Speaker 1: Hi, and welcome to the Sean Hannity Show. My name
Speaker 1: is Rose and guess what, they invited me back again.
Speaker 1: So I'm really happy because I love Sean's audience. Glad
Speaker 1: to be here with you. You guys are awesome. Sean
Speaker 1: is in China with President Trump. I don't know if
Speaker 1: you saw this, but they literally rolled out the red
Speaker 1: carpet for him, such fanfare, and it's great. We'll talk
Speaker 1: about that later in the show, but it was a
Speaker 1: lovely thing to behold. Linda talked to Sean earlier today
Speaker 1: and we're going to be bringing you that information in
Speaker 1: that interview at four o'clock. But in the meantime, I'd
Speaker 1: like to talk about where conviction meets calling and whether
Speaker 1: freedom is worth the cut. No, I think it is,
Speaker 1: But why don't you think about that for a while,
Speaker 1: because when I think about America, I think about it
Speaker 1: as more than a place. It's the idea that greatness
Speaker 1: doesn't come from a ruling class, but from ordinary people
Speaker 1: carrying extraordinary dreams. Our founders understood that the only way
Speaker 1: to unleash the power of individuals to let them be free,
Speaker 1: and in their wisdom, they understood that the answer to
Speaker 1: the human condition was liberty protected by the rule of law.
Speaker 1: And that's what made America America. It wasn't just their
Speaker 1: rocky mountains or the fruited plains. It's not our lakes,
Speaker 1: our rivers, wind swept shores. I mean, those are all great,
Speaker 1: but it was an idea. And once that idea is lost,
Speaker 1: I suggest that America would be lost as well. And
Speaker 1: all that's necessary to keep the republic is never forget
Speaker 1: what made this country great in the first place, and
Speaker 1: that was liberty. You only have to look at politics
Speaker 1: right now, academia, media, law to see that the American
Speaker 1: idea has been gradually fading from our memories. That's why
Speaker 1: this generation really does carry responsibility not only to remember liberty,
Speaker 1: but to protect it. The men and women who built
Speaker 1: this nation understood something extraordinary that they would never fully
Speaker 1: enjoy the benefits of their sacrifices because they knew when
Speaker 1: they were doing it that what they built they were
Speaker 1: building for people they would never meet. That to took
Speaker 1: courage and conviction. The forge a nation designed to stand
Speaker 1: against the tyranny of concentrated power. They risk their own lives,
Speaker 1: their livelihoods, their fortunes so that generations still unborn to
Speaker 1: live in freedom. Now that responsibility belongs to us. This year,
Speaker 1: I know, we celebrate two hundred and fifty years of
Speaker 1: the Declaration of Independence, but you know what, this year
Speaker 1: also marks the two hundred and thirty eighth anniversary of
Speaker 1: the ratification of the Constitution, the document framed in Philadelphia.
Speaker 1: It was in seventeen eighty seven, after months of fierce
Speaker 1: debate among all fifty five delegates, determined to create a
Speaker 1: constitutional and federal republic that would be strong enough to endure,
Speaker 1: but restrained enough to preserve liberty. That same since just
Speaker 1: eleven years earlier, as we've talked about yesterday, gave birth
Speaker 1: to the Declaration of Independence. And while those two documents
Speaker 1: are often spoken about together, they were never meant to
Speaker 1: do the same job. The Declaration tells us why America exists.
Speaker 1: It declared that our rights do not come from government,
Speaker 1: but from God, that every person is created with inherent
Speaker 1: dignity and liberty no ruler can rightfully take away. But
Speaker 1: the Declaration alone could not sustain a nation. And that's
Speaker 1: where the Constitution comes in. If the Declaration is the why,
Speaker 1: the Constitution is the how it transforms principle into structure,
Speaker 1: established laws, checks and balances, and limits on power so
Speaker 1: freedom can survive beyond a single generation. They did a
Speaker 1: heck of a job, didn't they. My boy gets challenged
Speaker 1: every day. One document declares freedom, the other one protects it.
Speaker 1: And together they formed the backbone of a nation built
Speaker 1: not merely on independence, but on the responsibility of governing
Speaker 1: freedom wisely. See this is important. We needed both. That's
Speaker 1: why the Constitution still matters so much today, because there
Speaker 1: was always going to be pressure, subtle and direct, for
Speaker 1: government to expand its own authority rather than protect the
Speaker 1: liberty of the people. But there is something deeper that
Speaker 1: we've got to understand if we are fully going to
Speaker 1: grasp what made this nation possible in the first place.
Speaker 1: Because America didn't begin with political ideas, It began with
Speaker 1: a moral formation. Because long before independence was declared, the
Speaker 1: American colonies were already being shaped by something quieter but
Speaker 1: more powerful than politics alone, and that was a spiritual awakening.
Speaker 1: You could go all across the colonies. Sermons filled churches
Speaker 1: and the meetinghouses. Ministers talk not only of salvation, but
Speaker 1: of responsibility, of virtue and conscience and accountability. Before God.
Speaker 1: And see that was the belief that took root, that
Speaker 1: liberty without moral restraint could not survive for long. So
Speaker 1: if you want to know why it survived as long
Speaker 1: as it has, it's because of that moral restraint, because
Speaker 1: of a moral formation. In other words, self government required
Speaker 1: self governance. And this is where the American experiment becomes unique.
Speaker 1: The founders didn't believe freedom meant the absence of structure.
Speaker 1: They believe freedom required a people capable of governing themselves
Speaker 1: because they understood a higher moral order. And that's where
Speaker 1: the declacaration of is so powerful. It doesn't begin with government,
Speaker 1: it begins with truth that rights are not granted by
Speaker 1: kings or legislatures, but are endowed by the Creator. Now
Speaker 1: that belief changes every because if rights come from God,
Speaker 1: then government is never the source of liberty, only it's steward.
Speaker 1: And if government is only a steward, then its powers
Speaker 1: must always be limited. I mean, that's the philosophy underneath
Speaker 1: everything that we inherited, not just political design, but moral conviction.
Speaker 1: And that's precisely why the Constitution matters. It's not simply
Speaker 1: a legal framework, it's the structure built to preserve a
Speaker 1: moral idea in a political system that will always be
Speaker 1: under pressure to drift. As I said, one declares freedom,
Speaker 1: the other protects it, but both both rest on something deeper,
Speaker 1: the belief that free people must also be a responsible people,
Speaker 1: because when that responsibility fades, the structure alone is not enough.
Speaker 1: And so the question isn't whether we understand the constitution.
Speaker 1: The question is whether we still understand the moral found
Speaker 1: that made it possible. And that, my friends, is what
Speaker 1: keeps getting chipped away at constantly because without that foundation,
Speaker 1: and those who love socialism, by the way, in communism,
Speaker 1: they understand this better than we do. Without that moral foundation,
Speaker 1: even the best designed republic eventually weakens from within. The
Speaker 1: parent of America isn't just institutional, it's moral, spiritual, generational,
Speaker 1: and it must be renewed in character. So the real
Speaker 1: question is do we still believe that freedom requires something
Speaker 1: of us, not just rights to defend, but responsibilities for
Speaker 1: us to actually live out. Because that is what made
Speaker 1: this nation possible in the first place, not just ideas
Speaker 1: on paper, but people willing to live as though those
Speaker 1: ideas were true. And one of the most urgent responsibilities
Speaker 1: we face today isn't just preserving the ideas of this nation,
Speaker 1: but passing them on because that next generation doesn't understand
Speaker 1: where America came from, we'll never understand what it's meant
Speaker 1: to be. And right now, too many young people are
Speaker 1: being shaped by fragments of history instead of the full story.
Speaker 1: If they're taught anything at all about our history, important
Speaker 1: context is often reduced, it's simplified. They find ways to
Speaker 1: filter it in ways that leave out the very principles
Speaker 1: that made this country unique in the first place. And
Speaker 1: since that responsibility no longer rests in the classrooms, you
Speaker 1: know it, and I know it, it's got to rest
Speaker 1: in homes and in families, in our communities, and in
Speaker 1: our voices, willing to speak truth clearly, in consistency, pass
Speaker 1: it on to the next generation, because no one else
Speaker 1: is going to do it if we don't. If history
Speaker 1: isn't fully taught, it's got to be intentionally remembered and
Speaker 1: passed down. Because a nation that forgets its story, I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you, is can eventually forget its identity. And
Speaker 1: you can even see that right now, the shadows of that.
Speaker 1: And we believe the ideas of liberty and self government
Speaker 1: and respect. I feel like that guy on the commercial
Speaker 1: liberty liberty. We believe the ideas of liberty, self government,
Speaker 1: and responsibility are worth preserving, then we also have to
Speaker 1: be willing to ensure our children know exactly what those
Speaker 1: ideas cost, why they matter, and what happens when they're lost.
Speaker 1: This is so important and we can't count on anyone
Speaker 1: else doing this job for us but ourselves. And if
Speaker 1: you're a parent right now, a grandparent, that's your responsibility.
Speaker 1: We owe it. We owe it to those brave men
Speaker 1: and women who did all that they could for us.
Speaker 1: And I love when we break down that Constitution and
Speaker 1: we remember this is about something that began with moral formation.
Speaker 1: It is a moral restraint. If you can't have that
Speaker 1: liberty without that moral restraint. I just had to get
Speaker 1: that off my chest today, So thanks for letting me
Speaker 1: do that. We do have a really great show planned
Speaker 1: for you today. Great Jarrett is coming up next actually
Speaker 1: at the half hour. I love Greg Jarrett. We're going
Speaker 1: to talk about a lot of things on the schedule
Speaker 1: here because there's so much going on all the time. Also,
Speaker 1: we have the author of the New York Times bestselling
Speaker 1: book Killed to Order, China's Organ Harvesting industry. Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: I've had him on my show. This is a horrific story,
Speaker 1: but we got to get to it. Also, I want
Speaker 1: to tell you about my TV show on Real Life
Speaker 1: Network is now available when I'm so excited about that
Speaker 1: the new show at real lifenetwork dot com. All you
Speaker 1: have to do is go in, sign up for free
Speaker 1: and search Rose Unplugged or download Real Life Network app
Speaker 1: on all platforms Real lifenetwork dot com log in search
Speaker 1: for Rose Unplugged and also my ministry, She is Called
Speaker 1: by Him dot Com. This is so important to me.
Speaker 1: Every time I'm on the show, I get a ton
Speaker 1: of prayer requests. We did last night and they are
Speaker 1: kept anonymous. We have a team of women who pray
Speaker 1: over every single one of them. Also, we have a
Speaker 1: daily devotional that's coming soon, but we do right now
Speaker 1: have a free weekly newsletter that's encouraging and uplifting. You
Speaker 1: have to subscribe for it to go to She is
Speaker 1: Called by Him dot Com. Coming up, we'll talk more
Speaker 1: about some of the things that are happening, a little
Speaker 1: bit about the China trip, and then Greg Jared at
Speaker 1: the half Hours to stay with me. Welcome back to
Speaker 1: the Sean Hannity Show. My name is Rose. By the way,
Speaker 1: the phone number here is one eight hundred nine four
Speaker 1: one Sean, one eight hundred nine to four to one. Sean.
Speaker 1: I'd love to take your phone calls today. I think
Speaker 1: we're gonna have more time to do that. Looking forward
Speaker 1: to talking to you. Also, I want to remind everybody
Speaker 1: that not only did Lynna do an interview with Sean,
Speaker 1: it's this Afternoon is going to air at four o'clock hour,
Speaker 1: so make sure that you tune in for that because
Speaker 1: he's going to give us some really great updates. Also,
Speaker 1: Sean is doing a live show tonight from China. It's
Speaker 1: going to be a special two hours. Apparently he's got
Speaker 1: some amazing interviews, but of course he does. He's Sean Hannity.
Speaker 1: So that's tonight starting at nine regular time, live from China.
Speaker 1: Make sure you tune into the Sean Hannity TV Show
Speaker 1: as well, but at four we'll hear from him then too.
Speaker 1: You know, yesterday we had new Gingridge on and we
Speaker 1: talked a little bit about the midterm elections, and it
Speaker 1: appears that American voters don't they're not so keen on
Speaker 1: Democrats at this time, and according that's according to our
Speaker 1: recent CNN poll, because the numbers show that Democrats are
Speaker 1: slipping as each tay goes by and Republicans are gearing
Speaker 1: up for the twenty twenty six midterm election, and in
Speaker 1: some cases, if you look at certain pulling, they are
Speaker 1: actually growing stronger. CNN reported that registered voters are now
Speaker 1: closely split in their partisan preference ahead of the midterms.
Speaker 1: That's actually good news. One of the things, though, that
Speaker 1: new Gingridge talked about yesterday was branding. He felt that
Speaker 1: we could really have a strong victory if we branded
Speaker 1: correctly and we messaged. But here's the thing. I remember
Speaker 1: the first term that Donald Trump had White House, and
Speaker 1: you could I was doing a lot of radio at
Speaker 1: the time. I mean I was full time radio, and
Speaker 1: I would be able to go to a number of
Speaker 1: sources to find out what he did today. And I
Speaker 1: mean there is a list of his accomplishments the first
Speaker 1: hundred days. Beyond the first hundred days, I mean, it
Speaker 1: was easy to see and to find what it was
Speaker 1: he was doing. Now, I know that he's still doing
Speaker 1: things right now, but they're not making it as available
Speaker 1: to everyone as they once did. And I feel like
Speaker 1: that is so important right now. We need to talk
Speaker 1: about the positive all of the things that he's been
Speaker 1: doing that are benefiting the American people, I mean just
Speaker 1: taxes alone. So I feel like the branding and the
Speaker 1: messaging could be a little stronger. In fact, that is
Speaker 1: what New Ginger's talked about as being necessary for a
Speaker 1: victory in the fall. So I'm just hoping I've got
Speaker 1: my fingers crossed that they do a little better job
Speaker 1: of that. They did an amazing job first time around.
Speaker 1: It really was easy to find out. But Republicans are
Speaker 1: still trying to simplify their message going into the midterms.
Speaker 1: Even Jim Jordan spoke about that during an appearance on
Speaker 1: breip Art News Daily I saw. The host asked him
Speaker 1: how Republicans could win the mid terms, especially since the
Speaker 1: party in power usually faces that uphill battle. You know it,
Speaker 1: they've talked about that before, but Representative Jordan answered by
Speaker 1: boiling it down to what he called two sentences. They're crazy,
Speaker 1: We're not. Yeah they are. So another great thing would
Speaker 1: be is to point all the crazy out and you
Speaker 1: would think it would be obvious. It's so obvious to
Speaker 1: most of us, But there's so many on the left
Speaker 1: that just aren't getting it. So yeah, let's point out
Speaker 1: they're crazy, we're not. And he said that Republicans simply
Speaker 1: need to make that contrast clear to the American people.
Speaker 1: So I think it should be easy, but they are crazy,
Speaker 1: and in fact, President Trump said the same thing.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: JD. Vance was talking today, and we're going to get
Speaker 1: too into this a little bit more later in the program,
Speaker 1: but one of the things he talked about I noticed
Speaker 1: towards the end when he was taking questions, the Dream
Speaker 1: Team came up. And you've even heard President Trump talk
Speaker 1: about the Dream Team, and when he talks about the
Speaker 1: Dream Team, he talks about Marco Rubio and JD. Vance
Speaker 1: And I have to tell you, personally, it's just fun
Speaker 1: to watch just how much I've always liked Marco Rubio,
Speaker 1: but he has really grown and he's just really shown
Speaker 1: himself to be quite the statesman. But I have some
Speaker 1: information and it's really hitting the social media platforms really strong.
Speaker 1: Right now, going back to twenty fifteen on some of
Speaker 1: the things that Rubio said that we're very precient. So
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about that, we'll talk about the
Speaker 1: Dream Team, all of that coming up. One eight hundred
Speaker 1: nine four to one, Shawn one eight hundred nine four
Speaker 1: one Shawn one, eight hundred nine to four one. Shawn
Speaker 1: call me. I'd love to hear from you today. This
Speaker 1: is the Sean Handedy Show. My name is Rose. Welcome
Speaker 1: back to the Sean Handedy Show. My name is Rose.
Speaker 1: Sitting in for him today. But while Sewan is in China,
Speaker 1: he is calling in and Linda's going to interview him
Speaker 1: at four o'clock today, so look forward to that. But
Speaker 1: in the meantime, joining us right now is Fox News
Speaker 1: Legal an analyst and New York Times best selling author
Speaker 1: Greg Jarrett to offer his perspective on shooter Cole Allen
Speaker 1: and a few other items on my list. Welcome Greg,
Speaker 1: How are you?
Speaker 2: Yeah? Fine, Road's good to be with you.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I love talking to you, I really do. There's
Speaker 1: so many things I want to ask you about, but
Speaker 1: let's start with Cole Allen because a lot of Americans
Speaker 1: are watching the prosecution really closely, and it's not just
Speaker 1: because of the allegations, but because of the growing controversy
Speaker 1: that's been surrounding the DOJ and the court proceedings and
Speaker 1: the defense. Once Todd Blanche and Janine pra Piro removed
Speaker 1: from the case because they attended the White House correspondence
Speaker 1: diinner legally, Greg how strong is that argument? And does
Speaker 1: and by the way, and does simply being present at
Speaker 1: the event create a real conflict of interest?
Speaker 2: Really does Dan, It's a pretty weak argument. Look, the
Speaker 2: rules of ethics call for recusal on two grounds, if
Speaker 2: they have speaking of Todd, Blanche and Janine, or if
Speaker 2: they have a personal or political involvement in the case,
Speaker 2: or if they have a substantial interest in the outcome
Speaker 2: because of a connection to it. But understand that a
Speaker 2: potential conflict is not necessarily disqualifying if the attorneys can
Speaker 2: still be fair and impartial, and the legal standard is
Speaker 2: that there has to be clear evidence of a conflict
Speaker 2: to disqualify. Now, it's true that Pirou and Blanche were
Speaker 2: inside the ballroom, but the shooting occurred outside the ballroom,
Speaker 2: so they're not witnesses anything, despite what defense counsel is claiming. Now,
Speaker 2: are they biased in some way because they could have
Speaker 2: been targeted eval and gain access. That's pretty debatable because
Speaker 2: the same charges would be brought regardless, which I think
Speaker 2: is why the defense is sort of resorted to the
Speaker 2: last claim of, well, there's an appearance of a conflict
Speaker 2: that might affect the public's perception of impartiality. I don't
Speaker 2: think it's going to work. But even if the court
Speaker 2: rules that there is a conflict, it doesn't really affect
Speaker 2: the case. Piro and Todd would be recused. Other top
Speaker 2: lawyers in the US Attorney's Office in DC would prosecute
Speaker 2: Cole Allen. If the entire office is disqualified, which I
Speaker 2: seriously doubt, then you simply transfer it to a different
Speaker 2: US attorney in a nearby jurisdiction they'd prosecute him. Or
Speaker 2: you could also appoint a special prosecutor. The fact of
Speaker 2: the matter is Cole Allen doesn't have a defense. He
Speaker 2: incriminated himself in photographs and a confessional. He laid out
Speaker 2: how he planned a mass murder and the assassination of
Speaker 2: top officials, eyewitnesses, his video of what he did. So
Speaker 2: he's going to get convicted. His attorneys right now are
Speaker 2: just trying to do anything they can to disrupt the prosecution.
Speaker 1: Now that makes sense, but you know, right now a
Speaker 1: lot of conservatives watching all of this, and they're asking
Speaker 1: themselves whether Americans, if we can still trust the justice
Speaker 1: system to operate without politics influencing outcomes. And I just wonder,
Speaker 1: do you think that this case is intensifying those concerns
Speaker 1: or is it just business as usual?
Speaker 2: Well, I you know, given the Russia hoax, the law
Speaker 2: fair campaign against Donald Trump, the conspiracies to deprive him
Speaker 2: of rights, I mean, it is so blatant, and it
Speaker 2: happened over a long period of time that it's no
Speaker 2: wonder that Americans have lost faith in our legal system.
Speaker 2: They have seen with their own eyes compelling evidence of
Speaker 2: the two tiered system of justice. You know, Joe Biden
Speaker 2: can keep classified documents, but Donald Trump can't. Biden doesn't
Speaker 2: get prosecuted, but Donald Trump does. Americans are pretty smart.
Speaker 2: They see this for what it is. It's crooked and corrupt.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I feel like it's another This case could
Speaker 1: just become another major flashpoint when we have a debate
Speaker 1: over fairness and consistency with the American justice system, because
Speaker 1: particularly when you have a judge apologizing for detention conditions,
Speaker 1: I mean, that was clearly not appropriate. President Trump weighed
Speaker 1: in on that, and we know of stories in the
Speaker 1: past how the conditions were bad for others that were
Speaker 1: detained and yet nothing was said from the bench.
Speaker 2: Right, Well, it was outrageous and stupid for this magistrate
Speaker 2: to apologize. He doesn't seem to comprehend that Cole Allen
Speaker 2: was treated as anybody would in a serious case like that.
Speaker 2: You put him in a safe cell under observation make
Speaker 2: sure he can't harm himself, because there's an affirmative duty
Speaker 2: imposed on the government under the eighth Amendment of the
Speaker 2: Constitution to make sure it doesn't harm himself. And if
Speaker 2: he had harmed himself, then you know, the same lawyers
Speaker 2: complaining about the safe cell would have said, you know,
Speaker 2: why didn't you put him in a safer cell? So
Speaker 2: you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
Speaker 2: And I also understand that the guy who apologized isn't
Speaker 2: even a real judge. He's not an Article three judge
Speaker 2: appointed by the federal by the President of the Federal Bench. No,
Speaker 2: he's a magistrate, which is a guy who handles sort
Speaker 2: of you know, arraignments and bail hearings and petty matters
Speaker 2: that real judges, district court judges don't want to be
Speaker 2: bothered with. So he's nothing more than a hired assistant
Speaker 2: and this particular magistrate has a long and distinguished record
Speaker 2: of liberal dei causes, and it's not the first time
Speaker 2: he's apologized to somebody in custody.
Speaker 1: You know, I know you're not a psychologist or a psychiatrist,
Speaker 1: but you got to ask the question. If a guy
Speaker 1: puts himself all over social media and I'm talking about
Speaker 1: cold right now, and he clearly does he really believe
Speaker 1: he could get away with something like this? What kind
Speaker 1: of person? It just astounds me. We go through all
Speaker 1: of this knowing that he's probably not going to make
Speaker 1: it out on the other end.
Speaker 2: What are you You know, how often have we seen this?
Speaker 2: There have been three assassination attempts against Trump. You know,
Speaker 2: we've seen Charlie Kirk's assassin, Tyler Robinson. And these are
Speaker 2: unhinged people, and you know, they became become wrapped up, brainwashed,
Speaker 2: if you will, in you know, by politics, and they
Speaker 2: annoying themselves as the person who is going to fix
Speaker 2: it and do it for violence and you know, there's
Speaker 2: far too much of that. Has the divisive, ugly rhetoric
Speaker 2: contributed to that sort of political brainwashing that turns into violence. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I think so. You know, when Democrats and others spend
Speaker 2: so much of their time, including the media, vilifying at
Speaker 2: every turn everything that Donald Trump does. It has an
Speaker 2: effect on all the nutballs out there, and this is
Speaker 2: the inexorable result.
Speaker 1: Well, it's just amazing, it really and it's so sad
Speaker 1: to watch this that this is what we've become as
Speaker 1: a society. I wanted to move into John Brennan's part
Speaker 1: in the Russia hoax because how significant is it that
Speaker 1: both Kelsey Gabbard and Jim Jordan made criminal referrals regarding
Speaker 1: the former CIA director John Brennan.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's highly significant. Those are very important referrals, and
Speaker 2: they're taken seriously by the Department of Justice and the
Speaker 2: various US attorneys that have jurisdiction. And we learned just
Speaker 2: yesterday that the FBI has been interviewing CIA officials about
Speaker 2: what John Brennan did. And it looks to me like
Speaker 2: a case against Brennan is building toward an indictment for
Speaker 2: lying to Congress about falsifying key intelligence to frame Trump
Speaker 2: in the Russia hoaks. I wrote two books about it.
Speaker 2: You know, the CIA hid these increment dominating documents for years,
Speaker 2: but finally several months ago, Radcliffe and Gabbard declassified them.
Speaker 2: And what they show is chilling that on Barack Obama's orders,
Speaker 2: John Brennan used the bogus, discredited anti Trump dossier to
Speaker 2: promote the false narrative that Trump colluded with Russia, even
Speaker 2: though the real intelligence, the Presidential Daily Briefing that Obama
Speaker 2: had and concealed, showed the exact office that Trump was innocent.
Speaker 2: And you know, so Obama orders Brennan Gov acta CIA
Speaker 2: and put together an intelligence community assessment that implicates Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: And that's what Brennan did. And as he was doing it,
Speaker 2: top CIA experts on Russia, Warren Brennan, you can't use
Speaker 2: this dossier. It's phony, it's paid for by Hillary Clinton,
Speaker 2: it's meant to smear Trump. You can't use it. Brennan
Speaker 2: didn't care, and he silenced and sidelined those people. And
Speaker 2: in my book, which on seven years ago, I wrote
Speaker 2: how Brennan did, in fact include the dossier in the
Speaker 2: Intel report, but then lied to Congress. I literally in
Speaker 2: my book accused him of lying. Well, his newly to
Speaker 2: classify documents now confirm what I wrote. He lied, And
Speaker 2: I think he may be looking at an indictment in
Speaker 2: a very near future.
Speaker 1: So the investigators, if it's determined that congressional testimony actually
Speaker 1: contradicted the internal communications, what would prosecutors have to prove
Speaker 1: to pursue a false statement a case? Is there something
Speaker 1: like that?
Speaker 2: It's very simple that when he testified last in twenty
Speaker 2: twenty three before Congress, so the statute limitations has not expired.
Speaker 2: That you know, he repeated his earlier denial and he
Speaker 2: didn't rely on the dossier. Now, of course we have
Speaker 2: the documents that the dossier was cited in the Intelligence
Speaker 2: Community assessment, and you've got email communications and I think
Speaker 2: forthcoming testimony from the CIA officials who Warren Brennan don't
Speaker 2: do it. So you know, he ended up getting charged
Speaker 2: with everything from false statements to perjury to obstruction of Congress.
Speaker 1: I hate, we only have like four minutes left and
Speaker 1: there's something more things I want to talk about. So
Speaker 1: now I'm going to jump to Biden going to court
Speaker 1: to stop the release of his ghostwriter tapes. And if
Speaker 1: he's preparing to go to court to block the release
Speaker 1: of the recordings between he and his ghostwriter, how strong
Speaker 1: is that effort likely to be? Once Congress and the
Speaker 1: FIA requests are made are involved, how strong the case
Speaker 1: can we have here?
Speaker 2: Biden is not going to win that one because the
Speaker 2: Supreme Court has said that presidential papers are not protected,
Speaker 2: nor are vice presidential papers. And look the decision by
Speaker 2: the Special Counsel Robert Hurr not to bring charges against Biden,
Speaker 2: it had always wreaked a favoritism and a corrupt cover
Speaker 2: up because Biden's crimes were so blatant. He illegally stole
Speaker 2: troes of classified documents when he was a senator and
Speaker 2: Vice president, and then he compounded the felonies by sharing
Speaker 2: them with somebody who didn't have classification authorization as ghostwriter. Well,
Speaker 2: now Biden wants to go to court to conceal the
Speaker 2: incriminating tapes where he openly admits to his ghostwriter, oh gee,
Speaker 2: you know I scrolled the right way all these top
Speaker 2: secret area Let me go get him, I'll read them
Speaker 2: to you. Or made him and he did well, of course.
Speaker 2: But Biden's always been a dope. He was the dumbest
Speaker 2: guy in the US in it for decades and everybody
Speaker 2: knew it. And this, you know, is further proof of that.
Speaker 2: So the public or at the very least. Congress has
Speaker 2: a right to know the truth. They have a right
Speaker 2: to listen to the tapes, and so Biden can try
Speaker 2: all a once, but it ain't gonna work.
Speaker 1: Yeah, let's jump to Comy real quick, if you have
Speaker 1: about a minute and a half. He's under indictment. He
Speaker 1: goes on MS, MSNBCA, CNN, and he's trashing Trump for
Speaker 1: weaponizing the law. He's talk to us about that because
Speaker 1: we only have a little more than a minute here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, it's perversely ironic to accuse Trump of
Speaker 2: weaponizing the law from a man James Comy, who promoted
Speaker 2: the most notorious lie in American history, the Russia hopes.
Speaker 2: He abused his power, fabricated a case against Trump, exploited
Speaker 2: the phony dossier, lie to the pis at court, conspired
Speaker 2: with others to frame Trump as a Russian asset when
Speaker 2: he knew it was all on Trill On top of it,
Speaker 2: Tomy was the biggest leequoring washingt in DC, and when
Speaker 2: questioned about it, claimed amnesia. He's a total phony always.
Speaker 1: You know what, Greg, You've always been on top of
Speaker 1: so many things. And I appreciate your input and thanks
Speaker 1: for asking the many questions that we had for you today.
Speaker 1: I hate to have let you go, but we have to.
Speaker 1: Greg Jarrett, thank you so much. Box News legal analyst
Speaker 1: and New York Times bestselling author. Thanks gre good to
Speaker 1: be with you right. Thank you. Save We'll be back
Speaker 1: with more of the Sean Handy. She remember, Sean is
Speaker 1: going to be joining us with Linda and they're going
Speaker 1: to talk about what's going on in China right now.
Speaker 1: What a reception he received there, My goodness, it was impressive. Literally,
Speaker 1: a red carpet was rolled out for him. Honestly, he did,
Speaker 1: and a lot of fanfare too. American flags being waved
Speaker 1: was quite the sight to see. So we're gonna hear from
Speaker 1: Sean and Linda coming up next to Don't Go Too
Speaker 1: Far Away, and also Shawn's got live two hours tonight
Speaker 1: on a TV show from China