All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 5, 2018 - Sean Hannity Show
01:47:55
Victory In Sight? - 10.5

Join Sean as he sits down with Senator Lindsey Graham to discuss the final push to confirm Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Plus, listen to Senator Collins’ floor remarks that marked a historic swing in this confirmation process. 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.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart Podcast.
Let not your heart be troubled.
You are listening to the Sean Hannity Radio Show Podcast.
My friends of MyPillow, my buddy Mike Lindell told me he was coming out with a brand new product.
It's called the New Mattress Topper.
So I got the new mattress topper immediately, and I've been sleeping on it now for a couple of months.
It's the best thing you've ever felt in your life.
Now you literally have my pillow foam for support.
It's a transitional foam that helps relieve pressure points.
And it's ultra-soft, patented temperature regulating cover.
And I gotta tell you, it has a 10-year warranty, a cover that's washable and dryable.
It's made in the USA, back by their 60-day unconditional money back guarantee.
Once you try this new mattress topper, you put it right over your mattress, you will never sleep better.
And right now, you, my radio listeners, you're gonna save 30% off when you go to my pillow.com and use the promo code topper.
And by the way, Mike will also give you two standard my pillows absolutely free.
All right, so try my pillow.com promo code topper.
Promo code topper with this great deal and the best night's sleep you ever had.
All right, glad you're with us.
Uh we are expecting any moment this hour that Senator Susan Collins of Maine will be making her announcement as to, and she did vote yes to enclosure, and that means the 30-hour clock has started.
And uh, we expect her decision on the final vote for confirmation, which we expect will take place sometime tomorrow around five o'clock Eastern time.
Uh oh, Susan, who's speaking?
Susan Collins has taken the floor if you want to go to a boat.
Susan Collins just took to the floor.
Let's listen in.
The Senator for Maine.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Collins, please don't call.
Senator will suspend.
The sergeant in arms will suspend until this.
The sergeant in arms will restore order in the gallery.
Sergeant Please speak here.
No, no.
Shaw Free Women!
Go!
Shaw Free Women!
Go!
Shaw Free Women!
Go!
As a reminder.
As a reminder to our guests in the galleries, expressions of approval or disapproval are not permitted in the Senate galleries.
The Senator for Maine.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. President, the five previous times that I've come to the floor to explain my vote on the nomination of a justice to the United States Supreme Court.
I have begun my floor remarks explaining my decision with a recognition of the solemn nature and the importance of the occasion.
But today, we have come to the conclusion of a confirmation process that has become so dysfunctional.
It looks more like a caricature of a gutter-level political campaign than a solemn occasion.
The president nominated Brett Kavanaugh on July 9th.
Within moments of that announcement, special interest groups raced to be the first to oppose him, including one organization that didn't even bother to fill in the judge's name on its pre-written press release.
They simply wrote that they opposed Donald Trump's nomination of X to the Supreme Court of the United States.
A number of senators joined the race to announce their opposition, but they were beaten to the punch by one of our colleagues who actually announced opposition before the nominee's identity was even known.
Since that time, we have seen special interest groups whip their followers into a frenzy by spreading misrepresentations and outright falsehoods about Judge Kavanaugh's judicial record.
Over the top rhetoric and distortions of his record and testimony at his first hearing produced short-lived headlines, which, although debunked hours later, continued to live on and be spread through social media.
Interest groups have also spent an unprecedented amount of dark money opposing this nomination.
Our Supreme Court confirmation process has been in steady decline for more than 30 years.
One can only hope that the Kavanaugh nomination is where the process has finally hit rock bottom.
Against this backdrop, it is up to each individual senator to decide what the Constitution's advice and consent duty means.
Informed by Alexander Hamilton's Federalist 76, I have interpreted this to mean that the president has broad discretion to consider a nominee's philosophy,
whereas my duty as a senator is to focus on the nominee's qualifications as long as that nominee's philosophy is within the mainstream of judicial thought.
I have always opposed litmus tests for judicial nominees with respect to their personal views or politics, but I fully expect them to be able to put aside any and all personal preferences in deciding the cases that come before them.
I've never considered the president's identity or party when evaluating Supreme Court nominations.
As a result, I voted in favor of Justices Roberts and Alito, who were nominated by President Bush.
Justices Soter Mayor and Kagan, who were nominated by President Obama, and Justice Gorsuch, who was nominated by President Trump.
So I began my evaluation of Judge Kavanaugh's nomination by reviewing his 12-year record on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, including his more than 300 opinions and his many speeches and law review articles.
Nineteen attorneys, including lawyers from the nonpartisan congressional research service, briefed me many times each week and assisted me in evaluating the judge's extensive record.
I met with Judge Kavanaugh for more than two hours in my office.
I listened carefully to the testimony at the committee hearings.
I spoke with people who knew him personally, such as Condoleezza Rice and many others.
And I talked with Judge Kavanaugh a second time by phone for another hour to ask him very specific additional questions.
I also have met with thousands of my constituents, both advocates and many opponents, regarding Judge Kavanaugh.
One concern that I frequently heard was that the judge would be likely to eliminate the Affordable Care Act's vital protections for people with preexisting conditions.
In a dissent in Seven Sky Beholder, Judge Kavanaugh rejected a challenge to the ACA on narrow procedural grounds, preserving the law in full.
Many experts have said that his dissent informed Justice Roberts' opinion upholding the ACA at the Supreme Court.
Furthermore, Judge Kavanaugh's approach toward the doctrine of severability is narrow.
When a part of a statute is challenged on constitutional grounds, he has argued for severing the invalid clause as surgically as possible while allowing the overall law to remain intact.
This was his approach in his descendant, a case that involved a challenge to the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
In his dissent, Judge Kavanaugh argued for quote, severing any problematic portions while leaving the remainder intact, end quote.
Given the current challenges to the ACA, proponents, including myself, of protections for people with pre-existing conditions should want a justice who would take just this kind of approach.
Another assertion that I've heard often is that Judge Kavanaugh cannot be trusted if a case involving alleged wrongdoing by the president were to come before the court.
First, Judge Kavanaugh has written that he believes that Congress should enact legislation to protect presidents from criminal prosecution or civil liability while in office.
Mr. President, I believe opponents missed the mark on this issue.
The fact that Judge Kavanaugh offered this legislative proposal suggests that the pre he believes that the president does not have such protection currently.
Second, there are some who argue that given the current special counsel investigation, President Trump should not even be allowed to nominate a justice.
That argument ignores our recent history.
President Clinton in 1993 nominated Justice Ginsburg after the Whitewater investigation was already underway, and she was confirmed 96 to 3.
The next year, just three months after independent counsel Robert Fisk was named to lead the whitewater investigation.
President Clinton nominated Justice Breyer.
He was confirmed along the Sean Hannity Show Network.
are going to stay with this through our first break and continue our coverage.
Supreme Court justices have not hesitated to rule against the presidents who have nominated them, perhaps most notably in the United States versus Nixon, Three Nixon appointees who heard the case joined the unanimous opinion against him.
Judge Kavanaugh has been unequivocal in his belief that no president is above the law.
He has stated that Marbury versus Madison, Youngstown Seal versus Sawyer, and the United States versus Nixon are three of the four greatest Supreme Court cases in history.
What do they have in Common, each of them is a case where Congress served as a check on presidential power.
And I would note that the fourth case that Judge Kavanaugh has pointed to as the greatest in history was Brown versus the Board of Education.
One Kavanaugh decision illustrates the point about the check on presidential power directly.
He wrote the opinion in Hamdan versus the United States, a case that challenges the Bush administration's Military Commission prosecution of an associate of Osama bin Laden.
This conviction was very important to the Bush administration.
But Judge Kavanaugh, who had been appointed to the DC circuit by President Bush, and had worked in President Bush's White House, ruled that the conviction was unlawful.
As he explained during the hearing, quote, we don't make decisions based on who people are or their policy preferences or the moment.
We base decisions on the law, end quote.
Others I've met with have expressed concerns that Justice Kennedy's retirement threatens the right of same-sex couples to marry.
Yet Judge Kavanaugh described the Obergefell decision, which legalized same gender marriages as an important landmark precedent.
He also cited Justice Kennedy's recent masterpiece cake shop opinion for the court's majority, stating that, quote, the days of treating gay and lesbian Americans or gay and lesbian couples as second-class citizens who are inferior in dignity and worth over in the Supreme Court, end quote.
Others have suggested that the judge holds extreme views on birth control.
In one case, Judge Kavanaugh incurred the disfavor of both sides of the political spectrum for seeking to ensure the availability of contraceptive services for women while minimizing the involvement of employers with religious objections.
Although his critics frequently overlooked this point, Judge Kavanaugh's dissent rejected arguments that the government did not have a compelling interest in facilitating access to contraception.
In fact, he wrote that the Supreme Court president strongly suggested that there was a compelling interest in facilitating access to birth control.
There has also been considerable focus on the future of abortion rights based on the concern that Judge Kavanaugh would seek to overturn Roe v.
Wade.
Protecting this right is important to me.
To my knowledge, Judge Kavanaugh is the first Supreme Court nominee to express the view that precedent is not merely a practice and tradition but rooted in Article III of our Constitution itself.
He believes that precedent is not just a judicial policy, it is constitutionally dictated to pay attention and pay heed to rules of precedent.
In other words, precedent isn't a goal or an aspiration.
It is a constitutional tenet that has to be followed, except in the most extraordinary circumstances.
The judge further explained that precedent provides stability, predictability, reliance, And fairness.
There are, of course, rare and extraordinary times where the Supreme Court would rightly overturn a precedent.
The most famous example was when the Supreme Court in Brown versus the Board of Education overruled Plessy versus Ferguson, correcting a grievously wrong decision to use the judge's term, allowing racial inequality.
But someone who believes that the importance of precedent has been rooted in the Constitution would follow long established president, except in those rare circumstances where a decision is grievously wrong or deeply inconsistent with the law.
Those are Judge Kavanaugh's phrases.
As the judge asserted to me, a long established precedent, it's not something to be trimmed, narrowed, discarded, or overlooked.
Its roots in the Constitution give the concept of starry decisive greater weight, such that the precedent can't be trimmed or narrowed simply because a judge might want to on a whim.
In short, his views on honoring precedent would presclude attempts to do by stealth that which one has committed not to do overtly.
Noting that Roe v.
Wade was decided 40 years, 45 years ago and reaffirmed 19 years later in Planned Parenthood versus Casey.
I asked Judge Kavanaugh whether the passage of time is relevant to following precedent.
He said decisions become part of our legal framework with the passage of time, and that honoring precedent is essential to maintaining public confidence.
Our discussion then turned to the right of privacy, on which the Supreme Court relied in Griswold v.
Connecticut, a case that struck down a law banning the use and sale of contraceptions.
Griswold established the legal foundation that led to Roe eight years later.
In describing Griswold as settled law, Judge Kavanaugh observed that it was the correct application of two famous cases from the 1920s, Meyer and Pierce, that are not seriously challenged by anyone today.
Finally, in his testimony, he noted repeatedly that Roe had been upheld by Planned Parenthood versus Casey, describing it as precedent on precedent.
When I asked him, would it be sufficient to overturn a long-established precedent if five current justices believed that it was wrongly decided?
He emphatically said no.
Opponents frequently cite then-candidate Donald Trump's campaign pledge to nominate only judges who would overturn Roe.
The Republican platform for all presidential campaigns...
And we're going to continue our coverage of Senator Susan Collins on the Senate floor.
She is about to announce her decision.
This could be the determining vote as it relates to Judge Kavanaugh.
We will be allowing our stations across the Sean Hannity Show network to make their own decisions on whether to break away.
We will be staying with our coverage.
We've concluded this pledge since at least 1980.
During this time, presidents, Republican presidents, have appointed Justices O'Connor, Souter, and Kennedy to the Supreme Court.
These are the very three justices, Republican, President, appointed justices, who authored the Casey decision which reaffirmed Roe.
Furthermore, pro-choice groups vigorously opposed each of these justices' nominations.
Incredibly, they even circulated buttons with the slogan, stop suitor or women will die.
Just two years later, Justice Suitor co-authored the case he opinion, reaffirming a woman's right to choose.
Suffice it to say, prominent advocacy organizations have been wrong.
These same interest groups have speculated that Judge Kavanaugh was selected to do the bidding of conservative ideologues despite his record of judicial independence.
I, as the judge, point blank whether he had made any commitments or pledges to anyone at the White House, to the Federalist Society, to any outside group on how he would decide cases.
He unequivocally assured me that he had not.
Judge Kavanaugh has received rave reviews for his 12-year track record as a judge, including for his judicial temperament.
The American Bar Association gave him its highest possible rating.
His standing committee on the federal judiciary conducted an extraordinarily thorough assessment, soliciting input from almost 500 people, including his judicial colleagues.
The APA concluded that his integrity, judicial temperament, and professional competence met the highest standards.
Lisa Blatt, who has argued more cases before the Supreme Court than any other woman in history testified, quote, by any objective measure, Judge Kavanaugh is clearly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court.
His opinions are invariably thoughtful and fair.
Ms. Blatt, who clerked for and is an ardent admirer of Justice Ginsburg and who is, in her own words, an unapologetic defender of a woman's right to choose, says that Judge Kavanaugh fits within the mainstream of legal thought.
She also observed that Judge Kavanaugh is remarkably committed to promoting women in the legal profession.
That Judge Kavanaugh is more of a centrist than some of his critics maintain is reflected in the fact that he and Chief Judge Merrick Garland voted the same way in 93% of the cases that they heard together.
Indeed, Chief Judge Garland joined in more than 96% of the majority opinions authored by Judge Kavanaugh, dissenting only once.
Despite all this, after weeks of reviewing Judge Kavanaugh's record and listening to 32 hours of his testimony, the Senate's advice and consent role was thrown into a tailspin following the allegations of sexual assault by Professor Christine Blasey Ford.
The confirmation process now involves evaluating whether or not Judge Kavanaugh committed sexual assault and lied about it to the Judiciary Committee.
Some argue that because this is a lifetime appointment to our highest courts, court, the public interest requires that doubts be resolved against the nominee.
Others see the public interest as embodied in our long established tradition of affording to those accused of misconduct a presumption of innocence.
In cases in which the facts are unclear, they would argue that the question should be resolved in favor of the nominee.
Mr. President, I understand both viewpoints.
This debate is complicated further by the fact that the Senate confirmation process is not a trial, but certain fundamental legal principles about due process, the presumption of innocence and fairness do bear on my thinking, and I cannot abandon them.
In evaluating any given claim of misconduct, we will be ill-served in the long run if we abandon the presumption of innocence and fairness, tempting though it may be.
We must always remember that it is when passions are most inflamed that fairness is most in jeopardy.
The presumption of innocence is relevant to the advice and consent function when an accusation departs from a nominee's otherwise exemplary record.
I worry that departing from this presumption could lead to a lack of public faith in the judiciary and would be hugely damaging to the confirmation process moving forward.
Some of the allegations levied against Judge Kavanaugh illustrate why the presumption of innocence is so important.
I am thinking in particular not of the allegations raised by Professor Ford, but of the allegation that when he was a teenager, Judge Kavanaugh drugged multiple girls and used their weakened state to facilitate gang rape.
That such an allegation can find its way into the Supreme Court confirmation process is a stark reminder about why the presumption of innocence is so ingrained.
That's why we are not afraid of the Supreme Court.
That's why we are afraid of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court.
That's why we are afraid of the Supreme Court.
that Supreme Court.
That's why we are afraid of the Supreme Court.
That we are afraid of the Supreme Court.
And Ms. Kaiser went further.
She indicated that not only does she not remember a night like that, but also that she does not even know Brett Kavanaugh.
In addition to the lack of corroborating evidence, we also learned some facts that raised more questions.
For instance, since these allegations have become public, Professor Ford testified that not a single person has contacted her to say I was at the party that night.
Furthermore, the professor testified that although she does not remember how she got home that evening, she knew that because of the distance she would have needed a ride.
Yet not a single person has come forward to say that they were the one who drove her home or were in the car with her that night.
And Professor Ford also indicated that even though she loved that small gathering of six or so people abruptly and without saying goodbye and distraught, None of them called her the next day or ever to ask why she left.
Is she okay?
Not even her closest friend, Ms. Kaiser.
Mr. President, the Constitution does not provide guidance on how we are supposed to evaluate these competing claims.
It leaves that decision up to each senator.
This is not a criminal trial, and I do not believe that the claims such as these need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Nevertheless, fairness would dictate that the claims at least should meet a threshold of more likely than not as our standard.
The facts presented do not mean that President that Professor Ford was not sexually assaulted that night or at some other time, but they do lead me to conclude that the allegations failed to meet the more likely than not standard.
Therefore, I do not believe that these charges can fairly prevent Judge Kavanaugh from serving on the court.
Let me emphasize that my approach to this question should not be misconstrued as suggesting that unwanted sexual contact of any nature is not a serious problem in this country.
To the contrary, of any good at all, has come from this ugly confirmation process.
It has been to create an awareness that we have underestimated the pervasiveness of this terrible problem.
I have been alarmed and disturbed, however, by some who have suggested that unless Judge Kavanaugh's nomination is rejected, the Senate is somehow condoning sexual assault.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Every person, man or woman, who makes a charge of sexual assault deserves to be heard and treated with respect.
The Me Too movement is real.
It matters.
It is needed, and it is long overdue.
We know that Rape and sexual assault are less likely to be reported to the police than other forms of assault.
On average, an estimated 211,000 rapes and sexual assaults go unreported every year.
We must listen to survivors, and every day we must seek to stop the criminal behavior that has hurt so many.
We owe this to ourselves, our children, and generations to come.
Since the hearing, I have listened to many survivors of sexual assault.
Many were total strangers who told me their heart-wrenching stories for the first time in their lives.
Some were friends that I had known for decades, yet, with the exception of one woman who had confided in me years ago, I had no idea that they had been the victims of sexual attacks.
I am grateful for their courage and their willingness to come forward.
And I hope that in heightening public awareness, they have also lightened the burden that they have been quietly bearing for so many years.
To them, I pledge to do all that I can to ensure that their daughters and granddaughters never share their experiences.
Over the past few weeks, I have been emphatic that the Senate has an obligation to investigate and evaluate the serious allegations of sexual assault.
I called for and supported the additional hearing to hear from both Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh.
I also pushed for and supported the FBI's supplemental background investigation.
This was the right thing to do.
Christine Ford never sought the spotlight.
She indicated that she was terrified to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and she has shunned attention since then.
She seemed completely unaware of Chairman Grassley's offer to allow her to testify confidentially in California.
Watching her, Mr. President, I could not help but feel that some people who wanted to engineer the defeat of this nomination cared little, if at all, for her well-being.
Professor Ford testified that a very limited number of people had access to her letter.
Yet that letter found its way into the public domain.
She testified that she never gave permission for that very private letter to be released.
And yet here we are.
We are in the middle of a fight that she never sought, arguing about claims that she wanted to raise confidentially.
Now, one theory I've heard espoused repeatedly is that our colleague Senator Feinstein leaked Professor Ford's letter at the 11th hour to derail this process.
I want to state this very clearly.
I know Senator Dianne Feinstein extremely well, and I believe that she would never do that.
I knew that to be the case before she even stated it at the hearing.
She is a person of integrity, and I stand by her.
I have also heard some argue that the Chairman of the Committee somehow treated Professor Ford unfairly.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Chairman Grassley, along with his excellent staff, treated Professor Ford with compassion and respect throughout the entire process.
And that is the way the Senator from Iowa has conducted himself throughout a lifetime dedicated to public service.
But the fact remains, Mr. President, someone leaked this letter against Professor Ford's express wishes.
I suspect regrettably that we will never know for certain who did it.
To that leaker, who I hope is listening now, let me say that what you did was unconscionable.
You have taken a survivor who was not only entitled to your respect, but who also trusted you to protect her, and you have sacrificed her well-being in a misguided attempt to win whatever political crusade you think you are fighting.
My only hope is that your callous act has turned this process into such a dysfunctional circus that it will cause the Senate and indeed all Americans to reconsider how we evaluate Supreme Court nominees.
If that happens, then the appalling lack of compassion you afforded Professor Ford will at least have some unintended positive consequences.
Mr. President, the politically charged atmosphere surrounding this nomination has reached a fever pitch even before these allegations were known, and it has been challenging, even to separate fact from fiction.
We live in a time of such great disunity as the bitter fight over this nomination, both in the Senate and among the public, clearly demonstrates.
It is not merely a case of different groups having different opinions.
It is a case of people bearing extreme ill will toward those who disagree with them.
In our intense focus on our differences, we have forgotten the common values that bind us together as Americans.
When some of our best minds are seeking to develop even more sophisticated algorithms designed to link us to websites that only report just giving a heads up again to the affiliates of the Sean Hannity Show Network, Susan Collins, this historic speech on the Senate floor.
We will continue our coverage.
And cater to our views.
We can only expect our differences to intensify.
This would have alarmed the drafters of our Constitution who were acutely aware that different values and interests could prevent Americans from becoming and remaining a single people.
Indeed, of the six objectives they invoked in the preamble to the Constitution, the one that they put first was the formation of a more perfect union.
Their vision of a more perfect union does not exist today.
And if anything, we appear to be moving farther away from it.
It is particularly worrisome that the Supreme Court, the institution that most Americans see as the principal guardian of our shared constitutional heritage is viewed as part of the problem through a political lens.
Mr. President, we've heard a lot of charges and countercharges about Judge Kavanaugh.
But as those who have known him best have attested, he has been an exemplary public servant, judge, teacher, coach, husband, and father.
Despite the turbulent bitter fights surrounding his nomination, my fervent hope is that Brad Kavanaugh will work to lessen the divisions in the Supreme Court, so that we have far fewer 5-4 decisions.
And so that public confidence in our judiciary and our highest court is restored.
Mr. President, I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I think one of the more amazing speeches, and I I have now, it's actually interesting because as of tomorrow, I begin my 23rd year on the Fox News Channel and my 30 years on radio.
That was one of the most thoughtful speeches I think I've ever heard.
And I'm frankly shocked.
Um Susan Collins over the years has frustrated the living daylights out of me over her opinions.
I think what stands out more than anything else is the sincere compelling amount of gravity that she gave to her decision and her speech,
and the gravity of the moment and bringing literally a sense of sanity to what has become an absolute, as she said, circus around the country, and systematically went over every single aspect of her decision-making process from Judge Kavanaugh,
his judicial temperament, the questions that he specifically answered, her passion about uh especially, and I disagree with her on Roe v.
Wade, but on the issue of constitutional precedence, the role of advice and consent, and the respect that she is showing the Constitution, the process, and the whole process of and role of what it means to give advice and consent.
Now, with Susan Collins a yes and Jeff Flake saying he is a yes on Kavanaugh, that now brings us to well, Lisa Murkowski seemingly is a no.
That brings us to 50 uh what, 49?
51, 49?
Yeah, so that brings us to 49.
So it really all comes down to, I guess at this point, Joe Manchin and Lisa Murkowski and Lisa Markowski appears to be a no, and I guess Manchin could be the yes.
Is our math right on this?
Who else is outstanding at this point?
Because everybody else, I think is on record.
Yeah.
Now I've got to believe, I think Joe Manchin, by the way, I don't think it'll be a surprise, he voted yes to end uh to start the debate, the 30 hours final vote uh that'll happen.
Manchin.
Well, here we go, it just broke.
Manchin is voting yes to confirm Judge Kavanaugh.
The votes are there.
Poor Steve Daines has to is supposed to walk his daughter down the aisle tomorrow in the middle of this vote.
I don't know how they're gonna work that out.
Somebody better blend them a private plane of some kind to get them over there.
Um what I admired, I think the most about this speech is the pressure under which Susan Collins has been.
There is literally in Maine going on now, and by the way, Maine is not exactly one of the most expensive media markets, but she talked in the beginning at length about the process and what this has now become, and talk about it being a gutter political campaign, and millions of dollars and people and groups of people pledging to destroy her and defeat her in upcoming elections, etc.
And um Wow, this is pretty amazing.
That was just an amazing speech.
800 941 Shauna's a toll free telephone number.
Lindsay Graham is gonna join us now at the bottom of the hour.
All right, mansion voting yes, Flake voting yes, and now Susan Collins voting yes, which means the votes are there to confirm Judge Kavanaugh.
With only a kite, a house key, and wet hemp string.
Benjamin Franklin captured lightning in a bottle.
Over 260 years later, with a little resourcefulness, ingenuity, and grit.
We're not only capturing energy from the sun and wind, we're storing it.
Ensuring Americans have the energy they need whenever they need it.
Learn more about the nation's leader in energy storage at Nextera Energy.com.
All right, glad you're with us hour to Sean Hannity Show.
So I um I don't really get this impressed by any one speech by any politician.
Uh the the thoroughness, the seriousness of Senator Collins of Maine, just before announcing she will vote yes to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court, literally blow me, blew me away.
It is she went through everything.
She went through the court, his testimony, the precedence, the allegations, how the presumption of innocence is so important, the role of advice and consent um and answered every single imaginable question and had for the most part been keeping her feelings to herself.
Uh we now have an announcement that Joe Manchin of West Virginia is a yes, and he will support uh Judge Kavanaugh, and we know that Senator Flake of Arizona is now a yes.
He has announced he's voting for Judge Kavanaugh.
It looks like Lisa Murkowski, although she has not officially announced, she voted uh no on the issue of of ending cloture and and ending debate in 30 hours.
So I would assume that she's probably a no at this point.
Uh let's uh bring in and well, let's first play here's Joe Manchin making his announcement right after Susan Collins.
Senator, explain your decision to vote for first of all, uh I saw that uh Senator Collins, I wonder out of respect.
I wanted to watch her give hers, and she has to do that, and uh I knew when I saw she was gonna do that, I said fine, I watched it.
And uh then I uh I made my decision and I gave my reasons for my decision.
Ours went out, and we want to make sure.
You can listen to the people here.
Are you concerned about the sexual abuse that people have had to endure?
And very much concerned that we have to do something as a country.
So I had to deal with the facts I had in front of me.
You believe the allegations vote for Jack Kavanaugh.
Yay!
Yay, yay!
I just you know, I never thought of it basically 50-59, whatever it would have happened.
I says, I had to vote on facts I had in front of me.
Um I would have liked to have brought this place back to normal procedure if I'd have had that opportunity to a 60 vote threshold.
But why did you wait?
Why did you wait for Collins to make her announcement before you made your announcement?
I think that was basically what was I saw her announcement that she was gonna say that she would do that.
But you did you follow her?
Did you just decide to vote that way because she voted your oh no, no, no.
I think everyone, everyone labored with this.
Everybody labored with this decision.
And you and we all did our own.
We're gonna do diligence.
I was all mourning wrong everything.
Her party affect your decision at all.
How does Senator Murkowski voting no affect your decision at all?
Creating a bipartisan on both sides.
Very different of mine.
And I she did everything crossed every T, uh, dollar, and she went through the same process we all did.
She came to a different conclusion.
I came to my conclusion really this morning when I went through another hour and a half.
You believe do you believe the allegations?
I believe Dr. Ford.
Something happened to Dr. Ford.
I don't believe that the facts showed that it was Brett Kavanaugh, but I believe something happened.
You think it was someone else that did it?
I think something happened to her.
I just there was no way, no way at all that we could see.
Senator, what do you say to women who watch this process unfold, heard Dr. Ford's story, and feel like Judge Kavanaugh is getting confirmed anyway, even though they've stepped forward and that the Senate is essentially slapping the city.
I've had people all over West Virginia come forward.
I have the greatest I mean, just to respect, but also just the uh basically the hurt that people have, the trauma they've gone through.
And uh I don't know.
I mean, my uh uh empathy and sympathy, and I'll do anything I can to make sure that they are her to make sure this doesn't continue.
I think this was an a adequate FBI investigation into Kavanaugh's.
That's all I have in front of me now.
Based on what you've seen, based on what's the word for the FBI investigation.
What was that?
Do you think there should have been more witnesses interviewed for the FBI investigation?
I think that you know there's always more that could have been done, I guess.
I looked at what was in front of me and I had to make a decision.
But based on what you've seen, was that a thorough investigation by the F. It was from my standpoint, it was thorough from what I saw.
The people that I was concerned about, how they said and what they said and how they did it.
I did.
Senator, do you think that there's still a place in the Democratic Party for you after this?
Why do you I'm just a West Virginian?
I'm just a good old Western.
But you're up for re-election in a difficult race.
Are you concerned the base is gonna revolt you?
I didn't look at this from a political standpoint.
Are you concerned with Kavanaugh's temperament at all?
I know some Democrats have expressed concern with Kavanaugh's temperament and tricky.
The Thursday bothered me.
Thursday bothered me a lot.
But I saw that basically a difference.
Shame on you!
Everybody right here!
All right, that is the, well, that's the party of Nancy Pelosi.
If in 32 days she's the Speaker of the House screaming in the background and all the protesting that we have seen in the party of Chuck Schumer.
And now we know a party that is willing to put all due process aside.
Fundamental core values, constitutional protections like the presumption of innocence aside.
That will go along with guilt by accusation.
I think one of the more articulate moments was in the beginning of of Senator Collins' speech today, and how she rightly pointed out there was opposition from day one.
Chuck Schumer was one of them.
There was nobody that President Trump that was that was going to be nominated that was ever gonna pass uh to get many Democrats from the get go.
And I do believe that that Joe Manchin probably issued his re-election with this decision today, but I don't really got I don't really get the sense after reading his statement and hearing what he's saying and what he's with standing in the halls of the Senate today, uh that that really might impacted it much at all.
I got the sense that he did it for all the right reasons, as was articulated by Senator Collins in what was the most riveting one-hour speeches I think I've ever seen on the Senate floor that actually meant something, and how she systematically went through every single not only allegation,
but the role of advice and consent, the meaning of the Constitution, the interpretation of the Federalist papers, um what it means, uh the whole issue and process of of presumption of innocence and and how important it is to society, uh, even issues where I disagree with her, like for example, Roe v.
Wade and precedence and and Judge Kavanaugh's real record.
She she brought a level of of seriousness and sobriety to the entire debate.
I I just I I I don't know her, and I frankly was blown away by this today.
Here to give us some reaction to all this.
We have David Schoen, civil liberties attorney, criminal defense attorney, Greg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst, author of the number one best seller of the Russian hoax.
Uh Greg, what was your reaction to that speech?
I don't know if you had the same reaction I did.
I was I was stunned.
I I don't know Susan Collins well, but I know her better today.
It was nothing short of brilliant.
Uh with uncommon eloquence and sound reasoning, she delivered the finest speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate that that I've ever witnessed, and for a non lawyer, it was a compelling legal brief in support of Kavanaugh.
I thought it was important that at the outset, Collins condemned the outrageous behavior, the distortions by special interest groups, activists, protesters, and some Democratic senators making it clear that their shameful character assassination backfired on them as far as her vote is concerned.
And I I the best part of what she said was recounting many of Kavanaugh's opinions to demonstrate that even Democrats and liberals should be satisfied, if not pleased with Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court justice.
But you know, she did something unique here.
She rebutted the sexual misconduct allegations and said in no uncertain terms that presumption of innocence and fairness is relevant in the Senate's advice and consent duty, and she announced her own standard for considering accusations.
She said it should be more likely than not, which lawyers know in civil cases is called a preponderance of the evidence.
And she said it wasn't there.
There were no witnesses to corroborate Christine Ford, including her closest friend.
Nobody has any recollection of it.
All said so under penalty of perjury.
So she presented that was probably the most impressive.
I mean, her of a real obvious heartfelt caring for Professor Ford, also excoriating whoever it was, and she doesn't believe it was Diane Feinstein, and she defended both her and Senator Grassley in terms of the fairness, which I've said from the beginning.
I think the seriousness of the allegation deserved a serious response from the Republicans.
And I'm often a critic of them.
And I think they did handle this perfectly on their side.
And but whoever did leak this did a grave disservice to this woman.
And there's no doubt about that.
David Schoen, let me bring you in and get your initial thoughts on what we watched unfold here.
Now with the announcement, Jeff Flake, Joe Manchin, and Susan Collins, it would appear that tomorrow's vote expected to be around five in the afternoon Eastern time on a Saturday, uh, that the that Judge Kavanaugh has the votes to be confirmed to the United States Supreme Court.
Right.
Certainly looks that way.
I'd like to think that Senator Collins' speech brought some dignity back to the process.
It certainly did for the moments in which he was speaking.
She, you know, is a student of Senator Bill Cohen from Maine.
I was a very close friend of mine, uh, with whom I disagreed on some issues, but it was thinks in that same vein.
You're absolutely right.
What she said was so critically important.
Again, it emphasized the language of Article 2, Section 2.
The president shall have the power with the advice and consent.
That's what's been lost in all of this.
Also critically important that she emphasize the presumption of innocence.
You have some legal scholars and commentators during the course of this debate who all of a sudden have said, well, the presumption of innocence doesn't really apply.
This isn't a trial.
It's not a trial-based concept in American law.
That's in a fundamental bedrock American principle.
That's the way we go about our business.
We don't assume based on allegations that a man is or a woman who's built up a career is guilty.
So it's important for that.
Um I worry still, I have to say, about where we go from here, because we have seen behavior by United States Senators that has been beyond the pale that I never in my wildest, perhaps naive dreams, could have imagined was possible.
People who would simply don't know anything about Professor Ford or Judge Kavanaugh, who took carved out a position.
You were a bad guy if you didn't wear black to Columbia Law School during the Kavanaugh hearing, because that meant that you might believe Judge Kavanaugh.
This is beyond the pale.
These are future lawyers.
Um I wonder about where we go from here.
And last point I want to make on this is the very same people who were lambasting the president for daring to criticize crooked FBI agents who have been proven to be crooked, struck, etc.
Those people for whom Strook was a hero are now criticizing the FBI that this wasn't a fair or thorough investigation.
They moved the ball uh with their criticism, whatever it is for Judge Kavanaugh was that he was a sex offender.
Now he's not that, but they don't like his demeanor because he took it personally when it comes to the city.
No, they don't like his temperament.
How is one supposed to respond to be a serial drugger and gang rapist of teenage girls?
I I don't know what the appropriate response, except if you're innocent, just outrage and anger at a level that I couldn't even begin and describe.
But uh, it looks like this goes forward.
It looks like Kavanaugh has the votes that will support his nomination, and that this will conclude tomorrow, barring any unforeseen last-minute, you know, insanity.
But I will tell you, we one issue we've got to deal with, and I'm um I gotta say goodbye to both of you.
Thank you both for weighing in on this.
Lindsey Graham is coming up, but I will say one thing.
We have got to deal with how the what this has now become.
It is a national disgusting personal bludgeoning disgrace.
They have ruined this man's reputation in 18 days with zero corroboration.
It's a national disgrace that people rushed to judgment, and there was nobody, nobody that on the Democratic side but for Manchester that ever considered voting for Judge Kavanaugh.
I know I said this.
I'm gonna I'm just saying it again.
I just maybe I just never knew Susan Collins.
Look, one thing that the Republican Party has that the Democratic Party does not have.
There is not this monolithic one-voice radicalism that has taken over the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.
I mean, it was what's been fascinating to watch with all of the madness, the bludgeoning, the character assassination, the smearing, the lying, the intensity, the protest, and it's not gonna stop.
This is going to go forward.
It's gotta stop if we're ever if we want to be the United States of America.
I mean, how is it that Republicans always support Ruth Bader Giddinsburg and Justice Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, and Republican nominees can just get bludgeoned.
But does it matter if there's any corroborating evidence?
You know, one thing is I'm watching Susan Collins.
The speech was so well thought out based on facts and the standards that she uses to evaluate important issues.
Maybe that's why she kept it to herself pretty much the whole time.
Nobody knew what she was gonna do.
It was a speech and a reminder of the dignity that we can have in spite of dig uh disagreements, and talked about the law, the constitution, the role of the Senate, advice and consent, and a little bit of class, and she made all of these left wingers that have been insane all these days, and it's gonna get worse unless we insist it stop in 32 days.
Lindsey Graham is next.
In addition to the lack of corroborating evidence, we also learned some facts that raised more questions.
For instance, since these allegations have become public, Professor Ford testified that not a single person has contacted her to say I was at the party that night.
Furthermore, the professor testified that although she does not remember how she got home that evening, she knew that because of the distance she would have needed a bride.
Yet not a single person has come forward to say that they were the one who drove her home or were in the car with her that night.
And Professor Ford also indicated that even though she left that small gathering of six or so people abruptly and without saying goodbye and distraught, none of them called her the next day or ever to Ask why she left.
Is she okay?
Not even her closest friend, Ms. Kaiser.
My fervent hope is that Brad Kavanaugh will work to lessen the divisions in the Supreme Court.
So that we have far fewer five four decisions.
And so that public confidence in our judiciary and our highest court is restored.
Mr. President, I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh.
And with that, Susan Collins announcing, I think one of the well, I'm gonna be honest, I thought it was the most powerful speech in recent memory on the Senate floor that I've ever seen.
It was thorough, it was sober, it was smart, it was thoughtful, it was comprehensive.
She went through everything from judicial temperament and philosophy to her own belief system, how she came to her decisions, her constitutional view on the Supreme Court on the role of advice and consent on the madness in the circus that has broken out in this country.
And um, I I have I I'm frankly uh we never run an entire commercial free hour unless it's really important news, and we did that for you, our beloved audience, because it was something that I wanted everybody to hear.
This is a moment in history.
What has happened in the last 18 days can't continue to happen in this country.
You cannot bludgeon people without any corroborating evidence the way Judge Kavanaugh and his family have been bludgeoned.
You can have political differences, and I've had my share with Senator Collins over the years.
What I really realized today is I don't know her well.
She doesn't do a lot of television, she's not somebody I've interviewed a lot.
I think the most impressive thing that I took away from this is the seriousness, the intellect, the the systematic she walked every American through her decision-making process, and frankly, it was flawless.
It was spectacular.
Nothing short of spectacular.
Now I know a lot of people are spending a lot of money, and it's probably only going to get worse for her because she clearly followed her conscience on this issue, and she had it was obvious she missed nothing.
She had followed every single solitary detail of this process, did all the work you would ever want or expect from a representative.
And now I guess the left is about as unhinged as they've been.
I don't even think it's safe to walk the Senate halls at this point.
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, I would argue it would not have happened but for him.
He joins us on our newsmaker line.
Um, you know, you told me something when I was in Washington earlier this week, and I asked you, I said, Well, what do you know about Susan Collins?
And you you basically described what I learned about her today.
I was blown away, and I don't get blown away very often.
I really I'm too cynical.
I'm from New York.
I've been in in radio 30 years.
I'm a tomorrow I start my 23rd year on the Fox News Channel.
Well, uh You know, I'm I'm in a political system that's deteriorating.
I think what you saw today, somebody stepped forward to maybe save it.
The biggest winner of this speech is the judiciary because there was a wholesale attack on the independence of the judiciary, won at all costs.
What you saw today was a person embracing the rule of law, not the rule of the mob.
What you saw today was a woman not being intimidated.
What you saw today was a good man, Brett Kavanaugh being saved by a strong woman.
What you saw today was everything good about the Senate, good about the country, and I'll have my differences with Susan Collins going forward.
But this is as close to McCarthyism as I hope I've ever witnessed in my life.
And if anybody turned it around, it was Senator Collins.
Uh, you know, Senator, you had a moment in this process too, and and that moment came when they were going the hardest after Judge Kavanaugh.
I don't think any of us will forget any time soon the things that this man was accused of.
And and I saw the outrage, even with Susan Collins that remember the accusation by Julie Swetnick was that well, it's almost on a weekend basis that Judge Kavanaugh and others were routinely drugging girls, lining up in halls, gang raping them, and it happened frequently.
And I I know that some people brought up the issue of the judge's temperament.
He addressed it in his Wall Street Journal article that came out last night.
How is one supposed to act if you're innocent to the charge of drugging teenage girls and participating in gang rapes of teenage girls?
I don't know what the appropriate reaction is, but I would think if you're innocent, it is one of deep anger and and deep frustration.
Eighteen days ago, nobody thought any of this of Judge Kavanaugh.
Well, yeah, I think uh I think th most Americans saw a man who was fighting for his family, his reputation, his life.
I did not do this, went through a logical explanation uh based on a calendar that very few people in the world keep except him and his dad, and just uh wanted everybody to know this is not me, you're trying to ruin my life, I am not evil, and uh, I think he reacted consistent with being innocent.
But let me tell you a pivotal moment here.
When the Sweatnick allegation came out, it was breaking news.
Allegation number three at a very new and evil level, right?
So I saw it and I read it, and I said it made no sense to me from the very beginning that a person would go to one party uh where people were drugged and raped and go to two, much less ten.
That made no sense.
So I called Susan, she said, This sounds bad, and I said, Yeah, Susan, it's gonna be this way for a while to come.
Read it.
Here's my take on it.
Um being in the law for most of my life, a prosecutor, defense attorney, and a judge, this doesn't have the ring of truth.
She said, you know, that makes sense.
Why would anybody keep going back and putting themselves in that situation and their friends, not tell anybody, and you gotta remember it's Avanati.
And she worked through the process.
She took each allegation on its own.
She went through all the major decisions of Judge Kavanaugh and uh spent a lot of time talking to him.
And this is a exact every I think this should be in every civics class in the country.
Every high school student should probably have to listen to Senator Collins' explanation of why she voted the way she did and what the rule of law is all about.
You know, I um we have an election in thirty-two days.
To me, Senator, uh look, I you're when Senator uh and I know how close you were to Senator McCain.
Right.
Who recently passed away, and I uh I always admired him for being a war hero, and I even said I've never regretted not a day, not a second supporting him for president in 08 over Barack Obama.
It was the right decision then and and I stand by it today.
I had a lot of disagreements when he came back and voted no on the health care appeal, I was frustrated.
And I remember he said the hell with these people on radio and cable TV.
And you know, I understood Senator McCain.
That's you know, he kind of had that side of him, and I knew it really well.
Um but he also talked in that speech too about civility.
I don't know if there is not consequences for what has just gone on in the last eighteen days.
Political consequences.
I mean, so here are the consequences.
A party that will do anything to maintain power should probably never have it.
Uh the best thing you can do to stop this in the future is deny them their goal of having more Senate seats, more house seats.
They want power too bad, and what did Susan say?
Listen, I I you know I went through the record.
The allegations don't hold water in terms of him being some kind of gang rapist, serial sexual predator.
He is a very reasoned logical judge.
I looked at everything they said about him.
I compared it to the facts, and I'm voting yes.
Here's what I want the voters to do.
I want the voters to remember what the Democratic Party will do to get power, and that they're being driven by people who would assume somebody guilty simply because they don't like their judicial philosophy.
Remember this, America.
Do you really want these people in charge of your government?
Well, I think that's a great question.
You know, there's something you mentioned earlier.
I saw I I've never known Susan Collins that well.
I know that look look, the Republican Party is not a monolithic party.
I'd love to.
I actually I I I found somebody today that I had no idea the thoroughness under which she makes her decisions, and I respect that time.
I respect I r I really have a deep respect.
I want everybody to have their own mind.
I'm not even a Republican.
I'm a conservative for reasons that I hold passionate and dear.
But you mentioned something earlier that this was a profile and courage for her.
Right.
In as much as we you've been outside in the halls in the Senate, and you see what's going on there and all the protesting, and Maine is not exactly in uh a an expensive media market, and I know they've been spending millions of dollars in Maine to try and influence her, and groups are pledging now to to vote her out of office and destroy her.
And I'm like, did anybody listen to what Senator Collins just said?
Did anybody want to listen?
I don't think anybody wanted to hear what she said because it was the single most thorough case for how any senator or congressman should make a decision.
Again, a good example for a civics class to look at in terms of the way a senator should act.
But let's talk about the politics for a moment.
Okay, I talk a lot about Sotomar and Kagan only because I tried to save a system.
Yeah, you annoyed me on those votes, but I mean I know, but but it's No, you more than made up for it.
Well, I don't think I had anything to make up for.
I really it's okay for you to disagree with me.
I'm not gonna run my life around being somebody different than the first one.
I'm not gonna run my life around what the hell Hannity thinks.
No way.
That's never happened.
To be honest with you, I'm gonna be true to me.
Aren't you true to you?
Yes, sir.
And I wouldn't expect any less.
She's a moderate, pro-choice Republican from New England that represents a party uh that used to exist in New England in greater numbers.
She is a fiscal conservative.
She voted for the tax bill.
She's a social moderate, and she will do things you won't like in the future, but whatever she does will be thought out and reasoned.
But here's why I appreciate you talking about Susan Collins today.
She has come as close to anybody in my lifetime of saving the Republic from the abyss because we're headed down where nobody would want to be a judge in the future.
If Susan had legitimized this, God helped the Senate confirmation process.
I agree.
She said it.
It's been in a rapid decline for 30 years.
I don't think any of this would have happened.
I don't think I don't know.
Well, I appreciate that, but I I'm gonna do something without you let you speak just for a second.
Okay.
I'm gonna do something you'll never hear another politician do, probably.
Uh I'm fine.
Uh, you know, I'm fine.
Uh, if you can help Susan help Susan.
They're gonna try to destroy her now.
She comes from a purple state.
Uh President Trump lost Maine by a few points.
He won the second congressional district.
But Maine politics are different than they are in South Carolina.
And she was not about Maine herself.
She was about America.
She represents the best of Margaret Chase Smith uh uh history of of Maine.
And if you really don't be fooled, she's a moderate, she's not a Sean Hannity conservative.
She's a moderate, but she loves the country and she's got more guts than most politicians in her little finger than most everybody I know in my business.
She's not afraid.
So help her, Sean.
Tell your viewers to help her.
They're killing her financially.
Senator help her.
I I was so blown away by that speech.
I would absolutely recommend that people help her.
She she did something to she has leveled the playing field and brought a voice of sanity, a well thought out intellectual, constitutional sanity that stood on core principles of presumption of innocence.
It was beyond impressive to me.
Let me ask you this.
Um tell us about Mansion.
Manchin's a yes, too.
Well, Mansion's a yes.
I like Joe, and uh, you know, he was a yes.
But Susan was the center of the storm.
And I want to say something about Flake.
We've had our differences.
I know the presidents had their differences.
But Jeff Flake also is a yes.
Jeff Flake uh is on the other side of a lot of things with Trump, but he rose to the occasion and say, Listen, uh, I want to hear more, but I'm inclined to believe what I believe.
I want to hear from Dr. Ford.
He listened.
He also listened to Kavanaugh, and to process her and Susan that Flake and Susan created is going to make Kavanaugh a better nominee, more legitimate nominee.
So I want to thank him too.
But at the end of the day, this is about a person, a single person who is sort of the odd person out in politics, rising to the occasion and being a giant.
And to the extent I did my part, thank you.
I wanted to stand up for a good man because I've known him for 20 years.
Uh I wanted to let everybody in the country know how despicable in my eyes he was being treated, and that they are headset.
Senator, this was your finest moment in all the years I've known you.
Good.
Good.
Yeah.
Yeah.
All right.
We'll have more tomorrow.
We're gonna you're gonna join us on Hannity tonight with a full reaction.
It looks like the vote takes place tomorrow at five.
Uh, thank you, Senator Lindsay Graham.
It wouldn't have happened without you, in my humble opinion.
And uh you had I again, I think your finest moment ever.
And uh you've had other great moments as well.
Uh 800-941 Sean Topre telephone number.
All right, news roundup information overload hour on the Sean Hannity show, 800-941 Sean Tollfrey telephone number.
You want to be a part of this extravaganza.
Uh let me go to some of the Democrats here, because until this vote is in, I'm not counting any chicken before it hatches.
Yeah, it's looking good.
Yeah, but this is a national disgrace.
And if we don't stop the politics of bludgeon and destroy by the left, and you reward them an election on election day, it's never gonna end.
No positive agenda at all for the country, for the people in this country.
You know, just just listen to what they say.
They now they got their FBI investigation.
There was nothing more the FBI can do than to talk to the people that would have that were involved as it relates to Professor Ford.
We had her story down pat.
And then Miss Ramirez they talked to, and then the people surrounding that case.
There is zero corroboration here.
Anyway, listen to your Democrats, the party of smear and slander and guilt by accusation.
To put it bluntly, it smacks of a whitewash, even a cover-up.
Well, first of all, I mean, those characterizations to me are uh can amount to just a sham for per perpetrating a sham on the American people.
The whole thing is a sham.
Five days to do the investigation.
And for the FBI, under the instructions from the White House not to talk to that individual, says that this investigation was a complete cover-up, a complete sham.
In your view, is this a fulsome and credible investigation?
It's obviously a cover-up.
Senator, you just read the FBI background report on Kavanaugh.
What are your thoughts?
You think that's an investigation is a bullshit investigation.
All right, then I also want to play the president as he says the only reason to vote Democrat is if you're tired of winning.
Which kind of is true based on what I was describing earlier in the show today.
And an unprecedented list of accomplishments that nobody ever discusses because of their daily minute by minute, second by second, weekly by week, week after week, month after month, hatred of all things Trump.
The only reason to vote Democrat is if you are tired of winning.
That's really it.
Because you're winning.
You're winning a lot.
There's never been an administration that in already less than two years.
But can you believe we all did this together?
We're coming up on two years.
Can you believe it?
There has never been an administration with you that's done so much in so little time.
Two years, no administration's come close.
We went through a lot of that success earlier in the program, and a lot of it bears repeating, by the way.
I mean, these are comp four million jobs created since the election, more Americans now employed than ever recorded in our history.
Unemployment the lowest since 1969, 400,000 new manufacturing jobs.
Those are the jobs Obama said are never coming back.
By the way, things are only going to get better with the explosion in the energy sector.
Once they can get up and online in Anwar and continue coal mining, the president saving the coal mining industry in West Virginia single-handedly.
And once we continue to extract more natural gas than the world would ever need in in 300 years, we have all of those re resources.
Now you have 14 states record low unemployment.
You have record low unemployment for Hispanic Americans, African Americans, Asian Americans, youth unemployment 55 year low, median household income, its highest record ever recorded.
You know, we have the the lowest unemployment rate ever recorded for Americans without even a high school diploma, and veterans' unemployment has now reached its lowest rate in 20 years, and four million people off of food stamps, and I can just keep on going.
And then promises about the types of judges he'd put on the court and gutting endless bureaucratic regulation that that literally hamstrings all businesses in America, promoting buying and hiring America, actively promoting and asking people to come and build their factories and manufacturing centers here and creating the economic conditions and the regulatory conditions where it's possible.
I mean, that's why all these manufacturing jobs are coming back, uh, reducing illegal immigration, of course, defeating ISIS, you know, of course, pulling out of that idiotic Iranian deal, and little rocket man's not firing a missile over Japan every other day.
I'd say that's pretty good.
But we're 32 days out of the election, a lot can happen between now and then.
John McLaughlin is a pollster, founder of McLaughlin and Associates.
Doug Schoen is with us, also a pollster, author, political analyst for Fox News.
Uh, thank you both for being with us.
Well, we can see, I don't know if you want to call it the Kavanaugh bounce or the Kavanaugh Awakening.
There's in every single state now, Claire McCaskill is down significantly in the latest poll in Missouri.
Joe Donnelly is in trouble in Indiana.
Heidi Heikamp is down an eleven in her state of North Dakota.
Uh I say that Rick Scott will be the next senator from Florida.
And then, of course, Martha McSallad's been surging lately.
Uh, where do you think it stands at this moment, John McLaughlin?
I th I think you're seeing uh uh definitely a Kavanaugh effect, but it's really what it is is the re-engagement of the Trump voters.
Uh Sean, you know, you Doug and I talked about two years ago how Trump had to bring new voters in to win the election.
And we did.
Donald Trump ignited millions of new voters who came out and voted in 2016 that didn't vote in 2012, that took a pass on Mitt Romney.
And up until this time, up until the hearing last Thursday, uh, those voters were staying home.
A good portion of them, a good portion of them weren't engaged.
And I think when they act got to see the the the actual hearing and the news coverage and the character assassination, the ruthless politics.
I think the Democrats had looked, and Chuck Schumer's a really smart strategic senator, and he's their leader.
And he looked at the map and he said there's 35 feats up, 26 are ours.
Henner and states that that Donald Trump won.
What can I do to try to take back the majority?
And he probably made a calculation if we can embarrass Kavanaugh that the Republicans pull him, it would suppress the Trump voters so that a good number of those 63 million would stay home because you only get 90 million come out in the midterm election.
So they they made the hit.
The Republicans stuck firm, the president stuck with them, and the Democrats were exposed.
These voters are now outraged that the Democrats would put such a late hit on and try to smear a good person who would remind them of their father, their their son, their their brother, and say, This was totally unfounded, uncorroborated.
There's no evidence to it, and they're trying to destroy this man and his family.
And the Republicans are coming, the Republicans and independents who supported Trump are coming back out.
You're seeing them in these polls.
That Missouri poll with McCaskell behind was a poll that we did for Superback.
She's down eight points now.
Uh, you're seeing this.
I'm seeing this in polls every day.
It's it's not a big explosion, but what it is is Trump voters coming back in and getting away.
And what was a huge enthusiasm gap just a month ago, a little less than a month ago, two weeks ago, two and a half weeks ago, um, has now totally and completely evaporated, and conservatives have been awakened.
And and by the way, Doug Schoen, the party that we saw protesting, and the party that rushes to judgment, the party that doesn't believe in due process, the party that doesn't believe in the presumption of innocence or the need for some corroboration, and the party that defended Clinton and defends Keith Ellison, uh, I don't think they're looking too good here to the American people right now, and they they're being shown to be the radical party I've been describing for some time.
Well, Sean, I mean, I don't quite know how to reply, but I'll give you a couple of answers if you're you can just say I actually agree with your characterization and their handling of all of this has been pretty stupid and detrimental um to you know any sense that they have have any sense of moderation in this day and age.
Well, I don't think they have any sense of moderation, but what they do have is an ongoing lead in the House, which I think is gonna lead to a pickup of the house.
And I think from uh what I see looking at the Senate races, they're all very, very close within the margin of error.
And I really think to get a definitive answer, we'll have to come back in a week or ten days after Kavanaugh is, as I think we all expect, narrowly confirmed to see whether the effect John and you are talking about, Sean, is actually going to hold over time.
I think it really has to play out, and I think there's a good chance that the protests you've seen from the Democrats and from women, like them or not, will continue and will ultimately uh benefit, particularly in suburban congressional districts, less so Senate races, the Democrats.
How's it gonna play with the voter in the rest of the country, not in New York, DC, San Francisco, and Los Angeles uh or Illinois or Chicago?
How's it gonna play with the rest of America?
I think it's gonna play very differently.
I think the the real challenge is the one John raises.
I think it's that's right.
Will this re-engage the Trump voter?
I think as of today, probably some evidence that that is some evidence, a 20-point enthusiasm gap just evaporated in in sixteen days.
Let let's let's wait a week, Sean, and we'll see where we you don't think this leaves a bad taste in people's mouths what they did to this man.
Do you support do you support what's been disgusting?
And as somebody who likes likes Marathon Harland and things people like.
But hang on, but forget that.
Do you what they did to this man and how they bludgeoned this man and his family, as as vicious as they've been, with no due process.
And for once, you know how critical I am of Republicans.
They took it with the seriousness the topic deserved.
They handled it properly, they looked into every crevice and corner, and we still have no corroboration.
Now, do we believe in the presumption of innocence or not?
Are you proud of the that how the Democrats handle this?
If I can voice support for you, perhaps you'll give me a chance to do that.
I will, go ahead.
Um I I say this as somebody who has my own uh judicial, legal, and philosophical differences with uh Judge Kavanaugh.
I would not be voting for him, but I do think Sean that you are correct that the way this process has played out depresses me as an American first and a Democrat second.
Um I think the process is destroying uh the independence of our judiciary, destroying the presumption of innocence, and basically what is destroying what makes our country great.
So we may disagree philosophically, but I'd like to think we stand for the same enduring values.
Listen, Lindsey Graham, who in many ways showed such a profile and courage in this, um, and even and I think the deliberate seriousness of Susan Collins, you know, Republican Party is made up of of varying factions that I don't see these factions really existing in the Democratic Party, John.
I mean, you got the extreme left, and then you got the super duper extreme left, and there's no room for a scoop, Jackson.
They even threw Joe Lieberman of all people out of the party.
How do you throw a Joel Lieberman out of your party?
Um I mean, that's insanity to me.
Oh, absolutely.
And and I'll tell you what, Doug Dove makes a point.
You have over four weeks to go, and that's a lifetime in politics.
I mean, I mean, remember 2016, the Democrats put the late hit on Bush, uh, not Bush, pardon me, they did it to Bush with the drunk driving, but they did it with uh Donald Trump with uh tape about women, and people people went right through it and realized it was a choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, and they voted for Donald Trump.
And and there's voters in the heartland right now that are engaged.
We have to keep them engaged over the next four weeks, because when we win again and Kavanaugh gets confirmed, they can think, oh, things are fine now.
I don't think so.
I I think everybody I I think that everybody understands there's a lot at stake here.
I will stay right there.
Well, we'll we'll continue.
More with John McLaughlin and Doug Shon, 800 941 Sean, our number.
All right, as we wrap up with our pollsters, we'll be checking in with them often now, 32 days out of election day, and I think the most important midterms in our lifetime uh John McLaughlin, Doug Shoner with us.
All right, Doug, predictions.
What's gonna happen?
I think Kavanaugh is going to be confirmed.
You will have the Republicans holding the Senate uh narrowly, and the Democrats winning the House by plus 30 plus 35 seats.
Wow, that's a huge prediction for the Democrats.
Um I don't think there's any scenario that I could discount 32 days out of this election.
I think anything can happen, and I hope the American people see what they're electing in Nancy Pelosi, Maxime Waters, and Chuck Schumer.
That's my up my biggest hope, John McLaughlin.
I think you're right.
And uh uh in terms of it's it's there's four weeks out, over four weeks to go, and a lot can happen.
But I will tell you that the key thing is Donald Trump is putting the Republicans on his shoulders and bringing them across the finish line in that he's bringing his votes to bear.
But his his voters are coming back out.
But the key thing is his two real opponents right now are Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.
He needs to take them on.
They're gonna be a nightmare if they get control of either house uh uh for next year.
So what we've got to do is Dancy Pelosi in our last national survey had a 55% unfavorable rating.
I mean, 55% would be a landslide for the Republicans, and they could and they could hold the house.
So right now we're headed to gain seats in the Senate, but it's too early on the House.
And and prior to Kavanaugh, it looked like we were gonna lose the House.
But uh uh with that kind of a negative on Pelosi, for her to be the leader to oppose Donald Trump every day for the next two years through his reelection, he needs to take her on every day about uh them wanting to raise taxes on the economy, have open borders, having having uh a back to the elites where the swamp runs the country again.
So uh if he does that over the next four weeks, the Republicans could hold the house, and they'll definitely pick up Senate seats.
All right, thank you both, John McLaughlin and Doug Shon, 800 941 Sean Topri telephone number.
We'll continue.
We'll have our Florida Georgia line Zach Brown concert series when we get back, and we'll continue uh with Jesse Lee Peterson, Reverend Z. O'Brien, and much more, as this Friday edition of the Sean Hannity show moves along.
I hope everybody remembers the anger that they've been feeling this week.
Listen, Griff Jenkins last night for Hannity on the TV show actually went out in the middle of these mob protesters asking them a simple question.
Do you believe in the presumption of innocence?
Listen.
Do you feel that he was uh forted the presumption of innocence?
This is a job interview, and the question is about the evidence that's presented and the credibility of her claim.
Do you believe that just Kavanaugh had presumption of innocence got a fair shank in the hearing?
No.
I think that he didn't give himself a fair share because he lied the entire time.
Do you believe Judge Kavanaugh was given the presumption of innocence?
Hey, hey, is this a port of law.
Why do you believe Judge Kavanaugh shouldn't be confirmed?
I feel like he lied multiple times and he feels he acted crazy.
Clearly, there has been enough allegations swirling around that we know that this job application needs to be denied.
Judge Kavanaugh wasn't given his fair presumption of innocence.
Um, Josh Kavanaugh investigation investigation.
He did not want it.
That is not the behavior of someone who understands.
Like that as a man his benefit and the country's benefit.
Just say let's discover the truth.
Do you believe that uh he was given a fair chance in his confirmation?
A fair chance.
This man is sitting amongst friends of his public, it's the people who should be making decisions about what they need and what they deserve.
Not the f rich white man who doesn't give a about us.
Because there are allegations of sexual assault against him that might quite likely will are true.
I believe they are true, but it hasn't been proven yet one way or the other.
This is a job interview.
There's no presumption of innocence in a job interview.
And in your mind, Judge Kavanaugh failed that absolutely he failed the job interview.
This is nothing short of a desperate grab by the old white male rich patriarchy.
In my view, Judge Kavanaugh made it pretty clear that he does not have the judicial temperament.
He believes the Supreme Court is just one more political football.
That's not what the Supreme Court is about.
And I think in that hearing, Judge Kavanaugh disqualified himself.
That is 32 days.
You're 32 days away.
That is the base of the Democratic Party.
That is that is who people like Nancy Pelosi are appealing to.
Chuck Schumer is appealing to, Maxine Waters is appealing to, and of course, Michael Lavinati, the new face of the Democratic Party.
What has happened to the old Democratic Party?
Party that once believed in tax cuts, stood up for the working men and women in this country, didn't believe in socialism, believed in civil liberties and the presumption of innocence and due process.
Where did they go?
All right, joining us now, the Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of Rebuilding the Man by Rebuilding, I'm sorry, rebuilding the family by rebuilding the man, author of the Antidote, Healing America from the poison of hate, blame, and victimhood.
Uh Reverend C. L. Bryant is also with us.
The race uh for freedom, also a senior fellow at Freedom Works.
Uh, welcome both of you back to the uh program.
And Jesse, I guess you're heading out on a road and you got a big panel you're gonna be a part of.
Where's that?
Um uh how you doing, Sean.
On October 23rd at 7 p.m., uh, my nonprofit organization, Bond, a brotherhood organization of a new destiny going to be holding a town hall forum and panel on the uh midterm election.
And so um for more information on that, people can go to Jesse Lee Peterson uh dot com, Jesse Lee Peterson.com, and we're gonna be talking with uh Democrats and Republicans and independents about this uh upcoming election because a lot of people are really really upset at what happened with Judge Kavanaugh, even people who at one time thought that they were going to be voting for the Democrats, they started to rethink their position.
And I have to tell you, Sean, I grew up on a plantation down in Alabama.
I grew up uh born there, I grew up under the Jim Crow laws.
I remember black and white five only when I voted at 18.
I voted for the Democratic Party.
I was freer growing up on that plantation, living under Jim Crow law than I was as a Democrat.
Democrats don't like for you to have free thoughts, they don't like for you to take care of yourself, they lie to you about the Republican Party, and it especially the uh straight white conservative Christian male, they're always calling them racist, and they use those words to brainwash you in order to enslave you.
And the beauty about if there isn't a beauty in this about what's happening with the judge and the hatred and the anger and the accusations false after gaze without proof that we have seen over these last uh couple weeks or a month or so, even longer than that.
Uh, even a lot of black people are starting to think about the Democratic Party, and they're starting to realize, especially the Christians, they're starting to realize maybe they are involved with the wrong party, and that the party, the Democratic Party, is not like the party that they joined many, many years ago.
And I think a lot of folks are being offensive by this.
You know, see how Brian, I if I remember correctly, weren't you part of the NAACP for a number of years?
Sean, I'm a two-term president of the NAACP in Garland, Texas.
By the way, you may not know it.
I'm I'm a life member.
I became a life member.
I was at an event in Atlanta, and uh it just so happens I said, but please the next time take politics out of a man like Clarence Thomas is advancing and is succeeding at the highest level.
Please please support him.
I I said that when I when I paid when I paid my membership fee.
I have the card here somewhere.
Absolutely right, Sean.
And what we're seeing now are the fake activists who are hitting the street.
I remember when I was president, uh there, and I'm gonna disclose this that there were times when we would load up ten buses full of activists by simply giving them ten dollars and a tuna fish sandwich and a drink to get on the bus to go protest something that they had no clue what it was that they were going to protest.
And that's what you're seeing on the streets now, and that is fake.
It is something that will not stop.
Freedomworks, the organization that I am with.
We have grassroots activists who are in the Capitol right now, who are checking on their congressmen and their senators to make certain that they ride herd on this particular vote.
We want Kavanaugh to come through.
Last week, Freedom Works, we had two thousand people on the Capitol grounds pushing through not only Jim Jordan, who I hope can be the next uh speaker of the House, but also we wanted those elected officials who should be responsible to the American people for the offices they hold to make sure that they go and do the job that we sent them to do.
It's a long way from when I was president of the NAACP 27 years ago to where I am now.
And that plantation that Reverend Peterson was talking about, that Jesse Lee was talking about.
By the way, Jesse Lee is in my movie, Runaway Slave.
Uh Jesse Lee.
Why am I not in your movie?
What's up with that?
You you and I have to make the next film together, Sean.
We have to make the next one.
No, no, no.
I'm just wondering why you picked Jesse and you didn't pick your good old friend Sean Hannity.
You're my good buddy.
You gotta come on the show real soon.
But that plantation was real.
I grew up in Louisiana during that same Jim Crow era.
It's very real, but many of us have run away from it, and we encourage many more at this point in time in America, and the president is giving us all the cover that's necessary to run away from that type of enslavement that this nation had fallen up under.
You know, to add to that, the the beauty of what President Trump has done is that because he lacked fear, he's put the country first, he's not afraid to really deal with these people.
He's not afraid to use social media to put the truth out there.
And this president is encouraging a lot of men and women, especially those of good, to stand up and speak up, fight for their country, fight for what is right.
And when they saw this attack on Judge Kavanaugh, his wife, his daughters, while they're saying that they care about women, they care about children.
Where's the love and compassion for the judge and his wife?
His children are gonna have to deal with these allegations.
This whole thing has to now look, we've got to get through the vote tomorrow, and I'm cautiously optimistic that Judge Kavanaugh gets to be on the court that he deserves to be on.
But if we don't deal with the these tactics, the willingness to tear down, bludgeon, destroy men, families, kids are obviously impacted by it.
If if they can't even have the the most simplest of civility on these issues, you know, the American people need to see it, know it, get it, understand it, embrace what they would be voting for.
It's horrible.
You know, destroying people, it's horrible.
How many more people have to go through a Clarence Thomas, Judge Kavanaugh, Robert Bork?
How many Republicans are falsely accused of being racist and wanting to kill their grandmothers?
It's ridiculous at this point.
And they do it with literally with the immune but it's total immunity for them.
There are no repercussions for the this conduct.
Anyway, Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson, thank you.
Reverend C. O'Brien, thank you.
And uh we wish you both the best.
As the countdown now continues, we'll know almost uh this time tomorrow.
Did Judge Kavanaugh get on the court looking a lot better than it did earlier in this week?
▲
Export Selection