Gregg Jarrett, Fox News Legal Analyst and Author of The Russia Hoax, and David Schoen, Criminal Defense & Civil Liberties attorney, discuss the hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee today discussing the Mueller report and the position of the AG. With Mueller’s disgraceful and egregious letter to the Attorney General and today’s ridiculous hearing, there seems to be no end to the democrats madness and obsession over Mueller and his report. The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
You know how much I love my pillow, how much it's changed my life for the better.
Well, I figured it was about time that I let you know about my pillow sheets.
Now, Mike Lindell has a passion to help you get the best sleep of your life.
That's why he has created the new Giza Dream Bed Sheets.
Now, these sheets are made from the world's best cotton, Giza, that's only grown in a very small region where the Sahara Desert, Mediterranean Sea, and the Nile River all meet to create the ideal weather conditions for growing cotton.
These Giza sheets are available in a variety of colors.
They come with Mike's 10-year warranty, 60-day money-back guarantee.
The first night you sleep on these sheets, it's heaven.
You'll never want to sleep on anything else.
Now, right now, you, my listeners, you're going to save 30% and get free shipping when you use the promo code Sean7, S-E-A-N-7, when you go to mypillow.com.
Again, that's promo code Sean7 S-E-A-N-7 at mypillow.com.
All right, buckle up.
It's going to be a busy day.
Write down our toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of this extravaganza 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Before we get to where these hearings have been today, I want to be very, very crystal clear about one thing.
No matter how much they throw a temper tantrum, no matter how much they whine and complain and distort and outright lie, they lost.
They can't handle it.
They lost.
They're trying to revive something that is totally and completely dead.
And their selective moral outrage is about to pretty much blow up politically in their face because based on the Attorney General's testimony today before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Lindsey Graham's committee, and the things that he says are coming, it is now going to go from Operation Crossfire Hurricane to Operation Boomerang.
And this is going to hit them so hard, it will rock their foundation going back generations in their families.
Their great-grandparents or great-great-great-great-grandparents are going to feel the vibrations of how this is going to blow them away.
They have nothing left.
So they rather than just admit that they lost, admit that they lied, admit that they believe something that was not true, and yet it is their candidate that was guilty of many of the things that they're acting like they seem outraged about.
And they know, sort of like, I keep using the example.
This is one of those I believe moments.
This is, oh my God, I believe Kavanaugh.
I mean, I believe the accusers are Kavanaugh.
I believe, I believe, I believe, I believe, I believe, I believe, I believe.
Where are the I believers when it comes to the Democratic lieutenant governor of Virginia?
No, I believers.
They just are quiet.
And on so many other issues, it is the same selective moral outrage.
This is not based on any principle, any guiding principle that they have.
Their understanding of the law, it's not even fundamental.
It's not even basic.
And the fact that these are lawmakers is frankly an embarrassment.
And I think many of them, you know, they can feign outrage all they want and they can act like they're indignant and they can make accusations that are definitely not true, which they're doing.
But at the end of the day, it's going to get them nowhere.
This is not going anywhere by anybody at any time.
I just want to explain.
Let me tell you how this all started before the day today.
We've got plenty of sound.
We got, you know, Senator Hirono said, men need to sit down and shut up, or whatever she said at the time of the Kavanaugh hearings.
It's a you lied, you're a liar, you're, you know, it's just typical, predictable, one-sided partisanship.
But there's a certain more, there's a certain level of rage and intensity that this hearing took on because they themselves have been so deeply embedded in the lie and in the conspiracy.
And what they didn't expect was the Mueller finding.
And it's not that Mueller didn't try, it's not that he didn't put the most biased team of prosecutors and lawyers and investigators around him.
He did, including his pit bull, Andrew Weissman, including Clinton's own attorney on the Clinton Foundation, Genie Ray.
I mean, trust me, if they had it, they would have gone with it.
They wanted to take the president down.
They wanted it with all of their heart, their minds, and their souls.
They wanted this thing over.
Now, let me explain where this all began.
Actually, it started last night, I guess about maybe an hour before Hannity.
We were able to get it all in.
And Washington Post first, Mueller complained that Barr's letter did not capture the context of the Trump probe.
And the headline in the New York Times was: Mueller objected to Barr's description.
Remember the four-page March 24th letter of Russia investigation's findings.
Okay, when you start actually taking the time and reading the body of what it is they're printing, they contradict, as the Attorney General did today, they actually contradict their own headline because they too are embedded in the lie, just like everybody else in the media.
They've all bought into their own narrative, their own worldview, their own truth, but it doesn't have evidence.
And that is that Donald Trump and the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to steal an election.
Unfortunately for them, the FBI's nine-month investigation, quote struck at Page, struck no, they're there.
Page said, Well, no, when we handed it off to Mueller, we had no evidence whatsoever.
Okay, oh boy.
And after now, two plus years, they still have nothing.
And that, and that is not even in dispute with anybody, but that doesn't stop them.
And by the way, their plan B is not to fall on the sword, acknowledge truth wrongdoing, and admit that they had this wrong from the beginning and now focus their attention on serving the country and serving the people that put them in office.
No, now it's never admit you're wrong, double down on stupid, triple down on stupid, and let's go on a fishing expedition and see if we can get Trump's financial records.
Let's empower the IRS now to go after our political adversaries.
Well, that's part of their plan.
Let's begin the process of finding out what Donald Trump, what bank he used when he was six years old.
And let's get every banking statement in his entire life.
And let's now dig deep into the financial records of Donald Trump.
You know, forget about the economy or peace and prosperity of the American people or the forgotten men and women.
You know, I guess thanks to Trump, that's all being fixed without any of their help.
Forget about securing the borders.
You know, there's no crisis at the border.
Walls are immoral as long as Donald Trump's president.
DACA dreamers, they don't matter either if Donald Trump's president.
You know, but unfortunately, when you dig into the New York Times, for example, his big, this big busting headline, Mueller objected to Barr's description of Russia investigation findings and that the special counsel sent this letter.
There's nothing in the letter that verifies what the headline says.
But buried in the article, it contradicts the headline: quote, the special counsel emphasized that nothing in the Attorney General's March 24th letter was inaccurate or misleading.
What part of nothing don't they understand?
All right, so Mueller's going to go up and testify at some point.
He expressed frustration over the lack of context and the resulting media coverage regarding the special counsel's obstruction analysis.
Nothing was inaccurate, nothing was misleading that Barr said in his 24th letter.
Now, just as a matter of law, the Attorney General does not, did not have to give any part of the Mueller report to anybody.
That's all part of the old independent counsel statute that after the Clinton impeachment, the Democrats wanted to get rid of.
They didn't want all of this going out in the public.
But now that it's politically expedient, all the press.
We got to have it all.
We got to have it all.
Well, Congress does have it all, except for one-tenth of 1% that was redacted from members of Congress, about 8% for public consumption, and for the four reasons that were given protect sources, methods, pending cases, etc.
You know, which is the smart thing to do.
So all it is, is the Democratic Party mob and the media mob doing what they do best.
And that is, you know, now going back again into the well in the hopes that they can convince people something happened that didn't happen.
But when Mueller says to Barr, nothing was inaccurate, nothing was misleading, the contents of the article literally, why would that even be a breaking story?
Because they were setting up Barr for a contentious hearing today.
They were doing their part.
They wanted this confrontation today.
They were praying for this confrontation today.
You know, and okay, the summary did not fully capture the Russia report's conclusion.
Well, that was the point.
It was a summary, but he said he was releasing it to the public, which he had no obligation under current law to do, period.
None whatsoever.
And if you really, you know, for those that actually care about the law and equal justice under the law and our Constitution and equal application of our laws, the biggest headline that nobody's going to pick up today is the Attorney General's comments about what he's investigating.
The Inspector General Horowitz is coming out, we think, next week now, with his report on FISA application abuse.
And I believe, predict with it, we're going to see a whole lot of criminal referrals.
Now, even the New York Times and people like Bob Woodward have pulled back a little bit in the sense that they're recognizing and may very well be proven that the Hillary bought and paid for Russian dossier that she bought with funneled money from a law firm that was then funneled to Fusion GPS, which we also learned last night.
Oh, the Obama whatever for America group that he supports, they've been paying Fusion GPS since 2016, almost a million dollars.
Why?
But anyway, then hiring Christopher Steele, then the admonitions, repeated admonitions that Steele hated Trump, that it was unverified.
It couldn't be verified.
Steele doesn't even stand by it.
And in fact, I know there's more stories that there might have been even more collusion and reports that some people are whispering in my ear, we might find out that Steele was in America talking to very specific people, which is going to get interesting.
But more importantly, what we do know is that what was presented to the FISA court was a fraud on the court, a knowing fraud or a conspiracy to commit fraud on the court.
And every person that put their signature to that so they can then spy on the Trump campaign and those that leaked it to David Korn and Isenkoff and the Washington Post to impact the election with Hillary's lies.
Well, what if it was now, as now is being suggested by the New York Times, Russian disinformation she paid for?
Wow, that would be a hell of a boomerang, wouldn't it?
Forget Operation Crossfire Hurricane.
This is Operation Boomerang.
This is the last, you know, rubber political bullet that they've got that they can use to bludgeon Trump.
This is it.
The next that, the next phase in all of this in the days, weeks, and months ahead are going to blow this wide open.
And we're going to get to the truth.
And what they're not going to like in all of this is everything they said was untrue.
These were conspiracy theories.
They spun up a narrative of lies.
And while they were lying, there really was Russian disinformation bought and paid for to impact the 2016 election.
And on top of that, that was the bulk of information that was used to commit a fraud on the FISA court.
So then they can get in and spy on the Trump campaign and all things campaign world Trump and then later president-elect Trump because they had the insurance policy in case he won, you know, just in case they have an insurance policy.
And those people, all of them, all of the people, the names we talk, call me Hillary, Strzok, Paige, McCabe.
You know, then you can add the general Baker Pre-Step.
Then you got Loretta Lynch's involvement.
Now it's getting more interesting by the day as these closed-door testimonies came out that Paige and Strzok say, no, she handled, she made every decision.
That's a problem.
And then it's going to go into, well, what did Obama and Biden know?
That's where it's headed.
That's how wrong they've been.
That's how much they've lied and they can't let it go.
But they've got, don't worry, they have a lot of fishing polls.
They're going to send their polls out in different areas.
Let's look.
Wait a minute.
He had $200 in the bank when he was six.
Where did it come from?
Which is their desperate attempt to destroy a duly elected president.
This is the biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in American history.
And it's all coming out.
Cascading down.
An avalanche of stuff coming.
Hey, this Mother's Day.
Don't try and pull the wool over your mom's eyes.
You know, getting a cheap last-minute gift.
Get ahead of the rush, 1-800Flowers.com.
And they have their truly thoughtful and beautiful bouquets.
Don't settle for anything less than the biggest, brightest bouquets.
1-800 Flowers has amazing offers on beautiful bouquets and arrangements starting at $29.99, guaranteed to make all the moms in your life smile.
And a great way to surprise people that you love.
Now, with an amazing selection of sweets and treats and bouquets, 1-800 Flowers has everything you need.
The perfect Mother's Day gift.
You pick the delivery date.
Let 1-800 Flowers handle the rest.
Order today.
Don't put it off.
Take care of your Mother's Day needs right now.
So to order, beautiful.
Bouquets starting at $29.99.
The perfect Mother's Day gift.
Go to 1-800FLOWERS.com slash Hannity.
Order today, 1-800Flowers.com slash Hannity.
That's 1-800Flowers.com slash Hannity.
The rage continues.
The psychosis, the belief in a lie continues.
The advancement of conspiracy theories continues.
But they've got a backup plan.
Right now it's Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction.
Okay.
Well, the Attorney General is very clear.
Now that they've had their four investigations, he's now moving on.
This issue, whether the left in America, these fake news phonies that know nothing about the law, they want to continue advancing and hanging on, clinging on, you know, building up more false hope in their audiences that they can do what they want.
And if that doesn't work, don't worry.
Adam Schiff is going to try to get Trump on now a financial crime.
We'll go on fishing expedition after expedition.
And this is almost unprecedented that we've ever seen in the country.
Now, Congress has oversight powers and put in the House, they're afraid to take on Bart.
Did you see Bart today?
He's like listening to this nonsense and he said, uh-huh, uh-huh.
Yeah, there was no underlying crime.
And yeah, the president was outspoken.
He did talk about the removal of Mueller conflicts.
There were conflicts, obvious conflicts.
He had been interviewed the day before his appointment and didn't get the FBI job.
Maybe pissed him off.
Also had an issue with Donald Trump on one of his golf clubs.
And by the way, if the Attorney General of the United States and the Deputy Attorney General and the Office of Legal Counsel decide there's no obstruction because there's no underlying crime and there was no intent and everything was said as somebody that knew their innocence, which Mueller confirms, well, now we'll just apply those standards to Hillary and FISA abuse and a lot of people are going to go to jail.
One thing that is not political, it's smoking.
That's about people.
And there are 34 million Americans now that smoke.
But for many, there's not been a clear alternative.
Juul for me has been a game changer.
I watch people all the time.
They go outside in the middle of the freezing winter just to have their smoke.
You don't have to do that anymore because of Juul.
Now, people don't have to worry about the smell on your hands.
Juul was specifically designed by smokers for smokers to be a satisfying alternative.
It's a clean technology.
Juul has no ash, no odor, no mess.
If you're one of those 34 million adults who do smoke, you now know there's an alternative to cigarettes and cigars.
Just go to jewel, j-u-u-l.com slash switchamerica.
That's j-u-u-l dot com slash switchamerica.
Now, this product does contain nicotine and nicotine is an addictive chemical.
But just go to jewel, j-u-u-l dot com slash switchamerica.
Interesting nuggets coming out of today.
Glad you're with us, by the way.
Thank you, Scott Shannon.
25 till the top of the hour, 800-941.
Sean, you want to be a part of the program?
We got a lot of analysis today and a breaking news story with John Solomon coming.
Greg Jarrett, David Shoan, Bill O'Reilly weighs in today.
We'll get to all of it.
You know, Barr saying that Mueller told him three times that the Office of Legal Counsel opinion that, quote, that you can't indict a sitting president was not a factor in Mueller's decision not to bring an obstruction charge.
Well, that puts that false fake news narrative that you've heard since day one to rest.
And Barr was surprised that Mueller, in other words, didn't finish the job.
That's the whole function of the special counsel as prosecutor.
Now, remember, Barr has no obligation to offer any of this publicly.
And Barr said he assumed that in his decision, there was no Office of Legal Counsel opinion.
The government did not have a prosecutable case in this case.
And he said he didn't think that any of the episodes that were described by Mueller as they're so meaningless and so insignificant with no underlying crime stated by somebody that was declaring his innocence for well, well, two and a half years.
The president has not been shy, nor would any innocent person, in my view, be shy in declaring there is their innocence, especially on basically being called a traitor that colluded with Russia to steal an election.
I think, you know, once Trey Gowdy famously says, well, if you're innocent, act like it.
Well, that's how I presume innocent people act.
Although lawyers tell you all the time, I get it.
You got to shut up.
You got to shut up.
You got to show up.
You can't say anything.
Can't say anything.
Can't say anything.
But that's what lawyers do.
They're doing their job.
And if you have a good lawyer, you usually have to take their advice, sadly.
But the president proclaimed his innocence.
One point did question with Don McGann.
Well, is Mueller conflicted?
And I think the answer is obviously yes, considering the day before he was appointed and he had no idea this appointment was coming.
I think the president had every right to ask if he's conflicted.
It's not like the investigation would have stopped.
It just would have been somebody else take over.
That can't be obstruction either.
And under Article 2, if any of these idiots in the Senate on the Democratic side ever cared about what the law says or the Constitution mandates, then they would know that that is not obstruction.
You know, thinking about firing, hoping to fire somebody, wishing they were fired, saying they ought to be fired is not the same thing.
Now, if Mueller found that obstruction, trust me, he would have charged him on obstruction.
You know, he could have said so.
He had the full authority to say so from the get-go.
And the fact, Comey, you know, how does he even list the Comey issue?
It's ridiculous to even be in the Mueller report.
James Comey's own word.
He could be fired for any reason or no reason at all.
He serves at the pleasure of the president bite.
Thank God we now know an awful lot about Comey.
And Comey taking government documents and leaking it through a professor friend of his to the New York Times, which may in and of itself be a crime.
And then the same Comey that signed the first FISA application in October of 2016, just before the election, based on a document that was bought and paid for by Hillary.
And they didn't tell the FISA court judge in the application.
Hillary paid for it, omitting a vital fact, lying by omission, and then, of course, not verifying the dossier and the truthfulness of it.
They didn't verify it in any way, shape, matter, or form.
And now we even know that it's unverifiable because Christopher Steele doesn't stand behind the dossier.
I don't know if any of it's true, maybe 50-50, because he was literally up against the threat of a perjury charge in an interrogatory in Great Britain when he was questioned about it.
And Comey refused to tell the public the truth that Trump was not under investigation.
He signed that October 2016 warrant.
And then, well, Trump wins.
All right, time for the insurance policy.
Anyway, they still have access to all things Trump transition world because the FISA warrant's still in effect.
And then it gets renewed, I believe, in December.
And we have other people signing the other three warrants, the three, you know, FISA warrants.
Each time, you've got to go back to a FISA court.
Each time, the bulk of information was the unverified, uncorroborated, now proven false dossier bought by Hillary Clinton.
And even the New York Times suggesting it might have been Russian disinformation.
How ironic.
This all comes down to Russian disinformation Hillary paid for to influence the election.
So, and then Comey goes right up to Trump Tower in that Trump Tower meeting with then President-elect Trump and says, well, there's this dossier out there.
Now, it's salacious, but it's not verified.
Okay, but that's not what Comey was telling the FISA court a few months earlier in October of 2016.
That meeting in Trump Tower took place January of 2017.
By the way, no obstruction.
Even Mueller's report says so on the firing of Comey.
Comey refused to tell the public the truth about his handling of the Clinton probe.
You know, that is a legitimate reason.
We now know he and Strzok, we know that he leaked government documents, illegal likely, for the sake of starting a special counsel.
He did it.
That was his goal.
That's what he testified to.
We also know that he testified that, yeah, Hillary did have top secret classified information on that secret server.
He just, no prosecutor would say that rises to the level.
That's a lie, too.
And we know that Strzok and Comey or Strzzok on Comey's instructions was writing the exoneration of Hillary in May of 2016 before he interviewed Hillary or 17 other people and also allowed two other people to be in the room, which is unheard of in that type of case.
If you're doing an FBI investigation, it's a real investigation.
You don't get to bring in your BFFs.
And Trump expressed to his counsel, McGahn, that Mueller should be replaced.
He's allowed to by Article 2 anyway.
And he wanted to remove someone who did have conflicts of interest.
And by the way, the president didn't need McCann to do it.
He could have done it himself.
And Barr pointed out as a matter of law, the president under Article 2, he didn't say this, Barr, I'm saying this.
The president has the right to fire the special counsel.
It's not a corrupt, you know, it's not a corrupt purpose.
It can't be obstruction of justice.
And on top of everything, there's no underlying crime.
It's clear that Robert Mueller and the special counsel, no evidence that any American Trump campaign, Donald Trump, colluded with the Russian government, period.
Now, if the president was being falsely accused, as he was, thought the investigation was unfair, it was.
It's not a corrupt purpose to replace the special counsel because it was a witch hunt.
You know, as it relates to trying to get McGahn to maybe perhaps somehow do it himself, well, the evidence shows the president was doing it to correct a false story by the New York Times.
You know, Trump trying to get Sessions to unrecuse himself.
You know, when Sessions recused himself, he cited the wrong law.
Everybody seems to forget that.
As it relates to the Mueller letter, you know, this is where the media just went full on lying.
And this was to set up this ridiculous hearing from earlier today in the circus that ensued thereafter because, you know, they seized on the, on Robert Mueller's letter to William Barr expressing frustration at the Attorney General's initial depiction of the investigation's findings and presented it as evidence of wrongdoing.
Yet much of the anti-Trump left, they seemingly ignored the crucial detail.
This is in the body of both articles in the New York Times and in the case of the Washington Post.
It is in there.
You can read it.
There's now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation, the letter read, according, let's use the Washington Post.
This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the department appointed the special counsel to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.
And then, of course, Maxine Waters calls on Barr to resign.
Schiff rushes to judgment.
He said the news, you know, to undermine the Attorney General, et cetera, et cetera.
Schumer called on Barr to testify.
He did.
Here's what else is in there that they don't want to talk about.
Now, there was a series of phone calls with Barr and Mueller.
And Barr pressed Mueller on the key question that should matter here.
And that is whether he thought Barr's memo to Congress was inaccurate.
This is in the body of the New York Times and the Washington Post pieces.
Mueller said that he did not at all.
And as a matter of fact, when you're looking at the actual words of it, he expressed frustration over the lack of context and the resulting media coverage, of course, of the special counsel's obstruction analysis, but also told the Attorney General nothing that Barr wrote in his letter, nothing, was inaccurate or misleading.
That's in the article.
Why is that even a story at this point?
The entire Mueller report is now completely out there.
It's available for anybody to see with the four reasons, categories for redactions.
And that is what people, this shows you, you know, people lie by omission and people can also lie.
They just outright lie.
And, you know, you would think after the embarrassment of two plus years of spinning lies and conspiracies that these guys would be done and maybe learn a lesson.
They're not learning a lesson.
And, you know, all of these deep state actors, I am telling you, I don't need to be involved at this point anymore, except that, well, everything we've said is true and everything's going to come out and everything will be self-evident because Operation Boomerang is going to happen in a massive way and it goes right to the Obama White House.
The Federalists reported last night that Obama's political campaign paid nearly a million dollars since 2016 to Fusion GPS, the firm responsible for Hillary's dossier.
The night before, we learned that, in fact, it was that Biden and others, that they were involved in meetings inside the Obama White House Oval Office.
And by the way, they'll never report that Trump is on the verge of signing a massive trade deal with China.
That would be good news that helps the country and the economy and things that we didn't have happen before.
Now, so I want to know what did Obama know?
What did Biden know?
When did they know it?
What did Alrettal Lynch know?
Did Strzok and Page lie when they said that the whole investigation into Hillary was being run by Loretta Lynch and Democrats in the Department of Justice.
You know, I mean, all these tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists clinging to a headline that the body of which contradicts the headline as if this was real breaking news.
They're just, they are now so deeply embedded themselves.
They cannot face the truth or face the truth of what's going to happen here.
I mean, Barr has said spying.
He goes, I don't look at that as a pejorative.
Spying occurred on two levels through Carter Page and the fraud abuse on the FISA court, the fraud committed against the court.
Stefan Halper told to approach Papadopoulos, Carter Page, and Sam Clovis, you know, all getting into the back door of all things world Trump.
And now the rigged investigation into Hillary, except this time he got a real crime, the Espionage Act, the real intent of deleting subpoenaed emails as if we needed to have what the intent was to destroy the evidence of the underlying crime, the very things Democrats don't have with Trump because there is no underlying crime.
And Donald Trump was extremely public in expressing his frustration that he was innocent.
Now, four times he's been proven correct, but that's not going to stop them.
And then when we get to the FISA abuse and the Horowitz report and then the Huber report, and then Barr's now starting his investigation and was very clear today that that extends into pretty much everything that has gone on here and the abuse of power at the Department of Justice and the FBI,
only upper echelon, not rank and file people, you know, at the premier, you know, law enforcement agency in the world or the premier intelligence community, those that do their good job and don't abuse the powerful tools of intelligence.
And then an effort to unseat and bludgeon a unseated a duly elected president, bludgeon him with what now may become, according to the New York Times, bought and paid for Russian disinformation.
How ironic could this all get?
Russia, Russia, Russia.
Well, and the Ukraine's influence.
That is going to blow up.
Horowitz next week, then Huber, then Attorney General Barr's investigation.
Is everything going to be reopened?
It sounded an awful lot today like everything was reopened.
I 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, there are other nice places I could go to, and I could better use that money.
But every year you got to 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 going to use.
Now, two ways to get them.
Online at lone startransfer.com.
All right.
Or give my friends a call, no obligation.
Call pound250 on your mobile, keyword timeshare.
Just hit pound250 on your mobile phone, say the keyword timeshare, or just go to lonestartransfer.com.
On Thursday morning, I received, it probably was received at the department Wednesday night or evening, but on Thursday morning, I received a letter from Bob, the letter that's just been put into the record.
And I called Bob and said, you know, what's the issue here?
And I asked him if he was suggesting that the March 24th letter was inaccurate.
And he said no, but that the press reporting had been inaccurate and that the press was reading too much into it.
And I asked him, you know, specifically what his concern was.
And he said that his concern focused on his explanation of why he did not reach a conclusion on obstruction.
And he wanted more put out on that issue.
He wanted, he argued for putting out summaries of each volume, the executive summaries that had been written by his office.
And if not that, then other material that focused on the issue of why he didn't reach the obstruction question.
But he was very clear with me that he was not suggesting that we had misrepresented his report.
Do you share my concerns about the Pfizer warrant process?
Yes.
Do you share my concerns about the counterintelligence investigation, how it was opened and why it was opened?
Yes.
Do you share my concerns that the professional lack of professionalism in the Clinton email investigation is something we should all look at?
Yes.
Do you expect to change your mind about the bottom line conclusions of the Mueller report?
No.
Do you know Bob Mueller?
Yes.
Do you trust him?
Yes.
How long have you known him?
30 years, roughly.
You think he had the time he needed?
Yes.
You think he had the money he needed?
Yes.
You think he had the resources he needed?
Yes.
Do you think he did a thorough job?
Yes, and I think he feels he did a thorough job and had adequate evidence to make the calls.
Do you think the president's campaign in 2016 was thoroughly looked at in terms of whether or not they colluded with the Russians?
Yes.
And the answer is no, according to Bob Mueller.
That's right.
He couldn't decide about obstruction.
You did.
Is that correct?
That's right.
You feel good about your decision?
Absolutely.
That was a great list of questions.
And I think this is where, of course, the corrupt fake news, well, frankly, they are partly responsible.
They can't let go of their own hoax and their own lies and their own conspiracies have missed the big headlines of the day is that Barr is going to investigate Hillary-Russia collusion.
And Barr is going to investigate this deal dossier.
Was it Russian disinformation as the New York Times is suggesting?
And on every one of those issues that you just heard on FISA, why this was opened in the first place?
One question I have, when did Mueller know there was no collusion?
The Clinton email corruption and whether he'd changed his mind on Mueller, we got definitive answers.
Or the Mueller report.
And his conversation with Mueller, I just keep going back because it is another big headline.
And that the special counsel, Robert Mueller, in these phone conversations, emphasized nothing in the Attorney General's March 24th letter was inaccurate or misleading.
And the frustration he was expressing was over the lack of context and the resulting fake news media coverage regarding the special counsel's obstruction analysis.
Nothing was inaccurate.
Nothing was misleading.
It's over.
It's done.
Except for now the real investigation.
And with the new knowledge that, in fact, Hillary Clinton bought and paid for Russian lies, the Horowitz report as early as next week, we think.
Anyway, joining us for their analysis, Greg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst, author of the number one bestseller, The Russian hoax, the illicit scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump.
Now we go to phase two.
Phase two has first framed Donald Trump, and now he's exonerated, whether they like it or not.
And now it's, oh, yeah, the illicit scheme to clear Hillary.
What did Hillary do as a, what did the FBI do on Hillary's investigation?
What did Hillary do relating to the Russian disinformation she paid for?
Also, David Schoen with us, criminal defense civil liberties attorney.
Welcome both of you back to the program.
Good to see you in studio.
David Schoen, how are you?
Thank you.
Fine, thanks.
Good to see you.
Greg Jarrett, let's start with you.
You know, the whole premise of your book pretty much was corroborated today, right there for the world to see.
And yes, we still have people that live in denial in a conspiracy world, but it just is not happening.
Yeah, there'll always be people like that.
You know, it's easy to make up a lie.
It's even easier to purvey the lie.
What's really hard is to uncover the truth.
And now we've done that.
And today, nothing changed.
There's still no collusion, insufficient evidence to prove an obstruction offense.
What struck me more than anything else is that Barr said openly today that he was mystified.
He never understood and still doesn't understand why Robert Mueller didn't do his job by reaching a conclusion on obstruction.
And in fact, you know, he said it was unclear to me.
We didn't get a clear understanding of Mueller's reason as to why he just didn't do his job.
He said it was very strange.
And then Barr went on to say, look, we're not in the business of exoneration.
And he said, you know, we didn't believe there was sufficient evidence to establish obstruction.
And he went through each and every one of the claims of obstruction that Mueller tried to peddle and disabused all of them.
All right.
So, well, first, let me get David's take because, I mean, look, you guys know this case so well.
I just want your general thoughts because there's so much here to digest.
Yeah, I want to say that I think there is a fully explainable reason why Mueller did what he did.
I think that they came to the conclusion there was no obstruction of justice.
That's clear by law and by fact.
And that people like, for people like Weissman, it wasn't palatable to say that after all of these millions of dollars and after all of this time and after all of his and their anti-Trump bias and agenda, they couldn't come to Hillary and tell her this is what we found.
They couldn't look their friends in the face and say we found no obstruction.
It's reckless to do what Bob Mueller did in that regard.
They should have given a full, clean bill of health on obstruction.
There was no obstruction, as a matter of fact and law.
Well, there's no obstruction, but we do have a list of things that the Attorney General said today that should be shocking and alarming to a lot of people here.
I mean, for the Attorney General of the United States to say that basically he's investigating Hillary-Russia collusion and for the Attorney General to announce he's looking into the rigged investigation into Hillary, which we now know that was rigged, and the evidence in that case was overwhelming.
And the intent when she deleted and bleach-bit and beat up devices and removed SIM cards, there was an intent to destroy evidence for the underlying crime.
The very things the liberal media was saying about Trump, I would say that this is a disaster for all things Democrat.
And how far up the chain it goes in the Obama White House as all of this happened on their watch.
Greg Jarrett is going to be fascinating.
Oh, absolutely.
I mean, he vowed to investigate wrongdoing among top officials at the FBI and the DOJ.
And he specifically named certain things, abuse of the FISA warrant, how the FBI and the DOJ learned of the Steele dossier and how Hillary Clinton was paying for it.
You know, at one point in time, he said, Barr said today, we've got to stop weaponizing, using the Justice Department to weaponize political differences.
And that was a very telling statement.
That tells you that Mueller knows that that's what people like James Comey and Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, John Brennan, James Clapper did.
They took their positions of power, and for political reasons, they decided to target Donald Trump.
And it's unconscionable, and frankly, as I lay out in my book, it's illegal, numerous crimes committed.
Well, all of which is true.
Go ahead, David.
I was going to say, I hope that Mr. Barr is serious because we almost had, I don't mean to overstate the matter, we almost had a coup through the Justice Department.
Remember what that agenda was, to overthrow the president?
This is the Justice Department.
Unless Mr. Barr really gets a serious investigation going into what started all of this and what went on at justice, it could happen again.
We can't take that in this country.
Well, we can't take it.
And by the way, it is scary for the entire country if, in fact, that happens.
That's the really, there's a danger here.
There's a danger for the entire country at all of this.
And I think that, you know, especially look, what do you both think of the notion?
We now know, I can't imagine any scenario if the Grassley, Graham, and Nunes memos are remotely accurate.
The fact that the FISA application consisted of a bulk of information full of, you know, Russian unverified lies, omitting or lying by omission, committing and conspiring to commit fraud in other ways, but lying by omission that Hillary bought and paid for it, not putting it in big bold letters to the FISA court judge in the FISA application.
I cannot imagine if we have equal justice under the law, Greg Jarrett, that anybody is going to get a pass on that.
They will not.
There were five big lies in the dossier.
The judges weren't told that Hillary Clinton's campaign had paid for the dossier.
They weren't told that Christopher Steele had been fired for lying.
Instead, Comey and Yates in the first application said, oh, he's credible.
All other applications said the same thing.
They knew he wasn't credible.
The judges weren't told that Steele had this virulent anti-Trump bias, that he was desperate to stop Trump.
And judges weren't told that the evidence that they presented was never verified.
That under the Woods procedures that the FBI established is a clear violation.
And finally, judges were never told of the exculpatory evidence that the FBI had of Carter Page's innocence, not to mention Papadopoulos, who was also mentioned in one of their applications.
So, you know, these judges were lied to.
That's a fraud on the court.
It's abuse of power.
It's obstruction of justice and several other felonies.
It also specifically violates the court's rules.
Listen, the FISA court aspect of this is only one aspect, but it's as serious as can be.
This is the most secretive and intrusive court in the land.
The courts should become proactive.
They should demand answers now.
They should convene a hearing and consider contempt proceedings.
But they also, it even goes deeper than that because it wasn't one application.
There were three subsequent renewal applications.
And as time went on, they still were relying on this particular Hillary dossier, which now the Attorney General is looking into whether or not Hillary Clinton entered into all of this bought and paid for Russian lies paid for by a foreign national.
And, you know, there's rumblings that Christopher Steele met with a lot of people in America at very strategic times.
That means the foreign nationals' influence in our election on multiple levels.
Yeah, isn't it always interesting that it's the people who engage in wrongdoing that accuse others of doing so?
And this is the perfect case.
It was Hillary Clinton who was colluding with foreigners, a British spy as well as Russians, using Russian information to damage her rival, feeding it to the FBI.
And it's always perplexed me how the Department of Justice and the FBI simply overlooked all of that.
And so did Mueller in his report.
Narry a word about that.
And he surely ran across incriminating information.
But now Bill Barr seems absolutely determined to get to the bottom of it.
I know Lindsey Graham certainly is, chairman of the Judiciary Committee as we saw him today.
So, you know, this story is only half over.
The important half is ongoing right now.
All right, stay right there.
Greg Jarrett and David Schoen, some breaking news and also reaction to the hearings today.
We have John Solomon coming up, Bill O'Reilly at our news roundup information overload hour.
All right, as we roll along, 800-941 Sean, toll free telephone number, you want to be a part of the program.
Anyway, we continue with Greg Jarrett and David Schoen.
All right, final thoughts.
Where's it going?
David, you're here with me.
Where's it going?
It sounds like Bob Barr, sorry, it sounds like Bill Barr is very serious now about going forward.
He has to be.
The country requires a full investigation as to how we got there and where we're going from here.
The same people who were involved, Hillary Clinton, Jim Comey, all of these, show their arrogance every single day with their public statements.
They haven't gotten the message.
Greg Jarrett.
I agree 100%.
I'll add two other things.
Barr said he was deeply troubled that the Trump campaign was never given a defensive briefing.
He said, I can't fathom why that did not happen.
He knows the reason.
They were setting him up.
And the second is that Barr didn't back off his usage of the term spying.
No, he embraced it.
He said it's not a pejorative.
It's a good English term.
And he said that he thinks it wasn't just the FISA surveillance of Carter Page and an undercover agent, but he's looking into other spying.
I guarantee you, when he starts turning over those rocks, he's going to find a lot of worms.
Who might get indicted quickly?
I need to follow Greg's book.
Greg's book gives them a roadmap.
Well, I'll tell you what.
You know what?
Why don't you guys stay on?
Because we have still so much to get to.
And John Solomon's going to join us, get his take, and also some breaking news and stories he's working on.
All right, as we continue our coverage, the bar hearings, wow, what a day this has been.
Unbelievable.
Have you already tasked any staff to look into whether spying by the FBI and other agencies on the Trump campaign was properly predicated?
And can Congress expect a formal report on your findings?
Yes, I do have people in the department helping me review the activities over the summer of 2016.
Okay.
I suppose it depends on what conclusions you come to, but is there any reason why Congress wouldn't be briefed on your conclusions?
It's a little early for me to commit completely, but I envision some kind of reporting at the end of this.
All right, that was from earlier today.
That was Senator Grassley of Iowa and the Attorney General Bill Barr.
We continue with Greg Jarrett and David Schoen adding to the mix our friend John Solomon, investigative reporter, executive director of The Hill.
And just literally breaking seconds ago, an investigative piece, Nellie Orr's, this sounds pretty blockbuster.
Nellie Orr's hi-honey emails to DOJ about Russia collusion.
And I'm reading it, you know, literally fresh off the presses now.
John, welcome back to the program.
Before I get to your thoughts on what went on today, tell me about this breaking news.
Yeah, so here was what we have.
We have now 339 pages of emails that Nellie Orr sent to Bruce Orr and his colleagues at the Justice Department.
She essentially used her marital privilege, her relationship with her husband, to feed her fusion GPS research on Russia and Donald Trump and Paul Manafort and Carter Page and all the figures of the now debunked collusion scandal.
She used that connection to feed her research right into the Justice Department to other prosecutors in the international criminal division.
So a new backdoor.
And the reason this is significant is twofold.
One, it raises a real serious question of conflict of interest.
Why is Nellie Orr sending Clinton-funded research to the Justice Department through her husband?
And two, when she testified to the Hill last year in the deposition, she stated to the Congress that she did not share any of her Fusion GPS research with anyone outside of Fusion GPS, her husband and Christopher Steele.
We clearly have a clear pattern here now of that fusion GPS research, that Russia collusion research going to Justice Department prosecutors who aren't her husband, but rather her husband's colleagues.
So it's a pretty big development.
Would that mean she lied under oath?
One of the things I'm hearing, I mean, to be determined, but one of the things I'm hearing is that several House Republicans who participated in the interview with Nellie Orr last year are now preparing a criminal referral asking the Justice Department to investigate and determine if she did lie to Congress in that deposition.
So to be determined, but there's movement on that today as we speak.
Any more details that you can get into this?
I mean, you know, Fusion GPS, we learned last night, and this kind of shocked me and came out of nowhere, to be very, very honest with you.
And I saw this with the Federalists reporting that Obama's political camp paid nearly $1 million since 2016 to Fusion GPS.
Again, it raises more questions about what did the Obama White House know?
When did they know it?
Struck and Page closed door testimony brings the entire decision-making in the Hillary Clinton's email server scandal right into the office of the Attorney General Loretta Lynch and also about meetings involving a lot of this in the Obama White House and Oval Office.
I mean, where's this going?
Well, it's clearly going to go to a much larger question.
We call it the boomerang, right?
Now that we know that the Russia collusion narrative was bogus, it's been debunked.
It was a political, dirty trick.
Now that we know that, I think the question is who participated and when did they know what was going on?
And we now know for certain that Nellie Orr sent things like Carter Page was in Moscow and having a meeting and had some connections to Gazprom.
She's forwarding that to the Justice Department months and months before the dossier comes out in public, or we hear about it.
And so she's got this backdoor channel going into the Justice Department, just like Steele did when she went to Bruce Or her husband and fed the dossier, just like James Baker had it when he took that information from the DNC lawyer and brought it into the FBI.
There were all these channels flooding the FBI with this bogus research.
And who knew what and how high did it go is going to be the question that will dominate the second half of 2019.
What was your reaction to the hearings today with the Attorney General?
A lot of political theater, but not much substance, right?
Everyone threw their bombs.
It was all for political ads.
But at the end of the day, Bill Barr has a very compelling defense.
If you think I was trying to mislead you, why did I release the whole report just a few weeks later?
Yeah, it doesn't hold up as a story.
It just doesn't hold up.
It's a bogus outrage.
Well, I mean, the fact that last night, both the Washington Post and New York Times, they wanted to set up this fight for earlier today, but they even contradicted in the body of their articles the real emphasis, which is, okay, Barr got the letter from Mueller, and he called Mueller, and he asked Mueller, and Mueller emphasized that there was nothing, nothing in the Attorney General's March 24th letter that was inaccurate or misleading.
Yeah, I think the more interesting thing is why does Mueller feel the need to send this letter?
If you're just worried about, hey, I explained why I did my declinations to the Attorney General, which was his real job under the law, that's all he's supposed to do, then who cares how it's spun in the press?
It looks to me as though Mueller and his team were trying to control the political narrative.
That's not something that prosecutors should be concerned with.
And when you look at the letter, he literally is bragging that, hey, I wrote this in such a way you could release my beautiful prose just the way I wrote it.
It's not how prosecutors are supposed to act.
I'll defer to Greg, who has such great legal background, but it does not feel like the sort of declination letter that's required in the court of law.
It feels like it was a political play in the court of public opinion, and that really tarnishes Bob Mueller's legacy here.
Let me get to you, Greg Jarrett, first reacting to John's article, Nellie Orr's Hi Honey Emails and Emails to the DOJ about Russia collusion raises an awful lot of questions about, you know, again, this small group of people in every way, shape, manner, and form organized in this effort.
Number one, to rig Hillary's investigation.
Number two, to impact the 2016 election for the favored candidate.
Even willingness to use what the New York Times is suggesting now is potentially Russian disinformation that Hillary bought and paid for.
I'm hearing rumors, John, tell me if I'm wrong, that there might have been some meetings with Christopher Steele that will blow that part of this wide open in a way that nobody saw coming.
I don't know.
Well, I'm just, I have little sources, little birdies that talk to me a lot.
I actually do some real work here.
Nobody believes it.
And then, of course, the effort to bludgeon the president with Hillary's bought and paid for potentially Russian disinformation, Greg.
Well, kudos to John for getting more information about Nellie Orr.
I lay out her role in my book, but now, thanks to John, we're getting a whole lot more information.
You know, when she testified, she only gave limited answers, and then she invoked the spousal privilege, which tipped me off immediately, that she's only giving a sliver of what she did and knows.
And so, you know, she's in real trouble now because If it's true that she was feeding information directly to prosecutors at DOJ and said otherwise in her testimony, that's perjury.
It's false and misleading statements.
She better go hire herself a crack defense attorney like David Schoen because she's certainly going to need it.
But they were all in on it.
I mean, Nellie Orr and Bruce Orr were meeting in a hotel lobby for breakfast at the end of July, right after Steele had already met with the FBI and composed the first of his dossier memos.
And from there on out, they were all feeding it to the FBI.
And Steele and Simpson were meeting with more than a dozen journalists.
And eventually, guys like Isakoff and David Korn took the bait and published it and later BuzzFeed published the whole dossier.
And David Schoen, you know, I'm sitting here looking at you shaking your head.
And then I want to get into a deeper question for all of you.
Yeah, listen, I think what John's report shows, if it wasn't shown before, is that the investigation probably should start with GPS, but it's a multi-pronged investigation.
GPS, DOJ, the Clinton campaign.
It has to be coordinated all in one package, it seems to me, with dogged prosecutors.
But you asked also about the reaction to what happened today.
It was a disgrace.
Have you ever before seen members of the United States Senate engaging in these kinds of ad hominem attacks on the Attorney General of the United States who voluntarily showed up there?
And you can see the attacks increasing the more they think Barr is serious about pursuing the truth here.
All right.
I want to be, this is now a very serious question.
And my conclude after all of this today is it's over.
Whether the conspiracy-lying media recognizes it or not, the Russia story is dead as it relates to Donald Trump.
But the Attorney General was very clear, very clear, that he is moving forward and investigating the Clinton investigation, FISA abuse.
When did this start?
The entire Russian narrative and Operation Crossfire Hurricane.
And it seems like there's nothing now that's off the table.
And Horowitz coming out next week.
Who is in the most trouble and why?
We'll start with John Solomon.
You know, I think it's going to start with Christopher Steele.
I think we're going to find out a lot more about his conduct and the possibility that he was setting up episodes to occur so that it would then create evidence that he could report back.
But anyone, anyone who represented to the court that they did not have derogatory information on Christopher Steele when they submitted that FISA, everybody in the chain of approval, including Baker and Comey and Andy McCabe, are going to be held to a high standard because there will be overwhelming evidence within the next week that the FBI knew in advance of the FISA that Christopher Steele had a bias, that he was leaking information,
and that he was trying to do it before the November 8th election.
Those elements are so essential, so derogatory that they should have been disclosed to the FISA court.
Anyone who hid that has committed a crime, as Greg has so eloquently described so many times before.
And Greg, I mean, you've gone through a list of specific crimes, but I would imagine that there's going to be some serious, really serious legal jeopardy for all of those people.
I can't imagine that there's not going to be indictments here at a level we may not have ever seen before.
Yeah, I agree with John.
I would start with Christopher Steele.
There's already a criminal referral against him because he lied to the FBI and got fired for it.
Now, he's a British citizen, so he's going to be protected by the British government.
But you might be able to do a deal with him because they, you know, the MI6 and the GCHQ were feeding information to CIA Director John Brennan.
and eventually the FBI.
So in order to insulate themselves, they might convince the U.S. government to say, all right, we'll give you access to steel.
Steele will lay it all out.
Then you go from there to Glenn Simpson, Nellie Orr, Bruce Orr, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, James Comey, the whole thing.
Is James Comey going to get indicted in your view?
I believe that it is inevitable.
He's out with an op-ed today, as we discussed.
I think so.
You know, he not only stole government documents and leaked them, but he also signed off the first two FISA warrants, which even he admits the information was unverified.
And the rules are very strict, as David Schoen can tell you.
You can never use in a FISA application anything that's unverified.
David Scho.
Yep.
I think that for me, at least the Justice Department's got to be the place where they clean house first.
First of all, there are so many regulations that they violated.
They have such a higher duty to the American people, and so much flows from the infiltration of the Justice Department by political agendas.
That's where FISA flowed from, and so on.
We've got to hold these people accountable.
And again, to me, James Comey and others show this incredible arrogance, Brennan.
People who have felt all along they're going to get away with what they've done.
They have to be sent the message, I'm afraid.
Now, the American people know that you are no different from Rudy Giuliani or Kellyanne Conway or any of the other people who sacrificed their once decent reputation for the grifter and liar who sits in the Oval Office.
The last question that I have in 17 seconds: Do you think it's okay for a president to offer pardons to people who don't testify against him to threaten the family of someone who does?
Is that okay?
When did he offer a pardon to somebody?
I think you know what I'm talking about.
Please please, Mr. Attorney General, you know, give us some credit for knowing what the hell is going on around here with you.
Not really to this line of questioning.
Listen, you've slandered this man.
What I sort of want to know is how do we get to this point?
How do we get to the point?
Anyone?
I'll confess.
Mr. Chairman, I am done.
Thank you very much.
And you slandered this man from top to bottom.
So if you want more of this, you're not going to get it.
If you want to ask him questions, you can't.
Finally, you lied to Congress.
You told Representative Charlie Chris that you didn't know what objections Mueller's team might have to your March 24th so-called summary.
You told Senator Chris Van Holland that you didn't know if Bob Mueller supported your conclusions, but you knew you lied.
And now we know.
Of course it helps that there are women on that committee.
But you know what?
I expect the men in this country and the men in this committee and many of them, believe me, because we all signed on to this letter to demand an FBI investigation.
But really, guess who's perpetuating all of these kinds of actions?
It's the men in this country.
And I just want to say to the men of this country, just shut up and step up.
Do the right thing for a change.
Yes, shut up and sit down and shut up.
And whatever else Senator Hirono is saying.
Glad you're with us as we continue our coverage of the hearings today in our news roundup information overload hour.
Look, there's one overriding fact that none of these people on the left want to deal with.
No collusion, and there's no obstruction.
And Bob Mueller emphasized that there was nothing in the four-page letter of the Attorney General that was inaccurate or misleading.
And the only thing that he was concerned at all about was the media coverage of the Mueller report when it was released before the redactions.
And he asked the Attorney General to work with the special counsel's team and expedite the process of redacting those things that needed to redact, that needed redacting for specific categories.
But the one thing that just stands out as you watch this circus unfold today is this never-ending hatred, this rage, this psychosis against all things Donald Trump.
And as they now try to, as they're floundering and literally in the wind, and they don't know what to do here because it's over and they lost after putting all of their hopes, dreams, and prayers that the Mueller report would end up with an indictment of Donald Trump.
It didn't come out the way they wanted.
So now they're going to go in for the fifth time and look into, quote, Russia collusion.
What they're missing is the Attorney General is pointing out, yeah, we're looking into how Hillary's investigation was handled.
We're looking into FISA abuse.
The Horowitz report next week will be coming out.
We expect that not only to deal with that, but perhaps even many other issues that we're not quite aware of yet.
And the closed-door testimony of 53 people, we will get to the bottom of it.
When did this Mueller investigation start?
Did Hillary really pay for, as the New York Times is now suggesting, Russian disinformation in the dossier she bought and paid for?
And so much more information.
Anyway, here to join us and get his take on all things insanity, the sewer, the swamp is Bill O'Reilly, BillO'Reilly.com for all things, Bill, including his new radio show and his books.
He's, by the way, in the process of writing a book about Donald Trump, the United States of Trump, how the president really sees America.
And how are you, sir?
Exhausted.
Did I miss something this morning?
It was far on.
Did I miss that?
No, nothing at all, Bill.
What have you been up to?
You know, I just think it's so hollow.
Let me advance this story for the Hannity radio audience.
No, for the folks, Bill.
We got to use your lingo for the folks.
Of course, but I'm assuming they're one and the same.
So, as you know, but I don't know if a lot of Americans know this.
There are groups affiliated with the Democratic Party and the Republican Party that are called political action committees.
And they're on K Street in Washington, many of them.
And every morning they have conference calls with party apparatchnicks, pro-Trump people, pro-Democrats, whatever it may be.
So my information, and I believe this to be true, and I don't like using anonymous sources, but I've got somebody from the inside on the Democratic team, and I don't want to burn that person.
It's kind of like Serpico, you know, That the order has gone out to people like Harano, who we just heard on the clip that you ran, and Adler and the other Democrats in Congress to keep the Mueller investigation alive until the election.
Make it a campaign issue, because Americans are now so confused, because most people don't pay attention, that they really don't know.
So there's no downside for the Democrats to keep it alive.
And that means that whatever comes up, they're going to say, oh, Trump did it.
Well, it doesn't really matter that Mueller said he didn't do it as far as collusion is concerned.
He did it.
And we're going to keep that drum pounding until election day.
So that's what you're seeing today, and that's what you'll see for the next year and a half.
You know, look, Bill, I understand politics.
You understand politics.
But if we stand back and, you know, all right, so President Trump's been there now over two years, and we see records on the economy that we never dreamed of.
After eight years of Biden-Obama, you know, it was a pretty horrific record.
I mean, 13 million more Americans on food stamps, 8 million more in poverty, lowest labor participation since the 70s, worst recovery since the 40s, 51-year low home ownership rate, only president ever to reach 3% GDP growth in a year, and accumulated more debt than all 43 presidents before him combined.
Compare that to record low unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, women in the workplace, youth unemployment.
He's got a pretty strong record to run on.
And by the way, all of this Russia-Russia stuff happened on Biden-Obama's watch, not Trump's.
Well, the only hope the Democrats have is to make it all about Donald Trump, the election of 2020.
You've got to be all about him.
Can't be on policy because I think Biden is going to get the nomination unless they have something.
The far left's going to try to destroy him.
They may have something on him.
You know, every human being's a sinner.
Everybody has stuff they're not proud of in their past.
So you might have a Biden revelation come up.
But if you don't, and it's not, you know, cataclysmic, I think Biden is pretty much going to coast to the nomination.
And if you look at the field, there's really nobody.
See, on paper, I agree with you, but in reality, with this new Democratic Party, I think all bets are off, you know, with this crazy new Green Deal stuff.
I think they saw the CNN poll this week.
The money men inside the Democratic Party, the people I was just talking about, the people that meet in the morning on the conference calls.
They know Bernie Sanders can't beat Trump.
They know Mayor Pete can't beat him or any of the others.
It looks like they're going to put the Stacey Abrams on the second.
I think that deal's been done with Biden.
He'll put her on the second black woman from Georgia.
And I think that's how it's going to go.
So the Democrats, in order to win, have to make it, well, Trump's corrupt, Trump's a loon, Trump's this, Trump's that.
You already see it.
You already see they're shaping that argument.
And in order to enhance the argument...
So let me ask you that.
Does hating Trump or running on hating Trump and dealing with a party that, again, they have an eight-year track record.
I mentioned the economy.
Then you also can bring Iran into the mix and tell Vladimir all more flexibility.
And then the new Green Deal.
They're not going to run on issues.
You know that.
They're not going to run on issues.
They can't.
How can they?
They don't have anything.
What, open borders?
They're going to run on open borders, let everybody in?
Pretty much.
That's what all the others are doing, Bill.
I mean, who knows what Biden's spot's going to be?
You know, numbers are numbers.
So they can't run on open borders.
They can't run on, well, we're the great economists.
Can't run on that.
All right, but think about what you're saying.
You're saying that Biden is going to go against the base of his party, the most enthusiastic voters.
No, he'll patronize them.
He'll kiss their butts like he did on The View.
He'll do that.
But in the end, when it comes down to the debate between Trump and Biden, Biden will move to the center.
That's what Barack Obama did.
He'll move to the center once he's got the nomination locked.
Let me ask this.
So you think in the primary, which is historically how things have worked, what you're describing.
You run to the left, you run to the right, you move to the center, you try to appeal the most amount of people.
I don't see that he has the enthusiasm and the base and the excitement of Barack Obama.
And by that, well, that's a problem, though.
You've got to have people be motivated to go out and vote for you on election day.
Look, love and hate motivate voters, love and hate.
So Barack Obama was love him, love him, love him, and go out and vote for him.
And they did.
So now it's going to be Trump, we hate him, we hate him, we hate him, go out and vote against him.
Whether that'll work or not, I don't know whether that'll work.
I'm not sure whether that'll work, but I am sure that that's what the Democratic Party is going to run on.
If the president continues a strong economy, there's a report out today that we are on the verge of a massive trade deal with China to sort of close the gap, the imbalance, the trade imbalance.
If this type of growth continues, you know, and barring any unforeseen foreign endeavor that we need to involve ourselves in, and the economy is the best that it's been in 20 years, you know, you say love and hate drive elections, but so do peace and prosperity.
Yeah, I think Trump wins.
I think Trump wins.
Yeah, if you have a vibrant economy in November 2020, I think Trump wins.
Unless he goes crazy.
You know, because when I say that, I don't mean he loses control of himself or anything like that.
He's a disciplined man.
That's what people don't know about Donald Trump.
I mean, when I'm writing this book, he's a fascinating guy.
He's a very disciplined man.
Wears a tie-in jacket every day, comes down at the same time to the Oval Office.
Very disciplined.
He never stops working, ever.
But he's insecure.
And he doesn't process attacks on himself very well.
I don't think it's insecurity.
I think he's a born fighter.
I think his instincts are to constantly understand that you're in a battle.
Everything's a negotiation.
Everything is a fight.
But sometimes he overreacts.
Listen, there are certainly times I wish he wouldn't tweet.
Who cares?
All right, stay right there, Bill.
You grew up in Levittown.
I remember.
I've been in the middle of the day.
Levittown.
And your mom had to put up with you because you were an incorrigible kid, right?
Well, thanks.
Thanks for turning.
Well, I mean, you actually wrote a book on it.
It's not a secret.
I appreciate that.
I think we actually have that in common.
I admit that I was incorrigible.
There was no control.
I was worse than you.
I was worse than you.
You were in Franklin Square.
I was in Levitton.
All right.
So, look, how does this end?
Because we already know if they don't get him on, which they didn't get him on collusion, they didn't get him on obstruction, and now they want to empower the IRS to take on political opponents and go after every banking statement in Donald Trump's life in the hopes that they'll find something on this fishing expedition.
How does this end?
I'm going to ask you a question.
Can I ask you a question?
Yeah, go ahead.
Take over my show, Bill.
It's no problem.
Do you think Comey's going to get indicted after that report comes out from Horowitz next week?
I think the following people are likely to have criminal referrals, and if there's justice, yes, they'll be indicted.
One is Hillary.
One is Hillary.
One is Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page.
Then you got people like Bruce and Nellie Orr.
Clapper and Brennan should be nervous.
Susan Rice should be nervous.
And Attorney General Lynch.
And I think it goes right into the Obama White House.
What did Obama and Biden know and when did they know it?
Yeah, I do.
Well, that's how it ends.
So next week.
It'll take a year to finish this story.
That's okay.
Okay, you got nothing to diversify.
Are you saying you have nothing better to do than wait till I get you the answer?
Well, you just said you think that they're all going to get referred to criminally, right?
I do believe they would be absolutely 100%.
If that comes true, I don't know if the list is going to be that long, but I think Comey may get indicted.
I agree.
And the tip-off was today.
He just wrote, I don't know whether you know this or not.
I saw that.
Yep.
An op-ed for the New York Times.
That's your tip.
All right, I got to run.
BillO'Reilly.com.
Bill, thanks for being with us.
Good to hear from you, Goo.
Okay, John.
Thank you.
All right, 800-941.
Sean, your call's next as our final hour of free-for-all continues.
What the House is doing is way over the top.
Mueller is the final word on this.
I fought like hell to make sure Mueller could do his job without interference.
I introduced legislation so that he couldn't be fired without cause.
And I've told everybody in the country, if the president colluded with the Russians, that would be horrible and terrible.
But I don't believe he did.
And Mueller said he didn't.
This is over.
This is political revenge.
The House is on a witch hunt, truly a witch hunt, to try to make something out of nothing.
He wanted, he argued for putting out summaries of each volume, the executive summaries that had been written by his office.
And if not that, then other material that focused on the issue of why he didn't reach the obstruction question.
But he was very clear with me that he was not suggesting that we had misrepresented his report.
You have to have specific intent to obstruct justice.
If there's no underlying reluctant to do this, we rarely do.
But the chairman of the Judiciary Committee just said that Mueller found there was no collusion.
That is not correct.
I'm sorry, Lindsey Graham, but your defensiveness is showing.
To talk about everything that went into it and in the next breath distort it is a stunning, stunning mischaracterization of what the whole exercise is specially about reveals what I talked about before, that he is sitting there today, not as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, but as a human shield for Donald Trump, and it would appear William Bobby.
Again, we try to offer just gavel-to-gavel coverage, but that phrase or the lack of it, its absence from federal code, this no collusion mantra.
That, of course, is your sick, ugly, twisted media.
It is beyond comprehension that this is how they cannot accept the simple truth, which is the words himself of Bob Mueller, that there was no American that colluded, conspired with Russian operatives to create chaos in the 2016 election.
But yet they cling to it.
They hold on to it.
They cannot admit that they're wrong, that they bought into conspiracies and lies.
Same Brian Williams that saw people floating right outside of his hotel at Katrina.
The only problem was there was no water around his hotel.
And now, we don't do this.
We don't do this offer.
I'm Brian Williams, NBC News.
What was it in New Orleans that you saw that kind of mature to mature man?
You know, it's funny.
Here we are remembering the loss of our colleague Ed Bradley.
Ed just handed me an Emmy for our work in Katrina.
Just weeks ago, handed me the Emmy that I accepted for my colleagues.
And when I was down there, I used to be a firefighter, volunteer firefighter in New Jersey.
I was wearing the boots that I've own since 1976.
I had them pulled up as waiters.
When you look out of your hotel room window in the French quarter and watch a man float by face down, when you see bodies that you last saw in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, and swore to yourself that you would never see in your country.
A spectacular lie.
I mean, so, look, it's very, very hard in life for people to just admit a truth.
These are not usual times.
We're dealing in a timeframe where there is a mass rage underlying a massive psychosis.
And literally, people that have lost touch with all reality, they cannot accept that Donald Trump won.
They cannot accept the results of the Mueller report.
They cannot accept that there was no conspiracy to conspire, collude with Russia in the lead up to 2016.
They can't accept that, you know, the Mueller report did not give them what they had anticipated, what the FBI didn't have after nine months, what the House Intel Committee couldn't find either, and the Senate Bipartisan Committee could not find.
It's four separate occasions.
And what they're really going to have a hard time dealing with is what's coming.
What the Attorney General Barr is saying today is very clear.
The Horowitz FISA abuse investigation is going to be devastating.
There's going to be criminal referrals.
You know, he was asked a series of questions, I think at one point by Marsha Blackburn.
Are you concerned about Hillary's rigged investigation?
Yep.
Were you concerned about lying to FISA court judges?
Yep.
Are you concerned about the abuse of power of the upper echelon of the FBI and the DOJ and the Intel community?
Yep.
Are you going to get to the bottom of it?
Yep.
Now, this is a process that is going to unfold in the days and the weeks and the months ahead.
And what we do know is a lot of this now we're going to go back in some cases and revisit.
Now with Hillary, you know, for all their claim about their passion for if there was obstruction, if there was collusion, there seems to be now some credible evidence emerging that we already know what Hillary did and why she did it.
We know that when she claimed that there was no top secret classified information on that secret server, she lied.
That's an indisputable fact.
It's incontrovertible.
That is a clear violation of felony, 18 USC 793.
And we know that being the underlying crime, even Struck and Page saying, Loretta Lynch is calling the shots.
She's never going to indict Hillary.
They're all Democrats in there.
She wouldn't even call it an investigation, but a maddener.
And then, of course, what was the intent of deleting subpoenaed emails, 33,000?
What was the intent behind the bleach bit, the attempt behind the hammers of the devices, the intent of removing SIM cards, that was to remove the evidence, destroy the evidence, obstruction of justice.
And if the Russian dossier that she bought and paid for, so interesting, we learned last night that, in fact, the Obama group that he's associated with, it spent nearly a million dollars with Fusion GPS.
Well, that's now problematic because of the New York Times and Bob Woodward.
They're beginning to think, uh-oh, the dossier may have been Russian disinformation.
And yeah, that's confirmed by Barr today.
And that she had it, she bought it, she paid for it.
And when we find out when Christopher Steele may have come to brief people and the fact that Bruce Orr, you know, kind of was sounding the siren and alarm and told everybody it's not verified and Hillary paid for it and Steele hates Trump and they used it anyway and they were all told it was phony.
Well, that means they conspired to commit fraud on a FISA court.
That means all the people that signed it are in deep trouble and that is criminal.
And, you know, forget Operation Crossfire Hurricane.
This is Operation Boomerang.
And it's going to be an avalanche.
And it's going to come cascading down on everybody.
Now, they can hold on to their collusion delusion, their fantasy, and their conspiracy, all that they want, but facts are facts and they lost.
They put all their hopes, all their dreams with no evidence, and they're anonymous sources.
And as they convince themselves, you know, with breathless reporting and breathless and hysterical reporting every single plus day for two years, you know, they, I guess, have now deluded themselves to believe their own lie.
And the fact that they have the double standard is not surprising.
They cared about obstruction.
You'd care about subpoenaed emails deleted.
If you cared about the rule of law, you'd care about Hillary.
If you cared about equal justice under the law, you would be demanding a full investigation in all of that.
If you cared about Russian interference, well, then you should be concerned about the Russian lies that were perpetrated to the American people and leaked to the American people before the election.
And if you believe in free and fair and open elections, you should be very concerned that fraud was committed against FISA courts on four separate occasions.
And on the first occasion, before the election in 2016, it gave them full and complete access to everything Trump world, Trump campaign world, then Trump transition world, and then Trump president's world.
It gave them everything because they had carte blanche through Carter Page's FISA warrant to look at everything.
Now, that is a clear present real danger to our Democratic Republic.
And it doesn't seem to concern any of these people.
All right, let's get to our busy phones here.
I'm long-winded today.
All right, let's say hi to Vanessa's in New Mexico.
How are you?
I'm doing good.
Thank you.
I just wanted to ask if you could light a fire under the Republicans to bring up the fact that President Obama committed obstruction with Holder, with not letting him testify with the Fast and Furious debacle, and then also with the whole Lois Lerner IRS, what they did to the Tea Party people.
And just remind the Democrats while they continue to yell obstruction because they have nothing to stand on and they know they've been caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
But just to remind the public of what the true obstruction that was perpetrated by President Obama and his administration.
Look, it's all going closer, inching closer and closer right into the Oval Office.
And maybe Biden himself, his world, along with Obama, in terms of discussions about all of this.
And we cannot forget to remind the American people, this all happened on their watch.
And they did nothing.
And they had been warned.
Scott in North Carolina, thank you, Vanessa.
Scott, how are you?
We're glad you called.
I am doing fine, Sean.
It is such an honor to get to talk to you today.
Oh, it's all mine.
Thank you.
I'm a law enforcement officer in North Carolina, and I...
Well, thank you.
By the way, thank you for what you do.
Thank you, sir.
It's a pleasure and an honor to do that as well.
Sir, something has struck my fancy as far as this Mueller investigation.
And law enforcement, if we make a stop on a vehicle or have to go into a house or whatever, there are rules that we have to go by.
And if we violate any of those rules and we go in, say, on bad information or whatever, and we find something, say we find a dead body, say we find drugs or whatever.
In invisible.
When it comes to trial, all that goes away.
It's fruit from a poison tree because I wasn't supposed to be there anyway.
So my point, my question is, why wouldn't that apply to the guys who are serving time now through the Mueller investigation?
Because the stuff that they were caught for, they wouldn't have been caught if it wasn't for this fraudulent investigation.
You know, it's such a good point that you're making.
Let's imagine you went in for a warrant and you provided false information to the court about the individual that you wanted the warrant on or maybe, you know, an application to put in surveillance of some kind, which is how our system works.
And you, let's say you purposefully lied in that case, the consequences would probably mean in your case, you're done.
Your job is over.
And you might even get charged.
I would get charged and the people that I hoped to charge would be set free.
Well, thank you for what you do, by the way, every day.
I know, you know, everybody forgets, and I can't state this enough.
It is instinctive to me to be appreciative of all law enforcement.
You know, that's what my parents, that's where they were.
My mom, a prison guard, 25 years.
My dad in family court probation.
So many cousins that were cops.
I can't even name them all.
And two cousins that were the top, kind of like deity everyone looked up to, made it to the FBI.
That is the 99 plus percent of FBI agents.
That's the 99% of intelligence people.
That's the 99% of those that work in law enforcement.
But when you have a few bad apples, it sadly impacts all of the good people.
And I urge people and remind people as often as they can.
Those people that abuse power here, they speak for themselves.
They're responsible for what they did.
It should not impact how we view the greatest law enforcement, premier law enforcement agency on the entire planet, the FBI.
Anyway, thank you, sir.
I appreciate it.
God bless you in your work every day.
We really wish you the best.
Godspeed and safety every day as well.
All right, Hannity tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
I can tell you the media is in a freakout mode.
The big headlines of the day, it's very simple, and that is Mueller over.
It's done on every level, but the Attorney General clearly saying, Yeah, he's investigating the rigged investigation, the FISA abuse.
When did the Mueller investigation operation, Crossfire Hurricane, really begin, et cetera?
Lindsey Graham, Ken Starr, Andy McCarthy, John Solomon, Greg Jarrett, Senator Hawley, Pam Bondi, Carl Rove, and others tonight at 9, Hannity, Fox News.
