All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 7, 2022 - Sean Hannity Show
33:14
Eric Schmitt - December 6th, Hour 3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday.
Normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen.
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
All right, news roundup, information overload hour, 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Now, I'm going to play here for a second some of Elon Musk and his, he basically did a two-hour show on Twitter this weekend and on this big reveal of his, and that is how the media mob, how big tech has been influencing our elections or being involved, in his words, election interference by shutting down dissenting voices.
Now, there's this other layer that we are getting into.
Most people don't seem to understand it all quite yet, but it's really, really simple.
And that is that we know that the FBI was warning not only Twitter, but every other big tech company with weekly meetings about a potential hack and leak operation.
And they specifically mentioned that it might involve Hunter Biden.
Now, why would that be important?
Why would the FBI be doing this?
Well, they had the Hunter Biden laptop since December of 2019.
By that time, they easily could have authenticated it and they could have investigated the crimes, the low-hanging fruit, you know, from the drug use and women of the night, et cetera, et cetera.
But more importantly, the implication of Hunter of his own father.
You know, Joe Biden lied to this country when he said that he never once spoke to Hunter or any family member about their foreign business dealings.
We have photographic evidence, photograph after photograph after photograph of Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and Hunter's foreign business associates.
We've identified at least 14 meetings that Joe was a part of involving Hunter and his foreign business partners.
Anyway, as it relates to Twitter, we have Twitter's former head of site Integrity.
He pointed out that the FBI was having weekly meetings in the lead up to the election in 2020.
Now, this is a big story.
It finally broke, and everybody worked together.
They were being instructed by the FBI about a possible hack and leak operation.
So to be on the lookout, especially if that has to do with Hunter, and why was the FBI involved in all of this?
You know, the FBI also warned Facebook to be on high alert for a dump of Russian propaganda before the 2020 elections.
All of these different sites, they all squelched.
They all buried the Hunter Biden story, which turned out to be true.
That laptop turned out to be real.
Now, in one particular case, the FBI agent that organized these weekly meetings, big tech was supervisory special agent, a guy by the name of Elvis Khan.
And by the way, as a side note, his postgraduate thesis claimed that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help former President Trump, which is an outright lie.
And his thesis is dead wrong.
The only Russian disinformation in 2016 was Hillary Clinton's bought and paid for Russian disinformation dossier.
But anyway, he testified in a lawsuit against the Biden administration that he had organized these meetings for as many as seven D.C.-based agents, FBI agents, in the run-up to the 2020 election.
And the lawsuit was brought by the Republican Attorneys General of Missouri and Louisiana, alleging the White House officials and federal agencies acted with big tech to censor disfavored speakers' viewpoints and content on social media platforms.
Because had this story gone viral, it would have very likely had a huge impact on the 2020 election results.
Anyway, under questioning from the Missouri Solicitor General, this guy, Khan, said that the FBI warned Twitter to be on guard for hack and leak operations.
He says he couldn't recall whether Hunter Biden was mentioned.
But in previous testimony, which I think is pretty interesting, we know that the guy that I mentioned earlier, this guy that is the site integrity head of Twitter, Yoel Roth, under oath, he swore a declaration saying the FBI specifically mentioned Hunter.
What did that mean?
They knew that they had Hunter's laptop.
They knew it was real.
They knew Rudy Giuliani had it.
They knew it was likely to come out.
So they were working big tech as a means of preventing this information from becoming public before an election, putting their thumbs on the scale of an election.
Here's what Elon Musk said in these calls.
He was taking calls for two hours over the weekend.
Here's some of what he said.
He was just curious if you've faced any pressure so far since releasing the Twitter files.
I mean, I face pressure all the time.
So it's kind of, it would say like, what's the differential in pressure before and after?
But I'm not, I haven't seen it yet.
I don't know.
Maybe there's pressure, but I might not be feeling it because every day is a high-pressure situation.
The media, you know, especially the media that downplayed and censored the whole Hunter Biden story is now trying to downplay your release.
Obviously, because they are under fire as well, right?
Because they have been exposed by this release.
What do you want to say to them?
What do you want to say to the media that is trying to turn this into a nothing burger?
Well, they're trying to turn it into a nothing burger because they were complicit in deceiving the American public.
And so rather than admit that they lied to the public, they're trying to pretend that this is a nothing burger, obviously.
To anyone looking at it, that's clearly what happened.
So, yeah, I mean, Chairman, you are basically exposing collusion between a political party and in one file that was released.
It was even called the Biden team contacting Twitter.
I mean, that is election interference, isn't it?
Yeah, I mean, clearly, if Twitter is doing one team's bidding before an election, shutting down dissenting voices on a pivotal election, that is the very definition of election interference.
And what the hell else we're doing?
Of course.
Like, yes.
You know, frankly, Twitter was acting like an arm of the Democratic National Committee.
It was absurd.
Acting like an arm of the Democratic National Committee.
If you're shutting down dissenting voices, that is by its very definition election interference.
And why would the media want to ignore it?
Because they were complicit in lying to the American public.
Anyway, Attorney General and Senator-elect for Missouri Eric Schmidt is with us.
He knows all of the details of this.
I'm trying to give a summary.
It gets a little complicated, but once you understand it, you can see what happened here.
Yeah, and all the, yeah, the pieces are starting to come together.
And I would actually, you know, amplify what Musk's just said, that beyond just the Democrat Party, the issue here in the crux of our lawsuit is there's a state actor involved.
The government is involved, which is what you need to have, obviously, for true censorship, right?
And government can't outsource illegal censorship to its big tech partners, which is exactly what they were doing.
And they were doing it on a number of fronts.
I mean, we talked last time, I was on your show, Sean, about Anthony Fauci and what they were trying to do to essentially censor people who disagreed with Lord Fauci and any of his views.
But in this particular instance, I think it's important to note you ran through it.
In 2019, the FBI had the laptop.
They had Hunter Biden's laptop.
They had it.
They knew it wasn't a hack.
They knew it was real.
And according to Miranda Devine of the New York Post, they had access to her emails.
So they knew exactly when this story was going to run about the laptop and when it would be published.
Prior to that, in the deposition we had of Elvis Chan, the FBI agent last week, he admitted and talked about how they had monthly and then weekly meetings with the social media companies, all the big ones, in which Chan said there might be Russian hack and leak operations leading up to the election, right?
So they set the stage for what could come up.
This is the government now telling the social media platforms they set the stage.
You mentioned Yoel Roth, the integrity guy from Twitter.
He said in his sworn affidavit with the FEC that the Hunter Biden situation is specifically mentioned in those stories.
So then guess what happened?
The story runs, Miranda Devine, and they immediately go into this mode of shutting it down.
The other interesting fact here is Jim Baker, who was the general counsel for the FBI in 2016, we know what happened in 2016, is then the general counsel for Twitter in fall of 2020 and is a central player in these emails that are released by Musk last Friday in making sure this story never saw the light of day.
So this kind of incestuous relationship is revealed now with two things that are going on.
Musk revealing it in our lawsuit, which we filed in May, and we're actually getting the documents and the deposition to prove all of this.
All right, quick break more with the Attorney General and Senator-elect from the great state of Missouri.
Eric Schmidt is with us.
We continue with Attorney General and Senator-elect from the great state of Missouri, Eric Schmidt, who's stayed with us.
Basically, we have in 2016, and you tell me if I'm wrong here, that Hillary Clinton, I mean, we hear a lot about top-secret classified information.
Well, James Comey identified a ton of top-secret classified information on Hillary Clinton's servers.
It was not legally allowed to be there.
We know that she also deleted 33,000 emails.
We never got to see what were on those emails.
She used BleachBit.
Nobody had ever heard of Bleach Bit before.
And then, of course, destroying hammers with devices and removing SIM cards.
I think a strong case for obstruction could be made, especially when you compare this to the Mar-a-Lago raid.
But she also bought the dirty dossier.
And the dirty dossier, even Bruce Orr, warned in August of 2016, it's political in nature.
It's not been verified.
The FBI in early October 2016, they sent agents over to meet with Christopher Steele, offered him a million-dollar bounty if he could corroborate any of the dossier being true.
He could not.
He never got his million dollars.
But at the end of October, they used that dossier that was not verified.
And they signed, James Comey signed his name to this, that it was verified as the basis for the PISA application, and none of the information was true.
And they did it four separate times.
And so that was 2016, the FBI putting their thumbs on the scales of an election.
Now we have the FBI pressuring big tech not to report a story that turned out to be true.
You can't make this up in a spy novel.
Oh, it's scary stuff, Sean.
And I think if you put it even in a broader context, if you kind of remember after 2016 when President Trump won the election, the left kind of vowed that they were never going to let that happen again, right?
That Republicans and Donald Trump kind of had free reign to tell it like it is and to kind of push back against the operating narrative of the corporate media.
They vowed it was never going to happen again.
And I think if you put that in context of what happened with social media in the run-up to 2020 and what has happened since, principally with the COVID-19 and anybody who questioned mass mandates or vaccine mandates were deplatformed, they ran this very much sort of like a Soviet style.
We're not going to let dissenting views see the light of day.
And in the United States of America, that ought to scare everybody.
It ought to scare the bejesus out of everybody that you have the government.
And Jen Saki, by the way, is up at the podium.
We're taking her deposition later in December.
She's up at the podium saying we are flagging things for Facebook.
We've already revealed through our discovery that there was a special portal for the government to directly communicate with social media platforms to take things down.
We have text messages to the Surgeon General of the United States from a high-ranking Facebook official saying, hey, take this down.
We took it down.
What else can we do?
I mean, they're working hand in glove to censor speech, dissenting views of Americans.
They're not supposed to be able to do that.
What are the consequences, though?
I mean, if the FBI has become a political arm, if you will, of an extension of the Democratic Party, and they themselves, by doing this, aren't they involved in election interference?
Well, I mean, we've got to get all the facts out here, Sean.
I mean, we are a few days past this Elvis Chan bombshell and Elon Mask, Elon Musk unmasking a lot of this stuff.
But people certainly need to be held accountable.
I think one of the big benefits, and obviously I'm going to be in the Senate in a few weeks here, they'll have the majority of the House.
And those oversight hearings are going to be very, very important because there's a lot more to unpeel here.
There's a lot more to unpack because we're just at the tip of the iceberg.
I mean, who else was a part of this?
Who else knew about it?
I mean, I think that we've got to run down this thing.
And also, the left, by the way, Sean, is trying to dismiss this as, you know, inappropriate photos of Hunter Biden.
Those exist.
But the contents, the substance of this, which is always what is the big guy's role in all this, is absolutely relevant.
Is the president compromised?
That is the main.
And we already know he lied when he denied ever having a single conversation with his son or any other family member about these foreign business dealings.
And we have all the evidence to the contrary now.
And we're talking about millions and millions and millions of dollars, tens of millions in the case of the deal with China, $1.5 billion deal with the Bank of China 10 days after Hunter flew with his dad on Air Force 2 and met with the leaders in China.
Yeah, and think about this.
I'm just going to throw a few facts out there, right?
When Fauci speaks, social media censors, Fauci was covering up, this became very clear, covering up for his role in funding gain of function research at the Wuhan Lab.
So the origins of COVID, you've got the government silencing dissent, the effectiveness of mass, right?
And the five-year-olds haven't aware of this, the government playing a role in censoring that speech.
The government essentially sending Dr. Lang to China and then raving about these lockdowns.
Anything that you said about that was censored.
The FBI playing a role in planting the seeds, essentially for the censorship of a huge story that most certainly would have affected, I mean, who knows to what degree, right?
But the American people deserve to hear that story about the Hunter Biden laptop serving.
And these things, I mean, put in their context are huge stories.
You're covering it.
So other people are covering it, but you don't hear a word out of sort of the mainstream media about this because it threatens their narrative and they know that they're complicit.
We're going to hold you over a few more minutes, if you don't mind.
Attorney General, Senator-elect from Missouri, Eric Schmidt, is with us.
800-941 Sean, our number if you want to be a part of the program.
We will get to some of your calls in the next half hour.
25 to the top of the hour, 800-941, Sean, our number.
You want to be a part of the program?
We continue.
He's been gracious to stay with us.
The Attorney General and Senator-elect from the great state of Missouri, Eric Schmidt, is with us.
We're discussing all of this information from Twitter, but more importantly, the government, your government's involvement with weekly meetings in the lead up to the 2020 election with big tech companies, warning them of potential hack and leak operations from foreign operatives.
And Hunter and Biden might be the target of all of this when, in fact, they had Hunter Biden's laptop since December of 2019.
Am I getting this about right?
And what is the proper protocol for people that involve themselves in elections this way?
Oh, I mean, you've got it right.
I mean, I'm sitting here listening to it on the phone because I've been talking about it.
It's unbelievable to actually hear it, right?
It's unbelievable to hear all this.
And so I think another thing that's worth mentioning, Sean, you can do this a little bit easier in the radio show than on TV because you have a little bit more time.
But I think another interesting tidbit from this deposition, I mean, this is a far-reaching sort of scandal.
Elvis Chan, in his deposition, he testified that he believed that pressure from Congress also, so you've got congressional leaders now part of this, made social media companies adopt stricter content modulation policies.
I mean, staffers from that committee, from the House Select, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the counterpart of the Senate traveled to Silicon Valley.
And it's his belief, because he was meeting with them weekly, that they were altering their policies from the pressure of, again, elected officials.
Did he mention specific names?
No, he just said the staffers and those committees in particular, right?
I mean, this was his testimony, which will get out there just like we released the deposition of Anthony Fauci yesterday in full.
I mean, we're going to provide a lot of transparency here that people haven't been able to look under the hood before.
So, again, the Democrats in Congress and their staffers, they wanted to affect outcomes.
They wanted to affect content they did not like.
And once again, this is part of our legal case here, which is having state actors involved, right, that affect censorship.
Because, you know, you can complain, and I certainly do about social media companies altering content themselves, and that brings up the Section 230 issue.
But when the government's directly involved, like the FBI or Anthony Fauci's office or a select committee like this, that's a different animal.
And that's one of the things we're trying to tackle that's come to light in these depositions as well.
We've discussed Section 230 in the past.
It shields these big tech companies from liability issues when people post things that is not afforded media companies.
For example, my radio company or the Fox News channel where I do my television show.
Correct.
Because you're considered a publisher, right?
When a typical media company is a publisher, they have some responsibility.
In 1996, when they drafted this law, they viewed these online platforms as exactly that, a platform for speech, right?
So since they were simply hosting it and not publishing anything responsibly like a typical news organization might, they were immune from legal action that a publisher typically can be subject to.
And so that's been the topic of debate.
Should they be part of it?
I think if they're in the spirit of the law, if people are allowed to express their opinions freely like Elon Musk is doing now, that's a different animal than saying, we're not going to allow a certain kind of speech to be viewed here because we don't agree with it or we want to editorialize or want to constrict the content.
So that's the Section 230 debate.
But why this lawsuit's so unique, Sean, is a lot of people have sued social media companies over this in the past.
It ends up in the Northern District of California, never to be seen again.
We filed this against the government, the Biden administration.
And that is, again, a very different thing now because we're alleged and now proved, proved that the government is specifically directing these social media companies to do something or take something down or deplatform something.
And that violates the First Amendment.
What happens in a case like this?
And I'm asking you to use your legal mind as Attorney General of Missouri and soon to be senator in Washington.
By the way, I think all this work that you've done as Attorney General will be extremely helpful and very powerful for Republicans as they begin their investigations.
And I hope you spend a lot of time with James Comer and Jim Jordan because I think you know as much about this as anybody I've ever spoken to.
But what should the consequences be if you have social media companies, but not necessarily the companies, but they're kind of taking orders from government officials and being at least to be charitable.
They're being manipulated.
To be more accurate, I think they would be all complicit together because they have a shared worldview and then preventing the public from seeing content that is so relevant that it would impact a presidential election.
Yeah, I think that, yeah, no, I think there's three kind of results here.
The first is the kind of letting people see this, right?
It's the discovery phase.
It's the investigation.
It's getting this stuff out there and sort of open sourcing this so people can finally form their own opinions and understand what has been going on.
I remember when we filed this lawsuit in May, you know, it was panned by the so-called experts as just sort of a publicity-seeking lawsuit.
Not true.
And it's been proven, in fact, that these things that people thought were happening are actually happening and at the highest levels of government.
This is a vast censorship enterprise, no doubt.
And we've never seen anything like it.
So that's the first sort of value brought here.
The second is injunctive relief to make it stop, to make sure this doesn't ever happen again, to have reporting requirements.
You may remember, Sean, it was Missouri.
It was my office that filed the Remain in Mexico lawsuit, and we won on Title 42.
But one of the results of those lawsuits was that the government had to report finally how many people were illegally crossing every month, right?
So there was some accountability built in to the win in court.
That's a second very important piece here.
And then the third is, we'll see where these go.
I mean, we don't know how high up the food chain this goes yet.
We're going to keep fighting.
And like I said, my time as AG will be over on January 3rd, but I'm going to continue that fight.
Let me ask the next obvious question.
You want to know how high it goes.
How is it possible we're three years removed from the FBI obtaining Hunter Biden's laptop?
We know that there is evidence of crimes on that laptop, and nothing's happened.
Can you explain that?
That's just somewhat inexplicable to me.
Yeah, well, because they effectively shut it down.
There was no meaningful way to get at the information.
We finally have a lawsuit now that's moving, and we have Elon Musk that's sort of opening up the books, right?
So the sunshine now that's shining on this is illuminating, and it's showing everybody.
And by the way, we've never had a chance.
Think about it.
We've had Anthony Fauci under oath.
We had Elvis Chan under oath.
That's never happened before, right?
That's just not happened.
And so that's a big first step.
And I think that that information, by the way, leads to more witnesses that we're going to subpoena in these lawsuits.
We've got Jim Saki coming up later in December, and I'm sure that'll be illuminating.
So we're going to keep fighting and get to the bottom of this.
And this FBI agent that organized these weekly meetings with big tech is this special agent Elvis Chan.
That's the guy that also had a postgraduate thesis that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump.
So clearly a political bias.
I've got to say this, and I don't often compliment a lot of politicians.
Some are better than others.
And we have friends of this program that really work hard to serve their states, their constituents.
But I don't think there's ever been a politician that I've interviewed that has been as successful as getting to the bottom of something as you have been.
And as Attorney General of Missouri, you've done a phenomenal job.
And I can't wait for you to get in the Senate because I think all of this discovery that you have had here will be pivotal for the country to now get a really good picture of, sadly, what should be the world's premier law enforcement agency putting their thumb on the scale to impact election results in this country because that would be two presidential elections in a row that they tried it.
And nobody has been held accountable to date.
Well, I come from the showme state, Sean, and one of the things we take pride in the state is we're not going to, we're skeptical.
We're going to we don't much trust the government a thousand miles away trying to tell us how to live our lives here in Missouri.
So there's a lot of wisdom in so-called flyover country.
And I'm going to take that same fighting spirit to the Senate and fight like hell for the things I believe in.
We really appreciate you taking all the time to explain this to the audience.
And we wish you the best in Washington.
Whatever happens, don't change.
That place has a history of changing people in ways that you can't even imagine.
Stay away from the chicken, rubber chicken dinners.
All right.
We appreciate it.
Eric Schmidt, Senator-elect, Attorney General, state of Missouri, 800-941.
Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, Keith is in Georgia.
We've been telling everybody everything in Georgia.
What does the polls close at 7, 7.30 tonight?
I forget, Linda.
Yeah, so everything, Herschel can win based on today's turnout.
And I've been getting anecdotal information in terms of turnout was high, which would help Herschel in spite of apparently bad weather.
But anyway, Keith is in Georgia.
We'll get a report from him.
Keith, how are things looking on the ground there?
It was nice and fast, Sean.
I mean, it took me two minutes from the time I entered polling to cast my ballot and walking out less than two minutes to cast my vote today.
Now, is it usually that way or is that unusual?
They've sped it up since the racist voting law took place, and it's faster now because now they have multiple voting locations within the county.
So it's far faster than it used to be.
You know, I mean, Jim Crow 2.0 that resulted in record numbers of people voting in the general election and in his runoff election?
Yes, sir.
That exact one.
Do you get any feel on the ground?
Look, I know Warnock outspent Herschel Oak II or 3-1 in this runoff race.
Get any feel on the ground how you think this is going to turn out?
Well, I know for our county, it bleeds red.
It's a pro-American county, so I think it's mostly leading towards Herschel Walker here.
And it's one reason I voted for him.
One reason I call is because Raphael Warnock voted to end what's called the Troops of Teacher program, which is you've talked about it a lot.
We need more teachers in the schools.
And he voted to end that program.
And it helped service members, people who retired from the military, people still in the military, transition to become teachers after their career in the military ended.
And he voted to end that.
So I to that point.
I was a member of that program.
You know, look, I think it would be great.
I'm managing my expectations.
Republicans have got to get, they've got to start matching the Democratic efforts in early voting and mail-in voting.
By the way, they've mastered this in Florida.
Republicans have.
They have no problem in Florida voting early.
They have no problem in Florida voting by mail.
They believe in the integrity of the system.
In Georgia and other states, Arizona being another one of them, there's great suspicion.
And there's been this reluctance and resistance.
This is not the voting system I would choose at all.
Let me be clear.
But until you win elections and you get people as governor in the state legislature that will change it and bring more integrity to election systems, this is the system you got.
So you got to take advantage of it and use it the way the Democrats are using it.
And they haven't been doing a good job of that.
So that's my advice going forward.
But we'll be watching the results tonight.
What else is on your mind?
That was basically it, sir.
One other thing was my wife has an ultra-rare condition, and since COVID hit, they have stopped her from getting her hydroxychloroquine that she used to get to help fight her condition.
She either has lupus or rheumatoid arthritis, right?
She actually has a different one called dermatopolymyositis.
And it kind of, it's a sister disease of those two, so it's treated very slowly.
But yeah, so her.
There has to be a way around that.
There has to be a doctor, and there has to be a pharmacy that will support the medical need and support the science behind HCQ because that's just wrong.
If that's the medicine that works best on your wife, she deserves the treatment that would work best for her.
That's outrageous.
Anyway, my friend, thank you.
Thanks for the update.
800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, Denny in Michigan, what's up, Denny?
How are you?
Yeah, Sean, good.
Thank you for having me on.
You know, we're focused on Elon Musk and his new Twitter business model.
And it's a great blessing for freedom of speech in America.
But we have a bigger problem, and that's where the free speech will not fix our dying democracy.
And voters vote, go home, and stay silent.
And to keep our representative democracy, voters must stay informed and involved.
Because without voter input, there's no democracy.
And without democracy, there's no freedom.
Currently, I don't even think Democrats are running elections anymore.
Look at Katie Hobbs.
Katie Hobbs doesn't debate.
You know, Fetterman waits till the week before the debate.
He hides in the basement.
Katie Hobbs, you know, she wasn't out there campaigning like Harry Lake was.
Democrats seem focused on one thing, and that's ballots.
Getting the ballots in the hands of people that they think will vote Democrat.
And that's where their focus is.
They're not focused on vote for me because I have better policies.
I'll represent you better.
I'll represent the state better.
That doesn't seem to be the discussion anymore.
All right, that's going to wrap things up for today.
Hannity tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
FBI whistleblowers coming out left and right.
We'll get an update from Senator Ron Johnson, Senator Marco Rubio.
We'll be watching the Georgia election results coming in.
I have no idea, earthly idea how it's going to go, but you still have a little over an hour to vote if you're in the great state of Georgia.
Today will make the difference.
If you're in line at seven o'clock, stay in line.
You get to vote.
We'll see you tonight on Hannity back here tomorrow.
Thank you for making this show possible.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
▲
Export Selection