All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 16, 2023 - Sean Hannity Show
32:46
Gregg Jarrett and Brett Tolman - August 15th, 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.
All right, news roundup and information overload hour.
Toll-free number is 800-941-Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
We did bring up with Newt Gingrich earlier in the program today something that is now a legitimate issue.
Even ABCNews.com had a story about this.
Georgia court's apparent error and early publishing of charges gives Trump an opening to attack the case.
Yes, it does.
And President Trump's legal team has now already suggested that they would claim prosecutorial misconduct, saying shortly after the document was posted that this was not a simple administrative mistake, but it was emblematic of the pervasive, glaring constitutional violations which have plagued this case from its very inception.
The events that have unfolded today have been shocking and absurd, starting with a leak of a presumed and premature indictment before witnesses had testified and grand jurors had deliberated, and ending with the DA being unable to offer any explanation at all.
These are lawyers, Drew Binling, Jennifer Little, and Marissa Goldberg, in a statement that they had released.
In light of this major fumble, the Fulton County DA's office clearly decided to force through and rush this 98-page indictment.
Now, that is true because we know that witnesses that were scheduled to talk tomorrow, Axios had a piece, you know, yesterday that came out, said, yeah, the former lieutenant governor of Georgia was scheduled to go in on Tuesday.
Well, he went in on Monday, and that led to the expedited process, the late-night session that they had, et cetera, et cetera.
Anyway, President Trump himself and the Trump campaign jumped on this as well, saying that the grand jury testimony had not even finished, but it's clear the DA has already decided how this case is going to end.
Is that prosecutorial misconduct?
Anyway, by the way, when you go to Fannie Willis last night, she was asked about this, had no answer for it.
Listen.
Today there was a fictitious document, according to the Fulton County Clerk's Office, that was circulated online with charges against former President Donald Trump.
That fictitious document matched exactly the charges that we now see in this indictment.
Can you tell us more about that document, Leak?
Because now you have the former president's lawyers who are saying this is emblematic of a serious problem with your office.
No, I can't tell you anything about what you refer to.
What I can tell you is that we had a grand jury here in Fulton County.
They deliberated till almost 8 o'clock, if not right after 8 o'clock.
An indictment was returned.
It was true-billed, and you now have an indictment.
I am not an expert on clerks' duties or even administrative duties.
I wouldn't know how to work that system, and so I'm not going to speculate.
Not going to speculate, okay?
Asked directly if she has had contact with the special counsel, Jack Smith.
Doesn't want to answer that question either.
And have you had any contact with the special counsel about the overlap between this indictment and the federal indictment?
I'm not going to discuss our investigation at this time.
That's a simple yes or no answer.
And then on the Trump indictment, the law is completely nonpartisan.
Really?
We're supposed to believe that?
Is this like a big joke or, you know, comedy hour, stand-up, you know, open mic night?
Call it whatever you want.
Here's what she said.
The arguments made by former President Trump that this is a politically motivated indictment.
I make decisions in this office based on the facts and the law.
The law is completely nonpartisan.
That's how decisions are made in every case.
To date, this office has indicted since I've been sitting as a district attorney over 12,000 cases.
This is the 11th RICO indictment.
We followed the same process.
We look at the facts, we look at the law, and we bring charges.
Okay.
Anyway, our legal panel is with us.
Greg Jarrett, author of the now current bestseller trial of the century.
Brett Tolman, former federal prosecutor, served as U.S. Attorney for Utah.
By the way, welcome both of you.
19 people indicted last night.
The theatrics earlier in the day.
I'll ask you, Brett, does the Trump campaign have a case to make here as it relates to this dump early in the day?
Whoopsie, Daisy.
They hadn't even heard from witnesses, but they were confident that they wouldn't be able to indict a ham sandwich and already had it all written out.
The press was ready to go.
Yeah, Sean, thanks for having me on.
I'll tell you that they're adding up, they're piling up the types of motions and arguments that the Trump team are going to be able to make.
When you consider the special purpose grand jury that assembled and the foreman of the grand jury and the comments made there, the comments made by Fannie Willis leading up to the investigation and during the investigation.
And then you have this leak.
I will tell you, though, I think the bigger issue is actually what they charged.
I describe this as a true Frankenstein.
Mary Shelley would have been repulsed by it is law and facts being put together.
It needs to be scorned, torn apart, and its creator ran out of office.
Truly, you take a RICO case, for example.
I've brought these cases.
You have to prove a corrupt organization, but you have to actually have evidence of an organization.
And it can't be just a client and his lawyers making legal arguments.
And then you have to show, if you can satisfy that, that there is an organization that is corrupt.
You have to satisfy the evidence that the purpose of the organization is to commit predicate crimes.
Well, the crimes they list, Sean, in this indictment are actually lawful actions.
They don't list criminal predicates that they can use in their RICO case.
So for me, it's sad that we're here.
It's another political weaponization of a justice system, but it's embarrassing.
I think it's grounds for an investigation of this DA and disbarment.
Well, I mean, we now have three examples where it's obvious.
I mean, you have an AG in New York, you have a DA in New York.
They ran on a platform to get one man, one organization, one family.
And that was the Trump family, the Trump organization, Donald Trump himself.
And obviously, the radicalism does not exclude other DAs and prosecutors in other states.
Greg Jarrett, we have talked at length about, for example, the documents case and the treatment of Hillary Clinton, the treatment of Joe Biden and the treatment versus Donald Trump.
We have talked at length about corruption.
We now are investigating the Joe Biden bribery and money laundering scandal allegations, and the evidence is accumulating daily, and everybody seems to want to ignore that.
Seems far more serious in my mind, especially because it involves our top geopolitical foes than a document issue that a lot of people seem to have, or this stupid indictment in New York, or relitigating January 6th for the 400 million time.
You know, these four indictments Are more like a corrupt criminal enterprise being run by prosecutors than anything Trump ever did.
You know, when you read this Georgia indictment, it is really a political denunciation of Trump.
I mean, the DA claims that everything Trump did on social media, public comments, speeches, messages, telephone calls, all part of a grand criminal conspiracy.
And I'll give you some examples.
I mean, Fannie Willis insists that when Trump urged his supporters to watch a hearing on TV or sign petitions or verify signatures or solicit phone numbers, he was committing, and I'll quote here, overt acts in furtherance of a conspiracy.
She literally makes that claim in the indictment.
Now, the absurdity of that is self-evident.
She also claims that everything Trump said was false.
Well, even if you accept that, so what?
The Supreme Court has said that false claims are protected lawful speech under the First Amendment.
So, you know, this is a partisan DA determined to weaponize the legal system against political opponents.
And this is a frontal assault on the rule of law.
Well, let me ask overall, when you look at the charges and, you know, the, quote, enterprise and the RICO and racketeering aspect of all of this, I mean, I found it a little bit strange and a little bit odd that they went through chapter and verse in Pennsylvania and Arizona and Michigan and all these other states.
Is that relevant to the case that they're trying to bring here in your view?
It's only relevant to individuals who aren't going to be shown the full picture.
And that's a grand jury.
You know, they get to go in, they get to use hearsay, they get to couch it in terms of, you know, misbehavior and lies about the election.
And so a grand jury sitting there, ordinary people, have no background in the law, will trust and rely on the prosecutors on this.
But to what Greg was articulating, and I think, Sean, you very well summarized, it's not that we're irate because Donald Trump is being mistreated.
What causes those of us who have brought RICO cases or conspiracy charges and sat in front of juries and sent individuals to prison for these crimes, this doesn't come close to being in the heartland of those cases nor even in the atmosphere of the intention of those statutes.
And so then we look at how they're using the criminal justice system and we say, this right here jeopardizes our ability to have confidence in the rule of law and in our trust that our leaders that we elect into those positions will actually use that power, that incredible power with solemnity and thoughtfulness.
That's out the window now.
And so we live in a different America going forward.
Well, that's pretty scary if we have a dual justice system.
It's scary if we weaponize the Department of Justice and politicized it like the FBI.
Is that the state of America today?
You know, we've been spending a lot of time, Greg, going over the outright lies of Joe Biden.
You know, never discussed foreign business deals with Hunter, my brother, or anybody for that matter, lie.
I've never met with any of my son's business partners.
Well, talk about the Cafe Milano and the phone calls that he made and the discussions he had even with Burisma executives leading to the actions that Joe Biden took that resulted in the enrichment, a continued enrichment of his son Hunter in Ukraine, or the lie that the Biden family didn't get any money from China.
We've debunked that lie.
The idiocy of his statement that Hunter's done nothing wrong or that the laptop was Russian disinformation.
A lot of lies that Joe has told to it and tens of millions of dollars in the family coffers funneled through shell corporations paying, according to James Comer, nine Biden family members, including one addicted to drugs and even grandchildren.
What did they do for that money when they admit, in the case of Hunter, he had no experience in any of these fields?
You know, Americans are pretty smart.
They see this for what it is.
They watched in disbelief as Hillary Clinton got away with clear crimes, including obstruction of justice in her email scandal.
They watched as James Cummin and the FBI lied and committed crimes in their Russia collusion hoax.
And they watched Trump being victimized in that hoax for three long years, as the media insisted he was a Manchurian candidate and a Russian secret Russian agent.
And now they see these prosecutions not as legitimate, but as political persecutions.
And I agree with Brett.
This tactic of bringing racketeering charges is such an egregious abuse of the statute.
I mean, racketeering requires proof of a corrupt, organized criminal enterprise and a repeated pattern of systemic illegal behavior.
It's usually extortion for monetary profit, control of property.
Here, the DA is treating RICO like this elastic rubber band and stretching it until it snaps.
And, you know, the chilling effect is severe.
In the future, losing candidates will certainly fear that they'll be criminally prosecuted if they exercise their rights under law by filing an election challenge.
Which, by the way, we played it at the bottom of the last half hour, montage that, you know, shows that they've done it many, many times.
All right, quick breakboard with our legal panel, Greg Jarrett, Brett Tolman on the other side.
Then your calls, 800-941-Sean, as we continue.
You're on the Sean Hannity Show, a place where free speech and the First Amendment are still alive and well.
Liberalism is a failed ideology.
Get your dose of independence and liberty every weekday right here with Sean.
Sean Hannity.
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 Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
Greg Jow, we continue our legal panel.
Greg Jarrett and Brett Tolman are with us.
800-941, Sean, your call's at the bottom of the half hour.
Let me ask you both 15 seconds each.
What is the political fallout of this?
Does Donald Trump does the strategy, the plan to burden him and put the weight of all of these indictments on him and ultimately trials on him, does it have the effect that they want, which is to stop him from being a viable candidate?
Brett, you go first.
Only if they put him in jail.
And otherwise, he's going to grow stronger.
People are going to, they're seeing him.
Why would they not put him in jail if they get a conviction, which I would argue in New York, D.C., and Fulton County is highly likely.
It is likely.
I think it's where they want to go.
If they get that done prior to the election, it's very, very difficult to run.
But even then, Sean, he's strong and he grows in strength as they attack him.
Your take, Greg, real quick.
I don't know what the political result will be because this defies all models of American political history.
This is unique beyond description.
So who knows?
All right, Greg Jarrett, thank you.
Brett Tolman, thank you.
We appreciate it.
800-941-Sean, our number.
If you want to be a part of the program, we'll get to your calls coming up next.
If you're in trouble with the IRS, owe back taxes, didn't file returns in years gone by, or maybe you filed, but there's no way you can pay the IRS what you owe.
You are crazy to deal with this on your own.
The IRS is not on your side.
But there is a company out there that will help you.
And I've been talking about RushtaxResolution.com.
All the money and headaches they've been saving my listeners now for years.
They have an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, the only company I trust and recommend if the IRS has you in their crosshairs.
And unlike other tax firms, RushtaxResolution.com, they're not going to charge you a penny to do an IRS transcript investigation.
And they'll give you a free consultation and they'll do the transcript investigation for free.
And by the way, they'll find out what the IRS has in your file.
And here's the best part.
They'll only take your case if they know they can help you.
Period.
Toll-free.
800-299-8077.
800-299-8077.
On the web.
One word, rushtaxresolution.com.
All right, let's get to our busy phones.
I know a lot of you standing by, angry, mad, upset, frustrated, wondering what's happening to your country, worried about the dual system of justice, weaponization of justice, criminalizing political differences.
I get it.
Trust me.
Wayne, Pennsylvania, next, Sean Hannity Show.
Hey, Sean, thanks for taking my call.
Pete.
Thank you.
I'd like to make two quick points on taxes.
And I have a question to you concerning Georgia.
Two points on taxes.
First one, I have an LLC, and I have an accountant do my taxes.
And you have to be very specific on what your business, what it does, whether it performs a service or deals with products.
And your taxes are paid quarterly, state and federal.
Now, I'd like to know who Hunter's accountant is, because he must know taxes weren't being paid on all these LLCs that he had.
Second point, personal taxes.
A parent cannot gift more than, I believe it's either $14,000 or $17,000 a year.
Anything over that is taxable.
Now, you mentioned that Hunter's been floating money to his father well over $14,000 or $17,000 a year.
Where's the accountant?
I'd like to retain him.
I think it's way more than that.
Hunter claims he was giving half his income to Pops, paying for Pops' home repairs.
We see those emails with the financial guy of the Rosemont Seneca group, this guy, Eric Schwerin.
I think he's supposed to testify before Congress.
Hopefully he'll shed some light on a lot of this.
But, you know, massive home repair bills for Pops.
Never mind 10% for the big guy.
Well, shouldn't his accountant be called in and questioned?
There's red flags there.
So I'm scratching.
Well, no, I mean, James Comer is now asking for all these financial records of the Biden family, and now he's going to be calling in Biden family members to testify.
Call in the accountant, too.
And my question to you on Georgia is that, and correct me if I'm wrong, there was a location where they were counting votes, and there was supposedly a water main break.
Yeah, my understanding and memory, if my memory serves me well, is that had happened earlier in the day, and there was that controversy about that.
And apparently it was not a big deal, but it was brought up as a reason that maybe they were going to stop.
I just don't fully remember it, but that was an issue, yes.
And remember there was video of these tables with long black tablecloths that reached to the floor, and I think they evacuated or something happened where all of the Republican counters had to evacuate.
The media and other people were asked to leave the room is my recollection, but I can't say 100% because now we're going back almost three years, so you got to cut me some lock here.
All right.
Can someone do some research?
Yeah, I'll go back and take a look at it for sure.
You know, I don't think this really has to do with the legal side of it.
Do you?
Something fishy is going on.
If you're hiding boxes underneath a table with a black tablecloth that reaches the floor, that should be all out in the open so people could see that and not hidden.
It looked like, if I remember, wasn't it like suitcases?
Something like that.
And it just seemed odd.
If I recall correctly, again, I'm giving myself some breathing room here.
But if I recall correctly, they just claimed, oh, no, no, they had had that under there and it was perfectly normal.
You know, do I, look, do I think things, nefarious things happened in terms of the elections being run properly in 2020?
I do not.
I mean, let me start with the basics.
States have laws that partisan observers got to watch the vote count.
Those laws were bypassed with COVID being the main argument for not enforcing the law.
Did we have states like Pennsylvania that had constitutions that, you know, for example, there's very specific constitutional limits on people that can vote by mail in the state of Pennsylvania.
Now, the legislature, rather than doing the right and difficult thing of amending the Constitution, they took an easier road and they passed legislation.
But that's not how you amend the Constitution.
I would argue that is unlawful.
You had a similar case in Wisconsin, a 3-4 decision that went against President Trump's side.
And in that case, the Chief Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court wrote a stinging rebuke of his fellow justices saying if you're going to allow this lawlessness to continue, it's never going to stop.
And it was pretty powerful.
But again, it was a 3-4 closed decision.
And now, I believe over the issue of abortion, I think now they have a majority liberal or left Supreme Court in Wisconsin, state Supreme Court.
So anyway, appreciate the call, my friend.
Thank you.
Delaware and Tricia next on the Sean Hannity Show.
Hi.
First of all, I have to tell you that at 9 o'clock, all eyes are on you with me.
I'll have to set my TVR.
Thank you.
Every day, Monday through Friday, 9 to 10.
I appreciate it.
It keeps me working.
I can't work without your support.
I'm here for you, Sean.
Thank you.
Anyway, I wanted to.
Oh, can you click?
I'm sorry, somebody came in.
I wanted to say that interview that you did with Tony Bobolinski.
Is there any way that you can bring that on or even better, have one of those one-on-one with Tony too?
Because I remember in this interview, I'm not sure if it was with you talking or Tucker talking.
My memory is like blah.
Tucker did the first interview with him.
I had a follow-up subsequent interview with him.
My understanding is I know his name has come up to be a witness.
I don't know what the status of that is.
Well, here's the thing.
I remember in the interview when you guys were talking about Tony meeting him in a bar in the hotel, and he was there.
I mean, they're always saying that they never meet each other.
They never, you know, he doesn't have anything to do with his business partners, which we all know is baloney.
But I remember that part of the interview when they met a couple.
Well, they've actually met a couple times, but particularly in that bar.
I don't know.
I just feel I'm in the background.
I'm chanting, get Tony, get Tony, have another interview, because he had so much information about the goings-on between the Biden family, you know, the business and everything.
I would think that the committee is probably, you know, ahead of us.
And my understanding was I know his name has come up.
I've heard it before, as going before the House Oversight Committee.
We told you yesterday and again today that you have this former supervisory agent for the FBI testifying.
And I mean, I thought it was very, very powerful testimony.
And he goes, you know, before the committee and very, very, you know, powerfully lays out the case about how things weren't run right on a lot of fronts.
Absolutely.
But those two interviews.
Remember, too, he's the one that tipped us off about the FBI supervisory agent.
He tipped off Team Biden about a planned interview, FBI interview with Hunter.
And that interview never happened as a result of that.
So much interview.
And I think this was back in 2020 when I first aired or viewed that.
I'm in the background saying, yes, somebody's finally coming forward.
And then with all these other whistleblowers that have been coming forward, I'm like, this is going to happen.
I think this is really going to happen, that they're going to call them down for what they did, what they're doing.
And we know it's true.
The American people see it.
Look, I think this House of Cards, I think the walls are closing in on the Biden family.
And there are two things happening simultaneously.
I think that the number of Democrats that know that Joe is weak and frail and a cognitive mess and not up to even this term, never mind a second term, and his policies are failing, they will either use some, they will use this scandal to take him down.
Now, if you go to New York, maybe the perception is that Republicans in New York took out Andrew Cuomo.
I could tell you for a fact, that's not true.
It was Democrats that wanted Andrew Cuomo out, and they made it their mission to get rid of him, even some political rivals of him.
So that was not the workings of the Republicans.
That was Democrats.
And I think there are a lot of Democrats that will be very quick to jump off the Biden train once given a really good opportunity.
And once this gets into the political bloodstream about all of Joe Biden's lying about the family syndicate and the business and what he knew and how he participated and how he benefited financially and all of the ways that the money was filtered through varying show corporations, I think it's going to become very apparent.
This is far bigger than any one of these four indictments of Donald J. Trump and that some Democrats are going to not want him at the top of the ticket.
Look, I don't think it's an accident that Gavin Newsom did an interview with me and he's going to debate.
Yes, I watched it.
Yeah.
And that he's going to debate Ron DeSantis with me as the moderator.
You know, give him credit for it.
But I think that's going to be interesting TV.
If he's not thinking about 2024, which he says he's not, and I'll take him at his word, but he's certainly thinking about 2028.
I don't think there's any doubt about that.
I think so too.
But I'm so happy that you took my call.
And I'm so happy to watch you every night and see all that you do for our America.
And I see what we get to see what's truly going on.
Just the only station, the only show that I watch that I know I'm getting the truth.
And I just want you to know that I appreciate it.
And if heroes come with it without capes, it would be you, Comer, Jordan, all of you guys up there just trying to hit the ball out of the park for the American people.
And I just want you to know that I appreciate you.
And like I said, I'm a staunch fan.
It means more than, you know, look, let me just say this, and this is important for everybody to understand.
Everybody is important in this.
It's all hands on deck.
It is very, very hard for a Republican to win the presidency.
You've got to run the table.
And I know states have changed in many ways because of what I call accelerated mass migration out of states like New York, New Jersey, California.
That's one thing.
You're not going to win those states anyway.
But the conservatives that are leaving Pennsylvania, the conservatives leaving Wisconsin and Michigan is very alarming.
And the numbers of liberal Californians heading into Arizona and Nevada are very alarming.
So it makes the electoral map for Republicans that much harder.
And it was hard enough to begin with.
And you got to run the table.
It's not just Florida and Ohio anymore.
I'm not that worried about Ohio and Florida, but I'm worried about Georgia, and I'm worried about even North Carolina.
You got to keep an eye on it.
And Pennsylvania and Arizona and Wisconsin and Michigan.
I mean, these will be the states that determine the outcome of the 2024 election, in my view.
Anyway, appreciate the call.
Thank you, Trisha.
I appreciate you.
800-94-1-Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, we are loaded up with every aspect of the double standard that exists in this country.
We'll have the latest on the Joe Biden bribery money laundering scandal allegations that the media is ignoring.
Laura Trump tonight, Kellyanne Conway, Donald Trump's attorney, Alina Haba, Lindsey Graham, the great one Mark Levin, Bob McDonald, who was charged and found guilty.
He was once the Virginia governor, and that was done by the special counsel, Jack Smith.
And then the Supreme Court overturned that conviction.
9-0.
Victor Davis Hansen, much more.
Sai DVR, Hannity, 9-Eastern, Fox.
We'll see you tonight, back here tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection