All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 20, 2020 - Sean Hannity Show
01:45:30
Remembering Dr. King

Evangelist Alveda King, Executive Director of Civil Rights for the Unborn with Priests for Life and Founder of Alveda King Ministries, is here to talk about the life of her uncle, Dr. Martin Luther King, and where she sees the state of race and the nation today. 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.

|

Time Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, Glenn, you're with us.
288 days.
Doesn't matter what these corrupt, abusively biased, psychotic, rage-filled, hate-Trump mob and the media and the Democrats do.
We know how this is all going to end.
That's the bottom line.
And I am really angry at some weak Republican senators because this, you know, John Cornyn even said it himself.
And David Perdue, the House managers should proceed with the evidence they use to impeach Trump in the House and stop demanding that the Senate take on their constitutional role.
They are given in the U.S. Constitution the sole power to impeach the president and others, offices, judges, etc.
That's their role.
The Senate's sole role is to listen via trial to the evidence that led to their vote to impeach.
They have now impeached.
Now the trial in the Senate.
And I think Cornyn was right.
The case is just so pathetically weak.
Now they're trying to ratchet up all this pressure on everybody else to do the job they themselves can't do.
Or they just want endless, never-ending impeachments of Donald Trump.
I mean, either present your evidence.
You know, they have their rock-solid case, as Jerry Nadler said.
But if the House isn't prepared to go forward with their rock-solid case and their evidence with all their urgency and blame the Senate and get the Senate to bring in the guests or the people they want to interview that they didn't even call, because that's going to be resolved.
The whole issue of executive privilege and witnesses really ticks me off because that's not the Senate's constitutional role.
That role would be in the impeachment process.
They've impeached them.
And if they don't think they have a good case, if they're not prepared to bring their case forward, if they're trying, their only argument is to, well, we found new evidence.
Okay, what's the new evidence?
Well, if you read what they sent over, Les Parnes, the guy that's under indictment in the Southern District of New York, federal indictment.
Let's see.
Oh, campaign finance violations.
One, two, allegedly gets a million dollars from of all places.
Russia didn't want to report that payment to him.
It is, okay, that's the best you got.
And then you read Schiff and his letter to the Senate about Parnes and the new evidence that they have, but Joe Biden is so innocent, and it was really the prosecutor that Joe Biden demanded leveraging, blackmailing the Ukrainian government with a billion dollars in tax money.
You're not getting the billion unless you fire the prosecutor.
What was the prosecutor doing that was so corrupt?
Investigating the payment of millions of dollars to zero experience Hunter.
Yeah, they have to forget that whole part, which is infuriating to me because the lack of fundamental common sense, reason, fairness, the same standards are not applied on anything, whether it be about a Russian election interference.
Well, except if it's Hillary's dirty Russian dossier, likely Russian misinformation from the get-go.
We don't care about that.
Russia, Russia, Russia was only about Trump Russia.
It is an affront to our Constitution.
It is, we are bastardizing and shredding it.
These senators, these Republicans, ought not legitimize this.
And they feel this compulsion.
They want to be liked, they want to appear fair.
They don't want to take tough votes.
So they're going to bend over backwards to prove that they are fair.
Why?
The Democrats are not fair.
Look at what your constitutional role is and do that.
They impeach the president.
Okay, now the managers have been selected.
Okay, now everybody's sworn in.
Okay, make your case.
And I guess if you're going to be stupid and then you feel compelled to bring in other guests, you better be very careful on the issue of executive privilege because this transcends anything to do with Donald Trump.
You know, President Trump invoked executive privilege.
You look at the history of that presidential power and it goes back to the very beginning.
And one of the, you know, George Washington invoked it.
Dwight Eisenhower named it.
Richard Nixon abused it.
But if a president and future presidents don't have the ability to speak freely and get advice, pure, unadulterated, raw advice from especially on national security concerns, nobody's ever going to want to talk freely to any president.
You know, the definition actually comes back from Mark Roselle, he authored two books of executive privilege.
Founding dean of the Shar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University, defined executive privilege in a 98 Minnesota Law Review article as the right of the president and high-level executive branch officers to withhold information from Congress,
the courts, and ultimately the public when it comes to one, certain national security needs, and two, protecting the privacy of White House deliberations when it is in the public interest to do so.
It is not in the U.S. Constitution.
It is considered an implied power based on the separation of powers laid out in Article 2, which is meant to make sure that one branch of government doesn't become all-powerful.
Executive privilege is one of the ways that one way the legislative branch's power over the executive is limited.
We only have one commander-in-chief, not 535 commanders-in-chief.
Congress investigating George W. Bush's firing of eight U.S. attorneys, 2006, White House Counsel, Fred Fielding, alluding to executive privilege in a letter referencing the constitutional law.
They called it a, you know, in their particular cases, they agree and they disagree.
But the bottom line is, you need this.
Any reasonable, complicated organization, you need a place where people can discuss what they're going to do, especially on national security with confidentiality.
That's it.
It really is that simple.
And if you want to go back to when it was first invoked, well, you go back to George Washington.
He claimed it in 1792 when Congress asked him to turn over documents related to an unsuccessful military operation involving Native Americans.
Oh, you look at that.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote that after conferring with his cabinet members, Washington believed the executive ought to be able to communicate such powers as the public good would permit and ought to refuse.
Those the disclosure of which would injure the public.
That's what it is.
It's really simple.
It has been, you know, it has involved somewhat, but it remains the same.
Now, in terms of what is happening here, every American, we got to watch these two big issues.
One, the fight over executive privilege.
President has a right to seek remedy.
That's why the whole second article of impeachment is absurd.
Well, you said you were going to invoke executive privilege.
Therefore, my point is you're obstructing Congress.
No, because the president, rightly, when there's a conflict between the executive and legislative branch, sought remedy from where?
That would be from, yes, the third branch of government, the judicial branch of government.
And so now the House of Representatives, they've done their job.
Now they have their managers.
Now their impeachment managers can move forward.
The only fact witness they ever found was Ambassador Sullivan, another fact witness that never got called, that should have been called.
Well, that would be the congenital liar, corrupt and compromised as he is, Adam Schipp, who's leading this shift sham show now in the Senate.
The executive summary of the president's defense team just nailed it.
They said this is, you know, these articles of impeachment are an affront to the Constitution of the United States.
It's an affront to our Democratic institutions.
The articles themselves, the rigged process that brought them to where we are, are a brazenly political act by House Democrats, and it must be rejected.
And to some of you, weak and wobbly Senate Republicans do not offer legitimacy into this corrupt process.
That's what they're trying to get you to do.
They're trying to get you to take on their role, which is solely their role defined in the Constitution.
I like how they write in the executive summary, they debase the grave power of impeachment and disdain the solemn responsibility that that power entails.
Anyone having the most basic respect for the sovereign will of the American people should shudder at the enormity of casting a vote to impeach a duly elected president.
By the way, supposed to be bipartisan.
Yeah, that's never happened before.
This is a purely partisan act.
You know, the jeering, the signing ceremony, the pens, the pictures, I mean, the whole thing is repulsive.
You know, they focus group all the varying charges.
Then they settle on, okay, well, two things, two articles.
Well, the problem with what they've settled on here is there's not a single article.
They don't identify any impeachable offense, bribery, high crimes, misdemeanors.
Abuse of power is not an impeachable offense.
And their theory about abuse of power supplants the standard high crimes misdemeanors and briberies and a made-up theory.
And the House and the President's attorneys are right.
That would permanently weaken the presidency.
It would effectively permit impeachments based on mere political and policy disagreements.
And by limiting impeachment to cases of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors, the framers restricted impeachment to very specific offenses against already known and established law.
I've been arguing, no one seems to want to listen to me, that when the president said, do us a favor, yeah, I want you to look into this, you know, what involvement did you have?
Ukrainian court determined that in fact, Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election.
Well, that's a big deal.
Do us a favor, not do me a favor.
Do us, meaning both countries.
Can you get to the bottom of this?
Well, that would be important to get to the bottom of.
By the way, you don't have to take my word for it.
Look at the liberal media.
And you have the political article.
January 11th, 2017.
Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire.
And you watch the mob and the media say, well, they're trying to say that Russia didn't do it, that really it was Ukraine.
No, I do believe Russia tried to interfere in our elections, as was warned by Devin Nunes in 2014.
But that doesn't mean Ukraine didn't also.
And well, Ukrainian court and Politico in January of 2017 told us they did, that Kiev officials are scrambling to make amends with the president-elect Trump after quietly working to boost Hillary.
Oh, they were trying to influence our elections.
That's what Politico is saying.
That's what a Ukraine court said, separate and apart from any interference Russia was involved in.
And Poroshenko's administration, along with the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, insists that they stay neutral.
The problem is the article goes on to chronicle exactly what they did.
How Ukrainian government officials, I'm reading verbatim, tried to help Hillary Clinton undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office, also disseminating documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption, and meaning Manafort, I would assume, and suggested they were investigating the matter only to back away after the election.
They helped Hillary Clinton's allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisors.
A political investigation found.
A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the DNC.
Oh, they're colluding.
Met with top officials in the Ukrainian embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, Manafort, Russia.
Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the 2016 race, helping to force Manafort's resignation, advancing the narrative that Trump's campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine's foe to the East, Russia.
The mob is saying, well, it's a conspiracy theory.
Well, then talk to Politico.
Author of that article now works at the New York Times.
Wow.
They don't want to, I'm sure they regret writing the truth for one time in their life.
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.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Ham.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So, if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked why.
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
You put two and two together.
Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
I'm Leon Nayfak from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
This is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Yes, that's right.
Lock her up.
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
This whole abuse of power article is not an impeachable offense.
It is not.
It is not there.
Just like the sole power to impeach, that is the role, the sole role of the House, trial, sole role of the Senate.
Now, the House managers present your case or withdraw them.
You know, this theory that a president can be impeached for taking permissible actions, or I've been arguing rightfully, the president asking both about election interference and the president asking about Joe on tape.
You're not getting the billion unless you fire the prosecutor who is investigating my zero experience son who's being paid millions.
That would be faithfully executing laws because on the surface, well, we have identified through our legal team numerous laws that we strongly believe would apply in that particular case.
You know, the idea of obstruction, that's not an impeachable offense.
When there is a conflict between branches, executive and legislative branch, yes, that third branch of government, you're allowed to seek remedy.
Seeking remedy is what the president's supposed to do.
You know, the president lacked lawful cause or excuse to resist House Democrats' subpoenas.
Well, they never ended up calling these witnesses.
Number one, they decided it was too urgent.
They needed to move forward because the House knew that it wouldn't be until June when we get a decision from the Supreme Court.
It's that simple.
And defending separation of powers is not an impeachable offense.
We'll continue.
I'm going to explain more of this on the other side and what's going to happen this week.
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.
What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
You put two and two together.
Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
I'm Leon Nayfak from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
This is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Yes, that's right.
Lock her up.
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
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.
All right, glad you're with us.
25 till the top of the hour.
It is, if this was such a rock-solid case, this impeachment, why would the Democrats be needing anything other than what they found?
The fact is, it is not.
It is an admission.
They know it's not.
Now, for the president, and this is where the issue of witnesses and executive privilege, this is where your Republican senators need to not add any legitimacy to the shift-sham show that we've watched, because this is an affront to the Constitution of the United States and to our Democratic institutions.
It is.
You know, if you look at the bottom line to all of this, there's no crime even alleged here.
There is no, it doesn't meet the constitutional standard.
You know, the House impeachment manager has been called out for making a bogus bribery charge.
You know, you have, let's see, their manager's name is Jason Crowe accusing Trump on Sunday of attempting to commit bribery in his dealings with Ukraine.
But when asked, this was not one of the articles of impeachment, yeah.
Specifically, he did attempt to bribe coercive foreign government official in this case, the president of Ukraine.
The only one that did that was Joe.
You're not getting the billion.
Now, I'll give you the billion if you do what I want.
Fire the prosecutor investigating my son.
You want to know why this whole Parnass argument is total BS?
Because when the shift-sham, congenital liar, compromise congenital liar sent over the new evidence, he declared the Biden's innocent, but it was the prosecutor corrupt.
All of this, you know, well, why wasn't this an article?
Well, you know, we have to look at the entire context of what happened here.
That's what this is about.
This is about abuse of power.
Oh, so there is no specific crime here.
That is at the end of it.
Now, Gallup is even saying in their poll, the majority of Americans want the Senate to acquit the president.
This is now by the time these, whatever weeks are over, the country is going to have had it with all of this because this is all they've given this country now for three long, solid years.
And it's interesting and kind of fascinating to me watching Team Biden going as far as they am and are in terms of damage control because if Hunter is brought in to testify about the millions he was paid for zero experience, they've got a problem.
Biden isn't taking any chances.
He's launched a damage control campaign to contain the fallout from anything Hunter might be forced to confess to under oath.
Team Biden has gone as far as to issue a direct order to their friends, basically the press organization for all things radical democratic socialist.
Any media organization referencing, reporting on, repeating these claims from Trump and his allies must state clearly and unambiguously that they have been discredited and debunked by authoritative sources.
No, they haven't.
We don't need the only authoritative source we have are the words of Joe and the words of Hunter because they're damning on both sides of it.
I said, I'm not going to, we're not going to give you the billion dollars.
They said, you have no authority.
You're not the president.
The president said, I said, call him.
I said, I'm telling you, you're not getting a billion dollars.
I said, you're not getting a billion.
I'm going to be leaving here.
I think it was, what, six hours?
I looked.
I said, I'm leaving in six hours.
If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money.
Oh, son of a b ⁇ .
Got fired.
There is all your quid and pro and quo that this idiot, the impeachment manager Jason Crowe, didn't want to talk about over the weekend.
Well, you're claiming that the president, in fact, in this, he was trying to bribe.
No, what is Biden doing with the billion?
And that should anger every American because you can see it is rank hypocrisy.
It is at the highest level even imaginable.
But they don't care.
Well, let's bring in Les Parnas.
Oh, the guy that will probably say anything at this point.
I got a picture with Trump.
I got a couple of pictures with Trump at a photo line.
Well, big deal.
And doesn't mean, well, I talked to Rudy Giuliani.
Big deal again.
And the idea that Rudy, the crime fighter, saw this corruption and hypocrisy and investigated, good for him.
Why shouldn't he?
He has every right to.
It's unbelievable.
And he wants to.
He wants to be a witness in this case.
You know, Levin said it.
Man, did he nail this?
He claimed Trump is getting less due process than the terrorists of 9-11.
Think back.
Remember Gitmo?
All the accommodations, the soccer field built, the dietary concerns taken care of, the whole argument that, well, we should give them due process rights of American citizens.
They're enemy combatants.
This is the middle of a war, the war on terrorism.
9-11 Commission report.
They were at war with us.
We weren't at war with them.
And he says, this is important.
Well, what due process have they ever given the president in any of this?
None.
That's the whole point.
You know, look at, oh, Ukrainian election interference.
Yeah, well, Democrats, media, mob, you're going to have to reconcile the January 11th, 2017 article in Politico and the Ukrainian court.
They're the ones that said Ukraine interfered.
And faithfully executing the laws.
I listened to Joe and Hunter and I'm thinking, holy crap, this defines everything that we say, that they say they care so much about.
There's no crime that they've even listed in all of this.
Their obstruction of Congress is obscene because the president, rightly seeking remedy, went in conflict with the legislative branch through the judicial branch.
That's what they do.
He asserted executive branch prerogatives.
And as they pointed out in their executive summary, contrary to a mistaken charge, the president lacked lawful cause or excuse to resist the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel.
And based on established legal principles and immunities, several executive branch officials refused to comply with the subpoenas purportedly that were going to be issued in the impeachment inquiry, but it was so urgent they just decided not to invite them before the House had even authorized any inquiry.
Because as the Office of Legal Counsel advised, the subpoenas were unauthorized and had no legal bearing or force.
There's your first ruling in the president's favor.
And I can't imagine that the court would ever go along with this nonsense either.
My only fear is: you know, is Congress going to say, well, this is political.
We have the right to decide that.
No, you don't.
This is a principle that would destroy the ability of any president has been argued since George Washington to have open conversations about issues of importance involving national security.
Well, who did they want to bring in?
Let's see, the chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, National Security Advisor John Bolton, and Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State.
Now, if they're not allowed to be able to freely advise the president, deliberate with the president on important issues involving how we deal with other countries, then the presidency and the constitutional right commander-in-chief is evaporated.
Under the president's supervision, executive branch officials were directed not to comply because the committees, seeking their testimony, refused to allow them to be accompanied by agency counsel EVIT.
That's how corrupt the process was there.
And the Office of Legal Counsel concluded that the committees may not bar agency counsel from assisting executive branch witnesses without contravening the legitimate prerogatives of the executive branch as it goes back to George Washington.
That attempting to enforce a subpoena while barring agency counsel would be unconstitutional.
The reason they didn't pursue it further is they know the odds are pretty strong they're going to lose.
And we'll find out from the Supreme Court, I guess, at some point down the road.
Defending the separation of powers is everything the system was designed to do.
That's why the conflict leads to the decision by the third branch of government.
In a government of laws asserting legal defenses, you can't claim that that's obstruction because that's a fundamental right.
Supreme Court is instructed, quote, for the agent of the state to pursue a course of action whose objective is to penalize a person's reliance on his legal rights is patently unconstitutional.
The same principles applied during the Clinton impeachment.
Lawrence Tribe has been on a, you know, holy war to defeat Trump, hates Trump.
Allegations that invoking privileges and otherwise using the judicial system to shield information is an abuse of power that should lead to impeachment and removal from office is not only frivolous, but dangerous.
And he hates Donald Trump.
Even Jerry Nadler agreed that a president cannot be impeached for asserting a legal privilege, but that's the whole second article that they agreed to in the House in their impeachment.
You can throw that sucker out now because it has no legal standing.
The impeachment inquiry was flawed, as we all know from the beginning.
They violated all prior precedent.
Every consideration Newt Gingrich and the Republicans gave Bill Clinton in 1998 and 9, none of it.
Then they had their audition impeachment hearings to see who did best.
And then they still are withholding some of the testimony because it's not good for them.
And then they had their hearsay witnesses.
And then they had their opinion witnesses.
It's meaningless.
And now we need you guys to do what we didn't do.
You know, the process that resulted was completely unjust.
No due process, no equal application of laws, no equal justice under the law.
I mean, it just trivializes what should be somber and serious and should be only done not for pure political purposes, like in this case.
They throw aside all past precedent.
They throw all history aside, all precedent aside, all due process aside, and they ram this thing down everybody's throat with no rights for the president at all.
You know, they concoct an unheard of procedure that denies the president the right to bring witnesses, cross-examine witnesses, and bring evidence and confront evidence.
That's all gone in this whole shift show.
That's why it was bad from the beginning.
That's why the Senate Republicans, they need not add legitimacy to this.
The hearings were defective.
You got the guy leading the shift sham show himself is compromised and helping to create the entire phony story and lying about that, like he's lied about Trump-Russia collusion for three straight years.
Denying a president of the United States his fundamental due process rights is a bad precedent.
You know, their goal was never to get to the truth.
They were selectively leaking.
We saw that by the selective editing and leaking of the audition, the audition interviews, but only the stuff that they thought they could use to propagandize the American people and win them over with half-truths and lies.
They pinned their impeachment hopes on the lie that Trump campaign colluded at Russia.
Well, that didn't work out.
Four separate investigations.
They've been trying to impeach him, which is why my impeachment montage on TV is so powerful since two days after he won election.
It fails because they have no evidence to support their claim.
The only fact witness, there were two, but the congenital compromise liar shift didn't go under oath.
The one fact witness, Ambassador Somlin, is the only relevant one.
You know, whatever they might have discussed privately, well, that's because that's the job and role of the president of the United States.
That's right.
He's the commander-in-chief.
We don't have 535 of them.
President didn't condition any security assistance or a presidential meeting.
We have the actual invitations.
He still invited Zelensky to come to America.
Five high-profile meetings after the call, none of them was any aid ever mentioned by anybody in any way, in any capacity.
You know, it's just to me, the whole thing is disgusting.
You know, they rest on the false premise that there could have been no legitimate reason to mention Joe Biden.
Want to know why it's relevant?
It's relevant because when I hear Joe Biden and then I hear Hunter's interview, I think we ought to be investigating real crimes of bribery and all the associated other charges I've identified and told you about.
I won't repeat them here now.
I mean, that's how.
Now, good thing that Senate Majority Leader McConnell, he's now close to finalizing a rule that's going to allow the president's team to move to dismiss the articles in the Senate after the evidence has been presented.
It's kind of a safety valve in case the Democrats try to drag out the trial for weeks.
And oh, we'll stop the trial now and we'll wait and go back to it in June.
No, the president has a right to a speedy trial here.
Because with political purposes, no president should have to govern with this hanging over their head because they have such a weak case.
It's not the Senate's role.
They're not obligated to publicize the final version of any resolution, by the way.
And so he's right.
And I hope the other Republican senators follow suit.
You know, Nadler and the rest of the Democrats, they're scared to death that Hunter Biden will ever testify.
The president's job approval rating is steady, and the support for impeachment has now dramatically inclined.
Even NBC News had a sight up arguing if that it could be illegal to vote for Donald Trump, a piece published by NBC News where they argue that voters who allegedly harbor racist feeling prejudices should be reprimanded or held accountable for their wrongthink.
Even they are saying, no, that's dumb.
By the way, the New York Times supports Warren and Klobuchar for president.
That's weird.
It really is.
Why don't they want Joe and Hunter?
Why don't they want them?
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.
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.
What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
Bad faith political warfare and, frankly, bullshit.
We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
You put two and two together.
Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
I'm Leon Nayfak from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
This is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Yes, that's right.
Lock her up.
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
So that's where the battle lines are drawn and Senate Republicans ought not legitimize it.
I mean, that's the bottom, bottom line here.
And if they're going to end up with witnesses, fine.
Bring in Joe and Hunter and the non-whistlebler, Hearsay Whistleblower, and Schiff.
An incredible book by Peter Schweitzer.
You want to know how corrupt the Bidens are?
Profiles in corruption.
Abuse of power by America's progressive elite.
Next.
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.
What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
You put two and two together.
Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
I'm Leon Nayfak from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
This is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Yes, that's right.
Lock her up.
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
All right, our two Sean Hannity show, toll-free.
It is 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Peter Schweitzer has done an incredible job for the country, especially heading into this election.
And what he has done is what he always does.
He exposes corruption.
This entire story about Joe Biden and Ukraine and China was first exposed in his last book.
Now, it takes the media mob.
Of course, they're not going to pay attention to it, but look at what this has blown up into.
So we're launching today, and we're proud to always have Peter on because the amount of research and detail that goes into his books is incredible.
And this book is called Profiles in Corruption and Abuse of Power by America's Progressive Elite.
And have you noticed they all get rich?
Well, he specifically deals with the presidential candidates from Biden, Kamala Harris, I guess she's out now, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar, and others.
And it is breathtaking what we're learning in this book.
Now, the mob and the media, they ignore Quid Pro Quo Joe and zero experience Hunter.
And even this, the Les Parnes, the new guy and the big guy that they're talking about, they forget everything about him as well.
When the congenital liar sent over the Parnes stuff to the Senate, he just exonerated, oh, Biden is innocent of everything.
The prosecutor was corrupt.
You mean the prosecutor that was investigating payments to zero experience Hunter?
Oh, we'll declare him corrupt.
This is just but one example.
Let's play it.
I said, I'm not going to, we're not going to give you the billion dollars.
They said, you have no authority.
You're not the president.
The president said, I said, call him.
I said, I'm telling you, you're not getting a billion dollars.
I said, you're not getting a billion.
I'm going to be leaving here.
I think it was, what, six hours?
I said, I'm leaving in six hours.
If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money.
Oh, son of a got fired.
You didn't have any extensive knowledge about natural gas or Ukraine itself, though.
No.
But I think that I had as much knowledge as anybody else that was on the board, if not more.
Oh, okay.
I didn't have any knowledge, but I'm paid millions and millions of dollars.
But that's how corrupt the Democrats are.
Anyway, the book, number one on Amazon already, Profiles in Corruption, we have it featured on Hannity.com.
Peter Schweitzer is with us.
He wrote the book Clinton Cash.
He has been in the forefront of exposing this corruption.
Joe Biden, I mean, you first did this.
How long ago was your last book where you exposed Biden and Hunter and Ukraine and China?
Sean, it's great to be with you.
Yeah, that book came out in March of 2018.
We did a show in an interview and we showed that Hunter Biden was a conduit for large sums of money from foreign interests who wanted favors from his father.
And that was in March of 2018.
Shortly after that book came out, we started researching this new book and we built upon the foundation of what we found about Hunter.
We found not only more stuff related to Hunter, other businesses he had set up that took in hundreds of millions from other foreign entities.
We also found four other Biden family members who profited handsomely off of Joe Biden's tenure as vice president.
So they bragged about it.
Yes, and they bragged about it.
It's the Biden five, we call them.
And I have to be honest with you, Sean, I mean, I've exposed a lot of corruption with Republicans and Democrats, both sides of the aisle.
I have never seen a circumstance where it is such a family affair as to where you have five members of a family who are profiting this way off of government service.
Well, this is what the New York Post had: how five members of Joe Biden's family got rich through connections.
And you go through all of it.
And this now takes us around the globe here.
You talk about Russia, Ukraine, China, Latin America, and elsewhere, correct?
Yeah, that's right.
I mean, for example, if you look at Frank Biden, Joe Biden's brother, he, during Joe Biden's tenure as vice president, is involved in two projects that takes in $54 million in taxpayer, U.S. taxpayer loans for energy projects in Costa Rica and in Jamaica.
He sets up this energy company after his brother becomes vice president.
He has no background in energy.
He has no background in Central America.
He has no background in any of these development plans.
And yet he piggybacks off of his brother.
Joe Biden visits Costa Rica in 2009.
Shortly after that, his brother Frank is meeting with the Costa Rican president and other government officials.
The same thing happens in foreign countries.
So it's a pattern.
It's a consistent pattern.
It's not just Hunter.
It's basically the entire family.
It's unbelievable.
Now, what are you making?
Maybe you can explain this to me because remember, this was all supposed to be about a quid and a pro and a quo with Donald Trump.
Aid was never discussed on the call with Zelensky, not one time.
Now, corruption was discussed.
The president's saying, well, I hear you might be hanging out with the same guys as your predecessor, and that's not a good idea.
So the president clearly was worried about American tax dollars going to a corrupt new administration.
Now, the five subsequent meetings, high-level meetings with the administration officials, including the vice president, not once was aid ever mentioned.
Zelensky and the foreign minister, there's no influence.
There was no quid pro quo.
The one fact witness that we ever heard from, Ambassador Sondlin.
Now you got, how is it the Democrats and the mob and the media can ignore you're not getting the billion unless you fire the prosecutor that he knew who was investigating his zero experienced son who's being paid millions.
How do they bifurcate, compartmentalize their brains that way?
Because I can't figure that part out.
Yeah, it's because there's different sets of rules for different people, Sean, and you know that as well as I do.
And, you know, look, I'm one of those people who thinks it was entirely legitimate for Donald Trump to raise the issue of the Bidens with Zelensky on that telephone call.
And here's why.
The media hasn't reported.
His job is to faithfully execute the laws.
What Joe is doing is lawbreaking.
Exactly, Sean.
But even more to the point, President Zelensky has just been elected in Ukraine.
Who is his chief backer?
Everybody acknowledges this.
His chief financial backer is a Ukrainian oligarch named Kolomoyski.
Very, very corrupt guy.
Kolomoyski is reportedly involved with burysma.
So you have a new president coming in of Ukraine whose chief financial backer is involved in the buryma scandal to begin with.
Of course, you are going to pointedly ask him in a phone conversation, I'm asking you to look into this.
You're basically I want you to do us a favor.
Exactly.
Not me, but we had spent three years on election interference.
And yeah, Biden, you know, being paid millions, the son, and by the way, he's not a kid.
He's 49.
Right.
And admitting he's only getting it with no experience because of his father.
His father's in charge of the money and his father's using taxpayer dollars to shake down Ukraine, to fire a prosecutor.
And Adam Schiff declares Biden's innocent and the prosecutor's corrupt.
Well, I'd like to hear from the prosecutor.
You're exactly right, Sean.
I mean, look, all of these issues that have come up about collusion, about Ukraine applies in this particular case to the Bidens.
There's money flowing to them, not only from Ukrainians.
One of the things we reveal in the book is that Hunter Biden's involved with a company called Burnham.
He and his business partner, his business partner, brags that they have a $200 million deal with a Russian oligarch named Yelena Badarina, who is widely reported in the West to be tied to Russian organized crime.
There doesn't seem to be any media interest in that.
This is the son of the sitting vice president who's doing deals with these kinds of individuals.
You have similar deals with these unknown Chinese companies that seem to be tied to the Chinese government.
You have Kazakh oligarchs.
They're all throwing money at Hunter Biden.
And he has no background in private equity or in any of these areas.
And there's just a complete lack of curiosity by much of the media in even looking into that.
It's just there's a different set of rules for different people as far as the media is concerned.
And the Bidens are the worst, but you also go into detail about Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders.
Let's focus in on Warren and Sanders as they are the top-tier candidates at this point, but also Amy Klobuchar.
Explain, Bernie.
Explain Elizabeth Warren.
Well, Elizabeth Warren's an interesting one because she basically has a three-layer cake of entangling deals that should be concerning.
The first one involves she herself.
A lot of people know that she did legal work for corporations.
She made a lot of money, millions of dollars doing that.
What people don't realize is that she made that money, Sean, because in the mid-1990s, she was hired by Congress.
She was paid by taxpayers as a consultant to rewrite a very narrow portion of the bankruptcy law.
And what did she do after she was paid by taxpayers to do that?
She went to corporations and said, pay me large sums of money, and I will help you get around this law.
And that's basically what she did.
She was hired by Dow Chemical, by Anderson Worldwide, a whole host of companies.
So that's Elizabeth Warren's, I think, corrupt behavior.
It's the oldest game in Washington and a very corrupt one.
But then on the second layer, you have her daughter, Amelia Tiagi, who in 2007, 2008 is setting up a business company called BTG.
They're having trouble raising capital.
Well, lo and behold, her mother is being recruited by Harry Reed to head up the TARP bailout, to be the chairman of the TARP Oversight Committee.
When the meeting takes place for that to occur, Elizabeth Warren's daughter shows up.
And what happens, Sean?
Elizabeth Warren, as the head of TARP Oversight, is involved in the bailing out of large Wall Street firms.
Who are the companies that come to finance and advise the daughter's business?
The same firms that are being bailed out by the committee her mother is overseeing.
It's this sort of crony cozy relationship that Elizabeth Warren always talks about, how opposed to it she is, but she then acts on it.
And then the third level, Sean, there's a lot of mystery and I think a lot of concern here.
This involves her son-in-law, Sushil Tiaghi.
He is married to Amelia Tiaghi, her daughter.
He is originally from India, met the daughter at Wharton Business School, but he has a series of international business deals he's involved in.
One of those involved a company called Tricolor Pictures that he set up.
It was designed specifically to make movies with the financial support of foreign governments.
One of those deals, Sean, was doing a film that was financed by the government of Iran.
And when you look at the credits of that film, he's the sole producer of this film, the sole producer.
The government agencies that funded that film are the government agencies that organize a lot of the anti-Semitic, anti-American rallies, cultural rallies in Iran.
And in those film credits, by the way, Amelia, sorry, Sushil Tiyaghi's film credits, in those film credits, they actually thank the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Air Force for their contribution to the film.
It's really quite astounding.
Unbelievable.
All right, stay right there.
This new book is Blockbuster.
This is not something we can fully inform you about in the course of one segment on radio.
We'll ask him quickly when we get back, Peter Schweitzer, about Bernie Sanders.
And Peter will join us tonight on TV.
He'll be back later this week on radio with us.
It's up on Hannity.com.
It couldn't be any more timely.
Profiles in corruption, abuse of power by America's progressive elite.
They're all getting rich.
They're a bunch of phonies.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hale.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
When I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
You put two and two together.
Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
I'm Leon Nafok from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
This is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Yes, that's right.
Lock her up.
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, as we continue, Peter Schweitzer is with us.
His new book out today, Profiles in Corruption, Abuse of Power by America's Progressive Elite.
I mean, the story about Biden alone.
It is so corrupt at such a level.
You know, five members of Biden's family, filthy rich because of Joe Biden and who he is, not because of experience or service that they're giving.
But he also goes into this book, and it's up on Hannity.com.
You can get it on Amazon.com, now in bookstores everywhere, about Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders.
So we're going to have Peter on TV tonight, back on the radio later this week, so we can really do a deep dive into this and think how timely it is considering all the Democrats are doing to the president.
Very quickly, in the minute we have left, give us a headline on Bernie and we'll talk more about it tonight.
Well, Bernie, over the course of his 30-plus years in public office, has funneled huge sums of money to his family.
That includes hiring family members, even when it was not justified in the Burlington city government.
But more specifically, in the 2016 campaign, there was this mysterious media buying company called Old Time Media that was set up.
They funneled $83 million through this media buying company, which was located in a house on a cul-de-sac in suburban Virginia.
Had no website, had no presence whatsoever.
That company was run by two of Bernie Sanders' wife's friends.
When she was asked about her connection or relationship to that firm, she hung up on a local Vermont reporter.
So there are various ways, taxpayer money, school money, other things that have flowed to the family and have made the Sanders family very, very wealthy.
Well, it's pretty unbelievable.
The book is phenomenal.
How many pages total in footnotes, notes do you have in the back of this book and research and sourcing pages?
I mean, it went on and on.
I didn't even count them.
How many?
Well, there's 1,121 endnotes, Sean, and we've got documents from seven different countries, legal documents, corporate records.
You need no research for the book.
It just flew off the top of your head.
And no anonymous sources, no anonymous sources.
This is all documented with paper trails.
Profiles in corruption, abuse of power by America's progressive elite.
Either way, those that lecture us, those that tax us to death, those that hate the rich, hate the word profit, are the most guilty.
Anyway, it's a great book, Hannity.com, Amazon.com, bookstores everywhere.
Peter Schweitzer, we're going to feature this, and we're going to make sure everybody gets to know and be familiar with every detail, especially with only 288 days till Election Day.
We appreciate you being with us.
We'll see you tonight.
When we come back, Congressman Doug Collins of Atlanta checks in with us.
And we have our friend, evangelist Alvida King on this Martin Luther King Day holiday.
Would you agree that this could be as short as two weeks?
What's your expectation?
I think it's certainly possible that this trial could last one to two weeks.
On the other hand, if the Senate makes the decision to go down the road of additional witnesses, that could extend it to six, eight weeks or even longer.
So I think there are really two paths here.
The threshold issue here, George, is will there be a fair trial?
Will the senators allow the House to call witnesses, to introduce documents?
That is the foundational issue on which everything else rests.
And one thing that the public is overwhelmingly in support of, and that is a fair trial.
Imagine that you're a juror, people watching your show from around the country.
Imagine that they're a juror and the judge comes into the courtroom and says, look, I've been in consultation with the defendant.
I'm working hand in hand with the defendant.
And we've agreed that I'm not going to allow the prosecution to call any witnesses.
And I'm not going to allow the prosecution to show you any documents.
I will only allow the prosecution to read the cold transcripts from the grand jury.
No juror has ever heard that kind of a thing from a judge because it would be absurd.
It would be a mockery of a trial, not a trial.
But that is what Senator McConnell to date is proposing.
But that's not what the American people want, and I don't think it's true to the oath the senators have taken to be impartial administers of justice.
If the Senate decides if Senator McConnell prevails and there are no witnesses, it will be the first impeachment trial in history that goes to conclusion without witnesses.
Look, I can tell you the atmosphere in the Senate when I came with the other House managers and we read the articles was one befitting something that has only happened three times in the nation's history.
And I intend during the trial to be respectful of the senators, to operate from the presumption that they do take their oath seriously, but also with the knowledge that Americans are watching, that they're going to demand a fair trial.
And if the senators don't give the country a fair trial, one that's fair to the president, but also fair to the American people, the senators will be held accountable.
So that's the approach I intend to take.
All right, there was the compromise.
I mean, you want the one guy on tape that thinks he's he's, that is literally believes he's colluding with a Russian.
You know, what is the nature of the compromising materials?
We have compromised materials on President Trump.
What are they?
Can you tell me?
Compromise the materials.
Yes, of course.
Does Vladimir know?
Yes.
Wow.
Can I get them?
That guy, the one guy that lied for three years, the congenital liar.
I mean, now what, look, this is now coming down to a fight, and we better be very careful as a country on this because if a president cannot, on executive privilege, have the freedom and ability to speak freely, get advice freely from those, especially with his national security team, it will forever destroy and literally prohibit the president from being able to fully do his job with the best,
freest advice, because otherwise everybody's going to run what they say through their lawyers.
Now, between that and, oh, we didn't do a good enough job in the House, so we only found one fact witness, Ambassador Sonlin, and Ambassador Sonlin said the president wanted nothing and no quit and pro and quo, and everything else was a shiff sham show.
And we just created this big illusion that there's something here.
There's not.
Now, Senator McConnell, rightly, considering what we just played at Ted Cruz, well, he is now working with other Republicans, finalizing a rule that would allow the president's team to move to dismiss these articles in the Senate.
After the evidence, they impeach the president.
Sole job of the House, the sole constitutional authority to impeach lies with the House of Representatives.
The sole constitutional authority to have the trial based on the impeachment of the House is in the Senate.
It's not the Senate's constitutional role to bolster or redo the work of the House.
That is their constitutional domain, not the Senate's.
But if they're going to try and drag this out to, you know, well, we'll just wait.
We'll let this sit and you impeached him.
Now let's get the trial on.
And at some point here, they've got to say, okay, we've heard enough.
Now, really, I think the addition of any other witness, you know, it legitimizes this entire farce.
It is unbelievable to me.
Well, why didn't Adam Schiff, the congenital liar, call all these people?
Oh, no, we need to do it urgently because he knows that when there's a conflict between the executive and legislative branch, well, the constitutional stopgap, if you will, is to seek remedy from that other branch of government known as the judicial branch of government.
Now, the Republicans in this particular case need to stand strong and do their job in the Senate.
The House impeached the president.
Now it's their job to have the trial.
Let the House managers present everything that they found why they impeached him.
Not another 400,000 reasons.
They want to go impeach him again.
I guess they can go do that.
They can try.
But they're doing nothing for the American people in the interim.
Nothing.
They've done nothing.
They couldn't even praise the killing of Solomoni.
They've done nothing to help the president with the economy.
Nothing to relieve taxes.
Nothing for job creation.
Nothing to secure the border.
They've done nothing to make us energy independent.
They've done nothing in terms of negotiating the new trade deals.
They just predicted it would be a disaster, like everything else they say about Trump.
Now it's time the game is on.
Okay, you did your impeachment thing.
We all know it's corrupt.
Now let the Senate hold the trial.
It's not their role constitutionally to do the job of the House.
Georgia Congressman Doug Collins is with us.
By the way, I saw an AJC poll that you're really well favored amongst Republicans in Georgia to be the next senator in Georgia.
I noticed that.
Maybe the governor should have listened to me.
Nobody ever listens to me.
Well, they may have, Sean.
We're going to be talking about that more, but it's good to be with you.
That piece of tape that you run on, you know, Schiff is just, you know, had just amazing problems with the truth.
I mean, when he said that there's no court in the land where drugs will come in and not expect people to see witnesses, let me take it back a step further.
There would be no court in the land that would allow prosecutors to come in with a case as bad as this one who have actually abused every power, abused everything to actually make their case to juror.
Look, you said a minute ago they found one fat witness on the list.
Let me rephrase that.
There was another fat witness they knew about, but they've ignored, and it's Adam Schiff.
Correct.
I mean, this is why this whole notion.
Look, the Constitution couldn't be any clearer to me.
Why are Republican senators, some of the weak ones, even contemplating bringing in new witnesses?
Because the House impeached them.
Now their job is to convince the Senate that it was warranted and just, and they hold the trial.
That's their constitutional role.
It's not their job to do the impeaching.
The House already did it, and it was done in the most corrupt way imaginable.
Why would they add legitimacy to this force?
Well, you're exactly right, Sean.
And this is the one thing that we've been emphasizing over and over again.
We don't feel like this in the way the impeachment is set up is that it's an evolving case.
It's not something that you bring up.
What they have brought up is they were supposed to do their inquiry.
They were supposed to have their hearings, which, by the way, we only had one side of the hearing.
They were supposed to allow at least some modicum of due process.
They didn't do that.
They were supposed to come to the Senate with a case.
Now, think about this.
We're not talking about a case for a crime such as we had in Clinton where he actually perjured himself.
We're just thinking about an impeachment case to remove a sitting president who is duly elected.
It should be more than hearsay and innuendo.
It should be more than just simply saying we had a few witnesses who we thought sounded good.
It should be more about more than just simply saying we disagree with the policy of the president.
It should be about something actually that put our country in jeopardy.
This president has done nothing to do that except put our country in a stronger position.
The reason for this impeachment, they don't like him and they don't have good candidates to beat him next November.
So this should have been thrown out a long time ago, but they had a clock and a calendar and they're doing it now and then trying to make the Senate do their job for them.
How did these Democrats, like when Schiff and this guy that's under how many indictments with the Southern District of New York, Parnes?
I mean, they're acting like it's the second coming.
Now, the guy's under serious indictment, including the recent charge that he tried to hide a million-dollar payment from, of all places, Russia.
But the reality is that this job was done.
Now, where are we with executive privilege?
Now, the court has already agreed, the Supreme Court, to take this issue up.
We'll get a ruling, I guess, sometime down the line in June or somewhere thereabouts when the Supreme Court finishes its term for this year.
So my question to you is, okay, they wouldn't wait.
Why would the Senate ever even consider, anybody ever consider a delay on this front?
Well, they shouldn't really.
And I think this is the part that when you bring a case to court, whenever I've had to bring a case to court or I've been a part of trial court, you bring your complete case.
And especially when it's a case that is more modicum after a civil trial than a criminal trial, you know, you have your court record, you have your transcripts, you have everything you come to court with.
They don't have that because they did such a poor job.
Adam Schiff was just ramping this through.
Jared Nadler was a giant rubber stamp.
And the rest of the folks that have been from Nancy Pelosi on down simply got their impeachment as they're claiming that they wanted so that they could run against the president.
Again, this is the problem.
You have to go through this process, and this has been something that is historically, they want to take this out of context.
With Nixon and Clinton, there were several years of investigation, several years of court proceedings, several years of things that went on in which the White House was fully involved.
In this roughly 78 days, and in which 71 of those days, the president had no even possibility of being part of the process.
So they just rushed it through.
All of those things that they talk about now about litigating witnesses and executive privilege was done prior to the impeachment investigation on Clinton and others.
They're just simply trying to make it up as they go.
Again, Sean, don't let anybody bully you.
This is about November 2020.
It's not about a phone call in July.
It is, well, it's about just smearing Trump.
This is all they do.
Now, I love the articles, the executive summary that was put out by the president's attorneys.
Finally, they're fighting back.
It is an affront to the Constitution.
It is an affront to our Democratic institutions.
The articles are been a rigged process the whole time.
There's been no due process for the president.
This is to damage the president.
Nobody thinks that it's ever going to go anywhere in the end.
They don't identify a single impeachable offense.
The theory about abuse of power is not an impeachable offense.
Their obstruction charges because the president seeks remedy on the issue of executive privileges is absurd on the face of it.
The president properly did what all presidents before him have done.
Defending the separation of powers is not an impeachable offense.
The impeachment inquiry was flawed from the beginning.
They have violated all precedent and due process.
So the question is, where does this end now?
What do you see?
Because I see some weak senators, Republican senators.
Well, that's a concern.
And I think my hope is that once we have the opening arguments and they'll get to hear Adam Shelf drawn on, they'll get to hear Jerry Nyler drawn on.
They'll get to hear the raffle and draw on about what they, about the innuendo hearsay, everything that they put together.
It's interesting.
The Democrats always say that we focus on process.
And I've always said, yes, we focus on process because she didn't do it properly.
But I've never not focused on the facts.
And one of the things you'll not hear them do is actually have anybody that can confirm that the money was withheld.
There was any conditionality for improper reasons or improper motive.
And at the end, they got the money without doing anything to get it.
They don't want to.
Stay right there.
I'll take a quick break.
Doug Collins, Congressman Atlanta with us, 800-941, Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, as we continue, Georgia Congressman Doug Collins, who is with us, 800-941, Sean is on number.
News Roundup Information Overload Hour coming up.
We'll get to your calls.
We'll check in with our friend Alvita King on this Martin Luther King Day.
All right.
So what about what, and I did like what obviously McConnell is recognizing that the Democrats might be happy to hold this over the president's head, I guess, for months and months.
So he's looking at a kill switch.
At some point, you've got to stop this madness.
What do you think of these weak Senate Republicans?
Some of them, it's just a few, but a few have all the power.
Well, they're going to have to see the evidence for what it is.
They're going to have to see the evidence that it exonerates with the president.
It's time for them to listen to a full hearing, let the Senate hear what happened in the House.
They look at the actual evidence that's being presented.
They look at the fact that there's nothing wrong.
And then they need to move to their questions.
And then, frankly, they need to move to acquit.
This is, I mean, the Democrats are not put on any kind of evidence to impeach this president and remove him from office.
And the Republicans, and frankly, Democrats as well.
Let's don't put it all on Republicans.
Democrats who vote to impeach this president have set a dangerous precedent for any future president going forward in which we have entered the realm of the political impeachment, in which this will be a talking point for anybody who's with president, no matter if they're Republican or Democrat, as long as the House is held by another party.
This will become something that is damaging the very core.
Nancy Pelosi's speakership is now, I frankly think, will always be tarnished with the ability to let her party do a political impeachment that damages our democracy and damages the House of Representatives.
All right.
Well said, Doug Collins, Congressman, the great state of Georgia.
Are you going to run for the Senate?
We're still looking at that, Sean.
And now that we're still helping the president finish it up, we're going to have some discussion about that.
And you and I are going to be able to talk about it.
Do you predict this will be over in two weeks?
I'm hopeful it will be.
I think that that's what needs to happen.
I don't see any reason to drag this out.
I think if they start trying to drag this out, I think the American people, and especially those senators who may be wave earring right now, will see this as nothing but a political toy.
And if they allow it to be used as a political tool, then the Senate is now diminished just as a House has been diminished.
All right, Congressman Doug Collins, great state of Georgia.
Thank you, sir, for being with us.
800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, news roundup, information, overload.
We'll get to your calls.
Our friend, Evangelist Alvida King, will join us as we remember this Martin Luther King Day holiday, her uncle, 800-941, Sean, our number.
Before I get there, I tell you, I'm watching this week.
I don't watch the Sunday shows much anymore, and I got to print out everything that's said, every interview.
I can sift through it quickly.
I'd rather read it than watch it because watching it is infuriating.
So that's kind of become my system.
I also get summaries they put out within Fox within the internal workings of the Fox News channel.
So that's a very helpful resource for me.
And I'm watching Stephanopoulos.
Every interview he's doing is so corrupt and abusively biased.
And I just want you to just listen to this.
Now, he was there in the war room.
He was one of Clinton's biggest defenders.
I guess ABC can hire whoever they want, but we know that he's part of the media mob.
We know he hates Trump.
We know he was in the tank for Hillary.
And people act like he's a newsman.
He's not.
I'm the one that goes, well, Hennedy has opinions.
So do all these other people, except I'm honest.
I tell you I give opinion.
I tell you that I give straight news.
I do.
I tell you we do investigative reporting.
We were right the last three years.
And the mob and the media, including Stephanopoulos and ABC, were dead wrong.
But just listen for example this weekend.
Brief filed by the president's attorneys last night asserts several times that the president did nothing wrong with Ukraine.
Do you agree with that?
I didn't sign that brief.
I didn't even see the brief until after it was filed.
That's not part of my mandate.
My mandate is to determine what is a constitutionally authorized criteria for impeachment.
And I strongly believe that abuse of power is so open-ended.
Half of American presidents in history, from Adams to Jefferson to Lincoln to Roosevelt, have been accused by the political enemies of abusing their power.
The framers didn't want to have that kind of criteria in the Constitution because it weaponizes impeachment.
I understand that's your position, but that's not what I'm asking because you're also a citizen.
As a citizen, do you think it's okay for a president to solicit foreign interference in our election?
There's a big difference between what's okay.
What's okay determines what you vote for, who you vote for.
I'm a liberal Democrat who's been critical of many of the policies of the president.
I'm here as a constitutional lawyer, a lawyer who's taught for 50 years constitutional criminal procedure at Harvard, taught a course on impeachment, taught a course on constitutional litigation.
I'm here to lend my expertise on that issue and that issue alone because that's the primary issue.
So you don't think his allegations are not impeachable, then this trial should result in an acquittal, regardless of whether the conduct is regarded as okay by you or by me or by voters.
That's the issue for the voters.
I'm asking what you think.
As a lawyer in the case, I'm not going to present my personal views on what I think.
I think that the conduct does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.
And then this is what infuriates me, because he's an advocate.
He's not fair, balanced.
He's not news, but he pretends to be like the rest of the mob.
They now don't care.
Why isn't he asking about Quid and Pro and Quo and Joe?
Why isn't he out there leading the charge?
It was his network that had the interview with zero experience, Hunter being paid millions, admitting, yeah.
Did you have any experience?
No, no, none whatsoever.
Well, why do you think you got chosen?
I don't know.
Do you think maybe it's because your dad's the vice president in charge of all things Ukraine?
Probably, probably.
Now we're learning again from our friend Peter Schweitzer's new book, Profiles in Corruption, abuse of power by America's Progressive Elite.
Now we have five ways the Biden family made money off of his position.
Well, that also is that in and of itself.
Listen, just remember who Stephanopoulos is.
He worked in the Bill Clinton administration.
He was there and got yelled at a lot, apparently, by Hillary Clinton.
Still, he's a Clinton sycophant.
But it's just, it is now the mainstream of media today to be corrupt, abusively biased.
They speak in one voice.
It's all anti-Trump every second, every minute, every hour of every broadcast day.
Let's listen to him when he was helping, trying to help Bill Clinton get elected and quote bimbo eruptions was going on.
What is names addressed?
I can send you a facts with names, addresses, phone numbers of who you had an affair with.
It wouldn't make it true.
It is completely if you went on the radio and said that Bill Clinton is the father of an illegitimate black child, you would be laughed at.
People would think you're crazy.
I guarantee you that if you do this, you'll never work in Democratic politics again.
Maybe you don't want to.
I'm not saying it matters.
You will be embarrassed before the national press.
People will think nobody will believe you.
And people will think you're scumbag.
The alternative is to don't do it.
It causes you some temporary pain with people who tomorrow aren't going to matter.
Are you going to be on the right group?
And you have a campaign that understands it in a difficult time.
You did something right.
But I don't know.
And that's important.
I mean, it doesn't mean anything, or we can't do anything for you specifically or anything like that, but you know that you did the right thing.
We're going to bludgeon you if you don't, if you dare run with a story.
Did anyone ever remind George that it all turned out to be true?
Unbelievable.
It's so corrupt.
How do they exonerate Quid Pro quo Joe and Hunter?
Why aren't they demanding answers here?
Why do they go along with a phony narrative, a lie?
They just echo the same thing.
Oh, there's nothing there.
No, no, no.
No reasonable person has ever even alleged anything wrong.
No, it's fine.
It is spectacular, breathtaking hypocrisy and lying that we are fed day in and day out, every day by every outlet.
Want to know why, thanks to all of you, Hannity's number one on all of cable news?
We're getting numbers now that rival what the networks used to get.
That's how much cable news has grown because people can't trust any of these other outlets.
Fake news will forever be their brand because of the corruption and the abusive biased coverage of everything.
There's a few of us.
There's a very few, small few of us.
I'm a talk show host.
I'm like the whole newspaper.
We do news, investigative reporting, opinion, sports, even.
I'd rather talk about, well, we got a Super Bowl coming up, Kansas City.
And boy, it's not Green Bay.
That was the disaster in the first seven minutes of the game yesterday.
And San Francisco.
All right, let's get to our phones here.
Kansas, we say hi to Wayne.
What's up, Wayne?
How are you?
Glad you called.
Hey, Sean, it's an honor to talk to you.
By the way, I'm guessing who you have in the Super Bowl.
I'm just taking just a long shot.
You're probably pulling for Kansas City.
Oh, absolutely.
Are you kidding?
Patrick Mahomes is a beast.
He's amazing.
There's no doubt about it.
Listen, they were behind for a period of time.
I thought Tannehill has become a pretty good quarterback.
He did.
He did.
And they had a lead for a while, then forget it.
There was no stopping him once he turned on fire.
Those long bombs he keeps throwing.
I'm like, wow, great football.
Yep.
Yep.
No, you're not going to beat Chiefs Kingdom in our house, though.
That's not how it goes down.
Well, the house I'm fighting in next two weeks from now is going to be in Miami.
So it's nobody's house.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Hey, Sean, the reason why I called is because I think I heard you say this a couple weeks ago.
This president is single-handedly changing two things.
One, the way people campaign, and two, what it means to be a civil servant.
How great is it that a president can go out and do a campaign rally for multiple hours and after being in public service for three and a half years, talk about what he has done?
And it's scaring the death out of the liberals because all they can do is go out and campaign on what they want to do.
And they realize that they can't throw out these empty promises anymore.
We're going to hold them accountable.
And it's scaring them to death.
Listen, I think at the end of the day, when this all goes away, and the only people I'm annoyed at are weak Republican senators.
And I expect it's going to frustrate us in the next week or two.
But at the end of the day, there's nothing here.
We all know how this ends.
Then there's an election in 288 days.
And I'll tell you, I voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980.
That was my first presidential vote.
I am dying to get to the ballot box, even though my vote in New York means little to nothing.
I understand that.
I'm still voting.
And I hope the people in the country are seeing what we're seeing, what you're describing, because he makes the promises and he keeps them.
And we've benefited from his policies.
And you know what?
I told all my conservative friends, and I lost friends over this.
I said, he's going to govern as a conservative.
I think we've been vindicated, just like we were vindicated on, oh, premeditated fraud, FISA abuse, spying on a candidate, a transition team, a president.
And it's much worse.
And we were right about Hillary and we're right about the double standard.
And we don't have equal application of our laws and we don't have equal justice under the law.
Hopefully that'll be rectified with Durham and Barr.
But what we're seeing here is a travesty.
And it is an unconstitutional power grab by people that have never accepted the will of the people.
You got to understand something here, Wayne.
They hate us more because we're the smelly Walmart Trump supporters that put him in office in the first place.
Yep, they don't want us to be free thinkers.
Correct.
And you know what the best revenge is?
Winning.
288 days.
Imagine the shock on the faces of all these mob people, the Democrats, when they project Donald J. Trump has been re-elected the 45th president of the United States.
Now, I can't predict that's going to happen.
The only way that happens is for we, the people, to do our job.
Now, we get the power back in 288 days.
And I put up on Hannity.com an interactive election, everything you need to know about how you can vote.
I'm not telling you how to vote, everything you need to do to get registered, when you need to register by, when you want to begin early voting, you're absentee voting, all that's up there, okay?
Yes, sir.
Thank you, Wayne.
Good luck in two weeks.
Karen in Los Angeles.
Karen, how are you?
Sorry about all your homeless problems going on there and all the lot of problems out in Los Angeles and California.
Yes, unfortunately there are.
Thank you.
First of all, thank you for being such a reliable source of information for me.
So I'm 29 years old and I live in Los Angeles and I was a loony liberal only six months ago.
I used to be one of those brainwashed Trump haters hypnotized by the fake news and hung on the way that he was portrayed in mainstream media.
I thought I knew it all.
I thought I had all the answers.
Turns out I really knew nothing, which is why I am calling today.
So like I said, six months ago, I stumbled onto a video of one of Trump's first speeches when he was running.
It was a video I've never seen before.
And in that moment, everything changed for me.
Was like a light going on in my head, and I understood Trump in that moment.
It was like really crazy.
And for the past six months, I've been diving into relearning everything that I thought I knew about politics, the Constitution, the history of this country, and the principles America was founded on.
Evolving from a loony liberal to a patriot means a whole new way of thinking.
If you want any chance in this battle for our minds, you have to have a basic understanding of this country because the things happening right now run so much deeper than some silly Trump quote that gets twisted by fake news.
And there aren't many Trump supporters my age in Los Angeles.
So I'm lucky enough to have a patriotic dad, and he told me that when he was in school, his history teacher was so passionate and made learning about history fun and interesting.
And I think that the modern day educational system has lost that.
Kids don't find learning about America fun, and then they're bombarded with all these anti-Trump ads and news stories, and they completely bypass the building blocks of forming an educational opinion.
Winston Churchill, the great Winston Churchill, once made the observation, if you're 20 and you're not a liberal, you don't have a heart.
If you're 40 and not a conservative, you don't have a brain.
What I admire about, what's that?
What I admire about your comments, and I'm going to have to let you go because I'm up on a break here, is that you took the time and cared enough to just say, okay, and had an open mind to look at it.
I believe if people do what you do, we would be such a better society.
I totally applaud you for your efforts.
You worked hard to inform yourself.
I'm not saying to believe me.
Just see, our track record's there.
We were right about Obama.
We were right about the deep state.
We've been right about a lot of things.
The media, they're wrong about most of it, and they have an agenda and they lie about it.
Great call, Karen.
We wish you the best as you now embark on your new political journey.
Quick break.
We'll come back.
More calls on the other side as we continue.
And Dr. Alvita King will join us at the bottom of the hour.
All right, here we are, just 288 days until election day.
I know many people have the day off today, and maybe you don't get to hear the program as often as you normally do with your regular schedule.
Glad to have you today because of the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday.
Let's play a portion.
I mean, this is one of the greatest speeches ever given in American history.
There was no more powerful orator than Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. or Courageous, along with all these other civil rights leaders at the time.
I still have a dream.
It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day, even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, Sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today that one day down in Alabama's vicious racists with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of position and nullification.
One day, right now, in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today, to be exalted.
And every hill and mountain shall be made low.
The rough places will be made plain.
And the crooked places will be made straight.
And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope.
This is the faith that I go back to the South with.
With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope.
With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood.
With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.
This will be the day.
This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning, my country tears at thee.
Sweet land of liberty of thee, I sing.
Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrims' pride from every mountainside.
Let freedom ring.
And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.
And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.
Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.
Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.
Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.
Let freedom ring from the crevatial slopes of California.
But not only that, let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.
Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.
Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi, from every mountainside.
Let freedom ring, and when this happens, and when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city,
we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual.
Free at last, free at last.
Just amazing words, amazing man, amazing life.
You know, or think about when he says, I've seen the promised land.
I may not get there with you, but I've seen the promised land.
Unbelievable.
Dr. King is with us, Alvita King, executive director, rights for unborn, priest for life.
Always great to have you back.
I just want to tell this quick story.
So when I went to Atlanta as a local radio host in 1992, I was welcomed to the city of Atlanta by then Mayor Maynard Jackson the first day I'm on the air.
Living in Atlanta, I got to meet all of these civil rights icons.
And I had good relationships with many of them, including Maynard Jackson.
He's since passed away.
I had a good relationship with the mayor.
He didn't like my politics, but I had a great respect for him.
I got to know SCLC founder, you know, Joe Lowry.
Amazing man.
Incredible courage that all of these civil rights leaders had and showed at the time.
I became best friends with Hosea Williams.
He was a trip.
And every year, the Monday before the Thursday, Thanksgiving, but I'm going to make it.
And then boom, he'd go on, give out the phone number, and he'd get all the money that he ever dreamed of to feed the poor and the hungry in and around the Atlanta area.
So everyone had a good, warm meal on Thanksgiving.
Amazing man.
He's since passed away.
You know, then you have people like Andy Young.
Again, I didn't agree with a lot of the politics.
You can look at Congressman John Lewis.
The thing that I admire so much and I learned so much about is this whole peaceful protest when fire hoses are being turned on you, when rocks, bottles, et cetera, are being thrown at you, when you gather, you march anyway, and in full, completely peaceful protesting with the worst vitriol and hatred thrown at you,
it was every single time an amazing act of courage.
And these brave founders of the civil rights organizations and, you know, resulting in the Civil Rights Act of 64 and the Voting Rights Act of 65, amazing accomplishments, and they've made our country a better place because of their courage.
I know there's the politics surrounding the issue of African Americans voting Democrat, a majority of which, but we've been addressing these polls.
They're not outliers anymore.
The amazing support now we're seeing for Donald Trump and the black community as he sets one record after another of low unemployment rates in the black community, Hispanic community, Asian community, women in the workforce, youth unemployment.
Because you look at any city in America that's been run by liberal Democrats for decades, they have failed the people in these cities.
But they, you know, every two, four years, oh, we need your vote.
What do I always complain about?
Every two, four years, what do we hear from Democrats?
Republicans are racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic.
They want dirty air water.
They want grandma and grandpa poor eating cat and dog food before a Paul Ryan lookalike throws them over a cliff one day in a campaign ad.
And I've gone through the history of this many times.
I think that's changing because I think more people are beginning to see Democratic policies have failed.
They're just dead promises.
Anyway, I've become friends over the years with Dr. Alvida King.
You knew your uncle growing up.
How old were you when he was assassinated?
I was 17 years old.
I got married the very next year.
My dad, Reverend A.D. King, walked me down the aisle and a week later he was killed in a swimming pool in Atlanta.
But I'm so glad, Sean, that you always give your history and the backstory because a lot of people think you just want to be a journalist and say you knew Martin Luther King about him and heard this and all that.
No, I didn't know him.
No, no, no.
No, I'm saying, not people want to say that you're trying to associate with, excuse me, but you knew a lot of the people that worked with him and you were very close and you've had that history and well respected on both sides.
And I don't think a lot of people really understand that about you.
So I'm glad you were able to tell all of that as well.
You know what people don't remember?
Under J. Edgar Hoover, this is not the first time that we've had abuse of power by high-ranking people, not the rank and file, 99%, but high-ranking people in the FBI.
They had sent to your uncle basically a letter.
It was a letter saying, you know, basically to kill yourself, if I remember correctly, because we have this, this, this, this, this, this, and this about your personal life.
It was.
You do that to people all the time.
I don't know if people really understand that, but yeah.
But it didn't stop him.
He didn't care.
Good for him.
They were trying to destroy him and make him stop fighting for what he believed in.
Well, he had a mission.
He had a purpose.
He knew why he was here.
And he set his face toward that.
And many of us who knew him saw him do that and knew that that was what he was doing.
My dad was able to do the same thing the very next year.
And then, so even at this particular season, we understand that we're in that kind of a season again.
And those of us who stand for truth, not that we're saying I'm ready to die.
I'm way beyond 39 years old.
I'm 69 Wednesday, you see.
No way.
No, you don't look a day over 20.
Oh, thank you.
Say, oh, hallelujah.
But, you know, no.
But, you know, you think about this.
Maybe he was a reverend, and I don't know whether it's true or not.
It doesn't take away from all of the great things he did and all of the great fight he had.
Yeah.
And then to have, just because they didn't like his political views, they were illegally surveilling him and then trying to destroy him.
People, when you meet Jesus, you start to try to get better.
And that's what all that's about.
So I really want people to admit that.
Don't you hate that part?
It's like Christians get disparaged, you know, like the media mob and everybody, they seem to relish in a, somebody who professes to want to be a Christian or is a Christian in their failures.
And I'm like, well, my understanding, and I'm, you know, I'm the one that needs the salvation.
I'm not one of the good Christians that's out proselytizing.
We have all works in progress.
Right.
But here's the thing.
I just take it as why are you making fun of people that say they want to live a better life and they want to treat people the way other people are treated?
And, you know, what did Jesus say?
You know, you know, love God and your neighbor as yourself.
And that's basically the summary of all the laws and all the laws of the prophet.
What's so bad about that?
Well, John, after all these years, and I'm still doing the best I can, I know it's a work in progress until we get home and heaven is home.
So it's the grace of God calling on the name of Jesus.
That doesn't mean we just keep doing whatever we're doing.
That's just no excuse to do that.
But we want to just do what we can to love others, to treat others fairly and kindly.
Those are things that we can.
Love God and your neighbor as yourself.
That's pretty much it.
And, you know, the other thing is, it's interesting that Jesus, let's see, he picked 12 fishermen.
I'm guessing fishermen weren't that different than fishermen today.
You know, probably.
So there's fishermen, tax collectors, all those things.
And the woman, you know, all right, you who are without sin, you throw the forest.
You know, the woman at the well, you know, Wolbert who was caught in the act.
But did you ever wonder who she was acting with?
Exactly.
You have to wonder.
Jesus actually dealt with that.
He did deal with that.
Yeah.
Well, your uncle was an amazing man, and I know you fight for his legacy.
I don't want to turn this into a political segment, but I do think there's something going on.
This is not an outlier.
I think the records, and thank God our American family, everybody, every demographic now is now benefiting from the conservative policies of the president.
Same color of blood.
We love you.
I just wanted to, I wanted to honor your uncle on this Martin Luther King Jr. Day holiday.
I don't unfortunately get it off with all the news going on, but we love you.
God bless you and the work you do.
I know you're out there saving lives every day and working hard on the issues you care the most about.
Evangelist Alvita King, amazing woman, amazing, amazing, unbelievable courage.
And I watched this.
You got to watch these documentaries on the civil rights movement and the marches.
Selma Montgomery, you know, look up the document about Dr. King.
They tried to destroy this man, the deep state then, under Jay Edgar Hoover.
All right, loaded up tonight on Hannity.
It's going to wrap things up for today.
We got Jordan Seculo on the president's defense team, Steve Scalise, Senator Marsha Blackburn, Eric Trump tonight, attorney Jenna Ellis, Ranks Privus, Peter Schweitzer.
This book is phenomenal.
You want to talk about corruption?
Look at the Bidens.
Oh, and Elizabeth Warren.
Oh, and Bernie Sanders.
They get rich.
That's all coming up tonight, 9 Eastern.
We will have the best election and impeachment and sanity coverage available on radio and TV.
We'll see you tonight at 9.
Set your DVR.
We'll be back here tomorrow.
As always, thank you for being with us tomorrow, 287 days.
Then you make the real decision.
Have a great night.
We'll see you tonight.
back you tomorrow.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
▲
Export Selection