All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 25, 2019 - Sean Hannity Show
01:41:20
President Trump Supports Transparency

President Trump made key announcements today supporting full transparency into the hoax that has "whistleblowers" coming after the White House.  Plus, Bill O'Reilly stops by to share the latest on the House investigations.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.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, glad you're with us.
Write down our toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of this extravaganza.
It is 800-941 Sean.
If you want to join us, you know, I got two groups of people contacting me.
Those that are nervous.
What does it mean?
What does it mean?
Look what they're saying on fake news, CNN, and the networks and everything else.
What do you think?
And then I got the other group of people that are just rightly very pissed off and angry because they see this for what it all is.
There is no objective soul on the face of this earth that could ever.
Now, remember, you got to look at the timeline here.
And they called for impeachment yesterday.
Now, an official impeachment inquiry.
Well, okay, the day before it was a probe.
It's been ongoing pretty much every second, every minute of every hour of every day.
It's there's nothing that has changed here.
And from the political perspective, Nancy Pelosi was able to kind of pull the wool over everybody's eyes and say, this is different.
It's not different.
It's more of the same.
It is rage, Trump, hate.
You know, I want to flash you back and remind you, you know, let's go back to May.
Remember, Congressman Al Green, I'm concerned if we don't impeach the president, he's going to get reelected.
And he said that on the conspiracy channel, MSDNC.
He said, hey, he's concerned.
We don't impeach this president.
He's going to get re-elected.
And he was asked the question by whatever radical leftist extension of the Democratic Socialist Party.
You've been calling for starting articles of impeachment since 2017.
A new Quinnipiac poll taken after the release of the redacted Mueller report says 66% say Congress should not start impeachment proceedings.
There's a sharp partisan divide with only 4% Republicans favoring impeachment.
Are you afraid this talk will help the president's reelection?
Quote, Al Green, Congressman, I'm concerned that if we don't impeach this president, he will get re-elected.
If we don't impeach him, he will say that he's been vindicated.
He will say the Democrats, because we're too stupid to figure out what all these socialists know, the Democrats had an overwhelming majority in the House and didn't take up impeachment.
He will say we have a constitutional duty to do it for if it was there and we didn't.
And he will say he is vindicated.
The Mueller report vindicated him.
That's why they came out first.
The first thing they did.
No, no, no.
We're going to impeach him regardless of whether there's any quid pro quo.
There is no quid pro quo.
You know, I don't care any way you read this, and every single solitary attorney, constitutional expert that I talk to in every way, is all saying the same thing.
They read the transcript, they read it over carefully.
What is the operative language that they're fixated on?
Donald Trump says, Well, I would like you to find out what happened.
Well, he had every right to find out why the prosecutor was fired after the vice president of the United States threatened to leverage U.S. tax dollars from Ukraine if they don't fire this guy.
Why would a vice president ever do that?
There's not even a hint of outrage in the mob about any of this.
It's the same selective, phony, moral outrage that they show on every issue.
They don't care about Russian interference or foreign interference unless they can bludgeon Trump.
If it's Trump-Russia collusion, which didn't exist, we have four investigations.
They never got what they wanted because it never happened.
Four separate investigations, and they didn't get it.
So they never cared about Hillary's dirty Russian dossier, likely Russian disinformation from the beginning.
Obstruction, obstruction, obstruction.
Well, there's no bigger slam-dunk case on obstruction than Hillary's subpoenaed emails and what she did thereafter.
That's the biggest obstruction case in the whole world.
You know, just like, you know, where are all the I believers with the lieutenant governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia?
None of them.
It wasn't about women's issues.
It was about bludgeoning Donald Trump's pick for the U.S. Supreme Court.
This is all selective moral outrage.
I'll give you an example of all this.
And then we're going to go over this in a lot of detail here.
You know, I think that a really good job of analyzing this because it's hard when you're on a day like today, when you're absorbing so much information, you're coming on the air, you're trying to do it.
You know, sometimes simple is better.
And I was reading Kimberly Strossel, and she says, All right, I read Donald Trump's Ukraine release.
This is another internal attempt to take out the president on the basis of another non-smoking gun.
And that's what this is.
This is about everything that happens from now until November 2020 is all about politics.
All of it.
All of it is about election.
It doesn't matter what anybody else tells you.
And the interesting thing is, the reason I don't have even a speck of fear within me about how any of this plays out because there's no there.
It just, we've got the whole transcript.
And what they're going to do is what they always do.
They're going to overreach.
They're going to misinterpret.
Kimberly goes on as the transcript itself says, as to call the transcript itself, the actual Trump favor is Ukraine look backwards to what happened in the 2016 election.
Remember, the mob didn't report what we reported, and John Solomon reported.
And John will join us later in the program, and Jay Sekula will also join us.
And we expect the president may speak during the course of this program.
But John Solomon said the Ukraine is begging us to give us information that they actively tried to influence our elections to help Hillary.
And all the people that were feigning moral outrage over Trump-Russia collusion, they didn't care Ukraine was trying to help Hillary.
How ironic that the New York Times finally admits, yeah, the dirty dossier she paid for with Russian lies, yeah, that was put together by a foreign MI, former MI6 agent.
Yeah, that one, that was likely Russian disinformation from the beginning.
And then it got worse, of course, because then they used it as the bulk of data in the application for the FISA warrant to spy on Trump, the candidate, his transition team, and Trump the president.
Anyway, so Kim goes on and says, well, Trump says good, expresses worries that a worries that a good prosecutor was shut down.
Now, hang on a second.
Why was this guy, why did this happen to this guy?
Why was this prosecutor fired?
Now, if you care about corruption and you care about truth and you care about telling the truth, I would think that's that's a pretty big deal for a lot of people that Joe Biden's son, who had no experience whatsoever, none, Joe Biden's son was making millions of dollars in a, what, 18, 19 month period and consulting Barice Maholdings.
Well, that's the company that the prosecutor that he demanded be fired.
That's the one he was looking into.
And even Joe Biden was warned by the New York Times, yeah, they're investigating your son.
He goes, well, that's my son's problem.
No, it wasn't because he was going to make pretty darn sure this prosecutor got fired.
And that's a big part of the conversation.
You look at the transcript and Strassel again, Trump's favor.
He's asking Ukraine to look at what happened in the 2016 election.
Yeah, because they did try to interfere.
They've been telling us they tried to interfere.
A legitimate ask since election meddling was the focus of everybody, you know, up until the Mueller letdown.
And Kimberly points out that we find out this morning that the Attorney General, a choice, Attorney John Durham, is looking at what role Ukraine played in the FBI investigation.
Here we go.
Now we're getting close because we know what the answer is.
And that was they wanted dirt on the Trump campaign and more specifically Paul Manafort.
So the Democrats were seeking, actively seeking the help of a foreign nation, the very thing they're whining about now that Trump didn't do, they themselves did.
And anyway, they're finding out that he's looking at that role.
And it was Zelensky who brought up Rudy Giuliani, not the president.
You know, he can't wait to meet him.
He's heard a lot about him.
And he referenced the investigation as he goes on to promise that all investigations will be done openly and candidly.
And what he's saying is, is that we want to clean up our swamp like you cleaned up your swamp and are cleaning up your swamp.
And Trump says, yeah, good.
Good.
I'm glad you're doing that.
And then he expressed the worried about worries about why an innocent, good prosecutor was shut down.
How did that happen?
How did a vice president leverage taxpayer dollars?
That's a fair question.
That is something that we need to understand deeply.
Donald Trump never did that.
Now, what all of these people that are out there doing this, they can't eat.
They're so blinded by rage, they cannot even see their own rage, psychosis, hypocrisy.
And Trump's reference to Julian, it's, you know, he's a great guy.
You're going to like him.
He's a really good guy.
Now, he does say he will have Giuliani in the AG call.
That never happened.
I'll get to that in a minute.
And by the way, never mind the fact that the DOJ says in their statement, the president has not spoken to the AG.
He never talked to Bob Barr about investigating Biden and talking to the Ukrainian president, not once.
And he never asked the AG to contact the Ukraine.
Oh, okay.
And the IG back in August referred this to the DOJ as a potential violation of campaign finance law, which, by the way, he would be able to do based on whistleblower's complaint.
Criminal division evaluated, determined, no violation.
All relevant components agree with the legal conclusion.
And it's not a whistleblower at all.
And we're learning a lot about that person as well.
So when you break it down to its brass tax, it gets pretty interesting.
Here's another little side bit, considering Joe Biden was up to his eyeballs and firing a prosecutor that was investigating the company that was paying his son who had no experience with Ukraine or the energy industry that they were responsible for.
Now, millions of dollars being paid out to somebody that knows nothing about what you do and has no experience in your country.
That's a lot of money.
Just like the whole issue of China with Hunter Biden again flying on Air Force 2 two weeks after he gets back, he gets a billion-dollar contract with him and John Kerry's stepson and Whitey Bolger's son.
Yeah, the murdering guy in Boston.
Anyway, so the demand we have written by Democrats, well, they demanded in a letter which came from Robert Menendez, Dick Durbin, Pat Leahy, and in a piece by Mark Thieson in the Washington Post.
And Speaker of the House Pelosi, remember, she declared yesterday that the mere possibility that Trump had asked Ukraine to continue an investigation of Biden, even without a quid pro quo, because there is no quid pro quo.
Anyone telling you there is one, they are making it up out of thin air.
I have read it.
I've read it again, and I've read it again after that.
Enough to trigger the impeachment inquiry, whether there was no quid pro quo, because Pelosi was getting rumblings, there isn't one, and there wasn't.
And anyway, he had forced Ukraine to remove their prosecutor.
Not one of the people condemning Trump is condemning their lead candidate for the 2020 presidential nomination.
That shouldn't surprise you.
Then in that letter, they go on to explain how much they really love to offer their support of Ukraine.
And then they were concerned that Ukraine closed four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe.
So these senators are writing, don't close these investigations.
And then in their letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake if they did shut down the investigations.
Oh, a quid pro quo.
Describing themselves, we're strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine.
The Democratic senators declare this is only 2018.
And we've supported and are disappointed that some appear to have cast aside some principles to avoid the ire of Trump.
And then they demanded that they reverse course and reopen the investigations to help Mueller and halt efforts to impede cooperation.
And then it went on to say, and this is the money line here, the reported refusal to cooperate with the Mueller probe sends a worrying signal to the Ukrainian people as well as international community about your government's commitment to support justice and the rule of law.
They did it.
Trump didn't do it.
They did the very thing.
Senators did it.
Biden did it.
And the people that when we get to the bottom of, yes, who in the DNC was seeking, soliciting, actively looking for the Ukrainian government to provide dirt to help elect Hillary Clinton.
That happened too.
And that will be revealed in the days and weeks ahead.
But nothing's going to happen to the president.
He's not getting impeached.
You know, we're going to hear a lot of nothing.
You're going to say the same people that have been lying are going to continue lying.
Same new conspiracy, just replace Ukraine for Russia.
You got the same story, except less.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hammond.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
We're going to take the time on this program.
I'll do it in the next half hour to actually go through all of this because it gets, I'm just going to read it because there's nothing wrong with this phone call.
Not a single thing.
And I just want to get to the issue of the Department of Justice because, well, you asked about Donald Trump should, you know, I want you to talk to Rudy and the Attorney General.
Okay, the Department of Justice released this statement.
The Attorney General was first notified of the president's conversation with the Ukrainian President Zelensky several weeks after the call took place when the DOJ learned of a potential referral.
The president has not spoken with the Attorney General about having Ukraine investigate anything related to former Vice President Biden or his son.
The president has not asked the Attorney General to contact Ukraine on this or any other matter.
The Attorney General has not communicated with Ukraine on this or any other subject, nor has the Attorney General discussed this matter or anything related to Ukraine with Rudy Giuliani.
And a Department of Justice team led by U.S. Attorney John Durham is separately exploring the extent to which a number of countries, including Ukraine, played a role in the counterintelligence directed at the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.
While the Attorney General is yet to contact Ukraine in connection with this investigation, certain Ukrainians who are not members of the government have volunteered information to Mr. Durham, which he is evaluating.
Let me translate.
The Democrats sought Ukraine's help, and Ukraine has evidence that they tried to influence our elections in 2016.
How do I know?
Because I'm smarter than the mob.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hammond, and I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, as we continue 800-941, Sean, you want to be a part of the program.
Yeah, by the way, the White House releasing the document showing the Intel community watchdog found the whistleblower had a political bias.
Oh, the whistleblower was not a whistleblower that had a political agenda.
The deep state stabbing Trump in the back again.
And it turns out the whistleblower's lawyers we now know, oh, interesting from the Washington Examiner, work for a group that offers to pay officials who leak against Trump.
Anonymous U.S. intelligence official accusing the president with secondhand information, not a whistleblower, of improperly pressuring Ukraine to investigate Biden is represented by two lawyers who run a group that offer financial help to fired whistleblowers.
Whistleblower aid launched in September 2017, eight months after the president's inauguration.
And that also with the advertising blitz that involved mobile billboards being driven close to the White House, Congress, the Pentagon, around headquarters of Langley, CIA, NSA.
They have pledged support in addition to free legal representation and rent and mortgage assistance and media coaching and doctors' bills and counseling is, yeah, critics say it violates attorneys' ethics.
Sounds to me that's like taking, you know, slip and fall to a whole new level on the surface.
But anyway, it was founded by a veteran attorney, Mark Said, and whistleblower, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
All right.
And the White House seeks a deal for the whistleblower to speak to Congress.
White House intelligence officials, they're working out a plan to release this.
We'll wait and see.
None of this matters because we have the actual transcript.
All of it has been delivered as the president promised.
This is a bad precedent, by the way, and I'll tell you why, because that means there's not going to be ever any president that talks to a foreign leader where the foreign leader is not very careful and you can't have a frank, open conversation, which impedes the enumerated power in the Constitution of the president to be the commander in chief.
And Republicans, of course, they rightly say this was in the Hill that any articles of impeachment from the House.
And I don't think they're going to get them.
And I don't even think Nancy Pelosi will ever call the role.
I don't think Nancy, Nancy Pelosi is threading a needle.
The radicals are going to remove her if she didn't give in to this impeachment frenzy.
She had no reason.
They were looking for a reason after Mueller collapsed on them.
Corey Lewandowski collapsed on them.
They were making up reasons.
They were going to find a reason.
And this comes off.
That's the reason.
And they called for the impeachment even long before they ever knew any of the facts in this case.
You know, if you look outside the bubble, even Politico picked up on this.
You got a dozen Democratic Party officials.
They're watching this madness.
And you watch their strategist and they're calculating what the price is going to be at the polls.
And it is unpopular all across the country except for those bubbles of New York, D.C., Los Angeles, and San Francisco.
And that is very unpopular.
And Democratic officials are screaming bloody murder that it's playing into the president's hands in the election.
And of course, I want impeachment from a moral perspective, said one guy from New Hampshire, a director for Pete Butta Judge's presidential campaign.
But from a political perspective, I don't want to spend a year talking about how Democrats tried to impeach him and couldn't pull it off.
Instead of healthcare, this guy's not stupid because I don't see anybody that's elected in Congress.
They haven't done anything for three years except try to impeach Trump and investigate, investigate, and push lies, untruths, conspiracy theories, and a hoax.
And so you even have Senate Democrats.
They're weighing in on this.
You know, you got the always sanctimonious Chucky Schumer announcing that he'd support Nancy if they decide to go on their kamikaze impeachment mission.
But apparently a lot of Schumer's colleagues, they're not ready to jump over the cliff.
There was a Hill article on this.
Several of these Democrats are cautious about any of what's going on.
John Tester, Democrat Montana, you know, he urged his party, get some facts first, particularly from the Inspector General.
It's the House.
I think we need to get the IG report.
We can see what's in that.
Pressed on impeachment and whether it was politically risky.
My point is you can talk about impeachment all you want.
We need to get facts.
Ben Cardin, same.
Joe Manchin, he's not taking a position.
Chris Coons arguing that it's critical for us to get to the bottom.
Why aren't they interested in what Biden did?
Why aren't they interested in Hillary's Russian, you know, dossier, Russian interference she paid for?
Why aren't they interested in that dirty, unverified dossier used to spy on a presidential campaign transition and then presidency?
The DOJ, by the way, concluded president was not asking of anything of value.
That came out also today.
Senior Department of Justice official, the only criminal violation being considered was the campaign finance law and the DOJ's criminal division concluded the best evidence did not and could not make any criminal finance violation under the statute.
You know, you have also the whistleblower's attorney once worked for the Trump impeachment cheerleader, Hillary Clinton.
Whoopsie daisy.
Well, shocking.
They have an agenda.
Longtime Democratic strategist calls impeachment a disaster for the party.
And that would be Hank Shinkoff.
He's not an idiot.
I can tell you that.
I don't agree with him, but he's not an idiot.
He said it's a national spectacle that will make either people either defend the presidency or tune out.
The incessant banging about it doesn't help.
Stick with the issues.
Even Bob Mulholland, Democratic National Committee member, said absent Trump being caught in a trunk with a young boy impeachment is a political disaster for us Democrats.
I don't know if exactly I'd agree with that, but whatever.
But this is where they now see this for what it is.
You know what this is?
New York Post had a great headline on this.
It's like a lousy sequel to their Russian collusion controversy and conspiracy theories.
I mean, it's like a bad knockoff.
And they, except this time, they weren't going to wait.
We don't need a special.
We're just going to go right to it all.
That's what we're going to do.
And how's this impacting the 2020 election?
Well, meet the Democrats' new impeachment cheerleader.
That's Hillary Clinton.
She's joined in.
Let's impeach him.
Biden's lead is collapsing in another national poll.
And I think the Democrats have already decided Biden's done.
There's no way he's fit to make this run.
Now they're going to plan B, and plan B for them seems to be Elizabeth Warren.
So if Biden is collateral damage in their attempt to draw this into Trump, they don't care.
Polls showing Biden in trouble in the first three primary states.
Yikes.
That would be, okay, we know the caucus state of Iowa.
Well, Biden's now trailing Elizabeth Warren officially.
And he's trailing, by the way, in the first primary state of New Hampshire.
His South Carolina, what we call the firewall, is showing signs of cracking there as well.
And I think it's only going to be, you know, and Trump, according to Rasmussen, leads Biden by four points.
Biden's done.
Democrats are going to throw him overboard over the whole thing.
They don't want any part of it.
So he's in trouble pretty much all across the board.
Sanders, by the way, oh, we have a great thing from him today.
Billionaires should not exist.
Now he's going to up the wealth tax.
Now, remember, that's the other bite at the apple after you paid just 65 cents in New York of every dollar you make in taxes.
And now they're going to come back if you save too much money.
Well, he's going to take 8% more.
They're going to legalize stealing.
We're going to empower our government to steal other people's citizens' money so they can pay for their radical $94 trillion, you know, new green deal and get rid of cars and oil and gas, the lifeblood of our economy.
Notice Biden yesterday.
Biden, he didn't want to take any questions.
Biden knows the minute he really gets questioned, it all goes back to Hunter now, doesn't it?
And Hunter Biden, and he had no experience.
And the amount of money is obscene on every level.
And I don't think they're ever going to be able to overcome that.
All right.
So let me go through this.
I'm not going to spend a lot of time on the.
All right.
Congratulations, the president says on your great victory.
We all watched.
You did a terrific job.
You came from behind.
You weren't given much of a chance.
You won easily.
Congratulations.
Yeah, you're absolutely right.
We did win big, worked hard.
And I got to confess, I had an opportunity to learn from you.
This is President Zelensky.
We use quite a few of your skills and knowledge, and we're able to use it as an example in our election.
And we're in a unique position that we were able to achieve unique success.
And I am able to tell you the following.
The first time you called me to congratulate me when I won the presidential election, the second time you're now calling me when my party won the parliamentary election.
I think I should run more often so you can call me more often.
They're having a friendly call.
Trump, laughing.
Very good idea.
I think your country is very happy about that.
Yes, sir.
To tell you the truth, we're trying to work hard because we want to drain the swamp here in our country.
We brought in many new people, not the old politicians, not the typical politicians.
We want to have a new format and a new type of government.
You're a great teacher for us in that.
President says, well, it's very nice of you to say.
I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine and we spend a lot of effort, a lot of time, much more than your European countries are doing.
And they should be helping you more than we are, more than they are.
Germany does almost nothing for you.
All they do is talk.
That's Trump.
I think it's something that you should really ask them about.
When I was speaking to Angela Merkel, this is the president.
She talks Ukraine, but she doesn't do anything.
A lot of European countries are the same.
It's something that you may want to look at, but the United States has been very good to Ukraine.
I wouldn't say it.
I wouldn't say that it's reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good, but the United States has been very good to Ukraine.
President's fighting for his country.
Any problem with that?
I don't have any.
Yes, you're absolutely right.
Not only 100%, 1,000%.
I can tell you the following.
I talked to Merkel.
I did meet with her.
I also met and talked with Macron.
I told them that they're not doing quite as much as they need to be doing on the issues with sanctions.
They're not enforcing the sanctions.
They're not working as much as they should work for Ukraine.
It turns out that even though logically the European Union should be our biggest partner, technically it's the United States is a much bigger partner than the European Union.
And I'm very grateful to you for that because the United States is doing quite a lot for Ukraine, much more than the European Union, especially when we're talking about sanctions against the Russian Federation, et cetera, et cetera.
And I'd like to thank you for your support on defense.
We're already continuing to cooperate for the next step specifically.
Almost ready to buy more javelins from the United States for defense purposes.
President said, I would like you to do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.
Now, remember, John Solomon talked about they have evidence of election interference in 2016.
Remember that.
Nobody else in the mob reported it.
They wanted to give it to us.
Nobody was taking it.
And I'd like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine.
They say crowd strike.
I guess you have one of your wealthy people, the server.
He's like, I don't know what it is.
Ukraine has it or something.
There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation.
And I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people.
I would like to have the attorney general call on you or your people.
Now, remember, president knows about the election interference evidence where the Ukraine is admitting that they helped Hillary Clinton.
That's a big part of it.
And I'd like to have the Attorney General call you or people or your people.
And I'd like to get to the bottom of the truth.
Okay, now I go back to what I said at the beginning of the program.
I talked to an awful lot of lawyers today.
There's not one.
One constitutional attorney friend of mine said the operative language, I would like you to find out what happened.
And he said he had every right to find out why the prosecutor was fired, every right to find out if there was election interference, any right to find out.
President's been watching all these investigations, and he saw Biden working to fire the prosecutor.
So I think what the president is doing here is the right thing for us.
And then he goes on to say, let's see, he'll ask you a call.
Now, we know that the Attorney General was never told a thing by the president.
Then he said, there's a lot to talk about Biden's son.
Now, how did he know that?
Because Biden stopped the prosecution, Trump says, and a lot of people, a lot of people want to find out about that.
So whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.
In other words, did he leverage American tax dollars?
Did he sell out this country to save his son from an investigation when he's getting paid millions of dollars in a field that he has no experience, the country he has no experience with, no energy experience, no gas experience, and that country is being corrupt.
And that Biden stopped the prosecution, stopped it, went around bragging that he stopped the prosecutor.
He said, it sounds horrible to me if you can look into it.
Okay, what's wrong with that?
Why shouldn't the United States know that?
That's all they got.
And then Zelensky goes, well, I wanted to tell you about the prosecutor.
And I understand and I'm knowledgeable about the situation since we won the majority in the parliament.
The next prosecutor general is going to be a good candidate.
We'll be approved by the parliament.
We'll start as a new prosecutor in September.
He or she will look into the situation specifically to the company that you mentioned on this issue because he knows corruption took place there.
And that was the end of it.
And it gets into he brings up Giuliani.
It wasn't the president that brought up Giuliani at that point.
It was the President Zelensky that brought him up.
And that's pretty much the whole thing.
And that's it.
Do we not have a right to know if the Democrats enlisted Ukraine?
I think we do in every way, shape, manner, and form to influence our elections.
I thought the Democrats cared about foreign election interference.
They don't.
It's like they don't care about Russian interference unless it's Trump, not Hillary's dossier.
They don't care about obstruction unless it's Trump, not Hillary's subpoenaed emails.
They don't care about spying and using the powerful weaponry of intelligence to spy and outsource intelligence gathering on the president, candidate, transition team to other countries to circumvent our loans.
They don't care about that either.
They don't care about anything unless they can bludgeon Trump.
Me too, I believe only if you can bludgeon Trump.
Not if it's the lieutenant governor of the great Commonwealth of Virginia.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Ham.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, glad you're with us.
Toll-free, our telephone number is 800-941 Sean.
If you want to be a part of the program, we're waiting.
The president's going to make some comments.
When he does, we will bring it to you.
Now that the release of the conversation, and still, I say this is a very dangerous thing for the future of the country.
But now that we've read through it all and we've gone into great specificity and detail, what did we hear?
Nothing.
No quid pro quo.
Nothing like what we have on Joe Biden bragging about.
Nothing about, oh, yeah, the Ukrainians and John Solomon will be with us at the bottom of the hour saying, yeah, they want to give us information how they tried to impact the 2016 election to get Hillary Clinton.
Anyway, Jay Seculo, chief counsel, American Center for Law and Justice and counsel to the president.
Jay, welcome to the program.
I actually tuned into your radio program today and I was listening to your take and I thought it was a good idea.
You went line by line through the entire conversation and I don't see anything that's problematic in any way, shape, matter, or form.
How do you interpret this?
I think you're 100% correct.
And I literally went on our broadcast, I went line by line through this with a team of lawyers that include former U.S. attorneys that are experts in international law as well.
And we went line by line.
And by the way, the whole reference to Joe Biden that's in this 30-minute conversation, let's say assume about half of that was with translators, so 15, 20 minutes, whatever it might have been.
The entire reference to Joe Biden as Joe Biden and his son, I read it.
It takes about 14 seconds.
If you doubled it to say the other references, it would have been 30 seconds.
There's a lot of conversations about energy independence.
There's a lot of congratulations about him winning the election.
There's a lot about the EU not doing enough to help the Ukraine.
There is a couple of references.
The president of Ukraine brings up the issue of Mayor Giuliani, my colleague, Rudy Giuliani, saying he's talked to us about or talked to some of my assistants about corruption.
The president says we're concerned about corruption, those kind of statements.
And if you look at it in both individually, line by line, and then in context, this is rather unremarkable.
And the Democrats launched this impeachment inquiry.
By the way, it's been the same inquiry for four months.
It's just now it's formal inquiry, whatever that means, nothing.
You look at it and you say, they did this before they got the transcript.
Now we've released to the, at least the classified version is going over to the Senate of the whistleblower complaint.
We hope to have out the rest of that.
I know they hope to have out either later today or tomorrow morning.
And then you take a look at the fact that Senators Menendez, Durbin, and Patrick Leahy wrote a letter to the Ukraines.
This is to Ukraine's prosecutor general, expressing concern at four investigations being closed by the prosecutor involving the presidents or associates of the president or how it would impact the Mueller investigation.
And they said this could affect our bilateral support, our bipartisan support for Ukraine.
Then take it a step further, and this is another aspect of it.
You have Joe Biden bragging about the fact that he had the ability to get a prosecutor fired who was investigating his son's business and this company he was on.
And he's bragging about it.
So let's cut the double standard nonsense.
They got nothing out of Mueller because there was nothing there.
They got nothing out of their obstruction hearing or whatever that was last week with Corey Lewandowski.
Nothing there.
Oh, now we've got Ukraine.
Except when you get the transcript, there's nothing there.
Why is there nothing there?
Because this is a perfectly normal conversation that a president would have with another president.
It's that straightforward.
But again, Sean, what I did was I went line, you know it because I know you told me you were tuning in, went line by line through it so there would be no misunderstandings.
You know, it is just a continuation.
I would argue it's more than four months.
I mean, this has now been going on a long time.
And the Mueller report didn't come out the way they wanted, just like the FBI investigation found nothing.
The House Intel investigation found nothing about Russian interference.
And the Senate Bipartisan Committee similarly found nothing on any of the issues that we're talking about here.
So what we have is a political witch hunt.
You know, now it went from Russia and now it's this.
I actually thought the New York Post, this is like a cheap version of what was the Russia witch hunt.
But there's something greater here.
John Solomon had broken the story that, in fact, Ukraine has been trying to give the United States information about how they tried to interfere in the 2016 elections on behalf of Hillary Clinton's campaign.
I understand from my sources that, in fact, they're investigating specific requests from top Democrats, DNC people, others, that in fact they were looking for the dirt on Paul Manafort, anybody related to Trump.
Isn't that what the investigation, John Durham, is looking into?
Isn't that what it's partly about?
Yeah, we're trying to figure out how it all started.
What was the basis upon which this entire nightmare, which is what it's been for the country, started, although it ended up with a, it ended up fine.
But it put the president through two and a half years of unnecessary burden, in my view.
And now you got this thing.
And when's the last time you heard about Russia or Russian investigations?
So now it's the mere opposite of Russia.
It's Ukraine.
I mean, think about this for a moment.
First it was Russia.
Now it's Ukraine.
So it's the complete opposite of Russia as far as political, geopolitical situations go.
And this is the irony of all this.
And, you know, people, isn't it unseemly that the president mentioned Joe Biden by name?
Is it unseemly that four members of the United States Senate sent a letter to the prosecutor in Ukraine urging him to continue investigations of the president and his associates and to not close it down and it could affect their aid?
Blockman cooperation cuts off a significant opportunity for Ukraine law enforcement.
Then it goes this refusal would also impact our government's commitment more broadly to support justice and the rule of law.
I mean, on and on it goes.
I don't know if there's a specific reference in that one to anything other than trying to get this shut down and talks about potentially jeopardizing U.S. financial and military aid.
Oh, you mean a quid pro quo?
You do this.
We will do that.
You don't do this.
We may not do that.
None of that exists in this.
And I am going to be addressing this on multimedia channels tonight.
Yours most importantly.
And this is absurd that this has gotten to this level.
And you know, when it first came out, everybody's looking at it.
And when I went through it this morning, line by line with an analysis with a lot of people sitting in the room, people you know, Sean, very good lawyers, we all realize there is nothing there.
This is another Peter Strzok line.
There is no there there.
And now we're finding out that the, quote, whistleblower, by the way, you can't be a whistleblower on the president.
I mean, think about that for a moment.
I mean, these members of Congress think that's okay?
Have a whistleblower on the president?
But besides that, it doesn't even meet the standards of whistleblower.
Jay, why is nobody asking whether the president whether we have another deep state operative leaking secret information on a president?
Now, you've got to be concerned over the long-term ramifications to all of this.
Number one, what foreign leader, we already had it with the Australian prime minister early on in the career, and there was some president somewhere, I forget who, that also we had the transcripts of the president's conversation with world leaders leaked.
How does a president conduct his constitutional duty, his enumerated power as commander-in-chief?
And in fact, he's being undermined by members in the government that don't like him that are leaking these private conversations with the commander-in-chief and world leaders of other countries.
There's no world leader that will be willing to have an honest conversation on the phone with Donald Trump or any other president.
Well, Sean, do you remember early on in the administration the leaks of his conversation, the president's conversations with foreign leaders coming right out of either the NSC or somebody that was in the situation where I mean this?
Who would put up with this?
Why would you tolerate this?
And why are we tolerating this right now?
And I think the answer is: Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry, which means nothing, no different than it was two days before or two hours before.
She announces this impeachment inquiry before the transcript is released.
So cut the baloney here because that's what this is.
It's total baloney.
It's nonsense.
We know what this is.
It's all politics all the time.
So they want political theater.
Great.
We'll engage in that.
We'll defend again against another complete really witch hunt is a Ukrainian witch hunt.
I don't know if that's fair to witches.
Yeah, I mean, I've got a flag for that one.
No, I caught it.
You don't go this far on your own show.
I'm just saying, you know, a lot of it always is.
All right, we have polls.
Biden is in trouble now.
It seems like they want to throw Biden over.
You know, everyone's got impeachment mania.
How do you analyze it?
Because I don't see any change like you do.
I think all we did was have a, you know, we had word games being played by Nancy Pelosi because we've had an impeachment inquiry.
Now it's the official impeachment inquiry.
So she's got this needle she has to thread because she's really being pressured by the squad and the real radical left in her party, and she's not apparently liberal enough for them.
And then she's got all these more moderate Democrats, if you will, and I don't think there's any, but Democrats that are in Trump won districts.
None of them want any part of this.
So now she comes out with a statement.
But if she really wanted to begin an impeachment inquiry, she would call a roll of the house, wouldn't she?
Roll call.
She's no way she was going to do that.
Okay.
So she didn't do that.
You know, it was yesterday when all this broke, and I appreciate you had Jordan on my son who's got that new book out there.
Yeah, he's got a chapter.
It's interesting.
It's called, and it's important.
Winds are forming.
That's the first chapter.
Winds are forming.
Next red wave.
Winds are forming, but they form both ways, Sean.
And part of what's happening right now is it is forming both ways.
There is this current and then a countercurrent.
And what we have to be prepared for, and I will tell you this as the president's council, that we are prepared.
But this is, I am not building, and people are saying, oh, you know, Seculo's out there building a team of 50.
Seculo didn't have a team of 50 for the last go-round, and we did pretty well, I have to say.
Came out pretty well.
And we didn't have it, they had a team of 50.
We had a team of about six, and we got it done.
We'll get it done this time, too.
No, I agree.
What do you think the great vulnerability here is?
And what do you think the political fallout of this is?
Because at some point, Americans are going to see that if this is all that they care about.
Meanwhile, the president's out there fighting for jobs, the wall, originalist justices, deregulation, the largest tax cut in history, trade deals.
I mean, all of this, of course, unfolding while he's at the UN with a million foreign leaders.
Yeah, okay, great optics for the Democrats.
Well, you know, what is the political fallout?
Well, I think, look, I mean, I think that the Democrats have got a heck of a risk here, right?
I mean, they're trying to keep their majority in the House of Representatives.
So they're trying to show some muscular flexibility here, which doesn't really have any substance to it.
I mean, this was cooked into the cake, so to speak, a week ago.
So this was going to come.
They're going to do this.
I think for conservatives, Republicans, what you have to do is parry this back.
You got to fight it back.
How do you fight it back?
Go to the document.
Look at the words.
Look at what was said.
By the way, what legal violation have you heard?
What statute, rule, or regulation has been violated here?
None.
That's a good point.
It's a high crime or misdemeanor.
It's whatever Congress thinks it is.
That's part of the difficulty, but it's also part of the challenge.
At the end of the day, Sean, we're going to win this.
I'm not worried about it.
I will prepare as I do.
As you know full well, I leave nothing for granted.
Our team will leave nothing for granted.
We will carry the day.
What about the Democrats who wrote to Ukraine in May of 2018, pretty much?
I've got the letter.
And your reaction, this is Dick Durbin.
Quinn pro quo.
I mean, talk about an abuse of power.
If you don't let these investigations continue, Mr. Prosecutor, you are jeopardizing financial assistance to the Ukraine, which has bipartisan support.
I mean, that's exactly what they say.
They talk about this could impact financial and military aid to Ukraine.
That is their words.
I'm not making it up.
Let me read you the sentence.
Do you think what Joe Biden did was wrong after you read the sentence?
Go ahead.
Yeah, well, let me read the sentence and I'll say what Joe Biden did.
The article notes that your office considered these cases as too politically sensitive, potentially jeopardizing U.S. financial and military aid to the Ukraine, to Ukraine.
And then it goes on and on about what happens here.
But they're saying, but if you block this, if you stop this, if you don't let these investigations go forward, you are putting everything else in jeopardy.
Here's the thing.
Is that wrong?
Yeah, is it illegal?
It's stupid.
It's ridiculous.
Is it an abuse of power?
Yeah, I don't know what statute that actually means in this context, but I will tell you this.
Joe Biden bragged about shutting down a prosecutor.
He got his quit.
He did the quit and he got his quo.
It's that straightforward.
Do you think that's illegal?
And what would you look at if you're in terms of the law?
And do you think Joe Biden could be in any legal jeopardy when he is leveraging U.S. tax dollars?
Last question.
I think, look, I mean, if there's such a thing as an abuse of power, I guess that would be it.
I'm not, is it illegal?
I'm not going to draw a legal conclusion on that.
I'll tell you this.
Quid and quo.
That's what it was.
That's what he got.
All right, Jay Seculo, American Center for Law and Justice.
He'll join us tonight on TV.
We have Greg Jarrett, John Solomon.
Solomon broke a lot of these stories that everybody ignored at the time.
He's up next.
Then we have Bill O'Reilly going to weigh in.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, the president's going to hold this press conference amid the Democrats' massive new word-altering nothing.
There's no fundamental change in where they were yesterday.
None whatsoever.
They can say that there wasn't.
Nancy Pelosi wants a roll call.
Let her call the roll.
Let all of these congressmen and women.
Now we're heading into an election season.
Let them all go out there on a limb and let them take a position and let the world see how this is their priority, not the American people.
President never made any promise to Zelensky, never demanded anything from Zelensky.
Wondered, well, you know, what happened here?
There was no quid pro quo.
That's clear.
Yeah, the president said nice things about Rudy.
The AG never talked to Zelensky.
What the president talked about was entirely proper.
That's right, asking a foreign leader to see if there's any election interference in 2016.
That would be a legitimate question.
You know, what high-ranking government officials like Biden are bragging about using their official position in taxpayer dollars to literally derail an investigation that would implicate his own son?
Yeah, that's not you're not allowed to do that.
John Solomon, Greg Jarrett, they're next.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hammond and I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, 25 to the top of the air.
We have John Solomon, Greg Jarrett standing by.
The president now just stepped out at a press conference, Intercontinental Hotel, New York City, and immediately goes right at it.
Let's listen.
We think we'll make this little announcement to you because important.
You know, the so-called whistleblower, the one that didn't have any first class or first rate or second-tier information from what I understand.
You'll have to figure that out for yourself.
But I've spoken with Leader Kevin McCarthy and the Republicans, many of them.
And we were going to do this anyway.
But I've informed them, all of the House members that I fully support transparency on the so-called whistleblower information, even though it was supposedly secondhand information, which is sort of interesting.
And other things have come out about the whistleblower that are also maybe even more interesting.
But also insist on transparency from Joe Biden and his son Hunter on the millions of dollars that have been quickly and easily taken out of Ukraine and China.
Millions of dollars, millions and millions of dollars taken out very rapidly while he was vice president.
And I think they should have transparency for that.
I've informed the leader about that.
And additionally, I demand transparency from Democrats who went to Ukraine and attempted to force the new president, who I met and is an outstanding person.
I just met a little while ago.
Some of you were there.
I think he's going to be outstanding.
He got elected on the basis of corruption.
He wants to end corruption in Ukraine.
And I think that's great.
But they went there and they wanted to force the new president to do things that they wanted under the form of political threat.
They threatened him if he didn't do things.
Now, that's what they're accusing me of, but I didn't do it.
I didn't threaten anybody.
In fact, the press was asking questions of the president of Ukraine, and he said, no pressure.
I used the word pressure.
I think he used the word push, but he meant pressure, but it's the same thing.
No push, no pressure, no nothing.
It's all a hoax, hoax.
It's all a big hoax.
And the sad thing about this hoax is that we work so hard with all of these countries.
And I mean, really hard this has been.
I've been up from early in the morning to late in the evening and meeting with different countries, all for the good of our country.
And the press doesn't even cover all of this.
And it's disappeared.
It's really disappointing also to those countries that are with us and spend so much time with us.
So we want transparency.
We've informed Kevin McCarthy about transparency, and we said vote for it.
So I think you'll have close to 100% of the Republican votes, I hope.
And it got almost no attention.
But in May, CNN reported that Senators Robert Menendez, Richard Durbin, and Patrick Leahy wrote a letter to Ukraine's prosecutor general expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical.
In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake, and that if they didn't do the right thing, they wouldn't get any assistance.
Gee, doesn't that sound familiar?
Doesn't that sound familiar?
And Chris Murphy, who I've been dealing with on guns, you know, so nice.
He's always, oh, no, we want to work it out.
We want to work it out.
But they're too busy wasting their time on the witch hunt.
So Senator Chris Murphy literally threatened the president of Ukraine that if he doesn't do things right, they won't have Democrat support in Congress.
So you're going to look all of this up.
One other thing, I'm just going off certain notes and elements of what we've been doing over the last three days, but this just came up a few minutes ago.
The Amazon Washington Post just put out a fake article that acting director of National Intelligence Joseph McGuire, who I've gotten to know, and he's a tough cookie.
And I was surprised, I was shocked to hear this, was going to quit blaming the White House for something that they wouldn't let him talk openly freely.
And I was shocked because I know Joe, and he's tough, tough guy.
And I was really surprised to hear he was going to quit.
Before I could even either talk to him or talk to anybody else, he put out a statement.
I didn't speak to Joe yet.
But he said, at no time have I considered resigning my position.
In other words, the story in the Washington Post was a fake.
At no time have I considered resigning my position since assuming this role on August 16th, 2019.
I have never quit anything in my life, and I am not going to start now.
I'm committed to leading the intelligence community to address the diverse and complex threats facing our nation.
That's from the acting director of national intelligence, a very good man, Joseph Maguire.
So we're having a great period of time.
Our country is the strongest it's ever been economically.
Our numbers are phenomenal, Wilbur.
Thank you.
And Larry, everybody.
All right, that's the president, and that's all he does.
We'll monitor if he gets back to it.
Greg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst, author of the soon-to-be-released sequel to his number one bestseller.
It's called Witch Hunt, the story of the greatest mass delusion in American political history.
This may top it, though.
We may need three in the series.
John Solomon, investigative reporter and executive vice president for The Hill.
John, I will begin with you because you broke the story how Ukraine wanted to give America information about 2016 election interference.
And they were solicited by who to give them dirt on Donald Trump and his team.
Yes, absolutely.
They had two concerns.
One was that Ukraine might have been trying to assist Hillary Clinton in winning the 2016 election unfairly.
And two, that Joe Biden may have been involved in an effort to extort or force Ukraine to drop an investigation involving his son's company, Burisma, in Ukraine, Hunter Biden, an employee, $3 million over a couple of years working for that company.
But I want to tell you something that's really important today.
They released this transcript.
And of course, all the media is all excited that President Trump said exactly what President Trump already told us, he said in the phone call.
What isn't getting covered is what President Zelensky said to President Trump.
President Zelensky, first call with the president, says he knew all about the situation involving Trump, excuse me, involving Joe Biden.
I'm just going to read a few words here.
My next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, and he'll be approved by the parliament, and he will start as the new prosecutor in September, and he and she is going to look into this situation, specifically to the company, Burisma, that you mentioned in this issue.
The issue of the investigation of this case, an action issue, making sure that we restore honesty in our own country.
The president was already of Ukraine, was ready to open investigation because he had his own concern that this dishonored Ukraine, and he wanted to get to the bottom of it.
President Trump didn't have to pressure him one bit.
He was already planning to do an investigation of Joe Biden, just like we reported.
And I'm going to mention one other thing.
He went out of his way to tell the president.
If you remember, we did a story that we broke in your show, Sean, that the ambassador to Ukraine from the United States, a woman named Maria Jovanovich, Had made disparaging comments about President Bush and was raising President Trump and was raising concerns in Ukraine that she was not representing the U.S. interests well.
President Trump recalled her, fired her essentially, and then the media started crying, this is a terrible political thing.
It was unjustified.
She was doing a great job in Ukraine.
Let me read to you what President Zelensky told President Trump in the call in July.
I want to thank you in regard to the ambassador to the United States from Ukraine.
As far as I recall her name, it was Ivanovich.
It was great that you were the first one who told me she was a bad ambassador because I agree with you 100%.
Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous president.
She was on his side and she would not accept me as a new president.
The reason Trump got rid of that ambassador because she was causing a problem with an ally, not because it was politics.
Two things that are vindicated in this transcript.
Great points and great pickups.
Let's get your general perception first, Greg Jarrett.
Well, the president has every right to ask a foreign country if they have any evidence of corruption involving an American official to please investigate and please produce that evidence.
Indeed, it's incumbent on the president to make that request.
You know, one of the president's fundamental duties is identified in the take care clause.
It imposes a duty on him to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.
And so if he has this information that's presented to him and it's connected to Ukraine and he's having a conversation with the new Ukrainian president, of course, it is both logical and, in my judgment, mandatory that he say, look, I want you to investigate this.
Nowhere in the conversation is there a quid pro quo.
Do we hear the president of the United States pressuring Zelensky?
There's no evidence of that in the discussion.
The transcript shows no demands, no conditions were stated or otherwise discussed.
But we now know in May of 2018 that Democrats, that would be Menendez, Leahy, and Durbin, that in fact, they were demanding Ukraine.
They wrote Ukraine to investigate Trump.
And when they had pulled their inquiry as it relates to what was going on that they thought would help the Mueller report, they basically said without, you know, without being ambiguous, the reported refusal to cooperate with the Mueller probe also sent a worrying signal to the Ukrainian people as well as the international community about your government's commitment more broadly to support justice and the rule of law.
And while they described themselves as strong advocates for a robust and close relationship, then they declared, you know, we've supported all of these things.
And it appears that you're casting aside the principles to avoid the ire of President Trump.
And then they demand he reverse course and halt any efforts to stop the investigation they wanted.
Now, to me, Donald Trump just perfectly nailed that.
Oh, he totally nailed it.
Look, there is no shortage of hypocrisy in this story by Democrats.
And one other thing that's very important, on July 22nd, the Washington Post published a column, an article.
They had interviewed this fired prosecutor, Victor Shokin, and he's on record as saying that he was fired because he was investigating Hunter Biden and his Ukrainian gas company, Burisma.
And then Vice President Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid unless Shokin was sacked.
Here's a quote from Shokin to the Washington Post.
I will answer that the activities of Burisma, the involvement of Biden's son, Hunter Biden, and the prosecutor's investigators who were on his tail are the only, I emphasize, the only motives for organizing my resignation.
So there is the real story, and the president was right in demanding that Biden be transparent now and talk to us about what appears to be rampant corruption by Joe Biden, his son, and others.
Sounds to me like there will be accountability in all of this.
I'll get back to you on the crimes committed.
Now, because I know John Solomon, you're working on a really big story that is going to blow this whole thing wide open if it's what I think it is.
Can you give us a clue?
Let's go back to what Greg just so rightfully pointed out.
I interviewed Shokin back in May, and I had a column back in May.
This is the prosecutor, right?
The prosecutor that Joe Biden got fired by saying, if you don't fire him, President of Ukraine, I'm going to withhold a billion dollars of U.S. aid and you will be bankrupt.
And then that prosecutor got fired.
Now, let's remember where we are.
Chokin says he was told he was fired because he was investigating Biden.
That's what he told me in May, and what I reported, he told that to ABC in June, and he told it to the Washington Post in July.
So he's told it three times.
Vice President Biden has said, I only fired the guy because I thought he was corrupt and it had nothing to do with the investigation of my son's company, Hunter Biden and Burisma.
Tomorrow, I'm going to present numerous hundreds of pages of internal documents from Hunter Biden's legal team, from Ukraine prosecutors, and from the State Department.
These documents have never seen the light of day.
They sharply and dramatically call into question the veracity of Joe Biden's claims.
They're going to show meetings and dates and times of the Hunter Biden team shadowing Joe Biden's efforts to get the prosecutor fired.
And there's an extraordinary, explosive statement by the Burisma legal team to Ukraine prosecutors.
So these are American lawyers coming in to help Burisma's case go away in Ukraine on Hunter Biden's watch.
They make a jaw-dropping admission of a political dirty trick that was involved in John Biden.
And you have the evidence, the emails that will prove all of this.
These are official documents approved and confirmed by the Ukrainian government, by the State Department, and by members of Hunter Biden's legal team.
These are documents that come from the inside, the very people Hunter Biden and Burisma were working with to make this legal case go away.
It will shock the conscience and it will cause a lot of people to question, is Joe Biden really telling us the truth?
Sounds like the end of the road for Joe Biden.
What crimes do you see here potentially, Greg Jarrett?
Well, if you're engaging in, you know, what we would normally call extortion with a foreign country, you're talking about bribery, honest services fraud, potentially mail fraud, wire fraud, a violation of the federal gratuity statute.
And, you know, if you give me a couple hours, I'll probably come up with another half a dozen potential felonies.
So both of you will be on Hannity tonight.
Jay Seculo on tonight, The Untold Story, 9 Eastern.
Bill O'Reilly after the break at the top.
John Solomon, Greg Jarrett, thank you.
Very enlightening.
We'll continue.
All right, we got a lot to get to.
We'll get Bill O'Reilly's take on all of this.
A lot of other breaking news and developments that we're going to get to in the next hour.
By the way, reports that the DNI threatened to resign, that's inaccurate fake news.
One point I didn't bring up, the Inspector General.
Now, think about that.
One of the more frightening aspects of this, the intelligence community's inspector general actually had the nerve to issue a criminal referral based on an account of a still anonymous whistleblower that had no first-hand account.
I mean, that is insane.
Washington Examiner had that.
Anyway, we'll get Bill's take.
We have Jay Seculo, Whitaker, Piro, Solomon, Jarrett, Dershowitz, all tonight at nine.
We'll continue.
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload in the final hour of the Sean Hannity show.
When you're talking about trying to get information about your potential 2020 rival, you're now crossing into the potential legal issues, right?
You're now talking about the possibility of influencing an election.
This is worse than I think people expected.
Meaning, I think when we were on Chris Christie earlier this morning, the suggestion was they're telling us this isn't going to be that big a deal.
It might have been vague.
Right, right.
So maybe he asked them a little bit something about Joe Biden.
I mean, this is unambiguous.
I'd like you to do us a favor.
And one of the Republican talking points, we heard it from Lindsey Graham, is that there was no quid pro quo.
But there is very strong evidence that there was a quid pro quo here.
The section that Caitlin was reading was the Ukrainian president talking about the military aid that he was looking forward to getting from the U.S. government.
It is a gross abuse of his oath to the nation and of his power as president of the United States.
He is coercing and I think actually extorting a foreign government to get involved in the U.S. political system to provide information.
And let's be clear, it's not just to provide, to launch an investigation.
It is to smear one of his political opponents because we know that the underlying information, there is no there, according to everyone that has looked at.
He wants a foreign government to provide him with information with which he can use to target a political appointee.
And I think the key thing is you don't need a quid pro quo for it to be an impeachable offense, but we have one here.
You read this transcript and it is there in black and white.
The president explicitly asking the Ukrainian president to work with his own attorney general, Bill Barr, and his private attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to investigate his political rival, Joe Biden, and his son, Hunter.
Manafort was representing the Ukrainian opposition, the pro-Russian government that was outside.
It's not explicit, but the context certainly suggests that people have analogized this kind of conversation to when, you know, a godfather would say, you know, I want you to do something.
Everyone knows what is involved here.
Everybody knows.
We don't need to know.
We just, we imply it.
We assume the worst because it's Donald Trump.
Anyway, news roundup information overload.
No, it was about 14 seconds of a 33-minute call.
And the president, you know, it was a congratulatory call.
It was of a benign nature in every way, talking about the future and getting along and some political stuff about, well, we're helping you more than Merkel and Macron, et cetera, et cetera.
And then the president, yeah, yeah, we've been through a lot here and Ukraine knows a lot about it.
He's talking about election interference.
I thought the media cared about foreign countries trying to influence U.S. elections.
President says, I'd like you to find out what happened with that whole situation.
And they say, crowds try, I don't know anything about it is what he's saying.
I guess, you know, you have one of your wealthy people or whatever.
And, you know, I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people.
And, you know, well, I would like to have my attorney general or whatever look into election interference.
They are conflating different parts of this conversation, and they do what they do best.
They are doing it purposefully.
Now, it had also been widely reported about sleepy, creepy, crazy Uncle Joe.
And what is so spectacularly hypocritical in the media today, and I don't think they even see it.
Listen to Joe Biden.
Listen to what Joe Biden did with our tax dollars as he's there.
He's recounting the story, bragging about how he leveraged a billion of our tax dollars for the purpose of getting of a Ukrainian prosecutor fired.
Donald Trump didn't do this.
This is Joe 30330.
Listen.
I said, I'm not going to give, we're not going to give you the billion dollars.
They said, you have no authority.
You're not the president.
The president said, I said, call him.
I said, I'm telling you, you're not getting a billion dollars.
I said, you're not getting a billion.
I'm going to be leaving here.
I think it was, what, six hours?
I looked at, I said, I'm leaving in six hours.
If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money.
Oh, son of a got fired.
Well, son of a got fired.
Anyway, joining us now, this is the launch day of his brand new book.
It's called The United States of Trump, How the President Really Sees America.
Bill O'Reilly is with us, billoreilly.com, Hannity.com, Amazon.com, bookstores now everywhere.
Now, he's been the best-selling author of 15 number one best-selling books.
A lot of it is killing series.
I kind of don't take this the wrong way.
I do like your history books, but I think this is probably your best book.
And I'll tell you why, because you did something very unique and very different.
And I've now finished the book and I've read it cover to cover.
And I want you to sort of take what you get out of here because you don't go through a whole interview and you spent a lot of time on Air Force One with the president.
You did a follow-up interview with the president and you give us what he's saying about a particular topic and the question and answer back and forth between the two of you.
And then you sort of navigate through the history of who he is in the presidency, which I thought was very clever and smart.
But then we've got this whole other aspect of what was going on today.
I saw your tweet earlier today.
You read the entire document.
You saw nothing.
Nobody with any intelligence saw anything.
And nobody seems to care that Biden leveraged the billion, but that's a different issue.
Why don't you sort of bring it into today's controversy as you wrote this book?
Okay.
And stop me here if you.
No, take your time.
I'm not going to interrupt you.
You go.
No, no, no.
I want you to because it's a little bit complicated.
But I got really lucky because on the day that the United States of Trump was released, all of this Ukraine stuff came out.
And I tell you in the book about the genesis of all of it.
And that is that Donald Trump firmly believes in his heart that the Democratic Party and President Obama and Hillary Clinton all colluded to give money to people to dig up dirt on him in Russia.
Do you disagree with that?
So in the book, I say that in August 2016, Barack Obama was told by the CIA that Russia was trying to interfere in the presidential election.
Barack Obama chose, for reasons unknown, not to say anything to anybody about it.
Not to Hillary Clinton, not to Donald Trump.
Now, you would think that once a president got intel that a foreign nation was trying to alter, no matter how, a presidential election, all the principles would be alerted.
So Trump believes that Barack Obama thought that he was cooperating with Russia and wanted to sting him and wanted to surveil him.
He's very bitter about that, Sean, and I know you know that personally.
He's very bitter about it.
Donald Trump says it is fundamentally unjust and unfair.
I don't think he's a bitter guy.
I just think he's like disgusted.
No, how could this happen?
Because he was hanging out with you, and neither one of you drink.
If you had a cocktail, I think it would be a little more fair.
Yeah, we could have been a little mellower, but we weren't.
So I got the raw, unfiltered Donald Trump.
So that's where it starts.
And as you know, if Donald Trump thinks that you're trying to hurt him, he's never going to forget.
So you fast forward up to July when he's on the phone with the new president of Ukraine.
He knows that Joe Biden influenced an internal Ukrainian investigation involving his son Hunter.
That's a fact.
Joe Biden admitted it to the Council of Foreign Relations.
You played the tape.
I played the tape on billorilly.com.
It's a fact.
But did you know that today in the Associated Press in covering this story wrote the following, quote, in the call, Trump raised allegations unsupported by any evidence that the former vice president sought to interfere with the Ukrainian prosecutor's investigation of his son Hunter, unquote.
That's the Associated Press.
That's a lie.
That's the second paragraph of their coverage of this thing today.
That's a lie.
All right.
There is no question the vice president, Biden, held up a billion dollars in loans to Ukraine unless they fired the guy who was investigating his son's company in Ukraine.
He admits it.
Yet the Associated Press lies, and this transcript goes out to every blanket newspaper in the country, which will then reprint the Associated Press article.
When you say fake news, when you say it's way beyond that, the Associated Press knows this second paragraph's a lie, yet they did it anyway.
All right, back to Trump.
There are two things involved here.
One is a constitutional violation, an allegation.
There is no constitution violation.
I read it.
I talked to the best experts in the country about it.
There's no constitutional violation.
If you're a president and you're talking to a foreign leader and you want to find out something about an American citizen, you have a perfect right to ask a question about the American citizen, whether that person is running for president or picking up your garbage.
Okay?
If you're a president and you want information about an American citizen, you can ask anyone to provide that information.
They don't have to do it, but you can ask.
So there's no constitutional violation.
The second one is the Nancy Pelosi, the election integrity.
Donald Trump allegedly impugned the election integrity.
Okay, that's a subjective thing, an opinion thing.
You can't disprove it.
You can't prove it.
That's Ms. Pelosi's opinion.
There is not going to be a conviction of Donald Trump on the Ukraine thing in the Senate.
He is not going to be convicted of anything in the Senate.
Pelosi and her married people can put a charade up in the House and alienate Americans further from themselves.
We're in the middle of a social civil war now.
No doubt about it.
The hatred is at the highest level I've ever seen in my life.
Okay.
Well, Pelosi can keep doing this, but it's not going to go anywhere, historically speaking.
Some believe that'll hurt the Democratic Party in the election.
Again, that's speculation.
But right now, there's no constitutional violation, and election integrity is a matter of opinion.
Let me ask you from the standpoint, the very thing that they say that they are so outraged about, meaning the Democrats, okay?
The very thing that they, they're going on and on.
This is unbelievable.
And they sold out the country, et cetera, et cetera.
Yet the very guy that is leading in most polls, I guess Warren has now picked up in one national poll, is on tape, Bill.
And on tape, he's bragging that he leveraged a billion U.S. dollars and demanded in six hours that they fire a Ukrainian prosecutor.
Why would a vice president of the United States leverage our tax money and demand that a prosecutor in Ukraine get fired, or he's not going to give them that money?
Now we know the real reason because his son, who had no energy experience, no oil, no gas experience, no Ukraine expertise, well, he had a special consultancy deal with Burisma Holdings.
And the prosecutor was looking into Burisma Holdings and this relationship with Hunter Biden.
And then it gets even worse because they were talking about millions of dollars.
But then we have Hunter Biden flying on Air Force 2.
He gets back 14 days after he gets back.
He has no experience with China, no experience in private equity.
But he gets a billion-dollar deal for him and his partners, including Whitey Bolger's son and John Kerry's stepson.
And it didn't go to Goldman Sachs.
That eventually became $1.5 billion.
And Joe Biden is on tape doing this.
Now, where is the outrage there?
Well, it's even worse than that.
So Biden never in a million years should have evoked the power of the United States government to threaten a foreign nation with losing a billion dollars in loans because his son's company was under investigation.
I mean, that's outrageous.
Now, you can call it a conflict of interest.
You can call it a whole bunch of things.
But it's outrageous.
So Biden's going to have to answer for that.
You're not going to get away with that.
China, a little bit of a different story, but there's no question it was nepotism.
And that Hunter Biden, all toll, probably got about $20 to $30 million because his father was vice president.
Okay.
That's the way it is.
You could make an argument that Trump kids benefited from their father being president.
You could make that argument.
But it's worse than that because this is something that, and talk about press corruption, my God.
There is no doubt that the Democratic National Committee, the Hillary Clinton campaign, paid a Washington, D.C. firm, Fusion, to dig up dirt on Donald Trump when he was running for president.
There's no doubt.
That's been established as fact.
All right, Bill, only because of the constraints of time, we want to we're going to get right back to you.
Bill O'Reilly will pick it up on Hillary Clinton paying for the dirty Russian dossier.
See, they only cared about Russian interference if it's Trump, not Hillary interference with Russia, or they don't care about Ukrainian attempts to influence our election.
They were offering us that information.
BillO'Reilly.com for all things, O'Reilly, including the release of his brand new book today, The United States of Trump, How the President Really Sees America.
It's at 15 number one New York Times bestsellers, Amazon.com, bookstores everywhere.
Are you doing any tour on this or what?
I've been doing four shows.
We're doing desert, Palm Desert, California, Phoenix, Arizona, Boston, Massachusetts, and Huntington, Long Island.
Go to billorilly.com for details on that.
But I want to give you a plug.
You've been nice enough to plug the book, and I'm really happy you liked it and you read it.
But last night, I get the cable ratings every day, and you, the Hanny program, dominated on a breaking news night.
Now, people can say, well, Sean Hanni is a conservative or whatever.
What difference does it make?
More Americans trusted you to tell them the truth about the story than any of the other by far.
Well, you know, by the way, I'm willing to let you go back to being number one in cable news if you come back any day, because frankly, you know, when you're number one, you get the crap beat out of you twice as hard.
I'd be very comfortable with you coming back and taking the number one slot.
I'll follow you and get great ratings and live happily ever after.
You want to use me as a meat shield?
Yeah, basically.
I mean, you know, come on.
I think it's pretty telling, though, that the American people now don't trust the hard news press at all, and they're going to you to get the story.
So I segue back into, so you got Nancy Pelosi sitting up there going, oh, the integrity of the election, and we have to have an impeachment inquiry and all this BS.
And it is BS because everybody knows and it's an established fact that the Democratic National Committee, Hillary Clinton, and perhaps the Obama administration, we don't know that for sure, but it certainly looks like it, all were fine with hiring foreign nationals to dig up dirt on Donald Trump.
They have any problem with that.
All right.
If that dossier had turned out to be true, and thank God it did not for everybody's sake, all right, they would have gotten that through foreign nationals, through foreign governments, through people working for Putin.
So it's okay for them to do it.
But then when Donald Trump says, look, we need to know about Hunter and Joe Biden because it looks to us here in the Trump administration that the country was used to interfere in your politics in Ukraine.
And we need to know that.
That's what the call was.
Now, I'm not naive.
I know that President Trump wants to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and vice versa.
That's the way the system works.
When you run against somebody, you do ops.
You try to find out about them.
And Trump believes in his heart that Joe Biden is corrupt and did things overseas that he should not have done.
So he wants to know.
To me, if I were Trump, I'd want to know too.
Wouldn't you?
I think, you know, as I read this, and I, like you, I've talked to a lot of attorneys today, and there's not one that sees any impropriety whatsoever.
I mean, the operative language, Donald Trump, I would like you to find out what happened.
Now, remember, we've been playing the tape of Joe Biden leveraging tax dollars to fire the prosecutor looking into his own kid who's making millions.
And that's already, he admitted doing it, so they don't have to investigate that.
What they do have to investigate is why this prosecutor was fired, what was the pretense for doing it, and all that.
But I mean, Donald Trump's not little bull peep.
I mean, when you read the United States of Trump, it's not a pro-Trump book.
It's not an anti-Trump book.
It's a look at a tough guy.
The guy is tough.
All right.
And if he could get dirt on Joe Biden doing untoward things in Ukraine and China, he's going to use it.
So Nancy Pelosi is right.
That's going to be used in the campaign.
But you can't impeach somebody for trying to find out what happened in his rival's political career.
That's insane.
And that's where we are.
That's what it's all about.
There was a Democratic letter.
Mark Thiessen in the Washington Post found this.
It came from U.S. Senators Bob Menendez, Dick Durbin, Pat Leahy.
And he reminded us of this.
And remember, Nancy Pelosi declared yesterday, and there was no change from the day before.
She just made it into a, well, it's official, but it was always official, that the mere possibility that President Trump had asked Ukraine to continue an investigation, just to continue to find truth of Biden even without a quid pro quo, there was no quid pro quo, would be enough to trigger impeachment.
Well, in 2018, you know, he had forced Ukraine to remove the prosecutor in that particular case.
But the Democrats in their letter to the Ukrainian government answer the, you know, answering their questions about the Mueller probe, but they had in there this line, Bill.
It says, this reported refusal to cooperate with the Mueller probe sends a worrying signal to the Ukrainian people as well as the international community about your government's commitment more broadly to support justice and the rule of law.
This is after they said, well, you know, we've supported you all these years.
It's the exact same thing, but it doesn't matter, Bill, does it?
Not in this environment we live in.
You know, you mentioned earlier my ratings.
You know, Bill, to me, it's about truth.
I want to get the story right.
I was right when I vetted Obama, and some people told me I was ruining my career.
And we've been right on everything from FISA abuse to the dirty dossier to a rigged investigation to spying on a candidate, a transition team, and a president.
And it's all been proven and the evidence is overwhelming and incontrovertible.
Why does the 99% of media have no interest in any truth?
Why should they?
Because that's what their profession is supposed to be dedicated to.
That's, look, this is an excellent question, but going back to my book, The United States of Trump, I explain in the book in great detail why the media hates Donald Trump so much.
And just in a broad view, it's because he outsmarted them.
And I was there, and you were there, and we saw how he manipulated the media in the campaign and how his apprentice experience gave him notoriety and an ID.
Everyone knew who he was.
Whereas John Kasich, nobody knew who he was.
So Trump had a tremendous advantage because he used the media to his benefit.
Now, the media never thought he would win and allowed itself to be used and too late found out, hey, now this guy has a good chance to be president and we don't want him.
They didn't want him from the beginning.
But they said, ah, he's a clown show.
We'll get the ratings and put him on and we'll get the headlines and get readers.
But he's really not going to win.
So he outsmarted the media, Hannity.
He made them look foolish.
And that's why they hate him so much.
In addition, he is promoting some conservative principles and the media loathes that.
You know, let me go into your book because I don't want to, I don't know, I've read the book and there's so much more to it.
And we've spent all day on this one topic today.
We're going to spend all night tonight.
We're going to blow this wide open.
Jay Secular, we've got a whole investigative team.
We have this nailed-down pat.
What did you learn about Donald Trump?
Because I learned some things about the president.
I think we've known him about the same amount of time, you know, 20, 25 years.
I don't remember anymore.
And you asked him personal questions.
Bill, and he's like, I don't want to answer this crap.
Why are you asking me this?
This is annoying, Bill.
It was funny, actually.
You know, I am an annoying guy.
I admit it.
You know it.
Everyone knows it.
I can be annoying because I'm persistent.
And I went in and I wrote this book because I do not believe most of the American public have a clue about who Donald Trump really is.
So I said, I'm going to write an honest book, no anonymous sources, everybody on the record.
I'm going to tell you about him from a little baby until yesterday.
All right.
And then you'll know whether you respect him or not, whether you want to revote for him or not, whatever it may be, but you'll have facts.
So I think what surprised me the most is the last chapter of the book when he tells me the toll emotionally that the Mueller thing and I'm sure this has taken on him personally.
That was the first time I ever in 30 years have seen him be vulnerable.
And that is a very important part of the United States of Trump, the last chapter.
I have never seen anyone take this much, Bill, ever.
And you and I have lived in a world we've gotten the living crap beaten out of us.
Absolutely.
And I can identify, and so can you.
He has taken an amazing amount of personal attacks.
It's hurt him, his family, and everybody he knows.
But as far as Donald Trump is concerned, he won.
He's president.
He's got the job he always wanted since 1990.
All right.
He won.
But the ferocious attacks on him have taken their toll.
There's no question.
If you looked at him yesterday at the UN, he looked tired.
He didn't have a lot of energy in his speech.
He got energized later with the press because that always happens.
But, I mean, anybody would say, look, every day of your life, you're going to get crucified, and that's what's happened.
And there's not going to be any respite.
It's going to go right on until the reelection vote.
And he knows it.
And it's brutal.
It is absolutely brutal.
And as I started this conversation with you today about the Associated Press outright lying, and there's no other word to use, and in a very important article about the Ukrainian situation, I mean, you can imagine the frustration of the president saying, oh, look at this.
Look at this.
You know, the American people are being misled on purpose because these people hate me and they hate me because I beat them at their own game.
And that's what it comes down to.
You know, these are really incredible times that we are living in here because it's fact-free.
Where do you think this ends up?
To me, it's a massive boomerang, a massive overreach.
The hypocrisy, it reeks of just political, disgusting hypocrisy.
And more importantly, they've done this now to the country for three years.
Is there a price to pay politically at some point, Bill?
I don't know yet.
I can tell you the anger level on politics is the highest I've ever seen it.
I think it's the highest since the Civil War.
As you know, I wrote the book Killing Lincoln.
The bitterness on both sides.
But the bitterness on the side of the Trump supporters is now rising.
I could see it.
I mean, because wherever I go, everybody knows who I am.
All right.
I got a 90% ID in America.
90% of the people know who I am.
So wherever I go, people stop me and they vent.
They go, what is this?
What's happening here?
And I'm seeing the anger rise.
And that's a horrible, horrible thing.
And if I could pull Nancy Pelosi aside, I would say, do you not care about your country at all?
If you have facts, put them out.
But to put the country through a charade that you yourself know is going nowhere because the Senate will never convict to do that and to harm your own country?
You know, beat them at the ballot box.
All right.
That's how you beat them.
Not with all of this insane, trumped up, pardon a pun, of false accusations.
Donald Trump's not a perfect man.
If you read the United States of Trump, you'll see that.
But did he get on and go, I want to violate the Constitution and I want to harm the United States of America.
So I'm going to call up the Ukrainian president and do that?
That's insane.
That didn't even cost me.
It was 14 seconds, Bill.
This is all made-up hype, lies.
And, you know, we've gone through three straight years of this.
And I'll tell you the interesting thing is, and I think this is where the comparison, and there's always, I think this is a defining moment, tipping point election for the country.
I've told you that privately.
I'm telling everybody publicly.
And if Elizabeth Warren ever becomes the president or anybody with her ideology, it's over.
Freedom will be a thing of the past.
It'll be state control of pretty much every aspect of our lives.
And it will lead to an America that is impoverished almost immediately.
As soon as they get rid of the oil and gas, they're going to get rid of and the combustion engine and give Medicare for all no private options and everything else is free.
And then we're going to confiscate everybody's wealth if they saved anything.
I agree.
Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are dangerous individuals.
And I had no problem, by the way, with Bill Clinton.
Not his politics.
I didn't like the way he conducted himself, but I had no problem with that.
Barack Obama, many discussions with him.
They were all respectful.
Okay.
Democratic Party, I have voted for Democrats.
But these individuals, these socialists, they do not believe in freedom.
I wrote a column called The Promise.
It's on billoreilly.com.
And I hope everybody reads it because you are absolutely correct.
These people get power.
Our freedoms are gone.
And that's what it's coming down to.
I think it's your best book yet, The United States of Trump, How the President Really Sees America.
Bill O'Reilly's brand new book just out today.
It's on billo'reilly.com, amazon.com.
We have it up on Hannity.com, bookstores everywhere.
And Bill, thanks for spending the time.
Thanks for giving us this interview, and we'll have you back next week.
I really appreciate it, Sean.
You very kind of helped me out.
800-941-Sean, toll-free telephone number.
We have an amazing Hannity, 9 Eastern tonight.
You're not going to want to miss.
All right, that's going to wrap things up for today.
All right, loaded up tonight, the story, the news, the angles you won't get anywhere else.
We are stacked.
We have Jay Seculo, counsel to the president.
We have Matt Whitaker, former Attorney General, United States.
We got Janine Pirow.
We've got Congressman Ratcliffe.
John Solomon, of course, knows more about this than anybody.
We've got Greg Jarrett, Alan Dershowitz, much, much more.
We'll see you tonight at nine.
Now, tomorrow, a full hour of breaking news with John Solomon.
This is not small.
This is huge.
So I hope we'll see you tomorrow.
Thanks for being with us.
See you tonight at nine back here tomorrow.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
▲
Export Selection