All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 25, 2018 - Sean Hannity Show
01:39:51
Best of Hannity: GOP and 2019

The “Best of Hannity” returns with Sean’s interview with FLorida Governor-elect Ron DeSantis Who looks forward to 2019. Plus, James Okeefe, Congressman Jim Jordan and Jon Sale. 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.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down at Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
The best of Sean Hannity is on now.
In his inaugural address, the 41st President of the United States said this.
We cannot hope only to leave our children a bigger car, a bigger bank account.
We must hope to give them a sense of what it means to be a loyal friend, a loving parent, a citizen who leaves his home, his neighborhood, and town better than he found it.
What do we want the men and women who work with us to say when we are no longer there?
That we were more driven to succeed than anyone around us?
Or that we stopped to ask if a sick child had gotten better and stayed a moment there to trade a word of friendship?
Well, Dad, we're going to remember you for exactly that and much more.
And we're going to miss you.
Your decency, sincerity, and kind soul will stay with us forever.
So through our tears, let us know the blessings of knowing and loving you.
A great and noble man.
The best father a son or daughter could have.
And in our grief, by this smile, knowing that Dad is hugging Robin and holding mom's hand again.
All right, that was George W. Bush at the service of his father, George H.W. Bush.
Very touching moment.
Watched the whole thing, and I thought it went off perfectly.
And it was just, you look into somebody's soul.
How do you want to be viewed after you're gone?
What do you want to be remembered for?
We talked to Ron DeSantis, governor of the great state of Florida.
How are you, sir?
Welcome aboard.
What were your interactions with the Bushes like?
Well, it was interesting, Sean.
I was the captain of the Yale baseball team in 2001, and that was the 300th anniversary of the university.
And so they had a big Jubilee.
And the main speaker was Bush41, who was, I think, the only Yale undergrad to ever be elected president or one of a few.
And so he asked to come out to baseball practice to meet the team.
And he just wanted to wish us well, wanted to see how we were doing.
So I got to introduce him to the rest of the team.
My coach pulled me aside before and said, listen, the president's going to come.
Tell all these knuckleheads, don't drop any F-bombs in front of them, be respectful.
And I'm like, of course.
But he was a very humble guy and was just interested in how we were doing and really loved his time playing baseball, really loved the sport.
And so I had never really even met anyone that was famous at that point in my life.
And it was, you know, I was like, man, yeah, this is a good guy.
And I've always just thought he was a really good guy.
And then when you think about his life, when he, the most famous picture in Yale athletics history is H.W. Bush as the captain in 1948 receiving Babe Bruce's autobiography from the Bambino.
Babe was going to die six months later, but you have this epic picture of them at Yale Field with thousands of people there.
And there's this handoff.
And so at that point in Bush 41's life, he's playing college baseball, but he already fought in World War II.
He joined when he was 18.
So he was already a bona fide American hero and had already lived a lot of life by the time he was playing college baseball.
So just a really first-class individual.
You know, I've known the family.
I've interviewed all of them many, many times, including Barbara and HW and 43 many times, and Jeb and other extended family members over the years.
So I know them very, very well.
They are what they seem that they are.
They're really good, honorable, hardworking, decent people that, you know, have this census calling for service.
And obviously you have it as well because you're part of the Freedom Caucus.
Now you're the governor-elect of Florida.
When do you get sworn in?
January 8th.
And so from that day forward, Sean, I'm going to be pestering you to move the studio down to Naples so that I can save you a lot of money on your taxes.
So just be ready for that.
I have warned you that during the whole campaign.
It's going to happen because I think it is the greatest story because all these companies, if you read the Starledger had a good piece a while back about this, and there's been other articles written about how there are massive amounts of money, wealth, leaving states like New York and states like Illinois and California and New Jersey.
And they're leaving because of the horrific economic environment, the high taxes, burdensome regulation.
I mean, we saw it out in California recently, you know, these horrific fires.
And then we find out, well, there's 130 million dead trees that people aren't allowed to cut down, that the state is not allowing people to even remove the kindling brush when it gets dry.
I mean, that stuff's flying all over the place, especially if you have a high wind or a Santa Ana wind.
People are, there's no more, you know, timber industry.
They destroyed that to protect whatever species of whatever.
And what they have done now is created an environment where you can't put these fires out anymore.
And now people are dying.
I mean, bad government policies.
So you see the migration of states like Florida.
I really think had Florida gone in the other direction and you would have elected the mayor of Tallahassee with the worst economic record, the worst crime record in his city, I think it would have been a disaster for Florida because he was talking about a 40% corporate tax.
And I think you would have seen businesses leaving on a fairly regular basis.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, I had people who said they were going to leave out of Florida and go elsewhere.
And that does happen from time to time.
Sometimes people will come to Florida and sometimes they will move to like North Carolina after they're retired or something like that.
Now, it doesn't happen that much, but there's reasons for that.
But that would have accelerated.
I mean, you would have seen a lot of people flee all the people who are looking at potentially coming down here.
These businesses would have fought twice and probably would have decided not to do it.
So we're in a really good spot because we have a good record of success.
I'm going to continue good policies and can even build off those.
I'm going to get to a point on my first day in office, three Supreme Court justices here in Florida.
One of the problems we've had with Florida government for a generation has been an activist liberal majority on our Supreme Court.
Well, I get sworn in.
I sign these judicial appointments, and judicial activism is done in Florida.
That's going to be good for our freedoms, but it's also good for having a good economic environment because they would strike down things that the legislature would pass like tort reform because they were siding with basically the liberal interest.
And so it was a very political court, and that's coming to an end very soon.
I've got to ask you, in light of it's now 18 years since 2000, and of course the recount that took place with swinging and pimpled and dimpled and hanging and perforated chads and whether that's a vote or meant to be a vote, an overvote, an undervote.
And, you know, here we are almost 11, almost every election year we have problems in Broward and Palm Beach counties.
And it seems to me that for whatever reason, nobody's just stepped in to fix it.
Will you have, as governor, the authority to get a system of voting in Florida that will work where people couldn't be up to the shenanigans or no good?
Oh, yeah.
So there'll be things I can do unilaterally, but then there'll probably be an election reform package that we pass in the legislative session, making sure I'm really concerned about what's going on in California with this ballot harvesting.
I think that that's prone to fraud.
So we want to make sure that the absentee votes through the mail in Florida have integrity.
We want to make sure those are documented when they come in.
Because what Broward was doing, supposedly they would get these ballots in during early voting and some absentee ballots, and they just never even logged that these things are coming in.
And then all of a sudden, 48 hours after the election, they start counting 75,000, 80,000 votes.
That is unacceptable.
That causes people to lose confidence in the results.
I don't think I'm a big fan of month-long voting either, because I think that lends itself to some type of corruption at some point, unless you're going to have a representative from every party stand watch over the ballots 24 hours a day.
And the thing is, too, Sean, with some of this, the way we do the early and absentee, and I'm not sure we're going to necessarily move away from vote by mail in Florida because it's a lot of people like to do it.
I imagine we're going to continue to have some level of early voting.
But the thing is, some of these states, you start voting in like the beginning of October.
My first debate with my opponent in the governor's race wasn't until October 21st.
People were already voting before we even had a debate.
And so I think that the more you spread out the voting, obviously you have different issues with administration, potential for fraud in different areas.
But then it's like, are we making like one crisp decision as an electorate?
And you don't really do that anymore.
It's kind of like a rolling process, and not all voters have the access to the same information when they choose to cast their ballots.
So it's just a little different.
All right, last question, and then we'll let you go.
So the three governors that I got to know best in New York were Rick Scott, who's now going to be a senator, Rick Perry of Texas, and Bobby Jindal when he was the governor of Louisiana.
These three governors came up to New York, and I couldn't believe they were up all the time.
And I always ask them, why are you here?
And I thought, what?
Are you taking free New York vacations?
It was never the case.
They were all competing successfully to get and entice and talk to big businesses in New York with their high taxes, burdensome regulation, horrible winners, and enticing them to states like Florida where they're going to get a better lifestyle and be able to produce more of their product at a cheaper rate and get much better deals for homes and everything else in between.
And so many people have moved down there.
Probably one of the reasons two of those three states don't have a state income tax.
Yeah, exactly.
And so what's going to happen, I'll continue that, but I think we can even do it at a greater level because this spring is the first year where people are going to have to fill out their tax returns and not be able to deduct the state income taxes.
And so that's going to hit a lot of people in New York.
It's going to hit you, Sean, big time.
It's going to hit people in New Jersey, Connecticut.
So if I live down there six months in a day, I can officially be a Florida resident.
That's right.
And the amount of money you will save, I mean, you could buy a new house down there.
I know you give a lot of money to charity.
I mean, you're talking probably you give millions more dollars to charity.
I mean, it would be better off for Florida's economy, but I think the money would be better rather than wasted, you know, in the New York City.
I'm looking at my whole staff.
My whole staff is looking at me.
Hey, stupid, why don't you make the move?
Stupid.
That's what everyone's telling me with their eyes right now.
You could make the move.
You could pay to relocate your staff.
You could probably pay for them to have new homes, and you'd still save money.
Probably not.
You're not going to do it in New York.
100%.
I mean, and that's why the only thing that worries me is you got people from these high-tax northeast states, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts.
It's happening.
People have been leaving states like Michigan and Drove, but Illinois, California, they can move to Florida.
They can move to Texas, but they can't bring their liberal views with them.
They've already helped destroy one state.
Don't go down and ruin the next state that you're living in.
I can tell you that from the people that particularly in the Midwest, the people that moved down from the Midwest to Florida, they are really, really strong for us.
Usually it is Republicans.
I mean, we register a lot of transplanted Midwesterners because they tend to go to the southwest part of Florida, Naples, Fort Myers, Sarasota.
And, you know, a lot of people from New York seem to gravitate towards.
Oh, yeah, yeah.
But these people get it.
And I think that we've had a lot of success with folks coming down from particularly the Midwest.
Listen, you take away the panhandle, and boy, they came out in huge numbers for you.
And you take away Southwest Florida, and you got a blue state in Florida, especially Southeast Florida.
I-4 corridors, always up for grabs.
That's always a tough spot, right?
Yeah, so, you know, and I actually, I mean, I did better than most Republicans do in Southeast Florida in terms of lowering the margins.
And we did do good in the panhandle.
Now, the place that got hit by the hurricane, they did come out and vote, you know, pretty good numbers, but their increase wasn't quite what some of these other counties were.
And I think the hurricane had a lot to do with it.
And then we, you know, held our own in central Florida.
But yeah, Southwest Florida, where you came for us, Sean, was huge.
And then you were up in Northwest Florida for us, too.
Those are two huge areas for Republicans, and they came in big for us.
All right, Ron DeSantis, congrats on being governor.
And we're looking forward to every time you're in New York, come stop by.
And I have no problem with you offering better deals for people.
That's the free market system and companies that want to save money and have less government burdensome regulation on their backs.
Florida is obviously the top state.
It's my second home now.
All right, Ron DeSantis, thank you, sir.
800-941-Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Quick break, right back.
We'll continue.
Hey, if you're one of 34 million Americans that smokes, you know what a hassle it can be.
For me, I'm out playing golf and I come back smelling like cigars.
It's the smell on your hands and your breath, your clothes.
But now thanks to Juul, you don't have to worry about it anymore.
Juul is a vaporizer.
It does contain nicotine for a satisfying transition.
Now, when I found Juul, it was a complete game changer in my life.
I don't smoke any cigars any longer.
And Juul was designed by smokers for smokers to be an alternative to whatever it is you're smoking.
So if you're one of 34 million adults who do smoke cigars, cigarettes, pipe, whatever, well, there is an alternative to all of them.
Now, to discover the smoking alternative that's like nothing you've ever tried, just visit juul.com/slash switchamerica.
That's ju l.com/slash switchamerica.
Now, warning, this product does contain nicotine, and nicotine is addictive.
Let's get to our busy phones as we continue.
800-941 Sean, you want to be a proud member of the program.
We love having you.
As we say hi to Frank is in Los Angeles, K-E-I-B.
What's up, Frank?
How are you, sir?
Hey, Sean, I'm doing well.
Thank you.
And I appreciate you taking my call.
Just real quick, just following up on what you were speaking about yesterday with Christmas and that type of stuff.
And first of all, I'm not a highly religious person, but I noticed where I live out in the west end of the San Fernando Valley in Los Angeles, and there's an area called the Commons in Calabasas.
And I was looking for the Christmas tree that they normally put up there for, you know, the holiday season, and I noticed it was gone.
So I called up the company that owns that, this guy, Rick Caruso from Caruso Development.
And they were telling me that they're not going to have a tree today or this year because the tree died.
So no artificial tree, nothing along those lines.
So I try not to be conspiratorial on it, but I also don't want to be a sap.
And I wonder if that's just one more thing where, you know, Christmas is not what it was.
Look, I go out of my way because I have friends of all backgrounds, faiths, and religions.
And when you say Merry Christmas to somebody, you're not saying it to offend them.
If you know that, like, for example, Hanukkah is going on now.
And I say to many of my friends that I know that are celebrating Hanukkah, happy Hanukkah.
And I just think at the end of the day that it's kind of a basic, simple thing to do.
All right, quick break, right back.
We'll continue on the other side.
Also, we'll be checking in with Cheryl Atkinson.
Her case is moving forward as she was spied on by her own government.
She'll explain next.
More of the best of the Sean Hannity Show coming up.
You are listening to the best of the Sean Hannity Show.
Listen to this show one time and you're Hannitized.
Sean Hannity is back on the radio.
Miss Ma'am, I had a question for you.
So let's just say my boyfriend is a dreamer, but he's registered to vote.
He just needs his ID, right?
Uh-huh.
That's it.
That's it.
So long as he's registered.
Yeah.
Okay.
Yeah.
Can I just ask you a question?
I went back and we went and grabbed his driver's license.
He's just, he's saying something about how some people are questioning whether it's legal since he's not a citizen, but he was able to register.
If he had some ID, that's all he needed.
If he's registered, yeah, it doesn't matter that he's not a citizen.
No, no, if he's registered, if he has a honey, it might not be that he's registered.
If he's giving you all this trouble, it may not be that he's registered.
No, he is registered.
He's able to do that.
He's got it with him.
We ran home and grabbed his driver's license because he's a DACA recipient.
So he was able to get a driver's license.
He's saying he saw some mess on the internet saying that it's not legal for him to vote since he's not a city.
Someone said on the internet, I don't know.
Hey, I didn't do that.
Yeah.
No.
We have dreamers voting, right?
If he has a voter registration, he's registered to vote.
Right.
He has an ID.
Drop his IC.
Right.
Okay.
Texas ID.
I pay it.
Right.
Bring it up here.
That's his ID.
And then he can vote.
Okay.
Pam, I just had a question because my so let's see my boyfriend's out in the car.
Yeah.
And he's just really nervous because he's a Docker recipient.
He was able to register, though.
I'm just trying to see if he's in the system.
Well, no, he is in the system, but he knows that, like, I don't know, there's like an issue with DACA people voting.
Don't know yet.
I don't know.
Got a lot of them.
Okay.
Early voter.
We get tons of DACA voters.
Thank you.
Okay.
All right.
We'll do.
He just needs his ID then.
That's it.
All right.
And it doesn't matter that he's the system.
Okay.
I'm register to vote.
And my girlfriend is too.
She has her license, but she's like a DACA recipient.
okay so I mean like she'll be good she'll be good Just bring her ID.
She definitely has her ID, but she doesn't have, I don't think she has been fully positive as a citizen yet, but like she does have her ID.
But she's in the process of getting it, right?
Yeah, like she's not a citizen yet, but you know.
Yeah.
Yeah, they're still good.
Oh, wait, don't check that.
Okay, then.
I think she'll go check.
I'll just bring it in.
Just bring it.
You're going to.
Yeah, so it actually says that you can.
Actually.
Okay, cool.
Because also, her mom and her aunt, she also has the ID too.
Because they have the ID.
So in the city of Texas, there's no discrimination against that.
We don't actually verify.
Stop.
I'm going to make a statement.
Yeah.
Not telling you who to vote for.
Okay.
America is in a dark age right now.
I agree.
Is it one that you like recommend?
I'm going to say that, but don't come tell me he told me.
No, but the thing is, right now, the Democrats has a better plant for you and the meat.
But think about how the country is with your rich.
The country's going.
It's going that way with that way.
I hope it's going to change soon.
Well, your vote's going to change.
If you don't vote right, then it's going that way too.
Yeah.
It's a tug of war.
All right.
I'll be back.
Thank you, though.
I'm not like super informed by candidates.
Yeah.
It's kind of hard to like.
I'm going to vote Democrat though because of Trump and stuff.
Well, that's a good idea.
And I vote.
You're buying that list.
Democrat.
I vote Democrat ticket.
But I ain't supposed to take it.
Okay.
Your name's James.
Yes, sir.
How you doing?
My name's James.
Nice to meet you.
Good to see you.
Did you know that it was unlawful to give your advice on who to vote for?
Yeah.
Okay.
You do know that's illegal, right?
Yeah.
I didn't give him no advice.
You talked about that lady else talking to me.
No, the young man that came in here earlier.
Yeah.
Yeah.
But I told him I can tell him nothing.
You told him that?
Yeah.
Okay.
All right.
Did you tell that young man, though, that you voted Democratic all the way?
And you didn't say that?
No.
Oh, you didn't say that?
No, I ain't calling him.
Oh, okay.
All right.
He was telling me.
He was telling me that he votes.
He didn't want to vote for Trump.
He was telling me that.
Yeah.
And I said, well, if you don't just vote any way you want to, you know?
Yeah.
I say, you follow all Democrats if you don't want to vote for ideas.
Oh, that's called electioneering.
That's illegal.
But, you know, what difference does it make?
All right, 23 now till the top of the hour.
And before that, you heard a Texas voting official telling a Project Veritas undercover reporter that, oh, non-citizens can vote.
And then another poll worker admitting, we don't check for that.
We don't check for citizenship.
Oh, yeah, it's fine.
Don't worry.
We have loads of people like that.
Bring them in.
Don't worry about it.
Nonsense.
It's fine.
Now, if we go back and look at this election, I don't think there's any doubt that the undercover work done by Project Veritas had an impact on this election as they got undercover video of a Tennessee Senate candidate, former governor.
At one point, the polls were very tight in Tennessee, Phil Bredeson, until that Project Veritas tape came out exposing him as being a phony.
Then we had Claire McCaskill being exposed as being a phony and Heidi Heitkamp being exposed as being a phony and Andrew Gillum and Kristen Sinema of all those races.
I think they had a major impact on the outcome because it made massive, huge news.
And there's been, I guess, some ramifications for James O'Keefe.
These are the newest developments that he has.
Mr. O'Keeffe, Project Veritas, how are you, sir?
Founder.
Hey, Sean, great to be with you again.
Thank you for having me.
Well, I do believe this had a big impact in a lot of these states because we played it nationally, and I did notice a lot of local pickup, which means the people in these individual states, I mean, you exposed a lot of people to a lot of phoniness, and they were all contrived, but yet you got them all on tape.
I think you got everybody, you know, wondering what just hit them.
Yep.
Sean, this was a campaign across the country.
We had a lot of recruits that we had worked with and hired over the last two years, some of whom, by the way, came to us from your radio show.
I was on there two years ago saying, come apply to work for Project Veritas as an undercover journalist.
By the way, if I was young, I would want to do this.
This would be fun for me.
I would really enjoy undercover work like this.
Well, it takes a certain type of person.
You have to be curious and enterprising and have initiative and have a little acting skill and political skill, but you have to have a sense for justice.
You really have to believe that there are wrongs like voter fraud that the media will not report on.
And some people, Sean, come construction workers, school teachers, nurses, just normal everyday heroes that decide to do something about it.
And Sean, in this election, Claire McCaskill, Gillum, we had exposed, I mean, the difference between how they projected themselves in public versus who they were in private.
These election officials you just played on the air, they're all telling people who to vote for in Georgia, which is a misdemeanor.
And in Texas, they're saying, DACA, illegals vote all the time, is what they told us.
So it was an extraordinary election season.
And I think people are waking up to see the power of video, just how powerful the truth, just showing people who they are.
What is the fallout, Ben?
Because there's always fallout and aftermath for Project Veritas after stuff like this.
And I did read that there were some people looking to bring legal action against you, which, by the way, is just a means, I think, of trying to stop you from doing the work you're doing.
Sean, I mean, going back to the two years ago to the videos we did on Creamer where they were inciting violence at Trump rallies, that guy, Creamer, is suing us for bogus things for intrusion and trespass and tortious interference.
They're coming after us.
They're trying to use litigation as a weapon to silence us and to stop us and to send a message to everyone out there that if you expose them, then they're going to come after you too.
They did it to David DeLeiden.
They're doing it to me.
I've got 12 lawsuits against me.
I'm being deposed.
I'm in depositions.
By the way, we did have a victory real quick.
We did take it all the way to the federal court in Massachusetts on the recording law, and it's declared unconstitutional.
So we defeated them in federal court this week.
But, Sean, there's a bigger issue, that these people think they can use lawsuits to stop us, and they want to try to make a lesson out of me.
And in response, I have no choice but to make a lesson out of them.
They have awakened a sleeping giant.
You've got how many people listen to your show?
20, 30 million people out there listening, okay?
And whether it's in your car, whether it's on your iPhone, iHeartRadio, wherever.
And you're thinking to yourself, I want to have purpose in my life and make a difference.
I want to expose them.
I want to do this.
Maybe I even have access to some things that are happening, and I want to do something about it.
If that's you, you should think about joining our crusade.
You should think about signing up to be a journalist.
Because journalism is an activity.
Citizens now need to do it, not just the mainstream press.
All right.
So are you actually recruiting people now?
I mean, or is this a job opening you're telling us about or what?
I'm telling you that last time, one of the times I went on your program, there was a person inside a Silicon Tech.
I'm not going to tell you which company it was.
This person came to me.
She is a fan of yours.
She was a listener of yours.
And she worked for one of these companies.
And she wrote to me and said, the things I find this company done, I'm going to quote her, the things I find this company doing are so appalling, I feel the public has a right to know.
Project Veritas just gave me the courage to do the right thing, even if it meant sacrificing free food and my high salary at the company.
She now works for Project Veritas full-time, documenting what has happened, and we're going to go public with it soon.
My point is there are people out there who feel they want to make a difference in life, who feel like they should be exposing the corruption and the fraud in our government, in our voting system, in these tech companies.
And you can do something about it.
Just go to projectveritas.com and send me a note, and I will recruit you.
I will pay you a full-time salary so that you can do this.
Because, Sean, we have to fight back.
They've awakened a sleeping giant.
We have an invisible army of people out there.
I'm just going to understand.
Look, on a legal basis, and I know you have an army of attorneys, so I'm not really, I'm sure it's expensive, and I'm sure that makes it difficult, and I'm sure it's time-consuming to sit through deposition after deposition.
But I do believe this is important work, and you do dot every I and cross every T, and you are fully aware of what the laws are in these states, correct?
One-party, two-party record states.
Like, for example, you would not have been able to do this, or it might have been questionable if you were in California, correct?
Well, Sean, we just, and we didn't do it in Massachusetts, which is a state that you're referencing.
But just to show you the enormous will and the sort of moral courage of our attorneys, this is a pretty historic victory for the First Amendment.
We got the statute in Massachusetts overturned in federal court on the grounds it's unconstitutional.
We have really good lawyers.
I mean, this wasn't the New York Times.
It wasn't the Washington Post that changed the law under the first.
This was Project Veritas.
This is the new frontier.
You can't expect these journalists.
By the way, 60 Minutes used to do this all the time.
Shows did this all the time, news programs over the years have done this.
Sean, they don't want to actually expose what's really going on these days because it contradicts their policy positions if they expose the truth.
So they won't do it.
But the people out there can.
And to answer your question, we never break the law.
We wouldn't ever dream of doing anything that broke the law.
Some people have.
We don't do that.
But that doesn't mean that the people out there listening to this program, if you feel compelled to live a life of purpose to actually document and expose this stuff, you should still contact us and we will talk to you and we will try to put you to work.
By the way, watch out for liberal infiltrators.
They're going to try and do the jiu-jitsu move on you as my first guest.
All right, James O'Keefe, founder of Project Veritas.
These new tapes are unbelievable.
We're linking them now to Hannity.com.
Their website has them all in full, projectveritas.com, I believe.
Quick break, right back.
We'll continue.
All right, wrapping things up with James O'Keefe.
He is the founder of Project Veritas.
These are big, big campaign issues.
Now, if they're going to fight back by going after you and bringing you and dragging you into lawsuits, what happens from there?
Well, Sean, I mean, we can never settle the lawsuits.
Bob Creamer is suing us.
He's going around to get other people to sue us.
They're trying to make a lesson out of me to send a message to patriots.
If you do this, if you expose them, so what I have to do is take a stand and never settle.
I did nothing wrong.
I was doing my job as a reporter.
It's my First Amendment right.
We got the Supreme Court, rather, the federal court to overturn the statute in Massachusetts.
And I just want to awaken a sleeping giant army of exposers.
They can take down one man, but they can't take down us all.
James Daymore gave Google a black eye.
You can do that too.
If you're on the inside and you see something, let's reverse George Orwell and let's make them afraid.
Let's report on their abuses.
That's what the future of Project Veritas is.
It's to engage a citizen army.
So where can people either write you, call you if they want to do this?
Because I bet there will be people, but I would tell you, and this is my advice, I'd also bet people on the left are going to try and penetrate your organization.
Well, we have a very, Sean, we have a very professional, dedicated group of employees at Project Veritas.
We have many people that work with me who make sure that the people that come through our website, you go to projectveritas.com.
If you're on the radio right now and you're hearing, that's me, I want to do that.
I want to serve a purpose to expose this.
Go to our website, Project Veritas.
Project Veritas.com and apply and submit a tip and tell us who you are and why you want to do this.
And we'll put you through our system and we will find the people who are meant to do this because we have to create an army of exposers.
They have awakened a sleeping giant.
And again, Sean, they're going to try to make an example out of me.
And in response, we're going to make an example out of them.
We're going to make them know that we're watching them.
And if you're lying, cheating, or stealing, you may become the next unwilling internet celebrity at Project Veritas.
All right, James O'Keefe, ProjectVeritas.com.
Thank you, sir, for being with us.
Quick break, right back, we'll continue.
And you're listening to the best of the Sean Hannity Show.
We'll have more of your favorite guests, topics, and memorable moments.
That's all coming up.
The best of Sean Hannity is on now.
This is how we rule.
We light it up with our hands up.
This is how we rule.
On the Mueller situation, we're very happy with what we are reading because there was no collusion whatsoever.
My takeaway is there's a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him, that he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time.
Holding them accountable.
Sean gets the answers.
No one else does.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the Revolution.
We're burning down the machine bullets at the moon, baby.
This is how we rule.
Sean Hannity, the new Sean Hannity show.
More behind the scenes information on breaking news and more bold, inspired solutions for America.
People who entered the United States without our permission are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who entered the U.S. legally.
The president's decision to end DACA was heartless and it was brainless.
When we use phrases like undocumented workers, we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration.
Hundreds, hundreds of thousands of families will be ripped apart.
If you don't think it's illegal, you're not going to say it.
I think it is illegal and wrong.
Tens of thousands of American businesses will lose hardworking employees.
And the argument there, Mr. President, is Americans don't want to do the work.
We just can't find American workers to do the work.
Mr. President, that is a crock in many instances.
It's just not true.
In my view, Trump's decision to end the DACA program for some 800,000 young people is the cruelest and most ugly presidential act in the modern history of this country.
I cannot think of one single act which is uglier and more cruel.
We've got to do several things, and I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants.
People have to stop employing illegal immigrants.
Come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand in the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx.
You're going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work.
Eno idi, this is not a problem that the people who are coming into the country are solely responsible for.
They wouldn't be coming if we didn't put them to work.
My proposal will keep families together and it will include a path to citizenship.
Those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.
We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants.
Real reform means establishing a responsible pathway to earn citizenship.
The flipping, the flopping, the flailing that goes on on the issue of immigration, and of course the beatdown that the president had with Pelosi and Schumer today.
And he's not given up.
And it's clear.
And the other good news is he has the support of even people like Lindsey Graham saying, no, he's got to hold out.
This is a fight worth fighting.
And, you know, the president also taking major steps today to rein in the abuse of our welfare system by non-citizens who utilize federal subsidies in far greater numbers than their U.S.-born counterpart.
I mean, 67% of illegal immigrants, according to a recent study that came out.
And the president now also threatening that if he has to, he'll use the military to get the wall built that way.
And that exchange goes back and forth.
He says, look, get it done.
I'll have the military do it.
And if I have to shut down the government, it's a myth that Republicans get hurt by government shutdowns.
They were afraid to do it when Obama was president.
Now they're afraid to do it when a Republican's president.
They're just afraid.
So, you know, 3,000 people on a single day got caught jumping the border recently.
And there's nothing that they're proposing, meaning Nancy or Chuck, that is going to fix that.
Anyway, Jim Jordan, Freedom Caucus member with us.
By the way, our two Sean Hannity show, 800-941 Sean, our toll-free telephone number.
What did you think of the president's exchange with Pelosi and Schumer today?
Sean, I loved it.
I mean, this is why the American people elected this guy president, because he is standing firm and going to this is not about shutdown.
This is about doing what we said, doing what we told the voters we were going to do.
And one of the central promises made in the 2016 campaign is that we were going to build a border security wall.
We were going to get control of the border.
And the president is standing firm for that.
We took a position as a Freedom Caucus last night that we will only think about supporting this big spending bill if, in fact, we do what the president said today.
So I thought it was great.
And I think the American people think the same thing.
Well, look, he pointed out that everywhere the wall is, it's 100% certainty we stop all illegal immigration.
Also, it's good.
We saw a potential catastrophe building with the caravan.
And as much as if what happened at the southern border of Mexico, and it was attempted up here, had happened up here and we didn't have the means to stop them, then at that point, it becomes unlimited illegal immigration into the country.
And also, you know, it was bad enough to watch rocks and bottles being thrown at our ICE guys and the Border Patrol people, but it was happening right before our eyes.
Yeah.
The president is this is common sense, and the president is standing strong for common sense reform here.
Build the wall and reform our asylum law.
Stop the catch and release, change our asylum law.
And if you do those two things, this caravan phenomena that we've watched the last several weeks, that's how you deal with it.
That's how you send the right message.
That's how you have orderly legal immigration, not what we've been seeing the last several weeks with this caravan and the attempts to try to get over the wall, under the wall, through the fence, all the things they're trying to do.
So again, I love what the president did.
He stood firm there.
And I think this is where we got to be.
Stand firm for doing what we told the American people we were going to do.
More importantly, what they elected us to do.
Any insight as to what's going on with Mark Meadows?
I keep reading his name all over the place as a potential candidate for chief of staff, which I'm sure you would probably like because then it's a coup for you, and you'd be probably back in the driver's seat.
Well, as chairman, you were the chairman, right?
But you lost your chairmanship.
I love what you bring it up.
You're the honorary member, you know.
You're the only honorary member outside of our group that's into Freedom Caucus.
You're the only people I trust.
Honestly, I will tell you, one person that is impressing me more and more is Lindsey Graham.
Lindsey Graham said, no, this is a fight we're going to have, and the president's going to win.
And he's right.
We have to win it because if not, this never goes away.
And it's interesting to watch the Democrats.
There's nothing that apparently the president would offer them that they would take because they so desperately want to just say no to him and not be seen as making any deals with this president.
So that means no progress at all for the country if they follow up on that.
It doesn't matter what the president's for, they're against it.
You played the montage there at the front end where it shows all the things they said before.
Now they're for the borderless hemisphere, as their candidate for president said in 2016, they're for abolishing ICE.
So they've changed dramatically.
To your first question, Mark Meadows would be a tremendous chief of staff.
I hate to lose him on Capitol Hill because he's my best friend up here, but he would be great for the president if that's who the president chooses.
I think the country and the president and our entire nation is well served if that's who he picks.
But on this immigration issue, Lindsay, Senator Graham is exactly right.
Stand firm, Mr. President.
Stand firm.
Let's get this done.
Now we got a few weeks left where we have the majorities in both houses.
Let's make it happen.
Well, I said Mitch McConnell saying that he's going to go forward.
How do you feel about the prison reform bill?
I interviewed Jared Kushner last night.
The one thing that had bothered me is one part that Tom Cotton has been pointing out.
There can't be any possibility that any violent felons are released as part of that deal.
But on the other hand, do you remember Alice Marie Johnson, the woman when she had her sentence commuted by the president?
She comes out of prison, 20-plus years in prison, one-time offender, it was a drug deal.
And she got out and she said something that I thought was amazing.
She said, first, thank you to the president.
Thanks to the country.
And then she went on and said, I'm never going to let you down.
Thank you for giving me a second chance.
And then I got a chance to interview her, and she's as lovely or more lovely in person.
Yep.
We have to find those people that deserve that second chance and maybe even transform the use of the pardon power of the president.
I'd love to see that.
Exactly.
We're all in need of God's grace.
If you do something wrong, you're going to have to serve your time.
But while you're in prison, let's get you the training, the help that you need so that when you do get out, you can go on with your life and get that second chance.
And I know Jared has been working hard on this.
We think this is the kind of legislation that makes sense.
There were some concerns that Senator Cotton raised.
I think those are being addressed.
We had Mike Lee at our Freedom Caucus meeting last night.
Mike's been a strong proponent of this legislation.
So, again, I think Jared and the team have done a lot of good work.
And let's see if we can get this thing done.
And I think we can.
All right.
So let's imagine at first I was a little concerned, and I heard Nadler and some others saying, We're going to end the deep state investigation almost immediately.
There's no point.
So we all knew that was going to happen.
However, we now had the testimony of, were you in the testimony when Comey gave it last week?
Heck yeah, the whole time.
Okay, and James Comey literally said he said in that meeting, well, first of all, he said, I don't remember, some 250 times.
Put that aside.
He never vetted the dossier.
We already knew it, but now he's on record saying they never vetted the dossier, but he put his signature to it, right?
And Sally Yates did, and Rod Rosenstein did, right?
Yeah.
Well, I think it's even worse, Sean.
He didn't know anything about Christopher Steele.
So it's one thing to take his work.
You don't know anything about the work product.
The guy who wrote the work product that you took to the court to get the warrant, he never talked to Christopher Steele, didn't know Christopher Steele was meeting with Brussels, a top Justice Department official, didn't know that Brussels was passing Chris Steele's information to the FBI.
Didn't know that they had terminated Christopher Steele.
Didn't know that Christopher Steele continued to give information to the FBI after he was terminated.
Didn't know any of that, and yet takes his work product to the FISA court to get the warrant to spy on the Trump campaign.
That's the literally, that was the biggest takeaway I had: you didn't know squat about the key guy whose work product was the basis for the whole darn thing.
Have you heard about this email chain that John Solomon was reporting about?
Now, there were three buckets that the president has talked about that he would unredact and release to the American people.
Bucket one would be the FISA applications.
Both the Nunes and Grassley Graham memos say that the bulk of information came from the dossier that we now know they never vetted.
On top of that, Christopher Steele has since distanced his own self from that by saying, I have no idea if any of it's true when he was threatened with perjury in an interrogatory in Great Britain.
But then we want the 302s, gang of ape, but there's also this email letter chain.
Comey is on it.
And what can you tell us about it?
I asked him about it.
He didn't know that was another one of his 245, I don't know.
So I did ask him about an email chain relative to the fact that Christopher Steele, this was in Mr. Solomon's reporting, and I went basically from Mr. Solomon's reporting that Mr. Steele had met with reporters in September 2016 prior to, again, his dossier being taken to the FISA court as the basis for the Carter Page FISA.
So I asked him about that.
He didn't know anything about it.
And I specifically asked him, so you didn't know anything about Christopher Steele possibly meeting with Michael Isikoff with Yahoo News.
He didn't know anything about that either.
I do think we need to come back to that and explore it deeper because it was basically two questions is all I got I got a chance to ask him about.
I think we need to dig a little deeper into that.
But he didn't know anything.
And that's what he told us in the deposition last week.
So we have the sentencing memos.
You know, this is what we whole Mueller investigation has become: lying to the FBI, lying to law enforcement about taxi medallions, loan applications, not paying your taxes, which is really stupid if you don't pay them.
You got to pay your taxes because that's the easiest way to throw anybody in jail.
And, you know, so we have all of this hysteria by the media and the left, and they're all throwing around the word impeachment.
By the way, these are the people that have been hating on the president from day one and even before he got elected.
The reality is you can't indict a sitting president.
That's DOJ policy, period.
Neither the special counsel nor the SDNY nor Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein can defy that policy.
Not only that, there is no campaign finance violation here for a multitude of reasons, which I went into earlier today.
Right.
No, right.
I mean, this is all about, you know, Cohen did a lot of things he shouldn't have done.
Mr. Manafort didn't register, right?
The lobbyist did pay the fight.
It's all that kind of stuff.
But where's the relationship to what the underlying mission of the special counsel was?
Where is any type of collusion or coordination or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia to date?
Not one bit of evidence in any of that to show that there was any type of coordination.
So I always just come back to the basics.
That's what Mr. Mueller is supposed to be looking at.
We have not seen any of that.
And yet, Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff, they already got the president going to prison.
No, I don't know.
Hey, listen, I'm just hoping that the new attorney general will believe in equal justice under the law, an equal application of our laws.
And if that's the case, and we really are worried about Russian interference, then I think the Uranium One deal shows a lot of stupidity, bad decisions, corruption, and Putin influence.
And I think the same thing with the dossier that was disseminated to the American people to make Americans vote against Donald Trump.
I'd like that to be dealt with as well.
But stay right there.
More with our good friend, Representative Jim Jordan, House Freedom Caucus member.
And as we continue with Jim Jordan, House Freedom Caucus member, Congressman from Ohio.
All right, so it's a little different.
I mean, it's a good thing I will say that the president worked so hard to save the Senate because it doesn't matter what Nancy Pelosi does in the end or what the House Democrats do as extreme as they are, but it makes your job harder.
And if they come in with a cannon of subpoenas as they are telegraphing, how do you in the minority fight that?
You focus on the truth.
I mean, that's all that's what you've been focused on, Sean does such a good job with.
What we've been focused on, Mark Meadows, Matt Gates, and a bunch of us in the House, you focus on the truth.
And that's got to be our job.
So, look, we have an obligation, constitutional duty, to provide oversight of the federal government, particularly in the oversight committee where Elijah Cummings already had 64 subpoenas he wanted to send this Congress.
So we assume those are coming the next Congress.
But we focus on the truth.
They're going to drive how they want to, and they're going to do what they want in subpoenas and hearings and bring people in and all the things they do.
Our job is to focus on the truth.
Could you imagine if anybody deleted their emails when they were subpoenaed by Gerald Nadler or any other committee chair of the Democrats and then used acid wash bleach pit to clean the hard drive and bust up their devices?
I wonder what they'd say then.
I wonder if they subpoenaed me and I did all those things.
What do you think would happen?
You'd be in big trouble.
This is the double standard that drives people crazy, and you've talked about it, but it's so true.
One set of rules for us regular folk, but a different set of your name is Dave, Lynch, Lerner, Paige, Strzok, you get a different set of rules.
You know, one of the things I was struck with, too, and I actually asked this question to Mr. Comey.
Think about it.
Go to the basics.
Remember, it was the same people who ran the Clinton investigation who then took over and launched and ran the Russian investigation.
And I think you go right back to the beginning.
Think of the names they gave each of those investigations.
One was called the mid-year exam.
That's sort of like you had to get through this.
We had to go kind of make it look like we were doing it, but the fix was in and they were going to make sure Clinton was exonerated.
And then the other one was called Crossfire Hurricane, which I just think when you step back and think about the names and what those names imply, that sort of right from the get-go shows you there was some extreme bias against President Trump right of 16, right from the get-go.
All right, Jim Jordan, thank you.
800.
You know, I'm going to play, you know, why don't we play this exchange in full when we get back?
Then we'll take some calls on it because I've been referring to it now since the first hour.
800-941-Sean is our number.
You want to be a part of the program.
Later on, John Sale will look at the prosecutorial.
The president is in trouble over campaign finance.
Forget Russia collusion.
It's campaign finance now.
The answer is no.
We'll explain and more coming up straight ahead.
Hannity, oh, we got a great show tonight, 9 Eastern.
This is the best of the Sean Hannity Show.
Don't forget, stay tuned for more right after the latest news right here on this radio station.
You are listening to the best of The Sean Hannity Show.
The new Sean Hannity Show, talking about what's right for America, with a renewed commitment to keep you up to date on the breaking news stories.
All right, 25 to the top of the hour.
I know a lot of you missed it earlier today.
I think it's worth it.
It's like a 10-minute exchange here.
With the President Pelosi and Schumer in the Oval Office and dealing with government funding, government shutdown possibility and funding the wall.
Lindsey Graham's backing the president.
Republicans are backing the president.
They're saying, no, we made a promise.
This is what people want them to do.
That's fight.
Stand up and fight because it's the right thing to do.
And so here's that exchange, which I just thought the president just nailed them multiple times, and it was great.
Listen to this.
We may not have an agreement today.
We probably won't.
But we have an agreement on other things that are really good.
Nancy, would you like to say something?
Well, thank you, Mr. President, for the opportunity to meet with you so that we can work together in a bipartisan way to meet the needs of the American people.
I think the American people recognize that we must keep government open, that a shutdown is not worth anything, and that you should not have a Trump shutdown.
You have the White House.
If you see Trump, you have the White House.
You have the Senate.
You have the House of Representatives.
You have the vote.
You should pass the Senate.
No, we don't have the votes, Nancy, because in the Senate we need 60 votes.
We have it in the House.
And we don't have it.
You should bring it up right now.
Yeah, but I can't get it passed in the House if it's not going to pass in the Senate.
I don't want to waste time.
Well, the fact is you can get it started that way.
The House we can get passed very easily.
And we do.
But the problem is the Senate, because we need 10 Democrats to vote.
No, no, no.
That's not the point, Mr. President.
The point is that there are equities to be weighed.
And we're here to have a conversation in a prayerful way.
So I don't think we should have a debate in front of the press on this.
But the fact is, the House Republicans could bring up this bill, if they had the votes, immediately and set the tone for what you want.
If we thought we were going to get it passed in the Senate, Nancy, we would do it immediately.
We get it passed very easily in the House.
We would get it.
Nancy, I'd have it passed in two seconds.
It doesn't matter, though, because we can't get it passed in the Senate because we need 10 Democrat votes.
That's what I'm saying.
Again, let us have our conversation, then we can meet with the press again.
But the fact is, is that legislating, which is what we do, you begin, you make your point, you state your case.
That's what the House Republicans could do if they had the votes.
But there are no votes in the House, a majority of votes, for a wall, no matter where you stand.
Exactly right.
If I needed the votes for the wall in the House, I would have them in one session.
It would be done.
Go do it.
It doesn't help because we need 10 Democrats in the Senate.
Put it on a negotiation.
Okay, let me ask you this, and we're doing this in a very friendly manner.
It doesn't help for me to take a vote in the House where I will win easily with the Republicans.
It doesn't help to take that vote because I'm not going to get the vote with the Senate.
I need 10 senators.
That's the problem.
You have the White House.
You have the Senate.
I have the White House.
The White House has done.
And the House would give me the vote if I wanted it.
But I can't because I need, Nancy, I need 10 votes from Chuck.
Let me say something.
Let me just say one thing.
The fact is, you do not have the votes in the House.
Nancy, I do.
And we need border security.
Nancy.
Nancy, we need border security.
It's very simple.
Of course we do.
We need border security.
People are pouring into our country, including terrorists.
We have terrorists.
We caught 10 terrorists over the last very short period of time.
10.
These are very serious people.
Our border agents, all of our law enforcement has been incredible, what they've done.
But we caught 10 terrorists.
These are people that were looking to do harm.
We need the wall.
We need, more important than anything, we need border security, of which the wall is just a piece.
But it's important.
Chuck, did you want to say something?
Yeah, here's what I want to say.
We have a lot of disagreements here.
The Washington Post today gave you a whole lot of Pinocchios because they say you constantly misstate how much of the wall is built and how much is there.
But that's not the point here.
We have a disagreement about the wall.
Washington, whether it's effective or not on border security, but on the wall.
We do not want to shut down the government.
You have called 20 times to shut down the government.
You say, I want to shut down the government.
We don't.
We want to come to an agreement.
If we can't come to an agreement, we have solutions that will pass the House and Senate right now and will not shut down the government.
And that's what we're urging you to do.
Not threaten to shut down the government because you can't get your way.
Let me say something, Mr. President.
You just say, my way, or we'll shut down the government.
We have a proposal that Democrats and Republicans will support to do a CR that will not shut down the government.
We urge you to take it.
And if it's not good border security, I will take it.
It is very good border security.
And if it's not good border security, I won't take it.
Because when you look at these numbers of the effectiveness of our border security, and when you look at the job that we're doing, can I tell you something?
Without a wall, these are only areas where you have the wall.
Where you have walls, Chuck, it's effective.
Where you don't have walls, it is not effective.
Let's call a halt to this.
We've come in here as the first branch of government.
Article 1, the legislative branch.
We're coming in in good faith to negotiate with you about how we can keep the government open.
We're going to keep it open if we have border security.
If we don't have border security, Chuck, we're not going to keep it open.
We are going to have border security.
And it's the same border.
You're bragging about what has been done.
We want to do the same thing we did last year, this year.
That's our proposal.
If it's good then, it's good now, and it won't shut down the government.
Chuck, we can build up.
But that's actually a good question.
Okay, yeah.
Let's debate in private.
That is devoid, frankly, of fact.
And we can.
We need border security.
I think we all agree that we need border security.
Yes, is that right?
Good.
We do.
See?
We get along.
Thank you, everybody.
President, you say border security and the wall.
Can you have border security without the wall?
You need the wall.
The wall is a part of border security.
What it means to have border security.
Yes.
We need border security.
The wall is a part of border security.
You can't have very good border security without the wall.
No.
That is a political promise.
Border security is a way to effectively honor our responses.
And the experts say you can do border security without a wall, which is wasteful and doesn't solve the problem.
It totally solves the problem.
And it's very important.
This has spiraled downwards when we came at a place to say, how do we meet the needs of American people who have needs?
The economy has, people are losing their jobs.
The market's in a mood.
Our members are already...
Well, we have the lowest unemployment that we've had in 50 years.
60 people of the Republican Party are losing their offices now because of the transition.
People are not at the middle of the country.
We've gained in the Senate.
Nancy, we've gained in the Senate.
Excuse me, did we win the Senate?
We won the Senate.
When the President brags that he won North Dakota and Indiana, he's in real trouble.
When I did, let me say this.
We did win North Dakota.
This is the most unfortunate thing.
We came in here in good faith and we're entering into this kind of a discussion in the public meeting.
But it's not bad, Nancy.
It's full transparency.
I know it's high transparency when we're not stipulating to a set of facts and when we want to have a debate with you about saying we confront some of those facts.
You know what?
We need border security.
That's what we're going to be talking about, border security.
If we don't have border security, we'll shut down the government.
This country needs border security.
The wall is a part of border security.
Let's have a talk.
We're going to get the wall built, and we've done a lot of wall already.
That big a part of border security is the wall.
It's a big section.
It's a big part of it.
Is it everything that you need?
It's a big part of it.
We need to have effective border security.
We need a wall in certain parts.
No, not in all parts, but in certain parts of a 2,000-mile border, we need a wall.
How much money?
We are doing it much under budget.
We're actually way under budget on the areas that we've renovated and areas that we've built.
I would say if we got $5 billion, we could do a tremendous chunk of wall.
Is there anything you want to accept less, though?
And are your guests?
Well, we're going to see.
We're going to see.
Look, we have to have the wall.
This isn't a question.
This is a national emergency.
Drugs are pouring into our country.
People with tremendous medical difficulty and medical problems are pouring in, and in many cases, it's contagious.
They're pouring into our country.
We have to have border security.
We have to have a wall as part of border security.
And I don't think we really disagree so much.
I also know that Nancy is in a situation where it's not easy for her to talk right now.
And I understand that.
And I fully understand that.
We're going to have a good discussion, and we're going to see what happens.
But we have to have border security.
Mr. President, please don't characterize the strength that I bring to this meeting as the leader of the House Democrats who just won a big victory.
Elections have consequences, Mr. President.
Sandy just said.
That's right.
And that's why the country is doing so well.
But the president is representing in terms of his cards over there are not factual.
We have to have an evidence-based conversation about what does work, what money has been spent, and how effective it is.
This is about the security of our country.
We take an oath to protect and defend.
And we don't want to have that mischaracterized by anyone.
I agree with you.
No, no, I agree with us.
So let us have a conversation where we don't have to contradict in public the statistics that you put forth, but instead can have a conversation about what will really work and what the American people deserve from us at this uncertain time in their lives.
One thing I think we can agree on is we shouldn't shut down the government over a dispute.
And you want to shut it down.
You keep talking about it.
The last time, Chuck, you shut it down.
No, no, no.
And then you opened up quickly.
I don't want to do what you did.
20 times you have called for I will shut down the government if I don't get my wool.
None of us have.
You want to know something?
You've said it.
Okay, you want to put that out.
Who said it?
I'll take it.
Okay, good.
You know what I'll say?
Yes.
If we don't get what we want one way or the other, whether it's through you, through a military, through anything you want to call, I will shut down the government.
Fair enough.
And I am proud.
And I'll just agree.
I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck, because the people of this country don't want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring into our country.
So I will take the mantle.
I will be the one to shut it down.
I'm not going to blame you for it.
The last time you shut it down, it didn't work.
I will take the method of shutting down.
And I'm going to shut it down for border.
But we believe you shouldn't shut it down.
Thank you very much, everybody.
Congrats on the bill.
Make your way out after this.
I don't want to do that.
We have a lot of great people for Jesus.
A lot of people want the job.
A lot of people want the job.
Guys are great people.
A lot of friends of mine want it.
A lot of people that Chuck and Nancy know very well want it.
I think people you'd like.
We have a lot of people that want the job, chief of staff.
So we'll be seeing what happens very soon.
We're in no rush.
Why?
We're in no rush.
Why no rush, Mr. President?
Why?
Because we have a wonderful chief of staff right now.
We are in no rush.
Over a period of a week or two, or maybe less, we'll announce who it's going to be.
But we have a lot of people that want the position.
Thank you very much.
All right.
So that was from earlier today.
That was the president with Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer in the Oval Office.
I'll take a quick break here.
We'll come back.
We'll continue.
800-941 Sean is on number.
We'll get to your calls when we get back.
John Sal, formerly of the Southern District Of New York prosecutor, is going to analyze this ridiculous notion that campaign finance is the big Mueller find here, because it's not and it's ridiculous and anyone that tells you it is doesn't know what they're talking about.
All right, as we continue, let's get to our busy phones here.
Michael is in Pittsburgh PA Mike hi, how are you glad you called sir.
Good Sean, good afternoon, hey.
The only problem that I think I have is the fact that the representative created a slush fund from our money and then went ahead and paid off women who accused them supposedly of sexually harassing them.
And I don't know who these women are.
Was it someone's cousin?
Was it their sister?
I mean, we have no way to trace you know how much hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of dollars of our money, and we don't know who they were.
We don't know what happened, but we knew that with Mr. Kavanaugh, we know it was Mr. Trump, President Trump, like a little uh, you know, a little openness about here's what we, here's what.
This is what I know and this was uh, printed.
This goes back a year now and I remember first seeing it in the NEW YORK POST.
You know, like Democratic control House members.
They want to impeach President Trump for non-disclosure agreement payments or whatever.
You know, a lot of times they're made just to make things go away and it's cheaper.
Other times it's true and accurate and they pay a lot of money.
But the difference here is and I think you're raising a point I think we have a right to know, because I think there's going to be a lot of explaining to do Republicans and Democrats, if they're spending millions of our tax dollars to silence women who accuse them of everything from sexual harassment to worse, and that would include a whole lot of Democrats who stand accused now.
Say what you will, the president's issues, believe them or not, were 12 years ago and the president, which we know, Would use his own money, but not the case of Congress.
You know, we had a Congresswoman who testified that current members of Congress are known sexual harassers and that $15 million of taxpayer money has been paid to hush accusers.
Okay.
And Representative Jackie Spire told a news outlet that millions have been doled out.
And even CNN reported, according to Congressional Office of Compliance, there were 268 settlements.
Okay, we're footing the bill for that.
Now, if you want to pay somebody off and have your own non-disclosure agreement, have at it, but don't make me pay for it.
I'm not paying for it.
At least we should have the knowledge of what went on, right?
Yeah, I think the hashto hash with the hashtag me too or the bring back the girls, that's all going to be fake and it's all going to be for naught if they don't really push it here.
I mean, they really need to go after these people, whether they're Republicans.
I'll bring this up tonight.
You're raising a good point.
All right.
Thank you so much for the call.
800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
All right.
Former SDNY Southern District New York prosecutor, John Sale, will join us.
We'll get his analysis on this whole campaign finance non-issue, but we'll get his take on it straight ahead as we continue.
It is proven that the president directed or coordinated with Cohen to commit these felonies.
Are those impeachable offenses?
Well, they would be impeachable offenses.
Whether they are important enough to justify an impeachment is a different question, but certainly they'd be impeachable offenses.
This president, in my estimation, has done everything possible to certainly be eligible for impeachment.
And so I really do think that it should be started.
I think what this totality of today's filings show is that the House is going to have little choice the way this is going other than to start impeachment proceedings.
This is a man who came in and said, I'm bigger than the House.
I'm bigger than checks and balances.
I'm bigger than the judicial community.
I'm bigger than the free press.
And he's going to pay for that the rest of his life.
When immigrants procure their citizenship by fraud, we strip them of their citizenship.
When a president procures his presidency by fraud, should we consider doing the same?
That can be a criminal case if they can prove willfulness there.
I also think it is potentially grounds for impeachment.
I think the American people would support impeachment.
Donald Trump will be, must be impeached.
He's got to know his future looks like it's behind bars.
Donald Trump is a criminal enterprise.
It certainly looks like they are the kind of offenses that would call for impeachment hearings.
You have this memorable phrase of individual number one.
You know, it's going to go down, I think, in the history books along with some of those memorable Watergate phrases.
Do you agree with Congressman Adam Schiff, who's going to be the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, that President Trump could be indicted and possibly face jail time after he leaves office?
Yes.
These are felonies that we're talking about.
As it relates to impeachment, Anderson, the Constitution could not be any clearer.
Impeachment is the appropriate remedy for bribery, for treason, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
It speaks for itself.
If the president orchestrated and ordered Michael Cohen to break the law, to act in a criminal manner, and did so knowingly, as Jerry Nadler, the incoming chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said, that would be an impeachable offense, potentially, again, if knowledge was there.
All right, dudes, roundup information overload.
And yeah, that is your left-wing media and their overreaction and their stupidity and their ignorance all on full display here.
You know, it's amazing that collectively they were waiting for these sentencing recommendations on Cohn and Manafort and the end of the cooperation deal that Manafort had with the special counsel, thinking that there's a smoking gun.
So on Russia, but of course, there was nothing.
For Michael Cohn, we're talking about taxi medallions, financial issues, tax issues, loan applications.
And for Manafort, pretty much the same thing, nothing to do with Russian collusion.
So first that raises the question, why might we even be here, right?
Then on the Michael Cohn, then they found nothing on Russia.
And then, like, we got to get something.
Well, Michael Cohn said that he did this at the direction of the president.
Problem with Michael is that's not the only version of that story that he's given.
He said actually that he did it on his own without any input for the president.
When the president found out, he paid him back.
So that turns into a whole different thing.
I go back to Levin's piece earlier that I mentioned that he put up on Facebook.
When you look at actual campaign rules and the wording and the context, they don't include non-disclosure agreements, NDAs, or infinite other contracts, payments, arrangements, acts of a private nature as campaign contributions.
In other words, it's normal human behavior that was never intended ever, nor is it mentioned to be regulated or reported.
So the Southern District of New York, which I have a lot of respect for, in this case, I believe is way off course.
And whatever private payments might have been made in any amount by anybody, they're private payments involving private matters.
And to underscore, there's no reporting requirement because they're not campaign payments made with or without campaign funds.
So the inclusion of this and their desire to only believe the version of events that fits their narrative doesn't really work in a court of law.
And as a practical matter, how do you get to pick and choose which version of somebody's story that you want?
He's not a cooperating witness in this particular case.
But, you know, this is what the left wing does.
This is what they've been now calling for for two years.
And as for impeachment, I mean, there's nothing dumber that I've heard in my life.
A non-disclosure agreement is a non-disclosure agreement involving private matters that people agree to.
They don't have to agree to it, but they choose to agree to it.
And unrelated to anything that ever had to do with his office or obtaining his office.
And how, you know, how we get to this point is just showing you how desperate and political things have become in this atmosphere of Destroy Trump.
Anyway, John Sale is a former federal prosecutor.
He served in the Southern District of New York as an assistant special Watergate prosecutor as well.
And Sale has particular understanding of the Southern District of New York, probably the most prestigious, I guess, in the country.
Is that a fair statement, John Sale?
I think it is, even though I've been in other U.S. attorneys' offices.
I think it is.
But I mean, the cases that have.
And you worked with Andy, I think, on the Blind Shake case, didn't you?
And you worked with Rudy over the years as well.
Well, I worked with Rudy over the years.
The judge in the Blind Sheikh case is my good friend Michael McKese.
Right.
I mean, the names that come out of here are who's who in terms of legal minds and political powerhouse people.
So, and I've taken the Southern District of New York and taken on some of the biggest, hardest cases, especially with terrorism and other issues.
What is your reaction to all of this?
Do you think there's any validity to this campaign finance argument?
Well, I think that that's a pretty easy one.
For starters, when Michael Cohn first entered his plea, he pled to, as you pointed out before, he pled to matters involving his own misdeeds, false tax returns, false applications to loans, having nothing in the world to do with the president.
And they threw in a couple of so-called campaign violations, and he gratuitously added, oh, and it was directed by, obviously he was referring to the president.
And then his lawyer went on TV and tried to sell his cooperation to the special counsel, which is a kind of a bizarre way to do it.
So now he's changed his story for about the eighth time.
But I'll tell you, Sean, something that really is unusual.
And as I said, I'm proud of my former office.
But usually when two prosecutors' offices take different positions, they don't do it publicly.
They'll sit down, sometimes with the Department of Justice being the referee, and then they take a uniform position.
So here you see the special counsel saying that he was helpful somewhat, and you have the Southern District blasting him in a sentencing memo.
But to get back to your question, I mean, first of all, it's only Michael Cohn who is saying he was authorized by individual number one, which I think it's disingenuous to say individual number one because we all know who he's referring to.
But I don't concede that that happened because of his credibility.
But if it did happen, and just for the sake of argument, it's a specific intent crime.
So they would have to prove that individual number one knew it was against the law, which they can't prove.
And it's also an offense which is rarely prosecuted criminally and is usually dealt with by a fine.
So, you know, is that impeachable?
Well, spitting on the sidewalk is impeachable if a Congress votes it is, but of course it shouldn't.
It's not an impeachable offense in fairness.
And I'm not, I don't join the bandwagon.
I watch a TV show regularly, Sean, and I'm a big fan.
But I don't necessarily agree that Mueller's office is on a witch hunt, but I just think they're wrong.
And I think the fairness, you frequently talk about the investigation is tainted.
I think you don't have to go there to just look at what are they doing regarding the president.
And I'm not here to defend the president, but what they're doing regarding the president is unfair, the special counsel's office.
These redacted pleadings to me are appalling that they're filed publicly.
And I called four different, very seasoned federal judges in different parts of the country.
And I asked every one of them, have you ever in your 20-some-odd years sitting on the bench seen anything like that?
And every single one of them said no.
And here's my problem.
X, or whichever one we're talking about, in public, they file a document that says he provided very valuable information regarding, and then it's all blank.
So what does that lead to?
Speculation about, is it X, is it Y. I'm not going to mention their names because I'm going to then contribute to the problem of destroying their reputations.
That information should be filed under seal so that nobody's speculating and nobody is in their imagination creating evidence about the president, about the president's family.
And the only thing it tells me is that this investigation is probably not coming to a close.
And I think it should.
And I think there, as I've said before, if a special counsel does a very thorough investigation and it does not incriminate the president, they have not failed.
If the evidence shows it does, then that's one thing.
But we have not seen any evidence to incriminate the president.
And everyone is on some of the other networks, everyone is speculating.
And that's all it is, unless they are able to do it.
Well, here's some of my problems.
Let me tell you what my main criticisms are: is I think we've lost any sense of equal application of our laws, equal justice of our laws under our laws.
I can compartmentalize and break down each individual case for you, but there are a whole lot of people I have listed that have been caught lying to either Congress or to the FBI, and nothing has happened to them.
I'm worried about a double standard.
I'm worried about in the Michael Flynn case, the abuse of surveillance.
They ended up unmasking him and leaking raw intelligence against him, which is against the law.
He wasn't doing anything nefarious except talking to a future counterpart.
Nobody in the FBI thought Michael Flynn had lied when they did the interview with him, but yet he signed on to that because he's bankrupt.
And I would suspect they probably said, well, we're going to go after your son.
And he probably dove on his sword.
I think it's a pretty good educated guess.
We know they were writing an exoneration of Hillary in May where they had written in the legal standard, gross negligence, and changed it, shifted it to extreme carelessness.
That was in early May of 2016.
Comey said that he wasn't writing it before he interviewed her.
That was a lie.
And Peter Strzzok and James Comey were writing that.
And then it ends up that I felt like they gave her a pass.
I think that it's a clear violation of having top secret classified information on an outside server the way she did.
And their original assessment was that as many as six foreign intelligence agencies hacked into it.
And then we have, of course, the beginning of the Russians investigations.
Comey said Friday, leased a page before that they had nothing after nine months of looking at it.
So why after nine months did they start with a special counsel that James Comey helped precipitate?
And then we get into the issue of the Russian dossier and lying to FISA courts.
For Jim Comey to say they never vetted or verified anything in that document that he signed that would spy on an American citizen, a Trump campaign official.
If we really care about Russian influence, I think we would dig into that matter as deeply as any matters involving Trump.
I think the Uranium One deal is even more problematic because we ended up handing over 20% of America's uranium.
While we had a spy inside of Putin's network in America, we knew they wanted a foothold in the uranium industry.
Our spy was telling our top FBI official at the time, Robert Mueller, that there was blackmail, bribery, extortion, and kickbacks going on.
It still happened, and the people involved kicked back $145 million of the Clinton Foundation.
So if we cared about Russian influence, we would be also covering those stories, and they're not.
In the particular cases I'm mentioning here, I feel like I have real evidence and corroboration where they have none as it relates to Trump.
So the double standard is glaring to me.
Well, Sean, you lay out a very plausible case, and I think there should be an investigation of all of that.
And I give all of the people you're referring to the presumption of innocence.
Oh, hang on one second.
Well, why don't we pick it up there?
I want to give you a full chance to respond.
More with John Sale, 800-941-Sean is our toll-free telephone number if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, as we continue with John Sale, former federal prosecutor, served in the Southern District of New York and also served as an assistant special Watergate prosecutor.
All right, I gave you this whole litany of where I believe the double standard is, and you were saying.
I was saying before you ought to go to the break that you lay out a very plausible case, and I think it should all be investigated by a legitimate, appropriate investigator, probably the Department of Justice.
I mean, I don't, I think there's too many special counsels around, having been part of a special prosecution of Watergate.
You know, I think we all came away thinking that there's a problem.
You have to do it right, but there's really no accountability.
That's the danger with a special counsel.
But switching to the president, I think that should be investigated, and I think every person you mentioned should get the presumption of innocence.
But where is that presumption of innocence for the president?
I mean, and what do you think?
But how can we justify all of this time?
Two years worth of investigative work with no evidence, and then they're going after people, you know, with 35 years of serving their country track records of, you know, on lying to the FBI.
By the way, doesn't that render, doesn't that take away motivation for those of us that love the FBI from ever wanting to talk to them if that's the result?
Well, I think we should respect the FBI.
I think most of the people who know you do.
And because I have an active law practice in Miami, and I deal with the FBI all the time, and most of them are one of the best.
But, Sean, it's not the FBI.
I mean, it's just what's going on possibly with a few individuals.
But again, I don't want to prejudge them, but I say other people who are prejudging the president and making outrageous statements based upon nothing.
And that's the double-blind.
I got to run.
John Sale, just way behind.
Thank you, my friend.
800-941-Sean.
Toll-free telephone number.
There's a voice of sanity in this.
Finally.
Quick break.
Right back.
We'll continue.
You are listening to the best of the Sean Hannity Show.
Didn't the IRS scandal and the NSA atrocities convince you?
You need a watchdog on Washington with insider sources.
You need Hannity every day.
All right, 25 now till the top of the hour.
Toll-free telephone numbers, 800-941.
Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, I can't tell you everything I'm doing tomorrow until I get on the air tomorrow, but I'm doing something very cool.
And, you know, at this time of year, especially, knowing all of you in this audience, your great love, your passion, your understanding of the sacrifice of so many others for us.
One group we've really gotten to know in recent years is Troops Direct.
They're an organization that gets needed supplies, tools to deploy troops.
And I'm not saying this.
We work with a lot of military charities, but they get the supplies to the troops that they need and the tools they need when they're sent overseas so they're not underprepared.
And it's donations from we, the people, the American people, that keep this nonprofit organization going all year long.
And, you know, look, we go about our daily lives.
We don't stop every minute, every second of every day, and think about what sacrifice goes on behind the scenes and on the front lines for us.
But at this time of year, we think about giving and we think about all that we have.
And one of the great blessings we have are so many men and women that want to serve us and keep us free so that we can live in peace are our brave men and women.
And they sacrifice a lot to do it.
Their families sacrifice a lot to let them do it.
Anyway, joining us now is Aaron Nierbaum, who's with us, founder executive director, and Jake Jones is with us.
Guys, how are you?
Good to talk to you again.
What's going on?
Hi, Sean.
Good afternoon.
How are you?
You know, the only thing I don't understand is why, for example, we're deploying people without needed helmets, body armor, carriers, and some fundamental things that the government should be providing.
We now had a big increase in our military budget.
Why are they still without some basics?
Well, Sean, when I founded Troops Direct in 2010, that was the question I asked as well.
And I thought our troops had everything that they needed when they were in harm's way defending our country.
And I found that that was just not the case because of bureaucracies, red tape, the slow logistics sometimes of the military, that our troops need things immediately for their missions and to protect their lives and the lives of their brethren in a manner that's quicker sometimes than the military supply chain is.
And I have Jake Jones, who works full-time for us, who was a recipient of our support.
And he said, I need to be a part of this.
And, you know, that's why we exist, is to support our troops immediately to help them get their jobs done and get them back home.
But, Sean, I'll let Jake speak more to it.
Jake, why don't you fill us in on all the things that you guys are doing and the things that they need?
Well, it's really a myriad of things, Sean.
We support anything that doesn't go boomer bang through our ITAR compliant vendors.
So it's anything from boots to rifle scopes, laser range finders, helmets, body armor, advanced medical kits.
And these things are in demand every day.
I mean, I spend approximately tens of thousands of dollars monthly in the support that we provide to our service members overseas.
And it's all done through the patriotic donations of just mom and pops from all around the United States that just want to keep America's sons and daughters secure.
All right.
So tell me, you know, so how does it work here?
You know, you tell stories.
I know there was a case where a generator that was powering a remote special ops outpost failed and replacement parts were on a 12-month backwater through the military supply chain.
You were able to acquire and ship those needed parts in less than 72 hours.
You know, that's mind-numbing bureaucracy to me.
That's the kind of thing that drives me crazy.
But, or when a unit was rushed to fight terrorism in the Middle East, but they didn't have the necessary communications equipment.
I agree.
Most of this help was needed in the Obama years.
Are you seeing a shift and a change, though, under the Trump administration, considering they now have considerably increased the military budget?
And General Mattis.
You know, Sean, we are seeing an increase in the support through the new Trump administration, whether it be our ability to, with rules of engagement or engagement authorities being pushed down to the tactical level as opposed to the previous administration where it was at the general officer level.
But yet, you know, the endless terrorist game of whack-a-mole, if you will, that's global, we need to have the ability to surge assets at a moment's notice.
And that's really what we're seeing now is the fluidity of the situation for us to go out and remove terrorists from the battlefield.
We have to be agile enough to do it.
And the government doesn't allow them to do that because of the contracting requirements.
So we can click and ship anything in the world, anything globally within 10 to 15 minutes if it's in stock.
And if it's not, I'll get it in stock and get it out the door as soon as possible.
And, you know, Sean, one thing that the public doesn't realize is that we have Americans serving right now, as this program airs, in over 130 countries around the globe, whether it's your special operations teams or it's your regular old infantry service member.
And they need things sometimes quicker than that airplane from the military can get there.
And that's why Troops Direct is so valuable, because our service members know what they need right now to get their job done.
And I can tell you, we've unfortunately seen casualties out there in the battle space with units that we have supplied through the years.
But those Americans have said that without Troops Direct, less missions would be accomplished and more lives would have been lost if it wasn't for the support that we provide them.
And as you know, Sean, we are the only ones out there that do what we do for our Americans every single day.
You know, people forget, too, we have Americans deployed, and I know it's hard to believe, in 130 different countries.
And this is a vital role that you guys are playing.
Look, the bottom line is I wanted to have you on, explain it to our audience, and how can they help?
We have a very generous audience, especially with military matters.
You're specifically getting them really important things so they can do their job.
You know, uniforms, helmets, communication equipment, life support gear.
So if somebody wants to help and you get to bypass all the bureaucracy, how can they do it?
Go to troopsdirect.org and make a donation today.
You know, our overhead is less than 2% here.
And if you really say you support the troops, this is the way to do it.
Yeah, the troops like cookies and candy, but the troops need life support systems.
The troops need replacement uniforms because theirs are bloodied and torn.
They need the communications that have failed while they're in the battle space.
And we're the ones that they come to to get them that.
So the best Christmas gift we can give our troops is the products they need so they can get back home to their families.
And so I'm going to make a donation.
I don't want to ask my audience to do something that I myself won't do.
And I'll gladly give to a great cause such as this.
We'll put it up on Hannity.com, troopsdirect.org, and there's also all the information you'd ever want to check out the good work that they're doing every day.
And Merry Christmas to you guys and, you know, Godspeed and what you're doing.
And our thoughts and prayers are always with these men and women that so bravely sacrificed so much for us to give us the opportunities we have every day.
Well, Sean, you've been a longtime advocate and supporter for us.
And, you know, from the helm here at Troops Direct, I just want to say to you, thank you so much for everything that you do for our troops through your advocacy.
Well, we appreciate it.
And we'll put it up on Hannity.com or just remember troopsdirect.org.
All right.
Thanks so much for being with us.
We appreciate it.
Aaron, thank you.
Jake, thanks you as well.
800-941 Sean is on number.
Greg is in Ohio.
Greg, hi, how are you?
Welcome to the Sean Hannity Show.
Hello, Sean.
Just want to say that I've been listening to you for a long time since actually since 2008.
And I keep hearing over and over again about this Mueller investigation.
The way to stop it, I think, is for whoever's being investigated, whoever's been found guilty of anything that he's uncovered, should just go and have it all reversed because it's all through the poisonous tree.
None of this investigation would have started without that dossier.
And we know the dossier is false.
Listen, the double standard is what is amazing to me.
It's so funny because Friday, there was a, you could feel it in the air.
They thought they had the president.
Then they got to the inner writings of the sentencing recommendations and the Cone case and the Manafort case.
And when you really break it down, they had nothing.
There's nothing Russia.
There's still nothing Russia.
I mean, it's amazing.
Then go to Friday's transcript of Jim Comey.
And Jim Comey, you know, said that, oh, when I was fired, we still hadn't found anything about Russia.
That's nine months after this whole thing began, nearly a year.
Lisa Page had said the same thing.
And what you then have is that dossier that Clinton bought for, that became the basis, again, unverified.
That's the other amazing thing.
He said, no, we never verified it, but he put his name to it.
And that Russian lying dossier that was paid for ought to be as important to the investigation of Mueller, or we need another special counsel to really look into that separately and uranium one separately.
But there's real evidence and proof here.
And the only thing they went back on is this whole issue of campaign finance, which I outlined earlier in the program today.
And I go back, there is nothing there for them legally at all in spite of what you are hearing.
Nothing.
So these are pretty amazing times that we live in.
And I'm just convinced that they're going to rise up and say, we got them.
Impeachment, impeachment, but they've been saying that for two years, and it's still the same people.
You know, if you really listen, it just gets louder at times, and then it lessens.
And look, Mueller's going to do his thing.
He's going to write his report.
Juliani will write his report, and there's not going to be any crimes.
You can't indict a sitting president in any way.
And the Trump administration is going to go on.
But as you're watching all of this unfold and then the new investigations in Congress, just ask yourself: you know, how is this all for the benefit of the American people?
Is this going to help the average American?
Is it going to keep us safer as a country?
Is it going to provide more opportunities for Americans?
And the answer is going to be a resounding no.
And that means that they're doing this purely out of a hatred and a power play that they have orchestrated.
You know, public servants are supposed to serve their constituents, the people, we, the people.
That's what was so powerful about the Pelosi, Trump, and Schumer exchange.
It's the president's like, no, my job's to keep the American people safe.
And they just can't deal with that reality.
It's a big issue.
Anyway, 800-941 Sean is on number.
Big time AJ Houston, Texas.
What's going on, baby?
How are you?
Big time, Sean Hennedy.
What's going on?
Oh, man.
Hey, real quick.
Happy Thanksgiving to you guys, all Linda.
Everybody, everybody up there.
Is everybody always sucking up to Linda?
Everybody's always sucking up to Linda.
On a phone call earlier today, they're sucking up to Linda.
I would not mistake true friendship and affection for sucking up.
You know, some people just like other people.
No, because they know that you hold the keys to the kingdom.
If people can get past you, which kingdom is that?
To get to me, what?
I don't know.
I don't have any kingdom.
My kingdom is a New York brashness, you know, especially people like AJ.
You know, he's in Texas.
There's no one like me there.
No one talks like you there, right, AJ?
Nobody talks like that.
You know, it's the first of all.
That's what we love about her.
That is the most important thing.
We love you.
I'm glad someone appreciates you.
Now, America, now that we see who President Trump is for, all the media ought to have egg on their face.
This man is for the people.
This man is for this country.
You see what Nancy and Schumer are doing.
They dirty rats.
And I said it.
And I don't care if they hear me.
They're dirty rats.
They don't care for America.
They don't care for our safety.
We didn't have illegals.
Like Trump said, we got people coming in here that's doing bad things to this country.
And they want two million more out of 2,000 more.
Trump is a man, and don't let nobody fool you, people.
This man up there making deals.
This man up there care about the country.
And if we set back and let the left-wing media dictate what this man is doing, you're right, Sean.
They're going to hit him like a bad habit.
But guess what?
They're hitting the wrong man because Trump is going to hit them back just as bad.
And our man, thank God we got God.
I mean, this is what America wanted.
America wanted a disruptor.
America wanted a fighter.
And it's like there's no chance in hell that you're ever going to win a better trade deal with your European allies, China, Mexico, Canada, unless you say, I'm going to pull out of the other one and we're going to have tariffs.
If the threat isn't real, it's empty.
And then they're never going to respond.
So all of that is getting done.
Some of it already has gotten done.
Same with NATO.
Why do we have to pay the bulk of NATO while Angela Merkel stupidly is making multi-billion dollar deals to make Putin and Russia rich again?
And their entire commodity is based on, you know, the hope that he doesn't turn off the spigot in a fit of rage one day.
That's a pretty dumb idea.
Hey, John, real quick.
The Republican Party, they better know we watching them and they better grow a set like Trump got.
We see them come on TV just running their mouth and ain't getting nothing done.
It's a joke what they're doing.
They better get behind him or they're going to be gone in 2020, the one that's run as well.
We tired of them coming on TV.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
We sick of it.
Get out there and do your job.
What we sent you up there to do is quit bullcrapping.
You know, good thing we ain't got a bar.
All right, big time.
I think if they hear that rant, they're going to, they just got their marching orders.
Do your job.
All right.
Big time A.J. Houston, Texas.
The inside story that no one else has.
The behind-the-scenes chatter that the mainstream media doesn't even know about.
This is the Sean Hannity Show.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
▲
Export Selection