Ami Horowitz, satirist, documentarian, and now candidate for President. Ami recently exposing the anti-semitism on college campuses, and what we are seeing in the halls of Congress, all of which is very upsetting. Now the Ami wants to straighten out the White House. 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.
And as you know, Sean and I never promote the stock market or investing in it, but I'm sure you've all seen the great GDP numbers, the awesome economy that Donald Trump is giving us, and we want you to benefit from it as well.
So now we've discovered Dr. Richard Smith, his incredible financial software tools.
They're trusted by thousands.
It tracks over 20 billion dollars of investments.
And if you're planning for your retirement, you have any money at all invested in the stock market.
You need to go to Hannity.com forward slash retirement right now.
Check it out.
I should have known it.
Yeah, there's more email deletions, but it never seems to matter if you're a Democrat.
Newly obtained documents show that Nelly Orr deleted the RussiaGate emails to her husband Bruce Orr.
If you're a Democrat, you get away with it.
If you're a Republican, forget it.
They throw the book at you.
Uh we're going to get to all of that.
Um really interesting comments by Joe de Genova that we're going to get to.
Obama spy masters point figures uh fingers at each other amidst the Russian probe throwing each other under the bus.
I've been saying this now for two days.
I mean, it is now becoming a major circular firing squad and the deep state now turning all on each other.
And you've got literally Brennan again and and Clapper against Comey, Comey against them.
You've got now the ORs are probably fighting at home.
Who deleted what email when?
Uh, you got struck and page throwing Loretta Lynch down the stairs and saying, oh, she did it.
The fix was in with her on the Hillary investigation.
Uh then, of course, James Baker, the general counsel.
Well, I thought she should have been indicted.
And everything in between.
And um it's gonna get interesting because they now are feeling the heat.
It's now happening, it's now real.
And um that it doesn't matter what Jerry Nadler says or or the cowardly shif says or does.
I mean, how idiotic of a lawmaker that is asking the attorney general of the United States to break the law, or they want to put him in handcuffs.
Um, so the president just wrapped up a proposal now as it relates to a new immigration plan.
Um, I don't have an opinion on it yet.
Uh some things that I heard, I was half listening, half not preparing the show.
We're gonna play the heart and soul of what he's proposing here, and uh we'll go over some of the details.
Uh, but let's go to that first.
To detail what they need to make our border, which is 100% operationally secure.
100%.
Everyone agrees that the physical infrastructure on the border and the ports of entry is gravely underfunded and woefully inadequate.
We scan only a small fraction of the vehicles, goods, and all of the other things coming across, including people.
And sadly, the drugs pour across our border.
We're gonna stop it.
Investment in technology will ensure we scan 100% of everything coming through, curbing the flow of drugs and contraband while speeding up legal trade and commerce.
It's the most heavily traded monetarily border anywhere in the world, and it's not even close.
To make certain that we are constantly making the upgrades we need, our proposal creates a permanent and self-sustaining border security trust fund.
This will be financed by the fees and revenues generated at the border crossings itself.
Importantly, we're already building the wall, and we should have close to 400 miles built by the end of next year, and probably even more than that.
It's going up very rapidly.
And I want to thank the Army Corps of Engineers are doing a fantastic job on the wall.
And that's a wall that is desperately needed.
As we close the gaps in our physical framework, we must also close the gaps in our legal framework critical to ending the border crisis is removing all incentives for smuggling women and children.
Current Law McSroe.
That's right.
Women and children.
People have no idea how bad it is unless you're there and unless you are a member of law enforcement.
They see it every day and they can't believe what they see.
Current law and federal court rulings encourage criminal organizations to smuggle children across the border.
The tragic result is that 65% of all border crossers this year were either minors or adults traveling with minors.
Our plan will change the law to stop the flood of child smuggling and to humanely reunite unaccompanied children with their families back home and rapidly, soon as possible.
We must also restore the integrity of our broken asylum system.
Our nation has a proud history of affording protection to those fleeting government persecutions.
Unfortunately, legitimate asylum seekers are being displaced by those lodging frivolous claims.
These are frivolous claims to gain admission into our country.
Asylum abuse also strains our public school systems, our hospitals and local shelters, using funds that we should and that have to go to elderly veterans, at-risk youth, Americans in poverty, and those in genuine need of protection.
We're using the funds that should be going to them.
And that shouldn't happen, and it's not going to happen in a very short period of time.
have to get this approved.
My plan expedites relief for legitimate asylum seekers by screening out the meritless claims.
If you have a proper claim, you will quickly be admitted.
If you don't, you will promptly be returned home.
Crucially, our plan closes loopholes in federal law to make clear that gang members and criminals are inadmissible.
These are some of the worst people anywhere in the world, MS-13 and others.
Inadmissible, not coming in.
We're taking them out all the time by the thousands a year, but they come in.
They are no longer admissible.
And for criminals already here, we will ensure their swift deportation.
Thank you.
We will keep our community safe.
Americans can have complete and total confidence that under this plan the borders will finally be fully and totally secured.
Thank you.
And I know a number of our Republican friends and others, Lindsay, I see you sitting right there and Steve.
You're working on a plan, an immediate plan, a smaller plan, but a very immediate plan to stop it as of this afternoon.
So as fast as you can get something done, this is the big, beautiful, bold plan, but we need something very quickly, and if you can get it done, that would be fantastic.
Okay?
Thank you.
Appreciate you working on it.
A topic of less discussion in national media, but of vital importance to our country is our legal immigration system itself.
Our plan includes a sweeping modernization of our dysfunctional legal immigration process.
It is totally dysfunctional.
The system will finally be fair, transparent, and promote equality and opportunity for all.
Every year we admit 1.1 million immigrants as permanent legal residents.
These green card holders get lifetime authorization to live and work here and a five-year path to American citizenship.
This is the most prized citizenship anywhere in the world by far.
Currently, 66% of legal immigrants come here on the basis of random chance.
They're admitted solely because they have a relative in the United States.
And it doesn't really matter who that relative is.
Another 21% of immigrants are issued either by random lottery or because they're fortunate enough to be selected for humanitarian relief.
Random selection is contrary to American values and blocks out many qualified potential immigrants from around the world who have much to contribute.
While countless and you wouldn't believe how many countries like Canada create a clear path for top talent.
America does not.
Under the senseless rules of the current system, we're not able to give preference to a doctor, a researcher, a student who graduated number one in his class from the finest colleges in the world.
Anybody we're not able to take care of it.
We're not able to make those.
All right, let me jump in here.
I think we got enough of the details.
Let me give you some of the details as we've been putting them together.
Again, this is just happening in the last 25 minutes.
But the proposal that would, you know, go a long way towards stabilizing an out-of-control system.
But uh in part, it would put new requirements on immigrants seeking to enter the U.S. Like, for example, I know that Australia and New Zealand, you you've got to invest money to get in their country, or you have to have a needed and desired skill.
It's and if you get caught trying to sneak into Australia, you don't get to put one foot on their land on their soil.
Now you get basically food, water, medical attention if you need it, but not on their soil, uh, and then you set on your way home.
And they will take you back out to sea.
That's how that whatever boat, whatever way you got there.
Now, it would put the requirements on immigrants seeking to enter the U.S. in addition to mandated checks like health screenings, background checks.
We got to be able to vet anybody that comes in here now at this point.
We have too many people that want to destroy Americans and America.
Immigrants would be required to pass a civics test, they would receive points based on age, English proficiency.
English is the language of opportunity in America and success.
Uh, that's just a fact.
Doesn't mean that one language is better than another, but if you want to have the most opportunities, speaking English is at the top of the list.
Uh, if you have an offer of employment and educational levels on the security side of it, the wall completion in in 33 designated prioritized areas, creation of a fee-based sustainable fund to continue to modernize border infrastructure, modifications to streamline the process, which is a smart thing to do also for those seeking asylum, including expedited adjudication of asylum hearings and prompt removal of illegal border crossers.
In other words, you cross the border illegally, you send back, which of course now courts have said, oh, we can't do.
Then they never show up for their court date.
It also calls for the creation of a merit-based immigration system or placing the current family-based immigration system, and the number of immigrants entering the country would neither increase nor decrease, but the composition would change.
And by the way, the DHS is asking the Pentagon to build ten cities now because of court rulings.
What's up, everybody?
Linda from the uh Sean Hannity show here to talk about your money, retirement, your money.
It's like your health, right?
You know, you don't think about it until you don't have it.
And a lot of people are making really bad mistakes, especially with their retirement.
They're not retiring with enough money.
And you know what?
It's just wrong.
But have no fear.
Meet one of the most incredible financial minds in America, Dr. Richard Smith.
And Richard's extraordinary tools are trusted by thousands of Americans.
It tracks over 20 billion dollars in the stock market.
And his tools can help you reset your retirement.
You're going to be hearing a lot from Sean and me about Richard.
And literally, we have never endorsed any financial software tool until now.
Why?
Because we've never seen anything like this before.
So see it for yourself.
Go to Hannity.com retirement.
That's Hannity.com forward slash retirement and check it out.
One additional uh point on the president's new immigration plan is uh DHS is asking the Pentagon.
Remember, they did get the Pentagon funds.
In the new Pentagon budget, Democrats are trying to prevent un look.
Past presidents have all done it.
And that is unused funds can then be reappropriated for other projects.
We have legislation that allows and authorizes the president laws, in other words, that authorize the president that if there are if there's any drug dealing commerce lanes in the country, he has the authority to build the barriers and the lights to stop them.
Now they have not changed that law.
And secondly, the president is the commander in chief.
If you have Americans being killed by illegal immigrant criminals, and then you have 4,000 homicides in two years, and 30,000 sexual assaults in two years, and 100,000 violent assaults in two years, maybe that then becomes about the safety, the security of the American people first.
And how do you argue against in the day and age of radical Islamic terrorists?
How do you argue against keeping the border secure, vetting those that want to come into this country illegally, not respecting our laws and our sovereignty and our borders?
You know, if we're gonna give priority to people to come in, I'm not against immigration.
I don't really give a rip where you come from.
I just want to make sure that you're not here to commit any harm against any American.
And number two, you gotta be able to take care of yourself.
We can't, you know, the cost is in over the years, the trillions of dollars when you add in the educational system, the healthcare system, the criminal justice system.
You know, say these are simple, basic fundamental things.
And the economic environment, the job environment, has to be such that Americans are not losing out and getting lower pay because we're letting in too many unskilled workers.
You know, look at what these other countries do.
Merit-based immigration, it's all over the world.
We'll continue.
Hey guys, it's Linda, the executive producer for the Sean Hannity Show.
You might also know me as Sean's Daily Sparring partner, and now that he's a ninja, of course.
And every day we argue about all sorts of things and talk about lots of stuff, including the incredible economy that the president has given everyday Americans.
And just like that, well, we want to tell you about how to fight for your retirement.
And that's right, fight.
There's a huge crisis in America, millions of people are retiring and without enough money.
And if that's not shocking enough, even if you think you've got your financial act together, chances are there are retirement killers out there that you don't know anything about.
So have no fear.
We have one of the brightest financial minds in America to help make sure your investments for your future retirement are on the right track.
I'm talking about Dr. Richard Smith, the founder of TradeSmith.
And his mission is to help Americans be more financially literate.
That's right.
Put the power, put the knowledge back in your hands, make better investment decisions, and avoid catastrophic mistakes that could cause your retirement to be a disaster.
That could cause your retirement to be a disaster.
Thousands and thousands of people trust Dr. Smith's investment tools to track over 20 billion dollars in the stock market.
And I'm telling you, you should too.
When we're talking about your retirement, you're in a financial fight for your future.
Please do yourself a favor, folks.
Register right now for Dr. Smith's special online event, the great retirement reset.
Go to Hannity.com forward slash retirement.
That's Hannity.com forward slash retirement.
Eliminate the stress, eliminate the worry of investing in the stock market.
Register now.
Hannitynow.com forward slash retirement.
Um there's a meeting at the FBI before Comey goes.
Uh, and one question on the table is do you tell the president elect that he is not under investigation as part of what the FBI is doing?
And as Comey has testified and written at his book, you very forcefully argued that that should not be communicated to President elect Trump.
Why?
Because I didn't think it was accurate.
Because I thought that by that point in time that the president fell within the category of what we would describe as the subject or a subject of the investigation, meaning that as the head of the campaign,
and given the scope of the investigation that we were conducting relative to the campaign, I thought that his activities fell within the scope of what we were investigating, and that's the definition under Department of Justice guidelines about what a subject is, that the activities of the person fall within the scope of the investigation.
So therefore, I didn't think it was accurate to say that he wasn't under investigation.
And Jim and I had many discussions about that.
And I know he's testified and uh written about it.
And uh he disagreed.
He disagreed.
On what grounds?
What did he say?
He thought that was too far of a stretch, and he just didn't feel comfortable saying that to the at that point in time, I guess he was the president-elect, because he thought my recollection is I think he thought it would be um what's the word exactly, too confusing, hard to understand, uh, be misinterpreted, um, and he just didn't think it was the right thing to do.
All right, that was uh James Baker, general counsel under Jim Comey saying he urged uh Comey not to tell Trump he was the subject of an investigation.
I didn't think it was accurate to say that he wasn't under investigation, did this on some podcast, and also defended the decision not to give the Trump campaign a defensive briefing on the FBI probe and you know, no spying on the Trump campaign, that's just a lie.
They're all repeating this lie.
The focus was Russia.
Well, if it was Russia, how do you do how do you ignore the dirty Clinton dossier that everybody knew about that everybody was warned about before the election?
And even the New York Times suggesting, as we've been telling you, that it could have been Russian disinformation from the beginning.
How do you justify this?
Now, what's happening here is real, and that is they're all turning on each other.
What's happening is they all know that there's serious potential for them to go to jail or them to get indicted or them to be tried.
I'm just telling you, this is exactly what's happening.
You know, Baker further goes on.
Now remember, he was the one that said, yeah, I kind of thought that Hillary needed to be indicted uh as it relates to the email server, because there was classified information there.
There was top secret information here.
But you know, this now new talking point that this is not spying is just not accurate and true.
You know, and and of course he's there, he's gonna defend the FBI's handling of the dossier, saying, Well, we took it seriously, but we didn't necessarily take it literally and did not treat it as literally true in every aspect.
They absolutely were warned what it was.
That's the whole issue behind you know, Kathleen Kavalek and John Solomon's reporting.
They were all told that uh, hello, this isn't true.
And then, of course, you know, then we had Bruce Orr under closed door testimony saying he told everybody at the state at the FBI and the Department of Justice.
Um this is not verified.
It's Hillary bought and paid for, and also that Steele hates, and the same thing with Kavlack hates Donald Trump.
And then everybody that worked first on rigging Hillary's investigation.
Yeah, there was a real crime with the real intention of destroying the evidence, that of course being the destruction of 33,000 subpoenaed emails and everything else that happened.
But the dossier was packed with unverified lies.
Now the problem is, even as as Baker says that it was salacious and unverified as it relates to the dossier, and that's what, remember, that's what Jim Comey told then president-elect Trump at Trump Tower in January of 2017.
Problem is in October of 2016, after the two warnings, one from Kavlik at the State Department who met with Christopher Steele, and then Bruce Orr, who warned everybody as well.
Well, they were told that it's not verified, but the problem for Comey is he said salacious and unverified in January of 2017, but verified is at the top of any Pfizer application.
So then he's either lying to the president elect in January, or he's lying on the Pfizer application.
Either way, it seems like he believed it, like a lot of other people believed it.
And we can't forget that the Pitbull, who apparently, according to new developments and reports, Andrew Weisman, he was also briefed in August of 2016.
And of course, he was at the Hillary Victory Party.
And, you know, the guy that lost 9-0 in the in the U.S. Supreme Court.
So Christopher Steele had an agenda.
Anyway, sitting down with Michael Isaacov and uh Daniel Claidman, it's, I guess it's called Skull Duggary, a podcast that was released uh, I guess yesterday.
Baker said the FBI treated the dossier as something we were obliged to deal with and obligated to assess.
They didn't provide details on that part.
But if anything, the FBI verified the dossier because they used it as the basis, the bulk of information for the Pfizer warrant.
And he says he personally reviewed and signed off on the page uh Pfizer application, Carter Page, replying, I'm not going to go into details with respect to what investigative steps we actually took to try to validate it.
Well, I think that the problem is it's unverifiable.
Because we now know Steele doesn't stand behind his own dossier.
They they can't talk their way out of this.
And this is a problem.
When you dig in a hole, every time you speak, the fact that these guys keep speaking is a colossal mistake and stupid.
And, you know, I know the FBI, every agent, this is why they're the world's premier law enforcement agency.
They all know the techniques to get people that don't want to talk to talk.
And the reality is they they've got to know deep down inside, like Comey's, you know, doing a town hall on fake news CNN, that this is they're contradicting themselves.
Number one, number two, they know what they did is wrong.
At least they have to have some knowledge of it.
I do believe that many of these people think that they're super patriots, that they know better than we, the smelly Walmart people.
I think they think that they are far superior to we, the smelly Walmart people, the irredeemable deplorable people that cling to God guns of Bibles and religion.
Anyway, so you know, it was challenging, Baker added, noting that validating information from sources can be challenging and mistakes can be made.
Well, not only were mistakes made, the author doesn't stand by it.
That renders it unverifiable.
And it's interesting they talked to Michael Izakov, because remember, Izakov, the whole circular reporting aspect is always the same source, the Steele dossier.
But they leak certain aspects of it to Isakoff and David Korn, and then they act like it's a separate independent source.
See, there are multiple sources on this.
Well, there's not multiple sources.
Anyway, so the general counsel said this week that he and other officials were quite worried that James Comey appeared to be blackmailing then president-elect Trump in that 2017 meeting regarding salacious allegations found in the Steele dossier, and that came up in the broadcast as well,
that they were so concerned about Comey briefing Trump at Trump Tower, that uh in as it relates to Russian interference in the election, As well as the dossier and the analogies were made to J. Edgar Hoover and former FBI director who famously abused power to blackmail individuals.
Quote, we were quite worried about the Hoover analogies.
We were determined not to have such a disaster happen on our watch, Baker said, hoping to convey to the incoming president that they did not want to continue the legacy of Hoover's blackmailing.
Now, Baker did not recall the moment that he first heard about the steel dossier, but he did remember the Bureau taking it seriously.
Obligated to deal.
It's more than obligated.
They took this thing and they ran with it and they used it as the basis to spy on the Trump campaign.
And I'm I'm hearing from a lot of people that the inspector general's report is going to be devastating.
And likely they broke the law in every case and abused power.
So it's going to be interesting to watch what happens on that.
Now we have other issues here.
The launch of the formal inquiry into the origins of the Russian investigation, Mr. Dorham is now involved in.
The Attorney General has promised that he is going to pursue with a vengeance.
And being led by one of the Justice Department's toughest prosecutors.
Now we have a new round of behind the scenes finger pointing among Obama administration officials.
And I think it's it's to watch this circular firing squad begin to form is quite fascinating.
But anyway, a key dispute this week concerns whether the FBI director then Comey or then CIA director Brennan, or both pushed the unverified steel dossier containing claims about the president and his relationship to Russia.
They're all pointing fingers at each other.
In other words, that a dossier that was never.
Well, first of all, the FBI's, you know, for him to say he's not spying on people, Comey, when he signed the first dossier, what was it for?
To wiretap and spy on Carter Page and through Carter Page, it gave them a backdoor into all things Trump campaign.
And then later Trump transition.
And then later the Trump presidency.
It's amazing that Comey says in 2016 that Brennan insisted on including the dossier in the assessment.
But Brennan says nope.
Now Mark Meadows of North Carolina has long demanded answers about the origins of the pro.
Meadows said they know the truth is coming, and now they're all just throwing each other under the bus.
That's just been my point for the last few days.
And the records, you know, with the records on Fox News that a late 2016 email chain, December 2016, to be more specific, indicated Comey told Bureau subordinates that Brennan insisted the dossier be included in the intelligence community assessment, or what they call the IC assessment.
And on Russian interference, known as an ICA, that the email chain has not been made public.
This is what Trey Gowdy and Lindsey Graham have been telling us for the last week or so.
And Brennan, along with the director of national intelligence, Clapper, the ones who oppose Comey's recommendation.
That's what they're saying.
But Comey's saying something very different.
Vox News did reach out to Comey's legal team twice and provided the statement of the former CIA official.
They didn't get a reply.
Shocking on the record.
And Comey's often posting his sanctimonious self-righteous superpatriot Twitter posts.
He's just a phony.
I mean, it's unbelievable.
If the one firing Trump got right dead on accurate, he saw right through this guy.
Thank you.
And another top FBI official, but you know, they acknowledge that others were worried.
Well, when do they admit that they use then unverified information?
That itself is a crime.
We do have a constitution, the rule of law.
And we got a new development today, an email chain picked up by Judicial Watch, showing that the Russia Gate hoax researcher for Fusion GPS, Nellie Orr, deleted a series of emails to her husband at the DOJ Bruce Or.
At the time, he was the fourth highest ranking person at the Department of Justice.
At the end of the email chain, Nelly Orr signs off with the words, quote, thanks.
I'm now deleting these.
Now they got an email today revealing that Nellie Orr, you know, of course, married to Bruce Orr, except she's working for Fusion GPS to build the dossier.
But anyway, the full exchange that took place with uh also a first secretary at the German embassy, part of 339 pages of heavily redacted records from the Department of Justice.
Nellie Orr's email had the same subject line as an email exchange with the subject line, analyst Russian organized crime, April 2016.
The email is disturbing, suggests documents relevant to improper targeting of the president were destroyed, said Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch.
Here's an interesting prediction by Jonathan Turley that a world of hurt awaits Jerry Nadler if he continues to press for grand jury information.
He said you're heading into a world of hurt if you go to the DC circuit.
And Turley pointed out, as Barr has pointed out, that the federal rules of criminal procedure do not allow the attorney general to disclose secret grand jury information that was redacted from the Mueller report.
And a D.C. court recently ruled on the very issue in a case called uh McKeever v.
Barr deciding that outside the specific exceptions outlined in Rule 6E, courts do not have authority to order disclosure of grand jury information.
So, you know, what Nadler and company are asking for is illegal.
And they're supposed to be lawmakers.
It's pathetic.
By the way, the Pfizer Court approved 95% of surveillance applications last year.
Just in case you're interested, that was in the Bangor Maine Daily News.
And uh I think that they're gonna they're going down at a big and all these people.
They can't handle the Trump one, and now they can't handle that.
Muller didn't give them what they wanted.
This is the fourth time they didn't get what they want.
And hour two, Sean Hannity Show.
Glad you're with us, 800 nine-four.
One Sean, if you want to be a part of this extravaganza.
By the way, Senator Tom Cotton is going to join us at the bottom of the hour.
He says we could take Iran out in two shots.
Like, huh?
I will tell you this, though, we better change.
If we're gonna send brave men and women to fight wars, and we're all gonna go when we start, and then lose 58,000 people in Vietnam and many others injured permanently for the rest of their lives.
They they answer the call to serve.
And then are we gonna send them to Iraq and not send them out in up-armored uh Humvees and stupidly go door to door and do the work of the what the Iraqis ought to be doing for themselves, only to take so much time that it gets politicized, just like Vietnam got politicized, and then we say, never mind.
That's not how you fight a war.
If you could, but God forbid we have to fight another war, you got to obliterate them and end it.
It just it's the it's the only way.
If it's an evil regime, you know, you could do war, future wars should be fought in Tampa, Florida on computers.
And that's what's going to happen because it's already happening with the drones, et cetera.
And we just got to be ahead of everybody else.
Anyway, I digress for a minute here.
Um, so we've been following all this news that I just laid out for you as it relates to the deep state.
One ex FBI officials uh worried that Comey appeared to be blackmailing Trump when he was president-elect and he went to Trump Tower and said it was the dossier was salacious but unverified.
But yet the bulk of information on the Pfizer warrant he signed in October was the unverified dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton with Russian lies of all things.
How Robert Muller missed the Russia part of this, I don't know, because he had plenty of time for taxi medallions, pharaoh violations, tax issues, lying to Congress, you know, uh time to go after a 33-year combat vet by the name of General Flynn.
And plenty of time for all this crap.
Anyway, so that's only a small part of it.
Now we see deleted emails between Nellie and Bruce Orr found by Judicial Watch.
You have this circular firing squad that is now forming among deep state operatives.
They're all turning on each other.
Struck and page are saying, uh, go look at Loretta Lynch.
She put the fix In on Hillary's investigation.
And then you've got Comey battling both Rod Rosenstein.
And on the one hand, then the Comey versus Cla um Clapper and Brennan, as it relates to the use of the dossier.
And you got a former top MBI lawyer, James Baker.
Well, we knew the steel dossier wasn't literally true.
Well, then why did you use it?
And 95% of surveillance applications last year are approved.
But McCabe said no dossier.
There wouldn't have been an approval here.
Um then, of course, we have Gerald Nadler that wants the fifth investigation.
And Congressman, the shifty shift, the cowardly shift that he is, he wants the seventh investigation.
FBI concluded, the House Intel Committee concluded, the bipartisan Senate committee concluded.
Now the Mueller report concluded.
No collusion.
Nobody that cared about collusion with Trump seems to care about real evidence collusion to cause chaos and help Hillary and Ukraine is providing us real evidence called emails.
Just like they don't care about obstruction, only if it's Donald Trump, not Hillary, subpoenaed emails, bleach, but you know the routine.
Just like they care about Kavanaugh's high school me too moments of what happened and allegations from 40 years ago.
I believe, I believe, but nobody believes the two women that accused the lieutenant governor of Virginia of violent rape and violent sexual assault.
I don't hear the I believers.
Anyway, Greg Jarrett is with us, uh Fox News legal analysts, author of the number one bestseller, The Russian hoax.
Also uh David Schoen is with us, criminal defense and civil liberties attorney.
You know, you wrote me a nasty email and you said, I know more about Andrew Weisman and Genie Ray than anybody else, because yesterday one of the stories was that Mueller allowed his pit bull, Andrew Weissman, to pick the team of uh Democratic donors.
I'm sorry about that.
I didn't know.
Mr. Schoen.
I certainly didn't intend for it to be a nasty email.
No, I'm just teasing you.
I'm this is a little bit of hyperbole there.
Yeah, no, listen, uh Weissman is what he is.
We've discussed it many times, but uh you know, I've had cases with Weissman, Greg Andres with Genie Ree.
I mean, Muller knew what he was doing when he picked this team.
This was a team of financial and other supporters of Hillary Clinton and anti-Trump.
And what Mr. Nadler ought to finally accept is if that team with that agenda found no collusion, whatever collusion means, didn't find sufficient evidence for obstruction of justice.
It's time to move on.
Now they put in there all their politically charged facts and all that sort of thing, and that's why you know this uh Mr. Nadler's committee wants to have this cathartic uh reading out loud of the report.
But this has become an absurdity now.
It's time to move on with policy, and it's time, I suppose, for this investigation to get fully underway by Mr. Well, I think it it has, and I'm getting some rumblings.
I can't confirm it, that it looks like Horowitz may be done, that it's going to be devastating.
Obviously, he's had to brief the attorney general.
The attorney general was very clear of the Mueller issues dead, but Hillary's investigation, how it was handled, the dossier, the Pfizer warrants, uh, the abuse of power by high-ranking officials is real.
That game is on, and we see it with Mr. Durham.
Yeah, John Durham was the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, specially appointed by the attorney general to investigate this, has the power and the skills to get to the bottom of all of the corrupt acts at the FBI and the Department of Justice.
Now, the inspector general has been doing a lot of the legwork over the course of the last year and a half coming up with some of the evidence.
But you need Sean, a U.S. attorney to force people who were no longer employed by the government to talk.
And you know, Durham has the authority to present incriminating evidence to grand jury to force people to testify for potential indictments.
So you're talking about people who have left the FBI, like Comey and McCabe and Strzok and Lisa Page.
But I I think he's also zeroing in on people like Bruce Orr, James Baker, uh, and of course, Christopher Steele, who composed the phony dossier that was all nothing but, you know, 17 memos of lies, and Glenn Simpson, who is taking the fifth, uh, the founder of Fusion GPS who was funding the whole thing and egging steel on and leaking it to the media, and then of course you've got uh Brenner and uh Brennan and Clapper.
You know, these guys are all now turning on each other.
There was a scheme afoot.
Comey and Brennan and Clapper.
They were gonna use this phony dossier, slip it in to the intelligence community assessment, and then use that as an excuse for coming to go to Trump and debrief him about the dossier, which was all a pretext for then leaking it by clapper to the media to damage the president.
And all three of these guys, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, they were all eager participants.
This was their scheme.
It was corrupt, and now they're getting caught because it's all unraveling.
I think it's all going in the same way.
But we're going to get the the five buckets that we always talk about.
We're gonna get the FISA applications, we're gonna get the 302s, we're gonna get uh the gang of eight, we're gonna get these exculpatory information apparently that was withheld, and we're gonna get apparently the email connection with the FBI admitting a lot of wrongdoing.
Um what else are we gonna get?
I'll ask you first, Greg, then I'll ask David.
Well, you he uh I think among those documents you will see that the FBI and the DOJ knew that this was an unverified phony document written by a guy who lied, who was virulently biased, and it was paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democrats.
They knew all of this.
They knew that Carter Page was not a spy, even though they told the FISA court literally, this is a Russian agent.
That those are their words in the FISA application, and they knew that was a lie.
They didn't care.
They were gonna bring down Trump.
They were gonna spy and surveil.
And God bless the attorney general, who who likes to use plain language that all Americans can understand.
You can listen all you want to the excuses being offered by people like Christopher Ray and James Comey and so forth.
That was spying.
And you know, whether it's done with a a legal predicate or not, the attorney general will get to the bottom of it.
What is your take on that part of it?
And do you see the indictments that we think are warranted here, David Show?
David, where'd you go?
I guess we lost David.
Well, the thing that I know everybody wants more than anything is they want to know when we get the smoking guns that blow them out of the water.
You know, like James Comey is an interesting guy.
He never shuts up, which I think is just legally it's it's dumb.
Yeah, stupid.
And he's contradicted himself.
But even on the warrants issue, you know, if the bulk of information as the Nunez Grassley grand memo say is the the dirty Russian dossier paid for by Hillary, and he signs that it's verified in the warrant October 2016, tells Trump it's not verified, but salacious in 2017, and now all the FBI guys are saying, holy crap, is he going J. Edgar Hoover on us?
And is he blackmailing the president?
You know, I'll tell you what Comey's gonna do.
When when he's up against the wall and the evidence uh is incriminating against him, he does one or two things.
He he either uh claims he can't remember anything except his name and date of birth, because that's what he did in the private sessions under testimony with Congress, or he'll just make stuff up.
He will lie, and you'll find that in the inspector general's report when his excuse for not indictory Clinton was, well, the congressional intent of that statute required intent.
And of course, I went down to Washington, D.C. and pulled the uh congressional uh recordings, and and it it was just the opposite.
Uh they specifically wrote a new provision eliminating intent.
So Comey was just lying and making it up.
So he'll either lie Or suddenly he will have amnesia and can't remember everything or anything, and he'll say, Oh, you know, my I may have affixed my signature to that, but I was relying on other people.
What is your take on that part, David?
Well, I think he's 100% right.
I mean, Comey has shown himself to believe that he's above the law.
What I want to see happen here is through Mr. Durham, a witness, a live witness come forward, whether motivated by fear of prosecution or conscience, whatever it is, I want that witness to tell the truth.
Because I hate to be a Johnny One note.
I don't think you've even scratched the surface on what people like Andrew Weissman did that was wrong.
This is dangerous.
Remember, you had an attempted coup at the Justice Department.
You have a cadre of people who felt they were above the law doing God's work in getting Donald Trump out of office.
That's a very, very constitutionally dangerous situation.
We need witnesses here on top of the documents.
I got to take a quick break.
We'll come back more with uh David Schoen and Greg Jarrett on the other side.
All right, as we continue on Sean Hannity Show, 800 9.1 Sean.
Greg Jarrett with us as well as uh David Schoen.
So we're gonna now I is there a possibility that the inspector general report becomes the the straw that breaks the camel's back.
David.
Yeah, there's a chance of that.
Listen, Michael Horowitz is an honest guy, if nothing else.
I've had him as a special prosecutor in a corruption case in the Southern District of New York.
He was hard hitting.
He slammed the agents when they were crooked.
Um I think he's you know been held back a little bit in the report that he issued earlier now.
Um and he certainly has longstanding relationships with some of these people.
But yes, there's a possibility that he could really finally pull the curtain back on the misconduct here.
Unbelievable.
Right.
I I think there have been several key individuals who have come to Michael Horowitz and spilled the beans.
And I I'm hearing the same thing, Sean, that you're hearing that this report by Horowitz will be devastating, and I think it will lead to legal action by the Department of Justice against people.
But how could it not?
Now let's just think about this for a minute.
If they used a dirty political dossier that was unverified as the means of spying on an opposition party candidate in an election year, um, and uh and they were warned multiple times by multiple people that she paid for it, still hated Trump.
It's not verified, but did it anyway.
Isn't that premeditated fraud on a court?
Oh, it is.
And as I identify in my book, The Russia Hoax, it's six different felonies, six of them.
But you know, here's what their excuses are going to be.
All the people who signed off on it from you know, Sally Yates to James Comey, you assigned three of them, Rod Rosenstein, they're gonna say, well, we relied on the work that was done putting the uh FISA application together.
We relied on all these other people, and they didn't properly communicate all of this stuff that we should have told the court.
So they're gonna blame up.
But Rod Rosenstein said, You're a career law enforcement official.
Yeah, but he's also made some other comments uh suggesting that he didn't actually read the document.
He didn't dig into the reason.
Is that gonna work?
That they they relied on other people's accounts of the dossier?
Well, it shouldn't work, uh, but in the end, you know, that's their only mayor culpa.
Does hit do we go back to Hillary?
Does she get in trouble for the first time?
Well, for for paying for paying a foreign national for information is a violation of the federal campaign election act.
What is it?
Is that a felony?
She paid for that dossier makes it a thing of value.
And in egregious cases, it can be a crime because it was willful.
She gets away with the emails, she gets away with the obstruction.
But she might not get away with the dossier.
What about the uranium-one deal?
Hard to know.
All right, thank you both.
When we come back, Senator Cotton of Arkansas, much more news roundup information overload.
Your call's also coming up.
800-941 Sean, straight ahead.
Yes.
That didn't take you a second.
Two strikes, the first strike and the last strike.
What are the conditions or the circumstances that would justify going to war with Iran?
Well, if Iran struck out militarily against the United States or against our allies in the region, then I would certainly expect a devastating response against Iran.
As somebody who fought in two fronts in the Middle East, both in Iraq and in Afghanistan.
Do you think it would be a good idea to go to war with Iran?
No, I don't advocate military action against Iran.
I'm simply delivering the message that if Iran were to attack the United States, uh, it would be a grave miscalculation on their part, and there would be a theorist response.
Um, we don't want to govern Iran.
We don't want to rule 80 million Iranians.
We want 80 million Iranians to be able to govern themselves.
Where are you on regime change?
What I want is to have an outlaw regime change its behavior and to rejoin the civilized world and stop supporting terrorism and trying to overthrow the governments of so many of its neighbors.
Ultimately it's up to the Iranian people and their leaders to decide how they're going to govern their country.
But with men like those in charge of Iran, I I think we're going to see what we've seen for the last 40 years, which is a revolutionary theological movement that's hijacked the powers of a nation state.
I wonder if that means on any level to you that war is inevitable.
War is never inevitable.
War is always the product of human choices.
All right, that was Senator Tom Cotton of uh Arkansas.
And in an interview, I it took me by surprise.
I'm going to get into this issue of the U.S. winning a war against Iran and two strikes.
Um for those of you that don't know, uh Senator Cotton is uh uh combat Torvet and served as a platoon leader for the Army's Third Infantry uh Regiment at Arlington.
Uh he actually has a new book out that pays homage to these soldiers who have gone before all of us and did what they did and and served their country.
Um many of them losing their lives in the course of that duty and honor um in service for other people.
And um anyway, it's called the Soldier A Soldier's Tour at Arlington National Cemetery.
Pretty inspiring portrait of Arlington.
If you haven't been there, you need to go.
And Arlington Cemetery is old guard, but also chronicling his personal journey and time as a platoon leader in the unit.
Senator, how are you?
Welcome to the program.
Hey, Sean, it's great to be on the program and thank you very much for your interest in sacred duty.
You know, it's a great honor to be able to serve at the old guard uh in 2007 and 2008 between my overseas tours, and it was uh great honor to spend the last year back at the cemetery with the soldiers of the old guard and to tell their story in sacred duty.
Well, this is important uh an important part of your history is that for over 16 months in 07 and 08, you know, between combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, you served as the platoon leader uh of this old guard, the Army's Third Infantry Regiment at Arlington.
Uh these soldiers have been embodied they you know, they embody the ideals of honor and sacrifice.
Um so between that time, what did you actually do there?
Sean, I was a platoon leader with the old guard whose primary mission is military honor funerals in Arlington National Cemetery.
We'd perform 20 to 30 funerals a day for veterans of World War II and Korea and Vietnam and unfortunately active duty burials for those who had just been killed a few days earlier in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Um we can do up to a hundred funerals in a week.
I probably did four to five hundred funerals in my time at Arlington.
Um, but the distinguishing hallmark of the old guard is their pursuit of perfection in everything they do, their ethos of excellence, because even though we might have performed 20 to 30 funerals a day, we knew for for that fallen hero and for that family at the grave site, that was the only funeral they were ever going to see.
That was a once-in-a-lifetime moment, and it was a lifetime in a making.
And we owed it to our uh comrades in arms to pay tribute to them.
We also knew that it helped create the next generation of guardians for this nation.
Whenever young men and women see the way our nation honors our war fallen, know that they will be treated in the exact same way if, heaven forbid, uh they join the military when they grow up and they have to go downrange to fight and they lose their lives.
I think it's a really important message that we send to the next generation of American that we've s that we started at the very beginning of this country, back in the Revolutionary War, and we carry forward to today, that there's no one we honor more than our warriors, and especially those who have laid down their life in defense of our nation.
What is the reaction?
Is it every time the same when taps are played or 21 guns salute?
I don't know if that's included in every funeral, but I know my father's built uh buried in a military gravesite as well.
He fought in World War II.
Tap taps is played at every military honor funerals.
Uh the big guns are fired at certain funerals for uh senior officers or for senior civilians inside the Department of Defense.
Um but uh, you know, it it's a mournful tune and many families lose their composure.
Um obviously the the raw the ra and newer that the um death was the harder it is on the family, but of course that kind of thing sticks with you.
It stays on your mind after the funeral if you've seen a young widow receive the flag from you, sobbing at the loss of her husband and what it means to raise the two small children next to her without their death dad for the rest of their lives.
Did you speak those words on behalf of a grateful nation?
Did you do that?
We did.
It's called condolences, Sean.
Um and it's part of the test that all officers and NCOs have to undergo um before they can be certified to perform a funeral in the cemetery.
Um it's uh you know something that you don't forget, um when you bend down on a knee and you take that flag and you put it in.
Tell tell us the whole pro tell everybody the whole process if you don't mind, walk them through, because this is after they fold the flag that was draped over the casket and it's folded with the honor that it deserves, and then take it from there.
Yeah.
So uh so once the the family is next to the graveside, once everything is in position, I as officer in charge at the head of the grave would step away, the chaplain would step in.
The chaplain was the main link to the family, the chaplain would know about the soldier uh whom we were honoring, uh whether he had just passed away in Iraq and the conditions of his death uh downrange, or if he was a World War II veteran, the chaplain perform a short service, um and then step out, at which point I would step back into the head of the casket.
That was the cue for the casket team which had been holding the flag taut to begin to fold the flag.
That is a precise uh maneuver.
They have exactly one minute fifty-five seconds uh to fold it into a crisp triangle and present it to me while the US Army band plays, usually either America the beautiful or Army Blue.
And then once it's presented to me, the casket team marches off and I I turn and and walk to the next of yen.
I take a knee and I present the flag to the next of Ken, and then I recite the condolences on behalf of the president and army and a grateful nation, and then I stand and I salute.
Um and then I return to the head of the casket while the funeral can be.
So you take a knee, you present the flag, you have white gloves on.
I know I remember that part.
And what are the exact words you say?
Yeah, so you t you go over, you you do have your dress uniform on and the white gloves on.
Um you take that knee and you present the flag and then you recite the condolences.
Now the condolences have changed just a little bit uh since the time I was there.
Um what they and that was done to harmonize them across all four services.
Um and today the condolences are on behalf of the President of the United States, the United States Army, and a grateful nation.
Please accept this flag as a symbol of our appreciation for your loved ones' honorable and faithful service.
And when the next of Ken takes the flag, you stand uh and you salute.
Uh one final salute to the flag that had adorned their loved ones' remains.
Unbelievable.
You know, we don't honor those brave men.
We don't think, I mean, we don't wake up every morning and say, Oh, I'm so free, you know.
And you take we take it for granted.
I mean, like a lot of blessings of life.
And then you think of all the people that have died in all the wars this country has had to endure.
And America, as I often say, is the country there's never been a country that has accumulated more power, abused it less, and we're not a perfect country, but also used it to advance the human condition more than the United States of America.
Just a fact.
But let me ask you, let me ask you this question.
Um go ahead.
No, I was gonna say that's an absolute fact, Sean, and it's those young men and women, whether that are like they're at Arlington National Cemetery or with famed divisions like the Hundred First Airborne Division where I serve that have done that good on behalf of our nation.
And as you say, probably most of us in civilian life probably don't think enough each day about those Americans who laid down their life and the fac sacrifices their Family made, but as I write in sacred duty, that's part of the reason why we have a unit like the old guard of Arlington to every single day in the cemetery,
whether it's at a military honor funeral or guarding the tomb of the unknown soldier for the eighty second consecutive year to express our gratitude, our reverence, and and even our love as a nation for those fallen heroes and their families.
We don't have the freedoms without these guys.
We don't have this country without them.
And again, you don't wake up every morning when you think of how profound it is, you know, no greater love have man for another than to lay down their life, and all these people have.
Um it it strikes you and you realize that the lives we enjoy are because of so many sacrificing.
But let me uh ask you why I have you on the phone.
I wanna and by the way, it's a great book.
It's uh coming out May 14th, uh Sacred Duty, a soldiers' tour at Arlington National Cemetery.
Um I have studied this Iranian situation a lot over the years.
You know, I can remember when the Shah was removed and out of France comes the Ayatollah and the theocracy emerges, and I was very angry when Obama dropped a hundred and fifty billion dollars in cash and other currency on the tarmac in Iran for the mullahs that chant death to America and death to Israel, etc.
Um they've been saber rattling the last week or so.
You in an interview, I believe it was on PBS, said that you believe the U.S. could win the war against Iran in two strikes.
And I wanted to ask you about it because I think we're all pretty confident that they, as evil as they are, they have uh intelligently moved a lot of their nuclear sites all around the country, deeply embedded into the ground, and which would make taking those sites out alone a monumental military task.
Well, Sean, to be exact, what I said on PBS is that we would uh resolve the dispute in one strike, because I said that if there were a military conflict with Iran, there would only be two strikes the first strike and the last strike.
What I mean by that is that we don't seek war with Iran.
We're not taking military action just for the hell of it.
But if Iran were to attack us, attack one of our ships in the Persian Gulf, attack our troops in Iraq, um, or attack the personnel, the thousands and thousands of citizens, in addition to diplomats and soldiers that we have living in the reason in the region, by taking the first strike against us, they would be guaranteeing that we take the last strike against them.
They might start a battle, we would be the ones ending the battle, and we would end it in a time time in a manner of our choosing.
All right, quick break.
We'll come back more with Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas uh on the other side.
And then, of course, we have our news roundup information overload, Jonathan Danielle and your call straight ahead.
All right, as we continue, Senator Tom Cotton is with us.
It's on sale, Amazon.com.
It's a great book.
I think you'll be interested in it.
We lost 58,000 troops in Vietnam.
I think uh grand total Iraq and Afghanistan, somewhere between seven and eight thousand and and so many more permanently injured, losing limbs, etc.
And I've met many of the the families, gold star families, families w that have, you know, injuries that are forever life-changing.
Um I don't like how we politicize war anymore.
I don't like the idea that we don't fight them to win them.
Uh it seems we're all gung-ho when we start, then it gets through seen through the prism of politics, and we're not winning it.
Um I I then it raises a question.
When Harry Truman hit Hiroshima, Nagasaki, it was over.
Did innocent people die?
Yeah.
We did not start that war either.
My father served four years in the Pacific.
Do we have to reconsider how war is fought and only get engaged?
We can't have guys in Iraq going door to door anymore, and they don't even have up armored Humvees for crying out loud.
So, Sean, it's not in our interest, nor should we desire, to try to govern 80 million Iranians.
I would much rather 80 million Iranians be able to govern themselves in basic stability and peace, and not be a threat to the United States and a threat to the security of a vital region as well.
That's why uh when I say that there would be two strikes, the first strike and the last strike, we would not precipitate, and we have not taken any Actions to precipitate the increased tensions you see in in the Persian Gulf region right now.
The administration is responding prudently to very serious and credible threats against the United States, our personnel and our interests in the region.
I hope by virtue of the actions we've taken, deploying an additional carrier strike group and more bombers and patriot missile systems, that we have sent the signal to Iran that they need to stand down from some of the threatening actions they're taking.
I've got a make no mistake.
I just want the next generation of weaponry to be I want our wars to be fought in Tampa.
That's it.
In other words, that uh seriously, I want the next generation of weapons.
We can't go to door to door anymore.
We can't do it.
There's too many kids sacrificing, then it gets politicized, then you have to ask, well, why did we even begin it?
And that infuriates me because it shows a a lack of respect for what we're asking these kids to do.
If you're gonna fight a war, you better fight and you better win it and you better win it fast.
That's how we have to fight it.
I I think yeah, I think what the uh the Department of Justice is trying to do, what Chairman Joe Dunford is trying to do is provide the options to the president should I Iran strike the United States and our personnel are our interests.
I gotta I gotta run those center.
I'm not trying to cut you off here, but I got we're just up on the on the clock.
Uh listen, we really appreciate your time.
Um thanks for all you do, and the book is out May uh fifth May 14th, uh Sacred Duty, a soldiers tour at Arlington National Cemetery.
All right, news roundup information uh overload our Sean Hannity show.
Let me remind you of the media attacks on Lindsey Graham.
Now, Lindsay Graham, by the way, yeah, he said to Donald Trump Jr., you don't have to go back and testify another 30 hours.
That's stupid.
You have and and these guys are they're so dumb, they're like, he's advising him to break the law, the constitutional order.
It's a it's a constitutional right, you idiots.
They're so dumb.
Just like they're asking the attorney general to break the law and give the unredacted Mueller report, even with grand jury information.
That is illegal.
They're so or they're gonna take him out in handcuffs by the sergeant of arms.
Just listen to how they attack uh Lindsey Graham and you know, and defending the deep state after the Durham investigation is announced because they're gonna look bad.
It's progress, yes.
You had U.S. Senators telling the president's family to ignore the rule of law.
That's nuts.
By the judiciary committee.
Yes.
Uh who you would think would be down.
Yes, I know.
His numbers were horrible before he started being Donald Trump's BFF.
But is it worth it?
That's an answer.
You know, only he can provide.
Chris, yeah.
Lindsay, uh, if you have an issue with anything you're I'm saying, you know my number, baby.
Give me a call.
William Barr, Trump's hand-picked defender as attorney general, is now operating as the president's personal hitman.
It's a really chilling message.
This is a completely unnecessary investigation.
And it's just a way of harassing people who have done their jobs.
We are living in in really strange times when there is such daylight between the president and the intelligence communities.
Um, it is never good for our national security.
The people, the professionals, the intelligence professionals who are working at the FBI or the CIA, are there as professionals, no matter how he chooses to characterize it.
So now you hear the term constitutional crisis.
You know, you hear this word constitutional crisis.
Do you agree with Chairman Natler that the country is currently in a constitutional crisis?
Yes.
It's a constitutional crisis.
Okay.
The country is in a constitutional crisis.
The official Trump constitutional crisis.
Folks, a constitutional crisis.
Behind door number two, you have a constitutional crisis.
Ever wonder what a constitutional crisis looks like?
The real total end of democracy.
Open your eyes.
If this is a constitutional crisis, how can Democrats not move forward with impeachment hearings?
We have the option of impeachment and we think this is a constitutional crisis.
Start impeachment proceedings.
Why not pursue impeachment?
Why are you resisting?
Some people would argue we've been in a constitutional crisis since Donald Trump was elected president.
All right, joining us now to discuss Jonathan Gillum, former FBI agent, Federal Air Marshal, author of Sheep No More, Daniel McLaughlin, attorney constitutional expert.
You know, Daniel, you're a Democrat, right?
Well, I'm a liberal.
I'm a liberal.
You're a liberal.
Okay.
So do you realize that the media, the ninety nine percent of the media that were going with this Russia hoax conspiracy theory, all the lying that they've done the last two years?
We've had four separate investigations that say no conspi uh conspiracy, no collusion, no obstruction, nothing.
But and they ignored the they got nothing right for two years.
They support your liberal views.
Why should why should anyone ever trust these people again?
They got an enormous amount right.
Hey, Sean, hey, Jonathan.
You know, obviously there was no connection made um in the Mueller report between Russia's efforts and the Trump campaign, although in the report was quite clear that Russia tried very hard and the campaign was open to it.
But to your point, no conspiracy.
And on obstruction, there were ten separate points, ten separate incidences where Mueller found possible obstruction.
He left it to Congress to figure out whether that was actually something that rose to the level of a crime.
I think the reporting has been pretty good, honestly.
You think the reporting has been good as it relates to the Mueller investigation?
I think it's there's been actually there was so much in that report that wasn't a surprise because there any minutes they have been assuring us forever that this president is guilty, and it came out four separate times, just the opposite is proven true.
And they had their hopes, their dreams, their fantasies, their desires shattered uh when the Mueller report didn't give them what they want.
Jonathan, I mean uh ninety-nine point nine percent, they just purposefully lied.
That's all they did is lie day in and day out, every second minute hour of every 24 hour day of every seven day week and month for two years.
Yeah, you know, uh Sean, first off, I want to congratulate Danielle because she's uh finally saying that she's a liberal and does not identify as a Democrat.
And I think that's a huge leap forward.
I think more people that are on the uh left should do that, and I think this uh actual subject that you're speaking about would actually start to um make more sense to all these people out there that say they're democrats, because the reality is, Sean, you're you're exactly right.
I'm gonna be giving a speech uh later today in Wayne County, Michigan, uh at the Republican committee there, and I'm gonna be talking about the fog of war.
And you know, the fog of war doesn't only exist in war, and war isn't just something that uh where you use guns and bullets.
Uh propaganda and subversion are warfare.
And what we're seeing with the media and with Moeller and with Comey and with Struck and Page and McCabe and all these people are subversive tactics.
And uh spying on a president's a subversive tactic.
And misrepresenting the facts and misreporting the facts is a subversive propaganda tactic of warfare.
And I think the majority of people that say they're democrats or identify as being liberal, if they see the reality of what's happening, they're gonna start to see that they have been under a mist of lies that are just shallow enough that they don't question them.
And that's what's happening here.
Danielle?
Uh I've I've got four examples here of uh reporting uh that was born out in the Miller report.
So the first is the Trump Town meeting where Russians offered uh Jared Kushner and others do it on Hillary Clinton.
That was number one.
Number two, the statement on Air Force One where it was about uh um uh adoption and it wasn't in fact.
Don McGunn, the reporting about John McGaughn and being asked to ask Rosenstein to fire the official counsel, all these things were.
Was there any was there any collusion with Russia to disrupt our election and our electoral process?
No.
Was there any obstruction of justice determined?
Uh well, the report.
No, no, no, no, no.
You you don't get to say an open question.
You don't get you don't get to say that there's obstruction when the attorney general, the office of legal counsel, the deputy attorney general who appointed Mueller, when they all say it doesn't rise to any level that would warrant any type of charge of obstruction of justice.
Now the next question.
Do you you care about obstruction of justice?
Do you think Hillary obstructed justice when she deleted subpoenaed emails and she bleep bleach bit clean the hard drive and had our devices busted up and removed SIM cards?
Do you think that was obstruction of justice?
You're a lawyer.
That was that was investigated.
That was investigated.
It was found that it didn't rise to the level.
And do you believe that?
But do you believe that was a rigged investigation?
Because Peter Strzok says so under closed door testimony.
Well, Lisa Page says it was rigged.
Uh they laugh about it.
They all said that Loretta Lynch, Tarmac, Bill Clinton Lynch, and it's a matter, not uh not a investigation, that sh there was no way they said that she was ever going to do a real investigation.
Now, did we find top secret and classified information on that private server in a mom and shop bathroom closet?
Is that true?
Has that been confirmed?
There are a handful of classified documents that were sent to people with clear.
Excuse me.
Excuse me.
Is that legal to have any top secret or classified?
So it's illegal.
So she committed a crime.
We go over this week after week, showing.
No, no, no.
I'm asking, did she commit a crime by having top secret and classified information on a private server?
It's a simple yes or no question.
No, according to the FBI.
I'm not asking according.
Did she is it against the law to have top secret classified information on a private server?
It's it's circumstantial, okay?
No, it's not circumstantial.
That's called hard evidence.
We found classified wait a minute.
We found classified top secret information on the server in the bathroom closet.
Yes or no?
Uh there were a handful of emails.
Yes, forget the how many.
There were top secret and classified and more classified on the server, correct?
Well, there were handful would see the things in the were they on that private server in the closet, yes or no?
Yes.
They were.
Yep.
Okay.
The Espionage Act, 18 USC 793, says that that is a crime, a felony, correct or not correct.
I don't have the statute in front of me, Sean.
The FBI investigated, there have been a lot of people who are not going to be able to do that.
You're giving me spin instances where people have not been prosecuted.
It's called discretion.
Do you think what do you think if I deleted subpoenaed emails, 33,000 of them, subpoenaed, and I cleaned up my server the way she did with bleach bit and I busted up the devices and removed SIM cards, would I be arrested?
She deleted personal emails that were not subject to the No, that's not true.
You're again that's not true what you're saying.
Because they ones they found, they found some of them in Anthony Wiener's laptop, and they weren't classified in top secret.
They were destroyed.
That's called there's an intention there.
It's to destroy the evidence.
Jonathan.
Yeah, and this is what we need to guard against.
And this is what I would I would uh you know, we would like to hear Danielle guard against uh and and a lot of the other liberals that are in media is that um you you cannot go when when you see an investigative group such as the Mueller group that is politically charged to the level that they were, he recruited far left Democrats.
The people at top of the bureau are far left uh I don't even want to call them Democrats, they're just far left socialists as far as I'm concerned, communists even.
When we have an investigative group like that, you have to question everything that they have said and done.
And when we look at what the Clintons did in the totality of the circumstances, we look at people actually committing felonies, espionage, I believe collusion themselves with the Russians when they send somebody out to go build a dossier and communicate with Russians to gather and and create fake evidence.
These are things that we need to look at.
And when you compare that to the stuff uh that the evidence that they brought up in the charges that they tried to bring up against the Trumps, including Donald Trump Jr. and General Flynn and the rest of these individuals in the Trump campaign, it doesn't even measure up.
There was nothing that they could prove that they did because they were trying to create it as They go along.
And that's the difference.
If we had a real if Barr does what he says he's gonna do, it's an open and shut case, Sean.
And Daniel, I hope you see that because it is literally committed felony, have evidence, charge them.
That's as far of a stretch as it has to be when it comes to what the Clintons and the rest of these leftists on the Democratic side have done and have covered up as far as I'm concerned.
All right, quick break.
More with the ever frustrating Daniel McLaughlin and Jonathan Gillam.
Uh as we continue, Ami Horowitz at the bottom of the hour.
And as we continue with Danielle McLaughlin and uh Jonathan Gillam.
Danielle.
Yeah, I need to explain something for folks who are sitting at home.
When the attorney They're not sitting, they're they're grip they're they're grabbing their car's uh steering wheel harder and harder every time you duck my question.
You know what?
Uh I don't I don't come on your show to be popular, and um, I'm appreciative of everyone who's listening, and I know most like folks don't agree with me, but just give me a minute to explain what I mean here.
So, Bill Barr, when you were talking about uh either Hillary Clinton or uh or the president, and you have someone in the on the FBI in the Clinton case because the attorney general had recused yourself because of that tarmac meeting, or you've got Bill Barr.
What they're looking for, what they have to basically make the decision per Department of Justice guidelines is whether they think they can get a conviction.
It's not, you know, whether you decide to charge or not, which is what you or I would get, but they have to decide whether they have enough evidence to convict.
That's a different standard than whether you would would charge.
And so what is happening, and my frustration is that you're willing to believe BAR that there were an obstruction.
Um, you know, there wasn't enough to to prove obstruction, but you're not willing to believe Comey and the FBI that there wasn't enough to convict Hillary Clinton, and that just seems unfair to me.
I can see both sides, certainly it's problematic and it's political, and we all believe what we believe, but the the standard is so high, that's that's why we're not gonna see uh, you know, uh we're not gonna see uh the Department of Justice going after either of them, and certainly because the president uh is immune at this point because of the Department of Justice guidelines, because he has uh more important things to do.
That's what the DOJ has decided in the past.
What do you think, John?
Daniel, I I don't believe anybody in Washington, DC, quite frankly.
And but what I do believe in is evidence, and I believe in the totality of the circumstances.
Look at what these two groups of people, one had that have been investigated, the other that is not.
What we see is an unbalance of fairness and justice, where one person who is assumed to have done something is fully investigated, and the other people where there is actual evidence of espionage hasn't been looked at at all.
And that's where I hope.
Well, we've got three investigations, right?
We've got three investments, but three investigations going on right now.
You've got Horowitz, now you have the Connecticut uh attorney general who's looking into this.
So we'll be investigated.
Yeah, well, it's happening, right?
I mean, the the the DOJ is run by the current administration and they are investigating, and we will all find out.
We will all find out.
And that's good.
Justice should be blind.
Justice should be blind to the I don't disagree, John.
I don't disagree.
I don't disagree.
And this is the last thing I'll say.
I mean, if they really wanted uh Hillary Clinton, they would never have announced, you know, ten days before the elections, uh, you know, they would never have sent the comedy would never have sent the letter, he would never have had the press conference, they would have buried it.
Ami Horowitz at the bottom of the hour when we come back.
My name is Ami Horowitz, and I'm running for the Democratic nomination to be president of the United States.
The Democratic Party has become the party of socialism, open borders, and later abortioners.
They become so radicalized over the past several years that I felt compelled to try to bring some sanity into the discussion.
In order for me to qualify to get on the Democratic debate stage, I need to raise money from 65,000 individual donors.
Even a single dollar will do.
So if you want to see me throw an intellectual hand grenade on the Democratic debate stage and hold them accountable, go to Ami for America dot com and donate some money.
Send some cash.
Anything.
I'm gonna wait while you do that.
I'm seriously gonna wait.
I'm going to wait until you send me the money.
I'm going to wait until you send me the money.
Anytime.
Just go ahead and do it.
It's cool.
I'm gonna wait away.
Honey, can you make me a sandwich?
All right, that's uh our crazy friend, uh 25 now till the top of the hour, uh Ami Horowitz, and he's running for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination because all the current candidates are insane, and if 65,000 people donate one buck, I'll be on stage at the next month's democratic debate and say that to their face.
Well, uh you know you are nuts.
You uh even your own daughter who I just met.
How old is your beautiful daughter?
She turned 18 today, Sean.
18.
No dating, by the way.
My daughter's seventeen.
Oh, come on.
What?
Oh.
No, when you're 45, maybe we'll consider.
Um on the scale of one to ten, how crazy is your dad at home?
Oh, a 14.
Yes, that was a quick answer.
Yeah.
Um, all right.
You you're serious because you think you would get in the debates.
That's why you're doing it, obviously.
Yes, there no, it's it's when I saw about in February, they announced what the qualifications were.
I said, this is achievable.
So I have to raise one dollar, anything, a dollar from 65,000 people, and I'm on the debate stage.
Or alternatively, if I pull at one percent.
Can I give you a dollar cash before you leave today?
No, unfortunately.
I can spend it on coffee, but uh by the way, another way to do it is that when the poll cards.
Right, but they but they've come up with some plan.
Yes.
That they're gonna weed out those people that they deem are not serious, and you probably would rise right to the top of that list.
No, they don't, they cannot do that.
They won't be able to do it.
Either the only way they could do it is if I don't they're they're if you have they have 20 people who both poll at 1% and the 65,000, they're first, but they only have 13 of those people who have qualified.
So in a day and age, by the way, I'm willing your listeners know if the pollsters call them and people can identify as a man or a woman, so you can identify as a Democrat.
Why not?
And say, Yeah, I choose Amy, why not?
May I I could poll too.
All right.
How much of the 65,000 one dollar donations have you gotten?
So we had this is our first week.
Our first week ended yesterday, and we're 15,000 individual donations.
So you can get there.
Totally if you but you you This is doable.
This is totally doable.
Um I like the idea.
Well, you don't want the money.
You're not doing this for money, you're doing it just to be able to get hopefully some interviews and on the debate stage.
Could you imagine me on the debate stage?
I think it would be the most well, first of all, bring a little life to this, you know, pathetic group of you know, new green dealers that are out there.
You don't support the new green deal, do you?
I do not.
That is my official position.
I do not support the new green deal.
Well, I don't know how you're running in the Democratic Party because you know you're probably the only Democrat now that doesn't want to eliminate oil, gas, uh, the combustion engine and cows and planes and give everything away for free.
Late-term abortion, socialism.
I mean, the list goes on.
But look, you know, it's so funny, like so before we go further.
Okay.
How do people donate the dollar?
And we need a lot of people.
We need so 50,000 more people if they go to donate a dollar.
That's it.
That's it.
And they have to write a check.
They can't send you a dollar.
No, go to omniforamerica.com.
It takes you right to a donate page.
The simplest thing in the world.
You can use your credit card.
Absolutely.
And you're not gonna steal their credit card, right?
You're not gonna steal their numbers.
You're not an identity.
Oh, you have you have like a firm doing it for you.
Yeah, oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
We don't have any access to it whatsoever.
Okay, and then once you're totally reputable, totally reputable.
You reach the magic number of sixty-five thousand by going to omieforamerica.org.
Or dot com.
Or dot com.
Or.NET.
Okay, great.
Wow, you're really you're really on top of your game.
I know what I'm doing, Sean.
But no, let's let's not go that far.
Um, you know, it would be entertaining and it would be funny as hell.
It'd be musty TV.
Are you kidding me?
I'm gonna be I'm gonna make that debate stage a very unsafe space for the Democratic government.
An unsafe space is that they're gonna say you just threaten them.
You know, they're gonna take that as Ami, which by the way, Army couldn't fight his Omni couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag.
Um, that's my daughter's here.
That's not nice.
Okay, I've trained for seven years mixed martial arts.
Do you want to want us want me to prove it on camera?
We have a camera right there.
You punch me in the stomach once, and I had I took it.
I get it was a baby tap.
I didn't hit you in the stomach.
I just based I let you hit me hard.
And you got to admit it's you can't penetrate.
Sean is super swole.
There's no question.
Sean's looking good.
stronger than I've ever been.
Sean's looking good.
All right, but all right.
So you've been doing a lot of good work, though.
Um the time you went with the refugees and and you literally joined that caravan.
Right.
Uh was amazing work that you've done.
You put yourself at risk all the time.
I bet your daughter doesn't like it.
No.
You don't like it, do you?
He's kind of a nut.
And uh then, of course, you know, you've exposed anti-Semitism on campuses.
It's getting pretty hostile there when you start asking for the people.
Anti-Semitism, the Democratic Party, which we're seeing now just it's everywhere.
Scares the living daylight side.
What has happened?
Why is there this rise of anti-Semitism?
Well, the anti-Semitism is rising.
Now, the anti-Semitism on the right, the extreme right, has always been there.
But that's a very small pocket, just a percentage of people on the right who make that up.
The real issue and the real problem is anti-Semitism on the left.
And that's happening because of intersectionality, which which presupposes that people who are rich and powerful are oppressing the people in the bottom, and these anti-Semites, these leftists look at Jews and say, you guys are the most powerful, therefore we don't like you because you're oppressing people in the bottom.
Why is that simple?
Historically, like, look at the Imam that Nancy Pelosi invited in the last week to the House floor.
Uh, okay, guys are virulent anti-Semite.
And I I quoted all his tweets, and I'm like, why would they do that?
Why does Omar get away with the things she said or Talib?
I get a peaceful feeling when I think about the Holocaust.
Uh six million Jews were slaughtered.
I'm like, I no one should get a peaceful feeling in that moment.
Look, it's I'm not saying that Nancy Pelosi and those groups are anti-Semites.
They're not.
But they're giving cover to anti-Semites.
They're dabbling with anti-Semites.
I know I find it so curious.
Well, why but if it was David Duke and then the Republicans they would they would condemn them by name?
What's that's right?
Tell me what the difference is.
I mean, well, the d the there's no difference.
Except except the real the real difference is you don't see President Trump giving cover to David Duke and those people.
You don't see him, he don't see what's going on.
They don't see this lie that he gives support.
He won't condemn.
The guy, I we played montages of him condemning, condemning, condemning, condemning.
If you don't condemn that second of that day, then they oh you didn't condemn.
He's done it so many times.
Yet yet you you don't see Nancy Pelosi and her people condemning the anti-Semites in their party at all.
Never mind like that, that that second.
They haven't done it at all.
They're in fact they're giving they're giving cover for it.
They're actually making excuses for Shia Talib and Ilan Omar and so forth and so on.
It's disgusting.
This is why I'm running, because this party has gone insane.
I have to call it out.
But you're not a Democrat, are you?
I'm a registered Democrat.
I am a registered Democrat.
When's the last who's the last Democrat you voted for?
I don't talk my personality.
I don't talk about it.
By the way, do you work with Howard Stirner?
I do.
You work for Howard.
Well, I do, I I do I'm a contra I'm a writing contributor for it.
You are.
Yeah, I don't do a lot of work for him, but yeah, I'm a you talk to him a lot?
Once in a while.
What what the hell is wrong with Howard not supporting Trump?
What is up with that?
Why did he support Hillary Clinton?
Look, I mean, he's a he came out with his book.
I actually they sent a copy over to Fox.
Um he doesn't want to do my show.
I'm sure I'd put him on any time he wants.
There's something I don't understand.
I when he did his movie Private Parts, that was my life, except I was a conservative host.
Sure.
I started in 1987.
I'm 30 years now on radio.
I mean, no money.
I work for 19 grand.
You know, you start out the same way.
Hey, welcome to the hour.
You know, we all want to sound like this stupid radio guy.
And I'm like identifying with every move that he made in his movie.
And I really admire everything that he's built in his career and his life, and he deserves all the success he has.
He's one of the best interviewers I've ever listened to.
Sure.
He doesn't interrupt like me.
He's not a liberal, by the way.
He'd be happy to have you on.
But he's he's not a liberal.
He's acting on the second, he is he's strongly for second amendment.
Pro-Israel, hawkish and foreign policy.
Well, what but certain on economic issues, just on the socialists.
He's a disruptor.
Yes.
He's an iconoclast himself.
Yes.
But he supported the biggest establishment corrupt creature in Hillary Clinton.
I that makes no sense to me.
Nobody's perfect, Sean.
Um and then he said one time, because I was in a feud with Kimmel, so he's interviewed.
I'm just curious.
So he says he says to Kimmel, or he's saying, I guess to Robin, why is Kimmel fighting Hannity?
I Hannity probably would die to be on on a broadcast network.
And I'm like, Howard, you're the king of all media.
We kick his ass.
He doesn't get the power that you have on Timmy.
I have more than twice the viewership of that idiot.
Yes.
There is a story, by the way, with me and Bob Iger.
He needs to ask Bob Iger about that story.
Oh, it's a good story.
You can't let us I'm gonna let Kimmel ask Iger, what's the story that involves him with me and Iger.
I don't think he's gonna ask him that question.
I don't think so.
I will.
Do you know Bob Iger?
I don't, but I'd like to I'm sure I'm gonna meet him at some point.
You're gonna go now the next time.
When I'm a democratic nominee, and I'm running for and I'm when I'm there up there in the podium.
When you're up there on the podium against Trump.
Okay, Ami, let me just bring a little reality check to where you are.
Yeah.
You're not gonna be president.
What?
That is offensive.
Your own daughter's shaking her head.
She agrees with me.
As president of the United States.
So therefore, I'm not sure.
I am therefore ideology, I am.
That's correct.
I identify as it.
They are nuts, though.
What do you think has happened?
Look, there's no question we know it's happened.
The whole the the everybody's dancing to the tune of AOC and Rashida Talib, okay, and Alan Omar.
They may not be on the Democratic debate stage, but they're all dancing to their tune.
They are they have become the whole woke concept, the radicalization of the left has fully taken over the Democratic Party.
Look, look at a guy like like uh Joe Biden.
They say he's a moderate.
The man just called for giving health coverage to illegal immigrants coming to the United States and the United States.
So do Kamala Harris and a bunch of others.
Let me ask you this.
And I have so many friends in the in the Jewish community.
So many in New York vote democratic.
Like, for example, I was really concerned about the latest election with Prime Minister Netanyahu.
I've known Bibi personally for way over two decades.
And I I viewed him as a lone voice of moral clarity, a Churchillian figure.
Sure.
You know, standing up to identifying evil in our time, which is radical Islamists.
Yep.
And Israel, you know, has had to the reality of a kid growing up in Israel versus the United States, it's night and night and day.
Correct.
Because those rockets are going into it Israel's cities every you know.
Thousands, thousands.
Thousands.
I've been there.
Think about that for a moment for a minute.
I've been to Soroto on the Gaza border.
They can't let kids play in playgrounds.
No.
No, no.
There's an underground bunker playground.
Every block.
Every block there are bomb shelters.
And I don't what why is it there this hatred?
Number one, and why when you have a guy like Trump, the everyone promised the embassy would move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
They never delivered.
He not only did that, but he recognized Golan as Israeli territory, which it is.
You're making a fatal mistake in understanding the Jewish American mind.
Jews don't care about Israel.
It doesn't rank, and they they do rankings every year.
It doesn't rank in the top ten of issues they care about.
I know it's shocking and awful.
It doesn't rank in the top ten.
They care about one thing social justice.
Jews were actually Republicans after Lincoln.
They only voted Republican.
And they switched after Franklin Del and Roosevelt because he they felt that now the Democrats are the party of social justice.
I look at the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe, the rise of anti-Semitism in America, and it scares the hell out of me.
And I don't know, I don't even know what this is rooted in.
I mean, America was founded on Judeo Christian values and principles.
Period.
End of sentence.
Well, let's be clear.
This is not a racist country.
This is not an anti-Semitic country.
There is a rise.
Doesn't mean that this defines what our country is.
But the question is, where is it coming from?
And I have to say over and over again, the the the growth business and the anti-Semitic industry is from the left.
It's from radical, it's from Islam and it's from the left.
The growth is not coming from the extreme right of the neo-Nazis.
How many neo-Nazis are there in this country?
5,000?
10,000, maybe?
There are probably two, three, four million crazy leftists who are anti-Semites in this country, at least right now.
That's where our worry should be.
It scares the living daylights out of me.
And it's it's unhinged hatred.
You know, I'm I was raised Catholic, but I'm a Christian.
And every Christian knows, number one, Jesus was Jewish.
A. B, the Bible can't be any more clear.
The Jewish people were God's chosen people.
Not me.
You're chosen.
You think not to be president?
You think the people on the left are religious people who look at the Bible for their own people who are not going to be able to do that?
I'm just telling you the biggest support, the biggest support from Israel comes from the Christian community.
Yeah, that's right.
Stay right there.
All right, Hannity tonight, nine Eastern, Fox News Channel.
Big breaking news from John Solomon tonight.
A brand new report will break on Hannity.
Also, Tom Fitt and Judicial Watch.
Brand new emails.
Oh, that were deleted.
This case by Nelly Orr.
I wonder if she used Bleach Pit.
Also, we'll get reaction from Greg Jarrett, Ari Fleischer, Anthony Scaramucci, Dan Bangino, and Geraldo.
We've got a big show.
Set your DVR.
Hannity, we'll see you tonight, 9 Eastern, back here tomorrow.
