Speaker 1: Thanks Scott han An Hour two Sean Hannity Show, eight
Speaker 1: hundred and nine four one, Shawns a number if you
Speaker 1: want to be a part of the program.
Speaker 2: I know.
Speaker 1: The state run legacy media mob has largely been ignoring
Speaker 1: how the deep state is being exposed. There's two big
Speaker 1: stories out today. One the White House, the Trump White
Speaker 1: House Council raising very serious questions about the legality of
Speaker 1: Joe Biden's final wave of pardons and commutations, urging the
Speaker 1: DOJ and Congress to interview the former president's advisors to
Speaker 1: determine if he truly authorized acts of clemency and pardons
Speaker 1: signed by an auto pen operated by his staff, and
Speaker 1: more and more. Even Joe Biden's interview in The New
Speaker 1: York Times indicate that he only set down standards and
Speaker 1: criteria which would invalidate probably every one of them.
Speaker 2: And so we're going to get to the bottom of that.
Speaker 1: The other big issue is material evidence has been discovered
Speaker 1: in previously secret, prohibited access case files raising concern about
Speaker 1: FBI agents and the abuse of their authority or obstruction
Speaker 1: of investigations to help democrats. Anyway, here, with all the
Speaker 1: deep dive investigative reporting, is our friend John Solomon again,
Speaker 1: chief investigative reporter, founder editor in chief Justinnews dot com.
Speaker 2: Sir, how are you.
Speaker 3: I'm well, you said those up right. It's an amazing
Speaker 3: moment to see some of these documents come out. I'm
Speaker 3: really shocked by some of the things we're finding right now.
Speaker 1: All right, let's start with commutations and pardons and auto
Speaker 1: pen and Joe Biden and in his own words, I
Speaker 1: find it pretty damning. And that was the New York
Speaker 1: Times interview. But if you listen to White House Counsel
Speaker 1: David Warrington, and you wrote this in your piece and
Speaker 1: a memo to President Donald Trump's Chief of Staff Susie Wiles,
Speaker 1: they do not have the authority to conduct interviews the
Speaker 1: White House Council, doesn't. We recommend that you approved making
Speaker 1: the information contained in this memorandum and the supporting materials
Speaker 1: available to entities that do have the power explain that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, this is a very powerful moment in the in
Speaker 3: the unraveling of the Biden era and potentially what we
Speaker 3: didn't know about President Biden because it was hidden from us.
Speaker 3: First off, what Dave Warrington's investigation found was that the
Speaker 3: President Joe Biden's staff believed he had a legal obligation
Speaker 3: to sign by hand any pardons that he gave. That
Speaker 3: was the rule that they created at the beginning of
Speaker 3: the presidency. But as the presidency went on, Joe Biden
Speaker 3: was working less and less. He was in the office
Speaker 3: lesson s and they couldn't get pardons in front of him.
Speaker 3: There was a memo at one point says because of
Speaker 3: the president's limited schedule, sometimes things weak to get a
Speaker 3: single pardon from him. At some point, Joe Biden became
Speaker 3: so disinterested in exercising one of the most awesome powers
Speaker 3: that he had his presidents, the pardoner of the power
Speaker 3: to partner commutation. He outsourced it to Vice President Kamala Harris, which,
Speaker 3: by the way, the constitution doesn't allow for. That is
Speaker 3: a body of evidences out there. And now what Dave
Speaker 3: Warrington says is listen to make sure that these memos
Speaker 3: are an accurate reflection, to make sure we can come
Speaker 3: to a question about whether these commutations and pardons were legal. Remember,
Speaker 3: President Biden gave thirty seven people a reprieve from death
Speaker 3: pamilies that juries that imposed them. He undid the will
Speaker 3: of the juries. They may be invalid based on some
Speaker 3: of the evidence. What Dave Warranton is asking is that
Speaker 3: the Justice Department in Congress, do subpoenas, do compelled interviews,
Speaker 3: and find out if these documents are an accurate reflection.
Speaker 3: If they are, there's a strong possibility that the Trump
Speaker 3: Justice Department could come and declare some of those pardons
Speaker 3: and commutations legally in balot.
Speaker 1: All right, So what this thing concludes with, according to
Speaker 1: the memo, is if Biden made every clemency decision pardon decision,
Speaker 1: then why do is briefing books from December of twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four to January twenty twenty five contain nothing of
Speaker 1: substance on pardons mutations that he allegedly approved. Now, that
Speaker 1: goes to a previous report that you had where his
Speaker 1: very own Department of Justice, the second in command, and
Speaker 1: this is behind Meryk Garland was warning two days before
Speaker 1: Joe left office that raising the question of the legality
Speaker 1: of all of that. So even they thought that they
Speaker 1: had legal issues going into this, Oh.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they had legal issues at the beginning. They believe
Speaker 3: the president has an obligation to sign he uses the
Speaker 3: auto pen instead, and as they get towards the end,
Speaker 3: they're very concerned that these mass category pardons where the
Speaker 3: president isn't even identifying which people he might be pardoning.
Speaker 3: He just like, hey, here's a class. Did you guys
Speaker 3: figure it out? They were deeply concerned that this was
Speaker 3: illegal and not sustainable in the courts. And that is
Speaker 3: the mess that Joe Biden left this country as he
Speaker 3: exited the White House. And I think we're going to
Speaker 3: have to walk through this for a period of time
Speaker 3: until we get some final answers. But the fact that
Speaker 3: his own Justice Department had concerns about his behavior, that is,
Speaker 3: his own staff couldn't get him to pay attention to pardons,
Speaker 3: and that's why he was outsourcing it. And at the
Speaker 3: very beginning they told the guy, hey, you got to
Speaker 3: sign on the dotted line. An auto pen doesn't work.
Speaker 3: The fact it didn't allow any of those three concerns,
Speaker 3: I think is going to become a major issue. I
Speaker 3: would expect James Comer to ramp up these interviews and
Speaker 3: maybe the Justice Department to start to take some action.
Speaker 3: And then there's one final part, because about a month
Speaker 3: ago President Biden raried his head up and said, I listen,
Speaker 3: the reason I used the auto pen is that there
Speaker 3: were fifteen hundred pardons that I didn't have time to
Speaker 3: sign them all, and Dave Warrington's great review puts the
Speaker 3: lie to that one. It turns out those mass pardons
Speaker 3: only required two personal signature, so it wasn't a lot
Speaker 3: of work. It wasn't fifteen hundred signatures. But unfortunately Joe
Speaker 3: Biden didn't do that. As far as we can tell,
Speaker 3: no evidence in the arch is that he attended the
Speaker 3: meetings or that he personally approved some of these. And
Speaker 3: I think given that there's going to be a pretty
Speaker 3: strong investigation in Congress and the Justice Department the next
Speaker 3: few weeks, and I wouldn't be surprised before we get
Speaker 3: to the holidays season the Justice departments made a determination
Speaker 3: on the legality of some of these pardons and commutations.
Speaker 1: Well, right after you were on the program late last week,
Speaker 1: we had on James Comer the House Overside Committee, and
Speaker 1: he raised the possibility of bringing in people if Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris was in fact, if this was handed off to her,
Speaker 1: of her being called in, maybe Biden family members being
Speaker 1: called in something you and I've discussed in the past,
Speaker 1: and that would include you know, Hunter Biden, Jim Biden
Speaker 1: people that as a matter of law, would not have
Speaker 1: the ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment because they themselves
Speaker 1: got these pardons. And by the way, I'd call an
Speaker 1: Adam schiff while I'm at it.
Speaker 3: Uh oh, yeah, I think all of that. And Kamala Harris,
Speaker 3: I think is one of those, as you mentioned, that
Speaker 3: is on the circle list now. I think given the
Speaker 3: fact that there's a clear reference that the President outsourced
Speaker 3: these pardon decisions to her, knowing what she did could
Speaker 3: be very significant, and she hesitated in most congressional investigations
Speaker 3: to date, I think she is next up in the
Speaker 3: potential bise of congressional subpoene and congressional interviews. So more
Speaker 3: to come.
Speaker 1: You've raised other important questions, and the memo raised his questions.
Speaker 1: If the president approved the pardons of commutations, why did
Speaker 1: staff often wait days before communicating any of these decisions.
Speaker 1: Why were these not included in any memos? Why is
Speaker 1: it on a whole variety of issues? You know, why
Speaker 1: didn't anybody know who ultimately made the decision to use
Speaker 1: the auto pen? You know, were staffers to the Chief
Speaker 1: of Staff and Deputy chief of Staff for policies sending
Speaker 1: emails on their behalf regarding pardons and other issues without
Speaker 1: informing recipients. And if he was fit to serve meeting
Speaker 1: Joe Biden as president, why did he need cheat sheets
Speaker 1: explaining that he had proved the commutations for fifteen hundred people?
Speaker 1: And why did he tell the New York Times that
Speaker 1: he set down criteria and standards. I'll add that question myself.
Speaker 3: Yeah, listen, the fact that his briefing books silent on
Speaker 3: these issues. You were president, the briefing book, doesn't it
Speaker 3: and what you're going to be doing today. Never in
Speaker 3: the briefing book is the Hey, mister president, you're going
Speaker 3: to sign these fifteen hundred car or you're going to
Speaker 3: improve these fifteen hundred commutations for people who know how
Speaker 3: the paperwork process works in the White House. It is
Speaker 3: a red flag and potentially a smoking gun that the
Speaker 3: president's own briefing books suggested. We all.
Speaker 1: Explain why his own Justice Department only two days before
Speaker 1: he left office, the second in charge behind or one
Speaker 1: of the top lieutenants behind Murray garla and raised the
Speaker 1: issue two days before they left the White House.
Speaker 3: Yeah, because they knew there were these categories of people
Speaker 3: who had gotten either drug offenses or COVID pendenty during
Speaker 3: the COVID era, and Joe Biden did not have the time,
Speaker 3: nor was there any evidence that anyone had looked at
Speaker 3: all the names and said who was on this list?
Speaker 3: As the president personally improving everyone, is he just giving
Speaker 3: an okay to let someone else decide that and to
Speaker 3: them that was a miss use of the part and power.
Speaker 3: You know, the great thing about the parton power in
Speaker 3: its history, it's derived from British law going all the
Speaker 3: way back to the thirteenth century, and American courts and
Speaker 3: British courts in the derision of the development of this
Speaker 3: law are very clear. Any deviation from the appropriate process
Speaker 3: the gates they pardon. That is the long term standard
Speaker 3: that the courts have set. And right now there's pretty
Speaker 3: strong evidence that Joe Biden didn't deviated went way off
Speaker 3: course on this and that may come around to invalidate
Speaker 3: some of these decisions he made. Imagine, if you're sitting
Speaker 3: on death rowe, you think you got off and you
Speaker 3: might be put back on now Joe Biden may have
Speaker 3: played the ultimate painful trick on you.
Speaker 1: All right, quick break more with Investigative Reporter founder editor
Speaker 1: in chief Justinnews dot Com. John Solomon, your calls on
Speaker 1: the other side, eight hundred and nine to four one, Shawn,
Speaker 1: as we continue.
Speaker 3: The information you need the man. This is the a
Speaker 3: Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 1: Hi, we contit you with John Solomon, Founder, editor in chief,
Speaker 1: chief investigative reporter Justinnews dot com. Can you go into
Speaker 1: detail the piece you wrote up about how material evidence
Speaker 1: has now been discovered and previously quote secret prohibited access
Speaker 1: case files raising concern about FBI agent's abuse of authority
Speaker 1: or obstruction of investigations. This is what we have referred
Speaker 1: to often over the years as the deep state.
Speaker 3: Yeah, now, this could be one of the most significant developments.
Speaker 3: And what we're learning is that Cash Betel and his
Speaker 3: team using career agents letting the people do their job,
Speaker 3: agents doing their job without political interfaarence are discovering that
Speaker 3: inside all of these prohibited case files these are case files,
Speaker 3: or most agents, even if you were working on a case,
Speaker 3: you weren't allowed to access some of the evidence. It
Speaker 3: was kept off of the books. And these are the
Speaker 3: most sensitive investigations about Hillary Clinton, Hunter Bidenman and the
Speaker 3: Clinton Foundation and CEFC, the China company that was paying
Speaker 3: lots of money to Hunter Biden and the Biden family.
Speaker 3: These were kept off the books, and when Cash Bettel's
Speaker 3: team got to look inside the books, they started to
Speaker 3: discover some very various concerns timelines that suggested that there
Speaker 3: was obstruction and interference not by witnesses. Normally, obstruction charges
Speaker 3: are you're investigating in a witness or somebody gets involved
Speaker 3: and tries to block the FBI. The FBI was blocking
Speaker 3: prosecutors from doing their job. And you begin to see
Speaker 3: a senior executives so concerned by what their bosses are
Speaker 3: doing above them, what the Andy mccabs and James Comey's
Speaker 3: of the world were doing above them, they start writing
Speaker 3: memos to file keeping book on their bosses so that
Speaker 3: if anything ever comes to this, they wrote down a memorial,
Speaker 3: a memo saying, hey, for some reason, we didn't follow
Speaker 3: the rules there for some reason, Hillary Clinton got a pass.
Speaker 3: This is so extraordinary, It's the rarest thing. I just
Speaker 3: interviewed an FBI agent worked for more than two decades
Speaker 3: in the fay SA. I never wrote a memo of
Speaker 3: I never felt in the entire time in twenty years,
Speaker 3: I needed to do something like that, and yet here
Speaker 3: you have the executive assistant director, like the number three
Speaker 3: official in the FBI writing memos saying, this happened is
Speaker 3: a little unusual about Hillary Clinton's laptop. I'm writing it,
Speaker 3: And he writes it the day before the election, the
Speaker 3: September seventh, twenty sixteen, just before Donald Trump wins. This
Speaker 3: guy feels so compelled by what he witnesses his boss
Speaker 3: is doing that he actually writes a memoo file. And
Speaker 3: they're discovering this. Now timeline is written by people saying, hey,
Speaker 3: the story out there isn't what it is. This is
Speaker 3: what really happened. You see this protection racket around Democrats,
Speaker 3: Hillary Clinton, Hunter Biden, people like that. And then of
Speaker 3: course the abuse is in trying to pursue the Donald
Speaker 3: Trumps and the Carter Pages and the George Papadopolis. It
Speaker 3: is almost when I just talked to two or three people, like,
Speaker 3: can you ever remember a time where the FBI was
Speaker 3: investigating its own agent's obstruction? Like? Never, No, this is
Speaker 3: like unprecedented. So what cash Betel has done has now
Speaker 3: created a body of evans to go look at They'm
Speaker 3: going to is ented to the Justice Department as far
Speaker 3: as I can tell the Justice Department will decide whether
Speaker 3: some of the things that the FBI did actually obstructed
Speaker 3: prosecutors from doing their job in legitimate criminal investigations. That
Speaker 3: is a rear and unprecedent moment.
Speaker 1: Now, if you go back to June, the Senate Judiciary
Speaker 1: Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley urged the FBI to probe how
Speaker 1: the bureau under James Colemy used the segregated system is
Speaker 1: what you're describing here of politically sensitive cases known as
Speaker 1: prohibited access case files. Fast forward to FBI Director Cash
Speaker 1: Bettel recently locating a document showing that then Executive assistant
Speaker 1: Director Randall Coleman wrote a memo to file the day
Speaker 1: before the twenty sixteen presidential election. That's the one where
Speaker 1: Donald trumpete Hillary Clinton laying out the unusual behavior of
Speaker 1: FBI managers after fresh evidence in Clinton's classified email scandal
Speaker 1: were discovered on former Congressman Anthony laptop.
Speaker 3: This goes back to the shut it down memo we
Speaker 3: talked about in your show a few weeks ago when
Speaker 3: I broke that. So the FBI has two simultaneous investigations
Speaker 3: going on. Hither Clinton won the email case one the
Speaker 3: pay to play allegations at the Clinton Foundation, going all
Speaker 3: the way back to Peter Schweitzer's great book. Both are
Speaker 3: highly active in the middle of the twenty sixteen election,
Speaker 3: and all of a sudden, Andy McCabe steps in and said,
Speaker 3: no more, and we're investigating Hillary Clinton's foundation unless I
Speaker 3: prove it. And then the Deputy Attorney General comes in,
Speaker 3: Sally Aids, who works for Obama, saying shut it down.
Speaker 3: I don't want any more investigation. That's in it of
Speaker 3: its self obstruction. But then something happens to Anthony Wiener
Speaker 3: laptop has found and on that laptop are all these
Speaker 3: emails that are related to the private server. Now, most
Speaker 3: of us have known about that and the private email
Speaker 3: server in the mishandling of the FBI net. But there
Speaker 3: was a second component about the discovery of the emails
Speaker 3: that is now concerned Cash Betel's leadership team. Those emails
Speaker 3: were not only relevant to whether she moved classified information
Speaker 3: through her server, they had potential evidence of whether deals
Speaker 3: were being made or if you made a donation to
Speaker 3: the Cooton Foundation you could get a favor from the
Speaker 3: State Department. And it appears there is strong concern based
Speaker 3: on what mister Coleman and others have written in these
Speaker 3: memos that they may have been keeping that from investigators
Speaker 3: so that Hillary Culton wouldn't face a potential crowd home
Speaker 3: investigation or new evidence in that. That's what this is
Speaker 3: all about, this new memo.
Speaker 1: John Solomon, justinnews dot com, Thank you, sir, appreciate your
Speaker 1: time as always.
Speaker 3: To be with you. Shawn, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: You know, with kids going back to school, you would
Speaker 1: think that things have changed now. Things are dramatically different
Speaker 1: than they were maybe four or five years ago in
Speaker 1: terms of DEI and and you know, woke education in schools.
Speaker 1: It has been challenged. Donald Trump has taken it to
Speaker 1: a new level. As a result, there have been significant changes,
Speaker 1: but not enough in terms of changes. Parental rights are
Speaker 1: front and center, you know, still for your kids in
Speaker 1: education debates. That's why you need tiger moms like Linda
Speaker 1: that show up at school board meetings and cause chaos.
Speaker 2: Do you cause chaos when you go if necessary? Absolutely
Speaker 2: anything for my children. And do they know you by name?
Speaker 2: I think they know me pretty well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they know they know, Oh there she is. When
Speaker 1: you walk in the room, it's like, oh no, it's
Speaker 1: going to be one of those meetings, right, How often
Speaker 1: does that happen? I would say every meeting is like that.
Speaker 2: You know, you have to stand up against the work ideology.
Speaker 2: I'm all in, I'm not afraid. I'll love to fight. Well,
Speaker 2: you're fighting.
Speaker 1: You know, if we would just focus on reading, writing, math, science, history, computers,
Speaker 1: you know, things that will benefit kids' lives, certainly imposing
Speaker 1: the you know, the golden rule love God. Well, you
Speaker 1: can't mention God in a lot of public schools. Love
Speaker 1: God with all your heart, mind, body and soul, and
Speaker 1: your neighbor as yourself, and the simple golden rule of
Speaker 1: you know, treat others the way you want to be treated.
Speaker 1: It kind of covers every HR book from start to finish.
Speaker 1: I don't care if it's five hundred pages or five pages.
Speaker 1: But we're still dealing with a lot of these issues now.
Speaker 1: Gene Hamilton's going to join us in a second, the
Speaker 1: new president of American First Legal. You might recall that
Speaker 1: was started by Steven Miller. He has launched a new
Speaker 1: parent and Student Action Center. It's a one stop hub.
Speaker 1: It's designed to give you parents and students practical resources
Speaker 1: so that you can push back against woe, curricula, union
Speaker 1: driven agendas, discrimination in schools. I mean, you are allowed
Speaker 1: to like Donald Trump, you are allowed to be a conservative.
Speaker 1: But they say the effort is about arming families with
Speaker 1: knowledge and tools that they need to fight back effectively
Speaker 1: against school bureaucracies, activists, agendas, teachers' unions, ensuring the parents,
Speaker 1: not special interests, will direct their child's education. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know again, we spend more per capita on education
Speaker 1: than any other industrialized country, and we have the worst
Speaker 1: test results you. We have institutionalized failure at best, institutionalized mediocrity. Now,
Speaker 1: let me play for you if I may hear Temecula, California,
Speaker 1: the Temecula Valley Unified School District confronted and harassed moms
Speaker 1: at a student walkout for opposing boys in girls' locker rooms. Yes,
Speaker 1: this is still happening.
Speaker 2: And I know you all are on the wrong side
Speaker 2: of the istory, and I know that's like you are
Speaker 2: endangering children's times by doing does not make anybody today
Speaker 2: he protest linea.
Speaker 3: Gay and and you're acting like, okay, so I'm along
Speaker 3: the perils and you're this line?
Speaker 4: Is that is that who's resist Jesus loves that young
Speaker 4: man just as much as you loves you.
Speaker 3: It is a.
Speaker 2: Young man. You don't get to tell somebody you do
Speaker 2: what they are. You don't get to tell.
Speaker 3: Somebody what they are yours.
Speaker 2: I can raise my voice of my lads.
Speaker 3: Go ahead, Thank you so much for being here, Thank
Speaker 3: you for seeing much for your.
Speaker 2: Person and the rights. We're doing the same. We're indeed children,
Speaker 2: and that's where y is not supposed.
Speaker 3: To do that.
Speaker 2: I am not endangering children.
Speaker 3: I'm here for the rights of.
Speaker 4: Children over Yes, this is not the right schools, children
Speaker 4: that we're scared to go in that vacuum.
Speaker 2: Hey, but I not to go in that bathroom. The
Speaker 2: administration name pad.
Speaker 4: Just be dows have to either right or moral or
Speaker 4: value by everybody seas going.
Speaker 2: Because what you're doing is wrong. I his permission. In
Speaker 2: a na is loved, She is loved, She is loved,
Speaker 2: She is what she wants to be. You don't get
Speaker 2: to tell her that you're not her parents. I could
Speaker 2: see whatever I want if you don't.
Speaker 1: Anyway, if you would have told me when I started
Speaker 1: in radio in nineteen eighty seven that I'd be talking
Speaker 1: about politicians fighting for the right to put feminine hygiene
Speaker 1: products in boys' bathrooms in grade school. I wouldn't have
Speaker 1: believed you. You know, if you would have told me
Speaker 1: that if you send your kid off to college, they
Speaker 1: spend their first day at school walking around a courtyard
Speaker 1: asking people what pronoun would you like to be called by?
Speaker 1: I probably would not have believed you. If you would
Speaker 1: have told me that there are vice presidential candidates that
Speaker 1: run states that offer gender affirming care for minors without
Speaker 1: parental consent, I probably would.
Speaker 2: Not have believed you. But that's the world we're now
Speaker 2: living it.
Speaker 1: That's where the American First Legal Center and their new
Speaker 1: Parent and Student Action Center is all about. Gean Hamilton
Speaker 1: is with us, he's heading this up. How are you,
Speaker 1: mister Hamilton, Welcome back to the program.
Speaker 3: I'm doing well.
Speaker 4: Thanks for having me on, Sean.
Speaker 2: Would you have believed it, you know, thirty forty years ago.
Speaker 3: No way, no way, There's not a chance.
Speaker 4: And it's really unreal because it's not just that one
Speaker 4: school district in California, right, we know this is happening
Speaker 4: all across the country. Every parent across the country is
Speaker 4: dealing with similar issues on a daily basis, and so
Speaker 4: this new action center is precisely for those types of
Speaker 4: situations like the clip you played. Say that your daughter
Speaker 4: is attending school and your school district has a policy
Speaker 4: that allows young men to go into the bathroom with her.
Speaker 4: We have a template for you and an explainer and
Speaker 4: resources to be able to push back, to file a
Speaker 4: complaint asserting your child's rights under Title nine of the
Speaker 4: Civil Rights Act. You submit this complaint to the Department
Speaker 4: of Education, then they can act on it well.
Speaker 1: So, in other words, whatever situation parents and students may
Speaker 1: find themselves in, you are providing a template for them
Speaker 1: to follow so that they can go through the proper
Speaker 1: procedure and fight back.
Speaker 4: One hundred percent Sean, that is exactly what this is about. So,
Speaker 4: whether we're talking about Title nine, whether we're talking about
Speaker 4: race discriminations under Title six, whether we're talking about radical
Speaker 4: curricula being introduced into schools, in proper surveys, soliciting their
Speaker 4: views on matters of sexuality, and all kinds of other issues,
Speaker 4: we are equipping parents with the tools that they need
Speaker 4: to fight back, to push back, to go through the
Speaker 4: proper channels to hold people accountable. Because as great as
Speaker 4: it is and as wonderful as it is that we
Speaker 4: have an administration in Washington, d C. That finally supports
Speaker 4: and believes in the rights of parents across this country.
Speaker 4: There's only so much that they can do on their own,
Speaker 4: and so what these tools enable parents to do is
Speaker 4: to push back at the local level and to also
Speaker 4: let the federal government intervene on their behalf where there
Speaker 4: are violations of the students' rights.
Speaker 1: Quick break right back more with Gene Hamilton. He is
Speaker 1: the new president of america First Legal that was created
Speaker 1: by Stephen Miller. He's launched a new service for parents.
Speaker 1: It's called Parents and Student Action Center, so you can
Speaker 1: deal with the woke mob in your school district.
Speaker 3: The final hour of the Sean Hannity shows up next.
Speaker 1: Hang on for Sean's Conservative solutions.
Speaker 4: This coming March.
Speaker 2: It runs in exactly the opposite direction, and it would
Speaker 2: be I suspect a near unanimity in the room that
Speaker 2: trans athletes have no place in.
Speaker 3: The female category. I don't think this is any question.
Speaker 2: I just think it was a strange.
Speaker 3: I mean I felt, I mean I was the reason
Speaker 3: I'm ashamed of my performance of that panel because I
Speaker 3: share your.
Speaker 2: Position one.
Speaker 1: And I was Colt all right, we continue now. Geene
Speaker 1: Hamilton is with us. If you're having problems with DEI
Speaker 1: or a woke agenda in your public school, you want
Speaker 1: to you're gonna want to get in touch with the
Speaker 1: American First Legal Parent and Student Action Center. We continue
Speaker 1: with its new president, Jean Hamilton. I think it's great
Speaker 1: that you're doing this. I love that American First Legal
Speaker 1: even exists in the first place. This is definitely definitely needed,
Speaker 1: But I know it's it's kind of lonely for parents
Speaker 1: if if they're standing out there, A lot of parents
Speaker 1: just want to put their head in the They don't
Speaker 1: want to be confrontational. Most most parents are not like Linda.
Speaker 1: They're not as vocal. They're not showing up at school
Speaker 1: board meetings. I never went to a school board meeting
Speaker 1: in my life, to be very frank with you, you know,
Speaker 1: the only issue I had when my son was in
Speaker 1: sixth grade many years ago was I knew a science
Speaker 1: teacher wanted to show the kids Earth and the Balance
Speaker 1: by Al Gore, and I said, my son will not
Speaker 1: be attending that class, and I'm sure his grade will
Speaker 1: not suffer. And that was the end of that conversation.
Speaker 1: That was it his grade did not suffer by the way, that's.
Speaker 3: Great, John.
Speaker 4: Yeah, Look, I think parents.
Speaker 2: Like, well, you want to know.
Speaker 1: The sad part is I'm going to be very blunt.
Speaker 1: Because I'm a public figure that you know, there was
Speaker 1: a certain degree of of I would even call it
Speaker 1: unnatural fear that I might say something publicly, and that
Speaker 1: gave me a lot more leverage than the average parent,
Speaker 1: which is unfair. I don't deserve it. But I also
Speaker 1: spoke of you know, there were of other parents that
Speaker 1: took my lead on it, and they said, yeah, well,
Speaker 1: if your son's not going, and mine's not going either,
Speaker 1: and it worked out for other people as well.
Speaker 2: But it shouldn't take that.
Speaker 4: No, it shouldn't. It shouldn't take that. And what these
Speaker 4: tools are intended to do, and you can find them
Speaker 4: on our website. If you just google America First Legal
Speaker 4: Parent and Student Action Center, or you go to our
Speaker 4: ex page, or you go to any of our other
Speaker 4: social media pages, you can find the links to these tools.
Speaker 4: What these tools enable parents to do is to push back,
Speaker 4: but also there's a way that you can talk contact
Speaker 4: America First Legal and our team will evaluate any case
Speaker 4: that's referred to as for potential legal action. And so
Speaker 4: just to give you a couple of examples, we represent
Speaker 4: a student in her family in Fairfax County, Virginia, which
Speaker 4: is at the epicenter of some of this ridiculousness. We
Speaker 4: also now represent, in partnership with other lawyers, the two
Speaker 4: parents in Loudon County, or the two students, two young
Speaker 4: boys who were punished by the school district for videotaping
Speaker 4: a girl going into their bathroom.
Speaker 1: Well, let me ask you about this then, because I
Speaker 1: think you know and I'm very aware of the case
Speaker 1: that you're talking about. Yeah, because this is now mom's
Speaker 1: confronted by a teacher for protesting boys in their daughter's bathroom,
Speaker 1: and I mean that's like almost standard. Fair Let me
Speaker 1: ask you about the Seattle case, where the school district
Speaker 1: there all kids need to learn about gender and sexuality.
Speaker 1: Parents are not not allowed there to opt out their
Speaker 1: kids about opt out requests. Seattle Public school Schools works
Speaker 1: to provide a wide range of educational opportunities that reflect
Speaker 1: whose students are, help them build empathy for others, and
Speaker 1: prepare them to be compassionate citizens of a diverse and
Speaker 1: changing world. There is no option to quote opt students
Speaker 1: out of learning about particular identities or groups of people.
Speaker 1: This guidance is reinforced by the State Superintendent's office the
Speaker 1: policies of other major urban dey districts, including states like California,
Speaker 1: New York, et cetera, et cetera. So you can't even
Speaker 1: opt your kids out legally if you're in Seattle. I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: Doesn't that conflict with something called parental rights?
Speaker 4: Yes, yes it does, Sean, And look, I suspect that
Speaker 4: the Seattle Public school system is in They're in the
Speaker 4: FA stage of the phrase, and the FO will come
Speaker 4: soon because they are flatly wrong. Federal law under the
Speaker 4: PPRA permit students and parents to withdraw from this type
Speaker 4: of radical curriculum from being forced upon them. They can
Speaker 4: opt out, and the Supreme Court affirmed the rights of
Speaker 4: parents to be able to opt their kids out of
Speaker 4: this type of radical ideology in classes just earlier this year,
Speaker 4: and in case my mood versus Taylor, So, Seattle public schools,
Speaker 4: they might think that they're doing something, they might think
Speaker 4: that they're on solid ground, But with action from committed
Speaker 4: parents and with the right legal support, we can fight back,
Speaker 4: and we will, and we can hold people like Seattle
Speaker 4: Public schools accountable.
Speaker 2: How can people get in touch with you because we
Speaker 2: have to run.
Speaker 4: Go to our website aflegal dot org and there's a
Speaker 4: contact US formed everywhere and fill it out and we'll
Speaker 4: be happy to hear from any parents.
Speaker 1: All right, that's AFL dot org. We appreciate it. Gene Hamilton,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for being with us. It's a great,
Speaker 1: great service you're providing.