Freedom Caucus Members, Congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida, Congressman Mark Meadows of North Carolina, and Chairman of the Freedom of the Freedom Caucus Congressman Andy Biggs of Arizona, are here to talk about today’s hearing with Marie Yovanovotich and the continuation of the #SchiffShamShow. By her own admission, the Ambassador is unable to be a material witness on anything.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.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
And I'm Carol Markovich.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hammond.
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 podcast.
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.
It's totally nobody's ever had such hard...
Here's Sean Hannity.
Such horrible due process.
There was no due process.
And I think it's I think it's considered a joke all over Washington and all over the world.
The Republicans are given no due process whatsoever.
We're not allowed to do anything.
It's a disgrace what's happening.
But you know what?
The American public understands it, and that's why the poll numbers are so good, and that's why other things are so good.
What they're doing in Washington with that hearing, and by the way, it's a political process, it's not a legal process.
So if I have somebody saying I'm allowed to speak up, if somebody says about me, we're not allowed to have any kind of representation, we're not allowed to have almost anything, and nobody's seen anything like it.
In the history of our country, there has never been a disgrace like what's going on right now.
So you know what?
Uh I w I have the right to speak.
I have freedom of speech just as other people do, but they've taken away the Republicans' rights.
And I watched today as certain very talented people wanted to ask questions, and they weren't even allowed to ask questions.
Republicans, they weren't allowed to ask questions.
It's a very sad thing.
Go ahead.
Start with your freedom.
Start with your freedom.
Were you trying to intimidate uh Ambassador Yovanovich?
I just want to have a total, I want freedom of speech.
That's a political process.
The Republicans have been treated very badly.
And I watched a little bit of it today.
I wasn't able to yesterday because we had the president of Turkey here, and I wasn't able to watch much.
I watched some of it this morning.
I thought it was a disgrace.
When we have great Republican representatives, people elected by the people, and they're not allowed to even ask a question.
They're not allowed to make a statement.
We're not allowed to have witnesses.
We're not allowed to have legal counsel, White House counsel.
It's a disgrace and it's an embarrassment to our nation.
Do you believe your tweets and your words can be intimidated?
Yes, go ahead.
Quiet.
Sir, do you believe your tweets and words can be intimidating?
I don't think so at all.
Go ahead.
Well, I shouldn't be.
In fact, I thought last night it ended because.
Alright, the president's there talking in the Roosevelt room.
We're gonna bring it back to our panel because he was just making a I mean I'm watching.
By the way, glad you're with us.
Happy Friday, 800 941.
Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Before we get even going here.
The president tweeted it doesn't like he tweeted.
He he doesn't like it.
Uh okay, for all you idiots, and I mean there are dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb people that that claim to even be legal analysts.
They are the dumbest of of the of them all, it seems sometimes.
Uh yeah, if you're gonna look at the legal definition defined by law, witness and tem intimidation.
Yeah, that would be if you threatened a witness with physical harm or actually harming a witness.
Oh bribing a witness, asking or coercing uh a witness in to lying.
Um I'm gonna play this cut here, and I thought I'll tell you what the great one said about this, which I thought was hilarious, but you know, I I can't talk about the the The well just listen to Cut 11 of this woman Maria Yovanovich, who's so freaking paranoid, thinks I actually gave a flying rip about her.
We mentioned her in passing four times.
It's not my fault that John Solomon interviewed the prosecutor general that said that she was handing him a list of names and not the prosecutor.
That's not my fault.
And it was done in passing.
Oh, Fox News.
Oh, it's the drama, the drama.
Anyway, this is her.
I can't talk about the black ledger, Paul Manafort's resignation from the Trump campaign or Shokin's departure.
She can't talk about anything.
And as Devin Nunes said here, why are you even here?
You know nothing.
Listen.
I arrived in Ukraine on August 22nd, 2016, and left Ukraine permanently on May 20th, 2019.
There are a number of events you are investigating to which I cannot bring any firsthand knowledge.
The events that predated my Ukraine service include the release of the so-called black ledger and Mr. Manafort's subsequent resignation from President Trump's campaign.
And the departure from office of former prosecutor general Victor Shokan.
Several other events occurred after I returned from Ukraine.
These include President Trump's July 25th, 2019 call with President Zelensky.
The discussions surrounding that phone call and any discussions surrounding the delay of security assistance to Ukraine in the summer of 2019.
All right, so I'm watching all of this insanity go on here, and I'm like, you gotta be kidding me, right?
She knows nothing.
She can add nothing.
Only thing she can add is hearsay, hearsay, more hearsay.
And so the media, the mob, and the democracy.
Whoa, this is witness intimidation.
Okay, well, let me just point out that when the president, first of all, it's not witness intimidation.
The president of the United States has a First Amendment right also to free speech, and everybody has the right to defend themselves from false accusations, or they are allowed to offer their opinion of a witness.
And uh yet that's called freedom of speech.
It's very simple if you just read the First Amendment.
I love my the great, by the way, the great woman.
I talked to him earlier today, who's on he's on fire.
He's coming on with us on TV tonight.
I'm glad he's coming.
And he goes, he pointed out, he goes, uh, yeah, Ivanovich, but and I knew so little about this woman until I found out she's talking about me as if I ever talked about her a lot, which I didn't.
It was it was imp we we went back and looked.
It was like four times.
I'm like, I didn't even know who she is.
I know nothing about I've never talked to anybody in Ukraine.
I mean, that's how insane this is.
The only thing I cared about was quid pro quo Joe and zero experience hunter, and yeah, that would be your real quid pro quo.
Anyway, Levin pointed out, he cracks me, he just cracks me up.
Uh, that Ivanovich wouldn't have even known that the president had tweeted during the hearing, except for the compromised, corrupt, coward, congenital liar.
Oh, I I don't know who the whistleblower is.
Uh, okay.
You c are you that messed up in the head that you don't remember what you said yesterday and the day before that?
Anyway, if Schiff didn't read this to her, Schiff created the basis for this ridiculous and erroneous, irrational witness intimidation.
It has no application.
None.
You know, I I mean it's I it's almost humorous, except what they're doing to the country, as I've been saying.
None of this is funny.
I mean, you know, look at the opening statement, another blockbuster by Devin Nunes today.
You know, as he points out, the Democrats have convened once again to advance an operation topple a duly elected president.
This is all they've done for three long solid years.
This is who they are.
This defines them.
They've done nothing to help peace, prosperity, uh uh safety, security in this country, job creation.
Nothing.
They've done zip except hate Trump.
This is a this is beyond A raging psychosis that has overcome them.
Now it's blowing up in their face.
I'm kind of, you know, good.
You know what?
You want to be idiots, go be idiots.
Let it blow up in your face.
That's fine.
But this is what they've basically have said.
We've played the montages again and again.
2016, two days after the president's elected impeach all through 2017, all through 2018, all through 2019, impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach, and peach.
You know, they they've been vowing to do this since the day that Donald Trump was elected because they never saw this coming, and they can't believe we smelly Walmart choppers, guilty as charged.
I like Costco and Target also.
Uh we smelly Walmart Costco target choppers that like Donald Trump, we irredeemable deplorables that cling to God.
All right, I'm guilty.
I want to I want a better relationship with my creator and our Bibles and our religion.
Oh, that makes us horrible people.
We want to be forgiven our sins.
What's that?
It's Christianity 101.
Yeah, how horrible.
But there's a contempt that they they can't believe it.
They know better.
They're smarter, they're super patriots.
We're not.
You know, until they secretly met with the whistleblower, yeah, there's where, you know, that the hiding the whistleblower and the Sixth Amendment is very clear, which is why I'm asking these senators these questions.
But, you know, if if you're on the phone, and the only, by the way, the only one colluding with a Russian is that idiot shif, the congenital liar.
Uh, what is the nature of the compromise?
Uh the naked, naked pictures of Trump.
Naked naked naked pictures.
Uh did Vladimir see them?
Uh yeah, but of course, the compromising materials, uh, Vladimir Sorry, of course.
This is in the uh can you get me the compromising material?
Of course I get to the compromising material.
You dumbass, you're being pranked.
You're being pumped.
Man.
And you know, you know, the only one on tape colluding with a Russian.
Anyway, so that now they've now this has been nothing but six weeks of secret depositions.
They're basically auditioning and cherry picking, and this is it.
You the I mean, why was this woman even here?
This is all hearsay again.
There is, and by on top of it, I mean, listening to Adam Schiff shut down, and we'll play this throughout the program today.
You know, point of order, point of order.
No, no, no, not recognized.
Point order, point, point.
I I mean it's like a kindergarten, play some of that.
It's like a kindergarten fight.
I do want to comment uh in our.
Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order under H. Res 660.
The general will state her point of order.
Uh, the point of order is will the chairman continue to prohibit witnesses from answering Republican questions as you've done in closed hearings and as you did.
This week when you interrupted our questions.
We'll suspend.
Chairman Evans, gentlemen's not recognized.
I have a point of order.
Gentlemen's not recognized.
I have a point of order, though.
Gentlemen's not recognized.
I do want to respond allowed the ranking.
Gentlemen's not recognized.
This is four gentlemen's scripts that have not been released.
Gentlemen is not recognized.
Oh, ranking member was allowed to exceed the opening statement.
And I was happy to allow him to do so.
I do want to respond to the point of order.
First of all, this this listen, you gotta understand their whole um when they when they put this phony resolution out there in the inquiry, they said, yeah, oh, and the the president will have the right to uh call witnesses and they'll have the right to question witnesses out of the way, except at the discretion of the uh compromise uh corrupt coward congenital liar, uh Adam Schiff.
And then the next pair, they'll have the right to ask witnesses questions at the discretion of the compromise corrupt congenital liar Schiff.
He's judge, jury, and executioner.
There's nothing here.
And as you as I'm sorting through this, I can't even believe that this is it.
This they want to impeach a president of the United States.
They don't have a single fact witness.
All you got is a bunch of if you found in your cherry-picking auditions a few few Trump haters.
And their interpretation of something that never happened, never happened.
They never did anything and they got the money.
And you got the president of the Ukraine, the farm minister saying over and over again, no, this is none of this is true.
Zero.
You know, um, it's an irrefutable fact here.
The aid only existed because of Trump.
The president and Zelensky made it clear nothing was linked.
The foreign minister has now said it again and again.
And they've said it on multiple occasions.
They didn't feel pressure to do a single thing.
You know, and I will tell you, and watching shift today, I mean, it was like, whoa.
What country are we all living in here?
All right, gotta take a uh break our first break here.
We got a lot to get to.
We got a lot.
I mean, I I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
I I'm kind of enjoying this blowing up in their face.
I mean, this is blowing up in their face.
This is this is like we're no longer the United States of America.
This is like the Banana Republic states of America.
This is this is former Soviet Union style madness here.
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 a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
Oh, yeah.
Uh, Democrats, maybe they don't want to follow this little point of order that uh the one thing Yovanovich did do today is confirm that, yeah, Hunter Biden zero experience role with Baris Maholdings.
Yeah, that's highly questionable.
Yeah, I thought, oh, oh, I thought nobody, I thought it I thought the verdict was in.
No reasonable person says anything wrong with the the billion dollars if you fire the guy, no billion if you don't.
Nobody saw anything wrong with that.
But we see the president is defending himself.
This is witnessing.
No, go read the statute.
Are you people that dumb and that lazy that you you can't even, you know, look up the federal statute.
It's not that hard.
You have to threaten a witness with physical harm.
Uh, or or harming a witness, or bribing a witness, or coercing a witness into lying.
Uh, the president has a First Amendment right just like the rest of us.
I know that's very surprising to you liberals, but you know, he does.
And uh as part of that, he can say whatever he wants to say.
And by the way, she wouldn't have even known about it while she was testifying because oh, the only one that told her was the cowardly corrupt compromise content congenital liar.
And that's who you know, that's who's in play here.
The most stunning thing in this is just like the other two Bozos, you know, Tuesday, when was it, Wednesday?
She has no firsthand knowledge at all of anything.
She has none.
He had no knowledge of the pause on aid on Ukraine, no knowledge of the phone call till it was made public.
She was not involved in the meeting in Warsaw, uh, and and had not spoken to the president or Mulvaney at all.
And she could not speak to the president's thought process regarding his decisions.
Now, she did agree a hundred percent, you know, Ukraine agreed with bringing her back.
They didn't want her there.
Because she actually, and you can look at this in John Solomon's column, apparently gave a speech and made her opinions known.
But she's upset that the prosecutor General said something about her and that got reported.
Wow.
Oh, the vapors.
Oh, hang on.
I gotta take a break because I'm about to pass out.
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, verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, 25 now till the top of the hour.
All right, so the let me just read the tweets.
Oh, the vapors.
Oh, and by the way, she wouldn't have even known that the president tweeted about her, but Adam Schiff has to tell her.
And this is intimidation.
No, it's not.
I have said on this program that if Donald Trump cured cancer, they would impeach him for curing cancer.
That's how sick they've gotten.
This is how detached from truth and reality they are.
Now, the president did tweet, they call it serving at the pleasure of the president.
The U.S. now has a very strong and powerful foreign policy, much different than preceding administrations.
It's called, by the way, quite simply, America first with all of that.
However, I have done far bet more for Ukraine than Obama.
Oh, good point.
And everywhere Maria Ivanovich went turned bad.
By the way, the Ukrainians, you uh nobody's saying this, by the way, they should have.
Uh they agreed a hundred percent with recalling the ambassador because the new president said with regard to the ambassador to the United States from Ukraine, as far as I recall her name, uh Ivanovich.
It was great that you were the first one who told me that she was not a great ambassador because I agree with you a hundred percent.
Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous president, and she was on his side.
She would not accept me as a new president well enough.
Oh, so the Ukrainian president agrees.
President just says, yeah, didn't work out well.
She started off in Somalia, had that go.
Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian president spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him.
It is a president's absolute right to appoint ambassadors.
Yeah, it's the president's foreign policy.
But the most stunning thing here, I'm gonna go to Jim Jordan here in a second, is she has no knowledge of anything.
That great Devin Nunez, why are you even here?
What is the point?
Confirm she wasn't involved in the phone call, had no knowledge about the issues of Ukraine, uh, and the pause on aid.
Uh she wasn't involved in the meeting and war war Warsaw, Warsaw had not spoken with President Trump or Mulvaney at all.
And you know, she also could not speak to the president's thought process regarding his decision related to Ukraine.
I know she's so upset that, oh, yeah, the prosecutor general there accused her of giving her giving him a list of people not to prosecute.
Let her take it up with that guy.
I apparently he stands by it according to Jim Jordan.
Others have said he's recanted.
Everything she had to offer today was just more hearsay.
She wasn't on the call.
She didn't know about the call until it was made public.
Uh She can only provide more hearsay about the discussion of aid to Ukraine.
I mean, that's it.
That's all they can do.
And by the way, Obama gave plenty of ambassadors their goodbye pink slips.
Yeah, uh, a lot of times.
And Yovanovich, even out of it, yeah, I do serve at the pleasure of the president.
Ambassadors are personal representatives of the president.
That's the president's job.
He's the one that campaigned and got elected.
And she confirmed that the president can recall an ambassador any time that for any reason.
He didn't need any reason for any reason at all.
And I don't know why that would be even complicated, even for the corrupt news media in this country.
You know, and she even praised the president's strong policies towards Ukraine.
Wow.
Shocking.
And all of this is based on hearsay.
Every bit of it.
Oh, by the way, I love how you know the Area 51 Roswell Rachel conspiracy theory channel, they're actually comparing her removal is worse than Benghazi.
Really?
What's that?
Well, let's go to Jim Jordan, who's now come out of this hearing, which is now over.
...who has no firsthand knowledge of the subject that is supposed to be the focus of this entire inquiry.
Third witness who never talked to the president.
Third witness who never spoke with Chief of Staff Malvaney, who was not third witness who was not on the call.
Um third witness who wasn't even in, as I said, in Ukraine when when the relevant uh during the relevant time frame wasn't even there when President Zelensky that uh left before he was even inaugurated as as the new president.
Um so again, four facts.
I say this every time, but it's the truth.
Four facts have never changed, will never change.
We got the call transcript.
There was no conditionality or uh linkage on the call between an investigation and security assistance.
We have the two individuals on the call who both said that um there was no pressure, no linkage.
We know that the Ukrainians didn't even know aid was withheld or on hold at the time of the call, and most importantly, the Ukrainians specifically President Zelensky never took any official action to get the aid released.
And so those those facts uh never change and and will never change.
I won't let Mr. Stefanix say a word and then we'll take the question.
Sure.
So this was day two of an abject failure of Adam Schiff and his regime of secrecy.
As we saw today, he is making up the window.
Let me jump in here.
I mean, it is uh Jim Jordan's gonna get up here and I'm sorry, Mark Meadows is gonna get up in a minute when he does.
I want to go to him.
Uh uh let me know, Linda, when he gets up there.
And we have a cued up and when we have it uh cued up and ready to go.
You know, I will tell you, you know, we're learning a lot of other things here, too.
Like Ivanovich's previous testimony was a dud.
They knew it was a dud.
A third hearsay witness.
What is the point?
It is inadmissible.
That's why I've been asking these senators.
Okay, are we gonna follow the federal laws that govern uh the admission admissibility of evidence and a trial, which means no hearsay, with very few exceptions, none that would apply here, and that's issue number one.
And issue number two, do we have a Sixth Amendment to our constitution?
Do you have a right to confront your accusers?
You know, there's a great piece Washington Post is actually saying the Democrats focus grouped, coming up with the name, we'll go with the name bribery because it's you know, quid pro quo is not as good.
We'll go to extortion.
No, no, no, no.
Now we'll move it to bribery.
I don't know what the hell they're doing.
You know, and you got fake news, MSDNC claiming that the president exercising his undisputed right to recall an ambassadors worse than McGhazi.
Mika Brzezinski.
I'm like, and Elise Jordan in an exchange today.
But all of this is backfiring.
You know, I can't hear you got to say it on the air.
What are you saying to me?
I can't hear I can't read your lips.
I say we're all cued up for Meadows whenever you're ready, boss.
Well, let's go to Mark Meadows.
He's just came out of the hearing.
We do have is we have what President Zelensky, we have a new administration in Ukraine that didn't have the same confidence in this ambassador, and so isn't it appropriate with all the the Foreign Service diplomats we have to put someone in with a new regime in in the Ukraine that can actually work on the president's behalf on behalf of the American people?
Why is it appropriate for the president to tap his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani to Mount, which he testified to was a smear campaign against her?
Why is that okay?
As I said, the president can have whom he desires doing diplomatic work for the country.
There's been all this talk about the irregular channel.
I think it's important that folks in the quote irregular channel were Senate confirmed Ambassador Silence and it confirmed Ambassador Bulker and Senate confirmed Secretary Perry.
So y'all want to make a some of the witnesses want to make a big deal about that.
And you had the president's lawyer also part of that group.
I think I think presidents are allowed to have whom they want doing the work of the of the country.
Do you think it was a smear case?
She said it was a smear campaign.
I don't know.
She testified it was a smear campaign of false attacks against her.
Do you believe her?
I mean, Democrats say that the president is intimidating the witness.
Is it appropriate for the president to be attacking a witness while she is testifying?
I think it's a good question.
Well, I don't know that it's excuse me.
I don't know that it was an attack on the witness.
It was it was really a characterization of her resume.
And when you look at this, when you look at this, you guys want him to go in with no attorneys, no witnesses, no Twitter, no anything.
You know, at some point you gotta say, when is it going to be a fair process?
And today was not a fair process in there.
It's not going to be a fair process in the bunker that we're about to have to go to.
And it was not a fair process when they muzzled the gentlewoman from New York over and over again.
It's not fair.
But is there an attack in the clear attack?
On policy on Together DJ.
Do you think it's a fair process for the witness?
The second sentence of that tweet.
For example, one example.
Adam Schiff never brought this up.
The second sentence of that tweet goes back to the July 25th call transcript.
And in that, President Zelensky is saying to President Trump that he's concerned that Ambassador Yovanovich is a quote, bad ambassador.
And that President Zelensky believed that Ambassador Yovanovich had a loyalty to President Koroshenko.
Now, Adam Schiff, when posing the question to Ambassador Yovanovich, to respond to the tweet, never even mentioned that.
Because this is what Adam Schiff did.
Does when he had the asking?
Let me just jump in here and say, you know, Jim Jordan sums it up, and every time he goes to the microphone, there was no linkage.
In the transcript, there was never even the mention of the word aid.
Not one time.
Not one time.
The president of Ukraine, foreign minister of Ukraine, they didn't even know that there was a hold, which was from a month before.
Why?
Because there's so much corruption as we all know goes on.
Both sides are saying no linkage, no pressure whatsoever.
And they got the money without doing anything.
So why are we here talking to a hearsay no-nothing witness again?
I mean, I've never seen anything like this.
I will tell you though, it's blowing up.
We got the latest survey by Rasmussen now out, which has been the most accurate polling operation in the 2016 election.
And it shows that the shift show that's going on in DC in the circus is boosting the president's approval numbers because their daily presidential survey find a four-point bounce for the president following the first day of this Ukrainian impeachment coup attempt.
And the president's overall approval has been tracking up since Wednesday, the first day of this shift show.
Keep it up.
Because that's only going to help the president.
And by the way, there's another.
Oh, they released the new Trump call transcript has now come out as well.
And guess what?
It actually contradicts Ivanovich's previous sworn testimony.
And you know the debunked conspiracy theory floated by by some people out there on the left that the tr that President Trump was bad-mouthing her in the first call.
Well, that's what the compromised corrupt coward congenital liar Adam Schiff had asked Yovanovich in the October 11th episode if she knew whether Trump had brought her up in previous conversations.
she said, I don't know.
I had assumed it was April 21st, the phone call, the first phone call, because that to my knowledge is the only time other time that they talked.
And then the congenital liar asked if the reason that she didn't receive a briefing or readout of the call was because Trump may have been bashing her.
It's possible, she says.
Great, more conjecture.
Let's all just guess around this.
White House released the poll transcript of that call today.
And guess what?
Uh, Jovanovich's name never came up.
Good grief.
I mean, the four minor mentions on my show.
Oh, smear campaign.
By the way, we know why is Rudy Giuliani there.
I'll tell you why.
Because the election interference by Ukraine.
And he's the president's lawyer, and that was the whole Mueller report thing.
Remember?
By the way, there is speculation.
Um, who is the person that said this earlier today?
Oh, it was Harold Ford was on Fox News.
He says, uh, yeah, this keeps going bad.
Uh, you're gonna have a much better sense of what Nancy Pelosi thinks because I don't think that she wanted to do this.
If she doesn't feel the Democrats are gonna have a sound boat, bipartisan boat, maybe even the chance to remove the president.
I would not be surprised if she didn't pull this in the next few days.
If she had a brain, she would.
But I think she's just speaker and name only.
Love how they, you know, is prayerful, by the way.
I wonder if that was one of the the focus group terms they came up with.
The bottom line is she had nothing to offer today.
Nothing.
She knew nothing.
There was no reason for her to ever be there.
No first hand knowledge of the first phone call between Trump and Zelensky.
None.
No direct knowledge of anything about withholding or delaying aid.
Nothing.
That is the center of their ridiculous impeachment coup attempt here.
And she's just upset that's that you know, you can't be upset with Juliani or Solomon or Hannity, and Hannity barely I knew nothing about her.
Now I do, and I know a lot about her now.
But she's upset four mere mentions.
Oh, smeared, like in passing.
What the hell this person's talking about?
By the way, Ron Johnson, if you want a real quid pro quo, we got one.
He's threatening now to subpoena Hunter Biden.
And I will tell you, this is this is gonna get interesting.
All right, 800 941 Sean.
If you want to be a part of the program.
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 a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, we got a lot to get to today.
800 941 Sean Topre uh telephone number.
I will tell you that there are some rock stars that are emerging here for the Republicans.
By the way, I mean, can I just say Yovan?
I was devastated that the president, you know, didn't like me.
I was devastated.
I'm like, okay.
Um I don't understand.
There's so many people that hate me.
I just don't understand snowflakesm.
Get over it.
Not everybody in life's gonna like you.
Too bad.
Anyway, we've got uh Mark these heroes, Mark Meadows has been great.
He's gonna join us.
Uh well, Jim Jordan's been amazing.
Mac Gates has been amazing, he'll join us, Andy Biggs.
Uh, we got Greg Jarrett checking in today, uh, Senator Rick Scott and oh Mark Levin on Hannity tonight.
Don't miss that.
And we'll tell you more about that straight ahead.
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 sas, 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 a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
Here's Sean Hannity.
Such horrible due process.
There was no due process.
And I think it's I think it's considered a joke all over Washington and all over the world.
The Republicans are given no due process whatsoever.
We're not allowed to do anything.
It's a disgrace what's happening.
But you know what?
The American public understands it, and that's why the poll numbers are so good, and that's why other things are so good.
What they're doing in Washington with that hearing, and by the way, it's a political process, it's not a legal process.
So if I have somebody saying I'm allowed to speak up, if somebody says about me, we're not allowed to have any kind of representation, we're not allowed to have almost anything, and nobody's seen anything like it.
In the history of our country, there has never been a disgrace like what's going on right now.
So you know what?
Uh I w I have the right to speak.
I have freedom of speech just as other people do, but they've taken away the Republicans' rights.
And I watched today as certain very talented people who wanted to ask questions, and they weren't even allowed to ask questions.
Republicans, they weren't allowed to ask questions.
It's a very sad thing.
Go ahead.
Start with your freedom.
Were you trying to intimidate uh Ambassador Yovanovich?
I just want to have a total, I want freedom of speech.
That's a political process.
The Republicans have been treated very badly.
And I watched a little bit of it today.
I wasn't able to yesterday because we had the president of Turkey here, and I wasn't able to watch much.
I watched some of it this morning.
I thought it was a disgrace.
When we have great Republican representatives, people elected by the people, and they're not allowed to even ask a question.
They're not allowed to make a statement.
We're not allowed to have witnesses.
We're not allowed to have legal counsel, White House counsel.
It's a disgrace and it's an embarrassment to our nation.
Do you believe your tweets and your words can be intimidated?
Yes, go ahead, please.
Quiet.
Sir, do you believe your tweets and words can be intimidating?
I don't think so at all.
Go ahead.
Well, I shouldn't be.
In fact, I thought last night it ended because.
Alright, the president's there talking in the Roosevelt room.
We're gonna bring it back to our panel because he was just making a card.
All right, there it is.
I mean, I'm watching.
By the way, glad you're with us.
Happy Friday, 800 941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Let me deal with this idiocy anyway.
Uh before we get even going here.
The president tweeted he doesn't like he tweeted.
He he doesn't like it.
Uh okay, for all you idiots, and I mean there are dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb people that that claim to even be legal analysts.
They are the dumbest of of the of them all, it seems sometimes.
Uh, yeah, if you're gonna look at the legal definition defined by law, witness intimidation, yeah.
That would be if you threatened a witness with physical harm or actually harming a witness.
Oh bribing a witness, asking or coercing uh a witness into lying.
Um, I'm gonna play this cut here, and I thought I'll tell you what the great one said about this, which I thought was hilarious.
But you know, I I can't talk about the the the well, just listen to Cut 11 of this woman, Maria Yovanovich, who's so freaking paranoid, thinks that I actually gave a flying rip about her.
We mentioned her in passing four times.
It's not my fault that John Solomon interviewed the prosecutor general that said that she was handing him a list of names and not the prosecutor.
That's not my fault.
And it was done in passing.
Oh, Fox News.
Oh, it's the drama, the drama.
Anyway, this is her.
I can't talk about the the black ledger Paul Manafort's resignation from the Trump campaign or Shokin's departure.
She can't talk about anything.
Well, and as Devin Nunes said here, why are you even here?
You know nothing.
Listen.
I arrived in Ukraine on August 22nd, 2016, and left Ukraine permanently on May 20th, 2019.
There are a number of events you are investigating to which I cannot bring any firsthand knowledge.
The events that predated my Ukraine service include the release of the so-called black ledger and Mr. Manafort's subsequent resignation from President Trump's campaign.
And the departure from office of former prosecutor general Victor Shokin.
Several other events occurred after I returned from Ukraine.
These include President Trump's July 25th, 2019 call with President Zelensky.
The discussions surrounding that phone call and any discussions surrounding the delay of security assistance to Ukraine in the summer of 2019.
All right, so I'm watching all of this insanity go on here, and I'm like, you gotta be kidding me, right?
She knows nothing.
She can add nothing.
Only thing she can add is hearsay, hearsay, more hearsay.
And so the media, the mob, and the democrat, whoa, this is witness intimidation.
Okay, well, let me just point out that when the president, first of all, it's not witness intimidation.
The president of the United States has a First Amendment right also to free speech, and everybody has the right to defend themselves from false accusations, or they are allowed to offer their opinion of a witness.
And uh yeah, that's called freedom of speech.
It's very simple if you just read the First Amendment.
I love my the great, by the way, the great woman.
I talked to him earlier today, who's he's on fire.
He's coming on with us on TV tonight.
I'm glad he's coming.
And he goes, he pointed out, he goes, uh, yeah, Yovanovich, but and I knew so little about this woman until I found out she's talking about me as if I ever talked about her a lot, which I didn't.
It was it was we we went back and looked, it was like four times.
I'm like, I didn't even know who she is.
I know nothing about I've never talked to anybody in Ukraine.
I mean, that's how insane this is.
The only thing I cared about was quid pro quo Joe and zero experience hunter, and yeah, that would be your real quid pro quo.
Anyway, Levin pointed out, he cracks me, he just cracks me up.
Uh, that Yovanovich wouldn't have even known that the president had tweeted during the hearing, except for the compromised corrupt coward, congenital liar.
Oh, I I don't know who the whistleblower is.
Uh, okay.
You can are you that messed up in the head that you don't remember what you said yesterday and the day before that.
Anyway, if Schiff didn't read this to her, Schiff created the basis for this ridiculous and erroneous, irrational witness intimidation, it has no application.
None.
You know, I I mean it's I it's almost humorous, except what they're doing to the country, as I've been saying.
None of this is funny.
I mean, you know, look at the opening statement, another blockbuster by Devin Nunes today.
You know, as he points out, the Democrats have convened once again to advance an operation to topple a duly elected president.
This is all they've done for three long solid years.
This is who they are.
This defines them.
They've done nothing to help peace, prosperity, uh uh safety, security in this country, job creation.
nothing.
They've done zip except hate Trump.
This is a this is beyond a raging psychosis that has overcome them.
Now it's blowing up in their face.
I'm kind of, you know, good.
You know what?
You want to be idiots, go be idiots.
Let it blow up in your face.
That's fine.
But this is what they've basically have said.
We've played the montages again and again.
2016, two days after the president's elected impeach all through 2017, all through 2018, all through 2019.
Impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach.
You know, they they've been vowing to do this since the day that Donald Trump was elected because they never saw this coming, and they can't believe we smelly Walmart choppers, guilty as charged.
I like Costco and Target also.
Uh we smelly Walmart Costco target shoppers that like Donald Trump, we irredeemable deplorables that cling to God.
All right, I'm guilty.
I want to I want a better relationship with my creator and our Bibles and our religion.
Oh, that makes us horrible people.
We want to be forgiven our sins.
What's that?
It's Christianity 101.
Yeah, how horrible.
But there's a contempt that they they can't believe it.
They know better.
They're smarter, they're super patriots.
We're not.
You know, until they secretly met with the whistleblower, yeah, there's where, you know, that the hiding the whistleblower and the Sixth Amendment is very clear, which is why I'm asking these senators these questions.
But you know, if if you're on the phone, and the only, by the way, the only one colluding with a Russian is that idiot Schiff, the congenital liar.
Uh, what is the nature of the compromise?
Uh naked, naked pictures of Trump, naked, naked, naked pictures.
Uh Did Vladimir see them?
Uh yeah, but of course, the compromising materials, uh, Vladimir Sorry, of course.
This is in the uh can you get me the compromising material?
Of course I get to the compromising material.
You dumbass, you're being pranked.
You're being pumped.
Man, and you know, you know, the only one on tape colluding with a Russian.
Anyway, so that now they've now this has been nothing but six weeks of secret depositions.
They're basically auditioning and cherry picking, and this is it.
You the I mean, why was this woman even here?
This is all hearsay again.
There is, and by on top of it, I mean, listening to Adam Schiff shut down, and we'll play this throughout the program today.
You know, point of order, point of order.
No, no, no, not recognized.
Point order, point of order.
I mean, it's like a kindergarten, play some of that.
It's like a kindergarten fight.
I do want to comment uh Mr. Chairman.
I have a point of order under H. Res 660.
The general will state her point of order.
Uh, the point of order is will the chairman continue to prohibit witnesses from answering Republican questions as you've done in closed hearings, and as you did this week when you interrupted our questions.
Not a proper point of order, gentlemen was will suspended.
Mr. Speaker, I do Chairman Abbott.
Gentlemen's not recognized.
Chairman, I have a point of order.
Gentlemen's not recognized.
Gentlemen's not recognized.
I do want to respond allowed the ranking.
Gentlemen's not recognized.
This is four gentlemen scripts that have not been released.
Gentlemen is not recognized.
Oh ranking member was allowed to exceed the opening statement.
And I was happy to allow him to do so.
I do want to respond to the point of order recording.
Listen, you gotta understand their whole um when they when they put this phony resolution out there in the inquiry, they said, yeah, oh, and the the president will have the right to uh call witnesses and they'll have the right to question witnesses now the way, except at the discretion of the uh compromise uh corrupt coward congenital liar, uh Adam Schiff.
And then the next pair, they'll have the right to ask witnesses questions at the discretion of the compromise corrupt congenital liar Schiff.
It is judge, jury, and executioner.
This this there's there's nothing here.
And as you as I'm sorting through this, I can't even believe that this is it.
This they want to impeach a president of the United States.
They don't have a single fact witness.
All you got is a bunch of if you found in your cherry-picking auditions a few few Trump haters.
And to this their interpretation of something that never happened.
Never happened.
They never did anything and they got the money.
And you got the president of the Ukraine, the farm minister saying over and over again, no, this is none of this is true.
Zero.
You know, um, it's an irrefutable fact here.
The aid only existed because of Trump.
The president and Zelensky made it clear nothing was linked.
The foreign minister has now said it again and again.
And they've said it on multiple occasions.
They didn't feel pressure to do a single thing.
You know, and I will tell you, and watching shift today, I mean, it was like, whoa!
What country are we all living in here?
All right, gotta take a uh break our first break here.
We got a lot to get to.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hammond.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple 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 a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
Oh, yeah.
Uh Democrats, maybe they don't want to follow this little point of order that uh the one thing Yovanovich did do today is confirm that, yeah, Hunter Biden zero experience role with Baris Maholdings.
Yeah, that's highly questionable.
Yeah, I thought, oh, oh, I thought nobody, I thought it, I thought the verdict was in.
No reasonable person says anything wrong with the billion dollars if you fire the guy, no billion if you don't.
Nobody saw anything wrong with that.
But we see the president is defending himself.
This is witnessing, no, go read the statute.
Are you people that dumb and that lazy that you you can't even, you know, look up the federal statute?
It's not that hard.
You have to threaten a witness with physical harm uh or or harming a witness or bribing a witness or coercing a witness into lying.
Uh the president has a First Amendment right just like the rest of us.
I know that's very surprising to you liberals, but you know, he does.
And uh, as part of that, he can say whatever he wants to say.
And by the way, she wouldn't have even known about it while she was testifying because oh, the only one that told her was the cowardly corrupt compromise congenital liar.
And that's who, you know, that's who's in play here.
The most stunning thing in this is just like the other two Bozos, you know, Tuesday, well, was it Wednesday, she has no firsthand knowledge at all of anything.
She has none.
You had no knowledge of the pause on aid on Ukraine, no knowledge of the phone call till it was made public.
She was not involved in the meeting in Warsaw, uh, and had not spoken to the president or Mulvaney at all.
And she could not speak to the president's thought process regarding his decisions.
Now, she did agree a hundred percent, you know, Ukraine agreed with bringing her back.
They didn't want her there because she actually, and you can look at this in John Solomon's column, apparently gave a speech and made her opinions known.
But she's upset that the prosecutor general said something about her and that got reported.
Wow.
Oh, the vapors.
Oh, hang on, I gotta take a break because I'm about to pass out.
All right, 25 now till the top of the hour.
All right, so let me just read the tweets.
Oh, the vapors.
Oh, and by the way, she wouldn't have even known that the president tweeted about her, but Adam Schiff has to tell her.
And this is intimidation.
No, it's not.
I have said on this program that if Donald Trump cured cancer, they would impeach him for curing cancer.
That's how sick they've gotten.
This is how detached from truth and reality they are.
Now, the president did tweet.
They call it serving at the pleasure of the president.
The U.S. now has a very strong and powerful foreign policy, much different than preceding administrations.
It's called, by the way, quite simply, America first with all of that.
However, I have done far bet more for Ukraine than Obama.
Oh, good point.
And everywhere Maria Ivanovich went turned bad.
By the way, the Ukrainians, you uh nobody's saying this, by the way, they should have.
Uh, they agreed a hundred percent with recalling the ambassador because the new president said with regard to the ambassador to the United States from Ukraine, as far as I recall her name, uh Yovanovich, who was great that you were the first one who told me that she was not a great ambassador, because I agree with you a hundred percent.
Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous president, and she was on his side.
She would not accept me as a new president well enough.
Oh, so the Ukrainian president agrees.
President just says, yeah, didn't work out well.
She started off in Somalia, had that go.
Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian president spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him.
It is a president's absolute right to appoint ambassadors.
Yeah, it's the president's foreign policy.
But the most stunning thing here, I'm gonna go to Jim Jordan here in a second, is she has no knowledge of anything.
That the great Devin Nunes, why are you even here?
What is the point?
Confirm she wasn't involved in the phone call, had no knowledge about the issues of Ukraine, uh and the pause on aid.
Uh she wasn't involved in the meeting in war war Warsaw Warsaw Warsaw had had not spoken with President Trump or Mulvaney at all.
And, you know, she also could not speak to the president's thought process regarding his decision related to Ukraine.
I know she's so upset that, oh, yeah, the prosecutor general there accused her of giving her giving him a list of people not to prosecute.
Let her take it up with that guy.
I apparently he stands by it according to Jim Jordan.
Others have said he's recanted.
Everything she had to offer today was just more hearsay.
She wasn't on the call.
She didn't know about the call until it was made public.
Uh she can only provide more hearsay about the discussion of aid to Ukraine.
I mean, that's it.
That's all they can do.
And by the way, Obama gave plenty of ambassadors their goodbye pink slips.
Yeah, uh, a lot of times.
And Yovanovich even out of it, yeah, I do serve at the pleasure of the president.
Ambassadors are personal representatives of the president.
That's the president's job.
He's the one that campaigned and got elected.
And she confirmed that the president can recall an ambassador any time that for any reason.
He didn't need any reason for any reason at all.
And I don't know why that would be even complicated, even for the corrupt news media in this country.
You know, and she even praised the president's strong policies towards Ukraine.
Wow, shocking.
And all of this is based on hearsay.
Every bit of it.
Oh, by the way, I love how you know the the Area 51 Roswell Rachel conspiracy theory channel, they're actually comparing her removal as worse than Benghazi.
Really?
What's that?
Well, let's go to my let's go to Jim Jordan, who's now come out of this hearing, which is now over.
Who has no firsthand knowledge of the subject that is supposed to be the focus of this entire inquiry?
Third witness who never talked to the president, third witness who never spoke with chief of staff Mulvaney, who was not third witness who was not on the call.
Third witness who wasn't even, as I said, in Ukraine when the relevant, during the relevant timeframe.
Wasn't even there when President Zelensky left before he was even inaugurated as the new president.
So again, four facts.
I say this every time, but it's the truth.
Four facts have never changed, will never change.
We got the call transcript.
There was no conditionality or uh linkage on the call between an investigation security assistance.
We have the two individuals on the call who both said that um there was no pressure, no linkage.
We know that the Ukrainians didn't even know aid was withheld or on hold at the time of the call, and most importantly, the Ukrainians specifically President Zelensky never took any official action to get the aid released.
And so those those facts uh never change and and will never change.
I'll let Mr. Fonic say a word and then we'll take the question.
Sure.
So this was day two of an abject failure of Adam Schiff and his regime of secrecy.
As we saw today, he is making up the wheel.
Let me jump in here.
I mean, it is uh Jim Jordan's gonna get up here and I'm sorry, Mark Meadows is gonna get up in a minute when he does.
I want to go to him.
Uh uh let me know, Linda, when he gets up there.
And we have a cued up in and when we have it uh cued up and ready to go.
You know, I will tell you uh, you know, we're learning a lot of other things here too, like Yovanovich's previous testimony was a dud, they knew it was a dud.
A third hearsay witness.
What is the point?
It is inadmissible.
That's why I've been asking these senators.
Okay, are we gonna follow the federal laws that govern uh the admission admissibility of evidence in a trial, which means no hearsay with very few exceptions, none that would apply here?
And that's issue number one.
And issue number two, do we have a sixth amendment to our constitution?
Do you have a right to confront your accusers?
You know, there's a a great piece Washington Post is actually saying the Democrats focus grouped.
Coming up with the name, we'll go with the name bribery because it's you know, quid pro quo is not as good.
We'll go to extortion.
No, no, no.
Now we'll move it to bribery.
I don't know what the hell they're doing.
You know, and you got fake news MSDNC claiming that the president exercising his undisputed right to recall an ambassadors worse than McGhazi.
Mika Brzezinski.
I'm like, and Elise Jordan in an exchange today.
But all of this is backfiring.
You know, I can't hear you gotta say it on the air.
What are you saying to me?
I can't hear I can't read your lips.
I say we're all cute up for Meadows whenever you're ready, boys.
Well, let's go to Mark Meadows.
He's just came out of the hearing.
What we do have is we have what President Zelensky, we have a new administration in Ukraine that didn't have the same confidence in this ambassador.
And so isn't it appropriate with all the the Foreign Service diplomats we have to put someone in with a new regime in in the Ukraine that can actually work on the president's behalf on behalf of the the American people?
Why is it appropriate for the president to tap his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to mount what she testified to was a smear campaign against her?
Why is that okay?
As I said, the president can have whom he desires doing diplomatic work for the country.
Uh there's been all this.
There's been all this talk about the irregular channel.
I think it's important that folks in the quote irregular channel were Senate confirmed Ambassador Sonlin, Senate confirmed Ambassador Bolker, and Senate confirmed Secretary Perry.
So y'all want to make a some of the witnesses want to make a big deal about that, and you had the president's lawyer also part of that that group.
I think I think presidents are allowed to have whom they want doing the work of the of the country.
You think it was a smear case?
She said it was a smear campaign.
It was a smear campaign of false attacks against her.
Do you believe her?
Is it appropriate for the president to be attacking a witness while she is testifying?
I think that's a good question.
Well, I don't know that it's excuse me.
I don't know that it was an attack on the witness.
It was it was really a characterization of her resume.
And when when you look at this, when you look at this, you guys want him to go in with no attorneys, no witnesses, No Twitter, no anything.
You know, at some point you gotta say, when is it going to be a fair process?
And today was not a fair process in there.
It's not going to be a fair process in the bunker that we're about to have to go to.
And it was not a fair process when they muzzled the gentlewoman from New York over and over again.
It's not fair.
But that is there to attack policy on Bogadiji.
Do you think it's a fair process for the stuff?
The second sentence of that tweet.
For example, one example.
Adam Schiff never brought this up.
The second sentence of that tweet goes back to the July 25th call transcript.
And in that, President Zelensky is saying the President Trump.
That he's concerned that Ambassador Yovanovich is a quote bad ambassador.
And that President Zelensky believed that Ambassador Yovanovich had a loyalty to President Poroshenko.
Now, Adam Schiff, when posing the question to Ambassador Ivanovich to respond to the tweet, never even mentioned that.
Because this is what Adam Schiff did.
Does when he had the act of the case?
Let me just jump in here and say, you know, Jim Jordan sums it up, and every time he goes to the microphone.
There was no linkage.
In the transcript, there was never even the mention of the word aid.
Not one time.
Not one time.
They didn't even know that there was a hold, which was from a month before.
Why?
Because there's so much corruption as we all know goes on.
Both sides are saying no linkage, no pressure whatsoever.
And they got the money without doing anything.
So why are we here talking to a hearsay no-nothing witness again?
I mean, I've never seen anything like this.
I will tell you though, it's blowing up.
We got the latest survey by Rasmussen now out, which has been the most accurate polling operation in the 2016 election.
And it shows that the shift show that's going on in DC in the circus is boosting the president's approval numbers because their daily presidential survey find a four-point bounce for the president following the first day of this Ukrainian impeachment coup attempt.
And the president's overall approval has been tracking up since Wednesday, the first day of this shift show.
It was a 46%.
Now it's 50.
Keep it up.
Because that's only going to help the president.
And by the way, there's another.
Oh, they released the new Trump call transcript has now come out as well.
And guess what?
It actually contradicts Ivanovich's previous sworn testimony.
And, you know, the debunk conspiracy theory floated by by some people out there on the left that the tr that President Trump was bad mouthing her in the first call.
Well, that's what the compromise corrupt coward congenital liar Adam Schiff had asked Yovanovich in the October 11th episode if she knew whether Trump had brought her up in previous conversations.
She said, I don't know.
I had assumed it was April 21st, the phone call, the first phone call, because that to my knowledge is the only time, other time that they talked.
And then the congenital liar asked if the reason that she didn't receive a briefing or readout of the call was because Trump may have been bashing her.
It's possible, she says.
Great, more conjecture.
Let's all just guess around this.
White House released the poll transcript of that call today.
And guess what?
Uh Yovanovich's name never came up.
Good grief.
I mean, the four minor mentions on my show.
Oh, smear campaign.
By the way, we know why is Rudy Giuliani there?
I'll tell you why, because the election interference by Ukraine.
And he's the president's lawyer, and that was the whole Mueller report thing.
Remember?
By the way, there is speculation.
Um, who is the person that said this earlier today?
Oh, it was Harold Ford was on Fox News.
He says, uh, yeah, this keeps going bad.
Uh you're gonna have a much better sense of what Nancy Pelosi thinks, because I don't think that she wanted to do this.
If she doesn't feel the Democrats are gonna have a sound boat, bipartisan boat, maybe even the chance to remove the president.
I would not be surprised if she didn't pull this in the next few days.
If she had a brain, she would.
But I think she's just speaker a name only.
Love how they, you know, prayerful, by the way.
I wonder if that was one of the the focus group terms they came up with.
The bottom line is she had nothing to offer today.
Nothing.
She knew nothing.
There was no reason for her to ever be there.
No firsthand knowledge of the first phone call between Trump and Zelensky.
None.
No direct knowledge of anything about withholding or delaying aid.
Nothing.
That is the center of their ridiculous impeachment coup attempt here.
And she's just upset that that you know, you can't be upset with Juliani or Solomon or Hannity, and Hannity barely I knew nothing about her.
Now I do, and I know a lot about her now.
But she's upset four mere mentions.
Oh, smeared.
Like in passing.
What the hell this person's talking about?
By the way, Ron Johnson, if you want a real quid pro quote, we got one.
He's threatening now to subpoena Hunter Biden.
And I will tell you, this is this is gonna get interesting.
I will tell you that there are some rock stars that are emerging here for the Republicans.
By the way, I mean, can I just say Yovano?
I was devastated that the president, you know, didn't like me.
I was devastated.
I'm like, okay.
Um I I don't understand.
There's so many people that hate me.
I just don't understand snowflakeism.
Get over it.
Not everybody in life's gonna like you.
Too bad.
Anyway, we've got uh Mark these heroes, Mark Meadows has been great.
He's gonna join us.
Uh well, Jim Jordan's been amazing.
Matt Gates has been amazing, he'll join us.
Andy Biggs, uh, we got Greg Jarrett checking in today, uh, Senator Rick Scott, and oh, Mark Levin on Hannity tonight.
Don't miss that.
We'll tell you more about that straight ahead.
Coming up next, our final news roundup and information overload hour.
I do want to comment uh in a Mr. Chairman.
I have a point of order under HRES 660.
The gentleman will state her point of order.
Uh, the point of order is will the chairman continue to prohibit witnesses from answering Republican questions as you've done in closed hearings and as you did this week when you interrupted our questions.
We'll suspend.
Mr. Speaker, I've got a chairman I have not recognized.
I have a point of order's not recognized.
That's a point of order, though.
Gentleman's not recognized.
I do want to respond.
I allowed the ranking.
Gentlemen's not recognized.
Mr. And there are four gentlemen scripts that have not been released.
Gentlemen is not recognized.
Oh, ranking member was allowed to exceed the opening statement.
And I was happy to allow him to do so.
I do want to respond to the call record.
First of all, I'm grateful that the president has released the call record.
I would now ask the president to release the thousands of other records that he has instructed the State Department not to release.
Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order.
Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order on the case.
So we know clearly you're going to interrupt us throughout this hearing.
Today, desperate request.
Today, no chairman have unanimous.
Gentlemen's not request, not recognized.
I mean, I never see, I've never heard any madness like this.
Point of order.
Yeah, you usually show some respect for your colleagues, ranking members.
But again, the compromise, corrupt, coward congenital liar is the judge, jury, and executioner.
So they come up with this impeachment inquiry, and they say everything we're going to be fair, fair, fair, but at the discretion of Adam Schiff.
We're going to be so fair at the discretion of Adam Schiff.
You can call witnesses at the discretion of Adam Schiff.
You can uh the president's attorneys at the discretion of Adam Schiff.
I mean the congenital liars in charge of the show.
I've never seen you talk about a shift show.
This is a shift show.
And it is embarrassing.
It's embarrassing.
Not if you are a Democrat, you ought to be humiliated today.
You ought to be embarrassed.
Another person, so-called witness with zero firsthand knowledge about the president's call.
Nothing.
Wasn't on the call.
Learned about it when it was released publicly.
Uh so what do we have?
The same shift show that we saw yesterday, which is or two days ago, which is more hearsay, tons of hearsay.
So-and-so said to so-and-so who said to so-and-so, so-and-so, so-and-so, so and so, you know, it just goes on and on, and it never ends.
And anyway, testified in a prior hearing that she was unaware about any of this.
And at the beginning, Devin, why is she even here?
Why was she even Called.
I mean, obviously, this is an emotional experience for this poor woman.
You know, but she did acknowledge that a president does have the right to recall ambassadors for any or no reason.
That would be the president.
That's one that's the guy that's elected.
Unbelievable.
Anyway, joining us now with the very latest on all of this.
Uh we have uh Greg Jarrett is back with us, Fox News legal analyst, author of the best selling book, Witch Hunt, uh, the greatest mass delusion in American political history.
I uh look, I've I've been doing this Greg 31 years.
I have never seen anything like this.
But on the other hand, I want the shift show to continue because it shows how corrupt these people are.
This is all they have done for three years.
This is who they are.
This defines them.
This is a madness, a rage, a psychosis, you know, a bifurcation of the brain, a compartmentalization of your brain where you live in it, where they shut down any intelligent thought, honesty, reason, or common sense.
What do you think?
You're absolutely right.
And yeah, you know, Devin Nunes put it best when he asked rhetorically of Ivanovich.
I'm trying to figure out why you're even here.
Well, he's right.
She was fired months before the Trump Zelensky telephone call was never privy to the conversation.
That didn't stop the legal counsel for Democrats from putting up on the big screen in the hearing room the transcript of the call and asking Ivanovich to offer her interpretation or opinion of its contents and what the president intended.
That's just conjecture, it's speculation.
This is another opinion witness whose testimony is irrelevant, it's immaterial, and would be inadmissible under any rules of evidence in any courtroom in America.
Her opinion is a very strong.
Slow down.
Hang on.
We learned something.
You may be wrong, Greg Jarrett, for the first time that I can think of of all the times we've had you on this show and on TV.
Because I learned yesterday for the first time that hearsay evidence can often be better than direct evidence.
Now, I never knew that.
Is that true?
You know, um and pigs fly and pixies cast spells.
It's ludicrous.
Uh you know, hearsay, single hearsay can be admissible if it falls under an exception.
Uh no exception applies to any of these witnesses so far.
And double hearsay is a joke.
Triple hearsay, you know, is a farce.
But we're getting into territory of quadruple hearsay.
George Kent was the best example.
He uh believed there was a quid pro quo because he heard it from Bill Taylor, who heard it from Tim Morrison, who heard it from uh Gordon Sondlin, who presumed a quid pro quo.
This is a coffee clutch at Starbucks.
This is the chattering class of diplomats, self-important people who traffic in rumor and innuendo.
And this witness today, Ivanovich confirmed.
She has no evidence of a quid pro quo demanded by Trump.
She has no direct knowledge of anything.
She is a superfluous witness.
I've never seen such a colossal waste of time.
I've never seen or witnessed such a one-sided, abusively corrupt and biased process, especially when something is as serious as what we're talking about, impeaching a president.
Um and what I have been now doing, look, I'm I'm just going to assume that I guess the 31 Democrats elected in Trump districts are probably just going to jump off the cliff because they're going to be told to jump and they're going to be stupid enough and they're going to jump.
Uh, and that's why I'm asking Senators, okay.
Um I want some answers to some fundamental questions.
Because, you know, federal law prohibits, correct me if I'm wrong, uh, the admissibility of hearsay evidence.
And I'm asking U.S. senators if they're going to allow if this goes into the Senate, would they support using hearsay uh as evidence in any trial?
Now, I know that the the chief justice ultimately rules on all of this, but And I I wonder if they believe in the Sixth Amendment with the right of individuals to face their accusers.
I think the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution is pretty clear.
Um, but maybe I'm wrong on that too, I guess.
Well, as I say, there are exceptions to the single hearsay rule, rarely double hearsay, but none of this triple and quadruple hearsay.
So if the rules, federal rules of evidence are invoked by Mitch McConnell at a potential Senate trial, I mean, these witnesses can't even be called to testify.
Uh, especially when there is direct evidence, and the best direct evidence is a transcript of the telephone conversation itself, where there is no evidence of pressure or demand, a threat, a quid pro quo corroborated by the statements of President Zelensky who said, This is a normal conversation.
I was happy with the conversation.
There was no blackmail or pressure.
You know, it's impossible to have a quid pro quo if the recipient of the quid is oblivious to the quo.
And that's what Zelensky and the Ukrainian government said.
We didn't even know that uh military aid had temporarily been frozen.
And in the end, it was released.
He received the money.
There was no concomitant investigation uh of uh Joe Biden.
Uh so there is no such thing as a quid pro quo.
Nancy Pelosi is now seamlessly shifted to oh bribery, she said it what, a dozen times yesterday in her news conference.
She's not a lawyer.
She clearly doesn't realize that bribery is a quid pro quo.
And so without a quid pro quo, there's no bribery.
Well, I actually may have found their quid pro quo.
I think we got it.
And I got a guy that used to be the vice president uh that was in charge of Ukraine policy, basically quid pro quoing when he says uh you're not getting the billion.
You you fire the prosecutor, I'll give you the billion.
You don't fire the prosecutor, you're not getting a billion.
And you've got six hours to decide, and now we know that he knew the prosecutor who's leveraging our money, quid pro quo joe, to fire the prosecutor investigating his zero, not a little bit, zero experienced son who is being paid millions and millions of dollars.
So is that a quid pro quo?
Is that bribery?
Sure.
It is a quid pro quo and could be uh bribery under the foreign corrupt practices act if his motive in withholding the billion dollars and then conveying it is to protect his son.
And there is some evidence that Barisma officials were throwing around the name and influence of Hunter Biden in order to get the investigation of Barisma shut down.
Uh so there needs to be a Department of Justice investigation.
I guarantee you that Lindsey Graham in the Senate will undertake an investigation of Hunter and Joe Biden.
There is more than sufficient evidence to support it.
Well, I think that definitely has to happen.
And you know, just like they only cared about Trump Russia collusion, we found out there was none, but we did have a dirty Russian dossier.
That they they ignored that fact.
We did have real obstruction with Hillary subpoenaed emails.
Uh we also had election interference with Ukraine, because the DNC operative met with the Ukrainians at the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, and I know this is true because the Ukrainian court taught tells us so, number one, and I also know because Politico wrote about it and said they were successful in their efforts, Ukraine to undermine Donald Trump, dig up dirt on him and associates, and to help Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Now, what where are all those people that used to care about foreign election interference?
Well, they're they're blinded by their bias.
Um and in fact, we also have Alexandra Chalupa, the Ukrainian DNC subcontractor.
Uh we have her emails bragging about how she has solicited uh dirt on the Trump campaign in order to influence the election and help Hillary Clinton.
And yet, you know, Yovanovich today uh was unknowing of any of this.
And frankly, probably didn't even care.
You know, she is a disgruntled fired employee, the typical self-important diplomat that inhabit uh foreign service.
At one point she testified today, and this is a quote the U.S. relationship with Ukraine is the single most important relationship the United States has.
Seriously?
With all due respect, no, it's not.
Yeah.
I mean, these diplomats think their jobs are the most important in the world.
The universe revolves around them.
They've deluded themselves into believing that they are the ones who dictate foreign policy, not the president.
And if President Trump dare to do something they don't like, they seek to undermine him.
This is the malignant force I write about in my book.
They abuse their positions of power in government to subvert the Constitution.
Greg Jarrett is with us.
We'll continue more on the other side, 800-941 Sean is on number.
You want to be a part of the program.
And then we got our audio of the week, your call's coming up in the next half hour.
So real clear.
All right, as we continue, Greg Garrett is uh with us.
Um I'm sitting here watching this this shift show unfold, and it's not going good for the Democrats.
And now, if you look at real clear politics, some Democrats are now suggesting that if Adam Schiff isn't able to rescue, you know, this Schiff show in the next couple of days, that in fact Pelosi may be forced to pull the plug on this.
Harold Ford said I think by Wednesday evening or perhaps Friday afternoon, after the ambassador comes forward, we're gonna have a much better sense of what Nancy Pelosi thinks because I don't think that she really wants to do this.
But if she does not feel the Democrats can have a sound vote, a bipartisan vote, maybe even a chance to remove a president, I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't pull this in the next several days.
Any chance of that in your view, Greg Jarrett?
Probably a slim chance.
I mean, she should uh if she were doing the right thing, but you know, since when does Nancy Pelosi do the right thing?
You know what the greatest embarrassment today was when Adam Schiff read the Trump tweet uh and and then led the witness into saying, oh gee, I feel intimidated.
Aha.
Witness intimidation.
It's an article of impeachment claim, Schiff.
No witness intimidation defined by law as threatening a witness with physical harm, bribing a witness, or coercing a witness into lying.
It is not witness intimidation for a president to exercise his First Amendment right of speech free speech to defend himself from false accusation or to offer an opinion of a witness.
Uh, you know, and as your friend and my friend Mark Levin pointed out, Yovanovich wouldn't have even known the president's tweet during the hearing, but for Schiff reading it aloud to her.
So this was all just a cleverly created.
I might be mistaken again, but I thought we have freedom of speech and especially uh uh a right to defend yourself if you think somebody's lying about you.
Of course you do, and that's exactly what the president was doing.
He'll never get a fair shake from the liberal mainstream media.
So he goes over their heads, which infuriates them to the American people, and he makes his case.
That is not witness intimidation.
That's ludicrous.
All right, Greg Jarrett, he'll join us tonight on Hannity, along with the great one Mark Levin, who we just mentioned.
We got a great show.
Uh this has been another disaster.
Uh uh an utter and complete disastrous day for these corrupt democrats.
This has been three years of this, and to watch it blow up in their face, frankly, is a a thing of political beauty.
This is the boomerang of all boomerangs.
All right, quick break.
Our audio of the week, your calls 800-941 Sean Tollfree telephone number, Hannity 9 Eastern tonight.
Oh, we'll have the latest on the shift show.
Straight ahead.
All right, 25 now till the top of the hour, 800-941 Sean.
If you want to be a part of the program.
Uh all right, before we get to our phones on this Friday, there's so much great work audio that goes into this program that we don't get it all on the air.
It's a lot of this is going to be very self-explanatory, but it kind of sums up the madness, the insanity of of these weeks we are now living through.
Um, I just I the one thing I'm taking the most heart in is that in three hundred and fifty-four days.
That all of this goes to you.
The American people.
This all gets put in your hands, and you will ultimately make that decision.
They never thought it could happen in 2016.
It did.
They've never recovered since.
And it's been three long, torturous years of never-ending lies, hoax after hoax, conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory, just to take down a duly elected president.
Imagine on in 354 days, they have to say these words.
So and so news can now project that Donald J. Trump has been re-elected the 45th president of the United States of America.
That's what matters now.
This show, the circus, the total the everything that they're doing that's hurting the country.
We get to we get to have the final say.
So anyway, here's the uh some of the highlights from this week's in our audio roundup on a Friday.
Your calls are coming up right out of those.
You testified in your prior testimony that you have not had any contact with the President of the United States, is that correct?
That's correct, sir.
Miss Taylor, Mr. Kent, have you had any contact with President of the United States?
I have not.
So not only no conversations with the President of the United States about Ukraine, you've not had any contact with the President of the United States, correct?
That's correct.
Okay.
So you both know that this impeachment inquiry is about the President of the United States, don't you?
I mean, the man that neither one of you have had any contact with, you're the first up witnesses.
I I just find that a little amazing that that that the first up would be two people who've uh who've never had any contact with the president himself.
Now Kurt Volcker did have contact with the president and contact with the president on Ukraine.
Um Mr. Ambassador uh Taylor, you said that he's a man of highest integrity.
Well, I know Kirk Volker, and uh I know you know he served as the NATO ambassador.
He serves as the director of the McCain Institute, he's the highest professional ethics, one of the most knowledgeable people about Europe.
He's absolutely a truthful man.
Mr. Kent, would you agree with Ambassador Taylor that he's of the highest integrity?
I believe Kurt Volker has uh served the U.S. as a public servant very well.
Do either of you have any evidence that Mr. Volker committed perjury or lied to this committee in his testimony in his testimony to this committee?
Do either of you have any evidence that Kurt Volker perjured himself or lied to this committee uh in his testimony?
Ambassador Taylor, any evidence?
Uh Mr. Turner, I have no evidence.
Ms. Kent.
I believe uh Ambassador Volker's uh uh deposition was over 400 pages, and I don't have it in front of me, so I can't make it.
But you have no evidence that he lied or perjured.
I have no basis to make that judgment, no sir.
Well, we're not in a court, gentlemen.
And if we were the Sixth Amendment would apply, and so would rules on hearsay and opinion, and most of your two testimonies would not be admissible whatsoever.
But I understand in your profession, you deal in words of understanding, words of beliefs and feelings, because in your profession, that's what you work with to try to pull together policy and to go in and out of meetings to try to formulate uh opinions that that affect other people's decision making.
Ambassador Taylor, have you ever prepared for a meeting with a president or a prime minister of a country?
Or were you told one thing before you went into the meeting as to what it was to be about, and the meeting be about another thing, or you get in there and the beliefs or opinions of the president or the prime minister were other than you believed.
Mr. Turner, you're asking if I ever learned something new in a walked in with a belief that you thought about the country that that you were serving in and find out that they were wrong.
Uh I learned something in every meeting, Mr. Turner, but I you know Ambassador Taylor, the reason why the the Sixth Amendment doesn't allow hearsay is because it's unreliable.
It's unreliable because frequently it's untruthful.
Uh, it is not factual.
It might be beliefs or understandings.
Ambassador, you testified about a number of things that you heard.
Isn't it true possible that the things that you heard were not true?
That some of the beliefs and understandings that you had are not accurate, that in fact you're mistaken about some of the things that you testified today in a factual basis versus a professional assessment.
Mr. Turner, I am here to tell you what I know.
I'm not going to tell you anything I don't know.
I'm going to tell you everything that I do know.
But since you learned it from others, that's exactly that's exactly what I'm saying.
You can't say why I'm here.
But since you learned it from others, you could be wrong, correct?
I am telling you what I heard them tell me.
And they could be wrong, or they could be mistaken, or they could have heard it incorrectly.
Right, Ambassador Taylor.
People make mistakes.
Right.
So you could be wrong.
Ambassador uh congratulate you.
You've been down in the secret deposition meeting rooms.
Uh you've graduated for your performance today.
Uh, later this afternoon, I should note that for the public that we will be back down in the basement of the Capitol, uh, doing uh more of these secret depositions.
Uh Ambassador, I just have a I don't really have very many questions for you, which is uh you admitted in your opening statement that nothing is uh you don't have any firsthand knowledge of the issues that we're looking into.
Uh but I do want to talk a little bit about Senator Grassley very briefly.
Uh I assume that you know who Senator Grassley is.
Yes, sir, I do.
Do you believe that Senator Grassley is a serious and credible elected official?
I have no reason to think otherwise.
Were you involved in the July 25th Trump Zelensky phone call or preparations for the call?
No, I was not.
Were you involved in the deliberations about the paws in military sales to Ukraine as the Trump administration reviewed newly elected President Zelensky's commitment to corruption reforms?
For the delay in um for the pause.
The pause.
Um, I was not.
Were you involved in the proposed Trump Zelensky later Pentzelensky meetings in Warsaw, Poland on September 1st?
No, I was not.
Did you ever talk to President Trump in 2019?
No, I have not.
Mick Mulvaney.
No, I have not.
Thank you, Ambassador.
Uh not exactly sure uh what the ambassador is doing here today.
Uh this is the House Intelligence Committee that's now turned into the House Impeachment Committee.
Uh this seems more appropriate uh for the subcommittee on human resources at the foreign affairs uh committee.
Uh if there's issues with with employment disagreements with the administration, it would seem like this would be a more appropriate setting uh instead of an impeachment hearing where uh the ambassador is not uh a material fact witness uh to anything, any of the accusations that are being hurled uh uh at the president.
All right, so that's like our week summary of the madness, the insanity that is the swamp.
It is a swamp.
It is a sewer.
You know why the country elected the disruptor Donald Trump?
Because they're that nuts, and they're willing to hurt the country in the process.
They haven't done a thing for we the people.
Uh all right, on this Friday, let's go to our phones.
Atlanta News Talk WSB.
Alan is standing by.
Alan Hi, how are you?
Glad you called, sir.
Hey, you're a great American, Sean.
Appreciate you taking my call.
Well, thank you, sir.
Glad for all you do.
I want to let you know that I am very impressed with the Democrats.
Um as a father of six kids, I can tell you that a three-year temper tantrum that's gotta be a record.
I mean, that's impressive no matter who you are.
Yeah, that's actually a pretty good point to be very blunt with you.
You know, keeping up a three-year crying, whining, complaining temperatant because you lost an election.
Yeah, that that that might yeah, I guess we could tip the hat to them for being the biggest crybabies in the history of the country, sure, but they're hurting the country now.
All right, let's send that message.
Yeah.
354 days.
Hang in there, Alan.
Thank you.
North Carolina Terry, happy Friday, Terry.
How are you?
Good.
How are you?
I'm good, my friend.
What's going on?
Um listening to all these uh all the hearings and all the wonderful witnesses they have.
Uh it reminded me of a song uh that Arya Speedway sang.
Heard it from a friend who heard it from another friend.
Okay, we have it.
Heard it from a friend who is summoned in the round.
They say you got a boy friend.
They're talking about you in the spending.
Uh, yeah, a friend from a friend from a friend whose brother whose father's grandfather's nephew's.
What a missed opportunity for you.
You could have been singing right there.
Well, you're sleeping on the job.
Yeah, okay.
That yeah, all right.
You're being uh wise ass, but you know what?
That's anyway.
thank you for the recommendation.
We take requests here on Fridays.
Uh, let's say hi to Tim.
Uh, in California, 13 and a half percent state income tax, more poverty, more homelessness, more misery than any other state in the country.
What's going on, sir?
Mr. Hannity, I'm very excited.
Big, big fan of yours, man.
Thanks for taking my call.
Uh, thank you, my friend.
God bless you.
Glad you called.
You give me this microphone every day, and I I'm very, very humbled and grateful.
Awesome.
So I would hope I was hoping for a little enlightenment.
Why can't Arson in the House?
Why can't they just be like, you know what?
I don't want to listen to any of this.
Let's take a vote now.
Why can't they just do that?
Is there a law that they have to abide by?
Because we know that there's no, you know, Republicans are gonna vote to unbeach our guy.
Why can't they just do that?
Is there a law?
Do they have to listen to this garbage lies?
The answer to your question is they don't have the power in the House.
This is all controlled.
This this is why it's a shift show.
I mean, it's it's a total shift show.
And uh, if you don't know what I mean, it's a shift show because it is, and because they've they've designed it this way.
Every single bit of due process that was afforded Bill Clinton and the Democrats in 1998, nothing.
This this is judge, jury, and executioner, the compromised material witness, the corrupt, coward, congenital liar, Adam Schiff, he has the final word on everything in this whole ridiculous process.
Now, the Senate, you know, look, I I I guess people can disagree with this idea that maybe it's in the president's best interest if they do send over articles of impeachment, not to just dismiss it, because if you just dismiss it, people are gonna say cover up, cover up.
Um, but it's they're never gonna convict him.
But if you start with the rules of evidence, the federal rules of evidence, like we have been asking every senator now to respond to us, and we've got a number of them we've been reporting on.
If if we now guarantee hearsay is inadmissible, then that let me tell you something.
It's over.
They have nothing to present at that point.
The only evidence they have to present is the transcript, which exonerates the president.
And that's you know, that's why I'm you know, I'm watching this woman today, and I'm like, okay, she wasn't on the call.
Uh she never learned about the specifics of the call.
She wasn't even the ambassador at that particular point.
You know, she has she confirmed she has no firsthand knowledge whatsoever, didn't learn about the contents of the call until it was made public.
She knows nothing.
Like Devin Nunes said, why is she even there?
There was no reason for this woman to be there today.
Oh, but the president tweeted it out.
Okay, well, how did how did she know that?
Because Adam Schiff told her.
And you know, we do have something called the First Amendment here.
And the First Amendment does allow you to say, yeah, this is total BS.
Anyway, glad you called.
Thank you.
Scott Oklahoma.
What's up, Scott?
How are you?
Hello.
Scott, happy Friday.
Welcome to the Sean Hannity Show.
Thank you, Sean.
Thank you, Sean.
Uh, my question is this, and it may be kind of vague, I don't know, but um, since we're seeing so much corruption in our system, I mean, how much longer I mean, we're we're using words like civil war, uh, you know, economy breakdown and all this jazz.
Before we get to that, you know, have we exhausted all of our options?
I mean, how much longer do we pay into this system that is obviously failing because people are corrupt?
And how how do we go about making an overhaul like that?
Uh look, I'm gonna tell you something.
Everything needs to change.
Um, one thing that has frustrated me over the years um is the Republican Party.
Republican Party has become just as swampy, just as sewer-oriented, many of them as Democrats.
You know, when they when they had 65 show votes repeal and replace Obamacare, they would have really mattered.
They didn't even have a plan, a consensus plan that they had built.
And then when it mattered, oh well, maybe we don't really mean it.
Or the the seven senators, Republican senators that in 2015, they vote for a straight repeal of Obamacare.
The same exact bill comes up when it means something, and uh, we didn't really mean that vote.
I mean, it just they just suck.
You know, I I I don't know what happens to these people.
Some go there, sound great, and they just turn into swamp creatures and they get addicted to being called senator and congressmen, and they think, you know, they got their head up there, their you know what, and their nose in the air.
Um, the best thing we can do is keep electing disruptors that will fight and are willing to fight, fight, fight, fight, fight for promises that they're making for their people that they're supposed to serve.
Remember, Scott, they're supposed to serve us.
They are to be our public servants.
I don't see a lot of serving going on here except their own political ambition.
Last word, sir.
I totally agree with you, Sean.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right, my friend.
God bless you.
I hope you have a great weekend.
800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, that's gonna wrap things up for today.
All right, Hannity tonight, full coverage, another disastrous day for the corrupt, compromised, congenital liar and the Democrats, Adam Schiff and Company.
Uh the great one, Mark Levin.
He's he is worked up.
I talked to him earlier.
He's gonna join us tonight.
Also, Jason Chapitz has been amazing.
Steve Scalise, John Solomon, Greg Jarrett tonight, Stephanie Grisham, White House Press Secretary, uh, Ken Starr, Charlie Hurt.
I'm I'm missing somebody.
Nine Eastern.
We'll see it tonight on Fox.
We'll be back here on Monday.
This is getting interesting.
Have a great weekend.
We'll see you Monday.
See you tonight at nine, then Monday.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markovich.
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.
