Sean Hannity Show - Trump vs China

Oct. 21, 2019 - Sean Hannity Show

01:38:51

Trump vs China

New Gingrich, Former Speaker of the House, and author of the new book, Trump vs. China: Facing America's Greatest Threat, out tomorrow. If you don't think President Trump has made an impact on America's greatest challenge...think again!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.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, glad you're with us.
	We're in the swamp.
	We're in the nation's capital.
	We're in Washington, D.C.
	And our toll-free number, that remains the same, 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
	Newt Gingrich, who didn't have a secret Soviet-style impeachment coup attempt when Clinton was president, based on the old independent counsel statute, not the special counsel statute.
	By the way, Democrats changed that.
	Remember, Ken Starr had 11 specific felonies that he identified.
	And yeah, Bill Clinton did lose his law license.
	He was impeached.
	He wasn't convicted, but he also paid Paula Jones $850,000.
	And a lot of people forget the outcome of all that.
	Now, politically speaking, what's fascinating about that is the political reaction of the country was he never had a higher approval rating than the day and the days after getting impeached.
	Probably could have even won a third term.
	People were so angry about it.
	But in that case, it wasn't as like this case.
	You know, look at the cowardly shift.
	I mean, now we're looking.
	I mean, here's a guy, and we're going to have this censure issue.
	And I want to say to this 15 Republicans that are not on board the Andy Biggs's censure resolution that they're probably going to push the vote on tonight.
	I don't know where these 15 people are.
	We have their names.
	You can check my website, Hannity.com.
	I don't know where the names are.
	Or you can call the Capitol.
	I mean, it's Roby, Buck, Rooney, Woodall, Davis, Pence in Illinois, Reed, New York, Catco, New York, Turner, Ohio, Walden, Oregon, Johnson, South Dakota, Mike McCall, Texas, Thornbury, Texas.
	Let's see, Kathy Morris, McMorris, Rogers, Washington.
	What's the other person's name?
	Jamie Herrera Bootlair or whatever.
	Also, Washington state.
	Where are these people?
	You want to call?
	You can call.
	They love when we give out the phone number switchboard.
	Now, my only admonition is be nice, be polite.
	You can be firm and say, why aren't you supporting the censure resolution?
	There's 15 Republicans short on this.
	Now, the president spoke a little earlier today.
	Let's play this.
	And I agree with him.
	You know, Al, what's his name?
	Congressman Al Green.
	Green is his name.
	Yeah, he said, we better impeach him because we're not going to beat him.
	President reiterated Al Green's point today, and they don't think they're going to win.
	And Republicans need to be tougher on the inquiry.
	And I agree with that too.
	You know, what they're doing here is their little secret Soviet-style impeachment coup attempt.
	And they're doing it behind closed doors.
	Here's what the president said.
	Then we'll get back to the cowardly shift.
	Well, I think they want to.
	Any Democrat wants to because they're not going to beat me in the election.
	So of course they want to impeach.
	Why wouldn't they want to impeach me?
	It's so illegitimate.
	It cannot be the way the founders, our great founders, meant this to be.
	But I see this guy, Congressman Al Green, say we have to impeach him.
	Otherwise, he's going to win the election.
	What's that all about?
	But that's exactly what they're saying.
	We have to impeach him because otherwise he's going to win.
	I'm going to win the election.
	Look, I have the strongest economy ever.
	It's the economy, stupid, right?
	I have the strongest economy in the history of our country.
	Okay, we're setting records over 100 times.
	I think it's like 118, but over 100 times we've had the highest stock market in history since November 8th.
	Over 100 times.
	And by the way, today I got elected, the following day from there until January 20th, the market went through the roof.
	You know why it went through the roof?
	Because they got rid of Obama and they got rid of Clinton.
	And if anybody else, any of these people that I've been watching on the stage got elected, your 401ks would be down the tubes.
	They'd go down not 20% or 30%.
	They'd go down 70, 90, 80.
	You'd destroy this country.
	You'd destroy the country.
	So I think they want to impeach me because it's the only way they're going to win.
	They've got nothing.
	All they have is a phone call that was perfect.
	All they have is a whistleblower who's disappeared.
	Where is he?
	He's gone.
	Then they have a second whistleblower.
	The second whistleblower's got, oh, it's going to, where is he?
	He disappeared.
	Then they have an informant.
	Oh, the informant is.
	Where is he?
	Great question.
	Where is the hearsay whistleblower, non-whistleblower, whistleblower?
	This is not how this process works.
	This kangaroo court behind closed doors.
	No, look, Pat Cipollone first said it, and he's dead on accurate.
	This is not a legitimate process.
	This inquiry is constitutionally invalid.
	And by the way, violates every basic due process right that we come to expect as Americans.
	And what it is, and Cipollone got a right too, it's an invalid impeachment inquiry, plainly designed to undo the election results of 2016 and hopefully their thinking impact the election of 2020.
	Well, I'm going to tell you something.
	I don't think it's going to work out that way.
	Let's assume that they impeach him.
	Although Nancy Pelosi may be getting some pushback from, you know, 30, 40 Democrats that see that this is career suicide, many that come from Trump won districts in 2016.
	But, you know, where are the Democrats that believe in fundamental fairness?
	I mean, this is the opposite of what Newt Gingrich did with Bill Clinton, you know, because they had a full House vote authorizing the impeachment inquiry.
	And by the way, each critical step, they had established rules and procedures that were followed.
	By the way, the procedures that were established by Democrats in the Nixon impeachment, on the Nixon impeachment issue.
	You know, they're not going to grant co-equal subpoena power to the chair and the ranking members.
	No.
	They're going to require, they're not going to require that all subpoenas be subject to a full vote of the committee at the request of the chair ranking member.
	Newt Gingrich allowed this.
	If the president's counsel, they're not going to give the president's counsel the right to attend the hearings and depositions or give the president's counsel the right to present evidence or give the president's counsel the right to object to admitting certain evidence or the president's counsel the right to cross-examine and recommend a witness list.
	They're not doing any of that.
	They don't want to do any of that.
	They want it behind closed doors.
	And I hear it's been devastating behind closed doors.
	And by devastating, what do I mean by that?
	I mean that every single person that had gone up there that they hoped and prayed would actually say, yeah, there was a quid pro quo.
	Doesn't.
	They say just the opposite.
	And then the Democrats become desperate, hyperventilating, trying to put words into the mouths of the different people that have gone into the Soviet secret style hearing rooms.
	You know, then you got the compromise shift.
	I mean, this guy lied to us for two and a half years.
	We've got the evidence.
	We got it all.
	Trump-Russia collusion.
	No, he didn't.
	Four investigations prove he's a liar.
	You know, now Schiff can't bring the non-whistleblower hearsay whistleblower, whistleblower up because he lied to us.
	Now we know that, in fact, he said that they didn't have any contact.
	Apparently there was contact with his office.
	Apparently there were recommendations made about a lawyer and getting to the inspector general.
	Apparently, oh, and then we're sending staffers to Ukraine.
	Schiff staffers is being reported now.
	You know, Schiff who had to make up the transcript because they announced the impeachment inquiry without a vote, without due process, before they had it.
	Well, because he knew all about it, because he had contact or his staff had contact.
	I mean, this guy cannot be the chair of this committee.
	This is beyond outrageous.
	I'm here to interview the president tonight, Hannity, 9 Eastern.
	That's one of the few reasons that I can justify coming to the swamp.
	Not a good one.
	I prefer he be in Mar-a-Lago right now if it's warm in Florida.
	But you look, we don't need a whistleblower anyway because we've got a transcript.
	The president clearly is asking.
	Now, remember, president, for nearly three years now, we've had uh-oh, Russian interference in the 2016 election.
	Well, the only one that had any contact with any Russians that interfered with the election was Hillary Clinton and her dirty Russian dossier full of lies.
	That then, of course, to get in that position, she had to be given a rigged investigation into the Espionage Act and, you know, slam dunk case on obstruction.
	And then it's used to, as the bulk of information to get a FISA warrant.
	None of it's verified, and that's not even verifiable.
	The same people that covered for her crimes, the same people.
	So the president says, you know, I'd like to find out what happened.
	Why?
	Because it's his job to faithfully execute.
	Everybody was so upset about potential Trump-Russia collusion.
	Nobody cared about Hillary-Russian collusion or a dirty dossier.
	That's selective moral outrage.
	Well, we now know that, in fact, Ukraine did interfere in our election.
	And you don't have to listen to me.
	Just listen to the politico.
	I've been reading that article often on the air.
	And the president says everything, the whole situation with Ukraine, you guys know a lot about it.
	And crowd strike, what was he talking about?
	2016.
	You know, I have one of your wealthy people.
	They went on the whole situation.
	And I hope my attorney general is going to investigate any foreign interference in our elections, which is what he's saying.
	I'm not doing an Adam Schiff here.
	I'm not reading verbatim.
	I'm telling you, I'm not reading verbatim.
	I'll make things up here.
	I can read the whole thing.
	But anyway, I'd like you to get to the bottom of it, the president said.
	Would you do us a favor?
	Go on Hannity.com, by the way.
	We have a montage.
	You know, the president says, can you do us a favor all the time?
	You know, all of us have certain little bridge things that we all, you know, phrases, and he happens to have a lot of them.
	I thought I was doing him a favor.
	Do me a favor.
	Do me a favor.
	I said, would you do me a favor?
	Do me a favor.
	Can you do us a favor?
	Do me a favor.
	Carl, do me a favor.
	He said, Would you do me a favor?
	Do me a favor.
	But I said, Do me a favor.
	Do me a favor.
	I say, Carl, do me a favor.
	Do me a favor.
	Do me a favor, though.
	Do me a favor.
	Please do me a favor.
	I say, Carl, do me a favor.
	You have to do me a favor.
	You know, hey, do me a favor or don't do me a favor.
	Just do it.
	He said, Would you do me a favor?
	And Phil, do me a favor.
	Say, hey, do me a favor.
	He said, will you do me a favor?
	I say, do me a favor.
	I said, would you do me a favor?
	I said, do me a favor.
	Do me a favor.
	Okay.
	The president says, do me a favor.
	He actually says, do me a favor.
	A lot of times he says, do me a favor.
	You know, as a matter of fact, we've identified hundreds of times he says, do me a favor.
	You know, just like he says a lot of other stuff.
	And, you know, there are certain catchphrases or bridge phrases that everybody uses.
	I have my own.
	Everybody else has their own.
	And forget it.
	I think it's a waste of time.
	Can't find the freaking article.
	It's driving me nuts.
	Oh, and by the way, Mitt Romney, really, Mitt?
	A secret, you know, Twitter account.
	Really?
	I don't know what it is when people lose the presidency.
	You know what?
	He had 2016.
	He could have won that election.
	You know, because they didn't fight and they gave up.
	Well, we lost 2012.
	I remember screaming at people on his staff during the third debate in particular because they were just, oh, it was horrible, horrible.
	The fact that, you know, they allowed this to happen.
	By the way, going back to some of Trump's favorite sayings, you know, well, you know, I know the best people.
	I know the best people.
	I know them.
	You can hear him say that.
	Oh, it's huge.
	Huge.
	Big league, big league.
	Believe me, right?
	This is all stuff the president said.
	Fake news, fake news.
	Do me a favor.
	That happens to be one of his catchphrases.
	You're fired.
	I don't want to give away what the purpose of what I'm going to do in this interview tonight, but I'm going to try to get to the bottom of the president's thinking on this phone call because there's no quid pro quo.
	The illegitimate, unconstitutional, lacking in all due process.
	And this is where I'd like to see Republicans stand loud, united, and clear for once.
	And instead of just going along timid as they usually are.
	Because if this was them doing it to Democrats, Democrats would be screaming holy hell every day about the process being rigged and unfair.
	Now, if they want to jump off the plane, it looks like most of them are out of the plane now.
	It's not like they can, you know, crawl back into the plane that they just jumped out of.
	Now they're, you know, 3,000 feet below where the plane is.
	They can't get back up.
	Question is, are the rest of them going to do it?
	Because if they do, okay, let's say they do.
	Then what's next?
	Well, maybe I guess Mitt Romney's signaling he just has so jumped the shark that what, now he's going to work with the Democrats on what, Mitt?
	Tell us what in the transcript makes you so uncomfortable.
	Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Ham, and I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So download Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	I don't know.
	My staff wants to come up with a private Twitter candle for me, like Mitt Romney.
	All these guys lose their minds.
	But what would it be?
	I don't know.
	What would it be?
	I mean, you know.
	Go ahead.
	You have something in mind, obviously.
	Ethan and I were talking about it.
	Ethan talking about it.
	And I was thinking, you know, something workout-themed, you know, now that you're skinny and you're a ninja.
	I am.
	You know, is it super skinny, man?
	Is it?
	All right.
	Well, don't.
	Stop it.
	I'm just in my normal weight, what I'm supposed to be at, number one.
	Number two, I am in the best shape of my life and I fight like an animal for an hour and a half a day.
	So Ethan was saying right-wing ninja.
	You want to be right-wing ninja?
	I think people should go and let us know online.
	We should put it in the- You know what pisses me off, though, about the whole thing?
	Pissed off Hannity handle.
	Yeah, pissed off ninja handle.
	No, I mean, I'm literally, Trump's getting everything done, doing all the heavy lifting.
	Mitt, what did you run for in 2012?
	What did you, what, tax cuts, originalists, ending burdensome regulation, better trade deals, fairer trade deals?
	Tell me, what?
	You disagree with his style?
	Too bad.
	Get over it.
	But you're not going to, are you?
	You know, if you would have fought like him, you probably would have won in 2012.
	Quick break from the swamp.
	Donald Trump tonight on Hannity.
	Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
	You're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
	On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So download Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	Look, I take responsibility for every decision I made, but that's not why I lost.
	So I had no control over the Russians.
	The use of my email account was turned into, you know, the biggest scandal since Lord knows when.
	This was the biggest nothing burger ever.
	I think it was interesting.
	I know you had Dean Bucket here from the New York Times yesterday, and they covered it like it was Pearl Harbor, and Republican governors and legislatures began doing everything they could to suppress the vote.
	You look at Facebook, the vast majority of the news, news items posted were fake.
	I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party.
	It was bankrupt.
	It was on the verge of insolvency.
	Its data was mediocre to poor, non-existent, wrong, that the Russians ran an extensive information war campaign against my campaign to influence voters in the election.
	You know, the Comey letter, which, you know, he dumps that on me on October 28th, and I immediately start falling.
	Since the mainstream media covered that, as I say, like Pearl Harbor, front pages everywhere, huge type, et cetera.
	After that letter, my momentum, particularly among women in the suburbs, stopped and dropped.
	If I put myself in the position of running a platform like Facebook, first of all, they've got to get back to trying to curate it more effectively, put me out of the equation.
	They've got to help prevent fake news.
	I also think I was the victim of a very broad assumption I was going to win.
	I never believed that.
	I always thought it was going to be a close election because our elections are always close.
	And we've got lots of network executives saying things like, you know, he may not be good for the country, but he's good for business.
	And there was that and putting him on all the time.
	And at some point, it sort of bleeds over into misogyny.
	And let's just be honest.
	You know, the Russians, in my opinion, and based on the Intel and counterintel people I've talked to, could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided.
	And here's a guided by Americans.
	Guided by Americans and guided by people who had, you know, polling and go to Netflix and say you want to see a political documentary.
	Eight of the top 10, last time I checked a few weeks ago, were screeds against President Obama or me or both of us.
	It's very difficult historically to succeed a two-term president of your own party.
	All right, 24 till the top of the hour from the swamp, from the sewer, our nation's capital, 800-941 Sean, our toll free telephone number.
	You want to be a part of the program.
	I mean, that's just a partial playing of the multitude of excuses that Hillary Clinton makes.
	Oh, Jim's Comey's fault.
	Oh, it's talk radio's fault.
	Oh, it's this's fault.
	Now it's Russia, Russians, Russians, Russians everywhere.
	I mean, going after Tulsi Gabbard, and, you know, she's a Russian asset.
	And by the way, in the last election, Jill Stein was a Russian asset, and Trump is a Russian asset.
	Well, the only one that worked with Russia and had any Russian lies and misinformation that, by the way, were spread to we, the American people, before the 2016 election, that would be the dirty dossier that she bought and paid for and her minions in the press circulated.
	And then later, her buddy Comey then used as the basis or bulk of information in a Pfizer report, even though it was unverified.
	I mean, we got to get some perspective in all of this.
	Look, let's assume that these Democrats jumped out of the plane.
	Whoopsie-daisy, they're out on impeachment.
	Now, it's funny how the media works because they say, Mitt Romney, Mitt Romney, who Mitt Romney is like, for whatever reason, and I cannot explain it.
	And I'm going to say this.
	I like Mitt Romney.
	I liked him a lot.
	I thought he would have been a far superior president to Barack Obama.
	I also would argue he blew it himself.
	But like, I don't know what it is.
	You can start with Al Gore in our lifetime, but people that run for president and lose then ultimately lose it to some extent or another.
	Al Gore has lost it.
	He's gone.
	Hillary Clinton has lost it.
	John McCain, they loved him as the maverick.
	Then he ran for president.
	Then he was a racist, sexist, homophobe, and everything in between.
	And then after he lost, he went back to being, you know, the liberal media's best friend.
	It makes no sense to me.
	And I think Mitt Romney forgets that everything that he said he was running on, Trump is actually accomplishing it.
	Except he doesn't have Mitt's demeanor.
	I think Mitt's, you know, nice demeanor didn't play well in debates two and three, and he took his foot off the gas, and he wasn't fighting hard enough, and he gave an opening for Obama to get back in this thing because he could have been defeated in 2012.
	So that's, look, that's all between them.
	I don't really care.
	But I mean, now that we have Russian assets, Russian assets.
	What does he talk?
	Russian assets.
	Jill Stein, they're grooming Tulsi Gabbard to be a Russian asset.
	Okay, whatever you say, Hillary, whatever you say.
	So I'm interviewing the president tonight, as I mentioned.
	And I don't want to give it away because I'm doing something a little different with this.
	But I'm going to get to the heart of all of this.
	And I think the president's comments earlier today, yeah.
	You know, let's say Democrats impeach.
	The Senate doesn't convict.
	What does that mean for 2020?
	I think that's when you, we, the people, we get to weigh in on this nonsense.
	What have Democrats done in the last four years except inquiry, inquiry, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment?
	That's what we get.
	They didn't, have they done anything to help the economy, help create jobs, to create more safety, security, peace, prosperity for the American people?
	No, they haven't.
	And the eight years they did have this power, well, we added 13 million Americans to food stamps and 8 million in poverty.
	I say it all the time.
	Do me a favor, the president said, all right.
	So we actually did a little research on Hannity.com, and this is the short version.
	No, I only put him on that board because of the fact I thought I was doing him a favor.
	Had him in the house.
	I said, do me a favor.
	Don't smoke in my house.
	Bill, do me a favor.
	Don't be my lawyer.
	You speak for yourself, okay?
	I said, would you do me a favor?
	Would you introduce me?
	He said, do me a favor.
	Let those poor people go.
	Hey, cameras, can you do us a favor?
	Instead of just, you know, they'll just pan on me and they won't say, do me a favor, take the cameras off me and pan the crowd, okay?
	Carl, do me a favor.
	Watch over the China trade deal.
	Got a call from Lorne Michaels.
	He said the other day, he said, would you do me a favor and host SNL?
	And I did it.
	Do me a favor.
	Find out what's the imbalance.
	But I said, do me a favor.
	Don't touch it.
	Just leave it.
	A friend of mine works for the Montreal Canadians, the ice hockey team in Canada.
	And I said, do me a favor.
	Who do I speak to about making ice?
	I say, Carl, do me a favor.
	You negotiate with China.
	Look over the trade packs a week ago.
	Somebody said, oh, you can't bomb Iraq.
	That's a sovereign nation.
	Do me a favor, bomb them.
	Sovereign nation.
	You know what that is?
	Sovereign nation.
	Sovereign crooked nation.
	They'll see about half of what we had to say.
	Do me a favor, though.
	Explain the rest of it to them.
	They know it anyway.
	Do me a favor.
	Just relax, okay?
	You'll like me very much, believe me.
	Okay.
	Polls are coming out.
	We're leading by like 20 points.
	We're doing great.
	But you know what?
	Please do me a favor.
	Go out and vote.
	Because if we don't vote, we're all wasting our time, folks.
	If I took Carl, I said, Carl, do me a favor.
	We're getting killed with China on trade.
	So I want to finish up because you got a bad evening out there and you have to drive.
	You have to do me a favor.
	I don't really care if you get hurt or not, but I want you to last until tomorrow, okay?
	So don't get hurt.
	Sometimes it's two minutes work.
	You know, hey, do me a favor or don't do me a favor.
	Just do it.
	They did any research on the president.
	You know, we all have these words that we use, go-to phrases, bridge phrases, if you will.
	I know, Trump, I'll give you Trump.
	I know the best people.
	Big league.
	Bigly, believe me.
	I mean, fake news.
	Well, one of them is do me a favor.
	I'll let you go watch the partial thing we put together, but you know, I mean, he uses the phrase in almost every speech 123 times in speeches and press conferences from the time he announced his presidential run until like mid-July.
	That's a lot of, you know, do me a favors in life.
	So he's talking to the Ukrainian president.
	I'd like you to do us a favor.
	That is a very Donald Trumpism.
	And then he's not, there's no quid pro quo.
	So you got to say, so why are they impeaching him?
	Because they can't win.
	That's the bottom line.
	They're hoping to muddy the waters as such that people get loud enough, but they're not offering anything.
	And I'll tell you another component of all of this, and you got to listen to me here.
	There is some significant progress made into exposing the deep state, the corruption, all the things that happened in the 2016 election that had nothing to do with Donald Trump, but happened to him.
	Starting, of course, we have a rigged investigation into Hillary.
	And then, of course, we have obvious, clear, slam-dunk obstruction of justice.
	That's not even in dispute.
	You know, subpoenaed emails, delete, delete.
	Okay.
	Good luck if you try that and you have a subpoena in your inbox or they gave you a subpoena for your emails and you decide to delete them and erase everything so you can't find them again, except they can.
	And then we got the dirty dossier.
	And then we got the bulk of information.
	Now we know it's unverifiable.
	We're going to get to the heart of all of this, which will be premeditated fraud committed on the FISA court for the purpose of spying on a presidential candidate, a transition team in a presidency.
	But the origins of this counterintelligence investigation, remember Andy McCarthy's statement, you cannot have a counterintelligence investigation unless it starts with the president.
	President at that time would then be Barack Hussein Obama.
	He's the one.
	He would have known about it.
	As a matter of fact, Strzok and Page in their texting, refer to it.
	The White House wants to be capped up to speed every development.
	Okay, that means, yeah, they're saying he wanted to know.
	Be interesting because I think Peter Strzzok is in a ton of legal jeopardy.
	Let's see what happens when they hit him with, well, you're facing 10 years in jail.
	Tell us what you know.
	That ought to be an interesting question for him one day.
	But Durham now, we have reports out that, in fact, that, you know, John Brennan, go back to June 16th, 2016, before the Senate Intel Committee, a hearing on the Islamic state.
	Brennan said the Islamic state remains formidable and resilient.
	Yeah, of course, because our troops had rules of engagement and Trump got rid of those and he beat back the caliphate.
	Didn't even take that long.
	Anyway, training and attempting to deploy operatives for further attacks on the West, et cetera, et cetera.
	And anyway, it goes on from there.
	Well, anyway, NBC News is reporting the Attorney General Barr and the prosecutor, John Durham, have expanded their examinations into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation.
	And Durham has increased the size of his staff, apparently significantly, and has pushed out his timeframe.
	And he's going to be interviewing former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, along with other current and former intelligence community officials.
	According to NBC, Durham has also requested to talk to CIA analysts involved in the intelligence assessments of Russia's activities, prompting them to start hiring lawyers.
	Oh, they're lawyering up.
	And anyway, it goes then it gets to the Durham.
	Why have they been spending so much time in Italy and Great Britain?
	And the issue of whether or not, according to some CIA officials familiar with the matter, there's a tension between the CIA and the Justice Department over what's classified.
	That goes to the heart of what's taken so long with FISA and the release of the Pfizer report by the Inspector General.
	And with Barr's approval, apparently Durham has now expanded his staff and his timeframe under scrutiny, according to a law enforcement agent. familiar with the matter.
	And he's now looking into the past conduct, looking into the conduct past Donald Trump's inauguration before the appointment of Robert Mueller.
	Now, John Brennan said on NBC that Durham's investigation is bizarre and said, I don't know what the legal basis for this is.
	Well, let me refresh his memory.
	I mean, his obsessive fear that Donald Trump might actually win the presidency.
	Did he outsource?
	I want to know if we're going to get to the answer.
	Did he outsource intelligence gathering for the purpose of circumventing American law?
	Now, by the way, we have now Professor Misfid's phones obtained by Durham, according to multiple reports.
	And that's going to be interesting and see if, in fact, some reports about the SIM cards being tied back to high-ranking Intel officials.
	That'll be a hell of an interesting question now that Durham, you know, could ask these questions of these key players.
	You know, once you start getting to the intelligence community on this, which is why I think all the leaking of intelligence is going on, don't think any of this is an accident.
	None of it's an accident.
	Chuck Schumer, we'll get you six ways in Sunday.
	Hate to admit it, but Chuck seems to be right in this particular case.
	Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Ham.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	This is so solemn.
	None of us came to Congress to impeach a president.
	That's not what we come here to do.
	And any such actions are to be taken very solemnly, seriously, in my view, prayerfully.
	If he takes the risk of going to trial and he's convicted, that could be seen as an impeachable offense.
	If Trump were caught on a video camera snorting cocaine in the White House, maybe with one of his children, there was at least a chance he'd be impeached.
	If he's not a legitimately elected president in your mind, there are tools that Congress has.
	I don't see how that wouldn't be an impeachable offense.
	That tweet fits the Republican definition of an impeachable offense.
	I will fight every day until he is impeached in Peach 45.
	Impeached 45.
	Grounds for impeachment.
	It's an impeachable offense.
	Perhaps impeachable offense.
	Is impeachment the appropriate remedy?
	Something for the Congress-like impeachment.
	All of that may be impeachable.
	That's an impeachable offense.
	Is that an impeachable offense?
	Is that an impeachable offense to you?
	He's much more vulnerable to impeachment.
	A potential ingredient of impeachment.
	Where do you see an impeachable offense?
	It is grounds for impeachment.
	For impeachment.
	Potentially criminal or even impeachable grounds for impeachment, or does that not go far enough in your view?
	Grounds for impeachment.
	This tweet alone may be an impeachable offense.
	Let's talk about impeachment.
	Which impeachable offense?
	Bullies don't win.
	And I said, baby, they don't because we're going to go in there.
	We're going to impeach them.
	Do you see an impeachable set of offenses?
	It's an impeachable offense.
	If that's not impeachable, I don't know what is.
	The president shall be removed from office on impeachment.
	Is it impeachable?
	100% is impeachable.
	Very substantial evidence that the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.
	Grounds for impeachment.
	Tipping point.
	Talk of impeachment reaches a fever pitch on Capitol Hill.
	All right, glad you're with us.
	Hour two, Sean Hannity Show 800-941-Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
	Now, I would just, it's more visual when we air it on TV, that montage, because the first call for impeachment, well, that happened two days after Donald Trump was elected.
	And then that's what we heard throughout 2017 and 2018 and now 2019, you know, leading up to the cowardly shif, you know, now, you know, the Soviet-style secret behind-the-scenes impeachment coup attempt.
	And remember, the day before we even were supposed to know what was in the transcript, they didn't expect the president was going to release that transcript.
	That became problematic for them.
	That's why the cowardly shif had to actually make up words that weren't in the transcript as he launched this thing.
	Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel, quote, your inquiry is constitutionally troubled, invalid, rather, and it violates basic due process rights and separation of powers.
	He says the invalid impeachment inquiry, well, plainly seeks to reverse the election of 2016 and influence the election of 2020.
	Now, we have gone through this chapter in verse.
	Well, Newt Gingrich was the Speaker of the House back in 1998, and he will tell us exactly what he did to offer, well, due process and constitutional order and rights and separation of powers because he did it and he allowed the entire House to authorize the impeachment inquiry.
	Remember, Ken Stark identified 11 separate felonies.
	This was under the independent counsel statute, not the special counsel statute.
	The entire house authorized it.
	And by the way, on the issues involving the full house, they define the scope.
	They establish procedures.
	They establish rules.
	Newt Gingrich granted co-equal subpoena power to the chair and the ranking member at the committee level.
	He allowed that subpoenas be subject to a full vote of the committee at either the request of the chair or the ranking member.
	He allowed the president's counsel, then Clintons, to literally have the right to attend all hearings, depositions.
	The president's counsel, the right to present evidence, the president's counsel, the right to object to the admittance of some evidence.
	The president's counsel, the right to cross-examine witnesses, the president's counsel, the right to recommend a witness list.
	Newt Gingrich joins us now.
	We're going to talk about this in foreign policy and everything else.
	We have him for the full hour because we have a lot to get to today.
	There's a brand new book out just out today, Trump versus China Facing America's Greatest Threat.
	There is an existential threat that is China now.
	Their military buildup, their movement into 5G in their country.
	We got to be careful we don't fall behind.
	Mr. Speaker, congrats and welcome back.
	Well, I'm glad to be with you.
	And of course, as you'll remember, because you were there and you were covering all this, we had Congressman Jim Rogan go up to see former chairman Peter Rodino, who is the Democrat from New Jersey, who would actually run the impeachment process with Nixon in 72, 73.
	And so he sat down with Rodino and Rodino outlined exactly what they had done to try to establish a sense of fairness, because they believed back then that unless the country felt you were doing something that was legitimate, it would all fall apart.
	And so when he came back from those meetings with Rodino, we adopted, in essence, all of the Rodino rules to establish for a bipartisan approach.
	And as a result, we had Democratic leader Dick Gephardt join me in holding a press conference where we announced that we were going to have the entire report from the special counsel printed so that anybody in America who wanted to could see for themselves what the issues were.
	And I think that was the level of openness.
	It was literally the opposite of everything we're watching right now, which I find to be just an appallingly bad approach to this thing and something which is really, I think, undermines the whole rule of law in the United States.
	Beyond the secrecy aspect of it, look at how many people are compromised in all of this.
	So we have a hearsay whistleblower.
	Whistleblower has no firsthand information.
	That's problem number one.
	Problem number two, apparently there was advice given by Adam Schiff, the committee chair, to the whistleblower.
	There was some contact.
	Did they recommend a lawyer?
	Did they recommend a report to the IG?
	Certainly seems like he lied when he said he did not have any contact in the beginning, had to retract that.
	We know that he lied for two and a half years, saying he has all the evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
	The one guy that's on tape negotiating with somebody he believes is a Russian to get dirt on Donald Trump, he was being pranked, but that was Adam Schiff.
	You know, what is the nature of the compromising materials?
	Can we get the pictures?
	Did Vladimir see them?
	I mean, we have all that on tape.
	He's such a dope.
	Anyway, so now we have a whistleblower.
	He can't bring the whistleblower in because the non-whistleblower whistleblower will probably implicate him in terms of exactly what has gone on here.
	So he's compromised.
	And apparently the non-whistleblower whistleblower was helping Joe 30330, was a Biden person or Biden contact.
	Sounds a little fishy to me.
	But you allowed, Mr. Speaker, due process.
	You did not have this all out in secret.
	There were 11 specific crimes that were identified by Ken Starr at the time.
	And, you know, the president, I think, is right today.
	Well, the president says a lot of things today.
	He says, you know, Democrats can't win.
	They want to impeach.
	Republicans need to be tougher on the injustice of this inquiry.
	And in the meantime, Hillary Clinton is accusing everyone of being a Russian asset, everybody.
	But look, the last thing is almost funny if it wasn't sad.
	This is clearly a woman who can't come to grips with the fact that she lost the election and the American people rejected her.
	Nobody else was responsible for her defeat.
	So she's in a different kind of place than anybody else.
	But I do think the president's right that we ought to be more aggressive in making the case here that this whole thing is just clearly a violation of the American Constitution.
	It violates the entire concept of due process.
	It allows people to go in secret into a room.
	As Secretary of State Pompeo pointed out yesterday, he's not allowed to have a lawyer in the room.
	He has no idea what people are testifying to.
	So even in his own department, he has no real information about what the allegations are.
	And then he goes on a TV show and they say, well, what about all these allegations, which apparently the Democrats are leaking?
	And the whole thing is just a totally one-sided and I think very un-American process.
	You know, we have the transcript.
	So we really don't need a whistleblower.
	But I've been told by people, my sources that know that all of these closed-door, you know, meetings or these hearings, that none of them are going well for the Democrats at all, which is why they keep it behind closed doors and leak anything that they can possibly use to create the impression that it's going great.
	But when you go to the transcript, Mr. Speaker, and, you know, the president, I'd like you to do us a favor.
	We've identified hundreds of times the president uses that.
	I mean, the president has, we all have this.
	We all have certain phrases that we like to use.
	And, you know, I know the best people.
	Big league.
	Believe me.
	Fake news.
	Another one is, you know, let me ask you a favor.
	I asked him for a favor.
	He says it all the time.
	But anyway, then he goes through and he talks about, you know, Ukraine, you know, our country's been through a lot.
	He's clearly talking about 2016.
	And Ukraine knows a lot about it, he says.
	I would like you to find out what happened with the whole situation with Ukraine.
	They say crowd strike.
	I guess you have one of your wealthy people, the server.
	They say Ukraine has it.
	There are a lot of things that went on.
	The whole situation, I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people.
	I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people, and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
	And you saw yesterday the whole nonsense ended with a poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but, well, they say a lot of it started in Ukraine.
	Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.
	Now, didn't we just spend the last three years, Mr. Speaker, with a country up in arms about a foreign country and their possible influence on our presidential election?
	It sounds to me like he's saying, you guys, you know, if you're involved, we need to know the truth because that can't happen in our country.
	Well, you know, I said to a reporter earlier today, this is the first time I can remember where the news media is against learning what the truth is.
	Because they come back and they say, oh, this is terrible.
	He's asking for dirt.
	No, he's asking for the truth.
	The dirt was the dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign, which was totally false and which was ultimately demolished by Robert Mueller.
	That was the dirt.
	What we're faced with now is a president of the United States who says, you know, we really need to get to the bottom of this and find out what the truth is.
	And in that setting, he is asking a country which had a brand new elected anti-corruption president who'd been elected in part just because people in that country are sick and tired of the level of corruption that they've been living under.
	Mr. Speaker, I have the January 11th, 2017 Politico article, Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire just before his inauguration.
	Kiev officials scrambling to make amends with the president-elect after quietly working to boost Clinton.
	This is politico.
	And it goes on.
	Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton undermine Trump, publicly questioning his fitness for office, disseminating documents, implicating a top Trump bait in corruption, suggesting they were investigating the matter only to back away after the election.
	And they helped Clinton's allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisors, according to a political investigation.
	And here's the money line here.
	A Ukrainian-American operative was consulting for the DNC, met with top officials in the Ukrainian embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, Manafort, and Russia.
	And the Ukrainian efforts had an impact on the race.
	Now, isn't that guilt that even Politico acknowledged?
	Well, of course.
	And look, what we know is that the Democrats, I mean, you had a former Secretary of State whose husband had been President of the United States.
	They had a worldwide network of friends, associates, and allies.
	They clearly went out.
	And somebody asked me the other day, and I don't have a good answer to this.
	You may have, how come a bunch of these people aren't in jail?
	Bingo.
	We're going to pick it up.
	They're going to get away with all this.
	And they're still out wandering around.
	And they haven't been put in solitary confinement.
	They haven't been put in a situation that they've had to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for lawyers.
	And yet we know for sure all the things they've done.
	Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	We all talk about this freedom of speech.
	Yes, we all do have freedom of speech.
	But at times, there are ramifications for the negative that can happen when you're not thinking about others and you only think about yourself.
	So I don't believe, I don't want to get into a word or sentence feud with Daryl with Daryl Morag, but I believe he wasn't educated on the situation at hand.
	And he spoke.
	And so many people could have been harmed, not only financially, but physically, emotionally, spiritually.
	So just be careful what we tweet, what we say, and what we do.
	Even though, yes, we do have freedom of speech, but there can be a lot of negative that comes with that too.
	All right, 800941, Sean is a number.
	Newt has a brand new book out today.
	It's called Trump versus China Facing America's Greatest Threats.
	We'll get to that.
	He stays with us the next half hour.
	Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
	You're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
	On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down on Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	We've come to a very substantial phase one deal.
	And I'll go through some of the points.
	And then I'll ask the Vice Premier to say a few words and any comments that he may have.
	We've come to a deal, pretty much subject to getting it written.
	It'll take probably three weeks, four weeks, or five weeks.
	But we've come to a deal on intellectual property, financial services, a tremendous deal for the farmers, a purchase of from $40 to $50 billion worth of agricultural products.
	To show you how big that is, that would be two and a half, three times what China had purchased at its highest point thus far.
	So they were purchasing $16 or $17 billion at the highest point, and that'll be brought up to $40 billion to $50 billion.
	So I'd suggest the farmers have to go and immediately buy more land and get bigger tractors.
	They'll be available at John Deere and a lot of other great distributors.
	But we're taking the purchase of agricultural products from 40 to 50 billion, meaning in that neighborhood from 40 to 50, approximately billion.
	And what they've been doing now, I believe, is about 8 billion, right?
	Right now, it's 8.
	All right, glad you're with us 25 till the top of the hour.
	That was the president.
	Now, what he's announcing there is not the big deal, but he's announcing phase one of a trade deal with China.
	Let me tell you, $40, $50 billion in terms of our agricultural products now not facing the obstacles they face.
	That's a huge step forward.
	And I think the president's right, you'll have a lot more in terms of other benefits for companies like, you know, Hustler and John Deere and maybe some other ones.
	But China has been an emerging threat.
	Now, they do have the lowest economic growth that they've had in 27 years.
	And clearly, the president's sanctions have been working.
	And the president saying we're going to have free and fair trade, but there are a lot of bigger issues here.
	We just talked about election interference and Politico in January of 2017 admitting, yeah, Ukraine big time interfered on behalf of Hillary in the 2016 elections.
	You know, we keep hearing about Hillary and everybody's a Russian asset.
	The only one that paid for a dirty Russian dossier was her.
	Then we have the issue of China, intellectual property theft, tariffs, unfair trade practices.
	Well, Newt Gingrich tries to address all of this, and he does in an ominous, frankly, possible scenario unfolding, and that is Trump versus China facing America's greatest threat.
	And we continue with Newt Gingrich.
	You know, there's a lot you write about in this book that actually scares me because there's things in here that I had no idea about.
	And the Chinese Communist Party influencing American students through propaganda, or American innovators are having all their property rights stolen.
	Intellectual property theft is massive, and it's costing Americans billions and probably trillions at the end of the day.
	How bad is that?
	I think you should be worried.
	And anybody who's listening to us, just think back to a week ago and the National Basketball Association getting pounded by the folks who are out there in China saying, basically, do what we want to, tell you to, or we're going to cut off basically one-fifth of your total revenue.
	And they caved.
	I mean, they folded.
	And I think that this gives you a sense of the arrogance and the growth and the willingness of the Chinese communist dictatorship to impose itself on people.
	Talk about some of the things that I didn't know.
	We've known about intellectual property theft.
	We've known about, you know, unfair trade practices.
	I never knew about the propaganda efforts.
	I will tell you this.
	This does go to the Hunter Biden issue.
	I mean, the kid admits, do you have any experience in China?
	No.
	Any experience, Ukraine?
	No.
	Any experience, private equity?
	No.
	Any experience gas, oil, energy?
	No.
	Millions and millions of dollars.
	I haven't gotten one penny from China yet, but he has his equity stake that is estimated to be over 20 million, if not more.
	And I'm thinking, well, why would they pay Hunter Biden with no experience all that money while his dad is the second most powerful man in America?
	Now, maybe I'm just naive, but to me, they wanted to buy favor with the Bidens, Mr. Speaker.
	And if it was Vice President Trump and Don Jr., I think it would have been a different story.
	Look, I've said all along that if Hunter's last name had been Jones, he wouldn't have gotten a penny.
	And the fact is, both in Ukraine, where he was getting $600,000 a year, and in China, where he apparently had an equity play, and we actually don't know what all the details are.
	But in both cases, his biggest asset was his father.
	And it's kind of amazing that they weren't aware of that and didn't understand it.
	Well, so go into the issue.
	How are they propagandizing Americans and American students more specifically?
	Well, I mean, one of the things they've done is they've created what are called Confucius Institutes.
	And those institutes are on college campuses all around the world.
	And they are basically Chinese propaganda centers.
	And they're also Chinese recruitment centers.
	They also monitor the students that they send overseas, and they keep track of their families back home.
	And a lot of these folks find themselves pretty heavily coerced by the Chinese government.
	I did a podcast that came out yesterday with a guy who teaches at Hunter College who is Chinese, who was disappeared.
	I mean, this is a system that police use over there where they can pick you up off the street, hold you for up to six months, not tell your family, not tell your lawyer.
	Just amazing.
	You know, one of the things, again, we've talked about the military buildup, intellectual property theft, unfair trade practices.
	You know, one thing that we haven't talked a lot about in recent years, but is true, is a lot of our country's debt they own.
	In your book, you quoted a Wall Street Journal piece where literally, you know, the Chinese technology giant known as Tencent has quietly become China's top corporate investor in Silicon Valley, pouring money into everything from electric cars to moonshot ventures and tourism and space and all sorts of other things.
	What if they decide to pull their money out, sir?
	Well, I think at that point you'd see a pretty dramatic rise in interest rates, but they'd also have a problem of where they're going to put their money.
	What I'm more concerned about, and something I've been working on, is that we allow right now Chinese companies to be listed on a series of investment lists, which is allowing them to raise billions and billions of dollars in the U.S.
	And in fact, there's an argument over right now about whether or not federal employees' pension funds should be investing on China.
	Now, I think that tells you how sick the system is if we're going to be investing in our major competitors' businesses in order to put ourselves out of business.
	Oh, you know, it's a pretty scary scenario.
	What about their military buildup?
	That scares me.
	And also, what about their commitment now to advancing 5G and moving forward at a pace that is accelerated and ahead of ours, you believe?
	Well, I think we have to be very concerned.
	And let me draw a distinction.
	First of all, they're making major investment in building up their military.
	They are consciously designing it to be able to fight the American military.
	So they're putting a lot of time and money into anti-ship missiles, for example, to go after our nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.
	They have built an entire system of fortifications along the South China Sea designed to force us further and further out and away from the Chinese coast.
	So they're very formidable just in straight military activity.
	They're also investing very heavily in space.
	And then I think one of the brilliant campaigns has been the rise of Huawei as a corporation where they're basically imitating the Americans.
	They built this giant international company which has come to dominate the rollout of 5G in countries after countries.
	And 5G, for our listeners, is the brand new technology, which is the next generation of internet.
	And it's enormously dangerous to us if the internet suddenly becomes controlled by the Chinese.
	They're able to gather all the information.
	They can go to dictators and offer them Chinese surveillance technology to strengthen their dictatorships.
	This has been, I think, a classic area where both American corporations and the American government bureaucracies have just failed.
	And I've been working on this now for almost a year.
	And it is very challenging because the resistance from our old companies and the resistance from our old bureaucracies to recognizing how big this challenge is has been just enormous.
	You know, I think the challenges we have are many.
	Are you as surprised as I am how bad it is?
	I mean, I'll go back to Hunter Biden because it's so breath.
	It takes my breath away.
	I mean, if it was Don Jr., no experience Ukraine and China getting all this money, you know, I can't even imagine what the media would be like, the intensity, the fervor, the anger, the feigned outrage, et cetera.
	And I'm thinking, why do these countries spend all of this money to, you know, in the case of Hunter Biden for a kid that had no experience in anything involving the millions he got paid?
	And the fact that they can get away with it, and in the case of the Democrats, they shrugged their shoulders.
	That takes my breath away.
	Yeah.
	Look, I think it's, and I had this experience today launching this book and doing a series of TV shows and interviews.
	And, you know, the depth of hostility to Trump and the depth of hostility to our ideas and our values in the American news media is just staggering.
	And they wake up every morning and they know that Trump has done something terrible.
	They just don't know what it is.
	And that's what I've been up against.
	And you try to explain to them, for example, that when you read the interview with the newly elected reform president of Ukraine, there is no quid pro quo.
	The things that the whistleblower alleged didn't happen, they're not in there.
	And somehow they just shrug it off and they go back as though it, you know, as though, as though your answer never occurred.
	Let me then go to what the president said today is that, you know, Republicans need to be tougher on this ridiculous, illegitimate so-called inquiry here, and they're not.
	Democrats want to impeach because they can't win.
	What would you advise the Republicans in the House?
	and the Republicans in the Senate.
	I mean, the fact that Mitch McConnell's planning on a five to six week, what, trial if they do this?
	I'm like, but that's what they should do.
	I mean, look, you have to take this seriously.
	This is not some trivial political game.
	They are tinkering with the American Constitution.
	They are basically saying that they are willing to overturn the vote of the American people and replace the choice of the American people.
	I mean, this is heavy stuff.
	I think in the House, the Republicans, by going after Schiff, are doing exactly the right thing.
	Steve Schiff is clearly a stunningly dishonest person who has lied consistently now for three years.
	It tells you something about every single member of the House Democratic Party, that they tolerate his being chairman of the Intelligence Committee.
	And I think that Kevin McCarthy and Steve Scalise and others are doing exactly the right thing in going after this and enforcing a vote on censure.
	And they ought to continue to be aggressive about it.
	I think, second, the White House ought to continue to refuse to cooperate with a kangaroo court that has no real standing and is being run in a totally unfair secret way.
	We have not seen secret star chambers as a technique since 1641 when they were outlawed.
	1641.
	Unbelievable.
	It was explicitly excluded by the founding fathers in the Constitution.
	All right, Newt Kingrich, final moments coming up.
	And then speaking of the House Minority Leader, Kevin McCarthy, I'm going to ask him that very question when he joins us at the top of the hour.
	Newt's new book, Trump versus China Facing America's Greatest Threat on Hannity.com, Amazon.com, bookstores everywhere.
	All right, as we continue, former Speaker of the House, Newt Kingrich's brand new book is out, Trump versus China Facing America's Greatest Threat, Amazon.com, Hannity.com, now in bookstores all across the country.
	Let me ask you if you think, have we gotten to the point where the Democrats now have jumped out of the plane?
	Because we got an indication last week.
	Apparently, there were like 27 Democrats that would not vote with Pelosi to have the legitimate impeachment inquiry.
	There are 40 Democrats in Trump won districts in 2016.
	But did they jump out of the plane?
	Are they going to have to impeach him?
	And if so, do you think the Senate would ever come near convicting him?
	And if not, doesn't 2020 then become the ultimate revenge of the American people against the deep state and the corrupt swamp?
	Oh, look, I think it's very likely that the Pelosi may not be able to get to a majority now because I think, you know, if you are Congressman Peterson in upstate Minnesota and you are in a district that Trump carried by 30 points, asking you to vote to impeach him is asking you to commit suicide.
	And so I think that, and I think what's happened in part is that the very process of watching how bad Schiff is has undermined and lowered their momentum.
	And I think they're having a harder and harder time getting people committed and getting people excited and interested.
	Well, I got to tell you something.
	Let's see.
	I mean, I think, well, let's just say they may not have the majority they need, but most of them jumped out of the plane.
	And now they can't get back.
	And then there'll be livid and more, you know, internal squabbling amongst them.
	But Newt Gingrich, love the new book.
	Again, Trump versus China Facing America's Greatest Threat, Amazon.com, Hannity.com, bookstores around the country.
	Mr. Speaker, thank you.
	When we come back, the House Minority Leader.
	President's saying that Republicans are not fighting back hard enough on this illegitimate inquiry.
	We'll ask Kevin McCarthy about it next.
	Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
	Well, I think they want to.
	Any Democrat wants to because they're not going to beat me in the election.
	So of course they want to impeach.
	Why wouldn't they want to impeach me?
	It's so illegitimate.
	It cannot be the way the founders, our great founders, meant this to be.
	But I see this guy, Congressman Al Green, say we have to impeach him.
	Otherwise, he's going to win the election.
	What's that all about?
	But that's exactly what they're saying.
	We have to impeach him because otherwise he's going to win.
	I'm going to win the election.
	Look, I have the strongest economy ever.
	It's the economy, stupid, right?
	I have the strongest economy in the history of our country.
	Okay, we're setting records over 100 times.
	I think it's like 118, but over 100 times we've had the highest stock market in history since November 8th.
	Over 100 times.
	And by the way, today I got elected, the following day from there until January 20th, the market went through the roof.
	You know why it went through the roof?
	Because they got rid of Obama and they got rid of Clinton.
	And if anybody else, any of these people that I've been watching on the stage got elected, your 401ks would be down the tubes.
	They'd go down not 20% or 30%.
	They'd go down 70%, 90, 80, and destroy this country.
	You'd destroy the country.
	So I think they want to impeach me because it's the only way they're going to win.
	They've got nothing.
	All they have is a phone call that was perfect.
	All they have is a whistleblower who's disappeared.
	Where is he?
	He's gone.
	Then they have a second whistleblower.
	The second whistleblower's got, oh, it's going to be.
	Where is he?
	He disappeared.
	Then they have an informant.
	Oh, the informant is, where is he?
	All right.
	Glad you're with us.
	News Roundup Information Overloader.
	And the president's right.
	You know, what is the impeachment for?
	We have gone over this transcript time and time again.
	And the non-whistleblower, whistleblower, hearsay whistleblower.
	Well, Schiff can't bring that person in because that person will likely implicate him because he lied, just like he lied for the last two and a half years.
	We've got all the evidence about Trump-Russia collusion.
	Nothing.
	Zip.
	Well, now we find out he lied about any contact.
	Well, we'd love to have contact with the whistleblower.
	Well, apparently his office did have contact with the hearsay non-whistleblower whistleblower.
	Where's the investigation of that?
	Also, the whistleblower, non-whistleblower, apparently was connected politically to Joe 30330.
	And now they want this secret Soviet-style, basically an impeachment coup.
	I think Pat Cipollone is right in what he suggested that, you know, this, quote, inquiry is constitutionally invalid, a violation of all due process rights, separation of powers, and that this invalid impeachment inquiry plainly wants to reverse the election results of 2016 and impact the 2020 election results.
	Yeah, probably Al Green, believe it or not, is right.
	Kevin McCarthy, who is the House minority leader, got the ball rolling on this.
	He points out, okay, well, Newt Gingrich, well, he had a full House vote authorizing an impeachment inquiry into Bill Clinton.
	By the way, Ken Starr had 11 felonies that he found, again, it was the, it wasn't the special counsel statute.
	They had changed it since that time, special prosecutor statute at the time.
	But for example, where's the House minority?
	Why are they doing all of this in secret and only selectively leaking those things that they think are favorable to them?
	When are they going to give co-equal subpoena power to the chair and ranking members?
	When are they going to require subpoenas be subject to a full vote of the committee at the request of the chair of the ranking member?
	But what about the president's counsel?
	Why can't they attend all hearings and depositions?
	Why can't they provide evidence of their own?
	Why can't the president's counsel object to the admittance of things that are false or other evidence?
	Or the president's counsel, when do they get the right to cross-examine?
	When does the president's counsel get the right to recommend a witness list?
	It's all secret.
	It's all secret.
	You know, just like they don't care about the Russian dossier of Hillary.
	They care about Russian interference, but only to bludgeon Trump.
	They care about believing, I believe, I believe, only if it's a Trump appointee, not the lieutenant governor and the allegations of the Commonwealth of Virginia lieutenant governor.
	What if Hunter Biden, who had no experience in getting millions from China and Ukraine with zero experience in anything?
	Well, I think they would say that they're trying to buy favor and influence.
	Or the Ukrainian, we have full acknowledgement by Politico.
	Ukraine tried to help Hillary in 2016.
	Now, the president did say today that Republicans, well, they need to be tougher on this inquiry.
	And Democrats want to impeach because they can't win.
	Kevin McCarthy joins us.
	He is the House minority leader.
	How are you?
	I'm doing well, Sean.
	Thanks for having me on.
	Okay, let's talk about the secret, I call it Soviet-style impeachment inquiry.
	You're 100% correct.
	The first thing your listeners have to understand, remember what we're talking about, how serious the word of impeachment itself.
	There's no other vote you'd make outside of sending men and women to war than taking a vote on impeachment, because what impeachment is doing is removing democracy.
	It's breaking the fabric of our nation.
	Somebody duly elected, you are now saying you have the power to remove that person.
	And it's so powerful that at any other time when we have even looked at it in Congress, we have set rules.
	We have set rules for due process because you want to make sure it's fair because this is such a serious, serious item that you would ever take up.
	You'd want to make sure the minority has equal power.
	You'd want to make sure whoever you're trying to accuse something of, like just like you were in court, that you had a due process, they could propose witness.
	They could cross-examine.
	They could be a part of it.
	Today, this is in the Intel community.
	Why?
	Committee?
	Because they're picking and choosing which even Republicans or what staffers can go into the room and they're not letting even the public to see it.
	We have members who would have to take a vote here to go down and look at the transcripts that they had interviewed two weeks before.
	They won't even let them have a transcript.
	You know why?
	Because in each of those interviews, what people have said and seen in writing, everyone says there's no quick pro quo.
	And remember how this all started?
	Every single person, my sources have absolutely confirmed that it's devastating if they ever brought this out in public.
	Yeah.
	And remember how this all started?
	And this is what we're taking up on the floor today, to censure Adam Schiff.
	Now, I requested a long time ago that he should be removed from committee.
	And your listeners have to understand the Intel community committee is different than any other committee inside Congress.
	Why?
	They get exclusive.
	They receive secret, sensitive information that members of Congress never see.
	So when they come and speak to us, because they get this certain information, you're held to a little higher standard.
	There's a little greater trust you have in those individuals.
	And look at who's in charge of that.
	Adam Schiff.
	And what has he done to us?
	He lied to us how many times.
	He had proof beyond circumstantial evidence, right?
	Put the country through a two-year nightmare where nobody else could find these lies that he made.
	Then he goes and says, from a standpoint, that there's a whistleblower, that there's quick pro-quo in a phone call, that the so-called whistleblower has first-hand knowledge, that at the same time, that the administration is holding back this whistleblower from coming and speaking.
	If they'd waited 48 hours, we'd never be in this nightmare again.
	We find out the phone call, no quick pro quo.
	We find out the whistleblower, no first-hand knowledge.
	And you know what?
	Now, Adam Schiff, we find out, met his staff, met with this individual.
	This individual then goes to the inspector general, never mentions that they met with Schiff's staff.
	The only people who know what they've talked about is Schiff and his staff.
	Any legal counsel will tell you they're fact witnesses.
	They shouldn't be in charge of any case.
	Those are peoples we should have come in as witnesses.
	And now we're finding out Schiff's own staff went to Ukraine during the break.
	He lied to the American public on television how many times?
	Then, before the committee, inside the committee where the rest of the nation is talking, he starts to tell what he wished was in that phone call that was not.
	He was so believable.
	The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, on national television, argued with George Stephanophoulos what he said was correct.
	At the very least, this man should be censured and removed from that.
	There are 15.
	We've been following it closely, and we give out the phone number occasionally, 202-224-3121.
	I know how much you congressmen love when we do that.
	202-224-3121.
	And I'm not asking them to call you.
	We put a list of 15 Republicans that aren't on board yet.
	Why haven't they signed on to this censure of the cowardly shift?
	Well, I think they'll be voting with us tonight.
	The question will be: you should put up those 31 Democrats who sit in seats that Trump carried and ask them if they believe in fairness.
	Excuse me, I'm way ahead of you.
	I believe in amnesty.
	I have put them all up regularly.
	All right, quick break.
	We'll come back more with the House Minority Leader, Kevin McCarthy, on the other side.
	What the whistleblower has set out that is within our power to this date to confirm, we see confirmed in that call record.
	The president can attack the whistleblower rhetorically, all the president wants.
	It doesn't change the fact that the record of that call shows the president of the United States in the same conversation, indeed, immediately after the Ukraine president asked for more military help, the president of the United States asked that leader a favor, though.
	And no attack on the whistleblower or anyone else is going to change those underlying facts.
	All right, as we continue, Kevin McCarthy is the House Minority Leader with us.
	Censure vote tonight on Adam the Cowardly, Shifty Schiff.
	All right, so here, what about the president saying Republicans are not pushing back hard enough on the inquiry?
	And listen, I'm not complaining.
	I'm just saying, to me, this secret behind closed doors, non, it's an illegitimate inquiry.
	There's no due process here.
	And I don't see enough passion on the part of Republicans saying this crap has to stop.
	Well, I will tell you inside the House, I see it quite a bit because you'll see they have to throw our members out of the room.
	You look how many members had gone down who aren't even on the committee that wanted to read the transcript and told no.
	Look how many times they posted it back home.
	This is the challenge.
	Not only do the Democrats dislike this president so much and want to change the election, outside of you and some others, the media is trying to pre-do it at the same time.
	How many times have I called for this to stop until we have a fair process?
	You've been great.
	You've read the letter I sent to the speaker.
	You did a great letter.
	Two of those questions.
	She's never answered the rest.
	And you know when the press in her press conference last week asked her about it, you know what her answer was?
	Who else is going to ask me a question on the Republican talking points?
	They ignore it and they don't go back and hold her accountable.
	This whole investigation should stop until there is a fair process.
	I'll be honest.
	I don't even know.
	Look, the only thing I might do, I don't think Republicans should participate in what is a secret, you know, constitutionally invalid, to quote Pat Cipollone, violation of every due process right we ever had in this country.
	I think the only thing that Republicans ought to do, they ought not be voting on any of it.
	And what they ought to be doing is just sending in lawyers and maybe one or two members to chronicle how bad it is behind closed doors.
	And when do we get to see the transcripts that they've been hiding from us the whole time that as you point out, that my sources all point out, show that everyone said there was no quid pro quo.
	The only one who said it and said he misspoke was Mick Mulvaney.
	Yeah, he didn't use that phrase.
	I mean, let's be honest about this.
	Every single person that they brought in, and I've heard or read in the paper, that there is no quick pro quo.
	And if they had it, they'd come out and say it.
	Remember what Adam Schiff told the American public that there is in this phone call?
	Well, you know what?
	We know more about the phone call than the so-called whistleblower because we have the whole transcript.
	And the majority of Americans know there's nothing in that call that is impeachable.
	Do you think Nancy Pelosi, do you think Nancy Pelosi, at the end of the day, look, most of these Democrats already jumped out of the plane, but I heard they were 27 votes short last week.
	Is that true?
	I don't know the inside there, but I will tell you this.
	She is just focused on impeaching this president.
	Like you haven't even talked about, I sat in a meeting last week where here we are.
	We're walking in to the cabinet room to talk about the defense of our nation, of what's going on in Syria and everywhere else.
	This is where you check your party politics, right?
	America comes first.
	The president starts out.
	He hands me a stack of letters, and it was a letter that he sent to the president of Turkey, Eric Juan.
	And he hands it to me, and I start handing it to every other elected official in the room.
	This is the first time we see the letter.
	Every Republican and Democrat in the room grab the letter, start to read it as the president talks.
	The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is directly across from the president.
	You know what she does?
	She doesn't even look at the letter.
	She grabs it from her side view, grabs it, flips it over where the lettering's on the bottom, slams it on the table and puts her hands over it to show the president she's not even going to listen to him.
	She had predecided she was going to storm out of that room.
	And I raised this question, Sean.
	Do leaders leave the room or do they solve a problem?
	And, you know, once she left the room and then Stinney left the room and then Schumer looks around like, oh my gosh, I didn't get the memo.
	I better get out of here.
	The other Democrats stayed.
	And you know what happened?
	We had a very normal, productive meeting once they were gone.
	They're the common denominator.
	I've been in that room many times where she storms out of it.
	And runs to the left.
	I don't think you can name one thing they've been willing to work with you on for safety, security, peace, prosperity for the American people.
	And this is impeachment.
	It started two days after he got elected, all through 2017, 18, 19.
	That's all they do.
	All right.
	Well, Kevin McCarthy, you're always welcome on these airwaves, radio and TV, because I think the American people need to know every single detail about the secret Soviet-style backroom, you know, impeachment coup attempt by them and what they're up to.
	And I hope your Republicans vote the right way tonight.
	Thank you.
	Well, thank you.
	Look forward to coming back.
	800-941-Sean, toll free telephone number.
	You know, we have Republicans in name only.
	I saw it on Twitter today.
	Journalists in name only.
	We'll check in with Joe Cuncha, who is a media critic, is going to join us from the hill.
	And by the way, all of this is on Hannity.com if you want to check it out and you might want to check out the do me a favor montage.
	Well, it's just a go-to phrase that the president uses.
	We all have them.
	That's one of his.
	We'll continue.
	Yes, Marie, and it's all being done in secret.
	Remember, these guys don't have any classified information.
	If they really want to do an impeachment, they should be having this out in the public.
	Paid for?
	They paid Fusion GPS to send a British spy to Ukraine to dig up this dirt.
	And now all of a sudden they pretend like that just doesn't exist.
	Yeah.
	You know, sorry, we're going to hold them accountable and we're going to ask the questions every time about the Democrats' ties to Ukraine.
	Now we understand that William Barr and John Dorham have obtained BlackBerries tied to the launch of the Russia probe and these phones were the property of Joseph Misfoot.
	What are we going to find on these phones?
	And why is it important that we look at Joseph Misfood?
	Well, Joseph Mifsud should have been the guy that we should have got to the bottom of with Moeller's $35 million probe.
	We should have known exactly what Joseph Mifsud was up to because he's the one that supposedly first knew about the emails.
	So why would you not spend the first part of your investigation to definitely get to the bottom of Joseph Mifsud?
	Now, what do we know about Joseph Mifsud?
	We know that he worked with FBI agents.
	We know that he trained FBI agents at the Link campus in Rome.
	We know that he was around many NATO members running dialogues with NATO members.
	So this is a guy who, if he was a Russian asset, okay, as so you have James Comey said he was a Russian asset.
	Moeller stopped short just saying that he had Russian connections.
	Well, somewhere in there, we got to know the truth because either Joseph Mifsud is not a Russian asset and he was working for someone else.
	We need to know who that was.
	Or if he was a Russian asset, my God, the State Department's been corrupted.
	Our own FBI has been corrupted.
	Joseph Mifsud was in the United States Congress in early 2017 as we were beginning our investigation.
	So something doesn't add up.
	Because once we know that Durham's building evidence.
	Yeah, that's right.
	Oh, facts.
	Why would we ever care about getting to the truth about whether or not, yeah, there was foreign interference by Ukraine?
	And why on earth would Ukraine and China ever want to pay Hunter Biden with zero, zero experience in either of their countries or the industries of which he's sitting on boards and making big deals with a penny, except that they want to buy favor with the Bidens?
	I'm just guessing it seems like a pretty simple question that you might want to investigate here.
	And as far as the deep state, well, why would they ever care about getting to the bottom of this whole Russia collusion?
	I mean, Hillary Clinton, everybody's a Russian asset.
	Everybody.
	If you listen to Hillary Clinton, everybody now is a Russian asset.
	And Russia caused her to lose the election.
	One problem, there's only one person in 2016 that had any connection that did have an impact on the election with Russia.
	And that's her dirty dossier that she paid for with funneled money through a law firm, to an op research firm, to a foreign national.
	I thought foreign nationals weren't supposed to be involved in our elections.
	And this is the insanity of what we now live in.
	You know, is the media going to point out what the Democrats are doing behind closed doors?
	You know, maybe they'd want to point out that that horrible speaker at the time, Newt Gingrich, he offered every single right that had been allowed in past impeachment proceedings.
	They're doing none of this in the public eye.
	And from my sources, they're actually purposely lying about what takes place in all of this.
	You know, Andy McCarthy today, Americans deserve a public impeachment inquiry, and they should end the secrecy.
	I would say the secret behind closed doors, Soviet-style, you know, attempted impeachment coup, which is what this is.
	When would Republicans ever get away with this?
	Or the corruption of Adam Schiff with the whistleblower, non-whistleblower, hearsay whistleblower, or the fact that, oh, apparently the whistleblower is connected to Joe 30330.
	It all stinks to high heaven.
	And then on top of it, well, then we actually do have some real impeachment issues to deal with and foreign election interference.
	You know, where's the outrage over, let's see, images of Trump and Times Square being stomped on, bound, gagged, or impaled.
	Oh, yeah, why would we pay attention to that?
	Or how about Gavin Newsom pardoning three criminal immigrants so they can escape deportation?
	No wonder why the New York Times is scared to death this Sunday with a sympathetic tale of Democrats, you know, being outgunned in the media, social media, and campaign ads by Trump and the run-up.
	I mean, you're complaining about media bias now?
	You got to be kidding me.
	You know, fake Jake Tapper complaining Republicans don't want to go on his low-rated show.
	Why should they?
	Now that we know they're getting their marching orders from Jeff Zucker's CNN fake news president, why should they do anything?
	And of course, we got Tom Arnold tweeting JFK style, you know, crazy violence fantasies of blowing up the White House, Cesar V. Madonna, or Johnny Depp.
	When's the last time an actor has assassinated a president?
	Hmm, maybe it's time.
	Joe Concha is with the Hill, and he actually is probably one of the few real media reporters that calls them out often for the insanity of what they're doing here.
	How are you, sir?
	I don't want to be referred to as Joe Concha anymore, Sean.
	I appreciate the kind introduction.
	My new name now is Pierre DeLecto.
	Oh, okay, Mitt.
	How are you?
	I'm well.
	Thank you.
	I mean, of all the names you're going to come up with, I thought Carlos Danger is actually pretty good, but Pierre Delecto.
	It's kind of weird.
	It's funny.
	Listen, I said this earlier in the program.
	Look at every presidential candidate that loses.
	They lose and then they lose their mind.
	You know, Gore, Hillary.
	I mean, Hillary now, she sees Russian assets everywhere.
	You know, I like Mitt Romney.
	Mitt Romney was brutalized by the media, but now he wants to be liked again.
	That's sort of the same syndrome that John McCain had after he lost in the election.
	It's just bizarre how they can't handle the loss.
	That's weird, particularly with Hillary Clinton, Sean, right?
	I mean, we're seeing this public therapy session now, day 1002.
	It's been, I think, about that many days since the president's been in office where every day I got to look up and see an interview that she's doing where she is saying some things where you think to yourself, thank God this person wasn't elected.
	I mean, over the weekend, she said that there was voter suppression to the tune of tens of thousands of votes.
	Now, remember, President Trump won by tens of thousands of votes in Wisconsin.
	And that's the reason why she lost in that state, besides the fact, of course, that she never campaigned there.
	And then we saw what she did with Tulsa Gabbert last week at Iraq War veteran.
	You may not agree with her policy positions, but she's a decorated war veteran, first female combat veteran to run for president, and you're being called a Russian asset.
	And nobody, Sean, and I mean nobody in the media outside of some more right-leaning organizations called it for what it was, which is Mrs. Clinton is engaging in conspiracy theories and lies.
	And they do that all the time when the other side says something that may be unfounded.
	This didn't apply to her here.
	It was just Hillary Clinton suggests that Tulsi Gabbard may be a Russian agent.
	Hmm, maybe we should look into that.
	No.
	So I wish somebody would call her out during one of these interviews, but it never ever happens because it's almost like they're afraid.
	And then all the Democratic candidates, including Pete Futige, just yesterday at Meet the Press, would not denounce what Mrs. Clinton said, did not condemn it.
	It is shameful, and it just gives us a preview of things to come as far as this 2020 race, where you can basically say whatever you want, get away with it if you're a Democrat.
	It just is pretty bad.
	You know, one of the things that fascinates me, everyone cares about, we've spent two and a half years on lies, hoaxes, conspiracy theories, propaganda, misinformation about Russian election interference.
	Okay, we've got Ukraine election interference on behalf of Hillary.
	We have a dirty Russian dossier.
	Those are two things that the media in this country has never cared about.
	But, you know, it's kind of funny to be able to quote Politico in January of 2017, January 11th specifically, and they're explaining all about Ukrainian election interference to help Hillary.
	Selective outrage.
	Yeah, it's selective outrage, right?
	I mean, when you say that we cannot have any foreign interference in our elections whatsoever, the sanctity of the country is at stake.
	How do you not look at the dossier and the fact that there was a British agent that put that thing together using Russian information?
	That's a proven fact.
	You can't even dispute it.
	And this doesn't get reported in any way, shape, or form, or at least Democrats aren't taking the same task saying, hey, you're talking about how we can't have any interference in our elections, but you don't seem to have any problem with what the DMC and the Clinton campaign did.
	And that's what I mean when we hear that not many Republican officials are going on some of these Sunday talk shows anymore.
	Why would they?
	When they know they're not going to get remotely anything resembling a fair shake because those interviewers want to impress the boss, A, and B, make headlines by making news themselves by being provocative and yelling at the person that's actually there and not doing what we would call like a Tim Russer kind of interview where you're tough, but you're tough on both sides.
	And the Russerts of the world are gone now.
	They don't exist anymore, Sean.
	Well, and that's our changing media landscape.
	And, you know, look at what fake news CNN president Jeff Zucker got caught doing last week.
	I mean, those Project Veritas tapes, if that was Fox, could you, they're state TV.
	That is what CNN is.
	And I mean, I can't even believe we're going to stay on impeachment.
	We don't care.
	And Fox News is horrible and destroying the country and their influence has spread.
	Well, it's a backhanded compliment.
	I'll take the compliment part.
	But the reality is he's dictating.
	I mean, literally, he's blowing off breaks, getting in Jake fake Tapper's ear, and I guess telling him, well, go after her.
	Go after her on this.
	She's a liar.
	It doesn't sound like news to me.
	It sounds like a political operation.
	And really, they are when you get to the bottom of it.
	These people just hate Trump.
	Everything about Trump.
	If Trump cured cancer, they'd impeach him for curing cancer.
	I've heard you say that.
	And, you know, it's not really much of a stretch, really.
	But I think by her, you're referring to Kellyanne Conway.
	And whenever she goes on CNN, whether it be with Tapper or whether it be with Cuomo or whether it be with anybody else she may join in that network, those interviews, to your point, go 35, 40 minutes without a break.
	So it's no longer an interview.
	It's an interrogation.
	They're blowing through these commercial breaks.
	Tell me the last time CNN did that with Adam Schiff, who has some severe credibility problems where somebody's in a control room saying, stay on him, stay on him, nail him.
	Of course that doesn't happen.
	I offered the guy four on-air hours, 625 of the country's biggest best talk radio stations, and the number one show on cable news.
	I've offered him the biggest audience in cable news.
	Four hours I'll give him.
	He won't return our call.
	I wonder why.
	He won't take it.
	Wow, that's amazing.
	Yeah, look, I think that impeachment's really going nowhere because if Adam Schiff is the face of impeachment, then I think in the end, this is a movie that we know how it's going to end.
	They probably will impeach the president in the House, and it won't mean anything because when it goes to the Senate, they won't come close to getting two-thirds of a vote.
	They may get Emmitt Romney to come over so he gets a couple of headlines.
	And then the president, I mean, remember, Clinton, after he was impeached, 73% approval day one after impeachment.
	That won't happen now because you have the media against Trump while they're on call.
	Well, let me ask you this.
	This time, there will be a boomerang effect of some kind, I think.
	Go ahead.
	Let's say they impeach him.
	I don't see the Senate under any circumstances, especially because we do have the transcript and there was no quid pro quo.
	So they're not going to convict him.
	I think what they're going to do is they are going to so anger the people in this country because really they're trying to undo an election and then steal the next one.
	I think the American people, Trump supporters, and people we don't even know are going to come out in force against this abuse of power.
	Yeah, I think outside the bubble, when you speak to people, they say, come on, there's nothing here.
	How could it be a cover-up when the transcript's already out?
	To your point.
	And look, CNBC did this.
	It wasn't even CNBC, excuse me, it was Moody's just last week.
	Moody's analyst.
	By the way, they were right every time except 2016 in picking, based on metrics, the next president.
	Yeah, and they said that that would be a very close election when everybody said it would be a landslide.
	So give them some credit.
	The one they got wrong, they weren't too far off.
	But yeah, every election since 1980, they've gotten right.
	And they see President Trump getting as much as 351 electoral votes.
	That's a landslide based on the models that they're looking at now.
	So I think in the end, this impeachment thing isn't going to go anywhere.
	It's going to have a boomerang effect.
	And if the economy holds where it is now, I think.
	Do you think they chicken out or do they go through with this charade?
	They go through with it because their base wouldn't forgive them if they didn't.
	But this is why Nancy Pelosi resisted this all along.
	I'm surprised she still went along with it, quite frankly, when the call transcript was released.
	Actually, she decided to go ahead with it before the transcript was released.
	If she just waited a couple of hours, she wouldn't be in the position where she's what she's in now, which is a no-win situation.
	And her saying that she's going into meetings into the White House like she did in May, and she had to leave right away because she was insulted.
	And there you see pictures of her pointing in the president's face.
	And when Jam Brewer did it in 2012 with President Obama, she was completely addicted to her.
	Oh, it was ridiculous.
	Yeah.
	All right, Joe Contradict.
	He's a fellow talk show host on our New York flagship, AM710WOR.
	Thank you.
	All right, that's going to wrap things up for today.
	We are in the swamp.
	We're in the sewer in Washington, D.C., an exclusive interview with the president coming up 9 Eastern tonight, Hannity exclusive Fox News Channel.
	He was on fire for the few minutes he talked with reporters today.
	We'll get to the bottom of all of this and much, much more.
	We'll see you tonight at 9 from the sewer, from the swamp.
	We're on the road a lot this week.
	We'll see you at the president tonight at 9.
	Back here tomorrow.
	Thank you for being with us.
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down a verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts.

▲