Greg Jarrett takes the wheel for the vacationing Sean and sits down with Jay Sekulow to discuss the ramifications of "the greatest political case ever, the attempted takedown of a President." The media and the Democrats have continued to push this false narrative! 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.
Sean richly deserves a little time off, and I'm very happy to fill in today.
We've got a great show coming up with terrific guests.
But we do want to hear from you, so be sure to give us a call.
The number is 1-800-941-7326.
Again, that's 1-800-941-Shawn.
Again, I'm Greg Gerrard.
I'm a legal analyst for the Fox News Channel, former trial attorney.
I spent about 15 years as an anchor at Fox News before I switched over to being a legal analyst, and it allowed me the freedom to write a couple of books.com,
Amazon.com, just go to Hannity.com.
There's a link there for the book.
The paperbook uh paperback version of the book came out in February, updated, so with new information.
So what have I been doing for the last uh four or five months?
Writing a new book, the sequel to the Russia hoax.
And it's called Witch Hunt, the plot to destroy Trump and undo his election.
And as a matter of fact, I turned it in to the publisher late last night.
Uh so they're working on the manuscript.
It'll be coming out uh October 1st.
You can order that one as well, Witch Hunt.
Again, just go to Barnes Noble.com.
Go to HarperCollins.com.
That's the publisher's website, HarperCollins.com.
Go to Hennity.com.
You can order it there.
Um essentially the story of Witch Hunt is that of a pernicious lie.
It was invented and then disseminated in a concerted effort to sabotage the election of Donald Trump.
And when that failed, there was a new objective.
New tactics were employed to destroy his presidency, undo his election, drive him from office.
Now, there was never any credible evidence that Trump was a Russia agent, or that he was colluding in a conspiracy with Vladimir Putin in the bowels of the Kremlin somewhere.
It was a damning fiction.
And it constitutes what is surely the dirtiest political trick in modern American history.
And it was conjured by none other than the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, and then brokered to solicitous collaborators of the FBI, the State Department, the Department of Justice, in order to bring down Donald Trump.
And there's no question, but the people in the Obama administration, the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Justice, other federal agencies, people like James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Struck, Lisa Page, Bruce Orr, James Clapper,
John Brennan, these are people who all thought they were above the law, accountable to no one, and supremely confident in their arrogance that they were smarter than you, the listener, the American people.
And so their actions in driving Trump from office based on nothing more than a hoax, served, you know, a higher moral purpose, or so they convinced themselves.
You can read about it in Witch Hunt, which will come out in about three months from now.
You can order it online.
But today we're going to be talking about Robert Muller, who, of course, found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy, a collusion with Russia.
You won't get the truth of that, by the way, by listening to the mainstream media.
you'll get it in my two books, and you'll you'll get it here today, listening in.
We're going to be talking to uh David Schoen, who is a fine criminal defense attorney and uh civil liberties attorney, as well as uh Manny Alecandro, who is also uh a New York attorney.
We're gonna be talking about Bob Mueller's upcoming testimony in a couple of weeks now.
You know, Democrats, I mean, why do they want Muller to testify?
448 pages of a Trump smear in the Mueller report, and yet no evidence of a criminal conspiracy with Russia.
Uh, he decided, well, I'm not going to make a decision on obstruction.
So the attorney general did and did so quite easily, because a president exercising his constitutional authority cannot be, by definition, obstructing justice.
So no obstruction of justice.
So Democrats anyway want Mueller to testify.
Why?
Well, they just want sound bites from the Mueller report because probably less than one percent of the American people actually read the report, and I don't blame people uh for not wanting to read it.
This thing, and I've read it three times, it was painful.
It's like getting a colonoscopy without propofol.
I mean, this thing is disorganized, self-contradictory, uh schizophrenic, generally incomprehensible from the first page.
But Democrats in Congress are just like those liberal actors who did the dramatic reading of sections of the report there.
They're hoping for drama.
They want Mueller to repeat uh some of what is in his report that they think will suggest or imply something nefarious and sinister, when in fact it's not.
But if Democrats and the media are expecting Robert Muller to sit there and say, oh, the president colluded with Russia, the president obstructed justice, I got news for them.
Ain't gonna happen.
If Muller had some smoking gun evidence of collusion or obstruction, he would put it in his report.
Um I'm gonna be talking to our guests in a couple of minutes, but after that I want to talk to you.
I want to hear what you think.
And in particular, tell me what you think uh Bob Muller should be asked.
Again, our number is 1-800-941-7326, 1-800-941.
By the way, uh check me out on Twitter at Greg Jarrett.
Uh Greg, by the way, has two Gs at the end of Greg.
Also, um, my website, the Greg Jarrett.com.
Again, that's theGregJarrett.com.
All right, so here's the deal with Mueller's testimony.
It's not good for Democrats.
Why?
Because he can't go beyond his report.
Because he was an employee of the uh Department of Justice, and the DOJ has very specific strict rules that you can't publicly talk about an uncharged individual.
So in other words, you can't sit there and trash Trump beyond how you smeared him in the report because you would be violating Department of Justice rules.
Those rules, however, do not apply to what Republicans want to ask Donald Trump.
And here's what they should ask you.
First of all, Mr. Mueller, if you were investigating Russian interference in our elections, how could you not investigate Hillary Clinton's campaign paying for a dossier of Russian disinformation?
And what about Christopher Steele infusion GPS and Glenn Simpson, the role of Brennan and Clapper in spreading that information to influence the election?
Your dossier is mentioned only in passing reference in the report.
How is it possible that you didn't talk about or investigate the Christopher Steele dossier?
That's question number one.
Muller should also be asked about Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.
Remember Strzok's testimony?
He said he was removed from the Mueller special counsel team because of his biased texts.
And yet, Strzok said when Mueller sat him down to say goodbye, he never bothered to ask whether that bias for which he was being fired had tainted or influenced any of his work, and thus contaminating the whole investigation by the special counsel.
I mean, to me, that is astonishing.
It tells me that Mueller didn't care that it might have unduly influenced his investigation.
Muller didn't care because he already knew what he was going to do.
he was going to trash Trump.
Third question I would ask is, why did you pick a team of partisans I mean, how could they all be Democrats who contributed to Democratic campaigns?
Didn't you realize the appearance of unfairness?
Mr. Muller, you ruined the integrity and credibility of your own work from the outset.
Fourth question would be: how could you pick somebody like Jeannie Ray?
I mean, Jeannie Ray was on the special counsel team, picked by Mueller.
She was a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation.
She also represented Hillary Clinton herself in a lawsuit over her emails.
And how could you pick Aaron Zebley?
I mean, this is a guy who represented Justin Cooper, who helped set up and administer Clinton's email account.
He smashed her Blackberry devices.
And yet you hired the lawyer for that guy?
And how could you pick Andrew Weissman, who has a disgraceful record of hiding evidence, threatening witnesses, weaponizing the law?
This is a guy who attended Hillary Clinton's victory party that turned out to be no victory at all.
This is a guy who complimented Sally Yates for defying Donald Trump.
How could you pick a guy like that?
And by the way, Mr. Muller, why, according to an email we've seen, did you give the responsibility to Weissman to pick the entire staff?
No wonder he assembled a team of partisans.
I'd also ask about FISA abuse.
I mean, after all, the warrant to spy Carter Page was renewed while Mueller was special counsel, so Mueller was involved.
Was any of that evidence verified, Mr. Muller?
Was it based on the phony unverified dossier?
Of course it was.
His closeness to James Comey, a key obstruction witness meant that Mueller should have disqualified himself.
Not to mention the fact that, you know, Muller interviewed for the FBI job the day before he took the job to be special counsel to investigate the president, an obvious conflict of interest demanding mandatory recusal.
But Mueller ignored it.
Another question I would ask is, Mr. Mueller, when exactly did you learn and figure out that there was no collusion?
The reason I ask this question is because I interviewed Trump's attorney, John Dowd, who told me that within months of the May 17th appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller, Mueller knew no later than December of 2017, Seven months after being named, he knew there was no collusion.
And importantly, thereafter, a meeting occurred March 5th, 2018.
Keep in mind, that's a full year before Mueller issued his report.
Mueller admitted to Dowd that the president had no criminal exposure over collusion.
Thank you.
Why didn't you just file an interim report?
Isn't it true, Mr. Muller?
The reason you didn't file an interim report saying there's no collusion is because you wanted this collusion phony narrative to influence the midterm elections so that Democrats would retake the House and file articles of impeachment.
Isn't that true, Mr. Muller?
I got some other questions I would ask him as well, but we're going to pause, take a quick break.
When we come back, we're going to be talking to very shortly, David Schoen, criminal defense attorney, Manny Alakandro, and you, our numbers 1800-941-7326.
Again, that's 1-800-941.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in on the Sean Hannity show.
Welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity.
The most important question Muller should be asked is the following.
When you met with Donald Trump on May 16, 2017 to interview for the job to replace Comey, isn't it true, Mr. Mueller, that you discussed with President Trump the reason why he fired Comey?
Because I am told they did discuss it.
Which means that Mueller was a witness in his own case and he was required to disqualify himself.
Think about it.
How is it even possible that the president who has talked openly about the reason why he fired Mueller or Comey would sit there with Mueller and not talk about, I had to fire Comey.
He was awful.
He did this, he did that, he did.
That makes Mueller a witness in any potential obstruction case.
And there is Mueller gathering evidence, allegedly to incriminate the president, and he is assigned with investigating the president.
A prosecutor cannot be a witness in his own case.
That is the key question.
We'll be right back with our guests and your phone calls on the other side.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity.
So what is your view of the way that the FBI interacted with Steele and how we should understand what his role was here?
That's a big question.
So look, the investigation was not predicated on the basis of the information that Christopher Steele Steele gave to us in the form of the dossier.
That is just not was not my understanding at the time and has never been my understanding.
So just to say that flat out.
Steele, at the time, my understanding was that he was thought to be a reliable source that had a prior relationship with the FBI and brought this information to us.
Look, with I don't know how to say this.
We're not stupid, right?
The FBI.
We're not stupid.
You take the information and you try to vet it.
And that, my recollection is we spent a lot, we, the Burk Bureau, uh, the folks in the counterintelligence division, spent a lot of time trying to vet that information line by line.
And do you think that you um you adequately informed the court about uh about the about the about the the origins of the Pfizer or the origins of the Steel dossier?
Yeah.
And uh, do you think Stu Evans, who's the chief of the intelligence officer, when he took it to the court was fully informed.
I do.
I do believe that we adequately notified the FISA court of the information we were using and what we thought about that information.
Um I think the the, in fact, in my experience with FISA packages, I've never seen a footnote like the one we included in that package specifically for that purpose.
This is like on page 16.
It's about a page and a half long footnote.
It goes into great detail about our previous relationship, what we thought of the information we were getting uh from him, and kind of where how we understood his involvement or interest in in this stuff that was in the uh in the FISA package.
So I do think we represented it adequately.
I know that's a matter that's currently under investigation.
Be anxious to see what they have to say about it.
All right, there are two of the biggest clowns that you will ever see, both of whom were employed by the FBI.
Andrew McCabe, and the first soundbite was from James Baker, who is general counsel of the FBI.
Welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
I'm Greg Jarrett, filling in for Sean Hannity.
So let's just pick those apart uh very briefly.
You heard uh Baker say, oh, we thought Steele was a reliable source.
No, he wasn't.
And he knew he wasn't because you fired him for leaking to the media and lying about it, and then you told the Pfizer court he was credible when you knew he wasn't.
Then you hear Baker say, you know, we're not stupid.
No, Mr. Baker, you're not stupid.
You're malevolent.
Peter Strck and Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe and James Comey, and all of you were malevolent actors.
You were a malignant force abusing your positions of power to try to bring down the president of the United States.
And then you hear the sound by the second sound by you heard is Andrew McCabe.
You know, the guy who was fired for lying not once, not twice, four times.
And he said, Oh, we adequately advised the FICE Accord about the steel dossier.
Then he starts talking about the footnotes and so forth.
No, you didn't.
Nowhere in the footnotes does it say it was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign.
As I noted in my book, The Russia Hoax.
I reprint the footnotes from the FISA warrant application.
You can read it for yourself in my book called The Russia Hoax.
And if you haven't uh bought it, you can go buy it online, the Russia hoax, and the new book, Witch Hunt, the sequel, will be coming out in a couple of months.
You can order that, pre-order that on Barnes Noble.com, Amazon.com, go to Hannity.com.
At any rate, joining us now to talk about all of this.
David Schoen, who is a criminal defense and civil liberties attorney, and Manny Alcondro is a New York attorney and former New York City public advocate candidate.
Good to have you both with us.
David, I haven't talked to you in a while, but I just summarized what McCabe said and what Baker said.
And these two guys are not being straight when they're asked straight questions.
What do you think?
Yeah.
Never have been, and I agree with everything you said, and I think you summed it up accurately and covered just about every angle.
I think the last thing is, you know, as you mentioned, the funding for the steel dossier and this opposition research is a key to this because it's all part of one package.
It ties in with who Muller picked for his team.
The two concepts of anti-Trump and the pro-Hillary Clinton are absolutely part of one package here.
And it uh permeated the approach the FBI took throughout, and it approved it uh it uh colored the team that Muller picked.
Manny, what do you think?
Well, that's good afternoon.
Thank you for having me.
I think unfortunately our democracy is under assault right now.
I think we need to conduct a thorough investigation and really get to the bottom of what's going on.
There's a lack of transparency and a lack of individuals who are in charge telling the truth.
They keep saying the same things over and over again.
I think we really know what happened.
We need to get to the bottom of it as quickly as we can.
You know, uh I I have said it before, but I'll say it again.
I think the greatest peril to democracy is not a foreign force, but a malignant force of unelected government officials here at home.
Because David, they are armed with immense power.
They operate quite often in the shadows, and they have proven to be capable of uncommon corruption.
Their allegiance is not to the Constitution and the rule of law, but to themselves.
Do you agree?
Yeah, I mean, we've never seen anything like this, at least now being publicly exposed, thanks, frankly, to this show leading the way.
Uh we've never seen this kind of thing.
Look, we saw nothing less than an attempted coup, Rod Rosenstein and company uh at one point during this.
But we see here people who are remained just as arrogant as they were at the time.
You can hear it in McCabe, you can hear it in Baker, you can hear it in Weissman, all and Comey, all of them remain just as arrogant.
They don't believe that they were will ever be called to task for what they did during this thing.
It has to somehow, this investigation both has to expose what happened and somehow put pl uh stops in place to make sure it never happens again.
You know, Manny, one of the things I think that's going to be very revealing comes on July 17th when Bob Mueller testifies.
And, you know, Democrats are the ones who, you know, served him with a quote unquote friendly subpoena.
I think that's going to backfire on them because he can't go beyond what's in his report.
But Republicans can ask him a whole lot of questions about what's not in his report.
Would you agree?
Absolutely.
I think the whole thing, unfortunately, is a circus.
I think what the Democrats are trying to do is just to continue the pressure on the Trump campaign, the Trump administration through the Mueller report and extend this into the 2020 campaign.
Unfortunately for the Democrats, they don't have any really serious candidates.
So the real effort from my perspective of the Democrats is continue to pressure on the media, continue the Mueller report.
Look, there's nothing there there, but continue this going on well into 19 and into 2020.
You know, uh I want to get your reaction, David, to the question I thought was the most important question of all, and that is I would ask Bob Mueller that when you sat in the Oval Office with the President of the United States on May 16, 2017, and and you're there talking to the President, either about replacing Comey or providing him with advice about the institution of the FBI.
Isn't it true that you talked with the President about the reason why he fired Comey?
And if the answer is, well, yes, we you know, he did express the reasons.
Didn't that make Mueller a witness in his own investigation?
Absolutely.
There are several reasons.
Muller never should have accepted this appointment, and I also believe several reasons he never should have been appointed.
But that would be one of them, clearly.
Listen, if this whole idea that the Comey firing could be a matter of obstruction of justice is such a canard in the first place for many, many reasons.
It should have been off the table and shouldn't be in the report.
And if the President had any liability there, then so did Rod Rosenstein and several other people.
But you're right.
Muller would have been a witness.
Um I have a lot to say about uh I think about the kinds of questions Muller ought to be asked now.
Go ahead, tell me.
And his testimony.
Well, first of all, I think that uh under Regulation 600.8, Muller's absolutely prohibited from testifying, even about what's in the report, let alone his methods uh and operations with respect to the report.
The regulations require that the report be kept confidential.
He was appointed with that understanding, that agreement, it's a matter of law.
Secondly, Mueller understands that he was appointed under 600.1, specifically because there is supposed to be a conflict of interests.
He was required to maintain an independent, above board investigation of the highest level of integrity and appearance of integrity.
I'd want to know what the criteria was for the team that he picked.
How can he possibly justify picking a team of partisan Democrats, not just partisan politically, but people who not only were anti-Trump, but who financially and emotionally and actively supported Hillary Clinton, knowing that Hillary Clinton provided the financing, the Democratic Party provided the financing for this opposition research.
And specifically, I'd like to focus him on Andrew Weissman, because Muller knows Weissman inside and out.
He hired him for his FBI general counsel after Weissman presided over the single most corrupt prosecution in the history of this country that I'm aware of, and that's in the Eastern District of New York, in which Weissman was personally responsible for the most corrupt FBI agent, Linda Vecchio, who ever walked, who was eventually indicted for murders, et cetera.
Muller, uh Weissman and Muller well knows this, Weissman was known as the pathological liar among lawyers after the Saturday Night Live character among lawyers in the Eastern District.
And he in that case those cases withheld evidence, lied about evidence, um, and covered up for this corrupt FBI agenda, and was singled out by the chief judge in the Eastern District of New York for extraordinarily unethical conduct.
Muller knew all of those things and much more when he picked him to be his right hand man.
I'd want to get into that and many other subjects.
Yeah, I absolutely would.
I mean, and it was Weissman who ruined uh the accounting firm Arthur Anderson.
They had to go out of business because of Weissman's behavior in that case that led to a conviction which was overturned on appeal, but not before 60,000 people lost their jobs.
Manny, um, you know, I I would certainly w say, wait a minute.
Your your appointment order says investigate Russia interference in the election.
How could you not investigate the Hillary Clinton campaign paying for a dossier of Russian disinformation that was then fed uh to the media to influence the election?
How could you not investigate that?
You would you ask that question?
Absolutely.
100% agree with you.
It's unfortunately just a one-sided investigation in terms of being independent in terms of the prosecutorial discretion exercised by Mueller, very poor judgments exercised in you know from him and and clearly his staff and his team.
Clearly, clearly there are so many outstanding questions about Hillary Clinton, any involvement, this deal dossier dealing with foreign officials.
Remember that question came of Trump by uh George Stephanopoulos last week.
If if he was provided with information from a foreign official, would he take it?
I mean, that fundamental question is at issue here.
We need to get to the bottom of this, and it needs to be balanced.
We need to know what happened with Hillary Clinton.
We need to know the level of involvement with with Russia and and foreign officials, and we need to look at her emails, and we need to get to the bottom of the whole email scandal.
Manny Alecondro and David Schoen, two great lawyers.
Thank you for taking the time to chat with us today.
Really appreciate it.
When we come back, want to get to your phone calls.
We've got several of them.
Questions about the Muller case about the whole Trump Russia collusion hoax that begat the witch hunt, which is the title of my new book.
You can pre-order it online.
I'm Greg Jarrett, filling in for Sean Hannity.
We'll be right back.
Welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
I'm Greg Jarrett.
Have the pleasure of filling in for Sean today while he's off.
Want to go to the phone lines.
Teresa joins us now from Florida.
Teresa, thanks for holding.
How are you?
I am absolutely fine, Mr. Jarrett, and it is an honor and pleasure to speak with you.
Well, call me Greg for goodness sakes.
Well, you know, it's a Southern thing.
I'm sorry.
My baby would definitely spank me if he could.
He passed away in Oakland as an always enjoyed watching you on talks.
Well, thank you.
Um I enjoyed your book.
Oh, my mother and I both have shared and reread, and it is spot on.
Well, everything that can come up, you you are a magnificent writer, uh, and you give very good detail.
Well, I hope you like my second book, Witch Hunt, which you can pre-order online now.
And uh, it's a sequel, really, because so much has happened since uh that first book went to print uh a year ago.
So hope you get witch hunt.
But what's your question uh today?
Well, my question is, do you feel like there will ever be uh any kind of judgment to the ones who have taken part in all this?
Do you feel like they'll end be held accountable?
100%.
You know, I didn't I didn't feel that way until William Barr, uh, who had previously served uh as attorney general was appointed by President Trump to be the new attorney general.
I mean, this is a guy who cares deeply about the rule of law, uh, that nobody is above the law.
And people like James Cummy, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, uh, Clapper and Brennan, uh, over in the intelligence community.
I mean, all of these people abuse their positions of power for political purposes, and that is not just wrong, it's criminal.
And so I I do think that after the inspector general report comes out, which should be very shortly, I think there'll be criminal referrals and Barr's Department of Justice will take action.
Teresa, thanks for calling in.
Appreciate it.
I'm Greg Jarrett, the Sean Hennedy show returns in a moment.
In retrospect, sitting here today, how comfortable with are you with the Carter Page FISA application?
So I've I read it at the time.
I read the initiation, the first one at the time, and went back and looked at it recently.
My recollection at the time Is that when I read it, I asked questions about it, but nevertheless, I was comfortable that the application that we were submitting to the FISA court was consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and was consistent with the requirements of the FISA statute and lawful.
And it was there was probable cause that was in my mind sufficient to pass muster and pass review and that it would be approved by the by the FISA court.
And that we were making disclosures in the application about the steel information in a way that were consistent with the other types of disclosures we've made about sources and their reliability.
All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity.
That was general former general counsel of the FBI, James Baker, being questioned.
And everything he said is wrong and inaccurate.
You know, oh, you know, that that seemed like a perfectly fine FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page.
No, it wasn't, Mr. Baker.
And I'll give you just some reasons why.
Number one, it came from not a source, but a guy who assembled information from sources, a guy by the name of Christopher Steele.
He wasn't the FBI source.
They called him their source, but he wasn't.
He collected information from multiple anonymous sources that was based on double, triple, and quadruple hearsay, which is junk.
and yet the FISA court judges were not told that.
They were also not told that it was unverified by the FBI.
They couldn't verify because they didn't know who the sources were.
And at the top of every application to surveil, it says verified application.
This information, based on anonymous sources, was not verified.
And Comey, James Cumming, the FBI director since fired, admitted as much to Congress when he testified.
He also told the president of the United States that it was salacious and unverified.
So that's two misrepresentations, or in the legal business, we just call those lies, uh, to the FISA court.
There was also exculpatory information about Carter Page that the FBI concealed from the FISA court judges.
They also deceived the judges by not telling them that the guy who assembled the information, Christopher Steele, had told the Department of Justice he detested Donald Trump and wanted to do anything he could to stop him from becoming president.
That was not disclosed to the judges.
There are two or three other things.
I mean, most importantly, they didn't tell the FISA court judges who paid for it all.
It was opposition research based on phony Russian disinformation that was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic Committee.
Did they tell the FISA court that?
No.
They didn't.
If you read my first book, The Russia Hoax, you will see what they put in a footnote that that was vague and ambiguous allusion to opposition research.
They didn't tell the judges, hey, the opposition research was Donald Trump's political opponent, Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee.
So they lied to the court.
And there you have James Bell, oh, gee, uh, it seemed reasonable and proper under the law to me.
It was not Mr. Baker, and you're not a very good lawyer if you didn't instantly recognize that it was garbage that belonged in the trash can.
And yet the man they targeted, Carter Page, had his constitutional rights violated unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment.
And Carter Page happens to be here with me today in studio.
So you heard my rant.
You got it so right, Greg, it's it's hard to uh you it's just the tip of the iceberg.
And I think you know, you referred to your your first book uh or your more recent book.
I I'm really excited uh what's coming with your your next book, The Witch Hunt, because a lot of these things eventually became so much worse as all these facts came out.
And you know, if you compare your level of analysis in the Russia hoax, number one bestseller, you just compare that to all the lies in the Mull in the Muller dossier, which came out a couple months ago.
Right, which had, you know, large teams of people working on them, tens of millions of dollars.
Your uh analysis is infinitely better, and it's uh completely out of control.
So I mean, there's so many more details to that.
I know you've how much you've dug into it.
So you know, um, I just turned in the manuscript of the publisher Harper Collins uh late last night.
Uh it's called Witch Hunt.
You can buy it online now, pre-order it.
It'll come out October 1st.
Chapter three is entitled Line and Spine.
I have uh chapter three in front of me of the new book, Witch Hunt, and you're in it.
You're in it quite a bit, Carter Page.
Um, I want to ask you this.
So you know, you're you're sitting at home, and I uh if I recall the story correctly, you get a phone call from a reporter that says, Do you have any comment about um the FISA warrant on you uh to surveil?
What was that like?
Well, it's interesting.
Uh it was uh I was actually on the run.
I was having so many death threats, which you know came from these false testimonies.
Right.
And this is in March, April 2017, you know, a couple months after the inauguration.
And yeah, these these lies which are constantly being put out there is uh with this complete hoax.
Um I just you know, I I start getting death threats from Oklahoma and elsewhere.
Right.
And you know, I asked the FBI for help about this.
And of course, they uh didn't lift a finger.
Not only did it not lift a finger, um, you know, they they said that they would look into it, but with more leaks, it only continued and in some ways even escalated.
Well, and they continue to spy on you while you're getting these death threats, and they're saying, Oh, yeah, we'll look into it.
But they renewed the FISA warrant three additional times.
Absolutely.
And I voluntarily sat with them over 10 hours in March of 2017, and there were two more FISA warrants, you know.
It's unbelievable.
In April and June.
June.
The final one, of course, with Mr. Rosenstein.
Right.
So and of course, a lot of these investigations, they've been saying that is really the worst by far.
So have you uh I think it was with Louis Goomert that Rosenstein was answering questions, and it's pretty it's clear to me that Rosenstein's defense is going to be I didn't read the FISA warrant I signed.
I mean, you get that sense from the responses that he gave that uh to Louis Goumert.
Well, it it really is amazing.
You know, I mean, when I was an officer in the U.S. Navy, I mean, if you if you sort of submit these false uh statements or false reports, you get court martialed.
Sure, right?
I mean, it's not a defense to say I didn't read it.
Well, particularly, I mean, not only is it they they're using it, but they had so many, you know, it's similar to your doing so much meticulous worse work in your first book and getting it right.
And whereas you have these big squads of people like the Mueller witch hunt democrats who are, you know, doing this uh who got it all wrong.
Who got it entirely wrong and you know, totally skewed story.
So I I spend more than 20,000 words in chapter five of the new book called Witch Hunt.
Again, you can pre-order it online.
Um, but I spend chapter five, twenty two thousand words, absolutely taking apart the Mueller report.
The title of that chapter is uh The Folly of Muller's Magnum Opus.
I mean, it was the most idiotic 448 pages I have ever read in my life.
Muller ought to go down to the Bar Association and say, I'm sorry, fellas, I'm turning in my law license.
I don't deserve to be a lawyer because he twists the facts and contorts the law in a way that even a first-year law student in his first month in class could figure out.
I mean, it's just astonishing to me.
And you were, you know, one of the targets.
And, you know, you're in the Mueller report.
Well, not only am I in it, I'm in it for tens of pages, right?
And you know, and I I I know how much you packed into your first book.
It's amazing.
I can only imagine there's so much low-hanging fruit.
Well, there's so much low-hanging fruit with all these lies which kept escalating over the subsequent uh couple years.
Yeah, I mean, for an author, it's like Christmas comes early, you know, because uh there was such malevolence and stupidity on the part, not just of Muller and his team of partisans, but you know, all these bad actors, I call them a malignant force.
Um, but I want to get back to to what happened to you.
So you actually, when you first started getting reporters calling you up saying, uh, they're spying on you.
Well, you know, they it's a FISA warrant.
You you were incensed.
And so you fired off a letter, but it was a very polite letter.
I recounted in the second book, Witch Hunt, that you you say to you send the letter to Comey and you say, Look, I I'd be happy to sit down and tell you everything I know.
And by the way, I've always helped uh the FBI and intelligence agencies, which you had.
You were a source for them.
Absolutely, uh, Greg.
And you know, if you look at uh that letter on September 25th, 2016.
Right.
I mentioned those meetings the following March, in March 2017, almost five months later or over five months later.
Literally, they never took me up on that offer, and they fired off two of their first fraudulent warrant applications in October and again in January, just a couple days before the inauguration.
And not only that, they were talking to their fraudulent DNC source, Mr. Christopher Steele.
Yeah.
And there's even a uh a testimony from someone from the um State Department in a couple of days before that October 21, 2016 Pfizer warrant, where this person who's not even an expert did a little Google search and realized all this stuff that he's talking about, Christopher Steele, is just a, as you say in your first book, a complete hoax.
You know, it's this is just a very basic internet search figuring this out.
Right.
Give me the date again of when you send the letter to Comey.
It was two days after the same that fraudulent uh defamatory article by Michael Isakoff in Yahoo News.
So that came out on September 23rd, uh, 2016, 2016.
I never was on Twitter before.
People call me up and say, oh, your name is trending on Twitter because this is like the biggest news story out here right now.
So I mean, I'm just getting these constantly badgered by the new the media, and I sent the letter to Comey two days later on Sunday night, uh, September 25th.
And here's the insane thing.
So you know what they're about to do, and they haven't even filed the the FISA warrant application yet, right?
Yes, yes.
So you're telling Comey, I know what you're doing, you're gonna spy on me through a FISA warrant.
And instead of talking to you, because you know, the gig's up, the target knows we're gonna be listening in on his conversations, right?
Instead of not filing the application, instead sitting down and talking with you, Carter Page, they decide to go ahead and spy on you.
It's unbelievable.
One of uh one of old, I was looking at one of Sean Hannity's old uh old books from uh many years ago, and there's a quote in from there where it says, Liberals are more tolerant Of Saddam Hussein than they are of George W. Bush.
No surprise.
After all, Bush is a much greater threat to the Democrats purely political agenda than Saddam would ever be.
And it's it's exactly the same case here.
This is the insanity of it all.
They think they thought Trump was a threat to democracy because they didn't like the man, they didn't like his policies.
So they decided they were gonna take him out.
And the media was a long for the ride.
We're gonna pause, take a quick break.
We're talking to Carter Page.
We'll be right back.
James Comey signed a FISA warrant that said Carter Page is a Russian spy.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, Carter Page is here in studio, and if he were a Russian spy, he'd be in an orange jumpsuit behind bars.
So Comey uh was lying, and we all know Comey was lying.
And Sally Yates was too.
She signed off on that first FISA warrant.
She was the um uh deputy attorney general at the time, later became acting attorney general and was fired by Donald Trump.
But Carter Page is here with us.
So so you're a Russian spy, right?
I mean, that's what Comey and Yates said.
A complete and utter hoax, you know, which they've just been pushing nonstop.
And they still, you know, let's see what happens on July 17th when Muller's in front of the Congress.
But, you know, he's just Yeah, I mean, one of the things I would ask is how come you didn't investigate any of this FISA nonsense because the the last renewal happened on your watch signed by your boss, Rod Rosenstein.
So, you know, it obviously didn't help you, did it, Mr. Muller, because you didn't conclude the charges should be brought uh uh against Carter Page.
Well, the whole m uh Muller dossier was a cleanup job.
And you know, Mousawi, who was the number 20 uh, you know uh participant in September 11th, he he could have gotten a FISA warrant on him and uh Mueller as FBI director, you know, decided not to even go for it.
Yeah, so he goes for Carter Page, but not one of the terrorists.
You gotta love Bob Mueller.
Not I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hennedy.
We'll be right back.
Welcome back to the Sean Hennedy show.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity today, and I've been talking uh with Carter Page, who, as you know, is a Russian spy.
So, you know, we got him out of prison, and he's here just for uh, you know, an hour or so.
He's got a really nice orange jumpsuit on.
Um I'm kidding, of course, he's not a Russian spy, even though Comey and the FBI and the Department of Justice in the Obama administration falsely said he was.
They smeared him, they ruined his life.
Um and and all because he did something daring, ladies and gentlemen.
What did he do?
He was invited to give a speech in Moscow at the New Economic School, which, you know, originated with support from America.
And Barack Obama had uh a few years earlier, uh, before Carter Page went there, uh, had given a speech there.
So the NES, the new economic school, invites Carter Page to come over and give uh an address.
Um so he does.
I mean, I would.
And uh and and that was his offense, ladies and gentlemen, because Carter, you know Christopher Steele, the the mendacious, pernicious bumbling ex-British spy, used to work for MI6, doesn't speak well of MI6.
He writes in this phony dossier that, yeah, that that your speech was a cover, and you were really meeting with Kremlin officials, colluding uh with uh the Trump campaign and the Kremlin to steal the presidential election and this utter nonsense that they're gonna give you interest in some uh Russian-owned energy company uh that would amount to what I think I think I said $19 billion in
my book, because I did some calculations and figured out what they were gonna give you was $19 billion.
I mean, it was just you can't make this Nonsense up.
On the face of it, it just makes no sense.
And the other interesting part about it, uh, Greg, is I was paid zero dollars, zero rubles for the to give this.
You got 19 billion dollars.
Well, what's interesting is you know, uh Mrs. Clinton, while she was Secretary of State, her husband went to give a speech in Moscow where he was paid five hundred thousand dollars.
Right.
Right?
For like an hour speech, 45 minutes speech.
And that's during the whole uranium one state.
Yeah, at the same time that that she is a presiding over a committee that approves the sale of American uranium assets to the Russians.
They're the last people you want to, you know, give your uranium to.
Uh and but that, you know, kumbaya, that's okay.
But Carter Page dares to give a speech.
And I remember vividly, so you get hauled in front of Adam Schiff, uh shifty shifts as Sean loves to call him.
And he grills you that you're walking off the stage after the speech and saying, hi, how are you, to some Kremlin official or a guy connected to the criminal, and is somehow a Russian conspiracy collusion.
I mean, and and Schiff wouldn't take no for an answer.
Well, it's the same partisan approach that they've been taking all along.
And sure enough, that same talking point, which was you know constantly pushed by the DNC and their consultants and their media hacks, um, that's a big piece in the Mueller report as well.
They keep pushing the same sort of conspiracy theory ridiculousness, which, you know, totally untrue.
Aaron Ross Powell, you know, in the first book, one of the chapters is literally entitled, It's not a crime to talk to a Russian.
And I and I gave that title just for Adam Schiff, hoping that it might get through his thick skull that shaking hands or talking to a Russian is not a crime.
It's just not.
And I go through the book and I explain how we have tens of thousands of Americans actually living and working in Moscow for American companies from McDonald's to GE to General Motors, and a dozens and dozens of companies.
And 400,000 Americans uh visit Russia every year.
In in the twisted world of Adam Schiff, I mean, they're all criminals.
Well, it's the same conflicts of interest that are throw out, right?
So the DNC and their lawyers are responsible for this fake dossier.
And sure enough, you know, these are the same organizations, funding organizations that help, you know, run his campaigns and you know, are pushing him the same nonsensical storyline.
It's just unbelievable to me.
You know, the greatest hoax in American uh history perpetrated by a bunch of uh knuckleheads and muttonheads.
And and they ought to be held accountable.
And people always ask me the same question, will they be held accountable?
And I, you know, I was talking to Teresa a short time ago, one of our callers, and I said, yes, they will be held accountable.
Let's go to uh some more of our callers.
Uh joining us now is Robert from New York.
Hi, Robert, how are you?
Greg, how are you?
I'm well your great work.
Thank you.
Now here's what I think.
I believe that the Pfizer court is possibly part of the witch hunt slash D-state operation.
And here's my reason why.
If I was a judge and was lied to in a way this judge was lied to, I would drag every one of them in front of my bench and demand an answer.
Yeah.
And accountability for how this happened.
Why wasn't I giving the information that Hillary paid for this?
Yeah, I agree with you.
You know, Robert, I I don't think that the Pfizer court is in on the Russia hoax and the witch hunt.
And I suspect that they have already gone to the inspector general, did so early on, and said, here's what happened.
They lied to us.
This should be a part of your investigation.
Carter Page, what do you think?
Well, it's interesting.
If you look through these 400 plus pages in these four heavily redacted FISA warrants, most of the warrants, applications from Comey, uh McCabe, uh uh Sally Yates, they're heavily redacted.
If but if you look at the end of each of those four, they have the section from the judges.
Those are completely redacted.
Yes.
There's literally no information other than like their the four signatures.
And so and I think the rep the meaning is if they start, you know, if DOJ and the FBI has to start explaining what actually happened, you know, the judges are going to be on the spot.
You know, if they're if their information, what they said was is out there, they need to defend themselves.
So I think they're trying to, you know, they're trying to hide.
You know, underneath the covers as possible.
I I think they were snookered is is what I think happened.
They were just fooled by the because it it is a statistical fact that more than 98% of all FISA applications are rubber stamped by the court.
They just approve them.
And there, you know, there aren't hearings, mind you.
Um these are all paper submissions.
So they take as fact whatever people like Cummy and McCabe and and Sally Yates are presenting to them.
And so, you know, these are people who can just, you know, file paperworks that that is a complete lie, and the chances are the court's going to approve it.
Well, the statute actually, you know, it was came into force in 1978.
And the whole whole reason why they put together this court in Washington is to, you know, in response to all these spying abuses for political purposes, both during what the Watergate era and against Martin Luther King and various other political people domestically.
So let's go to uh our next caller, Lou joins us from Florida.
Hey Lou, how are you?
Greg.
Greg, thanks for taking my call, sir.
Sure.
Uh you know what?
The one uh caller actually asked you a question I wanted to ask.
But well, I'm also I want to ask you if you really thank Attorney General Barr's investigations, okay, we'll bring about any indictments.
And I've learned that this could take up until 2020.
Oh, yeah.
Okay.
And I know that it's a race, you know, us against, you know, the left.
Right.
Because that's a little disturbing.
Now, what do you actually think?
How long do you think these investigations will take, and if there is going to be any indictments?
Well, look, um, these things take a long time.
And you know, uh this is this is how liars work.
You know, they're very adept at covering their tracks.
And, you know, if Trump had never been elected, we wouldn't have found out any about this.
Uh and so, you know, they they tend to uh dissemble and lie and cover up and obstruct.
That's what the FBI has been doing under Christopher Ray.
I mean, lawful subpoenas by Congress um have been ignored by Christopher Ray.
And I, you know, I'm told that Barr has sat Ray down and said, stop it.
And so, but this is a very long, arduous, slow process, Carter.
Well, I think, listen, if you look at all of these the as you're exactly saying, all the false information that they keep getting sent their way.
I mean, the the biggest, you know, most immediate concern I have is in this inspector general report, which Attorney General Barr originally said should be out in May or June.
Well, today's the first day of July and it's still not out, and they're saying it's gonna take some more time.
The problem with that is it's you know, a similar ex parte situation.
You know, they're looking at the FISA abuse against myself and the Trump campaign.
Yes.
However, who are they talking to?
They've never talked to me.
You know, it's an all an internal thing.
So they're they're just speaking with uh tons and tons of liars that are just looking to cover for themselves.
Yeah, but uh I have a sense, and I've been talking to people about this in Washington.
I was down in Washington last week.
Uh I was interviewing the president.
And uh but uh the president aside, the people I was talking to tell me that that people have been coming out of the woodwork uh at the FBI and the Department of Justice going to the inspector general and telling him what really happened.
And I think that's what's delayed the inspector general's report.
But to answer your question, Lou, I think that when the IG report comes out, I think it's gonna be devastating to some of these people.
I think there'll be criminal referrals, and Bill Barr has made it abundantly clear.
Nobody's above the law.
If you broke the law, I'm coming after you.
New sheriff in town.
Uh Carter Page, thank you so much for being with us today.
Best of luck to you.
Your life has been ruined by the likes of uh Andrew McCabe and James Baker and James Comey and Peter Strzok and the whole gang.
And uh, but you know, uh what goes around comes around, and things will turn out well for you, I predict in the end.
I think there's great things coming ahead.
I I agree with you, Greg, and congratulations on your new buck.
Thanks very much.
Witch Hunt is the name of the book.
You can buy it online.
Or you can go to Hannity.com and there's a link there where you can pre-order it coming out soon.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity.
We'll be right back with some of your phone calls.
Welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity.
We've been talking about uh Mueller's upcoming testimony.
I just said goodbye to Carter Page, of course, uh Cummy and McCabe and Yates and the whole gang uh said was a Russian spy, and of course he wasn't.
Um it was all a hoax.
And it was a witch hunt.
And by the way, Witch Hunt is the title of my new book coming out in a couple of months.
You can uh pre-order it online.
Go to HarperCollins.com or Amazon.com or BarnesandNoble.com, or just go to Hannity's website, uh Hannity.com, and you can uh pre-order it there.
Um let's go to our callers, though, right now.
Terry has been holding from Reno, Nevada.
Hey, Terry, how are you?
Hey, Greg, great book.
You had uh enjoy I'm enjoying reading it.
Three quick points that I'd like to comment on.
The first point is uh look a Pfizer judge by the name of Callier was one of the first ones involved in this mess, and she wrote a scathing rebuke to the people that put the FICE award in front of her, and in the same time putting a pathway to what she needed to approve it in order to get it done.
So that was the first thing that that kind of lends me to think of the FISA people are involved in this thing.
The second point I'd like to make the second point I'd like to make is that um in in um all of these investigations, there's been about a dozen people referred for indictment, and McCabe's was totally dropped.
There have been four or five others that the DOJ has refused to prosecute.
And the IG report came the first one that came out a year ago, had a whole bunch of people involved in this thing that nobody has been held accountable for.
So why the hell would anybody think that uh as we go forward anybody else is going to be indicted?
The last point is uh uh Trump made a huge mistake giving the redaction um control to A.G. Barr.
We're gonna go through the whole next year with a selective redaction process, and everything that Trump has done to this point in time that he could have redacted a long time ago and probably had indictments on their way now, is not gonna happen.
So now we're stuck with Trump sitting there, and nobody can control Barr in a selective redaction issue.
I'll tell you this much.
I had a lot of confidence in the attorney general William Barr.
So the declassification of documents, the president has given authority to Barr.
And I think that's a smart move because it gives it more credibility than if Trump declassified.
Second of all, you mentioned indictments.
The wheels of justice turned very slowly.
I've been a lawyer for 40 years.
I can certainly attest to that.
But finally, you mentioned Collier.
Now, Rosemary Collier, I've talked about before.
She's the uh presiding judge in the FISA court, so she should have immediately when information uh emerged that the FISA court had been lied to about the Carter Page surveillance warrant.
She should have immediately held a hearing demanding from the FBI and the Department of Justice an explanation for their lies to the court, because that's a fraud on the court.
When you deceive them, when you conceal exculpatory information, vital evidence.
That's a lie on the court.
It's a fraud on the court, it's abuse of power, which is a felony.
It's uh conspiracy to defraud.
It's obstruction of justice.
She should have held a hearing.
Too bad she didn't.
I'm Greg Jarrett sitting in for Sean Hannity.
We've got another hour to go.
Stick around.
We'll be right back.
Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity, this beautiful uh Monday, first day of July.
Thanks for being with us.
Uh I finished last night and submitted to my publisher a new book called Witch Hunt.
It is uh essentially A sequel to the first book, The Russia Hoax.
And it was all a big lie that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election.
But as with most political smears, you know, they're all bereft of any proof.
There was nothing in the way of probable cause or reasonable suspicion to believe that Donald Trump had coordinated or collaborated with Moscow to win the White House.
There was no hard evidence.
There was no soft evidence, for goodness sakes.
And the utter dearth of corroboration can only be explained, ladies and gentlemen, in one simple way.
It never happened.
Trump did not conspire, if you like, collude with Russia to influence the election.
There was no clandestine conspiracy.
It was all a grand hoax, the Russia hoax.
And in turn, the hoax begat the witch hunt, which is why I entitled the new book, which you can pre-order, Witch Hunt.
Go to Amazon.com, go to uh Barnes Noble.com, HarperCollins, my publisher.com, uh, or just go to Hannity.com.
There's a link there where you can pre-order the book.
It'll be coming out in a couple of months.
Uh, but it it reveals how this notorious canard evolved, the first seeds of which appear to have been planted by the CIA under the partisan stewardship of director John Brennan, who absolutely loathed Donald Trump and adored Hillary Clinton.
The idea germinated then as Clinton began to sprinkle her campaign speeches with these uh sinister references to her opponent's patriotism, suggesting that Donald Trump had absolute fealty to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
It was rubbish.
But, you know, it tends to arouse the kind of suspicion that only political bombast during an election can create.
But Clinton took it a step further, further.
You know, through a series of discreetly disguised transactions, she hires this British spy by the name of Christopher Steele, who invents the dossier, a series of 17 memos that were penned over a six-month period of time.
And he and Glenn Simpson at Fusion GPS worked furiously to feed it to the media and the FBI and other Obama administration officials to stop Donald Trump from getting elected when it failed, They doubled down, and they attempted to destroy Trump and undo his election.
It is a very difficult thing to unravel the truth Because truth always has its enemies.
And that is some of what is in Witch Hunt, the new book, which again you can pre-order online.
Very happy to have with us one of President Trump's lawyers, Jay Sekolo, uh, who has done yeoman's work, not just representing the president, but filing lawsuits in order to obtain information about corrupt acts in the intelligence community.
And, you know, Jay, great, great having you here with us today.
And one of the one of the amazing things that you've been able to uncover through your lawsuits is there was this furious effort by uh intelligence agency officials to change the rules in the days before Donald Trump uh was sworn into office on inaugurated inauguration day.
Tell us about that.
Well, I mean, it was political panic that set in.
I mean, we we finally, after going in, we had to go to federal court to get it.
But we finally got started to receive the documentation that we asked for, which included emails of people like Samantha Powers, Susan Rice, and others.
And what you see is this pattern where there is a sheer political panic.
You have an email saying uh from Samantha Powers, we only have seven days left, seven seventy long days left to get the job done, pitching uh uh argument to, and this is what I found interesting to see to 60 minutes to try to get a narrative out, which was basically how uh the incoming president was going to ruin our international relations.
And then on the intelligence side, yeah, for eight years the Obama administration operated under Executive Order 1233 with the idea that uh three agencies would have access to what's called raw signal intelligence.
That all changes within day literally days to go of the Obama administration, they change it to 17 additional total of 17 agencies, uh, which allows for, as you know, more leaking, more information sharing, more more nefarious acts.
And all of this is happening with a sense of panic.
So you've got an email from the general counsel over at NSA or DI, director of national intelligence, saying, hey, my boss really wants this to happen and happen soon.
Um another email saying the attorney general is gonna sign off on this.
We've got to make this happen before January 20th.
So what is becoming just crystal clear is that there is no question that the government at that point had put a plan in place to either surveil the incoming administration or surveil and share data with their colleagues that were friendlies.
And I think it's the latter.
I think it wasn't just a to get information, I think it was to share it with with what we would call deep state actors.
So all of this, and by the way, Greg, as you know, two years worth of litigation to get this.
Right.
Um the Department of Justice under the previous administration, as you can imagine, fought very, very aggressively, and then it's changed significantly under um President Trump.
But you still have to go to court to get it because in the agencies there's all these you know attempts to hide the ball.
But the end result, I think it's become clear.
But you know, the one thing we don't know yet, which I think you know, you and I have talked about, is other than Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, we know something else how to kick this thing off, right?
I mean, there's no way this the Pfizer warrants and all of this activity would have happened based on those two guys.
Uh with no disrespect to anybody, but it's just it just seems improbable.
So something else kicked this thing off that they use as a pretext.
And I think it was probably intelligence that they either manufacture, I'm not just talking about the dossier, but dossier-like.
And that's what launched this.
But you know, we're gonna keep digging until we find it.
But there was no question, political panic had struck uh had set in, and just look, their whole narrative, the whole worldview is about to change.
You know, i i it is so astonishing that something like this can happen um in our government.
Uh you know, that that senior officials at the FBI, the Department of Justice can exploit a phony document like the dossier, which is so laughable.
I mean, every time I read it, I never fail to laugh.
I've read it a hundred times.
If I'm feeling down, I I open it up and I read it because I uh you know, I start hysterically laughing.
Um so they use this as a pretext not only to launch their investigation of Donald Trump on July 31st, 2016, in direct violation of regulations that govern initiating a probe, but then they go to a bunch of judges and they lie to them so they can spy on the Trump campaign.
And I love the media always says, oh, but Carter Page had had already left the Trump campaign.
They don't understand that that warrant allowed them to retroactively uh access all of his communications going back into the campaign.
The media wouldn't know that because you know they're dumb uh or malicious or both.
But you know, this is certainly the let me let me say this on that because you bring a really important point.
They based, I mean, they used the Pfizer warrant as justification, and uh for uh rather the steel dossier for justification for the Pfizer bar.
Christopher Steele's testifying under oath, he knew it was unverified, it's lacious, and he told them that.
Ruth Orr, who I'm no fan of because what he was doing with his wife infusion GPS said he warned uh administration officials and on the Obama administration officials, the FBI not to use the dossier as a basis for anything.
And now you got Clapper and Brennan blaming James Comey for this.
We're gonna listen and by the way, with the new with the new U.S. attorney working this thing, uh, I think we're gonna we are gonna find out what happened here.
And it's not gonna be a pretty picture.
You know that.
You can almost paint the scenario already.
Oh, exactly.
You know, it's it's gonna be like a circular firing squad.
They're all gonna blame each other, you know.
And uh and you know, it's not just um the the individuals that you mentioned that that warned the FBI, the Department of Justice that this was phony information.
Kathleen Cavillac, who is a State Department official, meets with uh Christopher Steele, and she quickly determines that he's lying.
He's lying about a major part, you know, saying, Oh, you know, the Russians are are funneling all of this uh through their embassy in Miami.
It doesn't exist.
There is none.
She probably went to Google and and discovered within about 10 seconds there is no Russian embassy down or consulate down in Miami.
I mean, it if she could figure out in in the course of a day, the FBI could have and knew they must have known that this was all fabricated.
You know, that's the first question I want to ask, I want to ask, uh, have the Republicans ask.
I don't know, or a Democrat after that, I don't care who asked it, but so many needs to ask the question to Bob Mueller.
When did he know that there was no collusion conspiracy with the Russians?
Right.
And that's gonna be that's gonna be early on.
You know, because early on, and they were then gonna build, try to build to attack the president.
They were gonna try to build this, you know, obstruction by tweet theory.
I mean, that's what was going on here.
But I sure like to know the answer to that.
I'd like to know the answer to the question of what happened to Peter Strock evidence that he gathered for a year and a half, even though he got ultimately removed from the team.
I'd like to know how Bob Mueller's office allowed his phone to be swiped and wiped clean as if it was Hillary Clinton's server.
Right.
I mean, how did that happen?
How do they not get Greg, you and I are both lawyers, we've practiced law a long time.
How do they not catalog the evidence?
Knowing there being an inquiry.
I mean, could you imagine if someone did that inside the existing administration?
Yeah.
We brought up on charges immediately immediately.
Here it happens, and they get you know, well, I it just happened, and we reissued the phone.
This is absurd.
The American people have been you know, you called it witch hunt, it's that's a good name.
Subtitle, hoodwinked.
I mean, it's like this was something pulled on the American people.
Unf unfortunately, when Bob Mueller issued his report that nobody can understand because it's incoherent, the president's vindicated.
But the fact of the matter is, you know, as I said, no collusion, no conspiracy, no obstruction.
But you know what it was?
A colossal political show.
That's what it was.
Well, the subtitle of uh the book, Witch Hunt, um, is the plot to destroy Trump and Undo His Election.
Because that's really what was at foot here, wasn't it?
Yeah, you know, I had a friend of mine today and um once with a colleague I haven't seen in a long time, and he said, you know, you just handled the biggest attempt of a political takedown in U.S. history.
You know, because you know when you're in it, as you know, I'm you know, I'm in the case, you know, you you you you you focus on the what you've got to do, and you're not looking at the fact that this has been the biggest political case in our country's history, and an attempted takedown of a president.
Yeah.
Based on false information that they knew was false.
That's where this investigation of the investigators has to take place.
That's why it has to take place.
You know, um I was talking to the pres I interviewed him for the book last week.
And and I read to him one of the text messages from Peter Strzok uh to his lover Lisa Page, both at the FBI.
And it was a text that uh struck sent to Paige on the very day that Strzok opened the investigation July 31, 2016.
And I'm I'm just doing this for my memory, but he says he compares the Clinton case, which they had closed that same month to the new investigation of Trump that they'd officially opened that very day, and he said, damn, this matters.
The other one mattered, but only so we didn't F it up.
But this one matters.
Capital Letters matters.
And the president said to me, that text tells me that the whole thing was rigged.
And the president's right.
Yep, no question.
It was the it the it was it was right from the beginning.
But the the good news is in the end result is as I said, um, and we're gonna find out how all this happened.
And uh at the end of the day, there were no charges that could be brought because there was no crimes that were committed.
You know, Uh, this is probably the most frequent question you get asked.
It surely is the one I get asked all the time.
And then people who called in today asked me once again, will anybody be held accountable?
I believe they will, because I believe I believe in the rule of law, and I think William Barr, the attorney general does too.
I think you're 100% correct.
I think it's gonna happen.
I wouldn't have said that a year ago.
I would certainly say it now.
Not only would it be held accountable, but how held accountable, the American people are gonna find out what happened here.
We're gonna know this.
And and and yet, you know, Jay, the media continues to peddle this false narrative.
And they, you know, can you stick around?
I'd like to to ask you uh another couple of questions on the other side.
Can you stick around?
Uh let me yeah, I can.
All right.
Thanks very much.
We'll be right back with Jay Sekulo.
Welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
I'm Greg Jarrett.
Jay Sekolo had to run.
He was late to a meeting, you could kind of tell, right?
But let's that gives us time to go to our callers.
Damon joins us from Indiana.
Hey Damon, how are you?
Okay, good, sir.
Thanks for taking my call.
How are you guys today?
Good, good.
What's up?
Hey, so my question in all this review of evidence and the still dossier, etc.
Why is there I've never heard a single commentator mention why are they not going to go back and look at the situation with Hillary Clinton, the obstruction of justice, uh, etc.
and the clearing of her before there's even an investigation or an interview.
Can you guys comment on that?
Yeah, you know, it's uh that that's a tough one.
Some of the statute of limitations were five years and they've run, and that may have discouraged them.
So, you know, Hillary Clinton, as she often does, beat the clock.
Uh, but you're right.
She committed a variety of felonies, including obstruction of justice for destroying documents, and she mishandled classified uh material, which is also a felony, and she did it a hundred and ten times with a hundred and ten classified documents.
She should have been charged.
But Loretta Lynch and James Comey um saved her.
We'll be right back.
May 3, 2017.
In the afternoon following Comey's testimony before Congress, the president met with McGann, Jeff Sessions, and Sessions Chief of Staff, Jodie Hunt.
This is terrible, Jeff.
It's all because you recused.
Attorney General is supposed to be the most important appointment.
Kennedy appointed his brother.
Obama appointed Holder.
I appointed you, and you recused yourself.
You left me on an island.
I can't do anything.
The president said that the recruit recusal was unfair and that it was interfering with his ability to govern and undermining his authority with foreign leaders.
Sessions responded that he had no choice but to recuse.
And it was mandatory rather than discretionary decision.
Steve Bannon recalled.
Steve Bannon recalled that the president brought Comey up with him at least eight times on May 3rd and May 4th.
The president said the same thing each time.
He told me three times.
I'm not under investigation.
He's a showboater.
He's a grandstander.
I don't know any Russians.
There was no collusion.
Bannon told the president he could not fire Comey because that ship had sailed.
The president's personal counsel called McGann's attorney and said that the president wanted McGann to put out a statement denying that he had been asked to fire the special counsel and that he had threatened to quit in protest.
McGahn's attorney spoke with McGahn about that request and then called the president's personal counsel to relay that McGahn would not make such a statement.
You got to love that.
I mean, what a bunch of knuckleheads.
These are liberal actors who did a dramatic reading of their favorite sections of the Mueller report, which is, frankly, a tepid bore, disorganized, contradictory, schizophrenic.
So schizophrenic, you'll get whiplash, I guarantee you.
It's guaranteed reading for insomniacs.
It'll put you to sleep.
But you've got all the liberals there who have cherry picked certain parts of it.
And it's so easy to dispute and disabuse each and every one of the ones that they But I'll just take One example, you know, the dramatic reading of how the recusal of Attorney General Jeff Sessions was mandatory.
No, it wasn't.
And in fact, he violated the regulations in recusing himself.
Why?
The regulations, if you actually read them, uh only apply to criminal investigations.
They do not apply to a counterintelligence investigation, which it was at the time of the wrongful recusal.
Remember the testimony of uh of James Cummie, who described before Congress that it was a counterintelligence investigation.
Now, for for those of you uh who may not have read my book, The Russia Hoax, I explain it.
And it's very simple.
A criminal investigation is to determine whether there is any evidence of a crime, a counterintelligence investigation, is either the FBI or other agencies in the intelligence community gathering evidence of uh foreign conduct that would be helpful to the president for national security purposes.
In other words, the beneficiary of a counterintelligence investigation is the president.
Uh, and it is a completely different animal than a criminal investigation.
But the regulations are clear.
There's no recusal in a counterintelligence investigation.
So the feckless sessions was snookered by somebody uh in the Department of Justice when he recused himself.
He didn't have to.
It wasn't mandatory.
In fact, it was totally inappropriate and wrong.
And the president knew this, and you know, Sessions wouldn't know it because, you know, it's Jeff Sessions.
It's as dumb as the day is long.
Should ne I mean, and the president will tell you this, that it was the biggest mistake he's ever made with speaking to guy like Jeff Sessions.
You know, it's easy to be a United States senator.
You're one of a hundred guys and you don't do much.
But, you know, to be the attorney general of the United States, you actually have to be smart and competent.
Uh you have to really know the law.
I've forgotten more about the law than Jeff Sessions will ever know.
Uh so that was the president's biggest mistake, and he'll tell you that.
Let's go to our uh callers.
Uh on the line is Steve from Florida.
Steve, how are you?
Hey, how's it going, Greg?
Uh what you should watch out for is a surprise when Muller gets to testify on July 17th, that either Nadler or Chef are gonna pull something that they don't allow Republicans to ask any question.
And these guys are running the committees, and they've stepped in it by allowing Mueller to testify.
It's only gonna backfire, and those guys really have no choice other than to just shut up and silence the Republicans.
Yeah, you know, it's gonna be an interesting dynamic.
There's gonna be two hearings, uh, one by the Intelligence Committee, the other the Judiciary Committee, separate hearings.
Muller's gonna testify in a single day before both.
So that tells you pretty much it's it's only gonna be superficial.
His staff need to cut the time down.
Right.
The staff will be testifying behind closed doors because they are allegedly going to be asked questions about the counterintelligence uh nature of the case, which which is really strange since a special counsel only investigates crimes and not counterintelligence cases.
Uh so you know, go figure.
Let's go to our next caller, Pat joins us from New York.
Pat, uh thanks for holding on the line.
Uh, what's your question?
Fruit of the poisonous tree.
Uh-huh.
When it's found out that this uh these warrants was uh obtained um uh illegally.
Illegally.
Well, well, we'll flinwalk, will Manafort walk, and the other one that's sitting no, uh here here's here's the problem.
Um if you're talking about the Pfizer warrants and fruit of the points in his tree, if you if you gain a warrant illegally or by illegal means false representations to a court, then uh the fruit of that warrant um cannot be used in a court of law against anybody.
But the problem is uh they didn't get anything out of surveilling Carter Page.
Uh so the only question I would have, and and and this is a good one, Pat, is were they actually engaged in secret surveillance of Michael Flynn?
And I think the answer is yes, but we don't have confirmation of that.
But it seems likely to me that the FBI was not only surveilling Carter Page, but I think they were engaged in some acts of surveillance and monitoring of other individuals like George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn.
We know they were listening to Michael Flynn's conversation with ambassador Sergei Kisliak.
Um but but that was sort of a different animal.
And then it of course it was unmasked and leaked in order to damage Flynn and in turn Donald Trump.
So the question is if all of that was being done uh illegally and improperly without the sufficient uh predicate, then yeah, then charges could be dropped.
You know, the I I have a feeling that the judge who presides over the Michael Flynn case will want to take and has been taking his time to better examine what really unfolded.
Because as you know, Michael Flynn actually told the truth, according to the FBI agents who interviewed him.
And yet Mueller thought he knew better than everybody else and charged him with lying and and Flynn out of money, had to sell his house.
They were threatening his his wife and son, you know, through in the towel.
And who wouldn't?
I mean, I suppose I would.
You start threatening my family.
But that just shows you the extent to which uh the unscrupulous and unprincipled Robert Muller and his team of partisans will go in order to try to gain information against Donald Trump, and they hated him and they wanted to bring him down.
Let's go to our next caller, Eric, joins us in Maryland.
Hey, Eric, how are you?
I'm good.
Uh thanks for chronicling all this, Greg.
Um, I wanted to call though, because you mentioned statute of limitations, and you know, I'm not 100% sure, but I believe uh having special access programs on your outside of the skiff is uh doesn't have a statute of limitations, and when you destroy evidence, I believe that's a continuation of a crime, and that doesn't end statute of limitations either.
It could be there's there's a it depends on which statute you're looking at, and I go through all of the statutes in my book, uh the Russia hoax.
Some of them are five-year statute of limitations, some of them are unlimited.
So your point is is actually well taken.
While some may have lapsed, um others are continuing.
And so I I to answer the earlier caller's question, I hope that Attorney General Barr and John Durham, in addition to looking at the corrupt acts of people at the FAI and the Department of Justice, also go further back and extend it into the Hillary Clinton campaigns or the Hillary Clinton's email scandal, because she broke uh a variety of laws.
I mean, she should have been charged with more than a hundred crimes.
And you know, it was only because of Loretta Lynch and James Comey uh contorting the facts and twisting the law that uh she skated.
And it's you know, it's as simple as that.
I have talked to so many lawyers and former FBI people who were uh appalled at what Comey did.
That the, you know, had this been presented to a grand jury, and it wasn't, there would have been a myriad of indictments against Hillary Clinton.
But it's abundantly clear they wanted her to be president, they had to absolve her in order to accomplish that objective, and they did it.
And it was wrong.
Yeah.
Oh, it's definitely wrong.
When you have an SAP program on your server at home, uh that's that's beyond serious.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, it's terrible.
Eric, thanks very much.
Let me squeeze in one more caller.
Um, joining us now is Aaron from Colorado.
Hey, Aaron, how are you?
Hey, uh, my question is I'm I'm concerned about verbiage.
Would be why was Comey conspiring to get Hillary in office with his co-conspirator McCabe and Lynch and all that.
What crimes did they commit that they needed Hillary in office?
Well, I don't think for the eight years of Obama.
I I I argue my new book, Witch Hunt, which you can buy on pre-sale uh on the internet, Amazon or Barnes and Noble or HarperCollins.
Uh or even just go to Hannity.com.
You'll see a link there where you can buy the book.
But I make the argument that um these are people who uh were addicted to power.
It's like crack cocaine.
And they knew that uh if Hillary Clinton is elected president of the United States, they get to all keep their jobs.
Clapper, Brennan, uh, James Comey and McCabe.
And like I think they were doing crimes and they had to conspire, not collude.
Well, I think their crimes were in clearing Hillary Clinton, and then uh going after Donald Trump by abusing their position of power for political reasons, which is deprivation of rights under color of law.
You can look it up.
And a bunch of other crimes as well.
But um they did it because they wanted to perpetuate their own power.
I mean, power corrupts.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely, is the old saying, and it is so true.
These people uh watch Donald Trump vow that he would drain the swamp.
They were the swamp, they didn't want to be drained, so they were gonna drain him.
We're gonna pause, take a quick break.
We'll be right back with more of the Sean Hannity show.
I'm Greg Jarrett.
Welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
I'm Greg Jarrett, wrapping it up now.
We've spent a lot of time talking about the Russia hoax.
Um, which begat the witch hunt, which is the title of my new book.
I just actually turned in the manuscript to the uh publisher.
Uh we'll be doing some edits over the next couple of weeks, then it'll go to print.
It'll be out in bookstores in about two or three months.
And you can pre-order it uh online.
It's called Witch Hunt, the plot to destroy Trump and undo his election.
Make it easier on yourself and just go to Hannity.com.
There's a link there where you can uh go to a website and pre-order the book.
But uh it's all about how corrupt government officials abuse their positions of power to try to interfere in the election so that Hillary Clinton would win and Donald Trump wouldn't.
And when that failed, they then plotted to destroy him and remove him from office.
It is the dirtiest political trick in modern American history.
It was all a con.
It didn't exist.
And the Mueller report proves it.
There was no criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign or Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin that was hatched in the bowels of the Kremlin.
Didn't happen.
And now let's hope that the attorney general of the United States gets to the bottom of it and holds accountable all of the people at the FBI, the Department of Justice, and the intelligence agencies like the DNI and the CIA hold them accountable for their wrongful conduct.
