Mark Levin, author, constitutional lawyer, radio and TV host has a new book out. He was on Sean’s TV show Friday night, addressing the major issues facing our nation today. He discussed this divisive political climate, and his new book, Unfreedom of the Press with Sean. 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.
This is a news and information day that we have a lot coming out.
Um, we're giving you a preview of John Solomon and breaking report he's been working on uh coming up later in the program today.
All new developments on the deep state, a lot of developments on the 2020 election, poll numbers that are just stunning about people's belief in the economy right now, uh, all due to one person, and that would be Donald J. Trump, your new president.
And we are seeing now literally the walls are caving in on the deep state, and they're now freaking out and pointing out each other.
And it's getting because they know what's coming.
I mean, when I get into this story about how there were multiple, multiple times that they were warned, meaning the FBI and the DOJ and high-ranking officials, that in fact the dossier was a dirty dossier.
Hillary paid for it.
Christopher Steele, an unsavory character, was doing this for political reasons.
It's it's Russian disinformation.
Muller never touches it.
I mean, that we're getting that deep into this.
Now, we had a dump last night as I'm coming on TV of what we call new transcripts.
Thanks to Congressman Doug Collins, he released eight closed-door hearing transcripts.
Remember, he's given us Nelly and Bruce Orr.
He's given us Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, uh, James Baker, and we have literally been going through hundreds of pages of transcripts to get you the best information in this.
But and we'll give it to you throughout the show today.
But we have all of this new information.
Loretta Lynch, I'll give you the details, totally contradicting, saying Jim Comey's a liar, uh, Andrew McCabe, James Rabicke, all these other high-ranking officials.
This is testimony that had gone on behind closed doors.
And what we can tell you is all of these new documents, one major piece of information that we've got to pay very close attention to now.
And that is the attorney general of the United States under Barack Hussein Obama, the Biden Obama administration, literally is thrown James Comey under the bus.
And when she testified to Congress, uh, she said she never asked the embattled FBI director to refer to the Clinton criminal investigation as a matter.
Comey made a big deal about saying she said to call it a matter, not an investigation.
Here's the point.
Who lied to Congress?
Who lied under oath?
Oh, it only matters for, let's see, Michael Cohn or others.
If you only if you're a uh of a particular political point of view, or only if you're connected to Donald Trump.
Well, that's not equal justice under the law or equal application of our laws.
Uh, and so now one of the two lied.
We've been combing through literally since last night, each line of these transcripts.
And I'm I'm gonna try and break it down as best I can for you, but you know, it is when you look at Comey's lie, for example.
Think of this.
Come signs the first FISA warrant application.
All right, first one.
That's October 2016.
Now let's backtrack.
It was Comey who literally identified at that July 5th press conference where you thought, holy crap, he's gonna indict Hillary.
He's gonna they're they got her because he's explaining top secret classified information on a private server, clear, unambiguous, incontrovertible evidence.
Hillary Clinton broke the law by doing such, committed multiple felonies in the process.
Well, then we find out that Comey and Strzok, well, they're writing the exoneration in May of 2016.
And again, they they don't get to Clinton in the interview of her until July what, 2nd of 2016.
Three days later, he's out exonerating her.
This was not a real investigation.
Strzok and Page and some of their private text, they're laughing at the idea that this is a real investigation.
Yeah, yeah, sure.
We all know that Loretta Lynch is making the decisions.
See how the circular firing squad is now now developed.
So then Comey, so they they literally exonerate the favored candidate that they should have indicted.
They protect her.
Strzok said it.
Well, she should win a hundred million to zero because Trump is loathsome.
I can smell the Walmart Trump voters from here.
And so on and so forth.
And we know now how much Comey hated Donald Trump.
And then we find out that later that his own team was worried he was trying to blackmail the president of the United States.
Yeah, Mr. Integrity, Mr. Super Patriot.
So now we take it, they exonerate Hillary Clinton.
And then they turn their sights on Donald Trump.
Now, in August of 2016, thanks to Doug Collins getting Bruce Orr's closed door testimony, we find out Bruce Orr testified, he warned everybody about the dirty dossier.
Hillary paid for it, not verified, still hates Trump, doesn't want him to win.
Um that should have been caused to pause for everybody.
Then we learn from John Solomon's reporting in the last two weeks that a meeting took place, if you will, an unauthorized meeting with the State Department with this woman, Kathleen Kavaleck.
And Kathleen Kavak, ten days before Comey signing the first FISA application.
And at that meeting, uh, she is told by Christopher Steele, who's in a panic and a desperate state, he's got a deadline and it's election day.
Well, that's inappropriate because, and to her credit, she sent over warnings and memos to the top brass of the FBI and the DOJ.
So there was another warning.
Don't use this information.
What we're learning as well is, and we expect this coming out very soon.
It could be this week, no later than next week.
We're gonna get one of the buckets.
We've been talking about five buckets of information.
One of the buckets is the exculpatory statements that were made of Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, and those two men did not know that they were being taped.
Those two men made statements like, no, we're not interested in investigating Russia or colluding with Russia.
That's treason.
And all of that they had and they knew long before they used the dirty dossier or went after these guys in their perjury trapped in the case of Papadopoulos.
They didn't care about the truth.
Papadopoulos was saying, no, I've never been asked to do anything with Russia, never would.
What are you talking about?
And he didn't know at the time he was being taped.
And Carter Page, I'm sure for a long time, had no idea that the Pfizer warrant was taken out on him.
Then you've got spies, FBI spies, although Comey denies that the warrant or Stefan Hauper or the blonde bombshell that apparently was flirting with Papadopoulos in this, you know, James Bond novel that is unfolding here.
Um all of this they knew and they ignored.
As a matter of fact, there was far more evidence that showed it didn't happen, and they didn't care about the truth.
That's what that's that's what should scare everybody.
There's a reason Trey Gowdy is saying the FBI has these Papadopoulos transcripts because the FBI was monitoring the call.
And he called them a game changer.
The FBI agents' conversations with George Papadopoulos is because when an FBI agent sends in informants to someone they're looking at, typically those conversations are recorded, right?
Those people are wired.
Yeah, I mean, if the Bureau is going to send an informant in, the informant's gonna be wired, and if the Bureau is monitoring telephone calls, there's gonna be a transcript of that.
Um, and some of us have been fortunate enough to know whether or not those transcripts exist, but they haven't been made public, and I think one in particular is going, it has the potential to actually persuade people.
Very little on this Russia probe, I'm afraid, is gonna persuade people who hate Trump or who love Trump.
But there is some information in these transcripts that I think has the potential to be a game changer if it's ever made public.
Wow, it's going to be made public.
My sources telling me today could be as early tomorrow or next week.
I don't know for sure we'll ask John Solomon at the top of the hour.
In other words, damning Proof that this whole cabal of deep state actors lied from the beginning.
This is why Mark Meadows is saying once that's only one of the five buckets.
We're not even including including the FISA applications, the 302 conversations and notes, uh, the gang of aid information.
There is there's there's more that will come out that is going to blow people's minds because it's all true.
The effort they they literally rigged a criminal investigation for their favored candidate and saved her candidacy.
Then they actually used, even though they had all these warnings, bought and paid for Russian disinformation that Hillary paid for and put together.
And they used it as a means to not just spy on Carter Page.
They were spying on him numerous ways now with real spies, real recordings, and also through Carter Page's connection to the Trump campaign.
And because once they had that door open through that FISA application, they were into all world Trump.
You're watching, you know, the fights now beginning to emerge are hilarious.
Now it's Comey versus the AG.
Then you've got, okay, Comey is at war with Rod Rosenstein.
And then you've got Comey against Clapper and Brennan all accusing each other of being culpable for inserting the unverified dossier into all of this.
Now finally they figured out, oh, the dossier, which was the basis and justification that we used, even though we were warned not to.
Um, uh, we're associated with Russian disinformation now.
The very thing that they were saying now for almost three years was a horrible thing for the country, and Donald Trump did it.
Donald Trump did not do it.
Four years, we have four separate investigations, including the Mueller investigation.
And if you take it a step further, Comey insisting that the dossier is not discredited, yet he's like the only one.
And remember his deputy FBI director, Andrew McCabe.
The dossier was the anchoring evidence.
It was it.
That's the Grassley Graham, the bulk of information.
McCabe says, no dossier, no FISA application.
And then McCabe and Rosenstein, they're at odds.
Comey and Rosenstein are at odds.
You got the top people at the DOJ, the FBI, the CIA, the NSC, and Director of National Intelligence, all of them could possibly be in trouble for breaking the law.
And by the way, they thought Hillary would be the next president.
They thought, oh, we're going to be in great position with the next president for our careers.
That's where their minds were at the time, obviously, because they believe Donald Trump didn't have a shot.
And, you know, all of this material now, as it starts cascading down, is going to be an avalanche of evidence that is so compelling.
And the first piece it looks like is coming is withholding of exculpatory evidence.
And that you have people in the in the FBI, the top people, not rank and file.
What it means here is the level with all the warnings, Bruce Orr's warning, Kathleen Kabalec's warning, the exculpatory tapes and transcripts that we're gonna get that show that Papadopoulos and Carter Page were aghast at any suggestion the Trump campaign would work with Russia, and they themselves they were on tape, they didn't know they were being taped.
That's what's coming out.
This would mean the level of premeditated fraud and conspiracy against FISA and the Pfizer court system.
And in other words, they withheld from the court, Hillary paid for it.
They were warned that Hillary paid for it.
They were warned it was unverified and not corroborated.
Eventually it became obvious that it was unverifiable because Steele didn't stand by it.
He didn't know if any of it was true and he was facing a perjury charge.
And they attempted to first save a candidate, rig her investigation, then rig and steal a presidential election with the lies their favored candidate paid for, and then use the lies after they lost as a means of taking down a duly elected president.
Now maybe everyone understands why I keep saying this is the biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in American history.
And we're also expecting the declassified FISA application to come out, where they it should reveal Comey and others totally relying on the Clinton bought and paid for phony Russian dossier.
And it's all coming.
All right, as we move along, Sean Hannity Show 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
We've now scour scoured the Doug Collins transcripts.
You know, um I'm just gonna give you some headlines because we literally there's hundreds of pages we're looking at here.
And Lynch says Comey didn't notify her to ask permission to make the final announcement about the Clinton investigation, which by the way, everyone said was unusual at the time.
Uh he indicated he was only going to be talking about the investigation based on my prior knowledge of positions he had taken.
He indicated he was not interested in participating in an ultimate recommendation announcement, recommendation announcement.
Uh he did not want to consult with me on the specifics of what he was going to say because I did ask, and he indicated in words or substance, I don't recall the exact words, that he thought it would be better if we had not coordinated it.
But his announcement was going to be about the investigation.
And then Lynch contradicts Comey again.
I didn't direct anyone to use the specific phraseology matter instead of investigation.
I was quite surprised Comey characterized it that way.
This is Loretta Lynch.
We did have a conversation about it, so I wasn't surprised that he remembered that we met about it and talked about it, but I was quite surprised.
Uh that was his characterization of it because that was not how it was conveyed to him, certainly not how it was intended.
Lynch then testifies she was not trying to align with the Clinton campaign in any way.
Okay.
This is Jim Jordan asking the question, right?
Um and then Jordan says, Well, he said in his book, the attorney general seemed to be directing me to align me with the Clinton campaign strategy, he said.
Well, that's pretty interesting.
The FBI didn't do matters.
Is that true?
And she says, I was not aware of the Clinton campaign strategy on anything.
Yeah, I'm not sure I believe that.
So you can see what's happening.
They're all turning on each other.
I'll give you more of this background, this deep dive we've done, and much more John Solomon straight ahead.
All right, 25 till the top of the hour, 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Um Wow, nice weather, by the way, isn't it?
I'm looking at Jason.
It's like finally a little bit of summer.
A little bit of warmth has uh made its way to the Northeast.
Finally, I was getting tired of living in fake Seattle.
Yes, it's true.
It's been horrible.
Um we're letting a little sunshine light in on the studio here.
All right, so last night we get the the these documents, thanks to Congressman Doug Collins, great guy.
Behind closed door transcripts, like Paige struck Nelly Bruce or James Baker and the other ones that we've gone through.
Uh this time we have uh McCabe, Loretta Lynch, James Rabicke.
And there's a lot here, just this one thing that is said by Loretta Lynch.
Because when Loretta Lynch says, I didn't think anyone I never directed anyone to use the specific phrase calling the Clinton probe uh a matter instead of investigation.
Well, either she's lying or James Comey is lying.
Let me go back if I can very briefly to the decision to publicly go out with your results on the email.
Was your decision influenced by the attorney general's tarmac meeting with the former president Bill Clinton?
Yes, in in a ultimately uh conclusive way.
That was the thing that capped it for me that I had to do something separately to protect the credibility of the investigation, which meant both the FBI and the Justice Department.
Were there other things that contributed to that that you can describe in an open session?
There were other things that contributed to that.
Um significant item I can't.
I know the committee's been briefed on.
There's been some public accounts of it which are nonsense, but I understand the committee's been briefed on the classified facts.
Probably the only other consideration that I guess I can talk about an open setting is that at one point the attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me.
But that was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we're to close this case credibly.
Now notice Mr. Super Patriot.
Um we know he he had to lie uh himself.
We know he's a liar.
Why?
Because he signed the first FISA application October 2016.
Well, now he's saying it wasn't a spy.
That's a lie, too.
So there's three lies.
And then he told President elect Trump in January, just a couple of months after he signed off on the spot FISA warrant.
Oh, it is um, oh, it it's it's salacious but not verified.
So what the attorney general and what the attorney general is accusing Comey of is committing perjury.
Now she's flatly accusing him of this of mischaracterizing her statements by repeatedly alleging under oath that Lynch instructed uh him to call Hillary Clinton's probe a matter, not an investigation.
Now, Lynch, who testified that Comey's claim was she was quite surprised, made the dramatic remarks at a joint closed door session of the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees last December.
And that transcript of her testimony, again, part of this big document release yesterday.
And in a June 2017 interview under oath with the House Intel Committee, Comey said Lynch had pressed him to downplay the significance of the Clinton email uh review in September of 2015, just before congressional hearing, in which Comey was expected to be asked about the investigation.
Comey said the moment led him to question her independence and contributed to his decision to unilaterally hold a press conference after he only talked to Hillary and the main witnesses three days earlier, but we now know that the exoneration of Hillary was being written and words changed.
Um, so they would remove the legal standard, um, reckless disregard versus you know the legal standard in that particular case.
The attorney general directed me not to call it investigation.
So one of them is lying.
I didn't direct anyone to use specific phraseology.
When the rest director asked me how to best handle it, I said, Well, what I've been saying is we received a referral.
We're working on the matter, working on the issue.
So we have all the resources we need to handle the matter, handle the issue.
So one of them was lying here.
And then Lynch testifies that she was not trying to align with the Clinton camp.
I don't believe that either.
And Lynch says she was not aware Clinton was going to be in Phoenix on the same exact day when they met on the tarmac.
I'd like an investigation into that.
Were there any Secret Service involved in any of this?
I'd like to know.
And Lynch saying that she testified, well, she and Bill Clinton, 45 minutes on the tarmac, did not discuss anything about the email investigation, which she was deciding on in the next few days until she was assert by James Comey, you know, the Lone Ranger, thinking he had to do it himself because she was conflicted because of having met Clinton on the tarmac.
And she said, Well, we didn't discuss anything about the email investigation.
Nobody could believe that.
I don't believe her.
I don't believe him either.
So I don't know who's lying or if they're both lying.
I think it's more the latter.
I my humble opinion.
And she felt like the Clinton tarmac conversation went on too long, knew it would be an issue.
Well, why didn't she end it?
If she's the one that's in charge of it, why didn't she end that?
She had the power to say, I don't think this is a good idea that we're on a tarmac in a private plane talking alone.
And she says she can't be sure if the FBI was aware of her meeting with Clinton on the tarmac.
Jim Jordan asked, did you talk to the FBI about the fact that you had, did you talk to the folks who were doing the investigation?
Did you talk to them?
Director Comey, anyone at the FBI about the meeting you had with Mr. Clinton.
And she said, I don't believe anyone from the FBI was on the phone in DC.
They weren't with me when I was there.
I was in Phoenix, Los Angeles having these calls, mostly Phoenix, and I don't believe anyone from the FBI was on the phone in DC, but I just I couldn't say.
But I don't believe that they were on the phone.
I don't believe they were communications uh staff to staff.
Jordan says, okay.
Then Lynch testifies she regrets not being More clear about whether or not she recused herself from the Clinton investigation?
What was your reaction to the IG when the response to the IG's views on the fact you did not just clearly say either I'm in or I am out?
That's clearly what the IG thinks your position was.
What's your reaction?
Answer.
I think that when I went back and looked at the transcript much later, uh actually at the Aspen Institute, I don't think that I was clear as I should have been, or as I and I definitely regretted that.
And Lynch testifies Comey previously said he did not want to be involved in the final announcement of the Clinton investigation.
Um and Chairman Goodlatt said he just did the opposite of what you asked for, and Ms. Lynch said he did.
That was not conveyed to me.
Now Lynch also testified the Obama administration never spied on the Trump campaign.
Really?
Now, madam, attorney general, do you believe the FBI or DOJ ever investigated the Trump campaign for political purposes?
Uh I know that they did not.
Really?
Then Nadler asked, did President Obama, anyone in his administration, ever make a demand or request that the FBI or DOJ infiltrate surveiled the Trump campaign for political purposes?
No, well, that's a stacked question.
That's not what the question is.
Did you do it?
Now we know Comey did sign the Pfizer warrant.
Now we know that Struck and Page said, yeah, the whole Clinton email investigation was rigged right there by the attorney general Loretta Lynch.
She's got a lot of people she has conflicts with at this moment in time.
And Lynch says she still sees no reason for Hillary Clinton to be prosecuted.
Of course not.
Because that's how it works.
That's what Struck and Page were saying.
The fix was in.
Lynch testifying Obama neither involved himself in the in the Clinton investigation.
I don't believe that either.
And they're all what's this is why they're all now turning on each other.
And she testifies there was never an investigation into the Trump campaign.
It was rather directed at Russia.
That's a lie.
And how many people, when did you know about the FISA application?
When did you know about the steel dossier?
When did you know that that when did you call it a matter?
Why are you contradicting the FBI director?
The FBI director thought you were compromised.
Testifying, Comey and McCabe were the first to bring her information of Russia's attempts to meddle in the Trump campaign.
Yeah, whatever.
It never happened.
Then she dodged the question about why the Trump campaign was not notified about the investigations into Carter Page and Papadopoulos.
Did you ever discuss whether the Trump campaign should be defensively briefed on either Carter Page or George Papadopoulos?
She writes, she answers, I was certainly aware that it was an option, but I don't know that if anything ever happened to that option.
And what do you mean you were aware it was an option?
Without getting into specific discussions, it certainly is an option that one would consider, but I don't know if these actions were ever taken.
Were you ever involved in discussions about whether the Trump campaign should be defensively briefed?
Not to the level of giving direction.
And she claimed she was never briefed on the FISA warrant in a Carter Page.
I'm telling you, this is all unfolding.
And it's interesting too, because the American people have had it with these lies.
You have a poll out that shows a Hill Harris survey.
Only 42% of respondents said they have any interest in hearing from Robert Mueller.
Robert Muller, by the way, doesn't want to testify.
And the reason is is because it's obvious.
Democrats want to use him as, you know, in their circus and make it all public.
Because they want to say, well, did you think this?
Did you think this?
But the problem for Robert Mueller is, well, why did you hire all these Democrats and big Democratic donors?
Why did you hire Hillary Clinton's attorney?
Then you have McCabe is actually in these new transcripts saying that it was him, not Mueller, that made the decision to remove Struck and Page.
Whoopsie Daisy.
Maybe that explains why Muller cleaned those phones, or somebody in the special counsel's office cleaned the phones of Struck and Page.
Because they were wipe cleaned and sent right back to the manufacturer to get clean completely.
So here he's being called to be part of the Jerry Nadler circus in Washington.
And even the reporting Mueller plain doesn't want to testify.
Now he was working for now the Attorney General Barr.
Barr should make that decision and say if you don't want to testify, don't testify.
They're at an impasse because he doesn't want any of it public.
What he only wants to say bad things privately.
You know, how do you answer the question?
When did you learn that, in fact, this Russia collusion never happened?
When did you learn that about Hillary's dossier?
When were you warned that Hillary paid for the dirty dossier?
When were you warned that Christopher Steele had an agenda?
When were you warned?
When did why if you were looking in the taxicab medallions and you know decades old tax returns and loan applications that you couldn't find a little bit of time to maybe look into the core of what your mandate was.
I know it was broad.
You showed us how broad it is.
You know, pre-dawn raids, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone.
And why didn't you get into the fundamentals of the dossier?
I mean, it's amazing.
And by the way, let me say on this thing.
Wall Street Journal, I found this article from September 2016.
You know, White House says they're done.
They didn't they encouraged every person that works at the White House, including Don McGain.
He never should have spent 30 hours before the Mueller team.
But the president let it go.
1.5 million documents.
And the president allowed questions to be asked of him.
All right.
Now this is that was the fourth time, no collusion or obstruction.
Four separate occasions.
The FBI nine month investigation, the House Intel investigation, the bipartisan Senate committee investigation, now the Mueller report.
And Democrats, this is unprecedented because uh they're ignoring congressional subpoenas.
Well, if you go back to the Wall Street Journal, 2016, September, uh the Clinton Entourage, known for their faulty memories under oath.
Uh Brian Pagliano setting a new standard, the former Clinton aide chose Tuesday to ignore a congressional subpoena.
House Oversight Committee held the hearing, dig into some of the issues about Hillary's private server.
Pagliano, remember, was the IT specialist for Hillary's campaign in 2008, set up the private server in Chappaqua, New York, and was issued a subpoena.
Pagliano's lawyers replied saying that your their client couldn't be bothered.
That he since uh previously appeared and asserted his Fifth Amendment rights at any effort to make him appear again furthers, no legislative purpose.
So that that's the history.
What's really fascinating is not only is the deep state turning on each other, but there was a, I think it was a political report, how Nancy Pelosi now has to fight off, you know, all these hundred radicals in the House of Representatives that want impeachment proceedings to begin.
And I I don't know if she's long for this world.
Then you have the real speaker, Pelosi's speaker and name only, AOC, and she is now amplifying the House call for impeachment proceedings.
For what?
What for?
It'll be political suicide.
Go ahead, let them do it.
And you know, that would by the way, Elijah Cummings has been demanding Trump turnover or is all his to his committee, eight years of confidential financial records.
Although Washington examiner points out the wife of Elijah Cummings received millions of special interest groups and corporations' money uh and businesses before her husband's committee.
Okay, let's investigate the investigators there.
You know, in the chairman's words, subpoenas are a powerful and coercive tool, the beginning of a dialogue to increase his clout in the court, not optional.
You know, judiciary Democrats on the committee still can't agree on law 101.
It's total dysfunction.
And Democrats are running out of these stunts because nobody's showing up.
McGann's not showing up, and by the looks of it, I don't think Mueller's dumb enough to show up.
He'd be pretty dumb to show up, in my opinion.
I think it would be for him not good.
The FBI agents' conversations with George Papadopoulos is because when an FBI agent sends in informants to someone they're looking at, typically those conversations are recorded, right?
Those people are wired.
Yeah, I mean, if the Bureau is going to send an informant in, the informant's gonna be wired.
And if the Bureau is monitoring telephone calls, there's gonna be a transcript of that.
Um, and uh some of us have been fortunate enough to know whether or not those transcripts exist, but they haven't been made public, and I think one in particular is going, it has the potential to actually persuade people.
Very little on this Russia probe, I'm afraid, is gonna per persuade people who hate Trump or who love Trump.
But there is some information in these transcripts that I think has the potential to be a game changer if it's ever made public.
We can call it a dossier.
It sounds official.
It's really something the National Inquirer would blush if they print it.
So we know that it was used four times by the United States government.
What we're trying to figure out is whether or not it was used a fifth time in the intelligence assessment.
And you got Brennan, Clapper, and Comey, uh all three who know full well whether or not it was used in the intelligence assessment, but they're giving you different they're giving you different versions.
So there is information that exists in December of 2016, and I hope anyone who has access to it, Senator Burr, Devin, who whoever is open-minded, go look at that.
And I think it will help you understand whether or not that dossier that unverified hearsay was used a f for five times or just four times by the United States government.
It's pretty bad if it was just four times.
It's really bad if it was five.
You know, Trey Gowdy, what does he mean?
Well, he's a real serious uh chairman and actually uh has seen some documents that actually I have not seen, but we have uh come to the same conclusion, and that is indeed George Papadopoulos was was actually taped and recorded, and those uh interviews uh actually there there are records of those.
And I think what happens is in my conversations with Mr. Papadopoulos and others, when that comes out, when the president declassifies that, I think the American people will be astonished to to see that not only was it going on, and the president was right that he was actually taped and recorded, but other than that, is he was not colluding with the Russians, and they knew this very early on.
And uh, and so that could be the game changer that Trey is referring to.
Right.
The president's just got to declassify it and let it go out there.
Do you think the delay is almost over?
I think the delay is over.
I think the president is serious.
I've t spoken to him recently, and I think declassification is right around the corner, and hopefully the American people will be able to judge to themselves.
All right, that was Trey Gowdy.
Two cuts uh in an interview that he did with Maria Baromo, uh, my Fox business colleague.
The FBI has these Papadopoulos transcripts, and he's saying, No, this is a game changer.
Even talk of their actual tapes of this that exist as well.
And Gowdy just saying, Hey, we're trying to find out if the steel dossier was used for a fifth time in the intelligence assessment of the Russia probe.
And Mark Meadows talking about what John Solomon, myself, the Geneva, and so many others have said is that we have five or six buckets of information and declassification of key Russian probe documents is around the corner.
It's it's now happening.
And the information that we got last night that I went over last hour with these, you know, Loretta Lynch basically saying Jim Comey is a liar.
But we already knew Jim Comey was a liar.
Jim Comey is a liar because he signed the first Pfizer warrant.
At the top it says verified.
He could not verify the steel dossier, the bulk of information in it, but still put his signature on it because he wanted to spy, although he denies spying in that case, and then went up to Trump Tower.
This was October 2016.
He signed the first PISA application, January 2017, up to Trump Tower he goes and says, Oh, I just want you to know this is out there.
Uh it's salacious, but it's unverified.
So he lied.
When did he lie?
In October, or did he lie in January to the president elect?
Or maybe did he lie both times?
Because now Loretta Lynch is calling him a liar.
The issue of what would be coming out, be it the transcripts, or if there is this real tape, we have invited back John Solomon, who will be joining us with the definitive breaking news on this tonight at nine.
I know you're not finished and you're dotting the I's and crossing the T's at this hour.
And thank you for letting me pull you away from your computer, but let's talk about the declassification issue, your sources, what you're hearing.
There were these transcripts of Papadopoulos and Carter Page that were intercepted well before the first FISA, in which both men made statements that Contradicted the evidence that the FBI was about to put forward to the FISA case.
In the case of Papadopoulos, what Papadopoulos has said is he remembers saying to this FBI informer, uh, Professor Halper, that no, I wasn't interested in hacking uh uh information with the Russians, nor was the Trump campaign engaged with Russia on a hacking or election hijacking campaign, because we would have considered that treason.
Where were who taped those conversations?
Or who's the FBI from what we know, from what my reporting indicates, the FBI working with the informant.
These transcripts we know exist.
We think the tapes exist.
My question to you dealt with okay, what do we know what I had a I had three sources today that I confirm with on the issue of information that we've been talking about declassifications coming out, and my quick headline is it's coming out, but it's going to be it's not gonna be one big dump one day.
It's gonna come out information as it is available for declassification.
That's right.
It will come out as it's available.
I think that's right.
Rather than wait months and months and months, I think the president is trying to find an efficient way to get information to the American public, and so I think as each document gets reviewed and cleared for declassification, the president's gonna make it available as soon as he can, so the American people can benefit from that.
And keeping in mind this is gonna be occurring in a process where we're also gonna get the value of the IG report, Bill Barr's review.
There's gonna be lots of information flowing to the American people to understand just how bad this FISA scandal was.
And I think the first uh declassification could occur as early as Thursday or or sometime between this coming Thursday and next week, and I think I heard it could be as early as tomorrow or early next week after the holiday.
I think that could be right.
And it's in that window.
And I think most importantly, it it it's what uh we would call bucket five in the Devin Nunez list.
It's what's known as the exculpatory statements.
Text or written quotes from people like Papadopoulos and Carter Page who made exculpatory statements, not knowing that they were talking to FBI informants or being recorded by intelligence agencies, uh saying things that would debunk what was in the uh dossier or what that was the theory of the FBI's case.
And why is that important?
If you get information that weighs towards the innocence of a person, it's your obligation at the FBI at the Justice Department to provide that to the FISA court as part of the FISA application.
What we've heard from Devin Nunez and John Ratcliffe and all the people who've read these content is that those sort of pieces of innocence, those evidence of innocence was never provided to the court.
That would be a a violation of rule thirteen of the procedures of the FISA court.
So very it could be the first concrete evidence in public for what we've been saying for more than two years, the FBI was cheating, it was putting its thumb on the scale, as Bill Barr said in the FISA process to get Trump.
And that's exactly what we've got to do.
Well, let me go back to the specific spying in this case, because you we know that Stefan Halper was enlisted we were not sure either by the intelligence community, CIA perhaps, or the FBI.
Because they're th all pointing at each other now in a circular firing squad is formed.
Clapper and Brennan saying it's Comey.
Comey saying it's it's it's Brennan and Clapper and Yeah, well, one of the classic things in the intelligence community is when the facts start coming out, the best thing you can do is create confusion, right?
And I think there's a little bit of distraction confusion going on.
Uh but there's going to be a very clear record of what happened here.
I believe you will find out at the period these transcripts were made, the FBI was in control of Halper.
He was doing his job.
I don't think there's anything that we can criticize Halper for doing.
He was an informant uh under the control of the FBI.
I think the problem is after Halper gathers the information, provides it to the FBI, does the FBI put that under a rack and try to hide it because it goes against the theory of their case?
And if that happened, and that's what I believe happened from my reporting, then the FBI is in a world of trouble.
Okay, so they're in possession of these transcripts from 2016.
The conversations uh between the FBI informants, George Papadopoulos, and Carter Page.
I want to go through this slowly.
They do not know they are being recorded, they don't know that they're being taped.
What they have is even though the person they're talking to is an informant.
That's important.
Right.
Clear, irrefutable exculpatory evidence proving that the Trump Russia collusion was always a hoax.
Then why was it continuing and what time frame are we talking about?
When was this happening?
Was it after the FISA application, the first one was signed.
My reporting indicates that the Papadopoulos intercept at least uh was in September, which was a month before the FISA warning.
Carter Page recalls a conversation with Halper at his library on August, August 21 to 2016, two months before the FISA.
If those are the recorded conversations like my sources have led me to believe both of these occur before the very first FISA, and it's the sort of thing that should get should have given the FBI pause, just like what we reported last week, right?
Steel breaks ranks, goes to the State Department, has an unauthorized contact there, is sharing his same dirt, tells the State Department he's got a political deadline, he's leaking to the media, he's trying to work with the FBI's unhappy, and none of that gets disclosed to the court either.
And I think that that what we're seeing is numerous actions by the FBI, conscious actions by the FBI to hide the flaws or or the erosion of their case, and persisting to go to the court trying to put on a rosy face to the evidence that they knew was suspect, if not outright false.
That's the allegation that really will be troubling to the American people.
So I want to just put a little emphasis on this.
Steele was getting now, Steele at some point is fired for lying and leaking, which is interesting.
And then later we find out that he's using Bruce Orr as a conduit to even get to the special counsel, even though in August of 2016, among the upper echelon and the FBI and the intelligence community and the Department of Justice that were all warned Steele hates Trump.
Hillary paid for it, and it's unverified.
They still used it.
Now we have literally exculpatory information that was recorded with transcripts.
On top of that, Steele is so desperate in proving himself political that he has this election day deadline.
So what we're really saying here is this.
The level of premeditation to commit fraud and conspiracy against the FISA courts in an attempt to alter the 2016 election results in the beginning and evolving into an effort to unseat a duly elected president are far worse than we ever knew because they were warned by Bruce Ohr.
They were warned by Kathleen Kavlak over at the State Department.
They also knew that if they listened to the tapes that they were recording, they knew that these guys were giving exculpatory statements that should have stopped everything.
That is exactly what we expect.
We should let the evidence come out and evaluate it for what it is.
I'd met with an intelligence official who had kind of gotten some pretty good insights into the state of the case in 2018.
And that person said to me pretty flatly, there was far more evidence of innocence than there ever was of actionable intelligence against the Trump campaign.
For someone who looked at the full file and come to walk away with that impression that the evidence of innocence was so overwhelming and the evidence of guilt was suspect.
I think we're going to find out what Bob Woodward said on television not too long ago.
The Steele dossier was always thought to be garbage.
It was never considered to be a good intelligence project.
And yet it was used to make the core allegations to get the court started.
And all this evidence of innocence was hidden from the court to keep the court from being able to do an honest evaluation.
Is that why I read an article, I forgot where I read it today, but it basically came down to the wolves turning on each other and an effort to actually help.
And there's two aspects to helping Hillary win and win by 100 million to zero and not letting the smelly Walmart people like me.
I'll speak for myself.
You don't give your opinions.
You know, let Donald Trump become president.
But you have Clapper, Brennan and Comey all accusing each other of being culpable for inserting the the unverified dossier.
But it was, in fact, Comey's signature was not Brennan's and it wasn't Clapper's.
Now, all of a sudden, things have flipped.
The dossier is now seen as, oh, crap, we found we fell for Russian disinformation because the New York Times is calling it that.
Then we've got those guys all killing each other.
Then you've got, of course, Andrew McCabe and Comey are at odds.
Then you got Comey and Rod Rosenstein at Oz.
odds.
Remember, McCabe said no dossier, there would be no FISA warrant.
Then the leaking of such.
I mean, this is all, we never thought it would be this bad.
This is far worse for Far more premeditated.
They have far more evidence that it was not the case than we ever knew.
And they did it anyway.
I think that we are beginning to see a complete portrait, and that portrait is of the greatest political dirty trick ever pulled off in American history, where U.S. intelligence, U.S. law enforcement were used as a political dirty trick to handicap a candidate and then delegitimize a presidency.
And I think I'll give you one little hint of something I'm hoping to break tonight.
We now know what it was that the State Department got from Christopher Steele on October eleventh and sent to the FBI on October 13th.
Keep in mind that's a full week before the FISA warrant was it.
When you find out tonight when I can report what it is, what it was sent along, it was so easily disprovable that if the FBI took five minutes to evaluate Christopher Steele's credibility on this very issue that he relayed, they would have found out it was inaccurate, just like the State Department woman sitting there listening to him, Kathleen, saying, Wait a second, he's spinning this tail about a Russian consulate in Miami.
There is no Russian consulate in Miami.
I got to run, but you're going to have all this in detail.
You're going to you think your article will be coming out just as we go on the air at nine o'clock on Fox.
I'm hoping that just.
Just trying to wrap it up.
Yes.
This is a big deal.
Uh all right, great reporting as usual.
Um so many people in this equation have been literally pounding the shoe leather and working sources.
John Solomon, of course, you one of them at the top.
We appreciate everything you're doing.
Thank you.
Thank you.
800-941 Sean, toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
Yeah, what is this?
Forty-three percent of Americans think socialism would be a good thing for the country.
It's not true.
And the great one, Mark Levin, his incredible new book, Unfreedom of the Press, all coming up today on the Sean Hannity Show.
Which rats crawling all over rotting garbage.
It's a breeding ground for disease and fleas carrying typhus.
Now the rats are living in mountains of trash left uncollected for weeks, even months.
The mayor has promised to clean it up.
But ITeam investigator Joel Grover found the city continues to ignore the growing garbage heaps, and that puts all of us at risk.
You're getting a bird's eye view of LA's most notorious trash pile.
It's in downtown on Ceres Avenue, right between the fashion and produce districts.
Day and night, this spot and countless others are magnets for rats that could carry fleas infected with typhus and other diseases.
I am so scared.
Estella Lopez represents business owners who've complained to the city about the Ceres Avenue trash pile and others like it.
I can't walk down the street without thinking that a flea could jump on me.
This national survey now ranks LA as the second most rat-infested city in the nation.
One reason experts say heaps of uncollected trash at hundreds of homeless encampments where people are literally living in piles of garbage.
Like outside this supermarket and inside that mountain of filth on Ceres Avenue.
This is a breeding ground for typhus.
I'm disgusted by it personally.
We first told Mayor Garcetti about that Ceres Avenue health hazard last October.
Our responsibility is to make sure the trash doesn't even accumulate in the first place.
That shouldn't have happened, and we're gonna make sure it does.
Right after that interview, this city did clear away the trash here.
But month after month since then, we've been watching, and the filth has been piling up once again.
I want to report a huge trash pile at 800 Saras Street.
And even a cult of 311.
Hello, this is Mayor Eric Garcetti.
Couldn't get the city to act fast.
You're saying it could take up to 90 days to clean it up.
An inefficient system for collecting rotting garbage.
And the I team has learned the city has no program to control the growing rat population that feasts on all that trash.
When you have needles and um blood stained clothing in the streets, that can't be safe for anyone.
I do see like a lot of needles and then you know, feces everywhere.
And then that's obviously about drugs and stuff like that.
Um kind of makes it a drab when you walk around and you see needles and close to a playground.
And just feces everywhere.
I mean, the smell of it all.
It's kind of definitely have to look on the ground when you're walking.
And it's been it's it's definitely an uptick because I've lived in the city more than 30 years, and it this is probably the worst I've seen in.
You know, that's pretty unbelievable.
So now there are the two cities.
Uh by the way, 24 now till the top of the hour.
The great one, Mark Levin at the top of the hour.
800 941 Sean Tollfree telephone number you want to be a part of the program.
So first it's Los Angeles.
We had sent now Lawrence Jones, investigative reporter.
He works on the Hannity Show on Fox.
Now we sent him twice out to Nancy Pelosi's beloved San Francisco.
And literally in between, in one direction, you can walk less than a mile in this beautiful multi multi-millionaire enclave community.
I think I saw in one picture.
But anyway, all these rich Silicon Valley people living there, a mile away, all that stuff you heard about feces, that's real.
And needles, that's real.
And those are real people describing the real conditions.
That's Pelosi's district.
If in the other direction, you go about a mile, there's her office right there.
And in the middle is all of that junk.
Endless amount of attics.
And they don't even have a bathroom facility.
They've literally doing it in the street.
I'll be kind.
Number two.
And then the needles.
We had this, you know, case out in New Mexico last night about a kid playing on a baseball field, slides in the second base, right into a needle, literally perforated the skin.
And here's the question.
Well, okay.
Now I'm reading today that 43% of Americans saying socialism would be a good thing for the country.
51% believe socialism would be a bad thing for the country.
You have your socialist utopias all over the country.
Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York City.
How's that working out?
Because you have all the high taxes associated with this, but nobody solves the problems.
And there's a mass exodus from all of these states.
Anyway, joining us now to discuss uh Kayleigh McEnaney is with us, national press secretary for the Trump 2020 campaign.
And Jeff Lord, he's got a brand new book coming out.
His first one, a runaway best seller.
Uh this new one will be called Swamp Wars, Donald Trump and the New American Populism versus the Old Order.
Uh thank you both for being with us.
You know, Jeff, isn't it amazing that Nancy Pelosi, who I've read is worth well over thirty some odd million dollars.
She can't walk around the neighborhood and say, I'm I'm gonna donate a million.
I'm asking you whatever you can donate, and we want to build a shelter.
And in the shelter, we want to put in showers for all these people so that they can clean themselves, bathroom facilities so they don't have to take a dump on the street.
Uh maybe put in a kitchen so we can get them a warm meal once or twice a day, and maybe some drug counselors if they want to be rehabbed.
Um, why doesn't she do that?
It's literally right in the middle of our home and her district office.
Because progressivism, Sean, is about spending other people's money, not their own money.
Uh this is sort of the cardinal rule with all of these folks in their progressive policies.
Think back to the reason Rudy Giuliani was elected mayor of New York in the first place.
It's because of all the crime.
They are lenient when it comes to crime, they are lenient when it comes to garbage, literally.
And in international affairs, think of what they did with Iran.
I mean, you know, they they go down this path of appeasing people all the time, and uh the world winds up or cities wind up with disasters on their hand.
In this case, with all this garbage, physical garbage.
It's disgusting.
It really it's uh the images I saw.
This should not be in America.
And when you look at the amount of money that they tax Californians, Kaylee, 13 and a half percent income tax, um, state income tax.
So that's on top of the 40 percent.
And now every rich city is angry that they're not getting the free subsidies and tax breaks that the smarter low-tax states or no tax states never had the benefit of.
Um, maybe that'll incentivize them to get rid of uh high-taxing liberal democrats that don't fix problems anyway.
Yeah, that's right.
You know, they don't want the consequences of high taxes, they want the benefits of it, the revenue coming in that they can squander on who knows what because the city's falling apart.
Uh but they don't want the consequences, and here are the real consequences.
As you note, there's an exodus out of California.
All of my in-laws, a family of you know, nearly 20 people are leaving California to come to the lowest tax jurisdiction of Florida where you have no state income tax.
Uh, they don't want that consequence, and then they sure as heck don't want uh the federal government to stop subsidizing uh their high state income tax, which is essentially what was happening with that state and local tax deduction.
Uh high tech liberalism doesn't work.
It's proof is in the pudding in California as people flee to Texas into Florida.
No, I mean it's happening in bigger and bigger ways.
If you look at the nation's economy, 22% of Americans say it is excellent, the highest excellent rating ever for the economy.
Forty nine percent say the economy is in very good shape.
Uh seventy-one percent total for excellent and good.
It's the highest total number of American voter attitudes on the economy in almost 18 years.
Fifty-two percent of Americans say they are better off financially today than they were in 2016, while 21% say they are worse off.
What do you make of those numbers?
And I know I don't think President Trump by name polls well and is not really a pollable president if that's a term, Jeffrey Lord.
Just last night, the president was here in Pennsylvania.
And I have to tell you that the kind of things that you were just talking about is what's going to carry Pennsylvania for him again, a second time.
And I remember, I mean, I was by myself.
For the longest time at CNN until Cayley came around and I I kept telling them Trump could win Pennsylvania, and they never believed me, ever, until it's a very good thing.
Until they called Pennsylvania for Trump, yeah.
Yeah, and finally, uh there was the evidence here.
But the the evidence was well in sight right here.
This place was littered with Trump signs.
And it's gonna happen again precisely because of things like this.
And last night what he did was very smart.
He went after Joe Biden, who makes much of being, you know, Mr. Middle Class and he's well he abandoned he abandoned Pennsylvania and he went to Delaware.
That's exactly right.
That is exactly right.
And and the Obama Biden administration abandoned Pennsylvania with their economic policies.
Um here's the thing that if you look at the employment picture and the records that we set, and I won't repeat them all here because it takes a long time to list them.
But uh Cayley, you you look at it the job building ability of Pennsylvania, they're so desperate now, especially they're so much smarter in Pennsylvania than New York, because New York could be doing in upstate New York exactly what the state of Pennsylvania is doing, and that is the fracking that is creating a a literal bottom swell of wealth for the people of Pennsylvania, which is great for them, they deserve it, and they're smart enough to do it.
New York could be doing the same thing, but when they're now having job recruiting fares in prisons because they don't have enough workers, and they're asking people when you get out, uh do you want to apply?
We want to hire you.
Uh that's not an economic situation where I think people want to go back and say, Oh, let me go back to the Obama years.
Right, exactly.
And and Joe Biden laughably uh suggests that he's responsible for this economy.
Well, not the case.
You go back to the uh the Obama Biden years, you're exactly right.
The war on coal uh completely decimated Pennsylvania, it's now been reversed.
They lost fifty-one thousand manufacturing jobs because of Obama Biden.
Uh now they've regained five thousand manufacturing jobs and and nearly a hundred and forty thousand jobs overall.
The economy is booming, it's roaring.
It's because of a reversal of liberalism, a reversal of the slowest economy on record since World War II, to one of the hottest ones we've seen in modern history.
And what is the key formula?
It's President Trump, it's conservatism, it's low taxes, and it's low regulation.
You know, and the thing to me is is that conservatism, and Jeff, you and I go back.
I mean, um, we've studied the Kennedy years.
We watched Reagan literally take an economy where he by the end of his presidency, he had double digit inflation, double-digit unemployment.
He had what, 21 and a half percent interest rates.
I know that's almost incomprehensible uh for those that didn't live through that time.
Jimmy Carter gas lines you'd wait five hours to fill up your tank, and he's telling us to turn down our thermostats and wear sweaters.
Reagan comes in, 21 and a half million new jobs created, the longest period of peacetime economic growth in history to that point, and literally transformed the entire country economically.
And yeah, as you know, I I worked uh later worked in the White House for him, and I can tell you that there were all these Democrats in Pennsylvania and and some Republicans, I might add, and we still have some of those people around today who insisted that Ronald Reagan could never carry Pennsylvania.
And he did it twice, and he did it exactly the way Donald Trump is doing it, which is to say he went out and talked to working people here in Pennsylvania And said there's no need for the economy to be this bad.
We can turn this around.
And they gave him the chance.
He did it, and four years after he did it, uh, the first time he carried Pennsylvania again.
And it was so strong that George H.W. Bush managed to carry it campaigning on Reagan's coattails in 1990 I'm sorry, nineteen eighty-eight.
So you know, the the president President Trump is doing exactly the right thing.
This is what President Reagan did, and you're right about President Kennedy, he did it as well.
You know, and that's the phenomenal thing.
I don't think anyone did it faster than Trump.
I mean, he didn't waste any time just, you know.
Well, what business are you?
What regulations are hurting your industry?
Right.
Um, I I actually said today to somebody high up in our government, I won't tell you who that somebody whose name would be instantly recognizable.
I said, W the next step in this successful run if we want to raise the wealth and lifestyle of every American is energy.
And in the process, we kick we have the added benefit.
We don't suck up to people for energy, the lifeblood of our economy from countries that hate us.
That's one.
Number two, you want to get Putin the bad actor, the hostile regime down on its knees.
Well, outproduce him and his energy and find the ways to get it to our allies in Western Europe and in Asia, and guess what?
You're he will it will buckle Russia financially.
They'll be finished, and we won't have to worry about their hacking anymore.
You look at this president has attained energy independence.
Uh, what a what a complete reversal from the democratic plan of the Green New Deal, uh, which would eliminate Cal's airplanes uh and the way of living as we know it, while China's a chief emitter of CO2, so their plans are off or not.
But you're exactly right from a national security standpoint.
Energy independence is so crucial, independence from Russia, independence from the rest of the world, and this president's tackling that.
There's not a challenge that he's afraid to tackle.
That's just plain and simple, and we see it every day.
All right, thank you both.
Appreciate it.
Uh Jeff, when is the book out?
Um, a week from uh this past Monday, May 28th.
Oh, that's brilliant.
Now you're gonna go compete against the great one.
I gotta promote both your books.
I gave him a good review the other day.
No, he knows.
Uh all right, and Kaylee also, uh to her credit, wrote a best-selling book, too.
Thank you both.
Uh, Kayleigh McEnaney and Jeff Lord with us, 800 941 Sean.
Speaking of the great one, Mark Levin, he'll join us uh coming up for the full hour, the top of the hour.
Unfreedom of the press is his book.
Really great stuff in there.
Trump just last week he confirmed to the National Review that he is again considering a run in 2016.
Do it.
Do it.
Look at the do it.
I will probably write you a town buying check now, on behalf of this country, which does not want you to be president, but which badly wants you to run.
Donald Trump has been saying that he will run for president as a Republican, which is surprising since I just assumed he was running as a joke.
Is that people think that Donald Trump is a clown?
Donald Donald Trump is a clown.
I mean, does anybody seriously think that Donald Trump is serious about running for president?
Donald Trump, you know, he's a clown.
President Obama will go down as perhaps the worst president in the history of the United States.
Exclamation point.
At real Donald Trump.
As real Donald Trump.
At least I will go down as a president.
So basically this is the beginning of the end for Trump.
Beginning of the end.
Donald, uh, you're not going to be able to insult your way to the presidency.
The strongest person usually isn't the loudest one in the room.
So right now we have Hillary's about a 75 or an 80% favorite.
We have a different person in the forecast.
Nationally, 12 points, 50 to 38, four-way race.
Clinton leading in Florida, Clinton leading in North Carolina, Clinton leading in Ohio, Clinton leading in Nevada.
I could go on and on and on.
I continue to believe Mr. Trump.
Trump will not be present.
And so, right now, Mr. Trump, to answer your call for political honesty, I just want to say you're not going to be president, all right?
It's been fun.
It's been great.
I love you.
Come on, come on, buddy.
We have a major projection right now.
Donald Trump will take Ohio.
That's in our project.
Donald Trump will carry the state of Florida.
Huge win for Donald Trump.
Donald Trump, while we project will win in Kentucky in Indiana with its 11 electoral votes.
Yes.
Virginia and Global, Tennessee, Mississippi, South Carolina, Alabama, North Dakota, with its three electoral votes, and South Dakota, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, the state of Montana, North Carolina, Georgia, Iowa, Utah, Wisconsin, Arizona, Kansas, with its six electoral votes.
Nebraska with its five electoral votes.
And Wyoming with its three electoral votes.
Sorry to keep you waiting.
Complicated business.
A lot of people have laughed at me over the years.
Now they're not laughing so much, I'll tell you.
All right, that's like our favorite montage.
Glad you're with us.
News Roundup and information overload hour here on the Sean Hannity Show, 800 941 Sean.
You know, that's one of my favorite montages that this great team that we work with every day here on the radio show put together because it gives you the history.
Now we've got a history and some insight into our media that I think we probably never expected in our lifetime.
It has never been this bad.
Years now of lying, anonymous sources.
The role of the press and journalism, as I declared in 2007, has changed dramatically for the worse.
And that is they're all agenda driven.
And 99% of the media is hard left and nothing but an extension of all things radical, extreme, socialist, democratic party that is in a constant state of rage and hate bordering on psychosis against Donald Trump.
Well, the great one Mark Levin has captured all of this in his brand new book, Unfreedom of the Press, showing the great tradition and history of our press, and what an American free press did once look like, and now it's been denigrated into a standardless profession, squandering all faith and trust of the American people, abandoning every bit of press integrity and objective journalism.
It's dead.
The great one joins us.
Thank me.
How am I?
Sean Hannity.
Uh, thanks for having me, buddy.
I much appreciate that.
Such an important topic as far as I'm concerned.
Well, I gotta tell you, uh, the interview we did on Friday, with so much more to get to, so I'm gonna I'm gonna guide you a little bit in some of that direction.
But there is there's a history of the press in this country that I think is important, and I want to start there.
I want to end up to where we are now.
Why don't you walk us through that history?
Because I know you spend so much time researching this.
Well, uh, I can't do the whole history.
Let me be just concise about it.
It's in chapter two.
It's a concise review of the history, the parts that I think are critical to what's happening today.
And you know, early on in the uh history of this country, even before the revolution, there was a handful of printers, and these printers would push out what were less than 36, 40 newspapers, uh, and also uh pamphletiers, of which there might have been a hundred or so.
And they were very, very influential.
And these were patriots, and they pushed the ideas of individualism, property rights, representative government, low taxes.
They pushed the idea of the enlightenment.
They wrote about people like Locke and Montesquieu.
They were mostly men of faith.
And but for the early printing press, but for the early newspapers and pamphleteers, we wouldn't have had a revolution.
The ideas came from them.
A lot of the passion and emotion came from them, and people have gone back and actually studied these pamphlets and newspapers.
And I'll tell you something that's very interesting.
It was a revolution.
The revolution was not a revolution against our culture or our civil society.
This is very, very important.
It was a revolution about government.
It was a revolution about the tyranny of the British Crown imposing its will on the colonists.
And the colonists didn't merely want to break free from the British Crown.
They wanted to create a really special government that would honor the history of the country, the culture, the civil society.
And eventually that's how we got our declaration, and that's how we got our government, the constitution.
Today, that's not what the press does.
You know, Barack Obama famously or infamously talked about Fundamental transformation.
He was talking about fundamentally transform our our society, our culture.
Our founders never talked about that.
They thought that we were a special people and a special place, and it was a special time.
You don't hear that from the media today.
But where do these rights that this is your books vary in terms of your topics and your background and your history, but you know, I think one of your best selling books was Liberty and Tyranny.
Our founders and our framers, this has been your life study.
They believed that all of this was God-given, not man-given.
You talk about the Great Pamphileteer, and you mentioned on the TV show Thomas Pain, Common Sense, where the guides and dictates of conscience irresistibly obeyed.
We have no need for any lawgivers.
But that not being the case, government in its best state, a necessary evil, its worst state an intolerable one.
That's what he was writing, the greatest plant pamphleter of that time, 1776.
And I'll tell you what's interesting about this, Sean.
He was one of the later pamphleteers.
He came to the United States just a few years earlier from Britain.
There were pamphleteers before him.
In other words, this revolution had built before 1776.
It had built before there was a uh a second continental congress and the uh and the adoption of the Declaration of Independence.
It had been brewing, it was in Boston, it was brewing in New York.
Battles took place even before there was a declaration of independence, so it built to this.
Uh you had the printers, the early printers, they had to they had to be rather nimble.
They had a move because the British uh red coats were trying to hunt them down.
And I want to be clear about something.
The British were brutal.
They they you know, they did torture people, they did kill them in horrific ways.
Do you know almost half of the men who died during the revolutionary war died on prison ships?
They died on the British prison trips where they would have ships, where they would have thousands of these men, they would starve to death.
What they ate was rancid.
They died in the most horrific ways.
Half of approximately half of the men who died in the Civil War died as prisoners on those ships.
After we had the Patriot press, that's what we call it, we had the party press.
And that was in uh about uh the the late 1700s into the beginning of the Civil War.
And it really started with Hamilton and Adams on one side and Jefferson on the other, and then Hamilton and Adams went at each other very aggressively, but they were of the same party.
And the party press was very transparent.
You had many more newspapers then, after the founding, after the Constitution, uh during the presidency of uh of Washington.
They were vicious and they were brutal.
But they said, as an example, the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, you can figure out what party was aligned with.
The Arizona Republic used to be called the Arizona Republican, and there were many papers like this across the country.
Again, transparent, they didn't pretend they were something they were not.
Moving quickly to the beginning of the last century, the big progressive movement, latter part of the 1800s, early part of the 1900s.
They decided, as they have with all government and economics, we needed basically a handful of elites who are smarter than everybody else, to determine what the news should be, to create a standard and a profession and push for objectivity.
And of course, that objectivity, Sean, was what?
It was laundered through the progressive ideology.
And so this has been working its way through the last century, but now we come to today, or really the last 30 or 40 years, but especially today.
What else has changed?
We're back to a party press, but a one-party press, not a two-party press.
And there's simply no question, when you look at the first chapter of my book, when you look at the surveys and the polls, and when you look at really the confessions of many prominent reporters and so forth, their ideology is almost monopolistic in the sense that it is progressive.
They identify with the Democrat Party, and they believe in more and more social activism.
All right, quick break.
We'll come back.
Mark Levin, the great one with us, on freedom of the press, Amazon.com, Hannity.com, and as of today, bookstores all around the country.
This is perhaps the best book written, a definitive book written about the corrupt news industry in this country.
I can't live without my morning cup of coffee.
You don't want to be around me until I have my black rifle.
And as we continue, the great one, Mark Levin, uh, brand new book out today in bookstores all around the country, Unfreedom of the Press.
Also Amazon.com and Hannity.com.
This defines the modern day corruption between the press and the Democratic Socialist Party in America.
They are basically one.
And you get a great history of the press and what that right really means and should mean in America as well in this book.
Now listen, I'm watching Everything, listening to everything you're saying.
And you're right.
They came up with you go through the progressive era and the 20th century, the you know, object objectivity now comes into the press.
There is such a misnomer about what we do for a living.
And these guys they've laid out their opinions.
Mark Levin, I'll say it.
Nobody else will say it.
But you know what?
I'm not buying how they define us anymore.
Because we are legitimate press.
That those of us in talk radio, those of us that do TV shows.
Mark, I can produce hundreds of TV and radio hours of just doing straight news on this program.
I can produce hundreds of hours TV and radio doing real reporting that they don't do.
Vetting Obama, the deep state, two recent examples.
I can give real examples of me giving strong opinion.
We talking about sports or culture.
I view what we do as the whole newspaper, and yeah, opinions are part of it, and we are honest about our opinions.
We don't hide our opinions.
We don't hide who we are and what we believe.
And we don't present ourselves as pure journalists either.
That's the difference.
You know, there was reports.
We do do journalism.
Who broke more stories on the deep state?
The mainstream media or you, me, Rush, and f and a couple of people on Fox.
Well, in 1942, there was a report done, an analysis of the press.
Back then, the press looked at the press.
They never look at it themselves today.
And one of the things they said in this uh commission in this report, and they reviewed and examined the media themselves for five years, is we need to be extraordinarily careful about mixing opinion with fact.
It's fine if you do news and do commentary, if I do news and do commentary, but it's not the Sean Hannity newsroom.
It's the Sean Hannity program, and everybody knows where you're coming from, and that's a good thing.
You can't say the same for CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, and so forth, where they commingle fact and opinion, and it becomes very, very difficult for people to discern what's what, and that's why quite frankly, people get turned off by a lot of this.
I just want to mention a few things, though.
The reason we have a free press is for the republic.
It's for the people of the Republic.
It's not for the corporations that own these various newsrooms.
It's not even for the people who work in these newsrooms.
You need a free press to have a vibrant uh economic system, to have a vibrant governmental system, to have a functioning republic.
We don't have a very free press today.
We have a media.
And the greatest danger to the free press today is the modern media.
Because the modern media, as I said, is myopic in its ideology.
There's not a dimesworth of difference between most of the media and the Democrat Party.
One leads the other, it just depends which day it is, and social activism.
That's not the job of the press.
That's the job of political activists.
You see more and more, and I point all this out in the book, this ancestral relationship between uh Democrats who work in the Obama administration or worked on Capitol Hill or wherever they work, moving into the media, and vice versa.
You see their family members working in various Democrat administrations.
There are a few Republicans, nothing like the Democrats.
And Sean, the real objective analysts of what's taking place today, like the Schornstein Center in Harvard, they're not left, right, they're really just uh a you know think tank of sorts.
They looked at the first hundred days of the Trump administration.
I think they were shocked.
They said 90% negative reporting at CNN, CBS, and MBC.
84% negative at the New York Times.
Everybody way above 70 percent except Fox was 52, 48 percent negative, which is part of the reason.
Part of the reason why the other media outlets attack talk radio, attack you, attack me, and attack Fox and lead boycotts.
It's absolutely quite incredible.
Well, stay right there.
The book is phenomenal.
Uh, I also have to current you.
It's now been uh at least since last what, Thursday or Friday, number one, the number one best-selling book in the country on Amazon.com.
Uh, it's called Unfreedom of the Press.
It's up on Hannity.com, Amazon.com, and now today for the first day in bookstores all around the country.
I hope you'll pick up a copy and maybe a copy for a friend.
Well done book that exposes the absolute corruption and how the Democratic Party and the press are united.
Manufactur they even use the same words, manufacture crisis.
More with the great one on the other side.
This is the Sean Hannity Show.
Detailing on national television, an intimate relationship with Donald Trump and the effort to conceal it.
Adult film actress Stormy Daniels.
The White House briefing expected to begin any moment now.
They will certainly face questions about Stormy Daniels.
The stormy saga takes a dramatic turn as the porn star speaks out on her alleged affair with Citizen Trump.
Stormy Daniels, Stormy Daniels is layer.
We haven't heard from him about the Stormy Daniels um affair.
Adult film starmy Daniels breaking her silence about her alleged affair with President Trump.
We're talking, I think understandably inappropriately about the most serious legal allegations that Stormy Daniels made.
Stormy Daniels.
Stormy Daniels, I know you've heard a ton about that, and we have to see where that case goes and what this interview is about.
There's no coordination or conspiracy.
So this vindicates the president on collusion.
We have enough information to sit and wonder might this be the greatest crime in American history.
There's tons of proof of potential collusion.
Dramatic evidence of collusion.
This is collusion.
Most uh explicit public evidence of collusion.
And Trump, an asset of Russian intelligence.
Chate lays out what could be considered the worst case scenario.
That Donald Trump has been a Russian intelligence asset since 1987.
The piece acknowledges that that is probably not true, but it might be.
Is the operation that Russia started during the campaign?
Is it over?
Or are they still running it?
Are we still in this now?
Robert Mueller will likely indict people that Donald Trump cares about.
But is he an asset?
100%.
If he were really an innocent man, he wouldn't be behaving this way.
Everyone's running around acting guilty because they're guilty.
There is going to be a bridge of data here that is going to be unassailable.
There was no collusion.
And Muller knows it.
If you're shaking your head at that, you are not alone.
We'll fire Mueller at some point.
You can see he's teeing it up.
And that's where this is going.
All right.
So there is a montage we just played for you here that, yeah, once again, they're pushing for two plus years.
Nothing but lie after lie after lie.
Conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory.
They literally did no work.
They they sung in unison the 99% of the lying media mob that wakes up in a psychotic state of rage because they could not handle that Donald Trump became the president.
For two plus years, they have lied to their audiences.
They have passed on fake, fraudulent information to their audiences.
And nobody that I know of to date has said, you know what?
We were wrong the whole time.
None of them see they act like they care about uh, let's see, collusion, but not Ukrainian collusion with Hillary with actual evidence.
They care about obstruction, but only if it's Donald Trump for a crime he didn't commit.
Never mind Hillary Clinton violating committing felonies with the espionage act, top secret classified emails on a secret server, and the intent by deleting 33,000 subpoenaed emails and an aide with hammers on the devices and the SIM cards pulled.
They don't they don't care.
It's only if it's Trump obstruction, not Hillary obstruction.
They say I believe about Justice Kavanaugh when he was in his high school years.
The silence is deafening.
No I believers with the horrific charges against the lieutenant governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Yeah, rape and serious, significant violent assault.
Not one I believer has said anything because it's a Democrat.
It's fake, phony, selective moral outrage.
Mark Levin, the great one I call him, outlines all of this in his brand new book, Unfreedom of the Press, Amazon.com, Hannity.com, now today in bookstores all across the country.
This double standard makes me sick.
Look, I I just played that montage.
Russia, Russia, Russia, Stormy, Stormy, Stormy.
I put them together all the time.
They they're one voice, Mark.
And it was a lie for two and a half years.
We call this a pseudo-event.
And we have lies going on now that the president has committed impeachable offenses.
No, he hasn't.
He's challenging these reckless subpoenas pushed by a rogue Democrat Party that happens to call control one half of one branch of the federal government.
He's litigating these issues.
He's free to do that.
He's trying to protect the office of the presidency and the executive branch, because we've never seen so many subpoenas flying at a president for so many issues that have nothing to do with the public good.
His personal finance is going back eight years, his taxes going back six years, uh, his bank accounts and so forth.
Uh this is not the role of Congress.
But let me suggest that when the Republicans are in power, they ought to return the favor.
They're to do exactly that.
God forbid if it's Joe Biden, but if it is, we need his tax returns, but we particularly need information about Hunter Biden and all his activities overseas with Russia and the Ukraine.
We need a special counsel, and we have the only way you can stop this politically is to do it to them.
Now, as for the press, I want to ask you a question, Sean.
If you're the paper of record, all the news that's fit to print, and the Holocaust is going on.
And millions of Jews are disappearing in Europe, and you get eyewitness testimony, there's other newspapers covering it.
You're the biggest newspaper in the United States with the most resources.
And you're a Jewish family that owns this newspaper.
Would you push that story to the back pages or rarely cover it?
It shocks the conscience, Mark.
No.
It shocks the conscience.
There is a very vicious and foolish review of my book from NPR.
They must have gotten an advanced copy and they can read very quick by some uh buffoon, and I will address it on my own show.
Uh she dismisses this basically says that it wasn't covered adequately.
It wasn't covered adequately.
Covering up the Holocaust wasn't covered adequately.
And this is what you're going to get.
The problem is, I wrote this book for my audience, for your audience, for American people who are truly concerned about what's going on with the press in this nation.
We want a free press.
We don't have a free press.
We have an ideologically driven propaganda machine for the most part.
We get news from time to time.
You want to know where you really get news, Sean?
Maybe your local news is where you get news.
You're not going to get it from people like Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo and so forth, who still put themselves out as news people.
I have a chapter in this book, as you know.
It's called Collusion, Abuse of Power and Character.
It's really focusing on the media and the media's treatment of the president.
There are many examples of collusion, but not with Donald Trump.
There are many examples of abuse of power where presidents have used the FBI and the IRS and sicked them on their enemies.
LB Javen used the CIA.
There's many examples of bad character in the Oval Office.
John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson were absolutely sleazy as can you can imagine in the Oval Office.
You haven't heard about a damn thing about this president of the United States since he's uh uh during his presidency.
And I go through how the media protect individuals they agree with, and then they go after individuals who they disagree with.
Trump was not supposed to be president.
Trump became president.
The media's furious because they sided with the other side.
The media, we talk, you know, we we we shake our heads on it, look at these police state tactics of the Obama administration.
The media won't cover them.
Because they're involved in them.
The leaks have been made to them.
So they're participating in these things.
It's the lowest point of journalism in this country, I believe, ever.
You've got a media that pushes propaganda that creates manufacturers' events.
You have a media that is clearly in the Democrat Party's side that pushes a progressive agenda and a social activist, as opposed to the patriot media that admitted what it was that was promoting things that that undergird our Republic and liberty and individualism and all these other things.
And you have a media that believes in the fundamental transformation of the people of this country and the society and the culture, as opposed to a media that is a watchdog on government.
But this media loves the bureaucracy.
This media loves unelected judges, as long as they're appointed by Obama and do the things that they want them to do.
They have no problem with the criminality and unethical activity that took place at the highest levels of the FBI.
They don't even question it.
They have no problem with the lies that were told a fISA court.
They don't they they could care less.
They're on to the next phony issue.
The fact that they'll it never and people ask me, well, when are they going to admit they're wrong?
I said, Well, when do you think hell never freeze over?
They never will.
And you see already they're making their transition.
And now it's Okay, we didn't get what we wanted.
I I think this all goes back to when we started this hour and all the predictions about Trump and the possibility of him winning the presidency.
They didn't believe it.
Even on election day, uh you know the story.
We get the exit poll numbers.
I usually share my numbers with you as soon as I get them, right?
Every election day.
And they went on the air with their coverage at 5 30, 6 o'clock Eastern, and they were happy.
They were giddy because they read Donald Trump didn't win a single state, nothing.
Not North Carolina, not Florida, not Ohio, not Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin.
That didn't happen.
And so they were just happy.
They beat them, they won.
And then the night goes on, Mark.
And then the reality sets in, and then Donald Trump gets the call.
A whole new world opened for them.
And they've never gotten over that.
And I don't think they're getting over the Muller, no collusion, no conspiracy issue either.
No, and uh here's the problem.
They're prepared to disenfranchise sixty-three million Americans.
I I looked at this reprobate Nadler today in his hearing as chairman of this committee's way over his head.
Uh but he actually he actually declared that the president had committed crimes.
I want you to think about this?
He declared that the president had committed crimes based on what he read in volume two of the Mueller report.
Even those prosecutors didn't say that.
Then he cites 900 former federal prosecutors who had nothing to do with the case when there are thousands and thousands of former federal prosecutors that didn't sign any letter.
He has uh truncated his process on Capitol Hill rather than trying to work out differences with the executive branch so they don't have to have these constitutional battles.
He files subpoena after subpoena to create these battles for the purpose of trying to create an impression that the President of the United States is obstructing Congress.
Uh we it and and everything Nadler says and does is basically written down or regurgitated by most or the vast majority of media outlets in this country.
And this is the problem, this association uh between the Democrat Party and the Progressive Ideology and their agenda and the media in this country.
And now, if you criticize the media, they claim that you're attacking freedom of the press.
No, they're attacking freedom of the press.
We want a free press.
What we're attacking is the people who are abusing their roles and they're not reporting news.
What do they expect us to do?
Just sit here?
I guess so.
And digest.
Mm-hmm.
They hate what we do.
We're honest about what we do.
Go ahead.
Sorry.
I I want the public to understand this book is not written for CNN, even though Brian Stelter there attacked my book even before he got it.
He has a nickname.
We call him Humpty Dumpty.
Go ahead.
Well, that's the nicest nickname.
Uh the this book isn't written for this this person at National Public Radio who writes this long, incoherent piece with her cheap shot.
It's not written for her.
It's not even written for the media at large.
It's written for the American people.
Remember what the colonists did.
Remember the beginning of this country.
They talked to each other.
They shared information with each other.
They decided how they wanted this country to go forward.
And let me tell you something, Sean.
People say, well, what are we going to do about it?
You're already doing things about it.
The only reason the New York Times exists today is because a billionaire telecommunication magnet in Mexico bought 17% of it to help prop it up.
The only reason the Washington Post exists today is because Jeff Bezos bought it for a quarter of a billion dollars because it was going under.
CNN has no ratings.
You're going to see more and more of this.
And what are the alternatives?
Not only talk radio and so forth, but technology creates the alternatives.
You go to the Internet, the reason why the Democrats and the government want to get a control of the Internet, they call it net neutrality, which means the opposite of that, of course, is because they don't want us communicating with each other.
And I understand we have problems with these tech companies.
But the fact of the matter is there's still good news organizations you can find, good bloggers you can find, smart people.
You don't need to be fed this stuff by government radio, government TV, NPR and PBS, CNN by relatively low IQ Democrat activists, MSNBC, radicals on the left.
You don't have to uh uh commit yourself to that.
And the New York Times, I don't know how any entity stays in business that purposely covered up most of the Holocaust and purposely covered up Stalin wiping out the Ukrainians in 1932 and 33.
Oh, well, we uh you know we know we didn't cover it adequately.
Are you kidding me?
Can you think of any other business that would be called the the iconic news organization that you would want to work for?
Wouldn't you want to stay away from it?
Anyway, Mark's yeah.
They they they have missed the biggest political corruption, abuse of power scandal, I think, in at least a hundred years.
Sean, they helped perpetrate it.
They were willing accomplices.
That's right.
Remember what I said.
They're social activists.
They are involved in pushing this.
They push the Russia collusion.
They push the obstruction ideas.
They want they they they gave voice to the leaks coming out of the prosecutor's office.
They give voice to the leaks coming out of the intelligence committees.
They are participants in this process.
So when people say when are they going to apologize, they're never going to apologize.
They are the activists.
They are the social activists who believe that they are right, that they are morally superior, that you and I are plebs.
We're just too stupid to understand.
I mean, after all, we voted for Trump, and they have as their goal to fashion society like good little progressives.
I want to uh I can't put enough emphasis on how good this book is by the great one, Mark Levin.
Uh it's a must-read.
It's you're going to learn and absorb so much in it, um, which is typical of every Mark book.
It's called Unfreedom of the Press.
It's on Amazon.com, it is on Hannity.com, it is in bookstores now, as of today, everywhere.
And uh you're gonna want to get a copy.
Uh great one, by the way, congrats.
You're number one in your time slot at Fox.
Uh, we still stayed number one in prime time during the week.
Thank God.
And uh, you know, we're lucky to have this great audience that gives us this opportunity every day.
We're very blessed by God to live in the greatest country God gave man.
I'm thankful for your friendship, and I'm thankful for the patriotic Mark Levin.
We need you.
Thank God for you.
You're like a brother to me.
Everybody knows this, and thank God you're right for our patriots in the audience.
And together, we will overcome.
Together, we must overcome.
Amen.
All right, thank you.
Unfreedom of the press, the great one, Mark Levin.
