More Hot Water for Letitia James - April 17th, Hour 3
John Solomon, Editor in Chief of Just the News - joins us to talk about the breaking news on NY AG Letitia James including allegations of mortgage fraud.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
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 down with Verdict with Ted Cruz Now, wherever you get your podcasts, what I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Listen to Fiasco Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
If we're not smart, we're going to hurt our country very badly.
The fact that no one is questioning his mental acuity or fitness to serve is beyond wild to me, right?
This fear that some members of the media had sometimes that they would be perceived as helping Trump if they somehow diminished Biden, right?
That it was some sort of zero-sum game.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
Where we're coming to your city.
Gonna play our guitars and sing you a country song.
Sean Hennedy.
More behind the scenes information on breaking news and more bold, inspired solutions for America.
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
All right, news roundup, information overload hour.
Toll free.
Our number is 800-941-Sean.
If you want to be a part of the program, we're going to get into great specificity and detail.
In a moment, we'll be joined by founder, creator, investigative reporter, just the news.com, our friend John Solomon.
But it appears that the Trump administration now has issued a criminal referral for the New York State Attorney General Letitia James related to mortgage fraud by making false statements on bank lending applications to receive more favorable terms.
Now, that's kind of exactly what Letitia James tried to prosecute President Trump for as part of her lawfare campaign to bankrupt the Trump organization with a half billion dollar fine.
You might recall in the civil case in New York where they had this outrageous fine.
You might recall that the judge in that case, his name was Ngoron, you know, used a valuation of Mar-a-Lago at $18 million.
If anybody wants to go to Zillow or Realtor.com or any other real estate website, you will see that Mar-a-Lago is much closer to a billion, if not over $1 billion in value.
And the judge wouldn't even allow real estate experts from Palm Beach to testify in this case.
But anyway, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency sent a criminal referral to the DOJ alleging Ms. James falsified documents and property records to obtain loans.
In one incident cited in the referral, James claimed she lived in Virginia to purchase a home in Norfolk while serving as the New York Attorney General, where she is required to reside for her job.
In a separate incident, she allegedly misrepresented the description of a property that she owns in Brooklyn, New York, to meet the requirements for a government-backed loan.
And based on media reports, Letitia James has, in multiple instances, falsified bank documents and property records to acquire government-backed assistance and loans with more favorable law terms.
It was sent to the Attorney General Pam Pondi and the Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanch, and they said they will be reviewing it.
By the way, a 2016 report revealed that Letitia James had committed at that time, this is the New York Observer, November 18, 2016, finance fraud, and the city's campaign finance board slapped her with a $5,705 fine for various violations committed by her 2013 campaign to become the city's watchdog.
And she had put in claims for public funds during that election cycle, received $1,153,058 in public monies, and she was fined $1,500 for failing to file pre-election disclosure statements and got hit with a penalty at that time.
She is not the only elected official that has these issues.
But just as a matter of recall, remember, it's Letitia James that said no one's above the law.
This is before Donald Trump's civil fraud trial.
My message is simple.
No matter how powerful you are, no matter how much money you think you may have, no one is above the law.
And it is my responsibility and my duty and my job to enforce it.
The law is both powerful and fragile.
And today in court, we will prove our case.
I thank you all for being here.
And again, justice will prevail.
No, justice didn't prevail.
It was one of the greatest injustices.
John Solomon, founder, editor-in-chief, investigative reporter, justthenews.com.
Your reaction to all of this, John Solomon.
Well, I agree with Letitia James that nobody's above the law, and she may soon find that that is the case.
And as you pointed out, she did have this problem a decade ago with campaign finances, not complying with the law there.
Pretty egregious situation a decade ago.
So there's already a warning sign about her compliance with the law.
If you go out and you get a federally backed mortgage or a mortgage regulated by the federal government and you don't comply with the law, you can face very serious consequences.
We know that because another prosecutor, another Democrat in another blue state, just a year ago, the former Baltimore state's attorney was convicted in a very serious crime, which are doing something very similar to what Letitia James is now accused of.
So this is serious stuff.
Usually mortgage fraud is a slam-dunk case in the courts.
So if this moves forward, if the evidence that the Federal Housing Finance Agency has provided to the Justice Department checks out, if it's verified and the FBI feels confident with it, the next step is likely a grand jury investigation and the potential for an indictment of New York's top law enforcement officials.
Yeah.
Listen, there's other people that have had these allegations made.
One of them, if I'm not mistaken, is a guy that I often refer to as the congenital liar, Adam Schiff.
And if I'm not mistaken, didn't he get one of those preemptive pardons that in 2020, when Trump was leaving office, said that it's outrageous and illegitimate and should never be used?
But yet Biden gave him one out the door.
Yeah, that's right.
He did get one of the preemptive pardons in January on January 20th in conjunction to his work with the January 6th Committee.
He said he didn't want it.
He didn't need it.
He disagreed with it, but he took it.
Now, there are two questions about that pardon.
One, is it as sweeping as it's been portrayed in the media?
That will likely be tested in the courts at some point.
But two, if you're involved in a mortgage matter, you can also be civilly sued.
A pardon doesn't protect you from civil liability.
So there are two routes in these mortgage cases where people can get pursued.
One of those is criminal, like what we saw the referral yesterday refer to.
Another place is you can be sued civilly for mortgage fraud, something that we saw a lot of during the SNL scandal and other prior scandals.
By the way, wasn't that the civil trial in New York against Donald Trump?
There was a case of that exactly there.
That shows you the liability.
Letitia James took the civil route to create consequences for Donald Trump.
So just the pardon hasn't totally cleared any liability away from Adam Schiff yet.
And, you know, Adam Schiff is remarkable.
He's always on his moral high horse.
But you look over the years how much he misled the American people under the color of government, under the color of being an intelligence committee chair, a member of Congress.
We now know that massive things that he said at the time were not true, and he would have had to have known they were not true because he was getting briefed on the intelligence committee and the gang of eight.
And other gang of eight members obviously wouldn't say what he said because they knew it wasn't true.
So the history of Adam Schiff precedes this concern.
We wrote about this last year.
There's a Senate ethics complaint pending against him on that matter on mortgages and something similar.
He claimed multiple houses as his primary residence.
You're only allowed to take one, and it has to be the one that you live in most of the time.
So that's another lawmaker that potentially is going to come up in the conversation when it comes to Letitia James.
Let's talk about other information and documents that you have been able to examine in great detail as it relates to Operation Crossfire Hurricane.
You have found some information that I think is extremely enlightening.
After James Comey was fired four months into President Trump's administration, you had people like Rod Rosenstein and Andrew Weissman, I believe.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Were they not talking about invoking the 25th Amendment and removing Donald Trump from office?
And correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't everybody warned in August of 2020 by Bruce Orr that the dirty Russian disinformation Hillary Clinton bought and paid for Russian dossier, wasn't that, didn't they say it was a political document and it was not to be trusted?
And didn't James Comey move forward and get not one, but four separate FISA warrants?
Didn't James Comey sign three of the four?
Didn't Rod Rosenstein sign one of those?
What do you make of these new documents?
They're very confirming of the narrative that we so carefully built with facts over the last eight years that the Russia collusion story was never about evidence, was never about facts, was never about wrongdoing by Donald Trump or any of his things.
It was about creating a political consequence to keep Donald Trump from becoming the president or effectively executing his plan as president.
There are instances in these documents where you see people acknowledging that they were considering wearing a wire to capture the president or entrap the president in a conversation.
And they're doing that after the first round of evidence falls apart.
Once they find out the Christopher Steele dossier is garbage, that's a word I think Bob Woodward once used for it.
Once they found out that the evidence against Mike Flynn wasn't true, there was no basis to pursue Mike Flynn.
Once they had captured Carter Page and George Papadopoulos on intercept saying we would never do those things.
We're patriots.
We wouldn't sell out our country to Russia.
When they couldn't get the original allegations through, they just pivoted to try to create new crimes to investigate, to create process crimes.
This was never about following the law or enforcing the law, having real evidence that would back a criminal conspiracy.
Remember, John Durham has concluded there was no evidence to justify the opening of CrossFire Hurricane.
But every time any notion of an allegation fell apart, they just simply created a new allegation until finally it stopped because Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows and Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson and Sean Hennedy and John Solomon and Sarah Carter got the facts out.
And at some point the game was up.
But these documents show it was a get Trump operation and evidence did not matter.
What else did you discover?
You found a few other nuggets.
We were speaking late at night this week and you found a few other nuggets that a lot of people haven't picked up on.
Yeah, this is, I think, a really important one because as you have so eloquently helped people understand over the years, the intelligence community, the deep state, the FBI bad actors could not have carried out this scam on the American people if they didn't have complicit as players in the news media.
The news media drove the hysteria, created the perception there was something there when there was nothing there.
Again, another player in this drama that didn't care much about the facts.
They cared about the headlines and the clicks and the possibility of knocking Donald Trump out of the presidency, having another Watergate.
How many times did we hear Watergate?
This wasn't even remotely close to Watergate.
They didn't have any crime.
But the Washington Post and the New York Times, as we've reported, they won Pulitzers in 2018 for their reporting on this.
We now have, for the first time, direct proof from the FBI files declassified by Donald Trump released by Kash Patel that a story in the Washington Post Pulitzer submission is wrong.
They reported that in a conversation, and this is one that was in the Pulitzer package, so it's in a Pulitzer-winning article, that Donald Trump tried to pressure the NSA director, Obama's former NSA director who carried over into the Trump administration, to say that there was no truth to the Russian hacking or interference in the election.
That's not what Donald Trump said.
In fact, when he was interviewed, the NSA director said very clearly, the Washington Post story is wrong.
And it's not only wrong based on my recollection, there was a contemporaneous document that was written about the conversation that shows exactly what was said.
And it's not what the Washington Post reported.
For the very first time, we know a Pulitzer Prize, top journalism award-winning article in that compilation is factually demonstrably false.
Now, you'll say, well, that's great for history, but there's actually a current reason to be concerned about this.
Donald Trump has sued the Pulitzer Committee trying to force him to withdraw those awards.
This sort of evidence, this FBI 302 interview report and associated documents, could become important civil evidence in Donald Trump's quest to get the Pulitzer Committee to reverse this and to potentially pay a penalty for defaming him.
You broke this story, and you were the first to make it public.
In March of 2020, the FBI, for example, knew about the legitimacy.
They had verified the authenticity of the Hunter Biden laptop.
Then they went on a mission to pre-bunk that laptop.
They knew Rudy Giuliani's attorney, Bob Costello, had a copy of that laptop.
They knew that laptop would be made public before the election.
And yet they were meeting with big tech companies on a weekly basis in the months leading up to the 2020 election.
New York Post breaks that story.
And sure enough, big tech, even though the FBI knew that it was true, they went to the big tech companies like, well, then Twitter at the time and now Meta, but Facebook at the time and said, is this what you've been warning about?
This is likely Russian disinformation or is it real?
They knew the answer wouldn't tell them.
Yeah, that's exactly right.
Now, listen, there was a large number of aiders and abettors and conspirators that misled the American people for two consecutive elections.
First, 2016 on Russia occlusion, then 2020 on Hunter Biden and quite frankly, Joe Biden's ethical conduct.
And most of them still operate with impunity today.
Some have lost in the deep state have lost their security crances, but there's been very few penalties.
And these publications still have their rewards.
These publications still continue to spew stories that we can prove on a daily basis aren't true.
And every so often they will throw in a little jab to say, oh, yeah, we were wrong.
And I just want to point this out.
You'll laugh at this.
But on Sunday, the New York Times had a long story about a historian that they wanted to highlight.
And way down in the 30th paragraph, I'm not making this up.
The 30th paragraph of the story, out of the blue, the New York Times writers said there was no substantiation for Russia occlusion.
Now, it's hard to hear the New York Times ever say that publicly.
They don't, but they stuck it in the 30th paragraph of it.
Well, I'll believe they believe that when they return their Pulitzer along with the Washington Post, but we'll save that for another day.
John Solomon, just the news.com, appreciate you being with us.
Appreciate your hard work.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Sean.
Good to be with you.
800-941-Sean, our number.
Your phone call's coming up next.
Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
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 with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
When I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
It's almost a dirty word, one that connotes conspiracy theory.
Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
You put two and two together.
Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
Benghazi is a Rosetta Stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
I'm Leon NAFOC from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
This is fiasco, Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Yes, that's right.
Lock her up.
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Check out the show 24-7.
Download it to your iPod via Hannity Insider at Hannity.com.
I-25 now to the top of the hour from our nation's capital, the Swamp, the Sewer, 800-941.
Sean, if you want to join us, don't forget, Monday we will announce the winner to our Tesla contest.
And that winner, whoever it is.
It's not you.
You're not allowed to.
I found out for sure you're definitely not allowed to register.
If you registered, that means you cheated.
I told you, I registered under Schminden Mashmasha.
Well, it's not that you don't need a new car because you have a piece of crap old, you know, the worst car Susie, your car, which is so weird and bizarre that you name it.
I see Susie coming up.
It's not a boat.
You name boats.
You don't name cars.
Oh, someone actually reached out.
They said they saw a boat one time called Airwaves.
I had a little boat called Airways.
Naming a vehicle.
Everybody, if you look at the back of any boat, it has a name on it.
It's so weird.
It's so weird when people name things.
I've never seen except those people with vanity plates that name their cars.
That's weird.
I don't have a vanity.
Well, first of all, your car's a piece of garbage.
No, she's not.
Yes, she is.
No, she's trackable by the government.
She, they, them.
I mean, I mean, well, we have the prop.
Do I have the proper pronoun?
She identifies.
How do you know it's a she?
How do I know?
Because she's a sexy, sassy Susie.
And did she ever talk to you and say, I want this is my preferred pronoun?
She's like, listen, Linda, you better get some water.
You don't know what your preferred pronoun is.
Anyway, that'll be Monday.
We'll announce the winner of the Tesla contest.
It will not be Linda.
All right, spring is here.
With it, unpredictable weather.
And with that, you don't want to be caught off guard if severe storms or emergencies hit.
Now, that's where Rapid Radios can ensure you stay in touch no matter what Mother Nature may throw your way.
Now, they're ready to go right out of the box.
RapidRadios.com.
They're walkie-talkies, but they're industrial strength.
They're not a toy.
They have a nationwide LTE coverage network.
It's 100% guaranteed private communication.
And here's the beauty: you don't ever pay a penny, a monthly fee, a subscription, nothing at all.
You just can talk to, let's say, your kids, but they're not on the internet if you give them a phone, which is an added advantage, or maybe an elderly relative, wherever they happen to live in the country.
It's one-touch connection, push of the button, and or maybe you want to talk to your employees and check on them.
You never know where they are.
You never know what they're doing.
Anyway, for a limited time, go to rapidradios.com right now and you'll save 60% off.
Plus, you'll get free UPS shipping.
Now, if you use the promo code Radio25, you'll get an extra 25 bucks off and a free EMP protection bag.
Just go to rapidradios.com and stay prepared and you'll love this technology.
All right, so last night on Hannity, and the last time I did this and bring on somebody from the left, it is always me having to thread a needle because I like to listen to feedback from this audience.
And over the years, the feedback has been very consistent.
That people, some people don't like if I have any liberal, I'm considering they do kind of have a monopoly on the rest of the state-run legacy media mob.
Okay.
And this is my dilemma as a host.
So we brought Taylor Lorenz on last night, and she's the one that was, you know, praising joyful about Luigi Mangioni and all the other comments that she made.
Okay, so I'm going to ask and try and get into the mindset of somebody that thinks it's okay.
And then she actually put up the picture of the CEO of Blue Cross Blue Shield and confront them on what is, to me, you know, putting a smiley face, as I told her, right to her face, on assassination culture.
We see, you know, all the would-be assassins of Donald Trump.
We know all the threats that the president faces.
He just had two recent would-be assassins that they discovered, Elon Musk.
Not only are they firebombing his Tesla dealerships and firing bullets into them and putting Teslas ablaze and doxing Tesla owners and charging stations ablaze, but that is domestic terrorism.
What happened to Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania with the governor's mansion?
That would be domestic terrorism.
So this sympathy or silence in some cases towards this violent culture is solely now emerging on the left.
You know, the fact that they don't want to criticize these pro-Hamas radicals that are on college campuses.
Now, Hamas is a designated terrorist organization whose very charter calls for the destruction of Israel.
And I'm not sure what part of October 7th they don't understand because on that day, the Israelis lost the equivalent of 40,000 Americans that would have been killed in a single day.
And I don't know what part of murder, rape, torture, kidnapping, beheadings they don't understand, but they've become prominent voices not only on college campuses, but in the halls of Congress.
Very frustrating.
This obsession that we see on the left when it comes to Luigi Mangion.
And I have a hard time understanding that.
I have a hard time understanding, you know, people like Taylor that had actually said, oh, I'm so disappointed.
I had heard Joe Biden died, but he didn't die.
I don't like Joe Biden.
I don't wish Joe Biden dead.
And I think it's kind of a sick, ugly culture.
So here's my dilemma.
I put her on last night, and I start asking her about it.
She wants to only debate the healthcare system.
Well, a lot of people hate healthcare.
I'm not asking you about that.
I'm asking you why you are saying he's handsome and intelligent and you felt joy, et cetera, et cetera.
And I want to understand the mindset.
That was the focus of the segment.
She doesn't want to talk about the folks.
She wants to distract, divert, and obfuscate any real discussion about the things that she's been saying that sound awfully supportive to me about this culture.
Here's my dilemma.
Some of you don't even like the fact that I have her on.
Okay, fair criticism.
I have to balance the show and occasionally put on people that I disagree with.
Then if I let her talk uninterrupted and she's not answering my question, there are going to be many at home that are furious with me for not stepping in and challenging her, especially when she starts out by not answering the question every time.
And then there's another group of people that if I'm interrupted, why don't you let her finish?
Because she's not answering the question.
And I'm trying in the limited time I have on TV in a segment like this, seven minutes, 10 minutes, whatever it ends up being, I need answers to questions.
I need a real dialogue and somebody that's going to filibuster.
I'm not getting anywhere with that.
So I'm going to play this interview with that.
Please keep that in mind.
I can't win for losing in these situations because the people that don't like confrontation, interruption, and then the people that want me to hold this woman's feet to the fire, keep her dialed in and focused and don't let her off the map until she actually answers the question.
I have to balance it.
So I'm not going to make everybody happy with this, but I'm just trying to make you aware.
I hope you'll give me grace.
And but just notice you won't answer.
Let's play it from last night.
All right.
Try and explain this to me.
You feel joy.
Those are your words.
So you felt joy over the murder of this father.
No, those are the words you use.
You can shake your head all you want.
No.
And we have the tape.
And number one, then you go on to say, and people wonder why we want these executives dead.
Then you posted an image of the Blue Cross CEO, Kim Keck.
Now, let me ask you, what part of this United Healthcare CEO being a father and a husband don't you understand?
And what part of you having a choice of what healthcare provider you choose to deal with or not do you not understand?
Because you don't have to go with United.
You don't have to go Blue Cross.
So let me just be extra clear.
Never did I say that I felt joy in his death.
I said very explicitly, if you play the full segment, and actually people can watch that segment on my YouTube in full, not the edited version that Piers showed.
I said that I felt joy, along with millions of other Americans, that the brutality of our health care system was finally being acknowledged.
I believe that our current health care system is murderous, right?
I mean, we have uninsured Americans with a 40% higher risk of death compared to insured counterparts, nearly 70,000 Americans dying.
But that's not the topic.
Due to lack of health insurance.
Taylor, that's not the topic.
You can talk about healthcare.
I don't like the healthcare system either.
And a lot of people have experienced frustration, like you're saying.
That to me is separate and apart from the debate of praising, calling handsome, smart, intelligence being joyful over the death and assassination of innocent people.
And that's what your comments did.
Your comments basically put your seal of approval on murder and assassination.
And I'm trying to understand whether you like this guy, like the way he does business or not, you're advocating and putting a smiley face on assassination.
And I'm trying to understand what is in your soul that doesn't understand he's a father and a husband here.
What are you missing?
This seems to be a missing chip with you.
Sean, if you'd like to hear, you know, I will need to talk in order to explain.
I don't want the rationalization.
I want you to think about what you said.
Explain what you're saying.
Well, I know exactly what I said.
Again, I'm attempting to right now.
So I'd ask you to please give the space and try to listen here.
As I said once again, never did I say I felt joy that this man died.
I said again that I felt joy that millions of Americans are millions of really wealthy Americans and privileged Americans are forcing or forced to wake up to the reality that nearly 70,000 Americans die each year due to lack of health insurance.
I do feel joyful that that is an action.
Why would any human being with a conscience and soul be joyful over an assassination of any person?
Why would anybody be joyful over that?
Well, actually, that's a good question.
Why don't I explain?
So the other clip, so the other clip that you played is not me saying my own beliefs.
I have quite different beliefs from that.
What I'm describing, and if you watch the full segment, not just the clip, you'll see that I'm describing the mentality of these fangirls that show up outside Luigi's court and show up outside his jail cell.
Those girls are not me.
Okay.
We have very separate belief systems, but I was describing how they believe.
And now let me explain to you why people in America feel this way.
People in America feel this way and they feel outraged because again, every penny of the $22 billion in profit made by United Health was made at the expense and suffering of others.
And that is violence.
Our healthcare system is also violent.
And that is a violence that people in the mainstream media, such as yourself, continue to refuse to acknowledge.
So if you're going to talk about death and violence, it's crucial to talk about the violence.
Pardon?
There's a better way than saying that Luigi Mangioni is a revolutionary who's famous, handsome, young, smart.
That is what those people believe.
That is what those people believe.
And seems like he's a morally good man.
If you want to have legitimate criticism, you could write an intelligent piece saying, here is what's wrong with America's health care system.
Like, for example, I want health care savings accounts.
I would like to see more of the use of telemedicine.
I believe in healthcare cooperatives.
I know one that works, Josh Umber, Atlas MD, average person, 24-hour concierge care, 50 bucks a month.
There are better ways to do it.
That's a legitimate debate.
But that's not how you're saying it.
You're saying it in ways that are sympathetic to the people that are taking action.
I'm describing good looking.
This is why people are happy and joyful.
I'm describing the belief system of his supporters, Sean.
Taylor, do you condemn people that call for assassination?
Gosh, you're going to ask if I condemn Hamas next.
This is crazy.
I would love for you to acknowledge what I'm actually saying, Sean.
And we seem to be talking past each other.
I want to talk about the fact that House of Balls.
I'll hear you out of the way.
Because of cost.
We need to talk about the 70% of Americans, by the way, believe that the insurance company practices are responsible in part for Thompson's death.
These are signs of an unhealthy.
I don't want to put a rationalization.
I am saying anybody that wants to assassinate any innocent person is wrong.
I don't care if it's a Democrat or Republican or a father or a husband.
And I speak that is a simple truth that anyone with a heart would easily say on national TV.
If you want to prevent further deaths and you don't want gun violence in the street, which I think we both are aligned in wanting, right?
We want peace.
We do not want violence in this country, no matter what side of the political aisle it's coming from.
You need to understand motives and you need to understand the ideology that people have.
And that is what my daughter is.
I'm going to help you out.
Why don't you first condemn those that want to be involved in assassination and stop talking about them being handsome and smart and intelligent?
I didn't say that I believe that.
I am describing his supporters who do believe that.
And I think it's very important, just the way that I would try to understand the ideology of the people who condemn his supporters last year.
I would try to understand the ideology of anyone that would advocate for violence in the United States.
Do you condemn his supporters?
Once again, I believe in free speech.
I believe in free speech, and they have not committed any crimes.
His supporters are outside just saying things.
They're not committing any sort of action.
You won't condemn his supporters.
You won't say what they're doing is repulsive.
Once again, Sean, I believe in free speech and the right to free expression.
I seem to be in the minority.
What's the difference between assassination and speech?
Do you condemn those that support violence and in this case, praise Luigi Mangioni?
You asked, again, the people that are showing up outside of the world.
I'm going around the circle.
I gotta go.
They're exercising their right to free speech.
They're talking about the fact that over 320,000 people died from lack of health insurance in the first two years of the pandemic.
These are things that we need to acknowledge if we ever want to fix our system.
We have a violent, violent health care system, Sean, and it needs reform.
And that's what we should be focusing on.
That's the violence we should mention.
And people that have a platform like yours should speak out loudly and clearly and unambiguously, and you won't do it.
All right, that's going to wrap things up for today.
Hannity tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel from our nation's capital.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
will join us.
By the way, you like comedian Tim Dylan, right?
Absolutely.
Yeah, he's on tonight.
Horace Cooper, Stephen Miller, Victor Davis Hansen, Jason Chaffetz.
Set your DVR at 9 Eastern Hannity on Fox.
We'll see you tonight back here on Monday.
Have a great Easter.
Don't forget, Monday we announce our Tesla contest winner.
Have a great Passover.
Have a great Easter.
God bless you and your families.
And we'll see you back here on Monday.
We'll announce our Tesla contest winner.
And again, have a great weekend with your family.
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 down with Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
When I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco, Benghazi.