Sean Hannity Show - Ambassador Volker's Testimony Unpacked

Oct. 7, 2019 - Sean Hannity Show

01:39:23

Ambassador Volker's Testimony Unpacked

John Solomon, Executive Vice President and columnist for The Hill, obtained the transcript from the testimony of Ambassador Kurt Volker this weekend. Today he joins to discuss the information he received on Volker. 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.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart podcast.
	What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, glad you're with us.
	Buckle up.
	Yeah, these, I know for many of you, are troubling times.
	Let me tell you how it ends.
	It ends with Donald Trump's reelection.
	So the ending is going to be fine, but it's going to hit rough waters a time or two.
	And this is a really, really dangerous time for the country.
	And you have every right to be concerned, every right to be worried, every right to wonder what the hell is going on in our country.
	It's not complicated.
	It's not really hard to figure out.
	You've got a bunch of people that are willing to shred our Constitution, our rule of law.
	They are willing to suspend any connection to reality.
	They are unwilling to accept objective truth.
	That doesn't matter to them.
	They are willing to be glaring hypocrites at the highest level.
	I don't even know if they're aware of it, but they are.
	And this tornado-like atmosphere, this whirlwind of rush, rush, rush hysteria, you know, it really comes down to a couple of things here.
	You want the root cause of it.
	They hate Trump and they hate we, the people that voted for him.
	You know, smelly Walmart people is very descriptive.
	Walmart shoppers, Trump supporters.
	They can smell them.
	That's about as descriptive as you can get.
	Irredeemable, deplorables.
	That's, yeah, Trump supporters.
	That's what they think.
	They really believe it.
	And I know because of being in this business and now 31 years, if you can believe it, I now have started, as of today, my 24th year at the Fox News Channel.
	We went on the air in October of 1996, and I'm going to kill the dot-com people, not really, of course, for putting up the picture of me on day one.
	It's so humiliating, but they do it, and I told them not to do it, and they do it anyway.
	Nobody seems to care what I think.
	Is it an attempted coup?
	Is all of this when you combine it?
	Is it just any, of course?
	Now, what you're saying is, why would they put the country through this?
	Because they could never and have never accepted the irredeemable, deplorable, smelly Walmart voters, those that are angry and cling to their God in heaven, their guns, the Second Amendment, their Bibles,
	which is the word of God in the Bible, and their religion.
	Sorry, that makes us horrible people.
	And by the way, no, Christians aren't perfect.
	I love this.
	No, Christians are just admitting they're wrong and want help and God to make them a better person.
	That's it.
	Anyway, that's my little religious thought for the day.
	They couldn't accept that.
	We had four independent separate investigations into Russia, Russia, Russia, four of them.
	We had the FBI nine-month investigation, struck even said, no, they're there.
	Lisa Page said, yeah, we have nothing.
	Nine months, the FBI did this.
	And when we get to the origins of the Russia witch hunt and we get to see all the things they've done, it's going to open up a lot of people's eyes.
	But it's, well, we have an election in a year.
	Why don't they just do it by that process?
	You hate Trump so much.
	Why you got to manufacture?
	Like Adam Schiff is making up stuff that was never said in the phone call or the Reliance.
	No, no, that whistleblower may be a real partisan hack Democrat.
	So we've got money.
	No, now we've got a bunch of whistleblowers.
	Well, are we going to accept now that we have people within our intelligence community that are leaking the private conversations of a president of the United States with their own spin and interpretation when we actually have the transcript?
	The whistleblowers are meaningless at this point because we have the actual transcript.
	But for the Democrats and the left, it's by any means necessary.
	And what does it mean?
	It means they have to first get rid of him.
	And they know in their hearts they can't even risk a reelection in a year of Donald Trump because to them, that just is something they cannot accept.
	So it's now pretty much by any means necessary.
	And when I say the media mob, it is a mob mentality.
	There is no objective reporting.
	The media is dead.
	Journalism is dead.
	These people do not care.
	They don't even hide it.
	I mean, even, you know, for years, it used to be like Brinkley and Tim Russert.
	I mean, Russer tried to be fair a little bit.
	Brinkley, same thing.
	There was some level of objectivity.
	This is a blood in the water.
	They want to get them at any cost.
	And to do so, they have to ignore everything horrific of the people that they're supporting did.
	Now, if we're going to take the weapons that are so powerful, those tools of intelligence, and we're going to turn them on a president and we're going to turn them on the American people, America's done.
	Understand, this is that clear present of danger.
	I can't, in my entire lifetime, remember a time where we're leaking conversations with the president of the United States and the prime minister of Australia or the president of Mexico.
	Or as a result of this, now we've got to release transcripts to prove the president's innocence.
	And even when it shows there was nothing there that's being alleged, well, we have whistleblowers that interpreted it very differently.
	Therefore, we're going to go with the whistleblowers.
	To be a Democrat, you have to detach now from reality.
	There's no such thing as any adherence to objective, fundamental, basic truth.
	In other words, you just have to accept a whole series of lies.
	And it is, you know, and you'd have to not apply the standards that you're applying to one guy to the other guy.
	I mean, I always said in the last two and a half years, it was mind-numbing to me.
	It's like I'm the only one that cared that Bernie Sanders had a primary election stolen from him.
	It was rigged.
	Now, Bernie didn't even care as much as I cared.
	Donna Brazil cared because when she got to the bottom of it, she said she was crying on a telephone call to Bernie Sanders to say, yeah, it happened.
	They were in control of everything.
	You were never going to win.
	That was the bottom line.
	That was a, you know, say what you will about Donna Brazil.
	And you got the, and then the mob and then the mentality.
	I mean, then you can have the most corrupt guy, the only guy on tape coordinating with Russians to dig dirt on Donald Trump is Adam Schiff, the compromising materials.
	And, you know, did Vladimir see them?
	But because he showed the naked picture to Trump and all the compromising materials.
	Yes, yeah.
	He thinks he's talking to a Russian.
	You know, you got Mark Warner with a Russian oligarch doing the same thing.
	Do they not care about the country of, let's see, Ukraine's influence in the 2016 election, which they admitted to.
	Did they not care that in a letter written by three U.S. senators, Leahy, Durbin, and Menendez, they're threatening to withhold money.
	Chris Murphy, Connecticut, same thing.
	Imagine if it was Donald Trump Jr.
	with no experience in Ukraine, energy, oil, gas, getting millions of dollars the way Joe Biden's son was.
	Or the same thing with China and the fortune that went to that company with Whitey Bulger's nephew and Hunter Biden.
	Imagine if it was Don Jr.
	You don't think the press would be parked outside.
	We're not talking about kids here.
	It's not Baron Trump.
	It's not Chelsea.
	It's not the daughters of Obama, which I think, you know, hands off all these kids that are going to school, leave them alone.
	But these are adults.
	This guy is, what, however, 40 years old now?
	He's not a kid anymore.
	Not about that.
	We're going to release transcripts.
	I want all the transcripts with Biden and Ukrainian officials and the former president.
	We're going to have transcripts.
	I want the transcripts of Obama and Putin when he had more flexibility after the election.
	I want the transcripts with President Rouhane of Iran and any other mullahs Obama was talking to prior to giving them $150 billion in cash and other currency.
	We've now chronicle the history of how Democrats, two days after election day, wanted to impeach, impeach, impeach.
	By the way, as a side note, what have the Democrats done for the people of this country that they are supposed to serve?
	This is about power.
	This is about their desire for power, their desire to get power and then ruin the fundamentals of the greatest wealth creating system on the face of the earth.
	Barry Farber, no country has ever accumulated more power and abused it less than the United States.
	Little Sean Hannity's edition, no country has ever accumulated more power and used it to advance the human condition than this country.
	And now we're going to destroy it and take the lifeblood, oil and gas out of it.
	And then we're going to come up with 70% top marginal rates, 90% top corporate rates.
	Every business is going to flee.
	And then we're going to get rid of oil and gas anyways.
	No business is going to be in business.
	And then we're going to promise everything for free, a $94 trillion price tag and Medicare for all.
	If you think Obamacare was bad, this is going to be bad.
	So what is really at the heart of this, they can't, they know that Al Green, the congressman's right, we better impeach him because we can't beat them.
	And after this, what they're doing now, when it's all said and done, all they're going to do is piss off the American people for them, their inaction, their pettiness, it's like blood at this point that they're circling with blood in the water.
	But they did that for three years.
	The same people, the same liars, the same conspiracy theorists are at it again.
	And now they just replace Russia, Russia for Ukraine, Ukraine.
	They've done nothing in terms of making us more prosperous to create jobs, opportunities for the American people.
	Donald Trump has done that while simultaneously dealing with all this other crap.
	And even you never Trumper people, he did keep all his promises on judges and regulation and the biggest tax cuts.
	And he's building the wall.
	And yeah, he did say he was going to pull troops out, whether he liked it then or not.
	And he also said he'd get better trade deals, and he's got a lot of those too.
	You know, are we going to now live in a country where the deep state is going to leak and leak and leak and undermine a duly elected president to the point he can't even do his job?
	We're going to live in a perpetual state of tornado-like frenzy.
	That is a post-constitutional America.
	You know, these same people, they want to stack the Supreme Court, stack the courts so they can legislate that which they can't win at the ballot box or can't pass legislatively.
	The same group of people that want to get rid of the Electoral College and let New York, California, New Jersey, and Illinois pick every president.
	You know, you look at who are all these Democratic congressmen in districts Donald Trump won.
	We're going to name names now because are they going to stand up to the Ocasio-Cortez party of the New Green Deal?
	You know, I'm going to tell you, and countries, the world is watching this.
	They see its madness.
	They see this for politics and all a lust for power.
	You know, this hatred of Trump defies all logic, common sense, reason, except that they can't handle he won.
	They can't handle Mueller didn't give it to him.
	So now they're going to manufacture it.
	And the way they manufacture it, they put off that Hillary had a rigged investigation, stole a primary.
	She paid for a Russian dossier, leaked to the compliant media before the election to influence it.
	Ukraine did influence the election in 2016.
	Then you've got the dirty dossier, not verifiable, used to spy on a president, a transition team, and a presidential candidate.
	Now deep state operatives are willing to go even further and they'll leak whatever they need to leak to get rid of them.
	You think Impeach Kavanaugh?
	Well, what happened to that, by the way?
	We have a million whistleblowers.
	We got tons of whistleblowers, whistleblowers on top of whistleblowers, whistleblowers.
	Well, you don't need it because we have the transcript.
	Doesn't matter who these people are, except that they're doing it.
	That's the danger to the country.
	If they succeed in this, America, the system that we have, is in a lot of trouble.
	If they get power, forget it.
	Everyone that's leaving New York, New Jersey, and Illinois, they're going to start leaving the country and they're going to take their money with them.
	70% tax rates, then a state tax, state income tax, death tax, wealth tax.
	It's over.
	The people with money are going to take their money and leave.
	What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
	Nine times out of 10, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
	Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
	Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
	We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
	You put two and two together.
	Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
	Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
	I'm Leon Nayfak from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
	This is Fiasco, Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Yes, that's right.
	Lock her up.
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, as we roll along, Sean Hannity show, you know, the real, real scare that people ought to have in all of this is you got to remember something here.
	There was spying on a spectacular level as Operation Crossfire Hurricane got underway.
	And remember, you know, why is Barr and Durham spending so much time in Italy, Great Britain, and why does it matter about Australia?
	It matters for a lot of reasons.
	We've told you, sum it up, really is the outsourcing of spying to allied countries for the purpose of circumventing American laws.
	Then we got the dirty dossier that was never verified.
	They knew it was unverifiable.
	They did it anyway.
	That is a level of lawlessness by deep state operatives that didn't like your, the American people's decision in the 2016 election.
	And it is, you know, it's this group of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats.
	And I keep, nobody's defending the FBI and our intelligence community the 99.9% more than me because I grew up loving those people because that was my family.
	You know, how many times have I mentioned all the law enforcement within my family?
	And but if you're going to take these tools of intelligence and you're going to use them in ways to influence or let's say the American people, if you're going to leak stuff to take out a president you didn't want elected,
	that is the abuse of power corruption that defined everything with the 2016 election.
	And the fact that don't expect the mob to ever get into Hillary stealing a primary or Hillary paying for a dirty Russian dossier or the dossier being used to spy on a president or the outsourcing of intelligence gathering to circumvent U.S. laws.
	They're never going to touch.
	All right, 25 now to the top of the air.
	Remember what I said last week?
	Everything now has to be viewed through the prism of 2020, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20.
	The Democrats know that this is not going to work.
	You know, there's a reason.
	And I think we really have to hone in here.
	What is their motivation in this?
	What do they want at the end of the day?
	They want this guy gone.
	They don't like, they tried to stop him.
	They did everything they could do to stop him.
	They had an insurance policy.
	First, they protected Hillary.
	And understand, any other American would have been charged with multiple felonies, starting with the Espionage Act and subsequent subsections of that act.
	There's no bigger slam dunk case than Hillary's obstruction of justice.
	The dirty Russian dossier, yeah, that's real.
	She paid for it.
	They never verified it.
	Then they used that to bludgeon the president.
	Remember, they did have the insurance policy.
	You know, any counterintelligence investigation like this all had to start in the Obama White House.
	So they undermine him from day one.
	None of this, all of this defies logic, common sense, reason.
	They're never going to say or apply these standards to their fellow Democrats.
	If they did, then Durbin, Leahy, Menendez, Murphy would all be in trouble.
	If they did, Schiff himself on tape getting information from somebody thinks is a Russian, that would matter.
	The text messages with Mark Warner and an oligarch, that would matter because he's looking for dirt, but wants to keep it offline.
	You know, if all of a sudden we pulled out transcripts of Biden and Ukraine at the time all this is going on, I'm kind of betting those transcripts wouldn't be too favorable to sleepy, creepy, crazy Uncle Joe 30330 or Obama with the Iranian leaders or Obama with Putin with more flexibility.
	You know, we have an election year in a year, which is an election year.
	If they were confident they could beat Trump, this wouldn't be an issue.
	But every look, it happens with everything.
	Let's play.
	We've got a montage here of this is just the Russia stuff because it is exactly the same thing.
	The same liars, the same those that slander besmirch, character assassination, just outright lie, breathless hysteria, you know, countless predictions of Trump's demise and doom.
	You know, it's the same thing.
	Just a different topic because four investigations did not give them what they wanted, culminating with Mueller's report.
	That didn't give them what they had hoped and dreamed for.
	They're not going to risk another special counsel into Ukraine.
	Does it matter?
	You know, replace, say, it's Vice President Trump that shakes down Ukraine with taxpayer dollars and you got six hours or I'm taking the billion dollars home in loan guarantees.
	And it's Don Jr.
	that's making all that money without any experience in Ukraine and in China.
	You know, imagine, imagine how the media would react if Hillary, if it was Trump that paid for a dossier the way Hillary did, what do you think would happen to Trump?
	What do you think would happen to any of you listening to my voice right now if you're subpoenaed and you decide to delete the emails that are subpoenaed?
	What do you think is going to happen to you?
	What do you think if you then decide after you delete them that you're going to acid wash your hard drive so they can't forensically recover them?
	What do you think would happen if just to make Tripoli sure you busted up your BlackBerries and your iPhones with a hammer or had somebody do it for you and take out the SIM cards?
	What do you think would happen?
	The fact that Ukraine did influence the 2016 election.
	And as the January 11th article in Politico says, they were effective.
	That's where all the Manafort stuff came from.
	By the way, DC Whispers has out today.
	Oh, contributions by individuals of more than 50 grand and the Clinton Foundation based on minimum of donation range, Wall Street Journal analysis of Clinton Foundation disclosures.
	Yeah, Ukraine, $10 million.
	Saudi Arabia, $6.
	Well, $7.3 million, Clinton Foundation.
	And it goes on to, let's see, great countries with terrific human rights records like China and on and on and on.
	What if it was Trump and his foundation that he got this?
	You know, the timeline in this is devastating to the Democrats.
	But just you got to hear this because what you're seeing now is they just won't risk three years going by.
	We're going to rush the process.
	We're going to let the guy that's most corrupt run it, the cowardly, shifty shift himself.
	And with the blessing of a very afraid speaker, Nancy Pelosi, because, yeah, that's not going to be good.
	Just listen, this is Russia.
	This is Russia 2.0 now.
	Listen.
	We're about to find out if the new president of our country is going to do what Russia wants.
	That was Area 51, Roswell Rachel Maddow of the Conspiracy Channel, MSDNC.
	Do we have the whole montage?
	It just, oh, it crapped out on you.
	Now, also, I don't know if you noticed too, but Biden asked over the weekend.
	He's furious with even the media covering the allegations.
	What?
	You don't think it's bad enough that you unleashed a special counsel and then you had all these top officials in the intelligence community and the FBI warned about the dirty Russian dossier, but they used it anyway to spy on Trump?
	And you don't think that if Donald Trump were the vice president, this was Don Jr.
	or Eric Trump?
	Hell, if it was Biden, if it was Baron Trump, they would be after the president.
	I'm certain at this point, if Trump cured cancer, it wouldn't stop their psychosis.
	And Biden lashing out in fury.
	You don't have the montage.
	You can play that because he's mad that it's even being covered.
	He's furious at the idea that anyone would question this.
	Really?
	Has he not been following the news?
	Anyway, 800 Nineport Washington.
	How is your role as vice president in charge of policy in Ukraine and your son's job in Ukraine?
	How is that not a conflict of interest?
	It's not a conflict of interest.
	There's been no indication of any conflict of interest either from Ukraine or anywhere else.
	I'm not going to respond to that.
	Let's focus on the problem.
	Focus on this man, what he's doing that no president has ever done.
	No president.
	No president or vice president ever gave Mullahs in Iran $150 billion either, or promised Putin more flexibility, but don't tell the American people that we're going to be flexible.
	I mean, all of this stinks to high heaven.
	They want you to forget the rigged invest, the rigged primary with Bernie, the espionage act violated by Hillary slam dunk, slam dunk obstruction.
	They want you to forget the funneled money to a law firm, campaign finance issue, then hiring an op research firm, then hiring a foreign national.
	They don't want you to know that Ukraine did work on behalf of Hillary.
	How do we know?
	Well, look at Politico.
	I'll cite them.
	Yes, DNC operatives, contractors meeting at the Ukrainian embassy for the purpose of helping Hillary and digging up dirt on Donald Trump.
	Where do you think the Manafort stuff came from?
	Forget about that too.
	You know, they want you to forget, there was a good article.
	I forget where I found this.
	You know, Ukrainians did the digging of dirt, and they even conclude that they had the goods.
	They actually impacted the 2016 election on top of the dirty dossier to spy on the candidate.
	And the dossier's contents leaked to, you know, hacks like Izakov and conspiracy theorists like him and David Korn.
	They want you to forget that a shady Maltese professor set up a meeting with the Trump campaign aid for the purpose, yeah, of spying on the Trump campaign or the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer, you know, just happens to run into,
	you know, poor, unwitting George Papadopoulos in a London bar and tipped off the FBI about the aid's previous meeting with the professor that the Mueller report wrongly identified as Russian intelligence when he was Western intelligence.
	Anyone want to talk about that?
	Or the fact that top officials in the FBI, the CIA, the Justice Department, why didn't they ever alert the Trump campaign to potential threats from Russian agents?
	Do you think Donald Trump wouldn't have tried to work with them to get to the truth if anybody was acting this way?
	And I'm told by the end of this process, we're going to find out that they treated Hillary Clinton very differently on that very topic.
	You know, or would they want you to forget the same people that launched this counterintelligence investigation, which has to be from the president at the time?
	That's Obama.
	They want you to forget that those same people, you know, hid everything from then candidate and then president-elect and then President Trump.
	You know, then the same operatives are talking about, well, maybe we'll invoke the 25th Amendment or maybe we'll spy and we'll surreptitiously record the president.
	We'll set him up that way.
	You know, oh, and it was such a big deal.
	You're my guy, right, Jim?
	You know, okay, he never worked in politics.
	So when Donald Trump, being the mogul that he is, hired somebody, is working with somebody, says, you got the job.
	You know, he's like, we're going to work together, right?
	That's how it works.
	Would it really have been a horrible thing if Comey didn't already, we now know is corrupt.
	We know Comey's corrupt.
	There's no doubt about it.
	And I'm betting that we're going to find out even more about his relationship with Brennan.
	We're going to find out more what he really thought about the dossier and knows it wasn't verified.
	You know, you want us to forget that Barr said he'd get to the bottom of all this?
	And they're freaking out the fact that he's actually looking at the countries that likely did the illegal spying for them for the purpose of circumventing American law or Democratic senators asking Ukraine to help investigate Trump or they're going to risk losing U.S. aid.
	Yeah, that would be Murphy, Durbin, Leahy, and Menendez.
	Or that Democrats now feign outrage that Trump asked leaders of the Ukraine to get to the bottom of their election interference, which we know happened.
	You know, and they're in, then, of course, they have their stenographers in the mainstream media.
	You know, then, of course, we're leaking private conversations with the president that they never liked.
	And then Democrats all pretend to be outraged about all of this.
	They can't believe it.
	It's a cover-up.
	But look at all that they have to forget about their conduct.
	It doesn't matter to them how they get to where they want to go.
	You know, there's a great piece out by Victor Davis, you know, Hansen.
	You know, President Trump, how dare that he talk to the Australian prime minister and reference the role of foreign governments, particularly Australia in the electoral process.
	Yeah, let's forget about Alexander Downer.
	Let's forget about his role and the fact that he steered a large Australian donation to the Clinton Foundation.
	And he may have colluded with intelligence agencies to entrap this poor kid, George Papadopoulos, who I'm told there's exculpatory evidence out there for him.
	They're all upset about collusion, collusion.
	But, you know, okay, no Democrat is going to argue Ukraine interfered because of a DNC operative and contractor meeting with Ukrainians for the purpose of helping Hillary and to impact our elections.
	We're going to forget that.
	You know, Biden is out there, Trump colluding with the Ukrainian president.
	Okay, but then we have to stop the influence peddling that we know went on here or the fact that he shook down another country with a billion taxpayer dollars and gave him six hours to fire the guy investigating it all.
	And now there's even an affidavit signed by the prosecutor.
	He got fired.
	You know, okay, there's evidence.
	If Donald Trump did any of this, what do you think?
	What do you think it would be?
	What do you think the reaction would be?
	The fact that Mueller and his radical leftist staff, you know, did what they did to people in the course of this.
	You know, are we worried about leaking?
	Well, James Comey admits that he leaked and the presidential memos.
	You know, what are we going to see when we find about FISA abuse?
	What did they know that they didn't let anybody know they knew?
	They knew it was unverifiable.
	They did nothing to verify it because it just helped advance their cause because they know better than we know.
	We're supposed to pay attention to a whistleblower who's just what?
	Somebody with a political agenda.
	That gets exposed.
	Now we're told we have many whistleblowers when we have the actual conversation.
	And of course, Adam Schiff on tape.
	I am telling you, this is serious for one reason only because the outcome is done.
	Let them go.
	And I say, roll the call the roll.
	Let them vote.
	And they're going to do their thing.
	Whatever it is, it doesn't matter.
	Because they're not going to convict them of anything.
	Ken Starr had 11 felonies that Bill Clinton had committed when they impeached him.
	11 specific.
	What's the felony here?
	What's the high crime and misdemeanor here?
	But it's going to fail.
	And I know what the outcome is going to be.
	The American people are going to be disgusted.
	Yep, the smelly, the revenge of the smelly Walmart shoppers and Trump voters.
	That's where this is headed.
	This is now headed to, yeah, this is a bad idea.
	Those people, irredeemable, deplorables, I'm guessing they're going to be pissed off because this president who's kept his promises, done everything he said he would do, and is succeeding.
	This has now taken on an element of they just want to destroy him and in the process, insulting the American people along the way because it's really them that they don't like.
	They don't like that they voted for him.
	You know what they're going to do?
	They're going to vote for him again.
	That's the way to handle all of this.
	The way they don't want to, they don't have any confidence they can beat him.
	And doing this is only going to energize Donald Trump's base.
	And if they want to run on the Green New Deal and no private health insurance and Medicare for all, have at it.
	Let's have that vote now.
	Might as well know upfront whether America, as we know it, that has created the greatest standard of living for the entire world will survive or not.
	Let's have that vote.
	Let's make it a referendum up or down.
	Socialism or free market capitalism.
	What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
	Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
	Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
	Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
	We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
	You put two and two together.
	Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
	Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
	I'm Leon Napok from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
	This is Fiasco, Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Yes, that's right.
	Lock her up.
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, 800-941, Sean Tolfrey, telephone number.
	You want to be a part of the program hour two.
	I'm very proud to make this introduction.
	John Solomon is with us, now a Fox News channel investigative reporter and obviously a friend of this show.
	And he has obtained the transcript of testimony by Ambassador Kurt Volcker this weekend.
	And, you know, from everything that we had last week, it was fairly devastating towards them.
	First of all, congratulations.
	Second of all, you know, your work is incredible.
	And I think we're on the precipice here of getting to the real truth of Russia collusion.
	And that narrative is going to be totally debunked.
	It's going to happen with the Ukrainian issue faster and even more spectacularly, in my humble opinion.
	Yeah, there's no doubt, Sean, that we're at the cusp of getting a lot of the truth out here.
	And Attorney General Barr is in the process of helping declassify the Russia IG report.
	He's overseas trying to find out what other spying activities may or may not have gone on during the 2016 and 2017 timeframe.
	And then in the middle of this, we have this distraction called the Ukraine scandal, which I think when people see the facts and zero in rather than all the current rhetoric, they're going to realize that there's a substantial basis for being concerned about what happened on the ground in 2016 in Ukraine and inside our embassy,
	the Kiev Embassy, U.S. Embassy Kiev, in 2016 and 2017.
	And I think people have to remember the bad story they were sold in the beginning of 2017 about Russia collusion.
	I think there's a similar version of that going on right now about Ukraine.
	As for Volcker, he was an important witness.
	I think the most important thing is that he has told both in the transcript and in the private conversations that he had no evidence that there was a quid pro quo in place.
	There was no evidence that Donald Trump was withholding the military aid in order to force an investigation of Joe Biden's son.
	And I think that's going to be the most important outcome when they release a more complete transcript of his Q ⁇ A, because he was there for 10 hours.
	I think we're going to hear time and again, no quid pro quo, no quid pro quo, just like the text message from the European Union ambassador, Gary Sandlin, who said the same thing.
	The president wants no quid pro quo.
	I don't know how more clear the evidence needs to be that there was no quid pro quo.
	So important times ahead.
	I think people need to listen to the facts and not the spin.
	Well, the thing is, you know, behind closed doors, you know, what was he saying?
	The government of Ukraine was not pressured by Trump.
	He was saying that Ukraine never raised the issue of a quid pro quo.
	He was saying that no, they didn't view any of the interactions with the president as inappropriate at all.
	He confirmed Ukraine was not even aware that there was a U.S. hold on financial assistance until long after that was made public, like a month after and after the president's call with Zelensky.
	And when you look at what I had on Friday, the partial transcript, the issue of a hold placed on security assistance to Ukraine came up during this time.
	And he said, I didn't perceive these issues to be linked in any way, according to Ukrainian officials.
	And what was the president really negotiating?
	I mean, we now know, I'll quote Politico again, January 11, 2017.
	We know Ukraine did assist Hillary Clinton's campaign in the 2016 election.
	Now, this shows the hypocrisy of the left.
	I thought they cared about foreign influence in our campaigns.
	Apparently not, John Solomon.
	Well, that's a very good point.
	And let's keep in mind, in Volcker's testimony, the one that I obtained and spread around on Friday, he says he thinks it's highly probable that Ukraine tried to intervene in our election, particularly through the embassy.
	Now, there's a lot of reasons for that.
	You mentioned the politico story.
	That's a very important fact story with contemporaneous emails and interviews.
	Two years later, I interviewed or got a statement from the Ukraine ambassador to the United States, a guy named Ambassador Chalet.
	And he said flatly, yes, the Democratic National Committee came to me.
	Yes, they did ask me to get dirt on Donald Trump and Paul Manafort through this woman, Alexandra Chalupa.
	She also wanted our president, meaning the Ukrainian president, to come over to the United States and talk to an investigative reporter who was seeking dirt on Donald Trump.
	That sounds like a solicitation of foreign intervention in our election.
	No one seems to want to focus on that.
	But Volcker himself said, I think it's highly probable, highly probable, that there was an effort by the Ukrainians to play in the election.
	That's important testimony.
	And I think the more people hear the facts, the more there are these, we see the whole transcripts and not these partial little leaks that the Democrats are doing, the more we're going to realize, once again, we're getting sold the ruse, just like we were sold in 2016 and 17 on Russia collusion.
	Well, I mean, and I think the similarities are glaring.
	Here's where we are, though.
	I mean, look, impeachment is a political process.
	We know that while the House can impeach all they want, I think it backfires on them.
	I think the Senate dismisses it in very short order.
	And then the American people now are going to have to compare and contrast.
	There's certain things that we've discovered.
	We can start with the rigged primary against Bernie, but nobody ever wants to talk about that.
	I think the evidence is overwhelming, incontrovertible, that the Espionage Act and numerous subsections were violated by Hillary.
	Even James Comey said top secret classified information was on that server.
	I think if any American did what Hillary did by deleting and cleaning her hard drives and busting up devices, I think any American that did the same to anything subpoenaed, that would be viewed as obstruction.
	Then we have the issue of the dirty dossier, funneled money from a law firm to an op research to a foreign national.
	She paid for that, and subsequently information was leaked through people like Izakoff and David Korn.
	Then it was used as the, you know, no dossier.
	There would be no FISA warrant.
	Andrew McCabe said that himself.
	And then we have Sean, you mentioned Mike Isakoff, member Alexandra Chalupa, the DNC woman who was soliciting dirt on Ukraine.
	In May of 2016, she boasted in an email to her leadership at the DNC that she was, quote unquote, working with Mike Issakoff.
	I think that's a really important element, which is that Issakoff and the Ukrainian-American woman who was trying to get the Ukrainians involved in our election, there's that nexus as well.
	And I think the more people put all these contacts together, the more they can see how Hillary Clinton's campaign constructed a false narrative called Russia Collusion to try to influence the election.
	And in so doing, at times, they clearly intersect it with foreigners who then got involved in the election.
	That, I think, is a story that becomes more and more clear as we get the FISA report from the IG in a couple of weeks.
	And Bill Barr wraps up his testimony.
	I have sources telling me that there might be smoking gun evidence that Jim Comey and Brennan knew that the dossier was not verified even after they had signed off on the first FISA application.
	That would be Comey in his instance.
	Have you heard that?
	I have.
	And it's unclear what the evidence is.
	I've been told for quite some time it's an email, and it's probably part of that long, on-running email chain that Devin Nunez has repeatedly said he'd like to get released.
	I hope soon we will see that email chain released because I think it's a very long conversation.
	There was a running conversation inside the FBI about the credibility of the steel dossier and whether it should be used for the FISA.
	And I think the sooner we get that information out, the better the American public is to understand what really went on there.
	But it was your reporting, by the way, that told us eventually the FBI did get around to looking at the information.
	Yes.
	Now, in other words, they had a spreadsheet was the term you used.
	That's correct.
	And that spreadsheet assessed every factual statement or every statement in the dossier and tried to assess its accuracy, its reliability.
	And what it found at the end was about 90% of the steel dossier either could never be verified, had been debunked, or had been traced to open source internet garbage, basically internet rumor, as opposed to actionable intelligence.
	That makes it a really bad intelligence document.
	And for the purpose of using it to support the FISA, it's a real problem.
	Keep in mind, it's a very specific thing that they took from the dossier.
	They said they had verified to the FISA court that Carter Page had indeed gone to Moscow and met with two senior Russian officials.
	We now know that meeting didn't occur because Bob Mueller said it didn't curb.
	House intelligence said it didn't curb.
	Senate intelligence said it didn't curb.
	How could the FBI walk a FISA in, take that piece of information from the dossier, say it's verified when we know it was never true?
	Those are the sort of things that I think James Comey, Brennan Clapper, all are going to have to answer to in the next few months.
	So that is all going to come out as well as, well, I mean, I thought Victor Davis Hansen had a particularly smart analysis of all of this.
	And it's called the madness of progressive projection.
	That was the headline.
	I don't know if he wrote the headline or not, but he goes through all of this.
	And just to sum it up in so many different ways, that which they always accuse Trump of, they themselves are guilty of.
	That was the case in Russia.
	Yeah, but look, I have Biden's spokesperson, literally Kate Bettingfield.
	The White House approved Hunter's job in 2014.
	Listen to this.
	He's been asked, and he said, look, every single independent outlet that's looked into this has said there was no issue of wrongdoing here.
	And, you know, in 2014, the White House cleared Hunter serving on that board.
	Hold on a second.
	That was news to me.
	That sure was.
	And it shows in some degree.
	It shows that Joe knew, again, just like he was playing golf with Devin Archer, his son, and that picture emerged also.
	But he never talked to his son about his dealings with Ukraine.
	I mean, it's just one big lie.
	Here's the thing, though.
	I mean, you see the fever pitch of the media, the same people that lied, the same people that spread conspiracy theories and a hoax for two and a half years.
	You have the same cast of characters.
	The only difference here is they want to do it expeditiously without giving the minority any support or rights in this process whatsoever.
	They don't want the president's attorneys involved.
	They're not going to have a chance to question witnesses or bring their own evidence.
	And meanwhile, they just want to be able to say, no, no, no, no, what Biden did by shaking down the Ukrainian prosecutor, demanding he get fired, had nothing to do with his son.
	Why would any vice president ever demand such a thing then?
	Yeah, listen, there's so much of this story that doesn't add up.
	I'll give you just one example because it's personal to me.
	And when I look at it, it drives me nuts in terms of just seeing how neither the Democrats nor the news media want to look at the facts.
	So over the last few days, we've heard a lot of people say, listen, there's a prosecutor in Ukraine who said that the embassy gave him a do not prosecute list.
	They told him of people they didn't want to see prosecuted.
	We don't believe that story is true.
	We believe he made it up.
	We believe he recanted.
	Now, he has told me on the record, I never recanted.
	I stick by that story.
	There's no doubt it happened.
	But there is written evidence that it happened.
	There is a letter that I put into the public domain more than a year ago that states, it's from the U.S. Embassy to the Ukraine prosecutor saying you will not pursue this George Soros-funded group in Ukraine called ANCAC.
	It's in writing.
	No one in the news media, none of the Democrats want to look at the body of evidence.
	They want to spin in the area of uncertainty rather than look at the facts.
	And if impeachment goes that way, it won't be a very fair process.
	There are facts, written evidence, stubborn facts.
	Just like Chokin, the prosecutor, he's repeatedly said now an affidavit exists where he says he was fired because of the investigation into Biden in that six-hour interim period.
	And we know the Ukrainians helped Hillary, and we know a DNC operative contractor met to work with the Ukrainians to get dirt on Trump, and they succeeded.
	Even political acknowledges they succeeded.
	It's irrefutable.
	And there's also a court ruling in Ukraine.
	Correct.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	That they intervened in the election.
	That was a ruling last December.
	All of these facts are in evidence, and no one in the media and on the Democratic side wants to acknowledge those facts, and that's unfortunate.
	And now they're attacking you.
	What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
	Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
	Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
	Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
	We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
	You put two and two together.
	Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
	Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
	I'm Leon Nafok from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
	This is Fiasco, Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Yes, that's right.
	Lock her up.
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I know that like emotionally, it's so irritating to so many people, so many friends of mine.
	You're getting the same reaction I'm getting because everywhere I go, people are apoplectic at what the mob and the media and the Democrats are doing.
	This is beyond any normal back and forth.
	This is personal now.
	Yeah, but the problem is, is that the nets and the mainstream are so busy giving a false narrative.
	And unless people have the wherewithal to change the channel, do their own research, they're just being fed lies.
	But you know what?
	This is what I'm getting from my friends that are not like us, crazy about every detail of every story, every minute of every day.
	And they're like, really?
	You guys failed in three years.
	Now you're going to do it another time.
	And it's like the details even don't even matter.
	And there was a poll out I saw on whether or not they should investigate, you know, voters in a landslide want the Bidens investigated for both Ukraine and China, 57%.
	That's a lot.
	And I think people have just picked up that this is all a political game.
	And I'll tell you the other thing that's resonating is that they, people are perceptive.
	They realize they just hate Trump.
	There's nothing else that they stand for, nothing.
	And what they do stand for is really bad in terms of, yeah, new Green Deal.
	Yeah, I don't think you're wrong at all.
	And I hope that they can't.
	I don't think I'm wrong at all.
	I think that they should continue their paths of destruction because it's going to be a long other four years for them as they try to find something else to argue about.
	But that's what I keep saying.
	I said, you know, this is, I know how the story is going to end.
	It's going to end whether they impeach or don't impeach.
	And it seems like they're more locked into it now than ever.
	Let's assume they do.
	They're going to lose because it is, it's all of this is really about people.
	They hate that the American people didn't vote for their person.
	It's that simple.
	And they can't believe they've lost.
	And they had their plan in place from the get-go, their insurance policy.
	And then when that didn't work out after four investigations, now it's insurance policy 5.0.
	Jay Seculo, next.
	What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
	Nine times out of 10, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
	Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
	Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
	We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
	You put two and two together.
	Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
	Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
	I'm Leon Nayfak from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
	This is fiasco Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Yes, that's right.
	Lock her up.
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	Let's be honest.
	You don't need to be explicit to set up a shady deal.
	I mean, if you've ever watched any mafia anythings, you'll know that explicit is the exact opposite of what they do.
	I think those are mob tactics.
	I think the president styles himself as this unitary kind of mob figure.
	This individual went through these processes designed to protect individuals from exactly the kind of thing we're seeing right now from the president of the United States, which is almost like a mob style hit.
	Trump is the worst criminal.
	He's like a character from the Sopranos who everyone knows is only going to last one episode.
	We are at a moment in our lives in this country where this guy is like a gangster.
	He's a wannabe gangster.
	And he, the thing is that he makes gangsters look bad.
	He makes gangsters look bad.
	Then now we'll say, oh, Donald Trump is a gangster.
	All right.
	There's nothing at this point that this radical extreme Democratic Party won't say won't do to get Donald Trump.
	It has been their mission from day one.
	But remember, they can't win in the arena of ideas.
	They're even afraid to take this a year from now and have an election.
	So the bottom line is they didn't get what they wanted on election night 2016.
	They didn't get what they wanted after four investigations and conspiracy theories with Mueller.
	So now we'll just get Donald Trump any way we can get him and we'll manufacture a way, but we certainly don't want to have to run against him.
	This is going to end up going nowhere.
	Another arena area they've been trying to get the president is on the issue of taxes.
	And there was an immediate appeal.
	Remember, this is New York judges in a lot of cases.
	They're not exactly conservative, but the Second Circuit Court of Appeals did, in fact, grant the president an emergency stay after a federal judge in New York City said the president must turn over years of tax filings and financial records to Manhattan prosecutors.
	It's any way they can get them, they're going to get them.
	Jay Seculo, counsel to the president, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice.
	This has to do with the Manhattan DA, Cyrus Vance Jr., subpoenaed his tax records.
	It seems to me just part of let's throw everything against the wall stick scenario of the Democratic Party now.
	Well, this is an extension of what the House was trying to do when they had these committees meet and get together to try to get the president's tax returns.
	And the state of California, remember, passed a law saying that you cannot appear on a presidential ballot for election in a primary if, in fact, you've not given your five years' worth of tax returns.
	The Constitution of the United States has what's called a presidential qualification clause, and it lists out what qualifications are to run for president.
	And guess what's not in it?
	Tax returns.
	They weren't even thinking about tax returns because we didn't have a federal income tax like that at the time.
	I mean, that's how absurd this is.
	So then you have the DA, the local county district attorney for New York County, Cyrus Vance, send a subpoena to the president's accountant saying, we want the tax returns and other business records.
	So we said, which we believe is clear in the Constitution, that in fact, you don't have, and this is what I think is important here.
	You do not have a situation where you cannot allow a situation where you allow the president of the United States to be, let's say, subpoenaed by the 5,000 other DAs and local district attorneys throughout the United States.
	Because what prevents that?
	So the Constitution set up because of the unique aspects of being president.
	The president's position as president is unique in our constitutional framework.
	And because of that, the separation of powers and federalism and supremacy clause require that if you have to take an action against the president, you have to start that action to remove him from office, not bring a case.
	In other words, you don't let the Article, the President of the United States, the Article II authority be overrun by a Article III judge or in that matter, a state court judge.
	Because then what would stop the president from just being investigated by all of these?
	So here's what happened.
	We filed a federal lawsuit challenging Cyvance's subpoena.
	We got a temporary relief that was agreed to by Cyvance and others in his office for a few days, about a week and a half.
	Then we briefed the schedule, did a briefing schedule before the court of the district court.
	That judge issued this morning a 75-page order against our position, saying that the case is thrown out.
	Now, over the weekend, I had prepared with our team both a stay application for the Second Circuit and a potential stay application to the Supreme Court of the United States, if necessary.
	So what happened was we filed, we get the 75-page order.
	We said that we would immediately challenge it.
	We did.
	Literally within minutes of the decision from the district court judge, I was before.
	Our team was before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
	And within minutes of filing this application for stay, we got the following order.
	United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Donald J. Trump plaintiff, appellant versus Cyrus Vance in his official capacity as DA of the county of New York.
	And it says defendant appellees.
	The appellant, that's the president, has filed a motion seeking an order temporarily staying enforcement of a subpoena to his accountant.
	Because of the unique issues raised by this appeal, it is hereby ordered that a temporary administrative stay, administrative stay, is granted pending an expedited review by a panel of the court.
	A scheduling order will issue in the ordinary course.
	What the court recognized immediately was the unique constitutional issues raised in this appeal.
	And they are of such constitutional magnitude that the court issued a stay and is going to issue.
	We haven't got the briefing order yet, John, but we will get it.
	Explain the constitutional, because look, as far as I'm concerned, we're now living, Levin labeled it well in one of his recent books when he said this is a post-constitutional America.
	But everything that they want to do, Jay, stack the courts, eliminate the Electoral College.
	They are willing to weaponize the powerful tools of intelligence.
	Nobody seems to care that the weapons of our intelligence community have now been turned on a president of the United States just because they don't like him and they don't like the results of the Mueller witch hunt and they didn't like the results of the 2016 election.
	And, you know, the idea that whistleblowers are important when you actually have the transcript is a little mind-numbing to me as well.
	And they're going to expedite impeachment.
	We're losing.
	We have fundamental principles that have really served us well.
	And they seem to want to bypass all of it in their ambitious pursuit of power.
	But walk through the Constitutional Commission.
	Mark's right.
	It is almost like they're operating.
	By the way, I hope the courts are not because we're winning in court.
	By the way, California, remember that attempt there to circumvent the Constitution, we filed in federal court and we won.
	So, you know, it's not that you don't win, but they are trying to circumvent the actually, Mark says we're living in a post-constitutional environment.
	I think what they've done, what the left has done, is weaponize the execution of the Constitution so that if a president exercises his Article II authority, for instance, in discussions with Ukraine, all of a sudden they weaponize that into some kind of illegal act.
	If the president doesn't give them tax returns to the local DA, they weaponize.
	They try to weaponize the Constitution.
	But in fact, what's at stake here in the constitutional sense, and this is what I think is the important part, is that we have, because of the unique position the president plays in our constitutional scheme, you have safeguards in place so that you don't have every DA in the country trying to investigate a president,
	as our founders said, so that magistrates, local magistrates would thwart the execution of the office of president.
	So you have separation of powers.
	The president is the commander-in-chief and chief law enforcement officer.
	You have also supremacy, the federal constitutional rights take precedent over a state here, a district attorney.
	You have federalism, just general federalism issues here, the federal role, the federal role of federal government, but also equally important is, again, the role of commander-in-chief, the role as the president is chief executive.
	And you put that together.
	It's very simple.
	The Constitution does not allow these kind of investigations of a sitting president.
	If there is an attempt to take what I would call an action against the president, it is a political one.
	That's what our founders decided.
	That is an impeachment proceeding, which, of course, despite their protests to the contrary, Sean, the impeachment inquiry is not an impeachment proceeding.
	They still haven't called for a vote on the floor for impeachment.
	I suspect that they don't for a while, maybe never.
	And I think what you have here, in my view, is extra constitutional activity by the DA, extra constitutional activity by the House.
	Adam Schiff should be ashamed of himself for the stunts he's played.
	And I think that at the end of the day, I'm very confident we carry the day.
	You know me, I'm an optimist anyways, but I prepare for everything.
	And the fact is we were so prepared this weekend that we were ready to go within seconds of that decision coming down.
	Not minutes, seconds.
	I was on the phone with my colleague Will Consevoy.
	We decided within a minute.
	How do you feel about this court?
	It's going to now be presented to the judges in an expedited fashion.
	Second Circuit.
	Second Circuit.
	I mean, look, we know how this works.
	They go judge shopping.
	Yeah, I mean, here's the thing.
	The Manhattan DA did this was not an accident.
	Yeah.
	But here's the thing.
	I think we have to look at it this way.
	The Second Circuit also has some constitutionalists on that court, conservative judges.
	Depends on the panel.
	I think ultimately it probably goes to the full Second Circuit, what's called on bonk.
	And I think there's a look, if it rules against us, I think it goes to the Supreme Court of the United States and we win.
	But we're going to, listen, we're going to put this through its bases.
	This is a big issue, really big issue.
	Let's go to the issue of the president in Ukraine.
	The idea that we now have multiple whistleblowers is meaningless to me when you have a transcript.
	Completely.
	I'm glad you said that.
	Totally.
	Who cares what some CIA officer thought about a conversation, even if he had first-hand knowledge of it, we released the transcript.
	Go ahead.
	I'm sorry.
	But the point is, is that, all right, now, one of the biggest things that I fear the most in all of this is we're now spying on a president of the United States regularly.
	Nobody seems to care.
	I mean, when has it ever happened that conversations are released?
	Look, if this is going to be the precedent, we're going to go back and we're going to start looking at transcripts.
	I would like Biden's transcripts when he spoke to the leaders of Ukraine during this whole issue involving his son.
	I wouldn't mind getting the transcripts of Putin and Barack Obama after he finally had more flexibility when he was reelected.
	And I wouldn't mind having Iranian Mullers and Rouhani and the rest of them when they talk to Obama about the $150 billion in cash and other currency.
	I'd like those calls and transcripts of those calls released also.
	Well, look, here's the thing.
	You really don't wish any of these transcripts were released.
	Let's be honest.
	In the constitutional framework, again, that we live in, this isn't a healthy development that we're releasing conversations that heads of state have had with each other.
	The president did it here out of an abundance of transparency.
	There was a policy decision.
	Let me tell you what you can't do.
	You can't just start waiving every conversation that the president has with every other head of state because then you'll have no conversations with head of state.
	And this president's been able to accomplish an awful lot despite the incoming here, which has been intensive to say the least.
	But I think we got to be cautious about this handing over documents like this.
	And so now there's a second whistleblower.
	The first whistleblower, of course, you know why they're doing that, Sean, because the first one had no credibility in the end.
	Zero.
	All here.
	And the attorneys for the whistleblower saying, oh, no, no, we've got plenty of whistleblowers.
	How many people listen in to one comp one president?
	Yeah, you, you know, listen, here's the thing.
	This is what I think is important to understand on the first whistle.
	But why are they past the first whistleblower now?
	Well, the whistleblower didn't, on the forms, on the applications, on the forms you fill out for the urgent form that they have.
	The whistleblower did not bother to put that they had conversations with the House.
	Adam Schiff said the exact opposite.
	We did not reach out to them.
	We did not talk to them.
	And then, so that hurt that credibility there between the committee and the individual that came forward.
	That all of a sudden is off because that doesn't make any sense anymore.
	This person did not have firsthand.
	Now they have, we've got somebody with first-hand knowledge, except when it's already out, already out.
	They transcribe it.
	Stay right there.
	Jay Seculo, counsel to the president, chief counsel, American Center for Law and Justice, more with him on the other side.
	Greg Jarrett gives us the full complete analysis legally at the top of the hour.
	We have the other news of the day.
	We got a great Hannity tonight at nine.
	What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
	Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
	Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
	Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
	We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
	You put two and two together.
	Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
	Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
	I'm Leon Navok from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
	This is fiasco, Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Yes, that's right.
	Lock her up.
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, as we continue, Jay Seculo, counsel to the president, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice.
	All right, so we're talking about the whistleblower, non-whistleblowers.
	So now we got tons of whistleblowers.
	And I actually think what this really comes down to, it's now become by any means necessary to remove Donald Trump.
	They couldn't accept the election results, the Mueller report.
	And I don't think they care what damage they're doing to the country, the Constitution.
	I mean, if they can stack the courts, they'll do that.
	If they can get rid of the Electoral College, they'll do that.
	And if they can now leak conversations with the foreign leaders and their spin on them, they're going to do that also.
	Well, look, they're not going to stop.
	I mean, if we think they're going to stop trying, but by the way, they'll get off Ukraine.
	So what do we have?
	You look back.
	What it was Russia, then the collusion was no collusion.
	Then it was obstruction, but then there was no obstruction.
	Then it was quid pro quo and there's no quid pro quo.
	Then it was there, there's a cover-up, except the transcript was leaked.
	Then there was no one ever spoke to the whistleblower, but then the House did speak to the whistleblower.
	So now it's now it's we've got a second whistleblower because the first whistleblower's credibility is in serious jeopardy.
	Are they going to put forward an impeachment article against the president of the United States simply for this?
	Because they will not put this witness up.
	Who's going to cross-examine this anonymous witness?
	So that's going to be the basis of an article of impeachment?
	Give me a break.
	Not in the Constitutional Republic.
	All right.
	Well, I got to hope you're right.
	Jay Seculo, thank you.
	You got your work cut out for you because it's the mob, the media mob, the Democratic mob.
	They just are anything and everything is impeachable.
	Curing cancer would be impeachable if it's Donald Trump who came up with a cure.
	Quick break.
	We'll come back.
	800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, we get to Greg Jarrett as we continue.
	Your calls also.
	800-941, Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
	We're about to find out if the new president of our country is going to do what Russia wants.
	As if there are no shoes on the Trump human centipede that are not about Russia.
	Russia, Russia, Russia.
	This clown about collusion with Russia will hang over him no matter where he stands.
	He may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time.
	I think they're shocked that the news is tightening.
	It's clear that Mueller is now connecting the dots between a massive obstruction intended to hide the truth.
	This president needs to be impeached.
	I believe that.
	I believe there was collusion.
	The beginning of the end of the Trump presidency.
	You can feel the thread being pulled.
	You can feel the clothes starting to come off the emperor.
	I believe this is the beginning of the end.
	The president sees the walls closing in and is lashing out.
	He's desperate.
	He's obviously flailing around because he feels the walls closing in.
	He feels the walls closing in on him.
	The president has done everything he can in trashing the special counsel.
	Mr. Trump is seeing more and more of the walls closing in on him, which is why he is becoming increasingly desperate.
	What if he refuses to open the White House door?
	What if the secret, you know, what if he fires any Secret Service agent who will allow the federal marshals in?
	What if Donald Trump simply decides, I don't have to follow the law.
	I refuse to be held under the law.
	No marshal can get into this White House.
	The presidency is effectively a Russian op, right?
	You know, partisan warfare between Republicans and Democrats.
	This is international warfare against our country.
	That was just for the Russia stuff.
	Do you get the point here?
	Glad you're with us.
	News Roundup, Information Overload Hour, Sean Hannity Show, 800-941.
	Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
	Lies, conspiracy theories, one big hoax.
	They couldn't beat him.
	Trump shocked the world in November 2016.
	Then they thought Mueller was going to give them what they wanted and they'd impeach him over that.
	It didn't work.
	Four separate investigations, a nine-month FBI investigation, a House Intelligence Committee investigation, bipartisan Senate committee investigation, and Robert Mueller himself.
	They never got what they promised, what they said, what they want.
	They promised you all of this.
	They promised the country Adam Schiff more than anybody.
	We have the evidence.
	The evidence is overwhelming.
	We have it all.
	It's already on the record.
	We've got them.
	And it didn't happen.
	Now we just, now they're so freaked out.
	They didn't get what they wanted.
	Now, here's the interesting thing.
	They're not willing to just take the president on at the ballot box, in part because his track record is too strong.
	They see the crowds that he pulls together.
	So, well, as Al Green said, the congressman, well, we better impeach him because we're not going to beat him.
	So they better get rid of him now, which is the thinking behind all of this.
	Anyway, Greg Jarrett's brand new book, a follow-up to his number one bestseller, Witch Hunt, the story of the greatest mass delusion in American political history.
	It's out today.
	It's on amazon.com and Hannity.com.
	Bookstores everywhere as of today.
	Greg, welcome back.
	Congratulations.
	But really, I guess now there's going to be part three, which is the Ukraine lie.
	You're right.
	First, it was Russia collusion.
	Now it's Ukraine collusion.
	You know what?
	Your listeners need to know that this new book that comes out by me, Witch Hunt, this was only possible because of you.
	You led the fight to expose the truth.
	You gave voice to people like me who've been trying to unravel all the corruption surrounding the witch hunt.
	If you had not had the determination and courage to dig up the evidence and present it to your listeners and viewers every single day, Americans, I believe, would have seen this president destroyed.
	So this book, Sean, is really a book of your excellent work.
	Well, I'm going to defer to you because listen, I saw the hard work.
	We have, there are a few of us.
	There's not a lot of us.
	And I'm going to miss somebody's name, so I won't give the names, but we know who they are because they've been on radio and TV now for over two and a half years.
	And everything that they said that they claimed was true about Donald Trump actually turned out to be true about them, about Hillary Clinton and the corruption.
	You literally have to suspend any connection to reality to do what it is they're doing here.
	And the same, by the way, Joe Biden's on tape admitting that he shook down Ukraine using taxpayer dollars for the purpose of getting a guy fired after his son cashed in with no experience in Ukraine.
	There's no mention of it.
	Joe got asked once.
	It's a fever pitch and appetite like I've never seen in my life to destroy this man.
	Oh, you're absolutely right.
	You know, it was appropriate for the president to ask Ukraine to look into any potentially corrupt acts by a high-ranking, you know, public official involving a Ukrainian company.
	If Joe Biden's intent was to protect or benefit his son by threatening to withhold a billion dollars, that's taxpayer money, in order to force the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor who happened to be investigating the very company that his son,
	Hunter Biden, was working for, this would constitute a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
	It would be extortion, bribery, honest services, fraud.
	And Biden is not exempt from adhering to those laws just because he's running for president.
	The president was exercising a proper use of executive power, not abusing it.
	And it's Nancy Pelosi and Shifty Schiff who are abusing the power of impeachment in this, their latest witch hunt.
	What do you think in terms of the damage that they're doing here?
	I mean, we've got, look, impeachment is a political process.
	It's not a legal process.
	There's nothing illegal.
	There's nothing wrong with the president's call.
	I mean, to me, the fact that the media is obsessed, we've got more whistleblowers because the first whistleblower was too political and uh-oh, it didn't work out.
	But we have others that heard the same call.
	First thing I'm thinking is, how many people are spying on the president?
	How many people within the intelligence community have been weaponized to destroy the president because they don't like the outcome of an election and they don't like that they were beaten in the battle with the special counsel because there was nothing there.
	So now they're just going to leak and leak until they get the smoking gun leak that they want.
	Yeah, and the FBI and the CIA and many in the intelligence community are all aligned to spy and lie in order to remove President Trump.
	And, you know, the House knows that the president's telephone call was perfectly legal and acceptable and proper.
	It doesn't fall under the reading of high crimes and misdemeanor.
	So what are they doing?
	They're conjuring up this amorphous concept called abuse of power.
	Oh, it was an abuse of power.
	The problem with that, it's not anywhere in the Constitution.
	There's no fixed meaning that everybody agrees upon.
	This is, and I wrote a column about this today.
	It's a phrase of shifting sands.
	It's subjective.
	It's susceptible to pardon abuse, exactly what the framers feared.
	They didn't want a president to be removed on some pretext that is purely political reasons or personal animus.
	And Pelosi knows this.
	In January of this year, she said, quote, we shouldn't be impeaching for a political reason, yet that is precisely what she's doing.
	So all of this, how does it end?
	Do you think, to me, I think the country sees this for what it is.
	I think Washington has their own frenzy.
	It's a mob mentality now.
	And the media mob, I mean, they were embarrassed.
	They had egg on their face.
	They got it wrong for two and a half years.
	They want to prove that they were right someway.
	Maybe they weren't right about Russia, but we are right about Ukraine.
	And I'm sure if they don't impeach them on Ukraine, then they'll move on to the next topic.
	They just seem to make it up out of whole cloth.
	But to get where they are, they have to suspend any analysis of what the Democrats have actually done, which is real collusion with Russia and a Russian dossier and Ukraine and shaking down people with taxpayer dollars and real pay-to-play schemes in the process of all of that.
	You know, you have to accept that Hillary got a free ride in the investigation into a secret server with classified top secret information on it.
	And then, of course, the obstruction aspect of deleting the emails, et cetera.
	Then the dirty dossier, not verified, used to spy on a presidential candidate.
	And then a transition team and presidency, then spying outsourced to foreign countries.
	You have to not look at any of this to be a Democrat today.
	You know, when you look back at the last two presidential impeachment proceedings in 1974 and 98, they were presided over by House Chairman Peter Redino and Henry Hyde, who were agreed upon by all as fair-minded,
	able, even-tempered.
	That is the antithesis now of Adam Schiff, who has been appointed hand of the gavel by Nancy Pelosi this speaker.
	Schiff wears his partisan spite on his sleeve.
	His malice goes deeper than that inane statement he fabricated at the beginning of the recent hearing.
	His deceptions know no bounds.
	He's not only lied about the whistleblower and got four Pinocchios by the Washington Post fact checker, but he has lied about Carter Page.
	He lied about Bruce Orr.
	He lied about the dossier.
	He lied about evidence of collusion that he claimed he had, which he didn't have.
	And I write about all of this in my book.
	So if Democrats are serious in their impulsive impeachment inquiry, Nancy Pelosi should dump Adam Schiff as the guy who is in charge.
	She's not going to do it because she and Schiff are now dedicated collaborators.
	They're joined at the political hip.
	They want to destroy Trump's presidency at any cost.
	And I guarantee you the cost will be, in the end, to Democrats.
	I think politically speaking, because it's a political process, we know nothing's going to happen in the Senate, but there's got to be a price to pay here.
	I mean, because while the president has had to deal with more crap than anybody else, do you recall in your lifetime any president having their conversations with foreign leaders, prime ministers, presidents leaked the way now this has happened on how many numerous occasions?
	You know, what's happened is, is that there are still deep state operatives that are loyal to the Brennan's, the Comeys, McCabes, the Strux, and et cetera.
	And clearly, that's where this is all coming from.
	But we've never had to deal with this before.
	The weaponry of intelligence gathering has never been stronger.
	And to me, that's a threat to the country because they're willing to bypass what the will of the American people is and try to unseat with these leaks a duly elected president, which is what everything was about from the get-go.
	This is unprecedented.
	No American president has ever been under siege day after day.
	And it began with the day he was inaugurated.
	The Washington Post in a bold headline said the impeachment of Donald J. Trump is now underway.
	Think about that.
	He hadn't even moved into the White House yet.
	And the forces of evil were gathered against him to impeach him.
	And they have tried at least a dozen different arguments, none of them holding any validity or currency.
	All right, we've got to take a break.
	Greg Jarrett, we'll have more on the other side.
	Fox News legal analyst, his sequel to his number one bestseller is just out today.
	And this is called Witch Hunt, the story of the greatest mass delusion in American political history.
	It gives you facts.
	It gives you timelines.
	It gives you every instance.
	And yeah, this is basically it's unfolding now in a third wave with Ukraine.
	Quick break.
	Amazon.com, Hannity.com, now in bookstores across the country.
	Greg Jarrett with us, his brand new book out today, a follow-up to his number one bestseller.
	It's called Witch Hunt, the story of the greatest mass delusion in American political history.
	Amazon.com, Hannity.com, bookstores everywhere.
	So where does this end?
	Because it seems like they're pretty hell-bent on impeaching the president.
	Okay, they'll impeach him.
	Mitch McConnell said, sure, he's going to take it up.
	He has to in the Senate.
	How long is a different story?
	You may have your Mitt Romneys and your Ben Sasses of the world that hate the president for their own personal reasons, but I don't see the Republican Party, them getting two-thirds of the Senate to convict, which means it'll be over in pretty short order.
	And then now this is the legacy of the Democratic Party, the party of impeachment, the party of abuse of power, the party that wants a post-constitutional America, a party that wants to stack the courts, wants to eliminate the Electoral College.
	And if they don't like the results of an election, they'll do anything and everything to take that president out because they can't beat him.
	They can only take him out if two-thirds of the Senate agree to convict him for impeachment.
	Now, this was the wisdom of the framers of our Constitution.
	They feared people like Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Jerry Nadler that for purely political reasons, they would try to evict a president from the White House.
	And so they created...
	Yes, it's easy to move for impeachment in the House.
	A simple majority works.
	But they made it exceedingly difficult in the Senate to remove the president from office, two-thirds majority.
	And, you know, in the Bill Clinton impeachment, the Independent Council found 11 different crimes committed by Bill Clinton, tampering with witnesses, obstruction of justice, lying.
	And yet he beat a conviction in the Senate on impeachment by a country mile.
	So here, there are no high crimes and misdemeanors.
	They've simply conjured up this notion of abusive power, and that ain't going to fly.
	All right, Greg Jarrett, congrats.
	New book out today, Witch Hunt, the story of the greatest mass delusion in American political history.
	Now on bookstores, Amazon.com, Hannity.com.
	Congratulations.
	This book is chock full of information timelines and everything that the media forgot about what they did and how this all went down and how wrong they've been like they're wrong now.
	When we come back, wide open telephones, 800-941.
	Sean, if you want to be a part of the program as we continue.
	All right, 25 to the top of the hour, 800-941.
	Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, by the way, the speaker in reality, not speaker in name only, Nancy Pelosi, but Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has now unveiled a plan to give full federal benefits to criminal,
	illegal aliens.
	By the way, saying that in New York could cost me $250,000 if it is deemed, even though it's the statutory language, I didn't make it up.
	That's what the law says.
	But if you say it in New York, they risk putting you in jail or charging you $250,000.
	So anyway, when you think the Democratic Party and their radical leaders really, this is all basically a response to the squad.
	All of this impeachment madness, this is to cater to the most extreme radical elements that have now taken over the Democratic Party and the real, clear, present danger and fear that Nancy Pelosi has about losing her speakership.
	Now you've got the corrupt Adam Schiff leading the way.
	And the fact that, you know, here he is just making stuff up as during the committee hearings that Trump never said.
	Just makes it up.
	Oh, it was a parody when he finally got caught doing it.
	Nancy Pelosi's interview, she didn't even know he did that.
	Anyway, so when you thought it couldn't really get any more crazy, it is.
	But Ocasio-Cortez at the top of her list now is to pledge to give full benefits, federal benefits to criminal illegal aliens.
	It is known as the Embrace Act.
	And we also have the Mercy and Reentry Act and the Embrace Act.
	So I'll start with Mercy and Reentry Act.
	The Mercy and Reentry Act allows us to open all of our social safety nets and it ends federal discrimination on our social programs based on people who were formerly incarcerated.
	And the Embrace Act, we are doing the same.
	And we're ending, and it's a piece of legislation that ends similar discrimination based on documentation status.
	It's kind of a next level piece of legislation.
	And it is something that people are going to say, why would you do that?
	I believe that we need to acknowledge the contributions that immigrants make in America.
	And if you contribute to our society, I believe that you should benefit from our society.
	Oh, okay.
	So we have the Embrace Act allowing illegal aliens to claim the same welfare benefits as all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants.
	The Mercy in Reentry Act would grant public benefits to those convicted of criminal offenses.
	Okay, I think I got this down now.
	I'm just trying to understand liberal, extreme, radical madness, because that's what that is.
	I mean, okay, even if you commit crimes, we're just going to forgive them.
	Pretty nuts.
	Let me go to, you know, the New York Times, this was an interesting piece.
	They're kind of like declaring war on free speech, the paper of record.
	They had an article openly kind of, well, not kind of declaring war on free speech, you know, in as much as the left has been at war with free speech for a while, especially with conservative speech.
	But the new article bluntly is entitled, Free Speech is Killing Us.
	I mean, the piece by this guy, Andrew Morantz, solemnly declares he has spent the past few years embedded as a reporter with the trolls, the bigots, the propagandists.
	I no longer have any doubt the brutality that germinates on the internet can leap into the world of flesh and blood.
	And of course, the same could be said of the underground anti-Soviet cells in the 80s, you know, French revolutionary salons in the 1700s, Massachusetts town halls, and the run-up to the American Revolution.
	Anyway, Moranitz appears to be arguing against the colossal straw man in which there is never any talking before violence.
	Yeah, people do talk before they do things, and it's not always good.
	So, you know, this is where the left is now taking this.
	We have a Southwest flight attendant, allegedly profiled Trump supporter in a Facebook post, literally shaming a passenger because he had a Trump 45 t-shirt on.
	And the flight attendant allegedly encountered the passenger on a recent flight, later shared a picture of the man in his shirt on his personal Facebook account, and along with the photograph, which showed the man wearing a t-shirt that read Trump 45, suck it up, buttercup.
	The flight attendant shared the caption that reportedly suggested the passenger was treated differently than others on the flight.
	Someone did not get my most positively outrageous service today on my flight.
	That's what the flight attendant's doing.
	Hey, does it really matter what somebody's politics are?
	Unbelievable.
	You got LA officials pressuring Newsom to declare a state of emergency amid the homeless crisis.
	Let's see how liberal cities, why is it all these big liberal cities are having all these problems?
	Because they have all this money they're taking from everybody.
	And they're the ones with the highest crime rates, the biggest homeless problems.
	San Francisco, L.A., it's just so out of control.
	Anyway, California, New Jersey are well represented on the list of miserable U.S. cities.
	Business Insider, they released their list of the 50 most miserable cities in America with cities in California, 10, New Jersey, 9.
	And in compiling their list, they cited the U.S. Census information on a thousand cities, metrics on crime, drug addiction, population changes, job opportunities, commute times, household income, abandoned homes, effects from natural disasters.
	Yeah, California.
	Let's see.
	It's got Bell Gardens, Compton, El Monte, Huntington Park, Lancaster, and it goes on from there.
	Nine New Jersey cities, Camden, Newark, New Brunswick, Passaic, Patterson.
	Goes there.
	Six Florida cities, but again, that probably has more to do with natural disaster stuff.
	Sam Stein, Adam Schiff, expressed regret for lying about having no prior contact with the whistleblower.
	The Daily Beast coming to the rescue of Adam Schiff.
	Oh, yeah.
	Okay.
	Well, he denied it anyway.
	And he lied about it.
	This guy has no business running any.
	The only one that's on tape colluding with Russians is him.
	And the fact that nobody, you know, nobody says a thing about it.
	Okay.
	It's like the only one on tape in New York at some point after the 2013 Miss University.
	Compromising materials.
	Pageant.
	Absolutely.
	And she got compromising materials on Trot after their Relations.
	Okay.
	And what's the nature of the compromise?
	Well, there were pictures of naked Trump.
	Naked Trump pictures.
	Did Vladimir see them?
	Putin was made aware of the availability of the compromising material.
	Yes, of course, Buzawa shared those materials with Sobchak and Sopchak shares those materials with Putin because she's a goddaughter of Putin and Putin decided to press on Trump.
	And the materials that you can provide to the committee or to the FBI, would they corroborate this allegation?
	Sure, of course.
	But the compromising maturity.
	All right.
	But I mean, he's on tape.
	What is he doing?
	The very thing that they're claiming Trump did.
	I mean, that's the great irony in all of this.
	And they don't even care.
	It doesn't matter.
	All right, let's get to your busy calls.
	You've been waiting very patiently.
	Let's say hi to Andy, Seattle, Washington.
	Andy, hi, how are you?
	Welcome to the program.
	How are you doing?
	Thanks for letting me on, sir.
	And here's my question for you.
	It's obvious there's a coordinated coup attempt to try to take Trump down and the lying.
	But with the lying, you have the loss of integrity of the institutions.
	And when you have the loss of the integrity of the House or the FBI or the CIA and the loss of faith in the American public, then you're going to start to lose our sovereignty.
	So at what point in time do these lies go from just a coordinated political coup into treason?
	Because if we lose our sovereignty, we lose our country.
	Look, I don't like to throw that word around because it's so loaded.
	I will say this.
	There's nothing good about what they're doing here for their country.
	The country's not being thought of in any of this.
	To get to where they are as Democrats, you've got to understand something here.
	They can't accept election results.
	They can't accept four separate investigations on Russia.
	There's no doubt it's now by any means necessary.
	And by that, it means, you know, they can't even risk that Donald Trump will get reelected.
	They can't wait the year for the election.
	The sad part is, you know, to the extent that they're aware of the damage that they're doing, I mean, it's hard for me to analyze that because I don't know what's in somebody's heart and mind, but there's nothing good in what they're doing here.
	I said this earlier.
	Objective truth doesn't matter anymore.
	What matters is the whirlwind of fury and sort of like a tornado of hysteria.
	You know, it's they've they want blood in the water.
	They're embarrassed.
	You got to understand this.
	They went all in two and a half years, Russia, Russia, Russia.
	They went all in.
	And to achieve what they want, they don't think they can win at the ballot box, which means they don't really have a lot of respect for we, the smelly Walmart people shoppers and the irredeemable deplorables.
	They just don't care.
	So they're willing to weaponize the tools of intelligence and not ask a single question about it.
	They are willing to accept, you know, go through my list of what has gone on here.
	Hillary rigged primary.
	Hillary was guilty as hell with all the evidence you can ever want of violations of the Espionage Act and all the subsections.
	Hillary was guilty of obstruction, slam dunk case.
	You know, there was no Trump-Russia collusion for investigations into it, but there was a Russian bought and paid for dossier that was never verified, leaked to their allies in the press to influence the 2016 election.
	That happened with funneled money to a law firm, hiring an op research firm, hiring a foreign national to dig up dirt.
	Then we had the Ukraine issue.
	The Ukrainians were helping Hillary Clinton.
	Nobody seems to care.
	Even politico, they nailed it in January of 2017 before Trump became president, January 11th, and that they were trying to make amends in Ukraine because they bet on the wrong horse.
	And you had DNC contractors meeting with Ukrainians for the purpose of getting dirt on Donald Trump to impact the election.
	That's all there.
	You have to separate from truth and reality.
	You know, you can have Joe Biden bragging on tape that he shook down Ukraine for the purpose of demanding the prosecutor investigating his son who had no experience with Ukraine or oil, gas, or energy, but's getting paid millions of dollars.
	You know, he's bragging about it.
	You have to suspend all of this.
	You have to forget the dirty dossier was not verified, but we had deep state operatives using that unverified dossier to spy on a campaign on a transition team in a presidency.
	You have to, you know, the whistleblowers, we got multiple whistleblowers.
	Whistleblower doesn't matter because it's all about the same phone call.
	But you got to worry that the powerful tools of intelligence, you're going to lose the country if this is successful.
	We will lose this country because there is no constitutional order.
	There is no rule of law at that point.
	It is lawlessness, complete lawlessness.
	They've been saying this from day one, impeach, impeach, impeach.
	You know, it doesn't matter what we, the people, think.
	It just, to them, it doesn't.
	It's the ends justify the means.
	I mean, the double standard, you've got Chris Murphy, you know, saying we're going to withhold aid to Ukraine.
	Okay.
	He's guilty of what they're saying Trump did.
	And the same goes for, let's see, Dick Durbin and Pat Leahy and I forget what the other senator was, they all did the same thing.
	You better keep investigating, cooperating with Mueller.
	Okay.
	Well, can we have the transcripts of Biden in Ukraine if we're going to leak transcripts everywhere?
	Can we have the transcripts of Putin and Obama after he got re-election?
	No, they've been saying this from day.
	They want to impeach.
	You know, you've got a party that does nothing for the American people.
	Nothing.
	And what they do want to do is scary beyond any comprehension I have.
	A new Green Deal, America's gone.
	We cannot sustain it.
	If we ever attempt it, it'll still bankrupt us.
	And I don't think you can recover from it.
	And is it a coup attempt?
	Yeah, I believe it is.
	I think they want Trump removed by any means necessary.
	And they don't have confidence that they can beat him.
	They want to stack the courts, get rid of the Electoral College, and get rid of a president because he wasn't supposed to win.
	You know, it's scary.
	These are scary times.
	But on the other hand, I do believe Donald Trump, in the end, let him impeach him.
	It's a meaningless thing with no conviction, and there won't be a conviction, but there will be an election in a year.
	And if this doesn't motivate you to get involved and get all hands on deck, I don't know what will because this great country that we inherited will not be the same for our kids and grandkids.
	And I shudder to think what a weakened America does for the world.
	All right, that's going to wrap things up for today.
	All right.
	Full, complete analysis and everything else tonight on Hannity, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel, Jay Seculo, Alan Dershowitz.
	We've got Greg Jarrett, Jason Chavitz, Larry Elder, Dan Bongino, much, much more.
	9 Eastern Hannity, Satan DVR, Fox.
	We will have the information the mob will never give you.
	As always, sadly.
	We'll see you tonight back here tomorrow.
	When I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

▲