All Episodes
Previous Next
May 15, 2024 - Sean Hannity Show
31:50
Congresswoman Malliotakis - May 14th, 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 information overload our toll-free telephone number.
You'll get to your calls later.
It's 800-941-Sean if you want to be a part of the program.
It's amazing to even watch fake news, CNN Eli Hoenig, saying the entire prosecution witness team has been lied to by Michael Cohn.
And as, you know, we've had cross-examination this afternoon.
It's pretty interesting, you know, to watch.
I think the prosecution purposely delayed the beginning of cross-examination to see at least get a preview of coming attractions and just wanted to get an appetizer or a taste of what was going to probably be all day tomorrow.
And that's, you know, heavy cross-examination going right to the heart of the credibility of, of course, Michael Cohn, who really doesn't have much credibility.
But anyway, here's what Fake News CNN even said about it.
Here's what makes Michael Cohen so unusual, so unique.
I've never seen a witness with bigger credibility problems than Michael Cohen.
I've definitely seen witnesses.
I've definitely used witnesses who've done way worse things than Michael Cohen.
But I've never seen a witness who's lied to Congress, who's lied in court, who's lied to the IRS, who's lied to the Southern District of New York, who lied to his banker.
You know, the entire prosecution witness team has been lied to by Michael Cohen.
Now, Nicole Mollyotakis, commenting on this case, actually, you know, said the New York Hush Bunny trial is a sham trial.
She's a congresswoman, New York's 11th district.
She'll join us in a minute.
And she called the whole thing a sham.
Here's what she said.
This is a sham trial.
The people of America know that it is a sham trial.
It is based on a star witness that is a convicted, disparred perjurer who lied to Congress multiple times, has admitted to lying before Congress, and has been convicted of lying.
What I'll say is the people of the state of New York would wish that Alvin Bragg, the district attorney who brought this case, would focus on the actual crime that is taking place and plaguing our city.
All right.
We have drug smugglers that are poisoning our children.
We have illegal immigrant gang members wreaking havoc in our city.
We see career criminals being released over and over again.
And we see a district attorney that reduces or drops charges against the criminals who are plaguing New York.
And yet here you have a made-up, made-up charge for something that's not even within his jurisdiction that the FEC has said that there is no crime, that the DOJ has said there is no crime.
All right, joining us now, she is Congresswoman Nicole Mollyotakis is with us, and she is been following this case very closely.
Congresswoman, this is where we now find ourselves.
You can beat the hell out of police officers on tape, but don't worry, you'll be out of jail in an hour or two.
You can flip the bird to the people in New York and then head off to the sanctuary state of California, and I'm sure never to be seen or heard from again in New York State.
That's right, Sean.
And the New Yorkers that I talk to are angry.
They are upset.
They are furious that they feel unsafe in their city.
Many of my constituents commute to Manhattan to work, and they don't feel safe riding the subway.
They're concerned about illegal immigrant gang members that have taken over the streets.
They even had illegal immigrants that murdered each other in New York City.
And we are trying to figure out watching this trial, what is the evidence?
What is the crime?
Because I was there yesterday with the star witness who is a convicted, disbarred perjurer who lied to Congress multiple times.
He's guilty of that, convicted of that.
And yet there was no evidence that came out.
There was no connection that Donald Trump committed a crime.
And so my constituents want to know why we're wasting taxpayer money and resources to have this case, not to mention NYPD that has to be at the courthouse for protection when they can be out there making arrests of people who are actually committing crimes in the revolving door that is New York City.
All right.
So but that's the reality of where we are now.
Now, you represent, for example, part of southern Brooklyn and Staten Island, and I think it would have been a far more fair venue, at least to change a venue to maybe Long Island, upstate New York or Staten Island.
I mean, it might have given Trump a fighting chance.
I just stand by my belief that I don't believe in New York City, with the demographics as they are, where, you know, Democrats outnumber Republicans nine to one, that he can get a fair jury in New York City.
I stand by that.
I wish I was wrong.
I wish it weren't true.
If you look at this case, there's been no crime that has been, you know, not even a crime fully identified, to be honest.
But if you're looking at, okay, a bookkeeping error, okay, well, if it's booked as a legal fee, that seems appropriate considering Michael Cohen admitted he did the deal.
He was Trump's, quote, fixer attorney, and he paid the money.
I know because I paid it, he said.
And meanwhile, you got a guy with zero credibility on the stand, and yet here we find ourselves, and Trump's probably looking at a very abusively biased New York liberal jury.
Well, in looking at the jurors, I was thinking the same thing.
I mean, it's mostly young people, many women.
And this is a borough where 80% or so voted against Donald Trump for president.
So how can he get a fair ⁇ It was way more than 80%.
Go ahead.
Well, I mean, so the question then becomes, is there going to be a direct verdict from the judge?
Is it going to have to go to...
Well, why would you expect a direct verdict from the judge when the judge in this case donated to Biden?
The judges seemed hostile towards Donald Trump from day one with his gag order for Trump, but Michael Cohn can go on TikTok and ask for gifts and wear Donald Trump in prison t-shirts and pitch a reality show, The Fixer, and so on and so forth.
I mean, obviously for his own benefit.
And by the way, if anybody probably would benefit the most for Donald Trump not winning the election, it might be him in light of the fact that he's now facing new allegations of lying to Congress that were referred to the Biden's weaponized DOJ.
But that DOJ could change come January of next year.
But you got a guy, disbarred lawyer, Trump hater, released from prison, multi-year sentence, tax evasion, bank fraud, convicted of lying to Congress after lying under oath, more allegations pending.
And I'm like, okay, why would anybody believe a word he says?
This is their star witness.
But he'll be calm as he's being calm on the stand as they point out you're a liar, you're a liar.
You're lying now or you're lying then?
Well, I think you're right.
The star witness is a disaster.
But I think the case is so flawed that even CNN, when you watch their legal experts, are saying that there is no crime here.
This is a guy that's not trustworthy.
And so I have to believe, you know, in the courtroom, when you're sitting there all day in this cold, dreary courtroom, and you see on the wall it says, in God we trust.
And part of me says, you know what, sometimes you do need to turn over your battles.
You need to turn over your fights.
And I do believe that something's going to happen here where Donald Trump will come out stronger.
And he will be vindicated in this.
And I have to believe that at my court because this is such an injustice showing my mother fled a communist country.
This is the type of stuff that my mother fled.
And, you know, when I was speaking with constituents that are Chinese Americans, they are immigrants from Albania, from Egypt.
And all of them are telling me the same thing, that this is the stuff that they fled.
And they don't want to see it happening here.
And therefore, they are supporting Donald Trump more than ever.
And I really believe that you're going to see the immigrant communities come out strong for this president, strong for President Trump, because they don't want what their country's turned into to happen here.
And I just have that type of faith at this moment.
I will let you know if that changes.
but I do believe that something's going to happen here where Trump will be vindicated and he will win this presidency.
Well, how is he going to be vindicated?
Let's assume a guilty verdict.
Let's assume that my cynicism is correct, that he can't get a fair trial in New York.
And he's convicted.
Okay.
Is he going to get an expedited appeal hearing in light of a pending election, in light of a judge that was a Biden donor, in light of this being a misdemeanor whose statute of limitations have passed, in light of the recusal issue involving the judge's family,
in light of the fact that they're using this novel application of the law to somehow turn this into a federal issue involving an election crime that's a felony, and yet that has yet even to be outlined or explained to the jurors at this late date?
Well, look, we saw what happened with the Weinstein case, right?
got overturned i mean this is the interesting thing about yeah but it's going to get overturned after the election is my point I don't mean to interrupt you.
I'm sorry.
It may.
It may take until the election.
But I think, again, I still believe that even with a conviction, if it's unfair, people see it for what it is, that he can still prevail.
But I do believe that at some point, look, remember what happened to us New York members in New York court, right?
They tried to redraw all our lines the way that they tried to gerrymander.
And we went and fought and we won in the end of the day.
And so I think in New York, it's interesting because you do have some of these lower-level judges that are corrupt, that are totally politicized.
But when you reach the secondary court, I think you have a much better shot of having a fair hearing.
And I think if there's enough outrage from the public, and even like I said, these people who you would never think legal experts for CNN siding with us.
Alan Dershowitz, who voted for Biden, siding with us.
Every legal expert is saying that there's no case here.
And so I think the judge really has got to – because he wants to put his reputation on the line here and just for this political – I think the judge already crossed that threshold, don't you?
The fact that he was – usually they are chosen randomly.
No, he was selected for this case.
Is that the usual practice, Congresswoman?
Well, no, it's not.
And that's why I say we have probably a better shot when we get to the appellate court.
But I do believe that there's just no, look, it would be ludicrous for this judge to convict.
It would be.
Now, I actually get more concerned about the jury because the jury really, I don't know how independent these people could be talking about the makeup of the political electorate in New York and County.
But I think that if this judge wants to be an international laughingstock, then he may move forward.
But I think the support that we've been showing him in court, the support that the people have been showing for the president at the rally, the fact that the CNN legal experts are saying there's nothing going on here, I think that gives the judge some pause there if he cares at all about his reputation.
He may have taken it this far.
Let's see what happens.
Let's see what happens because they just finished the star witness and no evidence, no evidence came out.
And that has to give the judge some type of pause there to say, am I really going to put my reputation on the line here and actually go forward with some type of a conviction?
Well, I don't think, and let's see what jury instructions are.
I mean, in reality, I have no faith at all.
Anyway, we really appreciate you being here.
Congresswoman Nicole Maliotakis, thank you so much for being with us.
She is in New York's 11th district.
Thank you, Congresswoman.
Appreciate you being with us.
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 Podcast, or wherever you listen.
All right, we have our friend Liberal Rob from the great state of Ohio.
What's going on, Liberal Rob?
How are you?
What's on your mind today?
Thanks for taking my call.
Listen, I wanted to talk about a few different things, but obviously I'll keep it short.
You guys got to stop pretending that Donald is always the innocent victim with every single thing that comes out negative about him.
It just sounds exhausting.
Like the trial.
I'm sorry you're exhausted.
Let me ask you a question.
I'm excited.
Tell me what crime he's committed here.
for falsifying business records if you and i were to falsify slow slow down is this Tell me the evidence that shows that Donald Trump falsified any business record.
It was marked.
The bookkeeping was marked as a legal expense.
Is paying your lawyer Michael Cohn a legal expense or not?
It is not when you're using it to reimburse something else.
It wasn't his salary.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
No, it's a legal expense.
I'm just asking you is tell me what the crime is.
The crime is falsifying the legal expense.
It wasn't a legal expense.
It was to pay off a porn star.
It was his lawyer coming into a legal agreement with another party, which you do know is not illegal, right?
You understand that that's not illegal.
Right.
And you understand, though, that the premise behind it, though, is illegal, is that he's giving him information that...
No, no, no, no.
You've got to be very clear here with our audience.
When you pay, when one person's lawyer pays a amount of money for his services and costs, including an NDA payment, that is a legal expense.
And it was entered in the ledger as a legal business expense.
That's not correct.
That's not how you have to do those things.
All right, so then, okay, let's say you're right.
And that would be under New York law a misdemeanor.
How do we get to a felony?
Tell me that.
Federal offense.
If you falsify business.
No, no, no.
Well, how come the feds didn't try this?
And how come it's being tried in a New York City courtroom in a district like New York?
Why did the feds pass on charging Donald Trump on this?
They chose not to charge him with this.
They looked at it and they didn't charge him.
They charged Michael Cohen and then Michael Cohen.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Nice try.
The New York DA in this case has come up with a novel application of law, which, by the way, you need to show intent that Donald Trump intended to falsify records.
Where is the evidence that he intended to falsify records when it's actually on tape?
If you listen to the tape played in court yesterday, it was very clear.
And he said, payment for what?
You just want Donald Trump in jail and you want him off the campaign trail and you want him defeated and you don't care how.
But I'm going to give you a few more minutes on the other side.
Not very long because there's only so much patience I have.
I'm going to be very patient.
Anyway, more with Liberal Rob.
We'll get to your calls 800-941, Sean, as we continue.
All right, 25 to the top of the hour, 800-941, Sean, if you want to join us, more horrific economic news today.
And these are tough economic times for so many of you.
One way you can save a lot of money and not sacrifice service is with my friends at Pure Talk.
And once again, they invest in their customers out of their own pocket.
They give you more service and they don't charge you another penny.
And right now, our friends at Pure Talk, a veteran-owned company, are providing international roaming now to over 50 countries.
So as you plan your summer travel, well, make sure you're covered at home and abroad.
Now, remember, Pure Talk, they use the same exact 5G network, the same exact cell towers as the big carriers, ATT, Verizon, and T-Mobile.
You can get a plan, unlimited talk, unlimited text, plenty of 5G data.
Get this.
Just 20 bucks a month, less than half the price for the exact same service of the big carriers.
How do you make the switch?
It's simple.
It's fast.
It's easy.
Dial pound 250.
Say the keyword, save now.
You'll save an additional 50% off your first month if you do it now.
Call now, pound250.
Join the hundreds of thousands of us saving money for the exact same service.
Pound 250, keyword, save now from Pure Talk.
All right.
We go back to Liberal Rob.
He's in Ohio.
All right.
So you think that Donald Trump's payment in the Zendi A case is a crime and you're going along with this ridiculous novel application of the law.
New York law, the one that would be relevant, 17152, would be a misdemeanor.
The statute of limitations have passed.
I'm sure, by the way, you have no problem with the fact that the judge was selected.
There wasn't a pool and he was selected from a pool that he was purposely selected.
And I'm sure you have no problem at all with the fact that he's a Biden donor, do you?
So you always say those things.
I mean, I think.
All right, no, no, no.
Do you have a problem that he's a Biden donor?
I don't have a listen.
I'm not going to waste a lot of time.
Do you have a problem that the judge donated to Joe Biden in 2020?
I do.
It shows bias.
I think you don't think I'm a turnover.
It does.
Okay, next question.
Do you have a problem with what his daughter does for a living with the Democratic Party, especially in light of New York laws and jurisdiction over the issue of recusal?
Do you think that he should have recused himself?
No, because my daughter and me have different opinions on things, and whatever she thinks doesn't affect anything that I do.
What about the issue of donating to Biden in 2020?
You just admitted it was prejudicial.
Yeah, he particularly.
So, if you donate to Biden and you got a case with Donald Trump, his political opponent, obviously, you want an outcome because of your political beliefs, and just because of the appearance of impropriety, that would be cause for recusal if you had any fair-mindedness to you.
But I think you also have to put some hope in the fact that people are doing the right thing.
But, Nicole.
I have to put hope in a judge that donated to Biden that he'll be a good guy.
Is that what you're telling me?
That's how it works?
Absolutely.
And do you have any problem with the third highest-ranking Department of Justice official, Joe Biden's Justice Department, leaving that prestigious position to run this case for the New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg?
Does that seem like coordination to you?
Does that seem appropriate to you?
It sounds like conflict of interest.
Thank you.
All right, I appreciate the honesty.
Next question.
Now, if you believe that this is a crime and that this was a mislabel bookkeeping error and that you go along with the novel application of the law, which would need to show an intent to falsify records, et cetera, et cetera.
Well, let me ask you about this.
Because you remember the case of Hillary Clinton, right?
And you remember Christopher Steele, though those names sound familiar to you?
Steele dossier?
The dirty Russian bought and paid for Steele dossier.
I've talked about it a lot, right?
Yeah, Russia, Russia, Russia.
Okay.
Now, for Christopher Steele to get paid, do you know that Hillary Clinton gave money?
Do you think she gave money directly to Christopher Steele?
No, it was through a different company because it was.
No, no, no, no.
It was through a law firm, and it was written as a legal expense.
Did you know that?
I did not know that.
Yeah.
So she hires a company called Perkins Cooey.
Perkins Cooey then hires an op research firm, Fusion GPS.
Fusion GPS then hires Christopher Steele.
Christopher Steele's not doing any legal work.
Christopher Steele's putting together a phony Russian dossier.
Even the FBI had to finally admit that their most trusted source, yet again, was not so trustworthy.
And everybody that signed those FISA warrants said, oh, knowing what we know now, we never would have signed them.
So she used it as a legal expense.
Now, do you believe in equal application of our laws in America, sir?
I do, and I definitely think Hillary should be brought up on some charges, but we're talking about Donald Trump here.
Okay, but the reality is that was 2016, and it never happened.
So you're saying, based on the application of the same year we're talking about, and Hillary Clinton funneling money through a law firm to an op research firm to hire Christopher Steele, you're saying that that's pretty much the same allegation, isn't it?
Well, Sean, you know jiu-jitsu.
Let's have a set of arrest here.
No, no, no, no.
I'm asking.
So I'm asking it because I'm kind of putting you in a jiu-jitsu move right now.
And what you have to do, I want to see if you're intellectually honest.
If you support this case going forward, tell me how this is any different than what Hillary Clinton did in her case, which happened at the same time.
Sean, I'm much different than you think I am.
I think everyone that does those certain things should be tried and acquitted.
I think Hillary deserves it.
What does it say about our justice system that it didn't happen then?
It shows that it's weaponized, doesn't it?
It shows that we don't have equal justice and equal application of our laws, doesn't it?
It shows that there's some bias, absolutely.
It shows bias.
Now, if there's bias in the legal system, I'm going to actually say something about you.
And I appreciate your honesty.
Because if you were being brought up on charges and a Republican or a prominent conservative did the same thing and they weren't, I would find that repulsive.
I would find that as an affront to the rule of law.
I would consider that unequal justice under the law.
I would say that's not an equal application of our laws.
And I would say that if we continue this practice, we're shredding our Constitution.
Would I be right?
I think you would be right.
I appreciate that.
All right.
You're very welcome.
I now rest my case, Your Honor.
Liberal Rob, appreciate you being with us.
800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, Mike Free State of Florida.
What's up, Mike?
How are you?
First time caller.
Here's my question.
If Trump is found innocent or he has to appeal and he wins the appeal, can this judge and this prosecutor be charged with election interference?
And if so, if they lose that, could Trump around sued them for legal fees?
No, I mean, I don't think that we'd ever come to that.
Here's the problem.
I think that let's say that his odds that I am right and his odds of any hung jury or acquittal are very low.
And anyway, let's say that I'm right.
And let's say he's found guilty.
I believe on so many levels, all of which I've mentioned many times, you know, in the course of the last few weeks, that this case will be overturned on appeal.
Here's the problem: there's not going to be an expedited appeal.
They're going to be able to call Donald Trump convict.
Donald Trump convict.
You'll hear it till the cows come home.
And that will be their means of trying to bludgeon Trump with this ridiculous case, this insane application of the law, this insane novel interpretation of the law.
And that's where I think it's going to end up.
And that's sad.
Yeah, I think the thing is, though, with even doing that, though, and the way that Trump has his polling has gone so far, I think it'll just jump him up even further.
I will tell you this.
What do I also say?
Donald Trump defies all conventional political gravity.
Look at these polls yesterday, and we spent a lot of time on them.
You can spend a lot more time if you want.
I actually like talking about polls, but the polls are overwhelming.
And right now, Donald Trump's poll numbers are, let's see, he's winning in Nevada, 50-38.
He's winning in Arizona by seven points, 49-42.
He's winning by seven in Michigan, 49-42.
He's winning in Pennsylvania, 47-44.
He's winning in Georgia by 10 points, 4939.
That would be, now that's the New York Times Sienna poll.
So obviously, all of this lawfare, I will tell you so far has not particularly worked out so well.
And I'm going to tell you, I want you to, let me bring up an issue and see if you agree with me.
You remember when Clinton was impeached?
Yeah.
Yeah, I'm 50.
So, yeah.
Okay.
Remember the day he was impeached and the polls came out after?
Do you remember how high his approval rating was at that time?
Not really, no.
It was through the roof.
And the feeling, this is Bill Clinton being impeached on steroids.
Now, the American people didn't like what Clinton did, but they didn't want a president of the United States having to go through that ordeal.
Right.
And that's how it ended.
That's how I interpret it in retrospect.
Now, I will tell you between the Russia collusion lies, impeachment one, impeachment two, all this nonsense in New York, a D.C. case, the January 6th case, the case in Fulton County, Georgia, the documents case.
You know, Hillary Clinton, you know, nothing happened to her.
She didn't get raided.
She didn't get arrested.
Nothing happened to Joe Biden.
Same issues.
And I'll tell you, the American people see how fundamentally unjust and unfair all this is.
And that's how I explain the polls to people.
Yeah, we're seeing that.
And that's what it is.
Exactly.
Anyway, I appreciate you being with us, my friend.
Great call.
800-941-Sean, North Carolina.
We have a lot of North Carolina calls standing.
We got three calls from North Carolina.
Pamela, let's get your thoughts.
What's on your mind today?
I wanted to discuss the judge that's on the case as well as the hush money.
Okay, so the decisions that could be made in this case can possibly benefit the defendant, which is in this case, is going to be the defendant adversary, the opponent, which is Joe Biden.
We're dealing right now with judicial abuse.
And when I say that, I'm looking at the judicial position to enhance a private interest, which would be Joe Biden's campaign.
And it can create a president case.
And when you get ready to look at a board dyer later, it could create a president case for saying to a jury that when that question is asked, can you look at this case fair?
Can you look at this case and make a decision on this case and judge this case fairly?
They can easily say, no, I'm not going to look at it fair.
I'm not going to look at it and judge it.
I don't have to because we have a case right now where we found Donald Trump guilty.
And in that case, the judge, nothing being said in the court, just sitting there in that position, judicial position, is yelling just as loud and is, yes, my daughter's campaigning against you, Donald Trump.
Yes, I support your opponent.
And yes, I am not going to be fair.
I'm going to be illegally biased on this case.
Those things should be considered.
People need to stop saying that his daughter is campaigning for Joe Biden.
They need to say his daughter is campaigning against Donald Trump.
Because that is exactly what is going on, which makes it stronger on Trump's behalf.
Not only that, you have to also look at there are people in America right now that are sitting there looking at this case that are middle class and poor people who are sitting there saying if this judge can sit in that bench, on that bench, and judge Donald Trump and know that they support in this case, Donald Trump.
All right, I got to cut you short because we only got about 90 seconds.
I want to get CJ's quick comments and Deb's quick comments.
CJ first.
Yes, sir.
I own a truckyard in North Carolina, and I want to tell you, I've got drivers that have taken the seven or eight or nine years to become citizens in the USA.
They're very fragmented about what's happening at the border.
They're from Africa, Ukraine, Russia, Asia, and they're telling me that they came to the U.S. so they could live the American dream, make money, take money back to their families, which they actually do, which I appreciate greatly.
And they came here for a rule of law.
And now they're telling me that this is scary because they see this happening in the countries that they came from.
And that is very sad.
It is sad.
Well said.
Deb, you got the last word in our North Carolina trio.
I just, mine's a whole different subject, but thank you for taking the call.
The protesters that are screaming death to America, why can't they be charged with communicating domestic threat terrorism?
I didn't hear the last part of that, ma'am.
Oh, why can't they be charged or arrested for communicating threats?
Oh, like death to America, death to Israel, those?
Well, yes.
Yes.
I think they actually could be.
Anyway, three great calls from North Carolina.
Anyway, Pamela, Deb, and CJ.
Thank you, Sean.
▲
Export Selection