All Episodes
Previous Next
March 20, 2019 - Sean Hannity Show
01:33:28
Don't Forget About The Ukraine

John Solomon, of the Hill, has a new story for us regarding Ukraine and more underhanded dealings with the Democrats. As the 2020 elections heat up, it's obvious that the liberal Democrats really want American voters to forget about the Clinton-era. The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart Podcast.
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 gotta tell you, has a 10-year warranty, a cover that's washable and dryable.
It's made in the USA backed by their 60-day unconditional money back guarantee.
Once you try this new mattress topper, you put it right over your mattress, you will never sleep better.
And right now, you, my radio listeners, you're gonna save 30% off when you go to my pillow.com and use the promo code topper.
And by the way, Mike will also give you two standard my pillows absolutely free.
All right.
So try my pillow.com promo code topper.
Promo code topper for this great deal and the best night's sleep you ever had.
Want to remind you too if you're an unhappy timeshare owner, you went on a vacation, you're having the time of your life.
Somebody says you can duplicate this every year for the rest of your life, and then you never end up going back.
And then you realize uh there are other nice places I could go too, and I could better use that money, but every year you gotta pay the maintenance fees and whatever other fees associated with it.
You wish you never did it.
Well, there's a way out, thanks to my friends at Lone Star Transfer, Brian and Karen.
They run a family-owned business.
They will make sure that your experience is a pleasant one.
They will get you out of your timeshare legally, ethically, and quickly.
I have an A plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, and this is what they do.
Don't let another year go by and you're paying all this money for a timeshare you're never gonna use.
Now, two ways to get them online at Lone StarTransfer.com.
All right, or give my friends a call, no obligation.
Call pound 250 on your mobile keyword timeshare.
Just hit pound 250 on your mobile phone, say the keyword timeshare, or just go to Lone Starrtransfer.com.
All right, glad you're with us.
And write down our toll-free telephone number.
It's 800 nine four-one Sean.
You want to be a part of the program.
Uh huge breaking news story on the Hill regarding Ukraine and some of the more underhanded dealings.
Except this time it's not Paul Manafort.
This time it happens to be Democrats.
And how the Ukrainian president uh telling John Solomon in an interview that aired earlier today, and he'll join us later, uh, that he's opened a probe into alleged attempts by Ukrainians to interfere in the U.S. 2016 presidential election,
and that they've launched this investigation, and they're gonna give a legal assessment of the information that they have and probing a claim from a member of the Ukrainian Parliament that the director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau in the Ukraine attempted to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Oh, on behalf of Hillary Clinton, State Department spokesperson telling the Hill TV that officials uh aware of news are aware of these news reports.
We've always emphasized the need for deep, comprehensive, timely reforms that responds uh to the demands of the Ukrainian people made during the revolution of dignity, which is an end to the sis systemic uh assist uh corruption and and faster economic growth, et cetera, et cetera.
And I just happen to have a little birdie telling me in my ear that, well, Joe Biden may have an issue here that is bigger than anything ever alleged about Donald Trump.
Wonder if the media is gonna go full bore Joe Biden after this.
We'll have to wait and see.
Why do I guess that that's impossible?
Kind of what made Ted Koppel's comments, and I'm not I'm look, I'm I lost a lot of respect for Ted Koppel during this phony fake edited news interview with me.
You know, I'm bad for TV.
I'm bad for America.
We have to give some credit to the American people that they're somewhat intelligent and that they know the difference between an opinion show and a news show.
Yeah.
You know, you're cynical.
Look at that.
Yeah, I am cynical because uh, you know you think we're bad for America?
You think I'm bad for America.
Yeah.
You do.
In the in the long haul, I think you and all these opinion shows.
No, you know why.
That's sad.
Because you're very good at what you do, and because you have you have attracted a significantly more intuition.
Let me finish this.
Let me finish the sentence with all the respect.
Yes.
You have you have attracted people who are determined that ideology is more important than facts.
Ideology more important than facts.
First, it's insulting to you, this audience.
You know, if I was wrong on any of my venue, I'll give you an example.
And I always explain what my role is as a talk show host.
But let me backtrack.
That was a minute and seven seconds.
We did a one-hour interview where I actually gave an answer to him.
But they didn't air that part.
Nor did they air the rest.
You see, he sits there for an hour, cameras rolling, we're talking.
I'm trying to have a discussion, thinking that he cares what I he just wanted that moment to make him look good.
And if you noticed, he's let me finish my sentence.
Okay, I'll defer.
You finish your sentence and I talk.
And I gave him that opportunity.
Um the idea that somebody has strong opinions that differ from the from the overwhelming 95% of media, and that there's an audience for that opinion.
We can't force people to tune into this radio show.
I'd love to be able to reach through every radio in America, say, now's the time.
It's 306 Eastern.
Listen to Hannity.
I don't have that power or that ability, nor would I really ever want it.
You know, you what you do is you try to build a show every day with news, information, opinion, and entertainment that people are gonna want to tune into.
That they can't get anywhere else that distinguishes itself.
And I I've explained over and over again.
Yeah, opinion journalists, sure.
Advocacy journalists, sure.
Guilty as charged.
Do I ever say I'm a journalist?
No.
Do we do journalism?
Yes.
Plenty of days, hundreds of hours of coverage of straight news coverage, you know, during natural disaster, war, or uh, you know, a breaking news situation.
All right, what's the latest?
What's happening?
There's no opinion there.
We do it all the time.
Part of being a talk show host.
You gotta be able to do breaking news when it happens.
You know, sometimes I'll just do a straight interview with somebody I even disagree with.
Why do you think this?
Why do you think that?
Why do you believe this?
Why do you believe that?
And then we do investigative work.
And let me tell you, when I was vetting Obama, and we actually went back to his audio books, we read his books, we looked into his background, the influences in his life, starting with Frank Marshall Davis, Hawaii, the Chom gang, um, and and then leading to the schools that he went to, never got the transcripts, um, his associations, acorn, what is a Linsky, what is an Alinskiite?
What is a community organizer?
Why 20 plus years in the church at GD America?
America's chickens have come home to roost the Sunday after 9-11 of all Sundays with the attack worst attack on our homeland.
That's the church you're going to.
No, no, no, not God bless America, GD America, or then getting into that he begins his political career in the home of an unrepentant unrepentant domestic terrorist, 9-11 of all days, 2001.
The rest of the media didn't do this.
That was investigative reporting on radio and TV that we did.
Only one mainstream media outlet ever asked about why did you why did you associate with undomestic uh there are two questions that I don't think anybody has asked Barack Obama, and I don't know if this is going to be on your list tomorrow.
One is his the only time he's ever been asked about his association with Bill Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist uh from The Weather Underground, who on 9-11 of all days in the New York Times was saying, I don't regret setting bombs.
I I I don't think we did enough.
Uh, when asked about it by the political, David Axarod said they have a friendly relationship and that they had done a number of speeches together and that they sat on a board together.
Is that a question you might ask?
Well, I'm taking notes right now.
September 11, 2001, of all days.
Uh there was an article in the New York Times, and there are a number of quotes about Bill Ayers and the political had in there the comments about uh from David Axelrod.
I think that's an interesting question that nobody in the media has really brought up.
We we've highlighted a little bit more here on this program, but let me see if I can help you.
You want any more questions?
Yeah, keep going.
The Chicago reader talked about and commented, has comments of Barack Obama why he attended the Million Man March.
That most people don't know that, I don't think.
That's pretty pretty.
Didn't he write about that in his book?
I don't remember that in particular, but I know that he was quoted extensively in the Chicago Reader, December 8th, I forget the year, going back a couple of years.
So anyway, so anyway, George ended up asking the question.
Well, he's just a guy in the neighborhood, George.
And it's not to pat myself on the back here.
Please don't misinterpret this.
It's only that, yeah, we do straight journalism on days, and other days we do investigative work that the rest of the media won't do.
We now are in the process of investigating every single solitary 2020 candidate, and I guarantee you the reporting we do will be infinitely different than what the mainstream media does.
I don't need to watch them, I don't need to follow them.
We've we forge our own path.
They have been for over two years now, locked into breathless, hysterical reporting about Trump Russia collusion with no evidence.
None.
We have now what?
Not one but two separate congressional investigations that have concluded that there was no Trump Russia collusion.
House Intel Committee, Senate Intel Committee.
We also have Lisa Page and Struck.
We learned this just last week.
That after nine months of investigating Trump Russia collusion, before Mueller was ever even appointed, they found no evidence of collusion.
None whatsoever.
And that's where we find ourselves.
So, yeah, we do investigative reporting too.
Do I do opinion?
Yeah.
I am, I believe conservatism works.
Limited government, greater freedom.
You know, why do I like President Trump so much?
Is it is it his personality?
Well, I kind of like he's a fighter.
I really, you know, love the fact that he's unrelenting in his fight.
He's unrelenting in trying to keep his promises.
Yeah, I like that a lot.
And that that is such a stark contrast to Republicans and Democrats in Congress.
You know, Republicans have their 65 show votes about repealing replacing Obamacare.
And then when it matters, they're nowhere to be found.
Or the seven senators that are Republican that voted in 2015 to just repeal Obamacare.
Well, when it mattered in 2017, they were nowhere to be found.
Look at this, for example.
The president now has enough money to fund the construction of more than half the 550 miles of border wall that he plans to build because the Defense Department identified 12.8 billion dollars in funding that it could use to fulfill the president's call for a border wall, hence the money he's getting from the national emergency.
In other words, sources that are in excess of the amount needed, excess funds that other presidents have previously appropriated elsewhere.
That's awesome.
That is him not stopping, even though Republicans, uh even some in the House and Senate voted against the right of this president doing what everyone else has done.
And we do opinion, then we do culture.
We're like the whole newspaper.
And yet, but we say up front we do opinion.
Yes, we're very, very clear.
These people that say they are journalists, all you're getting on cable TV and Coppels, right?
Washington Post, New York Times, and every other quote, mainstream newspaper in this country and every broadcast network, it is hate destroy Trump.
Trump's bad for America.
Do it every second minute, hour of every 24-hour day.
That's what they do.
You know, and you know, and if you think assuming now that the Mueller report is not going to give Democrats the big impeachment bomb uh roadmap that they thought they'd have, because all of it was based on we now know the phony Clinton bought and paid for a dossier that nobody verified or nobody could verify because its author said he couldn't verify what he put together,
but still it was used as a basis to spy on the Trump campaign in the lead up to the 2016 election, and then it was used to bludgeon him afterwards and never stop bludgeoning him.
And now on the eve of whenever this report is going to come out, maybe we get the details, maybe we don't.
But you know, we have on top of all of this what?
What, eight congressional investigations?
And, you know, there's a witness in a Trump impeachment witch hunt launch resistant movement against Gerald Nandler.
This is interesting.
Looks like the resistance cuts both ways.
Because the majority of individuals and groups targeted in the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Nadler's sweeping request.
What does he have for documents?
Uh as now he's launched the probe, have missed the Nattler imposed deadline to respond, raising questions about whether the chairman is facing his own resistance movement.
And finally, people are saying enough is enough.
You know, this has become like a new McCarthyism.
Are you or have you ever been a supporter of Donald Trump?
This is what it's now becoming.
Newly obtained emails, by the way, contradict sworn testimony by Bruce and Nelly Orr.
Smoking is not about politics, it's about people.
There are 34 million Americans that smoke.
For me, Jewel was a game changer.
Because you switch to Jewel, it's simple, it's satisfying, and no more smell.
I watch people all the time.
They run outside in the freezing cold can be grabbing their cigarette.
Well, with Jewel, you'll take a quick puff and you're good.
That's it.
Now, Jewel is designed with smokers in mind from its form to technology.
It's easy to use, no buttons, no switches.
And the goal of Jewel is to impact the lives of adult smokers by providing a satisfying alternative.
Switch to Jule.
You'll wish you had done it a long time ago to discover the smoking alternative that is nothing like any e-cig vape you have ever tried.
Go to this website, J-U-U-L Joule.com slash switch America.
That's J-U-U-L.com slash switch America.
Warning, this product contains nicotine, and nicotine is an addictive chemical.
J-U-U-L.com/slash switch America.
All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity Show 800 941 Sean, if you want to be a part of this uh program, and uh so now just expect it's just gonna be more of the same.
It's gonna be endless investigation after investigation, and then on top of that, we head into an election.
And I don't think this is gonna work out well for them.
I think people now see this for the witch hunt that it is, as evidenced by the polling that came out yesterday.
But, you know, on top of the new Green Deal, you know, it was interesting.
We had Donna Brazil on last night, and I know some of you got mad me having her on, but we put liberals on the program and tried to get her to answer simple questions.
Do you agree with this part of the Green New Deal, that part of the Green New Deal, this part of the Green New Deal, that part of the you know, she didn't really want to answer.
Or, but she did answer on abortion, she did answer on some of these other things, and I'm like, wow, this really is a radical new extreme socialist democratic party.
And, you know, I I think the older Democrats, you know, more old school Pelosi Schumer, and you know, Donna Brazil ran Al Gore's campaign.
They just hid who they were.
Now the new modern extreme, they're just being outspoken where they really want to take the country, making Bernie look, you know, like a somewhat moderate Democratic Party.
And, you know, you think it's that bad, just the new Green Deal, and you know, eliminate oil and gas and everything's free and you know, 70% personal marginal tax rates, 90% corporate marginal tax rates, pure confiscation and redistribution and two each according to his need, from each according to his ability.
And, you know, and even after you're taxed, if you save any, we're gonna come back for a wealth tax that'll pay for daycare on top of, you know, pre-K care and on top of, you know, uh college education on top of retirement, guaranteed job, guaranteed healthy food, guaranteed retirement, guaranteed health care, but you can't have your own health care.
But now it's well, let's get rid of the electoral college.
So California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, they'll decide the elections, not those those all those red states in the middle.
You know, which I'm gonna get into.
Let's let 16-year-olds vote.
I mean, you can't drink till you're 21.
Um, let's um let's also stack the Supreme Court with as many members as we need until we get a liberal Supreme Court.
So what we can never get it done at the ballot box or in legislation, we'll we'll let the courts dictate our liberal policies and cite even foreign governments in the process.
All right, 25 now to the top of the hour.
So beyond the new Green Deal and all the radicalism and the 90% corporate tax rate, you know what a 90% corporate tax rate is going to do?
It's gonna chase every business out of America.
Every single one of them.
Now, maybe Ocasio Cortez doesn't care if robots take your job, robots start taking your job.
Let me tell you what's gonna happen.
You're gonna be out of a job.
She says you have time for art.
Now we have a new democratic candidate offering a thousand dollars a month per person in America.
Cities are now experimenting with that.
I mean, when I say they want everything to be free, everything guaranteed job at uh at a certain rate, guaranteed family medical leave, guaranteed retirement, uh, guaranteed uh housing, guaranteed Medicare for all, but you can't have private insurance.
Guaranteed college, guaranteed preschool.
You know, it's what do you think you give up in the process?
Every time you're offered what will be a false promise, something that can never ever, ever materialize or ever be fulfilled.
You are giving up freedom, and you are counting your you are you are giving the power of your life over to bureaucrats that just want power.
Now, maybe some of them are just so ignorant of history and idealistic that they think that this could really actually work if only we all put our money in one big pot.
Everyone will have the same house.
Everyone, oh, and we have to retrofit every house.
Don't forget that part.
Who's gonna pay for that?
And who's how are we gonna power the country when we have no natural gas and no uh oil, no energy, no lifeblood of the economy?
You know, now we'll have 16-year-old votes because 16-year-olds tend to be a little more liberal than older folks, you know, missing that life experience of actually getting a paycheck and having the taxes taking out of it.
You know, maybe they just think this is all a great idea on paper until they know the details of it.
And maybe when they see we get a, you know, the high tax rate, and they say, well, wait a minute, I thought I got $10 an hour.
Well, I'm only getting to keep two or three.
Well, what happened?
Well, there's your government that you're paying for.
What is what does that ever do to incentivize any individual to do anything?
But then again, according to the original document of Ocasio Cortez and company, it's whether you're unable or unwilling to work.
You still get all of the benefits.
You know, the electoral college, you know, remember, they want to stack the Supreme Court.
They want 16-year-olds now to be able to vote.
The Electoral College, if you want the history of this, I'll give you a quick history of this.
Um, and it's a series of compromises at our constitutional convention by those that drafted the constitution, devising a system as a way to temper.
Remember, we are a democratic republic.
We are not a democracy.
It's it was designed specifically to temper direct democracy, democracy, preserve stability during and after contentious elections, and guarantee that smaller states, less populous rural areas, that they have a voice in choosing the nation's leaders.
In other words, that presidents are not chosen only by big liberal cities.
I'm sure they foresaw that that would happen, you know, could foresee that that would happen at some point.
And, you know, the electoral, you know, people with different appeals outlived its usefulness.
Of course, because they want New York, California, New Jersey, and Illinois to decide how the country's gonna work.
Well, first of all, how have they managed those four states alone?
They're all unmitigated, high taxed, highly regulated disasters, which liberals want to impose on the rest of the country.
It has served this country well, the electoral college system, for you know, more than two centuries.
And the system also, if you really look at it, helps produce candidates with national appeal, ensures that all states, all regions in the United States, have a say in who leads the nation.
You know, but you know, it is, you know, so well, it's undemocratic, or it should be a direct vote.
Well, that's not the what this worked so well for all these years.
You know, four years after the uh uh American revolution ended, 1787, um, you had people holding the convention, the constitutional convention, and to revise the Articles of Confederation, which was the initial founding document of the federal government of the United States.
Delegates to the convention decided to scrap the articles, draft what became the U.S. Constitution.
And among the many debates and disputes at the convention was how to create a system that would maintain a proper balance between the federal government and numerous state governments, as well as the states themselves.
And you had the delegates obviously arguing over how the new nation would elect a leader, the president.
Some wanted Congress to make the choice, some wanted state governors to make the choice, or state legislatures to elect the president.
Others wanted uh warned that concentrating such power in the hands of too few would encourage political corruption.
And some delegates proposed a direct popular vote, though that idea faced opposition in part because holding nationwide elections in a time of limited communication transportation seemed logically challenging.
And others also saw it as well, that would mean only the big cities got to decide.
Um others feared that this quote direct democracy on large scale, that the general public would play a moderate role in selecting the president.
One of the skeptics was James Madison himself, delegate from Virginia, later a president, the far fourth president.
He created a series of essays, 1787 and 1788, promoting ratification of the Constitution.
Writing that about pure democracies have been spectacles of turbulence and contention, have been found uh incompatible with personal security and the rights of property, and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
And that's where they were at the time.
Yeah, Alexander Hamilton later wrote the Federalist Papers.
And it was desirable the sense of the people should operate and the choice of president, but it was equally desirable that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the to their station.
Having electors rather than, you know, make the final choice, he stated, affords a moral certainty that the office of president will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.
And it goes on from there.
But it is the system that has, you know, been designed and has provided this and served this country well.
It is, you know, providing, you know, for every voice in America from every region of America, that people with different needs, lifestyles, et cetera, be a part of the system.
But, you know, let's change that.
Let's just add another hundred, if we can, uh, people to the Supreme Court.
That'll get us to a liberal Supreme Court.
And again, the difference between this modern extreme radical Democratic Socialist Party and Democrats of old is they weren't, number one, this radical.
And number two, those that were were more moderate in speaking publicly about what they really believed.
You know, by the way, the greatest scandal of FDR's presidency was his attempt to pack the court.
You know, remember, FDR's attempt, You know, to pack the Supreme Court was the greatest scandal of his 13 years as president.
Remember, he served three full terms as president, died in office during uh the first year of his fourth term.
That's not why why we now have the 22nd amendment limiting a president to two terms.
You know, what you learn about FDR and his court packing scheme and what it did to the country back in 1937, it's stunning the way today's Democrats are now, you know, just proposing another court packing scheme, like it was no more serious than passing a pork barrel spending bill.
Roosevelt tried to do this 82 years ago.
Turned out the entire country, you know, went upside down.
People were at each other's throats.
Critics widely saw it as an attempted judicial coup.
On the other side, Roosevelt supporters thought the entire future of his New Deal was at stake.
You go back and check the history of this, the episode on the the website of the Smithsonian, which is where I found this, not exactly an alt-right news site.
And I think before the Democrats decide to go down this road, they might remind themselves what happened the last time somebody tried to do this, because in their report, FDR's 1937 attempt to pack the court, Roosevelt's Supreme Court plan touched off the greatest struggle in our history among the three branches of government.
Also triggered the most intense debate about constitutional issues since the earliest weeks of the republic.
For a hundred and sixty-eight days, the country was mesmerized by the controversy, dominating all of the headlines all across the country.
And members of Congress were so deluged by mail that they could not read most of it, let alone respond.
Senator Johnson of California at the time noted, I received some hundreds of letters a day, all on the court, sometimes some thousands.
And the same thing with the New York senator.
30,000 letters, telegrams, begged his constituents, begged by his constituents to desist.
And uh, or he begged his constituents to stop.
Both sides believed the future of the country was at stake.
Anyway, in the days following, you know, pretty much no legislator liked FDR's scheme.
Democratic senators thought they could not justify this to their constituents.
Following this 1936 election, FDR put the final touches on this audacious plan, and you know, there's a lot of dissent.
Roosevelt kept congressional leaders, his cabinet, American people in the dark.
And uh on January 24th, 1937, the editor of the Journal of the United States Law Week declared it was plain that he does not at the present time have in mind any legislation directed at the court.
The Supreme Court itself had no inkling was afoot, and three days later, Roosevelt shocked Congress as advisors in the country and unleashed a thunderbolt, asking Congress to empower him to appoint additional an additional justice for any member of the court over age 70 who didn't retire.
And he sought to name as many as six additional Supreme Court justices, as well as 44 judges to lower federal courts.
Anyway, the court would have uh would spring their own surprise, etc.
etc.
It just threw the country in a cat.
What they want is a power.
This is a power grab.
It's amazing that millennials in a poll now think that campus reform poll, Ocasio Cortez, not Pelosi's in charge.
By the way, a roar, Beto Bozo, Robert Francis admits he eats dirt for its regenerative powers.
I kid you not, Washington Post.
You know, whatever post-defeat sadness his wife felt, she was able to kick it quickly.
She's always been the more stable one.
Beto, on the other hand, is more prone to highs and lows, and he was in a funk, and in January he hit the road, much as a father had done before him and drew energy from the people he met.
One stop in New Mexico, eating New Mexican dirt, said to have regenerative powers.
Oh my gosh.
People are gonna vote for him for president.
Kristen Gillibram wants to pay illegals, Social Security benefits.
Like, this is the new Democratic Party.
You have this Democratic candidate, never even heard of this guy.
Andrew Yang is saying the federal government will punish media companies for the spread of misinformation if he wins in 2020.
Penalties for persistent and destructive misstatements that undermine public discourse.
Oh boy.
Isn't that what Putin just did in Russia?
He wants to introduce both a means to investigate and punish those who are seeking to misinform the American public.
Forget about freedom of the press.
My show will be dead, done, and forever gone.
I think he also wants to give a thousand dollars to every single American, too.
Universal income, he calls it.
He says it can curb the racism of his white nationalist fans.
Seriously, wants to give a thousand dollars.
And to every single person, every month, I think.
A universal basic income is a policy where every citizen in a country gets a certain amount of money, free and clear, to do whatever they want.
So my plan, the freedom dividend, would give every American adult a thousand dollars a month, twelve thousand dollars a year starting at age 18.
This would create millions of jobs around the country and would allow families and individuals to help manage uh this historic transition that we're in in terms of technology transforming uh the labor force.
All right, we're gonna have more on this throughout the day and night.
This is the challenge of our lifetime.
If we don't stop this, you know what happens.
Country you grew up in that you know that you love is gone.
This is not the United States of America anymore.
This now becomes very quickly a disintegrating decline of uh of a nation.
There's no good that's going to come out of this if they're successful.
That's why elections matter, your votes matter.
All right, glad you're with us, hour two Sean Hannity show, toll-free.
It's 800-941.
Sean, if you want to be a part of the uh program, um, this is a pretty fascinating column.
You know, we've been exposing the deep state.
You know that the Mueller report we keep hearing might be coming any day now.
The latest rumor is tomorrow, if not tomorrow, Friday.
Um, we know the attorney general, William Barr, is not going to, the minute he receives it, say here.
He has the sole discretion of whether or not some or all of it becomes public.
Nobody else.
And that was put in place after the Clinton impeachment because that's what Democrats wanted.
Now they're all demanding the opposite.
When it's convenient for them, the president, interestingly, today had said, let it out.
I want the people to see it.
But believe it or not, that's not even his decision.
We have discovered with the new uh depositions and the testimonies given, closed doors by the likes of Bruce Orr and Page and Strzok and John McCain's aid.
We've learned a lot of new details.
We learned that, for example, we hadn't known that there was a nine-month investigation right after the Clinton exoneration, which was written well before they ever looked into it.
We learned that they spent nine months looking into Donald Trump and the accusation of Trump Russia collusion.
And both struck and page of all people said they found no evidence whatsoever.
We have two congressional investigations found the same thing.
No evidence Trump Russia collusion.
Any way, shape, manner, or form.
The idea of firing Comey as obstruction, that's absurd too.
Comey himself acknowledged, and it's true, that the president has the authority to fire any FBI director for any reason or no reason.
So there's no there either.
We see that Robert Mueller then spent what?
Now another two plus years investigating the same issue as everybody else.
Wouldn't expect that all of a sudden Robert Mueller found evidence of Trump Russia collusion.
We have Russian bot companies that have been indicted.
They will never be brought to trial, never be extra extradited to the United States.
Russian intelligence figures that'll never be sent to the United States.
We also know that the general counsel, the top lawyer at the FBI under Comey, thought that Hillary Clinton should be indicted.
We also learned that in fact the dossier, Bruce Orr, warned everybody.
Hillary paid for it.
It's not verified, it's not corroborated.
And in fact, uh was built by somebody who hates Donald Trump.
We knew also it could not ever be verified because we know that the author of the dossier, Christopher Steele himself has said he can't verify it.
He doesn't know if it's true.
It's raw intelligence, 50-50, who knows.
So the FBI can't verify something that its own author can't verify.
We also learned this week that in fact Christopher Steele used commentary from anonymous sources on a CNN website.
In other words, keyboard warriors.
That became part of his dossier.
Just random people printing, putting up things.
Can't verify that either.
And we know that after everybody was warned of the nature of the dossier, who paid for it, and that it wasn't verified, and that Steele hated Trump, that it was still used as the bulk of information to acquire a Pfizer warrant in their application.
They never told the Pfizer court Hillary paid for it.
They affirmed the truthfulness of it by the very nature of filing it.
James Comey signed off on it in that particular case.
The same James Comey.
This is October 2016.
They were warned in August of 2016.
And then in January 2017, when Comey went to Trump Tower to see President Elect Trump and inform him of the existence of the dossier, he said it's salacious, but it's unverified.
Not what he told the Pfizer court in October of 2016.
We also know now what the insurance policy was to use this entire system to bludgeon Trump with a false narrative bought and paid for by Hillary that nobody could ever verify anyway, which asks the question and renders the question why didn't Mueller find any interest in these Russian lies being used by top people,
the Department of Justice and FBI to prevent one person from being elected president after they rigged an investigation into the same person who did violate uh our laws, commit felonies, and obstruct justice.
And then it gets even worse than that.
Now we're finding out through the testimony, closed door testimony of Paige and Strzok that it wasn't even the FBI in total control.
That Loretta Lynch, the one that met just days before the decision on his wife, met with Bill Clinton and a tarmac to talk about grandchildren for 45 minutes, not thinking anyone would ever see them.
Well, we know that happened.
We know that the same Loretta Lynch said to Comey, who said, well, as it relates to the Clinton investigation, stared at him and said it's not an investigation, it is a matter.
Melissa Page and Peter Strzok confirming that all decisions were being made by the FBI, uh, by the attorney general's office.
Well, that raises the question, why?
Why was Loretta Lynch running the investigation?
Every aspect of it, the FBI, they said couldn't do anything without the Attorney General and Department of Justice's permission.
Why was she running it all?
And then it raises even more questions.
Well, what did her boss Barack Obama know?
And when did he know it?
And why, in fact, did Hillary Clinton when she finally was interviewed, even though her exoneration was written months later and they months earlier in May of 2016, she wasn't interviewed till July of 2016.
Why was she allowed to have two individuals, Cheryl Mills and another person sitting next to her?
That would be highly inappropriate and very unusual.
Why was all of this taken out of the hands of the FBI field agents?
Why did the FBI upper echelon take on that particular investigation?
And why did Loretta Lynch have control over them even at that point?
Because they had a vest vested interest in one person be elected over another.
And even though the guy that did the interview look had a was thought Trump was loathsome, thought Hillary should win 100 million to none, and also believed uh that in that particular case that she if they needed an insurance policy and changed the standard from gross negligence to extreme carelessness to get Hillary out of legal jeopardy.
Why wasn't that investigated?
Russian lies to influence an election.
Now John Solomon of the Hill has a brand new report out today how the Ukrainian process or Ukrainian prosecutor in an interview exclusively with John has opened a probe into the attempts by Ukrainians to interfere in the 2016 presidential election to help Hillary Clinton.
Is this now going to be as big a deal?
John Solomon, welcome back.
Thank you.
Good to be with you.
And uh I think you queued that up just right, uh Sean.
There there is evidence and and compelling evidence, not just uh you Ukrainian style evidence, compelling evidence that officials in Ukraine, in fact, the uh law enforcement agency called Nabu that works directly with the U.S. Embassy on a regular basis, knowingly and willfully leaked the Paul Manafort financial records in the summer of 2016 to the U.S. media in an effort to help Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump.
And uh let me tell you what that evidence is.
First, we have the prosecutor general, the attorney general of uh Ukraine on our show today, and he says emphatically, I've opened a criminal investigation because I believe that this was an illicit and illegal effort by Ukrainian officials, law enforcement officials, the FBI equivalent in Ukraine to try to tamper in the American election.
But their evidence is very compelling.
First, there is a secret court ruling that's now been unsealed in which uh a court reviewing all the available evidence in Ukraine has concluded that a senior law enforcement official in um Ukraine, someone who frequented the U.S. Embassy in Kiev regularly, uh, was involved in trying to influence the election by releasing the Manafort documents and uh leaking them to U.S. media.
And then there is now a audio tape released by a member of Parliament, uh in which a law enforcement official in that same bureau, the NABU, the FBI of Ukraine, is quoted as saying, I did it because I wanted Hillary Clinton to lose uh win and Donald Trump to lose.
So have you heard the audio tape?
I have not.
No, I've I've seen the transcripts of it in the Ukrainian press.
And I I had the uh Ukrainian prosecutor himself describe what's on the tape since he's heard it and listened to it.
But it was enough for him to open up a a formal criminal probe of his own country, of his own law enforcement apparatus because of the concerns that it it raises.
And uh so we've spent two years on Russia collusion.
I think Robert Mueller will come out and conclude there was no collusion and that there's not enough evidence to support the.
Why do you think Robert Mueller will do that?
And what makes you believe that?
It's it's the reporting I've done.
It's what what I've learned from witnesses, what I've learned from law enforcement sources, and what we now know in the public, right?
We know that when Richard Burr came out and said our committee has no evidence of it, he cleared that statement with Robert Mueller by his own admission.
Robert Muller would not let him go out and say that if Robert Mueller had evidence to the contrary.
We we know from from the millions of pages of documents for that have now been uh reviewed by two separate intelligence committees, there's no evidence.
There's no chance that Congress is given no evidence and Robert Mueller suddenly has the evidence.
The apparatus of intelligence community is to inform Congress whenever there's evidence of such collusion.
So uh my source reporting, the public knowledge of what we know, the base of documents that we now know, all point to this conclusion.
And and you know, we're gonna have to wait and see uh when the fat lady sings and the button is sent on the final report will really know, but I think you're on a daily basis now seeing significant signs that Bob Mueller is wrapping up, and he's gonna wrap up with a finding of no collusion and you don't think that there's gonna be innuendo and you know it's gonna be written in a way I mean look at the team he's hired.
Why would that team all of a sudden not write something horrible about Donald Trump?
Listen, uh who uh we'll have to wait and see.
I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt.
We're at the end line, right?
Let's see what comes out.
I have a funny feeling that many people who are had heartburn about Robert Mueller's report are going to feel a lot better about it when they see the factual basis for it.
Okay, you're a great reporter.
I'm gonna dig in here a little bit.
Why uh well you are.
I mean, uh you have done amazing work.
Uh a lot of what I just mentioned, you've been digging at for two years and along with a lot of other people.
You've been in the forefront of this investigation, and um Robert Muller didn't care at all about Hillary Clinton's bought and paid for dossier.
Why?
If that was his mandate to look at interference, especially from Russia, how does he ignore that?
I think he I think he ignores the dossier for another reason.
I think he concludes Very early on, it is a bad piece of evidence.
I'm gonna tell you something that I know I haven't had a chance to really write.
Around the time Robert Mueller gets appointed, there is a spreadsheet that was created by the FBI that goes through all the allegations in in steel in over nine, ten months, what they had confirmed, what they hadn't confirmed, and what they had disproven.
And I can tell you that what they hadn't confirmed and what they had disproven far outweighed the few things that they had confirmed in the dossier.
Then how could it have been used as the bulk of information for the Pfizer Mars?
That that predates, remember that predates Robert Mueller, but I I think there is a tremendous great question of FISA abuse about how that fight.
He was appointed by a guy that signed the final dossier.
That's a year later.
Nine months later.
But Mahler never signs the dossier, and uh we know from the public testimony that Rod Rosenstein pursued that dossier with the FBI without Mueller signing on to it.
Mueller did not sign on to the fourth dossier.
He's not a signatory to it.
And remember, he's just getting staffed up at that moment.
He's only a few weeks into the investigation.
But I encourage everybody to go back and take a look at the um text messages of uh Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in June and July.
They are frustrated and angry and mad and confused because Robert Mueller doesn't want to talk to them anymore.
He's not interested in them.
And this is before their sex messages come out.
This is in the point where he's just staffing up.
Stay right there.
I want to ask you more about this when we get back on the other side.
Um as we roll along, huge-breaking story.
John Solomon will have more on Hannity tonight, nine Eastern.
John will be joining us among others.
So the Ukrainians now we have a tape, an audio tape.
They want to influence the election of 2016 in favor of Hillary.
Well, we first should have listened to Devin Nunez in 2014, because he warned us all that the Russians would do this.
Nobody listens, but and we've been hacked for 50 years as a country, and we don't have a defense system yet, which is also ridiculous.
Um I want to go back to Mueller.
And we'll put your story up on Hannity.com.
I know we tweeted it out earlier.
Thank you.
I want to go back to this Mueller thing.
You have sources in on the Mueller team.
Uh let's say I have a lot of good sources that understand what's going on in town.
I I don't like to be that specific, but uh why would we believe that this team that has done nothing but hire the worst people that hate Trump, like Weissman, who was at Hillary's victory party, or Genie Ray that, you know, was Clinton's attorney.
And the minute we have left, why would you really believe this?
That it's that's the one.
Well, again, I I listen, I'm not in the game of belief.
I'm in the game of trying to report facts and what people are telling me.
And I'll tell you something that someone told me very close to Bob Mueller very early on.
I mean, this is before anyone coined the turn 17 angry democrats working for Bob Mueller, right?
They said to me Bob Mueller is gonna have a difficult uh situation because here's what's happened.
Struck Page, McCabe, Rosenstein, the entire bureaucracy of the law enforcement by using leaks, created the impression that there was this overwhelming uh two other people in Brennan and Clapper and um and Schiff and Warner, created this unbelievable hysteria that there is absolute Watergate style Russia collusion.
And then Bob Mueller comes in, accepts the job, and the guy handing him the file, the now fired James Comey says, I got bad news for you.
Everybody thinks there's collusion, but there's no collusion.
We know Comey told them that because Comey then went to the hill a few days later and said the same thing to Chuck Grassley.
But he also signed off on the first warrant.
In the era of climate change, which most models show will produce more and more extreme weather events.
And the dawning awareness for what that means for every single life on the planet, every industry, every home and hearth on earth is driving climate to the very top of the 2020 agenda and leading to a massive global moment of protest.
Protests like the school walkout across the nation and the world that happened last week.
And how we respond to the climate crisis is the central issue and central debate of our time.
And we are pleased to announce a special event to talk about the major new policy proposal that has reshaped the American political discussion, the Green New Deal.
We're gonna be hosting an hour-long primetime special about the urgent need to meet the climate crisis head on with the freshman Congresswoman who introduced the Green New Deal resolution, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and we're gonna do it in our shared home borough of the Bronx.
Question is on the Green New Deal.
Uh, and by extension, if you don't mind, I'll take The spirit of the question, um, we face catastrophe and crisis on this planet, even if we were to stop emitting carbon today, right now, at this moment.
We know that the storms that we saw in Texas, Harvey, which don't the landfall record amount of rain on the United States of America, as long as we've been keeping records to claim the lives of too many of our fellow Americans, flooded people literally out of their homes and businesses.
Storms like Harvey are only going to become more frequent and more severe and more devastating, and ultimately they'll compromise the ability to live in a city like Houston, Texas.
Let us all be well aware that life is going to be a lot tougher for the generations that follow us, no matter what we do.
It is only a matter of degrees.
And along this current trajectory, there will be people who can no longer live in the cities that they call home today.
There is food grown in this country that will no longer prosper in these soils.
There's gonna be massive migration of tens or hundreds of millions of people from countries that are literally uninhabitable or underwater, that are above the sea right now.
This is our final chance.
The scientists are absolutely unanimous on this, that we have no more than 12 years to take incredibly bold action on this crisis.
So some will criticize the Green New Deal for being too bold or being unmanageable.
But I tell you what, I haven't seen anything better that addresses this singular crisis that we face, a crisis that could at its worst lead to extinction.
All right, that of course, uh Robert Francis Beto Bozo O'Rourke, and of course, climate, you know, shaming, fearing, doom, gloom predictions the earth is going to uh burn up as we've been hearing for years.
Well, five years, uh there won't be any more snow on Mount Kilimajaro, or whatever it was that Al Gore predicted, or that the ice caps will be totally melted by now.
Now remember, this all started out in the 70s, a coming ice age.
That's what time and newsweek and and the left were telling us then.
And we had to protect the planet because of the the cooling effect that was gonna happen all over the earth.
Then it evolved into global warming.
And you had a few years of record cold, and so that narrative didn't work out that well, so they just they came up generically with climate change.
Yeah, the climate changes.
We have four seasons.
Yeah, there's an ebb and flow to the Earth's temperature, always has been, as far as we can see.
But it's not the 99.9% consensus of Al Gore.
But to create the urgency that they think we need to advance their socialist policies, they now want you to believe that in 12 years we're doomed.
But they made predictions about 10 years and five years and 12 years numerous times, those dates have come and they have gone, and no doom and no gloom.
And the hope is is that you begin to fundamentally agree with them that this urgency must cause us to alter, shift, and change our way of life.
Because the predicate of all of this is that human beings, capitalism in particular, are at fault here.
That man is literally raping and pillaging the planet for profit.
That's what they believe.
That's what what do you think all the tree-cutting battles have been about?
The spotted owl battles have been about.
It's that, you know, man, their use of fossil fuels that have advanced mankind into a lifestyle of luxury, ease, and convenience that we all want, or at least most of us,
that have changed and altered the course of human existence, that have uh created wealth and uh and a system of wealth where even the poorest of Americans can have a car and shelter and a shower and a bath and be able to cook and a stove and a refrigerator and our freezer and a big screen TV and usually a cell phone and a microwave, and and some of the other niceties of life.
Um that is the system that they think it needs to be changed.
The idea that we're gonna get rid of oil and gas in 10 years, but the planet's over in 12, and then of course, we're gonna get rid of the combustion engine.
We'll have plug-in centers now built all over the country.
The idea that we will get rid of planes and cows because of cows, flatulence CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.
I mean, this is this is all part of a political agenda.
And that every everything will be guaranteed now.
How we were going to build high speed trains.
Planes will be gone.
They haven't described yet how we'll make trips to Europe.
I guess maybe sailboats.
Maybe we'll have little individual sailboats.
Maybe we'll have big sailboats.
How long is that going to take to get to Europe?
Maybe they're going to build a high-speed train.
Are they going to build it on top of the pond or below the pond?
How do we get to Asia?
How do we get to New Zealand and Australia?
Uh what happens to goods and services that are traded all around the world?
How is that gonna be transported?
Anyway, joining us now to discuss this, Haley McEnany, National Press Secretary for the Trump 2020 campaign, Jeff Lord.
Uh author of the uh soon to be coming out book, upcoming books, Swamp Wars, Donald Trump and the New American Populism versus the old order.
By the way, both survivors of fake news CNN.
Uh welcome both of you to the uh program.
Jeff, you know, this is something you and I have been through this battle over the years.
Explain the connection between the new Green Deal, socialism, the political agenda, and the evils of capitalism that fundamentally are driving this movement.
In one word, Sean, it's control.
If you look at the assaults on capitalism that you've discussed, the whole Green New Deal business, climate change, and then move on to other things like eliminating the electoral college or packing the Supreme Court or the assaults on Fox News and various anchors, on and on and on goes this list.
And what it's really all about is getting power, total control for the American left.
And in this case that you've been discussing here in detail, they're gonna use climate change as the approach.
But they've also been using, as you have detailed, day in and day out for two years, the use of the FBI and the CIA to go after Donald Trump and and uh sabotage the Trump campaign and then the Trump presidency.
It is all part and parcel of the same thing.
And it's just one last thing.
Every time I hear these things about the the Green New Deal and climate change, I think of the president at CPAC the other week, and you know, just in a few sentences he nailed it when he said, Honey, is the wind blowing?
I want to watch television.
Well, look, you know, Cayley, I think at the end of the day that if you really look at the predictions that have been made in the past, how wrong, how often they've been.
Now, let me be very clear here.
When you think of the timing about this, Donald Trump by removing burdensome regulation now has made America for the first time in 70 years not only energy independent, but we are now a net exporter, soon to be the largest net exporter of energy, oil, natural gas in the entire world.
That's good for not only for Americans.
We have two pipelines in that are being built, the Keystone Pipeline, the Dakota pipeline.
We have Anmour now is open.
We now have allowed drilling and natural gas production in many states that are producing unprecedented amounts of wealth, jobs, and energy.
You know, we're on the verge now with all these resources that we have of becoming one of the wealthiest people on the face of this earth, except that is there is this political movement that would stop it dead in its tracks, and that's problematic if you care about people.
Right.
That's exactly right, Sean.
You know, we are on pace that we've actually surpassed Russia and Saudi Arabia being the number one largest producer of crude oil.
And that's because of President Trump.
Uh, and it's because of him that we finally have uh at least some degree of energy independence.
And you know, meanwhile, Sean, you look over to the other side, and and Jeff says it's about control with the Democrats, he's exactly right.
It's also about hypocrisy.
You know, the world can end in 12 years, and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Beto O'Rourke are still taking airplanes and cars, and yet warning us the world is going to end in a decade.
It's the same kind of outright fraud we saw from the likes of Al Gore, who left his cars idling for an hour long speech on climate change, predicting the end of the world, while he leaves his cars running for that entire hour.
So it's hypocrisy, it's a while you have a president achieving.
And listen, we caught Al Gore getting off his Gulf Stream one day, which seats around fifteen people.
It was just him and his wife, and it was an older model that that burned more uh jet fuel and put more emissions into the air than probably any modern jet that carries four hundred people.
So uh it's interesting that you know, do as I say, but not as I do, and then we have the images of Al Gore's backyard, which was like a a toxic dump, what it looked like to me in Tennessee.
Oh, Limousine awaiting him and Tipper at the time when he got off the plane.
But that's the same with all of these liberals.
You know, for example, Ocasio Cortez, she doesn't take the Acela, which I've taken many times in my life between New York and Washington, DC, which is an Amtrak train.
She prefers to take the Delta Shuttle.
Um, so she uses the plane that we're not supposed to be using uh to go there or to go hang out with all our liberal friends down in Texas for Liberal Fest uh 2019.
All she had to do with that trip to to Austin, it's one simple word Skype.
Just sit in her Washington office, look into the computer, and she's in Austin, Texas.
But no, she had to get on a plane and fly.
The thing is, you know, she's got about a hundred well, I'll get to this on the other side of this.
And as we continue, uh with Kaylee McEnaney, National Press Secretary, Trump 2020 campaign, Jeff Lord, his new book coming out.
When is your book coming out?
Swamp Wars, Donald Trump and the new May 28th.
May 28th.
Oh, sooner than I thought.
That's awesome.
All right, so Kaylee, you know, it's not just Ocasio Cortez.
You know, we sent uh we sent we did a survey, I think it was down in Washington.
Who's the leader of the Democratic Party?
Nancy Pelosi or Ocasio Cortez.
It wasn't even close.
Everyone picked Ocasio Cortez.
So she's like the leader now of of not only this movement, but the Democrats in Congress.
Oh, there's simply no doubt.
She puts out a Green New Deal, one that Dick Durbin picks up, Democratic Senator, and says, What what is this thing?
She puts it out, and you have every single 2020 contencing it.
Even Amy Clogashar saying, Well, I embrace it in principle because they can't afford not to.
Make no mistake, this is a ninety-three trillion dollar mess that eliminates cows and airplanes, meanwhile, China still emits the most CO2 of anyone across the globe.
Uh, but AOC rules the party, and the Democratic 2020 contenders fall right in line.
Well, then and Jeff, this is it now.
The the 2020 candidates are adopting this, and if they don't adopt it, like let's say, you know, crazy, you know, quirky Uncle Joe Biden, he's kind of creepy at times too, but uh if he starts, he gets in the race, I don't even think he's gonna be able to run away from most of this, although he's gonna have to run on his and Obama's record, which was a fail record that nobody seems to want to talk about.
And he's gonna have to run on some of his his extreme statements that he's made about, you know, well, you can't work at a 7 Eleven or a Duncan Donuts without a slight Indian accent, or Obama being, well, it's storybook, man, he's clean and he's articulate, and uh some other things and positions he's taken, like on busing and segregation, etc.
etc.
Right, right.
That's right.
And I can tell you as the person in the White House staff in 1987 who outed Joe Biden for plagiarizing from Robert Kennedy, that may come back to haunt him as well.
Uh you know, and the interesting thing is because here because you've got all of these people uh that like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and these others stampeding to the left, and Joe Biden, whatever else you want to say about him.
I mean, he he is the old fashion wing of the Democratic Party.
They're gonna come for him.
Uh uh, you know, being Obama's vice president isn't gonna cut it with these people.
These people are now to the imaginably, unimaginably to the left of Obama.
And they are gonna come for good old Uncle Joe and and carve him up, I think, politically.
I think he's in for a much rougher ride than he thinks.
And I'm not even certain he's gonna get in.
I think he's gonna look at this field and look at the success of Trump and you know, people saying, well, he connects with the average Joe.
Um no, I don't think Joe does, uh, especially when you dig down deep into his positions.
I think he's out of touch as evidenced by.
Um, you know, what we saw in the Obama years, but all right, thank you, Cayley.
Thank you, Jeff Lord.
Jeff, looking forward to your book in May, 800 941 Sean Tollfree telephone number.
When we come back, Bill O'Reilly checks in on the issues of the day, Ted Koppel's statement, and much much more.
I'm terribly concerned that when you talk about the New York Times these days, when you talk about the Washington Post instance, we're not talking about the New York Times of 50 years ago.
We are not talking about the Washington Post of 50 years ago.
We're talking about organizations that I believe have in fact decided as organizations that Donald J. Trump is bad for the United States.
We have things appearing on the front page of the New York Times right now that never would have appeared 50 years ago.
Analysis, commentary on the front page.
I remember sitting at the breakfast table with my wife during the campaign after the excess Hollywood tape came out and the New York Times, and I will I will not offend any of you here by using the language, but you know exactly what words were used.
And they were spelled out on the front page of the New York Times.
I turned to my wife and I said the Times is absolutely committed to making sure that this guy does not get elected.
So his perception that the establishment press is out to get him doesn't mean the great journalism is not being done.
It is.
But the notion that most of us look upon Donald Trump as being an absolute fiasco, he's not mistaken in that perception, and he's not mistaken when so many of the liberal media, for example, describe themselves as belonging to the resistance.
What does that mean?
That's not that's not said by people who consider themselves reporters, objective reporters, facts.
That's the kind of language that's used by people who genuinely believe, and rather suspect with some justification that Donald Trump is bad for the United States.
And the better, you know, the sooner he's out of office, the better they will like it.
Whether that happens by virtue of indictment, impeachment, or election, we'll see.
All right, News Roundup Information Overload Hour.
That was Ted Koppel making some really profound and truthful comments about the Washington Post and the New York Times.
But it's also the same guy that used edited fake news when he interviewed me for his Sunday morning show on CBS for over an hour and said I'm bad for America, and only cut out a minute and seven seconds of an hour interview.
We have to give some credit to the American people that they're somewhat intelligent and that they know the difference between an opinion show and a news show.
Yeah.
You're not you're cynical.
Look at that.
I am cynical because uh, you know you think we're bad for America?
You think I'm bad for America.
Yeah.
You do.
In the in the long haul, I think you and all these opinion shows Ted.
No, you know why because you're very good at what you do, and because you have you have attracted a significantly more influential.
Let me finish the sentence before you do that.
With all the respect.
You yes, you have you have attracted people who are determined that ideology is more important than facts.
Bill O'Reilly joins us.
Yeah.
He said the same thing about me on the factor.
Did he what?
You're bad for America.
We're both bad for America.
Everybody knows that.
I I I ruined uh the entire journalism industry on television.
Yeah, well, I guess that's why so many people watch you, and by the way, why don't you go back on television?
I'd rather be number two.
It's a lot easier in terms of the BS he deal with.
I can help you with that.
Um just doesn't understand a big picture of what's happening uh with you and me, first of all, because we are commentators with the op-ed page, uh, and the fact that people like us uh should not disturb him at all.
And in this case, he's got 75% of it.
But what Ted Copel doesn't understand is That the reporting today is ordered up by corporations in order to make money.
He doesn't get that.
All right, because when he was on nightline, ABC, they didn't do that.
I worked at ABC News at the same time he was there.
He was there much longer than I was.
But now MSNBC is told the talent, this is the editorial posture you take.
Trump's bad for the country.
And that's what we want, and that's what they get.
Zucker does the same thing at CNN.
Those people are directed to spin negative every story.
Hannah, do you realize that I'm writing a book now?
The United States of Trump, and I have paid researchers.
And the they funnel things to me for the book.
Ninety percent of the research given to me is false.
When I check it out further, false.
And and that's what has been written.
That's what is on the record, going all the way back to Trump's childhood.
This is called fake news, Bill.
But it's more than fake news because it's based on money.
It's based on making money.
Um I could get into it in a microwave, but uh uh I don't think that would benefit you or me.
Let me go back in any secrets.
Um let me go back to one thing, though, that you said, uh, because I I have a slight disagreement with you on one issue.
You we're the opinion page, yes, but I remember Bill O'Reilly doing factor investigations.
In other words, you did journalism.
Uh like, for example, on a breaking news night, uh I'm I'm doing straight journalism.
I'm doing I have hours and hours of coverage TV and radio that I can bruise pr produce.
Um I would argue we did great investigative journalism that the media didn't do vetting Obama now with the deep state, now vetting the 2020 candidates.
Yeah, we do opinion, but sometimes we also do sports.
So I argue as a talk show host when people ask me what I do for a living, and yeah, uh you could say I'm an opinion journalist advocacy journalist, but we're like the whole newspaper.
We do it all.
They're supposed to do one thing.
Coppel was was objecting to me on a style basis.
So I remember when the uh when the Boston Marathon bomb blew up, that my program was the highest rated news program of the night, including all three networks.
So you're absolutely right.
So Americans came to O'Reilly and they come to Hannity now when there is a breaking news story because they believe we're honest, that we're gonna give an honest opinion.
And and here's something that's coming.
If it's true that Robert Mueller does not have anything that rises to a presidential collusion with any foreign nation, then what you've been reporting for the last almost two years will deem out to be true, and then all of the other news organizations like the New York Times, Washington Post, they will be false.
Bill, you know what's sad?
That's where the rubber is going to meet the road when that comes out.
We have the evidence that everything I've been reporting on for two years is true.
You'll be verified then.
Well, you'll be verified, but this is what they're gonna do.
That's actually hostile to President Trump.
But what they'll do is nothing.
What they'll they'll never stop and say we were wrong.
But that doesn't matter.
You can take it and ram it right down their throat, Hannity, and I expect you to do that.
And if you don't do it, I'll do it.
I'll do it too, but you have the bigger platform now.
Well, I um you're glad to fill in on the show.
You just have to work all that out for yourself.
I mean, look, I I'm relishing this.
I mean I really for the good of the nation.
I'm relishing, and I'm glad Trump said today that he wants the whole report in front of the public.
That was a smart thing to say.
Um, but this will be the final nail.
If the if this Mueller report comes out, and you know it's gonna have wording that's provocative and that Trump hired bad people, and that you know all that.
But when it comes down to, well, we didn't find anything for 30 million dollars, then the networks and the big news urban newspapers are finished.
Finished.
And I'm relishing it to the bigger.
I would really like to believe you.
And and look, there's no doubt, Bill, that Donald Trump has forever, forever branded these so-called news organizations, fake news.
That I don't think they ever recover their brand, if you wanted to say they ever had one as a result.
Um that's right, because then that's why they're doing what I'm saying they're doing.
So the New York Times knows it's not going to get one single subscriber that's not a committed liberal.
Nobody gonna subscribe to that newspaper unless you're a committed liberal.
So their coverage is tailored to calibr to committed liberals.
Let's look at Fox News.
You know, they just hired Donna Brazil.
They have me, they have you.
Um you are you were never a committed conservative.
Um I'm a conservat I'm a registered conservative in New York, passionate about my beliefs, but I also can do news and investigative reporting uh more so than what these networks purport to do, which is really sad.
Do you know how many times Barack Obama got asked by the mainstream media?
He started his political career in the home of an unrepentant terrorist, Ayers and Dorn, started his career on 9 1101 in the New York Times of all days.
He's quoted as saying that he wished he did more.
Bomb the Capitol, New York City police headquarters, you know, involved in multiple bombings.
Now, why would the media ignore that issue?
Would they have ignored that issue if it was Trump?
No, no, but you you everybody knows you're not gonna get a well-rounded, well uh examined report on anything.
So the the reporters have basically told, okay, go out and find out this.
But this is always framed in the context of we hate Trump.
So don't come back and say, well, Trump did a good job.
How many times have you heard the economy benefiting the black community and the Hispanic community in America?
How many times have you heard that story?
It it doesn't exist.
All right, is that not a legitimate story to tell next to your column excoriating Trump?
Maybe you want to tell that story that it's the lowest black unemployment rate in history.
Maybe there's a reason for that.
Maybe you want to explore that reason.
Why is it?
Because conservatism works.
Conservative look, limited government, lowered taxes, less burdensome regulation.
It's been tried by three modern day presidents, four of you include the Bush tax cuts.
Uh JFK, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and Donald Trump.
Every single time it's been implemented, it has worked.
Eight years of Obama, you've heard me give his economic statistics.
It was a disaster.
I I said it every day on radio and TV in the 2016 election.
Uh now people want to go to the new green deal and eliminate oil gas cars.
I know, but nobody wants to do cows and airplanes.
But there's a hundred Congressmen and women and many 2020 candidates, Bill.
I I would laugh if it wasn't real.
In a fair media, those people would be excoriated, not celebrated.
Because it's never going to happen.
It's a giant power grab on the far left.
It's like stacking the Supreme Court, okay.
And then in a fair media, you would say, gee, maybe that's not a good idea.
Maybe the whole country would be harmed.
But you never see news analysis like that.
Because it isn't permitted by the corporations that run the national media.
And you know, people used to ask me all the time when I was at Fox about you.
And they'd say, and I don't know, that must have been the most miserable moment in your career, Fox.
Why do I have to answer for Hannity?
No, but you know, when I was doing interviews, but they would say, well, what about Hannity?
Because you know, they point out like I'm not a doctrinaire conservative.
I'm a registered independent, and my main job is to watch all of those in power.
But I would say, I look at him and say, Well, what is your beef?
Hannity has an hour.
He's a conservative.
He's not trying to be anything else but that.
Why isn't he allowed to have an hour?
When you have seven hours on NBC, seven hours on CNN consecutively with liberal people.
Why isn't Hannity allowed to have an hour?
But Billy, there was never an answer.
Look at that.
Look at the other two cable networks today.
And I argue, and you tell me if I'm wrong.
Every second, every minute, every hour of every 24 hour day, every seven-day week, every month, every year.
All it is is hurt Trump, destroy Trump.
That's what they've become.
I mean, if there's a uh not one now, one you talked about record low unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, women in the workplace, youth unemployment.
A huge story if you're a democratic president.
Hey, listen, according to the AP, small business now has an optimistic outlook, thanks to Trump policies for 2019.
Bill O'Reilly joins us.
Is there anything else that anyone could write about you or me that hasn't been said or written?
I mean, at some point I lost whatever chip that I ever cared what people think.
It's gone.
I don't give a rip at all.
You're a better man than I, because when people make up stuff about me and you get mad at me, I just get absolutely furious.
And there's nothing I can do about it.
Uh we could sue under their legal system in old Bailey, but we can't do it here.
Um I don't know what this article is gonna be.
I just know that it's in the mo it's in motion.
And um that might explain some of the things that are happening.
Or it might not.
I don't know.
Well, you know what it is what it is.
All right, Bill O'Reilly, uh, he does his podcast, Bill O'Reilly.com every day, and uh he has his 15 best selling killing series book on history, and uh he's gonna have his book on Trump coming out sometime in the fall with an interview exclusively with Donald Trump, and we appreciate you being with us.
All right, any time, Sean, enjoy it.
I don't mind.
I mean, frankly, I told the House if you want, let him see it.
Again, I say a deputy because of the fact that the attorney general uh didn't have the courage to do it himself.
A deputy that's appointed appoints another man to write a report.
I just won an election with 63 million votes or so.
63 million.
I had 206 to 22 in the electoral college 306 to 223.
And I'm saying to myself, wait a minute.
I just won one of the greatest elections of all time in the history of this country, and even you will admit that.
And now I have somebody writing a report that never got a vote.
It's called the Mueller Report.
So explain that, because my voters don't get it.
And I don't get it.
Now, at the same time, let it come out, let people see it.
That's up to the attorney general.
We have a very good attorney general, he's a very highly respected man, and we'll see what happens.
But it's sort of interesting that a man out of the blue just writes a report.
I got 306 electoral votes against 223.
That's a tremendous victory.
I got 63 million more.
I got 63 million votes.
And now somebody just writes a report.
I think it's ridiculous, but I want to see the report, and you know who wanna see it?
The tens of millions of people that love the fact that we have the greatest economy we've ever had.
I'm going to Ohio right now, they were gonna close the plant.
It's where they make the tanks.
It was gonna be closed, and I stopped them from closing it, and now it's thriving and doing great.
And the people of Ohio, they like Trump because I've done a great job in Ohio.
And I've done a great job all over the country.
That's what the people want to hear.
All right, 25 now till well, 23 now till the top of the hour.
All right, so there's Trump saying, I don't care if Mueller report is made public, I'm making America great again.
And the president saying Muller is conflicted, but let's see what he says, and saying, you know, he talks about an ISIS map and how they're defeated.
You know, I the this idea now that we are gonna have never ending, never ending for the entire Trump presidency, and actually since July of 2015, nonstop, never-ending at all investigation into this president as the president's position.
This can't happen every time.
No good person will ever want to run for president again.
It's not gonna happen.
Now, I thought it was bad when Reagan was president.
I mean, I really did.
It was just wanting to destroy this man.
And then I thought it was really bad when Bush was president.
But this is about as bad as it gets because they wanted to take him down before he got elected, and they tried people that have power, people using opposition uh fake Russian research that she paid for, you know, that should have been indicted, but was literally we have the Department of Justice and the people that liked her in the FBI rigging the investigation.
There was no real investigation.
There was an exoneration long before it started.
And it goes right into Lorena Lynch's office and maybe higher when we get to the end of this.
You know, to think about Robert Mueller's report and to think about Russian interference in an election and to think about, let's see, before the election, you have what, Isikoff, David Korn, The Washington Post, They're all leaking out the contents of the dossier so that people, you know, are hearing that there's all these salacious stories about Donald Trump out there.
That all came out before the election.
You know, BuzzFeed produced it, I guess, in January when Donald Trump was president-elect, and how it becomes the basis of an investigation.
Nine months they investigate Donald Trump Trump Russia collusion.
That's before the appointment of Robert Mueller.
James Comey gets fired.
And by the way, he himself admits he can get fired for any reason or no reason at all.
That he works at the discretion of the president, period.
And then, of course, the appointment of Mueller, and you know, we're coming on what, 700 days, and what do we have?
A bunch of Russian bot companies that will never be prosecuted.
We have Russian intelligence officials that will never be prosecuted.
And then everybody else that is prosecuted is prosecuted for something other than anything to do with Trump Russia collusion.
And nobody, and then we have two committees in Congress, the House Intel Committee and then the Senate Intel Committee have both said after their investigations, no evidence of Trump Russia collusion.
So the FBI concluded such, as per Lisa Page and Peter Strzok's closed door testimony, the House Intel Committee, then the Senate Intel Committee, and all these reports.
And then you have Robert Mueller and all these process crimes that he's he's never would have happened.
These people wouldn't be spending time in jail.
Look, and I'm I advise everybody don't lie in your loan application and pay your taxes.
You know, you shouldn't put yourself in that vulnerable position because if you do, you're gonna you're gonna pay dearly.
But that's what we get at the end of all of this.
And the media's been hyping, you know, this hysteria, this breathless reporting every day now for over two years about this.
You know, tell me how any of this is good for the country.
And now there's no end in sight because now we got what, six to eight congressional committees, and they want to bring back everybody that's already testified.
Everybody.
Okay, what does that mean for those individuals?
Well, if you're working for the government or you worked in the campaign, or you work for the White House or worked in government in any capacity, and you're brought before uh a congressional panel, unless you're just gonna plead the fifth, which you have every right to do, and I wouldn't blame you, especially now that you're going in for the second, third, fourth, fifth time.
Some people have spent 25 hours there in total.
Well, what does that mean for you and your?
That means you got to hire lawyers.
You know what it costs to pay a Washington lawyer, a good one per hour to prepare you for such testimony so that you don't say something stupid or maybe you if you know don't remember something and you try to recollect it and it turns you know, make a recollection turns out to be wrong, then you're facing a lying to Congress charge.
Then you have to pay all those lawyers, probably to the point where you're paying to work in Washington.
You want to know why there's been a high turnover rate in the administration?
I'm sure that's a big part of it.
Who wants to live through that?
Nobody does.
And you have the stress and pressure going before Congress, and all that all they want to do is set you up to say something that maybe they can deem and decide is a lie, maybe not something you just didn't recollect.
They are the they will they are the ones that will determine whether it was a faulty right recollection.
Now, here's a question.
Where were you in August of 2016 on the 19th?
I don't know.
Who is on your show Monday night on Hannity?
I honestly can't answer the question.
I don't know.
It's not how my brain works.
If you ask me about Ronald Reagan's record, I can give it to you chapter and verse.
You ask me about George Bush's record, I can give you chapter and verse.
Ask me about Clinton or Obama's record.
I'll give you chapter and verse.
You know, it's but you know, those kinds there's only so much room in your head.
And then God forbid you you don't recollect something perfectly.
When are they going to put some of these liars in Congress under oath?
Why are they, when they tell lies, why are then they not held accountable?
How is it Hillary's never been held accountable?
Now we know the investigation was rigged.
It's that there's no ambiguity in the case.
None.
We knew, even Lisa Page and Struck, well, Lisa Page in particular said, we knew that the Attorney General's office, the Department of Justice, headed by Obama and Loretta Lynch.
We knew that they were all Democrats.
We knew that they already came to their conclusion.
We knew there'd never be an indictment.
The chief counsel at the FBI, a guy by the name of James Baker, he's the number one lawyer in the FBI.
He he recommended indict Hillary for the espionage act.
Forget about the obstruction side of it.
It was obvious what she did there with the email server scandal was against the law.
And she lied about having classified top secret emails on there when in fact she did.
You know, how how do you justify that Hillary Clinton gets to bring in AIDS when she's finally being interviewed on July 2nd 2016?
One of the two people doing the interviews, Peter Strut that thinks that anyone that votes for Trump is a smelly Walmart voter, and that Hillary should win a hundred million a zero.
And that that Donald Trump's a loathsome human being, among other things.
How's that a fair investigation?
How do you go to a Pfizer court now that we have the Bruce Orr testimony?
And Bruce Orr warned everybody in the DOJ, everybody in the FBI, even warned Robert Mueller's Pitbull, Andrew Weissman, that the dossier was Clinton paid for, that it was not verified and not corroborated, and that Christopher Steele had a hatred of Donald Trump and was well vested in him losing.
Okay, well, then how in August, just a couple of months later, does that become the basis of a Pfizer warrant?
And they don't tell the Pfizer court judge in the application those simple things.
They didn't say that it was Hillary that paid for it.
They said it might have a slight political taint.
That's big difference saying that is lying by omission, fraud by omission.
That should have been put in bold letters, Hillary Clinton's dossier.
That these were Russian lies, not verified.
They're unverifiable.
You know, if somebody in the FBI, well, we did our best.
We verified the dossier.
It would be impossible to verify the dossier because the dossier's author couldn't verify his own dossier.
And now we learn this week that some of the contents of the dossier literally will were pulled out of commentary from a CNN website, not even CNN, which is fake news enough.
Commentators, you know, people in their underwear, keyboard warrior type people.
That some of the information was drawn from there.
Unbelievable.
And these are the times we're living in.
All right, let's get to our busy phones here.
Um let's say hi to Brenton is it Brent is in Nebraska.
Brent, hi, how are you?
Thoughts and prayers go out to Nebraska, Iowa, all of our Midwest friends.
I know you guys have been suffering greatly with this record flooding that's going on, and I know a lot of damage and heartache and pain for a lot of families out there, and we're thinking about you, and and I know that people are gonna step up and the government will generously hopefully be doing the right thing and helping you all out as soon as possible.
I'm sorry about all that.
Oh, yeah, it's been uh tremendous, but I just wanted to thank you for bringing bring to light what's going on out here.
I mean, after five days, you're the first one to actually mention it.
I mean, the mainstream media, they haven't uh they set the local guys.
We haven't heard anything uh across the across the nation.
Oh, that well, I didn't know that, but I mean, why they're not talking about, I don't know.
I remember last time it just so happened, you know, my kids were like 12, 13, whatever years old, and I remember flying, they were playing in Omaha, and I remember flying over Omaha and thinking, wow, nobody's reporting this.
It was uh I mean miles upon it looked like to me what I saw when I flew over New Orleans during Katrina.
That's how bad it was.
Yeah, yeah.
And the bad thing about it is we've had such uh extreme cold temperatures leading up to this point.
The ground's frozen, and you know, there's nowhere for this water to go except you know to try try to travel uh downstream and uh we've just got floods everywhere.
You know, you got three quarters of the state that's just completely underwater.
We've had several roads that have been taken out, dams that have been completely destroyed.
But you know, the bad thing about it is back here, you know, our our country roads or dirt roads, um, they're the ones that get traveled the most uh for the farmers and ranchers, and and uh, you know, you got a high percentage of these is completely uh taken out.
I mean, we're talking it's gonna take years to get these things built back up.
Yeah, I'm really, really sorry.
I did see that some of those dams broke.
Um, you know, we ought to find out, Linda, and maybe put prominently on the website.
I I don't know if I assume Samaritan's purse is there because they're all actually Sean.
We did that yesterday, both locations of where people can donate and find out great to help.
Okay, make sure that uh I give a donation.
I just tell Linda to decide everything.
She decides all that.
It's a wonderful life.
I think she knows my financial advisor better than I do.
Yeah, he is, he really is.
Uh uh, all right.
Um, Brent, um, we have it on our website.
People can donate.
I always donate to Samaran's Purse because I know Franklin Graham and and he's the best to me, and I know that the money goes directly to the people.
I I don't have any problems at all with the Red Cross and any of these or other organizations.
That's just my personal choice.
Um, but uh hopefully too the government will step up.
I hope people have the flood insurance they need and everything else, and we'll keep an eye on it, I promise you.
All right, Hannity, tonight, nine Eastern on the Fox News Channel.
You ever notice, oh, Democrats, they want to change, oh, the electoral college.
Let's get rid of that.
Let's make it the popular vote.
Let's have 16-year-old vote.
Uh, let's change everything possible that we can have an advantage in the election.
Uh, we'll get to that tonight.
Also, John Solomon's story about, yeah, the Ukraine influencing 2016 elections.
Uh, for Hillary, when is that gonna create a special council?
We'll get to that.
Hannity tonight at nine.
We'll see you then back here tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection