Speaker 1: Hey everybody. I'm Greg Jared, filling in for Sean Hannity
Speaker 1: on the Sean Hannity Show. Happy to be here for
Speaker 1: the second day in a row. Shaw's taking off a
Speaker 1: few well deserved days of rest during the holidays. I've
Speaker 1: been at Fox. I'm a legal analyst there for going
Speaker 1: on twenty four years. I've written several books, beginning with
Speaker 1: the Russia Hoax, the Sequel witch Hunt, I wrote The
Speaker 1: Trial of the Century, and the latest book is The
Speaker 1: US Constitution and other patriotic documents. Please check them out.
Speaker 1: But I want to begin today with the burr in
Speaker 1: my saddle over fraud. Have you ever wondered where a
Speaker 1: lot of your hard earned tax dollars go? Well, look
Speaker 1: no further than the screwed up state of Minnesota. It
Speaker 1: is a blue state, to be sure, run by idiots
Speaker 1: and morons that are so utterly incompetent that they failed
Speaker 1: to refuse to recognize one of the greatest ripoffs in
Speaker 1: American history. Minnesota is now the epicenter of fraud. We're
Speaker 1: talking about roughly two billion dollars with a capital B
Speaker 1: stolen by scammers from social service programs. In fact, there
Speaker 1: were so many swindles going on at the same time.
Speaker 1: You'd need a float chart just to keep track of
Speaker 1: them all. And of course, at the top of the
Speaker 1: float chart should be a big fat picture of Governor
Speaker 1: Tim Walls and his sidekick Keith Ellison, the state's scandal
Speaker 1: plugued attorney general. Together, those two are the dumb and
Speaker 1: dumber of politics, and both are to blame because they
Speaker 1: were repeatedly warned of all the hustles and flim plans
Speaker 1: going on in their precious Somali community. But they didn't care.
Speaker 1: Now they thought it would be racist to prosecute Somali constituents,
Speaker 1: so they happily allowed the fraud to continue and indeed
Speaker 1: to escalate. You see, in uber liberal Minnesota, it is
Speaker 1: politically incorrect to enforce the law against Somali's God forbid,
Speaker 1: putting criminals behind bars might lose some votes. Not only
Speaker 1: did Waltz turn a blind eyed all the conjobs going
Speaker 1: on under his bulbous nose, he actually helped them flourish.
Speaker 1: Evidence shows he was told repeatedly of the ginormous COVID
Speaker 1: fraud scandal early on, but instead of fixing it, he
Speaker 1: worked to protect it and to cover it up. He
Speaker 1: allegedly aided and embedded all of the schemes by rit
Speaker 1: retaliating against whistleblowers who had come forward with courage.
Speaker 2: To try to expose the fraud. Waltz tried his level
Speaker 2: best to discredit the fraud reports themselves. So you know
Speaker 2: that's not merely rank incompetence. It's intentional malfeasance. No wonder
Speaker 2: Walt's admitted during the vice presidential debate that he's a knucklehead. Really,
Speaker 2: he actually said that, and by the way, nobody has
Speaker 2: ever disagreed with that assessment. The guy is a total buffoon.
Speaker 2: I wouldn't trust him to run a hot dog stand,
Speaker 2: and yet he has the audacity to run for reelection,
Speaker 2: So you know he can ruin Minnesota further with even
Speaker 2: more corruption. Tim Waltz is so clueless that his own.
Speaker 1: State workers at the Department of Human Services denounced his
Speaker 1: epic incompetence. They issued an official statement saying Waltz is
Speaker 1: one hundred percent responsible for fleecing more than a billion
Speaker 1: dollars from taxpayers. Look, is anybody really surprised? I mean,
Speaker 1: this is what happens when the government begins handing out
Speaker 1: free money while relying on states like Minnesota for oversight.
Speaker 1: I mean, the scammers and the grifters are having a
Speaker 1: field day. The pandemic relief was supposed to be administered
Speaker 1: by Waltz's Education Department, but they were so inept under
Speaker 1: his leadership or lack thereof, that it became a piece
Speaker 1: of cake to steal hundreds of millions of dollars in
Speaker 1: phony claims. Money that was supposed to go to feed
Speaker 1: needy children was stolen by scammers who splashed their cash
Speaker 1: on lock tree homes, fancy cars, elaborate vacations, lavish lifestyles.
Speaker 1: They were yucking it up. In one case alone, they
Speaker 1: claimed to have served ninety one million meals that were
Speaker 1: never served, for which they fraudulently received two hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty million dollars in federal funds. Those are your tax
Speaker 1: dollars going into the pockets of Minnesota Crux. I can't
Speaker 1: think of anything lower than stealing money from hungry children,
Speaker 1: or taking money away from kids who were supposed to
Speaker 1: be receiving autistic services that never happened. But that's not all.
Speaker 1: Housing programs were also ripped off in Minnesota. In fact,
Speaker 1: the list is so long that one former US Attorney
Speaker 1: estimates that the total figure will likely surpass two billion
Speaker 1: dollars in fraud. Trump is vowed to prosecute and then
Speaker 1: deport the Somali criminals responsible for all that fraud. But
Speaker 1: Timmy Waltz calls that petty vindictiveness. I'm not kidding. In
Speaker 1: the twisted world of Waltz, the law should be selective,
Speaker 1: because you know, equal enforcement of the law is racist.
Speaker 1: It's not just the wicked world of Waltz, but mega
Speaker 1: thefts are now being discovered in Ohio, where you guessed
Speaker 1: it's Somali's reportedly perpetrated a massive Medicaid theft involving healthcare
Speaker 1: payouts based on fake medical conditions. All right, that's appalling,
Speaker 1: But is anybody surprised since Obamacare, one of the greatest
Speaker 1: deceptions of all time, opened the door to a wholesale
Speaker 1: plundering of our nation's treasury. The General Accounting Office says
Speaker 1: that Obamacare subsidies are costing you, the taxpayers, some twenty
Speaker 1: seven billion dollars a year. Twenty seven billion in fake identities,
Speaker 1: dead people, and improper use of Social Security numbers. And
Speaker 1: then there's food stamps or we're not supposed to call
Speaker 1: them food stamps anymore, because that's what they are. We
Speaker 1: call them snap payments. Well, those are rife with fraud.
Speaker 1: Hundreds of thousands of people are getting government money, except
Speaker 1: they're dead, so you know they're not eating a lot.
Speaker 1: Don't get me started on my home state of California.
Speaker 1: Massive unemployment fraud has recently been uncovered that resulted in
Speaker 1: billions of stolen dollars. Get this, up to thirty one
Speaker 1: billion dollars that was paid to criminals, including people behind bars.
Speaker 1: Education fraud, healthcare fraud, Medicare fraud in California has been uncovered. Again,
Speaker 1: that's your money down the drain, and Gavin Newsom doesn't care,
Speaker 1: except to the extent that his former chief of staff
Speaker 1: was caught and charged in one of those schemes. Here's
Speaker 1: the bottom line. Democrats say they care about the needy,
Speaker 1: except they don't. That's just a ruse. It's a pretense
Speaker 1: for something else. They use the needy. They exploit the
Speaker 1: needy to strong arm the government into handing out benefits
Speaker 1: so that the cash can then be stolen by their constituents,
Speaker 1: and people like Tim Waltz look the other way, and
Speaker 1: always liberal Democrats want more they will ruthlessly and persistently
Speaker 1: dig deep into your pockets until they're empty, and then
Speaker 1: they demand more of your income with higher taxes. It's
Speaker 1: the old socialist stratagem that seems appealing to some until
Speaker 1: is Margaret Thatcher famously observed, you eventually run out of
Speaker 1: other people's money. That's the history of socialism. It's a
Speaker 1: well worn story of failure and collapse. Later on in
Speaker 1: our program, I'm going to be talking with Peter Schweitzer
Speaker 1: about this. He's president of the Government Accountability to Institute,
Speaker 1: and he is certainly an expert on the subject of fraud.
Speaker 1: Peter also wrote the book called Clinton Cash, so he's
Speaker 1: going to tell us about the recent news of how
Speaker 1: the FBI's corruption probe into Hillary Clinton's suspected pay to
Speaker 1: play schemes was killed by her protectors in Barack Obama's administration.
Speaker 1: We're going to take a quick break right now. Coming up,
Speaker 1: we have, in addition to Peter Schweizer, I'll be talking
Speaker 1: to Mike Davis about whether any of the people involved
Speaker 1: in the law fair crusade against Donald Trump will ever
Speaker 1: be held accountable with indictments. I think there'll be indictments
Speaker 1: in the beginning of the new year. We'll also talk
Speaker 1: to Brian Finch about Trump's attacks on Caribbean drug boats
Speaker 1: tied to Venezuela.
Speaker 2: Are they legal?
Speaker 3: They are.
Speaker 1: We'll be right back. I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for
Speaker 1: Sean Hannity. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show. I'm
Speaker 1: Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean. A few minutes ago,
Speaker 1: I mentioned, in the context of all the fraud going
Speaker 1: under the nose of Tim Waltz in Minnesota, how he's incompetent,
Speaker 1: and in fact, he admitted in the vice presidential debate
Speaker 1: when he was running with Kamalaw that he's a knucklehead.
Speaker 1: And so I want to play you know, some people
Speaker 1: have said, and I've mentioned it before, have said, oh,
Speaker 1: did he know, he didn't really he didn't call himself enhing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he did. And I'm going to play the clip for
Speaker 1: you right now. Here's the context. Waltz is a known liar,
Speaker 1: and he got caught many times in lies. The number
Speaker 1: of times he was in China. He claimed he was
Speaker 1: there at the time of the Tienneman Square massacre in
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty nine, record show he wasn't there. He was
Speaker 1: in the United States. So a moderator asked him during
Speaker 1: the debate, and here's what Timmy Waltz had to say.
Speaker 4: Governor Walls, you said you were in Hong Kong during
Speaker 4: the deadly Tieneman Square protests in the spring of nineteen
Speaker 4: eighty nine, But Minnesota Public Radio and other media outlets
Speaker 4: are reporting that you actually didn't travel to Asia until
Speaker 4: August of that year. Can you explain that discrepancy?
Speaker 5: Ye?
Speaker 6: Yeah, Well, and to the folks out there, it didn't
Speaker 6: get at the top of this. Look, I grew up
Speaker 6: in small, rural Nebraska town of four hundred town that
Speaker 6: you rode your bike with your buddies till the street
Speaker 6: lights come on, and I'm proud of that service. Now, look,
Speaker 6: my community knows who I am. They saw where I
Speaker 6: was at they look. I will be the first to
Speaker 6: tell you I have poured my heart into my community.
Speaker 6: I've tried to do the best I can, but I've
Speaker 6: not been perfect, and I'm a knucklehead at times. I
Speaker 6: will say more than anything. Many times I will talk
Speaker 6: a lot, I will get caught up in the rhetoric.
Speaker 6: But being there, the impact it made, the difference made
Speaker 6: in my life. I learned a lot about China governor.
Speaker 4: Just to follow up on that, the question was, can
Speaker 4: you explain therepancy?
Speaker 6: All I said on this was is I got there
Speaker 6: that summer and misspoke on this, So I will just
Speaker 6: that's what I've said.
Speaker 1: What a slee's ball, But there it is. He called
Speaker 1: himself a knucklehead, and no truer words wherever spoken. The
Speaker 1: guy's a buffoon. He's an incompetent governor of Minnesota, and
Speaker 1: he's running for reelection amid all of the fraud, which
Speaker 1: may roughly be two billion dollars of your taxpayer money.
Speaker 1: Coming up later, I'll talk to Peter Schweizer about it.
Speaker 1: He knows all about the fraud in Minnesota. But I
Speaker 1: also want to talk to Peter about how the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice under Barack Obama, probably under the president's orders,
Speaker 1: decided to kill and bury the growing corruption investigation into
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton's foreign pay to play schemes which enriched the
Speaker 1: Clinton Foundation, and of course they used that foundation as
Speaker 1: their personal piggybank. There's considerable evidence that Bill and Hillary
Speaker 1: got rich from foreign donations made to their Clinton Foundation, which,
Speaker 1: as I say, was really, you know, their own bank. Account.
Speaker 1: We're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars, and as
Speaker 1: I wrote in my book The Russia Hoaks back in
Speaker 1: twenty eighteen, many of the largest contributions were made by
Speaker 1: people and shell companies. There's a red alert connected to
Speaker 1: a Russian controlled business called Uranium One, which managed, through
Speaker 1: a series of clever maneuvers, to seize control of a
Speaker 1: sizeable percentage of America's prized uranium assets. I'm reading directly
Speaker 1: out of my book. All of this happened as Hillary
Speaker 1: was serving as Secretary of State, and of course the
Speaker 1: inevitable allegations of corruption followed. In The FBI became so
Speaker 1: concerned that it opened a criminal investigation into a pay
Speaker 1: to play scheme involving Hillary and her foundation. The bureau
Speaker 1: gathered evidence that the foreign cash may have illegally influenced
Speaker 1: US foreign policy under Hillary Clinton. Peter wrote about it.
Speaker 2: I wrote about it.
Speaker 1: We'll be talking with him coming up on the Sean
Speaker 1: Hannity Show. Solid as a rock, honest, truthful. This is
Speaker 1: the Sean Hannity Show. Hey, welcome back to the Sean
Speaker 1: Hannity Show. I'm Greg Jarrett. Of course, Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: his administration has been going after drug cartels smuggling deadly fentanyl, cocaine,
Speaker 1: synthetic opolioids into the United States that have killed more
Speaker 1: than three hundred thousand young people since twenty twenty one.
Speaker 1: So you know, they've carried out strikes against suspected drug
Speaker 1: vessels in the region. In the Caribbean, They've seized a
Speaker 1: sanctioned oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela, declared a
Speaker 1: blockade of all sank and oil tankers entering and leaving Venezuela.
Speaker 1: And Trump has said on more than one occasion that
Speaker 1: strikes on land in Venezuela could be coming sometime soon.
Speaker 1: Secretary of State Marco Rubio had this to say on
Speaker 1: that subject today.
Speaker 7: At the core, foreign policy needs to be the national
Speaker 7: interest of the United States. So you have to first
Speaker 7: of all define what is the national interest, and then
Speaker 7: you have to apply it. We defined it as we
Speaker 7: are in favor of foreign policies that make America safer,
Speaker 7: or stronger, or more prosperous, hopefully all three, but at
Speaker 7: least one of those three. And then it requires you
Speaker 7: to prioritize. Even the richest, most powerful and influential country
Speaker 7: on Earth has limited resources has limited time, and it
Speaker 7: has to be able to dedicate those resources in time
Speaker 7: through a process of prioritization that includes geographic prioritization. It
Speaker 7: also includes issue prioritization. When it comes to the Western Hemisphere,
Speaker 7: the single most serious threat to the United States and
Speaker 7: the Western Hemisphere is from transnational terrorist criminal groups. I'm
Speaker 7: merely focused on narco trafficking, but they're in all sides
Speaker 7: businesses as well. So the good news is we have
Speaker 7: a lot of countries in the region that openly cooperate
Speaker 7: and work with us to confront these challenges.
Speaker 1: All right, that was Marco Robio. Let's bring into the
Speaker 1: conversation now our guest today Brian Finch, who is a
Speaker 1: top notch lawyer. He's a partner with Pillsbury Winthrop. He
Speaker 1: co chairs the firm's global security practice, and Brian has
Speaker 1: been covering the ongoing Venezuela narco terrorism and the dictatorship
Speaker 1: under Maduro. As I say, the President and Secretary of
Speaker 1: War have been doing everything they can to prevent these
Speaker 1: boats from onboarding their drugs to American shores. Brian, thanks
Speaker 1: so much for being with us. You and I've talked
Speaker 1: about this before, but in your legal opinion, Does this
Speaker 1: administration have every legal right to defend its citizens from
Speaker 1: the lethal poison by using lethal military force.
Speaker 5: Of course, it's a basic constitutional tenet that the president
Speaker 5: has the authority to do that. I mean, that's he's
Speaker 5: the commander in chief of the military. There are dozens
Speaker 5: upon dozens of examples throughout American history where the president
Speaker 5: has acted unilaterally to defend the nation from any type
Speaker 5: of threat, and this falls squarely into that category once again.
Speaker 5: And folks who are protesting this, you know, this is
Speaker 5: about being anti Trump. It's not about the president actually
Speaker 5: exceeding his authority. So it's a policy complaint, it's not
Speaker 5: a legal complaint.
Speaker 1: Is there any doubt in your mind that Maduro himself
Speaker 1: and his murderous regime in Venezuela are behind the smuggling.
Speaker 5: No, I mean, it's like any other narco state cryptocracy,
Speaker 5: where of course he exerts control within iron fists. So
Speaker 5: why you've had people trying to flee the country by
Speaker 5: millions over the past decade or so. He runs it.
Speaker 5: Anything that happens in the country happens at his direction
Speaker 5: or at least with his awareness, and whether explicitly or
Speaker 5: implicitly this is all happening at his direction and more
Speaker 5: than likely as profit as well. You can easily imagine that.
Speaker 5: So of course this is all happening, you know, with
Speaker 5: his understanding, with his knowledge. It's not his direction at
Speaker 5: this point, so it's his responsibility, and the president is
Speaker 5: right to direct actions against him personally and against his
Speaker 5: regime to protect Americans.
Speaker 1: Back to the legality of it all, the cartels are
Speaker 1: officially designated by our government as armed terror organizations, and
Speaker 1: as such they are are they not enemy combatants and
Speaker 1: can be legally targeted by Trump under the president's constitutional
Speaker 1: war powers. So you do not need consent from Congress.
Speaker 1: Wasn't it long ago given by Congress when they approve
Speaker 1: the authorization for use of military force?
Speaker 5: It absolutely was. And even if you know, people will
Speaker 5: point to the War Powers Act for example, to say
Speaker 5: that the president has to go to Congress to explain
Speaker 5: what he's doing and seek their consent. Very good argument
Speaker 5: that the War Powers Act is itself unconstitutional, Yes, and
Speaker 5: so as the president, he can certainly consult with Congress.
Speaker 5: If Congress wants to weigh in, they can do so.
Speaker 5: They have in fact been doing so. The chairman of
Speaker 5: the Armed Services Committee, Mike Rodgers from Alabama. He looked
Speaker 5: into the questionable, you know, the questionable complaints about the
Speaker 5: one striking, whether that was a violation of the law
Speaker 5: of war, and the chairman walked away saying, I'm perfectly satisfied.
Speaker 5: The president's been doing everything by the book, by the law,
Speaker 5: and so he's acting fully within his constitutional authority. And oh,
Speaker 5: by the way, enemy commands, there's also a good argument
Speaker 5: that these are illegal combatants, much like we've said with
Speaker 5: al Qaeda and ISIS in the Taliban back in the
Speaker 5: early two thousands, and they don't necessarily get the protections
Speaker 5: of law war in those cases.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I think you're right that legal scholars, many
Speaker 1: of them, have said that the War Powers Act, passed
Speaker 1: by Congress it was a resolution, is unconstitutional and in fact,
Speaker 1: past presidents have ignored it, including Barack Obama. And of
Speaker 1: course he used the so called wall run Terrorism Statutes
Speaker 1: to take similar actions as President Trump.
Speaker 5: Didn't he Oh, President Obama actually went further than any
Speaker 5: thing that President Trump is doing. President Obama issued a
Speaker 5: very length or had a very lengthy memorandum written that
Speaker 5: justified him killing American citizens overseas without any sort of
Speaker 5: due process, as long as they were suspected of being
Speaker 5: associated with terrorists or presenting a potentially eminent threat to
Speaker 5: the United States. The President Obama's legal team and he agreed,
Speaker 5: said that he could order lefold drone strikes against American
Speaker 5: citizens anywhere in the world as long as it met
Speaker 5: those conditions, and he did so. He did so hundreds
Speaker 5: of times. So you look at the complaints that are
Speaker 5: being lodged against the president and his team about violations
Speaker 5: of the laws of work. It's silly. And you know,
Speaker 5: I've been thinking a lot about this, greg and it's
Speaker 5: remarkable but also predictably pathetic that you see such unanimity
Speaker 5: about violations with the president with law of war, those
Speaker 5: alleged violations of the law war. You couldn't get that
Speaker 5: same unanimity about Hamas going out and killing women, children,
Speaker 5: babies on October seventh, clearly in violation of every law
Speaker 5: in the world. But in those cases they said, well
Speaker 5: that's you know, there were some justifications there, so call
Speaker 5: that any sort of illegal act ets that the Israelis
Speaker 5: are so evil. So it just goes to show the
Speaker 5: hypocrisy and the lengths that the president's opponents will go
Speaker 5: to in order to claim that he is just the
Speaker 5: worst man in the history of the United States. And
Speaker 5: you and I and the listeners, Now it's just not true.
Speaker 5: It's it's just sad rhetoric that is cloaked and illegal vernacular,
Speaker 5: when all in reality is is Trump arrangement syndrome.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it really is. And you know, Democrats and their
Speaker 1: media handmaidens or you know, raging still against Trump. But again,
Speaker 1: they didn't seem to care when Barack Obama went after
Speaker 1: terror targets with deadly drone strikes. In fact, he approved
Speaker 1: five hundred and forty plus strikes, killing roughly three four
Speaker 1: hundred people. Joe Biden did pretty much the same thing
Speaker 1: in Yemen, in Syria and Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. But
Speaker 1: you know, when Obama and Biden to it, it's perfectly lawful,
Speaker 1: according to Democrats in the media. When Trump does it,
Speaker 1: it's somehow war crimes that's legally absurd, isn't it.
Speaker 5: It absolutely is. And by the way, you know, to
Speaker 5: paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you know, also find somebody who want
Speaker 5: to shoot shoot him. And I think that's that's the
Speaker 5: case here. If we find karis whether they're in the
Speaker 5: Middle East, or they're in Latin America, South America, or
Speaker 5: wherever they are, and they are threatening American lives, they
Speaker 5: are actively participating in killing Americans. Yeah, they need to
Speaker 5: be subject to the military force. And again it's you know,
Speaker 5: the hypocrisy and the irony. You know, there were incredible
Speaker 5: glee going after the manufacturer of opioids and Oscar winning
Speaker 5: movies about the crusades against them. But then you go
Speaker 5: after the makers of cocaine, Stanel and all these other drugs,
Speaker 5: and oh, my goodness, we violated the Geneva Convention. It's
Speaker 5: just a sad playbook that shows the desperation of striking
Speaker 5: out against someone who doesn't fit into this politically correct mold,
Speaker 5: doesn't use the language they like, and isn't pursuing the
Speaker 5: priorities they want. And so again, it's just sad, honestly
Speaker 5: at the end of the day. And the legal arguments
Speaker 5: are just smoke and mirrors to make it sound legitimate,
Speaker 5: but in reality there's nothing to it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, and I keep reading and hearing from
Speaker 1: so called experts. Oh, there is a violation of the
Speaker 1: law of arm conflict embedded in international law and established
Speaker 1: by the Geneva Conventions in nineteen forty nine. Wait a minute,
Speaker 1: did you guys read that because enemy combatants under international
Speaker 1: law can be lawfully targeted with deadly force in any hostilities.
Speaker 1: Those who are protected by that law are civilians and
Speaker 1: medical workers and religious personnel and wounded in six soldiers
Speaker 1: and prisoners of war. But that that's not happening here,
Speaker 1: is it.
Speaker 5: No, No, not at all. It's funny. I'm a bit
Speaker 5: of a history. Buffero was reading up in some World
Speaker 5: War two battles where the exact type of orders that
Speaker 5: people or alleged orders or no quarter, et cetera, supposedly
Speaker 5: our violation of all this. Americans were pursuing it and
Speaker 5: getting medals for it in World War Two, showing no
Speaker 5: quarter to the Japanese soldiers who are on convoys. And again,
Speaker 5: there are certain rules when it comes to the law
Speaker 5: of war. But anytime someone declares that, especially President Trump,
Speaker 5: has committed an open and shut violation of something particular,
Speaker 5: something as nebulous and in some ways you know, complicated,
Speaker 5: as a law of war, and they say, oh, it's
Speaker 5: clear violation. You know it's not. It is cherry picking facts,
Speaker 5: cherry picking scenarios and creating a fantasy situation in a
Speaker 5: fantasy case to convict him right away. But once you
Speaker 5: pull it apart, as you recognized and our listeners have recognized,
Speaker 5: this is not a violation. This is a president authorizing
Speaker 5: and executing exactly what he's been granted under the Constitution
Speaker 5: by the founders, and good.
Speaker 1: For him for doing it, all right, Brian Finch, many thanks.
Speaker 1: You're a terrific lawyer. You certainly know the subject matter
Speaker 1: quite well, and thank you for taking the time to
Speaker 1: join us. Brian Finch again partner at Pillsbury Winthrop. He's
Speaker 1: the co chair of the firm's Global security practice. So
Speaker 1: thanks again for being with us.
Speaker 5: Always a pleasure.
Speaker 1: Correct, all right, when we come back, we're going to
Speaker 1: take a couple of phone calls. Our number is one
Speaker 1: eight one hundred seventy three twenty six. Give me a call,
Speaker 1: love to hear from you your comments or questions. Again,
Speaker 1: that number is one eight hundred nine four one. Sean.
Speaker 1: I'm Greg Jarrett. We'll be right back on the Sean
Speaker 1: Hannity Show.
Speaker 6: Kennedy knows you're tired of government overreach and Big Brother
Speaker 6: watching your every move.
Speaker 2: Now it's time to take back America.
Speaker 5: This is the Hennity Show.
Speaker 1: Back with the Sean Hannity Show on Greg Jarrett right
Speaker 1: to our phone lines. Corbin joins us now from Springfield, Missouri,
Speaker 1: or as my mother who lived in Springfield used to
Speaker 1: call it, Missouri. Hey, Corbyn, how are you good?
Speaker 3: Call it whatever you want to Greg, Hey, I just
Speaker 3: want to talk to you about yesterday and today. You've
Speaker 3: laid out the law to where, you know what, an
Speaker 3: elementary kid could understand this thing, and thank you me.
Speaker 3: That's the way that it should be. And I'm kind
Speaker 3: of looking at Okay, here's what Letitia James has done,
Speaker 3: here's what finally Willis has done. You did, we went
Speaker 3: through what call me did here yesterday and I'm just
Speaker 3: you know, I want to head on a stick. I'm sorry,
Speaker 3: I want a head on a stick. I don't know
Speaker 3: what Pam Bondi's doing, but I don't know she's doing
Speaker 3: her job or not. You know what, we runed people's
Speaker 3: lives that were there at January sixth. We have somebody
Speaker 3: that actually lives here in the area that was there,
Speaker 3: and I mean the Biden Justice Department went after this guy.
Speaker 3: You know, that there was no mercy, right, no mercy,
Speaker 3: and these people are still walking around free, having a
Speaker 3: good time. I mean, Calemy puts eighty eighty six forty
Speaker 3: seven on the beach and well, I don't know what
Speaker 3: that means. Well, how I know what that means?
Speaker 5: You do?
Speaker 3: You know all of America does?
Speaker 1: Corbyn? You're preaching to the choir. I agree with you
Speaker 1: one hundred percent, one thousand percent, and I've laid it out.
Speaker 1: I laid it out yesterday. I'm going to talk more
Speaker 1: about it today with Mike Davis in just a few
Speaker 1: minutes actually. But you know, I think in the new
Speaker 1: year we may well see criminal charges against a whole
Speaker 1: host of people who misuse the law to destroy Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: to try to drive him from office, and then when
Speaker 1: he ran for reelection in twenty twenty four, in the
Speaker 1: run up to that contest, they did the law fair
Speaker 1: crusade all over again, bringing specious charges, phony cases, invented
Speaker 1: facts against him. And I think they need to be
Speaker 1: held accountable. And there's a grand jury that will be
Speaker 1: convened in Florida, and guess what in your neck of
Speaker 1: the woods, Corbin, in Missouri, a grand jury we'll be
Speaker 1: right back