got in trouble for that either.
That's abuse of power.
And then you get to the whole Michael Cohn case.
Now it's evolved from Russia collusion.
And now we got taxi medallions.
And then again, income tax fraud.
I think there was $1.3 million they were claiming yesterday that were unpaid taxes.
Well, I may be really weird in my thinking.
Maybe if you let the guy work, maybe he can pay the money back.
I'm just thinking, isn't that what they do with a lot of other people?
I know people that didn't pay taxes that never go to jail.
Al Sharpton is one of them.
The Clintons had to redo their taxes a number of times, and they even deducted their old underwear, I remember correctly.
And then you got, okay, but whatever.
All right, tax and lying.
Don't lie to banks in applications.
Don't lie in your tax forms.
Pay your taxes and don't lie to the FBI.
Okay, so where in all of this is the Russia thing?
Where is it?
Because I don't see it because it's not there.
And then I can bring you and go through chapter and burst real crimes that we know have been committed, starting with Hillary Clinton.
I'm sorry, this matters.
Hannity's talking about Hillary.
I'm talking, why is that important?
Good question, media.
It's important because if Hillary has subpoenaed emails and she deletes them, they're about yoga, wedding, and a funeral, and emailing Bill, but Bill doesn't have an email.
33,000 yoga, wedding, and a funeral.
33,000 emails.
Okay.
Then just to make itsy bitsy sure they're gone, we all learned a new word, bleach bit.
I doubt anybody had heard about it before.
She has people acid wash the hard drive so we can't recover anything.
You don't think that was a conscious decision?
Let me show you, sell you a bridge, you know, over a mountain someplace.
Did you wipe this earth?
What, like with a cloth or something?
You know.
And then if you take a hammer or have an A take a ham, break those devices into little itsy bitsy, teeny weeny pieces and pull out the SIM cards, that's called obstruction.
Espionage is obstruction.
And then if you, in the course of the, you know, you're lucky enough that you have people that we know hate Trump that are doing the investigating, and those people that hate Trump want you to win, and they're doing an investigation.
They like you so much, they're writing your exoneration before they do the investigation.
They're writing it in early May.
They don't talk to you till July 2nd.
Then by July 5th, okay, she's free.
Even though the facts stated, obviously she had committed many, broken many laws in that particular case.
And then you got on top of that.
Then you got, okay, she, speaking of Russia, whoever going to get to the Russia part of this, well, there is money that Clinton and the DNC funneled to a law firm.
The law firm hires an op research group.
That's an interesting transaction considering everybody's interested in following the money.
Speaking of which, we're going to follow the money today as it relates to James Comey.
You know, James Comey made $6.1 million in a single year working for Lockheed Martin.
And they had contracts with the FBI.
And guess who the FBI director at the time was?
Robert Mueller.
Wow.
And he worked from 2005 to 2010, but we only have one year's salary from him working for Lockheed Martin.
And that was in 2009.
Where's 2005?
Six, seven, and eight.
Where's 2010?
Did he make $6.1 million every year?
How many of those years did Robert Mueller sign off on whatever Lockheed Martin wanted?
I know they wanted the latest, greatest advancement in technology where they would be able to identify people, you know, facial recognition technology.
It's all important.
I'm not even suggesting anything nefarious is here.
You think we should have known all this ahead of time?
No, most people.
He also made $6 million from a hedge fund.
James Comey's a wealthy man.
I don't remember him ever saying, Mr. Integrity, that he made all of that money and that he was getting government contracts and that part of the other side of the contract was Robert Mueller.
I don't know.
That might be a little detail considering he's the one that leaked information that might have been a crime in and of itself to the professor.
And then we get the special counsel and then they pick Robert Mueller.
Accident?
I don't think so.
Doesn't look like it.
Anyway, so this new book chronicles all of this.
And then Hillary's able to, you know, funnel the money through the law firm to hire Fusion GPS, a foreign national Christopher Steele, information that eventually under oath, he says, I don't know if any of this is true.
Uses that to get, you know, in four FISA applications.
Sally Yates, Rod Rosenstein, James Coleman, all these people sign off in these FISA warrants as if what they presented the FISA courts was verified, accurate, and true.
They never verified or corroborated a thing, but they put their name on it, and a fraud was committed to the FISA court judges and the FISA court.
And if any of you did any of these things, I guarantee you, you would end up in jail.
And it would be a real Russia case, which we don't have now.
We have nothing but taxes and bank applications and taxi medallions.
And what else do we have?
Oh, lying to the FBI.
Don't ever talk to the FBI, and then you can't get accused of lying to the FBI.
So if the FBI comes and asks you for help, you're going to say, you're going to have to talk to my lawyer, even though your instinct would be to help the FBI because you love the FBI like I do.
The rank and file are great, but you better not lie to them.
If you even take the risk of lying to them, you know, you're going to get charged in that case.
We've got a lot of ground to cover.
By the way, Lanny Davis refusing a pardon if one was offered, Michael Cohn.
Who are you looking out for, Lanny?
Really?
I don't know if you checked in with your client, but if your client was smart, he'd say, sure, I'll take one if it was ever offered.
I have no knowledge about any of it, but I just, as a lawyer, you're saying we'd refuse a pardon.
It's not your asking to be sitting in a jail cell somewhere.
Jeez.
All right, as we continue on, I just can't believe Lanny Davis goes does these interviews.
Under no circumstances would Michael Cohn, he's supposed to be the client, ever accept a pardon from Trump.
Okay.
I mean, really?
Glad to hear that.
Does your client know that?
Because it doesn't sound like it.
Mark Levin last night was on, I mean, he just eviscerated Lanny, and I've known Lanny for years.
I like Lanny personally.
He's a Clinton sycophant.
And, you know, as Mark was pointing out, and others are now beginning to pick up on it, but I think Mark was first out with this, how he, you know, literally had his client plead guilty to two counts of criminality that don't exist.
That's counts seven and eight, the campaign finance violation all over TV.
Everyone's saying it implicates the president directly.
It does not.
And by the way, this is a plea between a prosecutor and somebody that doesn't want to spend the rest of their life in jail.
That is not a precedent in any way.
Anyway, and just because a prosecutor says somebody violated it, that's not been adjudicated anywhere.
A campaign expenditure, if you actually look at federal law, is an expenditure solely for campaign activity.
A candidate spends his own money or even corporate money for an event that occurred not as a result of the campaign.
It is not a campaign expenditure.
Mark gave a couple of good examples.
We'll get to that.
Mark Penn has a piece out that I want to share with you.
All the other news of the day, and when are we ever going to get to Russia, Russia, Russia?
Never, never, never.
The general counsel for the Clinton mob family, Lanny Davis, he had his client plead the two counts of criminality that don't exist.
These campaign finance violations that all over TV they're saying implicates the president of the United States directly.
First, let's back up.
It is a guilty plea.
It is a plea bargain between a prosecutor and a criminal.
A criminal who doesn't want to spend the rest of his life in prison.
That is not precedent.
That applies only to that specific case.
Nobody cites plea bargains for precedent.
That's number one.
Number two, just because a prosecutor says that somebody violated a campaign law doesn't make it so.
He's not the judge.
He's not the jury.
We didn't adjudicate anything.
It never went to court.
That's number two.
A campaign expenditure under our federal campaign laws is an expenditure solely for campaign activity.
A candidate who spends his own money or even corporate money for an event that occurred not as a result of the campaign, it is not a campaign expenditure.
How is it the great one comes up with all of this and all these dults that are supposed to be lawyers are paid to give legal advice and they don't know the law at all?
And Mark's right.
I mean, he gave other examples, you know, and, you know, for example, a candidate he pointed out had said we owe vendors a whole lot of money.
We've had disputes, but I want to go ahead and pay them.
I don't want all the negative publicity.
So he says to his private lawyer, you pay him.
I'll reimburse you.
Is that illegal?
Perfectly legal.
And, you know, all of these, there's plenty of examples.
By the way, this is a 2014 article from NBC News.
They weren't as corrupt as they are now.
I mean, every day it's like worse and worse and worse.
But anyway, the headline is: thousands of federal workers owe billions in back taxes.
Wonder if all these people have been arrested, or Al Sharpton's been arrested, or, you know, tax cheek Eitner.
He was charged with tax crimes, right?
Well, I guess not.
We have a dual system of justice in the country.
Why would we think that?
We have one system for them and one for the rest of us.
Federal workers in Congress and the White House, this is Obama's White House, to literally more than 318,000 federal employees and retirees owe over $3.3 billion in back taxes, the IRS said in 2014.
That works out to 3.3% of all federal workers.
Do they all going to get charges brought up against them?
The IRS said it estimates in terms of delinquent payers, overall population, 8.7%.
Listen, I keep telling them, I got to pay the taxes.
Pay, pay, pay, overpay, pay, pay, pay.
Pay, pay.
What about this?
You can deduct your old underwear like the Clintons.
No, thanks.
I'll pass.
It's embarrassing.
I don't think anybody wants my old underwear.
Slick Willie.
I mean, it's crazy.
Here's another headline.
If you work for our government, Jason Chaffetz wrote this in April of 2015.
As a matter of fact, April 15th, 2015, you must pay your taxes.
Tax cheats shouldn't be working for we the people.
He was talking about a year later.
Federal workers have done so and over a billion dollars in unpaid taxes.
I guess if you're not a famous person, it doesn't matter because they don't want to make an example out of you.
Here's another one I bet you haven't heard of.
FEC complaint accuses the Clinton campaign and the DNC of violating campaign finance law.
Get this with dossier payments.
Hannity, you've been saying this.
They funneled the money through the law firm Perkins Cooey.
And then, so it seemed like a legal expense.
And then they funneled that money to Fusion GPS.
And then Fusion GPS hired a foreign national.
Foreign nationals aren't supposed to impact our elections.
And then they put together a dossier full of what turned out to be Russian lies that even the dossier's author doesn't believe in and stand by.
Anyway, that article goes on to say, and this was in the Washington Times, that Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC violated campaign finance laws by failing to disclose payments for a dossier on Donald Trump, according to a complaint filed Wednesday with the FEC.
The complaint from the campaign legal center said Democrats effectively hid the payments from public scrutiny, scrutiny, scrutiny, contrary to requirements of federal law.
By law, campaign and party committees must disclose the reason that money is spent and its recipient.
This wasn't a legal expense.
This was op research, hiring a foreign national.
Oh, excuse me.
This is like what we told you yesterday.
The Obama campaign, $2 million in campaign violations, campaign finance violations.
What did they get?
Did anyone go to jail?
Jail time?
Prosecution?
Persecution?
Nope.
$375,000 fine.
Walk away.
I know people that have been caught not paying taxes.
In my life, I know people.
Now, sometimes for reasons beyond their control.
They needed the money.
Somebody's sick.
They needed the money.
Blah, blah, blah, blah.
Now, the best advice I would give you is tell them, file the form, say, I don't have the money right now.
Tell them the truth.
That's my advice.
I think any good tax attorney would tell you the same.
Don't hide it.
Don't not file because then it seems like you're really trying to cheat and hide.
But file it, talk to them.
And there are many, many people that you'll meet that have to, over time, pay back the IRS whatever money they owe them.
Very common practice, actually.
Anyway, by misleading reports, the DNC, the Clinton campaign, undermined the vital public information role of campaign disclosures.
Voters need campaign disclosure laws to be enforced so they can hold candidates accountable for how they raise and spend money.
By the way, I keep going back to what Levin was pointing out last night.
And yeah, it's not a campaign violation at all if you spend your own money.
Campaign expenditure under the federal campaign laws is an expenditure solely for campaign activity.
A candidate who spends his own money or corporate money for an event that occurred not as a result of the campaign.
It's not a campaign expenditure.
Means that what Donald Trump did is perfectly legal, which means that, yeah, he's right.
Lanny Davis had Michael Cohn plead guilty to two, and it's part of an agreement that had nothing to do with the campaign, or obviously, it's also part of a practice that had happened in the past.
Two offenses that aren't offenses.
The prosecutor insisted were offenses.
All right, but, you know, that's, I guess, part of the plea deal.
That happens sometimes.
Mark Penn makes an interesting point about this bizarre claim by the fake fraud media in the country that somehow Donald Trump's payment to Stormy Daniels Cameron McDougal was a campaign contribution.
And by the way, Mark Penn worked for the Clintons as their pollsters for years.
If the stormy payment was a campaign contribution, so was Hillary's payments to Christopher Steele, which he used to pay Russian sources to make up stories that they hope would torpedo Trump's presidential campaign.
That didn't get reported to the FEC either.
Contrast that with the Stormy Daniels payment with the treatment of millions of dollars paid to the Democratic law firm, which it turned out to be money to a political research firm to hire British ex-spy Christopher Steele without listing them on any campaign expenditure form, despite the crystal clear laws and regulations that the ultimate beneficiaries of the funds must be listed.
The rule was even tightened recently.
No question that hiring spies to do op research in Russia is a campaign expenditure.
Hasn't been anybody's home raided at 6 a.m. this morning or any time overnight last night, was there?
And by the way, there's no raids into Fusion GPS or Steele because it doesn't help their get Trump agenda.
Even Mark Penn recognizes this.
And Trump spends $130,000 to keep a lid on a personal story and a full weight of the state prosecutors come down on his lawyer, tossing attorney-client privilege to the wind.
And Democrats spend millions on secret op Russian research funneled through a law firm.
Nothing.
Now, he does, you know, there is a roadmap ahead here if we believe in equal justice under the law.
Now, isn't there?
That would have to be, they go after all of this.
I do notice that Robert Mueller rejected.
This was interesting in the Business Insider and Politico.
I mean, I'm watching Lanny.
I mean, Lanny needs to get off TV because I don't think he helped his client today.
And I've known Lanny many years, big Clinton sycophant, hates Donald Trump.
I get he's got a political agenda, but even still, you got to represent your client.
I mean, hey, well, Nick, he won't accept a pardon.
I'm like, all right, I don't know if anyone's ever talked to him about it or whatever.
I doubt it.
But I would just say that's not smart because I'm betting the guy that actually asked to spend the time in jail probably would take it.
Just guessing.
Anyway, Davis said today that Cohn knew of efforts by Trump to conspire with Russia to rig the 2016 presidential election.
Okay, well then bring out the information.
Why hasn't it come out?
Anyway, stop the presses.
Wait till Mueller finally finds out that Cohn is ready to flip on Trump.
Oh, we didn't know that before.
There's only one problem.
Mueller could have kept the Cohn case to himself, but he decided to pass it along to the Southern District of New York.
There's a reason for that.
And just because Lanny Davis, the biggest Clinton sycophant in the country, is running around week after week in every microphone and camera he can get in front of doesn't make any of it true.
If Mueller was even remotely interested, he would have contacted Lanny and his client well before yesterday's plea bargain.
And the fact that Mueller hasn't contacted Lanny speaks volumes about what Mueller thinks of Cohn's value as a witness.
Apparently, New York investigators are now subpoenaing Cohn in a Trump foundation thing because of, I guess, Lanny's comments or somebody's comments.
I'm like, oh, okay.
I guess Andrew Cuomo is pretty pissed off at the comments that he made about America was never great.
Now he's going to start a fight with Trump.
Okay, here we go again.
Equal justice under the law.
You know, the American Spectator had a great piece.
Actually, Manafort and Cohn are Mueller's ham sandwiches.
Interesting.
Good job today of explaining the absolute irrelevance of Robert Mueller's so-called wins yesterday.
Now, for all the media is oohing and eyeing over the legal victories here for Mueller.
Well, he still didn't win on 10 counts in the Manafort case.
Nobody talks about that.
Nobody talks about Bernie being cheated out of the nomination and a fixed primary.
Nobody seems to want to talk about the lies to the FISA court.
Nobody wants to talk about the obstruction of Hillary.
Nobody wants to talk about American people lied to in the general election about Trump vis-a-vis a paid-for dossier that was never reported as a campaign expenditure, but whatever.
For all of that, though, in terms of the Department of Justice mandate, he's made no progress whatsoever.
He's presiding over a Russia collusion probe that has nothing to do with collusion or Russia.
So I guess Mueller's going to keep indicting and convicting ham sandwiches.
In other words, if you're friends with Trump, you're a ham sandwich.
Most Americans, I'm telling you, they're going to get over this very quickly, much to the chagrin of the corrupt media.
And I'm going to tell you what it's going to do.
Like usual, they have overreached in their hysteria, their impeachment fever that they're trying to build up in the country.
But the people that actually voted for the president, they see that, oh, Manafort and Cohn tax and bank issues were before the campaign.
They didn't have anything to do with Russia.
They didn't have anything to do with Trump.
They're going to say, okay, we see this for what it is because the American people are smart.
What it's also going to do, it's going to piss off.
You watch over time.
76 days, a lot of time to get pissed off.
And if the Trump base gets pissed off enough at the unfair treatment and the lack of equal justice under the law and no equal application of our laws, guess what they're going to do in a midterm?
They're going to get their asses out of bed and out of their houses and out of their apartments.
And all those smelly Walmart people that cling to their God, their guns, their Bible, their religion, all the irredeemable deplorables are going to say enough of this crap and they're going to go vote.
And guess what's not going to happen?
Nancy Pelosi, if that happens, is not going to be speaker.
And all the stuff that they want, Obamacare to stay, getting rid of ICE, open borders, getting their crumbs back, ending the investigations into the deep state and impeaching Trump will all go away because the same people that voted for Trump,
that are happy with the results of Trump, that see the injustice and the double standard, they're basically going to flip the bird to all of the media and all of the destroy Trump, you know, the literal institutions that are building up in this country.
So let Mueller keep convicting and indicting ham sandwiches.
Most Americans are not going to care, and it's going to piss them off, and it's going to motivate them.
By the way, the judge in the Flynn case is now expressing frustration over now, what, the fourth delay in his sentencing.
What did he do?
Lie to the FBI, but the FBI agents that interviewed him didn't think he was lying.
And neither did Comey.
You see, I mean, I think people are pretty smart.
And people are also going to start asking, well, what about Hannity's stuff and Greg Jarrett's stuff and Sarah Carter's stuff?
They got the emails.
They got the proof.
They got the evidence.
Nobody says they're wrong because they're not.
When are we going to get to those crimes?
That's all coming to.
I must tell you that Paul Matterport's a good man.
He was with Ronald Reagan.
He was with a lot of different people over the years.
And I feel very sad about that.
It doesn't involve me, but I still feel, you know, it's a very sad thing that happens.
This has nothing to do with Russian collusion.
This started as Russian collusion.
This has absolutely nothing to do.
This is a witch hunt and it's a disgrace.
But this has nothing to do with what they started out looking for Russians involved in our campaign.
There were none.
This is the way it ends up.
And it was not the original mission, believe me.
It was something very much different.
So had nothing to do with Russian collusion.
We continue the witch hunt.
Fake news and the Russian witch hunt.
We got a whole big combination.
Where is the collusion?
You know, they're still looking for collusion.
Where is the collusion?
Find some collusion.
We want to find the collusion.
All right.
That was the president last night talking about, well, there's no collusion, which we have been saying over and over again.
Glad you're with us.
800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
Look, as I've been saying, this is ostensibly now as it relates to all issues involving Michael Cohn, in spite of what the media is telling you.
Because Michael Cohn said in this plea agreement at the direction of Trump, but he had said over and over and over again the opposite.
So there is not even, there's not even the hint of any issue in terms of that anybody is looking to use what he said this time as it relates to that versus what he had said in the past, nor would it have any credibility because then it would come up, well, you said on this occasion this, on this occasion, this, on this occasion, this.
Did you tell this person?
Did you tell that person?
There's a tape of you saying this and that.
So I think my analysis of this is I think they wanted that just that was a little bit of a hook.
And if you give us that, we'll give you a better deal.
That's my interpretation.
I have no facts to back that up.
But my analysis of what probably went on.
But if you go to Lieutenant General Flynn lying to the FBI, Papadopoulos lying to the FBI, nothing to do with Russia.
If you look at the tax fraud case and bank fraud cases of Manafort and Cohn, nothing to do at all with Russia, with Trump, with the 2016 campaign.
Nothing.
No collusion.
No conspiracy.
As it relates to the two other issues, Michael was repeatedly on record saying that he did that on his own without the knowledge of the president.
We have gotten a little bit of a preview of the interview that took place, I guess, earlier today.
We're going to air parts of it tonight on Hannity on Fox News.
Fox and Friends' Ainsley Earhart asked the question of the president, and he said he knew later.
He didn't know at the time.
We actually have that tape.
Did you know about the payments?
Later on, I knew.
Later on.
But you have to understand, Ainsley, what he did, and they weren't taken out of campaign finance.
That's a big thing.
That's a much bigger thing.
Did they come out of the campaign?
They didn't come out of the campaign.
They came from me, and I tweeted about it.
You know, I put, I don't know if you know, but I tweeted about the payments.
But they didn't come out of campaign.
In fact, my first question when I heard about it was, did they come out of the campaign?
Because that could be a little dicey.
And they didn't come out of the campaign.
And that's big.
But they weren't, that's not a it's not even a campaign violation.
If you look at President Obama, he had a massive campaign violation, but he had a different attorney general, and they viewed it a lot differently.
Yeah, that was a $2 million campaign violation, one of the largest fines ever paid, fine, and they didn't turn it into what this became for Michael Cohn.
All right, Greg Jarrett, author of the number one book, Three Weeks and Running Now, on the New York Times bestseller list, The Russian Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump.
Also, Bruce Marks is with us.
He is a U.S. attorney.
He has 20 years' experience.
By the way, with an office in Moscow, he has been the lead counsel in significant litigation against Russian oligarchs, including one guy by the name of Oleg Daraspaska and others who are now literally on the sanctions list and whose name has come up quite a bit.
And thank you both for being with us.
Let's first ask you, Greg, let's go over.
Look, as far as Michael Cohn and his issues, basically that case is over as it relates to the president, isn't it?
Well, it should be, although, you know, I was amused to hear Lenny Davis today say this on our air: quote: because Cohen pled guilty to a crime, then Trump is guilty of the same crime.
And that is a stunningly obtuse statement from a lawyer who went to Yale Law School.
And by the way, his classmate was Hillary Clinton.
Mr. Davis seems to have forgotten that little thing called innocent until proven guilty and that thing called a trial, in which the trier fact of the jury actually decides guilt or innocence.
It must be, there must be evidence, proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
So, what Lenny Davis said today was incredibly untrue and deceptive and misleading to viewers who are watching.
Well, I agree.
What's your take from an attorney's point of view, Bruce?
You had 20 years' experience with, and you have an office in Moscow, and you know, some of these Russian oligarchs like Oleg Daripaska and some of the others that we have talked about that are now on the sanctions list.
I don't see anything in any of these issues that have anything in any way related to Russia.
Now, I do believe Putin is a hostile actor and a bad guy, and this is a hostile regime.
And I believe, yeah, they've tried to influence elections, not only ours over many elections, but over the world as well.
And they've tried to influence elections all over the place, and I think they're trying it again now.
What do you suspect?
Well, listen, let me say one thing first.
I did file racketeering claims against Oleg Yerepaska and also Viktor Vexelberg, who is also now on the sanctions list.
The Trump administration has been stronger against the Russians than any other administration.
They have finally sanctioned serious oligarchs who are close to the Kremlin.
If you compare that to President Obama's administration, after Crimea was invaded, he really did absolutely nothing.
So I think it's an important point for people to understand that the Trump administration is taking sanctions against Russia very seriously.
Yeah, well, I think that, you know, and it was irresponsible, especially in light of a Washington Times piece by Devin Nunes warning us about Russia interfering in the 2016 elections.
He wrote that in 2014, and Obama in October 2016 is telling Donald Trump to stop whining, and no serious person could ever think that any country could ever impact our elections in any way.
Looks like Obama was fully confident at that moment that Hillary was going to be the next president.
Well, let me tell you one thing his administration didn't do, and I think Greg will know this name.
In 2015, I came to them, to the FBI, to give them evidence that Viktor Pinchuk, who was the largest foreign donor to the Clinton Foundation and the son-in-law of Ukraine's former corrupt president, was violating international law in trading with Iran.
And they did absolutely nothing to investigate that, which was a tie both to Ukrainian illegality and to the Clinton campaigns.
Well, what's your reaction to this, Greg?
I mean, look, there's nothing in anything involving Manafort or Cohn or even there's no connection to Trump and Russia collusion in any way, shape, matter, or form.
There are two questions that arise from this.
How does it evolve into, and why did Rod Rosenstein give such a wide berth that they can literally now begin tax charges and what, bank fraud charges and campaign finance regulations and get so afar from what the original mandate we were told was supposed to be about.
And, you know, now I'm listening to guys like Bruce, and he's telling me that there's a much bigger problem that we ought to be focused on, and we're not.
Well, Rosenstein has a lot to answer for.
I spoke with a DOJ, former official today, who said that his practice was almost entirely doing federal election law at the DOJ.
He said, these payments by Trump are not criminal.
They're not a violation of the law.
And he said, but Rosenstein would have had to have signed off on this.
And he said it's inexplicable that he would allow his Department of Justice to approve criminal charges for a non-crime.
You know, Trump can spend an unlimited amount of money of his own on a campaign.
There's no limit.
And let's say, for example, that Cohen made a payment for him, but with the intent of being reimbursed, and we know he was reimbursed.
That's a loan.
At worst, it's a civil violation.
And as I pointed out with you last night on your television program, if these payments serve a dual purpose, a secondary purpose, that's not a campaign expense.
Trump had other reasons for making the payments, personal and commercial.
And don't just take my word for it.
The former Federal Elections Commission Chairman Bradley Smith wrote an op-ed pointing out the same thing, that these kinds of payments are a personal expense.
They're not a campaign expense.
What is your take from a legal standpoint as you watch these two cases unfold here, Bruce Marks?
From my perspective, it's a big nothing for Robert Mueller.
And nobody really paid attention that he lost 10 and only got eight convictions, which also tells you that he just overcharges.
They just over and over and over charge.
And I think they always feel, well, we don't get you here.
We'll get you there.
We get you here.
We'll get you there.
And it just doesn't seem at that point about justice to me.
No, I don't think it's about justice at all.
I mean, I'm a little concerned maybe to be on the program here and there because I do business in Russia and maybe Mr. Mueller will become knocking at my door.
But I mean, let's just remember.
Trust me, he's going to be knocking on Greg and my door before yours.
Trust me.
You know, it is the whole thing to me is sad.
Whether you're Michael Cohn, Paul Manafort, George Pompadopoulos, Lieutenant General Flynn, just by the fact that you're in Trump's orbit and this whole witch hunt about Russia comes up, then every aspect of your life selectively gets chosen out.
And I believe in every case, it was for the purpose of putting the screws to people so they sing or compose to prosecute or impeach Trump.
We'll take a break.
We'll come back.
As we continue, Greg Jarrett, number one book in the country, three weeks and running now, The Russian Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton, frame Donald Trump, Bruce Marks, U.S. attorney with 20 years' experience, and by the way, has an office in Moscow.
He's been the lead counsel in significant litigation against these Russian oligarchs.
I assume they're going to probably want to talk to you just because you went to Russia.
Everyone's looking for Russians all over the place.
But, Greg, the whole premise of your book, if we're going to get down to this, there are a whole lot of crimes that we know were committed and that there was at the top levels of the FBI, at the top levels of the Department of Justice, and that an investigation was rigged to help one presidential candidate stay in the race and defeat the hated presidential candidate.
And then we know there's a Russia connection bought and paid for Russian lies with funneled money from a law firm to an op research group to a foreign national by the name of Christopher Steele.
And that such Russian lies not only were propagated to the American people to influence their election decision, but also then used as the basis for four specific Pfizer warrant applications, yet never verified or corroborated, most of it debunked.
And nobody involved in any of these shenanigans has been indicted yet.
Yeah, I mean, just look at the people who signed off on the dossier.
That's a fraud on the court.
They were using a phony document that they hadn't corroborated.
The law requires that they corroborate it.
They may not use an unverified document.
So among the crimes that people like Comey, McCabe, Sally Yates, Rod Rosenstein may have committed, not to mention Peter Strzok, abuse of power, perjury for signing a false document, a false and misleading statement, obstruction of justice, major fraud against the U.S., and conspiracy to defraud the U.S. Yet none of these people are the subject of a grand jury investigation in which that kind of evidence is presented.
Instead, it appears that Robert Mueller and his team of partisans are going after Donald Trump for things that are non-criminal.
I read one thing about you, Bruce, with your last question here.
You provided information to Bruce Orr in 1999 that Bill Browder was involved in vast international money laundering schemes and later became the subject of a federal RICO case.
But no, what?
Investigation?
Absolutely.
It was 1999 and afterwards.
Bruce Orr was the head of the RICO division of the Justice Department.
And this guy, Bill Browder, who's made a vendetta against Russia as part of his persona, was involved in a massive money laundering scheme.
We ended up filing a RICO suit in the United States, and the government did nothing.
And, you know, unbelievable Russia, I sort of believe in some of these theories.
Well, they did nothing to Bruce Orr and Lanny Davis involved.
And Lanny Davis is as close to the Clintons as you can guess.
Well, we knew Robert Mueller was the FBI director when Putin's thugs were in the United States involved because we had a spy inside of the Putin-led effort to get uranium out of America, which he succeeded, but they were involved in bribery and kickbacks and money laundering and other racketeering.
And guess what?
Nobody arrested them.
And Putin ended up getting control of 20% of our uranium.
And the Clintons got a nice big fat kickback to their foundation with a lot of people involved in that deal.
All right.
Thank you, Bruce.
We appreciate it.
Greg Jarrett stays with us.
When we come back, John Sale will join us to discuss Manafort and Cohn, having been a former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York and what he thinks of all of this.
800-941-Sean is our toll-free telephone number.
Also, Jim Jordan is going to check in with us later in the program today.
And we're going to follow the money, investigate the investigators.
All these FBI DOJ guys, they get filthy rich as soon as they leave and then come back.
Things that weren't disclosed.
Straight ahead.
All right, 25 now to the top of the hour, 800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
If you want to be a part of the program, we continue.
Greg Jarrett still remains with us, author of the number one book in the country, The Russian Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton, frame Donald Trump.
Boy, all of this is playing out to be exactly as its title says.
John Sale is with us.
He joins us to discuss.
He's a former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, former Watergate assistant prosecutor.
And welcome, John, to the program.
And a lot of good people.
I mean, some really great lawyers come out of the Southern District of New York.
I mean, they've had some of the biggest terrorism cases, of course, and the First World Trade Center bombing, the Blind Shea case, and people like Andy McCarthy and even former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
And I don't think I speak out of hand.
I don't know all the different districts in the country, but it is renowned as probably the toughest and best in the country.
Am I right about that?
It's the hardest place to get a job.
It is the most proud place, and it's wonderful.
And we have a fraternity forever of alumni, including, of course, Mayor Giuliani.
Yeah.
Let's start with.
So I watched very closely, and I know the media made a really big deal over this Cohn deal yesterday, more specifically at the direction of a candidate.
And obviously, that was the president.
Now, I know because you just read the New York Times and interviews, and I'm told there are even tapes specifically of Cohn saying exactly the opposite.
But yet he said this in the plea deal.
Now, I think, maybe I'm wrong here.
My guess is that as part of the negotiations, that wording was particularly important to certain people, and that if he wanted to get a better deal, that that wording had to be included.
You're part of these negotiations a lot more.
I've never been a part of them, but I'm assuming that that was part of the negotiations, the wording of what is actually said.
And maybe instead of facing 10 to 12, he's facing three to five years in prison.
Is that a possibility?
Are things like that negotiated?
Things like that are negotiated, but I think the prosecutors have to believe that what he's being, what he's saying is true.
But what's important, Sean, is excuse me, but everybody, the media is reading this up like it's a fact that the president knew about it, the president authorized it.
All this is, is his word, his accusation.
And because he said it under oath, I mean, to me, an oath for Michael Cohn is not worth the, I'm not going to mention the name of the newspaper that's in front of me.
It's just him saying it.
Well, for example, in an interview with Vanity Fair in March, he said Trump did not know that Cohn had paid the $130,000 in the Stormy Daniels case.
A month earlier, he had told the New York Times the same thing, that he paid the money out of his own pocket without President Trump's approval.
And there are at least a dozen that I can now cite in front of me.
So does it matter that he says one under oath, but said it a dozen times the other way?
Well, if there are a dozen times to be said it the other way, then Michael Cohn said it 13 times the other way.
He has said it more different times than you can imagine.
And I think his word, I heard Lanny Daniels say something.
Lanny Davis, yeah.
I'm sorry.
Excuse me, Larry Davis.
Lanny Davis say something last night that he's changed, to tell the truth, because he's concerned about his country.
I mean, give me a break.
You know, he's looking to get the best deal he can.
But let me tell you something that's very significant to at least somebody like me who's looked who's done this kind of work.
And I've been now I do white-collar criminal work.
I've done it for 20 years in Miami.
He does not have a cooperation deal.
So he's a non-cooperated, this was a non-cooperative deal, which means that they don't have any intention of using him down the road to testify on any of these issues that might come up.
Well, to me, it means, I don't know if they'll use him or not, but it means that they must have their own problems with his credibility.
Otherwise, they'd have given him a traditional cooperation deal, which is not big, great shakes.
Would that also be one of the reasons that Mueller farmed this out to the Southern District?
I don't know whether the special counsel knew that in the beginning, but again, talking about with all due respect to Lanny Davis, I don't mean to be critical, but last night and this morning on television, Lanny Davis is like peddling Michael Cohn's cooperation.
And I've never heard of, granted, I've never represented the president of the United States, but I've never heard of you trying to sell his cooperation by titillating teasers.
And here's what he can say.
I'm sure the special counsel will be interested.
If the special counsel were interested, they'd have already been talking to him.
Well, Mark Levin was on last night, a brilliant constitutional attorney, and he made a lot of, I think, really good points.
First of all, I was a little shocked this morning that Lanny Davis, if he's representing his client, my client will never accept a pardon.
I don't know if that's ever been discussed.
I would assume.
But I'm thinking, why wouldn't he if he ever got one?
Would you ever say that about your client?
I'm like, are you looking out for your political interests or your client's interest here?
Because I would think Michael Cohen, if he got a pardon, would want it.
Well, anybody who is facing five, six, seven years in prison who would not accept a pardon is from another planet.
But Michael Cohen has a very good lawyer, and his name is Guy Petrillo, and he is not grandstanding.
Lanny Davis, I think he's conducting a PR campaign, and I don't think that works with a special counsel or with the Southern District.
Let me ask about this.
The campaign expenditure issue under federal campaign laws, which was a point Levin made out.
He said that Lanny actually, you know, look, and I understand we got to back up and say this is a plea deal.
It's a bargain.
It's sort of like between a prosecutor and someone that's pleading guilty to a crime that doesn't want to spend the rest of his life in prison.
Maybe he was facing, you know, 65 years.
That's a life sentence.
It's over.
That happens every single day.
It applies only to specific cases.
And also, a campaign expenditure under federal campaign laws is an expenditure only and solely for campaign activity.
A candidate who spends his own money or corporate money for an event that occurred not as a result of the campaign, it is not a campaign expenditure.
So I don't even see the crime here.
And I want to get Greg's take on that, too.
Yeah.
Well, it gets into a gray area if the money is intended to benefit a candidate, but it becomes very murky.
But more importantly, is what the president, I don't care what Mr. Cohn did, because he probably did a thousand other things, and he's pleading to this one thing that's kind of sexy.
But the real issue is what liability, if any, the president has.
And in that regard, the big difference between the president and Michael Cohen is Michael Cohen is now conveniently saying the president knew about it in advance, authorized it in advance.
And I just saw the president on television about an hour ago saying he didn't know about it until afterwards.
Yeah, we played that clip.
A lot of things, a lot of things that need to be sorted out.
But I don't think that Michael Cohn's accusation, whether it's under oath or not under oath, means a hill of beans.
But I think the president's been consistent on that point.
Greg.
A campaign finance case is only a crime if there's a showing that a person is, quote, knowingly and willfully violated the campaign laws.
That's a direct quote out of the statute.
So there has to be, Sean, specific intent and knowledge that the law is being violated.
You played a clip of Ainslie's interview with the president.
And he is not a lawyer, didn't know campaign election laws, thought that what he was doing was for his own purposes out of his own money.
And it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to show that he had specific intent and knowledge that he was violating the law.
Plus, he had a dual purpose.
His other purpose would have been to make payments in exchange for a non-disclosure form for personal as well as commercial reasons.
He had done it in the past before he was ever a candidate.
So all of that militates against a decent case that prosecutors would ever have against Donald Trump.
They just don't have a case.
It's a non-crime as it applies to him.
John Sayle, let me ask you with your background and experience, and I think there's a good reason that Greg's book has been number one on the New York Times bestseller list for three weeks and running now.
How did we go from a mandate supposedly to look into Trump-Russia collusion?
And we've got Manafort, you know, years before he ever knew Donald Trump tax fraud charges and bank loan application fraud, and he didn't register, you know, a foreign bank account that he had.
And pretty much the same thing in the Michael Cohn case, tax issues, tax returns, not reporting income, and lying in an application for a loan.
And then these minor campaign violations that I would argue are not even a violation of law.
But none of this has to do with Trump-Russia collusion, nor does Michael Flynn pleading guilty to lying to the FBI, even though the agent that interviewed him and Comey, Strzzk and Comey, both said they didn't think he lied.
And George Papadopoulos lying to the FBI.
How do we go from all of that to this?
Well, the Manafort case is the best example because the Manafort case has absolutely nothing to do with so-called Russian collusion or the Russians meddling in our election.
Yet Manafort is now facing possibly up to 10 years in prison under the sentencing guidelines.
And at 69 years old, that's a life sentence.
The answer to your question is obvious.
And Judge Ellis, who I don't think he presided over the trial in the way most judges would, the way he gave the prosecutors a hard time.
But he hit the nail on the head.
The purpose was to squeeze Manafort in order to testify against the president.
And the two problems with that.
First of all, he can't flip or cooperate unless he can say truthful things that would really incriminate the president.
That's really, I think, the reason it hasn't even been on the table.
And furthermore, he obviously doesn't want to do it.
But more importantly, if you don't have truthful information, you're not in a position to cooperate, no matter how many years they threaten you with.
All right, we'll take a break.
We'll come back more with Greg Jarrett and John Sale 800-941-Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, as we continue, John Sale is with us.
He's an attorney, former prosecutor in the Southern District of New York.
Greg Jarrett, number one book in the country for three weeks and running on the New York Times bestseller list, The Russian Hoax, the illicit scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump.
The whole premise, Greg, and I'm asking John about these very specific things because we have tax fraud, bank fraud, again and again, lying to the FBI.
We have no Russia collusion, but we got the Espionage Act.
We got Hillary Clinton's violation of a subpoena and getting rid of evidence.
I think that's an obstruction case.
Lying to FISA court judges, disseminating false information bought and paid for by one campaign to the American people, fraudulently using it before a court to obtain warrants.
I just, I don't think if I hired every great attorney in the country, I would ever get off any of this or even think about it.
Well, I agree with John his assessment of James Comey's July 5th, 2016 news conference.
She clearly violated different provisions of the Espionage Act.
The sheer quantity, 110 documents on her server, was gross negligence.
And in fact, Comey wrote it down on May 2nd in a lengthy statement, not once, but twice.
But he wanted to clear her.
That's what he told his staff.
So they had to sanitize his findings of fact.
And they did so on Peter Strzzok's computer.
And then Comey stood there and cleared Hillary Clinton.
I'm with John.
I have interviewed a lot of former federal prosecutors, top former FBI officials.
All of them said that they were dumbstruck when Comey usurped the power of the Attorney General and turned a legal somersault to clear Hillary Clinton.
And frankly, that was the beginning of the Russia hoax to clear her.
And on that same day, his FBI is meeting secretly in London with Christopher Steele, who composed the fabricated dossier.
With that document, they were off to the races.
Do you understand, John, that why I feel that equal justice under the law, equal application of our laws is in jeopardy in this country based on the events that have been unfolding regarding all these issues?
Well, that's a common frustration that a lot of people feel.
But, you know, I'm in Miami, and I looked at the Miami Herald this morning, and the headline was one-two punch for the president.
The president has shown us that he, as I put it, he's like Rocky Balboa.
He's going to come up from these punches, meaning Manafort and Colin, and come out very, very strong.
Because we've got to deal with the facts, not.
I think that's only fair.
And if we had equal justice under the law, if Sean Hannity deleted subpoenaed emails, had somebody acid wash their hard drives and bust up devices, you and I both know I'd be in deep, deep, you know what?
And the same if I lied to any judge ever.
Whoever lies to a judge, you've got to be an idiot to commit a fraud on a judge.
Judges don't take well to that, I don't think.
Well, there's no doubt.
There's no doubt about that, assuming that happened, that the person who did it would be in trouble.
Yeah, not yet so far.
John, thank you.
We appreciate you joining us.
Greg, always, we appreciate you and what you've done.
And we're going to continue our narrative tonight on Hannity 9 Eastern, also an investigation, following the money.
What does that mean?
Investigating the investigators.
How do some of these key players want to talk about Manafort money and Cohn's money?
Let's talk about the money they make going in and out of government.
That's next.
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
A couple years back, you gave a speech saying if we fall in love with our own virtue, we can go sideways.
Hey, Dan, Sarah, can you interview you?
Excellent.
Thanks.
At any point over the last two years, did you fall prey to that?
Did you fall in love with your own virtue?
I don't think so, but I worried about it constantly.
And the guardrail for that, because that's a big worry I have about myself, was to surround myself with people who will hit that, hit at the certainty, hit at the pride to make sure I've thought about things well.
But at the end of the day, you got to look at yourself in the mirror, and you've got to make the decision, the right decision, but most of all, for the right reasons.
Yeah, James Comey's virtue and his superiority and his honor.
Well, is that exactly right?
Well, we have a new book out, and we've been telling you about investigating the investigators, follow the money, and something that, you know, and it's interesting considering that all the Trump-Russia collusion as it relates to Paul Manafort and his trial and all of that that we have followed.
This is the great work of Robert Mueller and his merry band of Democratic donors and, you know, real winners like Andrew Weissman and Jeannie Ray.
And it just is, how did we get here?
How did we start Trump-Russia collusion in the 2016 presidential race and end up with a tax case of Paul Manafort from years ago that had already been dispensed of, that they dug out of mothballs for the very purpose of putting the screws to him so he'll sing or compose in the hopes of getting the president impeached or impeached or prosecuted?
Then we're going to raid the president's attorney's office.
We'll do that.
Now we got, you know, a taxicab medallion issue.
Oh, okay.
Well, if we're going to follow the money, this new book that we have been telling you out is pretty interesting.
Now, if you remember our good friend Peter Schweitzer, he's the one that told us about Clinton Cash, and he wrote about secret empires, how the American political class hides corruption and enriches their family and their friends.
He's the president of the Government Accountability Institute.
And also with us is Seamus Bruner, and he is the author of this brand new book that is telling the story.
It's called Compromised, How Money and Politics Drive FBI Corruption Every Day.
Welcome both of you back to the program.
Now, Peter wrote the introduction to this book.
Seamus, listen, you work for a great guy.
He's very good on TV and radio.
I hope you don't mind him stepping on your book a little bit here.
No, happy to have Peter with me.
But so with all this talk and again, Trump-Russia collusion, 2016, election influence and all this, how did we spin off into, oh, Paul Manafort's taxes and a tax fraud case and issues going back to 2005?
How did we spin off into Michael Cohn's medallions?
And then we look into the investigators, and this is what I see in your book.
And tell me if any of this is wrong, but you're reporting in the book Compromised, How Money and Politics Drive FBI Corruption, which is now out at James Comey's net worth went over, skyrocketed over 4,000% when he left the DOJ in 2005 and returned to the FBI in 2013.
You point out James Comey made $6.1 million after Mueller's FBI granted his employer at the time.
I guess he had a consulting firm of some kind.
But James Comey made $6.1 million from Lockheed Martin and one of the largest contracts and contractors in American history in what you describe as a billion-dollar boondoggle.
And under Mueller's direction, he was the FBI director at the time.
The FBI granted multiple spy contracts to the very firm that employed Comey or his team to Lockheed Martin while Comey is advising them on the legality of their operations and that Comey received another $6 million working for one of the world's largest hedge funds and an additional 500 grand for unused vacation time.
Do I have any of this wrong, Seamus?
Or is that exactly corroborated, right, just and true?
Because they're not getting back to me.
We've tried to confirm it with them.
No, you have it exactly right, Sean.
This is a familiar story, the revolving door, turning public service into self-service.
And I think the question you asked, how did we get here, is a very smart and important question.
So we followed the money, we followed it to the top, and we found that these choir boys or Boy Scouts, as the media likes to depict them, James Comey, Robert Mueller, they're really no better than anyone else in the swamp.
They use their public service, they use their contacts, and they cash in through the revolving door.
So we followed the money, did a full cash analysis, and like you said, we found James Comey's net worth was a modest $206,000 before he went to Lockheed Martin.
And by the way, he wasn't just consulting Lockheed Martin.
He was their general counsel and a senior vice president at the corporation, which kind of begs the question: why would you choose a young James Comey?
He's got no corporate experience of that kind.
So he was working directly for Lockheed Martin.
Directly.
All right.
And explain the $6.1 million that Lockheed Martin, how much were they paying him a year?
Do you know the yearly salary?
Right.
So it's a good point.
And in fairness to James Comey, he could have been making $6.1 million before Lockheed Martin received a billion-dollar boondoggle from Robert Mueller's FBI.
But this is according to SEC documents.
They only disclose the full compensation to James Comey in the year 2009.
So it's possible he earned that much before then.
We just don't know.
Whoa, whoa, whoa.
You're saying the $6.1 million was only made in one year?
Just the year 2009, a single year, $6.1 million.
And how long did he work for Lockheed Martin?
He worked there from 2005 until 2010 and then jumped over to the 100%.
Oh, wait a minute.
If he made $6.1 million in one year, I'm assuming he made a lot.
Why don't you know the other years?
Right.
So it's the way financial disclosures work.
We only have what they give us.
We'd obviously like a lot more.
Well, let's say he was making $3 million a year for the other, how many years now?
It's five years total.
So if he was making $3, it could be $18 million.
Exactly right.
And what does somebody do for five years to make, you know, at least in one year, $6.1 million?
What did he do for the $6.1 million?
That seems like a lot of money to me.
I think most Americans are going to open their eyes and say, how much?
Right.
So in Lockheed Martin's annual reports, James Comey has power of attorney for all of the executives.
So he literally signs off on all of their operations, including some of the invasive surveillance programs like this billion-dollar boondoggle.
That's not my word.
It was reported in Huffington Post that it was called a boondoggle, and that's because it was plagued by cost overruns and delays.
But this program, the billion-dollar program to Lockheed Martin, was called Next Generation Identification, and it was a biometric facial recognition program trying to capture all of the faces of every man, woman, and child in America and turn them into a fingerprint, essentially.
So that came the year before.
Can I interrupt you?
Can I just go back to he worked there from 2005 to 2010?
Correct.
And you only could get his pay for 2009, which was $6.1 million.
Correct.
Where are the other four years?
That's a great question.
What about the years before?
If you can get 09, I would think you can get 08, 07, 06, and 05.
Why wouldn't you get those years?
I would think they would be released first.
Yeah, trust me, I went through every single year and looked for it.
They just don't total James Comey's compensation for those years.
But what we do know is in 2004, the previous general counsel made about $6.1 million.
So we used very conservative estimates here.
We didn't want to go a bridge too far.
So he made $6.1 million.
And is it possible it could have been for the four years together?
Not possible.
I guess anything's possible, but it specifically lays out the compensation for each executive in the year 2009.
And this is a combination of cash and stock options, which interestingly, the stock options were valid through 2020.
So he could have exercised them when he returned to the FBI.
We just don't know.
Right.
So if he has the power of attorney of all the executives at Lockheed Martin, doesn't that mean that he signs off on this stuff?
Correct.
He signs off on all of their operations.
In the annual reports from Lockheed Martin, they state that James Comey helped successfully resolve certain litigation.
They're often sued for various reasons.
So he's signing off on operations.
He's advising on the legality of them, which helps when you're getting surveillance contracts that many civil rights organizations say are too invasive.
And he and his buddy Robert Mueller, it looks like, worked kind of like a pitcher and a catcher.
So in other words, so it would have been on the Lockheed Martin side, you know, pushing to get the government contract.
That would be Comey's role.
And then on the other side, the person that signed off on it was Robert Mueller.
Right.
Well, Robert Mueller.
Did Robert Mueller know that he was getting $6.1 million in 2009?
The annual report comes out at the end of the year, so it's not, I mean, it's not clear, but he obviously would have known that James Comey was at Lockheed Martin, and he obviously would have had to sign off on a billion-dollar program.
But based on what you perceive and your research shows that the role that Comey had at Lockheed Martin, it was his job to sign off on such projects like this, this new generation of ID and facial recognition.
Correct.
And would this be something that Congress had to sign off on, or would it be something Mueller needed to approve within the FBI as the FBI director?
Right.
Well, James Comey and Robert Mueller have this long history together going back to the 90s at the DOJ.
And they've been very concerned with matters relating to surveillance, especially FISA and the Patriot Act.
So we see repeatedly throughout the early 2000s and all the way up through today, Robert Mueller, James Comey wanted to tear down the wall, so to speak, between intelligence agencies and had issues with what they called the going dark problem where they didn't have enough information.
So they really rapidly expanded, and I call it the surveillance state, which is now, of course, being used against journalists, citizens, and even now a presidential candidate.
Got to take a quick break.
We'll come back more with Peter Schweitzer, Government Accountability Institute president, and also Seamus Bruner, author of the blockbuster new book.
It's called Compromised, How Money and Politics Drive FBI Corruption, which is now out in bookstores today.
All right, as we continue, Peter Schweitzer, and he is the head and president of the Government Accountability Institute.
Seamus Bruner is with us.
They have a brand new book.
It's called Compromised, How Money and Politics Drive FBI Corruption, which is now out today.
I mean, it sounds like a lot of money, but on the other hand, there is a certain expertise that one would have that I could see somebody like Lockheed Martin wanting an FBI director and a security clearance would be of great value to them and the contacts that they have would be of great value to them.
It doesn't necessarily mean something nefarious happened here.
And if you're looking at a company that is getting, what, $50 billion a year in taxpayer-funded contracts, $6.1 million is kind of small potatoes, isn't it?
Well, Sean, I think what this highlights is this problem.
It happens at Health and Human Services.
It happens at DOD, where you have government officials who basically, while they're in government, create demand for their own services when they leave.
And so in the case of Jim Comey, he goes to Lockheed Martin from the Department of Justice.
At the Department of Justice, he helped establish some of these very programs that Lockheed Martin was getting contracts to implement and carry out.
So he sets up these programs.
Who is Lockheed Martin going to look for to give a paycheck to who understands this program better than anybody else, the government official who helped put it together?
And that is sort of a tried and truth story in Washington, D.C.
And the point is that, you know, you played that clip at the beginning of Jim Comey talking about, you know, how sensitive he is to the appearances of, you know, doing something wrong or wrongdoing.
The fact of the matter is this is a very familiar story, unfortunately, in the swamp.
And that, I think, is what's so troubling about it.
And what Seamus shows is this pattern where, you know, when Mueller is in the private sector and Comey is in government, there seem to be contracts and resources that flow in that direction as well.
It's kind of a tag team arrangement that these two have.
And so it speaks to the financial underbelly that exists even at the Department of Justice, which is an agency, the FBI, that we expect to be focused primarily on enforcing the law.
There are lots of ways in which these officials self-enrich themselves.
Wow.
This is a mind-blowing episode here.
By the way, if you're just joining us, the book is called Compromised, How Money and Politics Drive FBI Corruption.
Now out in bookstores, Amazon.com.
It's eye-opening.
And I think a lot of questions need to be asked by Congress of the people involved so that we know nothing nefarious has happened.
Anyway, I want to thank you both, Peter Schweitzer and Seamus Bruner.
Thank you both.
800-941 Shauna's on number.
All right, when we come back, Jim Jordan.
By the way, he's running for Speaker.
We support him, would love to see it.
And don't think that if, in fact, Republicans hold the House, that he couldn't win.
In the age of Trump, anything can happen.
Of course, that's 76 days away.
And remember, I also warned you that this election is about what?
They want to impeach the president.
They want to keep Obamacare.
How's that working out?
Let's see.
Fire, ice, and open borders.
And they want their crumbs back.
And they want to stop all the investigations into the deep state and their corruption.
So that's what that is all about.
Anyway, we'll talk about the elections.
We'll talk about Bruce Orr and his loving relationship with Christopher Steele, considering they see, text, or email, oh, 70-plus times.
How did that happen before and after the election?
Also, don't forget Hannity tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
Sarah Gregg, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Malcolm, Pambondi, and Ainsley Earhart with her exclusive interview with President Trump from earlier today.
That's all coming up at 9 on Fox.
We'll continue.
You know, one thing that we haven't got to, and that's Bruce Orr, Christopher Steele, 70-plus interactions, meetings, emails, text messages.
We have them all hoping the firewalls hold, and I don't want to get exposed.
And yeah, okay.
Well, now we know none of this is going to impact Donald Trump as it relates to either Manafort or Cohn's.
Now we can actually get back to the real crimes that were committed that everybody wants to avoid in the media.
Let's just go over some of the history of all of this, Trey Gowdy and some other people, and remind you about these interactions.
So what are we investigating here?
The number four person in the Department of Justice, Bruce Orr's wife, worked for Fusion GPS.
He had dozens of contacts with Mr. Steele, the informant the FBI was using on the payroll of the Democratic Party.
There's no way in the world he should have interacted with Mr. Steele because his wife worked for the same organization.
So somebody other than the people in charge today needs to look at what they did yesterday.
Senator Grassley, secondly, asked for the Bruce Orr 302s.
Bruce Orr is going to become more and more important in this investigation.
Explain a 302 and we'll pay attention to it.
Explain a 302, which is an official report where they altered.
So the FBI interviewed Bruce Orr at least a dozen times and put together reports.
So once they fired Steele, which at that point they should have not been meeting with him anymore, but what they had is they had Bruce Orr, whose wife, Nellie Orr, was working for Fusion GPS, was going to meet and still get the information from Christopher Steele as they were trying to verify this unverified dossier or the Clinton dirt that was used to get the Pfizer warrant.
Judge, I wanted to make a point about what Greg just said.
Rod Rosenstein won't tell us when he first learned that Nellie Orr was working for Fusion GPS.
So I want to know from Bruce Orr, when did he tell his colleagues at the Department of Justice that in violation of the law that required him to disclose his wife's occupation and her sources of income, he did not do that.
And so when did all the other people at the Department of Justice find this out?
Because Rod Rosenstein, I've asked him twice in open hearing, and he will not give an answer.
I think there's a real smoking gun there.
You said earlier Bruce Orr was not working on the Russia investigation.
Let me ask you to your knowledge.
Did you not know that Bruce Orr was meeting with Christopher Steele, getting information about the dossier and supplying that information to the FBI at the same time his wife Nellie was working for Fusion GPS that was helping Hillary Clinton?
Did you not know he was doing that for the FBI?
Correct.
We're going to be back and we're going to interview Bruce Orr, not in a public circus setting, but in a deposition with no time limits, and we're going to get to the bottom of what he did, why he did it, who he did it in concert with, whether he had the permission of the supervisors at the Department of Justice.
It is, I used to work doing what Bruce Orr does now.
It is unbelievable that a prosecutor would insert himself into an ongoing investigation for which he had nothing to do.
All right, he wants to be with the next speaker of the House.
He's an Ohio congressman, one of the most popular in Congress.
He is the well, you're the former chairman of the Freedom Caucus, aren't you?
That's right.
That's right, Sean.
And Mark Meadows beat you out for the second run, right?
Yeah, it wasn't a race, but Mark's doing a great job in leading our group.
That's for darn sure.
Well, one thing that I would like to highlight, if you don't mind me getting into it, there were a bunch of allegations made against you by individuals that, in fact, that you knew about as an assistant coach when I guess you were in your early 20s that you were adamant and passionate about that you knew nothing of.
And I saw that you were getting trashed and there was a rush to judgment as there usually is.
And now I'm seeing a number of these people, I don't know how many exactly, now rescinded what they said about you.
Yeah, because it wasn't true.
Every single coach has said the same thing I have.
All kinds of wrestlers have said the same thing I have.
And every reason they said all that, Sean, says it's the truth.
I mean, think about this.
So I'm the guy who stood up to this.
By the way, I got in trouble for saying on TV because I've known you all these years and I know the person you are.
I knew it was a fabrication.
Absolutely knew it.
But, you know, I live in this world where I get smeared and slandered all the time, and I recognize it when I see it.
Next to the president, you've probably dealt with this more than anyone else, Sean.
So you know how ridiculous it is, and you know how tough it is when people are just saying things that are not true, that are just lies.
But look, I stood up to the Speaker of the House from our own state.
I stood up to the IRS.
We're standing up to the FBI and the crazy things they tried to do to the President Trump and his campaign.
Do you think I wouldn't stand up? for our athletes if I thought something wrong was happening?
Of course I would.
This is so ridiculous.
But the good news is everybody sees through it, and we're focused on doing what we told the people we're going to do and helping President Trump get things done.
Well, and the good news is that, you know what, it took a while, and I'm sure it was painful to you and your family.
And to be honest, I've built up so many immunities, I barely even noticed the attacks anymore.
I just expect them.
But it is what it is.
I tell our colleagues, Sean, all the time, if the mainstream media isn't saying something bad about it, you're probably not doing anything any good.
I think you're right.
You know how this works, and you just got to keep focused on the job and the goal and get it.
You also learn who your friends are in these moments, too.
Sure do.
And I appreciate what you said.
I appreciate what the president said.
You two were the first two to come out and say this is ridiculous.
And I still appreciate that.
I know you.
I know who you are.
I knew this wasn't true.
I'm glad it worked out.
Now, let me go to this.
All right.
So now that we got the lying, now that the Russian investigation has gotten certain things out of the way, lying to the FBI, even though the agents that interviewed General Flynn didn't think he was lying, nor did Comey think he was lying, and Papadopoulos, you know, I bet he regrets being a campaign volunteer.
All right, so the lying part to the FBI is out of the way.
Now the, okay, those that committed tax fraud from years before that had nothing to do with the Trump campaign and made false statements on a loan application, now that all that's out of the way, and the two campaign finance issues are out of the way completely as it relates to Donald Trump.
They're dead issues.
Every lawyer that has any brains knows it.
And we got to finally now close to 500 days in.
Are we ever going to get to the collusion part, the Russian interference part, the Russian dossier that was propagated, the lies to the American people and the fraud committed four times on FISA court judges with bought and paid for Hillary Clinton, Russian lies?
Are we going to now get to that part?
I think we're going to get some answers next Tuesday when we have Bruce Orr in a deposition.
I'm looking forward to asking him a number of questions.
Never forget the basics here, Sean, and you've been great about this, highlighting this for the American people.
Bruce Orr, top Justice Department official, his wife worked for the firm hired by the Clintons to put together the dossier four weeks ago in a hearing.
Peter Strzok told me, third round of questioning, took me a while to get this, but third round of questioning, Peter Strzok told me, yes, in fact, the FBI was getting parts of the dossier from none other than Bruce Orr.
You cannot do that in this country, but they did it.
Bruce Orr's wife, working for the firm hired by the Clintons, was handing the dossier, the work product from that firm, handing the dossier to the FBI, and they then used it to go to the secret court to get the warrant to spy on President Trump's campaign.
That actually happened.
We know that for a fact.
What we need to know from Bruce Orr is, who'd you talk to?
Did Sally Hates know about it?
Did Rod Rosenstein know about it?
And maybe more importantly, who did you hand those dossiers to?
Who at the FBI actually took receipt of those when you gave them to him, as Peter Strzok said under oath?
So lots of important questions we hope to get the answers to next week.
So, and it does have to do with Russian lies bought and paid for, correct?
And that were used to misinform the American people to help Hillary Clinton win.
That's all true, right?
Well, never right.
We always highlight the basics here.
The Clinton campaign, paid Perkins Cooey, the law firm who paid Fusion GPS, who paid a foreigner, Christopher Steele, to do what?
Go talk to Russians that put together a garbage document called the dossier that they took to the court, and they didn't tell the court who paid for it, but they used it to get a warrant to spy on President Trump's campaign.
Those are the facts.
So there's the collusion, but no, no, we've spent 18, 19, whatever, how many months it is now, 15, 16 months trying to figure out whether anyone's going to be able to do it.
Yeah, we're coming up on 500 days of this crap.
500 days, it's ridiculous, and not one bit of evidence to show any type of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia to impact the election.
You know, as you watched all the events unfolding yesterday, and I'm like, well, there are lessons to be learned.
I mean, number one, you can't lie to the FBI.
I think everybody knows that.
You're not allowed to cheat on your taxes.
They're going to get you.
Pay your money.
Pay what you owe.
And if you don't like that, they're high, work to change the laws.
But don't decide on your own.
You're not going to pay.
I know people that did this.
It never works out well for them.
It's really dumb.
And the third thing is, don't lie in loan applications to banks.
I think that's a bad idea, too.
Now, with that said, I would also say it's a bad idea that if Congress subpoenases my emails, that I shouldn't delete them or acid wash my hard drive with beef pit.
And I don't think it would be a good idea to have someone bust up my devices with hammers and pull out SIM cards.
To me, why haven't people been held accountable there?
Yeah, because unfortunately today, and this is something that you've talked on, and our constituents and folks around the country know we now have two standards adjusted.
One for us regular people, but a different set if your name is Clinton, Comey, Lynch, Lerner, McCabe, Strutt.
A different set of rules for those guys compared to what we regular Americans and the folks I get the privilege of representing and the folks you get to talk to every day on your show, what they have to live under.
And it is never supposed to work.
How about this fact, Sean?
Why is it that only Republicans get if there's a campaign finance violation?
Why is it only Republicans?
Dinesh D'Souza went to jail, but the Obama campaign, the Johnson Edwards campaign, they have campaign finance violations.
No one ever goes to jail then, but oh, Dinesh has to do it for something that he, this is the other double standard.
Only Republicans get hit with campaign finance violations, never the Democrats.
That's such a good point.
And, you know, we actually, I don't know, I may be very old-fashioned, but, you know, when I go before a judge, you know, I really only had to go for parking tickets, if we're going to be blunt here.
But I say, yes, sir, no, sir.
Yes, ma'am, no, ma'am.
Your honor.
Yes, your honor, no, your honor.
And I'm very respectful.
And the idea that I would take information that I haven't verified or corroborated, even though the law requires that you can't present it if you don't know it to be true.
We know that happened with the FISA applications and the Steele dossier that Christopher Steele himself doesn't stand by because in an interrogatory in Great Britain, he said that, oh, I don't know if it's true.
It's raw intelligence, 50-50.
I think I'd probably be in deep trouble if I committed a fraud on a court, don't you think?
Of course you would.
When you go to court, when I go to court, when your listeners, your viewers, my constituents go to court, they have to tell the truth, the Whole truth and nothing but the truth.
When the FBI took the FISA application to the court, they didn't tell them who paid for it.
And more importantly, or as importantly, they didn't tell them the guy who wrote the darn thing, Christopher Steele, had been fired by the FBI because he's out leaking information.
So that is a big problem.
And they use that document.
Again, it all comes back to the dossier.
They use that document to secure the ability to spy on the Trump campaign.
And that is what is so wrong about this whole sort of deal.
You know, it is sad that we're at this point.
Are you confident for those people that look at where this Mueller investigation has taken us, nothing to do with Russia on any of these issues that have been made, you know, all the big deal that they have spent on all of this, and they see these crimes that have been committed, and we see that there are people within government with the most power that abuse their power and that none of them are being held accountable.
And you talk about a two-tier justice system.
You know, we're supposed to have in our Constitutional Republic equal justice and application of our laws.
If we don't have that, what does that mean for the country?
It's not healthy.
What they did is never supposed to happen in this great nation, the greatest country ever where we have the Constitution, the Bill of Rights.
It is never supposed to work the way it did.
And that is what bothers me so much.
It's what bothers our constituents.
Just yesterday, I said a constituent comes out, and it happens all the time.
When is someone going to be held accountable?
And I said, you know what?
We can't prosecute anyone.
All we can do is bring out the facts and the truth so that the American people can see what took place.
But I hope people who actually did this wrong are held to account.
Right now, there is a criminal referral for Andy McCabe.
Maybe someone's going to be held accountable.
But our job, Sean, and your job is to continue to bring the truth out so the American people can see it.
And I am not going to stop until I've got every single answer that I'd have.
You know what everybody says to me?
Hey, keep going, Hannity.
By the way, what are they going to pound down?
This is what people are afraid of.
When are they going to knock down your door and Greg Jarrett's door and Sarah Carter's door and sorry your and Jim Jordan's door because you guys are exposing this corruption and abuse of power?
And I said, oh, I guess that's the day the music dies that the United States doesn't exist anymore.
Yes.
Sean, how is it that Twitter can shadow ban four people?
Mark Meadows, Devin Noones, Matt Gates, and Jim Jordan.
And then Twitter says, oh, no, no, it was a glitch in our algorithm.
And I'm like, what?
What'd you put in your algorithm?
The names Meadows, Noonan, are you kidding me?
Like, this is what we're now seeing in the greatest country ever.
And it's all because of this crazy stuff that went on at the top levels of the FBI.
So we have got to continue to do this because, as you point out, where does it end?
Where does it end?
Good point.
All right, Jim Jordan, Ohio Congressman, running for speaker.
We'll have more on that in the weeks and months ahead.
We're now 76 days away from the most important midterm in our lifetime.
All right, that's going to wrap things up for today.
Hannity tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
All right, we are loaded up.
We have Greg, we have Sarah, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Malkin, Pam Bondi is with us.
Oh, and Ainsley Earhart with her exclusive interview with the President of the United States of America.
All coming up tonight at 9.
Tune in.
Hannity, Fox News.
We'll see you tonight, and we'll see you back here tomorrow.
