Speaker 1: Our two Sean Hannity Show eight hundred and ninety four
Speaker 1: one shawns on number if you want to be a
Speaker 1: part of the program Big News last week. John Brennan,
Speaker 1: This is an ex post by Congressman Jim Jordan, the
Speaker 1: House Judiciary Committee Chair. John Brennan lied to Congress today.
Speaker 1: We referred him to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution,
Speaker 1: and then he linked a letter that he sent to
Speaker 1: the Attorney General, Pam Bondy. We write to refer significant
Speaker 1: evidence that the former Director of the CIA, John Brennan,
Speaker 1: knowingly made false statements during his transcribed interview before the
Speaker 1: Committee of the Judiciary on May eleven, twenty twenty three.
Speaker 1: While testifying, Brennan made numerous willfully and intentionally false statements
Speaker 1: of material fact contradicted by the record established by the
Speaker 1: House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the CIA. Under
Speaker 1: eight USC. One thousand and one, A witness commits a
Speaker 1: crime if he knowingly willfully makes a materially false statement
Speaker 1: of representation with respect to any investigation or review conducted
Speaker 1: pursuing to the authority of any Committee of Congress. And
Speaker 1: he goes on to explain a lot of the details.
Speaker 1: For example, let me go back in time. We'll start
Speaker 1: in twenty seventeen. Now, if you recall, in twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: the dirty Russian disinformation dossier was used as the basis
Speaker 1: of the first visa application warrant. It was unverified and
Speaker 1: we all know unverify a bull and completely debunked by
Speaker 1: December of that year, twenty sixteen. Here's Brennan in twenty
Speaker 1: seventeen saying that the dossier wasn't used as the basis
Speaker 1: for any intelligence community assessment.
Speaker 2: Here's what he said in a house hearing that took place.
Speaker 3: Do you know if the Bureau who ever, relied on
Speaker 3: the Steel dossier any as part of any court filings, applications, petitions, pleadings.
Speaker 3: I have no awareness did the CIA rely on it?
Speaker 4: No?
Speaker 5: Why not?
Speaker 6: Because we didn't. It wasn't part of the corpus of
Speaker 6: intelligence information that we had. It was not in any
Speaker 6: way used as a basis for the intel. It's community
Speaker 6: assessment that was done. It was it was not.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's move forward to twenty eighteen. This is a
Speaker 1: clip of John Brennan saying he was concerned about the
Speaker 1: veracity of the Steele dossier, but the FBI had an
Speaker 1: obligation to seek out the truth on it. Here's what
Speaker 1: he said on Meet the Press with then hosts since departed,
Speaker 1: Chucky Todd, how.
Speaker 7: Was the steel Dosia treated it? How did you treat it?
Speaker 7: You said you looked at it in December. I assume
Speaker 7: it's been looked at by It was obviously looked at
Speaker 7: by the FBI. We've now learned they've tried to confirm
Speaker 7: some of it and have had some success.
Speaker 5: Not yet.
Speaker 7: They don't say it's they don't say it's unconfirmed.
Speaker 2: But that's about it.
Speaker 8: Well, there were things in that Dosier that made me
Speaker 8: wonder whether or not they would they were in fact
Speaker 8: accurate and true, and I do think it was up
Speaker 8: to the FBI to see whether or not they could
Speaker 8: verify any of it. I think Jim Comi has said
Speaker 8: that it was contained salacious and unverified information.
Speaker 2: Just because it was unverified didn't mean it wasn't true.
Speaker 8: And if the Russians were involved in something like that
Speaker 8: directed against individuals who are aspiring to the highest office
Speaker 8: in this land, there was an obligational part of the
Speaker 8: FBI to seek out the truth on it.
Speaker 1: Then one more clip again twenty eighteen. This is Brennan
Speaker 1: saying the Steele dossier didn't play any role in intelligence
Speaker 1: assessments to Obama or Trump.
Speaker 2: Here listen to this clip.
Speaker 7: When did you first learn of the so called Steele
Speaker 7: dosier and what Christopher Steele was doing?
Speaker 8: Well, it was a not a very well kept secret
Speaker 8: among press circles for several months before it came out,
Speaker 8: and it was in late summer of twenty sixteen when
Speaker 8: there were some individuals from the various US news outlets
Speaker 8: who asked me about my familiarity with it, and I
Speaker 8: had heard just snippets about it. I did not know
Speaker 8: what was in there. I did not see it until
Speaker 8: later in that year, I think it was in December,
Speaker 8: but I was unaware of the providence of it as
Speaker 8: well as what was in it. And it did not
Speaker 8: play any role whatsoever in the intelli's community assessments that
Speaker 8: was done that was presented to then President Obama and
Speaker 8: then President elect Trump.
Speaker 1: If you recall, we now know, thanks to Tulsi Gabberd's
Speaker 1: declassifications that in fact, that we had career senior intel
Speaker 1: officials look into the whole question of any Trump Russia
Speaker 1: collusion and senior career intelligence officials assessed there was none,
Speaker 1: and that was presented, and according to the declassification, it
Speaker 1: was Obama himself, working with Clapper and Brennan and other people,
Speaker 1: that demanded a new intelligence assessment that ended up concluding
Speaker 1: the exact opposite, and that part of that conclusion was
Speaker 1: based on the dossier. Jim Jordan, House Judiciary Committee Chair,
Speaker 1: True or false?
Speaker 4: No?
Speaker 9: True. As I said last week, Sean, you're not supposed
Speaker 9: to lie, but you're definitely not supposed to lie when
Speaker 9: you're under oath and you're talking to Congress. And that's
Speaker 9: exactly what it looks like mister Brendon did, because he
Speaker 9: repeated those statements that you played when he was in
Speaker 9: front of us last Congress. He said the dossier played
Speaker 9: no part in the intelligence community assessment, and I pushed
Speaker 9: to not have it in the intelligence community assessment. The
Speaker 9: only problem is, as you pointed out, is when Director
Speaker 9: National Intelligence Tulsey Gabbert declassified the House Intelligence Committee report
Speaker 9: from a few years ago, it said just the opposite.
Speaker 9: In fact, it related a story in there Sean where
Speaker 9: another CI official actually confronted mister Brennan and said, this
Speaker 9: dossier doesn't hold up. There's no underlying intelligence to support it,
Speaker 9: shouldn't put it in the intelligence community assessment that we
Speaker 9: take to President Trump and brief well, then President Electromp
Speaker 9: shouldn't do that. But Brennan response responded by saying, yeah,
Speaker 9: but doesn't it ring true? And I think just showing
Speaker 9: his entire motive his mindset, which was to go get
Speaker 9: President Trump. And then that's exactly what they did. Is
Speaker 9: we've talked about many times. They then went up to
Speaker 9: Trump Tower on January sixth, twenty seventeen, when it was
Speaker 9: President Electromp gave him is what he thinks his defensive briefing,
Speaker 9: his intelligence briefing that you get before you become president.
Speaker 9: And in fact, what they were trying to do is
Speaker 9: set him up and create the predicate for the whole
Speaker 9: Muller investigation and how they were going to try to
Speaker 9: sabotage his entire first term.
Speaker 1: But the reality too is is a true or false
Speaker 1: that in August of twenty sixteen that Bruce or had
Speaker 1: warned everybody that the dossier's political in nature and nobody
Speaker 1: should trust it.
Speaker 2: Wasn't Brennan aware of it then?
Speaker 1: And number two didn't Brennan himself how to have a
Speaker 1: meeting in the White House informing Obama that Hillary Clinton's
Speaker 1: campaign was building up a narrative about Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: Russia as part of a political scheme.
Speaker 9: Yes, exactly right. And they had this meeting also in
Speaker 9: December of sixteen, again between election day and Inauguration Day,
Speaker 9: where they decided to do the new IC assessment, the
Speaker 9: new Intelligence Community Assessment, the new report. And that's the
Speaker 9: one that they put the dossier in. For goodness sake,
Speaker 9: because they go up to Temp Tower and briefing about it.
Speaker 9: Colemy does it himself. So yeah, this all played out
Speaker 9: as part of this effort. And again I think the
Speaker 9: motive is clearly displayed in this the facts that Tulci
Speaker 9: brought forward when she declassified this report, where you have
Speaker 9: this person saying to Brennan, we shouldn't use this dossi
Speaker 9: at all. But his response is, yeah, but doesn't it
Speaker 9: ring true. They wanted to believe it. They wanted to
Speaker 9: believe this garbage document was true. And you're right, Schehn.
Speaker 9: Remember it was the Clinton campaign, through the law firm,
Speaker 9: who then hired the public relationship.
Speaker 2: The law firms Perkins Cooey.
Speaker 1: Perkins Cooey then funnels the money to an OP research firm,
Speaker 1: Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS then hires Christopher Steele, former MI
Speaker 1: six agent.
Speaker 9: Correct exactly, a foreigner who writes down all this garbage
Speaker 9: that they used in the ICA. And maybe more importantly,
Speaker 9: when Trey Gowdy the first clip you played was asking
Speaker 9: mister Brinnan the questions he said, did you ever rely
Speaker 9: on this in the court filings? Treys? I think getting
Speaker 9: at this idea. They used the doc date to help
Speaker 9: get defy the warrants, this file and president Toomp's campaign.
Speaker 10: So this is what we put.
Speaker 1: Well, we know that first PIZE application went in and
Speaker 1: the bulk of information was before the election in October
Speaker 1: of twenty sixteen, and James call me signed not only
Speaker 1: that one, but the two succeeding ones and there were
Speaker 1: four total.
Speaker 9: Yep, exactly right. So there's a pattern here. We think
Speaker 9: he lied to when he was under oath, when in
Speaker 9: an open hearing, when Trey was asking questions. We think
Speaker 9: he also wasn't square with us when we deposed him
Speaker 9: last Congress. And then, of course here's the big irony.
Speaker 9: We were asking these questions last Congress. The context was
Speaker 9: we had brought mister Brennan in to talk to him
Speaker 9: about another lie, which was the fifty one former Intel
Speaker 9: officials who told us in that letter before the twenty
Speaker 9: twenty election that the Hunter Biden laptop was a Russian
Speaker 9: information operation, when the FBI had to stink in laptop
Speaker 9: and they knew that was garbage. So it's this pattern
Speaker 9: we see from Brennan where he doesn't seem to be
Speaker 9: square with us in Congress or with the American people.
Speaker 9: And that's why we sent the referral, and I put
Speaker 9: it out last week on your show, Sean that I
Speaker 9: don't do this very often. The facts have to be there.
Speaker 9: I mean, it has to be clear to me and
Speaker 9: to our committee that this guy wasn't square with us,
Speaker 9: that this guy was lying to us, and he was
Speaker 9: under open an obligation to tell the truth. Then and
Speaker 9: only then do we send these referrals to the Justice Department.
Speaker 9: But we think it's certainly worth to hear, and that's
Speaker 9: why we sent it. It all began in twenty sixteen
Speaker 9: with the Dottier and this whole Russia collusion issue was
Speaker 9: designed to help Clinton win the election. And then, of
Speaker 9: course when they do the fifty one former intels and
Speaker 9: tell the country that piece of garbage lie that was
Speaker 9: designed to help help Biden win the election. So and then,
Speaker 9: as you say, the lawfair was the course to try
Speaker 9: to keep President Trump from getting back in office. So
Speaker 9: it was always political. But then what happened back in
Speaker 9: sixteen between again election day and inauguration day is they said, Wow,
Speaker 9: we didn't stop him. He won the race. Now let's
Speaker 9: use the dossier. Now let's lose the use the Russian
Speaker 9: hoax as a way to undermine President Trump. The question
Speaker 9: that you ask, I think is the central question. This
Speaker 9: is a call for the Justice Department. Was there a conspiracy?
Speaker 9: Can they prove there was a conspiracy to stop him
Speaker 9: from winning and then undermine his first term and then
Speaker 9: prevent him from winning re election? Can you can you
Speaker 9: just prove all that? That's the question for Attorney General
Speaker 9: bond the Deputy Attorney General Blanche and the team at
Speaker 9: the Justice Department. What we know is what we've referred
Speaker 9: John Brennan.
Speaker 1: Well were a conservative attorney Mike Davis an informal advisor.
Speaker 1: According to reports of the Attorney General, Pam Bondi is
Speaker 1: claiming now that this grand jury will consider whether to
Speaker 1: bring criminal charges against top Democratic figures that he claims
Speaker 1: have colluded over the last decade to impede Trump, starting
Speaker 1: with this dirty Russian disinformation dossier, and he is taking
Speaker 1: it all the way through the pre bunking of the
Speaker 1: very real Hunter Biden laptop. They knew it was going
Speaker 1: to be dropped because they knew that Rudy Giuliani's then attorney,
Speaker 1: Bob Costello, had a copy of it. They had verified
Speaker 1: its authenticity. In March of twenty twenty, they were meeting
Speaker 1: weekly with big tech court companies, warning them that maybe
Speaker 1: victims of a Russian disinformation campaign in twenty twenty, knowing
Speaker 1: that the laptop was real, and then when it finally
Speaker 1: came out in the New York Post, they wouldn't tell
Speaker 1: those companies is this true or not true, ultimately resulting
Speaker 1: in the suppression of that information prior to an election
Speaker 1: that I think would have had a great impact on it,
Speaker 1: and then lawf air and weaponization from twenty twenty to
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four to make Trump unelectable, you know, in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four.
Speaker 9: Yeah, no, Look, I think I think you've described it
Speaker 9: exactly what it is. I saw Mike Davis's report from
Speaker 9: what he had said. I think over the weekend, we'll
Speaker 9: just have to see that this is again, this is
Speaker 9: a call for the Attorney General if they think the
Speaker 9: facts are there and there are a lot of good
Speaker 9: facts that you just pointed out, and the facts that
Speaker 9: we've discovered in our committee and we've begain referred to
Speaker 9: refer them to the Justice Department. We'll just have to see.
Speaker 9: But I think it's a compelling case. They were certainly
Speaker 9: out to get President Trump for the last nine years.
Speaker 1: All right, quick break right back more with Congressman Jim Jordan,
Speaker 1: chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee in Congress. Will continue.
Speaker 1: We'll get to your calls on the other side today.
Speaker 1: Give us a call eight hundred and nine to one,
Speaker 1: Sean if you want to be a part of this
Speaker 1: program as we continue.
Speaker 2: Entered daining Americans, Go, didn go.
Speaker 11: Sean Hannity is on it down.
Speaker 2: How do we continue now?
Speaker 1: Jim Jordan, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Let me
Speaker 1: ask this question, how did Camy get off the hook?
Speaker 1: I guess the statute of limitations have run out unless
Speaker 1: there's a grand conspiracy charge.
Speaker 2: But call mey.
Speaker 1: You know signed three of the four PISA warrants. That's
Speaker 1: a nine month period of time. My understanding is Christopher
Speaker 1: Steele was kind of booted in December of twenty sixteen
Speaker 1: because they realized that the dossier was was garbed badge
Speaker 1: and bar talk, and so he was out, but call
Speaker 1: me kept still kept using it for two more PISO
Speaker 1: applications and then a third one side by Rob Rosenstein
Speaker 1: at the time. The fourth one and are they not
Speaker 1: by law supposed to go to the court and say
Speaker 1: that the information provided to them to acquire the the
Speaker 1: PISA app PISO warrant, uh, that false information was given
Speaker 1: to the court and then give the court a chance
Speaker 1: to you know, rescind that.
Speaker 9: Yeah, they are, they're they're supposed to sign and sign on,
Speaker 9: sign on and say this is accurate information. The only
Speaker 9: one who got in trouble was the guy who actually
Speaker 9: changed information. He changed the contents of an email. Is
Speaker 9: Kevin's clientsmith. But he basically got a slap on the wrist.
Speaker 9: Remember during the when this when we all start to
Speaker 9: figure this out, and it was you and it was
Speaker 9: some of us in Congress and a handful of people
Speaker 9: started to dig into this. It took us a while
Speaker 9: to get all the facts and get get everything figured out,
Speaker 9: and by the time we did, then you then you
Speaker 9: you get into the Biden administration because of you know,
Speaker 9: the if you want to Intel letter and everything else
Speaker 9: and what happened in that campaign, and of course the
Speaker 9: Garland Justice Department and the Biden administration aren't going to
Speaker 9: prosecute anyone. And so now here we are eight years later,
Speaker 9: and we have an attorney general, we have an administration
Speaker 9: who's saying we're going to hold people accountable who did
Speaker 9: things wrong. Now the left says we're engaging in the
Speaker 9: very law fair they engaged, and that's it's not true.
Speaker 9: We're trying to hold people accountable. So this kind of
Speaker 9: garbage doesn't happen in the future. So we will just
Speaker 9: have to see. But the reason Komi wasn't held accountable
Speaker 9: center is it because of the Garland ray. The Garland
Speaker 9: Justice Department.
Speaker 1: In the ray at Heugh was protected and the statute
Speaker 1: of limitations ran out unless there's a grand conspiracy charge
Speaker 1: exactly exactly.
Speaker 9: Now with Brennan, there's the statute of limitations on him
Speaker 9: lying eighteen USC.
Speaker 2: One thousand and one.
Speaker 9: Lying to Congress has not run out because he just
Speaker 9: testified in front of us two years ago, so that's
Speaker 9: a five year statute of limitation. So there's certainly that charge.
Speaker 9: But will that be part of a bigger, broader conspiracy charge.
Speaker 9: That's up to the Attorney General.
Speaker 1: All right, he is the chairman of the very important
Speaker 1: House Judiciary Committee. Chairman Jim Jordan is with us. We'll
Speaker 1: stay focused.
Speaker 2: And dialed in.
Speaker 1: I spent too many years of my life unpeeling every
Speaker 1: layer of that onion with a small ensemble cast you included.
Speaker 1: Thank you, We appreciate your time. Jim Jordan, Thank you, sir,
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 12: All Right.
Speaker 1: Look, we have maybe the longest government shutdown in history
Speaker 1: that we're facing.
Speaker 2: It's impacting a lot of people.
Speaker 1: But more importantly, you still have the Biden Harris hangover,
Speaker 1: which is a bad economy, which has put a lot
Speaker 1: of people in a bad spot, and they're putting bare
Speaker 1: necessities on high interest credit cards, and you got to
Speaker 1: save money. And that's where pure talk comes in. My
Speaker 1: wireless company, a veteran owned company, America's wireless company. Look,
Speaker 1: you get the same cell towers, the same five G
Speaker 1: network as the big carriers AT and T, Verizon and
Speaker 1: T Mobile, same exact ones, You get the same exact service,
Speaker 1: and the average family saves over one thousand dollars a year.
Speaker 1: That's real money in your pocket. Anyway, Pure Talk gives
Speaker 1: you plenty unlimited talk, unlimited text, plenty of data, twenty
Speaker 1: five bucks a month for the same service. Anyway, make
Speaker 1: the switch. It's simple, it's fast, it's easy. You dial
Speaker 1: pound two to fifty. You say the keyword save now.
Speaker 1: If you do it now, our friends at pure talk
Speaker 1: will give you fifty percent additional off your first month.
Speaker 1: That's pound two to fifty keywords saved now. Switch to
Speaker 1: my cell phone provider, an American company, a veteran owned company,
Speaker 1: America's wireless company, Pure Talk. I know we're all locked
Speaker 1: up in the off year elections, and we'll have an
Speaker 1: announcement tonight about these off year elections on Hannity on
Speaker 1: the Fox News channel that you're going to want to
Speaker 1: tune into.
Speaker 2: Let's put it this way.
Speaker 1: We will be on the road this week and hopefully
Speaker 1: many of you might be able to join us. I'll
Speaker 1: tell you and announce it tonight. Kamala Harris suggesting this
Speaker 1: weekend she be running for president again.
Speaker 13: When are they going to see a woman in charge
Speaker 13: in the White House in their lifetime for sure?
Speaker 5: Could it be you?
Speaker 7: Possibly?
Speaker 2: Have you made a decision yet?
Speaker 11: No, I have not.
Speaker 2: But you say in your book I'm not done. That
Speaker 2: is correct.
Speaker 11: I am not done.
Speaker 2: I have lived my entire career a.
Speaker 13: Life of service, and it's in my bones, and there
Speaker 13: are many ways to serve. I've not decided yet what
Speaker 13: I will do in the future beyond what I am
Speaker 13: doing right now.
Speaker 1: That should scare every Democrat. I don't think she's electable
Speaker 1: my own opinion, no surprise. Gavin Newsom United Socialists Utopia
Speaker 1: of California. He was on the All the Smoke podcasts.
Speaker 1: We heard of All the Smoke podcasts. I didn't hear
Speaker 1: that one, but anyway, said, Republicans are putting America to
Speaker 1: a pre nineteen sixties world that anti woke, is anti black.
Speaker 1: Listen to this.
Speaker 4: They're literally putting American reverse, I mean quite literally to
Speaker 4: a pre nineteen sixties world. You got the Supreme Court
Speaker 4: talking about getting rid of the Voting Rights Act, and
Speaker 4: that's very real. That may likely happen in just a
Speaker 4: matter of months. I mean, they're rewriting history, censory historical facts,
Speaker 4: it's a unbelievable moment. All this anti woke stuff is
Speaker 4: just anti black period, full stop. All the crtesg DEI stuff,
Speaker 4: that's all this is. It's this great purge and it's
Speaker 4: happening in real time. And I'm just I'm sitting here
Speaker 4: and I feel like, you know, luckily i'm governor, but
Speaker 4: like we're not doing enough. We're not calling this out,
Speaker 4: We're not drawing a line here.
Speaker 1: And he goes on to describe raising himself and hustling
Speaker 1: to pay bills when he had a very privileged upbringing,
Speaker 1: which is kind of laughable. He blasts trump ice raids
Speaker 1: and says it calls it terror on the streets of America,
Speaker 1: and then he admitted the it's not exactly a secret
Speaker 1: that he himself has presidential ambitions and admits finally for
Speaker 1: the first time, here's what he said.
Speaker 14: ELMREI say after the twenty twenty six midterms, you're going
Speaker 14: to give it serious thought.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'd be lying.
Speaker 4: Otherwise I'd just be lying, and I can't do that.
Speaker 2: Governor.
Speaker 14: You have long said that if you ever run for
Speaker 14: the White House, you need a compelling why a reason
Speaker 14: are you moving closer to figuring out your own why
Speaker 14: and your own decision.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and he's just said to you compelling why you
Speaker 4: can endure anyhow, And so I don't think. I think
Speaker 4: the biggest challenge for anyone who runs for any office
Speaker 4: is people see right through you. If you don't have that,
Speaker 4: why you're doing it for the wrong reasons. And so look, well,
Speaker 4: will that face will determine.
Speaker 14: That you certainly seem to like on the ground in
Speaker 14: South Carolina? I have to say that, Senior Uplos, you
Speaker 14: were having a good time.
Speaker 4: I happen to and thank god, I'm in the right business.
Speaker 4: I love people, actually love people.
Speaker 2: Oh love people. That's why he's running. All right.
Speaker 1: This will be the question America will need to answer.
Speaker 1: Do you want the United States to be California? Do
Speaker 1: you want the highest income taxes in the country, Because
Speaker 1: that's what he's instituted, and that's what the current state
Speaker 1: of California is. Poverty rate highest in the nation, schools
Speaker 1: mostly the worst in the entire country, highest sales taxes,
Speaker 1: highest gas taxes, more money for illegals than any other
Speaker 1: single state, sanctuary state, and city policies galore. Does he
Speaker 1: think that that will help him win a general election.
Speaker 1: May help him in a primary, but will it help
Speaker 1: him win a general election. We'll start getting serious about
Speaker 1: this when the time matters, but right now is not
Speaker 1: the right time. All right, let's get to our busy phones.
Speaker 1: Andrew is in the great state of Tennessee. Andrew, how
Speaker 1: are you glad you called Happy Monday? If there is
Speaker 1: such a thing.
Speaker 12: Hey, quick, idea for your listeners out there. Regarding the
Speaker 12: ice trackers that the Democrats are trying to put together,
Speaker 12: a really easy way to defeat that is, we need
Speaker 12: to just fill it with garbage reports. So across the
Speaker 12: country the ice tracker happens, just start reporting stuff. It'll
Speaker 12: make it unusable. Another way that that could be done
Speaker 12: faster if someone out there has the skills to code
Speaker 12: it up. You know, you could have it automated and
Speaker 12: just have it filent reports all the time.
Speaker 1: Oh, I actually think that's something probably ICE should be
Speaker 1: doing itself if they have to the fact that this
Speaker 1: is even allowed, I mean, think of what's happening here.
Speaker 2: What Democrats are supporting.
Speaker 1: They are supporting removing the element of surprise, which then
Speaker 1: does what what happened in that moment? That means they
Speaker 1: they're basically putting a target on the backs and the
Speaker 1: foreheads of ICE agents and making their job more dangerous
Speaker 1: and more difficult. And anybody that supports this, as far
Speaker 1: as I'm concerned, if and when something happens to these
Speaker 1: ICE agents, and I pray to God it doesn't, but
Speaker 1: they're they're exponentially, in my opinion, they are increasing the
Speaker 1: odds that somebody is going to get either seriously hurt
Speaker 1: or killed. And this is a very dangerous practice. And
Speaker 1: if that's not aiding and a betting law breaking, I
Speaker 1: don't know what is. And they're institutionalizing it. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: so we'll see what happens. Andrew, good call, appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Let's go to Wisconsin. Mike next on the Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 5: What's up, Mike, Hey, Shah, pleasure to get to talk
Speaker 5: to you today. I've got a question. I wish I
Speaker 5: could have gotten it to you before Jim Jordan got away.
Speaker 10: But what's up.
Speaker 5: I've got a complain. Both Republicans and the Democrats have
Speaker 5: blown it with this shutdown because they have not passed
Speaker 5: a budget. If they would have passed the budget, we
Speaker 5: would be in the twenty seventh day of our new
Speaker 5: fiscal year. But they have not passed the budget since
Speaker 5: one budget since nineteen sixty seven. That was in nineteen
Speaker 5: ninety six under Bill Clinton, and they blew that one
Speaker 5: up by one hundred and two billion dollars.
Speaker 1: Okay, Explain to me how again, unless you nuke the filibuster,
Speaker 1: Explain to me how Republicans they do have a majority,
Speaker 1: but they don't have that magic number sixty. How do
Speaker 1: Republicans get to that number. They would need democratic they
Speaker 1: would need democratic support. They're not going to get it
Speaker 1: in this part hyper partisan environment we live in.
Speaker 2: So I agree with you.
Speaker 1: I'd prefer to return to regular order, but it's under
Speaker 1: the current rules it's impossible.
Speaker 5: The budgeting process should where if they don't come up
Speaker 5: with a budget as they are required constitutionally required to do,
Speaker 5: they stay in Congress until they get a budget done.
Speaker 1: Okay, but you could stay there till the cows come home.
Speaker 1: Do you really think that, under Chucky Schumer and these
Speaker 1: radical Democrats, that the Senate is going to ultimately approve
Speaker 1: any budget Republicans put forward.
Speaker 2: I doubt it.
Speaker 5: Yeah, Well, I'm picking on Congress as a holes for
Speaker 5: the last sixty years.
Speaker 1: Okay, I'm granted the system's atrocious. Granted they should they
Speaker 1: should return to regular order. Granted they should be passing
Speaker 1: their budgets on time, and they're not. And the systems
Speaker 1: designed that they can't get it done, especially in the.
Speaker 2: Environment we're living in. I wish I want the same
Speaker 2: thing you do.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I wish we could get the media. I think
Speaker 5: yourself and everybody else in the media needs to hold
Speaker 5: them accountable and put their feet to the fire about.
Speaker 1: There's nothing I can do or say that's going to
Speaker 1: convince a single Democrat besides John.
Speaker 2: Betterman to do the right thing correct.
Speaker 1: Nothing, There's no, there's no there's no rational discussion with
Speaker 1: these people. They've lost their their minds, yes they have.
Speaker 5: But if all the voters, if we put the subject
Speaker 5: out there enough where both sides get a hold of it,
Speaker 5: where Democrats start holding their own leaders accountable, then maybe
Speaker 5: something will get done.
Speaker 1: Well, then why wouldn't they go along with a clean
Speaker 1: cr which Chuck Schumer has supported his entire you know,
Speaker 1: political career, but now was giving into the radical left
Speaker 1: in his party.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 5: Again, he's trying to blame it on the Republicans, and
Speaker 5: the Republicans are pointing their fingers chuck as they should be.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I mean, look, I get it now. Look
Speaker 1: we have a lot of news on this, and I
Speaker 1: went through it earlier, and I can just tell you
Speaker 1: the Schumer shut down. You know, I don't see there's
Speaker 1: going to be an end in sight, and I don't.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you why. For a lot of different reasons.
Speaker 1: Democrats have said that it's there. They know, they know
Speaker 1: it's going to impact and hurt poor people, but they're
Speaker 1: doing it anyway because they hate Trump and they don't
Speaker 1: want to give up their quote leverage. And the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party is in this doom, a spiral and loop if
Speaker 1: you will, and they're on the losing side.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: Even for example, their argument about healthcare, it's based on lies.
Speaker 1: If you strip away the lies about Obamacare subsidies that
Speaker 1: are going to expire this year, Democrats' main excuse for
Speaker 1: shutting down the government. What they're not telling you is
Speaker 1: that the Obamacare subsidies are already sending premium soaring and
Speaker 1: expected to rise one six hundred and sixty five dollars,
Speaker 1: or twenty percent on average, according to a Paragon Health
Speaker 1: Institute study. If you have the subsidies that only amounts
Speaker 1: for four percent of that money. That's it, and Democrats
Speaker 1: are lying when they say that. But Democrats, you know,
Speaker 1: they're now demanding the subsidy. They're demanding one point five
Speaker 1: trillion dollars the only you know, right now you have
Speaker 1: two Democrats that Fetterman and one other one that have said,
Speaker 1: you know, they're losing, you know, Jake Tapper, fake Jake
Speaker 1: even asking Chris Murphy if he's willing to let Americans
Speaker 1: go hungry. Why they're using you know, we played it
Speaker 1: last week. Theres one congresswoman saying, well, that's our only
Speaker 1: leverage point Hakeem Jefferies dismissing leverage. Talk is food security.
Speaker 1: You know, SNAP programs and SNAP benefits may be halted
Speaker 1: because of this, and the Agriculture Department posted a stunning
Speaker 1: notice that these these subsidies are ending. The world's largest
Speaker 1: federal workers union just demanded Chuck Schumer and Democrats reopen
Speaker 1: the government. They're the ones keeping it closed. The American
Speaker 1: Federation of Government Employees President, it's time to pass the
Speaker 1: clean cr and end the shutdown.
Speaker 2: But they're not doing it anyway.
Speaker 1: We'll see what happens appreciate the call, my friend, quick
Speaker 1: break right back. We'll get two more of your calls
Speaker 1: coming up here. Eight hundred and nine to four one, Sean.
Speaker 1: If you want to be a part of the program
Speaker 1: as we roll along this month, day the left wants
Speaker 1: to silence Hannity, don't let it happen.
Speaker 11: Make the commitment now.
Speaker 1: Three hours every day at three pm.
Speaker 11: This is the Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 1: All right, back to our busy phones. Eight hundred and
Speaker 1: ninety four one, Shawn is our number. Mike in Canada, I.
Speaker 10: Wanted to discuss the Ontario provincial ad that's been run
Speaker 10: on USTv that I know that you've seen relating to
Speaker 10: you Ronald reagae in his stance on trade, and.
Speaker 1: I did, and President Trump got a little pissed off
Speaker 1: about it because it's out of context with where we
Speaker 1: are today.
Speaker 2: But what's your point, okay?
Speaker 10: Well, the issue that he described when he went online
Speaker 10: late at night to tireraide and say that the ad
Speaker 10: was fake, there's nothing sake to that ad. The Ronald
Speaker 10: Reagan speech in nineteen eighty seven, Ran, I don't know
Speaker 10: between five and six minutes. I watched it on YouTube
Speaker 10: and the gist of what Reagan was trying to teut
Speaker 10: at that time had nothing to do with protectionism. He
Speaker 10: was embracing free trade, he was embracing capitalism. He was
Speaker 10: embracing the idea that everybody wins. You can increase the
Speaker 10: amount of you know, commerce, said you conduct as opposed
Speaker 10: to putting limits on it. Protectionism kills jobs.
Speaker 2: He raised me, I hate to tell.
Speaker 1: You, with all due respect to our friends in Canada,
Speaker 1: and I think we should be best friends. I like
Speaker 1: our friends in Canada. I'm glad you got rid of
Speaker 1: little Justin, but you could still do a little better.
Speaker 1: We're putting all that aside. Canada put massive tariffs on
Speaker 1: American farmers, American dairy products, on a lot of American
Speaker 1: meat and poultry and cheese and dairy and milk. You
Speaker 1: guys put that on us, and it's been on us
Speaker 1: for a long time. So if we were going to
Speaker 1: be honest about it, you started this fight. Now somebody
Speaker 1: is in office that's fighting back, and you guys don't
Speaker 1: like it. Get your own government to embrace what you're
Speaker 1: demanding that we embrace, and that's free and fair trade,
Speaker 1: and you'll have a much better time insist.
Speaker 10: That obviously that the people conduct themselves a little bit
Speaker 10: of dignity here to go.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but you're not acknowledging your country started this trade war.
Speaker 1: Canada started it, not the US.
Speaker 10: Nineteen eighty seven, we approached the United States at the time,
Speaker 10: Brian wrote, mulroney approached Ronald Reagan about the concept debate.
Speaker 10: Can we find a way to.
Speaker 1: The last fifteen or twenty years? Ryan Moroney was great,
Speaker 1: maybe one of your best prime ministers ever. I loved him,
Speaker 1: I knew him. Okay, God rest his soul. He was
Speaker 1: a great guy. But you know what, take a look
Speaker 1: at Canada's policies towards the US over these years and
Speaker 1: how much how much you put on us.
Speaker 2: I got a roll though. Thank you for being with us.