Speaker 1: All right, glad you're with us. Right down our to
Speaker 1: free telephone number if you want to be a part
Speaker 1: of this extravaganza. It's eight hundred and nine for one
Speaker 1: sewn if you want to be a part of the program.
Speaker 1: Did I not tell you all that there has been
Speaker 1: the biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in the history
Speaker 1: of this country. I am going to outline all of
Speaker 1: this to you, because you know, we now have Andrew
Speaker 1: McCabe going on sixty minutes admitting number one that they
Speaker 1: lied and lied a lot. But more importantly, what is
Speaker 1: an effort by top people within the FBI and the
Speaker 1: DOJ to literally stop Donald Trump first from becoming president
Speaker 1: and then to remove him and plotting to remove a
Speaker 1: sitting president. That's only one of the issues that we
Speaker 1: have on our plates today. A lot of other stuff
Speaker 1: that's coming up. Now. We've got this bill that nobody's
Speaker 1: reading a thousand pages and they don't have time to
Speaker 1: read because we're back to the Nancy Pelosi error, which is, well,
Speaker 1: you gotta pass it to find out what's in it,
Speaker 1: which is how they sold us healthcare. So I don't
Speaker 1: know what to believe because every single Congressional office I
Speaker 1: call into the well, we're distributing a hundred pages to
Speaker 1: this person and one hundred pages to that person. And
Speaker 1: you know, this is no way to govern a country.
Speaker 1: To spend a trillion dollars as they are now doing,
Speaker 1: and nobody reads the bill. That is not good governance.
Speaker 1: It is a typical what have I been calling it
Speaker 1: garbage swamp sewer deal, and it's you know, government acting
Speaker 1: at its worst because they cannot ever get the job done,
Speaker 1: which leads us to the whole battle over the border
Speaker 1: and what the president I think is going to end
Speaker 1: up doing anyway. Now, I have no idea. The headline
Speaker 1: on Drudge right now is President Mulls a shutdown on
Speaker 1: top of the sixty minutes interview with Andrew McCabe. One
Speaker 1: thing that makes it interesting to me, although I'm getting
Speaker 1: some mixed messages here, because Nita Lowey, who's a Committee
Speaker 1: of the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee in the House
Speaker 1: that was part of these negotiations, she has sent out
Speaker 1: a letter to her Democratic colleagues and she's asking them
Speaker 1: to vote on this conference report. She says it'll cover agriculture, commerce, justice, science,
Speaker 1: financial services, and general government, homeland security, internal Interior, in
Speaker 1: the Environment, State and Foreign Operations, Transportation, Housing in Urban Development, appropriations, bills,
Speaker 1: a lot of money, over a trillion dollars of spending.
Speaker 1: We got here, And she brags that the agreement is
Speaker 1: a repudiation of Trump's budget request, rejecting numerous proposed program
Speaker 1: reductions and eliminations. So she's bragging about that part. Typically
Speaker 1: Republicans never show any strength. They're scared to death of
Speaker 1: a shutdown. You don't even listen. I know everybody wants
Speaker 1: Trump to sign the bill so they can all go
Speaker 1: on vacation. Again. I don't really care if he does
Speaker 1: or doesn't, to be honest, because it relates to the
Speaker 1: defining issue for our country. He's going to get the
Speaker 1: wall built anyway. But Nita Lowe is calling it a
Speaker 1: repudiation of the president and of the President's budget and
Speaker 1: rejecting programs reductions and eliminations, and other words, trying to
Speaker 1: rein in some government spending which is out of control
Speaker 1: and has been forever. She brags it doesn't contain any
Speaker 1: poison pill writers. And I think specifically she's saying that
Speaker 1: we're added to bills by House Republicans. But I still
Speaker 1: haven't gotten a definitive answer as any restrictions on the
Speaker 1: one point three seven five billion dollars for new border
Speaker 1: wall construction. Remember they funded everything else. President is currently
Speaker 1: now building new wall and repairing old wall. That's happening
Speaker 1: as we speak. This bill adds a billion dollars for
Speaker 1: the Census Bureau, three hundred and eight million dollars for
Speaker 1: research and development at the National Science Foundation, twenty five
Speaker 1: million for Environmental Protection Agency, one hundred and sixty nine
Speaker 1: million for international peacekeeping, two hundred and ninety three million
Speaker 1: purport infrastructure, and one hundred and twenty three million for
Speaker 1: grants to combat homelessness. And then anyway, it goes on
Speaker 1: to say and acting this five partisan agreement would prevent
Speaker 1: another Trump shutdown, okay, and also provide federal workers with
Speaker 1: a one point nine percent pay raise. And she talks
Speaker 1: about the one point three seventy five billion for border barriers,
Speaker 1: although we do have about twenty three billion on other
Speaker 1: aspects of securing our border, but the wall is key,
Speaker 1: and that's been the president's key promise. The same provided
Speaker 1: for fiscal year twenty eighteen, she points out, and four
Speaker 1: point three two five billion, seventy six percent less than
Speaker 1: the President demanded. I'm just telling you how the Democratic
Speaker 1: leadership is selling this to their caucus. Oh, it is imperfect.
Speaker 1: It upholds democratic values and fund smart effective border security.
Speaker 1: Seven hundred and fifty five million for construction and technology
Speaker 1: at ports of entry where most drugs come into the
Speaker 1: country illegally. Okay, I'm for that, which is what I
Speaker 1: said about the twenty three billion, four hundred and fifteen
Speaker 1: million for customs and Border protection, humanitarian relief, etc. Five
Speaker 1: hundred and sixty three million for immigration judges to reduce
Speaker 1: the backlog of cases. Five hundred and twenty seven million
Speaker 1: to assist Central American countries so they can fund. No
Speaker 1: funding for new border patrol agents, no funding for additional
Speaker 1: immigration and customs enforcement ICE, and removal of field personnel.
Speaker 1: In a rebuke of the Trump administration's border and immigration policies,
Speaker 1: the conference report facilitates the release of detained children to
Speaker 1: family members or sponsors without fear that the individuals will
Speaker 1: be arrested by ICE. It prevents the Department of Homeland
Speaker 1: Security from destroying records related to potential sexual assault. Listen
Speaker 1: to this now, think about it. I'm gonna read this slowly.
Speaker 1: It in a rebuke to the Trump administration's border and
Speaker 1: immigration policies. The Conference report facilitates the release of detained
Speaker 1: children to family members or sponsors. Do we know who
Speaker 1: the sponsors are? Do the kids know who the sponsors are?
Speaker 1: Without fear that the individuals will be arrested by ice?
Speaker 1: In other words, if they get reunited with their families.
Speaker 1: But I don't like the idea of not handing them
Speaker 1: back to the mom and dad, and it prevents that
Speaker 1: they be arrested by ICE. Prevents the Department of Homeland
Speaker 1: Security from destroying records related to potential sexual assault or
Speaker 1: abuse of individuals in custody. Okay, places restrictions on putting
Speaker 1: pregnant women in restraints, and proves oversight of ICE treatment
Speaker 1: of detainees. Increases the frequency of ICE inspection of facilities
Speaker 1: from once every three years to twice per year. Now
Speaker 1: this is where it gets really interesting to me. Pay
Speaker 1: close attention. An alternative to the Conference Report. That's if
Speaker 1: they don't do it anyway. And by the way, McConnell says,
Speaker 1: the national Emergency's coming. What have I been telling you?
Speaker 1: President's telegraphing it every day. Nobody wants to listen to them.
Speaker 1: It's obvious that it's coming. An alternative to the conference
Speaker 1: report is a full year sea Are Continuing resolution for
Speaker 1: the remaining bills. This would result in losing approximately eleven
Speaker 1: billion and increased investments. In other words, they spend eleven
Speaker 1: billion less, including the additional one billion for the Census
Speaker 1: Bureau that is desperately needed for our communities to be
Speaker 1: well represented in the decade that follows. A CR would
Speaker 1: also lead to Department of Homeland Security to allow them
Speaker 1: to spend two billion on border barriers and significantly increase
Speaker 1: the number of detention beds. Well, that's more than one
Speaker 1: point three seven five billion when I was in school.
Speaker 1: Why not take this save eleven billion, get two billion
Speaker 1: instead of one point three seven five and you increase
Speaker 1: the number of detention beds which Democrats for some bizarre reason,
Speaker 1: are obsessed with. It's like they're obsessed with, you know,
Speaker 1: abortion in the ninth month, even during the birth process.
Speaker 1: And she says it's compromised. We have far more victories
Speaker 1: than defeat blah blah blah blah blah. And it rejects
Speaker 1: the vast majority of Trump's ineffective border security proposals. Invests
Speaker 1: in our priorities, allows us to turn to our positive
Speaker 1: agenda of help in working families. I urge you to
Speaker 1: vote yes. Well, there's good enough reason for Republicans to
Speaker 1: vote no. Now, I just don't get it. To be
Speaker 1: very frank with you about Republicans. Now that we expect
Speaker 1: that approximately six thirty after the show's off the year,
Speaker 1: we're gonna have the first vote in a series, you know,
Speaker 1: following the Senate passage of HJ Resolution thirty when the
Speaker 1: House is going to reconvete, they'll begin to debate on
Speaker 1: the rule. This is all Washington Swamp talk, providing for
Speaker 1: consideration the conference Report to a company the Senate HJ
Speaker 1: Resolution thirty one Consolidated Appropriations Act. So it's six thirty
Speaker 1: to seven thirty. You get your first vote in the House,
Speaker 1: a series of the day on the rule. Following the series,
Speaker 1: the House will move to general debate on a conference
Speaker 1: report to accompany the Senate bill, and an approximately eight
Speaker 1: fifteen to nine fifteen, probably during Hannity, we'll have our
Speaker 1: second and final vote series of the day on the
Speaker 1: passage of the conference report. Walk off the floor between
Speaker 1: nine and ten, and good news is that's during my show,
Speaker 1: I get to show them walking off the floor, which
Speaker 1: is a win for the American people. But I am
Speaker 1: going to tell you something here. Put aside how horrible
Speaker 1: the swamp and the sewer is, because it just is.
Speaker 1: And anybody that's a Republican you need to read Nita
Speaker 1: Lowe's report to her colleagues bragging about how she's kicking
Speaker 1: your ass. That's what she's doing. And now you look
Speaker 1: at the some of the insane provisions in this trillion
Speaker 1: dollars thousand page nobody has time to read bill. Well,
Speaker 1: it's actually one thousand, one hundred and sixty nine pages released,
Speaker 1: like you know, one in the morning, twelve midnight last night,
Speaker 1: less of a wall than even Democrats had already agreed to.
Speaker 1: That's number one. You have literally local officials have in this.
Speaker 1: I saw it. Daniel Horowitz wrote this. He picked this up.
Speaker 1: Liberal local officials have veto power over the wall. The
Speaker 1: bill contains an amnesty for the worst cartels smugglers he's identified.
Speaker 1: Section two twenty four A prohibits the deportation of anyone
Speaker 1: who's sponsoring and unaccompanied minor illegal immigrant who says or
Speaker 1: they're a sponsor who lives in a household. You can't
Speaker 1: get rid of anybody, no matter what they've done. He
Speaker 1: called it the the MS thirteen Household Protection Act. Those
Speaker 1: are pretty harsh words, but in a way that that
Speaker 1: could happen, more funding to manage and induce people coming
Speaker 1: into the country and doubling low skilled workers. That's that's
Speaker 1: his five arguments. Now, I'm gonna tell you something here.
Speaker 1: This is what the President's gonna do. He's either gonna
Speaker 1: look at this and say I'm not doing this and
Speaker 1: veto it. They're not going to be able to override
Speaker 1: his veto and say go back and give me a
Speaker 1: clean cr or the Democrats shut down the government. Or
Speaker 1: he's gonna sign the horrible bill and he's gonna take
Speaker 1: that money all the other moneies that he's now put together,
Speaker 1: which is i'm my estimates of between nine and three
Speaker 1: nine hundred million and three billion dollars, and he's gonna
Speaker 1: use that money in the interim to continue building the wall.
Speaker 1: And my guess is based on what he has said publicly,
Speaker 1: he's going to declare national emergency. I've been saying it
Speaker 1: for days, and then the president is gonna win. After
Speaker 1: they go judge shopping in California. They'll lose there. They're
Speaker 1: losing the Ninth Circuit Supreme Court because of all the
Speaker 1: constitutional issues in play. His role as commander in Chief USC.
Speaker 1: Two eighty four, which gives him the right to stop
Speaker 1: drug corridors and build barriers, and also the issue of
Speaker 1: separation of powers. He has the authority the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: We'll approve this because I gave you the history of
Speaker 1: these national emergencies. We have thirty five of them from
Speaker 1: past presidents in effect today. Hey, if you're one of
Speaker 1: thirty four million Americans that smokes, you know what a
Speaker 1: hassle that can be for me. I'm out playing golf
Speaker 1: and I come back smelling like cigars. It's the smell
Speaker 1: on your hands and your breath, your clothes. But now,
Speaker 1: thanks to Jewel, you don't have to worry about it anymore.
Speaker 1: Jewel is a vaporizer. It does contain nicotine for a
Speaker 1: satisfying transition. Now, when I found Jewel, it was a
Speaker 1: complete game changer in my life. I don't smoke any
Speaker 1: cigars any longer. And Jewel was designed by smokers for smokers,
Speaker 1: to be an alternative to whatever it is you're smoking.
Speaker 1: So if you're one of thirty four million adults who
Speaker 1: do smoke cigars, cigarettes, pipe, whatever, well there is an
Speaker 1: alternative to all of them. Now, to discover the smoking
Speaker 1: alternative that's like nothing you've ever tried, just visit Juul
Speaker 1: dot com slash switch America. That's ju Ul dot com
Speaker 1: slash switch America. Now warning, this product does contain nicotine,
Speaker 1: and nicotine is addictive. All right, So let me tell you,
Speaker 1: I'm beginning to suspect the President is going to sign
Speaker 1: the bill. It's the bill's garbage. President knows its garbage.
Speaker 1: But the president also has planned being c which here's
Speaker 1: my prediction. The President is going to announce all of
Speaker 1: the funds that are unspent that grants him discretionary authority
Speaker 1: to use in terms of military monies. And the statue
Speaker 1: couldn't be any clear. As I've now been telling you
Speaker 1: for a while, He's going to announce anywhere between nine
Speaker 1: hundred million and two to three billion dollars available that
Speaker 1: will be added to the one point three seven five
Speaker 1: billion that this bill does give him and keeps the
Speaker 1: government open, because nobody seems to accept that the government.
Speaker 1: Partial government shutdowns are never as bad as everybody thinks,
Speaker 1: except for the people that don't get their check, which
Speaker 1: I don't like that happening to them either, to be
Speaker 1: very frank people, most people, a lot of people have
Speaker 1: checked to check. That's hard on them. But then he's gonna,
Speaker 1: simultaneously my next bet declare the national emergency, and that
Speaker 1: means that the president's going to war because I told
Speaker 1: you he's unrelenting and tenacious, and he's gonna get the money,
Speaker 1: and he's gonna build or continue to build. It's being
Speaker 1: built the wall as he promised. That is him, frankly,
Speaker 1: just understanding that Congress is pathetic, Republicans included, except for
Speaker 1: the Freedom Caucus and a few others. I do make
Speaker 1: a stipulation that there are a few good people there,
Speaker 1: but not most Republicans. They are weak, spineless, and have
Speaker 1: no vision for the future of the country. That's my prediction.
Speaker 1: It's ostensibly the same thing, all right, twenty five till
Speaker 1: the top of the hour, right, so the Senate looks
Speaker 1: like they're gonna pass the build of voting now and
Speaker 1: then around anywhere between six when you're beginning all the
Speaker 1: procedures in the House, it'll start around six thirty this
Speaker 1: evening end sometime during my show Hannity on the Fox
Speaker 1: News Channel between nine and ten. And I think it's
Speaker 1: a fate to complete. But I think what I said,
Speaker 1: and McConnell said that, McConnell said, he talked to the president.
Speaker 1: President will sign it if they pass it. One point
Speaker 1: three seven five billion for the wall. But here's my prediction.
Speaker 1: At the same time, and McConnell, now it's on Drudge
Speaker 1: National Emergency coming that's gonna probably happen at the same time,
Speaker 1: as is the amount of moneys that the President has
Speaker 1: all authority to earmark unspent moneies that they've gathered together
Speaker 1: anywhere between nine hundred million and a few billion dollars
Speaker 1: that will keep when you couple it with the one
Speaker 1: three seven five Let's say it's nine hundred million, let's
Speaker 1: say it's two billion, whatever it is, that means in
Speaker 1: the term. While the President predictably will have a fight
Speaker 1: with Democrats that first go Judge Shopping in California into
Speaker 1: the Ninth Circuit and then hopefully because of the constitutional
Speaker 1: issues involved, to the Supreme Court. This goes to the
Speaker 1: heart of US Code two eighty four that I've been
Speaker 1: telling you about, and all the provisions that actually authorize
Speaker 1: the president and give him every again, laws passed by
Speaker 1: Congress signed into law that allowed the President to use
Speaker 1: these unspent moneys to stop drug interdiction, including as building barriers.
Speaker 1: So I would guess that's the announcement at some point
Speaker 1: later today, etc. By the way, one side side note
Speaker 1: before I get into I told you so about the
Speaker 1: abuse of power and the attempted coup of the president
Speaker 1: and all the efforts by these corrupt upper echelon on
Speaker 1: FBI and DJ people. So Amazon now decided to drop
Speaker 1: their plans. Andrew Cuomo, what an embarrassment for him and
Speaker 1: Comrade de Blasio. But they were gonna build their headquarters
Speaker 1: in Queens, New York, Long Island City, which is a
Speaker 1: they're gonna build their headquarters. They were getting a three
Speaker 1: billion dollar tax break. Now I feel torn because New
Speaker 1: York is such a colossal mess that is losing tens
Speaker 1: and tens of thousands of people everywhere, just like New Jersey,
Speaker 1: Illinois and California. And as the President told the governor, well,
Speaker 1: if you'd start fracking, maybe you could lower taxes and
Speaker 1: then help create an economic environment the people want to
Speaker 1: go to your state, not just one company in Amazon.
Speaker 1: We find out today they haven't paid a penny in
Speaker 1: federal income taxes for the second year in a row.
Speaker 1: Had they pulled that one off, because I know that
Speaker 1: wouldn't work in my world, or my life or your
Speaker 1: life either. And the President also majority of California residents
Speaker 1: want to leave. Well, they are leaving now these states
Speaker 1: that have been so punitive towards anything involving business development
Speaker 1: and factories. Of course they're leaving because you can't afford
Speaker 1: to build in these states. They take so much and
Speaker 1: they make it so difficult. All right, now, let's go
Speaker 1: to the deep state. Hannity watch on the deep state?
Speaker 1: What have I been telling you? It is the biggest
Speaker 1: abuse of power corruption scandal in the history of this country.
Speaker 1: And I am right. Andrew McCabe, who is under a
Speaker 1: criminal investigation right now, has written a book and by
Speaker 1: the way, that also includes James Baker. This is Jim
Speaker 1: Comey's FBI, the top echelon. And what have I been
Speaker 1: telling you? Because I know the phony you know news media,
Speaker 1: they're all excited about their get Trump hero. Andrew McCabe,
Speaker 1: who may very well be indicted very soon himself. I
Speaker 1: wonder if they'll send twenty seven agents pre dawn raid
Speaker 1: amphibious you know, vehicles, swat teams, you know, you know,
Speaker 1: armored vehicles like they did to Roger Stone's house for
Speaker 1: a process crime. He's under investigation Inspector General. Remember, he
Speaker 1: was fired because of committing perjury and lying based on
Speaker 1: the testimony of people who worked at the GoJ. So
Speaker 1: this whole thing, now we find out has always been true.
Speaker 1: And he tells sixty minutes, Yeah, that there were conversations
Speaker 1: about the possibility of removing Trump under the twenty fifth
Speaker 1: Amendment and confirming the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had
Speaker 1: offered to where a wire around the president. I was
Speaker 1: speaking to the man who had just run for the
Speaker 1: presidency and won the election for the presidency, and who
Speaker 1: might have done so, might have with the aid of
Speaker 1: the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the
Speaker 1: world stage. And that was something that troubled me greatly.
Speaker 1: How long was it after that that you decided to
Speaker 1: start the obstruction of justice and counterintelligence investigations involving the president.
Speaker 1: I think the next day I met with the team
Speaker 1: investigating the Russia cases, and I asked the team to
Speaker 1: go back and conduct an assessment to determine where are
Speaker 1: we with these efforts and what steps do we need
Speaker 1: to take going forward. I was very concerned that I
Speaker 1: was able to put the Russia case on absolutely solid
Speaker 1: ground in an indelible fashion, that were I removed quickly
Speaker 1: or reassigned or fired, that the case could not be
Speaker 1: closed or vanish in the night without a trace. I
Speaker 1: wanted to make sure that our case was on solid ground,
Speaker 1: and if somebody came in behind me and closed it
Speaker 1: and tried to walk away from it, they would not
Speaker 1: be able to do that without creating a record of
Speaker 1: why they'd made that decision. You wanted a documentary record.
Speaker 1: That's right that those investigations had begun because you feared
Speaker 1: that they would be made to go away. That's exactly right.
Speaker 1: They're not going to highlight that this man is now
Speaker 1: under a criminal investigation. They're not going to highlight that.
Speaker 1: Now notice the word he might have had the aid
Speaker 1: of Russia. Now here's a problem for Andrew McKay because
Speaker 1: the FBI kept telling the President he's not under investigation.
Speaker 1: There's another little problem in his timeline here, after because
Speaker 1: as our good friend Byron York refers to it as
Speaker 1: what the eight days in May that took place? And
Speaker 1: the problem with the timeline is, oh, Lisa Page testified
Speaker 1: and others testified. Remember, the Russia investigation into Trump began
Speaker 1: right after the exoneration of Hillary Clinton, but that exoneration
Speaker 1: was being written in May by Comey and Struck Struck
Speaker 1: as the one that interviewed Hillary. On July second, twenty sixteen.
Speaker 1: July fifth, James Comey admits that Hillary Clinton had top
Speaker 1: secret classified information on the mom and pop server, you know,
Speaker 1: and that, in fact that they thought in their earlier
Speaker 1: writings of this exoneration to May that oh, six foreign
Speaker 1: intelligence services had hacked into it. But anyway, they ended
Speaker 1: up he goes thirteen and a half minutes saying, yes,
Speaker 1: you convented all these crimes and then oops, never mind.
Speaker 1: Then they began the Trump Russia investigation with no basis whatsoever.
Speaker 1: Now the problem is, when you get to the May timeline,
Speaker 1: all these people now that had been involved in the investigation,
Speaker 1: even Trump paters, were admitting they had no evidence of such,
Speaker 1: including Lisa Page, who by the way, worked for McCabe.
Speaker 1: This is how sickness. All gets now Rod Rosenstein has
Speaker 1: a big problem in his life because Rod Rosenstein has
Speaker 1: now not only did he sign the FISA warrant number one,
Speaker 1: number two, Rod Rosenstein now it has given three different
Speaker 1: answers as it relates to wearing the wire. One, oh,
Speaker 1: just an outright denial. Then he jokes about it. Then
Speaker 1: he said, well, I never I never ordered it. So
Speaker 1: it is. And by the way, and the fascinating thing is,
Speaker 1: we just had how ironic this week the Senate Intelligence
Speaker 1: Committee saying there is no evidence, a bipartisan committee at all.
Speaker 1: And it all gets started because these top this is
Speaker 1: not rank and file FBI or Justice Department, the top people.
Speaker 1: They didn't like what the American people did. They're angry
Speaker 1: that Donald Trump got voted in. They first exonerated Hillary
Speaker 1: without an investigation. They were writing her exoneration in May,
Speaker 1: something Jim Comey also lied about. And Jim Comey released
Speaker 1: government documents to Columbia professor to get Muller set up.
Speaker 1: This never should have happened in any way because they
Speaker 1: didn't have any evidence at all that warranted this, according
Speaker 1: to the testimony of the people involved. Anyway, it's all
Speaker 1: because their favorite candidate that they knew committed crimes they
Speaker 1: exonerated because as Peter Struck, who interviewed Hillary in July
Speaker 1: of twenty sixteen, said, oh, she should win one hundred
Speaker 1: million to zero. He's loathesome, he's horrible. And by the way,
Speaker 1: we have an insurance policy just in case he does win.
Speaker 1: You're now beginning to see how this fits. So the
Speaker 1: favorite candidate gets the favorite treatment. Then if you really
Speaker 1: want to look at the abuse of power, well then
Speaker 1: we've got Hillary Clinton funneling money law firm, OP Research Group,
Speaker 1: Foreign national Christopher Steele. But we also now know that
Speaker 1: Bruce Or warned everybody in August to twenty sixteen that
Speaker 1: the dossier was paid for it by Hillary, not verified,
Speaker 1: not corroborated, and Steele, who eventually got fired for lying
Speaker 1: and leaking by the FBI. Steele hated Donald Trump. And
Speaker 1: then even though they were all warned it's not verified
Speaker 1: and now most of it debunked, they still used it
Speaker 1: as the bulk of information to get a fiser warrant
Speaker 1: to spy on a Trump campaign associate. Again, they're favoring
Speaker 1: one side here and the news and the revelations this
Speaker 1: week that came out Freedom of Information Act, Tom Fitton's
Speaker 1: Judicial Watch and they find out that, oh, when they
Speaker 1: found the laptop of Anthony Wiener, they did find classified
Speaker 1: top secret information on that laptop. And then there's email exchanges,
Speaker 1: including Lisa Page, that show that State Department supporters of
Speaker 1: Hillary were negotiating more positions for the FBI abroad. If
Speaker 1: only they would declassify what was classified to back and
Speaker 1: support Hillary, break the law for Hillary to tamper with
Speaker 1: evidence for Hillary. And the emails prove all of this.
Speaker 1: Now you take it a step further if you really
Speaker 1: care about Russian collusion. Why the uranium one deal? We
Speaker 1: know that Putin's thugs wanted a foothold in the uranium market,
Speaker 1: But we have a spy from the FBI within his network.
Speaker 1: He's reporting back to the FBI that the bribery, extortion, kickbacks,
Speaker 1: money laundering is happening. They do nothing. Well, there's some
Speaker 1: Russia collusion because then Hillary Clinton, among other Obama administration
Speaker 1: officials signed off on the uranium one deal. Bill Clinton
Speaker 1: goes at this time to Russia, gets three times as
Speaker 1: normal speaking fee, tries to speak with the Russian nuclear people.
Speaker 1: That meeting doesn't occur, but he gets a meeting with
Speaker 1: Putin himself, and then one hundred and forty five million
Speaker 1: dollars kicked back to the Clinton Foundation. Nobody's elders, there's
Speaker 1: a Russian connection. For you want another Russian connection, Well,
Speaker 1: the whole dossiers filled with Russian lies that even our
Speaker 1: intelligence top officials were peddling to the American people, lies, distortion, misinformation, propaganda,
Speaker 1: all Russian lie she paid for. And then even though
Speaker 1: they're worn by Bruce Or in August of twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: that she paid for its steel hate Trump and it's unverified.
Speaker 1: Then it becomes the basis of the FISA warrant to
Speaker 1: spy on the Trump campaign, and then it's used as frankly,
Speaker 1: a roadmap in their minds to bludgeon Trump, which then
Speaker 1: becomes the insurance policy. And what Andrew McCabe is admitting
Speaker 1: here is that, yeah, we were plotting a coup against
Speaker 1: the president of the United States, a silent coup. You
Speaker 1: don't think that's possible. What's Rod Rosen's First he denied
Speaker 1: by the way that he ever, I never talked about
Speaker 1: a wire ah. Then he was sarcastic about it, and
Speaker 1: he said, well, I never authorized it. Now the Justice
Speaker 1: Department says it's McCabe's comments are inaccurate and factually incorrect.
Speaker 1: It's a great piece by Byron York about these eight
Speaker 1: days in May, because at that time, before Muller's appointed,
Speaker 1: after investigating since July, it's now May of twenty seventeen,
Speaker 1: all of these people involved in this testifying we had
Speaker 1: no information at all to justify this whole thing. And
Speaker 1: just because well, as he says, Andrew mcavery day is
Speaker 1: a new low in the Trump White House. They thought
Speaker 1: that they knew better than you, the American people, and
Speaker 1: they used their power to favor one candidate over another,
Speaker 1: and they spread the misinformation, and they also didn't apply
Speaker 1: the law equally for the favored candidate. And then they
Speaker 1: used the Russian lies, lie to the FISA court, committed
Speaker 1: a fraud, didn't tell the court she paid for it,
Speaker 1: didn't tell the court it was never verified, didn't tell
Speaker 1: the court it was uncorroborated, didn't tell the court that
Speaker 1: everybody knew ahead of time. And so far nothing's happened,
Speaker 1: but that's all about to change. There are things happening
Speaker 1: as we speak. Eight hundred nine for one Shawn Tolfree
Speaker 1: telephone number. We'll get back into this with Greg Jarrett
Speaker 1: at the top of the hour. We got a lot
Speaker 1: of ground to cover today. Then we'll follow this bill.
Speaker 1: And by the way, Lindsey Graham said, it's imperative Andrew
Speaker 1: McCabe testify on the FBI's anti Trump bias. Sarah Sanders says,
Speaker 1: it's a disgrace. What has happened to lie to investigators
Speaker 1: under oath destructive agenda. There was Listen, this is not
Speaker 1: the FBI. This these people, well the upper echel hunt.
Speaker 1: Don't think the FBI is like that, because I know
Speaker 1: FBI agents that are. They're disgusted by this behavior. We
Speaker 1: better get this right. We lose the country. They tried
Speaker 1: to influence and steal a presidential election. I was speaking
Speaker 1: to the man who had just run for the presidency
Speaker 1: and won the election for the presidency, and who might
Speaker 1: have done so with the aid of the government of Russia,
Speaker 1: our most formidable adversary on the world stage, and that
Speaker 1: was something that troubled me greatly. How long was it
Speaker 1: after that that you decided to start the obstruction of
Speaker 1: justice and counterintelligence investigations involving the president? I think. The
Speaker 1: next day, I met with the team investigating the Russia cases,
Speaker 1: and I asked the team to go back and conduct
Speaker 1: an assessment to determine where are we with these efforts
Speaker 1: and what steps do we need to take going forward.
Speaker 1: I was very concerned that I was able to put
Speaker 1: the Russia case on absolutely solid ground in an indelible fashion,
Speaker 1: that were I removed quickly or reassigned or fired, that
Speaker 1: the case could not be closed or vanish in the
Speaker 1: night without a trace. I wanted to make sure that
Speaker 1: our case was on solid ground, and if somebody came
Speaker 1: in behind me and closed it and tried to walk
Speaker 1: away from it, they would not be able to do
Speaker 1: that without creating a record of why they'd made that decision.
Speaker 1: You wanted a documentary record that those investigations had begun
Speaker 1: because you feared that they would be made to go away.
Speaker 1: That's exactly right. The president may have been assisted in
Speaker 1: the election by Russia. Well, we just had two year
Speaker 1: investigation in the Senate Intelligence Committee. At a bipartisan group
Speaker 1: of senators said there's no evidence at all to back
Speaker 1: up that ridiculous claim. And the president also our investigation.
Speaker 1: He keeps our investigation the problem with that is they
Speaker 1: told the president he was not being investigated. There was
Speaker 1: no such FBI investigation. Now what you have, and it
Speaker 1: is here, is an admission that you have the top
Speaker 1: brass at the FBI admitting to what is a silent
Speaker 1: attempt of a coup of a sitting president. Now why
Speaker 1: would I say that, because we now know that they
Speaker 1: didn't just tell Hillary Clinton once and that would be
Speaker 1: his boss. He's the deputy FBI director. Andrew McCabe in
Speaker 1: this interview, was trying to sell a book who got fired,
Speaker 1: interestingly for being a liar, not telling the truth, and
Speaker 1: is now under criminal investigation himself. This little side note,
Speaker 1: but we know about the exoneration before the investigation. There's
Speaker 1: no bigger slam dunk case than Hillary Clinton and the classified,
Speaker 1: top secret special access programming information that even James Comey
Speaker 1: admitted on July fifth, twenty sixteen, was in the mom
Speaker 1: and pop bathroom closet server. It was there. We know
Speaker 1: that Hillary Clinton signed off on that horrific Uranium one deal,
Speaker 1: which gave up twenty percent of America's uranium. We knew
Speaker 1: that Vladimir Putin was looking for a foothold into the
Speaker 1: uranium industry in America, the foundation materials that are used
Speaker 1: to build nuclear weapons. We know that also happened. And
Speaker 1: we also know that we had a spy, William Campbell,
Speaker 1: inside of Putin's network, who exposed to the FBI and
Speaker 1: the director at the time, Muller, that there was bribery
Speaker 1: and extortion and kickbacks and money laundering going on by
Speaker 1: Putin's minions here in the US that wanted the uranium
Speaker 1: deal to go through. And then we have again follow
Speaker 1: the money bill. Clinton gets triple as normal speaking fee
Speaker 1: going to Russia trying to meet with their nuclear regulators,
Speaker 1: but instead gets a meeting with the man himself, Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 1: Hillary votes for the deal the Scifist board, if you will,
Speaker 1: one of nine and one hundred and forty five million's
Speaker 1: picked to kick back to the Clinton Foundation. And I'll
Speaker 1: add one other note, if you cared about Russian influence
Speaker 1: and collusion, Hillary paid for the dossier with funneled money
Speaker 1: from a law firm, to an op research group, to
Speaker 1: a foreign national Christopher Steele, and he even though they
Speaker 1: all knew in August of twenty sixteen, because Bruce Ord
Speaker 1: testified that he told everybody in the DJ and FBI
Speaker 1: that that Clinton paid for it, still hated Trump and
Speaker 1: none of it's verified. Well, then it became the basis
Speaker 1: of a not one, but four fis, a warrants against
Speaker 1: the Trump campaign associate. So they tried to stop helped
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton, stopped Donald Trump before and then screw him
Speaker 1: afterwards as his evidence here, because they think they knew
Speaker 1: better than you. The American people all right joining us
Speaker 1: now to discuss and shed more light on this. Greg
Speaker 1: Jarrett is with us. Am I missing anything here? Now?
Speaker 1: You've nailed it one hun. You know what I found
Speaker 1: amazing this morning? I flipped on CBS and there's Scott pelle.
Speaker 1: He seems to think that he's breaking news with his
Speaker 1: interview with Andrew mccaven. He was shocked at what McCabe
Speaker 1: was tolding him. We're has Scott Hellie been? You know,
Speaker 1: if it's news, it's news to Scott Pelley. In truth,
Speaker 1: there's really nothing new in his McCabe interview, And in fact,
Speaker 1: in my book, I confirm page two ninety one that
Speaker 1: Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page James Baker all confirmed that Rosenstein
Speaker 1: was serious about soliciting people to wear wires to secretly
Speaker 1: record Trump and recruit cabinet members to invoke the twenty
Speaker 1: fifth Amendment. Well, that's the other side of this, now,
Speaker 1: Rod Rosenstein didn't need to deny that. Oh, sure, he
Speaker 1: had three explanations and they don't coincide. In September, he
Speaker 1: denied that had ever happened. Then he said, well, it
Speaker 1: did happen, but I was being sarcastic. Now he says, well,
Speaker 1: I never authorized to recording or invoking the twenty fifth Amendment,
Speaker 1: which is sort of like saying, well, I seriously pitched it,
Speaker 1: but then I didn't authorize it. And now Rosenstein is
Speaker 1: Brandy McCabe is a liar. He says McCabe did not
Speaker 1: tell the truth to federal authorities on multiple occasions, leading
Speaker 1: to his termination, which is true. I mean, now you've
Speaker 1: got a shark tank if sharks who are really hungry,
Speaker 1: and now they're beginning to nibl at each other and
Speaker 1: consume each other. You've got McCabe, says Comey's a liar.
Speaker 1: Comey says McCabe's a liar. Rosenstein says McCabe's a liar.
Speaker 1: For my money, they're all crooks and liars. Well, what's
Speaker 1: fascinating to me as I read through. This is breathtaking
Speaker 1: because you don't think something like this could ever happen
Speaker 1: in the United States of America. I have said, and
Speaker 1: I stand by what I have said, this is the
Speaker 1: single biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in our history.
Speaker 1: It is. And I want to be clear as always,
Speaker 1: this is not rank and file FBI. Now the question
Speaker 1: is now that we you know, so he's under a
Speaker 1: criminal investigation. We know James Baker's under a criminal investigation.
Speaker 1: We know we're expecting the Inspector General. I've got to
Speaker 1: believe everybody that signed the fires A warrant knowing it
Speaker 1: warned ahead of time that it wasn't verified. Five people, okay,
Speaker 1: and they are Yates call me Daniel Blente, Rod Rosenstein,
Speaker 1: and Andrew mccaye. Right, So what happens to if they
Speaker 1: knowingly used as the bulk of information phony document and
Speaker 1: they didn't tell the court she paid for it, alied
Speaker 1: to the court. They deceived the court. They withheld vital,
Speaker 1: critical evidence, concealing all kinds of stuff. As I wrote
Speaker 1: on the very first page of my book, this is
Speaker 1: the most notorious hoax in modern American history. And John Dowd,
Speaker 1: transformer attorney this week pretty much has said the same thing.
Speaker 1: He said, this is the biggest fraud in American history,
Speaker 1: and he's absolutely right. And here you've got McCabe saying, well,
Speaker 1: you know, after the President fired James Comey, you know,
Speaker 1: I was concerned that he was a puppet for Russia
Speaker 1: and had stolen the election with Russia's help, so I
Speaker 1: launched the counterintelligence investigation of the president. What McCabe is
Speaker 1: conveniently ignoring is the testimony of Lisa Page, the FBI
Speaker 1: attorney top attorney, who confessed to congressional investigators that when
Speaker 1: that special council was appointed by McCabe, they had no
Speaker 1: evidence of collusion, which means the special council appointment was
Speaker 1: in violation of the regulations. Well, she's not the only one, though,
Speaker 1: that said that. Comey, Remember even though he signed off
Speaker 1: on the first FISA application. Then he goes to Trump Tower,
Speaker 1: meets President Trump and says it's fallacious but unverified, the
Speaker 1: very opposite of what he had testified to or presented
Speaker 1: before and signed off on before in October the year prior,
Speaker 1: that's three and a half months earlier. Sure, well, James
Speaker 1: Commy is the master of prevarication, evasion and lies. Well
Speaker 1: is he gonna all right? So what happens to all
Speaker 1: these deep state actors, those that didn't believe in the
Speaker 1: deep state? What happens to all these people? Well, today
Speaker 1: at four forty five, William Barr will be sworn in
Speaker 1: by Chief Justice John Roberts as the next Attorney General.
Speaker 1: In any his confirmation hearing, when Lindsey Graham, of the
Speaker 1: Chairman of the Judiciary Committee put it to him, all
Speaker 1: of these corrupt acts and especially lying to the Fiser Court,
Speaker 1: will you investigate? Barr said yes, because nobody, not even
Speaker 1: law enforcement, is above the law. So if William Barr
Speaker 1: holds true to his word, Sean, he'll investigate this. And look,
Speaker 1: he doesn't need a special counsel for this. There are
Speaker 1: plenty of competent, honest, honorable career prosecutors, top notch lawyers
Speaker 1: at the DJ who can do it. So before are
Speaker 1: Mueller's even appointed, they're thinking about invoking the twenty fifth Amendment,
Speaker 1: even though even though numerous people are on the record
Speaker 1: saying well since July when they launched this at twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: there was no evidence, right, so they're trying to basically
Speaker 1: remove a dually elected president because they don't like him,
Speaker 1: they don't like his policies, they don't like the man.
Speaker 1: The McCabe interview only illuminates the FBI severe bias against
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. Who violated laws? Name the names? Who is
Speaker 1: it who violated what law? Stared started the well? First
Speaker 1: of all, if you ignore evidence deliberately for political reasons,
Speaker 1: contort the law to clear somebody of a crime even
Speaker 1: though the evidence in front of you shows they committed
Speaker 1: those crimes, that substruction of justice. So that would be
Speaker 1: James Comey and all of the others who were involved,
Speaker 1: including Peter Strock and Lisa Page and the investigation of
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton. Then you move forward to launching an investigation
Speaker 1: for personal and political reasons when you don't have probable
Speaker 1: cause or credible evidence. That would be James Comey, Peter Struck,
Speaker 1: Andrew McCay, the whole gang at the FBI. And then
Speaker 1: you move on the five individuals you and I just
Speaker 1: named lying to a court that's perpetrating a fraud. It's
Speaker 1: six different felonies. So and that doesn't even include the
Speaker 1: people who lied. Everybody that's signed off on the FISA.
Speaker 1: Then we gotta go to Hillary Clinton and what cheap
Speaker 1: we gotta go back there? Right, Well, don't because I mean,
Speaker 1: don't forget James Comey stealing government documents and seeking Now,
Speaker 1: so if there's equal just as an application of our laws,
Speaker 1: everybody that's signed off on the FISA, Comey himself, McCay, baker,
Speaker 1: struck in page, who else? Yates? Sure, Sally Yates? Well
Speaker 1: when does Clapper and running get brought into all of this?
Speaker 1: Clapperer's five years statue limited is run. So he's free
Speaker 1: and clear. He got away with deliberately line to Congress,
Speaker 1: and nobody at the Department of Justice in the Obama
Speaker 1: administration was willing to pursue it. And then you had
Speaker 1: the feckless incompetent Jeff Sessions who didn't take it up either.
Speaker 1: In the statute is run. We'll take a break, We'll
Speaker 1: come back more with Greg Jarrett. His new paperback is out,
Speaker 1: The Russia Hoax, with a new chapter and available on
Speaker 1: Hannity dot com, Amazon dot com, bookstores everywhere. All Right,
Speaker 1: So I didn't think my friends at My Pillow would
Speaker 1: ever be able to outdo themselves. They've created the My
Speaker 1: Pillow Mattress topper. And what you do is you put
Speaker 1: it on top of your mattress and it's like you're
Speaker 1: floating on air. And yes, it helps you sleep better. Now.
Speaker 1: It has three layered design. One is my Pillow Phone
Speaker 1: for their support transitional phone to help relieve pressure points.
Speaker 1: And also the Ultrasoft patented temperature regulating cover comes with
Speaker 1: a ten year warranty. You're gonna love My Pillows Topper
Speaker 1: Washable Dryable made it in the USA, backed by Mike
Speaker 1: sixty day unconditional money back guarantee. And right now, because
Speaker 1: you listen to the show, you're gonna save thirty percent.
Speaker 1: It's gonna change your life. Just use the promo code,
Speaker 1: Hannity when you go to my pillow dot Com say
Speaker 1: thirty percent haul eight hundred nine nine six zero nine zero. Now,
Speaker 1: Mike is also going to throw in two standard my
Speaker 1: pillows absolutely free. Now when you add the mattress topper
Speaker 1: to the pillows, it's heaven My Pillow dot Com eight
Speaker 1: hundred nine nine six zero nine zero promo code Hannity.
Speaker 1: When we come back the eight Days in Mail, ask
Speaker 1: Greg about that straight ahead. Are you sick of fake news? Well,
Speaker 1: we've got you covered Hannity watches here and as the
Speaker 1: news you need Sean Hannity, all right, as we continue,
Speaker 1: Greg Jarrett, author of the number one bestseller now out
Speaker 1: in paperback with a new chapter, The Russia Hoax. All right,
Speaker 1: our friend colleague Byron York, talks about the eight days
Speaker 1: in May. That's eight days from the time Comee was
Speaker 1: fired by President Trump for just cause the ninth to
Speaker 1: the seventeenth, And the seventeenth was the day that Rod
Speaker 1: Rosenstein appointed Robert Muller as special counsel in violation of
Speaker 1: the regulations and at the same time told McCabe get lost,
Speaker 1: You're off the case. And it was that eight day
Speaker 1: period of time, and we know that they had been
Speaker 1: investigating potential contacts Trump and Russia, and they had enough
Speaker 1: since July of twenty sixteen, and numerous people, including coleme
Speaker 1: he couldn't page. They couldn't believe that this man, Donald
Speaker 1: Trump had won the presidency. It didn't want him to win.
Speaker 1: They were pushing for Hillary Clinton. They cleared her so
Speaker 1: she could win. And they had violated the law in
Speaker 1: lying to a court to spy on his campaign before
Speaker 1: the election. Can you imagine the panic that set in
Speaker 1: at the FBI and DOJ that night that Trump won
Speaker 1: when they said, my lord, we could get caught for
Speaker 1: what we did. And sure enough they've been caught, although
Speaker 1: the mainstream media to ignore it. Now we know what
Speaker 1: the insurance policy is about, don't we. You know, the
Speaker 1: guy that is interviewing Hillary writing an exoneration for Hillary
Speaker 1: even though she committed obvious crimes. The FBI favors her,
Speaker 1: even with you know, their shading whether to declassify classified
Speaker 1: emails on Wiener's laptop in exchange for oh, we'll give
Speaker 1: you more positions from the State Department. Those same people
Speaker 1: are now involved in their insurance policy because Hillary should
Speaker 1: have won one hundred million, zero right right. You know,
Speaker 1: the insurance policy was let's launch and leak dilating the
Speaker 1: investigation of Trump, accusing him of being a Russian spy.
Speaker 1: And then, of course, as you mentioned, the quid pro quo,
Speaker 1: that's a violation of public corruption laws. It's attempted obstruction
Speaker 1: of justice, attempted a bribery. You know, when you're offering
Speaker 1: and pressuring the FBI to do something and they lie
Speaker 1: to the country and the president when they said there
Speaker 1: wasn't an investigation and In this interview, McCabe admits there's
Speaker 1: an investigation. Yeah, of course, all right, we got to
Speaker 1: leave it there. Greg Jared, great work out in paperback,
Speaker 1: the Russia hoax, Hannity dot com, Amazon dot com, bookstores everywhere.
Speaker 1: When we come back, the latest on this trillion dollars
Speaker 1: thousand page nobody read bill that everyone's voting on today
Speaker 1: and what the president should do next? And you know
Speaker 1: who we are apprehending kids? Children, If they are lucky,
Speaker 1: they're there with their moms or dads walking two thousand miles.
Speaker 1: If they're lucky atop, not inside of a train known
Speaker 1: as the Beasts, or lave Estia, surviving every manner of
Speaker 1: depredation in those who pray on human misery, and here,
Speaker 1: at their most vulnerable and desperate moment, they want to
Speaker 1: make sure that they have found the right place. The
Speaker 1: two hundred and forty three years into this great experiment
Speaker 1: an idea that is America. We will not take advantage
Speaker 1: of them. We will not send them back to certain death.
Speaker 1: We will not believe that walls can or should keep
Speaker 1: them out. Instead, we welcome them with open arms. The wealthiest,
Speaker 1: the most powerful country on the face of the planets
Speaker 1: can meet this moment in our obligations to one another
Speaker 1: and be all the stronger for it. Our walls don't
Speaker 1: keep us safe at all. Twenty five now until the
Speaker 1: top of the hour, Bozo or' rourke at his very
Speaker 1: small attempt to compete rally with Donald Trump, I mean
Speaker 1: they were did you see the crowd outside in Alpasso?
Speaker 1: Unbelievable anyway, joining us now as Congressman McClintock of California discussing,
Speaker 1: you know what is now being a one trillion dollar
Speaker 1: spending bill, only one point three seven five billion as
Speaker 1: it relates to the wall, and nobody's had a chance
Speaker 1: to read the thousand page bill and I guess you
Speaker 1: have to pass it to find out what's in it.
Speaker 1: Once again, Congressman McClintock, welcome back to the program. How
Speaker 1: are you, um, great Sean, thanks for having me. The
Speaker 1: battle comes down to this in my mind, and I
Speaker 1: want to ask you about it. That the president is
Speaker 1: fighting against the ninety percent of heroin in our country
Speaker 1: that comes across that border, the new fentanyl and that
Speaker 1: kills three hundred people a week, the new fentanyl crisis
Speaker 1: that we have. He's fighting cartels, human traffickers, including young
Speaker 1: girls being you know, sex trafficking that goes on. He's
Speaker 1: fighting the gangs, and he's also fighting to protect America
Speaker 1: from those people that might commit other crimes. We've given
Speaker 1: the statistics on homicide, sexual assault, and biling assaults. What
Speaker 1: are your fellow congressmen that are on the other side
Speaker 1: of the aisle, the Democrats, what are they fighting for here? Well,
Speaker 1: they're fighting for open borders. I think they've made that
Speaker 1: very clear. They see that as a political opportunity to
Speaker 1: maintain perpetual power in this country. And it relies on
Speaker 1: the sixty thousand foreign nationals that are illegally crossing our
Speaker 1: border every month. And the problem with that is pretty simple.
Speaker 1: If we have no if we're not going to or
Speaker 1: immigration laws, our borders mean nothing. And if our borders
Speaker 1: mean nothing, we're no longer a country. We're just a
Speaker 1: vast international open territory between Canada and Mexico, both of which,
Speaker 1: by the way, have immigration laws and borders that they
Speaker 1: actually enforce. Well, I did see that you had written
Speaker 1: an editorial in the or an outped in a Washington
Speaker 1: An Examiner and this is what I think, And you
Speaker 1: said to Claire an emergency and build the wall. I
Speaker 1: think the President is going to let's assume for a minute,
Speaker 1: they didn't put a poison pill on the one point
Speaker 1: three seven five billion for the wall, which is all
Speaker 1: they've allocated for that. Now they've also allocated another twenty
Speaker 1: three billion for everything else but the wall, which I'm
Speaker 1: happy about that. But the wall needs to be built.
Speaker 1: That is the most fundamental part of it. The President
Speaker 1: says he has anywhere between nine hundred million and a
Speaker 1: couple of billion dollars of discretionary moneies that haven't been
Speaker 1: spent that he gets to spend anyway he wants. So
Speaker 1: I think the president's plan is he'll simultaneously again, if
Speaker 1: there's no poison pill, sign the bill, keep the government open.
Speaker 1: If there's a poison pill, he may ask for a
Speaker 1: short term cr Then he'll put those other moneys together
Speaker 1: that he has the discretion to spend as he wants,
Speaker 1: and then he'll declare a national emergency. And then they're
Speaker 1: going to go out to your state and they're going
Speaker 1: to file a lawsuit, which probably the Democrats will win.
Speaker 1: Then they'll go to the Ninth Circuit again in your state, California,
Speaker 1: which is pretty socialist at this point, and they'll probably
Speaker 1: win there. But I got to think the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: takes it up next, don't you. Well, whatever he does,
Speaker 1: even if it's using the congressional appropriation to build the wall,
Speaker 1: they're still going to try to block him in court.
Speaker 1: Anything he does, they're going to find a left wing
Speaker 1: judge to temporarily block. But he is on absolutely solid
Speaker 1: ground in using his authority the dates back to nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy six to reprogram unobligated military construction funds for projects
Speaker 1: for nation defense. And I can't think of anything more
Speaker 1: important to our national defense or than securing our southern border.
Speaker 1: And you know, when you hear folks attack it, they'll say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: that's going to come out of other military construction projects.
Speaker 1: And my response to that is what is more important
Speaker 1: securing the border of Iraq or curing the border of
Speaker 1: the United States. I just to trying to the Democrats
Speaker 1: always said they support this and Obama's second term they
Speaker 1: all sounded like Donald Trump on the wall and funding
Speaker 1: the wall and building the wall. They claim to care
Speaker 1: about dreamers and DACA, and they claim that they cared
Speaker 1: about furloughed employees, but they wouldn't even have a conversation
Speaker 1: with the president. Look look, for years now, they have
Speaker 1: not even been able to call illegal immigration for what
Speaker 1: it is. Illegal. It's hard to believe that they are
Speaker 1: opposed to illegal immigration when for years they've been working
Speaker 1: to reward illegal immigration with free taxpayer paid services, education, healthcare,
Speaker 1: legal services, you name it. Then you look at the
Speaker 1: sanctuary policies that they have been advocating for years that
Speaker 1: released dangerous criminal illegals back into our communities rather than
Speaker 1: deporting them. You can't point to one thing the Democrats
Speaker 1: have done to assist in securing our borders. They have
Speaker 1: done everything they can to undermine our borders, and that's
Speaker 1: why we're living with the crisis we have today. Have
Speaker 1: you had any time to read any of this bill
Speaker 1: or I assume you're probably you know, handing off two
Speaker 1: hundred pages to this staff or two hundred pages so
Speaker 1: that staff, or because you can't read a thousand pages. Well,
Speaker 1: I read the portions dealing with the with the border wall,
Speaker 1: and what we know for sure from this is it's
Speaker 1: completely inadequate to address the crisis. So are there any
Speaker 1: restrictions on the president's spending. Yeah, well, yes, there are
Speaker 1: many restrictions on it, including they've carved out big sections
Speaker 1: of the Rio Grande Valley where they're not permitted to build.
Speaker 1: They cannot start building until they get local government to
Speaker 1: consultation completed. There are a lot of restrictions like that.
Speaker 1: But the principle question is this, If it's not adequate
Speaker 1: to secure our border, he's going to have to use
Speaker 1: his executive authority anyway. And if he has to use
Speaker 1: his executive authority anyway, why does he need this appropriations
Speaker 1: bill now for the purpose of the wall. The other
Speaker 1: concern I have is that this continues us on a
Speaker 1: spending trajectory that is producing a trillion dollars annual deficit.
Speaker 1: That's about eight thousand dollars of additional debt an average
Speaker 1: family in this country will have to pay through its
Speaker 1: future taxes, and is economists are screaming this warning at us,
Speaker 1: that it is putting us on the verge of a
Speaker 1: debt spiral that will lead to a sovereign debt crisis.
Speaker 1: Of if this bill actually addressed our border crisis, I'd
Speaker 1: be willing to take one more step down that path. Well,
Speaker 1: let me it's completely inadequate to do so, I'm wondering
Speaker 1: what's the point. Nita Lowey put out to our Democratic
Speaker 1: colleagues a page and a half about the House's vote
Speaker 1: on the Conference report, covering the financial issues here, you know,
Speaker 1: a billion for the Census, three hundred and eight million
Speaker 1: for research development National Science Foundation, twenty five more million
Speaker 1: for the EPA, one hundred and sixty nine million for
Speaker 1: international peacekeeping, two hundred ninety three million for port infrastructure,
Speaker 1: one hundred and twenty three million for grants to combat homelessness.
Speaker 1: But then she has an an alternative to the Conference
Speaker 1: report is a full year CR for the remaining bills. Now,
Speaker 1: this would result in losing eleven billion and increased investments,
Speaker 1: including the additional one billion for the Census Bureau that
Speaker 1: is desperately needed for our communities to be well prepared
Speaker 1: in the decade that follows. CR would also lead to
Speaker 1: the Department of Homeland Security spending two billion on board
Speaker 1: of barriers and significantly increasing the number of detention bets.
Speaker 1: Sounds like the President should say no to this deal
Speaker 1: and maybe just get the full two billion dollars, which
Speaker 1: is more than they're offering. I agree with you. And
Speaker 1: by the way, once he invokes his authority to reprogram
Speaker 1: funds and it's upheld by the courts, the Democrats will
Speaker 1: then be in a very weak bargaining position. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: so what are they going to do? Are they going
Speaker 1: to shut down the government? Because I don't think they
Speaker 1: have the stomach to do that either, because this, to
Speaker 1: them would be their shutdown. Well. I can't read minds,
Speaker 1: and I can't tell fortunes, but I can tell you this,
Speaker 1: This bill does not secure our borders. The President, even
Speaker 1: if he signed this bill, he's going to have to
Speaker 1: use his executive authority anyway, and and ultimately he's on
Speaker 1: very solid legal groundoing. So yeah, is that true what
Speaker 1: Nita Lois Lowe's telling her her own Democratic conference that
Speaker 1: basically it's a better deal for Republicans not to support it. Well,
Speaker 1: what the cr does is basically continue the priorities of
Speaker 1: the Republicans set in the last Congress. The Appropriations Bill
Speaker 1: removes a lot of those provisions, so its moves us
Speaker 1: much much farther to the left's idea of government, which
Speaker 1: is huge tax is huge spending of it continues to
Speaker 1: all the farm suberty programs that green energy subsidy programs,
Speaker 1: which are the worst form of corporate welfare there are.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I agree with you. I think we would
Speaker 1: be in biddershape with ACR than we would with this bill.
Speaker 1: Tom Graves from Georgia also joins US now their fourteenth district.
Speaker 1: Welcome to the program. What's your take on this? Nita
Speaker 1: Lowy report to her conference, saying that well, we can
Speaker 1: have an alternative to the conference report, a full year
Speaker 1: CR for the remaining bills. That would mean spending or
Speaker 1: losing she calls it spending eleven billion dollars less in
Speaker 1: what she calls investments, and the CR would also lead
Speaker 1: to the DHS spending two billion on border barriers and
Speaker 1: significantly increasing the number of detention beds. I think I
Speaker 1: like that one. Hey, Sean, thanks for you know, going
Speaker 1: over that. And I appreciate mister McClinton. There's nobody more
Speaker 1: articulate on this issue and others than he is. But
Speaker 1: you're absolutely right. If this claim is true, then a
Speaker 1: continuing resolution by far would be the better option. If
Speaker 1: it is not true, then it should be debunked quickly.
Speaker 1: And I think that's an incumbent on those who are
Speaker 1: who are researching this and reading this to say, Okay,
Speaker 1: if that is true, why aren't we not sticking with
Speaker 1: a continuing resolution? But aside from that, I think we
Speaker 1: should hit the pause button anyhow. I think we should
Speaker 1: be doing a two week continuing resolution right now to
Speaker 1: allow every member, Republican and Democrat ample time to go
Speaker 1: through this legislation. It's eleven hundred plus pages which I've seen.
Speaker 1: I haven't had a chance to review one hundred percent
Speaker 1: of it, and I'm on the Conference committee myself. I
Speaker 1: think this is such an important topics, such a comprehensive,
Speaker 1: complex issue, that every member deserves time to review it.
Speaker 1: And if you have to get with the program, Congress,
Speaker 1: with all due respect to you, you got to pass
Speaker 1: the bill to find out what's in the darn thing.
Speaker 1: You're a little behind him, You're behind the times. Why
Speaker 1: read a thousand pages for a trillion dollars? I mean,
Speaker 1: that's it's a revolutionary thought. Yeah, we should actually read
Speaker 1: something before we vote on it. But you know there
Speaker 1: are folks who are worried about Well, if we leave
Speaker 1: it over the next couple of weeks, then people are
Speaker 1: going to shoot holes in it. Well, if it's bad policy,
Speaker 1: we shouldn't be passing it. If it's a good policy,
Speaker 1: it will withstand the criticisms in the scrutiny over the
Speaker 1: next ten to fourteen days. So this is a really
Speaker 1: important topic. And yeah, mister mcclint talk's exactly right. This
Speaker 1: is about securing our homeland. This is not about who's
Speaker 1: winning and who's losing. This is about security of our
Speaker 1: country and our citizens. You know the idea. Look, I'll
Speaker 1: be honest, at the end of the day, if the
Speaker 1: President signs this and the President uses all of the
Speaker 1: funds that he can appropriate, use the defense funds that
Speaker 1: he has the ability to discretion to spend as he chooses,
Speaker 1: let me put it that way, and the president simultaneously
Speaker 1: declares national emergency, I think that's a win win Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: because he has money to continue building the wall as
Speaker 1: he's doing now in the interim, as Democrats challenge it
Speaker 1: in court. Congressman mcclintop, would that work for you? Oh?
Speaker 1: Absolutely it would. And again, we need to remember there
Speaker 1: are two mortal perils facing our country. One of them
Speaker 1: is the class of our borders, but the others the
Speaker 1: collapse of our finances, I mean, history warns us that
Speaker 1: countries that lose control of our borders or that bankrupts
Speaker 1: themselves simply aren't around very long. So we have to
Speaker 1: ask ourselves, how does this bill affect these mortal dangers?
Speaker 1: And the answer is it is wholly inadequate to secure
Speaker 1: our borders and moves us further toward a sovereign debt
Speaker 1: crisis that could be fatal to our country. I agree.
Speaker 1: Final word we'll give to Tom Graves. They only got
Speaker 1: about fifteen seconds. Tom. I think we've got a great
Speaker 1: opportunity here to just take a break, get this thing right,
Speaker 1: make sure our customs and border protection have all the
Speaker 1: resources necessary to secure our homeland. And this is the
Speaker 1: one opportunity and moment we have to do it. And
Speaker 1: I hope we stand firm here and get it right. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well that would be a refreshing change, and be nice
Speaker 1: of people actually read a bill before they vote on it.
Speaker 1: All right, guys, thank you both. When we come back,
Speaker 1: News round Up Information Overload. How are the Democrats gonna
Speaker 1: deal with this new civil war among their new hard
Speaker 1: radical extreme left that has taken over their party. That's
Speaker 1: coming up in our News Roundup Information overload and tonight
Speaker 1: the definitive breakdown on Hannity of what was an attempted
Speaker 1: silent coup by people at the highest levels of the
Speaker 1: DJ and the FBI, not the rank and file nine
Speaker 1: Eastern Fox. Stay right here for our final news round
Speaker 1: up and information overload. No, I think it is a
Speaker 1: green dream, and I think that it is. It is,
Speaker 1: and I think that that all great, all great, all
Speaker 1: great American programs, everything from the Great Society to the
Speaker 1: New Deal, started with a vision or our future. And
Speaker 1: I don't think that, you know, I don't consider that
Speaker 1: to be a dismissive term. I think it's a great ten. Sorry. Recently,
Speaker 1: I know a lot of people that's run for president.
Speaker 1: They've been starting to accept a smoking marijuana is becoming
Speaker 1: president isn't something that sometimes they run away from it
Speaker 1: don't fully embrace. Well, I don't know about running away
Speaker 1: from I certainly think people used to run away from it.
Speaker 1: But we just need to accept that there is nothing
Speaker 1: more inherently damaging about marijuana than say, legal substances like
Speaker 1: alcohol or kind anything else. And so so I'm glad
Speaker 1: that we're moving towards a more just position as a
Speaker 1: party and that we're moving to legalized mariuana, but not
Speaker 1: just legalize marijuana, but to really make up for the
Speaker 1: damage is done by the war on drugs and the
Speaker 1: people that were unjustly incarcerated by the War on drucks.
Speaker 1: Some of the presidents, would it be okay, like even
Speaker 1: if they say, like I know, said state that it
Speaker 1: was a long time ago. So someone that wouldn't be
Speaker 1: okay to have a president who saying that they do
Speaker 1: smoke because I don't care. It's yeah, I don't care.
Speaker 1: It's fine with me. You're not hurting anybody, you know,
Speaker 1: because there's really no difference between that and now. There
Speaker 1: are plenty of exactly, there are plenty of people who drank.
Speaker 1: They'll go out to happy hour, they'll you know, they'll
Speaker 1: go out have one, two three. All right there, it
Speaker 1: is the star of the new radical extreme democratic Socialist Party,
Speaker 1: and that is a Cosio Cortes, the congresswoman. You know,
Speaker 1: great article in Red State that I told you about earlier.
Speaker 1: A war is coming between old and new school Democrats.
Speaker 1: It's not coming, though, it's here, it's right before our eyes.
Speaker 1: And what they're most afraid of is a Casio Cortez
Speaker 1: is just revealing what this party is already evolved into.
Speaker 1: Except they thought they were clever. They try to hide
Speaker 1: what their real positions are. They don't actively come out
Speaker 1: and say that they want socialism. They would always, you know,
Speaker 1: on the campaign that their m was to sound as
Speaker 1: moderate as possible and to bamboozle the American people and
Speaker 1: then always vote hard left no matter what the issue
Speaker 1: happened to be. But do they believe in the government
Speaker 1: takeover of industry like the healthcare industry? Will listen to
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris and Kirsten gilla Brand and Bernie Sanders and
Speaker 1: Medicare for all the well, Kamala Harris and Jillabrand say,
Speaker 1: we've got to eliminate all private health insurance. That's one
Speaker 1: hundred and eighty seven million Americans that will be forced
Speaker 1: into a government system. This is the radical party. They
Speaker 1: want energy, Okay, look at the New Green Deal or
Speaker 1: the Green New Deal. Okay, in ten years, no more
Speaker 1: fossil fuels, no natural gas, no coal, no nuclear, just
Speaker 1: clean renewable energy. Okay. That means that we're gonna have
Speaker 1: to change the cars that we drive. And but we'll
Speaker 1: have plug in areas all over the country. That's nice
Speaker 1: of them. Airplanes are gone, cow meat is gone, all
Speaker 1: the things that we Every home has to be rebuilt,
Speaker 1: every building has to be rebuilt. But you're guaranteed pretty
Speaker 1: much everything in this utopia society that they're promising, all
Speaker 1: the right words, all your fears are taken away, all
Speaker 1: the platitudes and false promises, which is everybody guaranteed a
Speaker 1: job with a family sustaining wage, and family leave and
Speaker 1: medical leave and vacations. Everyone gets full complete retirement security.
Speaker 1: They'll define what that is. Of course. Now we're gonna
Speaker 1: we destroyed K through twelve education. We pay more per
Speaker 1: capita than any other industrialized country, and we are like
Speaker 1: thirty seven when it comes to the educational system in
Speaker 1: this country. Well, now we'll take it straight on through college,
Speaker 1: guaranteed government. Healthy food. Great, what are they going to
Speaker 1: pick tonight for supper? But we can't have cows because
Speaker 1: there's too much cow flatulence and CO two emissions and
Speaker 1: it's hurting the environment. So you better stock up. If
Speaker 1: you want to make money, maybe you'll maybe you'll buy
Speaker 1: a lot of beef and freeze it for when beef
Speaker 1: then becomes illegal and then you have to of course
Speaker 1: you can sell it on the black market for huge profits.
Speaker 1: And of course we're gonna get rid of eventually the
Speaker 1: cows and eventually airplanes, and we're going to replace everything
Speaker 1: with high speed trains. Can't wait to see that high
Speaker 1: speed train express to Europe and Asia and New Zealand
Speaker 1: and Australia. But everyone gets free healthcare. Well, how do
Speaker 1: an Obamacare work out for you? Only this time they'll
Speaker 1: take away completely your healthcare plan? How do how do
Speaker 1: we ever recover from that? If they get their way.
Speaker 1: We're gonna have, of course, safe, affordable, adequate housing for everybody.
Speaker 1: That's after we rebuild every house in America because of
Speaker 1: the new Green mandate, economic security for those that are
Speaker 1: unable to work, those that are unwilling to work. But
Speaker 1: they try to back off that, but that's what they believe.
Speaker 1: Wasn't an accident they put it there. And economic environment
Speaker 1: free of monopolies. Yeah, because they will take over all
Speaker 1: industry in America. And then of course no beef, no planes.
Speaker 1: Oh and the party of late term abortion, even even
Speaker 1: during the birthing process, it will be legal. We're now
Speaker 1: up to eight states pushing this. It's not an anomaly.
Speaker 1: In New York. And then on top of that, the
Speaker 1: Senate wouldn't even take up the issue because the Democrats
Speaker 1: refused the you know, born a Live Protection Act if
Speaker 1: botched abortion happens. Now, we had a woman on the
Speaker 1: show last week that had that happened too. Anyway, glad
Speaker 1: you with us eight hundred and nine for one Sean
Speaker 1: toll free telephone number. It's our news Roundup and Information
Speaker 1: Overload hour on the program as we're joined by Jonathan Gillham,
Speaker 1: former FBI agent, Federal Air Marshall, author A Sheep no More,
Speaker 1: Danielle McLaughlin, attorney, who is a liberal quote constitutional expert. Um. Well, anyway,
Speaker 1: welcome both of you. Good to have you so tell us, Danielle,
Speaker 1: and congrats again on the baby. Tell us what part
Speaker 1: of the Green New Deal you don't like? Good, good afternoon, Sean,
Speaker 1: and happy Valentine's Day. Happy Valentine. Hey Jonathan too. I
Speaker 1: didn't think we'd be talking about cal' fletulence on Valentine's Day,
Speaker 1: but here we go. You knows because it's both applies
Speaker 1: to the Democrat Party. So well, yeah, well, I'm sure
Speaker 1: I suspect that they would be your your point of view. Look,
Speaker 1: the Green New Deal is a set of ideas, okay,
Speaker 1: and I agree there are some things in here that
Speaker 1: we're never going to get to. These kid timelines, the
Speaker 1: idea of making buildings green, that's crazy talk. That's never
Speaker 1: going to happen. But what this is meant to do
Speaker 1: is start a conversation and get us to start thinking
Speaker 1: about what this planet and what our cities and what
Speaker 1: our farm and our talents are going to look like
Speaker 1: in fifty, yes or one hundred years, and what we're
Speaker 1: going to do to adapt to climate change and the
Speaker 1: real economic downsides and economic harms that can come from
Speaker 1: a from a changing climate. Okay, you can say all
Speaker 1: you want that this is not We have one hundred
Speaker 1: Democrats signing onto this insanity. By the way, and a
Speaker 1: reporter asked Bob Benendez about the Green New Deal. We
Speaker 1: got all pissed off and threatened to call the cops
Speaker 1: after a reporter asked that. And now what we're seeing
Speaker 1: is there was an article in the New York Times,
Speaker 1: the Acasio Cortez effect Jonathan wave of challenges hits entrenched
Speaker 1: New York Democrats. What that means is every establishment, you know,
Speaker 1: real left wing Democrat. Now it is going to be
Speaker 1: challenged by one of these. You know, I want to
Speaker 1: take radical extremist Democrats, and the radicals will probably win. Well,
Speaker 1: that's what scary, you know. Was one thing I learned
Speaker 1: a while ago in politics in New York City was
Speaker 1: when Charlie Rangel used to get elected over and over again.
Speaker 1: I started looking into that, and as it turns out,
Speaker 1: in his district where he was running, you know, there's
Speaker 1: a million people there up in the Harlem area, maybe more,
Speaker 1: but only about eighteen thousand would come out and vote.
Speaker 1: That's it. So it's you know, some of these people
Speaker 1: that are getting in are going to the specific areas
Speaker 1: where people don't vote, and then they press these ridiculous
Speaker 1: things forward and then they convinced people just to come
Speaker 1: out and vote that aren't really looking at the issues
Speaker 1: at hand. And I think, you know, I'm hoping that
Speaker 1: they shoot themselves in the foot here, but I think
Speaker 1: it's really going to show what a way. But whether
Speaker 1: they will, they already have shot themselves in the foot.
Speaker 1: The American people, even if you identify yourself as pro choice,
Speaker 1: it don't support abortion while the birth is happening. After
Speaker 1: it's a fully formed baby. Most Americans heard the Governor
Speaker 1: of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Well, first, will deliver the baby,
Speaker 1: will make the baby comfortable and the mothers in labor.
Speaker 1: I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant
Speaker 1: would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the
Speaker 1: infant would be resuscitated if if that's what the mother
Speaker 1: and the family desire. If not, and then a discussion
Speaker 1: would ensue between the physicians and the mother. Nobody supports this,
Speaker 1: but this we are on the verge of being the
Speaker 1: wealthiest nation on the face of this earth because of
Speaker 1: the vast energy, natural gas, oil, coal resources we have
Speaker 1: that Donald Trump is now allowing us to use. This
Speaker 1: will create literally hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of
Speaker 1: high pain in career jobs for Americans. And the wealth
Speaker 1: we saw so long in the in the Middle East
Speaker 1: will now be our wealth and will be the biggest
Speaker 1: exporter of energy, the lifeblood of our economy. But not
Speaker 1: if Danielle's friends, however, way their way. Look for sure
Speaker 1: we can we can head it both ways. I think
Speaker 1: you know. We have to in the in the in
Speaker 1: the now. We have to think about jobs and energy
Speaker 1: and I know exactly what you're talking about in terms
Speaker 1: of the reserves and texas that have been uncovered, but
Speaker 1: we also have to think that government. Government is about stewardships.
Speaker 1: My kids, my children's children's, yours, Sean. They're going to
Speaker 1: be inherenting a planet that is even more polluted than
Speaker 1: this today. And the consensus of scientists is ninety seven percent.
Speaker 1: So basically what I'm saying is, if you believe it's
Speaker 1: smoking causes cancer, then you have to believe in climate
Speaker 1: change because the numbers are exactly the same in terms
Speaker 1: of scientific consensus. I agree that some of this stuff
Speaker 1: feels very kind of crazy, but the Republicans it feels.
Speaker 1: Listen in the seventies, the Democratic Party and liberals, Jonathan,
Speaker 1: we're telling us the new ice age is coming, that
Speaker 1: it involved in the global warming. Because they were wrong
Speaker 1: on that prediction. Then all of a sudden, the planets
Speaker 1: started cooling again in a lot of areas. Then they said,
Speaker 1: oh boy, they would being exposed a third time. So
Speaker 1: they just say climate change. So whether it's hot or cold,
Speaker 1: whether the temperature changes, which it has historically over the
Speaker 1: years or not, they're going to use it because the
Speaker 1: premise is that humans are pillaging the planet for profit,
Speaker 1: and humans are destroying the planet, and we should have full,
Speaker 1: complete redistribution and equality among every person. That's what it
Speaker 1: comes down to. That's what they truly believe well in that.
Speaker 1: And I know people think this is crazy when I
Speaker 1: say this is called communism. That is the utopia that
Speaker 1: they believe in, that they have to cause disruption in
Speaker 1: order to get there, and showing if you listen to
Speaker 1: the verbiage that they use. I've heard so many people
Speaker 1: over this past week, because this is accelerating quickly, use
Speaker 1: a term called the collective. And it's scary to me
Speaker 1: when I hear them say that, because that is a
Speaker 1: communist term. We can call it communism or globalism or socialism,
Speaker 1: but that is a term that what they're trying to
Speaker 1: do is get everyone to think the same not to
Speaker 1: say everybody to say she's shore a solution and everybody says, yes,
Speaker 1: that's a solution. That's not what they're trying to do.
Speaker 1: They're trying to get everybody to think the same way
Speaker 1: so they can control them. And the scary part of
Speaker 1: this whole thing is that they are affecting a big
Speaker 1: part of this country to where they don't even question
Speaker 1: what they're doing, and Corey Booker saying the world cannot
Speaker 1: sustain people eating meat. I'm telling you, I'm really thinking
Speaker 1: about buying a bunch of cows and having them frozen
Speaker 1: for future use. Jonathan, I take this as real because
Speaker 1: look at the numbers of people that are supporting a
Speaker 1: Kasio Cortez's Green New Deal, and knowing Nancy Pelosi, I mean,
Speaker 1: she could be out there saying as she is right now,
Speaker 1: just trying to dismiss it. But she's facing a rebellion
Speaker 1: from this wing and her party, and she may be
Speaker 1: overthrown in the sense losing her speakership by this radical
Speaker 1: wing that has taken over the party, and as if
Speaker 1: she's not radical enough, right, And people are saying, you know,
Speaker 1: I hear it talks to people all the time, and
Speaker 1: they're saying, you know, oh, let that happen because they're
Speaker 1: just going to destroy themselves. I can't say that that's
Speaker 1: the case. It's a very scary thing what's happening and
Speaker 1: the speed of which is happening in the Democrat Party.
Speaker 1: And I think people need to ask themselves. This should
Speaker 1: be the litmus test that they use when they're listening
Speaker 1: to this. Am I supporting a candidate or am I
Speaker 1: supporting a candidate that shows me individual solutions to problems?
Speaker 1: You can't. It's not like cable. You don't bundle solutions.
Speaker 1: You either fix this and fix that or you're just
Speaker 1: trying to sell something that identifies to an ideology. And
Speaker 1: that's what's happening. Last word, Danielle loving these new policies.
Speaker 1: You know what this is, what this is all about.
Speaker 1: We have to have a discussion. One thing, I'll say
Speaker 1: that the Democrats are doing his preceding division for the future,
Speaker 1: whether you like it or not. That's got some ideas.
Speaker 1: What is the goop saying about what we're going to
Speaker 1: be doing in sixty years? Nothing, Well, we'll see. Certainly.
Speaker 1: I don't really hear you objecting to a lot of
Speaker 1: what they're proposing, so I have to assume you'll like it.
Speaker 1: All right, we'll take a break. Thank you both. When
Speaker 1: we come back, wide open telephones, we have an amazing
Speaker 1: Hannity tonight nine Eastern on the Fox News Channel Quick Break.
Speaker 1: We are going to do what no one else in
Speaker 1: the media will do. We're going to lay out the
Speaker 1: definitive case of corruption in the Department of Justice and
Speaker 1: the FBI to literally pull off a coup and undo
Speaker 1: well first to help elect a favored candidate and then
Speaker 1: undo a presidential election. That's nine Eastern. We'll continue, mister President,
Speaker 1: my son got a bad deal. He was killed by
Speaker 1: an illegal alien eight years ago. This is my daughter,
Speaker 1: Amy Courtland, who was killed by an illegal alien. This
Speaker 1: is my only child, Dominique German chocolate dirtan. This bill
Speaker 1: will result in nothing more than tens of thousands of
Speaker 1: more Americans being killed. Please, we plead with you. Please
Speaker 1: do not sign this bill. Please don't sign this bill.
Speaker 1: American people who enter the United States without our permission
Speaker 1: are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not be treated
Speaker 1: the same as people who entered the US legally. President's
Speaker 1: decision to end DACA was heartless and it was brainless.
Speaker 1: When we use phrases like undocumented workers, we convey a
Speaker 1: message to the American people that their government is not
Speaker 1: serious about combating illegal immigration. Hundreds, hundreds of thousands of
Speaker 1: families will be ripped apart. If you don't think it's illegal,
Speaker 1: you're not going to say it. I think it is
Speaker 1: illegal and wrong. Ends of thousands of American businesses will
Speaker 1: lose hard working employees. And the argument them as the
Speaker 1: president is Americans don't want to do the work. Wait,
Speaker 1: just and fine American workers to do the work. But
Speaker 1: the president that is a cruck in many instances, it's
Speaker 1: just not true. In my view, From's decision to end
Speaker 1: the DOCCER program for some eight hundred thousand young people
Speaker 1: is the cruelest and most ugly presidential act in the
Speaker 1: modern history of this country. I cannot think of one
Speaker 1: single act which is uglier and more cruel. We've got
Speaker 1: to do several things, and I am, you know, adamantly
Speaker 1: against illegal immigrants. People have to stop employing illegal immigrants.
Speaker 1: Come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau County.
Speaker 1: Stand in the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx.
Speaker 1: You're going to see loads of people waiting to get
Speaker 1: picked up to go do yard work and construction work
Speaker 1: and domestic work. You know, idiot, this is not a
Speaker 1: problem that the people who are coming into the country
Speaker 1: are solely responsible for them be coming if we didn't
Speaker 1: put them to My proposal will keep families together, and
Speaker 1: it will include a path to citizenship. The number of
Speaker 1: immigrants added to the labor force every years of a
Speaker 1: magnitude not seen in this country for over a century.
Speaker 1: If this huge influx of mostly low scale workers provide
Speaker 1: some benefits to the economy as a whole, it also
Speaker 1: threatens to depress further the wages of blue collar Americans
Speaker 1: and put strains on an already overburdened safety net. Immigrants
Speaker 1: aren't the principal reason wages haven't gone up. There are
Speaker 1: those in the immigrants rights community who have argued passionately
Speaker 1: that we should simply provide those who are illegally with
Speaker 1: legal status, or at least ignore the laws on the
Speaker 1: books and put an end to deportation until we have
Speaker 1: better laws. But I believe such an indiscriminate approach would
Speaker 1: be both unwise and unfair. It would suggest to those
Speaker 1: thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no
Speaker 1: repercussions for such a decision, and this could lead to
Speaker 1: a surge in illegal immigration. These are students, their teachers,
Speaker 1: their doctors, their lawyers. They're Americans in every way, but
Speaker 1: on paper, those who enter the country illegally and those
Speaker 1: who employ them disrespect the rule of law, and they
Speaker 1: are showing disregard for those who are following the law.
Speaker 1: We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United
Speaker 1: States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people
Speaker 1: who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants.
Speaker 1: Real reform means establishing a responsible pathway to earn citizenship.
Speaker 1: All right, those you know, why does in Congress now
Speaker 1: that they're going to vote on their thousand page, trillion
Speaker 1: dollars bill and not know a darned thing that is
Speaker 1: in this Why why would they ever allow this to
Speaker 1: have it? We're now back till you gotta pass it
Speaker 1: to know what its Senate strategy of the Democrats. And
Speaker 1: the amazing thing about all of this, to me, is
Speaker 1: what Nita Lowie is telling people. So she writes to
Speaker 1: her Democratic colleagues, Oh, the House todays or Thursday meeting
Speaker 1: today is because it's gonna vote in conference and a
Speaker 1: report covering the agriculture, commerce, justice, science, financial services, general government,
Speaker 1: homeland security, etc. And she talks about all this new money,
Speaker 1: a billion dollars for the Census Bureau, of all this
Speaker 1: other money here, and then she has an interesting paragraph
Speaker 1: because she's urging Democrats to vote for this after with
Speaker 1: the horrible bill we're talking about. Remember it's supposed to
Speaker 1: give and she even says there's no poison pill in
Speaker 1: the bill as it relates to the one point three
Speaker 1: seven five. But then she writes an alternative to this bill,
Speaker 1: the trillion dollar nobody read, thousand page fiasco bill, And
Speaker 1: I'll turn to the conference report. Is a full year
Speaker 1: continuing resolution a CR for the remaining bills. This would
Speaker 1: result in losing approximately eleven billion dollars an increased well spending,
Speaker 1: she calls investments just like taxes. There's the investments, and
Speaker 1: she including the additional billion dollars for the Census Bureau
Speaker 1: that is desperately needed for our communities to be well
Speaker 1: represented in the decade that follows. A CR would also
Speaker 1: lead to the Department of Homeland Security spending two billion
Speaker 1: dollars on border barriers and significantly increasing the number of
Speaker 1: detention bets. Okay, do a clean CR. That's what Republicans
Speaker 1: ought to do. That's that's pretty straightforward to me. You know,
Speaker 1: we have so much big news. If we got this
Speaker 1: war emerging between as I've been talking about earlier today,
Speaker 1: we've got a Democratic Party that is just off the rails.
Speaker 1: I mean this, you know, you got one hundred people
Speaker 1: supporting Acasio Cortez's you know, Green New Deal bill. You know,
Speaker 1: the one that is gonna demand every home be rebuilt
Speaker 1: in America, every building be rebuilt in America. The one
Speaker 1: that's going to eliminate all fossil fuels, I mean, all gas,
Speaker 1: all oil, all coal is gone. And well that will
Speaker 1: eliminate the car. That will also eliminate airplanes. Well, that
Speaker 1: might take a little longer, she says. Then we've got,
Speaker 1: you know, everything else that they're now support. Everyone's going
Speaker 1: to get a great, equal sustaining wage, great promises, great platitudes,
Speaker 1: bumper stickers, free free, free family medical leave, guaranteed, a
Speaker 1: bill of rights that guarantees it high quality education. Now
Speaker 1: we've ruined K through twelve. Now we're gonna go into
Speaker 1: ruining college as well as if it's not enough indoctrination
Speaker 1: going on in colleges. Government's gonna absolutely guarantee you help
Speaker 1: the food a boy, here come the diet police. Then
Speaker 1: of course, safe affordable, adequate housing. Everyone gets the government house.
Speaker 1: Everyone you know, put it together on healthcare, same thing there,
Speaker 1: everyone is going to be guaranteed a retirements, security of
Speaker 1: vacation healthcare. And by the way, that includes Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: Kirsten Gillabrand, Bernie Sanders. No more private healthcare. Everyone's gonna
Speaker 1: have one healthcare. Everyone's gonna have guaranteed housing. Everyone's gonna
Speaker 1: have an environment and economic free of monopolies. Because they're
Speaker 1: going to nationalize the healthcare industry, good luck to you.
Speaker 1: And then of course on top of that, they'll nationalize energy.
Speaker 1: They will destroy what is the life blood of our economy,
Speaker 1: which is our energy sector. At a time, we're about
Speaker 1: to experience explosive growth and wealth creation for all Americans
Speaker 1: because you know, think back to the North Dakota boom
Speaker 1: and the Oklahoma Texas boom, and the natural gas boom
Speaker 1: that is developing right now. I love when you know
Speaker 1: Andrew Cuomo goes to talk to the President and beg
Speaker 1: for more money, that the President says, why don't you
Speaker 1: just frack your way out of it? Because you're stopping
Speaker 1: fracking is what is creating such devastation in the state
Speaker 1: of New York. And he's right, that's the answer. We
Speaker 1: have more natural gas. We are the Middle East of
Speaker 1: natural gas. We are frankly, we are the biggest energy
Speaker 1: We could be the world's biggest energy supplier easily. We
Speaker 1: got two literally right now, two separate pipelines that are
Speaker 1: available to us that are being built, and more is
Speaker 1: about to open up. We've surpassed for the first time
Speaker 1: in sixty five years where energy not only independent for
Speaker 1: the first time, but now we're literally exporting energy. And
Speaker 1: if drivers in North Dakota get one hundred grand and
Speaker 1: free training, well that means high paying career jobs for
Speaker 1: every American is literally now on our horizon. Money is
Speaker 1: that now people can afford homes and trucks and vacations
Speaker 1: and everything else. So you know what this means for
Speaker 1: the country. This is insanity. Okay, We're gonna have all
Speaker 1: these high speed trains built to Europe. We're gonna have
Speaker 1: a high speed train to How are you gonna get
Speaker 1: to Vietnam in ten years if they have a summit.
Speaker 1: We're gonna have a high speed train to the Asia.
Speaker 1: We're gonna have a high speed train to New Zealand
Speaker 1: and Australia. Australia, Hey, Mike, what are we gonna do? Free? Free, free,
Speaker 1: can't wait till you have to rebuild your home. Even
Speaker 1: the unions, by the way, are supporting, you know, saying
Speaker 1: this is insanity. By the way, Amy Kramer is with us,
Speaker 1: chairwoman of Women for Trump and CJ of the Deplorable Choir.
Speaker 1: Amy Kramer, by the way, her beautiful daughter works on
Speaker 1: our show now, And hey, son, what's going on? How
Speaker 1: are you good to talk to you? So you're actually
Speaker 1: you're saying you now the president. You know, we've been
Speaker 1: mullin a shutdown all day and on all of this,
Speaker 1: and I can, for the life of me understand if
Speaker 1: Nita Lowe is now telling us exactly why we shouldn't
Speaker 1: vote for why we would be even consider voting for it. Well,
Speaker 1: that's exactly it. I mean, I just go back to
Speaker 1: I think it was last March when the President himself
Speaker 1: said I'll never do this again. I'll never sign one
Speaker 1: of these bills again that no one's read. Here we are,
Speaker 1: you know, it came out last night, eleven hundred pages.
Speaker 1: What we do know is in it is not good.
Speaker 1: It's horrible. And look, I've been on Capitol Hill the
Speaker 1: past two days with angel families, people who have lost
Speaker 1: loved ones to illegal immigrants across this country starting from
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety. One of our angel parents lost somebody in
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety the most recent one December twenty ninth of
Speaker 1: twenty eight team, so not even two months ago. And
Speaker 1: you know what they told me today, Seun Days said
Speaker 1: our children are worth more than one point three billion dollars.
Speaker 1: That's how they feel about it. This is not acceptable,
Speaker 1: This is a bad deal, and they don't want the
Speaker 1: President to sign this bill. Well, I understand it. And
Speaker 1: look look at what Nita Louise. You know what she's
Speaker 1: saying in all of this, and that is that, you know,
Speaker 1: and she's trying to convince her conference, she said. An
Speaker 1: alternative to the conference report, meaning this trillion dollar boondoggle,
Speaker 1: is a full year of a CR continuing resolution for
Speaker 1: the remaining bills, which would result in losing approximately eleven
Speaker 1: billion dollars in increased investments, meaning government spending right and
Speaker 1: including the one billion for the Census Bureau that is
Speaker 1: desperately needed for our communities to be well represented in
Speaker 1: the decade that follows. A CR would also lead to
Speaker 1: the Department of Homeland Security spending two billion dollars on
Speaker 1: border barriers and significantly. Are you in the number of
Speaker 1: detention bets. Well, I think that's more what the president wants,
Speaker 1: isn't it right? But I mean Chris Kobak was on
Speaker 1: a new show to Thoughts and Friends, I believe this morning,
Speaker 1: and what he was talking about is the key words
Speaker 1: that talk about the spending, like before you know, the
Speaker 1: one point three to seven or the whatever, however much
Speaker 1: is going to be spent for barriers or whatnot, because
Speaker 1: if it says, you know, not anything above or more whatever,
Speaker 1: I mean, the president's hands are tied. So I don't
Speaker 1: trust the Democrats on anything, and honestly, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of Republicans I don't trust either. And I'm concerned right
Speaker 1: now that the people around the president are given him
Speaker 1: bad advice. I think they want to just push this
Speaker 1: through and be done with it, and that is not
Speaker 1: what we want. I mean, that is not why he
Speaker 1: was elected. He was elected to secure the border, build
Speaker 1: the wall, make sure America's safe again. That's his number
Speaker 1: one priority, making our national security, making sure we're safe,
Speaker 1: and that's what he needs to stay committed to, and
Speaker 1: he to know that there are millions of people out
Speaker 1: here supporting him. I feel like he's far right. Let's
Speaker 1: get let's get CJ in here as well. Hi, Sean,
Speaker 1: great to hear your voice. She's awesome, Sean. Yeah, I'm sure.
Speaker 1: Did you hear how we went to the Capitol yesterday
Speaker 1: and we brought all the Angel Moms and they actually
Speaker 1: called the police on these Angel Moms when we went
Speaker 1: into Nancy Pelosi's office. Yeah, I saw you guys at
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi's office with the Angel families. I'm so glad
Speaker 1: you're doing that. All right. CJ of the Deplorable Choir
Speaker 1: and Amy Kramer, thank you both for being with us.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Sean, Thank you, Sean. All right, that's gonna
Speaker 1: wrap things up for today. All right, we have more
Speaker 1: going on time. We're going to explain exactly what the
Speaker 1: president's plan is, which you just can't listen to the
Speaker 1: media here. And you know, part of this is election
Speaker 1: of conselt Jus elections due and the second part of
Speaker 1: it is that Republicans can be really weak. But with
Speaker 1: that said, the president is going to build the wall
Speaker 1: and I'll explain in all detail. Also, the biggest abuse
Speaker 1: of power scandal in history confirmed. We're gonna give the
Speaker 1: timeline and who now that was involved in the silent coup,
Speaker 1: Who ought to be facing charges and what charges? All right?
Speaker 1: John Dawd, the president's former attorney, Jim Jordan, Andy Biggs Tonight,
Speaker 1: Dan Bongino, Sarah Carter, Victor Davis Hansen, David Shown, Greg Jarrett,
Speaker 1: and Gorka all coming up, nine Eastern Hannity, Fox News,
Speaker 1: see it tonight, Thanks for being with us, have a
Speaker 1: great Valentine's Day, and see you back here tomorrow