Best of Hannity: The Path Forward for President Trump
Newt Gingrich, Gregg Jarrett, Alan Dershowitz, Scott Uehlinger, Hogan Gidley join Sean in this "Best of Hannity" to discuss President Trump's new immigration policy proposal, how the Democrats are imploding with Joe Biden as their leader and just what President Trump will need to do to win in 2020. Plus, the great Charlie Daniels joins Sean!The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
It's called Collusion, ripped right out of the headlines of today.
Crazy, creepy Uncle Joe.
I have to tell you, this was to me a real revelation.
It shouldn't have been after all these years, but it was.
So I watched the Anita Hill part, and it didn't sound right.
So I went back and Googled because I remember this.
And I'm very fond of Clarence Thomas.
And I went back.
When the hearing was over, by 58 to 26, the American people believed Justice Thomas and did not believe Anita Hill.
And what I realized was what the left does, and then they're trying to do it with Charlottesville.
They did it with communists in the government.
What the left does is they take something and they decided that they were going to make Anita Hill a heroine.
And so now we come to a point 30 years later where he can't even tell the truth.
The truth is, he said to Arlen Spector, and Arlen Spector wrote it in his memoir, he thought Anita Hill was lying.
But Biden couldn't say that, not in Stay in the Race.
Well, so, but the point is, yeah, but he has a whole history here.
Oh.
I mean, well, I don't know if you've seen the latest things.
Which one?
These things are so good.
Which one?
And I've got to tell you three quick things, if you'll let me.
One, they just reported that he voted to make Robert E. Lee give him back his citizenship.
Right.
Well, if you think about how the left responded.
Yeah, okay.
There's a whole when that goes out across, it's going to be too good.
He co-sponsored with Jesse Helms an amendment to stop busing.
Oh, this was in the 70s.
We've gone back and researched all that.
He was in one position.
Then he said, no, no, no, we don't want to have forced integration.
And his comments about reparations were pretty outrageous also.
So here's the analogy I draw.
And I wrote a newsletter about this.
Kate Smith did 3,000 recordings.
Her most famous was God Bless America, which was written for her.
She spent two decades visiting American troops around the world.
Two of the recordings in 1931 had language that was racist, one of which was actually sung by a black artist.
But it's no longer appropriate.
So they took down her statue from in front of the Flyers Stadium.
They've taken neither the Yankees nor the Flyers will use her voice anymore.
They'll use a different version.
And my point's simple.
He's going to have so many Kate Smith moments in his career that by the time they get done with him, it's going to be just an embarrassment.
I think by the time I get done with him, because it's not going to be a lot of people, he will get a pass.
Do you remember, I know we've talked about this a lot.
It was Obama 0708.
And I was driving, you know, Frank Marshall Davis and Alinsky and Acorn and Reverend Wright and Bernardine Dorn and Ayers.
And, you know, what is a community organizer?
And, you know, white folks' greed runs a world in need.
I had Obama on his own, reading his own book saying that.
And all I was pointing out is his background showed a rigid radical ideologue.
What do you call it?
Black liberation theology.
He stayed in the pews of Reverend Wright 20 years.
What did he hear in those pews?
And we went over all of it.
And for some reason, I think you thought it was too much.
I was going overboard.
I have said over and over since then, you are the only person who actually understood the core radicalism of Obama.
I mean, of all the people I dealt with that year, you were the only person.
And you did it no matter everybody else ignored you and you didn't care.
You kept coming back and coming back and coming back.
What have I been doing for two years on this whole fake, phony Russia collusion story?
Is there anyone else in the media, you know, except obviously talk radio, Rush, Mark, Laura, Tucker, and Fox and friends?
Who else is there?
Well, and I think.
Blue Dobbs.
And that's why I think you have these two alternative realities.
But the problem for Biden is the things that he did wrong are the things that drive the left crazy.
I mean, if he did things wrong that drove you and me crazy, he could still be the nominee.
He said Obama will.
Wow, this is a storybook, man.
He's clean and articulate and the further sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and nice looking guy.
I mean, that's a storybook.
Articulate, bright, and clean is African American.
That's a storybook, man.
I'm like, what?
I'm like, oh.
But the thing you have to remember about Biden is he has a very pleasant personality, but not particularly deep in the brain behind it.
And so.
You're saying all of this, does it matter, will it matter that the record of Obama Biden for eight years?
Oh, I think it's going to matter in part because of the Mueller report.
I think that'll matter.
It should matter.
I mean, the first question that needs to be asked of Joe Biden is: did you know any of this?
And if you didn't know, what does that say about your role in the administration?
By the time we get to the bottom of all this, it's right at the top.
Yeah.
And there's no stopping what's coming.
And people say to me, why can't we have it now?
Because that's not the way the process is.
But it's going to keep drawing.
You know, the other night when you did the interview with the president, which I thought was pretty amazing, frankly.
I think he loves doing it on the phone.
I think he's sitting, his feet are up, and he's having a good time.
No, I think he is an unusual character.
He's an effective president, but he is an unusual character.
Oh, my staff asked, well, how long is he going to be on?
And I said, well, he could go the rest of the show or he could go five or ten minutes.
It's up to him.
That's right.
That's exactly right.
I have no idea.
But he said something which drove the left crazy when he talked about this was an attempted coup.
It was.
That's exactly what it was.
I mean, we need to be honest about this.
You had people in the United States so offended by the notion that Donald Trump could beat Hillary Clinton, that there were bureaucrats in the U.S. government methodically, including, and I think up to the president, methodically doing things designed to undermine the next president of the United States.
Now, that is a coup by any reasonable standard.
How does this play out for the election?
And if you had to pick the top frontrunners, Biden probably has to be one.
Do you look at Robert Francis Bato?
Do you look at Elizabeth Warren?
Do you look at Bernie?
Who do you like?
Who do you think emerges?
I don't know.
I mean, to answer that question, you have to say, well, where are the Democrats?
How crazy are they going to be?
Well, I mean, I thought originally Kamala Harris had the best shot.
Not anymore.
Not anymore.
I think that's right.
But she kind of fit where they are.
Look, I think this is this, you're going to think I'm crazy, and I may be.
But I think Bedegig, if I've said that right, no, no, no, Buddha Judge.
Buddha Judge.
I got to learn how to say this.
I think Buddha Judge may have as good an opportunity as anybody.
Really?
From this standpoint, the two frontrunners are older people at a time when the Democratic Party's energy is younger.
One of the two frontrunners is sort of vaguely a moderate at a time when the Democratic Party is moving hard to the left.
The other one is nuts.
I mean, I don't know if you saw it.
My theory, this whole thing is that they're going to become the 15% party.
And if you look at it, the idea that you should allow violent criminals to vote while they're in prison is a 15% issue.
Okay.
And you go to killing babies after they're born.
That's a 15% issue.
That's a 2% issue.
No, no, it's about 15%.
Is it really?
Yes, that's it.
That's scary.
It is scary.
Then you get to the New Green Deal.
The New Green Deal, when you understand it, is like a 15% issue.
Taking away your right to buy life, to buy insurance is a 15% issue.
I mean, you go down this whole list of things, and you start to begin to realize these people are running as fast as they can into a blind canyon where they could.
So does Biden try and separate himself from that group or?
No.
I mean, if you watched him on View Friday, what he did is he tried to appease everybody.
Everybody.
I mean, Biden's natural instinct is to appease everybody and to be sort of a huggy.
In fact, one of the things he has a taxpayer is kind of a huggy bear.
But psychologically, he is a huggy bear.
Who objectively in your mind, you know, politics, this has been your sport and study for all these years, and you're a historian.
Who has the best shot?
At beating Trump?
Buddha Judge.
Really?
Yeah.
Think about it.
Mayor Pete Judge.
He doesn't exist.
He is exactly like Jimmy Carter.
Carter's great strength in 1976 was everybody could project onto him whatever they want.
Yeah, that makes sense.
All right.
And you think that he's going to emerge from the pack.
I think he could.
Now, of course, they're then going to ask questions like, how come your city has not been prosperous?
And how come you have all the problems with African Americans in your city?
I mean, this is a business where the higher you get, the hotter it gets.
Yeah, I think I've noticed in your life and career.
And Buddha Judge, by the way, is going to, he's coming to New York to meet with Al Sharpton.
Apparently, they have a specific topic, according to ABC News, to discuss homophobia.
Now, everyone's kissing Sharpton's ring.
But he's got to discuss reparations.
How can he go see Sharpton and not make a pledge on reparations?
But let's play the highlights of Sharpton so we know exactly.
I only have two minutes.
These are the highlights of Sharpton, okay?
All right.
Stop tired of the mega bitch.
You ain't nothing to a punk fool.
Now come on, do something.
David, take care.
You want to do the only legal on television?
All the lead on you.
All the leaders can talk.
Don't trouble him.
Don't talk to them because you got the only lead on Trump.
That's the guy they all want to support him?
This is the Democratic Party.
This is going to be fascinating to watch.
So everyone wants to kiss up to Al Sharpton.
We played the montage in the last break.
All right?
Does that fly?
I mean, that's okay.
Because Sharpton in the end is going to mean reparations.
Reparations in the end is insanity.
It's not possible.
Do you see any of these Green New Deal proposals being taken by the American people in this sense?
Socialism, we're going to take care of everything.
You don't have a worry, a fear in the world.
We're going to take care of your health care, your school, your education, your retirement.
This is going to be a race between a total fantasy that is obviously unsustainable and the hard work of creating a prosperous country.
And you're going to have Trump representing hard work, and you're going to have whoever ends up as a Democratic nominee representing just a total fantasy.
And it reminds me of two great presidential reelections: Nixon over McGovern, Reagan over Mondele.
Yeah, it's going to be great.
Well, Chris Emperson out exactly what happened.
And we're trying to get our arms around that, getting all the relevant information from the various agencies and starting to talk to some of the people that have information.
The thing that's interesting about this is that this was handled at a very senior level of these departments.
It wasn't handled in the ordinary way that investigations or counterintelligence activities are conducted.
It was sort of an ad hoc small group.
And most of these people are no longer with the FBI or the CIA or the other agencies involved.
This appears to run deep.
Why is it so hard to figure out?
Well, there are two things here.
One, no one's really looked at it.
I think there's a misconception out there that we know a lot about what happened.
The fact of the matter is, Bob Mueller did not look at the government's activities.
He was looking at whether or not the Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians.
But he was not going back and looking at the counterintelligence program.
And we have a number of investigations underway that touch upon it, the main one being the Office of Inspector General that's looking at the FISA warrants.
But as far as I'm aware, no one has really looked across the whole waterfront.
You also said back in April that you thought there was spying going on in the Trump campaign.
When do you think that started?
Well, I'm not going to speculate about when it started.
We're going to find out when it started.
It's been said that it was July of 2016.
Does that sound right to you?
Again, I don't want to speculate.
What I will say is that, you know, I've been trying to get answers to questions, and I found that a lot of the answers have been inadequate.
And I've also found that some of the explanations I've gotten don't hang together.
So in a sense, I have more questions today than I did when I first started.
Some of what things don't hang together.
Some of the explanations of what occurred.
Why does that matter?
Well, because I think people have to find out what the government was doing during that period.
If we're worried about foreign influence, for the very same reason, we should be worried about whether government officials abused their power and put their thumb on the scale.
And so I'm not saying that happened, but I'm saying that we have to look at that.
All right, a phenomenal interview with Bill Barb by my friend Bill Hemmer on the Fox News channel that aired this morning.
We actually had a portion of it last night on Hannity.
Hour two, Sean Hannity Show, 800-941-Sean, is our number.
You want to be a part of the program.
The Attorney General said a lot here that he is investigating what role the Steele dossier played in the Russia probe.
And the salacious document had a number of clear mistakes.
And it is a very unusual situation to have opposition research like that, especially one that on its face had a number of clear mistakes.
And really basically saying zero vetting.
What I've been saying, that it hasn't been verified.
It hasn't been corroborated.
And to use that conduct, counterintelligence, against an American political campaign would be a strange development.
And the thing is, is these are not even issues in dispute anymore.
This dossier was used as the bulk of information for the FISA applications that were used to spy.
And there were multiple ways that spying was done on the Trump campaign, but to spy on an opposition party campaign, and it was paid for by the other candidate.
And it turns out, through funneled money from a law firm to a op research firm, to former MI6 officer Steele, Christopher Steele, rather, who himself doesn't stand by his own dossier.
Anyway, here to help analyze what it is that the Attorney General is saying.
Greg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst, author of The Russia Hoax, and Alan Dershowitz, Harvard professor who contributed to analysis on the Mueller report for Skyhorse Publishing.
Thank you both for being with us.
Professor, why don't we start with you?
Because number one, I sense a seriousness in this man and a passion for the law.
I can't believe that members on the House Judiciary Committee are literally demanding he break the law and reveal grand jury information and talking about putting handcuffs on him by the sergeant of arms.
And he's saying, I'm not going to break the law.
Well, he's absolutely right.
And he's acting in the highest tradition of attorneys general in the Justice Department.
He says, I will obey the law.
And Congress has no authority to make me violate the law by providing secret grand jury material without court authorization.
And, you know, court authorization here is critical.
It's critical to the Steele dossier, and it's critical to this issue.
The big problem with the Steele dossier is not only that it is deeply flawed, it's that the people who sought the warrant knew it was deeply flawed and failed to tell the Pfizer court about it.
It's the failure to disclose to the Pfizer court what they knew about the source of the Steele dossier that makes it into a very, very serious violation of civil liberties and something that the Pfizer court should be extremely concerned about.
We're all awaiting obviously.
It seems to me, though, you know, we've had revelations, Greg Jarrett, in the last week.
Well, actually, over the last number of weeks that are stunning to me.
One Bruce Orr, closed door testimony, said he warned everybody.
Hillary paid for the dossier.
It's unverified.
Steele hates Donald Trump.
And that was in August of 2016.
Now we learned that, in fact, a State Department official had literally met with Steele, this Kathleen Kavalik, and in fact, warned the FBI 10 days prior to the first FISA application being filed and signed by Jim Comey, which again, at the top of the FISA application, it says verified.
It's an unverifiable document if its author doesn't stand by it.
And also, Jim Comey in January of 2017 went to Trump Tower and said, yeah, there's this dossier.
It's salacious and unverified.
So, you know, I think he's in a whole heap of trouble over this.
Oh, absolutely.
All the people who affixed their signatures verifying for its authenticity and its truthfulness when they knew it wasn't are in legal jeopardy.
You have to understand that for them, the dossier was their holy grail.
It would deliver them from Trump.
But now documents have emerged, and Kathleen Kavalik's is just one of them that prove it was really just a hoax.
The FBI took this phony political document.
It was funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC.
And they effectively weaponized it to destroy Trump, to surveil on an associate of his campaign, to gather incriminating evidence that didn't exist.
And now they've been caught red-handed.
So it's extremely important that a U.S. attorney by the name of John Durham will get to the bottom of this.
He has the power to do what the Inspector General doesn't have the power to do, and that is to compel testimony, to present it to a grand jury for potential indictments.
That's exactly right.
That's exactly right.
And it's so important because, you know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
And these folks believed that getting rid of Donald Trump was the highest interest of the United States.
And when you have people with that kind of zealotry, that's when the greatest violations of civil liberties occur.
Whether it's on the right or the left, when you have zealots who are convinced that they have truth on their side with a capital T and it's only they who can prevent disaster from happening to this country, they will do anything because they believe that the ends justify the means.
And here we have just a perfect example of zealots who were convinced that it would be a disaster to allow the voters in the Electoral College to determine who the president was.
And so they were going to essentially pull off a coup to make sure that the quote right result, in their view, occurred.
And whether you are a liberal or a conservative or a Democrat or a Republican, you have to be concerned with that approach, especially when it comes from law enforcement.
And so I'm very happy that this is all coming out.
As a liberal Democrat, I'm very happy this is coming out.
Whether it hurts the Democrats or helps the Democrats, that's a short-term issue.
The long-term issue is the rule of law.
Rule of law in the Constitution.
And I know this gets a little sensitive, and I think you think I'm being political, Professor, but I'm not.
I do believe that the law 18 U.S.C. 793 on the Espionage Act is clear.
And we do know that there were top secret and classified documents on Hillary's private server.
And the subpoenaed emails that were deleted, the bleach bit, the hammers to devices, and the SIM cards being removed, that would be intent and obstruction, the intent obviously being to destroy evidence.
That's not political to me.
You get it.
I'm happy to see it investigated.
I'm happy to see everything investigated.
Let the chips fall where they may.
Make sure that the law is equally applicable to Democrats and Republicans.
Agreed.
There's no thumb on the scale of justice.
That's why we agree.
We agree.
And, Greg, but I think you're more convinced as I am.
Oh, I absolutely am, as I point out in the book.
There are seven potential felonies that Hillary Clinton committed, and some of them she committed in the case of the statute you pointed out, 793, 110 times.
You see, there are 110 classified documents that Comey found that were on her private server.
So that alone would render, arguably, 110 felony counts on a single statute.
So, you know, this, nobody's above the law.
You know, you don't get a get out of jail free car just because you're running for president of the United States and, oh, gee, it's all over and, you know, let bygones be bygones, which was Trump's mistake after the election.
And so, you know, I think this needs to be investigated thoroughly, and I hope it will be.
You know, I guess at this point, and I'll go to Professor Dershowitz first on this.
I don't see how those people, I look at this, they had, it's all premeditated to me.
If you're warned about the dossier, you purposely hide where it came from.
They didn't put a big Hillary Clinton paid for this, and they knew it.
And they're testifying in that application that it is verified and corroborated, and it's not.
And they do it because of a political agenda.
And we know the people involved had a political agenda against Donald Trump in this particular case.
You're talking about really an attempted coup against the president of the United States or a candidate at first, then a president-elect, then a president.
Am I overstating that?
No, I think you're also talking about a fraud on the court.
And it's so important to emphasize that the Pfizer court takes its applications ex parte.
That is, there's no adversarial system.
So the other side never has a chance to respond.
That's why people who file applications for Pfizer warrants have a special obligation, a special obligation, more than they would at a trial, more than they would in other proceedings where the other side has a chance to respond, to be completely candid, completely thorough, to tell not only the truth, but the whole truth, and never to deny the court negative information that might impact on a decision not to grant the warrant.
That's what's so important, and why this is such a violation of civil liberties and why it's important for the Attorney General, the Inspector General to look very, very hard on this, and also for the Pfizer Court to look very, very hard on this and perhaps think about some contempt for CDs.
Greg, I mean, how many felonies can we possibly be talking about here?
Well, fraud on the court, conspiracy to defraud, deprivation of rights under color of law.
It could be perjury.
I mean, they signed their names to this or at the very least making a false and misleading statement.
It's also obstruction of justice.
They're actively interfering in a judicial process by concealing evidence and deceiving the judges.
So I identify six felonies in my book.
There could be more.
But these are very, as Professor Dersowicz points out, these are very, very serious violations.
It is almost comical now that James Baker, the former general counsel of the FBI, is out there trying to rationalize what are, to me, corrupt acts.
And I don't think anybody's buying it.
I mean, especially since none of these guys can seem to get their story straight.
They're pointing the finger of blame at each other, Comey and Clapper and Brennan.
But, you know, as I ⁇ But it's even worse than that.
Then you've got Struck and Page pointing right at Loretta Lynch saying she brigged that investigation.
So you're saying nobody's buying this.
But you're saying nobody's buying this.
People are buying it because people have taken partisan views of this.
And if the goal was to get Trump, then everything goes and we don't care.
We're not interested in civil liberties or what happened.
And so people are buying it.
And I think it's very important to keep emphasizing how the court was misled and how they fail to provide all the information necessary for the court to make the kind of decision it's supposed to make on an ex-party basis.
Greg, what's your response to that?
Yeah, you know, the professor is right.
The mainstream media seems to be buying what James Baker is peddling.
Democrats are certainly buying it.
But I don't think that a judge would buy it.
The FISA court would buy it.
And I don't think an inspector general has bought it.
And I think he's probably finished his investigation.
And when John Durham reviews it, I'm completely confident he ain't going to buy it.
So I think there will be criminal referrals.
All right.
I want to thank you both for being with us.
Professor Dershowitz, thank you.
Greg Jarrett, thank you.
Greg, you're going to stay with us as we continue and talk about the Russian Intel Operations Expert.
We're going to talk with Scott Ullinger, who's going to join us next as we continue and much more straight ahead.
How do you think John Brennan and James Clapper handled the Russian investigation?
Well, again, I don't want to speculate about the facts at this point at all.
I know some facts, but it's premature to be discussed.
Can you tell us what the steel dossier had to do with this?
What role did that play?
Well, that's one of the questions that we're going to have to look at.
It's a very unusual situation to have opposition research like that, especially one that on its face had a number of clear mistakes and a somewhat jejun analysis and to use that to conduct counterintelligence against an American political campaign is a strange would be a strange development.
I'm not sure what role it played, but that's something we have to look at.
Do you smell a rat in this at this point?
I don't know if I'd describe it a rat.
I would just say that the answers I'm getting are not sufficient.
Just to follow up on that, Republicans have said for months that these men, Brennan, Clapper, maybe James Comey, had it in for Trump.
Do you think that's true?
Again, I'm not going to speculate about their motives.
In the period of time between Election Day and the inauguration, did anyone in government or in intelligence, did they take action to justify their decisions?
Between Election Day, did you say?
Between Election Day of 2016 in November and Inauguration Day.
I think there were some very strange developments during that period.
That's one of the things we want to look into.
Such as?
Such as the handling of the meeting on January 6th between the intelligence chiefs and the president and the leaking of information subsequent to that meeting.
Was that meeting in New York City?
Yes.
In Trump Tower?
Yes.
What questions do you have about what happened that day?
Again, I'm not going to get into that at all.
But it's on your mind.
That's one of the things we need to look at.
Can you characterize how far advanced you are in understanding that meeting?
We're still in the stage of gathering all the information.
Horowitz has already concluded that the final three FISAs were completely illegal.
He's now on the brink of finding that the first FISA was completely illegal.
Durham has already used a grand jury in Connecticut.
They've already gotten documents.
He's already talked to the Intel people.
How long has this been going on?
Do we really know how long?
Durham's been working for a couple of months.
So the bottom line is this.
This is now big time.
This is where Brennan needs five lawyers.
Comey needs five lawyers.
Are they lawyered up sufficiently?
Well, I hope Comey has someone other than Mr. Richmond to whom he leaked his memos.
All right, that first was Bill Barr.
I mean, him on FISA, it is mind-numbing what he's saying because everything we said is going to happen is happening.
And then Joe DeGenova, that Horowitz has already concluded that the final three FISAs were completely illegal.
And Durham has already has convened a grand jury.
And he's working now for a couple of months.
And he made those comments on Fox.
I mean, pretty amazing stuff.
We continue with Greg Jarrett, author of the number one bestseller, The Russia Hoax.
Scott Ullinger is with us, retired CIA ops officer, Russian Intel Operations Expert.
And welcome to you, Scott.
Let me ask you this.
When the New York Times reports, especially on the FISA issue, which is now really becoming a focus for everybody, that it's likely Hillary bought and paid for Russian disinformation, and it becomes the basis of a FISA application.
That is even worse than what we thought.
We're not supposed to have foreign spies putting together dossiers that are full of lies in the first place.
And in an interrogatory, Chris Steele said he doesn't stand by his own document.
Then it's used as the basis for a FISA warrant.
It's an unverifiable document.
They don't tell the FISA quarters we discussed the last half hour that Hillary paid for this thing.
And yet they try it on a political campaign.
I mean, it's kind of scary to me.
Absolutely, absolutely, Sean.
And it's incredible that this happened.
I mean, the Steele dossier for an intelligence professional like myself, I realized it was garbage more than two years ago because Christopher Steele was literally speaking to former Russian officials on like an open channel.
He was not having a clandestine meeting.
So why would you think that any official Russian would give you anything other than what Vladimir Putin directly wanted to get out to us?
And that's the whole point of having clandestine sources.
They provide you information that is compromising.
But calling someone up on a telephone in London to Moscow, you're not going to get a real scoop from somebody that way.
So the Steele dossier was inherently poisoned from the get-go.
Well, you're a retired CIA ops officer, Russian Intel Operations Expert.
You know, I've been told by many people that know that Russia has done this not just to us, to everybody.
And I go back and I'm like, in 2014, before the 2016 election, Devin Nunes, then House Intelligence Committee chair, was saying they're going to do it in 2016.
And that's under Biden Obama.
All of this happened in Brennan and Clapper and Comey.
And I'm just like, now all of a sudden, it becomes they try to throw this somehow on Donald Trump when they had a duty and obligation, did they not?
If the head of the Intel Committee knows, they've got to know too, don't they?
Or am I just inferring something and it wouldn't be true?
No, that's absolutely true.
And in fact, the Obama administration dropped the ball by de-emphasizing the danger of this before the, you know, six months before the elections took place.
But anyone who understands the way the Russians operate knows that they've been doing this since the Russian Revolution.
I mean, the whole reason they subsumed the Iron Curtain was because they rotted those governments from within, you know, the countries like Czechoslovakia, Poland, and then eventually brought them into the Soviet empire.
So they're old hands at disrupting internal government functions and affecting political perception.
Greg, I mean, this gets into all of this.
I don't understand why America is still hackable.
Does that make sense?
I think I read we have 250,000 IT employees for the federal government.
I think I always view America with the belief that we have the best of the best.
But you have these instances where we keep hearing about our top secrets being hacked into.
I know there's some very smart, creative people out there with nefarious intentions that always want to hurt us.
But after you get hacked 100 times, do you not say it's we're allowing this to happen?
Why haven't we built the defense systems up to prevent this from happening to us?
And maybe it's a moving target, I assume, at all times, but still.
It is.
It is a moving target in this sense.
For every antivirus program you can introduce to protect your system, nefarious actors who are skilled at cyber espionage, like the GRU in Russia, they come up with a way around it or a different entrance to computer systems.
So it is, you're right, it's sort of a constant moving target.
You have to continue to upgrade and look for ways to protect your system.
So it's an interesting point that you bring up because it was always a silly proposition that the GRU and the Russians somehow needed the Trump campaign to help them to hack into the Podesta emails and the Democratic system and Hillary Clinton emails.
There was nobody sophisticated on the Trump campaign to do that.
The Russian intrusions began before the Trump campaign.
And so they didn't need Trump's help.
And yet, when you look at the Mueller report, so much time and attention is focused on their efforts to try to prove that Trump colluded in the hacking of email systems.
And it's just silliness to even consider it.
All right, quick break.
More at Scott and Greg on the other side as we continue.
And as we continue with Greg Jarrett and Scott Ullinger.
I know it's a moving target, Scott, and I wouldn't begin to, I barely can download an app for crying out loud.
That's how pathetic I am with computers, all right?
That's not my thing.
Right.
My young kids, can you do this for me?
That's what I say.
Just you do it.
And I think I'm like a lot of people.
I know the level of sophistication.
You know, I've had people on this program say that every phone call, every text, every email is recorded and stored and megadata stored.
And even our own government does it all.
And I'm fine with having the best intelligence.
I believe we have the premier law enforcement agency in the world with the FBI.
I really believe that.
And the 99.9% that should never be tainted by what some bad apples did at the top.
And I really believe that.
It pains me to ever even talk negatively about this great agency in any negative way.
But abuse of power occurred.
And I believe with the intelligence community too, the world's premier intelligence community.
But those tools are so powerful.
If we turn them on the American people or we use it for nefarious political reasons, you know, at home, everything we stand for is a constitutional republic.
All of our rights, they're not only diminished, they're destroyed.
And that seems to have happened.
That's right, Sean.
And that's why I'm very alarmed at everything we've been seeing with the Russian collusion hoax from the get-go.
I'm really glad that you've been sounding the call for going on two years now because this is the worst political scandal we've ever had.
I mean, this is unprecedented for the CIA to be doing things like installing spies to entrap people in a political campaign.
Now, usually the CIA and even the FBI are bureaucratically, sometimes they're relatively risk-averse.
I mean, they want to avoid what they call the, quote, appearance of impropriety, unquote.
And sometimes that can be even at the expense of not always performing the mission.
But here we have the opposite.
We have people dedicating the tools of the intelligence community to spying on a U.S. political campaign, which is inconceivable.
If you told me 15 years ago when I was in the agency that this would be occurring, I would have refused to have believed it because I saw the agency sometimes be very risk-averse.
But in this case, they're willing to do something which is not only far behind their mandate, but is illegal.
And yet they did it because under the Obama administration, the entire intelligence community, whether it's the FBI, the CIA, or the NSA, had become thoroughly politicized.
And this is what the American people now have to live with.
You know, Greg, I wonder now, I mean, I wonder if in the end, we actually have to weaken, you know, our great work because of the few bad apples.
In other words, you know, with the protections that we now need to put in, well, let's start with surveillance.
All the unmasking that took place, a 350% increase in unmasking in 2016 alone.
Samantha Powers, you know, 300 separate unmasking requests.
I don't want the talent of this agency in this ugly, evil world we live in, starting with the bad actors in Russia and Vladimir Putin himself, by the way, and we can bring him to his knees.
We will out-produce him energy-wise, and that's it.
We would cripple their economy.
That's how you defeat Russia.
But putting that aside, and I just wonder now, you know, what is the antidote?
How do you put in the protections and still do the hard job of intelligence?
Well, exposing corruption tends to put a stop to what I refer to as power creep.
And it happens in agencies like our intelligence community, the CIA, the FBI.
It's happened before.
When misconduct and corruption has been exposed, Congress has taken actions to limit powers and accountability, congressional oversight.
And this happens every 20, 30 years.
It happened about that time back in the 80s when we learned of corrupt acts.
And so it's going to happen again here.
We have now learned that, as Scott said, our intelligence community became politicized and weaponized improperly and illegally under the Obama administration.
And exposure is the only antidote because that precipitates restrictions and changes in oversight.
Well, let me ask you this, Scott, because you know, how bad is it?
How bad do you think the corruption is?
And how vulnerable are we as a country from outside actors, hostile regimes, Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, in terms of their ability to hack us?
Well, I think that this is, in some ways, this whole revelation, investigation by the Attorney General is a good thing.
Unfortunately, it comes at a very bad time when we are uniquely challenged by some significant threats, such as mostly China, to a lesser extent, Russia, and of course, Iran and North Korea.
I'm hoping that was said before, by exposing this corruption to the sunlight and having real reform made, we will reduce this politicization, which will automatically increase the effectiveness of our intelligence community because we very much need it in today's dangerous world.
You know, the curse of any Intel service, and I've seen it in my career all over the world, is politicization.
Once a service becomes politicized, it is usually the path to ruin, and that service becomes marginalized and ineffective.
So hopefully, Barr will put a stop to this.
We'll have a thorough investigation.
People who misbehaved will be punished severely, and then we can move on and have enhanced security for everyone.
Well, I want the right thing.
I love this country.
I love the people that work for this country and protect us and show us all the courage.
I want to be the best at that game because it's not really a game.
Look at the last century alone, 100 million souls destroyed, that we have to be ever vigilant.
So I just hope we got to the bottom of it all.
Scott, thank you for being with us.
Greg, thank you.
Appreciate it.
800-941 Sean Tolfrey telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
When we come back, Principal Deputy White House Secretary Hogan Giddley joins us, and your call straight ahead.
This is the most prized citizenship anywhere in the world by far.
Currently, 66% of legal immigrants come here on the basis of random chance.
They're admitted solely because they have a relative in the United States.
And it doesn't really matter who that relative is.
Our proposal fulfills our sacred duty to those living here today while ensuring America remains a welcoming country to immigrants joining us tomorrow.
And we want immigrants coming in.
We cherish the open door that we want to create for our country.
But a big proportion of those immigrants must come in through merit and skill.
The White House plan makes no change to the number of green cards allocated each year, but instead of admitting people through random chance, we will establish simple, universal criteria for admission to the United States.
No matter where in the world you're born, no matter who your relatives are, if you want to become an American citizen, it will be clear exactly what standard we ask you to achieve.
It will be made crystal clear.
We must also restore the integrity of our broken asylum system.
Our nation has a proud history of affording protection to those fleeting government persecutions.
Unfortunately, legitimate asylum seekers are being displaced by those lodging frivolous claims.
These are frivolous claims to gain admission into our country.
My plan expedites relief for legitimate asylum seekers by screening out the meritless claims.
If you have a proper claim, you will quickly be admitted.
If you don't, you will promptly be returned home.
All right, so that's what the president said.
And then there's fake news CNN.
Now, they claim to be the FACS First Network.
That's what they claim.
Okay, but never mind the fact for two years and running, they only perpetrated conspiracy theories, a hoax, and lies to their audience and the American people.
But anyway, so Acosta tweets, based on what you just heard, Trump in Rose Garden speech paints asylum seekers with broad brush accusing them of misleading immigration authorities at the border.
These are frivolous claims, which isn't accurate.
President said we must also restore the integrity of our broken asylum system.
Our nation has a proud history of affording protection to those fleeing government persecutions.
Unfortunately, legitimate asylum seekers are being displaced by those lodging frivolous claims, and these are frivolous claims to gain admission into our country.
And he added, my plan expedites relief for legitimate asylum seekers by screening out the meritless claims.
If you have a proper claim, you will quickly be admitted.
If you don't, you will be promptly returned home.
That's not a broad brush accusing or painting asylum seekers of misleading immigration authorities at the border.
Anyway, joining us is Hogan Goodley.
He's the principal deputy White House Secretary.
He works for Sarah Sanders.
How are you?
I'm great, Sean.
How are you?
I'm good, sir.
I mean, look, we know Acosta cares about Acosta and Acosta's image and Acosta's life and Acosta's ego.
I get it.
But I mean, just to purposely do it, and then you wonder why it's a waste of time to talk to these people.
I'm telling you, it's worse than that.
We have a million people in this country right now with final removal orders from judges who came here and claimed asylum.
They had their case adjudicated, and it turns out they were not telling the truth, and they did not deserve asylum in this great country, and the judge ordered them removed.
We have a million of those people.
No one reports on that at all.
It is completely brushed under the rug, and you hear reporter after reporter have these biased conversations and biased reporting that tries to somehow paint us as a nation that isn't compassionate.
We're the most compassionate nation on the face of the planet.
We let in 1.1 million people a year into this country legally.
Hundreds of thousands of visas for workers, hundreds of thousands of visas for students.
So to say anything other than the fact that we are generous and we welcome people, not to mention ones who desperately deserve and need asylum, as you just pointed out, you'll quickly be let into this country if that's the case.
The problem is so many are lying and defrauding the system and scamming the system.
We've seen a 1,700% increase in credible fear claims in the last seven years because they know the magic words.
They're coached by the drug cartels and the human smugglers and the child traffickers of how to get in this country.
It's time to change it.
This president is doing it regardless of what the mainstream media try to lie about.
Well, I mean, and that's the hard part.
I mean, and this is what you guys deal with every day.
And then they complain about, you know, well, you don't have enough press conferences.
Those press conferences have devolved into every single Washington Press Corps member.
They're not looking for information.
They're looking for their moment, their gotcha, their own careers are in play for them and what they're asking.
You know what I'm saying?
So it's really hard.
Of course.
Listen, we're not going to be responsible for launching the careers of people who just decide to grandstand inside the press briefing room.
Sarah Sanders goes out there every time, delivers the information.
The president gives information on the way to Marine One in gaggles.
He is the most accessible president in the history of the planet.
Anyone who covers the White House and has for decades will tell you as much.
However, in that briefing room, as you just said, so many are auditioning for contracts.
And you see, since we haven't had that many briefings of late because we've been giving the media so much other news and other forms, whether they're gaggles on the lawn or the president directly, those folks who used to get a lot of airtime aren't getting as much airtime because they're not relevant because they don't get to use the White House to try and pad their own careers.
Well, let me ask you from this standpoint.
I mean, you know, for example, it seems like nobody wants to give Donald Trump a win.
And, you know, when the Democrats were offered on the case of immigration, they seemed to care about walls and borders when Obama was proposing it in his second term, and they were willing to fund it then.
And they seemed to care about DREAMers, and they seem to care about DACA.
And the president offered all the above, and the answer became and evolved into that this is somehow a manufactured crisis and it's immoral to build walls.
So that tells me that this is all about politics.
Absolutely.
They've been playing politics with people's lives for a long time.
You know as well as I do.
Democrats just hate being out of power.
But they'll use DACA to their advantage any way possible.
The president offered 1.8 million people here under the DACA rule citizenship, three times more than Barack Obama, and the Democrats still wouldn't come to the table.
Barack Obama called this a humanitarian crisis from the Rose Garden, and the Democrats cheered and said, we have to fix it.
Donald Trump gets in office.
Not only does Donald Trump deliver his first Oval Office address directly to the American people predicting this would happen on the southern border, claiming the crisis was on its way.
He got mocked and derided, as did Fox News, for example, saying that they were lying about all of this.
And in all of that, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer go on and get airtime after his Oval Office address, which is unheard of in the first place.
But they go on television and use the term manufactured crisis three times.
But was it manufactured when Obama called it that?
Was it manufactured when they voted for walls and they voted to close loopholes in years past?
Absolutely not.
This has gotten way out of control.
And Democrats are the party of open borders.
That's their only solution to this because they choose to stand with hundreds of thousands of people who come here illegally and unlawfully every month as opposed to the hundreds of millions of American citizens.
And it's time they answer for it.
Well, I agree.
So as we move forward with the president's agenda, you've got record-breaking success.
You've got Democrats that are trying to out-green deal each other.
And somehow there has emerged a consensus among the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party that, well, we need to get rid of oil and gas.
For the first time in 75 years, Hogan, we are energy independent and a net exporter of energy.
All the talk about Russia, we can bring Russia to its knees if we out-produce them with energy and get it to our allies and get it to Asia and get it to Australia.
Secondly, record low unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, women in the workplace.
We have now 1.7 million more jobs available than we have people on unemployment.
This has not happened.
Biden Obama gave us 13 million more Americans on food stamps, 8 million more in poverty, the worst recovery in 40 years, and more debt than all 43 presidents before them combined.
And it's like, what part of this success are they not enjoying?
They ought to be cheering and thanking this president for turning around an economy for the very people they claim to want to help.
The point you just said, which are African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, women are now employed at record numbers.
I mean, this president has systematically turned around the economy with deregulation and tax cuts.
And the proof is what you see with the people who are actually seeing success.
And people like Mayor de Blasio, for example, saying with this Green New Deal taking it so far, he's talking about not using glass and steel to build buildings.
I mean, look, this has been tried before.
It's in the story of the three little pigs.
And if history is any guy, building with straw and sticks, it just doesn't end well for us.
Well, you can't do that either.
But what are you going to use?
You can't use wood because then you're cutting trees.
Exactly.
It's absolutely incredible.
And they still are going down this road.
You mentioned it on the intro.
They're still talking about cover-ups in Russia.
I heard Carl Bernstein of the famed Woodward and Bernstein group the other day saying this is an ongoing cover-up.
What is he talking about?
First of all, he's been scratching and clawing to be relevant since the 1970s.
But every time I hear him talk, it's almost as though he's a 50-year-old man at a cocktail party talking about the one time he threw a touchdown pass in high school.
I mean, it's over.
Watergate's over.
This cover-up he's claiming to be.
The entire thing is public.
Mueller had two years to do this.
Barr put out every word with a few little tenths of a redaction.
And they still can't get over it because they wanted it to be true so badly.
And if they admit that it was a lie, and they admit that they were telling the American people a flat-out lie to their face without proof or evidence, then they're going to admit the fact that the last two years of their life were a complete and total waste and they just refuse to let go.
Now, let me ask you a little bit more details about the president's plan on immigration.
Pure green cards given to people with relatives already in the U.S. Factors like age, English language proficiency, employment offers also taken into account.
The diversity visa lottery, which offers green cards to citizens of countries with historically low rates of immigration to the U.S. would be eliminated.
We'll strengthen our ports of entry.
We'll continue to build the wall and all the other technologies that are needed.
A fund paid for with increased fees created to modernize ports of entry.
And, you know, it sounds reasonable and rightly so.
It doesn't address what to do about the millions of people here already.
And I don't think that should be addressed until the wall is built and it's secure.
Sure.
Well, look, when you spring a leak, obviously you want to fix the leak.
You don't go shopping for a new sink.
I mean, the fact is we have a leak in this country as it relates to illegal immigration coming across our borders in record numbers.
You hit on it.
The plan that the president laid out is not only reasonable, it's rational and actually addresses the problem in twofold.
One is border security, the pieces you mentioned on strengthening some of our infrastructure to scan 100% of the vehicles that come across, 100% of the trade cargo.
I mean, you thought we'd been doing that.
We haven't.
Building the wall, we'll have about 400-plus miles built by the end of the year next year.
But also the merit-based system, as you just said.
We found out that people who come here who are younger tend to assimilate.
Data shows that.
They tend to actually contribute to the American economy and to the idea of what America actually is.
That's important.
Also, people who come here with degrees, people who come here with skills to work in our manufacturing sector.
I mean, the president's bringing back these jobs.
He keeps hearing from the owners of these companies they need more workers.
So we're talking about bringing people in like that, not low-wage workers, low-skill workers to depress wages, but higher-wage individuals who have a skill that can contribute to this country.
It seems rational.
It seems reasonable.
It's no wonder Democrats don't like it because it makes too much sense.
Well, I think this is the thing.
You know, one of the big messages, I think, for the reelection is going to be, are you better off than you were four years ago?
It's a pretty simple answer.
Absolutely.
Across the board, as the groups we just mentioned, as the demographics, the answer is yes.
And when 80-plus percent of this country receives a tax cut, and then the media comes out and has to say you guys received a tax cut, and then they're shocked that the American people didn't realize they got a tax cut, it's because they've been reporting a lie for the last two years saying you didn't get it.
It only went to the rich.
And we find out a majority of the country gets the tax cut.
I mean, this is the type of 93% negative news coverage this president has to endure that no other president in history has had to face.
And he's winning every day, all day for all demographics and all the people in this country.
And Democrats just don't know what to do about it.
Yeah, well said.
All right.
Thank you so much.
Hogan Gidley, he's the principal deputy White House Press Secretary.
Thank you so much for being with us.
When the devil finished, Johnny said, well, you're pretty good, old son.
But sit down in that chair right there and let me show you how it's done.
Found the mountain run forward from.
The devil's in the house of the rising sun.
Chicken and a bread pen, picking out those Like no town, no All right, and just to say, I just love music
Doesn't music make you feel good?
It makes me feel so good.
And by the way, second, we're going to talk to our buddy Charlie Daniels.
He's got a veterans nonprofit.
It's called the Journey Home Project.
They partnered with Rich Poverty Organization to assemble a new art exhibit at the Pentagon.
And the exhibit is entitled the Alliance Collection, a gallery literally of combat civilian photographs taken by vets and their families.
It's now on display for public viewing.
And the Journey Home Project, this nonprofit, you know, assists other not-for-profits in securing the funds they need to help the causes that benefit vets.
And let's play it.
So we've been at this for a long time and we got involved in recognizing veterans' needs.
That when our veterans are coming home, and especially it seems like from the more recent wars, the Afghanistan war, the Iraq war, that our Veterans Administration and the government agencies that are tasked with trying to help our veterans transition from one life to another, from military life to back to civilian life, are just dropping the bomb.
And my manager, David Corland, myself, got together with a couple of people with Joe and Mercy Longdriver and Ed Hardy and said, let's incorporate this thing.
David did a film called The Journey Home, and that's where the name came from.
It just seemed like a good name.
It's a Journey Home.
I think describes what happens with our veterans when they come home.
I look at the concept of the Journey Home Project.
It is a journey.
It is a path, a walk, a journey every bloody day.
And it's a hard journey to suddenly not have the focus, the organization, the discipline, the respect, the task, the commonality, the trust that you did when you were in uniform.
And then try to adapt to that, the transition period into a society that for most cases, bluntly, does not hold itself to the same ethical or moral standards that the armed forces do.
And so I'm so appreciative of not only the approach of the Journey Home Project, but the recognition that our emphasis from my foxhole needs to be on that transition period because that transition is different for everyone.
That walk along the path back home.
I think there's two parts to this.
I think we as veterans need to recognize that we're among a select few that have done and gone and done what we have done and been a part of something that's bigger than ourselves.
Just because we don't put our uniforms on anymore doesn't mean that we're not still a part of that.
We still have an obligation to our brothers and sisters to be there for them, to support them and push them just as we did in the military.
So we as veterans have to step up and take it to the fight.
We've got to be there to support our brothers and sisters and point them in the right direction.
We have to learn from our own mistakes.
We have to learn from our own hardships.
But we can't do that alone.
I never would have gotten to where I've gotten if it wasn't for the network that I've created and the help from the Journey Home.
And that's where other Americans come into play.
There's a lot of nonprofits out there that are honorable and that are focused on serving veterans rather than benefiting from being associated with veterans.
The Journey Home Project is at the top of that list.
So that's what Journey Home is.
We are here for the veterans.
We're here to try to help them have a softer land and a smoother transition coming from the military life to the civilian life.
Wow, that's very powerful.
The man, Charlie Daniels, country music legend, dear friend, and probably one of the most generous people when it comes to our vets loving this country, patriotism, appreciating the sacrifice of others and giving back, which he's done his entire career.
How are you?
I can't believe I don't get to see you more often, and I only get to talk to you occasionally on radio and TV.
What's going on, my friend?
Wow, man, it's just good to talk to you.
I was sitting here trying to figure out how I was going to say anything after that introduction you gave me, man.
Well, I mean, it's a great cause.
That's it.
And like so many other great veteran causes, like how many Freedom concerts did you do for us over the years?
We raised a bunch of money, and that money's even still being distributed to this day.
Well, we had more fun than we should have had.
That's true.
It ain't fair to be doing something good and having that much fun at the same time, you know?
Well, it's legendary me butchering the devil went down to Georgia on stage.
You didn't butcher it.
No, no, I ruined the whole concert.
It's your encore.
And then, you know, they're expecting Charlie Daniels' version, and they get the Hannity version.
And I'm just, I'm a mess.
I tried my hardest, though.
You know something?
If you were to go around the country and talk to 100 people that had come to that concert and you asked them, what is the moment you remember the most?
Oh, no.
What is it?
80% of them would say when Sean Hannity did down to Georgia and jumped all over the stage, man.
A combination of Big Jagger and Garth Brooks.
Oh, man.
There's a combination.
By the way, I stay in touch with Charlie Jr.
And I know you had a little health issues a while back, a pretty long while now.
You're doing great, right?
Back on the road?
Everything's fine.
Just had checkups this past week with my doctors and everything's good.
Like you all had to put up with me for a while off.
No, no, I think we'll be, God willing, we'll put up with you for much longer.
And how many shows are you doing this year?
We've got, I think, 114 on the books right now.
We're probably going to have to do it.
Oh, my God.
We're going to rock on out this year.
We're touring.
In fact, we're touring with Travis Tripp part of the year, touring with Alabama part of the year and doing a lot of stuff on our own.
I love Alabama and Travis.
They're both.
You know what?
I love that style of country.
I really do.
It's great.
Alabama, you know, sweet potato pie, and I shut my mouth.
Boom.
Yeah.
How cool is that?
You know, great guys, for sure.
But yeah, we're out here hitting it, getting on it.
We're going to be at the Bacon Theater a little later on the year.
Maybe you can come see us there in New York.
Oh, you're going to be up in New York.
When are you coming up to New York?
I didn't know.
I can't remember.
I'll make sure that you're in the middle of the morning.
Where am I?
What state am I in?
All right.
So when you're traveling, you travel on this beautiful big Charlie Daniel bus.
You tell me you love it.
It's home for you in many ways, although I know you love your home back in Tennessee.
And you travel in this thing.
Come on.
Over the years, there's got to be days when you're pounding it out night after night after night, entertaining so many people that you're like, what city are we in today?
Well, I do that, you know, I had to stop and think sometimes when I'm getting ready to say good Ethan, you know, whoever.
You ever have to say, where are we again?
What city are we in this time?
Well, I have made a mistake on that before.
People do not like it.
No, they don't like it, man.
They want to be loved in their state.
You know, and you're still doing music.
When did you first know you loved music?
I love music all my life.
I can't remember a time when I didn't, but I never got a chance to learn how to play until I was about 14 years old.
A friend of mine showed me a few chords on a guitar.
And once I learned three chords on a guitar and I could play a whole song, I was ruined.
That's all I ever wanted to do.
I just thank God I can make a living doing something I love as much as I do playing music.
I'm as in love with it now as I was when I first started out.
Okay, now for people that want to be a part of your charity, it is the Journey Home Project.
How do they do that?
We can go to our website.
We got a link on Hannity.com.
I'll make it easy for people.
How's that?
Yeah, we go to the website and we, you know, check us out and see what we are.
We're very open and above board about what we do.
We're involved in a thing right now with a picture display of the Pentagon that an ex-green, ex-Special Forces guy, Tim Wallace, put together.
That's an interesting thing.
It's like they have done pictures, all vet pictures.
They've taken pictures of war, but they've also taken pictures of their surroundings and the places they were fighting from all over the world, the people and the places that they were in and around.
And it's a really interesting thing.
It gives a whole nother look at things.
And the thing about it is these guys get together and it's unbelievable.
I love you.
I love what you're doing.
I love your love of our veterans.
They need all the help they can get.
It's the Journey Home Project.
We just threw it up on Hannity.com and anything people can do.
