Speaker 1: All right, glad you with us sign no. Yeah, another
Speaker 1: shift show charade has just started. Last night on Hannity,
Speaker 1: I mentioned to my buddy Mark Simone's tweet tomorrow is
Speaker 1: impeachment Day. Obviously, that's today. The Democrats impeach Trump every February.
Speaker 1: It's now becoming an annual event like the Golden Globes.
Speaker 1: Remember last February when they missed the pandemics starting because
Speaker 1: they were focused on impeachment. Good points. Well, so the
Speaker 1: Democrats predictable nothing it is. It is an amazing spectacle
Speaker 1: that is not going to end. Well. My prediction for
Speaker 1: the Democrats the longer this goes on and they're saying, well, okay,
Speaker 1: we know we don't have the votes, is this has
Speaker 1: a predetermined outcome. But the longer it goes on, the
Speaker 1: worse it gets for them. Because he's not president, there's
Speaker 1: no removal from office. And more and more, we have
Speaker 1: the same mob in the media that went along with
Speaker 1: the Democrats in this snap impeachment having to now report
Speaker 1: about how the attack on the Capitol was pre planned.
Speaker 1: There were organizers, there were people plotting, there were people planning,
Speaker 1: there were people scheming to make this happen. On that day. Now,
Speaker 1: why is that important? Because it takes the whole January
Speaker 1: sixth rally of Donald Trump inciting the mob to go
Speaker 1: and cause an insurrection at the Capitol, and it blows
Speaker 1: it up. That's a problem for them. I don't even
Speaker 1: play some of that coming up and throughout the program
Speaker 1: today and so on top of that, and it gets
Speaker 1: more interesting. And I didn't pick this up yesterday. I
Speaker 1: don't know why I missed Maria Maria's show Sunday Morning
Speaker 1: Futures because I usually don't miss it. But she had
Speaker 1: on White House former wanhous Chief of Staff Mark Meadows,
Speaker 1: and he pointed out how the President had been very
Speaker 1: vocal about offering the National Guard and a presence at
Speaker 1: the Capitol on numerous occasions in January, and he was
Speaker 1: rebuked every time. Quote, we know that in January, but
Speaker 1: also throughout the summer, the President was very vocal of
Speaker 1: making sure we had plenty of National Guard, plenty of
Speaker 1: additional support because he supports our rule of law and
Speaker 1: supports our law enforcement, and offered additional help even in
Speaker 1: January that was a given. As many as ten thousand
Speaker 1: National Guard troops were told to be on the ready
Speaker 1: by the Secretary of Defense that was a direct order
Speaker 1: from the president. And yet here is what we see,
Speaker 1: all kinds of blame going around, but yet not a
Speaker 1: whole lot of accountability. Now, this is why where I
Speaker 1: think we need the whole nine to eleven style Commission report.
Speaker 1: And you know, look, this is going to go down
Speaker 1: three ways, one way or another. It looks like that
Speaker 1: this ends a week from today, and it's gonna be loud,
Speaker 1: and it's gonna be never ending, and it's gonna be repetitive,
Speaker 1: and it's gonna be hyperbole. It's theater. This is not real.
Speaker 1: This is Washington being the swamp. When you have a
Speaker 1: predetermined outcome and you're doing it anyway, that's called a
Speaker 1: waste of taxpayer time, money, dollars, you name it. Now,
Speaker 1: we could be discussing, well, what do we do to
Speaker 1: get the guys that were working on the Keystone XL
Speaker 1: pipeline back to work. We could be talking about how
Speaker 1: to get the guys that were constructing the border wall
Speaker 1: back to work. We could be talking about, well, how
Speaker 1: do we better distribute the vaccine that Donald Trump had
Speaker 1: done with Operation Warp Speed. Because the governors are incompetent
Speaker 1: at its distribution and how can we fix and solve
Speaker 1: that problem. We could be working on relief for American
Speaker 1: families and businesses that have suffered because of the pandemic
Speaker 1: and subsequent draconian shutdowns of others. We're not doing any
Speaker 1: of the above. And on top of that, you know,
Speaker 1: we've got some great ideas for this week. It's going
Speaker 1: to be fun. I'm excited about it all because it's
Speaker 1: it's that it's sort of like low hanging fruit going
Speaker 1: after Democrats and their their rank hypocrisy, because the bottom
Speaker 1: line is Democrats are focusing on the You know, with
Speaker 1: all the riots that have occurred in the last year,
Speaker 1: the only one they cared about is the one in Washington.
Speaker 1: And we now know that the police chief six separate
Speaker 1: times called for the National Guard even before they started
Speaker 1: to be brought in. They knew hundreds of thousands of
Speaker 1: people were going to march from the Washington Monument to
Speaker 1: the Capitol, and they didn't have any preparation for such.
Speaker 1: Now we know that Congresswoman Acacio Cortez has acknowledged she
Speaker 1: knew a week in advance, she had been hearing this
Speaker 1: is all going to happen. Well, who knew what and when?
Speaker 1: And why do we want to know because we need
Speaker 1: to protect our institutions. And yes, we need to protect
Speaker 1: every elected official. This transcends any political ideology or philosophy
Speaker 1: or party. It doesn't matter if you're a conservative or
Speaker 1: a liberal, or a Republican, a Democrat. They are elected officials.
Speaker 1: They need to be protected, period, end of sentence. And
Speaker 1: none of which happened, but the silence over the summer
Speaker 1: when we had let's see police precincts burned to the ground,
Speaker 1: and we had what over twenty five hundred cops injured
Speaker 1: in the course of the summer and the rioting. They
Speaker 1: would be impelted with rocks and bricks and molotov cocktails
Speaker 1: and frozen water bottles and sticks and nine, and they
Speaker 1: were being shot at. Almost thirty people died as the insurrection.
Speaker 1: There we had entire city blocks taken over, commandeered by
Speaker 1: leftists and democratic politicians saying this is a summer of
Speaker 1: love zone, a spaghetti potluck dinner zone, a chazz chop zone,
Speaker 1: an autonomous zone. Well, the president wanted to send people
Speaker 1: in and the occupation, but wasn't allowed to do so.
Speaker 1: And the same with attacking federal courthouse buildings, and the
Speaker 1: rights that went on in Portland day after day and
Speaker 1: night after night, and the utter incompetence and unwillingness to
Speaker 1: stop or even speak out against the violence and the
Speaker 1: rioting there. And for the record, At a briefing today
Speaker 1: at the White House, as the second impeachment shift show
Speaker 1: charade starts was getting underway, Jensaki, the White House Press Secretary,
Speaker 1: pressed on how the Biden administration felt about the incendiy
Speaker 1: y rhetoric from Democrats in Congress. Oh, We've been playing
Speaker 1: a lot of it. And that would be maxim Waters.
Speaker 1: That would be Joe Biden. I want to beat the
Speaker 1: hell out of Donald Trump. And that would be Chuck
Speaker 1: Schumer threatening Supreme Court justices. That would be Kamala Harris.
Speaker 1: After the police precinct the Minneapolis burned to the ground,
Speaker 1: saying they're not going to stop. You be where you
Speaker 1: take note on both levels, They're not going to stop.
Speaker 1: They shouldn't stop. We shouldn't stop. Okay, in the middle
Speaker 1: of writing maybe not exactly the right words, and then
Speaker 1: on top of that, adding it and supporting efforts to
Speaker 1: bail out those people involved in the rioting from jail Wow,
Speaker 1: that's great anyway, the attorneys for the president now pointing
Speaker 1: the comments from twenty eighteen, Maxie Waters is one of
Speaker 1: them called supporters at a rally, you are to confront them,
Speaker 1: You're to create a crowd, and you're to follow them
Speaker 1: into the grocery stores. He's talking about members of the
Speaker 1: cabinet of Donald Trump. They're not wanted anywhere anymore. Biden
Speaker 1: advisac Cedric Richmond had even defended Waters, saying she had
Speaker 1: a constitutional right to express those views. Well, then, all
Speaker 1: the time Trump said fight like hell at the January
Speaker 1: sixth rally. Oh, we've played all the montages of every Democrat.
Speaker 1: It's common term of politicians, go out and fight, fight
Speaker 1: for your values, fight for this, fight for that. They're
Speaker 1: not saying to go out and have a physical brawl.
Speaker 1: And the president. You can't ignore the fact that he said,
Speaker 1: many of you will peacefully, patriotically now march to the
Speaker 1: Capitol so your voices will be heard. Well, how do
Speaker 1: you overcome that shift? Show? Whoopsie Daisy over at NBC
Speaker 1: they have a report of noting that you know all
Speaker 1: of these instances, Jensaki, for example, how does this how
Speaker 1: does the White House view, this is any different what
Speaker 1: Waters said. Oh, Joe's the press and he's not a pundit.
Speaker 1: He's not going to opine on the back and forth arguments,
Speaker 1: nor is he watching them that are taking place in
Speaker 1: the Senate. What happened to mister Unity. I thought he
Speaker 1: was going to bring the country together? Or Nancy Pelosi's
Speaker 1: comments when the Wisconsin State House there was their little
Speaker 1: insurrection issue going on there, but the President yeah, apparently
Speaker 1: offered to deploy the National Guards beforehand. It kind of
Speaker 1: goes away from all the arguments that have been made.
Speaker 1: But okay, Democrats now want to focus in on only
Speaker 1: one of the many riots this country has experienced over
Speaker 1: the last year. Wall Street Journal good piece out too
Speaker 1: that Democrats already know the outcome, but they think it'll
Speaker 1: hurt the GOP. Actually, that's beginning to shift. They're beginning
Speaker 1: to worry greatly because they know that they're now and
Speaker 1: that this will be so time consuming that it will
Speaker 1: take away from any agenda that they wanted to push
Speaker 1: through in the first hundred days of Biden. Then if
Speaker 1: that's this doesn't work, they're they're thinking about a plan B.
Speaker 1: Maybe the fourteenth ammm, maybe censure anyway. Trump believes that
Speaker 1: we'll see what happens, but we already have forty five
Speaker 1: Republican senators on record believing it's unconstitutional and their right.
Speaker 1: And the New York Times Tom Friedman, you know, is
Speaker 1: right in all the wrong ways on impeachment, and you
Speaker 1: know he's talking about you know, they don't they don't
Speaker 1: have Republicans in qNaN, in China, And how do we
Speaker 1: do this week after week, month after month and think
Speaker 1: we're a serious country. We're so deeply unseerious as a country. Now.
Speaker 1: We need to put this crap behind us, he says,
Speaker 1: and get focused on the future, because right now we're
Speaker 1: going to be falling father and father behind Okay. Daily
Speaker 1: Caller said that the outburst by Freedman was complimenting China
Speaker 1: on their on their faster trains that they have in
Speaker 1: spite of, you know, all the other bad stuff that
Speaker 1: goes on in that country and all the suppression of
Speaker 1: individual rights and all the territorial ambitions that are taking
Speaker 1: place there. So anyway, you know, what you have is
Speaker 1: probably both sides looking to avoid a dragged out impeachment battle.
Speaker 1: Is likely. I can't say for certain, I'd say, ninety
Speaker 1: five percent is going to be something that's over in
Speaker 1: a week. And there is some trepidation and fear among
Speaker 1: a lot of Democrats and apparently Biden deep down. But
Speaker 1: Biden I don't think has the ability to stand up
Speaker 1: to his radical base. But if you look at you know,
Speaker 1: the president now being out of office, as long as
Speaker 1: he's been out of office, Okay, well he's still take it.
Speaker 1: He's he's still bringing all the attention to him, insurrection chargers.
Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure this is going to break down to
Speaker 1: three separate arguments for the defense, and I don't think
Speaker 1: it's going to take them the sixteen hours that they've
Speaker 1: allocated to each side. And I would argue that the
Speaker 1: big part of it, it's going to be the lack
Speaker 1: of constitutionality, which would include jurisdictional issues that he's a
Speaker 1: private citizen, therefore they don't have the jurisdiction for this trial. Second,
Speaker 1: I think it's going to be argued on, you know,
Speaker 1: the whole issue of what actually happened, and now that
Speaker 1: we're learning that it was pre planned and that there
Speaker 1: are this was an organized orchestrated, preplanned effort, law enforcement
Speaker 1: is telling us that even the liberal news media mob
Speaker 1: is telling us that. Even Congresswoman Accio Cortez is telling
Speaker 1: us that, and everybody else in between is telling us that.
Speaker 1: So now they've got a problem. FBI investigators, now court
Speaker 1: documents are all telling us that. So the idea that
Speaker 1: a spontaneous insurrection, I don't think it's going to work.
Speaker 1: And on top of all of that, who's presiding. It's
Speaker 1: not Chief Justice John Roberts. As the constitution calls for, no,
Speaker 1: they've decided on Patrick Leahey, a guy that is already
Speaker 1: again this is supposed to be a trial, A guy
Speaker 1: that has already said Trump should be convicted is presiding
Speaker 1: over these proceedings. Now does that make Does that seem
Speaker 1: like a fair trial to any decent American? That doesn't
Speaker 1: sound like America at all to me. And that's the
Speaker 1: that's what that's what's unfolding, and your nation's swamp the sewer.
Speaker 1: All right, twenty five to the top of the hour.
Speaker 1: M glad you with us eight hundred nine one, Shawn,
Speaker 1: if you want to be a part of the program.
Speaker 1: So there's all this going on, This show is not
Speaker 1: going to spend an entire week regurgitating every single argument
Speaker 1: that we already know is going to be made when
Speaker 1: we know what the outcome is going to be, that
Speaker 1: it's predetermined. I see no point in that at all. Now,
Speaker 1: when it gets interesting, we'll let you know, because will monitor. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: I have now had to task people that work on
Speaker 1: radio and TV to have to sit and watch this crap.
Speaker 1: It's it's really a horrible thing. It's like torture. Actually
Speaker 1: offered a food bonus. You can order as much Uber
Speaker 1: eat Scrubhub food that you can possibly consume in the
Speaker 1: time that you you must suffer through all of this. Oh, man, Linda,
Speaker 1: thank god, it's not us right, thank god. Oh could
Speaker 1: you imagine? I don't know, it's too much. I think
Speaker 1: Linda would break the TV. Oh, Linda would break the TV.
Speaker 1: She still might by the time this is all said
Speaker 1: and done. I mean, you just have no idea where
Speaker 1: that's going to end up. Um, all right, but we'll
Speaker 1: be watching. It's it's gonna get interesting. Now. There's three
Speaker 1: arguments here. One the constitutional argument, jurisdictional issues included, they
Speaker 1: don't have jurisdiction. Number two is gonna be oh, the
Speaker 1: snap impeachment with no witnesses, no defense, no due process,
Speaker 1: nothing and how they race to get this done because
Speaker 1: that's what the Democrats do for political purposes. Now it's
Speaker 1: a political show trial because forty five senators say no,
Speaker 1: it's not constitutional. Every senator, by the way, I don't
Speaker 1: care what your political point of view is, you should
Speaker 1: not be validating this. This is dangerous to validate and
Speaker 1: legitimize what the House did. Here here's an example. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna play the longer montage. Pay attention now. Remember Accacio
Speaker 1: Cortez says she knew a week in advance that this
Speaker 1: is likely going to happen, and we had you know,
Speaker 1: the chief of police, Capitol Police, Yeah, asking in advance
Speaker 1: for the National Guard, Trump offering the National Guard, Mark
Speaker 1: Meadows saying on Sunday morning, futures with Maria Bartomo over
Speaker 1: the weekend. So all of that happened. Then now we
Speaker 1: have court filings, an FBI investigators saying it. And now
Speaker 1: that has had to result because the mob the media
Speaker 1: went along with all things Democrats because they're the press office,
Speaker 1: and even they now know they could not ignore it anymore,
Speaker 1: especially when the video came out of the pipe pipe
Speaker 1: bombs actually being planned at ahead of time, which now
Speaker 1: investigators are telling us believe was a diversionary tactic to
Speaker 1: inflict even more damage. Anyway, But here's the mob. The
Speaker 1: media now again going against the very impeachment, the premise
Speaker 1: of the impeachment, which is the incitement to insurrection. Listen.
Speaker 1: One of the big questions for investigators has been whether
Speaker 1: or not whether the people who attacked the capital, whether
Speaker 1: this was just a mob that just got out of control,
Speaker 1: or whether there was planning. And we're learning from people
Speaker 1: who were talking to familiar with the investigation that they're
Speaker 1: getting indications some evidence that they've seen that indicates that
Speaker 1: there was some level of planning. They've noticed from looking
Speaker 1: at surveillance cameras, from looking at some of the weaponry
Speaker 1: that showed up, that there were people who were at
Speaker 1: the ellipse where there was a Trump rally earlier in
Speaker 1: the day. Some people left the scene of that rally
Speaker 1: early and appeared to have gone to retrieve weapons that
Speaker 1: then turned up at the scene of the riot at
Speaker 1: the Capitol. Based on everything the FBI has learned, it
Speaker 1: was not some sort of spontaneous decision by a bunch
Speaker 1: of protesters to go up to Capitol Hill and storm
Speaker 1: Capitol Hill. This was all planned out. I want to
Speaker 1: get to this issue of coordination and premeditation because only
Speaker 1: and this is really the leading edge of this investigation.
Speaker 1: And for the first time today we heard the US
Speaker 1: Attorney say that he believes the pipe bombs are connected
Speaker 1: to the riders and that it was a diversionary tactic.
Speaker 1: So right at the height of this, between twelve forty
Speaker 1: five and one fifteen, when President Trump is speaking, you
Speaker 1: have the first group pushing onto the Capitol comp the
Speaker 1: first pipe bomb is reported at the RNC headquarters here
Speaker 1: in Washington. Then at one fifteen, the second is reported
Speaker 1: at the DNC, And the US Attorney said today he
Speaker 1: thought they were diversionary, which means they were an effort
Speaker 1: to pull first responders away from the Capitol at the
Speaker 1: very time frame that they were breaching on to the Capitol,
Speaker 1: so it would further weaken security at that site. And
Speaker 1: all of this goes to I'm sorry, it's a long answer.
Speaker 1: It all goes to the idea of premeditation and coordination
Speaker 1: among individuals. And now to that chilling new report that
Speaker 1: there was an FBI internal report the day before the
Speaker 1: siege warning of a violent war at the Capitol. In
Speaker 1: new reporting that the FBI received a very specific warning
Speaker 1: before the riot. Let's bring in CBS as Jeff the Gays,
Speaker 1: who's been reporting all day, good evening, Jeff or that
Speaker 1: FBI notice warned a war at the Capitol, but for
Speaker 1: some reason, security wasn't stepped up there to meet the
Speaker 1: challenge that that attack would pose on how much of
Speaker 1: it was was planned, how much of this was strategized
Speaker 1: ahead of time. People wandering around exercising their First Amendment
Speaker 1: rights don't bring ropes and ladders and sledgehammers to a
Speaker 1: spontaneous event. This was a planned assault, as if going
Speaker 1: after a castle. A week before. One week before the
Speaker 1: week prior to the insurrection, I started to get text
Speaker 1: messages that I needed to be careful and that in
Speaker 1: particular I needed to be careful about the six And
Speaker 1: those text messages came from other members of Congress. They
Speaker 1: were not threats, but they were other members saying that
Speaker 1: they knew premeditated planned attacks. They plotted, they planned, they schemed.
Speaker 1: The FBI was warned, and nobody did anything. Nobody Why
Speaker 1: Why that's our capital, We the that's the countries, this
Speaker 1: is these are our institutions. Why didn't they do anything,
Speaker 1: you know, a prepared assault. So that takes the entire argument,
Speaker 1: the entire article of the snap impeachment, and it disintegrates
Speaker 1: it because that is the argument. So the defense has
Speaker 1: three arguments, three main arguments, and it really isn't that hard.
Speaker 1: One is the constitutionality to no jurisdictions. No, there's nobody
Speaker 1: to remove from any office here. Do they have jurisdiction
Speaker 1: over a private citizen? The answer is no, because he's
Speaker 1: not in office. So that is a fairly simple argument.
Speaker 1: We've we've argued that, we've had on more experts analyzing,
Speaker 1: analyzing that for you again and again. Now you move,
Speaker 1: then they'll move to the whole issue. This was all premeditated,
Speaker 1: that they planned these attacks, that there were warnings, intelligence
Speaker 1: that was all missed, a planned assault on the Capitol,
Speaker 1: All right, Now, Well that doesn't get every MAGA person
Speaker 1: that was at the rally off the hook. Well, if
Speaker 1: you look at the size of the crowd that showed
Speaker 1: up at the Washington Monument, it was massive. Now they
Speaker 1: knew the night before because I remember Dan Scovino tweeting out,
Speaker 1: we can hear you in the West wing of the
Speaker 1: White House, they heard all the people that had been
Speaker 1: there the night before that were there in Washington to
Speaker 1: go to the rally, so law enforcement had plenty of
Speaker 1: knowledge that the crowd was likely to be large, while
Speaker 1: the crowd at the Washington Monument for the rally was huge.
Speaker 1: And then then they're going to focus on, Okay, well,
Speaker 1: if this is now the definition and this is where
Speaker 1: you know, this is the this is the slam dunk
Speaker 1: end of this case. Forty five senators are voted to
Speaker 1: end the impeachment show trial predetermined outcome, not constitutional, no
Speaker 1: jurisdiction over a private citizen. You can't remove somebody from
Speaker 1: an office they don't hold. And doesn't matter to Democrats
Speaker 1: because this is cathartic to get out there any remaining rage.
Speaker 1: It's sort of like the last Rocky, you know, and
Speaker 1: his brother in law was saying, Rocko, Rocko, clean out
Speaker 1: the basement, you know, get rid of whatever demons just
Speaker 1: you still have in there. While they're sort of cleaning
Speaker 1: out the last refuge of rage, psychosis and Trump hate here,
Speaker 1: and then they're gonna get into this whole thing about
Speaker 1: the Democrats and the things that they've said. I mean,
Speaker 1: I mentioned a number of people. I mentioned Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: I mentioned Joe Biden. I think you can add probably shifty,
Speaker 1: you know, the corrupt congenital liar Adam Schiff. Maxiem Waters
Speaker 1: has called for harassment and violence against the president, his staffers,
Speaker 1: his abinet, and others talk about I'm gonna take Trump
Speaker 1: out tonight. All of these these moments. Well, now, if
Speaker 1: this is the definition of insurrection, then that that same
Speaker 1: standard has to apply to everybody. Chuck Schumer threatening to
Speaker 1: US Supreme Court justices, Corey Booker go to the hill,
Speaker 1: get up and please get up in some of the
Speaker 1: faces of some congress people you know who talks about
Speaker 1: taking a president behind the gym to beat the hell
Speaker 1: out of them. You imagine if I ever said that
Speaker 1: about any Democratic president. I never, by the way, I
Speaker 1: never would never ever. Political differences are different, are quite different.
Speaker 1: In the context of the precinct burnt to the ground
Speaker 1: in Minneapolis, that goes to the Kamala Harris part. You know,
Speaker 1: nearly every media outlet now and the FBI end court documents,
Speaker 1: and Congresswoman Alexandria Cassio Cortez that this was all premeditated,
Speaker 1: pre planned and they're giving the details of such because
Speaker 1: that would then mean there was you know, and you
Speaker 1: can go to the president's words. They're going to spend
Speaker 1: a lot of time. The President said to fight, like hell,
Speaker 1: are you're gonna lose your country? Okay, I got a
Speaker 1: montage of Democrats saying fight, fight, fight. You want to
Speaker 1: hear them, I'll play it again if you want to
Speaker 1: hear it's Congress about this weight. We keep fighting. We're
Speaker 1: going to keep fighting and fighting and fighting for this.
Speaker 1: That doesn't mean we don't fight. I think we have
Speaker 1: to fight harder than every We know. This is going
Speaker 1: to be a hard fight. It's going to be a
Speaker 1: competitive fight. We should dream big, fight hard, and take
Speaker 1: back our country. This is the fight of our lives.
Speaker 1: Stand up and fight for the best of who we are.
Speaker 1: And I'm prepared to fight, and I know how to fight,
Speaker 1: but I'm ready for that fight. Increasing numbers of people
Speaker 1: are ready for that fight. Stand up and fight for democracy.
Speaker 1: Will fight every day until he is in peace. There's
Speaker 1: only two ways to win a fight. You can win
Speaker 1: a fight through submission or through exhaustion. We can't just
Speaker 1: imagine a better future. We've got to fight for him.
Speaker 1: We continue to fight for a progressive agenda in our future.
Speaker 1: That's what we're fighting against when we fight Republicans and
Speaker 1: Congress who don't want to pass legislation. Now, this is
Speaker 1: time for every single one of us to get up
Speaker 1: and fight for our country. This new a freshman class
Speaker 1: in Congress has got to come in and really set
Speaker 1: the agenda and fight fight, fight, fight, fight fight. Well, authorities,
Speaker 1: the FBI will warrant about an impending war at the
Speaker 1: Capitol that was being planned even weeks in advance. How
Speaker 1: did they miss the intelligence? Why didn't they react to
Speaker 1: the intelligence. Why didn't they accept the president's offer for
Speaker 1: National Guard troops? Why did they deny the Capitol police
Speaker 1: chief the guard groups that he asked for before? And Dorry,
Speaker 1: you know you've got a new network now, this comprehensive analysis.
Speaker 1: New York Post had a story today a sprawling network
Speaker 1: of federal and local law enforcement across the US is
Speaker 1: designed to stave off these terrorist threats. They failed to
Speaker 1: protect the capital. We can't have that in this country
Speaker 1: in a post nine to eleven world. I don't want
Speaker 1: anybody to have to live through any of these moments. Again,
Speaker 1: we need to secure our institutions, and yes, every elected
Speaker 1: official you know, and the idea that officials didn't act
Speaker 1: on intelligence. Why not? The Wall Street Journal said yesterday
Speaker 1: intelligence that they had included warnings from federal local law
Speaker 1: enforcement quote fusion centers around the country warning of protesters
Speaker 1: traveling to DC with weapons. The Wall Street Journal reported,
Speaker 1: citing internal documents viewed by the newspaper, FBI Field Office
Speaker 1: was warned by federal and local agencies handling security for
Speaker 1: the protest and demonstrations, sharing maps of the capital, and
Speaker 1: that the actual call for war. Despite the warnings, the
Speaker 1: intelligence arm of the Department of Homeland Security route, well,
Speaker 1: there's nothing significant to report in the January fifth memo
Speaker 1: to law enforcement. As a result, security forces in DC
Speaker 1: were not prepared for what was we now know premeditated
Speaker 1: and planned that day. We know, according to the Journal,
Speaker 1: that the heads of these fusion centers as they call them,
Speaker 1: where local law enforcement share intelligence with federal authorities. They
Speaker 1: hosted a call on January fourth warning about the number
Speaker 1: of participants planning to bring weapons. The intelligence was shared
Speaker 1: with the DC Fusion Center, and in turn, the offices
Speaker 1: were tasked with providing the security for January six, Department
Speaker 1: of Homeland Security didn't answer the journal's questions if it
Speaker 1: took any action based on the call, while the FBI
Speaker 1: said it held a separate call to brief other law
Speaker 1: enforcement officials. Why didn't they bring in all of their
Speaker 1: guys and insist the National Guard needed to be called up.
Speaker 1: They also pointed out and highlighted our the FBI Field
Speaker 1: Office Norfolk, Virginia pointed to a message board where one
Speaker 1: user was urging protesters to go there quote ready for war,
Speaker 1: sharing maps of the Capitol Complex. That intelligence was shared
Speaker 1: with the Joint Terrorism Task Force in DC, not acted
Speaker 1: upon by the FBI. According to the report, this is
Speaker 1: this is. You know, we have a lot of enemies
Speaker 1: as a country, may have a lot of disagreements as Americans,
Speaker 1: but we're one America, We're United States of America, and
Speaker 1: one thing we need to agree on is we need
Speaker 1: to keep our country safe. And all these other battles
Speaker 1: become quite insignificant when you have people that are planning
Speaker 1: such an attack. I glad you with us our two
Speaker 1: Sean Hannity's show, David shown, friend of this program, who
Speaker 1: is the President's lawyer, has now begun. The arguments now
Speaker 1: that the first part of this is arguing over the constitutionality.
Speaker 1: There'll be a motion to dismiss after this, and that
Speaker 1: will represent the floor of where this will ultimately end.
Speaker 1: In other words, if you get the forty five votes
Speaker 1: that Rampaul's motion got prior to this, that would mean
Speaker 1: that forty five Republican Senators, which we would expect, vote
Speaker 1: again after the motion to dismissed, not to impeach the president.
Speaker 1: Then that would mean that this is an exercise and
Speaker 1: futility with the complete, full, predetermined outcome. Before we get
Speaker 1: to Jordan Seculo and Greg Jarrett getting the legal arguments here,
Speaker 1: let's go to our friend. You recognize his voice. They
Speaker 1: it shown who just started turning up the heat pretty early.
Speaker 1: They tell us that we have to have this impeachment
Speaker 1: trial such as it is, to bring about unity. But
Speaker 1: they don't want unity, and they know this so called
Speaker 1: trial will tear the country in half, leaving tens of
Speaker 1: millions of Americans feeling left out of the nation's agenda
Speaker 1: as dictated by one political party that now holds the
Speaker 1: power in the White House and in our national legislature.
Speaker 1: But they're proud Americans who never quit getting back up
Speaker 1: when they're down, and they don't take dictates from another
Speaker 1: party based on partisan force feeding. This trial will tear
Speaker 1: this country apart, perhaps like we have only seen once
Speaker 1: before in our history. And to help the nation heal,
Speaker 1: we now learn that the house managers, in their wisdom,
Speaker 1: have hired a movie company and a large law firm
Speaker 1: to create, manufacture, and splace for you, a package designed
Speaker 1: by experts to chill and horrify you and our fellow Americans.
Speaker 1: They want to put you through a sixteen hour presentation
Speaker 1: over two days, focusing on this as if it were
Speaker 1: some sort of blood sport. And to what end for healing,
Speaker 1: for unity, for accountability, not for any of those, for
Speaker 1: they surely they are much better ways to achieve each.
Speaker 1: It is again for pure, raw, misguided partisanship that makes
Speaker 1: them believe playing to our worst instincts somehow is good.
Speaker 1: They don't need to show you movies to show you
Speaker 1: that the riot happened here. We will stipulate that it
Speaker 1: happened and you know all about it. This is a
Speaker 1: process fueled irresponsibly by base hatred by these house managers
Speaker 1: and those who gave them their charge, and they are
Speaker 1: willing to sacrifice our national character to advance their hatred
Speaker 1: and their fear that one day they might not be
Speaker 1: the party in power. They have a very different view
Speaker 1: of democracy and freedom from justice Jackson Vance. At one point,
Speaker 1: David Shown just leveled them and I was actually surprised
Speaker 1: by this. Came out with, Yeah, okay, what does impeachment
Speaker 1: basically mean to the Democrats? Nothing, with dates starting from
Speaker 1: pretty much day one in January of twenty seventeen, just
Speaker 1: as small. We have a big montage we use, but
Speaker 1: it's small montage of impeacham, impeacham, impeacham, impeach is all
Speaker 1: they've ever wanted to do. Country knows this at this point,
Speaker 1: but let's play that part assident. In snap impeachment process,
Speaker 1: the House of Representatives denied every attribute of fundamental constitutional
Speaker 1: due process that Americans correctly have come to believe is
Speaker 1: part of what makes this country so great. How and
Speaker 1: why did that happen? It is a function of the
Speaker 1: insatiable lust for impeachment in the House for the past
Speaker 1: four years. Consider this. I want to say this for
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, who I may well be voting to impeach.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump has already done a number of things which
Speaker 1: legitimately raised the question of impeachment. I don't respect this president,
Speaker 1: and I will fight every day until he is impeached.
Speaker 1: That is grounds to start impeachment proceedings. Those are grounds
Speaker 1: to start impeachment. Those are grounds to start impeachment proceedings. Yes,
Speaker 1: I think that's grounds to start impeachment proceeding. I rise today,
Speaker 1: mister Speaker, to call for the impeachment of the President
Speaker 1: of the United States of America. I continue to say,
Speaker 1: mpay tub M page forty five and pay forty five.
Speaker 1: So we're calling upon the House to begin impeachment hearings
Speaker 1: immediately on the impeachment Donald Trump, which you vote yesterday?
Speaker 1: I would vote yes. I would vote. I would vote
Speaker 1: because we're gonna go in there. We're gonna impeach some other.
Speaker 1: But the fact is I introduced articles of impeachment in
Speaker 1: July of twenty seventeen. If we don't impeach this president,
Speaker 1: he will get reelected. Most requires me to be for impeachment.
Speaker 1: Having impeachment hearing that he's the scarlet pilt his chest.
Speaker 1: The Representatives should begin impeachment proceedings against this president. It
Speaker 1: is time to st impeachment charges against him, bringing impeachment charges.
Speaker 1: My personal view is that he richly deserves impeachment, me Ley,
Speaker 1: and we already to impeach the It's been four straight
Speaker 1: years of this. I assume emotion to dismiss follows, and
Speaker 1: we will then get what will be a floor meaning
Speaker 1: then not going to get seventeen Republicans to go along
Speaker 1: with this. Joining us Greg Jarrett, host of his new
Speaker 1: podcast The Brief, author of two New York Times number
Speaker 1: one bestsellers. Jordan's Seculo, executive director for the American Center
Speaker 1: for Law and Justice, co host of The j Secular Live,
Speaker 1: author of the best seller of The Next Red Wave.
Speaker 1: Thank you both for being here. I'm watching David Shoam.
Speaker 1: We know him well on this program, Greg Jarrett, and
Speaker 1: pretty powerful open so far from what I see, I
Speaker 1: can't really watch the rest of it. David has really
Speaker 1: put the matter in proper perspective and done so persuasively
Speaker 1: and compellingly. And he needed to do that. I mean it,
Speaker 1: you know. Jamie Raskin and the lead house manager on
Speaker 1: behalf of Democrats, took just three minutes into his opening
Speaker 1: argument before he queued up the graphic video of the
Speaker 1: mob and blamed it on Trump when Trump, at one
Speaker 1: point in time said, you know, we need to fight
Speaker 1: like hell for our country. Trump was using the term figuratively,
Speaker 1: not literally, and Askin knows that Democrats know that. And they,
Speaker 1: by the way, greg I just played in the last
Speaker 1: hour for this show a montage of Democrats saying fight,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna fight, We'll fight, We'll fight. You know common term.
Speaker 1: I mean, how many times have lawmakers on the floor
Speaker 1: of Congress said we're going to fight this, We're gonna
Speaker 1: fight that. And of course they don't mean it literally,
Speaker 1: they mean it figuratively, So they're taking it wholly out
Speaker 1: of context and conveniently leaving out of the cliffs what
Speaker 1: Trump really said to the crowd that was gathered, act
Speaker 1: peacefully and patriotically when you march down to the Capitol.
Speaker 1: So it was a setup. It was cleverly put together
Speaker 1: by a movie company. And this is all intended to
Speaker 1: stoke and gin up emotion. Why because they lack merit
Speaker 1: on the case in earnest, you know, Jordan Seculo adding
Speaker 1: to that, you know, there are three aspects of this,
Speaker 1: and today's argument is the constitutionality. Although David Shone did
Speaker 1: discuss the fact with a snap impeachment that had been
Speaker 1: no investigation, we now have all of the details of
Speaker 1: a massive intelligence failure that occurred. And in other words,
Speaker 1: we know this was premeditated. These were plans attacked. There
Speaker 1: was a plot, scheme planning. The FBI, they go in
Speaker 1: a great detail, had been specifically warned and didn't do
Speaker 1: a thing about it. And even a New York Post
Speaker 1: piece today that you have an admitted Black Lives Matter
Speaker 1: of supporter John Sullivan just got slapped with additional charges.
Speaker 1: We're playing a primary role in instigating violence during the
Speaker 1: January sixth Capitol riot, according to their reporting. So you
Speaker 1: know that's aspect number two. That well, the snap impeachment,
Speaker 1: but it was preplanned. It wasn't a spontaneous quote insurrection
Speaker 1: incited by the words of Donald Trump. And lastly, what
Speaker 1: about the insurrection as language that I play often of
Speaker 1: the Democrats themselves. Yeah, well, I mean, Sean, this is
Speaker 1: a continuation, this impeachment. And I was on the floor
Speaker 1: the first one on that legal team of what is
Speaker 1: we call in law, especially in international law. But it's
Speaker 1: certainly been experienced by this president as laws there and
Speaker 1: he's going through it right now. And it's not just
Speaker 1: the impete the second impeachment Maller, the first impeachment of
Speaker 1: a phone call that thirty five other people are on.
Speaker 1: He's got das, he's got the Georgia's Secretary of State
Speaker 1: referring a phone call to a DA. There, he's got tax.
Speaker 1: You know, the tax issue still is in question. The
Speaker 1: New York DA, the New York Attorney General Florida is
Speaker 1: going after for where he lives. I mean, it is
Speaker 1: non stop. They cannot let go of a former president.
Speaker 1: And you know that that again, I think plays into
Speaker 1: the argument of he's not looking too. It's not like
Speaker 1: you can escape the legal system by leaving offices president.
Speaker 1: In fact, when you leave offices president, the legal system
Speaker 1: can come at you one hundred miles per hour quicker
Speaker 1: than it could before because of the protections you have
Speaker 1: while you're president. And this idea that he's this January exception,
Speaker 1: I know they wanted to, you know, do something that
Speaker 1: could give it a hashtag going. That is not the case.
Speaker 1: If the president is even believed to be guilty of
Speaker 1: inciting insurrection, as David Shone said, he should be in handcuffs.
Speaker 1: You know, he should be he should be getting knocked
Speaker 1: on the door. None of that has occurred, even because
Speaker 1: all those prosecutors know, even the ones that hate him,
Speaker 1: that they're not going to be able to meet any
Speaker 1: of those standards in a court of law. So they're
Speaker 1: trying to do an impeachment by arguing they have a
Speaker 1: constitutional authority to try a private citizen, but that they
Speaker 1: can ignore it First Amendment rights. I mean, that's going
Speaker 1: to be part of their second argument here is that
Speaker 1: it's really the First Amendment doesn't apply. When you're president.
Speaker 1: You're held to a higher standard, and no one has
Speaker 1: helped to a higher standard than the Constitution itself, including
Speaker 1: those members. And so yes, they can try to show video.
Speaker 1: I think it shows desperation. The House managers have gotten caught.
Speaker 1: And I think you already hear parts of how they're
Speaker 1: going to take part their entire article of impeachment. That
Speaker 1: it was written wrong, they didn't actually lacked the process,
Speaker 1: that they rushed this, that they a month and a
Speaker 1: half later, this is not the same and the people
Speaker 1: don't feel the same. And why are we talking about
Speaker 1: you know, Donald Trump every day now for the next
Speaker 1: week and a half and in the whole lead up
Speaker 1: to this instead of what the Biden administration is trying
Speaker 1: to accomplish. And it's because of that fear the President
Speaker 1: Trump and his supporters and I think the word was
Speaker 1: used cancel out the cancel culture. They want to cancel
Speaker 1: this president and they want to somehow cancel the supporters.
Speaker 1: You know, you could shut down his Twitter account, but
Speaker 1: you can't shut down seventy five million people and their
Speaker 1: views aren't going to change, and in fact, you're reminding
Speaker 1: them about why they have these views so constitutionally. You know,
Speaker 1: It's like even Senator corn and Center, I keep going
Speaker 1: back to it. They go down this road and they
Speaker 1: they'll hold this vote today and yes, it will show
Speaker 1: that the president cannot will not be impeached, He'll be
Speaker 1: acquitted again, he'll be vindicated again. But they will go
Speaker 1: down a road that now opens the door for Republican
Speaker 1: Center to say, you know what, and the you know,
Speaker 1: a Republican House to say, you know what, Barack Obama
Speaker 1: with that test and furious where people got killed, is
Speaker 1: he directly responsible? What about the i RS targeting of
Speaker 1: conservative groups? That's that's certainly a high crime and misdemeanor.
Speaker 1: Do we now impeach him for just the purpose of
Speaker 1: going through it, and maybe then we get a vote
Speaker 1: on so he can't hold office anymore. To take the advance,
Speaker 1: take away all his advantages of being a former president,
Speaker 1: like his security. You know that's an issue here too.
Speaker 1: Take you away your security, take you away your your
Speaker 1: ability to keep your family safe. Uh. That that is
Speaker 1: that that again will be part of the I think
Speaker 1: the bigger argument here, but today all about the zop
Speaker 1: that happens. It seems like both sides now we're shunning witnesses. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there woul any live witnesses. They're simply manufacturing a case
Speaker 1: of emotion via videotape by a professional film company. That's
Speaker 1: that's what democrats and the house managers are doing. They're
Speaker 1: playing to emotion, not to facts, not to evidence. Now
Speaker 1: we know that there is compelling evidence that the attackers
Speaker 1: plan their assault days and weeks in advance. This is
Speaker 1: evidence collected by the FBI. It's impossible for a person
Speaker 1: to incite a pre planned event. And so this just
Speaker 1: underscores how Nancy Pelosi hastily crafted sloppy article of impeachment
Speaker 1: charging Trump with incitement where there's no actual evidence of incitement.
Speaker 1: Nowhere to the president advocator direct to supporters to launch
Speaker 1: an assault of the nation's cattle, to attack police, to
Speaker 1: threaten lawmakers, and commit destruction of property and looting in vandals. Nowhere,
Speaker 1: show me where the president said that. And Democrats will say, well,
Speaker 1: you know there are clips of people who say they
Speaker 1: were inspired by the president. Well, that's irrelevant. This is
Speaker 1: a specific intent crime called incitement. You have to intend it.
Speaker 1: Nowhere did the president intend that? Look at his words.
Speaker 1: It's not how people perceive the president president's words, but
Speaker 1: what he said and what he intended. There is no
Speaker 1: incitement case. Yeah, your take. How does it end? Jordan's
Speaker 1: secular all right, it ends with the president being acquitted
Speaker 1: and vindicated. Yet again they're trying to tarnish him and
Speaker 1: his supporters. They don't really care about the end game.
Speaker 1: I think they care more about just showing the videos,
Speaker 1: trying to tarnish him for the mid terms and the
Speaker 1: effect he could have on that. They're barely hanging on
Speaker 1: to power in the House of the Senate and and
Speaker 1: so I think tho, again, it's going to end in acquittal.
Speaker 1: We're going to see that base vote, Like you said,
Speaker 1: very soon if the forty five remain the Democrat the
Speaker 1: house managers know they've lost already. That's why I think
Speaker 1: that that the witness issue is probably not going to
Speaker 1: happen because neither side wants, especially the Democrat side, that
Speaker 1: were Honestly, I think the presidents I could call a
Speaker 1: lot of witnesses to talk about exactly what Greg just said.
Speaker 1: Is it all this was pre planned? That we had
Speaker 1: all this intel is a failure by the Sergeant of Arms,
Speaker 1: the failure of these other policing departments to put enough
Speaker 1: security in place. And for God's sakes, if we had
Speaker 1: to ban if we can't use the word fight in
Speaker 1: political rhetoric, then none of them read all of the
Speaker 1: fundraising emails you get from both sides of the aisle
Speaker 1: using that kind of language. And if I say, well
Speaker 1: that that encouraged media. That's the reason why I punched
Speaker 1: my neighbor who's a Democrat, or that's the reason by
Speaker 1: democrat neighbor punched me. That is not the country we
Speaker 1: want to live in when we care about the freedom
Speaker 1: of speech, which they are trying to trample on him.
Speaker 1: That's the second part of this trampling on our first amendment. Right, Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: you're right on all points, as are you. Greg. All right,
Speaker 1: Jordan's seculo, Greg God Jared, thank you when we come back.
Speaker 1: Congressman Andy Biggs on this shift show sharade as we
Speaker 1: continue all right twenty five till the top of the hour,
Speaker 1: impeachment Shift Sham Sharade Show. And it's everything we predicted
Speaker 1: with the predetermined outcome. It's pretty amazing the underlying seam
Speaker 1: of the impeachment charge of inciting insurrection. We're spending a
Speaker 1: lot of time on this because the Democrats they're only
Speaker 1: singularly focused on, well, only one riot that they cared
Speaker 1: about over the last year, and the only one they
Speaker 1: cared about. There were a lot of them last year,
Speaker 1: but the one they cared about was in DC. And
Speaker 1: their argument is an incitement towards insurrection, And well, we
Speaker 1: had riots all summer in the biggest cities run by
Speaker 1: liberal Democrats. Homicides were up thirty percent last year in
Speaker 1: a period over the summer. We had police precincts occupied
Speaker 1: and others burned to the ground. We had city blocks occupied,
Speaker 1: chaz chop autonomous, Summer of love, spaghetti potluck dinner zones
Speaker 1: where people died New York City, a portion of which, yes,
Speaker 1: would be rep all of which is represented by Chucky,
Speaker 1: and part of which is represented by say Congress Homan
Speaker 1: A Casio Cortez, the real speaker of the House. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they recorded a record four hundred and sixty two murders
Speaker 1: last year. That's up forty five percent from the prior year.
Speaker 1: They had a ninety seven percent increase in the number
Speaker 1: of shootings last year. We know in New York, for example,
Speaker 1: ninety six percent of people shot were African American or Latino.
Speaker 1: And if the people shot, you know, by it weren't
Speaker 1: being shot by the comps. But the thing is, so
Speaker 1: they care about Remember, the silence was deafening. The comments
Speaker 1: of Kamala Harris the insurrection in citing comments they're not
Speaker 1: gonna stop. They shouldn't stop. They won't stop. You better
Speaker 1: be where you better take note on both levels. It's
Speaker 1: not gonna we shouldn't stop. That was after the police
Speaker 1: precinct that Minneapolis was burned to the ground. That's that's
Speaker 1: after the writing that was going on there and elsewhere,
Speaker 1: you know. So let's just take a little bit of
Speaker 1: some of the incitement insurrection language of the hypocritical democrats
Speaker 1: in terms of all of the other riots that took
Speaker 1: place in the last year. And then we'll dovetell it
Speaker 1: into the sounds of what actually happened as during and
Speaker 1: after the rhetoric was being used by them. And you decide,
Speaker 1: let punch some people in the face when they sit
Speaker 1: to the store and people start doing no white House,
Speaker 1: Your white house must die, the white House, White House, President, Bernie.
Speaker 1: They must go the house now more than ever. We
Speaker 1: must choose to fight. We must choose to resist. We
Speaker 1: must choose to stand up. Who are we believing teacher
Speaker 1: kids to throw that cup part in the garbage about
Speaker 1: to go, that has about to go. This fight will
Speaker 1: be long, This fight will be difficult. And so I
Speaker 1: call on everybody standing here, those that can hear my voice,
Speaker 1: that we now must be determined to fight to the
Speaker 1: long hall. All right there it is, Oh, you have
Speaker 1: a direct reaction response to the incitement, the insurrectionist language
Speaker 1: of the left and the riots that they ignored, that
Speaker 1: they never talked about, that nobody ever got impeached over.
Speaker 1: That was going on pretty much most of the summer anyway.
Speaker 1: Congressman Andy Biggs is with US CO chair Border Security
Speaker 1: Caucus representative from Arizona. By the way, we'll get to
Speaker 1: some of your calls this half hour. Eight hundred and
Speaker 1: nine for one. Sean is our number, and Congressman, I
Speaker 1: think we could have the exact same impeachment for Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, who wants to beat the hell out of
Speaker 1: Trump when he's the president, Chuck Schumer threatening Supreme Court
Speaker 1: Justice Kamala Harris. You know, after the police precinct burn
Speaker 1: and the rioting, they're not going to stop. They shouldn't stop.
Speaker 1: We shouldn't stop. Nancy Pelosi. We could take her back
Speaker 1: to her Wisconsin days and her support of the rioting
Speaker 1: in that capital. And Maxie Waters that takes the cake.
Speaker 1: I'm going to take Trump out tonight. So I think
Speaker 1: we have a lot of hypocrisy on display here, Pushan.
Speaker 1: There's never a shortage of hypocrisy in Washington, DC. But
Speaker 1: you're seeing the two tier system. I mean that what
Speaker 1: this is all about is nothing about January sixth. That
Speaker 1: was the pretext to do what they've always want to do.
Speaker 1: They just want to continue to hassle Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: they would like to racist legacy his good policies, everything,
Speaker 1: And you're right. I mean we hear, we have heard
Speaker 1: language all summer long. Don't forget. You've got the new
Speaker 1: representative from Missouri who says that the prison right, the
Speaker 1: jail right, was just a bunch of her constituents and
Speaker 1: she wants to get in there and help them out
Speaker 1: and make sure they're all right. That's the type of
Speaker 1: a thing that's going on up here constantly. So so
Speaker 1: we can't be surprised at what we're hearing so far
Speaker 1: in the in the impeachment hearing. It's just not a
Speaker 1: surprise at all. And it's the double standard is hobbyists. Now,
Speaker 1: I don't think that the president and we already know
Speaker 1: what the outcome is. It's a predetermined outcome. So they're
Speaker 1: putting on a show and they've got their tapes and
Speaker 1: they got their pictures. But now we know something that's
Speaker 1: very critical and factual and relevant to the whole snap impeachment.
Speaker 1: Why you don't have a snap impeachment, you actually need
Speaker 1: an investigation, and that is that we now have all
Speaker 1: the evidence. We have court documents, we have Congresswoman Acasto
Speaker 1: Cortez for that matter, We now have FBI, we have
Speaker 1: investigators and intelligence and videos of what was a pre
Speaker 1: planned an event that was planned and plotted and schemed
Speaker 1: way in advance and then orchestrated by those people responsible.
Speaker 1: Now other did some people that went to the rally,
Speaker 1: did they join in? Yes? Is that Donald Trump's fault? Well,
Speaker 1: he said to peacefully, patriotically march to the Capitol so
Speaker 1: your voices will be heard. I don't think you have
Speaker 1: a case to make there, So you're exactly right. I mean,
Speaker 1: they we had two hours of debate in the House,
Speaker 1: and that's we need to find out what Nancy Pelosi knew,
Speaker 1: what Chuck Schumer knew when they knew it. There there's
Speaker 1: not been a complete investigation here, and so what we
Speaker 1: have found out is that there were I mean, you
Speaker 1: don't have a pipe bond that just shows up hours
Speaker 1: before President Trump speaks as part of this coordinated attack
Speaker 1: on the Capitol. I mean, and it was coordinated and
Speaker 1: the President was still speaking when the capital is already
Speaker 1: being breached. So so to say that he incited something,
Speaker 1: it's against the standard that we know is the law,
Speaker 1: and it's also against the timeline and the facts and
Speaker 1: the reasonable standard here. So in reality, what you've got
Speaker 1: is you've got people who rushed to a judgment, and
Speaker 1: they rushed to a judgment because they hate this former
Speaker 1: now former president Trump so badly that they're willing to
Speaker 1: say or doing anything, and they actually hate those of
Speaker 1: us who support Preston Trump as well. How ironic is
Speaker 1: it that they have a guy leading their impeachment team
Speaker 1: from your body, the House of Representatives, Jamie Raskin, who
Speaker 1: is a very guy who challenged the results of the
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen election. And then you got a guy that
Speaker 1: sits on the House Intelligence Committee, Swalwell, that we now
Speaker 1: know had a long term relationship with Fang Fang, the
Speaker 1: Chinese spy. How does he how does he manage to
Speaker 1: survive all of this? You know, Sean, it would be laughable.
Speaker 1: But in order to really appreciate irony, you have to
Speaker 1: be able to know shame, and these people don't know shame.
Speaker 1: So so you're right, Raskin was the was objected in
Speaker 1: twenty seventeen to one of the States certifying he got
Speaker 1: Swalwell and his issues. You've got other people on there
Speaker 1: on that committee that just really don't have any business
Speaker 1: being there. And the reality is it is ironic. It
Speaker 1: is laughable. But they don't know that because they don't
Speaker 1: know shame, they're not embarrassed by it. They should be embarrassed,
Speaker 1: but they're not. Well, I don't think that's the case.
Speaker 1: All right, So Democrats from all my sources, they're more
Speaker 1: afraid of this, seemingly than Republicans. Doesn't look like witnesses
Speaker 1: on either side are going to be called. So at
Speaker 1: that point, is this all over? Because I understand Tim
Speaker 1: came maybe Susan Collins and others say well, we might
Speaker 1: move on to the fourteenth Amendment or censure? Is that
Speaker 1: dead on arrival? Also, and what's the process for that? Well,
Speaker 1: I think the impeachment is going to be Uh, that's
Speaker 1: a company. It's not going to happen, no conviction, but
Speaker 1: the censure, um, you know that that might happen. That
Speaker 1: that might happen because it takes my understanding, it takes
Speaker 1: a smaller vote on the majority. Uh. They a lot
Speaker 1: of people say well, we should, we should come after
Speaker 1: him for some reason. I do think though, that they're
Speaker 1: going to be swimming upstream at that point because the
Speaker 1: tide and momentum will the tide will have gone out
Speaker 1: on him. This is the this is their big moment.
Speaker 1: It's failing and it will fail, and to do anything
Speaker 1: more would just make them look even more petty, even
Speaker 1: more amazingly weak than they already appear. And Sean just
Speaker 1: never forget I never forget this. How would it be
Speaker 1: to have Donald Trump living in your head every day
Speaker 1: so that you know you're going to lose this, but
Speaker 1: you say, okay, well we'll try something else. That's that's
Speaker 1: kind of what's going on. And the tide is going
Speaker 1: out on him. The momentum is lost. Well, I think
Speaker 1: the country is going to see this and they're gonna
Speaker 1: say enough's enough. But okay, thank you, Congressman Andy Biggs Arizona.
Speaker 1: We appreciate you being will US eight hundred and nine
Speaker 1: four one. Sean, you want to be a part of
Speaker 1: the program. Joe in the great state of Ohio. What's up, Joe?
Speaker 1: How are you glad you called? Sir? Good John? How
Speaker 1: are you doing today? I'm good, sir. What's up? Hey?
Speaker 1: Two things real quick? First of all, about the election,
Speaker 1: you know, completely unconstitutional. I don't understand how they think
Speaker 1: they're gonna impeach a guy that's already out of office.
Speaker 1: Best president ever in my opinion. Anyhow. Secondly, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm real worried about our country. We're essentially teaching the
Speaker 1: next generation here that it's okay to lie, cheat, and
Speaker 1: manipulate the system. We have a guy in office that
Speaker 1: you know, we don't know if there was fraud. We
Speaker 1: don't know for sure because nobody investigated. Our government didn't investigate.
Speaker 1: And I think it's a shame. It's really a shame.
Speaker 1: It's a it's just a how do you have a
Speaker 1: snap impeachment? And now look at what's coming out? A
Speaker 1: snap in thing about this? A snap impeachment where you
Speaker 1: don't even do you do no informational background, there's no
Speaker 1: research whatsoever. Now we're discovering that all of this apparently
Speaker 1: there were organizers that plotted, planned, and scheme the whole thing.
Speaker 1: Come opening videotape. Then you listen to Trump's words, not
Speaker 1: the distorted montages that they're putting out or putting up. Well,
Speaker 1: his his tweets that he that he had out there
Speaker 1: and saying, well he said that the election was stolen,
Speaker 1: or the president said to fight like hell. Well, we've
Speaker 1: montaged over and over again all the Democrats saying fight, fight, fight, fight, fight,
Speaker 1: so that's kind of a common term used in all
Speaker 1: of politics. And yeah, they'll waste our time, they'll waste
Speaker 1: our money. But there looked even the Democrats sense deep
Speaker 1: down inside. The longer this goes on, the worse it
Speaker 1: is for them, and especially because everybody knows the outcome.
Speaker 1: So why are they doing it? Because they want their
Speaker 1: lad They want to squeeze their last bit of rage
Speaker 1: and spew it on him as But they're not governing
Speaker 1: the country, they're not making there's a nine percent poll
Speaker 1: out today that people only nine percent think that the
Speaker 1: economy under Biden is getting better. Okay, I think the
Speaker 1: American people are speaking loudly. Fix the economy, get aid
Speaker 1: to people that need it, open up the economy, start
Speaker 1: distributing the vaccine in an organized fashion. So that's on
Speaker 1: them they, you know, if they want to be small,
Speaker 1: if they want to be petty, as predictably is usually
Speaker 1: the case, and then let them go do their thing.
Speaker 1: That's their thing, that's what they like to do, that's
Speaker 1: what they're good at. Let me come back, News rounds up,
Speaker 1: information overload. All right, we'll get to the legal arguments,
Speaker 1: which are really weak, pathetic, The pure hypocrisy, double standard
Speaker 1: that we've been watching unfold as the beginning of what
Speaker 1: is now I guess, I guess this goes on to
Speaker 1: Monday on study the night, maybe next week into the
Speaker 1: They say the sixteenth is the vote. So not exactly
Speaker 1: a long period of time the last impeachment at this
Speaker 1: time last year. Remember, they weren't focused on coronavirus when
Speaker 1: Donald Trump was. And I guess this be just their
Speaker 1: annual event, Republican President February impeachment trial, because this is
Speaker 1: the Democrats. They're doing so much to help your economic situation.
Speaker 1: They're doing so much to help your personal income. They're
Speaker 1: doing so much to help workers by firing everybody and
Speaker 1: sending out pink slips and promising billions of jobs in
Speaker 1: the New Green Deal industry. No jobs available, but they're
Speaker 1: going to focus on this, all right, So we'll get
Speaker 1: to that. Also. Mark Hemingway, investigative reporter, Real Clear Investigations
Speaker 1: is here. We'll get to that and your calls next
Speaker 1: hour eight hundred and nine four one sewn. You want
Speaker 1: to be a part of the program, Hannity Tonight, nine
Speaker 1: Eastern the News and Information. The media mob will never
Speaker 1: give you quick break right back. Investigation at the deadly
Speaker 1: insurrection at the US capital a week ago at new
Speaker 1: evidence that it was planned. Also shocking new We're pointing
Speaker 1: that the FBI receeemed a very specific warning before the
Speaker 1: riot at I notice warned of war at the Capitol,
Speaker 1: but for some reason security wasn't stepped up there to
Speaker 1: meet the challenge that that attack would hoax. That there
Speaker 1: was an FBI internal report the day before the siege
Speaker 1: warning of a violent war at the Capitol. The FBI
Speaker 1: admitting that it had intelligence before the insurrection that people
Speaker 1: were planning to travel to DC with the intent to
Speaker 1: cause violence. All right, there you have it. Yeah, all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, we're finding out, Oh man, a lot
Speaker 1: of this happened ahead of time, and a lot of this,
Speaker 1: well I can't believe this, but it looks like people
Speaker 1: plotted and planned and schemed and orchestrated an attack on
Speaker 1: the Capitol. Now, did some the one percent, as I say,
Speaker 1: of the people that attended the rally, join in and
Speaker 1: violate the law. Absolutely, those people are going to be
Speaker 1: in trouble, yep, every one of them. But the fact
Speaker 1: is that there were warnings left and right, and we
Speaker 1: now know that the Capitol police had requested how many
Speaker 1: six separate times that the guard be called up. We
Speaker 1: also know we've also learned that in fact, Mark Meadows
Speaker 1: saying that the President, the President Trump at the time,
Speaker 1: offered to deploy ten thousand National Guard troops ahead of
Speaker 1: January sixth. He said that to Maria on her Sunday
Speaker 1: program Sunday Morning Futures, and he said, yeah, yeah. Trump
Speaker 1: had been vocal about offering Capital police and National Guard
Speaker 1: presidents at the Capitol on multiple occasions last month. He
Speaker 1: was rebuked every time. We know, not only in January,
Speaker 1: but throughout the summer. The President was vocal of making
Speaker 1: sure we had plenty of National Guard troops and additional
Speaker 1: support because he supports the rule of law and law enforcement,
Speaker 1: and offered all the additional help, and in January offered
Speaker 1: as many as ten thousand troops and they were told
Speaker 1: to be on the ready by the Secretary of Defense,
Speaker 1: a direct order from the President. Well, that puts a
Speaker 1: whole different spin on things, and you know, so I
Speaker 1: think that kind of lays out and kind to bear
Speaker 1: all of the things that the Democrats have been arguing.
Speaker 1: Joining us now is Mark Hemingway he's a senior writer
Speaker 1: for real clear investigations. We'll get his take on this
Speaker 1: shift show, this show trial with a predetermined outcome. The
Speaker 1: rest of the nation's trying to get back to work,
Speaker 1: trying to pay their mortgages, their rent and deal with
Speaker 1: draconian shutdowns and get a hold of the virus that's
Speaker 1: been mismanaged by many democratic governors around the country. Mark,
Speaker 1: thanks for joining us, glad to be here. Let's talk
Speaker 1: about your take on this about democratic impeachment managers suppressing
Speaker 1: witnesses and other tactics to protect Biden and allow you know,
Speaker 1: his media supporters to later cast allegations on some other things.
Speaker 1: We'll get to that, but what's your take on this
Speaker 1: on the current impeachment. You know, well, it ties into
Speaker 1: what happened with the first impeachment. I mean, part of
Speaker 1: the problem we're dealing with right now is that by
Speaker 1: violating so many standards of process and transparency with the
Speaker 1: first impeachment, we have a situation here where Democrats have
Speaker 1: politicized and cheapened this second impeachment proceeding to the point where,
Speaker 1: you know, we have a situation where most modern Republicans
Speaker 1: in this Senate are already saying that this is a
Speaker 1: farce and we know that there's no point in going
Speaker 1: through this because he's he's going to be acquitted. But
Speaker 1: you know, secondarily, the impeachment was one of our most
Speaker 1: solemn processes for holding a democrat of the elected leaders
Speaker 1: of accountable, and now it's just being seen completely as
Speaker 1: a politicized process that doesn't mean anything. You know, you've
Speaker 1: written extensively about, for example, the first impeachment, and what
Speaker 1: I could never understand in all of that, with all
Speaker 1: of the witnesses, they were all hearsay witnesses. Has all
Speaker 1: started because of not a real whistle blower, but a
Speaker 1: hearsay whistle blower that was anonymous. On top of everything else. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: the whistle blowers post election that saw irregularities with the
Speaker 1: election process were completely ignored by the media, which I
Speaker 1: think is a double standard. But all of the you
Speaker 1: had hearsay, a hearsay whistle blower anonymous, You had hearsay witnesses,
Speaker 1: and you had opinion witnesses. You had only one fact
Speaker 1: witness correct me, Mark Emmingway if I'm wrong. And then
Speaker 1: one fact witness that talked to Donald Trump said no
Speaker 1: quid pro quo, none at all, he wants nothing. That
Speaker 1: was the exact phrase. Now, Joe Biden's on tape leveraging
Speaker 1: a billion US tax dollars to fire a Ukrainian prosecutor
Speaker 1: that he knew, we all know now was investigating his
Speaker 1: zero experience fifty year old son hunter who was being
Speaker 1: paid millions. Now, why didn't that rise to the level
Speaker 1: of impeachment. Well, that was a key aspect of the
Speaker 1: first impeachment and why it was such a farcet in
Speaker 1: so many ways, which is to say, if the Biden
Speaker 1: family had corruption issues, then you know, the truth would
Speaker 1: have been a defense for Donald Trump in the impeachment proceeding,
Speaker 1: would it not have? I mean, it would have been
Speaker 1: perfectly reasonable for the president, under national security grounds to ask,
Speaker 1: you know, whether or not you know Joe Biden and
Speaker 1: his family were leveraging their political connections to engage in
Speaker 1: corrupt financial dealings. But that was never allowed to be
Speaker 1: a question that was addressed in the first impeachment, and
Speaker 1: in fact, they specifically went out of their way to
Speaker 1: hide in in questions about it. Adam Shift deposed all
Speaker 1: of the witnesses except for the first one that you
Speaker 1: already mentioned who you know, sort of embarrassed Shift by
Speaker 1: establishing that there was no qui pro quo and quite convincingly.
Speaker 1: And after that first witness, Shift deposed every person in
Speaker 1: the House impeachment trial in such a manner that it
Speaker 1: was done under a secretive testimony and Republicans could not
Speaker 1: talk about what was that witness said under questioning without
Speaker 1: facing ethnic charges when it was over. Meanwhile, they were
Speaker 1: leaking the one sided testimony transcripts they were giving beforehand,
Speaker 1: so the press could run wild with this one sided speculation.
Speaker 1: I mean, impeachment, like I said again, it was supposed
Speaker 1: to be a solemn process for holding people accountable and
Speaker 1: it was completely non transparent. I mean, who could trust
Speaker 1: that after what they had been through? And now we're
Speaker 1: a situation here where Democrats are demanding more accountability, but
Speaker 1: the well is still poison that there's no reason for
Speaker 1: Republicans to go along with because they cannot trust Democrats
Speaker 1: to run a fair impeachment process. Well they can't, I mean,
Speaker 1: if we're going to be honest about this, And I
Speaker 1: just got into this in the last half hour or
Speaker 1: the last hour, my friend Andy Biggs, and then the
Speaker 1: point that we were making with him, is that when
Speaker 1: you take the language of the left and the utter
Speaker 1: silence of the left in terms of the last impeachment,
Speaker 1: it is kind of amazing because there was a lot
Speaker 1: of riots that took place in the last year, and
Speaker 1: this seems to be the only one that they really
Speaker 1: cared about. We had police precincts burned to the ground,
Speaker 1: We had police officers over twenty twenty five hundred or
Speaker 1: so injured. We had nearly thirty people dead as a
Speaker 1: result of the rioting. And what did we hear, you know,
Speaker 1: people like Kamala Harris saying you better beware, you better
Speaker 1: take note. On both levels, they're not going to stop.
Speaker 1: They shouldn't stop, and we shouldn't stop. Is that insurrection
Speaker 1: as language? You would think? So? Um, there were you know,
Speaker 1: you forgot. There were sixty Secret Service agents injured in
Speaker 1: a single night of writing at the White House trying
Speaker 1: to protect the president. The president had be moved to
Speaker 1: a secure location. That was not a cause for urgency,
Speaker 1: That was not a symbolic attack on a few of democracy.
Speaker 1: You know, that was never regarded as anything. You know
Speaker 1: that that was not regarded as a crisis, and it
Speaker 1: perhaps it should have been you know, certainly by the
Speaker 1: standards of what we're treating would happen on January sixth,
Speaker 1: which you know, I agree was a very serious thing.
Speaker 1: But so you're absolutely right. The duplicity and the double
Speaker 1: standards here again make it very hard for the average
Speaker 1: citizen to look at what's going on, to look at
Speaker 1: the process and say, you know what, this is fair,
Speaker 1: and they're probably concluding the opposite. You know, when when
Speaker 1: riots happen, when Republicans do it, it's it's the end
Speaker 1: of democracy. When you know, the entire media establishment buys
Speaker 1: in and the entire corporate establishment buys in, it supports
Speaker 1: ongoing riots you know across you know, dozens and dozens
Speaker 1: of US cities that you know, do billions of dollars
Speaker 1: in damage, you know, you know, killed dozens of people. Um,
Speaker 1: that's okay, um. And I just don't see how we
Speaker 1: get through this current impeaching process about people, a significant
Speaker 1: number of voters being discussed by the duplicity at least. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's pretty an amazing it's really an
Speaker 1: amazing time, you know, And you can add some other
Speaker 1: issues here that begin to flow from all of this.
Speaker 1: The double standard, the hypocrisy, which is pretty breathtaking. Um,
Speaker 1: then you go back to the first impeachment. Now you've
Speaker 1: got a federal criminal investigation for possible tax fraud as
Speaker 1: it relates to you know, fifty year old to Biden.
Speaker 1: Then yeah, big tech censoring the New York Post story,
Speaker 1: you know, with accompanying picture. And I'm told other far
Speaker 1: worse pictures, but the one that they printed had a
Speaker 1: hunter asleep with a crack pipe in his mouth, barely
Speaker 1: a word about it. And it's it's pretty amazing to
Speaker 1: me that that goes under the radar by so many others.
Speaker 1: And you know, here you are an investigative reporter and
Speaker 1: you do the comparison objectively. You tell me, am, I
Speaker 1: being too conservative here to prejudice in my outlook in life. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, I don't think so, I mean. And again
Speaker 1: it goes back to the first impeachment. You know, we
Speaker 1: weren't allowed to ask any questions publicly about Biden impeached
Speaker 1: abou about Biden corruption and whether or not this was
Speaker 1: a problem. No, we didn't have any sort of like
Speaker 1: public hearing on these issues. And not only not be
Speaker 1: public hearing in these issues. Once we got through impeachment. Basically,
Speaker 1: the word had gotten out. These Democrats suppressed asking questions
Speaker 1: about corruption. By the time the New York Post runs
Speaker 1: around in the heart of the campaign, everyone's decided that
Speaker 1: the questions about Biden corruption have been and asked and answered.
Speaker 1: So they completely suppressed the New York Post story to
Speaker 1: the point where they think the you know, absolutely stunning,
Speaker 1: you know, move where they censor it on social media online.
Speaker 1: Biden eats out the narrowest victory of forty thousand votes
Speaker 1: spread across three states, and then, you know, barely two
Speaker 1: months after election, we come to find out that, oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, there has been an ongoing Justice Department
Speaker 1: investigation in Joe Hunter Biden's corruption for years. And oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, you know, we we already had, in
Speaker 1: the heat of the campaign, knowledge of one man coming
Speaker 1: forward and saying that Joe Biden is personally involved in this,
Speaker 1: you know, and even now no one's asking any questions.
Speaker 1: He's the president now. So if you if you were
Speaker 1: at least gonna, you know, pretend to, you know, try
Speaker 1: and swing the election for Biden, you know, you could
Speaker 1: at least, you think, take a breather and go back
Speaker 1: to doing your regular journalistic responsibility of holding the guy
Speaker 1: in power responsible. Now we have a serious, you know,
Speaker 1: interest in knowing whether or not the President of the
Speaker 1: United States is in any way beholding to these business
Speaker 1: dealings that Hunter Biden was making with foreign governments, including China.
Speaker 1: You know, this is a very very serious matter, and
Speaker 1: journalists need to take the responsibility to getting to the
Speaker 1: bottom of that very very seriously. Let me ask you
Speaker 1: about another real clear investigation that has to do with
Speaker 1: how Democrats crafted the first impeachment helping, you know, and
Speaker 1: the impact it had on twenty twenty in the in
Speaker 1: the help of the media, and more specifically, you know,
Speaker 1: if you look at the razor thin swing state margins.
Speaker 1: Perhaps am I wrong in thinking that if the American
Speaker 1: people had access to a lot of the information that
Speaker 1: was suppressed on behalf of Joe Biden by big tech,
Speaker 1: by the news media, the mob as I call them,
Speaker 1: Is it a leap to think that that could have
Speaker 1: swung the election in Trump's favor? Oh not at all.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's been polling that has shown basically that
Speaker 1: there's a you know that almost certainly Biden would have
Speaker 1: lost if it had been sort of widely discussed. You know,
Speaker 1: there were polls that showed the huge numbers of Biden
Speaker 1: voters weren't even aware of the Hunter Biden corruption stuff.
Speaker 1: It was so successfully blocked out by this you know
Speaker 1: sort of you know, hit huge word but collusion between
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party and the media. And I have no
Speaker 1: doubt that it would have made a massive difference in
Speaker 1: the election if the press had been fair and in
Speaker 1: terms of you know, covering that stuff. And we all
Speaker 1: know if there had been this kind of corruption involving
Speaker 1: one of the Trump kids, you know, the media would
Speaker 1: have you know, gone overboard on top of that. You know,
Speaker 1: in November, just at the election, we had reporters like
Speaker 1: Sam Stein, who I believe is now the White House
Speaker 1: editor for Politico, like literally spiking the football online and
Speaker 1: saying that the difference between the Biden story and the
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton laptop story. That was the big October's pride
Speaker 1: of Anthony Weiner back in twenty sixteen was that we
Speaker 1: made sure that in the media, we made sure that
Speaker 1: the Hunter Biden laptop story didn't spread out into you know,
Speaker 1: the mainstream news, and we deliberately made a choice to
Speaker 1: call it Russian disinformation. And that must have been the
Speaker 1: difference in the Trump's narrow victory in twenty sixteen and
Speaker 1: Trump's narrow victory in twenty twenty. He may not have
Speaker 1: been wrong, but you know, learning just a few weeks
Speaker 1: later that they had suppressed the true story, you think
Speaker 1: that would prompt some sort of you know, dramatic reflection
Speaker 1: upon the media establishment that they went out calling a
Speaker 1: story that turned out being mark I'm kind of laughing
Speaker 1: about media reflection or introspection or an examination of their practices.
Speaker 1: These are the same people that spread nothing but a
Speaker 1: pure conspiracy theory for three straight years, and they never retracted,
Speaker 1: They never apologize, they never corrected the record. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean there obviously it's not just the impeachment or Biden corruption.
Speaker 1: There are any of these number numbers wild good spaces
Speaker 1: of the media covered at nauseum, Russia being the chief
Speaker 1: example where you know that might have been the difference
Speaker 1: in the election too, Wayne, What if they hadn't spent
Speaker 1: you know, four years saying that Trump was increasonously colluding
Speaker 1: with Russia. With that of Swan forty thousand votes, I mean,
Speaker 1: we could just go down the line here, but yes,
Speaker 1: it is truly alarming. I think the way that the
Speaker 1: media have decided to basically, you know, cheerlead and you know,
Speaker 1: compete for Democrats essentially, well said all right, Mark Hemingway,
Speaker 1: Senior writer, Real Clear Investigations. Thank you, sir for being
Speaker 1: with us. We appreciate your insight. All right, twenty five
Speaker 1: to the top of the hour, and glad jore with us.
Speaker 1: We'll get to your calls. Eight hundred and nine four one. Sean,
Speaker 1: you want to be a part of the program, you know,
Speaker 1: I love taking little trips down memory lane to listen
Speaker 1: to Democrats and their rank, hypocrisy, the double standard. You know,
Speaker 1: let's take a little trip down memory lane. Democrats defending
Speaker 1: Bill Clinton during impeachment. Listen, they aren't driven by hatred.
Speaker 1: They hate Bill and Hillary Clinton so much they will
Speaker 1: stop at nothing to bring him down. Because we are
Speaker 1: here as we are here today, because the Republicans in
Speaker 1: the House are paralyzed with hatred of President Clinton. And
Speaker 1: until the Republicans free themselves of this hatred, our country
Speaker 1: will suffer. And one of the reasons we all feel
Speaker 1: so angry about what they are doing is that they
Speaker 1: are ripping from us. They are ripping us under our votes.
Speaker 1: They are telling us that our votes don't count. This
Speaker 1: is their president we are talking about, and we in
Speaker 1: Congress had better be very careful before we upset their
Speaker 1: decision and make darn sure that our decision to impeach
Speaker 1: him was based upon principle and not politics. My theory
Speaker 1: is that when a Republican wins the White House, Democrats
Speaker 1: will demand payback. All right, let's get to our busy
Speaker 1: telephones here. Let's say hi. Two, let's see EWA is
Speaker 1: in Florida? Ewa, Hi, how are you glad you called? Thanks? Sean?
Speaker 1: I'm Sean. I just wanted to ask you a couple
Speaker 1: of questions real quick. Number one, why is our taxpayer
Speaker 1: dollars going to try to impeach somebody who's not even
Speaker 1: in office? That's number one. Number two, that money could
Speaker 1: be used for the people and their constituents, and they're
Speaker 1: wasting all this time on all the circus and they're
Speaker 1: not helping the people. I mean, what is this really?
Speaker 1: They should pay the people back for the four years
Speaker 1: of sham impeachment and pay the people back for what
Speaker 1: they're trying to do right now. This is coming out
Speaker 1: of our taxpayer dollars, and it really upsets me. It
Speaker 1: should upset you because listen, look at all the people
Speaker 1: they got pink slips thanks to Joe Biden the fifties
Speaker 1: some odd now executive orders. This is not the people's
Speaker 1: business that's going on here. You know, this is irrational,
Speaker 1: psychotic rage, just outright hatred. You know, the danger to
Speaker 1: the constitution, the whole snap impeachment. Why they would ever validate,
Speaker 1: legitimize what the House did is unbelievable to me. And
Speaker 1: because it's not a legitimate process, they race through it
Speaker 1: in record time. Anyway, I share, I share your feelings. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I just want to say one more thing before I get,
Speaker 1: before I go and into You're a busy man, But listen,
Speaker 1: Trump said I'm going to do these things if you
Speaker 1: elect me. He has checked off almost every box except
Speaker 1: draining the deep filled swamp. What has what has the
Speaker 1: Democrats done? Where's their checklist? What have they checked off
Speaker 1: that they've done for the people, for America, for our freedoms?
Speaker 1: Nothing excepts the press on Listen, you're you're right. Every
Speaker 1: American should be angered at all of this. You know,
Speaker 1: That's why I keep saying, and people are like, what
Speaker 1: do you mean you want it to go on for long.
Speaker 1: Let it go as long as they wanted to go.
Speaker 1: Let him impeach every day. Let's go for ninety nine
Speaker 1: more by the time they're done with this one, because
Speaker 1: every day they do it, that's less damage that they're
Speaker 1: doing to the American economy. Now, they should be doing
Speaker 1: things like COVID vaccine distribution, helping small businesses that have
Speaker 1: been struggling, shut down draconian shutdown measures that have been
Speaker 1: in place. They should be worried about. Oh, those oil workers,
Speaker 1: the pipeline workers. No, they'd rather listen to Leonardo DiCaprio
Speaker 1: now shut down the CODA pipeline. Well, obviously he doesn't
Speaker 1: have to worry about it himself. It's just sad and anyway,
Speaker 1: thank you for the call. And then on top of
Speaker 1: it all, then you got the mob the media now
Speaker 1: after the snap impeachment. Oh, this was all pre planned?
Speaker 1: Oh my goodness. Hoof well, I guess the incitement to
Speaker 1: insurrection charge spontaneous nature of it can't be true if
Speaker 1: it was pre planned. I got a long montage here.
Speaker 1: Just listen to the media, you know, having to report
Speaker 1: on this being pre planned. I want to get to
Speaker 1: this issue of coordination and premeditation, because only and this
Speaker 1: is really the leading edge of this investigation. And for
Speaker 1: the first time today we heard the US Attorney say
Speaker 1: that he believes the pipe bombs are connected to the
Speaker 1: riders and that it was a diversionary tactic. So right
Speaker 1: at the height of this, between twelve forty five and
Speaker 1: one fifteen, when President Trump is speaking, you have the
Speaker 1: first group pushing onto the Capitol complex, the first pipe
Speaker 1: bomb is reported at the RNC headquarters here in Washington.
Speaker 1: Then at one fifteen the second is reported at the DNC,
Speaker 1: And the US Attorney said today he thought they were diversionary,
Speaker 1: which means they were an effort to pull first responders
Speaker 1: away from the Capitol at the very time frame that
Speaker 1: they were breaching on to the Capitol, so it would
Speaker 1: further weaken security at that site. And all of this
Speaker 1: goes to I'm sorry, it's a long answer. It all
Speaker 1: goes to the idea premeditation and coordination among individuals been
Speaker 1: Now to that chilling new report that there was an
Speaker 1: FBI internal report the day before the siege warning of
Speaker 1: a violent war at the Capitol. In new reporting that
Speaker 1: the FBI receivemed a very specific warning before the riot.
Speaker 1: Let's bring in CBS as Jeff, the gays, who's been
Speaker 1: reporting all day, good evening, Jeff, or that FBI notice
Speaker 1: warned of war at the Capitol, but for some reason
Speaker 1: security wasn't stepped up there to meet the challenge that
Speaker 1: that attack would post on. How much of it was
Speaker 1: was planned? How much of this was strategized ahead of time?
Speaker 1: People wandering around exercising their First Amendment rights don't bring
Speaker 1: ropes and ladders and sledgehammers to a spontaneous event. This
Speaker 1: was a planned assault, as if going after a castle.
Speaker 1: Such rank hypocrisy. All right, let's get back to our phones. Robert, Texas,
Speaker 1: what's up, Robert? How are you glad you called? Sir?
Speaker 1: Glad you're in a state that has a well a
Speaker 1: good decent amount of common sense and decency. D Bless Texas.
Speaker 1: I got a question for you, God Bless Texas. I agree. So,
Speaker 1: how is it or why is it that Chief Justice
Speaker 1: Roberts is not proceeding at this kangaroo court? That's part one.
Speaker 1: Part two is why doesn't the judicial branch grow a
Speaker 1: spine and stop this travesty with a nine to zero
Speaker 1: vote about its constitutionality. You know, they all took an
Speaker 1: oath to protect, defend, and follow the constitution, and right
Speaker 1: now they're lying to three hundred and thirty million Americans.
Speaker 1: They you know, you raise an interesting point. The Chief
Speaker 1: Justice isn't there for a reason. Now, how would you
Speaker 1: like to have a quote, impeachment trial or any trial?
Speaker 1: And the judge is already determined before the start of
Speaker 1: the trial that you're guilty as hell. Boy, that sounds
Speaker 1: like the American way, doesn't it. That sounds like a
Speaker 1: good old American way to me. Unbelievable times. Robert Yep,
Speaker 1: God bless Texas. Moses Knew Joyce. What's up, Moses? How
Speaker 1: are you? I'm doing great, Sean. Great to talk to you,
Speaker 1: my friend. Thank you for taking my call. Thank you
Speaker 1: all right, So a couple of comments don't want to
Speaker 1: make Sean, and it's I've seen it, especially after like
Speaker 1: you know, the events has happened in the last couple
Speaker 1: of months. But I understand even more clearly now why
Speaker 1: Trump got elected. It's because of Republican weakness and inaction
Speaker 1: decades of it. You know, the Republicans don't have to
Speaker 1: fight back. All they have to do is just simply
Speaker 1: respond in kind. We've now had two unconstitutional impeachments. We've
Speaker 1: had Adam Schiff completely destroyed presidents when he comes to impeachment,
Speaker 1: release phone records of sitting members of Congress, release phone
Speaker 1: records illegally of lawyers like Rudy Giuliani and other and
Speaker 1: other private citizens, you know. And now the hypocrisy. You
Speaker 1: have Alsie Hastings. They're talking about impeachment, right, you have
Speaker 1: Alcie hey Things, congressan from Florida Democrat who was a
Speaker 1: judge that was impeached for bribery, and he sits on
Speaker 1: the Democrat Rules Committee, is the vice chairman. But yet
Speaker 1: they want to go after but you want to go
Speaker 1: after Donald Trump, Republicans. What they need to do is
Speaker 1: attack the establishment, you know, obviously peacefully. Of course. Let
Speaker 1: me just make that very clear. And I've said this
Speaker 1: for years. You're onto something here, Moses, and that is yeah,
Speaker 1: weak Republicans. They helped create Donald Trump, and a lot
Speaker 1: of them still didn't learn the lesson of Trump. Now,
Speaker 1: you might have personality differences or stylistic differences, but you
Speaker 1: can see the passion for the people that went out
Speaker 1: and by far, record numbers to vote for him for president,
Speaker 1: and it's fair that you get that much more in
Speaker 1: terms of voters the second time around. And the reason
Speaker 1: simple is he made promises and he went literally every day,
Speaker 1: rolled up his sleeves and fought to keep the promises. Now,
Speaker 1: can you argue that maybe shouldn't have fought so much
Speaker 1: on Twitter? Stylistically? You know there is America knew they
Speaker 1: were electing a disruptor and an iconic classed and frankly,
Speaker 1: it is probably the cleaning out that the swamp needed.
Speaker 1: But with that said, do I see Republicans in the
Speaker 1: House and Senate as willing to fight as he is? No,
Speaker 1: I don't some, I do see some. I don't see enough. Yep.
Speaker 1: And that is the problem, you know. And let me
Speaker 1: tell you something, Sean. You know, I'm a former marine,
Speaker 1: and it's just like you said, never a former marine, semplify,
Speaker 1: I've never. Here's the thing. I don't approve of all
Speaker 1: of the former president's you know, style, his approach. But
Speaker 1: guess what if I was overseas in Iraq right and
Speaker 1: our embassy which it was attacked, was attacked, I would
Speaker 1: rather have President Trump as the commander in chief than
Speaker 1: any other past president, because he responded within hours with
Speaker 1: an entire battalion of marines and several helicopters to make
Speaker 1: sure that there was never going to be another Benghazi.
Speaker 1: And at the end of the day, it's results that matter,
Speaker 1: not style. Who do you think if you had the guests,
Speaker 1: we have a hostile actor, Vladimir Putin, hostile regime Rusher,
Speaker 1: you have hostile Iranian mulas, you have hostile regime China
Speaker 1: President She. Who do you think? And they're paying very
Speaker 1: close attention to America, they're s buying on all of
Speaker 1: us in all likelihood. Who do you think they fear more?
Speaker 1: Fear Trump or Biden? And who do you think they
Speaker 1: think is is the two? Which would they view as
Speaker 1: a pushover? That's not even a question. You know they
Speaker 1: fear Trump or more, and they're even bragging about it.
Speaker 1: What is the last month? You know, your network reported
Speaker 1: you have Chinese academics right now and the video got
Speaker 1: taken down a couple of hours later, bragging about the
Speaker 1: deals that they already put in with Hunter Biden. You know,
Speaker 1: So whether Joe Biden knows or not, you might maybe
Speaker 1: he forgot, like legitimately he probably forgot, but he is compromised,
Speaker 1: you know, and you have to give it a score,
Speaker 1: if you have to give it a waiting. Joe Biden
Speaker 1: is far He's done far worse than I've done, far
Speaker 1: worse that can be proven than anything in Donald Trump
Speaker 1: has ever been accused of that's not proven. All right,
Speaker 1: appreciate the call. Thank you very much, Moses Leo in Massachusetts. Leo,
Speaker 1: you're on the Sean Hannity Show. Sean, thank you very
Speaker 1: much for taking my call, and thanks for being the
Speaker 1: patriot you are and truth teller. I think I offer
Speaker 1: a pretty unique persive and for previty fake I'll get
Speaker 1: right to it. My heart breaks for this country. I
Speaker 1: served forty years with this government, twenty two reactive duty
Speaker 1: combat that eighteen with civil service, and I think, thank you,
Speaker 1: by the way, thank you, thank you for all you've done. No,
Speaker 1: it was my pleasure to serve. But I will tell
Speaker 1: you my brothers and sisters right now, we feel like
Speaker 1: we're being sold out. When did the word patriotism become
Speaker 1: a dirty word? When did freedom become some kind of
Speaker 1: invasion technique as as described by the left. When did
Speaker 1: the woke media come all together with this unholy alliance
Speaker 1: Dorothy Zukerberg, Bazos Pachai, the whole system to I mean,
Speaker 1: what I feel is going on is that they're trying
Speaker 1: to degrade and destroy the will of the American people.
Speaker 1: And let's face it, we're not represented by our representatives
Speaker 1: anymore in Congress. They're too worried about their next seats
Speaker 1: that you know, the very insurrectionists in this country are
Speaker 1: sitting members of Congress right now. There's a real insurrectionist.
Speaker 1: Look at this farce that's going on. My heart bleeds
Speaker 1: and my heart breaks. My brothers and sisters who I'm
Speaker 1: still in contact with, and the ones I've lost overseas
Speaker 1: on many many deployments for this country, we all feel
Speaker 1: the same. We feel like, you know, we've first taken
Speaker 1: ourselves for a country that doesn't appreciate us, for a
Speaker 1: government doesn't support us, and for a Congress and administrative branch.
Speaker 1: It's selling out this country and selling out the very
Speaker 1: ideal that I and every one of my brothers and
Speaker 1: sisters stand for. And we all bled the same. When
Speaker 1: you see a man's legs drifted off, or eyes damned out,
Speaker 1: or a head explode in the blood, there's no race overseas.
Speaker 1: There's no race overseas when you're sitting next to a
Speaker 1: guy defecating in his pants because he's still afraid of
Speaker 1: what the town's going on, the next roadside bomb that's
Speaker 1: going off. That's what I want our members of Congress
Speaker 1: to understand. The millions of us whose heart, whose hearts
Speaker 1: are breaking to I can tell you this, you speak
Speaker 1: for a lot of people. What I see saddens me
Speaker 1: as well. And I worry about our children and our grandchildren.
Speaker 1: I don't like the road we're going down. It's not
Speaker 1: gonna end well. I hope I'm wrong. That's gonna wrap
Speaker 1: things up today, all right. Full coverage opening arguments and
Speaker 1: the latest impeachment shift show charadeed on Capitol Hill. Chad Program,
Speaker 1: Alan der Schwitzgraig Jarrett Don Junior Senator Ted Cruz, Tammy Bruce,
Speaker 1: Joe Conscha, Pete HEGSETH nine Eastern, Set your DVR. We'll
Speaker 1: see you tonight at nine. Back here tomorrow. As always,
Speaker 1: thank you for being with us,