Sharyl Attkisson, host of Sinclair's Sunday morning TV program "Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson, has a new book out next week, SLANTED: How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship and Hate Journalism on the 23rd. She is here today to talk about a media who is complicit in misleading the public on almost every topic in our society 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.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markovich.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So Down, verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, Cladson with us, 800-941.
If you want to be a part of the program, uh my phone's been blowing up all day since the uh press conference with Sidney Powell, Rudy Giuliani, uh Jenna Ellis, and others, uh, Joe and Victoria saw were there uh earlier today.
You know, I just want to backtrack and I wanted everybody to understand something here, because this is very, very important.
And and you know, I had no idea when I said in 2007 and 2008 that journalism in America is dead, gone, and buried.
It just is.
And what I've just sadly concluded is, and I've been feeling this way for a good while, and I warned about this for three years when we were unpeeling every layer of every onion and proven correct on this whole dirty dossier, you know, Trump Russia collusion, phony narrative.
Um that there's we're we're now at a very different point in the country in terms of the media, you gotta understand these institutions, they don't care about what truth is anymore.
They won't even entertain the idea uh of you know, for example, why do we make a big deal that we gotta get to the bottom of Russia Russia Russia?
Now, you have four separate investigations culminating with the Mueller report, no evidence of Trump Russia collusion.
The mob, the media, which is the 99%, they were out there peddling these conspiracy theories, these hoaxes, these lies.
They they put Hillary in the media mob candidate protection program in 2016.
They had Joe in his bubble in 2020.
You know, like you call it the candidate, the media mob, big tech uh candidate campaign protection program.
He's able to hide in his basement and they ask him no tough questions, and then they beat up on Trump for him every day.
That's pretty much what happened.
And and that that that is the state of media in this country today.
So you've got to understand, and maybe it's hard for a lot of you to just wrap your head around here, but it's it's very transparent, it's very obvious, it's more obvious to me than it's ever been, is you've got big major institutions like the media, like big tech companies, uh, like the Democratic Party, and even establishment Republicans that do not care about actually equal application of justice, equal justice under the law, all the things that we've talked about.
Now, let me let me make a point here, and I'm not trying to be redundant and go backwards, but I just want to lead up to something here.
So if you don't care about the fact that all these years they've Democrats, media claim Trump Russia collusion, right?
They dragged this country through hell for three long years, and every accusation they made is false.
And the media was their willing accomplices in all of this.
You know, here and then in the end, you get a bigger story.
So you'd think the mob, the media, they're interested in pursuing truth, right?
And and getting to the bottom of a big scoop.
They're not.
They're interested in helping elect Democrats.
They're interested in helping Hillary or helping Joe Biden or helping any other Democrat or down in Georgia, they'll be interested in helping the two senatorial candidates down there.
That's just who they are.
But Hillary Clinton paid for, finally, the New York Times admitted Russian disinformation.
And that is the dirty dossier, a dirty Russian dossier.
But they were telling us for three years they cared about Russian interference in our election.
Did they ever, any of these, any of these media outlets, did they ever go back and say they were wrong about Trump Russia collusion, and that Hillary paid for a dirty Russian dossier that was then used as the bulk of information without which, according to Andrew McCabe and Sally Yates and Rod Rosenstein and all these other people, even James Comey wouldn't sign the FISA application today.
Was that phony bought and paid for Russian disinformation used to then spy on candidate Trump, transition team Trump, President Trump?
The answer's yes.
Did the media ever report a huge big breaking news story like that?
No, they did not.
You know, we go, then that fails, and then I'm going to make the mistake of another special prosecutor because Mueller didn't give them what they wanted because it was not there to be gotten with a partisan team of witch hunters in that particular case.
And so then they bring up this whole thing about the Zelensky call brought up by a hearsay whistleblower with only one fact witness.
And the one fact witness said, no, he said no quid pro call.
I want nothing.
Everybody else was either an opinion witness or hearsay witness.
Nobody saw, heard any evidence whatsoever.
Transcriptive call released by the president.
And then it's simultaneously, they're ignoring.
We have then, well, now former vice president Biden on tape, giving a speech.
I think it was, you know, some big group, foreign policy group, and maybe the council on foreign relations, if my memory serves me right.
And he's saying that uh you got six hours, and you either fire the prosecutor or you're not getting a billion dollars.
Wow, that sounds like using taxpayer dollars as a quid and a pro and a quo.
Then we find out that did happen.
Then the prosecutor says, Yeah, I got fired because of Joe Biden, withhold it threatening to withhold the billion dollars.
Then zero experience Hunter goes on TV.
And he says, Nope, no experience, oil, gas, energy, none whatsoever.
Or Ukraine.
Why did you get paid?
I don't know.
Maybe because your dad?
Yeah, probably.
Then you get a little deeper, and then you see what happened, Peter Schweitzer 2018, Secret Empires reveals this whole, you know, bank of China deal after Hunter flies on Air Force II.
Now ask yourself, did any Democrat care about a quid pro quo with Ukraine?
No.
They only cared about Russia to bludgeon Trump, not Hillary.
They only cared about Ukraine to bludgeon Trump, not Joe Biden.
They talk about China, and you know, here you've got real threat to the world.
Now you got a compromise, you know, guy that potentially is the president of the United States.
Great.
The media talk about this, ask him any questions.
Then you got the Johnson and Grassley reports, where they have wire transfers, three and a half million dollars, Russian oligarch, first lady of Moscow, three and a half million dollars to Hunter's firm.
Well, what did he do?
What experience did he have there?
What experience did he have in private equity to get the Bank of China deal?
What experience did he have with Kazakhstan that he that he got money earmarked for a brand new car?
Uh you know, all of these deals, or the shopping spree with a Chinese national.
All of these things are out there.
We report on them.
They don't.
Now, why do I say why why is this relevant to you know where we are today?
They don't even want to look at or ask a single solitary question about you have American citizens signing affidavits under the threat of perjury, and they don't care.
And that is my point.
Now, what does it mean for we, the people?
Well, you got to understand it's not just Donald Trump that they hate.
And, you know, I said this before the election, and I'm gonna say it now.
If you'd had any doubt, you have major and powerful institutional forces That are not only aligned against all things Donald Trump, but aligned against what at the extra 11 or 12 million people, whatever the final number will end up being that voted for Trump this time over last time.
You know, and and we're supposed to look at Joe Biden's numbers.
Now, is Joe Biden really that great a candidate that you know he got all of these votes, more votes than Barack Obama in a lot of areas?
Mathematically, it doesn't make sense in my head, but you know, we'll let we'll we'll let the court cases and the affidavits and everything else.
Now, then you apply it to what we've been watching unfold with the election.
Now, you have certain cases where they say, no, we're just going to accept ballots for three additional more days, two days before the election.
Well, does anybody in the media say raise an eyebrow and say, uh, you can't do that?
That would be illegal.
That's not allowed.
Or does anybody care?
And should we care, and should they care, and should the country care?
And I think the answer is yes, when all these laws that I have described to you about partisan observers being able to watch the vote process start to finish, and you have person after person after person saying, No, I didn't get to see anything.
I've been doing this 20 years, always able to have confidence in the outcome of an election.
And I was there as a partisan observer, but this is the year that I was not allowed.
Or reports of we're closing down the polling place for the night, come back tomorrow.
Then reports from other people saying that's when they brought in ballots.
Okay, should we get to the bottom of that?
Should we listen at all to the you know, uh hundreds and hundreds of people signing affidavits under the threat of perjury?
Now, common sense would say, yeah, we ought to be doing that.
You know, we have been spending a lot of time.
Um, look, I'm not a voting machine expert.
But everything that I've looked into we have told you about about this Dominion software is it just raises so many different questions.
I mean, you've got Dominion now under fire, allegations that their machines caused, well, we know it happened in that one Michigan County.
That's when I first started paying attention to it.
They said human error.
Okay, well, do we we had problems in the primary in Georgia using it?
All 159 counties there used it.
Uh, then you have all these different accounts that during the Georgia primary, there were serious issues surrounding their voting machines.
You know, what look when you have disparate groups like the New York Times saying about Dominion and some of the new machines require too much extra power for aging polling locations with blue fuses, never powering on.
And others, workers who were still being trained just days before the election struggled with the setup.
You know, the election that the Times goes on to write the electronic poll books also new were plagued by freezing software and user error.
All right, so that's the New York Times.
Were they right?
They've been pretty quiet about this question.
Uh now, again, very tight margins.
A lot of the states, 28 states use this software.
Uh, are Dominion systems truly prone to error?
And are we having problems with the software freezing and all these other things?
And can they be programmed?
And should we not, if we want to have faith, integrity, competence in our election results, is it really horrible that Americans are asking these questions and looking into these questions?
I think that's just reasonable.
You know, their system was rejected.
Uh the AP, by the way, reported Dominion, quote, look long skimped on security in favor of convenience, making it more difficult to detect intrusions.
Dominion rejected twice in 2019 by the attorney general and and the uh Secretary of State of Texas.
They why, after they ran tests, it didn't beat their standards twice in 2019, once in 2013.
That prominent Princeton Princeton professor, tenured, this guy actually specializes in election machinery, if you can believe it.
I never knew such specialty existed and policy and security.
His name's Andrew Appell, and he issued a an op-ed blasting Dominion over security concerns.
I have his quote, the Dominion image cast evolution looks like a pretty good Voting machine, but it has serious design flaws.
After you mark the ballot, after you review your ballot, the voting machine can print more votes on it.
Whoopsie Daisy.
He said, of course, the legitimate software installed by Dominion won't do that, but the machine is physically capable of it, and fraudulent software can exploit the ability.
Now my question is, well, why would we be using it?
I have a letter here in front of me.
And this is from 2018, and it's by well Amy Klobuchar signed it.
Elizabeth Warren signed it.
Uh Ron Wyden signed it.
In 2018 alone, voters in South Carolina reporting machines that switch their votes.
And after they'd inputted them, scanners were rejecting paper ballots in Missouri, busted machines were causing long lines in Indiana.
In addition, researchers recently uncovered previously undisclosed vulnerabilities in nearly three dozen back-end election systems in ten states.
And just this year, after Democratic candidates' electronic tally show he received an improbable 164 votes out of 55,000 cast in Pennsylvania state judicial election in 2019.
The Republican chairwoman said nothing went right on election day.
Everything went wrong.
That's a problem.
That's from Elizabeth Warren, A.B. Klobuchar, and Ron Wyden, and the New York Times, and a tenured Princeton professor, and the AP and the state of Texas.
Well, you can't raise a question.
Is that a legitimate question?
Should we get the answer to it?
Do Americans deserve to have integrity, confidence, faith in their elections.
The media doesn't want it.
Democrats don't want it.
They don't care.
As long as they get the outcome they want, is my point.
Russia collusion, Ukraine, you name it, elections, they don't care.
Hey there.
I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, 800-941-SHAWN is a number.
You want to be a part of the program.
Now think about it this way.
You know, we watched in Georgia this week, magically, thousands and thousands of ballots being found.
Three different counties.
I'm told there might even be more coming.
And now forget about politics for a second.
Wouldn't you think that the media would look at that two weeks after, two weeks plus after an election and say, what the hell is going on here?
How is that possible?
How do we find thousands of uncounted ballots?
How do they just magically show up?
I mean, if again, if there's any fundamental fairness, if there was fundamental application of the we can't have Russia interfere standard, they would have gone after Hillary's dirty dossier.
They cared about real quid pro quos with Ukraine, they would have gone after Joe.
If they cared about vetting candidates, Joe wouldn't have been allowed to hide in his basement bunker every day and not ever answer any tough questions whatsoever.
Got away the whole campaign.
I have a whole list of questions I'd like to, you know, ask Joe.
You know, it's gonna be hiding Biden you watch in the White House, he'll be hiding a lot.
If he gets there, that's it.
Um it's pretty spectacular.
I mean, just when you stand back and look at that, why wouldn't everybody have questions and want those questions answered?
When thousands of people are signing affidavits under the threat of perjury, why is that not impressive?
When the New York Times and the AP and Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar and the state of Texas and uh expert professor of prints that all say these machines suck.
Why wouldn't anyone care?
They don't, because they're corrupt.
Hey there.
I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional SAS.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So Down, verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
25 till the top of the hour, 800 94.
One Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, Linda just said something to me.
And because I had been going through all of the double standards that exist, all of the hypocrisy, all of the stories we've broken, and and pretty much we do it very independently.
We do it alone.
Now there are others in talk radio.
There are others, a few of us at Fox, there are some of us.
But it's not the majority by any stretch.
You know, very few people were able ever got the Russia collusion hoax correct.
We did.
Why did we get that story right?
Because this is this is what we do differently.
Now it took three years, and I kept warning if you don't follow this up, and I don't know what the status of it is.
I'm as frustrated as all of you because we we broke many of those stories on TV and radio.
And I don't know the answer.
And I've been asked now for way too long, and I'm more as frustrated, if not more frustrated, because I put, you know, we put our heart and soul into making sure we got it right.
You know, exposing Hillary's dirty dossier, exposing premeditated fraud on the Pfizer court.
None of this, it it took a long time, a lot of digging, a lot of work, and we had our ensemble cast, my radio team, my TV team, these cat this cast of characters that was not the majority anywhere, and we went our own way.
You know, and it is like when I say institutional forces, the mob, the media, it is the media mob, big tech candidate protection program for Biden.
It was all true.
You know it's true.
It is it's the same thing with you know Hillary's dirty dossier, the same thing with the deep state, the same thing with Pfizer abuse, the same thing, you know, with the double standard on Ukraine and quit and pros and quos, the same thing on Zero Experience Hunter versus the way, say the Trump kids have been treated and are treated.
It's the the only way we get it right is we go our own path and we're just independent.
And I gotta tell you something else.
For me, that's not about Republican, it's not about Democrat, it's it's not about conservative, it's not about liberal, it's about right and it's about wrong.
And what happened in all of these instances was massive corruption.
I call it the biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in history.
You know, I go back to this issue that I have been describing.
I I won't read them again, but the New York Times, highly critical of the Dominion software, very critical.
The associated press, the exact same thing.
Uh, the Texas Secretary of State Attorney General twice in 2019 were rejected the system, rejected it once in 2013.
Uh, These are just facts.
Tenured Princeton professor who actually specializes in election machinery, critical of what can be loaded into the software of these things.
You would think somebody in the media wants to just ask a question.
Okay, can we get to the bottom of this?
Show us how this works.
I'm not a computer geek.
I don't know how I could barely download an app.
I'm not the right guy to do it.
But there are people that, you know, it's the home of Apple and Silicon Valley and Microsoft.
I'm sure we have people that are more than capable of being able to go back and see if anything untoward happened.
You know, if you know, at the end of the day, if you have the New York Times, the Associated Press, the Attorney General, Secretary of State of Texas, Princeton, and then I'll read to you again this note that was what's the date on this?
December 6th, 2019.
Now, this is a letter, and this is talking about this very topic with signed by Elizabeth Warren, Ron Wyden, uh, Senator Oregon, Amy Klobuchar, and Mark Poken, a member of Congress.
And it says in 2018 alone, voters in South Carolina were reporting machines that switched their votes, excuse me, after they inputted them, scanners were rejecting paper ballots in Missouri, busted machines were causing long lines in Indiana.
In addition, researchers recently uncovered previously undisclosed undisclosed vulnerabilities in nearly three dozen back end election systems in ten states.
And just this year, after the Democratic candidates' electronic tally showed he received an improbable 164 votes out of 55,000 cast in Pennsylvania, the state judicial election in 2019, the county's Republican chairwoman said nothing went right on election day.
Everything went wrong.
That's a problem.
Now, again, Klobuchar, Wyden, and Elizabeth Warren then go on to say, these problems threaten the integrity of our elections and demonstrate the importance of election systems that are strong and durable and not vulnerable to attack.
Well, it's amazing how silent they have all been.
Just like if you cared about Russia collusion, you would have cared about the dossier.
If you care about election interference, you wouldn't accept spying on a candidate or a transition team or a presidency using Russian disinformation and everybody involved in it heretofore pretty much has gotten away with everything.
If you cared about quid and pro and quos, you'd look at Hunter and Joe Biden.
They don't.
So, you know, how are we, the people, because that's who we are.
You know, how do we overcome massive institutional forces that just honestly they just they don't even want you to ask a question?
How do you have faith and trust in them?
Now, that raises another question about okay, the future of the Republican Party, et cetera, because I'm sure that a lot of Republicans, establishment in particular, that is, uh, what is this long nightmare of Donald Trump go away?
Well, there's 73 million now.
I don't know what the exact vote count is.
What's the latest London?
You have an update?
You can get us one, I'm sure.
Um, but there's, you know, that's that's 11 million more voters than Donald Trump had in 2016.
You look at all the victories in the House of Representatives, and and I and I see some very positive things emerging.
I don't want to be all doom and gloom here.
But the reality is I I think a lot of this is rooted in the fact that Donald Trump disrupted all of Washington, disrupted the entire political system.
This is what training the swamp looks like.
And it's not pretty at all.
And I I, you know, if you want to know where Donald Trump got with all the look at what he was able to succeed by being different.
Now, is he disruptive?
Yep.
Did he tweet a lot?
Yep.
Was he ever gonna, you know, he's a he's a fighter by nature, but some people just anticipated and expected that he'd fight for trade deals, That he'd fight for the money for the border wall, that he'd fight for tax cuts, that he'd fight for Supreme Court nominees, that he'd fight for energy independence, and you ending regulation and fight for all of these things, but then, you know, when it came time to tweet, he was just gonna stop fighting.
And that the switch would turn into we will be the presidential candidate.
It's just not his style, and you know, you can argue all day that it maybe he would have just sort of adapted, adjusted slightly here, there, whatever that it it would have that they would have accepted him.
I'm not really so sure that that's the case because I think one of the main things that he did accomplish that you can't even really quantify is that he forever tattooed into some of these institutions, descriptions that will be with them forever.
Fake news is now tattooed into the foreheads of all of those people, whoever they are, and organizations that deserve it.
Because they are fake news.
They are biased, they are abusively so, and they're one-sided.
And as I've said many times, if Trump had cured cancer, they wouldn't care.
Well, now he did get through Operation Warp Speed.
You know, he was able to get us what, two vaccines in a period of time, which is a pretty incredible amazing accomplishment.
And Donald Trump was able to accomplish, I think his accomplishments pretty much stick for him s speak for themselves.
72 million, Linda's telling me.
Thank you, Linda.
You're welcome, boss.
You read that report from 20 nine from December 2019.
Isn't that stunning what Clobichar, Wyden, Warren had to say, and now there's silence, but it's predictable.
Is it this is all the way to the wheel?
You know what I thought was the best, and this highlights exactly what you're saying.
You know, you're an independent thinker, you have your own ideas, you know.
No matter where we work or who we're friends with, right?
That's the beauty of being, you know, a child of God, having free will and free thought, and you do your own thing, right?
You march to your own drum.
And I think one of the things that was really highlighted today was, you know, when we went through the Al Gore, you know, Chad moment, you know, it was one state that we were looking at, and we took 37 days to analyze it.
So now we're looking at this is a national problem.
We have voter fraud everywhere.
Anytime anybody speaks out that was an observer or worked at the precincts or the polls or helped in any way that tries to say, yeah, some really weird stuff happened, like the quote unquote water main break in Fulton County that was really just a leak in the software update the night before, you know, and somebody's like, Yeah, I saw that, I was there, and they're like got rocks through their window.
I mean, look at this poor guy Rich Hopkins.
He's got a four-year-old daughter, he's had to hire private security detail.
This is not normal.
So when people fight back this hard to shut you down, that means that you're telling the truth.
So now we just need more people to rally.
And Rudy said it best today, I thought with that Florida comment.
Of course, I'm very favorable to Sydney, but that's just me.
Of course you are.
I think you're Sydney's best friend.
But you know, look at the work that Sydney's done with uh Michael Flynn.
I mean, I mean, she has been on the lunch.
By the way, to our credit too, we we we've been over that.
They ruined four years of this guy's life.
I mean, just think of this one act alone that the media ignored.
Has there been anybody in the media that's gone back to say, uh-oh, what they did to this 33-year veteran can't happen in this country?
I, you know, I know I I people accuse me of repeating myself because nobody else is gonna say it.
And if we didn't keep it in the forefront, if you don't keep these ideas in the forefront and stand on your own two feet, it's just it's even raising questions.
It's, you know, you talk about wokeness.
I mean, this is this is exactly what we're talking about.
If you dare to talk, speak out.
I mean, they the media is dismissing fellow citizens that are saying that they saw irregularities.
Now, is it ultimately going to change the outcome of the election?
I don't know.
But they don't even want to give them a platform or any credibility at all, and or whatsoever.
And that's what I mean by these institutional forces.
Now, just think of one thing, just kind of just go a little bit deeper into how profound it is that Joe Biden is able to hide in his basement bunker half the campaign, and that Joe Biden never gave a satisfactory answer on packing the courts, never had to answer a question about whether or not he'd abolish the electoral college, which would mean New York, New Jersey, Illinois, California, Oregon, and Washington would decide every election in this country.
That's not gonna go over well.
Ending the legislative filibuster.
He's never had to answer any, you know, he never really.
He actually got in a position where he lied about his support of the Biden Bolshevik Bernie Manifesto, and they let him get away with that.
All of these, well, let's call it brain lapses of his.
Obviously weak and frail.
Now, we raised the question that the media had no problem raising about John McCain and in 2008 about his age.
We had no problem in 1984 raising the age question about Ronald Reagan.
Uh but they didn't ask it about Joe.
And I never saw any one person in my life mess up cognitively, publicly, repeatedly, like him, and it's alarming to me.
Now, legitimate questions.
Uh, they didn't ask it.
You know, and then he got angry.
Come on, man.
You know, come on.
What are you a junkie?
Come on, man.
Oh man.
This writes itself.
Sean, let me ask you a question.
I got a good one for you.
Are you ready?
Yeah.
Okay.
You've been covering politics a long time, yeah?
Yes, ma'am.
When in your history of covering politics, I know you stay home alone and watch 13 TVs as it goes on all night.
Have you ever seen You're basically saying, which is the truth that I am a loser?
That's true.
I would never say that.
I admit it.
I'm a loser.
I wouldn't say it in public.
So moving on.
What does it mean when you look up at the TV and one candidate is losing votes while an election is occurring?
Has that ever happened in our history?
Like this, not even close.
But I mean, think about that.
You may not be excelling as much as a big thing.
Wait, wait, wait.
You may not be excelling as much as the other candidate, but you're not losing votes.
You're not losing 20,000 votes at a shot.
You gotta understand where we are.
This is my bigger point, and I don't think I can even articulate how I feel well, which I'm in the communication business, which is does not bode well for my career.
But I am telling you nobody cares as long as they get the result they want.
They didn't care about Russia because if it affected Hillary, they didn't care about Ukraine if it affected Biden.
But I don't think any of that is as digestible as watching on election.
It doesn't make sense.
It's not feasible.
Republican Party is not going to be taken back over by the establishment.
People didn't vote for Republic for the Republican Party as much as they went out to vote for Trump.
No, they went out to vote for the iconoclast who's governed more conservatively and was never accepted by the Republican establishment class.
I think it's bigger than Trump.
I think it's all about the Republic.
But he helped.
But I agree, but that's the whole point about draining the swamp.
That's what he exposed.
Now the water's gone, and now you got that black muck and tar, and all these people are, you know, we're beginning to see them in it, and it's ugly, and they wanted rid of this any whatever at whatever price.
Because this is institutional.
Government institutions, Democratic Party institutions, Republican Party, big media, big tech.
There's a lot of powerful forces here.
I'm just one little lone voice that they hate, like a few others.
There's a reason we're hated.
Hey there.
I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So Dow, verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, Clans are with us.
Hour two, Sean Hannity Show, 800-941.
Sean, you want to be a part of the program.
Yeah, I was talking earlier how the media is corrupt.
Media didn't care about Russia collusion with Hillary's dirty dossier or the of course the subpoenaed emails deleted and spot, you know, the dirty, you know, premeditated fraud on a Pfizer court.
They didn't care about Joe's quid pro quo.
Uh they don't only if they can bludgeon a Republican or Trump.
In this case, it's just Trump and the American people.
They don't care.
You can't even ask questions.
You have thousands of ballots showing up this week alone in Georgia.
Why question it?
That's uh you you're you're being unfair to question it, which is ridiculous.
Uh because I'm sure if it was in reverse, Democrats would be saying, we've got thousands of new ballots that appear over two weeks later.
Everybody in the media would say it.
Um but I, you know, looked at the whole 2020 election campaign, and what do you have?
The candidate, the media mob, big tech, the candidate protection program.
Biden hides in the basement, they do his dirty work, they slam Donald Trump 24-7.
Pretty much how it works.
And then they don't even allow you the choice, the option of getting information.
Now, I was talking about a very small ensemble cast that we put together, and we spent the better part of three years, and we've been proven right on everything that we reported.
The mob and the media peddled lies and conspiracy theories, and they were never held accountable because they don't care about fairness.
They didn't care about real Russia collusion, only if they could bludgeon Trump or real quid pro quos, unless they can say it's Trump.
They didn't care about any of it.
Uh anyway, two of the the cast members in this whole cast that we put together, Greg Jarrett, host of his new podcast, by the way, the brief, two New York Times bestsellers, uh the Russia hoax, Witch Hunt, and John Solomon, now editor-in-chief, just the news.com, his book bestseller, Fallout.
Uh welcome both of you to the program.
In the bigger picture, Greg, you understand what I'm saying here.
There wasn't really many of us for that three-year period, and John Solomon, you even got it started, but Greg, I'll start with you, that were exposing what ultimately turned out to be vindicated and true.
Now, people haven't been held accountable.
That that's a separate issue.
Well, you're absolutely right.
The media hates Donald Trump.
They loathe the man, they despise his policies.
They were shocked that he won uh in November of 2016.
And so they spent the better part of the last four years trying to vilify and demonize Trump.
Uh and many of them still claim he stole the 2016 election uh by conspiring or colluding with uh the Kremlin in the bowels somewhere.
And of course, that's utterly been rebutted and disproven.
It was actually a hoax that was invented by none other than Hillary Clinton.
But the media never cared.
They didn't care about facts or evidence or proof.
They ran with phony false stories based on biased anonymous sources, and they tried to destroy Trump and drive him from office.
The great irony is even though now there is eyewitness evidence and testimony and and affidavits of not just irregularities but voting fraud.
The same media doesn't want to spend four weeks in courts of law to make sure that this was a free and fair election and not rigged.
But is Jenna Ellis, who is a lawyer for Team Trump said, what the media believes and their opinion doesn't matter.
She's absolutely right in my judgment.
The media is so biased they are irrelevant.
John Solomon, your take.
Yeah, I think Craig has it right.
I think the media squander would have credibility and uh connectivity it had to the American people with its willful ignorance, it's bad reporting, it's bad polls.
Let's remember uh the Washington Post had Donald Trump down 17 points in Wisconsin on election day.
That that's just shameful to be that far off in their polling.
Uh and I think when you're when you're done, uh the credibility of the media is there.
And I think, you know, when I go around the country and I talk to people, or when people call into Jess the News, they want to talk to me.
Uh one of the things they are just mystified by is an utter lack of curiosity by today's reporters.
They're just not interested in talking to Jesse Jacob, the woman who worked in the city of election, city Election Center in Detroit who lays out fraud.
She witnessed it.
She says she participated in.
She can name the supervisors who told her to do it.
They don't interview her.
They don't interview the people with the Nevada native vote project where gifts were being given out as inducements to get people to pay.
There's just an utter lack of curiosity among reporters.
It's willful ignorance, and it's why the old fashioned media are in danger of of uh being swept away as irrelevant.
But I don't think you can render them irrelevant when you think of just they have no desire to ever tell the truth on major issues that have impact this country.
And that you know, you would think the affidavits of American citizens given under the threat of perjury would be worthy of an interview or an investigation, even hard questioning.
You know, what do you mean you saw this?
Can you prove you saw this?
Did you take videos of this, etc., etc.?
How did you report this?
Um that would just be simple fundamental, you know, one on one journalism, wouldn't it, Greg?
Exactly.
It's it's media malpractice on steroids, as I've said before.
Uh and frankly, nobody believes the media anymore.
Uh they have squandered all credibility.
Uh they now have a license to lie and they do it with impunity.
Uh and they've shamed themselves, they've disgraced their profession.
Uh, and you know, look at any poll over the last three or four years.
And you know, you you've got uh confidence in the media hovering in the single digits, uh, because they've been proven wrong so often.
You know, it's it's chicken little.
The sky is falling in it.
It the sky it turns out is blue and not falling on anybody.
And this is a a perfect example of when you have people who sign sworn affidavits under penalty of perjury who say that phantom ballots, ballots without names are being assigned random names, yeah, and those votes go for Joe Biden.
Uh when you have invalid, tardy ballots that are being deliberately backdated to make them valid ballots for Joe Biden, uh, you know, these are serious concerns.
And you know, if if Joe Biden really wants to be uh considered a legitimate president, he should demand that these inquiries and investigations and legal challenges be had.
But John, that's never gonna happen.
But I mean they let the they let this guy get through an entire election cycle hiding.
They helped him hide, they did all the dirty work to smear Trump for him, and they never asked him a tough question.
That's where we are.
And they never dug in.
They never dug in on the Hunter Biden thing one bit.
But here's an amazing thing, and I think this is the proof of the power of the platform you have, uh uh Sean, with your your radio and your TV shows, and with uh Greg and his amazing books and just the news.
The these facts are now getting around the media to the American people.
How do I know it?
I've been running polls the last couple weeks trying to measure this.
A majority of Americans, uh, I think like seventy percent said they believed uh Joe Biden engaged in a conflict of interest with his son in Ukraine.
Today we have a poll out.
A majority of Americans believe a special prosecutor should be named to investigate Hunter Biden and Joe Biden's shakedown across the globe.
They couldn't feel that way if they didn't know about it.
And what it shows you is they're getting these messages through new means like Greg's great books, your shows, uh our site, and other places.
So I'm optimistic that this new ecosystem of people that were building true you know, truth tellers in new new realms can get around the complete blackout that the news media has given to these issues for four years.
Okay, let me play Devo's advocate and let me let me let me be the pessimist here because with all the low-hanging fruit and premeditated fraud on a FISA court and let's see a dirty Russian dossier uh used as the basis for that, and of course, you know, subpoenaed emails deleted and bleached, but who's been held accountable in the past?
Why should people listening to us, even though we got it all right?
Why would they believe that it's gonna end any other way except the fixes in on everything?
I I would remind people of the report that Joe Biden says he will not interfere in any Department of Justice investigations, which means that the Durham investigation will continue to its conclusion.
Uh I have faith in injustice.
And and actually I have faith in in Bill Barr and John Durham, both of whom have a record of completing investigations and calling it uh in a non-political, nonpartisan way.
And uh, and I think there will be people held accountable.
Uh and you know, I I hope that that will instill greater faith in our system of justice across America.
Look at the report that came out yesterday and addendum to the September 23rd report of Senators Grassley and Johnson talking about deep ties.
We're talking about zero experience Hunter and Joe Biden.
Uh creating counterintelligence and extortion concerns.
And Biden was the subject of this staff report, and this is the one that went into the Russian oligarchs, the Kazakh oligarchs, the Chinese nationals.
Uh the three and a half million dollars first lady of Moscow, the the money's transferred for a new car, shopping sprees.
I mean, serious allegations.
I've seen nobody in the mainstream media, John Solomon.
Just us, the few of us, not a lot of us, a select group.
We go our own way.
We get to the truth, because we get it wrong.
We get the crap kicked out of us.
So we have to get everything right.
We even took our time when we had stories lined up, triple confirmed.
We'd still wait to make sure beyond any doubt before we'd go with it.
How many times did we do that during this process over Russia Russia?
We we did.
And you take look at Greg's books, the incredible footnoting and ex precision of every fact in his every one of his books and my book was Seamus.
We we took great care because we owe the American people the truth, not the half-truths or the bogus truths or the fiction that the New York Times and the Washington Post fed this country for a long, long time.
And I I think that in in this process, you know, one of the things that I I'm just amazed in watching over the last few weeks, the more the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the networks ignore this, the more people become curious and looking at it.
They have figured it out, and when they hear something being knocked down in the media, they're getting more curious for the first time.
It's like, oh, if the media is knocking it down, I better check into it.
That dynamic is going on.
I see it in our polling, I see it in the people coming to our site.
I think there's a new ecosystem.
I I'm not as pessimistic as you, Sean.
I can want to talk for you, but I I really believe there's a new ecosystem where books and radio shows and new websites can get the truth out, and the Washington Post and the New York Times won't matter a damn to the American people in the not so distant future.
I I I think we get there, but how do we get there with this election in particular?
Yeah, that's a great question.
I think you follow the process established by all state legislatures, and that's a legal protest pro uh process.
You file a petition before a court and you go to a judge and you present the evidence, the affidavits, the eyewitnesses.
A hearing is held.
That evidence is then tested.
And if there it is compelling enough, uh then a judge issues an order.
And the order could be for an audit, it can be for uh a recount.
Uh it could be to discount uh a certain category of votes, such as votes uh that came in late.
So, you know, the process needs to be played out.
That's how it works in America.
It's not the media that ordains the president of the United States or coronates him.
No, it's the American people through the electoral process and where there are serious, legitimate questions about the integrity of that process, it needs to be examined, and that's the process that's unfolding right now.
Don't have a lot of time left.
Uh you watch this today, Greg Jarrett.
Republicans, Democrat, left wing media, all critical of Dominion.
Not now.
Why not when there's not when there's a sworn affidavit under penalty of perjury that there's a backdoor to this software that allows tens of thousands of votes uh to be changed with a click of a mouse or uh the the pressing of a keyboard.
So I think this needs now to be looked at in a court of law, the evidence presented, tested, examined, and a decision made as to what to do next.
Last word, John Solomon.
You know, I think the state legislatures can play a big role here.
They have subpoena power.
They can get the communications, the records, and start exploiting things that are being withheld from the legal teams.
I'd love to see the state legislatures do what Devin Union is with Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, and Lindsey Graham did in Russia on this election.
That's the missing component in this investigation right now.
But is there a time to get it uh in terms of impact in the race or no?
Sure.
A subpoena can be given a date of five days and you get the documents.
It's not that hard.
Greg, quick.
Absolutely.
I I covered the two thousand election contest, thirty-seven days.
There's plenty of time to do it.
Quick break.
We got Cheryl Atkinson, Ken Starr, all coming up as we continue.
Hey there.
I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, 25 till the top of the hour, 800-941-SHAWN, if you want to be a part of the program.
Let's just listen to the media.
It doesn't matter how many hundreds of people have cited an affidavit.
They don't even want to hear it.
The media ignored everything as it relates to this phony, trumped-up Trump-Russia collusion and just outright lied to us for years.
If partisan observers, as the statutory language in voting laws say can watch the counting and they're not allowed to watch, they don't care.
They don't care at all because they're candidate one, because they're smearing Trump.
They didn't care about Hillary's dirty dossier, though.
They didn't care about spying on a candidate because it wasn't theirs, or a president because it wasn't theirs.
They didn't care about a quid pro quo with Ukraine because they protect their own.
And and this is just the state of affairs.
So if there are legitimate questions in people that say, for example, I'm a here lawfully.
I've I've actually observed elections for 20 years, but I wasn't allowed this year.
And hundreds of people testify to that fact, which is in the law.
Why would we ever want to hear them?
Here's the mob.
Breaking overnight, American democracy.
Actually, it didn't break, but it wasn't for lack of trying from President Trump.
A dizzying 12-hour period where the president assaulted dedicated civil servants while simultaneously trying to undermine the outcome of an election.
The losers in the Republican uh leadership should take a page and don't lecture us anymore about patriotism or about putting country over party, or rather putting party over country, which is what they did.
I never thought I'd see a day where you saw pretty much an entire party in this country refuse to accept election results.
This is like a sick childish fantasy that these Republicans, okay, are basically titling around Donald Trump.
Uh, did they ever accept the 2016 election results?
Because if they did, I missed it.
Or did uh Stacy Abrams ever accept her loss in Georgia?
I think I missed that too.
Um, Cheryl Atkinson is back with us.
She's written a phenomenal new book, and by the way, the timing couldn't be any more perfect for this.
And it's called Slanted, How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship, Hate Journalism.
And uh anyway, best-selling author in our own right and and journalist, uh, has been very outspoken on all of this for a long time.
Uh Cheryl, welcome back to the program.
It's on Amazon.com now in bookstores everywhere.
How are you?
I'm great.
Thanks so much for having me.
You know, if you let's just look at the last four years.
Um, didn't the media pretty much lie daily with conspiracy theories about Trump and Russia and this collusion narrative, and weren't there four separate investigations saying it didn't happen?
Well, in my book, I talk about why I don't use the word lie, but there was definitely a false reporting, rampant false, misleading and incorrect reporting, a pattern that cannot really be denied in terms of could it be willful or could it just be accidental mistakes?
Well, what about when everything that they said had happened didn't happen?
Did they ever go on the record and say we we want to make a correction here, that our reporting was wrong?
No, and I think that's really the tell, the fact that they don't see that their mission wasn't accomplished.
The mission was accomplished if you understand, as I think you do, Sean, that in many instances it's not journalism as we thought of it traditionally to get at the facts and the truth and be accurate.
It's trying to sway public opinion and forward narratives.
So even if they're wrong in the end, there's no apologies.
There are usually no firings, there are no mayor culpa, and that's because they accomplished the exact mission that they wanted to accomplish.
In this case, showing distrust and chaos in their attempt to undermine, if not oust President Trump.
Now, even and then on the other side of it to show that they've got an agenda.
You know, when you have hundreds of our fellow Americans signing a lawful affidavit under the threat of perjury, a legal document.
Uh, they don't even want to they they don't even want to entertain it.
Uh or for example, if partisan observers as the statutory language in election law allows for partisan observers in all the states that we're talking about, and partisan observers one after another come out and say, No, I wasn't allowed to observe.
I would think that following the law would be critical and crucial to instilling confidence in an election for the American people, uh, but they don't care at all.
Is it isn't it because their candidate won?
I think so.
I mean, this is what is so telling of the conflicted media.
A neutral media would have covered this election and the aftermath entirely differently.
We were told, after all, in 2016, that Russia interfered in the election, China will try and has done so before, it'll happen again in 2020.
We know that domestic bad actors committed illegal acts allegedly to interfere with President Trump.
So neutral journalists would have had every rational reason to be on the ground digging and watching for any slight hint of impropriety in these swing states and places where we were conducting an election like we've never done before with different tactics and rules and ballots.
And instead, you saw the media kind of on a wholesale basis stepping back and saying, Well, show us the evidence that anything bad happened.
You know, there was a time that we didn't expect it to walk up on the door, knock on the door and present itself to us.
We would search for it and we would look for it and not simply declare that it doesn't exist simply because the guilty parties haven't come forward and told us what they did.
So this is this is a whole new world in terms of what the media, how it covers something like this, and how it would have covered it, I think, if it were unconflicted.
See, I think there's a pattern here, and I think the election, I think your analysis is dead on.
And but I would argue, for example, uh Hillary's violation of the espionage act, Hillary's deleted subpoenaed emails, Hillary's dirty bought and paid for Russian dossier, uh spying on a Republican presidential candidate, transition team, and then president.
Again, if this is happened in reverse, I think we get a very different type of media coverage, or even let's look at Ukrainian impeachment.
I mean, is it did it bother you with all the talk about quid pro quo's that Joe Biden's bragging on tape, he leveraged a billion dollars to get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired for the say then we find out his son is making millions with no experience?
Uh would they have ignored that the way they did Biden if the last name was Trump?
And you look at the timeline, and that was already done and already known by the time that they accused President Trump of impropriety in Ukraine.
They knew full well because actually some of the liberal press had done stories on these alleged Biden conflicts of interest in Ukraine and elsewhere.
So they knew that at the time they were lobbying these counter-accusations against President Trump.
But as you said, one set of accusations was covered as if proven true when there wasn't evidence, and the other set of accusations was called a conspiracy theory for which there was no evidence when in fact there was quite a bit of evidence.
So, you know, what we've got here is a whole system where there's a crisis of confidence in what the media reports, what the Department of Justice investigates, how our elections are held.
I mean, top to bottom, social media.
I just think we're we're at a really scary time in a transition to something else.
I hope something better as people recognize what's going on and kind of rise up.
Yeah, but I don't think it's going to happen.
I think, look, I just think the media is in the pockets of all things, radical democratic socialist and all things, especially anything related to Donald Trump.
But really the American people, uh, they just have no interest in representing the other side of the story at all.
And I I I really think that there are very few exceptions now.
I don't see many people in your profession, and you are a journalist.
I'm a talk show host.
Journalism is a part of what I do, but it's a small part.
Um we even do investigative journalism and we do opinion and we do every with pretty much the whole newspaper when you're a talk show host is my argument.
And but the media, I think has been corrupted for a long time, and I think they've chosen sides, and I think it's more obvious every day, and I think people have every right not to trust anything that they're told by them.
And you can see this agenda on display.
I'll give you another example.
Do you think that Joe Biden is struggling cognitively?
That's a good question.
I ha I I just don't have enough information.
I will say that I've seen indications visually that yes, he's suffering from something, but I also know that what we see.
I'm not diagnosing him.
I'm just asking if he's if that's the same Joe Biden that we knew even when he left office in in 2016.
Yeah, I would say a rational person sees what seem to be fairly normal signs of aging as happens to a lot of people, and I recognize it.
Okay, fair enough.
Well, I'm I'm getting older by the day.
We all are, right?
So my question is did the media by allowing him to hide almost half the campaign in his basement bunker.
How many tough questions do you believe Joe Biden really got as a candidate?
Because I can name ten off the top of my head that he should have had to answer and he didn't.
Is that a fair assessment?
Absolutely.
And you know, if Donald Trump, if we play the substitution game, had been so absent and answered so few questions from reporters and disappeared at crucial times, like no other presidential candidate, at least in my time has done right before the election.
If he had done that, you know what the headlines would have read, and you know how it would have been covered.
So that's that's the dead giveaway.
But why, Sean, that I think something will come of it, and I don't mean the media is going to turn around.
I just think something else may emerge.
Why do I think that?
Because the media has almost universally been against Donald Trump in a very biased and unfair way, in my view.
And yet he got more votes this time than any other president in history, than any other candidate besides Joe Biden, they say.
So let's put that aside for the moment.
Despite social media universally conspiring against him, despite the media almost universally conspiring against them with false information many times over, you know, this drum beat over four years, tens of millions of Americans saw past that and still wanted to vote for Donald Trump, which makes me think there are a lot of people not listening to this system or operating sort of outside of it in a way that they think is more honest and more real.
And that means there's a market for somebody else to develop that.
I I think a little bit of that is seeing people go from Twitter to parlor.
That's just one example of something that's happening because I think the floodgates are about to open.
I I think that Twitter is in for a big wake-up call now, and I think you know, YouTube as well with Rumble, and uh I can see if a Facebook challenger at some point coming on board, and I think their business model is just right for a competitor.
I agree.
Now you talk about you actually had uh insiders at fake news CNN and the New York Times uh actually talk to you and tell you about uh what the atmosphere working environment is there, and and they see what we see in terms of their bias.
I I actually think some of their on-air people believe this crap and they've diluted themselves, but that's my own humble opinion.
Uh what are they telling you?
Well, you know, there's a whole chapter on CNN, whole chapter on New York Times.
I worked at CNN back when it was a news organization, and I can tell you that the CNNers I know, And some of them are quoted in the book, are horrified at the turn of events at the place that used to be seen as really the best place that we had where news was firewalled from opinion and that we were as neutral as it was perhaps possible to be.
By the way, when we were run by Ted Turner, a liberal billionaire donor, who didn't interfere at least ever when I worked there on any sort of daily basis with what we reported.
And I knew we were supposed to be neutral.
I would never have dreamed of inserting my opinions and diagnosis of you know any politician.
That was done in a very relative few political shows we had, or maybe Larry King Live and Crossfire.
The rest of the programs at CNN at the time were non-political coverage.
There's a lot going on in the world, not surrounding these two or three topics we beat to death every day because the propagandists want to put these narratives on the table.
And so, yes, in the book, I talked to former executives and current insiders at CNN, New York Times, ABC, MSNBC, people who have worked or worked at 60 Minutes, um, all the networks, and they do see a lot of what we see.
But if you understand the So they want to keep their job.
Last question.
Yeah.
And I've said in 2007 and 2007 and eight journalism's dead.
By and large, I believe that is more true than ever.
Am I right?
I do think traditional journalism.
I say it's the death of the news as we once knew it.
There's something else now, but it's certainly not what you and I uh came to think of as journalism.
Kind of sad.
But uh a lot of depth, a lot of research, a lot of work.
And if you really want to understand how corrupt this all is, uh Cheryl Atkinson has her brand new book out.
It's called Slanted, How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship and Hate Journalism.
Uh you can get it at Amazon.com.
We put it up on Hannity.com, it's now in bookstores everywhere.
Uh Cheryl Atkinson, great book.
Thanks for being with us.
We appreciate your time.
Thanks so much, Sean.
Take care.
All right, when we come back, the legal case with uh Ken Starr, who's been really outstanding on all of this.
Uh 800-941 Sean, you want to be a part of the program.
Quick break, right back, we'll continue.
Hey there.
I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
Sir Dow, verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
All right, news roundup information overload hour, Sean Hannity show.
Sydney Powell had a powerful close today in this uh long press conference.
Uh and here's what she said.
This is stunning, heartbreaking, infuriating, and the most unpatriotic acts I can even imagine for people in this country to have participated in in any way, shape, or form.
And I want the American public to know right now that we will not be intimidated.
American patriots are fed up with the corruption from the local level to the highest level of our government.
And we are going to take this country back.
We are not going to be intimidated.
We are not going to back down.
We are going to clean this mess up now.
President Trump won by a landslide.
We are going to prove it, and we are going to reclaim the United States of America for the people who vote for freedom.
All right, Sydney Powell from the presser from uh earlier today.
Maybe I don't know.
After all these years and you see where we are, did anyone care uh that the narrative the media and Democrats sold us on Russia was a lie for three years?
Did they care about the real Russian dossier that Hillary paid for?
They did not.
Did they care care about obstruction with deleted emails?
They did not.
Did they care about spying on a president, presidential candidate, transition team?
They did not.
The media lied for three long years.
Uh the American people the the evidence was overwhelming.
It was incontrovertible, it was proven over and over again.
Did they really care about a quid pro quo in Ukraine?
Well, if they did, how do you ignore Joe Biden bragging he leveraged a billion taxpayer dollars to fire a Ukrainian prosecutor so his zero experience on can be paid millions?
They care about you know Russian oligarchs so bad.
Why didn't they care about the wire transfers that Senators Johnson and Grassley were able to expose as it relates to Hunter Biden?
If they care about being compromised by the Chinese, why didn't they care about the billion five deal with the Bank of China that Hunter got after flying on Air Force Two with Daddy or the Kazakh oligarch?
You see where the double standard is.
News media's chosen side, it's big tech has chosen sides, and we the American people are left with, you know, it's uh if it's against a conservator or a republican, go all in.
You know, politics, personal destruction.
If it's a Democrat, go all in.
Defend it.
Lie, defend.
Ken Starr has been watching uh all of this, and uh you saw the presser today.
I'm dying to get your thoughts on it.
How are you, sir?
I'm doing great, Sean.
Thank you very much.
Am I wrong in my analysis about Hillary's dirty dossier about FISA Warren abuse?
Am I wrong about the double standard on Ukraine?
Am I wrong about deleted emails with bleach pit, etc.?
No, I think you uh score an A plus.
Uh Sumaculati.
No, what I first but go ahead.
You Yeah, Professor uh Ken here.
Yeah, what I heard you uh go down the list, uh I couldn't find anything that say, no, Sean, that's that's a little bit off.
And uh as someone who followed the whole spe I'll just pick out one, the special counsel, the appointment uh in May of 2017, the almost two years and so forth and then that report that blesses heart, Bill Barr becomes the attorney general of the United States, and what's the first thing that lands on his desk?
This 400 plus page report.
And the coverage of the report once it was released was just to me extraordinary.
I studied the report as did you in depth.
And the coverage was just, shall I say, misplaced, erroneous, uh, concluding that there was in fact uh uh the I'm talking about the reporting, that there was in fact all this evidence of collusion and so forth, when as you and I know, and I'm harping on this because it was so important for what?
The first really two and a half years of the president's tenure, right?
Imagine your reaction as the president, you've been in office for five months, and you're told a special counsel has been appointed to investigate you.
As someone who was an independent counselor, special counsel, I can attest that's not good news for the president.
It's very disruptive.
The point is the Mueller report actually exonerated the president with respect to the collusion, just as you said, but of course it was not portrayed that way at all.
You know, w when you look at what what's going on here, um, and you look at you know, I don't know, I try to keep it simple.
And if we have election laws about partisan observers, and we have example after example the partisan observers were not allowed to watch the vote count as the statutory language calls for.
I don't know what the remedy is, but you know, the we have so many people that is not even in dispute, but nobody really seems to care.
If you're changing laws just before the election, or like they're trying to do in Wisconsin, where they're, you know, in the process of even as we speak trying to change things there in terms of the vote count, et cetera, and and giving out absentee ballots when the state doesn't even allow for it, that that should be troublesome to America.
Why are all these hundreds of witnesses now, about a thousand that I know of and affidavits, why are they just outright ignored and pushed to the side and nobody gives them any merit whatsoever?
Because my understanding is if you sign a legal affidavit, you do so under the threat of perjury, don't you?
Yeah, absolutely.
It's a serious thing to swear something uh under oath.
I did one just uh this day, and I said, Oh, I'm going to I'm gonna read this with great care.
It was just a routine kind of document.
But exactly perjury is a felony.
You go to jail if you've been convicted of perjury.
So absolutely.
So that the here's here's the point.
How do we unscramble the egg in light of all of this evidence?
Well, that's remains to be seen.
But here's the key.
Let's now prove this.
Facts, facts, facts.
And one of the things that Sydney Powell, and I respect Sydney Powell, she's well, she's a great patriot.
She is a very experienced lawyer, and I don't think that she would just make be making accusations, and these are very serious accusations.
Where did this software come from?
Where's the hardware?
What countries has it been used in, the sources of funding?
These are all the most serious kinds of allegations.
They're troubling.
They should go to the core since the system was used in what, 20 states.
We already know it made the software glitch and Him County, Michigan, and so forth.
But this that was small.
This is obviously what Sidney Powell said today is very big.
And really these are serious allegations, as you and I will fully agree, that merit the most serious and obviously quick investigation.
What do you see as the best legal arguments that they're making after the press conference today?
I think the best is uh is frankly what Sydney was suggesting, and the the use and the manipulability and the perhaps built in with the algorithms and so forth.
My word, if that is true, and those systems were used as they say in 20 states, that's what took uh really got my uh attention.
Well, let me can I explain something to you?
This is something Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren bitterly complained about.
A Princeton tenured professor that's an expert on voting machines, complained also and talked about the flaws in this system.
The state of Texas in 2019 rejected this system, not once but twice, and had previously rejected the system in 2013.
Uh the AP has been critical of it.
The New York Times has been critical of this particular system, but yet it's used in in 28 states.
Um now, from my just logical brain, I'm thinking, okay, if everybody on both sides of the aisle think the system is not the best and we deserve better, why was it ever used?
Because all it does do is lead to doubt because all of these people from all these different political persuasions had been telling us that is extraordinarily serious that and it shows the gravity of what Sidney Powell said.
And I think we're all just trying to absorb this.
I learned a lot from what Sydney was saying.
Again, these are allegations, easy to make allegations, let's prove them.
But Sydney and the team, there's some terrific lawyers on the team.
I think those lawyers have integrity, and that's what they're pushing for integrity in the system.
Now, I'm so glad that you called out the fact that Carolyn Maloney, right of New York, complained about this.
You mentioned uh Amy Golbachor and so forth.
So why in heaven's name would it be used?
There's no good answer for that.
And uh happily I'm a Texan who lives in Texas.
I'm very proud.
I didn't know this was all news to me, that Texas considered it unreliable.
What we do know is that just as mail-in ballots can be abused, misused, fraud, can be, can be, right?
So to electronic systems.
We know they can be hacked, right?
We know that, especially if they have a provenance, Venezuela, Maduro, what we were hearing today is just to me quite staggering.
So how could we possibly have done this in so many states?
And so it uh this is the this demands immediate kind of investigation, but we've got to have proof.
We've got to prove here's the key.
You frequently ask in rightly so, what's the remedy?
We've got to prove that there's causation.
We know that there is wrongdoing.
So let's find out those facts, and then what does that lead us to?
And Rudy made some strong statements today.
Causation.
We can prove that the wrongdoing, not just mistakes, but the wrongdoing, in fact, affected the election.
And Sidney Powell said, as you just played, the president won in a landslide.
That's an extraordinary claim to make, and now she's got to back it up.
But let's see the let's see the evidence.
Let's see the facts.
How much weight in the court, and this is your wheelhouse, not mine, when you have hundreds and if not thousands of affidavits signed by American citizens.
Does that weigh in playing part in terms of evidence being presented in a case?
Yes.
Well, you have the evidence report, but uh all of the courts, of course, are going to be focusing on is the election in their respective states.
But six states have been seriously called into into question, right?
So let's find out the facts on uh in that respect.
But there's not a lot of time.
To be honest, there's that's the huge challenge.
There are too many states, six seriously, right?
You might say five gravely serious, uh, and there's just not not a lot of time.
So the clock is running.
I uh have every reason to believe that the president's legal team is terrific and they are working around the clock, but you're exactly right.
Time time is uh is the the enemy.
Yeah.
Well I mean I think that's yeah, go ahead.
Yeah.
I uh and I can't speculate, okay, exactly what is going to happen if there's a doomsday scenario in Pennsylvania or in Wisconsin or whatever.
But I do know this.
There is authority to invalidate an election, not a nationwide election.
Elections are run in communities and in states to actually invalidate.
It was done during the civil rights era when racist uh jurisdictions would play fast and loose with the vote count.
Sound familiar.
And so there is in fact case law out there to invalidate an election.
What do you do with this?
You've got the electors meeting right in December and so forth, and the certification that goes to Congress.
I know time is very short, but guess what?
When the stakes are really high, you and I have talked about this before.
For example, the New York Times, the Pentagon Papers case from a generation ago, Watergate, uh excuse me, uh the uh the the issues that eventuated in in Watergate, but just the publication of the Pentagon Papers case, those issues were resolved in days all the way up to the Supreme Court.
Now this is more complex.
I'm just saying it can happen that there will be a rapid resolution once the facts are in.
Let's get those facts.
Um you know what it's like when you're also in the middle of a political fire storm uh in a high profile case like this.
Uh it's not easy, is it?
No, it's not.
Uh and especially in light of what uh you said just a few minutes ago about the the media and uh the unwillingness to be truth seekers.
I was really blessed, uh Sean during the Clinton investigation to have it was a different era.
Real truth seekers at the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC News, ABC News.
Yeah, though they they had some truth seekers.
Whatever there are.
Not many even then though.
Now there's none.
Then now where are they exactly?
So we have had this move, this shift to we don't even not seek the truth.
We simply seek to portray and to present a particular viewpoint, even in our news coverage, and it's just been terrible.
Terrible.
Yeah, no, I mean it's a well it's a disservice to the American people, but you know the fact that they just they they have no they're shameless in this.
You know, the double standard on Russia, the double standard on Ukraine, the double standard on obstruction, the double standard on on the rule of law, um you know, on on quid pro quo's I mean it is so spectacularly obvious that it just makes you you worry about you know whether we ever get back to normalcy or this just gets baked into the culture of corruption that is not just Washington,
but it's all things democratic socialists because the ends justifies the means for them.
I that I fear for our kids.
Well, I would say be of good cheer as you as you say let not your hearts be troubled, because the marketplace works.
If there is going to be this uh incredible bias And non-truth seeking, then the marketplace gives rise to truth seekers.
Right?
It's just the ebb and flow of the marketplace.
So we're at a bad patch right now in terms of the great traditions of American journalism.
And we're here to find out the facts.
No fear, no favor, right?
Just the kind of thing Sidney Powell was talking about from the perspective of a lawyer.
The unpopular lawyer, the unpopular cause.
But we're going to fight to do this.
This is John Adams at the time of the Boston massacre.
This is who we are.
So market dynamics and courage.
All right.
Appreciate you being with us, Ken Star 800-941 Sean.
You want to be a part of the program.
We'll come back on the other side.
We'll get to your calls.
800-941 Sean, you want to be a part of the program.
Quick break, right back, and we will continue.
All right, 25 till the top of the hour.
800 941 Sean, you want to be a part of the program.
All right, we're gonna go straight to our busy phones here.
A lot of you want to weigh in, press her today.
We'll have full coverage on Hannity tonight.
Uh Bubba Florida will start with you, Bubba.
What's going on, my friend?
Brother Sean, man, it is longtime listener, first time caller, my brother.
It is an honor and a pleasure to get the opportunity to chat with you or honor to have you on.
What's on your mind today?
Listen, real quickly, I just want to say uh, you know, Superior, uh, it's pretty obvious that the Democrats have stolen or tried attempted to steal this election, Sean.
You know, as you have so eloquently put.
And and my concern right now is the fact that it looks like they're gonna try to see if they get away with this constitutional mugging of the American people, it seems that they're gonna try to steal the two senatorial races in Georgia.
So the question that I have, you know, as an American, we're doing everything on our part to try to stop that.
But if they they go through with it, America will forever change.
So the question I have, you know, especially Sean, with the way that you know, they basically they they terrorize people, and it seems to me that if we don't stop them here, like I said, America will forever change.
So is it too early to start talking about irreconcilable differences and maybe you know, divorcing the Democrat Party and then not I'm not condoning or suggesting violence at all, but what are our real options if this does in fact happen?
The fight for liberty and freedom never stops.
It just, you know, as Reagan said, freedom's but one generation away from extinction.
And I'm that's not a cliche.
You know, what's been building here, and which is pretty much been my my message now for years, is this this is a progression away from truth, away from a media that has any sense of fairness or objectivity.
Um that uh I'm I'm not joking when I say that Biden lived in the bubble of the media mob big tech candidate protection program that they they protected him.
They didn't ask him tough questions, they let him hide half the time, and they just did the job of his campaign and blasted Trump every single second of every single hour of every every single day.
Um I you know that I kept saying during this whole Trump Russia collusion hoax and Ukrainian impeachment.
I kept saying that if we don't get an and get to the bottom of it and hold people accountable, it's only going to get worse.
Now we're at the point that if you raise a question about, okay, partisan observers are allowed to observe the vote count from beginning to end, and all these people say that did not happen because I was one of the observers and I didn't observe a thing, they wouldn't let me, and nobody in the media cares, and nobody in the Democratic Party cares.
Well, they didn't care about Hillary's uh dirty Russian dossier, but they they acted like they cared about Russian interference.
They didn't care about spying on a candidate.
They but you know, if it was their candidate, they'd care.
You know, look, I I know a lot of people are gonna get disheartened by this, but you just can't.
Because there's seven there's a 72 million army strong of conservative thinkers out there that really love this country and want law and order and truth.
And you know, I I don't want any vote that Donald Trump didn't earn, but I want to know, I want to have faith, I want to have trust, I want to have confidence.
I want to be able to, you know, look my kids in the eye and say that you can you can trust your government and your media, but right now I can't say that.
You keep up the fight because you are a true warrior.
And in and how about Sydney Powell?
Wow.
One word, strong.
Look at what she's done for, you know, her unrelenting advocacy of General Flynn.
I mean, it listen, I I just she has been extraordinary.
And by the way, she took a lot of heat in that courtroom with that judge, Emmett Sullivan all those times.
And you know, we we kept putting her on and stayed on the case, and nobody else was ever covering it.
And, you know, hopefully we get the right resolution because four years of this man's life, it's now four years, has been destroyed.
And nobody seems to care.
And that's how we treat a 33-year veteran in this country.
Uh, you know, it's when I let myself go there, um, I don't see a lot of light.
Let me put it that way.
Because that would be something that if you had a fair-minded media, they would too care about.
They would care.
If if people were that were screaming about Russia can ignore Hillary's dossier and screaming about quid pro quos and ignore Joe and Hunter, you just know they're just dripping with partisan hypocrisy.
The the amount that they take on daily is breathtaking to me, but it's where they are.
Now, I think Donald Trump, for whatever reason, just has triggered them to this next level where there's there's no amount of truth that they'd be willing to accept.
You know, Donald Trump has anyone said many people said that, hey, good job on the vaccine.
Operation warps, they no, they're not capable.
I've always said if Trump cured cancer, they would want to impeach him for that.
But anyway, Tim, they uh Bubba, thank you.
Uh, Eric is in Florida too, is uh well.
Eric, how are you?
Glad you called.
Hey, Sean.
Um I just I was listening just now, and I heard you say it was not partisan uh hypocrisy.
Um one of the things I've been wondering since it's uh that all this began was when you hear people like Maxine Waters and many other Democrats were saying at the very beginning, between election of Trump and being sworn in, they were screaming, impeach, impeach, impeach.
So my question is is I know that everybody hates him from that side, even Republicans are not exempt from that.
Why?
Why do they hate him so much?
And the only thing I can think of is they're they've done some things that are so insidious that they have to cover it up, they're desperate.
They have to they have to get them out of office.
And I'm curious why what that is.
You're asking a very deep question, and that I've thought a lot about, and I'm not sure I'm gonna give you an answer that is that you're that is good enough for you, and I'm good, but I'm gonna try my best.
I think if I'm gonna break it down to its brass tax, you know, simple as I can make this is Donald Trump has exposed an underbelly of swamp creatures that is far worse than I think any of us, and I've been doing this a long time.
I always knew there was a biased media, I didn't know they were this bad.
Now I know.
I'm I'm under no illusions anymore.
Uh I knew Democrats lean socialists, they used to hide it.
They're not even hiding it anymore.
And I think that Donald Trump, in many, many ways exposed the swamp, and that would, by the way, that would be establishment Republicans as well.
And how inefficient they are, how lazy they are, how corrupt that they are, and I think that he has rubbed everybody the wrong way, and except for the extra 11, 12 million people that went out to vote for him this election over the last election.
Um, I think people have gravitated because they like success.
They like somebody that shoots straight, they like somebody that's a disruptor and an iconoclast, and all of these institutions, powerful forces, media mob, democratic party, republican establishment, they just hate his guts because they've been exposed.
You know, look at how much one guy has accomplished in four years under the worst circumstances.
Uh how many in the media are ever going to admit that he's done anything good?
They will never do that.
And that then puts don't you but I'm sorry, Sean.
Don't you think it's past beyond that he's doing good and that you know they're exposed to their laziness and their corruption.
You don't think there's something else that they're covering up?
I'm talking about like Epstein flight lists and things like that.
Something so bad.
They can't let people find out about All I know is he makes them look bad.
All I know is is that the people love him and they can't they they also look down on you and me and us and we, the people.
You know, these these comments about the 15% as Biden said, or what we were a bunch of chumps, irredeemable deplorables, uh bitter Americans clinging to God guns, constitution and and religion.
Yeah, it's condescension.
You know, conservatism has always been looked down.
Look, if you go back to Reagan, far less combative than Donald Trump, but Reagan was hated by establishment Republicans also.
They hated his guts.
You know, the amiable dunts came from Republicans.
They didn't hook that in, if I recall correctly, that didn't come from Democrats.
And, you know, he might have massaged it and played the game a little more than Trump will.
Trump just has no tolerance for gameplay.
And maybe maybe to his own detriment at the end of the day.
Maybe that doesn't serve, maybe it didn't serve him well because he just, you know, he just he literally he drained the swamp and all the swamp creatures in that disgusting black tar mud, you know, started to get exposed, and it's really ugly.
And so the issue then of win at all costs, investigate nothing, just accept whatever and ignore uh American American citizens' affidavits.
That's just par for the course.
But that was par for the course with Russia, Russia, Russia.
That was par for the course with Impeach Impeach.
Um, you know, I see it more clearly.
I don't like what I see.
I'm actually a little nervous at what I see.
Um it's sad to me because it's gonna be an uphill battle, and the more the Democrats, more the media, the more they get away, the more empowered and emboldened they will be.
And and they will intimidate anybody that dares to get in their way to the best of their ability.
As we as we saw, you know, all these people get intimidated over Trump Russia and all the deep state get away with a lot of stuff.
Um, you know, I know some people are more optimistic than me.
Uh I'm not taking a pessimistic view.
I'm just trying to take a realistic view.
I'm trying to look at this, understand this, explain this to you, Eric, and explain it to other people, and talk about the dangers associated when you will take on spectacular hypocrisy institutionally.
Uh did that help at all?
It it did, it did.
I'm looking for more specifics.
You're right.
It wasn't exactly what I was looking for.
But if we if he didn't, I got confidence that he's gonna pull it out because he's a winner and a fighter, and if he doesn't, we're in big trouble, no fair elections ever again, and they're coming after all the voices like Sean Hannity and Rush Lambas.
So we gotta pray for this guy.
They've been after us for a long time.
And will they triple down?
Yeah, of course they will.
Uh been there, done that, understand it.
It's part of the part of the gig at this point.
Tim in California.
Tim, what's up?
How are you?
Mr. Hannity, it's uh quite uh an honor to talk to you.
Uh retired deputy sheriff, uh, Southern Cal for 31 years.
Um sitting here, this uh election was a sham, and I think that we need to have a national vote protocol.
I don't know how they would go about doing that.
But one of my concerns that I've been uh wanted to address today, and which gets your opinion on this is we don't live in a monarchy.
What is going on with Gavin with uh Gavin Newsom with uh Kate Brown at Oregon with with coma in New York?
Uh uh I think Kate Brown said that she has a new freeze order.
The last time I looked at the Fourth Amendment as a police officer, the very first thing that I learned in the Academy was that we can estates can add to the Constitution as far as the protections, like we can add in the state of California to the search and seizure clause, but we can never diminish from it.
So as a police officer, when these governors are calling for limited amount of people in their homes during the holidays, it's ridiculous.
It's a violation of our constitutional right.
Uh as a police officer, I cannot, because I see 25 people in your home, I can't go and and find you.
She was saying that she wants to uh enforce uh with uh fines and maybe jail time.
I'm thinking I have to have consent to get in your house, a search warrant, or have an emergency circumstance.
But none of this is is legal, and it's ridiculous that that we're even tolerating this.
Americans need to wake up to this, that these uh kings, they're not kings, they're not queens.
They are elected officials, and they're violating the uh constitution by these orders, these directives that they are uh uh putting out their edicts.
So I I just uh what I find amazing in all of this is number one, they they can't possibly mandate everything that they think they're gonna be able to mandate.
Amer people are gonna be people, human nature is human nature.
Uh and I kind of like the way Christy Gnome of South Dakota, the governor there had handled this, and there were a couple little hot spots here and there, and you know, at different times.
She never closed down her state.
It's a little different than say a metropolitan area like New York, heavy concentration of people, small geographic area, et cetera.
Um, but I think we don't give people enough credit.
I think most people know what social distancing means.
I think most people understand, you know, that probably wearing a mask helps.
I think it does.
I I and look, my thinking and rationale on this is very simple.
That I don't mind wearing a mask now that we got two vaccines, you know, just literally weeks away.
Um, and soon to be made available to everyone.
It's it's now hopefully coming to an end.
And with that said, you know, my advice to kids coming home from school that are gonna see grandma and grandpa, get a test if you can.
If you can't, you know, keep the distance, don't hug grandma, don't get in her face, keep you know your mask on to protect the people you love.
Um, if you can go outside if it's warm enough, fine.
But you there's way people understand it.
We've we absorbed it all.
We know the risks.
Everybody is smart enough and can make their own decisions.
That's gonna wrap things up for today.
Let not your heart be trouble.
Full coverage updates tonight.
Hannity, Fox News, Kaylee back and any, Ronna McDaniel, also Rhin's previous with new information on Wisconsin.
That's more than fascinating.
Uh Greg Jarrett, John Solomon, Cheryl Atkinson joins us, Elise Stefanik, uh Jason Chafitz, and much more.
Uh LJ on the road.
Don't want to miss that.
Nine Eastern Tonight, Satan D VR, Hannity Fox News.
You won't get our news from the mob.
Anyway, we'll see you tonight at nine back here tomorrow.
Thanks for being with us.
We'll be right back.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
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 Dow, verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
