Speaker 1: Hello America, and welcome to the Sean Hannity Show. As
Speaker 1: you have already instantly guessed, I am not Sean. Shawn
Speaker 1: is enjoying the last of his much deserved twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four end of year vacation, getting ready to get back,
Speaker 1: and as we all head into the first year of
Speaker 1: the Trump presidency. I am Jeffrey Lord, contributing editor the
Speaker 1: American Spectator, a Newsmas TV contributor, and columnists for NewsBusters,
Speaker 1: the Media Research Center's media watchdog. So let's let's get
Speaker 1: right into it. If we can do that, We've got
Speaker 1: some great guests coming up. We have Civil Liberties and
Speaker 1: former Trump Attorney Council David Shoon. We have our friends
Speaker 1: Matt and Mercy Schlapp from the American Conservative Union and SEAPAC.
Speaker 1: And my friend in fellow Pennsylvania, Jeff Bartos, who has
Speaker 1: run for the US Senate from Pennsylvania himself and spent
Speaker 1: some significant time helping Dave McCormick win this Senate seat
Speaker 1: in a unbelievable race against three term in common Democrat
Speaker 1: Bob Casey, the namesake son of his late dad, Governor
Speaker 1: Robert P. Casey. So we've got a good show going
Speaker 1: for you here, and I just want to I want
Speaker 1: to start with talking a little bit about what Sean
Speaker 1: loves to talk about, the media mob. And one of
Speaker 1: the things that has gotten me going here in the
Speaker 1: last few days, I saw a you know, I read
Speaker 1: the Washington Post, so you don't have to, and one
Speaker 1: of the things I noticed was this column. It was
Speaker 1: written two days published two days before Christmas in the Post,
Speaker 1: and it was by a columnist of theirs named Eugene Robinson,
Speaker 1: who I'm sure is a nice enough guy. But his
Speaker 1: headline was, we cannot by Donald Trump's wish for a
Speaker 1: compliant news media fight the President elect's attack on independent
Speaker 1: journalism with the pro truth stands now in this step,
Speaker 1: in this gem. Rather, he begins by saying this, anyone
Speaker 1: who doubts the incoming Trump administration poses a serious threat
Speaker 1: to independent journalism catch that phrase. Independent journalism has not
Speaker 1: been paying attention, an attack, he says, is already underway,
Speaker 1: and we journalists must now allow ourselves to be intimidated
Speaker 1: unquote now, to which one can only reply with a
Speaker 1: considerable burst of outright laughter. In fact, I would suggest
Speaker 1: mister Robinson has it completely backwards. The Washington Post and
Speaker 1: its allies in the so called quote unquote mainstream media
Speaker 1: are anything about being seeking quote independent journalism quote unquote.
Speaker 1: They are the central players in what is much more
Speaker 1: accurately known as the liberal media. They themselves are the
Speaker 1: compliant ones who have long ago abandoned independent journalism to
Speaker 1: take sides one side, specifically in our political discussions of
Speaker 1: the day. Some examples back before the twenty twenty four election.
Speaker 1: In October, the New York Post headlined this more Washington
Speaker 1: Post staffers resign over paper's failure to endorse Kamala Harris.
Speaker 1: That story reported quote at least two more staffers have
Speaker 1: penned their last story for the Washington Post, Don't you
Speaker 1: love this? As employees resign in protest over the Broadsheets
Speaker 1: decision not to endorse Kamala Harris for the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four presidential election. Editorial board members David Hoffman and Molly
Speaker 1: Roberts have issued their resignations. Semiphore. Media journalist Max Tannai
Speaker 1: reported on Monday the two longtime Washington Post staffers each
Speaker 1: authored resignation letters slamming the paper's decision not to endorse Harris. Quote.
Speaker 1: They said, I believe we face a very real threat
Speaker 1: of autocracy in the candidacy of Donald Trump unquote, said Hoffman,
Speaker 1: who took home the Pulitzer Prize last week and first
Speaker 1: joined the paper in nineteen eighty two. And he was
Speaker 1: writing this in his resignation letter, which of course was
Speaker 1: posted on x. He went on, I find it untenable
Speaker 1: and unconscionable that we have lost our voice at this
Speaker 1: perilous moment quote unquote. And Ms Roberts, another longtime employee
Speaker 1: of the Post who first joined the paper as a
Speaker 1: student intern while studying at Harvard University, said she was
Speaker 1: resigning due to the paper's refusal to endorse Harris. Quote.
Speaker 1: I'm resigning from the Post editorial board because the imperative
Speaker 1: to endorse Kamala Harris over Donald Trump is about as
Speaker 1: morally clear as it gets, she said. She went on
Speaker 1: to write in her resignation letter, worse, our silence is
Speaker 1: exactly what Donald Trump wants for the media, for us
Speaker 1: to keep quiet unquote. So right there, the veil gets
Speaker 1: torn away from Robinson's supposed quote unquote independent journalism at
Speaker 1: the Washington Post. Interestingly, the same situation arose across the
Speaker 1: country at the Los Angeles Times. CBS News headlined that
Speaker 1: story this way, Two more LA Times editorial board members
Speaker 1: resign after the paper withholds a Harris endorsement, Unlike columnist
Speaker 1: Robinson over there in the New York Post, where a
Speaker 1: great columnist named Michael Goodwin has reported the reality of
Speaker 1: the fanatical and decidedly non independent journalism of the day
Speaker 1: from liberals, mister Goodwin headlined, the left wing media created
Speaker 1: their own crisis and now have to pay the price
Speaker 1: for repeatedly attacking Donald Trump. Goodwin wrote, even as defeated
Speaker 1: Democrats try to decide who they are and what they
Speaker 1: believe in their media handmaids, what they believe in their
Speaker 1: media handmaids, face a crisis of their own. The come
Speaker 1: up and against their politically driven bias, say again, bias
Speaker 1: has arrived, and it's proving to be expensive in more
Speaker 1: ways than one. ABC News and its chief Democratic operative
Speaker 1: George Stephanopolis the rights fell into another trap. They meaning ABC,
Speaker 1: put their agenda of defeating Trump ahead of the facts
Speaker 1: and the law, and faced with depositions that likely would
Speaker 1: have supported his claim of defamation, ABC caved in a settlement.
Speaker 1: I still find this incredible in a settlement, the network
Speaker 1: forked over sixteen million dollars for a Trump library and
Speaker 1: his legal fees, and had to publicly say they quote
Speaker 1: regret unquote Stephanopolos's false claims that Trump had been found
Speaker 1: libel for rape in a civil case, says Goodwin Ouch.
Speaker 1: The apology surely stung much more than the money. Unquote. Well,
Speaker 1: I think that is safe to say. And you know,
Speaker 1: it isn't just major newspapers that have the left wing
Speaker 1: bias problem. As this is written, Fox News is headlining
Speaker 1: something else quote TV Saturday Night Late Night, TV Saturday
Speaker 1: Night Lives boring, anti Trump's gold routines go unheeded. Well expletive,
Speaker 1: I can't say. On the radio, it happened again, they said.
Speaker 1: Late night hosts melted down the night after Trump's twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four victory after making him the butt of ninety
Speaker 1: eight percent of their political jokes. The story goes on
Speaker 1: to report on the antics of late night hosts Stephen Colbert,
Speaker 1: Jimmy Kimmel, Seth Meyers, and others, including of course NBC's
Speaker 1: Saturday Night Live, going all in on pro democratic and
Speaker 1: anti Trump humor quote unquote well exactly, yet with all
Speaker 1: of this out there, not to mention oh so much
Speaker 1: more in the way of a decidedly far left leaning media.
Speaker 1: There is the Washington Post, mister Robinson saying, quote and
Speaker 1: when Trump takes office, the threat will escalate, perhaps dramatically unquote.
Speaker 1: The real threat, let me just say this to American democracy,
Speaker 1: is the central fact that Robinson simply ignores. That central
Speaker 1: fact being that American journalism has overwhelmingly abandoned the idea
Speaker 1: of so called independent journalism. And it should be noted
Speaker 1: this problem has been around a long time before Donald
Speaker 1: Trump came on the political seat. You read the memoirs
Speaker 1: as I've done over the years of Republicans like nineteen
Speaker 1: sixty four Republican nominee Senator Barry Goldwater, or former President
Speaker 1: Richard Nixon, or the Bush's father and son and others
Speaker 1: from the conservative side of the aisle, and there is
Speaker 1: reference after reference to the liberal media and the hard
Speaker 1: fact and that person's days on the active political scene
Speaker 1: that they had to constantly deal with a far left
Speaker 1: leaning media. You want an example, In August of twenty eighteen,
Speaker 1: the Washington Examiners Paul Baddard took a look back and
Speaker 1: headlined public's media hat fanned by Trump started with George H. W. Bush,
Speaker 1: and Badard wrote former President George H. W. Bush. HW
Speaker 1: Bush had it a lot better than President Trump. Economic
Speaker 1: growth was humming at five percent, his polling was high,
Speaker 1: and he was on duty in the Oval Office when
Speaker 1: the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union crumbled. But
Speaker 1: the press attacked him, and as he headed to defeat
Speaker 1: to Bill Clinton, Bush became the first president to publicly
Speaker 1: rip on the media at campaign events, even handing out redhair.
Speaker 1: I remember this that had the words quote annoy the media,
Speaker 1: re elect Bush on them. Former Bush aid Mary Madeleine
Speaker 1: is quoted by bedardas saying, quote, Madeleine, isn't surprised the
Speaker 1: public has turned on the press again. The assaults on
Speaker 1: freedom of speech religiosity, combined with the hypocrisy of a
Speaker 1: ruling class exempting themselves from all the degenerative policies they
Speaker 1: imposed on the electorate, created a combustible environment, and Trump
Speaker 1: picked up the fire starter. She said in short, the
Speaker 1: idea of being pushed in the Washington Post by one
Speaker 1: of its own, mister Robinson, is completely upside down and backwards.
Speaker 1: He ends by saying this we work for the people,
Speaker 1: not the president. Whenever it's necessary, will remind the President
Speaker 1: that he works for the people too, quote unquote. Well,
Speaker 1: suffice to say, when large media organizations present themselves as
Speaker 1: doing quote independent journalism quote, when in fact they are
Speaker 1: about furthering a far left wing agenda, not independent journalism,
Speaker 1: they are not quote working for the people unquote. The irony.
Speaker 1: The American people have long gotten onto this game of
Speaker 1: the media pretending to be doing independent journalism when in
Speaker 1: fact they are doing the opposite. In October of twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four, the Gallup Organization headlined this story, Americans trust
Speaker 1: in media remains a trend low trust in political and
Speaker 1: civic institution's highest for local and state governments, lowest for
Speaker 1: media and Congress. The story reported, for the third consecutive
Speaker 1: year more US adults have no trust at all in
Speaker 1: the media. That would be thirty six percent than trusted
Speaker 1: a great deal or fair amount. Another thirty three percent
Speaker 1: of Americans express quote not very much confidence. There is
Speaker 1: a reason for this, and when a Washington Post columnst
Speaker 1: so so prominently denies the reality of that reason, media
Speaker 1: credibility takes are suffer another hit. Shocking not and I'm
Speaker 1: sure you have all seen the stories of MSNBC and
Speaker 1: CNN losing their audience and having all kinds of problems
Speaker 1: out there. And interestingly, I vividly remember a personal note
Speaker 1: here when I was on CNN in the twenty sixteen
Speaker 1: election campaign defending then candidate Trump. It drew, as I
Speaker 1: began to understand, it drew considerable attention, and I was
Speaker 1: told personally by the president of the network that my
Speaker 1: appearance on the shows there was actually helping the ratings
Speaker 1: at CNN. Ah, you can't make this stuff up. So
Speaker 1: we're going to go on and we'll talk a little
Speaker 1: bit more about this. One of the things that sort
Speaker 1: of as a corollary I think to all of this,
Speaker 1: and we're going to talk about this with David shown,
Speaker 1: and that is the rise of law fair and weaponizing
Speaker 1: the law to go after your political opponents. You know,
Speaker 1: I always find it very interesting that when you are
Speaker 1: accused by the left of whatever terrible thing they want
Speaker 1: to accuse you of, in point of fact, they're the
Speaker 1: ones that are guilty of it. They're the ones who
Speaker 1: do this. And when they talk about Donald Trump wanting
Speaker 1: to be or he is a fascist, or he's going
Speaker 1: to do this or he's going to do that. And
Speaker 1: then at the same time they talk about all of
Speaker 1: the legal things that have been hurled in Donald Trump's direction.
Speaker 1: Well who's doing that. We're getting We're getting some music here,
Speaker 1: and we'll come back and talk that in just a
Speaker 1: little bit. But wow, we we're done now. I guess
Speaker 1: saying Merry Christmas, Happy fourth of July, no, happy New Year.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show. And let me
Speaker 1: start out the segment here by giving you the phone
Speaker 1: number to call in. It's eight hundred nine four one
Speaker 1: seven three two six, or in other words, eight hundred
Speaker 1: ninety four to one Sean, and I hope you will
Speaker 1: holler a little bit. You know, we've got some very
Speaker 1: interesting times coming up President Trump. I always find this
Speaker 1: comeback of his absolutely remarkable. And for those of you
Speaker 1: out there, and I'm sure it's a lot of you
Speaker 1: who know your American history, this kind of thing has
Speaker 1: not happened since Grover Cleveland was President of the United States.
Speaker 1: Groover Cleveland had been mayor of Buffalo, the governor of
Speaker 1: New York. He was elected President of the United States
Speaker 1: in eighteen forty four. I think it was I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: Eighteen eighty four years later, he was defeated by the
Speaker 1: son or grandson of President William Henry Harrison, Benjamin Harrison
Speaker 1: by name uh and William Henry Harrison was famous in history.
Speaker 1: He was the hero of the Battle of Tippy Canoe,
Speaker 1: and the slogan of the campaign was Tippy Canoe and
Speaker 1: Tyler too, John Tyler of Virginia Center from Virginia, I think,
Speaker 1: being his running mate. Well, he got he got elected,
Speaker 1: gave his inaugural address, caught a cold, and died in office.
Speaker 1: So that was that was about it. So Grover Cleveland
Speaker 1: eventually came back four years later. So President Trump is repeating,
Speaker 1: and we will see what's going to happen here. So
Speaker 1: let's say we've got a little break here and we
Speaker 1: will go from there and welcome back to the Sean
Speaker 1: Hannity Show. This is Jeffrey Lord filling in for Sean
Speaker 1: and I want to start out by giving our call
Speaker 1: in number here eight hundred and nine four one, seven,
Speaker 1: three two six or eight hundred ninety four one. Sean.
Speaker 1: I want to bring on now our guest David Shoan,
Speaker 1: who is a former counsel to President Trump. A noted
Speaker 1: civil liberties attorney, and David, before we start to talk,
Speaker 1: I have a our friend, Jason has a clip here
Speaker 1: of District Attorney Bragg in New York that he's going
Speaker 1: to play for us, and that I think can help
Speaker 1: us set up our discussion here. I know a lot
Speaker 1: of people are wondering, whoever has this job? Are they
Speaker 1: going to convict Donald Trump?
Speaker 2: Look, that is the number one issue. The Times calls
Speaker 2: Brag a talented prosecutor who's successful suit of the Trump
Speaker 2: Foundation could be invaluable experience.
Speaker 1: But the investigation he'll take over is.
Speaker 2: The chief Deputy Attorney General in New York State. I
Speaker 2: oversaw some of the office's biggest cases from exposing a
Speaker 2: legal behavior by the Trump Foundation. We know there's a
Speaker 2: Trump investigation. I have investigated Trump and his children and
Speaker 2: held them accountable for their misconduct with the Trump Foundation.
Speaker 2: I also sued the Trump administration more than one hundred times.
Speaker 2: We know that the DA investigating Trump. When I was
Speaker 2: at the AG's office, I sued Trump over one hundred
Speaker 2: times for his administration's misconduct and brought a case against
Speaker 2: the Trump Foundation and held him accountable.
Speaker 1: All Right, David, welcome to the Sean Hannity Show, Thank
Speaker 1: you very much. I got to add, I am not
Speaker 1: a lawyer, but I listened to that kind of thing,
Speaker 1: and I've watched the whole business unfold with all these
Speaker 1: legal proceedings against President Trump, and it just seems to me,
Speaker 1: as a non lawyer, that this is about a bunch
Speaker 1: of insider inside legal system that doesn't like somebody, and
Speaker 1: so whether it's the US Justice Department or the district
Speaker 1: attorneys in New York City or Fulton County in Georgia,
Speaker 1: they're going out to get them. What are your thoughts, Well.
Speaker 2: You're one hundred percent right, your instincts are right, whether
Speaker 2: lawyer or not. That's been the nature of things for
Speaker 2: the past few years that we've seen. I don't think
Speaker 2: we've ever seen anything like it. First of all, there
Speaker 2: are tremendous ethical violations in Bragg running for office on
Speaker 2: a platform to get and target a particular citizen hadn't
Speaker 2: been accused of anything. He promised to be the guy
Speaker 2: to convict him. We saw that entire case unfold as
Speaker 2: a complete mess, miscarriage of justice. Andrew Cuomo, who had
Speaker 2: been the Attorney General New York and the governor of
Speaker 2: New York, of course, and no Trump fan said that
Speaker 2: had he been Attorney General, that case never would have
Speaker 2: been brought. As you know the book out by Mark Pomerantz,
Speaker 2: who had been appointed sort of special counsel to investigate it.
Speaker 2: That office was against the prosecution until things changed politically,
Speaker 2: so it became advantageous for Alvin Bragg in his view
Speaker 2: at least to bring the case. The case of the travesty,
Speaker 2: it will never hold up on appeal if it's not
Speaker 2: dismissed outright. It should be dismissed, frankly, for a number
Speaker 2: of reasons. Should be dismissed on presidential immunity ground that
Speaker 2: should be dismissed on the elected the election that just happened,
Speaker 2: those immunity, that kind of immunity. But even if it
Speaker 2: weren't dismissed on a bill, it has to be reversed
Speaker 2: for a number of constitutional infirmities, including never identifying the
Speaker 2: target crime that made a felony in the case, giving
Speaker 2: a jury the choice and then not having them identify
Speaker 2: what crime it was. But there are many other errors
Speaker 2: in the case. The judge never should have sat on
Speaker 2: the case, clear conflict of interest. It's an abomination. And
Speaker 2: that's just one example. But you know you mentioned the others.
Speaker 2: The others have all have infirmities of their own.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, it just it just astonishes me. And
Speaker 1: as a layman, the question that I have is, how
Speaker 1: do we hold how does the system hold these people
Speaker 1: who were doing this, the lawyers that whatever, whether it's
Speaker 1: Leticia James, the Attorney General of New York, or Alvin
Speaker 1: Bragg or Fanny Willis or whatever, how do they get
Speaker 1: to be held accountable for what they're doing or what
Speaker 1: they have done.
Speaker 2: It's a real problem in a situation like this, especially
Speaker 2: because you know, you think that ultimately the check on
Speaker 2: an abusive power is the ballot box. But if you're
Speaker 2: in the jurisdiction where the elected official is playing to
Speaker 2: the worst instinct or human instincts. In that jurisdiction, they
Speaker 2: don't like a particular person, they don't like someone because
Speaker 2: of race or gender or some other reason, and they
Speaker 2: have an electric electorate filled with that kind of viewpoint,
Speaker 2: then the person can stay in office if you can
Speaker 2: prove that you know their professional violations. For example, we
Speaker 2: saw in the Georgia case with Fannie Willis. Now you
Speaker 2: know the Georgia Court of Appeal has removed her from
Speaker 2: the case as she had to be. That's because you know, she,
Speaker 2: in her zeal to get President Trump and to advance
Speaker 2: her interests in the interests of her lover, she really
Speaker 2: overstepped the boundaries and created a clear appearance of impropriety
Speaker 2: and impartiality. As we moved from the case, and hopefully
Speaker 2: that case is going to be dismissed. But you're right,
Speaker 2: you know, you've identified a real problem. What do we
Speaker 2: do to hold them accountable outside of the ballot box?
Speaker 1: Is this something that on the federal level, Congress can
Speaker 1: deal with, or in a state, a state legislature can
Speaker 1: deal with to change the rules and all that. You know,
Speaker 1: one of the things that we're old enough to remember
Speaker 1: this is President Nixon's Watergate situation. And it has occurred
Speaker 1: to me more than once that once that occurred, then
Speaker 1: all bets were off and every president, every public official
Speaker 1: was going to be targeted or could easily be targeted
Speaker 1: by prosecutors, because well, if they got Richard Nixon to
Speaker 1: resign and almost you know, other than Gerald Ford's pardon,
Speaker 1: he might have had more problems. What else would have
Speaker 1: happened there. I keep having the feeling that opened the
Speaker 1: floodgates for all kinds of conduct here on the part
Speaker 1: of the legal community, which is just not good.
Speaker 2: I think that's absolutely right. And you know, we saw
Speaker 2: in twenty nineteen Jerry Nadler, Democratic Congressman from New York
Speaker 2: made this comment in the context of the first Trump
Speaker 2: impeachment proceeding, and he said, basically, we can't trust the voters,
Speaker 2: can't wait for another election. We have to find some
Speaker 2: other way to get rid of President Trump in effect,
Speaker 2: and that's about an anti democratic a statement as I
Speaker 2: can imagine from an elected official. You know, on the
Speaker 2: one hand, with our separate branches of government, often we
Speaker 2: like to see, you know, different parties having different branches
Speaker 2: a sort of check on the other But in this case,
Speaker 2: I think the President Trump provided the ultimate answer to
Speaker 2: the unfair attacks. I think the American people have said
Speaker 2: this many times now, are basically a fair minded people
Speaker 2: in the majority.
Speaker 1: Yes, I think they got.
Speaker 2: I think that this law fare and the weaponization of
Speaker 2: the criminal justice system was just too much for a
Speaker 2: normal American person to take, and the backlash was seen
Speaker 2: through the ballot box, and so ultimately he gets the
Speaker 2: last ward. President Trump gets the last word in this
Speaker 2: because now he has both Houses of Congress and the presidency,
Speaker 2: and so if someone's going to try to abuse the
Speaker 2: impeachment process again as we saw last time, they're going
Speaker 2: to have a tough rota hoo with the Republican Party
Speaker 2: in both houses.
Speaker 1: Yes, you know. Back in twenty fourteen, I interviewed then
Speaker 1: private citizen Trump for The American Spectator, and one of
Speaker 1: the things I said to him was that Republicans that
Speaker 1: I had talked to, and mind you, this was after
Speaker 1: the McCain and the Romney campaigns, was that they get
Speaker 1: attacked by their opposition and so savagely, and yet they
Speaker 1: don't fight back. And so I said to him, if
Speaker 1: you run for president, will you fight back, to which
Speaker 1: his response was something like, Oh, don't worry about that.
Speaker 1: I will fight back. Do you think we're just we're
Speaker 1: fortunate that we've got somebody here who is just not
Speaker 1: going to let people get away with it as opposed
Speaker 1: to just rolling over here. I mean, I can only
Speaker 1: imagine the conversations that you that you and his staff
Speaker 1: and friends have had with him. I saw him in Johnstown,
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania during the campaign, and because I know him that
Speaker 1: they asked if I would come out and talk to him.
Speaker 1: I did, and I have to say, David, I was standing,
Speaker 1: you know, like almost nose to nose with and I'm
Speaker 1: sort of tilting my head a little bit to see
Speaker 1: the condition of his ear where he'd been shot, and
Speaker 1: he notices and and I said, are you all right?
Speaker 1: He said, yeah, I'm doing great. I'm doing just great.
Speaker 1: I'm fine, And then he went out on stage and
Speaker 1: delivered this, you know, incredible speech that had thousands of
Speaker 1: people all set to go. I have never seen anything
Speaker 1: like this, and I worked for President Reagan and have
Speaker 1: been around my share of people like this, but wow,
Speaker 1: I just think he's amazing when he comes to this.
Speaker 1: But it's also very helpful because otherwise they're going to
Speaker 1: try and bring him down.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, I mean that was an iconic moment. I'm
Speaker 2: sorry to say I didn't really recognize the gravity of
Speaker 2: the situation at the time, and my initial reaction was
Speaker 2: to trash talk him a little bit about you know,
Speaker 2: I got a little graves wound on the ear sort
Speaker 2: of thing. But he took it very well and gave
Speaker 2: it back. But no, look, I think I personally think
Speaker 2: that the toughness. First of all, it's real, but secondly,
Speaker 2: I think it plays best in our foreign affairs quite frankly.
Speaker 2: I mean, we've seen it already. We've just now, you know,
Speaker 2: backing off publicly of some of our arch enemies. And
Speaker 2: they know that he means business. And part of it
Speaker 2: is the unpredictability. They don't know what he's going to do,
Speaker 2: but they know what he's capable of doing if he
Speaker 2: decides to in terms of sort of payback. You know. Look,
Speaker 2: I hope that doesn't dominate the agenda. I think though
Speaker 2: he learned a great lesson over these last four years
Speaker 2: and the four years administration. Remember, they tried to sideline
Speaker 2: him with this phony Mueller so called investigation that really
Speaker 2: you know, it wasn't fair to the country. It handcuffed
Speaker 2: the country, and then we got COVID, and so now
Speaker 2: he gets to start anew Listen. He made the decision,
Speaker 2: constant conscious decision at the beginning of his last administration
Speaker 2: not to prosecute Hillary Clinton, despite the evidence of what
Speaker 2: she did with her computer, you know, and so on.
Speaker 2: You know, any criminal defense lawyer has had clients who
Speaker 2: were indicted for a lot less in terms of obstruction
Speaker 2: of justice and evidence tampering and that sort of thing.
Speaker 2: But he made that decision. I don't know if he
Speaker 2: would make that same decision today, and he was believing,
Speaker 2: you know, he got a lot of pressure all of that.
Speaker 2: Locker up, locker up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I remember my share of rallies where I would
Speaker 1: do that in twenty sixteen. It was pretty amazing. Well,
Speaker 1: I guess. And one of the other things that I
Speaker 1: think sort of comes from this as well is that
Speaker 1: he's become a role model for foreign leaders. And you know,
Speaker 1: trump Ism, if as you might call it, is surging
Speaker 1: in places like you know, Europe and France and South
Speaker 1: America and all of this kind of thing, which I
Speaker 1: find very interesting. You know, it's democracy, but you have
Speaker 1: to have a strong leader. And I think that they've
Speaker 1: really responded. I don't think there's any accident that he
Speaker 1: was invited to France just as president elect for the
Speaker 1: anniversary or the celebration of the redoing of the Cathedral
Speaker 1: of Notre Dame, and President Matron went out of his
Speaker 1: way to treat him as if he were already the
Speaker 1: sitting president. I think that's pretty amazing right there.
Speaker 2: Oh, you make very points with this, I think, but
Speaker 2: we're seeing it, you know, kind of across the board
Speaker 2: and the other The flip side of it is, in
Speaker 2: each of these situations, the media, and I say the
Speaker 2: media that's reflected in the New York Times, the Washington
Speaker 2: Post plays out these doomsday scenarios. The world leaders hate them.
Speaker 2: World leaders don't hate them. The first of all, they
Speaker 2: love the guy on many levels, but they respect him,
Speaker 2: they fear him in some ways, and they want to
Speaker 2: be like him. They want to be, you know, that
Speaker 2: kind of leader for many of them. But you know,
Speaker 2: we see these doomsday reports. If he were to move
Speaker 2: the Israeli of the United States embassy in Israel to Jerusalem,
Speaker 2: it would be armageddon. Well, he did it because it
Speaker 2: was the right thing to do. It's the thing the
Speaker 2: law requires him to do, and he wanted to do it,
Speaker 2: and it turned out to be the perfect decision. The
Speaker 2: Abraham Accords then arose from that. Now we were told
Speaker 2: those would be impossible, we could never make peace with
Speaker 2: these countries, never have dialogue with them. But he went
Speaker 2: out and did it. Now, you remember, when they Biden
Speaker 2: administration came in, there was apparently a ban on using
Speaker 2: the term Abraham Accords. I read it for any of
Speaker 2: these things which they said he couldn't do, and he
Speaker 2: did them all. So I'm hoping to see a lot
Speaker 2: more positive things along those lines, you know, with this administration,
Speaker 2: and it comes through strength, as.
Speaker 1: You say, yes, it does.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: I can give you an anecdote from my Reagan days.
Speaker 1: In August of nineteen eighty one, the federal air traffic
Speaker 1: controllers threatened threatened to go on strike, which was against
Speaker 1: the law, and the whole Washington Press Corps was, well,
Speaker 1: you know, you can't do anything about this, and Reagan
Speaker 1: came out and said, if you do this, I will
Speaker 1: fire you. Well, they didn't believe him. He did it,
Speaker 1: they fired, he fired him, and lo and behold. We
Speaker 1: later found out that who paid real close attention to
Speaker 1: this the Soviet Union.
Speaker 2: YEP.
Speaker 1: So well, thank you very much, David. This has been
Speaker 1: a great conversation. I think the next four years are
Speaker 1: going to be remarkable, and I'm looking forward to your
Speaker 1: involvement with it, and the American people will be well
Speaker 1: served if you were there. This is Jeffrey Lord sitting
Speaker 1: in for Sean Hannity, and our calling number is eight
Speaker 1: hundred and nine for one seven three two six. All Right,
Speaker 1: this is Jeffrey Lord sitting in for our friend Sean Hannity,
Speaker 1: and our number here is eight hundred and nine four
Speaker 1: one seven three two six. We invite you to call in.
Speaker 1: We have just about a minute here before we get
Speaker 1: into our heartbreak, and I just thought i'd use that
Speaker 1: even though we are a few days past Christmas, I
Speaker 1: did go through for the American Spectator before Christmas a
Speaker 1: list of conservative books for Christmas. And even though Christmas
Speaker 1: may be over, you could buy it for somebody's New
Speaker 1: Year's gift or what have you. So I'll probably mention
Speaker 1: this a little bit later in the show here, but
Speaker 1: we have some great books out there, new books in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four, and also some old books that are
Speaker 1: the classics, like from Bill Buckley. Okay, so that is great,
Speaker 1: and we will be back in a few minutes. That
Speaker 1: This is Geoffrey Lord filling in for Sean Hannity, and
Speaker 1: the number again is eight hundred ninety four one seven
Speaker 1: three two six.