All Episodes
Previous Next
March 25, 2025 - Sean Hannity Show
34:59
Who Is Judge Boasberg? - March 24th, Hour 2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
To your city, country sound.
Do you know Elon Musk?
Have you met with him?
I have met him before.
He was saying, I mean, he was kind of an erratic genius.
He's now an erratic, evil, not-so-genius.
They've got that little stock app.
I added Tesla to it to give me a little boost during the day.
225 and dropping.
On March 29th, it's my birthday.
And all I want to see happen on my birthday is for Elon to be taken down.
Yes.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
Yeah, we're coming to your city.
Going to play our guitars and sing you a country song.
Sean Hannity, the new Sean Hannity Show.
More behind the scenes information on breaking news and more bold, inspired solutions for America.
All right, thanks, Scott Shannon.
Hour two, Sean Hannity Show 800-941 Sean is on number.
If you want to be a part of the program, really fascinating cabinet meeting that took place earlier today.
We'll play some of the highlights coming up in a few moments.
One of the biggest obstacles, problems now that the president and the administration is facing is these liberal activists, judges, and their backgrounds and the things that and positions that they have.
And they are trying to circumvent presidential authority, the duly elected office of the president, constitutionally authorized authority.
And we see that the judge, for example, that blocked the president's deportations.
It's amazing that liberals want to go to court to allow and fight for the rights of trendy Aragua illegal immigrants to stay in our country, knowing what they are capable of.
The president this weekend put out a big truth social and ex post conflict of interest.
And he was specifically speaking about the judge in the deportation case after he temporarily ordered the administration to stop deporting these illegals under the Alien Enemies Act.
We've gone through this in great specificity and detail.
There is court precedent as recently as 1948.
It was not during wartime.
It was Harry Truman.
And the court not only ruled that the law was constitutional, but also said after the president makes a decision, it is not subject to judicial review.
The president now is very defiant about these judges.
Again, in many cases, you know, if you look, for example, lower courts are growing, you know, they're growing power over the president.
For example, injunctions that were issued under President Bush were only six.
Under Obama, 12.
Under Biden, 14.
Under Donald Trump in his first term, 64.
And that number just keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger.
Now we're finding out some breaking news and some information about this federal judge in the deportation case, but this is only one of many cases.
Tom Holman was on this weekend speaking about how he doesn't really care what this judge thinks, but he won't defy the court order.
And I do believe it's being argued before the appeals court in D.C. today.
I'm not sure how that's going to work out.
Eventually, it may work itself up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
But here's Tom Holman over the weekend.
So what do you mean when you say I don't care what judges think?
I don't care what that judges think as far as this case.
We're going to continue to arrest safety threats and national security threats.
We're going to continue to deport them from the United States.
I understand this case is in litigation through the Alien Enemies Act, and we'll abide by the court order as litigated.
But my quote was, despite what he thinks, we're going to keep targeting the worst of the worst, which we've been doing since day one, in deporting from the United States through the various laws on the books.
We're not making this up.
The Alien Enemies Act was actually a federal law.
It's a statute enacted by Congress and signed by a president.
Now, that's under litigation.
But put that aside, we still have Title VIII authority to remove illegal aliens from the United States, and we're going to continue to concentrate on those who are the biggest threat to our communities, the public safety threats.
But you're going to abide by court orders.
As long as you go through your appeals process, but you are not going to defy those orders.
No.
All right.
Now, also, Jim Jordan spoke out about this judge.
His name is Bozberg.
This is the deportation judge.
But what we're watching and witnessing are liberals trying to go to use a tactic called court shopping or judge shopping.
They go to these liberal activist judges and they get a ruling.
They get an injunction.
And what they can't get done electorally at the ballot box, what they can't get done legislatively in Congress, then they use the courts for.
This is what they have historically done.
And now they're using it as a new weapon of lawfare, a new venue of lawfare, in my view.
Anyway, here is, as I said, what Jim Jordan said about it.
And then, frankly, there's the broader issue of all these judges' injunctions and then decisions like Judge Boesberg, what he's trying to do and how that case is working.
We're going to have hearings on all of that because particularly when you look at Judge Boseberg, it starts to look like this is getting totally political from this guy, particularly when you remember he's also the judge who was part of the whole Trump Rush and FISA court granting those warrants that allowed the Comey FBI to spy on President Trump's campaign.
So we're going to look at that issue as well.
But hopefully we can get that bill passed next week on the House floor, move it to the Senate, hopefully get it to the president's desk.
Now we're learning more thanks to our friends at justthenews.com and editor-in-chief and investigative reporter John Solomon, who is now reporting that months before he blocked the president's deportations of these illegal alien gang members.
This judge attended a privately funded legal conference in Idaho that featured sponsors and speakers who have expressed clear anti-Trump sentiments, particularly on immigration and a theme that echoed the Democratic Party's 2024 stated mission of, quote, saving democracy.
And he was one of nine Democratic-appointed judges to attend this conference in Sun Valley, where two of the four sessions were titled The Role of Judges in Democracy in the State of Democracy.
Anyway, John Solomon is here to hear his investigative report with us, sir.
How are you?
I am well.
Good to be with you, Sean.
All right, let's get into it.
What did you find out?
Well, listen, when we were going through and unraveling that onion that was the FBI and the Russia collusion, we learned how much the far left had infiltrated the FBI.
They were taking FBI agents and prosecutors on Junkins, where they would indoctrinate them on their preferred liberal policies, their preferred liberal agenda.
And then partnerships were formed.
That's one of the things that we unraveled during the FBI-Russia collusion case.
Well, a similar thing is going on in the judiciary.
People say, well, wait a second, judges can't take Junkins.
They're supposed to be above approach.
Actually, not.
Judges are allowed to take these free trips, and it depends who sends them there.
And over the last summer, as Trump was moving towards winning the presidency, Judge Boesberg was wined and dined out in Sun Valley, Idaho, beautiful place, great summer destination.
And the people sponsoring him there, the group that brought him there, the Rodell Institute, overtly anti-Trump.
Basically, the speakers, the funders, the CEO of the Rodell Institute, extremely anti-Trump.
And so you have a judge for three or four days on the till of a special interest, and that special interest is bombarding him with far-left people, far-left sentiments like Donald Trump's immigration policies are bad.
Donald Trump's pardons were haphazard.
These are things that the faculty teaching at this conference had written about and spoken about in the past.
I think a lot of people are going to look at this and say, well, maybe this is something Congress can get involved with.
Maybe it's time for Congress to say, you know, judges should be above reproach.
Let's not let them take free trips and get indoctrinated, much like we saw the FBI agents and prosecutors were during the Russia collusion case.
So really fascinating stuff.
You take a look at some of the teachers at this conference.
They were as virulent, anti-Trump, and far-left as you can get.
Everything from criticizing his ability to do pardons to the way he's handled immigration.
And of course, that's important because Judge Bosberg's main ruling affects immigration policy right now.
Governor DeSantis and a lot of judicial experts are all advocating that Congress get involved and prevent these lower-level judges from being able to usurp the power of a constitutionally elected president.
Is that the best answer in your view?
Yeah, listen, I've been doing a lot of interviews, Andy Biggs, Jim Jordan.
There is some legislation that's coming to the forefront in Congress the next week or so.
One of the ideas that's out there is a single judge in a single blue city shouldn't be allowed to impose a nationwide injunction and that maybe it's time to create a FISA-like panel of multiple judges.
And if a judge wants to impose a nationwide injunction like what Judge Bosberg's done, that it goes to a more senior group of multiple judges to balance out the partisanship and politics that some of these district judges are showing.
And I think this is a second issue.
We're going to talk to Jim Jordan about this tonight, but is it time for Congress to say, do we really want judges going to conferences where they're being whined and dined by people like the Henry Luce Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation, and the Hewlett Foundation?
All three foundations clearly have a political bent to them, including being against Donald Trump and for a much more looser, more Biden-like immigration policy, certainly not where Americans are.
I think that's a second issue for Congress to wrestle with, which is maybe it's time to outlaw these junkets.
Well, I think the junkets is only part of it.
What about the fact that at the lowest level in our judiciary that they're using their activism, I would argue it's activism, to usurp the constitutional authority of a duly elected president.
And with that comes the president's own constitutional authority.
And under this particular law, I mean, if you look at the Supreme Court decision in 1948, it upheld the law.
It had been used by four prior presidents, and it actually said in the ruling that there was no remedy through judicial review once it's invoked by the president.
That's right.
Yeah, listen, Judge Boesberg is, in his ruling, goes against several things.
He says it has to be in wartime.
The courts have said it doesn't have to be in wartime.
It's been upheld in use in non-wartime.
By the way, after World War I and World War II, it was used, and that's not wartime.
No, that's exactly right.
And I think President Trump has a leg up on a lot of these constitutional issues.
My guess is it'll take all the way to the Supreme Court before it gets rectified.
But this, you talked about earlier what these far liberal causes are doing.
They're judge shopping, right?
They're going to districts and judges.
They wait for a certain judge to get on the wheel and they file their injunction that day.
How did they learn what judges would be most predisposed to doing an injunction or being aligned with their values?
These conferences are sort of the sorting of the wheat and the chaff.
It's sort of the schmoozing that lets you say, hey, that judge might be good for immigration, or that judge is bad on this, but good on abortion.
These conferences have been used by these liberal groups to identify which judges they're going to shop for on what issues.
And I think this whole system of the abuse of the judicial power, the judge shopping, and then the junkets are all intertwined.
The left has a very sophisticated process of how they do this.
And I think today we're getting a much better sense of how Judge Bozberg fits into that system.
All right, quick break more with Investigative Reporter, editor-in-chief, JustTheNews.com.
John Solomon, your calls on the other side, 800-941-Sean, as we continue.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hale.
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.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, we continue now.
John Solomon is with us, Investigative Reporter, editor-in-chief of justthenews.com.
There was a very small cast of us, if you will, that were unpealing the layers of the onion as it related to the Russia collusion hoax, and it has been debunked.
And a lot of that was also rooted in the FISA warrants and the dirty Russian disinformation dossier that was used as the foundation to secure those warrants.
And one of the most fascinating things is years later, at least three of the four people that signed off on those Pfizer warrants, Jim Comey signed off personally on three of the four, all said knowing what they know now, they wouldn't have signed them.
But meanwhile, we know through your reporting that that dossier that was the foundation of that FISA warrants was debunked in December of 2016, right after it was implemented just before the election.
So they knew it was false, but they continue to use it as the foundation for those FISA applications.
What role did this judge play in that case?
Well, he takes it over after the four FISA are signed.
So the fourth extension occurred under another judge.
And he takes over the case after that.
He says a few terse things to the FBI, but at the end of the day, he doesn't impose that significant a punishment.
Not the sort of punishment that would make the FBI stand up straight and say, hey, and then he gets a moment where the FBI lawyer who filed, knowingly filed a false information in one of those FISAs, that he is about to be sentenced.
And the judge, Judge Boseberg, is actually sympathetic to the FBI lawyer and spares him from any real penny.
Basically gives him a slap on the hand when he could have gone to prison.
In fact, the judge fought with the prosecutors who wanted that FBI lawyer to face more serious penalty.
So he was a sympathist to the very sort of abuse that his judgeship as the head chief judge of the FISA court should have been again, should have been reprimanding, should have been punishing in such a way that there would be a deterrent for future people not to cheat into the court.
And then as Judge Boseberg is running the FISA court for a couple of years, the FBI continues, even after insisting under Chris Rabe, we got this fixed, Your Honor.
Don't worry, we're okay.
And so the judges start approving more FISA warrants, and two dozen more FISA warrants continue to have material flaws.
So the problem with the judge is that he basically enabled the system to continue just the way it did under Russia occlusion.
And when given a chance to make an example, to make a deterrence, he decided to give the FBI lawyer, who was at the heart of literally filing a false piece of information to the court.
He gives him a pass, a tap on the hand, when prosecutors wanted the more serious punishment.
But we both know that in August of 2016, that everybody was warned not to use that dirty Russian disinformation dossier.
And they were told it was a political document.
They were told by, of all people, Bruce Orr, putting aside what role his wife might have had.
Didn't she work for Fusion GPS, if I remember correctly?
Nellie Orr.
That's right.
And remember, the CIA was telling the FBI, hey, we think Christopher Steele's orbit has been infiltrated.
The CIA was warning the FBI, and still they proceeded with, because at the end of the day, it wasn't about the facts.
It was about the political outcome.
Really amazing times we live through and amazing times we're living in.
John Solomon, we appreciate you being with us.
Thank you.
As always, great work.
Justtheenews.com, editor-in-chief, investigator reporter.
Thank you, sir.
So we've been watching all the, and we've been chronicling everything that's been happening with Tesla.
It's one of the reasons that we're giving away a Tesla.
I'm buying it myself.
One lucky winner will win a Tesla, the Tesla of your choice.
I hope and encourage all of you to go to Hannity.com to register.
And if you go there, you just click on the Tesla.
It's a picture of Tesla, the icon, the contest, and you will then have to put in the word of the day.
Today's word is liberty.
We saw an Austin police officer found a suspicious or found suspicious devices intended to start a fire at a North Austin Tesla dealership just after 8 a.m. this morning.
The bomb squad was called in.
I mean, just it's getting more sad and more pathetic and more dangerous by the day.
Now, the Attorney General Pam Bondi has weighed in on all of this.
Specifically, he went after Jasmine Crockett because of things she has been saying like take down Elon Musk.
Now, if you remember back in 2018, you had Maxine Waters telling a crowd, I will take Trump out tonight.
This is not the first time.
Now, the attorney general specifically mentioned Jasmine Crockett and said she should tread very carefully with her plans to, quote, take down Tesla boss Elon Musk because of, what, rescuing astronauts or, you know, creating the most innovative car in history, whether you ever want an electric car or not is neither here nor there.
I mean, the technology is amazing.
On March 29th, she said it's my birthday.
And she said, all I want to see happen on my birthday is for Elon to be taken down.
Well, that sounds like a threat to me.
Anyway, here's Jasmine Crockett responding back to Pam Bondi.
Listen.
And so, yeah, I'm excited to see that Elon Musk, that his money, as it relates to Tesla, well, Tesla's tanking right now.
And I'm okay with that.
So just in case the slow people listening decide to click this up later, I just want to say that I have never promoted violence whatsoever, yet I've also never made excuse for those violent actors such as the ones on January 6th.
So Pam Bondi, if you have an issue with terrorism, maybe you should talk to your boss about locking back up those guys that he let out that participated in January 6th.
What does it mean when you say I'm going to take somebody down?
That sounds like a physical threat to me.
And here's Jasmine Crockett then going further, this time speaking about Senator Ted Cruz and how he needs to be knocked over the head like hard.
I think that you punch.
I think you punch.
I think you're okay with you.
You okay with punching.
You know, I think, and I love Colin.
And I think towards the end, he started to punch a little harder.
But like, it's Ted Cruz.
I mean, like, this dude has to be knocked over the head like hard, right?
Like, there is no niceties with him, like, at all.
Like, you, you go clean off on him, right?
I mean, this is now the radical left-wing Democratic Party.
And this is their radicalism.
And, you know, they cheer a guy that murders a CEO of United Healthcare.
And they worship Luigi Mangioni.
And in this particular case, celebrating, making jokes about and threats to Elon Musk.
And the people that will get hurt here are the people that work for Elon Musk.
And those are the people in his dealerships.
Those are the people that work on the line that build these Teslas.
And the most American car, by the way, made in America today.
And then the people that repair these cars.
They won't have as much work to do.
So they act like the party that cares about working men and women.
Well, they're hurting working men and women by doing all of this.
But they're a party now that is just completely rudderless and as I've been saying, soulless.
You know, how you can't stand for the mothers that lost their children at the joint session of Congress.
You can't stand for the first lady.
You can't stand for the president.
You can't stand for a young man that beat his battle with cancer and became a secret service agent.
He's 12 years old.
You can't stand for that young man.
You can't stand for another young man who lost his hero father who was informed that night that he got into West Point.
You can't stand for the wife of a hero police officer that was killed in the line of duty.
I mean, all you really can stand for is more war in Ukraine and wave your bingo cards at a president of the United States.
And then they're wondering why, you know, AOC and Bernie Sanders are now emerging as the voices of resistance in their party, the radical left and their rise.
And they will be a force to reckon with.
Moderate voices are not going to want to be heard by this Democratic Party.
All right, let's get to our busy phones.
Say hi to Mark out in the left-wing utopia United Socialist State of California.
How are you?
Mark, glad you called.
By the way, I have a list of stuff about California.
You ready?
I'm ready, absolutely.
48% of likely Californian voters say they would consider now voting for a Republican for governor in 26.
Republican Party registration in California is 25%, meaning a total of 25%.
83% of voters, how much do you pay for a gallon of gasoline out there?
It's about anywhere from about $5 to $6, depending on where you're at.
Yeah, you know how much I pay in the free state of Florida?
This weekend, $2.79 a gallon.
That's it.
I'm not surprised.
Not surprised.
I mean, first of all, Sean, I just wanted to say thank you to you and the entire Fox team for just staying the course these past years.
It's been a long road and there's still a lot of work to do.
But I had a couple, just an observation and then a quick question for you.
I think one of the biggest problems facing the Dems is Trump has truly cornered the market, if you will, on all common sense issues.
So they're falling because what can they really stand for?
You know, border security, well, can't stand for that.
Keeping men out of women's locker rooms, deporting criminals, even stopping the war, as you mentioned earlier.
I mean, I don't know how you can't be for that, but they've really boxed themselves into the corner.
And I think this is really where the real derangement exposes itself.
Because if you ask any one of these folks, kind of an individually, hey, are you forgetting criminals out of your neighborhoods?
What they're going to say, of course, but they can't be per Trump.
One of my concerns is we've developed into this society of instant kind of gratification.
You know, I want it now.
I've got to have it now.
And I kind of call it the Baruch assault syndrome, right?
And I think we have to keep reminding people that Trump is working the long game here.
It takes time to achieve long-lasting and sustainable results.
And I hope that people will recognize that and stay the course with him and you as you've done.
So here's my question.
I'm not as concerned about AOC and Bernie.
I think they can create some damage, but I just don't see them as being viable in a bigger sense.
But Gavin, who has really ruined much of our state, as you know, people have short-term memory, Sean, and I'm concerned.
And I watch him slick and kind of grease his way into the alternative media and position himself.
Now, you know him.
You've seen him.
I'm sure you've met with him.
That's the guy who I'm concerned about.
What's your take on it?
On Bernie?
No, on Gavin.
On Gavin.
Oh, Gavin.
You're worried about Gavin being the next president?
I got to tell you, I know.
All right, let me go through the rest of this poll with you.
Let me go through what people in your state think.
All right.
83% think gas prices are too high.
69% think California's political leaders have not done enough to bring down energy and utility costs.
71% believe the governor and legislative leaders have not addressed California and their high cost of living.
73% support the funding of the anti-crime Prop 36, which has not occurred.
72% feel homelessness is a massive problem.
60% oppose free health care to illegal immigrants.
62% support a full independent investigation of the recent wildfires.
And only 24% of Californians think that men should be able to compete in female sports.
Does that sound like Gavin is in touch with the people even in his own state?
I mean, things are changing.
How do you think that's going to fly nationwide?
The fact that Gavin is slick and can communicate?
I know Gavin really well.
He's got a big problem, and that is his past positions.
And in a campaign, all of that will come to light.
I hope you're right.
I agree.
I've just seen this guy, and he's a slippery snake.
So I just still have my concerns.
I hope you're right.
Thank you again, Sean, for everything.
Appreciate it.
Appreciate your call.
Thank you.
Rick is in New York.
We're going from one socialist utopia to the next.
What's up, Rick?
How are you?
I'm doing fine.
I'm so glad you're our voice.
I tell you what, since Russian volunteers.
Thank you for giving it to me.
I appreciate it.
What's on your mind?
Well, I was, you know, I see how that seems like the liberals seem like they weaponize against themselves.
I'm watching how they're going after Elon Musk's electric cars.
And, you know, for years as a conservative, I'm like, you know what?
They're kind of forcing us in these electric cars.
I don't really want to own one.
I'm a muscle car guy myself.
And then all of a sudden, now they're running their own people off the road and they're graffiti, you know, vandalizing their own people that are driving these cars.
Most of your electric car drivers are kind of a liberal group.
Well, here's the cool thing.
I can tell you this now from my own personal experience.
I'm a muscle car guy.
I'm like a Corvette Z06, you know, guy.
Do you realize the Tesla S-Plaid has over 1,000 horsepower?
It goes from 0 to 60 in 2.0 seconds.
It feels like a rocket ship when you drive it.
It's self-driving, and the technology is incredible.
So, I mean, it's beyond innovation.
Now, with all that said, I'm pro-choice in the sense that buy whatever car you want, but I am buying a Tesla in a show of solidarity to speak out against what they're doing to somebody who has not done anything to deserve this.
It's evil what they're doing.
Yeah, you've won me over, though.
I signed up to win the Tesla.
I'll drive one next to my CUDA.
Oh, really?
You got a CUDA?
Oh, yeah, I got a couple of them.
I'm building one now in the garage.
So I just fired it up like three, four days ago with the engine.
Oh, good for you.
You're a real motorhead.
You really get in there and get your hands dirty.
I used to do all that.
I don't have time anymore.
I wish I did.
And by the way, I look under the hood of a new car and I'm like, okay, I just shut it because there's nothing I can do to help that car.
Anyway, my friend, appreciate it.
And don't forget Hannity.com.
And the word of the day is, what's the Liberty today?
If you want to sign up, you can sign up once a day every day.
Real quick, let's say hi to Tom in Texas.
All right.
God bless Texas.
Finally, a red state.
What's going on, Tom?
Hi, Sean.
How are you?
It's a pleasure to talk to you.
I just wanted to talk a little bit about the expenditures that everybody seems to think are out of line.
And I think they're out of line, too.
But when I take a look at it, when I look at all the lists of expenditures that are misspent that you put on TV every night, what occurs to me is how come no one takes a look at the organization chart of the U.S. government?
You know, we've got a Congress that says, oh, we carry the power of the purse.
And all they seem to do is do a top-line funding level down to all these different agencies that have the responsibility of spending the money that they appropriate.
And when I look at the organization chart of the United States government, it starts with the Constitution.
It has the three branches, Article 1, 2, and 3 of the Constitution.
But when I get down to the agency levels that the Congress seems to say that you have the authority to spend the money and determine how it's spent, they all report to the President of the United States.
They don't report back to the legislative branch, and they don't report over to the judicial branch with respect to their organizations.
So I guess I'm of the opinion that President Trump can select anyone he wants, and thank God for Elon Musk to take a look at him.
It hasn't been looked at seriously for 150 years, I don't think.
Well, it's what we have all said, and even Democrats have said they wanted, which is the elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse.
It is now a moral imperative that we not put $40 trillion in debt on our children and grandchildren.
And it's not fair to the hardworking men and women in this country to have their money wasted like this.
It just isn't.
And that's why Democrats, they want to die on this hill, let them die on it.
They want to die on, you know, men and women's sports and standing up for the rights of the illegals over the safety of Americans.
Let them.
The final hour of the Sean Hannity Show is up next.
Come on for Sean's conservative solutions.
All right, everybody knows that I'm more into health, wellness, fitness, nutrition than I've ever been.
I'm not perfect yet, but I'm trying to get better and better.
And I really, you know, I'm keeping as much sugar out of my diet as possible.
And that meant that I had to give up cereal, which I love.
I love, love, love cereal, but they're high in sugar and corn syrup and chemical additives.
And especially cereal made in America, it's unbelievable.
It's just garbage compared to other countries.
It's amazing that they can make one brand of cereal here in America with all this junk in it, and then they make a whole different brand, same name, and they'll sell the healthier brand in Canada and in Europe.
It's insane.
Well, that's until recently.
My life changed, and I added cereal back into my life thanks to meeting Peter Harris.
He and his father created Grainberry Cereals.
And the purpose was to bring the healthiest, most natural choice to the cereal aisle, and you're going to love it.
And unlike these other cereals that are high in sugar, have corn syrup and these chemical additives, Grainberry instead is focused on controlling sugar levels and being heart healthy.
And Grainberry uses natural plant-based fiber.
It has a ton of antioxidants.
Grainberry cereal is healthy and it tastes great, which matters to me.
Anyway, it's an all-around healthy food choice.
And I've added it back to my diet thanks to Grainberry.
Now, there are seven different Grainberry cereals you could choose from, like multi-brand flakes, honey nut, original toasted oats, oats, apple cinnamon, Linda's favorite, which is Grainberry Raisin Brand.
Just go to Grainberry.
Now, remember the name.
It's hard.
You have to go through the cereal aisle, which is massive, and you have to really look for it.
Or you might find it in your health food aisle, but you're going to find it if you look for it.
Look for the name or talk to your grocer or talk to the manager.
Grainberry.
Remember the name Grainberry today.
When we come back, Miranda Devine will join us next.
our toll free numbers 800-941-SHAWN if you want to be a part of the program and the cabinet meeting from earlier today as well.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markowitz, and I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
▲
Export Selection