All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 23, 2022 - Sean Hannity Show
34:42
Hannity 4pm Hour 122222
| 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.
The fact is that the removal of Title 42 does not mean the border is open.
I'm proud of the fact that with a Democratic president, a Democratic House, and a Democratic Senate, we were able to achieve, through this omnibus spending bill, essentially all of our priorities.
Thank you.
I may be Irish, but I'm not stupid.
I married Dominic Giacoppa's daughter, so I got a little Italian to me now.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to Revolution.
More behind-the-scenes information on breaking news and more bold, inspired solutions for America.
Hello, America.
This is Jeffrey Lord, again sitting in for our vacationing friend Sean Hannity.
We are looking forward now to talking with one of America's great attorneys, David Schoen, who was also, of course, President Trump's attorney.
And hello there, David.
Welcome to the Sean Hannity Show.
Thank you very much.
Great to talk to you.
Well, David, you know, I've got a whole long list of things to talk to you about, but I'll try and limit it.
But I did want to start with the Trump tax return dump.
I mean, just as an American citizen, this is outrageous, is it not?
And my question to you is, how legal is this?
I think it's outrageous.
I think there should be and will be some legal challenges to it.
Listen, the committee to get the documents in the first place had to show some legislative purpose.
But the idea now, first of all, politically, practically, it's a horrible mistake, which will come back to bite them, of course.
But the Wall Street Journal did an interesting piece about it today, just about the fundamental unfairness of it and the unfairness of the reporting on what the documents themselves say.
Because, you know, I suppose the committee is banking on the fact that nobody's really going to read things for themselves and they'll just read the partisan political message they put out.
And the Wall Street Journal kind of points out that that message isn't even accurate.
But I think it's a terrible, I think it's a terrible mistake.
I think it's going to hit everybody wrong.
And the more they do this, I think the more it backfires.
This kind of thing certainly ought to pump up President Trump.
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean, it is amazing to me the number of things that people like this do that absolutely backfire on them and work to President Trump's advantage.
One of the other things I wanted to talk to you about is, you know, what is going on with the FBI?
I mean, here is supposedly a gold standard American institution.
And, you know, I went back and took a look, David, because I'm old enough to remember some of this stuff.
There's an author, Ron Kessler, Ronald Kessler, who wrote a very detailed book on the history of the FBI and all of this sort of thing.
And one of the things that I remembered off the top of my head, and I've gone back in and looked, is that J. Edgar Hoover had this curious, interestingly interesting habit.
He would send a memo to President Kennedy or to Robert Kennedy, Robert Kennedy being, of course, for our younger audience, John F. Kennedy's brother and Attorney General of the United States and his nominal boss as Attorney General.
And they would say things like, well, we have an agent who's reported in that President Kennedy was married once, and we have some contact.
And then they'd say to Robert Kennedy, well, we have an agent who's reported that you're having an affair with a woman in El Paso.
To which Robert Kennedy said, I've never been to El Paso.
And then the kicker was, this was all bipartisan.
Richard Nixon comes along and he sends a memo to Nixon that, well, we've got an agent who says you're having an affair with a woman from China.
Let's just say the conduct of the FBI in the past has not been all on the up and up.
And now we've got this.
What are your thoughts on this?
I mean, I just find some of this behavior appalling with Twitter and all of this kind of thing.
Right.
I think it's frightening.
And I say this, my father was an FBI agent.
Wow.
But so I've always been very proud of that connection, quite frankly.
I have a scrapbook about it and so on.
It's been a wonderful agency most of the time also.
But I think that the Twitter connection now is one of the most shocking episodes we've seen.
I still don't think we know probably half of the story.
It's pretty shocking.
I mean, being used clearly for political purposes.
And not just that.
We see other missteps or intentional missteps by the FBI in the Mueller investigation and so on.
And then former heads of agencies backing it up.
Former heads of agencies passing along the story that the Hunter Biden laptop was probably a function of Russian collusion.
Just crazy stuff.
But these are people who the public credit with great sort of as having great integrity and so on, head of a CIA, head of national intelligence or something like that.
It's a very scary proposition.
I haven't seen that before in this country.
No, and what worries me here is you get the feeling, and I worked in Washington for a long time for a congressman, Senator President Reagan, and then in the Bush 41 era for HUD Secretary Jack Kemp.
And it just seems to me that this has become, I mean, the thing that keeps coming back to me is like junior high school, where you've got the in kids and the cool kids, and then you've got the sort of geeks that are not part of it and all of this kind of thing.
And in Washington, you're either part of that cool kids collection or you're not.
And most of the people there, or a lot of the people certainly, they live in the same neighborhoods.
They work in the same buildings, and they could be Republican and Democrat.
But they socialize together, they're working together.
And it creates this mindset that they're sort of in charge of the whole thing.
Forget what the American people have to say about things.
And that, I find, really disturbing.
And I think we're seeing signs of this mentality here in all of these revelations that are coming out.
I think you've put your finger on something very important.
And I think at some point, you know, the American people are getting fed up with it.
I did a show on MSNBC the other day, and the host, Ari Melberg, spoke about bipartisan January 6th committee.
I said, there's absolutely nothing bipartisan in the committee.
And then he had a guest on it.
It was remarkable that we see the two branches of government, the executive branch and legislative, working together.
There's nothing remarkable about that in this scenario.
They all have a common purpose, and that is, you know, among other things, keep Donald Trump off of the ticket for 2024.
But how much are we getting sort of distracted by all of this?
There's so many things, positive things to do that the American people need to have done.
And there's this fixation in just about every setting with trying to stop Donald Trump at all costs.
That's the tax return business.
That's the January 6th referral and so on.
It's depressing.
Yeah, it is very depressing.
And I think it's dangerous.
You know, it's one thing for Americans to sit around the kitchen table, and if there's Trump supporters and Trump never Trumpers, that's fine.
That's the conversation.
But when you're dealing with the world of Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping and North Korea and Iran and all this kind of thing, this kind of attitude and focus can be exceedingly dangerous.
You're right.
You're right.
100% right.
You know, one thing I'd like to say is what we've always been proud of in this country, I think, is keeping a sense of integrity about our processes.
We're a fair-minded people, I think, generally.
And I think most people would say that there was nothing fair about, for example, this January 6th committee.
And I think that has implications in a number of ways.
Number one, if you feel you have a strong case, why do you have to rig the deck?
All one condoms.
Same with the Mueller investigation.
And secondly, just independent of whether they have a strong case or weak case, their work is only important to the extent the American people believe in it.
And you automatically, with the composition of this panel, determine that at least half the public wouldn't believe in it.
For example, if you believe, as I do, that the events of January 6th were important and we ought to get to the bottom of things, then why not just put nonpartisan people in an investigative body?
Instead, of all of the people in Congress, you pick Chairman Thompson to lead this so-called investigation.
He filed a lawsuit against President Trump, alleging Trump was responsible for the events of January 6th and that he, Chairman Thompson, was personally injured.
That's probably the last person I think a fair-minded American would expect to head up an investigation.
You have, I'll wrap it up in a second, but you have Schiff and Raskin, who've written books on the subject.
They have a vested interest in ensuring that the committee comes out with a conclusion consistent with their books.
Why have testimony behind closed doors for witnesses you don't think are going to be favorable to your story?
Why put on heavily edited TV-produced hearings for public consumption?
Why make comments during the course of your investigation about how you want to send people to jail?
And Liz Cheney, the goal is to stop President Trump from becoming president.
The Washington Post did a telling piece last month about this.
They interviewed 15 staffers, and the staffers said, we got involved with this thing to try to do some fact-finding.
We didn't think it was going to become Liz Cheney's 2024 campaign to stop Donald Trump.
That's what it is.
And now all of the focus is on the criminal referrals and so on.
And now what?
You're going to criminally refer them to a Justice Department where the criminal section headed up by Lisa Monaco and Andrew Weissman actually.
Bingo.
That was on my list of things to talk to you about here.
And this gets to some degree of what we're talking about, about a network of people here and how they abuse these positions.
Lisa Monaco, what is her former title?
She's in the Justice Department.
She deputies.
Summer two person.
She's what?
Number two person, yeah, in the Justice Department.
And Andrew Weissman, of course, was a key player in the Mueller investigation.
And they worked together for years, you know.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, so, and, you know, when you look at this committee, and again, as I say, having worked in the House, and for that matter, the Senate, but in this case, in the House, one of the things she learned very quickly is whether it's Republican or Democrat, there's a majority and a minority.
And the purpose of that setup and the minority is to question the majority.
And I mean, President Trump was in essence blocked from any defense.
There was no one called, no one, who could offer a different view of President Trump.
And that was designed on purpose.
I mean, that is a witch hunt or a lynch mob, as it were.
And consistent with that, by having no ranking member, minority member on the committee, which, as you have just pointed out, is there to be a buffer to hold the other side honest.
There was no cross-examination with any witness.
And so, again, this fellow on this MSNBC, Mr. Melburg, said, what do you think about this evidence and that evidence?
I said, I refuse to legitimize the process.
Unless that evidence was subjected to cross-examination, it's like watching a trial where just the prosecution goes forward.
There's no defense, and then you're asked to come to a conclusion.
Well, you never heard any cross-examination.
You never heard any other side of a story.
You never heard any explanation for testimony.
How can anybody possibly give that any credibility?
That's not the American way.
Well, one of the things that I have suggested, and I made this suggestion, I asked a question of Steve Scalise, I think it was, who came to an American spectator dinner some time ago and was open to questions.
And I said, you know, will there be an effort if Republicans take control of the House to investigate the January 6th Committee?
I mean, I just think that we should be going there.
And, you know, and I said today before you came on, I said to, you know, memo to the January 6th Committee, save your text, emails, and phone records and that of your staff.
And one of the things that really got to me was, I mean, since I'm sitting here on Sean Hannity's show, was they were releasing his private communications, his emails or text or whatever.
Well, you know, a member of the media, can you imagine if somebody out there in the government had released the private communications of somebody from the New York Times or MSNBC, they would go crazy.
And they should.
And they should.
Or as you say, fellow members of this committee who actually do work for us.
Unlike Sean Hannity or the New York Times, these folks are our public servants.
And to get away with this in our name is just very, very wrong.
And so what are we going to see now?
Payback with the next Congress and all that.
At some point, somebody has to step up and say, let's move forward in the interest of the American people, the American projects, and what's good for our country.
Not just the personal criminations and that sort of stuff.
It's really gotten everything as partisan politics now.
It drives every agenda.
Right.
And I mean, this has to be, you know, I'm not necessarily here for tit for tat, but one of the things that I think is this has to be dealt with in such a fashion so that it will never happen again.
Yeah.
And I mean, the whole stacking of the committee and all of this kind of thing, and as you say, no cross-examination.
I mean, who's heard of that?
I mean, this is a country that, you know, loves to pay attention to lawyer shows, and they all know you get the right to defend yourself and to ask questions and all that, and that simply was not allowed.
That's right.
And in every trial or adversarial proceeding that anyone's familiar with, you get a very different perspective once cross-examination starts.
It's not just whether the facts are the facts as the person sees it.
It's the motivation behind them.
It's the context of those facts.
It's the motivation potentially of the witness to misstate those facts, to evade trouble for him or herself, all of those things.
Each witness was produced as a hero.
People who people on this committee absolutely hated before because they were associated with President Trump.
Now, if they tell the story they want to hear, they're heroes.
That's exactly what we see in organized crime cases.
People who were killers are now portrayed as good guys who just wanted to come and do the right thing.
No, they wanted to help themselves avoid any problem.
Well, David, it's been a joy talking to you.
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, Valentine's Day, St. Patrick's Day, Happy Hanukkah, all of that.
And we'll see you in the new year and we'll buckle in.
Great.
Thanks, Mr. Brad.
Thank you very much.
This is Jeffrey Lord sitting in for Sean Hannity.
We hope you tune in.
Go to my website, thegerelord.com, and the word of the Lord with Jeffrey Lord and also the American Spectator and your calls will be up very shortly.
800-941-7.
800-941-Sean.
That's 800-941-7326.
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 iHeart Radio 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.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, this is Jeffrey Lord sitting in for our friend Sean Hannity.
We only have about a minute here, and then when we come back, we are going to be talking to Kentucky Congressman James Comer.
The congressman is slated to be the new chairman, uh-oh, of the House Oversight Committee.
And I can only suggest, I hope he's resting up for Christmas because he's going to be one very busy guy when we get into this new year's.
There is a lot of oversight to be done, and I'm sure he is hard at work on this already.
So we're looking forward to that, and on we will go here.
We've got all kinds of activities, I'm sure, for everybody around the country here as we roll into Christmas.
So let me just say Merry Christmas, and I hope at some point we'll get some calls in here.
And I am Jeffrey Lord of the Word of the Lord podcast and thegerelord.com.
And I hope you'll take some time to visit with me over the holidays.
And maybe read your book.
And my book.
Oh, Linda, there was a book.
Did you know that?
Swamp Swamp Swamp Wars.
Donald Trump and the New American Populism versus the Old Order.
Very sticky.
And welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
This is Jeffrey Lord from the American Spectator, Newsmax TV, my book, Swamp Wars, from a whole bunch of places here, the American Spectator, as I say.
And we are delighted to welcome to the show here Congressman James Comer from Kentucky.
The Congressman, as I said, is slated to become the new chairman of the House Oversight Committee.
And I can only imagine, Congressman, thanks for being here.
What a task you've got ahead of yourself here.
There's no shortage of oversight in the Biden administration.
And sadly, the Democrats haven't provided any over the past two years.
And hopefully that'll change in a few weeks.
Yeah.
Do you have any sort of, I'm sure you do, outline of where you're going?
I mean, you know, the obvious ones like Hunter Biden and all that, but I'm sure there are others that may not be front and center in a lot of people's minds that are front and center with yourself and your colleagues.
Yeah, we're very concerned about wasteful spending.
I mean, if you go back the last two and a half years in the name of COVID, I mean, it's ridiculous.
The unemployment insurance fraud, the PPP loan fraud, the stimulus fraud, the state and local government money that was doled out with no safeguards in the last or next-to-last stimulus bill that Biden passed.
The list goes on and on and on of hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars wasted, and no one's been held accountable.
No one has gotten a final tally of how much was wasted.
And, you know, sadly, you do a lot of investigations to try to prevent history from repeating itself.
And, you know, it's just like there's no worry in the world from the Democrats and sadly a few Republicans in the Senate about how much money is being wasted.
So that's going to be a priority for us in January.
Yeah, well, that's a good thing.
I was saying we had Congressman Scott Perry on earlier, who happens to be my congressman in Pennsylvania.
He's a great American.
He is.
He is indeed.
And I was saying to him that in the long ago and far away, I was the legislative director and budget committee staffer for Congressman Bud Schuster from Pennsylvania.
And it was my task to read these things.
And it was just appalling what was in them.
I mean, they were huge.
And at one point when President Reagan came to address Congress, and when I was working for him, he had people didn't really know what it was.
It was a huge stack of papers next to him on the podium there.
And finally, he gets to the subject of the budget and says, you know, this is what you sent me.
And he goes through a struggle to lift this thing up and says, and if you send me one again, I won't sign it.
And drops it on the podium with a loud resounding smack, which got lots of cheers from Republicans.
But here we are all these years later, and this kind of thing is still going on.
And I sometimes despair that you can ever shut this off.
Well, it's pretty discouraging.
I'm at a low point in the six years of my time in Congress.
I've never been so discouraged seeing what's going on with this omnibus spending bill.
I mean, all Republicans have talked about over the past 12 months and during the midterm elections was the wasteful spending at the CDC with Dr. Fauci and the National Institute for Health with Dr. Collins.
And then you go over into the Department of Justice with Merrick Garland and the FBI and all this wasteful spending.
Every one of their budgets are not only fully funded, they received more money in this omnibus bill than President Biden even requested from Congress.
So no one's held accountable.
And what makes it hard for me as the next chairman of the Oversight Committee, we want to bring these bureaucrats and these agency heads in front of the committee and grill them.
We want to ask them about who authorized the FBI to pay Twitter $3.5 million.
Who authorized the FBI to create 80 new employees to be a ministry of propaganda for the FBI?
And what's happened is when the Senate went along with the Democrats, that omnimus spending bill, every one of these agencies is funded for the next 12 months.
So there's not going to be a sense of urgency from these department heads and cabinet secretaries to even come before Congress for a long time.
No, that's absolutely right.
And I'd like to ask all of this stuff that we see coming out of the bureaucracies, particularly the FBI and the Department of Justice, is there a plan to look into who did what and with all of these groups here?
I mean, again, having worked in Washington a long time, you know, it was very clear to me that there's a whole cadre of career bureaucrats.
And they think presidents come and go and all this, and they're really in charge.
And what particularly attracted my attention in the day, this would be, it was January of 2017, a full 11 days after Donald Trump was sworn in as president.
And the Washington Post ran a front-page story about all these career bureaucrats who were plotting to, you know, screw up his agenda and overturn it and block it wherever they could.
And they were reaching out to former Obama staffers and all this kind of thing.
Well, that's bad enough as it is, but when you get this kind of thing into the Department of Justice, wow, that's pretty dangerous, I think.
It is dangerous, and we are going to make a priority to identify all the wrongdoing and hold people accountable and go a step further and try to reform the FBI and the Department of Justice.
And the person that's going to lead that is Jim Jordan, and I don't think anyone would question whether or not he has any fight in him and whether he's a high-energy guy, like Trump would say, you know, and I mean, he's passionate about it.
I know he's on my oversight committee.
Of course, he's also chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
We work together on a lot of things.
A lot of my investigations overlap with stuff the judiciary is doing with respect to the Department of Justice.
So I can tell you he's the right guy for the job.
And, you know, he is as outraged as anyone listening to your show right now about the wrongdoing in the FBI.
From an oversight standpoint, who authorized this?
They don't have the authority not just to censor free speech, but they don't have the authority to create these massive divisions with 80 employees and to dole out, you know, we've heard $3.5 million to Twitter.
Just think how much they gave Google and Facebook for the same thing.
And then, you know, we learned recently they tried to offer a million dollars to anyone that could validate the steel dossier.
I mean, who gives them this authority to spend this money?
Congress doesn't.
This is an instance of the deep state and the other bureaucracies that do just exactly what you said the Washington Post cited when Trump got elected.
They do whatever they want.
And unfortunately, nobody in Congress has tried to stop them.
And that's going to be a priority for Republicans in the House.
But I tell you, I'm not feeling a sense of urgency from our Republican colleagues in the Senate because one way to stop them, one way to get them to come before Congress and spill the beans on what's happening is to threaten to hold up their funding.
Yes.
Yes.
Just a few minutes ago, the Senate approved their funding for the next year, and we're going to vote against it in the morning in the House, the Republicans.
But you know how it's going to go?
Pelosi will get every Democrat to vote for it.
I'm looking at a Chiron on Newsmax that says the GOP House members vow retribution for senators who voted for the omnibus.
Yeah.
I mean, I just voted against some little bill that Murkowski had just a minute ago.
And, you know, just I'm frustrated with Murkowski.
I'm frustrated with all those Republican senators who did that.
I mean, there's no who do they do they not listen to the voters?
I mean, the voters of America are angry.
They're mad because of inflation.
We have inflation because we're spending too much money.
Not only did they not make any cuts anywhere, they significantly increased spending for the next 12 months.
I mean, what a slap in the face to every voter who said in the midterm elections they wanted to flip the House of Representatives and they wanted to make inflation the number one issue in the midterm.
I mean, it's just unbelievable that there's this big of a disconnect between what the people of America want and what these members of Congress are voting for today.
I suspect in the case of Senator Murkowski, her main constituent is Senator McConnell.
But one of the things that has occurred to me and others, it's certainly not original to me, and one of these, and I've suggested this as a matter of fact to President Trump quite a while ago, that Republicans in Congress should be pushing for term limits for the bureaucrats so that if you sign on to work in, what, the Department of Energy or wherever, you stay 10 years and you're out.
I think that's a great idea.
I mean, I'm for term limits for members of Congress.
I'm for term limits for bureaucrats.
This is where I differ from a lot of Republicans.
I'm for term limits for Supreme Court justices and federal judges.
I mean, if you want to fundamentally change Congress, we'll just talk about Congress here.
If you just want to fundamentally change Congress for the better, two things that can be done tomorrow that will make a difference long term, and that's term limits and passing a balanced budget amendment.
Because the only way Congress will ever balance the budget is if it's required.
Right.
Because if it's not required, you're not going to get a ⁇ I mean, we're increasing the debt every day.
The deficit grows every day.
We're not even ⁇ I mean, there's no leadership in Washington right now that's serious about balancing the budget, much less trying to pay off any of the debt.
No, and you know, the thing that really bugs me about this is that people float along as if there's not going to be a consequence for this.
There will be consequences.
You know, we will have to pay the bill literally and figuratively for this down the road.
And there just seems to be no realization of this.
They think they can operate in a vacuum here, and that's the end of it.
That's right.
And you look at because we've spent so much money, we have inflation.
Because we have inflation, the Federal Reserve's had to raise interest rates.
Because we have a national debt of $30 trillion, our interest payments on the debt could be over a trillion dollars a year now.
I mean, it's spiraling out of control, and members of Congress know that, but the average person doesn't really think about that.
The average person doesn't, you know, I don't think can comprehend how big a trillion is.
Right.
And then at the end of the day, at the end of the day, not only do they not try to make modest cuts, they increase the budget, increase it even more than what Joe Biden requested.
And you know Joe Biden doesn't give a crap about the national debt.
No, he certainly doesn't.
He certainly doesn't.
Well, and you add all this in, as we've talked about, Title 42 and the border agents and all of this, all of these people streaming it at will over the border here.
And we can't even get the president to go down there and eyeball the situation, which the rest of us can see plainly on television.
And he's responsible for this.
I just, you know, where is the federal government in doing all of this?
And you've got all these people, Border Patrol and all this complaining about it.
This is serious, and there will be a price to pay for that.
We're paying the price every day.
I don't think the taxpayers realize how much is being spent on housing these migrants, in transporting these migrants, in providing Medicaid for these migrants.
And think about that when people are out struggling to pay their health insurance premiums and pay their deductibles and copays.
These people who Joe Biden's welcoming across the border every day, they're getting it for free.
Because if you have Medicaid, you get free health care.
And then, you know, the kids end up in the public school systems.
They're having to take teachers away from, you know, American students and provide a special teacher that speaks a special language for these immigrants that have crossed over the line.
And, you know, there's a misconception that they're all from Mexico.
I've said for a long time, anybody from Mexico that wants to come to the United States, they're already here.
These people are from Africa, they're from Europe, they're from Asia, they're from Central America, they're from South America.
They speak, you know, dozens of languages.
And that's an unfunded mandate on the school system when they have to, you know, provide a public education form.
So the expense to the taxpayers is enormous.
And then you throw in the fentanyl that's coming across the border and the death rate and the crime rate and all of the expense involved with that.
I mean, you can't even put a price tag on it.
But yet, here we are in Congress, and the senators can't agree on even doing anything to try to secure the border.
Much less give it Title 42, which is the one tool in the toolbox.
Well, Congressman, I hate to say this, but we've got to run.
But thank you very much for coming on the show.
Have a Merry Christmas, and we will be watching you next year for sure.
And good luck.
Thank you.
Congressman James Comer from Kentucky.
This is Jeffrey Lord, sitting in for Sean Hannity.
And you can see my podcast.
You listen to my podcast at the word of the Lord, but with Jeffrey Lord and also my website, thejeffreylord.com.
And of course, there's my book, Swamp Wars: Donald Trump and the New American Populism versus the Old Order.
And boy, are we seeing that play out?
See you on the other side.
This is Jeffrey Lord in for Sean Hannity.
We have a great show coming up with Michael Schellenberger.
We're going to talk about Twitter and all the things that he has discovered.
So please stay tuned for that.
And then we will keep talking to Jeff.
We're going to keep talking.
Jeff's crushing it.
We're going to find out about Twitter drop number seven.
Yeah, yeah.
The Jeffrey Lord.
Yeah, right, exactly.
And not to mention the word of the Lord.
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