All Episodes
Previous Next
March 24, 2022 - Sean Hannity Show
35:48
Senator Marsha Blackburn - March 24th, Hour 3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart Podcast.
Well, we're coming to your city Gonna play our guitars and sing you a country sound We'll all be in fire.
High than a jail I know.
And if you want a little bang in your yin yang, come along.
Now's a time when things are shifted.
We're gonna there's gonna be a new world order out there.
And we've got leaded.
Everything is Putin's price heights, inflation is Putin's fault.
People don't believe that either.
They know that we had inflation before this.
Tell you a secret.
Most people don't really know what capitalism is.
Most people don't even know what socialism is.
But most people are not capitalists.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
Yeah, we'll come in.
Go to play open toss and send you a concept.
Sean Henners.
More behind the scenes information on breaking news and more bold inspired solutions for America.
This is a special edition of the Sean Hannity Show.
America trapped behind enemy lines.
Day number two, twenty two.
Coming up next, our final news roundup and information overload hour.
All right, news roundup information overload hour, 800 941 Sean, our number, you want to be a part of the program.
We'll get to your calls at the bottom of uh this half hour.
Uh joining us now, though, is Senator Marsha Blackburn from the great state of Tennessee.
We have a lot to talk about.
Uh obviously, uh uh I know Senator, you you heard the president's remarks in Ukraine.
Um I'm reading all of these articles that seem Pollyanish to me.
And Russia's top defense officials not been seen for the last twelve days.
Okay, that that's anecdotal.
Or Russian special envoy resigns over Ukraine invasion reportedly flees the country.
Um Russian spokesperson admits uh Russia was surprised by the scale of Western sanctions.
Uh Russia's Ministry of Defense had missing the top Russian military leaders, you know, repeatedly declined calls from the U.S. prompting fears of uh they didn't know what happened, how many people got killed.
I'm reading this.
It seems Pollyannish to me.
And I'll tell you why, because as long as Western Europe keeps putting billions of dollars a day into the coffers into the pocket of Vladimir Putin, they are funding this war against Ukraine.
Unless they stop importing oil and gas from Russia, and I know they talked about it today, but by the time they accomplish it, uh whatever conflict is going on there will likely be over.
Um I don't see the urgency to get the weaponry that the Ukrainian people need now.
Um and that would include, I don't know why Joe Biden vetoed the MiGs.
I wanted to get your thoughts overall, the president, what's happening on the ground.
Uh, because what I see is that if we got the weapons to the Ukrainians, they they could win this thing.
I think you're exactly right, Sean.
If you give them what they need, they can win this war.
And last fall, when I wrote to White House, I said, now is the time for sanctions, for keeping the Nord Stream 2 sanctions, for military sales of lethal aid to Ukraine, and also for a meeting with NATO.
Get a good consolidated message that says, Russia, if you do this, we are going to take action.
And by the way, to make certain that you don't take action, we are going to do this, that, and the other right now.
And well, why would NATO be a partner?
Ukraine is not part of NATO.
And over the years leading up to Zelensky, I've been a loud voice of all the corruption in Ukraine.
We we have Joe Biden bragging about it on tape, leveraging a billion taxpayer dollars to demand the firing of a prosecutor investigating his zero experienced son being paid millions.
So there's been a lot of corruption in Ukraine.
I don't know how much Zelensky would be involved in it.
Uh I've not seen any evidence of it, but prior to Zelensky, there's a lot of cor corruption in Ukraine.
And you're right about that.
And that's why there should have been a coordinated message of what was going to happen if there was action that was taken by Russia.
And if I had been talking to Joe Biden, I would have said, look, this is your opportunity to show leadership.
And to say this is how we're going to stand against what you're doing in Ukraine.
And going after him for war crimes, cutting off the energy, just like you said, you are so spot on with that.
Because you cannot continue to do business with him.
And Sean, that means we need an operation warp speed for U.S. energy, returning us to be energy independent like we were under President Donald Trump.
Yeah.
Um you know, that's what we need to do.
And and Biden should have gone in there and said to NATO, look, this is what we're doing.
Join us in this.
Stop doing business with them.
We're restarting Keystone.
We're going to stop um flaring natural gas.
We're going to drill in and war.
Okay, all of these things, uh Senator, I agree completely.
And I'm echoing the same remarks you are.
The problem is this is that Joe Biden and and this climate alarmist religious cult known as the New Green Deal Democratic Socialist Party, there's no way uh they that Joe is ever going to go against them.
And if it means doing a deal with the mullahs of Iran, as we've been discussing, or that thug dictator murderer in Venezuela, or begging OPEC, he chooses that path over our own natural resources of which we have an abundance.
So nothing is going to happen, I would argue, even if we win the House and Senate back in November, uh until we have the House, Senate, and the White House.
I don't I don't see any way that he ever changes his mind on this.
It would be very difficult for him to change his mind, but every day that the American people go to the pump and fill up and they're paying five dollars a gallon for gas, which by the way, all of the climate religious climate is my god fanatics, they've long wanted five dollar a gallon gas.
That's been a goal of theirs.
So they're happy.
Oh, they got it.
By the way, the average in in Southern California now is over six dollars a gallon.
Um let me now transition.
I I I think we are on the same page as it relates to Ukraine.
I'm uh I support the Reagan doctrine, and that is no boots on the ground.
Uh like he supported the Mujahideen in Afghanistan when the former Soviet Union invaded.
Uh the the the Mujadin won that war.
That by the way, they weren't perfect people either, um, or helping the Nicaraguan freedom fighters uh battle against the Contra Rebels battle against the Sandinistas and Daniel Ortega, not an American boot on the ground.
So uh I don't want to see that because I don't think this uh I don't think Democrats are or frankly politicians in general know how to fight wars to win them.
Donald Trump did, but these you know, but they get gung-ho and then they politicize it.
Let me play you asking Patanji Brown Jackson as you're a part of the Senate Judiciary Committee, uh about the definition of the word woman.
Let me play this exchange.
Uh, can you provide a definition for the word woman?
Can I provide a definition?
No.
Yeah.
I can't.
You can't?
Not in this context.
I'm not a biologist.
The meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can't give me...
A definition.
Senator, in my work as a judge, what I do is I address disputes.
If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments and I look at the law and I decide.
Now the reason uh I assume you asked this question is we've been watching, for example, Leah Thomas and biologically born a man and is transgender and just you know, beating everybody, you know, because uh and I and I had a great discussion on TV with with Caitlin Jenner about this.
Uh literally said I would not play in an LPGA tournament because I'm I'm stronger than most women because I was born biologically a man.
Yes, you're right about that.
And as I talked to Judge Jackson, we were talking about I had questioned her on CRT in the school.
Children as young as five choosing gender in a curriculum for a school board that she sits on.
I asked her, and I couldn't get a straight answer on that.
I asked her about the uh VMI decision, which is a landmark case in uh gender.
And she and Justice Ginsburg wrote the opinion there.
She wouldn't give me a straight answer as to whether or not she agreed with Justice Ginsburg that male and female differences are enduring.
So then I just asked her, I said, Well, can you give me the definition of the word woman?
And she refused.
And Sean, this shows you just how far the left is pushing this progressive ideology and how they're trying to change the makeup of the federal court, how they're trying to pack it, whether it's our federal district, appellate, or nail.
She wouldn't answer that question either, but she uh that's a legislative issue was her answer.
Uh she feels like everything was a policy matter, but then when you look at her sentencing practices, if she disagreed with the policy, she took the activist route.
She adjusted what the sentencing should be.
And we went after her on the child porn issue, which in our committee work with some of the cases that we had discovered, she would be below the minimum recommended sentence.
Not the maximum, but we'd be about five years below the recommended minimum minimum.
And going back to the time she was in college in law school, she felt like the courts were coercive and sentencing was too harsh.
And that is why she has gone light on hardened criminals and why during COVID nineteen she thought that all 1,561 federal criminals in the DC Department of Correction should be released and lamented that as a judge she could release some of them on compassionate release, but not all of them.
But she did release a murderer of a U.S. marshal, a bank robber addicted to heroin, a fentanyl drug dealer.
Put them back out on the streets on the You can't even make this up.
You just can't make this up.
I mean, it it's beyond shocking.
Quick break right back more with Marsha Blackburn uh on the other side.
Then your calls 800-941 Sean, our number if you want to be a part of the program.
Look, inflation, 40-year high, a massive problem in this country.
I mean, we haven't seen this in in decades.
This is bad.
And the cost of everything is going up.
So you've got to be pragmatic, smart, protective, and prepared.
Now, the biggest investment for most people is their home.
Now, many millions of Americans have not taken advantage of these historically low interest rates.
We had one rate increase last week.
We're expecting six more this year, according to Goldman Sachs.
So if you haven't refinanced, please contact our friends at American Financing.
You'll learn about custom loans that fit your life.
Maybe you save hundreds of dollars, maybe thousands of dollars every month.
Maybe you save 10,000 or tens of thousands of dollars or hundred thousand of dollars over the course of your loan.
You won't know unless you get your free no obligation mortgage review.
Now their mortgage experts are standing by right now.
Give them a call.
It's 866-615-9200.
They'll tell you exactly how much you can save.
866-615-9200.
They're on the web, AmericanFinancing.net.
American Financing NMLS 18234 NMLS Consumer Access dot org.
Are you ready to get out of the media spin room?
Well, you've come to the right place.
This is the Sean Hannity Show.
All right, we continue with Senator Marsha Blackburn, great state of Tennessee, and of course these uh Supreme Court nominee hearings uh for Judge Jackson that continue.
You know, at one point you s you you talked to her about her college thesis, uh, arguing that every judge has judge has a personal hidden agenda, and then you asked her a series of questions.
What's your agenda?
Do you have you gotten an answer?
No, we have not.
And of course, on that she punted, saying, Well, that was an observation that she had made, and she had written in this thesis that uh every judge or court officer has a personal hidden agenda.
And all of this was part of her assumption that the courts were coercive and they moved forward with penalties and sentencing in a c coercive manner.
And Sean, that is just not true.
And she could not give us her judicial philosophy.
She would not, she talked about her methodology.
And even yesterday, as I wrapped up the questioning for the Republican side, I went back to her opening statement, and I said, you know, you walked through your opening statement and said, when you are going through looking at how to rule on a case, you look at you start from a neutral position, you look at the facts of the case, you look at the law, and then you do your best under the oath you've taken.
I said, but the problem with that is you never mention the Constitution.
And people want to have constitutionalist judges on the bench.
She left out the most important thing.
She takes an oath to uphold the Constitution.
But when you ask her about her philosophy or even her methodology, she does not mention the Constitution as the place to start, which should be step number one.
You know, a lot of questions were raised about CRT and the 1619 project, and then that was related to a speech that she gave at the University of Michigan Law School.
Uh, and she seemed to renounce her own words in that speech, which I found pretty spectacular.
Um it's like she's debating herself.
Uh uh in in that sense, uh do you believe what you believe then, or do you believe what you're saying now?
My my gut tells me she still believes what she said in that speech.
Well, of course she does.
And in that speech, what she said is that she tries to convince her students, convince them, not have a point of discussion.
I try to convince my students that sentencing is just plain interesting on an intellectual level.
In part, and I'm reading her statement, because it mails together myriad types of law.
Criminal law, of course, but also administrative law, constitutional law, critical race theory.
And think about that.
Critical race theory is not a form of law.
Critical race theory is a way of thinking in a progressive Marxist area.
But Sean, the danger here is that she equates the the different metrics that she is going to use to evaluate a case and reach a decision.
Well, it's it seems like I don't think it's the right analogy, but uh she has different sentencing guidelines uh and fac things that you would factor in that relate to identity politics.
Let me ask you a last question.
I only have like twenty seconds.
Um Mitt Romney seems favorable to vote for her.
Do you see any other Republican leaning that way?
Uh or do you see any Democrats leaning against her?
One of the things we know is the more people know about her, the less inclined they are to vote for her.
She is personable, She is well educated, but on the issues she is wrong.
She is an ideologue.
She uh clearly would be a judicial activist.
That I can say with certainty.
Senator Marcia Blackburn, thank you.
Always love having you on the program.
Our best to all our friends in Tennessee.
I have more friends moving to Tennessee lately.
It's unreal.
Thank you for being with us.
800-941-SHAWN if you want to be a part of the program.
We'll get to your calls coming up right after the bottom of the hour.
Music Holding them accountable.
Sean gets the answers no one else does.
America deserves to know the truth about Congress.
All right, 25 to the top of the hour.
I thought Marcia Blackburn, didn't you think so, Linda answered every question?
Very reasonable.
Um if you have been watching the hearings in in any way, uh, you have uh Judge Katanji Brown Jackson uh not answering questions, but it's a very revealing judicial philosophy she has.
And there is an agenda here, and all the money and all the left-wing groups are have gotten behind her, and there's a reason for it, is that they fully anticipate she will be a hardcore leftist judicial activist on the bench, and it's a lifetime appointment.
And and Republicans are trying.
Um I'm I could see 49 Republicans now voting against her after these hearings, based on her horrific answers in terms of judicial philosophy.
But um anyway, let me play some of the highlights of of all of this uh because I know a lot of you have been busy working and paying your bills, some of the highlights or lowlights, if you will, from the hearings.
Can you provide a definition for the word woman?
Can I provide a definition?
No.
Yeah.
I can't.
You can't?
Not in this context.
I'm not a biology of under the modern leftist sensibilities.
If if I decide right now that that I'm a woman, um, then apparently I'm a woman.
Does that mean that I would have Article III standing to challenge a gender-based restriction?
Senator, to the extent that you are asking me about um who has the ability to bring lawsuits based on gender, those kinds of issues are working their way through the courts, and I'm not able to comment on them.
You're telling me you don't have an opinion about back in the United States Supreme Court.
Senator, I have opinions about a lot of things.
Um I don't have an opinion that I think it appropriate to share.
I mean, it just is this is a lifetime appointment.
You know, being a judge is a simple thing.
It's predicated on a foundation.
Foundations are constitution.
Constitution allows for co-equal branches of government.
We have three branches of government the executive branch, legislative branch, and the judicial branch.
And it is not the role of a judge to legislate from the bench or to bring a particular agenda, or is or as Judge Jackson had said previously.
Well, every every judge has a hidden agenda.
What's your hidden agenda?
If every judge has one, that means you have one.
What is it?
And to totally completely distance herself as she has in these hearings from her own words, her own writings, her own speeches.
It's it's it it you'd have to, as I said to my kids, when they're not telling me the truth, I say, stop.
You're not good at it.
This is a prepared planned answer for every question, and I do not believe this is her how she will act on the Supreme Court.
And I also think to your point, one of the most important things that we need to address is this is a person, she's she's not hiding what she thinks.
She has never hidden what she thinks.
Um, and you know, she's makes us grandiose.
She sounds a lot different during these hearings than she does in her rulings and writings.
Well, this is my point though.
She's not hiding it.
She's putting it out there.
But she knows that the majority not only that, but the majority of people are too lazy.
They're not going to go back and do the reading.
This takes me right back to when Barack Obama ran for office and we talked about dreams of my father and Audacity of Hope.
And we read both books.
We transcribed the audio tapes, which actually didn't match the book.
But I'm just saying, like nobody read it.
So when we quoted it, people would say that's not true.
He didn't say that.
Oh, that's racist.
Exactly.
So the problem now we're at is instead of basing anybody's qualifications on merit, we base them on race and gender.
I don't ever want to be hired because of my race or my gender, and I don't ever want to be not considered because of my race or my gender.
And I think that's the place where we want to be.
And if we hire the most qualified person and Joe Biden said was that he would absolutely pick a minority woman to the Supreme Court, an African-American woman to the Supreme Court.
I think the criteria should be the most qualified person, whoever that happens to be.
Doesn't mean that there aren't qualified African American women.
I mean, her credentials are impeccable.
Her personality is not a good thing.
But the whole point is if she's qualified and she's the best person, she would win out of any pool of candidates.
So what we're saying is we see identity politics injected into the process.
And it's very, very upsetting.
And I think it's really upsetting for you know our future generations who are watching the process.
That asking a question of someone, why did you rule this?
I guarantee you.
And we asked people how many Supreme Court justices are there.
Most people don't know.
Oh, they won't.
If you ask them to name them, it won't happen.
Uh let's check in with Scott.
He's in Marsha Blackburn State of Tennessee.
Scott, how are you?
Glad you called.
Thanks for being with us.
Thank you, sir.
It's a pleasure speaking with you.
Long time listener.
What's going on?
Thank you.
Could you please explain where's our representation from our congressmen, senators, and some of the governors that's allowing President Biden to make these deals, executive orders, mandates.
Where's the balance in checks, our forefathers thought and died for and gave us the constitution, Bill of Rights.
That we're just throwing out the window, and I just remember elections matter.
And right now the government is run by one party, the Democratic Party, the House, the Senate, the White House.
Uh that party is run by climate alarmist religious cult members, the new Green Deal socialists that run the Democratic Party.
And if you're asking uh if for example, what's more important, quote, climate issues or lowering the price for the average American uh now that we have record uh gas prices, they're gonna p pick climate.
And you say, Hannity, you're making that up.
Jennifer Granholm said it.
Uh others have said it.
Joe Biden promised it before he ran for office.
This is what he ran on.
I'll I'm gonna eliminate, I'm gonna end it.
That's a I've played that montage many times.
And so this is who they are.
You know, the the fact that we have more natural resources available to us that would would easily supply our country and other countries, allied countries for for example, a natural gas, 200 plus years, over a hundred plus years with oil.
You know, that gives us plenty of time to come up with new sources of clean energy and new technologies, but they don't exist right now.
So they're not living in the real world, so they'd rather you pay more for gas, and they're saying it.
And they choose a 40-year inflation high, they choose to compromise national security.
Remember, if you're if we're energy independent, we don't have to worry about Iran, the streets of Hormuz, we don't have to do a deal with Iran, we don't have to suck up to the murdering thug dictator in in Venezuela.
Well, you we don't need to beg OPEC.
And we also could supply our Western European and NATO allies their energy needs, considering it's the lifeblood of the world's economy.
It's simple math.
So the answer to your question, Scott, Is unfortunately Republicans don't have enough of them in Congress in the Senate to have any dramatic impact.
Now, with that said, you're right.
Joe will use executive orders, and there are you know plenty of groups, landmark legal, uh, Mark Meadows and Steve Miller have put together a really good group, uh, Jay Seculose's group, the American Center for Law and Justice.
They're out there, they're filing the lawsuits, but that usually takes years.
Tom Fitton over at uh what's it called?
Um Judicial Watch, he's done a great job on many things.
Um, but it takes years.
Even even to get a simple foyer request, freedom of information arc request.
Um I wish I had better news for you.
The only good news I have is we start the process in November, and hopefully the American people have suffered enough and have experienced enough pain to realize that this this has to end.
Um anyway, Barbara's in Maryland.
Barbara, how are you?
Thank you for calling.
I'm doing really good, Sean.
Thank you.
Thanks for taking my call.
Um I just wanted to comment.
First of all, I'd like to thank you for being the tip of the spear about Ukraine and also keeping us reminded of the people left in Afghanistan.
You're the only one that's doing it, and I'm so grateful to you for doing that.
Well, you know what?
I wish I didn't have to, but this is this is the world with a weak, frail cognitive mess as a president.
You're not kidding.
It's really something that you and Linda would start to that you were talking uh about Obama, because that's when I first uh around when I discovered you in two thousand and seven, and you did uh, you know, went through his ideology in the book, and that is exactly what we're looking at right now with um this hearing.
I've been fascinated uh to watch it, and what what's fascinating about it to me is that you can see it.
I'm looking at this woman, and being a black woman myself, I know uh I mean she's she's racist in my opinion.
She her her opinions and the things she's not just using the Constitution.
And uh I can understand having some compassion for um some criminals.
So you know, but I I don't understand her her reasoning, uh, especially regarding the pedophiles and and and uh giving these people light sentences uh when they really shouldn't.
And she's referring to children as being the peers, eight and nine-year-olds that are in the in the in the porn that they're the peers of the eighteen or nineteen year olds who have them.
That they're not peers.
Uh, I mean, that's a grown man uh with little children's pictures, and that's just not a lot of people.
Let me tell you something.
Uh though I I don't have the ability to use the adjectives that I would like to use to describe any person that ever harms a child or would even participate in in looking at at such repulsive evil.
This is this that is evil.
It's sort of like I I know a lot of people, some have disagreed with me, you know, with the Reagan doctrine and the Trump doctrine.
I don't know why, because it's as conservative as as anything I ever say.
And uh the idea when I see dead children in the street, dead women in the street, when I see si cities like Merriot Polk just the whole city's wiped out.
They wiped out a city indiscriminately bombing everything and anything.
And I see human evil in our time, and and people complain that I'm I'm suggesting that we arm the Ukrainians who have shown incredible strength, valor, courage on the battlefield, and have been effective as hell, and we're not doing enough fast enough.
And if we don't move armed to the T Shaw, and I agree with you on that.
They should have been armed to the T. All of those, all of those things that were left on the ground in Afghanistan have been sent or flown into the helicopters, the planes, all of those could have been in Ukraine, and they could have been in Ukraine months and months ago, long before this happened.
Well, as the build-up started, NATO should have gotten together and said we better get ready.
And by the way, there's now a build-up of troops on the border of Ukraine and Belarus.
And if we don't take that seriously, that's going to be another error.
To be honest, I am beyond impressed at how the Ukrainians have been able to, with an insurgency strategy, battle Russia as effectively as they have.
I'm I'll be honest.
I'm surprised.
But they had a lot of heart.
And that's their country.
It's their country.
And it's the same thing that we would do if we're armed.
And that's one of the reasons why in this country, we're not going to be taken lightly.
So we, you know, being armed and able to protect yourself, but also loving your country and loving freedom.
They are freedom loving people.
And I I applaud them.
I'd just like to say one last thing, if I could, about um this uh Judge Jackson.
I can't keep getting her name.
I just feel like I have to say sorry, Miss Jackson, but you're just not for real.
I um I think the the Marxists have endangered our country.
Um they have been doing this for the last 20 years or more.
Uh the ideology that's in the classrooms now.
We need to get our children out of public schools.
Every candidate that's running in the Republican Party should have school choice at the top of their list.
School choice, school vouchers, and save our children.
Women are going to be destroyed by this uh mess that's going on.
Women's sports is going to be no more.
We're not going to have women's sports if we don't put a stop to this.
Listen, this is personal for me because you know, I have members of my family that are high-level athletes.
And and Title Nine has been very effective in creating an equal playing field for women in large part because there's no women on large football teams or basketball teams.
And so it has created opportunities for young women to get into colleges and compete in the sports that they dedicate, you know, decades of the decade of their life at least, uh, training for.
Uh, but anyway, I Barbara, I could talk to you all day.
Great call.
Thank you for being with us.
800-941 Shauna's on number.
You want to be a part of the program.
We have an awesome Hannity tonight at nine.
I'll tell you about that in a minute.
All of us every day are putting our personal information at risk on the internet.
Now these cyber attacks are evolving.
They're getting more sophisticated, you're getting more elaborate.
Help yourself.
Always use two-factor authentication, create unique passwords for every account.
LifeLock.com sees all of the threats we ourselves will miss.
They'll scour the dark web to see if any of your personal information is already compromised.
If it is, you get an alert.
If your identity is stolen, you will have access to a dedicated restoration specialist that will help you.
But by the way, they have a low annual rate, life lock by Norton.
And if you go there today, call 1-800 Lifelock or go to lifelog.com.
You can save an additional 25% off there already low price off your first year by using the promo code Hannity.
1-800 Lifelock, Lifelock.com, promo code Hannity, protect your good name and reputation and your finances and your credit score.
lifelock.com Hi!
America's top defender of freedom, liberty, and American values.
This is the Hannity Show.
All right, that's going to wrap things up for us today.
Full coverage of Ukraine and obviously Joe and weak NATO leaders, and they don't quite get it.
Anyway, we'll talk to General Jack Keene, Tulsi Gabbard, Senator Tom Cotton, I mean, is really nailed it in these confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court.
We'll get to him.
Greg Palcott, he is in Ukraine.
Greg Jarrett will join us.
Dr. Oz, Sarah Palin, and much more.
Nine Eastern Hannity, Fox News.
We'll see you tonight back here tomorrow.
Thank you for making this show possible.
▲
Export Selection