I'm Greg Jarrett, filling in for Sean Hannity on the Sean Hannity Show.
Sean's taking a few days off, well deserved during the holidays.
I'm happy to fill in both today and tomorrow.
For those of you who don't know me, I'm a Fox News legal analyst.
I've been with the network, goodness, for going on 24 years.
You can follow me on X at Greg Jarrett.
I've written several books, Trial of the Century, Constitution and Patriotic Documents, Witch Hunt, The Trial of the Century I mentioned, and the Russia hoax.
So what I normally do is talk about legal issues, and there's never any shortage of that.
I'll be joined today by John Solomon, by Newt Gingrich, by Jason Chaffetz, and be sure to give us a call.
I'd love to hear from you.
Let me give you the number 1-800-941-7326.
Again, that's 1-800-941-Sean.
I'll be taking your calls.
If you have any questions or comments to make, love to hear from you.
So give us a ring.
In the meantime, I'd like to begin by talking about what I think is the greatest political scandal of our time.
And it also happens to be the worst abuse of power in American history.
Those who hated Donald Trump took it upon themselves to hijack our legal system, to bring a series of investigations and prosecutions against Trump based on invented stories, false accusations, and clever lies.
And there's a word for it.
It's called lawfare.
It's the weaponization of the law as a form of warfare waged against Trump.
And these people who did it thought they could get away with it.
They were in power.
They could cover it up.
But now, as we venture into a new year very shortly, the Department of Justice is gearing up to turn the tables on those who deliberately misused our system of justice for political gain.
Because in bringing these specious charges against Trump, they were actually committing crimes themselves.
It's called deprivation of rights under color of law.
And it's a crime, punishable for up to 10 years behind bars for each wrongful act.
And there were a lot of those wrongful acts.
You'll find it at 18 U.S.C. 242.
It's very simple.
It's straightforward.
It kind of sounds complicated, but it's really not.
Essentially, it's when a public official misuses their position and willfully violates a person's constitutional rights, such as due process of law and unreasonable searches and seizures, or more directly, indicting Donald Trump on knowingly phony charges to stop him from running for the highest office.
So in the new year, we may well see criminal charges against a whole host of people who misuse the law to destroy Trump.
And the latest revelation comes from our friend, investigative reporter John Solomon and his team at justthenews.com.
Their article is entitled DOJI's Civil Rights Action Against Feds and State Officials Who Pursued Trump.
And John will be joining me in a few moments as a guest.
So we'll talk to him about that.
But his story quotes the Assistant Attorney General, Harmeet Dillon.
She runs the Civil Rights Division at the DOJ.
And Harmeet confirmed to John that criminal charges are being considered and developed.
So the question is, who could be charged?
Well, let's begin with the most obvious, special counsel Jack Smith and his coterie of prosecutors who brought two meritless criminal cases against Donald Trump in advance of the 2024 election.
The Florida federal case involving custody of presidential records was always legally absurd, and I said it the very day of the Mar-a-Lago raid on air because the exclusive remedy over presidential papers is civil, not criminal.
But Smith mangled the law to charge Trump anyway, and that's not all.
Smith covertly seized telephone data on more than 400 Republicans, anybody in Donald Trump's orbit, including Republican senators and congressmen, without any notice to them as the law demands.
So, Jack Smith is in the criminal crosshairs, to be sure.
There's also Joe Biden's Attorney General, Merrick Garland, who personally signed off on the raid on Mar-a-Lago.
He bragged about it.
Now we've come to learn that there were stern warnings from the FBI that, wait a minute, you can't raid his home because there's no probable cause to do so.
Newly declassified FBI records show that Garland and the DOJ were told by the Washington Field Office of the FBI, they were leading the case, there's no legal justification for the raid on Trump's home because there's no evidence of any crimes committed, thus no probable cause.
Well, Merritt Garland didn't care.
So what did he do?
He snookered a local anti-Trump magistrate in Florida into signing off on the warrant, and then Garland weaponized the law to bring a silly case against Donald Trump to stop his bid for reelection.
All right, so that's Garland, that's Smith.
What about state prosecutors like Thoni Willis and Alvin Bragg?
Well, the DOJ is surely looking at them as well.
Whether they conspired with others to illegally target Trump for purely political reasons.
And I'd probably toss in Letitia James into the mix as well.
But look, the abuse of law and criminality that I've just identified predates all of that going all the way back to the Russia hoax, codenamed Crossfire Hurricane by James Comey's FBI.
Comey and his confederates knew at the outset that Trump never colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election.
The CIA discovered that it was all a damning fiction that was invented by none other than Hillary Clinton's campaign and personally approved by her in late July of that year.
Her campaign and Democrats funded the bogus dossier in a deliberate attempt to smear Trump, distract from her own email scandals and her foundation scandals, where she was receiving a ton of money from Russians.
And they did it to help Hillary win and defeat Donald Trump.
Meetings were held at the White House.
Obama, Biden, Comey, they were told what Clinton had done.
And instead of coming clean and telling the truth to Congress and the American people, what did they do?
They clammed up and they concealed the truth.
And then Comey went about using the fake dossier to launch his dilating investigation of Trump to stop him from winning the election.
And when that failed, Comey and his team doubled down.
They tried to drive Trump from office.
There's compelling evidence that Comey covered up exculpatory evidence, deceived the FISA court with lies, and together with CIA Director John Brennan, manipulated intelligence all to frame Trump for imaginary crimes that he never committed.
Comey even went to Trump Tower just before the inauguration and tried to entrap Trump with false accusations.
Remember the P-tape?
It was phony, but that's what Comey was using.
A few months later, Comey was fired.
And on his way out the door, he stole FBI documents and leaked them to the media for the admitted purpose of triggering a special counsel who just happened to be his longtime friend and former colleague, Robert Mueller.
And we know how that story went.
Mueller hired a team of partisans who hated Trump, and they spent the better part of two years looking in every nook and cranny and under every rock.
And in the end, they were forced to admit in their report, we found no evidence of a criminal collusion conspiracy between Trump and Russia.
You know, $35 million later, oh, sorry, there's no there.
And the media, they were all in, they convicted Trump in the court of public opinion without a shred of evidence.
They never bothered to verify anything.
They just reacted with a ho-hum, let's move on to our next faux scandal.
No mea culpa, no apology, classic crooked media.
So all of the people who were involved in the Russia hoax are currently the subject of the Department of Justice's criminal investigation.
Now, I know what you're saying.
Wait a minute, what about the statute of limitations?
All of that was so long ago.
And you're right.
While it's true that the statute of limitations expired for many of the suspected crimes, it is not true in any ongoing criminal conspiracy case that might encompass lies and cover-ups.
And to that point, the new FBI director, Cash Batel, discovered, lo and behold, burn bags hidden in a room at the FBI that were filled with allegedly incriminating evidence from the James Comey era.
What's that called?
Obstruction of justice.
And the statute of limitations begins ticking only upon the discovery. of those documents, which was rather recent.
So this coming year, you're going to see a grand jury in South Florida convened by a U.S. attorney there who has already issued dozens of subpoenas, criminal indictments in 2026 could follow.
We'll be talking about it with John Solomon in just a few minutes, and we'll be taking your phone calls after that.
Our number is 1-800-941-7326.
That's 1-800-941 Sean.
Love to hear from you.
Give me a call.
I'm Greg Jarrett, filling in for Sean Hannity.
Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean today.
Let's go right to our phone lines.
Mike in San Antonio joins us.
Mike, how are you?
Do you have a question or a comment?
Hi, Greg.
Big fan, especially your expertise, and we're sure blessed that you're on our side.
But I do have a question.
All the conservatives for bogus charges seem to get prosecuted and go to jail.
Is anybody on the left ever going to go to prison?
The Clintons, the Bidens, and now most recently the fraud going on in Minnesota.
But nobody ever seems to go to jail.
And it's very frustrating.
Yeah, no, I share your concern.
And I think that you're going to see in this next year, this new year, I mean, it's taken a while to gather some of the evidence.
For example, as I mentioned a moment ago, the burn bags were discovered at the FBI implicating James Comey and a host of his Confederates.
That's obstruction of justice.
But I, you know, and yesterday, Jack Smith appeared before the House Judiciary Committee.
A bunch of his aides have either clammed up or taken the fifth.
You know, I think he's in legal jeopardy.
You know, I think people associated with Merrick Arlin at the DOGJ bringing meritless cases.
I think the grand jury and the U.S. attorney in South Florida are going to be looking at that closely.
There's also a grand jury in the state of Missouri that is also looking at a wide variety of potentially wrongful acts, all of it falling under the category of lawfare against Donald Trump.
So, you know, the people who did this may have thought they could get away with it, but I'm hoping that they'll be held accountable in the new year 2026.
So, you know, stay tuned.
We'll wait and see.
We're going to pause and take a quick break in a moment or two.
I want to mention one other thing.
You know, somebody asked me recently, what were the big fails by the Democratic Party?
Well, my answer was that Democrats sued Donald Trump over anything and everything, and it boomeranged against them.
Because when they lost those cases, then they lost most of them.
The rulings had the unintended effect of vastly expanding Trump's presidential power.
More than 500 times Trump and his administration have been sued in 11 months.
That's more than one a day.
And the major cases that went to the Supreme Court, Trump won 90% of the time.
So that's quite an astonishing record, and it boomeranged against Democrats.
We'll be right back with the Sean Hannity Show.
You won't hear the mainstream press talking about this stuff.
Sean Hannity is on the radio.
And welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity today.
We're going to be getting to your phone calls in just a moment.
I see Duke is standing by, so is Robert in Florida.
We'll get to you guys in just a minute.
Give us a call at 1-800-941-7326.
That is 1-800-941 Sean.
Love to hear from you.
Take your questions or your comments.
Very pleased to have with us my old friend, the finest investigative reporter in America, who has broken just about every story, beginning with the Russia hoax back in 2016 and 2017, all the way up to the latest involving Arctic Frost and the Jack Smith,
Merrick Garland, misbegotten investigation that tried to nail Donald Trump for imaginary crimes that he did not commit.
And John joins us now on the telephone.
And John, thanks for being with us.
I was reading your latest story that came out today, and people can check it out on justthenews.com.
It's entitled DOJI's Civil Rights Actions Against Feds and State Officials Who Pursued Trump and MAGA.
Tell us about that, if you would.
Yeah, this is a big moment.
This is the first time the Justice Department has ever said on the record it was Harmee Dillon, the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.
A lot of times you think civil rights, you think, oh, it's going to be a civil case.
No.
She says she believes she sees a conspiracy, a criminal conspiracy by federal and state officials to infringe the civil liberties of President Trump and his followers, the MAGA world, from 2017 all the way to 2024.
That is a profound statement on the record very clearly.
And then she lays out, listen, it's no different than what the Ku Klux Klan tried to do to African Americans back in the 60s, and we're going to treat it the same way.
If someone's entitled to due process, if someone's entitled to probable cause and you trample over that, if someone's innocent, you keep investigating them, you have infringed their civil liberties, and it is a criminal matter, not a civil matter.
That was a pretty extraordinary thing.
And just a few minutes ago, I just got off the phone with Jonathan Gilliam, decorated, retired FBI agent, former Navy CEO.
And he said, listen, I did a lot of mob cases.
I did a lot of organized crime cases.
I am telling you now the pattern of protecting Hillary Clinton, pursuing Donald Trump, protecting Hunter Biden, pursuing Donald Trump when there was no evidence for Trump and there was lots of evidence against Clinton and Hunter Biden, that that is a slam dunk conspiracy case.
I could make it tomorrow and I could get a conviction tomorrow.
He was very animated about how strong the body of evidence is.
So you're beginning to see people talk the way you've been talking, Greg.
You laid this case out years ago.
I think the justice system has finally caught up to you.
Thank you.
I appreciate it.
Yeah.
In fact, in my first book called The Russia Hoax, I went into enormous detail with discovered facts about the corruption at the Hillary Clinton Foundation.
I mean, hundreds of millions of Russian rubles flowing into the Clinton Foundation, which Bill and Hillary used as their personal piggy bank.
And there was an FBI investigation into it.
It was.
And you reported a couple of days ago.
I'll read the title of your column.
New memos show how corruption probe into Clinton Foundation was killed.
So my question is, who killed it?
How did they do it?
It's pretty easy.
They just simply said, shut it down.
That was Sally Yates, the deputy attorney general for Barack Obama.
Then we had Andy McCabe, the deputy FBI director, who, by the way, should never have been overseeing a case against Hillary Clinton, why he had recused himself from Hillary Clinton matters on paper, but not in practice because his wife had benefited from donations arranged by one of Hillary Clinton's acolytes.
In fact, the donations were arranged to help his wife run for a Virginia State Senate seat right at the time some of the Clinton family was under investigation.
So you got Andy McCabe at the seventh floor of the FBI, the deputy director, number two, most powerful person in the FBI.
And you got the deputy attorney general right below Loretta Lynch saying, shut it down.
You don't get it.
You don't get anything unless I approve it.
And of course, Andy McCabe didn't.
And then you have scores of FBI agents who are writing memos chronicling how they were thwarted in the face of real evidence.
It is a classic case of obstruction.
A lot of people have looked at it.
And Jonathan Gilliam, again, the guy who took on the mob in some big cities and brought some big cases.
He's like, this is some of the worst stuff I've seen.
They acted like they were a mob.
They acted like they were a drug cartel, except they weren't playing with drugs and they weren't playing with gambling earnings.
They were playing with the civil liberties of everyday Americans.
Yeah, and it wasn't just that the Obama administration shut down this criminal investigation into wrongdoing by the Clintons and their foundation.
But then, of course, it was James Comey who famously killed any potential prosecution of Hillary Clinton in her email scandal, in which she clearly and obviously violated the Espionage Act, either intentionally, and I think it was quite intentional, or recklessly.
And on either basis, you can bring criminal charges.
And James Comey stood in front of television cameras and usurped the authority of the Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, and said, we're not going to bring criminal charges against Hillary Clinton because no reasonable prosecutor would do such a thing, which is a standard, by the way, that doesn't exist in the law.
And, you know, even though before he said those words, he laid out how Hillary Clinton had clearly committed crimes under the Espionage Act.
I nearly fell off my chair when that happened.
I think the date was July 5th, 2016.
And by the way, as I reported in my book, The Russia Hoax, the very moment he's uttering those words, wrongfully clearing Hillary Clinton, the FBI is holding its first meeting in London with Christopher Steele obtaining the first of several memos that composed his infamous dossier.
I mean, you can't make this stuff up.
You can't.
No, unfortunately, it is all real.
Jim Jordan has said this a few times on our show.
And of course, Jim Jordan was a big part of helping you and me and the American public unravel this as a Judiciary Committee Chairman.
He said, we didn't have it only right, John, or Greg, you could say it, because you were right on top of this.
It's a lot worse than we originally thought.
And I think that that's right.
I think people are waking up to the idea that the pattern is so pronounced that the intentionality is so provable.
Think about Andy McCabe.
He's supposed to be recused, but he's sitting on the Hillary Clinton case.
Think of James Comey.
He knows he used to be in the Justice Department.
He knows the FBI doesn't make prosecutive decisions.
He makes them.
Think of all the people, including James Comey and others who signed those, and Andy McCabe and others who signed those FISA warrants, knowing that the evidence in them was not true.
It had long since been debunked.
You have a level of intentionality now.
And I think what Harmee Dillon did yesterday was put the nation on notice that something big is about to happen.
My reporting indicates that a grand jury will be impaneled on January 2nd in Fort Pierce, Florida.
And it will begin looking at the era of weaponization, starting with the IRS.
And by the way, Jack Smith was back all the way in the IRS case.
He was advising Lois Lerner on how to go about this, all the way to the raid on President Trump's house and the 2024 prosecutions that occurred as one ongoing criminal conspiracy to infringe or deprive the civil liberties of Americans around President Trump, MAGA and President Trump.
That is a bombshell statement from the Assistant Attorney General.
And I think a sign that maybe for the first time, we're not going to get taps on the hands in another, oh, well, we missed the statute of limitations, but we may get a real predicated criminal case with real teeth in it.
And so, you know, the question that people routinely have is, how do you get around the statute of limitations?
But as you've explained it, and I believe as a lawyer, you're right about it.
You get around it by alleging an ongoing criminal conspiracy, right?
That's right.
Yeah.
Events that occurred outside the statute of limitations mirror and are connected to events that are still inside the investigation.
And I think one of the most important events for a conspiracy case is the stuff that we now have confirmed from Kash Patel, from Chuck Grassley, from Jim Jordan, from Ron Johnson, that in January of this year, the most contemporaneous crime that we know of in this cycle, a group of FBI agents in the final days of the Biden administration were trying to burn, shred, and hide documents from multiple investigations.
What were those investigations?
The Clintons, January 6th, Russia collusion, Ukraine.
In the minds of the people who were allegedly burning those documents or hiding those documents or destroying those documents, those cases somehow were connected.
They were all part of a mission.
That is the most overt act that says, hey, the people who were involved in this believe that these things were connected.
That's why they were destroying them at the end of the Biden administration.
I think a lot of people are going to seize on that when the grand jury gets before it gets going in Fort Pierce, Florida, pretty soon.
And, you know, the other bombshell that has been dropped is that the FBI, the newly declassified documents just came out.
They show the FBI repeatedly warned Merrick Orland and the DOJ, you don't have probable cause to raid Trump's home.
I mean, probable cause is evidence that shows it's more probable than not that crimes were committed.
And essentially, the FBI was saying, wait a minute, these records confirm that there's really no hard evidence that the documents were classified.
They may have been declassified by Trump.
And agents emphasized to the DOJ, Trump's cooperating.
Should just continue the dialogue if we want these documents to be given to the National Archives, which is a debatable argument, right?
Well, listen, the other thing is they were treating Joe Biden very differently.
At the same time, they're going after Donald Trump, they're discovering that Joe Biden had classified documents.
By the way, he was a vice president, didn't have the same declassification powers as President Trump.
And they're treating Joe Biden with kid gloves.
We'll just work this out with them.
We'll go see it.
Let's have them return it.
Let's go voluntarily interview him and go get the documents.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump is, there's literally a line in these emails where the Justice Department says, We're not interested in accommodating President Trump.
We're going to raid him.
That is amazing.
And the FBI saying, well, but we can't raid him.
We don't have proof that he committed a crime.
We don't have proof.
We don't have the right to go into his office or to his bedroom.
And they're like, we don't care.
We're doing it.
That is the sort of stuff that someone like a Jonathan Gilliam who brought big cases sees and said, that's criminal.
That's a conspiracy.
That is prima facie evidence that multiple people were involved in a conspiracy to infringe President Trump's and his followers' rights.
And I think that's the moment we're about to head into all the great work you've done, the two great books you've done, Greg.
2026 could be the year where we see some form of real accountability because, by God, we haven't gotten it up to this point.
All right.
You know, to anybody who doesn't follow John Solomon, you must.
You must always log on to justthenews.com every day.
He has a breaking news story due to his great investigative work and his team.
I get his emails via text or an email, and it's always got the latest news, and this is the first thing I read in the morning.
You should too.
John, many thanks for taking the time to talk to us about it.