All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 17, 2024 - Sean Hannity Show
29:48
Fani Willis Unhinged - February 16th, Hour 3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
All right, news roundup and information overload hour.
Glad you're with us this Friday.
Here's our toll-free telephone number.
It's 800-941-Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
You know, as all of these legal issues now coming to a head as it relates to President Trump, if anybody is a fair-minded American, if anybody believes in that justice should be blind, if anyone believes in equal justice of our laws, equal application of our laws, we're living in a time, I love Levin's line the best.
It's a post-constitutional America.
It's a very, very, very, very dangerous time for the country.
You can call it lawfare.
You can call it the criminalization of political differences.
There's all sorts of names, a dual justice system and the weaponization of our Justice Department, how it's been politicized as well.
You can call it any of the above.
And I don't care if we're talking about Ngoron and an attorney general in New York.
You have an attorney general run on a platform to destroy one man, one family, one organization.
And then you got a judge.
The whole heart of this case is about, quote, valuations.
Meanwhile, you've got to consider nobody complained.
There's not one bank that has complained.
There's not one insurance company that has complained.
There's not any person involved in this that didn't get paid the money that they were promised.
In the case of Donald J. Trump, what did you have?
Okay, they put in a loan application.
And banks then have a fiduciary responsibility to figure out when they put valuations of property, collateral, et cetera.
It's up to them to make that decision based on their own expertise.
They have that responsibility for anybody that's invested in the company that's part of the company.
No company can survive.
Nobody takes a lendee's word for it.
Oh, my building, my house is worth $5,000 billion, whatever, and runs with that.
That's not how it works.
Never mind the fact that every contract that Donald Trump had has a general disclaimer in there that says, don't take our valuations, get your own valuations and make your own decision.
Nobody complained at all.
You know, this idea that it's about valuations, but then you have a judge in this case.
You have an attorney general, first of all, that says, I'm going after this one organization.
Then you have a judge in the case that does not move away from a valuation of Mar-a-Lago at $18 million.
Now, I've shown on TV, I'll show it again tonight.
You can get a two-acre empty lot, oceanfront lot that's on sale in Palm Beach.
If it hasn't been sold yet, but it was on the market when this case first came up for $200 million.
You're paying for two acres of dirt.
It's the view that raises the cost of money.
I know it sounds insane to all of you that live in other parts of the country, but that's what it costs in Palm Beach, Florida.
Then you got Mar-a-Lago, 22 acres.
You got a historic building.
It is in tip-top shape.
It's got not one, but two clubs.
It's on the intercoastal side, and it's also on the oceanfront side.
It's got 58 rooms.
It's got 40 some-odd bathrooms.
It's got all these other buildings associated with the property as well, cottages, et cetera, tennis courts, whatever.
It's got a salon.
It's got everything you'd ever want.
Oh, but that's only worth $18 million.
And the judge's valuation was more wrong than anything they ever accused Donald Trump of.
But still, they stuck to all of this.
This has been the case.
Now, if you love this country and you believe in equal justice, I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican, a liberal or a conservative, you have to look at this objectively and say, this is insanity.
And then you got the case in Georgia.
Okay, well, we've got Fannie Willis.
Fanny Willis or Fonnie, I guess is the proper pronunciation.
Oh, yeah, she hires a guy that has never tried a felony case in his life.
That's the top guy.
You had more qualified people that she paid less, pays the guy over $650,000.
This guy's on the stand sweating his ass off because he's nervous as hell.
They're involved together, according to the best friend, one of the best friends of Fonnie Willis since 2019.
And they're taking the money that she's paying them, and they're going on all these elaborate vacations, as we've pointed out.
Does this sound like equal justice to you?
Does this sound like equal application of our laws to you?
Does this sound constitutional to you?
Or does it sound like a banana republic?
Does it sound like political vengeance?
Did it sound like the weaponization of our justice system?
You know, now that we know that, in fact, Joe Biden, you know, willfully kept these documents in really a dozen locations, but four separate individual locations, but all throughout the four locations.
And you've got top secret, classified information that he kept willingly.
And then you have a special prosecutor that says, yeah, but he's going to come across as a very, very sincere, nice old man that has really severe memory problems.
So we're not going to charge him.
Wow, that's the answer.
Hillary Clinton, top secret, classified information all over her servers that we pretty much know will compromised and that our top adversaries had access to.
We're told in real time.
And never mind the 33,000 subpoenaed emails that she deleted with something we had never heard of called bleach bit.
Her aides, you know, busting up devices with hammers, you know, blackberries and iPhones and removing SIM cards.
Oh, I don't know where I grew up.
Maybe the word obstruction just comes to mind, pops into my little old head.
And then, of course, no reasonable prosecutor would ever prosecute.
This is not justice as it is designed in this country.
And you may think, well, I don't like Donald Trump.
I'm glad this is happening to Donald Trump.
Good.
I'm glad.
Okay.
Well, what if it happens to you or somebody that you support politically?
How are you going to feel then?
Because if it can happen to one person, I promise you it can happen to anybody.
If you institutionalize corruption, it will be with you forever.
And the double standard, we got, anyway, joining us for our analysis of all of this is Greg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst, best-selling author, Pam Bondi, former attorney general of the great state of Florida.
Welcome both of you to this Friday fun edition of Hannity.
Guys, good to have you both.
I mean, it really now fundamentally comes down to simple questions, Pam.
Do we have equal justice under the law in this country?
Is justice blind in America?
Do we have equal application of our laws in this country?
Or do we have a two-tier justice system?
To me, it's obvious.
Sean, it should be obvious to every American right now.
You know, as a career prosecutor, I've never seen anything like this in my life.
And as you said, every American should be worried right now.
If they can weaponize our government, weaponize our law enforcement officers, weaponize our prosecutors, weaponize our judges to behave this way and do these things, our system of justice is in big, big trouble.
Having said that, most of the prosecutors, all of the ones I have worked with, are great.
But then when you bring in these few, Sean, they can bring down our entire system of justice.
And you always say that about the great men and women in law enforcement as well.
Well, I do say that.
And, you know, they work hard to apply justice equally, most of them.
And yet, what's the thanks they get?
They can get the hellbeat out of them in Times Square in New York, only to have the perpetrators released with no bail, flipping the double bird on the way out of prison and heading off to the sanctuary state of California.
That sounds like a lawless society to me, Greg Jarrett.
It is lawless.
The good news is Americans are smart.
They're not easily fooled.
And they see what Biden and Democrats and the prosecutors are doing here.
They are bringing politically motivated cases by contorting the law.
They don't care that it'll be overturned on appeal.
And I think any conviction would be in any of the four indictments because they just want to harm Donald Trump's chances for reelection.
And quite frankly, they're sort of taking a page out of the Vladimir Putin playbook.
And Nalvani, he arrested him, phonied up evidence.
There was a show trial.
He was tossed in a gulag in the Arctic.
And, of course, tragically, he ends up dead.
You know, this is why Americans see what's going on here, and that's why.
But Greg, when you have a president that is going to have convictions or a presidential candidate with convictions in the months leading up to an election, how's that going to impact a political race?
I've said it from the beginning.
I don't think Trump can get a fair hearing in New York, or I don't think he can get a fair trial in D.C.
I don't think he can get a fair trial in Fulton County, Georgia.
I don't think he can get a fair trial in any of these venues.
No, maybe in Florida you can get a fair trial if the classified documents case goes forward, and I'm dubious about that.
But look, my point is, every time that Donald Trump was indicted, his poll numbers went up.
His campaign contributions increased substantially.
Americans are reacting adversely to this.
It extends to Trump's benefit politically, and it hurts Joe Biden.
And I gently disagree a little bit.
Some Americans are acting that way.
But then you got other groups of Americans.
They're giddy.
They're doing backflips.
They're happy with every new nuance development attack that they can make.
They act as though this is sacrosanct.
They don't want to look with an open set of eyes and say, well, why was Hillary and Joe treated one way and Trump another way?
That doesn't cross their mind, Greg.
That's a problem.
Yeah, but those people were never going to vote for Trump to begin with.
It's the people in the middle, which is the vast majority of voters.
Look at the polling of independents.
They have reacted negatively to what these Democrats have done with these politically driven indictments of Donald Trump.
To them, it makes a material difference because they're smart, they're open-minded, and they recognize the obvious in plain sight.
Pam Bondi, as we now get into the criminal side of these things, where do you stand on the issue of the Supreme Court and immunity?
Because if the Supreme Court does not take up the immunity issue, and I think they should do it before any trial, and there's some of the arguments that were made in earlier hearings that I didn't particularly like.
I think better arguments could be made.
But putting that aside, if they don't take that up, that trial goes forward probably sometime May, June, July.
Would you agree?
Yeah, we'll definitely go forward if they don't take it up.
Sean, they have to take it up.
The president has to have immunity.
Here's why Jack Smith has really stuck his head in the sand on this.
He's really messed up himself because he said the Supreme Court needs to hear the immunity, but he wanted them to hear it expedited.
And now, I don't think they're going to do that, nor should they.
Their regular docket, assuming they take it, and I feel they must take it, their regular docket is next November.
So I've never seen a case where a prosecutor is coming in saying, I want an expedited hearing because, of course, they want Donald Trump to be in trial, as you said, before the election.
Well, why do I suspect that they're probably going to rule on the issue of Trump being on the ballot?
That should be a no-brainer 9-0 decision, although I didn't like, I felt that the justices were trying to feed both sides what their argument should be, and I didn't like that aspect of it.
Okay, and don't you think they can come out with a one sentence saying we're not going to take it up at this time?
Well, they can, but I think they need to hear the issue of immunity.
The issue of immunity must be heard to protect the president.
He has presidential immunity.
You know, they're a mixed bag right now.
We don't know how they're going to rule.
It should be unanimous.
But interested to hear what Greg thinks, but they should take it up, but they should take it up in their normal course of business, and the trial should be stayed in the meantime, meaning it should go the normal course of business and go to trial after the election.
Or if they grant him immunity, then it goes away, as it should.
Again, this is all a witch hunt to keep him out of office.
They're trying to take his freedom.
They're trying to lock him up.
They're doing it in multiple jurisdictions, and they're even doing it in state court in some states to keep him where he can't pardon himself.
Then, Sean, look at the New York case, Letitia James.
They're trying to ruin him financially.
They're coming at him from every angle, and it's the most conservative, corrupt effort ever seen in my career.
I think in the history country.
I got to run, but will they take the case, Greg Jarrett?
The U.S. Supreme Court case on immunity.
I think what they want to do is slow it down because beyond the immunity debate, the justices already are set to hear this related J-6 case on obstruction that could completely knock out half of Special Counsel Smith's case against Donald Trump.
You know, Supreme Court doesn't like to be hurried along.
They don't like to be told by Jack Smith, you need to act urgently.
And what was missing from his brief was the why?
Because he wants to rush to trial to interfere in a presidential election.
I hope they see that.
Anyway, great analysis, both of you.
We appreciate it.
800-941, Sean, if you want to be a part of the program on this Friday, your call's coming up next.
Toll-free, it's 800-941, Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
All right.
I know everybody's been patient.
Thank you for your patience.
Let's get to our busy, busy telephones.
Dave is in the great state of Kentucky.
Dave, how are you?
Glad you called, sir.
How you doing, sir?
I appreciate you taking my call.
It's always a pleasure.
Thank you.
What's going on?
Just something I wanted to bring to the forefront of attention.
I mean, I know people know this, but it seems we're forgetting about it.
In the four years of Donald Trump's presidency, how much money did he make as the president?
I mean, understand it.
He never cashed a paycheck.
He gave it away to charity every single paycheck.
Yes, that's true.
Donald Trump does not need the money to be the president.
So look at what he's went through before he took office, since he's took office, since he's been out of office.
If the man is doing what he's doing today, if it's not for the love of country, for God's sake, what else is it?
Well, I mean, look, not only did he not get paid, you know, just look at the legal bills alone.
This cost him, well, an opportunity cost.
You can add this guy would have made a lot of money in these years in his life by doing business.
But more importantly, the amount of money he's spending on legal fees is astronomical.
I mean, by the time this is all said and done, I wouldn't be surprised if he's at anywhere from $500 million to $1 billion in legal fees.
I mean, it's just unbelievable.
This is why you don't weaponize our justice system.
You know, this is why we have a justice system.
If you need an attorney and cannot afford one, one will be provided for you.
Everybody has a right to representation.
Now, Donald Trump wouldn't qualify, nor would he want those lawyers, probably in most cases.
And he's got to pay for the best attorneys that cost the most amount of money.
And as somebody that has to hire attorneys way more than I want to hire them, I can tell you there's not one that I hire because I only hire the best that is inexpensive.
And I have to do that because of the never-ending attacks by people that have my entire career wanted to silence my voice, shut me down, get me fired, boycott me, and make sure that I pretty much go away.
And that's just the reality of the America that's divided that we live in today.
You want to know why I don't support boycotts, cancellations, firings?
That's why.
Well, thank you for doing what you do.
And I know there's a few other conservative talk show hosts.
And I thank all of y'all for the fight.
And just one other point about our president.
And this might not be fair to say, but, you know, I always judge a man not by the car he drives or the house he lives in.
But to me, one of the best, biggest guides or judging a person is by his kids.
And tell me Donald Trump's children ain't successful for their own right, not just because their last name is Trump.
You know, I mean, I think it says a lot about him.
And, you know, I kind of have a pretty good feel for how he was as a dad because I've gotten to know all his kids.
I probably know Eric the best of all of them.
But, you know, look at Ivanka.
Look at Don Jr.
Look at Barron.
Baron Trump.
I mean, I had a conversation with Baron.
I've had a couple of conversations with Baron.
I'm blown away how bright this young man is.
Incredibly intelligent, incredibly bright.
He has an amazing future ahead of himself.
And a lot of it is his mother's influence, but also a lot is his father's influence.
You know, I think a strong father is pivotal for any child to emulate.
I try to be a strong father to my kids in everything that I do in every aspect of my life.
And nobody's going to be a perfect parent.
That doesn't exist.
If it does, tell me who it is because I like to interview them.
But with that said, yeah, I mean, although I do know good parents whose kids just go their own way and get in trouble, and you can't talk sense into them either.
I mean, that's sad to watch.
I don't know if you have friends like that.
You know they're good parents.
You know they're good people.
And their kids go down a tough road.
I know even Billy Graham's son, Franklin, who I love Franklin Graham.
He's one of the real deal Christians that I just admire.
This guy has an amazing organization, Samaritan's Purse, and all they do is raise money to help people around the world, and they do it with perfection.
It's amazing what Samaritan's Purse does.
But he gave his father a run for his money.
He was a pain in the neck growing up.
And he's the first to admit it.
I'm like, I would ask him and joke with him and say, why'd you do that to your poor father?
And he smiles and he laughs.
He goes, I know, I was awful.
But so was I in a lot of ways.
So I was just as guilty as he was.
Yes, but I'm just saying to everybody who wants to judge Donald Trump's character, his children should bring about a different side of recognizing character and what it is.
You know, I know, I have known Donald Trump long before he even really considered getting into politics.
There's a side of him I wish he'd show more often.
And that side of him is if you sat with him and ate dinner with this guy, you would be mesmerized by his wicked sense of humor, his incredible knowledge on pretty much any subject, his ability to communicate.
He's generous to a fault.
I've witnessed it up front.
One of the things that I've always said to him, I don't want anything from you, nothing.
And all I want, if you're going to do anything, save the country.
And when he was trying in 2015 and we were having private conversations and I was vetting him and saying, I'm not voting for anybody that's not conservative, we had those conversations deep into the night.
And they were, you know, really, really, they were on every issue imaginable.
And I began to realize, wow, deep down, this guy is a conservative.
And yeah, he played the game in New York so he could keep his workers working and keep putting up buildings and getting permits.
And that's the way it works in New York.
If you don't play that game, you're never putting up a building anywhere.
And I understood why he did it.
That's the system that he was stuck with.
It wasn't the right system.
He didn't even like it.
He knew what it was.
Anyway, my friend, God bless you.
You have a great weekend.
Let's say, hi, Mendy is in North Carolina.
Hey, Mendy, how are you?
Glad you called.
Happy Friday to you.
Happy Friday.
Hey, Sean.
So we lived in South America for over 15 years, and we saw all of the constant political volatility and the corruption.
And it was a joke that with the, I'm thinking of Clinton and Hillary Clinton and Biden and Hunter and all of the different criminal behavior that they've either been accused of or that there is tons of evidence for.
And there's a joke that all of these people that were into corruption in South America, that they would either flee the country or they'd get indicted, go to jail.
There's a seven-year rule that after seven years, it was like they could come back, everything was wiped off, they could run again and win.
And I'm seeing that two sides of that here with Trump's being convicted or being tried for everything possible under the sun, where we have evidence of all of these other potential criminal issues with all these other people.
But, you know, as long as a few years go by or they have the spin story going and the talking heads keeping it out there, they're able to run and win.
And on the other side, there's Trump, you know, getting kicked to the side and constantly being involved in all of these actual trials.
Well, I mean, conservatives out to keep it top of mind for all of these other issues and not just keeping it on Trump, because I feel like that's where we're what we're bad at.
Look, I think we're bad at it, you know, on a lot of different levels, unfortunately.
I really do.
I think the country has gotten way off course in so many different directions.
And I really believe that America is crumbling before our very eyes.
Our constitutional is being a constitution is being shredded.
That's not hyperbole on my part.
I think liberals are perfectly happy with it as long as the system is working for them and against their opponents.
They don't seem to care.
Look at voting, for example.
Really, we can't have a system of voting with more integrity.
Really?
Explain to me why you need a driver's license to buy beer, wine, spirits, jewel pods, a pack of cigarettes.
You got to be 21.
You need ID, but you don't need an ID for voting.
You don't want integrity.
You don't want signature verification to make sure the person is who they say they are for our elections.
You don't want, what, partisan observers watching.
It's perfectly okay to ignore laws like that, that partisan observers get to watch the vote count, but you keep them a thousand feet away where they can't see a darn thing.
And that's okay because you didn't make accommodations for COVID, even though you knew you needed to do so if you wanted to comply with the law, and that's perfectly fine with people.
I mean, there's so much wrong right now, and it's so easy to right these wrongs, but I don't know if I see among our fellows, see within our fellow citizens that they want to go there.
I love this country.
I want this country to thrive.
I want this country to prosper.
I want this country to be a land of hope and opportunity.
I want it to be that shining city on a hill.
It was, and it can be again.
I believe that too.
Anyway, Mendy, you raise a lot of good points.
Thank you.
I hope you have a great weekend.
Let's say hi to Steve in Connecticut.
Steve, you're on the Sean Hannity show.
Hi.
Good afternoon, sir.
You know, it's funny you were just talking about things boomeranging back, and that's kind of the point I was calling to make is with the Justice Department not believing that immunity follows the president out of office so much so they're willing to fight it to the Supreme Court.
They were pretty jubilant in their victory in the lower court.
How come they have not yet indicted Obama for targeting four Americans with drone strikes, which he admitted to doing?
If that immunity hasn't followed him, then why is that two-tier justice system, and that's the answer, why have they not indicted him for a crime he confessed to?
Because he deprived those citizens, who the world won't miss.
Don't mistake the point of my call, not to defend them, but to say he deprived them.
Well, there's not one person listening, I bet, that could name one of the four people you're talking about.
But your point's well taken, but you answered your own question, didn't you?
I sure did.
It's a two-tier justice system, but we have to point that out every day.
And that's a very specific example.
President admitted.
And then Eric Holder said, well, we believe that was in keeping with the use of fourth authorization, but no law passed by Congress can usurp the Constitution.
It's the other way around.
Their laws are supposed to be guided by the Constitution.
So the Fifth and 14th Amendments, still intact.
If the Supreme Court rules against immunity for the president or doesn't take it up in the lower ruling stands, they have to indict President Obama or their argument is gone.
But until never, it's just wasting your breath.
It's never going to happen.
You're not wasting your breath.
I take that back.
I take that back.
I think it's important that people speak out.
What you meant, sir?
I mean, it's just you and I both know it's never going to happen, especially under this administration.
I mean, this family, the level of corruption, the idea that you're doing business with our top geopolitical foes, and the person at the head of the company is compromised.
He's an admitted drug addict at the time.
He is, you know, he's got no experience and he's getting paid a fortune.
And Pops, who lied and said he never talked to anybody about it, ends up being at every meeting, you know, or all these meetings as chronicled by Devin Archer and others.
Well, it's enough to make me puke.
President Trump now, by the way, has responded.
He said the justice system in New York State and America as a whole is now under assault by partisan, deluded, biased judges and prosecutors.
Racist, corrupt AG Tish James has been obsessed with getting Trump for years and used crooked New York state judge and Goron to get an illegal, un-American judgment against me, my family, and my tremendous business.
I have helped New York City during its worst of times and now while it's overrun with violent Biden migrant crime and radicals are doing all they can do to kick me out.
This decision is a complete and total sham.
There were no victims, damages, no complaints, only satisfied banks and insurance companies, which made a ton of money, great financial statements that didn't even include the most valuable asset, which is the Trump brand.
Ironclad disclaimers, buyer beware, do your own due diligence, and amazing properties all over the world.
And all the other side had was a ridiculous $18 million valuation of magnificent Mar-a-Lago, an unconstitutional gag order, a consumer fraud statute never before used for this purpose, no jury allowed, and a refusal to send this disgusting charade to the commercial division where it would have been put to a deserving end.
Wow, pretty powerful.
We'll have a lot more.
Set your DVR, Hannity, tonight on the Fox News channel.
We are loaded up, and we hope you'll join us.
We have everybody.
Oh, my gosh, we got a great lineup.
Mark Garagos, Pam Bondi will join us tonight.
We'll also have on the program Alan Dershowitz.
Greg Jarrett is checking in.
We have all legal panels here, there, and everywhere.
We'll look at the mob, the media, Jason Chaffetz, Joe Concha, and we'll also check in with Jimmy Phala.
We'll try and put a little smile on your face on what is a brutal news week.
Anyway, thank you for being with us.
We'll see you tonight, 9 Eastern.
Set your DVR back here next week.
▲
Export Selection