Luke Rosiak, author of the new book out tomorrow, "Obstruction of Justice", is an investigative reporter for the Daily Caller News Foundation. Prior, he was an investigator for the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. He has written for the Washington Post, Washington Examiner, and Washington Times - we have featured him often for the past year as he attempted to uncover the truth behind so much of the scandal with former DNC Chair - Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the Awan brothers. While the political left is searching for evidence of Russia collusion they were deliberately ignoring the crimes being committed by their own.Sean Hannity is live 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.
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 with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
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.
My friends at MyPillow, my buddy Mike Lindell told me he was coming out with a brand new product.
It's called the New Mattress Topper.
So I got the new mattress topper immediately and I've been sleeping on it now for a couple of months.
It's the best thing you've ever felt in your life.
Now, you literally have MyPillow foam for support.
It's a transitional foam that helps relieve pressure points and it's ultra-soft, patented temperature regulating cover.
And I got to tell you, it has a 10-year warranty, a cover that's washable and dryable.
It's made in the USA, backed by the 60-day unconditional money-back guarantee.
Once you try this new mattress topper, you put it right over your mattress, you will never sleep better.
And right now, you, my radio listeners, are going to save 30% off when you go to mypillow.com and use the promo code TOPPER.
And by the way, Mike will also give you two standard MyPillows absolutely free.
All right, so try mypillow.com promo code Topper.
Promo code Topper for this great deal and the best night's sleep you ever had.
All right, happy Monday and glad you're with us.
Write down our toll-free telephone number if you want to be a part of the program.
Lot to get to as it relates to the pre-dawn raid of Roger Stone.
We'll hit that in all of its ridiculousness and the double standard that we're going to hit in detail as well.
That's coming up in the course of the program today.
Luke Roziak, you know, we had another hacking scandal that was equally, if not worse, than the one we know about, and nobody ever did anything.
And it's really scary what they came up with.
And he's like the only guy in media that's done this story.
He's now out with a book about it because, you know, here you have somebody we believe is part of Pakistani connected to Pakistani intelligence getting money from the Iranians, has access to 44 congressmen's emails, is hacking into and getting into Congress's emails while in Pakistan, and nobody cared.
And the cover-up is unbelievable.
I want to start, though, first.
Oh, and then we're going to get to, this is 2020 is going to be great.
The difference between, oh, it's going to be awesome.
Starting now, 2019 is when it all starts.
You are going to watch every Democrat that wants to be president and get the nomination.
They are going so hard, radical, left, socialist, that it's going to be entertaining.
I promise.
The problem is, you know, when you got people like Ocasio-Cortez and all these other Democrats talking about, you know, 70% income tax rates, some wanting 90%, others wanting wealth confiscation.
It's frightening.
It's scary, but they're finally going to tell us what they really think where they hit everything in 2018.
Remember, they didn't want to talk about impeachment.
We'll do it.
Just don't say it.
They didn't talk about endless investigations.
Now, everything I predicted they were going to do is happening.
They didn't talk about eliminating ICE just on the rare occasions that it came up, but that's what they want to do, and they want open borders.
And they literally want full and complete redistribution.
The cost factor of everything that they're proposing is so astronomically cost-prohibitive.
And all of this is going to be pointed out by people like me and other conservatives, and America is going to have a big choice.
But I want to go back to, I had a lot of conversations with a lot of friends of mine, a lot of mixed feelings about the president saying, okay, I'm going to give Congress three weeks to get together a border deal.
If not, I'm going to, I have other powers, meaning he will declare a national emergency or shut down the government again.
And the reaction of some of my fellow conservatives, I think, is unwarranted.
I mean, it's sort of like, what have you done for me lately?
And I understand that the president's original strategy was to shut it down, you know, and the shutdown for really practical reasons, if we're going to be honest here.
I mean, I don't think anybody factored in that if the president put DACA on the table, DREAMers on the table, the Democrats having once supported a border wall, the compelling case that can be made about, oh, 90% of the heroin that gets into this country crosses that border.
Now fentanyl is coming across that border.
Now we have cartels influencing what happens on that border and gang members infiltrating even migrant caravans with people that just want a better future.
We've got now a 12,000 strong new caravan that is marching towards our southern border.
When you add into that the crime factor, in other words, Americans that have been victims of crimes by illegal immigrants, and you factor in the cost and the nature of the impact on our educational system, our health care system, our criminal justice system, the president is the commander-in-chief of this country.
The president has not just the, he has a constitutional duty to protect the American people as commander-in-chief.
Now, the fact that it's happening at our southern border, although these are people coming from other countries, I think the case is compelling as possible.
My guess is there's no way this radical Democratic Party is ever, really, ever willing to make a deal with the president on building the border wall, which they supported themselves just a couple of years ago when Obama was president.
Democrats have decided furlough employees mean nothing to them.
They're just pawns in their hatred of Donald Trump.
Democrats have proven DREAMers are just pawns in this game that they're playing because if they really cared about DREAMers, they really cared about DACA.
The president wants a wall that they themselves supported just a couple of years ago.
Then all it is is they're driven by a hatred of the president.
You know, I kept looking at some people.
I said, all right, well, what is Nancy Pelosi standing for in all of this?
What is Chuck Schumer standing for?
Because the president's standing on safety, security, and life and death.
The president's about stopping cartels, gangs, and drugs, and human trafficking.
And what are they standing for?
Just to stop Trump.
That is their position on all of this.
And so to me, and I've said this from the beginning, I don't care which way the president goes to get the money.
We were getting to a point within the shutdown where flights were now being grounded.
We were facing a potential walkout of air traffic controllers, TSA workers, people not getting paid that were forced to do their jobs.
A hardship on furloughed employees was happening.
To me, this is just a shift in strategy.
And I don't think it's any more complicated than that.
In other words, if you think, here's the question I would ask you, and I asked all my friends this weekend when I was talking to them, I said, do you really believe the president is any less committed to building that wall than he was the day before he agreed to give Congress three weeks and open the government?
And 100% of them said no, he's committed.
Do you think the president will invoke a national emergency as a means of getting what he wants here for all the right reasons?
And they all said, yeah, he's going to do that.
So what you're looking at is a guy with a track record who fights tooth and nail to keep his promises and keep his word.
He's done it with tax cuts.
He's done it with deregulation.
He's done it with trade deals.
Look at the trade deals he got done.
Nobody thought it would happen.
Canada, Mexico, Europe, fighting to get our costs down at NATO, Little Rocket Man, fire and fury.
Now, look, you know, China is now, their economy is feeling the total impact of Donald Trump's policies against them.
And they're now begging us to do a new trade deal.
So I'm just, it's sort of like there's no room for, no wiggle room here for people to accept that sometimes it's just smart to change strategies.
Now, there's a lot of advantages to it, and there's some disadvantages to it.
The biggest advantage is, assuming that Congress can't get their act together and they're going to stay rigid and hating Trump, and even if Trump gives them the things that they've said they wanted over the years, you know, number one, he's exposing them for who they are, that they don't care about furloughed employees, dreamers, a DACA.
They don't care about border security.
We know they want open borders.
We know they want to eliminate ICE.
So they're the do-nothing party.
He's the guy that's fighting for the right things.
He's fighting for safety, security, life and death in some cases.
Now, let's assume that he declares in whatever, 12 days or however many days, a national emergency on February 15th.
Well, what's going to happen after that?
Well, unless they got a declaratory judgment of some kind, then we know Democrats will file a lawsuit.
They'll go judge shopping.
It'll be probably in California, Oregon, somewhere where the Ninth Circuit would be the appeal level.
Then they'll lose to a liberal judge out there.
Then they'll lose to the Ninth Circuit.
And they get overturned 80-plus percent of the time anyway.
I'm pretty confident based on the Constitution and on the law that the president wins.
Now, if he wins in the Supreme Court, and I think the national emergency side of this expedites the process, in other words, this is not going to take years.
I've checked in with a lot of constitutional lawyers over the weekend.
This will be expedited, but courts are still slow.
So within four, six, seven months, I would expect it right there in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.
And if he is the commander-in-chief and he took an oath to protect the American people and you lay out the statistics of Americans that have been victims of homicide, sexual assault, violent assault by illegal immigrants, by the way, not the 98% that want a better lives that obey our laws except for the border.
I think he wins.
Or that 90% of heroin comes.
I think he wins.
And when somebody changes strategies but still is fighting hard for what they promised, in all honesty, I don't think I've ever seen the president fight so hard for everything that he promised.
I'll put the whole checklist up there, but we have a long list of promises made, promises kept.
I've scrolled it many times on TV.
I could do it now.
Most of you know it by now.
And it's like if he changes policy, that's it.
And I think part of it is rooted in the fact that we've been disappointed so many times with so many other politicians in the past, especially Republicans, especially, you know, politicians.
look at health care um by the way we're now oh we do have some news we got a break Linda handed me this at this moment.
Okay, so we'll stop the monologue just for this.
We have some news.
We want to let you know that we're now putting the power back in your hands.
You elect your government officials, and we want to know what happens when you reach out to speak to these elected representatives and other public media figures who think it's their job to speak on our behalf, on behalf of the American people.
What happens with the very people they claim to speak for and on whose behalf they claim to speak?
In other words, their constituents.
You can now send on Hannity.com emails to us, video submissions to us, and we may pick yours and feature it on TV tonight.
So just go to Hannity.com.
You can use Twitter too at Sean Hannity, but our website is a better way to do it.
So I'm just, look, I get it.
He said, you know what?
I'll keep it.
Here's the reality, though.
The reality is the president was winning poll-wise.
Although it's interesting, the shutdown did not hurt.
If you look at the Wall Street Journal, what you see, the fraudulent hate Trump media said it was, oh, devastating for the president.
His supporters were deserting him in droves.
That's not happening.
12 days from now, if he does what I'm 99% sure he's going to do, and that is he's going to declare that national emergency, I think you're going to be thankful that he just decided to fight another way.
And by the way, that way is not going to include any deal for DACA.
That way is not going to cost him anything.
And I bet, let's say worst case scenario, let's say he lost in the Supreme Court.
He's going to come back in every negotiation and fight for it.
This is a key promise, and it's also a key national security issue.
For the Democrats, it's politics.
They're not standing for anybody here except hurting this president.
And I just think, you know, every once in a while, you got to stand back and ask, all right, is this a change in strategy?
Is it better?
You know, we're not going to get it this way.
Let me try this way.
And I don't see that as a weakness.
I see that as a strength.
And, you know, when I made this case to a lot of my friends over the weekend, where they started out, he caved, he caved, he caved, they all said, you know what?
I think you're right.
Because he hadn't disappointed people to that point.
And if he gets it this way, if I'm right, my prediction is he goes the national emergency route.
Now, if he doesn't, we have to see what he does then.
But I'm assuming he's doing that.
That's my guess.
There was a betting line on it.
I'd put a lot of money on it.
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 me just tell you another thing about the national emergency.
It's not going to be the precedent-setting move that Democrats want you to, and Republicans fear, and Democrats want you to believe.
When the president told the Wall Street Journal that the chances of him being able to make an acceptable border wall deal are 50-50, he even said less than that over the weekend.
And he said, you know, of course, it's an option.
Mulvaney has said Trump will secure the border with or without Congress.
Maybe I'm just different than some of you.
Maybe because we've been so tainted with politicians that don't fight to keep their promises.
The strategic shift doesn't bother me if you're still fighting and you're committed to winning.
And I think the president is.
That's maybe the difference that I have with some of my fellow conservatives here.
You've got a 12,000-strong new caravan heading up our southern border.
You know, we've got other problems associated with the border.
I think his role as commander-in-chief plays in this.
Wall Street Journal goes on to say that, you know, look, I don't think we're going to get a deal with the Democrats.
Then the president's going to do what he said.
Let's assume I'm right, declare a national emergency and keep his promise to build the wall.
You know, we have the usual weak Republicans, you know, with no backbone or spine.
They're scared of this, you know, because the awful precedent it would set, some of them said.
If Trump declares a national emergency, the next time we have a Democratic president, they all have to be able to do the same thing on gun control or climate change.
The one problem with the argument is, you know, he's not decreeing anything.
Congress already passed legislation to build the wall on the southern border.
It's called the Secure Fence Act of 2006, and it actually called for the greater area to be fenced off than Trump currently plans.
And I think his odds of winning this are huge.
And isn't that what matters?
We get the wall.
And we don't give anything under that scenario to any Democrat.
All right, 25 to the top of the hour, 800-941 Sean is our number.
Luke Roziak has written an amazing but chilling and scary book about the ability of people from foreign countries to hack into our system, get secure information, and nobody seemingly to care.
In this case, 44 Democrats, and this is Imran Owan, and how this guy got away with all this is unbelievable.
Let me just say one last thing on the border issue before we've got a lot to get to today.
Is Democrats may think this is a good spot for them to be in.
It's not.
This is a 70-30 issue.
Americans want the drug flow to stop.
Americans like the idea of vetting people that come into the country, which, by the way, is 98%.
We got a 12,000 to 15,000-strong caravan now marching up again.
If they go to a different location without a wall, how do you stop them without a massive confrontation?
It's good for both sides of the border.
It's about the president's arguing safety, security, life and death.
These drugs are killing Americans.
So for the Democrats to be against that security, and let's say the president loses on the national emergency front.
In the interim, as this is being debated, anybody that crosses that border, that where we would be building these barriers and walls, they own that.
That's them.
Just like sanctuary city policies, you know, if you don't hand over, look at the case of Steve Ronnebach and his son Grant.
The guy that killed his son, who was working overnight in a convenience store, 22 years old.
Grant Ronabach is his name.
I know his father, Steve, very well, great guy.
But he lost his son.
And we find out that the guy that killed his son had kidnapped for almost two weeks a young woman and involved in horrible, you know, violent crimes against this woman.
Anyway, he goes to jail, not handed over to ICE, and guess what?
He ends up killing another American.
Instead of following the law, not defying the law, not aiding and abetting because of a sanctuary policy, you know, those that commit crimes.
And then when they commit further crimes, they bear some of that responsibility.
That's just a fact.
And that's going to be the legacy of the Democrats.
Because between now and 2020, if they are successful, and I don't think they will be, but if they are, they're not going to be successful by not standing to support the safety and security of the American people.
I'm telling you, sometimes you got to play three-dimensional chess here.
It's not checkers.
You've got to strategize.
And sometimes you go to plan B because it's a better plan.
And it's more likely to work.
And I think this is going to be one of those cases.
I want to get to the issue of Roger Stone.
He's going to be on Hannity tonight on the Fox News channel.
I don't even know what to say about this latest pre-dawn raid where you have, what, 27 FBI agents.
By the way, I don't blame the agents.
They're told what to do.
You know, like 17 vehicles breaking down.
All they had to do was say to his lawyer, could he hand himself in?
He was released in a couple hours on his own recognizance on a $250,000 bail bomb.
So there's no threat that he was not going to turn himself in, but they put on a big show, you know.
And I'm looking at this, and I'm kind of curious, what does our next Attorney General Bill Barr have to say about, you know, this practice of, especially has Andrew Weissman fingerprints all over this and the habit of sending in heavily armed FBI agents and SWAT teams to people's houses in pre-dawn hours, guns drawn like they're doing battle with, you know, Al Capone or El Chapo or, you know, the mafia or, you know, whatever.
It's a guy who's accused of lying to Congress.
I mean, it's basically fundamentally it.
And, you know, Mueller's gotten away with this.
He did it to Manafort.
Now he did it the same thing to Roger Stone here.
You really got to, and even the president ripped this tactic that they're using.
And he actually said border coyotes, drug dealers, human traffickers are treated better.
He didn't name Stone directly, but, and by the way, who alerted CNN to be there?
Which he makes clear, there's no way they figured that out, in my opinion, at all.
Stone is saying firmly, affirmatively, I will not take a plea bargain, and I'm not testifying against Trump.
I'm going to be facing trial with the District of Columbia, and I intend to fight for my life.
There's no circumstance under which I would plead guilty, and no circumstance under which I'd bear false witness of the president, which is, you know, we go back to Judge Ellis.
The hope says you put the screws to him, and then he starts to sing or compose and say what they want.
And, well, it's, you know, maybe working for some people.
We won't know until we see whatever.
But we've seen this movie before.
This is not the first time.
And that is called, again, you know, and here's another thing.
If we're looking for crimes and people that lie to Congress or people that obstruct justice, we have to ask, when is Hillary's raid coming?
When is the raid of Eric Holder?
He has a long history of lying to Congress.
You know, he lied to Congress under oath about what he knew about targeting reporters, fast and furious.
As early as the new Black Panther case, Eric Holder had a problem with the truth.
The House Judiciary is investigating whether, at the time, we're investigating what Holder lied under oath.
The same goes with Hillary Clinton and Benghazi.
That was one big, massive lie that was told to Congress in her testimony before Congress.
Or when Obama officials lied to Congress about Iran's access to U.S. banks.
Remember, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lou testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations concerning the nature of potential sanctions relief that they were involved in.
And Lou stated that it would suspend nuclear-related secondary sanctions.
But a number of key sanctions would remain in place.
Specifically, Lou explained Iranian banks will not be able to clear U.S. dollars through New York.
And he testified further, Iran will continue to be denied access to the world's largest financial and commercial markets.
Well, turns out that the acting Undersecretary of the Treasury for Terrorism, Financial Intelligence, testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking that Iran will be denied access to the world's most important market, unable to deal with the world's most important currency, and Iranian banks will not be able to clear U.S. dollars through New York.
Well, that all turned out not to be true.
John Brennan.
Well, he lied to us and to the Senate.
You know, the facts will come out, Brennan told NBC News in March after Dianne Feinstein issued a blistering condemnation of the CIA and their tactics on the Senate floor, accusing the agency of hacking into computers used by the intelligence committee staffers.
Let me assure you, the CIA was in no way spying on the committee or the Senate.
Well, it turns out that's not true.
After the CIA Inspector General's report completely contradicted Brennan's statements, now appears Brennan was forced to privately apologize to intelligence committee chairs in a tense meeting described at the time.
What about Clapper?
Well, it seems that, you know, almost a lifetime ago, but we now have James Clapper lying to Ron Wyden about the NSA's domestic collections.
Wyden pointedly asking Clapper during an intelligence committee hearing whether or not the NSA was collecting any type of data at all on American citizens.
No, sir, not wittingly.
A couple of months later, the first Snowden leak detailed massive amounts of called data captured in the Section 215 dragnet.
It undid Clapper's lying under oath.
What's ever happened to him?
Nothing.
But in the end, we're still back at the same spot.
You've got to look at all of this, and you've got to understand what's going on here.
And that is, you know, Roger Stone, these are all process crimes only because of the creation of Mueller.
And interviewing him and interviewing, you know, Coursey, as I have at the time, I'm, you know, I get back to the same point.
No Mueller.
Oh, if you forgot an email from however long ago, apparently that's a crime now.
And then that raises the question of why would anyone want to help the FBI anymore if you don't get something right and remember an email or a text from two years ago?
Well, I don't think anybody remembers an email or a text from two years ago.
Now, if they have it and they share it with you and you look at it and you say, I don't know what this is, maybe you don't.
You know, they're both older gentlemen.
You know, memory starts to fade on everybody.
Even when I was young, I don't think I could have.
I cannot tell you, you gave me a million dollars right now to name every guest on radio and TV last week.
I could not do it.
I would fail that test dramatically, probably.
I mean, I'd sit down, I'd really go through and rack my brain, but I'm not going to remember all of this.
It's just not going to happen.
You know, we've got Roger Stone over the weekend.
You know, he was on with, what's his name, Georgie Stephanopoulos on this week's program, and he called the probe thin as piss on a rock.
That's what he said.
And then he went on to say, you know, goes on and calling it Gestapo tactics.
Was it really necessary for 27 guys fully armed, guns drawn, pre-dawn raid, when all they had to do was say, can you come in at a certain time for your arrest?
That's all they had to do.
There's a great piece by Andy McCarthy.
Stone's indictment underscores there was no Trump-Russia conspiracy.
We're still at the same point.
You know, and all these phony Russians, you know, that are Putin thugs and, you know, Putin spies that Mueller indicted.
He knows he's not going to never going to be extradited to this country.
It's just to get the word Russia out there.
All of this is process crime stuff.
All of this is, all right, you didn't tell Congress the truth, or did you not remember everything?
What is the point?
You know, Roger Stone's kind of a blustery guy that likes to play political hardball, mess with people's heads, and the fact that he wanted, you know, and is asking people, hey, what's Wikileaks got?
Hey, what are they going to drop next?
I hear it's about the Clinton Foundation.
Turns out it wasn't.
You know, or the fact that Paul Manafort, who deals with the Ukraine, and, well, so did John Podesta, his brother.
And he makes the comment about John Podesta.
It had nothing to do.
There's no indication it had to do with stolen emails that he had knowledge of.
Pentagon Papers case, I've told you all about it last week.
You know, there's a precedent-setting case where you can print stolen information.
By the way, WikiLeaks was printed by the New York Times, Washington Post, and so many other places.
You know, we used it at Fox News because that case sets a precedent.
You know, guessing what might come out or what might not come out, everybody that was following the election was curious if there was going to be another, you know, document or trove of information let out.
Remember, WikiLeaks had a perfect record.
So if it was something that was released, well, it was probably going to be impactful, which ended up happening.
I don't remember.
I can't even remember the timeline on that.
You know, the diamond is just, this is just the latest example.
You know, we have known, Mueller's known, the FBI has known there was no Trump-Russia collusion.
It's sort of like Patrick Fitzgerald knowing on day one that the leaker was Richard Armitage.
He should have shut his office down.
But no, he went after Scooter Libby.
The reason he went after Scooter Libby is because he wanted Libby to flip on Vice President Cheney.
You know, we've got to stop this process where, well, if you give us what you want, we're going to get you a get out of jail free cart.
That's called bribery.
You are forcing people, putting them in a position to save their own ass, and saying, well, we'll get you out of jail, or are you going to spend the rest of your life dying in a jail cell?
A lot of people are going to pick, well, what do you want me to say?
What are you looking for?
Oh, yeah, I think I remember that part.
When in fact, they don't.
You are encouraging the suborning of perjury under those circumstances and giving something of value for people to flip.
It's not good for the country.
None of this is good for the United States of America.
And why can't, why hasn't Mueller declaratively said, and then the whole double standard with Hillary, the fixes in, Hillary, the payphony dossier, Hillary, obstruction, emails, you know, destroyed, deleted, bleach bit, devices, SIM cards, FISA, they're all warned it's fake, it's phony, it's a political document.
Fraud against the FISA court by the top people in the FBI and Department of Justice.
Nothing there either.
Russian lies propagated to the American people before the election, put together by a foreign agent who hates Trump.
It's unbelievable.
We're going to lose the country.
I'm telling you right now, we will lose this country if we don't have equal justice under the law, equal application of our laws, and we continue to have a dual justice system.
But you're going to lose your country.
No constitutional republic can survive this double standard.
All right, our two Sean Hannity show.
Glad you're with us.
800941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
A couple of issues.
I think everybody in the media has totally gotten what Donald Trump has done in terms of ending the shutdown wrong and what's going to happen in the future, completely wrong.
And what's amazing is there's never been a guy that's made this many promises that he fights hard to keep.
So you have congressional Democrats led by the extreme leadership, working behind the scenes with guys like Lindsey Graham.
Say, get the government open and give us a few weeks and let's see if we can't get the border security because there's a lot of Democrats in Trump-held districts that are scared to death that if this wall doesn't get done because of them, they're going to take the blame for it and it's going to impact their race in 2020.
Now, there are two options the president's put on the table.
Another shutdown, I don't think that's the option he's going to take.
I think the president will declare a national emergency.
And I think with that, there's going to be the predictable filing of a lawsuit in some California court, which will go against the president.
They do their usual judge shopping.
Then it'll go to the Ninth Circuit.
And I believe on the constitutional grounds of the president being the commander in chief, the president has not only a duty, well, not only the desire, he has a duty to protect this country.
And when you lay out that 90% of heroin is in fact coming across our southern border, all this fentanyl now coming across our southern border, the influence of human trafficking, drug trafficking, cartels, gangs, then you put in the statistics of Americans that have been killed by illegal immigrants.
I think there's a compelling national security case that the president has a constitutional duty and the authority to in fact do it.
But what he's not going to do is just drop the issue.
And this is what frustrates me about some people's comments.
Oh, he gave in.
Well, I think the president, if you look at it, is winning on the issue.
The issue of protecting our borders is a 70-30 issue.
The issue of the shutdown, when it starts impacting air travel, when it starts impacting, you keep hearing about TSA going out on the blue flu, meaning that they just, they're going to make a statement.
Air traffic controllers are going to make a statement.
The president said, all right, I pushed that strategy as far as I can.
These guys are asking for an opportunity to fix it themselves.
I'm willing to compromise, as he has shown throughout this process.
I'm willing to meet with anybody about a potential compromise.
That'd be TPA and DACA, DREAMers, whatever.
As long as it doesn't entail a path to citizenship and it doesn't entail amnesty and the president gets his money, I think he'd take any of those deals.
But if he goes the national emergency route, well, then Democrats get nothing.
Anyway, joining us now pollsters, John McLaughlin, McLaughlin and Associates, and Doug Schoen is with us, also a Fox News contributor, pollster in his own right.
Thank you both for being with us.
Happy to, Sean.
Do you agree that on the issue that it's a winning issue for the president to fight to keep a promise and secure the border, but the shutdown part was not going his way?
If that's a question for me, I would tell you I felt for a long time he needs to go the route of the national emergency because the Democrats are not going to cooperate with him.
And if the Democrats don't cooperate with him, Sean, it is a losing issue for him.
And I think he's got to get it to the Supreme Court.
And if he gets to the Supreme Court, I think he's got a better than 50% chance of winning.
My position is very simple.
Why can't we trade a wall for long-term security for the Dreamers?
Seems to me pretty logical.
The president offered that deal, but they wouldn't even sit down and talk to the guy.
It was just three years.
I think we need much closer to permanence for him.
But bottom line, I think the Democrats should have, as the Washington Post said, Sean, should have talked to the president when he floated that proposal about 10 days ago.
Doug, think about it this way.
So the president is fighting for life and death.
He's fighting for safety and security.
What is Nancy and Chuck, what are they standing for here?
What is their position except to just oppose the president with a past track record of wanting all the things he offered?
What they're fighting for is a 55-35 split on who's responsible for the shutdown in the direction of the president.
And they believe this is a winning issue politically.
And they, on that basis, are refusing to talk, notwithstanding the fact that others voted for $25 billion for a wall, what is it, five, six years ago, if I remember correctly.
Under Barack Obama.
John McLaughlin, I think at the end of the day, when the American people analyze that they won't sit, they won't talk, they won't discuss, they won't compromise.
All the things they said they wanted, obviously furloughed employees were not that important to them.
Obviously, DREAMers are not that important to them.
DACA kids are not that important to them because the president offered to put it all on the table and they wouldn't sit down.
They sent surrogates to go meet, aides to go meet with the vice president to negotiate, which means they're not serious, and they declined every invitation the president gave.
Absolutely.
And what this is all about is about 2020 politics because they're still upset that he got elected.
They're still upset that we beat the D.C. establishment in 2016.
And they're not going to give him anything to run on.
They will punish DACA recipients.
They will risk the national security.
And one of the cards the president hasn't played, we did a June survey where he asked, is it fair or unfair that illegal immigrants come to this country, claim asylum, and jump the line over legal immigrants for economic opportunities?
And 75% of all Americans said it's unfair.
So the Democrats, while it doesn't resonate the security issues with them as much, the economic issues, which the president hasn't played that message yet, that what Democrats care about.
And in fact, he could broaden his coalition to recent legal immigrants if he was able to say, this is unfair.
They're jumping the line ahead of people who are doing it right, waiting years, spending millions of dollars, not millions, but spending personally thousands of dollars to get here illegally.
And the Democrats are saying no.
And what it's all about is the deranged Democratic primary.
Because when we won in 2016, Donald Trump ran as the most anti-Obama candidate, anti-Clinton candidate in the field.
90% of the Republicans disapproved the job Obama was doing, didn't like Hillary Clinton.
I used to say to him, you need to get up every morning and attack Obama and Hillary on their policies.
And he said, okay, I can do that.
Well, now it's the reverse.
The Democrats, 90% of them, over 90% dislike the president, the primary voters, the socialists.
And they're in a contest now with 30 some-odd candidates to see who's the most deranged that can win their primaries and be the opponents to Donald Trump.
And that's what's going on right now.
So they're not going to give him anything.
And Doug was exactly right.
We should have declared an emergency a month ago and gone through the courts because Pelosi and Schumer are not going to give him a single vote between now and November 2010.
But that's the point.
If the president is making the case that this is about preventing fentanyl, heroin from getting into the country and having dangerous cartels and gang members getting into the country, the high cost of human and drug trafficking, the numbers of crimes that have been committed against innocent Americans because we don't vet people, and all they're standing for is to destroy Trump.
I don't think you win anything, Doug Shoan, if all you're doing is playing politics.
At this point, I actually think the timing worked out perfectly for the president.
Now they've got three weeks.
I predict they won't do a thing.
I know some people that support the president were disappointed that he stopped the shutdown, but I know this man.
I would say it's 100% certainty he's going to declare a national emergency.
I must tell you.
Which means he's not stopping his fight.
He's just changed strategies.
Yeah, I understand this three-week strategy didn't, frankly, make a lot of sense because to be perceived rightly or wrongly to cave only to come back three weeks later.
Why wait?
He should have done it right away.
He should have said, come to the White House today, be prepared to talk if they weren't prepared to talk.
He didn't need the three weeks.
He just needed to do it.
As I say, it troubles me that there's not flexibility on both sides.
But, Sean, you haven't mentioned today the biggest development of all, which could well presage Donald Trump's almost certain reelection, which is the entrance of another Democrat, Howard Schultz, as an independent candidate.
That could be the biggest break of all, far more important than the border wall.
Look at Elizabeth Warren.
Elizabeth Warren literally wants to go back and get a second bite of the apple of tax money and is talking about confiscating wealth.
This is how far.
Then you've got a 70% tax rate being pushed by the Democratic Party, by almost all of these candidates.
Well, you know what?
Sean, you know what that's about is Doug's client is former Mayor Bloomberg.
Right.
And what Lizbeth Warren wants to do is confiscate his wealth before the primary starts.
Exactly.
When he gets in his Democrat.
That's right.
But with Schultz running, he's doing a smart thing.
And by the way, free advice is what it is, Doug.
But you know, I mean, Mayor.
But it's funny to watch these people change their views and move so hard left.
I mean, Gillibrand is grappling with her past views on immigration.
By the way, Kamala Harris.
Yeah, every, I mean, they're trying to all out social.
This is now the extraordinarily extreme radical socialist Democratic Party.
This is not Doug Shoan's party anymore or even the party of even Bill Clinton, where the era of big government is over and the welfare as we know it.
That party's gone, Doug, and I don't think this is going to sell with the American people.
Well, I think we've got two unpopular parties now.
But that being said, I don't count Donald Trump out.
And if we have 15 Democrats running for the nomination and another Democrat, Schultz, on the ballot as an independent, I can tell you, Sean, that the likelihood of Donald Trump being returned to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has gone up exponentially.
Well, you also have to factor in one other thing.
Look at the economy.
Record low, what?
We just heard last lowest claims for unemployment since 1969.
Record low unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, women in the workplace, youth unemployment.
A president that will be able to go out and say, I promised this, this, this, this, and this, and I kept my promises.
Also abroad, you can't deny that the president kept his promise on new trade deals.
Canada, Mexico, Europe, lowering America's responsibility to NATO.
Look at the impact the president's policies on China have had on the Chinese economy, bringing them to the table.
Look at North Korea.
Look at any part of the world where the president has gotten involved.
Things have gotten better.
Right.
But your point is that they're all running off to the left.
And we had a December poll, and we'll do a new one after the State of the Union.
But among Democrat primary voters, you got Bernie Sanders at 18%, Joe Biden, 17, Michelle Obama, 16.
Beethoven Rook was at 11.
They all go off with liberals, and you get Hillary Clinton only at 9%.
This is not the same Democrat Party.
Maybe Bloomberg was only at 4.
And it's like you've got a bunch of candidates like Gillibrand had 1%, de Blasio, 0.
I mean, they're all going off on this deranged policy against Trump.
And Trump is strong.
He is solid.
In the same poll among Republican primary voters, we had Trump crushing Mitt Romney 72-9.
And so the Republican Party and the base is solid, loyal to the president.
The Democrats are going to have a free-for-all, and they're going to, you know, they're literally going to tear each other up.
And, you know, like Elizabeth Warren's going to go after the ones who are wealthy and successful.
That's why Schultz is out there running as an independent.
And the country's going to have probably a very lively presidential debate, which goes between now and November of 2020, where the president, if he can broaden his numbers and get his job approval over 50, will win re-election.
He's close, but he has to get it over 50%.
Bush had 51%.
He got re-elected 51% in 04.
Obama had a 51% approval.
He got re-elected in 2012 with 51%.
Well, listen, Ronald Reagan, by the way, started at this point of his presidency with a 35% approval rating, and he won 49 states 22 months later.
You know, a lot of it's going to be peace and prosperity as it drives every election.
This lurch hard left.
One of the differences between 2018 and 2020, Doug, is going to be Democrats hid their agenda in 2018.
They didn't want to talk about taking back your crumbs, endless investigations.
They told Maxine to stop talking about impeachment.
They didn't want to talk about top marginal rates that are astronomical and confiscation of wealth or open borders and firing ice.
All that they hid.
The difference between then and 2020 is they're going to be like dying to tell their agenda.
And that's where I think they're going to lose it with the American people as it is an extreme left-wing socialist party that the party's now emerged into.
The other thing is they're all going to be fighting among themselves to prove who is the most authentic, quasi- or actual socialist.
And you've got Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will be on egging them all on.
So, Sean, I think that, and I think John was saying this, they're going to be fighting among themselves to move hard left, which only plays into Donald Trump's hands.
I agree.
And, John, you agree with that as well, right?
Absolutely.
I'm trying to encourage it as best I can.
Me too.
I think it's a great strategy.
The last person I want them listening to is Doug Schoen.
All right, so who's going to quick predictions?
Who gets the nomination if you had the pick today, Doug?
I think it will be Kamala Harris or Beto O'Rourke.
Interesting.
Two radical left-wingers.
That would be a good case scenario.
John McLaughlin, who gets it?
I think Doug's on to something because what people don't realize, Beto Rook speaks Spanish.
California has moved their primary up into Super Tuesday.
The plurality of voters will be Mexican Americans who speak Spanish, Beto Rook.
Axelrod got him a meeting with Obama.
The fix is in.
They're looking for him to be the next Obama because those Californians will be voting in February at the same time as Iowa and New Hampshire.
It's going to be exciting to watch them out socialize themselves.
Thank you both.
800-941 Sean, toll-free telephone number.
When we come back, we'll hit the phones, and your call is coming up next.
Straight ahead.
All right, 25 now till the top of the hour, 800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
I'm going to get some calls in here.
Our friend Luke Roziak has come out with a great book.
It's shocking how our security was breached by what seems like a Pakistani intelligence connected agent, and our government just literally buried it under a rug.
I mean, and the evidence is overwhelming, compelling, incontrovertible even at points.
All right, let's get to some phone calls here.
Let's say hi to David is in Wyoming.
David, hi, how are you?
Glad you called, sir.
Yeah, Sean, thanks for taking my call.
Thank you.
What's going on?
Oh, nothing.
Just snow, wind a little bit.
And so shoveling snow and talking to you.
Yeah, listen, I love.
How much snow are you shoveling out there?
Well, you know, it's a lot of wind drifts and a little bit of ice.
Well, you don't have a snowblower or a plow?
Nah, I'm an old-fashioned guy, Sean.
Let me tell you what used to happen to me whenever it snowed.
My mother and father would be saying, go out and shovel the snow.
Now I'm like, all right, all right, all right, I'll get there.
I'll get there.
And I would delay and procrastinate.
And then finally, they do the same routine every time.
My father would all of a sudden start pulling out his totes from the closet and acting like he was going to go out and do it himself.
He was never going to do it.
And then my mother screaming, you're going to give your father a heart attack.
You're going to live with that?
You're going to be happy with that?
And I'll be like, all right, I'll go shovel the snow so dad doesn't have a heart attack.
Guilty me into, you know, getting off my butt and going out and doing like what I guess I should have been doing anyway.
Yeah, my three daughters are gone.
One's serving in the Air Force in Hawaii.
One's a defense contractor in Afghanistan, and one's a nurse, and they're all gone.
I'm on my own.
Well, so what's on your mind today?
Okay, well, I, you know, I just wanted to tell you, I'm just Joe average American out here in America, and I was disgusted with what the president did on Friday.
You know, when he makes promises and goes on national TV and says, we will not open the government.
We will stand firm, whether it takes weeks or months or years.
You know, we actually believe him.
And the other part about that is, you know, the House initiates a bill, sends it to the Senate.
They both negotiate and send it to the president.
If he has $5.7 billion, he signs it.
If he doesn't, he vetoes it.
Here's the listen.
I have said from the get-go, I don't care how he gets the money.
But the more important issue to me is, and I think where people are miscalculating, and I understand that some people wanted this in perpetuity, the government shut down.
The problem is, is when it starts affecting every American's life in terms of flights not taking off out of LaGuardia, TSA threatening to walk off the job, same with air traffic controllers and people not getting paid, et cetera.
There comes a point where the president's winning on a 70-30 issue, but losing on the shutdown, and then just saying, and then he's being persuaded by Democrats that they want a shot to go behind their leaderships back and negotiate.
So he says, okay, I'll give you your three weeks.
Now, I am convinced.
I have no evidence, just my gut.
This is a guy that fights for what he believes in.
This is a guy that doesn't give up easily on anything.
And if he says he's going to declare a national emergency to get the funds, I believe he's going to do it, which is fine with me.
And I'm even willing to take a crapshoot with the court system, even if it takes a few months longer, because I think that, you know, he's fighting for life and death.
He's not going to let this issue die.
Every negotiation, he's going to want more money.
I think he declares the national emergency.
I think it gets shopped, judge-shopped to California, goes up to the Ninth Circuit, gets to the Supreme Court.
And I think we win.
Constitutionally, it is his duty to protect the American people and the Constitution.
And you know what?
The compelling case about heroin, fentanyl, cartels, gangs, violence that comes into our small towns and big cities is overwhelming.
And that's my take.
He's not given up.
So I honestly feel that people have underestimated a guy that they're clearly not understanding here, in my opinion.
Does that make sense?
No, it does.
And, you know, I'm just a big fan of you and the president when he says, hey, our priority is keeping illegal drugs out of this country, keeping the terrorist.
So if I'm right in what, now, 12 days, and he declares a national emergency, will you feel like he's still engaged in the fight and that he's willing to go to the mat and he just changed strategies?
Because that's what I think's coming.
Well, I think that's coming also.
So that means he's willing to do more and put it on the line more to me.
He's not stopping.
He's fighting for what he promised.
And I love the fight.
I don't think, you know, I think it's shifting strategy where if you're winning on the issue, but you're losing on the shutdown, sometimes you've got to cut your losses and move to plan B.
I see this as a move to plan B. That's what I'm and look, I may be wrong in 12 days.
I don't think I am.
I think he's going to do.
I'm 99.9% confident he does.
Well, I hope he does.
I hope we do get funding for the wall.
It may not be 2,500 miles long, but we do need it in parts at the very least.
And if we don't, it's just going to continue to get worse and worse and worse.
He just needs to follow through on his promise and, you know, get it done.
Listen, if he gets, the bottom line is getting the money, getting the job done, building the wall.
To me, I don't care how we get there.
I don't know why everyone's so caught up on it had to be this one way.
It was obvious they won't even sit down and talk to the guy.
It's obvious that it was becoming a futile attempt, even offering them the things that they want and have stated they wanted.
Clearly, the Democrats didn't care about the furloughed employees.
They didn't care about DACA and they didn't care about DREAMers.
So they're all full of crap.
He's fighting for life and death, safety and security.
They're fighting just to hurt him.
I don't think that's going to play well in the long game.
You got to play long ball sometimes.
That includes being flexible, smart enough to shift strategies to get what you want.
And I think that's all he did here.
But I understand I've been arguing with friends all weekend about it.
Jack in Michigan, Jack, you think the same as David.
How are you?
Hey, Sean.
It's a pleasure to speak to you today.
I appreciate you taking my call.
I totally disagree.
There's an old saying I remember: when the going gets tough, the tough gets going.
And I feel that the shutdown was starting to have results.
In other words, yeah, they were going to miss their second paycheck.
Yeah, airports are partially shut down or fully shut down.
But President Trump, the American people didn't feel this was President Trump's doing.
And had he stuck to it and said, Mr. and Mrs. America, I want to open this government, but I can't.
I have Nancy and Pelosi and Schumer and all these people in government who are not looking after the best for this country.
And I feel he blinked.
He blinked at a time when you say Democrats were going around the back of Nancy and Schumer negotiating.
Well, how many Democrats are going around their backs today?
Here's the thing.
We'll find out if they're serious or not.
It's a three-week interim.
I think with a 15,000-strong caravan making its way to our southern border as we speak, I think the strength of the president and his case gets stronger.
And I think, I honestly think that, again, I go back to what I've been saying even before this.
I don't care how he gets the money.
I want the wall built.
To me, it's about the result.
The strategy, the fight, the powers that he has that he'll use.
I think he very strongly believed in trying to get this done in a bipartisan basis and thought that he could negotiate with people that were serious about DACA, serious about DREAMers, serious about security, and they're not.
So maybe it was a miscalculation.
And he decided, okay, I'm going to go this route.
Now, if in 12 days he declares a national emergency and we now go through a court process that I think he's going to win.
His odds are very high, in my opinion.
In the end, he wins because of the declarative nature of the national emergency.
I think it gets expedited through the courts.
And I think we'll know shortly thereafter.
And I think every negotiation going forward, he's going to be asking for wall money.
You know, to me, I just, it just doesn't, I understand how you feel, but I think a change in strategy was absolutely this may turn out to be brilliant.
And I think that the president, the one thing that I believe is he doesn't give up on his fight and his promises.
And I think people look at his track record and they don't give him credit for, you know, he fights tooth and nail for the things he believes in.
Would you feel better in 12 days if he declared the national emergency and sent the military down there?
No, I'm a conservative who's tired of playing the long game.
Well, the long game is three extra weeks.
I mean, we're not talking about, you know, an eternity here.
You know, I trust President Trump.
I trust him.
Do you think his commitment to building this wall is any less than it was before Friday?
No, sir.
Neither do I. Do you think he's going to go to the mat fighting for that money?
Yes, but if he wanted to expose the corruption the absolute dishonesty of the Democrats.
I think he did.
He offered them everything and they said no.
They wouldn't even sit with him.
Well, keep playing that over and over.
And Americans would say.
Well, I think he wants to actually get the money at some point to build it.
I mean, that's the point.
I mean, he wants more money.
He's got $3.5 billion that he spent.
He wants the rest of it.
And by hook or by crook, I think he's going to the mat to get it.
And I think that there are a lot of people that are his supporters that are not giving him enough credit for the fact that he's not given up this fight.
And he's going to do everything in his power to make this happen.
Do you believe that?
I agree, but I felt that he blinked.
I felt that he gave up and he came up.
Well, I don't think he gave up.
I think he changed strategies.
There's a big difference.
That's a good point.
I agree.
You know, I'm look, sometimes when you're dealing, you know, there's also a reality of what we've got to face here.
And the reality is you got Nancy Pelosi in the House, and she is just a few votes away from losing her speakership.
She can't even sit in the same room with him without that base being livid because they're so deranged in their hatred of the president.
It's an obstacle here because we can't get it done without the House.
If they'll give up DACA and they'll give up Dreamers and they'll sell furloughed employees down the river just to appease that base, there's no hope of ever getting that deal.
So, okay, we're not going to get it that way.
I'm going to do this.
That to me is smart.
Make sense?
The good work, Sean.
We appreciate you very much.
I know I do, and I know a lot of my friends appreciate you.
I know most Americans do as well.
I hope you keep it up.
Listen, he's not giving up this fight, that I can tell you.
And I think he, I actually think it's probably a better way to get it because he's given up in the end.
He won't have to give up anything.
Under that scenario, he gets the money.
They get nothing.
Nothing.
They can't get a deal in three weeks.
They get nothing.
Let's get back to our busy phones.
Luke Roziak at the top of the hour, his new blockbuster book is out.
It is mind-numbing the amount of detail about Congress and hacking that he discovered and that the FBI knew about and didn't do anything about.
We'll get to that.
All right, let's go to Chuck in Cincinnati, 55KRC.
Chuck, you're a great American.
God bless you.
And I want a full report.
Amazing how everybody in Cincinnati knows exactly who I'm talking about.
Amen, Sean.
Amen.
What's going on, brother?
Hey, quick comment.
I really think we need to broaden the wall argument just a little bit.
I mean, I've been screaming at my TV for months, waiting for someone to make this very simple point.
Every time a Democrat says border security other than a wall is what is required, the reply has to be, we're trying to protect ourselves from the next Democratic administration.
Look, Democrats, unfortunately, some Republicans, will give him his $5 billion, but they're only going to do it for drones or border agents, sensors, et cetera.
Why?
Because all those things can be either repurposed, defunded, or have reductions in.
Yeah, they don't want the wall.
You're absolutely right.
They do not want, and that is the answer to this problem.
There's no doubt about it.
But they're masking their hidden agenda, which is which you've been talking about constantly, is they want to open borders.
They're even talking about eliminating ICE.
But now it's going to come out.
The difference between 2020 and 2018 is they're going to run on trying to out leftist all the other primary candidates.
It's going to be a fascinating reveal in the next year as they try to kill the bludgeon each other.
I'm more socialist than you.
I want to confiscate every penny everybody has.
That's what it's going to come down to.
Exactly.
But the president, I think, is going to win.
Look, I am as confident as I can be, not knowing what's in his head or what he's going to do, but my guess is he does it.
And I don't think this president is, I would argue he's more committed to winning.
He does not like to lose, and taking on a different approach or strategy, to me, is smart, especially in the end.
If they don't do anything in three weeks, you give up nothing.
You might have to fight through the courts, but it's a national emergency.
They'll have to expedite at some point, and it'll get to the Supreme Court.
I think we win.
If there's fairness, constitutionality, we win.
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
Let me just be very clear.
At no point during my tenure at the DNC was I contacted by the FBI, DHS, or any government agency or alerted or made aware that they believed that the Russians, an enemy state, was intruding on our network.
At no point.
And I am a member of Congress who had the ability to sit down and be briefed in a classified setting.
Even Director Comey testified publicly that he wished that he had gone to the top of the organization.
We're one of the two national political parties.
It is astounding that when they had a member of Congress who was leading that organization, that no one felt it was any more important when we had a foreign enemy intruding on one of the two political parties' networks to do anything more than lob a phone call in to our tech support through our main switchboard.
But how can both I mean Secretary Johnson says that DNC rebuffed the help that they offered?
You're saying that no one ever could be able to do it.
Respectfully, Secretary Johnson is utterly misinformed.
That is simply not accurate.
And much that has been written about the timeline of events by the New York Times, the Washington Post, that document through multiple sources, including me, that The FBI and other federal agencies did virtually nothing to make sure that when they were aware,
at the point that they were aware that there was or concerned that there was an intrusion on our network by the Russians, that they did virtually nothing to sound the alarm bells to make us aware of that.
And they left essentially the Russians on our network for more than for almost a year.
Can you elaborate more on what the DHS's connection with the DNC was or consultation with the DNC was after you became aware of the hacking?
I mean, they became aware of the hacking, as to what was offered them, what they accepted.
Was there any level of cooperation at all?
To my disappointment, not to my knowledge, sir.
And this is a question I asked repeatedly when I first learned of it.
You know, what are we doing?
Are we in there?
Are we helping them discover the vulnerabilities?
Because this was fresh off the OPM experience.
And there was a point at which DHS cybersecurity experts did get into OPM and actually helped them discover the bad actors and patch some of the exfiltrations or at least minimize some of the damage.
And so I was anxious to know whether or not our folks were in there.
And the response I got was FBI had spoken to them.
They don't want our help.
They have CrowdStrike, the cybersecurity firm.
And that was the answer I got after I asked the question a number of times over the progression of time.
Now that was, I assume, totally different from the reaction you got from OPM.
The OPM effort, we were actually in there on site helping them find the bad actors.
Do you know who it was at the DNC who made that decision or who was making resistance?
No.
Do you know if the FBI continued to try to help, try to assist?
I have read in the New York Times about those efforts sometime earlier this year.
Well, he's not my staffer.
He no longer works for me.
And when he was arrested, I terminated him.
I kept him on the payroll during the time that he was not arrested and not charged with anything.
And that was because, as I said, that I was concerned about the violation of his due process rights and also that there were racial and ethnic profiling concerns as well.
I have maintained that it was important and will continue to maintain that when someone's due process rights are potentially being violated, that I'm going to stand up and make sure that people's rights are protected in this country.
That's the oath that I swore to uphold when I swore to uphold the Constitution.
And when he was arrested and due process was established, then I terminated him.
All right, news roundup and information overload.
You know, there's so much discussion about hacking and computers, and it's mind-numbing to me, especially when you go back and you realize that people are hacking into our Department of Defense, NASA, all these other government agencies going back 30 plus years, and that we have not created a safe and secure means of protecting national security secrets, which raises the issue of Hillary Clinton.
We on this program have tried to point out one of the biggest cases of corruption and what a threat to national security, this whole issue of a guy by the name of Imran Awan.
You've heard it before.
Days after the DNC hack, Democrats began working to set the Russian narrative, but just then the House Inspector General discovered that there had been a hack on Congress by the IT aide that was hired by Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Imran Awan literally worked for a number of Democrats, but they got rid of this guy, but Debbie Wasserman Schultz, well, kept him on the payroll and had access to all of our secrets from Congress.
And he took $100,000 from an Iranian government official tied to Hezbollah, hid the money using an LLC.
According to the CIA, the House knows that the computer equipment was disappearing.
He also knows that Awan's relatives had no business being hired and paid.
They caught this guy double billing, double dipping on what he was charging the government.
He spends months out of the year in Pakistan the whole time, logging into congressional servers from there and travels with an entourage of Pakistani agents.
And Awan has two Sharia law wives, both in Virginia, according to Luke Roziak.
But this is as or more serious than the DNC hacked, and it's been buried and, you know, literally killed by a deep state that is just hell-bent on only the issues that seem to affect Donald Trump.
And this one-sidedness is hurting our national security.
Now, the person that really broke this story wide open, we spent a lot of time with him as he was developing the story.
He's now come out with a book about it.
It's called Obstruction of Justice, How the Deep State Risked National Security to Protect the Democrats.
Luke Roziak is here.
I had the honor of blurbing the book.
And I say the cover-up detailed in this book is key reading for anyone who wants to know how the deep state works, how establishment politicians deviously scheme to control a corrupt Department of Justice bureaucracy and the liberal mainstream media to manipulate the truth, deceive the American people.
Luke Roziak has done what these politicians never wanted to, uncovered and told the truth.
Luke, welcome.
Glad to see you in studio.
How are you?
It's great to be here, Sean.
You know, like a lot of these stories, it gets a little complicated.
Let's start at the beginning.
I want you to walk this audience through exactly what happened here.
Yeah, and it is a complicated tale and it's a surreal one.
My life has been like a movie for the last two years as I've investigated this.
As you mentioned, a couple days after the DNC was hacked, the House of Representatives was hacked too.
And unlike the DNC, where they didn't really know who did it, but they immediately started this campaign about Russia, they got the guy right away in the House.
And it was this Pakistani fellow named Imran Awan who worked for Debbie Wassman Schultz and a bunch of other members of Congress, but then he was logging into servers.
He shouldn't have been taking additional information that he should not have been accessing on the House, funneling it off the network.
He was also taking computer supplies, sending them over to Pakistan, huge sums of computers just disappearing.
And so the House uncovered this.
And put yourself back in, you know, summer of 2016.
Everyone is freaking out about the DNC.
It's just happened.
The document dumps are going on WikiLeaks every week, and they find this hack.
And so the narrative is not very good.
And now, keep in mind, this is a separate hack.
It's different.
But the Democrats are always concerned about optics.
They don't care about national security.
They don't actually care about foreign meddling.
And so they cover it up.
Let's start with, all right.
So we have the whole DNC.
Debbie Wassum and Schultz is out.
Donna Brazil becomes the interim DNC chairwoman.
But this hack happens right after.
And this is a congressional hack.
This guy controls and has access to classified information, top secret information that some of these congressmen and women have.
Certainly sensitive information, information that could be used to blackmail members.
He also tended to work for members on extraordinarily sensitive committees like the Intelligence Committee, Homeland Security, et cetera.
All right.
So how did he get $100,000 from an Iranian government official tied to Hezbollah?
So this guy, he's got his whole family on the payroll.
They take $7 million in congressional service.
So the family you're talking about is a family where they have no expertise in IT.
One guy was a car salesman, if I remember correctly, and another guy had worked at McDonald's, right?
Right.
And they caught this guy double billing, but Debbie Wassum and Schultz still kept him on the payroll.
And all these unqualified people, how did they end up getting on the payroll?
That's the question is this guy, Imran Awan, had extraordinary sway over Congress.
He caused members of Congress to do his bidding.
For example, now Senator Joe Connolly placed Imran Awan's father, who's like an elderly Muslim cleric who doesn't know anything about computers, on his payroll as his IT guy.
These guys weren't working.
They weren't showing up.
And so these guys really gained influence over members of Congress who are paying no-show employees.
And then these guys basically start doing really frightening stuff using their IT access.
And so to your point about taking money from this guy connected to Hezbollah, they set up this LLC and it's called, the name of the LLC is get this.
It's just called CIA.
And so they funnel $100,000 through CIA.
And this money comes from an Iranian.
The LLC is named CIA.
Correct.
Okay.
And so they take $100,000 from this Iranian government minister who's been linked by the actual CIA to Hezbollah.
And they launder it through this company.
And of course, they hide it from Congress.
And I find this from like local civil court records.
Like it comes up in a lawsuit.
And so I look into this case because I find out that what happened in Congress, even though it's very muted, and I'm kind of the only reporter looking into it because everyone else has got Trump derangement syndrome, right?
No, the only thing they can, look, it's taken us on Hannity and on this radio show at two years to get to the bottom of they rigged the Hillary investigation.
She committed crimes.
You know, Roger Stone, okay, let's talk about Hillary's obstruction of justice.
Let's talk about, oh, when has anybody ever heard about deleting subpoenaed emails, acid washing hard drives with bleach pit, and busting up every device you have and ripping out the SIM cards?
Again, all subpoenaed, but Roger Stone obstructed justice, not Hillary.
Absolutely.
And remember, they weren't going to tell us about any of that stuff.
They were just going to say, hey, the FBI looked into it and, you know, Hillary didn't do anything wrong.
And Trump.
Well, then it was FISA and then the FISA.
Now we know that they were all warned that it was put together by a guy that hated Trump, that Hillary paid for, funneled money, and that was the basis of an application for FISA four separate times.
And all these top FBI guys who had been warned that this is a political document, not verified, used it as if it was gospel truth.
And they didn't care about that either.
Absolutely.
And so I started looking into these guys and I find things.
And if I can find them, the FBI can find it too.
The evidence that I find in public records and through basic interviews with people who know these guys.
And it's clear that they're extortionists.
They really are like sociopathic extortionists.
That Imran Awan is an extortionist.
You do call him that in the book.
Absolutely.
A Pakistani extortionist who, by the way, he had the emails and files of 20% of the Democrats in the House.
Yep, everything.
Every email they sent, he was logging in as members of Congress.
And the stuff he was doing, I mean, if they're going to bust down Roger Stone's door, a 66-year-old man, at five in the morning, this is a guy who's like a 33-year-old Pakistani guy with access to all the files in Congress.
They catch him.
And that's the thing about computers is there's a log of everything.
And the logs show that he made unauthorized access.
On a regular basis.
Thousands of times right before the election to the House Democratic Caucus.
That was the main group that he was breaking into.
So what you basically do here is track the trail of Awan, who's the central character in this scandal, to the shady work that he and his family did in Congress and getting all of our secrets from these congressional people and then nobody investigating it.
Well, yeah, and so that's what we've been talking about over the last two years.
And then what this book looks at is how it came to be that this was covered up and they put out a statement.
Jeff Sessions, you know, prosecutor said, Imran Awan didn't do anything wrong.
And the media said, oh, it must be a conspiracy theory.
And I'm like, you can see the documents.
I've uploaded them.
You can go down to the civil courts and the public records and you can see these things.
And so this is.
Stay right there.
Hold that thought.
And there's a lot more to this story.
And we're going to stay with Luke Roziak, Obstruction of Justice, How the Deep State Risked National Security to Protect the Democrats.
We have a link up on Hannity.com, Amazon.com, bookstores everywhere now.
All right, we continue.
Luke Roziak, investigative reporter with the Daily Caller, his new book, Obstruction of Justice, How the Deep State Risked National Security to Protect the Democrats.
When you look at the network Awan put together, how did they not know that he's in Pakistan getting into 20% of the congressional Democrats' emails and their secrets and getting paid and not even working?
Well, and that's why this would have been the trial of the century if he was charged and it went to trial because 44 Democrats, people are always running their mouth about Trump like Ted Liu, you know, members of the intelligence committee who hired this guy, and they're all talking about the DNC and all this.
And these guys are completely incompetent when it comes to their cybersecurity.
They didn't vet these people.
They gave them all the access to all their files.
And then they want to pretend it didn't happen because it's all about the narrative for them.
It's not the security of our country.
And so when I started pursuing this guy, at some point, it really started to be a story about a cover-up rather than a hack.
It's both.
But what's interesting to me now is Nancy Pelosi is practically as manipulative as Imran Awan in terms of the way that she orchestrated this cover-up when she was not in power.
And it really makes you think now that she's in charge of the House of Representatives, I mean, if this is the kind of influence that she could exert over the last couple of years by working the back channels and working the media and working the bureaucracy down in the deep state to circumvent the formal control.
Can you imagine what she could do now that she's actually Speaker?
It's literally you lay out a roadmap of corruption and cover-ups and how, in fact, the Department of Justice ignored witnesses that would testify that the Awans were peddling this information to foreign officials.
I'm going to get into what they got, where they sold it, how much money they got, and how they were able to prevent the FBI from doing their job.
We'll continue.
Luke Roziak, Obstruction of Justice, How the Deep State Risked National Security to Protect the Democrats.
It's on Hannity.com, Amazon.com, bookstores everywhere.
Quick break, right back.
We'll continue.
All right, 25 till the top of the hour.
It's amazing the level of corruption that is going on within our government, within the deep state.
I know we have spent an awful lot of time talking about all that has happened as it relates to, oh, the corruption of the FBI, the exoneration of Hillary when she was clearly guilty of crimes that they're now even charging Roger Stone with.
Then, of course, the phony FISA.
They were all warned it was bought and paid for with funneled money, and Christopher Steele was a Trump hater, but they used it as a bulk of information to get the FISA applications.
We've been able to make more progress on that, but parallel to this has been an ongoing investigation into the deep state and how they risked national security and what in large part they failed to do.
And that is, you know, 20% of Democrats had an IT guy by the name of Imran Awand, central character in this scandal.
And he did all this work for Congress, had access to all their emails, all their, you know, obviously a lot of our nation's secrets.
And he is an agent of Pakistan.
You write about the fact that he had these entourages when he would go back to Pakistan, literally driving him around.
He's getting money from the Iranians in this whole thing.
The book is called Obstruction of Justice, How the Deep State Risked National Security to Protect Democrats.
Luke Roziak is with us.
So we have WikiLeaks hacking the DNC emails and Hillary's private server and all of that goes on.
Meanwhile, we have this scandal going on.
Now, every step of the way, as you were writing for the Daily Caller, we were covering the story with you.
We didn't do the hard research you did.
And every time you came on, I was shocked again and again.
Let's go through.
So they find out that all of these people are double charging.
Most Democrats get rid of Imran Awan.
Not Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
He keeps them on.
Didn't want to be called a racist, if I recall correctly.
And he still has access to all of this information, correct?
Correct.
And it's not at all, it's not just double charging.
I mean, they found, they looked at the server logs and they found that they were logging in using other people's credentials to log in as members of Congress and check their emails and things like that.
And so they knew that this really frightening stuff was going on for seven months.
And what they did is they just waited and waited and waited until after the election because they thought Hillary Clinton was going to be in charge.
And that is really, really reckless what they did.
They knew of an ongoing hack on Congress and they let it happen.
They literally allowed this guy, even after they found out a lot about who he was, he still was able to remain on the system of getting congressional emails and information for seven months.
Why?
Why didn't they get rid of him right away?
Why wasn't he arrested?
Because then it would hit the papers and it would kind of derail this Russian narrative because then you'd have two hacks and this one is in Russia.
You know, this is what the Democrats do.
And it's crazy that we hear about some things all the time and we don't hear about this.
That's because the Democrats have so successfully managed to control the narrative and a big part of that is the way that they control the DOJ.
So they made it so that this guy was never arrested.
He was kicked off the network but not arrested right at the same time that Donald Trump was arrested.
The amazing thing is just in your own personal life, just identify for a second or think about for a second, your family's emails are being hacked.
How worried would you be?
Or your own personal emails or your own text messages.
And then imagine letting the FBI know and your government know and them not helping you.
You call it more serious than the DNC hack.
Why?
Well, these are government computers.
I mean, the DNC is a fundraising group.
This guy has a track record of just horrible, horrible extortion.
So first of all, the Democrats, you know, the investigator who finds this is the inspector general of the House of Representatives, who's an expert in computers and was appointed by Nancy Pelosi 10 years ago.
And so what they do is they turn on the investigator.
And Nancy Pelosi's general counsel screams at her and says, mind your business.
You will not investigate these guys.
Eventually, they basically frame this woman on ethics charges.
They falsely accuse her of violating the Logan Act of this ridiculous stuff.
And they drive her out of federal service.
I mean, they will turn on their own people in a second to control the narrative.
How did you discover he had two Sharia law wives in Virginia?
Well, so one of them approached me and said, I'm being held against, you know, I'm being basically kept like a slave.
Imran Awan is extorting me.
I tried to go to the police earlier, and then someone shot at me, and he told me it was him.
He tried to have me killed for blowing the whistle on him.
Imran Awan told me that he's a mole in Congress.
How did you know when these months he'd go back to Pakistan?
How did you know he was a Pakistani official?
So at the same time that this guy's own wife is coming to me as the only person who's paying any attention to this and pleading for her safety and pleading for me to do something, his stepmother also comes to me and says, I'm being held in captivity by him as well because I also tried to go to the police and he told me that he would have my whole family killed and Imran Awan is controlling me with death threats.
And so this is a guy who, and by the way, both the stepmom and one of the wives, they're being surveilled.
He's using his IT expertise to use audio and hidden cameras in their houses and monitoring what they do in the UK.
Were you able to confirm all that?
Yeah.
I mean, there's one of them has pictures of, you know, some of the hidden devices.
And, you know, some of this, you know, it would be very, very easy for the FBI to get this information.
The women were trying to talk to the FBI.
And so this woman, his own wife, is telling me, you've got to save the country from this guy.
Something has got to be done.
Interesting that both Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, well, their phones with critical text messages were wiped clean.
Now we find out in this particular case, the police say the Democratic caucus server, which was key evidence in this hack, disappeared.
How did the Democrats always get away with disappearing computer records?
So much evidence disappeared in this case, Sean.
The IG said, you know, you've got to look at this server.
It just contains so much bad stuff.
This is what they're hacking.
And then the police write a Capitol Police, and I have the memo.
It says the House Democratic Caucus server is now missing.
Then you have other devices that were turned over by firsthand witnesses to the FBI, and the FBI loses them.
Basically, after they fire the IG driver out, they turn it over to the FBI because Nancy Pelosi knows she controls the FBI.
You know, there's a lot here, and it would take a long time, I guess, in a big court case.
But at the core of it, you have the server logs, which show they made unauthorized access to Congress.
You have these financial documents, which they're cooking the books in Congress to steal computers and send it over to Pakistan.
Those documents are falsified.
It takes two seconds to prove those things.
And magically, they send it over to the FBI to, quote, investigate for two years.
And by the end of two years, documents that plainly show wrongdoing somehow no longer show wrongdoing, but it serves to kind of distract you.
You say in the book that one of the wives calls the police, says she's being held like a slave, and that she was shot at, as you just said, and he said to her that he did it.
How did the FBI come to stand in her front door to make sure she can't go to court?
You say, why?
So they never actually charged this guy in Ranawan with hacking Congress, because if they did, that's when it goes to trial and there's testimony.
And so he got a Hillary Clinton lawyer, former aide to Hillary Clinton, and they start meeting with the prosecutors behind the scenes.
And then the prosecutors start basically calling in witnesses and threatening them and saying, don't bring evidence.
And then, you know, eventually they put out this statement saying, basically acquitting him, giving him immunity and saying he did nothing wrong.
Now the evidence shows that he did this thing.
And of course, the media runs wild and says, you know, Jeff Sessions has debunked a conspiracy theory from Trump.
And none of them had the attention span to see that the documents prove that, you know, this is completely false, what the FBI said.
And the whole time they knew, it wasn't like they didn't, they certainly didn't knock down his door like they did to Roger Stone.
They didn't do search warrants against this guy.
They intentionally didn't interview anyone.
What about when the computer was left in the phone booth?
So after he's banned from Congress, he takes Wassman Schultz's laptop and leaves it in a phone booth at midnight.
And again, no one's going to tell us that ever happened until Wassman Schultz pops up in a hearing yelling at the chief of police.
There's going to be criminal cases.
She wants the computer back.
She was yelling at the police people at the time.
We have that video.
Absolutely.
And there were so many things like that that are in this book that went on behind the scenes in Congress.
And it really just shows you how they do these things.
I mean, when you hear that, you know, they arrived at this decision not to charge Hillary Clinton or, you know, how the Fusion GPS steered all this, set all the wheels in motion to start this whole Russia collusion thing.
This is kind of tracing from the beginning.
So this is a foreign entity.
You believe he's an agent for Pakistan and that he has access to 44 Democratic Congress people's computers, that he's taking and having access to their emails and sensitive information and that we know about it and that they successfully navigate through the deep state Justice Department FBI and convince them not to investigate what is a breach of our national security.
Well, not only not investigate, but a lot of times they knew of evidence and they made it go away actively.
And it was really a tremendous concerted effort.
At what level of the FBI are we talking about here?
Is it this again, like in the case of Strzok and Page and McCabe and Baker and Comey?
So one of the things about this book is it really names names and it talks about the deep state, which I think of as being way down there.
It's not the figureheads who actually have much less control of the government.
So this book names names and it says which FBI agents, just regular old special agents, threatened witnesses, did all this stuff.
It talks about the prosecutors.
I don't know exactly how to do it.
Were you threatened in the course of your investigation?
You know, not physically, but a lot of other people were.
His own wife was shot at.
A lot of people are in great fear over this kind of thing.
And it's not just the people in the Pakistani circles, it's the Democrats who wanted to speak up.
And so one of the things this book shows is how a lot of Democrats were trying to blow the whistle inside the house, but they were afraid of their leadership and they were more concerned with their jobs at the end of the day.
And so this Pakistani woman goes to the FBI and says, look, he told me that he's a mole in Congress.
I mean, you're investigating.
Is he a mole in Congress, supposedly?
He told me he was.
And you've got to do something because he put a hidden camera in my house and he had made a sex tape of me.
And now he's blackmailing me.
And if he puts that sex tape out in Pakistan, I'm going to be, you know, excommunicated from the culture.
And he's, you know, threatening to kill me if I come to the.
Did you speak to both of his wives?
You say he had two.
So I only spoke to one.
The other one works for, worked for Debbie Wassman-Schultz as well.
She was on the Hill.
And she files this lawsuit in Pakistan saying this guy is trying to control me with death threats.
And the FBI, that's government documents.
The FBI knew it, but they didn't try to flip her.
They just said Imran's a great guy.
Well, how does this, I mean, if your own wife, or in this case, your own wives are saying you're a bad guy, I mean, your own family doesn't think you're a good guy, that's not a good idea.
Explain the suitcases of gold bars and cash and busted up hard drives because we have that in this case as well.
It really is like something out of a movie.
I mean, so this guy is, you know, he's not like booked in jail.
He's charged on a minor thing and it might turn into something bigger later, but it never does.
And so he's out on, you know, on bail, just running around.
And the whole time, he's got these millions of dollars stored overseas and in these various bank accounts.
And he starts making people like move his assets around and ordering people to buy gold bars, setting up LLCs to hide his money more.
And the prosecutors, you know, they know about this and they keep doing a deal with him anyway.
And they say, oh, he didn't do anything wrong because the prosecutors had to make this, they wanted to make it go away on behalf of the Democrats.
But it makes no sense because you're talking about Congress allowing IT systems and administrators like this guy who handles sensitive networks with sensitive national secrets.
He's working remotely from Pakistan and you were able to confirm that in Pakistan he would arrive and he'd have these an entourage of intelligence people meeting him.
Absolutely.
I mean, first of all, there was a civil court lawsuit filed by his own stepmom that said that.
And then I teamed up with the freelancer who went to Pakistan.
Everyone in his town saw that.
And this guy would brag about how he had the power to change the president, in his words, these outlandish boasts by this guy who had this extraordinary power somehow from the access that he had to all these computer files.
But the Democrats are the victims at the beginning.
I assume that they want to deal with this swiftly.
But as I start investigating this, I see they don't care about anything but the optics and the narrative that the American people learn about because it's embarrassing.
And so after he leaves the laptop in the phone booth, I find that Imran Awan is impersonating an intelligence staffer and he still has access to the Congress, even though he's been banned from the network.
And that's through an email address that's listed in the name of an intelligence specialist for Andre Carson, who's a member of Congress on the intelligence committee.
And so this kind of stuff that's going on is deeply disturbing.
Anyone could confirm it.
You know, I went to Andre Carson and I thought he would thank me for alerting him and would take swift action.
And you realize that they would rather just have this go away.
And it's like, think about the sexual harassment slush fund that Congress did.
Remember that?
I mean, they don't care.
They don't care what party is.
It's like $14, $15 million, right?
Yeah.
And I mean, they want to protect each other because it's kind of like mutually assured destruction.
I mean, if you start firing accusations among members of Congress, they're all going to be exposed and, you know, kicked out of office.
So they protect themselves and the House bunkered down.
I always like to say, you know, this book is so chock full of information.
You know, people need to read it and you can determine yourself whether or not this is a massive security breach, which I believe it is, and an injustice in how we did not do our job and protect.
Again, I keep saying, where is our national defense of hacking and our national defense of our secrets and sensitive information?
This was real shoe leather-like reporting.
You include all of your evidence in the book.
Luke Roziak, Obstruction of Justice, How the Deep State Risked National Security to Protect the Democrats.
When you read this, you're going to be blown away.
All right, Hannity tonight, Nine Eastern on the Fox News channel.
We'll check in with Devin Nunes, Steve Scalise, Roger Stone is on tonight.
Mark Penn, Pam Bondi, Luke Roziak, and Chris Christie.
That's Nine Eastern tonight, Hannity, Fox News, Tuesday edition Sean Hannity Show, as we have the latest over-the-border battle.
Will the president declare a national emergency?
And also, where's Director Ray on the tactics of, oh yeah, Robert Mueller and his team?
Really?
You need 27 armed guys pre-dawn raid over lying to Congress?
Is this the mafia?
Is this the mob?
Is this guy a murderer?
Is this guy a flight risk?
Nope.
Thanks for being with us.
We'll see you tonight, back here tomorrow.
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 with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
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.
