Sean Hannity Show - Gregg Jarrett - February 22nd, Hour 2

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 23, 2024 - Sean Hannity Show

32:39

Gregg Jarrett - February 22nd, Hour 2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart Podcast.
	Well, we have come in.
	Come on, they are guitars and send you a contrast sound.
	We'll all be flying.
	How them a jail.
	And if you want a little bang and you yin yang, come along.
	The crooked New York State judge just ruled that I have to pay a fine of 355 million dollars for having built the perfect company.
	You need to listen to him and take him seriously.
	He is telling us what he wants to do.
	He wants to be a dictator on day one.
	Two weeks.
	Two weeks.
	What are they thinking?
	Only two hundred and fifty-six days left till the presidential election.
	Yeah, we're coming to your city Gonna play our guitars and sing you a country song From coast to coast.
	From border to border.
	From sea to shining sea.
	Sean Hannity is on.
	All right, hour two, Sean Hannity Show, toll-free, our numbers 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
	You know what's amazing that, you know, watching the media, the mob uh try and run defense on the Biden family syndicate is actually interesting to watch.
	It's a case study of things to watch, as a matter of fact, because there's so much that they get wrong.
	There is so much that they don't want to report.
	There's so much in terms of offering a defense for all things either Clinton or Biden, basically all things Democrats.
	I mean, that's what it really is.
	You know, I I mean they're now beginning.
	I know this over a conspiracy theory channel MSDNC.
	You know, the people that were responsible for using the dirty Russian disinformation dossier for three long years.
	They used it.
	And that was a quote, trusted source, Hillary Clinton uses a law firm, funnels money to an to uh an op research group.
	They hired this former MI6 guy by the name of Christopher Steele.
	He puts together a series of papers.
	They become known as the Russian dossier.
	And they were preaching this like this was gospel truth.
	And it turned out it was full of lies.
	It was a political document.
	Bruce Orr warned that it was a political document in August of 2016.
	You know, it's it's insane.
	And now they're saying, well, see, the the entire case of this informant Schmirnoff has fallen apart, and that means that everything involving the Bidens is not true.
	It's not been true the whole time.
	I love Jonathan Turley's take on this.
	Headline in the New York Post today.
	No, one liar doesn't clear them.
	And it doesn't clear them.
	You know, the very same people, bunch of useful idiots duped into pushing this three-year-old conspiracy theory.
	Hillary's bought and paid for a dossier.
	You know, they peddled that for three years, and steel, it turns out, like in this case, uh another trusted FBI informant, this guy Smirnoff, apparently has been working with the FBI for for since 2010.
	And apparently at one point was actually given permission to break the law in in the help and investigations they were involved in.
	I mean, it's pretty unbelievable.
	You know, we were told they're well trusted, longtime FBI informants, both Steele and Smirnoff.
	Well, how did first of all, how does the FBI vet these guys?
	Clearly, not well.
	Now that's a separate issue for a separate day.
	But if you look at the record, you know, the FBI defended these these people for the longest time.
	James Comey signed three of the four FISA warrants, and the bulk of that information came from Hillary Clinton's bought and paid for unverifiable, dirty Russian dossier that the media mob ran with.
	And you know, when you think about it, they were warned not to run with it in August of 2016 by Bruce Orr of all people.
	He said it was political and phony.
	Don't trust it.
	Then, of course, all our reporting was vindicated by the Horowitz report, the Durham Report.
	And in fact, uh, you know, backed up that they peddled lies and conspiracy theories.
	The FBI we learned later they were meeting with big tech every week.
	You know, in the months leading up to the election, and meanwhile, the FBI had verified the authenticity of Hunter Biden's laptop in March of 2020.
	Wow.
	The laptop was very real.
	But you wouldn't have known if you were on, you know, social media because they weren't allowed to even link to the story that was put out by the New York Post.
	So all of this, I mean, they censored a very real laptop story that even polls have shown could have had a big difference.
	And here's the most important part, and then we're going to bring in our friend Greg Jarrett.
	And that is none of the arguments about this one person that the DOJ is now telling us this trusted source since 2010.
	It doesn't exonerate anybody.
	It doesn't negate the fact that Joe Biden lied to the country about contact with his son, brother, and and others as it relates to their foreign business deals.
	And that starts with Barisma.
	You know, why would a vice president leverage a billion dollars, even though it's official Obama administration policies uh to get a uh a guy in in Ukraine, a prosecutor fired.
	What was the result of that firing?
	The result was that his son that was addicted to crack at the time, admittedly, continued to get paid for a j for being on a board of which he had no knowledge, no background, no experience in a country where he had no knowledge, no background, no experience.
	I'm sitting here with my father.
	You know, that was the CEFC.
	That's the Chinese uh uh communist oil conglomerate.
	And between everybody he knows and my ability to keep a dr uh a grudge you're gonna regret not paying the money.
	None of it negates the amount of money that get they got paid and how they got paid.
	Doesn't explain away the LLCs where they don't see any other any financial business, tens of millions of dollars from hostile regimes, no apparent work that has been identified, no services that we can find rendered.
	You would think they'd have an answer for that, considering the massive amount of money.
	Why would these countries pay a guy addicted to crack and no experience all that money?
	Why were grandchildren paid?
	Why were ten Biden family members funneled money?
	Why did Joe go against official Obama administration policy at the time?
	What about the WhatsApp message?
	How damning is that?
	You know, what is well, why the exact money from a Kazakhstan oligarch for a new Porsche for Hunter?
	You know, Joe's big lie, what, that he never talked to them, and he's heaven Archer says he was on the phone 20 separate times, meeting at the Cafe Milana with a Russian oligarch Elena Baterina and other meetings apparently took place,
	and before he leveraged it, the reported phone call by James Comer and his committee, Hunter in Dubai with the Barisma executives at a time they desperately needed DC help, and they get on a phone call with Joe, and then five days later he fires the prosecutor by leveraging your tax money.
	You can't make this up.
	I'm just getting started.
	But if I keep going, I'm not going to put Greg Jarrett on, who's our friend.
	You know, you might have, you know, a new book to come out pretty soon because the media seems to be going with the Russia hoax number two if you watch MSDNC.
	Yeah, and it it's laughable, Sean, that uh people like Jamie Raskin, even the White House uh, you know, apologists for Joe Biden are saying, uh, see uh the the entire investigation should be dismissed.
	Uh Hunter's laptop may be Russian disinformation.
	No.
	I mean, if you read the criminal compan complaint carefully, you will see that there's no connection whatsoever, Jonathan Turley's right.
	The court filing dispels the claim that there's a connection between the Smirnov and the laptop.
	Um one of the reasons is because Smirnov's contacts were recent.
	They do not precede 2020.
	And remember, the laptop was obtained in 2019, and the 51 Intel people lied about it in uh November of 2020.
	So they're completely unconnected.
	And it has nothing to do with all of the volumes of evidence on the laptop of influence pedaling that's found in text messages and photographs and emails.
	Uh so you know, Smirnoff's arrest in criminal charges against him is simply a side show, nothing more than that.
	Well, I went through some of the evidence.
	I mean, they want to take that one issue, and and Turley, I think, put it very well on his piece.
	And that is the issue that okay, we do have a liar here.
	First of all, are you as concerned as I am that the FBI is uh standing up uh for the credibility of not one but two informants that have been paid that have been uh longtime FBI informants that they told the American people were to be trusted,
	and that two of them end up being huge liars, and they both play such a critical role in impacting you know presidencies in this country.
	That that's a problem for me.
	What the hell are they doing?
	Yeah, I mean, the FBI operates uh like a high-level three stooges comedy.
	Um, they are forever vouching for the trustworthiness and credibility of uh lying informants, whether it's Christopher Steele or Igor Danchenko, uh now Alexander Smirnov.
	So it it makes you really wonder what in the world is going on at the FBI.
	In the case of Christopher Steele, they knew he was lying.
	They knew his dossier was phony.
	They in fact fired Steele for lying to them, but conveniently they didn't tell that to the FISA court.
	Instead, they covered it up and they presented his dossier as credible and steel as trustworthy, even though he had been fired.
	They used it as a pretext to spy on uh, you know, Donald Trump's campaign and one of his uh participants in the campaign.
	Um, and there's been no remorse.
	And Christopher uh Ray now says, Oh, don't worry, it'll never happen again, because we've instituted new policies and procedures to make sure it doesn't.
	Well, it just did with Smirnoff.
	All right, let me ask you now.
	Senator Grassley and Grassley's office says the Smirnov indictment isn't enough, and it seems that he doesn't quite believe that the FBI is telling the truth when it comes to the claims that the Biden bribery witness, the 1023 form, which by the way, we all know is one person's account of what they said happened.
	But it doesn't, as you point out, it doesn't deal with all the other corroborating evidence, nor does it negate what we do know about the case.
	Um, now this is the same FBI that fabricated, you know, evidence to falsely paint Trump campaign aid Carter Page.
	Wasn't he wasn't it insinuated he was a Russian agent of some kind, and meanwhile we found out way later that he worked for the CIA?
	Yeah, i exactly, and the FBI covered that up.
	I mean, you'd have to be crazy to believe much of anything that the FBI says uh these days.
	Their track record is abysmal.
	And again, I come back to what's on the laptop.
	Uh there is uh is there irrefutable proof that Joe Biden committed corrupt acts?
	Probably not, but there's compelling evidence that could lead in that direction.
	Documents, photographs, texts, emails, testimony, circumstantial and direct, and they all implicate Joe Biden as complicit in his son's activities, and the IRS whistleblowers said the same thing.
	Uh, you know, I'm reminded of the lead character Harvey Spector in the hit TV series suits.
	He was known as the closer.
	He would just appear at the very end, shake a few hands, and the deal was closed.
	That was Joe Biden's role.
	Hunter solicited the deal with foreign actors, selling access to his powerful vice president dad, promises of influence.
	Joe would suddenly show up at a meeting or a dinner with the benefactors, simply make phone calls to him.
	His appearance signified his participation, thus closing the deals.
	Joe Biden was the closer, and millions of dollars would immediately flow into Hunter-controlled bank accounts.
	The cash funneled through a complex web of shell companies, some of it then distributed to Biden family members.
	In other words, Joe was a winning accessory.
	He aided and abetted the influence peddling schemes by helping to sell the Biden brand.
	And that's what Tony Bobolinski just the other day testified to.
	And the same testimony came from Devin Archer, who also corroborated that Joe lied and that when he said he never once spoke to his son, brother, or anybody about their foreign business deals.
	Quick break more with Fox News legal analyst, our friend Greg Jarrett, 800-941 Sean, our number, if you want to be a part of the program as we continue.
	Alright, we continue now with Greg Jarrett, then your call's coming up, 800-941 Sean.
	It's interesting what Charles Grassley is now doing.
	He was the one that publicly released the 1023 form, and he's saying this indictment's not enough.
	He said the public has the right to see all the underlying evidence supporting the Biden Justice Department's case.
	The Biden administration administration must show must show its work.
	I actually agree with that.
	On top of that, the New York Post is reporting that there is a corroborating witness whose name is Alexander Ostapanko or Panko.
	And the did the FBI ever check with him?
	Because apparently not.
	If you look at a word search through the DOJ's 37-page uh Smyrnoff indictment, nowhere is the name uh Alexander Ostapanko uh mentioned one time.
	No, it wasn't mentioned one time.
	I'd like to know what happened with him.
	It does make you wonder.
	Um, by filing the criminal charges against Smyrnoff, is the FBI covering up its own misconduct.
	Uh, you know, again, they vouched for him for years, said he was trusted, they paid him truckloads of money.
	Um, and they hid the 1023 form in Smirnoff's identity until Grassley came up with it.
	And then suddenly now they charge Smyrnoff.
	Well, maybe Smirnoff's telling the truth.
	Um you can't trust the FBI to properly investigate it.
	So it is amazing.
	And then and then oopsie daisy, yeah, we signed four Pfizer warrants based on our trusted informant and took away the rights of American citizens uh in the process.
	But oopsie daisy, nobody gets held accountable.
	Right.
	You know, and then you can go back to the issue of Page and and Strck, you know, openly, you know, wanting to go after uh Peter Strzok and Lisa Page plotting to destroy Trump and the 2016 campaign.
	Oh, we can't you don't think he'll ever become president, do you?
	Oh, well, I'm gonna make sure that doesn't happen.
	All right, Greg Jarrett, I think you have a best-selling book as this unfolds uh uh in the days, weeks, months, and probably years ahead, my friend.
	All right, thanks, Sean.
	Appreciate it as always.
	800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
	All right, 25 to the top of the hour.
	We'll get to your calls here in a second.
	800-941 Sean, our number if you want to be a part of the program.
	Hey, Mike Lindell, his employees, they want to thank you, their loyal customers, for your continued support.
	And to do so, they're having a massive sale, not only on overstock and clearance products, but new products as well.
	Just go to my pillow.com, click on the Sean Hannity Square.
	Right now, 50% off the all new MyPillow 2.0, the new flannel sheets, they're 50% off.
	They're not going to last long.
	The new towel sets, 50% off, 2998.
	Also, right now you get free shipping, which means you save a lot of money if you buy their larger items like a mattress or mattress topper, all 100% made in the U.S., on sale now for as low as 9999.
	You also have all their other great products.
	Check them out.
	Go to MyPillow.com, click on the Sean Hannity Square, and check out everything.
	And uh, or just call 800-919-6090.
	Mention my name.
	It's that simple.
	Um, it's actually amazing.
	It's taken a while for some in the media, and I'm I'm not being critical.
	Um, I actually like Joe Rogan.
	Uh uh, but he's not as political, say, as this show is, which is great.
	I think that's, you know, he's been successful on his own.
	He doesn't need it any any he doesn't need any help from anybody.
	Uh, but he had Dr. Phil on, and we've had Dr. Phil on TV.
	Dr. Phil did Something that was actually amazing.
	He actually spent time at the border with Brandon Judd, head of the border patrol union, and told him that American taxpayer dollars are paying for human trafficking of children.
	And this is all stuff we've been trying, we've been like, you know, a voice in the wilderness here to get America to wake up to this fact.
	Let's play that exchange.
	These children that are coming in with someone that says I'm their mother, aunt, uncle, or whatever, we have no way of verifying that.
	We do not.
	We used to, present under under President Trump.
	We had rapid DNA testing.
	That's been done away with.
	Are they given money?
	These people that are released into the country.
	So it's our taxpayers that's ultimately facilitate the travel.
	But yes, travel is facilitated, and they are given all the necessities that they need.
	But that could be a trafficker.
	There's a very good possibility that they're being trafficked, that they're going into the sex industry.
	Or they're being forced into the sweatshops.
	And we know that.
	We knowingly are spending our tax dollars to sell children into sex trafficking.
	How under any theory is that okay for us to be spending tax dollars to traffic children?
	Now, this is the head guy on the border.
	And uh I asked him when this went on a little more.
	We went in more depth.
	You know you're on camera here, right?
	You you just said we're spending tax dollars to sell children into sex slavery.
	And he said, Yeah.
	I said, Why have you not talked about this?
	He said, Nobody's ever asked me these pointed questions, but I'm grateful that you're asking them now.
	That's how out of control we are down there.
	We are we are paying money to take these children and sell them into sex slavery.
	They come in with these addresses written on their bodies, written on their arm, and we call up there and say, uh, do you know so and so?
	Yeah, yes, uh, we're waiting for them.
	Okay, they'll be on a plane or a bus, and you need to pick them up.
	And and I ask him, uh so some pimp or trafficker or whatever is picking them up up there, and he said, We are knowingly sending them up there for that.
	Now, by the way, all credit to Dr. Phil for taking the time to look at what is uh a real national security threat, and and Joe Rogan's looking at this saying, Oh nobody can believe it.
	And it's like all the networks have pretty much you know had a blackout on how bad the border has gotten.
	Never mind the the fentanyl and the opioid uh opioids as horrific as that is and the deaths that result from open borders.
	And the human trafficking.
	We've had all these people on that work for border patrol and and the years of human trafficking.
	Uh now we have all these unvetted illegal Joe Biden immigrants, and and they're coming from countries that are a top geopolitical foes, even the number one state sponsor of terror, Iran, and their satellite state Syria, and and then of course the home of the Muslim Brotherhood Egypt, the home of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, then there's China and Russia.
	Tens of to tens and tens of thousands unvetted, and it's getting worse.
	Anyway, 800, 941.
	Sean, if you want to be a part of the program uh as we continue.
	Let's say hi to Chris in New York.
	Chris, hi, how are you?
	Glad you called, sir.
	What's going on?
	Yeah, hi, how are you doing?
	Listen, my concern is people like you and and Mark Simone and other people are saying that we have to embrace early voting and do the mail in ballots.
	But like I live in Manhattan.
	I don't trust anybody in Manhattan to count a paper ballot.
	You know, it's not who you vote for, it's who counts the votes.
	And I have absolutely no trust or faith that if I mail something in, it's not going to get coffee spilled on it and tossed if they see it to vote for Trump.
	How do we deal with this?
	Well, it's not the system we want.
	I've explained in great specificity and detail what I think the system should be that would have the most integrity that would result in the the most confidence in the results, and that is you're returning like like Canada did and France did to pay for ballots.
	And it's simple.
	You have voter ID, signature verification, you allow the military, the sick, the infirm, the elderly, they can they can vote by mail, but It's got to be verified.
	Uh chain of custody controls, updated vote, voter rolls every election, and then you need people that are partisan observers.
	In other words, anybody that's on the ballot should have a representative that watches the voting all day and the vote counting all night.
	You declare a winner, everybody goes home confident that the result was fair.
	I that's my system.
	Here's our problem.
	That's not the system we have.
	And the system we have now is weeks and weeks and weeks of early voting, even though a lot can happen between early voting days and election day, i.e.
	a laptop can be discovered uh and can be vetted.
	Um and number one and and number two, uh, I think there's less integrity.
	Now Florida does it perfectly, I can tell you.
	So that that's good news.
	They have integrity in the system, and it's it's come off flawlessly.
	Uh without, by the way, they've had their own hiccups starting back in two thousand.
	But here's the problem.
	That's not the system we have.
	The system we have, you know, in many states you don't even need voter ID.
	New York, you don't need voter ID.
	There's no signature verification anymore.
	And you know, partisan observers during COVID in 2020, it were a thousand feet away, what good is that?
	You need to be up close and and watching it closely.
	That's what partisan observers should do.
	And anyway, so you have to deal until Republicans win elections and then can change voting to a better system with more integrity, resulting in more confidence.
	You gotta deal with the sisters the hand you dealt.
	Now, if Republicans and conservatives like you continue to reject and early voting, voting by mail, and and then decide to show up on election day, that that's all fine and dandy.
	But we saw the exact uh exact consequence of that in New York's congressional district number three, and that was with Maze Pillup versus uh Tom Swazi.
	And in that case, what do we see?
	Okay, Democrats, they won the early voting by a long shot, and guess what?
	They had a snowstorm on election day, a pretty bad storm where older people certainly are not going to go out and vote, and they tend to vote in the morning, didn't clean up till later in the afternoon, and I think the race, I don't I don't believe that that pillow would have been able to make up the difference, but it would have been a lot closer.
	And so you have to you can't start out on election day down hundreds and hundreds of thousands of votes.
	Great, it looks great on election night, returns coming in, your candidates up by by a lot, and then as the days go by and the counting continues and the mail in ballots get counted, and I think they should be counted right away as they come in, by the way, not not day of.
	Uh, you know, then you all of a sudden that lead diminishes, and then all of a sudden you find yourself twelve thousand votes behind, and the they they're saying the Democrat won.
	Right.
	So that's the danger.
	You've got to play with the system.
	It's you gotta deal with the hand you dealt.
	If you're sitting at a blackjack table, you know, you got a hand.
	It is what it is.
	You can't change that.
	And then hopefully change it down the road.
	Does that help you?
	I would vote.
	I I'm I'm highly recommending.
	Get over your reluctance and resistance to voting early.
	So uh hopefully, you know, better systems will be in check, and hopefully state legislatures where Republicans are in charge, they can they can put more integrity into the system.
	I told you the system I'd like.
	Anyway, I hope that it's an important question you're asking, and I I just I've been saying this now for a couple of years.
	I feel like a broken record, but I know that people don't hear every second of every show, so I'm saying it again.
	Uh anyway, uh back to our phones.
	Good call.
	Uh, Herb is in Georgia.
	Herb, how are you?
	Glad you called, sir.
	I am doing well.
	It's a pleasure to speak with you.
	Uh great to speak with you.
	I I just had a comment question uh regarding President Trump and this New York ruling that came down against him and him having to pay back hundreds of millions of dollars.
	Um and basically that was um he had my understanding was that it was the ruling was over valuations over what somebody said a piece of property or something was worth.
	So he had a and I'm just throwing numbers out there, ten million Dollar building.
	And he got a loan for that ten million dollar building and he paid back his loan and all that.
	Everybody was happy.
	But now victims.
	Yep.
	They're saying that ten million dollar building was only worth one million dollars.
	So they want him to pay back money on that, nine million dollars or whatever it was.
	However, he paid insurance on a ten million dollar building and the premiums higher than it is on a one million dollar building.
	He paid taxes on a ten million dollar building.
	So the state, the counties, the cities, the municipalities, all of them benefited from his valuations.
	But yet they're they're they're charging him and penalizing him for what he said it was worth or what the bank said it was worth, they're going to penalize him for that, but they're not giving him refunds on what he paid in taxes and uh properties and interest and insurance premiums and all of that.
	What is the what's the deal with all of that?
	Look, I I can only tell you if if you can't look at this case and objectively discern that one man, one family, one organization was singled out.
	If you can't see the politics behind this, if you can't see the danger uh in this for the country, then I gotta tell you something.
	That um we have a problem because it is extraordinarily uh dangerous and you know, and then then you've got all these uh w is everybody being treated equally?
	If there's no victim and there's a disclaimer, don't use our valuations, and you have no c nobody nobody's complaining as a matter of fact, Deutsche Bank representatives, they still do business with Donald Trump and they want his business.
	And they say no, valuations are subject uh are are subjective to, you know, to to I guess the the eye of the beholder.
	I mean, somebody might come to your house and offer you more than you're asking for it.
	That's happened to many people because they think it's worth it to them for whatever reason.
	But that's why there's a fiduciary responsibility for lenders and insurance companies, and there's no lender and there's no insurance company that is gonna take the word of a borrower or uh an insureree uh in terms of what they value their collateral at.
	That is not they're gonna that they if they did, they'd be out of business.
	So um i again, no victims here, but uh it's scary actually.
	This this is really scary because we're now using the law to punish people we dislike politically.
	And they're trying to create an avalanche of legal troubles for President Trump, so he doesn't have the ability to run a regular campaign.
	And and at the end of the process may have the word co convict uh next to his name in every article, every report, convict on I can hear it now.
	And then the American people are gonna have to decipher whether or not he's been unfairly targeted.
	But I think that narrative I I think the people in this country get it.
	Fair-minded people at least get it.
	And they've so overreached in their desire to destroy this man that I I I think it's gonna boomerang back on them and they're gonna probably realize that it was a big mistake.
	American people are good people.
	They also have a sense of fundamental fairness.
	And I'm I'm I'm confident in that.
	Anyway, Herb, thank you.
	Love our friends in Georgia.
	God bless you, my friend.
	Um quick break, we'll come right back.
	More of your calls coming up straight ahead.
	It's 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the uh program.
	I packed your busy phones.
	Let us say hi to Cassandra.
	She's out in Colorado, Rocky Mountain High.
	What's up, Cassandra?
	How are you?
	Hi, Sean.
	I'm calling to well ask your opinion about something.
	Um regarding the sentence that he received from that judge in the Latricia James case.
	What I and I I might not know how all the facts, but you can correct me.
	Anyway, uh it's my understanding that that sentence plus the pretrial and post trial interest on that sentence is gonna cost him or he has to pay in order to appeal it, he has to pay something close to half a billion dollars.
	And that's a that's a fair estimate.
	And no no matter how rich you are, I mean he's got buildings he can sell, but how fast can you sell a building?
	And I don't know when he has to make that payment.
	But here's what I've been thinking.
	He cannot pay.
	I don't care how rich you are.
	Half a billion dollars and all the other legal fees and and all the other attorneys.
	He must I I can only imagine.
	I mean, nobody could afford all this in the end.
	I don't care how wealthy you are.
	I mean, does Donald Trump now have to sell off some of his prized properties?
	I don't know.
	I I was there was even a GoFundMe page.
	Uh yes, somebody pointed out to me.
	I'm like, well, I mean, uh, even you know, a half a billion dollars to a billionaire, uh, I bet you is a lot of money.
	I don't know how much Donald Trump is worth.
	I don't.
	But that's a lot of money, and that is a lot of harassment, and this is why we are investigating the weaponization of our entire legal system.
	These are scary times, but um I have to let you go only because I'm running out of time.
	When we come back, uh, we're gonna talk to the chairman's of the House Oversight Committee, Judiciary Committee, and Ways and Means Committee, Jordan Comer and Jason Smith.

▲