All Episodes
Previous Next
April 12, 2023 - Sean Hannity Show
29:20
What's Happening in NY? - April 11th, Hour 3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
News Roundup, Information Overload, Hour 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, we have a lot of developments today in terms of what's going on with these GOP investigations.
They are making progress.
Earlier in the program, we had Jim Jordan on.
And of course, you know, the whole issue of his Judiciary Committee has now issued a subpoena to Director Ray.
They have repeatedly sought information from the FBI relating to a January 23rd, 2023 document generated by the Richmond Field Office entitled Interest of Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists in Radical Traditionalist Catholic Ideology almost certainly presents new mitigation opportunities.
And we know the FBI is relying, quote, on information derived from at least one undercover employee sought to use local religious organizations as new avenues to tripwire and find source development.
In other words, they're recruiting there.
Foxnews.com had an article.
Josh Hawley is now accusing the Attorney General Merrick Garland of lying under oath and giving false testimony to the Senate last month when he said that his department is not developing sources inside Catholic churches and other houses of worship and demanded to know how many undercover informants or other agents are aiding in the department with these religious sites.
He sent a letter to Garland and it says, this is an unconscionable assault on American Catholics and First Amendment rights and an abdication of your duty to enforce the law without fear or favor.
Let's be clear.
Your department has decided to turn Catholic congregations into front organizations for the FBI.
When asked about it, you decided to fudge the truth before Congress.
He's accusing him of lying to Congress.
This is now becoming a real serious issue.
Our friend Kerry Pickett over at the Washington Times has a piece on this.
The FBI planned to spy on Catholic churches nationwide.
She went through it in great specificity and detail.
The very testimony of Merritt Garland with Josh Hawley, we have the tape of it.
He asks if the DOJ has an anti-Catholic bias.
Garland told Hawley that the DOJ is not cultivating sources and spies in Catholic parishes.
And then he testified to Hawley that he doesn't believe DOJ informants aimed at Catholic churches.
And now we're finding out just the opposite.
In the meantime, Jim, well, let me play the take.
Attorney General Garland, let me just ask you, does your department have a problem with anti-Catholic bias?
Our department protects all religions and all ideologies.
It does not have any bias against any religion of any kind.
Well, you could have surprised me because given the resources that you are expending and the apparently intelligence assets that you are deploying against Catholics, it appears, and other people of faith, while simultaneously turning a blind eye while people are executed gang style in the streets of our cities, including in my home state.
Your answer frankly surprises me.
The FBI field office in Richmond on the 23rd of January of this year issued a memorandum in which they advocated for, and I quote, the exploration of new avenues for tripwire and source development against traditionalist Catholics, their language, including those who favor the Latin Mass.
Attorney General, are you cultivating sources and spies in Latin Mass parishes and other Catholic parishes around the country?
The Justice Department does not do that.
It does not do investigations based on religion.
I saw the document you have.
It's appalling.
It's appalling.
I'm in complete agreement with you.
I understand that the FBI has withdrawn it and is now looking into how this could ever have happened.
How did it happen?
That's what they're looking into, but I'm totally in agreement with you.
That document is appalling.
I'll tell you how it happened.
This memorandum, which is supposed to be intelligent, cites extensively the Southern Poverty Law Center, which goes on to identify all of these different Catholics as being part of hate groups.
Is this how the FBI, under your direction and leadership, is this how they do their intelligence work?
They look at left-wing advocacy groups to target Catholics?
Is this what's going on?
I mean, clearly it is.
How is this happening?
The FBI is not targeting Catholics.
And as I've said, this is an inappropriate memorandum, and it doesn't reflect the methods that the FBI is supposed to be using.
It should not be relying on any single organization without doing its own work.
How many informants do you have in Catholic churches across America?
I don't know.
And I don't believe we have any informants aimed at Catholic churches.
We have a rule against investigations based on First Amendment activity.
And Catholic churches are obviously First Amendment.
Well, but I don't know a specific answer.
You don't know the specifics of anything, it seems, but apparently on your watch, this Justice Department is targeting Catholics, targeting people of faith specifically for their faith views.
And Mr. Attorney General, I'll just say to you, it's a disgrace.
Now, on top of that, House, Republicans have opened a probe into Bragg's soft-on crime policies, and they're going to have that hearing in New York, which I think is a good idea.
Jordan has now subpoenaed the Manhattan prosecutor, Pomerance, who pushed Alvin Bragg to indict Donald Trump.
So that's getting interesting.
Pomerance openly admitting that he targeted Donald Trump and he had to be stopped because he posed, quote, a real danger to the country and to the ideals that mattered to him.
Well, that would be the same as Bragg's promise to go after one man, one organization, and when one family, just like the Attorney General of New York, did the same thing.
And Donald Trump will be back in New York, I believe, tomorrow dealing with the Attorney General on that particular issue.
And if that's not enough, we have now district attorneys, Republicans are now moving to see if there are any laws that the Biden family has, in fact, broken.
James Comer subpoenaed one of Hunter Biden's Chinese business partners.
And we have a FoxNews.com article that Hunter's business partners and assistants visited the White House over 80 times when Joe Biden was the vice president.
That's a little problematic.
John Solomon, editor-in-chief, investigative reporter, justthennews.com, author of Fallout, and Greg Jarrett's upcoming book.
You can get it on Amazon.com, get a first print edition, Trial of the Century.
Both of you, welcome back to the program.
Good to be here.
Let me start with you, Greg Jarrett.
So Josh Hawley is now, they want to bring both Director Ray and Merrick Garland back to find out if the FBI was, in fact, lying when they went before Congress on this issue of recruiting Catholics or traditional Catholics and people in other churches to spy for them.
Yeah, I mean, they've targeted parents who complain at school board meetings.
They have targeted, you know, Catholics.
And of course, most famously, you know, Merrick Garland refused to enforce the law when conservative Supreme Court justices were targeted by protesters who were violent and threats against the justices' lives.
I mean, look, Merrick Garland should have recused himself a long time ago in the Hunter Biden, Joe Biden crime family suspected racket and appointed a special counsel.
He knew that such a counsel would easily and quickly indict Hunter Biden in alleged crimes that would implicate his own father, the president of the United States.
So Garland, in all these matters, you know, should have recused himself.
He claims, oh, gee, I'm not involved.
I don't believe Garland for one minute, given his abysmal track record for the truth.
Nobody should have any confidence in his integrity and fairness.
And I do think he ought to be hauled in front of Congress and investigated further for lying.
What's your take, John Solomon?
Well, listen, when we first got our hands on this memo six weeks ago, it was obvious about two things.
One, some of the sourcing for this memo targeting Catholics came from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a very liberal group that in recent years has become increasingly under scrutiny for its weaponization of hate designations, calling someone a hate group when they may or not.
In fact, they're facing a lawsuit right now over that in one very specific thing.
So once again, like we saw with the Steele dossier and other earlier FBI missteps, a liberal group gets inside the FBI, pushes some of the information in, and then the FBI goes and tries to insinuate itself into a religious organization where there are clear First Amendment protections.
And the reference to looking to convert people undercover at these churches is sitting in that memo.
So when they asked the director, is there any possibility that they were trying to recruit people to Catholic Church, the answer was already sitting in the memo.
The memo suggested that'd be the next step from this intelligence bullet to go out and start recruiting Catholics to spy on other Catholics.
So this has all been sitting out in plain view.
Jim Jordan has jumped on it.
I think the FBI has a real problem here.
I had the former intelligence chief of the FBI look at this memo, and I'll just read a couple of words of what Kevin Brock told me when he analyzed it.
He called it a lazy, absurdly speculative document that seems to be more aligned with the political left than with reality.
That's the FBI's former intelligence chief debunking and chagrining his own agency.
You know, it's just amazing.
Here we are again.
I mean, we have 2016 in the FBI.
Early October 2016, they try to verify the dossier that Hillary Clinton bought and paid for, the dirty Russian disinformation dossier.
They offer Christopher Steele a million dollars to corroborate it, but he can't.
And then from there, what happens?
They use it anyway by the end of the month, even though he couldn't corroborate a thing as the bulk of information to acquire not one but four FISA warrants.
First spying on a presidential candidate, then a president.
2020, Greg Jarrett, then that evolves into the FBI.
They had Hunter Biden's laptop since December 2019, and yet they never verified it.
Instead, they sent agents to meet with big tech companies every single week in the lead up to the 2020 election, warning them they may be victims of misinformation.
And here we go again.
How much influence is the FBI going to have over our elections?
Yeah, I mean, the FBI suppressed and censored the laptop story in social media.
They're running a protection racket, as you've called it, Sean.
If the last name was Trump, not Biden, there would have been indictments five years ago.
But, you know, this is our deep state, hard at work, twisting, contorting, obstructing the law to run interference for their preferred candidate, a Democrat, at the same time abusing the reins of power to persecute his Republican opponent, Donald Trump.
It's the definition of corruption.
And the U.S. Attorney in Delaware, David Weiss, has been investigating Biden corruption for five years.
That's beyond reasonable.
It's absurd.
And it's obvious to me that Weiss has no intention of fulfilling his duty and following the law.
He's running out the clock, purposefully delaying any action to protect Hunter Biden and his dad, the president.
It's essentially obstruction of justice within.
the Department of Justice.
And as you point out, Hunter's business cronies, we now know, visited the White House more than 80 times when Joe was VP.
There are photographs, emails, transaction sheets, public statements of those involved.
It's crystal clear.
Joe Biden has always been lying when he said he had no involvement in his son's multi-million dollar influence peddling scheme, selling access, promises of influence to entities with direct ties to foreign adversary governments.
It's the selling out of America.
And the trick was hiding his role, which is why they used code names for Joe like Celtic and the big guy.
There's even one smoking gun email instructing others, do not refer directly to Joe Biden.
I know you know that, but just don't do it.
So the only way to expose corruption fully is not with the Department of Justice.
They won't do it, but the House Oversight, the Judiciary Committee, the Intel Committee, which is what they're now doing.
Yeah.
What's your take on it?
And where do you think this is going?
I mean, things never seem to pan out unless you're a Republican.
If you're a Democrat, you always seem to get a pass, John Solomon.
Well, listen, that is the big question.
And I think there is some significant work going on in Congress right now to explain and learn why the Hunter Biden case has come to such a screeching halt.
And I think we're going to learn some really dramatic things in the next couple of weeks about what has happened.
I think more testimonies of senior Justice Department officials are going to be called into question as we learn why, even though Hunter Biden has admitted he paid a $2 million related tax bill, even though his own email showed he was being told for years he hadn't paid taxes, he was stiffing the government's taxes, why he has not yet been charged or a decision made on that.
When that comes out, you'll have this extraordinary gulf between the way Donald Trump and conservatives and Catholics have been treated and the way Hunter Biden and liberals and Democrats have been treated.
I think it's only going to accentuate that picture more.
We do have a dual system of justice right now.
The perception has become reality, and so many Americans are afraid to engage even the FBI.
I just had a prosecutor in Florida tell me he wanted to put an FBI agent, one of their best FBI agents, on the stand, and they decided that he would only alienate the jury because he worked for the FBI.
That's a real problem for the United States government.
The FBI can't be trusted in trials anymore.
It's really, really sad and sad for the country and sad for our future and our kids and our grandkids.
I'll tell you that to both of you.
We appreciate it.
Greg Jarrett, thank you.
And John Solomon, as always, thank you.
800-941 Sean, our number, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, when we come back, we'll hit the phones toll-free.
It's 800-941.
Sean, if you want to be a part of the program as we continue.
Oh, Karine Jean-Pierre's been on her game all week and won't answer a single question about China cashing in on U.S. green energy goals.
She won't no answer on how Biden's Ireland trip is going to do anything to boost national security as he goes to visit castles.
And then she got pushback from reporters on why Biden won't hold the press conference.
Why won't this guy hold press conferences?
The answer is obvious.
He's not capable of it.
Let me play these for you.
Some of the companies investing in EV battery plants here in the U.S. are Chinese companies.
Is the administration doing anything to stop China from cashing in on green energy goals?
Don't have anything to share on China's specifically as it relates to electric vehicles.
You know, are where we stand on China.
We want competition, not conflict.
That's where we have always moved with China.
You got this Ireland trip next week.
The dramatics.
How does a Biden trip to Ireland help counter China or end the war in Ukraine?
So let me just say a couple of things.
The president is certainly looking forward to taking this trip to Northern Ireland and also the U.K. He'll be heading out on Tuesday.
We certainly will have more to share on this trip in the upcoming days, as my colleague just said on Monday.
But I also want to lay out here the important, kind of the important history between U.S. and Ireland, right?
And a question that I'm often asked, and I don't know the answer to, so I'll ask you that question.
Is the administration trying to protect the president from our questions?
Please, I guess.
Absolutely not.
Absolutely not.
So why is the lack of any interaction in a formal setting to have a press conference?
I mean, the president takes shouty questions.
I understand.
John, I understand.
I understand.
I have dealt with this question about three times already.
I understand.
It is the job of you all to ask this question to me.
Totally get that.
And that's not a problem at all.
But certainly the president many times has stood in front of all of you, has taken questions on his own because he wanted to see what was all on your minds.
He wanted to see what the questions you all were going to ask him.
And he wanted to answer them directly.
That has happened multiple times, many times during this administration.
And that will certainly continue to be.
When it comes to a formal press conference, I don't have anything to share with you at this time.
Pretty unbelievable.
Anyway, 800-941-Sean, our number, if you want to be a part of the program.
Let's get to our busy phones.
All right.
David is a Democrat, wants to join the program.
David is in Arizona.
David, hi, how are you?
Glad you called, sir.
I'm fine.
What's going on, Mr. Democrat?
Oh, I'm doing.
I'm great.
Yes, I'm a proud Democrat.
Proud Democrat.
I'm glad.
Yes.
And I come through the radio.
I hear you hear him in this horn about, oh, Donald Trump.
They're going after Donald Trump.
I hate him.
I actually do hate the guy.
Can't stand him.
Can't stand them.
You hate.
You totally.
Let me ask you, did you wake up in the morning and the thought of him?
If you make a mental image, on a scale of one to 10, how great is that hate with 10 being the greatest amount possible?
20.
20.
You got a lot of hate in there.
I can't stand him.
He's a piece of crap.
Piece of crap.
Steaming pile.
He's a steaming pile.
And how do you like your president, Joe?
You think, Joe?
Let me ask you a question.
I showed him what both form again.
Let me ask you a question.
Do you think Joe is in a steep cognitive decline, or do you think he's got his act together?
He got his act together.
He does.
Okay.
You see, you talk all that crap, dementia crap.
Let me remind you a little bit of Joe.
Let me play Joe Biden, your president.
You say he's cognitive.
Would it be fair to say that you think he's cognitively very sharp?
Would you agree with that?
I watch him, so you don't need to play me in it.
Do you think he's cognitively sharp?
I'm asking a question.
You're not going to change my mind.
All right.
Well, let me play and you tell me if this man sounds cognitively sharp to you, okay?
Listen.
The political coverage.
Look, some of the political players and some of the...
Let me ask a rhetorical question.
No, anyway.
You're going to stand by that statement?
He's cognitively sharp.
Oh, yes, I am.
But what I called you about was, you want to go on about Donald Trump.
They shouldn't be charging Donald Trump with this.
And the feds passed on.
Okay, the Feds passed on.
But guess what?
Alvin Bragg in New York and pass on it.
Well, can you tell me what the crime is he's being charged with?
They told you.
No, no, no.
You told me, actually, if you read, did you?
Did you read the indictment?
Political laws.
That's what he did.
Did you?
No, where in the indictment does it say that?
Because I got a copy of the indictment.
Where does it say that?
Newt Gangris can cry.
All of you can cry.
Alvin?
I'm not crying.
I'm asking you to show me in the indictment where it says federal crimes.
And by the way, if you knew even a little bit about the law, you would know that Alvin Bragg does not have the authority to charge the president in New York for federal crimes.
But he's not charging with federal crimes.
That's the thing.
He's charging with New York.
That's what you just told me.
Okay, so I'll ask you again.
What is he being charged with?
That's what you don't know.
He's shotting with New York.
What is he being charged with?
34 counts of what?
He broke New York.
New York what?
New York fighter.
Where in the indictment does it say that?
You can stop it with the federal crimes.
Let me ask you, where in the indictment does he say that?
He's taking him down.
You can cry.
You can bleed in your panties all day.
You can't tell me.
You know why?
Because you don't know.
No, you can't tell me because he's not charging with a federal crime.
But you can't tell me what the state crime is.
Tell me what the state crime is.
With a state crime.
What is the state crime?
Tell me.
You heard it.
No, I didn't hear it.
It's not.
I read it.
You tell me what it is.
Well, I, you can see what is the, wait a minute.
What?
What is the state crime?
What is it?
And by the way, what does the blood in the pants comment mean?
I didn't understand that.
Oh, Sean, yo, since hurt.
What's going on?
Let me ask you this question, Mr. Liberal, Mr. Democrat.
Name me three successful things that Joe Biden has done as president.
Ready, go.
Him down.
And you are so mad.
Name three things that Joe Biden has accomplished as president.
Damn.
Don't you love it?
Name me three things that Joe Biden has done successfully.
Ready?
Go.
Hello?
Hello?
David?
Inflation is down.
All right.
And I don't want to hear about no gas prices and none of that because you don't want to hear none of that.
Damn.
Inflation is up dramatically.
Like 35%.
I know you're going to holler about gas prices.
1.4%, and now it's hovering at 6%.
How do you say that it's down?
How do you say gas prices are down when it's up over $1.50 a gallon on average across the country since he became president?
How do you make the you just like to spew lies?
Do you know anything about politics?
Talk to the CEOs of the gas companies, Mr. Know-It-All Hannity.
Well, at least I give you facts.
You don't seem to have a clue about anything.
All right.
Just take a deep breath.
Let's have a discussion.
Just you saying, dude.
David, dude, let's have a discussion.
I'm going to ask you again.
I'm going to ask you again a simple question.
Now, you're wrong on inflation.
You're wrong on gas prices.
I'm going to give you another chance because I like you.
I like when Democrats make fools of themselves.
So I'm going to ask you again: name three things that Joe has done as president that you would say are very successful.
Ready?
Go.
Is Joe Biden a CEO exon?
Okay, then.
Name three things that Joe has done and accomplished as president.
But I knew you were going to go to the gas price thing.
I'm not going.
I'm asking you what you love this man.
You're going to vote for him again.
You say he's cognitively sharp.
I'm asking you to name three, identify three things he's done as president that are successful.
I told you.
What?
You probably had your fingers in your head because you don't want to hear.
I told you.
He said gas prices are down.
That's a lie.
He said that inflation was down.
He inherited 1.4%.
The gas companies.
That's the thing about it.
Joe Biden don't control the gas company.
So he can't control.
Okay, so then tell me the three things that he's done.
Listen to me.
Look, slow down.
Listen, listen, take a deep breath.
Ready?
In through the nose, out through the mouth.
Now tell me three things that he's done that are successful.
And then, and now you're going to go to the.
Let's go.
Number one.
Tell me number one.
What did he do that's successful?
Oh, did I just tell you unemployment is 3.4%?
Okay, bam.
Okay, we learned yesterday that those numbers are deflated by 20%.
It's actually 20% higher.
But I'll give you that one, even though they sent out figures that are lies.
Number two, go ahead.
Oh, inflation is going down.
Inflation is going down.
He drove it up from 1.4% to 9%, and it's still hovering at an unacceptable high, 40-year record high.
So that doesn't count.
You don't get that point.
Next.
I told y'all, and the economy is doing pretty good.
Okay, the economy is going good.
Well, I have articles on the economy right here.
70% of Americans are feeling financially stressed.
Nearly two-thirds of the country live paycheck to paycheck.
Does that sound like a success to you?
Truth is your truth.
I'm asking you, does that sound successful to you?
So you can't name two things that this guy has done that is successful.
And you want to know why, David?
This is your problem.
David, your mind is closed.
You're a radical leftist Democrat.
The fact that you think this guy even knows that today is Tuesday tells me a lot about you.
Okay, you hate Donald Trump.
You hate Republicans.
They're never going to get your vote.
I'm never going to convince you that you're wrong.
And you come to this program basically unarmed because you don't have a single fact to back up one word you're saying.
But, however, you represent a lot of Democrats that are purely run on emotion, not facts, not information, not truth, but on just, you know, you're driven by your hatred.
Listen, let me give you a biblical quote about hatred.
You should love God with all your heart, mind, body, and soul, and your neighbor as yourself.
And you forgive others as we forgive.
If you keep going through life that angry, David, it's not going to end well for you because anger only hurts yourself.
So I'm giving you that free advice, and I don't hate anybody.
My advice to you is don't hate anybody.
It's not good for your mind, your heart, your soul.
Okay?
You're a Catholic, right?
No, I'm a non-denominational Christian.
He ain't no Christian because the stuff you talk about is I'm not a good, you're right.
I'm a sinner like every other person in the world.
You're right.
Guilty is charged.
And you know, to be so anti-gay.
I'm not anti-gay.
I am a very libertarian.
I don't care what people do in the privacy of their own bedroom.
It's none of my business.
Dude, I'm just telling you, I'm very libertarian.
People's personal lives.
I don't care.
It's none of my business.
You're a libertarian now, but you'd be hollering Republican tomorrow.
No, I'm not a registered Republican either.
One of the biggest phonies in America.
Does that make you feel good?
Tell me everything, everything you've ever wanted to say to me.
Why don't you just unload on me?
Just let it out.
You feel good.
You don't sound like you feel good.
You sound like a very angry liberal.
You don't want to sit on the radio and talk with anger every day because you're unhappy.
I'm not angry.
I'm not unhappy.
I just feel I'm sad for my country.
I'm sad for the state of all the problems we have with the economy, with the high cost of energy, with inflation, all that's preventable.
The problems we have at our border, all that's preventable.
If we had a president that knew what day of the week it was and was engaged with world events, I don't think China and Russia and Iran would be in an alliance basically to eradicate America's standing in the world and become world dominant.
That's what China's trying to do, and you don't seem to see it.
But I can't make you see it.
It wasn't Donald Trump.
All right.
I'm done talking to you, David.
I've had it.
I've given you enough time.
God bless you.
Appreciate the call.
I'm earning my money today.
Hannity tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel.
Josh Hawley calling out the DOJ and Merrick Garland saying that he lied before a congressional committee.
We'll get to that.
Marco Rubio and the danger of China.
We'll look at the bad economic news out now, seemingly every single day.
And also we'll look at Donald Trump's interview with Tucker.
We'll talk about that and much, much more.
Set your DBR at 9 Eastern, Hannity Fox News.
Set your DBR.
We'll see you tonight.
Back here tomorrow.
Thank you for making this show possible.
▲
Export Selection