John Solomon, Executive Vice President and columnist for The Hill, and Gregg Jarrett, Fox News Legal Analyst and Author of The Russia Hoax and the upcoming book Witch Hunt, analyze the upcoming IG report, the actions of the left in their desperate search of a crime following these investigations and their blind eye to the evidence leading back to Comey, Clapper, Clinton, Brennan and Obama. An interesting take on the IG report, that is suspected to be delayed, and the indictments which are expected any day now.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.
I am personally absolutely loving the intramural battle going on within the Democratic Party.
I mean, it is so out there, and it's only going to get more entertaining.
And to watch people like Ocasio-Cortez literally is in charge of the entire Democratic establishment.
They fear her at a level that is, it's bordering on irrational.
This is well beyond her being the Speaker of the House, Pelosi being Speaker of name only.
And I'll get to all of that today.
I've got to give credit to Devin Nunes.
We have a lot of stuff breaking in terms of Spygate investigating the investigators.
And a lot of it is really interesting.
And I think the letter that we got from the DOJ, Stephen Boyd, the Deputy Attorney General this week to Gerald Nadler is so revealing.
But Devin Nunes and some of these Freedom Caucus guys like Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, and guys like Doug Collins, Matt Gates, there's been a few of them that have been all over this, even when we weren't looking behind closed doors, as we now have had an opportunity to peek into some of the closed-door testimony given by key figures in this, Bruce, Nelly, Orr, Strzok and Page, and Baker and a whole bunch precept and a whole bunch of other people.
You see behind the scenes that they have been drilling down so deep that all of this is going to be now that the Attorney General has stated Mueller's dead and gone.
But yeah, the investigation, how did Hillary's investigation get rigged?
FISA abuse.
Yeah, it's probably the Horowitz report is temporarily put on hold.
I hear it is a devastating report.
Everything that we've told you about premeditated fraud committed against this court all happened.
Leaking the intelligence of the unverified dossier all happened.
The fact that everybody was warned about Steele and about his dossier, it's all there in black and white.
There's no stopping this train.
You add the other spying implications, not only spying through the Carter Page FISA application warrant that was gotten under false pretenses through a fraud committed against the court, but then the spying of Stefan Halper, you know, again, on foreign soil.
Now we've got a big intelligence fiasco that is unfolding in Italy, and many observers now believe it's connected directly to what happened here and the abuse of intelligence gathering by the few, not by the many, in the, you know, the Brennans, the Clappers, and others.
That is now under serious, significant review.
My sources confirming Italy, Great Britain, and Australia scared to death because as what we what we think likely happened, and this is what I think that Barr and Boyd are pointing to in this letter to Nadler in this now what they're calling review is that in fact, things that are illegal for intelligence people in this country, I mean,
the tools that we give them are so powerful that they can literally pinpoint a single individual and listen to every word they say and view them almost their every action.
Now, the implications in a free society are deep and profound.
On the one hand, we've got a very dangerous, ugly world we live in, and intelligence is the key to keeping Americans safe against enemies, foreign and domestic.
So we need these powerful tools.
We need them to the extent they've got to be better than our counterparts.
I mean, you know, it was no surprise to anybody what happened in 2016 because Russia, hostile regime that they are, Putin, hostile actor he is, they have been known to do this to try to create chaos in the elections of many countries.
And had the warnings been heeded by people like Devin Nunes, who wrote a piece, Washington Times, 2014, saying this very thing is going to happen.
And this will become a big issue for Joe Biden if he were, say, to get the nomination.
And I don't think anybody should be certain of that today at all, but we'll see over time.
But it all happened under the Democrats' watch.
All of this, rigging investigations, rigged primaries, rigged attempts to rig a presidential election, and literally bludgeoning a duly elected president in the hopes of undoing a presidential election.
It's all there.
And the way Nunes laid all of this out today, you know, he said, you know, here we are, Mr. Chairman, to hearing on the Mueller report, you know, more than two years, more than two since Democrats from this committee, yeah, he's talking about, you know, the cowardly shift and the rest of them.
And more than two years, they have perpetrated a hoax on the American people and they have known.
And they've used nothing but bought and paid for Russian lies in terms of their basis of fact that has always been a lie.
You know, allegations from an unverifiable dossier paid for by an opposition party.
The endless hysteria that the media, the Democrats, they're anonymous intelligence source leakers that we know who they are, you know, almost, you know, breathlessly thinking on a daily basis, triumphantly publishing the next bombshell and the next bombshell and the next bombshell, in some cases based on classified documents and reporters that they've never seen.
They're just fed and they take on, well, if they say it, it's got to be true.
And then they have the echo chamber and one person reports it, then they all report it and it's not even twice source.
It's zero sources and made up in many cases and purporting that Trump or Trump's associates are, you know, somebody's a treacherous Russian agent.
The scheme has now been exposed, as Nunes called it, imploded.
The collusion accusations are a hoax.
He said that today.
He said it and actually suggested, and this is never going to happen.
One would think the Democrats would apologize.
I'll add the media mob to this, get back to lawmaking and get back to oversight.
But as he said, they can't stop what is now a grotesque spectacle, even if they wanted to stop it.
You know, years of false accusations, McCarthy smears, he goes on, the collusion hoax now defines the Democratic Party.
It's more than that.
It's also the corrupt media mob, which are the mere extension of everything Democratic.
They have literally put in place, you know, of a governing philosophy.
What Nunes wrote and said today was a constructive vision for the country.
This is all they think about.
This is, they maybe even convince themselves.
You know, that's why it's so profound that NBC News.
I mean, if you're a reporter at NBC, your head's got to be spinning in all directions, and you've got to want to projectile vomit out, you know, vis-a-vis the exorcist green bile at the thought that the biggest Roswell-Rachel conspiracy theorist in the country is moderating their debates, their presidential debates.
Apparently, Phil Griffin of NBC is meeting with the New York Times.
Why won't the New York Times put people on Rachel's show?
Because she spent two years lying and advancing lies and conspiracy theories.
It's that simple.
Maybe he's not really audit.
Like, all of those little things might be true.
Okay, that'd be interesting to know.
I don't know that that would change the world that much.
But what would change the world is if, you know, Russia was interfering in the election and they weren't doing it on their own and he was in on it.
After all the worry, we are actually about to find out if Russia maybe has something on the new president.
We're about to find out if the new president of our country is going to do what Russia wants once he's commander-in-chief of the U.S. military.
We haven't ever had to reckon with the possibility that somebody has ascended to the presidency of the United States to serve the interests of another country rather than our own.
What's the corrective to that?
How do you remedy that?
These are no longer hypothetical questions.
This is where we are.
He received the Order of Friendship from Vladimir Putin personally, the highest civilian award that Russia gives to non-Russian citizens.
Somehow, Rex Tillerson ended up as U.S. Secretary of State under Donald Trump, who he'd never met.
If Mueller is proceeding without being throttled, without being stymied, and he's proceeding at this kind of a pace, rolling out this stuff right now.
I could go on all day.
We don't have time.
It's all, it was all a lie and a hoax.
And the level of conjecture and conspiracy, it is mind-numbing.
You know, and what you've got is the single biggest abuse of power ignored by a media that is now totally, completely invested in their own lies.
And it's beyond a political hit report.
I did like that Nunes refers to the Mueller report as the Mueller dossier, as he calls it.
And even rightly, John Solomon pointing out all the factual errors within the Mueller report that we're now discovering.
And the Mueller dossier, when you actually look at it, debunked many of the favorite conspiracy theories of the shifts of the world and the Nadlers of the world and the Roswell, New Mexico, Madows of the world.
You know, Mueller's, well, Michael Cohn didn't travel to Prague to conspire with the Russians.
I had firsthand knowledge where he was that particular weekend because his son is an athlete.
I knew it was false, but that was the big story that Carter Page never conspired with Russians.
No, just the opposite.
He was an American asset.
Paul Manafort never visited Julian Assange in London.
No secret communications between a Trump Tower computer and Russia's Alpha Bank.
You know, no mention in the report of an NRA lawyer named Cleta Mitchell and her knowledge of a scheme to launder Russian money through the NRA for the Trump campaign, which originated with Fusion GPS and Glenn Simpson.
But the Mueller dossier, it was all designed.
It was a political document, a roadmap that they first tried to use to impeach the president, and it's not going to work because there was no collusion.
And there's so many, you know, ordinary contexts that were ordinary, and they tried to create a conspiracy of nefarious activity.
And then they even edit Trump's attorney.
How does Mueller's team selectively edit Trump attorney John Dowd the way they did to make it seem exactly the opposite of what it was?
Or the close relationship between Democratic operatives at Fusion GPS vis-a-vis Nellie Orr, and then others, multiple Russians who participated in it.
Why did they meet before and after the Trump Tower meeting?
Huh.
Interesting question, Hannity.
You know, no useful information, no discovery, no talk at all about the dirty dossier in the Mueller dossier.
Interesting.
Or the irregularities in the Clinton investigation, who paid for the Russian lies, how it's an unverifiable document, how the extent to which, you know, even later, you have Christopher Steele still working with Bruce Order to send messages to special counsel Mueller.
And then they cite the media leaks from the same people in circular reporting.
And they literally quote those articles as if they're responsible.
That all happened.
And, you know, reporting the Central Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.
It's false.
And everybody knew it was false, and they know it's false today.
But they don't care about the American people.
All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity show 800-941.
Sean, you want to be a part of the part?
You know, this is what's great about the second act and the curtain going up.
Washington Times, there are now people that are doing, listen, I don't want to dismiss anybody here.
There have been a small group of us that have been on this from the beginning.
And now that is a great, Andy McCarthy has been great.
He has a great piece out on National Review today.
I'll hopefully have time to get to it with you.
A new analysis by the Washington Times shows that four surveillance applications submitted to the FISA court authorizing the FBI spying on the Trump campaign were riddled with errors, half-truths, and downright misrepresentations.
Yes, Linda, to the answer to your question, why does Linda always like write me these cryptic notes?
You can say it on the air.
You have an open mic policy, except when you're annoying me.
I have an open mic policy.
I annoy you all the time then.
That's pretty true.
I mean, it's hard to decipher.
So the FISA warrants first came to light in 2018, July.
FBI reluctantly declassified 412 pages of four highly redacted applications signed by senior FBI Justice Department officials.
And the Washington Times analysis, at the time they were released, Republicans said they had two main complaints: dubious corroboration of allegations against Page and the FBI's use of Democratic Party research.
Well, now we know that the bulk of the information came from the dirty dossier, which was likely from the beginning Russian disinformation.
And what's known more fully today about FISA applications and accuracy comes from three main sources.
The investigation by Republicans into FBI actions, the Mueller reports, and court filings by Steele in London, Christopher Steele, and he's being sued by Russians named in his infamous dossier.
So he's got a whole host of legal problems.
All right, we'll get more on the other side.
A Democratic Civil War has broken out.
We've got Solomon, Jarrett, Bill O'Reilly all coming up on a busy Newsday.
Stay with us.
All right, 25 till the top of the hour.
The great one, Levin, by the way, is book number one, New York Times, yet again.
Great news for him.
And it's a great book on freedom of the press.
Anyway, he interviewed, we've had him on the show a lot too, Clinton Polster and Democrat strategist Mark Penn about how the current Democrats focus on impeachment and how it's hurting them with the American people.
It's way worse than what anybody is seeing at this time.
If you're reading polls for 2020, I'm telling you, just throw it in the fireplace.
It's worthless for a couple of reasons.
Donald Trump does not poll like any other politician, especially any presidential candidate, because there's too many people.
You know what?
I have so many people that I know.
They're never going to answer a pollster's question.
Also, polls have never caught up with the fact, you know, there's too high a percentage in some cases of cell phone usage, but there's also a big percentage of people that don't want to argue with a pollster.
And they're like, yeah, we like Trump too bad.
You can go to hell.
That's pretty much their attitude.
And they like his policies.
They like his success.
They like his fight.
They like that he is a disruptor.
They like that he is an iconoclast.
They like that he says what he means, means what he says.
And he fights like hell for everything he believes in.
Because it is refreshing.
You know, people ask, well, why did you, how did you know this about him?
I said, because I've known him for 20 some odd years.
Because we were out there, Linda, how true it was this point.
Because there are a lot of conservatives leading into 2016 that had doubts about his conservatism.
And they said, well, what about this Democrat that he donated to?
What about that Democrat that he donated to?
What about, how do you know that he's really pro-life?
He's now been the most pro-life president in modern American history, along with Vice President Pence.
But he kept his promise on the tax cuts, originalists on the court.
And, you know, but we went out there, the tallest part of a tree, the shortest limb, longest limb, I guess, at that point, you know, a little twig hanging on a leaf that remained from last fall, telling everybody that he meant what he said.
The same with ending burdensome bureaucracy.
He meant it, and it's been effective as it relates to energy independence.
You want wealth creation in America.
You want the standard of living for the forgotten men and women in this country that deserve it most.
Now that we are free of any need for the lifeblood of our economy, oil and gas, and now that we know we've got all these resources that Democrats, influenced by environmental extremists, have prevented us from ever tapping.
Now, remember, we're still using oil and gas, except we're importing it.
That is until Donald Trump becomes president.
But we have more natural resources available to us than the Mideast combined.
And if you really, now that we're energy independent and a net exporter of energy, you really want to hurt Putin.
Well, we figure out the best way, the most efficient way, the most cost-effective way to get our energy resources to Western Europe.
And guess what?
Putin is on his knees.
That is their economy.
It's not the basis of our economy, but it will be the wealth creation of our economy.
And it will single-handedly be the one thing that raises the standard of living for the Americans that deserve it the most.
These jobs in the energy industry are real career jobs.
You know, they'll train you to be a truck driver, 80 grand starting pay, and all the overtime you can handle.
You get the pipelines on tap, the fracking in place, and war discovered.
We know vast resources.
You get all of this, all of this up to the level of production where we can literally create millions of jobs in this country.
It will raise the standard of living.
All those people, and it's always, I know they're numbers, but they're real people, real families, real lives.
You know, the 13 million under Biden-Obama that ended up on food stamps because of their crappy economic policies and their redistribution policies and their tax the rich policies and their burdensome regulation policies.
Yeah, those 13 million, the 8 million more that they put on in poverty as a result of their policies that now those disproportionately impacted by those negative socialist policies that Democrats stupidly want to double, triple, quadruple down on vis-a-vis the new Green Deal.
That is death to the American economy.
That is a prescription absolutely for poverty.
It'll drag this country into a depression faster than you can blink an eye if we get rid of the lifeblood of our economy, oil, gas.
All competitiveness is eliminated in terms of the economic machine of this country.
It's gone.
And it's just a fantasy that these people believe in as if Solyndra wasn't bad enough.
But this is where they're headed.
And the problem is, and this is what Mark Penn was saying, is that, you know, now we've lived through the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.
And now we're watching this fight emerge in the Democratic Party.
I mean, it was a pretty good Red State article with the headline, the Democratic Party is slipping through Nancy Pelosi's fingers.
It's not slipping.
It's gone.
You know, they even used a line I've been using, which is she's speaker and name only.
The real speaker of the house is Ocasio-Cortez.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has more power than Nancy Pelosi does.
And even on the issue, the biggest divide now is their obsession among their hardcore leftists.
They want to impeach President Trump for what they don't know.
They can't identify any crime.
The same people that will ignore the real crimes of Hillary, which is relevant, they just ignore because it's not the issue.
It's just like, you know, Bludgeon Kavanaugh ignore the lieutenant governor of Virginia and serious allegations of rape and serious allegations of violent sexual assault.
You care about obstruction, but the only liberal that's ever said it is Bill Maher.
And he said it this, I guess, last week, within the last week.
He said, yeah, Hillary, of course she obstructed.
I mean, look at how much they overcovered Hillary's emails in 2016 and what effect did that have on the election.
Now, there's a lot of reasons why the Democrats lost, and many of them were Hillary was a terrible candidate.
That's absolutely.
She didn't help the situation with the emails in terms of how she handled it when she answers and her actions.
Absolutely.
Right.
And she committed obstruction of justice.
Now, Trump did, I think, in a much worse fashion, but, you know, I mean, smashing up your phones and your.
I'm a hard story about it, but it was a bad idea.
Yeah.
Okay.
But they overcovered it.
No, the only people that covered it are conservatives, slight disagreement, but at least he had the honesty to say it.
Yeah, she was a horrible candidate.
And number two, yeah, of course she obstructed justice, but Democrats don't care.
They only care about Trump obstruction, but there's no underlying crime and four separate investigations that say the same thing.
And now all they want to do is they want a fifth investigation until they manufacture something that somehow would get them to the level.
So you have a real crime, the Espionage Act, with real evidence, top secret classified emails on a server in a bathroom closet.
Then you have the real intention to destroy the evidence, hence the subpoenaed emails.
And so all of that's going on.
So you have this divide, but the hypocrisy and selective moral outrage is obvious.
Obstruction only if it's Trump.
You know, violating law only if it's Trump.
You know, I believe, but only if you can bludgeon Trump.
Not I believe because of the principle.
It's all fake, phony moral outrage by a party that frankly is out of ideas.
And the ideas they're now advancing are beyond scary.
Everything's free.
Guaranteed job, government job, guaranteed vacation, guaranteed pre-K through college education as if they haven't screwed up government schools enough.
You know, we pay more than any other industrialized nation, but we come in 37th.
You can't do much worse than that.
That also is the Democratic Party and an unholy alliance they have with teachers unions.
So now we'll take, and then we'll take over the healthcare industry, Medicare for all, but you can't have a choice.
Forget about keep your doctor plan and save money.
No, we're going to now drag everyone into one system and there's no exit strategy.
There's no exit ramp, even if you want to pay for it yourself.
But then again, they want a 70% top marginal rate for individuals and a 90% top corporate rate.
Then they want to bring back all the regulations that would make us energy dependent again until they eliminate oil and gas in 10 years and cows and planes.
And this is what this is supposed to be taken seriously.
Ocasio-Cortez accusing Pelosi, sitting on their hands about impeaching Trump.
The pressure is real.
The divide is real.
Danielle Caller had a piece out that, you know, 43 Democrats are holding newly flipped seats.
In other words, from red to blue.
And only two of them have voiced any support for any impeachment inquiry because they know they're done.
They'll be one and done and fired and out if they follow this radical crew.
And, you know, then Pelosi is now contradicting Ocasio-Cortez.
He said, we're not even close to starting impeachment.
And yet they have this weekend, you know, hashtag impeach Trump a day of action.
133 events nationwide.
Okay.
There was actually a pretty good piece written by a Democrat, Jay Scott Applewhite, and he says an alternative to impeachment is to beat him in the ballot box.
The problem is they don't have anybody on my radar that I think can win.
And you got the GOP clashing with House Democrats.
You got this woman, Marsha Fudge, you know, reading a letter calling Trump supporters racist and dumb.
It is glaringly apparent that many who support the president administration are either racist, steeped in racist religious beliefs, ignorant, or as my mother used to say, just plain dumb.
They have chosen to support a president who has a proven recognition.
So you're racist and dumb.
You're a smelly Walmart voter.
You're an irredeemable, deplorable, and you cling to your God-gun Bibles and religion.
Okay, this arrogance is not going to fly with real Americans.
It's not.
All they do is insult Americans that don't live in D.C., New York, L.A., and San Francisco.
And that part of the country, they're going to go out and vote.
If you ask me today, I don't think Trump has lost one voter from 2016.
And my guess is he's probably, because of the economy, going to gain a bunch of voters.
And if he does, it's over.
Doesn't matter who they nominate in the end.
You know, this idea that, you know, Biden said the dumbest thing, we'll get to it maybe later in the program.
You know, he actually bragging during the eight years, not a hint of scandal in Biden, Obama.
Well, okay, look at the Ukraine and this guy literally using American tax dollars to get a guy, a prosecutor fired for investigating his son.
That's a scandal.
Or his son flying with him on Air Force 2 to China.
And days after Biden's in China, a big hedge fund deal.
But of course, the kid never had any experience in hedge funds.
Not a hint of scandal.
Did anyone ever hear Joe, Crazy Uncle Joe of Benghazi, ever hear, talk to the families fast and furious?
You know, I have.
We lost an agent because of the guns you gave criminals.
I'd say the whole Russia debacle that you were warned about by Devin Newton, it all happened on your watch.
Loretta Lynch on the tarmac happened on your watch.
Rigging Hillary's investigation happened on your watch.
The abuse of intelligence gathering, the 350% increase in unmaskings all happened on Biden's watch.
Lois Lerner going after the IRS, weaponizing them to go after conservatives.
That happened on their watch.
Sally Yates happened on their watch.
Susan Rice lying on five Sunday shows happened on their watch.
I mean, it's just the things that they get away with.
Now you got Ocasio-Cortez dangling 2020 endorsements of either Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
She's now in charge of the Democratic Party.
And by the way, voting for a pay raise, not just for herself.
She wants to raise for every worker in America a wage or salary.
Gets a raise.
Okay.
Who's going to pay for it?
Well, we don't need to ask that.
The question of paying for it is irrelevant.
No, it's kind of very relevant here.
And even by the way, the polls that are out there, the numbers don't add up.
I look at the latest Quinnipiac poll.
You know, self-identified registered voters.
Survey includes 503 Democrats, Democratic leaning.
And then you got 31 Democrat, 33 Democrats, 31 Republican.
I don't know, 20 Independent, 28%, but they don't give actual numbers.
I'm not sure I trust any of these things.
And I don't believe any of these polls at any time because I think we have no idea what the conditions and issues will be in November of 2020.
Just be vigilant and just go out and vote.
And Kamala Harris is vowing to prosecute Trump.
Okay, that'll get you far.
Avenatti is out there accusing Joe Biden of plagiarizing his campaign slogan.
That's how great it's going for Crazy Uncle Joe.
And his speech, I got to tell you, if you can only get 85 people or 200 people at a speech, you're in deep trouble.
And I don't care what anybody says.
In this case, crowd size matters because there's a certain enthusiasm that even Obama had.
And Crazy Uncle Joe's never had.
He's got a lot of questions to answer about the economy, the Iranians, the tarmac, the money, the scandals.
It's all.
Where does he stand on borders?
Does he want Medicare for all?
Should Americans have the choice on health care?
Do you think Obamacare was successful?
Nobody's asked any questions yet.
Wait till the questions start coming.
It's going to get interesting.
There's been a number of leaks coming out of the Justice Department FBI during high-profile investigations.
The Inspector General found that during the Department's investigation of Hillary Clinton for mishandling highly classified information, there was a culture of unauthorized media contacts.
During the Russian investigation, the leaks continued.
Leaks undermine the ability of investigators to investigate.
Further leaks to the papers, while Congress's questions to the department go unanswered, is unacceptable.
Why?
What are you doing to investigate unauthorized media contacts by the department and FBI officials during the Russian investigation?
We have multiple criminal leak investigations underway.
Do you share my concerns about the Pfizer warrant process?
Yes.
Do you share my concerns about the counterintelligence investigation, how it was opened and why it was opened?
Yes.
Do you share my concerns that the professional lack of professionalism in the Clinton email investigation is something we should all look at?
Yes.
Do you expect to change your mind about the bottom-line conclusions of the Mueller report?
No.
Do you know Bob Mueller?
Yes.
Do you trust him?
Yes.
How long have you known him?
30 years, roughly.
You think he had time he needed?
Yes.
You think he had the money he needed?
Yes.
You think he had the resources he needed?
Yes.
Do you think he did a thorough job?
Yes, and I think he feels he did a thorough job and had adequate evidence to make the calls.
Do you think the president's campaign in 2016 was thoroughly looked at in terms of whether or not they colluded with the Russians?
Yes.
And the answer is no, according to Bob Mueller.
That's right.
He couldn't decide about obstruction.
You did.
Is that correct?
That's right.
You feel good about your decision?
Absolutely.
All right.
That, of course, the Attorney General speaking to the Senate Committee, 800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number, you want to be a part of the program.
Devin Nunes gave a devastating opening statement on the hearing of the Mueller report.
And I mean, devastating.
And going into the endless hysteria of the media, the Democrats, synonymous intelligence leakers, and every day, the media triumphantly publishing a supposed bombshell story that he then goes on to say imploded and the collusion accusations has been exposed as a hoax.
One would think the Democrats would simply apologize, get back to lawmaking and oversight, but they can't stop this grotesque spectacle, even if they wanted to.
You know, a year of false accusation, McCarthyite smears the collusion hoax now defines the Democratic Party.
The hoax is what they have in place for a governing philosophy or a constructive vision.
Then he goes on even further, calling it the Mueller dossier.
Mueller's finding that Michael Cohn did not travel to Prague to conspire with the Russians.
No evidence Carter Page ever conspired with the Russians.
No mention of Paul Maniport visiting Julian Assange that had been discussed in London.
No mention of secret communications between a Trump Tower computer server and Russia's Alpha Bank.
No mention of former NRA lawyer Cleta Mitchell or supposed knowledge of a scheme to launder Russian money through the NRA for the Trump campaign.
Insinuations against Mitchell originated with Fusion, GPS, and Glenn Simpson.
And the real purpose, he says, of this phony dossier was to help the Democrats impeach the president in the absence of any evidence of collusion.
Thus, the report literally includes a long litany of ordinary contacts between Trump associates and Russians as if they were somehow nefarious.
That Mueller excerpts a voicemail from Trump attorney John Dow that the Mueller team selectively edited to make it seem nefarious when it wasn't.
No comment on the close relationship between the Democratic operatives at Fusion GPS and multiple Russians who participated in the Trump Tower meeting.
In fact, no comment on Fusion GPS at all.
No useful information about the many irregularities that marred the FBI's investigation.
No useful information on the figures who played key roles.
And literally, it cites dozens of articles from reporters and publications that, well, they were responsible for perpetuating the hoax and relying on the dirty dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton.
And in some, he says, Mueller relied on a mass reporting, central narrative that the Trump campaign colluded with Russians to hack the election is false, and the Democrats spread a hoax claiming Trump is a Russian agent.
Only later it was discovered the only people who colluded with Russians were Democrats who paid for the steel dossier.
Wow.
We have some other breaking news.
General Flynn has hired Andrew Weissman's nemesis, Sidney Powell, author of License to Lie.
Anyway, these are just the latest developments.
And of course, the Deputy Attorney General's letter to Gerald Nadler, which I think is devastating.
We have John Solomon, investigative reporter, executive vice president for The Hill, Greg Jarrett, author of the number one bestseller of the Russia hoax, Fox News legal analyst.
Thank you both for being with us.
John, I think Nunes captured it completely accurately, but now we begin Act Two, and Act Two is unfolding before our eyes as explained to Lindsey Graham by the Attorney General.
Yeah, absolutely.
I was struck by a couple of things.
One of the things that Devin Nunez did today is he started to call the Mueller report a dossier, and I don't think that was an accident.
I think he's trying to equate the Steele dossier and the Mueller report for the same sort of problem.
Yes, Mueller debunks large parts of the Steele dossier, but I think the point that Congressman Nunez was making today is that the Mueller report let us down.
It failed to address really significant information.
For instance, he says it provided no useful information about Joseph Missouri, Alexander Downer, or Christopher Steele so that we could judge their credibility.
How come?
Why did you not give us that information, Director Mueller?
He said he didn't provide us any useful information about the irregularities in the way the FBI conducted the investigation, and he asked why not.
And so I think one of the interesting lines, and it started last week with a story that I wrote, is there are significant omissions and significant errors in the Mueller report that are surprising experts.
People are looking at this saying, why isn't this addressed?
Why is this wrong?
And we talked about Konstantin Klemenek and the fact that he was portrayed as a Russian agent as a business partner of Paul Manafort, when in fact the State Department's own documents show he was an intelligence source.
So I think this narrative that Devin Nunez seized upon today is going to become a bigger and bigger story.
There are material errors and material omissions in the Mueller report that raise really serious questions about its value to the American public.
Greg Jarrett, let me go to the Assistant Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General Stephen Boyd's letter, which is now calling the new review that the Attorney General has set in place multifaceted, broad in scope.
And it further goes on to, you know, literally the Attorney General ordering the intelligence agencies to preserve records, et cetera, of Obama administration FISA abuse.
How do you read and interpret what the Deputy Attorney General was saying in that?
Well, this is a real investigation as opposed to the original FBI investigation into collusion that was then taken up by Robert Mueller.
So, I mean, this is a real and legitimate and serious investigation into suspected acts of corruption by officials, top officials at the FBI and the Department of Justice.
Okay, and what does it mean about New Haven, Connecticut-based U.S. Attorney John Durham and his role in this that it seems now to have expanded even way beyond what maybe Robert Mueller would ever look into?
Well, it would have been impossible for Mueller to not run across much of the evidence that Durham is now investigating, but Mueller chose to ignore it, I think, for partisan political reasons.
Durham will now be looking at the conduct of James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, who launched the investigation without credible evidence on July 31st, 2016, based largely on a phony dossier.
Anybody who reads this would know immediately that this thing was fabricated or composed of Russian disinformation.
It was a joke.
What do you mean?
The FBI likely knew it, didn't care, because they wanted to use it, anything, as a pretext to investigate Trump, to damage him when he won, then to remove him from office and undo the election results.
And I think, you know, Durham is vowing to get to the bottom of this, and I think it's a great step to begin by sitting down with Christopher Steele in Great Britain and tell us everything you know.
Well, we know what he's going to say because we know what he said when Push came to shove in an interrogatory where he faced the possibility of being charged with perjury.
And what he said was he had no idea if anything in his own dossier was true.
He said maybe 50-50.
He confirmed what we had been thinking from the beginning.
It's an unverifiable document.
But now we're at a point where Horowitz is delaying his final report.
In part, we're told to interview Christopher Steele or get information about the interview from Christopher Steele.
And Mark Meadows said also that the Inspector General's report will likely be late due to other new developments.
Do we have any idea what they are?
Well, but the important part of Christopher Steele is his ability to say, I warned the FBI and Bruce Orr at the Department of Justice that this information was not vetted.
It was not verified.
And once he tells that to investigators, and he surely must, then that demonstrates that the FBI and the DOJ engaged in acts of corruption and lies to the FISA court by representing something that was verified when it wasn't.
All right, John Solomon, I have a source that told me that Horowitz had pretty much come to the conclusion, he was very certain on the three renewal applications, that in fact that FISA abuse fraud against the court was committed, but for some reason was a little stuck, and I don't understand why.
The first one seems the most logical to me that they could have absolutely, positively identified this as wrong, because we now know because of closed-door testimony.
Doug Collins got out for us that Bruce Orr claims he warned everybody at the FBI and DOJ.
Hillary paid for it.
It's unverifiable.
And Steele hates Trump.
And then we've got your, you were the person that broke the story about Steele's contacts, which we now know from a FOIA request that Judicial Watch got were even more extensive than we originally thought.
But that Kathleen Kavillek specifically warned after a meeting that should have taken place with Christopher Steele took place, and he is in a state of panic with the deadline of Election Day to get his false information into the public's consciousness.
And that is what your article tipped the balance, and that means that everybody was warned, and any doubt that maybe Horowitz could have had about Comey signing that first warrant, you know, went away and melted away like butter on a hot stove.
I think that there is some significant evidence, and my source reporting indicates that the discovery of the State Department documents have had a significant impact on the Inspector General's investigation.
And here is one thing, and I think Greg just hit it on the head.
The FBI has had this really great tight story for two years, which is, geez, we didn't figure out that Christopher Steele was unverified, leaking to the media, and engaged in other wrongdoing and having a political motive until after we submitted the first FISA warrant.
That's sort of the Bender cover story.
And it's been hard to penetrate that.
If you look at the hearing with Stroke when he testified, Republicans were unaware of some of the things that they were unable to get him to confess to the things that we now know.
And here's probably the single most significant part of the development.
If the State Department, in a 45-minute meeting with Christopher Steele, could figure out all of these extraordinary things, one, that's...
All right, let me interrupt you.
Hold the thought.
We'll get back to it.
All right, as we continue, Sean Hannity Show, John Solomon, Greg Jarrett, they're with us for the hour.
Bill O'Reilly at the top of the hour.
We have about a minute, minute and a half here, John Solomon, to finish that thought about Horowitz maybe having doubt about the first FISA application that Comey signed, but your reporting, my source is very firm in stating had an impact because so many people warned the FBI ahead of time about the dirty dossier.
Yeah, I think the key question, and Greg hit it on the head, the FBI affirmatively stated that they had no reason to doubt Steele.
And in fact, the State Department, 10 days before the first FBI FISA warrant, was able to detect immediately, almost instantly, that there were many reasons to doubt Steele.
Political motive, he describes, political deadline, he describes, erroneous information being provided, and acknowledging he was leaking to the media.
If the State Department, with none of the FBI's great intelligence tools, could figure that out, I think the question that Michael Horowitz is now asking is, why didn't the FBI, and most likely the FBI did, and why did they hide it from the court?
I think that's where this first FISA question is now turning, and the State Department document has become a seminal new piece of information to question the FBI's entire cover story that they've kept for two and a half years.
All right, we'll stay right there, take a break.
More with John Solomon.
He's the executive vice president and investigative reporter for The Hill.
Greg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst, is number one bestseller, runaway bestseller of the Russia hoax.
Bill O'Reilly at the top of the hour and amazing Hannity tonight at 9.
We hope you'll join us.
Quick break right back.
We'll continue.
We call the CIA, the agency, and say, call off the agents, call off any recruitment of agents so he can protect his friend, the North Korean dictator.
Would he actually do that?
Well, I wouldn't put it past him to try to prevent the intelligence agency from understanding what might be happening if he felt that that was going to be harmful to his policy or personal interests or objectives.
And that's why I am very concerned about the upcoming presidential election.
The deep state.
It's like out of a science fiction novel.
As well as, by the way, attacking the Congress, whether it's Democrat or Republican.
He doesn't care.
It's about breaking down the barriers that constrain his power.
He's deliberately and completely ignoring the legitimacy of the Congress.
And he's doing it with full complicity of the Republicans in Congress who know better.
They know better.
They know it's wrong.
The worst economy. of any administration in history, the only one to never hit 3% GDP growth in history in a single year.
The worst recovery since the 40s, the lowest labor participation since the 70s.
13 million more Americans on food stamps, 8 million more in poverty.
Does he forget the Benghazi issue?
Does he forget Fast and Furious and that scandal?
All of the Russian interference that happened on Biden Obama's watch, a 350% increase in unmasking, what looks like the outsourcing of intelligence gathering to circumvent laws to spy on an American president looked like happened on their watch.
Hillary Clinton gets a rigged investigation on their watch.
Loretta Lynch and the tarmac on their watch.
IRS, Lois Lerner, targeting conservatives on their watch.
Susan Rice's Five Sunday Show Lies on their watch.
Sally Yates.
Oh, but they've had not a hint of scandal.
What universe is this guy living in?
Anyway, we continue for the hour, 25 now till the, or 24 now till the top of the hour with John Solomon, executive vice president, investigative reporter for The Hill, and Greg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst, author of The Russia Hoax, number one runaway bestseller.
So now I guess the question is, I want to go back to this issue, Greg Jarrett, of the interpretation of what we're hearing from the Attorney General himself, what he's interested in getting to the bottom of.
And secondly, the letter to Jerry Nadler by the Deputy Attorney General, Stephen Boyd, and what this all means in terms of where we're headed, who's in trouble, and why the Horowitz report is likely now delayed because of these developments.
Well, it's clear now he's going to be looking at intelligence agencies, the conduct of Clapper and Brennan and others at the CIA, the DNI.
He's also going to be looking at their outsourcing of intelligence capabilities to foreign governments, particularly Great Britain, Australia, and Italy, as you pointed out.
Well, go back to what happened in Italy this week.
I think this is an important point.
And that is the Intel shakeup that they had that many are saying, and there's a lot of speculation is all related to this and the possible potential circumventing of American intelligence gathering and civil liberties abuse, constitutional issues by outsourcing intelligence gathering against Americans.
Some of the, and I think it is an outgrowth of the entire Russia hoax.
Because remember, some of the spying took place with confidential informants and Professor Massoud in Rome in the summer of 2016, in which Papadopoulos was duped and lured by this mysterious Professor Massoud at what became known as Spook University, where the FBI helps to teach spying techniques.
And again, this is on Italian soil.
And so I suspect not just the British and the Australians, but the Italian intelligence agencies were all working in concert to help John Brennan and James Clapper.
But beyond the intelligence agencies, I think Boyd's letter to Nadler makes clear they're also going to be looking at non-governmental individuals and groups, and that would include Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, who's already invoked the fifth, Nellie Orr, who is under a criminal referral for line.
And then you've got the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee that paid for Russian information that was fed to the FBI and the Department of Justice to damage or destroy Trump.
So, you know, this is a wide-ranging, exhaustive investigation.
It will take, I think, more than a year.
Your thoughts on all of that.
Was there outsourcing of intelligence gathering, in your view?
Is that part of the investigation that Barr is hinting at, the deputy AG now is hinting at in this letter to Nadler, John Solomon?
Yes, I think that's one of the fundamental questions.
I'll go back to something that never got answered back in 2017.
Chuck Grassley, then the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asked the FBI, did they have any evidence that the FBI had shared classified information with Christopher Steele to activate some of his actions?
The FBI astutely and stubbornly never answered that question.
But one of the theories that people have looked at the evidence that we can't see, the classified evidence, is Christopher Steele and others may have been taking actions at the soft direction of the United States government and sort of using a backdoor way of targeting Americans without following the Constitution's Fourth Amendment protections for all of us.
And I think that's where they're looking.
They're looking, did private entities like Orbis and Link University and did foreign governments be used by the FBI to do stuff that they couldn't legally do until they got to a certain point of evidence and then they can turn on the full weight of the government with a FISA warrant.
That's what this is all getting down to.
And I want to go back to one other thing.
Just one second.
The Biden comments, no scandal.
Less than a week after Joe Biden made those comments, the United States government filed a criminal case against a guy named Proz Michel.
He's a rapper, a well-known artist.
He was a friend of Barack Obama, a frequenter of the White House residence.
I mean, this was an inner circle guy for Barack Obama.
Everyone should go read United States government versus Proz Michael, because here's what the federal prosecutors just laid out in court a few days after Biden made that boast.
Michael directed millions of dollars of foreign donations into the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee and Democratic super PACs to help Barack Obama get elected in 2012.
None of the media, very little of the media, have covered this case.
This is a major straw donor foreign money, foreign intervention federal indictment that has been brought in the middle of the Biden Obama presidency.
And it just was filed recently.
It's a jaw-dropping case, and it's very hard for Joe Biden to stay up there with a straight face, not only in all the scandals you listed, Sean, but this new one where you have foreign money, foreign intervention, a friend of Barack Obama at the heart of a conspiracy to launder money into the 2012 reelection efforts of Barack Obama.
Everyone should go read that case.
It's a remarkable statement, and it debunks anything that Joe Biden has said.
All right.
I always ask this question too late in the segment, and I want to get to it when I have time.
With all of these new developments and my sources telling me the IG reporter is going to be devastating, let's assume for a minute that everything we've been saying, Bruce Orr's testimony that everybody was warned about the dossier being dirty, unverified, Hillary bought and paid for.
That, of course, by omission, they did not highlight that for the FISA court judges in the initial application, three subsequent applications.
Then, of course, the bulk of information coming from what is now an unverifiable document, but they were warned repeatedly ahead of time that it is unverifiable.
Those that put their signatures on it.
You heard Lindsey Graham ask the Attorney General Barr about Hillary's rigged investigation.
That is in the purview.
We have intelligence abuse, unmasking.
I want to know, Greg Jarrett, we'll begin with you.
Who should be worried about their actions?
And are there going to be criminal indictments?
Are we going to see a grand jury?
Are we going to see criminal referrals?
Are we going to see these people held accountable for these actions, which to me seem often like slam-dunk cases?
There will absolutely be a grand jury.
It's inescapable.
There's no way around it.
And John Durham has adroitly used grand juries before to obtain information and evidence.
And so he'll do it again here.
There will be criminal referrals, I suspect, from the Inspector General.
And the people who I think are in legal jeopardy are anybody who signed the FISA warrants.
James Comey signed three of them, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates, Dana Buente, and yes, Rod Rosenstein filed the final renewal and seems to be suggesting when he was questioned before Congress that, gee, I don't read every FISA applicant.
Well, this one he should have read.
And so, you know, he's in trouble as well.
Glenn Simpson, no question, is in trouble for perjury and false statements, and Ellie Orr as well.
And then, of course, I think Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC and maybe Perkins Cooey are all at legal risk here for their involvement paying for foreign information in a campaign, which is a problem.
Okay, but what about the Hillary-rigged investigation?
Is there any bigger slam dunk of the Espionage Act and Act and obstruction?
I think that any good, conscientious prosecutor, and Durham is one, will re-examine that because even as Bill Maher said, you know, that was clearly obstruction of justice.
When you're under subpoena to preserve records and you destroy 33,000 of them, and it takes months for the FBI to try to resurrect that information, that's obstruction of justice, deadbang obstruction of justice.
And so I think Durham needs to look at that.
I hope he will.
John Solomon, where is this going?
Who should now be sleeping?
Well, even if they have a my pillow bed, they're probably insomniac right now.
Who's worried?
I think one of them has to be James Comey, and not for the reasons we just discussed, but because of the fact that there is now public evidence that he leaked classified memos to his lawyers in violation of the very law that he exonerated or at least refused to prosecute Hillary Clinton under.
And remember, we now know we've confirmed that they had to send scrub teams to his lawyers' offices to reclaim the classified information he had wrongly given to his lawyers.
That's the first thing that could come out, even before the IG report on FISA abuses.
Let's keep an eye on that.
On FISA, what I've been hearing in the inside from people who know what's going on is that one thing they're looking at is a large case, a conspiracy to defraud the United States by submitting knowing and willful false information to the FISA court and perhaps misleading Congress during the early parts of the Russian investigation.
These testimonies, these lies, these leaks, these false submissions in the FISA, that that may ultimately roll up into a large conspiracy case in which multiple members of the law enforcement community are identified.
Now, getting that to a point of prosecution is a big step, but I think it's one of the areas they're looking at, and I think we should keep an eye on that as one of the potential outcomes in this investigation.
I absolutely agree with that.
In my book, I named conspiracy to defraud the government as one of the crimes that was committed by, in my judgment, by the people who signed off on that FISA warrant.
And think about it.
When Greg wrote that, we didn't have half the information we have today.
So talk about how prescient that was to see that that's where this was headed.
But I really do think the body of evidence is pointing in that direction.
Now the question is, can this be a- I want to ask you, I don't mean to interrupt.
I want to ask you about Sidney Powell, now representing Michael Flynn.
That's a big issue to me.
Andrew Weissman's nemesis, if you will, license to lie, really takes down Andrew Weissman.
Real quick question.
About 30 seconds each.
John Solomon, Greg Jarrett, Sidney Powell, now the lawyer for General Flynn, will he withdraw his plea?
I think he should, but I'm not a lawyer, Greg Jarrett.
I argued in my book he should because prosecutors could never prove the case because the only two percipient witnesses to the Flynn conversation with the FBI, two agents, said they concluded he was telling the truth.
Mueller could never have won the case.
Flynn caved in because he was broke and they were threatening his son, but he's going to withdraw his plea.
I almost guarantee it.
What do you think, John Solomon?
It's certainly one of the options that has to be on the table.
I'd like to look at two others, too.
I think being able, having the preeminent expert on how the Justice Department has cheated over the last two decades now represents you, you can make a compelling argument at sentencing why he should get more leniency than what is currently being available.
The FBI didn't think he lied.
They didn't think he lied.
And the thing is, is McCabe told him, don't bring your attorney.
And then Comey bragged that they set him up.
I mean, if that's not abuse of power.
It's very hard.
Once a defendant allocutes the way he did to eat those words, it's a very hard.
Well, those circumstances weren't known at the time, and I think those are compelling argument and reason.
But, you know, I feel strongly you don't set up a 33-year veteran of this country that put his life on the line like this.
It's a national disgrace.
There's clearly a misconduct, and that could go to affect many different things.
A pardon application, the final sentencing, or reversal of the plea deal if there's enough evidence that Mike Flynn didn't know the things that we now know.
We'll have to find that out.
We would not be where we are today without these two people, John Solomon, Greg Jarrett.
Thank you both.
When we come back, Bill O'Reilly joins us.
All things O'Reilly next.
And your calls 800-941 Sean, you want to be a part of the program.
And great Hannity tonight at 9.
Tell you about that as well.
Straight ahead.
I'd rather run against, I think, Biden than anybody.
I think he's the weakest mentally.
And I like running against people that are weak mentally.
I think Joe is the weakest up here.
The other ones have much more energy.
I don't agree with their policies, but I think Joe is a man who is, I call him 1% Joe because until Obama came along, he didn't do very well.
Joe Biden thought that China was not a competitor of ours.
Joe Biden is a dummy.
Joe Biden thought China was not a competitor.
China made $500 billion over a short period of time against Obama, Biden, and for many, many years.
The president is literally an existential threat to America for three reasons.
One, he is a genuine threat to our core values.
And if you wondered about that, remember what happened in Charlottesville.
I never thought I'd see that happen in my lifetime again.
You had people come climbing out of the fields and from under rocks, carrying torches, contorted faces, chanting the same anti-Semitic bile that was chanted in Europe and in Germany in the 30s.
Same exact language.
carrying Nazi flags, accompanied by white supremacists, accompanied by the Ku Klux Klan.
When he was asked to comment on it, he said, quote, there were very fine people in both groups.
No president of the United States, Democrat or Republican, has ever, ever, ever said something like that.
This is the same Biden, by the way, when you examine his record on race and being against integration and a whole host of other issues.
All of that is going to be coming out.
We've just given you a preview of coming attractions.
Bob Gates, the defense secretary under Barack Obama, actually said that Biden's been wrong on every foreign policy issue for 40 years.
I think my favorite part of Biden with his 85 people in attendance yesterday was him claiming not a hint of scandal in eight years.
Did he miss Benghazi, Fast and Furious?
All the interference with Russia happened under their watch, and they were warned repeatedly by people like Devin Nunes going back to 2014 that it would happen.
Loretta Lynch, the tarmac, the rigged investigation into Hillary, IRS, Lois Lerner targeting conservative groups, the five Sunday show lies of Susan Rice, Sally Yates, and let's not forget his son and oh, the issue of him literally using American tax dollars to get a prosecutor fired who was looking into allegations of wrongdoing of his own son, leveraging American tax bucks in the process.
And then, of course, yeah, his son getting this big billion-dollar deal, hedge fund deal in China, but he had no association or any background in that field whatsoever.
Wonder why he had to ride on Air Force 2.
Anyway, it's time for all things O'Reilly, News Roundup Information Overload Hour.
You love fights like this because it's just who you are.
You like when people fight.
I like when people fight.
Listen, you go to a hockey game.
Don't you like it better when they're fighting?
I do.
Yeah, I don't want to see any skating or shooting.
I just want to see brawling.
I am the original Federation guy.
I know you played football, but I was a hockey player.
Did you ever play?
So was I at Chiminad High School?
I played hockey.
I loved, I was the biggest Philadelphia Flyer fan.
And all my friends were Islander fans.
I wanted to be Bobby Clark with no teeth.
Let me bring some astute analysis to the Biden-Trump situation.
Both men are helping the other, number one.
So by calling Biden a dummy and by implying that he's Slow Joe, this galvanizes the Trump haters to dislike Biden less.
So Biden's problem is with his far-left crew in the Democratic Party that hate Trump so much they shake.
I mean, they physically shake.
That's how much they hate him.
He lives in people's heads.
Don't you think he lives in people's minds?
Absolutely.
He's got these people.
They can't even sleep at night.
They hate him so much.
So if he attacks Biden, that makes Biden more acceptable to the lunatic far left.
So that helps Biden a little bit.
Now, on the other side, Biden saying that Trump is an existential threat basically makes Biden a non-acceptable Democrat because he's attacking Trump.
And if you like Trump a little bit and you think he's doing okay for the country by the economic stuff, and then all of a sudden this guy says, well, he's an existential fat, which means he's a threat to your well-being, you, the American citizens, that he's going to hurt you and every one of us.
This is what Donald Trump's out to do.
Number one, that's absurd.
And number two, that basically helps Trump.
So what these guys should be doing, in particular, Donald Trump, and you know, he never listens to me.
I am just at this moment editing that Charlottesville stuff in the United States of Trump, my history book on Trump, to be out in September.
And when you read the three pages that I have uncovered about Charlottesville, it's going to make Biden look foolish because he's not telling the truth.
But let's get back to Trump.
So if I were Trump and I was trying to marginalize Biden, which I don't know whether Trump wants to do or not, he may well want to run against Biden.
But if I were Trump, I want to run against Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders or one of those.
That's who I'd want to run against.
All right, so all he has to do to Biden is go, hey, Joe, what's your solution to the border?
Come on, I'm looking for some ideas here.
What's your solution to that?
Hey, Joe, and he did this a little bit.
You know, China's really hosing his way.
How are you going to get that done?
Your boss, Barack Obama, couldn't get it done for eight years.
How are you going to get it done?
How?
Hey, hey, Joe, you were against the raid to get Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.
You were the only one of the cabinet, the presidential cabinet, who said don't do it.
Do you want to explain that to me, Joe?
See, if you hit him on those things where everybody knows these are very, very tough problems, Biden doesn't have any answer for that.
He never will.
He can't answer it.
All right, so let's go to conventional wisdom.
Let's stand back and be objective for a minute.
All right.
So historically, traditionally, the issues of peace and prosperity drive elections.
That's it.
The question will be: are you better off than you were four years ago?
Now, when the voters, or Bill O'Reilly says the folks, make that consideration and determination, here's the questions.
Did Donald Trump fulfill his promises?
Are we better off than we were before?
And when other issues and hard questions come up, like, well, the whole Russia thing that everybody was warned about happened on their watch, then they've got these other issues that happened on their watch and the worst recovery since the 40s, and 13 million more Americans on food stamps and 8 million more in poverty.
That record is going to be right around Joe Biden and haunting him the whole entire election process.
How does that play out?
Well, that's right.
And that's what I'm saying.
Donald Trump has to basically make the case that Vice President Biden has no solutions to anything and that the train he was riding on for eight years led to suffering for the American people rather than calling him a dummy.
But here's another interesting thing: the election of 2020 will be unlike any election in modern times in America because it's not about Joe Biden or whoever runs against him, Donald Trump.
It's not about any Democrat.
It's 100% about Trump.
So it's whether you like him, accept his presidency, and what he's done, or you don't.
Here's a question.
On that point, do you think Donald Trump, all the people that voted for him in 2016, do you think he's lost many, if any, and do you think he's won over any people that didn't vote for him because of the successful economy?
63 million Americans voted for Trump.
I would say he has retained 90% of the 63 I'd say 98%.
But go ahead, but it's a slight difference.
I think there are some voters who didn't prosper under the new tax law.
Yeah, you and me.
Because we live in stupid states like New York.
We're not human beings, Hannity.
We got votes.
No, no, no.
No, we're not.
No.
Where did you come up with that insane concept?
Just Google your name and you'll see that you're Satan and the same with me.
If I were analyzing Trump's campaign from a point of view of working for Trump, I would say that you've got 90% going in of what you've had.
And the other 10% can be persuaded.
There are a few that don't like his style.
But you have a shot at $63 million.
You have a shot at that.
Now, the other people who voted against him or stayed home, that's the key stat.
Stayed home, didn't vote last time around.
You have to motivate them by saying, if you throw me out of office, me, Donald Trump, if I am defeated, you are going to suffer.
You are going to suffer economically.
The country is going to be in chaos.
And most importantly, you're going to have an open southern border where millions and millions of people are going to pour in here because the Democratic Party will not stop it.
If you make that case, you can get up to $68 million from 63.
Okay?
And that's unbeatable.
I agree with your analysis.
I think the case can be made.
And I also think, you know, when those comparison ads come out, and it's going to be the Trump economy, the Biden, Obama economy, it's going to be the mullahs in Iran, $150 billion in cash and other currency, Donald Trump, the toughest sanctions on Russia, winning the war, tariff battles all over the world, and new trade deals.
I also think that the fact that America has become energy independent is a huge issue because we're talking about millions of career jobs for many Americans.
And literally single-handedly, one industry can lift so many Americans up the ladder to a much greater future for themselves and their families.
That's what I'm saying.
But you are talking to the policy-driven crew.
I'm talking about the men that work every day.
I mean, the people like me and you growing up.
Yeah, but most people vote on a motion and pocketbook.
And I'm telling you, that open border thing, you hang that around Biden's neck.
That's the biggest issue.
All right, here's another question.
The biggest issue.
So he has record low unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, women in the workplace, youth unemployment.
Historically, those are demographic groups that tend to vote Democrat.
If you go by demographics alone, does he win over higher percentages of those groups because of that success?
The reason that he won the first time is that more than 800,000 African Americans who voted for Obama didn't vote for Hillary.
They stayed home.
There's a good chance that'll happen again.
AllthingsO'Reilly, BillO'Reilly.com.
The United States of Trump comes out in the fall.
We'll get back to Bill in a second.
Then we're going to be taking your calls, 800-941.
Sean.
Well, I think what the Democrats are trying to do, because they know they're going to lose the election, so they're going to give this a shot.
They're going to just every day, they're going to be going more and more after, after.
I don't know if you have this, Mr. President, but we have people that are totally out of control.
It's the only way they think they can win the election.
So we'll see what happens.
All right, as we wrap up with Bill O'Reilly, BillO'Reilly.com, his book on Trump coming out in the fall, we look forward to it.
Give us one tidbit from the book.
Yeah, give us, no, no, not something insignificant.
Give us one good tidbit ahead of the book coming out.
All right, you want political, you want social, because the book's divided into two.
Political.
You know, I'm a politics guy.
Give me the politics.
Okay.
So Donald Trump pulled off something that only two individuals in the world could have done, himself and Oprah Winfrey.
No one else could have had no political machine and experience and risen up and won the presidency.
Nobody.
Could Oprah still do?
He did not say that Donald Trump.
One was that he figured out the anger of the American people.
He figured it out.
All right.
Now, how he did that, it's an amazing situation because he lived in the Trump tower.
It's not like he was out in Kentucky.
I can give you the answer to that.
He's a blue-collar billionaire.
That's what his own sons call him.
Well, and he was raised, and I go from soup to nuts on how he was raised.
That's correct.
But he figured it out, and then he figured out, okay, here's how I, Donald Trump, can go around the Republican Party, not cooperate with the party at all, and get elected.
And the secret was Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, CNN, NBC, he made himself indispensable to the television news industry.
All right, you did really well.
I thought you were going to give us something insignificant.
That is a really good tease for the book.
It's out.
You're telling me I did very well.
You did very well.
I give you the Hannity seal of approval.
I've already invited you back to cable.
I've invited you back to cable.
I mean, you could be number one and take all the crap.
I'm now taking.
I mean, it's all yours.
Take it.
I think I'm going to retire now, Hannity.
After getting the Hannity seal of approval?
I'm telling you, it's very hard to get that.
Very, very hard to get it.
It really is.
All right, O'Reilly, pullo'reilly.com.
Thanks for being with us.
We'll talk to you next week.
All right, when we come back right to the phones, 800-941.
Sean, great Hannity tonight at 9.
News you won't get anywhere else, that's for sure in this day and age.
Straight ahead.
25 down till the top of the hour.
Glad you're with us.
800-941.
Sean, you want to be a part of this extravaganza?
All right, Lisa thinks that I and Trump are liars and frauds.
All right, Lisa, give it your best shot from Kansas City.
How are you?
I'm fine, thank you.
I've listened to you for a long time, Sean, but you've changed since Donald Trump was president.
You become his attack dog, and you don't hold him to the same standard that you're trying to hold the people that you're going after in the FBI.
I mean, I'm sorry, but Donald Trump has lied to the American people many times, most recently about these tariffs.
China is not paying the tariff.
And he also said that if he puts tariffs on Mexico, that he's going to tax Mexico in order to make a fortune.
And that it's not a tax on Mexico.
It's a tax on us.
And I call that being a fraud.
Okay, let me answer your question because it was a great piece.
I forget who wrote it on FoxNews.com.
The president, and I've said this many times, he doesn't want tariffs.
He wants free and fair trade.
The only way you're going to negotiate a deal with anybody is if they're going to have to believe you're serious.
And for example, we all kept hearing the price of guacamole is going to skyrocket.
Well, it's not going to skyrocket.
And in this article that I read earlier, I thought it really laid it out well that Trump defends the deal with Mexico, and he did win.
Now, the New York Times made a suggestion that the negotiations yielded nothing new, but they're wrong.
And that, you know, for example, if it was a done deal, as they were suggesting, why did Mexico feel the need to rush a high-level delegation to D.C.?
Why were there marathon hours and hours of talks with Vice President Pence and other U.S. negotiators?
And why did they now embolden and empower 6,000 National Guard to stop the migrant caravans from Central America?
Because what he got was a framework of really effective action from Mexico to stem the tide of illegal immigration.
It was a big win for the president.
But I can tell you, because if you read the art of the deal, if you really know Donald Trump, the art of the deal is he will tell you at any deal you're doing, you need to be able mentally, emotionally, to walk away up to the last second in any deal.
I know people that have done deals with him.
And after the deal is done, he throws it in his desk and it's over.
And I don't think any of these senators that quickly were condemning the threat have ever negotiated a deal in their life.
And what I can tell you is about myself.
My entire career, I have been a conservative.
My entire career, I believed in tax cuts.
I have believed in deregulation.
I have believed in securing the border first.
I have believed in peace through strength, trust but verify.
I have believed in energy independence.
I have believed in every originalist justices to the Supreme Court.
It has been, you say, I changed.
I have not changed on any of my core positions, any of my core positions that I have advocated since I started on radio in 1987.
And the only thing I would concede I changed on is I'm a lot more libertarian.
I don't care about people's personal lives at all, not a little bit.
And go ahead.
There's nothing, two quick things.
There's nothing conservative about tariffs.
I mean, I don't think if I buy something that's made in China, and if I get that thing and they get my money, to me, that's even.
You know, that's my choice.
And the other thing that I've done is that.
You know, but Lisa, think back before the election.
And I kept, there were a lot of conservative friends of mine.
I was saying very publicly, like usual, I'm at the tippy top of a tree hanging on the longest, smallest branch with a little twig hanging onto a leaf, usually alone that was still there from last fall because that's how I run my career.
I go out on a limb and I give you my full opinion on everything.
And I kept, I told people he's going to govern conservatively on tax cuts.
He means it.
On judges, he means it.
On immigration, he means it.
On energy, he means it because I've known him longer than anybody else.
Now, did he donate to Democrats when he was a businessman in New York?
He joked about playing the game.
He literally said it disgusted him to have to play the game.
But he kept people working and his buildings kept going up.
So I don't believe to this second that he ever wants to have any type of tariff.
What he's doing is negotiating.
He got NATO to pay more.
He's getting, he got better trade deals with Canada and Mexico.
He used his leverage again with Mexico.
He's going to use it with China, and we're going to have a better trade deal at the end of the day.
And, you know, you go through the rough period of negotiation, but at the end, I don't think we're going to have tariffs.
That's my guess.
He doesn't want them.
Well, but he's not presenting it in an honest way.
It might be his pride, but he's not saying this is a tax on the American people because it is.
Because Lisa, yeah, of course he knows that.
But he doesn't say that.
But Lisa, you're basically telling him to take his biggest negotiating weapon and put it aside.
Look, as soon as NATO believed that we were going to cut back, once they, the great thing about Trump is people believe him.
You know, the harshest, you know, nobody's been harder on Russia than Donald Trump.
You know, nobody's been tougher on Iran than Donald Trump.
Nobody's tougher on China than Donald Trump.
Nobody's fought in this unrelenting focus for borders than Donald Trump.
He's tough on the Russia, the country, but he gives Vladimir Putin.
When Putin had soldiers in Venezuela, Trump had an hour phone call with him, and he let Putin off the hook.
He said, oh, Putin has, he has good intentions toward Venezuela.
So on an individual basis, he's not so tough on Vladimir Putin.
Now, on the country, sure, that Vladimir Putin is the richest man in the world, I think.
And he's not going to hurt.
Nothing that we do to Russia hurts Vladimir Putin.
And so, and Trump.
Well, I disagree.
Let me tell you, I disagree with that.
I don't think Americans fully recognize how profound we this, for the first time in 75 years, we're energy independent and now a net exporter of energy.
Once America really begins the process of tapping into these vast resources, number one, for national security reasons, we don't have to go to the Middle East ever again for a drop of oil.
We don't need it.
And not only do we not, we will create high-paying, life-altering jobs and careers, permanent lifetime careers for so many millions of Americans.
And the quicker we're able to figure out, and we will, how to cheaply get this energy to our Western European allies and others, I am telling you, Russia can be brought to their knees without firing a shot because this is the life flow.
This is their lifeblood.
This is it.
There's no in-between at all.
Well, I don't want to see the country go to its knees.
I mean, I don't care.
That doesn't seem to be that important to me.
It's the leaders.
People that don't like this president don't like the way he praises Putin or Kim Jong-un.
We don't like that.
We don't like to see him not call out bad people.
And on a consistent basis, he doesn't.
He just, it's like he befriends them, and it bothers us.
And maybe you can tell us.
Lisa, I think you're a good person.
I really do.
I love you to death.
You know, conservatism works.
And unfortunately, the country always resorts back to failure.
It's like we forget how bad it was under people.
But, you know, I'm telling you on most issues, positions, these are things Donald Trump is doing.
I have fought for my entire life, believed in my entire life.
This is a moment in history where we are making profound changes that are making the country better.
From everything from the courts, everything to the economy, the records that he's setting on economic and job creation are spectacular.
Having a genuine fear among other nations, America looking out for Americans first.
It's all, you know, he's kind of a force of nature.
I know he's a disruptor.
I know he's an iconoclast.
I know some people don't like the style.
You know, Mitt Romney advocated many of the same things, but he was nice and they still accused him of being a sexist, misogynist, and a racist.
And Donald Trump just said, well, I'm not going to take that crap and I'm going to fight back because being nice doesn't work with people that hate you and want to destroy you.
Has he even tried?
Come on, Sean.
But let me tell you, let me tell you, George Bush was nice too, and they destroyed him.
And so was Mitt Romney.
Nice people, but they get destroyed because the left is systematically, this is what they do to every conservative.
And I am telling you that you can't, you know, there's a time in life to be nice and there's a time to take the gloves off and fight.
And the guy's fighting.
And you know what?
He's winning in his fights.
And I want America to win.
And America is worth fighting for.
And everybody needs to get over the little sensitive, this sensitivity that they have as if they haven't heard this sort of thing their whole lives.
Well, just real quick, my first question.
I'm going to let you go, though, but go ahead.
Last one.
Oh, okay.
Well, please tell him to tell the American people that tariffs are a tax on them.
He's not going to give away his leverage.
You're not listening to me.
That's his leverage.
He's negotiating.
All right.
Let the man do it.
He just won a big negotiation using that technique.
I'm not saying don't tell me.
I'm saying tell the people.
Why do I like you so much?
You sound like the nicest person in the world.
All right, I got to go.
800-941-Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Arlene is in Florida.
Arlene, hi, how are you?
What's going on?
I just wanted to let you know that, well, I'm a big supporter.
I moved from California and I'm in Florida now, but I just love what he's done for the country.
He loves Americans.
He wants what's best for us.
And I mean, I just love all his policies.
I knew what it was like to live in California.
Let me ask you.
It says on my screen that you don't tell people you're a Trump supporter.
Not when I was in California, no.
You just kept...
Yeah, we lived where Devin Nunes was a representative.
It was not...
It was kind of dangerous.
In the San Joaquin Valley area, right?
San Joaquin Valley, correct.
Exactly.
Isn't that amazing that people don't want to tell other people that they support Trump?
I'm telling you, he does not poll like any conventional politician.
None of these polls leading up to 2020 are going to mean a whole lot.
I'll cite them.
Oh, yeah.
But I don't think they're going to mean a whole lot because I think there's a whole group of people just like you that are just going to just, yeah, why bother getting in a fight with this dopey neighbor of mine over Trump?
We would take the signs out in the daytime and then bring them back in the evening so nothing would happen to them.
But now that we're here and they're stealing and burn them.
No, they would.
They were awful.
But here in Florida, it's a little different other than we have from, I guess, New Yorkers, you could say, snowbirds.
But yeah, all his policies are great.
I understand what he's doing.
I love his personality.
That does not bother me.
He takes care of us.
He listens to what we want.
Listen, he's a, you know, it's really, I guess it's nice.
And this is why being a disruptor is so it's it's necessary.
He has to be.
I mean, he knows you have to be.
You're going to get mowed down in Washington.
There's just no other way to do it.
And I don't think it's going to change.
And everybody can go there with the we're going to bring everybody together, kumbaya, but I don't believe any of that.
I don't think it's going to be.
I think kumbaya days are long gone.
Yeah, no.
Yeah, he'll get me back for 2020.
I will be one of the voters.
I'm not going to be able to do that.
I'm going to need your vote in Florida.
I'm not listening to any of those people in Hollywood.
I don't need their opinion.
We don't care about their opinion.
All right.
You're the best.
Thank you, Arlene.
All right.
We've got a great Hannity tonight.
I'm telling you, Devin Nunes has never been better in laying out the facts, the reality, the truth.
He joins us tonight.
Now, we have other developments as it relates to the deep state.
We now know that General Flynn has hired Sidney Powell, author of License to Lie.
Man, she eviscerates Andrew Weissman in that book.
She's now going to be General Flynn's attorney, which raises a lot of probability in my mind that he may try to withdraw his plea.
But in light of Comey and McCabe, McCabe saying, oh, you don't need a lawyer, Comey bragging, they set him up.
It's going to take a very interesting turn.
The new analysis, how these FISA applications are riddled with errors, misleading claims, the actual errors that keep coming out on what Nunes calls the Mueller dossier.
So we got Nunes, Mark Meadows, Dershowitz, Larry Eldergreg, Jarrett, Joe Concha, Jason Chaffetz, and much more.
Tonight, 9 Eastern, Hannity Fox News, set your DVR.
